Re: actual legal advice question
 

It turns out they weren't paying a bill. Settlement check. Hank will be served today on the malpractice action.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

Nice work if you can get it.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

I want to say I hate this lawyer, but I know I'd do the same thing if I stumbled into the claim.

Which probably explains a lot my self-loathing.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

I always stay at the Hay Adams when I go to the Fed Cir, but nimble nuts here is on his own dime, so who knows where he'll stay.

• False Marking Case Dismissed
  Posted: 10 Jul 2009 02:31 PM PDT
  Pequignot v. Solo Cup (E.D. Va.)
  
  Judge Brinkema has dismissed Matthew Pequignot’s false marking case against Solo Cup and cancelled the trial previously set to be heard this month. [Order] At oral arguments, the Judge indicated that the ruling is intended to "get [the] case teed up for the Federal Circuit."
  
  In this case, Solo knew that its patents had expired but continued to use the same molds to make its coffee cup lids and other disposable products. During that time - between 20 and 50 billion products were manufactured - each marked as patented. The falseness of the marking was not in serious dispute. Nonetheless, Judge Brinkema ruled that Pequignot did not have any direct evidence to prove that the false marking was done “for the purpose of deceiving the public” as required by the statute. 35 USC 292.
  
  On appeal the Federal Circuit will likely be asked to clarify the level of culpability or intent necessary for a finding of purposeful deception. The choice may follow the same lines of debate as the issue of willful patent infringement. The Federal Circuit recently shifted the law of willfulness to require at least objectively reckless acts of infringement (Seagate) and away from any affirmative duty of caution (Underwater Devices). Professor Winston has argued that intent to deceive should be presumed.
  
  Although the Federal Circuit will probably not be able to reach this issue, the parties hotly dispute the appropriate remedy. The statute calls for a maximum penalty of "not more than $500 for every such offense." Here, the question is whether damages should be calculated based on one offense per product line or one offense per item marked.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

Before Heller Ehrman imploded, it distributed $9MM in profits but booked them as shareholder loans -- possibly without even telling those shareholders that their draw that year was actually a loan. Oooooooooops.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

help- a friend is writing a story that starts with this: a lawyer is in alaska to get some papers signed on a Saturday. as written she has the papers being a sales agreement for real estate. the thing is, the story requires that he be back in boston with the papers by monday.

any thing under Mass law that would require an original, because the writer just realized the documents could be scanned and emailed. FWIW, the law could be Ct or NY or Va or anything East Coast.

the only thing I could think of is unreasonable client insisting on seeing the lawyer with originals (maybe crusty old guy that remembers "originals") but any ideas would be appreciated.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

If the documents signed constituted a security this could work, but I'm not sure what story line requires that a security physically be somewhere unless there is some kind of security interest involved.

As to real estate law, not my cup of tea.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

right now it is pissed off buyer saying this must be done, and proof in my hands, by monday-

I thought of throwing out the law aspect and making it a coin collection or something else- the point is just must be there saturday, must be back Monday.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

Could be a deed or a mortgage, or any recorded real estate document. Needs to be an original to be recordable. And that works in any state.

A Sad Day
 

Today, on this day of national mourning, I always think of all of you.

When the attacks happened, we turned to each other. With phones down in New York, we relayed messaged via infirm to let people know who was safe and who was drinking.

Re: A Sad Day
 

You should post this on the fashion board, where people will see it.

I was just thinking the exact same thing...

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

And $35 million in collectibles go poof at Thelen. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/...id=48034&tsp=1

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

Do you think even 5% of that was genuinely collectible? Or is Citi thinking the Chapter 7 trustee will be able to do the job for less, even after the 5% commission?

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

At this point, you have to think not.

Re: It was the wrong thread
 

I guess the third possibility (and, now that I think about it a little, the most likely) is that Citi was faced with pursuing collections actions against existing customers and thus facing the prospect of throwing good money after bad *and* losing business in the exchange.

Better to leave a trustee to pursue anything collectible, probably using cheaper lawyers than Citi would, and keep a safe distance from your other customers. That has to be worth the 5%+expenses (or whatever it is in NDCal) that goes to the trustee. Could end up ahead on the net return *and* get to say to your customers being sued "hey, we can't control the trustee".