It’s been a while since we mentioned She-Hulk, the lawyer superhero. Above, you’ll see the cover of She-Hulk #8, published not so long ago in 2004.  Note that She-Hulk, clad in her lawyer attire and carrying her law books, finds herself on a crowded elevator with a number of heroes, including Howard the Duck and Matt Murdock (a blind lawyer who moonlights as the superhero Daredevil). We wonder if the occupants of that elevator are all traveling to She-Hulk’s law office as a part of the same case. If so, that is some litigation we would like to see.  (To see our previous coverage of She-Hulk, please see here, here, here, and here.).

Happy birthday to Walter Olson’s Overlawyered blog, which turns 13 years old this week, if you can believe it. Let us tell you something: that is quite an accomplishment. In fact, we here at Abnormal Use were early readers of Overlawyered, and we can remember perusing its pages in the law school library in 2000. We wish Walter and the site our most sincere congratulations, and we must confess that we are now looking forward to our own site’s 13th birthday in January 2023.

It’s been a big week here at Abnormal Use and Gallivan, White, & Boyd, P.A. with us adding not one but two new partners into the mix in South Carolina.  We’d like to welcome Todd R. Davidson to our Greenville office and Curtis Ott to our Columbia office. Todd, with 23 years as a transactional attorney, joins our office’s Business and Commercial Group, while Curtis, with 20 years of experience litigating commercial, transportation and product liability cases, joins our Litigation Group.

We hope and trust that you had a fine and fun Fourth of July holiday this past week (despite the challenge of having the holiday fall on a weekday rather than the weekend!). To keep the celebration going, we direct you to The Charlotte Observer’s collection of photographs of the fireworks display from downtown Charlotte, North Carolina this past Wednesday evening. It was something to see. Check it out!

Don’t forget! You can follow Abnormal Use on Twitter here and on Facebook here! Drop us a line!

Who knew that they made a comic book adaptation of the 1972 patriotic film musical, 1776? We certainly didn’t until we began preparing to draft this post for you, our dear readers, who we hope are enjoying a well earned day off to celebrate our nation’s birthday. Whatever you’ve decided to do with your day, we here at Abnormal Use and Gallivan, White & Boyd, P.A. wish you a fun and safe holiday.

(Last but not least, click here to see our first Fourth of July post back in 2010, complete with Greenville, South Carolina fireworks, and here for our post from last year, featuring a very, very patriotic and inspiring Superman comic book cover).

Behold, the cover of Archie #618, published not so long ago in 2011. Note that Archie, somehow transplanted back in history to the days of Robin Hood and Sherwood Forest, is now “Robbing Arch” and a wanted criminal to boot. Here’s our question: The wanted poster is affixed to a tree, and the only thing holding it to the tree is an arrow, which must have been shot at a distance. Who was the guy who was holding the poster to the tree waiting for the arrow to be shot into it? Wouldn’t a hammer and nail have been far, far easier?

Apparently the U.S. Supreme Court released some big opinion yesterday. Here it is, if you haven’t read it yet.

Music writer Caryn Rose of the Jukebox Graduate blog and the Backstreets magazine reflects on the one year anniversary of the death of Clarence Clemons, famed saxophone player for Bruce Springsteen’s E Street Band.  Our own obituary, published in June 2011, can be found here.

Don’t forget! You can follow Abnormal Use on Twitter here and on Facebook here! Drop us a line!

Quite some time ago, friend of the blog Walter Olson of Overlawered opined on the proposed revisions to the DSM-IV, soon to be the DSM-5, which will apparently include some brand new mental disorders therein.  (He also tweeted a link to a related news report). The DSM, of course, is the The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a thick volume published by the American Psychiatric Association which purports to list (and include the elements of) a host of mental disorders.  Daily, it is used by practitioners – from psychiatrists to primary care physicians – to diagnose particular mental conditions, from potential tobacco addiction to post traumatic stress disorder. It’s often called “the Bible of the profession.” Predictably, Plaintiffs’ experts often use the mighty tome – haphazardly, more likely than not – to advance their clients’ cases.

Olson linked to a piece he wrote for the Cato Institute, in which he speculates that the liberalization of standards for preexisting mental disorders and the addition of new disorders – such as Internet Addiction Disorder and Mild Neurocognitive Disorder – will result in a flurry of new claims for benefits, discrimination, and such.  Certainly, plaintiffs’ retained testifying experts – and local treating physicians and mental health providers advocating for their patients in personal injury lawsuits – may seize upon these new diagnoses.  However, many of these experts and plaintiff friendly treaters do not actually employ the formal DSM criteria when making these diagnoses in the first place.  Whatever you say about the merits or lack thereof of the DSM-IV, many plaintiffs’ experts and treaters shoot from the hip when making these mental diagnoses.  When they see a patient claiming psychological symptoms following a traumatic incident, they immediately leap to a PTSD diagnosis without employing the specific multi-axial diagnosis process.  Further, when called upon to analyze the factors set forth in Axis IV, which requires an analysis of  – or at the every least, knowledge and consideration of – other environmental or psychosocial factors contributing to the patient’s condition, these providers almost never conduct any independent evaluation.

The DSM-IV-TR provides that the mental health professional consider a number of factors when performing a multi-axial diagnosis, including such things as the following:

• Source of psychosocial and environmental problems interview with patient and parents?
• Positive stressors
• Problems with primary support group?
  • Death of a family member
  • Health problems in the family
  • Disruption of family by separation
  • Divorce or estrangement
  • Removal from the home
• Problems related to social environment
  • Death or loss of a friend
  • Living alone
  • Difficulty with acculturation
  • Adjustment to life transition (such as retirement)
  • Adjustment to life-cycle transition
• Occupational Problems?
  • Unemployment
  • Threat of job loss
  • Stressful work schedule
  • Difficult work conditions
  • Job dissatisfaction
  • Job Change
  • Discord with boss or co-workers?
• Economic Problems?
  • Extreme poverty
  • Inadequate finances
  • Insufficient welfare support
• Housing Problems?
  • Homelessness
  • Inadequate housing
  • Unsafe neighborhood
  • Discord with neighbors or landlord
• Problems with access to health care services?
• Problems with primary support group
• Problems related to interaction with legal system/crime
  • Litigation
  • Arrest or incarceration or victim of crime?
• Other psychosocial and environmental problems?

Yet, in the rush to reach a diagnosis, the professional often fails to consider many of these as alternatives to the event being litigation.  (Also neglected is secondary gain syndrome, an ailment which Plaintiff’s retained testifying experts never seem to diagnose.). Thus, we can always rely on plaintiff’s testifying experts to fail to do what the DSM instructs.  This can be helpful when cross examining or deposing these experts before trial.  Even plaintiff friendly treaters, in their attempts to get one patient out the door so the next one can come in, do not traditionally take all of the steps suggested by the DSM-IV or analyze the factors of a full multi-axial diagnosis. So, as with any list, people skip steps, particularly when they feel they can. In this setting, defense counsel can sometimes actually benefit from the extraordinary detail of the publication by highlighting all of the portions of the guidelines that the expert failed to consider or make a part of his or her analysis.

So, even when the DSM-5 arrives, we can still count on these individuals to take short cuts. (Although we’re a bit concerned about this “Internet Addiction Disorder.”  Might we here have that?).

(Hat tip also to these two tweets from Jay Hornack a/k/a Panic Street Lawyer: here and here).

Behold, the cover of Showcase #96, published by DC Comics way, way back in 1978.  This issue of the series focused on the Doom Patrol, one of whom’s members, Negative Woman a/k/a Valentina Vostock, faces arrest on the cover. “Your team can call it quits, Robotman . . . Valentina Vostock is under arrest,” proclaims someone who must be a state actor of some sort. Now, Ms. Vostock was a Soviet defector, so maybe there is some late 1970’s Cold War era politics going on here, but this is still more than a decade after Miranda. You’d think Robotman could at least raise that issue with the arresting officer. Thanks for nothing, Robotman.

Here is a funny tweet about courtroom sketch artists.

Colin Miller of the EvidenceProf Blog remarks upon Adam Sandler. And Adam Sandler litigation. And litigation with similar themes to Adam Sandler films. Read it here. (Oh, and if you haven’t seen Red Letter Media’s ultra harsh video review of Sandler’s Jack and Jill, you’re missing out. Really, seriously, you should check out that movie review.).

The always great Letters of Note blogs publishes the famous 1988 legal letter from Laramie, Wyoming attorney Becky Klemt to a California lawyer who asked for a $100,000 retainer and a $1,000 per hour rate to collect a partially unsatisified judgment of $4,239.84.  If you’ve not read Klemt’s letter, please do so, as you can’t help but enjoy it.

William K. Berenson, a Plaintiff’s lawyer blogging at the Fort Worth Injury Lawyer Blog, offers “McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case: Bet You Didn’t Know That . . . .” (Warning: A graphic image of Stella Liebeck’s burn injuries is embedded in the entry.).

In July of 1948, Walt Disney Productions released “The Trial of Donald Duck,” a short in which Donald, our hero, faces the legal system.  Here’s how the Internet Movie Database summarizes the plot of this criminal prosecution, truly the trial of the century:

Donald is caught in the rain while eating his lunch. He ducks into a restaurant for a cup of coffee, but Chez Pierre is a very ritzy place, and by the time all is said and done, he’s facing a bill for $35.99, and he only got a drop of coffee, and he only has a nickel. Pierre takes him to court, where this story is told, and is ordered to pay $10 or wash dishes for ten days.

Directed by Jack King, with a story by Dan MacManus, the story is a fun one which, of course, doesn’t accurately depict the legal process. But who would expect it to? Our favorite legal mistake: Donald’s lawyer, apparently unaware of the burden of proof, offers to prove to the court that his client is innocent.  Further, he doesn’t even request a jury trial. Best part:  You can watch the six minute short here on YouTube!

About a month ago, we ran a piece asking the question, “Is Music on Vinyl Better?”  Fellow lawyer and friend of the blog Matt J. writes in to respond to our conclusion that compact discs may, in fact, offer the better listening experience:

I don’t know whether vinyl or CD is superior.  I’ve always had the belief that people think vinyl is better, because they listened to vinyl on non-portable devices and, therefore, on potentially superior equipment. That’s the case with me.  When I bought The Uplift Mofo Party Plan on LP and killed a party with my NAD amp, Genesis speakers, and Sony turntable, it was 10x the experience of listening to the copy I ripped (at the highest bit rate I could) from CD and listen to on my iPod and pretty good Sennheiser in-ear headphones. I’m still convinced it’s not the vinyl v. CD that matters, but how you listen.

Remember back in October when we published a piece on bath salts? This new drug continues to be in the news, and this week, Natasha Vargas-Cooper at Spin magazine offers a lengthy investigative piece on the history of the drug and the war against it.

“You’d better come along,” the policeman instructs Archie on the cover of Archie #114, published way, way back in 1960. Obviously, this scene takes place before some important Warren Court jurisprudence, but we can’t help but wonder what Archie did to earn the attention of local law enforcement. (By the way, back in July 2011, we showed you Archie’s encounter with civil litigation.).

Friend of the blog Maxwell S. Kennerly of the Litigation & Trial blog has a piece entitled “The Legal Ethics of Going On A Date With Opposing Counsel.” How about that? Says he: “I’m not in the business of giving out relationship advice, but I can give a handful of pointers relating to protocol in the legal world.” Check it out.

Well, you knew it wouldn’t be long before we returned to the topic of My Cousin Vinny, that movie of movies. In an interview with Will Harris of The Onion AV Club, Bruce McGill, the actor who played Sheriff Farley in My Cousin Vinny, shares some memories of that role.  Published earlier this week, the piece includes these thoughts from McGill:

BM: Well, I think that was just [casting director] David Rubin. I just went in and read, and I think I read really well, but I think David Rubin is one of the great casting directors. He was an assistant at that time, but I just think he’s a wonderful casting director and one of the best readers with you, which makes a difference. When you go in and the casting director reads with you, if they can’t read and they’re not a very good actor, the scene suffers, obviously. But I think I got the part from the read with David Rubin, but the first thing Joe Pesci said—and I knew Joe from New York, and I see Joe a lot out here on the golf course—and in a very Godfather-ly manner, “Yeah, y’know, I approved you for that role.” [Laughs.] I said, “Oh, thank you, Godfather, thank you!” I’m sure he did, and I’m glad he did.

But, you know, it’s not any one thing. There’s a cumulative effect to getting good parts as a freelance actor, because you’re only as good as your last job, and you have to keep going out and getting them. Unless you’re part of the finance structure, by which I mean a bankable star, which I never was and never will be. That’s why actors who might not be such great actors but are bankable will have a great career. But mine is different. I’ve got to sell myself every time. And I embrace that gladly now. I didn’t always. There was a period of time where I thought, “This is irritating. I’ve done 70 movies. Why won’t you just give me the job or don’t give me the job?”

Then I ran across the following phrase: “There are two kinds of people in the world: the very, very wealthy and salesmen.” And I knew I was not in the former camp, so instead of looking at auditions as what I used to call “grovels.” I used to say, “Oh, I can’t play golf, I’ve got a 2 o’clock grovel.” I really did! And even when I said it, I’d say, “That’s not a really good attitude.” So then I ran across that phrase about the two kinds of people, it happened instantly. [Snaps fingers.] In the blink of an eye and the passing of a thought, I went from calling them “grovels” to looking at them as sales opportunities, as if I were selling wrenches. And I would go to a buyer and say, “These are my wrenches. They’re the very best wrenches for your job. Here they are, and here’s the price.” So I began to look at auditions like that, and I’ve never had a problem with it again.

Of course, I don’t audition for things I’m not interested in doing. I don’t have to do that anymore. And now I’ll still go and meet and… Actually, agents think you should not read, that you should just go and meet and discuss what you would do. And I don’t think so. I mean, it depends, but time and time again, I think that if you’re a good actor and you prepare well and you can audition well, you should. Because you may knock somebody else out of the box just by being better in the room.

You’ll recall that back in March we celebrated the twentieth anniversary of the release of My Cousin Vinny and featured interviews with the director, the writer, and several members of the cast. We had actually requested an interview with Mr. McGill, through his representation, to no avail.  Alas.

As we previously mentioned, we here at Abnormal Use spent May 2012 focusing on comic book covers featuring police line-ups.  Well, today is the first day of June, but we thought we’d share one more line-up cover with you, our dear readers. Above, you’ll find the cover of Justice Traps The Guilty #56, which appears to have been published way, way back in late 1953.  Just like last week’s cover, there is no barrier between the suspects in the line-up and the witness making the identification. This, to us, seems unsafe.

Davis Francis of the David Francis Law Firm, writing at his blog (which is called, simply, The Blog), discusses the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s new pool safety tips and even gives our earlier post on the matter a shout-out!

Since we very recently discussed the issue of vinyl records, we direct you to Roy Furchgott’s recent New York Times article, entitled “The Secrets of a High-Quality Vinyl Record.” Indeed.

Speaking of music, friend of the blog Matt Wake of The Huntsville Times recently published “9 destinations across the Southeast every music lover should visit.” A good list, though we, of course, would have included Harvest Records in Asheville, North Carolina and Horizon Records in Greenville, South Carolina.

“Is Blogging Dead?” asks Susan Cartier Liebel. Our response: Fear not, dear readers. We still live.

Whoa! The Charlotte Business Journal ran a brief profile of our North Carolina office this week. See here!

As we previously mentioned, we here at Abnormal Use are spending May 2012 focusing on comic book covers featuring police line-ups.  Behold! Above, you’ll find the cover to Mr. District Attorney #4, published way, way back in 1948. Okay, it doesn’t look like there is anything in between the purposed “Merchants of Death” and the witness identifying the suspect.  In fact, the suspect who has been identified appears to be glaring icily at the witness from atop some type of raised platform.  This does not bode well for the witness. Alas.

For some reason, yesterday, we here at Abnormal Use were thinking about Star Wars.  It’s a bittersweet topic for us, to be certain. Did you know that two years ago, we published excerpts from several state and federal court cases referencing Star Wars characters? And, of course, our magnum opus was our Star Wars April Fool’s Day gag in 2011. Take a look, if you like.

Speaking of nostalgia, did you know that our very first edition of Friday Links was published way, way back on January 8, 2010? Take a look at that puny first entry – which didn’t even feature an image, much less a legal themed comic book cover – by clicking here!

Have you heard of Tiger Lawyer? If not, it’s clearly something you need to investigate. With a name like that, how can you not?

Don’t forget! You can follow Abnormal Use on Twitter here and on Facebook here! Drop us a line!

As we’ve previously mentioned, our editor Jim Dedman is now contributing one monthly post to the North Carolina Law Blog.  Last week, his most recent submission was published at that site.  The topic: “It’s Hard Out There For A Blog Editor – Strategies to Keep Contributors Interested.” That one hits close to home, as we here know all too well about the perils of maintaining a blog.

The enthusiasm of a new law blogger is unparalleled.  When a lawyer decides to blog, he or she has much to say and to offer potential readers.  Often, the new legal blogger already has several – perhaps even half a dozen – potential posts in mind.  In fact, it is that initial multitude of post ideas which prompts the desire to create a blog in the first place.  But, inevitably, as days pass, weeks go by, and weeks become months, the initial joy of blogging – like most other things that once made us happy – becomes a chore.  Sadly, the once promising blog evolves from a labor of love to a non-billable business development task, which typically falls to the bottom of the stack.  After all, non-billable work – particularly tasks which do not involve direct contact with actual or potential clients – must come second, third, or even fourth to other such plans.  This is why so many blogs die early deaths and why the legal blogosphere is full of blog graveyards.

There’s lot’s more, so click here to read the rest, which includes some suggestions on how to keep writers interested.