Limited situations in which a judicial officer may preside remotely from a location other than a courtroom

(a) Purpose This rule prescribes when, in limited situations and in the interest of justice, a judicial officer may use remote technology to effectuate their own participation in a proceeding from a location other than a courtroom. (b) Application (1) This rule applies when a judicial officer presiding from a location other than a courtroom uses remote technology to effectuate their own participation in the proceeding. (2) This rule does not apply when a judicial officer presides in person over a proceeding convened in a location other than a court facility, even if another participant appears remotely. (3) This rule applies to all civil cases subject to Code of Civil Procedure section 367.75. (4) Nothing in this rule limits a judicial officer from engaging in any other judicial functions, duties, or actions authorized by law to be performed in a location other than a courtroom. (c) Definitions As used in this rule: (1) “Court facility” has the same meaning as that provided in Government Code section 70301(d). (2) The following terms have the same meaning as those provided in rule 3.672(c): (A) “Proceeding.” (B) “Remote proceeding.” (C) “Remote technology.” (d) Location of a judicial officer within a court facility A judicial officer may preside remotely from a location within a court facility other than a courtroom only if doing so is in the interest of justice, the presiding judge approves, and either: (1) No parties are appearing in person at the proceeding; or (2) No courtrooms are available in the court facility. (e) Location of a judicial officer outside a court facility A judicial officer may not preside remotely from a location outside a court facility unless doing so is in the interest of justice, the presiding judge approves, and (1) The judicial officer cannot safely access or preside from a court facility because of hazardous conditions, including those resulting from: (A) Natural disaster; (B) Severe weather; (C) Public emergency; (D) Facilities failure; (E) Security threats; or (F) Other extraordinary circumstances as determined by the presiding judge; or (2) Presiding remotely in a matter is essential to prevent a significant delay that would substantially prejudice the litigants. Rule 10.635 adopted effective July 1, 2024.