My second story about editing in two days? Woohoo! Nothing is more exciting.
I hope people don’t get the wrong idea about my feelings when it comes to typos and grammatical errors. They should be avoided. I’m just saying there’s no reason to get all bent out of shape over them. There are thousands of opportunities to make a small error in typing or applying the arbitrary rules of the English language, and when an error happens, it should be noted and fixed with minimal drama. Instead there are people like this. Or this.
But if you’re going to rip a bunch of people for poor editing, at least try to keep typos and grammatical screw-ups in your email to a minimum.
* When it comes to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage mandate, corporate personhood only goes so far. Religious freedoms apply to human beings, not their businesses, and the Third Circuit agrees. [New York Times]
* According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the legal sector added 2,800 jobs in July after major losses in the two months prior. We’re sure that the eleventy billion members of the class of 2013 will be very pleased. [Am Law Daily]
* Not a Nigerian scam: Biglaw firms in Washington, D.C. — like Covington & Burling, Greenberg Traurig, and Williams Mullen — are busy chasing business in Africa. [Capital Business / Washington Post]
* A New Jersey municipal judge faces ethics charges due to his “extra-judicial activities” with an exotic dancer. It seems she appeared before him in his courtroom and in his bed. [New Jersey Law Journal]
* Tawana Brawley, the woman who dragged a New York prosecutor into an elaborate rape hoax (complete with race-baiting), is finally making payments on a defamation verdict. [New York Post]
* “Either I’m a stupid lawyer, or I’m stupid for thinking the court will enforce the rights of guys.” Former Cravath attorney and men’s rights advocate Roy Den Hollander is at it again. [New York Daily News]
* Morehouse College will be the fifth undergraduate school in the nation to publish a law journal. This is basically a case study in what it means to begin law school gunning while in college. [Daily Report]
Personally, I gave up on law reviews in the mid-90s.
For a while after I graduated from law school, I flipped through the tables of contents of the highest profile law reviews, to see what the scholars were saying and to read things that were relevant to my practice. But by the mid-90s, I gave up: There was no chance of finding anything relevant, so the game was no longer worth the candle.
(When I took up blogging about pharmaceutical product liability cases, I began rooting around for law review articles in that field, which could generate the fodder for blog posts for which I was always desperate. Even then, the law reviews rarely offered much that practitioners would care about.)
None of that convinced me that the law reviews were dead, however, because I figured that the academics were at least still relying on the law reviews to screen and distribute each other’s work. But I had dinner recently with an old law school classmate who’s now (1) a prominent scholar in his or her field and (2) a member of the hiring committee at his or her law school. A short conversation with this guy (or gal) convinced me that law reviews are not long for this world. . . .
Going to a top law school doesn’t make you any more considerate of others. It certainly doesn’t teach you to clean up after yourself.
But maybe going to this top law school will teach some kids on law review that being a slob has consequences. Monetary consequences.
I think anytime a poor custodian has to scold some slovenly law students, things have already gone too far. I mean, since we’re talking about kids who are going to law school in New York, the rats came out even before the law review students were told to clean up their act….
UPDATE (1:15 PM): And now we’ve got a response from one of the allegedly dirty students.
On Friday, we brought you some controversial news about Julian Davis, a UC Hastings Law grad running for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. He faces allegations of acting “royally douchey.” One of his accusers is a former classmate at UC Hastings, and after the story went up, we heard from a few more of his former Hastings peers.
One wrote in strong defense of Julian’s “firebrand” personality — and his politics. But a few others wrote to tell about his tumultuous — and unexpectedly brief — stint on the Hastings Law Journal.
Let’s jump right in and learn more about Davis’s interesting law school past…
UPDATED (4:35PM) with a significant response from Julian Davis.
Grind up some brilliant legal theories, spice liberally with Bluebook-compliant citations, and voilà — law review articles!
Have you ever wondered how the law review sausage factory works? Perhaps you’re a law professor or practitioner who regularly submits pieces to law journals for possible publication. If you are, and if you’d like to know more about how the process works — or, more to the point, what law review editors say about you behind your back — you’ve come to the right place.
Thanks to the wonders of technology, collaborating with far-flung colleagues has never been easier. Here at Above the Law, for example, your four full-time editors — myself, Elie, Staci, and Chris — keep in touch throughout the day using Gchat.
But what if, due to inadequate security, your organization’s internal deliberations were accessible to the public? And, in some cases, even crawled by search engines?
What if you were, say, law students at a highly ranked law school, where you served as editors of a high-profile law review? And what if your, er, candid and colorful comments about the articles pending before you were to become publicly available?
If you sent a document to the Engineers in Prometheus in .docx, they would say, 'Kill the one who expects us to convert.'
When most people call lawyers “paper pushers,” they mean it in a pejorative way. But pushing paper around correctly, in an organized and detail-oriented fashion, is a big part of a lawyer’s job. Some might say it’s the most important part of the job. The best lawyers have an attention to detail that can only be matched by research scientists and portrait artists.
If you can’t bring that maddening, borderline obsessive-compulsiveness to the little things, you might not be able to do things like become an awesome Supreme Court clerk — or even make it onto your school’s law review. That’s okay; you still might have other talents. But good lawyers can follow instructions (or afford secretaries who can follow instructions).
It’s an important lesson that three kids who got booted from their school’s law review competition just learned the hard way…
[A]mong the world’s democracies … constitutional similarity to the United States has clearly gone into free fall. Over the 1960s and 1970s, democratic constitutions as a whole became more similar to the U.S. constitution, only to reverse course in the 1980s and 1990s. The turn of the twenty-first century, however, saw the beginning of a steep plunge that continues through the most recent years for which we have data, to the point that the constitutions of the world’s democracies are, on average, less similar to the U.S. Constitution now than they were at the end of World War II.
I’m posing three questions to myself today. First, why might a lawyer at a law firm choose to write articles? Second, what topics should lawyers write about, and where should they publish the articles? Finally, why might an in-house lawyer choose to write?
The honest truth is that outside lawyers choose to write for many, varied reasons. In-house lawyers might also choose to write for many reasons, but those reasons are different and fewer. Across the board, authors’ motivations for writing will be mixed.
Do I have a right to speak on the subject of publications? My credentials, in a nutshell, are these: Three books; twelve law review articles; two book chapters; about 70 other, shorter articles (in places ranging from The Wall Street Journal and the Chicago Tribune to Pharmaceutical Executive and Litigation); and maybe 600 blog posts (roughly 500 at Drug and Device Law and north of 100 here). Call me nuts (and I may well be), but I’ve spent a professional lifetime doing a ton of “recreational” legal writing.
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: email@example.com.
Things have changed recently in Korea – a few of our US and UK client firms are looking, very selectively, for a lateral US associate hire. Until just recently, there was not much hiring like this going on in Korea, since US and UK firms started opening offices there. We have already placed two US associates in Korea in the past month at top firms. Most of the hiring partners we work with in Korea do not actively work with other recruiters.
If you are a Korean fluent US associate in London, New York or another major US market, 2nd to 6th year, at a top 20 firm, with cap markets or M&A focus (or mix), or project finance background, and you are interested in lateraling to Korea to a top US or UK firm, please feel free to reach out to us at firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com. Our head of Asia, Evan Jowers, was just in Korea recently, and Evan and Robert Kinney will be in Korea in a few weeks. We are in the process of helping several firms open new offices in Korea (a number of which are interviewing our partner level candidates) and also helping existing offices there fill openings.
Professor Joel P. Trachtman has developed a unique, practical guide to help lawyers analyze, argue, and write effectively.
The Tools of Argument: How the Best Lawyers Think, Argue, and Win is a highly readable 200-page book, available for about $10 in paperback or e-book. Chapters focus on foundational principles in legal argument: procedure, interpretation of contracts and statutes, use of evidence, and more. The material covered is taught only implicitly in law school. Yet, when up-and-coming attorneys master these straightforward tools, they will think and argue like the best lawyers.
For most attorneys, time spent managing the books is a necessary evil at best. Yet it is undeniably a crucial aspect of running a successful practice. With that in mind, we invite you to view or download a free webinar by Above the Law and our friends at Clio to learn how to better manage your finances.
Take this opportunity to learn what it takes to streamline your accounting and get the most out of your time. The webinar agenda:
● The basics of accounting for lawyers.
● How legal accounting differs from regular accounting.
● Report and reconciliation issues surrounding trust accounts.
● How to pick and integrate the best accounting tools for your practice.
● Steps to prepare your tax return for your firm’s income.
Do not miss this crucial chance to optimize your accounting practices. Save time and get back to billing!