I have a small firm. Occasionally I handle civil cases with hundreds of thousands (and in one case, over a million) documents or pages of documents. Many are electronic, e.g., emails, excel spreadsheets, etc.
I've tried CloudNine and looked at other cloud-based discovery management outfits, but haven't tried any of the others, mainly because of cost. CloudNine was expensive and I was not that impressed, although this was a couple years ago, so they might be better now.
Can anyone recommend an affordable solution for document management that can tag documents / pages, OCR from PDFs reasonably well, and doesn't cost a fortune?
Cities are truly in a no-win situation right now with the domestic battery issue. I actually think the City's plan will work, and I would hope it would get the attention of the legislature and the capitol and spark a special session to address this.
It won't work. A municipality cannot legislate around the Constitution. It is merely a delay tactic which buys Municipal courts time to have to deal with the issue. I guarantee you they have a back up plan for implementation and budgetary considerations. The same thing happened when DUI search warrants came into play – municipalities tried to foist the issue off but later capitulated.
Speaking of profit, how is it a municipal court judge earns $171,539 per year (listed base plus cost of living) for a four-day work week and a district court judge earns $159,561 (less approximately $15,000 per year returned as that judge's portion of his/her PERS)? Where is the work parity and yes, by all means, do those battery DV trials. Salary information is from Transparent Nevada for the curious.
The state statute preempts the field on the issue and a municipality cannot impose a lesser restriction. The municipal court may have separate and independent duty to uphold the state statute over the municipal statute. If the city goes foreword, would not the AG be required to seek something akin to writ of prohibition blocking the city statute?
Any experts on municipal law out there?
Not a good choice for the city. Wait for the fall-out from the public when a DV victim is shot by a gun left in the possession of the Defendant by the new (proposed) city ordinance.
Well either you charge under the city ordinance that arguably wouldn't affect the state prohibition against owning a gun, or you dismiss/plea down to a simple battery since you can't hold the necessary jury trial. No good options.
1:27, NRS 266 doesn't apply to most larger cities. But even without 266, there is no statutory authorization for cities to hold jury trials. That's why LV is trying to establish its own domestic battery ordinance, since a conviction under city code arguably wouldn't trigger NRS 202.360's prohibition against owning a firearm. If that prohibit isn't triggered, then the NV Supreme Court's decision requiring a jury trial doesn't apply. It's not air tight, but the alternative is to dismiss all domestic battery cases since you can't hold the necessary trial and maybe if you ask nicely the DA will take the case in justice court.
There are misdemeanor jury trials in many, many other states. The whining by the prosecutors, both city and county, the muni court judges, and the justice court judges is beneath the dignity of their offices, and certainly beneath the heft of their pay checks. Get over it. You may have to work past 11 am. The Constitution trumps your golf game, shopping schedule, and desire to pick up your kids from school rather than paying a nanny or making them take a bus. Welcome to the real world.
@ 2:46
Even if the City Attorneys and Municipal Judges worked a full day (and many do), it is not practical to have a jury trial for the 5,000 DV/Battery cases filed every year using our present system. You can't take a whole day for one trial that is basically he said/she said with one police officer witness. The jury selection would have to be streamlined, voir dire conducted by the judge, and probably the veniremen would have to sit for a couple of trials. And by the way … none of the LV Municipal Court rooms have a jury box.
3:11 – mmm, why is it that thousands of cities and counties across the country can have jury trials in DV cases, but Nevada somehow is different? And the idea that jurors would have to sit for a couple of trials seems completely unprecedented. Does any other jurisdiction have that system? How would peremptory challenges work? Where's the magic eraser that would make jurors forget the facts from the first trial when hearing the second trial? That is the most asinine idea I've heard to date. As for the muni court jury boxes, make a temporary fix now and then add them to the shiny new courtrooms that are being built in the new muni-courthouse. Or better yet, get rid of muni-courts altogether, send everything to justice court, and end the ridiculously expensive dual-system that we have now.
Then the prosecutors and judges should be requesting additional funding for more prosecutors, judges, and courtrooms, not trying to brush aside the constitution.
I have a small firm. Occasionally I handle civil cases with hundreds of thousands (and in one case, over a million) documents or pages of documents. Many are electronic, e.g., emails, excel spreadsheets, etc.
I've tried CloudNine and looked at other cloud-based discovery management outfits, but haven't tried any of the others, mainly because of cost. CloudNine was expensive and I was not that impressed, although this was a couple years ago, so they might be better now.
Can anyone recommend an affordable solution for document management that can tag documents / pages, OCR from PDFs reasonably well, and doesn't cost a fortune?
Logikull is pretty good.
Try Holo Discovery. They have always done me right and worked within my budget.
I recommend Holo also.
Thanks all.
Cities are truly in a no-win situation right now with the domestic battery issue. I actually think the City's plan will work, and I would hope it would get the attention of the legislature and the capitol and spark a special session to address this.
It won't work. A municipality cannot legislate around the Constitution. It is merely a delay tactic which buys Municipal courts time to have to deal with the issue. I guarantee you they have a back up plan for implementation and budgetary considerations. The same thing happened when DUI search warrants came into play – municipalities tried to foist the issue off but later capitulated.
Jury trials cut into the profit margin of DV cases in the municipal courts.
Speaking of profit, how is it a municipal court judge earns $171,539 per year (listed base plus cost of living) for a four-day work week and a district court judge earns $159,561 (less approximately $15,000 per year returned as that judge's portion of his/her PERS)? Where is the work parity and yes, by all means, do those battery DV trials. Salary information is from Transparent Nevada for the curious.
The state statute preempts the field on the issue and a municipality cannot impose a lesser restriction. The municipal court may have separate and independent duty to uphold the state statute over the municipal statute. If the city goes foreword, would not the AG be required to seek something akin to writ of prohibition blocking the city statute?
Any experts on municipal law out there?
Not a good choice for the city. Wait for the fall-out from the public when a DV victim is shot by a gun left in the possession of the Defendant by the new (proposed) city ordinance.
Well either you charge under the city ordinance that arguably wouldn't affect the state prohibition against owning a gun, or you dismiss/plea down to a simple battery since you can't hold the necessary jury trial. No good options.
Municipalities cannot hold jury trial, per statute…
NRS 266.550
this will be addressed by the legislature next session. Meanwhile, kick the can and avoid the work.
1:27, NRS 266 doesn't apply to most larger cities. But even without 266, there is no statutory authorization for cities to hold jury trials. That's why LV is trying to establish its own domestic battery ordinance, since a conviction under city code arguably wouldn't trigger NRS 202.360's prohibition against owning a firearm. If that prohibit isn't triggered, then the NV Supreme Court's decision requiring a jury trial doesn't apply. It's not air tight, but the alternative is to dismiss all domestic battery cases since you can't hold the necessary trial and maybe if you ask nicely the DA will take the case in justice court.
There are misdemeanor jury trials in many, many other states. The whining by the prosecutors, both city and county, the muni court judges, and the justice court judges is beneath the dignity of their offices, and certainly beneath the heft of their pay checks. Get over it. You may have to work past 11 am. The Constitution trumps your golf game, shopping schedule, and desire to pick up your kids from school rather than paying a nanny or making them take a bus. Welcome to the real world.
@ 2:46
Even if the City Attorneys and Municipal Judges worked a full day (and many do), it is not practical to have a jury trial for the 5,000 DV/Battery cases filed every year using our present system. You can't take a whole day for one trial that is basically he said/she said with one police officer witness. The jury selection would have to be streamlined, voir dire conducted by the judge, and probably the veniremen would have to sit for a couple of trials. And by the way … none of the LV Municipal Court rooms have a jury box.
3:11 – mmm, why is it that thousands of cities and counties across the country can have jury trials in DV cases, but Nevada somehow is different? And the idea that jurors would have to sit for a couple of trials seems completely unprecedented. Does any other jurisdiction have that system? How would peremptory challenges work? Where's the magic eraser that would make jurors forget the facts from the first trial when hearing the second trial? That is the most asinine idea I've heard to date. As for the muni court jury boxes, make a temporary fix now and then add them to the shiny new courtrooms that are being built in the new muni-courthouse. Or better yet, get rid of muni-courts altogether, send everything to justice court, and end the ridiculously expensive dual-system that we have now.
Then the prosecutors and judges should be requesting additional funding for more prosecutors, judges, and courtrooms, not trying to brush aside the constitution.
Hey 3:11, read 3:55P. Cry me a river. That's the job (and most aren't working full days).
"Save the date–the CPK 23rd Annual Party is on Friday, October 11, from 5pm to 11pm!" WOW! Really! Is is going to be at CPK? California Pizza Kitchen?
Went to the CPK party as a student but never as an attorney because it seems creepy to hang out with law students.
Wooderson does not approve of this comment.