Battle of the Smartphones: iPhone v. Android | Legal Talk Network

Battle of the Smartphones: iPhone v. Android

Battle of the Smartphones: iPhone v. Android

There is an ongoing  debate in the legal community about whether the iPhone or the Android is best for attorneys and their practices.  Attorneys and co-hosts Bob Ambrogi and J. Craig Williams welcomeAttorney Richard M. Georges, blogger for FutureLawyer and Attorney Jeff Richardson, from Adams and Reese LLP and blogger for iPhone J.D., to take the gloves off on Lawyer2Lawyer about the pros and cons of each, look at the best applications for attorneys and security issues surrounding smartphones.


Related articles

 

NYLJ: OCA Contacts Unions On Feasibility of Furloughs

Court administrators said yesterday they are contacting union leaders to see whether furloughs are worth exploring as a way of making up part of $170 million in cuts being imposed on the Judiciary. “Furloughs are a possibility but they have to be negotiated,” Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman said.

 

NYLJ: ‘Hundreds’ of Layoffs Loom as Judiciary Prepares to Slash Another $70 Million

Read entire report in NYLJ.

Cortland County Supreme Court Justice Philip R. Rumsey, the president of the Association of Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, said the courts are being ill-used by the governor and the Legislature.

“The other two branches are requiring the courts to establish ‘worthy programs,’ such as the mandatory settlement conferences in foreclosure cases,” Justice Rumsey said. “But then they are not providing the resources to do what they have required.”

Related articles

 

PLI Live Seminars – Scared and Alone: Representing Unaccompanied Children in Immigration Proceedings (FREE Audio-only)

Scared and Alone: Representing Unaccompanied Children in Immigration Proceedings (FREE Audio-only) Webcast Mar. 30, 2011 1:00 PM Eastern

March 30, 2011, 1:00 pm – 2:00 pm (E.D.T.)
Each year, thousands of children travel alone to the United States.  Some are the victims of abuse or persecution, others of human trafficking or forced prostitution.  Some are placed into the custody of the U.S. government, others enter undetected.  All of them are in need of legal assistance to navigate the immigration proceedings. Please join Diana Castañeda, National Legal Services Director at Kids in Need of Defense (KIND), and Noël L. Young, an associate at Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP and KIND pro bono attorney, for a free One-Hour Briefing on Representing Unaccompanied Minors and learn how you, too, can help.
Topics to be addressed include:
Definition of Unaccompanied Alien Children
Forms of immigration relief available for UACs
Practice tips for representing children, including ethical considerations
Attorneys of all backgrounds, expertise, and experience are welcome.Click here for more information.

 

NYSBA Pro Bono: Free Criminal Law CLE Program

Friday, June 17, 2011

Staying Ahead of the Curve: What Every Criminal Defense Lawyer Needs to Know

Free Criminal Law CLE Program for Public Defenders, Conflict Defenders and Assigned Counsel
7 MCLE Credits (6.0 Professional Practice and or Skills; 1.0 Ethics)

Click here for the Program Agenda and On-Line Registration

 

iPhone J.D.

iPhone J.D. is a site for lawyers using iPhones published by Jeff Richardson, an attorney in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Jeff does a great job of reviewing products related to lawyers’ use of the iPhone.  Here are some recent reviews:
Related articles

 

NYLJ: New Circuit Disciplinary Rule Targets Uncooperative Attorneys

Attorneys charged before a Second Circuit grievance committee who fail to respond to or comply with show cause orders can be deemed to have waived objections on appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled.

In In re Paul E. Warburgh, 07-9056-am, a per curiam opinion issued Tuesday, Judges Jose A. Cabranes, Robert D. Sack and Richard C. Wesley, who make up the circuit’s grievance panel, said the committee was well within its rights to take summary action once Mr. Warburgh had repeatedly refused to respond to the show cause order.
Related articles

 

Spring Cleaning – Gadgets You Can Get Rid Of – NYTimes.com

Gadgets You Should Get Rid Of (or Not) (full text)

By SAM GROBART
Published: March 23, 2011

The common rap against technology is that it leads to an accumulation of devices. But the nature of technology is changing. Fewer products are doing more tasks — all accomplished by countless lines of massless software code.

And so we no longer need to accumulate products. If anything, we can cut down. The question is, Which can be replaced and which are fine, or even preferable, to keep? It is plain as day that paper maps and Rolodexes have given way to their digital counterparts. But what else can you get rid of? Here is a list of common consumer technologies and products and a somewhat opinionated judgment on whether to keep or pitch it.

Related articles

 

Slaw

Slaw is a Canadian co-operative weblog about any and all things legal.

They began in 2005 with a focus on legal information and research, but now consider any aspect of law their meat and drink. Their audience is primarily lawyers, law librarians, and others working in or studying law. Their aim is to share knowledge, offer advice and instruction, and occasionally provoke.

They operate with a core of regular contributors and a penumbra of occasional contributors, as well as a significant roster of regular columnists. They have published literally thousands of entries and have received many more thousands of comments from their readers, who are not only Canadians but can also be found in dozens of countries around the globe. They have been honoured with quite a few awards: the 2008 and 2009 Blawgie for Best Overall Law-Related Blog, the 2009 Clawbie for Best Canadian Law Blog, and the Canadian Association of Law Libraries 2009 Hugh Lawford Award for Excellence in Legal Publishing, to mention a few.

 

NYLJ: Judge Squawks at Town’s Bid To Penalize Chicken Owners

Justice Court of Town of Hyde Park, Dutchess County

Criminal Practice

People v. Mahoney, 10-11-0062

In the instant case, requiring the People to allege and prove that defendants’ animals were not household pets would not unfairly apportion the burden of proof. Quite simply, the People would be required to affirmatively allege and prove beyond a reasonable doubt the negative fact that the animals in question were not household pets. .

The court finds several additional deficiencies in the accusatory instrument. The information does not factually allege the property in question is possessed, occupied, or owned by the defendants, and does not even allege the chickens and other animals belonged to the defendants. It does not state how many chickens were observed, or provide any identifying facts as to what “other animals typically associated with farming and animal husbandry” means in the context of constituting the offense.

Based upon the foregoing facial insufficiencies, defendants’ motion to dismiss on grounds the information is jurisdictionally defective is granted and the information is dismissed.

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,450 other followers

%d bloggers like this: