Legal News Minute for Friday May 16, 2008

The popular online hangout MySpace has won a $230 million judgment over junk messages sent to its members in what is believed to be the largest anti-spam award ever.
A federal judge in Los Angeles ruled against a notorious "Spam King," Sanford Wallace, and his partner, Walter Rines, after the two failed to show up at a court hearing, MySpace told The Associated Press on Tuesday.
Wallace earned the monikers "Spam King" and "Spamford" as head of a company that sent as many as 30 million junk e-mails a day in the 1990s. He left that company, Cyber Promotions, following lawsuits from leading Internet service providers such as Time Warner Inc.'s AOL, only to re-emerge in a spyware case that led to a $4 million federal judgment against him in 2006.
"MySpace has zero tolerance for those who attempt to act illegally on our site," said MySpace's chief security officer, Hemanshu Nigam. "We remain committed to punishing those who violate the law and try to harm our members."
Rines and Wallace created their own MySpace accounts or took over existing ones by stealing passwords through "phishing" scams, Nigam said.
They then e-mailed other MySpace members, he said, "asking them to check out a cool video or another cool site. When you (got) there, they were making money trying to sell you something or making money based on hits or trying to sell ring tones."
MySpace said the pair sent more than 730,000 messages to MySpace members, many made to look like they were coming from trusted friends, giving them an air of legitimacy. Under the 2003 federal anti-spam law known as CAN-SPAM, each violation entitles MySpace to $100 in damages, tripled when conducted "willfully and knowingly."

 

Scott Drake talks to John Levine of the anti spam advocacy group Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email. 

 

After years of preparation, two Yale Law School students were in front of the Connecticut Supreme Court on Tuesday, arguing a case that could lead to major changes in Connecticut's public education system and how it's funded.

Law students Neil Weare and David Noah and a dozen classmates have spent thousands of hours interviewing plaintiffs, conducting research, drafting briefs and developing oral arguments in a lawsuit that would have cost an estimated $5 million to $7 million if handled by private lawyers.

The law students, representing the Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding and public school students across the state for free, argued that the Connecticut Constitution guarantees every student at least an adequate education.

"We had a healthy sense of nerves," Weare said. "When you have potentially the future of Connecticut's schoolchildren resting on this argument today, there's a lot riding on it."

Weare and Noah are among the 80 percent of Yale Law School students who participate in clinics where they represent real people with real issues in courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

Scott Drake talks with David Noah about the case in this podcast. 

One of the nations leading experts on the taxation of damages is Attorney Robert Wood of the firm, Wood Porter of San Francisco, CA and he joins Mark Wahlstrom and Scott Drake on Speaking of Settlements this week to discuss his recent article in the Journal of Tax practices and Procedure on the use of 468b trusts. 

As regular readers and listeners to The Legal Broadcast Network and The Settlement Channel know, 468b trusts, also know as qualified settlement funds, are one of the single most useful and powerful tools for the management of multi-claimant/multi-defendant litigation. They provide a safe harbor during the management and prosecution of a case into which funds can be received by defendants at various times and amounts, with out taxable receipt by the attorney or the plaintiffs in the case. This allows for a rational, transparent process by which legal fees are paid, expenses are paid, government benefits or liens calculated and accounted for, structured annuities purchased and funded along with other substantial benefits. 

However, as these gain in popularity and awareness in the trial practices of leading attorneys, the potential for mistakes or over reaching as to their use looms large and that is the focus of these articles and this two part podcast. Rob and Mark discuss how lawyers can avoid mistakes in the creation of these trusts in the first place, but in the article and podcast they also review the process by which a code sec. 468b trust for a lawyers trust account can potentially be established even after receiving settlement proceeds. This is a very technical area and one that attorneys or settlement professionals should tread carefully in, and only with top quality tax counsel that knows exactly what they are doing.

If you or your firm are considering the use of a 468b trust, or possibly have received funds in a recent case that you think might have been better served by the process of electing status of a 468b trust, then you should listen to these two podcasts or go to Rob Wood's site where you can access the complete articles.

You can listen to the first podcast on 468b trusts by clicking here.

You can listen to the second follow up podcast on 468b trusts by clicking here. 

Karl Stark, one of the featured writers for the Philadelphia Inquirer and someone who has closely followed the drug industry over the last few years, joins Scott Drake of The Legal Broadcast Network to discuss the recent Federal Appeals court ruling that seems to indicate that preemption is going to be the law of the land regarding FDA warning labels and liability.

As you know, LBN has been following this story over the past few months, and in this podcast Karl Stark goes into the 2-1 ruling from a Federal Appeals court panel that sided with the drug industry on the sufficiency of warnings on drug labels.

You can listen to the entire podcast by clicking here.

Or you can go to Speaking of Justice to download the full podcast or cut and paste it to your site.

Preemption is going to be addressed by the full Supreme Court in the Wyeth vs Levine case that is in the current docket, but this appeals court ruling adds further momentum to the argument that the FDA is going to be providing cover to drug companies in state courts regarding their potentially defective or dangerous products. This podcast gives you a quick back ground of what has gone on so far, gives you the framework of what the Wyeth v Levine case is going to be about and the potential impact to trial lawyers and injured parties in the year ahead.  

You may also read the entire article from Karl Stark by clicking here. 

In a long awaited unveiling the National Structured Settlement Trade Association, NSSTA, released the first of several videos featuring legendary trial lawyer Joe Jamail of Houston, TX. Best known for his landmark victory in the Penzoil vs Texaco case, the largest jury verdict in US history at the time, but also widely regarded among trial lawyers as one of the great litigators and advocates for injured plaintiffs, Mr. Jamail discusses in this video the responsibility a trial lawyer has to make sure his client is protected AFTER the verdict or settlement by the use of a structured settlement annuity. This video on structured settlements value and importance, from the perspective of an esteemed trial lawyer should be mandatory viewing for any personal injury lawyer working today. By discussing the value and importance of structuring a settlement using an annuity approach, Mr. Jamail touches on the core concepts of advocacy of your clients, responsibility for what happens after the verdict and a degree of compassion and interest for the client beyond the mere achievement of settlement or verdict. This is one of the great trial lawyers, in fact often referred to by many as the trial lawyer of the century, and we at LBN encourage you to not only view this video if you are considering a structured settlement, but share it with associates well in advance of settlement decisions to discuss how you or your firm protects the client once the verdict or settlement comes in. The NSSTA is an industry trade group and association of settlement professsionals and life insurance companies with offices in Washington, DC. Their web site is www.nssta.com if you wish to learn more about their organization.

In today's Speaking of Justice, the daily legal broadcast and interview segment featured exclusively on The Legal Broadcast Network, one of the most acclaimed and widely read authors in the world, John Grisham,  joins Scott Drake for a conversation that is somewhat of a departure from his standard "book tour" interview. 

John Grisham spends a good part of his time with us talking about his support for Hillary Clinton's run for the Presidency, his long friendship with the Clinton's and his views as to why he feels she is the strongest candidate to lead the Democratic Party to victory in November. As most of his fan's know, and even others who might not have read his books but who have seen the movie adaptations, Grisham is a former trial lawyer himself, a man who ran for political office back before his writing career took off, and his thoughts on exactly why he believes so strongly in her candidacy should be of interest to his fans, and to political types who are fascinated with the epic electoral battle between Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama.

John Grisham doesn't grant a lot of interviews and we are pleased he took the time to join The Legal Broadcast Network for this enjoyable and revealing conversation where fan's of the author of such best sellers as The Appeal,  The Innocent Man, The Broker, The Last Juror, The King of Torts and The Client, can get a glimpse into the political beliefs and theories of this intriguing author.

While LBN doesn't cover politics on a regular basis, we definitely discuss political issues, the views of trial lawyers and opinion makers in the law, and this is a really enjoyable, insightful podcast that will appeal to Democrats who are looking at the choice between Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama and are interested why John Grisham is convinced that Hillary Clinton is the best choice for her party. He also discusses why the idea of a Clinton/Obama ticket doesn't look like a winner in his eyes and the importance of a candidate having been in the arena and tested the way Hillary Clinton has so they are fully able to compete in a national campaign in November. Just a really solid podcast.

You can listen to the entire podcast with John Grisham by clicking here.

Or you can go to the audio player at the bottom of this post which links to the Speaking of Justice video archive and listen to the entire John Grisham interview by clicking the player.  

Also, if you want to know more about John Grisham, you can click this link and go to his official page at Random House which has all of his books, his bio and other information you might want on this author.

These interviews and the expanded coverage you are seeing from The Legal Broadcast Network are just the "toe in the water" of what is going to be a dramatic expansion over the next few months to a full video, daily broadcast platform with radio podcasts, video news and interviews ,as well as in depth writing and discussion for attorney's , law students, judges and others intrigued by the law. Also, don't forget to check out our beta test page for Speaking of Justice, the new social/professional network for attorneys that will feature all of our video, audio, blog posts, discussion boards and social networks. Just one more tool for you to use being brought to you by The Legal Broadcast Network.  

 

John Grisham Podcast

In today's Speaking of Justice, Scott Drake is joined by nationally respected Attorney Kathleen Wu of the firm Andrews and Kurth. Attorney Wu was recently featured in the Wall Street Journal as well as the Texas Lawyer discussing "What women lawyers can learn from Hillary", an opinion piece from a top flight attorney who has developed an impressive reputation both locally in Texas as well as nationally in the area of real estate law. 

One of the areas of interest to attorney's nationally, particularly women attorney's, is the ability to learn from and be mentored by other lawyers who have risen to a level of prominence. Kathleen in her article as well as this featured podcast on The Legal Broadcast Network uses Senator and former first Lady Hillary Clinton as an object lesson for women lawyers as to the pit falls that await women attorney's in particular.

What we at LBN particularly like about this podcast, and the accompanying article in Texas Lawyer that you can access by clicking here, is that Kathleen makes no apologies for being tough on herself and associates and in one section advises women attorney's to get a thicker skin, and in another to never under estimate your opponent. This is a really solid podcast and has interest far beyond just "women legal issues" but is an insightful analysis by an attorney who has walked the walk of building a dynamic and successful legal career and has value advice for law students, young lawyers and others looking to build a career and a practice.

You can learn more about Attorney Kathleen Wu by clicking here at her site at Andrews Kurth or by linking to her article in Texas Lawyer by clicking here.

The Wall Street Journal link is available here.  

The full podcast is available by clicking this link or by going to Speaking of Justice and looking for audio podcasts.  Just a reminder that Speaking of Justice's new social multi-media web site is now actively in beta test stage, is open for anyone to join and will be formally launched in 10 days.  

 

You saw him on Fox news last night, joined by Sean Hannity, to discuss his recent book, " How can you defend those people." However, the Legal Broadcast Network and Scott Drake talked to him first in our interview last week with nationally renown trial lawyer, Mickey Sherman. You've seen him on Court TV, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC and just about every law show or commentary and now you can listen to him on LBN.

In our daily broadcast on Speaking of Justice, we were joined last week by Mickey Sherman to discuss in greater detail his recent book, " How can you defend those people?", a look at his life as one of the nations most high profile criminal defense attorneys.  As his book jacket and review says " In the tradition of true crime bestsellers by Alan Dershowitz and Dominick Dunne, Mickey Sherman delivers a powerful and extraordinarily candid account of his legal career that gives the readers an all-access backstage pass to not only the sausage factory that is the criminal justice system but the “big cases” we have all lived with on TV. "

Speaking of Justice host Scott Drake gets a deeper look at the issue of how criminal defense attorney's need to view their professional and ethical responsibilities, as well as attempt to educate the public on the constitutional right every citizen has to a vigorous and powerful defense. If you are a fan of legal issues, a practicing trial or defense attorney or a law student this well written book is going to be of value to you. 

Listen in to our podcast with famed criminal defense Attorney Mickey Sherman and learn "how he can defend those people" and the crucial role a defense attorney plays in our legal system.

 

You may also purchase his book on Amazon by click this link. We encourage you to purchase it for yourself or for the next person who asks why "criminals" are entitled to a vigorous defense.  

This podcast is a further example of the kind of authors, legal experts and commentators you can expect to find every day on The Legal Broadcast Network and our daily audio show, "Speaking of Justice". In the next few weeks you will witness our transformation to a daily video show as well, capitalizing on our recent expansion and the acquisition of the people and talent necessary to evolve LBN into the daily watering hole for lawyers of all types, practices and areas of interest.

If you have a guest, a topic or material you'd like to see us cover on Speaking of Justice, drop us a note or call our studio and we will be happy to get them on the air.  

In today's Speaking of Justice, LBN host Scott Drake sits down with noted national expert, Attorney Roberta Ashkin to discuss the recent settlement by Eli Lilly with the State of Alaska over anti psychotic drug Zyprexa. This case, which settled during the trial for $15 million has wide spread implications that have been poorly reported and poorly understood in the business media. LBN, as usual, will bring you the story that you really need to know about as regards the implications of the Zyprexa settlement.

The origin of this case was a suit brought by the Alaska for reimbursement of Medicare or Medicaid prescriptions written for Alaska residents, at an average of $5000 per case, on the theory that the manufacturer had not adequately warned about the drugs side effects of excessive weight gain, risk to diabetics and subsequent illness and medical risks that this created to a wide class of people who used the drug. While effective as an antipsychotic in many cases, these secondary risks were glossed over or poorly explained and resulted in health and medical issues for a large number of residents. In addition, it was marketed for off label uses that went well beyond it's studied or approved uses by the FDA.

Roberta Ashkin, in this podcast on both the Alaska case and the larger picture of Zyprexa litigation, discusses the foundation of these cases, the implication in other state reimbursement cases as well as the looming issue of preemption and the part it played in this case being settled. What at first look seems like a minor settlement and a win for Eli Lilly in making this go away, actually has broad implications on other similar cases in many states.

The timing of the settlement, three weeks into trial, was curious and if you want to know more we strongly urge you to listen to this podcast on Zyprexa litigation, a featured commentary brought to you exclusively on The Legal Broadcast Network. 

You can also find the WSJ article on the Alaska settlement with Eli Lilly by clicking here.  

In a ruling two weeks ago, the California State Court of Appeals sent shock waves through the home schooling community when it ruled in a case that parents who do not have a state teaching certificate do not have a constitutional right to home school their children.

This ruling is the focus of an excellent podcast on Speaking of Justice in which J. Michael Smith,  the president of HSLDA ( Home Schooling Legal Defense Association) joined host Scott Drake to look into the specifics of this ruling and it's potential impact on parents who home school their children in the State of California.

You can hear the entire Speaking of Justice podcast with J. Michael Smith on the California home schooling ruling by clicking here.

Why would the Legal Broadcast Network make this a focus of our daily show and interview segment you might ask? It is because LBN reports on all areas of the law, not just trial court issues! The shock waves this ruling sent through the area of law surrounding parental rights to home school their children raised the profile of this issue at LBN and caused us to look into the patch work of laws, regulations and ruling that parents who rightfully wish to home school their children need to deal with on a state to state, or even city to city, basis.

If you are the parent who home schools, like apparently Chuck Norris is,  or just an attorney who is curious as to what exactly the Appeals court in California was thinking. We suggest you research the issue by checking out the various links. You can click here to read Chuck Norris's commentary. ( Who knew Chuck was a columnist?)

Just today the San Francisco Chronicle reported that the Second District Court of Appeals in Los Angeles is going to potentially rehear the arguments on Tuesday of next week. This is common in certain cases and might only result in a minor change, if any change at all, but the article gives you the latest news on this case.

I'd suggest you read the commentary and definitely listen to our podcast with the HSLDA. Don't make us send Chuck over there! 

In news from last week, the EPA announced on March 12, 2008 that WR Grace had agreed to pay $250 million to the EPA to fund the clean up of the town of Libby, MT., one of the most notorious environmental disasters of the last 25 years. You can read the entire AP news wire report by clicking here.

" Taxpayers have been footing the bill for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's investigative and cleanup work in Libby, where the agency arrived in 1999. Expenses total $168 million and another $175 million in costs are likely, said Paul Peronard, EPA's Libby project leader. Sen. Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat, called $250 million "a drop in the bucket compared to the destruction and pain our neighbors in Libby have been through."

Asbestos came from the vermiculite mine and processing facilities, a few miles from Libby, that Grace owned and operated from 1963 until the site's closure in 1990. Vermiculite was used in a variety of products and the asbestos was dispersed in a variety of ways. Workers carried it home on their clothing. Asbestos also ended up in the yards of homes where vermiculite was spread as a soil conditioner. Exposure in Libby has been blamed for lung-scarring asbestosis and for mesothelioma, a fast-moving cancer that attacks the lungs. "

While notable for it's amount and the fact that at long last some measure of compensation and justice for the residents of the small Montana mining community is on the horizon, the facts of the Libby case and what still lies ahead really isn't discussed in great detail in any of the news reports.  For perspective on what happened at Libby, the nature of this environmental and public health disaster we have turned to LBN's Jan Schlichtmann, one of the nations leading environmental lawyers to discuss the case.

For today's edition of Speaking of Justice, discussing the Libby Montana $250 million EPA settlement and what the future holds, click here.  

In yet another indictment, both literally and figuratively, of the legal profession Attorney Mel Weiss, one of the pioneers of class action litigation and legal practice, pled guilty last week to charges that his firm had for years been paying illegal kickbacks to lead plaintiffs in class action cases.  Additional charges related to attempting to cover up the payments to investigators also hung over his head and he now joins his former associate William Lerach and "The King of Torts" Dickie Scruggs as three of the most shameful cases of trial lawyer malfeasance.

In today's Speaking of Justice, Scott Drake and Jan Schlichtmann discuss the career of Mel Weiss, who truly was one of the pioneers of mass tort litigation and for decades was at the pinnacle of his profession. Much like Eliot Spitzer, the class action attorney's took on Wall Street and over the years the enmity between the CEO's and shareholders of big public companies and the mass tort bar was ongoing.

Take a few minutes and listen in to this analysis of the fall of Mel Weiss and the lessons it holds for trial lawyers nationally in this edition of Speaking of Justice.  

What is going on, what has been going on, that drives these men of extreme talent and ability to make such fundamentally flaw decisions and destroy their reputations and legal practices. Jan discusses what might drive these prominent lawyers to this destructive end and how attorney's must be vigilant to constantly look in the mirror and determine if they are serving their clients, or if their practices as designed to serve themselves instead.  

In today's edition of Speaking of Justice, Scott Drake is joined by one of the nations leading experts in the area of HRT ( Hormone Replacement Therapy ) litigation, Attorney Zoe Littlepage of the firm, Littlepage Booth in Houston, TX. 

Zoe has been in the headlines for well over a year in this intriguing area of pharmaceutical litigation, first with her appointment in 2003 as the lead counsel in Prempro litigation and more recently as a result of the  landmark verdict last year in Reno, NV  where she obtained a verdict of $134 million for three plaintiffs. This case was recently reduced by the trial judge to just over $50 million, but coupled with another major verdict that another legal team recently brought home in Arkansas that was also in excess of $25 million, it is readily apparent that when HRT or Prempro cases reach a jury or get a full trial that the evidence is not only compelling but that record punitive awards are being brought in as well.

Zoe Littlepage, a frequent guest and commentator here on LBN,  spends a few minutes with Scott Drake to update our listeners and readers on the status of HRT litigation, what cases are pending and the events of the last few months.

You can listen to the entire podcast by clicking here and get up todate on HRT litigation with the nations leading expert, Attorney Zoe Littlepage.

Frequent guest and contributor, Attorney Jim Orr of the Dallas, TX based Heygood, Orr, Reyes, Pearson and Bartolomei firm, joins Speaking of Justice host Scott Drake to discuss the recent recall of a generic based copy of the Duragesic patch.  The product defect recall by Actavis Inc, the U.S based arm of the international drug manufacturing company Actavis Group hf, is important to note in that it is a total recall of ALL patches manufactured during significant time frame.

You may link to the FDA press release on the recall with all the lot and information numbers by clicking here.  

As listeners to LBN know, we have been following the Duragesic/Fentanyl patch litigation and recalls closely, including some video and audio podcasts with Jim Orr in the past. Important news in this particular podcasts covers the scope of the recall of the generic fentanyl patch, updates on the depositions that have recently been taken with the inventor/designer of the patch and further discussion of the manufacturing defect known as a fold over defect that dramatically increases the chances of leaks in the patch. If you are an attorney investigating or looking to get involved in Fentanyl patch litigation you should listen in to this podcast with Jim Orr, one of the nations leading experts in Duragesic or Fentanyl patch liability cases.

Click here to listen to the entire podcast with Attorney Jim Orr on the recall of the Actavis generic Fentanyl patch. 

Late last week the Dean of the Washington and Lee University Law School announced a revolutionary change in how the highly esteemed law school would approach the third year of law school. Today on Speaking of Justice the man charged with developing this innovative new approach to legal education work, Dean Rodney A. Smolla, joins host Scott Drake to discuss just how this decision was made and what this highly regarded law school hopes to provide it's students through this intriguing change in 3L.

Click here to listen to the podcast of Dean Smolla on Speaking of Justice. 

The new third-year curriculum, approved unanimously by the Law School faculty, will be entirely experiential in nature. Traditional classroom instruction will be replaced by practice simulations, real-client interactions and the development of law practice skills. These project simulations will span the array of traditional legal subject matter, including transactional areas such as banking and corporate finance that have often been overlooked in the hands-on offerings of traditional law school curriculums. Also, the Law School's existing clinics and externship programs will be modestly expanded. All third-year students will be required to obtain a Virginia practice certificate and participate in at least one real-client experience during the year.

Legal education has been immersed in tradition and methodology that has remained largely unchanged for decades, if not hundreds of years, so this innovative departure is currently the talk of the legal world. Washington and Lee is considered one of the nation's finest law firms with a star studded list of alumni. Additionally Dean Smolla is regarded by many in the world of legal education as one of its leading innovators, with a reputation as a scholar, teacher, advocate and writer. His wide ranging scholarship includes a case book on the First Amendment, four legal treatises and many article in the nations top law reviews, in fact winning the ABA Silver Gavel Award and the William O. Douglass Award. Rodney Smolla is one of the nations leading legal scholars on first amendment issues and with this recent move now sure to be viewed nationally as one of the innovators in legal education, LBN is pleased to offer this podcast to it's listeners who want to know more about Washington and Lee, or who wish to learn more about Dean Smolla.

Listen to the entire podcast interview of Dean Rodney Smolla of Washington and Lee by clicking here.  

In today's edition of Speaking of Justice the topic turns to the headline story of last week, the guilty plea of the "King of Torts", Richard "Dickie" Scruggs.  In a week of amazing headlines regarding the likes of Eliot Spitzer or William Lerach, to our mind the most amazing story is this guilty plea of Scruggs to a charge of attempting to bribe a judge to rule in his favor during a legal dispute over attorney fees. 

Civil Action attorney Jan Schlichtmann and Speaking of Justice host Scott Drake look at the career of Dickie Scruggs, discuss the landmark case that brought him to prominence, that being the Tobacco litigation of the mid 1990s and the twists and turns of a career that has gone from the pinnacle of the law to now the very bottom. The question that comes to mind when anyone looks at the facts of this case and the status Mr. Scrugg's enjoyed in the legal community virtually everyone wonders what could have driven this man to such an unlawful action when he already enjoyed wealth beyond that of all but a handful of citizens. 

Listen in as the dramatic rise and fall of "The King of Torts" is discussed today on Speaking of Justice.  

In today's Speaking of Justice, Attorney Jan Schlichtmann and host Scott Drake discuss the provocative article of March 16th, 2008 in the Sunday New York Times entitled "Supreme Court, Inc. ".  This article is available for you read and review by clicking here.

Authored by noted George Washington University law professor Jeffrey Rosen, this is a fascinating analysis and review of the shifting role of the U.S. Supreme Court over the last ten years as it has become decidedly  pro-business in it's tilt as more and more conservative justices have been confirmed during the last 24 years. In the latest term 13 of 15 cases involving business issues the court sided with business, a stunning turn around in results and rulings.  If you haven't read this article yet we strongly urge you to take the time to do so today.

For a full review and analysis on the conclusions of this thoughtful article you can click here to listen to Jan Schlichtmann look at the root causes of the pro-business tilt and the prospects for change any time soon.  

 

In today's edition of Speaking of Justice, host Scott Drake is joined by the Executive Director of the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association, Marcia Shanor to discuss the organizations up coming "Ski CLE" to be held in the breathtaking location of Jackson Hole, WY. This is the third annual ski event and each year it's popularity grows as more and more attorney's from around the country who love to ski participate in this unique event.

You can find out all you need to know about the CLE, which is being held from March 26th to the 28th in Jackson Hole and registration is available right up to the last minute by contacting the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association at 307-635-0820, or by going to their web site at www.wytla.org. This is a great event, there is over 300 inches of base snow in Jackson this winter and if you love to ski and want some top quality CLE this event is for you!

The headline speaker, Attorney Richard Friedman is the author of two highly regarded books for trial lawyers,   " Rules of the Road" and " Polarizing the Case".        

Rick Friedman is one of the nation's top civil trial attorneys representing individuals and small businesses injured by large corporate and government interests. He has established a reputation for obtaining large verdicts in cases other law firms have been unable or unwilling to take on in the fields of personal injury, defamation, insurance bad faith and business torts.

Rick Friedman's successful career has been distinguished by multi-million dollar verdicts and precedent-setting case law. Among many of his landmark cases are the $150 million awarded to a State Farm agent in Bellott v. State Farm, $84 million awarded to a disabled doctor in Ceimo v. Paul Revere, $17.3 million awarded for improper denial of disability benefits in McKendry v. General American, $16.5 million awarded to a disabled worker in Ace v. Aetna Life Insurance Company, and $12.7 million awarded to a disabled businessman in - Merrick v. Paul Revere. Rick handles all types of cases, including personal injury, wrongful death, medical malpractice, insurance bad faith and business torts. Rick is a member of the Inner Circle of Advocates, an invitation-only group that limits its membership to 100 of the leading trial lawyers in the country. He is also a member of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers.

In an extended piece of commentary, this weeks featured guest on Speaking of Justice-Weekend edition, the Legal Broadcast Network's showcase of the nations top lawyers, is Attorney Billy Murphy. Known nationally as one of the premier criminal defense attorney's practicing law today, Attorney Murphy is also recognized as one of the most passionate advocates of civil liberties and an astute commentator on the legal scene. 

This podcast interview with Scott Drake of LBN and Billy Murphy took place a few days after the resignation of N.Y. Governor and former Attorney General Eliot Spitzer as a result of his being exposed in an online prostitution ring. Unlike most of the media coverage that was gloating, sarcastic and focusing on the lurid elements of the hooker with whom he had the liaison, this extended podcast looks at the cost of this resignation to the people and taxpayers of New York.  If you are looking for thoughtful, provocative and unvarnished analysis of what this spectacle was really all about, you absolutely want to listen to this podcast with Billy Murphy. While Governor Spitzer certainly visited this personal tragedy upon himself through his actions, Billy looks at the larger issues of what exactly has become of the American concept of privacy in a world where banks are required by FINRA and other federal agencies to report cash flows as small as a few thousand dollars on the pretext of looking for terrorists and drug dealers, but instead turn the enforcement arm of the US Justice system on citizens engaged in behaviors that are typically misdemeanors.

This is a fascinating and engaging conversation and if you are tired of the tabloid TV coverage on Eliot Spitzer you will want to listen to this podcast from start to finish.

A member of the Board of Governors of the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association and the Board of Directors of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the recipient of the inaugural Charles Hamilton Houston Award for Lifetime Achievement in Litigation, the Murphy Firm's founder and senior partner, Judge William H. "Billy" Murphy, Jr., graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a B.S. in electrical engineering in 1965 and a J.D. from the University of Maryland School of Law in 1969 where he was a member of the Law Review.  He has practiced law for over thirty years, including three years as a judge on the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, the highest level Maryland trial court. Judge Murphy has tried numerous high-profile criminal and civil cases including some of the most celebrated criminal and civil cases in Maryland history. Making history comes naturally to Judge Murphy, as he comes from one of the most distinguished African-American families in the country. His father, William H. Murphy, Sr., was one of the first African-American judges in Maryland. His great-grandfather, founded the Afro-American Newspaper. His sister, Laura Murphy, is a top lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union and heads their Washington D.C. office.

You can look forward to more commentary in the future from this legal legend and one of the nations most provocative and thoughtful legal minds. If you are tired of the same old TV talking heads on what pass for legal shows on the networks, check out Attorney Billy Murphy here on LBN for a breath of fresh air.