Interesting post. I've taken the opposite track. I do have a FB "fanpage" as well as linked in, twitter, and half a dozen other (more legally specialized) accounts. For the most part, all of these revolve around my law blog carried by the Oakland Press. My target audience is: client prospects, primarily, with a strong secondary audience of attorneys and judges. One of the things I like about the different accounts is that they are an excellent way to distribute my blog posts and overall newsfeed. In my humble opinion, such posts on a variety of sites enhances one's "search engine optimization". If you're looking for clients, you need to get picked-up by the search engines. In order to get picked-up by the search engines, you've got to post frequent, relevant content. In so doing, we all benefit. Sometimes, I think the readers of the ABA Journal are the types that wave wands and expect things to happen around them in their (large) law firms. The senior partner demands: "Get us to the top of that Internet search result; NOW." Neither FB, LI or Twitter (I hate that name) are going to do it for you. As you point out in your article, it's the networking and genuine sharing of fresh content that does it. Information flies around the world now, passing through our professional circles, at the speed of light. Ideas now instantaneously disseminated and digested worldwide. It used to take months, even years, for professional information to percolate. Of note: I will be presenting on this subject for ICLE in Ann Arbor on January 18, 2011. The seminar is sponsored by the Law Practice Management section of the SBM and titled: "How to Start a Law Practice". An interesting topic given these tough times. Your blog, website, and professional model will be features Jeanne; keep up the great work.

In Michigan, foreclosures are touching just about everyone. I've handled only a handful of divorces over the past 18-months that did not involve the strategy of a foreclosure or a short sale. Our law firm's blog posted an informative piece from the Denver, CO firm of Wink & Wink concerning the subject. You can check it out here: http://bit.ly/bVo6Cv

This jury instruction is a very good idea. There is so much information at everyone's fingertips, literally. As a litigator, I want at least the ground rules, the concept, to be explained about how cases should be decided on the facts presented in court, not what a juror thinks about the subjects or the names involved in the case. Juror's could easily have their minds swayed by what's out there on the Internet. Also agree with the above comment that jurors must be instructed why they are restricted from accessing information about the case from outside the courtroom.

Jeanne: Give you kudos for tracking this story over the past several months; even a year or more? This is the kind of story that grabs the attention of family law professionals and the general public alike. I feel so bad for this boy and his father. Not only has the boy lost his mother at such a young age, he undoubtedly made deep connections with his faux-family during the five years he spent down in Brazil. Also, your emphasis on the family member who also happens to be an "expert" on Parental Alienation "Syndrome" is spot on. What a farce. Keep up the excellent blog posts!

Jeanne, as usual, very interesting post about ISP addresses and contacts. I've saved the link and will be using it this very weekend in one of my wrongful death cases. Keep-up the high quality content of your outstanding blog.

This case is significant, not only for it's Second Amendment context, but also for the fact that no seizure occurred. The Supreme Court has a similar gun-ordinance case, McDonald -v- Chicago on its docket for oral argument in the spring.