Remember that ditty about legal blogs that quoted us and appeared in the May issue of The American Lawyer (with a subscription required)?
The same piece appears at law.com this morning, and, this time around, no subscription is required.
Welcome, law.com readers!
One of the ways we feed this blog is doing what comes naturally to us lawyers – reading recent cases – and hoping that something inspires us. Sometimes that works. Sometimes that doesn’t. This week it worked too well. We’ve seen several decisions that bring back memories of stuff we’ve had to deal with over
The May 2008 issue of The American Lawyer (subscription required) includes an article about legal blogs — “Net Profits,” by Alan Cohen.
The article generally discusses the proliferation of blogs at Am Law 200 firms and, along the way, mentions our little experiment.
This is the annual “Am Law 100” issue of The American Lawyer
Who’d a thunk we’d agree completely with words posted yesterday at the New York Personal Injury Law Blog?
But we do.
Thanks, Eric Turkewitz.
You’re a good man, when you’re not suing our clients.
The May issue of the ABA Journal is out, and it includes a story about the success of the ABA’s efforts in book publishing.
Herrmann’s contribution to that cause, The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law, didn’t earn the photograph at the top of the article, but it did land the tag-line at the
Today’s Daily Journal (subscription required) reports (at page 2) that the Judiciary Committee of the California Assembly yesterday passed a bill meant to eliminate the learned intermediary doctrine and to make drug manufacturers responsible for giving warnings to patients using prescription medical products. The bill now moves to the Assembly floor:
“The California Assembly’s Judiciary
Here’s a weird one:
A party files a motion with a trial judge to transfer a case to a different venue. That motion is made under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1404, for the convenience of the parties and witnesses. The trial judge denies the motion. Can the party then file a new motion, with the Judicial
This post has absolutely nothing to do with drug and device law.
But, if you’re having a really bad day at the office, click here and feel better.
(HT to Bob Kraft’s P.I.S.S.D.)
When American courts hand down important decisions, we try to act quickly. We link to the decisions as soon as we hear about them, and we try to publish an analytical post within 24 hours.
That’s the life of a blogger.
When stuff comes from Europe, we’re a little slower.
We don’t hear about those
To the surprise of absolutely nobody, the Plaintiffs filed their petition seeking rehearing en banc in Colacicco/McNellis late on Tuesday. We obtained a copy late yesterday (thanks Chilton!). The plaintiffs could have decided not to seek rehearing and could have proceeded with a certiorari petition to the Supreme Court. Instead, they’ve decided to slow the