Messing with Texas part 2: @AppAdvoc asked for my typographic analysis of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4

Messing with Texas part 2: @AppAdvoc asked for my typographic analysis of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.4

When it comes to conflicts of interest, transparency may not be the panacea we'd hoped:

Hillary's quote at the end of this story is a great illustration of how history is weird & mostly random:

Hillary's quote at the end of this story is a great illustration of how history is weird & mostly random:

Here's my #PeerIndex list of the top 50 legal news sources on Twitter. Who have you included on your list?

Here's my #PeerIndex list of the top 50 legal news sources on Twitter. Who have you included on your list?

My current blog in Harvard Business Review on line.

My current blog in Harvard Business Review on line.

My current blog in Harvard Business Review on line.

LexisNexis Corporate and Commercial Insights: Francis Pileggi Unravels Decisions in Delaware on Anti-Assignment Clause…

Dropbox as a CMS - DropPages

Dropbox as a CMS - DropPages

This thing @mariabustillos wrote @ the @awl is absurdly good. "Inside David Foster Wallace's Private Self-Help Library."

This thing @mariabustillos wrote @ the @awl is absurdly good. "Inside David Foster Wallace's Private Self-Help Library."

This report presents the findings of a Federal Judicial Center study on the filing and resolution of motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The study was requested by the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules. The study compared motion activity in 23 federal district courts in 2006 and 2010 and included an assessment of the outcome of motions in orders that do not appear in the computerized legal reference systems such as Westlaw. Statistical models were used to control for such factors as differences in levels of motion activity in individual federal district courts and types of cases.

Because this case was resolved on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, the question below was “not whether [Skinner] will ultimately prevail” on his procedural due process claim, see Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U. S. 232, 236 (1974), but whether his complaint was sufficient to cross the federal court’s threshold, see Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U. S. 506, 514 (2002). Skinner’s complaint is not a model of the careful drafter’s art, but under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a complaint need not pin plaintiff’s claim for relief to a precise legal theory. Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally requires only a plausible “short and plain” statement of the plaintiff’s claim, not an exposition of his legal argument. See 5 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure §1219, pp. 277–278 (3d ed. 2004 and Supp. 2010).