Here are some Games for the Brain for Friday! 

Thanks to Resource Shelf. 

Findlaw has a great stash of form contracts.  They are arranged by industry, by type, and by company.  You can also see a list of the newest contracts.  It’s a great resource for lawyers who draft contracts and especially for those who don’t.

Thanks to Wisblawg (from the UW Law Library).

The Cleveland Law Library Weblog lists more articles on the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.   December (and the effective date for the amendments) will be here before you know it. 

  The Reference Question of the Week blog "shares common questions and answers handled by an academic librarian."  The question this week is one that almost every researcher faces -- when do I stop?  As the questioner puts it, "My concern is about using my time well both now and in the future while trying to be the most effective research I can be." 

Not surprisingly, the answer is not a bright-line rule, but rather some suggestions such as: 


Very good ideas!  

LLRX, as usual, has very helpful articles this month.  For example, check out "It’s Not Rocket Science: Making Sense of Scientific Evidence" by Paul Barron.  "The purpose of this article is to review a search process using advanced search query features in Google, Yahoo, and other search tools to find publicly accessible Web-based information on toxic substances and the law and, more specifically, the reliability of scientific evidence about toxic substances." The article walks you through the search, teaching techniques and strategies far beyond basic "googling."  

The Practice Blog has some helpful deposition tips.  They include

• Know your state and local rules. And, maybe more importantly, know your local customs.

• Ask open ended questions and LET THE WITNESS TALK. This includes taking a pause after you think the witness is done talking. People want to fill silence and leaving a few seconds of silence may get the witness talk to more and provide you with information he/she may not have otherwise said.

•  Ask the witness who cannot remember if there are any documents that would refresh his/her recollection.

•  

I would add this to any list of deposition tips:   Listen to the answer. 

 

Rees Morrison at Law Department Management has interesting thoughts on the “futility of collecting work-product from outside counsel.”   He points out (correctly, I think)  that the “well-intentioned projects”  for corporate law departments to compile electronic versions of the documents that outside counsel produce “languish because someone must retrieve a useful document, get it to the law firm, and the law firm must make use of it for there to be any gain. Each step in that chain diminishes the likelihood that it will happen, with the net effect that the promise rarely materializes.”

I agree. 

Here is Forbes list of America’s Drunkest Cities. Nashville came in 35th. 

Thanks to Resource Shelf (for the link, not for Nashville’s ranking) 

Dealbreaker.com has an article that should interest a lot of lawyers:  “Crackberry: You Really Might Be Addicted.”  Enough said.  You can read the article here. 

Here are Ellen Ostrow's ten rules for "How To Lose A Client in 10 Days."  Read more about the rules here. 

The spring 2006 issue of the Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property has two articles on the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.   Those amendments are scheduled to go into effect in December 2006, so it's time to start thinking about their effect. 

Kenneth J. Withers wrote  Electronically Stored Information:  The December 2006 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.   The article includes discussion of the "distinctive characteristics of electronically stored information" and and overview of the 2006 amendments.   It ends with analysis of five cases that have already addressed the amended rules as persuasive authority even though the rules are not yet in effect.

Nathan Larsen addresses that issue that strikes fear in the heart of every lawyer -- spoliation -- in "Evaluating the Proposed Changes to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37:  Spoliation, Routine Operation and the Rules Enabling Act." 

Both of these articles give important insight into the new rules. 

The Third Branch (the Newsletter of the Federal Courts)  announces that the Seventh Circuit “is the first federal court of appeals to make RSS feeds of opinions and audio recordings of oral arguments available from its Web site.”  You can get the feed here. 

The Third Branch says this about innovations in the Seventh Circuit and other circuits: 

Over a decade ago, the Seventh Circuit was the first federal circuit with a bulletin board, a type of pre-Internet system that allowed users to exchange messages and read news over a phone line. The circuit was the first to require attorneys to submit briefs on floppy disks. They also were one of the first to make audio of arguments available online. With the addition of an RSS feed, audio of oral arguments is now available the same day, and the Seventh Circuit is again leading the way. The circuit also plans to add more "how to" information about rules and procedures to their Web site.

"I think having the briefs and arguments up on the Web makes for a much better-educated bar," said Circuit Executive Collins Fitzpatrick. "They can listen to arguments, and see what happens. They can be better prepared."

When compared to other circuits, the Seventh Circuit may be out front when it comes to the acces-sibility of opinions and arguments, but they are not alone. Most courts of appeals make audio files of oral arguments available to the public. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Federal Circuit make audio files of oral arguments available in MP3 format. The Ninth Circuit posts audio files of arguments on its Web site. (The Second and Ninth Circuits also permit camera coverage of their proceedings.) The D.C., First, Second, Fourth, and Sixth Circuits all provide audio files on a CD upon request.

While I was checking out the Seventh Circuit website to learn about its RSS feed, I found this article.  It's by Ruth Anne Robbins and is entitled "Painting with Print:  Incorporating concepts of typographic and layout design into the text of legal writing documents."  It addresses points such as the use of all capital letters (why they just don't work), the "great font debate," line spacing issues and justified text.  There is also a very interesting section on roadmaps and the groundwork for memory.  Check it out. 

Gregory Bowman at Law Career Blog discusses the importance of briefing cases in law school here and here.  He says: 

This is because briefing a case is a good exercise for learning to differentiate among the different parts of a judicial opinion. Perhaps shockingly (or perhaps not so shockingly), judicial opinions are not always well written--including those by our esteemed Supreme Court Justices. Working to identify the specific legal issue in question, the relevant facts, the analysis and reasoning of the case, and the legal holding of a case--and writing it all out in a concise and standard format--is a good habit to get into as a new law student.

There are several case briefing methods, but he thinks should be included in a typical casebrief:

•    Parties
•    Relevant facts
•    The legal issue(s) raised
•    Summary of the relevant law
•    Analysis: the application of the law to the issue(s) and facts at hand--that is, the court's reasoning
•    Holding (and disposition)
•    Your thoughts: was the case properly decided? What did the court get right or wrong? What do you think the implications of the case are?

The only thing that I would add to Gregory’s list is some emphasis on brevity.  It would be easy to include long quotations from the opinion as your statement of the holding or summary of relevant law.  But the point is to understand the opinion so well that you can state the issue, the holding and analysis succinctly. 

After some years in practice, I still find briefing a case to be a helpful exercise, especially when I am stuck and cannot figure out how to use or analyze a particular opinion. For example, there are times when I have read several opinions that address a particular issue and am having trouble meshing those opinions in my mind.  Or I have an opinion that is not directly on point, but I think that I should be able to use it by analogy to support my argument.  Or I want to rely on an opinion that is factually complicated and I need to state the facts briefly and concisely so that the complicated facts do not detract from the point I want to make.  In all those situations, I resort to the old law school habit of briefing the case and think about how I would describe the case if my cruelest law school professor called my name in class.  When I understand the opinion well enough to be able to state the issue, holding and analysis, I also understand how I can use that opinion for my argument. 


 

Do you have a client who you really want to impress? 

May I suggest Dinner in the Sky.  According to its website, Dinner in the Sky is a "unique event meant for anyone who wishes to transform an ordinary meal or meeting into a magical moment that will leave a lasting impression on their guests!"  Here is how it works.   Dinner in the Sky suspends a table 50 meters in the sky.   Twenty-two people can sit around the table and three in the middle (your chef or meeting presenter).  The price is about 8,000 pounds, and that does not include the chef or food. 

As for me, I will continue to give my clients chocolate chip cookies. 

Law Practice Today has an article this month on the "art of time entries."  Harry Styron says: 

 Time entries are the journal of what we do for our clients and are a valuable tool for communicating with clients, building and affirming client relationships, preventing misunderstandings and protecting ourselves from unfounded accusations of misconduct.

Many clients don’t carefully read the contracts and pleadings we prepare for them because they believe we are looking out for them. But they do pore over our time entries to protect themselves from us. We should take advantage of their interest in these entries as opportunities to show our skills at organization, professionalism and accomplishment. We should also use the process to earn and reinforce client loyalty.

The article includes good and bad examples of time entry content and discusses how to decide how much to bill.  Styron makes some important points.  

I read about the article at Morepartnerincome. 

Here is a summary of the decisions of the Supreme Court during its 2005-2006 term, including denials of petitions for cert.    Part I of the summary is here and Part II can be found here. 


Thanks to Heafey Headnotes! 

Mark Liberman at Language Log has another update on his search for verification that women speak more words than men.  Still no support. 

Law Dawg Blawg,  which is brought to you by the law librarians of Southern Illinois University, has updated and expanded its research guide on "Evaluating Websites and Other Information Resources." According to the blog/blawg,

It covers the basics of evaluating websites as legal research sources and provides references and links to CALI lessons, articles, tutorials and other websites for further information.

The guide covers the issues of authority, objectivity, accuracy, coverage and timeliness.  Check it out. 

There are more new proposals to amend the federal rules.  The Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference met in April and proposed changes to several rules, including Rule 502 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.  You can read the report here. 

According to the report, the Committee found a number of problems with the current federal common law governing waiver of privilege and work product. 

One major problem is that significant amounts of time and effort are expended during litigation to preserve the privilege, even when many of the documents are of no concern to the producing party.  . . .  Moreover, an enormous amoung of expense is put into document production in order to protect against inadvertent disclosure of privileged information, becuase the producing party risks a ruling that even a mistaken disclosure can result in a subject matter waiver.  The Committee has determined that the discovery process would be more efficient and less costly if documents could be produced without risking a subject matter waiver of the attorney-client privilege or work product protection.

The report also includes five basic principles that the Committee embodied in the proposed Rule 502.  The principles address subject matter waiver, inadvertent waiver, selective waiver, protection against the consequences of waiver and confidentiality agreements. 

Check them out.  Here are suggestions for making effective comments.

Thanks to the Cleveland Law Library Weblog./