phoneCall Now for a Free Case Evaluation - 800-611-7080
Seedol.com > News > General Legal

A Hip Recall Discussion will take place at Mass Tort Seminar

September 20, 2011 by

A Hip Recall Discussion will take place at Mass Tort Seminar
(September 20, 2011) A Hip Recall discussion will be but one of the many topics presented at “Not Your Typical Plaintiff Lawyer’s Seminar” that will be taking place at the 10th anniversary celebration of Mass Torts Made Perfect and Torts Made Perfect. This highly anticipated event will take place at the Bellagio Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada on October 12th-14th, 2011. The agenda put together for this seminar was designed to, “help plaintiff attorneys succeed in all aspects of their practices, from attracting clients to preparing for trials against formidable opponents”.

The Depuy Hip Recall is still a hot subject today, even after a year of its having been recalled. Many believe that there are still unanswered questions in reference to this Hip Replacement Recall and many patients are still suffering from the defective product. This Hip Implant Recall was brought about after the United States Food and Drug Administration issued a statement declaring that, “On August 24, 2010, there was a voluntary recall of the Depuy ASR total hip system because of new, unpublished data from the UK joint registry indicating the revision rates within 5 years were approximately 13 percent”.

Hip Recall law firms are still receiving phone calls on a daily basis from people who are suffering serious complications from their defective hip replacements and are seeking out legal advice for a possible Hip Implant Recall Lawsuit. One such call that led to a major Hip Replacement Recall lawsuit was that of a Michigan woman who filed a lawsuit against Depuy Orthopedics Inc. and its parent company Johnson & Johnson claiming that they purposely concealed the device’s harmful effects to consumers.

If you were affected by the Hip Recall or if you have had any type of hip replacement implant that has been causing unusual pain and discomfort, then it is important to contact a reputable hip recall attorney to find out about your legal rights in reference to a Hip Replacement Recall and to answer any other questions that you may have.

If you are interested in finding out more about the Mass Torts Made Perfect and Torts Made Perfect 10th anniversary seminar, then please visit their website at: www.masstortsmadeperfect.com to get all the details about registration, guest speakers and topic agendas such as the Depuy Hip Recall.

Filed Under: Breaking News, Depuy Hip Lawsuit, FDA Recall, Featured, General Legal, Law Firm Marketing, Mass Tort News, Medical Device Lawsuits

Casey Anthony Trial Compared to Robert Blake (part 1)

July 12, 2011 by
With the recent trial of Casey Anthony coming to a surprising conclusion for many, the case has been compared to other high profile trials, including those of O.J. Simpson and Robert Blake. Defense attorney Jose Baez and his team prevailed, due to insufficient evidence to support the charges. Different charges certainly might have delivered a guilty verdict. 
I served on the defense team of Robert Blake, led by M. Gerald Schwartzbach, one of the truly great attorneys of our time. If you or anyone you know needs a great criminal defense attorney, give him a call. He may even bring me along (if you mention you read this article). For another professional reference, here’s a Celebrity endorsement:
I wrote an article for Technolawyer back in 2005, which I will share here now, with a few minor updates. Shortly after publication, I received this note:

Your article was one of the best we’ve ever published! Thank you! 

Neil J. Squillante, Publisher TechnoLawyer/PeerViews Inc.

I hope you’ll enjoy the article. I will post this in two parts. Don’t miss the extra bonus material at the end of part two.
—Ted
Gerry Schwartzbach, Robert Blake, Ted Brooks
Synopsis
During the Robert Blake murder trial, M. Gerald Schwartzbach and his defense team called upon trial and technology consultant Ted Brooks to assist with the trial presentation. In this article, Ted shares his perspective, and provides a behind-the-scenes look at this widely-followed celebrity trial. In particular, he contrasts the trial presentation methods used by the defense and prosecution.

TechnoFeature: Inside Robert Blake’s High-Tech Defense

By Ted Brooks

(This article is a TechnoLawyer Exclusive.)
INTRODUCTION
The Robert Blake murder trial captivated the nation. This article discusses the technology used by the defense team and how it compared with that used by the prosecution.
Robert Blake’s jury consultant, Lois Heaney (National Jury Project), initially contacted me to meet with attorney M. Gerald (Gerry) Schwartzbach several months prior to the trial date to discuss trial presentation and technology. Lois and I had worked together in the past, and Gerry had never before used technology in trial.
It helps, particularly in larger matters, to involve a trial technology consultant early in the process. Doing so can greatly reduce the amount of duplicative and/or wasted efforts.
THE DATABASES
The defense team had chosen Summation software as the document database, and had created a second database for photos. Summation made it easy for the team to efficiently search and review nearly 40,000 documents and 5,000 photos. The Summation database also included many transcripts of LAPD interviews, preliminary hearings, and the like.
THE CONVERSION
First, we sent our Summation guru, Reggie Pool, to clean up the database, identify and correct any technical “issues,” and then copy the database. Reggie worked on several document coding and numbering issues, and then gathered a full copy. This copy would be used during trial, and also converted to TrialDirector for presentation in court.
Normally, a very simple conversion link exists between the two programs. In this case, there were simply too many inconsistencies to enable a smooth conversion. To avoid this problem, make sure that all coding fields (i.e., Author, Date, etc.) are set up correctly, document numbering formats remain consistent, and the database itself is designed, developed, and maintained properly. A database does not know how to forgive human input error — it simply takes all information and then attempts to organize it.
Because of these issues, we used LoadFile Pro by Image Capture Engineering to generate the proper files to populate a new TrialDirector database, which would include all contents of both Summation databases. By the end of the trial, the new database held over 73,000 combined document and photo images (pages), plus all of the transcripts.
THE DISCOVERY
Once we gathered all the data and created a new TrialDirector database, the defense team could search all the document images and photos simultaneously. All transcripts were included as well, and many were “digitized” to enable searching of the transcripts and playback of the corresponding video or audio. Perhaps the most notable use of this technology during the trial was an edited portion of Robert’s 20-20 interview with Barbara Walters, played during the opening argument, during the trial as an exhibit, and during the closing argument.
We then conducted a thorough search and review of the photos, using the capabilities of TrialDirector to quickly review and zoom in on desired items, annotating and identifying them for quick retrieval. During this process, we made many important discoveries, including one photo of an LAPD Detective who didn’t even realize he was in the picture — until we zoomed in on him in front of the jury.
Every document page was reviewed, and rotated if necessary for proper display. Having the two databases combined enables you to search everything at once.
COURTROOM TECHNOLOGY
Nothing will happen with all of this preparation if the court is not consulted prior to coming in and setting up your equipment. In this case, as with most others, we visited the courtroom, and met with the court staff and Judge Darlene Schempp to learn about previous trials, especially the positive and negative experiences.
This “scouting” quickly alerted us to a problem that needed attention in that particular courtroom: the placement of a projector and screen — typically a small screen and a projector, placed in between counsel and the jurors, provided by the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office.
The Court decided that we would provide the equipment for both sides of this trial (this is typical, as only one set of equipment will normally fit and be allowed by the Judge), so we had to come up with a solution — with the added conditions that alternate jurors would sit beyond the end of the jury box, over 25 feet away from the screen, and the courtroom would fill with media eager to see the evidence.
To ensure visibility, we installed an eight-foot screen against the rear wall and a 3500 lumen projector with a wide-angle lens, providing space for us to place the projector very close to the screen. As a result, the projector stood far enough forward so as not to interfere with counsel as they addressed the jury, and also gave plenty of screen visibility to the entire courtroom. Some of the journalists even complimented the setup.


All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal

Casey Anthony Trial Compared to Robert Blake (part 2)

July 12, 2011 by
Last Friday, I posted the first part of this article. If you haven’t read it yet, here’s the link: LINK TO PART 1 HERE
This article was originally published by Technolawyer in 2005. I’ve included a few minor updates and extras. The following note was received by the publisher:

Your article was one of the best we’ve ever published! Thank you! 

Neil J. Squillante, Publisher TechnoLawyer/PeerViews Inc.

One common thread you’ll find here when comparing the Casey Anthony and Robert Blake trials is that it takes evidence to get a conviction. The evidence must support the charges, or the jury will find for the defendant. That’s the duty of the jury, and the law. Speculation and feelings are not part of the deliberations process, even if you really dislike the defendant.
“I just swear to God,” the man, identified only as Juror No. 2, tells the St. Petersburg Times, “I wish we had more evidence to put her away. I truly do. … But it wasn’t there. “In the end, he adds, “We just wanted to go on the evidence that was presented to us.”
Troubling as it may seem, I believe that based on the evidence presented, the jury was required to acquit. They did the right thing, and are to be commended for not caving in to their emotions. I hope you’ll enjoy the article. Don’t miss the extra bonus material at the end of part two.
—Ted
OPENING STATEMENT
Although Mr. Schwartzbach had never before used technology in trial, he caught on quickly, greatly enhancing his ability to instantly call up exhibits and keep the jurors engaged. A fair amount of extra preparation and rehearsal was required, especially for the opening argument. After practicing law quite successfully for 37 years without technology, he at first found it a bit uncomfortable to rehearse and go through the added steps to share his outline and plans, but we quickly established a communication protocol, which would allow him to speak to the jurors just as he had always done, but now with the added benefit of visual support.
For those who viewed the opening statements on Court TV, you know that it lasted about five hours. This was the longest opening statement I’ve ever witnessed, but it was very compelling, and I never once noticed any fading jurors as the story unfolded before them.
The prosecution (Shellie Samuels) chose to run PowerPoint, and had a few (predictable and common, in my opinion) glitches. The main problem in using PowerPoint in litigation is its linear format — one slide follows another until the end. Should you decide to jump to another topic, no easy way exists to do so. The defense ran with a combination of TrialDirector and PowerPoint, facilitating immediate random access of anything in the database, from documents to photos and demonstrative graphics to video.
THE TRIAL
Technology-wise, the trial seemed fairly uneventful. This is not a bad thing at all — technology is generally only noticeable when it fails. We had plenty of 16+ hour days, however, getting it all ready for prime-time, and we did have some problems. Actually, I have never participated in a trial that didn’t have technology problems — the key lies in dealing with those problems quickly and quietly, so that nobody else even knows.
Small safeguards like having more than one trial presentation computer in court, having a portable scanner and printer, and making frequent backups of the database are worth their weight in gold. When it comes to using technology in trial, the question is not if an issue will arise, but rather when, and how quickly it can be resolved.
When comparing our (defense) exhibit presentation with that of the prosecution, we could zoom in on photographs, highlight exhibits on-the-fly, and point out items to the jury in ways the prosecution could not, as it relied on hard-copy documents and photos, displayed on an ELMO (document camera). On several occasions, they searched for several minutes to find an exhibit, and at times could not find what they needed.
It is also very helpful and valuable to include the daily transcripts in the database, making the entire set of trial transcripts fully searchable.
We could instantly display exhibits (accessing the database by exhibit number, barcode, or Bates number), rather than digging through piles of documents for the right page. There were just over 100 prosecution exhibits admitted, and well over 300 defense exhibits. It is common, in my experience, thanks to the sheer efficiency of trial technology, to easily outpace the quantity of exhibits identified by opposing counsel (not using technology) by 3 to 5 times.
When considering costs, the length of a trial can be significantly shortened — one reason the courts (and informed clients) encourage its use. Juror comprehension and retention seem to dramatically improve with visually supported communication techniques as well — another key reason to consider using technology in trial.
CLOSING ARGUMENT
Again lasting several hours, many critics and journalists thought that the jury could not have paid attention to the entire closing argument. I can tell you, having sat in the courtroom for the entire trial observing the jury, that they intently listened to every detail and viewed every piece of evidence.
Once again the prosecution ran PowerPoint slides, and once again it experienced problems in navigating to the correct slides, which caused a recess at one point.
The rehearsal for the closing argument flowed very naturally, as did the argument itself, now having a great deal of trial experience working together with technology. Often, by the end of the first technology-enhanced trial, a lawyer will become quite familiar and comfortable with its use.
Also helpful was the fact that during the trial all of the exhibits were numbered (as exhibits), making it much easier to call them up using only a few digits, as opposed to typing in a long Bates number or looking for the correct barcode (which themselves are much faster than digging for hard-copy documents).
THE VERDICT
I recall being asked by Gerry how I thought we did, and what did I expect to see as a verdict. My only statement was, “I just can’t put the gun in his hand.” Without that, there should be no conviction. As I watched the jurors being interviewed during the press conference, a chill ran up my spine, as the Jury Foreman was asked why they had voted to acquit, and he then simply stated, “We couldn’t put the gun in his hand.”
The jury has spoken. Regardless of all the “armchair quarterbacking” and plentiful opinions on how the case should or should not have been tried, Robert Blake walked out of the Van Nuys courthouse a free man.
CONCLUSION
M. Gerald Schwartzbach and Robert Blake both commented on the use of technology during this trial, with Robert stating, “This small band of warriors saved my life.”
There’s my Celebrity endorsement. I work on civil and criminal cases. Call me – I need to work for a living too.
Participating in this case resulted in a truly great and very educational experience. Mr. Schwartzbach has completely converted to trial technology. Despite the fact that L.A. District Attorney Steve Cooley publicly stated that the jurors were “incredibly stupid” for their verdict of acquittal, I do believe that justice has prevailed, thanks to the diligent efforts of Gerry Schwartzbach and his “small band of warriors.” Hmm, does this sound familiar, as in the Casey Anthony case? I guess jurors haven’t gotten any smarter?
Copyright 2005, ©2011 Ted Brooks. All rights reserved.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ted Brooks is the President of Litigation-Tech LLC , a trial presentation and technology consulting firm with offices in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Ted won the Law Technology News Award for Most Innovative Use of Technology in a Trial, and is a frequent speaker and author.
BONUS EXTRA MATERIAL
RELATED ARTICLES
All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal

Casey Anthony Verdict: Was it Wrong?

July 12, 2011 by
I will begin by stating that I have worked on a number of high profile criminal and civil trials in my career, including the Robert Blake murder defense, so I know what it looks like on the inside. I hope to work on several more, so there are some things I cannot share here.
I will admit that I didn’t follow this trial closely, even though it was deemed the “Trial of the Century” by HLN. Ratings reportedly doubled for the trial on HLN, as they focused almost exclusively on the trial. It is important to note that media carriers are not just a public service – they are a business. Other than a few inside tidbits here and there, my source of information on this trial was the same as most everyone else’s – the various forms of mass media coverage.
While Nancy Grace and the HLN team seemed to imply this was a done deal, as I watched the verdict being published, I can’t say that I was shocked. I may have been leaning slightly toward a guilty verdict, but I know that the jury has information that I do not, and that I have information that they do not. Although the waves of comments on Twitter seemed disappointed with our legal system and the outcome of this trial, I can say that a case is not decided on the opinions of observers and commentators. It is decided by the evidence presented by each side, and in Criminal Law, it must be convincing beyond a “reasonable doubt.” In other words, what the jury sees and hears is used to determine the outcome of the case, and nothing else. Although this jury was sequestered (isolated), a “normal” jury will simply be instructed to avoid any contact or exposure to media coverage of a trial, and not to discuss it with anyone.
During deliberations, the jury has only their notes and admitted evidence to work with. Although we were given an opportunity to see most of the evidence presented to the jury, they were not viewing it along with a picture of little Caylee in one corner, and “Tot-Mom” in another. Visual presentation can be very persuasive. In fact, that’s what I do for a living. It’s not always just the information that matters, but also the way it is presented.
So, do I agree with the verdict? Absolutely. You cannot convict someone if you don’t have the evidence to do so. That’s why our justice system works. It may not be perfect, but it’s the best there is. The jury agreed that Casey Anthony had lied to Law Enforcement Officers, and convicted her, based on the evidence. They found her not guilty of murder, due to the lack of evidence.
For additional info:
What a quick verdict can tell us about a jury by Doug Keene for CNN, about the Casey Anthony trial
The Red Well: Blog Aggregator for Views on Litigation Persuasion by members of the ASTC (American Society of Trial Consultants) 
Jurors and Technology in Trial: What Were Once Vices Are Now Habits By Ted Brooks, about the Robert Blake trial, and others
Video of Robert Blake Verdict
Video of Robert Blake Jury Foreman explaining why they acquitted him.


All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal

iPad App for eDiscovery: idocument REVIEW

July 12, 2011 by

Reprinted with permission from the July 1, 2011 issue of Law Technology News, ©2011 ALM Media Properties, LLC.


idocument REVIEW, a new iPad App was recently introduced in a brief article by John Cleaves for Law Technology News. The new application sells for $29.99 and claims to tag, highlight, and redact documents. Those features, without more, made it worthy to investigate. There are, however, more key features:

No internet access required to review your documents.

Files are loaded through iTunes in a custom load file format (three files). To load a 20,000 page case takes about 2 and a half minutes.

You can load up to 20,000 pages per case load

You can load multiple cases.

You can Keyword search or search by document ID.

You can tag documents (like in Concordance, Summation, etc.) with up to 16 tags all of which can be customized to whatever the user needs (by the user and on the fly).

You can highlight and redact (black or white).

From iTunes:

idocument REVIEW has been developed to aid the on-the-go litigator! Unlike other document review tools available, idocument REVIEW is not dependent on an internet connection for access to your documents. Maintaining folder structure and OCR, idocument REVIEW provides an essential tool for you to review your documents right on your iPad.

The app allows users to tag, highlight and redact documents — all at their fingertips. The app is also capable of sorting by tags and searching by keywords and image keys. Reviewing up to 20,000 pages per case load, exporting your changes after review is made possible by Discovery Document Technologies.

The app manages the content of a case on the iPad in three files: a DDT load file, an image file containing the document images, and an OCR file containing extracted text from the images. As advertised, idocument Review allowed me to tag, highlight, and redact documents — all at my fingertips. I sorted content by tags and searched it using keywords and image IDs.

So what’s the process?

1. Provide the data to Discovery Document Technologies for conversion to an iPad load file.

2. Save the iPad load file to the computer you synchronize your iPad with.

3. Synchronize the files with your iPad using iTunes. On your iPad….

4. Review your documents.

5. Export a .DDT file and send via e-mail to Discovery Document Technologies for processing against the original files.

6. Discovery will then send you a revised edition of the original images of your data.
So, this all sounds pretty good. It even comes with a sample data set, which is one of my pet peeves for iPad apps which need some material to learn with. The set is from the Enron matter, which is actually something I worked on several years ago.

There are some great training tutorials on the web site, which will get you quickly up to speed. This is not a complex app – at least from the user’s perspective. It is fairly simple to use, and easy to learn. It seems to run searches very quickly. The only downside of the search results that I can see is that it doesn’t highlight the text. Since you are viewing the image, and not the underlying OCR text file, you will have to visually look for your search hits on the returned pages, if you wish to verify your results.

One little “gotcha,” is the fact that once you’ve completed your review, you’ll need to send a file to Discovery Document Technologies in order to get your reviewed/redacted production set. The app, while useful, won’t be of much value if you can’t get your work product out of it. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, since DDT does have a very good reputation, but just know that you’re going to be married to them throughout the case.

I also did not find any complex search-building options. Typing a simple string of “Enron AND email” rendered no hits, so you’ll be restricted to using this as sort of a first round review. Again, not that that’s a bad thing, but this clearly isn’t going to replace Summation or Concordance.

I wasn’t feeling so warm about spending $29.99 on an app that, while it does appear to be a great value (especially in comparison to applications like Summation or Concordance), requires you to send everything to DDT for processing. However, I found that if you are loading at least 3GB of data, they will give you a voucher for the app, making this more of a “value-added” approach. With that, it becomes a very nice alternative to using a PC, especially if you’re traveling. In the right scenario, it may even be possible to have an entire review team working on iPads. Happy reviewers (with iPads) are good reviewers.

Conclusion

If you’d like to work with some of the coolest stuff available, idocument REVIEW for the iPad is for you. It really is a kick to use, and it works well. Although it has limitations, if you’re able to fit it into your workflow, you’ll have fun doing it. Another way to look at it might be that if you have a set of data to process anyway (3 GB or more gets the app included free), and the processing pricing is acceptable, try it out.
idocument REVIEW $29.99 (or free with 3 GB data order)

All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal

Great Backyard Grilling iPad App

July 12, 2011 by

Okay, so this doesn’t have much to do with legal technology, or trial presentation, but it does have something to do with iPad apps for attorneys and other legal professionals – assuming you eat. More specifically, assuming you have an iPad, and you like to BBQ. And, since another review I had ready to publish just got snagged by Law Technology News (idocument REVIEW), and since I had been asked to review this app, and since we’re coming into the Independence Day weekend, and since Jeff Richardson (iPhoneJD) is on vacation, well, I saw a void.

With that, here is the Great Backyard Grilling iPad App. Before I get into the details of the app, I’ll share a bit about the celebrities involved, from On The House.

James Carey and Morris Carey, known as the Carey Bros., are nationally-recognized experts on home building and renovation. They share their 55+ years of experience as award-winning, licensed contractors with millions of people nationwide through a weekly radio program and syndicated newspaper column both titled On The House.


With wit, enthusiasm and clarity, the Carey Bros.’ Associated Press syndicated newspaper column, four-hour radio broadcast and daily radio vignette offer people money-saving tips on building, remodeling and repairing homes. The column, with accompanying graphic, is distributed weekly to over 700 AP member papers including The San Francisco Chronicle, Chicago Tribune, Cleveland Plain-Dealer, San Diego Union-Tribune, Detroit Free Press, Washington Post and New Orleans Times-Picayune.

Television personality, award winning designer and author Rebecca Cole joins the Carey Brothers as the new radio co-host of the nationally syndicated radio show On The House.

Over the past 13 years, Rebecca Cole has developed an internationally renowned lifestyle and design business, known in New York City as Rebecca Cole Design and worldwide as Cole Creates.

When she is not designing terraces or giving color-anemic living rooms her trademark infusion of orange, she might be writing a book or newspaper article, planning weddings and events, designing furniture or bedding or hosting a TV or radio show. Rebecca hosted all 200 shows for Discovery Channel’s Surprise by Design and has appeared nearly as often on to the Today Show. Other favorite TV appearances include Oprah, The View, CNN, BBC World News and The Megan Mullally Show.

So, Great Outdoor Grilling is produced in the same fashion as you might expect from a TV show, with the opening screen showing the three hosts of On The House. From there, we get right into the meat and potatoes of the app (sometimes I crack myself up).

There are 6 icons at the bottom: Recipes, Shopping, Favorites, Menu, Know-How, and On The House. Once you pick a category from meats, seafood, chicken, or veggies & fruit, you are then able to view a list of possible entrees, sides, appetizers, and deserts. When cooking times are indicated, tapping the icon brings up an actual time, which you can use during cooking. Okay, you could probably use this in court too, since the timer can be set as desired.

Tapping on the + sign of the image brings up a full-screen photo of what your meal should look like when it’s done. Actual mileage may vary.

You can also choose from serving 4 or 6 people, and the ingredients quantities change automatically. While this is pretty cool, it would be nice to have more flexibility with the number of people.

There’s also a shopping list section, and an invitation you can fill out and email to friends.
The app states that videos will be added with upcoming updates, and I would expect additional recipes to be added as well.

From iTunes

BBQ and grilling enthusiasts out there, this app is for you! Here comes On The House – Great Backyard Grilling, an iPad app developed by Culinart Media, that features the best grilled delicacies you can imagine. With over 50 lip-smacking grilling recipes, this app is sure to bring out the passionate griller in you.

On The House – Great Backyard Grilling has a range of exciting features that are bound to leave a smile on the faces of both grilling neophytes and veterans. The app makes grilling easier and a lot more fun. The recipes are all illustrated and presented in a step-by-step manner. Included with each recipe is a list of required ingredients, details of the time needed for preparation and cooking, and the level of difficulty. Users have the option of adding their favorite recipes to their favorites list or personal shopping lists.

Grilling has never been so exciting. On The House – Great Backyard Grilling for iPad includes some impressive features such as:

-A collection of popular, mouth-watering grilled food recipes
-Quick sharing of recipes through Facebook and e-mail
-Descriptions of key ingredients with photographs
-Attractive illustrations
-Simple preparation and dispatch of invitations for events
-Innovative shopping list generation
-Handy inbuilt timer that lets you know when to take your food off the grill
-Convenience of adding notes to recipes
-An ingredient calculator that simplifies your job by determining the exact quantity of ingredients to be used for a specific recipe, according to the number of people being served.
-Easy saving of recipes to the menu, list of favorites and shopping list.
-Ability to shop on the go by saving recipes to shopping list. The app combines all the ingredients you will need at the store.

If you are craving grilled beef, pork, lamb, seafood, chicken, vegetables or fruits, your wait ends here. And if you know other people who just can’t seem to tear themselves away from the grill, recommend On The House to them so that they can download it and add it to their grilling repertoire.

So folks, the time is now to get your grill going. Where there’s smoke there’s fire; and where there’s On The House – Great Backyard Grilling, there’s great grilling going on!

Conclusion

For $3.99, the Great Backyard Grilling iPad App might just help you become the BBQ star you’ve always dreamed of. Actually, a very well-designed and helpful app. This type of activity can help alleviate some of the Stress of Trial.

Happy 4th of July!
All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal

iPad Apps for Lawyers: TrialPad 2.0 Reviewed

July 12, 2011 by
TrialPad 2.0 has just been released, and I will begin by saying that they have indeed read the reviews, listened to the feedback, and have implemented the features necessary to make TrialPad the new Gold Standard of iPad Apps for Trial Presentation.
I always attempt to write my reviews from a professional and objective perspective, and am not afraid to point out weaknesses, as well as strengths of a product. I’m not one to offer a cheesy sales pitch to make someone feel good about their product (the same way I look at a case during trial – I’m not there to make you believe you’re convincing the jury if you’re not). If you want that, you can find it elsewhere. Here’s the link to my first review of TrialPad, “Apples to Apples: Two iPad Apps for Trial Presentation,” which helps make my point. This article continues to dominate the all-time highest traffic rating of any article on my blog.
Here’s an actual presentation screen-grab, taken with two exhibits, and two call-outs.
I’ll include the list of update features from the iTunes site below, but will point out that a few of most important game changers are:
1. Ability to display two documents (or document + video) side-by-side
2. Multiple zoom callouts
3. Handles multi-page tiff images
4. Basic video editing
Now, would I actually use TrialPad in a trial? Only if there were some compelling reason to do so. Sorry fanboys — but it’s still not a laptop, and it’s still not TrialDirector. The trials I work on are generally larger matters, which would introduce unnecessary risks and challenges, all at the expense of looking cool. Those attorneys who actually use it in trial are generally working alone on smaller cases, which would be fine. My services wouldn’t fit within that budget anyway.
However, I have used TrialPad in presentations (non-trial), and will continue to do so, just because it is cool, and since my presentations generally focus around legal technology – well, you get the picture. Now, if someone contacts me to support a trial with the iPad, I’d love to do it.
TrialPad’s competitors are Exhibit A and Evidence, and can each be had at around 10% of the cost of the $89.99 price of TrialPad. The “game-changers” noted above now make it an accurate statement to say, “You get what you pay for.”
One issue I will note is that if you wish to highlight and zoom on a section of an exhibit, you’ll need to highlight it first. You cannot do anything to the zoomed section. Also, if you intend on showing a lot of documents in a side-by-side manner, you may want to create and save some of these ahead of time, as there seemed to be a bit of instability when working with multiple zooms from both exhibits. In trial, a delay of even a few extra seconds can seem like an hour.
From iTunes:
You have asked for all these features, and we have delivered!
CALLOUT TOOL – Pull out multiple sections of a page (with annotations!), even multiple sections from different pages in the same document, even multiple sections from different documents when in split screen (see below)!
SPLIT SCREEN – Show two separate pages side-by-side, even callout and compare different parts of different documents with their highlighting or other annotations!
CASES VIEW – Using intuitive case folders you can now view by Icon, Thumbnails, and List. Sort alphabetically (A-Z, Z-A) or by date. Also search for a case by name.
VIDEO – Import, edit, make clips, and take snapshots!
NEW FILE TYPES – Besides the gold standard Adobe Acrobat PDF format, now you can now import JPG, GIF, PNG, TIF, Multi-Page TIF, and TXT. [Also imports DOC, DOCX, XLS, XLSX, PPT, PPTX, Keynote, Pages, and Numbers, but PLEASE NOTE, for these files our best practices recommendation is to convert these files to Adobe Acrobat to maintain the formatting and look of the original document.]
IMPORT FROM PHOTOS APP – Import photos and web page screen shots.
DROPBOX – Download/upload your files from/to Dropbox to collaborate with the trial team.
EXPORT – Print or email pages or entire documents, with or without annotations.
DOCUMENT NAVIGATION – To complement the existing scroll bar and flick function, new Page Up and Page Down buttons to quickly flip through multi-page documents.
DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT – Now you can easily move documents between cases.
FILE SORT OPTIONS – Sort documents within a case by name or file type, as well as the ability to reorder documents manually.
LASER TOOL – Show a red, blue, or green laser to guide your audience through a document. It even works across documents when in split screen mode.
WHITEBOARD – Draw or write on the new Whiteboard tool and save as a Hot Doc.
NEW HIGHLIGHTER COLORS – Our crisp, blended highlighter now comes in yellow, green, blue, and pink, without ghosting the background document.
NEW PEN COLORS AND WIDTHS – Now choose from red, blue, green, and black in three pen stroke widths, with ability to write.
STICKY TOOLS – Double-tap to lock the Callout, Highlight, Pen, Redact, or Laser tools to keep them active (just like shift lock on the keyboard).
REDACT TOOL – Redact in white or black.

All of this with the same sleek and intuitive user interface!
Conclusion
If you’re willing to pay ten times the money for an iPad App versus its competitors, TrialPad is an excellent choice. If you’d rather spend less money, and are willing to have a few less features, I’d recommend Exhibit A, or possibly Evidence. If you have a larger or complex trial, you may want to focus more on trying your case, rather than trying your patience, dealing with the technology yourself. Call me.
Feel free to “like” this topic, share it, tweet it, and add your comments.
All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal

iKeyboard for iPad: No More Hunt & Peck Typing

July 12, 2011 by
Finally (or, at least almost finally), a touch-typist’s dream-come-true – a keypad you can actually “feel,” instead of having to keep your fingers hovering above the iPad’s display, simultaneously watching the document you are creating, and the keypad, making sure you’re about to hit the right key. All of this is done as you’re also monitoring the auto-text to see if you can tap the spacebar for a shortcut or watching to see if you’ve misspelled a word.

The iKeyboard has joined a long list of inventions on the Kickstarter website, each trying to hook an audience, in order to help with financing the initial development of an idea. I first learned of this when it showed up on #Tech & #Law.
(Note: The content at this Paper.li link changes twice daily, so you will not find this original article there, although you can find it on Mashable.com: iKeyboard Enhances Touch Typing on iPad)
I was so impressed with the concept that I joined what has now grown to over 500 “backers” of this Kickstarter project. Why? Because I’m not about to carry an external battery-powered keyboard, just so I can make my iPad work more like my laptop. Although the total weight would still be less than my laptop (but then, many full-sized desktop computers would probably be lighter), the advantage of easily fitting the iPad on the tray while on an airplane, or the social advantages of not being separated from others by your laptop screen, would all be lost.

The real advantage of the iKeyboard is that it can easily stay with your iPad, and since it lays directly on the iPad display, it doesn’t add extra bulk, and doesn’t mean having to tilt your iPad up to use it.

I eagerly look forward to receiving my first generation iKeyboard, and then followed by the next version (all part of my backer-level investment of $50).

If you’ve never heard of Kickstarter, give it a look. If you’re interested in the iKeyboard, you still have 4 days left to join as a backer. After that, you’ll pay retail to whoever sells it. Stay tuned, as I will review it as soon as I get it and have a chance to try it out.
All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal

Top 12 Reasons Attorneys Should Be Using Technology in Trial

July 12, 2011 by
Trial Presentation Consultant Robb Helt, of Litigation Resource Group, recently polled his jury, shortly after they came back with a favorable verdict. Their feedback is priceless, as it gets directly to the core of the matter as to whether we might look “too slick,” or like we have so much money that we can afford to drop a truckload of it into our trial presentation.
Let’s assume that most attorneys nowadays accept the fact that technology helps speed up a trial, that it aids in juror comprehension, and that they retain the evidence better than if they just listened to witness after witness, explaining fact after fact.
With those assumptions in place, the only real considerations left are cost, and whether the jury is sophisticated enough to accept the “high-tech” trial presentation – especially in a rural setting. While I won’t cover costs in this article, you can email me with questions and request a rate sheet.
So, if you’re in Los Angeles, New York, Washington, D.C., or another major city, it should be easy to decide. But, what if you’re in some remote part of Arkansas? While I cannot personally claim to have ever been in trial in Arkansas, Robb Helt has, plenty of times. Here is what the twelve most important people in the courtroom had to say about technology in trial:



This feedback, along with quotes from the Judiciary, indicate there are fewer excuses than ever for not bringing technology to trial. If presenting the best possible case for your client is important, you may want to consider trying your case with a little help from a Trial Presentation Consultant.

BVB5SB777EGR

All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal

Exhibit A iPad App for Trial Presentation Version 1.3 Released

July 12, 2011 by
Although it didn’t appear in my iPad or computer iTunes App Store Updates list, once I launched Exhibit A, I was prompted to go to the App Store for an update to version 1.3.0, released (today) on 6/15/2011. It is a free update to the $9.99 app.


I will say that this version is a very significant update, and although I’ll list the update features below, I can tell you that the callout and highlighter work like trial presentation software now, as opposed to just an area focus, like an ELMO.

Although you’re limited to one exhibit with one callout, this can now actually be put to work in smaller matters. It would also work well for presentations, using PDF or another supported format. Supported file types are PDF, images (jpeg, png, etc.) and video. PowerPoint is no longer listed as a supported file type.


My original review:


The developer’s site:

The iTunes link:



From the iTunes Update Feature Listing:


What’s New in Version 1.3.0

Introducing New Features!

The most advance, easy to use presentation app is now even better!


INSTANT CALL-OUT:
(Access by selecting “Tools” from the exhibit display screen)


Create call-outs on the fly to emphasize areas of an image, or focus on items in a document. Simply select the Magnifying Glass from the Tools menu and drag your finger over the desired area of the exhibit. The exhibit dims and a bright box containing the designated area of the exhibit is displayed in magnified form. Dismiss a call-out with a touch and select another, quickly creating multiple call-outs.

QUICK HIGHLIGHTER:
(Access by selecting “Tools” from the exhibit display screen)

Need to quickly highlight a large section of the exhibit? Simply select the Quick Highlighter from the Tools menu and create a highlight block by dragging your finger over the desired area of the exhibit. This new tool nicely complements the existing highlighter pen, which allows you to freehand draw highlights.

REDACTION MARKER:
(Access by selecting “Tools” from the exhibit display screen)


Quickly block out sections of your exhibit. Simply select the Redaction Marker from the Tools menu and drag your finger over the desired area of the exhibit. Default redaction color is white, but you can select any of the five colors available in the color palette.


EXPORT EXHIBITS:
(Access by holding a touch on an exhibit thumbnail)


You can currently email exhibits up to 10MB in size. Now, we are adding the ability to:
(1) Send exhibits to your Dropbox account, for seamless sharing of exhibits with your colleagues, team members or others; and
(2) Save photo and video exhibits to your Photos library, enabling you to send them for editing with iMovie or other apps. Edited photos and movies can be reimported to Exhibit A from your Photos library.

BATCH MOVE & DELETE:
(Access by selecting “File View” from the exhibit thumbnail screen)


Delete or move multiple exhibits, or entire Folders and Subfolders of exhibits at a time. You can move between Folders and Subfolders, or between separate Projects. This feature greatly improves your ability to manage your files and projects from within Exhibit A.


UPDATED USER INTERFACE:


We have made several changes to enhance the way you interact with your Projects.


The “My Projects” screen now graphically displays when Projects are empty, and shows projects to the left and right of your current selection for easier navigation.
The Toolbar on the exhibit display screen is now easier to see against the background of the exhibit.
The “File View” has been redone for easier navigation.

If you already have Exhibit A, get the update! If you don’t, for $9.99 it’s worth a look.


All materials Copyright Ted Brooks. http://www.litigationtech.com
Filed Under: General Legal