« November 11, 2007 - November 17, 2007 | Main | November 25, 2007 - December 01, 2007 »
November 24, 2007
Patriotism, conflicts and high-profile trial blunders.
Midwest-raised WAC? is quite patriotic--as American as apple pie, baseball, moral pretension and land grabs. And even though patriotism has limitations as a system of thought, since early 2003 (U.S. making noises about invading Iraq, and finally does that) I have "defended America" at dinner parties, meetings, hotel lobbies and restaurants in London, Aldeburgh, Paris, Kandel, Mainz, Frankfurt, Heidelberg, Dusseldorf, Berlin and Barcelona. Until late 2003, my rule for ground travel was this: rented cars in UK, Germany and Austria; trains everywhere else. That had always made sense. But trains, no matter where I went in 2003, became a problem. In April 2003, a half dozen chain-smoking French boarding school students once cross-examined me on a train from Paris to London, causing me to start smoking again. In the late summer of 2003, an inebriated
Hungarian guy twice my size in the bar car as we were nearing Budapest (he claimed I was an American "bombardier") tried to pick a fist-fight with me--but apparently settled for putting a hex on me and mine. A week later, a Prague massage lady swore at me in a decent-looking non-goofy Marriott near the Charles Bridge, but at least it wasn't on a train.
So I love my country--and have taken to renting cars in Europe in countries other than the UK and Germany. However, and as we've noticed since 2005, the Canadian Bar Association's CBA PracticeLink has a client service and real lawyering-oriented website which puts counterpart sites by bar associations here in the U.S., well, to shame. For examples, see "Developing a Conflict Checking System for Your Law Firm" by Janice Mucalov, and "Top Five High-Profile Trial Blunders and How to Avoid Them in Your Own Practice" by Ted Brooks. Don't worry that it's Canadian material--you can still use it.
Posted by JD Hull at 03:00 AM | Comments (0)
November 21, 2007
Does America lack capacity for entanglements abroad?
That question keeps coming up. The young Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville thought 170 years ago that the answer is yes. He wrote that America by nature was an isolationist creature. For a more recent take, see today's post by Joerg Wolf, a German Fulbright alumni, in the Atlantic Review. Wolf comments on a recent WSJ op-ed piece by DC lawyer David Rivkin, "Diplomacy in the Post-9/11 Era". Both are excellent. If your firm works abroad--or will be--read them.
Posted by JD Hull at 11:59 PM | Comments (0)
Anne Frank tree gets a second reprieve.
AP: The famous chestnut tree, over 150 years old, wins another stay from Judge Bade. Amsterdam city officials must present more detailed alternatives to the tree's proposed destruction.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at 11:51 PM | Comments (0)
Climate change: The new overture in US policy.
The price of admission has changed. "No Net New Greenhouse Gases" should begin today. --John Reaves
See in last week's San Diego Union-Tribune "Global Warming and San Diego", an op-ed piece by environmental lawyer John Reaves. It's irrelevant how you interpret the science, or precisely where it leads you. Even in San Diego, America's answer to paradise on earth, the topic of climate change is here to stay. It's the new fixture in the national conversation.
Posted by JD Hull at 06:06 PM | Comments (0)
November 20, 2007
George Will on the The Plaintiff's Bar
No matter what you think of columnist George F. Will--someone once called George America's best 19th-century mind--he's a smart guy, and an interesting writer, and we very much like the bow-tie thing. Besides, WAC? reads everything. Will's piece below is consistent with our belief that no one will ever write a book entitled The American Class Actions Bar: A Passion for Client Service Excellence (whether or not the author is a "specially-compensated" Rule 23 plaintiff). Anyway, in The Washington Post, see Will's Sunday piece "Edwards, Lerach and the Little People". While we are on the topic, please be reminded that, to us, it's always about the lawyering. For clients--the ones who get it, the ones you value, the ones you want to keep.
We don't care what your politics are.
Two years ago we launched What About Clients? because we were certain that putting clients and clients' interests first is a rarity. How even the best corporate clients on the globe are still served up a third-rate legal services-client service mix mystifies us; we are inclined to conclude that they put up with it because so many GCs don't know anything better. So we still think the "client service" rubric on most law firm websites is a ruse. We suspect that individuals--actual humans with their transactions, family matters, estates and claims--don't fare any better than corporations.
Finally, WAC? likes presidential candidate John Edwards, and even briefly but seriously considered working with his campaign four years ago. We just have a tough time with the "I represented the little people" overture.
If you're a lawyer, you know what we mean.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at 06:25 PM | Comments (0)
November 19, 2007
Pakistan's lawyers, Musharraf and emergency rule.
How can you walk into a courtroom and address a judge as 'My lord' if he has taken an oath to a dictator? --Asad Abbasi, Islamabad lawyer
The Washington Post's Pam Constable writes about how lawyers in Pakistan wage a campaign against President Pervez Musharraf by boycotting courts.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at 11:59 PM | Comments (0)
Redux: You're smart when you're angry.
Anger is that powerful internal force that blows out the light of reason.
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Maybe, maybe not. WAC? could never be sure. Last week, writing about the Las Vegas Dem debate, we were just kidding, mainly. We did like HRC's pluck. But being in an ADR-non-warrior-let's-explore mode lately (keep that on the down-low), we noticed that Stephanie West Allen had this great piece back in June at her "other blog", Brains on Purpose: "Good Brain, Bad Brain? Bring It All to the Negotiation Table".
Posted by JD Hull at 05:23 PM | Comments (0)
Blawg Review # 135
Today is Equal Opportunity Day in the U.S., and Part 1 of Blawg Review #135 is hosted by Transgender Workplace Diversity. Part 2 will appear tomorrow, Transgender Day of Remembrance, at the Rainbow Law Center Blog.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at 08:40 AM | Comments (0)
ADR, Mediation--and a few words about Dinosaurs.
How do scientists--and dinosaurs--resolve their disputes, anyway? Hear an interview with Kevin Padian, curator of University of California—Berkeley’s Museum of Paleontology. It's from "International Dispute Negotiation", a podcast interview series of The International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR). The interviews are conducted by General Electric in-house lawyer Michael McIlwrath, based in Florence, Italy. The Padian interview is here. Vigilant Diane Levin pointed out IDN to us last week.
Posted by JD Hull at 12:59 AM | Comments (0)
November 18, 2007
Clinton, Edwards and Kucinich do LA environmental forum.
This happened Saturday afternoon. WAC? even sent its secret resident stringer to this limited-seating event at the Wadsworth Theater in West Los Angeles. But never mind--the NYT was there anyway, along with the feisty Huffington Post. The forum was held by the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund and other environmental groups. All Dem and GOP candidates were invited--but only Clinton, Edwards
and Kucinich accepted the invitation. Climate change and energy security were the main topics. No tough panel questions, and no real differences in positions. WAC? and many others think charming, articulate and nothing-to-lose-now faux populist John Edwards was the forum's real star. Hillary seemed tired, more stiff than usual, and overly-careful. Dennis was, well, genuinely liberal and spectacularly un-Presidential. But we have liked the Ohio Boy Wonder since 1978.
Posted by JD Hull at 10:13 PM | Comments (0)
Can you overdo courtroom technology?
You sure can. And some good trial lawyers we know are making that mistake right now. Remember the idea is to tell your story, simplify the arcane, and drive main points home to a jury which is doing its best to understand your client's case. Tech should help you and your client with jurors--not frustrate them. Don't hold your client back. Evan Schaeffer explains in "Are You Using Too Much Courtroom Tech?".
Posted by JD Hull at 12:37 AM | Comments (0)