It was the wrong thread

[Tyrone Slothrop]

I'm not impressed that Skadden was helping Yanukovych justify the prosecution of Tymoshenko.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I'm not impressed that Skadden was helping Yanukovych justify the prosecution of Tymoshenko.

On a similar note, I am Not Impressed that Mayer Brown is representing the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the city of Glendale about a statue honoring Korean "comfort women." Hurt feelings and historical truth? I doubt they would represent a German-American Holocaust denier (or a Turkish-American Armenian genocide denier, or an WASP Potato Famine denier, etc.) in a similar action.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

On a similar note, I am Not Impressed that Mayer Brown is representing the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the city of Glendale about a statue honoring Korean "comfort women." Hurt feelings and historical truth? I doubt they would represent a German-American Holocaust denier (or a Turkish-American Armenian genocide denier, or an WASP Potato Famine denier, etc.) in a similar action.

I'm not sure which is worse -- the side they are taking, or that they are advancing the notion that erecting a statue somehow "infringes upon the federal government's power to exclusively conduct the foreign affairs of the United States and violates the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I'm not sure which is worse -- the side they are taking, or that they are advancing the notion that erecting a statue somehow "infringes upon the federal government's power to exclusively conduct the foreign affairs of the United States and violates the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

I was prepared to make the same point - regardless of the morality in supporting this plaintiff, the arguments are so legally flimsy that Mayer Brown should be shamed for that alone.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

I was prepared to make the same point - regardless of the morality in supporting this plaintiff, the arguments are so legally flimsy that Mayer Brown should be shamed for that alone.

Agree with you and Sidd that their legal basis seems a bit, well, weak.

Though I do note that if their theory is successful, I will be able to represent the ACLU of Podunkville in suing to remove the ("Fifteen ... [crash!] Oy! Ten!") Commandments from the courthouse lobby because it implies that the state is taking a foreign policy position vis a vis Israel and the Palestinians, which is something reserved to the federal government.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Agree with you and Sidd that their legal basis seems a bit, well, weak.

Though I do note that if their theory is successful, I will be able to represent the ACLU of Podunkville in suing to remove the ("Fifteen ... [crash!] Oy! Ten!") Commandments from the courthouse lobby because it implies that the state is taking a foreign policy position vis a vis Israel and the Palestinians, which is something reserved to the federal government.

Yup. And next time a city or county or state names a public building, road, or anything else after a political or military figure that I don't like, WHAM! I'm suing their ass.

Hell, if I sue San Francisco for having a "Bush" street, the city might just default (but I won't mess with Noriega and Ortega).

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Yup. And next time a city or county or state names a public building, road, or anything else after a political or military figure that I don't like, WHAM! I'm suing their ass.

Hell, if I sue San Francisco for having a "Bush" street, the city might just default (but I won't mess with Noriega and Ortega).

I’ve never felt closer to you than I do right now.

[SlaveNoMore]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Hell, if I sue San Francisco for having a "Bush" street, the city might just default

I double dog dare you. I'll even buy your "war paint."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I'm not sure which is worse -- the side they are taking, or that they are advancing the notion that erecting a statue somehow "infringes upon the federal government's power to exclusively conduct the foreign affairs of the United States and violates the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

I am not saying that Koreans were not exploited in that war. However, I do want to remind you, as 1 or 3 socks posting here that do trials, we might want to be cautious to chastise another lawyer for advancing a somewhat questionable position.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)

I was prepared to make the same point - regardless of the morality in supporting this plaintiff, the arguments are so legally flimsy that Mayer Brown should be shamed for that alone.

if I give you the phone numbers of several law firms defending the infringers of my client's very very successful consumer product, would you call them and counsel them to this point?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

"Lawyers for the doctors deny wrongdoing but 'declined to answer questions about specifics in the suit, including whether the man had a penis when he left the hospital.'"

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Footnote OTD:

[Paisley]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Footnote OTD:

Worked at PFE back in the day. Best office décor evah. See, e.g., employer supplied Fargo show globes (complete with wood chipper and faux blood on snow), Usual Suspects movie posters on wall, etc.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by paisley

worked at pfe back in the day. Best office décor evah. See, e.g., employer supplied fargo show globes (complete with wood chipper and faux blood on snow), usual suspects movie posters on wall, etc.

pfe=?

[bold_n_brazen]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

pfe=?

By simply using basic deductive reasoning, PFE= PolyGram Filmed Entertainment.

What do I win?