The Toilet Won't Stop Running.
Consider Yourself Sued.
After Kramarsky v. Stahl Management, 92 Misc.2d 1030, 401 N.Y.S.2d 943 (N.Y.Sup. 1977) – where a landlord refused to rent to a woman because she was a lawyer – New York City amended its landlord/tenant law to prohibit discrimination on the basis of a "lawful occupation."
California has no such bar on discriminating on the basis of a "lawful occupation." Of the roughly 10 places we applied to before finally signing a lease for a house last night, fully a third of them expressed reservations to renting to a couple where both people were lawyers.
Why were they so worried? We should sue them. ALL OF THEM.
Categories:
california,
law,
new york
2 comments:
Well...as Yossi Vardi said from the platform at TechCrunch50 a couple of weeks ago, "It's just a shame about the 97% of lawyers who give all the rest a bad name." In other words, your profession does have a public image problem.
Mind you, I'm not saying I agree with such sentiments. My own recent interactions with lawyers have been helpful and pleasant.
Speak of the devil...
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/09/25/trademark-fight-intel-is-worried-you-might-think-it-is-a-chinese-travel-agency/
Whatever the technical merits of Intel's case, the suit is now a public relations disaster. Note that TechCrunch alone has over a million feed subscribers. And it wouldn't be surprising if the story were picked up by the mainstream media, which generally loves "David vs. Goliath" stories.
Post a Comment