A series of videos created by Boston law firm Choate Hall & Stewart echoes the "Mac vs. PC" ads created by Apple. The video series, called "Choate vs. Megafirm," features a frustrated Megafirm employee complaining about his firm, while a self-assured Choate employee sings her employer's praises.

However, sometimes law firms recognize when their attempts to be hip go too far. Los Angeles firm Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges pulled a video from their Web site before it even went live. The video, titled "A Day in the Life of an Associate," followed a jeans-wearing associate named Ivey who plays Ultimate Frisbee in between meetings with partners.

"Some of the associates, some of the partners, thought it was too contrived; maybe corny was probably a better word," said A. William Urquhart, the firm’s hiring partner.

"They violated the integrity of the game," Mayer's attorney, Bruce Afran, told The Associated Press. "This is a way of punishing Belichick and the Patriots."

Mayer is seeking more than $184 million in damages for Jets ticket holders.

Belichick was fined $500,000 by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, and the team was fined $250,000 for violating a league rule that prohibits clubs from using a video camera on the sidelines for any purpose -- including recording signals relayed to opposing players on the field. New England also must forfeit a first-round draft pick next year if it makes the playoffs or a second- and third-rounder if it doesn't.

"They were deceiving customers," said the 48-year-old Mayer. "You can't deceive customers."

The lawsuit maintained that because other teams found illegal videotaping by the defendants, Jets ticket holders should be compensated for all games played in Giants Stadium between the Jets and Patriots since Belichick became head coach in 2000.

The two calculated that because customers paid $61.6 million to watch eight "fraudulent" games, they're entitled to triple that amount -- or $184.8 million -- in compensation under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

"How many times have the Patriots done this? We find it hard to believe they did it just once," Mayer said. "We just want to get to the truth of the matter of what the Patriots did to the Jets. I think the ticket holders are genuinely concerned about it. This is a type of misrepresentation."

Patriots spokesman Stacey James declined to comment on the lawsuit.

Mayer and Afran, who consider themselves public interest lawyers, have been thorns in the side of New Jersey politicians for years, filing lawsuits and demanding investigations to advance their grievances. They are well known in the state but generally have had little success in their causes.

Both have lost bids for elected offices, and Mayer once served as a presidential campaign adviser to Ralph Nader.

Their demand in March for a probe of Gov. Jon S. Corzine's gifts to a former girlfriend was rejected by a federal prosecutor. In 2006, a judge vetoed their effort to block Corzine's appointment of Rep. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., to fill the governor's seat in the U.S. Senate.

They also failed to get a court to order a special election to replace Gov. James E. McGreevey when he resigned in 2004.

Now, they're taking on the Patriots.

Their latest lawsuit asserted that the secret videotaping violated the contractual "expectations and rights" of Jets ticket holders "to observe an honest match played in compliance with all laws and regulations."

The actions of Belichick and the Patriots violated federal and state racketeering laws, as well as the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and New Jersey Deceptive Business Practices Act, according to the lawsuit.

"Having been a lifelong Jets fan, as soon as I heard this, I was completely outraged," Mayer said. "The NFL just slapped them on the wrist. I'm a consumer lawyer, and this is consumer fraud."

Fabian was indicted by a federal grand jury last month on charges of a $32 million computer equipment leasing scheme. The grand jury alleges Fabian used the money to buy beach property, travel on jets and set up the nonprofit Centre for Management.

The center bills itself as a resource that helps other nonprofits operate more efficiently and use technology better. The center is not a defendant in Fabian's criminal case, but it is required to provide monthly financial reports to the federal court and not to make any financial transactions outside the ordinary course of business.

The award will be formally announced next month. It recognizes firms that provide free, or pro bono, legal services to the community.

Eckert Seamans is being honored for administering the county's Custody Conciliation Project, which provides free attorneys to disadvantaged people involved in custody disputes and works to help them reach custody agreements without litigation.

Most McKissock lawyers are expected to follow name partner Peter Hoffman to Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott while two other partners, Reed Haywood and John McGrath, will be joining Dickie McCamey & Chilcote. Like Burns White, both of those firms are based in Pittsburgh. Name partner Bruce McKissock has yet to decide where he will practice after being conflicted out of joining Eckert Seamans.

When the new group arrives, Burns White, Pittsburgh's 10th-largest law firm, will have 81 lawyers spread over Philadelphia; Pittsburgh; Plymouth Meeting, Pa.,; Princeton, N.J., and Wheeling, W. Va. The firm focuses on litigation, business law and transportation law.

The Mundy group will continue to work from offices formerly occupied by McKissock & Hoffman located at 1818 Market St., 13th floor, in Center City at least through the end of next month, Mundy said.

O'Brien also appealed the original ruling, claiming the court didn't properly calculate the amount of damages due and that OSU shouldn't have been able to reduce the sum because of bonus amounts they previously paid.

O'Brien was fired after he told former OSU Athletics Director Andy Geiger that he made the loan to the family of Aleksandar Radojevic, a prospect from Serbia. Radojevic never played for the Buckeyes, but O'Brien said he made the loan because his family was in financial straits following the death of Radojevic's father. Geiger reported the transaction to the NCAA in May 2004 and O'Brien was terminated in June, according to court documents.

The ruling that awarded O'Brien the judgment found that OSU's termination wasn't for a "material breach," defined as an act that defeats the entire purpose of the contract. The appeals court found that "NCAA compliance was but one of O'Brien's many duties."

The court added in its ruling that the stipulation in O'Brien's contract, approving termination for a material breach or NCAA violation, didn't allow OSU to determine a violation occured before the NCAA handed it down. The termination created "a 'bootstrapping effect' by allowing OSU to substitute its own judgment for that of the NCAA," the opinion stated.

The NCAA didn't issue an official ruling regarding O'Brien's violations until early 2006, and "even if it would have been proper to terminate him at that time, much of the liquidated damages awarded to O'Brien in the judgment of the trial court would have been earned as salary," the court said.

OSU is expected to issue a statement Thursday afternoon.

"There's some good news," Fidler told the jurors before letting them go for the day. "We will give you new instructions that may be a benefit to you." Jurors will return this morning.

On Tuesday, the jury of nine men and three women said it was split 7-5 on whether famed record producer Spector, 67, shot actress Lana Clarkson, 40, on Feb. 3, 2003. The jury was not allowed to say whether the majority supported guilt or acquittal.

When Fidler polled the jurors yesterday morning, they indicated they had questions about Special Instruction 3. They also said they had discussions about how to determine reasonable doubt.

Special Instruction 3 lays out the prosecution theory of the encounter between Spector and Clarkson on Feb. 3.

"It is the prosecution's contention that the act committed by the defendant that caused the death of Ms. Clarkson was to point a gun at her, which resulted in that gun entering Ms. Clarkson's mouth while in Mr. Spector's hand," Fidler told the jurors Sept. 10 before sending them off to deliberate.

"The prosecution bears the burden of proving that defendant Spector committed that act. If you do not find that the prosecution has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the act, you must return a verdict of not guilty," Fidler said.

The problem with the instruction, Fidler said yesterday, was that the last sentence misstated the law. "I can see why the jury is confused," he said.

The judge said he would give both sides a chance to reargue before the jury resumes deliberations.