Author: Ryan

We’re exploring some very cool ideas to clarify the stream of notes and emails in Highrise. We want to make it easier to scan the streams and differentiate notes from emails from comments. Along the way we’re also cleaning up a lot of complex, overly-DRY code. It’s a great project, but it’s not quite as simple as it sounded at first.

Our initial plan sounded simple:

“Redesign the recording streams.”

“Recording” is an abstraction for the things that appear in streams: notes, comments, emails and more. They’re just notes that appear in a stream, like a blog index. How hard can it be?

When I started working on the new design and touching the code, I realized that recordings have a ton of dependencies. I made a quick and dirty graffle to keep them all in my head:

Recordings appear in multiple places: “aggregated streams” like cases and the dashboard, and “non-aggregated streams” like the stream for a particular person. Recordings include comments, and comments are mixed in with all other recordings but also appear in dedicated “comment streams” on recording perma pages. Recordings can be filed, they show privacy status, they have special states if you move them out of the current stream, and on and on. None of these things are obvious at first glance.

And none of this is a problem. We can even use this new design iteration to reduce the complexity. But it’s a good reminder that things often look simpler on the surface. When you dig into an established feature there may be a lot of dependencies and factors that only the source code and some careful spelunking will reveal.

by Ryan McKeen

I don’t know.  The truth is that in my opinion Susan Bysiewicz would make a fantastic anything she wants to do. She’s intelligent and hardworking. In the interest of full disclosure, I’m a Democrat and would have voted for Susan Bysiewicz for Governor. I am not involved with nor have I ever been contacted by anyone running for attorney general from either party.

But this post isn’t about that. It’s about whether or not she’s legally qualified to serve. Keep in mind that I’m a lawyer engaged in the active practice of law who happens to devote some of his free time to this site. I’m not Bob Woodward. A few clicks of the google is as far as I go.

Let me begin by saying it’s very possible and perhaps likely that Ms. Bysiewicz is legally qualified to serve as attorney general. Many Connecticut legislators maintain law practices while serving in the General Assembly. It’s possible that something like that just didn’t make the cut in her online biography.

At any rate, even if there’s an easy answer, and that answer is “yes” the question is still worth asking. It’s a fair question and one that deserves an answer.

Here’s the relevant text of the statute that lays out the qualifications to serve as Connecticut’s attorney general:

…The Attorney General shall be an elector of this state and an attorney at law of at least ten years’ active practice at the bar of this state….Conn.Gen.Stat. Section 3-124.

Pretty straight forward, in order to serve as attorney general a person must be an attorney with at least ten years’ active practice.

According to the Judicial Branch website, Ms. Bysiewicz was admitted to practice law in Connecticut on November 21, 1986. If it weren’t for the words “active practice at the bar of this state” I wouldn’t be writing this post.

VoteSmart.org lists Ms. Bysiewicz’s professional experience as follows:

Attorney, Aetna Insurance Company, 1992-1994
Attorney, Robinson and Cole, 1988-1992
Attorney, White and Case Law Firm

If my math is right that’s 6 years active practice (Robinson and Cole and Aetna) at the Connecticut bar.

Here’s what Ms. Bysiewicz’s biography on the Secretary of State’s Website reads about her time at White and Case in New York City:

A graduate of Yale College and Duke University School of Law, she practiced corporate and international law at White and Case in New York City.

It’s possible the work Ms. Bysiewicz did at White and Case could qualify as practice at the Connecticut bar – she was licensed at the time.  However, given that she practiced international law in New York city it’s possible that her years at White and Case would not count as “active practice at the bar of this state”.

We know that Ms. Bysiewicz served as a State-Representative from 1993 to 1998.  It’s not clear from either her biography on her website or from Project Vote Smart that Ms. Bysiewicz was engaged in the “active practice” of law during these years. Serving in the legislature doesn’t qualify as the active practice of law at the Connecticut bar. It’s certainly possible she was working as a lawyer in private practice while she was serving but also possible she wasn’t.

Assuming that Ms. Bysiewicz’s time at White and Case counts as the active practice of law at the Connecticut bar that would mean she had accrued 8 years active practice by the time she left Aetna in 1994.  If not, then she would have had 6 years in active practice.

Either way, if Ms. Bysiewicz was not engaged in the active practice of law after she left Aetna and prior to her becoming Secretary of State she may not be legally qualified to be attorney general in large part because of the statute that defines the role of Secretary of State which reads in relevant part as follows:

The Secretary shall keep all the public records and documents and record all acts, orders, grants and resolutions of the General Assembly, including all resolutions of appointment and resolutions directing orders to be drawn on the Treasurer, and give true copies thereof when required. The Secretary shall keep the records and files of the Superior Court previous to May, 1798, and the original books and papers of the late Connecticut Land Company; provided the Secretary may turn over any such records, documents or papers to the State Library in accordance with the provisions of section 11-4c. The Secretary may give certified copies of any entries in such records, files, books or other papers and of the files and records of said Superior Court and of the Supreme Court, remaining in the office, which copies shall be legal evidence. The Secretary shall be the keeper of the seal of the state, which shall not be altered, and shall affix the same to acts, laws, orders, commissions, instruments and certificates, when requested or required by law. In accordance with established procedures, the Secretary may enter into such contractual agreements as may be necessary for the discharge of the Secretary’s duties. The Secretary shall receive an annual salary of one hundred ten thousand dollars and shall devote full time to the duties of the office. Conn. Gen. Stat. 3-77.

No matter how one slices it, time served as Secretary of State does not count for being engaged in the active practice of law at the Connecticut bar. There’s no requirement that the Secretary of State be an attorney because it’s not the practice of law. If the Secretary of State was engaged in the active practice of law she would have to be an attorney. Further, the statute requires the Secretary of State to devote full time duties to the office.

Ms. Bysiewicz has served as Secretary of State from 1998 to the present. That means at the very most she’s been engaged in the active practice of law for 12 years (from 1986 when she was licensed to 1998 when she became Secretary of State).

Who knows? I may get to cast my vote for her as Governor after all….or not.

by Ryan McKeen

I was asked this question last week and my response was “I think so, otherwise he or she would be a felon for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law!”

Yeah, I roll with an exciting crowd.

The question is actually kind of interesting because one does not have to be an attorney to be a justice on the United States Supreme Court.

Anyway conversations like that fuel the fire that is this blog.

…The Attorney General shall be an elector of this state and an attorney at law of at least ten years’ active practice at the bar of this state….Conn.Gen.Stat. Section 3-124.

As is often the case, the answer lies in the statutes.

by Ryan McKeen

It seems that the music is about to stop for real estate attorneys yet again.

2009 was the year of the refi. With interest rates at historic lows it made sense for many homeowners to lock in fixed rate loans at rates at or near 5%.

While attorneys weren’t doing record numbers of purchases and sales they were doing plenty of refinances.

Now this:

U.S. residential mortgage originations will plunge 40 percent this year to the lowest level in a decade as home refinancing demand sinks with rising mortgage rates, the industry’s main trade group said.

Lenders will underwrite $1.28 trillion in home loans this year, down from $2.11 trillion in 2009, the Mortgage Bankers Association said in its annual forecast on Tuesday. That would be the lowest since $1.14 trillion in 2000. Reuters.

With interest rates expecting to rise in 2010 it makes sense that refinances will decrease.

Short of a “hot” real estate market it looks like 2010 might be a tough year for real estate attorneys.

Suzanne at the 2010 Detroit Auto Show

It’s on. And we’re here (see the pic for proof … no, it wasn’t photoshopped;-)

Stay tuned for daily updates with news and impressions from the 2010 Detroit Auto Show…

“Those things that hurt, instruct.” -Ben Franklin

You don’t really know if your templates and CSS are well factored until you try to make changes.

Aren’t you oversimplifying this?

Yes. That’s the whole point.

—From the Steve Krug’s new book, Rocket Surgery Made Easy

By Ryan McKeen

In July of 2008, I wrote about Attorney General Blumenthal taking on the makers of a beer pong video game for the Nintendo Wii. In the name of protecting the children of Connecticut, Mr. Blumenthal forced the makers of the game to rename the game Pong Toss. Point Mr. Blumenthal.

Right now, it’s all about cell phone games for the kids. In between texts kids play all sorts of games on their iPods.

And guess what, in the App Store there are at least 3 virtual beer pong games. One of the games happens to be free.

The cold hard truth that kids in Connecticut have access to virtual beer pong games. The horror of it all!

With today’s announcement that Attorney General Blumenthal will seek one of Connecticut’s seats in the U.S. Senate, I hope that some intrepid reporter will ask him for an update on the war against virtual beer pong and whether or not he thinks federal legislation is necessary.

I can’t think of a better intro to the essential points of usability than this presentation by Steve Krug. I especially appreciate his “least you can do” approach. Enjoy.

Important: if something is important, say why and to whom. Use sparingly.

—The Economist Style Guide

by Ryan McKeen

I hope that you had a Happy New Year. I had a festive weekend. In between celebrating the new year and a family member’s new job – I attended a wedding on Saturday. The wedding was very nice.

The bride and groom couldn’t have bought better weather for a winter wedding. Their pictures will look like they got married in a snow globe.

While I was watching the beautiful bride and happy groom exchange vows, I started thinking of the legal requirements of the ceremony. Romantic, I know. Anyone thinking of taking the LSAT should reread the two previous sentences.

What are the requirements for a valid marriage ceremony in Connecticut?

1. The physical presence of the parties before an official licensed to perform a marriage ceremony in Connecticut; and

2. A third party official must witness or officiate at a ceremony wherein the parties each presently consent to marriage. Hames v. Hames, 163 Conn. 588 (1972).

That’s all that is required by law. No need to kiss the bride.

The price of shipping is imperfection. If you wait for your product to be perfect, you’ll never finish it. Fortunately you can decide which features should be closer to perfect and which can slack off a little. The Kindle DX is a good case in point. Reading and flipping pages on the Kindle is a wonderful experience. On the other hand, using the keyboard is painful. The keys are hard to press. The modifier keys are confusing. Mistakes are easy to make, slow to spot and hard to correct. Yet despite all these problems, I still love the device.

A good way to square the great overall experience with a bad feature is the “suckage to usage” ratio. You can take any feature and say “it sucks,” but that doesn’t tell you anything about the whole product until you factor in how often you use the feature. Have a look at this unscientific chart.

Feature	Suckage (1-5)	Usage	Contribution (1-5)
Reading	0	90%	0
Typing	5	3%	0.15
Switching books	1	7%	0.07
Total suckage			0.22

Suppose reading on the Kindle doesn’t suck at all (0 out of 5), typing sucks maximally (5 out of 5), and switching between books sucks a little (1 out of 5). Considering I spend 90% of my time just reading on the device, the contributions add up to a total suckage of only 0.22 out of 5. Inverted, that’s 4.78—basically a 5-star product.

It’s rational for the Kindle designers to skimp on the keyboard when every feature takes time and time is scarce. Maybe the third or fourth generation Kindle will change such that keyboard input becomes more important. Pressures do change over time. But for now, it’s a fair trade.

It’s easy to accept in theory that some parts of your own product won’t be up to standard. In practice, it’s hard to drop the sword. Nobody wants to release a feature that you know could be better. When this happens, try adding a factor of usage to the equation to see if perfection is really worth its price.

Next time you want to illustrate a flow or concept with a diagramming tool, throw away the source file as soon as you export the PNG or PDF. If you’re afraid to throw the source file away, you spent too much time on it.

by Ryan McKeen

I’m pretty proud of this. On Christmas Eve, two years ago, this blog went live. Most law blogs die quick deaths and with good reason: maintaining a blog is hardwork.

The mission of this blog has always been to bring the law to the people. My audience isn’t just law professors or lawyers it’s you. Whoever you are.

For me, this site is a labor of love. In fact, most of the things I write about have nothing to do with my practice. Believe it or not, I’ve never taken on a turkey law case. I spend most of my day writing technical briefs, pleadings, and memos about all sorts of things. I seize this space to write about cat attacks and judges who despise Halloween.

As a lawyer, this site broadens my perspective on Connecticut law. It keeps me informed, entertained, and engaged. Writing about illegal pets brings me a sense of joy. It reaffirms my love for the law.

The truth is that this blog doesn’t feel like work for me. If it did, it would soon cease to exist.

I’ve had more traffic on this site than I ever thought possible. This is my 384th post and there are 393 approved comments.

This blog has helped me work with the Statewide Grievance Committee to change a legal ethics rule. As a result of this blog, I’ve been interviewed by the CT Law Tribune and ABA Journal. I’m presently working on an article for the ABA journal. I’ve met some great people.

In sum, this blog has been a significant net plus for me. I hope it’s been at least a little net plus for you.

Thank you for reading. I wish you and yours a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Over the last few years I’ve noticed that as I’m giving a talk or a workshop, everyones’ antennas perk up when I turn to an example. It’s been a personal goal of mine to cut out as much preamble as possible and get straight into examples because they change the mood so drastically. Walking through an example says “here comes some reality.” You can theorize all you want, but examples force you to show that your theory holds. They allow the audience to test if what you say is true or not. And best of all, they turn the focus from abstract concepts to the mess and color of the real world.

I couldn’t help but think of the power of examples when I ran into this whirlwind talk about Kant’s Critique of Aesthetic Judgement illustrated exclusively with comic book art.

Would you have thought Kant could be so entertaining?

(via Schmüdde)