Welcome
Thanks for stopping by my little place on the web. This parking spot is not for me to rant (though there will certainly be some of that), but as a place for my former and current students to converse about the full gamut of law school questions and about the class assignments and goals: you know I feel that conversation is the best learning experience.
So, follow. Check in every few days and chat away: anything is fair game (remember, I live vicariously through all your wild lives). To start, some of you already in law school can express some wisdom since decision time is beginning to arrive for this year’s seniors, and those of you currently being abused can ask the world your questions about the class assignments.
This is for you. Enjoy.
-Prof. B.
Monday, April 14, 2014
For those of you who struggled with sections 50 and 51:
http://pagesix.com/2014/04/09/heigl-slaps-duane-reade-with-6m-suit-for-using-photo-online/
and here's the complaint:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/217334096/Heigl-vs-Duane-Reade-Inc
But I could not pass this by - is there any cause of action in the complaint?
Friday, April 4, 2014
ah, Florida, again, times 3:
http://members.jacksonville.com/news/crime/2014-04-03/story/federal-jury-returns-puzzling-verdict-civil-rights-case-career-criminal
http://www.3dca.flcourts.org/Opinions/3D13-1294.pdf
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Bad legal writing is everywhere!
JUSTICE ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court.
We must decide in this case whether the Airline Deregulation Act pre-empts a state-law claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Following our interpretation of the Act in American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, 513 U. S. 219 (1995), we hold that such a claim is pre-empted if it seeks to enlarge the contractual obligations that the parties voluntarily adopt. And because the doctrine is invoked in the present case in an attempt to expand those obligations, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals.
For you very "old" students who had covenant of good faith and fair dealing with poor Charlotte:
Tuesday, April 1, 2014
And, current classes, speaking of defamation: case or no case?
For you "Office Space" fans, a little commercial appropriation discussion:
Monday, March 24, 2014
There is a difference between television fantasy law and reality law:
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
As much as I (justifiably) pick on my old state of Florida:
In the modern world of no dialogue based on facts (just consider the press talking head frenzy on the missing Malaysian airliner), it's awfully nice to see a Court which understands how the actual facts really matter (read pages 18-40):
http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2014/sc11-1148.pdf
Let's play the commercial appropriation game (esp. current students):
http://www.naughtyjewishboys.com/Naughty_c_d_letter.pdf
http://www.naughtyjewishboys.com/njgresponseletter-1.pdf
Monday, March 17, 2014
From Forbes, law salaries to start (some interesting choices 11-25):
Starting pay: $146,900
Mid-career pay: $176,200
Starting pay: $125,400
Mid-career pay: $201,400
Starting pay: $110,800
Mid-career pay: $210,000
Mid-caeer pay: $177,500
Starting pay: $104,000
Mid-career pay: $217,300
Starting pay: $101,800
Mid-career pay: $165,000
7. University of Virginia School of LawStarting pay: $97,400
Mid-career pay: $153,900
Starting pay: $95,500
Mid-career pay: $198,700
Starting pay: $87,700
Mid-career pay: $206,900
Starting pay: $84,200
Mid-career pay: $184,500
Mid-career pay: $130,100
Mid-career pay: $180,900
Mid-career pay: $160,400
Mid-career pay: $114,300
Mid-career pay: $192,800
Mid-career pay: $136,100
Mid-career pay: $126,000
Mid-career pay: $125,700
Mid-career pay: $158,000
Mid-career pay: $177,800
Mid-career pay: $155,300
Mid-career pay: $146,400
Starting pay: $75,300
Mid-career pay: $114,700
Starting pay: $75,100
Mid-career pay: $192,200
Thursday, March 6, 2014
Ah, the return of Glas
http://weblinks.westlaw.com/result/default.aspx?action=Search&cnt=DOC&db=MA%2DORSLIP&eq=search&fmqv=c&fn=%5Ftop&method=TNC&mt=Westlaw&n=4&origin=Search&query=TO%28ALLSCT+ALLSCTRS+ALLSCTOJ%29&rlt=CLID%5FQRYRLT657915157073&rltdb=CLID%5FDB232165057073&rlti=1&rp=%2Fsearch%2Fdefault%2Ewl&rs=MAOR1%2E0&service=Search&sp=MassOF%2D1001&srch=TRUE&ss=CNT&sskey=CLID%5FSSSA363405057073&sv=Split&vr=1%2E0
Monday, March 3, 2014
Speaking of commercial appropriation (as my 340 classes are about to do):
And they say there are no new areas of law practice
http://www.vaselfdefenselaw.com/
Friday, February 14, 2014
She have a cause of action?
Monday, February 10, 2014
I have avoided this because it is so obvious:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-dumb-starbucks-corporation-20140210,0,6899826.story#axzz2sxhJHZTq
PS - This is one reason your commercial appropriation was in New York and not federal - even if this were "parody" and one word does not parody make, there is a serious trademark problem here.
Monday, February 3, 2014
If you have not seen this lawyer ad on Deadspin:
I am speechless.
But, at least, it has production values better than this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwt1rHo1P_M
Friday, January 31, 2014
Knowing how I feel about lawyers advertising . . .
http://southfloridalawyers.blogspot.com/2014/01/breaking-mike-grieco-has-opinions-about.html
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Once again, let's play find the cause of action:
P.S. - Notice line 19, page 2 - I guess the Addams family cousin wrote the screenplay.
Monday, January 13, 2014
Remember when I always say that WHERE you want to end up living matters:
http://www.online-paralegal-programs.com/superlawyers/