All eyes are on the electronic-recording original proceeding in the Supreme Court, Family Violence Appellate Panel v. Superior Court, and the Court’s recent order to show cause why, when a court reporter can’t be found, California’s trial courts should not be ordered to hit the “record” button. This could this be the most significant advancement in electronic court recording in decades. But it raises a few questions:
❔ The remedy sought is limited to low-income litigants. But if the Court buys the equal-protection arguments, won’t it require a holding for all Californians?
❔ Will the Superior Courts oppose the relief? LA Superior Court, after all, already issued a local rule allowing electronic recordings.
❓ Will the Legislature oppose? To the contrary, Jeff makes a bold prediction that the Legislature, to avoid embarrassment, will amend or abolish Gov. Code § 69957 before the Court rules.
⁉️ Will the court reporter lobby oppose? Is opposition possible without appearing villainous?
Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.
Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.
Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal’s weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.
Other items discussed in the episode:
Disclaimer: The views expressed by our guest, James Mixon, are his own and do not reflect the official position of the California Court of Appeal or the California Judicial Branch. AI technology and legal standards are rapidly evolving, listeners should verify current rules and consult qualified attorneys before implementing AI tools in their practice. Attorneys must independently verify all legal citations and comply with applicable rules of professional conduct.
