Last month, the Wisconsin Supreme Court approved a
new rule requiring mandatory electronic filing statewide. (Wis. Stat. § 801.18)
According to a recent edition of The Third Branch, the quarterly newsletter of the Wisconsin court system, the mandatory eFiling rule takes effect July 1 but will be phased in gradually over the next three years.
Mandatory eFiling will be established first in a small number of pilot counties that already offer voluntary eFiling in civil, family, small claims and paternity cases and then expand in those case types to other counties statewide by the end of 2017. Other case types will be added with a targeted completion date for mandatory eFiling in all case types statewide by Dec. 31, 2019.
The court’s CCAP staff will implement the program with initial help from contractors.
A class action lawsuit filed yesterday in federal court in Washington, D.C., challenges the fees charged by PACER, the federal courts’ online court records system, as excessive. The lawsuit seeks to obtain relief on behalf of “all individuals and entities who have paid fees for the use of PACER within the past six years, excluding class counsel and agencies of the federal government.”
The lawsuit, filed by the Alliance for Justice, the National Veterans Legal Services Program and the National Consumer Law Center, claims that the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts is violating the E-Government Act of 2002, which mandates that the fees to access court records online cannot exceed the amount needed to maintain the system itself.
The lawsuit alleges that the Administrative Office has improperly increased fees to cover other costs such as courtroom audio systems and flat-screen televisions in jury boxes.
According to the Wall Street Journal Law Blog, the Supreme Court has denied cert to Authors Guild, et al. v. Google, Inc., in which the Authors Guild and individual writers argued that Google engaged in copyright infringement “on an epic scale” by digitizing, indexing, and displaying snippets of print books in internet search results.
From the article:
The last major development came in October when a federal appeals court in New York ruled for Google….
The dispute involves the boundaries of “fair use,” the legal doctrine that permits unauthorized copying in certain, limited circumstances. The Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded in October that Google’s scanning millions of copyrighted books wasn’t infringement because what the company makes viewable online is so limited.
Have you ever been asked to complete and electronically submit a fillable PDF form only to find that you couldn’t save it after you’d finished completing it? That all you could do was print it, then have to snail mail, fax, or scan it back in?
Or maybe you’re the one who created a form then received complaints from users who spent time completing the form but couldn’t save it?
If those completing the form were using the free Adobe Acrobat Reader, you’ve probably encountered this problem. While saving fillable PDFs is easy with Adobe Acrobat Pro, it’s often not possible for those using Acrobat Reader.
There are a couple of ways around this problem without spending hundreds to purchase Acrobat Pro.
For form creators, there are some simple changes that you can make to way that you save your form in Acrobat Pro that will allow users to be able to save the form that they’ve just completed. Rather than selecting Save, you’ll do a Save As and select Reader Extended PDF. For more information, see these instructions from Adobe.
I followed the instructions and successfully created a form that I could complete and save using the free Acrobat Reader. I also found that I could reopen it later and add more information. That’s especially useful for longer forms.
For form users, there is an app called Sign My Pad that allows one to fill out as well as sign any PDF form, regardless of how it was saved. It doesn’t even have to be a fillable form. You can add text, boxes, signatures, etc. to any PDF. Sign My Pad is available for less than $4 for both iPad and Android.
Here is the latest faculty and staff scholarship from the University of Wisconsin Law School Legal Studies Research Papers series found on SSRN.
- Decentering the Consuming Self: Personalized Medicine, Science, and the Market for Lemons by Shubha Ghosh
- Constitutional Lawyers and the Inter-American Court’s Varied Authority by Alexandra Valeria Huneeus
The University of Wisconsin Law School Legal Studies journal contains abstracts and papers from this institution focused on this area of scholarly research. To access all the papers in this series, please use the following URL: http://www.ssrn.com/link/u-wisconsin-legal-studies.html
Stats and data about any aspect of the legal world have often been notoriously difficult to track down. I know that when I am asked a question about stats at the reference desk, I always prepare myself for what could be a difficult search.
That sigh of relief you are hearing is from law librarians and legal researchers across the US as Sunlight Foundation announced their new repository of Criminal Justice statistics called “Hall of Justice”. Not only does Hall of Justice collect many datasets into one convenient place, but it also, as HOJ’s homepage puts it, brings “criminal justice data transparency” to the forefront.
This data is out there and publicly available, but it can be nearly impossible for a casual searcher (or lawyer, or law faculty, or law librarian) to locate easily. With Hall of Justice, nearly 10,000 datasets are collected in one place and tagged with relevant keywords, allowing users to quickly locate data on a wide array of criminal justice topics ranging from sexual offenders to identify theft. While the repository is not comprehensive, it is still a great step forward in making this important information much more available.
The interface is very intuitive, and a searcher can use it to search by keyword, category or location. Once you have made your initial search, you can then filter the results by Groups (who owns/created the dataset), Sectors (governmental data or non-profit), or by Access Type. This makes the searching process simple and effective.
Try it out yourself and see what useful and eye-opening data you can find. Hall of Justice can also be found on the Law Library’s database list. If you have any questions, be sure to ask a law librarian!
The Wisconsin State Bar has recently published a newly updated edition of the Wisconsin Guide to Citation.
The new eighth edition reflects recent changes made to The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation, now in its 20th edition. New developments discussed in this edition of the Wisconsin Guide include:
- A new section on how to cite uniform acts, model codes, sentencing guidelines, and standards
- New sections discussing how to cite blog and social media posts
- Update to guidelines for citing sources on the Internet
- Update regarding how to cite legal dictionaries
- New examples showing how to cite various sources with different pincites
I’d like to thank Attorney-Editor Rita Knauss for offering me and my Law Librarians Association of Wisconsin colleagues the opportunity to comment and make suggestions for the new edition.
More information about the Guide, including information about how to order it, is available on the State Bar of Wisconsin website.
Today, the Third District Court of Appeals affirmed that library patrons do not have a constitutional right to view pornography on library computers.
The defendant was cited for disorderly conduct in 2014 after a couple of students reported he was watching pornography on a UW Eau Claire library computer.
From Channel 3000:
Reidinger argued he has a First Amendment right to view legal adult pornographic material at a public library. He also alleged UW System administrators, campus police and Eau Claire County prosecutors conspired to harass him.
The 3rd District Court of Appeals rejected his arguments Tuesday, ruling that the evidence showed Reidinger’s conduct tended to provoke a disturbance. The court opted not to address his harassment allegations, calling them unsupported and undeveloped.
The full opinion is available on the Wisconsin Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Case Access system (WSCCA).
Thanks to my colleague, Mary Jo Koranda, for alerting me to the story.
According to a press release by the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions , the DFI will join the state Secretary of State’s office in issuing apostilles and authentications – certificates needed to verify a document for use in a foreign country.
From the release:
Businesses and individuals at times need to authenticate the origin of a public document issued in Wisconsin for use in a foreign country. Some examples of such public documents are birth certificates, adoption papers, marriage licenses, corporate documents, school transcripts and trademarks. There are two ways to accomplish this:
By obtaining an apostille, an authentication certificate that is recognized and required by countries that are parties to a treaty called the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961. It is commonly called the Hague Convention.
By obtaining an authentication certificate, which is similar to an apostille but is used in countries that are not parties to the Hague Convention.