Comments for Going Paperless

Comment on 3 Ways to Make Google Work for You by Kayo

Kayo — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:22:27 +0000

That’s a wise asnewr to a tricky question

Comment on 8 Ways to Extend Your iPad’s Battery Life by Correctingyourpost

Correctingyourpost — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:22:25 +0000

Misconceptions About iOS Multitasking – not closing apps doesnt affect your battery or performance http://speirs.org/blog/2012/1/2/misconceptions-about-ios-multitasking.html

Comment on PA Court Holds that Facebook Friendship Requires Recusal of Judge by Charles Jannace

Charles Jannace — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:30:00 +0000

Molly, I don’t think regulation is necessary. We already have a Code of Professional Responsibility or similar in every State. Judges have their Code of Judicial Conduct or similar in every State. Every Judge has to maintain a lifestyle very different from a practicing attorney in order to avoid recusal. When litigating I try to reduce things to the lowest common denominator. If I find out before or after trial that the Judge has an overt connection to a party I try looking at it from the client’s perspective and allow the client to make the call. All in all, I doubt that there are many Judges who would put much weight in maintaining FB friendships over avoiding recusals in their chosen profession.

Comment on PA Court Holds that Facebook Friendship Requires Recusal of Judge by Molly DiBianca

Molly DiBianca — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:12:04 +0000

Randy:
Thanks for sharing this link–Utah seems to be significantly ahead of the rest of us on this issue! I definitely agree that education is the best prevention and it’s great that Utah is taking such a proactive approach.

Comment on PA Court Holds that Facebook Friendship Requires Recusal of Judge by Molly DiBianca

Molly DiBianca — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:10:20 +0000

Charles:
I don’t disagree about the likelihood that a judge’s online “friendship” with a litigant may give rise to the appearance of impropriety. I think the question I’m struggling with, really, is whether the next generation of judges will be disqualified en masse as a result. I attended a seminar at a local high school recently, when the students were asked how many Facebook friends they have. The average student reported having more than 1,000 Facebook friends! And that’s just high school–I can’t imagine what that number will be by the time they graduate college or law school!

To me, this case is indicative of an underlying need for specific guidance on the issue from the states’ judidical ethics committees, as opposed to letting the law develop on a case-by-case basis at the expense of the court system and litigants, etc. Prior to this case, though, I was not inclined to think that such regulation would be necessary. This case has me leaning in the other direction.

Comment on PA Court Holds that Facebook Friendship Requires Recusal of Judge by Charles Jannace

Charles Jannace — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:24:23 +0000

There may be a “big” difference between a FaceBook friend and a real life friend but in litigation the appearance of impropriety to a non-friend is inevitable.

Comment on PA Court Holds that Facebook Friendship Requires Recusal of Judge by Randy Dryer

Randy Dryer — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:16:09 +0000

You are absolutely correct, Molly, when you note that “social-media activity by judges is an issue not likely to go away anytime soon.” Although the issue usually arises first in those states with contested judicial elections, the issue is one every state will eventually have to address as more and more younger lawyers comfortable with social media are being appointed to the bench. Even in Utah, which does not have contested judicial elections, we have several appellate court judges and dozens of trial judges who have Facebook or other social networking accounts. I chaired a Utah Judicial Council committee of judges, lawyers and court executives which studied the issue and recently issued a report. We identified several areas of potential ethical concerns when judges use social media and recommended the Utah Judicial Ethics Committee proactively issue some guidance for lawyers and judges as opposed to the normal process of developing opinions on a case-by-case basis. Our report, which is working its way through the judicial rerview process may be accessed at our committee web page. http://www.utcourts.gov/committees/social_media/. Regarding the Pennsylvania ruling, it is likely that no one on the Common Pleas Court has a Facebook account as anyone who does knows there is a big difference between a Facebook friend and a real life friend. Unfortunately, many appellate judges are digital dinosaurs and are fearful of the new communications platforms. Great post!

Comment on Law Practice Today: Time Management Tips & Technology by Adrian

Adrian — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 06:33:28 +0000

The blog is so helpful. I like this. Thanks.

Comment on N.Y. Ethics Opinion on Ways to “Win” Facebook Friends by Thou Shall Not Tweet From Thy Jury Box « Criminal Law in the Virtual Context

Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:10:26 +0000

[...] [22] Going Paperless, Ethics Opinion on Ways to “Win” Facebook Friends, Access at: http://goingpaperlessblog.com/2011/08/09/n-y-ethics-opinion-on-ways-to-win-facebook-friends/. [...]

Comment on Just Sit Right Back and You’ll Hear a Tale . . . of a Lawyer and His Facebook Page by Thou Shall Not Tweet From Thy Jury Box « Criminal Law in the Virtual Context

Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:10:24 +0000

[...] [21] Going Paperless, Just Sit Right Back and You’ll Hear a Tale…of a Lawyer and His Facebook Page, Access at: http://goingpaperlessblog.com/2010/04/25/just-sit-right-back-and-youll-hear-a-tale-of-a-lawyer-and-h…. [...]