Open Source, Lawyers, and Beer: FOSS+Beer, Beryl’s, and a Legal Talk Network Podcast

A podcast from LawSites (Robert Ambrogi): A Most Unusual Episode of Lawyer2Lawyer (Hint: It Involves Beer)

Excerpt: “It is not every day that I get to record a podcast episode in a brewery…. But for our interview with the hosts of the FOSS+Beer podcast, we set up our mikes in Beryl’s Beer Co. in Denver ….

I previously wrote about the FOSS+Beer podcast, which I described as A Podcast About Law, Tech and Open Source. And Beer. Craft Beer. Since I was in Denver and the FOSS folks are in nearby Boulder, we invited them down to talk about open source software, podcasting and, yes, beer….” [Link to full Open Source and Beer podcast]

Court Dockets and the $40 Million Dollar Dope Slap

From LawSites (Robert Ambrogi): New PacerPro Service Automatically Retrieves and Delivers Federal ‘Free Look’ Documents

Excerpt: “If I were to tell you that a new service could help you avoid a $40 million mistake in litigation, would you be interested?

The mistake to which I refer was Sidley Austin’s failure to timely read orders referenced in a notice of electronic filing (NEF). The orders denied Sidley’s post-trial motions filed on behalf of AT&T after it was hit with a $40 million verdict in a patent infringement case. Because Sidley did not read the orders in time, it missed the deadline to file an appeal….“[Link to full Law Sites post.]

Searching Case Law with Google Scholar: New and Improved

Google Scholar Case Law Evolves by Mark Giangrande, Law Librarian blog:

Excerpt: “…. Google is hardly a substitute for any of the commercial databases as it does not have the value-added features such as secondary sources and others. At the same time, anyone searching Scholar’s case law database can do so with a good amount of confidence in my opinion….” [Google Scholar Case Law Evolves]

Alternative Legal Research Databases for New and Experienced Lawyers

From the Gallagher Law Library Blog: Alternative Legal Research Databases

When you think of online legal research, LexisAdvance, WestlawNext, or BloombergLaw probably spring to mind. With summer fast approaching, it may be worthwhile to explore some alternative legal research databases….” [Link to Gallagher Law Library blog post.]

When Lawyers Go Bad: Law Library Book Thieves: Law and Ethics

The Law Librarian, the Washington County Bar Association, the Law Library Committee, and the Oregon State Bar consider it a serious matter when attorneys do not return borrowed Law Library materials. Please note OSB Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(a) & ORS 164.005, 164.015, 357.975 & 357.990

More about law book page thefts at the Legal Research is Easy blog: This Just Torques my Shorts.

Librarians versus the NSA (The Nation)

Hat tip to the 5/11/15,Library Link of the Day:

Librarians Versus the NSA: Your local library is on the front lines against government surveillance,” by Zoë Carpenter May 6, 2015, The Nation, May 25, 2015

“…. Librarians have frequently been involved in the fight against government surveillance. The first librarian to be locked up for defending privacy and intellectual freedom was Zoia Horn, who spent three week in jail in 1972 for refusing to testify against anti–Vietnam War activists. During the Cold War, librarians exposed the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s attempts to recruit library staffers to spy on foreigners, particularly Soviets, through a national effort called the Library Awareness Program….” [Link to full Nation article.]

A trip down memory lane, in darker days: the Law Librarian and the FBI.

Last Thoughts on Legislative Drafting and Poetry Month (April at the Law Library of Congress)

“The Unacknowledged Legislators of the World,” April 28, 2015 by Jennifer Davis (Law Library of Congress)

“…. The centrality of interpretation to law and poetry is also explored by Wallace Stevens, most markedly in his poem “Metaphors of a Magnifico“:

Twenty men crossing a bridge,
Into a village,
Are twenty men crossing twenty bridges,
Into twenty villages,
Or one man
Crossing a single bridge into a village….

[Link to full Library of Congress blog post.]

California Court Documents: Trial Court Documents and Appellate Court Briefs

California Superior (trial) Court documents note: availability and cost will vary from one Superior Court to another.

Visit the California Superior Court website where the case was filed and decided:

For example:

1) Alameda County: The Superior Court of California, County of Alameda, provides the public with online access to civil case records (documents and information) through Alameda County Court DomainWeb. Searching for dockets is free but retrieving documents is fee based and anyone with a credit card can create an account to retrieve documents. (Visit the Alameda County Law Library website.)

2) Orange County: Superior Court allows any person in the 50 United States to purchase some court documents online. Here in the Law Library we do not have access. Case name search is only available if the individual has set up an account.

3) San Bernardino County: Most of the documents going back into at least the 1990s are available through the San Bernardino Superior Court website. The Court determines court document availability and cost, if any. As of the now, the Court does not charge for access. (Visit the San Bernardino County Law Library website.)

California Appellate Court briefs:

The Council of California County Law Librarians (CCCLL) has a guide to major collections of California appellate court briefs.

Other CCCLL law libraries may also have briefs in their print or digital collections.

California has an excellent family of county law librarians who work together through the Council of California County Law Librarians (CCCLL).

Oregon Supreme Court: PERS Decision (4/30/15)

Moro v. State of Oregon, 357 Or 167 (S061452) (2015)

“.... Before Balmer, Chief Justice, and Kistler, Walters, Linder, Brewer, and Baldwin, Justices, and Haselton, Chief Judge of the Oregon Court of Appeals, Justice pro tempore.**

Brewer, J., concurred and filed an opinion. Oregon Laws 2013, chapter 53, sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, are declared unconstitutional under Article I, section 21, of the Oregon Constitution insofar as they affect retirement benefits earned before May 6, 2013. Oregon Laws 2013, chapter 2, sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Special Session), are declared unconstitutional under Article I, section 21, of the Oregon Constitution insofar as they affect retirement benefits earned before October 8, 2013. Oregon Laws 2013, chapter 2, section 8 (Special Session) is declared void. Petitioners’ requests for relief challenging Oregon Laws 2013, chapter 53, sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17, are denied….” [Moro v State of Oregon]