May It Please The Court: Weblog of legal news and observations, including a quote of the day and daily updates

Skip To Content

MIPTC Author:

Bookstore:


Listed in Latino Who's Who, June 2014
 Attorney
Locations of visitors to this page

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.


Adjust font size: A A+ A++
Claim Your Profile on Avvo
There are 2033 Journal Items on 255 page(s) and you are on page number 189

Technology Outstrips Wiretapping Law

There's an interesting development occurring in the wiretapping arena. There's been a big flap about dialing into an existing conference call as wiretapping.

But is it really wiretapping, asks Becky Dale in the Virginia Lawyer's Weekly?

While it may not be under the strict definition of the rules, it won't take courts long to make it fit. If you're listening in on a conversation where the callers expect it to be private, it sounds like wiretapping to me, even if the law hasn't yet caught up with the technology.

Perhaps it's time to watch where your fingers are dialing.

Printer friendly page Permalink Email to a friend Posted by J. Craig Williams on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 at 20:49. Comments Closed (0) |

Bhopal Turns Twenty (Part 2)

B>II. Safety Devices Were Inadequate or Turned Off

Moreover, safety standards and maintenance procedures at the plant had been ignored for months prior to the accident. A listing of the defects of the MIC unit runs as follows:

-Gauges measuring temperature and pressure in the various parts of the unit, including the crucial MIC storage tanks, were so notoriously unreliable that workers ignored early signs of trouble;

-The refrigeration unit for keeping MIC at low temperatures (and therefore less likely to undergo overheating and expansion should a contaminant enter the tank) had been shut off for some time;

-The gas scrubber, designed to neutralize any escaping MIC, had been shut off for maintenance. Even had it been operative, post-disaster inquiries revealed, the maximum pressure it could handle was only one-quarter that which was actually reached in the accident;

-The flare tower, designed to burn off MIC escaping from the scrubber, was also turned off, waiting for replacement of a corroded piece of pipe. The tower, however, was inadequately designed for its task, as it was capable of handling only a quarter of the volume of gas released;

-The water curtain, designed to neutralize any remaining gas, was too short to reach the top of the flare tower, from where the MIC was billowing;

-The alarm on storage tank # 610 failed to signal the increase in temperature on the night of the disaster; and,

-MIC storage tank # 610 was filled beyond recommended capacity, and a storage tank which was supposed to be held in reserve for excess MIC already contained the MIC.

To add insult to injury, nobody outside the factory was warned because the safety siren had been turned off.

See Part 3, Wed., 12/8/04

Printer friendly page Permalink Email to a friend Posted by Gregory D. Granger on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 at 16:47. Comments Closed (0) |

Two Towers, Three Decisions And Counting

Will the third time be a charm?

So far, Larry Silverstein is one for one (subscription needed for second link).

The insurance companies have indicated they're going to appeal.

The twin towers decision, that is. The big question in this second trial is the same as the first: were there two occurrences or one?

Yesterday, the second jury answered it soundly: two occurrences, so Silverstein, the owner of the two buildings will be able to collect twice.

Perhaps as much as $7 billion instead of $3.5. Silverstein lost the first trial, and some insurers only have to pay once. Why would some insurers pay once and some pay twice?

That will make for an interesting appeal. The Second Circuit which decided against Silverstein the first time, will be able to decide either way and be justified in doing so.

Podcast 

Printer friendly page Permalink Email to a friend Posted by J. Craig Williams on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 at 11:58. Comments Closed (0) |

Hiding Behind The Curtain - It's The Wizard Of Oz

What?

I may not be able to argue in front of a judge anymore? Admittedly, there may be a good reason, but I don't know of one.

What's the matter, can't take the heat?

Judges apparently think they get all they need to know from the lawyer's brief, and don't need attorneys to appear in front of them.

"A waste of time," some judges have said.

But an argument answers questions. Perhaps more important, however, is that argument allows the lawyers to correct the judge's thinking. Certainly judges typically get it right. But frequently, lawyers have to bring a motion for reconsideration to straighten out a judge's ruling.

Very frequently, opposing lawyers agree that the judge got it wrong and the ruling needs to get straightened out. I wouldn't have a problem with the "no argument" rule if judges got it right all the time. But they don't.

That's the problem when you put on a robe. Sometimes it goes to your head.

Podcast 

Printer friendly page Permalink Email to a friend Posted by J. Craig Williams on Monday, December 06, 2004 at 12:13. Comments Closed (2) |

Deleting Comment Spam

MIPTC is getting splogged. No, it's not really a word that I know of. It's certainly not in the dictionary.

But there is plenty of comment spam on the blog posts.

So much so that we took our Dreamweaver kit (that was used to build MIPTC), and developed a weapon.

I can now look at just the comments that are posted everywhere on MIPTC and the two channels. Check the box and hit delete.

So, comment spammers beware. You will be deleted.

Podcast 

Printer friendly page Permalink Email to a friend Posted by J. Craig Williams on Monday, December 06, 2004 at 11:56. Comments Closed (0) |

The Grinch Stole? Arrest Him.

Florida cops are trying to prevent the Grinch from stealing Christmas.

They're looking for Deadbeat dads and moms (audio plays). They don't want kids to go without Christmas presents.

Not everyone who fails to pay is a deadbeat according to some. They simply can't pay without a job, without money and when they're homeless.

New Mexico wants to find these people who are not paying.

Who's right? Both sides. Some dads and moms don't pay, and some can't because they can't afford to, not because they don't want to.

If you want to get toys into kids' hands for the holidays, I know of one sure way: Toys for Tots.

Printer friendly page Permalink Email to a friend Posted by J. Craig Williams on Sunday, December 05, 2004 at 23:53. Comments Closed (0) |

Wireless or Broadband? Dock It, and You May Be Wireless

This is the second in a continuing series of occasional posts about the hardware and software we use at WLF.

I'm writing this post from a tablet computer. In its dock, with a wireless keyboard.

But now, I know what I almost want for Christmas. This keyboard, but with the split, ergonomic configuration. Apparently not made yet.

On the tablet, I've learned that when it's in its dock, I need to disable the wireless connection. Apparently, a computer that has both a wireless and a hard-wired connection to the internet doesn't automatically default to the faster, hard-wired broadband connection.

A really, really dumb design flaw.

So, when I'm docked, I rely on the broadband connection. When the tablet's out of the dock, I have to reconfigure the wireless connection.

Anybody got a batch file?

Podcast 

Printer friendly page Permalink Email to a friend Posted by J. Craig Williams on Sunday, December 05, 2004 at 23:26. Comments Closed (0) |

Hooters Out In The Cold

About three weeks ago, MIPTC told you that Hooters had sued a competitor, Ker's Winghouse, over it's "intellectual property."

Turns out that the federal court just dismissed Hooter's action.

According to Findlaw, "U.S. District Judge Anne Conway dismissed the case Thursday before it went to the jury, finding that 'no reasonable juror' could confuse waitresses for Ker's WingHouse and those for Hooters. Ker's WingHouse waitresses are dressed in all-black shorts and tops, while Hooters girls wear orange shorts and white tops."

Hooters wanted $4 million in damages. To add insult to injury, the judge ordered Hooters to pay Ker's $1.2 million.

Puns are up to you. Fill in your comments below.


Podcast 

Printer friendly page Permalink Email to a friend Posted by J. Craig Williams on Sunday, December 05, 2004 at 23:05. Comments Closed (1) |



Page:  << Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  87  88  89  90  91  92  93  94  95  96  97  98  99  100  101  102  103  104  105  106  107  108  109  110  111  112  113  114  115  116  117  118  119  120  121  122  123  124  125  126  127  128  129  130  131  132  133  134  135  136  137  138  139  140  141  142  143  144  145  146  147  148  149  150  151  152  153  154  155  156  157  158  159  160  161  162  163  164  165  166  167  168  169  170  171  172  173  174  175  176  177  178  179  180  181  182  183  184  185  186  187  188  189 190  191  192  193  194  195  196  197  198  199  200  201  202  203  204  205  206  207  208  209  210  211  212  213  214  215  216  217  218  219  220  221  222  223  224  225  226  227  228  229  230  231  232  233  234  235  236  237  238  239  240  241  242  243  244  245  246  247  248  249  250  251  252  253  254  255  Next >>

Back to top.