[blindlaw] Seamlessly procuring relevant pieces of information

Tue Feb 27 16:21:27 UTC 2018

Hi Sai,

Thanks for those thoughtful comments. I agree that such an accommodation could be asked for if you are the arguing counsel, but it's much harder in the circumstances that I currently confront. We in fact even submitted a representation to the Indian Supreme Court to issue a circular mandating that all materials be made accessible if disabled lawyers are involved. It has unfortunately not been acted on yet.

I think the idea of  pushing for legislative change is also a great one - something that I'll definitely explore in the Indian context.

While I am able to access briefs, accessing the record is the main challenge. For drafting, this is not such a huge issue as one has to decide what arguments to make in collaboration with others, so they can help me understand what pieces of evidence are relevant. But I find that my inability to access the record is greatly hampering my ability to realize my full potential professionally.

Best,
Rahul
Best,
Rahul

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 27, 2018, at 5:33 PM, Sai <sai at fiatfiendum.org> wrote:
> 
> I'm very interested in this as well.
>  
> My blindness is strictly due to light sensitivity, so in dim environments I can read visually. However, if I'm in court presenting oral arguments (or second chair), that'd be a problem.
> 
> I suspect that asking the court to lower the lights enough for me to see would make it hard for the judges to see, so that's probably not an accommodation I could get. Using voiceover in a headset might seem suspicious or the like. I've been thinking about whether I should learn to use a refreshable Braille display.
> 
> As to the other point: when I externed at CA9, it was very common for the briefs to be accessible, but the record to be a really bad scan, despite a local rule mandating electronic documents. This was even for eg the decisions and briefs below, which had originally been filed electronically, but especially so for transcripts (usually 4 pages per page, with varying conventions on whether the second page was top right or bottom left), last pages of affidavits & declarations (due to the signature), and other evidence.
> 
> The court never pushed back on the litigants when I complained about this.
> 
> However, I think that if you were counsel on a case, and disclose that you're blind and the format interferes with your ability to litigate, you could file a motion to strike and compel compliance with both local rules and reasonable cooperation as to the form and accessibility of the record. Possibly even an FRE argument to be had.
> 
> I would hope that most opposing counsel would cooperate with such a request voluntarily without the need for a motion to compel, but from experience I can say that isn't always true. In my own FOIA litigation – despite insisting on native electronic records – agencies refused and only gave me scans, even when it originated from an electronic document or database. Infuriating.
> 
> 
> FWIW, I think this would make for a good proposal to amend the Federal Rules of Procedure (and Evidence) – require by default that all filings and productions in discovery be accessible (except where impossible, like photos), allow motion to compel for failure to do so, and allow sanctions for knowing or post-warning/request failure.
> 
> Anyone interested in working with me on such a proposal (or signing on once it's in final draft)?
> 
> Sincerely,
> Sai
> President, Fiat Fiendum, Inc.
> 
> Sent from my phone; please excuse the concision & autocorrect typos.
> 
>> On Feb 27, 2018 10:37, "Rahul Bajaj via BlindLaw" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> Hi Everyone,
>> 
>> I hope this message finds you well. One key challenge that I have been
>> facing, since the time I started practicing law last year, is that I
>> am often unable to seamlessly procure the information that is needed
>> to answer a lawyer's questions when preparing for oral argument or
>> during the course of the argument.
>> 
>> I am not sure how these processes operate in the US, but in India,
>> during the first few years of one's career, one spends a significant
>> amount of time briefing senior lawyers who are slated to argue a given
>> case. During such meetings, called conferences, you have to walk them
>> through the facts of the case and, more importantly, help them
>> identify the relevant annexures that form the subject matter of the
>> dispute. These are usually in the shape of correspondence between the
>> parties, notices and other pieces of information, depending on the
>> nature of the case.
>> 
>> Indian courts do make the pleadings available in full before argument,
>> but these are typically in the form of inaccessible PDFs. While I am
>> able to grasp the content of most written submissions on converting
>> these documents into word, the quality of the conversion is typically
>> quite bad insofar as other annexures are concerned.
>> 
>> At the same time, it is infeasible to get everything read by a sighted
>> person, as these files run into at least 3-400 pages and a large chunk
>> of the material is irrelevant.
>> 
>> Similarly, during the course of argument, judges often ask questions
>> in order to answer which one has to be able to refer to the relevant
>> documents in an expeditious and seamless way. As a junior lawyer, you
>> are expected to help the arguing counsel in this pursuit. This also
>> becomes challenging on account of the factors I outlined above.
>> 
>> Finally, when you convert documents from pdf to word, the page
>> numbering of the document goes haywire, so what was page 10 in the
>> petition would be something totally different in your version. I am
>> wondering if those of you who are seasoned litigators could comment on
>> how you deal with these issues, in case you have faced them.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Rahul
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> BlindLaw mailing list
>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/sai%40fiatfiendum.org