The sun rises over the Supreme Court in Washington as visitors to the court wait for the opening session of the 1996-97 term. In the iCourthouse-room, plaintiffs post their case and anyone with an Internet connection can sit on the jury.
Jurors can ask questions, look at evidence, read a response from the defendant and render a verdict.
There are cases involving sexual harassment, the payment of a cat's medical bills after its owners' divorce, and whether a disc jockey should be liable for an injury sustained during a perilous conga line he initiated at a wedding reception. But lately, the most common cases are from plaintiffs wronged online. It portends of great things in the future. The site was started in November by Clyde and Claudia Long, two trial attorneys in California, as an avenue for alternate dispute resolution. The verdict is non-binding, but offers both parties a place to air their dispute in hopes of reaching a mutually amenable resolution without incurring big attorney fees.