Originally published by lawschool academicsupport.
Now that the bar exam is over, it’s time to turn our attention to the incoming first-year students. Orientation is right around the corner. I have roughly 50 minutes to speak with the students during orientation about academic support programming….
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Charles Sartain.
The pitches in your arsenal are your fastball and your curveball; it’s the late innings; third time around the batting order; they’re sitting on the fastball. Once they catch up to it (and they will unless you’re Justin Verlander which, face it, you are not), goodbye game. Why not go to the bender to keep ’em uncomfortable and give you options? In Lackey v. Templeton, plaintiffs stayed with the heater. Goodbye game.
The lesson to be learned
In this title action the title issues didn’t matter. The lesson is simple: The exclusive procedure to resolve competing claims to real property in Texas is a statutory trespass-to-try-title suit under Property Code Chapter 22, not a suit for declaratory judgment. Most often the question arises when the plaintiff asserts both actions, prevails, tries to recover attorneys’ fees under the Declaratory Judgment Act, and is rebuked by the court. In Lackey, the penalty was more severe.
The only basis asserted by the plaintiffs for recovery of mineral interests in two tracts in Jasper County was under the DJA. Faced with special exceptions and motions for summary judgment by the (many) defendants, plaintiffs failed/refused/elected not (whichever it was) to amend their petition to include trespass-to-try-title. Summary judgment for the plaintiffs was overturned by the court of appeals, resulting in a take-nothing judgment in favor of defendants.
A dispute involving deeds or contracts might appear to be appropriate under DJA, but it’s not. A suit to recover real property must be brought under the TTT statute and the specific pleading and proof requirements of Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 783 through 809.
Query
I wasn’t there and I’m sure there’s a good answer, but why didn’t the plaintiffs just amend the petition in the face of the defendants’ pleadings to add a trespass to try title cause of action?
This short post gives you time to honor the 12-string guitar.
A disciple
Another disciple
With apologies to Jimmy Page.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by David Coale.
After trial of a Lanham Act claim involving the right to use the term “Cowboy” in advertising bourbon, the jury found abandonment of the plaintiff’s alleged mark, and the Fifth Circuit affirmed. “As the district court observed, the jury fairly rejected the testimony of Allied’s founder, Marci Palatella, and Allied’s price lists as evidence of intent to resume use. . . . Garrison Brothers presented evidence undermining Palatella’s contention that Allied specializes in old, rare, and expensive whiskeys; disputing Palatella’s reliance on a bourbon shortage as a reason for Allied’s failure to sell ‘COWBOY LITTLE BARREL’ bourbon after 2009; and highlighting Palatella’s inconsistent testimony concerning Allied’s price lists.” Allied Lomar, Inc. v. Lone Star Distillery LLC, No. 17-50148 (July 17, 2018, unpublished).
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by lawschool academicsupport.
One student leaves and the next student comes in. The first thing he/she says is an excuse why they don’t have the practice problem done or didn’t turn in homework. The professor at the desk proceeds to scold the student…
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by John Council.
A Texas Court of Appeals has ruled that a music production company can sue an Atlanta-based hip-hop artist for breach of contract in a Houston state
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Karen Sloan.
At the same time, the Law School Admission Council is increasing the number of LSAT test dates from six to 10 and will move to a computerized version of the exam in the spring of 2019.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by David Coale.
Miskevitch, a store manager, alleged that 7-Eleven terminated her in violation of the 
Texas Labor Code in retaliation for opposing a discriminatory practice. Specifically, she alleged that in accordance with company policy, she had reported an employee’s complaint of harassment by another manager, and then shook her head in disgust at a meeting about the complaint. The Fifth Court, following precedent from San Antonio, found that because the report was made pursuant to company policy, it was done in support of the company rather than in opposition to it, and was not actionable under this statute. And the evidence showed that her head shake was in reaction to the report of harassment – not actions by the company. The Court denied 7-Eleven’s request for fees, however, observing: “Although [Miskevitch] lacked Texas authority for her position on protected activity, she attempted to distinguish 7-Eleven’s cases and argued for an extension of federal law.” Miskevitch v. 7-Eleven, No. 05-17-00099-CV (July 25, 2018) (mem. op.)
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Hutchison & Stoy.
When it comes time for taxes, reportable income can vary. If you received money from a court settlement, you are probably wondering if you are required to report your earnings.
The term “damages” applies to the amount of money the victim receives due to the lawsuit. Courts promote justice for those involved by awarding damages. Justice is given to those suffering who receive a lump sum to help them through the situation they are experiencing financially.
Justice also administered as a punishment for those acting negligently and creating an incentive for others not to engage in similar behavior.
There are two types of damages that result from lawsuits:
In a lawsuit, the defendant is the party charged, while the plaintiff is the one pressing charges. Any damages awarded go to the plaintiff.
So where does the law stand on money received as a court settlement?
Are lawsuit settlements considered as taxable income?
Before we can answer that question, let’s look at the different types of damages and why a judge or jury would award them.
People have disagreements that are usually resolved between those involved without any additional help.
Sometimes though, further guidance is needed.
When an event reaches the courts to make a decision, the result is to discover if the defendant must pay the plaintiff, how much, and why. The next question is if the financial exchange is taxable.
But first, the types of damages you may receive.
Compensatory damages deal with the actual loss backed up by evidence.
Just as the name implies, it is compensation for injuries accrued due to the actions of the defendant to the plaintiff. This reparation is intended to help the plaintiff with any expenses they had to take care of themselves.
Primary reasons for compensatory damages include:
Compensatory damages get broken into two categories:
Economic damages involve compensation for monetary costs: bills for medical expenses, property damage that requires fixing or replacement, and income lost because of missed work due to the events surrounding the lawsuit.
Non-economic damages involve pain and suffering, emotional distress, and a decrease in quality of life related to the events involved with the court settlement.
Let us look at a real-life situation, such as a car accident.
The plaintiff is taking the defendant to court because Person B (defendant) crashed into Person A (plaintiff). Due to the vehicles colliding, Person A suffered a shoulder injury. Person A had multiple visits to the doctor and was unable to work for a period of time directly related to the injury.
All the injuries listed would fall under economic damages. If Person A reports a loss of enjoyment of life related to the shoulder injury, then non-economic damages are claimed.
With the help from a car accident lawyer, the judge agrees that the actions of Person B personally affected Person A. Person B must now reimburse Person A for the medical bills and money that Person A would have received via paycheck for any employment hours missed. Person A would also receive an amount that was decided as the value for the decrease in quality of life.
Punitive damages aren’t awarded to balance any loss the plaintiff has experienced.
Instead, these damages are designed to be a form of punishment for those found responsible by the lawsuit. Typically, punitive damages get reserved for situations where the defendant acted with extreme recklessness and no regard for the safety of the plaintiff.
Your personal injury attorney knows if punitive damages are a possibility depending on your situation.
In the auto accident scenario, the plaintiff may pursue punitive damages if the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the car crash. The defendant’s actions intentionally put others at risk and may have increased the physical damage done to people and property involved.
Damages in this category can be controversial because they are in addition to any compensatory damages that get paid.
The punishment is intended to discourage any further behavior that is similar to the actions reviewed in the lawsuit. It’s a way of ensuring justice for victims of situations that were out of their control.
Damages awarded as punitive are not common, as clear evidence must prove the defendant acted willfully malicious and was immensely irresponsible in their actions.
If you received a court settlement in the past year, is it considered taxable income? To answer that, the type of awarded sum and the initial reason for granting must consider.
Punitive damages are a very cut and dry situation. Because punitive damages are not to compensate for any loss, be it economical or emotional, they are taxable under all conditions.
The IRS requires any punitive damages to be reported as “Other Income” when filing for taxes.
So the short answer is:
Yes, punitive damages are considered as taxable income.
Any money Person A received that was part of the punitive damages would be considered separate from the compensatory damages, and the punitive money is taxable income.
Compensatory damages are not as black and white.
The type of compensatory damage – economic or non-economic – does not affect the taxability of the award.
Instead, taxability on compensatory damages depends on the reasons for awarding the money. Physical injury and emotional injury play an essential role in the decision.
Personal injury cases, like the car accident example, awarded damages for physical injuries are not considered taxable income and do not need to be reported.
The definition of “physical injuries” is a crucial point here.
Physical injuries involved in a personal injury must be considered visible by the IRS to avoid taxation. Cuts, scrapes, bruises, broken bones and other visible injuries mean the income is not taxable with no requirement to report.
Looking back at our example above with the car wreck with Person A and Person B.
If there is money awarded to Person A because of the broken shoulder and multiple cuts, Person A does not need to report the money. Person A keeps the tax-free cash. Tax-free only pertains to the funds given explicitly for the physical injuries viewable on Person A.
Any additional damages awarded must follow the taxable regulations specific to them.
However, if damages are awarded and non-visible injuries are involved, the IRS usually requires a portion of the money.
Examples of non-visible injuries are sexual harassment, slander, or defamation. Emotional distress is different from non-visible injuries but handled similarly.
When it comes to damages awarded for emotional distress, there are two varieties. If compensatory damages given for emotional distress that shows physical symptoms, the IRS finds the money taxable.
In this case, a person reports having headaches caused by stress. The headaches are a physical symptom caused by emotional distress. Therefore, any compensation received will need to be disclosed and taxed as income.
However, if a bodily injury has caused emotional distress, it is treated as a physical injury in a personal case and any damages awarded are not taxed.
These situations can be tricky because it’s often a “chicken or the egg” scenario.
Did the physical injury cause emotional suffering or is the physical symptom caused by the emotional stress?
That is why the original purpose of filing the lawsuit is taken into consideration when looking at taxability for compensatory damages.
Emotional damages are usually measured by one of two methods. Either an expert witness testifies about the trauma the plaintiff endures, or a close family or friend of the plaintiff (or the plaintiff themselves) testifies about how the events have negatively affected the plaintiff and their life.
Money awarded in a court settlement often goes to pay for prejudgment or attorney’s fees. This helps you compensate your lawyer for their assistance in your victory.
Court verdicts or settlements decide damages. If both parties agree, a settlement is reached.
Person A and Person B could have reached a conclusion without ever going to court with the help of their insurance companies. If the decision moves on to the courthouse, a judge or jury doles out the response as a verdict.
Taxes on compensation are the same whether awarded by a verdict or a settlement.
Whether money earned from a lawsuit is taxable or not depends on why it was originally awarded.
Court settlements are always taxable if they involve punitive damages. Court settlements involving compensatory damages may be taxable income.
The reason for the lawsuit settlement is the deciding factor.
Personal injuries with physical damage are not required to be reported and therefore are not taxable, while most non-visible injuries and emotional distress cases are taxable.
If you have any questions or need help with your personal injury case, contact the experienced attorneys at Hutchison & Stoy today.
The post Are Compensatory or Punitive Damages Taxable? appeared first on Warriors For Justice.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Texas Personal Injury News.
In many jurisdictions, for an insurer to carry its burden of proving that coverage is void due to a material misrepresentation, the insurer must prove not only that the misrepresented fact was something that the insurer wanted to know, but that the misrepresentation affected the insurer’s investigation. In other words, that the misrepresentation was material….… Continue Reading
.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by tiffany.dowell.
*Don’t forget to nominate us for the ABA Web 100! Here’s a link to the quick, easy form to fill out.*
A common concern for landowners across the country is how to ensure they are protected from liability if someone is injured on their property. In fact, in one morning last week, I got three emails from landowners asking what they could do now to be in a position to best defend themselves in the event an injury does occur on their land.
Importantly, there is no silver-bullet that will ensure a landowner will not ever be liable for anything. Additionally, there is nothing a landowner can do to make it impossible for another person to file a lawsuit against the landowner. There are, however, numerous steps landowners can take to limit liability and protect their operations from this concern.
Carry liability insurance.
This is the most important step a landowner can take in order to protect his or her operation. Every landowner needs to have a liability insurance policy that covers every activity taking place on the property. For example, if a landowner has a farm and ranch policy, but also conducts other activities like a roadside fruit stand or guided hunts, the landowner should confirm that the additional activities are covered by the farm and ranch policy’s provisions. How much insurance should a landowner carry? Well, in typical attorney fashion I’ll say that it depends. Landowners should consider the amount of risk associated with their operation. For example, a farm in the middle of nowhere that does not host any sort of events or have any guests would likely need a lower coverage amount than a farm that has a pumpkin patch and corn maze every fall with thousands of guests. Talking through the details of your operation with you insurance agent is a great way to determine the right coverage level and type of policy to obtain.
Identify dangerous conditions on the land and either provide warnings or make them safe.
Every state has slightly different laws related to when a landowner can be held liable for injuries. Most states group people into different categories and assign a certain level of duty to a landowner for each category. However, generally speaking, warning any guest on the property about dangerous conditions or making them safe would satisfy the duty of care owned by a landowner to any type of guest on the property. What are dangerous conditions? Well, whatever a court says they are. A deep hole covered with tree limbs, for example, could be considered a dangerous condition. A landowner can either warn people about potential dangers or make them self. There is no set requirement for how warnings may be given, but oftentimes if the landowner is entering into any type of lease or contract, identifying dangerous conditions in that type of document is useful.
Texas law divides people into three categories: (1) trespassers; (2) licensees; and (3) invitees. Landowners owe a different duty (level of responsibility) to each category. If the duty is met, the landowner is not liable. If not met, the landowner can be held liable to an injured party. Under Texas law, a landowner’s only duty to a trespasser–which is anyone on the land without permission–is not to intentionally injure them and not to act with gross negligence. [Read more here]. This is a very high bar for an injured party to prove in order to recover damages from a landowner. For a licensee–anyone on the property for their own benefit–the duty is a bit higher. In addition to not intentionally injuring or acting with gross negligence, the landowner must warn or make safe dangerous conditions known to the landowner that might not be obvious to the plaintiff. For an invitee–someone entering the property for the mutual benefit of themselves and the landowner–the duty is even higher. In addition to no intentional acts or gross negligence, and in addition to warning for known dangerous conditions, the landowner now has a duty to warn or make safe any dangerous condition of which he or she should have known with a reasonable inspection. For more info on the Texas approach to premises liability, click here.
Obtain written liability releases from anyone coming on the property.
Liability releases (also called liability waivers) are simply documents signed by guests agreeing that they will not hold a landowner liable for injuries that occur on the property. Again, laws differ by state, but generally speaking, courts will enforce this type of waiver if drafted in a manner comporting with the law of the state where the land is located. Releases usually identify the activity involved, list out common dangerous associated with that type of activity, state that the signor understands those risks, and agrees not to sue the landowner for negligence. Given the complex nature of these releases, and the importance of having one that is enforceable, it is recommended that a landowner seek the assistance of an attorney to draft a proper waiver. Spending the money up front to do so can certainly pay off in the long run if a lawsuit can be avoided.
In Texas, courts require releases to be conspicuous and to comply with the express negligence doctrine. This essentially means that the release cannot be hidden in the fine print of a larger document, like a hunting lease, and must contain language providing that the signor releases the landowner all claims of negligence or gross negligence related to the signor’s being on the property. [For more detail on these requirements, click here.]
Ensure that all limited liability statutes apply to the operation.
Many states have limited liability statutes protecting landowners from liability if certain conditions are met. Two of the most common types of statutes are an Agritourism Act or a Recreational Use Statute. Again, the details of these statutes differ by state, but they can offer important protections for landowners and generally are fairly easy and inexpensive to comply with. For example, the Texas Recreational Use Statute provides that a landowner is not liable except for intentional acts or gross negligence if the person injured was there for a recreational purpose and the landowner either charged no fee, did not charge more than a certain amount, or carried a sufficient level of insurance. Landowners should investigate the various statutes in their own state and ensure that they apply to their operation.
Both the Texas Recreational Use Statute and the Texas Agritourism Act provide important protections for owners of ag land in Texas. “Ag land” is defined under the Recreational Use Statute as land that is suitable for growing crops, forestry, or raising livestock and under the Agritourism Act as land suitable for growing crops and raising livestock. They offer limited liability to the landowner if a plaintiff is injured on the property while engaging in a recreational activity, including hunting, fishing, riding four-wheelers, and many more listed examples. Further, the Agritourism Act also applies to plaintiffs on the property for educational activities. Both have different requirements in order to apply, with the Recreational Use Statute requiring certain monetary requirements be met and the Agritourism Act requiring a sign be hung or certain release language signed. Additionally, Texas also has a Farm Animal Liability Act that protects farm animal owners from injuries caused by the inherent risks of farm animal activities. [Read more about these statutes here.]
Consider the use of a limited liability business entity structure.
Landowners may want to consider putting their business (or a particular part of the business) into a business entity that offers limited liability. This could include a limited liability company, limited partnership, or corporation. When formed correctly and handled property, these types of entities can provide limited liability for a landowner if an injury occurs on property owned by the entity. For example, if someone gets injured on property owned by an LLC of which Bob is a member, Bob would not be personally liable for the injuries. Conversely, if Bob owned the land in his own name, his personal assets could be subject to liability if an injury were to occur. There are a number of considerations that go into whether a business entity is right for an operation and, if so, which entity to select. Landowners should consult with an accountant and attorney in their area to help make the right decision for their operation. [For more information on selecting a business entity, listen to this prior podcast with Amber Miller.]
The post How Can Landowners Protect Themselves from Liability? appeared first on Texas Agriculture Law.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Peggy Keene.
Recording of Everyday Activities Has Become Common These days, it has become a common practice to find people willing to live stream and broadcast every […]
The post Live Streaming of Uber/Lyft Passengers Raise New Privacy Concerns appeared first on Klemchuk LLP.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Drew York.
Jim Duncey is more than just the majority owner of Duncey’s Caps, Inc. – he’s the face of the Company, appearing on billboards, in television and radio ads, and on the home page of the company’s website. He is one of the most influential business leaders in the city. On Saturday night Jim and his wife Diane attend a charity event at the toniest country club in town. With a little “liquid courage” Jim was the high bidder at the night’s live auction, which earned him respect (and envy) from those in attendance. On the way home Jim ran a stop sign and t-boned another vehicle. The driver of the other vehicle suffered serious injuries that would force her to spend several weeks in the hospital. Police investigating the accident gave Jim a field sobriety test, which he failed. Jim ended blowing a .12 BAC and was charged with DWI. The accident, along with Jim’s arrest, was the lead story on the Sunday news.
With the face of the company in legal and public relations trouble, Duncey’s board of directors called an emergency meeting to discuss the situation and consider options. What can they do?
It seems like executives’ conduct is under the microscope more than ever before these days, and for far worse than Jim’s DWI arrest. Just last week 6 women accused Les Moonves, the CEO of CBS, of sexual harassment. While those allegations are no doubt troubling for all involved, including CBS’s management team, the management team arguably faces a more difficult task when the accused is the face of the company. We’ve seen several recent examples: Harvey Weinstein, the founder of the movie production company The Weinstein Company, has faced numerous sexual harassment and sexual assault allegations; John Schnatter, the founder of Papa John’s, was caught on a tape recording using racist language. And these issues are not limited to executives who serve as the face of the company. No one can forget Jared Fogle, the pitchman for Subway, was arrested and convicted of possessing child pornography and paying minors for sex. What do companies’ management teams do in these situations?
A management team needs to have a crisis plan ready to implement if necessary. That plan should include immediately releasing a statement about the incident, and establish a communications team that will handle all public relations. Furthermore, if the incident only amounts to an allegation, the company’s management team (usually the board of directors) should call an emergency meeting to appoint outside counsel to investigate the allegations. The company’s marketing team should also pull any advertising where the accused is the face of the company.
The thornier issue becomes whether the accused is such a persona non grata that they need to be removed from the company’s management. While the accused may voluntarily step down, that isn’t always the case, as evidenced by the current fight between Mr. Schnatter and Papa John’s board of directors. Ironically, Mr. Schnatter’s desire to fight to maintain control over the company he founded continues to bring Papa John’s negative headlines, which leads to prolonged depression of Papa John’s stock price.
In those situations where an executive is unwilling to step down, the company’s board of directors will have to stealthily take actions to replace the executive. This may require the board to rely on a morals clause in the executive’s employment agreement. If that does not exist, the board will then have to rely on the company’s bylaw provisions for the appointment and replacement of executives. This is particularly important when the executive owns a significant interest in the company. In the Papa John’s case, Mr. Schnatter reportedly owns 30 percent of the shares, and the company’s board of directors adopted a “poison pill” defense to prevent Mr. Schnatter from attempting a hostile takeover.
While companies cannot prevent negative headlines impacting their bottom line or stock price, they can plan ahead for deftly addressing them to mitigate the impact. If you fail to plan, you plan to fail.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Thomas G. Ciarlone, Jr..
Tom Ciarlone is joined by Chip Morris for the final installment of a six-part series featuring guest speakers from Kane Russell Coleman Logan PC on a range of legal issues impacting the oil and gas sector. Chip discusses the top ten mistakes employers can make—in the oilfield, and beyond—when drafting non-compete agreements.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Teri Rodriguez.
Chip Morris from Kane Russell Coleman Logan PC discusses the top ten mistakes employers can make—in the oilfield, and beyond—when drafting non-compete agreements.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Texas Personal Injury News.
Recently, the Supreme Court of Texas upheld a decision by the Court of Appeals for the 14th District of Texas regarding a medical malpractice case over the death of a woman, confirming that the evidence of causation was legally sufficient.
Shannon McCoy suffered brain damage and quadriplegia after experiencing pre- and post-delivery complications in September 2004. She was admitted to the Hospital of Texas to give birth to her first child. McCoy’s baby had died in utero from placenta abruption. She ended up developing complications, which ultimately resulted in brain damage, and required around the clock care for the remainder of her life. She passed in 2015. Her widower, Andre McCoy, filed a negligence lawsuit in 2006 against her prenatal physician, Dr. Debra Gunn, as well as her practice, Obstetrical and Gynecological Associates PA and Obstetrical and Gynecological Associates PLLC, claiming that Gunn’s failure to make proper adjustments to the administration of blood and blood products was the cause of her permanent brain damage. Other previous defendants, including Woman’s Hospital and Dr. Mark Jacobs, reached a settlement of $1.2 million. They originally included cardiologist, Dr. James Collins, as he was the one who had treated her with Digoxin after discovering that she had an elevated heart rate. The remaining defendants alleged that McCoy, his family members, the treating nurses, and Cardiologist, contributed to the patient’s brain damage because of negligence.
In an 11-1 verdict, the trial court granted McCoy’s no-evidence motion for summary judgment. The jury ruled in favor of McCoy, agreeing with the fact of Gunn’s negligence, and he was awarded $10.6 million in damages for past and future medical expenses. The Court found that OGA and Gunn were both jointly and severally liable.
Gunn and OGA appealed the decision, and in December 2015, the appellate court finding that there was not in fact enough evidence to prove the award for damages for future medical expenses, and lowered it from $7.242 million to $7.082 million. Again, Gunn and OGA appealed the decision with the Supreme Court.
In May 2017, the OGA filed a petition for review with the Texas Supreme Court. The Supreme Court only affirmed the Appellate Court’s ruling that there was not in fact enough evidence to prove causation. Gunn had claimed that the testimony of McCoy’s liability expert, who stated that the amount of blood loss caused by McCoy’s brain injury was speculative and not supported by evidence. She also claimed that Shannon’s passing caused a windfall for her husband, but the Supreme Court denied this claim.
All in all, the Court held:
The Dissent argued that the trial court’s decision to exclude expert testimony concerning future medical expenses was harmful.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Joanna Herzik.
To highlight some of the posts that stand out from the crowd, the editors of Texas Bar Today have created a list from the week’s blog posts of the top ten based on subject matter, writing style, headline, and imagery. We hope you enjoy this installment.
10. Career Success and Life Fulfillment: Focus on Big Rocks – Cordell Parvin @cordellparvin of Cordell Parvin LLC in Dallas
9. Fifth Circuit Affirms Right to Discuss Conditions of the Job – Thomas J. Crane @tomjcrane of Law Office of Thomas J. Crane in San Antonio
8. Uber’s 911 Button – Tony Nguyen of Tony Nguyen Law Firm, PLLC in Austin
7. Can Corporate Officers be Held Personally Liability for Environmental Violations in Texas? – C. William Smalling of The Law Office of C. William Smalling, P.C. in Houston
6. 6 Tips for A Successful Law Firm Blog – Amanda Taylor of Stacey E. Burke, P.C. @StaceyEBurke in Houston
5. Beneficiary Distribution Requests under Texas Trust Law: A Potential Minefield for the Trustee – Paul Romano of Romano & Sumner, LLC @RomanoSumner in Sugar Land
4. Too Much of a Good Thing – Ryan Bruderer and Ladd Hirsch of Winstead PC @WinsteadPC in Dallas
3. What Jurors Really Think, Part 3: Presenting Evidence – Kacy Miller of CourtroomLogic Consulting, LLC @CourtroomLogic in Dallas and Fort Worth
2. How to Recycle Your Best Content to Market Your Law Practice – Amy Boardman Hunt of Muse Communications, LLC @MuseCommLLC
1. The Appellate Road Warrior: Essential Skills and Best Practices – D. Todd Smith of Smith Law Group LLLP @dtoddsmith in Austin
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by bcuban.
Lawyers are a lonely bunch. At least that is what a recent survey found, as reported by the Washington Post. Using a “loneliness scale,” lawyers beat out more than 1,600 other professions.
There are many aspects and triggers to loneliness but one many in the legal profession can identify with is social isolation.
Here is how one lawyer deals with that issue.
Miriam is a practicing criminal defense attorney in the Washington, D.C., area. She says:
When I went out on my own, it was pretty jarring. There was no one to ask a question of, no one to just vent frustrations to. And criminal defense is an incredibly frustrating area of law. There was no reason to take a break, because who was I going to socialize with? Myself?
Miriam then joined a listserv called SoloSez (part of the American Bar Association), and it turned out she wasn’t alone: “There were lots of us solo practitioners struggling with the same thing. Who do you talk to when you are literally all by yourself all day long.”
As to how isolation impacted her personally and professionally, Miriam says:
I realized the value of human interaction in professional settings and how important it is as a stress relief. Water cooler talk may be lame but it is important. I ended up renting an office inside a larger firm. Lots of solos in that office space and we became friends. My productivity increased and I was just generally happier.
Today, Miriam has a small law office with employees, and they all have an open-door policy. She says:
We eat lunch together, we talk about our cases on a regular basis, and we are able to talk to each other freely. What’s the point of working with people if you can’t talk to them? I recommend renting an office in a suite – having someone else there to vent to is incredibly important. And while you may say oh I can talk to my wife when I get home, etc., it really isn’t the same. Being at work and bitching, then being able to go home and not feel so frustrated, is a great thing!
I also reached out to a treatment provider who deals with social isolation issues in his practice. Dr. David Henderson is a psychiatrist practicing in Dallas, Texas.[1] One of the issues I asked him to address is the difference between damaging social isolation and the simple desire to be alone. He says:
There are two states of aloneness: the physical state of being alone (solitude) and the emotional state of being alone (loneliness). Solitude is not always painful. In fact, it may be quite pleasant for those who are confident and comfortable with themselves, and who understand that it need not be a permanent experience. A stable balance between solitude and time with others is necessary for mental and physical well-being. Even when we are forced to be alone, knowing that someone is with us in spirit helps.
Conversely loneliness, the emotional state of being alone, is the belief that no one else understands our circumstances, our thoughts, or our emotions, nor do they care. Social isolation is the combination of these two states, experienced by an individual for an extended period. The length of time in social isolation for any individual can vary, but both the emotional state and physical state feed off of one another, creating a perpetual inability within the individual to reengage society in a meaningful way.
Here are Dr. Henderson’s tips for dealing with social isolation:
Plan ahead. Isolation and loneliness can result from procrastination. When an individual fails to anticipate future isolation and plan for it, it never gets better. Individuals must carve out time in their schedules for social engagement like they would carve out time to study or complete a task for work. Waiting until the last minute always ends with missed opportunities.
Confront the mind-games you play. We all have a script that plays over and over in our heads that dictates our actions. The most successful individuals are the ones who recognize the script and make the hard decisions to act contrary to it. The key to overcoming social isolation is being able to acknowledge the very real pain that exists in engaging others and then working to develop the confidence within oneself to know that you have the power to endure and overcome it.
Seek out accountability. For many, this accountability starts with one person: a trained professional counselor. A professional can challenge you to think outside the box, provide you with resources that will help you overcome the struggle, and check in with you to measure your progress. Overcoming social isolation is like any other challenge. In order to break the cycle, we must reach a point at which the pain of staying the same is worse than the pain of changing. If you are struggling to reach out and find help, simply ask yourself one question, “What do I have to lose in reaching out for help?” Make a decision today that you are going reengage one step at a time. Fight discouragement with true statements about your abilities, and recognize that with each decision to think and act contrary to what you feel, you are getting stronger and closer to your goals. You are not alone. Keep reaching!
What’s the common thread here to either becoming or staying connected in a healthy way? Reaching out! Regardless of the genesis of your feelings of loneliness and isolation. It all starts there.
[1] David L. Henderson, M.D., is a board-certified psychiatrist, author, and professional speaker. He is the owner and president of Four Stones Collaborative Group, a mental health practice in Dallas, Texas, treating a wide range of psychological issues including depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and trauma. He is the author of the book My Teenage Zombie: Resurrecting the Undead Adolescent In Your Home. For more information about his practice or for further resources, you can visit his websites at https://ift.tt/2AgTBvN and www.fourstonesgroup.com.
Brian Cuban (@bcuban) is The Addicted Lawyer. Brian is the author of the Amazon best-selling book, The Addicted Lawyer: Tales Of The Bar, Booze, Blow & Redemption (affiliate link). A graduate of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, he somehow made it through as an alcoholic then added cocaine to his résumé as a practicing attorney. He went into recovery April 8, 2007. He left the practice of law and now writes and speaks on recovery topics, not only for the legal profession, but on recovery in general. He can be reached at brian@addictedlawyer.com.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Thomas J. Crane.
The National Labor Relations Act has always protected a worker’s right to discuss “terms and conditions” of employment. Sec. 7 of the NLRA protects the right of workers to discuss conditions at their job. Sec. 7 of the NLRA is found at 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1).
But, because labor unions are so rare in the country now, very few people are aware of this right. The right applies even before a union is formed. When the NLRA was passed into law, Congress recognized that to form a union, workers would have to discuss problems at work. I last discussed those Sec. 7 rights here. The Fifth Circuit has recently re-affirmed the right to discuss conditions at work. In the case of In-N-Out Burger v. NLRB, No. 17-60241 (5th Cir. 7/6/2018), some fast food workers demonstrated solidarity with a national movement to raise the minimum wage to $15. The workers wore buttons with the slogan “Fight for $15” to work.
Management then cited a company rule that forbade workers from wearing any pins or stickers on their work uniform. The workers complied. Someone filed a complaint with the NLRB. The NLRB found the burger chain to have violated Sec. 7. The Fifth Circuit agreed. Despite the rule against buttons, the burger chain requires its workers to wear holiday themed buttons at Christmas time and a donation button in April seeking donations to the In-N-Out Foundation. The burger chain argued that “special circumstances” under the NLRA would allow them to implement rules regarding food safety and to project a certain “public image.”
The appellate court was not impressed. It reviewed the history of Sec. 7, noting its critical role in forming labor unions. It noted that “special circumstances” under the NLRA pertain to work place safety. The no pins or buttons rule had no direct connection to the company’s desire to presenting consistent menu and ownership structure at each restaurant. Prior cases law does not support a “special circumstances” privilege in regard to buttons and interacting with the public. And, the use of a Christmas button and a donation button undercut the company’s claim that “special circumstances” required that uniforms be button free. The appellate court found in favor of the NLRB. See the decision here.
Overcoming Sec. 7 is very difficult. In-N-Out Burger wasted a lot of effort.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Darin Klemchuk.
In nearly two decades of practicing law, I have tried numerous systems to manage projects, stay on top of tasks, and delegate work to team […]
The post Project Planning for Lawyers – Upping Your Game in a Chaotic World appeared first on Klemchuk LLP.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Zach Warren.
Patrick Bénot, CEO and owner of Long Island-based computer consulting services company SwiftLife, says the singer’s app The Swift Life infringes upon his company’s trademark.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Environmental and Energy Law Blog.
The Texas Supreme Court recently overturned an Austin Court of Appeals decision which held that a corporate officer could not be held personally liable for environmental violations unless certain conditions were present. Below is an overview of this decision and its implications on corporate officers in Texas.
The case involved an action by the State of Texas against a corporation and one of its officers for failing to comply with provisions of the Texas Water Code. The state alleged that the corporate officer personally engaged in activities that constituted violations of the Texas Water Code. Before making its way to the Texas Supreme Court, the Austin Court of Appeals, in relieving the corporate officer of liability for the alleged environmental violations, held that that a corporate officer could only be liable for such actions if his or her individual conduct was fraudulent or tortious.
However, at the Texas Supreme Court, the state argued that the laws in question, Texas Water Code sections 7.101 and .102, should be interpreted based on their plain meaning. The laws, which prohibit a “person” from committing certain environmental violations, also state:
A person who causes, suffers, allows, or permits a violation shall be assessed for each violation a civil penalty of not less than $50 nor greater than $25,000 for each day of violation….
The state, in focusing on the laws’ use of the word “person,” argued that this language clearly intends liability to apply to both individual actors and corporate entities—not just corporations.
Agreeing with the state that the term “person” refers to an individual, the court held that a corporate officer who violates the aforementioned sections of the Texas Water Code may be held personally liable for his or her unlawful acts. In reaching its decision, the court joined several other state and federal courts that have reached similar decisions regarding the personal liability of corporate officers.
If you or your company have been cited for non-compliance or are facing legal action based on non-compliance, then you need an experienced Texas attorney like C. William Smalling on your side. Smalling, with a background in engineering, understands both the technical and legal aspects of situations affecting corporations in the oil, gas, and energy industries. Whether negotiating with the government or litigating government enforcement actions and private tort suits, the experience of C. William Smalling provides corporate clients with a significant edge in all oil, gas, and energy matters. We take pride in providing our business clients with the legal tools to remain confident while navigating the complicated world of environmental regulations. If your company is facing legal action or simply needs guidance in the area of environmental law, please contact the Law Office of C. William Smalling for a consultation.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Brenda Sapino Jeffreys.
About 200 lawyers applied for 23 positions as fellows working at legal aid organizations assisting victims of Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Stacey E Burke Blog.
It’s no secret these days that content marketing is a must for law firms when it comes to boosting online presence and attracting new clients. What better way to achieve brand awareness and traffic to your website than blogging?
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Seyfarth Shaw LLP.
By Nick C. Geannacopulos, Timothy M. Hoppe, and Mark Casciari
Seyfarth Synopsis: The trend-lines describe employment-related litigation in the past 25 years: (1) the emergence of arbitration as a flexible and increasingly legally viable to resolve employment claims; and (2) the dangerous politicization of the judicial selection process in federal and state government. These trends should make arbitration in any state, whether red or blue, an even more attractive dispute-resolution device for employers and employees alike.
No decades-old federal legislation has experienced a legal resurrection like that of the Federal Arbitration Act. Passed in 1925, it now is the legal cornerstone of a quarter century of Supreme Court jurisprudence that permits most employers to require employees to arbitrate employment disputes. In Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corporation, the Supreme Court said that statutory age discrimination claims can be subject to mandatory arbitration agreements. Since then, courts have consistently held that employment claims of various varieties can be forced into arbitration. They have also held that the contracting parties can delegate questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator—in other words, the arbitrator decides whether claims fall under the arbitration agreement. If the arbitration agreement is properly written, this leaves courts with a simple, threshold analysis of determining whether the parties entered into a valid contract to arbitrate their dispute.
At the same time that arbitration has solidified its dispute-resolution status, the judiciary at the state, federal, and administrative level have seen continued politicization. More and more, it seems leaders from both major parties—at the state and federal level—have political litmus tests for judges, emphasizing party affiliation and ideology above other qualities. In California, for example, we recently saw attempts to unseat superior court judges, seemingly for little reason other than the political affiliation of the governor who appointed them. The four incumbents all survived the challenge, but the impact of politics on the California judiciary is a trend that won’t just go away. Other states—both liberal and conservative—have experienced similar efforts to reshape the judiciary to advance political agendas. And in Washington, the politicization of the judicial-selection process seems to be intensifying (including at the administrative level).
All of this is to say that arbitration may not be such a bad alternative for employers and individual employees alike. Unlike the court systems, arbitration agreements allow the parties to agree on the selection of the arbitrator, to arbitrate before a panel of adjudicators (as opposed to a single fact finder), and to provide for an appellate level of arbitration. Arbitration also allows the parties to agree on other efficiencies, such as streamlining the discovery process, allowing for dispositive motions, and ensuring a timely decision. As between the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and arbitral procedural rules, the latter are leaner and more efficient. And states have put employee-focused safeguards in place. For instance, California requires employers to cover most of the cost of arbitration, and to allow adequate discovery.
To be sure, the plaintiff bar and some legislative bodies will try to curb the scope of mandatory arbitration. If the judicial selection process continues on its politicization path, however, it may be best for both employers and employees simply to “opt out” of our mainstream dispute-resolution system in favor of arbitration.
For more information on this topic, please contact the authors, your Seyfarth Attorney, or any member of Seyfarth Shaw’s Arbitration Strategy & Litigation or Alternative Dispute Resolution Teams.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Cordell Parvin.
I ate lunch and had a coaching session recently with a really sharp associate in a well-known law firm. During our lunch she asked:
What if I really don’t care to become a partner?
She continued that many of the partners in her firm and other firms did not appear to be happy. I immediately thought of Stephen Covey and said:
Maybe those partners aren’t focused on the big rocks.
Having never heard the story, the young associate looked confused. She told me she wanted to have more “work-life balance” in her life.
Are you striving for work-life balance? Put simply, you will never find it and even if you could it would be incredibly boring. I have never sought balance instead I have sought to live my life based on my priorities.
If you want to strive to spend quality time on your priorities, I suggest you read “First Things First
” by Stephen Covey, A. Roger Merrill, and Rebecca Merrill. It is filled with many suggestions I know will help you, including planning your life around your roles. I particularly enjoy Dr. Covey’s story about the “big rocks.”
Dr. Covey describes that when he was teaching he pulled out a wide-mouth gallon jar and placed it next to a pile of fist-sized rocks. After filling the jar to the top with rocks, he asked, “Is the jar full?”
The students replied, “Yes.” He then got some gravel from under the table and added it to the jar. He jiggled the jar until the gravel filled the spaces between the rocks. Again, he asked, “Is the jar full?”
This time, the students replied, “Probably not.” Dr. Covey then added sand and asked, “Is the jar full?” By then the students had figured it out and replied “No!”
Finally, Dr. Covey filled the jar to the brim with water and asked his students the point of what he had done. One student replied: “you can always fit more things into your life if you really work at it. “No,” countered Dr. Covey.
“The point is, you have to put the big rocks in first.”
Billable work for clients is clearly a big rock. But, there are many other big rocks that must be put in the jar. Your big rocks likely include being a father/mother, husband/wife, son/daughter, being fit, being active in church/community.
I coached an outstanding lawyer, now 11 years ago. At the beginning of our coaching, we didn’t focus on client development. Instead, we focused on what were the big rocks for her. In our second coaching session she told me hers were:
From that point on when she was evaluating an opportunity, she considered whether it fell into one or more of her big rocks.
She frequently repeated her version of something Stephen Covey had said:
When you say yes to something that is not a priority, given your limited time, it is the same as saying no to something that is a priority.
If you were asked to list your priorities, what would they be?
P.S. One point I made to the lawyer with whom I ate lunch was simply that it is better to have the opportunity to become a partner and then make a choice than it is to never be considered.
The post Career Success and Life Fulfillment: Focus on Big Rocks appeared first on Cordell Parvin Blog.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Amy Boardman Hunt.
Many lawyers spend countless hours preparing CLE presentations, writing informative blog posts, giving media interviews, and generally creating informative content of interest to their clients, prospective clients and referral sources. The smartest lawyers find ways to get multiple uses out of those efforts by recycling their content in a variety of other formats. Recycling your […]
The post How to Recycle Your Best Content to Market Your Law Practice appeared first on Muse Communications.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Adam Faderewski.
Former State Bar of Texas President Terry Tottenham talked about the importance of the Texas Lawyers for Texas Veterans program during a recent episode of The Dog Tag podcast.
“We’ve reached and serviced more than 28,000 veterans and veteran family members up to now in Texas alone,” said Tottenham. “We have over 9,000 lawyers who’ve contributed their time thus far.”
In 2011, Tottenham and the State Bar of Texas implemented the statewide program that provides pro bono civil legal assistance to veterans and their families who otherwise cannot afford legal services. Texas has the second-highest population of veterans in the nation, and a distressing number of Texas veterans are living in poverty or without homes. TLTV was modeled after a similar program launched by the Houston Bar Association.
Veteran Matt Elledge interviewed Tottenham for the podcast, which is sponsored by the Texas Veterans Land Board. Tottenham said the program’s “Clinic-in-a-Box” contains all the materials someone would need to set up a clinic for veterans. Interested attorneys can also go to texasbar.com/veterans to get information on how to start a veterans clinic. Attorneys looking to volunteer at a clinic can view see a current schedule of clinics here.
The legal services provided by the clinics run the gamut, but Tottenham said the greatest demand for legal services is in the area of family law.
To learn more about TLTV, go to texasbar.com/veterans.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by D. Todd Smith.
This is the fifth and final installment of my series on mobile lawyering for appellate practitioners. To easily access the entire series, click here.
By this point, you should have the equipment and the software to get your work done from the road. This post discusses some special considerations for working efficiently and securely.
Practicing from the road requires a certain amount of independence. Working outside the office—away from coworkers who can help you troubleshoot technology problems—requires a greater degree of self-sufficiency and resourcefulness.
Most troubleshooting involves searching for well-known solutions to common problems. As funny as it sounds, this is best accomplished via Google. The better you are at solving common problems by searching Google, the easier it will be to work outside the office using only your tablet or smartphone.
If your mobile device is lost or stolen, your data should be secure enough that a third party cannot gain access to it. Obviously, that means password-protecting all of your devices.
But it also means choosing hard-to-guess passwords. Using complex passwords is often advised (e.g., Xf7<8zf$qjf89), but they’re hard to type. A simpler way to create hard-to-guess passwords is to use a passphrase.
A passphrase is a sequence of words or phrases, with spaces. For example, “Dog Missile Rainbow” is a nonsense phrase that’s easy to type, but hard to guess.
So, a password is step one. The second step is to encrypt your hard drive or device. If you do not encrypt the data on your device, then a hacker could remove the hard drive and plug it into a new device to access the data.
Encryption is easy to set up. If you aren’t sure how, then just research on the internet as discussed above. Type in the name of your device and the word “how to encrypt” and you’ll find helpful articles.
When you sign in to do your banking online, there’s a reason the site won’t let you simply type “12345678” or “password” to access your data. Complex or strong passwords reduce the chances that a hacker will be able to access your online accounts and do something malicious.
The problem with strong passwords is that they are impossible to remember. But writing them on a Post-It note stuck to your computer monitor or keeping them in the notes app on your phone is just looking for trouble.
Password managers help avoid these issues by generating strong passwords and storing them in a secure location. Without the master password—the only one you’ll have to remember—the list is locked down. By entering the master password, you enable the password manager to fill in passwords for you when logging in to certain websites.
Three popular password managers are 1Password, LastPass, and Dashlane. All are free or very affordable and will sync to mobile devices. A password manager is an investment every appellate road warrior should make.
The primary concern with online storage services is security. Anyone with your password can access all of the documents you have stored in your online document service. And if they have access, they can often easily bulk-download those documents.
So, you must ensure that mere possession of your password will not grant a hacker access to those documents. And how do you accomplish that? Use dual-factor authentication. This is security that requires more than a mere password to access an online account. The second factor required is physical possession of your smartphone.
If an important account offers dual-factor authentication, you should enable it. For example, you should set it up on all of your online document storage accounts, your financial services accounts, and your email accounts.
Here’s how dual-factor authentication works in practice. If someone tries to access an online account with dual-factor authentication enabled, and they’re using a device that has never accessed that account before, they won’t be able to get in.
For example, say that a Russian hacker has the password to your Dropbox account and tries to login from a computer in Moscow. Dropbox’s security system will detect that a new computer is accessing your account (red flag #1) from a location that has never been used before (red flag #2).
Any red flag in Dropbox’s system will cause it to send a text message to your phone with a six-digit code. And the system will inform the hacker in Moscow that they need to also enter the six-digit code. Typically, the code will only be valid for about five minutes. And if the hacker tries to guess the code and guesses wrong more than three times, the system will typically lock up your account.
Some people perceive dual-factor authentication as a hassle. And that’s true. But it’s worth the hassle because it prevents someone else from accessing your online accounts even if they have your password.
Being able to connect to the internet reliably and securely is crucial. Fortunately, you have many options. Unfortunately, not all of those options are appropriate or safe.
When traveling, it’s tempting to connect through free wi-fi provided in various places such as hotels, coffee shops, conference rooms, and event spaces. Be wary of connecting to these wi-fi services. They provide the best opportunity for hackers to access your device and your precious data.
To ensure that you are not vulnerable to hackers when using public wi-fi, you should use a virtual private network service. You can quickly research this by typing “VPN services” into Google. Among the top picks are NordVPN, IPVanish, and TunnelBear.
Make sure that the service you want works with your devices. Sometimes using a VPN will slow down your internet speed, so that’s another factor to consider.
VPN services are crucial if you’re traveling in foreign countries, especially ones that are disreputable. The cost of VPN services is reasonable. Expect to pay about $60 per year to use a service that covers all of your devices.
Today, every lawyer should be able to connect to the internet via their smartphone. If your smartphone service provider has an option for sharing that internet connection with an external device (e.g., your laptop), you should enable that option. You may have to pay extra, but it will be worth it.
If you cannot access the internet securely through a VPN, using your smartphone as a personal hotspot will do the trick. You need not use a VPN when you’re accessing through your cellular service, but if you want to be extra secure, you can.
If you want to use wireless headphones with your devices you need to know how to connect them via Bluetooth. You may also want to use a wireless keyboard or similar accessories. If so, you must know how to connect those devices via Bluetooth.
This is pretty easy in most cases. The trickier issue is fixing connectivity problems that sometimes crop up. Usually, the solution is to untether the Bluetooth device and reconnect it. If that doesn’t solve the problem, do some internet research.
Being able to sign documents that people send you by email is an important skill in today’s mobile world. What would you do if you had only your smartphone and received an email attachment that required your signature?
That happens a lot. And so you should learn how to sign a document with nothing more than your smartphone. PDF Expert will store an image of your signature for just this situation. Adobe’s Acrobat Reader mobile app is easy to use and free, so try that unless you have a different method that’s more familiar.
Obviously, your smartphone will allow you to receive and send emails. Dealing with attachments, however, can sometimes become challenging.
You should be skilled at downloading attachments and working with them on your phone. And you should then be able to transmit a document that you’ve worked on with your phone to someone.
Mobile devices generally will require you to send an attachment to the app you want to use to work with it. For example, in the digital signature example above, you’d have to send the attachment to PDF Expert or Adobe Acrobat Reader. Then you’d sign the document using your finger or a stylus. Then you’d send the edited document back to your email program as an attachment.
Your email program should be connected to your contacts list so you can easily access the recipient’s email address. But sometimes you don’t have the person in your contacts.
What do you do then?
If you can find the email address somewhere else and copy it, then you can paste it into the email address field. Or, if you have to, you can just type the address in manually, being very careful to get every single letter correct, or else the email will wind up bouncing back without reaching its intended destination.
The online storage services discussed in this article all have apps that allow you to synchronize or share documents to your mobile devices. It’s unrealistic to carry around an entire synchronized set of your digital documents on your mobile phone or tablet. At best you can download a small batch.
But you should strive to have your key data synchronized among all of your devices. So, if you add contact information for someone to the database on your phone it should show up instantly on all your other devices.
And if you make a calendar appointment on your phone, the same thing should happen. This is especially important if you’re working with an assistant who has control of your digital calendar.
Synchronization is complex, and that’s why it’s hardly ever 100% reliable. But it’s usually at least 97% reliable. The problem is we all assume our devices are constantly 100% in sync.
When synchronization stops working, you’re not typically given a warning. Even if you do get a warning, it often goes unnoticed. So, you should be mindful of and vigilant about potential synchronization problems. The best practice is to periodically check whether a new contact record you added on one device is showing up on other devices and how long the sync takes.
The hardware and software available to an appellate road warrior is largely a matter of preference. Getting comfortable with the technology, becoming proficient at using it, and learning how to preserve data security are important first steps.
Upon reaching that threshold, however, the majority of tasks most appellate lawyers must accomplish to serve their clients need not be performed in a traditional office. The right equipment, software, and a secure, high-speed internet connection provide the tools necessary for the job. Because we’re able to interface with courts electronically and in-person client meetings are rare, our location just doesn’t matter.
So, take that long weekend, extended vacation, or sabbatical if your firm allows. See the world and spend time with your family. With the right setup and the proper mindset, work shouldn’t hold you back.
Thanks again to Ernie Svenson for his significant contribution to this series.
Image courtesy of Flickr by Barry Dahl.
The post The Appellate Road Warrior: Essential Skills and Best Practices appeared first on Texas Appellate Law.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
