To help trial attorneys, I am always looking for new legal trends, war stories, tips, and trap doors to share with you, my colleagues. If you have reactions to these tips, or tips of your own, drop me a line at [email protected].

And I am always happy to talk about these kinds of issues in your cases.

–Tim

An attorney is now a “vexatious litigant” for filing five unsuccessful writs and appeals

As an attorney, you might not be surprised to learn that—if you file serial meritless lawsuits in pro per—you, too, may be deemed a vexatious litigant. File five unsuccessful lawsuits within seven years, and that's what happens. But you might not realize that appeals count toward your five-lawsuit limit.

The vexatious litigant here graduated from U.C. Berkeley Law School, previously worked in Big Law at Wilson Sonsini, and is a current staff attorney at none other than the Commission on Judicial Performance. So the vexatious-litigant statute is definitely not a respecter of persons.

Of course, this only applies if you are in pro per. But even appellate challenges that have merit are often denied—and five of those and you're a vexatious litigant. So you should always consider hiring an appellate attorney.

This is a summary. Read the full article here.

New Cal.App.Law.Pod Episode: “Don’t Boies Schiller your brief—”Read all your cases!” says AI Legal Writing Prof. Jayne Woods”

Few lawyers and LRW instructors write and think more about AI than Professor Jane Woods of Mizzou Law, who offers this most important AI advice: If you haven't read the case, don't cite the case.

That would have saved Boies Schiller's bacon. We discuss the high-profile Scientology/Masterson appeal, and whether the Court of Appeal is going to strike plaintiff's respondent's brief because of the Boies Schiller attorneys hallucinated cases and otherwise wrong legal citations.

Some firms have reportedly banned em dashes in legal writing because they're seen as indicators of AI-generated text, highlighting how AI's stylistic preferences may be reshaping legal writing conventions.

This is a summary. Read the full article here.

New Cal.App.Law.Pod Episode: “Skating to Where the AI Puck is Going: ClioCon 2025 Insights”

Jeff Lewis reports from the 2025 Clio Cloud Conference in Boston. Day 1 was encouraging, but Jeff reports feeling Day 2 as a "gut punch": within about 5-10 years, many fundamentals of legal practice will be unrecognizable.

Here are a few ways legal industry leaders suggest you can skate to where the puck is going—rather than finding yourself behind by skating to where it is now. Clio CEO Jack Newton says there are billions in untapped legal services—and AI tools can help lawyers tap it. Clio's research suggests nearly three-quarters of current billable work could be automated. The game: find the redundancy, or else be the redundancy.

True, there are shiny objects out there, and as Tim says many will get "Sherlocked"—become obsolete as the underlying AI tech improves. But getting in the game is key—the sidelines are going to be a very unhappy place very soon.

This is a summary. Read the full article here.

New Cal.App.Law.Pod Episode: “What’s on Judges’ Minds, with Jimmy Azadian: From Threats to Judges to the ‘Turn It Down’ Law”

Jimmy Azadian is often in the room when federal judges get together to share their personal concerns about the job. When judges are asked to come speak to a group, Jimmy reports that top of mind are the recent threats to judges and the courts—whether from armed vigilantes, protesters, students, or senators.

Tune in for essential perspectives on judicial independence, constitutional interpretation, and strategic considerations that could impact your federal practice in the coming year.

This is a summary. Read the full article here.

New Cal.App.Law.Pod Episode: “Pronouns at the Supreme Court & AI Arbitrators”

The California Supreme Court's long-awaited "Taking Offense" decision on gender pronouns in elder care facilities introduces a new "captive audience" exception to the First Amendment. Tim worries this new judicial carve out may creep to other forums; Jeff is unperturbed.

Tim highlights potential "mission creep" with a "captive audience" rationale, potentially extending beyond elder care facilities to courthouses, government offices, and other venues where First Amendment protections could be weakened.

The American Arbitration Association announced a pilot program offering AI resolution of construction disputes with human oversight, signaling that AI's impact on legal practice may be just "a couple of years away" rather than decades.

This is a summary. Read the full article here.