You searched for we v. me - Page 14 of 19

Law: It Doesn’t Serve Our Interests

December 21, 2015

Law can be viewed from many perspectives. Of late I’ve been working through how laws do (and too often don’t) serve our interests.

Let’s take criminal law. Traditionally, state laws have governed criminal conduct. Not so much anymore. Gary Fields and John Emshwiller wrote As Criminal Laws Proliferate, More Are Ensnared for the Wall Street Journal in July 2011. The article includes some great examples of conduct which should not be criminalized. Most telling is the fact that no one knows how many federal criminal laws exist. A law professor, the Justice Department and the American Bar Association have counted, and get no closer than estimates of 4500, 3000, and “much higher than 3000,” respectively.

Then there is the area

Law, The Rest of Everything

Leave a comment

One-Person/One-Vote. Really?

December 7, 2015

Mark Rubin

The U.S. Supreme Court hosts One-Person/One-Vote day on December 8. The Court will hear oral arguments in Evenwel v. Abbott, No. 14-940 and Harris v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, No. 14-232. Both cases address the concept that our representatives should be distributed among us with a very high degree of equality.

In 1962, in Baker v. Carr, the Court wandered into the redistricting thicket. It held that legislative districts must be proportional in size, and that states cannot fail to redistrict for some 60 years. (Tennessee, where the case originated, had last done a redistricting in 1901.)

Reynolds v. Sims came two years after Baker v. Carr. It really honed in on the concept of drawing

Law

Leave a comment

Max A. Finch, Guest Blogger

November 28, 2015

Mark Rubin

[Editor’s Note: Today’s guest blogger is Max A. Finch, sharing the news about his first week in Tucson. Please be kind about the conceit that Max wrote this. He’s very sensitive.]

I’m Max A. Finch.* Here’s my story.

I was Dumas on November 20, 2015, hanging out at Woofstock in Chandler. This tall, dark, and devilishly handsome fellow walks up. Persons talk, and I’m off on a walk. (Leash? Person? Let’s go.) Soon after, I’m off—same fellow—on a walk, into a car, and gone. Free will v. determinism? Pshaw.

The person—Mark is what persons call him—got a few surprises from me. I threw up as we approached I-10, and 2x more before we pulled into his garage. (Maybe there

The Rest of Everything

6 Comments

Paris

November 21, 2015

Mark Rubin

I have many thoughts about the events in Paris, and about the reaction in our country. The thoughts are mine, but they’re based on research and my developing perspective on how stuff works. Organizing those thoughts has challenged me, so the structure may not be great. Anyway, here goes:

Nothing Justifies the Actions of Those Who Killed 140+ People and Wounded Hundreds More. I know I’m offering up a “duh” comment. I state the obvious, however, because many of my words will upset people, and I want to be clear about the fact that explanations do not justify murder. For those who need it twice: Explanation ≠ justification.

The Problems Are Decades or More in the Making. Many commentators link

daesh, Iraq, Isil

The Rest of Everything

Leave a comment

Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions

October 26, 2015

Mark Rubin

Covenants, conditions, and restrictions aka CC&Rs are today’s topic. Dry? Yes, about like toast. Important? Only if you care about how you can use the property you own.

CC&Rs are embodied in a document which gets recorded by the County Recorder. CC&Rs will always include a legal description of the land they affect. Once they are recorded they constitute an agreement or contract between the individual parcels which are referenced or embodied in the legal description. If we assume CC&Rs which control 10 acres, it’s as if No. 1 has agreements with Nos. 2-10, No. 2 has agreements with No. 1 and Nos. 3-10, etc.

CC&Rs govern use issues. In a residential subdivision you can expect statements about home size

conditions, covenants, restrictions, shelley v. kraemer

Law

Leave a comment

The Kim Davis Story: More Thoughts

September 14, 2015

Mark Rubin

Like a moth which cannot ignore the flame, I’m finding it hard to walk away from the Kim Davis story. She has clearly arrived, as I have linked to her Wikipedia page. Do you have a Wikipedia page?

You know the basics. Kimberly Jean Bailey Davis does not believe in same sex marriage. The law interferes with her beliefs, so she thinks she’s entitled to an accommodation. That position has gotten her a contempt citation and jail, courtesy of U.S. District Judge David Bunning. Now she’s out, back at work, and planning to sue Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear (D).* (Details are reported by Caitlin MacNeal for TPM, in Kim Davis’ Lawyers to File New Lawsuit against Kentucky Governor.)

kim davis, nepotism

Law, The Rest of Everything

6 Comments

Legal Malpractice

August 31, 2015

Mark Rubin

Today’s subject is legal malpractice. ‘Tis true; attorneys make mistakes. Really!

Malpractice is a term synonymous with professional negligence. One sounds ugly, and the other doesn’t. Still,, they have the same meaning. And that meaning? Per The Free Dictionary

Malpractice refers to negligence or misconduct by a professional person, such as a lawyer, a doctor, a dentist, or an accountant. The failure to meet the standard of care … that is recognized by a profession reaches the level of malpractice when a client or patient is damaged because of error.

Some appellate court opinions—and yours truly—nibble at the edges of this definition. For our purposes, it suffices.

So, if I make a mistake I’ve committed malpractice? No. First, there is

legal malpractice, professional negligence

Law

Leave a comment

Lay Witnesses and Expert Witnesses

July 27, 2015

Mark Rubin

Witnesses come in two varieties: Lay witnesses and expert witnesses. Lay witnesses testify only when they have personal knowledge about the matter about which they have been offered as a witness. And, generally, they testify about facts, i.e., what they have seen, heard, or read. Lay witnesses can only offer opinions only when they are “rationally based on their perceptions” or “helpful to clearly understand the witness’s testimony or determine a fact in issue.” Lay witness testimony cannot rely on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge.

Expert witnesses, on the other hand, rarely have first-hand knowledge about the facts associated with a case. Instead, they rely on what they are told, and on what they read. They use their

Law

2 Comments

End of Life Issues

July 25, 2015

Mark Rubin

Theresa Brown wrote Choosing How We Die for the New York Times on July 24, 2015. It’s an excellent overview of the challenges we face as a nation with an aging population and not very adequate mechanisms for providing options about end-of-life issues.

On July 8, 2015—yes, only as recently as slightly more than two weeks ago—the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued a proposed rule which addresses, in part, advance care planning. As the CMS fact sheet reflects, advance care planning—as a service for which Medicare will pay a doctor—has only been available as a part of “Welcome to Medicare” at age 65. For healthy, active, never gonna die Boomers, advance care planning discussions are not going to

The Rest of Everything

Leave a comment

Core Issues about Public Discourse

July 25, 2015

Mark Rubin

Core issues have been on my mind lately. They gelled when I saw No, It’s Not Your Opinion. You’re Just Wrong, written by Jef Rouner and shared on FB by Friend RL. More on opinions in a moment.

Public discourse is a disaster right now. Maybe we should blame the media, our leaders, or, just maybe, we should recall Pogo, channeling Walt Kelly, who told us “we have met the enemy, and he is us.” Argue the premise if you want to; I’m here not to debate that issue. Instead, I’m focused on two aspects of poor discourse, hoping increased awareness might provide opportunities for improvement. (Expect more postings on the same broad topic.)

Kudos to Mr.

The Rest of Everything

Leave a comment