they wont be bringing suit in that court again...

legally they cant take patients in if they cant do an adequate job treating them. i wouldnt be surprised if some of their regular staff was busy fixing the medical records. therefore they were probably short on workers and also unable to keep adequate medical records for patients. this is a big no-no in the health care industry. bottom line is that a hospital may send patients elsewhere if they cannot adequately treat them (ie. overcrowded, don't specialize in the needed area, etc.). They must, however, be sure not to send patients away simply based on that patient's ability to pay - so long as the hospital is eligible for federal funding of any sort (ie. medicaid, medicare). I don't see this as a situation where they are "dumping" patients. Therefore, it's both legal and smart. Failure to correctly treat patients could lead to huge malpractice suits. no one wants that.

the closer you got to central america, the smaller the "border" would be.. you've got the idea!

thats temporary. every industry is laying off people right now. and for that matter, i see far more lawyers in other specialty fields being laid off than those working in IP. typically IP firms are boutiques anyway and their clients are rather large and consistent with the amount of work they require.

Go to law school. I'm telling you, you will make bank. IP law is lucrative. I recommend law school to any science undergrad. There are tons of IP jobs out there and the field is growing fast. There are so few individuals who are science-minded that choose to go to law school and the IP jobs require this science background. I was a programmer and a web designer for many years but chose to get my BS in Economics because I was worried the CS field was dying out (this was right around the time all the jobs began being outsourced). Once I got to law school and found out that taking the PatentBar requires an undergrad degree in the sciences field, I wanted to kick myself... hard. IP lawyers are doing interesting work and making big dollars. My recommendation is goto law school and focus on becoming an IP lawyer for a computer company.

sounds more like an invasion of privacy tort to me than libel. plaintiffs counsel is (i think) referencing the 'public figure' exception that allows slightly more leeway in what may be said about one who holds oneself out to be a public figure. malice is an added element the plaintiff must show when the plaintiff is a public figure. the media can use this element as a shield from liability.

less is more, my friend. i'd toss the resume in a second if it came with an affidavit attesting to anything longer than 2 sentences.

1) a confidence level of 95% w/ interval of 10% isn't very good. you show me just one business operating on that level and i'll show you a bankruptcy filing. 2) the fact that the survey was 2/3 women seriously skews the results. at least 50/50 would be acceptable, but to derive more useful results it would be best to fit your population to demographic studies (ie. gamers that play violent games) having said that, i still agree that, yes, you can still draw something useful from the study. just not something very relevant.