Evan Schaeffer's Legal Underground

CHRISTMAS AS PRACTICED IN THE SCHAEFFER HOUSEHOLD . . . My 16-year-old daughter Lydia, who you might know from my podcast Litigation Radio #1, has always rolled her eyes at my Internet ventures. She was the model for the correspondent in Advice to Families of Lawyers #1, and she only reluctantly agreed to allow me to post her photo in a post about her trip to France.

Not only has Lydia been dismissive of weblogs, but she claimed she'd never start one, in part because she has "nothing to say." I didn't learn she was lying until yesterday, when she emailed a link to her new weblog, Lydia's Christmas List!

Frankly, it's not a bad model for a weblog. She'll only have to post once per year, and she'll always be writing about things she feels passionate about. And she already has a fan!

Related posts:

1. Politics as Practiced in the Schaeffer Household
2. Halloween as Practiced in the Schaeffer Household

BLAWGWORLD 2006: A Book About Law-Related Weblogs from TechnoLawyer . . . Here's how TechnoLawyer.com describes its new ebook, published today--

According to various studies, approximately 80,000 new blogs launch every day, including dozens of legal blogs (blawgs). No one knows how many blawgs exist, but whatever the number, monitoring them would amount to a full-time job.

For this reason, we've published BlawgWorld 2006: Capital of Big Ideas, a TechnoLawyer eBook designed to take you on a journey through 51 of the most influential blawgs.

BlawgWorld 2006 includes posts from both Legal Underground and the Illinois Trial Practice Weblog. You'll also recognize a number of other legal weblogs. The book is easy to download and read --just go to this page and register (for free) with TechnoLawyer.

UPDATE 12/6/05  In the comments, there is some interesting criticism of the BlawgWorld concept. If you're interested in the controversy, you should also read Robert Ambrogi's post about BlawgWorld. Ambrogi concludes, "BlawgWorld was a worthwhile experiment, but now it should be shelved." For context, read the whole post.

LAST YEAR AT LEGAL UNDERGROUND . . . "A Giant Brain, One in an Ongoing Series of Essays on 'Things Important to Every Lawyer'."

And don't miss these other things that are important to every lawyer: a briefcase, a circle of advisors, and a satisfying hobby.

THE 18-MONTH VIOXX MYTH . . . Does Vioxx increase the risk of heart attacks only after 18 months of use? In today's "Vioxx Litigation Goes Federal," trial attorney Andy Birchfield says this idea is a "myth" that "Merck has manufactured to avoid liability."

Birchfield's right. You don't have to take my word for it, however: you can ask a federal judge. Relying on the 18-month myth, the defense-minded commentators have been predicting for months that the judge overseeing the federal Vioxx litigation was going to gut the plaintiff's case even before the first federal trial began. For example, here's how the National Law Journal portrayed the view of one defense lawyer--"not involved in Vioxx litigation"--in the linked article:

[B]ased on what he has seen reported of the case going to trial, he expects that the federal standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence will give the plaintiffs in this case "a challenging test to pass."

"What you will probably see is a barrage of pretrial Daubert motions to strike the plaintiff's medical causation case," he said.

What the article fails to mention is that Judge Fallon has already ruled on the "barrage" of pre-trial Daubert motions. You can read his 57-page ruling here (pdf). Almost all of Merck's motions were denied. That means the plaintiff's experts will be allowed to testify that Vioxx can increase cardiovascular risks if used even less than 30 days.

What about that 18-month myth? There's no doubt that Merck is very skilled at selling it to newspaper reporters and getting it planted in newspapers. That doesn't make it true.

In fact, why not call it what it is: junk science. My collected Vioxx posts are here.

AT MY TRIAL PRACTICE WEBSITE . . . "Law Journals Online."

NEW CLASS ACTION NEWSLETTER: AN EMBARRASSMENT TO ITS BOARD OF EDITORS? My free copy of Class Action Law & Strategy, the new publication from Law Journal Newsletters, was supposed to entice me to subscribe at the "special rate" of $299 per year.  Sorry, but I wasn't impressed. The lead article--"The Class Action Fairness Act: What Is It All About?"--was nothing but a political tract that parrots the Bush White House on tort reform. Example:

Another driving force behind CAFA was the recognition of abuses of the system that had harmed even defendants that acted responsibly. One such abuse specifically recognized by Congress was forum shopping: the practice of filing claims in jurisdictions with the most beneficial legislation and bringing actions in jurisdictions that have a history of large damage awards. One of the most widely abused forums, which has been shopped by many plaintiffs' counsel in class action cases, is Madison County, IL. A notable case from this jurisdiction involved Phillip Morris, the cigarette manufacturer, which was ordered to pay $10.1 billion in a suit that involved deceptive marketing of "light" cigarettes.

There's a lot more similar "analysis" in the article, which would work great as a newspaper Op-Ed but fails as a teaching tool. It certainly didn't inspire me to sign up for a year of Class Action Law & Strategy.

I'm also thinking that the publication's Board of Editors might not have been too happy with the inaugural issue. Why? Because one of its members is Stephen Tillery, the Illinois lawyer who obtained that large judgment against Philip Morris.

Sort of odd, don't you think?

UPDATE 12/28/05: "Tillery Resigns from Board."

Related post: "Thinking Out Loud About the Federal Class-Action Bill."

BLAWG REVIEW #34 . . . This week's creative theme is that there is no creative theme. Hey, that's creative!

You'll find Blawg Review #34 at Douglas Sorocco's PHOSITA.

IN THE MAGAZINES . . . Things to read this Sunday when you're finished reading weblogs.

Precious Resources for the Future Everything you wanted to know about child prodigies. [The New York Times]
Rootkit, Anyone? Sony's grand mess-up. [Business Week]
Google Is Everywhere Where it's been, and where it's headed. [Wired]
What's a "Nanometer"? The world's smallest robot. [Popular Science]
A Comic Who Needs Tweaking What's wrong with Sarah Silverman? [American Prospect]

AT MY TRIAL PRACTICE WEBSITE . . . "Just Say No to Speaking Without Visual Aids."

THE STUPENDOUS LAWYER KIT . . . If you want to be a lawyer but aren't sure how to go about it, you need the Stupendous Lawyer Kit. Learn more in the short animated film "Lawyer, Lawyer," by Kahye Hwang of the Vancouver Film School. Don't forget: "Image first, competence second"!

Thanks to a reader for the link. And here's an alternative link from the Vancouver Film School.