Based on this news story-I’m voting NO on Amendment 1, well at least I think I am. I hate these questions, they all feel like they are designed to make you feel like an idiot. Lawyers in the audience, please help!

Bill Clinton lays it out. Preach it Bill.

Want to Defeat Nathan Deal? Here is a ridiculously easy way to volunteer! Most all of this is done from your computer, and I suspect they don’t care if you do it in your pjs.

Don’t be a Sue!

Here is a totally random household tip: Need to polish a lot of silver quickly? Line the sink with aluminum foil, pour in really hot water, add salt and baking soda and drop the silver in. Boom, some chemical reaction makes all the tarnish vanish. It works, honest.

Can’t make it to DC for the Jon Stewart rally? Looks like a bunch of cool  people have put together a watch party at Manuel’s Tavern that day! I’ll be stopping by in between campaign events. Statewide candidates- you should too! Looks like the whole thing was organized on FaceBook… here are details

There’s no better time for us to regain sanity in Atlanta and we would love to attend the Washington, D.C. event, but some of us have stuff to do! Come out to Manuel’s Tavern, 602 N. Highland Avenue, Atlanta from 12-3pm on 10/30, and bring your indoor voice! Time to take it down a notch, Atlanta!


8 Responses to Open Thread-Weekend Edition

  1. JMPrince says:

    ‘Tall Paul’, now appearing as an elder truth telling sage absolutely unloads on the banksters. WSJ, September 23, 2010

    “Volcker Spares No One in Broad Critique

    By Damian Paletta

    Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker scrapped a prepared speech he had planned to deliver at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago on Thursday, and instead delivered a blistering, off-the-cuff critique leveled at nearly every corner of the financial system…”

  2. JerryT says:

    What is the matter with the Florida Democratic Party?

    They sent out a mailer on behalf of Ron Klein that included his opponents Social Security number. OK, maybe an oversight, but… the mailer is about a tax lien his tea-Party opponent had back in 2005, that was paid off within 4 months. wtf? is that all they got? Allen west is crazy. They should have plenty of stuff to use without digging up marginal stuff like that.

  3. AmyMorton says:

    The whole “boom” thing scares me.

  4. Sorry but the silver from my grandmother (God rest her soul) is about my only inheritance. Not taking a chance on that.

  5. Jen B. says:

    Reasonable non-competes are already upheld in Georgia. Amendment One is bullshit.

    • griftdrift says:

      Good enough for me.

      • Tony says:

        Jules, I’m with you on the wording of amendments. And, my default position is to vote “no” to everything.

        Jen, Amendment One is not outright bullshit. There are pros and cons.

        For purposes of full disclosure, I routinely represent clients looking to enforce restrictive covenants. I also routinely represent clients looking to defeat restrictive covenants.

        Under the current law, if an employer goes too far with a restrictive covenant, none of the employment agreement’s covenants can be enforced. Because there is no set standard for what is reasonable in a given circumstance, there is always uncertainty — for example, a nation-wide restriction is reasonable in one context but may be unreasonable in another. If a covenant is found unreasonable and unenforceable, the employee is usually free to apply her knowledge and relationships at her new employer, who is usually the biggest beneficiary of a covenant being defeated.

        Amendment One would allow the court to enforce an agreement up to the point that it is reasonable, by modifying (or “blue penciling”) the agreement. For example, an unreasonable 10-year restraint on working for a competitor may be modified to be a reasonable 3-year restriction.

        The pros of adopting blue penciling include:
        -Provides some certainty at the outset (when the employment relationship begins) that a business’s proprietary and/or confidential information will be protected, at least to the extent reasonable under the circumstances.
        -Philosophically respects the idea that a bargained-for contract provision should be enforced, even if only in part.
        -May eliminate the need to have a lawyer involved in restrictive covenants on the front end. Given that it is such a high-stakes wager right now, a lawyer should review every restrictive covenant before the agreement is entered into. This can be costly.

        The cons include:
        -Judicial modification of contracts is not a sound practice generally and may lead to over-interference.
        -Permits enforcement of contract provisions that, as drafted, are an unreasonable restraints on fair competition.
        -As Jen points out, reasonable restrictions are already enforceable under the current law.
        -In theory, under the current law, parties actually think about the particular circumstances of an employment relationship on the front end to come up with a fair set of restrictions on post-employment conduct.