Originally published by Claudia Alvarado.
Innovation in technology is continuously providing us with new smart and intuitive devices to help make our lives simpler. With numerous companies running to get […]
The post Is Simplifying Life More Important Than Consumer Security? appeared first on Klemchuk LLP.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Jason P. Steed.
A good way to teach (and to learn) good writing is by demonstration. So, in an attempt to demonstrate how to improve the first two paragraphs of a motion, I’m just going to show you what the two paragraphs looked like before and after the revision.
Before:
COMES NOW, Joe Strummer, by and through his attorneys of record, Penny Rimbaud and Poly Styrene, and respectfully moves this Honorable Court to reconsider its December 21, 2016 order detaining Strummer pending trial. Due to changed circumstances discussed below, it is not only appropriate to consider the imposition of additional conditions of release that will serve to reasonable assure Strummer’s appearance at trial, but is also essential that Strummer be released from custody subject to strict conditions of release in order that he be able to meaningfully participate in his defense and receive effective assistance of counsel.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY OF DETENTION PROCEEDINGS
On December 21, 2016, United States Magistrate Judge John Lydon conducted a detention hearing at the government’s request and, after hearing testimony and considering exhibits proffered by both sides, determined that Strummer should be detained pending trial. Transcript of Detention Hearing, p. 90–1 (“While it pains me to do this, I must detain Mr. Strummer for the period pending trial.”).
After:
On December 21, 2016, the Court held a detention hearing and reluctantly ordered the detention of Defendant Joe Strummer pending trial. See Tr. 90–91 (“While it pains me to do this, I must detain Mr. Strummer for the period pending trial.”). Strummer now moves the Court to reconsider that ruling because (1) Strummer does not pose an actual flight risk and, even if he did, (2) there are other ways to assure his appearance at trial, short of detention, that should have been considered.
Factual & Procedural Background
Strummer is the son of a Holocaust survivor who evaded capture by the Nazis, left Europe, and started over with nothing in South Africa. Strummer grew up and became a doctor, and immigrated to the U.S. in the 1980s to escape apartheid. Now 70 years old and in declining health, Strummer suffers from esophageal stricture and a heart condition, both of which require regular medical attention.
I think the second version is better, but it’s important (as a writer) to think about why the second version is better. Note: all the juicy details in the second version were in the first version of the motion—they just weren’t in the first two paragraphs. I’ll let the other revisions speak for themselves.
To use this demonstration as a tool for improving your own writing, study every change from version one to version two—sentence by sentence, even word by word. And think about not only what was changed, but also why it was changed, how it was changed—and why it was changed the way it was changed. These decisions (what to change, and why and how to change it) are the decisions good writers make all the time. So to become better writers we need to figure out how to make these decisions.
Happy writing!
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Rosenthal & Wadas.
Beginning this month, first-time felony offenders in Collin County now may be offered the opportunity to enter a Felony Diversion Program which would result in the underlying charges to be dismissed and eventually expunged. This is new program was developed…Read more ›
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Guest Blogger.
Jennifer M. Ramovs and Catherine Sanders Reach
Excerpted from “How and Why to Document Your Firm Technology and Processes” from ABA TECHSHOW 2016
The first big question you may ask is why should you document your firm’s information? This is a daunting project, no doubt. The investment of time now can provide unlimited returns in the future and provide you with preparedness that will set you apart from other law firms when it really matters.
Why?
The first reason is disaster recovery. If anything goes wrong from a failed hard drive to a fire to a flood, you need to have a business continuity plan and a disaster recovery plan. Much of the plan will consist of actions, but those actions will be dependent on information that is documented and available. Many of us fail to consider the different varieties of “disaster” that can threaten our firm’s viability.
What?
Document hardware and software. Determine what software applications people are using (name, manufacturer, version/edition), the frequency of each (daily, weekly, occasionally), and whether there are any problems to report with those applications. Keeping an inventory of all the hardware that is in use will also be necessary for insurance purposes, and if you have to “rebuild” after a disaster, you will have a handle on what needs to be replaced.
How?
Part of a technology audit/inventory will be to determine what technology (software and hardware) your firm is using. Once that is established, you will need to document software licenses, user names, installed drivers, security updates, and service packs for each computer. That may sound difficult, but tools can help, such as software asset management.
One example is Belarc Advisor, which provides a free computer profile summary for an individual personal computer. It is useful if you need to reinstall software or work with IT support.
To manage this information for a number of computers, use products like BelManage, which runs about $1,800 for up to 50 monitored clients and provides organizational asset management, including software license optimizations, server and individual machine software discovery, and printers, IP phones, and mobile devices attached to the network. BelManage helps document this complex information, plus identify unlicensed, unauthorized, or obsolete software, and it also identifies missing security patches and service packs.
This type of software is commonly called “asset management” or “software asset management.” You can also track this information in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The point is to have it captured and keep it updated.
Registration for the ABA TECHSHOW 2017 is open. Reserve your spot today by taking advantage of the early-bird discount with the code EP1721. For a complete list of upcoming sessions like this one, go to techshow.com.
Jennifer M. Ramovs
Catherine Sanders Reach
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by Jillian Beck.
Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan L. Hecht delivered the State of the Judiciary on February 1 to a joint session of the state legislature, touching on issues including judicial security and compensation, access to justice, electronic records, and the bail system.
“As important as it is for courts to be efficient, it is more important for them to get every case right,” Hecht said during his remarks. “We are committed to making all our processes serve the cause of justice.”
Hecht began by describing what Travis County District Judge Julie Kocurek endured after being shot by a gunman in front of her home in Austin in November 2015. He used the experience of Kocurek, who was in attendance with her family, to urge the Legislature to prioritize funding for additional security for judges across the state.
He also discussed proposed legislation and recommendations from judicial commissions regarding reforming the bail system, supporting treatment for those with mental illness in the justice system, establishing a formula for judicial compensation increases, and providing electronic access to court records for the public.
The need to continue improving access to justice for veterans, sexual assault survivors, and low-income Texans was another focal point of Hecht’s speech.
“If justice were food, too many would be starving. If it were housing, too many would be homeless. If it were medicine, too many would be sick. If it were faith, too many houses of worship would be closed,” Hecht said. “The Texas Judiciary is committed to doing all it can to close the justice gap. We are grateful for the Legislature’s support.”
Read Hecht’s full remarks here.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by mkhtx.
Happy Groundhog Day! Hope yours is better than Phil’s.
The Fourteenth Court of Appeals released its memorandum opinion in Grant v. Calligan, No. 14-15-01084-CV this morning, affirming the trial court’s denial of a bill of review.
Grant filed a divorce petition against Calligan in 2013. The trial court sent a scheduling order with a trial date (January 13, 2014) to Grant’s attorney. Grant’s attorney testified he never received this notice. Calligan showed at the trial, but Grant and his attorney did not. The trial court (the 246th) entered a default judgment which was signed January 31, 2014.
About ten months later, on December 2, 2014, Grant filed a bill of review. At trial, Grant’s attorney testified that he never received notice of trial. The Court of Appeals presumed this to be true in its analysis. Grant’s attorney also testified that when he received notice of the default judgment, he called up his appellate counsel. But, the Court of Appeals noted, the record did not contain any evidence of when that allegedly happened. That is, was it while the trial court still had plenary power or not?
Even though the Court of Appeals presumed Grant established that he did not receive notice of the trial date, he still had the burden of establishing that he diligently pursued “all available and adequate legal remedies against the default judgment.” Grant asserted he was not required to pursue any post-judgment remedies (such as a MNT) because he also did not receive notice of the default judgment until after the trial court’s plenary power expired. The record did not include any evidence which tended to show Grant’s attorney didn’t receive notice of the default judgment, either. At this point, I was thinking “How can you prove you didn’t receive something?” But the Court of Appeals pointed to the following exchange between the trial court and Grant’s attorney:
Trial Court: What did you do when you got the notice of the clerk that the default had been granted?
Grant’s Attorney: That’s when I contacted my client to see if he received any–anything in the mail or was served–personally served and he said no and then contacted [appellate counsel].
This testimony, the Court of Appeals stated, did not indicate when Grant’s attorney received notice of the default judgment, much less the date he contacted his client or appellate counsel. As such, the COA said, the record did not include evidence that he received notice of the default judgment after the trial court lost plenary power, meaning Grant failed to establish that he diligently pursued his available legal remedies. The COA affirmed the trial court’s denial of the Bill of Review.
This raises the question: If Grant’s attorney had testified that he received the notice of default judgment on March 3 (the day after the trial court lost plenary power), would that have been sufficient evidence to overrule the trial court’s denial of the BOR? If I had world enough and time, I’d research it myself to see if there’s any caselaw out there. However, the fact that the BOR petition wasn’t filed for ten months after the default was entered certainly is a strike against Grant’s case.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
Originally published by lawschool academicsupport.
February Bar-Takers! Here’s a list of friendly “to dos” as you prepare for success on your bar exam (adapted from Pass the Bar!): Confirm the exam location, times, transportation solutions, and parking locations, etc. Pack your bar exam items (i.e.,…
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
