News & Insights

Recent Posts

Covid-19: Assessing the Legal Risk of Infectious Diseases

WSHB Employer Alert: FFCRA and DOL Regulations 4.2.20

Employment Practices Consultation & COVID-19

It’s a No-Win Situation: The Perils Facing Hospitals Due to the Coronavirus

COVID-19 Employer Alert: Summary of the CARES Act

COVID-19: New York Malpractice Law Alert

COVID-19 Employer Alert: Enactment of Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA)

WSHB Co-Founder Stephen Henning to Announce the Winner of CLM's 2020 Outside Counsel Professional of the Year Award

WSHB Partner Robert Hellner Shares Mediation Tactics at CLM’s 2020 Annual Conference

Risk Transfer and Contractual Indemnification – Who Gets Left Holding the Bag?

New Developments in Challenging Certificates of Merit — Seeking Dismissal for Failure to Concurrently File Certificate with the Original Petition

Seven Habits that Define a Highly Effective Claims Team

Social Media Do's and Don'ts

WSHB Partner Kelly Waters Named to NJBIZ's 2020 Best Fifty Women in Business List

WSHB Names Andrew S. Kessler as Managing Partner of the Firm's Philadelphia Office

WSHB Employment Alert: California Law Banning Arbitration Agreements Temporarily on Hold

Sam McDermott on the Dos and Don’ts of Construction Project Termination

Full Disclosure! Insurer Beware: Colorado’s New Automobile Policy Disclosure Law Has Teeth!

Andrew S. Kessler Named Legal Counsel for Northeast Community Center for Behavioral Health

WSHB Elevates Ten Partners to Defined Equity Status

Eleven WSHB Attorneys Elected Into Partnership

Eighteen Attorneys Elected to WSHB Senior Counsel

Supreme Court Allows Suit Over Website Accessibility

Strategies for Defending Legionella and Mold Claims

Residential Revolution

Time Limit Demand Issues Arrive in North Carolina

Temp Agency Absolved of Liability in Hotly Contested Action

Alternative Fee Agreements and Construction Issues: Oil and Water or Perfect Pairing!?

WSHB's Graham Miller Helps Demystify Construction Claims in the Pacific Northwest

WSHB Partner Janice Michaels Named to The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 List

One Bad Apple: Navigating through Sexual Battery and other Intentional Torts

Leading Construction Litigator Cynthia Tari Joins WSHB's Dallas Office

WSHB’s Philadelphia Partner Secures Summary Judgment in Catastrophic Premises Liability Matter

WSHB Welcomes New Partner Andrew Kessler

New Bill In New York Proposed for Signature by Governor Andrew Cuomo is Set To Make Employers "SWEAT"

Renowned Litigator Jason Williams Joins WSHB's Nevada Office

Litigator Richard Young Joins WSHB's Nevada Office

Published Appellate Opinion Upholding Summary Judgment in Favor of Commercial Tenant Against $3.5M Subrogation Suit

17 WSHB Lawyers Honored as 2019's Rising Stars

Arizona Supreme Court Allows Court of Appeals Decision Expanding Defendants' Ability to Enforce Settlements to Stand

WSHB’s Jason Klein Breaks Down the Good, the Sad and the Funny Sides of Claims

Litigating Sexual Battery and Other Intentional Torts: Navigating the One Bad Apple in Medical Negligence

WSHB Partner Michelle Arbitrio to Moderate Panel on Insurance and Risk Management in the Age of Mass Shootings

Girl on Fire: The Price of Pursuing the Truth in the #MeToo World

Pragmatic Issues on Settlement Versus Trial for Legal Malpractice Cases

A Withering Assault

The Natural Progression of Natural Disasters

Nevada’s Governor Signs Chapter 40 Reform Bill

WA Condo Law Changes Hope to Curtail Frivolous Defect Lawsuits and Stimulate Production

WSHB Co-Founder Stephen Henning Steps Into the Spotlight at this Year's West Coast Casualty Seminar

Professional Liability Expert Weighs In On Protecting Your Practice From Opioid Doc Arrest Fallout

Penalties, Punitives, and Granny Cams: The Escalating Lure of Elder Abuse Litigation

Are Structured Settlements Still Relevant

Game Changing Trends Affecting Construction

He's Not My Guy: The Joint-Employer Doctrine

WSHB Case Update: DOL Proposes Increase to Minimum Salary Threshold

WSHB and DWF Announce Exclusive Association

California's New Survival Statute Takes Effect and Increases the Complexity, Value, and Costs of Survival Actions

Professional Liability Defense Federation Names Michelle Arbitrio Chief Diversity Officer

New Jersey on a Crash Course for Increased Auto-Insurance Litigation

Supreme Court Prevents OSHA "Vaccine or Test" Standard From Taking Immediate Effect But Allows Healthcare Worker Mandate To Stand

Leaders in an Emerging Nationwide Trend: Orange County Courts to Pilot New Electronic Evidence Portal

December 3, 2021

Reflecting an emerging trend around the country, courts in Orange County, California have implemented a portal for the submission of electronic evidence in select courtrooms. This new program was set in motion in response to the backlog of cases caused in large part by the COVID-19 shutdowns of courts during the early months of the pandemic. The goal according to the order released by Assistant Presiding Judge, Maria Hernandez, is to “provide greater access to justice, promote court efficiency, enhance evidence management practices, and facilitate remote proceedings.”

In this pilot program, certain courtrooms will require that evidence be submitted electronically into the system portal. Currently, the courtrooms using the portal are Departments C10, C61, VCC5 and W10. Departments C17, C64, C66 and L69 will begin utilizing the portal for hearings scheduled as of December 6, 2021, and Departments L60, L72, L73 and L67 for hearings scheduled as of January 10, 2022.

When practitioners enter the portal they will need the case type, case number and hearing date in order to properly access their matter. The court recommends using a desktop computer with a Chrome or Microsoft browser for the most optimal experience. The electronic evidence portal may be accessed here.

The order points to sections 128,177, and 187 of the California Code of Civil Procedure as authority for this new program. The order contains the following key provisions:

    • All participating courtrooms will require that all evidence be submitted electronically through the portal rather than via any type of paper format.
    • Evidence must only be uploaded to the portal in reference to a specific court case pending in a participating courtroom.
    • Parties must upload evidence into the portal for legitimate litigation purposes only.
    • Any confidential or sealed information or evidence must be marked as confidential during the uploading process.
    • Evidence uploaded into the portal does not automatically become part of the court record. Uploaded evidence is considered “lodged”, which means it has been received by the court for temporary storage pending its use at trial or other proceeding. The party submitting the evidence will still be required to offer and authenticate the electronic evidence during the trial or proceeding and ask the court to admit the evidence as part of the record. Electronic evidence that is admitted as part of the court record will not be returned to the party after the court proceeding.
    • Only parties, attorneys, or law enforcement officers may upload evidence in a traffic proceeding, unless a court orders otherwise.
    • No visual depiction of a child engaging in sexually explicit conduct, or harmful matter, may be uploaded into the system. If any evidence of this nature is necessary for the case, parties should notify the court and proceed according to its instructions on this front.
    • Any person granted access to confidential information on the portal shall not “download, use, disseminate, or copy” that information.
    • The unauthorized use of any evidence in the electronic portal is prohibited.
    • The disposition of electronic evidence will be pursuant to statute, party stipulation, or court order.
    • Any violations in usage of the electronic portal may result in the violator being fined, held in contempt, or subject to criminal penalties or prosecution.

As more courts move toward electronic and paperless submission of evidence, this pilot program is likely to provide valuable data and assessment tools for courtrooms nationwide as attorneys, parties and judges learn how to best use this technology to increase efficiency as well as reducing the environmental footprint left by those utilizing the court system. Although the electronic evidence portal was catapulted into existence by necessity in response to the COVID-19 shutdowns; movements toward reducing paper usage and environmental concerns likely would have pushed the courts in this direction eventually. For information regarding current protocols for remote trials and hearings, please check the COVID-19 webpage.

PRINT

Privacy Policy      |      Site Map

© 2022 Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required