Thread of legal hubbub

MalkinIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 16260
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:45 pm
Location: (=^_^=)

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MalkinIsMyHomeboy » Mon Oct 24, 2016 12:07 pm

I can't remember if a thread like this already exists (search brought up nothing) but figured we can have a thread specific to legal questions and whatnot


anyway, specifically on the AT&T acquisition of Time Warner...what will officials look at when deciding if this purchase violates anti-trust laws or not? What do the modern anti-trust laws look like anyway?

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Mon Oct 24, 2016 12:15 pm

There is a probate thread, of all things.

I can't offer legal advice. Not that you asked, but I'm putting it here anyway.

tifosi77
Posts: 38923
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Wed Oct 26, 2016 12:02 am

I can't remember if a thread like this already exists (search brought up nothing) but figured we can have a thread specific to legal questions and whatnot


anyway, specifically on the AT&T acquisition of Time Warner...what will officials look at when deciding if this purchase violates anti-trust laws or not? What do the modern anti-trust laws look like anyway?
Antitrust scrutiny would largely be focused the transfer of FCC licenses. TW only has one entity with a broadcast license, but pretty much all of their networks (CNN, HBO, etc) have transmission licenses for getting signals up to spaaaaaaaaaace. From what I've read, they could transfer those licenses to a third party and escape the eye of the FCC altogether, but I don't know how practical that would be.

Conflicts with the ISP businesses are a non-issue, as Warner spun TWC off into a separate entity in 2009, and that entity is not part of this transaction.

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:50 pm

I sat on a mock Supreme Court as a justice today and had a blast. I helped steer the opinion of the court to make new rules that I wanted, kept an 8 year old from recovering damages, and since I had a large enough majority I flipped so I could dissent saying the new rules went too far (the kid was assed out regardless of which rules we adopted, I just thought we went too far with the rule we were changing).

It was the most fun I've had since I started this program.

willeyeam
Posts: 21858
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:49 pm
Location: Sticky Boy

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby willeyeam » Tue Nov 08, 2016 11:18 am

I was in a mock supreme court in high school. We adopted English as the official language of the US. We then changed the name of our official language to American.

willeyeam
Posts: 21858
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:49 pm
Location: Sticky Boy

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby willeyeam » Tue Nov 08, 2016 11:19 am

Or maybe that was our mock government day. Either way it was fun

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Tue Nov 08, 2016 11:20 am

:lol:

:thumb:

Kaiser
Posts: 4600
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:35 pm
Location: In these uncertain times

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Kaiser » Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:55 pm

I'm legal
and tender

MalkinIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 16260
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:45 pm
Location: (=^_^=)

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MalkinIsMyHomeboy » Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:35 pm

I was in a mock supreme court in high school. We adopted English as the official language of the US. We then changed the name of our official language to American.
That's unconstitutional

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:37 pm

Says who?

Shyster
Posts: 7551
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Wed Nov 16, 2016 5:42 pm

This might be the single worst time I've ever heard a lawyer have at appellate oral argument. When Judge Easterbrook tells you that he's amazed you haven't been sanctioned because "I've rarely seen an appeal as frivolous as this one," You Are Having A Bad Day.
The only way it could have been worse would be if the judges on the panel came down off the bench and took turns kicking the appellant's lawyer in the nuts.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/ext ... 1_2016.mp3

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Nov 16, 2016 6:10 pm

:lol:

He started with a quote, too. Jesus. Websters didn't have a definition he could've started with?

Unrelated:

https://twitter.com/justinaireland/stat ... 6947186688

That has some layers to it. First, the original and copied tweet is hilarious, but there is also drama because of the plagiarism. lulz

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Nov 16, 2016 6:17 pm

Oh, just finished that oral argument. I lol'd when the judge told opposing council to not even put forth an argument. :lol:

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Tue Nov 29, 2016 10:02 pm

My new office is directly across the hall from the US Tax Court for Pittsburgh. On one hand, that sounds boring af. But it's probably the Holy Grail of federal admin law which is kind of my thing so, cool.

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:48 am

Federal judge who questioned meaning of 'drop-down menu,' didn't instruct jurors is tossed from case
U.S. District Judge Patricia Minaldi was removed from the St. Charles case in February, and a new judge declared a mistrial, the Associated Press reports.

In a transcript of the second day of the trial proceedings, which was already available, Gibbens and Walker told Minaldi they were concerned about the lack of jury instructions. “You know,” Minaldi said, “it’s so seldom that we have jury trials here, I forget. OK. I forget but I rely on you to remember.”

Questioning of witnesses resumed the same day with questions by another prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Moore. Minaldi expressed frustration with Moore, who was questioning a witness about the defendant’s grant application that is filled out on a computer.

Minaldi interrupted the questioning for clarification on the meaning of a “drop-down box” and “drop-down menu.”

“I have no idea what that means,” Minaldi said after the reference to drop-down menu. “If I don’t understand it …”
The witness begins an explanation but Minaldi interrupts.

“No offense, but if I don’t understand it, I don’t think anybody else is going to understand it,” Minaldi said. “I’ve been to law school. I’ve been doing this for 30 years. I have no idea what y’all are talking about.”

At that point, the witness explains computer drop-down menus, and resumes answering the prosecutor’s questions. Moore questions the witness about part of the grant application with “Y’s and yeses.”

Minaldi interrupts to ask what that means, and the witness explains they are answers to a list of questions seeking a yes or no answer.

Minaldi decides to break for lunch. “Get your act together. Okay,” Minaldi told the prosecutor. “I have no idea what’s going on here. Get your act together.” The trial didn’t resume.

willeyeam
Posts: 21858
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:49 pm
Location: Sticky Boy

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby willeyeam » Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:54 am

what a dodint

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:55 am

She's been to law school, man. And if she doesn't understand it, well then...

MalkinIsMyHomeboy
Posts: 16260
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:45 pm
Location: (=^_^=)

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MalkinIsMyHomeboy » Fri Dec 09, 2016 9:59 am

similar to doctors, it's pretty alarming how dumb some judges can be

Silentom
Posts: 18137
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 3:00 pm
Location: NTP66 lied about watching the game.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Silentom » Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:03 am

I know she is younger, but that's why I voted for judges to be done at 70. Barmy old codgers need to GTFO.

Kraftster
Posts: 2069
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:22 pm

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Kraftster » Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:28 am

This might be the single worst time I've ever heard a lawyer have at appellate oral argument. When Judge Easterbrook tells you that he's amazed you haven't been sanctioned because "I've rarely seen an appeal as frivolous as this one," You Are Having A Bad Day.
The only way it could have been worse would be if the judges on the panel came down off the bench and took turns kicking the appellant's lawyer in the nuts.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/ext ... 1_2016.mp3
:o this was a good listen.

slappybrown
Posts: 16556
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:19 pm
Location: Lifelong Alabama Football Fan

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby slappybrown » Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:35 am

My new office is directly across the hall from the US Tax Court for Pittsburgh. On one hand, that sounds boring af. But it's probably the Holy Grail of federal admin law which is kind of my thing so, cool.
What are you looking to do when you graduate?

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:47 am

My new office is directly across the hall from the US Tax Court for Pittsburgh. On one hand, that sounds boring af. But it's probably the Holy Grail of federal admin law which is kind of my thing so, cool.
What are you looking to do when you graduate?
1. I'm going to try to join the Army as a JAG and finish my military career; HIGHLY competitive, like 3-6% acceptance rate.
2. If not 1, then I'm going to apply to a bunch of Federal HONORS programs for agencies such as NSA, CIA, NIST, probably USACE just because they're my current employer, VA, etc. The goal is to get hired as in-agency counsel that advises on the legality of intelligence/cyber/operations policy, depending on the agency.

Both options are highly competitive. If I don't get picked up for either one I'll keep going in my current career and use my JD as a teaching credential and to do legal aide on the side (helping veterans w/VA issues, etc). Once my fed career is done in my early 50s I would probably start a consulting firm/boutique practice in whatever interest I happen to have in twenty years. Consumer protection/UCC stuff, system accreditation, legal aide, whatever.

I'm a 1L, man. The world is wide open.

In all seriousness though I'm going to start reaching out and networking locally this spring. I have to start nailing down possible externship opportunities for 2018. If you know anyone that enjoys mentorship and works in anything remotely similar to the areas above keep me in mind.

slappybrown
Posts: 16556
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:19 pm
Location: Lifelong Alabama Football Fan

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby slappybrown » Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:50 am

You are very far ahead of most 1Ls in terms of a plan. I deal with DOJ/USAOs/SEC primarily because I do white collar work so I don't have much in the way of NSA/CIA type contacts, but when the time comes, let me know who you're talking to locally.

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Dec 09, 2016 10:59 am

Well, at this juncture the agency isn't really important. I want to work with someone that wants me there and has something to show me. The actual subject matter doesn't really matter, I'm just not trying to get too involved in private practice work because it has very little interest to me. For my last externship I *may* consider going down to DC if I can get some face time with an intelligence agency, but it would be more about networking than actually honing a craft. My short term practical goal is to find a government attorney that is within walking distance of the federal building that wants to mentor me. I'm working with my school right now to that end. I did briefly meet our in-house council here at USACE today, but I'm worried about there being a possible conflict of interest there so I'm not sure I'll pursue that lead.

DOJ/USAO HONORS is hyper competitive to the point that I'm not really going to try for them. And they don't do the kind of law I want to do anyway. I know all the gunners that want to fall on the federal sword instead of going to BigLaw want those spots, and they can have them. I'm just not wired for criminal litigation work.

Will keep you posted, thanks.

dodint
Posts: 43566
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Engaging in sarcastic, unproductive wonder.
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Dec 09, 2016 11:02 am

Source of the post that's why I voted for judges to be done at 70.
Shyster already covered why specifically, but that's a bummer.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests