Recently, Conrad & Metlitzky attended a Q&A session with the leadership of the San Francisco Superior Court about court operations during the coronavirus pandemic. Presiding Judge Garrett L. Wong, Assistant Presiding Judge Samuel K. Feng, and Chief Executive Officer T. Michael Yuen answered questions from the bar about filings, hearings, trials, and more under the court’s emergency orders. The full presentation is available here: SF Superior Full Zoom Presentation. The court’s various COVID-19 orders can be found here: SF Superior Court COVID-19 Orders.
Just a few of the helpful tips we learned are below.
SF Superior is “Open for Business”, But Operating On a Skeleton Crew. The Court is hearing priority matters, and working to scale up operations in June.
SF Superior is Accepting Filings, But They May Not Be Processed. Motions and even new civil matters can be e-filed during this period, but they may not be processed immediately.
4/16/20 through 6/1/20 are Court Holidays; Trials During This Period are Continued 60 Days. On April 13, the court issued an emergency order declaring April 16 through June 1, 2020 to be court holidays for certain filings:
Motions to quash, demurrers, motions to strike, answers, or other responses to a complaint or cross-complaint;
Discovery responses such as objections, motions for protective orders, or motions to compel;
Post-trial motions, including notices regarding intention to move for a new trial;
Judgments notwithstanding the verdict, cost bills, motions to tax a cost bill, motions for attorney fees.
All trial dates set during the closure period are continued by 60 days. Notices of continuance will be circulated resetting trial dates.
Court Holidays Are Like “Many Christmas Days In a Row.” Filings covered by the court holiday period (i.e., filings of the specified types due between 4/16 and 6/1) are now due June 2 and should be filed and served on that date. For purposes of due dates for the covered filings, the court holidays are like any other holiday; Presiding Judge Wong provided the example of Christmas Day.
The Holiday Period Applies to Service of Discovery Responses. The judges clarified that the holiday period through June 1 applies to discovery responses due to be served (not filed) between April 16 and June 1. Such responses are now due June 2. An amended order to clarify this may be issued.
Future Trial Continuances Are Highly Likely, But On A Case-By-Case Basis. Although the court’s April 13 emergency order only affects trial dates previously set for April 16 through June 1, 2020, Judges Wong and Feng indicated that continuances for trial dates currently set after June 1 will be readily granted on a case-by-case basis if good cause is shown based on pandemic-related delays. The court specifically indicated good cause can be shown by citing Government Code section 68115(a), which provides authority to declare court holidays based on an “epidemic.” Judge Feng noted that if you have a summary judgment motion due before June 1, the court will likely consider that good cause and will continue the trial sufficiently far in the future to permit the parties to take the discovery they need before bringing a summary judgment motion on statutory notice. Judge Wong and Judge Feng emphasized that they expect parties to meet and confer and to act reasonably in light on the ongoing logistical challenges.
In Clearing the Ongoing Trial Backlog, Criminal Trials Will Take Priority. The court expects a backlog of trials and evidentiary hearings, and will give priority to criminal cases and pressing matters such as dependency hearings and domestic violence TROs. For civil trials, the court will imminently announce a voluntary settlement program through which parties with approaching trial dates may discuss resolution of the matter with a Superior Court judge.
All Logistical Options for Trial Are Being Considered. Holding a jury trial while observing social distancing practices is logistically daunting, and the court has not yet settled on a plan or plans for how to start holding jury trials. Each courtroom, as well as entrances and jury assembly areas, are being examined by the court, and these areas may be rearranged to satisfy social distancing guidelines. The court has not ruled out any options for future trials and hearings, including telephonic and videoconferencing options or in-person trials that incorporate social distancing practices.
During This Period, Law and Motion Hearings May Occur Remotely. The Law and Motion judges in SF Superior have discretion to hold remote hearings during the court holiday period in instances where briefing has already been completed and electronic review of materials is workable. Parties are free to contact Law and Motion, with CC to all counsel, to request a remote hearing. Parties should be aware that, in cases where the materials submitted are voluminous, remote hearings may not be practical.
Judges Will Be Social Distancing, Too. Some SF Superior Court judges plan to wear masks on the bench, and litigants would be free (and may ultimately be required) to do the same. Judges are considering whether Plexiglass dividers are appropriate so that litigants might once again approach the bench. For now, as Judge Wong put it, “You may not approach the bench.”
Conrad & Metlitzky is closely tracking court operations and closures at SF Superior and other courts. We are working hard to deliver legal services remotely without interruptions or delays. Read our past article on remote depositions here.