The UCL Practitioner
Monday, December 27, 2004
 
"Citing Prop. 64, Firms Seek to Kill Lawsuits"
Today's Los Angeles Times has the story. The email message referred to in the story is attached as Exhibit A to the amicus brief filed by the CAOC in the Consumer Advocates case.
Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
Is this a plaintiff only blog as is suggested by the previous poster? The initial Prop 64-related posts seemed to hint that this blog was clearly plaintiff-oriented, but I thought the posts had become more well-balanced (i.e., reporting on developments as opposed to pushing an agenda). If there is an agenda, the blog should clearly state that it is so biased. That way readers and reporters can take everything they read with a grain of salt.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
I've indicated since my very first post in October 2003 that I am a plaintiffs' lawyer. I have since posted a new welcome page with more information on my background and affiliations. Nonetheless, I hope that this website will be a resource for all, just like any published treatise would be. The benefit of running a blog, unlike a published treatise, is that I am the author of a living, breathing, evolving document. I reserve the right to editorialize, and generally to post whatever I feel like posting. Readers can judge for themselves whether they think the blog is "biased."
 
Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger


© 2003-2005 by Kimberly A. Kralowec