Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
This is the second half of the article that appeared in our special July/August Women and Diversity issue. Women in Law initiatives and programs are not a new phenomenon. Many firms nationwide have programs that afford their women attorneys business development, mentoring and career counseling. In writing this article, we spoke to ten different firms (see insert which lists the firms in the order in which they are profiled in this article) to learn the how's and why's of their women's initiatives. In Part 2 we have profiled the last five firms.
Sometimes it seems easier to ask the correct questions, than to answer them concisely and it becomes harder to apply them to solutions that work easily. That said; let us see if we can do exactly that.
In June 2004, the American Bar Association's Legal Technology Resource Center completed its annual technology survey, published in five parts. The Litigation and Courtroom Technology volume serves as a sobering background for those who crave a total technology trial. Firms are slowly embracing litigation technology, but there is still a long road to follow before the technology is ubiquitous. Courtrooms have yet to provide much technology in the way of hardware or software, citing expenses and implementation as key barriers. Many lawyers are hesitant to spend thousands, much less hundreds of thousands, of dollars on sophisticated hardware and software. So what are the courts and attorneys embracing, and what are they putting off for another day?
Most law firms, regardless of size, have to outsource technology projects to consultants who have capabilities that the firm does not carry in-house. The smaller firms that do not retain a large IT staff must take this approach more often. Fortunately, outsourcing technology support can evolve into a more valuable model for working with outside consultants: "expertSourcing." When a law firm hires a company to assist on a technology project, generally they are bringing in technicians who will execute it within the narrow boundaries of the scope. The consultants may not ask, or even know to ask, crucial questions about how the technology fits into the law firm practice, how it facilitates other firm needs or if a better solution is available.
Our firm wanted a program that would not only organize our case files electronically, but improve workflow and allow for easy access from a desktop as well as remotely. Because of our team approach to handling cases, we also needed a product that would allow each of us to see what tasks or issues another person was handling, without having to inquire as to the status or physically look at the file.
The latest rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Important cases for you to consider.
The latest cases of importance to you and your practice.
In <i>Merscorp. v. Romaine</i> (<i>see</i> page 7, <i>infra</i>), Suffolk County Supreme Court was faced with a clash between the traditionally local real property recording system and the increasingly national secondary mortgage market. The County Clerk's office had refused to accept for recording instruments filed in the name of MERS (Mortgage Electronic Recording Systems, Inc.), prompting a proceeding by MERS and the operating company that owns the MERS system for a writ of mandamus compelling the County Clerk to record and index MERS instruments. The case resulted in a split decision: the County Clerk is required to record MERS mortgages, but not assignments or certificates of discharge. The court's opinion, however, reveals some misunderstanding both of the MERS system and of the recording act.
