My email program has a ‘signature’ function that allows it to paste my signature into an email. The problem is I have to navigate over to invoke it. I’d rather just be able to type a short phrase when I want to include an email signature. So, for example, if I type ‘ssig’ and hit the spacebar it will produce the following text:

You’ll note that it can insert formatted text, as well as graphics (which is what my name ‘Ernie’ is). Now you might ask, why not just do that in the email program? The answer is that application-specific macros are too limiting.  Once you start regularly using any kind of application-specific text-replacement, you’ll quickly find yourself wishing that you could use the text replacement shortcut across all applications. That’s the real power of this tool. You create snippets that work in any context and in any application.

Another snippet I use involves my telephone and fax numbers. If type ‘ccell’ it expands to: ‘(504) 669-5150 (cell).’ If I type ‘ffax’ it expands to: ‘(888) 425-1232 (fax)’.  People are always asking what number they should call me on when they email me to set up a conference call. As I said, there are lots of ways you can use these kinds of short snippets once you start thinking about it.

The latest version added a couple of new features that make this program indispensable. First, it now allows synchronizing of your ‘snippets’ via the cloud service DropBox (see above). So if you use TextExpander on more than one computer, as I do, you can have all of your snippets reflect up-to-the minute changes you make on any of your computers. Not to mention, your valuable snippets are automatically backed up to the cloud.

Perhaps even more enticing is the new feature that allows you to insert chunks of boilerplate text, and then be prompted to enter variable values. I use this for creating my form engagement letter for new clients. Typically, I need to input the ‘client name,’ the ‘client address,’ and a ‘short description of the matter’ I’m representing them on. Sure, I could open a template in my word processing progrm and then replace certain passages, but that’s more cumbersome and tedious.  TextExpander is much faster, and the TextExpander prompt-method assures that I’ll properly fill in each variable.  Why?  Well, because it forces me to look at each and every variable field. Setting this up is not intuitive, but once you figure it out it’s easy to remember and do.  The power of this function cannot be overstated.

You can think of dozens of ways you would use this application once you start to use it. And once you do you’ll consider its price of $35 to be ridiculously inexpensive, especially given how much time (and agony) it saves you.

First of all, it’s important to note that the prospect of having to use paper at trial does not diminish the value of having a paperless system for all of your case files.  During the course of litigation you’ll save a lot of money, time and annoyance by not having paper to deal with.  If there comes a time when you are required to use paper, you’re still in a good position because all you have to do is print out the paper that you need.

Remember, that In the old days of paper you’d have boxes of exhibits that you shuffle around, and because you were working with the paper yourself there was some risk that you’d shuffle things up and lose an important document.

Let’s look at how ‘being paperless at trial’ plays out in practice.

Because you’re adept at being paperless you’ll be able to pull up documents that you need using your computer.  If your opponent introduces an exhibit you will be able to access it quickly, and see the notes that you superimposed upon that document.  The only time you need to worry about paper is when you are introducing your exhibits.  In federal court, you’d have already specified the possible exhibits in the pretrial order.  Most state courts have similar disclosure requirements.  In other words, a week or so before the trial you have defined the universe of documents that you are limited to using as trial exhibits.  No doubt you also specify that any document your opponent uses is available to you.  But the point is the universe of documents that trial exhibits can be drawn from is limited before trial.

These are the documents that you need to convert to paper (i.e. print out).

You, or your office staff, will carefully create paper versions of all of these documents in proper sequence (you determine what is proper sequence based on need, or preference). The boxes that contain these papers will not be disturbed once they are assembled.  Why not?  Well, because you are proficient at preparing your case digitally and don’t need to deal with the paper.  So, the paper is organized and then remains that way until you need it at trial.

The only thing you need the paper for is to introduce an exhibit.  So, for each exhibit you need one copy for the judge, one for the witness and one copy for each trial counsel that you would need to hand a copy to when you introduce the exhibit. You could bring a printer, but then you’d have to depend on the reliability of the printer to produce the paper on demand.  Plus printers can be noisy.  You might want one so you can print documents during recesses, but you’re not going to be able to rely on a printer in court as a primary way of creating the exhibits you’ll introduce.

You will want to use your computer to keep track of notes about exhibits, including whether a particular document was offered into evidence or not.  And whether it was admitted or not.  This doesn’t take very long to do, and you’re proficient with the computer so it’s not a big deal to you.  The key thing is: you have to be proficient and very comfortable with your paperless system before you’re ready to go to trial.  If you are proficient, then having to print out some paper to use when you offer exhibits is not a big deal.

If you’re not proficient then you shouldn’t take any chances.

The best scenario is when you are proficient and don’t need paper, except to offer your exhibits, and your opponent is bound to paper.  And if it’s a jury trial then you’re in the best of all worlds.  Why? Because jurors will pick up on the difference in the rhythm of how you operate (which is smooth and stress-free) and how your opponent operates.  Every time your opponent offers a document you always wave him off and say “I don’t need a copy. I’ve got it right here on my computer.”  By the end of the trial the jury will have had many chances to quietly think to themselves “why doesn’t that other lawyer use a computer?”

Even better is when you are able to display your documents on a large screen.  Obviously, to do this you’d have to have scanned your documents.  Since this was part of your routine from day one, it’s no big deal to hook your computer to a projector and blow up a key part of a document.  Your opponent would probably not want to start scanning his documents on the eve of trial.

Of course, you’ll have to get clearance from the judge to use a projector to display your documents.  And every judge has preferences about things like this, so you should find out how to address those preferences well before trial.  But, my experience is that, if the judge can trust that you won’t delay the trial, they’ll let you use display technology. The best way to get the judge to ‘buy in’ is to hire a firm that specializes in this sort of thing.  The way it usually works is that the trial display company charges a set fee per day to bring in display monitors for the judge and jury, and all counsel. If something goes wrong, they have backup systems and know how to fix those problems.

Doing exhibit display can be tricky and so, even if you feel really comfortable with technology, it’s usually a good idea to hire an expert that specializes in courtroom graphics.  They have special software, and they know how to use it. If they have to scan your documents they charge extra, but you’ve already done that so you usually only have to pay the daily fee. If your opponent wants to display their stuff too, then you can split the daily fee.  If they don’t want to pay then you look the tech-savvy wizard to the jury, and you have an edge.  If your oppenent does want to split the cost, odds are they’ll still  fumble around because they’re unfamiliar with handling digital information. In other words, either way: advantage to you.

Of course, the dream situation is where you have a small case and the judge is fine with you using a display projector and you (or your staff person) operates it while you refer to your exhibits. Meanwhile, your opponent is shlepping through paper and looking disorganized in comparison.  If they work for a big firm and have a large corporate client, even better.

At the end of the trial you take the boxes of paper that you didn’t use and shred them.  The exhibits that were introduced are already on your computer and are already tagged. Unplug your computer, pack it away and head home. No need to walk out of court like the sap at a carnival who won a lot of cheap crap and now has to lug it home.  You’re a lean, mean information-processing machine and the dinosaurs will never know what hit them.

Is there a better alternative to traipsing down to the bank and waiting in line?

Yes, there is.  Many banks offer the option of self-deposit using a scanner. The workflow is dead-simple and quite convenient.  Just scan the checks and they show up as a pending transaction right away.  Real Estate lawyers who do lots of closings would certainly benefit from this option.  However, any lawyers who make more than one visit per week to the bank would probably find digital depositing to be a major boon.

Now, here are the caveats: Not every bank offers this system, and you typically have to use a special scanner provided to you by the bank (none that I know of allow you to use the Fujitsu ScanSnap for example). This is a relatively new service so it’s hard to say exactly how it will work at your bank. The best thing to do is ask to see if the service is available and how much extra it might cost. In Louisiana the following banks are reported to offer this service: CapitalOne, Chase, Whitney, and Gulf Coast Bank & Trust. And for those who are military veterans there is the USAA which allows online bank deposits via an iPhone application.

I am dictating this entire passage using software called MacSpeech Dictate, which costs about $160 on Amazon (comes with headphone). It runs on the same speech engine as Dragon Naturally Speaking software, which is a Windows-based program that costs about $145 (does not come with headphone). So, for very little money, you can start using off-the shelf dictation software to crank out text at an alarming rate.

The first step when you get the software is to train it to understand your voice. This process takes about five minutes, and in the course of doing so you will learn basic things, such as that when you end a sentence you have to say the word “Period.” In other words, you have to specifically describe the punctuation that you want to be applied  to your text. At first, this seems a little awkward. But, once you get the hang of it, it becomes natural and effortless. The amazing thing is how quickly you can dictate passages of text that would take you three or four times as long to type.

To give you an idea of how quickly it will type passages of text, I will record the time it takes me to dictate the following passage that I am reading from an investment newsletter I got from Charles Schwab.

One step closer… to job growth; Birdseye lookahead and year in review
Year is always a time for reflection, and investors have a lot to reflect on in the year coming to a close. From an Oregon outlook in the early part of the year to hope and relief as the year closes, it’s been a wild ride. From my perch, it’s been fascinating and enlightening to watch the disbelief with which our optimism was met last spring turned to something closer to resignation, but nothing approaching euphoria.

Many remain incredulous at the optimists, at the market’s phenomenal rally since March, and the continued better-than-expected readings on the economy. But with each successive piece of better news, a little more confidence creeps into the picture. As we head into 2010, it’s instructive to analyze the latest market action in order to see what possible themes might be developing.

The above passage took me exactly 60 seconds to dictate. There is no way that I could type that passage in under a minute.  But, let’s not speculate, let’s see what happens if I type it myself:

One-step closer … to job growth; Bird’s-eye look ahead and year in review.
Year-end is always a time for relrection, and investors have a lot to reflect on in the year coming to a close.  From an Armageddon outook in the early part of the year to hope and relief as the year closes, it’s been a wild ride.  From my perch, it’s been a fascinating adn enlighting to wathc the disblieve with which our optimism was met last spring turn to something closer to resignation, though nothing approaching euphoria.

Many remain incredulous at the optmist, at the market’s phenomenal rally since last March, and the continued better-than-expected readings on the economy.  But with each succesive piece of better news, a little more confidence creeps into the picture.  As we head into 2010, it’s instructive to analyze teh latest market action in order to see what possible themes might be developing.

It took me 3 minutes and 30 seconds to type that same passage, which is almost 4 times as long.  Note that both passages contain inaccuracies.  I’ll be honest and say that when I was typing I often backed up as I tried to clean up mistakes.  Obviously, this is one reason I was slower when I typed.  But, even if I hadn’t stopped to fix typos I probably would have only shaved about 30 seconds off of my final time.  That means that the dictation software is at least three times faster than my typing.

True, the dictation software made some mistakes.  The first words in the passage are supposed to be ‘Year-end is always a time for reflection.’  The dictation software missed the word ‘end’ after ‘year.’  And the dictation software used the word ‘Oregon’ instead of ‘Armageddon,’ which is a big difference, and renders that sentence almost meaningless.  People who dismiss the value of dictation software often point to such mistakes as deal-killers.  They say “well, spell-check would never catch that kind of error and so how am I supposed to proof-read the document?”  The answer is you should proof-read by reading, and not by relying on the computer software’s spell-check function.

All of the dictation mistakes are obvious to me as I read them, and are thus easily correctible.  It took me exactly 26 seconds to proofread the dictated passage and correct the errors.  So, factoring in the time for making corrections, the dictated passage was still completed in about one third the time it took me to type it.

Enough about problems.  Now let’s talk about the unexpected benefits of dictating.  First, notice how it knew to hyphenate the phrase ‘better-than-expected’ in the second paragraph (I didn’t tell it to do that, even though that’s how it was written in the brochure that I was reading from).  Also, note that when I said ‘twenty-ten’ in reference to the current year, it spelled out 2010. These are the kinds of results you probably wouldn’t expect. I certainly didn’t.  So, while you do have to describe basic punctuation as you dictate, the software will correctly apply certain punctuation that you might not think about, or even know is applicable.

Yes, you do have to get used to using the software. And it can take some time to get past the initial frustration of learning something new.  But, if you knew that using the software was going to cut your typing time by 30%, wouldn’t you be interested?  Let’s face it: very few people have exceptional keyboard skills.  I’m considered a decent typist by many folks, but the reality is I can’t type 40 words a minute with acceptable accuracy.  Having to think about what I’m typing at the same time that I think of what to say takes more brain effort than I’d like to have to use.  The real power of dictation software is that it frees you from paying any attention to typing, and allows you to focus completely on what you want to say.  That fact alone makes it worthwhile for me.

Dictation software used to be expensive, and hard to set up. And it used to require a lot of computing horsepower,  more than the average computer had.  All that has changed, and programs like Dragon Naturally Speaking and MacSpeech Dictate are  leading the charge.  Speech recognition software is ready for Prime Time, and it just might be something for you to consider using in your law practice.  If you’re willing to take the time to learn how to use it properly, that is.

Be advised, I mostly use Mac software (since I have Mac computers).  So, this information will probably be most useful to the Mac lawyers out there. Nevertheless, I do discuss the Windows software that I run, and also the hardware that I use, some of which is platform independent (which is to say, it doesn’t matter if you have Windows or Mac).

I’d love to hear back from folks (in the comments preferably) about any questions or suggestions they have.  Thanks!

Lawyers providing an online file storage and retrieval system for client access of documents must take reasonable precautions to protect the security and confidentiality of client documents and information. Lawyers should be aware of limitations in their competence regarding online security measures and take appropriate actions to ensure that a competent review of the proposed security measures is conducted. As technology advances over time, a periodic review of the reasonability of security precautions may be necessary.