IT'S HERE!

  • A NEW BOOK BY EVAN SCHAEFFER



    How to Feed a Lawyer (and Other Irreverent Observations from the Legal Underground)

    Click on the book cover for details!

« Critic Terry Teachout Consumes Too Much Art, Violently Explodes | Main | Six Great Ways to Unmuddle Your Writing »

Comments

David Giacalone

An award-winning post from you, Evan! You're going to be sued some day, Mr. Schaeffer, not for your hot coffee, but for distracting far too many lawyers from billing, employees from working, and law students from studying.

(Geez, why am I sucking up so much lately?)

Federalist No. 84

(Geez, why am I sucking up so much lately?)
>>>>

Because these past couple of weeks, Evan has been in rare form. I'll suck up too if it keeps the humor coming!

Scheherazade

Love it. This is why I'm scared to write anything about the law on my blog. I'm afraid it will turn into a mean name-calling contest of folks pointing out who's smarter than whom. Why does this happen when people discuss law or politics on blogs? Is this kind of debate fun for everyone but me?

David Giacalone

Hi, Scheherazade,

Although I engaged in such misbehavior for decades, it never really was fun for me. I've been doing my best to resist joining in such verbal melees ever since I noticed that it actually caused me "lotsa agita".

Sad to say, it's not just lawyers and political junkies who do this: take a look at some of the weblogs that critique the arts. It may be a male thing. Very few women seem to waste their time on such wheel-spinning and (pseudo)intellectual sabre-rattling.

David Giacalone

p.s. If you want to see how low commenting can get on an otherwise reputable weblog, check out this Open Thread at TalkLeft. When you're away all day, do you know what your visitors are up to?

The Curmudgeonly Clerk

Mr. Schaeffer:

I read with interest your comparison of me with Jesus. When read in conjunction with Mr. Giacalone's warning about the danger of a potential lawsuit, I can only conclude that you owe me your coat and your cloak.

Mr. Poon

The irony of it all is I can't stand Starbucks. Not the taste, mind you, but the fact that my girlfriend loves it and law students have it so much better than med students and she'd use that to guilt me into fetching some for her.

I'm not generally whipped, but I sure am in the coffee-fetching area. It's like liberal-guilt or something.

UCL

First: LOL!

Second: Yes, it is a male thing. Some of my best "couple friends" are lawyers, and the lawyer wives are always making fun of the fact that the only heated debates about law that take place during our get-togethers are by their testosterone-overdosing neanderthal lawyer husbands, myself included.

Ted

Evan: I happen to agree that the McDonald's coffee case was an aberration. Most courts throw such litigation out before it gets to trial. ATLA, however, defends the Liebeck verdict, and suggests that it was the aspirationally appropriate way to resolve the case.

You nicely elide this issue, as you did with the obesity lawsuits, where you rejected the idea that a law was needed to protect food manufacturers, but then endorsed the theory of liability of the food industry. Where do you stand on Liebeck? Is it an incorrect aberration or is ATLA correct that it's an example of how the tort system is supposed to work?

Poon: you think you have irony? I don't even like hot coffee! I always order iced.

(For the record, I am and was not offended by disagreement, as evidenced by my continued courteous relationship with Mr. Schaeffer, but by repeated baseless and insulting claims in the Clerk's comment section that I made up facts, when those same facts were readily verifiable from cites I gave.)

Evan

Ted: As always, I appreciate the comment. However, I do not want to answer your substantive questions about Liebeck in the comment section of this particular post. As propietor of this weblog, I would like to keep this one light-hearted, rather than starting up Comment War II (or XIV, as the case may be). Perhaps I'll do another post in a few weeks.

Ted

"Proprietor"

Evan

Damn, you got me. I'd have to pay you $20, enough for nearly two cups of iced Starbucks coffee, except for the rule stated at the end of the post to which you linked: "errors in my comments don't count." That's because, like many weblog commenters, I frequently dash comments off in a fit of overheated passion that doesn't allow time to check for errors of grammar, usage and spelling.

This week, I'm afraid, you'll have to purchase your coffee at McDonald's.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

My Photo

About Evan Schaeffer

Search Beyond the Underground


Sitemeter


Archives

cc