Monthly Archives: January 2006

Legal futurist and IT visionary Richard Susskind offers his predictions about the future of the law in “Hold on to your seats, change is getting faster,” an article posted on Times Online. Susskind paints a vivid picture of the ways in which he anticipates technological advances will continue to radically transform legal practice.

According to Susskind,

The foundations of dispute resolution will be rocked by a combination of electronic disclosure, e-filing in the courts and online dispute resolution. Legal education and training, along with knowledge management, will be reconceived and reshaped by e-learning and online community. At the same time, the working relationships between lawyers and their clients will mutate beyond recognition, as they come under the one virtual roof and operate under a new order of online collaboration and communication.

(Thanks to the odr.info weblog for the link.)

Also, for an exploration of a rapidly developing interdisciplinary movement in the law, read Professor of Law Susan Daicoff’s “Law as a Healing Profession: The ‘Comprehensive Law Movement’“. This article examines the converging forces of collaborative law, creative problem solving, restorative justice, transformative mediation, and other related fields that comprise a movement which seeks to revolutionize the legal system and the delivery of justice.

A number of law bloggers, including Kevin O’Keefe at LexBlog, are buzzing about the informal survey the ABA Section of Litigation conducted last month on lawyers and blogging, which revealed that 57% of attorneys who responded reported that they read blogs regularly.

Although I’m generally a glass-is-half-full kind of person, this means that a sizeable number–43%–aren’t regular readers. Bummer.

One lawyer said bluntly, “I don’t read editorials in newspapers so why should I waste my time reading people’s opinions online?”

Although it may be unfair of me to say this (seeing as how I’m someone who actually does read newspaper editorials), people who don’t read blogs don’t know what they’re missing. Law blogs are an invaluable source of the latest news, ideas, and analysis–not to mention inspiration–something no professional can afford to miss out on.

But I’m a realist. I know that reading blogs takes time out of a busy day. For professionals whose lives are bound by calendar and clock, every minute must count.

So, what busy attorneys and mediators should be reading is Blawg Review, the weekly review of law blogging.

Here are 4 compelling reasons why:

1. Blawg Review keeps you current

Attorneys and ADR practitioners alike know how important it is to stay on top of the latest developments in the fields we practice in. And many of us who are in the ADR field ply our trade within the shadow of the courthouse or even under the courthouse roof. Since the law influences, informs, and even inspires much of our work, knowing what’s happening in the legal world keeps us competitive. And Blawg Review serves as one-stop shopping for the latest word on legal affairs.

2. Blawg Review is free

‘Nuff said.

3. Blawg Review takes care of business

Whether you’re an attorney or a mediator, you know that the work you do isn’t just a calling, or an art. It’s a business, too. And staying abreast of the latest business trends is key.

Blawg Review keeps the entrepreneur connected. To see what I mean, check out Blawg Review #40, hosted by Small Business Trends earlier this month.

4. Blawg Review makes you smarter (and fun at cocktail parties)

As one respondent to the ABA survey put it,

“I am still a student and find the academic and professional blawgs a great supplement to what I learn in the classroom. It’s nice to have access to the latest thoughts from practitioners and scholars in virtual realtime. I feel like a virtual student/protege.”

(Side benefit: Your increased knowledge will also make you a scintillating conversationalist at social gatherings.)

—————-

Don’t believe me? See for yourself at this week’s Blawg Review, hosted at Kevin Thompson’s Cyberlaw Central, where you can find answers to “life, the universe and everything”.

To see a list of past hosts and upcoming ones, visit the Blawg Review web site. For submission guidelines, click here. To host the party yourself, you can click here.

(In the interests of full disclosure, I should probably mention that I’m hosting Blawg Review next Monday. Looking forward to your submissions!)

The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.

Slowly but surely, more and more of us in the alternative dispute resolution field are recognizing the power of technology to transform the way we work. Technology has not only grown more accessible, but there is an increasing—and often bewildering—array of tools available.

To help mediators make sense of the abundance of technological innovations to choose among, Tammy Lenski, profiled here last year, has launched MediatorTech, a blog aimed at aiding ADR professionals “build, promote and manage thriving practices by leveraging technology to make those jobs easier.”

MediatorTech promises to do much to demystify and bring within reach the realm of technology. Posts so far include “How to Teleconference for Free“, “Think Blogging Is for You?”, and “5 Questions Before Starting an E-Zine“.

Regular readers of this blog may remember a post from November, “Test of character: using instruments to probe conflict styles and moral intuition“, which linked to a free online conflict style test, the Adult Personal Conflict Style Inventory. Its creator, Ron Kraybill, a trainer and advisor in conflict transformation and peacebuilding since 1979 and an Associate Professor of Conflict Studies at Eastern Mennonite University, has just launched a new turbo-charged version.

Style Matters: The Kraybill Conflict Style Inventory, 22 pages in length, recognizes cultural diversity among users, includes a greatly expanded interpretation section along with pages of practical tips for each style, and provides discussion questions for group leaders and trainers. What makes Style Matters especially useful is that it provides two scores for test-takers: one for “calm” conditions, another for “storm”. It’s also easy to take and to score, which makes it suitable for a wide range of audiences. You can view sample pages of Style Matters in PDF format here at the Riverhouse ePress web site.

Style Matters is not only robust but affordable: it can be ordered online at Riverhouse ePress for $3.95 to $5.95 depending upon order size, which puts it more easily within the reach of community mediation programs and not-for-profits. There is also an offer to trainers who can request a free one-time use of this inventory.

Although it’s hard to believe (especially if you still haven’t gotten around to taking down your Christmas lights display), January is almost over. February is bearing down upon us at breakneck speed, which means that holidays like Ground Hog Day, Valentine’s Day, and, here in the U.S., Presidents’ Day, are just around the corner (not to mention that event sacred to Americans everywhere, myself included, the Super Bowl).

These days, sadly, Presidents’ Day is probably more closely linked in the public’s mind with car sales and great deals on ski packages than it is with honoring two former presidents.

Nonetheless, with Presidents’ Day looming ever closer, it is no surprise that American bloggers’ thoughts are turning to George Washington. Joel Schoenmeyer reports in his Death and Taxes blog that George Washington was evidently an early proponent of alternative dispute resolution—George’s will included an ADR provision. You can read Joel’s post for the text of the relevant provision of the will, or you can read the entire document online yourself here.

(By the way, ADR professionals who regularly mediate trust and estate disputes should spend some time perusing Death and Taxes. And don’t miss Joel’s post on “Cryonics and Personal Revival Trusts” for a whole new perspective on “You can’t take it with you”.)

In a decision that will be good news for mediators, since it strikes a well-aimed blow on behalf of mediation confidentiality, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey concluded that a trial court had erred in permitting a mediator to testify at a plenary hearing and reversed the trial court’s order enforcing a purported divorce settlement.

The decision, Lehr v. Afflitto, can be downloaded in PDF format at the New Jersey Judiciary web site.

(With thanks to the ever-vigilant Ericka Gray.)

Last year I reported on how conflicts arising from interactions in virtual worlds have become the subject of study by scholars in the fields of online dispute resolution and law. It is not only conflict, however, that virtual activities can give rise to.

Clive Thompson at Collision Detection recently posted on the efforts of Julian Dibbell, journalist and observer of digital culture, to learn what tax implications, if any, could arise from the $11,000 he earned selling on eBay the virtual items he won playing an Internet-based, multi-player game, Ultima Online.

In entertaining detail, Dibbell describes here on Legal Affairs his quest to get answers from the Internal Revenue Service. As it turns out, we’ll have to wait a little longer for the answer: not only was Dibbell thwarted by the $650 fee necessary to obtain a letter ruling from the IRS, but he was not exactly eager to be the one to break new tax ground. Who, after all, would want to be remembered as the guy who opened the gates of the virtual kingdom to federal tax officials?

I was intrigued to read in the Boston Globe today about the latest use for speech recognition technology. NICE Systems, Inc., based in Israel, has created a system which combines digital voice recording with voice analysis capabilities, including emotion detection, to–among other things–help organizations manage telephone interactions with customers and clients more effectively.

NICE Perform, as NICE calls this multimedia system, enables organizations to record phone conversations for purposes of training and development of staff, as well as to gauge customer satisfaction and improve customer care.

This system has applications for the legal sphere as well—as a means of anticipating or predicting potential legal issues or liability. According to the NICE web site:

Legal advisors can assure compliance with regulations concerning storage and retrieval of interactions to meet legislative requirements, as well as receiving advance warning of possible legal problems by analyzing customer interactions. Repeated complaints or threats to sue might require changes in contracts or other legal remedies, and these can be implemented sooner due to insights gained from NICE Perform.

While all this is fascinating and also tremendously exciting, it is somehow disquieting as well for so many reasons.

There is something disturbing about utilizing speech recognition software to reveal what a man or woman is experiencing emotionally, what his or her state of mind may be, and what factors may be influencing his or her consumer habits. If employees depend on technology to recognize emotions or dissatisfaction in customers, rather than their own senses or experience, what cost is there to human interaction? And what does this mean as well for privacy, if any of our communications as consumers may potentially be digitally recorded, analyzed, and archived? Finally, what information, if any, will callers be given about the uses to which these recordings may be put, and what ethical obligations do organizations have to customers with respect to the uses of systems like this?

(Hmm, maybe conspiracy theorists are right: sometimes paranoia is just good common sense.)

The hope of a secure and livable world lies with disciplined nonconformists who are dedicated to justice, peace and brotherhood.