Sentences with phrase «based electronic evidence»
In another recent case indicative of the power inherent to the Ringtail platform, Joseph Perkovich, who directs Dorsey's New York based electronic evidence and discovery practice, gathered together more than 270,000 files from 44 e-mail custodians, had them loaded into Ringtail in their native format, and began an expansive document production in the span of a weekend.
http://www.ftitechnology.com/ Not exact matches
For more details — including evidence - based tips for reducing the impact of electronic media — see this Parenting Science review.
For the background literature review and data analyses on which this policy statement and recommendations are based, refer to the accompanying technical report, «SIDS and Other Sleep - Related Infant Deaths: Evidence Base for 2016 Updated Recommendations for a Safe Infant Sleeping Environment,» available in the electronic pages of this issue (www.pediatrics.org/cgi/doi/10.1542/peds.2016-2940).3
A summary of the RCP's submission to the Future Forum workstream on information: · The development of evidence and consensus - based national standards for electronic records is essential.
Critical appraisal skills — including basic numeracy, electronic database searching, and the ability systematically to ask questions of a research study — are prerequisites for competence in evidence based medicine.6 But clinicians need to be able to apply them to real case examples.51
The purpose of this study was to systematically investigate currently available commercial electronic activity monitors to (1) characterize their behavior change techniques, (2) determine the extent to which they include techniques associated with successful outcomes, and (3) compare implementation of several critical techniques to theory - based and evidence - based recommendations.
Although the recent Practice Directions for CPR Pt 31 have provided some guidance on the handling of electronic documents, the rules of best evidence that apply to paper - based evidence are of limited relevance.
He provides advice to clients in the areas of European Union based evidence collection and disclosure, computer - based forensics and electronic data hosting for litigation and regulatory increase.
Author: Lawyer2Lawyer is hosted by J. Craig Williams a lawyer with the Williams Law Firm in Newport Beach, Calif. who also authors May it Please the Court, and Robert Ambrogi, a solo practitioner in Rockport, Mass., who also authors Robert Ambrogi's Lawsites, Media Law and BullsEye - Expert Witnesses & Litigation, contributes to Catalyst E-Discovery Blog; The ESI Report is hosted by Michele C.S. Lange, a staff attorney in the electronic evidence services group at Eden Prairie, Minn. - based Kroll Ontrack Inc.; Workers» Comp Matters is hosted by Alan S. Pierce, who practices at Alan S. Pierce & Associates in Salem, Mass.; and Ringler Radio is co-hosted by Ringler Associates» Larry Cohen (North Andover, Mass.) and Donald J. Engels (Chicago); Law Technology Now is hosted by Monica Bay, who is editor - in - chief of Law Technology News and also authors The Common Scold; In - House Legal is hosted by Paul D. Boynton of MCB Communications in Needham, Mass.; The Kennedy - Mighell Report is hosted by Dennis Kennedy, who also authors DennisKennedy.com and is a columnist for the ABA Journal, and Tom Mighell.
Joining my co-host J.Craig Williams and me to provide their insights are two e-discovery experts: Michele C.S. Lange, staff attorney in the Electronic Evidence Services group at Kroll Ontrack Inc. and author of the ABA book, Electronic Evidence and Discovery: What Every Lawyer Should Know, and Dennis Kennedy, well - known lawyer and legal technology consultant based in St. Louis, Mo..
That concept is expressly made the basis of the rule of admissibility in the electronic record provisions that are in 11 of the Evidence Acts in Canada — e.g., s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the (Ontario) Evidence Act, and s. 31.2 (1) of the Canada Evidence Act.
«Technologically competent» also requires knowledge of the electronic technology that now produces most of the evidence, and very frequently used types of evidence; for example, these kinds of evidence: (1) records are now the most frequently used kind of evidence but most often come from very complex electronic records management systems; (2) mobile phone tracking evidence because we all carry mobile phones; (3) breathalyzer device readings because they are the basis of more than 95 % of impaired driving cases; and, (4) expert opinion evidence that depends upon data produced by electronic systems and devices.
You may not use these electronic means to investigate or communicate about the case because it is important that you decide this case based solely on the evidence presented in this courtroom.
The chapter provides a useful review of the vast array of electronic evidence that now pervades the criminal courts; digital images and videos, data bases, emails and internet derived evidence.
No law firm has the necessary degree of specialization of staff, legal materials used, re-use of previously created work - product, or scaled volumes of production, to be able to cope with rapidly expanding volumes of laws, complexity of laws based upon technology, and the masses of records created by the automating of records by electronic technology — every interaction, communication, and transmission that we have now, produces a record, which could be related to some legal service, and records are now the most frequently used kind of evidence in legal proceedings.
The three analogies: (1) whereas a pre-electronic paper record can be symbolized by a piece of paper in a file drawer, an electronic record is like a drop of water in a pool of water, i.e., it is completely dependent upon its ERMS for its existence, accessibility, and «integrity» (as that word is used in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts; e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) CEA); (2) if expert opinion evidence were rendered admissible in the way that electronic records are, there would be no evidence presented, nor cross-examination allowed, as to the qualifications of the expert witnesses, i.e., the «qualifications» of an electronic record being the state of records management of the ERMS in which it is stored; (3) going from a horse - powered transportation system to a motor vehicle - based transportation system has required a vast amount of new laws, regulations, and enforcement personnel, including police officers, judges, and lawyers, i.e., stepping up to a new technology requires that it be controlled by new laws and regulations, otherwise it will cause injury, damage, and inEvidence Acts; e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) CEA); (2) if expert opinion evidence were rendered admissible in the way that electronic records are, there would be no evidence presented, nor cross-examination allowed, as to the qualifications of the expert witnesses, i.e., the «qualifications» of an electronic record being the state of records management of the ERMS in which it is stored; (3) going from a horse - powered transportation system to a motor vehicle - based transportation system has required a vast amount of new laws, regulations, and enforcement personnel, including police officers, judges, and lawyers, i.e., stepping up to a new technology requires that it be controlled by new laws and regulations, otherwise it will cause injury, damage, and inevidence were rendered admissible in the way that electronic records are, there would be no evidence presented, nor cross-examination allowed, as to the qualifications of the expert witnesses, i.e., the «qualifications» of an electronic record being the state of records management of the ERMS in which it is stored; (3) going from a horse - powered transportation system to a motor vehicle - based transportation system has required a vast amount of new laws, regulations, and enforcement personnel, including police officers, judges, and lawyers, i.e., stepping up to a new technology requires that it be controlled by new laws and regulations, otherwise it will cause injury, damage, and inevidence presented, nor cross-examination allowed, as to the qualifications of the expert witnesses, i.e., the «qualifications» of an electronic record being the state of records management of the ERMS in which it is stored; (3) going from a horse - powered transportation system to a motor vehicle - based transportation system has required a vast amount of new laws, regulations, and enforcement personnel, including police officers, judges, and lawyers, i.e., stepping up to a new technology requires that it be controlled by new laws and regulations, otherwise it will cause injury, damage, and injustice.
(4) the consequences of more laws based upon technology; and the fact that almost every electronic communication, interaction, and service automatically creates a record that is potentially evidence and relevant to some legal service.
Author: Jeff Fehrman is president of Electronic Evidence Labs in Arlington, Va., and Bob Krantz is a Washington, D.C. - based ESI consultant.
Re: lawyers practising in association with non-lawyers: - Absolutely necessary because: (1) technology will be the basis of almost all laws, therefore we will have to practice with other experts in that technology; (2) records management law will be a major area of practice because, records are the most frequently used form of evidence and e-records depend for everything on their e-records management systems (ERMSs), and they must be compliant with the National Standards of Canada for e-records management, which standards require legal opinions, and every significant change to an ERMS requires a legal opinion re ability to produce records able to satisfy laws as to e-discovery, admissibility of evidence, privacy & access to information, electronic commerce, tax laws, and compliance with National Standards of Canada for e-records management; (3) all new technologies require a legal framework, which means more work for lawyers; and, (4) otherwise, other professions and service providers who now provide «legal information,» will begin to provide «legal advice» and other services that only lawyers should be providing.
Rakesh Madhava is CEO of Nextpoint, an evidence management service based in the cloud for lawyers to manage their electronic data.
The Austin, Texas - based attorney, professor and electronic evidence expert has always been passionate about technology — somewhat too passionate at times.
In order for those phrases in s. 31.3 to provide sufficient evidence of reliability: (1) they have to be given objective meanings, rather than subjective meanings as determined by the operation of the electronic system itself; and, (2) be based upon authoritative standards.
PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY Looking for an Epidemiologist position with Lab Services: • Five years of clinical experience of coordinating and implementing activities related to building the practice and evidence - base of health equity • Highly skilled in conducting analysis of performance monitoring data to bring about comprehension of equity impact • Hands on experience in designing and developing data collection instruments and systems related to diseases on case - based surveillance • Proven experience of assisting in planning implementing electronic lab reporting
Abided by and followed all procedures relating to the proper handling and chain - of - custody of evidence in the computer forensic laboratory and performed triage and examinations on electronic media to quickly assess and prioritize the intelligence value of computer based electronic media (e.g., hard drives, CDs).
In 2013, there were only 32 published articles regarding depression apps, compared with a total of 1536 available for download.22 This finding of a high availability but low evidence base is synonymous with results observed for apps dedicated to the treatment of other psychological disorders, including bipolar disorder, 23 bulimia nervosa24 and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); 25 bringing into question the scientific credibility, validity and efficacy of the majority of electronic psychological interventions currently available to consumers.
For more details — including evidence - based tips for reducing the impact of electronic media — see this Parenting Science review.