Is this a true story stranger than fiction or a clever hoax or urban legend??
The Doc is in blog reports that the drug-resistant TB victim (who ignored doctor’s orders and swept past border and airport security) is a personal injury lawyer. And, as all cute 7-year olds would then say, “it gets better!” The father-in-law is a microbiologist with the CDC. Another news story here, from the LA Times.
Dog Law in Oregon (but beware of those cats and ferrets!):
HB 2345 (2007) (engrossed bill here) has passed both chambers of the legislature and appears to be on the way to the Governor (look for the “enrolled bill” in a few days). Here is a summary (from the engrossed bill) and a history (as of today):
“The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor’s brief statement of the essential features of the measure.
Leave it to soldiers not to be able to call a library a library. It’s very funny. Maybe the name “library” is too girly? too wimpy? too something not manly or tough enough?
But the Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) is a wonderful sounding place (it’s a library!) and I love the name. After all, isn’t a library also a Center for Lessons Learned? (If only we would learn them!) This week’s (5/25/07) This American Life (TAL) broadcast a superb program on the CALL and it is worth listening to (free podcast/download from the TAL website).
Juvenile-law attorneys, teens, and parents may not know about the wealth of information at the Juvenile Rights Project web page. Prepare to spend some time digging deeply into and through it. Parents and teens might want to look at the Helpline page and links. Attorneys will want to look at the many newsletters and reports. The guides for teens in foster care, for incarcerated parents, and many others provide a wealth of valuable information.
It doesn’t get any better than a new Bedsworth, so enjoy. Excerpt here:
“There are only six grounds for divorce in New York. Adultery or cruel and inhuman treatment are the first two, but they tend to be literal about the “cruel and inhuman treatment” part. “You don’t bring me flowers anymore,” apparently doesn’t cut it.
It’s the other four grounds I find most interesting. They consist of: (1) living apart for a year, (2) living apart for a year, (3) living apart for a year, or (4) going to prison for three years.
Honest, that’s what the statute provides. I don’t know why. I’m 3,000 miles from New York and there is no one I want to divorce there, so it would be wrong for me to spend a lot of time researching this, but four of the six grounds for divorce in New York are: abandonment for a year, living apart under a court-approved separation agreement for a year, living apart under contract for a year, or one of the parties being imprisoned for three years.
Another book reading to attend (I last blogged about one here):
Sasha Abramsky, author of “American Furies: Crime, Punishment, and Vengeance in the Age of Mass Imprisonment,” will be reading from her book and answering questions at Powell’s City of Books, on Friday, June 1st, at 7:30 p.m.
From Powell’s web site:
“In this dramatic exposé of U.S. penitentiaries and the communities around them, Sasha Abramsky finds that prisons have dumped their age-old goal of rehabilitation, often for political reasons. Brilliantly researched and compellingly told, American Furies: Crime, Punishment, and Vengeance in the Age of Mass Imprisonment shows that the ethos of “lock ’em up and throw away the key” has enormous social costs.”
The return of Shlep is very welcome news. For updates on pro se litant news around the country, and links to even more pro se litigant news blogs and web sites, visit Shlep now and meet the new hosts.
Sunday’s Oregonian, 5/27/07, had two stories about two prosecutors, Norman Frink, Jr., a Multnomah County prosecutor and Mark Lindquist, a Pierce County, Washington, prosecutor (who will discuss his new book (“The King of Methlahem”) at Powell’s Books on Hawthorne, Thursday, May 31st, at 7:30 p.m.)
Will the two prosecutors (one who reads widely and has a picture in his office of Meg Ryan and the other who writes novels and has a picture in his office of Kurt Cobain (if we are to believe the Oregonian writers, Anne Saker and Jeff Baker)) meet?
There isn’t a legal or other researcher who hasn’t gnashed teeth over the quality of indexes, print and online. I think the only scholars who don’t complain about their own discipline’s indexes are theologians (but then they have access to higher indexing powers than we mere mortals do :-).
Professional indexers work really hard, but need to earn a living and there isn’t a whole lot of R&D money out there to support them while they play at indexing, which is the only way we’ll get some real creativity going. As long as publishers (print and online) give short shrift to the quality of their indexes, not much is going to change.
Those of us who use Westlaw and Lexis are aware how dated these databases look and function and how these phenomenal data repositories are in need of some brave new Indexing Models. A librarian friend sent me this example of an unusual and effective archive/index – so incredibly simple too as many good indexes are, e.g. here and here (and even Edward Tufte might like it). We really should be at the beginning of a Renaissance of Indexing. I should live so long – sigh.
Inter Alia spotlights a new mental disability law blog, which has a nice little roundup of the Winkelman case. Another mental disabilities blog is here.
Oregon Legal Research Blog