Misdirection

I don't always read the instructions that come with things less complicated than a toothbrush but sometimes doing so ends up being more fun than the products themselves.

One thing I love doing, however, is looking to see just how many warranties a manufacturer can attempt to disclaim? Why every one of course. (Good luck!). Recently, in the course of contemplating the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, the following instructional directives/commands/pleas jumped out at me:

Panasonic Hairdryer:
"Never use while underwater."

Graco Children's Car Seat:
"Not for use on motorcycles, watercraft or farm equipment, including push or riding lawn mowers."

Kirtland Stainless Chaffing Dishes:
"Never use heated fuel with cold dishes."

Pizza Box from Dion's Pizza (A local Albuquerque chain):
"Always remove pizza from box before reheating in oven or over open flame."

LG Front-Loading Washer:
"Never attempt to operate washer when someone is inside unit."

Craftsman Circular Saw:
"Use Care When Operating - When in motion, blade will cut skin on contact."

As I'm working on a fairly large products liability case right now, I'm reminded that someone, somewhere has taken the above action, been injured as a result and sued the manufacturer for their injuries under a theory of products liability. The instructions, while clearly appearing to fly in the face of common sense also have the legal effect of serving to warn and trim back at least one branch of a potential plaintiff's case.

Neat huh? Not so much common sense as common law. Oh, and don't even think about scoffing and telling me we live in too litigious a society.

Instead, consider that we live in a society where most companies need to put a notice on their return envelopes informing us, the wise, sue-happy American public to, "Affix Postage. Post Office will not deliver without a stamp."

I, uh, rest my case.

Gift You!

So what did you get for Christmas?

Peace?
(No. Not if we're in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Congo, Sudan and a long list of other places we never hear about!)

Goodwill?
(Nope. Especially if we're talking about the last parking spot at Trader Joe's!)

Fellowship?
(Nada! Particularly if we've overstayed our visa or crossed the border "illegally"!)

Your two front teeth?
(Nope, implants!)

Well, what did you get for Christmas then?
(One damn funny movie with a title that says it all... Sexy Beast!)

Maybe Christmas is about getting what you want as long as you don't live in certain places, do ride a bicycle to shop and just happen to be born in the United States...

Cool...

Oh, but implant-wise having dental uh, "insurance" makes no difference either way! It doesn't cover them!

Visions of Sugar Plums

Yes, boys and girls I'm nothing if not realistic, even cynical when it comes to Christmas.

But that won't keep me from enjoying the glow of the tree lights and curling up on the couch with my main squeeze, a bottle of Korbel Brut handy and Christmas in Connecticut on the big screen.

Forget fat Santa boy. That's kid's stuff. I'll take a young Barbara Stanwyck on a ladder any day.

Spend All You Want... We'll Print More.

Christmas time is here and I can't seem to get that chorus from a Charlie Brown Christmas out of my head.


This is the time of year when people smile a little more between the stress of finding the "perfect" gift for you-know-who. (I don't know who, YOU know who!) Of course, this is also the time when most people dig themselves deeper into debt for the sole purpose of feeling like they're flush with cash and yule-tide cheer; i.e. the credit card bills won't arrive until mid-January so put another gift under that tree.

Christmas always reminds me that the majority of Americans continue to live way beyond their financial means (and yes, I do think about this stuff). More than any other holiday, Christmas justifies excess and personal irresponsibility. To me, the holiday's purpose is first and foremost a mass rationalization for the group-think of spending money one doesn't have. Retailers and the media send a message that resonates quite effectively for family members who "feel" like they need to buy a sufficient number of presents or they'll "feel" less good about themselves.

Cynical? Whatever. Realistic? You bet'cha!

Articles abound about consumer confidence; i.e. willingness to spend and whether or not retailers are or are not going to make projected increased sales this year. At the same time, the mortgage issue (I refuse to subscribe to the "C" word) continues to be an editor's dream and the rate of credit card defaults remains on a steady upward climb.

I'd like to see media reporting and consumer education that effectively correlates the two issues; namely your holiday spending translates into your deepening consumer debt. Reduce one and the other must follow. I admit that perhaps that might be too uh.. cynical or even too realistic for all those shoppers striving to feel good during this holiday season. It's certain they don't want to hear that message.


But didn't Linus tell Charlie Brown that Christmas is not all about getting what you want?

Smart guy that Linus.

Double Indemnity for Credit

It's almost the end of the year and all over the U.S. busy little lawyers are scurrying around doing their best to rack up enough continuing legal education (CLE) credits to remain in good standing with their respective bars for at least one more year.

Although both Wisconsin and New Mexico give first year lawyers a break and don't require CLEs from them until the following year after admission (2008 in my case), it's never to early to let one's butt grow numb via the combined efforts of a hotel chair and an overly sentence-heavy, power point slide show.

(Tip for Presenters: Stop reading the paragraphs of information you've put in your slides. Let the audience do that, it helps keep them awake).

I spent the day in a bad faith insurance CLE, which if truth be told was interesting and informative.

The seminar had the added bonus of reminding me of a particular insurance course at Wisconsin taught by one Professor Peter Carstensen. His course was great not only because of the subject, but also because Carstensen is a funny guy who knows how to keep his audience entertained. The only issue I had with the course was that it was scheduled to meet in the wee early hours of the morning, i.e. 8:00, 8:15 or some such time and which significantly impacted my attendance, no doubt.

But to think... a scant 18 months after first learning about subrogation, bad faith and those sneaky endorsements, I'm actually practicing insurance defense and enjoying myself immensely.

Thanks Pete!

Makes You Wanna' Treat Me with More Respect, Don't It?

Checking my email this morning, I found the daily news digest from Law.com indicating that starting salaries for new associates have been raised by one DC law firm to the lofty height of $180K annually.

One-hundred and eighty thousand dollars per year? For a brand-spanking new attorney fresh from the trials and tribulations of law school?

Wait, I'm one of those aren't I? You mean I'm worth 180 GRAND? (Shhhh, I say to the supervising attorneys giggling in the background).

Please...

I'd like to put that figure in perspective:

One hundred and eighty thousand dollars is more than a Member of Congress makes annually ($165,200) and more than the minimum starting salary in the NFL ($131,000), NHL ($125,000) and MLB ($109,000). It's more than eight times the federal poverty line for a family of four and nearly double what a top tier law school charges for tuition. More importantly, its a number that suggests that the client's money is somehow worth less than the firm's own. After all, it's the clients paying for these salaries, not the partners (find me one partner who wants to take funds out of their annual bonuses to pay new law grads such sums, and I'll show you a partner who's "Of Counsel".)

Now correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the point of being an associate that one has yet to learn enough to participate as a full partner in the practice of law with other lawyers? Is there anyone out there that thinks a first year associate, and I don't care if he or she graduated top of their class at Harvard, knows one single thing about the 'practice' of law?

So why the inflated salary?

In a word, oneupmanship. The firm at issue here, Williams & Connoley, is a DC-based firm that wants to top the New York firms in the salary department. Look at us, aren't we spiffy?

Oh, and there are practicalities at stake too of course. "The firm does not offer end-of-the-year bonuses as most firms do, so it typically compensates by paying higher base salaries."

Ohhhhh... of course.

Pumping Legal Iron...

Headline this morning from the Chicago Tribune grabbed my attention:

"Roberts Admits to Taking Steroids"

Until I saw that the article was referring to that 'other' Roberts, I couldn't help but wonder if the Chief Justice's steroid use might help overcome the Supreme Court's apparent unwillingness to take on the heavy lifting required in granting certiorari to more than the hundred or so cases is presently accepts each year?

Now, Get to Work!

Ah well... It seems the ABA Journal published its "Blawg 100" and the old R&G Law apparently did not make the cut.

Oversight? I doubt it. The truth is, I've not been updating the blog like I should, given its obvious niche audience and subject matter.

But no more folks!

Going forward, the goal for 2008 is to make the Top 100 by focusing on legal topics of interest, albeit with that unique Land of Enchantment flavor; i.e. a red or green perspective.

Today, you are witness as we embark on the exciting, improved Spinal Tap... er, uh, Red and Green Law.

We hope you enjoy our new direction.

Never Forget!

After a lifetime of slurping at the public trough and all the "I'm not gay!", "I'll resign", "I'm not resigning!" rhetoric, Senator Larry Craig will never-the-less be remembered for his pit-stop in a Minneapolis Airport mens room that went badly awry.


Oh well, maybe he'll get something long and hard for Christmas in his stocking.

After all kiddies, Santa equally knows when you've been nice or naughty.