How the legal profession can come to a halt, and what you can do to keep on going

For almost the entire day yesterday, Thomson Reuters Westlaw was down. I am using it since 2009 and this was the first time I have experienced the outage there, overall a pretty good indicator of the things working 99% of the time. Suddenly being left without this research tool, it was a powerful reminder that nothing is guaranteed to be ever-present and available for us online, and with our dependency on it, it is scary to think about the "what if" situation. This made me think of two things: that the progress in our profession could be curbed, and that we should take those contingencies into account if we wish to keep on going.

Bay Area courts re-opening

This week, with the "Stage 2" lessening, finally came the tide of the courts reopening.

[Update May 29] But not the federal bankruptcy courts - - just announced to remain close to public through September (link)

Alameda court is now accepting almost all civil filings, makes hearing reservations, and offers hearings via phone and video remote access: Rule 1.8a and Rule 3.30 (May 7, 2020, version). Appeals and unlawful detainers remain on hold. Alameda court adopted "Blue Jeans" technology for video appearances.
[Update May 20, 2020] - now says the court mostly (yet remotely) re-opens (link).

Contra Costa starts conducting remote hearings on May 18, as its May 5 press-release states.
On May 13, the updated order was issued, it looks like the court reopened on May 26 for physical access to the hearings (essential parties only, no records' department, and wear a mask of course). But there is no mentioning of remote hearings in the order.

Santa Clara court in today's order promised to reopen Law & Motion on May 19 and Appellate division on May 22 (May 8, 2020, order).

Also today, San Mateo published its reopening order, it has several dates there for different purposes, but the general note is that it is reopening during the next 2 weeks for remote hearings. Entered on May 18, an updated order hints at June 12 as the reopening date, with the unlawful detainers pushed further down, at least to June 22 for the earliest trial date.

San Francisco court was silent this week, no new orders since April 30, but the e-filing does go through, as it was going before. Even better, limited UD cases are now also included in the e-filing system. Main operations are still expected to reopen after June 1, with the housing court kicking in after June 22nd.
[May 27 update] - the court opens up mostly (and mostly for remotely handled hearings) on June 1 (link). The emergency is however continued through June 19 (order).

Marin county court also remains closed until May 29 based on its own April 30 order, no word on a sooner reopening there yet. May 26 order confirms the date and provides some more detail, all matters to proceed remotely from June 1 on. Marin court adopted Zoom for video appearances, and those appearances are free of charge.

The above news are welcomed, I was wondering why not to keep the remote hearings and e-filing going, which are mostly available with the help of the CourtCall and e-filing providers (although not each court fully accepts e-files yet). Coming into the court in person is still a risky proposition, but remotely it could be all done, the technology is there. Keeping the courts open is important, and it can be done without physical contact for a large chunk of operations.

But please remain careful and avoid coming to courts in person. Why I am glad the courts are reopening for remote hearings, I don't understand why the lessening is made under the banner of an improving virus situation. Look at the graphs, published by the state (update.covid19.ca.gov). If these were the graphs of some stock, I would say the trends of both the cases and the deaths are still creeping up, maybe slower, but not giving up yet. And while the number of cases' growth is not just due to the spread, but also because of the increased testing, the deaths are only increasing with the virus spread, and they are not declining. We went into the quarantine when there were recorded 3-4-9 deaths per day. We now have the latest spikes and valleys between 45-98 and 39-95 runs, I mean, over 10 times more deaths now from when the complete shutdown was ordered. Remote court operations are great, but when we need to be physically there, remember that there is no vaccine yet, so the risk of infection remains the same, hanging solely on the chance that each court visitor (and each co-commuter on the way to the court and back) had a mask or stayed home.
[update May 27]: we do now have "lows" in 20-19 region, and lower heights too, so the overall "curve" looks flat or even declining a bit, in approximation, but in no way ceasing or falling (i.e., after several days of declining, today's number of deaths was 70).

Back to futuristic—for my future laptops I shall look over the shoulder

This is what happens to people, who are left idle to themselves—they may start thinking about some irrelevant stuff. This happened to me: I got sick and, under the influence of “Tera Flu,” could neither work, nor sleep. So it got me thinking. And who am I to think about work, while on vacation away from boss (me, when I am not sick, is that boss of mine)? So, not a word about work or law, here, I promise.

Direct Deposits And Other Electronic Means Affecting Landlord and Tenant Duties

An important new case came down last December, Kruger v. Reyes, 232 Cal.App.4th Supp. 10, 181 Cal. Rptr. 3d 521 (2014), covering several rules: timely service of the notice for non-payment rent, proper calculations in that notice of the rent due and the time when it is due. None of those concepts are new, but the case contains rare findings due to its fact pattern, including the issue of tenants paying rent by depositing funds directly to the landlord's account.

E-filing works in SF Superior Court

Since I wrote about the e-filing coming to San Francisco last October, many changes were proposed, and some were even made, and the system started working on a wide variety of cases on July 14. Yesterday, I tried it for myself and today my first ever state-court filing went live! You may want to give it a try, the water looks safe!

[UPDATE 11-6-14] E-filing becomes mandatory across the board in civil cases in this court, with very few exceptions, effective December 8, 2014. Three more vendors were approved on November 5 in addition to the previously sole vendor, File & Serve Xpress.

fLAWcharts and fLAWpps

The laws are the rules, and following those rules is akin following steps of an algorithm. "Yes" or "No," or, if you did X, then you get Y under the rule Z.  On this basic premise, I decided to try my hand in making a legal flowchart ("flawchart") and an app to walk a user by that flawchart ("flawpp"). I so far was able to complete just one, covering steps a homeowner might take if (s)he gets a notice of violation from the San Francisco Department of Building Inspection.

Legal Paper Size is ... Illegal. Foolscap!

Today, for the first time, my complaint was not accepted for filing because some of the pages were presented on legal size paper. The lease was printed on an old "long" form, requiring the legal size, and, while I used to have those exhibits successfully filed before, my luck ended today. The reason is not even a law, but the technology: I was told that the scanning company complains about the legal size, so all non-letter sized papers are now prohibited, in order not to upset the scanners. There you have it, the paper size called "legal" is not legal after all. I made a new copy of the long pages, reducing them to 8.5" x 11," and the filing went through, but, while I waited in line, I tried to look the subject up, and here are my findings.

"App" Help For Lawyers - FilingRabbit.com Takes On Document Management

The "Internet of Things" comes as a next phase in our practical appreciation of the Internet, going beyond webpage interactions and social media. You can call a cab substitute, summon a baby-sitter, or get your online order delivered, all by tapping into a power of crowd-sourced and -outsourced apps, straight from your phone.

Search your phone's app store, and you will discover that pretty much any activity under the sun has its own app for it. Legal profession, though, notably lags in the apps offering.