Social Signals Rank Highest for Best Google Search Results

A new study from Searchmetrics shows that of 44 ranking factors, social signals account for 7 of the top 8 most highly associated with Google search results,  The chart below shows the ranking importance for the top 22:
google search ranking factors in the US

The top findings from the Searchmetrics Ranking Factors-Rank Correlation Study show the following SEO trends for 2013:

  • Keyword domains and keyword links are not nearly as relevant as in the past
  • Social signals directly correlate with better rankings
  • Good content continues to be key
  • The number of backlinks continues to be of high importance
  • On-page technology (URL length, keywords in page titles, page descriptions, H1 and H2 tags, etc.) is still an important basic

This latest study makes it clear that you can no longer ignore social media if you are interested in showing up in Google search results.

Article By:

 of

Using Technological Innovation to Enhance Law Department Management

180x180-w-tagline

In today’s law firm environment, legal marketing professionals hold the dual role of preserving value as well as creating value. One of the best ways of accomplishing both goals is to take full advantage of technological innovation while minding the inevitable limitations that exist in law firms, such as budget constraints and reluctance to accept technological advancement. From website development to social networking, the right technological tools can steer law firms to align their system capabilities with their clientele needs. By taking advantage of such tools as analytics and systems of engagement that raise the level of awareness, legal marketers can justify technology budgets and get shareholders and partners on board with the tech express.

Steps Legal Marketers Must Take Before Investing in Technology

Analytics: Measuring Data Integrity Holistically to Determine Performance Impact

Legal marketers must ensure that vendors provide detailed, structured analytics for marketing optimization purposes. Analytics deliver the data while metrics and dimensions can be queried together to measure performance. Analytics as a system allow legal marketers to analyze data and determine whether the technology garners a return on investment. In addition, the description of performance guides legal marketers in the decision-making process to predict outcomes and drive efficiency. It remains up to legal marketers to ensure that analytics are providing valuable knowledge and being used to improve business performance as well to justify investment into technology.

Analytics only fulfill their purpose when providing holistic and accurate data. They must present a clear understanding of a complex structure, likened to looking at the world through a keyhole. No one metric will account for all of the data in totality so the goal is to view the data holistically to get the full story. Moreover, data integrity remains essential to the equation as far as the quantification, quality and presentation of analytics.

Analytics are comprised of a two-prong system: how comprehensive the data serves as only the start—the challenging part is for the legal marketer to use context to asses and model the data. Because the function of marketing metrics is ultimately to gauge performance impact, every metric should remained nuanced enough from which to derive a take-away point. For instance, a metric may show that one legal project took two months to close while another similar project took two years to close. Because no two matters are the same, the metric and dimension should be nuanced enough to present variables accounting for the disparity. In its barest terms, the legal marketer wants to determine that she spent x time and resources for a y amount of value.

Business Intelligence and Systems of Engagement

Legal marketers must also select technologies that commoditize knowledge work, which serves as among the most strategic activities taking place within the law firm. IT systems in the past, known as systems of record, have focused heavily on technological features and processes rather than users. These systems are used in everyday business operations to compile, automate and store data and, while important, are not conducive to collaborative work amongst attorneys or interaction with clients.

In contrast, emerging IT systems called systems of engagement, which are the future of technology-led business innovation, raise capability to a higher order and allow for immediate and streamlined communication. As such, systems of record host processes while systems of engagement touch people and drive more interaction among colleagues on top of just maintaining data. This is not to say that systems of records are rendered obsolete—in fact, by using both systems of record and engagement to monitor transaction and interact with the data respectively, the full value of technology is tapped. Hence, legal marketers can take all of the data coming from the interactions mixed with the meaning derived from translating the data into insights to product true innovation.

 

The information in the this article was gathered from the Inside Counsel’s 2013 SuperConference from presentations by:  David Cambria, Senior Director, Enterprise Information Management, CDW; Mike McGuire, Corporate In-House Counsel, Axiom; and Pamela Woldow, Partner & General Counsel, Edge International.

Article By:

 of

The Value of Having an In-House E-Discovery Process

Marcus Evans

Having an end-to-end process in place for electronic discovery (e-discovery) and litigation management is critical, says Raquel Tamez, Principal/Deputy General Counsel, Litigation, Computer Sciences Corporation and speaker at the marcus evans Chief Litigation Officer Summit Fall 2013. Even if outside counsel and multiple service providers are involved, Chief Litigation Officers (CLOs) need to have a process, identify the various stakeholders, and determine and define their respective responsibilities. According to Tamez, that is the best approach to take.

How should CLOs approach e-discovery?

It is different for each company. There are opportunities for cost savings if companies can bring some of the data collection and processing in-house, but not every company has that capability or the appropriate litigation profile to justify the time and expense of doing so.

Nevertheless, CLOs should have a “process” in place whether entirely outsourced or entirely in-house or a hybrid. Having an end-to-end process for e-discovery is critical. CLOs may be inclined to simply hand-off the e-discovery function to its outside counsel who, in turn, utilize various service providers with different data processing capabilities and various document review platforms. There is a lack of efficiency and cost effectiveness with this hand-off approach. The better approach is for the CLO to have a robust, documented, end-to-end e-discovery process and “playbook” that outside counsel is required to follow. The process, ideally, should identify the CLO’s exclusive, full-service e-discovery service provider or at a minimum a list of service providers that have been vetted by the CLO’s legal staff and the company’s IT personnel. CLOs will, necessarily, have to invest time and some money to create and build out the process. These front-end costs will result in significant cost-savings in the long-run.

What is the next step? How does this lead to cost savings?

The key to cost-savings here is to have a repeatable process and not an ad hoc approach where the wheel must be reinvented every time a piece of litigation or an investigation is initiated. If the e-discovery process is well-executed, all relevant stakeholders, will know what to do, when do it, how to do it, and who to go to if any doubt. The transparency in the process leads to defensibility and ultimately, savings in both time and monies.

 of

A Review of Legal Technology and Innovation: Leopard Solutions

computer broadcast world

In review is Leopard Solutions, provider of an online legal technology service that compiles, tracks and delivers a wealth of information about law firms and attorneys across the country.

History Behind the Technology and Origins in Legal Recruiting

Leopard Solutions is the brainchild of Laura Leopard, an actress turned legal recruiter turned Founder and CEO of the Leopard Solutions system. The origin of the system initially occurred in the midst of her acting career, when Ms. Leopard worked as a cold caller for legal recruiters and discovered a severe lack of accessible information. At that point, Ms. Leopard first conceived of the Leopard List, the premier informational database offered by Leopard Solutions, now one among other such systems featured. From a simple Excel spreadsheet that contained the Leopard List, Ms. Leopard eventually developed an innovative online resource for the legal community.

Intelligence Programs and Strategic Data Directed Towards the Legal Community

Leopard Solutions offers comprehensive and strategic data captured in various intelligence programs directed towards different sectors of the legal community, including law firms, legal recruiters and law students. These are ‘live databases” which are updated on a weekly basis. Firmscape, their law firm intelligence program, is updated any time new data becomes available. For instance, if new salary information becomes available or a new office is opened, it can be immediately added to the program.)  On the day I spoke with Ms. Leopard, the system monitored a total of 183 new associates joining law firms, 71 practitioners being promoted to partner status and 86 partners leaving their firm positions.

The Leopard List: Attorney Database & Lateral Recruitment Tool

Among these databases is the Leopard List, which houses information across the spectrum of attorneys, including partners, counsels and associates, from over 1600 law firms in 23 U.S. markets. Attorneys can be searched by their practice area, JD year, law school, states admitted to practice and more. Moreover, a click of the practitioner’s name conveniently yields his or her law firm attorney profile and users can search these biographies by keyword. The Leopard staff is assigned to read and manually peruse each individual law firm attorney profile to verify all of the information stored in the system. This “personal touch” extends to any gaps of information– Leopard has been known to reach out to the firm for details if need be.

In addition, the system reveals an attorney’s  “professional history” that tracks any change in the practitioner’s status, including lateral employment moves and promotions within the firm, moves from previous law firms and name changes. In other words, no need for a Google search– Leopard hand-delivers the nuts and bolts.

Firmscape: Law Firm Intelligence

Firmscape serves as another example of Leopard successfully consolidating and analyzing information, in this instance by capturing a big-picture view of the legal industry. To say Firmscape collects a snapshot of the legal industry is an understatement- rather, this system showcases the evolution of the industry. Perhaps most helpful to legal recruiters, Firmscape sizes up the top law firms in the country and their starting salaries, practitioner lateral moves, and growth in practicing areas, among other aspects. Like the Leopard List, Firmscape is easily navigated and can be mined for reports on specific variables, such as practice area, specialty, firm history and promotion record.

Other Intelligence Programs for the Legal Community

Other systems include Leopard Reporting, which gives an overview of all the law firms in the system (currently 1666); Leopard Job Search, which monitors 655 law firms twice a day for job postings; Leopard Solutions for Law School, which offers law firm resource tools to law students; the Leopard Job Board, geared towards both legal recruiters and applicants; and Leopard Solutions Hot Spot, which aggregates all national news available for the firms amassed in the database.

A Technological Model for Timely, Interactive and Dynamic Data

Perhaps most notable about Leopard Solutions is the absence of any parallel technology in the market. The company’s model of keeping law firms under its radar and going to long lengths to obtain searchable data distinguishes it from other models which rely exclusively on web crawlers or press for information. In addition, Leopard’s model reaches far beyond displaying data but permits the viewer to target and interact with the information though reports and keyword searches. Finally, the company aims to stay reactionary, current and attuned with the needs of the market. Ms. Leopard often relies on clients’ counsel to further develop their system. A cutting-edge product, Leopard Solutions keeps up with the fluctuating legal landscape with its efficiency and accuracy.

Growing Client Accounts With Tablet Apps (TBC)

phones, multiple

“We Need An App!” This has been a consistent cry from partners in law firms around the world over the past few years. Unfortunately those who were tasked with this jumped a little too quickly without understanding their audience and the purpose of an app. In most cases, apps were built that essentially reflected content that could be found on the corporate website and were launched in haste – without being updated regularly or adding any value. These apps were not ‘sticky’ and gave the target audience little reason to return. The results of these experiments were costly apps that failed to truly connect with the targeted audience. As business development tools these were a fail, but at least these initiatives were a start in exploring how firms can adopt mobile as tool and channel. But how can law firms harness the power of the tablet?

The growth in tablet technology for the enterprise is truly explosive. Research by digital ad agency Vertic, predicts enterprise tablet adoption will grow by almost 50% per year and by 2015 mobile app development projects will outnumber native PC projects by a ratio of 4-to-1! These are facts that can’t be ignored by professional services firms and mobile is now well and truly on the agenda. However, most firms’ initial mobile strategies have been focused on client adoption, when the focus should be business adoption. Your most captive and receptive audience is your own workforce, let’s equip them with mobile tools that empower them to engage effectively with clients and generate new revenue opportunities.

Law firms produce substantial amounts of marketing and business development collateral but much of it is inaccessible, out of date or not in easily consumed formats. Tablet technology is rapidly changing how proprietary marketing and business development content is shared and leveraged to internal and external audiences.

Forward thinking firms have recognized this and are placing mobile high on the agenda and revising their strategies, or formulating one if they haven’t before. One part of the puzzle is the device strategy – how to secure, deploy and manage smartphones and tablets (both personal and firm-owned devices). The other piece is the application strategy – deciding on the enterprise apps that are most relevant for achieving the firm’s objectives and what mobile platforms these need to cater for (iOS, Blackberry, Android etc.). IT teams will push for firms to adopt enterprise apps that mobilize internal processes and improving efficiencies. However, there should be a higher priority whilst the competitive window is open, which is using enterprise tablet apps as tools for growing client accounts and acquiring new clients. We are calling this ‘business development enablement’.

In the age of the internet, most firm-wide marketing collateral is stored as electronic files in difficult to access and immobilized intranets or file storage systems. These are hardly encouraging for an attorney who is trying to prepare and rally their team for a big business development meeting with a key client. If they are out of the office it is even more difficult to access and share the right information. Many still use their own personal decks or carry with them the printed materials that the firm has produced –  which is often out of date the day. Even though many partners prefer print, they are high cost and low usage, or ‘low viewage’ to be more accurate. Your target audiences are now much more likely to consume content on a mobile device than print. Your firm’s business development and marketing content – brochures, case studies, client briefings, press releases and deal memorandums– must be mobilized. Fee earners need to be able to access collateral quickly and easily on the devices where they are both consuming and sharing marketing content.

So why should your firm deploy an enterprise tablet apps for marketing and business development enablement?

Fee earners can access knowledge outside their area of expertise

Most fee earners are experts in a particular area of the law and may not be able to confidently convey the firm’s experience or track record in other areas, where potential opportunities may arise within an existing client. A tablet app empowers a fee earner to quickly access relevant collateral with a couple of swipes, so opportunities are captured at the time they arise.

Have everyone singing from the same hymn sheet

Using a centrally managed and distributed app ensures the whole client facing organization is using consistent and up-to-date collateral that has been made available by marketing, business development and knowledge teams.

A Branded Experience

Your firm-branded app will produce a positive and focused brand experience for both user and client. An app is a concentrated place with no distractions and also brings stagnant collateral to life by giving it an extra dimension that cannot be achieved using printed or static web pages.

Access marketing or business development collateral, anywhere, any time

An enterprise app for business development can store and present any digital asset that the firm has produced. Documents, presentations, video and audio can all be consumed, shared and even presented over a coffee or on a screen, in a client-facing meeting. A tablet enterprise app with a well design user experiences also requires little or no training for fee earners and business development teams, meaning user adoption is rapid.

Collaboration around clients, matters and opportunities

Apps can be rolled out to multiple devices across the firm, allowing fee earners and business development teams to all share and collaborate around client meetings and opportunities.

Gain a competitive advantage through innovation

Impression is everything. Using the latest mobile technology and software can enhance the face-to-face engagement with a client or prospect and subsequently improves the perception of, not just the individual expert, but the firm itself. Even though a firm’s reputation may rely on history, using a tablet and enterprise app to market, demonstrates that a firm is progressive, innovative and employing technology to deliver results.

Are you behind or ahead?

There is a vast contrast between where law firm are with their mobile strategy. One major  AMLAW 100 firm purchased iPads for its entire 1,000 strong workforce back in 2011. This was bold move back then but this was real foresight, as the firm now understands the usage of these devices for the enterprise, and not to just be more efficient, but to consume and share information and knowledge both internally and externally. For those of you who are reading this and are a little concerned that your firm is behind in its pursuit of mobile, consider this – I met with a senior marketing executive of a Global AMLaw20 firm in the latter half of 2012. When I asked if they were considering their mobile strategy, I was told in no uncertain terms “that we are at least three years away from looking into mobile”.

Article By:

 of

Avvo Releases Online Marketing Playbook for Attorneys

consumer_colorlogoWhitepaper provides practical legal marketing guidance for solo to mid-sized firm lawyers

Seattle, Wash – May 16, 2013 – Avvo, Inc., the web’s largest expert-only legal Q&A forum, directory and legal marketplace (http://www.avvo.com/), today released The Online Marketing Playbook for Attorneys: A practical guide to the digital tools and strategies that can grow your practice. The more than 30 page whitepaper offers solo to mid-sized  firm lawyers a thorough and step-by-step resource to navigate the complexities of online marketing, including how to define a target audience, website design best practices, search engine optimization and how to choose the right marketing channels.

“This whitepaper covers the legal marketing topics that attorneys have asked us about the most, including the ins and outs of Google Authorship, keyword targeting and mobile website optimization,” said Leigh McMillan, vice president of marketing, Avvo, Inc. “The playbook, which includes content relevant for beginners to seasoned legal marketers, is a follow-up to our recent 4th annual Lawyernomics conference, where a record number of attendees learned how to grow their practice online from experts at companies such as Twitter, Yelp and Avvo, as well as from marketing-savvy attorneys.”

Availability

The free whitepaper is available for download here: http://ignite.avvo.com/whitepapers/attorney-online-marketing-strategy-ebook.html

About Avvo, Inc.

Avvo is the web’s largest legal Q&A forum, directory and legal marketplace (http://www.avvo.com), connecting hundreds of thousands of consumers and lawyers every month.  In Avvo’s Q&A forum consumers can get free legal advice 24/7 from more than 125,000 participating lawyers, and Avvo’s directory provides comprehensive profiles, client reviews, peer endorsements and the industry-recognized Avvo Rating for more than 95 percent of all lawyers in the U.S.  The Avvo Legal Marketplace, currently available for traffic tickets and divorce cases, revolutionizes how consumers find and hire an attorney. In addition, Avvo helps lawyers grow their business with Avvo Ignite, a cloud-based marketing platform and website solution designed specifically for attorneys. Founded in 2007, Avvo is privately held with funding from Benchmark Capital, DAG Ventures and Ignition Partners.

Avvo and Avvo Ignite are trademarks or registered trademarks of Avvo, Inc.

 

Improving the Return on Investment of Your Legal Marketing Dollars

consumer_colorlogo

At the end of April, Avvo hosted its “Lawyernomics” conference.  Some 300 lawyers from across the country assembled at the Bellagio in Las Vegas to hear from speakers from a variety of disciplines and communications platforms (including representatives from Avvo, Twitter and Yelp).  Although a wealth of information was shared, there was a broad, tactical theme that permeated the entire program:  Improving return on a firm’s business development investment.

Choosing Your Investments Wisely

For an industry that pays so much to get in front of consumers, lawyers are often poor at converting interested consumers into paying clients.  Similarly, even those firms investing heavily in numerous forms of advertising – online and traditional – usually don’t have a clear picture of which of those advertising channels are effective.  They’re left to “go by gut” when choosing whether to continue investing in an advertising campaign.

The lowest-hanging fruit in this area is establishing systems for following up with client inquiries.  It should be simple, but far too many firms don’t have adequate processes in place to ensure that consumer inquiries are immediately followed up on.  With the likelihood of making contact with someone who leaves a message plummeting within minutes of their reaching out, establishing a follow-up system is critical.  Doing so involves a mix of “rules and tools.”  The “rules” are business processes established and monitored to ensure that phones are covered, calls are answered, and inquiries get an immediate response.  The “tools” can be as simple as an excel spreadsheet tracking inbound inquiries to as sophisticated as powerful Customer Relationship Management (“CRM”) systems such as Salesforce or Avvo Ignite.

Measuring Marketing Channel’s Effectiveness

Having a good system for contact and customer management is key to calculating marketing channel effectiveness. Used diligently, the CRM tools of such a system will tell the firm where each inquiry originates from (its website, a search marketing campaign, the Yellow Pages, etc.). Over a period of months, the firm will then be able to tell the rate at which those inquiries turn into actual clients. This may show, for example, that while a conference sponsorship is driving a lot of calls, such contacts become clients at a far lower rate than the smaller number of calls and appointments generated from a webinar. When all marketing platforms are matched up, the most successful ones should stand out for future business development projections and budget reviews.

By layering the cost of these marketing initiatives on the number of clients generated, a firm can get a very clear picture of the return on investment of each channel (i.e., what it costs to generate a client).  That information allows the firm to identify those channels where it can profitably increase its marketing investment – and those that it needs to cut loose.

Article By:

 of

Twitter: Little Statements with Big Consequences for Companies

McBrayer

Twitter is under attack. In recent months, accounts belonging to media giants CBS, BBC, and NPR have all been temporarily taken over by hackers. The Associated Press is the most recent victim. On April 23, 2013, a false statement about explosions at the White House and the President being injured sent shock waves through the Twitter-sphere. The real surprise is the effect the single tweet had in the real world: the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index dropped so sharply moments after the frightening tweet that $136 billion in market value was wiped out. While the hacking of these massive media outlets make headlines, everyday businesses are not safe from the threat, either. In February of this year, a hacker changed the @BurgerKing feed to resemble that of McDonald’s, putting the McDonald’s logo in place of Burger King’s. The hackers posted offensive claims about company employees and practices. If accounts belonging to well-established companies like these are vulnerable, so is yours. If a tweet can have a profound impact on the nation’s stock market, imagine what an ill-contrived tweet could do to your business.

Business owners may have the knee-jerk reaction to delete their Twitter account, but despite the recent blemishes to its security, Twitter remains one of the most important social media sites out there. Just recently, the Securities Exchange Commission made clear that companies could use social media like Twitter when announcing key information in compliance with Regulation Fair Disclosure. Twitter is not just a marketing or PR tool—Twitter is business. And you should never turn your back on existing business. So instead of hanging up your hashtags, consider some steps that can make your Twitter account safer.

Limit Access

Not every employee should have access to the company’s Twitter account. In fact, hardly anyone should, except a few designated employees like the marketing director or business owner. While those with access may never do anything harmful to the account, the more people who have the log-in information, the more likely it is to fall into the wrong hands.

Create a strong password

I know, you already have too many passwords to remember. But a creative password is your best defense against someone seeking to break into your account. Employers should, at minimum, have unique passwords for their most commonly used media sites; please do not use the same word for your Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter account. Once a hacker figures it out, they have control of your entire social media presence.

When creating a password, avoid using anything that would be too common. “Password,” “1234,” or the business’s name should never be the only thing standing between you and a hacker. The longer the password, the better. Use a mix of uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols.

Article By:

 of

Making Copies! The Fourth Circuit Defines Taxable Costs Associated With eDiscovery

GT Law

Can this happen to your client? Your client gets sued, is forced to spend over $100,000 on eDiscovery despite you making all the right objections, you deliver a clean victory on dispositive motions and the District Court awards costs of … $200. Here is what happened in the Fourth Circuit and what you can do to help your clients avoid the same fate:

The Fourth Circuit just decided the scope of taxable eDiscovery costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4) in Country Vintner of North Carolina v. E. & J. Gallo Winery, Inc., __ F.3d __, 2013 WL 1789728 (4th Cir. Apr. 29, 2013). Section 1920(4) allows the District Courts to “tax as costs … [f]ees for exemplification and the costs of making copies of any materials where the copies are necessarily obtained for use in the case.” Id.   Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1), the cost of making copies “should be allowed to the prevailing party.” As an initial matter, the Fourth Circuit concluded that section 1920(4) applies to the costs related to documents produced in discovery – not just used at trial or in connection with a dispositive motion. Country Vintner, 2013 WL 1789728, *7. The Fourth Circuit then examined the meaning of “making copies,” and held that section 1920(4) “limits taxable costs to … converting electronic files to non-editable formats and burning files onto discs.” Id., *9.   In reaching that conclusion, the Fourth Circuit explicitly rejected the argument that “ESI processing costs constitute[d]” “making copies” under Section 1920(4). Id., *7. As a consequence, Appellant Gallo was awarded only $218.59 out of the $111,047.75 in eDiscovery costs it sought.

What does that mean?

Appellant Gallo sought more than $70,000 for “indexing” and “flattening” ESI – processing methods that extracted irrelevant files and duplicates, made the remaining data searchable, and organized the data; spent more than $15,000 extracting and organizing metadata and preparing it for review; less than $100 on electronic bates numbering; and over $20,000 on quality assurance and preparing the document production. None of these costs were taxed. Instead, Gallo received only $178.59 to convert certain native files into TIFF and PDF format and another $40 to burn images onto CDs. While the documents could not be “copied” without all of the processing that preceded it, such processing costs will not be shifted through a bill of costs. Id., *8-9 (citing Race Tires Am.supra n. 2, 674 F.3d at 169).

What lessons can we learn?

The Fourth Circuit seems to recognize the harshness of its ruling and provides two helpful clues for future litigants seeking to manage their eDiscovery burdens. The court first observes: “That Gallo will recover only a fraction of its litigation costs under our approach does not establish that our reading of the statute is too grudging in an age of unforeseen innovations in litigation-support technology.” Id., *9. Then, the court leaves open the question of whether the allowable costs of production might include the processing costs had the parties “clearly agreed to the production of ESI on a particular database or in native file format.” Id., *9 n. 20 (citing In re Ricoh Co., Ltd. Patent Litig., 661 F.3d 1361, 1365–66 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (holding that $234,702.43 for the cost of an electronic database which the parties agreed to use for document production would have been allowed, but for the parties’ agreement to share costs)). Next, the court points out that, where discovery costs are excessive, the responding party can move for a protective order and, if that motion is denied (as Gallo’s motion was denied), then the responding party “can appeal that decision” Id., *9; id., *9 n. 21 (noting that Gallo had not appealed the denial of its motion for protective order).

Lesson #1: While it is not entirely clear how the parties’ agreement to utilize a particular format or database alters the conclusion that processing is not “making copies,” the Fourth Circuit seems to suggest that it might.  So, any party seeking to shift its eDiscovery costs should consider agreeing with the other side regarding the format or database to be used to handle the parties’ productions.

Lesson #2: While it is not entirely clear whether parties are entitled to file an interlocutory appeal with respect to the denial of a motion for protective order, the Fourth Circuit seems to urge parties to do so. 4  Either the court is encouraging interlocutory appeals before the ESI expenses are incurred, or the court is suggesting that a final judgment (for either party) does not moot the trial court’s refusal to shift pre-trial eDiscovery costs.


 1 Because appellant Gallo’s eDiscovery costs neither involved authentication of public records nor demonstrative exhibits – two potential meanings of exemplification – the Fourth Circuit did not define the meaning of exemplification in this case.  Country Vintner, 2013 WL 1789728, *10.

 2 In reaching that conclusion, the Fourth Circuit aligned itself with the Third Circuit’s approach in Race Tires Am., Inc. v. Hoosier Racing Tire Corp., 674 F.3d 158 (3d Cir. 2012).

 In distinguishing In re Ricoh Co., the Third Circuit explained: “we have acknowledged that the costs of conversion to an agreed-upon production format are taxable as the functional equivalent of ‘making copies.’ It is all the other activity, such as searching, culling and deduplication that are not taxable.” Race Tires Am., 674 F.3d at 171 n.11.

 On one hand, discovery orders against a party are not immediately appealable. Seee.g.Nicholas v. Wyndham Int’l, Inc., 373 F.3d 537 (4th Cir. 2004). On the other hand, most discovery orders will be moot by the time a final order is entered. See, e.g., E. H. Reise v. Bd. of Regents of the Univ. of Wisconsin, Sys., 957 F.2d 293, 295-296 (7th Cir. 1992).

Article By:

 of

Is Your Smartphone Costing You Thousands Each Month in Billable Time?

Client Logo

Back in the early 2000s, I had a friend who’d recently purchased a new-fangled flip-style mobile phone. Oohing and aahing, I asked if he loved all the things he could do with it. “I can play games on it and check the news, stock prices, sports scores, and weather” he lamented, “but I can’t figure out how to just make a phone call.”

Flash forward a decade to the ubiquity of smartphones, with their sleek design, shiny screens, and bright, colorful icons. Nearly every lawyer, young and old, has one. Newsletters and blog posts extol the smartphone’s positive impact on a lawyer’s productivity. New apps appear in the store almost daily to assist with note taking, dictation, file creation and storage, calendaring, practice management, and time tracking, to name a few. Bar associations and professional organizations host conferences, meetings, and CLEs to offer practical training on making the most of tablets, smartphones and cloud services.

Despite this, when lawyers use their smartphones for the most basic of tasks – talking on the phone – they struggle with capturing and billing that time. Are you one of them? Ask yourself the following questions:

  • Do I spend a lot of billable time on the phone?
    Surveys show that lawyers spend nearly one-quarter of their billable time on the phone, with over 70% percent of that time spent on the desktop phone in their office.
  • Do I use my mobile smartphone for work calls when I’m out of the office?
    If you do, you’re not alone. Lawyers report spending an average of 23 percent of their time working outside the office, during which time over 85 percent make work calls on smartphones.
  • Have I struggled finding good smartphone apps to use for work?
    Although a majority of lawyers responding to the 2012 ABA Legal Technology Survey use their own personal devices for work (making them part of the growing Bring Your Own Device, or BYOD, movement), two-thirds have never downloaded a general business app, while even fewer have tried a legal-specific smartphone app.
  • Have I ever forgotten or been unable to bill my time spent on the phone?
    You’re human and you’re busy, so you’re probably like most lawyers, who estimate that they lose a conservative five billable hours related to phone calls each month. Some of these hours are for forgotten, undocumented, or untimed calls. Others come from time spent reconstructing the call history for billing purposes, an arduous and inaccurate task.

If you answered yes to these questions, then that ubiquitous productivity tool – your smartphone – may make you more productive but still not help your bottom line. At an average hourly billable rate of $250, an office of four lawyers stands to lose nearly $5,000 every month, just on billable phone time.

With numbers like these, it’s never been more important that attorneys have access to timekeeping solutions that make it simple to track billable hours while on the phone. There are many time-trackers on the market, but common complaints about them include:

  • They’re too complex and full of bells and whistles that I will never use” (just like my friend with the fancy new flip phone).
  • “They require the use of a timer, which I often forget to start and stop.”
  • “They don’t capture time on the desktop phone, where I make the majority of my calls.”
  • “There’s too much manual entry required to create detailed records. Postponing the entry does nothing to alleviate the chore of billing reconciliation at the end of the month.”

When evaluating the options, consider these requirements:

  • Choose a solution that’s so simple, compliance is a snap.
    Look for a solution that is compatible with both mobile and desktop phones. From here, you can easily capture the call details and duration as it happens, no matter which device you’re using. In seconds, you can ensure that every minute spent on the phone is billed.
  • Simplify the billing reconciliation process with 24×7 access to the captured call data.
    A worthwhile solution will reclaim the hours previously spent digging through voicemail, paper phone messages, calendar appointments, and mobile call logs to reconstruct billable phone time. The internet is the perfect platform for the billing staff to gain access to captured call data from any browser whenever and wherever needed.
  • Impress your clients with descriptive, auditable billing records.
    Capturing comprehensive call details as they happen will improve your billing accuracy and show your clients exactly what they’re paying for. The more detail you can provide, the more they will trust your records, and the more likely you will be to collect on each invoice. Greater detail will help speed up your billing reconciliation time as well.
  • Minimize training time and increase usage by ensuring that the app is virtually identical on any device.
    If the process of capturing call information is the same on both office and mobile phones, it will quickly become a habit, no matter which device is in use. Consolidating the records generated from every device in a single, intuitive place online will help billing staff easily export and create line items for invoices.

While many time-trackers offer bells and whistles that sound great on paper, their complexity leaves many lawyers feeling like my friend who couldn’t figure out how to make a call on his new flip phone. Focus on simplicity to find a telephone timekeeping solution that you’ll actually use. An app that works automatically on any device will eliminate lost revenue for billable phone time, provide an audit trail for your clients, and allow your lawyers to be both productive and profitable.

Article By:

 of