Law School For Dummies


I’d thought they covered this basic info in law school, but apparently I’d been wrong. I’m no attorney, but I DO know how to google. (gee ya would think they’d at least cover that; why the heck is law school so gol-darned expensive?)


Misconduct rule – Rule 8.4(c): It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation


Defamation of character –  n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation.  Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, are called libel per se or slander and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed.  —Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill


An attempt to interfere with the judicial system or law enforcement officers is obstruction of justice. It may include hiding evidence or interfering with an arrest.  Interference may be with the work of police, investigators, or other government officials. Often, no actual investigation or substantiated suspicion of a specific incident need exist to support a charge of obstruction of justice. Such activity is a crime.  –


from The IT Wiki:

A speaker may not hide behind a pseudonym to avoid liability for defamatory remarks.


In Columbia Insurance Co. v., the California court required only a showing sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss, in order to compel the identity of anonymous posters.


excerpted from Hoaxes and the First Amendment , Volokh:

Re Haley v. State: The Haley court was correct that knowingly false statements that one contemplates will come to the attention of a government agency that has jurisdiction over the matter you describe, should be seen as constitutionally unprotected. This case, involving a knowing hoax that seemed sure to waste a considerable amount of police time, is a good example of why that should be so.



While the original publishers of a defamatory statement are not automatically liable for subsequent republications of the statement by third parties, liability against the original publishers may be found where they “approved or participated in some other manner in the activities of the third-party republisher” (Karaduman v. Newsday, Inc., 51 NY 2d 531, 540 [1980]). Moreover, “an individual may not escape liability when a defamatory statement he makes is foreseeably republished” (Rand v. New York Times Co., 75 AD 2d 417 [1st Dept 1980]).


A conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons to accomplish an unlawful end or to accomplish a lawful end by unlawful means  –

Conspiracy requires less than attempt.

The law seeks to punish conspiracy as a substantive crime separate from the intended crime because when two or more persons agree to commit a crime, the potential for criminal activity increases, and as a result, the danger to the public increases. Therefore, the very act of an agreement with criminal intent is considered sufficiently dangerous to warrant charging conspiracy as an offense separate from the intended crime.  –


Volokh: The law makes it possible to issue subpoenas and track down the people who make false statements. You have a right to know who these people are, and once that happens, they can be sued for fraud and defamation.

. “Actual malice” as defined by New York Times, supra, is “knowledge that the defamatory matter was false or it was published with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”



The defendants published and/or caused the publication of false and disparaging statements. Defendants knew that the statements published were false and/or published or caused their publication with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of the statements.

Defendants have combined, confederated, conspired, and agreed to make false and disparaging statements, in an effort to injure the Plaintiff in occupation, business, and employment and to expose to distrust, hatred, contempt and ridicule and to cause to be avoided.

Plaintiff asked for: compensation for the harm to personal and professional reputation and the mental anguish, emotional injuries, humiliation, and loss of dignity suffered, punitive damages to punish the defendants and to deter others from engaging in similar misconduct, as well as court costs.

case said to have been settled out of court (sealed settlement)


Helpful tip! — If you love telling lies about folks, make sure you have plenty of assets that you wouldn’t mind losing to them!


… and not a legal definition, just some common sense (umm…note to Stranahan):

If someone asks you to tell lies repeatedly, that person is not your friend.  Actually, that person is trying to drag you into some shit while covering their own ass. (Duh.)



in related news? excerpted from

New Brunswick libel case upgraded to criminal charge

Libel cases are normally tried in civil court, but are there some defamatory statements that are so vicious that they warrant criminal prosecution?

That’s the question confronting prosecutors who are deciding whether to approve a criminal libel charge against a blogger who referred to an officer as a “sexual pervert.” Police arrested the blogger in January.

A spokesman for the police, said “when we receive a complaint … we have a duty to investigate. If the facts lead us to a point where a charge is applicable, then it is our role to follow through with it.”

The case involves political blogger, 52-year-old Charles LeBlanc. During an encounter with the police, LeBlanc alleges, an officer touched him in an inappropriate manner. LeBlanc said he tried to get police to investigate but the complaint was dismissed. LeBlanc said he subsequently used his blog to warn the public about the officer.

In January, when police arrested LeBlanc at his home, they seized his computer. The search warrant indicated police were investigating a complaint that one of his blog posts had referred to an officer as a “sexual pervert.”

Police recommended that LeBlanc be charged under the criminal code, which states that someone who is guilty of defamatory libel can be imprisoned for up to two years.

The law defines defamatory libel as publishing material “that is likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or that is designed to insult the person of or concerning whom it is published.”



Tony Martin - Actor


21 Responses to “Law School For Dummies”

  1. Reblogged this on The Crying Wolfe.

  2. This is an awfully long post just to say “I want to stick it to Patterico”. See—I just did it in seven words. What did Shakespeare say about brevity?

    • Dear dumbfuck troll,
      1. It seems to me that some folks who are guilty of breaking laws have been trying hard for a long time to “stick it” to some people who HAVEN’T broken any laws. Interesting that you turn it completely around and post that I’M trying to “stick it” to someone by posting about the law. Where’d ya learn that tactic, “Trolling For Dummies”?
      2. Please tell us which parts of the post put you in mind of Patterico and why.
      3. If the post is too long for you to read, then don’t read it (Duh)
      4. Noodles! Is it you??
      5. If I’ve misundertood your point, sry – perhaps you didn’t use enough words to explain yourself properly

    • no you mean deputy not brevity
      he sed some deputy is rotten in the state of caluhfornya

      and he sed other gud things like
      to sleep; perchance to chase rabbits
      and to drove or not to drove that is the qweschun
      and faulty thy name is cat
      and to canine self be troo

  3. He's an Asshole Says:

  4. Redacterrrrico Says:

    Noodles (@NoodleSpoon):
    5/10/12 1:01 AM
    I just read through @Patterico timeline. It’s good to look back with fresh eyes. You can get lost in all the story lines.

    Noodles is right. It’s important to get a reminder of how much Patterico lies, misleads, manipulates and intimidates others.

    Too bad he deleted so much of the really, really good stuff.

    PS: If you’re reading this, you’re the latest Alicia Pain suspect. Tick tock, riiiiiing, riiiiiing, police, etc. You know the drill.       

  5. I’m told Mike is tall, Doug is not tall of average height, and NJ case v Neal is going into moderation.

    • Douglas Stewart Says:

      I’d prefer “average height” rather than “not tall”. Im 5’9″ but Stack is so tall that if he stands still long enough I would climb him like a jungle gym

      • lol

        i’m not tall err i mean i’m of average height too.
        maybe we should start a club. (i’m not climbing up Stack tho)

      • ugh. Doug/Stack height differential reminded me of the horrors of high school.

        I was the new girl and this bunch of swans adopted me. One became a model – I mean these girls were tall. And slim. And I stuck out like a stumpy ugly duckling. Even though I AM of average height. (Oh and of course all they had was money too.)

  6. also

  7. Redacterrrrico Says:

    Is O’Keefe bullshitting about a “permanent restraining order” or is it unrelated?

    5/16/12 12:06 PM
    Plot thickens. “Richard Head” from NH AGs office sent email letter dated this morning, to person who now has permanent restraining order…

    Richard Head is Deputy AG in New Hampshire. Unlike O’Keefe, he is not a punch line.

  8. Stalker Seth Says:

    Seth has to lay off the references to violence.

    Prepostericity (@Prepostericity):
    5/17/12 5:54 PM
    @Liberty_Chick Same for me. Nothing else can be done short of violence. It’s hard to believe Ron’s been supporting such nonsense for free.

    Mandy Nagy (@Liberty_Chick):
    5/17/12 5:46 PM
    @Prepostericity It’s done 1 thing tho – I am stronger than a warrior now. My mind is strong. I fear nothing. I am numb. But I am determined.

    • i am stronger than a waryor now
      my mind is strong
      i feer nuthing
      i am num
      but I am deetermind to jump on the cownter and swipe a cooky

  9. Klouchebag Says:

    Is Ken Danieli proud of his pathetic Klout whore-ishness? Is Pepsi? Or Kiva?

    KOAM @Wittier (@wittier):
    5/19/12 3:16 PM
    Swap +Ks in Klout I’ll return 1 for 1, 2, for 2, 3 for 3

    He should add this tweet to his CV.

    I gave Ken Danieli a +K on Klout in trying to scam Klout.
    Who influences you?

Leave a Qomment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s