That'll Show 'Em

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,
By James Bowden

Ever been mad at someone? Perhaps someone doesn’t value your services, or tries to stiff you on your bills for services rendered? Don’t get mad – get even. Sue them for …[doing my best Dr. Evil impersonation] … 38 Quadrillion Dollars.

You heard me right. Just to give you an idea of how much money we are talking about, written out that is $38,000,000,000,000,000.00. Total world circulation is about $24 trillion, or by my math 1/1,583th of the claimed damages. As a bonus, the article manages to state the obvious without a hint of irony: “If [the defendant] loses the lawsuit and [plaintiff] is awarded $38 quadrillion, or perhaps 204 times that amount, [the defendant] said he is not sure how he will pay it.”

I’m just going to let the article do the talking on this one, with the one comment that the claims the plaintiff is making are epic, even in the wacky context of pro se representation (Really? Punitive damages of 204^3 times actual damages for breach of contract? On what planet?).

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (1) | September 2, 2010 07:38

Nashville Flood Recovery: $32,000 Rescued

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,

The Davidson County Juvenile Court—still completely displaced from its building by massive flooding early this month—had some good luck shine its way this week.  The clean-up efforts revealed $32,000 in cash in a safe in the clerk’s office—soggy and smelly, perhaps, but present and accounted for!  Assuming the cash can be treated, this is some welcome news.  Check out the article.

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (0) | May 27, 2010 07:40

SEC Accuses Goldman Sachs of Playing Liar's Poker, Bonfire of Vanities Ensues

Posted by wlansden | Filed under
By James Bowden

The SEC’s suit against Goldman Sachs is starting to look like a battle for the soul of the U.S. financial industry, and for good reason.  The SEC’s case gets to the heart of financial engineering as it was practiced during the mortgage-backed securities boom of the mid-aughts, the hangover of which the world economy is still suffering. The transaction in question, the sale of a synthetic Collateral Debt Obligation styled “ABACUS 2007-AC1” to institutional investors, is a case study in how investment banks used mortgage debts to increase their leverage exponentially, but I think that the financial press is missing the real meat of the story.  The real story is that investors that lost on the deal didn’t buy a mortgage-backed security at all – in fact, the transaction didn’t involve any mortgage assets at all.  The aggrieved investors bought shares in a bet that a collection of mortgage-backed bonds would not default, and they lost.

My guess is that folks in the Enforcement Division at the SEC read Michael Lewis’s article The End, and have been savvy to the game ever since.  Lewis, whose book Liar’s Poker shed a not-so-nice light on the 1980’s iteration of Wall Street, presents a story that is prescient despite often being profane; the crown jewel of the article is a succinct explanation on page five of how bad home loans in Florida led to insane levels of leverage on Wall Street.  The idea is that because interest rates reflect risk of default, there is effectively no difference between the cash flow produced by an interest-only mortgage and a credit default swap on that mortgage.  The SEC is clearly aware of this – paragraph 13 of the SEC’s complaint could have been written by Lewis.  This element of financial alchemy meant that an investment bank could double down by engineering a bond that mirrored the performance of any other bond simply with the payments that they received on a side-bet, and they could do so without ever having to own any interest in the underlying assets.  This is the type of security that a man much smarter than me has referred to as “Financial Weapons of  Mass Destruction.”

In the Goldman Sachs suit, the SEC has identified an interesting example of the life cycle of a synthetic CDO.  The SEC’s suit rests on the theory that because the securities were allegedly designed by a third party who expected them to default and had a financial interest in such, and the alleged failure to disclose that third party’s involvement was a material misstatement or omission.  Still, all the parties involved were financially sophisticated, Goldman Sachs has indicated they intend to put up a good fight, and the SEC will have to prove scienter, or a guilty intent, in order to prevail.  Goldman’s defense?  My guess is it will be an artful formulation of “c’mon, ref – we’re all big boys.  Let us play!”  The only thing that is certain is that this case will be interesting to watch.

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (0) | April 23, 2010 07:34

How to Date a Lawyer - A Response

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,

By James Bowden

Avvo.com, in an apparent attempt to assist users in finding the right lawyer for any and every purpose, has published a list of 10 suggestions on how to date a lawyer. While it is clearly tongue-in-cheek, per Avvo’s suggestion number three I have chosen to take the list literally and will respond accordingly.  Obviously, I am completely serious and by no means intend the following to be interpreted as being sarcastic, sardonic, or (heaven forbid) “pithy.”

  1. “Fish where the fish are” - First off, if you want to meet a successful lawyer, you might want to try a rich location over a lawyer-rich location.  Contrary to popular belief, not all lawyers are rich (unless by “rich” you mean “rich in debt”).  As for the provided ranking, I think we can all agree that Guam beats D.C., New York, and Arkansas despite its lack of (practicing) attorneys resulting directly from its location on a beach in the Pacific Ocean.
  2. “Go in for the kill” - Please do not kill lawyers.  Also, frequently bar association events are in fact held in … bars.
  3. “Beware the lawyer personality” - Ouch.  “The same qualities that persuade juries and win cases can also work like acid on marital relations.”  That one hurts.  It’s a good thing for my marriage that I’m a transactional attorney.
  4. “Only repeat things you hear from credible people” - While I don’t think that filing briefs with your prospective lawyer beau or belle is a dating best practice (“The Life of Pi is an excellent book. Oprah, 132 N.B.C. 882 (2006)”), are you really in the habit of passing along information from dubious sources as objectively factual?  If so, stop.
  5. “Use Latin whenever possible” - You have a poodle AND you named it Per Stirpes?  Gross.
  6. "Make love notes long and confusing” - This one gets my hackles up.  No, I don’t like writing to be deliberately baroque.  Quite the contrary - first and foremost I am a technical writer in my role as an attorney, and I deal with complex and difficult subject matter (law).  Nothing bothers me more than wasted words.  My advice re: writing love notes to a lawyer would be “Short (max 0.1) and sweet.”
  7. “Don’t be surprised when your lawyer sweetheart nitpicks everything” - Finally, a statement I can agree with.  But I must point out that I do not nitpick because I am a lawyer; I nitpick because I am slightly obsessive-compulsive.  Oh, and I’m a bit of a jerk, too (see Number Three, above).
  8. "Always cite sources” - Yes, lying will in fact win a lawyer’s heart.  Go with that.  Citing an imagined source will never result in mockery or discipline (see item L).
  9. "Never speak of beliefs not backed by empirical evidence” - They are on a real winning streak here, aren't they?  Yes, treating wait staff and children with scorn is sure to melt your law-trained mate's heart every time.  But you might want to make sure he or she didn't attend Michigan, Chicago, Berkeley, Penn, or any of the many other top-ranked law schools that happen to be a part of a public university before you get too down on the American education system.
  10. “Remember, it can all be very worth it” - Cute.  I didn’t know that dating a lawyer was comparable to house-breaking a Doberman Pinscher.

I think Avvo’s article can be summed up: “lawyers are like grapes: beat ‘em up, crush ‘em into goo, and lock them in a dark place for a few years and you might end up with something really nice.”  Clearly Avvo doesn’t work much with recent law school graduates, or they’d have a keener sense of the debt loads that many young and single attorneys labor under.  Overall, I give their Ten Tips a split decision: one thumb up for entertaining, one thumb down for missing the mark by a New York mile.

Currently rated 3.8 by 6 people

  • Currently 3.833333/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (1) | April 12, 2010 12:25

Most Extreme: Getting Out of Jury Duty Edition

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,

By Bahar Azhdari

In St. Joseph County, Illinois, those who are called to jury duty can only get out of serving due to, “hardship, extreme inconvenience, or necessity.” That sounds like a pretty high hurdle to me.  Putting myself in the position of one who were to shirk her civic duties, I have tried to come up with some good excuses.  I don’t think that catching up on the past four episodes of the final season of “LOST” carefully saved to my DVR would count in the court’s mind.  Other than that, I am at a loss.

It looks like Railton Loy, however, has a better excuse.  Mr. Loy doesn’t believe he should have to appear for jury duty – and Judge Roland Chamblee Jr., the person who gets to make the call – agrees.  What is Mr. Loy’s hardship?  What is the source of his extreme inconvenience?  Well, it ends up that he is a little bit of a racist.  And by “a little bit of a racist” I mean that he is the Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.  Oh, and he apparently planned to show up for jury duty wearing his full KKK regalia.  And, in case that was insufficient, he called and left a message with the court pointing out that he couldn’t be fair “unless the defendant was white.”  Judge Chamblee wisely allowed Mr. Loy’s deferral.  According to Judge Chamblee, "I saw no reason to subject the criminal justice system to Mr. Loy as a juror." (subscription required).  Truer words were never spoken.

Still, while Mr. Loy is not going to be serving on a jury any time soon, it seems that he is no stranger to the inside of a court room.

Currently rated 5.0 by 3 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (0) | March 30, 2010 09:38

Old Lawyers Blog Post: Cite Your Age to Avoid Sanctions

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,
By Brian Malcom

If you happen to "accidentally" move a key piece of evidence to set up a dramatic courtroom demonstration supporting your theory of a case and the opposition questions your conduct, cite your age.

The ABA Journal is reporting that a 70-year-old South Carolina attorney did just that in a case involving Kia's seat belt design in federal court.  The attorney, J. Kendall Few, argued that a seat-back reclining lever severed his client's seat belt and allegedly caused his client to be thrown from the car during a 2004 accident.  Kia argued that the plaintiff was simply not wearing his seat belt.

Kia lawyers brought a section of the car into the courtroom as an exhibit.  Conveniently, when the defense presented the exhibit, the seat belt was wedged behind the reclining lever just like the plaintiff argued.

The plaintiff's attorney admitted that he moved the seat belt the night before the courtroom spectacle, but he said he thought he had put the seat belt back like he found it.  In his defense, Few said "I'm 70 years old, and I'd been through a fairly hard day. I went down there, and I don't remember everything as good as I did when I was 25 or 30."

In a "close call," the federal district judge decided not to sanction Few.  According to the judge, there was no conclusive evidence that Few acted in bad faith or committed intentional misconduct.  As a side note, Few lost the case.   

Currently rated 5.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (0) | March 25, 2010 09:30

Why, [State Bar of] Georgia, Why?

Posted by wlansden | Filed under
By Brian Malcom

I am not usually one to quote John Mayer, but it seemed appropriate here.

The Georgia Supreme Court gave a slap from the bench to both a former Greenberg Traurig associate and the State Bar of Georgia.  The rapping follows a slap on the wrist by the State Bar of Georgia after an associate admitted that he stole about $493,000 between 2003 and 2009.

The associate, Michael J.C. Shaw, used fake identities to bill his firm for performing title examinations, skip traces and other investigative services as a bankruptcy and foreclosure associate at Greenberg.  Following his admission, Shaw filed a voluntary petition requesting a 6-to-12 month retroactive suspension, though the maximum penalty available to the bar is disbarment.  Georgia’s high court rejected the petition.

Despite Shaw’s troublesome personal life, his admission, and his restitution of $526,922 to his former firm, the Georgia Supreme Court wrote that Shaw was lucky not to be in prison for his actions.  In a concurrence, Justice Nahmias also found it highly troubling that the State Bar of Georgia and Shaw believed that such a short “break” from the practice of law was appropriate for a six-year scheme to defraud a firm of nearly half-a-million dollars.

I happen to agree with the high court that a “six-month to one-year suspension is an inappropriate sanction in view of the scope and extent of Shaw’s fraudulent and deceptive conduct.”  While Shaw had some personal issues that may have influenced his behavior, which is no excuse for what he did, Georgia’s high court has to think about the message it would send to give such a light punishment to such reprehensible conduct.

An attorney, or any member of society for that matter, should not be allowed to steal someone’s identity, misuse someone else’s SSN, and engage in a complicated scheme to defraud his company of nearly $500,000 and then walk away with what amounts to a long vacation plus a public “shame on you.”  A multi-year suspension (like 3 to 5 years) is the absolute minimum that the state bar should seek, and that is only because Shaw was highly cooperative and mitigating factors exist.  Certainly, no one would blame the state bar if they sought disbarment despite the mitigating factors.  While disbarment is a serious penalty, Shaw would still be able to consider himself lucky if he stays out of prison.

What are your thoughts?  The opinion is available here.

“Are you living it right?
Why, tell me why
Why, why [State Bar of] Georgia why?”

Currently rated 5.0 by 4 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (1) | March 16, 2010 08:59

Web 2.0 - Lawyer to Client: Delete Your Facebook Profile

Posted by wlansden | Filed under , ,

By Brian Malcom 

Social media is becoming a crime-fighting weapon, and criminal defense attorneys are catching on.  For some reason, most people believe that there is anonymity on the Internet.  This is an especially absurd belief when people go through great pains to make themselves as visible as possible in social media.

A Nashville, Tennessee criminal defense attorney named David Raybin immediately advises his clients to shut down their Facebook account.  I suspect that he is not the only criminal defense attorney giving this advice to his clients.  Lately, there has been an increased use of social media by police investigations.

The ABA Journal writes, "USA Today notes several cases throughout the country in which police investigations were bolstered by taking time to explore YouTube, Flickr and other online message boards:" 

  • Police in Suffolk, Va., were able to identify suspects involved in a Dec. 14 street fight when cellphone videos were posted on YouTube.
  • Police in Chattanooga, Tenn., discovered an online forum where residents were planning illegal drag races, staked out the area and ticketed participants.
  • Police in Los Angeles used YouTube and Flickr to identify people suspected of being involved in riots following the June 2009 NBA Championship. 

What can a young lawyer learn from this?  Well if you are interested in going into criminal defense, you may want to advise your client to immediately delete their social media account.  If you are not interested in criminal defense, maybe you should just take this as a yet another example that social media can be dangerous.

I would place good money on the fact that all bar organizations are already trolling social media outlets for information about bar applicants, committee applicants, and practicing attorneys under investigation for ethical misconduct.  This may be a good time to take down the picture of you doing a keg stand at last month's young lawyers get together.

Reminder about my rule of thumb: never post anything on the Internet you don't want your employer to see.  Thanks to cache technology, anything posted to the Internet will exist forever in cyberspace.

Currently rated 3.0 by 2 people

  • Currently 3/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (7) | February 16, 2010 14:27

Adventure in Legal Advertising: YouTube for Attorneys

Posted by wlansden | Filed under ,

By James Bowden

Do you need an attorney, and are more familiar and comfortable with online dating sites than the common law firm website?  Are you a practicing attorney who wishes for a way to use your charismatic personality and your rakish good looks to woo clients?  Have no fear, LegalTube is here!

LegalTube is apparently the natural evolution of legal advertising in the information age.  According to the ABA’s Business Law Today:

The site is intended to mimic that initial conversation for a prospective client—learning about the lawyer's personal style, experience, areas of expertise, and answers to general queries. As opposed to a standard directory where only certain text information is available, lawyers participating in LegalTube can not only give virtual tours of their offices, but also give viewers insight into their firm, their personality, and their background.

I don’t know about all of that, but the website does feature the three worst-delivered lawyer jokes in history.  Also included is an honestly entertaining “webisode reality series” called “Law After Dark,” which is really just a series of hilarious/sad clips from the Jefferson County Alabama (Birmingham) Circuit Court.  Fun game: juxtaposing the instructions concerning appropriate courtroom attire in the “Shorts?” clip with the treatment given to the defendant wearing the Hooters t-shirt in the “Nice hair” clip, planning wardrobe for upcoming hearing in Jefferson County appropriately.

Overall, I don’t know how well the site functions as a business development tool, and I somehow doubt that its existence will improve a client’s ability to select their ideal attorney – but the limited content available certainly is entertaining.  It should keep you chortling for at least a .2.

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (0) | February 16, 2010 07:34

Hanging Up a Shingle With Style

Posted by wlansden | Filed under , ,
By James Bowden

Recent law school grads throwing your hat in the ring as sole practitioners, the bar has been set.  Portland, Oregon’s newest law office features a Cornell Law Graduate with an interesting take on specialization versus general practice, an innovative fee structure, and an ambitiously nontraditional office layout.

Starting out without the support of a law firm staffed with experienced attorneys and the existing client base that they serve is a tough way to get started in the practice of law – but it is still a way to get started.  I really do admire Mr. Kaplon-Olson’s pluck and entrepreneurialism, too.  Here is a shameless personal story - my spouse is currently in business school, and she and her classmates are facing a lack of available jobs that is akin to that of law students.  Their response to adversity is inspiring – they are starting their own businesses.  The entrepreneurial spirit is something that I found lacking in law school, and something from which I think that we would have benefited greatly.

So my hat is off to Mr. Kaplon-Olson for breaking the mold and striking out on his own, and to all the entrepreneurs out there, too.

Currently rated 5.0 by 2 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
E-mail | Share on Facebook | Share on LinkedIn
Digg it! | Kick it! | DZone it! | del.icio.us
Permalink | Comments (5) | February 5, 2010 08:27