Lawyerly law stuff that's interesting


In regards to inauguration day protesters that got arrested.

Government: Look… the rule of law doesn’t apply to our political enemies.

At least the judge didn’t stand for it… much.



“You can’t do good and be poor at the same time,” Millender testified. “You can’t help the poor and be poor; it makes no sense.”


Seems plausible and explains why Jesus was a millionaire.


Well, I hear his father was pretty well-off


And that’s why we have to get rid of the estate tax.


Dad was the worst kind of absentee landlord. Remember when there was that leak he took forever to fix?


Said he’d pick us up, one time, and yet my folks got stuck in the freaking desert for 40 years. Yeah, I’ve got a gripe.


Then there was that time Dad turned himself into a swan to fuck a king’s wife.


Let us all pray it is a landmark case so that we can later cite Thugtorious G’ v. Yarddown Muzik.


He needs to team up with Ruth Ginsberg and put out a duet album.


Law enforcement in this country are beyond fubar.



A lot of potential Trump voters in Florida prisons, possibly. But also possibly a lot of new voters for Dems or Black and Latino candidates, I guess. But which will turn out in greater numbers at the polls? I’m guessing the former, sadly.


Well, since Rick Scott ® as the Florida Gov had the absolute last say with no requirements, he was in the position to only restore ® felon voters’ rights.



That’s shocking!


So I have a question for you real lawyers (even you lapsed ones.).

The ACLU very entertainingamicus brief

Ask for this.

Plaintiffs are attempting to use this Court as vehicle to chill protected speech and silence
the marketplace of ideas. For the following reasons, the American Civil Liberties Union of West
Virginia Foundation (“ACLU-WV”) respectfully requests the Court deny Plaintiffs’ Motion for a
Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (“Pl.’s Mot.”) [Docket 1-1] and issue an
Order to Show Cause as to why this case should not be dismissed and Plaintiffs sanctioned.

This case is beyond meritless. It is offensive to the very ideals of free speech embodied in
the First Amendment. The fact that Plaintiffs filed this case is ridiculous enough; but, to pour
gasoline on the fire, plaintiffs’ counsel has also filed a motion asking the court to make John Oliver
not say mean things about him anymore. See Pl.’s Mot. [Docket 1-1]. It is frankly shocking that
Plaintiffs were able to find attorneys willing to file a lawsuit that is so obviously unconstitutional.

Astonishingly Bob Murray is appealing this case West Virginia Supreme court. This seems to me one of those clear-cut cases where Bob Murray is abusing the courts and should be paying HBOs legal fees and the lawyer sanctioned. What I’m missing?


Losing a case doesn’t mean you are abusing the system. And the ACLU are fine folks, but they don’t have the last word.

The plaintiffs alleged that Oliver said mean things and knowingly made false statements. The latter is actionable. Oliver provided his sources, which were legit. Truth is an absolute defense, so the lawsuit was dismissed.

Anyone can appeal. And maybe Oliver will sue for attorney’s fees, or maybe not.


I see the knowingly made false statements is understandable. I guess I was looking at the long list of unsuccessful cases and it seems like abuse to me. Obviously HBO is a big company and perfectly able to defend themselves, but a small town newspaper or blogger less so.