Category Archives: Diligence

Ways to Improve Your Performance.

16 Sunday Sep 2018

Posted by in Billing, Diligence, Job Performance, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Management, Time Management

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Associates: Top 10 Questions to Ask Your Supervising Attorney, by Cordell Parvin, Cordell Parvin Blog (with hat tip to William Statsky)

https://bit.ly/2oPQqmf

Let’s go with the premise that, whenever a supervisor gives you an assignment, you are familiar with office procedures, court rules, or whatever basics you need to perform the work. This post has two sections: (1) questions to ask before starting an assignment, and (2) questions to ask after completion.

Even if you already know some or all of the answers to the first, asking the second set of questions will help you get valuable feedback to improve your performance. – CCE

“[A]t the Beginning of a Project:

  1. When would you like me to complete this project?
  2. Describe what you have been told to do and then ask: Have I missed anything?
  3. How many hours are you expecting me to take on the project?
  4. Are there any materials I should review?
  5. Would it be helpful if I gave you my initial findings/conclusions?

At the end of the project:

  1. Have I covered all the areas you wanted?
  2. Is there anything more I can do to help you with this?
  3. Can you give me some feedback on my work?
  4. Are there any areas where you think I could improve?
  5. Can I help you with any other projects now?”

The Oklahoma Supreme Court Sanctions Attorney for Computer Illiteracy.

31 Thursday Mar 2016

Posted by in Attorney Discipline, Bankruptcy Court Rules, Bankruptcy Law, Diligence, Legal Ethics, Oklahoma Supreme Court, Sanctions, Technology

≈ Comments Off on The Oklahoma Supreme Court Sanctions Attorney for Computer Illiteracy.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Oklahoma Accepts Computer Illiteracy As Mitigation: Censure Imposed, by Mike Frisch, Legal Profession Blog (with hat tip to William P. Statsky!)

http://bit.ly/1MFG9S8

No doubt you have seen posts here and elsewhere that discuss whether computer competency is now required due diligence for attorneys. The Oklahoma Supreme Court bench-slammed an older attorney for his lack of computer literacy. But, before you make up your mind, read the dissent. -CCE

 

Chief Justice Urges Judges To Impose More Management Over Their Cases.

01 Friday Jan 2016

Posted by in Diligence, Discovery, E-Discovery, Federal Judges, Interrogatories, Judges, Legal Ethics, Requests for Admissions, Requests for Production, Rules of Professional Responsibility

≈ Comments Off on Chief Justice Urges Judges To Impose More Management Over Their Cases.

Tags

, , , ,

Chief Justice Wants Less Gamesmanship By Lawyers, by Lyle Denniston, SCOTUSblog

http://bit.ly/1JkhNf7

Justice Roberts’ words apply to state courts as well. Ignoring client’s cases, unnecessary and burdensome discovery disputes, and repeated continuances do nothing to endear the legal profession to their clients or the public. -CCE

Speaking in soft but plain words, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., used his year-end report on Thursday night to urge lawyers who practice in federal courts to take steps to help improve the efficiency, and reduce the cost, of trying cases.  Roberts also added some strong encouragement for judges who preside over federal civil trials to take greater control of the management of cases, rather than leaving the process to the tactics of the competing lawyers. . . .

Continue reading →

Big Law Firms Miss $1.5 Billion Dollar Mistake.

07 Friday Aug 2015

Posted by in 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, Diligence, Lawyer Supervision, Legal Ethics, Malpractice, Paralegals/Legal Assistants, Rules of Professional Responsibility, Supervising Support Staff

≈ Comments Off on Big Law Firms Miss $1.5 Billion Dollar Mistake.

Tags

, , , ,

Mayer  Brown & Simpson Thacher Make Epic Screwup, by Joe Patrice, Above The Law (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://abovethelaw.com/2015/01/mayer-brown-simpson-thacher-make-epic-screwup/

It is rare indeed to find such a dearth of responsibility among so many fine legal professionals. If you can, follow the bouncing ball. –CCE

Mistakes happen. It’s why pencils have erasers. But it’s also why law firms install tier after tier of increasingly senior professionals to second-guess every ounce of work product. It’s remarkably effective — and fairly lucrative on an hourly basis.

Unfortunately, the flip side of a tiered system is a tendency toward over-delegation. And that’s how an unwary paralegal ends up costing a bank millions. . . .

Continue reading →

How Many Types of Metadata Can You Name?

27 Saturday Jun 2015

Posted by in Diligence, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Metadata, Technology

≈ Comments Off on How Many Types of Metadata Can You Name?

Tags

, , ,

Production of System Metadata, by Joshua Gilliland, Bow Tie Law Blog

https://bowtielaw.wordpress.com/2015/06/27/production-of-system-metadata/

Have you ever been bit because you ignored metadata? Hands?

The legal profession is embracing technology to the point where it is considered a lawyer’s duty to know it, understand it, and use it. Paralegals and other legal staff, I am talking to you too.

Do you know what metadata is or how many types there are? This post is a good illustration of why all types of metadata should be on your radar. -CCE

A New York state judge confronted the issue of producing system metadata in a medical malpractice case where the plaintiff had to have a foot amputated due to post surgical complications. Vargas v Lee (Sup.Ct.) 2015 NY Slip Op 31048(U), ¶¶ 3-5. The case is direct and thoughtful on the issue of system metadata. . . .

Continue reading →

Why Aren’t All Lawyers And Law Students Trained In E-Discovery And Should They Be?

07 Saturday Mar 2015

Posted by in Continuing Legal Education, Diligence, Discovery, E-Discovery, Ethics Opinions, Federal Rules of Discovery, Legal Ethics, Technology

≈ Comments Off on Why Aren’t All Lawyers And Law Students Trained In E-Discovery And Should They Be?

Tags

, , , , ,

The Conundrum of Competence in E-Discovery: Need Input, by Craig Ball, Ball In Your Court Blog

https://ballinyourcourt.wordpress.com/2015/03/07/the-conundrum-of-competence-in-e-discovery-need-input/

I frequently blast lawyers for their lack of competence when it comes to electronic evidence. I’m proud to be a lawyer and admire all who toil in the fields of justice; but I cannot hide my shame at how my brilliant colleagues have shirked and dodged their duty to master modern evidence.

So, you might assume I’d be tickled by the efforts of the American Bar Association and the State Bar of California to weave technical competency into the rules of professional conduct. And I am, a little. Requiring competence is just part of the solution to the competence crisis. The balance comes from supplying the education and training needed to become competent. You can’t just order someone who’s lost to ’get there;’ you must show them the way. In this, the bar associations and, to a lesser extent, the law schools have not just failed; they’ve not tried to succeed.

The legal profession is dominated by lawyers and judges. I state the obvious to expose the insidious: the profession polices itself. We set the standards for our own, and our standard setters tend to be our old guard. What standard setter defines himself out of competence? Hence, it’s extraordinary that the ABA commentary to Model Rule 1.1 and the proposed California ethics opinion have emerged at all.

These laudable efforts just say ‘get there.’ They do not show us the way. . . .

Continue reading →