Earlier in the week, this email went out to all the lawyers in the Restructuring Group at Kirkland & Ellis, from the head of the group:

04/01/2008 10:58 AM
To: #FW Restructuring Attorneys
Subject: Upcoming Dress Code Program

As part of our KIRT [Kirkland Institute of Restructuring Training] programs, I am pleased to announce a "dress for success" program, which will be held on each Monday for one hour for the next four weeks. I have arranged for outside speakers from a number of prominent men's and women's fine clothing stores to lead the programs. In light of the number of button down shirts being worn with suits and the number of associates (mostly, male) wearing boring and mismatched ties and shiny suits, the program is highly needed. Attendance for the program is strongly encouraged.

We've seen how bankruptcy lawyers dress. This is a wise idea. Just don't bring in the Cleary Anti-Afro Lady.

Also -- was the reference to the sartorial dubiousness of wearing button-down shirts with suits a shout-out to ATL? See here.

More after the jump.

Courtesy of Professor Dan Solove, "a sneak peak at this year's rankings, as well as some amazing secrets about how US News ranks law schools."

The Official Leaked US News Law School Rankings, Plus Ranking Secrets Revealed! [Concurring Opinions]

To our surprise, yesterday's open thread on the MPRE generated over 200 comments. Who knew that this topic would incite such interest?

Since you're all so interested in talking about the MPRE, here's more. A reader sent us a long but entertaining story about the test -- which you can read in full, after the jump.

Sigh. Guess we got a little lax in our factchecking around here (i.e., not doing it at all, since it had been a while since anyone bothered to put together a fake memo).

The purported Much Shelist memo that we posted earlier appears to be a fake. Sorry, Chicago.

If anyone has a real memo to send us, please do so. But the lag time between our receiving memos and posting them will undoubtedly increase going forward, due to pranks like this one. Thanks.

This was forwarded to us by a tipster:

April 25, 2007

To: Boalt Community

From: Dean Christopher Edley, Jr.

It has been a week since the distressing events involving a Boalt student’s threat —a hoax — against the community at Hastings College of the Law. I am writing to let you know that all our actions following the incident have been taken with the intention of securing the safety and well-being of our community and that at Hastings, while respecting the procedural rights of the student.

On Wednesday, April 25, 2007, the Law School filed a complaint with the U.C. Berkeley Judicial Affairs Office against the law student who claimed responsibility for posting the threat on a website. We, the administrative leadership of Boalt, believe that the student’s action is clearly in violation of a number of regulations detailed in the Student Code of Conduct. The case will be adjudicated by Judicial Affairs according to campus regulations. Those regulations prohibit us from disclosing the name of the student against whom we are proceeding.

Based on the facts as we understand them today, we have recommended expulsion. This is based not only on the intrinsic wrongfulness of the act itself, but also the disruption, turmoil and emotional toll on the Hastings community and, to a more limited extent, the Boalt community as well. I have received ample evidence of this through a great many emails, some of them painful to read.

This incident has once again confirmed for me the strength and qualities of the Boalt community. Even in this challenging circumstance, you have engaged in thoughtful and productive discussions. We should all take some pride in this, imperfect though we are.

Christopher Edley, Jr.
Professor of Law and Dean

Does the punishment fit the crime here? Judging by some of the comments to this thread, some readers think expulsion would be an overreaction. Pre-Virginia Tech, what kind of behavior would get you expelled from law school?

* If you’re not spreading your music like herpes, then you’re just paying an extra 30 cents for the same product you’ve always been buying; as a side note, doesn’t Damon Alburn look dreamy these days? [New York Times]

* The SEC wants to be more like a friend than a parent, but watch out if you try to sneak out of the house after curfew on a school night. [FT.com via MSN]

* She may fight it until she regains her dignity writes another best seller, but chances are that I’ll get my groove back before she does. [New York Magazine’s Daily Intelligencer]

* Remember how Andrea from Beverly Hills, 90210 used her grandma’s address, and Vivian Abromowitz lived in the Slums of Beverly Hills to attend the prestigious public high school? Well, this is different. [Los Angeles Times]

* Would you drink this if you knew it was named after someone who choked on his own drug and alcohol-induced vomit? Yeah, probably, if you were out of Grey Goose. [TMZ]

* I bet it’s Jim and Pam. My best prank? The classic Frozen Underwear I set up in my brother’s room before he came home from college with his new girlfriend. [The Times-Tribune (Scranton)]

* For once, we’re talking about the witch with a “W.” [Newsday]

* WTF? First, I didn’t realize there was some life to that old Vagina Monologues yet, and second, I have learned more about vaginas this year alone (not by choice) than I did through “Our Bodies, Ourselves,” those Women’s Center round tables in college and my compact. [The Journal News (Westchester) via How Appealing]

* At this rate, if we fire even those teachers who don’t have sex with their students, public schools are going to be left with just those “Nice White Ladies.” [Pittsburgh Tribune-Review]

It's only a matter of time before BNA starts publishing a Borat Law Reporter. There have been a few developments in this area since we last checked in.

First, a victory for the defendants:

Two college fraternity buddies shown guzzling alcohol and making racist remarks in the "Borat" movie have lost their bid for a court order to cut the scene they claim has tarnished their reputations....

At the time the suit was filed, a judge denied the pair's request for a temporary restraining order that would remove footage of them from the film, but the plaintiffs were given a another chance to seek an injunction at a hearing last week.

The South Carolina college students lost again when Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Joseph Biderman ruled they had failed to show a reasonable probability of success on the merits of their case or that money damages alone would be insufficient to resolve their claims.

Second, another lawsuit, based on Borat footage that didn't make the movie (but was shown on TV):

A South Carolina man has sued Ristorante Divino, claiming that it allowed a “Borat” film crew to film him while using the restaurant’s bathroom. The man also is suing Sasha Baron Cohen, the actor who played Borat, who he said made comments about his genitals. Comedy Central also is named in the lawsuit for showing the clip, which was not included in the movie.

This might be one of the more meritorious Borat lawsuits. The plaintiff is somewhat sympathetic, at least if the Althouse commenters are a representative bunch. And it's not clear if he signed a release, as did the frat boys.

Borat has made a ton of money -- over $225 million in worldwide grosses. Maybe 20th Century Fox should take some of that loot and use it to set up a Borat Litigation Trust?

L.A. judge sides with "Borat" against frat boys [Reuters]
S.C. man sues Columbia restaurant over 'Borat' movie [The State via Althouse]

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Borat (scroll down)

Still no news. The message boards are quiet (aside from complaints about the "trolls," and admonitions not to "feed" them).

At this point in time, we're guessing that no major bonus news will break this week. But we're happy to be proven wrong. As soon as you hear something, please email us.

Last night, a fake Willkie Farr bonus memo was making the rounds (just like the fake Milbank Tweed bonus memo). We posted the memo quickly, in the interest of timeliness, but papered it up and down with disclaimers: unconfirmed, not verified, do not rely, etc. An hour or two later, after conferring with our Willkie sources, we came back and declared it to be fake.

Some folks were annoyed that we posted the fake memo to begin with. So we'd like to explain how we operate around here, by quoting from two reader comments. Comment 1:

ATL posts them immediately because these things are time-sensitive. No one should rely on this info before it gets confirmed, but the easiest way to confirm it is to get it out to a wide audience quickly and let it be debunked. I for one don't care whether it's initially accurate or not, I just appreciate the effort to shed light on one of the many mysterious aspects of big firm life -- compensation.

And comment 2:

The blogosphere way of doing things is to publish stuff ASAP, then to correct or modify as the story develops. The mainstream media way of doing things is to hold a story - sometimes for a long time - until it's all confirmed. It is not surprising that ATL takes the blogosphere approach.

Also, when ATL originally posted the memo, there were boldface, all-caps disclaimers all over the post. You'd have to be a moron to rely upon anything posted with all those caveats.

So this is how we're going to operate around here. We'll put up purported "bonus memos" ASAP, but with disclaimers, while we work on confirming and fact-checking them. But please don't treat such memos as authentic until we append a confirmation (or remove the disclaimers).

Striking a balance between speed and accuracy is a constant struggle, in both the blogosphere and the mainstream media. This is our explanation of how we strike the balance; we hope you find it helpful. Thanks for reading.

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of bonuses (scroll down)

The fake bonus announcement memos really aren't that funny, people. Everybody gets all worked up for an hour or two, and then the ruse is exposed.

The purported Willkie Farr bonus memo, which surfaced earlier tonight, is not authentic. From one of our sources at Willkie:

This is clearly a fake. FYI, Willkie never sends out bonus memos this early in December, and in any event, it wouldn't come from Matt Feldman, who is a bankruptcy partner. It would come from someone like Jack Nusbaum (chairman) or Thomas Cerabino (a high-ranking partner on the Executive Committee).

This was confirmed by a second Willkie source, who reported receiving no such memo.

We have sources at pretty much all the top firms. It doesn't take us very long to contact them for confirmation (or denial). We also have no qualms about contacting the supposed senders of these memos, whether they're HR people or Biglaw partners, for verification and comment.

So please stop wasting your time -- and ours. Thank you.

Earlier: Associate Bonus Watch: Willkie's Bonus Memo???
Prior ATL coverage of bonuses (scroll down)

Update: As explained here, the supposed Willkie Farr "bonus memo" reprinted below is a fake.

From: "Matthew A. Feldman"
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 6:29 PM
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Associate Bonuses

We are pleased to announce that the firm will once again award year-end bonuses for associates.

Class of 2006 - $40,000
Class of 2005 - $45,000
Class of 2004 - $55,000
Class of 2003 - $60,000
Class of 2002 - $70,000
Class of 2001 - $80,000
Class of 2000 - $95,000
Class of 1999 - $110,000
Class of 1998 - $120,000

The Compensation Committee thanks everyone for their hard work in making 2006 a successful year.

Matthew A. Feldman
xxxxxxxx@willkie.com
787 Seventh Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10019-6099
T: 212-xxx-xxxx
F: 212-xxx-xxxx

Willkie bonuses announced [Infirmation/Greedy NY Board]

Back in this post, an ATL reader confessed to playing a little trick on Ann Israel, the legal recruiter who writes NYLawyer.com's popular Advice for the Lawlorn column. He wrote:

Love ATL's Advice for the Lawlame column. My friends and I have been reading NYLawyer.com's Advice for the Lawlorn with a sort of amused contempt for a year.

After a while, we grew tired of the formulaic cluelessness of the posts and the answers, so we challeged each other to get our fake submissions answered. I won, with this entry....

Well, it appears that Ann Israel got wind of this prank. And she's none too pleased about it.

Her fit of pique, after the jump.

Yet another sign that reality television has gone too, too far:

City leaders have apologized after a program on Tempe's cable channel showed a white police officer telling two black men they could get out of a littering ticket by performing a rap....

[After pulling the car over,] the officer then tells the men that they can avoid getting a littering ticket "if the two of you just do a little rap about — what do you want to do a rap about? Littering? About the dangers of littering."

The two men agree, and each performs a short rap, laughing afterward. One says, "The dangers of littering, you will get a ticket. If you ain't wit' it, you better be experienced."

The second man raps, "Yo, I just got pulled over 'cause I threw my trash out the window when they rolled over. They got behind me and pulled me over."

They got out of the ticket. But query whether they should have been fined for their mediocre rapping.

The cop also pulled over an Asian woman for making an illegal turn. He told her she could get out of a ticket by being a bad driver.

Arizona cop had black men rap away ticket [Associated Press via Drudge Report]

Yesterday we requested tips from you about associate bonuses: leaked bonus memos, juicy rumors, etc. Please send this information to us by email, to tips AT abovethelaw DOT com (subject line: "Associate Bonus Watch").

Please send us tips that you believe in good faith to be true. Because if you send us stuff that's fake, we'll find that out when we do our fact-checking.

Take the supposed "bonus memo" of Milbank Tweed. It was purportedly sent out by Christine Wagner, Milbank's director of legal personnel.

We contacted Ms. Wagner by email. Here's her response:

From: Wagner, Christine
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 10:27 PM
To: David Lat
Subject: RE: Milbank "bonus memo"

It is not authentic. No such memo has been issued.

Don't f*** with us, fellas. This ain't our first time at the rodeo.

Update: Looking for the REAL Milbank Tweed bonus memo, issued on Friday, December 8? To view it, click here.

Memorable Quotes from Mommie Dearest [IMDb]

Earlier: Associate Bonus Watch: The Milbank Memo Is Fake
Welcome to ATL Associate Bonus Watch

We tend to think that fact-checking is overrated. But sometimes it pays dividends.

This afternoon, a document purporting to be a Milbank Tweed bonus memo appeared on the oh-so-reliable message board of AutoAdmit.com, aka xoxohth. It sparked frenzied discussion at both AutoAdmit and Greedy Associates.

We checked with our sources at Milbank. The "bonus memo" is phony. But we give the prankster credit for decent execution.

Update: Looking for the REAL Milbank Tweed bonus memo, issued on Friday, December 8? To view it, click here.

In case you'd like to see the fake "bonus memo," in all of its fraudulent glory, we reprint it for you after the jump.

On Friday night, we saw Borat at our local movie theater. We found it hilarious for the first fifteen minutes, before it turned repetitive. That said, there were some impressive set pieces in the second half of the film, such as the hotel room wrestling match.

(We viewed Borat on the recommendation of one of the Elect, and we spotted another in the theater. Supreme Court clerks: They're just like us!)

If you'd like to know more about how the film was made, including who was in on the joke and who wasn't, check out this Guide to Borat, from Salon (via How Appealing). According to Salon, most of the people who interacted with Sacha Baron Cohen in the movie were NOT in on the joke.

Commenting on "Lexytime" -- our prior post about Borat, concerning two fraternity brothers who are suing the film's producers -- Tortious Malfoy wrote:

If you had seen the movie you would know why they're suing: they went on a racial rant about how they wish they could still own slaves, women were nothing, and alot of other hostile stuff. Don't think they'll be getting much love in the South anytime soon, especially considering the movie's reach.

Actually, if Borat's portrayal of the South is even halfway accurate, we think that the plaintiffs might be embraced by southerners (e.g., the people at the rodeo, the gun store owner, etc.).

Having seen Borat, we actually have the opposite reaction to what Tortious Malfoy predicted: We are LESS sympathetic to the fraternity brothers' lawsuit against 20th Century Fox and One America Productions. The frat boys are recorded drinking, watching porn, and spewing racist and misogynistic statements. And now they're upset because, among other things, they thought that the movie would only be screened in Europe? Please.

Furthermore, we agree with this commenter at the WSJ Law Blog. In vino veritas. If the frat boys come across as racist and misogynist, well, maybe there's a reason for that.

We also note that the frat boys' lawsuit is counterproductive, due to the Robert Steinbuch effect. By filing a lawsuit, the plaintiffs are only highlighting the actions and statements of theirs that they did not want exposed to public view.

The impoverished Romanian villagers who are now thinking about suing over Borat are far more sympathetic than the frat boys. Regardless of the legal merits of the contemplated action, Cohen and the production companies might as well throw some money in the villagers' direction, especially in light of Borat's financial success.

A bunch of poor, exploited Romanian villagers are sure to arouse some public sympathy. Especially this man:

Mr Tudorache, a deeply religious grandfather who lost his arm in an accident, was one of those who feels most humiliated. For one scene, a rubber sex toy in the shape of a fist was attached to the stump of his missing arm - but he had no idea what it was.

Borat was number one again at the box office this past weekend, taking in another $28.3 million. Surely Cohen and Fox can afford to do something nice for the villagers. Like buying Mr. Tudorache a fist dildo made of glass, not rubber.

* The plaintiff frat boys are represented by the very handsome Olivier Taillieu. Here's an excerpt from his unintentionally amusing bio:

[Olivier clerked] for the Honorable A. Wallace Tashima on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, one of the most prestigious and sought-after clerkships in the country. Following his clerkships, he entered private practice as a litigator in the Intellectual Property and Technology Department in the Los Angeles office of O’Melveny & Myers, LLP, one of the top 15 law firms in the country as ranked by revenue by The American Lawyer.

Now, we are the last people to dispute the prestige of a Ninth Circuit clerkship and a Biglaw gig. But traditionally law firm bios merely list these credentials, without the grandiose description.

(Then again, self-promotion is to be expected from a former contestant on the short-lived, ill-fated reality TV show, The Law Firm.)

Earlier: Prior Above the Law coverage of Borat (scroll down)

Collected Borat coverage [How Appealing (linkwrap)]
Guide to Borat [Salon]
Borat film 'tricked' poor village actors [Daily Mail]
Olivier A. Taillieu, Esq., bio [Zuber & Taillieu]

Yeah, we know, the law is what's on the books -- not what judges feel like it should be. So we don't take issue with the New Jersey Supreme Court's recent sex offender registration decision as a legal matter.

But we do question the case's outcome as a policy matter. From the Newark Star-Ledger (via How Appealing):

A Warren County teenager who, at age 12, was caught "playing doctor" with his 6-year-old half-brother must register as a sex offender under Megan's Law, the state Supreme Court ruled yesterday.

The 6-0 decision reversed an appeals court ruling that the teenager, now 19 and identified only as "T.T.," was exempt from Megan's Law because his offense was not sexually motivated.

So this poor kid, an aspiring proctologist, gets lumped in with all the hard-core sex offenders. Here's what he did, back when he was a wee lad of 12 (he's now 19):

[O]n Jan. 15, 2000, T.T. was visiting the Phillipsburg home where his half-brother lives when he used a douche bottle to give the younger boy an enema.

The boy said T.T. woke him early in the morning, "threw me on the couch and took off my pants" and inserted the douche bottle.

T.T. admitted doing that and said he had done the same thing to himself. According to court records, T.T. told psychologist Timothy Foley he was "curious."

Heh. Take it from us, kid: No good deed goes unpunished.

P.S. Note to Star-Ledger copy editor: Including "loophole" in this article's title strikes us as being in poor taste.

Justices Close Megan's Law Loophole [Newark Star-Ledger via How Appealing]
Court Upholds Juvenile Registration as Sex Offender [New York Times]

Okay, kids, it's official. We've reached Labor Day weekend, and summer is pretty much over. Officially summer doesn't end until next month (September 23, to be exact). But at law firms, the summer fun is done.

Summer associates are heading back to law school (if they're not back already). For permanent associates, who got to tag along on lavish meals with the summers, the conventional wisdom is back in force: there's no such thing as a free lunch.

To commemorate the change of the season in the world of Biglaw, we'd like to bring you stories of some of the most stupid, funny, or embarrassing things that summer associates did while at your law firm this summer. As usual, we need your help. Please send us such tales by email, to tips(AT)abovethelaw.com (subject line: "Summer Associate Stories").

Please send us stories from this summer. We know all about the summer associate stories from years past, the ones that have become the stuff of legend. Like the Sullivan & Cromwell summer who got rip-roaringly drunk and started hitting on the hiring partner's wife, before puking his guts out all over the restaurant. Or the summer who, without authorization, blew his firm's cash on round-trip business class travel to London (and a pair of snazzy sunglasses). Or the summer caught having sex with his girlfriend late at night in the ladies' bathroom. (That guy probably got an offer -- the partners love it if you can satisfy all your needs without leaving the building.)

So send us your craziest summer associate stories. We'll read through your submissions, pick out the best ones, and share them in these pages. If we get enough good ones, maybe we'll even have a contest in which you can vote on your favorites.

It's the Friday afternoon before Labor Day weekend. What the heck are we still doing here?

We sure are glad we never worked on any sexual harassment cases when we were in practice. The depositions can get pretty awkward. Check out this video:

Yes, the video is a gag. But read the comments appended to this post at Concurring Opinions. Oy!

Candid Camera: Legally Punk'd [YouTube via Concurring Opinions]