This is me again with another solid tip concerning your constitutional rights. Today we will explore the question about your home rights. The question; when can a law enforcer legally search your home or apartment. The answer; he can only normally search your place of habitat under two circumstances. First, if he has obtain a legal search warrant from a judge. You knew that huh? Well, there are some qualifiers. First, the warrant must dictate what will be searched. For instance, the warrant may say only search the garage, or a certain room, or a certain area of the home. If the warrant says that he can search the entire home, he can search anywhere he likes, and believe me he will. And please keep this in mind, if anything illegal is discovered during the search that doesn't pertains to the warrant, he can still use it against you. You could fight it in court, but your chances of winning are slim.

The second circumstance, and this is the one that bothers me to no end. If you give him permission! The reason why I'm disturbed by this is the founding fathers of the constitution gave us the right to dwell in our homes free from harassment. These are what they called OUR RIGHTS! Why would you give me or anyone the right to search your home? Yes, one might say," what you got to hide". Well I say, that's none of your business! It's one of your fundamental rights and you should protect it. When the police ask to search your home, most times they're looking for a fugitive, illegal contraband, or any other illegal activities. The law expects you to live by the law, so therefore make sure the law lives by the law. Refuse the officers entry into your home unless they have a search warrant. And oh, one more thing, if he performs an illegal search, you will win if you sue the agency.

As many of you know, I'm not trying to tell anyone to break the law. I'm a former rogue cop who knew all the tricks of rogue cops. This is my way to pay back society for all the wrong I've done. I'm just a strong advocate for human rights. I also know that many people do not know their rights, so lets just say I'm assisting them. Read my book called COP OUT. You'll be amazed at what the police will do if you are ignorant of your rights. Drive safe, obey the laws, and arrive home safe.

By: Robert Davis
http://www.authorsden.com
Mr. Robert Davis is a former police officer. He is a consultant and speaker with the Baton Rouge Polic Department. He won the physical fitness award in the police academy. He studied at Loyola University and enjoys a wide variety of outdoor activities. Mr. Davis is a master of wilderness survival. He enjoys camping, hiking, physical fitness, and spelunking. He currently resides in Louisiana. The foreword of "Cop Out " is written by Father George Clements of Chicago. Father Clements is an internationally known priest. A major motion picture was made about his life titled, "The Father George Clements Story " played by actors Lou Gossett Jr. and Malcolm Jamal Warner.

Featured by Resources For Attorneys, an attorney resources and lifestyle resources directory for attorneys, lawyers and the general internet public.

For more law articles see our Legal Articles Directory.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include that link.

For those of you that have no idea what mesothelioma is; or at least knows that it's a type of cancer but would like to know more about it, this article on asbestos mesothelioma resource will attempt to inform you as much as possible. This disease may not be popular but it certainly destroys the lives of people who have mesothelioma and his or her close friends and relatives.

Causes

To start, mesothelioma is caused by exposure to a mineral called asbestos. Fortunately, not many people are at risk of the hazardous asbestos compared to other toxic material. Even so, according to the AJRCCM 1.3 million people are still vulnerable to poisonous asbestos.

These are the people who are most susceptible to be exposed to asbestos and obtain either pleural mesothelioma or peritoneal mesothelioma:


Workers in mines of asbestos extraction
People who work in the trade industry
Workers at shipyards
Manufacturers of Asbestos products
Workers in the construction industry
Workers in heating industry
Family and friends of all of the above
The depressing part of it all is that getting mesothelioma isn't your fault, but because of negligence from the owners of these mines, shipyards, construction sites, etc. In the past these people have failed to implement safety measures and the consequences are being paid by everyone involved. The workers because of the illness and the owners because of all the compensation money they have to pay for every mesothelioma lawsuit they have had in the years.

Asbestos and the Law

Asbestos mesothelioma legal claims cost around $200 billion in the US. It is relatively easy to win a mesothelioma case because of the implications on how you obtained the disease. However, you must take into account that these people have had thousands of lawsuits throughout the years and they hire the best legal sharks out there. So it must be noted that they have techniques to drag and setback as much as possible the lawsuits.

By: Ermenegildo Billar
After certain events in his life, Ermenegildo Billar has dedicated years of his life to understanding and helping people with the malignant mesothelioma. For your comfort he decided to create www.infothelioma.com so you can have easy access to his research.

Featured by Resources For Attorneys, an attorney resources and lifestyle resources directory for attorneys, lawyers and the general internet public.

For more law articles see our Legal Articles Directory.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include that link.

Federal Criminal Law Statutes (Title 18, United States Code)

"Money laundering" as it is commonly called, involves the transfer of monies that are a product of criminal activity – whether that activity is drug trafficking related or white collar crime related. Although there is a fairly broad definition of money laundering, the federal money laundering laws were enacted to attempt to take the profit out of criminal activity.

Congress has passed several laws over the years to prevent profits of criminal activity from being utilized, such as Currency Transaction Reports. The Anti-Money Laundering Statutes criminalizes the movement and use of profits/wealth created by criminal activity. See Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1956 and 1957.

Many people have concerns about these statutes, included the apparently broad application of these statutes, especially concerns about reaching into legitimate business activities. A common example of this concern is a scenario where an individual or business handles money with no knowledge of any criminal origin, which could result in prosecution for money laundering in federal court.

In summary, the government has to prove that a person knowingly made some transfer or transaction with monies that were proceeds of a specified unlawful activity. The two commonly used statutes in federal courts, 18, U.S.C., Sections 1956 and 1957, list the specified unlawful activities that are the basis for federal money laundering. Money laundering that is often used in federal prosecutions and that is considered the consummate money laundering statute, is 18, U.S.C., Section 1956, shown here:

§ 1956. Laundering of Monetary Instruments
(a)
(1) Whoever, knowing that the property involved in a financial transaction represents the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, conducts or attempts to conduct such a financial transaction which in fact involves the proceeds of specified unlawful activity—
(A)
(i) with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity; or

(ii) with intent to engage in conduct constituting a violation of section 7201 or 7206 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or
(B) knowing that the transaction is designed in whole or in part—
(i) to conceal or disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, or the control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity; or
(ii) to avoid a transaction reporting requirement under State or Federal law,
shall be sentenced to a fine of not more than $500,000 or twice the value of the property involved in the transaction, whichever is greater, or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both.
(2) Whoever transports, transmits, or transfers, or attempts to transport, transmit, or transfer a monetary instrument or funds from a place in the United States to or through a place outside the United States or to a place in the United States from or through a place outside the United States—
(A) with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity; or
(B) knowing that the monetary instrument or funds involved in the transportation, transmission, or transfer represent the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity and knowing that such transportation, transmission, or transfer is designed in whole or in part—
(i) to conceal or disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, or the control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity; or

(ii) to avoid a transaction reporting requirement under State or Federal law,
shall be sentenced to a fine of not more than $500,000 or twice the value of the monetary instrument or funds involved in the transportation, transmission, or transfer, whichever is greater, or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both. For the purpose of the offense described in subparagraph (B), the defendant’s knowledge may be established by proof that a law enforcement officer represented the matter specified in subparagraph (B) as true, and the defendant’s subsequent statements or actions indicate that the defendant believed such representations to be true.

(3) Whoever, with the intent—
(A) to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity;
(B) to conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, or control of property believed to be the proceeds of specified unlawful activity; or
(C) to avoid a transaction reporting requirement under State or Federal law,
conducts or attempts to conduct a financial transaction involving property represented to be the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, or property used to conduct or facilitate specified unlawful activity, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. For purposes of this paragraph and paragraph (2), the term “represented” means any representation made by a law enforcement officer or by another person at the direction of, or with the approval of, a Federal official authorized to investigate or prosecute violations of this section.
(b) Penalties.—

(1) In general.— Whoever conducts or attempts to conduct a transaction described in subsection (a)(1) or (a)(3), or section 1957, or a transportation, transmission, or transfer described in subsection (a)(2), is liable to the United States for a civil penalty of not more than the greater of—
(A) the value of the property, funds, or monetary instruments involved in the transaction; or
(B) $10,000.
(2) Jurisdiction over foreign persons.— For purposes of adjudicating an action filed or enforcing a penalty ordered under this section, the district courts shall have jurisdiction over any foreign person, including any financial institution authorized under the laws of a foreign country, against whom the action is brought, if service of process upon the foreign person is made under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the laws of the country in which the foreign person is found, and—
(A) the foreign person commits an offense under subsection (a) involving a financial transaction that occurs in whole or in part in the United States;
(B) the foreign person converts, to his or her own use, property in which the United States has an ownership interest by virtue of the entry of an order of forfeiture by a court of the United States; or
(C) the foreign person is a financial institution that maintains a bank account at a financial institution in the United States.
(3) Court authority over assets.— A court described in paragraph (2) may issue a pretrial restraining order or take any other action necessary to ensure that any bank account or other property held by the defendant in the United States is available to satisfy a judgment under this section.

(4) Federal receiver.—
(A) In general.— A court described in paragraph (2) may appoint a Federal Receiver, in accordance with subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, to collect, marshal, and take custody, control, and possession of all assets of the defendant, wherever located, to satisfy a civil judgment under this subsection, a forfeiture judgment under section 981 or 982, or a criminal sentence under section 1957 or subsection (a) of this section, including an order of restitution to any victim of a specified unlawful activity.
(B) Appointment and authority.— A Federal Receiver described in subparagraph (A)—
(i) may be appointed upon application of a Federal prosecutor or a Federal or State regulator, by the court having jurisdiction over the defendant in the case;
(ii) shall be an officer of the court, and the powers of the Federal Receiver shall include the powers set out in section 754 of title 28, United States Code; and
(iii) shall have standing equivalent to that of a Federal prosecutor for the purpose of submitting requests to obtain information regarding the assets of the defendant—
(I) from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Department of the Treasury; or
(II) from a foreign country pursuant to a mutual legal assistance treaty, multilateral agreement, or other arrangement for international law enforcement assistance, provided that such requests are in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Attorney General.
(c) As used in this section—

(1) the term “knowing that the property involved in a financial transaction represents the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity” means that the person knew the property involved in the transaction represented proceeds from some form, though not necessarily which form, of activity that constitutes a felony under State, Federal, or foreign law, regardless of whether or not such activity is specified in paragraph (7);
(2) the term “conducts” includes initiating, concluding, or participating in initiating, or concluding a transaction;
(3) the term “transaction” includes a purchase, sale, loan, pledge, gift, transfer, delivery, or other disposition, and with respect to a financial institution includes a deposit, withdrawal, transfer between accounts, exchange of currency, loan, extension of credit, purchase or sale of any stock, bond, certificate of deposit, or other monetary instrument, use of a safe deposit box, or any other payment, transfer, or delivery by, through, or to a financial institution, by whatever means effected;
(4) the term “financial transaction” means
(A) a transaction which in any way or degree affects interstate or foreign commerce
(i) involving the movement of funds by wire or other means or
(ii) involving one or more monetary instruments, or
(iii) involving the transfer of title to any real property, vehicle, vessel, or aircraft, or

(B) a transaction involving the use of a financial institution which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce in any way or degree;
(5) the term “monetary instruments” means
(i) coin or currency of the United States or of any other country, travelers’ checks, personal checks, bank checks, and money orders, or
(ii) investment securities or negotiable instruments, in bearer form or otherwise in such form that title thereto passes upon delivery;
(6) the term “financial institution” includes—
(A) any financial institution, as defined in section 5312 (a)(2) of title 31, United States Code, or the regulations promulgated thereunder; and
(B) any foreign bank, as defined in section 1 of the International Banking Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3101);
(7) the term “specified unlawful activity” means—
(A) any act or activity constituting an offense listed in section 1961 (1) of this title except an act which is indictable under subchapter II of chapter 53 of title 31;

(B) with respect to a financial transaction occurring in whole or in part in the United States, an offense against a foreign nation involving—
(i) the manufacture, importation, sale, or distribution of a controlled substance (as such term is defined for the purposes of the Controlled Substances Act);
(ii) murder, kidnapping, robbery, extortion, destruction of property by means of explosive or fire, or a crime of violence (as defined in section 16);
(iii) fraud, or any scheme or attempt to defraud, by or against a foreign bank (as defined in paragraph 7 of section 1(b) of the International Banking Act of 1978)); [1]
(iv) bribery of a public official, or the misappropriation, theft, or embezzlement of public funds by or for the benefit of a public official;
(v) smuggling or export control violations involving—
(I) an item controlled on the United States Munitions List established under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778); or
(II) an item controlled under regulations under the Export Administration Regulations (15 C.F.R. Parts 730–774); or

(vi) an offense with respect to which the United States would be obligated by a multilateral treaty, either to extradite the alleged offender or to submit the case for prosecution, if the offender were found within the territory of the United States;
(C) any act or acts constituting a continuing criminal enterprise, as that term is defined in section 408 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 848);

(D) an offense under section 32 (relating to the destruction of aircraft), section 37 (relating to violence at international airports), section 115 (relating to influencing, impeding, or retaliating against a Federal official by threatening or injuring a family member), section 152 (relating to concealment of assets; false oaths and claims; bribery), section 175c (relating to the variola virus), section 215 (relating to commissions or gifts for procuring loans), section 351 (relating to congressional or Cabinet officer assassination), any of sections 500 through 503 (relating to certain counterfeiting offenses), section 513 (relating to securities of States and private entities), section 541 (relating to goods falsely classified), section 542 (relating to entry of goods by means of false statements), section 545 (relating to smuggling goods into the United States), section 549 (relating to removing goods from Customs custody), section 641 (relating to public money, property, or records), section 656 (relating to theft, embezzlement, or misapplication by bank officer or employee), section 657 (relating to lending, credit, and insurance institutions), section 658 (relating to property mortgaged or pledged to farm credit agencies), section 666 (relating to theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds), section 793, 794, or 798 (relating to espionage), section 831 (relating to prohibited transactions involving nuclear materials), section 844 (f) or (i) (relating to destruction by explosives or fire of Government property or property affecting interstate or foreign commerce), section 875 (relating to interstate communications), section 922 (l) (relating to the unlawful importation of firearms), section 924 (n) (relating to firearms trafficking), section 956 (relating to conspiracy to kill, kidnap, maim, or injure certain property in a foreign country), section 1005 (relating to fraudulent bank entries), 1006 [2] (relating to fraudulent Federal credit institution entries), 1007 [2] (relating to Federal Deposit Insurance transactions), 1014 [2] (relating to fraudulent loan or credit applications), section 1030 (relating to computer fraud and abuse), 1032 [2] (relating to concealment of assets from conservator, receiver, or liquidating agent of financial institution), section 1111 (relating to murder), section 1114 (relating to murder of United States law enforcement officials), section 1116 (relating to murder of foreign officials, official guests, or internationally protected persons), section 1201 (relating to kidnaping), section 1203 (relating to hostage taking), section 1361 (relating to willful injury of Government property), section 1363 (relating to destruction of property within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction), section 1708 (theft from the mail), section 1751 (relating to Presidential assassination), section 2113 or 2114 (relating to bank and postal robbery and theft), section 2280 (relating to violence against maritime navigation), section 2281 (relating to violence against maritime fixed platforms), section 2319 (relating to copyright infringement), section 2320 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit goods and services), section 2332 (relating to terrorist acts abroad against United States nationals), section 2332a (relating to use of weapons of mass destruction), section 2332b (relating to international terrorist acts transcending national boundaries), section 2332g (relating to missile systems designed to destroy aircraft), section 2332h (relating to radiological dispersal devices), or section 2339A or 2339B (relating to providing material support to terrorists) of this title, section 46502 of title 49, United States Code, a felony violation of the Chemical Diversion and Trafficking Act of 1988 (relating to precursor and essential chemicals), section 590 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1590) (relating to aviation smuggling), section 422 of the Controlled Substances Act (relating to transportation of drug paraphernalia), section 38 (c) (relating to criminal violations) of the Arms Export Control Act, section 11 (relating to violations) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, section 206 (relating to penalties) of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, section 16 (relating to offenses and punishment) of the Trading with the Enemy Act, any felony violation of section 15 of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (relating to food stamp fraud) involving a quantity of coupons having a value of not less than $5,000, any violation of section 543(a)(1) of the Housing Act of 1949 (relating to equity skimming), any felony violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, any felony violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or section 92 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2122) (relating to prohibitions governing atomic weapons) [3] environmental crimes
(E) a felony violation of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), the Ocean Dumping Act (33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (33 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.), the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.), or the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.); or
(F) any act or activity constituting an offense involving a Federal health care offense;
(8) the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.
(d) Nothing in this section shall supersede any provision of Federal, State, or other law imposing criminal penalties or affording civil remedies in addition to those provided for in this section.
(e) Violations of this section may be investigated by such components of the Department of Justice as the Attorney General may direct, and by such components of the Department of the Treasury as the Secretary of the Treasury may direct, as appropriate and, with respect to offenses over which the United States Postal Service has jurisdiction, by the Postal Service. Such authority of the Secretary of the Treasury and the Postal Service shall be exercised in accordance with an agreement which shall be entered into by the Secretary of the Treasury, the Postal Service, and the Attorney General. Violations of this section involving offenses described in paragraph (c)(7)(E) may be investigated by such components of the Department of Justice as the Attorney General may direct, and the National Enforcement Investigations Center of the Environmental Protection Agency.

(f) There is extraterritorial jurisdiction over the conduct prohibited by this section if—
(1) the conduct is by a United States citizen or, in the case of a non-United States citizen, the conduct occurs in part in the United States; and
(2) the transaction or series of related transactions involves funds or monetary instruments of a value exceeding $10,000.

(g) Notice of Conviction of Financial Institutions.— If any financial institution or any officer, director, or employee of any financial institution has been found guilty of an offense under this section, section 1957 or 1960 of this title, or section 5322 or 5324 of title 31, the Attorney General shall provide written notice of such fact to the appropriate regulatory agency for the financial institution.
(h) Any person who conspires to commit any offense defined in this section or section 1957 shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.
(i) Venue.—
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), a prosecution for an offense under this section or section 1957 may be brought in—
(A) any district in which the financial or monetary transaction is conducted; or

(B) any district where a prosecution for the underlying specified unlawful activity could be brought, if the defendant participated in the transfer of the proceeds of the specified unlawful activity from that district to the district where the financial or monetary transaction is conducted.
(2) A prosecution for an attempt or conspiracy offense under this section or section 1957 may be brought in the district where venue would lie for the completed offense under paragraph (1), or in any other district where an act in furtherance of the attempt or conspiracy took place.
(3) For purposes of this section, a transfer of funds from 1 place to another, by wire or any other means, shall constitute a single, continuing transaction. Any person who conducts (as that term is defined in subsection (c)(2)) any portion of the transaction may be charged in any district in which the transaction takes place.

[1] So in original. The second closing parenthesis probably should not appear. [2] So in original. Probably should be preceded by “section”. [3] So in original. Probably should be followed by a semicolon.

By: John Teakell
Dallas-based criminal attorney John Teakell, offers defense for money laundering, and other white collar offenses. For more information, visit http://www.teakelllaw.com.

Featured by Resources For Attorneys, an attorney resources and lifestyle resources directory for attorneys, lawyers and the general internet public.

For more law articles see our Legal Articles Directory.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include that link.

In today's computer dependant world, the zealous advocate must be able to navigate his way through every conceivable form of discovery in order to effectively represent his or her client. Failure to seek the appropriate records or the failure to respond to discovery requests with the appropriate electronic discovery knowledge could potentially expose both client and attorney to the risk of sanctions for discovery abuses and/or result in the spoliation of evidence. Knowledge of the electronic evidence is crucial to any attorney hoping to retain clients. Once electronic evidence is in hand though, an attorney faces additional obstacles, specifically, regarding how to properly use such evidence. Gaining a true understanding of metadata can mean the difference between success and failure.

Metadata is more than simple electronic evidence. General electronic discovery typically considers easily accessible electronic files, such as those on an active network file server. Metadata is more obscure and difficult to locate, and is found through an examination of often hidden and deleted files, or even left over file fragments that were supposed to be deleted. Specifically, metadata describes how, when and by whom particular set of data is collected and formatted. Metadata can often be thought of as the "DNA" of documents. It is hidden from view and often contains the most damaging information. Discovering the metadata behind a piece of data, such as a document or spreadsheet, can reveal the authors of the document, all comments and edits made and any other trait related to its creation. Mining for metadata is the newest tool in the ongoing battle between those seeking to conceal and those seeking to reveal electronic evidence.
The "hard" paper evidence obtained throughout the discovery process only reflects the most recent form of the document, and often does not reveal the most useful information. Direct or cross examination based strictly on the hard copy document restricts the examiner to questions regarding the information only contained on the printed page. It is therefore difficult to determine the document's authenticity, its author and any edits made while the copy was still a work in progress. Often times though, these documents were created in a word processing program such as Microsoft Word, which leaves a trail of information regarding the life of the document itself. The use of a skilled attorney or a forensic examiner can lead to the discovery of every detail regarding the document.

The metadata contained in documents will include 'tags' and information regarding when and by whom the document was created, what changes were ever made to the document, and even what else may have been on the creator's computer screen when making the document. For example, a forensic examination of a single fax cover letter can reveal not only the name and fax number but can also reveal every message sent by that user, using the same fax template. The metadata can reveal this information because when text is deleted using a word processor program, it is never truly removed from the document. In reality, when deleting the text the processor is simply instructed not to print or display the data. Knowledge of what the creator thought was deleted can be an extremely useful tool, for persuasive, substantive and impeachment purposes throughout the trial.

The hiring of an expert Data Forensics Expert may well be a justified expense when in the best interests of a client. The examiner will be able to help paint a picture by providing a story line with corroborating evidence including creation and edits dates, authorship, all communications regarding the document and potentially even the intent behind the acts. Such experts should be used in cases where substantial hidden digital evidence may exist. This is not restricted to intellectual property cases, but may involve every area of law, including family law, breach of contract, discrimination and sexual harassment.

The ability to spot the cases when metadata may be recovered is an important skill for any practitioner. The more important skill, however, is the ability to know how to use the electronic discovery means once identified. It is wise to use an attorney experienced in electronic discovery and metadata mining when faced with such a case. <c>"Because of their ubiquitous nature, documents stored in electronic form...should be specifically targeted by counsel in developing their discovery plans. Failing to do so may not only prejudice their case, but may also constitute malpractice." CEB California Discovery Practice 3rd Ed Vol. 2, §8.24 p. 711 (1998). It is the duty of every advocate to have a sufficient level of knowledge regarding electronic discovery and metadata, or to at least associate with counsel who does. Failure to understand the importance and usefulness of metadata and electronic discovery in general may lead to undesirable consequences.

By: Nicholas J. Deleault
This article was written by Nick Delaunt, for the Law firm of Goldstein and Clegg, LLC, a law firm representing clients in online defamation actions.

Featured by Resources For Attorneys, an attorney resources and lifestyle directory for attorneys, lawyers and the general internet public.

For more law articles see our Legal Articles Directory.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include that link.