LawWithoutWalls 2014 Conposium, 12-13 April 2014: Storify, tweets, and resources

Legal Informatics Blog - Mon, 04/14/2014 - 03:46

LawWithoutWalls 2014 Conposium was held 12-13 April 2014 at the University of Miami School of Law in Coral Gables, Florida, USA.

The event’s Website is at: http://www.lawwithoutwalls.org/conposium

Click here for the program for the event.

The Twitter hashtag for the event is #lwow2014

Click here for a storify of Twitter tweets from the event.

Click here for archived Twitter tweets from the event, in .csv format.

Here is a description of the program, from the Website’s About page:

LawWithoutWalls is a part-virtual collaboratory devised and led by Michele DeStefano, that develops the skills necessary to provide effective legal services in today’s global, multi-disciplinary, and cross-cultural marketplace. It centers on the intersection of law, business, technology, and innovation. [...]

Several leaders in the legal technology community participated in the program and the event, as mentors or judges.

Video was made of the event, but it’s unclear whether the video will be made available to the public.

HT @LawWithoutWalls


Filed under: Applications, Conference resources, Presentations, Storify, Technology developments, Technology tools, Tweet archives Tagged: #lwow2014, Innovation in law practice technology, Innovation in legal technology, Innovation in the delivery of legal services, Law practice technology, LawWithoutWalls, LawWithoutWalls Conposium, LawWithoutWalls Conposium 2014, Legal instructional technology, Legal services delivery innovation, Legal technology innovation, LWOW, Michele DeStefano, Technology for access to justice
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

30-Minute WordPress Setup Guide

The Lawyerist - Mon, 04/14/2014 - 02:22

We have called it “marketing malpractice” not to have a law firm website. That is because most people, whether they are potential clients or referral sources or networking contacts, will expect you to have one so they can look you up online before they contact you. If they don’t find a website, chances are good they will call someone else — someone who does have a decent-looking website.

If you do not have a website, you are probably missing out on clients, networking opportunities, and more. Although you’ll never know unless you get with the program and get yourself a website.

Fortunately, getting a website is really cheap and really simple. This tutorial will walk you through setting up a website using WordPress, the most-popular content-management system (read: a website you can easily edit yourself) around. It is free and open source, and it powers everything from Lawyerist and our Sites network of websites to some of the world’s biggest websites.

All you need to get started is an internet connection and a credit or debit card. The total cost is less than $5.

Disclaimer: This may take you more than 30 minutes. I have not timed myself, to be honest. Sorry if it takes you longer. That said, I’m pretty sure it will take you 30 minutes or less to get a WordPress website up and running.

Sign up for shared hosting and get a domain name

Difficulty: Piece of cake.

There are many options for shared hosting. We recommend going with one we have used before, that comes with good support, and that is a great deal: HostGator.

To sign up for shared hosting, visit HostGator and sign up for the Hatchling Plan. You can buy three years up front and get a great deal, but I think it’s a good idea to start out with a month-to-month plan to get started, and commit to a longer term, lower-priced package once your website is up and running.

Once you click the ORDER NOW button, you can pick a domain name. (Use the option on the left, which is selected by default.)

Choosing a domain name is important. Good domain names contain keywords relevant to your practice, use the .com top-level domain (as opposed to .net, .us, etc.), are short (10 characters or less), and are easy to tell someone over the phone. No hyphens, either.

If that gets your head spinning, just go with the name of your firm. If you can get a great domain name, that’s great, but there is a lot more to good search-engine optimization (SEO) than a domain name. Convenience is worth a lot, too; it gets tiring spelling out your email address military-style (“Charlie Tango Foxtrot law firm dot com”) a dozen times a day.

When you have picked your domain name, go ahead and check out. You should get a confirmation email shortly after completing the payment process with the information you will need to set up WordPress.

If you already have a domain name, you will need to use the box on the right, then forward your nameservers after you complete the setup process. To do this, go to the place where you bought your domain name — try GoDaddy if you aren’t sure — and set your nameservers to ns1.hostgator.com and ns2.hostgator.com. Follow GoDaddy’s instructions and select the “I have specific nameservers for my domains” option. You will also need to transfer your email to your new server. How you do this depends on how you use email; you should contact HostGator or get help in the Lab before you forward your nameservers.

Install WordPress

Difficulty: Still really easy.

Follow the link in the email you received from HostGator to your control panel. This is the central control panel for your hosting account, which lets you set up email accounts, upload and download files, and much more. For now, find the Fantastico De Luxe icon and click it.

Then, click on WordPress in the sidebar under Blogs, then on New Installation.

Here is what goes in each box:

Installation location
  • Install on domain. The domain you just registered.
  • Install in directory. Leave blank.
Admin access data
  • Administrator username. Whatever you want to use to log into your website.
  • Password. Pick a password.
Base configuration
  • Admin nickname. Put your name here as you want it to appear on the site.
  • Admin e-mail. Your email address.
  • Site name. The name of your website. For now, you can just use your firm name.
  • Description. You can leave this blank for now, or insert your firm’s slogan, if it has one.

Once you have filled in all the fields, click the Install WordPress button. On the next screen, you will get the address to log in to your new WordPress website! Bookmark the address, then click the link and log in.

Your new WordPress website is up and running! (Check your watch — did it take more than 30 minutes?) Be honest, you thought that was going to be a lot harder, didn’t you?

Of course, a blank WordPress install is not much use as your website, so let’s get it cleaned up, configured, and start adding content.

Configure WordPress

Difficulty: Like taking candy from a baby.

Now that you have WordPress installed, you should tweak the settings.

To make these configuration tweaks, you need to be logged into the WordPress Dashboard, the “backend” of your new site. The address is usually http://yourdomain.com/wp-admin/ (replace yourdomain with the domain name you registered), and you should have bookmarked it a moment ago.

Here are some of the things I do to configure a new WordPress install:

  1. Delete default posts. WordPress helpfully starts you out with a Hello World post. Click on Posts in the WordPress Dashboard sidebar and then on the Trash link under the default post (the Trash link only shows up when you hover the mouse cursor over the post name).
  2. Modify the default settings. Click on Settings in the sidebar. Under General, update the Timezone to yours. This is also the place to update the Site Title and Tagline if you need to.
  3. Under Writing Settings, enable XML-RPC under Remote Publishing. (Make sure the Atom Publishing Protocol is enabled, too.)
  4. Under Reading Settings, you can decide whether you want the front page of your website to be a static page or to show your latest posts. (A static page is usually a good idea for law firm websites.)
  5. Under Permalink Settings, select Custom Structure under Common settings, and paste this into the empty field: /%postname%/

That takes care of the basics. However, you are not quite done. First, we will install a few plugins to trick out your new website. Then, you can make it pretty.

Install and Configure Plugins

Difficulty: Slightly less easy, but still easy.

One of the reasons WordPress is so popular is that it is so extensible. There are thousands of plugins that add features and functionality, and the vast majority of them are free.

Installing plugins in WordPress is a piece of cake. Just go to Plugins in the WordPress Dashboard sidebar and click on Add New. Use the search field to look for each of the following plugins and install each one by clicking Install Now:

  • Broken Link Checker. This plugin will tell you if you have any broken links on your site and allow you to fix the links from a central dashboard.
  • WordPress SEO by Yoast. This plugin will take care of most of the easy SEO settings, give you access to more-advanced SEO tools, if you need them.
  • Jetpack. This Swiss-Army-Knife plugin from WordPress contains a bunch of great modules, including basic analytics, Markdown support, email subscriptions, social-media sharing buttons, better comments, and much more. (In order to speed up your site, deactivate any modules you do not need or want.)
  • iThemes Security. This plugin will help “harden” your WordPress install to keep it safe from hackers and malicious code.

After you install each plugin, go ahead and click the Activate Plugin link on the next page. Broken Link Checker and WordPress SEO will start working without any additional steps, but the rest take a little more work.

Jetpack

Being from WordPress, Jetpack is a user-friendly plugin. Sign into WordPress.com as directed, and you will get to use all the features, including site stats. To activate a module, click the Activate button (some will be activated by default). To deactivate modules, click the Learn More button on any module and then click the Deactivate button.

Here are the modules I would activate for a new site:

  • Publicize
  • WordPress.com Stats
  • Jetpack Comments
  • Subscriptions
  • Sharing
  • Related Posts
  • Contact Form
iThemes Security

Go to Security > Dashboard in your WordPress dashboard to access the iThemes Security options. You should click Fix It for each of the items under High Priority.

There are many (many many) other plugins you may find useful; these are just a few that everyone with a WordPress site should probably use. A word of caution, though. Keep plugins to a minimum. Many plugins will slow down your site, so make sure there is a tradeoff in terms of functionality. Also, plugins can occasionally cause conflicts that can break your site. A few carefully-chosen plugins should be fine; go wild, though, and you may regret it. All of my own WordPress websites have fewer than 10 plugins active. Lawyerist, which has a lot more going on than the typical law firm website or blog, has 28.

Add Content

Difficulty: Pretty hard, unless you hire someone to do it for you.

Your WordPress website is now set up, so my work here is technically done. However, I would not be doing my job if I let you stop at an empty website. You have a website, but you need to add content. To start with, at least, you need three pages:

  1. The front page/introduction
  2. Your bio page, and
  3. A contact page

Start with those and build your site out further when you can.

As you know now, setting up the basic website itself is pretty is easy. Writing compelling copy that helps turn potential clients into paying clients is another story. Keep it simple, straightforward, and short, so that potential clients can quickly understand who you are, what you do, and why they should hire you.

If you get stuck or come down with writer’s block, and your brand-new website is in danger of stagnating, start thinking about hiring someone to take the copywriting off your hands. A professional copywriter is a great way to get top-notch content and lower your stress levels.

Here is what I would recommend. Set a reminder for 4 weeks from today. If you still haven’t finished at least the three pages above at the end of 4 weeks, hire a copyrighter to help you get it done. If you cannot get your site content squared away in 4 weeks or less, you probably aren’t going to.

Next Step: Design

Difficulty:  While it is easy to play with your site’s looks, hire someone unless you have a lot of time and tech savvy.

At some point during this process, you probably looked at your website and were not very impressed. That is because all you did was put together the default WordPress install. It is pretty plain.

Nevertheless, design is crucial. It probably has more to do with the impression you make on visitors than anything else. To get you started, there are a ton of free and paid themes for WordPress. To start exploring themes, just click on Appearance in the sidebar, then on the Install Themes tab. Have fun.

There are also lots of professional premium themes out there. Two of our favorite theme frameworks are Genesis/StudioPress and WooThemes. These themes are generally more polished than what you can find for free, and they come with support.

Of course, not everyone wants to deal with customizing a theme, no matter how premium. If that is you, hire a designer to create a custom theme for your website. You can hire a designer (like us) directly.

Though it comes last and receives the least attention in this tutorial, design is one of the most important parts of building and maintaining your website. Build an amateurish site, and potential clients will think of you as an amateur lawyer.

Parting Thoughts

Difficulty: That depends on how painful you find my prose.

I put together this guide because it seems like there are a lot of lawyers without websites, probably because they do not realize how easy it is to get started and set up a website themselves. It really is easy, and it doesn’t take long to set up a website. The hard part, it turns out, is not getting a website online, but filling it with compelling content.

So get started, and get help when you need it.

This was originally published on November 4, 2011. It was updated and republished on April 14, 2014.

30-Minute WordPress Setup Guide is a post from Lawyerist.com. The original content in this feed is © 2013 Lawyerist Media, LLC. This feed is provided for private use only and may not be re-published.

Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Legal Informatics Conference Calendar: Updated as of April 2014

Legal Informatics Blog - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 22:27

The legal informatics conference calendar has now been updated.

The calendar lists primarily scholarly conferences that focus on legal information systems, legal communication, legal/forensic linguistics, or egovernment (as applied to legal information), or that are known to welcome papers on those topics. The calendar also lists legal hackathons and other legal hacking events.

Click here for a list of events just added to the calendar.

Valentino Spataro’s enhanced version of the calendar is available at http://www.gloxa.it/rr/

If you know of events or other information that should be on the calendar but are not; or if you spot errors in the calendar, I’d be grateful if you would please share that information in the comments to this post.


Filed under: Calls for papers, Calls for participation, Calls for proposals, Conference Announcements, Hackathons, Hacking Tagged: egovernment conferences, Forensic linguistics conferences, Legal argumentation conferences, Legal communication studies conferences, Legal design jams, Legal hackathons, Legal hacking, Legal hacking events, Legal informatics conference calendar, Legal informatics conferences, Legal information science conferences, Legal linguistics conferences, Legal rhetoric conferences, Legal translation conferences
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Legal Informatics Conference Calendar: Updated as of April 2014

Legal Informatics Blog - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 22:27

The legal informatics conference calendar has now been updated.

The calendar lists primarily scholarly conferences that focus on legal information systems, legal communication, legal/forensic linguistics, or egovernment (as applied to legal information), or that are known to welcome papers on those topics. The calendar also lists legal hackathons and other legal hacking events.

Click here for a list of events just added to the calendar.

Valentino Spataro’s enhanced version of the calendar is available at http://www.gloxa.it/rr/

If you know of events or other information that should be on the calendar but are not; or if you spot errors in the calendar, I’d be grateful if you would please share that information in the comments to this post.


Filed under: Calls for papers, Calls for participation, Calls for proposals, Conference Announcements, Hackathons, Hacking Tagged: egovernment conferences, Forensic linguistics conferences, Legal argumentation conferences, Legal communication studies conferences, Legal design jams, Legal hackathons, Legal hacking, Legal hacking events, Legal informatics conference calendar, Legal informatics conferences, Legal information science conferences, Legal linguistics conferences, Legal rhetoric conferences, Legal translation conferences
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Red Bean Buns and Law

slaw - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 15:51

I was in my wife’s favourite Chinese bakery the other day searching for red bean buns. The décor is nothing special, but the baked goods are exceptionally well done and insanely fresh! It’s no wonder then that we’re willing to travel a little bit out of our way to go there. And judging by the line-ups, many others feel the same way.

There are other places we can go to in Chinatown for baked goods, but we choose this one because of the quality of their goods. And they can compete against other bakers on quality because none of the others have figured out how to increase their quality.

Eventually however, the other bakers will make their wares of the same quality, then my wife and I will be in a quandary. What would make us choose this bakery over the others when the quality of its competitors is comparable?

This’s the same question I ask lawyers to consider.

We’ve been trained since school that success in law will be based on quality.

Get the best marks and you’ll get the best job.

Work the hardest and be the smartest and clients will naturally flow to you.

But remember Goodman & Carr’s slogan, “Hard Working Law”? Working really hard didn’t work out so well for lawyers at that firm.

And it didn’t work out so well for lawyers at Heenan Blaikie either….

Like my favourite baker, too many law firms compete on quality alone and when faced with competitors of similar quality, we become lost and have no way to differentiate ourselves.

I’ve suggested for some time that there are far too many plain vanilla law firms in Canada – particularly in the so-called mid-tier. And this will only hasten their demise – look for at least one and perhaps two more Canadian law firms to fail over the next 18 – 24 months.

The obvious solution is to create a unique client experience that can only be obtained at your firm.

The client already assumes your quality, otherwise she wouldn’t be in your office in the first place. So you must do more to ensure that she purchases your products – make her file experience more convenient, more accessible and perhaps even more cost-effective.

Unlike my favourite baker, in a crowded, over-capacity legal marketplace with flat growth, we can no longer compete on the quality of our “red bean buns” and hope to have a sustainable business.

Categories: Teknoids Blogs

My Twitter Digest for 04/12/2014

<CONTENT /> v.5 - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 14:30
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

eCommerce Resources on the Internet

LLRX - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 13:33
Marcus P. Zillman's guide is a comprehensive, diverse and wide ranging listing of eCommerce Resources on the Web. These resources include those in a wide range of areas such as: associations, indexes, search engines as well as individual websites.
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

BCCLA Files Class Action for Spying by CSEC

slaw - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 12:32

The British Columbia’s Civil Liberties Association recently filed a class action in Federal Court over the actions by Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC).

The statutory scheme under ss. 273.65, 273.68 and 273.7 under the National Defence A empowers CSEC to monitor communications for foreign entities, not Canadians, absent written authorization for unintended interceptions. Revelations earlier this year demonstrated that CSEC had monitored wireless devices at Canadian airports.

The claim seeks a declaratory relief of a finding of a violation of s. 8 of the Charter for the actions of CSEC. The claim takes particular issue with the collection of metadata, which it claims is potentially even be more revealing than the contents of private communications because it allows for a profile to be created of the individuals involved,

40. …Class Members have a reasonable expectation that Canada will not collect, analyze, retain, use, and/or distribute internationally metadata associated with or produced by them as such reveals private and confidential information about them.

41. CSEC’s collection, analysis, retention and/or use of metadata in accordance with the Directives is not authorized by law and constitutes a breach of s. 8 of the Charter…

42. The defendant, through CSEC, has routinely violated the privacy rights of Class Members in a methodical and systematic manner. The particulars of these violations are known to the defendant and should be produced.

The communications involved are protected by s. 2(b) of the Charter according to the claim, and the breach cannot be saved by s. 1.

The biggest problem that certification may face is that the representative class is framed extremely broadly,

a. Canadian citizens, permanent residents within the meaning of s. 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. F-7, and bodies corporate incorporated and continued under the laws of Canada or a province who have used one or more Wireless Devices since 2001; and

b. individuals who do not fall within subparagraph (a) but have used one or more Wireless Devices in Canada since 2001

Josh Paterson, executive director for the BCCLA explained to the Toronto Star the reason for framing the claim in this manner,

It’s certainly a large class of people, that’s for sure, but we also can’t be entirely sure who in Canada, which specific people have been targeted by this kind of electronic spying.

If this injustice has been committed . . . there does need to be some kind of remedy.

 

Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Lawyer Threatens Stupid Lawsuit Over Stupid Rule Interpretation for Stupid Entry in Stupid Contest

The Lawyerist - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 09:59

Res ipsa loquitur:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

Contact Person:

Jonathan R. Zell
Attorney-at-Law
5953 Rock Hill Road
Columbus, OH 43213-2127

Tel. (614) 864-2292
E-mail: jonathanrzell@gmail.com

Lawyer threatens lawsuit over American Bar Association’s censorship of malpractice-themed Peeps® diorama 

Columbus, OH.  Jonathan Zell simply wanted to illustrate a novel legal argument that his adversaries had made in a malpractice case Zell had filed on behalf of his mother against the Ohio-based law firm of Frost Brown Todd.  (Eileen Zell v. Frost Brown Todd LLC, et al.. Case No. 2:13-cv-0458, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division.)  So Zell entered the American Bar Assn’s (ABA’s) “Peeps in Law 2014” contest by submitting a miniature scene (called a “diorama”) made out of Peeps® (the animal-shaped marshmallow candies) depicting this argument.

In response, according to Zell, the national lawyers group “has banned my diorama simply because it involves the touchy subject (that is, touchy to lawyers) of legal malpractice.”  So Zell now plans to sue the ABA, claiming that, “to avoid embarrassing lawyers,” the ABA is engaging in “a blatant kind of self-interested political censorship.”

In an e-mail to Zell, an ABA official claimed that Zell’s diorama was not accepted because it was submitted by someone “personally involved” in the legal case being depicted.  But, because the contest deadline had already passed, it was now too late for anyone else to submit this diorama instead of Zell.

Zell wrote back to the ABA, pointing out that the contest rules say nothing about “involved persons.”  Also, the ABA had already accepted and posted on its website similar dioramas from other “involved persons.”  But Zell received no response.

Zell’s diorama showed six lawyers sitting in a law firm’s office, each of whom was holding up a sign stating “Not me.”  This was intended to depict the six Frost Brown Todd lawyers whom Zell’s mother has sued for legal malpractice.  As was explained in a caption accompanying the diorama, the statute of limitations on legal malpractice does not begin to run until after the client’s legal representation in the matter in question has ended.  This is designed to give the malpracticing lawyer an opportunity to correct his or her mistake.

However, Frost Brown Todd recently filed a motion in court arguing that, because its six lawyers had worked on Zell’s mother’s case “successively,” the statute of limitations should be computed separately “for each particular attorney.”  If so, then Ohio’s one-year statute of limitations on legal malpractice would have already expired on the first five lawyers’ mistakes.  Since the alleged harm had already occurred before the sixth lawyer took over the case, Frost Brown Todd then claimed that none of its lawyers or even the firm itself has any liability.

Zell contends that, if Frost Brown Todd’s “novel legal argument” is accepted by the court, it would “provid[e] a roadmap for Ohio’s attorneys on how to defeat claims for legal malpractice committed during trial litigation.”  Calling it the “Hot Potato” strategy, Zell described this roadmap as follows:

When one of the firm’s attorneys commits malpractice, reassign the case to another attorney.  If the second attorney also commits malpractice, then reassign the case to a third attorney, and so on. Then have the final (non-malpracticing) attorney continue to represent the client on appeal in the same matter until the statutes of limitations on the previous attorneys’ legal malpractice expire.

The caption to Zell’s diorama concluded that a court decision sanctioning the “Hot Potato” strategy would be so unfair to clients that it might “provide the necessary impetus to get Ohio’s legislature to extend what is now the shortest statute of limitations on legal malpractice in the nation.”

So, although illustrated by a piece of artwork composed of marshmallow candies, Zell’s mother’s case has the potential to be a landmark legal ruling.  On the other hand, Zell’s planned lawsuit against the ABA seems like a lot of peeping about nothing.

The contest entries can be viewed at http://www.abajournal.com/gallery/peeps_2014.  Viewers of the website can vote for their favorite diorama at http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/vote_for_your_favorite_2014_peeps_in_law_diorama.

ATTACHMENTS:

Photo of Zell’s Diorama
Close-up Photo of a Portion of Zell’s Diorama
The Caption to Zell’s Diorama
The ABA’s e-mail to Zell of 4/7/2014
Zell’s e-mail Reply to the ABA of 4/7/2014

Here’s the 3-page “caption” (pdf) that went with the diorama. Click over to the next page if you want to read those emails for some reason.

Lawyer Threatens Stupid Lawsuit Over Stupid Rule Interpretation for Stupid Entry in Stupid Contest is a post from Lawyerist.com. The original content in this feed is © 2013 Lawyerist Media, LLC. This feed is provided for private use only and may not be re-published.

Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Summaries Sunday: Supreme Advocacy

slaw - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 06:00

On one Sunday each month we bring you a summary from Supreme Advocacy LLP of recent decisions at the Supreme Court of Canada. Supreme Advocacy LLP offers a weekly electronic newsletter, SupremeAdvocacyLett@r, to which you may subscribe.

Summary of all appeals and leaves to appeal granted (so you know what the S.C.C. will soon be dealing with). For leaves, both the date the S.C.C. granted leave and the date of the C.A. judgment below are added in, in case you want to track and check out the C.A. judgment. (Mar. 15 – Apr. 11 2014, inclusive). 

APPEALS

Courts/Supreme Court: Appointment
Reference re Supreme Court Act, ss. 5 and 6 (Order in Council P.C. 2013-1105, October 22, 2013) (35586) Mar. 21, 2014
A lawyer with 10 years standing at the Barreau du Québec cannot be appointed to the S.C.C. pursuant to sections 5 and 6 of the Supreme Court Act, and Parliament cannot (except as a constitutional amendment) pass correcting legislation.

Criminal Law: Inmate Transfer; Habeas Corpus; Standard of Review; Concurrent Jurisdiction
Mission Institution v. Khela (B.C.C.A., Nov. 9, 2011) (34609) Mar. 27, 2014
Federal inmates can access provincial superior courts.

Criminal Law: Parole|
Canada (Attorney General) v. Whaling (B.C.C.A., Nov. 2, 2012)(35024) Mar. 20, 2014
The retrospective application of delayed day parole eligibility violates the s. 11(h) right not to be “punished . . . again”, and is not justified under s. 1.

Criminal Law: Pre-Sentence Credit
R. v. Carvery (N.S.C.A., Oct. 3, 2012) (35115)
Ineligibility for early release/parole may justify pre-sentence credit under the Truth in Sentencing Act.

Criminal Law: Pre-Sentence Credit; Retrospectivity
R. v. Clarke (O.N.C.A., Jan. 11, 2013) (35487)
Being charged after the Truth in Sentencing Act came into effect means the Act applies.

 Criminal Law: Pre-Sentence Credit
R. v. Summers (O.N.C.A., Mar.12, 2013) (35339)
No particular “circumstance” is excluded from consideration for pre-sentence credit under the Truth in Sentencing Act.

Workers’ Comp: Federal Employees; Chronic Stress; “Accidents”; Reasonableness
Martin v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board (Alta.C.A., Aug. 29, 2012) (35052) Mar. 28, 2014
Provincial boards and authorities are required under federal legislation to apply their own provincial laws and policies, provided they do not conflict, and here the Commission’s decision to reject the claim was reasonable.

ORAL JUDGMENTS

Criminal Law: “Equally Plausible Explanation”
R. v. Vokurka (N.L.C.A., August 5, 2013) (35510) Judgment rendered March 21, 2014.
Abella J.: — “The dissenting judge was of the view that the trial judge erred in failing to adequately consider and explain why, in her view, the “equally plausible explanation” supporting the defence of accident was not accepted. We do not agree, and agree instead with the majority that the trial judge adequately explained why he rejected the possibility of accident and found that the charge was proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Criminal Law: Voluntariness/Intent
R. v. Leinen (Alta.C.A., Aug. 12, 2013) (35531) Judgment rendered March 21, 2014.
LeBel J.: — “We are all of the view that the charge to the jury, read as a whole, contained no reversible error in relation to either voluntariness or intent. For these reasons, the appeal is allowed and the convictions are restored.”

LEAVES TO APPEAL GRANTED

Administrative Law: Utilities; Pensions
How are unfunded pension liabilities in regulated industries to be dealt with.
ATCO Gas and Pipelines Ltd., ATCO Electric Ltd. v. Alberta Utilities Commission (Alta. C.A., Sept. 23, 2013) (35624) Apr. 10, 2014

Charter: Minority Language Educational Rights
How do minority language educational rights work in practice re schools and facilities.
Association des parents de l’école Rose‑des‑vents et al. v. Ministry of Education of British Columbia, et al. (B.C.C.A., Sept. 20, 2013) (35619) Mar. 27, 2014

Civil Procedure: Foreign Judgments
There is a sealing order in this case, in the context of enforceability in Canada of foreign judgments.
Chevron Corporation, et al. v. Daniel Carlos Lusitande Yaiguaje, et al. (Ont. C.A., Dec. 17, 2013) (35682) Apr. 3, 2014

Civil Procedure: Mareva Injunctions; Contempt
Was a Mareva order violated here.
Peter W. G. Carey v. Judith Laiken (Ont. C.A., Aug. 27, 2013) (35597) Mar. 20, 2014

Criminal Law: Mandatory Minimums
Constitutionality of mandatory minimum sentences for firearm offences.
R. v. Hussein Jama Nur et al. (Ont. C.A., Nov. 12, 2013) (35678) Apr. 10, 2014

Criminal Law: Mandatory Minimums
Summary same as that immediately above.
R. et al. v. Sidney Charles et al. (Ont. Nov. 12, 2013) (35684) Apr. 10, 2014

 Criminal Law: Unknown Third Party Evidence
When should unknown third party suspect evidence to go to a jury.
R. v. Mark Edward Grant (Man. C.A., Oct. 30, 2013) (35664) Mar. 20, 2014

Criminal Law: Wrongful Convictions
Are federal authorities liable for this Quebec wrongful conviction.
Réjean Hinse v. A.G. of Canada (Que. C.A., Sept. 11, 2013) (35613) Mar. 20, 2014

Labour Law/Administrative Law: Standard of Review; ‘Prudence’ Reviews
Can a ‘prudence’ review be done on a JR.
Ontario Energy Board v. Ontario Power Generation Inc., et al. (Ont. C.A., June 4, 2013) (35506) Mar. 20, 2014

Labour Law: Grievances
Did discrimination exist here re maternal/parental leave.
British Columbia Teachers’ Federation, et al. v. British Columbia Public School Employers’ Association, et al. (B.C.C.A., Sept. 20, 2013) (35623) Mar. 20, 2014

Tax: Assessments
Are tax assessments civil or criminal in characterization.
Julie Guindon v. R. (Fed. C.A., June 12, 2013) (35519) Mar. 20, 2014

Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Summaries Sunday: Maritime Law Book

slaw - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 06:00

Summaries of selected recent cases are provided each week to Slaw by Maritime Law Book. Every Sunday we present a precis of the latest summaries, a fuller version of which can be found on MLB-Slaw Selected Case Summaries at cases.slaw.ca.

This week’s summaries concern:
Purchase of land & remedies / Workers’ compensation / Habeas corpus:

Pan Canadian Mortgage Group III Inc. v. 0859811 B.C. Ltd. et al. 2014 BCCA 113
Sale of Land - Remedies of purchaser – Purchaser’s lien – General
The purchasers entered into agreements with Lalli, whom they believed was acting on behalf of the owner of real property to be developed into townhouses. Each purchaser paid the entire purchase price for a townhouse to Lalli, but acknowledged in the agreement that a strata lot could not be sold before property was properly stratified, so that the purchaser would not acquire an interest in the land until he . . .

Workers’ Compensation Board (N.W.T. and Nunavut) v. Mercer et al. 2014 NWTCA 1
Civil Rights – Discrimination – Facilities and services customarily available to public – Discrimination on basis of social condition or source of income
A seasonal worker suffered an employment-related injury. He received less workers’ compensation than would have been paid to a permanent worker who suffered the same injury. As a result, he made a complaint to the territorial human rights commission that he had suffered discrimination on the basis of his social condition, a prohibited ground within the Human . . .

Khela v. Mission Institution (Warden) et al. 2014 SCC 24
Habeas Corpus - Grounds for issue of writ – Imprisonment – Change of conditions of (incl. transfers)
The Warden of Mission Institution decided to transfer a federal inmate (Khela) from the medium security Mission Institution to the maximum security Kent Institution on an emergency and involuntary basis. Khela made an application for habeas corpus in the British Columbia Supreme Court. The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at [2010] B.C.T.C. Uned. 721, granted the writ. The court held that . . .

Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Summaries Sunday: SOQUIJ

slaw - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 06:00

Chaque semaine, nous vous présentons un résumé d’une décision d’un tribunal québécois qui nous est fournis par la Société québécoise d’information juridique (SOQUIJ) et ayant un intérêt pancanadien. SOQUIJ relève du ministre de la Justice du Québec, et elle analyse, organise, enrichit et diffuse le droit au Québec.

Every week we present a summary of a decision by a Québec court provided to us by SOQUIJ and selected to be of interest to our readers throughout Canada. SOQUIJ is attached to the Québec Department of Justice and collects, analyzes, enriches, and disseminates legal information in Québec.

Pénal : fait de conseiller le suicide est un crime d’intention spécifique; en l’espèce, les propos échangés entre l’accusé et la victime sur le réseau social Facebook ne traduisent pas le degré d’insistance, de persuasion et d’incitation nécessaire à la perpétration du crime prévu à l’article 241 a) du Code criminel.

Intitulé : R. c. Morin, 2014 QCCQ 1609
Juridiction : Cour du Québec, Chambre criminelle et pénale (C.Q.), Montmagny, 300-01-012937-126
Décision de : Juge Christine Gosselin
Date : 24 février 2014

PÉNAL (DROIT) — infraction — infractions contre la personne — divers — conseil au suicide — adolescente — tentative de suicide à la suite d’une conversation sur le média social Facebook — échange d’insultes — interprétation de l’article 241 a) C.Cr. — élément de l’infraction — intention spécifique — interprétation de «conseil» — degré d’insistance, de persuasion et d’incitation requis.

Accusation en vertu de l’article 241 a) du Code criminel (C.Cr.). Acquittement.

Il est reproché à l’accusé d’avoir conseillé à X de se donner la mort et d’avoir ainsi commis l’acte criminel prévu à l’article 241 a) C.Cr. Au moment des événements, X, âgée de 14 ans, et Y, âgée de 15 ans, étaient amies et se voyaient principalement à l’école. Y fréquentait l’accusé, qui était âgé de 19 ans. La victime ne connaissait ce dernier que pour l’avoir croisé à quelques reprises à l’école. Le jour du drame, X et Y clavardaient sur le réseau social Facebook et s’échangeaient des insultes. Choqué par les propos que tenait X à sa copine, l’accusé lui a transmis plusieurs insultes et lui a dit qu’elle devrait se suicider. Des insultes et propos semblables ont aussi été tenus par Y, qui, à son tour, a suggéré à la victime d’aller se pendre. Ce soir-là, la victime a attenté à ses jours en ingurgitant 20 comprimés prescrits pour des maux de ventre. Quelques minutes plus tard, elle est allée trouver sa mère et lui a avoué avoir avalé les comprimés. Conduite à l’hôpital pour un lavage d’estomac, X a confié au personnel médical que c’est la conversation tenue avec Y et l’accusé qui l’avait poussée à commettre ce geste. Il s’agit de déterminer: 1) si les propos tenus par l’accusé à la victime constituent un conseil de se donner la mort; 2) si le crime prévu au paragraphe a) de l’article 241 C.Cr. est d’intention générale ou spécifique; et 3) dans le cas où il s’agirait d’un crime d’intention spécifique, si l’accusé a fait preuve d’une insouciance telle qu’elle constitue l’intention suffisante à la perpétration du crime de conseil au suicide.

Décision
Dans R. c. Dufour (C.A., 2010-12-21), 2010 QCCA 2413, SOQUIJ AZ-50710531, 2011EXP-374, J.E. 2011-205, [2011] R.J.Q. 62, la Cour d’appel ne fait pas de distinction entre les deux paragraphes de l’article 241 C.Cr. Elle confirme plutôt que les deux façons de perpétrer le crime qui y sont prévues requièrent une intention coupable. En l’espèce, l’accusé a prononcé des paroles inacceptables à l’endroit d’une jeune fille vulnérable au cours d’une conversation où les deux s’insultaient. Toutefois, il est crédible lorsqu’il affirme qu’il ne souhaitait pas que ses propos soient pris au sérieux ni que la victime attente à ses jours. Les propos tenus doivent être interprétés dans leur contexte. Ceux de l’accusé se voulaient, malgré l’utilisation de termes inappropriés, une réplique sarcastique à ceux de la victime. Quant à savoir si ces propos constituent un «conseil» donné à la victime d’attenter à ses jours au sens de l’article 241 a) C.Cr., il ressort de la jurisprudence que l’auteur du conseil doit vouloir, par ses propos, inciter une personne à faire quelque chose. Ses paroles doivent viser à convaincre ou à persuader cette personne de faire quelque chose dans un objectif précis. L’auteur du conseil doit avoir l’intention de persuader la victime de commettre le geste illégal. Dans les circonstances, et compte tenu du contexte particulier dans lequel ils ont été tenus, les propos de l’accusé ne traduisent pas le degré d’insistance, de persuasion et d’incitation nécessaire à la perpétration du crime de conseil au suicide prévu à l’article 241 a) C.Cr. Enfin, bien qu’il ne soit pas nécessaire que le tribunal se prononce sur la troisième question, il y aurait lieu de répondre par la négative. En effet, le comportement de l’accusé ne démontre pas un degré d’insouciance tel qu’il équivaut à l’intention spécifique requise pour la perpétration du crime d’incitation au suicide. La connaissance des conséquences possibles de l’intimidation n’équivaut pas au degré d’insouciance requis pour entraîner la responsabilité criminelle de l’accusé. Ce dernier ne connaissait pas la victime et ses propos n’ont pas été tenus dans un contexte d’intimidation ou de harcèlement. Il ne mesurait pas non plus le degré de fragilité de la victime. Il est impossible de conclure que l’accusé possédait un degré de connaissance suffisant pour conclure qu’il a sciemment fait fi des conséquences possibles de ses paroles et couru le risque que la victime attente à sa vie.

Le texte intégral de la décision est disponible ici

Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Góźdź-Roszkowski : Corpus approaches to study of evaluative language in judicial opinions

Legal Informatics Blog - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 04:25

Professor Dr. Stanisław Góźdź-Roszkowski of the University of Łódź presented a paper entitled Corpus approaches to the study of evaluative language in institutional discourse, at EMLS 2014: Empirical Methods in Language Studies Conference, held 7-8 April 2014 in Łódź, Poland.

Here is the abstract, from the book of abstracts:

The term ‘evaluative language’ refers to a wide range of language resources used to express subjectivity, value and opinion. Corpus approaches to the study of evaluative language range from Sentiment Analysis (e.g. Liu 2010) to the study of stance (e.g. Biber 2006) to the application of corpus techniques to the study of appraisal (e.g. Bednarek 2008). In my presentation I plan to focus on the use of evaluative language in the context of the US Supreme Court Opinions. Court judgments, especially those given by appellate courts offer a fertile ground for the study of evaluation construal since they contain not only majority opinion but also concurring and, most importantly, dissenting opinions. In these texts, appellate judges argue for or against decisions of lower courts, decisions of their colleagues sitting on the same bench or arguments of the appellants. Based on a one-million word corpus of US Supreme Court opinions, this paper attempts to compare the pros and cons of two corpus approaches. First, it will illustrate a corpus-based approach by focusing on two patterns v-link + ADJ + that pattern and v-link + ADJ + to-infinitive pattern. It is argued that these two patterns represent a viable and efficient diagnostic tool for retrieving instances of evaluative expression and for providing a starting point for a generalized description of how evaluation is expressed in the judicial disciplinary discourse. Then, I will turn to demonstrate the use of a corpus-assisted discourse analysis (CADS) methodological framework (cf. Partington et al. 2013) by discussing the role of evaluative language and prosody in the landmark US Supreme Court opinion on same-sex marriage: United States v. Windsor decided June, 26, 2013.


Filed under: Applications, Research findings Tagged: Automated legal text analysis, CADS, Computational linguistics and law, Corpus linguistics and law, corpus-assisted discourse analysis, Corpus-assisted discourse analysis and legal texts, EMLS, EMLS 2014, Empirical Methods in Language Studies Conference, Evaluative language in court decisions, Evaluative language in judicial decisions, Evaluative language in U.S. Supreme Court decisions, Legal communication, Legal corpus linguistics, Legal linguistics, Legal text analysis, Legal text corpora, SCOTUS, Stanisław Góźdź-Roszkowski, U.S. Supreme Court decisions
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Góźdź-Roszkowski : Corpus approaches to study of evaluative language in judicial opinions

Legal Informatics Blog - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 04:25

Professor Dr. Stanisław Góźdź-Roszkowski of the University of Łódź presented a paper entitled Corpus approaches to the study of evaluative language in institutional discourse, at EMLS 2014: Empirical Methods in Language Studies Conference, held 7-8 April 2014 in Łódź, Poland.

Here is the abstract, from the book of abstracts:

The term ‘evaluative language’ refers to a wide range of language resources used to express subjectivity, value and opinion. Corpus approaches to the study of evaluative language range from Sentiment Analysis (e.g. Liu 2010) to the study of stance (e.g. Biber 2006) to the application of corpus techniques to the study of appraisal (e.g. Bednarek 2008). In my presentation I plan to focus on the use of evaluative language in the context of the US Supreme Court Opinions. Court judgments, especially those given by appellate courts offer a fertile ground for the study of evaluation construal since they contain not only majority opinion but also concurring and, most importantly, dissenting opinions. In these texts, appellate judges argue for or against decisions of lower courts, decisions of their colleagues sitting on the same bench or arguments of the appellants. Based on a one-million word corpus of US Supreme Court opinions, this paper attempts to compare the pros and cons of two corpus approaches. First, it will illustrate a corpus-based approach by focusing on two patterns v-link + ADJ + that pattern and v-link + ADJ + to-infinitive pattern. It is argued that these two patterns represent a viable and efficient diagnostic tool for retrieving instances of evaluative expression and for providing a starting point for a generalized description of how evaluation is expressed in the judicial disciplinary discourse. Then, I will turn to demonstrate the use of a corpus-assisted discourse analysis (CADS) methodological framework (cf. Partington et al. 2013) by discussing the role of evaluative language and prosody in the landmark US Supreme Court opinion on same-sex marriage: United States v. Windsor decided June, 26, 2013.


Filed under: Applications, Research findings Tagged: Automated legal text analysis, CADS, Computational linguistics and law, Corpus linguistics and law, corpus-assisted discourse analysis, Corpus-assisted discourse analysis and legal texts, EMLS, EMLS 2014, Empirical Methods in Language Studies Conference, Evaluative language in court decisions, Evaluative language in judicial decisions, Evaluative language in U.S. Supreme Court decisions, Legal communication, Legal corpus linguistics, Legal linguistics, Legal text analysis, Legal text corpora, SCOTUS, Stanisław Góźdź-Roszkowski, U.S. Supreme Court decisions
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Call for papers: RuleML 2014 Special Track: Legal rules and Norms

Legal Informatics Blog - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 04:04

The submission deadlines have been extended for RuleML 2014 Special Track: Legal rules and Norms.

The new abstracts submission deadline is: 14 April 2014.

The new paper submission deadline is: 22 April 2014.

The conference is scheduled to be held 18-20 August 2014 in Prague.

Professor Dr. Monica Palmirani and Dr. Guido Governatori are organizers of this special track.

Here is the description of the event, from the event’s Website:

A norm, following Kelsen’s definition is a mandatory command concerning rights or duties endorsed by an organization that has the power to impose these rules to addressees. A norm is usually expressed in writing using legal texts or in an oral way (e.g., a social norm, an oral contract) or in other representations (e.g., symbolic road signs). This legal source is the main inspiration for the legal rules. Legal rules are interpretations of one or more norms formalized using logical rules in the form of antecedent and consequent. It is mostly the interpretation of the legal source and it is often a normalization of the convoluted and technical legal language. This track wants to investigate the complex relationship among norms, legal sources, interpretation, argumentation and legal rules.

Topics

  • Methodologies for modeling regulations using both ontologies and rules
  • Defeasibility and norms: modeling rule exceptions and priority relations among rules
  • The relationship between rules and legal argumentation schemes
  • Rule based inference mechanism for legal reasoning
  • E-contracting and automated negotiations with rule-based declarative strategies
  • Business Process Compliance
  • LegalRuleML formalization
  • Isomorphism principle in legal rule modelling
  • The relationship between norms, legal source and rules in the interpretation [...]

Filed under: Applications, Calls for papers, Conference Announcements, Standards, Technology developments Tagged: Automated interpretation of legal rules, Automated legal negotiations, Automated negotiations, Business process compliance, Business process compliance information systems, Business process compliance systems, Digital contracting systems, econtracting, econtracting systems, Electronic contracting systems, Electronic contracts, Guido Governatori, Inference in legal reasoning, Interpretation of legal rules, Isomorphism in modeling legal rules, Legal argumentation schemes, Legal compliance information systems, Legal compliance systems, Legal defeasible reasoning, Legal inference engines, Legal informatics conferences, Legal interpretation, Legal knowledge representation, Legal metadata, Legal ontologies, Legal RuleML, LegalRuleML, Modeling legal defeasible reasoning, Modeling legal norms, Modeling legal rules, Monica Palmirani, RuleML, RuleML 2014, RuleML 2014 Special Track: Legal rules and Norms, Special Track: Legal rules and Norms
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Call for papers: RuleML 2014 Special Track: Legal rules and Norms

Legal Informatics Blog - Sun, 04/13/2014 - 04:04

The submission deadlines have been extended for RuleML 2014 Special Track: Legal rules and Norms.

The new abstracts submission deadline is: 14 April 2014.

The new paper submission deadline is: 22 April 2014.

The conference is scheduled to be held 18-20 August 2014 in Prague.

Professor Dr. Monica Palmirani and Dr. Guido Governatori are organizers of this special track.

Here is the description of the event, from the event’s Website:

A norm, following Kelsen’s definition is a mandatory command concerning rights or duties endorsed by an organization that has the power to impose these rules to addressees. A norm is usually expressed in writing using legal texts or in an oral way (e.g., a social norm, an oral contract) or in other representations (e.g., symbolic road signs). This legal source is the main inspiration for the legal rules. Legal rules are interpretations of one or more norms formalized using logical rules in the form of antecedent and consequent. It is mostly the interpretation of the legal source and it is often a normalization of the convoluted and technical legal language. This track wants to investigate the complex relationship among norms, legal sources, interpretation, argumentation and legal rules.

Topics

  • Methodologies for modeling regulations using both ontologies and rules
  • Defeasibility and norms: modeling rule exceptions and priority relations among rules
  • The relationship between rules and legal argumentation schemes
  • Rule based inference mechanism for legal reasoning
  • E-contracting and automated negotiations with rule-based declarative strategies
  • Business Process Compliance
  • LegalRuleML formalization
  • Isomorphism principle in legal rule modelling
  • The relationship between norms, legal source and rules in the interpretation [...]

Filed under: Applications, Calls for papers, Conference Announcements, Standards, Technology developments Tagged: Automated interpretation of legal rules, Automated legal negotiations, Automated negotiations, Business process compliance, Business process compliance information systems, Business process compliance systems, Digital contracting systems, econtracting, econtracting systems, Electronic contracting systems, Electronic contracts, Guido Governatori, Inference in legal reasoning, Interpretation of legal rules, Isomorphism in modeling legal rules, Legal argumentation schemes, Legal compliance information systems, Legal compliance systems, Legal defeasible reasoning, Legal inference engines, Legal informatics conferences, Legal interpretation, Legal knowledge representation, Legal metadata, Legal ontologies, Legal RuleML, LegalRuleML, Modeling legal defeasible reasoning, Modeling legal norms, Modeling legal rules, Monica Palmirani, RuleML, RuleML 2014, RuleML 2014 Special Track: Legal rules and Norms, Special Track: Legal rules and Norms
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

My Twitter Digest for 04/11/2014

<CONTENT /> v.5 - Sat, 04/12/2014 - 14:30
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Legal technology projects at LawWithoutWalls 2014 Conposium, 12-13 April

Legal Informatics Blog - Sat, 04/12/2014 - 05:27

A number of legal technology projects are scheduled to be presented at the LawWithoutWalls 2014 Conposium, taking place 12-13 April 2014 at the University of Miami, in Coral Gables, Florida, USA.

The event Website is at http://www.lawwithoutwalls.org/conposium

Click here for the program of the event.

The Twitter hashtag for the event is #lwow2014

A link to the video live Webcast of the event is available by sending an email request to: lawwithoutwalls@law.miami.edu

Here is a description of the program from the program’s About page:

LawWithoutWalls is a part-virtual collaboratory devised and led by Michele DeStefano, that develops the skills necessary to provide effective legal services in today’s global, multi-disciplinary, and cross-cultural marketplace. It centers on the intersection of law, business, technology, and innovation. [...]

A number of leaders in the legal technology community are participating in the event as mentors or judges.

HT @LawWithoutWalls


Filed under: Applications, Conference Announcements, Projects, Technology developments, Technology tools, Webcasts Tagged: #lwow2014, Innovation in law practice technology, Innovation in legal technology, Innovation in the delivery of legal services, Law practice technology, LawWithoutWalls, LawWithoutWalls Conposium, LawWithoutWalls Conposium 2014, Legal instructional technology, Legal services delivery innovation, Legal technology innovation, LWOW, Michele DeStefano
Categories: Teknoids Blogs

Legal technology projects at LawWithoutWalls 2014 Conposium, 12-13 April

Legal Informatics Blog - Sat, 04/12/2014 - 05:27

A number of legal technology projects are scheduled to be presented at the LawWithoutWalls 2014 Conposium, taking place 12-13 April 2014 at the University of Miami, in Coral Gables, Florida, USA.

The event Website is at http://www.lawwithoutwalls.org/conposium

Click here for the program of the event.

The Twitter hashtag for the event is #lwow2014

A link to the video live Webcast of the event is available by sending an email request to: lawwithoutwalls@law.miami.edu

Here is a description of the program from the program’s About page:

LawWithoutWalls is a part-virtual collaboratory devised and led by Michele DeStefano, that develops the skills necessary to provide effective legal services in today’s global, multi-disciplinary, and cross-cultural marketplace. It centers on the intersection of law, business, technology, and innovation. [...]

A number of leaders in the legal technology community are participating in the event as mentors or judges.

HT @LawWithoutWalls


Filed under: Applications, Conference Announcements, Projects, Technology developments, Technology tools, Webcasts Tagged: #lwow2014, Innovation in law practice technology, Innovation in legal technology, Innovation in the delivery of legal services, Law practice technology, LawWithoutWalls, LawWithoutWalls Conposium, LawWithoutWalls Conposium 2014, Legal instructional technology, Legal services delivery innovation, Legal technology innovation, LWOW, Michele DeStefano
Categories: Teknoids Blogs