Morning Docket 11.24.09
* You, sir, are a douche. But that’s just an opinion, and not a statement of provable fact. [New York Law Journal]
* Baker & Hostetler may make more than $37 million for the Madoff unwinding. [New York Post]
*Gitmo detainees with ties to 9/11 will plead not guilty in a justification defense, arguing that the attacks were a response to American foreign policy. [CNN]
* Fort Hood shooter will claim mental illness defense. [USA Today]
* A 14-year-old Alabama girl may be charged for helping to arrange the gang rape of a classmate. [Associated Press]
* Michigan spam king to head to prison for four years for pumping up the prices of penny stocks. [Detroit News]
* A Seattle lawyer makes very good money off of very bad food. [Seattle Times]
(21) 
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
douchedom is pretty provable
wow...big bonuses for baker associates?
Mystal is the New York HAM king.
The biggest douche of the day (month, maybe year) is Eric Holder for allowing the 9/11 Jihadists a public venue.
4 - Uh, ever heard of this thing called the internet? Jihadists have had a public venue ever since OBL learned how to log on back in 1996.
4, I don't know, Stan Gable was pretty bad. BTW, is that his pic? Looks like him circa 1985 at Adams College.
Does anyone know how much of that $59 million will be funneled to B&H's Bratislava office? We're still waiting for bonus information out here!
4
Objection. Relevance.
See, that is easy.
Why do Black chicks sound like hyenas when they laugh?
4 - What's wrong with US courts? Why are you promoting fear? Weren't they good enough for Rudy Guiliani? Isn't this all Bush's fault?
-Not 5 (but just as stupid)
This trial is a fraud. At no time did we violate your airspace.
Ted Masters
It will be interesting to see what relationships the lawyers for the Gitmo detainees have with Holder, Obama, or other administration officials.
The attorneys who will be representing them are going to make a huge amount of money.
Breaking: 9/11 terrorists will be found guilty.
-Lawstradamus's assistant
Lat
It would be wrong to drink your cousin's breast milk. The fact that you must even ask such a question disturbs me.
http://twitter.com/davidlat
Picard is an amateur. Anyone can prosecute a clawback suit in a ponzi. Let's see him hit a bank...then he's shown he's got some nunchuk skills.
6, nice revenge of the nerds reference, don't see many of those
""To the extent that Mr. Kerr's action implied a statement that Mr. Torossian was "a 'douche' or 'douche bag,'" Gische wrote in Four Corners Communications Inc. v. Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance Company, 601166/09, it is an opinion which "is not capable of being proven false." Based on that finding, Gische found that the insurance company could not rely on a provision of the policy exempting defamation coverage of statements made "with knowledge of falsity.""
Darn, I was so looking foward to the coverage trial wherein Kerr would have had to prove that Mr. Torossian was a 'douche' .
Thanks for the mention,
The Human Rights in Ireland team.
Thanks for the mention,
The Human Rights in Ireland team.
Re Douche Case: I thought the duty to defend was based on the causes of action pled in the complaint, not whether the allegations could be proven. If Plaintiff alleged he was defamed by being called a douchebag, then defense should not have been owed even though the case was doomed to failure.
There was a similar case here more than 20 years ago where a district judge threw out a defamation case where defendant called plaintiff a "sleaze" and a "sleazebag." The court could not find dictionary definition for those words, so held there could be no proof as a matter of law.
As Mr. Justice Stewart noted, Douchebaggery and Sleazebaggery are like hard core pornography--you know them when you see them.
STOP WRITING 'OFF OF!!!'