Blog of law articles

So I hope everyone either got teabagged or teabagged somebody else yesterday, depending on your preference. Personally, I think a healthy public discussion of teabagging can only be a good thing.

Meanwhile, here is freeloader Edward B. Kaplan boasting about all the perks of being a Guardian Ad Litem:

Funds that may be cut are badly needed for Guardian ad Litem staff and office expenses. None of those funds go to the volunteer guardians. I have been a volunteer for 2 ½ years and have made a difference in the lives of 10 children.

Although I've logged more than 300 hours and 3,000 miles, the only thing I've received is free parking at the Broward County Courthouse. I rely heavily on my supervisor, program attorney and support staff to help me do this job. They must be paid.

The Broward Guardian Ad Litem program has seen a huge increase in cases and in volunteers to the program, which should be expanded, not reduced.

Free parking, huh -- what do you think, that kind of stuff grows on trees? I suppose you want taxpayers to pay your mortgage too, Eddy. Try harder my friend -- two and half years and you've only helped 10 kids? I want that parking money back, buddy.

Speaking of freeloading, I see that H&K may cut its commitment to pro bono:

The firm’s prized Chesterfield Smith Fellowship Program — named for the firm’s larger-than-life founder — and its 100-hour billable hour credit for pro bono work could go on the chopping block as Holland & Knight’s leaders complete a restructuring plan in the next month or two.

Pro bono cutbacks would be a seismic shift in the firm’s culture and image “as a firm that cares,” which is an important recruiting tool, a source said on condition of anonymity.

“The identity of Holland & Knight is pro bono, diversity and the firm that cares,” the source said. “If you take out that identity and say, ‘We’re only committed to profit, not pro bono, diversity nor quality of life,’ you’ll be taking away the very qualities that would attract” high-quality attorneys.

In an e-mailed statement, Steven Sonberg, the firm’s managing shareholder, confirmed last week that Holland & Knight is considering changes to its pro bono program but he did not provide any specifics.

There's no other way to increase productivity other than cut the pro bono programs? Hmm, I wonder what Chesterfield would think of these changes. Just change the name of your firm and be done with it, Steve.

I'm calling it early to hit the waves, should be around later today.