This supposed lawyer ad, on behalf of “Gene Butterfield” of “Glinder & Glinder”, is surely a spoof. It was posted by something called the Kaspar Hauser comedy podcast. Going before a camera can be frightening (tastelessness warning).
Author Archive
Rights for (some) stranded travelers
If an ice storm leaves you immobile and furious, the law surely must provide you with a remedy, at least if you’re at New York’s JFK airport, as opposed to being stuck on Interstate 78 in Pennsylvania. Right? (Steve Chapman, “The right protection for airline passengers”, Chicago Tribune/syndicated, Feb. 22; “The Politics of JetBlue” (editorial), Wall Street Journal/OpinionJournal.com, Feb. 24).
Microsoft told to pay $1.5 billion over music patents
“A federal jury in San Diego [Thursday] ordered Microsoft to pay $1.52 billion to Alcatel-Lucent for violating two patents for a technology used by hundreds of companies that allows users to play digital music on computers, cellphones and other portable devices.” (Alan Sipress, “Microsoft Loses Big In MP3 Patent Suit”, Washington Post, Feb. 23). Washington Post tech blogger Rob Pegoraro (Feb. 23):
Alcatel-Lucent’s patent payday has all the things that patent-abuse critics hate:
* “Submarine” patents, invoked years after a contested invention has hit the market? Check
* Claiming ownership of a media format most people use all the time? Check
* A plaintiff that’s failed to commercialize its own alleged invention? Check
* Extortionate royalty demands? Check
(via Kevin Drum, Feb. 23).
Spank-ban solon will try for half a loaf
Or other bread product as appropriate: California Assemblywoman Sally Lieber concedes the votes “simply [are] not there” for her widely derided proposal to ban the spanking of small children (Jan. 22, Feb. 14), but she’ll still try to get the state’s regulatory nose into the nursery by pushing a law banning various parental disciplinary techniques, including spanking that employs an “instrument”. (Mike Zapler, “No-spanking bid softened”, San Jose Mercury News, Feb. 23).
Client intake dressed up as consumer info, cont’d
While on the subject of consumer information websites that funnel readers to lawyers, reader R.F. nominated 4mychild.com, a website about cerebral palsy whose site is bannered “Organizations for Special Needs Children”. Scroll down to the bottom of the opening page to find the attorney-advertising disclaimer.
Common Cause, Colorado, and unintended consequences
“Voters last November approved Amendment 41, which limited gifts to most government employees and their families to $50. The constitutional amendment was put on the ballot by wealthy entrepreneur Jared Polis and the public-interest group Common Cause.” It soon emerged that the measure might prohibit the award of university scholarships to children of government employees or the award of the Nobel Prize to a government-employed scientist. Highly placed Coloradans have been scurrying about for weeks now trying to figure out what to do. (Lynn Bartels and Alan Gathright, “Pressure to fix ethics law”, Rocky Mountain News, Feb. 6; Lynn Bartels, “GOP’s May says Polis ‘threatening’ in Amendment 41 talk”, Rocky Mountain News, Feb. 9; Chris Frates and Jeri Clausing, “Fix it yourself, backers of 41 told”, Denver Post, Jan. 31; Mark Hillman (former Colo. state treasurer), “Ethics amendment creates an ethical dilemma”, Independence Institute, Jan. 25; text of Amendment 41 (PDF); Peter Blake (columnist), Rocky Mountain News, Nov. 15, Dec. 20, Jan. 3, and Jan. 20).
A “fixture” in Gotham courthouses
Michael Melnitzky, whose wife filed for divorce in 1994, “has sued virtually everyone involved: one of his former lawyers, his wife’s lawyer, three banks, five judges and a psychiatrist appointed by the court to evaluate his mental health. In unrelated cases, he has sued a neighbor, a thrift shop, the city and his former employer. And he has almost always lost.” “I used to be an art restorer,“ says Melnitzky, a pro se litigant. “Now I’m a litigator. If you’re going to attack me or assault me on a legal front, and I don’t hit back, I would feel dishonorable with myself.” (Ray Rivera, “The Marriage Lasted 10 Years. The Lawsuits? 13 Years, and Counting”, New York Times, Feb. 19; Above the Law, Feb. 20).
Lerach Coughlin partner faces D.C. ethics charges
G. Paul Howes, who’s handled Lerach’s high-profile litigation over losses arising from the Enron collapse, faces serious ethics charges over actions he took during his earlier career as a federal prosecutor. “On Feb. 1, the D.C. Bar Counsel filed eight charges against Howes after a four-year investigation, accusing him of violating bar ethics rules by committing criminal acts, making false statements in court, offering prohibited payments to witnesses, and interfering with the administration of justice.” Ethics proceedings against federal prosecutors are rare; disbarment is among the possible sanctions that could be asked. It doesn’t appear Howes is going to win any popularity contests among his former law enforcement colleagues:
Amy Jeffress, deputy chief of the office’s Organized Crime and Narcotics Trafficking Section[,] referred to Howes — though not by name — during a Jan. 31 debate on the power of prosecutors at American University, Washington College of Law.
“He actually left the office and moved all the way across the country to San Diego to escape his shame and his bad reputation,” Jeffress said, according to a recording of the debate. “He basically became a pariah in our office. His name is a synonym around our office for no-no. You don’t want to do what he did.”
(Brendan Smith, “Former Prosecutor Charged With Misconduct in Gang Cases”, Legal Times, Feb. 15).
Disposition of Anna Nicole Smith remains
ConsumerAffairs.com
Billing itself as a “non-partisan, independent information provider”, it invites you to submit your complaint about an unsatisfactory consumer transaction on its automated complaint form. The complaint form notes that reports “become the property of ConsumerAffairs.Com Inc.” and you must include your contact information. If you keep reading down, you may notice that “We work with attorneys with specific expertise in many areas of consumer law. It is sometimes necessary for them to contact you in order to determine whether there is a legal remedy for your complaint. There is no charge for any such consultation.” (Fred Lucas, “‘Consumer Watchdog’ Website Faces Complaints, Lawsuits”, CNSNews.com, Feb. 12; Childs, Feb. 16).