Should lawyers’ blogs be classified as advertizing? I have wondered about that before, but never thought a state would consider passing a regulation to that effect. A committee of New York State’s Administrative Board of Courts has not only suggested such a regulation but also has proposed "extend[ing] court jurisdiction to out-of-state legal advertising that appears in New York." This has prompted a London-based lawyer to ask, "Could I be disciplined by New York state because there are pay-per-click adverts on my weblog or seminars, and these are interpreted as acts which ‘solicit legal services’?" Interesting issue. Would LDS-themed blogs written by lawyers that sometimes talk about legal issues and how they apply to the Church or Church history be subject to this regulation because they can be read in New York? Would Nate Oman, Kaimi, Steve Evans, Kevin Barney, ECS, Guy Murray, DMI Dave, A. Greenwood and other lawyers be subject to discipline for our participation on LDS blogs?
Witness depositions are often very dry affairs. A lot of mundane questions about subtle details that may or may not make a difference at trial- they are often used for discovering information, gaining admissions, and testing theories.
But sometimes they get very animated. For an amusing look at one such deposition, take a look at this one in Texas. (We watched this recently at a NITA deposition training- it is quite an entertaining look at an example of "depositions gone wild":
(By the way, the witness is right, sometimes we lawyers DO get a "case of insipient verbal diarrhea". . .)