Whenever there is a conversation about using technology to enhance access to justice for the poor, there is sure to be talk of A2J Author. Developed almost 10 years ago by the Center for Computer-Assisted Legal Instruction and the Center for Access to Justice and Technology at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, A2J Author is [...]
CAT | General
This is interesting. LexisNexis today announced that it has been named official publisher of the Massachusetts Reports, the official publication containing decisions of the Supreme Judicial Court and the Appeals Court. Previously, Thomson Reuters (West) was the official publisher.
LexisNexis took over the contract as of July 1, the press release said. (more…)
I’ve seen a lot of infographics, but never before have I been
blamed credited for one. According to Nicole Black at the MyCase blog, the infographic I’ve embedded below, 10 Technologies that Have Changed the Practice of Law, was inspired by a post here on LawSites, A Chronology of Legal Technology, 1842-1995. Thanks Nicole and MyCase for turning my rudimentary list into something much nicer.
Any moment now, I expect to see Paul Revere gallop by, shouting, “The lawyers are coming! The lawyers are coming!” In just over a week, the ABA annual meeting descends on Boston, and while it may not be bringing redcoats, it is sure to deliver an influx of black, blue and grey suitcoats.
For anyone interested in legal technology or access to justice, possibly the most interesting event during the annual meeting is its first-ever hackathon, sponsored by the ABA Journal and Suffolk University Law School. If you are not familiar with the term, a hackathon is an event in which groups of people compete in teams to develop computer or mobile applications.
The theme of this hackathon is Hackcess to Justice – and there is prize money to be had. A total of $3,000 will be awarded to the top three hacks, with $1,500 to the winner, $1,000 to second place and $500 to third place. (Read more at this Challengepost page.)
As the name suggests, the challenge to the teams will be to develop ways that technology can expand access to justice for those unable to obtain or afford legal services. Applications should address one of the five areas of need outlined by the Legal Services Corporation’s 2013 Report of The Summit on the Use of Technology to Expand Access to Justice:
- Statewide legal portals.
- Document assembly.
- Mobile applications.
- Business processes and analysis.
- Expert systems
The hackathon will be judged by:
- K. Krasnow Waterman, principal, K. Krasnow Waterman Consulting.
- Glenn Rawdon, program counsel, Legal Services Corporation.
- Robert Ambrogi, some guy who writes a blog.
This is a two-day event held at Suffolk Law School. It kicks off on Thursday, Aug. 7, at 9 a.m., and concludes with the announcement of the winners on Friday at 7 p.m. On Saturday, some related programs will be presented at the annual meeting venue. The schedule is here.
If you want to just observe it, the best time to come is probably Friday at 5 p.m., when the teams will present their submissions to the judges. If you want to participate, then you can find full rules and registration information at this page.
In a post here two months ago, I wrote about recent developments involving LegalZoom in South Carolina and North Carolina, where legal actions had sought to shut down the company as engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. Those were just two of a string of state lawsuits seeking to bar the company from engaging in unauthorized practice. But with a major victory in the South Carolina suit and having fended off all but one of the other suits, LegalZoom has no plans to go away.
To the contrary, the company has plans to significantly broaden the range of services it offers consumers and small businesses.
In the August issue of the ABA Journal magazine, I have an article looking at what is in store for LegalZoom: Latest Legal Victory Has LegalZoom Poised for Growth. I talk to several ethicists who say it’s time to stop focusing on the unauthorized practice issue and instead worry about how best to regulate such companies in a way that best serves consumers.
It was one year ago that I first wrote here about Casetext, the free legal research site that uses “crowdsourcing” to annotate court opinions. More recently, I wrote about Casetext’s addition of a citator, called WeCite. Now, there is more Casetext news to report.
Casetext is preparing to launch a new version of its research platform that will add communities and other social features. The new features have already been rolled out in a beta version. The text version came out of private beta last week and is now in public beta at beta.casetext.com. (more…)
If you’ve been following this blog lately, you’ll know that I recently attended the annual meeting of the American Association of Law Libraries. While I was there, I spoke briefly with David Harriman, the CEO of Casemaker, the legal research service offered as a member benefit by some 25 state and local bar associations. He gave me a brief update on new Casemaker features, then sent me an email providing more details.
Two major enhancements involve Casemaker’s library. For case law, Casemaker has expanded its coverage further back in time. For most states, it now has case law back to statehood or earlier or to the first state reporter volume. (more…)
After returning from the American Association of Law Libraries annual meeting in San Antonio last week, I wrote about having seen previews there of major changes in the works for Fastcase, Lexis Advance and Wolters Kluwer. I also wrote last week about WellSettled.com, which I learned about through conversations at AALL.
But these were not the only products that caught my attention there. Here are a couple of others worth noting.
Firm Central, the cloud-based practice-management platform from Thomson Reuters, now offers rules-based court calendaring through a new add-on module called Deadline Assistant. The feature calculates litigation dates and events based on the court rules specific to the jurisdiction.
Deadline Assistant is sold as an additional subscription to Firm Central. The cost is $40 per month for the first user and then $20 a month for each additional user. The basic Firm Central subscription is $40 a month per seat. (more…)
How many times have you come across the phrase “It is well settled that …” or “It is well established that …” in a judicial opinion? What if someone collected all these instances and made them searchable? When you are writing a brief or memorandum, wouldn’t it be useful to quickly locate these judicial statements of established principles?
A new website, still in its early stages of development, is doing just that. Called WellSettled.com, it mines judicial opinions for specific types of statements and phrases that either summarize a case or state a legal principle. The idea is that these judge-generated statements carry significant weight when discussing a case or legal principle. If you can easily find them, then you can incorporate them into your own research and writing. (more…)