I am just back from ABA Techshow in Chicago. It was well worth the trip, with great programming, a teeming exhibit hall, and abundant opportunities for networking and socializing. The one question I was most often asked there (and that I most often asked others) was, “What have you seen that is new and interesting?” [...]
CAT | General
I’ve written both here and for the ABA Journal about Casetext, a free legal research platform that uses crowdsourcing to add annotations and descriptions to cases. As a matter of fact, I’ll be talking about Casetext at ABA Techshow tomorrow as part of a presentation on using crowdsourcing in legal research.
Today, Casetext is officially announcing its version of a citator (think Shepard’s or KeyCite) to help users understand a case’s subsequent history. It is called WeCite and it has been developed in conjunction with the Stanford Center of Legal Informatics, which will make the data gathered through the effort publicly available.
Now, when you view a case in Casetext, WeCite appears as an option in the left ribbon. Click it and you will then see a list of all judicial opinions that cite that case and brief descriptions of each opinion. Casetext automatically creates the list of opinions that cite to the case, but users can add their own citation references and analysis. And just as users can vote up or down on annotations in Casetext, they can vote up or down on WeCite entries, causing the entries to move up or down the list.
While WeCite is not comparable to Shepard’s or KeyCite in its thoroughness, capabilities or analysis, it is a useful addition to this free legal research site.
Another new feature in Casetext is the “heatmap” that runs alongside each case as you view it on your screen. The heatmap shows how frequently each page in a case has been cited — the darker the color red on the map, the more it has been cited.
Jake Heller, Casetext CEO, says there are more developments in the works for his company, which was launched just last summer. So stay tuned here for updates.
Big news this morning from Clio, the cloud-based practice management platform: It announced this morning that it has raised $20 million in Series C financing led by Bessemer Venture Partners. Clio says it will use the new funding to accelerate product development and sales and fuel international expansion.
Clio says it plans on doubling its workforce over the next year, to more than 200. The expansion will come in the U.S. and Canada, as well as in Europe, where Clio recently opened an office in Dublin. Clio says it will also continue to invest aggressively in mobile. (more…)
Last week brought news that BigHand Inc., a provider of voice productivity and workflow software, had acquired Esquire Innovations Inc., a maker of legal document automation and productivity tools used to create, format and compare documents and remove and manage document metadata. For me, that news served as a nudge, since I’ve been meaning to write about BigHand for some time now.
So what is BigHand and what the heck is “voice productivity”? Basically, BigHand is a digital dictation system, with an enterprise version for larger firms and a cloud-based version for smaller firms of up to 25 lawyers. But as the “productivity” part suggests, it is more than a dictation system – it is also a system for managing dictation and transcription workflow and for making that workflow more efficient.
A firm would purchase BigHand as a replacement for its legacy tape-based dictation system or standalone digital system. With BigHand, the firm gets:
- A smartphone app on which lawyers can record, submit and track dictation. (Versions are available for Android, iPhone and BlackBerry, with a Windows version in the works.) This can also be done from the desktop.
- The ability to integration existing analog or digital dictation devices.
- A dictation workflow system that delivers, prioritizes and assigns dictation to support staff.
- Speech recognition (using Dragon NaturallySpeaking) for first-pass transcription.
How would this work in practice? Here is a typical scenario:
The attorney opens the BigHand app on her smartphone. She can immediately see the status of all the jobs she has submitted. To dictate, she simply presses the record button. She can listen back to the recording, edit it, and insert additional audio at any point. The app also allows her to insert a photo to accompany the dictation – perhaps of a business card or a receipt.
Once she is ready to submit the dictation, BigHand asks her where she wants to send it. Firms can customize up to 10 options here, but a typical set-up might allow the attorney to send it to her own secretary, to a typing pool, or through speech recognition, with or without proofing. The attorney can also designate the job’s priority or set a calendar date by which it must be completed.
When the job is done, its status on the app changes from “pending” to “complete” and BigHand sends the attorney an email with the document attached. An attorney could be at a meeting, dictate something, and have the finished document returned before ever leaving the meeting.
On the support-staff side, when the attorney sends a file, a pop-up notifies the staff that a new job has been submitted. The staff can see a list of all dictation in the queue. BigHand integrates with several document-management systems, so a dictation can easily be dropped into a letterhead or other template.
As items are completed, BigHand automatically moves them into a completed items folder. Firms can customize the folders and also set up shared folders, such as for litigation matters. The attorney is notified and can approve or reject the work at that point.
If the file is sent through speech recognition, then the support staff can review the speech-recognized text as they listen to the recording. BigHand can play the recording Karaoke style, meaning it shows all the text and highlights each word as it is played, or streaming style, in which it adds words to the screen as they are played.
As the staff person corrects mistakes, the system learns from those corrections and thereby becomes better at recognizing the attorney’s voice. Each attorney has his or her own voice profile on the system, as well as separate profiles for mobile or desktop. The system will also learn from corrections made by the attorney.
While both attorneys and support staff have slightly different interfaces into the BigHand system, there is also another interface for the office managers. They can see every pending job and follow its workflow. They can also manage workflows to accommodate vacations, workloads and the like. Office managers can generate various reports.
Versions and Pricing
BigHand is available in both an installed enterprise version for larger firms and a cloud-based “Professional Edition” for smaller firms. The major difference between the two is that the cloud version does not include speech recognition. BigHand expects to add speech recognition to the cloud version sometime this year. Another difference is that the cloud version limits the number of workflow-routing options.
Both versions can be customized in many ways, both on a firm-wide basis and also by attorney.
BigHand, which was founded in 1996 in London, focuses primarily on the legal market. Of 185,000 users worldwide, 150,000 are in the legal market. In the United States, its customers are almost exclusively within the legal market.
The cost of BigHand’s cloud-based Professional Version is $240 per year/per license, with both attorneys and support staff requiring their own licenses. The cost of the Enterprise Version depends on the number of user licenses, modules and features required. (Speech recognition is an added module.) Volume discounts are generally available.
BigHand offers obvious advantages over tape-based dictation systems. There is no need to worry about delivering or losing tapes. There is no need to regularly replace dictation systems. Work is transferred in real time and managed in real time.
For lawyers, BigHand’s mobile integration should be a boost to productivity. For firms, it should enhance enhance their efficiency and cut administrative overhead. For support staff, it should make their workflow more balanced and orderly.
Even for attorneys (like me) who do not use dictation, having the app on a mobile device makes it convenient to use it to manage tasks, give themselves reminders, keep notes or send instructions to a secretary.
In the past, when I wanted to find photos or images to illustrate a blog post, my go-to default was Wikimedia Commons, a database of more than 20 million user-contributed images that are free to copy and use according to the author’s specified license terms (often just requiring credit to the source). But now there are two new ways to get free images for your blog that can help you find a much wider selection and, in some cases, much higher quality images.
Somewhat surprisingly, the first of these new sources is Getty Images, a company that is in the business of selling creative and news stock photography. Earlier this month, it announced that it was making its collection of roughly 35 million images free for editorial, non-commercial use. Images are available through an embed feature — meaning you don’t copy and paste them, you embed their source code. Images on the Getty site now have an embed icon (</>) that you click to get the code. The embed code includes copyright information and a link back to licensing information on the Getty site.
Why would Getty give away what it is in business to sell? For Getty, it is an attempt to wrestle back control over the widespread pirating of its images. Craig Peters, Getty’s senior vice president of business development, explained in an interview with the British Journal of Photography:
First, there will be attribution around that image, and since we’re serving the image, we’re actually going to make sure there’s proper attribution. Second, all of the images will link back to our site and directly to the image’s details page. So anybody who has a valid commercial need for that image will be able to license it from our website. Third, since all the images are served by Getty Images, we’ll have access to the information on who is using and viewing that image and how, and we’ll reserve the right to utilise that data to the benefit of our business.
Given that the images are available only for non-commercial use, this raises the question of whether they may be used by lawyers who blog in order to promote their legal practices. In his interview with the British Journal of Photography, Peters said that Getty would not consider blogs that draw revenue from Google Ads to be commercial use. “What would limit that use,” he went on to say, “is if they used our imagery to promote a service, a product or their business.”
You should be aware that the Electronic Frontier Foundation has raised a red flag over Getty’s program. On one hand, the EFF praises Getty for making it easier for users to give proper attribution and a link. On the other, it notes that this is yet another intrusion on Web privacy, insofar as all these embedded images will allow Getty to collect information about users’ browsing history.
Google Images License Search
If that discourages you from using Getty’s images, there is another new way to find images that are available for reuse. In January, Google Images added a filter to its search results that allows users to find images based on their usage rights.
After entering your search quiery in Google Images, click on the “Search Tools” button at the top of the page and a selection appears for usage rights. Here you can select to filter results by any of the following:
- Not filtered by license.
- Labeled for reuse with modification.
- Labeled for reuse.
- Labeled for noncommercial reuse with modification.
- Labeled for noncommercial reuse.
In actuality, Google has offered license filtering for several years, but it was a hard-to-find feature. With this change, Google has made it easy for users to find images with open licenses.
The recent disclosure that an N.S.A. counterpart had eavesdropped on a U.S. law firm raises troubling questions about attorney-client privilege in an age of seemingly ubiquitous government snooping. In the criminal context, such monitoring implicates the Bill of Rights. In the latest episode of the legal-affairs podcast Lawyer2Lawyer, we discuss the implications of all this with two esteemed legal academics:
Erwin Chemerinsky is the founding dean and distinguished professor of law, and Raymond Pryke professor of First Amendment law, at the University of California, Irvine School of Law. His areas of expertise include, but are not limited to, constitutional law, federal practice, and civil rights. Erwin is a renowned author of seven books and nearly 200 articles in top law reviews. He has argued before the nation’s highest courts and has been counsel to detainees in Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp in the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. He is also a regular commentator on legal issues before the national and local media.
Dr. John Eastman is the Henry Salvatori professor of law and community service at Chapman University Fowler School of Law. He was the school’s dean from June 2007 to January 2010, when he stepped down to pursue a bid for California attorney general. John is the founding director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, former law clerk for Justice Clarence Thomas, and has served as the director of congressional and public affairs at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights during the Reagan administration. He is also a regular commentator on legal issues before the national and local media.
You can read more about the show as well as find all our back episodes at the Legal Talk Network. Be sure you never miss an episode by subscribing to Lawyer2Lawyer in the iTunes library or via our RSS feed.
A year ago, I wrote here about Orion, the practice-management system designed for mid-sized law firms, and its app for iPad and iPhone, iOrion. At LegalTech New York in February, Orion announcing the forthcoming release of version 2.0 of its app, with new features and functionality. I’ve been testing a pre-release version of the upgraded app on an iPad Mini (thumbnails above) and an iPhone 5s (image below) and here is what I’ve found.
For those of you who are not familiar with Orion, it is a full-featured financial management, firm management and practice management system designed for mid-sized law firms. Whereas many practice management systems for smaller firms operate via the cloud, Orion is a locally installed system that is able to integrate with a firm’s back-office infrastructure and front-office tools. (See this comparison chart by Sean Doherty at Law Technology News.)
As I noted last year, it is unusual for a locally installed system such as this to have a full-featured mobile app on a par with apps for cloud-based systems. Yet I concluded then that the iOrion app was not only on a par with other practice management apps, but that it actually surpassed others in the range of features and access to data it offered. (You might want to refer back to my prior post for a full description of the app’s features.)
With version 2.0, the company is aiming to make its app a true replica of the functionality of the desktop version, according to Kevin Harris, the iOrion project manager. “We’re not trying to replace the desktop with the app,” he said, “but we want them to complement each other.”
The primary change over the app’s prior version is in added functionality. With several new features added to the Orion platform over the last year, the app has been upgraded to incorporate those features.
The most significant of these is the new Expense Reimbursement Manager, which is new to both the Orion platform and the iOrion app. As its name suggests, this is a system for submitting and managing reimbursement requests, eliminating manual, paper-based expense-tracking systems.
Now, reimbursement requests can be submitted through the app and all communications regarding the request can be tracked through the app. Adding a request is done through a pop-up, from which the user can designate the amount and nature of the expense and the client/matter to which it relates. Paper receipts can be scanned with the device’s camera and attached and electronic receipts can be directly attached. Alerts notify the attorney if a request is denied or if more information is required. The advantage to attorneys is that they can add expenses and receipts as they incur them, using their iPhone or iPad.
As with the prior version, the app continues to allow access to all contacts, key case information, and key client and matter financial information. Customizable “Smart Timers” allow users to track time for multiple matters.
In addition to announcing the updated app and the Expense Reimbursement Manager at LegalTech, Orion also announced its new Productivity Pack for Microsoft Office. The Productivity Pack provides greater integration between Orion’s desktop version and Office applications such as Word and Outlook. This includes the ability to capture and record time from within Office and the ability to link Outlook appointments and tasks with clients and matters in Orion.
iOrion version 2.0 is awaiting final approval from Apple. Once it gets that approval, it will be available for download in the iTunes Store. The current version of the app (1.3.0) is available here.
Let’s face it, business development is all about relationships. If you are courting a potential business client, there is no better way to get in the door than by knowing someone on the inside — ideally someone high up the chain of command. Some lawyers consider developing these relationships to be an art. As its name indicates, Relationship Science aims to make it more of a science.
In its basic concept, Relationship Science (or RelSci as it calls itself) sounds similar to LinkedIn, insofar as it maps out your connections in order to help you discover ways to connect with people and companies outside your immediate network. But RelSci has far more powerful tools than LinkedIn for mapping and searching relationships and has far more information about prospects.
On top of that, it claims to have far more of the people who matter than does LinkedIn — top executives and corporate counsel who are often reluctant to share their profiles publicly on LinkedIn. RelSci claims that its database includes more than 3 million high-level “decision makers” at public and private companies — and that nearly half of them are not on LinkedIn.
It also claims to have a much deeper level of intelligence about the names in its database — which also includes more than 1 million organizations. It employs some 150 researchers who scrape public sources for all available information about a subject and who then curate that information into “research-grade” profiles. It includes every public company across the globe and a number of private companies. Increasingly, it also includes law firms.
The idea of all this is to help you identify who you and your colleagues know within an organization so that you can get a foot in the door. It can be used to generate new business, to get more intelligence about a prospect, or even to strengthen existing relationships.
It works by mapping your contacts and those of others in your firm against its database of people and companies. Its principal tool for doing this is something called Path Finder. Say you are at a firm with an interest in exploring a relationship with Company X. Search that company and Path Finder will map out how you are connected to that company. Maybe your contacts include someone within the company or maybe one of your partners has a contact there. You can find the strongest pathway and then follow it.
RelSci also has a Power Search feature that includes an array of advanced search filters. Search by industry, interests, work history, education, investments, political contributions, nonprofit donations, memberships and other parameters. The level of information available here is much deeper than you could find through LinkedIn.
Worth noting is that RelSci can also be used to map external relationships. Use it, for example, to find out which law firms already represent a company or which companies a law firm or lawyer represents (to the extent this information is available through public filings).
Another feature, 360 Alerts, provides daily alerts by email when people and companies you know are mentioned in the news. You can customize these to build specific lists of people and companies. You can also customize these to alert you only for specified events, such as when someone changes employment.
One other feature worth noting is Visit a City. As its name suggests, use it in advance of your next business trip to research who you could or should meet with.
When it launched last year, RelSci’s initial focus was on the financial services market. Over the last six months, it has made a greater push into the legal industry. It counts several AmLaw 100 firms among its subscribers. Within firms, it would be useful for those who work in business development and marketing for research and prospecting as well as for partners and associates who are involved in rainmaking.
An individual subscription to RelSci is $3,000 a year. Enterprise subscriptions are available at more favorable per-user prices.
The student, David Lutz, found it cumbersome to have to print out PDFs of cases, annotate them, and then type all the annotated information into a brief. The app lets you do all that on an iPad. (There are no iPhone or Android versions.)
The app allows you to annotate PDFs of court decisions using nine customizable highlight colors. Each color represents a facet of a case, such as Facts, Procedural History, Issues, Holding and Reasoning. You can edit the colors to give them any label you like.
As you read a case, you use the different colored highlighters to mark text as important to one of the facets. Marking is done simply by holding your finger down on the text and then dragging to select the portion you want. You can also underline text and add notes.
When you are done, tap the “Brief” button and a case brief is created, with your highlights organized in bullet points under the labels associated with each color. Each bullet point links back to its place in the text.
Cases can be organized into folders that you create and name. Cases can be moved between folders and folders can be organized either alphabetically or by creation date.
BriefCase also has a built-in dictionary that allows you to highlight any term in a case and get its definition, even when offline.
Free vs. Paid Features
The app is free to download and everything I described above can be done for free. For a price of $9.99 a year, users can get these additional features.
- A unique email address that allows the user to send cases directly from Westlaw, Lexis or other research sites into BriefCase. (Free users must import the cases manually.)
- Ability to share briefs by email and print them. (There is no way to share or print briefs in the free version.)
- Ability to sync briefs with Google Drive and Dropbox.
Given that the free version does not allow you to print or email briefs, it is pretty much useless except as a way of trying out the app. At the same time, if you try it and find it useful, then $9.99 for a year is certainly a reasonable price.
Frankly, it has been a long time since I have briefed cases in this way. The app is likely to be of interest only to law students and newer associates. If you brief a lot of cases, it may be worth checking out.
How does your state rate in supporting access to justice for those who face economic, language or physical barriers? A new website, The Justice Index, provides a state-by-state scorecard of resources and initiatives designed to ensure that everyone has equal access to the legal system.
The site was built by the National Center for Access to Justice at Cardozo Law School, with support from Pfizer Inc. and the Pfizer Legal Alliance of 15 law firms, as well as from Deloitte and MSDS. Research to compile the index was done by attorneys at Skadden Arps, Kirkland & Ellis and UBS and by students at Cardozo School of Law and University of Pennsylvania School of Law.
The Justice Index describes itself as “a snapshot of the degree to which best practices for ensuring access to the civil and criminal justice systems have been adopted across the country.” It scores states based on four components:
- Number of civil legal aid lawyers for every 10,000 people in poverty within a state.
- Systems in place to support self represented parties in state courts.
- Systems in place to support people with limited proficiency in English in state courts.
- Systems in place to support people with disabilities in state courts.
Using a 100-point scale, the site provides a composite index based on all four components as well as scores for each one separately. In the composite index, Minnesota ranks highest, with a score of 69.4, while Oklahoma holds the lowest spot, with a 23.7 score.
The site uses powerful visualization tools to display the data. Produced by Deloitte’s financial analytics group, the visualizations lets users filter and view the data in various ways, including by category, region and state. The data visualizations can be downloaded and viewed on your desktop using the free Tableau Public software.
The data visualizations are presented over separate pages, one for the composite index and one for each of the four components. The individual component pages provide more specific details on the factors that were considered in creating the scores.
The site’s creators say that they plan to update the Index and examine trends over time. For now, it is a fascinating look at how well (or how poorly) states are doing at supporting access to justice.