Archive for the ‘courts and’Category

Opinion: Zelotes v. Rousseau (Total Attorneys Case)

At issue in this case was whether Chicago-based lead-generation service Total Attorneys was violating ethical rules by doing business Lawyers in the State of Connecticut. The answer apparently was no. At least, not based on the complaint brought by this Attorney-Plaintiff. The opinion is seen as a victory for free enterprise as opposed to the grip of local bar associations, which routinely monopolize Attorney-Referral Services, which are a source of profit.

I’m not saying the decision actually is a victory for anyone (other than Total Attorneys) but even the most cynical observer will admit that the idea of preventing lawyers from saving money and reaching prospective clients so that bar associations could maintain their monopoly … I mean, ensure the clients’ best interests – was heavy handed and backward-looking.

Prove me wrong. I dare you.

Posted via email from practice (redux)

7th Circuit E-Discovery Program

This month’s installment from Cybercontrols is about the E-Discovery Pilot Program run by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The Pilot runs from Oct. 1 ‘09 to May 1 ‘10 and is intended to motivate informational exchanges between counsel relating to electronically stored information (ESI) through a proposed standing order that select district judges, magistrates, and bankruptcy judges in the Seventh Circuit have already agreed to use. The principals set out in the proposed order go beyond the 2006 ESI amendements to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to include subjects such as

Zealous Representation. Principle 1.02 specifically addresses the zealous representation excuse for obstructionist behavior – the principles state that “An attorney’s zealous representation of a client is NOT compromised by conducting discovery in a cooperative manner.” (Emphasis added)

Proportionality. Principle 1.03 calls attention to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C), which permits objections to discovery requests where the burden or expense outweighs its likely benefit considering such things as the resources of the parties and the amount in controversy.

Meet and Confers. Principle 2.01 specifically references Fed. R. Evid. 502. If the pilot project can find a way to minimize the amount of attorney time spent in pre-production privilege reviews it would have made a huge contribution to achieving the overall goal of securing the “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action.”

E-Discovery Liaison. Principle 2.02 contemplates the appointment of an e-discovery liaison for the purpose of meeting, conferring or attending court hearings on e-discovery issues. The liaison may be an attorney but can also be a third party consultant or an employee of the party. The liaison needs to know or have access to the people who are familiar with a party’s electronic systems and capabilities, as well as the technical aspects of e-discovery

Preservation. Principle 2.03 explicitly disfavors broad requests for preservation and encourages the exchange of specific information to help determine appropriately specific preservation agreements.

Scope of Preservation. Principle 2.04 covers the scope of preservation. 2.04(b) requires a party seeking information regarding the other party’s preservation and collection efforts to confer with the other party before initiating such discovery. 2.04(d) enumerates types of information that would NOT ordinarily be preserved, e.g. deleted, slack, fragmented or unallocated data.

Identification of ESI. Principle 2.05 encourages parties to discuss such things as treatment for duplicative ESI, filtering based on file type, date ranges, etc, and use of keyword searching, topic or concept clustering or other advanced culling technologies.

Production Format. Principle 2.06 states that ESI and other tangible or hard copy documents that are not text-searchable need not be made text searchable, meaning, evidently, that scanned paper documents would not need to be OCR’d.

Education. Principle 3.01 states a judicial expectation that counsel will be familiar with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governing electronic discovery. Considering that the ESI rules have been in effect for three years as of December 1, 2009, and they were much publicized prior to their adoption, that hardly seems unreasonable or overreaching.

Seventh Circuit E-Discovery Pilot Program: 7th Circuit E-Discovery Program

CyberControls E-Discovery Request Considerations: E-Discovery Request Considerations

CyberControls specializes in electronic discovery and production, computer forensics, and integration of computer technology in civil litigation. Visit www.cybercontrols.net.

social-media time management

Better late than never?

Once more the Old Gray Lady has demonstrated how old and gray she is; this time by publishing this piece about lawyers who post on blogs, Facebook, or Twitter, could risk a reprimand or censure from oversight authorities like the Bar or State Supreme Court.

I know what you’re thinking. Could anyone at the Times actually think this was news?  But be fair. If you lived in a time warp, you too might think that bland observations like this one amount to journalism:

Sean Conway found himself hauled up before the Florida bar, which issued a reprimand and a fine for one of his blog posts. But as an officer of the court lawyers like Conway face special risks. Their freedom to gripe is limited by codes of conduct.

The rest of the article is equally insightful. My theory is that the author swiped every single point in the piece from the blogging policies I developed in 2004. Way to stay cutting edge NY Times.

Top 10 Disruptive Technologies Noted by Richard Susskind at ILTA 2009

Prism Legal’s Ron Friendman liveblogged (a/k/a real-time blogged) Richard Susskind’s discussion of the future of the profession at ILTA 2009.  Here are the Top 10 disruptive legal technologies on the list:

Document Assembly. Has already changed markets. Providing document assembly online allows for economies of scale. Charges and hours don’t have to relate, making this technology “disruptive.

Always on Connectivity. Lawyers can, and are expected to, be on call 24/7.  Deal with it.

Electronic Legal Marketplace. Your value in the  a frictionless marketplace. Clients can select legal services in the electronic marketplace and even choose to go with non-lawyer alternatives.

E-Learning. Law schools have long been falling down on the job. The Internet can revive learning with realistic simulations.

Online Legal Guidance. Interactive advice systems in the “latent legal market” (see Suskind, The Future of Lawyers). Sounds like self-guided document automation.

Legal Open-Sourcing. A la Wikipedia. Crowd-sourcing communities of interested individuals can result in better answers than throwing the problem to a single individual.  Consumers more likely to talk to friend with similar problems than a lawyer.

Closed Legal Communities. See Legal Onramp. Clients and In House Counsel can pool legal information and check a common knowledge-base before consulting pricey outside counsel.

Workflow and Project Management. High volume, low value work can be made into off-the-rack solutions; making certain lawyers into de facto project managers. Project management requires significant training, but lawyers aren’t getting any. This is a disruptive trend because it highlights the fact that as efficiency increases, billable hours decrease.

Embedded Legal Knowledge. In the future legal knowledge will be built into compliance systems making the contributions of highly-trained counsel less necessary except for unusual assignments.

Online Dispute Resolution. Dispute resolution as a service. Services like CyberSettle versus time spent in Court or in the arbitration system.


Will Recap finally make PACER user friendly?

Recap: Making Pacer User Friendly

Making Pacer User Friendly

Friday I stumbled on Recap and was impressed.  How impressed? I downloaded it immediately and signed the online petition to make federal case-law available for free. Yeah – that impressed. Recap seems to have impressed some others as well; it has even enlisted top-shelf talent like the lawyer-activist-millionaires over at Justia (you might be more familiar with their last project, Findlaw).

How it works: Recap saves every document you view on PACER, adds meta-tags and other features, makes the item easier to find, and posts it to a central locale.  The next time a user goes to PACER and wants that document, if it’s already been “liberated” then the user can download it free of charge.

Granted, you end up paying the 8 cents per page, which means that someone else gets a free ride, but the idea is that someone else could be doing the same and so on.  Of course the fact that Recap exists begs the question of why we Americans must pay to view the fruits of our own justice system. Westlaw and Lexis figured out that answer a long time ago.

To use Recap you must use Firefox, the open-source alternative to Internet Explorer. But I suggest you download Firefox even if you don’t download Recap. It’s just a better browser.

Feedback:  If you’ve used Recap or have an opinion sound off in our comment section or contact me, Hacker in Chief, at mhedayat@mha-law.com

Office 2010 will be free and exist only online? How times have changed …

Microsoft Office 2010

Microsoft Office 2010

Just when the future of its venerable franchise was in doubt this movie about Microsoft Office 2010 reminds us that the company can still afford top-of-the-line PR.  On the other hand it remains to be seen whether Redmond can produce software that isn’t bloated and crash-prone.

Whatever the answer, by the time the dinosaurs at Microsoft roll out their “finished” product they will already have had to compete with the likes of Google Apps, Zimbra, Zoho, LiveOffice, and much, much more. Maybe that’s why the rumored price for the next-gen office suite is $0.00; take that everyone else in the world!

Does anyone else think Microsoft’s unweildly size and sluggish reaction times have finally overcome its monopoly power?  Hey, a guy can dream.



practicehacker is using WP-Gravatar