By Gregory A. Dorsey • Posted 10/08/13
As a former software developer, I was once called upon to develop custom software for a law firm in its defense of a multinational corporation involving hundreds, if not thousands, of plaintiffs. When I started practicing law nearly 17 years ago, I presumed law firms—large and small—were similarly implementing technology into their client engagements, even if not to the scale of a law firm representing a major corporate client with billions of dollars at stake. I quickly learned that was not the case. The same holds true today.
I represent individuals and businesses in litigation where the outcome has the potential to bankrupt the client or force the business to close its doors. Such disputes can threaten the very existence of a company, challenge an ongoing business relationship, or present an important point of principal. Whatever the case, and regardless of the amount in controversy, the attorneys at Kelly | Dorsey are required to be well versed in legal technology and its implementation in the courtroom. Indeed, Kelly | Dorsey Associate Darren H. Weiss has even co-authored an article in the Maryland Bar Journal on the topic. See Hon. Lenore R. Gelfman, Darren Weiss, & Carolyn Mech, A Solo Practitioner’s Guide to the Use of Technology in the Courtroom: A View from the Bench, Md. Bar J., May/June 2012, at 43 (provided with the permission of the Maryland State Bar Association).
The benefits of being cognizant of, and conversant in, cutting-edge technology and tools of the trade extend far beyond mere efficiency. For example, I recall representing a construction and remodeling company in a breach of contract action against homeowners who locked the client out of their residence, preventing the completion of a significant remodeling project. During the course of the multi-day jury trial, there were many times I was called upon to provide assistance to opposing counsel in his use of the courtroom technology—often at his request during his examination of a witness or at the request of the trial judge—all while the jury remained observant from the jury box. To the jury I appeared helpful to my adversary, trusted by the judge, and knowledgeable not only of the intimate facts of my client’s case, but also of evolving high-technology courtrooms. I had clearly been there before. The jury returned a verdict in favor of my client.
A more recent example that comes to mind is my firm’s use of technology throughout the course of an extended multi-million dollar breach of contract and fraud litigation. During the course of motions hearings and a scheduled two-week jury trial, my firm’s expert use of courtroom technology—from digitally manipulating exhibits for presentation purposes to providing multimedia demonstrations in aid of argument—not only compelled opposing counsel to ensure he was equally versed in such technology, but demonstrated to the jury competence, professionalism, and adeptness. Again, judgment was rendered in favor of our clients.
Of course, the use of technology—whether inside or outside of the courtroom—will never guarantee success for our clients. However, there is no question that technological proficiency and responsible use of that technology demonstrates both to clients, other attorneys, and courts of law that counsel is prepared, organized, and equipped with the skills to achieve results. Let the attorneys at Kelly|Dorsey show you how they use technology to their advantage in the course of advancing or defending your legal rights.
If you would like to learn more about Kelly | Dorsey’s business, litigation, and alternative dispute resolution practice groups, please fill out and send the Contact Form on our Contact Us page. You can also connect with Kelly | Dorsey through Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, and Google+. Business and Litigation Practice groups Chair Gregory A. Dorsey can be reached via e-mail email@example.com or telephone at (410) 740-8750.