<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: September 28 roundup</title>
	<atom:link href="http://overlawyered.com/2009/09/september-28-roundup/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://overlawyered.com/2009/09/september-28-roundup/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=september-28-roundup</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 17:39:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: wfjag</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2009/09/september-28-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-72138</link>
		<dc:creator>wfjag</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 15:41:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=13898#comment-72138</guid>
		<description>RE: ACORN suit:
1.  The Complaint lists the lawyers as &quot;Attorneys for Plaintiffs&quot; -- which makes it look like the same attorneys are representing both ACORN and the 2 former attorneys that ACORN fired.  Does the phrase &quot;conflict of interest&quot; ring any bells?

2.  The Complaint pleads complete diversity of citizenship.  Wonder if Plaintiffs&#039; attorneys considered effects of removal?

3.  Maryland has an Anti-SLAPP statute.  It&#039;s pretty narrow, but looks like it may cover this suit, especially if Defendants raise First Amendment issues.

4.  ACORN isn&#039;t authorized to do business in Maryland and didn&#039;t pay its corporate taxes.  That&#039;s always a good point with the jury for a plaintiff. 

5.  I&#039;m still trying to figure out the theory of the case for the former ACORN employees.  Is it &quot;we&#039;re feeling distressed because co-plaintiff ACORN fired us for what we did&quot;, or is it &quot;we&#039;re feeling distressed because Defendants accurately reported our willingness to engage in multiple criminal conspiracies&quot; ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RE: ACORN suit:<br />
1.  The Complaint lists the lawyers as &#8220;Attorneys for Plaintiffs&#8221; &#8212; which makes it look like the same attorneys are representing both ACORN and the 2 former attorneys that ACORN fired.  Does the phrase &#8220;conflict of interest&#8221; ring any bells?</p>
<p>2.  The Complaint pleads complete diversity of citizenship.  Wonder if Plaintiffs&#8217; attorneys considered effects of removal?</p>
<p>3.  Maryland has an Anti-SLAPP statute.  It&#8217;s pretty narrow, but looks like it may cover this suit, especially if Defendants raise First Amendment issues.</p>
<p>4.  ACORN isn&#8217;t authorized to do business in Maryland and didn&#8217;t pay its corporate taxes.  That&#8217;s always a good point with the jury for a plaintiff. </p>
<p>5.  I&#8217;m still trying to figure out the theory of the case for the former ACORN employees.  Is it &#8220;we&#8217;re feeling distressed because co-plaintiff ACORN fired us for what we did&#8221;, or is it &#8220;we&#8217;re feeling distressed because Defendants accurately reported our willingness to engage in multiple criminal conspiracies&#8221; ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2009/09/september-28-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-72128</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=13898#comment-72128</guid>
		<description>The first thing that Massachsetts Dunkin&#039; Donuts should have done is reported that &quot;mother&quot; to Child Protective Services. Give her back a taste of her own medicine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The first thing that Massachsetts Dunkin&#8217; Donuts should have done is reported that &#8220;mother&#8221; to Child Protective Services. Give her back a taste of her own medicine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.112 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2012-05-27 16:52:40 -->
<!-- Compression = gzip -->
