I presented “Blawgs” 101: Incorporating Legal Blogs into Your Practice to the Business Litigation Section of the Ventura County Bar Association at their monthly luncheon today, and had a great time doing it. I think I managed to pique the curiosity of a few folks, which is what I was trying to accomplish. I’m hoping that curiosity will take them to their computers with the resources list I provided (PDF download) in hand to explore law blogs. To any participants here looking for the PDF of the resource list, the link in this post is the same as the link in the left sidebar that I directed you to. In…
-
-
What Happens to the Trial Lawyer’s Contingency Fee when an Appeal is Taken?
The Texas Appellate Law Blog has done all appellate lawyers and contingency fee trial lawyers a favor with a post urging trial lawyers to include in their contingent fee agreements a provision explaining how the fee is affected if an appeal is taken: “There really is no right or wrong way to do it, but in my view, contingent-fee agreements should always spell out what happens in the event of an appeal.” He also covers a number of different ways to do it. Please check it out.
-
Roommates.com Decision
Well, I got through the en banc opinion in the CDA immunity case of Fair Housing Council v. Roommates.com, case no. 04-56916 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2008) this weekend. There’s too much on the merits at the links provided in this post for me to get into them. Suffice it to say I’m terribly disappointed the court did not even address the free speech and free association issues I had hoped it would, based on the rehearing petition arguments made in those regards. It boggles my mind that someone might not be able to discriminate in their choice of roommate, and unless Roommates.com offers a very different service than its…
-
Prep for Next Week’s Blawg Review
It will be my privilege to post Blawg Review #155 here on Monday, April 14. The weekly Blawg Review is a round-up of some of the most attention-getting and interesting law blog posts of the previous week. If you haven’t seen one before, check out this week’s Blawg Review #154 at Healthblawg, and those from the past two weeks, Blawg Review #153 and Blawg Review #152, to get an idea of what’s coming up here. Go to Blawg Review for links to others (scroll down to the “Past Issues” list in the sidebar there). If you visit a couple of Blawg Reviews, you’ll note that most bloggers who host the…
-
Who Thinks that Contractions Shouldn’t Should Not Be Used in Appellate Briefs or Other Legal Writing?
There are some grammatical “rules” that simply don’t make sense and can make your briefs more stilted if strictly followed. Two common favorites for being disregarded are: (1) don’t end a sentence with a preposition; and (2) don’t split an infinitive. I think most legal writers feel free, and rightly so, to ignore these “rules” when doing so makes for a smoother presentation. (Though Ray Ward says to be cautious about splitting infinitives.) These rules are general grammatical rules. A rule I have heard applied only to more formal writing, including legal writing, is “Do not use contractions.” From force of habit, I usually don’t. (Yes, I know I use…
-
En Bancs on the Upswing under Chief Judge Kozinski
Image from Wikipedia In yesterday’s Daily Journal, Staff Reporter John Roemer has a front-page article about an apparent surge in en banc rehearings granted by the Ninth Circuit since Alex Kozinski became Chief Judge. (Full disclosure: yours truly is quoted in the article.) Are the two phenomena related? Not according to Judge Kozinski, whom the article quotes: “I’ve always been more en banc friendly than many of my colleagues,” he wrote in the e-mail. “But I frankly doubt that my being chief judge will have any effect on the process. I’ve had my share of successes as well as failures when calling for en banc review. “There are not –…
-
En Banc Decision in Roommates.com Case
It’s killing me that I don’t have had time yet to digest the combined 56 pagers of the majority opinion and the concurring/dissenting opinion in Fair Housing Council v. Roommates.com, case no. 04-56916 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2008). You can read my prior coverage in this series of posts. (When you click that link, this post will appear at the top, with prior posts below it.) I’ll digest the opinions over the weekend, and post a round-up of links on Monday. As expected, The Volokh Conspiracy and Professor Eric Goldman were all over it yesterday, with The Conspiracy’s post garnering the usuall large number of comments. (Plug in “roommates.com” into…
-
Subtle Forgery Distinction
Not all forgery is the same. In People v. Martinez, case no. E042427 (4th Dist.. Apr. 2, 2008), the court of appeal reverses the conviction on one of two forgery counts, notwithstanding two forged signatures, because the signatures appear on the same instrument. Defendant fraudulently induced a homeowner to sign a deed of trust and forged a notary signature on the same deed — two forged signatures, same document. He recorded the deed. Defendant was convicted of two counts of forgery. The key here is that the defendant was charged with the two counts of forgery under Penal Code section 470, subdivision (d), which provides that: Every person who, with…
-
Congratulations to Justice Arthur Gilbert
Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert, one of our local (Second District, Division Six) appellate jurists, was honored last night in a ceremony held in the main reading room of the Los Angeles County Law Library, where he was presented with the Beacon of Justice award. The award was created by a group called Friends of the Los Angeles County Law Library, which describes the award this way: Created by the FRIENDS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY LAW LIBRARY in 2005, the BEACON OF JUSTICE AWARD is given to those whose character and outstanding service to the legal community, especially in the areas of access to justice and legal information, education, scholarship,…
-
That/Which Drives Me Nuts
Peeve time. The that/which distinction. If I had a nickel for every time a court opinion used “which” where it should have used “that,” I’d be rich. With misuse by the courts so widespread, it is almost tempting to mimic the courts’ misuse, lest the justices deem your correct usage an example of poor writing. But then comes this post at Set in Style, in which the author notes that legislatures have traditionally received “a pass” on misuse, but links to an exception explained in this post at The Legal Satyricon. The Chicago-Kent College of Law has a great statement and explanation of the rule here. And Grammar Girl has…
-
Edit in Stages
Ray Ward passes along that advice from Bryan Garner. What he means by it is to concentrate on a single type of edit on each editing pass. The post provides the eight types of review that Garner advocates be executed at a micro level. Get more detail at Ward’s post.
-
Appealing from an Order of Dismissal
An order dismissing a complaint is not a “final decision,” so such an order is generally not appealable under 28 USC § 1291. A dismissal order may be appealable, however, when it appears that the district court intended the order to dispose of the action. What to make of the district court’s intent when its order dismissing a complaint does not specify whether or not leave to amend is granted? In Mendiondo v. Centinela Hospital, case no. 06-55981 (9th Cir. Apr. 1, 2008), the Ninth Circuit notes that failure to address amendment means that the court denied leave to amend. Accordingly, it infers that the district court intended the order…
-
Blogging Professors
The New York Times recently ran a piece called The Professor as Open Book, about professors (across all disciplines) sharing personal information on their blogs and social networking sites. How much is too much? Hat tip: Legal Writing Prof Blog, where John Marshall Law School professor Mark Wojcik offers some commentary on the subject. It was just last June when University of Colorado law professor Paul Campos wrote in a tongue-in-cheek way about being perhaps the last law professor in America without a blog. You’ll see precious little personal info on this blog. I only got around to adding my picture a week or so ago. And that’s not exactly…
-
Appellate Surprises
Some points about appellate practice — even well-settled points — can come as surprises to those not well versed in it. Doe v. United Airlines, case no. B192865 (2d Dist. Mar. 20, 2008) consolidates several of them in a single case. I’m only going to spend a line or two on each one, without much elaboration. The point of the post is to disclose just a few traps trial attorneys can fall into, not to give detailed exposition on each point. My original post about the case concerned what some might consider a procedural oddity: a new trial motion where no trial ever occurred. A new trial motion is validly…
-
Not Really Appellate Stuff . . .
. . . but it concerns a legal blog — or at least a blog that likes to criticise the legal system — so what the heck. You know that annoying “404 Not Found” message you get when you try to access a web page that is no longer there? Of course you do. Royal Pingdom shows that they don’t have to be boring. Among the 17 such pages honored in that post is the one at Overlawyered, which gave me a chuckle.