Few rulings on appeal are as frustrating for a defense attorney as one that holds the defense is correct on the merits, but that the error was harmless.
I was in Madison one day last week. Those of you who enjoy my work will be happy to know that I was not burned at the stake for heresy. Instead, I had a lovely time.
Shorter prison sentences for illegal aliens convicted of illegal re-entry after deportation are on the way.
Within three days, the Seventh Circuit issued two opinions both addressing whether a out-of-state business could be sued for cybersquatting.
A vanity search on the Internet may result in some dismaying hits. But it is not the basis for a federal lawsuit.
If a defendant does not timely object that the plaintiff is not the real party in interest, the defense can be waived.
The State Bar’s use of mandatory dues to fund the Public Image Campaign did not violate the First Amendment.
An attorney who discloses information pursuant to court order, despite asserting it is privileged, cannot file an interlocutory appeal of the order to disclose.
Longstanding precedent holds that federal courts can’t enjoin state court proceedings, despite the state court defendant’s claim that the proceedings violate federal rights. Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971).
When requesting attorney fees in federal court pursuant to a contractual fee-shifting provision, rather than a statute, the attorney can submit redacted bills that omit descriptions of the work performed.
An employee’s participation in internal investigations is not protected activity under Title VII.
The Seventh Circuit has denied Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge John Siefert’s request for rehearing en banc on his lawsuit challenging portions of Wisconsin’s Code of Judicial Conduct.
An Aug. 20 opinion from the Seventh Circuit addressing Indiana’s Code of Judicial Conduct effectively immunizes some provisions in Wisconsin’s code from constitutional challenge, as well.
President Obama has appointed UW law professor Victoria Nourse to replace retiring Judge Terence Evans on the Seventh Circuit.
Needless to say, it’s not a choice I would make. For me, the simple fact that she wrote an article in the California Law Review last year entitled “A Tale of Two Lochners,” in which she asserts that Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905), was incorrectly decided, is sufficient reason for me not to like the nomination.
