Palm, iPhone, & DataViz Documents to Go

If you've owned a Palm for years and thoroughly enjoyed using DataViz Documents to Go, then loving the iPhone and still toting your Palm has been irritating. Well, the irritation may be coming to an end.

Why? Because Documents to Go (DTG) should soon be available for your iPhone.

DTG was considered by many to be the Cadillac (okay, maybe we should say Lexus now) of the word processing programs for the Palm and it was one of the reasons the Palm was such a success, especially with lawyers. You could take your document and load it on your palm and then edit it on the road using DTG. Then you could print it out and you were ready to go.

iPhone, on the other hand, was static with documents.

There was no editing on the iPhone itself and you had to use internet sources or tricky tactics to use the iPhone not to actually edit on the phone but to go on the internet and edit documents there. That was a hassle because it meant figuring out how to upload the doc, use the iPhone to get to it, edit it there, and then wait until you returned to the office to be able to do much about it. Hassle, hassle, hassle.

Well, DataViz says (on their Twitter, click here) that they have just sent the final DTG app to Apple for approval and posting to the store. In a few days you could have DTG on your iPhone.

It still isn't clear what all the app will do but it's logical that DataViz will want it to be as much like the "normal" version as possible. You can bet that means that you will be able to view Word, Excel and likely PowerPoint files on your iPhone. The technical challange deals with being able to edit any of those. The Word documents very likely will be editable on your iPhone and maybe even an Excel spreadsheet, but PowerPoint just may not be ready for prime time yet. We'll have to wait a few days to see.

Still, DTG on an iPhone is long overdue. They aren't talking price yet but whatever it is will likely be no more than the Palm version and probably much less, given the average app price. Regardless of the price though, we'll very likely order up DTG asap. QuickOffice just never was my cup of tea.

Meanwhile, iPhone plans to reduce its third operating system Summer 2009 and intentions are to enable some significant editing abilities and that undoubtedly is part of what pushed DataViz to get DTG out the door. If they wait too long, the market share projections for DTG could well change as other products come online.

When we get the new DTG, we'll be able to see what's real and how much of the old DTG is lost like vaporware. For now, cross your fingers and get your credit card ready.

Ron Burdge

http://www.thelawcoach.com/

Helping lawyers helping clients since 1978.

Great Site for Free Software Utilities

Downloadpedia is a great site we just stumbled upon. We all use software to do our work and it's worth a look to find a lower cost alternative to the higher cost commercial programs if you can.

They bill themselves as a free content software encyclopedia and that's pretty much what it is, with loads of free software and utilities that is largely open source, including iPod software too. Some of it is deliberately tagged as "for the experienced user" so you have a warning of what you might be getting into, but most of it is for the average, everyday user who just wants to get something done.

One of their best projects, they've put together a list of 50 great free utility programs that you are bound to find something on you can use. Everything from adware and spy programs to website rippers and pdf and more programs in between.

There's even a page with hundreds of free icons and buttons that can be quickly and easily copied for your use in powerpoints or other projects.

Highly recommended. It's worth checking out.

Ron Burdge

http://www.thelawcoach.com/

Helping Consumer Lawyers Helping Their Clients Since 1978

SLAPP Suits Get SLAPPed Back

Picture this. Your client has a legitimate claim and negotiations are fruitless so you file a lawsuit. Then, the defendant files a creative counterclaim that you know has no real legitimate basis.

So why did they file it? To SLAPP your client, that's why.

Merchants and businesses have figured out that they can sometimes get what they want by using (some say abusing) the very system that the consumer is using: the Courts.

A socially unhealthy way to silence critics of any endeavor is to hit them with a lawsuit that can tie them up, both their time and their resources. Such lawsuits have been called a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation ("SLAPP") and the purpose is nothing more than intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.

Fighting a SLAPP lawsuit is not easy and not cheap, and that is often the very purpose of filing it.

Winning the lawsuit is often not real goal of a SLAPP lawsuit at all. The merchant's goals are accomplished if the consumer-defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs or simple exhaustion and abandons their own cause in exchange for having the SLAPP lawsuit dropped. A SLAPP may also intimidate others from taking the same course.

Well, finally there's a new case that says you can slap back. It comes out of New Jersey and may provide some relief to this sort of vindictive and abusive lawsuit. The case is James LoBiondo Jr v Grace Schwartz, decided May 14, 209, Case A-86/87-07. In a long-running series of lawsuits between the parties, the high court has now made it clear that people who file SLAPP lawsuits can get SLAPPed back.

LoBiondo says that the common law cause of action for malicious use of process can be a legitimate claim by a SLAPP suit victim. In some states it's called abuse of process. To win such a claim the victim has to prove a complaint was filed without probable cause, that was caused by malice, that ended in favor of the victim, and that the victim suffered "a special grievance." That last part is a little puzzling, but the Court indicates it will use some flexibility to determine what a special grievance may be.

The right of free speech or to petition the government, if actually infringed, will satisfy the special grievance element of the claim, according to the Court.

The advice of counsel defense is available to defend a SLAPP suit but when asserted, the victim may also sue the attorney too, but there is the additional need to prove the attorney's primary motive was an improper one.

The New Jersey Court adopted the Restatement 3rd of the Law Governing Lawyers and the Restatement 2nd of Torts to lay out the principles and elements of the claims the victim can use.

The bottom line is that SLAPP suits have been used by some parties to intimidate and plaintiffs and prospective plaintiffs from asserting their rights and now the Courts are finding such lawsuits can trigger abuse of process claims back against the abuser. That's only fair.

The purpose of the law should not be to provide the rich and powerful with a means to silence their critics. Such abusers of the legal system should themselves become the target of "SLAPP-back" lawsuits until they stop.

Ronald Burdge

http://www.thelawcoach.com/

Helping consumer advocates win cases since 1978.

Arbitrators Gone Wild

Binding Mandatory Arbitration, bma, has gotten rave reviews and acidic condemnations. What you think depends on which side of the argument you are on. But one thing is for sure, it's going to be tougher to get around now with Hall St. Assocs. LLC v Mattell Inc (2008), 128 S. Ct. 1396 (Mar. 25, 2008), a case that hasn't garnered as much tought as it probably deserves.

Before Hall St, there was some argument that an attorney could make that if an arbitrator ignored the law in making their decision, then the decision itself was flawed and could be attacked in court. Not so, now. You think it was bad before? It could get much worse.

Now, the Supreme Court has basically held that ignoring the law is not an appealable ground to attack an arbitrator's decision in court.

Before Hall St, Wilco v Swan (1953), 346 US 427, left some room for doubt and some attorneys successfully argued (though it was not often) that if an arbitrator ignored the law and their decision was actually contrary to applicable law, then the decision was flawed to the point that a court could set it aside. Now? Simple: you're stuck.

What the Supreme Court seems to have concluded, in its "supreme" wisdom, is that no matter what the arbitrator does or says about the law, their decision is "right" even if they get it all wrong.

Now it seems more likely than ever that no matter how badly the arbitrator miscontrues or misapplies the law, even to the point of being totally opposite to what the law says, that's tough. It seems like an extraordinarily harsh result, even for a Court that seems to love arbitration as a mechanism that is little more, in reality, than a private system for "justice."

Still, some courts have said that ignoring the law may actually be "where the arbitrators exceeded their powers" and can justify vacating a bad arbitration result. Comedy Club Inc. v Improv W Assocs. (9th Cir 2009), 553 F.3d 1277, 1290, in spite of Hall St.

The result? Arbitration decisions are likely to be upheld even if the arbitrator was mentally "out to lunch on the law" when the decision was made, unless you're in the 9th Circuit. For the rest of the US? It's still anybody's guess.

For now, with a little help from the Hall St., it looks like it's time for arbitrators gone wild --- and so long as the courts are enthralled with the notion that a secret private form of justice can somehow still be justice, then there's little we can do about it.

The moral of the story? Make sure you trust your arbitrator because unless they are totally drunk or schizoid, whatever they decide is probably what you'll be stuck with.

Ron Burdge

www.TheLawCoach.com

Helping Lawyers Help Their Clients Since 1978.