Remote Proceedings and Appearances

(a) Purpose. A district court has discretion to hold a proceeding remotely or allow a remote appearance. Because remote participation can improve efficiency and access, a court should consider it in the following and similar circumstances: (1) the parties agree to a remote proceeding or appearance; (2) the proceeding is preliminary or only for scheduling purposes; (3) the time, expense, or travel for an in-person proceeding or appearance outweighs its benefits; (4) a remote proceeding or appearance would increase access to the court or help address an attorney shortage; or (5) a party, witness, attorney, or other participant expresses health concerns about attending an in-person proceeding or appearance. (b) Notice. A party requesting a remote proceeding or appearance must notify all parties of the request. If the court grants the request, the requesting party must ensure that all parties have the required link to access the proceeding. (c) Platform Designation. A judicial district may designate a platform for remote proceedings and appearances. The chief judge must send the platform designation to the judicial administrator. The Office of Judicial Administration will post the platform designation on the Judicial Branch website. (d) Discretion. A district court has discretion to deny a party’s request for a remote proceeding or appearance for any reason, such as the following reasons: (1) the request is untimely under the circumstances; (2) the requesting party failed to properly notify all parties of the request; (3) the party requested a different platform than the judicial district’s designated platform; (4) a remote proceeding or appearance would undermine the integrity, fairness, or effectiveness of the proceeding, such as when highly sensitive, particularly dense, or exhibit-heavy testimony is expected; (5) a participant has a history of abusing remote proceedings or appearances or failing to observe the dignity and decorum expected in a court proceeding; (6) subsection (e) applies; or (7) the court finds that a remote proceeding or appearance is inappropriate for any other reason. (e) Prohibited. A district court must not hold a remote proceeding or allow a remote appearance under the following circumstances: (1) a remote proceeding or appearance would be inconsistent with any person’s rights under the United States or Kansas Constitutions, including the rights of a criminal defendant or victim; (2) a remote proceeding or appearance would make privileged attorney-client communications or other confidential communications difficult; (3) a remote proceeding or appearance would not allow public access during the proceeding unless the proceeding is closed or access is limited by statute or rule; (4) a remote proceeding or appearance would prevent the court from making a recording sufficient to produce a transcript after the proceeding; or (5) the court or a party cannot access the technology required for a remote proceeding or appearance, including when a jail or correctional institution cannot provide an inmate access to a remote proceeding or appearance. (f) Record of Denial. A district court is not required to make findings or state its reason for denying a remote proceeding or appearance unless a party asks the court to do so on the record or in a journal entry. This rule does not provide any grounds for appellate review beyond existing statutory or constitutional law. (g) Constitutional Right. Nothing in this rule requires a person to waive a constitutional right. (h) Request for Accommodation. This rule does not apply to a request from a qualified individual with a disability for an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and its implementing regulations. [ History: New rule adopted effective October 14, 2025.]