Rule 2.408.Use of Videoconferencing Technology in Civil Cases

Building on Rule 2.407's general framework, this rule draws a line between routine procedural matters and the kind of proceeding where live testimony and evidence make an in-person setting the default. A court can allow videoconferencing at any participant's request, or on its own, in any civil proceeding, but bench and jury trials, and any civil proceeding where witness testimony or evidence might come in, are kept out of that default unless the court decides otherwise, with notice and a chance for every party to be heard on the question first.

For everything else, the rule flips the presumption toward video, subject to a court finding under Rule 2.407(C) that a particular case doesn't fit that mold. In circuit court, that presumption covers civil pretrials, early scheduling conferences, discovery motions, adjournments, changes to a scheduling order, motions in limine, postjudgment collection or discovery matters, certain testimonial hearings, and motions to correct or amend pleadings or for summary disposition. District court's list is a shorter version of the same idea: pretrials, early scheduling conferences, discovery motions, adjournments, postjudgment collection matters, and motions to correct or amend pleadings.