 |
Description  |
|
|
INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
The descriptive matter of the above-referred to parent U.S. application
Ser. No. 08/036,488, filed Mar. 24,1993, by Bennett et al. is incorporated
herein by reference in its entirety, and is made part of this application.
Also incorporated herein by reference in their entirety and made part of
this application are pending U.S. applications by Bennett et al.:
1) Ser. No. 08/066,948, filed May 24, 1993, entitled "Audio and Video
Transcription System for Manipulating Real-Time Testimony"; and
2) Ser. No. 08/065,132, filed May 20, 1993, entitled "Down-Line
Transcription System Having Context Sensitive Searching Capability".
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
This invention relates to a down-line transcription system used by
attorneys for reviewing real-time transcription during a proceeding such
as a trial or deposition; and, more particularly, it relates to a method
and apparatus for interactively preparing an outline for use during such a
proceeding based on case evidence and case law which may be locally or
remotely located.
As is well known, legal proceedings such as a deposition or trial involve
the participation of, among others, an examining attorney who asks
questions and a witness who must answer ("testify") while under oath. To
prepare for such proceedings, the examining attorney must review the
applicable case law and the related case evidence. The attorney also
consults experts, clients and other associate attorneys regarding specific
issues of law and fact as proves necessary. During his investigation
process the attorney takes notes, and makes copies of documents and legal
cases regarding everything at issue. Based on these materials, the
attorney attempts to develop a strategy, constructs an outline of possible
lines of inquiry, drafts potential questions for the witness and organizes
relevant documentary evidence for use as exhibits for the proceeding.
During the entire process, the examining attorney attempts to anticipate
all of the legal issues that might arise.
The entire preparation process often proves to be very time consuming and
cyclical in nature. Every important fact uncovered leads to a new case law
search. Similarly, every new legal issue leads to a need for additional
facts that are found by conducting a case evidence search or are found by
directly examining a witness. Because of this, lead attorneys on a case
must be organized and skilled at memory recall.
The defending attorney must also attempt to understand the factual and
legal issues in the case via case law and case evidence searching and
through conversations with the client, expert witnesses, other attorneys
and, most importantly, the witness to be deposed. During the entire
process, the defending attorney's goal is to anticipate the strengths and
weaknesses of the case and the factual evidence which may arise in the
proceeding. The defending attorney must be well versed in all categories
of the facts and law which might arise so as to be able to properly defend
the witness. The defending attorney takes notes during his
pre-investigation process to prepare the witness for the proceeding.
However, neither the examining attorney nor the defending attorney can
anticipate everything. Typically, in the midst of a proceeding, the
witness reveals something unexpected to one or both attorneys. The
revelation could involve a new area of law which the attorneys know little
if anything about. More often, the revelation suggests an unknown variant
in a known category of law. The revelation also creates a need for
additional documents for use during the proceeding to pursue the new
issue. In all such situations, additional searching is needed. However,
during the proceeding, because the attorneys do not have the luxury of
time, outlining, legal researching, and factual evidence retrieval prove
to be an impossibility.
Additionally, the examining attorney generally takes notes (1) on a legal
pad of paper, (2) directly on copies of potentially relevant documents
identified for use in the deposition, and (3) on Post-it.RTM. brand notes
which are associated with the documents and other materials. During the
proceeding, the attorney attempts to recreate the associations of the
notes, the identified documents and draft questions with legal inquiries
into the different categories of law. Because of disorganization, the
attorney is often unable to use a great deal of the prepared information.
In complex litigation, the problems facing the attorneys are compounded.
Because the preparation process becomes a very time consuming task, the
lead examining (and defending) attorney delegates the task to an associate
attorney on the case. The associate attorney, who often has lesser
knowledge of the facts and law at issue, is faced with the task of
retrieving the important case law and evidence which will be relevant in
the upcoming proceeding. Because of lesser knowledge and inexperience, the
associate attorney either over prepares or else complicates the matter by
not culling out the appropriate law or facts. In addition, because the
associate attorney must brief the lead attorney during a relatively short
time period before the proceeding, the lead attorney cannot grasp all of
what is attempted to be conveyed. Similarly, the associate attorney may
convey a misconstrued understanding of the law and the evidence because of
inexperience. Either way, the lead attorney often does not find out all he
needs until the proceeding is underway.
In the midst of the proceeding, the examining attorney is also confronted
with the problem of recalling the testimony of former witnesses regarding
the same subject matter now being addressed. If recalled, the examining
attorney may use the prior testimony to his advantage. Also, after the
deposition, the attorney is faced with the problem of reorganizing the
materials in some type of saveable form for later use when a similar
witness is deposed.
Hence, it would be highly desirable to solve the foregoing variety of
problems enumerated in preparing for legal proceedings such as a
deposition or trial by guiding the attorney in the preparation process
while associating all notes, documents and law into a workable format
which requires minimal attorney interaction during the proceeding.
It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a method and
apparatus having interactive outlining capabilities based on tailorable,
default outlines that provide immediate access to current case law,
pre-typed tailorable and default questions while providing for association
of case and witness specific notes, testimony, and other case evidence.
It is another object of the present invention to provide a method and
apparatus for selecting a pre-typed outline based on categories or
subcategories of law, by providing for interactive queries based on
specific facts and law at issue in a given lawsuit.
It is another object of the present invention to provide a method and
apparatus for interactively selecting a pre-typed outline based on
categories or subcategories of law which contains tailored potential
questions that may be further tailored for managing depositions, trial and
case evidence, law and attorney work product.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
These and other objects of the present invention are achieved in a
transcription network having an outline used by attorney terminals for
managing a lawsuit. The outline contains a plurality of categorization
entries related to issues in a specific lawsuit. At least one of the
plurality of categorization entries relates to a first data item of case
law information. Similarly, the outline comprises a second data item of
case evidence information relating to at least one of the plurality of
categorization entries. Other objects are also achieved with the outline
provides for the association of the first and second data items.
Objects are also achieved in a method for preparing to take the testimony
of a witness including the steps of storing case evidence in a database,
associating the evidence in the computer database with a deposition
question or witness answer, and viewing this association. In another
embodiment, associating the evidence includes associating the evidence in
real time. In a further embodiment, case evidence includes testimony,
pleadings, or documents, and the database includes either a local or
remote database.
Other objects are achieved in a method used by an attorney terminal for a
given lawsuit which comprises the steps of accessing an outline library
that includes a number of outline areas related to witness testimony, and
selectively using at least one of the outline areas for use in a given
lawsuit.
In one embodiment, the method includes associating a plurality of preset
examination questions with at least one outline area and storing preset
examination questions in a database. In a further embodiment, the method
further includes the step of tailoring the stored examination question so
as to direct questions to a specific witness to be deposed. In yet a
further embodiment, the method includes retrieving the stored examination
questions during the examination of the witness in real time by addressing
the stored outline areas to automatically retrieve associated questions.
Other objects and further aspects of the present invention will become
apparent in view of the following detailed description and claims with
reference to the accompanying drawings.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
FIG. 1 is perspective view which illustrates an overall system
configuration in which attorney terminals operate in Outline, Pretrial and
Timeline Modes to manage a lawsuit according to the present invention.
FIG. 2 is perspective view which illustrates an overall system
configuration in which attorney terminals operate in Deposition and Trial
Modes to manage a lawsuit according to the present invention.
FIG. 3 is a detailed perspective view illustrating an attorney terminal in
an Outline Mode configuration as used by an attorney to prepare for a
deposition or trial proceeding according to the present invention.
FIG. 4a is a diagram illustrating the hierarchical structure of the outline
library according to the present invention which is interactively used by
the attorney terminals to create a tailored outline for a given lawsuit.
FIG. 4b is a detailed diagram illustrating the types and groupings of
information contained within each hierarchical category, subcategory,
etc., of the outline library according to the present invention.
FIG. 4c is a diagram illustrating an exemplary pointer structure under the
groupings in the tailored outline according to the present invention which
provides access to and association information for each data item of the
tailored outline.
FIG. 5a is a detailed perspective view illustrating an attorney terminal
which provides a Roman numeric outline display of the categories and
subcategories contained in a tailored outline according to the present
invention.
FIGS. 5b-5f are detailed perspective views of the attorney terminal of FIG.
5a which further illustrate how an attorney may move through, create,
modify or otherwise use the hierarchical structure of the tailored outline
according to the present invention.
FIG. 6a is a detailed perspective view of an attorney terminal which
graphically displays specific groupings of case law information under
certain subcategories of the outline library.
FIG. 6b is a detailed perspective view of the attorney terminal of FIG. 6a
which illustrates the use of an edit window to fully display, modify, or
create case law grouping information such as a headnote which is directly
associated with a subcategory of the outline library.
FIGS. 7a-7c are detailed perspective views of an attorney terminal
operating in the outline mode which graphically displays groupings of
draft questions under a marking subcategory in the outline library,
wherein the draft questions are selected, modified or added for use in a
deposition or trial proceeding.
FIG. 7d is a detailed perspective view of an attorney terminal operating in
the deposition mode which illustrates the use of a draft question as the
basis for an actual question asked during a deposition or trial
proceeding.
FIG. 8 is a perspective view illustrating the selection of categories,
subcategories, etc., to be used during an upcoming deposition or trial,
wherein, in view of the witness's anticipated knowledge, only those areas
of the tailored outline considered pertinent are selected for later access
during the proceeding.
FIG. 9 is perspective view providing further detail of the system
configuration of attorney terminals operating in the evidence mode
according to the present invention.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
FIGS. 1 and 2 are perspective views which illustrate overall system
configurations in which attorney terminals operate in various modes to
manage a lawsuit according to the present invention. In particular, FIG. 1
is a perspective view of a system configuration in which a second chair
attorney prepares for a deposition or trial proceeding using an attorney
terminal 21 which operates in an Outline Mode, Pretrial Mode, Timeline
Mode and other modes.
Upon initiation of a new lawsuit, an attorney (generally the second chair
attorney on the case) uses the attorney terminal 21 in its Outline Mode to
prepare for conducting the new lawsuit. First, the attorney gains access
to an outline library 43, and interactively responds to a query regarding:
1) the issues of law from the Complaint of the new lawsuit; 2) the State
and/or Federal laws at issue; 3) the specific court involved; 4) the names
of the parties; 5) the party represented; and 5) other specific factual
information relevant given the law at issue. Thereafter, a second query
interactively extracts information as to the Answer in the lawsuit,
including all defenses and counterclaims at issue. A third query captures
information regarding defenses to any counterclaims raised.
As an added advantage to the querying process, a plaintiff's attorney may
access the outline library 43 to interactively construct the Complaint.
The information provided to construct the Complaint provides all of the
lawsuit information needed in the first query, and, therefore, does not
need to be asked again.
Similarly, a defending attorney might access the outline library 43 and,
after responding to the first query using the Complaint, the defending
attorney might interactively construct the Answer in lieu of the second
query. During the interaction, all possible legal defenses to the charges
in the Complaint aid the defending attorney in drafting the Answer. To
complete the Answer, the defending attorney may then add counterclaims, if
any, and selectively choose those defenses which are appropriate for the
current lawsuit. Similarly, a Reply to the counterclaims may be
interactively prepared by the plaintiff's attorney. Moreover, headnotes,
seminal cases, pre-typed searches, and comments regarding each charge
raised and all potential defenses thereto aid the attorneys in preparing
the Complaint, Answer, or Reply.
From the queried information, the outline library 43 provides a tailored
outline corresponding to the issues in the case for conducting and
managing the lawsuit. Basically, the tailored outline provides a
hierarchical structure for associating the law at issue, case evidence,
and attorney work product so that the attorney can easily access
information retrieved from a variety of sources. At the root of the
hierarchical structure, the outline provides all of the major categories
of law and fact at issue in the lawsuit. Branches of the hierarchical
structure, i.e., subcategories, sub-subcategories, etc., provide further
and further levels of legal/factual detail regarding the major categories
or subcategories.
Through the hierarchical structure of the outline, the attorney can rapidly
access a desired grouping of evidence, law and work product pertaining to
a solitary legal or factual issue. However, access is not the only
benefit. Additional benefits include ease of closing off an area of
inquiry. By closing off a subcategory, all of the further levels below
that subcategory (sub-subcategories, etc.) are closed off, rapidly
minimizing the size of the working outline. Moreover, the mere listing of
all the potential areas of law provides the attorney with a hierarchical
checklist, reminding the attorney of what law might be at issue. Other
benefits enhance the attorney's ability to prepare for a legal proceeding
by providing: 1) virtually instant legal overviews (headnotes) of the
suggested categories and subcategories of law without having to conduct a
search; 3) immediate access to the burdens of proof required; 4) pre-typed
legal search formulations for further legal inquiry via a case law library
63; 5) instant access to the seminal case regarding the categories or
subcategories; 6) pre-typed potential questions to be asked based on the
current case and witness; 7) pre-typed potential interrogatories and
document requests relating to the categories or subcategories; 8) the
ability to associate case evidence, work product (notes, pleadings or
portions thereof), or related communications with the categories or
subcategories; 9) sequential and interactive guidance of the attorney
through the hierarchical categorizations of law based on the attorney's
response; and 10) where beneficial, suggestions of evidentiary searches
and other discovery tips such as, for example, pertinent local court
discovery rules.
On an ongoing basis, while in the Outline Mode, the attorney terminal 21,
such as might be used by a second chair attorney, utilizes the retrieved
tailored outline to begin a second level of case specific tailoring
governed by the discovery process. As further evidence is obtained through
discovery, the attorney continues to pursue deeper levels of some
categories at issue, while closing off others.
To aid in the discovery process, the Outline Mode helps formulate
interrogatories, document requests, and questions for upcoming
depositions. To formulate document requests and interrogatories, the
attorney first analyzes the categories, subcategories, sub-subcategories,
etc., to become familiar with the potential issues in the lawsuit through
the headnotes provided, and begins to construct document requests and
interrogatories from sample, partially-tailored interrogatories available
at each level of hierarchy. Partial-tailoring automatically occurs upon
retrieval of the tailored outline from the outline library 43 via the
initial stage of querying by substituting specific lawsuit information
where appropriate into the text of the sample document requests and
interrogatories. Such tailoring minimizes the attorney's need for further
modification. Upon completing the tailoring process within the
hierarchical structure, the attorney terminal 21 extracts or "copies" all
of the newly created document requests and interrogatories from the
hierarchical structure and places them into draft discovery requests.
After minimal further modification, the attorney is able to serve the
requests on the opposing side.
The answers to the interrogatories are first placed into a case evidence
library 91. From there, the attorney terminal 21, if so directed,
automatically compares and updates the draft interrogatories in the
tailored outline with those actually served, and then directly associates
the received answers into the outline. In particular, the terminal 21
parses a text file of the served interrogatories into units of single
interrogatories. Each of the served interrogatories are then compared to
each draft interrogatory on an ordered word by word basis. The draft
interrogatory providing the best match is displayed by the attorney
terminal 21 along with the corresponding served interrogatory and a
matching percentage (based on the number of matching words). Thereafter,
the attorney terminal 21 prompts the attorney for verification. If the
attorney verifies the match, the terminal 21 replaces the draft
interrogatory with the served interrogatory, and associates the answer
therewith. If the attorney does not detect a match, the attorney terminal
21 can be directed to display the draft interrogatory offering next best
match. This process can continue until verification is received. If at any
point during the verification process, however, the attorney detects that
the served interrogatory has been newly added outside of the tailored
outline, the attorney terminal 21 can be used to categorize that
interrogatory within the appropriate hierarchical area(s) in the tailored
outline. Once a draft interrogatory has been updated (or replaced) by a
served interrogatory, it is taken out of consideration for further
correspondence matching. Thus, the served interrogatories can be
interactively imported back into the hierarchical structure of the
tailored outline. If, however, the attorney makes all modifications to the
draft interrogatories directly within the tailored outline, the
importation process occurs rapidly and accurately to locate and associate
the answers received.
After the importing process, the attorney is directed back through the
hierarchical structure by the attorney terminal 21 to review the newly
received interrogatories. By doing so, the attorney may choose to close
off additional categories or subcategories of inquiry, or pursue others.
In many circumstances, supplemental interrogatories may be in order after
reviewing the responses. In such circumstances, the attorney may draft
additional requests and, at some later time, extract the newly drafted
requests for service. Moreover, any type of discovery request can be
periodically drafted whenever the need arises. At any time, the attorney
may extract a collection of the draft discovery requests for review,
modification and service or use during a deposition or trial proceeding.
The attorney terminal 21 also automatically prepares draft document
requests during a deposition or trial proceeding. For example, if during a
deposition the examining attorney asks opposing counsel to produce
documents which the witness has identified, the attorney terminal 21,
monitoring the transcribed text, detects the question to the opposing
counsel, detects the use of the word "produce", concludes that a formal
request needs to be made, and prepares a draft document request based on
the interchange between the attorney and the opposing counsel.
If during the process of reviewing responses the attorney recognizes that
an unanticipated area of law might be at issue, the attorney merely gains
access to the outline library 43, enters the unanticipated area of law,
and the attorney's tailored outline is updated to include all of the
categories and subcategories and related information regarding the
unanticipated area of law for review.
Depending on the lawsuit budget and the number of items anticipated, the
documents and things produced may be entered into the case evidence
library in a variety of ways. Where possible, all documents received are
immediately scanned and converted to text via an optical character
recognition ("OCR") process. The scanned documents and the corresponding
text are stored in the case evidence library 91. Summaries describing the
"things" produced are also added to the library 91. In alternate
situations, only summaries for all of the documents and things received
are loaded into the case evidence library 91. In yet other situations,
only summaries or scanning is used for documents and things identified as
being significant.
The attorney interacts with the documents and things received for
annotation and association into the hierarchical structure of the tailored
outline. If the documents have been scanned, the attorney terminal 21 can
be used to display all documents by Bates number for review by the
attorney. If the corresponding text of the documents has been extracted,
the attorney may search the corresponding text to identify all documents
which contain key words or names, for example. Doing so minimizes the
quantity of documents that an attorney needs to review for a specific
purpose. Although all documents may be scanned and converted, in many
lawsuits, only specific documents may be scanned and/or converted.
Summaries might also be used either as an annotation to scanned documents,
or as a stand-alone index to the actual documents via the Bates numbers.
As each document is reviewed, the attorney may choose to add textual
annotations thereto, and may also choose to associate documents with a
specific categorization entry in the tailored outline. Furthermore, the
attorney may choose to directly associate the document with a pre-typed or
actual deposition question, a specific case law headnote, a treatise
selection, or any other data stored within a given categorization entry.
To better automate the process of association, the attorney terminal 21
directs the attorney through the draft document requests in the
hierarchical structure of the tailored outline. From the draft document
requests extracted, the attorney modifies and serves the document
requests. In a process identical to that available for interrogatories,
the attorney terminal 21 provides for interactive importation of the
served document requests into the tailored outline. Thereafter, on a
document request by document request basis, each Bates stamped document
produced can be scanned and immediately associated with the corresponding
served document request in the hierarchical structure of the tailored
outline. Thus, to review all documents relating, for example, to an oral
contract, the attorney first uses the terminal 21 to access the
categorization entry corresponding to oral contracts within the tailored
outline. Upon accessing the entry, all of the documents stored therein (or
associated therewith) can be directly accessed. Documents and things can
also receive multiple associations under multiple categorization entries
as proves necessary. This is accomplished using an associate/copy command
sequence via the command line 33. Similarly, associate/move or
associate/delete command sequences can be used to modify associations.
During the reviewing process, the attorney marks all significant documents,
and may annotate the documents as needed with text or voice. In addition,
during the process, additional discovery requests or unanticipated areas
of law may come to light. The discovery requests may be drafted and
associated with specific documents and/or annotations for later extraction
for formal service. Any unanticipated areas of law can be retrieved from
the outline library 43 to supplement the tailorable outline.
The tailored outline also provides sample draft deposition questions within
each category or subcategory (i.e., each categorization entry) of its
hierarchical structure. The attorney can mark those which might prove
advantageous for potential modification and use during an upcoming
deposition or trial. If so desired, additional questions might also be
drafted within the hierarchical structure. To aid in this process and
because of the diversity of the backgrounds of potential witnesses,
different subcategory groupings of questions are provided for the
different types of witnesses. For example, technical questions might be
grouped for technical witnesses being deposed which might be ignored for a
non-technical witness. Similarly, questions for expert witness extracting
opinions might be appropriately grouped.
In addition, as described in more detail below, during a deposition while
operating in the Deposition Mode, questions and answers are automatically
associated with the appropriate categories and subcategories in the
hierarchical structure, providing further groupings of potential
questions. Specific questions used during prior depositions can thereafter
be selected and possibly refined for use in an upcoming deposition with a
different witness.
Where appropriate, each category and subcategory of tailored outline
provides instant access to headnotes, associated full text of seminal
cases, and pre-typed search requests to supplement the attorney's
understanding of the specific law at issue. The outline library 43 draws
and updates such legal information via a case law library 63. At any time
during the lawsuit, the attorney may compare and update the legal
information contained in the tailored outline via a comparison process
with the outline library 43 which is maintained as legally "current". Any
differences detected are flagged and sequentially presented to the
attorney via the terminal 21 for immediate consideration of possible
impacts on the ongoing lawsuit. The tailored outline is thereafter updated
to reflect the current state of the law.
Using the attorney terminal 21, the attorney can directly tap into further
legal and evidentiary information of expert witnesses, associate attorneys
and clients via communication over the link 23 with corresponding
terminals 3, 4 and 5. For example, while contemplating a specific
subcategory in the tailored outline, the attorney realizes that the client
might possess needed factual information at issue. Instead of calling the
client, the attorney types in a message, and associates therewith any
information grouped within that subcategory as deemed necessary to clarify
the request. Such information might include the specific discovery
requests, documents, answers, etc., which raised the need for the
information. The message and associated information is then forwarded to
the client via the communication link 23 to the terminal 5. After reading
the communication, the client responds via the link 23. Upon receipt of
the response, the tailored outline automatically stores the client's
response within the hierarchical category from which the request
originated. In this way, further evidence or law can be collected to
further tailor the outline.
Once discovery has been completed, the attorney uses the tailored outline
to aid in the preparation of the pretrial order in a Pretrial Mode. First,
in the Pretrial Mode, the terminal 21 automatically generates a list of
all Exhibits and other documents or things which have been marked as
significant. This list provides the attorney with a starting point for
identifying a list of Exhibits for trial. Using the terminal 21, the
attorney can immediately access all annotations and the subcategory or
subcategories in which a potential Exhibit was associated. With such
access, the attorney can readily determine whether the potential Exhibit
should be removed from the list.
Similarly, designated deposition testimony may be easily identified while
in the Pretrial Mode. Upon request, the terminal 21 automatically extracts
all question and answer interchanges deemed during the deposition
proceeding to be important, i.e., through marking. The terminal 21
displays all such important interchanges for review by the attorney to
determine whether they might be useful at trial. All of the associated
annotations to the interchanges are also available to aid in the
determination.
The Pretrial Mode also provides for a draft set of jury instructions for
the Pretrial Order. Specifically, operating from the tailored outline, the
attorney terminal 21 automatically generates a set of draft jury
instructions based on the categories and subcategories of law still at
issue upon completion of the discovery process. Although the draft jury
instructions are preferably stored within the hierarchical structure of
the tailored outline, they may be interactively retrieved using the
outline library 43.
The attorney terminal 21 also provides potential witness and expert witness
lists while in the Pretrial Mode. All parties which have been deposed are
immediately listed as potential candidates. Any party having been deposed
which is removed from a list, automatically cues the terminal 21 to
designate the deposition in a list of depositions, or portions thereof, to
be read in at the trial. To further aid the attorney, the terminal 21
identifies those portions of the designated deposition transcripts which
have been previously marked as significant as being the portions to be
read into the record during the trial. The witness lists and designations,
along with the other pretrial information generated, provide the attorney
with a reasonable starting point when preparing the Pretrial Order.
At any time during the discovery process or thereafter, the attorney
terminal 21 may also be used in a Timeline Mode. In the Timeline Mode, the
terminal 21 automatically searches through the evidence referenced in the
tailored outline to identify dates and times, and then places the
references in a chronological order for attorney review. As a default,
only the documents and things and portions of the depositions that have
been marked as significant are considered for the search. However, the
scope of the search can be broadened or narrowed to encompass other
documents and the full transcripts of the proceedings.
The terminal 21 also provides for designation of a specific time frame
searching restriction to limit the search to the time period of an
important event, for example. Similarly, to limit the scope of a search,
only a single subcategory or group of subcategories can be chosen so as to
confine the search to the evidence associated with those subcategories.
Lexical searching can be combined with time line searching to help focus
the information retrieved.
Once a chronologically ordered time-line listing has been retrieved, the
attorney terminal 21 provides for an interactive review of the evidence
associated with each entry so that entries may be deleted or else
summarized. Thereafter, the terminal 21 provides for the display and
printout of the summarized remaining entries in a graphical time-line
format.
FIG. 2 is perspective view of a system configuration in which first and
second chair attorneys utilize the information obtained from the tailored
outline in the Outline Mode to conduct a deposition or trial proceeding,
while operating attorney terminals 19 and 21 in a Deposition or Trial
Mode. In the illustrated configuration, a computer aided transcription
("CAT") system 11 provides real-time, down-line transcription for
down-line review by the attorney terminals 19 and 21. As questioning is
conducted, the attorney terminals 19 and 21 operate within the
hierarchical structure of the tailored outline so as to retrieve the
transcript (the Q & A's), storing it into the hierarchical structure as
the proceeding is taking place. Operation within the hierarchical
structure occurs naturally because the attorneys use the hierarchical
structure of the tailored outline as the basis for conducting the
questioning. Moving through the structure may either be managed by the
first or second chair attorneys.
As will suggest itself, the Deposition Mode need not be used to
automatically retrieve the transcript into the tailored outline. Instead,
an attorney (or paralegal) may categorize the Q & A's ("questions and
answers") after the deposition has ended. The attorney may also choose to
only categorize those Q & A's believed to be significant. This
post-proceeding categorization process takes place directly via
interactive review of the transcript while moving through the hierarchical
structure of the tailored outline. As an intermediate step, the attorney
may manually mark-up the transcript, and have a paralegal perform the
interactive post-proceeding categorization.
In one embodiment, deposition transcripts, annotations, scanned documents,
etc., and other case evidence is stored in the case evidence library 91.
The supplemental library 92 stores draft discovery, jury instructions,
etc. Similarly, all case law, treatise selections, etc., are stored in the
case law library 63. The outline library 43 only stores the hierarchical
structure of the tailored outline which provides pointers to and
associations between the case law, case evidence and supplemental
information stored in respective libraries 63, 91 and 92. These libraries
may be in entirely separate databases, or in allocated portions of a
single database. In an alternate embodiment, the tailored outline stores
all of the case evidence, case law, and supplemental information directly
into the hierarchical structure of the tailored outline.
Upon interacting with outline library 43, the attorney terminal 21 may
extract and store the tailored outline locally. However, the tailored
outline may be fully stored and maintained by the outline library 43,
alleviating the need for local maintenance.
Specifically, at a trial or deposition, a stenographic recorder 13 converts
key-strokes entered by a court reporter via a keyboard 15 into digital
codes. The digital codes are intended to correspond to the words spoken at
the deposition or trial. The stenographic recorder 13 communicates the
key-stroke codes to the CAT system 11 via a link 17. Upon receipt, the CAT
system 11 attempts to transcribe the key-stroke codes into the exact text
of the words which were spoken to provide for a real-time textual display
of the transcript. To do so, the CAT system 11 communicates with a number
of libraries, dictionary, index and tables stored in a database 25. The
CAT system 11 transmits the exact and, where necessary, phoneme text
down-line to the attorney terminals 19 and 21 via a communication link 23
for real-time review. Further detail regarding code-to-text conversion
process and the down-line attorney terminals can be found in the pending
parent U.S. application Ser. No. 08/036,488, filed Mar. 24, 1993, which is
incorporated herein by reference.
In addition to the textual transcript which is generated, the CAT system 11
also provides access to audio and video transcripts which may also be
fully or selectively associated into the hierarchical structure of the
tailored outline. The CAT system 11 utilizes a tape recorder 8 and a video
camera 7 as a basis for creating the audio and video transcripts. Further
detail regarding the creation and association of the audio and video
transcripts can be found in pending U.S. application Ser. No. 08/066,948,
filed May 24, 199 | | |
