We should have known that the Fisher opinion was going to be a letdown — a “great big dodge,” as my colleague Elie Mystal put it. Instead of readying herself for an historical moment, Justice Elena Kagan spent yesterday doing some window-shopping.
Where did she go, and what merchandise did she check out? Here’s an eyewitness report….
Before there was Four Loko there was, and still is, the Red Bull and vodka. You can pour nearly any amount of vodka into a glass and just a little bit of Red Bull will cut the taste enough so that you can drink it like water. Plus you’ll get an energy kick. Back in my day, when Red Bull was still made with ephedra, that kick was damn noticeable.
Red Bull and vodka is a great way to start a night. It’s a great way to extend a night. It’s a terrible way to end a night. At the end of the night, you don’t need all that alcohol and energy. You need a cab and a glass of water.
One lawyer in D.C. learned that lesson the hard way. He had a Red Bull and Vodka right before closing time, and ended up “bleeding all over Georgetown.” Now he’s suing the bar for giving him that last drink.
Yesterday marked the first day of Women’s History Month. And as we noted for our readers, Rush Limbaugh began his celebrations a day early by calling Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown Law student who testified before a Congressional committee on the need for access to birth control, a “slut.”
In case you’re in need of a refresher, here’s what Limbaugh had to say of Fluke’s testimony: “What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute.”
Needless to say, people are outraged about Limbaugh’s comments. Because really, who wouldn’t be? Let’s take a look at what Fluke had to say in response….
You might think that watching law students play sports would be like watching U. Conn. and Butler play basketball. You know, undersized, intense people playing in an ugly and painful style. You’d think that watching law students play a pick-up game of 21 would be indistinguishable from watching Butler unsuccessfully try to throw a ball in the ocean.
But you’d be wrong. Because at some point in the athletic competition, law students would undoubtedly halt competition and begin arguing over rules and regulations. Granted, halfway through the second half of the National Championship game, I wanted somebody to file an injunction on behalf of the rims in Houston that were being murdered. But in general I like my athletic competitions to be devoid of brief writing.
The past few weeks have brought lots of news on the law school dean front. Last week, Chapman Law selected a former congressman as its next head. Earlier this month, Pepperdine Law picked up a judge as its latest leader.
We’ve done a lot of coverage about deferral stipends, public interest stipends, and other direct payments to graduates who are not able to secure prime, private practice employment.
If you think about it, these programs have popped up with shocking speed. In 2007, there was no such thing as a “deferral stipend” from firms, and the public interest fellowship programs offered by schools were small and for grads who wanted to wait a little while before heading into the open arms of a private law firm. Now, these programs represent the last hope for grads who are unable to secure jobs.
With everybody trying to describe what these programs are, there’s been little time to analyze how these programs work. One aspect is particularly interesting to students considering some of these stipend options: how will the stipend be taxed.
Because each program is different, the tax situations differ wildly. So you really need to work with your career service/human resource people and figure out how your stipend will be taxed.
If you didn’t put in that work with regards to the Georgetown University Law Center post-grad public interest stipend, the taxes totally screwed up your budget…
No Gropius dorms for her, thank you very much. Harvard Law School student Cate Edwards, oldest daughter of prominent politician John Edwards, just purchased a million-dollar property in Washington’s tony Georgetown neighborhood.
Famous dad: Former presidential hopeful John Edwards.
Price: $1.3 million.
Amenities: Two bedrooms, five baths.
An NPR internship with Nina Totenberg doesn’t pay like a summer associate gig. Perhaps Cate was able to draw upon the fortune amassed by her father during his career as a top trial lawyer.
The property has two bedrooms and five bathrooms. A high bathroom-to-bedroom ratio is a token of a luxuriousness. But does Cate really need all those bathrooms? Does Papa Edwards — who might crash occasionally at Cate’s place, having sold his own mansion around the corner in 2006 (for $5.2 million) — really have that much ickiness to wash off?
The children of Senators Ted Kennedy and John Warner also snapped up some swank properties. Read about them over at Washingtonian.
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.
Please note that Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney are still in Hong Kong and will stay FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK. We still have a handful of available slots for meetings with our Asia Chronicles fans. If we have not been in touch lately, reach out and let us know when we could meet! There is no need for an agenda at all. Most of our in-person meetings on these trips are with folks who understand that improving a legal practice through lateral hiring is an information-driven process that takes time to handle correctly.
Regarding trends in lateral US associate hiring in Hong Kong, we of course keep much of what we know off of this blog. Based on placement revenue, though, Kinney is having one of our most successful years ever in Asia. We are helping a number of our law firm clients with M&A, fund formation, cap markets, project finance, FCPA and disputes openings. These are very specific needs in many cases, so a conversation with us before jumping in may be helpful. As always, we like to be sure to get the maximum number of interviews per submission, using a well-informed, highly targeted, and selective approach, taking into account short, medium and long-term career aims.
Making a well informed decision during a job search is easier said than done – the information we provide comes from 10 years of being the market leader in US attorney placements at the top tier firms in Asia. There is no substitute for having known a hiring partner since he/she was an associate or for having helped a partner grow his or her practice from zip to zooming, and this is happily where we stand today – with years of background information on just about every relevant person in all the markets we serve, and most especially in Hong Kong/China/Greater Asia. So get in touch and get a download from us this week if we can fit it in, or soon in any case!
The legal industry is being disrupted at every level by technological advances. While legal tech entrepreneurs and innovators are racing to create a more efficient and productive future, there is widespread indifference on the part of attorneys toward these emerging technologies.
When the LexisNexis Cloud Technology Survey results were reported earlier this year, it showed that attorneys were starting to peer less skeptically into the future, and slowly but surely leaning more toward all the benefits the law cloud has to offer.
Because let’s face it, plenty of attorneys are perhaps a bit too comfortable with their “system” of practice management, which may or may not include neon highlighters, sticky notes, dog-eared file folders, and a word processing program that was last updated when the term “raise the roof” was still de rigueur.