« September 21, 2008 - September 27, 2008 | Main | October 05, 2008 - October 11, 2008 »
October 03, 2008
Government by Gaels?
Dance there upon the shore;
What need have you to care
For wind or water's roar?
The charm. The love of words. War-like energies. Child-like joy and optimism mixed with bouts of sadness. And, of course, the burning, even tortuous, God-given right to serve as General-Manager-of-the-Universe, at least while on earth. By now, surrounded as I am by lawyers with big Irish genes, I know it when it when I hear it. For example, Joe Biden is as Irish as Irish-American pols come. But according to Newsweek writer Carl Sullivan, John McCain, Sarah Palin and Barack O'Bama each have strong ancestries in Ireland. Well, all four sure can talk. But WAC? sees nothing "Irish" in the talented but deliberate, mild, unconfrontational Senator Obama. It will be up to Joe.
Daniel O'Connell, Irish lawyer-politician, fighter, charmer, Muse.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at 11:04 PM | Comments (0)
October 02, 2008
"Slick Answers to Lazy Interrogatories."
Color me silly, but I love and respect written discovery during the pretrial process in American federal courts. Years ago, a fed-up U.S. district court judge, throwing up his hands during arguments by lawyers on a motion to compel discovery responses, referred to answers to interrogatories as "slick lawyer answers to lazy lawyer questions". I feel his pain.
Years ago a new second year associate who worked at our firm (after one year at another firm) complained that we were putting "too much thought" into a set of interrogatories under Rule 33, Fed. R. Civ. P. Our new hire patiently explained to me that interrogatories and other written discovery were in fact "simply a way for lawyers to bill time so they could make money, and nothing more." He was adamant about it, too. Nice guy, and I liked him--I always try to take his cab when I'm in Pittsburgh.
But complex and hard-fought civil cases really do turn about 90 per cent on the quality of the discovery questions and requests, including deposition questions, and the responses to them. And well-thought out and strategically-timed written discovery is the best way there is to prepare great depositions--and get ready for trial.
Posted by JD Hull at 02:45 PM | Comments (2)
Lawyers, Voting and Voters' Rights
Politics are always important. If you are a lawyer and don't believe that, please (a) sue your law school, (b) find another blog to read, and (c) consider new employment selling home improvements, shoes, PEZ dispensers or insurance. Re: the 2008 elections and the Fifteenth Amendment, which turned 138-years-old this year, see at GlobalTort this fine collection of resources.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at 12:06 AM | Comments (0)
October 01, 2008
D.C. Circuit vacates air monitoring rule.
Sierra Club v. Environmental Protection Agency, 536 F.3d 673 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
We forgot to note that, in mid-August, the D.C. Circuit invalidated a two-year-old EPA federal Clean Air Act regulation barring states from requiring increased air pollution monitoring in permits issued under Title V of the Act. Under Title V, states with program approval--which EPA gives and takes away--issue permits to power plants and factories on their own, rather than directly through EPA. In a 2-1 decision, the D.C. Circuit, which by statute reviews most challenges to EPA rulemaking, concluded that states may require power plants, oil refineries and other stationary sources of pollution to include in their permits stronger monitoring requirements than those imposed by EPA. Environmental groups, of course, like the decision, but energy companies and other industries do not. By far the best summary for corporate clients and GCs we've seen is one given by Dustin Till of the Seattle-based environmental boutique, Marten Law Group. See also Law.com.
Posted by JD Hull at 12:00 AM | Comments (0)
September 30, 2008
THE List of Global Arbitration Centers.
Courtesy of the excellent and always-understated China Law Blog, and particularly of Los Angeles lawyer Constance Kim, here's a gem your clients and you can use now: THE List of International Arbitration Centers. We'd change only one thing: it: put the ICC's International Court of Arbitration under "International" rather than under "France". And see CLB's "How To Handle Bad Product From Your China Supplier".
Posted by JD Hull at 01:16 PM | Comments (1)
The World's Markets: Grim.
The headline and Andrew Clark's reporting in London's The Guardian are representative:
Panic Grips World's Markets; Shock as American Rescue Plan Rejected.
NEW YORK--The US government's $700bn bail-out of the banking industry collapsed yesterday as Congress defied the White House by voting down the plan, sending Wall Street stocks plummeting and spreading shockwaves through the global economy. [more]
Posted by JD Hull at 12:59 AM | Comments (0)
September 29, 2008
Citigroup buys Wachovia's banking units.
For $2.2 billion. Another Black September sideshow and detail--but a fair one for Wachovia shareholders. See New York Times.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at 11:59 PM | Comments (1)
LinkedIn and Xing as "Facebook for Suits."
This week's The Economist: there are now 35 million members between LinkedIn and Xing. WAC? and some HMPC lawyers were early joiners. Our reasons were not compelling. They were: "Well, why not?"; as courtesy to those who asked us to link to them; it didn't take much time to join; and no public profile was required. We're still impressed with the overall set-up--but we still don't quite get it. Like most firms that solve problems for money, we already have a network of fine business lawyers, consultants, mover-shakers, influential people and other aggressive humans and their shops to help large and publicly-traded clients in Europe, the Americas and Asia; we'd like to use these kind of sites to supplement it. So:
1. What do we do now?
2. How do "facebooks for suits" help clients?
3. What about quality control?
"Justin, thanks for the recommendation on LinkedIn. Do I know you?"
(Photo: Warner Bros.)
Posted by JD Hull at 03:09 PM | Comments (4)
All IP, All Week: Blawg Review #179
See Blawg Review #179 at Securing Innovation. One of the better BRs this year. Query: Did the U.S. Constitution's framers regard patents as “property” or a "monopoly privilege"? WAC? thinks it was both.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at 12:00 AM | Comments (0)
September 28, 2008
Is Obama too wimpy to be President of the United States?
For over two decades, I've worked for and raised money for both national Republican and Democratic officeholders and candidates. And I've always voted "D" for president. But after watching the first 2008 debate Friday night, I am not so sure. Right now, I'd feel far more comfortable in the years 2009-2013 with Michelle Obama, Jimmy Carter, Mr. Rogers or maybe the late Tom Mix as my Decider in war, foreign affairs, the economy or even human rights than I would with Obama. Is Obama just another All-Resume, No-Action post-boomer talker? No, I don't love John McCain. But can Obama even utter the word "horseshit" under his breath without choking to death? See Salon. Can he get angry without seeming embarrassed about it? BO is a bright guy--and so what? Can he think and decide? And get things done?
All hat, no cattle? Can Obama Please Mix It Up More?
Posted by JD Hull at 11:59 PM | Comments (0)
Ease-of-Use Awards for Services?
In 2004, services sold alone or as support features to the sale of goods and products accounted for over 65% of the gross domestic product (GDP) in the US, 50% of the United Kingdom's GDP and 90% of Hong Kong's.
What if the services sector competed for clients on the basis of "ease-of-use"?
Develop and apply ease-of-use concepts to pure services? Our clients' services? Our services? Law. Accounting. Consulting. Advertising. And anything where a service or product-service mix is part of what you pay for. In other words, pretty much everything--and the direction global markets now march, in good and bad times.
Ease-of-use for services. Sure, and why not?
Consider for a moment just products. In 2006, The Folgers Coffee Company was awarded an Ease-of-Use Commendation by the Arthritis Foundation for its AromaSeal™ Canister. If you're a Folgers® drinker, you notice that Folgers® added an easy-to-peel tin freshness seal (no need for a can-opener), a new "snap-tight" lid and even a grip on its plastic red can.
The great companies many of us represent do spend money and expertise on making their goods, equipment and products usable. Think about your car, your luggage, your TV remote (well, strike that one), your watch and even grips on household tools. Think about Apple, Dell and Microsoft. Each year they think through your experience with their products and try to make it better. Continuous improvement models for "things."
Folgers® did it for coffee cans. IBM and CISCO have ease-of-use programs for the products they sell.
Develop and apply ease-of-use concepts to pure services? Our clients' services? Our services? Sure, why not? It's probably coming anyway, even while it will be infinitely harder to do for services than for products. WAC? has noted before that even corporate clients that sell goods see themselves as selling solutions and not products. In 2004, services sold alone or as support features to the sale of goods and products accounted for over 65% of the gross domestic product (GDP) in the US, 50% of the United Kingdom's GDP and 90% of Hong Kong's. Even products sold by IBM and CISCO, now chiefly service companies, are part of a services-products mix in which the services component is the main event.
Law firms, of course, have always sold services. And we are a small but powerful engine in the growth of the services sector. We strategize with and guide big clients every day. While that's all going on--day in and day out--what is it like for the client to work with you and yours? Are clients experiencing a team--or hearing and seeing isolated acts by talented but soul-less techies? Do you make reports and communications short, easy and to the point? Who gets copied openly so clients don't have to guess about who knows what? Is it fun (yeah, we just said "fun") to work with your firm? How are your logistics for client meetings, travel and lodging? Do you make life easier? Or harder? Are you accessible 24/7? In short, aside from the technical aspects of your service (i.e., the client "is safe"), do your clients "feel safe"?
What if law firms--or any other service provider for that matter--"thought through," applied and constantly improved the delivery of our services and how clients really experience them?
And then competed on it...?
Posted by JD Hull at 11:11 PM | Comments (0)