Pillsbury, a full service global law firm with 700 attorneys, has chosen Courtroom Insight to host its repository of information regarding experts, arbitrators and judges.
Pillsbury’s co-heads of litigation, Kirke M. Hasson and Kenneth W. Taber, recognized a need to better manage institutional knowledge of their numerous attorney relationships with experts, arbitrators and judges. “We were tired of reading firm-wide emails asking for information about prior experiences working with different individuals,” explained Mr. Taber. “Courtroom Insight provides a superior alternative.” Pillsbury’s Director of Knowledge Management, Lisa Gianakos notes “Courtroom Insight has been on my radar for some time and I appreciate their willingness to customize their solution to fit our specific needs.”
Courtroom Insight Chief Executive Officer Mark Torchiana said, “Our company is eager to work alongside Pillsbury’s knowledge management group to install our solution for the Pillsbury litigation team. They have already provided useful product feedback and we will continue to incorporate their input going forward to help entrench Courtroom Insight as the leading litigation knowledge management solution.”
Courtroom Insight, the leading litigation knowledge management solution for sharing critical information about experts, arbitrators, judges and attorneys, is proud to announce Sheppard Mullin as its newest law firm client.
Sheppard Mullin’s Director of Research & Library Services, Martin Korn, chose Courtroom Insight to help the team provide the right information at the right time. Mr. Korn states “I’m excited to add Courtroom Insight to our arsenal of resources and expect it to enhance the background reports we regularly deliver to our attorneys. This is yet another way in which we can add value to the services we provide our clients.”
Sheppard Mullin’s Chief Knowledge Officer, Dora Tynes, explains that “by signing up our library staff, I am able to provide a central repository of key information about experts and other litigation professionals. I particularly like the way expanded research and expert witness search services are made available directly from the product interface.”
You can read more about the partnership between Sheppard Mullin and Courtroom Insight in the full press release.
When Santa Clara County Judge Aaron Persky handed down, what many consider to be an extremely light, and possibly irresponsible sentence of just 6 months to Brock Turner, a former Stanford University swimmer, convicted of sexually assaulting a woman on campus, he could not have predicted the firestorm that has followed. While the majority of the criticism was in favor of a harsher sentence for the defendant, the public outrage has been followed by a move to recall the judge from the bench.
However, 18 retired Santa Clara County judges have now penned an open letter, denouncing the recall of Persky. It’s not that they disagree with the public outcry, but rather, they are balking at the precedent that could potentially be set if Persky is recalled. In the letter, the group of judges point out that “the essence of judicial independence is that judges must be able to make decisions without fear of political repercussions.”
Persky has been on the bench since 2003, and it will be interesting to see how the push for his recall plays out once the media attention dies down.
Read more about the open letter here: http://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2016/07/06/removing-judge-aaron-persky-would-set-a-dangerous-precedent/?slreturn=20160612195241
Courtroom Insight significantly upgrades its knowledge management platform with the release of a new international attorney referral directory. Clients may now search for the best attorney to fit their needs in the international market based upon criteria such as language, country and legal expertise. In addition, Courtroom Insight’s expert witness, arbitrator and judge directories may now include professionals in all international jurisdictions. This development solidifies our position as a leader in litigation knowledge management.
We are thankful for the opportunity to partner with Littler on developing this new software. To read the full press release, click here.
A Civil Grand Jury in San Francisco mandated on June 1, 2016 that the San Francisco Police Department Crime Lab divest itself from the SFPD and become an independent entity. The Crime Lab has long been plagued by a number of scandalous incidents, including a lab employee stealing and using evidentiary cocaine in 2010 and a DNA analyst failing a proficiency test in 2014. Problems with case tracking and lab management with little or no scientific background have also surfaced.
Although the Lab was recently accredited by the American Society of Crime Lab Directors (ASCLAD), the Jury found that additional steps, including replacing the current Lab Director with a civilian and removing the Lab from the oversight of the SFPD were necessary in order to increase the credibility of the Lab in court and in the community.
There will, of course, be implications of this change in management and in the findings of the Grand Jury. Laboratory staff and management will likely need to defend their previous work on past cases and all current cases in the courtroom. Defense attorneys are sure to use these Jury findings as a way to challenge the witness’ expertise and ability to work in an unbiased fashion. Maintaining a high level of transparency and accountability will be important if the Lab is to raise its status in the legal community.
Read the full article here: http://www.sfexaminer.com/sfpd-shouldnt-oversee-crime-lab-report-recommends
In April, lawmakers in Missouri passed a bill that work to ensure that all experts who testify in court are actually experts. This bill would allow expert testimony only after determining it was based on “sufficient facts” and “reliable principles and methods,” as well as being “reliably applied” to the facts of the case. The few notable exceptions to the new law are divorce and adoption cases and other cases in juvenile and family court. The overall goal is to be “sure that the jury can rely upon expert testimony.”
This law arguably strengthens expert testimony admissibility requirements and reinforces the judicial gatekeeping role. Learn more about specific challenges to expert witness testimony at Courtroom Insight.
Read the full excerpt here http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/27/missouri-legislature-passes-bill-to-add-expert-wit/
Expert Witness Testimony in Death Cases Jeopardized in LA County with recent departure of County Coroner
Citing lack of personnel and resources, as well as a backlog in cases, Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner Dr. Mark Fajardo suddenly announced his resignation from the LA County Coroner’s office in March 2015. Over 8,500 autopsies are performed in LA County each year. Dr. Fajardo’s departure also puts LA County’s accreditation with the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME) at risk. Accreditation with NAME requires that Medical Examiners perform at least 250 autopsies per year and 90% of cases must be cleared within 90 days. While not required in the U.S., accreditation becomes crucial when the Medical Examiner appears in court on homicide or suspicious death cases.
According to Dr. David Fowler (NAME), L.A. County is not the only jurisdiction to face these challenges in their ME offices. Other counties across the United States report similar shortfalls in trained Medical Examiners coming out fellowship programs. Currently, enough Medical Examiners graduate to replace those leaving the profession for retirement, indicating that this shortfall is not likely to disappear anytime soon. A substantial deficit in accredited Medical Examiners, has complex and dire implications in the courtroom, leaving room for unnecessary challenges.
Read the entire article at http://www.pe.com/articles/county-800263-coroner-department.html?page=1