Macros, Monsters and Malpractice
| Publication year | 1989 |
| Pages | 641 |
| Citation | Vol. 04 No. 1989 Pg. 641 |
1989, April, Pg. 641. Macros, Monsters and Malpractice
In the movie "Young Frankenstein," there is a classic scene in which Frankenstein's monster meets a blind hermit. The hermit pours hot soup in the monster's lap, breaks his wine glass in an abortive toast and sets fire to the monster's thumb trying to light his cigar, all in a zestful spirit of camaraderie and companionship. This scene is an illustration of what goes wrong when two people who are trying to accomplish a mutual goal fail to understand it fully or fail to appreciate the need for cooperation and coordination to achieve the goal.
In the law office, the two people whose cooperation is most essential to get the job done are the attorney and the legal word processor. However, sometimes this combination of professions results in scenarios that are typical of the classic horror movie: advances in technology which should theoretically produce greater efficiency and effectiveness, a communications and systems breakdown and resultant disaster.
This article focuses on the realities of the need for computers in the law office and how they can help attorneys avoid all-too-common problems and, possibly, malpractice. It also discusses the essential communication between the lawyer and the computer staff.
There are three inescapable realities in the practice of law today:
1. The "paper flood" increases virtually hour by hour. Despite noble efforts by courts and committees, a wave of paper is washing over practitioners, and proper paper flow management is needed to prevent multiple "drownings."
2. Budget constraints and a sluggish economy demand greater law office efficiency. Offices are faced with reduced staff and increased competition in the marketplace, resulting in greater vulnerability to mistakes. These mistakes are the bases of lost cases, lost clients, malpractice claims and grievance actions.
3. Computers and word processing systems are essential for law offices simply to keep up with the paper flow, not to mention staying ahead. The reality is that the law office without an effective computer and word processing system is no longer able to represent its clients adequately in today's hyper-competitive legal climate.
The necessity for adequacy of representation can be illustrated by a look at the Code of Professional Responsibility ("Code"), adopted by Colorado, and the Model Rules of Professional Conduct ("Model Rules"), proposed by the American Bar Association and under consideration for possible adoption by Colorado. In the Code, DR 6-101(A)(2) requires "preparation adequate in the circumstances." Rule 1.1 (Competence) states, "A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation." The two differ in that the Code generally consists of numerous prohibitions, while the Model Rules affirmatively require competency, promptness and diligence in client representation. If adopted by Colorado, the Model Rules promise to hold the legal profession to an even higher standard.(fn1)
Even so, many practitioners fear the potential cure provided by computers almost as much as they fear the uncertain horror of grievances or malpractice. Despite the inevitability of computerized law offices, many attorneys continue to avoid that strange group of flashing screens, clicking keys and foreboding machines that spew sheets of paper. Attorneys are afraid to tread into the part of the office where the support staff members wave their fingers over ominously coded keys and talk about such things as macros, merges and booting.
The reality is that attorneys must make a concerted effort to become familiar with law office automation and word processing. Until they do, a chasm will exist between attorney and staff which inhibits the ability to coordinate efficiently and to produce the most effective work product.
Computers in the law office are required for more than word processing. By utilizing computer research, law offices will find it easier to meet the guidelines of both the Code and the Model Rules. Computer research enables an attorney to stay current with the latest cases and legal news. An example of this can be seen in the reporter systems available in Colorado. There is a gap of approximately one to two months between an announced decision and its availability within the legal community via the West Publishing Co. bound reporter or The Colorado Lawyer. This
To continue reading
Request your trial