LOS ANGELES - July 23, 2020 - (Newswire.com)
Courts are increasingly accepting that remote or virtual hearings are an important alternative to in-person court attendance. Many that initially looked to purportedly free or low-cost alternatives are discovering that those platforms do not meet the needs of the courts, attorneys or the public and actually come at significant expense. Increasingly, courts are acknowledging the value of the support, service and added security provided by CourtCall.
Unlike many of the other platforms including Zoom, Skype, and Webex that require software downloads to optimize user experience, CourtCall is browser-based and does not require downloads to court or law firm networks. Sessions are passcode protected and multiple parties cannot participate on a set of shared codes. Scheduling is provided and caucus rooms are activated in real-time to replicate the court and legal environment for private communications while integration with Docusign allows for the immediate and in platform execution of orders, stipulations and agreements. Only CourtCall has the elements to support the workflow of judges and attorneys.
Busy judges should not moderate their own calls, court staff should not be required to create user guides, handle scheduling issues and troubleshoot video and audio issues on dozens and dozens of calls every day. Indeed, the thousands of hours spent by courts on such items currently cost courts and taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars each day. Time spent on such items also delay the actual work of judges and staff and often contribute to the worsening backlogs that many courts are experiencing.
“On an emergency basis, a number of courts moved judges and court staff away from their traditional roles and responsibilities. Limited and extremely valuable judicial and staff resources and salaries have been directed away from important work to support the remote services associated with free or low-cost but unsupported generic platforms. As a result, what appears to be a free alternative actually comes at a very steep price,” said Bob Alvarado, CEO of CourtCall. “A quick analysis demonstrates that such redirection of judicial and court resources is not sustainable and we can swiftly walk any court through the review process,” Alvarado continued.
“As just one example, for smaller communities, we can provide fully remote video arraignment services between a courtroom and a CourtCall customized detention facility kiosk for $1,200.00 per month – often less than the cost of transportation of inmates for one day, saving a community hundreds of thousands of dollars each year. Of course, we are also scaling those systems to suit dozens of courtrooms in larger communities. In our 25 years of service to the courts and legal community, we have tailored our service to every situation imaginable and continue to enable courts to make audio or video remote appearances a part of every element of their daily work from Civil, Family, Criminal, Juvenile and Mental Health matters to fully remote Trials, Settlement Conferences, Arbitrations and Mediations,” Alvarado concluded.
CourtCall was established in 1995, with the desire to make remote Court Appearances simple, accessible and affordable for all parties and has completed more than 6,000,000 remote appearances. CourtCall developed the Remote Appearance Platform, creating an organized and voluntary way for attorneys to appear for routine matters in Civil, Family, Criminal, Probate, Bankruptcy, Workers’ Compensation and other cases from their offices, homes or other convenient locations. Designed with reliable and user-friendly technologies, courts and remote participants experience seamless communication during cases, while benefiting from significant time and cost savings. CourtCall is the industry leader in facilitating remote Court Appearances throughout the United States, Canada and Worldwide.
Contact
Edie Liu, Chief Operating Officer
(888) 882-6878, Ext. 856 or eliu@CourtCall.com
Press Release Service by Newswire.com
Original Source: CourtCall Continues to Allow Courts to Avoid the Costs and Disruption Associated "Free" Offerings.
