document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("Constitutionality of Los Angeles Curfew Ordinance\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("Constitutional Analysis of Los Angeles Curfew Ordinance submitted to Mid City West Community Council for discussion at July 12, 2005 Board Meeting (Agenda Item 9(e).\n"); document.write(" \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("more..\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("Comment regarding Proposed Fed.R.App.Proc. 32.1\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("This is a comment sent by email to the \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference of the United States, regarding Proposed Fed.R.App.Proc. 32.1 (which would permit citation of unpublished opinions).\n"); document.write("  \n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write(" \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("more..\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("Kozinski-itis: Hypocrisy in the Unpublished Opinions Controversy,
\n"); document.write("by L. Neuton
\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("The 9th Circuit's non-publication rule (Circuit Rule 36-3) undermines the Doctrine of Precedent -  the very foundation of Anglo-American law.  In a published case, Judge Alex Kozinski ruled it constitutional - assuring the public not to worry about its being abused.  Yet he, himself, abused the rule in two unpublished cases.  A rule he sets forth as law in one opinion is completely contradicted by his own ruling in another, nearly identical, case (article revised 2-9-04).\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write(" \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("more..\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("Lawyer as Sophist: Wolfgram Revisited, by L. Neuton \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("The Lawyer as \"sophist\" - antithesis of the proper litigant.\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write(" \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("more..\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("CONSTITUTIONALITY OF CALIFORNIA'S SO-CALLED \"VEXATIOUS LITIGANT\" STATUTE, by L. Neuton \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("Constitutionality of California's \"vexatious litigant\" statute analyzed in light of \n"); document.write("Wolfgram v. Wells Fargo Bank\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write(" \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("more..\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("The Unnatural Nature of the Spendthrift Trust by L.Neuton\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("American trust law should be reformed.  The \"trust\" constitutes a form of property ownership which is antithetical to American concepts of private property.  The goals of the trust for the most part can be accomplished by other means which are less complex, less subject to varying interpretations, and therefore, less of a windfall for the lawyer industry. And, in the case of spendthrift trusts - which are of questionable consitutionality and contrary to public policy - there is a more pressing need for change. \n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("
\n"); document.write(" \n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("more..\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("\n"); document.write("

\n"); document.write("
\n");