BC Law IPTF Blog

The ABA Journal online published a list of “law hacks” this past summer. They group these “hacks” under E-mail, Your PC, Time Management, Phones, the Web, Software, Low Tech, Your Brain, Your Money, Hardware, and more. (If you’re unfamiliar with the world of “hacks” or more properly “life hacks,” then they’re generally tidbits of advice to streamline your productivity. See Lifehacker for your daily dose.)

It’s pretty much a list scarfed from Lifehacker posts over the years. Only a few of them cater specifically to legal work. But nonetheless it’s a decent summary for people who are too busy to read through Lifehacker archives.

Instead of merely criticizing, here’s me putting my money where my mouth is and starting my own list of law hacks, some replicative of the ABA, others not. (You can read a snippet of my criticisms at the end of the list.)

1. Google Desktop Search (”GDS”) (or Spotlight in Mac OS). This is essential. Whenever I use a case, I save the PDF version in a folder for each client/project. And I allow GDS to catalog the contents. Then if I know I ran across a case about something, I don’t have to dig around—all I do is search. It’s that easy.
2. Name your files usefully. So I have a folder for every client/project. But files often float around independently. If I have a motion to dismiss document for client Smith, then it doesn’t help if the filename is “mot dismiss.doc,” especially if I e-mail it to someone or to myself to work on remotely. Name it usefully. I’ll use “Smith.MtD pers juris.111707.doc.” I won’t even explain what my abbreviations are for. It should be that easy.
3. Add short descriptions to case filenames. Even with GDS, sometimes you do find yourself digging around in folders and files looking for cases. When you’re reading cases, you’re usually looking for one main point of law from each one. So when you read through a case, name the file with the point it’s useful for. For example, “Smith v. Kim (1st Cir. 1992) neg op turn signals.pdf.”
4. Use a wiki or blog as a to-do list and notepad. I use a wiki to keep a running to-do list of short- and long-term tasks. I also have a list of “notepads” linked from the home page of long-term projects or just places to jot down important numbers and passwords, etc. Blogs are sometimes better for to-do lists because every day is a new to-do list and you can track your progress (or lack thereof) by replicating your existing to-do list every day. And keep them password-protected for security.
5. Use del.icio.us (or another bookmark manager). Organize and store all your bookmarks remotely so you can access them from any computer. Check out my bookmarks on rules: http://del.icio.us/pham/rules. Enough said.
6. Keep track of your time daily. Each summer, I had a small notebook for my to-do list that I would check off of and re-create at the end of each day—planning the next day’s work. I would have another small notebook where I’d write down the current project name, the time I started, and the time I stopped. Then at the end of the day or first thing the next day, I’d enter my time. I actually “experimented” by trying to account for time at the end of a week—it was impossible. And I didn’t feel right “fudging” the time, and in the end I’m sure I lost minutes which added up to hours, etc.
7. Use paper wisely—print double-sided and purge or re-use paper. It takes a few seconds to set your default printer to print double-sided. It just makes sense to do it. You’ll cut your paper usage approximately in half. I also think it’s easier to read; it’s more natural, like reading a book. Then, when you’re done with a project, purge as much paper as you can. Get it out of your office and into the recycling bin. Also, if you have to print on one-side, re-use it as scrap paper, put a staple into it and use it as a notebook, or take it home and use it in your inkjet. If you hand-write important annotations on cases, consider using something like Skim (Mac OS) to electronically annotate PDFs.
8. Keep your inbox slim. I talk about this below. You don’t need to empty your inbox every day; just keep it slim. It’s satisfying—or at least not overwhelming—to have a slim inbox. It doesn’t take much. When you get an e-mail, read it immediately and then file it away. If something needs to be taken care of, take care of it ASAP. If you can’t, then keep it in your inbox until you can, but make sure you get to it.
9. Practice voice mail etiquette—keep your greeting short, leave informative messages, use e-mail, text, or IM. Voice mail greetings don’t have to say much—hey, know you’re number, that’s why they’re calling you. “You’re reached [name]. Please leave a message.” And then when you’re leaving a message, don’t just say, “Call me back.” Tell me why. Compel me. Otherwise, you’ve wasted everybody’s time. Or just e-mail me or IM me. Voice mails are passive communications (just like e-mail or IM) that I can’t skim, that I have to work to get to.
10. Use IM. I think IM can be so useful in a work environment. It’s a quick, passive, unobtrusive way to get in touch with people. There’s also the fantastically helpful status message—you can, at a glance, tell if the person is available or not, and if they have informative statuses, what they’re up. (For example: “out to lunch until 1:30,” “working on Smith case,” “anyone know anything about suing a cop,” “afk” (away from keyboard), “working from home,” etc.) And if you use IM for work, don’t use your “BCEaglesROXNUMoneShoRTy” screen name from your foolish youth. Create a just-for-work screen name that’s professional and descriptive, like “johnsmithatXYZ.” And don’t give it out to your friends.

I don’t quite agree with the e-mail tips. I tend to think that you should keep your inbox small, but it doesn’t need to be cleared every day. My inbox is more of my mid- to long-term to-do list. Anything short-term I read and then archive or accomplish and then archive. Generally, I think once you file an e-mail away, it disappears unless you search for it. So if it’s not addressed or done, it can’t get filed away. But to keep your inbox slim, you have to address e-mails which gives you a satisfying incentive to get things done quick.

The PC hacks are a bit too technical. Plus, the recommendation of Quicksilver–which I use and love and couldn’t live without–is Mac-specific. (Launchy is the not-up-to-snuff PC variant.) But I’m totally on-board with the Google Desktop Search–or just Spotlight on the Mac OS–to search through documents, especially PDF files of cases.

So I decided to re-write the BCIPTF Publication Agreement. One of the barriers to publishing articles on our journal is the pedantic process of getting the darn agreement signed. Wouldn’t it be great—instead of mailing a hard copy of the agreement (or burdening an author with printing it out), getting a signature, getting it mailed back, counter-signing, then sending a copy back—if we could do it over e-mail?

Funny you should ask.

Generally a signature is any mark by which a signee intends to be bound. In the old days, it could be an “X” or even in modern days an incomprehensible scribble. It was generally used as a hedge in support of a statute of frauds claim. Written by hand, there are some evidentiary tactics one can use to authenticate a signature—but in an electronic age, what do we have?

First, it has to be understood that a contract with a “real” written signature isn’t self-authenticating. A signature does not a contract make. Even though I have my own fancy, idiosyncratic signature, if I sign a contract with my non-dominant hand and misspell my name, I can still make that contract binding.

Therefore, there’s really no difference between me writing an “X” and calling it a signature and typing my name out on an electronic document. In either case, under oath, I would have to say, yes, I did sign it and mean to be bound by the agreement.

But then we shift back into the real world. Do I really think that a name typed into a word processing document binds me to a contract I want to sneak out of? No way!

Well, maybe. Few things in life are in a vacuum. So leading up to the digital signing of that DOC or RTF file, there’s a chain of e-mails that comprise negotiations. Then in the contract we specify:

Section 9(a)(i)(B) [T]he Licensor e-mails the Digitally Signed Agreement to the Journal from the Licensor’s E-mail Address to the Journal’s E-mail Address, both specified below, and within the body of the e-mail message types “I, [Licensor’s name], hereby accept the attached Publication Agreement.”

There, we have quadruple authentication: a signature on the electronic document, a chain of e-mails leading to an e-mail with an acceptance, a second typed signature in an e-mail, and then an “authenticating” e-mail address. If there’s author metadata in the document, then that’s just a bonus.

Taking a look at ALR: In Cloud Corp. v. Hasbro, Inc., the Seventh Circuit court of appeals ruled that the sender’s name in an e-mail was sufficient as a signature. 314 F.3d 289, 49 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d 413 (7th Cir. 2002). Similarly, the First Circuit ruled in Roger Edwards, LLC v. Fiddes & Son, Ltd. that a chain of business e-mails referencing an agreement satisfied the statute of frauds requirement in Maine. 245 F. Supp. 2d 251 (D. Me. 2003). Part of the reasoning behind courts’ acceptance of electronic signatures hearkens back to days when a typed signature on a telegram was held sufficient for a contract. See Shattuck v. Klotzbach, 2001 WL 1839720 (Mass. Super. 2001).

So maybe this isn’t the *perfect* way of creating a contract. But it has to be weighed with the need for expediency in the larger system. And, as a law journal and forum, isn’t it part of our job to test the waters and try new things to push the edge of legal thinking and processes? BCIPTF was the first law journal to be completely on-line. We have to continue this tradition of keeping new and current in the face of uncertainty.

I’ve always followed the typographer’s rule that you should only put one space after terminal punctuation, i.e., a single space after periods and the like. But in my legal writing attorney’s insist on two spaces because that’s the way it’s supposed to be done.

I finally got my copy of The Redbook: A Manual on Legal Style by Bryan A. Garner. Garner is the editor of the Black’s Law Dictionary and is becoming the expert and ombudsman on legal style. Lo and behold, here’s what Garner has to say on the issue in Section 4.12:

Use even forward-spacing in your documents: one space between words and one space after punctuation marks (including colons and periods).

The custom during the reign of the typewriter was to insert two spaces between sentences and after colons. The reason was that letters on a typewriter are monospaced… Continue the custom only if you use a typewriter or the Courier font.

Now what’s unclear is that Garner claims that “most word processors can automatically replace two spaces with one.” Does this mean that when you type two spaces, the word processor automatically replaces them with a single space? That doesn’t appear to be true—two spaces after a period creates more space than one space. I think he must be referring to a search-and-replace functionality.

Another personal victory: It seems like most lawyers I’ve worked with eschew using serial commas. Here, Garner agrees with Strunk & White in Section 1.3: “Use commas to separate words or phrases in a series of three or more, and include a comma before the conjunction.”

Yes. Axe? Ground.

Lifehack.org has an interesting post on Taking Notes that Work. Probably pretty applicable for law school students.

I think a lot of people, students and professionals alike, attempt to capture a complete record of a lecture, book, or meeting in their notes — to create, in effect, minutes. This is a recipe for failure. Trying to get every last fact and figure down like that leaves no room for thinking about what you’re writing and how it fits together.

I’m going to try the first bit which generally says to just focus on the new stuff you’re learning; don’t write down the stuff you already know.

Your focus while taking notes should be two-fold. First, what’s new to you? There’s no point in writing down facts you already know. If you already know the Declaration of Independence was written and signed in 1776, there’s no reason to write that down. Anything you know you know you can leave out of your notes.

I’ve decided to give the Apple iWork Pages ‘08 a fair shake in the word processor wars. It’s taking me a bit to get used to it. But my first impression of the cleanliness of the interface and the way it aesthetically “fits in” with the Mac environment assisted my persistence with the new world. (The biggest thing, immediately, was that it “knew” how to size the page and text to my 12″ Powerbook screen. Word always felt a bit uncomfortable: Was the page screen in the middle of the screen or to the left? Normal view or Page view? Zoom at 115% or 135%? Things like that.)

Let’s start by saying that it’s been about a month, and I’m still using it in lieu of Microsoft Word.

There’s no default font setting in Pages. So if you want all your documents to *not* use Helvetica 12-pt, then you have to create a new “Blank” template. (My font is Georgia 11-pt, for the record.) I can handle that.

You create shortcut keys for special characters in the Preferences… menu option. For example, in Word I’d map option-6 to the “section” symbol; option-shift-p to the “pi” symbol for “plaintiff,” etc. In Pages, I map things differently. Instead of key combinations, I use typed macros: “-s” for section, -pp for pi. Fine.

What kills me is that two dashes doesn’t auto-correct to an em-dash without a trailing space in Pages. (”Dash dash space” instead of just “dash dash.”) And when I insert mathematical symbols, the leading gets screwed up. And the bullet schemes are weird; I like the Word filled bullet on level one, then hollow bullet on level two. And their nice thick bullets, not the anemic ones that Pages uses.

But there are smart things in Pages. (Like the many more smart things in Numbers, the Excel rival.) I just tried a spell-check. In Pages, it’s called Proofread. And you know what it proofread for me? It told me that “prior to” is too wordy, and I should just use “before.” Ah, proofreading only a lawyer can love! And then it told me that I should limit my usage of the word “input” to computer and other technical uses. Kind of groovy, if you ask me. It’s the touch of an actual editor and proofreader, and not just some linguistically brute-force algorithm that makes vague suggestions insulting your style a la Word.

And so I’ll continue to plug away with Pages. Hopefully I don’t get stuck with Betamax on this one.

I don’t consider my setup that “unique” in that it would differ greatly from what I would regularly use. But there are nuances that help me with my legal work that I’d like to document.

Del.icio.us

You *should* use Google as your first step in researching an issue. It’s fast, free, and helps you get background and narrow your research tasks. And as you use Google, you run across web pages that need to be bookmarked for later reference (or citation). You need a bookmark manager that you can access across computer (at work, school, and home) that allows you to describe, tag, and find your saved bookmarks. That’s what del.icio.us is for. You can see an example of how I used it for some of my corporate research.

The problems with del.icio.us are numerous, though. The tagging functionality is too basic: you can’t have multiple words in a tag (e.g., “Rule of Law” has to be RuleofLaw or ruleoflaw), you can’t browse on multiple tags (e.g., I want all bookmarks tagged “work” and “afghanistan” because I have bookmarks tagged “education” and “afghanistan” that I don’t want to see). It also can be slow. And it’s not private in that I can’t tag my bookmarks with a client name.

Also, I should note that Zotero (a free Firefox plugin) has awesome capabilities for this type of thing. It’s specifically made for academic and legal on-line research. I’d use it more, but for me, right now, it’s a overload. Del.icio.us, while technically and functionally lacking, does what I need simply and fast.

Firefox

Tabbing in Firefox is crucial. Tabs are the step before bookmarking—you “save” searches and web pages as tabs in the background while you’re browsing other branches of your thought-process. The plugins and bookmarklet support are crucial (see Zotero and del.icio.us above). Also, it “works around” some of the little things that Westlaw and LexisNexis do with Internet Explorer that can slow down your research and make it more expensive. (I don’t know 100% because I pretty much use Firefox all the time, and the few times I have used IE I’ve experienced frustration with what I can’t do.) You can open up multiple Results from searches in multiple tabs and browse them all at once, instead of one at a time. You can background Results pop-up windows. I think you can print from the browser in some instances where you can’t with IE.

Launchy

Launchy replicates the functionality of Mac’s Quicksilver or Spotlight onto the PC. I hit alt-space and a translucent box appears in the middle of my screen. I start typing the name of an application I want to launch (e.g., f-i-r, and it finds Firefox, and I hit enter to launch it), or a Firefox bookmark (e.g., w-e-s and I get my Westlaw bookmark), or a filename or folder, or I start typing in a math calculation (e.g., 162/6, and I get the my billable hours for a project), and Launchy finds and executes it for me.

Freemind

Freemind is a mind-mapping tool that makes nice charts and graphs easy to make, but it’s also great for note-taking. Let me tell you, it’s a lot better than Microsoft Word for outlining your ideas. And when you create presentations with this people always ask, “Does PowerPoint do that? How’d you make it look like that?” To which you answer, “No, and I can’t tell you.”

Here’s a mind-map that I just created about Demand Resources in energy auction markets:

Use a Wiki

I use my own personal installation of MediaWiki, but I have used hosted services like the excellent PBWiki. It basically use it for to-do lists and for notes that I want to access and edit anywhere in the world. They’re not super-fancy, but they’re functional and fast and easy to use. You can collaborate via them, but I don’t.

Google Desktop Search

I save nearly all my cases as PDFs onto my hard drive for later reference. With Google Desktop Search, you can search all these PDFs. Very useful.

I’ve recently been using del.icio.us a lot in keeping track of bookmarks for my legal research at work. When you’re doing Google searches all over the place, the bookmarking in-browser isn’t sufficient. Yes, you can put bookmarks into folders. But you don’t get the snapshot view that you can create with the description and tags in something like del.icio.us.

So, for example, I have a list of bookmarks I’ve saving for the corporate work I’ve been doing lately.  Pretty nice, if you ask me.

I’m not sure, though, if del.icio.us is the best bookmark manager. I think the code is a bit clunky, and it’s made to be a social bookmarking tool—and I’m doing nothing social with this. I use edtags.org for my law school and education-related tags, for bookmark managing and for the social aspect, but I don’t think that bookmarks on corporate and real estate law would be of interest to teachers.

It seems like a lot of law school students come to the IPTF thinking that they want to be “intellectual property lawyers.” But the concepts of IP bleed over into a lot of areas. For example, I’m helping a partner write a presentation on trade secrets; but neither of us are IP lawyers. And then what I’ve learned about trade secrets has helped me in writing up a non-competition agreement within a corporate acquisition.

So I think that when folks come in with an interest in IP they shouldn’t limit themselves to pure patent practice, but just leverage those interests into making an informed impact in broader areas that overlap with IP. It opens a lot more options for jobs, too.

At BC Law, I took Tax I under Prof. Kornhauser. She’s a new, visiting professor, but I saw that she had a degree in education and mentioned a “problem-solving” approach to tax in her class description. After taking the class, I highly recommend it because of this problem-based approach, as opposed to a case-based approach to tax. And here’s why.

Our class pretty much wholly relied upon working through a packet of problems alongside the tax code book. It was just you and the code. So not only was the approach very practical in terms of addressing real-world problems, but it taught me—and Prof. Kornhauser stressed this a lot in class—how to “read the code.”

So I’m writing a provision about compliance with “Section 1060 of the Code.” I have no idea what this is… I look it up in the Definitions section and figure out it’s Section 1060 of the Internal Revenue Code—the tax code. I browse through Cornell’s LII and find Section 1060. Anyone who has struggled with the code knows that at first blush it just looks like a mess. But, really, it makes a lot of sense. You read the whole section first, then re-read the first chunk, and then step through and mentally apply the conditions and exceptions that generally follow.

Now, the reason why I started this post: although Federal Income Tax might not have that much application to people interested in corporate practice, it’s use is that it teaches you to read the Code. And, personally, I’d stay away from theory and policy classes and take a class like Prof. Kornhauser’s that gets your hands dirty in it.

Oh, and regarding Section 1060: From what I can gather, it allows the parties in our specific agreement to agree in writing to the allocation of assets, and then guides the parties into how to report the assets to the government (Form 8594).

I often hear the “rumor” that if you go to challenge a traffic violation, and the arresting officer doesn’ t show up, you’re automatically let go. So, one time, I went into an Orange County, MA, courthouse to contest a speeding ticket—I honestly don’t think I was going as fast as the cop reports I was going.

I go into a room, and at a desk, there’s a woman who mumbles something about who she is—she looked half-asleep—and asked me what happened. I told her that it was late at night, and I was going down a hill. I remember being mindful of my speed because I know there are lots of cops out on Route 2 late at night. All of a sudden, I see these lights bearing down on me from the top of the hill, and then they’re tailgating me… So I probably sped up a bit. And then he hit his lights, and then I find a ticket in my hand.

She kind of glances up at me and says, “I don’t believe you.” And she says I have to pay the fine. But then I ask her, I thought that if the police officer who arrested me isn’t here, then I get off. She said, no, she represents the police officer, and the ticket still stands. What?

So for the longest time, I thought this “cop no-show” freebie was a myth. But I’m studying Evidence, and I run across Fed. R. Evid. 803(8)(B). It says that records of public offices setting forth matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law fall under hearsay exceptions, excluding matters in criminal cases observed by police officers. So, if a traffic violation is a criminal case where my speed was a matter observed by a police officer, then this out-of-court written statement is hearsay. The police officer may appear at court to testify as to the contents of that writing, but the writing in itself is not evidence admissible into court.

I think this means that lady in Orange County, MA, screwed me. (Unless, for that level of violation, the rules of evidence are “relaxed.”)