In a story already making the rounds on the internet, Police at the Mexico City airport detained Roberto Cabrera, 38, and charged him with the trafficking of endangered species.  Why?  Well, they found 18 small endangered monkeys concealed under his clothing in a girdle; sadly 2 of them were already dead.

Get this- the monkeys, about 6 inches in size, were hidden in small sacks and suspended from the girdle and could fetch as much as $1,000 on the illegal wildlife market, which, like many other illegal markets, apparently thrives in Mexico.  The guy apparently bought the monkeys for about $30.00 ea. 

Thanks to ABC News for much of this information and the picture of the Titi Monkey. 

Why post this story?  Because I really like saying “smuggling monkeys” over and over again. 

Many thanks too www.glengoland.com, my buddy now living in Portland, Oregon, for capturing me in a sea of law school graduates. Many thanks to him for the help during school too!  

In a concise, 23-page opinion (PDF), the Supreme Court explained that the NFL is not a single entity because “the NFL teams do not possess either the unitary decision-making quality or the single aggregation of economic power characteristic of independent action.”

Read more about the SCOTUS decision to reject the NFL’s request for broad antitrust law protection on ESPN and Above the Law. The NFL must be considered 32 separate teams — not one big business — when selling branded items like jerseys and caps, said the Court.

“Although NFL teams have common interests such as promoting the NFL brand, they are still separate, profit-maximizing entities, and their interests in licensing team trademarks are not necessarily aligned,” said the retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for a unanimous court.

Decisions by NFL teams to license their separately owned trademarks collectively and to only one vendor are decisions that ‘deprive the marketplace of independent centers of decisionmaking … and therefore of actual or potential competition.’  — John Paul Stevens- Supreme Court Justice. 

Above the Law has generated interest with a series of articles about getting a small law job and the often harsh rejection letters that follow. 

In response to the waive of interest their rejection letter post generated, they asked Donna Gerson, the author of Choosing Small, Choosing Smart, to provide them with a list of tips that should be considered when applying to smaller firms.  I believe Donna writes this as advice for former BigLaw or Mid-Sized associates who now find themselves out of work, but I think the tips can work for anyone.  I think these are valuable and wanted to add a couple of my own as well.  Donna’s tips are below the dotted line, mine are above. 

- Be a “Hustler”:  Neptunes front-man and producer Pharrell once sang in a Jay-Z song “I’m a Hustler baby, and I want you to know… it ain’t where I been, but where I’m about to go”… and he was right, sort of. 

It’s not entirely about where you have been.  Likely you’ve attended a halfway decent law school and undergraduate institution, and have some work experience.  The key is taking “where [you] been” and show how that experience, acquired skills, and knowledge, will lead you to “where [you are] about to go”.  So even if you spent most of college working at a beach, bartending, waiting tables, etc… find a way to use and sell the skills you gained from there to show how you will find success down the line.  Further, the hustler’s are always working, always up to something.  You should be too.  Find volunteer gigs, advisory boards, get active with charities and other efforts… show that you are always working, always grinding, interested in reaching the top, and hopefully that will establish you as someone who can be counted on to take on new challenges. 

- Have a Plan: Where will this get you and what will you give the firm during your time there.  Is this the right job for you, and the right fit for the employer?  Often the desperation of finding any job blinds us to why we should work at a place, and why the employer might hire us.  Consider planning out more than how to commute to the office when you are thinking about applying.  It will show you are forward thinking and help you sell yourself for the available position. 

- Wear lots of “Hats”:  Not literally, but one thing I have learned from growing up in a family of solo practitioners, and working for a handful of them as well, is that you will not be doing only one thing.  In fact, if hired, it’s likely your day will have no many other tasks that it will make your head spin.  Law is still a business, so you must now be concerned with, and perhaps you can separate yourself from other applicants by showing you can excel at, other areas of running a law firm.  From marketing to business development, filing systems to transaction management and legal research software, implementing efficient technology or establishing a firm’s presence within social media, find a way to give value to your employer, since, let’s be honest, law school doesn’t really prepare you for the “real world” and even coming from BigLaw you may find that practicing in a solo setting is a whole new world. 

————————————————————————-

• Experience matters. More than grades or law school pedigree, small firm practitioners value associates who can hit the ground running and practice law. Be specific about the skills you have acquired as an associate. If you are a law student, acquire experience while in law school. Whether that experience is paid, unpaid, volunteer, clinic, or an externship – experience matters. These experiences do not necessarily need to relate directly to the firm’s practice area (although that helps).

• Location matters, especially in smaller markets. Few lawyers in Manhattan, Washington, D.C., Chicago, Los Angeles, or San Francisco will inquire why an applicant is looking for a position in a large metropolitan area. But when you’re seeking a job in a smaller market (St. Louis, Indianapolis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, the suburbs, etc.), an applicant ought to have some plausible narrative to explain one’s presence in that market. Small law firms hire on an “as needed” basis and each hire matters. Small firm employers want to understand an applicant’s connection to a particular area because it can relate to your business development skills, retention, and general happiness (see Gretchen Rubin’s article for more on happiness).

• Business development skills matter. While Biglaw doesn’t typically expect its associates to build a book of business (at least for several years), a thoughtful job applicant can impress a small firm employer by broaching the issue of business development. As one small firm partner explained, “it’s important to understand not only your clients’ needs, but where those clients come from.”

• Grades matter, but less than you think. While some small firms do place weight on grades as a hiring criterion, many small firm practitioners focus on evidence of good judgment, discretion, a solid work ethic, and a client-focused mentality. How does one convey those intangibles? Start by writing a well-written, thoughtful cover letter and preparing for an interview by discussing those skills and connecting one’s experience to the needs of the firm.

• Networking matters. For associates accustomed to hiring via the on-campus interview process, here’s important information: small firm employers expect you to reach out to them. Several small firm practitioners have mentioned to me that they post job openings on Craigslist because it’s free. They do not typically engage the services of headhunters due to cost. What other ways can you reach out to small firm employers? In addition to research and sending unsolicited cover letters and résumés, consider the following networking tips: Conduct informational interviews, attend networking events through one’s law school and local bar association, connect to one’s undergraduate alumni network, and more. Yes, I hear the collective groan of disgust out there, but these are important steps toward finding a job with a small law firm.

The team at the LawShucks blog came across this list of AmLaw 100 firms’ taglines, and noticed a striking similarity between two firm taglines:

2.  Alston & Bird: Leadership. Creativity. Results.
7.  Crowell & Moring: Experience. Creativity. Results.

As LawShucks points out, having taglines that are identical in 2 out of 3 words to a competitor in the same industry is pretty bad.  Of course when they’re touting their creativity, “it’s just horrendous”.

I’m pretty good with the mottos & the like, so if either of these firms wants to save some money and have me come up with a new, and actually creative, tagline, I encourage them to contact me. 

Universal Hub reported on BU cops trying to be, well, cops… the case is here, but below you can find a summary of what happened.  I know a number of BU cops from my days tending bar near campus, and the ones I know are stellar guys and still friends to this day.  In fact, these cops did a great job here, however they just have to remember that without a nexus to BU , it’s not their job. 

The Supreme Judicial Court today threw out drug-related evidence seized by BU police on an I-93 exit ramp from a man they had no reason to believe had anything to do with BU.

The case involved two BU police officers who decided to “randomly” run the plate of a man they watched pumping gas near Boston Medical Center, which BU police patrol. When they found out he had an outstanding warrant (for what turned out to be a misdemeanor), they pursued him as he drove away, stopping him on the Mass. Ave. connector. They arrested him and discovered heroin and cocaine in his car’s center console (scumbag).

But the court ruled that because the man was not on BU property and because the outstanding warrant they uncovered in their check had nothing to do with BU, the cops had no right to follow or stop him. And because of that, the heroin and cocaine they allegedly removed from his car’s center console after they stopped him can’t be used against him at his trial (soon-to-be-free-scumbag).

The court rejected the state’s argument that the officers acted in “good faith” to try and allow the evidence in, however that was rejected since  the way the evidence was seized in the first place caused substantial and prejudicial harm to the man’s rights against unreasonable search and seizure under Article 14 of the state constitution.

Jay-Z is suing David Ortiz? 

Apparently our beloved (well, formerly beloved, now more embattled, I mean this slump is starting to look like PEDs were secret to his success) Boston Red Sox star named his Dominican nightclubs after Jigga’s (not up with the lingo? This is one of Jay-Z’s many monikers) chain of 40/40 clubs, which pour the bubbly out in Manhattan, Las Vegas and Atlantic City.

In the lawsuit, which was filed Thursday in Manhattan Federal Court, Jay-Z (aka S. Carter) accuses Ortiz of naming his Santo Domingo club Forty-Forty (as opposed to Jigga man’s 40/40 Clubs) in the hopes of trading in on the rap star’s fame. The suit seeks over $5 million in damages and for Ortiz to forfeit any use of the 40/40 name, written out alphabetically or numerically.


According to the website Pop Eater, the the lawsuit states:

“David Ortiz is fully aware of Plaintiff’s Manhattan 40/40 club, since he had been a patron there on several occasions before he opened his Infringing Forty/Forty club”

I’m guessing that the clubs are named after hitting 40 homers and stealing 40 bases in one season, something I’m pretty sure Papi never did, but PED users and abusers Mark McGuire and Jose Canseco made famous. 

Thanks again to Pop Eater for the article.  

Maryland’s governor signed legislation this week creating a new kind of corporation that seeks to make a profit at the same time it performs social good.  (link to ABA article here)

This is the nation’s first “benefit corporation” law, say stories in Business Week and the Philadelphia Inquirer. It allows directors of such corporations to make decisions that consider employees, the community and the environment in addition to shareholder value. I had been under the impression there was similar legislation in Vermont, but I was misinformed. Apparently, William Clark Jr., a corporate lawyer at Drinker, Biddle & Reath, was the man who drafted the legislation, and he says that at least seven states are considering similar measures; among them, Vermont is closest to enacting a bill. (Ice cream entrepreneurs Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield are backing the Vermont bill, according to the Associated Press. They believe that if Ben & Jerry’s had been incorporated as a benefit corporation, they may have had legal cover to avoid a buyout by current owners Unilever). California lawmakers are also considering related legislation to allow “flexible purpose corporations”, that is corporations which allow companies to protect their social missions without the affirmative requirements that the “benefit corporation” law puts in place.

The law is modeled on proposals by B-Lab, a Berwyn, Pa. non-profit that certifies socially responsible companies. The law lets entrepreneurs commit their for-profit ventures to a specific public good, and requires them to report on contributions to that goal and submit to auditing of their impact.

Personally, I’d like to see forward thinking states, such as VT, Mass, Cali, and others, immediately take up this type of legislation.  We talk about big business and corporations as evil, profit driven beasts with no conscience… this type of corporate entity could be the first step to changing that, and, hopefully, changing the world. 

Imagine if a company like Pepsi was incorporated like this?  It’d be more than just a marketing effort, it’d be a wholesale perpetual company wide effort. 

US News & World Report came out with their often controversial law school rankings recently.  Why controversial?  Well there’s lots of reasons, many believe schools manipulate rankings factors in their favor, lack of inclusion or weight given to certain factors, and the ranking grading system itself.  Regardless though, employers look for big name law schools and big names are often cemented and made through the USN&WR rankings. 

My take has not to put too much stock into these rankings, and I don’t plan on changing my tune anytime soon. Still though, I wasn’t happy to see my law school, a place where I saw many outstanding future attorneys study under well regarded professors in excellent facilities, stay in the third tier and yet continue to charge a tuition higher than its better ranked Boston brethren. 

Charging more than BC and BU, and ranking just above the who cares mark of the fourth tier, is probably a savvy business move though. By all accounts I think my time off from undergrad and just missing the bench mark LSAT scores prevented me from attending one of these Top 30 law schools, but if you want to go to school in Boston, as I did, you’re left little choice but to go with the next best option, and man do you pay for it. Despite this criticism, as I said I feel I obtained an excellent education and competed against and with intelligent and diligent attorneys-to-be, its just a shame that the job opportunities are severely limited and the costs so high as to make many of its graduates regret ever attending. 

Below are the US News Rankings for the Boston area law schools.  Visit the complete rankings here. 

Rank, Name & Location, Score, Tier, 09-10 Tuition, #full-time enrollment

2 Harvard University Cambridge, MA 97 1 Full-time: $43,900 per year 1,771

22 Boston University Boston, MA 67 1 Full-time: $39,658 per year 827

28 Boston College Newton, MA 63 1 Full-time: $39,490 per year 814

86 Northeastern University Boston, MA 44 1 Full-time: $39,866 per year 602

Suffolk University Boston, MA N/A 3 Full-time: $39,670 per year 1,079

New England School of Law Boston, MA N/A 4 Full-time: $38,580 per year 737 

Western New England College Springfield, MA N/A 4 Full-time: $35,612 per year 389

All of this said, an education is what you make of it.  So if you’re at SULS, NESL, or WNEC, or wherever else, my advice is this: work hard, network, think outside the box, and stay positive. 

I’ve been dreading writing this post for a couple of reasons;

1- I am trying to stay positive despite my legal career, and many of my close friend’s legal careers, not taking off quite the way we expected. 

2- My brother, girlfriend, and others are always on me to stay positive and not get dragged down into depression and anger about the way things have worked out since law school

3- Because this isn’t Big Debt, Small Law, Exposing the Law School Scam, JD Underdog, Temporary Attorney, Esq. Never, Toiletlaw, and Third Tier Reality…not to say these blogs don’t serve an important purpose, and for that matter, demographic. 

Law isn’t for everyone.  It may, after all of this, maybe years from now, turn out to not be for me as well, but I don’t believe we can just sit around and tell people not to go. This blog is here for those of us who are lawyers, or are about to be lawyers, or if there are any of them still out there, those who want to be lawyers, and still have a sense of humor and like fun, awesome stuff.  Which, it so happens, is my specialty.  (note this blog is also here for those who just love awesome stuff). 

My purpose is not to, as Third Tier Reality writes, … inform potential law school students and applicants of the ugly realities of attending law school. DO NOT ATTEND UNLESS: (1) YOU GET INTO A TOP 8 LAW SCHOOL;(2) YOU GET A FULL-TUITION SCHOLARSHIP TO ATTEND;(3) YOU HAVE EMPLOYMENT AS AN ATTORNEY SECURED THROUGH A RELATIVE OR CLOSE FRIEND; OR (4) YOU ARE FULLY AWARE BEFOREHAND THAT YOUR HUGE INVESTMENT IN TIME, ENERGY, AND MONEY DOES NOT, IN ANY WAY, GUARANTEE A JOB AS AN ATTORNEY OR IN THE LEGAL INDUSTRY… regardless of how much I agree or disagree with that advice. 

But it can be tough, and I know that.  I’m a year removed from graduating with honors from, as some of the blogs above would describe it, a third tier toilet, with plenty of leadership and awards to boot… with no one offering me a “lucrative” or even a full time job.  But I’m making the best of it, and anyone else in my place should as well. 

HOWEVER, that being said, it’s amazing that, as the Dan Henninger of the WSJ writes, the youth of today face more unemployment than ever before (The U.S. unemployment rate for workers under 25 years old is now about 20%). 

Meanwhile, some of our supposedly best and brightest youth who spend 3-4 years toiling away in law school only to be taken advantage of by firms who offer them unpaid internships as a way to get a foot in the door.  Evidence shows that the number of unpaid internships is mushrooming — fueled by employers’ desire to hold down costs and students’ eagerness to gain experience for their résumés. Which is all fine and good, I suppose, except that these firms and companies are not giving the student interns real work that will benefit them in the future, but instead are treated as office monkeys made to wipe door handles for swine flu prevention, or mop the floors (read the NY Times article).  Many employers internships did not comply with the six federal legal criteria that must be satisfied for internships to be unpaid, among which are that the internship should be similar to the training given in a vocational school or academic institution, that the intern does not displace regular paid workers and that the employer “derives no immediate advantage” from the intern’s activities — in other words, it’s largely a benevolent contribution to the intern. Further, another serious problem surrounding unpaid interns is they are often not considered employees and therefore are not protected by employment discrimination laws, including sexual harassment claims!

Add to that consultants telling recent grads who have part-time, low paying jobs that:

“I know a lot of recent law school graduates who would give anything to trade places with you right now” (see ABA article)

and you can see why many of us struggle with staying positive. 

But the fight goes on.  I promise to have some more awesome stuff up asap, so we can skip over these boring/sad articles and get into the good stuff! 

Was becoming a Lawyer a good call?

I DVR/TiVo (I have Comcast w/TiVo, I’d give mixed reviews…) Important Things with Demetri Martin.  It’s a pretty funny show overall, with moments of so-funny-it-hurts hilarity, but mostly I just think its weird and out there, which hits my sense of humor well.  Its geeky, creative, smart (and stupid at the same time if that’s possible), and has many different elements; stand-up, music and sketch.

What I didn’t know was that Demetri always wanted to be a lawyer.  He told people that since he was 11 years old.  BUT when he got there, it wasn’t what he expected.  It changed him, drove him to “being weird”, and so he left after finishing 2/3rds of his degree.  That sure is a tough move, to abandon something you put years and years of aspiration into, poured money into the cost of the education, and had to face the reality that you have to tell people “I went to Law School… sort of”.

I respect that he knew it wasn’t for him and left.  I’m a near opposite.  My grandfather was an attorney.  My father is still an attorney, when he’s not sailing.  And since I was old enough to care, I always told people that hell no, I was not following in their footsteps.  It took years of traveling and life experience, of growing up, of finding a challenge that I felt worthy, before I decided that being an attorney and having the power to help so many people as I had seen my father and grandfather do, would be something that would make me happy.

Has it so far?  Nope.  Will it?  Let’s hope so.  I’ve talked to many many disillusioned people in this profession, young and old… but I’m still confident that I’ll find my place in the profession and hopefully make enough money to support a family.

I’m proud to be a third generation attorney, and for now anyway, I don’t regret the decision to finish up, earn my J.D. and pass the bar.  We’ll see what attitude the future brings ; )

Thanks to canadian law blog Lawiscool.com, via The Huffington Post,  we now know that:

1. In Missouri, It is Illegal To Drive With An Uncaged Bear (Caged Bears Are OK)
2. In Maine, It’s Illegal To Have Christmas Decorations Up After Jan. 14
3. In Nevada, It Is Illegal For A Man To Buy Drinks For More Than Three People At A Time
4. In Ohio, It Is Illegal To Get A Fish Drunk

and many more laws that maybe, just maybe, we should get off the books.  If I want to stay home and have a few beers with my beta fish (i don’t have one, but if I did)… who am I hurting?!

Everyone needs motivation at some point.  For many of us, especially recent law grads, we’re in desperate need.  So this should pump you up.  Stay positive gang!