Menu
Log in
Forgot password

Association for Conflict Resolution - Greater New York Chapter↑

Search
Log in
Forgot password

Virtual Hearings and Cameras

Monday, June 01, 2026 11:24 AM | Anonymous

Remote Legal Proceedings ...

Should an arbitrator allow some parties or counsel to turn off cameras during a virtual arbitration hearing?  Should all be required to have cameras on?  If cameras are on, should the arbitrator prohibit blurred or virtual backgrounds? 

What are your thoughts?


Comments

  • Monday, June 01, 2026 12:11 PM | Eric D. Kuritzky, Architect, CBO, Arbitrator
    If cameras are employed, they should either be all on or all off.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 12:15 PM | Lou Russo, Russo Law LLC
    My view is that the goal isn't perfect video etiquette—it's preserving the integrity of the proceeding.

    As long as each participant represents who is present in the room (or listening) and confirms that no undisclosed individuals are observing the hearing, I'm generally comfortable with some flexibility. If a party needs to briefly turn off their camera, particularly where there are multiple attorneys appearing for that party and at least one remains visible on camera, I don't see that as a problem.

    Similarly, blurred or virtual backgrounds don't bother me so long as they aren't being used to conceal the presence of others. The important thing is that everyone knows who is participating in the hearing and who may be able to hear the proceedings.

    One practice I like is requiring participants to promptly disclose if anyone enters the room, overhears the proceedings, or has been listening without prior disclosure. Transparency is more important than whether someone's bookshelf or laundry room is visible.

    For those working from home, headphones and closed (preferably locked) doors are also good practice to minimize unintended intrusions and prevent non-participants from overhearing confidential testimony. The only exception, of course, is the occasional dog wandering through the background. Most arbitrators seem willing to extend limited immunity to canine interruptions. 🐶

    In short, I would focus less on rigid camera and background rules and more on ensuring that everyone participating in the hearing knows exactly who is present, who is listening, and that the record remains fair and secure.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 12:15 PM | Jim Gansinger
    One on, all on. No blurred or virtual backgrounds.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 12:19 PM | Robert L. Arrington
    I think there can be some flexibility, especially when there are multiple persons serving as counsel for the same party, and one of them is always visible. If a witness is testifying, that witness should be required to confirm that no one off camera is coaching him or her.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 12:25 PM | Jack Levin
    I agree with Lou Russo on all points. I'd add that for anyone actively participating, the camera should always be on as an indication that the person is truly engaged. As an arbitrator, it's a bad look for a lawyer with a speaking role to have their camera off. Similarly, arbitrators should have their cameras on. Of course, everyone may need to turn off their camera for a moment or two. If they need to be away longer, they might want to explain why.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 12:38 PM | dan feinstein
    In in-person hearings, there are times when it is acceptable for an attorney to not be physically present. For example, when there are co-counsel representing one side, one of the attorneys may be out in the hall to arrange for the next witness to be present while other counsel is questioning a different witness. I see no reason why we shouldn't allow something similar in virtual hearings.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 12:50 PM | Stephen Sorensen
    Most of my recent arbitrations have been virtual. I don’t allow the witnesses to have blurred backgrounds as I want to make sure there is no one with them. I use breakout rooms when the attorneys need to talk to their witnesses. This is just same as the attorney leaving the room to talk to their witnesses witnesses. My own background is also not blurred as I want to make sure that the attorneys know there there is no one else in the room with me.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 2:24 PM | David B. Wilson
    A virtual hearing is intended to mirror the conditions at an "in-person" hearing. Any hearing participants whom the tribunal would see if present with them in the hearing room "in person" should be visible on camera. Thus, for example, cameras should be on for testifying witnesses, the parties' counsel, and client representatives. Virtual or blurred backgrounds should not be used. Microphones should be muted for anyone who is not speaking.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 2:55 PM | Stanley Santire
    In a virtual situation, the camera needs to be on at all times. Period. And no blurring. I also need confirmation that there is not anyone in the loop or the room that is not directly involved in the process.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, June 01, 2026 3:56 PM | Rebecca A. Bowman, Esq., P.E.
    Generally, I don't have a problem with brief turn-offs for non-testifying and non-questioning participants (or canine interruptions). WITH the disclosure requirement, I don't have a problem with blurred and substitute backgrounds. HOWEVER, I occasionally have connectivity issues come up and sometimes the only option on-the-fly is to turn off the camera to reduce the load. I have started instructing the witnesses need to be in a fixed location with service. I've had too many instances of 18-wheelers whizzing by, rocking the parked car the witness is in. Yes, I DO request, but not require headphones.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Tuesday, June 02, 2026 10:14 AM | Judge Richard B Klein (ret.)
    I think Lou Russo covered the issue well. The idea is to make sure there is no coaching of the witnesses. It may be more complicated if the lawyer and witness are in different locations. Often it is asked that the lay person scan the room to show no one else is there. A more common problem is that while the lawyers are set up for a Zoom, there are problems with connectivity of the lay witnesses (who may or may not be parties). The lawyers should be REQUIRED to run a test if the parties/witnesses will not be in their office. In some circumstances, the arbitrators should be able to observe, making sure there is no ex parte communiation.
    Link  •  
    Author
    Comment
     
  • Tuesday, June 02, 2026 3:55 PM | David E. Robbins
    Ful disclosure / full exposure. A virtual hearing should be as close to a live one as possible.
    Link  •  Reply
Association for Conflict Resolution - Greater New York Chapter

© ACR-GNY

Contact Us

Email us at questions@acrgny.org

ACR-GNY's mission and programming are generously sponsored by:

ADR Notable: Dispute Resolution Management Made Easy
Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software