Last January’s experiment was fun and I’m leaving a week from tomorrow to go visit family in the Midwest prior to Leaguefest 2013, so we should be able to finish off this round of the ask-anything game right before then.
So here’s the rules again: You get only one question. Ask it in the comment section. I pick five of those questions to answer, one a day over the course of the next week.
In advance: Great Cases No. 6 will be Gibbons v. Ogden. And I feel as though there are three entire books I need to read before I can do it justice: it’s a king-sized case in every sense of the word. Which I’ll get to finishing as soon as I’m done with In The First Circle, Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power, Ike’s Bluff, and The Mongoliad: Book One.
I notice that there’s a great disparity of outcomes for folk sucked into our system of justice; if you cannot afford a lawyer, the worse you fare. Presuming you agree with this, my question is: How can we make our justice system more equitable?
What’s your bank account number?
Let me assure you, Professor, that given the contents of said account, there is functionally no means available by which you or anyone else could exploit that information which would redound to a substantial financial benefit.
You don’t need money in the account.
Gimme an account number as a bit of verification detail, and I can open a line of credit in your name. *Then* you’re screwed.
Burt,
If it can buy me In ‘n Out when I’m in SoCal, it’s all good. Watch out for that Patrick fellow, though. Sounds like he’s planning major home renovations or something.
It’s not violence that’s inherent in the system. It’s bad security processes.
James, that account may very well buy you In-N-Out when you’re in SoCal. You let me know when and where.
Canoga Park, midnight.
Will there be time limits on the term of service of any federal (Article III) judges before 2045?
Aren’t bankruptcy judges up for 6 year terms, like senators?
That’s why I said Art III (who, i believe are all currently lifetime appointments*). Bankruptcy judges are considered Art I positions (if wiki is accurate, and I have no reason to doubt it in this instance) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_bankruptcy_court
*and it could be that the lifetime tenure can only be altered via a constitutional amendment, but I’m not sure about that. (and I’m not asking another question!)
I think it’s actually by statute; somewhere in title 28.
Kolohe,
Yes, changing life tenure for federal judges would require a constitutional amendment. Article III, section 1, says ” The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour,”.
It says the same thing concerning district judges in 28 USC 134, and for circuit judges at sec. 44.
But never does it say that “good behavior” is the sole consideration.
Actually, it goes on to talk about residing in the district, etc.
Federal magistrates are under 28 USC 631.
They have an 8-yr appointment.
Where is the power of Congress limited in legislating term limits for the judiciary?
Will,
At least as far as Article III judges goes, “shall hold their offices during good behaviour” is a constitutional rule. Any rule that would force them out while they’re still behaving well would be in contradiction to that rule.
You’re kind of a foodie, so here’s one…
Let’s say you’re stuck preparing only one set of meals for the rest of your life. I’ll let Tod construct the fanciful description of why.
Breakfast, lunch, or dinner?
Wrinkle: the other two are prepared by two wretchedly unskilled chefs who produce meals that are safe to eat, but half the time they’re unpalatable at best and the other half of the time they’re actively bad.
“I’ll let Tod construct the fanciful description of why.”
Thanks a lot, Obama!
My work here is done.
“Patrick O’Bama” still sounds very Irish.
Government officials can seriously claim the 5th Amendment when it comes to answering questions about their job?
Wouldn’t that right apply to everyone? Isn’t that what the Bill of Rights means, JB? Otherwise, we get you’re game; replace ‘government officials’ with ‘bloggers.’
There is a DOJ criminal investigation going on. Why should she lose her 5th A rights?
The same reason she should lose her right to vote: being a government employee.
What should the Lakers do about Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard, Mike D’Antoni, specifically with regards to the 2013-14 season?
Have them all move in together and make a reality show about it.
The Real Failures of Los Angeles?
They didn’t fail, they performed as expected.
What are Burt Likko’s thoughts on the adversarial system as a means of revealing truth?
Shut up! Punches James
Well, I’m convinced.
Truth.
What problems occur because we have a Capitalistic form of legal representation?
(A question I asked in this thread.)
My apologies for asking a second time.
What’s wrong with the Dodgers?
They left Brooklyn
Isn’t hockey great?
(How many SoCals are there here?)
A surprising number. Back before Leaguefest 2012 was announced, I was vaguely planning a trip to SoCal to meet a bunch of them.
You guys can take over Jack’s room for a night any time you’re in the area.
Do you think we should go back to a system of having people “read” for the law instead of law school?
This question has stuck in my mind.
Five worst horror movies of all time… Not just badly made, but so unwatchable, boringly bad that even as a bad horror movie aficionado you would rather punch kittens than have to sit through them again?
Other than Plan 9?
Plan 9…oh please….there are so many many movies worse this P9. P9 also had some serious goofy going for it, which plenty other movies don’t have.
Burt, I think this one’s got an ulterior motive; sounds like research for a future bar fight.
This is 1, and the other two in the series are 2 and 3.
I hope this counts as one question:
Do you believe that there are substantial problems with the class action torts*, and if so how would you go about reforming it?
(This comment was inspired by King of Torts, by John Grisham.)
* – I’m not talking about big-sized verdicts and the tort reform for such, but rather distribution of the proceeds, client recruitment, and along those lines.
A legal question. Magic Hat is suing West 6th Street Brewery for trademark infringement because Magic Hat uses a #9 and West 6th uses as 6*. linky.
Is it possible to trademark the idea of using a number and then sue people who use a different number and a different design in a different color but a similar font?
My two cents on this…
I think for a trademark infringement suit (or the like) to be successful, the plaintiff should have to demonstrate both damages and intentionality on the part of the defendant.
If there is no harm… well, what do you care?
And if there is harm but intentionality cannot be proven, a cease-and-desist order should suffice. Once the defendant is made aware of the infringement and harm, they should be given a grace period to make the necessary changes.
No one is going to accidentally buy the 6th Street Brew when they’re looking for Magic Hat #9. No harm, no foul.
Kazzy, there’s an odd thing about trademark — you actively have to defend it, or you loose it; think how ‘jell-o,’ a trademaked name, has become a household word for gelatins.
If there’s somewhere here with more experience in IP law, and trademarks in specific, they might be better able to illuminate the topic. But from what I’ve seen, trademark infringement cases seem somewhat more common then other potential IP violations because of the requirement that to maintain a trademark, you must defend that trademark; I’m not sure that the outcome of any individual case is as crucial as a record of defending the trademark in case there is a serious violation.
That’s interesting. I had no idea it worked that way. With just a superficial understanding, it seems to create some really perverse incentives.
Yes, it does.
My favorite recent ‘trademark’ incident is The Jayne Hat.
I’m kinda partial to Victor Stanley II, for a few reasons.
This was a patent infringement case between two furniture manufacturers.
The case has gotten a lot of ink on the topic of sanctions and spoliation; and granted, there is a handy reference guide to every federal circuit attached as an appendix.
Basically stated, the court ordered the defendant to pay over $1 million in sanctions, awarded summary judgement, costs, and attorneys fees to the plaintiff.
That’s pretty big right there.
But then they ordered him jailed for up to two years until he paid it off.
But it’s some of the stuff the guy did that makes it interesting. The order reads like a handbook of destruction of evidence.
And it goes into how one line of furniture by the defendant was named “Fuvista,” which stood for “F*ck you, Victor Stanley.”
The only occasion I know of where the F-word is used in an order of a federal court.
There was a case in Florida that had a Perry Mason-like breakdown of a witness on the stand. The witness confessed to a murder with a string of profanity, beginning with, “F*ck it.”
I couldn’t believe they wrote that into the transcript.
Will, there was also the “Fuck the Draft” case the SupCt heard, Cohen v. California.
The case of Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc. is most often cited as (a somewhat dated) means of determining “minimum contacts” by internet activity for personal jurisdiction. I believe this was actually a trademark case though.
Two very similar cases come to mind; one involving a dealer of herbal supplements, and another of hair care products. Both were in Western states (Colorado, Oklahoma). Both did substantial business by internet sales. Both had competitors in Eastern states with the same name (Florida, Maryland).
Both cases were dismissed, because they could not show ‘purposeful availment’ in the forum state; i.e. the markets did not overlap to a substantial enough degree to support a claim.
Which is what I see happening in this case.
Anyway, they’re both infringing on Zippo Marx.
The standard here will be whether the newer mark is “confusingly similar” to the older mark, as viewed from the perspective of an “ordinary consumer” (as opposed to a subject matter expert).
This particular case has a lower standard, as it’s “confusingly similar after some number of beers”.
Well, 6th’s IPA only comes in green cans (with really snazzy bright-green snap rings holding the 6-pack together). As far as I’ve seen, Magic Hat only comes in brown bottles with orange labels. You’d have to drink a lot of beer to confuse the two.
There are rumors circulating in the liquor stores that Alltech (the horse-feed manufacturer and local brewer who sponsored the World Equestrian Games last year) might have had something to do with the suit. They started up in the business several years ago, producing Kentucky Ale and Bourbon Barrel Ales, which are distributed by Eagle Distributors, and want to become the go-to beer for Kentucky (and later, the world!!!). Eagle’s local competitor is Clark Distributing which is carrying the new 6th Street products. There is said to be bad blood between the two brewers because one or more of Alltech’s brew masters left to form or join 6th Street. It’s possible that Alltech or Eagle Distributing goaded Magic Hat into this action, and of course just a week or so ago Alltech introduced their own IPA, in a can, to compete directly with 6th Street’s flagship offering (and this after several years of only offering two beers, and only in bottles).
The city seems to have rallied strongly in 6th Street’s defense, and the folks there are getting news stories and long radio interviews and everything. Sales have jumped two or three-fold in the past week, according to the clerk I talked to. Given the size of Magic Hat (headquarter in New York City or Puerto Rico), a David vs. Goliath loyalty as taken hold. It will be interesting to see what happens.
I’m still interested in your views on Taft, both as a justice and as president.
He was really fat.
When he sat around the White House…
He was big-boned.
Best SupCt CJ who was ever POTUS, best POTUS who was ever SupCt CJ.
I see that the comments for being underwater on your home are closed. So I’ll ask here. Being underwater is defined as your house being worth less on the market than you owe the bank on it. But where does my initial payment — 40,000 thin ones– fit into the equation? This was my life’s savings; I don’t care about the bank. I don’t have to move yet, but layoffs are now a daily event (go America!), so calculating my next move.
Thanks.
I’m sorry Franc but that money is in the house. A down payment goes to the purchase price. It’s not analagous to a security deposit. If you owe more than the market price on your house, the money is gone. If you can, hold on to the house and wait for the market to creep back up to a positive-equity situation.
Thanks Burt. This little “detail” is seldom addressed in “underwater” discussions. Appreciate the clarification.