Home  |  Blog  |  FIND A LAWYER  

Upcoming DRI Webcasts

Due to certain state bar policies the following states do not grant CLE approval for DRI Webcasts: Delaware, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Ohio, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Vermont.

Click Here to view Frequently Ask Questions and minimum technical requirements for viewing DRI Webcasts.

  • WEBCAST Wednesday, September 24, 2014

    Going Paperless: Adapt to Survive and Thrive

    Efficient storage and organization, and effective utilization of, electronic documents and data are essential for firms to stay competitive. Firms that embrace this progression in the industry will keep up with their clients and their clients’ expectations. Firms that do not embrace such a practice will not. Once a “paperless” practice is implemented, firms wonder how they functioned without it. Of course, implementing and utilizing such a system involves pitfalls and ethical considerations. The DRI Law Practice Management Committee, Technology Committee, and Lawyers’ Professionalism & Ethics Committee present this webcast featuring speakers with real world experience and expertise to address software options, internal office practices that work, how to use and benefit from the electronically stored documents, and the common pitfalls and ethical problems to avoid.

  • WEBCAST Wednesday, October 1, 2014

    Rules of Engagement: Effective Construction Scheduling

    Construction projects inevitably experience events that challenge the schedule. Implementation of a timely protocol, akin to “rules of engagement” is a cost effective approach that reduces expensive dispute resolution. Responsibility can be nebulous, but effective schedule analysis can significantly improve performance and reduce unnecessary cost and frustration. Adopting a well-defined approach to a contemporaneous schedule impact analysis is a valuable risk mitigation tool that provides a basis for a timely decision to recover or extend the schedule time. Our panel will highlight two different project approaches to demonstrate the difference in transactional costs to resolve disputes.