Check back regularly to stay informed of the latest legal technology updates, as well as news from our office.
Video synchronization is the process of taking the court reporter's transcript and the videographer's video files and combining them so that they can be used with Microsoft PowerPoint, inData's Trial Director, Summation or other legal presentation programs.
Imagine being able to search a video just as you would search a word processing document and finding the perfect video clip
to impeach a witness. You can also use these clips as part of a settlement hearing to avoid even going to trial.
Contact LegalTek today to find out how you can take advantage of one of the most exciting developments in legal technology.
While the State of Indiana does not yet require a certified videographer do you want to use less than the best? Some states, a Louisiana Ruling shown below, are beginning to require certification for videographers as well as court reporters. All LegalTek videographers are certified by the American Guild of Court Videographers.
The Louisiana Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a "professional videographer" was required when a party wished to have a deposition video recorded and ruled against the law firm that wished to use their own in-house videographer to tape a deposition.
In its decision, the court said: "It is clear that the Code of Civil Procedure points out that accuracy and trustworthiness of the videotaped deposition must be provided for. In any non-videotaped deposition, a certified stenographic reporter is required in order to protect the objectivity and validity as well as the accuracy and trustworthiness of the transcribed deposition. It would be inconsistent to provide for a certified professional reporter to be used when transcribing and not to require that a professional videographer be used in a videotaped deposition."
"Furthermore, it is plaintiff's request to take the deposition. It is plaintiff's responsibility to provide for the objectivity and trustworthiness as well as the accuracy of the deposed party. It is indeed not defendant's deposition in the instant case. It is unreasonable to require the opposing party to incur the expense of a videotape of its own."
The ruling goes on to say: "We conclude that a party seeking a deposition, is desirous
using a videotape of the deposition, shall provide a disinterested professional
videographer to take the deposition. Accordingly, this matter is remanded to
the trial court to allow the parties to proceed consistent with the views