old fashioned beatdown, , , , " />

Incorrigible Dicta
Platitudes and Diatribes from the Best Defense Money Can’t Buy

Anti-SLAPP Statute–No Fees If Plaintiff Voluntarily Dismisses

Yesterday the Appeals Court issued a decision that was probably correct, but disappointing.  The gist of it is that we have a law in Mass that if you get sued for “public participation,” you can file a motion to dismiss and make the big bully pay your legal fees.  The idea is that people with deep pockets (like Wal*Mart) shouldn’t be able to use the legal system to intimidate their political opponents (like local people who oppose building a new Wal*Mart).  These suits are called SLAPP suits, for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.  The idea of the SLAPP suit isn’t necessarily to win–it’s to distract your detractors, divert their resources from activism to litigation, and make them shut up.
After the jump, read how one SLAPP plaintiff carved out a loophole


Posted by AndyCowan on February 24th, 2010 :: Filed under In the News, Law for the Layman
Tags :: , , , ,

GVR, Baby!

(GVR: Grant, Vacate, and Remand — a disposition that is the US Supreme Court’s way of telling a lower court “don’t waste our time; go do what we told you to do.”  The court grants certiorari–agreeing to take the case; vacates the judgment below; and remands the case–sends it back to the lower court with instructions to get it right next time).

And that, friends is what happened today in Briscoe v. Virginia–the case that was widely feared (or hoped) to limit the reach of this summer’s decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts.  That’s right, folks–you really really have to put the analyst on the witness stand!

And for the record, that is exactly what I predicted they were going to do when they granted cert in this case.


Posted by AndyCowan on January 25th, 2010 :: Filed under A Day in the Life
Tags :: , , ,

How Law School Distorts a Person’s Priorities

Above the Law reports on a story about a 1L (first-year law student) at Minnesota who got hit by a stray bullet while leaving a nightclub in Minneapolis.  At his blog, he recounts:

So it’s around 2:30 am on a Monday morning and I’m sitting downtown bleeding on the side of the street. Random people coming from clubs stopped as they saw the blood coming from my back. I had a pretty good idea that I was going to miss this morning’s civil procedure class…

Shot in the back and worrying about civ pro… only from a 1L!

ATL doesn’t do the story justice though.  You have to read the first-hand account for such hilarious gems as:

A nurse then tells me that they are going to have to take off all my clothes. Do I have a problem with that?

Me: “I have a bullet in my back. It’s not the time for modesty.”

A few minutes later I’m covered with those wash-rag-like hospital blankets. A homicide detective comes in and asks me a few questions. I remind him that I’m not a homicide case yet…

The dude’s blog his hilarious. Seriously, go read it.


Posted by AndyCowan on May 7th, 2009 :: Filed under A Day in the Life, In the News, War Stories
Tags :: , , , , ,

Is this really necesary?

On a visit to a court I don’t normally go to, for what I thought would take five minutes: getting a certified copy of a witness’ prior conviction.

Clerk: Can I help you?

Me: I just need a certified conviction.

Clerk: You need a certified conviction?

Me: Yes.

Clerk: You have the docket number?

Me: Yes, here it is [gives her docket number on legal pad]

Clerk: [makes the copy] That’ll be $4.50

Me: Oh no, this is for an indigent case.

Clerk: [in a tone of utmost contempt] What do you mean, ‘it’s for an indigent case?’


Posted by AndyCowan on April 13th, 2009 :: Filed under A Day in the Life, Client Service, War Stories
Tags :: , , , ,

11th Circuit Endorses Police Torture

Or, “It’s OK, tase him bro!”

The US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit thinks this is okay:


Posted by AndyCowan on February 9th, 2009 :: Filed under In the News, Judicial Pearls of Wisdom
Tags :: , ,