The above e-mail today from a friend was how I found out about the results of the Proposition 8 ruling (which the District Court apparently slipped under the door into the court’s press room and then ran like hell; it wasn’t read aloud in court).

I am bummed that I am out of the city and so can’t participate in the celebration, but still OMG OMG SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

And yes, I told my friend she should leave work early in case the court is persuaded to impose a stay. In the meantime, you can read the entire opinion here.

 

I’m actually a little surprised, though I shouldn’t be, that the courts are failing to realize how much jurors rely on the Internet.

Judges always tell jurors not to do any research and not to talk to anyone about the case. Thankfully, most of them are happy to go along with the suggestion that they get specific about this and go beyond the boilerplate of jury pre-instructions.  Most people don’t think of Google as “research” and don’t think of Twitter as “talking to anyone”. They have to be told: do not look up anything about this case, including the parties and the attorneys, on the Internet, and that includes Google and Wikipedia; do not blog about this trial, do not email people, do not Twitter or send text messages.

And you can see that they didn’t think of it that way, because the nods at “don’t do research” turn to surprise when the judge starts reeling off exactly what that means. I’ve actually seen one person kicked off a jury because he would not agree to refrain from looking things up on the Internet about the case. The judge’s explanation that all information had to come in during the trial did not sway him; he was annoyed that anyone might put a hold on his sacred right to Google for any reason.

If you hate the idea of jury service, imagine what it would be like to put in eight weeks of time, only to have it end in a mistrial because some bozo couldn’t find anything else to talk about on his Facebook page.

YANAL

 Comments Off
Mar 072009
 

If you feel compelled to preface a discussion with “I’m not a lawyer, but…”, even in abbreviated form, chances are the next thing to come out of your mouth is going to be a horribly-manged misunderstanding and/or generalization of the law that will make anyone with a JD clutch their ears and howl in agony.

Then they will recover, and beat you viciously and without mercy. Rhetorically speaking.

It is true that many people who aren’t lawyers to have a clear understanding of certain areas of the law, and are even able to talk about it intelligently. Unfortunately those people are vastly outnumbered by other people, who think that Wikipedia is a real legal resource, or who take one line in a judicial opinion out of context and think that’s what the law is.

It is also true that the law is full of different specialities and lawyers have different levels of competency. I’m not familiar enough with patent law to explain its complexities to you, either at a cocktail party or on the Internet. Likewise, don’t tell me that you fully understand product-liability law in California because you heard about it from your dad, a retired lawyer who used to do criminal cases in Massachusetts.

And for god’s sake don’t present your half-baked legal expertise as legal advice to others.

National Coming Out Day

 Comments Off
Oct 112008
 

is today, October 11. If you’re out or don’t need to be because you’re straight, there are other things you can do: show support for LGBT friends and relatives, work to stop cretinous ballot initiatives from becoming law, tell your political representatives that you want them to support laws and policies that promote equality for all.

Yesterday, The Queen mentioned something she was doing as part of her LGBT Alliance club at school. I didn’t know she was a member. She hadn’t thought it such a big deal that she needed to make a big deal about it. It is.

 

The main difference being that cockroaches don’t have the ability to whine loudly about how you’re shining light on them.

Continue reading »

Habeas Claus!

 Comments Off
Jun 122008
 

At least part of the Supreme Court managed to figure out that, wow, this whole habeas corpus thing is an important legal right, even for bad people who don’t believe Jesus is their Lord and Savior.

I look forward to reading the decision to see how the faux “strict constructionalists” (*cough* Scalia *cough*) explain how the Framers took Islamofacism into account to create a mystical unwritten exception to the rule.

 

The California Supreme Court overturned the statutory ban on same-sex marriage. (Large PDF of the opinion here.)

The forces of evil will be right back at it, though. Today we party elegantly–tomorrow back in the trenches.

Edit: Lynn points out that all three branches of government are in agreement on this. Take that, pseudo-originalist whinebots!

 

Insurance companies in Washington state are panicking over an initiative that would subject them to triple damages for denying a legitimate claim.

It is true, as the McTools point out, that this will encourage more lawsuits; what they don’t want to spell out is that it increases lawsuits because victims are not at a financial disadvantage, either paying out-of-pocket for legal fees, or hoping that their claim is worth enough to persuade a lawyer to take their case on contingency. (In other words, unless your claim is big, your insurance company can gleefully deny it because they know you won’t sue.) This makes the financial incentives to pursue a valid claim much, much bigger.

Insurance companies aren’t really in the business of insurance anymore. They’re in the business of persuading you to hand over the money they invest, and they don’t take kindly to being told they have to give some of it back.

 

Amanda writes about the “ZOMG John Edwards is a trial lawyar!!!11! smearing, and unfortunately, as is so often the case, people are reduced to putting “tort reform” into quotes to make clear that the National Association of Manufacturers/Chamber of Commerce/DRI crowd isn’t about actually reforming the tort system. Yet it’s hard to find a good term, since ‘corporate welfare’ is both a mouthful and pretty broad, including as it does those who think government assistance is bad when given to an African-American single mother, but good when it’s given to a legal entity that trades on NASDAQ.

I would suggest the term McTools for these folks. “Tools”, obviously; the ones who aren’t actually corporate masters themselves are happy in their role as paid zealous advocate, in or out of the courtroom. The “Mc” because if they hadn’t invented a distorted version of the McDonald’s coffee-injury case, they’d have to invent it, being as they are friend to anything with “Inc.” after its name that is dedicated to making money, large multinational corporations being a favorite.

Hey, they didn’t get the public’s ire up about the ATLA to AAJ name change. Why not give them something else to cause another epic fit of monocle-clutching?

Jul 202007
 

When even the corporate defense lawyers are against you, it’s time to pack it in.

In the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, a gentleman named Harold Lischner filed a lawsuit for false arrest against Upper Darby Township. Apparently the President was visiting Upper Darby, and a catering facility allowed people to come onto its property to watch the motorcade go by–but forbidding protest or the displaying of signs. When Mr. Lischner nonetheless showed up with an anti-Bush sign, refusing to put down the sign or leave, he was arrested, and therefore sued the township for its police department’s illegal actions.

The defense lawyers made a motion to prevent the plaintiff from mentioning President Bush’s name during the trial, arguing that the mere mention of this unpopular fellow “”is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to defendant”. They wanted the court to agree that “it will be sufficient for plaintiff to testify that he displayed a sign in opposition of a ‘presidential candidate.’”

The Court, unsurprisingly, denied the motion. Can’t blame them for trying, I suppose.

© 2012 mythago Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha