The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark search twitter facebook feed linkedin instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close
Skip to main content

Here at The Legal Examiner we are always striving to provide better content with news and articles pertinent to our readers' lives. As such, many Legal Examiner contributors will be gathering next week in Delray Beach, Florida to discuss, among other things, how we can provide readers with a better experience. What would you like to see improve around here? How can we make this better for you? Leave ideas in the comments, and we'll present them to the group next week. On to the links!

Legal Examiner Articles

Mark Bello takes the US Chamber of Commerce to task for their "frivolous" survey – the 2012 State Liability Systems Ranking Study.

Michael Stratton wonders about the way we get our food and has me hoping against an alien invasion.

Patrick Quinlan asks "When did it become OK to attack firefighters and police officers?"

On the 11th anniversary of 9/11, Andrew Cocran wanted people to remember terror victims' constitutional rights.

Was the Michigan Supreme Court ruling in Johnson v. Recca contradictory to another ruling from eight years ago? Steven Gursten thinks so.

Elsewhere around the Web

So, basically, at the end of the day, crutch words are, like, bad? (Atlantic Wire)

Scott Greenfiled updated his profile at a legal rating site to get his coveted 10.0 back. Who knew Bronies were such fans of SJ? (Simple Justice)

How do you engage clients? Brian Tannebaum offers some tips. (Above the Law)

Max Kennerly links problems with Pradaxa to forgotten lessons of the Thalidomide crisis.

Should each law firm involved in a class action lawsuit be required to "document exactly how much time they spent on the case and how much they expect to be paid for their work"? Daniel Fisher thinks so. (Forbes)

Image courtesy TripAdvisor.

Comments are closed.