The issue of gay marriage can be divisive, but the book has in many ways been uniting. In addition to bringing together Corvino and Gallagher — who have done numerous joint events to promote the book, despite their very divergent views — even the book’s blurbs have made for strange bedfellows. In the words of Dan Savage, author of the Savage Love sex advice column, Debating Same-Sex Marriage “is the first and, without a doubt, the last book in the whole sordid history of books that will be blurbed by both me and Rick Santorum.”
Over the weekend, I interviewed Corvino about the issues discussed in the book, with a focus on legal issues relating to same sex-marriage….
Back in January, we brought you news about a ridiculous million-dollar lawsuit that was filed by the mother of a young Toddlers & Tiaras star after her child was allegedly made out to be a prosti-tot by various media outlets.
Months later, the reality TV show has reared its pretty little head again in the courts, but this time in a custody battle for the ages. As it turns out, this doting dad didn’t want his darling daughter to be sexually exploited by her own mother, through the use of breast and booty padding.
The best part of the story is definitely the fact that this poor girl’s father — you know, the one trying to prevent his kid from becoming what pedos’ dreams are made of — is a convicted felon, on probation for child endangerment. Just wait till you see what his daughter looks like….
Ed. note: This new column is about sports and the law. You can read the introductory installment here.
Last night, I was having trouble coming up with something to say in this space that begins the post. I think it’s called an introduction. I called up the only woman who doesn’t screen my calls and asked for her help.
Mama Juggs: Are you in trouble? Juggs: No, mom. Christ, why would you ask me that? No, I’m finding it difficult to think up a story only tenuously related to sports that I can open my column with. MJ: I don’t understand a word of what you just said. J: My column, mom. On Above The Law. You said you’ve been reading it? MJ: *silence* J: Whatever. Mom, can you think of a sports-related story that’s mildly funny and has little-to-no point? MJ: Do you remember how your father used to shoot free throws? God, you’d stand out there for hours rebounding for him. How many did he make in a row? J: Something over 100. I don’t remember. Mom, that’s not a ripping yarn, you’d have to agree. MJ: You were too young to remember this, but the way his teams ran defense at Lucky High. Oh God, it was poetry. Every motion had an order, but it was so fluid and graceful. It was intuitive, y’know? Your father was so proud of those boys. J: This isn’t going anywhere, is it? MJ: The team that took second at state was great, but it was actually the team after that that your father always claimed was the best he coached. I can still see him walking out onto the court with the boutonnière and he looked so impressive. Just striding onto that court with all the confidence in the world. I’ll have to see if I can find a picture. I know I have one around here. He looked so handsome, your dad did. J: Didn’t he get kicked out of a lot of games for arguing with refs?
On Friday, I took a little trip to the New York County Clerk’s office to become registered as a marriage officiant in the state of New York.
Let me say that again: I can now legally marry people. Like a mayor. Or a ship’s captain.
Going through the process of becoming a marriage officiant has given me a wonderful look at the state of our marriage laws, and my hours at the clerk’s office were the perfect icing. Let me say just say that the closer you get to the legal process of marriage, the more ridiculous gay marriage opponents appear.
I mean, come on, if I can legally marry people, how “sacred” or “traditional” is the institution of marriage really? Besides, have you looked at some of the man/woman combinations that are getting married these days? I just think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fists at Him and say, “Instead of helping the poor or sick or infirm, we’re all going to eat chicken sandwiches to show that we’ll defend as sacred something that can be done in two hours at the freaking clerk’s office.”
Let’s just say that the number of gay people getting marriage licenses was dwarfed by the number of men standing their with pregnant girlfriends looking like their balls were being held in a vise grip….
I’m not going to pretend to care about Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson. And here’s why: I don’t care about vampires, werewolves, trolls, magical rings, wands, space, fantasy or anything that encourages nerds of the world to be even more annoying. I am tired of walking by hoards of absolute losers waiting in costume at 4 p.m. for a midnight showing of a 3D movie about sexy blue people that live in a fake jungle on a different planet. I will not read a 700-page book about wizards and gargoyles. And since I do not wear Pink University sweatpants, listen to “OneDirection” or hang out at Cinnabon at the mall, there is absolutely no reason for me to see, or care, about Twilight.
But I do care about Twilight dogs. Obviously we all do.
You’ve no doubt heard that shifty minx “KStew” cheated on “RPat,” her boyfriend of three years, with Rupert Sanders, her creepy married director from Snow White and the Hunstman. This turn of events of was absolutely shocking because it destroyed eveybody’s faith in true love and also Kristin and Rob were supposed to maintain their sham relationship until their Twilight promotional duties are over for the third and mercifully final installment, to be released this November.
But when life veers off-script, true actors improvise and deliver the satisfying alternate storyline…
* The easiest way to stop James Holmes from becoming a celebrity and inspiring copycats is to stop trying to monetize the Aurora killings to turn a profit with ad revenue, but Professor David Kopel says it in more elegant terms. [Volokh Conspiracy]
* Of course there’s a law school death watch list. Now, it would be nice to think that these law schools would shut down, but there are still people willing to fill the seats. You should’ve known better than to assume a silly thing like employment statistics would stop people from applying. [Legal Blog Watch]
* Divorce for men: it’s “not for women.” These family law practitioners may want to get together with Dr. Pepper for some kind of a licensing deal. [WSJ Law Blog]
* A pube sandwich is a very creative culinary treat — unfortunately, the recipe isn’t taught in sandwich artist school. FYI, the price to serve it to a police officer is $13,750. [Gothamist]
* The next time your husband complains about your sex life or lack thereof, just tell him that it’s against the law for married women to fornicate. Or that you’ve had a headache for the past few years. [Legal Juice]
* In a Supreme Court decision split across gender lines, prosecutors can now get a do-over on criminal charges without double jeopardy, even if an otherwise deadlocked jury unanimously rejected them. [New York Times]
* And yet another day ended without a verdict in the John Edwards campaign finance trial, but the jury asked to review every exhibit in the case. The former presidential candidate must feel like he’s being punk’d. [CNN]
* The DOJ found that two prosecutors in the Ted Stevens case committed reckless professional misconduct punishable by unpaid time off. Looks like they’ll be getting an extended Memorial Day break. [Blog of Legal Times]
* Hot on the heels of Obama’s announcement in support of gay marriage, yet another California judge has found that DOMA is unconstitutional (along with a provision of the tax code). [Poliglot / Metro Weekly]
* Occupy Wall Street is suing for $48K over the destruction of the group’s “People’s Library” after their eviction from Zuccotti Park. But let’s get real, who wants used books that reek like patchouli and pot? [Bloomberg]
* More than one million “de facto spouses” in Quebec may soon be automatically married by the state against their will. Imagine how much fun it’ll be to get a divorce from someone you never actually married. [Slate]
* Two waitresses who claim they were fired for complaining about their former employer’s “no fatties” policy will get to bring their $15M lawsuit before a jury. Hopefully Peter Griffin isn’t a juror. [Law & Daily Life / FindLaw]
If you’ve been representing someone in a knock-down, drag-out, decade-long divorce action, with no end in sight, it’s understandable that you’d be a little pissed off. And while some attorneys prefer to write “not so sincere” letters calling opposing counsel “a**holes,” others find more creative ways to channel their anger for the sake of poetic justice.
And while poetry may be the best way to make passive-aggressive complaints about your case, the next time you’re considering writing a four-page, 60-line email riffing on a classic holiday poem, you might want to consider your audience. Some people might not be fans of your rhyme scheme….
Remember Steven Simkin, the prominent Paul Weiss partner who sued his ex-wife for a better divorce deal? Simkin argued that even though he negotiated for and obtained the couple’s investment account with one Bernard Madoff as part of their 2006 separation agreement, his former wife should now pay him more money — since it was subsequently revealed, years later, that Madoff was running a huge Ponzi scheme.
As you may recall, I was not terribly sympathetic to Simkin. In my view, an expert negotiator like Simkin — the head of PW’s real estate practice, who was also represented by separate counsel in the divorce — should be required to live with the bargain he struck. In negotiating for and taking on the Madoff account, he also took on the risks associated with that investment.
An intermediate appeals court sided with Simkin. But now New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, has spoken….
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
It’s that time of year again when JDs are starting to apply for 2L summer jobs and 2L summers are deciding which practice area to focus on.
For those JDs with an interest in potentially lateraling to or transferring to Asia in the future, please feel free to reach out to Kinney for advice on firm choices, interviewing and practice choices, relating to future marketability in Asia, or for a general discussion on your particular Asia markets of interest. This is of course a free of cost service for those who some years in the future may be our future industry contacts or perhaps even clients.
For some years now Kinney’s Asia head, Evan Jowers, has been formally advising Harvard Law students with such questions, as the Asia expert in Harvard Law’s “Ask The Experts Market Program” each summer and fall, with podcasts and scheduled phone calls. This has been an enjoyable and productive experience for all involved.
If you are considering a virtual law practice, you know that many of today’s solo firms started that way. But why are established, multi-attorney law firms going virtual?
Many small firms are successfully moving part—or even all—of their practice to a virtual setting. This even includes multi-jurisdictional practice spanning several states and practice areas, although solo and small partnerships are still the largest adopters of virtual law.
Can you do the same? The new article Mobile in Practice, Virtual by Design from author Jared Correia, Esq., explores how mobile technology bring real-life benefits to a small law firm. Read this new article—the next in Thomson Reuters’ Independent Thinking series for small firms—to explore how a mobile practice:
Reduces malpractice risk
Enables you to gather the best attorneys to fit the firm, regardless of each person’s geographic location
Leverages mobile devices and cloud technology to enable on-the-spot client and prospect communication
Transitioning in-house is something many (if not most) firm lawyers find themselves considering at some point. For many, it’s the first step in their career that isn’t simply a function of picking the best option available based on a ranking system.
Unknown territory feels high-risk, and can have the effect of steering many of us towards the well-greased channels into large, established companies.
For those who may be open to something more entrepreneurial, there is far less information available. No recruiter is calling every week with offers and details.
In sponsorship with Betterment, ATL and David Lat will moderate a panel about life in-house and we’ll hear from GCs at Birchbox, Gawker Media, Squarespace, Bonobos, and Betterment. Drinks, snacks, networking, and a great time guaranteed. Invite your colleagues, but RSVP fast, as space is limited.