By Tom Jarvis
It has been five years since the COVID-19 pandemic upended the world. While the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the novel coronavirus a global pandemic on March 11, 2020, it wasn’t until April that the gravity of the situation set in – it wasn’t going away anytime soon. In rapid succession, schools and businesses shut down, lockdowns were enforced, travel came to a standstill, and hospitals were overwhelmed with patients clinging to the hope that a cure or effective treatment would emerge – only to face a harsh and prolonged reality.
By April 2020, more than 3.9 billion people in more than 90 countries and territories – nearly half the world’s population – had been ordered or advised to stay home. These lockdowns had profound and far-reaching consequences on individuals and society as a whole.
For better or worse, the shutdowns and quarantines, mask and vaccine mandates, and the spread of misinformation and media censorship deepened divisions among Americans. The widespread fear and uncertainty that resulted fueled mistrust, resentment, and incivility that persist to this day.
During a period when plexiglass and PPE were everywhere and phrases like unprecedented times, new normal, social distancing, flatten the curve, and trust the science were becoming part of the everyday vernacular, public health itself had become a partisan issue. The lasting economic and mental health impacts further compounded these societal fractures.
The Courts Pivot Under Pressure
As the shutdowns took effect, New Hampshire’s court system scrambled to adapt, ensuring continued access to justice, while the New Hampshire Bar Association worked urgently to support its members through unprecedented challenges. These efforts underscored the legal community’s resilience and the need for innovation in the face of crisis.
“Looking back, it’s hard to believe that it happened,” says Judge Tina Nadeau, who was the Superior Court Chief Justice at the time. “It’s hard to believe that we were able to pivot and continue our operations in the court system. It’s the only time in my career that I truly lost sleep at night. The challenge of balancing the severe threat to public safety with defendants’ constitutional rights to a speedy trial was always on my mind.”
Judge Nadeau continues: “Since we had no Supreme Court Chief Justice at the time, the remaining four justices relied on the trial court judges and the Administrative Office of the Courts director to manage operations. Because of our close collaboration, we did not close the courts, but rather slowed down operations so that we could institute remote and telephonic hearings. Our IT department worked around the clock to make it happen.”
Judge Nadeau says her biggest focus was safely resuming jury trials. She partnered with Chief Judge of the US District Court for the District of New Hampshire Landya McCafferty and others to determine an effective solution, seeking guidance from an epidemiologist, Dr. Erin Bromage from UMass Dartmouth.
In the Superior Court, Judge Nadeau formed the Return to Operations Committee, composed of judges, lawyers, clerks, and staff. The committee developed a 30-page protocol covering every aspect of trial safety, from jury selection to objections and security.
In August 2020, New Hampshire’s state and federal courts were among the first in the country to restart jury trials. The Granite State’s thorough approach was later recognized by the National Center for State Courts, which shared their protocols with 20 other states.
“There was exceptional cooperation between the state and federal courts in New Hampshire,” says Chief Judge McCafferty. “Justice Nadeau and I worked hand in glove throughout the entire pandemic and Dr. Bromage was instrumental in the success of both the state and federal courts. The federal court is especially grateful to Dr. Bromage for explaining the science in a way we judges could understand. We could not have achieved success during the pandemic without him. I never thought I would need a degree in virology to be an effective chief!”
Chief Judge McCafferty notes that Dr. Bromage attended the federal court’s first trial back to observe and give feedback for all the other courts.
“We also collaborated with other federal and state courts,” she says, explaining that Dr. Bromage was part of their group meetings, which began weekly via Zoom, then shifted to biweekly, and eventually monthly, before stopping once they felt they could continue independently. “Our first-rate, out-of-this-world IT team at the federal court figured out how to make Zoom work securely for us, too. It was inspiring how everybody worked together and was able to get through that nightmarish experience.”
Judge David King, then-administrative judge of the Circuit Court, says the Administrative Council was crucial during that period without a state Supreme Court chief justice at the helm.
“I think it’s amazing that we came through that period in the court’s history as well as we did,” says Judge King. “Judge Nadeau became the expert on the science of COVID. In the Circuit Court, we handle all the emergencies in the court system, so we quickly realized we had to figure out how to keep the courts moving, how to keep up with the statutory deadlines that a lot of our cases have, and pivot to working remotely, both judges and court staff, to continue to serve the public with all of the needs that they had.”
Judge King praises the Circuit Court’s swift response to the pandemic, prioritizing urgent cases with statutory deadlines while transitioning about a third of the 11,000 scheduled hearings in the first three weeks to telephonic proceedings. Cases were categorized into those that had to proceed, those that could continue if resources allowed, and those that were postponed, such as small claims and minor criminal cases.
The Circuit Court collaborated with advocacy centers and DCYF to accept petitions via email, expedited adult guardianship hearings from 14 days to 24 hours, and shifted involuntary admission cases to telephonic hearings. Additionally, Court Information Center staff rapidly transitioned to remote work to handle 2,000 daily calls from the public.
“We never missed a phone call,” says Judge King. “Every day it was a different issue, though. I’ve often said that managing the Circuit Court through the COVID-19 pandemic was much more of a managerial challenge than creating the Circuit Court in the first place back in 2011.”
Beyond the courts, the legal profession also had to adapt quickly, facing financial and mental health strains while working to support clients and communities.
The Bar Stands Together
The pandemic’s immediate and devastating impact was the widespread loss of livelihoods, as businesses shuttered, industries collapsed, and unemployment soared. While governments provided financial aid, it often fell short, leading to increased poverty, housing insecurity, and food instability.
Beyond financial hardship, the crisis took a severe toll on mental health, with isolation, uncertainty, and grief fueling rising rates of anxiety, depression, and other disorders. Limited access to in-person therapy and support systems worsened the situation, while homeschooling, job loss, and health concerns put immense strain on families, contributing to higher divorce rates.
Tragically, domestic violence and suicide rates also spiked, as victims found themselves trapped at home with fewer options for help, and many who faced financial ruin or mental health struggles saw no way out. While the long-term effects are still unfolding, the social, psychological, and economic scars will take years to heal.
Attorney Ed Philpot, who served as president of the NHBA during the initial shutdowns, says one of his main concerns throughout the ordeal was making sure that lawyers were okay.
“I was spending half my day, many days, handling Bar-related issues, mostly focused on helping people,” he says. “The effect was seismic on the practice for members of the Bar, fundamentally changing the way business was conducted, with a particularly huge impact on small and solo firm practitioners.”
Philpot says he worked with the NHBA’s Professional Development department to provide CLEs at little-to-no cost so members could stay in compliance and keep working.
“There was a real human cost early on,” he says. “When the courts closed down and transactions stopped occurring, it became difficult for people to make a living. I had a lot of conversations with members who were struggling to make ends meet. When I called to check in with members, the standard response – 10 out of 10 times – was that they were busy. That’s not really an answer. The mental health toll was immense; people were scared and upset. When someone is asking whether to pay their mortgage or their Bar dues, that’s a pretty profound thing.”
Judge Daniel Will, who succeeded Philpot as NHBA president, recalls that they had to pass the gavel remotely during the first-ever virtual NHBA Annual Meeting, a break from tradition forced by the pandemic.
“It was really strange [coming into the role as Bar president], you just did what you had to do to keep things running,” says Judge Will. “We devised new ways to conduct business as usual in a highly unusual time. Looking back, I’m proud of the Association and its staff for navigating those uncharted waters so well – keeping programming, the administration, and the Board of Governors going while supporting members in a very challenging environment.”
Judge Will says one of the main challenges of his presidency was figuring out how to conduct the NHBA’s Midyear Meeting virtually for the first time ever.
“It was a huge pivot to have the meeting virtually,” he says. “Presenters had to record their presentations in advance, and I sometimes had to go and help with some segments. Then the whole thing had to be stitched together.”
A Changed World
On May 5, 2023, the WHO declared that the COVID-19 pandemic was no longer a global health emergency. Some experts now classify it as endemic, meaning it will persist in the population indefinitely.
Much has changed in our way of life since then. How we communicate (Zoom, Teams, etc.), education, work-from-home policies, vaccine reticence, and public health discourse have all transformed.
A 2024 Pew Research Center survey found that only 20 percent of Americans now consider COVID-19 a major threat – a sharp decline from the peak of 67 percent in 2020. The survey also revealed that three-quarters of Americans acknowledge the pandemic took a toll on their lives. When it comes to public restrictions, opinions remain divided: 38 percent believe there should have been fewer, 18 percent say there should have been more, and 44 percent feel the measures were appropriate. Overall, 72 percent of respondents said the pandemic did more to divide the country than unite it.
While the pandemic’s effects continue to shape society, one thing remains clear: the resilience and adaptability shown during the crisis left lasting lessons. In New Hampshire’s legal system, those lessons ensured that access to justice never wavered.
“I honestly think we did a phenomenal job in New Hampshire of keeping access to justice available to anybody who needed it, particularly on an emergency basis,” says Judge King. “Everybody just rolled up their sleeves and pitched in. We couldn’t have done it without our staff. It truly was a collaborative effort from everybody in the system that made it work. If it ever happens again, we can take everything we’ve learned and apply it.”