Most times when I read the newspaper, I see maybe one or two articles dealing with things legal or solid blog worthy articles. Today, they're all over the place. For example...
In the Los Angeles Daily Journal is an article: SCOTUS union dues case affected. Apparently, a case was brought to determine if public employees can be compelled to pay union dues. Because the obama administration has deemed this a requirement (I suspect because the unions donated to his campaign), his pocket judges think so too. As such, the case is headed for a 4-4 tie (now that Justice Scalia is no more) and will be deferred to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal (and other branch of the Obama Administration) with will uphold the requirement that public employees must pay union dues.
The legal research tie-in here is, of course, the U.S. Constitution (specificially the sections that deal with the separation of powers). See I have a silly belief that just because the POTUS says one thing, that the SCOTUS does not have to follow suit. The SCOUTS can have a mind of it's own. In fact, it should be illegal for the POTUS to ever schedule private meetings or lunch appointments with any sitting justice on the SCOTUS for fear (yes, fear) that the POTUS will try to persuade a judge to side with an issues promulgated by the POTUS.
In other news,both the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times devote front page space to the story that: Apple to fight FBI in terror probe. Apparently, the FBI has hold of the I-phone belonging to one of the shooters of the San Bernardino massacre. Apparently, this is data on that phone that the FBI really, REALLY wants and apparently, the FBI got a court order to force Apple to unlock said I-phone so it can get at said data. Apparently, however, Apple is saying to the FBI and the federal court system: Nuts.
The legal research tie-in here is a number of resources relating to PRIVACY:
The problem with government and law "enforcement" is that it doesn't know when to quit. They already know who did it but, I suspect, the FBI is looking for opportunities to harass anyone the shooter called (guilt by association). What it comes down to, I suspect, is what are we the people willing to give up to apprehend the "bad guys?" Then, when all the "bad guys" are apprehended, who will the feds go after to justify their budget? You and me, that's who!
Finally, in the Riverside Business Journal we find the article dealing with St. Joseph Health System Medical Information Cases: Judge grants final approval to $39M data breach deal.
Here's the fun part. Run a search in Google.com and you'll find that $39 million is not so unique since Target was also ordered to pay $39 million for its data breach. The problem with the St. Joseph case is that the 31,000 Californian's who had data stolen will receive a whopping $242. Compare that with the $7.42 million the lawyers get and the $50,000 the class representatives received. Yeah, that's fair.
It's like that one movie, Bruce Almighty, where he grants everyone their wish to win the lottery. Followed by the following dialog between Bruce and God:
Bruce Nolan: There were so many. I just gave them all what they want.God: Yeah. But since when does anyone have a clue about what they want?
See, the problem is because winning the lottery is everyone's wish, the payout to each person was $1. Yeah, thanks for that.
Anyway, the legal research tie-in to this story is:
Who knew so much was happening around the nation/world. Heck, who knew so much would relate to the legal resources at your local county law library. Turns out, THIS local county law Librarian did and brings it to you in his weekly blog.
You're welcome.
Have you ever come up on something so
difficult it feels like you're just banging your head against the wall?
Nothing you do seems to work. Everything is out to get you to fail.
Then, just as you're about to quit...things start to fall into place. You
see vistas where once there were stumbling blocks. All is easy sailing
until...you hit the next wall and it starts all over again.
That's kind of what the litigation process is like for a lot of people. You file a complaint, do discovery,
go to trial, everything is going relatively well and then you hit a wall - or,
in the case of litigation, you lose your case. Dang but your argument
sounded so solid. You knew you'd win. Your friend's told you you
should win. Heck, you mother's brothers' cousin twice removed told you you
should win. But you lost. What to do, now? Quit? Run
away. Well, you could but some determined people move on to the appeals process.
Appealing a case is the process were people go when they don't get the result they wanted at the trial level. There are at least three key stages
to the appellate process: notice of appeal, requesting the record, writing the brief, and arguing your case
(optional). The notice of appeals is critical because it is the point
where you tell everyone that you're going to appeal your case. A great
resource that can help you with the notice and record stage is California Civil Appellate Practice (CEB; Notice: Chs. 7 & 10, Request Record: Ch.
9). Other resources that can help include:
So, next time you find yourself up
against a wall with no seeming way forward, head on over to your local county law library
and your local county Law Librarian will hook you up with whatever it is you're needing.
Yeah, we're good that way.
In today's news, we read where SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts sold upwards of $500,000 of Microsoft stock shortly before the SCOTUS agreed to hear a case involving Microsoft. The champion of the Constitution (unless he's ruling on obamacare or abortion) made a magnanimous gesture by divesting his interest in Microsoft before sitting for the case. Or did he?
See, what gets my attention is that he made a clean profit on his stock. Did he know something before selling? Was he privy to insider information prior to the sale? It would have been an easy thing to simply recuse himself from the Microsoft case. Of course, he didn't bother to do that when he voted on a case involving Texas Instruments. While, the court spokesperson chalked it up to human error (i.e. forgetting you have a couple hundred thousand dollars in a company you are ruling on) but you gotta wonder what's going on?
If he were not the Chief Justice, would Roberts have been charged with insider trading for the sale of the Microsoft stock? Of course, who can forget Secretary of the Treaury Timothy Geithner's tax fiasco or the fact that he didn't spend a single night in jail for cheating on his taxes? The point to this is that it seems if you are in a political office, that you can cheat, steal, lie, maim, and murder and still not get investigated; whereas the rest of we the people are easy pickings.
So much for the clarity our POTUS promised.
For the record, during the months of November through January, the legal world, for the most part, slows down. For the most part. Today, we've had three domestic violence cases come through out doors and one of them involved a guy being beaten up by his wife. Oh, the humanity!
What is domestic violence, you ask? According to Black's Law Dictionary, Domestic Violence is the use of force (by fury, vehemence, or outrage esp. physical force) between members of a household usu. spouses; an assault or other violent act committed by one member of a household against another. Domestic Violence has become such a national past-time that the Feds created the Violence against Women Act of 1994 under 42 USC 13981. While generally geared to protect women, section (b) of this Act boldly states:
(b) Right to be free from crimes of violence
All persons within the United States shall have the right to be free from crimes of violence motivated by gender (as defined in subsection (d) of this section).
suggesting that all persons (including men) have a right to be free from violence - which is kinda sad that we the people have to be told we have a right to be free from violence. I mean, daily you have people screaming that they want to be treated with respect. Then, as adults, people scream that they need a law declaring that they are free from violence? For as much as people whine about the over-inclusion of government, it is sad that they demand over-inclusion in matters of the heart.
In any event, what with February being the month of love (or the lack, thereof), if you find yourself in need of help from a former loved-one, might I suggest you head on over to your local county law library and take a look at
While there may be a whole lot of lovin' going on in the world, there is a whole lot of crazy to match it. Good thing that your local county law library is around to help with either or both (as the case may be).
