Total Immersion – Second Quarter Report

Taken from http://ncraonline.org/Careers/totalimmersion/secondquarter/default.htm

The second quarter of the Total Immersion Pilot Program began on June 15.  The students were writing in speeds ranging from approximately 40 to 80 words per minute at the start of the quarter.

Unfortunately, we lost two students in the second quarter.  They voluntarily left the program in July, due to personal reasons.

On July 28, Lynette Eggers, a member of the NCRA Education staff, assumed the instructor position for the pilot.  The students were given a series of speedbuilding tests to determine baseline speeds, and drills were created after each test for the students’ specific errors.  A structured daily assignment sheet was created, which includes a practice log for both StenographU and Realtime Coach. Students are writing between six and eight hours per day.  Included in their daily assignments are speedbuilding practice and drills on vocabulary, numbers, challenging material, word families, and high frequency words.  Additionally, legal terminology dictation and word drills have been developed and structured within the course site.  Legal terminology is also included in short dictations during class time.

Class is held five days per week, with an additional hour-long class at the end of the week.  Fridays are test days.  Attendance remains excellent, with few absences.    Individual coaching sessions are ongoing, with discussions about student progress, writing issues, day-to-day commitments, and anything else that might be relevant to the training.  Various guest speakers have joined the class to share their knowledge, including freelance and official reporters.  Karen Ruud spoke about career path options.  Donna Crane gave the students some Case CATalyst guidance.  Nancy Varallo discussed the steno theory and answered questions.  The students will begin more extensive CaseCATalyst training in the third quarter.

This is an exceptional group of students who possess an intense desire to succeed.  Some of the students have had perfect test scores.  They aren’t surrounded by more advanced students, so they have no preconceived notions about speedbuilding.

The second quarter ended on September 4, and the benchmark goal was 120 words per minute.  Two students are writing at 140 wpm, seven at 120 wpm, three at 100 wpm, and one at 80 wpm.  After a one-week break, classes resume on September 14.  The third quarter ends on December 18, and the benchmark is 160/180 words per minute.

On June 8, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger went on NPR to talk about California’s budget crisis, and while discussing ways to relieve the crisis, Governor Schwarzenegger stated that court reporters are “unnecessary” and “can be cut completely”.  NCRA is outraged that Governor Schwarzenegger claimed that court reporters can be replaced by digital means.

This comment is part of a series of ongoing attacks against court reporters including the Legislative Analyst’s Office’s proposal to  replace official court reporters with digital recording and repeated attempts to do away with the California Court Reporting Board. NCRA supports the court reporters in California who are fighting against these assaults on the profession and hopes that Governor Schwarzenegger and legislators in California will recognize the integral role that court reporters play in the judicial system.

Total Immersion Third Quarter Report

Taken from http://ncraonline.org/Careers/totalimmersion/thirdquarter/default.htm

The third quarter of the Total Immersion Pilot Program began on September 14.  The students were writing in ranges from 80 words per minute (wpm) to 140 wpm at the start of the quarter.  Speedbuilding was the primary focus for this quarter.

In November, a student dropped from the program, citing personal reasons.  There are now 12 students remaining of the original 15 in the program.

Classes continued to be held five days per week, with an extra hour-long class at the end of each week.  Daily assignments were again very structured, and students still spent six to eight hours per day on their machines, utilizing both Stenograph University and Realtime Coach in their practice.  In addition to the speedbuilding drills, students also worked their way through both English grammar and legal terminology power points and dictation.  The students also received basic CaseCATalyst training this quarter, focusing on translation and edit functions, managing job functions, and managing dictionary functions.  Personal coaching sessions are ongoing.

The third quarter ended on December 18, and the benchmark goal was 160/180 words per minute.  Once the final third quarter tests were graded, there were three students writing at 160 wpm, four at 140 wpm, four at 120 wpm, and one at 100 wpm.  After a one-week break, classes resumed on December 28.  The fourth quarter ends on March 19, 2010, and the goal is 225 words per minute.

This article summarizes some of the fundamental e-discovery issues that must be addressed in modern civil litigation.

Today, e-discovery is no longer a best practice; it is the required practice. On December 1, 2006, proposed changes relating to electronically stored information (ESI) in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) took effect. These changes require advanced e-discovery planning in the earliest stages of litigation and will impact almost every case in federal court, and a vast majority of state court cases as state legislatures adopt the new FRCP provisions in full or in part.

While court reporters typically are uninvolved in the discovery process, evidence issues and e-discovery plans are beginning to migrate into depositions, hearings, and the courtroom. Becoming familiar with such recent developments will prove advantageous in the court reporting field as this area continues to develop. This article summarizes some of the fundamental e-discovery issues that must be addressed in modern civil litigation.

LOCATION OF DATA
As electronic discovery becomes routinely accepted in today’s technology marketplace, courts increasingly are demanding counsel to actively engage in the direction and management of the e-discovery process. In one landmark e-discovery case, Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, 2004 WL 1620866 (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2004), the court addressed the general role of counsel in litigation, stating that “[c]ounsel must take affirmative steps to monitor compliance so that all sources of discoverable information are identified and searched.”
This includes assuming responsibility for uncovering relevant documents (with the assistance of an e-discovery expert if necessary), evaluating discovery requests for electronic information and properly preserving this information. It is imperative that all data locations are explored when searching for responsive documents.

PRESERVATION
Although electronic files are easy and convenient to create and duplicate, they also are easy to alter or destroy. For example, simply booting a computer can destroy “slack” and “temporary” files contained on a computer hard drive. Clicking on a file, rather than properly copying it, can change its “last access” date, revealing another innocuous way that computer data can be lost. In most cases, maintaining the status quo without taking proactive measures to save computer evidence will have unfortunate consequences.

As soon as litigation is anticipated, preservation letters should be sent to all parties and nonparties in possession of potentially relevant data. In some cases, securing a preservation order from the court and monitoring compliance thereafter may be required. Finally, practitioners must discuss technical considerations with their client’s information technology manager and electronic discovery expert. In complicated or voluminous discovery cases, requesting that the court appoint a neutral expert may be advisable.

SPOLIATION AND SANCTIONS
When proper preservation procedures are not followed, courts are faced with considering the effect of the spoliation, negligent or intentional destruction of evidence, and whether any sanctions are appropriate. From monetary fines to adverse inferences or dismissal and default judgments, courts have levied a wide range of penalties on parties committing e-evidence spoliation.

CONCLUSION
In today’s high-tech corporate world, litigators, courts, and organizations have clearly acknowledged that technology has a significant role in litigation. With this ever-growing recognition of modern technology trends, all legal professionals – including court reporters – will benefit by understanding the issues, rules, and case law relating to electronically stored information. 

Adam Kish, Esq., is a legal consultant for Kroll Ontrack Inc., a Minnesota-based company specializing in electronic discovery, paper discovery, and computer forensics.