Add RSS RSS

Morning Docket 5.04.09

Souters house.jpg* The Chrysler bankruptcy judge, Arthur Gonzalez, is a hotshot and has presided over Enron and Worldcom bankruptcies. [The Associated Press]

* What did Obama mean when he said he was looking for “empathy” in Souter’s replacement? [Politico]

* The rickety farm house (pictured here) where Souter grew up and to which he returns each summer is completely charming. [The Boston Globe]

* Former Bush fundraiser and ambassador to Austria, David Girard-diCarlo, joins Philadelphia firm Cozen O’Connor. [The Philadelphia Inquirer]

* The California Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that let a Catholic Lutheran school expel two 16-year-old girls for having a lesbian relationship. [The Los Angeles Times]

* Trying terrorism suspects is complicated, to say the least. [The New York Times]

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:10 AM

When does the 2010 Vault Guide to Top 100 Law firms come out? August? When did it go to print?

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:10 AM

that farmhouse is STILL there? rickety farmhouses are a blight on the area. and i want to put up a movie theater-resturant complex in that spot. can't i get the town to step in to take the property and sell it to me?

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:11 AM

It's a Lutheran high school, not a Catholic one. Not much of a difference, really, but some people may care. I'm sure the Catholics would have done the same had they the chance, though.

avatar
4 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:14 AM

It's sort of scary that Catholic schools are now being sued for being faithful to their religious beliefs. If a public school were to expel students for being in homosexual relationships, I can understand why this would be problematic, but don't religious schools get to say what behaviors are acceptable?

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:19 AM

Can anybody confirm rumors of Latham stealth layoffs in May?

worried in SF

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:21 AM

I didn't think Latham had associates anymore...

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:21 AM

GODDAMN IT ELIZA THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT DID NOT UPHOLD ANYTHING. THEY DENIED CERT. THiS MIGHT FLY IN REGULAR MEDIA, BUT THIS IS A SITE FOR LAWYERS FOR GOD'S SAKE.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh.

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:22 AM

I heard a recently stealthly laid off senior associate from Simpson committed suicide last week. ATL - you should investigate. Simpson is trying to keep it quiet.

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:24 AM

Wow, ATL has really gone whole-hog on the anti-Catholic bias. Oh, a school bans lesbians? Must be Catholic!

Nice fact-checking, buttheads. Couldn't squeeze in another "the pope is Hitler" remark to go with that?

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:25 AM

What's up with the Atlas Shrugged book on the mailbox? Are the locals dropping hints?

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:25 AM

Catholics, Lutherans, they're all the same. Just ask the Pope.

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:27 AM

perhaps empathy does not equate with sotomayor? or maybe it does depending on who you talk to?


avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:27 AM

Eliza, the word "Catholic" didn't even appear in that article. Way to expose your anti-Catholic bigotry.

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:42 AM

I approve of the appropriately-placed novel. The champagne flows in Galt's Gulch, if you can afford it.

-Pop Bottles

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:48 AM

Eliza, if you are trying to be a professional journalist, you should really do better than confusing Catholics with Lutherans and an affirmation of an order with a denial of cert. Fuckin a.

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:51 AM

Hey ATL, rather than stirring up anti-Catholic sentiment with a minor cert denied case that does not involve Catholics, why don't you publish real news? For example, Madonna is taking her adoption case to the Malawi Supreme Court. Or is Madonna too Catholic a reference for you?

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:52 AM

4, I would like to think so, but it shouldn't be surprising that this would come up as an issue in modern discrimination law, "i'm a private religious actor" is not neccesarily a defense. I would give it awhile, but I would be shocked if California allowed this kind of discrimination ~10 years down the road.

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:55 AM

Do they allow Catholic Lesbians who have been attacked by coat hangers at Paul Hastings in Galt's Gulch?

avatar
19 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 9:57 AM

17 - It's not up to CA. Congress is going to have to change the Civil Rights Act provisions regarding private organizations.

avatar
20 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:01 AM

"The girls had sued California Lutheran High School, contending that the Riverside County school had violated a state anti-discrimination law.

An appeals court ruled in January that the private religious school was not a business, and therefore did not have to comply with a state law that prohibits businesses from discriminating."

sounds like a state issue to me.

-17

avatar
21 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:02 AM

10 Probably locals don't like he sided with the Majority in the Kelo decision. And good sighting, I didn't recognize the Atlas Shrugged book at first.

avatar
22 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:03 AM

Eliza - get off your hairy duff and do a little research rather than slinging mud. For example, find out why the CA Supremes denied cert. It might have been procedural, and had nothing to do with substance.

Stop taking journalism lessons from Elie.

avatar
23 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:05 AM

17/20: CA can't enact laws contrary to federal law. Sounds like a federal issue to me.

avatar
24 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:09 AM

I'm more concerned with the article saying that the next Supreme Court justice might not even be a lawyer...a real kick in the face there...one more unemployed JD...

avatar
25 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:11 AM

Can't be said enough times...

Martin Luther (of Lutheranism obviously) is the reason there's a Protestant Church at all. Lutheran =/= Catholic. The guy nailed a list of his 99 biggest beefs to the local Catholic church door that led to decades-longs bloody wars in Europe. My god, it's like saying North Korea, South Korea, what's the difference... they're all Asian.

And denial of cert. =/= affirmance. Seriously, what the crap ATL? I realize you're a gossip blog, but if you're going to report on substance, at least read the articles closely and parrot back correctly.

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:12 AM

I think Bill Clinton will be the next Justice. I believe that was the deal Obama cut with the Clintons in exchange for their support. First ever disbarred Justice!

avatar
27 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:15 AM

Lat, please come back and stop this drivel that passes for reporting.

avatar
28 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:15 AM

Eliza did a great article in Newsweek on epilepsy about a month ago. Really, it was a great article.

avatar
29 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:19 AM

Those lawyers who can, do, and those lawyers who can't, blog.

avatar
30 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:23 AM

Have to agree with all the other comments thus far re: the Lutheran expulsion case. Please fix the post.

avatar
31 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:27 AM

"California Lutheran High School" is Catholic? I missed the story about how Lutherans rejoined the one true Church.

And it goes without saying that denial of cert =/= upholding a ruling. I thought this was a blog for lawyers, by lawyers?

avatar
32 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:30 AM

Can we use Kelo to repossess ATL's offices and make them into something more useful? Sloppy crap like this and most other posts indicate just how badly this site has jumped the shark.

avatar
33 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:32 AM

It seems to me that the lesbian girls in question would have a good argument for promissory estoppel under Rst.90. Clearly, being kicked out of school is a scenario in which one may have relied, to one's detriment, on the promises of the Lutheran school (did it say which synod?) to provide a quality education. Someone should look into this...

avatar
34 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:34 AM

Nothing enrages Obama more than seeing those pesky Justice statues wearing blindfolds. Justice is not blind and applied uniformly. Rather, it is important for a judge to use their own liberal biases to empathize with whichever party can throw more weight into it's side of the grievance ledger. For example, it's pretty obvious that a judge should empathize with a school of orphans suing a large faceless corporation. But what if the orphans are just white, while the corporation is black owned and also produces medicines that save thousands of lives every year? These are the heady moral issues that only the truly empathetic judges are able to wrestle with. Could we be months from seeing the first non-lawyer community organizer appointed to the Supreme Court? It just makes sense.

avatar
35 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:35 AM

2,

Excellent Kelo reference.

2FTW

avatar
36 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:35 AM

Ashcroft and Gonzales have issued statements defending torture. Go to a different site for actual legal news.

avatar
37 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:38 AM

Rst. 90 guy to 190!

avatar
38 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:40 AM

Hey it clearly says it's a LUTHERAN school - it's in the title of the school. the word CATHOLIC is not even mentioned in the article.... nice job with the accuracy.

avatar
39 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:41 AM

25: As a Catholic, I've given up attempting to explain such distinctions, never mind that I don't subscribe to Opus Dei-type insanity despite attending weekly mass.

avatar
40 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:43 AM

2 hours later, the post still says "Catholic."

avatar
41 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:48 AM

Eliza, please moderate yourself.

avatar
42 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:51 AM

More egregious from my perspective as a LAWYER: 2 hours later, the post still says the Cal Supremes "upheld" a ruling when THEY DENIED CERT. NOT THE SAME THING!

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

avatar
43 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:52 AM

I once did a hot Catholic CWT NY 05 chick in the ass.

avatar
44 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:54 AM

43 - you're mistaken. She was Lutheran.

avatar
45 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:56 AM

OMG ELIE!!!!

You deleted the "Pope Führer" reference from your post last week. What the hell?

http://abovethelaw.com/search.php?cx=016468871173144498974%3Aad9tci4ogk0&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=f%C3%BChrer&sa.x=0&sa.y=0&sa=submit#603

This is unreal. You deleted it. Remember when Elie called the Pope of the Catholic Church "Pope Führer" last week!

Here is proof: http://abovethelaw.com/search.php?cx=016468871173144498974%3Aad9tci4ogk0&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=f%C3%BChrer&sa.x=0&sa.y=0&sa=submit#603

Look at the first thread.

Now, Elie has deleted the comment because he regrets it, but won't apologize.

This is crazy.

avatar
46 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 10:59 AM

What's up with the Catholic bashing you mother suckers! What @$$holes.

Eliza, I'd really like to know what the hell you and Elie have against Catholics. Until I get an explanation, let's just leave it at I hope you get forcibly sodomized.

avatar
47 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 11:01 AM

46 - this is an easy one. They both went to Harvard.

avatar
48 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 11:02 AM

Eliza --

Thank you! I am so glad you wrote Catholic, because lets all face it -- lesbian Catholic schoolgirls is soooo much hotter than lesbian Lutherans.

avatar
49 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 11:06 AM

Great almost-correction, Eliza. Now how about correcting the fact that the decision wasn't upheld - the court denied cert.

avatar
50 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 11:10 AM

17, our society will collapse within 30 years time. If discrimination is thought of as the utmost moral evil, then no behavior can ever be proscribed, not can any alien group of people be kept out. Welcome Sharia to the United States!

avatar
51 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 11:16 AM

50 -- I am guessing your family came over on a boat at some point.

avatar
52 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 11:21 AM

51, please learn the difference between legal immigration and illegal immigration. There's something about following the law of the land.

avatar
53 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 11:37 AM

Where's the story about the White & Case lawyer being strong-armed by the Administration in the Chrysler bankruptcy? Seems like that might be within the scope of ATL...

avatar
54 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 11:52 AM

50-52: Hey, we are all human beings on the same planet. Do we really need these silly lines on the maps? Can't we all just get along?

avatar
55 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 12:24 PM

54, do you mind if I move into your home? That's a nice bedroom you got there. Or just let me build a shack with port-a-potty on your front yard? We're both human beings, so why can't we just get along and not pay attention to these imaginary lines on the city/county tract surveys. My apartment is not as nice as yours, due to my own fault, so I am perfectly entitled to move into yours.

avatar
56 Posted by guest | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 7:50 PM

Did somebody mention §90 of the Restatement ?

57 Posted by Pacific Reporter | Permalink Monday, May 4, 2009 8:58 PM

I don't think it's accurate to say "[t]he California Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling" when all the Court did was deny the petition for review.

avatar
58 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, May 5, 2009 12:19 AM

# 12 & # 34 say what's wrong with Obama using the "empathy" quotient litmus test criteria ? "It just makes sense." Yes, # 34, it "just makes sense" for Obama to slap the low functioning autism people with his Special Olympics slur.

Then, he has DOJ "civil rights" intake trained to reject autism hearing impairment discrimination complaints as a 'legal issue not cognizable' under the Americans With Disabilities Act, probably because intake have checklists that only list deaf people as having hearing impairments and not autism.

But don't stop there, have the $900 an hour Chrysler lawyer, Corinne Ball fail to informHon. Judge Gonzalez there are autism creditors with Chrysler car defect brain injury claims for whom Deutsch the "tort committee" lawyer is not representative or typicality under Bankr. C. Sec. 1102 and who are not being provided the federal court accommdoations they have received in other US federal courts to cut off their medical claims from being paid by the Chrysler bankruptcy estate.

No loyalty to the autism people who voted for Obama, contributed to his campaign, and convinced numerous others to vote for him, now comes the *real big* high functioning autism SLAP in the face -- imposing an "empathy" quotient qualification criteria that directly targets the PET scan EQ deficits of autism !

I have to wonder if there are ANY diagnosed high functioning autism people in the pool in #s they are in the population (1:150), for selection of Supreme Corut Justice. Are there even ANY diagnosed people with autism "for whom the system worked for them?" Autism people have extreme male brains, so even nominating a NT woman would cause intra-gender discrimination against a diagnosed female candidate with autism. Nominating a Latina would put three ethnicity people on the Supreme Court )there are two Italians already), instead of an autism person whose PET scan demonstrates speaking a different language "Thinking in Pictures" not pleadings.

Oh, and for over 200 years, ONLY left brained linear thinkers have been selected, not one right brain visuospatial person with autism, better yet, one who must process language as a synesthete.

So, yes, # 12 & # 34, EVERYTHING is wring with Obama's "empathy" quotient qualification criteria -- if you believe Barack Obama is the "civil rights" President and wishes to remedy his mutiple slaps targeting peopel with autism.

In fact, it appear the ONLY remedy for such transgressions on autism would be for the President to search even people with J.D. degrees who are not licensed due to attorney licensure excluding a pool of candidates with autism in #s matching their #s in the population -- i.e. the very people for whom "the system does not work for them" -- to nominate as the next Supreme Court Justice.

And why not ? The only real difference between a prodigious NT and a prodigious savant person with autism is that they are both among "the best and the brightest."

avatar
59 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, May 5, 2009 12:26 AM

Let's also not forget in selecting that Supreme Court nominee, when evaluating pedigrees, how many candidates received their initial bar alicenses in a bar exam in which not only were the people with autism excluded from a fair test, but NTs substance abusing Ritalan and Adderall for performance enhancement were among the takers of the bar examination such candidates passed.

Everything that is up is down and everything that is down is up, and the one thing we DO know is -- NO person diagnosed with autism has EVER been nominated or confirmed as a Justice of the Supreme Court AND the President has announced a direct discriminatory qualification criteria to make sure not person with autism can qualify -- the "empathy" quotient.

avatar
60 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, May 5, 2009 12:27 AM

Let's also not forget in selecting that Supreme Court nominee, when evaluating pedigrees, how many candidates received their initial bar alicenses in a bar exam in which not only were the people with autism excluded from a fair test, but NTs substance abusing Ritalan and Adderall for performance enhancement were among the takers of the bar examination such candidates passed.

Everything that is up is down and everything that is down is up, and the one thing we DO know is -- NO person diagnosed with autism has EVER been nominated or confirmed as a Justice of the Supreme Court AND the President has announced a direct discriminatory qualification criteria to make sure no person with autism can qualify -- the "empathy" quotient.

avatar
61 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, May 5, 2009 12:27 AM

Let's also not forget in selecting that Supreme Court nominee, when evaluating pedigrees, how many candidates received their initial bar alicenses in a bar exam in which not only were the people with autism excluded from a fair test, but NTs substance abusing Ritalan and Adderall for performance enhancement were among the takers of the bar examination such candidates passed.

Everything that is up is down and everything that is down is up, and the one thing we DO know is -- NO person diagnosed with autism has EVER been nominated or confirmed as a Justice of the Supreme Court AND the President has announced a direct discriminatory qualification criteria to make sure no person with autism can qualify -- the "empathy" quotient.

avatar
62 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, May 5, 2009 3:34 AM

#58-61, you are very cool. I saw your amazing website and the incredible magnificent prodigious savant autistic artwork you have featured in your art galleries link ! http://equiisautisticsavantartist.webs.com/


After viewing the brilliant way in which you "Think in Pictures," I can now fully understand how the ultra-discriminatory, anti-autism Judicial selection policies (and so many bar admission policies for that matter) on which the President intends to rely just cannot capture the best and brightest potential candidates. I wonder where else one would find prodigious savant art doodles in another person's law school notes, for Heaven's sake !

If those are some of your credentials, they are ones of exellence I must agree, and if you "Think in Pictures" not pleadings, well I say it's high time a diagnosed savant perosn with autism be found by the President somewhere in the United States and included for the first time ever on our Supreme Court !!

With all the law schools in the U.S. and the U.S. Law School Rankings lists, how hard can it be to find several such persons with such talent !

If the President chooses a pedigree over a budding Michaelangelo or DaVinci for our High Court, then I would have to sonder of he is missing the real meaning and spirit of "empathy."

avatar
63 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, May 5, 2009 3:34 AM

#58-61, you are very cool. I saw your amazing website and the incredible magnificent prodigious savant autistic artwork you have featured in your art galleries link ! http://equiisautisticsavantartist.webs.com/


After viewing the brilliant way in which you "Think in Pictures," I can now fully understand how the ultra-discriminatory, anti-autism Judicial selection policies (and so many bar admission policies for that matter) on which the President intends to rely just cannot capture the best and brightest potential candidates. I wonder where else one would find prodigious savant art doodles in another person's law school notes, for Heaven's sake !

If those are some of your credentials, they are ones of exellence I must agree, and if you "Think in Pictures" not pleadings, well I say it's high time a diagnosed savant perosn with autism be found by the President somewhere in the United States and included for the first time ever on our Supreme Court !!

With all the law schools in the U.S. and the U.S. Law School Rankings lists, how hard can it be to find several such persons with such talent !

If the President chooses a pedigree over a budding Michaelangelo or DaVinci for our High Court, then I would have to wonder of he is missing the real meaning and spirit of "empathy."

avatar
64 Posted by guest | Permalink Tuesday, May 5, 2009 3:35 AM

#58-61, you are very cool. I saw your amazing website and the incredible magnificent prodigious savant autistic artwork you have featured in your art galleries link ! http://equiisautisticsavantartist.webs.com/


After viewing the brilliant way in which you "Think in Pictures," I can now fully understand how the ultra-discriminatory, anti-autism Judicial selection policies (and so many bar admission policies for that matter) on which the President intends to rely just cannot capture the best and brightest potential candidates. I wonder where else one would find prodigious savant art doodles in another person's law school notes, for Heaven's sake !

If those are some of your credentials, they are ones of exellence I must agree, and if you "Think in Pictures" not pleadings, well I say it's high time a diagnosed savant perosn with autism be found by the President somewhere in the United States and included for the first time ever on our Supreme Court !!

With all the law schools in the U.S. and the U.S. Law School Rankings lists, how hard can it be to find several such persons with such talent !

If the President chooses a pedigree over a budding Michaelangelo or DaVinci for our High Court, then I would have to wonder if he is missing the real meaning and spirit of "empathy."

Post Your Comment