I like Laurie Lin's posts very much. Well done.

Hmm. I think I have a chance with this guy.

1. Laurie Lin is awesome

2. This has to be the benchslap of the year, hands down.

How can you "dissent" from an opinion you have not read? I mean how do you even know you disagree?

Its not so much “ouch” as “what?, come again.”

It's really easy, actually. See, after oral argument, the judges retire to a room and discuss where they likely fall and why. Then, after lining up based on their initial thoughts, they circulate opinions. While Judge Jacobs didn't read the opinion, his clerks certainly did, and told him of the result - partial vacatur and remand - with which he dissented. Quite frankly, that's all you need.

I am in love with the clerk who wrote this opinion. Anybody know who it is? Is he/she single?

you can dissent from a majority opinion that you haven't read if you disagree with their conclusions and couldn't care less about their reasons.

What's fascinating about this is how in the world it could ever happen. I mean is collegiality that bad in the 2d Cir.?

I guess I can understand that the Dark Elf, or whatever you want to call him, wants to go off on some First Amendment rant. But how in the world was Jacobs not able to convince Walker to join him in a dismissive affirmance on QI grounds? Even if its not an easy QI case, they can usually find a way to sand down the edges when the ends justify the means.

My money says the judge wrote this one himself. A clerk would have to have some major cajones to turn in a draft like that.

well done. For a while I was going to have to award Merck victory over Laurie for this week but maybe not.

I know the clerk. He's quite a looker.

I especially like the dry humor at the end:
"This prolonged litigation has already cost the school a lot of money that could better have been spent to enrich course offerings or expand student day-care."

Oh but if the gods of jurisdiction and venue could get Stephen Dunne's inevitable appeal in front of this judge.

The whole time I was reading this I kept looking back at that picture up there. He looks so happy. He looks like somebody's grampa.

I hear that the clerk that worked with Chief Judge Jacobs on this is a single/heterosexual male who is very very handsome and brilliant.

Hold on a minute - he's not THAT cute. Smart as hell, though.

What's this guy's name already?

The Chief Judge is a total asshole and a tool for writing something as unprofessional and injudicious as that opinion. Frankly, after many years of litigating, I am becoming tired of the arrogance towards litigants and their counsel that seems to continually seep from the bench, a place populated by politically-connected lawyers wearing black cocktail dresses.

BEST. DISSENT. EVER.

Death to the cockroaches!

Long live capitalism!

Clerk = "My money says the judge wrote this one himself. A clerk would have to have some major cajones to turn in a draft like that."

Agreed. No way a clerk would write something like that on his or her own.

Those of you who think this clerk is attractive need to get out more. A lot more. There isn't one clerk -- male or female -- in this building that is even somewhat attractive.

05:55:

I view things differently. As soon as a trial judge manifests talent he or she is removed from the one forum where he can do the most good and “elevated” to the position where he or she (due to the standard of review) has the least impact on the outcome of a case.

judge jacobs rocks.

Any chance the cutie clerk wants to move to California?

Am loving the dissent.

Jacobs makes a lot of good points, particularly with the waste of time caused by a case that is, essentially, moot. But his attacking the students is petty and unnecessary. Clearly, some of the stuff he quotes from the paper is stupid. But that's pretty much par for the course for college newspapers.

For someone who's laments the waste of time caused by this suit... why is he wasting our time with a bunch of irrelevant commentary about how stupid he thinks CSI students are? I definitely appreciate a judge who knows not to take things too seriously, and benchslaps can be great. But he's a federal judge who so fit to get into name-calling match with some silly 20-year-olds at a random city college (and Jacobs is the only one doing the name calling)... That itself is a little demeaning to the court.

Jacobs for President!

The picture is great. His facial expression says, "I just pooed a little."

5:55-
You, my friend, are quite evidently a douche (who couldn't litigate his way out of a paper bag). Lay off the Chief Judge.

In the last paragraph of his dissent, Jacobs says: "This prolonged litigation has already cost the school a lot of money that could better have been spent to enrich course offerings or expand student day-care."

Earlier he said: This case "is a slow-motion tantrum by children."

For some reason I don't think Jacobs was referring to expanding day-care options for the children of students...

Need there be a jury trial? The Seventh Amendment only guarantees jury trials "where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars."

check out his Wickipedia page. He's a former Simpson Partner. Puts things in clearer perspective (although I personally agree with him)

In the last paragraph of his dissent, Jacobs says: "This prolonged litigation has already cost the school a lot of money that could better have been spent to enrich course offerings or expand student day-care."

Earlier he said: This case "is a slow-motion tantrum by children."

For some reason I don't think Jacobs was referring to expanding day-care options for the children of students...

Posted by: Anonymous | July 13, 2007 07:35 PM

=============

Thanks again, Cpt. Obvious!

That dissent humps Guido hard!

7:39, can you tell me where to find "Wickipedia" on the Web?

Time to get back to document review, 7:13. Have a nice life in the basement.

"expand student day care" priceless

Entertaining but smacks of cranky elitism. Do you really need to tell kids at some crappy college that they're naive and stupid? Also, for the judge's sake, I hope his clerk was responsible for the overheated "Oh look how disparaging I can be!" rhetoric. Also, only a shortsightted A-hole would be that dismissive of a COA colleague over one case. It just isn't worth it.

I only note the irony of the previous post...

The judge isn't picking on naive college kids -- he is picking on people who WERE naive college kids back in 1997-98, when the events at issue took place, and who are still pressing forward with this litigation now that they are in their late 20s.
They or their lawyer should have realized that this lawsuit was a waste of time before they filed it. But even cutting them some slack for youthful enthusiasm at the time, if they had any sense whatsoever, they should have dropped it by now.
The two judges in the majority waste their time, and direct a district judge to waste additional time, on this grandstanding nonsense. Meanwhile, the Second Circuit complains about its enormous caseload, in particular the increase in immigration cases in the last few years. Jacobs hits the nail on the head here.
Litigation is serious business, and the courts are not some sort of psychotherapy forums for people to work out their frustrations.

The one opinion you know the judge wrote himself is Judge R. Garza's concurring opinion in Ruiz v. U.S., 243 F.3d 941 (5CA 2001), which includes:

I was Chief Judge of the Southern District of Texas when this case was transferred to our court. I knew the case would keep a judge tied up for months, and I could not spare any of my judges to do so. Shortly thereafter, I swore in five new judges to the Southern District of Texas at one time, which shows that the ones that were there were carrying a very heavy load. I knew that my friend Judge W. Wayne Justice was familiar with the case and I talked to him about taking the case over. He said he would if Chief Judge Joe Fisher of the Eastern District of Texas gave his consent. I was able to get the consent of Chief Judge Fisher and I appointed Judge W. Wayne Justice to take over the trial of this case.

I remember the Attorney General's Office asked that I call a special en banc court of the Southern District of Texas, claiming that I did not have the authority to give the case to Judge Justice. By an order that I entered, I refused the request and told them that I did not need the Attorney General of Texas to tell me what my duties as Chief Judge of The Southern District of Texas were. Chief Judge John R. Brown had filed an order giving every district judge in Texas the right to sit in any other district in Texas. Judge W. Wayne Justice could sit, if assigned, in the Southern District of Texas. Our Southern District owes a big debt of gratitude to Judge W. Wayne Justice.

****

No law clerk wrote that one.

Judge Justice? Holy shit, that's better than attorneys I've seen with the last names "Counsel" and "Law."

Those who used "Adjudication and its Alternatives," the festering pile of a civil procedure casebook, are quite familiar with the exploits of Judge Justice.

9:08: Even better if you know Judge Willie Wayne Justice's nickname is "The Real Governor of Texas."

laurie--fantastic post, i laughed out loud a number of times. thanks!

"Do you really need to tell kids at some crappy college that they're naive and stupid?"

Entertaining but smacks of cranky elitism.

Jacobs rocks. He told like it is. The courts of appeals need more people like him.

"Judge Justice"

I don't care what his credentials or political qualifications may be, this man needs to be appointed to the Supreme Court!

"Writing for the majority, Justice Justice, held..."

L2L -- you have NO chance getting a clerkship with Judge Jacobs

Judge Jacobs. NYU Law. Hardcore.

7:13: How does one litigate herself out of a paperbag?

Rhines: Are you bisexual?

Wait, is Laurie Lin white (i.e., not Chinese)? I am very disappointed.

This dissent is pathetically immature.

That the Chief Judge of any court would behave in such a brazen and sickening manner -- while, sadly, no longer shocking -- is deeply disturbing for anyone who view the administration of justice in this country as anything other than the trifles of the elite.

We are lost and there is strong reason to doubt that we will ever find our way again.

7:07, cry me a river. Hippie.

hello

I entirely agree, 7:07. This dissent is embarrassing. Although I agree with Judge Jacobs that the case is ridiculous, I hardly think his reaction, especially as a respected, distinguished jurist, is at all appropriate. Hundreds of appellate courts deal with hundreds of stupid cases every year in which the litigants obsess about trivial matters and raise issues of nothingness to life and death proportions. Somehow, they all manage to refrain from diatribes like this one, bite their tongues, and deal with such cases as adults, which I would argue necessarily includes reading the opinions produced by the co-members of their panels. Judge Jacobs, with all due respect, you’re paid a fair share of money to handle disputes, no matter how ridiculous they may be. Is chastising a bunch of idiot college students by throwing your own opinion-style tantrum really the best way to convey the message?

Judge jacobs, I'm a Vietnam Veteran murdered and given a death sentence by Dow and Monsanto. I wasn't diagnosed until 1990 and now terminal I've survided my disease much longer than most. The 2nd decision about Agent Orange increase my hate 10 fold. In my sixty years, I've learned that "justice" has little or nothing or little to do with "The Law". How shameful and disappointing. I feel like taking up arms against those perpetuating this injustice, but my religion and faith prevent me from taking action, after all one more crime will not justify another. Ido pray that all involved, go to eternal Hell and damntion. For those thousand of dead and dying revenge is in the hands of The Almighty.

Murdered Veteran, Marvin Derrick