i'm drinking beer and writing a paper at the same time

[Bob]

law school more like lol school

[Dorothy Wood]

gimme dem beers!

[Bob]

*beer*

i know what you're thinking, this is a horrible idea, but no! it's actually pretty brilliant, because i have incentive now. i have to finish this motherfucker quickly before i get too drunk to think

obviously the best way to do this is to post in great detail on the internet about how brilliant this idea is instead of working

[Dorothy Wood]

why are you writing a paper on a friday night?

I am declining an invitation for mexican foods and margaritas because I'm sick, but I will drink some internet beer, so thank you.


I wonder what it is about cold medicine that makes me into a retard. I swear, I stabbed myself with various sharp things at work today accidentally and dropped stuff on the floor. my brain broke. probably. what is this thread about?

[Pres Zount]

I think that's a horrible idea! Oh wait, you've already covered your bases.

[ggirlballa]

well since you're drinkin get off of here & get writing before it kicks in as u planned it

[Bob]

why are you writing a paper on a friday night?

I am declining an invitation for mexican foods and margaritas because I'm sick, but I will drink some internet beer, so thank you.


I wonder what it is about cold medicine that makes me into a retard. I swear, I stabbed myself with various sharp things at work today accidentally and dropped stuff on the floor. my brain broke. probably. what is this thread about?

so i have some free time tomorrow to work on my other project (and i'm only doing that on saturday night so i have some time on sunday to work on my homework for monday, which i'm probably not going to get to because of all these projects)

i have to do laundry in there somewhere too

lol school

[Schmeltz]

Hmmm, I'm working on a history paper at the moment. A beer or two would really hit the spot! Maybe I'll go get some.

[Loppfessor]

sounds like the only thing your drunk ass is "writing" is posts on here...get to work mister!

[mikizee]

laundry.... fuckin laundry. i gotta do some. but its raining.

[Randetica]

blame it on the rain

[mikizee]

thats exactly what im doing

i always liked those milli vanilli guys, what ever happened to them? still touring?

[Bob]

sounds like the only thing your drunk ass is "writing" is posts on here...get to work mister!

pssh i'm writing

writing more than you

see

The Human Rights Law and Disparate Impact
The New York State Statute governing disparate impact claims is the New York State Human Rights Law (“Human Rights Law”), N.Y. Exec Law § 290 (McKinney 1974) et. seq. The statute authorizes the creation of the New York State Division of Human Rights (“NYSDHR”). N.Y. Exec Law §293 (McKinney 2000). The statute authorizes the NYSDHR to investigate violations of the Human Rights Law and to hold public hearings before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) to adjudicate claims of violations. N.Y. Exec Law §295 (2003). Any party that is aggrieved by a decision of the NYSDHR after a public hearing has a right to file a petition in their county’s trial court for judicial review. N.Y. Exec Law §298 (McKinney 2000).
The Human Rights Law makes no specific reference to employment practices that result in a disparate impact; it states in relevant part only that:
1. It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice:

(a) For an employer or licensing agency, because of the age, race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, military status, sex, disability, predisposing genetic characteristics, or marital status of any individual, to refuse to hire or employ or to bar or to discharge from employment such individual or to discriminate against such individual in compensation or in terms, conditions or privileges of employment.

N.Y. Exec Law §296 (McKinney 2005). However, the Court of Appeals of New York has interpreted this language so that it extends to claims of disparate impact as well as disparate treatment. State Division of Human Rights v. Kilian Mfg. Corp., 35 N.Y.2d 201, 209 (N.Y. 1974) (a standard or practice "fair in form but discriminatory in operation" as to employment or promotional opportunity is within the reach of the Human Rights Law).
Prima Facie Case of Disparate Impact Under the Human Rights Law
Similar to a Title VII analysis, the prima facie case of disparate impact under the Human Rights Law has three elements. First, the plaintiff must prove that an employment practice that is neutral on its face and in terms of intent has an adverse impact on a protected class of persons. New York State Office of Mental Health v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 645 N.Y.S.2d 926, 928 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996). If the plaintiff is successful, the burden of proof shifts to the employer to show that the disputed practice is sufficiently related to a legitimate business necessity. People v. New York City Transit Authority, 59 N.Y.2d 343, 349 (N.Y. 1983). If the employer successfully does so, the burden of proof shifts back to the plaintiff to suggest a reasonable alternative to the disputed practice that will achieve the employer’s goal without having a discriminatory effect. Becker v. City of New York, 671 N.Y.S. 2d 88, 91.
A Facially Neutral Employment Practice With A Discriminatory Impact
In order to prevail on the first element of the prima facie case, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that a facially neutral employment practice has a disproportionate effect on a protected class of persons. New York State Office of Mental Health, 645 N.Y.S.2d at 928. While statistics are a useful tool in accomplishing this task, simply showing a statistical disparity in an employer’s workforce is not enough; the specific employment practice responsible for the imbalance must be identified, and the statistical evidence must be of a kind and degree sufficient to show that the disputed practice caused the exclusion of the protected class of persons. 645 N.Y.S.2d at 928.



of course in microsoft word it looks much prettier than that

[Loppfessor]

zzzzzzzzzz..............zzzzzzzzzz......better switch to shots buddy

[ScarySquirrel]

Drinking alcohol during class was one of the best/worst ideas ever. I'd recommend it to almost anyone. It can make for an interesting day of class, at least.

Just get a 2 liter of Coca-Cola, dump some out (or drink it ahead of time) and fill the missing space with Captain Morgan (or whatever you like to drink). Have a few sips before class and continue it throughout.

[Bob]

oh man, i just had such a scare

there's this case that i'm relying on heavily for my analysis, only i thought i just discovered that the case doesn't actually discuss the statute that i'm analyzing! that would be disastrous at this point, i don't know how i'd overlook a thing like that, or recover from it for that matter

only it turns out it was a false alarm, because it refers to the statute by "section 296 of the executive law" and not "the human rights law", which is the more popular name

lol oh my god what a fright, can you believe that?

[Tzar]

BOB TOLD US HE WAS HARCORE!

[ggirlballa]

oh man, i just had such a scare

there's this case that i'm relying on heavily for my analysis, only i thought i just discovered that the case doesn't actually discuss the statute that i'm analyzing! that would be disastrous at this point, i don't know how i'd overlook a thing like that, or recover from it for that matter

only it turns out it was a false alarm, because it refers to the statute by "section 296 of the executive law" and not "the human rights law", which is the more popular name

lol oh my god what a fright, can you believe that?

omg omg u made me spill my water

[Dorothy Wood]

that sure was a fright indeed!

[Documad]

The New York State Statute governing disparate impact claims is the New York State Human Rights Law (“Human Rights Law”), N.Y. Exec Law § 290 (McKinney 1974) et. seq. The statute authorizes the creation of the New York State Division of Human Rights (“NYSDHR”). N.Y. Exec Law §293 (McKinney 2000). The statute authorizes the NYSDHR to investigate violations of the Human Rights Law and to hold public hearings before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) to adjudicate claims of violations. N.Y. Exec Law §295 (2003). Any party that is aggrieved by a decision of the NYSDHR after a public hearing has a right to file a petition in their county’s trial court for judicial review. N.Y. Exec Law §298 (McKinney 2000).
Why aren't you using the current version of the statute? Aren't you supposed to cite the current year unless the statute has been amended and you're citing a prior version?

What is McKinney?

Plus that et. seq. is in the wrong place.

[Randetica]

thats exactly what im doing

i always liked those milli vanilli guys, what ever happened to them? still touring?


one of them died you heartless bitch!

[Bob]

Why aren't you using the current version of the statute? Aren't you supposed to cite the current year unless the statute has been amended and you're citing a prior version?

What is McKinney?

Plus that et. seq. is in the wrong place.

i wasn't sure about the et. seq to be honest

McKinney's is the name given to west's database of new york's state statutes...for example it's McKinney's Executive Law section 296 (i bluebooked it, i'm positive i cited it right except for maybe the year).

i was confused about how to cite the year, though...which year do i cite? i mean, the statute was enacted in i think 1954, but the different sections of it have all been amended at different times. at the top of westlaw, for example, s 296 says "effective august 2005", while s 295 says "effective june 2000" and s 290 says "see text amendments", so i did, and the most recent amendment was 1974.

or by current year, do you mean 2007?

to be honest though, i can cite better drunk than anyone else in my class can sober

not to brag but they suck at it

[Bob]

anyway it doesn't matter if this thing's a piece of shit right now. what i'm writing right now is the first time any of us are writing anything down related to the final project...it's a group project, i'm working on my part for the first time now...then we're going to put them all together and edit them into one "cohesive" document (i'm on the 4 person team responsible for establishing a single voice...figure that one out) that will be our very very shitty official first draft

there are no expectations for this thing not to suck right now

[Kid Presentable]

If I read bob's stuff, my bucket of a brain will pour out some of the easy stuff I'm struggling to learn.

[Knuckles]

I wish I could adopt Bob.

Then when I got really old he could take care of me (cause you know he's going to make lots of lawyer money) and make me lol while I pee in my Depends.

[Bob]

alright i think i solved the mystery of the year problem...the bluebook says to cite to the year of the code (which turned out to be 2006) unless you're using an older version, which i'm not, so that's that.

but now i'm getting thrown off by the Mckinney thing, because to my knowledge, "McKinney's consolidated laws" is the official code for new york statutes, and the bluebook seems to be telling me that i only need to include the name of the code in the parentheses if i'm using an unofficial code, which i don't think i am...however, the bluebook also tells me, in the new york statute area, that the proper form of citation for this code is "N.Y. [subject] Law s X (McKinney year)", which is why i tossed the mckinney in there. and early in the bluebook, where they give you examples of how to cite statutes, one of the examples is actually a new york statute, and the "mckinney" is in the parentheses too.

bluebook:rolleyes:

but you know, if slightly off citations is the worst thing going on with this paper, i'm going to just jerk off in the middle of class, that's how excited i'd be

this is gonna be a rough project

[ToucanSpam]

I tried writing a paper and drinking one night, it turned out rather well. 85 to be exact.


Keep doing it Bob, there's no reason to stop.

[Documad]

I am not familiar with that statute. In my state, the official statutes are printed by the legislature, so it's: Minn. Stat. § 609.01 (2006). The statutes are published in even numbered years, so I'd go to the books for 2006 and if I'm citing the current law, then the first time I cite each new section of the statutes, I'd use (2006). If I was talking about the older version of that statute to show how the law had changed, that's the only time I'd have an earlier year in the (___).

If you're using an unofficial reporter published by a company, I don't know what you do for a year. I suppose you would use the year in the cover of the book. But if you're getting it off the internet, it is probably more difficult to know what year.

In real life, you're supposed to cite the official reporter, not the unofficial one, but you would cite the unofficial one if you needed to cite an annotation that's not in the official statute. In real life, you would never need to do that because no one is going to rule in your favor based on an annotation.

I never use et seq. I'd say: The Human Rights Law is found at Minn. Stat. §§ 609.01-.54 (2006). But if you want to use et seq, it's probably Minn. Stat. § 609.01, et seq (2006).

[Pres Zount]

Crazy lawyer talk! I can't tell if Documad is telling Bob off, or not.

[mikizee]

i like boobies.

[Documad]

I'm a slow typer and so I didn't get to read what Bob wrote until after I was done typing. So it's out of order and it looks like I'm telling him something after he already said it.

[Documad]

I got the 18th edition of the bluebook today, but I leave it at work.

Law school is probably a lot easier with the internet, but the citation part is probably harder. If you're holding the book in your hands I think it's easier to cite. I have no idea what is up with new york's statutes. It's the same state that calls their trial court a supreme court and their higher court a court of appeals. That's so fucked up.

[Bob]

yeah i'm not even 100% positive what et seq. even means, i just saw it in a bunch of the cases and secondary sources i was reading and decided it looked sexy, so i used it.

i honestly think mckinney's IS the official code, but i'm just not sure. i started my research in the books in the library, and the books were called "mckinney's consolidated laws of new york" or some such. i didn't see anything else that looked like a code, unofficial or not (although northeastern's library isn't exactly magnificent). then i looked up statutes on westlaw and again, they're all mckinney's. the main statute database is mckinney's, too. no "official unannoted code of new york" or whatnot. courts and secondary sources that cite the statute all cite mckinney's too.

i've decided, i'm leaving the mckinney in

and i'm done with the paper for now too so i'm gonna drink more

[Knuckles]

Crazy lawyer talk! I can't tell if Documad is telling Bob off, or not.

Yeah, I now feel much dumber for having read this thread.

[Documad]

Bob, you should NEVER rely on this for your guide, but how do the higher NY appellate courts cite their statute? If they're using the McKinney thing, then you're probably doing the right thing.

[Bob]

I got the 18th edition of the bluebook today, but I leave it at work.

Law school is probably a lot easier with the internet, but the citation part is probably harder. If you're holding the book in your hands I think it's easier to cite. I have no idea what is up with new york's statutes. It's the same state that calls their trial court a supreme court and their higher court a court of appeals. That's so fucked up.

YEAH! that took me a while to figure out. and the bluebook was no help, because it lists like 5 bizarre specialty courts in between the high court and the main appellate court, so i had no idea which one to use. i figured it out though.

the appellate court is called "supreme court, appellate division", and the high court is "the court of appeals". oh, obviously

fucking new york

[ggirlballa]

i keep checking on this thread but end up getting sucked into reading law-lingo

oh well.......

[Bob]

Bob, you should NEVER rely on this for your guide, but how do the higher NY appellate courts cite their statute? If they're using the McKinney thing, then you're probably doing the right thing.

they flip flop. some cases say "mckinney's executive law s 296", some cases say "NY executive law s 296", others just say "executive law s 296" (and none of them have anything in parentheses, not even a date) but they all link back to the same statute, which has "mckinney's executive law s 296" right there at the top of the page.

i'm 98% positive that i'm citing it correctly in my paper, though. it's the courts that are wrong (seriously).

[Documad]

I don't know what et seq literally means, but you use it when you're citing a whole part of a statute (the human rights act), and like I did above, you can either cite the first and last section of the act and separate it like a dash (like you would for pages) : Minn. Stat. §§ 609.01-.54 (2006).

Or you can say "609.01 (the first section of the act) and the pages that immediately follow that section" by doing this: Minn. Stat. § 609.01, et seq. (2006). But there might be another § in there and I don't know how to punctuate it so I do the one above because I'm sure I know how to do it.

I've been drinking as well and had to give one of my new underlings shit today over bad bluebook which caused me to flashback to law review days and it shook me to my core and so I'm probably not making sense.

[Documad]

Bob, I actually tried to find the NY code on the internet and everything linked me to a shitty webpage. Even the NY senate site sent me to some shitty webpage. In my state, it would never be that way. I'll bet NY legislature gave up on publishing their own books and it is McKinney.

(Westlaw is useless for statutes in my opinion because they always send you to an annotated unofficial version.)

[Documad]

I'll have the rest of you know that citation form is probably the most interesting thing you learn in law school. :p

[mikizee]

if thats the most interesting thing then i want no part in it!!

[Bob]

I'll have the rest of you know that citation form is probably the most interesting thing you learn in law school. :p

when i first was asked to read the blue pages of the bluebook in my first or second week, i was all "WTF IS THIS SHIT, 'UNDERLINE UP TO BUT NOT INCLUDING THE SECOND COMMA' I DIDN'T COME TO LAW SCHOOL FOR THIS CRAP" but to be honest i'm actually kind of enjoying it in a sick little way. everyone else in my class hates it, and apparently most of them really aren't very good at it, but i don't see what's so hard about it, generally. i mean yeah, you run into weird situations like this now and then, and some things are harder to cite than others (session laws are disgusting) but i dunno, i kind of like it.

that's interesting to know that westlaw is so worthless for statutes (well, official statutes anyway, annotated statutes are still really useful for research purposes as far as my experience has been)...but i'm really kind of boned on that for this, because there really isn't much to work with in the library.

i bet westlaw has them somewhere though, if they even exist. there are so many databases on this thing you need a wizard to find the one you're looking for. i'm sure i've seen unannotated statutes somewhere.

[Bob]

i'm looking at the bluebook more closely and i think new york is just weird, i don't think it has an unannotated official code. i looked at all the other states, and most of them have something like "mass general laws" and then "mass general laws annotated", and for the first, you just cite (year), but for the second, you cite (west year)...new york, however, has nothing with just a (year) citation, it's either gould, or mckinney, or something...i think you're right, they probably just stopped publishing their statutes and let this mckinney guy do it. what clout this man must have.

[Documad]

The availability of state statutes and tricks you can use in navigating them varies from state to state. West is trying to input them all. My state is not as important to west for some reason (even though half my class went to work for west). I've found so many typos in cases and statutes on westlaw that for statutes if it's important in a case I pull the books--but then I have the books in my office. And annotated statutes on line are a good way to get started on research.

Bob, you're going to be a great lawyer. If you're nutty enough to enjoy the bluebook, you're going to be willing to dig into the details when you need to on substantive things. And I can tell from what you drunk posted that you're getting the hang of writing. It's a big improvement from your first legal writing post.

[milleson]

I ate an entire pint of Ben & Jerry's Chocolate Fudge Brownie ice cream while reading this thread.

[Bob]

The availability of state statutes and tricks you can use in navigating them varies from state to state. West is trying to input them all. My state is not as important to west for some reason (even though half my class went to work for west). I've found so many typos in cases and statutes on westlaw that for statutes if it's important in a case I pull the books--but then I have the books in my office. And annotated statutes on line are a good way to get started on research.

Bob, you're going to be a great lawyer. If you're nutty enough to enjoy the bluebook, you're going to be willing to dig into the details when you need to on substantive things. And I can tell from what you drunk posted that you're getting the hang of writing. It's a big improvement from your first legal writing post.

oh....that wasn't really drunk posting actually, haha. i only had the one beer and decided that i probably really shouldn't have any more because i really needed to get this thing done tonight.

i was drunk on law. my legal writing is much less drunk sounding than my internet writing (i hope)

[Documad]

I understood everything you said, and I'm very rusty on human rights law.

[cosmo105]

i'm having a beer too, but my semester doesn't start for another week. we're on a weird schedule.

i'm drinking beer my mom gave me. i felt a little weird accepting it from her. i was just going to take 2 or 3 from the bunch she had on a table in the garage, but she said, "wait, i have a 6-pack in a box that you can take!" uh, okay mom. :o