|
|
Back to William H. Skeels, IV Articles
Introduction / Acknowledgement
The following article was originally published in the Spring 1996 edition of the North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers
Trial Briefs, and is reprinted electronically with their permission. This version replaces the graphic images of the sites
referenced with a 'live' internet 'hypertext' reference, allowing the reader to follow the progress of the case study on-line.
This version also includes parenthetical references to subsequent developments, such as the release of the North Carolina
Supreme Court web site. Note also that the LawSight roadmap found on this site provides both easy link and explanation of
the core resources discussed in this article.
1. Overview
The Internet is a topic of enormous current interest, as reflected both in the news generally, and in discussions among
attorneys. There are numerous sources for technical description of the Internet; for purposes of describing how it plays a
growing practical role for attorneys, it will suffice to say that the Internet is an agreement or set of standards which
provides connection between computers which 'subscribe', allowing search and access to information from computers all
over the world which are similarly connected. For most attorneys, gaining access will come in the form of subscribing to
the services of an Internet 'provider', who will take care of the behind the scenes aspects of bringing the service to the user
much as an electric utility provides power for various purposes.
In spite of the publicity, indeed hype, behind the Internet, the attorney is justified in asking, 'what's in it for me?', and may
well wonder if there are real-world, practical benefits to being net-connected. Though the experience of our firm indicates
that the answer to this question is clearly in the affirmative, simple descriptions of the available resources are often
inadequate to describe why that is so. Listings of key resources, such as that included in the appendix, though useful, do not
necessarily provide a sense of how the Internet can be used in the practice on a day to day basis. This simple case study
will provide such a view of Internet usage, in this instance, on the part of a litigator organizing and preparing a typical case
for trial. While the facts, the case, and its preparation, are fictional, the kinds of research, resource location and
communication made illustrated here are not only realistic, they are being performed on a daily basis by attorneys in every
state. The Internet functions performed in the case study are but the tip of the iceberg of those which might usefully and
reasonably be performed, or which will be performed as additional characteristics and functionality are provided on the
Internet.
2. Case Study - the Facts
For purposes of this article, we adopt a highly simplified version of the fact scenario we have used in our 'Lawyers
OnLine' CLE seminar series. The simplified facts are:
SYC Limited Partners built and managed a boat dock and restaurant called Sands Yacht Club whose major feature was an
outside seating area and bar built on a floating dock. The restaurant was opened with a black-tie charity function, with the
cream of the political and social community in attendance.
The affair was underway when, at approximately 10:15PM, a late arrival driving a late 50's Ford Thunderbird was unable
to stop due to brake failure, and skidded through the parking lot, spun over the guard rail and landed in the water next to the
floating dock. Hearing the crashing sound, almost all of the 500 in attendance guests rushed toward the outer left quarter of
the dock for a better view. As the last few of the guests rushed forward, the structure gave way, followed by a pitching
motion of the dock toward the collective weight of the attendees. The collective force of rolling equipment, and falling
persons sent 200 of the patrons into the water, and several dozen of those who remained on the dock received injuries of
varying severity. In spite of rescue efforts, two persons drowned. The estate of one of the drowned persons requests
representation from Hal Litigator in their claims against the various potential defendants. The remainder of the article will
provide a few highlights of resources which might be used by the Internet-aware attorney in the course of representation.
3. The Tools
The World Wide Web. Most of the recent press concerning and attention concerning the Internet has focused on a
particular type of content called the World Wide Web. The 'Web' allows information providers to offer information to the
public in the graphic, mouse-oriented, 'point and click' format familiar to users of the Apple Macintosh, Windows and
similar systems. 'Web sites' are collections of computer information, usually made up of individual 'web pages' and
dedicated to a particular theme or function, ranging from substantive information (e.g., Supreme Court cases) to compiled
lists of other web sites on a similar theme (e.g., legal resources) to more general utilities such as 'search engines' which
assist with locating Internet resources. .
The computer software used to review information on the web is called a 'web browser'. Its job is to make navigation,
review and manipulation of information on the web easy and visual. While discussion of particular software is beyond the
scope of this article, the 'Navigator' from Netscape Corporation dominates this category so thoroughly that we would be
remiss in not mentioning it at this point. The web sites shown in the illustrations here are viewed through Netscape, though
it must be said that the operation of all web browsers is fundamentally similar. The web sites are based on a unique
address (similar in concept to a postal address) called a 'uniform resource locator' or URL, which typically appear at the
top of web sites as they first appear to the user.
One of the most important aspects of the easy, point and click method presented by a web browser is called 'hypertext'.
Simply put, a hypertext 'link' lets the user click on a word or picture found in one location on a web site and 'jump' directly
to another. I might choose, for example, to review a legal resource summary web site to begin case research. A particularly
useful 'legal list' is maintained by the Rutgers Law School. This quite extensive list contains a subset entitled 'U.S. Federal
Sites', which, in turn, contains the phrase 'U.S. Supreme Court'. That phrase is underlined and highlighted in blue, alerting
the user that the phrase may be used to jump directly to the resource it describes. To add to the visual cue, the arrow
controlled by the mouse becomes a pointing finger, further emphasizing the message: 'click here and the computer will take
you to the location these words describe'. [Click on the blue highlighted area to view the Rutgers site; click the right
mouse button / select back to return to this article].
How does one become aware of these starting locations? This question reflects the most difficult aspect of web usage;
there is no one starting point, and it is usually necessary for beginning web users to obtain help from outside sources for
that purpose. There is, in fact, probably no better way to start than to use the 'low tech' method of learning of favorite
resources from articles, fellow attorney Internet users, or other similar sources. The good news is that this introductory
confusion is usually very short lived. You can navigate from even one or two of the basic legal lists to most of the
important and well known legal sites; the Rutgers site, for example, has hypertext links to over thirty other U.S. law
libraries, numerous international law school sites, over twenty bar association, interest group and other legal association
sites, multiple sites under dozens of subject matter areas ranging from Constitutional Law to Environmental Law to
Taxation, in addition to the government sites noted. It is, in fact, typical of many Internet law sites that they reference each
other, insuring that once you are 'inside the group', you will have little difficulty in locating further sites. Add to the lists
one or two general purpose Internet 'search engines', and you are ready to use the web to assist with factual and legal
preparation of your case straight from the desktop.
E-mail is almost as significant as the web to the practicing attorney. Fundamentally, e-mail permits the attorney to send
messages to anyone who is similarly linked to the Internet on an essentially instant basis. This can include not only text
messages, but computer files as well.
E-mail is managed through special programs which, for those who are linked to the Internet through a provider, sends,
receives and organizes messages for the user.
Discussion groups. The Internet is home to many flavors of discussion groups on every imaginable topic. These
discussions come in the form of 'chat groups', 'newsgroups' and 'list servers', among others. The list servers utilized in the
case study utilize e-mail to distribute the discussion material. There are well over 1,000 legal list servers on virtually
every topic of interest to attorneys; the number grows substantially every month.
4. OnLine tasks
Covering all potential tasks which might face OnLine in preparing for this case is obviously beyond the scope of this
article. Rather, we will concentrate on highlights which are both useful and which illustrate use of Internet resources.
Litigator finds that he needs to quickly review recent Federal cases on the law of subrogation. Starting with the Rutgers site earlier discussed, Litigator jumps to top of the Supreme Court site. [Click on the blue highlighted area to view the Cornell U.S. Supreme Court site; click the right mouse button / select back to return to this article].
Litigator quickly scrolls down to the heart of the Supreme Court site shown in Figure C. [Figure C is further down the page
cited in the previous paragraph]. The site maintains various means of locating US Supreme Court decisions for the past five
years. These include a topical index, a basic text search utility, cases arranged by date and various other navigational
devices. However the decisions are located, they are presented in a list form, ready for review or download.
Litigator requests the 'Indexed by Topic' function, then selects the 'Subrogation' topic. The site presents a list of the cases
decided which refer to that topic. To review the case of United States v. California, he clicks on the 'Opinion' button under
the case, which takes him immediately to the text of the opinion. From that point, the File options of Netscape permit
printing the text of the opinion, or downloading the opinion to his local PC hard drive. As OnLine has noted that there is
text he wishes to quote in his brief, he decides to download the opinion to disk; in that form, he can pull the opinion into his
word processor, cut and paste selections from the case to his briefs, etc.
OnLine can, of course, perform term searches through the same body of cases as well. Similar facilities are available for
the various Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals; the Fourth and several other circuit decisions are housed at Emory Law
School. Expect to see the various District Court decisions as well as various state court decisions OnLine as well in due
time.
Litigator is aware of both the benefits and limitations of these facilities. His review of recent North Carolina Supreme
Court and Court of Appeals decisions is performed through the best source and most up to date source available, a bulletin
board maintained by the technical staff at the North Carolina Supreme Court. Robert Northrup, Director of Information
Systems for the North Carolina Appellate Courts, indicates that he plans to expand that site for Internet availability in the
very near future. [Author's note: that site is now up and available for use at
http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/courts/index.html
These sites obviously do not cover the depth and breadth in case research of the 'pay' services such as Westlaw and/or Lexis. Litigator has adopted the habit of doing research on the Internet services then using the information and knowledge learned on those systems to determine what and how much research he needs to do on the 'pay' services. He has found that this can lend substantial efficiency and economy to his use of these services, both cutting down on charges and increasing effectiveness of usage.
Expert witnesses. Mr. Litigator decides that he needs expert witnesses on several subjects, including the brake systems of
vintage Ford Thunderbirds and the construction of floating docks.
List Server Posting. Soon after he obtained Internet access, Litigator became aware through an article in a bar magazine of
'Net-Lawyers', a list server discussion group covering areas of interest to OnLine attorneys. He joined that group by
following instructions to e-mail a message to the list with the word 'subscribe' in the body; as is usually the case, there is
no additional charge for belonging to these lists, though there may be rules with respect to the persons who can join and
appropriate message topics. In reviewing the days 'shipment' of messages (delivered to him through his e-mail box) he
notices a 'thread' (series of related messages on a given topic) in a favorite list server group, which tells him how to join
another group called EXPERTWITNESS. He joins, and shortly thereafter 'posts' a request for experts in both categories
listed above.
E-mail help request. Litigator uses Internet e-mail to request help from two attorneys with whom he is acquainted, one for
death valuation and another who has expertise in automotive cases. The automotive attorney sends back the name of two
experts by return e-mail post, together with an 'attached' brief (in Microsoft Word format) on the subject of brake failure on
a vintage automobile which he had utilized a case several years earlier. Litigator telephones the first suggested expert (who
had no e-mail address) and e-mails the second. He also pulls the WordPerfect document into his Word Processor, which
happened to be WordPerfect, using the standard file conversion features of the program.
Web factual research. Litigator decides to perform research on the vintage Thunderbird. He is acquainted with several web utilities called 'web search engines'; he learned of the Web Crawler at some time previous through reading an article. At that previous time, he took the 'URL' and typed it into the slot at the top of the screen called 'Location'; you will note that location at the top of your browser.
In order to avoid the necessity of remembering and typing these URLs (some of which are much longer than that of Web
Crawler), OnLine always 'bookmarks' resources for later point and click usage. [A site is bookmarked by clicking on the
'Bookmarks' choice on the menu, then clicking 'Add Bookmark', while you are located on the site you wish to save; try that
technique now, and note that the current site is added to your bookmark list].
WebCrawler is set up to support text searches. OnLine enters the terms 'Ford Thunderbird', then requests the results by
clicking on the Search button. WebCrawler returns a list of research sources which have reference to these two terms.
OnLine checks out various of these sites, educating himself as to the various models, and the subtle differences in both
performance, structure and, more directly to the point, parts. He first 'clicks through' the official Ford Motor Company site
to a section focusing on Ford history, reviewing particularly the overview and context for the introduction of the
Thunderbird, along with some full-color images of the automobile. He finds far more relevant detail on a hobbyist-oriented
site called 'Thunderbird - Classic/Vintage', which proves to contain a wealth of information concerning the older vehicles,
learning that, in hobbyist jargon, the 1955-57 T-Birds are referred to as 'classic', while the 1958-1966 versions are
referred to as 'vintage', a distinction which will prove critical in understanding the trade talk he will run across later. He
then delves into the site for more detail, quickly orienting himself toward the concepts he will need to determine whether
the brake failure was provably a matter of wear and tear, a faulty third party part manufactured by a 'classic' car specialist,
or other factor. Probably more to the point, OnLine is able to locate a well-respected Thunderbird expert who lives in the
next state by looking at the 'Vintage Club' list posted within the site. While the expert, who also has a mechanical
background, does not have an e-mail address, OnLine is able to contact him from the telephone information in the listing
and, within the hour, he has engaged this person as one of his expert witnesses. The Thunderbird site is found at
http://www.autopro.com:80/tbird/
5. Summary
These are but a small slice of the potential and continuing uses which counsel might make of the Internet; in fact, Hal
Litigator will continue to use research and e-mail resources of the Internet throughout case preparation for any number of
issues ranging from marine architecture to ABC crowd permit rules. His effective use of the Internet is based on usage and
a knowledge of both the power and limitations of the medium; he always assumes he may be able to find relevant
information on the Internet on any given topic, but is cautious about assuming that what he may find is the last word in a
given subject. By so doing, he assures that he will continue to take full advantage of the growing resources on the Internet in
a reasonable and professionally responsible manner.
Back to William H. Skeels, IV Articles
      |