Somewhere, stored in the Slaw archive, amidst the collected wisdom of this congregation, is the thread listing new collective nouns for groups within the legal profession.

Actually, it’s here.

Anyway, so that the contest doesn’t run interminably – and to kick start it – John and I are now able to announce the prize. It will be awarded two weeks, hence, as part of that day’s fillip, Simon F willing.

What’s below are paragraphs from e-mail exchanges between us setting out how we arrived at the prize, and what it will be. All explicit identifiers have been removed to protect . . . [more]

About two years ago there was a contest on Slaw to see who could come up with the best collective noun for, well, a legion, a conspiracy, a bombast, an argument, etc. of lawyers. I thought we might revisit the broader topic of collective nouns this Friday, and as a resource to help you follow along you might want to open another couple of tabs in your browser to these two sites (one, two) that have improbably long lists of collectives.

I’m resisting the temptation to delve into the history and origin of the whole business of . . . [more]

David Cheifetz and I consider that it would be a major contribution to both the English language and the profession if we had a collective noun for any or all of the groups that I have mentioned or, indeed, for any other group within the profession: a parade of judges, a snarl of litigators perhaps.
David and I (assisted by an impartial arbiter in the event of a tie) will choose the winning entries and offer the winners some unimaginably fabulous prizes.
There is a site, http://www.rinkworks.com/words/collective.shtml, where there is a longer (and more dubious) collection of collective nouns than . . . [more]

At the LSBC’s AGM tomorrow, several member resolutions will be up for a vote. Among them is a controversial resolution (Resolution 3) submitted by two BC lawyers that calls for changes to certain language in the LSBC’s Indigenous Intercultural Course. The language at issue references an unmarked burial site at the former Kamloops Indian Residential School. Various legal organizations have condemned Resolution 3 as being, among other things, “alarming Residential School denialism”, “an attack on the principles of Truth and Reconciliation”, an “insidious attempt to distort history” and as “undermin[ing] engagement with Indigenous communities”.

Resolution 3 follows . . . [more]

This is a post in a series to appear occasionally, setting out some articles, videos, podcasts and the like that contributors at Slaw are enjoying and that you might find interesting. The articles tend to be longer than blog posts and shorter than books, just right for that stolen half hour on the weekend. It’s also likely that most of them won’t be about law — just right for etc.

Please let us have your recommendations for what we and our readers might like.