Vintage Filings Legal Blog

By Benjamin Blascoe

There aren’t many things on this planet that are more devastating to the environment and its natural resources than an oil spill. If we think back through all the varying spills in the headlines over the past 20 years, none of them have ever amounted to anything worthwhile or revolutionary. And the same goes for Fleet Management Ltd.’s spill in the San Francisco Bay in 2007.

The Hong-Kong based company pleaded guilty last Thursday (August 13, 2009) to criminal charges for the devastating damage to the Bay Area. Taken from BreakingLegalNews.com, “The Cosco Busan sideswiped the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge on a foggy morning on Nov. 7, 2007. The ship spilled 53,000 gallons of oil into the water, killing thousands of birds and other wildlife and fouling miles of shoreline.”

The result will be 10 million USD – pending a federal court judge’s approval. But even though that is a staggering number, it still isn’t enough for some. The damage that the 2007 spill caused will not be amended for some time and that angers many in the Bay Area.

The pilot of the ship was sentenced to 10 months in prison. However, there is still a lot of debate around the issue of whether or not he is even to blame. Many say that the controller of the port never should have let him go through such a dense fog. Be that as it may, the ship is still at fault and finally some justice will be brought to this grim situation.

By Benjamin Blascoe

It is always quite a shameful experience when one’s credit card gets declined at the register. Often times there is a long line and when you’re finally told you have been declined, everyone gives you that ‘oh poor you’ face as you scramble for alternative means of payment. Then the luxury of calling your given credit company sets in, usually for a flustered debacle of a debate that could last hours.

The only thing I wonder is why it is perfectly legal for credit card Companies to cancel without any notice, reason or seemingly a purpose. When one calls customer service to get some answers – often times, there are no answers to be had besides the fact that your card has simply been cancelled.

Mary Pilon of the Wall Street Journal wrote a similar article and there she highlighted the experience of one Mar Harowitz. After a long and relaxing day at the spa (a birthday present to herself), Harowitz found herself amidst a credit card battle – cancelled without her knowledge. This came of surprise for Harowitz because she has perfect credit.

She is definitely not an isolated case. According to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, an issuer is allowed to cancel an account due to inactivity, default or delinquency, notification without cardholder’s knowledge. Sometimes a notice is required after the cancellation but many say what is the use?

There will be some new regulation passed in late august of this year, and I look forward to seeing if it addresses these unwarranted cancellations – although the outlook is grim.

Tell us your story!

By Benjamin Blascoe

Hal Turner, the infamous bigoted, white supremacist, foul-mouthed, intolerant, jaw-flappin’ web and radio host has been denied bail for his allegations against three appellate court judges. Taken from Law.com, on a “posting in early June (Turner Radio Network), Turner said 7th Circuit Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook and Judges Richard Posner and William Bauer “deserve to be killed” for their ruling in the handgun case that day.” Then, on June 24, 2009 Turner was brought in by the Federal Bureau of Investigation Turner for these blinkered remarks

Isn’t that a perfect case-study for irony? A man sentenced for making death threats because judges chose to ban a weapon that kills more people that the bird flu, swine flu and west-nile virus combined (actually much much much more). But Turner’s intellect isn’t on trial here, it is why he is in prison that is causing some stir. Is he really a danger to authority or is this political free speech?

At first glance, it seems like a definite ban on free speech. After all, the beauty of the internet is that there is no regulation. People can say and do whatever he or she pleases whenever he or she feels like it. But this case goes to prove that ‘big-brother’ is always watching, especially on the unregulated internet. The real interesting part of this piece is that Turner was denied bail for his remarks in yesterday’s decision.

Law.com’s Lynne Marek says “At Turner’s arraignment hearing on July 28, Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Hogan argued that Turner should remain in custody based, in part, on the fact that he continued to threaten authorities even after his arrest. Hogan said that while Turner was in custody in New Jersey, he called in additional postings naming three FBI agents who interviewed him. He called in those postings despite court restrictions on his Internet use.” And consequently, he was denied bail.

We have been seeing more and more of these loud-mouthed radio and web jockeys getting in trouble for the nonsensical “shock” vernacular oozing from their mouths. I don’t think that the law is zoning in on free speech as much as I believe some people just talk without thinking.

I mean, if overturning a gun ban is worth jail with no bail – mission accomplished, except the ban still stands.

How do you feel about these ‘shock jocks’ hogging the airwaves? Are they worth it? Do they provide at least some service? Or are they just over-the-top figureheads for cultish communities?

Join the discussion on Twitter:

@VintageBen

@VintageAlli

@VintageJaz

@VintageJonny

By Benjamin Blascoe

Lawyers have the illustrious opportunity to essentially be two people at once, both hated scoundrels and loved soldiers of the law. The career itself is lucrative and can often be the voice behind an excellent cause all while continuously facing the blunt-end of jokes, puns and knee-slappers. While we are all the instigators of such blithe remarks, there is just as much discontent within the practice and many are taking the fall of ‘big-firms’ to start a career of their dreams.

Whether by force (lay-off) or mere self-induced psychosis (stress of the job), the resiliency of the law community is something to applaud. Many are heading towards careers that couldn’t be further away from practicing law but are finding new and creative ways to keep food on the table.

In June, both the Washington Examiner and abovethelaw.com (a legal tabloid) featured a story about Gordon Chin. Chin, an American University graduate, had a great career at Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell before being laid off in November of last year. Since then, Chin has followed his passion of interior design and is making quite a name for himself in the D.C. area- accomplishing anything from interior design to stage/set planning.

And the list goes on….

The superstar of the ex-lawyer community is probably David E. Kelley. The one-time successful lawyer turned Hollywood writer is responsible for some of the highest grossing sitcoms around. He is responsible for the timeless ‘lawyer-friendly’ shows such as “The Practice,” “Ally McBeal” and “Boston Public.”

The trend is even hotter for fresh graduates of law-school. Facing the grim outlook of potential unemployment, many students are seeking other means. A perfect example being New York Law School Grad Lev Ekster who turned entrepreneur and founded Cupcakestop.com – a mobile cupcake service offering delectable sweets to New Yorkers on the go. Ekster keeps his loyal followers updated on location via twitter and is slowly establishing himself as a New York icon.

As history would prove, innovation always comes out of necessity and the law community is definitely not an exception. Everyone is being hit hard right now, but in the end it is what we make with what we have that really judges success.

Are you an ex lawyer facing a new career? In a field you never thought you would be in? Join the discussion! I want to hear your thoughts…

By Benjamin Blascoe

The imprisoned ex-Enron Corp Chief Executive Officer Jeffery Skilling is back at trial today. Skilling is currently serving a 24-year sentence for deceiving investors and employees about Enron’s fiscal health, consequently leading to a cluster of financial atom-bombs. However, Skilling stands before the court today to not receive more backlashes from his peers but to reduce his sentence…?

District Court Judge Sim Lake in Houston, Texas did the original sentencing. But complaints via friends, family and even law professionals felt that the 24 year and 4 month sentence was a bit tough. Lake was under the impression that Skilling’s wrongdoings endangered a financial institution which is what led to the harsh punishment.

With new evidence and guidelines surfaced, Skilling is likely to have his sentence reduced somewhere between 188 and 235 months – roughly 15 ½ years.

However, the controversy is not likely to cease. There are still a lot of angry Enronites out there who enjoy the fact that Skilling is behind bars. And given that it is also feasible for Judge Lake to simply reinstate the first sentencing, it should make for quite the courtroom showdown. Both sides are braced with the best and brightest of their given practices and with the likelihood that Skilling’s sentence could be upheld – there may be even more appeals to come.

By Benjamin Blascoe

I grew up in the Midwestern metropolis of Chicago, IL but my college days were spent amidst the beautiful Rocky Mountains of Colorado. As a cash-strapped, full-time student I had to milk the best possible utilities friendly to the wallet –obviously including travel. Holidays, marriages and the unfortunate funeral could have proven problematic if it weren’t for my cost-savvy airline Frontier.

I can’t begin to tell you how many times other airlines were delayed for hours on end while flights on Frontier operated like the gears of a well-oiled machine. And if delayed, via human error or weather – Frontier offered up free cable for all! What more could a college-student ask for?

That is why I was so disappointed to hear that Frontier Airlines asked for bankruptcy protection in early April of 2008. Ever since, I’ve been watching the airline closely and this morning my hopes were answered as I was extremely delighted to hear that Southwest put in a bid.

Southwest Airlines placed a $113.6M bid to acquire the Denver-based airline. Frontier has received a couple of other offers but was allowed the stipulation to attract other bids if any proved more beneficial to the company. Southwest is a good purchaser because both Frontier and Southwest’s reputation for low-rates and stellar customer service – not to mention the stronghold on the continental U.S.

Taken from the New York Times this morning, Frontier has 5,000 employees and 51 aircraft, while Southwest has 35,000 employees and more than 500 aircraft. It would be a pretty lucrative purchase for Southwest considering that Frontier uses Denver as its hub – a trait shared with United Airlines. If Southwest acquires Frontier, it won’t surpass United in sales but will definitely have a larger presence.

The only foreseeable conflict would be the contract for who will build the planes. Frontier Airlines’ aircrafts are all made my airbus and Southwest operates on the Boeing 737. Let the battle begin….

By Benjamin Blascoe

Despite the layoffs, the financial insecurities, the pay-cuts and even the hiring freezes there is one facet of American Law Firms that is booming – pro bono.

According to the Pro-Bono Institute in Washington DC, pro-bono hours increased by roughly 13% in 2008 as compared to the previous years – a figure both representative and a bit bloodcurdling. Is it that clients simply cannot afford the law services they once could, or have the soldiers of the law turned a new cheek and began helping in this time of need?

The findings come with a lot of concern because as history has taught, in times of economic recession, pro-bono cases are usually the first to leave. But in America’s current crisis, it seems quite the opposite. Esther Lardent of the Pro-Bono Institute feels that it may be due to the “slowdown” of work for lawyers. Americans are using the larger firms less and less in effort to save money leaving the door wide open for some of these major firms -  and  many are taking on pro-bono cases to develop better or new skills.

Another reason may also be that pro-bono cases are becoming more readily accepted in today’s world of law. In the past, pro-bono cases were only taken on under specific circumstance. However, as the old systems of law scoot over to make room for the new, there is a different outlook on pro-bono cases. Taken from Law.com, “We’re seeing a different attitude about pro bono,” Lardent said. “Firms are being much more proactive. They’re taken on big-time signature projects.”

By Benjamin Blascoe

We have come a long way since Napster first opened the floodgates of peer-to-peer file sharing in June of 1999. Since then we have seen more and more technology and creative platforms that allow access to a copious amount of digital media for anyone who can harness the power of the web.

Yet, since Napster’s inception the debate around the legality of peer-to-peer file sharing hasn’t really changed. Especially this week as Boston University graduate student Joel Tenenbaum, only the second ‘downloader’ to reach the court level, faces trial for copyright against several major record labels for illegally downloading music and sharing it on the network Kazaa.

Even more astounding is the amount of money these labels are asking Tenenbaum to fork over. The first individual brought under the eyes of the law for peer-to-peer file sharing was forced to pay the gargantuan sum of $1.92m. So as the court case in Boston gets rolling this week, stakeholders are keeping an ever vigilant watch.

But what are the logistics of this incredible lump sum? A few songs here and there, how can that add up to $1.92 million?

It is obvious that the courts are throwing the book at these people, to disillusion young and old alike from downloading ‘illegally’. The argument from the con side is obviously rooted in copyright but also the direct heist of earnings from the artist. On the other hand, the music industry has changed drastically in the past 20 years, specifically the routing of earnings. With all the corporate bureaucracy involved in the music industry now days, how much money is actually being taken out musicians’ pocket? Are they really being affected? Or is there more to the story….

“The internet was an opportunity for everyone to be treated fairly, for the consumer to get a fair price, for the artist to be paid fairly, for the record companies to make some money,” said infamous musician and bad boy Kid Rock. “But iTunes is an old system, where iTunes takes the money, the record company takes the money, and they don’t give it to the artists.” Rock believes that ‘illegal’ downloads don’t hurt musicians because of such corporate hijackings. “I was telling kids: download it illegally, I don’t care. I want you to hear my music so I can play live,” he said.

While Rock is one of the more outspoken critics of the Tenenbaum court proceedings, he is not alone in his beliefs. Many smaller local bands enjoy putting their music up for download because it draws buzz around the band. Andrew Scarborough, of the local Los Angeles band the Black Apples, believes that putting music up for everyone puts shoes on the dance floor. “We still sell CDs but when we put all our music available for download we had much better turnouts at our shows. We play for people who love music, who shouldn’t have to pay $14 for 10 songs – that’s just ridiculous. People need to get their priorities straight.”

But while some can ally under musicianship, a lot of artists still enjoy reaping the fruits of their labor. Metalica and their notorious bout with Napster are the first that come to mind. It seems that most of the lashing comes from the corporate end – those who truly make money off of album sales. Regardless of personal belief, there is still a major copyright factor that the law will hold above any moral argument, as well as past precedence.

As things are sure to get heated in Boston this week, a lot of this banter will surface. And by the end of the proceedings I’m sure we will either have some new legislation concerning peer-to-peer file sharing or one very broke college graduate.

By Ben Blascoe

In these tumultuous financial times, everyone is watching their money like a loose offspring in deep end of the swimming pool. People are consuming less, staying in more and learning about different priorities in life. Even those who allegedly had the most secure jobs, most stable income and most “worth” are falling like dominoes off the end of the economy’s kitchen table. I’m speaking in terms of our lawyers – the soldiers of the law, the consultants of charter. All over the United States, huge law firms are being forced to cap salaries, institute pay cuts and lay-off countless practicing attorneys and paralegals.

Take Michael P. Rumore, 50, of New Jersey for example. He is headed to state prison for 15 years for blowing $4 million of his clients’ money in Atlantic City. Four million dollars – not a dime to be claimed anywhere but Atlantic City (gambling capitol of the east coast). Have times gotten that bad where even lawyers are forced to break the rules in order to ensure a nice nest-egg for themselves? The answer: Yes and No

Of course Rumore is a specific case study, he also has a history of depression and bipolar disorder, but I believe his story speaks to the current situation our practicing law community is facing. With unemployment only expected to rise, what does that say for huge law firms? And also, what does that say for the small-time lawyer, living case-to-case?

According to Lawshucks.com (who runs a lawyer layoff tracker for some reason), as of July 26, 2009, roughly 13,311 lawyers and staff have been laid-off by major law firms, 11,000 of them from 2009 alone. No wonder Rumore booked it to Atlantic City in a last ditch effort for some financial security.

The reasoning is specific to each individual case. Katharine C. Patterson of LawJobs.com claims that young lawyers have it the worst stating “…the current generation of young lawyers and law students is cursed not just by its lack of experience of hard times, but by an egocentricity born of good times.” This idea makes a lot of sense if we look at the employment and personality traits on fresh college graduates typical of the quote-on-quote boomerang generation (the children of the baby boomers).

But the problem with this disproportionate lawyer lay-off era is that the recession is affecting those young and old. Nobody is safe!

No no, that wasn’t an entirely accurate statement. Even though the laid-off-lawyer figures are staggering and expected to rise, many practicing attorneys are still doing fine. In these rough financial times, it’s important to realize that everyone is being affected – the fluctuation level may be a bit different but reality the concurrent.