• Announcements,  Appellate Blogs,  Blogging

    Shameless request for nominations

    Expert witness service The Expert Institute is taking nominations for entries in its 2015 Best Legal Blog Contest. Do I need to say anything more? OK, here comes the shameless part. Whether you are a years-long fanatical subscriber to this blog whose first action every morning upon waking is to grab your iPhone off your nightstand and check your RSS reader to see if there are any updates to this blog, or someone who just came across this blog yesterday, give some thought to nominating this blog. If you do, you should nominate it in the “niche” category. (If Best Blog By A Guy Who Does The Best He Can With…

  • Appellate Blogs,  Blogroll

    Blogroll Addition: Judgment Day

    I discovered the new blog Judgment Day a couple of weeks ago, when my stats page showed that it linked to The California Blog of Appeal. The blogger there is an anonymous attorney who dies work as appointed counsel on criminal appeals in New York and goes by the nom de blog (or is that nom de blogue?) Blakely, after Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296 . Notwithstanding his (or her) New York home base, Blakely has already had a number of posts relevant to California practice. Welcome aboard, Blakely. And congratulations on the second-best blog name ever (according to me, that is).

  • Appellate Blogs,  Blogging

    New Appellate Blog: “Appellate Review”

    An anonymous third-year law student has gotten a head start on his appellate clerkship by starting a new blog in the last few weeks:  Appellate Review.  The writing is good, and if you enjoy this blog and others like Decision of the Day and California Appellate Report, I think you’ll like Appellate Review.  It is now on my blogroll and one of the RSS feeds I will be checking daily. Hat Tip: Appellate Law & Practice

  • Appellate Blogs,  Blogging

    New California Law Blog

    Matthew Stucky, a newly admitted attorney in San Diego, launched the Cal. Civ. Blog three days ago.  He describes his blog as “self-serving” because it is intended to force him to keep up with recent civil decisions, and any information it provides to others is a by-product of that goal. This is far more humility than most bloggers have (including me)!  Matthew would seem to be a blogger that even Judge Kozinski — who famously derided bloggers for their lack of humility — would like. Matt, welcome to the blogosphere, welcome to the bar, and good luck with both.   I think launching your blog this early in your career is an excellent idea, and I’m sure we will…

  • Appellate Blogs,  Attorney Fees,  Post-Trial Practice

    Attorney Fees in Public Interest Case

    I added Anthony “Tom” Caso’s “The Opening Brief” to my “Appellate Blogs” blogroll a few weeks ago.  Tom is a Sacramento appellate attorney and new appellate blogger.  (By the way, Tom, welcome to the blogosphere.) Today, he has an excellent post entitled “Can Fees Exceed Damages?”  He discusses yesterday’s decision in Estrada v. Fedex Ground Package System, Inc., case no. B189031 (2d Dist. August 13, 2007), in which the Court of Appeal reverses an attorney fee award for plaintiff and remands for reconsideration of the amount.  This was no “small potatoes” case.  From the opinion: Estrada’s motion asked for $619,691 in costs and $6,789,325 for his attorneys’ fees, a total…

  • Appellate Blogs,  Blogroll

    Military Additions to the Blogroll

    Let me join Appellate Law & Practice in welcoming the Military Justice Blog to the legal blogosphere. According to the blog’s subheading, the Military Jusice Blog will include miltary appellate issues. It appears to be an anonymous blog with the profile name “Sacramentum,” which, according to the profile, “was an oath taken by all Roman legionaries on entering the Roman army and was the foundation of military discipline.” AL & P’s post also referenced CAAFlog, a well-established blog by seven contibutors following developments in the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF). I remember reading while I was a Marine Corps officer (in fact, it might have…

  • Appellate Blogs,  Judges,  Legal Writing

    A Quip Too Far? Update

    I’ve updated my May 17 “A Quip Too Far?” post with a link to more recent, and quite excellent, commentary on the unorthodox opinion in Funny Cide Ventures, LLC v. Miami Herald, and am providing this separate post for those who already read my previous post and aren’t likely to see the update in it.  Matt Conigliaro of Abstract Appeal promised last week to follow up on his original post, and he delivers a winner with his explanation of why it may be impossible to make judicial opinions understandable to non-lawyers and still have them adequately serve their function as precedent.

  • Appellate Blogs,  Judges,  Legal Writing

    A Quip Too Far?

    The writing style on display in a Florida appellate decision, Funny Cide Ventures, LLC v. Miami Herald, Fourth Dist. Ct. of Appeal case no. 4D06-2347 (May 16, 2007) has attracted some attention today. The actual per curiam decision is run-of-the mill, but one of the judges took it upon himself to write a supplemental opinion that spends its first few pages complaining about the dullness of typical legal writing before launching into an unconventional style that, if read aloud, sounds like a dime store novel detective recounting the events of the case. To be fair, Judge Farmer lays out why he wrote the supplemental opinion: In my view nothing that…

  • Appellate Blogs,  First Amendment,  Internet Law,  Judges,  Ninth Circuit

    Legal Blogosphere Reacts as Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on CDA Immunity for Online Services

    Yesterday’s Ninth Circuit decision in Fair Housing Council v. Roommates.com, LLC, case no. 04-56916 (May 15, 2007) has the digital legal world abuzz . . . as one should expect of the latest decision on the scope of immunity afforded to online services by the Communications Decency Act (“CDA”), 47 U.S.C. § 230(c). In this case, two municipal fair housing councils sued Roommates.com, an online clearinghouse for those seeking to obtain roommates or move in as one. They alleged that the website published discriminatory roommate preferences in violation of the Fair Housing Act and various state laws. The district court found Roommates immune under the CDA and granted summary judgment…