{"id":30091,"date":"2016-11-15T17:38:57","date_gmt":"2016-11-15T22:38:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=30091"},"modified":"2016-11-15T17:38:57","modified_gmt":"2016-11-15T22:38:57","slug":"the-pelican-brief-the-pelican-brief","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=30091","title":{"rendered":"The Pelican Brief, The Pelican Brief?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Although I am deliberately moving away from legal stories here, I still can’t help peeking at law headlines that make me think, Hmm?<\/p>\n

And here is one from the Law Journal. Take a look–it’s fast, just an abstract–and see if you, too, don’t start thinking about “The Pelican Brief.” Was Grisham prescient?<\/p>\n

P.S. Credit to the editors for a rockin’ witty headline.<\/p>\n

\n

Family That Was Rooked for a Rookery Asks for Help From Supreme Court<\/em><\/h1>\n<\/div>\n

Commentary by Mark Miller and Katie Duke, Daily Business Review<\/small><\/em><\/p>\n

\n
\n

Two Florida courts have rubber stamped the elimination of development rights without compensation to the family that owns a Florida Keys island teeming with birds, write attorney Mark Miller and law student Katie Duke.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Although I am deliberately moving away from legal stories here, I still can’t help peeking at law headlines that make me think, Hmm? And here is one from the Law Journal. Take a look–it’s fast, just an abstract–and see if … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[337],"tags":[1180],"class_list":["post-30091","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-legal-news","tag-conservation-law"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t