By COREY KILGANNON
Published: July 9, 2007
AQUEBOGUE, N.Y., July 3 — In the 35 years since vines began sprouting out of its sandy soil, the North Fork of Long Island has fought to be recognized as a bona fide wine region, and now more than a million visitors a year visit the tasting rooms at its 30 vineyards to sample award-winning merlots and cabernet francs.
But this season, small signs bearing stern messages — “No Buses,” “No Limos,” “Appointment Only” — have sprouted outside many of the wineries. There also are reports of tastings gone wild involving intoxicated visitors who have tossed back full glasses of wine without regard to nose or body until they grabbed the brass spittoon for baser purposes. (more . . .)
by Michael Calderone
“I seem to be the last man standing here,” said Jeff Roth. Dressed in a sharp gray suit with a white handkerchief peeking from the pocket, Mr. Roth was 24 feet below sidewalk level, in the depths of the New York Times Building at 229 West 43rd Street.
Mr. Roth, a group-three clerk for The Times, is the keeper of the paper’s morgue, the files of millions of clippings that served as the institutional memory for a century. “There were probably 50 guys like me at one time, who knew where everything was.”
The clips currently take up a labyrinthine space, an intricate system of dusty file cabinets and stacked cardboard boxes. Only one elevator currently goes from the Times lobby down to the basement. It was once the pressroom, but the presses were packed up and shipped to the Philippines in 1997. (more. . .)
New York Law Journal
The involvement of the bar in the formulation of new attorney advertising restrictions marked an unprecedented collaboration between the legal community and court administrators, and one entered into with considerable consternation, a top judge revealed Thursday.
Eugene F. Pigott Jr., now a judge of the New York Court of Appeals, said the presiding justices were reluctant to solicit opinions from the bar in drafting a new disciplinary rule on advertising, largely because they had never done so before. But ultimately the judges “knew what we didn’t know” and began a cooperative venture, he said.
Pigott, who was presiding justice of the Appellate Division, 4th Department, when the new rules were first crafted, suggested ground may have been broken for a new relationship between the rule makers and practitioners.
“This was the first time we ever asked for input,” Pigott said yesterday at the New York State Bar Association’s annual meeting. “But I think we knew what we didn’t know, and we didn’t really know how it would impact practice.”
The presiding justices last June proposed amending the code of professional conduct to add sweeping new restrictions on attorney advertising. However, rather than just impose the rules, the justices opened a comment period. Approximately 100 attorneys and virtually all of the major bar groups expressed concerns, which are reflected in the final product. (more…)
New rules governing lawyer advertising can be viewed on the New York Office of Court Administration’s website here.