If the power to tax is the power to destroy, then shouldn’t we at least try taxing stupidity? They’re thinking about doing it in France. From Going Concern:

Our frog eating friends have decided that they will start taxing people for their stupidity:

“The French Foreign Ministry is proposing a very narrow law requiring citizens foolish enough to wander into international danger zones, regardless of public warnings, to pay at least part of the cost of their own rescue.”

If you wander up a silly mountain and get stuck, it is civilized to have somebody go and try to find you even it was your own damn fault. But that doesn’t mean society should have to foot the entire bill for your weekend warrior shenanigans. Right?

Click on the link below to read — and comment on — the full post.

The Solution to All Our Fiscal Problems [Going Concern]

Yesterday we introduced you to DB (not his real name — please keep it that way), formerly an associate at Sullivan & Cromwell. At S&C, and in law school before that, DB became notorious for bragging about his wealth and making politically incorrect remarks.

We collected some of his impolitic quips in our prior post, and other anecdotes surfaced in the comments (e.g., here and here). For your reading pleasure, here are a few more stories:

In law school, at a firm reception in the Time Warner center, DB got drunk and started going on about how he was wearing crocodile shoes that cost thousands of dollars and how his brother drove a more expensive car than the partners at the host firm.

At an S&C firm retreat, the same one where he made his comments about the ballet, DB was placed in charge of entertainment for one evening. This included brainstorming for the “S&C Superlatives” contest, which is supposed to feature innocuous, yearbook-style items like “Miss Congeniality,” “Best Smile,” or “Most Athletic.”

The items suggested by DB? “Sluttiest Partner” and “Partner Most Likely To Sleep With His Secretary.”

DB once said, to a highly attractive summer associate he encountered in the hallway, “You really aren’t that hot. Everyone thinks you are, but outside of here you really aren’t.”

In fairness to DB, he has his defenders and positive attributes. One tipster describes him as “a bright guy,” and another as “nice in a weird way,” as well as unusually generous and thoughtful at times. A third raves about his hotness, including “six-pack abs and amazing arms.” As for the sexist (and homophobic) quips, they may be best attributed not to malice, but to personal issues that DB is probably still working through.

His colorful comments, however, aren’t what got DB in truly hot water. Find out what did, after the jump.

Ah, Sullivan & Cromwell. It’s a top law firm — not just in prestige and profits, but also blog fodder. See, e.g., Carlos Spinelli-Noseda (partner who defrauded firm and clients of half a million dollars through expense fraud); Aaron Charney (associate who sued the firm for antigay discrimination, while still employed there).

When people leave 125 Broad Street, they go out with a bang. Today, courtesy of several tipsters, we bring you the tale of another former SullCrom employee who departed under less than ideal circumstances. Let’s call him “DB,” short for “douchebag.”

(To those of you who find the term offensive, we say: if it’s good enough for the Second Circuit, it’s good enough for ATL. Also, we use it affectionately.)

During law school, DB developed a reputation “as a racist, sexist jerkoff who always flaunted the fact that he was wealthy.” Here’s why:

His first words upon meeting his law school roommates: “Hi, I’m DB. I’m independently wealthy.”

In a class discussion about price discrimination and consumer choice, he said: “Sometimes when I’m in a real hurry, I am forced to fly coach.”

At a law firm reception, he said to the attorneys, “Don’t you miss the good old days when there were no girls at a place like this, except for hookers and strippers?”

This charming lad then made his way to 125 Broad Street, where he joined GP (general practice; S&C-speak for “Corporate”) at Sullivan. Now, S&C pays well — in addition to generous base salaries and year-end bonuses, they pay supplemental bonuses to senior associates. But DB was unimpressed:

“My allowance used to be bigger than whatever I earn from this place. I feel so poor now that I’m working.”

Read more about his rudeness, after the jump.

Yesterday we solicited stories from you about on-campus interview bloopers — this time by the student interviewees, rather than their law firm interrogators. We received an embarrassment of riches — or riches of embarrassment — in response.

In terms of favorite stories, it seems the people’s choice was comment 177. Do a ctrl-F on the page for “177,” and you’ll encounter some pretty funny stuff. Comment 83 also had some crowd support, but it was completely disgusting, and some people read ATL during the lunch hour.

Not convinced that 83 and 177 are true stories, we decided to go with these as our top tales:

1. The People Person

Interviewer asks inevitable, everyone-is-prepared-for-it question: What do your consider your weaknesses to be?

Candidate (stratospheric GPA to offer and little else): Well, I don’t really like other people very much.

Job not offered.

2. Revenge of the Nerd?

I heard a story here at Cleary Gottlieb from this recruiting season, not terribly exciting but a nice foot-in-mouth moment. At one of our OCI’s, during this kid’s interview, he remarked that he’s the perfect lawyer for Cleary because he’s “like, a big socially awkward nerd.” The mid-level associate interviewing him deadpanned: “So I’m a socially awkward nerd?” Ouch. I don’t think he got a callback.

It’s unfortunate, because his assessment of Cleary lawyers was pretty spot on.

3. “Forget it, Jake, it’s Koreatown.”

I was conducting a callback lunch interview in Los Angeles when the interviewee starts talking about how he can’t stand living in Koreatown because Koreans were so rude and also bad drivers. I said, “Dude, my last name is Kim. You know I’m Korean, right?

After an uncomfortable ending to the lunch I called HR and told them if they gave this kid an offer I was quitting. Needless to say, no offer for this guy.

4. To Catch A Thief

At an OCI reception for a mid-sized Firm X, a few students are engaging in polite conversating with partner in Firm X. The partner asks each student what they did the summer before. One student, who apparently took full advantage of the open bar, begins talking about spending his 1L summer working with general counsel for an apartment complex, often dealing with tenant evictions.

Completely unsolicited, the student begins talking about how they used to break into the [tenants’] apartments and if they found weed/drugs in the place, they’d steal the drugs and some electronics from the apartment like it was their own personal Best Buy. He said, and I quote: “what were the tenants gonna do? They can’t tell the cops that we took their stuff or we’ll just report them for the drugs.” Partner and other students (including me) look at each other and then stare at the floor.

5. Veggie Girl

To an applicant with no special interests or activities listed on her resume: “So what do you do with your free time outside of school? Do you have any hobbies?”

Applicant: “Vegetarianism.”

No offer.

6. What’s the difference between a law firm and a paint store?

During a Shearman & Sterling interview, a friend once asked the interviewer, “So, how have you liked your experience at Sherwin & Williams?”

**********************
Vote for your favorite of these six stories, and check out seven more stories that get honorable mention, after the jump.

One of the best things about getting a law degree is that you can really help people. People in need who are being railroaded by the system. People in power who are creating jobs for the economy. And occasionally, people suffering from perma-drunk on craigslist.

WANTED FRESH BARRED VA ATTORNEY just graduated college and I was charged with a bull **** drunk in public and vandalism charge in the City of Fairfax. … What I need is an attorney to come with me on my court date Aug 27 to try to talk to the prosecutor and have him drop the charge or lessen it, since this is the first time I have ever been charged with anything and I have paid back the person and there was no way to prove I was legally drunk since I was not tested. … I am looking for fresh attorneys or recently barred attorneys.

I’d make a joke but I am so terrified of getting “barred.”

Ad reprinted in full after the jump

Last week we covered some goings-on — or non-goings-on, to those of you who found them boring — at Shearman & Sterling. Here’s a quick update.

We reported that, according to the firm, there have been no staff layoffs. One source writes:

I’d like to know how they define administrative staff, as they laid off their entire word processing / document production center (i.e legal word processors, proofreaders, EDGAR operators, and supervisors) in February 2007. It has since been disastrously outsourced….

Outsourcing from a year and a half ago isn’t what we had in mind when we asked about recent layoffs. But we pass that along, for what it’s worth; we do aim to be accurate.

In the comments, there were some rumors about start dates for 2009 associates. We’re looking into the rumors and will report back. If you can confirm, please email us.

Update: We’re still waiting for official word from the firm, but one Shearman offeree confirms that yes, start dates for incoming associates next year will be no earlier than November 30, 2009.

Finally, we wondered whether there might be an interesting story surrounding the one out of 140 summer associates who didn’t get an offer. It turns out that there is.

Find out what it takes to get no-offered by Shearman these days, after the jump.

So far this summer has been a little slow in terms of juicy summer associate stories. Are SAs this year just too well-behaved for their own good? C’mon, kids — lighten up, have some fun, drink a little (or a lot) at firm events….

Almost three weeks have passed since our last summer associate tale. So we were delighted to receive this gift in our inbox today, pertaining to a summer at Schulte Roth & Zabel in New York:

[A]t a summer event last night, one the Schulte summers — let’s call him Randy Savage — unaware of the identity of a particular stranger, put him in a headlock and called him a (homophobic insult redacted) for wearing a Yankees jersey.

The stranger then asked Randy Savage: “Do you know who I am?” Randy Savage replied: “No, you punk.”

Said “punk” turned out to be a Schulte partner. The fate of Mr. Savage is currently unknown.

Clearly it’s the partner’s fault for not looking sufficiently partner-like. It happens; we know some junior partners who still get carded. We hope the SRZ folks cut the guy some slack and keep him around, so he can proceed to embarrass himself at future events.

We reached out to the firm this morning to see if they might have any comment. They haven’t gotten back to us as of the time of this posting.

As always, please don’t name this summer associate or provide more biographical detail about him (e.g., his law school). If you do, we may ban your IP address from further commenting. Thanks.

Update: This comment from Dr. Gonzo says it all: “SNAP INTO A PARTNER!!!”

Sometimes it’s hard to keep the law civil. But when you feel your temper rising, resist the urge to call opposing counsel a “jackass.” And if opposing counsel calls you a jackass, resist the urge to retort by calling his mother a jackass.

Two Louisiana lawyers, Douglas H. Greenburg and Anthony P. Lewis, did not heed this advice, and now they’ve been reprimanded by the state attorney discipline board. Debra Cassens Weiss reports on the reprimand in the ABA Journal:

Greenburg is the former district attorney of Terrebonne Parish, according to a story published by the Courier at the time of the incident. Lewis had a private practice and was also an assistant district attorney in Lafourche Parish, the story said.

Lewis told the publication that he and Greenburg have a “long-standing mutual dislike” based on disagreements over each others’ manner of trial practice.

Lewis told the Courier that the incident began when Greenburg accused him of wrongdoing. Lewis retorted that Greenburg was still trying to prosecute, prompting Greenburg’s jackass comment and Lewis’ jackass retort, he said. At that point, Lewis said, Greenburg lunged at him, grabbed his lapel and knocked him over, causing a temporary blackout. Greenburg told police he grabbed Lewis’ collar but he did not push him, the story says.

It seems like it’s always the boy attorneys who lock horns in court. When is someone going to send us a good courthouse catfight story?

Reprimand Recommended for Lawyers Who Fought After Trading ‘Jackass’ Barbs [ABA Journal]

Three hundred and sixty billion? Even Exxon Mobil, whose $10.9 quarterly profit just disappointed Wall Street, doesn’t have that kind of cash on hand.

So we’re not sure what this fellow was thinking. From the Dallas Morning News:

A man has been accused of attempting to pass a $360 billion check, which he claims was given to him by his girlfriend’s mother to start a record business, Fort Worth police said.

Charles Ray Fuller, 21, of Crowley, was arrested on April 22 on an accusation of forgery, police said….

The personal check was not made out to Mr. Fuller and when the bank contacted the check owner, the woman said she did not write a check for $360 billion.

‘Cause overdraft fees are a bitch.

Quips our tipster: “[T]he dollar amount reminds me of something in the range of what Jonathan Lee Riches looks for. Perhaps JLR can represent him.”

Man accused of trying to cash check for $360,000,000,000 [Dallas Morning News]

When judges preside over law school moot court arguments, like the one at Columbia Law School last week, they often dish out this compliment to the student advocates: “You’re better than most of the practicing lawyers who appear before us.”

And maybe they’re not just being nice. If we had gotten to this item a bit earlier — it’s from last week — Roger Phipps would have been a Lawyer of the Day. We’re happy to declare him our Lawyer of Last Week.

Over at the Legal Profession Blog, Professor Alan Childress draws attention to this per curiam opinion (PDF) by the Fifth Circuit. Here’s an excerpt:

[W]e would be remiss if we did not comment on the conduct of Roger Phipps, counsel for Hartz, during oral argument in this case on Tuesday, March 4, 2008. Phipps’ conduct towards the Court during argument was unprofessional. Even more serious was his admission that during his work on the case (including his preparation for argument), he had not read a key Supreme Court case. His cavalier disregard for his client’s interest and for his obligation to the Court was both troubling and disgraceful. [FN4]

Accordingly, we are ordering Phipps to provide his client, Hartz, a copy of our opinion immediately after it is released. In order to ensure compliance, we are further directing him to supply our Court with proof of service.

Ouch. So what did Phipps do to incur the court’s wrath?

Read the text of footnote four, after the jump.

Update: For a postscript to this story, see here.

We don’t get nearly enough news from the west coast, so we are happy to anoint two Oregonian attorneys our Lawyers of the Day.

At first, the idea of landlord-tenant lawyers duking it out struck us as awesome. But apparently their fight involved slapping, running away, and a “talking-to” from a judge. Not so awesome.

From the Oregonian:

[J]aws dropped last week when two attorneys duked it out in a first-floor hallway in front of a crowd of spectators, including a few county sheriff’s deputies and Portland traffic cops.

Attorneys David Lawrence and Aaron Matusick had been in landlord-tenant court Thursday for a hearing and began shouting at each other when they left the courtroom, according to witnesses and officials who investigated the fight.

People in three nearby courtrooms spilled into the hallway to see what was going on, some just in time to see the two men literally butt heads. Although it’s not clear exactly who did what, witnesses said one man slapped the other and the other responded with a punch to the forehead.

Then one of the attorneys dashed out of the courthouse. He was called back on his cell phone, and both men were summoned to Judge Pro-Tem Lewis Lawrence’s chambers for a talking-to.

We wonder whether the deputies and traffic cops were just standing around cheering and taking cell phone photos. That’s probably what we would have done. But we’re not responsible for, like, keeping the peace and stuff.

Court fight! Lawyers trade blows in hall [The Oregonian]

Last week was a busy one in terms of bonus news. In addition, we were prevented from publishing as much as we wanted by technical difficulties (which lie outside the jurisdiction of your undersigned blogger, a mere writer and not a tech person).

Our recent neglect of the “misbehaving lawyers” beat has given rise to a backlog of possible Lawyers of the Day. We’ve decided to clear the backlog by tossing out five nominees and having you vote on who should get the honor.

Click on each lawyer’s name to read more about their alleged misadventures. Then vote on who should be our Lawyer of the Day.

1. Todd Paris: This North Carolina lawyer was held in contempt after a judge caught him reading Maxim [quasi-NSFW] in court. “When [Judge Kevin] Eddinger gave Paris a chance to respond he apologized and ‘stated in his view the magazine was not pornography, was available at local stores and that he did not intend contempt,’ the [contempt] order said.”

2. Beth Modica: “A former suburban prosecutor and PTA president had sex with two underage boys, joined many other teens in booze and pot parties and kept it all a secret from her police chief husband, officials said Tuesday. Beth Modica, 44, was indicted on 35 counts alleging statutory rape, criminal sex acts, sex abuse and endangering children. Wearing an olive-gray suit and handcuffs, she pleaded not guilty at her arraignment in Rockland County Court and was ordered held on $75,000 bail.”

3. Mikal Hanson: “Pierre police early Thursday morning arrested an assistant U.S. attorney, who is accused of drunken driving and speeding. Mikal Hanson, 52, an assistant U.S. attorney in Sioux Falls, was stopped by police shortly before 1 a.m. for speeding, said Pierre Police Chief Elton Blemaster. The arresting officer could smell alcohol on Hanson and asked him to perform field sobriety tests, Blemaster said. ‘Mr. Hanson didn’t complete them as instructed,’ he said.”

4. Canadian Senator Mobina Jaffer: “Liberal Senator Mobina Jaffer is under investigation by the Law Society of British Columbia for allegedly overbilling one of her legal clients, including charging for 30 hours of work in a single day…. Jaffer has been called before the law society to account for more than $6 million in legal bills charged to her former client, a Catholic missionary order known as the Oblates of Mary Immaculate.”

5. Jay Grodner: From the Chicago Tribune (via Blackfive.net):

Jay Grodner, the Chicago lawyer who keyed a Marine’s car in anger because the car had military plates and a Marine insignia, finally got his day in court last week. Grodner pleaded guilty in a Chicago courtroom packed with former Marines. They came to support Marine Sgt. Michael McNulty, whose car Grodner defaced in December, but who couldn’t attend because he’s preparing for his second tour in Iraq….

“You caused damage to this young Marine sergeant’s car because you were offended by his Marine Corps license plates,” said Judge [William] O’Malley….

“That’s because there is a little principle that the Marine Corps has had since 1775,” the judge continued. “When they fought and lost their lives so that people like you could enjoy the freedom of this country. It is a little proverb that we follow: “No Marine is left behind.

“So Sgt. McNulty couldn’t be here. But other Marines showed up in his stead. Take him away,” said the judge and former Marine.

So those are the five contestants. Here’s the poll:

* Dems to propose new surveillance bill? [Newsweek]

* Only a Garrison Keillor stalker would call it “transcendental love.” [CNN]

* Pearl drops lawsuit against terrorists. [MSNBC]

* Law firm World Series. [WSJ Law Blog]

* Today’s stupid crimes from Court TV. [CourtTV]

Maximilian Cordero believes the second time is a charm — with respect to (1) a gender and (2) suing rich guys. From DealBreaker:

In the grand tradition of trying to turn the (real or imaginary) sexual assault you suffered at the hands of a creepy old guy into stocks and bonds, everyone knows you don’t start at the top of the food chain. You get a few starter suits under your belt first, THEN you go to the top. Got to walk before you can run, got to allege “he put his hand on my knee and I didn’t like it” before you allege “he jerked off into a towel while I stood there awkwardly, and I think there might’ve been a purple vibrator in there, too” (those are just for instances).

A few years ago, Maximilia née Maximilian Cordero filed a $10 million lawsuit that accused her former lawyer, Glen Gentile, of statutory rape and endangering the welfare of a minor 2002, when she was “under the age of 17” (representing Cordero was her new—at the time—boyfriend/attorney, William Unroch).

Unfortunately, the case got thrown out when the court informed Cordero (yes, it informed her) that in 2002, she was over the age of 17, and, actually almost 19. For her part, Cordero said that she was “shocked” to find out how old she was.

As Barbie (née Ken) might say, “Math is hard! (And so am I.)”

(You can read the complete post over at DealBreaker.)

Jeffrey Epstein Accuser Attempting To Get It Right Second Time Around [DealBreaker]

Earlier: Lawsuit of the Day: Cordero v. Epstein
Cordero v. Epstein: She’s a Man, Man!

As we mentioned last week, U.C. Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law hired a brand consulting firm to come up with a new name for the school. The effort ended somewhat anticlimactically. Boalt paid $25,000 to Marshall Strategy Inc., which came up with this brilliant new moniker: “UC Berkeley School of Law.”

Oh well. But since we already took the time to read through hundreds of suggested new names for Boalt Hall, we’re going to conduct this reader poll anyway.

Cast your vote, after the jump.

Just like Justice Anthony Kennedy, Bankruptcy Judge Paul J. Kilburg (S.D. Iowa) does his own internet research. This is a lesson that Peter Cannon, Esq., learned the hard way.

From TaxProf Blog:

Mr. Peter Cannon, a West Des Moines, Iowa attorney, represented Defendant John Petit in an adversary proceeding initiated by Trustee to uncover assets of the Theodore Burghoff bankruptcy estate….

After reading both briefs filed by Mr. Cannon, and concluding that both contained an extraordinary amount of research, the Court directed Mr. Cannon to certify the author or authors of the two briefs. On December 22, 2006, Mr. Cannon certified that while he had prepared both briefs, he had “relied heavily” on an article written by others. The article upon which Mr. Cannon relied is Why Professionals Must Be Interested in “Disinterestedness” Under the Bankruptcy Code, May 2005, (“the Article”) by William H. Schrag and Mark C. Haut, two attorneys of the New York office of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. The Court located this article on the internet. Mr. Cannon fails to acknowledge or cite this article in either brief.

To be sure, our job involves heavy use of ctrl-C and ctrl-V. But what Mr. Cannon did — “seventeen of the nineteen total pages in the pre-hearing brief are verbatim excerpts from the Article” — went a bit far.

You can find out how much Mr. Cannon charged his client for this plagiarism, and what happened to him next, over here (TaxProf Blog) and here (Volokh Conspiracy).

Judge Orders Attorney to Take Professional Responsibility Course [TaxProf Blog]
Attorney Sanctioned for Plagiarizing Article in His Brief [Volokh Conspiracy]
In re Burghoff [U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Iowa]

Sadly, the humorless crew over at Nixon Peabody has had their fabulous law firm song — which, mind you, is NOT a theme song — pulled from YouTube. See here.

Even if it’s gone from YouTube, you can still access “Everyone’s A Winner” as a plain-vanilla MP3 file. Just click here. We incorporate by reference all of our prior commentary on the song.

This memorable tune will also live on in the blogosphere. Numerous fine websites and blogs picked up on the story of the Nixon Peabody song controversy. Here are a few links:

1. Law Firms, the Blogosphere, and Unexpected Attention [Volokh Conspiracy (Orin Kerr)]

2. That ridiculous Nixon Peabody “theme song” was for real [Daily Intelligencer / New York Magazine]

3. Wow. Big law is so lame. With a capital “L” [Legal Antics (Nicole Black)]

4. Nixon Peabody Throws Fantastic Tantrum: Threatens Blogger Over Leaked Song [Keeping Up With Jonas]

5. Blogger contends posting silly leaked law firm song is fair use [ZDNet (Denise Howell)]

6. Everyone’s a Winner (or, Friday Music Blog) [PrawfsBlawg (Liz Glazer)]

7. Sorry, but no one involved is a winner [IPTAblog (Andrew Raff)]

8. Best/Worst Law Firm Song. Ever. [the (non)billable hour (Matt Homann)]

9. OMG…The Worst Song Ever [Two Guitar Heroes and a Cat]

10. Everyone Is A Winner At Nixon Peabody [The Dish Daily]

11. Nobody Is Above the Law [Galley Slaves (Jonathan Last)]

If you know of a link that’s missing, feel free to email us, and we can add it. Thanks!

Update: Additional links:

12. Sure, your firm just gave you a $25k raise, but do you have a theme song? [Sophistic Miltonian Serbonian Blog]

13. Law Firm Going Crazy to Keep Its Corporate Song Off the Internet [The Startup Lawyer]

14. Law Firm Freaks Out That Ridiculous Corporate Song Leaked Out To Blogs [Techdirt]

15. Re. Nixon Peabody [YouTube (ChurchHatesTucker)]

Everyone’s A Winner at Nixon Peabody (mp3 file)

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Nixon Peabody (scroll down)

Our most recent post about Nixon Peabody — which has a song, but NOT a theme song — is about to scroll off the ATL front page. And we couldn’t allow that, now could we?

So here’s an update. A few brief points:

1. Some of you have described a fabulous video that accompanied “Everyone’s A Winner at Nixon Peabody.” Sadly, we’ve never seen this video. If you have a copy, please send it to us.

2. We received the song, from multiple sources, as an MP3 file. It was being widely disseminated by email (“FW: FW: FW:”). As far as we know, it was not sent to us by a disgruntled ex-Winner (contrary to the quasi-paranoid speculation of NP brass).

3. As of now, the song remains on YouTube. It has been viewed almost 14,000 times and garnered several accolades, including #26 - Most Viewed (Entertainment) and #11 - Most Linked (Entertainment).

4. In case the song gets yanked from YouTube, you can now access it directly on ATL, as an MP3 file. Just click here. Enjoy!

5. Some of you have inquired into the identities of the NP representatives with whom we spoke yesterday. These individuals expressly asked not to be identified by name (quelle surprise), and we agreed to that request. But we can tell you that they were in-house reps, not external PR people. One is a firm spokesperson, and one works on the business side of the firm. As far as we know, neither is a lawyer.

We haven’t heard more from the firm since yesterday afternoon’s phone call. If we do hear from them again, rest assured that we will let you know.

Everyone’s A Winner at Nixon Peabody (mp3 file)

We’ve been in touch with representatives of the Nixon Peabody law firm about the musical composition that we posted (mp3) and wrote about this morning. First they sent us a statement by email:

“This song was put together in celebration of Nixon Peabody’s Fortune 100 ‘Best Places to Work’ recognition. Nixon Peabody aims to be the best law firm to work with and the best law firm to work for. Fun is not prohibited here.”

Fair enough. But then we spoke with two firm spokespersons by telephone. They called us.

It wasn’t a very “[f]un” conversation. They weren’t happy campers. Even if they may be winners, since “everyone’s a winner at Nixon Peabody.”

They emphasized that the song was internal to the firm and is protected by copyright. They also insisted that it is NOT a “theme song” — in any way, shape or form.

They demanded to know who sent the song to us. We informed them that we don’t reveal our sources, unless served with a subpoena (and maybe not even then — a Judy Miller-style jail stint might be good publicity for ATL).

They asserted copyright over the song and asked us to take it down, from our site and from YouTube. We stated our view that posting and commenting on the song constitutes fair use. It also falls within our newsgathering mission as a media organization.

We explained that our site is all about law firms and the legal profession. They said: “We know what you’re about.”

They claimed the person who leaked this song is “in a fight” with Nixon Peabody, and menacingly stated that they (meaning NP) “don’t intend to let this thing lie.” We informed them that we have no desire to get involved in the firm’s purported dispute with this unnamed individual. And that’s where we left things.

More thoughts after the jump.

* Scott Moss wants to know: What’s the weakest legal argument you’ve ever heard? [PrawfsBlawg]

* William Birdthistle wants to know: What financial and legal regimes are most conducive to the development of French-fry-selling Thai restaurants? [Conglomerate]

* NBS wants to know: Is Hillary Clinton channeling Eva Peron? Bonus observation: “Dolly Madison had a decent rack, and now there’s a whole line of cookies names after her.” [Nasty, Brutish & Short]

* The WSJ Law Blog wants to know: Why are there so many darn lawyers in Roseland, New Jersey? [WSJ Law Blog]