- Many of our readers liked the ruling, but someone didn’t: “Judge censured for ordering class-action lawyer to take pay in $125,000 worth of gift-cards” [BoingBoing, ABA Journal, Leonard/L.A. Times, Lowering the Bar]
- “NFL Concedes In Who Dat Battle” [Lowering the Bar, more, earlier; here’s a protest t-shirt, and more on those]
- Some plaintiff’s lawyers give their side of the story, disputing fraud allegations in Dole banana-worker pesticide cases [Bronstad, NLJ, earlier]
- “Google Blog Bundle — 42 criminal defense blogs” [Mark Bennett] And while you’re at it, why not take a moment right now to put Overlawyered in your RSS blog reader?
- Massachusetts hardball: state lawmaker says private law schools might be breaking antitrust laws in working to oppose state school proposed in his district [ABA Journal via Above the Law; public law school plan OK’d]
- Making the rounds: why medieval trial by ordeal may not have been so crazy after all [Peter Leeson, Boston Globe and full paper (PDF) via Volokh]
- “Rothstein E-Mails Reveal Role of Former Plaintiffs’ Lawyer” [Brian Baxter, AmLaw Litigation Daily]
- Obama: I tried to reach across aisle on medical liability reform but GOP wasn’t nibbling. Fact check please [Wood, PoL]
Posts Tagged ‘law schools’
“Cyber-harassment” and speech codes
Eugene Volokh and Scott Greenfield worry that free speech could be the loser from a buzz of law school interest in the topic of “cyber-stalking” or “cyber-harassment” — rather broadly couched in one description to include law students’ “using websites to make outrageous gender– or race-specific comments.” Volokh:
I’m sure that most backers of these restrictions would stress that of course they’re not trying to shut down substantive debate, only incivility. But once viewpoint-based restrictions are accepted, once speech can be suppressed because it’s “outrageous” or “smearing,” it’s pretty hard to have much confidence that substantive (but to some “outrageous”) discussion of ideas will remain untouched; and even if actual punishments for such speech are rare, the risk of punishment may powerfully deter the substantive debate as well as the nonsubstantive smears (of which I agree there is plenty). That has certainly been the experience with “civility codes” at university campuses, and governmentally coerced restrictions on “harassment” in workplaces.
Bar exam preparation app
A $1,000 iPhone application, cheap compared with BarBri, is stirring interest.
“Applying to Law School? Please Reconsider!”
“To those prospective law students applying to law school as a fallback in a bad economy, or because you want three more years to figure out what to do with your life: please save yourself time, money, and a huge amount of stress.” [Aaron Street, Lawyerist]
“Jackpot: Lawyers earn fees from law they wrote”
By reader acclaim, this report from AP’s Michael Blood in Los Angeles:
Every lawsuit filed or even threatened under a California law aimed at electing more minorities to local offices – and all of the roughly $4.3 million from settlements so far – can be traced to just two people: a pair of attorneys who worked together writing the statute, The Associated Press has found.
The law makes it easier for lawyers to sue and win financial judgments in cases arising from claims that minorities effectively were shut out of local elections, while shielding attorneys from liability if the claims are tossed out.
The law was drafted mainly by Seattle law professor Joaquin Avila, with advice from lawyers including Robert Rubin, legal director for the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area. Avila, Rubin’s committee and lawyers working with them have collected or billed local governments about $4.3 million in three cases that settled, and could reap more from two pending lawsuits.
Dozens of other California jurisdictions have been threatened with suits over at-large (undistricted) elections, and officials in many communities say they heard no complaints from voters until lawyers came around.
“It’s a money grab,” charged John Stafford, superintendent of the Madera Unified School District that was slapped with a $1.2 million attorneys’ bill even though it never contested a lawsuit. … A judge is reviewing the bill submitted to Madera. To pay, Stafford said the district would have to slash money for books and lunches for its mostly Hispanic students, an odd consequence for a law intended to aid Hispanics.
If you’re wondering about Prof. Avila of Seattle U., who agrees to being the law’s principal drafter, his biographical page is here, and it’s replete with elite law school connections. Excerpts:
…Professor Avila has taught courses at the University of California/Berkeley, University of Texas, and UCLA schools of law. Professor Avila has received numerous awards in recognition of his work in the voting rights area. He received a John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Fellowship in 1996 for his voting rights work. In the same year, he received the Vanguard Public Foundation’s Social Justice Sabbatical for his work in providing political access to minority communities. In 2001 he received the State Bar of California’s Loren Miller Legal Services Award for providing outstanding legal services to disadvantaged and underserved communities. …
“Law Professor Sues Above the Law Blog”
Ben Sheffner at Copyrights & Campaigns, Michael Krauss at Point of Law and Karen Sloan at the NLJ have details on a pro se suit filed by University of Miami lawprof Donald Marvin Jones.
Speaking at Columbia Law tomorrow
The Federalist Society chapter at Columbia Law School is having me in for a lunchtime talk there tomorrow (Thursday, Oct. 29) on problems with the changing (and seemingly ever-more-aggressive) role of state attorneys general. James Tierney, former attorney general of the state of Maine and director of Columbia’s program on state AGs, will be on hand to offer a contrasting point of view. Hope to see a few readers there.
October 12 roundup
- Speech-curbing proposals continue to get polite academic reception: NYU’s Jeremy Waldron, big advocate of laws to curb “hate speech”, delivered Holmes Lectures at Harvard this past week [HLS, schedule]
- Lawsuit over collectible baseball hit into stands by Phillies’ Ryan Howard, his 200th career homer [Howard Wasserman, PrawfsBlawg; NJLRA]
- Orchid-importer prosecution a poster case for the evils of overcriminalization? Maybe not [Ken at Popehat]
- Texas State Fair and city of Dallas don’t have to allow evangelist to distribute religious tracts inside the fair, judge rules after three years [Dallas Observer blog]
- Drug maker: FDA’s curbs on truthful promotion of off-label uses impair our First Amendment speech rights [Beck and Herrmann and more, Point of Law and more]
- Did plaintiff Eolas Technologies go to unusual lengths to ensure Eastern District of Texas venue for its patent litigation? [Joe Mullin, IP Law and Business via Alison Frankel, AmLaw]
- Update: “Lesbian Denied Infertility Treatment Settles Lawsuit” [San Diego 6, earlier]
- Even in the Ninth Circuit, “psychological injury resulting from a legitimate personnel action” is not compensable [Volokh]
September 23 roundup
- There are “almost certainly” many innocent persons in prison today wrongly convicted of shaking a baby to death [Radley Balko, Reason] Harris County, Texas forensic examiner under scrutiny [same, Reason “Hit and Run”] L.A. Times on forensics reform [same]
- Feds order large private insurer Humana to pull criticisms of Obama health plan from its website [David Henderson, Eugene Volokh and followup]
- Why would anyone market lawyers’ services through blog comment spam? Especially at Popehat? [first and second posts]
- “Revolving door” for officials of regulatory agencies tends to lead to law firms [Naked Capitalism]
- Tenure trouble: teacher’s union head “would protect a dead body in the classroom” [Ron Bailey, Reason on Brill “Rubber Room” article, earlier]
- Google asked to unmask user in another defamation suit (Turks & Caicos developer) [Brian Kumnick, FindLaw “Injured”]
- “Fired Ave Maria Law Prof Gets Tenure in Whistle-Blower Settlement, Lawyer Says” [ABA Journal, background Washington Monthly]
- Ted Frank on Ameritrade settlement [Center for Class Action Fairness, earlier]
“Lock the law school doors”
There are too many lawyers entering practice already, argues former litigator Dan Slater in the NYT’s “DealBook”. “The American Bar Association, which continues to approve law schools with impunity and with no end in sight, bears complicity in creating this mess. …. many law schools appear to profit from what may charitably be called an inefficient distribution of market information.” Profs. Bainbridge and Ribstein react.