Magazzino

September 2, 2010

Expedited jury trials measure goes to the governor

Filed under: Legal — @ 4:58 am

A bill to authorize expedited jury trials, a streamlined method for handling certain civil cases in a more cost-effective manner for the litigants and the courts, sailed through the legislature on a unanimous vote last month, enjoying the same level of support it has drawn from plaintiff and defense lawyers, as well as other parties typically involved in civil cases.

If the governor signs the bill, the Judicial Council will be authorized to create court rules that will be implemented Jan. 1.

Noreen Evans
Noreen Evans

The Expedited Jury Trials Act (AB 2284) would permit cases to be heard on a date certain, before a judge and a jury of eight. Each side will be limited to three peremptory challenges and must put on their case in three hours, including opening and closing arguments, with a goal of concluding the case in one day. Participation is voluntary, verdicts — reached by six jurors — are binding, and appeals and post-trial motions are strictly limited. The proposal was developed over 18 months by a wide-ranging Judicial Council group that included advocates who otherwise agree on little and is modeled on similar quick trials that have been offered in New York and South Carolina for at least five years.

Dan Pone, senior attorney in the Judicial Council’s Office of Governmental Affairs who shepherded the measure through the legislature, said it offers a win-win for all the parties. Plaintiffs get their day in court and cases are heard quickly and less expensively. Defendants and their insurance companies can get guaranteed maximum exposure and more finality.

The rules will apply to all counties, but each court will decide how to offer speedy trials. If the demand is high in larger counties, courts may create separate divisions or appoint a particular judge to handle the expedited trials.

Assemblywoman Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa, who authored the bill, said it “saves the judiciary significant amounts of money and allows people to get their cases to trial and have their day in court. . . . There’s no reason for people to oppose it.” The measure came to fruition after two years of work by a coalition of defense counsel, consumer attorneys, and representatives of the judiciary and business who were able to hammer out a compromise before the bill came up for debate.

Evans, a former insurance defense counsel, worked with the same coalition to win passage last year of the Electronic Discovery Act, and said she is working on a number of issues “to modernize legal practice and save the judiciary money.”

July 9, 2010

Poll Shows People Support Checks and Balances, But Want More Limits on Supreme Court Justices

Filed under: Legal — @ 11:03 pm

Despite their support of checks and balances and desire for minimal changes in the Constitution, the American public favors a series of populist changes in our system of government, according to the results of a poll on the US Constitution prepared by Penn Schoen Berland for the Aspen Institute and released today at the Aspen Ideas Festival. Initiatives receiving public support include direct election of Supreme Court justices, elimination of the Electoral College, and the addition of amendments by national referenda.

(more…)

May 28, 2010

Scalia glad Kagan is not a judge

Filed under: Legal — @ 10:54 am

In a speech sponsored by Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law, Scalia said being a judge was not a requirement in the past. And he’s glad that nominee Elena Kagan has a different background. ABC News and the Washington Post reported on his remarks.

“When I first came to the Supreme Court [in 1986], three of my colleagues had never been a federal judge,” Scalia said. “William Rehnquist came to the bench from the Office of Legal Counsel. Byron White was deputy attorney general. And Lewis Powell … was a private lawyer in Richmond and had been president of the American Bar Association.”

(more…)

March 8, 2010

Center for families, children and the courts

Filed under: Legal — @ 7:39 pm

Subject:     Please Visit the Center for Families, Children and the Courts’ Blog
Date:     03/08/2010 05:39:24 PM (Mon, 8 Mar 2010 12:39:24 -0500)

Hi, all.

I am excited to announce that theUniversity of Baltimore School of Law Center for Families, Children and the Courts has created a blog.  The blog, at http://ub-cfcc.blogspot.com/, is intended to be a medium to share and discuss ideas, information, and news related to CFCC’s mission and projects.

We hope you will subscribe to, follow, or regularly check the blog to get updates about our work and to engage in discussions on some very important issues related to law’s impact on the lives of families and children.  Your involvement no doubt will deepen our understanding of the many influences affecting this work, and we look forward to hearing from you.

Best,

Barbara

 

Barbara A. Babb

Associate Professor of Law and Director

Center for Families, Children and the Courts (CFCC)

University of Baltimore School of Law

1420 North Charles Street

Baltimore, Maryland  21201

410.837.5661 (p)

410.837.5737 (f)

bbabb@ubalt.edu
CFCC’s Web site:  http://law.ubalt.edu/cfcc
My scholarship is available at http://ssrn.com/author=29837.
 See http://www.therapeuticjurisprudence.org

February 13, 2010

Open Jurist

Filed under: Legal — @ 9:33 pm

BBC News - Budding authors publish own work online and in printFrom:     John Page <jpagesq@GMAIL.COM>
Reply-to:     John Page <jpagesq@GMAIL.COM>
To:     SOLOSEZ@MAIL.ABANET.ORG
Subject:     [SOLOSEZ] OPEN JURIST FREE SEARCH ENGINE INSTALLS ON TOOLBAR
Date:     02/11/2010 05:47:41 PM (Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:47:41 -0500)

 Open Jurist is a resource for access to the case law of the United States.
Our organization believes that because the laws of the land are in the
public domain, they should be accessible by the public without restriction
and especially without charge. Our collection includes approximately 647,000
opinions and other transactions from the:

   - United States Supreme Court <http://openjurist.org/us>, beginning with
   the first session in 1790; and
   - Lower Federal Courts <http://openjurist.org/browse-open-jurist>, as
   published in the Federal Reporter beginning in 1880.

Search engine installs with your others on tool bar.  Convenient for quick
search.  I often like a global search just to get idea of syntax variations
related to theory of law.  For that I use VersusLaw, which will search all
states and fed in one pass.  Open Jurist may serve for those who don’t have
that option.

Can’t find much about OJ search connectors, syntax.  Seams to do fairly well
for plain language.

January 10, 2010

Justices to solos: Unbundle

Filed under: Legal — @ 5:38 pm

Solos: Unbundling

Posted Jan 4, 2010 10:56 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Unbundled legal services are one way to close a justice gap that is growing as more people find themselves unable to afford a lawyer, according to the chief justices of the California and New Hampshire supreme courts.

Writing in the New York Times, Chief Justices John Broderick Jr. of New Hampshire and Ronald George of California note that 41 states have adopted an ABA model rule that allows lawyers to take on only part of a case. The practice is known as “limited-scope representation” or unbundled legal services.

With proper ethical safeguards, lawyers offering unbundled legal services—particularly solo practitioners–may be able to help some people who would otherwise have never hired a lawyer, they say. “For those whose only option is to go it alone, at least some limited, affordable time with a lawyer is a valuable option we should all encourage,” they write.

“We need members of the legal profession to join with us, as many have done, in meeting this challenge by making unbundled legal services and other innovative solutions—like self-help websites, online assistance programs and court self-help centers—work for all who need them.”

December 1, 2009

Google legal search - from My Shingle.com

Filed under: Legal — @ 9:37 pm

1.  Is Google’s free service functional?  Google’s service isn’t the first time we’ve seen free legal research on the Internet.  For years, Findlaw purported to be a source of free research and to its credit, it aggregated most publicly issued court releases.  But Findlaw didn’t offer a search engine for locating the material nor did the cases include citations.  Moreover, Findlaw didn’t include any federal district court law, thus severely limiting its functionality.

Google’s legal research tool is different.  The coverage is broad, dating back at least 60 years and encompassing federal district court cases, bankruptcy and state and federal appellate decisions.  Not surprisingly, the search engine is robust, speedy and offers several neat features, such as the ability to search by state and to see how a case has been cited previously.  In addition, the cases include the appropriate Bluebook citation (e.g., 333 US 234 (1943)) and hyperlinks to other cited precedent.  

One deficiency I noticed, however:  I was unable to find unreported cases (or at least my one unreported case; most of mine are published).  For example, a Section 1983 case of mine went up to the Fourth Circuit and was affirmed in an unreported case.  Google lists the lower court decision, but the appellate decision isn’t available either through direct search or the cited previously feature.  That’s potentially a problem (even though many circuits don’t permit cites to unreported cases, they can prove valuable) and I assume it will be corrected or the omission will be clarified.

Update - for more extensive functionality analysis, see Don Cruse’s Scotx Blog and Volokh (describing his vanity search).

Google legal research

Filed under: Legal — @ 9:29 pm

Updated: Google has announced it is adding a new search function that will find full-text legal opinions from federal and state courts.

Users can go to the Google Scholar online search engine and type in case names, topics or key words to find the relevant cases. “We think this addition to Google Scholar will empower the average citizen by helping everyone learn more about the laws that govern us all,” Google says in an announcement posted at TaxProf Blog.

Researchers can try an “advanced scholar” search link that narrows searches to opinions in specific states, according to the Supreme Court of Texas Blog. Users can also specify whether they want to search for “all of the words,” an exact phrase, or at least one of the words. They can also add date and author restrictions.

Case law goes back about 80 years for federal cases and more than 50 years for state cases, according to Information Today Inc. The opinions will have “cited by” and “related articles” links that take readers to other opinions and articles that will help them understand the information. But there is no citator service that flags when an opinion is overruled or called into question.

The Supreme Court of Texas Blog says the new search option is “quite polished and looks like it might be usable for serious legal work.”

Josh Blackman’s Blog is also impressed with the results. “Extremely quick, efficient, and free,” the blog says. “And it doesn’t just link to FindLaw or Cornell. It actually has an original, full text version. I just entered in a few key Supreme Court cases, and a few prominent circuit cases, and they were all in Google. Pretty cool.”

There are some shortcomings, however, according to the story by Information Today Inc.

“This product is not going to put Lexis or Westlaw out of business,” Carol Ebbinghouse, law library director at the California 2nd District Court of Appeals, writes for the blog. “These files do not cover the time dating from the beginning of our country, nor to the beginnings of the individual states.”

Ebbinghouse notes that although there are hyperlinks within cases to other opinions, hyperlinks to other materials are not there.

“There are no hyperlinks to statutes, codes, regulations, administrative opinions, or anything else quoted or referred to in the text of the opinions,” she says. “Finally, there is no citator service to verify that a particular opinion has not been overruled or vacated, distinguished, or otherwise declared of dubious value.”

Related Coverage:

MyShingle: “Free Legal Research by Google & What It Means”

November 8, 2009

Web OS - Cloud computing

Filed under: Informatica, Legal — @ 8:45 pm

Theoretically, all you need is a computer, laptop or netbook with an internet connection and web browser. Simply logon and you’re sitting at your virtual desk. No more operating systems, updates or backups.

The Web OS system I’m using is called G.Ho.St at www.g.ho.st.com. It’s free and is working very well. Other Web OS I’ve heard about but have not used are www.glideos.com and www.icloud.com.

What worked great for us was the Folder Sync Service. We told the Web OS to sync a virtual folder with the client’s case folder on our office computer. The end result was that any work or changes I made during trial or late at night from home would be instantly updated on the office system, and visa versa. Motions, jury instructions and verdict forms were all easily modified and updated using this service.

Another cool aspect of the Web OS is that it’s performance doesn’t depend much on the speed of your computer. Aging laptops and older desktop work stations should work just fine. The quality and speed of your internet connection will affect performance but since most of us are already using DSL, cable or 3G wireless, this is not really a factor.

October 3, 2009

Scalia Worries Gifted Litigators Should Be Doing Something More Productive

Filed under: Legal — @ 11:33 am

Posted Oct 1, 2009, 08:28 am CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Justice Antonin Scalia says most lawyers who appear before the U.S. Supreme Court are so brilliant that he worries they should be doing something more productive.

Scalia’s observation was made in an interview with C-Span, the Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports. Scalia said he disagreed with former Chief Justice Warren Burger, who complained about the low quality of counsel.

“I used to have just the opposite reaction,” Scalia said, according to the Law Blog account. “I used to be disappointed that so many of the best minds in the country were being devoted to this enterprise.

“I mean there’d be a … public defender from Podunk, you know, and this woman is really brilliant, you know. Why isn’t she out inventing the automobile or, you know, doing something productive for this society?

“I mean lawyers, after all, don’t produce anything. They enable other people to produce and to go on with their lives efficiently and in an atmosphere of freedom. That’s important, but it doesn’t put food on the table, and there have to be other people who are doing that. And I worry that we are devoting too many of our very best minds to this enterprise.”

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress