Integrating remote technology into courtroom proceedings is now commonplace, particularly in Florida, where the Rules of General Practice and Judicial Administration embrace video conferencing platforms like Zoom. Rule 2.530 governs the use of communication technology, offering a framework that balances convenience with due process. This article explores how Florida’ s rules facilitate Zoom, procedural requirements, and practical implications for attorneys.

Under Rule 2.530( b), communication technology— defined as audio or audio-video— may be used for all proceedings unless another rule or law specifies

otherwise. The rule distinguishes between non-evidentiary and evidentiary proceedings. The court must allow Zoom for all non-evidentiary hearings of 30 minutes or less, upon request, unless good cause exists to deny it. Using Zoom at an evidentiary proceeding, such as trial, requires more rigorous analysis. A party seeking to use Zoom must file a motion demonstrating“ good cause” and specify whether all parties consent. If contested, the court retains discretion to approve or deny the request, while considering enumerated factors such as technological capabilities, witness location, costs, and the need to observe demeanor.

The administration of oaths is a critical component of remote testimony. Rule 2.530( b)( 2)( B) sets forth two scenarios: if the oath administrator is physically present with the witness, the oath must comply with the witness’ s jurisdiction; if not, it must be administered by audio-video technology under Florida law, with the witness’ s consent if outside the state. This ensures testimonial integrity while accommodating geographic challenges.

For proceedings involving mental capacity or competency, Rule 2.530( b)( 2)( C) prohibits audio-only formats. This restriction

Continued on page 59

��

HCBA Lawyer Magazine No. 35, Issue 5 | Page 60