This email exchange, between two law students at Washington University Law, took place late last month. It’s reminiscent of that Greenberg Traurig email exchange from the other day — which, in our book, is high praise.
Some background, from our tipster:
I’m an avid reader of ATL. Although I don’t see much law school coverage on your site, I thought you might find this email string between a couple Washington University in St. Louis law students amusing.
Note that the email string starts as a solicitation sent to the entire school, marketing a washer/dryer for sale. The proceeding communications are also copied to the ENTIRE school of law (including professors, deans, etc.).
We kinda love Greenberg Traurig. There’s always something wacky afoot over there, whether it’s an unorthodox resignation letter or a recruiting reception debacle.
Now, we haven’t verified this latest tale, so consider it mere rumor. But here’s what one tipster told us:
A partner in one of Greenberg Traurig’s international offices sent out a long and angry firmwide e-mail, criticizing the firm for raising money for a charity which provides phone cards to soldiers overseas. Apparently, he was angry about the war, President Bush… , etc.
I don’t have a copy of it — a friend of mine who works in the NYC office had it — but it is worth getting and posting, if you don’t already have a copy. One of the firm’s managing shareholders responded; it too is worth posting, I think.
We haven’t seen this ranting email, and we haven’t been able to get our hands on a copy. But it sounds like just the kind of over-the-top correspondence that we love to publish in these pages.
Do you have a copy of said email? If so, please do share, either by emailing us or posting in the comments. Thanks. Update (2:15 PM): That was fast; thanks. The email exchange, which is pretty catty and amusing, appears after the jump.
Since the lastcoverage of her on ATL, the Energizer-bunny-esque Judge Elizabeth Halverson has been ordered on the inactive list by the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline.
Following an emotional plea by Halverson in a rare television interview, and a similar public plea by two sexy ex-Halverson staffers (a law clerk and a secretary), the hearing transcripts have been released by the Nevada Supreme Court.
The Las Vegas Review-Journal published a story this morning that basically places the final nail in the 425 500 lb jurist’s cavernous coffin career:
District Judge Elizabeth Halverson’s former bailiff testified that she fell asleep daily in court and frequently told him to shoot her husband, according to transcripts of a closed-door hearing that were made public Wednesday.
Yes, you read that right: “frequently told him to shoot her husband.”
(Dozing off on the bench is no big deal. Some highly regarded judges do it all the time.)
The balance of the insanity, after the jump.
Earlier today, we posted the first installment of our recent interview with Dean Bernard Dobranski, of Ave Maria School of Law. You can access that part of the write-up, which includes background on current controversies at Ave Maria, by clicking here.
Now we bring you the second half of the interview. It appears after the jump.
We officially declare today to be Ave Maria School of Law Day here at ATL.
This morning, we wrote about a dubious recusal motion, seeking recusal of a judge who hired Ave Maria graduates as law clerks. And now we bring you more detailed discussion about the relatively new, Catholic law school, founded in 2000 by Domino’s Pizza mogul Tom Monaghan.
We’re not the only folks these days who are writing about Ave Maria School of Law, which has been embroiled in controversy for months now. The law school has been the subject of extensive (and generally unflattering) discussion, on such blogs as Fumare, Mirror of Justice, and AveWatch. The story has been picked up by online news sources such as Inside Higher Ed and the WSJ Law Blog.
So what’s the fuss all about? It’s a long and tortured history, but here’s the short version:
(1) the school is scheduled to move in 2009 to the new town of Ave Maria, Florida (the home of Ave Maria University, located outside Naples, FL, and described as “a sort of utopia for devout Catholics and others”);
(2) a number of faculty members vigorously oppose the move; and
(3) things have gotten ugly between these faculty members and the law school’s administration, led by Dean Bernard Dobranski.
In a recent telephone interview with ATL, Dean Dobranski offered his side of the story. You can check out our interview with him after the jump.
Remember our extensive, mischievous-yet-good-natured coverage of internal strife at the legendary Harvard Law Review? It appears to have irritated HLR President Andrew Crespo. And it probably will have to stop now, thanks to the Review’s new “email and internet usage policy,” which prohibits sharing HLR internal emails with the eyes of outsiders.
UH OH! Looks like Andrew “Crespolini” Crespo didn’t like his dirty laundry being aired on Above The Law, so he’s created a new policy (this one, mercifully, public) to ensure that all inanity can be confined to Gannett House.
Fortunately, since it won’t take effect until next week, I figured I would send it along your way!
As our source notes, the policy doesn’t take effect until July 18, 2007. So taking the policy and forwarding it to, say, your favorite legal tabloid is permitted (until Wednesday, when all bets are off).
It’s not particularly interesting — but if you’d like to read the policy, you can check it out after the jump.
We continue our series of posts chronicling rampant internal strife at America’s top law journal, the Harvard Law Review. Prior posts appear here, here and here.
The standard caveats apply:
1. This material is not for everyone. If you don’t share our appreciation for tempests in teapots, you may have a “So what?” reaction. But if you do enjoy the hilarity of petty law school squabbles, then keep reading.
2. The internal emails reprinted below speak for themselves. After reading them, you may end up siding with the HLR editor or with president Andrew Crespo. We take no side in this controversy.
3. If you feel that we’ve missed something in our coverage, please email us (subject line: “Harvard Law Review”). We’re eager to hear from all parties to this dispute.
(Alas, it’s usually the case that one side leaks info to communicates with us more than the other. As a result, that side’s viewpoint may receive more coverage in these pages. E.g., Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell. If you want to level the playing field, you need to feed us information that supports your position.)
Discussion of the latest controversy, plus internal Harvard Law Review emails, after the jump.
Today we bring you another post in our series about controversy and dissension at America’s top law journal: the Harvard Law Review. Earlier posts appear here and here.
We repeat the warning we included in our last post:
[This material] is not for everyone. If you don’t share our appreciation for tempests in teapots, you may have a “So what?” reaction. But if you do enjoy the hilarity of petty law school squabbles, then keep reading.
It appears that a fair number of you do enjoy such ridiculousness. Our last HLR post generated over 80 comments.
The latest controversy unfolds, in all of its crimson glory, after the jump.
The holiday season is upon us, and yet again, you have no idea what to get for the fickle lawyer in your life. We’re here to help. Even if your bonus check hasn’t arrived yet, any one of the gifts we’ve highlighted here could be a worthy substitute until your employer decides to make it rain.
We’ve got an eclectic selection for you to choose from, so settle in by that stack of documents yet to be reviewed and dig in…
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 six years. You can reach them by email: email@example.com.
We currently have a very exciting and rare type of in-house opening in China at one of the world’s leading internet and social media companies. Our client is looking for an IP Transactional / TMT / Licensing attorney with 2 to 6 years experience. The new hire will be based in Shenzhen or Shanghai. Mandarin is not required (deal documentation will be in English) but is preferred. A solid reason to be in China and a commitment to that market is required of course. This new hire will likely be US qualified (but could also be qualified in UK or other jurisdictions) and with experience and training at a top law firm’s IP transactional / TMT practice and could be currently at a law firm or in-house. Qualified candidates currently Asia based, Europe based or US based will be considered. The new hire’s supervisors in this technology transactions in-house team are very well regarded US trained IP transactional lawyers, with substantial experience at Silicon Valley firms. The culture and atmosphere in this in-house group and the company in general is entrepreneurial, team oriented, and the work is cutting edge, even for a cutting edge industry. The upside of being in an important strategic in-house position in this fast growing and world leading internet company is of the “sky is the limit” variety. Its a very exciting place to be in China for a rising IP transactional lawyer in our opinion, for many reasons beyond the basic info we can share here in this ad / post. This is a special A+ opportunity.
If your firm is in ‘go’ mode when it comes to recruiting lateral partners with loyal clients, then take this quiz to see how well you measure up. Keep track of your ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses.
1. Does your firm have a clearly defined strategy of practice groups that are priorities of growth for your office? Nothing gets done by random chance, but with a clear vision for the future. Identify the top practice areas for which you wish to add lateral partners. Seek input from practice group leaders and get specifics on needs, outcomes, and ideal target profiles.
2. In addition to clarifying your firm’s growth strategy, are you still open to the hire of a partner outside of your plan? I’ve made several placements that fit this category. The partner’s practice was not within the strategic growth plan of my client, but once the two parties started talking with each other, we all saw how it could indeed be a seamless fit. Be open to “Opportunistic Hires.” You never know where your next producing partner might come from, so you have to be open to it. I will be the first to admit that there is a quirky element of randomness in recruiting.
The traditional job application and interview process can be impersonal, and applicants often struggle to present themselves as more than just the sum of their GPAs, alma maters, and previous work history. ATL has partnered with ViewYou to help job seekers overcome this challenge. ViewYou NOW Profiles offer a unique way for job seekers to make a personal, memorable connection with prospective employers: introduction videos. These videos allow job candidates to display their personalities, interpersonal skills, and professional interests, creating an eDossier to brand themselves to potential employers all over the world. Check it out today!