Controversial Immigration Law Brings Fear, Conversation

I had a spirited and energizing conversation with a man this morning. At Dunkin Donuts, I had grabbed a hot chocolate and a donut and took a seat, beginning to peruse the morning Courant. I couldn't help but notice the man at the next table chatting with a young man, and they were quite engaged. What they were discussing, I do not know; only that they were clearly enjoying their conversation.

Shortly after I sat, the young man left. As I read through the news section of the paper, the gentleman (now with no one to share his time with) asked if there was anything good "in there." I responded by telling him there was lots of crazy stuff.

"Have you heard about what they're doing in Arizona?" I asked him. Before allowing a response, I informed him of the new legislation signed by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, which makes it a misdemeanor to not possess proper immigration paperwork and also requires police to determine whether people are in the country illegally.

His take on the matter? He feels it's okay...after all, we need to know who's here legally and who's here illegally. I countered with my argument that it's blatant discrimination. Now he didn't tell me what part of the south he's from, but he did tell me that down south it was a way of life to be discriminated against when he was coming up, and it was "just how it was." "But it's still discrimination," I protested.

Noting that I recognized how there were separate toilets, separate water fountains, separate everything, I fervently told him, "Medgar Evers died for freedom from discrimination, Martin Luther King died for freedom, all sorts of folk died for freedom." He mentioned how on the buses he was required to sit in the back. I countered thus, "Yeah, Rosa Parks made a stand for freedom!"

There was no way in which I was going to convince him of the wrong perpetrated on the citizenry of Arizona, though. He was adamant about the need to be certain of who was who. After all, "back in the day, 90% of the black people were outlaws." My protest to that statement brought his estimate down to 80%. I laughed and protested again, to no avail.

I told him about the time I was driving on Weston Street in Hartford with my Jamaican sister, Michelle, on a Sunday morning. We were heading to church and I got pulled over by a police officer. This was shortly after my license plate had been stolen, and I had put the other plate in my back window so as to prevent another theft.

Now I know the only reason I got pulled over was because it was 9:30 on a Sunday morning, I was in North Hartford, and there was a Black woman in my passenger seat. Ostensibly, the reason was the license plate, but Michelle and I both knew better (So did the cop!). Of course, there was no ticket, no warning, just the traffic stop and what we considered to be harassment.

When I told him, he just nodded his head in (I suppose) agreement; acknowledging that it's just how things are. Though he agreed that discrimination was wrong, I could tell that there was no way I was going to change his mind about it being normal and expected.

As for the Arizona law itself, supporters have described it as a way for police to take the handcuffs off police in dealing with illegal immigration in Arizona, a gateway for illegal human and drug smuggling (primarily from Mexico). The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund is planning a legal challenge to the law, saying that it "launches Arizona into a spiral of pervasive fear, community distrust, increased crime and costly litigation, with nationwide repercussions.

Governor Brewer ignored an admonition from President Barack Obama that it would lead to widespread racial profiling. Also, on Thursday, April 21, Mexico's Senate unanimously passed a resolution that urged the governor to veto the law. The Vice President of Guatemala, Rafael Estrada, said the law is "a step back for those migrants who have fought" for their rights; and Guatemala's Foreign Relations Department decried the measure in a statement that said "it threatens basic notions of justice."

Approximately 2000 protestors booed upon learning that Gov. Brewer had signed the bill and, according to County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, "the governor did not listen to our prayers."

Gov. Brewer has ordered that the state's law enforcement licensing agency develop a training course to teach implementation of the law without violations of civil rights. "We must enforce the law evenly, and without regard to skin color, accent, or social status," she said. "We must prove the alarmists and the cynics wrong."

Time will obviously be the judge. President Obama has instructed the Justice Department to examine the law for its legality. He called the bill "misguided" and said the federal government must enact immigration reform at the national level - or leave the door open to "irresponsibility by others."

Now back to my conversation with John (I learned his name just before I departed). We did, in the end, agree to disagree. Our hour-long conversation covered all sorts of topics...church, white folk, New Orleans (somehow I almost always get to insert that topic into conversation), the peculiar habits of church-folk, the need to stay in shape (prompted by a friend of his on her way to the gym to work out).

I would imagine I'll see John again, and I'll welcome it. For me, I'm hoping that the next opportunity will enable me to say "I told you so" about this immigration (anti-immigration) law; but if it's not to be, that will still be fine with me. I'll enjoy another opportunity to share a beverage and a coffee shop with a new friend.

George M. Akerley

Admirable characteristics of a medium size law department regarding talent

A profile of Respironics’ general counsel, Steve Fulton, has dotted throughout four commendable people practices in his department.

Strong hires and strong retention. During Fulton’s 13-year tenure, “I have never needed to terminate an attorney and none of the attorneys I hired has left” as quoted in GC Mid-Atlantic, June 2008 at 8 (See my posts of Dec. 12, 2006: low attrition in UK legal teams; March 4, 2007: rates of departure; June 24, 2007: blame the general counsel for high attrition rates; and June 15, 2008: Qwest lowers its attrition rate.).

Experienced, mature lawyers. Respironics’ four transactional attorneys average 17 years of experience.

Autonomy for lawyers. Work comes from clients to the individual attorney, rather than coming to Fulton to parcel out. This system allows the attorneys to build relationships with what are in effect their own clients. General counsel should not be the primary clearinghouse for work assignments.

Keep good work inside. The Respironics legal team does nearly all of the company’s legal work inside. The exceptions are international work and litigation (See my post of July 11, 2008: autarky and Respironics.). Keep good work inside and you keep good workers inside.

Law Department Management

So many cottage industries thrive on law departments! A village!

As Rees Morrison points out, there's a whole cottage industry of niche legal services that are making a living off law departments. Here's the list compiled by Rees Morrison:

• ADR (alternative dispute resolution)
• Auditors of legal bills
• Class action claims
• Consultants on law department management
• Consultants on compliance, corporate governance, and ethics
• Corporate governance groups
• Corporate secretary services and software
• Corporate secretary portals
• Court reporters
• Decision analysts
• Document assembly
• Document discovery
• E-billing vendors
• Economic analysis experts
• Electronic discovery
• Ethics line third parties
• Expert witness sites online
• Legal and compliance training online
• Legal research
• Litigation and trial consultants
• Matter management systems
• Medical/nurse analysts
• Offshore providers
• Online selection of law firms
• Part-time general counsel
• Search firms
• Settlement and ADR capabilities online
• Settlement counsel
• Writing instructors

Law Department Management

LWB: The Impact of Children on Lawyer Productivity

Carolyn Elefant:

Having children impacts lawyer productivity in different ways depending on gender, concludes a recent investigation by the British Psychological Society, reported here. After studying the schedules and billing records of 670 lawyers in Alberta, Canada, researchers Jean Wallace and Marisa Young found that when women lawyers have children, their productivity (or at least hours worked) decreases. The decrease occurs because female lawyers with children usually juggle professional and domestic responsibilities. By contrast, male lawyers with children were found to be more productive than their childless male counterparts, which according to the study " is consistent with the dominant cultural view of men as breadwinners, such that those with greater family responsibilities put in more hours to earn more money." At the same time, male lawyers with children were more likely to have a partner who did not work and could assume responsibility for household duties.

The study also examined the impact of "family friendly" work practices on productivity. Interestingly, the researchers concluded that flexible hours negatively impacted the productivity of male staff, but not female staff.

So which category of lawyers is most productive? That would be childless female lawyers, whose productivity exceeds that of their childless male counterparts and male and female lawyers with children.

My biggest gripe with the study is that it uses hours as a proxy for productivity. But as we all know, hours billed don't necessarily correlate to efficiency; indeed, longer hours may signal less productivity, not more. I'd be curious to see, for example, whether women lawyers manage to complete tasks more quickly precisely because they have less time. If that's the case (and I suspect it is), perhaps having children makes them productive, not less.

Is an Oral Contract as Good as a Written Contract?

An Oral Contract is as legally binding as a Written Contract, the issue with an Oral Contract is in proving its existence. To begin, the existence of a Written Contract is fairly obvious, either there is a writing or there isn’t. An oral contract, by definition, does not have a writing to support its terms, conditions or even existence. So how can we prove that it exists? One way is to use witness testimony. If A and B enter into an oral agreement, and C and D are present at the time the oral contract is made, C and D can be used to prove the existence of the oral contract. Their testimony that they heard the terms of the agreement will be sufficient to prove the existence of an Oral Contract.

Course of Conduct is another way to prove the existence of an oral contract. Let’s assume that X offers to buy a radio from Y for $50. Y accepts and hands the radio to X, who then gives Y $50. The parties’ course of conduct indicates that an oral contract existed. If the radio were defective, or if Y changed his mind, he could not say that a contract did not exist. Another example of Course of Conduct would be your typical neighborhood newspaper delivery. For the most part, the newspaper boy delivers a newspaper to you and you pay him on a weekly basis. There is rarely a written agreement with the newspaper boy to deliver newspapers. You simply tell him, “please deliver a paper to me, and I will pay you”. If the newspaper boy delivers newspapers to you for a few week, and you pay him, an oral contract exists based upon the parties course of conduct. After this time, if the papers are delivered and then you refuse to pay, you cannot allege that there is no contract. The Course of Conduct indicates that an Oral Contract exists.

Credibility of the parties is another factor in proving the existence of an Oral Contract. Suppose that Patron walks into a local restaurant and orders a plate of spaghetti. When Patron orders the spaghetti, an offer is made by Patron to pay for a plate of spaghetti. When the server brings the spaghetti to Patron, an Acceptance occurs and a binding oral contract is made. Credibility comes into play where the Patron then refuses to pay for spaghetti, saying “I never agreed to pay for this, I thought it was free”. All of you can see that is an incredible statement. Should that type of matter go to court, a judge would look at the credibility of the parties in regard to the situation and likely find that an oral contract was formed. If you reconsider the spaghetti scenario, though, you can see where an oral contract would be just as legally binding as a written contract. If a lawsuit were to arise out of the patron’s failure to pay, any court in the land would find the existence of the oral contract based upon credibility.

The existence of an oral contract can be more difficult to prove in a different type of scenario. Imagine a scenario with P and Q. P and Q are complete strangers. P approached Q and offers to buy a Corvette from Q for $1,000. Q laughs, and says “sure”, then drives away in the Corvette. If P attempts to enforce what he feels is a binding oral agreement, will he succeed? He will have a very difficult time proving that a contract exists. There is no writing to show the agreement. There is no prior course of dealing between the parties. There were no other witnesses to this alleged conversation. Credibility becomes an issue here, along with believe-ability.
As you can see, the difficulty in enforcement of an oral contract lies in the parties' ability to prove what the terms of the contract were. Absent proof of the terms of the contract, a party may be unable to enforce what it believes to be a firm contract. Evidence, such as witness testimony, prior dealing of the parties, course of conduct and credibility of the parties are some factors that may play into the enforcement of an oral contract. If sufficient evidence can be established that the parties orally entered into a contract, the terms of that contract will be enforced. If the proof is strong, then an oral contract is just as binding as a written one. The question at hand lies with the sufficiency of that oral evidence.

About the author: Greg Artim is an Attorney with offices located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. For more answers to your Contracts or other legal questions, please visit his website at www.gregartim.com

Lawyers Use RSS Feeds To Increase Productivity And Profitability

Lawyers have never been known as a technical bunch, but more and more often you see a lawyer with a palm pilot making appointments and a blackberry for those urgent messages. Electronic gadgets are now common in the courthouses across the USA. Lawyers have increased productivity by utilizing technology so it should come as no surprise that lawyers are using RSS feeds as a means to grow and manage their practices.

Lawyers are using RSS feeds a number of different ways to increase efficiency and productivity. Common RSS feed usage in the legal field include:

1. Ego Feeds

First and foremost, lawyers want to know what is being said about their firm. It is easy enough to monitor search engines and news searches using RSS. Lawyers create what is commonly referred to as "ego searches". These are essentially keyword searches (the keyword is the firm or lawyer's name). Each time the keyword appears in the news article or search engine a new item will appear in the feed. Lawyers can click through and view the source of the mention.

2. Current Events

Similar to ego feeds, lawyers use RSS to track current events that are related to cases in which they are involved. This might involve monitoring specific news agencies or topics.

Ego Search Tools - http://www.rss-tools.com/ego-search-feeds.htm

3. Firm Public Relations

Won a big case, what better way to convey it than sending a press release? Naturally, this release should also appear in an RSS feed.to help increase the distribution and reach of the press release. RSS can also be used by large firms to announce press conferences at the culmination of a case.

Law.com - http://www.law.com/service/rss.shtml

4. Court Cases

RSS can be used to monitor pending court cases, and rulings that might effect a specific segment of law.

RSSGov - http://www.rssgov.com/archives/000036.html

5. Pending Legislation

Lawyers can use RSS to monitor legislation that relates to specific cases or topics. Lobbyists can monitor votes of politicians and follow their positions on important issues.

GovTrack - http://www.govtrack.us/

6. Client News

Ego feeds can also be used to monitor the word on the street about a client. Whether the client is facing a criminal trial or a civil case, the press can undoubtedly influence a trial. Monitoring the press for mentions help lawyers prepare the best possible defense or prosecution.

Ego Search - http://www.feedforall.com/ego-searches.htm

7. Legal Calenders

Industry events can be followed using RSS feeds. Legal conferences and events can be traced on public RSS calenders.

Law School Calender - http://www.law.uoregon.edu/cal/events/index.php?com=rss

8. Share Research Tools

Lawyers can use social bookmarking tools and RSS feeds to share web research resources with colleagues. This can reduce the amount of time spent researching issues.

del.icio.us - http://del.icio.us

9. Legal Employment

Job feeds are increasing in popularity in all industries. Lawyers in search of employment openings can subscribe to RSS feeds and learn about new employment opportunities as they become available.

4 Legal Jobs - http://www.4legaljobs.com/show_content.php?id=1144741774

10. Court Rulings

Many courts are now publishing court rulings in RSS feeds, making them available to the general public.

Court Rulings - http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/subscribe.html

11. Court of Appeals

Appeals courts are also adopting RSS feeds to allow interested parties to monitor decisions coming out of the court of appeals.

US Courts - http://www.a7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=rss_ops

12. Legal Organizations

The American Bar Association has an RSS feed and podcast that discusses litigation. Lawyers can use RSS feeds to stay connected to industry information.

American Bar Association - http://www.abanet.org/litigation/litigationfeed.xml

13. Continuation Education

Many legal courses have podcasts available, and lawyers interested in expanding their education on a specific segment of the law can listen to audio podcasts or subscribe to video podcast lectures.

Education Feeds - http://www.educational-feeds.com

14. Legal Blogs

Many lawyers have expanded their practices by setting up a blog offering legal advice. Often the contents of the blog are syndicated using RSS feeds.

Law Professors - http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/antitrustprof_blog/

15. Cease and Desist

There is even an RSS feed that contains Cease and Desist Letters. As cease and desist letters are added, clinical law students can annotate them with questions and answers.

Chilling Effects - http://www.chillingeffects.org/index.xml

Lawyers have begun using RSS to stay ahead and adapt to the needs of their clients. Members of the legal profession are using RSS in very specific ways. RSS is more than simply a communication medium to lawyers, it is helping them filter information that is relevant to their practice and case load. Through RSS they are able to gain access to relevant information in a timely fashion.
--
Sharon Housley manages marketing for FeedForAll http://www.feedforall.com software for creating, editing, publishing RSS feeds and podcasts. In addition Sharon manages marketing for RecordForAll http://www.recordforall.com audio recording and editing software.

Tips: Prevent Motorcycle Accidents

In this generation wherein our roads are occupied by a large volume of vehicles, the chance of being stuck in a heavy traffic is quite high. This is one of the reasons people choose riding their motorcycles to reach their daily destinations with much ease. Another thing is; some types of motorcycles are more fuel-efficient compared to utilizing other kinds of vehicles. This enables the bike owners to save more money for their other expenses.

On the other hand, due to the increasing popularity of motorcycles, rapid growth in the number of motorcycle accidents has resulted. Each year, at least five percent of all road accident casualties are attributed to motorcycle crashes. As we clearly perceive, motorcyclists are considerably unprotected in a motorcycle since it has no protective metal cage to ensure the safety of the rider. In addition, motorcycles also lack any safety gadgets such as air bags, windshields and safety belts. Thus, it has no match to a fearsome trucks or any other four-wheeler.

To lessen the possibility of being involved in a motorcycle accident than can cause serious personal injuries, the riders may follow these tips:

- Be courteous and respectful to other motorist who uses the roads

- Never practice tailgating

- Avoid riding a motorcycle when you are under the influence of liquor

- Do not ride between slow moving vehicles

- Recognize and follow the traffic rules and ordinances

- Reduce the noise produced by the motorcycle

- Utilize signals whenever necessary

- Be cautious especially at road intersections

- Always check the side mirrors for possible upcoming vehicles - Be watchful on road hazards and defects as well as traffic problems ahead

- Always be on the road position where the other motorists clearly see you

- Maintain a safe speed that you are most comfortable of and with consistency to your driving capability and road conditions - Have a complete check up on your motorcycle especially the brakes

- Wear your protective gears such as a helmet, jackets, proper footwear and gloves

There are still other ways to prevent motorcycle accidents and injuries. These can be well understood if you will try to attend a motorcycle-riding training. However, if you are already engaged in these accidents, do not accept the fault better consult a motorcycle accident attorney to determine if you have a case to pursue. Your legal counsel will evaluate the incident. Then, if he finds a liability or fault on the other party, he will help you in recovering damages against the defendant. Keep in mind that the law entitles all the motorists with such protection that they are worthy of. We just have to know how to utilize those rights.

Violence in Our Homes

The family is considered as the basic unit of the society. It is an inviolable social institution, which for all intents and purposes, is safeguarded by the state with all its pervasive powers and coercive mechanism. The family has in fact been so important in our present society, that marriage is actually a foundation of the family has been protected with much zeal by the state. When man and woman comes into a conglomeration with each other, it is assumed that they are already one, and not even the mere acquiescence of the parties, or the volition of one party could have such contract be eradicated. Yet notwithstanding the same, it is not a bolted lock that would last a lifetime even if it would no longer be healthy to the family whose interest it was suppose to foster. The marriage bonds may be broken if the union has already been plagued with envy, angry, hatred, and violence. Domestic violence has been abundant in our society today. Psychologists view it as a way of showing one’s control over a family, and to show who actually must be followed and who owns and manipulates the same.

It is a showing of territorial control prevalent among lower forms of animals, that is, with the expression of violent acts on the beings within his territorial domain, the predator acts in such a vicious manner to maintain his control thereof, and thus, legitimizes his rule. This is the picture being painted in domestic violence among members of the family. The father, which usually is the culprit in these types of offenses, has a constant drive to show that he has a control over his wife and his flock, showing his power by hurting his wife, or even to the extent of hurting his children, or other people in the household.

Domestic violence is a dreaded offense. Not only would it amount to lose of parental authority, it may also be considered as a criminal offense which can be penalized by imprisonment, or if circumstances led to more drastic effects then the penalty of death. A person shall be liable for all the consequences of his act whether the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. That has been the constant rule when it comes to our courts of law. Hence, if a person causes the death of another by reason of a domestic violence then he would be liable thereof even the wrongful act done was not what he supposedly and originally intended. For more information about Domestic Violence consult our Los Angeles Attorneys

What You Need to Know About Personal Injury

If you want to get the most out of your personal injury settlement, you have your work cut out for you. There are always some things you need that are very expensive and if you can no longer work, then you are in for a lot of trouble. The main types of insurance will be explained in this article.

Cars are all around us and talking about the components of motor vehicle insurance coverage presents some interesting insurance questions. The main components of car insurance include personal liability protection which is also known as personal injury protection, uninsured automobile coverage, property damage coverage, comprehensive coverage, statutory accident benefits and more.

Collision coverage is a must when it comes to car insurance. The first thing you do in a car accident is damage you vehicle. If the car accident is much worse, you can face people being injured in one way or another. But the first thing that happens is damaging your car.

Accidents happen in different situations. You can either hit another car or non-vehicular objects. No matter the case, you car will sustain damages and with the help of your property damage insurance, repairing those damages will be supported by the insurance company.

Car theft is another issue you should be worried about and luckily there is a type of insurance for that also. It is called comprehensive insurance and it covers the situation when you car is damaged illegally, after it has been taken without the owner’s permission or harmed in other ways, for instance by an act of nature. As we all know that we cannot predict the acts of nature.

Some types of motor vehicle insurance are optional and others are mandatory. For instance, property damage coverage is optional in Ontario, but others like liability insurance is mandatory. The requirements for various types insurance varies from province to province.

This brings us to the topic of this article – the personal injury protection which is also known as personal liability insurance. In the Province of Ontario, it is mandatory . It is the most important part of your insurance and you should consider purchasing more than the statutory minimum in order to ensure both your safety and the safety of your passengers.

When a personal injury occurs, liability insurance is very useful.. Since there are a lot of accidents that have a harmful outcome on your and/or a third party’s health, this type of insurance will cover some or all of the costs if someone is killed or injured in an accident, when you or other insured persons are at fault in the accident. This also applies to all of your passengers as well.

But this is not always the case. Considering all the steps involved in determining what party is to blame and who will cover the costs, the process could take a long time and you may end up with nothing in the end. A similar situation would be a wrongful dismissal, because you are not to blame, yet you suffer the consequences.

What you need is good legal representation that knows how to handle personal injury and wrongful dismissal law suits. You can find something like this over the internet, by visiting preszlerlaw.com. Here you will find all the information you need about wrongful dismissal and the legal action you can engage. They provide aggressive legal representation that can solve your problems regarding any matter, especially injury cases and wrongful dismissal.

Buying a Home 'As-Is' - Should You Be Worried?

Most homes are sold 'as is'. In fact, the form Residential Purchase Agreement used by most brokers has a pre-printed 'as is' clause stating that the property is sold 'as is' without any warranty and in its present physical condition. In a recent purchase, I was asked by the seller to also sign a special lawyer-prepared document which reiterated (in a full page of legalese) that the property was being sold 'as is.' My first instinct was to ask: What is wrong with this property and am I losing all of my rights by agreeing to buy it 'as is'.

There is no clear-cut answer but a quick explanation of the law should put your mind at ease when buying a property 'as is'.

What is wrong with This Property?

As the Agreement notes, 'as is' means that the Seller is not making any warranties about the condition of the property. Selling 'as is' does not necessarily mean that anything is wrong with the property. The Buyer, however, should have a professional inspector look at the property and accompany the inspector as he examines the property. The inspector's trained eye will catch items that you may not notice.

Am I losing All of My Rights?

If it turns out that a problem arises with the property after the deal has been closed, what remedy does a Buyer have in an 'as is' sale? The 'as is' clause works in concert with other laws, most notably California Civil Code 1102. This section requires that the Seller provide the Buyer with a detailed Real Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement.

The Disclosure Statement addresses almost every conceivable defect with the property-from the presence of contaminants to lawsuits against the property. In general, the Seller is under a duty to disclose any and all facts materially affecting the value or desirability of the property which are known only to him and which he knows are not known to, or reasonably discoverable by, the Buyer. Even loud or obnoxious neighbors must be disclosed.

If the problem has been disclosed by the Seller, the Buyer has no cause to complain at a later date. He could have walked away from the deal or renegotiated. However, if the Seller knew about the problem but did not disclose it, the Buyer may have a claim against the Seller.

In a recent case, our client purchased a multi-million dollar home only to find that the winter rains brought extensive leaking. The professional inspection had noted that the roof should be maintained yearly and would have to be replaced in three years. However, it had not uncovered any leaking, and the Seller made no mention of roof leaks in the Disclosure Statement. However, the gardener and housekeeper, both of whom had worked for the Seller, remembered numerous roof leaks while the Seller lived in the house.

The Seller argued that (1) the house was being sold 'as is' and (2) the inspection put the Buyer on notice that the roof was in bad shape, thereby absolving her of any liability. In any event, she also claimed to have repaired the leaks and thought that they had been fixed.

While the inspector may have noted the limited life of the roof, the Seller was still required to disclose the leaking. The leaks were a material fact affecting the value (and habitability) of the home. In this case, neither the Buyer nor the inspector could have discovered the leaks in a visual inspection of the property. (Interestingly, because of liability issues, professional inspectors often will not allow the Buyer to follow them up to the roof, at least not on the inspector's ladder!) The Seller settled with the Buyer, and the roof was replaced.

So, rest assured, although you may be buying the house 'as is', the Seller is not excused from disclosing material problems in the Disclosure Statement. And in the event the Seller fails to make these required disclosures, the Buyer has a legal remedy, despite the 'as is' provisions of the Agreement.

Starting A Law Firm

Toronto Lawyer Gary Wise has an excellent post on the challenges of a startup solo practice, see Starting A Law Firm.

Why lawyers love hourly billing

The Greatest American Lawyer:

One of the issues, which is repeatedly overlooked in the discussion concerning hourly billing, is the fact that many law firms prefer it. Think about it. Hourly billing is the perfect vehicle to obtain the first retainer check from a client. An average retainer ranges between $2,500 and $7,500.

Price Discrimination

Very interesting post about price discrimination:

The WSJ had an article now about drug pricing and the power that big purchasers have with the drug manufacturers. The article got me thinking: Am I the only one who cares that small retail pharmacies (to the extent that they still exist) get the short end of the stick with drug manufacturers (or have historically, anyway)?

A nice example, albeit dated, deals with birth control pills. Most colleges sell to their students birth control pills at somewhere around $10 per package. The colleges get their birth control pills for perhaps $5 per package. The retail pharmacy on Main Street, however, gets the pills for $14 per package, and it sells for $19 to the person with insurance and $38 per package to the person without insurance. How is that fair? There is no way the retail pharmacy can ever compete with the University pharmacy (or the Wal-Mart pharmacy, that likely gets a equally significant discount).

The birth control pill manufacturers typically evade antitrust scrutiny b/c they maintain that they are giving the university a volume discount. Last I checked, however, most antitrust lawyers agreed that the true volume discount in situations like that was nowhere near the discounts universities, Wal-Marts, etc. were actually being given. The discounts given were far larger than the discounts that could be justified on a basis of costs saved due to volume purchases. Yet nobody squawks.

On a related note, why is it that I have to pay $75 for my doctors appointment if I miss it and dont call to cancel, but, if I had actually gone to the appointment, my insurer would have only been billed $48 or some such? I realize that my insurer has negotiated better prices with my doctor than have I, but why is that not price discrimination in violation of the Robinson-Patman Act? Where are our antitrust lawyers? I cannot believe that the volume discount math really works out in this case - my gut instinct is that the doctors are just caving to the insurers and sticking it to the poor individuals when insurance does not apply.

In my pursuit to be like Harvey Goldschmid, I have long wanted to teach antitrust, but Richmond could not really afford to have me give up a corporate class to teach antitrust. Hopefully, if I were teaching antitrust, I could answer my doctors appointment question myself.