Screw-Ups

– A rather confusing message displayed earlier today on the State of Connecticut Judicial Branch website. It has since been corrected.

On Monday, we asked readers to submit possible captions for this picture of an egregious typo sent out by the admissions office of the St. Thomas University School of Law (click on the image to enlarge it):

Let’s have a look at what our readers came up with, and vote on the finalists….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Caption Contest Finalists: A Terrible, Terrible Typo”

Who doesn’t love a good typo? We certainly do here at Above the Law (which is why we make so many; we’re just trying to amuse you — and to test the proofreading skills of the commenters).

Typos can be quite funny, especially when committed by leading law firms. As long as they don’t hurt your clients by costing them millions, they generally amount to harmless fun.

Everyone knows that typos happen — like a certain other thing. Which brings us to today’s caption contest….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Caption Contest: A Terrible, Terrible Typo”


Instead of going after actual terrorists, the government has been investigating innocent people and violating their civil and constitutional rights in the process.

– Jeffrey Kantor, a former government contractor employee, who alleges in a federal lawsuit that he’s being stalked by the government after accidentally searching for “How do I build a bomb?” on Google. Kantor claims he was trying to search for “How do I build a radio-controlled airplane?” but that the search engine’s autocomplete function backfired on him.

What would it be like it Elmo wrote your law school exams?

I was starting to wonder if we might get through all of finals period without a major exam screw-up. Imagine the competence.

Don’t worry, we didn’t make it. And as Ned Ryerson might say, this first testing mishap of the season is a doozy. It’s one thing for a professor to blast his own exam by lazily reusing a question set from a prior exam. But this guy put the entire answer in with the testing materials given to his students.

That’s one way of making finals easier….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “New And Improved Finals: Now With All The Answers In The Exam!”

When people in the legal profession screw up in major ways, we are there to chronicle the action, providing entertainment and education (in terms of what not to do). For example, sometimes lawyers volunteer to enlarge the size of opposing counsel’s a-holes — and get canned. Sometimes lawyers bill for 29 hours in a day and get taken to task. Sometimes lawyers blush when they accidentally request a trial “on all the c**ts”.

These things do happen, but they’re usually one-time occurrences that would otherwise be missed by the members of the legal community, if not for our coverage here at Above the Law.

On the other side of the coin, when you screw up so many times that a federal judge feels the need to publicly excoriate you with the ultimate insult — by comparing your work to that of a pro se litigant — maybe it’s time to hang your head in shame for the rest of your days…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Federal Judge Issues Sick Burn, Compares Lawyer’s Filings To Those Of Pro Se Litigant”

The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Legal secretaries and other support staffers aren’t the only folks getting exiled from Biglaw. Partners who lie on their résumés are getting shown the door too.

In the prestige-soaked precincts of Biglaw, the pressure to inflate one’s credentials is understandable. Once you’re above a certain threshold, the quality of legal work can be hard to judge. In other fields of endeavor, you either can do it or you can’t — write code for a specific program, execute a triple Lutz, surgically reattach a severed hand (my dad can do this, in case you ever need his services).

In law, many people can write a brief or negotiate a contract. It then becomes a matter of how well you can do these things — and pedigree inevitably colors the evaluation of the legal services rendered.

In light of all this, a lawyer’s lying on his CV might be understandable — but it’s still a firing offense. A Biglaw partner learned this lesson the hard way….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Don’t Lie On Your Résumé — Even If You’re A Partner”

Have you ever sent an email to the wrong person? I remember sending co-defendant’s counsel a random musing about my office because Microsoft Exchange autocompleted the address to the name partner I was working with rather than the associate sitting down the hall with the same first name. Thankfully, my musing was not damaging or uniquely embarrassing.

The same cannot be said of this lawyer. After a state supreme court heard oral argument on his case, he wrote the lawyers who argued the case and questioned the wisdom of the jurists.

But, of course, he also sent it to the court’s chief justice….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “This Is Why You Always Check The Address Field Before Sending An Email”

Look, typos happen. No matter how vigilant a proofer is, a typo will eventually slip through. Anyone can type “they it is” or “raceism” once in awhile.[1] As long as the meaning is still clear, there’s not a reason to harp on the person unless you’re just a petty person desperate to use another person’s misplacement of a letter as an affirmation of your life.

So I don’t want to lay scorn on the lawyer or paralegal or court clerk who committed this error. But when a typo in the very title of the filing creates a slur, it’s snicker-worthy.

Here’s a filing that opposes summary judgment “on all the c**ts” of the complaint….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Oops! Lawyer for Fortune 100 Company Wants Trial ‘On All The C**ts’”

There’s no better way to introduce this story than by reprinting the opening paragraph of the Sixth Circuit opinion by Judge Raymond Kethledge (citation omitted):

There are good reasons not to call an opponent’s argument “ridiculous,” which is what State Farm calls Barbara Bennett’s principal argument here. The reasons include civility; the near-certainty that overstatement will only push the reader away (especially when, as here, the hyperbole begins on page one of the brief); and that, even where the record supports an extreme modifier, “the better practice is usually to lay out the facts and let the court reach its own conclusions.” But here the biggest reason is more simple: the argument that State Farm derides as ridiculous is instead correct.

Trolls. So. Hard.

Want to know the argument that set off the panel? “Like a Good Neighbor, State Farm is there… with a detailed explanation!

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Don’t Mock A Legal Argument If You’re Completely Wrong”

Page 4 of 2012345678...20