Adjunct Law Prof Blog has a post linking to information on upcoming internet repositories for federal case law, and wonders whether new services coming on line will spell the end of Lexis and Westlaw. I suspect these venerable pay services will stay one step ahead for some time. I remember seeing a debate in an internet forum once over whether it might be considered malpractice not to conduct computer-aided research. If there is a big gap in services, or the newer services cannot replicate book research, then perhaps that debate will turn to whether it is malpractice to use a less powerful computer-aided research tool.
-
-
A Technology-Induced Rush to Dismiss?
The Ninth Circuit has some unkind words for the district judge in Calderon v. IBEW Local 47, case no. 05-56937 (November 13, 2007). The district court dismissed the case for lack of prosecution because plaintiff’s counsel did not show up at a hearing on an order to show cause re dismissal for failure to serve one of the defendants. Problem: the district court only gave notice of the OSC re dismissal via e-mail. Since plaintiff’s counsel did not consent to electronic notice (Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(D)) and did not regularly check his e-mail (and, given his lack of consent to electronic notice, had no obligation to do so), he…
-
Appellate Jurisdiction of a Non-Final Order: Denial of Eleventh Amendment Immunity
Everyone knows the general rule that an appeal lies only from a final judgment. But there are rare exceptions. State of Alaska v. EEOC, case no. 07-70174 (9th Cir. Nov. 8, 2007) illustrates one of them. Plaintiffs were political appointees in the Alaska Governor’s Office who, after their discharge, filed claims with the EEOC against the Governor’s Office alleging various forms of harassment and/or discrimination. The Governor’s Office moved for summary judgment on Eleventh Amendment immunity. The Administrative Law Judge felt he lacked jurisdiction to decide the Eleventh Amendment issue and certified the question to the EEOC. The EEOC, holding that “an agency will not rule on the constitutionality of…
-
A Pair of Interesting Posts on Discovery
Cal Biz Lit has a pair of interesting posts regarding civil discovery in California. The first links to a white paper on the subject written with the non-California lawyer in mind. The second answers whether a party, in light of the fact that form interrogatories have already been approved by the Judicial Council, may nonetheless object to a form interrogatory.
-
Updates to Code of Judicial Ethics
This press release from the Judicial Council of California announces that the Supreme Court has approved several amendments to the Code of Judicial Ethics. The press release recounts the areas affected before going into significant detail on the changes: The issues covered by the amendments include handling cases with self-represented litigants, judicial disclosure, character reference letters, self-reporting by judges after being charged with or convicted of certain crimes, and misusing the prestige of the office by commissioners or referees. The updated code is available as a downloadable PDF. Click here for the PDF. The changes do not take effect until January 1, 2008.
-
The Arbitration Skill Set
Are the skills and tactics best suited for arbitration very different than those routinely used in litigation? Legal Writing Prof Blog has a link to an upcoming law review article on the topic.
-
Supreme Court Gets Rid of Conflicts by Dismissing Case
Laura Ernde, a staff writer at the Daily Journal, alerted me to her piece in yesterday’s edition of that paper about last week’s dismissal of the Lockheed Litigation Cases, case no. S132167. According to her article, this was one of the oldest matters on the court’s docket and the dismissal comes more than two years after briefing was complete. The dismissal apparently arises out of conflicts of interest. According to the article, four of the seven justices had recused themselves from these five consolidated toxic tort cases because they owned stock in at least one of the oil company defendants. The Supreme Court’s actual order is not posted as a…
-
Employers Get Break on Reimbursement of Employee Expenses
Some of the employment law specialty blogs have been quick to provide detailed coverage of Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc., case no. S139555 (November 5, 2007), in which the California Supreme Court, reversing the Court of Appeal, holds that an employer may meet its statutory obligation to indemnify employees for “all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his or her duties” (Labor Code, § 2802, subd. (a)) by increasing the employees’ pay or commissions instead of separately reimbursing them for their actual expenses. There are conditions, naturally. If you need recruitment help! You can read about this important FWB employment case at…
-
Are You Presenting Non-Topics as Topics?
In a post called Choosing topics for topic sentences, Professor Wayne Schiess gives some great advice, backed up by commentary from judges, about topic pitfalls to avoid. Read it to find out if you are guilty of turning cases, witnesses, or dates into topics when they aren’t.
-
Recent Judicial Council Action on Appellate Issues
The Judicial Council approved several recommendations of the Appellate Advisory Panel on the Council’s “consent agenda” for its October 26, 2007 meeting. Those recommendations include rule amendments/additions regarding costs and sanctions, designation of the record on appeal, clarification regarding extensions of time to appeal, overlength briefs in capital cases, and citation format. See the agenda (available as a PDF download here) for details. If you’re interested in how the discussion items were actually debated at the meeting, the Council has made audio files of the meeting available, broken down by discussion item, here.
-
Best Law Blog Voting Open Until . . . ?
The finalists for Best Law Blog have been decided and the polling site to vote for your favorite is here. In a great example of ambiguous writing to avoid in your briefs, the site says only that “Polls close November 8, 2007.” When on November 8 . . . who knows? To be on the safe side, get your vote in by 11:59 p.m. EST on November 7.
-
Enforcing a Foreign Judgment
You don’t always get three positions advocated on a single issue in a single appeal. On the subject of the statute of limitations for enforcing a foreign money judgment, that’s exactly what the Court of Appeal heard in Guimaraes v. Northrup Grumman, case no. B194205 (2d Dist. Oct. 30, 2007). For the position that the “catch-all” limitations period of Code of Civil Procedure section 343 applies, Northrup relied on a 116-year-old California Supreme Court case. Not usually a good sign. And despite prevailing in the trial court, Northrup loses on appeal. The court adopts Guimaraes’s position that the intervening enactment of the Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act (Code Civ. Proc.,…
-
Playing Catch-Up
Last week’s workload left even less time for blogging than I thought it would, so I am still playing catch-up on last week’s legal developments. Look for some catch-up posts this week.
-
An Arrest Warrant is an Arrest Warrant is an Arrest Warrant
At least, when it comes to whether the police may enter a residence when executing it. In U.S. v. Gooch, case no. 06-30645 (9th Cir. Nov. 1, 2007), the defendant was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. He was arrested when reaching for firearms during the execution of a warrant for the search of his residence. He claimed the search warrant was invalid because it was based on police officers’ observation of drug paraphernalia when they got out of their express van and entered the residence to execute an arrest warrant for Gooch’s roommate. Gooch contended that because the arrest warrant was only a misdemeanor bench…