|
|
Litigation support products, including us(!), make much noise about "linking" because linking allows you to locate information quickly. However, in reality all linking boils down to providing two functions:
- Linking information to one or more issues (more accurately described as tagging).
- Linking to a document, or a part of it, because either:
- there is a static relationship, such as connecting an affidavit to it's attachments, or
- you've discovered a relationship between two pieces of information (perhaps contradictory testimony) and want to be able to access the related information quickly using a "cross-link" of some type
To accomplish these two basic and simple tasks, competitive products advertise a confusing and dizzying array of "linking" capabilities:
- CaseMap® talks of:
object links, issue links, source links, potential source links, question links, document links, linked files, related files, etc.
- Summation® talks of:
transcript links, evidence links, file attachment links, image links, internet links, linked documents, linking to "Core DB Summaries", case organizer links, cross links, link fields: Linked Document, Attachments, Related IDs, Attachment Doc IDs, Parent ID, Related Document IDs, Transcript Zoom Field, Case Organizer/DB Fields, issue fields, etc.
- Concordance®, on the other hand doesn't provide any "linking" features similar to the above in CaseMap or Summation, other than linking documents or notes to issues -- tagging in Concordance terminology.
In this issue of Just the Facts, we go through and unravel the problems with these technologies. Here's what we'll cover:
Issue linking done right
With respect to issue linking, we'd just like to make one, illuminating, comment.
Despite the critical importance of linking evidence and information to one or more issues, only MasterFile lets you review and/or explore everything (documents, extracts, facts, events, players) linked to the issues, live, without printed reports, as shown below:
Even CaseMap, which specifically advertises that it "makes it easy to ... explore the facts, the cast of characters, and the issues in a case", doesn't let you review, browse or explore everything "by Issue" -- you have to print and keep a paper report next to you to use side by side with CaseMap.
For an in depth and closer look at Issues and Topics in MasterFile, see our article:
Now, for the remainder of this issue of Just The Facts, we're going to take a look at item (ii) above -- linking to a document or part of it. We'll first review "linking" technology in CaseMap and Summation, and then compare them to MasterFile's doc-link technology.
The big problem with CaseMap's direct file linking: Broken links
Since CaseMap does not have any sort of document repository, it must use "linked files" and "related files" fields to connect the real document files (Word, PDF, TIFF, etc. scattered across your network) to the document objects, facts, etc. If the actual files are renamed or moved, or become unavailable, such as when on the road, or when a client or co-counsel share the database on their own networks, the links break and you can no longer get the document.
Imagine you've got to meet a critical deadline and decide to take your case home to work on it during the evening. You copy it to your notebook along with all the document files. When you open it up you discover that none of the file links work because your drive letters and/or network paths at home don't match the office's (which are stored in the database). So you tediously go through the database, document by document, and fix several hundred file links, only to remember that you'll have to do it all over again when you're back at the office -- tomorrow.
Alternatively, to avoid direct file linking, you can purchase and support a document repository, such as Concordance or Summation, to use with CaseMap. However, now all users -- mobile users, remote offices, clients, co-counsel, etc. -- must also purchase and support the repository system along with a copy of the document database in order to review the documents.
But even then, with Concordance or Summation, for example, you still won't have all your problems solved. Concordance, for example, uses direct file linking for its PDF files, and specifically say they break if you move the PDF files (or looking at it another way -- if you move). They suggest you use their utility to bulk fix it. So you'll bulk fix at home, bulk fix back at the office, co-counsel and other colleagues are all bulk fixing. Similar problems exist with Summation's handling of PDF (and other native format document files) with their "pleadings" feature, but not their "edoc" feature (which has its own problems), and so on and so forth. (Summation also has other linking deficiencies, unrelated to document files, described later in this article.)
You will no doubt run into these, and other subtle surprises and nuances (such as finding out other users can delete, move or rename directories with critical documents and break the file links even at the office) -- but only after the fact and usually when you least need to be "surprised". The simple fact is that direct file links are a weak method.
What's the solution? MasterFile doc-links, explained below. Firstly, MasterFile doesn't treat PDF, "edocs", pleadings, etc. "specially". A document is a document. Secondly, MasterFile stores all the documents in the database itself. MasterFile does not use external files. None. So there are no direct file links to break! It's that simple. MasterFile doc-links work all the time, everywhere.
The problem with CaseMap's "short names"
In CaseMap, every document is an "object", every person is an "object", every organization is an "object", etc., and every "object" must be given a "short name". For example, if you refer to 1000 key documents you need to figure out 1000 "short names" for these documents -- remember the "old days before Windows" when we had to figure out short 8 character filenames for our documents, and then remember from those short names, which file was which?
Furthermore, your colleagues are going to have an even harder time figuring out what the name for a particular document is -- one reason why the desktop and server search tools were developed. Naming conventions can be used but they are soon abandoned and also staff will inevitably make errors when hundreds or thousands of documents are involved.
To solve these problems, CaseSoft recommends you use ID numbers instead of short names, and even released a "Bates Stamper" to generate these ID numbers for you. However, as we explain in "The CaseSoft "Bates" Stamper, the CaseMap PDF Loader", this "solution" actually creates bigger problems.
Another issue with CaseMap is that despite all the different types of links, short names, objects, etc. you can't even link one CaseMap fact to another, as they often are in the real world.
The problem with point-to-point cross-linking of related information
Despite Summation LG, LG Gold and iBlaze®'s sweeping array of link types and fields to accomplish the above two tasks, their evidence/transcript links are what you use to cross-link two pieces of information that have a relationship you've discovered (i.e. point ii.b above). However, there is a fundamental flaw inherent with methods, such as Summation's evidence links or "paper-clip" type document links, that directly cross-link, point-to-point, related information.
The following example best illustrates the problem:
Imagine reading an encyclopaedia and as you uncover something new and critical which is related to other information you've already read, you decide to make a citation in the margin with the volume, page and line number of where the other information can be found, perhaps also doing the reverse to create a "cross link". Some of your citations may also be to relevant reports and documents you've collected in your filing-cabinet.
Now, close the encyclopaedia, or simply come back after a few days, or give it to your colleague. Do you or they have any clue about what valuable links you've uncovered, where they are, what they were about, etc.? No because they're hidden, lost and forgotten in the margins thousands of pages.
And, once you've created a few hundred, all you have is the chaos of spaghetti -- hundreds of references pointing here and there, scattered willy-nilly throughout the encyclopaedia. There's no order or organization to your references and nothing to explain why you created them.
You could make an extra effort to put a reminder note next to each and every reference (which, for example, Summation recommends "to keep track" of evidence links), but remember, the notes will be hidden in the pages along with references. And even if you could also then search for your notes, you have to first remember you've got some references or notes to search for to begin with. If you don't, you may miss critical links you've found, which may still happen if you don't search with the right keywords. Also, how will your colleagues know what to search for and what keywords to use? They have no idea about what you've discovered that's hidden in the margins.
Nevertheless, even if you take the extra effort to put a reminder note next to each and every reference and find them all, you have to read each and every note to begin to understand the little stories told by each set of related notes. And then after that reconstruct and remember the whole story in your mind (and each of your colleagues must do the same).
Is this the way you would really conduct research and document your findings?
All methods of cross-linking information directly, point-to-point, like Summation's evidence links or "paper-clip" type document links, have essentially this problem.
The root of the problem is that the your links and notes (i.e. your citations, etc.) are stored with the original information rather than being organized separately, where they would always be readily available for review by anybody.
This problem with point-to-point cross linking is also exactly the problem you'll face with electronic sticky notes (but not paper Post-it notes), as we explain in "Our short take on electronic sticky notes"
Point-to-point cross linking and electronic sticky notes: technologies that test your memory, rather than assisting it.
MasterFile's innovative doc-links for argument, security over e-mail, eliminating file links, etc.
MasterFile has only one linking technology -- doc-links. They're simple to understand and easy to use.
It doesn't matter why you're linking or what you're linking -- they're used for everything. They let you link work product, work in progress, evidentiary documents, transcripts, extracts, or facts to any other document, extract or fact. They're self-descriptive so there are no short names to remember, and because MasterFile stores everything in its database, there are no external document file links to break when you go mobile or share the database with co-counsel.
Now let's go back to the above example and see how you would really manage your encyclopaedia research:
While browsing the encyclopaedia you would naturally have a notepad next to you. Each page would be titled with a description of a fact you're researching. Then, as you uncover something important about any fact, you'd simply turn to the relevant page and make a note about what you've uncovered, perhaps also noting how and why it's related to something else you've noted earlier on the page, or another page (i.e. another fact) and finally note down the volume, page and line number next to your new notes so you can locate the source information again.
Nothing is hidden so nothing gets lost or forgotten. And there's no chaotic spaghetti of references -- there's an organized and orderly set of notes and points for each fact, with references back to the source evidence.
MasterFile works exactly the same way -- the way you work.
Its exclusive Fact & Argument Drafting system and doc-link technology lets you make your notes inside each fact (i.e. like the piece of paper) complete with doc-links (i.e. volume, page and line #) directly to the source document, extract or other fact.
As can be seen below, first, each point in the argument for this fact is set out, just as you would do on a notepad. Then, following each point, is a yellow doc-link hotspot to the source evidence -- a document, extract or another fact. Note how the doc-link is self-descriptive with details and description of the source evidence.
What's shown is the argument for a hypothetical point thrown out by the other side (Sky High Elevators), that Arcade (our client) is responsible for an elevator failure because of faulty brake maintenance by our client's engineer.
First, the opposing side's position has been set out together with an extract from an expert report and an authority they're relying on. Then, our position is set out, substantiated by a letter and another fact we're relying on. Notice how you're able to set out positions and substantiate them, point by point. Any team member (and now even you!) can immediately understand, or be reminded, how to argue and substantiate this issue.
MasterFile's exclusive Fact & Argument Drafting system and doc-link technology lets you be professional, confident, clear, concise and to the point -- there's no chaos, there's nothing hidden and there's nothing willy-nilly.
Since MasterFile stores all your case documents (evidentiary, work product, and work in progress), the powerful synergistic value of  MasterFile's repository design immediately becomes obvious -- you're able to set out and substantiate your argument with any supporting information.
And because you can even doc-link other facts, you can build argument for a fact by relying on, and linking in, other facts to be argued, already established or stipulated, as shown.
You can even reference documents, extracts and facts in other MasterFile databases. These databases could be from other cases or research databases, for example, which contain only authorities.
Although we'll now try and explain how smoothly and fluidly MasterFile lets you "research the encyclopaedia" and create the above argument, there's nothing better than seeing it in action. View our short video "Creating and working with doc-links" -- you won't believe something so powerful could be so simple.
When you uncover something new, simply select the text and click on the "Add to Existing Fact" button, shown below:
You will be shown MasterFile's fact management views. Simply choose the fact to update and the selected text, together with the doc-link, is automatically inserted into the fact's argument. The fact is then opened ready for you to add your notes or comments. It's all no different or harder than turning to the correct page in your paper notepad and updating your existing research with new notes and a bibliographic citation back to the source evidence.
Alternatively, you could first click the "Make Extract" button shown above to instantly create an extract of the critical information. And then, from the extract, simply click on "Add to Existing Fact" to insert a descriptive doc-link back to the extract in the fact's argument, as shown under the first bullet in the above screen shot. By making an extract, whenever you review the document, you'll see at a glance this key information along with any other already identified in the document and you'll be able to easily link to the extract again.
Beyond letting you substantiate argument with references to evidence relied on, doc-links can be used whenever you need to reference documents such as exhibits or attachments.
Finally, and most impressively even if we say so ourselves, when it comes to collaboration doc-links are unmatched. With one click on the buttons shown above, you can even e-mail doc-links, as shown below, to your colleagues, or others with access to the server or replicas of the databases, and eliminate bulky file attachments which clog e-mail systems. Also, by e-mailing doc-links, rather than copies of the documents themselves, you also ensure security is maintained over e-mail because only those with access to the specific documents, facts, etc. will be able to retrieve the documents, facts, etc. as access will flow through the doc-link.
Doc-links -- Innovative. Powerfully simple. And only MasterFile has them.
We focus on the technology so you can focus on your cases.
Further information
|
