Articles Posted in February, 2007

Here are two HOA proxies. Which one do you want your HOA to use? From Wayne Schiess, at his Legal Writing blog:

This one:

1. “In accordance with the Texas Nonprofit Corporation Act and the By-Laws of the Homeowners Association, the undersigned does hereby tender this proxy. The undersigned does hereby warrant that he/she is the sole owner of the hereinafter named property, or one of the owners of said property and after having consulted with the other owner/owners of said property, and in accordance with the agreement of said owners, warrants that he/she is entitled to vote on this matter in accordance with Article III of the By-Laws.”

Boleyblogs links to this article by Kenneth Adams on using Wikies for drafting contracts. I know “contract law” sounds very dull, but, if you’ll forgive the personal reminiscence, I used to be married to a most extraordinary law professor and contract law ran in his blood. Consequently I sat through days and nights listening to marvelous adventure stories on the history of contract law, of Williston and Corbin and Restatements, with side journeys by way of Gilmore and Leff and others who I never met but who lived through those law professors whose air I breathed and wine I drank for a treasured time in my life. So, to me, contract law is anything but dull. It’s also everywhere. It’s on your airline ticket; it’s on your sales receipt. It’s on your lease, your mortgage, your shrink wrap license, and it may even be there in a handshake.

The right to contract is about as sacred as the right to vote. Don’t take either lightly. But that doesn’t mean it’s all work and no fun. The writing skills needed by a lawyer to draft a great contract are as great as those of any great writer of poetry or prose, so read the great contract writers and cultivate the writing skills.

And don’t forget the wine. Today’s Oregonian Food Day has a terrific story about Madeira, which goes very well with roasted, toasted, or even fried contracts, served on the veranda with all parties. Don’t forget to invite the third-party-beneficiaries.

I just got a nice comment to my Zines and the Law post and by chance this at Overdue Media was posted today as well. I like how the cartoonists describe zines. And I liked the commentator’s idea for a legal zine about “historic musician legal battles.” Now if only I didn’t have 14 other projects waiting in the wings …

How could you resist a job with this title? (Though I have to admit I’m less concerned about the future of our digits than I am about our corporeal selves.)

Some reference questions are of the Duh/Huh variety, by which I mean there is often a quick and dirty answer that could just as well be followed by a “how much time do you have?” response. This article linked to from today’s Library Link of the Day reminded me of a question I had last week, which was along the lines of, “a friend looked over my shoulder while I was on the computer and wrote down my password and I want to know if I have a legal remedy.”

The duh answer is easy and you see it as well as I do. Change your password, pal (and maybe rethink your ideas of what “friends” are). The not-so-duh answers are much more interesting, but they do call for a little conversation, which I chose to have afterward with my assistant who wanted to know what was going through my very non-linear brain after hearing me mumble (off-line) about 18 USC 1346, thefts of intangibles, and other such imponderables. I explained to her why the duh answer may not have been sufficient in different circumstances. Did the caller’s friend use the password, did he use it for “bad” (layperson’s bad”) or for unlawful “bad” purposes, did his “friend” (!) pretend to be the caller (my patron), etc. If the patron hadn’t in the course of our conversation answered the question himself (“ha, ha, maybe I should change my password”) then I may have probed a little bit (we try not to probe too much) and then referred him to consumer or criminal law resources.

I used to use 18 USC 1346 and the Privacy Act of 1974 when I taught legal research in my previous life and came to love them as statutory research teaching tools (they are excellent vehicles for teaching legislative history and codification (or lack thereof) in all their glory). Law librarians are weird that way – we have crushes on statutes – go figure. I once organized a tour of the U.S. Office of the Law Revision Counsel for a group of law librarians visiting D.C. Ten years later, when I run into those same librarians, the first thing they say to me is, “I remember that great tour!” See what I mean about law librarians? And it was a great tour. Who wouldn’t want to know how the USC comes into being?

A law librarian on one of my listserves reminded me that Law Day (see also here) is celebrating its 50th anniversary in 2008 and lots of people are getting ready. When I looked at the recommended “Justice Talking” web site I noticed that their radio broadcasts of the same name are available at the web site. The program is not broadcast on any NPR stations in Oregon. I can’t vouch yet for the quality of the program (but hope to soon – your own reviews are welcome), but you can find them here and here for online and MP3 listening. Details for the upcoming (3/5/07) program on casino gambling and state revenues is here:

“Casino gambling has undergone a big boom in recent years as cash-strapped states and Native American tribes have opened casinos and entertainment complexes across the nation. In this edition of Justice Talking, we’ll take a look at who is profiting from these developments. Will casino gambling raise the state revenues that have been promised? How will gambling affect local neighborhoods and gamblers?” A future broadcast from Justice Talking.

From the Oregon Supreme Court:

“For those reasons, effective April 1, 2007, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals on the court’s own motion will strike any motion that does not comply with the titling requirements of ORAP 7.10(1)(b), (c), and (d), with leave to refile in compliance with those requirements. “

Announcement here (drop down Supreme Court and click on 2/23/07 media releases).

I may not be blogging for a few days, due to my impending jury service, duration unknown. I like jury service and I’m a librarian (perceived to be more open-minded than the average person?) so litigators seem to like me for their juries – sigh. I never minded serving before, but now that I’m in a 2-person operation, it’s much more difficult than when I worked in large organizations where I could be spared without having to lock the front door to the business. We’ll see, we’ll see.