The Court Technology and Trial Presentation Blawg features articles, reviews and news of interest to lawyers and other legal professionals. This blog is published by Ted Brooks, a Trial Presentation and Legal Technology Consultant, Author and Speaker. Ted's trial experience includes the Los Angeles Dodgers divorce trial, People v. Robert Blake murder trial, and a hundreds of high profile, high value and complex civil matters.

All materials © Ted Brooks, unless otherwise indicated.

SOCIAL Twitter -- LinkedIn -- Facebook WEB PHONE 888-907-4434

Thursday, July 11, 2013

Five Tips to Keep Trial Tech on Course

This article was just published on The Legal Intelligencer, the oldest law journal in the United States. You can find the entire article here: Five Tips to Keep Trial Tech on Course

Before (or after) you read it, however, The Recorder is currently running California’s Best Legal Services Providers ballot, and you’re encouraged to vote! It is time once again to select the best the Golden State has to offer, and in particular, Best Courtroom Service Provider, which is found at question #30. Please consider voting for Litigation-Tech in this category – we are honored to have been selected in 2012. Although you are not required to vote in any other category, you might at least want to support those that you're familiar with.

Now, back to our irregularly-scheduled programming.

The five tips covered in this article are:
  1. Management
  2. Communication
  3. Equipment
  4. Personality
  5. Experience

One thing I didn’t mention in the article is the company you’re working with. It can be difficult to find the right Courtroom Service (Trial Presentation) Provider, especially if you’ve never before worked with one. A large percentage of our clients had never before taken full advantage of using technology in trial, and none of our clients would try a case without us now.

If your provider is an individual, you may be risking more than you know. Likewise, if their primary business is anything other than trial presentation, they may be sending inexperienced “trainees” to cover your trial. Your client might not appreciate that you’ve saved them $50, but ended up with an unqualified trial tech disaster in court.

In any event, if you’re searching for an established and reputable Courtroom Service Provider, please consider contacting Litigation-Tech LLC. If you’d like to learn a little more about the company and its leadership, you may download Ted Brooks’ bio here. If you haven’t yet voted for California's Best Courtroom Service Provider, please do so now. And finally, if you haven’t read the entire article, here again is the link to Five Tips to Keep Trial Tech on Course.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. Ross –

      Thank you for your comment. While I do agree with you for the most part, I must add that along with those who are indeed qualified and experienced trial techs, there are also many out there representing themselves as such who have no business doing so. They have minimal experience, no professional liability coverage, and no network of resources to turn to when things get difficult or too busy.

      The problem with this is that the client may not realize the difference if they have never before worked with someone who actually knew what they were doing. Not only can it affect the outcome of the trial, but can also have a long-term negative effect on our entire profession. Of course, the same result can occur when a large company sends out this same person. I've seen it happen both ways.

      I think the bottom line here is the same as with hiring any other consultant – The hiring firm must perform their due diligence, checking and verifying that they are getting the “real deal.”



Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.