RANDOM NOTES . . . I haven't been jotting many notes here lately. Here are a few--
--I enjoyed spending a few minutes this morning with the case of Redwood v. Dodson, in which Judge Easterbrook lays down the law on bad behavior by lawyers at depositions. I did a quick post about the case on the Illinois Trial Practice Weblog. If nothing else, you can read the opinion to learn the difference between being "admonished" and being "censured." Which would you prefer?
--Is the debate over a silly cartoon in a Kentucky bar journal for real? Take a look at the cartoon in the linked post. That lawyer sitting on the sidewalk with the "Will Sue for Food" sign -- supposedly, that's a plaintiffs' lawyer. But from what I know about the effects of tort reform, it could just as easily be a defense lawyer. Okay, perhaps not, but it's still just a cartoon. Not offensive, in my opinion.
--Lawyer Daniel A. Olivas, author of Devil Talk and other works, has an essay about writing a (literary) novel despite his "busy schedule as a full-time litigator with the California Department of Justice." Here's the link: "Moving from Tight Little Machines to the Novel." It makes me want to do more posts of the type that used to be in the "Between the Covers" category of this weblog.
--Hey, I like White Castles. And I'm from Missouri!
--There are some interesting comments about blogging and legal scholarship, soon to be published in the Yale Law Report, at Balkinization. Link from Jeremy Blachman.
--Is this weblogging lawyer really the "typical overworked, frazzled public defender"? I don't think so. Most lawyers of any type aren't so perceptively introspective. It's another joy of reading good weblogs.
I don't think it's the effects of tort reform. For all we know, he could just be another unemployed law student with very limited job prospects and a massive student loan debt that he needs to repay...
Posted by: The Adamant Redneck | February 13, 2007 at 10:16 PM
Hi, Evan. You might be interested to know that there is an article in today's edition of the Louisville Courier-Journal regarding the cartoon mentioned in your post. It appears that many plaintiff's personal injury lawyers don't think it was a silly matter.
See: http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070219/NEWS01/702190384
Posted by: Ben Cowgill | February 19, 2007 at 01:12 PM
Ben: Thanks for the link. I too am a plaintiffs' lawyer, but I still think the uproar is silly. I guess not all plaintiffs' lawyers think alike.
Posted by: Evan | February 19, 2007 at 01:27 PM