Google Challenges Westlaw and Lexis With “Google Scholar”
Google continues to expand the universe around it—this time it has rolled out “Scholar” a free search engine for case law and articles. Scholar has the ability to search for specific cases or by topic. Once a case is identified, you can then explore “cited by” and “related articles” links. You can also explore articles or opinions related to your case or topic. Scholar exposes the profit foundation for Westlaw and Lexis and threatens to relegate these companies into nothing more than a way to make sure case is current (a la Shepard’s or Keycite). That day may be years away while Scholar is fine-tuned to produce results to compete with these services, however, it certainly appears that day is at least on the horizon. The only question now is how long will it take to get here.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=e5f95dbf-56aa-469c-82f4-4193a0c0ea7c)
MUJI 2d Will Try to Address the “Google” Mistrial
The ubiquitous smartphone strikes again: the New York Times reports that jury misconduct in the form of researching on the internet the case on trial in courtroom. Is this the tip of the iceberg? Perhaps before smartphones became as widespread independent jury research was limited to juries doing their research on their home computers after hours. Now it seems every juror with a smartphone is googling the defendant over the lunch hour in even one-day trials:
A juror on a lunch or bathroom break can find out many details about a case. Wikipedia can help explain the technology underlying a patent claim or medical condition, Google Maps can show how long it might take to drive from point A to point B, and news sites can write about a criminal defendant, his lawyers or expert witnesses.
Utah is currently in the process of redrafting its Model Utah Jury Instructions and will apparently include a jury instruction to address the threatened “Google” mistrial. It is reported that the proposed jury instruction will instruct jurors to not use the Internet while they are serving as jurors. Presumably the instruction will be tailored to each case since many people use the Internet for much more than research or inappropriately twittering about their jury trial. We shall see.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=cec873e2-7d6e-47ee-96ff-1e23851889d2)
Twitter and Facebook Comments Fodder for Trial and Cross-Examination
Although it may be a bit too late for some of your clients, you may want to remind them that any Facebook comments or Twitter tweets are published for public consumption, likely discoverable, and most likely admissible at trial (as noted by this personal injury lawyer in New York). As for you defense-types out there, if you are not Googling witnesses and personal injury plaintiffs, then you are likely missing out on a lot of potentially juicy fodder for your upcoming depositions or for cross-examination at trial. You should also be asking plaintiffs for their “handle” or name they use when posting or commenting on the Internet. Oftentimes people use the same name for their Twitter username as well as across the other sites that they frequent, i.e, Digg, del.icio.us, Stumbleupon, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Salt Lake Tribune, Deseret News, etc. Another potential source of information are photographs of the witness/plaintiff posted on blogs, websites, Facebook, MySpace, Flicker, Picasa, etc. The photos are not always posted by the witness/plaintiff but are posted by others who identify those contained in the photograph. This can lead to a wealth of information about your potential client/witness/deponent/plaintiff.
So, have you warned your clients about the dangers of exposing too much on the Internet? Or, have you done your research so that you know when your witness is lying about not being able to snowboard any longer when the witness recently posted on Twitter how awesome the halfpipe was at Brighton? Let’s be safe out there or, alternatively, good hunting!
Update: The New York Times published an article today that highlights the dangers. NYT reports that most Facebook users never adjust their privacy settings which by default allow the public to view everything on your Facebook profile, including photographs, comments, and personal information.
Update: Aren’t you convinced yet? No? Well, see what happened to the poor bloke working the gates at the Philadelphia Eagles’ home stadium who bad-mouthed a Philadelphia Eagles’ player decision in a Facebook comment: he was fired. Do you really want everyone to know what you think? Just put it on Facebook.