And actually, I do agree with parent. Most trials' facts are extremely close calls. The obvious cases always--ALWAYS--settle before trial. So, on these extremely close calls, it becomes a matter of persuading the jury or judge that your client's position is more correct.
What we do isn't magic. My caselaw search engine uses Boolean operators. Law school just teaches you the magic words to look for. We investigate the facts, we investigate the rules (laws, regulations, judicial opinions), and put together an argument for applying them in the way that gets the best result for our clients, within the confines of the ethical rules that govern us.
The legitimate, if somewhat carebearish, reason they do that, whether they know it or not, is that if someone reasonably believes you're offering legal advice, and she follows your advice and loses some legal right or money, she can sue you for legal malpractice.
"IANAL" hedges heavily against that. Just like when I invoke "IAALBIANYL" when I comment on legal stuff.
DC Metrorail is such a mixed bag. On the one hand, the stations drive development above them, so everything at U Street is close. But then you have Adams Morgan.
I live in Ballston and work in Dupont, and it saves me an hour in commute time every day to drive to work instead of Metroing. I just wish parking didn't cost $240 a month.
Biggest problem with "market-based" solutions to the issue: Most people don't care about most of the Internet.
I doubt there is much "demand" for having access to the entirety of the Internet. So most people won't care if 95% of it isn't blocked, so long as they can still get to foxnews.com or npr.org.
So suddenly that 95% of the Internet is useless as a vessel for meaningful communication. The number of outlets for people to get their information becomes minute and controlled by large corporations.
Given the demonstrably strong connections between governments and these large corporate entities, I would like to retain the ability to access the other 95%. And I want to preserve that right for the people that don't yet know they need it.
Think about it: the Constitution is a big ol' Nanny State document. After all, nothing says, "We don't trust you not to screw with this" like "We made it really hard for you to change this."
Whenever something cthonic comes up on/., I always see the same tag: "Cthulu." Folks, it's "Cthulhu." A cursory Google search tells you this.
Now, of course, when Cthulhu does wake from his ancient slumber in R'lyeh, we're all going to go stark raving mad. But I, for one, plan to be spared the worst agony by presenting myself as a harmless copy editor in the service of His great Following, and then being eaten.
TFA does not say that craigslist turned over the guy's identity, just that they figured out who it was. Granted, AP articles sometimes read like they were written by a high-school journalism student, translated into Bantu, then back into English, but the omission seems glaring. Other TFAs on the same topic also do not actually say that craigslist turned the name over.
is that it's a libel case in Britain. Judgment for plaintiff.
To sue for libel in Britain, you don't have to be a resident, and neither does your defendant. All you have to have is one instance of "publication" (i.e. communicating the information to a third party), and you're set.
Who said the First Amendment didn't have any teeth?
For every WSJ article trumpeting the apparent success of the latest "free market except when we don't like it because it hurts rich people" program, there's another side to the story.
"Venue shopping" doesn't mean finding jurisdictions that will take your "frivolous" case (quoted from TFA). It means finding the best court for your client. And jurisdiction statutes keep you from filing your case anywhere you want. If the court's county (or city or district) doesn't have a logical relationship with the injury, you can file suit there, but your case will be dismissed or transferred. It's a waste of time.
If you get past the FUD that the legion tort-reform entities put out, and actually think about what's going on here, we're talking about doctors' insurance rates. Doctors, who get paid obscene amounts of money. Doctors, upon whose judgment we rely to -keep us from dying.- Doctors, whose innocent mistakes can mean families left without a wage-earner, forever.
They've got enough money to have a giant lobby (which happily works with the insurance lobby, one of the most evil IMHO), and they've got enough ego to develop Jesus complexes. I, for one, am not worried about whether they get a windfall vis a vis a cut in malpractice-insurance rates by 40%.
At the end of the day, if we want doctors to move to Texas and we want to incentivize it by reducing premiums, we can either divert tax money toward subsidizing premiums, which puts the burden on everyone (i.e., the consumers of medical services), or we can do like Texas and put the burden on injured people and their families by cutting into the amount they can recover. Which sounds more fair to you?
The idea behind CCTVs is deterrence, right? We disincentivize street crime by raising the chances that the criminal will get caught.
Except, when has getting caught bothered a criminal? The CCTV system assumes a set of motivations that the average well-off, law-abiding citizen has. But most robbers are not robbing for sport; either they're dirt-poor, or they're addicts.
Getting out of heroin withdrawal is such a strong desire that the threat of jail becomes abstract in comparison. So what if the cameras see me?
You can keep your BBC so long as I don't have to give anyone my DNA and be filmed, by the government, no matter where I go....so, by that reasoning, in about five years, I'll be asking you for the BBC. Keep her warm for me.
Yes. The EDVA Local Rules say that attorneys can file subpoenas pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(3), which says that the court clerk has to issue a subpoena to any party (or their attorney) who asks for one. Like much of the discovery process under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the judge/magistrate isn't supposed to get involved until the parties or a subpoenaed person have a dispute. And even then, they're supposed to try to resolve it out of court.
I am not a lawyer, but you just wait about six months.
The thing to understand about subpoenas is that in most states, once litigation commences, the lawyers (as officers of the court) for each side have the power to issue subpoenas to anyone who might have information relevant to the lawsuit.
The major limitations on such subpoenas are ethical limitations (attorneys' behavior is governed by a complex but far-from-bright-line set of rules) and the rules against discovery abuse, which can be found at Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b) and elsewhere. The decision to grant sanctions is up to the discretion of the court, which basically means that an appellate court will go with what the judge decides, unless, for example, the discovery sanction is death.
However, it looks like Ms. Seidel is in good hands lawyer-wise. Her motion to quash the subpoena (the way that one tries to avoid having to comply) hits a lot of different theories and defenses, including the most important one: that the subpoena won't lead to discoverable evidence.
Postscript of Surprise: The plaintiff's attorney filed the suit in the Eastern District of Virginia, a federal court whose nickname is "The Rocket Docket." The consensus among attorneys is that once you file a case there, you should go ahead and say goodbye to your family for a few months. Rather than let litigation drag out for years, the Rocket Docket judges set -extremely- aggressive discovery schedules. Filing any complaint there is ballsy, no less a thimerosal one, since whether thimerosal causes autism is far from crystal-clear. Long discovery would mean more time for the plaintiff to gather evidence (and for new autism studies to come out).
The SHDC slot (up to 16gb of extra storage) really makes up for the small SSD. I have nLited XP running on my eee SSD and have all my programs and documents on the SD card. The only problem is stupid programs that insist on being installed to root. Those programs get run on my tower, assuming I don't decide that their reluctance makes them unworthy of being used on any system.
...welcome our new barley-free overlords. While there is nothing appealing paying more for Duchesse de Bourgogne or Longhammer, the prospect of Natty Light, Keystone, Budweiser, Miller, Coors, etc., disappearing forever gives me comfort in these dark, warm, melty times.
We're talking about a product (yes, only one product--there are no meaningful distinctions among the brands) so bad that the tasting contests have to create a category called "American-Style Lager" (read: macrobrew) to accomodate them. And something tells me the big breweries pay the competitions to have that category there in the first place. You know the organizers have to be huge beer snobs, and even Level 1 Beer Snobs automatically get the Hating on Macrobrews feat.
Check out the Bud/Miller/Coors Web sites and notice how they each win the category every four years. It's almost like they're just taking turns.
A few months back,/. ran an article about a Times article about programs designed to de-clutter writers' screens. I settled on jdarkroom which defaults to green on black.
I like it. Typing in it feels like creating something out of nothing. But as various posters have noted, there is definitely an old-school sense about it, even for me (a Linux lover who gets stage fright in front of a command line and so runs XP). I remember the old Apple II and IIGS having similar display setups.
I think our minds tend to remember younger days as simpler days (I know third grade was a simpler time for me, at least) and so a green-on-black means simplicity for a lot of tech people for a variety of reasons. Typing on that screen evokes simplicity and makes my mind feel more clear.
Verizon just wired my apartment building for FiOS, and the brochure they kindly distributed after wiring my apartment during the day while I was out specifically says you can't use FiOS to host a server.
Slashdot Mirror
IAAL, a plaintiffs' attorney, in fact.
And actually, I do agree with parent. Most trials' facts are extremely close calls. The obvious cases always--ALWAYS--settle before trial. So, on these extremely close calls, it becomes a matter of persuading the jury or judge that your client's position is more correct.
What we do isn't magic. My caselaw search engine uses Boolean operators. Law school just teaches you the magic words to look for. We investigate the facts, we investigate the rules (laws, regulations, judicial opinions), and put together an argument for applying them in the way that gets the best result for our clients, within the confines of the ethical rules that govern us.
IAAL, but I am not your lawyer.
The legitimate, if somewhat carebearish, reason they do that, whether they know it or not, is that if someone reasonably believes you're offering legal advice, and she follows your advice and loses some legal right or money, she can sue you for legal malpractice.
"IANAL" hedges heavily against that. Just like when I invoke "IAALBIANYL" when I comment on legal stuff.
DC Metrorail is such a mixed bag. On the one hand, the stations drive development above them, so everything at U Street is close. But then you have Adams Morgan.
I live in Ballston and work in Dupont, and it saves me an hour in commute time every day to drive to work instead of Metroing. I just wish parking didn't cost $240 a month.
Wut was teh foolproof plan??? I have studet loans aswell!!!
Biggest problem with "market-based" solutions to the issue: Most people don't care about most of the Internet.
I doubt there is much "demand" for having access to the entirety of the Internet. So most people won't care if 95% of it isn't blocked, so long as they can still get to foxnews.com or npr.org.
So suddenly that 95% of the Internet is useless as a vessel for meaningful communication. The number of outlets for people to get their information becomes minute and controlled by large corporations.
Given the demonstrably strong connections between governments and these large corporate entities, I would like to retain the ability to access the other 95%. And I want to preserve that right for the people that don't yet know they need it.
Think about it: the Constitution is a big ol' Nanny State document. After all, nothing says, "We don't trust you not to screw with this" like "We made it really hard for you to change this."
Whenever something cthonic comes up on /., I always see the same tag: "Cthulu." Folks, it's "Cthulhu." A cursory Google search tells you this.
Now, of course, when Cthulhu does wake from his ancient slumber in R'lyeh, we're all going to go stark raving mad. But I, for one, plan to be spared the worst agony by presenting myself as a harmless copy editor in the service of His great Following, and then being eaten.
TFA does not say that craigslist turned over the guy's identity, just that they figured out who it was. Granted, AP articles sometimes read like they were written by a high-school journalism student, translated into Bantu, then back into English, but the omission seems glaring. Other TFAs on the same topic also do not actually say that craigslist turned the name over.
is that it's a libel case in Britain. Judgment for plaintiff.
To sue for libel in Britain, you don't have to be a resident, and neither does your defendant. All you have to have is one instance of "publication" (i.e. communicating the information to a third party), and you're set.
Who said the First Amendment didn't have any teeth?
I live in D.C., you insensitive clod!
For every WSJ article trumpeting the apparent success of the latest "free market except when we don't like it because it hurts rich people" program, there's another side to the story.
"Venue shopping" doesn't mean finding jurisdictions that will take your "frivolous" case (quoted from TFA). It means finding the best court for your client. And jurisdiction statutes keep you from filing your case anywhere you want. If the court's county (or city or district) doesn't have a logical relationship with the injury, you can file suit there, but your case will be dismissed or transferred. It's a waste of time.
If you get past the FUD that the legion tort-reform entities put out, and actually think about what's going on here, we're talking about doctors' insurance rates. Doctors, who get paid obscene amounts of money. Doctors, upon whose judgment we rely to -keep us from dying.- Doctors, whose innocent mistakes can mean families left without a wage-earner, forever.
They've got enough money to have a giant lobby (which happily works with the insurance lobby, one of the most evil IMHO), and they've got enough ego to develop Jesus complexes. I, for one, am not worried about whether they get a windfall vis a vis a cut in malpractice-insurance rates by 40%.
At the end of the day, if we want doctors to move to Texas and we want to incentivize it by reducing premiums, we can either divert tax money toward subsidizing premiums, which puts the burden on everyone (i.e., the consumers of medical services), or we can do like Texas and put the burden on injured people and their families by cutting into the amount they can recover. Which sounds more fair to you?
The idea behind CCTVs is deterrence, right? We disincentivize street crime by raising the chances that the criminal will get caught. Except, when has getting caught bothered a criminal? The CCTV system assumes a set of motivations that the average well-off, law-abiding citizen has. But most robbers are not robbing for sport; either they're dirt-poor, or they're addicts. Getting out of heroin withdrawal is such a strong desire that the threat of jail becomes abstract in comparison. So what if the cameras see me?
You can keep your BBC so long as I don't have to give anyone my DNA and be filmed, by the government, no matter where I go. ...so, by that reasoning, in about five years, I'll be asking you for the BBC. Keep her warm for me.
Yes. The EDVA Local Rules say that attorneys can file subpoenas pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(3), which says that the court clerk has to issue a subpoena to any party (or their attorney) who asks for one. Like much of the discovery process under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the judge/magistrate isn't supposed to get involved until the parties or a subpoenaed person have a dispute. And even then, they're supposed to try to resolve it out of court.
I am not a lawyer, but you just wait about six months.
The thing to understand about subpoenas is that in most states, once litigation commences, the lawyers (as officers of the court) for each side have the power to issue subpoenas to anyone who might have information relevant to the lawsuit.
The major limitations on such subpoenas are ethical limitations (attorneys' behavior is governed by a complex but far-from-bright-line set of rules) and the rules against discovery abuse, which can be found at Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b) and elsewhere. The decision to grant sanctions is up to the discretion of the court, which basically means that an appellate court will go with what the judge decides, unless, for example, the discovery sanction is death.
However, it looks like Ms. Seidel is in good hands lawyer-wise. Her motion to quash the subpoena (the way that one tries to avoid having to comply) hits a lot of different theories and defenses, including the most important one: that the subpoena won't lead to discoverable evidence.
Postscript of Surprise: The plaintiff's attorney filed the suit in the Eastern District of Virginia, a federal court whose nickname is "The Rocket Docket." The consensus among attorneys is that once you file a case there, you should go ahead and say goodbye to your family for a few months. Rather than let litigation drag out for years, the Rocket Docket judges set -extremely- aggressive discovery schedules. Filing any complaint there is ballsy, no less a thimerosal one, since whether thimerosal causes autism is far from crystal-clear. Long discovery would mean more time for the plaintiff to gather evidence (and for new autism studies to come out).
The SHDC slot (up to 16gb of extra storage) really makes up for the small SSD. I have nLited XP running on my eee SSD and have all my programs and documents on the SD card. The only problem is stupid programs that insist on being installed to root. Those programs get run on my tower, assuming I don't decide that their reluctance makes them unworthy of being used on any system.
...welcome our new barley-free overlords. While there is nothing appealing paying more for Duchesse de Bourgogne or Longhammer, the prospect of Natty Light, Keystone, Budweiser, Miller, Coors, etc., disappearing forever gives me comfort in these dark, warm, melty times. We're talking about a product (yes, only one product--there are no meaningful distinctions among the brands) so bad that the tasting contests have to create a category called "American-Style Lager" (read: macrobrew) to accomodate them. And something tells me the big breweries pay the competitions to have that category there in the first place. You know the organizers have to be huge beer snobs, and even Level 1 Beer Snobs automatically get the Hating on Macrobrews feat. Check out the Bud/Miller/Coors Web sites and notice how they each win the category every four years. It's almost like they're just taking turns.
A few months back, /. ran an article about a Times article about programs designed to de-clutter writers' screens. I settled on jdarkroom which defaults to green on black.
I like it. Typing in it feels like creating something out of nothing. But as various posters have noted, there is definitely an old-school sense about it, even for me (a Linux lover who gets stage fright in front of a command line and so runs XP). I remember the old Apple II and IIGS having similar display setups.
I think our minds tend to remember younger days as simpler days (I know third grade was a simpler time for me, at least) and so a green-on-black means simplicity for a lot of tech people for a variety of reasons. Typing on that screen evokes simplicity and makes my mind feel more clear.
Verizon just wired my apartment building for FiOS, and the brochure they kindly distributed after wiring my apartment during the day while I was out specifically says you can't use FiOS to host a server.