According to the Center for Disease Control, these are the groups most at risk for swine flu:

* Children younger than 2 years old;
* Adults 65 years of age or older;
* Pregnant women and women up to 2 weeks postpartum (including following pregnancy loss)
* Persons with the following conditions:
* Chronic pulmonary (including asthma), cardiovascular (except hypertension), renal, hepatic, hematological (including sickle cell disease), or metabolic disorders (including diabetes mellitus);
* Disorders that that can compromise respiratory function or the handling of respiratory secretions or that can increase the risk for aspiration (e.g., cognitive dysfunction, spinal cord injuries, seizure disorders, or other neuromuscular disorders)
*Immunosuppression, including that caused by medications or by HIV;

Oh wait, I think the CDC forgot a group: Biglaw lawyers. Ropes & Gray apparently thinks that its lawyers are at risk — so like any good company, the firm is “stockpiling” swine flu drugs. The Boston Globe reports:

The Boston-based law firm Ropes & Gray made arrangements this month for hundreds of its employees and their families to obtain the antiviral medicine Tamiflu to protect them from swine flu, a move that the company calls a wise precaution but that public health officials criticized as medically questionable stockpiling.

Hoarding swine flu medication? Really? That is not cool.

Additional details after the jump.

If you were hoping for the AutoAdmit lawsuit to result in courtroom drama, with Cheese Eating Surrender Monkey breaking down in tears on the stand, then we’re sorry to disappoint you. The case has ended, somewhat anticlimactically.

Last week, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their case against the remaining defendants. From the Hartford Courant:

Two former Yale University law school students have quietly settled a high-profile lawsuit they brought against about two dozen anonymous authors who the students said defamed and threatened them by posting malicious falsehoods on an Internet message board.

Perhaps plaintiff Brittan Heller felt ready to put down her sword, now that she’s happily married. But note that the dismissal is without prejudice (so check yo self, Pauliewalnuts).

What did the plaintiffs get out of filing their lawsuit?

SMU Dedman School of Law in Texas has turned out at least one charmer. We now have evidence that it can produce the not-so-charming type as well. Multiple readers alerted us to this thread on Reddit.com: How to Get Kicked Out of Grad School Before You Even Start.

It’s an email conversation between Jonathan Eakman, an SMU Dedman law school student, and the admissions office of the SMU Cox School of Business. Eakman was supposed to start the MBA portion of a JD/MBA joint program this fall. Before starting classes, MBA students must complete three mandatory online tests. These emails track Eakman’s series of excuses for not taking the tests. They include “having too much fun this summer” and “a car wreck, computer problems, stupid family issues and a kidney stone scare.”

He asks the admissions office to “be cool on this” since, in a previous job, he “dodged having to take responsibility for a billion dollar budget, so [he knows] what [he’s] doing.” It only gets more hilarious from there.

We contacted Jonathan Eakman by Facebook. After the jump, we give you the email thread as well as the postscript. SMU Cox Business School did not greet Eakman with open arms on the first day of school.

Last month, we asked you to share your stories of summer associate craziness. Based on the responses we received, I feel very sorry for the 2009 summer associates. Obviously the days of summers peeing off the side of a Duck Boat are long gone.

This story we received from summers at Weil Gotshal in New York illustrates the difference between summer 2009 and actual fun:

Did you hear about the Weil partner who got a summer so wasted from shots the summer barfed on himself in the bathroom at a firm event?

Were this year’s summers really so dull that partners had to be the ones to encourage after-work debauchery? I mean seriously, if you can make it to the bathroom, you probably could have had at least one more shot.

The Weil summer rallies after the boot, after the jump.

A female law student at American University - Washington College of Law had an unpleasant Yom Kippur. First, she was at the library at 11 p.m. on a Monday night. Second, she had some unexpected company.

From an e-mail that went out to WCL students earlier this week:

TO ALL STUDENTS, FACULTY & STAFF
INCIDENT REPORT

Incident:

On Monday, September 28, at approximately 11:00 pm, a male visitor to the Pence Library exposed himself to a WCL female student while in the quiet reading room of the library. The male then ran out of the library and although chased by WCL students across Mass Ave was able to avoid getting caught. During the chase he dropped a bag containing personal papers possible indicating his name but no address.

They say hell has no fury like a women scorned. But the fury of Jezebel over bloggerly treatment of female harassment might be worse. So when one of my male co-editors responded to this tip with, “This is AWESOME. Who wants to do the honors?”, I realized I better handle this one.

At Duke, masturbatory attacks on unsuspecting female students in the Perkins Library stacks happened with some regularity. I thought this was the case at university libraries across the land, but my co-editors tell me such incidents did not occur at their alma maters. Apparently Duke has more in common with AU than with Harvard and Yale.

More on the Attack of the Stack Whacker, after the jump.

This is a blind item, since we don’t know the identity of the attorney. Yesterday, this unknown attorney sent an employee a text message. It wasn’t to wish the employee a happy Labor Day. From Reddit:

“Sexting” was the latest hot cell phone trend. Maybe the new trend will be “diSMSing.”

Dear Reddit. It is 10:40 PM, on a Holiday, and I was just fired via text. [Reddit]

The executive director of Sheppard Mullin sent out an email to the Los Angeles office yesterday with the following subject: “Copycat Urinater.” Here’s an excerpt:

A few weeks ago, someone urinated on the floor and two of the toilet seats in women’s room on the 43rd Floor. I reviewed the security tapes and interviewed those entering the restroom over the two hour stretch preceding the first report of the incident. Unfortunately, each person interviewed recalled seeing the mess but simply elected to use a clean toilet and did not report what they had seen. This is not the first time something like this has happened in a Sheppard Mullin women’s room. We had similar problem on the 41st Floor some time ago. Due to the vigilance of the ladies on 41, the perpetrator was identified and corrective active taken. That person is no longer with the Firm.

Nationwide Layoff Watch: Toilet seat sprayers at Sheppard Mullin.

Sheppard executive director Robert Zuber is third in command, according to this firm facts page. Apparently, potty puddle investigations fall within an ED’s job responsibilities.

More discussion, plus the full email from Zuber, after the jump.

Last recruiting season, Above the Law was the first publication to warn law students to accept their offers for summer employment as soon as possible.

This year that advice is so obvious that even law school career service professionals are telling students to accept offers quickly. William A. Chamberlain, assistant dean for law career strategy and advancement at Northwestern, wrote an article for the National Law Journal this week, strongly urging students to make decisions rapidly:

Our message to students about how to handle offers has been straightforward — accept your offer quickly. The key is to get a job for next summer. Smart students will not rely on NALP’s 45-day guideline but rather accept their offers as soon as humanly possible. [W]e have dealt with all sorts of reactions by firms to the economy and are urging our students to be risk-averse. Any sense of entitlement will be fatal this fall.

Relying on NALP guidelines = fatal?

You know, when the career services dean is directly warning students not to rely upon the NALP rules, I am forced to ask why students should heed the NALP rule limiting the number of offers students can accept.

Let’s get into it after the jump.

When Justice Sonia Sotomayor needs to work off all the rice, beans and pork she’s consumed, she hits the gym.

Alas, it appears that Her Honor’s Equinox gym membership was canceled, after she apparently refused to show identification when trying to enter the premises. We’re with Justice Sotomayor on this: she’s a frickin’ federal judge, the closest thing this nation has to an aristocracy. Showing ID is for little people!

Sure, Barack Obama showed his birth certificate identification when he visited Equinox health clubs during the campaign. But he’s Article II — ick, having to run for election, how déclassé — and Justice Sotomayor is Article III, fabulous and life-tenured.

Luckily, the SCOTUS has its own gym — replete with a basketball court, aka “the highest court in the land.” And Justice Sotomayor won’t have to worry about being recognized at One First Street (where even the law clerks are recognized on sight by the Supreme Court police).

Sotomayor v. Equinox Fitness: The Case of the Canceled Membership [New York magazine]

(Gavel bang: commenter.)

From two distinguished commentators: lawyer and law firm consultant Bruce MacEwen, of Adam Smith Esq., and Professor Daniel Filler, over at the Faculty Lounge.

Above the Law reader sentiment generally supported Fordham Law School and Dean William Michael Treanor. Interestingly enough, both MacEwen and Filler side with Reed Smith. MacEwen confesses to being mystified by Dean Treanor’s handling of the situation; Filler argues that Reed Smith’s late withdrawal from OCI was a minor infraction, and that Fordham’s “punishment” of the firm will only hurt students.

Check out their analyses via the links below.

In This Corner, AmLaw #16… [Adam Smith, Esq.]
Fordham Law v. Reed Smith, Or, How To Scare Away Firms From OCI [The Faculty Lounge]

Earlier: Fordham Law v. Big Law: Reed Smith’s Response
Fordham Law Lashes Out at Reed Smith Rudeness

Jeffrey L. Marcuzzo is a Nebraska county judge with a temper. Leigh Jones at the National Law Journal reports that Marcuzzo’s corn got husked when a prosecutor rescheduled a matter before him back in October 2007. Marcuzzo called and left a vulgar message on the prosecutor’s voicemail:

“I did not appreciate that one f**king bit. And if I find out you ever did that again to me or any other members of the county court bench, I’ll shove it up your a** so f**king far it will make your throat hurt.”

The Supreme Court of Nebraska has disciplined the judge for violating judicial disciplinary rules and sentenced him to a 120-day suspension without pay.

We were curious: How did the prosecutor react to the profane message?

We’ve heard from many frustrated law students who bid on a particular law firm for on-campus interviewing only to learn, after using up a bid or an interview slot, that the firm in question wouldn’t be coming to OCI after all. We’ve even heard from students who were told, mid-interview, that the office they were supposedly interviewing for wouldn’t be having a summer program (but more on that later).

Law firms are certainly entitled to pick which schools they want to interview at. But, as a matter of basic professional courtesy and respect, they should make those decisions as early in the process as possible. When a law firm withdraws from the fall recruiting process at a given school at the eleventh hour, it causes great inconvenience to law students and schools.

What do most law schools do when firms pull out from OCI at the last minute? As far as we know, nothing. In this economy, law firms are in the driver’s seat. They’re the people with jobs to dole out.

But at least one law school has decided to take a stand against rudeness. After Reed Smith announced its late withdrawal from the recruiting process at Fordham Law, the school struck back, banning the firm from recruiting at Fordham for the next five years.

Dean William Treanor announced the move to the law school in a saucy email that truly puts the “F.U.” in Fordham University. The Fordham law folks are located at Lincoln Center rather than Rose Hill, but this message suggests they can brawl like their Bronx brethren.

Update (8/13/09): The firm’s response to the situation appears here.

Read the dean’s complete email message, and vote in our reader poll — yes, another one, we can’t help ourselves (we love to get your opinion on such matters) — after the jump.

Jones Day has escaped a lot of the worst side effects of the recession. The firm hasn’t had massive layoffs, it hasn’t cut associate salaries, it hasn’t canceled its summer program. That is something to be proud of.

And Jones Day seems very proud. Above the Law has obtained an internal newsletter from Jones Day that was aimed at its California office. The message was written by partner Joe Sims and it’s slated as a “midterm report” about the firm. Much of the letter is the kind of standard stuff you are used to seeing from slick, firm sponsored content:

The reality is that we are feeling the same reduced demand that is facing all law firms; I think it is clear — and as the results from other firms become visible, it is going to be even more obvious — that we are dealing with those circumstances better than most. So we have our challenges but, ironically, this difficult economic climate is also producing the best opportunity we have ever had in California to really separate ourselves from most of our peer competitors, and to move toward the position we aspire to — being universally recognized as one of the leading firms in California.

But what makes this newsletter extraordinary is that the message gets very specific about just why Jones Day is poised to separate itself from its peer competitors. And the newsletter offers Sims’s analysis of precisely where the firm’s California competitors went wrong.

More details after the jump.

Now that Gatesgate is behind us, capped off by a beer summit at the White House yesterday, what can we get riled up about now?

Well, there’s always something going on with the police. From Arthur Delaney of the Huffington Post:

A lawyer who moments earlier had been complaining to friends about police overreaction in the arrest of Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., got a taste of the Gates treatment himself after loudly chanting “I hate the police” near a traffic stop in Northwest Washington, D.C.

Pepin Tuma, 33, was walking with two friends along Washington’s hip U Street corridor around midnight Saturday, complaining about how Gates had been rousted from his home for not showing a proper amount of deference to a cop….

Then the group noticed five or six police cruisers surrounding two cars in an apparent traffic stop on the other side of the street. It seemed to Tuma that was more cops than necessary.

“That’s why I hate the police,” Tuma said. He told the Huffington Post that in a loud sing-song voice, he then chanted, “I hate the police, I hate the police.”

Uh-oh. Find out what happened next to Tuma — a former associate at Milbank Tweed and Gibson Dunn, by the way — after the jump.

As you may have noticed, we generally moderate comments relating to a certain rather vulgar meme (and sometimes we ban IP addresses too).

If you don’t know what we’re talking about, then skip this post — and consider yourself lucky. But if you miss being able to invoke the ass lobster meme, then you’re in luck.

We are offering “ass lobster amnesty” in the comments to this post. Get it all out of your system now, since we will continue to zap “ass lobster” comments on other posts.

To inspire you, we took some photos this weekend of associate editor Kashmir Hill, posing with a big-ass lobster (five pounds).

Slideshow after the jump.

We know of quite a few lawyers who are trying to downsize their lifestyles, whether because of being laid off or opting for a sabbatical-sized salary. We thought you would appreciate this note and photo from an ATL reader:

A lawyer in my building was having trouble selling an apartment and posted the attached sign in the elevator.

UPDATE (5:48 p.m.): The author of the note really is unwinding his assets. We’re told the apartment is in White Plains, New York, and is owned by “an associate from a city mega firm who just got laid off.”

There are a lot of things you can do in New Orleans that you can’t do anywhere else. But cursing out a judge is apparently not one of them.

Ashton O’Dwyer has made a bit of a name for himself in the post-Katrina universe. A tipster provides some backstory on this former lawyer:

Ashton O’Dwyer has become a bit of a nuisance in Louisiana post Katrina. I am pretty sure that at one point, he actually seceded from the union in an attempt to get financial foreign aid following Katrina. He has been disbarred for abusive language and disrespect of the legal system. He does have several cases where he represents himself pro se.

Recently, Judge Ivan L. R. Lemelle (E.D. La.) held O’Dwyer in contempt of court for saying “screw you” and hanging up, at the conclusion of a status conference.

O’Dwyer fired off a (handwritten) response to the contempt order, defending his conduct:

[A]t the time he told Ivan L. R. Lemelle (as a man, not as a Judge): “screw you,” and hung up the telephone during the referenced status conference by telephone, the business of the Court had already been concluded.

Actually, that is not a terrible argument, if the court’s business was actually concluded before O’Dwyer made his remark.

But O’Dwyer doesn’t leave well enough alone. Did you know that both O’Dwyer and Lemelle are Judge Lemellle is black? That fact becomes important — at least in O’Dwyer’s mind.

More details after the jump.

Law firm partners need to watch more Gossip Girl. If they did, they’d learn the perils of talking about private matters in public places. In the age of BlackBerrys, texting, and cameraphones, it’s ridiculously easy for tipsters to leak details of overheard conversations and not-so-secret rendezvous to their favorite online gossip girl (or boy — XOXO, Lat).

Last year, we wrote about a Thelen partner who was overheard discussing her firm’s layoffs on the subway. Last night, we received this information, from a law student traveling from D.C. to New York:

This afternoon I boarded a train from Washington bound for Penn Station…. I, along with all of the other passengers, were sitting quietly when the man directly behind me decided to make a phone call using his bluetooth. He was talking so loudly that I think most people in the car were able to hear him.

His conversation, though he stressed how necessary it was to be kept secret (ah, the irony), detailed the current plans of Pillsbury to lay off somewhere in the range of 15-20 attorneys from four offices by the end of March, including a few senior associates with low billable hours and two or three first-year associates. I wouldn’t have believed it except for the fact that he identified himself to the call as Bob Robbins, who I learned is the leader of the firm’s Corporate & Securities practice section, and was talking to Rick Donaldson, who I learned was COO. What’s more, he was NAMING NAMES over the phone!

After we expressed skepticism over this wild story, including the tipster’s ability to catch the names of both Robbins and Donaldson, we received this response:

I agree it’s pretty wild. I wasn’t trying to overhear, but I had no choice because of the proximity. The name “Robbins” I remembered because he said it so damn loud. I went to their website, and the picture [at right] was an exact match. He was big enough to fit almost two chairs.

“Donaldson” I didn’t remember as clearly. I remembered that it began with a “Do” and thought it was “Dotson,” but there was no “Dotson” on the site — just “Donaldson.” Also, he called him “Rick” a few times.

Says our source, in explaining the decision to tip off ATL:

Before today, I have never even considered posting on this website, but I was so mortified by my experience…. I’ve heard of attorneys being reprimanded for discussing client matters in an elevator. Where does airing your own firm’s dirty laundry on an express train fit on the list? I don’t know if there is a way that you can independently verify this, but if so, please do.

Partial verification, after the jump.

Back in 2007, two female Yale Law School students filed a lawsuit over allegedly defamatory and threatening comments written about them on AutoAdmit.com. The stuff written went way beyond lobsters and buttcheeks, and the women said the resulting Google hits on their names did serious damage to their job prospects.

The case was near and dear to ATL readers’ hearts in its challenge to the culture of anonymous online commentary, as the YLS students sought to out their unknown assailants (including the incongruously-named :D and more appropriately-named AK47) through the course of litigation. We covered the various twists and turns of the case, but hadn’t heard anything since last summer.

The newest issue of Portfolio Magazine has the case on its cover. In Slimed Online, David Margolick identifies the YLS plaintiffs as Brittan Heller and Heide Iravani and explores the legal ramifications for cyber bullying.

The article is a great read, and we’d advise checking it out. We’re a big fan of the writer: Margolick covered the O.J. Simpson trial as the New York Times national legal correspondent in the 90s, and was one of Kash’s favorite journalism professors last semester.

For the lazy among you, we have chosen some highlights, including the “where are they now” grafs (hint: hello, Cleary). Find out whether job prospects were really damaged, after the jump.

As the Above the Law community continues to grow, more people are posting absurd, inane, and arguably offensive comments. And more people are complaining about those comments — in the comments, as well by email and other means.

Here at ATL, we reserve the right to moderate comments as we see fit. We delete comments for reasons including (but not limited to) offensiveness, abusiveness, excessive profanity, irrelevance, or rank stupidity. Above the Law is a privately owned website, and we have no obligation to provide our bandwidth to any particular user.

But we also offer this recommendation to people who are offended by the comments: don’t read them. Toward that end, we want to make it easier for you to avoid the comments if you want to. Over the next 24 hours, we’ll be changing our site design so that comments will default to “hidden.” If you want to see the comments, you must affirmatively opt-in, by clicking a button to reveal them (either the “show them anyway” button within the post, or the “comments” button / counter on the front page).

Read more — and see for yourself how this policy will work — after the jump.