In a recent post on his Court Technology, Trial Presentation blog, Ted Brooks explains how a decision out of Los Angeles demonstrates that L.A. courts are “on the cutting edge of technology.” Traditionally, Brooks explains, though many preparation costs for trial have been recoverable, such as animations, video, and editing and printing oversized boards, the time spent during trial showing the evidence has not been. But in Bender v. County of Los Angeles, the court finally addressed this matter.
At issue was whether certain technological costs could be recoverable, such as the synchronization of videotaped depositions and employing a projectionist. The court below had approved the costs. But the defendants argued that the costs, which included courtroom presentations, should not be awarded to the plaintiffs. Defendants relied on almost 20-year-old case law, where a party spent more than $2 million in high-tech litigation costs. The court instead said that too much time had passed to rely on the case fully and the “use of technology in the courtroom has become commonplace,” and cheaper.
“The costs at issue total just over $24,000, and the trial court specifically found the trial technology enhanced counsel’s advocacy and was reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation,” explained the Bender court, which noted the trial court “acted well within its discretion in allowing recovery of these costs.”
Attorney Marlisse Silver Sweeney is a freelance writer based in Vancouver. MarlisseSilverSweeney@gmail.com. Twitter: @MarlisseSS. LTN: @lawtechnews.
No comments:
Post a Comment