Blogging

This was the Twitter of Olden Times.

Seeing as law firms are among Earth’s last enthusiasts of Lotus Notes and fax machines, they can hardly be expected to be on the cutting edge of evolving social media technologies. As social media platforms and blogs were exploding over the last decade, most law firms did not engage. Firms continued to churn out the unread white papers and ignorable client alerts as part of their traditional marketing efforts.

This reluctance or skepticism has waned some in the last couple of years and given way to a wary appreciation of the positive role that LinkedIn, Facebook, blogs, and similar sites can play in marketing, recruiting, client support and internal collaboration. A 2012 survey of lawyers and legal marketers by ALM Legal Intelligence attests to this shifting attitude. The survey had some striking findings. Among them:

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “This ‘Social Media’ Thing Might Not Be A Fad, Law Firms Acknowledge”

One of the things I hear from lawyers is: “I want to write, but I don’t have the time/know where to post/want to start a blog.”

Now I’m not in the blog-selling business or believe that every lawyer should have a blog because I’m not in the blog-selling business. (Get ready commentariat.) Not every lawyer can write (there commentariat… go!), but if you want to write, I’ll offer my thoughts. I offer them because this is my column, and I can do whatever I damn well please and I feel like it.

The first thing you have to determine when thinking about writing is your audience.

Unfortunately, many of you law review types actually think anyone out there wants to read something closely resembling a law review article. You can’t write anything without citing to case law or other articles no one has read or wants to read. You believe you’re still writing for adoration of your ability to analyze the history of some statute. You believe you can’t write anything unless it takes you weeks to research and is perfectly cited. You believe writing is done to impress rather than educate or inform.

When you write, you’ll see — ahem — comments about the writing style. Those are coming from those that can’t write like normal people. They spent months writing some over-cited, boring article that no one read and are raging against anyone who writes something interesting that contains a non-law-review-type writing style…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Writing For Lawyers”

That was tiring, huh?

A dizzying array of legal news delivered almost non-stop for an entire week. Emotional highs when DOMA is struck down, lows when a pillar of the legal landscape for nearly 50 years is swept aside, leaving millions of Americans even more concerned about their constitutional rights than they were before. There was an epic filibuster and failed jokes. This was a hell of a week to be covering the law.

As the frenzied week draws to a close, I decided to look back and compile my personal review of the major events of the week, gathered in one omnibus post.

So let’s take a look at the week that was ranging from Aaron Hernandez to the Supreme Court…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Five Stories That Made This an Exhausting Week of Legal News”

I did not plan to write an anniversary column this week. But since I try and write about the things that are on my mind, I have no choice.

A year ago, my first column appeared. I did not know what to expect. All I hoped was that it would be an interesting experience. And that I would be able to contribute to the discussion about what it means to be a partner in Biglaw. The Biglaw of today — not the Biglaw of yore, with its WASP firms and its Jewish ones, white-shoes and Wall Street, single offices and “friendly competition.” Because that world has died, and anyone reading this has an interest in thriving in the current one….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Buying In: Anniversary Reflections”

You can download the notes, or not. I don’t care. I have to write a law review article that nobody will ever read.

Of course it does. That question has such an obvious answer that it’s kind of dumb to ask. Of course a system that rewards “teachers” with lifetime jobs for focusing on esoteric research that has little or no applicability to the challenges their students will face in the real world is of limited value to the students who pay their salaries.

So why would a professor get in trouble for saying that? Why would a professor get in trouble for saying it to other professors? If there are people who think the job of a big-time legal academic is to service students, they are sadly mistaken.

Why should anybody have a problem with a Harvard Law professor who says that?

Please note the UPDATE added after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Does Tenure Hurt Students?”

When was the last long trip you took? For many of you, especially those of you who work at law firms, it might have been you post-bar-exam trip or your honeymoon. But it was probably a really long time ago.

How would you like to go on a trip that never ends? How would you like to leave your office behind and visit different countries, learning about different cultures and expressing yourself along the way?

If you have a camera and a laptop, you might be able to turn this dream into a reality….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Want To Leave the Law and Travel Around the World?”

Dred Scott

[UPDATE: You know how you can get people to read your post -- put the wrong date on it. Now updated to June]

* Slave law is still considered “good law” by the courts? Originalism is alive and well! [Post & Found]

* For the first time ever, the Washington Post’s scavenger hunt/riddle/prove how pretentious we are competition was won by a single individual. Congratulations to Sullivan and Cromwell’s Sean Memon, an ’08 Duke grad, who prevailed after figuring out that nothing was happening. That makes sense when you read the article. [Constitutional Daily]

* Here’s an argument against affirmative action based on the premise that black people at the barest of margins may be hindered by having too good of a résumé. This is, well, wrong, but much more intellectual than the arguments against affirmative action advanced by the Chief Justice. [Ramblings on Appeal]

* A San Diego lawyer is seeking a young attorney in L.A. to work for slightly more than peanuts. But the requirements are entertaining, like confidence that “you are going to be the next F. Lee Baily or Johnny Cochran.” The poster is also an “elderly gay man (late 50′s).” Is that really elderly anymore? [Craigslist]

* More on the problems facing the D.C. Circuit. Probably a good reason to shrink the complement of the Circuit. [SSRN]

* Another look at the business benefits of blogging. Get out there, people! [Likelihood of Confusion]

* Hey there, lawyers! The Wall Street Journal would like you to know that you and your ilk are responsible for the student loan bailout. Video after ye olde jump…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Non-Sequiturs: 06.03.13″

The Scripps National Spelling Bee took place this week. I find that contest to be a cruel torture for young people who don’t need the pressure or exposure of being forced to fail in front of a national audience. Also, I don’t like watching little kids who can perform tasks I can only dream about.

But, in honor of the Spelling Bee, we’ve decided to have our own Above the Law spelling contest. How do you have a spelling contest on a blog without audio, you ask? Well, have you ever seen me try to spell without spell check?

Here’s how it’s going to work: I’m going to give you a little vignette during which I murder some legalese, and you’re going to tell me what I meant. No cheating…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Above the Law Spelling Bee”

* America, you won’t have Michele Bachmann to kick around anymore! The political equivalent of comic relief announced that she will not seek another term. [CNN]

* Eric Holder testified that he would support reform of the ECPA. Apparently this newfound love of electronic privacy doesn’t extend to the Associated Press. [IT-Lex]

* Atlanta is soon to host its Battle of the (Lawyer) Bands. LawJam 2013 is set to rock Atlanta like a litigious hurricane on June 8. Last year featured bands like Mikey Mel & the JDs, so you have a sense of what you’re getting here. [Atlanta Bar Association]

* The CFTC had no idea how to do its job? Say it ain’t so! [Breaking Energy]

* So the sequester has an advantage! Cocaine is going to get cheaper! [Breaking Defense]

* Paul Caron has acquired a 100 percent ownership share of the Law Professor Blogs Network. Congrats! [TaxProf Blog]

* Woman acquitted of manslaughter responds in the best way ever. Video after the jump…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Non-Sequiturs: 05.29.13″

It’s just nice clothing. There’s nothing to be afraid of.

Are you afraid of fashion? You’re not alone.

Many male lawyers would rather not deal with picking clothes. These attorneys can negotiate billion-dollar deals or address juries without fear, but the concept of “business casual” fills them with terror.

If you count yourself among the fashion-impaired — or if you see yourself as stylish, but in need of a wardrobe expansion — here are two lawyers who can help….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Are Male Lawyers Fashion-Impaired?”

Page 7 of 421...34567891011...42