Posts Tagged ‘lawyer’

More Backbone for Our Invertebrate Ethics Commish: “Dennis Herrera Names Peter Keane to San Francisco Ethics Commission”

Monday, October 21st, 2013

In one fell swoop, our ethics commish has become 40%* vertebrate, a strong minority:

“Herrera names Peter Keane to San Francisco Ethics Commission. Law professor, former law school dean and Chief Assistant S.F. Public Defender brings ‘extraordinary professionalism and legal credentials’ to five-member panel

SAN FRANCISCO (Oct. 21, 2013)—City Attorney Dennis Herrera today named law professor and law school dean emeritus Peter Keane to the San Francisco Ethics Commission. Keane brings a wealth of experience in law and government ethics issues to the five-member panel, which is charged with serving citizens, public officials and political candidates through education and enforcement of ethics laws and regulations.

Keane currently serves as a professor of law and dean emeritus at Golden Gate University Law School, and as a visiting professor at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, where he teaches evidence, criminal procedure, constitutional law and professional responsibility. He served for 20 years as San Francisco’s Chief Assistant Public Defender, and was appointed by the Board of Supervisors in 2004 to serve a term on the San Francisco Police Commission. Keane, a former president of the Bar Association of San Francisco and vice-president of the State Bar of California, remains a highly sought-after legal commentator for local, national, and international news organizations, and has hosted numerous legal roundtables and radio programs, including “Keane on the Law” for KPIX Radio. He authored 1994’s Proposition 190, the successful statewide ballot measure that amended California’s Constitution to reform and restructure the Commission on Judicial Performance, the agency that oversees the California Judiciary.

“Peter Keane brings extraordinary professionalism and legal credentials to the San Francisco Ethics Commission, and I know San Franciscans will be extremely well served by his experience as an educator and veteran public servant,” Herrera said. “Peter’s dedication to the cause of justice and remarkable knowledge of government ethics will be an enormously valuable asset for the commission and the citizens it serves.”

The San Francisco Charter specifies that the City Attorney’s appointment to the Ethics Commission have a background in law as it relates to government ethics. Created by voters with the passage of Proposition K in November 1993, the Ethics Commission is empowered to, among other things, administer the City’s ethics laws, including its campaign contribution, conflict of interest, lobbying and whistle-blowing laws; to investigate alleged violations of those laws and to impose penalties; and to submit proposed ordinances directly to voters relating to government ethics.

Keane fills the vacancy created by the resignation of Herrera’s prior appointee, Jamienne S. Studley, who was recently appointed to serve as Deputy Undersecretary of the U.S. Department of Education in the Obama Administration. The unexpired term is set to lapse on Feb. 1, 2014.”

*Keane plus Benedict Y. Hur, Esq., vs., you know, three jellyfish.

Bacon Bacon NIMBYs Make Saturday Night Live: Client(s) of Ryan Patterson Now a National Laughingstock

Sunday, May 19th, 2013

I believe Bagdad By The Bay has the latest on our Bacon Bacon saga at Ashbury Market near the corner of Frederick in not-so-scenic Ashbury Heights.

Well this wacky story just went national today on Saturday Night Live – here’s Weekend Update co-host Amy Poehler, via Brock Keeling of SFist:

Perhaps not that funny but at least now more people are mocking attorney Ryan Patterson and his unknown client(s).

At least now there’s an upside to this flagrant NIMBYism.

So feel free to add this incident…

…to the time this Kramer-esque sign hung off the back of nearby 1965 Page…

…and, for that matter, Kramer’s famous run in:

Cosmo Kramer vs. Kenny Rogers Roasters, Inc.

Bacon Bacon ‏@BaconBaconSF: ”Apparently bacon bacon on SNL tonight!! Weekend update. Here we go folks. Here we go.” #baconbaconsf#snl

On It Goes…

Big Lawsuit Against Costco: Explaining to Tiffany and Co. Why It’s OK for People to Use the Term “Tiffany Setting”

Friday, March 22nd, 2013

What’s this? Tiffany and Company is suing Costco for selling diamonds using the term “Tiffany setting” or something?

“We now know that there are at least hundreds, if not thousands, of Costco members who think they bought a Tiffany engagement ring at Costco, which they didn’t. Costco knew what it was doing when it used the Tiffany trademark to sell rings that had nothing to do with Tiffany. This is not the kind of behavior people expect from a company like Costco and this case will shed a much-needed light on this outrageous behavior,” says Jeffrey Mitchell, a lawyer with Dickstein Shapiro who is representing Tiffany in the case. “The Tiffany brand has been damaged, Costco members have been damaged and Costco has profited from the sale of engagement rings by misrepresenting what they were. We will get to the bottom of what Costco was up to and why, and right a terrible wrong.

I cry foul.

You see, Tiffany, the phrase Tiffany mount and similar, well, that’s a genericized term these days, you know, like champagne.

Check it.

Oh, and Tiffany, Costco marks up the price of its worthless rocks a lot less than you do, right? That’s why Costco will take back any diamonds people bought if they were stupid enough to be confused over this issue.

It’s not like they were selling the rings in little blue boxes, right?

OK, Tiffany, keep on keeping on.

Now I’ve got a little shopping to do:

A 2013 Update for Albert Bartal, the Firefighter Seriously Injured after that Jack in the Box Fight in 2011

Wednesday, February 27th, 2013

And when I say fight, I mean he ended up getting run over by a car on Geary near the infamous late-night Jack in the Box of the Inner Richmond.

Here’s the update:

Albert Bartal Support Group

“Elizabeth got to visit her Daddy on 1.18.13.”

I’m ignorant of the disposition of this case so I wouldn’t necessarily be protected if wrote about what I think of all this.

But why don’t you look into things and draw your own conclusion about what happened?

And then, why don’t you make a contribution?

OMG, It’s a Free Photography Art Show at City Hall Tonight! – “CASH FOR GOLD” by The Tens – At Sup. Jane Kim’s Office

Friday, February 8th, 2013

OMG, it’s The Tens website IRL:

Click to expand

And if they have cheese and crackers and two-and-a-half-buck Chuck, that’ll just be the icing on the cake.

Can You Really Sign Binding Legal Documents with Your Handle? Yes – Meet “John The Animal Protector Mounier”

Monday, January 14th, 2013

Here he is:

Click to expand

I’ve never seen anything like that in a signature line.

In other news, Charlie lives – he just got a life sentence on a farm someplace after his mouthpiece struck a plea bargain with Dennis Herrera and the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office.

But, come to think of it, attorney John Mounier is actually “The Animal Attacker Protector,” IRL.

Oh well.

District Five Meltdown: Going Over Ivory Madison’s Sanctimonious YouTube Demo Reel Against Christina Olague, Line By Line

Monday, November 5th, 2012

Here’s a one-minute hit piece against Christina Olague from Ross Mirkarimi neighbor Ivory Madison:

Yes, she’s coming back for more.

You have the script so here my notes:

1. Your name is Ivory Madison for real? Oh. Really? How theatrical.

2. I think you mean former friend, right?

3. [Sanctimonious line reading but otherwise within the bounds of reality.]

4. I think I’m going to call bullshit on this one. That’s just your opinion, IM.

5. So you “contacted the police on her behalf” but without her permission? And in a maladroit fashion to boot, one might add. Like using your personal iPhone to do so, “anonymously.” You’re not that sharp, are you, IM?

6. [Sanctimonious line reading but otherwise within the bounds of reality.]

7. All right, I’ll bite. How does suspending Ross Mirkarimi protect victims of DV? 

8. Uh Madison, I don’t think you can declare victory before a process ends, right?  And it turns out that Christina Olague’s vote didn’t matter nohow. You understand that, right? 

9. You didn’t want to get involved? Are you fucking serious – who’s going to believe that, Huntress? 

10. Voters need to know what Olague did? Don’t they know already? Mmmm…

11. Is Ross Mirkarimi a “convicted batterer” like in real life? What does the word “batterer” mean? What does the word “batter” mean? Oh, what’s that, you didn’t actually have a chance to learn that in colledge because you thought a high school diploma would suffice when applying to Stanford Law?  That might have worked for Daredevil Matt Murdock in the comix but I don’t think that kind of thing works IRL.

12. Um, I think Ross Mirkarimi is your Sheriff because your neighbors voted for him, like overwhelmingly, right? Didn’t you host a fundraiser for him?

13. Does Christina Olague really think “it’s OK to abuse your wife?”  Any support at all for this, you know, outside of this particular vendetta? Wow. 

Hey Ivory. You talk about law school so much, why not just sign up for the state bar exam and study for it? You could pass if you applied yourself.

Just asking…

Here’s What Tonight’s World Series Viewing Party Will Look Like – But No Alcohol in Civic Center – Vote No on Prop B

Sunday, October 28th, 2012

You’re invited to come to Civic Center tonight to see Game Four of the World Series on a makeshift “Jumbotron.”

See you at 5:07 PM (or earlier, to get a good spot if you want to be able to actually see the action unobstructed.)

It’ll look like this, but probably with more Matt Cain than Timothy Leroy Lincecum on the screen:

Via RubyxCube - click to expand

The SFPD requests (more or less) that you transfer your alcohol to unmarked containers, thusly:

And, oh yes, speaking of the Rec and Park, Remember to Vote No on Proposition B (November 2012), the so-called “Clean and Safe Neighborhood Parks Bond”

Why?

Well, because Prop. B is too costly for San Francisco

And also because Reform is Needed at San Francisco’s Recreation and Parks Department.

Also because area lawyer Philip Alan Ginsburg would consider passage of Prop B (November 2012) an endorsement of how he’s running the RPD.

That’s why.

Now, let’s hear from San Francisco Mayor Ron Conway,* after the jump. (Spoiler: He wants you to go to Chipotle’s and spend your money before you blow town.)

PS: The after party will be in the Mission District – spread the word, bring fireworks.

*Poor Sony. It appears that any television-like contraption bigger than 100 inches now gets the generic term “jumbotron.”

Oh well.

Displays similar to the Jumbotron include:

(more…)

“SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT PTA LEADERSHIP AGAIN URGES STATE PTA TO MAKE A DUAL ENDORSEMENT ON PROPS 30 AND 38″

Tuesday, October 23rd, 2012

The headline says it all, but here’s the entire release:

“SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT PTA LEADERSHIP AGAIN URGES STATE PTA TO MAKE A DUAL ENDORSEMENT ON PROPS 30 AND 38

San Francisco — The Second District (San Francisco) PTA leadership recommended in July a dual endorsement of state ballot measures, Propositions 30 and 38, to the California State PTA after hearing from PTA members across the City that funding education was a high priority. At that time, the State PTA held its “Yes” on Prop 38 and voted to approve a “Neutral” position on Prop 30.

In light of recent public polling and campaign dynamics with both initiatives, and again with the encouragement of its members, the District PTA leadership is re-recommending the State PTA take a “Yes” position on Prop 30 to add to its current “Yes” on Prop 38 at the State PTA Board of Managers Meeting October 27.

It is critical that education be funded at a higher level, or at the minimum, maintain current funding in order for all of California’s children to be prepared to be successful in college, career and life. Either Prop 30 or Prop 38 must pass for this to happen. The District PTA also strongly encourages both campaigns to refrain from negative messaging about the other to increase the possibility that at least one measure will receive the required 50% + 1 votes.

Prop 30 would prevent further cuts to K-12 public schools and higher education funding through an increase of around $6 billion per year for 7 years to the state’s general fund budget. Prop 38 would increase funding to K-12 schools, early education and school bond debt payments by $10-11 billion per year for 12 years. Prop 38’s increase in funding would greatly mitigate the result of state education budget cuts of over $20 billion statewide and the laying off of over 40,000 educators over the last three years alone.

For more information: http://www.prop38forlocalschools.org/ and http://www.yesonprop30.com/

For a comparison of both propositions go to http://www.edsource.org/infographic-initiatives.html

I don’t know, if San Francisco’s Nate Ballard and Planet Neptune’s Molly Munger want to drive over the cliff* holding hands ala Thelma and Louise, that’s their business:

Image Photoshopped slightly, courtesy of the Gavin Newsom for Governor Lt. Governor campaign

But I’ll tell you, the People of the State of California are not going to follow them.

Hey Molly, if you’re so great, why don’t you just give all your inherited money to the California Teachers Association no strings attached?

You know, instead of driving over the cliff with Prop 30 stashed in the trunk?

*In a Porsche paid for by Daddy, of course.

 

So This Blog is Getting Sued by a Former Chronicle Publisher Wife? Read the Lawyer Letter – Why is the ‘Xam Afraid?

Friday, October 5th, 2012

[UPDATE 2013: My grandmother, who's on the wrong side of fifty but the good side of 100, is still driving her new Hyundai around and, bonus, she doesn't spend any of her hard-earned on SoCal lawyers. And her recent stomach surgery went well, so that's nice.]

Hey look what’s sitting in my Spam folder right now – it’s a scary letter from a Los Angeles attorney demanding that this blog be retracted.

Immediately.

Can you imagine?

Here’s what caused the trouble:

“Pwned! Area Socialite Elisabeth Thieriot Loses Her “SLAPP” Lawsuit against Journalists in L.A. – Mayan Prophecy”

And here’s the vast bulk of the resulting lawyer letter:

Click to expand, if you dare.

Now I can understand why the San Francisco Chronicle might not want to get involved with all the allegations surrounding the making of some movie project about the Mayan calendar deal. You know, relationships ‘n stuff. And plus, it’s not like a whole bunch of people are going to watch this flick.

So that’s one thing, but the San Francisco Examiner, did it get a similar letter earlier this year? You make the call. See? Earlier this year it used to have something to say about Elisabeth Thieriot and the Mayan Prophecy and Mexico and whatnot, but not now. Mmmm. Did the San Francisco Examiner take down a Reuters news story on this topic because it was afraid of getting sued? Sure looks that way.

Of course that online trade journal TheWrap did get sued. For one million dollars to be exact. But then it responded with a Motion to Strike and that took care of that. And then TheWrap wrote about how it won, big-time. Then I linked to its story (and the entire decision itself) and now it sure looks like I’m the next to get sued.

Comments:

Uh, do I know that this lawyer represented/s that lady? No, not all. I mean, I assume that’s the case, but what’s this “as you know” stuff?

Does the lawyer really want/expect me to retract the entire blog, all 6000 posts? (Does the lawyer actually know what a blog is? Apparently not.)

Does the lawyer want to write my blog posts for me, you know, using his point of view? Sure looks that way. Is that his right? And how can I retract something that’s not wrong?

And I’m supposed to rely on CA law about retractions that apply to the MSM, but not really? So what’s the point of bringing that up? 

And I’m “not authorized” by the lawyer to disclose the contents of the lawyer letter so I can’t do it? Really? Well, similarly, I’m not authorized by that lawyer to have a delicious Taco Bell Doritos Locos taco for lunch, so does that mean I can’t have that for lunch IRL? And I can’t show the letter to anybody, even to get help with how to respond? Is that fair dinkum? I think not.

So who else in the bay area has gotten these kinds of communications from Down South? I don’t know.

Anyway, I guess I’ll take that email chain* out of the Spam folder and put it into the Archive folder and await further developments.

But I’ll think to myself, “Man, don’t you realize you just lost, in a big way, on the very same topic in the very same state?” 

KTHXBYE.

*Apparently, Elisabeth Thieriot herself sent me an email last month as well, on purpose, or by mistake, or something in betwixt. I’ll tell her what I told my grandmother,** about how Reply All is kind of an advanced email technique best left to the younger generation, you know, so you don’t email people by mistake.

** I still can’t believe she got a Hyundai, after all those decades of her having large RWD Ford products such as the Mercury Grand Marquis.  She says her new ride is a “good  snow car.”