15 Months

 

Abraham Lincoln as a young lawyer

Stating the obvious, since March 2020 we have seen massive changes in court and work/office organization and communications.  The pandemic forced changes to process, office, and data design that embrace the new virtual environment.  But first, we must discuss some pushback.

---

An attorney, John C. Coughenour, argues in an editorial published in the Seattle Times on Jun 1, 2021 that “(a)s we transition out of the pandemic, I urge my colleagues to return to trying cases the way we did when Abraham Lincoln tried cases — live and in person. We are at a crossroads. In an appeal to perceived efficiencies, some of my colleagues have suggested that this remote make-do procedure become permanent. But something critically important would be lost.”

I counter-argue that if he wishes to try cases like Abraham Lincoln that he cannot stop at Zoom.  He will have to take a bath in a tub after warming the water on fire outside.  Eat breakfast from the eggs his chickens laid in their coop.  Of course, they cannot cook the eggs over an electric or natural gas stove.  He must use fire, wood, or coal.  Then they must walk or ride a horse to the courthouse.  They cannot use a car or bus, forego use any electrical devices such as the elevator or the electric lights.  Forget the microphones… speak up!  They must carry all files with him in paper format (that is if he can get them somehow out of the court’s EDMS).  They must communicate only using the US Postal Mail or courier … with anyone.  They must handwrite all copies and all submissions for the case as there were no typewriters or copy machines available in Lincoln’s day.

In other words, the arguments taken to the extreme, as the editorial author did, are absurd in my opinion.

Hybrid Work Paradox

Across Lake Washington from Seattle (I once had a fun float-plane ride there) comes a LinkedIn article by Microsoft CEO, Satya Nadella, “The hybrid work paradox”…

“According to our research, the vast majority of employees say they want more flexible remote work options, but at the same time also say they want more in-person collaboration, post-pandemic. This is the hybrid work paradox.

Hybrid work represents the biggest shift to how we work in our generation. And it will require a new operating model, spanning people, places, and processes. Today, we published a playbook sharing some of what we’ve learned to date, including data, research, and best practices designed to help organizations navigate these evolving work norms.”

Microsoft Teams as a Platform

While web conferencing chat is fine by itself, I have found that more work can get done when the meeting uses a shared workspace such as Teams to collaboratively write the meeting minutes, and then share demonstrations, code, and planning tools. 

In that direction, an article on The Verge website wrotethat Microsoft Teams is opening up new collaborative apps that plug into meetings.

“Microsoft first let developers build third-party apps into Teams last year, but the company is going a step further at Build 2021 today. In a push to get more app developers building for Teams, Microsoft is opening up its crucial APIs, Teams Store, and tools to what it calls collaborative apps.

Developers will soon be able to build apps that plug into the Teams meeting canvas, ones that use in-app purchases or subscriptions, and even create separate apps that get access to Teams’ real-time video and audio streams. “If you can build web apps, you can build extensions into Teams chats, channels, and meetings,” explains Jeff Teper, head of Microsoft 365 collaboration, in an interview with The Verge. “You can build once, run, deploy anywhere.””

Lawyers Changing Law Firms so they don't have to go into the Office

An article from “The American Lawyer” posted on Law.com on June 1, 2021 wrote: 

“As firms begin the process of reuniting their attorneys in the office, some lawyers are rebelling—threatening to move to another firm so that they don’t have to move from their home office.

Earlier this month, some associates professed a hesitancy to return to any form of so-called normal office attendance. Mid-career and senior associates, in particular, felt that they were in their element on Zoom call with colleagues and clients—able to contribute more effectively to their practices and enjoying greater visibility both in the firm and with clients.

“I don’t want to go back to the office and the way things were before,” said one sixth-year associate at an Am Law 200 firm who chose to remain anonymous to speak candidly at the time. “I just don’t think I’ll have the same opportunity to contribute the way I have in the virtual environment.”

What?  Virtual is better for some associates?  Didn’t we just read?  Never mind.

Why not both?

While I had fun with the Seattle attorney’s editorial.  The actual argument is that people want both virtual and in-person as it best fits the event and situation. 

Note, that the argument for in-person often revolves around jury trials.  The truth is that jury trials are normally perhaps 1 to 2 percent of the court’s caseload. So they can be “special events”.  But that doesn’t mean they can’t be improved and perhaps enhanced by virtual voir dire (jury selection).  I mean, if you were a juror, wouldn’t it just be easier to go through that Q&A without needing to travel, park, and wait in the courthouse and then never be called serve?  We have several courts doing that process as an option.

Again, the lawyers want to work remotely.  And judges can do many proceedings such as Virginia swearing and signing a warrant virtually for more than a decade.

We have tools.  Let’s use them.