Regardless of political affiliation, Tina Fey's grand return to Saturday Night Live to impersonate Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin has people on the floor laughing.  Professor Adler @ Volokh Conspiracy wakes up earlier than I do, and linked the 3 Fey-as-Palin sketches on this blog post with a poll (Palin - Couric is currently leading. Palin & Hillary Press Conference Palin interview with Katie Couric VP Debate - Palin/Biden I was wondering if Fey would be breaking any laws if she impersonated Palin and staged a public rally.  I know it's a crime to impersonate a police officer, so it would likely be similarly illegal to impersonate an acting governor.  But would there be a First Amendment parody exception? The real Gov. Palin

So I'm doing a ton of research for PSLR and came across this sweet Florida statute that was "void for vagueness because it did not give fair notice of what conduct was forbidden and because it encouraged arbitrary and erratic arrests by the police." (Lexis) Jacksonville Ordinance Code § 26-57 provided at the time of these arrests and convictions as follows: "Rogues and vagabonds, or dissolute persons who go about begging, common gamblers, persons who use juggling or unlawful games or plays, common drunkards, common night walkers, thieves, pilferers or pickpockets, traders in stolen property, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons, keepers of gambling places, common railers and brawlers, persons wandering or strolling around from place to place without any lawful purpose or object, habitual loafers, disorderly persons, persons neglecting all lawful business and habitually spending their time by frequenting houses of ill fame, gaming houses, or places where alcoholic beverages are sold or served, persons able to work but habitually living upon the earnings of their wives or minor children shall be deemed vagrants and, upon conviction in the Municipal Court shall be punished as provided for Class D offenses." Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 158 (1972). "Four of the ...

I would be interested to know how many times a certain R.E.M. song has been referenced within the last week. As a rational consumer of goods (law firms) who is in the process of making an important choice (2L summer employment), I've been reading a lot about how the recent bailouts of Fannie/Freddie and AIG, and failures of Bear Sterns and Lehman Bros. (hereinafter "1929" or "the crisis") will change the legal landscape.  Recognizing that my future as a litigation associate will be significantly impacted by this crisis, even if I don't specialize in financial services, is an important first step. I believe that law students should be aware of the business world to be better able to serve their clients, and see two major consequences of the current financial crisis: (1) Firms will change their employment practices, and (2) Clients will demand more of their firms. The Shrinking Legal Employment Market My advice for 1Ls - study harder, for 2Ls - job search smarter (diversify), for 3Ls - pray.  There's no doubt that the top large law firms will be directly affected by these business failures. Above the Law conducted a survey of associates in major markets to gauge their reactions.  It's a ...

I can't take credit for the idea behind this post. My awesome civ pro / con law professor / research adviser devoted the end of a civ pro class to watching some of these crazy depositions while we were studying discovery rules. Without further adieu, I give you the Top 6 Most Amusing Depositions. 6. "Background Noise on the Phone" [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dz4YBrUML-8&hl=en&fs=1] Okay, so it's debatable whether this one belongs in this collection as the hilarity comes from a source other than the deposed. But it's still amusing, right? This is why I always hate being on conference calls. Is there a polite way to tell some random guy to shut his kid up? I don't even want to consider whether there is a polite way to tell someone to stop pleasuring themselves and/or others. 5. Thank God for Rape Shield Laws [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7T3HLvRrA8&hl=en&fs=1] In this long clip, a junior associate is set up by his firm with a fake, ridiculous deposition. I don't know whether I love or hate this firm for setting up this elaborate situation. The only thing that remains certain is that this guy has some awesome frames. 4. "Would You Object if I Wear a Mask Over My Face?" [youtube="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1FdIDGmdSU"] I'm actually really excited about this ...

Sometimes it dawns on me that I am getting older.  Preferences change over time, you fall into patterns and life slows down a little.  So it's late Friday night in a collegetown--I'm sipping a beer on my couch next to my girlfriend, and we're ignoring a movie in favor of our computers.  The twin 12" Lenovos that are perched on our laps let us explore the wireless internets. I figure I'd share an interesting article I found while procrastinating (writing cover letters).  Sidenote: sorry employers, but I can't find a tactful way of telling a firm that I think it's sweet that oral advocacy skills just saved your client $4 billion (scotusblog & o'melveny). Washington Post article about copyright infringement and the facebook craze Scrabulous.  This blog article has a description of the similarities w/ pictures, and a link to the complaint.

You know how angry you get when you're sitting down to write a brief for the Supreme Court in the comfort of your own home, and someone starts using a jackhammer next to your head? Yeah, neither did I until this past week. See this audio clip for details. [audio http://www.personal.psu.edu/jra221/audio/jackhammers.mp3] Well, off to Barnes & Noble.

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="529" caption="Click to enlarge."][/caption] It wasn't my goal to mimic xkcd (though he is awesome) -- I just can't draw.

I'm working a bit late to get some additional material for my research adviser (read: boss) and while researching Terms of Service Agreements, I came across the case Van$ Money Pie Inc., 47 U.S.P.Q.2d 1020 (N.D. Cal. 1998). For some reason, I'm just not used to seeing symbols in case names. At first I thought it was a Lexis formatting error, but then I realized that it was just a character in the company name. That got me thinking. If I ever start my own company, I should name it something to really screw with Lexis/Westlaw searches. Maybe something like: L! L! L! Love or of atleast57(His!) /3 Pancakes What do you think? Flows off the tongue, right? Amusingly, the proper search for that name would be "love and pancakes." Could life be any more right than that?