For a limited time, Oregon Constitutional Law is available for pre-order at a discount. Use coupon code CONLAW2022 at check-out to save 10% through February 28, 2022. You won’t want to miss this fully updated second edition. It includes a new chapter on constitutional odds and ends, as well as a copy of the original 1857 constitution and the current Oregon Constitution with updates through 2021. Continue reading
Category: Authors and Editors
Articles about our wonderful volunteer authors and editorial review board members.
Oregon State Bar Wins International Award
The Association for Continuing Legal Education (ACLEA) has awarded the Oregon State Bar, Legal Publications, one of only 10 annual awards granted to competitors representing more than 300 organizations.
An Award of Outstanding Achievement was given to the Oregon State Bar for Oregon Civil Pleading and Litigation, in the Best Publication category. Continue reading
Damages Book Wins ACLEA Award
OSB Legal Publications has once again been recognized for our commitment to publishing quality legal resources. We received an award for a book we released in 2016.
The Association for Continuing Legal Education (ACLEA) has selected Damages as the winner of its ACLEA’s Best Award of Outstanding Achievement in Publications. A plaque commemorating the award was presented at ACLEA’s Annual Meeting in Montreal, Quebec, Canada in August and is on display in the lobby of the OSB Center.
Of course, Legal Pubs couldn’t have created this highly informative and innovative book without the help of our three volunteer editorial board members Hon. Karsten Rasmussen, Rick Lee, and Heather Bowman.
Damages was designed to support Oregon attorneys in their role as litigator and advisor. Whether the attorney is a recent law grad or a seasoned attorney, there is something in here for them. This publication was made possible only through the extraordinary dedication and gratuitous contribution of time and talent offered by 50 Oregon attorneys. The accomplished attorneys who drafted each chapter offered their insights—starting with an overview of the particular practice area or basis for money damages, and drilling down into the most relevant details that practicing attorneys are likely to encounter in their practice. The authors included practice tips and caveats where appropriate. Many authors also provided references to other resources, which are often helpful springboards when greater depth of understanding in a nuanced area of the law is necessary.
The authors who volunteered their time and talent on this publication and made an ACLEA award possible are Allen E. Eraut, Julie A. Smith, Joshua Sasaki, Megan McGuire, Laura C. Johnson, David Auxier, Ted Reuter, Bernard S. Moore, Samuel T. Smith, Joshua D. Stadtler, Jeffrey D. Munns, Nicholas E. Wheeler, James C. Edmonds, Jeffrey A. Trautman, Donald E. Templeton, Frederick H. Lundblade, III, Jennifer Middleton, Meredith Holley, Hon. Benjamin M. Bloom, Thomas M. Triplett, Keith S. Dubanevich, Nadine A. Gartner, W. Greg Lockwood, Carson D. Bowler, Michelle G. Rudd, Reilley D. Keating, Jay W. Beattie, Gavin W. Bruce, Emily S. Miller, D. Gary Christensen, Cody Berne, Robert Lane Carey, Lindsay L. Reynolds, Sarah M. Einowski, Jeff Bradford, Rima I. Ghandour, Erin E. Gould, Bryan P. Murphy, Justine Fischer, Thomas C. Peachey, Andrew J. Myers, Michael B. Hallinan, Sara Kobak, Jordan R. Silk, James Coon, Gordon T. Carey, Jr.
The editorial review board, authors, and in-house editors have produced a deskbook that is practical, comprehensive, and well-supported with citations to legal authorities. It filled an ever-present need for up-to-date information on the law of damages in a variety of areas of law. Because of the quality of the publication and its unique place in the market it has become an invaluable resource for Oregon lawyers.
Oregon Real Estate Deskbook Wins Award
OSB Legal Publications has once again been recognized for our commitment to publishing quality legal resources. We received an award for a book we released in 2015.
The Association for Continuing Legal Education (ACLEA) has selected Oregon Real Estate Deskbook as the winner of its ACLEA’s Best Award of Outstanding Achievement in Publications. A plaque commemorating the award was presented at ACLEA’s Annual Meeting in Seattle, Washington in August and is on display in the lobby of the OSB Center.
Of course, Legal Pubs couldn’t have created this highly informative and innovative book without the help of our many volunteer editorial board members (in bold) and authors: Thomas E. Bahrman, Dustin R. Klinger, Andrew I. Davis, Dina E. Alexander, Peter R. Jarvis, Lee Aronson, Patricia A. Ihnat, C. Cleveland Abbe, Dean P. Gisvold, Jonathan M. Radmacher, Michael G. Magnus, Michelle D. Da Rosa, Robert W. Wilkinson, Amy Heverly, Damien R. Hall, Mark A. Manulik, Paul B. Barton, John B. Benazzi, Rebecca S. Schwarzkopf, Don G. Carter , Jeffrey S. Davis, Benjamin Leedy, Thomas S. Hillier, Christopher R. Ambrose, John A. Lusky, Jonathon L. Goodling, Valerie Athena Tomasi, Marisol Ricoy McAllister, Eleanor A. DuBay, Cody Hoesly, Steven A. Moore, Barry L. Groce, Bennett H. Goldstein, Brent Summers, Jason Alexander, Mike G. Halligan, Rich Canaday, Ryan Nisle, James M. Walker, Charles M. Greeff, Mike Silvey, Jeremy Bader, Thomas S. Smith, Kimberly McCullough, Richard Bailey, Robert W. Wilkinson, Jacob A. Zahniser, P. Stephen Russell III, Rebecca Biermann Tom, Howard M. Feuerstein , Steven F. Hill, Hong N. Huynh, Jennie Bricker, David E. Filippi, Kirk B. Maag, Jerry R. Fish, Eric L. Martin, Christopher C. Criglow, Greg Fullem, Richard Allan, Phillip E. Grillo, Lauren E. Johnson, Phillip C. Querin, William D. Miner, Kathleen L. Wilde, Clifton Molatore, Jeanne Kallage Sinnott, David W. Hercher, John Casey Mills, Teresa H. Pearson, William H. Caffee, Ann E. McQuesten, Jim L. Guse, Ronald A. Shellan, Jeneé (Gifford) Hilliard, John H. Gadon, Adam C. Kobos, Eric J. Kodesch, William F. (Fritz) Paulus, Edwin C. Perry, Neil N. Olsen, Sean M. Mazorol, Jill S. Gelineau, Marilyn Moylan Wall, Harold D. Gillis, Alexandra E. Sosnkowski, Robert R. Griffith, Alec J. Shebiel, and Michael H. McGean. Thanks to all of you for your hard work and dedication to this volunteer effort.
For many years, the Oregon State Bar published a loosely related series of real estate books, each published at different times, with different editorial boards, and with a different focus. In addition, we published a book titled Foreclosing Security Interests, which included real estate foreclosure topics.
In late 2012, we assembled a new editorial board interested in a complete reorganization of the series into a comprehensive multi-volume deskbook designed to meet the evolving needs of Oregon real estate attorneys. The editorial board represented a cross-section of the varied practice areas within real estate law. The board members reviewed all of the existing chapters of the real estate series as well as the Foreclosing Security Interests chapters. They identified topics that were covered in different ways in multiple chapters of the existing series and combined them; identified several topics that were no longer relevant and eliminated those chapters; determined that there were 11 additional topics not covered before that needed to be added; and logically organized the 66 chapters based on the order in which they would likely be encountered by the practitioner.
Oregon Real Estate Deskbook was designed to support Oregon attorneys in their role as legal counselor in real estate transactions where nonlawyers are increasingly playing a leading role. Whether the attorney is a recent law grad or a seasoned attorney, there is something in here for them. This publication was made possible only through the extraordinary dedication and gratuitous contribution of time and talent offered by over 90 Oregon attorneys. The accomplished attorneys who drafted each chapter offered their insights—starting with an overview of the particular practice area and drilling down into the most relevant details that practicing attorneys are likely to encounter in their practice. The authors included forms and practice tips where appropriate. They also provided references to other resources, which are often helpful springboards when greater depth of understanding in a nuanced area of the law is necessary.
Oregon Real Estate Deskbook is available on BarBooks™ to all Oregon Bar members or for purchase in print at the Bar’s online bookstore.
Editorial Sloth, Lists, Etc.
By Yasha Renner, Attorney Editor
It was a Friday, almost lunch time, and I was nearing the end of a chapter I was editing for the 2016 revision of Damages. I couldn’t figure out why the chapter’s author decided to include only four of the nine contractor designations cited in ORS 701.081 when they all seemed applicable. Does the author think less of locksmiths or home inspectors? I wondered.
Here’s the sentence:
As part of the registration process, a $10,000, $15,000, or $20,000 surety bond must be posted, depending on the contractor’s designation as a residential general contractor, a residential developer, a residential specialty contractor, or a residential limited contractor. ORS 701.068; ORS 701.081.
At a loss, a sly thought entered my mind; I could finish the sentence with an etc. That way I wouldn’t have to bother the author with a stupid question, nor would I have to endanger the assertion by adding the remaining actors, who (I am sure) were excluded for noble reasons. But to act on this temptation, I soon learned, would have been quite wrong. And just as I resolved to do so my conscience spoke, accusing me of editorial sloth—a capital vice.
So I did what I often do when faced with a question of editorial ethics: I turn to Bryan Garner, our department’s de facto editor in chief, who, with meekness and charity, invoked the following French proverb: “God save us from a lawyer’s et cetera.” Garner’s Dictionary of Legal Usage 331 (3rd ed. 2011). And thus, with the help of a higher power (i.e., a style guide), I was instantly freed from the enemy’s grip. “Still,” he counseled, “it would be foolish to lay down an absolute proscription against using etc., for often one simply cannot practicably list all that should be listed in a given context.” Id.
Alright, then, I thought to myself. I was relieved to know that etc. is not malum in se. But does the context here sanction its use? Certainly not, since I could list all of the designations. “Hideous!” my right-brain suddenly cried out, clearly bothered by the thought; and with that I yielded to its complaint. This sentence had to be pretty.
What’s an attorney editor to do?
Let’s just say I banished the offending half-truth. But that doesn’t really matter. What matters is that we lawyers don’t miss the moral here, which has nothing to do with style or grammar and everything to do with cultivating good habits, namely diligence and veracity, i.e., completeness. Because an incomplete thought, if aired, could become a scandal to others who, for instance, might be tempted to complete it for you, etc., etc.
Lawyer Advertising on the Internet
Excerpted from The Ethical Oregon Lawyer (OSB Legal Pubs 2015), chapter 2 “Marketing, Advertising, and Solicitation” by David J. Elkanich.
§ 2.4 ADVERTISING
Lawyer advertising, marketing, and self-promotion have changed markedly over the years. Prior versions of this chapter may have focused almost exclusively on business cards, Yellow Page ads, letterheads, and solicitation; and although this chapter still addresses those topics, it is important to pause and reflect on the ever-evolving nature of lawyer advertising.
Lawyers have been turning to the Internet in increasing numbers as a means of self-promotion. Almost all law firms have their own website, and lawyers now may create blogs to provide general legal analysis, send out e-mail alerts on new cases, use Internet directories and referral services, and join group advertising to develop larger and more effective websites. Lawyers may study web traffic and become proficient in “SEO” (search-engine optimization), and may need to understand “Adwords” and “pay per click advertising.” Other lawyers may join social media (such as Twitter or Facebook) to expand and develop their Internet presence. Over recent years, bar associations have begun responding to the proliferation of lawyer and law-firm websites and other forms of Internet activity by lawyers by modifying or clarifying the extent to which the rules governing lawyer advertising and solicitation extend to these activities.
For lawyers who are subject to regulation by Oregon, no reported decisions currently exist concerning the applicability of the rules governing advertising and solicitation to most types of Internet activity, such as lawyer websites, nor do the Oregon rules expressly regulate such activity to any substantial extent. However, the rules expressly address the related area of electronic-mail communications and real-time communications (see § 2.4-3; § 2.6-1 of The Ethical Oregon Lawyer), and at least one ethics opinion deals with whether (and when) lawyers may accept Internet-based referrals and how they can pay for that service. See, e.g., OSB Formal Ethics Op No 2007-180 (“Internet Advertising: Payment of Referral Fees”).
Note: However, numerous ethics opinions address how lawyers navigate an electronic practice, including the Internet and other electronically derived issues. See, e.g., OSB Formal Ethics Op No 2005-164 (“Communicating with Represented Persons: Contact Through Web Sites and the Internet”); OSB Formal Ethics Op No 2011-187 (rev 2015) (“Competency: Disclosure of Metadata”); OSB Formal Ethics Op No 2011-188 (rev 2015) (“Information Relating to the Representation of a Client: Third-Party Electronic Storage of Client Materials”); OSB Formal Ethics Op No 2013-189 (“Accessing Information about Third Parties Through a Social Networking Website”).
An increasing number of jurisdictions have addressed Internet-related issues in reported decisions, and these decisions may provide insights into how the Oregon rules will be applied to Internet activity. For a description of efforts in other states, see ABA/BNA Lawyers’ Manual on Professional Conduct 81:551–81:574 (2014); 81:2012–81:2014 (2013) (supplemented periodically) (summarizing state regulatory activity in this area). The ABA Center for Professional Responsibility’s website lists resources concerning technology and marketing. See <www.abanet.org/ cpr>.
For a discussion of how the usual principles governing lawyer advertising and solicitation will or should work as applied to the Internet, see Louise L. Hill, Change Is In the Air: Lawyer Advertising and the Internet, 36 U Richmond L Rev 21 (2002); Louise L. Hill, Lawyer Communications on the Internet: Beginning the Millennium with Disparate Standards, 75 Wash L Rev 785 (2000); J. Clayton Athey, The Ethics of Attorney Web Sites: Updating the Model Rules to Better Deal with Emerging Technologies, 13 Geo J Legal Ethics 499 (2000); and Peter R. Jarvis & Bradley F. Tellam, Competence and Confidentiality in the Context of Cellular Telephone, Cordless Telephone, and E-Mail Communications, 33 Willamette L Rev 467 (1997) (addressing limits placed on communications by rules governing advertising and solicitation).
Lawyers disseminating information via the Internet should take account of the multijurisdictional character of the dissemination. Information included on an Oregon lawyer’s website will be disseminated in other jurisdictions. Given the myriad restrictions placed on lawyer advertising by state regulators, it would be at least impractical to suggest that lawyer advertisements on the Internet must comply with each state’s regulatory scheme. However, the inherent multijurisdictional nature of Internet communications has led some commentators to favor replacing the current state-by-state approach to the regulation of lawyer self-promotion with a national standard. See, e.g., William E. Hornsby, Jr., Ad Rules Infinitum: The Need for Alternatives to State-Based Ethics Governing Legal Services Marketing, 36 U Richmond L Rev 49 (2002). Unless and until a national approach is adopted, lawyers must determine which states’ rules to follow in communicating through the Internet. For Oregon lawyers, Oregon’s choice-of-law provision provides some assistance in making this determination. See § 2.7.
Practice Tip: Although the law in this area is not well-developed, the existing decisional law from other jurisdictions indicates that lawyers’ dissemination of information via the Internet is likely to be treated as advertising and solicitation. See, e.g., California Formal Op Interim No 12-0006 (2015) (a blog that is part of a lawyer’s professional website, or that otherwise expresses the lawyer’s availability for professional employment, is subject to the rules regulating lawyer advertising). See also New York State Bar Ethics Op 967 (2013) (a blog written by a lawyer, “the primary purpose of which is not retention of the attorney,” is not subject to the advertising rules).
Internet communications can take a number of forms, at least some of which do not fit comfortably into the traditional advertising and solicitation paradigm. See, for example, California Formal Op No 2012-186, which discusses whether social-media communications (such as through Facebook or Twitter) are lawyer advertising. Lawyers using the Internet should at the very least assume that the basic requirement that information be truthful and nonmisleading will apply to Internet communications. These restrictions should be considered with respect not only to the content of lawyers’ websites, but also to their domain names.
Caveat: Lawyers who advertise in Oregon should be aware that the Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct are not the sole legal constraints on lawyer advertising. Oregon statutes prohibiting unfair trade practices also apply. See ORS 646.605–646.656; ORS 646.881–646.885.
Style Matters and Grammar Questions
All publishers have standards and style guides that they adhere to. OSB Legal Publications is no different. Often our volunteer authors want to know why we made a particular edit when they thought the way they wrote it was just fine. The answer is usually that the Attorney Editor was adhering to one of the style guides that we rely on.
For in-house editing, we rely on the following style guides on issues of citation format, grammar, and style, with a few minor exceptions:
- Oregon Appellate Courts Style Manual, available online at http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/UpdatedStyleManual2002.pdf.
- The Bluebook, A Uniform System of Citation
- Bryan Garner’s A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage
- The Chicago Manual of Style
- For forms, the American Bar Association’s A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting
The first style guide on this list takes top billing so that if a Bar member wants to quote from one of our books into a brief, they can copy and paste the quote from BarBooks™ and have the citations conform to the same style guide they need to follow to keep the court happy.
But some citation style issues aren’t specifically spelled out in the Oregon Appellate Courts Style Manual and so The Bluebook is the appropriate back-up.
The other three style guides are in our repertoire to provide consistency from one chapter to another and from one book to another. We don’t want to just be making stuff up, after all, because we’d all make it up a little differently.
So if you wonder why we do things the way we do in our publications, you can either check out these style guides to see if we are following them, or you can just ask us. Drop us a line at [email protected] if you have questions.
Introducing Our Newest Team Member
The OSB Legal Publications team is made up of four Attorney Editors, one Administrative Assistant, one Production Coordinator, and the Director. In August, one of our Attorney Editors left the Bar for a new adventure. Last week, our newest Attorney Editor started on his adventure here.
Yasha Renner earned his BS in Graphic Design from PSU and worked for a number of years at Rogue Ales Brewery as a graphic designer. He left Rogue and Oregon to attend Liberty University School of Law in Lynchburg, VA. He was on law review while at Liberty, a position he enjoyed immensely. In 2013, he graduated 4th in his class and was admitted to OSB.
Upon returning to Oregon after law school, Yasha was rehired by Rogue Ales Brewery as a database administrator and Chief IT Officer. While working at Rogue Ales, Yasha opened his own general practice with a focus on personal injury and estate planning.
Then he saw the posting for a Legal Publications Attorney Editor and decided it would be a good fit for his skill set, personality, and career goals. During the interview process, we decided we agreed. When we asked him if he could have one superpower, what would it be, he replied, “The power to read super fast.” That would definitely come in handy in this job.
We are very excited to have Yasha join the team! If you are a volunteer author, you may have the pleasure of having Yasha edit your submissions with his thorough yet reserved style.
Appeal and Review Wins Award
OSB Legal Publications has once again been recognized for our commitment to publishing quality legal resources. We received an award for a book we released in 2014.
The Association for Continuing Legal Education (ACLEA) has selected Appeal and Review: Beyond the Basics as the winner of its ACLEA’s Best Award of Outstanding Achievement in Publications. The physical award will be presented at ACLEA’s Annual Meeting in Chicago, Illinois in August and put on display in the lobby of the OSB Center.
Of course, Legal Pubs couldn’t have created this highly informative and innovative book without the help of our many volunteer editorial board members (in bold) and authors: Hon. Erika L. Hadlock; Edward J. Harri; Hon. Virginia L. Linder; James N. Westwood; Jerome Lidz; R. Daniel Lindahl; George W. Kelly; Erin Galli; Thomas W. Brown; Roy Pulvers; Hon. Erin C. Lagesen; Rolf Moan; Janet M. Schroer; Marjorie A. Speirs; Hon. Meagan A. Flynn; William F. Gary; Hon. Joel S. DeVore; Hon. Jack L. Landau; James W. Nass. Thanks to all of you for your hard work and dedication to this volunteer effort.
Appeal and Review: Beyond the Basics explores several areas of appellate practice and jurisprudence in greater depth than its companion volume, Appeal and Review: The Basics (OSB Legal Pubs 2010). The first introductory chapter provides thoughts on the convergence of theory and practice. In chapter 2, the authors discuss the principles that serve as the basis for familiar rules of appellate practice, including rules related to preservation, standards of review, and harmless error. The authors then explain how those principles should influence a lawyer’s analysis of whether to appeal or seek judicial review, balancing client considerations like the expense of appeal, the likelihood of prevailing, delay, and the possibility of having to pay the respondent’s attorney fees. The chapter 3 authors discuss the art of drafting appellate briefs, covering everything from appropriate structure to techniques for making briefs helpful and persuasive to appellate judges. Chapter 4 addresses oral argument from both sides of the bench, focusing on goals that all participants often do—and should—have for oral arguments. Both chapters 3 and 4 touch on the differences between practicing in the Oregon Court of Appeals and practicing in the Oregon Supreme Court. Finally, chapter 5 provides a comprehensive explanation of motion practice in both courts. All chapters reflect contemporary practices built on longstanding Oregon tradition.
Appeal and Review: Beyond the Basics is available on BarBooks™ to all Oregon Bar members or for purchase in print at the Bar’s online bookstore.
Giving Thanks
OSB Legal Publications would like to thank all of our volunteer authors and editorial review board members for their contribution to our books. We couldn’t do what we do without their tireless efforts and expertise. This year we thank the following bar members:
Criminal Law, 2013 revision
Laura Fine Moro — C. Amber Kinney — Kenneth Lerner — Ryan Lufkin — Kristin Carveth — Janet A. Klapstein — Hon. Richard L. Barron — Hon. John L. Collins — Michael E. Rose — Susan Russell — Michael J. Slauson — Shaun S. McCrea — Hon. Jamese L. Rhoades — Jonathan W. Diehl — Jeffrey Alan Howes — Kristen E. Boyd — Erin Galli — W. Douglas Marshall — Carolyn Alexander — Kristina Hellman — Daniel M. Carroll — Meg Garvin — Greg Rios — Margie Paris — Lisa J. Ludwig — Steven Griffin — Jamie K. Contreras — Anne Fujita Munsey — Joanna Jenkins — Ben Eder — Stephen Morgan — Katherine Green — Laura S. Anderson — Kendra M. Matthews — Laura Graser — Harris S. Matarazzo — Stephen A. Houze — Alex Bassos — Hon. Edward Jones — Timothy A. Sylwester — Michael L. Schmidt — Shelley Keller — Matthew J. Lysne — Ryan O’Connor — Kathleen M. Correll — Kathleen M. Cegla — Dan Bennett — Paul L. Smith — Hon. Joseph V. Ochoa — Ginger G. Mooney —Samuel A. Kubernick — Daina A. Vitolins
Appeal and Review: Beyond the Basics, 2014 edition
Jerry Lidz — R. Daniel Lindahl — George Kelly — Erin Galli — Thom Brown — Roy Pulvers — Hon. Erin C. Lagesen — Rolf Moan — Janet Schroer — Marjorie Speirs — Meagan Flynn — Bill Gary — Hon. Joel DeVore — Hon. Erika Hadlock — Hon. Jack Landau — James W. Nass — Edward Harri — Hon. Virginia Linder — James Westwood