Some loose yet interesting stuff that I came across recently during a long stroll around the internet that never made it into a post of its own.

A Smashing Good Time

The Appellate Division,4th Department, held in  Franklin Corp v. Prahler that the owner of a collector car damaged by the negligence of another was no longer limited to the lesser of the reasonable cost of repairs or the reduction in market value.

Plaintiff was the owner of a 2000 Ford GT (hereafter, GT). On May 28, 2005, the GT was parked on the east side of Franklin Street in the City of Buffalo. According to plaintiff, the GT “is a rare collector’s sports car rapidly appreciating in value.” On the day in question, Justin M. Prahler (defendant) was driving a 1997 Jeep Cherokee and had consumed several alcoholic beverages. He was legally intoxicated when he struck and damaged the GT.

There’s nothing the owner of a collector car fears more than having his baby hit, whether by drunk, distracted SUV owner or loving fan who just wanted a closer look at 67 miles per hour.  But it’s still a car, and it needs to feel road beneath its tires.  Anytime you put a car on the road, the potential for disaster exists, though prohibitions against driving like a blithering fool are supposed to bring some small comfort.

For those unaware, the cost of insurance for a classic car is pennies compared to your minivan. That’s because classic car owners are actuarially recognized to take exceptional precautions to protect their vehicles.  But that doesn’t mean bad things won’t happen, not of their doing. So what happens when some collector car (say, a 1964 Austin Healey 3000 Mark III, Series II, BJ8) gets smashed?



Unlike a K-car, an exotic or classic car isn’t quite returned to its status quo ante by repair. Originality is highly prized, and a significant part of the intrinsic value of a classic car.  When some drunk smashes into it, the loss in value is far greater than the cost of repairs, and there’s no logic to precluding the plaintiff to recovering both the cost of repairs as well as the diminution of value.  About time a court recognized it.

Cowardice, The Next Big Thing In Legal Marketing

Is nothing sacred? For years,  Brian Tannebaum has made a nuisance of himself harping on the evils unethical behavior and deceptive legal marketing.  All this time, I thought he did it because he was deeply concerned about the profession and, well, he was inclined to be a douche.  Not so, according to divorce lawyer Lee Rosen.

If I had any guts, I’d say more about the bullshit that’s written about marketing, search engine optimization, virtual practices, unbundling, etc. because there is so much bullshit that it would fill a thousand railroad cars every month.

Having guts—being willing to tell the truth, even when it’s controversial—is a good marketing practice. It generates attention, which usually translates into increased business. You should try it because it works. Calling someone out is great marketing. It’s amazingly effective.

Exhibit  A: Brian Tannebaum,

So this has all been about increasing business by counter-marketing?  Not with an online picture like this:


(Image courtesy of Hair Club for Men and Lapel Pins-R-Us)

Rosen describes himself as “chickenshit” in comparison to Tannebaum, taking leave by saying, “Now, excuse me so I can head up to my room and see whether I can’t grow a pair.” Such humility, coming from a bald guy.

I Never Saw It Coming, Your Honor

Speaking of humility, few things are as humbling as being unable to get table on a Friday night at a decent restaurant or being sentenced, at least if you’re a hedge fund guy.  Both compel explanation, though one is easier than the other.  Via  Ashby Jones at the WSJ.

“Your Honor, I was not aware of the changes that were happening in me that blurred the line between right and wrong. They came slowly over several years. I allowed myself to slip into the world of relativism where the ends justified the means. Quite frankly, it’s very hard to imagine how I became that kind of person.” — Joseph “Chip” Skowron III, Friday, Nov. 18.

And yet, he used the information to dump stock in a biotech that was about to become a huge loser, you know? It’s really not that hard to imagine.

The above is sort of an elegant mea culpa, no? We thinks it’s likely the way that a lot of white-collar crooks get covered in mud, by wading into it very gently at first.

It always starts with a few million here, a few million there, and pretty soon we’re talking real money.  Every time a guy pleads to a corporate or financial crime, he’s stuck trying to come up with a way to explain why he isn’t a venal, malevolent criminal. Sometimes, there’s an actual reason. Most times, it’s just opportunity combined with self-interest multiplied by the belief that he’ll never get caught.

But it’s a damn fine statement at sentence, no doubt vetted through his lawyer.

Skowron was repped by Akin Gump’s James J. Benjamin, Jr., a former SDNY prosecutor.

And remember, white collar crooks, nobody knows how to prepare a better worded sentencing statement than a former SDNY prosecutor.  Credit where credit is due. Plus 60 months, $5 million in restitution and a $150k fine. Try shorting that.

Ralph Nader Wishes He Was Ben

The  Consumerist is one of those websites, almost a blawg, that actually managed to do something useful, making it stand apart from the rest of us who blathering on pointlessly.  The reason for this can be summed up in two words, “Ben” and “Popken,” the man who saved more consumers from misery than anyone else on the interwebz.

Via Bruce Carton at Legal Blog Watch, I learned that Ben is leaving the Consumerist, which has been on my blogroll for years, because, as it turns out, he hates people.

Here’s the part in these things where I’m supposed to tell you about the ground-exploding Web5.0 transdimensional hyperrealistic consumer empowerment matrix I’m starting. Except there isn’t one. I’m working on a few different ways to exploit my brain for profit. In the meantime, please stay in touch. I’m writing at benpopkenwrites.com, making funny stuff at benpopkenisjustkidding.com, and my personal landing page and catchall for my endeavors and adventures is iambenpopken.com.

Well, hate may be too strong a word, but apparently after six years of effectively humiliating corporate skels into doing what consumers paid them to do, he’s decided that it’s good to eat and he wants to make money.  My personal belief is that he’s preparing a run for the Republican nomination for President of the United States of America, expecting his campaign to be financed by his good friends at Comcast.  It could happen.

Great News for the Criminal Defense Lawyer doing Criminal Defense Law in Criminal Defense

There are few names bigger in the industry sucking earned fees out of servicing lawyers than Lexis/Nexis, so if Lexis says so, it has to be, right?  And combine the Lexis caché with the street cred of Larry Bodine, marketer extraordinaire whose lawyer consulting business was so fabulous that he traded it in for a spot on the corporate ladder, and you’ve got must-do for every lawyer, right?

The Keywords to Success: How to Generate More Business for Your Law Firm with Search Engine Optimization

That’s right, the joys of search engine optimization! As any fabulous legal marketer will tell you, use it or die.  So you think that the secret to wealth and prestige as a criminal defense lawyer lies in criminal defense lawyers using keywords as a criminal defense lawyer in criminal defense, whatever.

But this is no mere scuzzbucket SEO webinar to “demystify search engine optimization (SEO) and explore how you can strategically apply some of the latest SEO techniques to generate more clients.”  Oh no. That would be beneath Bodine’s dignity, not to mention that value added approach of Lexis.  Nope, this is a CLE for credit!  That’s right, your continuing legal education now includes demystifying SEO.

Earn CLE credits*

Wait a sec.  An asterisk?  What’s that all about?

*CLE is in the process of approval. LexisNexis is approved for telephonic/Webinar training on this topic in the following states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New York┼, North Dakota, and Utah (self-study only).

┼Only experienced (having completed their first 32 hours of CLE) NY attorneys may take telephonic training for CLE. New York regulation requires that all CLE sessions must be conducted by a JD or an attorney in good standing.

Why is this part in light gray, kinda hard to read? Barely noticeable? So you mean it has yet to actually be approved for CLE credits.  Maybe because it’s absurd and outrageous and disgusting that anybody would think they deserve CLE credits for a webinar about search engine optimization?  But this is Lexis. This is Larry Bodine.  They would never lie to us about the value of SEO or its merit for continuing legal education. Never. That would be wrong.

Me and My Shadow

One time JAG turned dirty guy, Eric Mayer, who now goes by the handle  Unwashed Advocate (for reasons too disgusting to mention) has taken up making lists, in a therapeutic sort of way. 

 When I first decided to leave my comfy government job with a pension and regular paycheck, I did a lot of research about solo practice, the business of running a practice, and things that help my particular business model. I saw tons of articles and lists called “Everything you WANTED [emphasis added] to know about solo practice.” Sure, there was a lot I wanted to know. I wanted to hear that I’d make millions. I wanted to hear that it was easy. I wanted to hear that I’d get great cases and find myself arguing before a jury in minutes. I wanted to know that I’d have no problem finding success. I wanted to know that a rainbow would pop through the window every morning.

Nobody published that list. I exaggerate. Some did. Some people talked about aspects about practice that were challenging or undesirable, but they were drowned-out by the volumes of folks talking about solo practice with wide-eyed wonderment and zeal. Sunshine was regularly injected into my rectum.

The rectum obsession is disturbing, particularly in light of his new blawg name, but hardly the most disconcerting part of his post.  He proceeds to lay it on the line, with such notable gems as:

Those wonderful thoughts you had about answering your own phone evaporate once you answer your own phone. The world is full of tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists. They’ve all been wronged by the government. They all have a highly complex story to share. They know how to trap someone on a phone better than a telemarketer. They’ve all been probed by aliens, and they love talking to lawyers. Now, you’re fresh meat.

And lest I not tie things together, the easiest way for the nutjobs to find your phone number is via the magic of SEO.  But as Eric delightfully points out, it not necessarily the worst thing in the world that your name gets passed around the tin foil hat society, since even your dog or cat couldn’t give a damn about your day.

You may eventually turn to Twitter for companionship. There, you’ll meet lawyers and lawyer-friendly people. You’ll share your funnies and thoughts, but, eventually, you realize something. Everyone there is pathetic, just like you. Like you, they just want to share their thoughts and funnies. They could care less about your thoughts and funnies. They only want you to read their thoughts and funnies. Like you, they sit at a computer, mumble incoherent thoughts, and chuckle at internet humor–all while farting their last highly-processed TV dinner. Calling Twitter one big circle jerk is an insult to circle jerks.

And this, amigos, is the reason why everyone, receding hairline or not, should own a classic car and take their chances on it getting smashed by some drunk.  It’s better than turning to twitter for companionship. Even if you can get CLE credit for doing so.