U.S. Supreme Court questions someone will ask about and that we will want to find quickly.
These can all be found at the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 Term webpage:
1) The “firefighters” case, aka the “new haven firefighters case”: Ricci V. DeStefano, 07-1428 (decided 6/29/09)
See the explanatory memo at the Oregon State Bar (OSB):
“Effective July 1, 2009, some state court filing fees will change due to 2007 legislative changes that become effective July 1, 2009, and the extension of the temporary filing fee surcharges through September 30, 2009, as provided in a 2009 legislative bill (HB 2287B). The Oregon Judicial Department has more information here.
For circuit courts, there is no single circuit court fee schedule, because circuit court fees vary by county depending on local fee assessments. If a court has not posted its fee schedule on its webpage, contact the court directly for information….” (Link to full OSB announcement)
It’s a new month and the funniest judge in the country is still on the bench and online:
Justice Bedsworth, of the California Court of Appeals, returns in July 2009 with his not to be missed Criminal Waste of Space column in the Orange County Lawyer Magazine:
“A Ticket to Walk: Beds takes a look at prison administration“
Oregon State Bar (OSB) Bulletin: June 2009: Duty of Confidentiality: Top 10 Myths, by Helen Hierschbiel, will be interesting for lawyer and client alike. It is another reminder to non-attorneys that you can’t learn the law from watching television shows or reading legal fiction, not that they aren’t fun and I highly recommend you keep enjoying both. But don’t confuse what you see portrayed on the big screen, or the Internet or in a novel, with the actual practice and word of law.
Excerpt: “If there is one duty that virtually all lawyers have ingrained in their psyches, it is the duty to protect their clients’ confidential information. Notwithstanding this basic instinct, myths about the duty abound. In a highly unscientific method called “asking around,” the OSB general counsel’s office compiled the following list of top 10 myths about the duty of confidentiality, and the truth behind these myths….
…
Myth #3: You may reveal your client’s confidences after the client has died.
Contrary to popular belief, the lawyer-client privilege survives the death of the client. The U.S. Supreme Court explained the purpose of this rule in Swidler & Berlin v. United States, 524 U.S. 399, 407 (1998), saying that posthumous application of the privilege encourages full and frank communication with counsel….” (read full article)
Link to Oregon Rules of Professional Responsibility and other sources of information on the regulation of attorneys in Oregon.
Can a self-represented (pro se) litigant claim “attorneys fees?”
For a discussion of the meaning of attorneys fees in the context of a pro se litigant’s public records lawsuit, I recommend you read the recently decided (June 17) Colby v. Gunson (A133979) (2009).
Excerpt: “Plaintiff argues that he is entitled to attorney fees and costs under ORS 192.490(3) because he is a “person seeking the right to inspect” public records, and he prevailed in the appeal. Defendant contends that the statutory reference to “attorney fees” includes only fees that are charged to a client under a contractual commitment between an attorney and client and not the value of the time invested in the case by a self-represented client. Our determination of the intended meaning of the term “attorney fees” in ORS 192.490(3) is governed by the method described in PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 610-12, 859 P2d 1143 (1993), as recently modified by State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160, 171-72, ___ P3d ___ (2009) (examination of the text and context of the statute, and legislative history of the enactment when that history appears useful to the court’s analysis)….
…
ORS 192.409(3) does not require that the attorney fees be “incurred.” The statutory construction issue in this case, then, is whether the bare term “attorney fees” implies that same contractual dynamic–a charge by an attorney that a separate entity is obligated to pay. We determine the legislative intent in the use of particular statutory wording by giving words their plain, natural, and ordinary meaning. Haynes v. Tri-County Metro., 337 Or 659, 663, 103 P3d 101 (2004). In common parlance, “attorney fee” connotes a charge for an attorney’s professional services. Webster’s Third New Int’l Dictionary 833 (unabridged ed 2002) defines “fee” to include “compensation often in the form of a fixed charge for professional service or for special and requested exercise of talent or of skill (as by an artist) (a doctor’s ~) (a lawyer’s retainer ~).” Similarly, Black’s Law Dictionary 139 (8th ed 2004) defines “attorney fee” as “[t]he charge to a client for services performed for the client, such as an hourly fee, a flat fee, or a contingent fee.” A “charge,” in turn, arises in a transaction between two persons. Webster’s defines “charge” to mean:…” (read full case!)
From the Oregon Legislature Clerk of the House website:
“In 1999, the Legislative Assembly adopted ORS 171.022, which reads, “Except as otherwise provided in the Act, an Act of the Legislative Assembly takes effect on January 1 of the year after passage of the Act.”
Some bills contain a clause which specify a particular effective date. Still others may have emergency, sunset, or referendum clauses attached.”
See also previous OLR Blog post on effective dates of legislation.
From the Law Writing Prof Blog:
Northwest Regional Legal Writing Conference in Portland – August 28-29, 2009
“Lewis & Clark Law School and the University of Oregon School of Law are pleased to announce their joint sponsorship of the 2009 Northwest Regional Legal Writing Conference. Because of that sponsorship, the conference will have no registration fee.
An excellent, and fast, tutorial on free and low cost legal research tools is available from the Duke University law librarians: The Unexploded Cow’s Guide to Legal Research.
My previous posts on free and low-cost legal research are here and here (with additional imbedded links).
Even in the world of zines and social networking, there is still a kind of Periodical Underworld, which isn’t as under the world as it used to be, but it’s still not quite mainstream.
Here is an AP story that I found through Google News, about the Prison Legal News (PLN):
Ex-con’s magazine focuses on advocacy, prison life, by JOHN CURRAN, May 24, 2009. Other releases of the story are here and here.
I went to the Amazing World of Claymation exhibit at the Oregon Historical Society and, of course, saw the legal research angle! Wouldn’t any law librarian?
So, you may ask, what does legal research have to do with claymation?
Quite a lot, if you want to make a business (or any money) out of the art and craft of claymation. And without business or money, most of us would never have heard of claymation, which would be very sad.
Oregon Legal Research Blog