ZiefBrief

2008 Ballot Proposition Resources

Ziefbrief is non-partisan; we will be blogging no matter who wins the election next week. But Ziefbrief wants to make sure that everybody who does vote has all the information available  to make an informed decision. Along those lines we refer anybody who is inclined to exercise their franchise to the following sites:

California Ballot Endorsements: November 4, 2008 General Election (click link to open in new window.)
This handy tool from the folks at the Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) Library at UC Berkeley provides a table showing which paper, party or organization is endorsing which of the raft of current ballot propositions. Each proposition is linked to in-depth analysis through the Library's Hot Topic pages.

The National Conference of State Legislatures Ballot Measure Database (click link to open in new window.)
The NCSL is a bipartisan organization founded in 1975 "with the conviction that legislative service is one of democracy's worthiest pursuits". This web page lists ballot measures for each state, going back in some cases to the early 1900's. The search engine allows you to limit by state, topic, year and search by key word.

(both of these useful web sites were brought to our attention by the excellent Librarians' Internet Index.)

Can You Sue God?

The answer from Douglas County District Court Judge Marlon Polk is no.  According to this Associated Press story on Law.com, a senator in the Nebraska State Legislature, Ernie Chambers, tried to sue God in order to prove that "anybody can sue anybody."  Judge Polk disagreed, ruling that if Senator Chambers was not able to serve notice of the lawsuit on God, the case would have to be dismissed.  Although Senator Chambers tried to argue that God's omniscience made notice unnecessary, Judge Polk was not convinced, and he dismissed the suit.

The Texas Scuffle

Remember our post about a Houston's attorney indignant letter to a Dallas attorney about a deposition cancellation?  The Dallas attorney has responded and at great length.  Above the Law has full details along with ongoing commentary on this Texas saga. 

Typos Matter

Legal writing and research instructors spend a lot of time emphasizing the importance of proofreading briefs and memos, and here's why -- The Legal Intelligencer reports today that a federal judge decided to award just $26,000 in attorneys' fees instead of the requested $180,000, in part because the petitioning attorney's brief was filled with typographical errors.  In fact, the attorney inserted some text from a brief involving different parties, but never bothered to change the defendants' names.  The judge made this wry comment about the attorney's "cut and paste" error, "It is suggested that I sign an order which recites the wrong amount of McKenna's judgment and orders three strangers to this action to pay attorneys' fees and costs."  Ouch.  In his closing paragraph, the judge stated:

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, each lawyer knew he and she could not nail any old slap-dash parchment to the church door and expect someone else to pay for it. Most lawyers who practice in this court also know that. They all should.

Professor Richard Leo's New Book on the Norfolk Four Case

Professor Richard Leo's new book, The Wrong Guys: Murder, False Confessions, and the Norfolk Four, will be released on November 3, 2008.  Co-authored with Tom Wells, the book traces the prosecution of four innocent men for a murder committed in 1997.  Although the real perpetrator was identified and convicted, three of the four innocent men remain imprisoned today.  The book's publisher, The New Press, describes the book as "an urgent call for justice and a convincing case for reform in the criminal justice system. . . . writer Tom Wells and law professor Richard Leo masterfully interweave a narrative covering the unfolding of the case with an exploration of topics ranging from coercive interrogation, police perjury (“testilying”), and prosecutorial politics to the role of the death penalty in criminal law."  You can find a copy of The Wrong Guys in the Zief collection.

Follow-Up on Kennedy v. Louisiana

Weeks ago, we reported on the legal research omissions that led some parties to ask the Supreme Court to reconsider its ruling in Kennedy v. Louisiana.  To bring closure to our coverage, we are linking to the SCOTUSblog post that reports on the Court's action in this area.  In a nutshell, the Court decided not to rehear the case, but it did modify the majority and dissenting opinions by adding a footnote to both segments.