Technology on Trial
March 28, 2017
Judges, attorneys have mixed views on IT in the courtroom.
James Wick is quoted in this article:
James Wicks, a commercial litigation partner at Uniondale-based Farrell Fritz, has used technology to view exhibits electronically, to create graphics, animations and timelines, for video depositions and to annotate documents.
Wicks has sometimes split the cost of having a technician at trial with the opposing side. He noted, however, that if he wanted to create a time-line or other demonstrative, that it would be at his cost, adding that the use of these technologies can get expensive and therefore always requires a cost-benefit analysis.
“For example, I had a case years ago where we had hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages of time sheets. We were able to create a summary timeline graphic where we could click on a particular date and pull up that time sheet. It was very effective,” Wicks said, noting that in smaller cases, the use of technology may not prove as beneficial.
Wicks believes the days where there was a perception that the use of technology might make a judge or jury believe that one side had more money than the other are gone, at least in business law, because competition among litigation support services has driven prices down.
“I can tell you in business cases, which is what I litigate, that there’s an expectation, I think, that you’ll be using some technology,” Wicks said. “The judges that preside expect it and appreciate it and so do the jurors.”
Wicks added that in business, a lawyer may be perceived as doing his client a disservice if he doesn’t use technology.
To read the full article please download pdf.
Reprinted with permission from Long Island Business News, March 10-16, 2017 issue. Vol. 64 | No. 10
View the PDF