Brokeback Lawfirm: A Cinderella Story?
More fine blogging from Lavi Soloway -- although his latest material is related only indirectly to Aaron Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell.
Remember LeGal, the gay and lesbian lawyers' association that got itself into a bit of controversy after its (now former) president, Jack Scheich, came out swinging in favor of S&C?
Well, last night LeGal held its big annual dinner. At this gala event, big law firms cough up dough for insurance against anti-gay bias lawsuits tables to show their support for the organization. (We wrote previously about the hideous invitation for the dinner over here.)
We weren't able to attend last night's festivities, 'cause we were spending quality time with Justice Kennedy. But Lavi Soloway was there. His party write-up, with photos, appears here.
There was a rumor floating around, several weeks ago, that Aaron Charney was going to make an appearance at the LeGal dinner. We were, for obvious reasons, excited about this possibility. It might have given rise to some deliciously awkward moments -- since his former employer and current adversary, S&C, bought a table and turned out in force.
Alas, based on Soloway's coverage, it appears the answer to "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner?" was "Not Aaron Charney." If Charney had been there, surely Soloway -- who knows what Charney looks like, having seen him at the big hearing earlier this week -- would have mentioned it.
So what happened to poor Aaron? Was he stuck at home, scrubbing floors like Cinderella, while his mean S&C stepsisters danced the night away at the Ritz-Carlton?
Looking ahead, will the Aaron Charney saga have a fairy tale ending? Might Charney's newfound fame bring him to the attention of a sugar daddy Prince Charming -- a boyfriend so rich he can afford to drop his lawsuit against S&C? Will S&C break down and settle the case, placing a glass slipper on Charney's (presumably large) foot,* thereby transforming him from an unemployed ex-Biglaw associate into a millionaire plaintiff princess?
To find out the answers, just stay tuned to ATL. We will continue to cover even the most trivial developments in this litigation with obsessive zeal.
* We speculate that Charney has large feet because we hear that he's tall and thin -- as you can sort of see from this photo, by Lavi Soloway.
NYC Lesbian & Gay Lawyers Hold Annual Dinner [Soloway]
Earlier: Beware the Ides of March
(11) 
Thin yes, tall no.
[Eugene Volokh, March 16, 2007 at 1:29am] Trackbacks
An Interesting Item I Found, From 1757: I haven't seen anyone else cite it; it's from the Journal of the Virginia House of Burgesses, June 2, 1757, reporting on a "Petition of sundry Freeholders, Inhabitants of the County of Middlesex," which set forth (emphasis added):
That a Sum, not exceeding £1000, was expressly limitted by Law, for constructing a Fort at Winchester, and they are informed £10,000 hath been expended. — That a well regulated Militia is the true and natural Defence of every free State, and praying that the Expence of building the Fort, and the Conduct of the Forces in the Pay of this Colony may be enquired to: And that if it is necessary to lay any more Taxes the same may be laid on the nett Produce of the Planter's labor, and raised within the Year ....
Further evidence, it seems to me, that "free state" in the Second Amendment means "free country", and not "state of the union independent of undue federal power." In 1757, no-one was thinking of Virginia as a "State," or talking about its independence to the colonial legislature. But, as Blackstone made clear in 1765, people were reasoning — whether or not correctly, or in a way applicable to modern conditions — that a free (in the sense of nontyrannical) country was best defended by the militia. And if the Colony of Virginia was seen as part of the free State called Great Britain, then it's quite reasonable that D.C. would be part of the free State called the U.S.
10:19: I think you meant to append your comment to this post?
http://www.abovethelaw.com/2007/03/skaddenfreude_friday_afternoon_1.php
I'd guess Aaron is about 5'10" or so. Does that qualify as tall? Depends on your perspective, I s'pose.
Great job with the photo.
Interesting question is whether ABC ever went to such an event. Other gay S&C lawyers didn't seem to have a problem showing up.
I'm surprised you linked to that photo and didn't even bother to comment on ABC's HIDEOUS tie. Maybe he's only being a fake homo trying to cash in. I just can't believe anyone in the "family" would wear that.
Contrary to what Ann Coulter would like you to believe, there is no necessary correlation between sexual orientation and style consciousness.... Take a look around at the LeGaL dinner!
5:30: How can you say that there is no relationship, at least on some very general level, between sexual orientation and style?
Why is it that gay men are disproportionately represented among the ranks of the world's top fashion designers? Interior designers? Any other occupation requiring a sense of style?
Charney's tie is not as bad as Alterman's though.
Zzz. Lat is now up to two straight days of blog entries about Soloway's blog entries...