Saturday, April 30, 2005

Rude Awakening

Thanks to Berkeley F.D. I mean, I salute you all for responding so quickly whenever the fire alarm in this building malfunctions, but do you have to blare your sirens at 2:30 in the morning while driving on a residential street? I'm no expert in these things, but even I know that it's customary for fire and police to only use their lights when driving on residential streets (AND AT WEE HOURS OF THE MORNING WHEN THERE'S NO TRAFFIC).

Just a thought!

The Runaway Bride

So the missing Georgia bride has been found in New Mexico. My hunch is that she got cold feet, much like Earl Warren below.

UPDATE: Oh god I love being proven right (and before anyone had a chance to call me a cold-hearted asshole to boot).
"It turns out that Miss Wilbanks basically felt the pressure of this large wedding and could not handle it," said Randy Belcher, the police chief in Duluth, Ga., the Atlanta suburb where Wilbanks lives with her fiance. He said there would be no criminal charges.

Thursday, April 28, 2005

Fight Clubrary

Now I'm curious what the details are of the incident that this mass e-mail from the Librarian refers to:
A few days ago we had an incident where a misunderstanding about a library rule led to an unpleasant confrontation. The whole thing was misbegotten from the start and we deeply regret the series of missteps that caused the problem. We apologize to the student who was caught up in the situation and to anyone else who got involved. While we cannot rewind the video tape on that incident the library staff will work to avoid similar situations in the future. The point is that we are all in this together. The library really exists to serve the students and the staff is here to work with you.

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Can't Get Enough of Yoo!

So Yoo didn't, as we know, hold his debate on the torture and the war on terror, her in Berkeley, out of security concerns (that's the story, and we're sticking to it). He did, however, debate Jeremy Waldron in a similar format at Columbia. Want to hear what he has to say (aside from more than a polite amount of joking about the "People's Republic of Berkeley" -- my favorite: "In Berkeley, we wouldn't have a structured debate like this, people would just start yelling." Neither true nor funny. Stick to your day job, Prof. Yoo, leave the stand-up to bloggers and other pros)? Columbia's ACS chapter has kindly posted a video of the debate, so you should check it out here if you have an hour to spare during this busy week.

Labels: , ,

For Sale by Dean

Crap, I was hoping to have a post about a Daily California article on Boalt's plans to increasingly rely on private sources for funding, but looks like Expressio Unius beat me to the punch.

I have made similar arguments before.

Labels: ,

Interview With A Vampire...

...or "The Constitution in Exile". Whatever. They're both dead, right? (If they ever even existed (see discussion on Volokh)). In any case, the indispensible Fafblog has this little absurdity, which hopefully we can all still laugh about, even in the midst of finals.

Mother of All Posts

I have quite a few things to write about but haven't had the energy to do it. In part because:

I've had a cough for about 3 weeks now that just won't go away. The last I had this was a couple of years ago. At the time I went to the UCLA student health center and they prescribed Z-Pack (the mother of all anti-biotics). BAM! Cough and everything else that goes with it....gone. Fast forward to last Monday. The NP at the Tang Center prescribed gues what? Flonase and Sudafed. (My nose is and has been completely dry). The cough remains. She said I could go back in a week if the cough persisted. I'm counting the hours and the steroid sprays up my nose.

If you're trying to cut down on fat consumption don't do it on something as fat-laden as peanut butter...something will inherently go wrong. I recently purchased "Jif Reduced Fat." I read the nutritional facts, but not much else. At home I noticed the TRUE fine print.

"Jif reduced fat spread contains 60% peanuts."

"Jif tastes like peanuts."

Anyway, you get the idea...I fell for that Miracle Whip rip-off shit.

Lastly there is this item via Yahoo News about a Texas School Board adding an ELECTIVE Bible course. The ACLU is of course jumping into the frey, but I see this as much ado about nothing. My high school (public) had an elective Bible as a Lit course.

I do take exception to the School Board's justification for the course. I highly doubt you need to be the Son of a Preacherman to fully appreciate Da Vinci's Last Supper.


Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Manville of a Night II

Last night in an attempt to get away from the distractions available in my room, such as blogging about IP, I went to the third floor lounge of Manville (the grad housing building for Berkeley). It was great...there were 4 or 5 of us there who regularly hang there was some distraction but still, work was kinda getting done.

Once some of the people left, the real action began. That is, the action next to the lounge in ROOM 345. Not only were the typical sounds of sex audible, but the minor chit chat could even be heard. I know it gets hot and stuffy in these rooms, but please consider closing your windows. Oh and if you're going to leave 3/4 of an inch open under the blinds, can you make it a full 2 or 3 inches just so we can get a decent look? A kneecap bouncing around just doesn't do it for me.

I somewhat mused about it this morning to someone else who lives in Manville and she had the following wise words.

"Well you know what, this is Manville and it's supposed to be quiet. Don't be afraid to tell them to keep it down. If they want loud sex they can live in the I-house."

Monday, April 25, 2005

Another Reason to Love IP

Only in an IP case will a distinguished 2d Circuit judge ever write:

"With respect to the Giggle Bunny evidence...", followed a page later by a weaving section on Tickle-Me-Elmo and Tornado Tazmanian Devil.

Source: Nadel v. Play-by-Play Toys & Novelties, Inc., 208 F.3d 308 (2d. Cir 2000)


I can put down my reading long enough to conjure up this vision of how the oral argument went:

"With respect to what evidence?"

"That would be the Giggle Bunny evidence, Your Honor."

::snickering:: "Excuse me counsel, what evidence?"

::sigh:: "The, ahem, Giggle Bunny evidence, Your Honor. Giggle Bunny."


I bet there were exhibits. And I bet the judges took an extra long time to decide the case so that they could play with the exhibits. Ooh, and the judges could meet with their clerks, but then refuse to address the clerks when they said somethign stupid, and instead speak to the toys, "Justice T.M. Elmo, do you think the Yale Clerk meant to leave out the element of privity?" "bzzzzzzzz" "I agree, that did seem wrongheaded and foolish. Oh well, that's Yale for you." "bzzzzzzzzztttttt" "Now, Justice Taz, you don't mean that!"

Well, it amuses me. And with spirits lifted, I can now return to reading.


Sunday, April 24, 2005

A Very Special Patent Case

Armen demanded I post on patents, since I'm the nerdy "IP Guy" he keeps hidden in the corner. Well fine, he gives me space on the blog he started, it seems only fair.

However, he wanted me to post on the peanut-butter-and-jelly-sandwich patent that became all the rage of internet and "look how stupid the patent system is" discussions (side note: the patent appears fine and valid to me, and rightly granted, as Smuckers really solved a tough problem with their new sandwich).

Instead, I'd like to discuss a special case, Lariscey v. United States, 20 U.S.P.Q.2d 1845 (Fed. Cir. 1991). The case features intrigue (employer tries to steal patented invention!), an anti-hero of invention (the aptly named Earl Jason Lariscey), and a very special invention that likely saves the lives of numerous men in Iraq on a weekly basis. The case also implicates trade secret law (a favorite of mine), and my favorite aspect of property... takings.

To begin, consider the overview provided by LexisNexis, in all their brilliance. Particularly inane statements appear in bold. Jaw-droppingly awesome statements appear in bolded italics. Things which are simply wrong appear in italics.

Plaintiff, a prisoner, filed suit alleging the appropriation without just compensation of plaintiff's invention of a metal cutting jig saw. Plaintiff invented the saw when, during the course of his employment through a prisoner work program making helmets, he discovered the difficulty in cutting metal. Plaintiff invented the saw on his own initiative, working in his cell during leisure time. Plaintiff appealed an order of the trial court that granted summary judgment to defendant. The court reversed and remanded. The court held that plaintiff had a property interest in the saw. The court found that plaintiff did not forfeit his trade secret or the possibility of payment for his invention through the demonstration of the saw at the prison. The court held that although the saw was made with scraps of defendant's metal, the discovery belonged to plaintiff because it was invented within the scope and purpose of plaintiff's employment.

Ok, what does this overview tell us?

First, in bold: metal is hard to cut! Wow, it heartens me that LexisNexis tells lawyers these things, because I bet they did not know otherwise. So you ask, what magical metal was this? Kevlar. Wait - you say. I'm a law student with an Intricacies of Political Theory Applied to Basket Weaving degree, and I'm pretty sure Kevlar is not a metal. You'd be correct. It's a fiber.

Second, in bolded italics: this man surely served as the model for Macguyver. Who are you Earl Jason Lariscey? What were you in for? I could probably look, but I bet you'd find out and kick my ass. Regardless, I'm sorry that the other inmates called you "Fred Flintstone" (read the case on Lexis or Westlaw, not available on FindLaw). You should have cut them with your Kevlar cutting saw. I know this would have landed you in the clink for even longer, but they deserved for not recognizing your genius. And you made this thing out of scrap metal? Man, if they had given you a rubberband, I bet you could have built a Howitzer. Needless to say, you are awesome. Just awesome.

Third, in italics: this is completely incorrect. If it were correct, the employer would have an implied license or shop right in the invention. But in fact, Judge Newman found that the saw got invented in Mr. Lariscey's own time, and that's why the device belonged to him.

So, what do we know so far? Lexis overviews are full of lies (see Kevlar), tales of heroism (see our federal prisoner Macguyver) and flagrant mistakes about the law that will lead you to malpractice (see shop right) [note: Dear LexisNexis, I will stop saying bad but true things about your fine services in exchange for a large four to six digit number of Lexis points, which I will use on books and a new basketball. Witness how easily I am bought, and the press you coudl get from this website! Amazing!]

Anyway, I need to get back to reading, but basically Mr. Lariscey avoids the cruel taunts of his fellow prisoners, threats from the wardens, a transfer to menial duty when he tries to claim his invention, the filing of a pro se complaint before the Claims Court, numerous denials of counsel, and then wins a 3-0 reversal from the federal circuit, thereby securing a trade secret and hopefully a patent in a marvelous invention that no doubt is saving numerous lives as we speak! Bravo!


PS: Prior to the saw that Lariscey made from scrap metal, the government was shopping for saws from contractors. Their options: a $30,000 sonic saw that did not work and a $350,000 "laser" saw that the vendor would not guarantee would work. And Lariscey used scrap metal! SCRAP METAL!! In his cell! With no tools!

Coda: Surely, Earl Jason Lariscey, you are one of the twentieth century's great inventors, and I will recognize you as such, even if no else will. When I cash in as an IP lawyer, I hope to endow a scholarship in your name for that punk kid with a knack for hard sciences. America needs more people like that.


Friday, April 22, 2005

Yoo've gotta be kidding me

With the Abu Ghraib experience that is registration now partly behind me, I can opine on a few related issues. Punchline: The technological inadequacies of this school have now pushed me to the brink of insanity.

I cannot grasp what genius thought it convenient to create the following student information/transaction websites:

Summer TeleBears

The irony of course is that each of the bears use the mother of all passwords (which requires cyrillic characters and hierogliphs) so it would not be even remotely difficult to combine the functions. Second they are all "best viewed with Netscape." In case anyone missed the newsflash, Netscape now only lives on through Mozilla and Firefox. Although I am an avid Firefox user, I don't understand why anyone would design a website that is not ideal for the browser used by 90% of your clients. Hmmmmm....

If we leave the main campus and move to Boalt for a second, we see the situation does not improve at all. First, you need to look up your enrollment time on InfoBears...or maybe BearFacts...not sure. Then you need to figure out your schedule from this. Remember, you must go to Fall 2005, then wade through the classes to find something that (1) intrests you since all you see at first are course titles (2) click on the course to find (i) the Professor teaching it, and (ii) the days and times the course is offered, and (iii) credits, grading, etc. Be sure to write all that down, since there is no capability to somehow select courses you like to see how they fit with the rest of your schedule. In fact, the Registrar is very kind in giving us a packet that lists all the courses for the Fall semester (about half of which have the correct corresponding professor listed, if any) along with a sheet that has each hour blocked off for a week. But only up to 5 PM. It's not like 85% of the classes are offered after the sun sets. I don't want to sound like an ingrate, I actually liked putting my highlighters to non-holding/facts/proc/issue use. In fact that method was far more superior than being able to search for a class by units, or by schedule.

If you're so curious as to actually care about enrollment counts, you are once again SOL. Some claim that there is a secret, mysterious procedure where you can get such information by using one of the Bears. To the best of this writer's ability and at press time, these appear to be rumors. Shawn Bayern, the incoming EIC of CLR does have a website on his own server that tracks current enrollment counts for all courses at Boalt. Kudos to Shawn, but why does it take the ingenuity and brain power of CLR to come up with something as simple as this?

The reason that enrollment counts are important is because we are allowed to enroll in 12 units during phase 1 of enrollment. For some this is more than a full load, for others this is one unit shy of a full load, and yet for some this is a 4-unit class away from a full load...but there is no cap on enrollment in any class. Why not cap enrollment at 90%?

Here's a novel thought: offer useful courses at useful times. As a bar course, I think quite a few more people would be interested in taking Estates and Trusts if it was not competing with the Tonight Show. Also, I think we can forego the classroom space of Topics in English Legal History for, oh I don't know, another course on legal ethics since it's kinda sorta mandatory for us to take (at the moment, according to Shawn's site, the only legal ethics course offered in the fall is waitlisted).

Lastly, as co-blogger Earl Warren has asked before, why don't we have a site that allows professor ratings and comments by students who have taken their courses? I'm glad that the course eval results are posted for every prof, but with an average rating of 4.8 (on a scale of 1-5) and a standard deviation 0.00003 this tells me nothing other than that Boalt professors are just bad asses...a probabilistic coincidence that is as likely as the rapture occuring today at noon.

A lot of people come here from a lot of different schools and I'm sure that there is no other school represented here at Boalt that has these technological shortcomings. But then again, how many bloggers out there can claim that they're going to have a syndicated series dedicated to their professor? That's right, I'd like to formally announce the series, "Yoo Said That?" which will cover the lectures of Prof. John Yoo, of torture memo and war powers memo fame. Should be fun.

And lastly my upcoming schedule:

Con Law -- Structural (Yoo)
Income Tax I (Rakowski)
Bonehead (Legal) Accounting
Financial Analysis (possible Drop)
Legal Ethics (God willing)

Labels: , ,

Thursday, April 21, 2005

Be Seeing Yoo In The Fall...

Dear colleagues,

If wish to enjoy my lively company, you may find me in the following classes:

Con Law: S
Income Tax I
Advanced Constitutional Theory
Law & Econmics Workshop


(pending admission)

Law & Technology Writing Seminar

for a healthy diet of 14 units (OCIP), two finals and... MTW!!

Oh the places I will go on my four-day weekends...

Something to keep in mind on "Justice Sunday"

"The matter is quite simple. The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand we are obliged to act accordingly. Take any words in the New Testament and forget everything except pledging yourself to act accordingly. My God, you will say, if I do that my whole life will be ruined. Herein lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian scholarship is the Church's prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament."

- Soren Kierkegaard


Merchant of Volokh

Yet something else that Volokh will shamelessly plug. Yes, I do have my copy of Academic Legal Writing.

More Disgrace

I've made it abundantly clear how much I hate Nancy Grace. Here's a couple from yesterday's Larry King Live (ugh, why did I leave the TV on CNN when studying?)
GRACE: ...And I'm still trying to get my head, Larry, around this videotape that surfaced yesterday. Videotape that some of Jackson's people had taken of this boy walking in and out of his school in his little school uniform. Of the mom going in and out of her apartment. Why was the king of pop, literally, the king of pop, worldwide an icon, videotaping this kid going in and out of school?


KING: Raymone Bain, a spokesperson for Michael Jackson. What's the talk about taking the stand?

BAIN: Well Larry, before I answer that, let me just say that earlier some one on the program indicated that Michael Jackson videotaped the kids. That is absolutely incorrect. An accusation was made on the stand that someone under Mr. Jackson's employment -- however, we can't even determine if that's true or false. But for the pronouncement to be made that it was Michael Jackson to videotape, I think is absolutely outrageous.

GRACE: That's not what I said, Larry.

BAIN: That's what you said, Grace.

GRACE: Check the transcript, Ms. Raymone -- no ma'am. I said some one in the Jackson camp or worked for Jackson.

BAIN: That's not what you said.

GRACE: Yes it is.

BAIN: You said Michael Jackson videotaped.

GRACE: No, ma'am, he never leaves Neverland. He's always holed up in his bedroom. I don't believe he was out taking video.

BAIN: That's what you said.

KING: We'll check the tape and see what she said. Let's check the tape. Let's check the tape.
Unfortunately, Grace kinda covered her ass, but then she also asked why literally the king of pop made that tape. Good observation Nancy. She had another brilliant observation that was dealt with rather well by Michael Cardoza (whom I now greatly respect not only because he makes Grace look like the fool that she is but he's also worked on both sides and offers honest no-shit, non-emotional assessment of cases). Here it is for you to enjoy.
GRACE: I think they're going to rest next week, that's what they're intimating. Of course, I don't know if that's going to happen. In California, Larry, it always takes longer than it does in any other state in the union. It's a phenomena.

CARDOZA: ...And I want to address something that Nancy said, and that's the speed of California courts. I know that she takes shots at our courts here a lot. I have never understood why do we worship speed. I mean, here Jackson is facing 20 years plus in state prison. The case is important, to both the district attorney's office, the alleged victims and to Jackson. So why do we have to do it quickly? Isn't it more important to get it right than to achieve speed.

KING: Well, what she -- Michael, was she saying, they have to do it quickly or was she just commenting they take it slow. Nancy, you want to respond? Let's let Nancy respond.

GRACE: The question it's more important to get a speedy verdict rather, as opposed to a true verdict is ridiculous. And if Michael can prove to me that California courts are not slower in their trials. Same trial, tried here in New York, Georgia it would move more quickly. I don't know what that ingredient is in California courtrooms. I've been there. I was there last week for Pete's sake. I feel strongly about justice being sought in California courtrooms. So, that assertion is ridiculous.

CARDOZA: Well, Nancy...

KING: David Willis -- I'm sorry, go ahead, Michael.

CARDOZA: That's right. And you always talk speed, and say we do it slow.

GRACE: No, I don't. I don't talk about speed.

CARDOZA: Look at what the judge is doing here. He's working -- he's working these attorneys awfully hard. I mean, they get 10 minute breaks. They're doing a forced march in this trial. So, why is it so slow? Why do you keep commenting on our courts?

GRACE: Because Larry asked me.

CARDOZA: (INAUDIBLE) done correctly here. It is done correctly here, and we get justice in our courts.

GRACE: OK. Michael.


Wednesday, April 20, 2005

Passion of the Academy

Armen's post-law school JAG options:

Air Force

Ballad of the Landlord

Since everyone seems to be in a "ohmagosh I need to find a new apartment/subletter/alien spaceship" kind of mood, I thought I'd post one of my favorite poems of all time.

Ballad of the Landlord
Langston Hughes

Landlord, landlord,
My roof has sprung a leak.
Don't you 'member I told you about it
Way last week?

Landlord, Landlord,
These steps is broken down...
When you come up youself
It's a wonder you don't fall down.

Ten Bucks you say I owe you?
Ten Bucks you say is due?
Well, that's Ten Bucks more'n I'll pay you
Till you fix this house up new.

What? You gonna get eviction orders?
You gonna cut off my heat?
You gonna take my furntirue and
Throw it in the Street

Um-huh! You talking high and mighty.
Talk on--till you get through.
You ain't gonna be able to say a word
If I land my fist on you.

Police! Police!
Come and get this man!
He's trying to ruin the government
And overturn the land!

Copper's whistle!
Patrol bell!

Precintnt Station.
Iron cell.
Headlines in press:


Lost in Translation

Bush: Our oil supplies can't meet the demands.

Translation: My stock portfolio has taken a beating.


Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Lest Ye be Judged

I love the South. First a Tennessee family judge threatens to take custody of a child away from AN AMERICAN woman of Mexican descent (naturalized citizen not that it should matter the kind of citizen one is). Among his reasons, the mom not speaking English is harming the child. Second, he forced her to take contraceptives to be more familiar with American lifestyle. Then the judge relented.

It's hard to seriously write anything about this, so please don't read any of the following as such. With respect to language, the judge basically had the right idea. But it's not other languages that are harming our kids, it's regional illiteracy perpetuated by dialects. New Yorkers need to be dealt with first. Tennessee and the rest of the South is no bastion of proper English either. Anyone who sounds like Jeff Foxworthy needs to go to family court to have the welfare of their children examined. Here on the West Coast parents need to be taught that the rest of the nation doesn't have time to hear their children say "like" 500 times in a single conversation. Lose it or lose the kid.

I must, however, disagree with the judge that using contraceptives is a great American activity. Aside from the whole First Amendment (freedom to practice religion) concerns (which some silly liberals might argue as more American than forcing someone to speak English or take the pill), this approach is not at all effective. As anyone who's read the official government information about contraceptives knows, they are not at all effective. Therefore she will just produce more un-American kids who are not at all suited to live in Tennessee. To truly be American, the judge should have made her do any of the following:

- Watch car racing.
- Cook various original American dishes
- Learn about Icons of American Film and TV.
- Make sure the daughter plays the most popular sport.
- And of course drive what most Americans drive.

Welcome to America, loyalty oaths to your left, McDonalds on your right. The hammer and sickel, always nearby.

Monday, April 18, 2005

Eminemesque Retort

[Warning, the following Blog post is rated BG 14: L, S, V. Some content may be inappropriate for bloggers with a maurity below 14 years of age due to language, sex, and violence.]

To the members of the Parents' Television Council:

Shut the fuck up before I fuckin' kill you.

A 2L-2L sign of the Apocalypse?

Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered weak and weary,
Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore...

Whether to write on for CLR, or tell a story about that chick named Lenore.

If you're in a similar dilemma, please note that De Novo is hosting a symposium on law 1 is devoted to alternatives to law review.


The Invisible Movement

First I want to apologize for the slow-down in posts, but I'm finally done with oral arguments and you can all be sure to see a flury once studying for finals (and the accompanying breaks) kick in. More substantively, there have been several critical posts at VC regarding Rosen's NYT article about the Constitution in Exile Movement.

Here's one that made me chuckle:

Amber Taylor on the "Fictitious" Constitution-in-Exile Movement: Over at Class Maledictorian, Harvard law student Amber Taylor comments on claims that there is a libertarian Constitution-in-Exile movement:
As someone who pretty much agrees with Richard Epstein on everything, I would be a card-carrying member of this movement if it existed. But it doesn't.
In light of Amber's post, it seems safe to predict that future New York Times coverage will claim the movement is thriving at Harvard.
Just worth pointing out that the *cough* "controversy" around the term and concept seem to be semantic. I.e. the arguments run as follows: well there's no organization devoted to a constitution in exile...or well we're not for getting rid of ALL jurisprudence since the New Deal. Are libertarians that insecure? I mean just come out and say that you think Social Security should be held unconstitutional. Minimum wage? Grossy unconstitutional. Unemployment insurance? A tool for the devil.

I must confess, I haven't had a chance to read the Rosen article but from what I gather it is pointing to arguments made by the likes of Richard Epstein, their impact, etc. Instead the only comeback the libertarian/right has is to pick on the nomenclature? Disappointing to say the least.

By the way, Classical Liberals, stop using that term. The ancient Athenians called and they want it back. Thanks.

Thursday, April 14, 2005

Quotent Quotables III

Well it's that time of the semester where students are panicking about exams, and the same panicking students need to create more space in their notes by finally posting amusing quotes from class on their blog. I'm not using anyone's name directly because then anyone can just search them, but I'll try to make it as unambiguous as possible. Without further ado, the quotes, entirely out of context.


From Prof. Civ Pro, whose last name is the same as the family in Married with Children.

“A ‘we can work it out approach’ to quote Lennon and McCartney.”

“And the person describes the ethics equivalent of an axe murderer.”

“In Fisons we have two smoking guns. These are the real things in smoking gun terms.”

“This is the rule in 59 states.”

“This is one of those cutely defunct department stores.” (SH Kress)

“Maybe you want three noted religious figures each with 20/10 vision of Ted Williams all of whom were figures in the civil rights movement and had a good view of the entrance.” (In re Adickes)

“How do we deal with jury trials when they’re so god-damn expensive?”

“Nothing like this existed in 1791 because unions were criminal conspiracies.”

“I’m watching the clock like a hawk.”

“Why do I do this? Because it costs a shit load of money…eh sorry a lot of money. I forgot I’m in class.”

“This is a typical Hollywood case. We should burst into Johnny Mercer’s ‘Hooray for Hollywood.’ My favorite line from that is, ‘Where you’re terrific even if you’re just good.’ And it’s still true today. Think Keanu Reeves.”

“You mean 'or is this just a civil procedure professor’s conceit?'”

"Whichever one these roll over? Ford, Suzuki?....that's sort of where the rubber meets the road in this doctrine. It just slipped out, I'm sorry."

"Phillip Morris was worried about this for a while. You know how in Men in Black when the aliens were ready to leave and they had the cartons of Marlboro with them? It was that bad."

“And so forth and so on.” 12 times since counting began in mid Feb.

From Immigration lecturer whose last name is one letter shy of Oakland A's GM.

“That was a very good question. But not for immigration purposes.”

“It’s ok to have fun during this even when your clients are miserable.”

“Not that I want them to be lovey dovey in my office. Sometimes that’s a fraud profile for me. ‘Stop that!’”

“In San Francisco anything goes. You wanna go renew your vows on a boat? Eh go ahead.”

“What seems like the crisis of the century in the beginning of your practice becomes a ‘oh that again’ later on.”

Prof. Int'l Trade, whose initials appear below

“Suppose you’re a clever North Korean businessman…and not in jail.”

“I’m a social scientist. And all social scientists want to be real scientists, and what real scientists would do is look to see if they are similar.”

“I don’t know the answer to that, but if I had to guess, it’s because American producers contribute a lot more to elections than foreign producers.”

AG: “Now who wants to say something that starts with, ‘[student name] is obviously wrong because…’”
Student: “That’s just too Hobbesian.”
AG: “That’s worse than saying she’s obviously wrong.”

“Room 122, it’s where all important trade discussions take place at Boalt”

“This is the second Sardines case to rise in the WTO. The humble sardine is rattling the cages of international trade.”


Prof. Property, visiting from Michigan.

“We’ll try to insert babies into the conveyance.”

“If like 20 people own one-tenth of it.”

“This is an empirical question for ME?”

“My neighbors claim I don’t really understand the nature of an easement so they claim I don’t need it since I can back in and out of my driveway. A court may buy that if it was an easement by prior use, but it’s an [grinding teeth together] EXRPESS! easement.”

“Aren’t there any heiresses here? Mr. Fletcher!”

Lastly, an anonymous student talking about his or her practice oral arguments.

"And then my mind erased and I had nothing in the brain."


Wednesday, April 13, 2005

You're on notice now...

Details for tomorrow:

Drink beer and eat pizza!

We’ll be teaching ourselves tomorrow’s Civ Pro assignment. And we’ll do a better job of it.

LaVals Northside (Hearst @ Euclid). Thursday Noon.

Also, everybody that missed the Wood Newton talk: I pity you. That hour easily surpassed any other hour I have spent at Boalt. I have not bought any new music in a while, but I sure will be tonight!

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Picking Classes...

Hey fellow bloggers (and anonymous Boalt community readers),

What classes do you plan to take? I ask because I would much rather be in a class with people I trust to stimulate discussion than to take a crapshoot and end up in a silent seminar...

So far, I propose striving for:

Con Law: S OR Fed. Courts
Income Tax I
Corporations I

and then, getting to the fun part of the schedule, any of:

Wine Law
Law & Ec Workshop
Accounting / FInancial Analysis
Adv. Con. Theory

and then back to work:

Mass Torts
Securities Regulation I
Internet Commerce
Legal Profession

Given the way the schedule shakes out, Civ. Pro II can go take itself.

Also, for those who lurk and have advice, please do leave it in the comments section.

Labels: ,

Breaking (into Lexis) News

Hot off the press (or computer hard drives) folks. The database service that allows you to search for such personal information as your law professor's shoe size has also been distributing user information.

And now for something completely different

To the best of my knowledge none of the co-bloggers have taken the time to single out a new blog that's of note..a practice that I want to encourage about as much as Earl Warren's juicy gossip [on that note, I actually see this blog turning into a Boalt version of Underneath their Robes. Hell Earl Warren can change his name and call himself CJOTUS Groupie]. But anywho, I want to point to Barely Legal. Now I'm not saying I agree with everything they say, but let's just say I nod my head a lot, slap my knees while laughing hysterically, smoke crystal meth, and snuggle with witnesses to the Michael Jackson case while I read the blog.

Here's a taste:

USNews has declared John Marshall law school to have the 3rd best legal writing program in the nation.

Legal Writing is the "great personality" of law school ranking compliments.


Monday, April 11, 2005

I Can Read His RIghteous Sentence...

... but only by dim and flaring lamps. Namely those at an ideal bar, where a pint is all we'd need to possess a table for at least an hour to have Civ Pro on Thursday. Yes, I'm calling myself on my promise - I'll honor the strike by not going to class, participating in class, or having the school hire another worker to video the class for me while I am skipping. So, that's means I'll be teaching myself some mre issue preclusion law, and I'd love to have you join me.

Since Civ Pro is my only Thursday class, there does not seem to me to be a good reason to have it at 8:30. Not even the porter in Macbeth would find 8:30 to be a reasonable time for sousing and civ pro (though that may be do the "and" in that sentence, not the "8:30"). My inclination would be to give it a go sometime in the early afternoon.

Of course, I can shuffle and juggle around other people's needs. If you wish to be my co-conspirator, comment on this (and not anonymously for I am an old-fashioned person not enamored of that aspect of the internet) or email me at my email address, which is very sensibly my first initial and last name, at berkeley (damn you spam robots!).

Who knows - if we have an awesome vibe, maybe it can be a finals thing too.

PS: ever so tangential link to Hitchens. Oh, and of course, tell your ma, tell your pa, our reviews goona grow, owah, owah... (meaning, tell your friends)

Sunday, April 10, 2005

Judge Bellerophon and his high-flying rhetoric

It is rare that I write "BLOG!" five times in the margins of a single case, but Gonzalez v. Banco Central Corp., 27 F. 3d 751 (1st Cir. 1994)(Opinion by Selya, J.), our reading for Civ Pro for Tuesday, presented such an opportunity. Without further ado, I present to you out of context lines from the case that would make co-blogger Earl Warren blush.

"Despite strong evidence of skullduggery (fn), the Rodriguez plaintiffs frittered away much of their case through a series of pretrial blunders."

"After silhouetting the Gonzalez plaintiff's suti against the backdrop of the completed Rodriguez litigation, Judge Laffitte..."

"We step back to gain a sense of perspective." (Then proceed to ignore SCOTUS precedent by calling it dictum).

"We appreciate that this is a murky corner of the law and caution the distric courts to tread ginerly..."

"The most familiar mechanism for extending res judicata to nonparties without savaging important constitutional rights is the concept of privity..."

"Although privity can be elusive, this case does not require us to build four walls around it."

"...but after close perscrutation of the record...neither stripe of privity exists here."

"what one might call in the vernacular, the power--whether exercised or not--to call the shots."

"As the proverb suggests, a picture is sometimes worth a thousand words."

"The attempt stalls. Following defendants' itinerary would require us to imbue the theory of virtual representation with a much greater cruising range than either hte law or the facts permit...virtual representation has only recently emerged as a vehicle for general nonparty preclusion."

"These pererrations, and the competing centrifugal and centripetal forces that account for them..." [note how centrifugal force is not really a force].

"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properites...See, e.g., Aerojet-General Corp v. Askew, 511 F.2d 710, 719 (5th Cir)...Despite such sweeping generalities, courts soon came to realize that, though virtual representation was not the old gray mare, neither should it be confused with Pegasus...For this reason, contemporary caselaw has placed the theory of virtual representation on a short tether, significantly restricting its range."

"The upshot is that..."

"Not surprisingly, then, the cases in which courts have dealt with the doctrine, taken as an array, are resistant to doctrinal rationalization in the form of a single elegant limiting princple of the 'one size fits all' variety.

"In the third place, the lack of a special type of close relationship between the two groups of plaintiffs (who are, for the most part, unrelated lambs purportedly fleeced by the same cadre of unscrupulous sheepherders) also weighs against a finding of virtual representation."

"This whipsawing placed appellants in an untenable position."

"Consequently, we hold that the theory of virtual representation cannot be galvanized to preclude appellants from maintaining their suit."

Since there was a definite horse/car/war theme in Judge Selya's opinion, I am now open to suggestions about possible theme(s) for my next post. Feel free to suggest some token prize as well in case I select yours.


Saturday, April 09, 2005

Numbers, Schmumbers...

There has been a lively discussion in the blogosphere (See Leiter, Volokh, Armen at De Novo et al.) about the US News rankings and whatnot. I was talking with a friend, an associate in a large D.C.-based, national firm, and she brought up two numbers that I found more stunning than any in the law school admissions debate:

Two years ago, this firm had approximately five-hundred lawyers at its D.C. office. Of the partners, 14 were women. Of those 14 female partners, only 1 (ONE) had children (a child, rather).

Now, part of these stats is generational: there are more women in law schools these days, so the numbers sticking it out in biglaw are likely to gradually go up. But another part, I'd venture (an uncontroversial speculation, I think), is biglaw's work style and culture. They're sacrificing a lot of talent (both male and female, probably) to maintain a work culture that clearly doesn't appeal to many. For myself, I wonder if I will be willing to join that culture for the long-term; for the industry, I wonder when the tipping point will arrive that they simply lose too much talent to sustain their huge billing rates (or will they pre-emptively take "the right" (whatever those are) steps to improve the situation before it reaches that point?).


Friday, April 08, 2005

Too good to be admitted

Oral arguments are in T minus 2.0 hours and I really can't add too much. But there has been discussion in the blawgsphere (I really hate this word) about schools waitlisting applicants who "appear" to be overly qualified. Please see my post at De Novo for a counterpoint. I'll add my thoughts about how this applies to Boalt (or if it should apply) later.

UPDATE: Ok now that I'm done with practice oral arguments I'd just like to add that with a 10% admit rate, someone would have to be out of his fucking mind to think that they are entitled to admission to Boalt just because they got in somewhere else.


Thursday, April 07, 2005

The Ides of Airbears

With the coming of stable wireless access in the classrooms (coming about 3 days before admit day), I find myself more and more in the business of writing e-mails than taking notes. Today the practice stabbed me in the back. While composing an e-mail I was called on in Civ Pro with less than 30 seconds left in class. I could blame it on our loss last night (putting us in a thee-way tie for the last playoff spot), or my laziness resulting in not doing the reading...but I'd rather just blame it on Brutus.

PS -- Note that the post below was written during the same class.

Save the Day(light Savings)

As popular as the discussion of the upcoming strike may be (I have a feeling the comments will continue through the upcoming week), this story really caught my eye for a couple of reasons. Congress is contemplating extending DST by two months (expanding it so that it runs from early March to late November) to save energy costs.

First, I think it's a bit ironic that daylight savings came into existence at a time when people were using lamps to light their homes yet with the introduction of electricity we still have not solved that problem (unless you're crazy enough, like me, to believe that nuclear power plants actually would solve a lot of these problems).

Second, I think there are quite a few other costs associated with the concept of DST that we do not take into account, let alone measure, when discussing this odd feature. The 24 time zones were created for the sake of international uniformity (I think). With the growing global economy, predicting time is VERY important, but literally taken for granted. Yet the pressure to reduce oil consumption is forcing countries to adopt different DST standards to fit their needs. If I need to be in Paris by 9 AM for a meeting, it's really not efficient to spend an hour researching EU daylight savings time rules. Granted, this will not be a factor most of the time.

On the other hand, what are the odds that people will continue to function much the same way as they do at Charles De Gaul then ask for the time.

UPDATE: Drum likes the idea but not the bill it is attached to.

Wednesday, April 06, 2005

Quotent Quotables 2

A friend's away message reads: "MLB -- sorry i accidentally kicked you in the balls. my bad."

I dare say that the above quote would be better attributed to Jose Canseco.

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

10 LBs

A few of my own impressions of the Lakhdar Brahimi remarks, and the blog discussion generally:

1. I find myself in the unfamiliar and uncomfortable position of defending the UN when I note that Earl Warren's rhetorical question: "has the UN even influenced, let alone made, a major post-war decision?" is profoundly unfair. The UN is an organization composed of and directed by members. If a "major post-war decision" has not emerged from the UN (a claim I think could be contested but don't want to bother doing the research), that is really the fault of the membership, not the "UN" per se. Why has the UN been ineffectual in the past few years? Because of fractures in the membership (aggravated in part by the Bush administration). I don't really like the UN for a variety of reasons, and I agree that it hasn't had many high-profile successes in recent years (though the fairly successful elections in East Timor and Afghanistan are notable), but to criticize the UN administration for the failures of its membership strikes me as unfair.

2. That point aside, ad hominem attacks against my fellow co-bloggers such as this one are not appreciated.

3. I enjoyed Brahimi's remarks very much. I found him a candid, engaging and often funny speaker -- certainly more candid and engaging than your average still-serving diplomat.

4. That said, I didn't find that he made many "controversial" or non-obvious points, though others I have spoken to disagree with me. Looking at Brahimi's main points:
a) All political players -- even the unsavory -- should be incorporated into a post-conflict political process: That's certainly true, and few diplomats of Brahimi's stature would really contest that claim. Sure, many real human rights campaigners don't like that Dostum or Ismail Khan are involved in Afghan politics now, but I don't think most diplomats would quibble with their inclusion in the political process. Diplomats and governments are used to dealing with unsavory but powerful political actors. Rarely do governments refuse to deal with political leaders on human rights grounds (and often when they cite human rights, it's just a pretense masking other reasons -- See Castro, Fidel; Hussein, Saddam; Iran).
b) Elections are not a panacea and do not alone resolve underlying problems of post-conflict societies: this seems to me pretty accepted truth these days -- indeed, it is precisely why the US and others have spent so much money on security to help stabilize the new governments in Afghanistan and Iraq. That said, I think Brahimi made a very interesting and thoughtful point regarding the cost of elections, and the possibility of building off of models that are different than "western" models (i.e. India, Malaysia, etc.) that might be more cost-effective and culturally appropriate.

5. I suppose what was most unsatisfying about the talk was that beyond "Every situation is different and should be handled differently", Brahimi offered little prescriptive advice, let alone a blueprint, of how to best manage a post-conflict transition. He urged bringing all political players to the table. Fine. But we do that in Angola in 1992 and it blows up in our face; in Afghanistan in 2002 (minus the Taleban) and it seems to work fairly well. He cautioned that we must take a long-view of reconciliation and let local politics play out, with rather hands-off "advice" from outsiders such as himself. This is the same formula that the international community has used for over a decade, and it has a mixed record of successes and failures. I was hoping he would draw a few clearer lessons on what worked and what didn't from his career, rather than prescribe the same measures only done "better" or "more sensitively". Perhaps it is foolish to wish for more prescriptive advice, in light of the complexities of post-conflict situations, but I still do.

6. My friends who know Afghanistan better than I found Brahimi's staunch defense of Ismail Khan both surprising and satisfying. They share his enthusiasm for Khan as a "doer", and say that he (Khan) has been unfairly criticized by many foreign organizations in Afghanistan. Just interesting to note.

7. Brahimi's insistence on using "faction leaders" rather than "warlords" was an interesting semantic point. Brahimi justified this because of the "faction leaders" supposed political standing. I agree that "warlords" does not adequately capture all of the many hats Ismail Khan has worn or Ahmed Shah Massoud wore in his life. I prefer the term "field commander" over faction leader, because it recognizes that these men earned their reputations on battlefields, and the respect they still undeniably command among the populace is generally not out of superior conventional political skills or policies or platforms, but out of the militias they continue to control. Regardless of what we're calling them, I agree with Brahimi that these leaders need to be incorporated into the political process. Again, I don't think that is truly a controversial opinion, as that has indeed been what has happened in Afghanistan (and to a lesser extent, with the insurgency still ongoing, in Iraq).

8. I thought I'd get to 10, but it looks like I am struggling. I'm sure I've forgotten some things, and much of this may not make much sense, or may be seen as too nit-picky, or a misinterpretation of Brahimi's remarks. For any and all of those, I apologize.

9. On an only loosely related note, I thought it was interesting that Dean Edley showed up for this but not for Admit Day. Edley arrived at Boalt with something of a reputation for grandstanding. He is not doing a particularly good job of disproving that reputation. I am generally an Edley supporter, but as several classmates have commented over the past few days, the Dean's PR skills could use some improvement. I hope to continue this discussion in future posts.

10. It's Two for Tuesday at a bar near you! Why the heck are you still reading this long-a$$ed blog post?!

Brahimi's Lullaby

Liveblogging talk by Lakhdar Brahimi, sponsored by the Berkeley J. Int'l L.

12:37 -- Homeless guy referred to earlier is present. But there is no food served, heh.

12:38 -- Introduction by BJIL co-editor-in-chief Will Trachman

- Turn off cell phones morons

12:39 -- Intro by Dean Edley (I guess he does exist in person)

- LB an accomplished and effective statesman who will now work in Sudan.

- Prof. Buxbaum very accomplished also

12:43 – Prof. Buxbaum

- LB was envoy to Afghanistan for three years.

- In 2000 he issued a report guiding UN operation in war-time situations

- Brokered the end of Lebanese Civil War

- Indulging people of his generation to talk about LB’s beginnings in the anti-colonial movements of 50 years ago. LB grew up in Algerian anti-colonial movement. Under 30, he was representative to Arab league and then Amb. to Egypt. He became foreign minister of his own country before moving to the UN.

12:49 – Lakhdar Brahimi

- First off will not be talking about Iraq as much. “It is a bit dangerous to talk about Iraq these days.” He will talk enough about Afghanistan. Thanks the Boalt faculty and students because it is the fashion to bash the UN justifiably or unjustifiably. LB also wants to recognize colleagues who’ve helped him.

- Fall of Berlin Wall or 9/11 common ways of starting talk about international affairs, but he will resist the temptation. Just recently Kofi Annan released a report on the protection of freedom almost 2 years to the day from the fall of Baghdad. There are some 40 countries that are experiencing or have experienced conflict in the last 15 years. The sensible thing for LB to do would be to share a few thoughts and a few impressions that have stayed with him over the years. “Rather than attempt to rise to the high academic levels these walls are accustomed to, which I humbly confess are not within my reach” I shall remain within the role of the practitioner with my accent which Arabs find too French and the French find too Arabic. His talk will revolve around elections and dictatorships.


- Referred to as the exit strategy par excellence. In 90s it was questioned whether elections could stand alone as a process without other factors that go into stability. In Haiti elections failed to bring stability that Hatians were credited with. US and Europe spent millions on elections and today Aristide is again a refugee and there is yet again a peacekeeping mission in the country and a new election scheduled. In Angola in 92 the election was declared free and fair by US, EU, and Pan-African Union, but the country quickly plunged into a civil war for 10 years.

- Cost of elections. Every vote will cost a min $7, but up to $10. This does not include expenses on security (e.g. Iraq). In Afgh. security costs were nearly $100 mil. For the parliamentary elections donors are expected to contribute $148 mil for voting. This does not match US standards where a sen spends $70 mil on a campaign. But Afgh. does not have the resources to spend $250 mil every four years on elections. A credible, viable solution is necessary to ensure future elections. Such a solution exists but it is found in India and Malaysia. 8 million people voted in Afgh. but 600 million people voted in India. The UN is at long last looking to India about running massive elections in hostile and often contentious environments.

- In his discussion of elections, we might detect an obsession with his life-long plank against foreign rule. For this he does not apologize. If we are willing to look, it is not hard to find locals ready to take on the role of governing, the role that foreign powers often do not want to give up.


- It is hard to distinguish between wrongdoers and good-doers. In Afgh. he did not use the word warlord, but instead used “faction leaders.” He does not mean there were no warlords. There are too many of them. He is also not arguing for blanket immunity for these warlords. Dostum first fought as a Soviet mercenary. He then switched sides so many times that he probably does not remember when he fought, with whom, and against what enemy. He got 1 million votes. He probably got votes from most Uzbeks, but there were financial and fear factors. Another warlord is Ismael Khan. He ran “Hirat” (sp?) as if he owned the place. He collected all customs duties. He is profoundly conservative. He did not tolerate dissent or women in NGOs or in the UN. But there is more to the man. He was a patriarch and a hero of the resistance to the USSR occupation. This was the only city that the Soviets had to leave. He is to this day a doer rather than a talker. He spent a great deal of money to make the city the best run and the most beautiful. He is deeply religious and people are not wrong to compare him to Taliban. But he is committed to the education to women. Some wanted him to be removed from the city early but it was not possible. In 2004 he was finally given a ministerial position in Kabul. UN positions were attacked in the city when he was ordered removed because his loyalists believed the UN responsible for his removal. In his case national reconciliation are better than retribution. Today Karzai is calling for efforts to break the rule of warlord while at the same time calling for national reconciliation. Afgh. needs to strike a balance between forgiveness/reconciliation on one hand and justice and retribution on the other hand. S. Africa came close to finding that balance under Mandela and DeKlerk. Peace in Afgh. will not be complete without the full participation of former Taliban who are ready to participate peacefully in the rebuilding of Afgh. Exclusion of Taliban from Bonn Conference in Nov/Dec. 2001 was the original sin as per LB. It would not have been possible to bring Mullah Omar to Bonn, but it was not fair or wise to demonize Taliban so early. LB met MO. MO soft-spoken and poorly educated. No administrative background. Though MO and Taliban were aided by Pak. and S. Ara. they would not have gotten 90% support in Afgh. if there was wide-spread hostility to them among the masses. The big mistake of the Taliban was the hospitality they gave to foreigners like Osama. These influenced their actions such as the destruction of the Buddhist statues. The overwhelming majority of former Taliban would be willing to go home if they are given the respect and recognition of their families. It is important that when we go into a country raging with conflict that we listen to the people and not let our own biases cloud our judgment and agenda. We must not forget that in the real world, esp. in messy post-conflict situations we must make decisions about peace that might work in the short term but not in the long.


- Why were Taliban welcomed? Welcomed because the rule following the Soviets was not pleasant to anyone. Int’l presence now has moderated power of warlords, a function the Taliban performed. Omar, et al are calling for the overthrow of America because they are occupying, but people are not listening because they don’t consider US an occupying force. In Iraq people are listening to such calls.

- Question inaudible…TAL (transitional admin law) organized to assure Kurds they will have autonomy. Also problem of organizing election too soon, which led to hastily formed groups rather than political parties, except for the Kurds. LB partly responsible for the unrepresentative government under Allawi.

- Thinking about creating commissions or amnesty programs in countries? Truth commission in S. Afr took 5 years to form. DeKlerk stated that he could have challenged the election in 100 different constituencies. But what for? The whole purpose was to end apartheid. The election was almost a formality. Elections have to come at the right time in an integrated political process. If they come too early they may not succeed. So the question of tribunals is who will organize them? Who will be taken to court? Also we often claim to know the will of the people but which people? He refers to these as the 50 people who speak English. They know the vocabulary we love to hear here in the US.

- Fear of Taliban coming back? And why praise Khan? Doesn't think that T will come back but Afgh will remain a conservative country for a while. Democracy not a word he uses very often because he thinks it is a process that takes a long time to take hold. Khan has done many wrongs but he has not been guilty of mass killings but he is a ruthless dictator. He is a trained military officer. He has proved in Hirat that he is a builder. He can be a very good minister, but the problem is that he wants to be the interior minister.

- How can we defend the UN and acknowledge the complexity of IR while presenting it to people in a simple way? Sweeping changes and quick fixes do not work. You are working with real men and women, people who have fought for their country or killed in their country. You have to understand that it is not simple and that you do not have a solution--they have the solution. It is a very arrogant project because you think you can make people understand what they want much better than they do. At the same time it is humble and modest and careful. About the UN, relevant or irrelevant...look the US government said the UN is irrelevant because the UNSC refused to support the invasion of Iraq. Three months later the US was back at the UN asking for support. A year later the US was back at the UN saying we cannot form a government without you. It is this image of the UN that you can use to support the org. At the same time we are human and make mistakes. E.g. in the oil for food program he is certain some have done wrong. But he hopes we can look at oil for food and ask why we had it in the first place. We had it because there were sanctions. What was the effect of the sanctions? Was it true that 500,000 children died because of the sanctions? Why did we not know that Saddam was making money off the sanctions? Where were the press at that time when Saddam was making money? Why did people not listen to the UN when it said the sanctions were not working but were hurting the people instead? Where were all these people who are now shedding tears for Iraq? Of course if you look at Fox News you can see they know what facts are and how bad Kofi Annan is.

1:45 END

Post Scrip

I will edit the mistakes (which I'm sure are many in number) later. Boothe was nearly full, so attendance was not at all a problem, despite the lack of food.

Monday, April 04, 2005

Lakhdar he goes

VERY IMPORTANT! Canned message follows...

The Berkeley Journal of International Law Annual Riesenfeld Symposium will be held on Tuesday, April 5th, at 12:30 PM in Booth Auditorium. Special Advisor to the Secretary General of the United Nations Lakhdar Brahimi will be discussing the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Democracy Promotion, and the Future of the United Nations.

Introducing Mr. Brahimi will be last year's Riesenfeld Honoree, Professor Dick Buxbaum, as well as Dean Edley.

Please be sure to arrive promptly at 12:30 PM on Tuesday.

As an added bonus, I will attempt to liveblog the event (if I can get out of Int'l Trade in time). As a favor, if anyone on BJIL, or anyone else from Boalt who will attend the event (yes, including that homeless guy who always mooches on our free food...the one who probably has gone to enough law talks to get tenure at a T1 law school) can save me a seat I'd greatly appreciate it. If you so volunteer, please e-mail me at my berkeley addy.

More substantively, Mr. Brahimi is the reason why we had election in Iraq in January of this year, as opposed to 20XX. Every time Bush gets credit for the election it reminds of him getting credit for the 9/11 commission.

Boalt of Fame

That's right gentle readers, Nuts and Boalts has officially been inducted into the Boalt of Fame, formally known as the Boalt Archives. In this month's exhibit, the archives showcase the various ways that Boalt students have used EC activities to get through law school. Of note, the 1963 Musical, "Nuts in Boalts."

Check it out.

Also if you are a Boalt student with your own blog, please be sure to let the archivist know so that he can printout and store your blog.


Friday, April 01, 2005

Charlie's Admits

Today is admit day for Boalt. Rumor has it that Dean Edley could not speak to the admitted class personally so he spoke to them through a prerecorded video tape. I hope the people at Boalt Briefs are on top of this.

UPDATE: As the comment below states, and as I later learned, Dean Edley did not speak to admits per se. However, if you are an admit, you should be rest assured that you can trust everything he says (no sarcasm). He's like The Professor on Giligan's Island...he's never wrong. Slight miscalculations here and there, but never wrong.

Oh and yes, the technological prowess of the number 1 law and tech program IS as advertised. On the flip side, so is the weather.

Labels: , ,

Outbreak (of laughter)

...shall occur if you visit, the Fed website devoted to depriving people of the right (or left) to get laid. I basically read bits and pieces and just started laughing in front of the computer. For example, under the "[NOT] using a condom" section, the site states:

"Tell your teen son or daughter that not having vaginal, oral or anal sex protects 100% of the time."

Except when you fingerbang someone with little red sores. Unimaginative sexless bastards!!! Anyway, I'm sure the gentle readers will find other amusing reads...feel free to post them.