Was Troll Tracker a Journalist?

The now infamous case of the anonymous blogger known as Patent Troll Tracker and the lawyer who offered a reward to unmask him is an object lesson in the potential perils and pitfalls of legal blogging. As we all know, the blogger unmasked himself, revealing that he is Rick Frenkel, a lawyer at Cisco. But that was hardly the end of this blogosphere soap opera. First, two Texas lawyers sued Frenkel and Cisco for defamation, a suit that remains pending. Then, lawyers at the firm Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro -- the firm founded by the lawyer who offered the reward in the first place, Raymond P. Niro -- sought to depose Frenkel in connection with their suspicion that he was in cahoots with the firm Fish & Richardson in its lawsuit against its former partner and now Niro client Scott Harris.

A Gordian knot, to be sure. But IP Law & Business reporter Joe Mullin is shedding some light on the situation through his blog The Prior Art, where he has obtained various pleadings from the federal court in San Jose, Calif., relating to the Niro firm's efforts to depose Frenkel. He has three posts so far based on the documents, with another promised for later today:

• Part One: Scott Harris' lawyers drop Troll Tracker deposition demand.
• Part Two: Patent Troll Tracker speaks—and vows to return.
• Part Three: Is the Patent Troll Tracker a reporter?

This last one is particularly interesting. It details Frenkel's efforts to invoke the protection of California's journalist shield law, contending that he is a "non-party lawyer-journalist" and the deposition would require him to testify "regarding confidential sources and unpublished information." Forcing him to testify, Frenkel writes in court papers, "would result in a serious detriment to Frenkel’s future ability to gather and disseminate news." Niro's response, Mullin writes, "sizzles and jumps through Frenkel's various sins, calling him unqualified, unethical, threatening, a corporate stooge for Cisco, a writer of devilish anagrams and haikus, and most importantly, not a reporter." Then Mullin weighs in with his own opinion, which is that Frenkel's blogging most decidedly did qualify him to be considered a reporter:

It's a good question how far the reporter's privilege should be extended; not everyone with a domain name can be allowed to evade a civil subpoena. But I don't think Frenkel's blog was even a close call. There's no doubt in my mind that Frenkel was reporting the news, and will continue to be if and when he re-starts his blog; more than anything, he was my competitor.

I have to agree with Mullin's take on the blogger-as-journalist question. Meanwhile, I recommend that you keep an eye on Mullin's blog for further developments regarding the Patent Troll Tracker.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 9, 2008 at 10:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Two Podcasts: Am Law 100 and E-Discovery

The Am Law 100 is out, The American Lawyer magazine's annual ranking of the nation's highest-grossing law firms. All tolled, they brought in a record $64.5 billion and marked their best five-year run ever. So what do the numbers mean and what can they tell us about the future economic health of the legal industry? This week on the legal-affairs podcast Lawyer2Lawyer, we discuss the survey with two guests who are well-acquainted with its findings: Aric Press, the magazine's editor-in-chief, and Bruce  MacEwen, consultant to law firms on strategic and economic  issues and author of the blog Adam Smith, Esq. You can get more details about the show and listen to or download it from this page.

Elsewhere on the podcast front, Monica Bay, editor-in-chief of Law Technology News, talks about e-discovery with her guest, Tom O'Connor, director of the Legal Electronic Document Institute. They focus on the question of how best to manage electronic documents and make the leap from hard-copy Bates numbering to digital equivalents. O'Connor tells Bay that it is time for lawyers to rethink how they process and review electronic documents. He and Bay also discuss this month's Louisiana Bar Solo and Small Firm Technology Conference in New Orleans, which they both attended. Listen to or read more about this podcast at the Legal Talk Network.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 9, 2008 at 09:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A Case Study in Crisis PR

I just finished reading, Stop the Presses: The Crisis and Litigation PR Desk Reference, by Richard S. Levick and Larry Smith of Levick Strategic Communications. Drawing on a mix of experience and common sense, the authors provide practical advice for businesses and law firms facing media challenges to their reputations or brands. So the issue of crisis PR was very much in my mind when I picked up yesterday's Boston Globe and read that a former Bingham McCutchen associate, Michelle Moor, was claiming the firm failed to promptly investigate her allegation that she had been drugged at a firm holiday party, that another female associate had been drugged and raped a year earlier by a Bingham employee, and that a Bingham employee remarked at a firm dinner that he enjoyed giving women date-rape drugs and having sex with them. The story was also reported by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly and on Law.com.

Needless to say, this was a made-for-the-blogosphere story, where it was soon picked up by the Wall St. Journal's Law Blog, which called it a "strange and frightening little tale from Boston," by Above the Law, which asked, "At what kind of firm dinner does an attorney feel comfortable talking about taking advantage of passed-out women?" and by the ABA Journal news blog, under the headline, "Lawyers Drugged at Bingham Events, Ex-Associate says." Here at Legal Blog Watch, my colleague Carolyn Elefant also picked up on it, questioning whether Bingham acted on the former associate's complaint as it would have advised a client to do.

Here was a PR crisis if ever there was one. So what would Levick and Smith advise? Not to put words in their mouths, but as the story unfolded, a few points from their book seemed salient:

• Don't explain, narrate. "Explanations sound like excuses," they write. "Instead, leaders describe the steps they've taken, and the steps they're going to take to solve the problem."
• Go beyond what is expected. "If consumers are waiting for an apology, leaders go further and provide a full-blown bill of rights. If regulators want information, leaders provide more than what the law requires."
• "Have an alternative story to tell: positive, equally impressive, equally important."

Before I go any further, in the interest of full disclosure I have to say that Bingham's PR director, Claire Papanastasiou, is a former colleague and a long-time friend. I have not discussed this story with her and have no idea what role she played other than the formal statement she issued.

That said, Bingham's handling of the situation seemed to be a textbook example of crisis PR done right. First it issued a statement, published on Above the Law, which made three key points: 1. that it took the complaint "extremely seriously," 2. that it acted "diligently, responsibly and fairly" in investigating the complaint, and 3. that it "went beyond what is expected," as the Levick book counsels, and had developed and was providing its staff with  personal-safety training. Later, the firm's general counsel, William Southard, sent an e-mail to the entire staff that provided more details about the firm's investigation and response. Among the key points here: the firm wanted to investigate the matter immediately but held off at Michelle Moor's request, the eventual investigation was unable to determine the drug's source, the firm had initiated personal-safety training for all lawyers and staff, the other associate alleged to have been drugged had contacted the firm and indicated that was "fundamentally inaccurate," and the firm had investigated and terminated the employee whom Moor alleged had made inappropriate comments over dinner.

Southard's e-mail was "internal" and we can only guess at whether he thought it would be leaked to a blogger such as Above the Law's David Lat. But we do know that a day that started with Lat referring to the "worst holiday office party ever" ended with him writing that there are two sides to every story and that Bingham seemed to have "handled this difficult situation with sensitivity." Bingham took control of the story, presented an equally (if not more) important alternative story, and showed that its response went beyond expectations through a serious investigation, termination of one employee and institution of firm-wide training. Levick and Smith, I suspect, would approve.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 9, 2008 at 08:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Will India Open Its Borders to Foreign Law Firms?

We've posted previously on the huge market for legal process outsourcing providers in India as well as on firms trying to position themselves for business opportunities should India open its borders to foreign firms.

Along this same theme, last week's issue of The Economist carried a detailed story about the Indian legal market. (H/T Blog of the American Constitutional Society.)

As we've noted previously, India does not permit foreign firms to open offices within the country. Though the prohibition has been in place for nearly fifty years, back in the 1990s, Ashurst, a British firm, Chadbourne & Parke and White & Case apparently perceived some ambiguity because they went ahead and opened offices in India. The Indian lawyers sued and last week, India's High Court judges were due to hear argument on how the rule should be interpreted.

So why don't Indian lawyers want foreign firms playing on their turf?  Quite simply, they fear the competition -- a fear that seems well-founded, given existing regulations that apply to Indian firms. As the Economist article describes:

Strict rules have stymied growth while other firms around the world have been able to develop into global organisations. Indian firms are not allowed to have more than 20 partners, cannot advertise their services via websites, and cannot even give someone a business card unless it has been specifically requested. The big global firms, with their vast resources and long experience of international transactions, make fearsome opponents....Litigators, who make up the majority of lawyers in India, are concerned for other reasons. They occupy an important position in Indian society as the guardians of democracy and are associated with independence from the old British Empire.

In the meantime, global firms aren't just waiting around for the doors to open. Many are heading to Indian law colleges to pick the cream of the crop. Firms will employ these Indian graduates at their existing offices overseas, with the hopes of sending them home to run India-based offshoots if and when the legal market opens up.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on May 8, 2008 at 12:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sex, Drugs and Lawsuits at Boston Law Firm

This story about an associate who claims that her law firm failed to investigate her complaint that she had been drugged at a firm holiday party, and that another associate had been drugged and raped, seems like a plot out of a TV show like Boston Legal -- but unfortunately, it's not. 

According to the article, yesterday, the associate, Michelle Moor, filed a discrimination complaint at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, asserting that the firm did not take her allegations seriously. The complaint describes that Moor had two glasses of wine at the firm holiday party.  Later, feeling ill, she went to an emergency room, where a blood test revealed she had ingested Tegretol, an antiseizure medication that can cause memory loss when mixed with alcohol.  When Moor later told a more senior associate about the incident, the other associate confided that she had been raped by a Bingham employee the year before and reported the incident to the police.  She did not, however, tell the firm, for fear of not being promoted.  Subsequently, Moor reported both incidents to the firm's human resources officer, who said that the firm would investigate.  Later, Moor overhead a discussion where a Bingham employee revealed that he enjoyed having sex with women who were unconscious and that he knew where to get date-rape drugs.  Moor brought this information to the human resources office as well.  Eventually, Moor left the firm over concerns for her safety -- and thereafter, the firm issued a notice to employees about the drugging incident.

If Bingham were representing a company where an employee reported the type of conduct that Moor did, I'm certain that they'd advise their client to undertake a full investigation of the incident, collect statements and take remedial action if necessary.   Likewise, I'm guessing that Paul Hastings would have advised its clients not to act so insensitively in terminating a potentially protected employee.  Why don't law firms take the same advice that they'd render to their clients?

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on May 8, 2008 at 12:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Changing of the Blog-Guard

OK, so maybe it's not as big a deal as changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace, but these days, changing of the guard, i.e., the creator or writer, of a popular law blog is significant enough to warrant a press release.  At least, that's what labor and employment law firm Ford Harrison did to announce the departure of Julie Elgar, a firm attorney and editor of the firm's popular legal blog, That's What She Said which is based on the hit NBC show, The Office. Elgar, who is leaving the firm to go in-house at a corporation, will be replaced by Troy Foster, a partner in the Phoenix office who has previously served as a guest-blogger for the site.

The transition at That's What She Said reminds us that bloggers, particularly those at popular sites, need to keep in mind an exit strategy.  If you or your firm stopped blogging, what would happen to the site?  Could you replace the original creator, or would that damage the personality of the blog? 

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on May 8, 2008 at 12:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

More Non-Equity Partners = Lower PPP

When The American Lawyer released its Am Law 100 report last week, many noticed a correlation between increased PPP (profits per partner) on the one hand and the decline in the number of equity partners and growth in the category of non-equity partners on the other.  This correlation might lead some to assume that law firms with a higher percentage of non-equity partners will have larger PPP's, because there are fewer partners taking a piece of the profit pie.

But as Bruce MacEwen convincingly argues, the truth is that firms with a larger percentage of non-equity partners have lower PPPs overall.  The reason?  As MacEwen describes:

As it turns out, what comes with introducing a non-equity tier is a subtly changed dynamic in the incentive set facing your talent.  Firms with a single-tier partnership attract the true Type A's:  Those of us who have never finished anywhere but at the top of a class and have no intention of starting to do otherwise.  But the two-tier firms hold out a veiled alternative:  If you keep your nose clean and work (reasonably but not insanely) hard, you might find yourself taking home (say)  $400,000 per year, adjusted for inflation, for the duration.   And you won't have to kill yourself in either billable hours or business generation.

As MacEwen explains further, non-equity partners cost the most and are also less productive than either partners or associates. 

Sure, there are reasons to establish non-equity partnership tracks -- perhaps to hold on to specific individuals or to facilitate work-life balance.  But increasing revenues and boosting profitability isn't one of them.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on May 8, 2008 at 12:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Law Prof's E-mail is Campaign Issue

Robert M. Bastress, a professor at West Virginia University College of Law, is campaigning for a seat on the West Virginia Supreme Court. In March, he denied accusations that he was using university resources in his campaign, which state law forbids him from doing. So the West Virginia Record filed an FOIA request and obtained his law school e-mail. The newspaper found that, in fact, Bastress had used his e-mail account to conduct campaign business and to solicit support for his campaign, but only to a limited degree.

In his defense, Bastress told the Charleston Daily Mail that he did not initiate any of the messages and was only responding to messages he received. "I hit 'reply.' It was an unthinking response." If anything, he says, the e-mails show he is not using his law school office as a campaign headquarters. And if turnabout is fair play, Bastress is now calling on his opponent, incumbent Justice Spike Maynard, to release his own e-mails to the media. The Associated Press has filed a lawsuit seeking to obtain Maynard's e-mails.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 7, 2008 at 10:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Depression Among Lawyers: Chicken or Egg?

Lawyer depression is one of those topics that seems to reappear on a regular basis here at Legal Blog Watch, and the latest sighting comes by way of an article this month in the California Bar Journal, "Depression Takes a Heavy Toll on Lawyers." Consider this excerpt:

According to a Johns Hopkins University study, lawyers suffer the highest rate of depression among workers in 104 occupations. A University of Washington study found that 19 percent of lawyers suffered depression compared to 3 percent to 9 percent in the general population. And a University of Arizona study of law students found that they suffer eight to 15 times the anxiety, hostility and depression of the general population.

Richard Carlton, deputy director of the State Bar of California's Lawyer Assistance Program, sees those numbers and says, "There's something about the practice of law that attracts a certain personality that is prone to experiencing these problems." But is it the chicken or the egg? Is it that law attracts people who are prone to depression or that those who choose law find themselves depressed by their work? As the California LAP's director, Janis Thibault, puts it, "I've never seen such a lonely profession -- the inability to connect with other people at a deep level because there's so much of an adversarial relationship."

Tim Willison, a licensed clinical therapist who works with the California bar, says that lawyers typically come to him in their 40s and 50s because the pressures they face have reached the boiling point. "It's cumulative," he says, "there's a creeping paralysis." How could anybody, he wonders, be happy in such a demanding, high-pressure job? His observations would seem to lend support to the theory that law tends to be a depressing job, as opposed to lawyers tending towards depression. Therapy, of course, is part of the answer for lawyers suffering from depression. But the article suggests that another route out from under depression might be for the lawyer to refocus on personal and interpersonal matters -- on personal growth, close relationships, helping others and improving their communities. Those who do that, research shows, tend to be happier and more satisfied with their lives.

Your thoughts? Why are lawyers more depressed than others? What, if anything, can they do about it?

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 7, 2008 at 09:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

RIAA Lead Lawyer Named to Bench

Richard L. Gabriel, the Denver lawyer who has led the recording industry's litigation battles against file sharing and music downloading, will soon be singing a different song. Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter appointed Gabriel this week to a newly created seat on the Colorado Court of Appeals, effective July 1. A partner with the law firm Holme Roberts & Owen, Gabriel has been national lead counsel for the Recording Industry Association of America in its lawsuits to put an end to what it contends is illegal music distribution. He has personally appeared as lead counsel in most of the best known of these cases, including the only one that has gone to trial.

Not surprisingly, the peer-to-peer fans at p2pnet are not happy about the news, not because they'll miss going up against him, but because they question his ability to be impartial. The p2pnet post on his appointment describes him as an "attack lawyer" who RIAA used "to terrorize scores of innocent American men, women and even children." Another person not likely to be thrilled about the appointment: Gabriel's frequent adversary, Ray Beckerman, author of the blog Recording Industry vs. The People.

Gabriel is a 1987 graduate of the University of Pennsylvania law school and received his bachelor's degree from Yale University in 1984. After law school, he was a law clerk to U.S. District Judge Frederick Motz in Maryland and was city prosecutor for Lafayette, Colo., before joining his current firm in 1990. The appointment to the bench is for a provisional two-year term, after which it will be for Colorado voters to decide whether to retain him. He will earn a salary of $124,092.

We interviewed Gabriel in November 2007 for our Lawyer2Lawyer podcast. You can hear that interview from this page.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 7, 2008 at 09:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Blawg Review #158

If you haven't seen it already, Blawg Review #158 is up and running at the Mommy Blawg, with a theme of "Midwives and the Law" in honor of International Midwives' Day. Along these lines, Blawg Review #158 reports on the birth of a law section for Guy Kawasaki's baby, Alltop, a web-based aggregator for blogs that doesn't require an RSS reader.  And there's also this apt post by Anne Reed of Deliberations, about whether a judge is required to strike his own mother from the jury. (Answer: he's not, at least not in Wisconsin.)

Be sure to check out these posts as well as all of the others covered in Blawg Review #158.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on May 6, 2008 at 12:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Can a Practitioner Run a Law School?

Last week, University of Miami Law Professor Michael Froomkin blogged that having a law practitioner serve as a law school dean sounds like a better idea than it is.  Among other things, Froomkin wrote that practitioners lack the academic credentials to command the respect of serious law scholars and don't have the administrative or management skills unique to running an academic institution.

Well, apparently, the Paul M. Herbert Law Center of Louisiana State University didn't get the message that practitioners may not be well suited to run a law school.  Ninth months ago, the school hired former Gibson Dunn partner,  Jack Weiss, who's profiled here, as its law school chancellor.  According to the profile, Weiss' early days were rough:

He ruffled some feathers among faculty members who thought Weiss lacked sufficient academic credentials to lead the law school, coming as he did from a law practice environment rather than a law education environment. He also ran afoul of some faculty members by going against a recommendation to grant tenure to a [now former] law center professor, Alberto Zuppi.

Weiss has worked to gain the respect of academics, and he's implementing programs to increase diversity and provide more scholarships for students.

Can practicing lawyers head law schools -- and should law schools seek them out?  Send your comments below.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on May 6, 2008 at 11:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Can Law Firms Silence Terminated Associates?

In the Internet Age, everyone lives in a fishbowl -- and law firms are no exception.   As I've posted previously, it used to be that terminated or otherwise aggrieved associates would slip gently into the night, fearing that a highly-publicized lawsuit or outcry against the firm could kill their careers.  These days, however, associates realize that firms suffer adverse publicity when word of a termination hits high-traffic sites like Above the Law -- and that they can use the threat of disclosure as leverage to negotiate better terms of departure.

So what's a law firm to do? Some firms have proposed mandatory arbitration clauses, which may shield the gory details of a dispute from the spotlight. In contrast to a judicial proceeding, an arbitration does not have a public docket.   

Now it seems that other law firms are proposing "non-disparagement clauses" to prevent disgruntled, terminated employees from speaking ill of the firm after they're handed their walking papers.  As David Lat reports at Above the Law, Paul Hastings tried the non-disparagement approach after terminating an associate shortly after she suffered a miscarriage.  Lat published the associate's vent in full (apparently, the firm downgraded her performance review shortly before axing her) as well as the non-disparagement agreement. 

Generally speaking, non-disparagement agreements are enforceable, says Frank Pasquale at Concurring Opinions.  Even so, they won't work, where, as in the Paul Hastings case, the employee refuses to sign.  Here's what the associate had to say:

As for your request for a release, non-disclosure, and non-disparagement agreement in return for three months' pay, I reject it. Unlike you, I am not just a paid mouthpiece with no independent judgment. I will decide how and to whom to communicate how you have treated me. I find it ironic that you would try to buy the right not to be disparaged after behaving as you have. Your actions speak volumes, and you don't need much help from me in damaging your reputation.

As for me, call me old-fashioned, but what ever happened to the practice of not burning bridges or keeping open possibilities with a former employer -- even where lawyers depart under less-than-ideal circumstances?  (The exception of course is where a firm has acted unlawfully; in these situations, a lawsuit may be necessary to punish the firm and deter similar conduct in the future).  At the end of the day, lawyers shouldn't need a non-disparagement clause to prevent them from bad-mouthing a former employer.  They should realize that in most cases, it's in their best interest.

Do you agree?

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on May 6, 2008 at 11:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)

Lawyers Atwitter About Twitter

What's the newest social networking-cum-marketing tool that has lawyers all atwitter?  It's Twitter, of course, which is best described as a hybrid between blogging and a Web-based IM (instant messaging) system where users respond to the common question, "What are you doing now?" 

For most power-Twitter users, the answer is rarely "I'm hanging around in my bathrobe" or "Getting a facial."  Instead of just "twitter-ing their thumbs," you'll find that most expert Twitter-ers are exchanging tips about interesting marketing ideas they've come across or blog posts or books they've just read.  For that reason, Twitter can serve as a useful marketing tool for lawyers (and as a legal lifeline for those in need of a lawyer), as Steve Matthews writes in this post,  Lawyer Marketing With Twitter.  Matthews lists some of the lawyers already on Twitter (you can find me here) and offers some tips on using the site.  Matthew suggests that you begin by checking out the "following" lists of people you know on Twitter to find others to follow; use @ symbols followed by the user name to respond to individual messages; and above all, "smile and act like you're having fun."

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on May 6, 2008 at 11:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Microsoft GC: Face Time Beats Blogging

Brad Smith, senior VP and general counsel of Microsoft Corp., talks about corporate blogging in the latest issue of InsideCounsel magazine. Along the way, he intriguingly raises the question of whether a corporate legal department should have a public blog, but then avoids offering an answer. Smith writes:

New technologies create external opportunities as well. Increasingly, legal statements come from companies not in the form of a traditional press release, but as less formal blog postings. These communications are in their infancy and raise new questions. In a media- and Internet-dominated age, does it make sense for a legal department to have an external blog? What does it make sense to say? How often should the legal department say something?

Good questions, but he follows them only by saying, "A decade from now these questions may well seem like old hat." Fortunately, Rees Morrison steps up to the challenge at his blog Law Department Management, answering that, as a blogger, he would be all for it, "but as a consultant on legal department management, I think I would counsel a would-be pioneer department to let that idea lapse."

As for Smith, he writes that Microsoft has more than 1,500 employees who blog and that companies should understand that "every employee is a potential blogger." This means that every company should have a policy on blogs, as does Microsoft, "to help employees apply existing standards on confidentiality and business conduct in this new online environment." That said, Smith believes no company should overlook the value of face-to-face conversations. "Technology is giving us new tools that can make us more effective," Smith writes. "But we shouldn’t forget that some of the best communications require no technology at all. They simply require that we get up from our computers."

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 5, 2008 at 09:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Dann's Days Numbered as Ohio AG

When Marc Dann announced his candidacy for Ohio attorney general in 2005, he vowed to be an AG in the mold of Eliot Spitzer. That promise has proven more prescient than he could have known, as he faces pressure to step down over sexual infidelity and mismanagement. On Friday, Dann admitted to having had an extramarital affair with a subordinate, just hours after the release of an internal-investigation report detailing lewdness, profanity and sexual harassment in the AG's office under his watch. The only question now is whether Dann will follow in Spitzer's footsteps and resign quickly, or stick with his assertion Friday that he would not.

In a news conference Friday, Dann conceded, "I have not conducted myself in a way that is consistent with my values as a husband, a father and my responsibilities as attorney general." But he said he would stay on and "work tirelessly to regain the public's trust." He'd have to work at a superhuman pace. Over the weekend, editorials in four major Ohio newspapers called for Dann to resign, as did the state Republican deputy chairman Kevin DeWine, who said Dann had turned the AG's office into a "raunchy frat pad." In an editorial Sunday, the Cleveland Plain-Dealer said that Dann has turned the AG's office "into a laughingstock," and it called on him to do what is best for the state, not what is best for himself. "Marc Dann has disgraced himself far more than he seems to realize. He has fallen so far, so fast, that it's impossible to see how he can recover, personally, politically or professionally," the editorial said. "That's why he needs to go." Also on Sunday, an editorial in The Columbus Dispatch said that the AG "must be able to provide leadership, command respect and exercise strong judgment. Marc Dann has failed miserably in all three and is not fit to serve." The Cincinnati Enquirer on Saturday urged him to step down, calling him "a disgrace" whose "hypocrisy is breathtaking. Meanwhile, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland and Ohio Democratic Party Chairman Chris Redfern have both called for an independent investigation of the AG's office.

As if this was not all sufficiently bizarre, Dann, during his press conference Friday, admitted that he was surprised he ever won election as AG in the first place, adding, "I was not as well prepared for the office as I should have been." Given how the on-the-job training has gone so far, Dann really should consider another line of work.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 5, 2008 at 09:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Legal News Roundup: Edicion de Cinco de Mayo

• Is the Criminal Justice System Racist? Article in the Manhattan Institute's City Journal sidesteps issues of poverty and class to argue it is not.
• Study: Lawsuit reform has helped local economy. Of course, the Texas study was conducted by the group that advocated for the "reform."
• Shearman Eliminates General Counsel Post. A spokesperson says the firm is "returning to the more traditional structure of partner oversight over risk management."
• California attorney convicted of stalking girlfriend. Criminal defense lawyer faces up to four years in prison.
• N.Y. judge files $10M defamation suit against attorney, newspaper. Judge says lawyer was source for defamatory columns.
• Judge rules for Taser in cause-of-death decisions. Stun-gun maker targets medical examiners with lawsuits that some see as intimidation.
• Man asks court to change his name to 'In God We Trust.' We trust the judge will turn him down.
• Storied R.I. law firm to close. With roots back to at least 1818, Tillinghast Licht to wind down.
• Lords linger over extreme porn definition. The U.K. struggles with where to draw the line.
• Patent Reform Act suffers serious setback, stalled in Senate. Bill is taken off Senate's agenda, at least for now.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 5, 2008 at 08:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

The Power of Legal Blogging

Will legal bloggers soon find themselves hounded by paparazzi? According to "The Search for Intelligent Life in the Blogosphere," an article in this month's California Lawyer magazine, Southern California legal blogger J. Craig Williams was all the way Down Under at a restaurant in Sydney when a complete stranger called out to him, "I know you. You write that blog!" Williams, whose blog is part of the Law.com blog network (and with whom I co-host the podcast Lawyer2Lawyer), told the magazine he was stunned. "I thought to myself, 'I'm this little guy from Newport Beach traveling halfway around the world, and somebody knows me!'"

The story, as the article concludes, illustrates the power of blogging. But despite that power, many California lawyers "are still scratching their heads about blogs," writes author Jeanette Borzo. (They are not alone, as Carolyn Elefant noted in a post here Friday.) As long-time legal blogger Denise Howell puts it, "People haven't figured out how to reduce the noise-to-signal ratio. It has become somewhat overwhelming." Still, blogging success stories abound, says Borzo in this article dubbed a "survival guide to legal blogs":

It worked for Kristie D. Prinz. When her former firm, Pennie & Edmonds, closed its doors in 2003, the young intellectual property attorney decided it was time to launch her own firm (The Prinz Law Office in Los Gatos). That meant establishing a name and getting known quickly among potential clients as an expert.

Prinz, then 31, set up a blog straight away. And soon, prospective clients began mentioning that they had seen her California Biotech Law Blog. Two years later, she had a steady stream of media attention. 'Having a blog on relevant issues helps establish you as an expert to potential clients,' Prinz says. 'And if you're building your practice, that's exactly what you're looking to do.'

Sure, blogging also has "an underbelly," Borzo writes. For one, blogging carries the potential of getting caught up in virtual fisticuffs, leading to public black eyes and legal entanglements. Still, blog producer Kevin O'Keefe tells Borzo that he predicts the number of legal blogs will continue to grow, one day becoming as common among lawyers as e-mail addresses and Web sites. If that happens, early adopters such as J. Craig Williams won't seem quite so conspicuous -- freeing the paparazzi for other pursuits.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 5, 2008 at 08:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

From the Law.com Newswire

Sign up to receive Legal Blog Watch by email View a Sample