Belgian Prince

Priorities

2009-02-08T19:17:00.002-05:00

Apparently, Senator Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat from Michigan, wants to bring back the "Fairness Doctrine." The Fairness Doctrine was a FCC rule that was in place for approximately 40 years, beginning in the 40s. According to one source:

The FCC took the view, in 1949, that station licensees were "public trustees," and as such had an obligation to afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of contrasting points of view on controversial issues of public importance. The Commission later held that stations were also obligated to actively seek out issues of importance to their community and air programming that addressed those issues.

Michigan has an unemployment rate of over 10%. Its housing market is in the gutter; you can buy houses for $8,000 or less. So why is Senator Stabenow focusing on bringing back what I, along with doubtless countless others, consider to be at least a silly, if not outright imprudent rule? There are better things for the government to focus on these days.

Pink Floyd's One Slip

2008-11-09T13:23:00.003-05:00

The introduction is pretentious Floyd noise; the lyrics are sufficiently profound; the fully developed melody redeems the inauspicious introduction. In sum, this song is worth listening to carefully. Most interestingly, the lyrics echo St. Augustine:

Veni Carthaginem, et circumstrepebat me undique sartago flagitiosorum amorum. Nondum amabam, et amare amabam, et secretiore indigentia oderam me minus indigentem. Quaerebam quid amarem, amans amare, et oderam securitatem et viam sine muscipulis.

To Carthage I came, where there sang all around me in my ears a cauldron of unholy loves. I loved not yet, yet I loved to love, and out of a deep-seated want, I hated myself for wanting not. I sought what I might love, in love with loving, and safety I hated, and a way without snares.

Confessions, Book Three, Chapter One.

A restless eye across a weary room
A glazed look and I was on the road to ruin
The music played and played as we whirled without end
No hint, no word her honour to defend
I will, I will she sighed to my request
And then she tossed her mane while my resolve was put to the test
Then drowned in desire, our souls on fire
I lead the way to the funeral pyre
And without a thought of the consequence
I gave in to my decadence
One slip, and down the hole we fall
It seems to take no time at all
A momentary lapse of reason
That binds a life for life
A small regret, you won't forget,
There'll be no sleep in here tonight
Was it love, or was it the idea of being in love?
Or was it the hand of fate, that seemed to fit just like a glove?
The moment slipped by and soon the seeds were sown
The year grew late and neither one wanted to remain alone
One slip, and down the hole we fall
It seems to take no time at all
A momentary lapse of reason
That binds a life for life
A small regret, you won't forget,
There'll be no sleep in here tonight
One slip ... one slip

Not really...

2008-11-09T13:08:00.002-05:00

Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, Todd Zywicki discusses the role of Mormons in passing Proposition 8 in California. He writes:

I should have noted that given the unusual history of Mormons in the United States and their periodic struggles with polygamist schism groups, it is easy to understand why the mainstream Mormon Church would have a particular interest in opposing efforts to weaken the traditional definition of marriage.

I would think that "given the unusual history of Mormons" they would be more understanding of other peoples' definitions of marriage, and not so quick to impose their (hardly consistent) idea of marriage on others.

Ironic

2008-10-26T21:04:00.003-04:00

I received the following email last week. Note that their proposed solution for economic blues is to spend $50, plus costs for the "cash bar," to learn about another great civilization that hit a road bump it couldn't recover from.

--- Forwarded message from Administrative Drone ---

>Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:13:17 -0400
>Reply-To: AR Travel and Education
>Sender: AR Travel and Education
>From: "Administrative Drone"
>Subject: DOL: Bringing the world and Dartmouth to you!
>To: AR-TRAVEL-ED@LISTSERV.DARTMOUTH.EDU

Dear Alumni, Parents & Friends of Dartmouth:

Has the economy got you down? Here's your chance to lift your spirits and experience the magnificence of ancient art from Assyria without having to wait in long lines.

Join fellow Dartmouth alums for an after hours private tour of Art and Empire: Treasures from Assyria in the British Museum" and lecture by Steven Kangas, Senior Lecturer, Department of Art History at Dartmouth College.

Date: Sunday, November 2, 2008
Location: Museum of Fine Arts, Boston
Time: 5:45 pm to 9 pm
Cost: $65/person for alumni and guests through the Class of 1992;
$50/person for alumni and guests in the Classes of 1993–2008.
Covers lecture, private exhibit tour, and a hearty reception. Cash bar will be provided.

Please visit www.alumni.dartmouth.edu/ace/onlocation and link to the Art and Empire to register.

Register today to help us plan for an appropriate number of tickets and refreshments.

I hope to see you at the MFA,

Administrative Drone
Assistant Director
Alumni Continuing Education & Travel
Office of Alumni Relations at Dartmouth College
6068 Blunt Alumni Center, Suite 103, Hanover, NH 03755
603-646-2454 Fax:603-646-1600
www.alumni.dartmouth.edu/ace

Assyrian Treasures is a special Dartmouth on Location event brought to you by the Office of Alumni Relations in cooperation with the Dartmouth Club of Greater Boston

DARTMOUTH COLLEGE NEVER SELLS ADDRESSES TO OUTSIDE VENDORS. If you do NOT wish to receive e-mail information about Dartmouth's Alumni Continuing Education programs, please send an e-mail to ar.ace@dartmouth.edu with "Remove from continuing ed e-mail" in the subject line.

*******************************************

Doctors as Conformists

2008-09-10T01:10:00.000-04:00

I started thinking about this topic last summer, when I spent a good deal of time defending doctors who had been sued by their patients. Then, this summer, while studying torts for the bar exam, some of my thoughts crystallized somewhat, so I decided it merited a post when I got the time.

For starters, doctors generally owe their patients a duty of care. In other words, they have to be good doctors. What it means to be a good doctor is defined by the “standard of care.” Generally speaking, and this varies from state to state, a doctor owes his or her patient the standard of care which is used by an average doctor practicing medicine in a similar community. As my bar review torts professor succinctly put it, “It is a command to be a conformist. The custom of the profession sets the standard of care.”

The last two lines of that quote are what got me thinking more about this. Essentially, doctors are expected to be conformists. They have to be sheep if they don't want to be sued. If they are sued, they will most likely lose if they deviated from the standard of care used by the “average doctor practicing medicine in a similar community.” This can lead to interesting results; a cardiologist practicing in Manhattan is likely to be held to a higher standard of care than a cardiologist of the same educational background practicing in upstate New York, a few miles from the Canadian border. But I digress.

This treatment of doctors differs from that of other professionals. Lawyers don't have to be conformists like doctors do. This is because a lawyer doesn’t lose a malpractice suit unless the client can show that he would have won if the lawyer hadn’t been negligent. In other words, the case is decided based on the merits of underlying lawsuit. A lawyer could have screwed up a trial in all sorts of ways, but unless what he actually did caused the client to lose, he will not be liable to the client. The client might have been harmed in other ways – the trial was more costly than it should have been, his reputation was unnecessarily harmed, etc. – but unless the lawyer’s negligence, as opposed to his use of novel legal theories or other forms of what we in the profession label as “zealous advocacy” caused the client to lose a case, the lawyer will not be found liable.

It is a bit different for doctors. If a doctor deviated from the standard of care common in his community, and that deviation caused harm to the patient, then the jury will likely find the doctor liable. I think this is because when doctors do screw up, it more often hurts people in very tangible, painful ways. It is simply the nature of the job. Medical care is really more of a process, whereas lawyers are generally working towards one goal: winning for their client. Also, because of the roles of the judge and jury, the lawyer has less control over the outcome of the case, and so it is harder to prove liability. On the other hand, doctors control more of their patient’s treatment, it's more one-on-one, and so, when things go wrong, there is often no one else to blame.

Doctors, therefore, are often reluctant to try novel or generally unaccepted forms of treatment, often because of the risks associated with them, but just as importantly, because they know that, should the treatment fail, the patient will likely sue. The patient’s lawyers will hire experts who will testify, quite truthfully, that the doctor’s novel or generally unaccepted course of treatment fell outside what is generally accepted the standard of care expected of an average doctor practicing medicine in a similar community. Whether the patient would have been worse off had the doctor conformed is not very important. What is the operative fact (pun intended) is whether the doctor deviated from the standard of care, and whether that deviation caused the patient to suffer.

But suppose the doctor hadn’t used this novel treatment, and the patient still suffered the same or even worse harms. Well, if the doctor can prove this at trial, he will likely prevail. But the problem is, if he is outside the norm, he won’t find any credible doctor, as an expert witness, to back him up on this. Thus the jury will be left with the plaintiff’s expert doctor’s entirely truthful and learned testimony regarding the generic standards of care, and will most likely decide for the patient. Note that, even if the patient consented to the risks of the novel procedure, the patient can still successfully sue the doctor if the patient can show that his consent was not adequately informed. The problem of consent is another issue for another post. I just wanted to mention it because you are probably thinking about it at this point, if you read this far.

A few concluding thoughts:

The history of medical profession has been characterized by inertia and skepticism of change. For example, Louis Pasteur faced hostility to his discoveries. I think that doctors are often hostile to innovation, and this can be traced to their fear of being non-conformist. Lawyers are freer to be non-conformists. They attempt novel legal theories all the time, and if they lose, well, they tried their best for their client. When doctors try and fail, their patients sue them. Because of our current legal system, doctors are much more likely to lose such lawsuits than lawyers. Therefore, doctors are hesitant to attempt novel yet perhaps beneficial treatments for fear of liability. That’s probably not something we want to promote, but that’s the way things are.

Why Not Diesel?

2008-09-08T17:50:00.003-04:00

This article about the new European Ford Fiesta ECOnetic, which gets 65 mpg, got me thinking about diesel powered cars, and why they are not more popular in the US. At first glance, it is pretty simple. Diesel is more expensive (the government's fault - it is taxed more), harder to find (only 42% of stations sell it - both industry's and the government's fault), and people (ignorantly) think that diesel cars are inferior to gasoline cars.

In Europe, half of passenger cars run on diesel. I have ridden in and driven many of them - Fords, BMWs, etc. - and they are indistinguishable from gasoline cars from a performance perspective. Moreover, in Europe, diesel is cheaper (by 10 Euro cents per liter) than gasoline. Furthermore, diesel cars in Europe get, on average, 60 mpg. A limited number of diesel cars are available in the US.

Hybrid cars are, for the most part, more popular among environmentally conscious people than are diesel cars. This seems a bit mistaken; hybrid cars, while they admittedly save gasoline, require expensive and environmentally taxing (toxic and expensive to recycle) battery systems. Moreover, while the government provides a tax break to hybrid buyers (up to $3k), hybrids often cost more than conventional cars. Furthermore, hybrid cars still only get 45 mpg on average (because hybrids save the most gasoline in urban driving conditions), rendering them inferior to diesel vehicles for driving conditions that are not primarily stop-and-go.

While diesel is admittedly a dirtier fuel than gasoline, modern clean-diesel engines render this difference negligible. Moreover, when fuel efficiency is taken into account, modern diesel cars produce far fewer emissions per mile than conventional gasoline cars.

Why aren't diesel cars more popular in the US? Why does the government subsidize hybrids yet tax diesel at a higher rate than gasoline? What am I missing here?

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

2008-09-02T13:50:00.000-04:00

This is a little late, but I've been busy with myriad sundry things, such as taking two bar exams and visiting the motherland for two weeks.

First, I have a (very tangential) personal connection with Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. During the summer of 2006, I worked in the freight department of our local Home Depot. One day, a special order toilet - low water, but high power - arrived for a certain Ignat Solzhenitsyn. A few days later, a middle-aged gentleman came in to pick it up. I asked if the person who had placed the order was related to the noted Russian author. The gentleman looked at me inquisitively, and said that yes, "it was for the family." For those who don't know, the Solzhenitsyn family made their home in Cavendish, Vermont, mere miles from the N.H. Home Depot I was working at.

I respect Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and his work. Ten years ago, I read the Gulag Archipelago, and it made quite an impression on me. I do, however, disagree with much of what he stood for, apart from our mutual distaste for Communism.

For example, as some have noted, Solzhenitsyn was more anti-communist than pro-democracy.

Solzhenitsyn was a Russian nationalist, not a liberal democrat. As such, he was suspicious of Western-style democracy and individual rights. While he was not as much of a chauvinist as some other Russian nationalists, his writings defending czarist Russia and Russian culture sometimes verged into anti-Semitism.

But, I agree with Ilya Somin's conclusion in his blog post I quoted above:

Overall, I believe that the good Solzhenitsyn did greatly outweighs his misguided statements on some issues. Solzhenitsyn deserves to be remembered for the fortitude he showed during his years in the Gulag and for his courage in resisting and exposing the crimes of a brutal totalitarian regime.

More controversially, perhaps, I agree with many of the sentiments Solzhenitsyn expressed in his notable speech, A World Split Apart at Harvard University's Class Day Exercises in 1978. In that speech, he severely, and in some cases, I believe, unfairly, criticized Western/American culture. But some of his criticisms were and remain valid, especially his critique of what he termed our "spiritual exhaustion." Essentially, although he did not use these precise words, he thought the West had arrived at a post-Enlightenment stage that was destructive to the very ideals that had made the West great in the first place.

Western society has given itself the organization best suited to its purposes, based, I would say, on the letter of the law. The limits of human rights and righteousness are determined by a system of laws; such limits are very broad. People in the West have acquired considerable skill in using, interpreting and manipulating law, even though laws tend to be too complicated for an average person to understand without the help of an expert.
[. . .]
I have spent all my life under a communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society with no other scale but the legal one is not quite worthy of man either. A society which is based on the letter of the law and never reaches any higher is taking very scarce advantage of the high level of human possibilities. The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relations, there is an atmosphere of moral mediocrity, paralyzing man's noblest impulses.

I disagree with his critique of our legalistic society, and would, rather agree with Robert Bolt's Thomas Moore, in his Man For All Seasons:

ROPER: So now you'd give the devil the benefit of law?

MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the devil?

ROPER: I'd cut down every tree in England to do that.

MORE: Oh, and when the last law was down and the devil turned on you where would you hide, Roper, all the laws being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, man's laws not God's, and if you cut them down - and you're just the man to do it - do you really think that you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the devil the benefit of the law, for my own safety's sake.

I maintain that the rule of law, tempered with humanity, is best, because, to paraphrase Justice John Marshall, "we must never forget that these are humans that we are governing."

The Aging of Free Speech?

2008-08-08T11:46:00.003-04:00

This article got me riled up when I read it a while back. I shared some thoughts about it with some friends at the time, which I'll post here.

A couple of years ago, a Canadian magazine published an article arguing that the rise of Islam threatened Western values. The article’s tone was mocking and biting, but it said nothing that conservative magazines and blogs in the United States do not say every day without fear of legal reprisal.

Things are different here. The magazine is on trial.

Two members of the Canadian Islamic Congress say the magazine, Maclean’s, Canada’s leading newsweekly, violated a provincial hate speech law by stirring up hatred against Muslims. They say the magazine should be forbidden from saying similar things, forced to publish a rebuttal and made to compensate Muslims for injuring their “dignity, feelings and self-respect.”

In the United States, that debate has been settled. Under the First Amendment, newspapers and magazines can say what they like about minorities and religions — even false, provocative or hateful things — without legal consequence.

Perhaps it was the general "America is weird" slant of it, or the overall theme that seems to insinuate that it is important to protect people from certain speech.

People do not need to be protected from speech. The few exceptions that the Supreme Court have found for speech involve when the speech incites immediate violence in a setting where that violence would be likely.

While our American exceptionalism is something to be proud of, and that much of the world once admired (beacon of democracy, land of freedom, etc), now it appears that we are more and more seen as simply the cowboys of the world.

For example, my Belgian cousins lump our First Amendment protection of free speech dismissively in with our Second Amendment rights to bear arms, and our Fourth Amendment rights against warrantless searches and seizures. They don't understand why police can't just search people on the street who are obviously sketchy. So, they shrug their shoulders and write America off as a throwback country, an anachronism in today's world.

Such blatant disregard for the American tradition and the peer pressure to make me change my beliefs deeply offends my dignity, feelings and self-respect. So those Canadians and others better stop saying this, before I tell on them.

Stereotypes?

2008-08-07T10:03:00.002-04:00

My roommate was watching the weather report on CNN this morning. I straggled into the kitchen to get some juice, and heard "it will be very hot in the South today," and, a little later, "watch for wind in Chicago."

Maybe it was too early, but I found it amusing.

Wisdom vs. Knowledge vs. Information

2008-07-20T20:38:00.003-04:00

Many people can said that we are in an "information age." We now have access to more facts than we ever have had in the past. Yet we are surrounded by spectacularly unwise people. This is because information is nothing until it is used. It is like potential energy; a piece of firewood. Raw facts need to be first known, and then applied, in order to be useful - this is wisdom.

Let's start with some definitions:

Wisdom is the "quality of being wise; knowledge, and the capacity to make due use of it; knowledge of the best ends and the best means; discernment and judgment; discretion; sagacity; skill; dexterity."

Knowledge can be defined as the "act or state of knowing; clear perception of fact, truth, or duty; certain apprehension; familiar cognizance; cognition."

Information simply is "any fact or set of facts, knowledge, news, or advice."

Paul Graham has written a very interesting essay on the differences between wisdom and intelligence. There is a good discussion of his argument over at the Volokh Conspiracy blog. Essentially, Graham argues that "a wise person knows what to do in most situations, while a smart person knows what to do in situations where few others could." He explains:

"Wise" and "smart" are both ways of saying someone knows what to do. The difference is that "wise" means one has a high average outcome across all situations, and "smart" means one does spectacularly well in a few. . . . As knowledge gets more specialized . . . intelligence and wisdom drift apart, [and] we may have to decide which we prefer. We may not be able to optimize for both simultaneously.

I would distinguish his argument somewhat, since I believe information and knowledge are prerequisites to wisdom, while intelligence is something qualitatively different. Intelligence, in my opinion, is best defined as the "capacity to know or understand; readiness of comprehension; the intellect, as a gift or an endowment." In other words, intelligence is an ability, and it is nothing until it is exercised. Many, if not most of us, know very intelligent people who make very bad decisions. Wisdom, on the other hand, is defined by its application - it is kinetic - since it is the application of known information. Intelligence goes hand-in-hand with this process, as intelligence is a measure of capacity to know or understand. Wisdom is the process.

Information is great. Knowing lots of information can be helpful. But we need wisdom to sort it all out. Some level of intelligence is necessary but not sufficient in order to be wise. And, the Information Age, with its ease of access to information, makes it too easy to set aside knowledge, as we don't need to remember things anymore, we can just look them up any time on our Blackberrys or iPhones. Let's just be intelligent about it, and not forget about wisdom.

Uncomfortably Numb

2008-07-20T19:18:00.003-04:00

I watched the movie Garden State for the first time recently. I felt rather depressed while watching it. Afterwards, I tried to figure out why I felt this way. If you haven't watched it, I have two pieces of advice: don't watch it unless you are feeling rather invulnerable, and, don't the rest of this post until you read the plot synopsis.

For one thing, the protagonist, Andrew Largeman, is numb to life for a number of reasons. The relevant ones for me were, first, his guilt about his mother - a less significant reason, I'd argue; second, his medication - lithium; and third, his lack of direction in life - arguably a result of the first two factors.

Andrew's numbness eventually ends, partly because he stops taking lithium, but mostly, he is thawed by the warmth of life when he meets an eccentric girl (not the best description, but oh well) and falls for her. The redeeming power of love is grand.

Andrew's situation, however, seems to be shared, to some extent or another, by many people today. The one example I have in mind is medication, specifically, anti-depressants. I think medications that interfere with the mind's chemistry are far more potent than our doctors want to admit, especially when taken for long periods of time. In Andrew's case, he took lithium for 16 years, beginning when he was 10 years old.

I do not believe that anti-depressants and other similar substances are useless per se. I believe they can help some people very much. I do believe, however, that too many people take them while ignoring the underlying causes of their depression. Doctors are partly to blame for this; there is a trend today to prescribe drugs to treat a symptom without seeking out the underlying bad habits that cause the illness. Just look at the plethora of prescription advertisements in today's media.

Moreover, many college students struggle with depression while simultaneously maintaining drinking habits that can only be described as alcoholism. Consumption of alcohol to the extent many of us did in college alters the brain's chemistry. This often makes people prone to, if it does not outright cause, depression. Oftentimes, doctors prescribe anti-depressants without simultaneously recommending reducing alcohol consumption. Even if doctors do make such a recommendation, once someone begins taking anti-depressants, they rarely stop. They may switch medications, but because the withdrawal process is often very difficult, and depression inducing in and of itself, they usually remain on medication for a long if not indefinite period of time.

I've struggled with depression in the past, although it was never too serious. I think that much of it was caused by messing with my brain's chemistry with alcohol, bad diet, and the general roller coaster of emotion that defines college for many of us. Speaking of roller coasters, I think that depression, to some extent, is to be expected in life, especially in college. Many of us had life pretty easy up to that point, and the crushed expectations, confusing situations, and academic stress often lead to depression. If depression is natural, perhaps we should try first to control it naturally before bringing out the big guns of medication.

Anti-depressants, I would argue, function as an override switch on the brain. Therefore, they should only be used when someone is irretrievably depressed. Furthermore, because anti-depressants are often used for a long time, and their long term effects are not well known, there is a significant risk to prescribing them for what is often a short-term problem.

Going back to Garden State, we of course have extreme example: Andrew took lithium for 16 years, beginning when he was 10 years old. His father, a psychiatrist, prescribed it because Andrew was having issues coping with the fact that he accidentally caused his mother to spend the rest of her life in a wheelchair. Any behavioral problems a 10 year old might have are most likely short term, and should not be controlled with something as potent as lithium. I could argue here against giving ADD/ADHD drugs to young people, but let's save that for another post.

Bottom line is that the medical profession is too prone to solving problems with pills, and that if we rely on doctors to solve all our problems, we risk ending up like Andrew Largeman was before he providentially left his lithium prescription behind in L.A.

Postscript: Another problem I did not discuss is that most doctors are very much like sheep when it comes to proposing cures. This innate medical conservatism will be the subject of a later post.

Haha

2008-07-20T16:01:00.002-04:00

I saw this scribbling on the wall of the men's toilet stall at a Starbucks in downtown Boston:

"Drinking fancy coffee does not make you more intelligent."

Minimum Legal Proficiency?

2008-07-20T08:24:00.002-04:00

Joe Arpaio is the sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona. He is well-known for being tough on crime, is somewhat controversial. I'm very much in favor of not releasing inmates because of overcrowding, and so forth. Some of his tactics, however, seem a bit unorthodox, but who am I to judge.

Today, however, I read this article, in which Sheriff Joe, while discussing his recent arrest of rapper DMX, shares his opinion on bail and presumptions of innocence.

"He's back in jail again," Arpaio said. "I don't know why judges keep letting this guy out. Every time he goes in there, he gets out on bond.

"I'm hoping this is the one time he's going to pay the penalty for his offense," he added.

Arpaio said the bail had not been set in the recent arrest.

If DMX remains jailed, the sheriff said, he would be isolated from the rest of the inmates for his own safety.

"They may not like his music," he said.

We must remember that our justice system assumes people are innocent until proven guilty. During a suspect's trip through the system, we require increasingly greater degrees of proof at each step on the way to a conviction. First, an arrest simply means that police had probable cause to believe the person committed a crime. Warrants are often not required, and probable cause simply means "a reasonable belief."

Indictments have to be based on legally sufficient evidence that is admissible at trial, and of course, guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The point is that an arrest by no means shows guilt. It simply means that an officer reasonably believed the suspect committed a crime

Where does bail come in? When Sheriff Joe says, "I don't know why judges keep letting this guy out. Every time he goes in there, he gets out on bond," he is displaying a fundamental misunderstanding of how bail law works. The general presumption is that bail must be granted, except for particularly violent crimes, or if the suspect poses a flight risk. In most states, judges have to release someone on bail if they don't fit in either of those categories. As long as DMX doesn't have a history of not showing up for his court dates and so forth, he has a right to bail. Those judges have simply been discharging their constitutional duties.

Furthermore, when Sheriff Joe states, "I'm hoping this is the one time he's going to pay the penalty for his offense," he again does not appear to understand that there is a difference, as far as the presumption of guilt is concerned, between an arrest and a conviction.

I could go on, but I need to go study Wills, Trusts, and NY Civil Procedure today.

Good Joke

2008-07-19T16:53:00.003-04:00

When I was home this past weekend, my mom told me a joke she had heard recently, which combined two aspects of my life - the viola and practicing law.

Q. How is a viola like a lawsuit?
A. Everyone breathes a sigh of relief when the case is closed.

Coffee Wars

2008-07-18T10:38:00.003-04:00

This article is about a guy who walked into an independent coffee shop in the D.C. area, and ordered an espresso over ice. The barista "scolded him, saying that what he was doing to his espresso was 'not okay' and that the store's policy was to preserve the integrity of the drink."

My visceral reaction is that the barista and the coffee shop acted in a snobby and inappropriate manner. Customers should be able to, within reason, get their drinks to their liking. On the other hand, customers should realize there are limits to what they can request.

This can be illustrated by analogy to certain restaurants that offer only a single menu for dinner each evening - a table d’hôte. Diners understand that when they eat there, they must trust the chef's judgment for the most part. If they don't like that, they can go to another restaurant that offers a choice-based menu - a menu à la carte - trusting the chef's judgment to a lesser extent. In other words, for a table d’hôte, the diner has very little discretion, whereas for a menu à la carte, the diner expects reasonably broad discretion.

The problem is that most consumers, myself included, place coffee shops in the category of choice-based menus, not the single menu group. This leads us to expect that we can order coffee to our liking, subject only to a reasonableness standard. The D.C. coffee shop in the article is too close to the table d’hôte, and coffee, the style of which often considered to be a very personal preference, is inappropriate subject matter for this sort of menu.

The D.C. coffee shop is, in some way that is intuitively, but not rationally apparent to me, the inverse of the situation posed in this cartoon:

Study Moods

2008-07-17T16:32:00.003-04:00

This quote from Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment is apt as the bar exam approaches:

He was so weary after a whole month of concentrated wretchedness and gloomy excitement that he longed to rest, if only for a moment, in some other world, whatever it might be, and in spite of the filthiness of the surroundings, he was glad now to stay in the tavern.

Bar Exam

2008-07-17T15:26:00.002-04:00

I am currently studying for the New York and Massachusetts bar exams.

Those who share my misery have helpfully sent me some links to some amusing material.

This is a video of a country-style music video entitled "Bar Exam."

This is a rant about the often absurd and ancient subjects tested on the bar exam.

Humor will often preserve sanity. But it is important to remember that "humor can be dissected, as a frog can, but the thing dies in the process. . ." Leonard v. Pepsico, 88 F.Supp.2d 116 (S.D.N.Y. 1999).

Light reading

2006-04-25T12:39:00.000-04:00

These are the books on my nightstand. Strictly recreational reading.

Pensees, Blaise Pascal (English translation)
La Chute, Albert Camus (Original French)
Les Jeux Sont Faits, Jean-Paul Sartre (Original French)
The Age of Reason, Jean-Paul Sartre
The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Milan Kundera

It sures beats reading about a grant of a fee simple subject to open, with a executory interest in fee simple absolute to a third party.

Lyrics

2006-04-19T17:19:00.000-04:00

I liked the lyrics to this song. The original French is much better than my translation.

Quelques phares brillent dans le noir
Ton regard est rempli d'histoire
Le cœur est un voyageur
Quelque part c'est toujours ailleurs
Chaque soir est un jour qui pleure
Le cœur est un voyageur

Some lights shining in the dark
Your glance reflects the past
The heart is a wanderer
Part of it is always elsewhere
Each evening cries out
That the heart is a wanderer

Elderly Easter

2006-04-17T16:52:00.000-04:00

This Sunday, I went with my parents and youngest brother to an Easter Egg hunt that some of my parents' friends were hosting. Over the potluck luncheon, one of the other adults there asked me: "so are you the visiting uncle?"

Later on, after I had made a self-referential lawyer joke, one older guy asked me which area of law I practiced in.

I do have precisely two gray hairs, but I didn't think I looked that old. Ugh.

My Resume

2006-04-09T20:21:00.000-04:00

It's an awesome day
Fixed up my resume
One page long
Nothing's wrong
I got great expectations
Jobs for consideration
Not gonna get fired
Lookin to get hired

I'm no wimp, this resume's pimp
I'm really a dork, so I'll get work
With my pimpin, def not wimpin resume
Starting a job in May,
With my resume.

Boston

2006-04-09T20:17:00.000-04:00

Let's go down to town
Living fast, we'll have a blast
Partying in class, a critical mass
Everything's new for us two
Walking in the park, watching the dogs bark
Walk and talk, gawk and mock
In a city so pretty.

Assignment for property class

2006-04-08T14:57:00.000-04:00

From the professor:

I have also assigned for Friday an old English case called Spencer's Case. DO NOT try to read that mess. Gaze at it wonderingly; I will explain later why it is in the materials.

More verse

2006-04-08T14:37:00.000-04:00

Walking in the park
Watch the dogs bark
Taking the city after dark
We try to leave our mark,
And strike a spark,
Living life on a lark.

Let's get technical
This is critical
The world's political
It's not theorectical
More rhetorical
Just ask the Oracle.

Poetry

2006-04-08T14:32:00.000-04:00

We are all wordsmiths now
Fruitlessly seducing the muses
In desperation
Seeking inspiration
All we get is perspiration
Is it our generation?

We are all copycats now
Reading what's gone before
Forgetting what's at our core
But life's such bore
Yet writing's a chore.
Show distraction the door!
Study more. And more.

We are all yuppies now.
Living in a city
Looking all pretty
Hello kitty!
But the reality's gritty
Stuck in the rat race, what a pity.

We should all be happy now.
Youth is beauty
Fate is duty
Don't be moody
Youth is cutie
Let's be happy. Tutti.

More creativity

2005-11-02T10:35:00.000-05:00

I wrote another creative submission for my contracts class, and the prof performed it.

We read this case. I wrote this rap about it. The prof did his best Jay-Z impression and performed my rap. The class really enjoyed it.

On the subway...

2005-10-16T22:16:00.000-04:00

Saw a blonde girl with a t-shirt that said: "B is for blonde."

Decadence?

2005-10-16T11:15:00.000-04:00

College Bellhop is a professional cleaning service aimed at college students who do not wish to clean their dorms or apartments.

Is it just me, or is this a bit over the top?

More mischief

2005-10-13T20:56:00.000-04:00

There are six elevators in the law tower - the law school itself. Ten minutes before each class, these elevators are essentially overwhelmed. The number of stories that I would normally view as walkable increases by a surprising margin.

I was on the third floor, and needed to go to a class on the eighth floor that started in 5 minutes. There were five other people making the five story trek up, backpacks strapped on, laptops in hand. Two stories up, the girl at the head of the group said, "We really need to get some sherpas. Y'know, sherpas would make this climbing so much more easy."

There was an awkward silence, until I spoke up, "I think that would make a great work-release program, don't you think?" Then, the silence got even more awkward.

Summers in Boston

2005-10-12T21:04:00.000-04:00

Before my writing seminar this evening, two female students were discussing whether their laptops were compatible with the exam software that enables law students to take exams on their laptops. Very nonchalantly, they concluded that they were going to handwrite their exams (these are three hour exams, written in the infamous bluebook).

I piped up that I'm planning on spending $300 on a used thinkpad so that I wouldn't have to handwrite my exams (I have a iBook). I commented that since they were girls, they probably knew how to "write by hand." They were amused by my choice of words and seemingly offended that I categorized them based on gender. Thankfully, some other people in the room, including some other females, quickly corroborated my stereotyping. Guys generally have barely legible handwriting, as opposed to girls.

It was just amusing.

Eureka!

2005-10-05T11:56:00.000-04:00

I've thrown off my body's chemistry lately. I think it's because I've cut back on coffee, but not on nicotine or alcohol. Today, however, is free coffee morning at the law school, and I'm studying in the law library. This yields two results, increased intake of caffeine, and decreased intake of nicotine in the form of cigarettes. The end result is that I'm feeling very sprightly right now, and am very actively procrastinating, instead of just lurking around. Now I just wonder what would happen if I brought my tin of skoal to the library?

Cool

2005-10-04T19:29:00.000-04:00

I belatedly put together some bits of information, and realized that Professor Randy Barnett, the author of my Contracts textbook is also a professor at my law school, a contributor to the Volokh Conspiracy blog, and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. Professor Barnett also argued the medical marijuana case before the US Supreme Court this past November.

More recently, Professor Barnett wrote an op-ed for today's Wall Street Journal on the most recent Supreme Court nominee. Fascinating stuff.

Legal Creativity

2005-09-28T09:16:00.000-04:00

The professor who teaches my contracts class encourages creative submissions that comment on the cases we have read.

We read this case. I wrote this rap poem about it. The prof, much to his credit, assumed a hip hop artist's demeanor, and performed the poem, much to the delight of the class.

Law School Hijinks

2005-09-27T21:33:00.000-04:00

I received this email today from the director of the First Year Writing Program at my law school. It's both disturbing and amusing.

The law school administration has noticed that an unnamed first year law student has posted flyers with the heading "Give me Proof," offering to pay another student "to proofread certain Legal Writing assignments." Paying another student to work on your legal writing assignments violates the school's disciplinary regulations. Any student found guilty of this practice will be subject to disciplinary action.

First year students are encouraged to meet with their Writing Seminar Teaching Assistants for help with their Writing Assignments. The TAs have been selected and trained to help first years to improve their writing skills. The TAs also know what the instructors are looking for in the assignments. Thus, paying a student to work on your paper not only violates the school's disciplinary regulations, it also is a waste of money and not a very effective way to produce a good final product.

More blogsense

2005-09-21T22:04:00.000-04:00

I'm just not going to comment.

From my civil procedure class

2005-09-21T15:27:00.000-04:00

We're discussing what the "use" means in the context of 18 U.S.C. 924(c): "Whoever, during and in relation to any crime of violence or a drug trafficking crime ... uses or carries a firearm, shall be sentenced ... if the firearm is a machinegun ... for thirty years."

The professor was, in his words, "trying to make you into connoisseurs of ambiguity." To this end, he solicited suggested meanings of "using" a machinegun in the commission of a crime.

One girl, a graduate of Middlebury College in Vermont, gleefully proposed a hypothetical, in graphic detail, of a cocaine dealer who would snort lines of coke off his fully-automatic AK-47 as traditional way of sealing a drug deal. The question becomes whether he was "using" the machinegun in connection to a drug trafficking crime. The answer on the part of everyone else was sustained laughter.

The professor then proceed to mention Justice Scalia's hypothetical of the criminal who only "used" his machinegun to scratch his head during the drug deal. The good justice concluded that such "use" didn't quite qualify as "use."

Why I hate Starbucks

2005-09-18T21:47:00.000-04:00

(click for a full-size picture)

I like their coffee. I just hate their customers.

Haha

2005-09-18T21:04:00.000-04:00

Overheard a conversation today between two college-aged girls on the subway:

"Stop holding on to my pants! You're going to tear them."
::Giggles::
"I'll buy you a new pair if they tear."
"But I got these on clearance. It was the last pair."
"You want everyone on the train to know that?!"

Ruminations on education

2005-09-18T20:29:00.000-04:00

In the system of American legal education, much emphasis is placed on the process of learning. It seems to me that this is in keeping with the goal of a legal education – to teach its students to think like lawyers. This process is complex, and perhaps a few definitions will help towards understanding it.

Knowledge can be seen as the ability to mentally retrieve information. When legal knowledge is challenged and defended, this leads towards a deeper understanding of and use for this knowledge. Yet, the ultimate ability to understand the law and to apply it to diverse cases requires one to “think like a lawyer” – or in the ancient sense – wisdom.

To facilitate the mental retrieval of information, one creates multiple mental connections to that information, which, in itself, is helpful. In law school, this is accomplished through complicated reading assignments, often discussing a sole concept from both case law and academic treatises. The Socratic method completes this process. It is a beneficial mental exercise, enabling the student to consider one problem from multiple angles, all the while refining the same underlying legal principles. This is legal wisdom – derived from information, through knowledge and ultimately understanding.

My own irrelevance

2005-09-13T18:39:00.000-04:00

Paul Mirengoff of Powerline wonders if the liveblogging of the Roberts confirmation hearings is "the 61st minute for windbag senators." What ever happened to CSPAN 3? Also, each blogger has his own bias, not unlike the bias of the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times. What's so special about bloggers?

My view is that blogging simplifies and diversifies the information dissemination process, but not to such a radical degree as to render either the traditional media or "windbag senators" obsolete. First, only people who are interested enough will read blogs and/or newspapers; they comprise a self selective group. Second, these people have, generally, their own biased opinions about the issues in general and senators and the nominee specifically, and usually turn to the media - including blogs - to validate these opinions with selected facts.

Judge Roberts

2005-09-13T18:35:00.000-04:00

John Tierney, writing in the New York Times, proposes an unique line of questioning for the nominee for Chief Justice. Some of my favorites are:

When you were a clerk at the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Warren Burger was disliked for his pretentiousness. What nickname did the clerks have for him? Burger King?

Does President Bush have a nickname for you yet?

When justices have birthday parties, should they invite all the other justices, or can they invite just the ones they like?

If Vice President Dick Cheney and Justice Scalia invited you duck hunting, would you go?

If Judge Judy isn't afraid of television cameras in her courtroom, why is the Supreme Court so chicken?

Ashley or Mary-Kate?

Optimism

2005-09-11T11:03:00.000-04:00

En flânant à Boston

2005-09-09T10:51:00.000-04:00

Flâneur, a sort of an observant pedestrian, alone in the crowd. I am an amateur flâneur, and here are some of my observations.

Boston is different from Hanover. Boston is not New York, and size is not the only differentiating factor. Boston is a place, Hanover is an idea. New York is both a place and an idea. Boston lacks the global mystique of New York, yet manages to fill that void with a tangible presence and notable absence of the overly processed and commercialized mystique of New York. Hanover is all mystique and little substance. If New York sells its soul and body, Hanover is a ghost that haunts those who leave, and Boston creates its soul from the reality of its inhabitants, neither imposing nor posing. If New York is a trendy club, defining by bling and bustle the behavior of its patrons, Hanover is a fraternity basement, an illusion created by an idea, and drawing the resultant masses with the Edenesque promise of coolness, knowledge and free beer. Boston is an old-fashioned pub, providing a framework for existence, nurturing its clientele, who in turn define this place that allows them to flourish as themselves.

Grad student...

2005-09-09T10:36:00.000-04:00

I haven't updated this blog in months, and at the urging of several friends, I've decided to start again.

I just finished my first week of classes at Boston University School of Law. Academically, classes are stimulating, the reading is extremely dense; a 5 page reading assignment might seem simple, but it can take a full hour to read it twice, brief the case, and perhaps comprehend some of the issues the professor will extrapolate upon in class. At the moment I understand all the material covered thus far.

The students at BUSL are an interesting lot. If my writing seminar is a representative sample, the vast majority of 1Ls just finished undergrad in 2005. There are more females than males here, but several of the females are married/engaged (ring finger action). Nothing reminiscent of Legally Blonde yet, but there are some incredibly naive folks here, as made clear in class discussions, especially in criminal law, when we were discussing sentencing in light of retributive or utilitarian philosophical underpinnings.

Professors here seem to be left of center, but aside from calling certain theories as "forward-looking," the classroom scene avoids politics rather well. And no mention of the Supreme Court vacancies either.

One of the best things is that my weekend starts at 9:35am on Fridays. Except there's really nothing to do before the evening, so I plan to finish all my work for Monday in the next 6 hours or so.

Catching up

2005-02-15T13:44:00.000-05:00

I've been so busy lately, (see previous post) that I think I've neglected my old friends, and I've definitely not reached out and met anyone. So I've filled my new daily planner with lunch, coffee, and dinner engagements for the next week or so. Along those lines, if I've been seeming distant lately, drop me a line, and I'll be happy to make time to meet up and shoot the breeze with you. It's just that time is never free anymore for me. If I have a block of free time, I could be at my job earning an hourly wage. So my time actually has a price tag on it, and the bill goes to me. But time with friends is invaluable, so I'll be happy to spend away.

Writing...I'd better like it

2005-02-15T13:41:00.000-05:00

So I calculated that I have 75 pages to write before this term ends for me. I also have 40 or so pages to write over the interim. At least all but 5 pages of that deals with the history of same geographical region during a 300 year period. So if you have any questions at all about French, Spanish, or Netherlandic history between 1350 and 1650, I'll be happy to overwhelm you with all sorts of awesome wisdom.

Hmm...musical musings

2005-02-15T13:36:00.000-05:00

"Anna" by the Beatles carries a little more meaning for me than for your average person. For a substantial portion of my time at Dartmouth, someone by that name - not a student here - was very special to me. Due to family pressure, and our mutual dismay, we stopped all contact. So, the song doesn't quite match up to my situation, but it certainly brings back a part of my life I wish could have been different.

Justification

2005-02-02T09:09:00.000-05:00

by blogging alone?

I have taken quite the vacation from this blog, but not without several good excuses. I started off the winter term with a severe sinus infection and a resultant case of intense bronchitis. Good news: since January 10, I've smoked 8 cigarettes while sober, down from an average of 20 per day in the month before. Oh, and my bronchitis is almost gone now.

I feel I owe further explanation as to why I neglected a project I began so recently. It's simple: I'm at a loss as to what purpose a blog such as this should serve. I'm not going to reveal the intricacies and intimacies of my life here, thereby eliminating much bloggable material. Second, after reading two newspapers, seven blogs, and two MSM websites each morning, I feel like I have heard quite enough about what is going on in the world. In terms of information, that is. Ostensibly, a blog is a forum for personal opinions to be easily and widely disseminated. In the past month, I have found ample fora for my opinions in the form of personal conversations, email messages, and telephone calls. How outdated of me.

In short, I have had a crisis of faith in my blogging. Hopefully, I am now sufficiently confident of the importance of my perspective that I am compelled to share it with the world. For what good is faith in myself if not made perfect by its expression in works? Namely, the sharing of those opinions as eminently worthy of consideration by the world at large.

On pordjet di libe eciclopedeye e lingaedje walon

2004-12-17T14:49:00.000-05:00

I found the Walloon segment of the Wikipedia while performing a Google search as part of brainstorming (procrastinating?) for my thesis. The Mwaisse pådje (Main page) is intriguing, and is also quite readable for the cultured Francophone (and amateur phoneticist and etymologist). My dad did his undergraduate work in Liège, the center of Walloon culture, and spent most of his formative years in Namur, the capital of the modern Belgian province of Wallonia, so this explains part of my fascination.

Another smoking ban

2004-12-17T14:33:00.000-05:00

The small kingdom of Bhutan, wedged between India and China, has banned smoking in public, as well as all commercial sales of tobacco. This is the logical extension of most smoking bans, and the potential repercussions for commercial and personal freedom are many. The most ominous aspect I've noticed is that a majority of respondents on a CNN online poll support a similar ban by their home governments. I wonder what Europe will do.

Personally, I'm torn. The tortured cigarette quitter in me is intrigued, but the rest of me, especially the libertarian side, is dead against this. At the heart of the matter is the perennial problem of morality being enforced by the government. And in pluralistic states - which are the majority of modern societies - this is very controversial. I guess the crux of the problem is to what extent tobacco usage impacts the other members of society, and is that impact harmful enough to prohibit in the form of legislation (or decree)?

Construction

2004-12-17T14:15:00.000-05:00

Those of you returning to Dartmouth for the Winter term will notice two new construction sites, one near the "Shower Towers" (Bradley and Gerry). These monstrosities of architecture are due to be replaced by the new Kemeny Math Building, to be located adjacent to the two towers. Ground was broken for the new building towards the end of Fall term, and at the moment, there are at least three pieces of machinery at work preparing the site.

Also, the parking lot at the corner of Maynard and College streets has been cordoned off, and construction has begun on the McLaughlin Residential Cluster. This will expand the number of beds for undergraduate students as well as a new dining hall; both much needed additions to Dartmouth's residential environment. But it looks like my senior year will be marked by construction just as my freshman year was. 05's and older will fondly remember the corridor through the Baker Stacks, with the Paradiso (new Berry) and the Inferno (old Baker) marking each end. Ah well, growing pains. Can't avoid them...

AP wire

2004-12-17T13:01:00.000-05:00

The dealing with the media is a fine art, one that can only be taught so much, and the rest must be learned through my trial and their error. A couple of observations: Decide what you want published, and repeat it often. Get a good quote, and try to work it into the end of each answer you give. Be nice to an extreme, especially during phone interviews. You can ignore their questions, and reply with what you want, as long as you are polite to a fault. Develop a rapport with journalists. And feel free to tell them things "in confidence," or "off the record," as long as you want it possibly published. After being interviewed by numerous local and regional papers, and finally making it to the AP, I'm still constantly working on the best way to get across what I want to say, while still making sure I'm relevant enough to be published. It's a delicate balance.

These

2004-12-13T17:52:00.000-05:00

Darned writer's block. I need to write something like 25 paragraphs for my thesis introduction and I don't know where to start. The toughest part is the opening paragraph, which is most important. I should write it first, since everything else is dependant on it, but I should also write it last, since I need to write what follows, to make sure it all makes sense, something I'm not making at the moment either.

Maudite espece de these!

La loi...des chiffres

2004-12-13T13:53:00.000-05:00

So I got a ding letter from Georgetown Law. It wasn't entirely unexpected, but I had hoped that applying Early Decision would help to some extent. Ah well, there are twelve other schools that have my application in their hands. Although only half of those are schools I'd be ecstatic to attend (read: top 15). Life goes on.

Writing and the reading thereof

2004-12-12T18:47:00.000-05:00

The 2004 Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded to the Austrian writer Elfriede Jelinek. If her acceptance lecture is an example of her prose, I have no doubts that the Nobel Committee's collective mind is still floating way out in the ether. Which is a distinctive possibility when you consider their choice for the Nobel Peace Prize was the poster girl for Arbor Day. What the heck? Peace for the trees and the Ents. It's all good, man. Read some of this, and pass it to the right....

When will it silently make off? When will something make off, so there’s silence? The more the language over there makes off, the louder it can be heard. It’s on everyone’s lips, only not on my lips. My mind is clouded. I have not passed out, but my mind is clouded. I am worn out from gazing after my language like a lighthouse by the sea, which is supposed to light someone home and so has itself been lit up, and which as it revolves always reveals something else from the darkness, but is there anyway, whether it is lit up or not, it’s a lighthouse, which doesn’t help anyone, no matter how hard that man wishes it would, so as not to have to die in the water. The harder I try to make it out, the more obstinately it doesn’t go out, language.

(From Elfriede Jelinek's Nobel acceptance lecture.)

Fin de semaine

2004-12-12T18:28:00.000-05:00

This afternoon, I was elected to the Grafton County Republican Committee as the Young Republican Representative, as well as selected as one of forty-seven representatives from the county to the NH Republican State Committee. This means I will be largely responsible for working closely with the rest of the Committee to enlarge the extent of youth participation in the political process, and especially facilitating a rapport between the County Committee and the local interests they represent and young people who are interested in becoming involved in the political process. Democracy in its purest form is found on the local level, and involving young people on this level is a great introduction to politics. I look forward to working with the rest of the committee on this, as well as the task of developing a strategy for the next two years, as we approach the midterm elections in 2006, as well as laying the groundwork for 2008.

Vacances

2004-12-07T10:00:00.000-05:00

Rage is often a misnomer for what Dartmouth students do. Rage is a monosyllabic, multiuse verb that conveniently describes partying without limits. For example, last night, I started playing pong at 5:30, went to dinner with friends at 7, and was back in the basement playing pong at 9, just until 1 am. Sobriety was lacking throughout, as was sloppy drunkeness. The average age of those in the basment was 22 years, and I have never seen a less destructive or a more responsible evening of merriment. If that was rage, what about my 12 hour bender after taking the LSATs? Or that evening at the beginning of the term of which I have no memory after a certain point? To extend the moniker of rage to a normal night of moderate merriment is to seriously devalue the ponderance of a wild and ragey night of rage.

Naissance

2004-12-06T12:00:00.000-05:00

So today inaugurates indisputable adulthood on my part - 22 years. As one of the many resolutions we usually make on birthdays, I have started this blog. I've long resisted starting my own blog, as I've barely been able to post with any consistency on the team blogs that have invited me. However, moved by the entreaties of friends, and foreseeing the pragmatics of post-Dartmouth communication, I have begun this endeavor. Anything and everything may be posted, yet these pages shall not receive my entire confidence. With that disclaimer, everything here posted shall be truthful. Nuff said.