Thursday, April 08, 2010

The Digital Ontario Reports (Fail)

I received this morning's email with great anticipation.

The inaugural, digital edition of the Ontario Reports was, after numerous calls by bloggers, parody-video-makers and concerned environmentalists alike, at long last in my inbox.

It went downhill from there.

To my surprise, the email notice itself did not feature an index, with links, of the cases reported in the edition. No headnote summaries. No information at all, in fact. And not a single utilization of the advanced functionality offered by the new, long-awaited digital environment.

The email does, however, feature an advertisement for LexisNexis - along with a link to the online O.R. edition - 98 O.R. (3d) Part 8 Pages 561-640 -itself.

Clicking through, we arrive at a cumbersome, awkward effort to mimic the stodgy look and feel of the old paper version of the O.R.'s.

It is difficult to read. The pages require ongoing zoom adjustments. It was necessary to use a page-format selection to change the default, two-pages-at-once view, which rendered the text virtually unintelligible.

The case text cannot be selected, copied and pasted. It is difficult to view an entire page on one screen in a font size large enough to read.

An attempt to use the Reports' social media sharing function to post the O.R. cover to Facebook resulted in an error message.

And then there were those pages and pages of ads.

Easy to flip through en-masse in paper-form, but a labourious succession of repeated clicks was required to proceed through the advertisement section, until I simply had enough, and used the contents index to skip the ads altogether (as I suspect most readers will).

Ultimately, it is a case of a good idea gone bad. Poorly conceived, poorly implemented.

Which is a shame - what we need is not that complicated.

Lawyers would benefit from a weekly Ontario Reports email containing:
  1. An index of the cases reported, with subject area, concise summary of the ruling, and links to the complete text of each ruling, whether on CanLii or elsewhere;
  2. A listing of the other key O.R. sections - Law Society news, careers, practise resources, tribunal decisions, etc., including highlights of key items.
  3. An O.R. that is current, and does not simply regurgitate cases that have been reported by blogs and the major press months prior. As an example, the Tauber decision, found in this week's O.R.'s, has been available online at CanLii since it was decided on December 23, 2009, and was covered in the National Post on January 11, 2010 - nearly three months ago.
Beyond that, the O.R.'s ads section just won't work in the digital format and needs a complete rethink.

As does the entire format of the, new digital O.R. era.

The Canadian Legal Newswire (subscribe here) provides an excellent model of a legal update newsletter that works. By comparison, the digital O.R.'s take a disappointing step backward in time.

While we applaud the intentions behind the effort, we frankly give this digital incarnation of the Ontario Reports a major thumbs down.

Bottom line is that hard to read, outdated materials will not cut it in 2010.

Even if there are lots of Lexis-Nexis ads.
- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

UPDATE:

Also see comments today from Slaw, David Canton and Michael Carabash on the digital O.R's.

- GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Wednesday, April 07, 2010

Boy, 16, Sues Mom Over Facebook 'Harassment'

Via Associated Press:

ARKADELPHIA, Ark. — A 16-year-old Arkansas boy is suing his mother, accusing her of slandering him on his Facebook page.

Denise New of Arkadelphia is charged with harassment and her son — whose name has not been released — is asking that his mother be prohibited from contacting him.

Authorities say the boy lives with his grandmother, who has custodial rights.

Denise New says she believes she has the legal right to monitor her son's activities online and that plans to fight the charges.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Monday, April 05, 2010

That April Foolin' New York Personal Injury Lawyer

I confess that for a brief moment, I was fooled too.

When our blawger friend, Eric Turkewitz of the New York Personal Injury Attorney Blog announced his appointment last week as "official White House law blogger,“ my instant immediate reaction was 'wow, that's cool - I know that guy!'

Mr. Turkewitz' announcement was unusually (for him) understated, well in keeping with the solemnity of the moment:
Since word is already dribbling out among my friends, I thought I should let you know here: I'm closing down this blog in the next few weeks to start up a new one at the White House as their official law blogger. I'll have the opportunity to both expand the scope of my writing and serve my country at the same time. As blogging gigs go, it doesn't get any better than that.

Here's the back story....

Then, I noticed the date - April 1, 2010 - and like most readers, was fooled no more.

The New York Times Cityroom Blog, however, did not exercise these basic deductive processes, and apparently, kinda-sorta took the bait.

Here's the Times' "correction:"

[Note: an earlier version of this column had an item about a blog post by a personal-injury lawyer, Eric Turkewitz, announcing that he had been appointed the White House law blogger. Blogospheric chatter indicates a high likelihood that this post was an April Fool hoax. Mr. Turkewitz declined to give us a straight answer on this score, so, pending callback from the White House, we've taken the item down.]

Nicely done, Eric.

(I may be seeing you soon.

I'm considering a run for Mayor of New York as a Tea Party candidate).

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Update: April 6, 2010

Some people just can't take a joke: Lawyer Says April Fool’s Joke Was Not an Ethics Violation

- GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Wise Law Blog - Five Years and Counting

It would be an understatement to say I had no idea what I was getting myself into on April 5, 2005, when started this blog, stating simply,

As an occasional contributor and frequent visitor to numerous politically oriented blogs from the USA, I have decided that the time has come for this distinctly Canadian voice to be heard in the blogosphere.

Legal updates, politics, the media - all are fair game. If you have a comment or legal question ... fire away.

And thus, without further fanfare or cacaphony....

Welcome to the Wise Law Blog.

Five years and 1,579 posts later, I'm still not sure exactly where this little online offering will lead me, but it has been quite the ride, so far.

I am extremely glad you've been reading, and I sincerely hope that will continue in the years ahead.

Thanks to all who've contributed as guest bloggers, commenters, supporters, provocateurs and readers.

And happy 5th Anniversary to Wise Law Blog.

Friday, April 02, 2010

Palin Panned by Times TV Critic

New York Times arts blogger Alessandra Stanley didn't think much of the debut of Sarah Palin's Fox News show, Real American Stories:
Sarah Palin didn’t reload, she retreated into canned television formula...
The stories were inspirational. The show was not.
Ouch.

Thursday, April 01, 2010

"Repeal the Bill" Momentum Wanes

Some Republicans are now balking at advancing election promises to repeal newly-enacted U.S. health care legislation:

Top Republicans are starting to worry about their health care rallying cry "Repeal the bill." It just might singe GOP candidates in November's elections, they fear, if voters begin to see benefits from the new law.

Democrats, hoping the GOP is indeed positioning itself too far to the right for the elections, are taking note of every Republican who pledges to fight for repeal. Such a pledge might work well in conservative-dominated Republican primaries, they say, but it could backfire in the fall when more moderate voters turn out.

..."It's just not going to happen," Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said of repeal in a speech Wednesday. "It's a great political issue," he said, but opponents will never muster the 67 votes needed in the 100-member Senate.

Advantage Obama.

Althouse - A Contrary View on Criminal Charges Against School Bullies

University of Wisconsin law professor Ann Althouse checks in with a contrarian perspective on criminal charges pending against nine students, after a Massachusetts teenager's suicide was allegedly caused by school bullying:
Of course, it's terrible when a young person commits suicide. And a suicide may have chosen self-murder because of the bad relationships in her environment. But if we don't favor arresting people who are very mean to people who don't commit suicide, why would we favor these arrests when someone does commit suicide?

Assume you are a teenager contemplating suicide. If you knew the 9 kids at school who were meanest to you would get criminally prosecuted if you killed yourself, would you be more likely to kill yourself or less? I don't know enough about the psychology of suicide to answer my own question, but my intuitive sense is that self-murderers — or some self-murderers — intend to deal a severe blow to the people they leave behind. And knowing your enemies will be prosecuted might spur you on.

We now return to our regularly-scheduled reality.

Also see the New York Times coverage: 9 Teenagers Are Charged After Classmate’s Suicide

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

UK Granny Fined £1,000 For Selling Goldfish to Child

Via Raw Story:

A British grandmother was heavily fined and electronically tagged for selling a goldfish to a child, triggering criticism Wednesday of over-zealous use of animal protection laws.

Pet shop owner Joan Higgins, 66, was fined 1,000 pounds (1,500 dollars, 1,120 euros) also given a dusk-to-dawn curfew for selling an animal to a person under the age of 16, but her 47-year-old son Mark -- also ordered to do community service -- slammed the ruling as a farce.

The pair were prosecuted after the local council sent a 14-year-old boy to buy a goldfish in a "sting" operation following reports that their shop, Majors Pets, had sold a gerbil to a teenager with learning difficulties.

The shopkeepers sold the fish without asking his age or how the fish would be cared for, prosecutors said.

...The story was highlighted by a number of British newspapers Wednesday. The Daily Express said it made a "farce" of Britain's legal system, adding in a front-page headline: "Proof Britain really has gone mad."

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Digital Due Process

WebPro News reports on a lobbying initiative by a coalition of leading U.S. corporations and organizations to convince America's Congress to modernize the country's outdated digital privacy laws.

The excerpt below is from Chris Crum's article, Google, Microsoft Part of Coalition to Get Privacy Law Updated:
A coalition that includes Google and Microsoft is aiming to get the Electronic Communications Privacy Act updated to reflect the needs of today's technologically fast-paced world, where much consumer and business data resides in the cloud.

...Jim Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology... ran down the four principles the coalition is trying to get instilled in the legislation. As laid out on the coalition's site, these include:

- A governmental entity may require an entity covered by ECPA (a provider of wire or electronic communication service or a provider of remote computing service) to disclose communications that are not readily accessible to the public only with a search warrant issued based on a showing of probable cause, regardless of the age of the communications, the means or status of their storage or the provider’s access to or use of the communications in its normal business operations.

- A governmental entity may access, or may require a covered entity to provide, prospectively or retrospectively, location information regarding a mobile communications device only with a warrant issued based on a showing of probable cause.

- A governmental entity may access, or may require a covered entity to provide, prospectively or in real time, dialed number information, email to and from information or other data currently covered by the authority for pen registers and trap and trace devices only after judicial review and a court finding that the governmental entity has made a showing at least as strong as the showing under 2703(d).

- Where the Stored Communications Act authorizes a subpoena to acquire information, a governmental entity may use such subpoenas only for information related to a specified account(s) or individual(s). All non-particularized requests must be subject to judicial approval.
...So far, members of the coalition include: ACLU, American Library Association, Americans for Tax Reform, AOL, Association of Research Libraries, AT&T, Center for Democracy & Technology, Citizens Against Government Waste, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Computer and Communications Industry Association, eBay, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Google, Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, Integra Telecom, Intel, Loopt, Microsoft, NetCoalition, The Progress & Freedom Foundation, and Salesforce.com.

More information about the initiative can be found at DigitalDueProcess.org.


Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Ruling: "Virtual" Law Offices May Not Satisfy N.J. Ethics Regulations

Virtual law offices have received much hype in some circles as the way of the future for legal practitioners.

Some juridictions, however, maintain "brick and mortar" regulations that call the legality of such offices into question. Law.com reports today on a New Jersey decision holding that some forms of virtual offices do not comply with that state's ethical code:

In an action that could affect large numbers of New Jersey practitioners, two court regulatory committees said on Friday that "virtual offices" staffed by receptionists who are mere answering services do not satisfy New Jersey's bona fide office rule.

Virtual offices, time shares in an office building on an hourly or daily basis, are popular with lawyers who work from their homes but need someone to take their calls and a conference room to meet clients.

But these lawyers are violating Rule 1:21-1(a), the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics and the Committee on Attorney Advertising said in a joint opinion, ACPE 718/CAA 41.

The rule defines a bona fide office as a place where an attorney or a responsible person acting on the attorney's behalf can be reached in person and by telephone during normal business hours to answer questions posed by courts,

..."A 'virtual office' cannot be a bona fide office since the attorney generally is not present during normal business hours but will only be present when he or she has reserved the space," the opinions say. "Moreover, the receptionist at a 'virtual office' does not qualify as a responsible person acting on the attorney's behalf who can answer questions posed by the courts, clients or adversaries."

20 Things To Do With Matzah

Happy Passover...


- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Domestic Terrorism

Andrew Sullivan, on the latest round of U.S. domestic terror arrests:

Surely we can all assent to the notion that a Christian militia of the type now accused of planning domestic terrorism is not Christian. This is why I call them Christianist. Anyone planning to murder innocents by way of IEDs cannot plausibly call himself or herself a follower of Jesus of Nazareth.

May we also assume that every single one of these terror suspects is innocent until proven guilty, and shouldn't be seized as enemy combatants and tortured until they confess? Will even Andy McCarthy concede that? Or not?

Also see: Hutaree militia members charged with seditious conspiracy

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Friday, March 26, 2010

Video - 40 Birds Play the Electric Guitar

Too crazy... enjoy the weekend:


- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Thursday, March 25, 2010

On Health Care Reform, Sex Offenders and Viagra

The antics never end in Washington, D.C.

Republicans were mighty busy Wednesday night, tabling proposed amendments to the health care reconciliation bill that is currently been debated in the Senate. The Democrats have made it known that all amendments will be defeated, as any change to the bill will derail their delicate health care reform agreement with the House.

Since they can't win on health care, the Republicans are taking the opportunity to get some interesting campaign-oriented sound-bites out of the process.

Digby explains:
Yes, they're just trying to improve the bill. You've undoubtedly heard about the important improvement to keep Viagra from sex offenders. Here are just a few more:

Brownback 3653 –“To promote the production of renewable fuel.”
Brownback 3690 -- “To provide for the relocation of the United State Embassy to Jerusalem.”
Vitter 4872 – “To repeal the law that provides automatic pay increases for members of Congress.”
David Dayen at Firedoglake:
Republicans have something of a free shot in the reconciliation bill. Democrats have already signaled that they will whip against any amendments and changes to the bill, in an effort to pass it intact and send it directly to the President, avoiding another vote in the House. So Republicans can write virtually any amendment, forcing Democrats into terrible votes, without much consequence, knowing they will be defeated and providing campaign ad fodder
As the Senate gets closer to voting on a health care reconciliation bill, the Republican strategy to derail the Democrats' plans is getting creative--and dirty. Their strategy is clear: with Democrats determined to pass a clean bill, Republicans will force them to vote down politically juiced-up amendments, and likely turn them into political ads meant to characterize Dems as sympathetic to sex offenders and fraudsters.
The goal is simple. To expedite its passage, Democrats need to keep the changes to the reconciliation bill to a minimum, and so have committed to voting down all amendments, even ones that they like. And Republicans want to turn those votes into negative campaign ads ahead of this November's election.
Once the votes are cast, the ads all but write themselves.
"Senator X voted to preserve sex offenders' right to Viagra."
And so on.

Let the games begin.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

UPDATE: New York Times reports that due to parliamentary concerns regarding peripheral issues in the bill, the reconciliation bill will have to go back to the House for yet another vote, after all.

“The parliamentarian struck two minor provisions tonight from the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act,” the spokeswoman, Kate Cyrul, said. “These changes do not impact the reforms to the student loan programs and the important investments in education. We are confident the House will quickly pass the bill with these minor changes.”

- GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Pirate Matzah

Passover alert from the holy land.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Free Speech Wars - Here We Go Again

Frum - Canada's Free Speech Problem



Nonetheless, Scott Tribe and some enquiring minds at CBC still want to know - Ann Coulter Ottawa 'cancellation' a mere publicity stunt? On a similar note, BCL lays out the case and thinks he smells a rat: Coulter - The Aftermath.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

U.S. 'Democracy Restoration Act' Seeks to Reinstate Voting Rights of Felons on Release

Via Talk Left:

The Democracy Restoration Act would restore federal voting rights to felons who have served their sentences. The bill was introduced last summer by Sen. Russ Feingold and Rep. John Conyers. The Judiciary Committee, Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill last week.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice, an estimated 5.3 million American citizens cannot vote because of a criminal conviction. Of these, 4 million are out of prison and living and working in the community. Restoring a person’s right to vote is a critical element to successful reentry into society after incarceration and consistent with our democracy’s modern ideal of universal suffrage. 4 million Americans cannot vote because they suffered a felony conviction.

Canada has no equivalent restriction on voting.

In fact, as noted at Elections Canada online, the right to vote in Canada extends even to all incarcerated persons:

1.15 Right to Vote of Inmates Serving Sentences of Two Years or More

Sections 246 and 247 of theCanada Elections Act, which set out the process for voting in provincial correctional institutions, should be amended to provide a similar process for voting in federal institutions. This would ensure the existence of a process through which prisoners serving a sentence of two years or more might exercise their right to vote, pending a legislative response to the striking down of paragraph 4(c) by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2002.

Sections 246 and 247 of the Act set out the process whereby persons incarcerated in provincial correctional institutions can exercise their right to vote, by means of a special ballot. The Act provides no similar process for persons incarcerated in a federal penitentiary, because the current wording of those provisions reflects the prohibition in paragraph 4(c) of the Act that directs that every person who is imprisoned in a correctional institution and serving a sentence of two years or more is ineligible to vote. Prisoners serving sentences of two years or more are generally incarcerated in federal institutions.16 However, paragraph 4(c) was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2002 in its decision inSauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer).17 As a result, all persons who are otherwise eligible to vote in a federal election are entitled to vote, regardless of the length of their sentence of incarceration.

In every by-election and general election since the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Sauvé, the Chief Electoral Officer has used his authority under section 17 of the Act to adapt sections 246 and 247 to provide a process for voting by individuals incarcerated in federal penitentiaries.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Fired on Facebook

Fired via Facebook - a U.K. first?:
"hiya Chelsea its Elaine from work. I had to tell the owner bout u losin that tenner coz obviously the till was down. she wasn't pleased and said I have to let u go. I'm really sorry. If u call in in the week with your uniform i'll sort your wages out. Elaine xx."

Monday, March 22, 2010

Link Love

Thanks to Canadian Cynic and Toronto Marketing Blog for their links today to Wise Law Blog.

And welcome to readers from those sites.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Opening and Closing Statements in Ontario Civil Jury Trials

The Ontario Court of Appeal has concisely restated many of the key "rules of the road" on lawyers' civil jury addresses in a new decision, Fiddler v. Chiavetti, 2010 ONCA 210, released March 19, 2010.

Also of note, the decision establishes that the current cap on damages awards under Ontario's Family Law Act for loss of care, companionship and guidance is $125,000.00.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Sunday, March 21, 2010

David Frum on the Republican Health Care Defeat

David Frum's verdict is in. This pretty much sums it up:
We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.
The commentary is, of course, entirely correct.

Having said that, wouldn't it have been easier to swallow this stirring indictment of conservative hyperbole if it had come from someone who hadn't played so vital a role in coining the neocon catchphrase, "axis of evil" that was at root of so much of the tumultuous, global reverberation America faced by the end of the last Bush presidency?

It wasn't so long ago that Mr. Frum's own talking points were being eagerly fed to, lapped up and ramped up by the very voices he now castigates and blames for everything.

Mr. Frum, former Bush speechwriter, states, "I’ve been on a soapbox for months now about the harm that our overheated talk is doing to us."

He might want to face that soapbox toward a conveniently located mirror. He is not without personal responsibility here for the tenor of America's current political dialogue.

Read the entire David Frum commentary: Waterloo.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

UPDATE: Also see Mr. Frum on video:

- GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Spammiest. Professional Announcement. Ever.

I have no idea whether the law firm involved had anything to do with the creation of this "press release" (and I suspect it did not - I'd like to believe that nobody who writes so poorly could ever have made it through three years of law school), but someone, somewhere sure does like using the keyword phrases "Ottawa Family Law lawyers" and "Ottawa Wills and Estates lawyers."

The phrases makes numerous redundant appearances in a professional announcement, published online, that announces the addition of two "Ottawa Family Law lawyers" and "Ottawa Wills and Estates Lawyers" to a "premier Ottawa law firm," thereby purportedly adding to the "depth of the firm."

This exciting career news of these two "Ottawa Family Law lawyers" and "Ottawa Wills and Estates lawyers" was published on March 19, 2010, according to the notice's text.

Which is quite interesting, given that one of the lawyers welcomed by the announcement has apparently been with this firm since 2004, according to the very same news release.

Huh?

(Better late than never for professional announcements, I guess?)

The phrases "one of the top estates lawyers," "one of the top family lawyers," and "one of the best family lawyers" also make regular cameos in the online announcement.

This appears potentially problematic, in view of the commentary to Rule 3.01 (2) of the Ontario Rules of Professional Conduct, which precludes "suggesting qualitative superiority to other lawyers" in professional marketing materials.

But as far as keyword spam goes, this is apparently the natural order of things.

Does anyone know - are these sorts of monstrous affronts to the English language created solely through automated means, or are humans actually involved?

U.S. Democrats Release Final Health Care Bill

U.S. Democrats have released their final health care bill.

A vote in the House of Representatives on the landmark legislation is expected Sunday.

Among the bill's highlights:

  • 32 million currently-uninsured Americans will gain health care coverage by 2014;
  • No public option or government insurance plan is included in the legislation;
  • Most Americans will be legally required to buy health care coverage;
  • Denials of coverage for children with pre-existing conditions will be immediately prohibited;
  • Denial of coverages for all adults with pre-existing illnesses will be banned, effective 2014;
  • The bill does not include the restrictive abortion language demanded by Representative Bart Stupak.

The new legislation is summarized here by AP: Democrats release final health care overhaul bill

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Update - Obama Says Bill Will Pass

US President Barack Obama led Democrats in a triumphant, fist-pumping rally Saturday and confidently predicted Congress would rise to a century-old challenge and pass his health care overhaul.

"It is in your hands, it is time to pass health care reform for America, and I am confident that you are going to do it tomorrow," told his allies on the eve of a cliffhanger House of Representatives vote. "Let's get this done."

...Using a blend of expanded government health programs and subsidies for millions to buy private insurance, the bill would add some 32 million Americans to the ranks of those covered for a total of 95 percent of Americans a century after Theodore Roosevelt called for a national approach to US health care.
- GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAWCIVIL LITIGATIONWILLS AND ESTATESFAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOGSUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Friday, March 19, 2010

Stewart on Beck

Comedian Jon Stewart riffs for fifteen minutes on Glenn Beck, and leaves me thinking, yet again, that he might well be the most astute, incisive - and influential - progressive thinker in America.