Newsitem

Google Proximity Search Site (GAPS) No Longer Functional

One feature that Google does not offer in its Web search is the ability to create a well-defined proximity search. Unlike paid search products, we cannot indicate how close we want our keywords to be to one another in search results. 

While Google does offer the asterisk (*) to take the place of one (or more than one) word in a search (e.g., Mark * Rosch), we cannot indicate that we want Mark within one word of Rosch, or Mark in the same sentence as Rosch, etc.

One of our favorite work-arounds for this drawback was the was the Google API Proximity Search (GAPS) tool created by Web developer Kevin Shay at his site Staggernation.com. It allowed you to dictate a distance of up to three words between your terms - to keep them closer together (and more closely related). Note, however, that I am referring to Staggernation in the past tense.

Unfortunately, Google has retired the development tools on which GAPS was based, and the interface no longer functions.

Staggernation - GAPS

P.S. Kevin, yes we did find it useful AND entertaining. Thanks for taking the time to develop and share this tool.

 

Google Voice Now Open and Free to All - in the United States

This morning, Google announced that its Google Voice service is now available to anyone in the United States. Google Voice is Google’s free telephone service offering a wide range of calling and voicemail services. Its best-known feature is probably the ability to simultaneously forward incoming calls to multiple phone numbers, like a switchboard. You can configure your Google Voice number to ring your home phone, office phone and mobile phone all at the same time. This way, wherever you are, you can get the call, or you can choose to let it go to voice mail.

Google Voice also gives you an easy way to conduct conference calls. You simply have the participating individuals call your Google Voice number at the prescribed time and then use the service’s call waiting feature to add each caller to the conference. The service was born with Google’s 2007 acquisition of telephone management startup GrandCentral. It was relaunched as Google Voice in March 2009. A full list of Google Voice features can be found at http://linkon.in/dsIwgh.

Additionally, according to a Twitter post by Dave Girouard, Google's Vice President of Enterprise Sales, Google Voice will also soon be integrated into Google Apps.

Previously, Google Voice was available to non-education users only by invitation. (We know of one attorney so keen to use the tools available in Google Voice that she purchased an invitation for $18.00 on e-Bay. She thought it was well worth the price.)

 

7VSA2EPAJXWZ

LegalTech West Coast Returns to Los Angeles | Registration Discounts Available

On June 23 and 24, 2010, ALM’s LegalTech, the largest annual gathering of legal professionals on the West Coast, returns to Los Angeles. This year marks the conference's fourth consecutive year at the Los Angeles Convention Center in downtown Los Angeles. 

 

LegalTech is the one of the largest legal technology events of the year, and highly regarded among those in the legal industry. With conferences and trade shows in both New York and Los Angeles, LegalTech is a key resource for law firms and legal departments to get hands-on practical information for improving their law practice management.  

 

LegalTech West Coast 2010

 

All readers of this newsletter can attend the exhibit hall free of charge by selecting the "Exhibits Only, Keynotes, Emerging Technologies, SuperSessions & General Sessions" option on the online registration form. (https://secure.lawcatalog.com/almevents/almevents_registration.cfm?seminarid=1225&pregister=1This complimentary pass includes entry to both Keynote Sessions, afternoon general sessions, SuperSessions and Emerging Technology sessions as well as the exhibit hall to peruse the latest in technological advances. Those with questions or comments regarding the 2010 LegalTech West Coast Conference can contact ALM Events at (212) 457-7905. 

 

Additional registration information and the complete conference schedule is available online at http://www.legaltechshow.com/r5/cob_page.asp?category_id=64210&initial_file=cob_page-ltech.asp

 

Internet For Lawyers (IFL) subscribers can also claim an additional 20% discount on full conference registration by selecting the "MasterPass Discounted for Association Members" option on the registration page (a $170 savings), and adding in the priority code IFL. Produced by ALM Events, LegalTech is the number one resource for law firms and legal departments to get hands-on practical information for improving their law practice management. The conference provides an in-depth look at what the technological world has in store for you and your practice, and it offers an expansive exhibit floor with the most extensive gathering of innovative products designed to meet your current and future technology needs. 

 

This year's conference will offer up to 13 CLE credits, 1.5 of them being ethics credits as well as featuring two keynote addresses: "Privacy, Security Breaches & Accountability," presented by Los Angeles Times Business Columnist David Lazarus; and "Breakthrough Collaboration & Cost Savings," presented by Microsoft, Vice President and Deputy General Counsel Erich Andersen. Other faculty at this year’s event includes the legal industry’s top technologists, including Texas attorney/technologist Craig Ball; and California attorney Browning Marean, among others. 

 

Free Productivity Power Tools From Google

Since its launch more than a decade ago, Google has become synonymous with Internet search. But since 2004, as many lawyers know, Google has also been expanding its reach by offering free productivity applications and services like Gmail and Google Docs. And it continues to innovate with amazing regularity, launching different innovations not just to its search features, but also to its productivity tools and services.

The following examines a sampling of some of Google’s most-popular tools and also its newest services. It is adapted from our forthcoming ABA book Google for Lawyers: Essential Search Tips and Productivity Tools.

Before we begin, note that to access these tools, you must first create a free Google account, which is a pretty straightforward process. Just go to www.google.com/accounts/newaccount to complete the one-page form. It is not necessary to tie your Google account to a Gmail.com e-mail address, although that’s the most common method for creating an account. You can use any existing e-mail address to create your account. You can also customize your Google Apps account so the e-mail address for it reflects your own domain (e.g., you@yourfirmname.com) as opposed to the usual generic (e.g., you@gmail.com) address.

Tools in the Google Apps Collection 
Google Apps is a set of Web-based tools that allow you to create, share and store documents on the Internet and communicate with others online.

Using Google Apps, you can draft documents online and share them with clients or co-counsel for comment. The online storage eliminates the need to exchange documents and revisions via e-mail (and the frustrations that arise from all the attendant back-and-forth exchanges). Plus, Google’s tracking of the changes made to these shared documents makes viewing revision histories easier, with each contributor’s changes date stamped. So the concern over whether or not you’re working from the most recently revised version of a document is precluded. As the owner of the document, however, you have final say over which changes are accepted and included in the final document.

The Google Apps collection includes Gmail, Google Calendar, Google Docs, Google Spreadsheets and Google Presentations—with the latter three programs as well as the new Google Drawings collectively referred to as Google Documents. All together, it’s a fantastic set of collaboration tools to help solos and small firms compete with big firm technology budgets.

The Standard Edition of Google Apps is free. There’s also a Premiere Edition that adds greater storage capacity, additional security features, dedicated technical support and certain service guarantees for a cost of $50 per user per year. (A reduced-price version is available to nonprofit organizations for $30 per user per year for organizations with over 3,000 users.)

Here’s a rundown on the functions of a free Google Apps account.

Gmail 
The most familiar of the Google Apps services, Gmail can be accessed via its robust Web-based inbox interface or through your favorite e-mail client, such as Microsoft Outlook. If you use Google Apps for your practice and have multiple e-mail users in your office, they can each choose how they want to access their messages. Some users prefer to receive their messages in Gmail’s Web-based inbox so they can access e-mails (and any attachments) from anywhere there’s an Internet connection—although Gmail’s “Offline” feature also allows users to access their previously downloaded e-mail when they don’t have an Internet connection (like when you’re on a plane). The advantage to accessing Gmail messages through your Outlook box, on the other hand, is the ability to take advantage of some of that client program’s features and functions, which many users find useful for managing e-mails. Google has a step-by-step guide to setting up your e-mail client at http://mail.google.com/support/bin/topic.py?topic=12912.

In March 2010, Google also announced a set of tools to help firms migrate their messages, contacts and so forth from Microsoft Exchange mail servers to Gmail, which you can learn about at http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2010/03/now-its-easy-switch-to-google-apps-from.html.

Google Calendar 
Google Calendar is a full-featured appointment calendar that lets you add appointments, events, reminders and the like, and access them from anywhere you have Internet access—including via Web-enabled cell phones. Google Calendar can also sync with Microsoft Outlook, Apple iCal and Mozilla Sunbird. One particular advantage over stand-alone products is the easy ability to share your calendar with others on the Web. Like Gmail, however, you can also store your Google Calendar information on your hard drive to access your events and appointments when you don’t have an Internet connection.

Google Documents 
The Google Documents component of Google Apps allows you to create, edit, store and share word processing documents, spreadsheets, presentations and forms, among other files. It includes an online word processing documents creation and sharing service that allows you to create word processing documents similar to the way you would with Microsoft Word, Corel WordPerfect or Apple Pages.

It also includes Google Spreadsheets, as well as Google Presentations, a slide presentation editor and creator, which works similar to Microsoft PowerPoint, Corel Presentations or Apple’s Keynote. One shortcoming of Google Presentations, though, is that it doesn’t support the animation of text, images or other elements that are supported in commercial presentation software. Any animations contained in presentations imported into Google Presentations will not be active.

You can create new documents online using the Google Docs Web interface or upload existing documents from your computer to edit and share. You can upload the following:

■ Documents up to 500KB in size. There’s a limit of 500 documents and presentations in a Docs account; acceptable file types are .doc, .docx, .html, plain text (.txt), .rtf and .odt.

■ Spreadsheets up to 256 columns wide. There’s a limit of 1,000 spreadsheets in a Docs account. Acceptable file types are .xls, .xlsx, .ods, .csv, .tsv, .txt and .tsb.

■ Presentations up to 10MB in size or containing up to 200 slides. Acceptable file types are .ppt and .pps.

■ PDF files up to 10MB in size can be uploaded and viewed but not directly edited. There’s a limit of 100 .pdf files in a Docs account.

But regardless of whether you upload a document from your computer or create a new one online, Google Docs includes editing and formatting tools that will look familiar to you if you are a regular user of Microsoft Office, Corel WordPerfect Office, Open Office or Apple’s iWork productivity software. For users of Microsoft Office programs in particular, the Menu Toolbar of the Google Documents editor (File, Edit, View, Insert, Format, Table, Tools, Help) will look very familiar.

Google Talk 
Google Talk is a text, voice and video chat instant messaging service that offers lawyers an easy—and free—method of conducting “virtual” meetings with clients, co-counsel and others. There are three ways to access the service. One way is through a stand-alone application that you download and install on your computer, the second is through a Web-based Google Talk Gadget interface, and the third is through a browser plug-in that integrates Google Talk into Gmail, iGoogle and some other Google services.

Google Voice 
Google Voice is Google’s free telephone service offering a wide range of calling and voicemail services. Its best-known feature is probably the ability to simultaneously forward incoming calls to multiple phone numbers, like a switchboard. You can configure your Google Voice number to ring your home phone, office phone and mobile phone all at the same time. This way, wherever you are, you can get the call, or you can choose to let it go to voice mail.

Google Voice also gives you an easy way to conduct conference calls. You simply have the participating individuals call your Google Voice number at the prescribed time and then use the service’s call waiting feature to add each caller to the conference. The service was born with Google’s 2007 acquisition of telephone management startup GrandCentral. It was relaunched as Google Voice in March 2009.

At the time of this publication, Google Voice is only widely available to educational users holding a .edu e-mail address. It is open to non-education users only by invitation. You can request an invitation at https://services.google.com/fb/forms/googlevoiceinvite. (We know of one attorney so keen to use the tools available in Google Voice that she purchased an invitation for $18.00 on e-Bay.)

Google Wave 
One of Google’s most recent product launches, Google Wave is a new kind of online communication and collaboration tool. One element that can be a bit confusing, just to clarify, is that “Wave” (with a capital “W”) is the name of the service, and “wave” (with a lowercase “w”) is the name used for an individual exchange created in Wave. In one online explanation of the service, Google describes it this way: “A wave can be both a conversation and a document where people can discuss and work together using richly formatted text, photos, videos, maps and more.”

As with Google Docs, any wave participant can add or edit content anywhere in the conversation.

Wave is meant to work completely in real-time. In other words, when multiple collaborators are online simultaneously, the wave is simultaneously updated, so as you type edits or make additions, other participants in a wave can see what you’re typing as you type it. (This feature was also incorporated into Google Docs in May 2010.) A wave can also be viewed or edited by one collaborator at a time if others are offline at any particular moment. Many of Wave’s real-time capabilities have been incorporated into Google Docs and Spreadsheets.

Another innovative element is that Wave’s playback feature lets collaborators rewind the wave to see who said what and when. At the time of this publication, access to Wave was open to any users of Google Apps for Domains (as described at the beginning of this article - http://google.com/a). Access for non-Apps users is by invitation only. Request an invitation at https://services.google.com/fb/forms/wavesignup.

Security and Privacy of the Information in Your Google Account 
All of the foregoing tools can have a positive impact on your productivity as well as your technology budget. But there’s an additional matter to consider before we close, of course. When we discuss Gmail and Google Docs in our live seminars, one of the first questions we’re asked is, “What about the security of the information stored in those documents and e-mails?”

The answer to that question depends on who you ask. No system is perfect. Google lists its high level of security and many examples of the security measures in place to keep your documents from prying eyes at www.google.com/apps/intl/en/business/infrastructure_security.html. Additionally, in early June 2010 Google released a white paper detailing specific steps in its security process related to user-generated content. The white paper is available at http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrusted_dlcp/www.google.com/en/us/a/help/intl/en/admins/pdf/ds_gsa_apps_whitepaper_0207.pdf

What do Bar Associations Say About These Kinds of Online Services

ABA Model Rule of Conduct 1.6 (a) states in part that: “A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent.” (See www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_1_6.html.) But the rules of conduct are generally silent on the specific question of outsourced storage of documents. It is nonetheless clear that lawyers have a duty to protect information related to the matters they are handling.

The ABA’s Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility Formal Opinion No. 99-413 concluded in part that: “Lawyers have a reasonable expectation of privacy in communications made by all forms of e-mail, including unencrypted e-mail sent on the Internet, despite some risk of interception and disclosure. It therefore follows that its use is consistent with the duty under Rule 1.6 to use reasonable means to maintain the confidentiality of information relating to a client’s representation.” (See www.abanet.org/cprpubs/fo99-413.html.)

In addition, both the New York State Bar Association’s Committee on Professional Ethics (Opinion 820–2/8/08) and the State Bar of Nevada’s Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility (Formal Opinion Number 33) would appear to allow online storage of e-mail messages and documents with these types of services.

Before using these or any similar services, be sure to check the exact wording and related commentary of relevant rules and ethics opinions in all jurisdictions where you are licensed to practice.

 

In the end, you will have to decide if you are comfortable enough with the security and privacy measures that Google (or any other online storage provider) provides based on the kind of data you store there.

 

Google Allows Further Customization/Personalization of Default Search Page

In what appears to be a tip of the hat (and a bit of one-upsmanship) to Bing's image-rich search page, Google has announced the ability personalize your default view of the Google search page with your own photo. While Bing has become known for the daily rotation of lush images (and the informative annotations that accompany them) on its homepage, users have no control over the selection of those images.

With this new feature, you can select any image from your computer, your Picasa image storage account, or any public Picasa galleries to serve as the background for your Google search page.

In an Official Google Blog post, Marisa Meyer, Google's VP of Search Products & User Experience, indicated that the feature would be available via a "link in the lower left-hand corner of Google.com." We have not yet seen this feature in any any of the browser/operating system combinations we've tried. The blog post also indicated that the feature would be rolled out to "users in the U.S. over the next few days." 

 

(H/T The NextWeb via Techmeme)

Study Finds More Than Half of Adult Internet Users Search for Information About Themselves

A new survey conducted by the Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project finds that more than half of American adults who are online are conducting search engine searches to locate information posted about themselves on the Internet. While the concept of "ego-surfing" is nothing new, the study indicates an increase in awareness  by adults of the volume of information that can be compiled from these kinds of searches. In our live MCLE seminars, books, and interviews, we have long-advocated using these tools as investigative and background research resources to locate information about others.

In part, the study found that:

  • Online reputation-monitoring via search engines has increased – 57% of adult internet users now use search engines to find information about themselves online, up from 47% in 2006.
  • Activities tied to maintaining an online identity have grown as people post information on profiles and other virtual spaces – 46% of online adults have created their own profile on a social networking site, up from just 20% in 2006.
  • Monitoring the digital footprints of others has also become much more common—46% of internet users search online to find information about people from their past, up from 36% in 2006. Likewise, 38%% have sought information about their friends, up from 26% in 2006.
We have also long-stressed that participating in social media is not just for "young people" who give little thought to the consequences of the information they post.  The stereotypical images of a social-media-profile-owner as a 15-23 year old, who "over-shares" online is outdated. While those users do still exist, many previous Pew studies have documented the rise in social media usage in the 30-49 and 50-64 year old age ranges. This new study goes one step further, finding that the younger users are also more careful, or at least aware, of the potential ramifications of the information they post online.
The study found that respondents aged 18-29 are more likely than older adults to say:
  • They take steps to limit the amount of personal information available about them online —44% of young adult internet users say this, compared with 33% of internet users between ages 30-49, 25% of those ages 50-64 and 20% of those ages 65 and older.
  • They change privacy settings — 71% of social networking users ages 18-29 have changed the privacy settings on their profile to limit what they share with others online. By comparison, just 55% of SNS users ages 50-64 have changed the default settings.
  • They delete unwanted comments — 47% social networking users ages 18-29 have deleted comments that others have made on their profile, compared with just 29% of those ages 30-49 and 26% of those ages 50-64.
  • They remove their name from photos — 41% of social networking users ages 18-29 say they have removed their name from photos that were tagged to identify them, compared with just 24% of SNS users ages 30-49 and only 18% of those ages 50-64.
Despite all of this information available on the Internet, only a small percentage of respondents report consequences from information they posted online though:
  • 4% of online adults say they have personally had bad experiences because embarrassing or inaccurate information was posted about them online, a number that is unchanged since 2006.
  • 8% have requested that someone remove information about them that was posted online, including things like photos or videos. The vast majority (82%) say they are usually successful at getting that content taken down
Attend one of our live MCLE seminars, or use one of our books as a guide to learn how to locate the personal information that people post about themselves in social networking sites, blogs, Web sites, and other sources online. We also include real life "war stories" of how other legal professionals have used these sources to benefit the cases they handle.
This Pew Center study is based on responses to random (landline and cellular) telephone calls to 2,253 adults, 18 and older between August 18 to September 14, 2009. 

 

 

New ABA Book Helps You Mine the Internet for Publicly Available Investigative Research Resources

Finding information and conducting research on the Internet can be overwhelming and intimidating.  To help all professionals – not just lawyers – conduct effective research on the Internet, the American Bar Association Law Practice Management Section has published Find Info Like a Pro, Volume 1:  Mining the Internet’s Publicly Available Resources for Investigative Research.

This newly released, complete, hands-on guide shares the secrets, shortcuts, and realities of conducting investigative research using the mostly-free sources of publicly available information accessible on the Internet.  Written for all business professionals, including lawyers,  this resource lists, categorizes, and describes hundreds of free Internet sites, as well as some fee-based sites.

Any business professional can use the resources and techniques in Find Info Like a Pro to conduct background investigations on potential employees or business partners, identify and research competitive products, or locate missing clients.  Legal professionals can use these resources and techniques to locate missing witnesses, clients, or heirs; identify potential clients in target industries; and prepare for deposition or trial, among other specialized research challenges.

Find Info Like a Pro will help you:

  • Determine where to begin a search by using general search engines effectively as an investigative tool.
  • Find addresses, plus telephone, cellular, and fax numbers.
  • Use social networking and genealogy sites for investigative research.
  • Search news and magazine articles to find people.
  • Locate expert witnesses.
  • Uncover archived material and “extinct” web pages.
  • Learn how to get Internet content admitted into evidence.

Find Info Like a Pro includes a valuable CD-ROM that features clickable links to all of the sites contained in this book.

Authors Carole Levitt and Mark Rosch, principals of Internet For Lawyers , are nationally acclaimed speakers and authors who focus on Internet research and social networking for lawyers. In addition to Find Info Like a Pro, Volume 1, they have co-authored two other books, The Lawyer’s Guide to Fact Finding on the Internet and The Cybersleuth’s Guide to the Internet. Levitt and Rosch present continuing legal education seminars on these topics throughout the U.S. Levitt practiced law in California, taught legal research and writing at Pepperdine Law School, and was a law librarian in Chicago and Los Angeles.  In addition to speaking and writing, Rosch is the developer and manager of IFL’s Web site and more recently, IFL’s Facebook Fan page. He also tweets about legal technology and Internet research.

The ABA Law Practice Management Section is a professional membership organization providing resources for lawyers and other legal professionals in the core areas of the business of practicing law — marketing, management, technology and finance — through its award-winning magazine, webzines, educational CLE programs, Web site and publishing division. For more than 30 years, LPM has established itself as a leader within the profession by producing ABA TECHSHOW, the world’s premier legal technology conference and expo, and through its publishing arm, which has more than 90 titles in print.

With nearly 400,000 members, the American Bar Association is the largest voluntary professional membership organization in the world.  As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law.

 

 

Google Scholar Adds E-mail Alerts

Google has made it easier to keep up to date with topics, cases, patents, etc. searched via Google Scholar with the addition of e-mail alerts to the Scholar service.

Google Scholar Email Alert Button

An envelope icon now appears at the top of each Scholar search results list. The Scholar Alerts feature functions similarly to the more-familiar Google Alerts (previously known as News Alerts) but with a few differences.

Clicking the envelope icon creates an intermediate page that displays your original search query (you do have the ability to modify the original query), a box into which you can enter the e-mail address to which you want the Alert sent (this address is auto-filled if you are logged into your Google Account), and "Sample Results" showing what content would be included in the Alert.

You can click the "Update Results" button to generate a new "Sample Results" list if you have altered your original query. Clicking the "Create Alert" button completes the process.

Once the Alert is created, Scholar displays your list of existing Alerts. Interestingly, this is a separate list from any existing Google Alerts (News Alerts) that you had previously created.

Also, Scholar Alerts do not give you the ability to dictate how often you receive the Alerts, as you can with Google Alerts which offers "as-it-happens/once a day/once a week" drop-down menu options.

For a more detailed discussion of Google Scholar's free caselaw search capabilities see "Google Makes Free Caselaw Search Available on Scholar."

Social Networking Sites are Valuable Tools for Lawyers: But Beware the Potential Ethical Pitfalls

Social networking and ethics: what do these two concepts have in common? Plenty, if you're a lawyer. Using social networking can ensnare attorneys in ethical traps in two different ways — when accessing information in someone else's profile, or when an attorney's own profile information might be used against them. These are real world issues many practicing attorneys face every day. Let's focus on the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct.

WHAT'S PRIVATE?
An attorney recently pondered how she could access a witness' private (open only to "friends") profile on a social networking site. The Philadelphia Bar Association's Professional Guidance Committee Opinion 2009-02 (March 2009) addresses a similar question from a lawyer who wished to gain access to an unrepresented witness' private profile to use the profile information against the witness during litigation.

The inquiring attorney asked if he would be in breach of professional conduct rules if he asked a non-lawyer assistant to "friend" the witness, without the assistant explaining the reason for the request or disclosing that the assistant worked for the attorney.

The opinion concluded that this conduct would violate several rules of professional conduct.

First, the "proposed course of conduct contemplated by the inquirer [the lawyer] would violate ABA Rule 8.4(c) because the planned communication by the third party [the assistant] with the witness is deceptive. It omits a highly material fact — namely that the third party who asks to be allowed access to the witness's pages is doing so only because he or she is intent on obtaining information and sharing it with a lawyer for use in a lawsuit to impeach the testimony of the witness."

Second, even though the attorney is not making the actual "friend" request, because of Rule 5.3 (Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants), the attorney is in violation of Rule 8.4(c) because he is responsible for the "violative conduct" of the person he supervises.

Third, the proposed conduct violates Rule 4.1 because it, "constitutes the making of a false statement of material fact to the witness."

Fourth, because "the violative conduct would be done through the acts of another third party, this would also be a violation of Rule 8.4a."

Would any of the above ethical dilemmas arise if this were a public profile? Probably not. After all, if the profile is open to the public, there would be no actual contact or exchange with the profile's owner.

ETHICAL TRAPS
How can information posted by an attorney to his own social networking profile create ethical traps? For the most part, the attorneys simply trap themselves with their own words. 
Here are a few examples:

  • Texas: Judge Susan Criss caught an attorney lying about the reasons he needed a continuance, by viewing the attorney's Facebook profile where she learned that he was on vacation and not attending a relative's funeral. This is just the type of situation that could invoke a Rule 3.3(a)(1) "Candor Toward the Tribunal" charge. ("A lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal...")
  • Nevada: A lawyer, sitting as a temporary pro tem judge in Clark County, Nevada, was removed from the bench after his MySpace page caught the attention of the local district attorney, who believed that the profile exhibited hostility to prosecutors and could result in bias against the D.A.'s office.

In addition to losing his pro tem position, this conduct could have been considered a breach of Rule 8.4(d). ("It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.")

  • Minnesota: A Somali man convicted of murder in Minneapolis filed an appeal based on derogatory remarks against Somalis — allegedly posted by the prosecutor in her Facebook profile during trial.

In addition to a potentially successful appeal, an 8.4(d) misconduct charge could be on the horizon for this prosecutor based on Comment 3, which states that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer, in representing a client, to knowingly manifest by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin … when the actions are prejudicial to the administration of justice.

  • North Carolina: The state's Judicial Standard Commission reprimanded Judge B. Carlton Terry Jr. for using Facebook to talk to a defense attorney about a child custody case, including indications of when the verdict would be delivered. 

While there was no report of what the attorney said to the judge, be careful about friending a judge (or a juror) for fear of invoking a Rule 3.5 "Impartiality and Decorum of the Tribunal" ethics charge ("A lawyer shall not knowingly: (a) seek to influence a judge, juror, prospective juror, or other official by means prohibited by law or (b) communicate ex parte with such a person during the proceeding...").

  • LinkedIn: In a recommendation on an attorney's profile, a client stated, "In every case Mark was equal to or significantly better than the opposing lawyer." While these words were not written by the attorney, the attorney does have control over posting this recommendation. 

Thus, the posting might violate Rule 7.1 if it were considered misleading under the comment to Rule 7.1. (An "unsubstantiated comparison of the lawyer's services … with the services … of other lawyers may be misleading if presented with such specificity as would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the comparison can be substantiated.")

DON'T GET TRAPPED 
To avoid any ethical traps concerning accessing a private profile, read the Philadelphia opinion. It's the only ethics opinion on point.

To avoid having your own profile ensnare you into an ethical trap, configure your profile with the site's most restrictive security/privacy settings.

This assumes you are using your social networking profile for personal reasons only. But if you are using your social networking profile for professional/marketing purposes, using the most restrictive settings would run counter to your purpose, so choose your words (and your friends) carefully.

 

Judicial Conference Announces Changes to PACER

In a March 16, 2010 press release, the Judicial Conference of the United States announced "key steps to improve public access to federal courts by increasing the availability of court opinions and expanding the services and reducing the costs for many users of the Public Access to Electronic Court Records (PACER) system."

Changes to the PACER system stemming from the announcment, include:

  • Allow[ing] courts, at the discretion of the presiding judge, to make digital audio recordings of court hearings available online to the public through PACER, for $2.40 per audio file.
  • Adjust[ing] the Electronic Public Access fee schedule so that users are not billed unless they accrue charges of more than $10 of PACER usage in a quarterly billing cycle, in effect quadrupling the amount of data available without charge.
  • Approv[ing] a pilot in up to 12 courts to publish federal district and bankruptcy court opinions via the Government Printing Office’s Federal Digital System (FDsys) so members of the public can more easily search across opinions and across courts.

Previously:

  • digital audio recordings of court hearings were available to the public by ordering a CD for $26.00 per audio file.
  • PACER users were not billed unless their accounts totaled at least $10 in a one-year period.

For step-by-step details on utilizing and searching FDsys, PACER and its US Party/Case Index see The Cybersleuth's Guide to the Internet.

Also buried in the press release is news that a "new version of the [US Party/Case Index] search tool, which includes additional search capabilities and result formats, has been developed and will be deployed under the new name PACER Case Locator this month." There is no indication if this new PACER Case Locator will encompass all courts with a unified search, or continue the holes in coverage of the existing US Party/Case Index.

The Judicial Conference is the policy-making body for the federal court system. The Chief Justice serves as its presiding officer. It is comprised of the chief judges of the 13 courts of appeals, a district judge from each of the 12 geographic circuits, and the chief judge of the Court of International Trade. The Conference meets twice a year to consider administrative and policy issues affecting the court system, and to make recommendations to Congress concerning legislation involving the Judicial Branch.

 

Syndicate content

Copyright: Internet For Lawers logo, site design and all copy are © 1999-2010 Internet For Lawyers, Inc.

Any other copywritten material or brands contained herein are the properties of their respective owners.