* A shout-out to the Elect on TV tonight. The lawyer protagonist of the new ABC drama, "Eli Stone" -- portrayed by Jonny Lee Miller (pictured), an ex-husband of Angelina Jolie -- is supposedly a former law clerk to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. [New York Times]

* A novel approach to the legal job hunt: build your own website, then advertise it in the ABA Journal. If Loyola 2L doesn't have a job lined up already -- although rumor has it that he does, which may explain his "retirement" from blogging -- here's something for him to consider. [3L for Hire and ABA Journal, via WSJ Law Blog]

* More proof that New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is a wannabe Eliot Spitzer. [DealBreaker]

* Lawyerly lairs: Tunisia. [flickr]

This has been all over the news. We like the ABA Journal's version, 'cause it's the crispest:

The Atlanta judge overseeing the prosecution of alleged courthouse shooter Brian Nichols has stepped aside from the case after he was quoted [in a New Yorker article] as saying, “Everyone in the world knows he did it.”

The New Yorker piece was by one of our idols, prosecutor-turned-writer Jeffrey Toobin (who launched our blogging career, with this Talk of the Town piece). Judge Fuller and Jeff Toobin were interviewed by the Fulton County Daily Report about the controversy:

"I had a specific agreement with Toobin," said Fuller on Tuesday, before announcing his recusal. "Our conversation was to be on background only, and there would be no direct quotations or attributions, unless they were floated by me first."

Not so, said Toobin, reached in New York. "I don't know what to say," he said. "I mean, it was clearly for attribution; we even had a New Yorker fact-checker call and confirm it. ... I have great respect for Judge Fuller, but that was not at all my understanding."

We're with the meticulous Toobin on this one. In fact, we share the suspicion of one of the correspondents who wrote us about this story: Was Judge Fuller's indiscretion intentional? Was it his way of getting out from under a long and complex nightmare of a case?

Judge Recuses From Courthouse Shooting Case Due to New Yorker Quotes [ABA Journal]
Judge Fuller recuses from Nichols case [Fulton County Daily Report]
Judge in Courthouse Shooting Case Steps Down [New York Times]
Death in Georgia [The New Yorker]
New Yorker Quote Leads to Atlanta Judge Recusal [WSJ Law Blog]

Our friends at the ABA Journal are working on an interesting piece about associates getting "pigeonholed" at their law firms. They're looking for some sources, opinions, and ideas. We're hoping that you can help.

Some background, from Richard Acello, the reporter on the story:

By pigeonholing, we mean the tendency of an associate to get locked into a practice area -- depending on what the firm does -- because he/she was assigned to a lawyer or group upon joining the firm. So let's say it was an intellectual property firm, and the associate does all patent prosecutions. (We can probably think of similar specialty/subspecialty examples in other practices.)

How does the associate branch out? After all, they probably don't want to rock the boat or have partners think they're unhappy, especially when compared to other associates who, say, have happily accepted being pigeonholed.

Who should be responsible for this? Should the firm have a built in way to make sure associates get a variety of work, or should it be the associate's responsibility to speak up?

These are all excellent questions. If you have some thoughts, please opine in the comments (and provide some descriptive information in your signature if possible -- e.g., "IP associate at East Coast law firm"). You can also contact reporter Rich Acello directly, via email, by clicking here. Thanks.

Today brings us bonus and salary news from DLA Piper, the biggest of all Biglaws. Back in November, the firm was crowned by the National Law Journal as the nation's largest law firm (with a whopping 3,623 attorneys).

DLA Piper may be the biggest -- but not when it comes to bonuses. From a disgruntled tipster:

It's official: no special bonuses for DLA Piper's New York office. But first year associates in our secondary offices got raise to a $160,000 start. I attach the chart. [Ed. note: It's after the jump.]

The firm did it in a very slimy way with no official announcement, just individual notices of bonuses. Pretty funny after last year's heralded promises to stay with the New York market... I guess Frank and Lee thought: "never mind."

So was DLA Piper managing expectations when it issued a somewhat gloomy email earlier in the month? From a few weeks ago (around January 8):

I'm an associate at DLA Piper and we got a firmwide email discussing the firm's 2007 finances and applauding us all on a job well done. They exceeded expectations and last year's totals. However, the email closes with this paragraph:

"While we are pleased with the results for 2007, we approach 2008 with caution, given the uncertain economic outlook. We intend to be conservative in both our budgeting for 2008 and in our financial management."

It may be nothing... but I feel like they are bracing us for something, whether it's crappy bonuses or no pay increase. Good times!

Today's bonus and salary memo, plus the firm-wide salary chart, after the jump.

Back in December -- around the holidays, so many of you may have missed it -- we wrote about Schoenfeld v. Allen & Overy. It's a lawsuit brought by Norman Schoenfeld, an observant Jewish lawyer who once worked in the New York office of Allen & Overy. Schoenfeld claims, among other things, that A&O discriminated and retaliated against him as a result of his observing the Sabbath.

Since then, we've received many requests for updates. This message is representative:

"Is there any news on this lawsuit? As a Sabbath observant 2L, this is of interest to me and many of my friends. A post on ATL providing an update would be appreciated. Love the site. Thanks."

We're not aware of any procedural developments in the case. And we sadly didn't receive much in response to our request for firsthand information about Norman Schoenfeld or Allen & Overy in New York. Here's the most interesting tip we received -- some opinions from an A&O associate:

"That this suit goes on is beyond anyone here at A&O. I did not know this Schoenfeld guy much for the five minutes he worked here and don't know if his complaint has merit. I will say this though: associates don't want to work with Mark Wojciechowski and are asking not to work with him."

"He told A&O he was bringing associates from Mayer Brown; MB associates refused to come work with him. Better to stay on a sinking ship like MB NY than work for a nightmare like Mark Woj...."

"No one can understand how firm management let this happen (rumor is that A&O already fired their first outside counsel). Recruitment of NY lawyers is badly affected and we just wait to see how much this costs the firm in damages (and associates of course since all s**t gets passed down - you know the partners won't take the hit in their pocket)."

We contacted the firm for comment, but they didn't have anything to add.

If you have any firsthand information to pass along about the events in question, please email us. Thanks.

Complaint: Norman Schoenfeld v. Allen & Overy (PDF)

Earlier: Lawsuit of the Day: The Jewish Version of Charney v. S&C?

A little follow-up on Kaye Scholer, whose bonus memo we posted back in November. From a source at the firm:

Just found out that despite the memo sent to associates last year, Kaye Scholer has decided to tie the special bonus to hours. Requiring 2200 hours to receive the special bonus.

There was no mention of this hours requirement in the original memo. Of course, it was designed to appear that Kaye Scholer was paying market when they had no intention of doing so.

But in fairness to the firm, they did leave themselves with some wiggle room, stating that special bonuses would be paid on a "discretionary" basis. It just seems that 2200 was the magic number required to trigger the exercise of said discretion.

Some associates aren't happy about how that requirement was communicated (or not communicated, as the case may be). One associate claims that managing partner Barry Wilner, at a meeting held last year to discuss the bonus situation, did not disclose that 2200 hours would be the cutoff. As a result, "[a]ll the associates had to go on were rumors, which caused many associates to scramble at the last minute to achieve what they thought would be a sufficient amount of hours.... I'm not so much concerned about the amounts involved as much as I am concerned about the lack of information that floats through this firm."

Two other bizarre bits of news about Kaye Scholer -- involving "a giant Care Bear" and a roller derby queen named "She Raw," which would seem to take the firm to Venable-level heights of weirdness -- after the jump.

[Ed. note: As you may recall, last month we solicited applications for the position of ATL's sports columnist. We thank the many fine applicants who threw their hats into the ring.

Today we're pleased to introduce you to this site's new sportswriter: Marc Edelman, a sports lawyer and law professor. You can reach him directly by email (click here). And now, without further ado, we turn the floor over to Professor Edelman.]

As a young boy, I remember sitting with my father watching Super Bowl XXI. In that game, New York Giants quarterback Phil Simms completed 22-of-25 passes for 268 yards, leading my hometown G-Men to a 39-20 victory over John Elway’s Denver Broncos. At that moment, I knew that I would one day work in sports.

Flash forward 21 years. The Giants are back in the Super Bowl. Their then-famous center Bart Oates is now a practicing attorney, and I recently was named as a professor of sports law at New York Law School, Seton Hall University, and Manhattanville College. I am also the new sports columnist at Above the Law.

In the coming weeks, my column Sports and the Law will focus on issues involving the legal aspects of sports, including moral issues, labor policy, and antitrust policy (or lack thereof). This column will also discuss how lawyers can find jobs in the sports field.

Read the first column, after the jump.

The time has come, and the crowning of ATL's Lawyer of the Year and Second Favorite Blog After ATL, both of which are sponsored by ATL and Lateral Link, is at last upon us.

In all, a whopping 4,186 votes were cast, with 2,683 of you voting for Lawyer of the Year and 1,503 weighing in on which blog you like second-most after this one. Find out how it all turned out after the jump.

* New accounting rules for M&A. [DealBook]

* Lilly contemplates $1 billion payment to settle civil and criminal investigations relating to its marketing of Zyprexa. [New York Times]

* NYPD officer accused of pimping child. [MSNBC]

* Ex-priest jailed for murder via exorcism. [CNN]

* Indiana man arrested for making his own crosswalk. [The Indy Channel]

* Nader takes steps toward another run for the presidency in 2008. [Bloomberg]

We bring you an addendum to Monday's post about the latest in Supreme Court clerk hiring. And we're pleasantly surprised to see that we have this news before Wikipedia.

Recently hired to clerk for Justice Stephen G. Breyer in October Term 2008: Brianne Gorod, currently in the D.C. office of O'Melveny & Myers. Gorod is a 2005 Yale Law grad and a former clerk to the judicial tag team of Jed S. Rakoff (S.D.N.Y.) and Robert A. Katzmann (2d Cir.).

Those who obsessively follows SCOTUS clerk hiring know that Judges Rakoff and Katzmann have jointly sent clerks to the Court before. But contrary to some rumors, they're not always a "package deal" when it comes to hiring (although there is a significant degree of overlap among their current and former clerks).

Judge Katzmann prefers to hire individuals who have clerked on the district court (or have some other kind of post-law school work experience), so he regularly turns to Judge Rakoff, for whom he has a great deal of respect, as a source of clerkly talent. Judge Katzmann sometimes also helps promising applicants to his own chambers to secure interviews with Judge Rakoff. Conversely, Judge Rakoff also refers and sends clerks to Judge Katzmann, as well as to other Second Circuit judges, and he has also hired some clerks after Second Circuit clerkships. In short, both judges think it's valuable for people to have both district and circuit clerkship experiences, and they try to help make that happen for their clerks. But they don't hire 100 percent of their clerks jointly.

The current tally of OT 2008 SCOTUS clerks, with Brianne Gorod added, appears after the jump.

* Think of this as a compendium of Lawyers and Judges of the Day. [Legal Blog Watch]

* Speaking of judges who do embarrassing things, a Canadian judge insisted that an HIV-positive witness testify while wearing a mask. The judge also "moved the case to a bigger courtroom in order to create more distance between the witness and the bench." [Toronto Star]

* D.C. power lawyer Robert Bennett has a new memoir coming out -- plus a really cute dog! [Washingtonian]

* News you can use, with Super Bowl parties looming: double-dipping in a communal bowl of dip really is gross. [PrawfsBlawg]

* Federal judges to apply their judicial skills to reviewing submissions in the ACS's Richard D. Cudahy Writing Competition. Deadline is February 15; contest details here. [ACS Blog]

Any trial judge with the Gall to benchslap the Supreme Court has a serious set of cojones.

Accordingly, Judge Richard Kopf (D. Neb.) -- who sent beer to Professor Doug Berman, as recently noted -- is our Judge of the Day. See links collected below.

We agree with Tony Mauro: Judge Kopf's irreverent "top 10" list of lessons learned from the high court's sentencing jurisprudence is "a provocative jaw-dropper that may get Kopf scratched off the holiday card list at the Supreme Court."

Judge Kopf's "Top Ten" take on SCOTUS sentencing work [Sentencing Law and Policy]
The Top Ten Things I Learned from Apprendi, Blakely, Booker, Rita, Kimbrough, and Gall (PDF) [Sentencing Law and Policy]
Federal Judge's 'Top 10' List Takes On Supreme Court's Sentencing Decisions [Legal Times]
Richard G. Kopf bio [Federal Judicial Center]

The rain in Spain falls mainly on... a**holes? Well, only if most Spaniards are like Tomas Delgado -- and we're guessing (and hoping) they're not.

After all, since chutzpah like this doesn't come along often. Our latest Lawsuit of the Day hails from Spain, via CNN:

A Spanish businessman withdrew a controversial lawsuit Wednesday against the family of a teenage boy he struck and killed while driving a luxury car.

Tomas Delgado had filed a suit asking the dead boy's parents to pay him €20,000 ($29,400) on the grounds that the collision that killed their teenage son also damaged his Audi A-8.

After public outrage ensued, Delgado dropped the suit -- but was none too happy about it:

The businessman had insisted in a recent television interview that he was a victim, too. He was not present for a court hearing Wednesday. His lawyer told the court that Delgado felt that the extensive publicity amounted to a public lynching.

A high-tech lynch mob for an uppity Audi driver. Who was reportedly driving 107 miles per hour in an area where the speed limit is 55 miles per hour. Who hit the boy from behind, according to the boy's father, and "dragged [him] 106 meters (347 feet) along a rural highway."

Read more in the full article (which includes an interesting digression about how quickly you need to file your notice of appeal in Spanish courts; their appeal periods make ours look like an eternity).

Driver drops bid to sue family of boy he killed [CNN]

Here are a few quick updates on the associate bonus front:

1. Wilson Sonsini: On Monday night, the firm issued a long and complicated memo, which we've posted in all its glory after the jump. Since we haven't taken math since high school calculus, it went a bit over our head.

General reaction to the WSGR bonus news was less than positive. From one tipster: "My friends there are pretty pissed in light of Latham's bonuses." From another:

"Some constituent groups (those with low hours) are happy. Other groups (people who work for a living) are less happy. All associates outside of New York are upset that New York special bonuses were paid without a minimum hours requirement."

Under the WSGR bonus system, in certain class years, a lawyer in New York who billed 500 hours less than her counterpart outside New York could wind up with a bigger bonus.

2. Akin Gump (Washington, DC): On rather short notice -- the email went out at around 1 p.m., announcing a meeting at 5 p.m. -- a meeting to talk about bonuses was held on Monday in the D.C. office of Akin Gump. Here's the bottom line:

[T]he gist was that bonuses "ranged from $1,000 to 75,000," which basically means that if you are a first year (or any associate who started in the fall) you got $1,000, and the most senior associates who are most valued got $75,000. Associates were also told that the average was $25,000. This was not broken down by class year, hours, or any other details that may tell you whether you'll be compensated well or terribly.

Lovely. Guess they think transparency is overrated

3. Quinn Emanuel: At Quinn Emanuel, in contrast, management is fairly transparent, and communication is relatively open (at least by Biglaw standards). How many senior partners of major law firms write open letters to ATL, as John Quinn did recently?

Anyway, two pieces of news. First, yesterday QE gave supplemental bonuses today to laterals, recalculating how they pro-rated (a subject of prior controversy). Second, they provided some information -- albeit not terribly specific information -- about billable hours and 2008 bonuses. Memo after the jump.

Last year, we ran a popular series of posts on the Harvard Law Review (click here and scroll down, to the posts marked with a mushroom cloud over Gannett House). The gist of the coverage, as described by one of our sources, was that the Review's new, left-leaning leadership "is running the journal into the ground with a cabal of radical ideologues, making the outgoing editors nervous about the future reputation of the journal."

We got some flak for our HLR coverage. But in view of what the Review is publishing these days, as discussed extensively in the blogosphere last week -- see, e.g., the Volokh Conspiracy and PrawfsBlawg -- we can't help gloating. Just a little.

Harvard Law Review on Punitive Damages and the 14th Amendment [Volokh Conspiracy]
Cruel and Unusual? On the Harvard Law Review's Case Comment on Philip Morris [PrawfsBlawg]

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of the Harvard Law Review

For Monday's Lawyer of the Day, we faced an embarrassment of riches -- of embarrassment. So we nominated a quintet of contenders: a North Carolina lawyer caught reading Maxim in court, a former prosecutor who allegedly had sex with two teenage boys, an AUSA arrested on DUI charges, a Canadian lawyer/politician who allegedly overbilled an order of nuns, and a Chicago lawyer who keyed a Marine's car. Then we had you vote on who should take the honors.

Participation was enthusiastic, with almost 1,300 votes cast. Two contenders emerged early in the voting: Beth Modica, the allegedly predatory prosecutrix, and Jay Grodner, who pleaded guilty to keying the Marine's vehicle. Competition was fierce. But in the end, Mrs. Modica came out on top.

So congratulations, Beth Modica. You take the prize as Monday's Lawyer of the Day!

Read more about her alleged misadventures, after the jump.

No, seriously. Despite the perception of Biglaw partners as fat cats, some of them, at least in their early years, take home less than the senior associates who toil under them. From an article in the Legal Times by Nathan Carlile (whose work we've always admired, even before he wrote this nice profile of us):

[T]he most recent round of associate pay hikes has edged senior associates ever closer to junior partner pay rates. In fact, in some cases, senior associates can come out ahead of partners -- particularly if the firm has a nonequity tier.

Here's just one example: At Arent Fox, Chairman Marc Fleischaker says senior associates can earn as much as $280,000 in base salary and -- if they meet targets for generating business -- an additional $100,000 in bonuses. Total: $380,000. First-year nonequity partners start off with a pay rate of $310,000. But they subtract $20,000 to cover their own benefits. Their total: $290,000.

Additional excerpts and discussion, after the jump.

In previous ATL / Lateral Link surveys, we've discovered that a surprising number of you worked over Christmas or New Year's, and that many of you crave a better work environment or better hours.

So, as we look forward to the Superbowl and tomorrow night's Lost premiere and the crowning of ATL's Lawyer of the Year (not necessarily in that order), we can't help but wonder: how many of you will actually be in the office instead of celebrating?

Today's ATL / Lateral Link survey takes a wistful look back at the cancelled plans of yesteryear.

Whatever your responses, you can look forward to this: tomorrow we'll announce both the ATL Lawyer of the Year and your Second Favorite Blog After ATL. For that latter contest, we're adding in Blogonaut after receiving at least seventy write-in ballots. Sure, they were all from one person so most of them didn't count, but they were committed. (Thanks also to those of you who wrote in The Associate Pirate (Arr is for Resume!), but I'm recusing myself from this one. It's not so much the potential conflict of interest as the fear that my blog would get beat up by taxgirl's blog.)

Official announcements haven't been made yet, but they're imminent. Two prominent attorneys are about to drop out of the presidential race: former U.S. Attorney and Associate Attorney General Rudy Giuliani, and super-successful trial lawyer John Edwards.

Random factoid: Giuliani and Edwards both attended top law schools, NYU and UNC - Chapel Hill, respectively. These schools are respectively ranked #4 and #36 by U.S. News. [FN1]

But the remaining candidates who happen to be lawyers went to Harvard (Barack Obama and Mitt Romney) and Yale (Hillary Clinton). These two schools, national institutions for many years, are ranked #2 and #1, respectively.

Loyola 2L claims to be "retired" from the blogosphere. But if here were still around, he might wonder aloud: Are American voters "tier-ist"?

P.S. And who cares about these stupid rankings anyway? A number of top law schools may be overrated.

[FN1] And the law school rankings didn't exist back when Edwards and Giuliani attended.

Update: First, it appears that some of you have misread this post. We doubt that many voters know or care about where a candidate went to law school. We just (1) pointed out a "random factoid," and (2) suggested that people who are obsessed with law school rankings, like Loyola 2L, might try to read something into this.

Second, from an observant tipster:

"It might be worth noting that according to the exit polls the most influential lawyer yesterday was none of the ones you mentioned."

"Rather it was T3 graduate Gov. Charlie Crist (Cumberland Law), whose endorsement seemed to boost McCain past Romney while at the same time destroying any hope Rudy had since Rudy had been courting Crist for weeks."

McCain Wins; Giuliani Set to Drop Out [New York Times]
John Edwards to Quit Presidential Race [AP]
The Most Overrated Law Schools: A Student Perspective [TaxProf Blog]
Which top school do law students think is most overrated in US News? [Brian Leiter's Law School Reports]

Earlier: One Fewer Lawyer in the Presidential Race

* "T.Owes." [ESPN]

* Rebates to $500? [CNN]

* AG Mukasey won't label waterboarding. [MSNBC]

* Sen. McCain wins Florida, Rudy to bow out. [New York Times; Washington Post]

* Federal inquiry into stolen artifacts expands. [New York Times]

* Margaret Truman, only child of President Truman and author of mysteries set at the Supreme Court and the FBI, RIP. [AP]

Earlier this month, we posted an open thread on the law school gunner. It generated a spirited discussion -- perhaps too spirited -- and we eventually closed it to new comments.

We're going to try this again. Here's another open thread to share your gunner stories. But please keep the discourse civil, and please don't call out anyone by name. If you're mentioned in a story and want to defend yourself, come up with a pseudonym for doing so. You really don't want ATL to come up when someone Googles you (e.g., around recruiting season).

As is our practice, we'll kick things off with a story. From a tipster at a law school in New York:

last semester a 1L decided to spread a little rumor. he said he knew what was going to be on one of the finals (civ pro) -- actually he dropped another person's name who people trusted and said that the prof told her what was going to be on the exam. word spread pretty quickly that the last question of the exam would be a policy question, and that preclusion wouldn't be covered. it was a complete lie; he just made it up. most people studied everything anyway, but there were definitely a bunch who spent a lot of extra time trying to study "policy" issues and less time on preclusion (which of course ended up being a question on the exam).

p.s. this guy studies with a small group who call themselves the "dream team" - haha

some other things that i was told later on but didn't experience first-hand:

1) he allegedly conspired to mislead the class for weeks about this

2) his facebook status said "[his name] is exploiting situations like Geraldo Rivera" after he spread the word about what was supposedly on the test

Earlier: Law School Gunners: Open Thread

* A PSA for Blackberry Pearl users on the T-Mobile network. Also, Theresa sounds deliciously evil. [PrawfsBlawg]

* "Senator Obama, we knew Jack Kennedy, and you, Senator, are--well, dude, you were two-years-old...." [What About Clients?]

* "Lessons from Mary-Kategate: Why Lawyers Should Not Engage in Media Relations." And we agree wholeheartedly with this statement: "the ability to get under powerful people’s skin. If ever there was a talent valued among tabloid journalists, that’s got to be it." [Starkman & Associates]

* DLA Piper to launch an in-house version of Facebook. But can you play Scrabulous on it? [Legal Blog Watch]

* It's hard out here in a courtroom for a pimp, proceeding pro se. [11Alive.com]

* Oregon Supreme Court puts kibosh on unkindest cut. [Blogonaut]

* Blawg Review #144, with a Lord of the Rings theme. [Cyberlaw Central via Blawg Review]

Georgetown is an excellent law school -- "T14" (top 14), as some like to say -- with many things going for it. Supreme Court justices love to visit. Students get to take classes like The Law of 24. The diva-licious Nina Totenberg speaks at commencement.

Perhaps most importantly, at least to readers of ATL, Georgetown grads land excellent jobs. Not surprisingly, in a recent poll, a majority of respondents said they'd need $100,000 to turn down 14th-ranked Georgetown in favor of, say, 51st-ranked Arizona State (maybe 'cause they'd like to be separated from Kumari Fulbright by multiple states).

But GULC isn't perfect. Mistakes get made -- mistakes that could, say, compromise your personally identifiable information (and mess with your credit score). From several tipsters:

"You might want to post this so anyone who graduated during this time but didn't get the e-mail knows about the stolen identities."

"I got this warning this morning. Evidently, not everyone is affected, as students next to me in class have not received the email. Just thought I'd forward this along to show the problems at American could be worse - at least their identities aren't at risk."

View the email, after the jump.

Update: We have also posted a follow-up to the original message.

Unlike yesterday -- and by the way, we'll keep the reader poll open for a few more hours -- today we have no difficulty picking our Lawyer of the Day. Hollywood lawyer James Jackson maltreated his Filipino maid. We do not like it when you mess with our peeps.

From the AP (via Law.com):

A former Hollywood studio attorney and his wife were sentenced Monday for abusive treatment of their Filipino maid in a case federal prosecutors said "amounts to modern-day slavery."

James Jackson, the former vice president of legal affairs at Sony Pictures, was ordered to perform 200 hours of community service and pay a $5,000 fine. His wife, Elizabeth, was sentenced to three years in prison after her attorneys unsuccessfully pleaded for her to receive home detention.

These Hollywood types are ruthless (we've watched "Entourage"). Studio lawyers make Biglaw partners look like social workers. Consider the treatment alleged by the former maid in her civil suit against the couple:

[Former maid Nena] Ruiz claimed in her civil lawsuit that Elizabeth Jackson regularly slapped her and pulled her hair. She also said she was forced to sleep on a dog bed and was given three-day-old food to eat even as she was expected to clean and provide fresh fruit to the Jacksons' pets. The Jacksons only paid her $300 for her work....

See? Studio lawyers are meaner than law firm partners. At least associates get paid $160K for their suffering.

Happily, Nena Ruiz ultimately made out quite well. She was awarded $825,000 in damages by the jury that heard her case.

P.S. In fairness to Mr. Jackson, it appears that much of the abuse was perpetrated by his wife. In her allocution, Elizabeth Jackson told the court: "In my life I have always tried and strived to do the right thing. I failed in this case." Um, yeah.

P.P.S. A tipster observes: "Is it just me, or have these modern-day slavery stories been popping up a lot lately? See here."

Former Sony Pictures Lawyer and Wife Sentenced in Forced Labor of Filipino Maid [AP via Law.com]
Hollywood couple sentenced in Filipino maid 'slave' case [AFP via Philippine Inquirer]
In Pictures: Long Island Slaver Family On Facebook [Gawker]

Back in November, we broke the news that, barring a "substantial improvement" in market conditions, the law firm of Thacher Proffitt & Wood would resort to lawyer layoffs in January. The firm is a major player in structured finance and real estate, two practice areas that have been hard hit by the credit crunch.

January is now here -- and, in fact, almost over. We were reminded of this last week, when we saw this article in the New York Sun about law firm layoffs, mentioning Thacher Proffitt:

Earlier this month, Manhattan-based Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft laid off 35 lawyers, 26 of them in New York City, and late last year, Thatcher Proffitt & Wood cut 50 associates' jobs. The cuts have spurred other firms to follow suit, experts said.

Was the statement accurate, insofar as it suggests or implies that TPW laid off fifty (50) associates? We followed up with Thacher, which issued this statement, through a spokesperson:

As described in our November 27, 2007 official statement, we notified 24 associates in the Structured Finance and Real Estate Practice Groups that if there was no substantial improvement in the market, it was near certain that economic layoffs would take effect in January 2008. As of today, 99% of the 24 associates have accepted a package which compensates them through the end of March 2008, and many have already found new positions. To clarify recent media reports, these events occurred ahead of our initial plan to commence layoffs. [Ed. note: Maybe it should be 96% of the 24 associates -- 23/24 = 95.8%. But who knows... maybe one person is still working part-time for TPW?]

In addition, we offered our first-year associates in the Structured Finance and Real Estate Practice Groups a four-month severance package, should they volunteer to leave the firm. Again, referring to our original statement, the first-year associates' offer remains strictly voluntary; they are under no obligation to accept it. We do feel it's in their best interest to explore other opportunities, since we are concerned that we will not be able to provide them with the best work experience at this formative stage of their careers. A group of first-year associates has voluntarily accepted this package.

Finally, we would like to acknowledge the goodwill of those in the business and legal communities who have expressed interest in our associates and have helped to place them in new positions. Although these decisions were difficult for our firm, we are confident that our approach kept our associates' interests in mind and also mitigated our business risks.

We construed this as a statement that the firm did not have to resort to layoffs (as originally planned). We followed up with TPW, and they confirmed this understanding: "Up to this point, departures have been voluntary." [FN1]

But should TPW associates start dancing in the hallways? Not yet. When we asked if this meant the firm had ruled out layoffs going forward, Thacher was noncommittal: "We cannot speculate on future market conditions and the potential impact on our attorney population."

So stay tuned. In other TPW news, it's not just associates who are leaving. Partner V. Gerard (“Jerry”) Comizio, a prominent banking and financial services lawyer here in D.C., just left Thacher to join Paul Hastings (see this press release). When a firm is going through tough times, partner defections are to be expected (although they're unwelcome news, since rainmaker departures only exacerbate the problem of insufficient business to go around).

[FN1] We realize, of course, that if you "voluntarily" depart after being told you'll probably be laid off if you stay, it's not completely "voluntary." A cynic must suggest that it's like "voluntarily" giving the mugger your wallet after being told you'll be shot if you don't. But, on a hyper-technical level, we wouldn't consider these departures "true" layoffs. People can always wait for the ax to fall -- like the one apparent holdout among the 24 associates.

Fearing Recession, Law Firms Tighten Belts [New York Sun]
Pinup's Naked Justice: Keeps Lawyer Job [New York Post]
Paul Hastings Bolsters Bank Regulatory Practice with the Addition of V. Gerard Comizio to the Washington, D.C. Office [Paul Hastings (press release)]

Earlier: Nationwide Layoff Watch: Thacher Proffitt Announces Likely Future Layoffs

Our favorite bride this week is one we don't get to write about. Rachel Berkowitz is a professional organizer who "helps individuals and businesses to organize closets, filing systems and offices and to move and pack." And if you're not a little bit turned on by that, we want to see your underwear drawer.

On the legal-eagle front, three Fordham JDs (at least) and a Sunday school teacher make this our first Catholic-themed week here at LEWW.

The contenders:

1. Sandra Zucker and Joshua Bennett

2. Mari-Claudia Jiménez and Steven Coffey

3. Laura Brown and Brian Vogt

More about these couples, after the jump.

Before the New Year, associates in the New York office of Morrison & Foerster received their bonus news. Now it's time for their colleagues outside of NYC to collect their cash.

In addition to the firm's "standard productivity bonuses under the published 2007 compensation program," MoFo is paying out (1) "a one-time bonus" (it sounds "special" to us), ranging from $10,000 - $20,000, to associates and certain of counsel who met or exceeded their hours requirements, and (2) merit bonuses, for "exemplary lawyering and exceptional teamwork," ranging from $15,000 - $30,000.

Full memo, after the jump.

Time is running out on this month's ATL Lawyer of the Year and Second Favorite Blog After ATL polls, both sponsored by ATL and Lateral Link.

So far, we're up to just over 2,600 votes for Lawyer of the Year, and Wall Street Journal pick Loyola 2L is still going strong. Meanwhile, Barack Obama has a roughly 2.5 to 1 lead over Hillary Clinton, and Alberto Gonzales is stamping out civil rights stomping on music rights attorney Ray Beckerman . . . but pretty much nobody else.

On the blogging front, the Wall Street Journal remains the blog to beat, while Above The Law is still in second place and Volokh Conspiracy is on track for third, having opened up a hefty lead over Patently-O and SCOTUSblog. Write-in candidate Ms. JD has overpowered Overlawyered, and Likelihood of Confusion has turned the tables on Professor Bainbridge and is now closing in on Skadden Insider.

We'll post the final results on Thursday.

But while you're voting for the champions above, are you also voting with your feet at work? In last month's ATL / Lateral Link job survey about 20% of you responded that you were considering leaving your current firms once you received your bonus. But that was before many of you knew what your bonuses were going to be.

So last week, we asked you whether your job searches were indeed underway. Find out if the answers changed after the jump.

* Resignation in Detroit text-message scandal (previously discussed here). [Detroit News]

* A proud American tradition unknown in the rest of the world: bail for profit. [New York Times]

* Legal luminaries at the SOTU. [WSJ Law Blog]

* Trial begins in alleged microwaving of infant. [CNN]

* TRO against Patriots' Moss extended until after Super Bowl. [SI]

* Mortgage crisis may affect litigation departments. [WSJ Law Blog]

* U.S. jails Colombian FARC leader. [BBC]

We don't really have any major bonus news to pass along. Here are a few items following up on previously reported developments:

1. Latham & Watkins: On Friday we reported on the LW bonuses, which were well-received by associates. We now have more detailed information, which appears after the jump.

2. McDermott Will & Emery: We wrote here about their decision to issue supplemental bonuses. Those bonuses have now been paid, and people are happy. More details after the jump.

3. Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft: As previously reported, the bonus situation over there is rather vague. An addendum, also after the jump.

Remember MacGate, at American University's Washington College of Law? It was resolved. But technology problems persist at WCL:

Date: January 28, 2008 2:34:20 PM EST
Subject: Wireless at WCL

Dear Student Body:

The following problems have been discovered with the WCL network:

1. All access points in room 101 were either turned off, or nonfunctional for the past two years.

2. All access points on the 5th floor were located in elevator shafts, or other places where they did not provide coverage.

3. Certain points on the 6th floor were assigned the wrong IP address,and so did not provide access.

The Technology department is working to address these problems. If you continue to experience problems with the internet, please inform the Student Services Committee at [xxxx]. You can also file an online trouble ticket, when you find yourself in an area with internet access, at [xxxx].

Regards,
Student Services Committee

At first we thought this was satirical, but we were assured that it's not: "This is for real -- we got it from the SBA today. Our wireless has been terrible recently."

Your friends at ATL obviously want you to have wireless access in class. But we realize that some professors contend that internet access in classrooms is an impediment to instruction.

* Where do broken hearts Lawyers for Fred go? Into the open arms of Mitt Romney, who just picked up an impressive group of conservative legal eagles. [Mitt Romney]

* We previously linked to transcripts of the Kumari Fulbright 911 tapes, but now you can listen to them yourself (click here, then scroll down to the italicized link). Says a tipster: "The screams must have been pretty loud if that many people could hear them from their homes and from the street." [Arizona Daily Star]

* Sangria is illegal in Virginia, so restaurants there serve "a bowdlerized version of the drink." Ted Frank wonders: "[W]hen is someone going to bring a consumer class action against the Spanish restaurants serving faux sangrias without warning customers?" [Overlawyered via WSJ Law Blog]

* Is IP law sexy? Not to this "curvy," aspiring actress. [New York Post; Ropes & Gray]

* Speaking of sexy, do you have a crush on Hillary? This kid does. [YouTube via Blogonaut]

P.S. Some of these items are a little stale (from last week). As we just mentioned, we're clearing a backlog of items we've been meaning to write about.

Update: In response to this comment -- no, we're not done for the day. More posts to come.

Last week was a busy one in terms of bonus news. In addition, we were prevented from publishing as much as we wanted by technical difficulties (which lie outside the jurisdiction of your undersigned blogger, a mere writer and not a tech person).

Our recent neglect of the "misbehaving lawyers" beat has given rise to a backlog of possible Lawyers of the Day. We've decided to clear the backlog by tossing out five nominees and having you vote on who should get the honor.

Click on each lawyer's name to read more about their alleged misadventures. Then vote on who should be our Lawyer of the Day.

1. Todd Paris: This North Carolina lawyer was held in contempt after a judge caught him reading Maxim [quasi-NSFW] in court. "When [Judge Kevin] Eddinger gave Paris a chance to respond he apologized and 'stated in his view the magazine was not pornography, was available at local stores and that he did not intend contempt,' the [contempt] order said."

2. Beth Modica: "A former suburban prosecutor and PTA president had sex with two underage boys, joined many other teens in booze and pot parties and kept it all a secret from her police chief husband, officials said Tuesday. Beth Modica, 44, was indicted on 35 counts alleging statutory rape, criminal sex acts, sex abuse and endangering children. Wearing an olive-gray suit and handcuffs, she pleaded not guilty at her arraignment in Rockland County Court and was ordered held on $75,000 bail."

3. Mikal Hanson: "Pierre police early Thursday morning arrested an assistant U.S. attorney, who is accused of drunken driving and speeding. Mikal Hanson, 52, an assistant U.S. attorney in Sioux Falls, was stopped by police shortly before 1 a.m. for speeding, said Pierre Police Chief Elton Blemaster. The arresting officer could smell alcohol on Hanson and asked him to perform field sobriety tests, Blemaster said. 'Mr. Hanson didn't complete them as instructed,' he said."

4. Canadian Senator Mobina Jaffer: "Liberal Senator Mobina Jaffer is under investigation by the Law Society of British Columbia for allegedly overbilling one of her legal clients, including charging for 30 hours of work in a single day.... Jaffer has been called before the law society to account for more than $6 million in legal bills charged to her former client, a Catholic missionary order known as the Oblates of Mary Immaculate."

5. Jay Grodner: From the Chicago Tribune (via Blackfive.net):

Jay Grodner, the Chicago lawyer who keyed a Marine's car in anger because the car had military plates and a Marine insignia, finally got his day in court last week. Grodner pleaded guilty in a Chicago courtroom packed with former Marines. They came to support Marine Sgt. Michael McNulty, whose car Grodner defaced in December, but who couldn't attend because he's preparing for his second tour in Iraq....

"You caused damage to this young Marine sergeant's car because you were offended by his Marine Corps license plates," said Judge [William] O'Malley....

"That's because there is a little principle that the Marine Corps has had since 1775," the judge continued. "When they fought and lost their lives so that people like you could enjoy the freedom of this country. It is a little proverb that we follow: "No Marine is left behind.

"So Sgt. McNulty couldn't be here. But other Marines showed up in his stead. Take him away," said the judge and former Marine.

So those are the five contestants. Here's the poll:

Things have been quiet on the Supreme Court clerk hiring front. There are rumors that Justice Alito has finally finished hiring for October Term 2008, but nobody seems to know who the lucky winners are. If you know, please drop us a line.

We do, however, have some news. A tipster reports:

Justice Ginsburg just hired a 2006 UVA Grad to begin clerking summer 2009. I knew Pamela Bookman (pictured) in law school, and not only is she incredibly smart, she is remarkably fun and down to earth. Kudos to Pam!

For confirmation, see this article, which has the story of how Pam Bookman got an offer from RBG on the spot:

Even though Bookman [who is clerking for the International Court of Justice in The Hague] currently lives thousands of miles away from Washington, D.C., she was still able to arrange an in-person meeting with Ginsburg. Two weeks after receiving an e-mail from Klarman saying that Ginsb