Having polished off a very engrossing biography of Alexander Hamilton, I have begun to read the biography of another famous American thinker, writer, and jurist: Judge Learned Hand.  The first thing I found out is that his name wasn’t actually Learned, but Billings.  Had his name been Billable, I guess he never would have made it to the bench.  (Please, folks, tip your waitress!)

So in 1907, Learned Hand is considering leaving a big law firm on Wall Street in hopes of becoming a judge.  His father-in-law, aware of how poorly judges are paid compared to high-powered attorneys at law, attempts to dissuade the young Hand.  When Hand makes clear that he intends to be a judge, his father-in-law finally relents, promising to support Mr. and Mrs. Hand, even after his death.  He writes:

“It’s up to me to add ultimately to the family store when my life’s action has been dismissed with costs…”

See?  Old lawyers don’t die, they just get their motions denied, and are remanded for further proceedings in a higher court.

The problem with accusing others of overachieving is that you run the risk of sounding like (1) a condescending bastard and/or (2) an underachieving lay-about. I mean, I’m in law school, and I’m working my ass off, so I’m fairly certain I’m not a great example of the second.  But I’m probably the former. (more…)

Hypothetical situation about the opposite of a Big Brother Police State: you’re on a public street in a car registered in your name, in plain view of Tom, Dick, Harry, and pretty much every concept of God known to the Western World.  In this situation, is a police officer allowed to look at you, or not allowed to look at you?  The answer ought to be obvious.

So if you’re on a public street in a car registered in your name, in plain view of a GPS satellite, and probably carrying a phone and/or navigation system in your pants and on your dashboard, what makes you think that the police can’t use the same technology to watch you?  Do you magically gain some sort of rights when computers are involved?  A recent AP article about a court ruling in Michigan seems amazed at the lack of privacy we have while in public.

If we want to make a law requiring the police use only eyeballs to follow you, that’s fine.  I think it’s much more cost-effective to have the police use technology to keep up with society, but there’s plenty of room for debate.  However, let’s not act surprised that driving around on a public road is less than completely private.

Repent, all ye slackers! The almighty curve shall smite the wicked! The end is nigh, and that means law students everywhere are doing their best “groundhog that’s seen his shadow” impression.

See you on the other side, world.