Merry Christmas, Free Exercise Clause

BYU put this tree up in its law library. I really liked having Christmas trees around during finals. As a university, BYU is bureaucratic by definiton. But as a private instittuion, it has one less layer of bureaucracy than other state universities. How nice. I'm sure that certain grinches are working on "fixing" that unfairness. But in the mean time, merry Christmas from BYU.

UI crushes BYU in Spam Race

The semseter is over, and UI wins 761 to 480 in my great administrative spam race. That's over 1,200 emails! Both law schools gave noble efforts and sent constant emails about everything from examtaking software to library etiquette. However, right off the starting line, BYU's sabbath day observance and heavier bureaucracy (e.g., requiring Lawmailer approval for bulk emails) dragged it down. The results are shown below, showing each school's running total. Level stretches represent zero emails, usually weekends or holidays.

Bankruptcy Court uses Parasitic Mites:

"the state court authorized the receiver to mange the partnership"

In re StatePark Building Group, Ltd., 316 B.R. 466, 471 (Bkrtcy.N.D.Tex.,2004).
http://www.txnb.uscourts.gov/opinions/pdf/2004-33916-100.pdf at 5.

Professor Jose "Pepe" Silva

Professor Silva teaches Hispanic Street Law here at BYU. The class is a real eye opener. For example, check out this cartoon flowchart on immigration law. It addresses the question why immigrants don't come the legal way (hint: it takes 20 years). Many immigrants come legally but stay longer than their visas permit. This is technically the correct way to cross the border. And "technically correct" is the best kind of correct-- the law makes a huge distinction regarding this technicality.

What's so bad about Good Samaritans (in the law)?

Utah’s Good Samaritan Act provides:

A person who renders emergency care . . .during an emergency, gratuitously and in good faith, is not liable for any civil damages or penalties as a result of any act or omission by the person rendering the emergency care, unless the person is grossly negligent or caused the emergency.

Why can't Rule 14-802 (prohibiting the Unauthorized Practice of Law) have a similar exception for legal emergencies?

A person who renders emergency [legal services]. . .during an emergency, gratuitously and in good faith, is not liable for any civil damages or penalties as a result of any act or omission by the person rendering the emergency [legal services], unless the person is grossly negligent or caused the emergency.

A "legal emergency" could be defined as a case involving an (1) indigent (2) defendant (3) with no access to professional services (4) ill-equipped to represent themselves. (Eg., a 75 year old who can't afford rent but is being sued over medical bills, and who doesn't speak any English.)

Normally I’d agree that a layman in court is a bad idea. I also normally prefer a doctor over some witness to a car accident with no medical training. A Spanish speaking senior citizen with a high school education is a layman among laypersons, and a legal emergency justifying whatever help is available, even less-than-professional help if that's all that is available. If lawyers won't volunteer themselves they should step aside and let somebody, anybody, help. Instead, the current system would punish any legal Good Samaritans.