Considering the popularity of Supreme Court bobbleheads (as reported in yesterday’s New York Times), maybe the Court should next set up a Facebook page.   I’d be happy to friend some of the Justices, starting with Stevens, who has several Facebook pages devoted to him, including John Paul Stevens, John Paul Stevens’ Bowties, and John Paul Stevens: The Most Adorable Supreme Court Justice.

Britain’s High Court ordered its first injunction via Twitter on Thursday, saying the social website and micro-blogging service was the best way to reach an anonymous Tweeter who had been impersonating someone.

The order will appear for the recipient the next time he or she logs into their Twitter account.  According to Andrew Walker at Griffin Law, “Whoever they are, they will be told to stop posting, to remove previous posts and to identify themselves to the High Court via a web link form.”

UPDATE 10/4: Last night I read a great article on the dispute in Time Magazine about the dispute, which involves “Conservative blogger Donal Blaney and a Twitter imposter tweeting as @blaneysblarney,” who has allegedly been impersonating as Blaney.  The article says:

in response to a petition filed by Blaney, the English High Court sent this “direct message” to @blaneysblarney via Twitter: “You are hereby ordered by the High Court of Justice to read and comply with the following order.” This was accompanied by a link to a web page containing the command to desist from the misleading tweeting. By clicking the link, the miscreant risks revealing his or her personal IP address, but Blaney realizes his shadowy opponent might not fall into this cunning trap.

Hat tip to Jim Bolin at Charlotte Law.

Plaintiff has a great deal to say,
But it seems he skipped Rule 8(a),
His Complaint is too long,
Which renders it wrong,
Please re-write and re-file today.

Hat tip to my St. Thomas colleague Fred Light for sending this to me.

The defendants’ names? Limerick Golf Club, Inc. and Limerick Golf Club Estates, Inc. (collectively, “Limerick”).  Concluding that Limerick didn’t justify the late filing, Judge Berle M. Schiller dismissed their third-party complaint.  Stating that Limerick’s “sub-par performance occurred in the pleading stage of this case and not on the golf course,” the court closed with a rhyme:

With arguments hard to resist,
The movant correctly insists,
His joinder was tardy,
And so the third party
Complaint is hereby dismissed.

Hat tip to Law.com for the story and where you can find additional details on the suit.  Court’s opinion here.

In a copyright opinion issued last Friday, Judge Selya opined that a party’s counterclaims “assert[ed] copyright infringement and a gallimaufry of other federal and state-law causes of action. ” (Emphasis added.)

Gallimaufry.  Merriam-Webster Online states that it’s of Middle French origin and means “hodgepodge.”  In the context of pleading, what a wonderful word.  Of course, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were intended to permit liberal joinder of claims and defenses. Thus, the Rules (such as Rules 8 and 18) were designed with hodgepodgery in mind, subject to limits such as those in Rule 11. Thus, to an extent, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are Federal Rules of Gallimaufry.

Note: BOGO means “buy one, get one free.”

New Year’s Resolution: catching up on my blogging. Along those lines, my St. Thomas colleague Fred Light brought to my attention last term to an interesting administrative order from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

The order, entitled In re: Cellular Phone and Electronic Equipment Usage in the Courthouse, addresses legitimate concerns over the presence and use of cell phones — and particularly camera phones — in the courtroom. It designates persons who can bring cell or camera phones to court but warns that “[n]o cellular phones of any kind may be used in a courtroom or jury deliberations room and no photographs of any kind may be taken in any federal courthouse facility.” Penalties for violations include 30 days in jail and/or a fine of $5000 and/or punishment for contempt of court.

Woe to the first person in a Miami courtroom whose Motorola Razr blares out Iron Butterfly’s In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida as a ringtone.

Thanks to dreamingyakker at Flickr, who licensed the photo through this Creative Commons license.