In addition to his role as a speaker at the International Funds Conference on Grand Cayman, Ward & Ward Partner Mark Vlasic recently published an article on international asset recovery and grand corruption in the Cayman Financial Review.
Archive for the ‘Law’ Category
Apparently (as least one member of) the South Carolina Bar could learn a thing or two about civility — According to Above the Law, citing the Charlotte Observer, attorney Irby Walker was charged with solicitation of a felony after trying to hire a hitman to kill a fellow lawyer!
Wow. Just . . . wow.
The Redskins’ day in court is soon to come — will the Court determine that the name is racist and offensive, and thus not entitled to trademark protection under the Lanham Act? If so, what’s a Skins fan (or its Napoleonic owner, Dan Snyder) to do? Frankly, I’m amazed the ‘Skins have held on to the name this long, and I am a lifelong fan. Part of me says it is a testament to the warrior spirit, and thus a compliment, that a football team would choose to name itself after your race or ethnic group — the Fightin’ Irish come to mind. But “Redskin” is universally seen as a very derogatory term for a Native American, so the “testament to the warrior spirit” argument breaks down, big time. It is interesting to note that the previous attack on the Redskins’ trademark was thrown out as being time-barred under the doctrine of Laches, but the current assault cites Marshak v. Treadwell, a 2001 3rd Circuit opinion which held that the law allows for trademark cancellation “at any time.” The author of Marshak? None other than current Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. Could be interesting . . . http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/sports/Redskins-Trademark-Battle-Goes-to-Supreme-Court-59323632.html and http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/09/challenge-to-redskins-name-reaches-supreme-court.html
Here’s an interesting article about civility in the practice of law. It reminds me of a patent infringement lawsuit I was involved in 5 or 6 years ago. Opposing counsel was quick witted and tough as nails. Nothing was a “gimme.” There were battles about deposition locations, discovery deadlines, confidentiality designations, etc. After a rather meaningless day of depositions, I offered to drive him back to his hotel, and we had a drink together. There was some discussion of the case, but it was mostly just two lawyers sharing a drink and telling tales.
We got up the next day and did our jobs, and we continued to bang each other around, but it was never personal. Too often, lawyers let it “get personal.” Next time things head in that direction, consider breaking bread with opposing counsel.
That case settled (favorably, both parties would say) and a friendship, and source of referrals, was born.
The next time you are considering sending a incendiary letter to opposing counsel, or losing your temper “on the record” (or off), consider your professional reputation, your duty to your client, and the fact that the Court will almost certainly hear about it, and then set the letter aside overnight, or hold your tongue for 10 seconds. 99% of the time, your restraint will pay a healthy dividend.
(tip o’ the hat to WSJLawBlog).