Heather Colman explains how wikis were an ideal KM solution for her law firm. Quick and easy to set up, requiring little IT support, wikis support central data repositories and provide features including search capabilities, email, RSS, and also allow users to create a taxonomy of subject tags to classify information.
Following up on his commentary about how problem-solving models can help lawyers (and law students) to solve legal problems systematically and to communicate legal solutions persuasively in writing, Troy Simpson discusses what makes a good problem-solving model.
Jim Calloway explains why every lawyer needs to understand a few basic things about metadata. He contends that the legal ethics implications of metadata “mining” are no longer just of interest to the lawyers processing electronic discovery, or the ethics mavens.
Conrad J. Jacoby’s holiday wish is for the legal community to finally develop one or more judicially accepted standards that can be used to craft consistent ways of requesting and producing information. With baseline procedures in place, both producing and requesting parties, as well as judges, will be able to make more informed decisions about the need for discovery and the way in which such discovery should be conducted.
Conrad J. Jacoby addresses how critical technology issues related to document authenticity and document-associated metadata have left fewer lawyers willing to accept e-mail messages and other electronic documents in print format. He argues that litigants choosing to produce electronically stored information in hardcopy format should be prepared to provide more complete electronic copies of their production, even when it isn’t initially requested by opposing counsel.
In his third article in the series, Troy Simpson focuses on “a process model of problem-solving that provides a useful framework, because it offers a systematic, non-random way of tackling problems.”
In this second article in the series, Troy Simpson suggests that the ‘case method’ of teaching law may help to explain why lawyers write badly. He then outlines some of the advantages of the ‘problem method’ of teaching law.
Conrad J. Jacoby examines the recent case of Southern New England Telephone Company (“SNET”) v. Global NAPS, Inc. as an example of how stonewalling and committing perjury, especially with respect to electronic discovery matters that can be independently validated, remains a poor litigation strategy.
In this column, Troy Simpson writes on persuading judges in writing. This first article in the series surveys the history of written advocacy in three jurisdictions — England and Wales, Australia, and America – to show why good written advocacy is vital to the modern lawyer.
Conrad J. Jacoby focuses on two recent cases that emphasize the credibility problems counsel can face in the context of e-discovery – and suggest that outside assistance may be the only way for some counsel to demonstrate that these materials are being managed in a competent and trustworthy way.