Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Let me start by assuring you that I have nothing against using high-end technology in the courtroom. Like many who read this column, my colleagues and I make our livings designing state-of-the-art demonstrative evidence and other teaching tools for use in complex civil and criminal cases. Why is it so important for me to let you know this? Because I want you to fully appreciate where I am coming from when I state the major premise of this article: We need to help trial lawyers make better choices when it comes to how they display material in court. An increasing number of lawyers are relying on high-end technology as a crutch and using these display methods without thinking about whether it makes sense to do so or whether their cases are better as a result.
Some lawyers believe that all the money spent on technology can substitute for carefully preparing their case. These lawyers forget a basic truth. They forget an ill-conceived message does not get better merely because they display it using high-end technology. The only thing that lawyers get when using expensive technology to display a crummy message is a more expensive crummy message.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.