I recently noticed a peculiar quirk on several blogs I read that are part of the Law Professor Blog Network (LPBN). No matter how many contributing authors a blog has, all posts on each site seemed to be signed within the system by the same author.

This isn't obvious if you read these blogs directly on the LPBN website. That's because the system author name doesn't display anywhere on the sites. Instead, each author manually signs his or her post within the body text, usally at the end. Thus, it's clear that each of these blogs is, in fact, being updated regularly by more than one author.

The problem is, I consume blogs via Google Reader, meaning that what I see is dependent upon what's in a blog's RSS feed. In the case of LPBN sites, the RSS feed shows the author of each post not as who signed it at the end of the post body, but instead as the account name with which the the post was submitted. In the case of the Law Librarian Blog, it's always editor Joe Hodnicki. On Law School Innovation, it's a more generic "LS Innovation Editor." On ContractsProf Blog, it's "lpbncontracts."

To make matters worse, these RSS feeds only display a teaser for each post, not the entire post, so I only see the system author because each article is clipped long before the tell-tale signature at the end.

Not all LPBN sites have this same authoring discrepancy. For example, ADR Prof Blog includes the author name from the system in its theme, and it reflects the actual post author. Consequently, the actual author is also included in the blog's RSS feed.

I'm not sure why this problem exists. Is it due to some sort of licensing restriction on TypePad? If each blog in the network is being paid for separately by its editors/authors, that may actually be the case, as both the Basic and Plus plans offered by the company restrict a blog to a single author. The Pro Plan and above all offer unlimited authors. Thus, perhaps Law Librarian Blog, Law School Innovation and ContractsProf Blog are all on the Plus plan, while ADR Prof Blog is on the Pro plan. Or perhaps ADR Prof Blog isn't even on TypePad, as it has its own unique domain name and no reference to TypePad appears anywhere in the page source. (Law Librarian Blog, Law School Innovation and ContractsProf Blog, however, are all definitely on TypePad.)

Does anyone have any insight about this?

Today in Advanced Legal Research, there was a question as to whether the index for American Law Reports, a very important tool for using the print volumes of ALR, is available online. ALR, of course, is now exclusively available on Westlaw after being removed from LexisNexis last year. While Westlaw now has lots of browsable indices for resources (statutory codes, regional digests, etc.) available directly from a specific database's search page, no index link appears for ALR.

This is unfortunate because, as it turns out, there is an electronic index available on Westlaw. This is clear because individual index entries show up in search results. And as the Harvard Law School Library's website points out, you can "browse" the index simply by running the following citation field search: ci(index).

When you run this search, it returns 10,000 results, the upper system limit imposed by Westlaw on the number of search results that can be retrieved at one time. How far does 10,000 get you? All the way into the D's. "DISCRETIONARY FUNCTION OR DUTY Federal Tort Claims Act warning duty" to be exact. Hardly the entire index, and given that you have to browse in alphabetical order, page by page, even getting to your topic (assuming it falls somewhere alphabetically before "Discretionary") is a slow tedious task.

No need to panic, however, because the only one of these 10,000 results you need is the first one. This document contains an alphabetical list of ALR's main subject headings, and each subject term is a clickable hyperlink that will take you to all the index entries for that subject. Here you'll find links to annotations and to any additional subheadings for your subject.

So Westlaw does have a wonderfully functional ALR index, it's just extremely hard to find.

This information isn't exactly new, but I still thought I'd pass it along...

CNN and Court TV personality Nancy Grace purports to be an advocate for law and order, and she regularly uses her program to express her disgust for anyone even suspected of breaking the law. I wonder if this self-righteous outrage extends to her own indiscretions? Here's what the Georgia Supreme Court had to say in 1997 about Grace's behavior as the prosecuting attorney in a murder trial:

Our review of the record supports Carr's contention that the prosecuting attorney engaged in an extensive pattern of inappropriate and, in some cases, illegal conduct in the course of the trial. Specifically, his allegations about illegal entries into his home are borne out by the record; the trial court, after a hearing on a motion to suppress evidence gathered through illegal use of subpoenas, specifically found that the prosecuting attorney abused the subpoena process by, among other things, inserting false information regarding hearing dates; the record shows that the witness list delivered on the eve of trial contained many names new to the defense...; the transcript of the opening argument shows that the prosecuting attorney repeatedly made references to physical abuse although the trial court had ruled out all evidence of purported abuse...; and the closing argument was replete with references to the prosecuting attorney's beliefs and patent misrepresentations of fact such as the prosecuting attorney's use of a chart falsely indicating that a defense expert had not disagreed with a specific opinion by a State's witness. We conclude that the conduct of the prosecuting attorney in this case demonstrated her disregard of the notions of due process and fairness, and was inexcusable.

Carr v. Georgia, 482 S.E.2d 314, 322 (Ga. 1997) (emphasis added).

The Georgia court is not alone in expressing such an opinion of Grace's prosecutorial behavior. Just last year, the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals also had harsh words for her, noting her "failure... to fulfill her responsibilities." Stephens v. Hall, 407 F.3d 1195, 1207 (11th Cir. 2005). Specifically, the court pointed out that "Grace, as the prosecutor, failed in her 'duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to others acting on the government's behalf in the case, including the police.' [citation omitted]." Id. at 1204. All in all, according to the court, "Grace 'played fast and loose' with her ethical duties." Id. at 1207.

Gee, I wonder why she's not a prosecutor anymore?

You may recall that Fox and Marvel Comics sued Sony and Revolution Pictures back in June over alleged similarities between Fox/Marvel's "X-Men" franchise and Sony/Revolution's "Zoom." You may also recall that Fox's grounds for the suit were a bit pathetic and that there was some speculation that the real motivation for the lawsuit was the fact that Sony had scheduled "Zoom" for release just a few weeks before "X-Men 3." What Fox really wanted, the speculation continued, was simply to pressure Sony into moving its film to a later date.

Well, Fox and Marvel have dropped their lawsuit after the parties resolved their dispute "amicably." And coincidentally enough, Fox has also pushed back "Zoom" to an August 2006 release date, two months after "X-Men 3" hits theaters. Naturally, the former defendants deny that the lawsuit had anything to do with this change. According to Revolution, the studio simply opted to move the film to a less-crowded date.

I don't think there's anything quite as heartwarming as watching rich people use our nation's legal system as little more than a means to gaining the upper hand in a non-legal dispute. James Gandolfini would be proud.

[Yahoo! News] Fox, Marvel drop lawsuit over 'Zoom'

For a man who has spent his entire life making people laugh, Bill Cosby seems to be lacking a sense of humor today. The comedian-turned-actor-turned-pudding pop salesman has slapped website Channel 101 with a cease and desist order. Channel 101, you may recall, has been hosting episodes of an animated series called "House of Cosbys," which follows the misadventures of a gaggle of cloned Cosbys.

I guess Cosby has gained a new appreciation for legal wrangling since being sued to the ends of the earth by one of the women he's allegedly been groping over the years.

[Cinematical] Bill Cosby slams short film site with cease and desist