Autumn cold; curtained window
of the fortuneteller
softly glowing
Rainfall pelts the roof–
smell of fresh pine chips
from the pinto’s empty stall
autumn evening —
yellow leaves cover
the plot reserved for me
“Autumn evening” — A New Resonance 2 & Modern Haiku XXX:2
potluck
both have it covered.
Methinks Ted Frank is over-reaching with his suggestion that Ralph
Nader’s complaint over the Eagles cutting Terrell Owens is representative
of the state of consumer fraud jurisprudence. Ted alleges that Nader is
“arguing that the Philadelphia Eagles’ decision to suspend star wide receiver
Terrell Owens . . . is consumer fraud because season-ticket holders had an
expectation that Owens would play for the team.” In his Overlawyered.com
post, he continues:
“(But what about all those New York Times subscribers who
expected to read Judy Miller?) The suggestion rises to self-
parody, though it exhibits the absurdity of modern consumer
fraud law in that it isn’t crazier than suits that actually succeed.”
At Slate, Robert S. Boynton has a balanced article on whether junior
academics can afford to be opinionated webloggers. “Attack of the
Career-Killer Blogs,” Nov. 16, 2005, via Bashman). I believe too many
law professors pull their punches on weblogs on any topic that might
interfere with appointment to academic chairs, political plum positions,
or prized judicial seats.
go out long
I don’t think I’m overreaching. Consumer fraud attorneys get millions in settlements for allegations as insane as that one. While it’s unlikely that any judge will intervene, it’s not for lack of supporting precedent that a case would be dismissed.
Comment by Ted — November 17, 2005 @ 12:34 pm
I don’t think I’m overreaching. Consumer fraud attorneys get millions in settlements for allegations as insane as that one. While it’s unlikely that any judge will intervene, it’s not for lack of supporting precedent that a case would be dismissed.
Comment by Ted — November 17, 2005 @ 12:34 pm