Women’s Issues

* According to Justice Kagan, Justice Ginsburg “is responsible for eliminating sex discrimination from American law.” Whoa, that’s a nice thought, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves with wishful thinking. [New York Law Journal]

* After handing out pink slips staff, Heenan Blaikie lawyers sat down and voted to dissolve the Canadian firm’s partnership and wind up its business. It’s kind of like Dewey, but with maple syrup! [Legal Post / Financial Post]

* Jack W. Butler, the bankruptcy bigwig who managed to negotiate the American Airlines / US Airways merger, will leave his home at Skadden Arps after 23 years and head to Hilco Global. [DealBook / New York Times]

* Vermont Law School has partnered with several historically black colleges and universities in order to put warm bodies in empty seats promote the expansion of racial diversity in the legal profession. [VT Digger]

* David Savner, a corporate partner at Jenner & Block, recently donated $1 million to his alma mater, Northwestern Law, to fund a high-tech classroom. It must be nice to be rich. [Crain's Chicago Business]

* The ABA Journal wants to know what the “oddest” elective course you ever took in law school was. If you took a “Law and _____” class and didn’t get an “A,” you should hang your head in shame. [ABA Journal]

Join us at the Yale Club in New York City on March 14 for the inaugural ATL Attorney@Blog conference. Featuring opening remarks by preeminent First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams of Cahill Gordon & Reindel, Attorney@Blog will be a first-of-its-kind convocation of the leading legal bloggers. Panelists will include Tim Wu of Columbia Law School, Karen Sloan of the National Law Journal, Kyle McEntee of Law School Transparency, Kevin O’Keefe of LexBlog, Vivia Chen of The Careerist, and many more.

Still in search of those hard-to-find and desperately needed ethics credits? We’ve got a solution for you: CLE credit will be available at the conference, complimentary with your admission. We will be offering up to SIX ETHICS CREDITS, courtesy of Marino Legal, for our first three panels. Attendees will have to check in with the company before and after each panel to confirm their attendance. Has anything ever been easier?

Click here for more details and to buy tickets. We’ve extended early-bird pricing until February 15th, just so you can come and get your FREE CLE credits. Hurry up and get your tickets before it’s too late!

Attorney@Blog Panels:

Free Speech Online
Moderator: David Lat
This panel will discuss emerging free speech issues in addition to practical advice on how to avoid violating libel statutes and other related legal pitfalls.

The Trolls: Confronting (or Ignoring) Racism and Sexism
Moderator: Staci Zaretsky
This panel will explore the various strategies and best practices (along with their intellectual underpinnings) available to legal bloggers in managing the dark side of the internet: the “trolls” who engage in offensive and hateful (albeit protected) speech.

Blogs as Agents of Change
Moderator: Elie Mystal
This session will explore the degree to which blogs and bloggers are a by-product or prime mover behind the way in which the profession is being forced to challenge some of its basic assumptions.

Emerging Technical Trends & Best Practices
Moderator: Joe Patrice
This panel will explore the intersection of technology and the law, including the use of social media for business development, as well as practical tips on content strategy, SEO, blogging platforms, and other topics.

Attorney@Blog Conference [Above the Law]

Only you can prevent lateral fires.

* There will be filibusters: Victoria Nourse, a Georgetown Law professor whose nomination to the Seventh Circuit was blocked, thinks the political move will remain intact for SCOTUS nominees. [Legal Times]

* The Tenth Circuit politely pwned Roberta Kaplan. Her bid to intervene in the Utah same-sex marriage case before the court was rejected. Guess she’ll have settle for writing an amicus brief. [Salt Lake Tribune]

* Are laterals killing your firm? It happened to Dewey, and it could happen to you. Only you can prevent lateral fires. Take the pledge and show your commitment to lateral fire prevention. [American Lawyer]

* Lawyers are worried about what’s been going down at the storied Canadian firm of Heenan Blaikie. A third of its partners did the dip over the weekend amid financial troubles. Sounds familiar… [Ottawa Citizen]

* Women are slowly but surely working to close the gender gap in the law — well, at least they are in South Florida. It seems to be working, though, so feel free to follow their lead. [Daily Business Review]

* “Just because you can’t make the world a perfectly fair place doesn’t mean you can’t make it fairer.” If you really liked socialized health care, then you’re going to absolutely love socialized law. [New Republic]

* If your LSAT score is in the 160 range and you’re writing to an advice columnist to figure out what to do next, then you are the most special of all the little snowflakes. [Law Admissions Lowdown / U.S. News]

Join us at the Yale Club in New York City on March 14 for the inaugural ATL Attorney@Blog conference. Featuring opening remarks by the preeminent First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams of Cahill Gordon & Reindel, Attorney@Blog will be a first-of-its-kind convocation of the leading legal bloggers. Panelists will include Tim Wu of Columbia Law School, Karen Sloan of the National Law Journal, Kyle McEntee of Law School Transparency, Kevin O’Keefe of LexBlog, Vivia Chen of The Careerist, and many more.

In addition, the conference will provide space for attendees to network, socialize, and, of course, blog the proceedings. CLE credit will be available. See here for more details and tickets. Early bird pricing remains in effect until February 1st, and tickets are going fast, so be sure to get yours before it’s too late!

Attorney@Blog Panels:

Free Speech Online
Moderator: David Lat
This panel will discuss emerging free speech issues in addition to practical advice on how to avoid violating libel statutes and other related legal pitfalls.

The Trolls: Confronting (or Ignoring) Racism and Sexism
Moderator: Staci Zaretsky
This panel will explore the various strategies and best practices (along with their intellectual underpinnings) available to legal bloggers in managing the dark side of the internet: the “trolls” who engage in offensive and hateful (albeit protected) speech.

Blogs as Agents of Change
Moderator: Elie Mystal
This session will explore the degree to which blogs and bloggers are a by-product or prime mover behind the way in which the profession is being forced to challenge some of its basic assumptions.

Emerging Technical Trends & Best Practices
Moderator: Joe Patrice
This panel will explore the intersection of technology and the law. Topics to include the use of social media for business development as well as practical tips on content strategy, SEO, blogging platforms, and other topics.

Attorney@Blog Conference [Above the Law]

It’s been well documented in these pages that male lawyers in Texas are a little rough around the edges, and many of them seem virtually incapable of getting along with their female counterparts. To that end, some of them have threatened to enlarge opposing counsels’ assholes, and others have used terms of endearment like “c*nt,” “flat-chested bitch,” and “dumb sh*t” when referring to women colleagues.

With that as a backdrop, it’s no wonder that even more colorful allegations are coming out as a result of a small-firm breakup in Texas. Sure, the defendant in this case may have allegedly “emptied” the firm’s bank account before she left for her new firm, but perhaps she had a good reason to do so.

You’d probably want to take the money and run too if your partner was allegedly sexually harassing female employees and “requesting sex for favorable treatment” within the firm….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “‘Uppity Bitch’ Frowns Upon Using Firm Funds For ‘Strip Club Outings’”

Alexandra Marchuk

“Discovery is going to be FUN in this case.” That’s what we previously predicted about Marchuk v. Faruqi & Faruqi, the high-profile lawsuit filed by plaintiff Alexandra Marchuk against her former firm and one of its most prominent partners, Juan Monteverde.

Why did we expect fireworks from discovery? Because of the lurid nature of Marchuk’s allegations, including severe sexual harassment and (effectively) sexual assault, and because of the Faruqi firm’s aggressive response, which included suing Marchuk for defamation and claiming that it was Marchuk who was obsessed with Monteverde.

But it wasn’t just another “he said, she said” type of situation. Both sides claimed that third-party witnesses and contemporaneous documents would corroborate their respective and conflicting accounts.

Discovery is now underway in the case. Witnesses have been deposed, and documents have been produced. What kind of portrait do they paint?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Tasty Tidbits From A Salacious Summary Judgment Motion”

Fat. Stupid. Raging feminist. Bitch. Moron. K*ke. Slut. Woman-hater. Skank. Assh*le. C*nt. Whore.

“You have plenty of assets, like that fat milky white ass. I will tear that shit up, destroy it, every position until you can’t walk or feel the inside of your anus.”

These are just some of the colorful terms that have been used to describe me, and one of the messages publicly posted about me, in the nearly four years that I’ve written both pseudonymously and under my real name here at Above the Law. Our comments are hidden for our readers’ protection because they can be quite vile, but as editors, we have to look at them, and sometimes moderate them.

It’s difficult being a minority online, whether that word is used to describe race, gender, or sexual orientation. If you’re interested in learning how to engage your commenters, you should attend Above the Law’s inaugural Attorney@Blog conference, where I will moderate a panel on racism, sexism, and homophobia in online commenting platforms, featuring the following distinguished panelists:

This panel will explore the various strategies and best practices (along with their intellectual underpinnings) available to legal bloggers in managing the dark side of the internet: the “trolls” who engage in offensive and hateful (albeit protected) speech.

For more information and for tickets to the conference, please click here. CLE credit will be available, and early bird pricing remains in effect until February 1. We look forward to seeing you on March 14.

Attorney@Blog Conference [Above the Law]

‘I will probably live to rue the day I got pregnant.’

I’m going to be late to my f**king ultrasound because I’m waiting for a partner to review work that would only need to be reviewed if I wore a helmet and licked windows.

– An anonymous associate at an Am Law 100 firm who just realized how difficult carrying a pregnancy while working in Biglaw is going to be.

May as well be this firm’s logo.

We enjoy a good holiday card here at ATL. We hold an annual competition to crown the firm that maximizes the opportunity to spread cheer to its friends and professional acquaintances. And if a card is really doing its job, it makes clients remember that you run the most interesting firm in the world.

And then there are cards like this. So if you want to see exactly how out of touch with the modern era this law firm is, click on….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “A Delightful Holiday Greeting If You Kind Of Hate Women”

“Do you want me to write an opinion and say there’s no free speech right to quietly converse on an issue of public importance?”

– Justice Anthony Kennedy, in oral arguments for McCullen v. Coakley

On Wednesday, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in McCullen v. Coakley, a constitutional challenge to a Massachusetts law creating buffer zones, sometimes called “zones of exclusion,” around abortion clinics. The law at issue, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 266 § 120E ½ (2007), provides in part as follows: “No person shall knowingly enter or remain on a public way or sidewalk adjacent to a reproductive health care facility within a radius of 35 feet of any portion of an entrance, exit or driveway of a reproductive health care facility.” Eleanor McCullen, one of the challengers of the law, is a 76-year-old grandmother who in the past has stood on public sidewalks near abortion clinics in order to initiate one-on-one, non-confrontational conversations with women seeking abortions. The petitioners claim that, over the years, hundreds of women have accepted offers of help from McCullen and the other petitioners. They argue that the new law violates their right to free speech.

The First Circuit opinion below characterizes the plaintiffs’ appeal as advancing “a salmagundi of arguments, old and new, some of which are couched in a creative recalibration of First Amendment principles.” That opinion finds that “[t]he Massachusetts statute at issue here is a content-neutral, narrowly tailored time-place-manner regulation that protects the rights of prospective patients and clinic employees without offending the First Amendment rights of others.”

Unfortunately, the First Circuit is wrong about each of those points. Even more unfortunately, this law does the exact opposite of what most of us would hope . . . .

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “An Intimate Conversation From 35 Feet: A Misguided Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Law”

Page 9 of 166461...5678910111213...16646