Sentences with phrase «of electronic records management systems»

(3) the legal consequences of electronic records management systems changing as their organizations and operations change; and,

In regard to best evidence rule issues, admissibility of electronic records requires proof of the «systems integrity» of the electronic records management systems (ERMSs) in which the records are recorded or stored; see... [more]

In regard to best evidence rule issues, admissibility of electronic records requires proof of the «systems integrity» of the electronic records management systems (ERMSs) in which the records are recorded or stored; see for example: Canada Evidence Act (CEA) s. 31.2 (1)(a); Ontario Evidence Act (OEA) s. 34.1 (5), (5.1); Alberta Evidence Act s. 41.4 (1), (2); and the, Nova Scotia Evidence Act s. 23D (1).

Sedona Canada does not analyze: (1) the meaning and consequences of the «system integrity concept» in the e-records provisions of the Evidence Acts — proof of «records integrity» requires proof of «records system integrity»; (2) the National Standard of Canada for e-records management, Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence CAN / CGSB -72.34-2005 («72.34»); and, (3) the need of the parties to exchange verifications of compliance, provided by records management experts, of their electronic records management systems (ERMS's) with the national standard.

[ii] The integrity (reliability; truthfulness) of an electronic record is dependent upon the integrity of its electronic records management system (its ERMS).

An electronic record (an e-record) is merely an electronic impression upon an electronic storage device, which is but a part of an electronic records management system (an ERMS).

Not exact matches

The following is a sample list of the Practice Management and Electronic Medical Records systems we use.

Ram and her collaborators — including Wenli Zhang, a UA doctoral student in management information systems, and researchers from the Parkland Center for Clinical Innovation — created a model that was able to successfully predict approximately how many asthma sufferers would visit the emergency room at a large hospital in Dallas on a given day, based on an analysis of data gleaned from electronic medical records, air quality sensors and Twitter.

UC San Diego Health achieves Stage 7 of electronic medical record (EMR) adoption — a ranking devised by the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS) Analytics group and achieved by only 1.1 percent of U.S. hospitals in 2011.

My published paper «The Sedona Canada Principles are Very Inadequate on Records Management and for Electronic Discovery» [i] criticizes the first edition (January 2008) of: The Sedona Canada Principles — Addressing Electronic Discovery (hereinafter, «Sedona Canada») because it provides neither analysis nor description of the relationship between electronic discovery and electronic records management sRecords Management and for Electronic Discovery» [i] criticizes the first edition (January 2008) of: The Sedona Canada Principles — Addressing Electronic Discovery (hereinafter, «Sedona Canada») because it provides neither analysis nor description of the relationship between electronic discovery and electronic records managemenManagement and for Electronic Discovery» [i] criticizes the first edition (January 2008) of: The Sedona Canada Principles — Addressing Electronic Discovery (hereinafter, «Sedona Canada») because it provides neither analysis nor description of the relationship between electronic discovery and electronic records managemenElectronic Discovery» [i] criticizes the first edition (January 2008) of: The Sedona Canada Principles — Addressing Electronic Discovery (hereinafter, «Sedona Canada») because it provides neither analysis nor description of the relationship between electronic discovery and electronic records managemenElectronic Discovery (hereinafter, «Sedona Canada») because it provides neither analysis nor description of the relationship between electronic discovery and electronic records managemenelectronic discovery and electronic records managemenelectronic records management srecords managementmanagement systems.

Also, the 2nd edition will not direct sufficient attention to: (1) the serious, common defects of records management and of software, and their considerable worsening of the difficulty of determining the adequacy of disclosure made in discovery proceedings; and, (2) the fact that the admissibility of records is dependent upon proof of the «integrity» of the records systems in which they are stored, which requires proof of the compliance of such records systems with the National Standards of Canada for electronic records management.

My experience in working with experts in electronic records management systems since 1978, and being a legal advisor in the drafting of the National Standards of Canada that provide the principles and practices by which they should be regulated, leads me to believe that there is no records system that does not have some serious errors.

However, the Principles are not intended to place significant focus on records management (RM) or the importance or desirability of appropriate RM practices so as to be properly prepared for litigation, or on issues related to the integrity of information systems under Evidence Acts, or on the substantive law related to the admissibility of electronic records into evidence.

(Until the second edition of 72.34 replaces the first, ask opposing counsel and witnesses, «has your electronic records management system been certified as being in compliance with the National Standards of Canada, and if so when?)

For many years he has worked with such experts by providing legal opinions in relation to their servicing the electronic records management systems of large institutions.

And there are a number of short «electronic records management systems» articles (ERMSs articles) listed on my Slaw author's page.

Like a drop of water in a pool of water, it is dependent upon its electronic records management system (its ERMS) for everything, i.e., records integrity requires proof of records system integrity.

The admissibility of an electronic record requires proof of its records management «system integrity»; e.g.: Canada Evidence Act (CEA) s. 31.2 (1)(a); and, Ontario Evidence Act (OEA) s. 34.1 (5), (5.1).

Electronic records management is a complex technology, which makes current legal infrastructure of statutes, guidelines, and case law that controls the use of electronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andElectronic records management is a complex technology, which makes current legal infrastructure of statutes, guidelines, and case law that controls the use of electronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andelectronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andelectronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andelectronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), andelectronic records management systems (ERMS's), and... [more]

See these articles (pdf): (1) «Admissibility of Electronic Records Requires Proof of Records Management System Integrity»; (2) «The Sedona Canada Principles are Very Inadequate on Records Management and for Electronic Discovery»; (3) «A Legal Opinion is Necessary for Electronic Records Management Systems»; (4) «Electronic Records as Evidence»; and, (5) «Solving the High Cost of the «Review» Stage of Electronic Discovery».

For example, these frequently used evidence - producing types of technology go unchallenged: (1) mobile phone tower location evidence used to locate us - very frequently used because we all carry mobile phones; (2) breathalyzer / intoxilyzer readings; (3) electronic records management systems (records are now the most frequently used kind of evidence); and, (4) the technology that produces the data used to formulate expert opinion evidence.

It provides the necessary means of determining when an e-records management system has the necessary «system integrity» required by the admissibility rule that your ULCC working group wrote into the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts.

John: This should have been dealt with as electronic records management system issue (ERMS issue), i.e., requiring proof of the integrity of the ERMS in which the e-records in question were stored or created.

To the contrary of Sedona Canada 2nd, electronic records management technology makes these 3 concepts more interdependent in law and necessary application: (1) the «system integrity concept» of the e-records provisions of the Evidence Acts; (2) the «proportionality principle» of electronic discovery proceedings; and, (3) the «Prime Directive» of 72.34: «an organization shall always be prepared to produce its records as evidence», i.e., records systems must always be kept in compliance with this national standard (otherwise, the e-records produced, and the adequacy of their production, should not be relied upon because, the quality of records system integrity determines the quality of records integrity — that is the «system integrity concept»).

And e-records in their electronic records management systems are like drops of water in pools of water, and not like pieces of paper in file drawers.

the development of a capability to accept electronic case filing via a portal that will feed into the electronic document and records management system so that documents are immediately accessible to Justices and SCC staff as well as in the Courtroom

«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.

[8] See for example this article: Ken Chasse, «Why a Legal Opinion is Necessary for Electronic Records Management Systems» (2012), 9 Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review 17, a U.K. «open source» journal, i.e., providing free downloading of articles (click «Archives» to access the contents of volume 9).

Such is also true of their legal departments, as is shown by the absence of ERMS issues in almost all case law and guidelines concerning the use of electronic records as evidence, including the four Sedona Canada Principles texts; see: Why a Legal Opinion is Necessary for Electronic Records Management Systems,» (2012), 9 Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Reviewelectronic records as evidence, including the four Sedona Canada Principles texts; see: Why a Legal Opinion is Necessary for Electronic Records Management Systems,» (2012), 9 Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review 17records as evidence, including the four Sedona Canada Principles texts; see: Why a Legal Opinion is Necessary for Electronic Records Management Systems,» (2012), 9 Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law ReviewElectronic Records Management Systems,» (2012), 9 Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review 17Records Management Systems,» (2012), 9 Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law ReviewElectronic Signature Law Review 17 (pdf).

Electronic records management is a complex technology, which makes current legal infrastructure of statutes, guidelines, and case law that controls the use of electronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), and in their software; (3) the electronic records «system integrity concept» (records integrity requires proof of records system integrity) in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence ActsElectronic records management is a complex technology, which makes current legal infrastructure of statutes, guidelines, and case law that controls the use of electronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), and in their software; (3) the electronic records «system integrity concept» (records integrity requires proof of records system integrity) in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Actselectronic records as evidence very inadequate because it ignores these facts: (1) electronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), and in their software; (3) the electronic records «system integrity concept» (records integrity requires proof of records system integrity) in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Actselectronic records technology, and pre-electronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), and in their software; (3) the electronic records «system integrity concept» (records integrity requires proof of records system integrity) in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Actselectronic paper records technology are very different technologies — each requires its own unique legal infrastructure; (2) the many serious defects frequently found in electronic records management systems (ERMS's), and in their software; (3) the electronic records «system integrity concept» (records integrity requires proof of records system integrity) in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Actselectronic records management systems (ERMS's), and in their software; (3) the electronic records «system integrity concept» (records integrity requires proof of records system integrity) in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Actselectronic records «system integrity concept» (records integrity requires proof of records system integrity) in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Actselectronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts (e.g. ss.

The colloquium held in New York in February of this year looked at several topics that be dealt with productively at the international level: identity management, mobile e-commerce, transferable electronic records and «single window» systems for border crossing or shipping documents.

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 injustice.

Providing project management and electronic records management expertise for the conception, planning, design, testing, implementation, and deployment of a DoD 5015.2 - compliant Electronic Record of Investigation (eROI) System in response to requirements of the Presidential Memorandum — Managing Governmenelectronic records management expertise for the conception, planning, design, testing, implementation, and deployment of a DoD 5015.2 - compliant Electronic Record of Investigation (eROI) System in response to requirements of the Presidential Memorandum — Managing Government Rrecords management expertise for the conception, planning, design, testing, implementation, and deployment of a DoD 5015.2 - compliant Electronic Record of Investigation (eROI) System in response to requirements of the Presidential Memorandum — Managing GovernmenElectronic Record of Investigation (eROI) System in response to requirements of the Presidential Memorandum — Managing Government RecordsRecords.

Plus, our time - tested technology offers an out - of - the - box Applied Systems software integration and a Microsoft Dynamics CRM integration to meet your agency's overall needs for electronic records management.

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.

[4] Therefore, during e-discovery proceedings concerning large ERMSs, opposing lawyers should be asking one another: «Is your client's electronic records management system in compliance with the National Standard of Canada for electronic records management, and if so, when was the last time it was so certified by an expert in electronic records management?»

Electronic discovery can not be made as simple and inexpensive as pre-electronic paper discovery because: (1) the integrity of an e-record is dependent upon the integrity of its ERMS, but the integrity of a pre-electronic paper record is not affected by its records management system; (2) electronic technology has made the making of records much less expensive and time - consuming, therefore ERMSs quickly become voluminous; and, (3) every electronic communication createsElectronic discovery can not be made as simple and inexpensive as pre-electronic paper discovery because: (1) the integrity of an e-record is dependent upon the integrity of its ERMS, but the integrity of a pre-electronic paper record is not affected by its records management system; (2) electronic technology has made the making of records much less expensive and time - consuming, therefore ERMSs quickly become voluminous; and, (3) every electronic communication createselectronic paper discovery because: (1) the integrity of an e-record is dependent upon the integrity of its ERMS, but the integrity of a pre-electronic paper record is not affected by its records management system; (2) electronic technology has made the making of records much less expensive and time - consuming, therefore ERMSs quickly become voluminous; and, (3) every electronic communication createselectronic paper record is not affected by its records management system; (2) electronic technology has made the making of records much less expensive and time - consuming, therefore ERMSs quickly become voluminous; and, (3) every electronic communication createselectronic technology has made the making of records much less expensive and time - consuming, therefore ERMSs quickly become voluminous; and, (3) every electronic communication createselectronic communication creates a record.

The «system integrity» concept that is in the electronic records provisions in 11 of the 14 Evidence Acts in Canada, [2] dictates that the use of an e-record as evidence requires an assessment of the records management of the ERMS in which it is stored — «records integrity» requires proof of «systems integrity.»

Better to increase the attractiveness of legal services by enabling lawyers to provide related services accompanying their legal services, e.g., family law lawyers providing financial planning advice, and law firms providing accounting and tax advisory work, and litigation lawyers working with experts who improve and maintain their clients» electronic records management systems, because records are the most frequently used kind of evidence and are completely dependent on their records management systems for everything, particularly their «integrity» （ which is what the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts require be proved for admissibility; e.g., section 31.2 （ 1 ） （ a ） of the Canada Evidence Act - see: Ken Chasse, «Electronic Records as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free doelectronic records management systems, because records are the most frequently used kind of evidence and are completely dependent on their records management systems for everything, particularly their «integrity» （ which is what the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts require be proved for admissibility; e.g., section 31.2 （ 1 ） （ a ） of the Canada Evidence Act - see: Ken Chasse, «Electronic Records as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free downlrecords management systems, because records are the most frequently used kind of evidence and are completely dependent on their records management systems for everything, particularly their «integrity» （ which is what the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts require be proved for admissibility; e.g., section 31.2 （ 1 ） （ a ） of the Canada Evidence Act - see: Ken Chasse, «Electronic Records as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free downlrecords are the most frequently used kind of evidence and are completely dependent on their records management systems for everything, particularly their «integrity» （ which is what the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts require be proved for admissibility; e.g., section 31.2 （ 1 ） （ a ） of the Canada Evidence Act - see: Ken Chasse, «Electronic Records as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free downlrecords management systems for everything, particularly their «integrity» （ which is what the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts require be proved for admissibility; e.g., section 31.2 （ 1 ） （ a ） of the Canada Evidence Act - see: Ken Chasse, «Electronic Records as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free doelectronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts require be proved for admissibility; e.g., section 31.2 （ 1 ） （ a ） of the Canada Evidence Act - see: Ken Chasse, «Electronic Records as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free downlrecords provisions of the Evidence Acts require be proved for admissibility; e.g., section 31.2 （ 1 ） （ a ） of the Canada Evidence Act - see: Ken Chasse, «Electronic Records as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free doElectronic Records as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free downlRecords as Evidence,» and the other «records as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free downlrecords as evidence» articles on «my SSRN authors page, for free download ） 。

Chief court clerks are responsible for administration and supervision of the day - to - day operations of the Clerk's Office, including areas such as intake, courtroom deputies, jury, case management and electronic case filing systems, records management, statistical reporting, quality assurance, staffing and procedural manuals.

Our presentation will review the concept of leveraging the features of a court management system and electronic records to make business practices more efficient, as well as utilizing reports for quality control and automatically sharing information with our justice partners.

Courts must ensure that case management systems, in which our electronic records are located, do the mundane work of initiating, tracking, and resolving deadlines while freeing staff to concentrate on maintaining the quality of the court record.

ND has been using electronic records since October 2009 and we will share our lessons learned, one of which is to be in control of your case management system.

For purposes of this discussion, mobile phone tower location data involves two technologies: (1) that which provides the mobile phone services and thereby produces the data that is recorded in Rogers» electronic records management systems (ERMSs), and is later made available to the police; and, (2) the technology upon which Rogers» ERMSs are based, and is therefore that which is depended upon to accurately store and retrieve such data.

This is a comment coming from the library and electronic records management world where those of us formally trained in university programs but not in IT pure world, but have hands - on experience with some coding, applications design including report and screen user designs from systems perspective:

It doesn't deal with: (1) the great size and complexity of such systems — they operate using tens of millions of lines of software code; (2) the National Standards of Canada for electronic records management; (3) the serious, and very common errors in ERMSs; and, (4) the need for ERMS software with acceptable error rates.

The electronic records management system technology (ERMS technology) that controls their existence, accessibility, and integrity will need a larger and more complex legal infrastructure of laws, and increased number of varieties of specialized personal such as lawyers, judges, administrators, and enforcers, than do motor vehicles.

This very varied evidentiary legislation situation, will produce a very inconsistent caselaw, one jurisdiction to the next, once judges and lawyers realize the consequences in law required by the fundamental difference between an electronic record and a pre-electronic paper record — in particular, the «system integrity concept» that is expressly stated in the electronic records provisions; e.g.: s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act; and, s. 31.2 (1) of the Canada Evidence Act (see my Slaw blog article, «The Dependence of Electronic Discovery and Admissibility upon Electronic Records Management,» published Nov. electronic record and a pre-electronic paper record — in particular, the «system integrity concept» that is expressly stated in the electronic records provisions; e.g.: s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act; and, s. 31.2 (1) of the Canada Evidence Act (see my Slaw blog article, «The Dependence of Electronic Discovery and Admissibility upon Electronic Records Management,» published Nov. electronic paper record — in particular, the «system integrity concept» that is expressly stated in the electronic records provisions; e.g.: s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act; and, s. 31.2 (1) of the Canada Evidence Act (see my Slaw blog article, «The Dependence of Electronic Discovery and Admissibility upon Electronic Records Management,» published Nov. electronic records provisions; e.g.: s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act; and, s. 31.2 (1) of the Canada Evidence Act (see my Slaw blog article, «The Dependence of Electronic Discovery and Admissibility upon Electronic Records Management,» published Nov. 22,records provisions; e.g.: s. 34.1 (5), (5.1) of the Ontario Evidence Act; and, s. 31.2 (1) of the Canada Evidence Act (see my Slaw blog article, «The Dependence of Electronic Discovery and Admissibility upon Electronic Records Management,» published Nov. Electronic Discovery and Admissibility upon Electronic Records Management,» published Nov. Electronic Records Management,» published Nov. 22,Records Management,» published Nov. 22, 2013).

See; (1) «Admissibility of Electronic Records Requires Proof of Records Management System Integrity»; (2) «Electronic Records as Evidence»; (3) «The Admissibility of Electronic Business Records,» (2010), 8 Canadian Journal of Law and Technology 105; and, (4) «A Legal Opinion is Necessary for Electronic Records Management Systems.»

I write the legal opinions as to the ability of clients» electronic records management systems (ERMS's) to comply with various laws concerning records.