The most shocking part is these climbers are built in someone’s backyard, without the requirement of an engineer. The platforms in this case were held on by two bolts… two bolts. And the “manufacturer” used the wrong bolts. Extremely sad but alarming trial.

You can checkout another news story and video during the trial at YNN news.

Still no ruling yet!

There aren’t many options; zoom in/out, auto focus, input selection and on/off, so we’re able to train attorneys how to use it in 30 seconds. The only con we’ve found is there is no arm light, but this typically isn’t an issue in courtrooms.

All you need is a projector and a screen and you’re ready to show all the exhibits your heart desires. Take a look at their website here – http://www.averusa.com

In April the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the biggest class action
employment discrimination case in U.S. history. The court will not hear the arguments of the case. Instead it will consider whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was right in allowing it to move forward as a class action. The suit (Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, No. 10-277) was brought by between 500,000 and 1.5 million former and current female Walmart employees who allege that the company has denied them equal pay and promotion opportunities.

For its part, Walmart contends that the class action should be broken into individual suits because the circumstances of individual plaintiffs have little in common and thus can’t be lumped into a single suit. Walmart attorneys maintain that the plaintiffs hold a wide range of jobs, work in more than 3,400 stores in 50 states, and report to hundreds of different managers, thus making it impossible for there to be a coordinated effort to discriminate against female employees.

This much is clear; the court’s decision will change how large-scale class action suits will be handled in the future.

But attorneys aren’t the only ones closely monitoring this case. IT professionals at law firms and corporations are keeping a close eye on how the court will rule because a decision in favor of the plaintiffs will also change the size and scope of eDiscovery.

If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, Walmart will be forced to locate, search, cull, review and retain hundreds of millions pages of documentation. The costs associated with conducting eDiscovery of this scale is impossible to calculate with any degree of certainty, but it’s not unreasonable to think that the price tag could exceed a hundred million dollars..

Even if Wal-Mart prevails, their eDiscovery challenges remain high. Without knowing which individuals will file lawsuits Walmart will be obligated to place legal holds on all electronic information that may pertain to those matters. Adding further complication will be the extensive amount of cross-matter management that will arise as many of the documents pertinent to one individual’s claim will exist in many others. If careful planning and project management is not performed, the additional complexity of handling multiple related matters and the potential for redundant work could raise the cost for eDiscovery even higher than for a single, larger matter.

The Walmart case highlights precisely why eDiscovery must be a proactive concern for corporations even if they are not currently facing litigation. Failing to implement the proper technology and develop business processes to conduct end-to-end eDiscovery can generate prohibitively high costs at precisely the time a corporation is under greatest pressure and risk.

Apart from whether or not you believe the case should or should not move forward as a class action you should ask yourself the following questions:

Would your company be able to conduct eDiscovery for a large-scale class action lawsuit?

Are your eDiscovery systems and processes ready to scale for the increased workload?

Do you have the processes, technology and outside partners in place to quickly implement a defensible eDiscovery strategy?

Join the discussion and tell us how well your company is prepared for class action litigation.

Note from Blake: If you have any Ediscovery questions or needs, please call Daegis at 415.364.7300

*Note: The family names, pictures and demands have been edited.

I always check my phone when I wake up and noticed the missed calls.. And a frantic voice mail from an attorney hoping we could make it out to New Mexico that day.

The “in-house” technology person from the local firm was trying to figure out how to run Sanction the night before trial and our client, who has used us on multiple occasions, could see that they needed help. They know trial technology is an important aspect of your case, even more so if it’s complex issue or high value.

So why take your trial tech on the road with you? Why hire a out-of-town trial technology / litigation support company?

Edgar was in New Mexico 5 hours later, with no extra expense to the client (we don’t charge travel time, only lodging/meals) and I just heard that he’s saved the day once again. Opening went well along with the first witness, he has video clips loaded and exhibits ready to be displayed.

I will say that our client, Tom Rhodes, is an exceptional attorney. He and his staff run trials like few others, and have a voire dire technique that has proven it self over and over again. Their use of technology is always spot on, and it shows.

Verdict is in! $10.3 million. Congrats!

(This is a 100mb file please give it time to load, the final effect is about 9 minutes in)

You can read more about the trial from news reports here, here and here. But what I wanted to write about is a strategy that I’ve never seen or used before in my career of litigation support.

In the initial meeting our client stressed that he did not want us to show up until the prosecution’s star witness was about to take the stand. He was going to ask the judge for a quick break (we had two trial consultants waiting outside for a quick 10 minute complete setup) when she was called. The thought process was to make the witness uneasy about telling her story, which was full of holes, by the unknown of what we had on our computer and projector and 8 foot screen.

Well… It worked. The prosecution DIDN’T CALL THE WITNESS, when they saw us setting up for our trial support, they decided to rest.

After the not guilty verdict, the attorney went straight to do jury research. He asked why they felt the way they did and it was clear; They felt the DA’s office was hiding something by not calling the witness, and without her testimony there was no question about convicting.

We didn’t project one trial graphic, no legal Powerpoint, no trial presentation at all…basically didn’t do a bit of what is know as “trial support”.. didn’t even turn the computer on. Our client’s response was “your presence is what won this case for us, I can’t thank you enough, for doing nothing”.

First time for everything I suppose! The world of litigation support never ceases to amaze me.

1. Stand when told and do not look at screen/keyboard.
I put this first because I am somewhat guilty of this. When the jury is coming in or leaving for a break you need to STOP working on your laptop. Clear the screen as quickly as possible. Stand and give your attention to the jury.

2. Pay Attention.
If you’re currently not using the computer or not asking questions, try to use the computer as little as possible. Pay attention to the question and answer. Ignoring when it’s “not your turn” isn’t very professional.

3. Take ear buds out!
Anyone that spends enough time in the courtroom knows that earbuds are an essential way to make clips during testimony of a live witness. I see many trial tech’s that leave their earbuds in while the jury is entering or exiting.

4. Put away that phone.
I try not to have my phone out at all in the courtroom. Although most of us are guilty of checking and responding to email.

5. Buy quiet peripherals.
My biggest pet peeve. Writing a novel on your clanky keyboard and playing mine sweeper with your mouse isn’t going to help you look like you’re paying attention. Have you ever had to sit and listen to someone type and click for an extended period of time?

Also, a technologist will be considered part of the “plaintiff” or “defense” even if they are independent of the case, like I always am. I’m asked constantly by jurors if I work for the firm or if I’m an attorney. I attribute that to acting like an attorney. Impressions are a huge battle in the courtroom.Under the pressures of trial you must take a second, stand back, and look at exactly what you’re doing.

I was excited to learn I was being given freedom to design the Opening Statement without a single bullet point. I spent a couple hours with the attorney gathering his ideas and put this presentation together without much direction.

During opening my client only referred to the slides as a guide on what to talk about next, the actual slides only gave a visual reference to his story (or facts of the case). I think it went over very well, the jury was listening to him, not reading the screen.

(This was a trucking accident where the truck driver was drunk, traveling the wrong way down the highway causing a mild traumatic brain injury.)