Oh No You Weren’t Just Folfing!

disc golf

There’s a certain part of Helena, Montana where – let’s just say if you’re going there, LEAVE YOUR DISC AT HOME, lest you be accused of folfing. You really don’t know what “folf” means? Well, as defined by the Helena Montana Code, folf is “A game formally called disc golf. It is played with golf discs and simulates the game of golf in accordance with the rules of golf on a course usually containing nine (9) to eighteen (18) “holes” or “tones”. The holes or tones are predesignated stationary targets. The purpose of the game is to hit each of the targets with the golf disc with a minimum number of throws.”

But you can’t just folf anywhere. No sir.

5-13-2: FOLFING PROHIBITED:

No person shall play or engage in the game of folf or throw a golf disc at nighttime in any area within the business improvement district that has not been sanctioned as a designated folf course by the city. (Ord. 2797, 6-23-1997)

Son, you have been warned. And if you don’t heed, well here’s what.

5-13-3: PENALTY:

Any person violating the provisions of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and may, upon conviction, be punished by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00) or imprisoned in jail for a term not to exceed six (6) months, or both.

Can you imagine someone actually getting 6 months in jail for playing disc golf? Here’s a link to the Helena, Montana Code.

Read more here: http://rss.justia.com/~r/LegalJuiceCom/~3/qdyqCgHER9E/oh-werent-just-folfing.html

    

“Applebee’s not liable for N.J. man burned while praying over fajita skillet”

“A New Jersey man cannot collect damages for burns he suffered while bowing his head in prayer over a sizzling steak fajita skillet at Applebee’s, a state appeals panel ruled.” [Religion News Service/Newark Star-Ledger]

Tags: assumption of risk, restaurants

“Applebee’s not liable for N.J. man burned while praying over fajita skillet” is a post from Overlawyered – Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Read more here: http://overlawyered.com/2015/03/applebees-not-liable-for-n-j-man-burned-while-praying-over-fajita-skillet/

    

"Pao v. Kleiner" – Was Plaintiff Allegedly Obsessed With Gender Issues?

“An investigator [Stephen Hirschfeld] hired by Kleiner Perkins to investigate legal complaints said John Doerr told him Ellen Pao had a ‘female chip on her shoulder.'” – Sam Colt, Business Insider, March 5, 2015. Here is the article.

Among the topics Ellen Pao had issues with were alleged conversations on a company jet trip. They involved porn stars, the Playboy mansion, the Victoria Secret show and the perception that Yahoo head Marissa Mayer was hot and should be on their board.

Pao reported that she was uncomfortable with such banter. That scared me that maybe a journalist I deal with would “report” me for discussing in email the phenomenon of “revenge porn.” Actually, he did link to one of my blog posts on that topic so I guess I won’t find myself sued by him and his media outlet for discussing subjects which have sexual components.

Some of us remember reading in the book “Tough Choices” by former H-P head, Carly Fiorina. It recounted how uncomfortable she was when a business social event included strippers.

I was among those who had rolled my eyes during that part of the book. At the time, for decades I had been ghostwriting for primarily male executives. On company jets, they drank. They bantered. It never bothered me one bit. I was simply thrilled to be among such influential thought leaders.

Are the Paos and Fiornias of the work world looking for supposed put-downs against their gender? I always perceived being a woman in business a plus. The males didn’t feel threatened by my 5-foot presence. I sense I had opportunities males didn’t.

Read more here: http://lawandmore.typepad.com/law_and_more/2015/03/pao-v-kleiner-was-plaintiff-allegedly-obsessed-with-gender-issues.html

    

Boston Bombing Trial – Jurors Weep

In the opening arguments in the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarvaev, Assistant U.S. Attorney William Weinreb brought up that the defendant was standing near children, at the finish line.

Tsarvaev admits he was the bomber. Reasonable people would then conclude that he was without human instinct. He saw no reason to avoid killing and maiming children. That impulse seems hard-wired in, at least for those of us who aren’t alleged monsters.

Today in court, that image was reinforced. Among those killed was Martin Richard, 8 years old. His father Bill Richard testified how he found his son, reports Rich Calder and Danika Fears, in the New York Post:

“I saw a little boy [who turned out to be Martin] who had his body severely damaged by an explosion … From what I saw, there was no chance.”

Then the father went on to recount how he located his daughter, Jane, age 6 then. She had tried to stand. But could not. Her leg had been blown off.

Some in the jury wept.

The late Martin Richard is Weinreb’s not-so-secret weapon. The defendant’s lawyer Judy Clarke has a tough job ahead attempting to save him from the death penalty. Her strategy, as many know, is to position and package this young man as controlled by his later older brother. One wonders if the jury will care much about that.

Read more here: http://lawandmore.typepad.com/law_and_more/2015/03/boston-bombing-trial-jurors-weep.html

    

“Roy Moore: Two U.S. Supreme Court justices should abstain from gay marriage vote.”

“Roy Moore: Two U.S. Supreme Court justices should abstain from gay marriage vote.” Kent Faulk of The Birmingham News has an article that begins, “Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore says two U.S. Supreme Court Justices should recuse themselves from an upcoming vote on gay marriage because they have performed the marriages of same-sex couples.”

Read more here: http://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/030515.html#060795

    

Yale JD Hillary Clinton Breaks Email Rules – Are Law School/Lawyering Training Grounds For Those Sorts Of Things

“‘I’m very disappointed that yet another person in political power treats the rules as if they do not apply to them,’ said Matt Tapscott, chairman of Iowa’s Winneshiek County Democrats.” - Quoted by Gabriel DeBenedetti, “‘Who knows? She could implode totally'” in Politico, March 5, 2015. Here is the article.

When human beings need something difficult done, they tend to go to a lawyer. Law school and actually practicing law seem to be the training ground for strategically approaching getting around the rules. Only fools revere what is codified. In fact, that’s exactly what makes religious fundamentalist come across as, well, dumb as dirt. They really do love those rules.

So, it’s no surprise one of the brightest of Yale Law School JDs and former practicing lawyer Hillary Clinton is in a pickle for not following government protocol. Instead she sent her email as U.S. Secretary of State through her own personal system.

As we know, this belief that they are beyond rules has done in so many lawyers. Many are in prison for “borrowing” from client funds. On “The Good Wife,” Will’s license was suspended for six months.

Or lawyers default into insider trading through information obtained during an M&A. There are also the ones who watch kiddie porn on the side. And some attempt murder when informed their spouse is ditching them. Thou shalt not kill is a rule which shouldn’t apply when you are over-the-top angry.

Does the whole continuum of lawyering, from the education part through who gets promoted to partner, need to return to a code of ethics? Before Hillary declares herself a candidate running for U.S. president should the party bigwigs insist she take a seminar in ethics – and be tested on the content?

Maybe on the Fourth Of July there should be a Meet Up on ethics held in every major city.

Read more here: http://lawandmore.typepad.com/law_and_more/2015/03/yale-jd-hillary-clinton-breaks-email-rules-are-law-schoollawyering-training-grounds-for-those-sorts-.html

    

April 1, 2015 is the new date for the Appellate Rules and Forms Public Hearing

April 1, 2015 is the new date for the Appellate Rules and Forms Public Hearing: April Fools’ Day is quite fittingly the newly scheduled date for the public hearing for considering the FRAP briefing word limit reduction proposal.

Word has reached me that a major newspaper may be in the midst of researching and writing an article on the subject of the word limit reduction proposal. According to what I have heard, the article may even contain some humor.

Read more here: http://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/030515.html#060793

    

“I Was Alabama’s Top Judge. I’m Ashamed by What I Had to Do to Get There. How money is ruining America’s courts.”

“I Was Alabama’s Top Judge. I’m Ashamed by What I Had to Do to Get There. How money is ruining America’s courts.” Sue Bell Cobb has this article in the March/April 2015 issue of Politico Magazine.

Read more here: http://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/030515.html#060792

    

Worker’s Compensation Reform: Can It Affect Your Claim?

Two new studies have shown a dramatic decrease in worker’s compensation benefits over the last 10 years. And it appears that a system designed to compensate employees for serious on-the-job injuries is being whittled away.

A study by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and joint investigation by ProPublica and NPR combine to paint a dire picture for those injured on the job — a picture that may be getting worse.

Recent Reforms

A ProPublica chart shows how many states have been scaling back worker’s compensation benefits since 2012 and the extent to which benefits have been cut. Legislation in 33 states has not only reduced benefits but made it more difficult to qualify for worker’s comp. New laws also created additional hurdles to getting medical care.

This means employers are paying the lowest worker’s compensation rates since the 1970s, while employees bear the brunt of the costs of workplace injuries. While some states have been singled out as having the lowest compensation benefits, others might be thinking even lower by allowing companies to opt out of state worker’s compensation systems altogether.

Are You Covered?

If you live in a state that has already rolled back worker’s comp benefits, or has plans to in the future, these reforms could affect your injury claim. And it starts from the very beginning, when just filing a worker’s compensation claim can seem like a process too daunting to even begin.

Many more worker’s comp claims are being denied because of stricter regulations, and in cases where you can get benefits, you may be better off filing your own lawsuit than accepting a meager worker’s comp award.

All of this can add up to injured workers not getting the benefits they deserve. If you’ve been injured on the job, there may be things an experienced worker’s compensation attorney can do that you probably can’t.

Related Resources:

Read more here: http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/Injured/~3/DeZHGJyJlNI/workers-compensation-reform-can-it-affect-your-claim.html

    

“An Obamacare Cliff-Hanger at the Supreme Court: Oral arguments before the Justices offer clarity on the legal issues, but the law’s fate is less certain than ever.”

“An Obamacare Cliff-Hanger at the Supreme Court: Oral arguments before the Justices offer clarity on the legal issues, but the law’s fate is less certain than ever.” Law professor Garrett Epps has this essay online at The Atlantic.

Read more here: http://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/030515.html#060791

    

YouGotPosted ‘Revenge Porn’ Operators Must Pay $900K Judgment

Don’t post sexually explicit pictures of a minor on a revenge porn website. Even more importantly, don’t ignore the lawsuit when you get sued!

Eric Chanson and Kevin Bollaert, owners of the (now-defunct) revenge porn website YouGotPosted.com, must now pay a $900,000 default judgment to a young girl whose pictures were posted on the site.

What did they do, and what is a default judgment?

What Happened With the Lawsuit?

A young girl sued Chanson and Bollaert after they posted sexually explicit photos of her, with the watermark “You Got Posted” on their revenge porn website. As TechDirt reports, the suit claimed that the defendants knew the plaintiff was a minor, used her photo without permission, and profited from advertising with her photo.

Both Chanson and Bollaert failed to really put up a fight. Chanson filed a motion to dismiss, which was denied. After that, Chanson completely failed to communicate with the court or participate in the litigation. Bollaert never filed a response after he was served. He was probably preoccupied with the criminal charges against him for extortion, online harassment, and identity theft.

With regard to the civil lawsuit, the court found that the two defendants had defaulted, and awarded the plaintiff $900,000 in damages — $450,000 to be paid by each defendant.

What Is a Default Judgment?

Chanson and Bollaert defaulted because they failed to respond to and participate in the federal lawsuit.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 governs default judgments. Once a defendant defaults, the court treats all the allegations in the plaintiff’s complaints as true. The court must weigh the prejudice to the plaintiff with the rights of the defendant to have a decision based on the merits of the case. The plaintiff asking for a default judgment must still show that the facts of the case support the judgment requested. Any requested judgment amount must also be supported by evidence.

Even after a default judgment has been entered, the losing party may still petition the court to set aside the default judgment, but the defendant must have a good legal explanation for the failure to respond. If approved, the court will take back the default judgment and allow the defendant to proceed with litigation.

If a default judgment has been awarded against you, an experienced attorney can help you explore options to set aside the default.

Related Resources:

Read more here: http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/Decided/~3/K4ul0jW1olc/yougotposted-revenge-porn-operators-must-pay-900k-judgment.html