So, What Have We Learned? Part II

Posted by wlansden | Filed under , ,

You’ve heard the "dos" that we have learned from the YLB’s first year.  Now, here are the “don'ts”:

  • Don’t be too specific about experiences, clients or colleagues.  Did you see the article we wrote about the guy upstairs?  Nope.  It was removed (or was it disguised?).
  • Don’t use graphics unless you have permission—our Intellectual Property colleagues got us on this one.
  • Don’t forget about the good!  We have tried to highlight stories we hear about lawyers doing good things.  Not surprisingly, these stories get far less attention than the opposite.  See our stories here and here.
  • Don’t let your colleagues forget about you.  One of our “dos” was to get as many people involved as possible in writing articles.  An easy way to do this is to keep reminding them of the blog—it is easy for people to forget that their articles and materials can be turned into a post.

And one final thought, we love comments! Even when the commentators don’t, ahem, love us!

Here’s to the Second Year!

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

"The First Thing We Do, Let's Kill All the Lawyers"

Posted by wlansden | Filed under
By James Bowden

Apologies to Shakespeare, but I’ve been thinking about this quote too frequently recently.  First, it was because of an online video branding DOJ attorneys the “Al Qaeda 7.”  Later it was because of an interview on the Daily Show with John Stewart on the same subject.  Most recently, it was because of an Op-Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal.  More and more, it seems that Rule 1.2(b) of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct counts for naught outside of the halls of law.

I’m no hero, but I share a profession with some.  For many years the Nashville Public Defender was a man named Ross Alderman.  Ross defended the good and the bad alike against charges ranging from petty crimes to capitol offenses - he did so as a zealous advocate and at great personal sacrifice.  A motorcycle accident cut Ross’s career in public service short.  Soon after his death I saw an attorney from the District Attorney’s office who had regularly opposed him in court toast his memory; she wept as she spoke.  She didn’t weep alone.

The quote above is not a truism, as the legal profession’s detractors sometimes seem to think; it isn’t even a lawyer joke.  Shakespeare’s character, Dick the Butcher, was instigating for revolution, anarchy, and tyranny led by a villain that would be dictator named Jack Cade when he spoke.  The phrase is ironic; it stands for the necessity of lawyers in a free and just society, not the opposite.

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Why, [State Bar of] Georgia, Why?

Posted by wlansden | Filed under
By Brian Malcom

I am not usually one to quote John Mayer, but it seemed appropriate here.

The Georgia Supreme Court gave a slap from the bench to both a former Greenberg Traurig associate and the State Bar of Georgia.  The rapping follows a slap on the wrist by the State Bar of Georgia after an associate admitted that he stole about $493,000 between 2003 and 2009.

The associate, Michael J.C. Shaw, used fake identities to bill his firm for performing title examinations, skip traces and other investigative services as a bankruptcy and foreclosure associate at Greenberg.  Following his admission, Shaw filed a voluntary petition requesting a 6-to-12 month retroactive suspension, though the maximum penalty available to the bar is disbarment.  Georgia’s high court rejected the petition.

Despite Shaw’s troublesome personal life, his admission, and his restitution of $526,922 to his former firm, the Georgia Supreme Court wrote that Shaw was lucky not to be in prison for his actions.  In a concurrence, Justice Nahmias also found it highly troubling that the State Bar of Georgia and Shaw believed that such a short “break” from the practice of law was appropriate for a six-year scheme to defraud a firm of nearly half-a-million dollars.

I happen to agree with the high court that a “six-month to one-year suspension is an inappropriate sanction in view of the scope and extent of Shaw’s fraudulent and deceptive conduct.”  While Shaw had some personal issues that may have influenced his behavior, which is no excuse for what he did, Georgia’s high court has to think about the message it would send to give such a light punishment to such reprehensible conduct.

An attorney, or any member of society for that matter, should not be allowed to steal someone’s identity, misuse someone else’s SSN, and engage in a complicated scheme to defraud his company of nearly $500,000 and then walk away with what amounts to a long vacation plus a public “shame on you.”  A multi-year suspension (like 3 to 5 years) is the absolute minimum that the state bar should seek, and that is only because Shaw was highly cooperative and mitigating factors exist.  Certainly, no one would blame the state bar if they sought disbarment despite the mitigating factors.  While disbarment is a serious penalty, Shaw would still be able to consider himself lucky if he stays out of prison.

What are your thoughts?  The opinion is available here.

“Are you living it right?
Why, tell me why
Why, why [State Bar of] Georgia why?”

Currently rated 5.0 by 3 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Fighting Words in the Bluegrass State

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,
By James Bowden

True story: since 1891, the Kentucky State Constitution has required all Members of the General Assembly, Officers, and members of the bar to take an oath that includes a statement that, “since the adoption of the present [Kentucky State] Constitution, I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending.”

Apparently, in the twilight of the nineteenth century Kentucky was concerned about its growing reputation as the “Wow, That Escalated Quickly” state.  Legislative machinations are now afoot to amend the State Constitution to remove the language.  However, I wonder if eliminating the last vestige of an attempt to suppress a dispute resolution problem that harkens to the days of yore is really worth the trouble.  After all, it’s no secret that a few of the founding fathers weren’t above settling their problems from twenty paces; and a particularly famous Tennessean was allegedly quite fond of pistols at dawn (goes great with grits and red-eye gravy!).  I’m afraid that Kentucky may be losing a colorful part of its heritage if it goes through with stripping the oath of the “no dueling” rep.  In any case, is it really worth the time and effort of a Constitutional amendment?

Attorneys in Kentucky: what do you think?  Also, as a practical matter, how many attorneys make it through the oath without laughing?  My guess is about one in five.

Currently rated 4.8 by 4 people

  • Currently 4.75/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Check Your Laptops at the Door

Posted by wlansden | Filed under , , ,

By Brian Malcom

While "attractive nuisance" would be a terrific band name for a bunch of law students who are wannabe rock stars, it is also what a Georgetown law professor is calling laptops in the classroom.  In case you missed it, Washington Post has the story here.

Apparently, the professor has shaky confidence in his ability to sustain the rapt attention of his audience while the Internet and solitaire are tempting their wandering eyes.

I can't imagine why.  I know my mind never wandered to espn.com when we were discussing the Rule Against Perpetuities in law school.  Why would I care about my March Madness bracketology when the Testator's heirs' interest in Blackacre is hanging by a measuring life?  Why?!

Another problem with laptops in the classrooms, according to the professor, is that they can be used to spread rumors.  I know I got all of the juciest gossip in law school during class and straight from the professor's mouth.  This piece of logic ignores the fact that PDAs are just as capable at spreading rumors as laptops and even more portable.

Despite this insult to the students' ability to manage their own attention spans, some students support the ban on laptops in the classroom.  Most say they are more engaged in classroom discussion and could concentrate easier.

What are your thoughts?

Currently rated 5.0 by 3 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Pro Bono Could Cost You

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,

Brian Malcom

No good deed goes unpunished, especially those done in violation of copyright law.  Copyrights & Campaigns posted about this very subject last week.  

Harvard Law Professor Charles Nesson led a defense team for a graduate student at the university pro bono.  The student was ordered to pay $675,000 for unlawfully downloading 30 songs on the Internet.  (Yes, that is $22,500 per song).  Here's hoping he really likes the songs. 

A while ago, the plaintiffs in the case filed a motion to compel seeking evidence regarding the posting of seven songs to a public website.  The federal district judge granted the motion to compel in June 2009.  The plaintiffs then filed a motion for costs and fees under Rule 37.  The motion for costs and fees is available here.  No opposition was filed. 

Last week, the judge also ordered the defendant and his attorney, Professor Nesson, to pay the costs and attorneys fees for the motion to compel filed by the plaintiffs.  Professor Nesson apparently posted some songs at issue in the case on his blog, with a public link for anyone to download the songs. 

The Lessons: 

  1. If you find yourself in a lawsuit concerning illegal downloading or distribution of copyrighted material, do not -- I repeat, do not -- post a link for everyone and their cousin to download the material for free;
  2. Respond to motions that seek to tax costs and fees against you and your client; and 
  3. Pro bono can cost you. 

Currently rated 5.0 by 4 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Web 2.0 - Lawyer to Client: Delete Your Facebook Profile

Posted by wlansden | Filed under , ,

By Brian Malcom 

Social media is becoming a crime-fighting weapon, and criminal defense attorneys are catching on.  For some reason, most people believe that there is anonymity on the Internet.  This is an especially absurd belief when people go through great pains to make themselves as visible as possible in social media.

A Nashville, Tennessee criminal defense attorney named David Raybin immediately advises his clients to shut down their Facebook account.  I suspect that he is not the only criminal defense attorney giving this advice to his clients.  Lately, there has been an increased use of social media by police investigations.

The ABA Journal writes, "USA Today notes several cases throughout the country in which police investigations were bolstered by taking time to explore YouTube, Flickr and other online message boards:" 

  • Police in Suffolk, Va., were able to identify suspects involved in a Dec. 14 street fight when cellphone videos were posted on YouTube.
  • Police in Chattanooga, Tenn., discovered an online forum where residents were planning illegal drag races, staked out the area and ticketed participants.
  • Police in Los Angeles used YouTube and Flickr to identify people suspected of being involved in riots following the June 2009 NBA Championship. 

What can a young lawyer learn from this?  Well if you are interested in going into criminal defense, you may want to advise your client to immediately delete their social media account.  If you are not interested in criminal defense, maybe you should just take this as a yet another example that social media can be dangerous.

I would place good money on the fact that all bar organizations are already trolling social media outlets for information about bar applicants, committee applicants, and practicing attorneys under investigation for ethical misconduct.  This may be a good time to take down the picture of you doing a keg stand at last month's young lawyers get together.

Reminder about my rule of thumb: never post anything on the Internet you don't want your employer to see.  Thanks to cache technology, anything posted to the Internet will exist forever in cyberspace.

Currently rated 3.0 by 2 people

  • Currently 3/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Adventure in Legal Advertising: YouTube for Attorneys

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,

By James Bowden

Do you need an attorney, and are more familiar and comfortable with online dating sites than the common law firm website?  Are you a practicing attorney who wishes for a way to use your charismatic personality and your rakish good looks to woo clients?  Have no fear, LegalTube is here!

LegalTube is apparently the natural evolution of legal advertising in the information age.  According to the ABA’s Business Law Today:

The site is intended to mimic that initial conversation for a prospective client—learning about the lawyer's personal style, experience, areas of expertise, and answers to general queries. As opposed to a standard directory where only certain text information is available, lawyers participating in LegalTube can not only give virtual tours of their offices, but also give viewers insight into their firm, their personality, and their background.

I don’t know about all of that, but the website does feature the three worst-delivered lawyer jokes in history.  Also included is an honestly entertaining “webisode reality series” called “Law After Dark,” which is really just a series of hilarious/sad clips from the Jefferson County Alabama (Birmingham) Circuit Court.  Fun game: juxtaposing the instructions concerning appropriate courtroom attire in the “Shorts?” clip with the treatment given to the defendant wearing the Hooters t-shirt in the “Nice hair” clip, planning wardrobe for upcoming hearing in Jefferson County appropriately.

Overall, I don’t know how well the site functions as a business development tool, and I somehow doubt that its existence will improve a client’s ability to select their ideal attorney – but the limited content available certainly is entertaining.  It should keep you chortling for at least a .2.

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Hearsay: Strange Things Are Afoot

Posted by wlansden | Filed under , , ,
By Eileen Burkhalter Smith

I can’t get enough of this situation in IllinoisThe legislature passed a law in 2008, to allow into evidence hearsay statements from witnesses who were murdered in the trials about the murders.

The law has been called the “Drew Peterson Law” because it is being immediately used by the prosecution in an attempt to introduce 15 hearsay statements that Kathleen Savio, Mr. Peterson’s third wife, allegedly made to people about her ex-husband, prior to her death in 2004.  Currently, an Illinois court is determining the trustworthiness of these 15 statements and will make a decision about whether they are admissible in Mr. Peterson’s trial relating to Ms. Savio’s 2004 death.  The Court has already kept out one of the statements (purportedly made to a pastor) and is considering the others.

The law creates a hearsay exception for statements “offered against a party that has killed the declarant . . . intending to procure the unavailability of the declarant as a witness in a criminal or civil proceeding.”  725 ILCS 5/115-10.6.

Obviously, this is creating heated debate on both sides, and is requiring the airing of much of the evidence before the trial itself.  Many of the legal documents in this matter are available here.

Who knew hearsay could be such a hot topic?

Currently rated 4.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 4/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Hanging Up a Shingle With Style

Posted by wlansden | Filed under , ,
By James Bowden

Recent law school grads throwing your hat in the ring as sole practitioners, the bar has been set.  Portland, Oregon’s newest law office features a Cornell Law Graduate with an interesting take on specialization versus general practice, an innovative fee structure, and an ambitiously nontraditional office layout.

Starting out without the support of a law firm staffed with experienced attorneys and the existing client base that they serve is a tough way to get started in the practice of law – but it is still a way to get started.  I really do admire Mr. Kaplon-Olson’s pluck and entrepreneurialism, too.  Here is a shameless personal story - my spouse is currently in business school, and she and her classmates are facing a lack of available jobs that is akin to that of law students.  Their response to adversity is inspiring – they are starting their own businesses.  The entrepreneurial spirit is something that I found lacking in law school, and something from which I think that we would have benefited greatly.

So my hat is off to Mr. Kaplon-Olson for breaking the mold and striking out on his own, and to all the entrepreneurs out there, too.

Currently rated 5.0 by 2 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5