SBM Blog

Are Online Child Pornography Offenders Likely to Commit Offenses Involving Sexual Contact With Children?

Data from Canada (PDF) suggests not. Also, tough fines do not appear to deter drunk driving.

HT: Slaw

R. v. Smickle: The Canadians Do Silly Things, Too

The case has raises some interesting questions for Canadian criminal law, but we offer it to you for its entertaining facts and the lively writing of the opinion:

Canadian "Don't Go To Law School" Video Goes Viral

 

Oh, my.  It's not just hockey and doughnuts that we have in common.

Canada's Same-Sex Marriage "Stumble"

Canada's Conservative government (that's "conservative" with a Canadian "c") is sending mixed signals about the country's same-sex marriage law. In 2005 Canada became the Western Hemisphere's first country to legalize same-sex marriage by adopting a gender-neutral definition of marriage, over the opposition of the Conservative Party. Although they took power the following year, the Conservative Party has not moved to re-open the law.  But recently the government told a U.S. couple married in Canada that it cannot grant the couple a divorce because the jurisdictions they reside in -- Florida and England -- do not recognize same-sex marriage. Questioned about the government's action, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said the issue was not on the Conservative government's agenda, and pled ignorance:

In terms of the specifics of the story this morning, I will admit to you that I am not aware of the details. This I gather is a case before the courts where Canadian lawyers have taken a particular position based on the law and I will be asking officials to provide me more details.

The Toronto Globe and Mail calls the government's action a legal "about face," and Harper's response a  "stumble."

Simon Fodden at Slaw explains how the Conservative government might be trying to have it both ways.

More than a third of the 15,000 same sex marriages that have taken place in Canada involve couples from outside Canada.

The Odds of Working for Your Father's Firm

Canadian economist Miles Scorak who teaches at the University of Ottawa describes the connection at his blog, summarizing the findings of a study he conducted with Patrizio Piraino about a cohort of young Canadian men and their fathers:

The bottom line is that about 40% of us have at some point worked for exactly the same firm that at some point also employed our fathers. But if dad’s earnings put him in the top 25% these chances are above average, they start taking off if dad was in the top 5%, and reach the stratosphere for top earners. Almost 7 out of 10 sons of top earning dads had a job with his employer.

All parents want to help their children in whatever way they can. But top earners can do it more than others, and with more consequence: virtually guaranteeing, if not a lifetime of high earnings, at least a great start in life.

Canada's Version of the Lousy Lawyer Market

Just across the border job prospects for new law school grduates are apparently not any rosier than they are here, leading blogger Pulat Yunusov of Law is Cool to propose a radical change:

There is an articling crisis in Ontario. Many students enticed to law schools by the prospect of being a lawyer, can’t overcome the final hurdle because they can’t find an articling job. Ten months of working for an experienced lawyer is a prerequisite to joining the legal profession, in addition to a law degree, the bar exams, and a “good character.” But most lawyers don’t want to hire articling students despite cajoling from the Law Society. They probably have a good reason. Supervising an articling student is expensive: it costs a lot in salary (though often still meager), liability, time, and office space. I propose that students pay for their own articling instead of paying for the third year of law school.

Fraud Knows No Borders: Advice About Scams Targeted at Lawyers

As our prior posts about scams directed at lawyers illustrate, cross-border email scams directed at lawyers are common, and there appears to be a particular Canada-U.S. affinity. Which is why this post especially relevant:  "Real Looking Scams Require Lawyers to Be Warier Than Ever," on Canada's excellent website Slaw, quoting from the Fall 2011 issue of LAWPRO Magazine.

Oh Canada: Example of A Kinder, Gentler Kind of Regulation

Remember the Red Flags rule that the FTC tried to impose on lawyers, failing both in court and ultimately in Congress thanks to the combined opposition of the ABA and state bar associations?  Compare that experience to this.  The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has released a handbook called PIPEDA and Your Practice — A Privacy Handbook for Lawyers, that it says “describes best practices in managing the collection, use and disclosure of personal information, responding to requests for access to personal information, and the potential application of PIPEDA. The Handbook covers practical privacy issues that arise in the course of managing a law firm and conducting litigation.”

HT: Slaw

Thinking Through Public Statements About Your Client

Among the many useful skills attorneys are typically not taught in law school is how to handle media attention about your client's legal problems.  For example, if you are representing a freshman Tea Party-backed Congressman charged with owing over $100,000 in child support, you might, on a moment's reflection, come up with a better statement to the press than that your client "hasn’t been a big-time wage-earner politician until recently."

Bonus lesson. From the Canadian Bar Association's "A Lawyer's Guide to Dealing with the Media," an instructive story:

Keep yourself on a short leash

Kevin Aschenbrenner tells the story of a lawyer who did a fairly significant, high-pressure interview. There were some possibilities for some tense situations and some areas that the lawyer did not want addressed.

“He got training and did a great job through the interview. He stayed on message, used all the techniques. And then, showing the reporter out of the firm, he promptly in the elevator rattled on about everything he wasn’t supposed to say in the interview. Of course, that’s what got printed. So keep yourself on a short leash and talking only about what you want to talk about is really important.”

Ontario Mandates Mediation Information in Divorce

From the National Post:

By mandating the information session [on mediation], and by subsidizing mediation for couples who choose to forgo litigation, Ontario has joined an international push toward mediation and away from costly, time-consuming and oftentimes nasty litigation. Britain and New York's Nassau County recently joined U.S. states such as Utah and Florida in requiring that divorcing couples attend at least one mandatory mediation session.