Two Projects

In addition to covering signfican developments in California Employment law, there are two other projects that I am dedicating some of my energies to, and I hope this website will serve as the main center for.

First, “cradle to grave” law tracking.  For example, let’s say the California Supreme Court reverses Torrey Pines.  I would expect that would generate a bill in the legislature.  That bill has to go through the Sacramento Labyrinth, and one day maybe codified.  Then, as you know, it may bounce around in the Courts.  One day, it may be repealed or voided.

Though blogging and the Internet in general have radically improved practitioners’ ability to do this, the abilities of current technology far exceed what’s offered.  Most of us rely on expensive on-line services to provide us with public records, most of which are linked to each other through explicit citation.  Google and a few algorithmic tweaks could put Shepards and KeyCite to shame, if only those records were better organized, but I’ll get to that later.

What is already publicly available is not, to my mind, sufficiently organized for efficient use by practitioners.  The tracking widget you see on the left side of the blog is the nascent stage of software I am writing that will do that.  I’m somewhat afraid of making “vaporware” promises, but I hope to have an automated system that will interface with the publicly available legislative and court records to update the status on employment law matters.  With a few tweaks, practitioners in other fields could easily adapt that software for their purpose.  Analyzing these trends lets you play weatherman a little bit.  Just for example, when you settle a case may be important depending on your forecast of an upcoming case that could radically change the dynamics.  A few years back, I worked on a case that would have been completely different if Hillside and Torrey Pines had been settled by the Supreme Court.  I’d like to have some coefficient to factor these in in the future.

Part of that means recording Justices’ and Legislators’ (and Governors’) tendencies.  That is included in the data model I’m developing. I’ll update you as I progress.  Right now, the software is not yet code-complete, but the data model is.

Second,  the Internet has redefined “public record.”  For the most part, for a nominal fee, you can see almost everything filed in a federal court case, at least within the last few years.  Some of our counties let you do the same.  Unfortunately, you can’t search for a “decision re: Labor Code 226.7,” if for no other reason that none of these records, as far as I’m aware, are OCRed.

Google’s mission statement is, “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”  To that end, they have organized and made useful map information, yellow-page style information, and even patent filings.  But, at least as far as I know, they haven’t made any push to organize and make universally accessible the petabytes of data out there that are ostensibly public records.

It is certainly beyond the scope of this site, or even one person, to do that.  But in my field, I believe I am most hampered by, and my clients are most encumbered by, the delays and expenses related to acquiring information.

Though I have no specific plans yet, I would like to call on other legal bloggers, and other legal practitioners to work on creating repositories for public records so that they can be accessed in a manner consistent with what Google wants.  I hope this doesn’t create a wave of briefing plagiarism; rather, I hope it creates a more consistent feel for what’s going on throughout the state in the field, and more consistent application of the law throughout.

To the extent it will function that way, my software will enable you to do something like a Shepards search, but only on laws created beginning in 2008.  I have neither the resources nor the ability to go backwards.  It will also link to whatever information is on the Internet, including blog postings.

Please continue to share your feedback and thoughts with me–as I told one reader, it is that interactivity that makes blogging powerful and useful.  I’m hoping to carry that exponentially further.

No Podcast This Week; In Brief

Due to the slow week last week, I don’t have enough worthwhile to say to create a Podcast. We’ll be back next week with a new Podcast.

Briefly noted:

  • DHS retracts no-match letters in wake of court’s ruling.
  • Torrey Pines will be argued before the Supreme Court on December 6th 4th (Thanks, Michael!).
  • The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case of Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn on December 3rd (h/t California Labor & Employment Law Blog*)

* Good thing I renamed my blog a few years back, isn’t it? (;

Terms of Use; Scrapers

Due to the unbelievably high amount of content being scraped from this site, I have formally posted a terms of use page. I feel silly doing it, but, the idea that content that I have worked to generate is being posted, often without attribution, on some robot-generated site in order to generate ad revenue is not right.

I will be pressing my rights against any content scrapers.

This doesn’t mean I’m going to sue you if you quote my article, or anything like that. This is directed at robot-generated sites who copy my content in order to generate ad revenue. If you haven’t heard of this Google it, because it’s happening to your site too.

Site Upgraded.

UPDATE: I just now found out how stupid this site is looking in Internet Explorer. I’m working on it. Fixed. Sigh.

I apologize to those of you who had been wondering what the matter with this site was.

I’ve upgraded the site to WordPress 2.3. Unfortunately, that borked some of the tag functionality. The tracking pages linked at the left will only show posts, and not their master pages. I’m working on manually updating the code. Also, you’ll note that none of the pages that used to be in the “legislature” category have been tagged. I will be repairing that soon.

Just by way of a short update, the tracking widget on the left will eventually have much more functionality added to it. I am currently writing some custom software that will update it automatically, and provide on-demand information. I have about 10% of the controller code done, 90% of the interface done, and about 50% of the data model done.

One of the first features I am going to add is a feature that will let you examine employment law opinions by justice/judge, and bill by legislator. I hate announcements like this that lead to vaporware, but, barring some unforeseen calamity, I should have it ready in early 2008.

Update: Both problems solved. Tag permalinks now include pages, and ‘legislature’ tagged posts are back on the list.

List of Employment Law Blogs

Here’s a list of some of the employment law blogs I read:

That’s What She Said” by Julie Elgar
The UCL Practitioner” by Kimberly Kralowec
George’s Employment Blawg” by George Lenard
Labor & Employment Law Blog” by Sheppard Mullin
Jottings By An Employer’s Lawyer” by Michael Fox
Law Memo” by Ross Runke
Wage Law” by Walsh & Walsh P.C.

Got a good one? E-mail me.

Podcast Subscriptions

I received a question in the comments about subscribing to the Podcast with iTunes.

Currently, you can simply open iTunes, go to the Advanced menu, and select Subscribe to Podcast. . . and enter http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?feed=podcast to subscribe.

Apple is currently reviewing my Podcast. It should appear on iTunes’s Podcast directory before long, and then you can subscribe that way also. It should also be listed on PodcastAlley.com, PodcastReady.com, and Yahoo! Podcasts in the next several days.

I am also in the process of putting the final few touches on SCEL 3.0: (1) custom art, (2) I am coding a sidebar widget that will list all of the bills and cases I am tracking, and will give a color code as to their status, and a click-through link for all of the posts on that topic on this blog. (I’m still early in the coding phase, and I don’t even have a fully functional test version yet, but I’m getting there.)

UPDATE: Apple has approved my podcast.  The link to add it in iTunes is:  http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=264298114

That will cause your browser to open iTunes and should eventually send you to my podcast.  I’ve had no problems using the manual subscription method in XP, Vista, or Mac OS on iTunes 7.4.1.

Blog Status

Everything is working, more or less, at this point. There are still a few problems with the FeedBurner feed and the Podcasting feed to Apple. I’m working on it.

You can subscribe to this site’s Podcast in iTunes by going to Menu Advanced > Subscribe to Podcast… and entering either of the following URLs: (1) http://stormsemploymentlaw.com/?feed=podcast
2) http://feeds.feedburner.com/stormscaliforniaemploymentlaw

There appears to be a bit of a delay on Feedburner in Google Reader and Bloglines, but the feed is instantly updated on the actual Feedburner page. Anyone who has any suggestions, please let me know.

The Feeds appear to be updating rapidly, but showing wildly incorrect timestamps.

I’ve given up on Feedburner. Straight RSS now only. Usual methods.

New Digs

The move to WordPress and the new URL appears to be complete. I am adjusting some settings with the RSS feed, and then we’ll be ready to go live.

UPDATE: I apologize for the generic graphic above, but that’s a separate project. We’re going live.

Here are some of the new features:

  • Thin PDA theme for SmartPhone browsing
  • Feedburner instant updates for RSS subscribers
  • Anyone can comment, but there is a spam checker
  • All posts have tags updated
  • Social networking referral buttons
  • Podcasts!!!

Much more

Changes Coming

When I moved to TypePad, I thought it was a much better solution than Blogger.  I’m not so sure anymore.  WordPress also seems to be quite a bit ahead.

I’m designing a new site that will be based on one of those technologies.  I plan to include podcasts, video, and panel discussions.  I’ve realized that the one small thing that sets this site apart just a little bit from most legal blogs (I think the term "blawg" is dead, isn’t it?) is that I do do some original investigative reporting, instead of just analysis, opinion, and citation.

Unfortunately, not a lot of that has resulted in printable reporting.  A few times, yes.  I plan to expand on that with interviews and more comment from parties who have taken positions on bills. (Another aspect that is, as far as I know, mainly different is that I follow laws from ideas to bills to statutes to case law, as they develop.)

Stay tuned.  Unfortunately, another URL change is probably inevitable.

Happy New Year!

Brian and I created an employment law update for 2007. It doesn’t contain much that you won’t find on most of the major firms’ websites. The difference is the user-friendly action cues for the non-lawyers among us. Also, I have probably focused on some different things.

We’d appreciate any feedback you have. If we’ve missed something that you think is significant this year, I’d love to discuss it further. I’m not quite to the point where I’m ready to turn something like this into a Wiki, but I sure wouldn’t mind a lot of participation.

I presented these materials to a mostly nonplussed audience today. There really just isn’t that much that is really earth-shattering that’s new for this year.

Download employment_law_update_2007_rev1001.pdf

New Author

Please welcome Brian C. Donnelly to this blog.  Hopefully, he will be stepping up the pace of the posting.

Brian is a recent graduate of Hastings, and we just learned that he passed the bar exam. Congrats to him.

Regulating Attorney Blogging?

By now, I’m sure most of you have seen some noises about the regulation of attorneys’ blogs by state bars.  My favorite California law blogger, Kimberly Kralowec has her take here.

I agree with her.  This blog is not advertising.  I’m not too shy to take credit for it, either, but I’m not selling anything here.  Having said that, I think many of the larger firms’ "blogs" out there are anything but.  They are frequently updated marketing sites that seek to freighten or agitate clients into their arms by drumming up the importance of some recent development in the law. 

But I’m not sure there’s an easy line to draw, or who should draw it.

I think the legal-blogosphere adds a valuable medium to the discussion of the law and its practice.  Regulating it would be a mistake.  Personally, I find almost all of the regulations relating to how attorneys advertise to be embarassingly archaic, and more about (poorly) managing the impression of the practice of law than about protecting the consumer.