JD Supra is one of the leading hubs of legal information for lawyers and business people who are looking for high quality advice and information. We’ve been using the site for about the last nine months to stay informed about what law firms like ours are publishing all around the country. This week, we’ve increased our role in that community by adding the JD Supra Doc application to our GJEL Facebook page.

This application will be a repository for our contributions to the network of professionals that use JD Supra’s high quality store of content. Check back in the coming weeks as we continue to bolster the section, which will include everything from guides for lawyers handling large personal injury cases to information on how parents can help make teen drivers safer.

The law should be accessible to everyone. JD Supra’s technology will make finding smart thoughts on legal issues increasingly available and accessible.

“The Commission concluded that no new restrictions are necessary in this area,” the ABA Ethics Commission writes on the report’s cover letter. But, it added, “lawyers would benefit from more guidance on how to use new client development tools in a manner that is consistent with the profession’s core values.” The report went on to suggest revisions to its policy regarding advertising, and contact with prospective clients.

The report seems to confirm what many observers initially suspected: that alarm over the ABA’s review of its technology policy was largely blown out of proportion. Robert Ambrogi, who called the draft a “sensible balance,” said the “proposed rules recognize that lawyers should be able to communicate and engage with others online without necessarily creating a prospective attorney-client relationship. Rather, that prospective would arise only when the lawyer creates a ‘reasonable expectation’ that he or she is interested in forming such a relationship.”

I think this hits the nail on the head. If a lawyer is inclined to act unethically, then he or she is going to do so, without or without the help of Facebook and Twitter. Sure, technology provides new platforms that lawyers can use to slip up, but social media tools are not inherently unethical until individual lawyers act unethically. At the end of the day, lawyers have the right to exercise free speech on and off line, and should be held accountable for whatever mistakes they make whether it’s in a coffee shop, or sitting on Facebook in their living room.

So as long as the ABA does not forbid the use of social media for lawyers, it seems likely that their guidelines will simply provide some more clarity while essentially allowing lawyers to continue using social media as they do already.

Photo Credit: GJELblogger

So far, the federal judiciary has not weighed in on the question of social media for lawyers and judges. The only whiff of an opinion comes from Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, who said recently that he joined “the tweeting thing” during the protests in Iran, “and I sat there totally fascinated.” Still, Breyer doesn’t think judges should set up their own Facebook pages for professional purposes.

California judges have a bit more clarity in terms of the level to which they should engage in social media. This comes from a 2010 opinion by the California Judges Association that essentially warns judges to take caution online. “In short, notwithstanding the explosion of participation in online social networking sites,” the final paragraph reads, “judges should carefully weigh whether the benefit of their participation is worth all the attendant risks.”

Of course, this gives individual judges space to have a variety of opinions on the subject. San Jose federal Judge Jeremy Fogel, for example, is skeptical. “It’s a poor idea for judges to participate in social media because you don’t know who’s reading what you post,” he said. “And even if you’re just a passive viewer, you’re probably hearing and seeing things that you shouldn’t.” Northern District Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal is much more receptive to social media. “It allows you to personalize yourself and reveal facets of your life and personality to a broader range of people, including professional colleagues,” he said. “Judges, I think, are at an unfortunate disadvantage because we are somewhat constrained in taking advantage of reasons to be on a social network.”

This is a tricky subject for California lawyers and judges. But I tend to side with Grewal in defense of social media use. If a lawyer or judge is inclined to act unethically, he or she will probably find a way to do so in person or online. I have doubts that social media or other online tools will make unethical conduct more likely. Last year, we spoke to Diane Karpman, an attorney with a special interest in social media and legal ethics. “Any way that makes it easier to communicate with clients and potential clients is just terrific,” she said. “The idea of lawyers being separate from the population is a disservice for the profession.”

Still, opinions on this subject vary across the board. Read the Recorder’s full story and video for more input from California judges using (or not using) social media.

Photo Credit: GJELblogger

In a recent feature for Wired Magazine’s Autopia blog, Keith Barry frames the discussion of automotive black boxes with the example of a car accident that killed two teenagers in suburban Florida 9 years ago. Edwin Matos was convicted on two counts of manslaughter after his Pontiac Firebird Firehawk collided with a car backing out of a driveway. Using black box evidence, police were able to determine that Matos was driving 114 miles per hour through the neighborhood. Following an appeal attempt, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the conviction, due partially to the fact that Florida, like 36 states, has no statute banning black box recorder technology.

I was surprised to hear that many auto companies have been installing automotive black boxes in vehicles for years. This is so common, in fact, that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration stipulated in 2006 that automakers must tell consumers about the devices. And this fall, the NHTSA will consider whether a proposal to “expand the future utility” of black box data. This is a significant change that would likely have an impact on how information is collected during car accident lawsuits.

Of course, like so many technologies, automotive black boxes should not be adopted until all sides agree that the technology is beyond repute. But so far, despite what the insurance companies and Matos’ attorney say, it appears that black boxes are reliable. So as long as the NHTSA testing phase goes well, I’d expect that automotive black boxes would have a positive impact on clarifying car accident lawsuits and improving street safety.

Photo credit: gtall1

One of the lessons I took away is that lawyers should really take the time to develop their online strategy before jumping in to the world of online marketing. Setting up a blog, Facebook profile, and Twitter account, for example, will be effective only if your firm truly has the time to monitor those accounts and develop new, relevant content. Lawyers should also remember that social media is intended to be a way to connect with people and engage in discussions, not a marketing vehicle. You will develop a much more loyal and interested social following by posting and commenting on interesting stories (not just your own), and engaging in conversations with others.

Of course, this investment in social media and online marketing takes time and resources. Avvo emphasizes that if you decide to take the leap, it should never interfere with your attention to providing outstanding legal services to your clients. That’s probably why they invited Brian Tannebaum (who’s not quite a fan of Avvo), to speak on Friday morning. Tannebaum emphasizes that no amount of online marketing can live up to the power of simply being a great lawyer. On this point, he’s absolutely right, which is why attorneys who intend to engage online should really take the time to develop a strategy that includes honest engagement.

Thanks to the whole Avvo crew for a great conference. I’ll look forward to next year’s! A few more shout outs to presenters Vanessa Fox, who wrote the book Marketing in the Age of Google, and Mike Blumenthal, one of the world’s experts when it comes to Google Places information.

The agenda for next week’s Avvocating Conference is jam packed with some of the best minds in legal marketing. In addition to CEO Mark Britton and Marketing Director Conrad Saam, Google Places guru Mike Blumenthal will speak about online rankings and reviews, and Brian Tannebaum will parse some of the complicated legal ethics issues in the online marketing world. The keynote speaker is Kendall Coffee, an experienced attorney who worked on the Elian Gonzales controversy and the 2000 presidential election recount in Florida. Take a look at the detailed Avvocating agenda and visit the Avvo webpage to register for the event. If you can’t make it, I’ll be tweeting and liveblogging on issues related to web and social media marketing for lawyers.

I did not attend the Avvocating conference last year, but my predecessor Kaitlin returned with glowing reviews and a positive outlook on Avvo’s operating procedure. After the conference, Mark Britton and Conrad Saam sat for informative interviews with GJEL blog. GJEL Managing Partner Andy Gillin has been an active Avvo participant, routinely answering user questions and uploading legal documents on issues like car accident preparedness. Take a look at Andy’s “Car Accident 101” webinar recorded with Avvo last year.

Head Injury Helmet Sensor

If your bicycle crashes in the forest and no one hears, will anyone find out? Well, yes, thanks to top chef Biju Thomas’ new experimental helmet technology. Thomas and a team of scientists and product designers have developed the SenseTech HALO helmet technology to sense major head injuries and alert medical authorities through cell phones to bring help to the injured cyclist. The new helmet design includes a high-tech sensor beneath the helmet’s foam surface that is programmed to know when the cyclist has experienced a major accident. The sensor then transmits a signal via Bluetooth to the cyclist’s smart phone, which alerts the closest relevant hospital or medical center on the location and severity of injury to the cyclist.

Thomas, a past chef for bicycle superstar Lance Armstrong and current chef for US cyclist Levi Leipheimer, came up with the idea after cycling for hours alone recreationally. “Being around such a beautiful yet dangerous and individual sport for years led me to the ‘Aha!’ moment,” he said.

Helmet Stink Bomb!

Even if your bike helmet looks normal, it could be harmed by minor structural problems that could render the helmet ineffective in a serious bicycle accident. That’s what led the Fraunhofter Institute for Mechanics of Materials to develop a brilliant way to determine when it’s time to buy a new, more secure bicycle helmet: make it stink. Not all the time, of course, but the new helmet is packed with stinky chemical capsules that are released when the helmet’s shell deteriorates. The smell leaves cyclists with no choice but to bite the bullet and buy a new helmet.

Helmet Turn Signals

Tired of throwing your hands out every which way to indicate which way you’re turning while cycling in the city? Well Blink has a helmet design solution for you. The helmet works exactly like car turn signals, in that other drivers, pedestrians and cyclists can determine which way you intend to turn just by seeing which side of your head is lighting up. To turn left, the cyclist just taps the turn light on the left side of his or her head. To turn right, he or she taps the right turn signal. To turn the signals off, the cyclist simply taps again after the intersection.

The design, which won an award at the 2010 Seoul Cycle Design Competition, is a brilliant concept with some clear drawbacks. First of all, since drivers and pedestrians currently expect hand turn signals from cyclists, they’re not likely to notice this high-tech helmet. And the turn signals are so small that they could be difficult to view from many angles, leading cars and pedestrians unable to tell which way the cyclist will turn. Still, the Blink design is a great idea that could really take off with a few improvements.

Distracted Driving & Cell Phone Suppressants

Distracted driving among vehicle drivers has been a hot topic recently. Since the dangerous practice kills nearly 6,000 drivers and injures 500,000 each year, Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood has made eliminating distracted driving a key focus. But distracted driving is also a serious problem for bicyclists. For this reason, California Senator Joe Simitian has included cyclists in his plan for increased distracted driving penalties. “The cycling community is of mixed minds on this,” said Simitian, noting that many cyclists don’t want to face additional fines. But, he says, “common sense tells us it’s not a safe habit, given all the risks that cyclists have to contend with.”

The best strategy to combat distracted driving and distracted cycling is just to turn off your phone while in transit. A number of cell phone companies and safety advocates have developed cell phone apps that prevent distracted driving by blocking incoming calls and texts and replying with an automated message that the driver or cyclist is in transit and will reply when they reach the destination safely. This is a great, low-cost way to cut down on distracted cycling and make the roads safer for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians alike.

Handlebar Traffic Control

Wouldn’t it be great if cars and trucks knew when cyclists were approaching a busy intersection? That’s a distinct possibility based on research developed by the city of Copenhagen, Denmark. As a test project, the city equipped 300 bicycles with R-fid chips on the handlebars which sent out radio frequencies while approaching an intersection. When the radio frequency is received, an illustration illuminates under the “walk” and “don’t walk” signals to notify drivers that a cyclist is near. Supposedly, this will coax drivers into watching out for cyclists and pedestrians.

All of the technologies mentioned above could greatly improve traffic safety by preventing serious head injuries, reducing distractions, and increasing road awareness. But when it comes to reducing bicycle accident injuries, the best solution is always to keep a “share the road” attitude, obey all traffic signs, and wear a helmet. Be safe! And enjoy National Bike Month.

Photo credit: mikebaird

Dashboard Social Media

When the Facebook add-on was first announced, Car Talk’s distracted driving blog stressed its inherent dangers. “Simply put, you cannot pay attention to two different things at the same time,” wrote David Strayer. “If you are updating the status of your Facebook account, you are not paying attention to the road.”

Self-Driving Car

This raises a number of important safety questions. First, the New York Times reports that “the car can be programmed for different driving personalities – from cautious, in which it is more likely to yield to another car, to aggressive, where it is more likely to go first.” But if a many cars are programmed “aggressive,” are accidents more likely? This technology should be viewed as a novelty until it becomes much more advanced and tested. Until then, let’s agree to stay in control of our vehicles, and not to use cell phones behind the wheel.

Intelligent Control

There are a couple of problems with this model. First, it only works if the driver’s hands are at the traditional “10 and 2” points on the steering wheel. Unless hands are in the exact area, this could lead to distracting confusion. Second, the product’s designers say it combines “with speech recognition in order to allow people to dictate text messages in the car.” But distracted driving technology should make phone communication harder, not easier, behind the wheel.

Video on Navagation Screen

Cars.com writes that in addition to overwriting the film prevention software, many dealers will gladly install monitors on the rear-view mirror, or even the steering wheel. “Whatever you choose,” Cars.com clarifies, “make sure to always keep your eyes on the road while driving and only use the DVD system when the vehicle is parked. Please.”

Smart Phone

Most states still consider distracted driving a secondary offence, meaning drivers can only be penalized if they are pulled over for another violation first. So the best way to eliminate the urge to talk, type, or text while driving is to install anti-distraction technology that blocks incoming calls and texts, while sending an automatic reply that you are driving and will return the call or text message when you reach your destination safely. Such technology often switches on automatically when the car is in motion.

The problem here is that some don’t have the benefit of a lawyer’s advice on top notch attorneys.  So the world’s best legal raters — and some newcomers — began pairing their print ratings with detailed online databases. Each of the major raters has its own advantages, but it can be difficult, for example, to parse when it’s best to use Martindale Hubbell’s Lawyers.com as opposed to startup web crusader Avvo. So we’ve compiled some information about the four major legal raters, their differences, and their main qualities.

Take a look, and let us know what you think in the comments.

Lawyers.com

Best for: Largest profile database; Great research tools

Total Peer Reviews: 70% of US lawyers peer rated

Oldest; Initial commitment to offline

Lawyers.com is the consumer-focused website of Martindale-Hubbell, a leading legal directory that stretches back 140 years, and creator of the prestigious “AV” rating for great peer-rated lawyers. The free website provides profiles and information for up to 1 million lawyers and law firms around the world. Lawyers.com also provides tips on how to select a great lawyer, explanations of major areas of law, and hosts community discussions on hundreds of legal topics.

Back in 2008 and 2009, Lawyers.com seemed to be struggling in terms of brand recognition and website traffic. In 2009, it even appeared that legal ratings startup Avvo would overtake Lawyers.com in unique monthly visitors. In November 2009, for example, Avvo only trailed Lawyers.com by 42,000 unique visitors and seemed to have all the momentum. But a set of television ads and a revamped online presence seems to have revived Lawyers.com, as it now lead Avvo by nearly 130,000 monthly unique visitors as of February 2011.

Best Lawyers

Best for: Media partnerships; International reach

Total Peer Reviews: 3.1 million

Best Lawyers describes itself as the “oldest and most respected peer-review publication in the legal profession.” For 25 years, Best Lawyers has reviewed attorneys nationwide, and provided a forum to help consumers find great lawyers in a wide range of practice areas. The newest edition of their print referral guide, The Best Lawyers in America, included 41,149 lawyers in nearly 130 practice areas, and was based on over 3.1 million evaluations from other attorneys. Best Lawyers teams up with local news publications upon the release of their referral guide, adding detailed legal stories about some of the best and most innovative lawyers.

This year, for the first time, Best Lawyers teamed up with US News and World Report to provide whole law firm rankings based on peer-rated reviews. The best law firms in each practice area were designated “Tier 1.” Best Lawyers continues to grow and remains a powerful force in the world of legal ratings.

Super Lawyers

Best for: Selection process transparency; “Rising Stars”

5% of lawyers in each state selected

By accepting only 5% of the lawyers in a given state, Super Lawyers selects the statistical cream of the crop. Like Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers bases its decisions on “peer recognition and professional achievement.” Super Lawyers’ complicated selection process includes a combination of peer nominations and their own “Star Search” program, in which the Super Lawyers research department investigates great lawyers who may not have been nominated by their peers. Once the nominations and search process are complete, Super Lawyers evaluates the candidates based on twelve factors including verdicts and settlements, honors and awards, experience, and position within law firm. Super Lawyers Magazines are then published on a geographic basis in all 50 states.

In 1998, Super Lawyers launched Rising Stars, an effort to highlight the country’s best lawyers who are under 40 and have been practicing for fewer than 10 years. Rising Stars now operates in 17 states including California, Washington, and Pennsylvania. Talented young lawyers are great for consumers because they are often cheaper, but often don’t qualify for other ratings.  In addition to the Super Lawyers print magazine, the service enables lawyers to claim their online profile in order to add updates about contact information and new accomplishments at my.superlawyers.com.

Avvo

Best for: Consumer-focused information; Q&A database

Total Profiles: 90% of licensed attorneys in the US

Primary commitment to web

Avvo is a newcomer, and probably the most controversial of the bunch. Avvo uses an algorithm to rank lawyers on a scale of 1 to 10 based on their experience, reputation, education, and a number of other factors. Avvo also allows attorneys to claim their profiles by adding contact information and additional details about their practice. Lawyers can also use Avvo to engage with consumers by writing legal guides on a variety of issues and answering questions on Avvo’s Q&A database.

Critics have said that Avvo’s ranking system can seem arbitrary and fluctuate for no apparent reason. But 2 million visitors each month and the monthly generation of up to 150,000 contacts for lawyers, according to CEO Mark Britton, is nothing to scoff at. And as consumer reviews become an increasingly important aspect of online life, you can expect Avvo to take even more mojo from the legal ranking titans. Avvo has taken strides to be the main consumer-oriented alternative to the other raters, encouraging lawyers to develop simple legal guides for non-lawyers and writing blogs like Avvo Blog and NakedLaw, which “exposes everyday law in a way non-lawyers can understand.”

It’s important to note that online reviews have recently been proven to be vulnerable to fraud. Last week, for example, the Federal Trade Commission fined a company selling guitar training DVDs $250,000 for paying marketers to post positive reviews and boost profits. But the ratings services often guard against these false reviews. Avvo, for example, states in its community guidelines that reviews that appear to be solicited or part of a quid pro quo will not be posted. And Super Lawyers has implemented safeguards to prevent lawyers from “gaming” the system by preventing “back-scratch” nominations and forbidding campaigning for nominations.

To date, 30 states including the District of Colombia have adopted laws against distracted driving. But many members of congress have been weary of a federal distracted driving law, fearing that it would interfere with states rights. In an interview with Consumer Reports, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says that’s going to change, if he has anything to do with it. “We’re going to push Congress to pass a federal law,” said LaHood, a tireless advocate for stricter distracted driving laws. “We believe a federal law with good enforcement can change people’s behavior.” LaHood also said that police officers should be able to pull a driver over for talking on his or her phone; currently, drivers can only be cited for distracted driving as a secondary offense.

LaHood has long said that laws are ineffective if they’re not backed up with strict enforcement. To test this theory, the Department of Transportation launched extensive enforcement programs in Syracuse, New York and Hartford, Connecticut. Halfway through the program, handheld cell phone use was down 56 percent in Hartford, and 38 percent in Syracuse. “We know there is a dramatic change in behavior when somebody gets a ticket, when a law is enforced,” said LaHood of the program.

The Consumer Reports survey supports LaHood’s contention that distracted driving laws aren’t being enforced strongly enough to impact driver behavior. Of the 78 percent of respondents who told Consumer Reports that they have stopped distractions, 66 percent said the behavior change was due to reading about the dangers of distracted driving, and 44 percent said they were deterred by laws against the practice, but only 1 percent said they were issued a ticket for distracted driving. This is quite low, considering that 80 percent of respondents admitted to habitually texting or talking on the phone behind the wheel in the past.

Fortunately, safety advocates, phone companies, and technology manufacturers are taking clear steps to help teenagers and adults end distracted driving. We’ve compiled a list of some of the best tech devices for distracted drivers, as has Consumer Reports. These include hands free aids, in addition to phone blockers that take away the urge to text altogether.

There are other actions concerned drivers can take to help end distracted driving. Support state and national laws against distracted driving, for example, and the push to make distractions a primary, rather than secondary, driving offense. The nonprofit organization that backs Consumer Reports suggests a four pronged approach to distracted driving that includes collecting more data, implementing more and stronger laws, boosting enforcement, and simplifying vehicle and cell phone controls.

There are also more grassroots groups taking up the fight against distracted driving. Even teens, who are generally considered the worst offenders, have launched organizations – like Students Against Destructive Decisions – to make a stronger peer-to-peer connection. And, of course, distracted driving can be combated on Facebook and Twitter, by following streams like @iDriveSafeUSA, @DontTwive, @DropItAndDrive, and @RayLaHood.