Any amendments to the local rule must be submitted to the Administrative Office prior to implementation.
Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 45
Committee Comments
(Revised Feb. 2, 2023)
In enacting Rule 45 in May 2020, the Supreme Court recognized that telephone and video conference appearances can be used effectively and appropriately for both civil and criminal cases. The Committee Comments at that time stated that the use of remote participation was subject to the discretion of the court and that the court had wide latitude to allow remote appearances without a showing of good cause or any particular level of hardship. The Committee Comments emphasized that remote appearances should be easy to request and liberally allowed. The original Rule adopted the definitions in the Supreme Court Policy on Remote Appearances in Civil Cases, in particular the definition of case participant.
In 2022, the Illinois Judicial Conference determined that the use of remote appearances in both civil and criminal cases should be further encouraged and promoted. At the same time, the Supreme Court desired that courts continue their use of telephone and video conferences which was so prevalent during the COVID-19 pandemic and assisted circuits in obtaining necessary technology. For these reasons, the Illinois Judicial Conference presented a proposal to amend Rule 45 which identified non-evidentiary case proceeding types which were suited to remote appearances and provided that case participants should be given the opportunity to appear remotely without any advance court approval in those proceeding types. However, the proposal as set forth in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) afforded discretion to individual judges on a case-by-case basis and circuits by local rule to determine when an in-person appearance is necessary.
In proposing new Rule 45, the Illinois Judicial Conference sought to build on the effective use and acceptance of remote appearances in both criminal and civil cases by the courts since the enactment of Rule 45. The proposal continued to adopt the definitions in the Supreme Court Policy on Remote Appearances in Civil cases and where appropriate the original Committee Comments.
a. Individual circuits are encouraged to submit their local rules in advance of the deadline outlined in paragraph (b)(7). The 90-day deadline specified in paragraph (b)(7) is to afford circuits time to implement new technology, but courts may still comply with the Rule by offering the option to appear by telephone. A model local rule is available on the Supreme Court website to assist circuits in submitting and publishing their individual local rules in accordance with Rule 45.
b. When exercising discretion under paragraph (b)(1), the judge presiding over the matter shall consider whether the in-person appearance is necessary, the nature and purpose of the proceeding, the impact this decision will have on the case paiiicipant' s ability to paiiicipate in the proceeding, and other issues of fairness and due process.
c. When exercising discretion under paragraph (b)(2), circuits shall consider whether there is a necessity for the exemption and the impact that the exemption may have on the ability of all case participants to participate in court proceedings and on the ability of lawyers to efficiently and cost effectively serve people, particularly those in need.
d. In accordance with the prior Committee Comments to the original Rule 45, any procedures and processes for seeking an approval for a remote appearance shall be easy, and an approval should be liberally granted without requiring a showing of good cause or any particular level of hardship, unless otherwise provided by Supreme Comi Rule (for example, Rule 241, on the use of remote appearances in civil trials and evidentiary hearings).
e. In remote proceedings, as in in-person proceedings, courts must maintain order and ensure that the proceedings are conducted with dignity, decorum, and without distraction. The local rules should set forth the standards of decorum and expectations as to appropriate behavior with the use of telephone and video conferencing.
f. Courts should first consider obtaining and using free telephone or video conference services before considering fee-based services. Services that are free for case participants to use are readily available. Any fees associated with the use of a particular remote appearance platform should not impose a barrier on a case paiiicipant who is not able to pay that cost and should be subject to waiver for case participants who cannot afford them. If a court chooses to use a service that requires the payment of fees, the court should consider whether the costs can be waived by the service, paid by another party, or paid by the court, or if the court should also use a free service. The focus should be on increasing accessibility to the courts and not on imposing an additional barrier to a remote court appearance in the form of a fee. The court or circuit clerk shall not impose their own fees for case participants to appear remotely.
g. Courts should consider related processes that may need to be adjusted to accommodate remote appearances, including, but not limited to, how case paiiicipants submit and obtain orders after remote appearances and how to best assist the public in accessing remote technology.