“Oregon Statutory Time Limitations” 2014 Edition (BarBooks)

The 2014 edition of Oregon Statutory Time Limitations is available on BarBooks.

Oregon lawyers have access through the bar association and others through the county law libraries that subscribe to BarBooks.

(In the past one could purchase a print copy of this book. We don’t know yet if this one will be available in print or digital format for purchase and use outside of BarBooks.)

Mandatory eFiling for Oregon Attorneys, December 1, 2014

Excerpt from the CJ announcement (link from Oregon LPM blog):

Mandatory eFiling Plan for Attorneys Filing in Oregon State Courts

Chief Justice Thomas A. Balmer, Oregon Supreme Court, has approved a plan for the move to a mandatory eFiling requirement for attorneys filing as es in Oregon’s circuit and appellate courts. The Oregon Judicial department will circulate proposed court rules in the upcoming months for comment. he plan calls for a mandatory date of December 1, 2014 for the eleven circuit courts that currently have the Oregon eCourt system, including the filing component (File and Serve), and includes a transition plan for those courts that implement later….” [Link to Law Practice Management blog post.]

Pronoun Puzzles: “He said, She said” in Oregon Legal Documents

“He said, she said,” by Ian Pisarcik, Legal Publications Attorney Editor

Excerpt: “One of my favorite cartoons depicts a young female student standing next to a tall male teacher. Both are staring at a chalkboard. The chalkboard reads: Stone Age Man, Bronze Age Man, and Iron Age Man. The speech bubble extending from the young girls mouth asks: “Did they have women in those days?”

“Gender-neutral language is achieved by avoiding the use of ‘gendered generics‘ (male or female nouns and pronouns used to refer to both men and women).” This is easier said than done. But so is carrying a tune, and that doesn’t stop nine out of ten I-5 drivers from pulling their lips back and pretending they’re Mick Jagger….” [Link to full OSB Legal Pubs He said/She said blog post.]

Notario Fraud Conference (Oregon State Bar CLE, 9/24/14)

Notario Fraud Conference at the bar on September 24, 2014 from 1:00 to 4:45 p.m. at the OSB Center. The conference is co-sponsored by the Oregon Chapter of American Immigration Lawyers Association and in cooperation with the OSB Consumer Law Section. Participants will earn 3.75 Access to Justice MCLE Credits.

Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown will give the keynote address.

“…. You will hear up-to-date information about the growing problem of dishonest notarios, and learn about the remedies available to victims. Notarios are nonlawyers who commonly provide immigration, tax, and other legal advice to members of immigrant communities. Victims of notario fraud often pay thousands of dollars, only to find out they will never get the results they hoped for because of dishonest notarios who promise results they cannot deliver.…” [Link to "Notario Fraud Conference" information at the OSB/CLE website.]

Lawyer Ethics: Advising Marijuana Users and Businesses (Washington State)

From Trial Ad (UW): Ethics of Advising Marijuana Users and Businesses

Excerpt: “Under RPC 1.2(d), a “lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal . . .” Does this cover lawyers advising clients under Washington’s new marijuana law, when possession is still a crime under federal law? ….” [Read full blog post.]

The Comment period for the proposed rule ends September 6, 2014.

How to Drive a Legal Editor Mad: To Verb is Human and/or To Adverb Divine?

An OSB editor takes to task users of the term “and/or”  – and makes a practical suggestion on how to avoid driving your editor mad:

“…. So how do you avoid this problem? The answer, as the muttering editor will tell you, is to simply say what you mean. If you mean or, say or; if you mean and, say and; if you mean one or the other or both, say just that. For example, the defendant may be charged with unlawful arrest or malicious prosecution, or both….”  [Link to the OSB Legal Pubs blog post and/or.]

Human Lawyers (and Law Librarians) vs. Online Legal Services: It’s Not About You

Jim Calloway’s blog post: GPSOLO: Law Practice 2020 has lots of tips including this one from GP Solo, vol. 31 No. 3, by David Hiersekorn:

“Online Legal Paper Mills: Are They a Threat and How Do We Compete?

…. Using LegalZoom as an example, a consumer goes to the website and sees testimonials from smiling customers. Then they go through the online questionnaire, never encountering a question that they can’t answer. And soon they find that they are just a credit card number away from having the document they went looking for.

The magic of the LegalZoom system is its ability to make consumers believe that they have found a complete solution and that they don’t need to look further. If a question is difficult or requires legal advice, then it doesn’t make its way into the process.

Think of it this way. If a consumer completes the process and doesn’t have any unanswered questions, what exactly is he or she going to go ask an attorney? In Carlin’s terms, consumers stop looking for additional solutions because they think they’ve already found one….

Remember, usefulness is the currency of the Internet. People flock to the most useful websites. They don’t care whether you’re an expert or how much experience you have. The web isn’t about you. It’s about them. Put yourself in their shoes, assume that they have just learned that they have a problem that you solve, and then walk them through the process of solving it.

Lawyers have a huge advantage in this regard. The non-lawyer services can’t give legal advice and they can’t promise results or suitability….

Six and A Half Tips to Get You Started….” [For full article, link to GP Solo article, "Online Paper Mills" and the 6-1/2 tips.]