Preservation Week, April 21 – 27, is drawing near. Law librarians play a key role in preserving legal information and scholarship for the benefit of future generations. In a print environment, preservation may be as simple as protecting the binding of a book, repairing a ripped page, or ordering multiple copies of a well-used title. With the birth and growth of digital documents, the task becomes more complex and difficult to achieve, especially for smaller institutions and establishments. Without adequate resources to undertake the needed work, digital legal information becomes especially vulnerable to technological obsolescence and potential degradation over time. In 2003 attendees at a conference sponsored by the Georgetown University Law Library and the American Association of Law Libraries recognized the challenging landscape and the need to establish long-term archiving and preservation support to institutions charged with overseeing…
Read more detail on Recent Law Librarian posts –
Related news:
- @Risk North Summary Report on Shared Print Preservation Programs
- Supreme Court of Canada Decision: Labour Relations
- LCs Digital Preservation Program Launches Newsletter
- BOOK DEALS: THE WEEK OF APRIL 27, 1667
- Selected cases noted in the press during the week ending April 6, 2019
- USCIS Reaches FY 2019 H-1B Cap in First Week of April
- New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli announced the following audits were issued during the week ending April 5, 2019
- Unsatisfactory rating voided because employee's "performance review," failed to comply with the employer's own procedures and thus undermined the integrity of the process Joyce v City of New York, 2018 NY Slip Op 03433, Appellate Division, First Department The Appellate Division annulled the determination of respondent New York City Department of Education [DOE] sustaining the "unsatisfactory" rating for the 2010-2011 academic year give to John Joyce, a tenured teacher. The court said that the record demonstrates "deficiencies in the performance review process" that resulted in Mr. Joyce being given an unsatisfactory rating for the 2010-2011 academic year. Citing Matter of Gumbs v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 125 AD3d 484, and Matter of Richards v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 117 AD3d 605, the Appellate Division noted that these deficiencies "were not merely technical, but undermined the integrity and fairness of the process." Mr. Joyce had received a satisfactory rating for the previous academic year and, in contravention of its own procedures, DOE failed to place him on notice that he was in danger of receiving an unsatisfactory rating for the 2010-2011 academic year until after April 28, 2011. Although DOE's procedures required that tenured teachers in danger of receiving an unsatisfactory rating have "formal observations including a pre-observation and post-observation conference by the principal … as part of a prescriptive plan to improve their teaching," Mr. Joyce received only one formal observation which took place one week before the end of the academic year and was not part of a prescriptive plan to improve his performance as a teacher. The decision is posted on the Internet at: http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2018/2018_03433.htm
- Two Northern California Doctors Face Sentencing in April 2018 After Being Convicted by Jury of Health Care Fraud After 8 Week Trial for Billing for Unperformed Services, Unseen Patients and Other False Billing Statements
- Week of April 30 – May 4, 2018
