Bloggers Impacting the World of Litigation 120
DaveKleiman writes "Will bloggers change the world of Supreme Court litigation by inspecting published opinions? Rachel C. Lee has an interesting take on the question in the Stanford Law Review, Ex Parte Blogging: the Legal Ethics of Supreme Court Advocacy In the Internet Era (PDF). She begins the review with: 'Lawyers have been arguing their cases before the Supreme Court for over two centuries, while the phenomenon of legal blogs is perhaps a decade old. Yet legal blogs cannot be dismissed as merely a sideshow novelty — they are already capable of having a substantial impact on Supreme Court litigation.' The review hits on many key points both for and against the use of blogging, but ultimately concludes that members of the Court and their staff will have to refrain from reading any blog post relating to a pending case, no matter who it is written by. It's even possible we'll get carefully drafted rules preventing blogging by attorneys." It's going to be tough to make any such prohibition work. After all, Groklaw's PJ is not an attorney.
Re:Why not? (Score:5, Funny)
Well IANAL but I'm willing to bet a real one would disagree with you. ;)
Re:Why not? (Score:2, Funny)
IAAL, a plaintiffs' attorney, in fact. ...
My caselaw search engine uses Boolean operators. Law school just teaches you the magic words to look for.
Interesting. Does your ambulance search engine show you their locations on Google maps?
(too easy to resist)
Re:Why not? (Score:3, Funny)
when in fact they ultimately do something directly analogous to what I did in high school speech: do some research and present an opinion in a persuasive manner.
$.10 for tapping with the hammer
$.10 for knowing where to tap
$999.80 for being allowed to.
Re:Why not? (Score:1, Funny)
I'll see you in court!
--
H. Reiser