I never understood Pennoyer. I joked about jurisdiction. I thought in rem was a band. They’ve figured me out. What do they want? To take away my quote? Do I need this? During a pandemic?
I panic. WHAT DO THEY WANT?
Wait. WHAT?? You want ANOTHER QUOTE? Um…I’ll check my quote schedule. Ah ha! I knew it! They were impressed I made a post-Pennoyer comeback.
Everyone loves a comeback!
So I’ll teach you a trick to make legalese, legalEASY. MAKE. IT. FUN.
Speaking of fun, it’s HARDLY my fault Pennoyer was not fun. That’s on him. Not everyone is fun.
DEFINTIONS #clearasabelitz style:
Promissory Esptoppel: Oops, STOP! I totally spaced and forgot to make a contract.
Adverse Possession: Not moving my *ss (as long as it’s an OCEAN).
Res ipsa Loquitur: Duh. I mean WHO throws flour out the window?
Prima Facie: Double duh.
The Unborn Widow: The ultimate trophy wife
The fertile octoganarian: Look at that uber-couger sporting some cute maternity jeans.
Due Process: The utility player of the constitution.
Long arm jurisdiction: Fancy foreign footwear
Character Evidence: Time to bring in the PR spin doctors.
Oh, yes my quote. Question presented: Do lawyers need to learn to code?
On the one hand, Shari E. Belitz CEO of Shari Belitz Communications, summarized it: “If you asked me in 1990 if lawyers needed to learn email, I would have said no. If you asked in 1995 if lawyers needed to know how to type rather than dictate a memo, I would have said no. If you asked me in 2019 if lawyers would need to learn how to use an online platform to mediate, I would have said no. So, do lawyers need to learn to code? Yes. Learning to code provides the added bonus of sharpening logic skills, so is not just a utilitarian function.”
For the full article published on Above the Law, click here.