Today is Friday, when we present for your consideration quirky queries about style, grammar, and usage. E.g., how to pronounce "substantive"; is a marked-up document a "blackline," or a "redline"; and do you prefer "pleaded" or "pled" in legal writing.

This latest poll may seem a little edgy (especially since today is Good Friday). But it actually presents a serious and legitimate question now facing Second Circuit judges (and their law clerks). Legal research reveals a split of authority; the courts have been inconsistent.

For background, read this post, including all the updates and comments. Now, the question:

Earlier: Lawsuit of the Day: Second Circuit Gets That 'Not So Fresh' Feeling

Here's an interesting factoid. According to a quick search we ran over at the Public Library of Law (powered by Fastcase), the word "douchebag" has yet to appear in the pages of F.3d. [FN1]

That may be about to change, if the Second Circuit decides to publish in a case that was just argued. From the AP:

A teen who used vulgar slang in an Internet blog to complain about school administrators shouldn't have been punished by the school, her lawyer told a federal appeals court.... [Ed. note: an "Internet blog" -- not to be confused with all those Non-Internet blogs.]

Avery Doninger, 17, claims officials at Lewis S. Mills High School violated her free speech rights when they barred her from serving on the student council because of what she wrote from her home computer.

In her Internet journal, Doninger said officials were canceling the school's annual Jamfest, which is similar to a battle of the bands contest. The event, which she helped coordinate, was rescheduled.

According to the lawsuit, she wrote: "'Jamfest' is canceled due to douchebags in central office," and also referred to an administrator who was "pissed off."

In the district court proceedings, there was some extensive discussion of the whole d-bag remark:

When [the school board's lawyer] pressed [student council treasurer Pat] Abate on whether he had ever seen the famous douchebag posting, Abate’s responses included: “I haven’t seen it on my computer monitor, I haven’t seen it in my dreams.”

Guess he isn't very imaginative.

[A lawyer] asked Abate and [senior class vice president Jackie] Evans to define douchebag.

“Stupid, moron, idiot, Abate said.

“Jerks,” Evans said.

Hmm.... They're in the vicinity, but haven't hit the definitional g-spot. We respectfully submit that the term "douchebag" carries a stronger sense of condemnation than the terms proffered by Abate and Evans. See UrbanDictionary.com (defining "douchebag" as "[s]omeone who has surpassed the levels of jerk and a**hole, however not yet reached f**ker or motherf**ker"). [FN2]

[FN1] Maybe someone with free Westlaw or Lexis access can confirm for us that F.3d is douchebag-free.

[FN2] Alternate definition of "douchebag" from Urban Dictionary: "A student or instructor at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities." Well, as long as it's not the law school....

Update: Thanks, commenters -- F.3d is certifiably douchebag-free.

Further Update: Oh wait... As this commenter notes, if you expand the search to include "douche bag" and "douche-bag," you'll see that F.3d has been thoroughly defiled.

Appeals Court Weighs Teen's Web Speech [AP]
Defense Crumbles as Students Weather Cross-Examination [CT News Junkie]
douchebag [Urban Dictionary]
douche commercial [YouTube]

Last Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit heard oral argument in Arar v. Ashcroft, a high-profile lawsuit arising out of the U.S. government's rendition of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen, to Syria.

We interviewed DLA Piper partner Joshua Sohn (at right), co-counsel to Mr. Arar along with the Center for Constitutional Rights, about this interesting case and his firm's work on it.

For readers who aren't familiar with the case, what's it all about?

It's about the federal government's extraordinary renditions program, which sends "people of interest" to sites around the world for indefinite detention and interrogation under harsh conditions -- in this case torture. Mr. Arar, who is a computer engineer, Canadian citizen, husband, and father of two young children, was pulled out of the immigration line at JFK when he was attempting to change planes, but not enter the United States. Mr. Arar was interrogated at the airport, detained and interrogated at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, and ultimately flown by private jet in the dead of night to Jordan and delivered to Syria. Mr. Arar was never charged with a crime, was not allowed to consult with an attorney for many days when he was first detained and both he and his attorney were lied to about what was going to happen to him and the fact that he was being sent to Syria.

Mr. Arar made plain to those holding him that he feared being tortured in Syria and that he wanted to be sent to Canada-where he lived and was a citizen. Those pleas were ignored and Mr. Arar was sent to Syria where he was tortured and kept in a grave-like cell for almost a year. This case seeks to hold the federal officials who are responsible for Mr. Arar's treatment, responsible.

Read the rest of the interview, after the jump.

* As a judge, Michael Mukasey cited Shakespeare in snarking on -- and striking down -- the federal sentencing guidelines. [AP]

* Speaking of district judges, the well-regarded Judge Paul Cassell (D. Utah -- at right) is resigning from the bench -- partly due to low judicial pay. [Sentencing Law & Policy via WSJ Law Blog]

* What not to wear when you go to the airport. [Boston Globe]

* Unlike, say, the Ninth Circuit, the Second Circuit follows on-point Supreme Court precedent. [TaxProf Blog]

* Your submissions for Blawg Review #127 are respectfully requested. [Deliberations]

Update: The citation for the Mukasey opinion is United States v. Mendez, 691 F. Supp. 656, 663-64 (S.D.N.Y. 1988).

Back in this post, in which we incorrectly predicted that Mukasey wouldn't get the AG nomination, we wrote: "We'd also add that Judge Mukasey probably isn't solidly conservative enough for the White House. See, e.g., his views on the federal sentencing guidelines."

* Lawyer opinions solicited: Is this an effective ad for malpractice insurance? [Copyranter]

* Another ugly day for the stock market. [Volokh Conspiracy]

* On that subject: Is the vast family fortune of Rachel Kovner, ATL's official It girl, in jeopardy -- as recently rumored by our sibling site? Not exactly. But if Bruce Kovner's legendary fund is up only 3 percent year-to-date, things could certainly be better. [DealBreaker]

* What? The iPhone is not God's greatest gift to man? Bite your tongue! [Althouse]

* Ignoring a handslap will get you a benchslap. See page 15, footnote 7. [U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (PDF)]

* Washingtonienne, the sequel? But this time around, blame the "backdoor action" on the Spicy Mussel Soup. [Medill Reports]

* A compelling defense of Judge Dennis Jacobs's "look ma, no eyes" approach to dissenting. [ProfessorBainbridge.com]

* "My friends said to me, 'It would take a murder trial for you to meet the right person.'" [Associated Press]

* Because we need to use the "Weirdness" tag at least once a day. [Underbelly]

Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals engages in some impressive benchslappery in a dissent released today. He's not attacking the court's majority opinion, just ignoring it:

I concede that this short opinion of mine does not consider or take into account the majority opinion. So I should disclose at the outset that I have not read it.

Ouch! (We take particular pleasure in pointing out that the majority opinion is by Judge Guido Calabresi, LEWW's favorite elfin jurist.)

Click below to read more about the case, plus more from Judge Jacobs' delightfully disdainful dissent.

We now interrupt your regularly scheduled programming of Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell to bring you some embarrassing news about another ultra-prestigious New York law firm: Simpson Thacher & Bartlett.

From Decision of the Day:

From the "it can happen to anyone" file, the Second Circuit dismisses a cross-appeal by Travelers Insurance Company because its law firm filed the notice of appeal one day late. After the losing party in the district court filed a notice of appeal, Travelers had 14 days to file its notice of cross-appeal. However, the firm calculated the 14 days from the date it received the notice, not from the date the notice was actually filed. The district court denied Traveler’s motion to extend the deadline by one day, explaining that this was a case of "garden variety attorney inattention" and not excusable neglect. The Second Circuit affirms (PDF).

The law firm that made this rookie mistake was one of the whitest of the white shoes, the venerable Simpson Thacher & Bartlett. The partners on the brief have stunning resumes, and the fifth-year associate has done plenty of litigating, given that he is admitted to practice in three jurisdictions and thirteen courts. So, yes, it can happen to anyone. (And in case you’re wondering, no, STB did not reject me.)

Decision of the Day is too nice to name the STB lawyers on the brief, but we have no such qualms. These are matters of public record. The attorneys who screwed up here are partner Barry R. Ostrager, partner Andrew T. Frankel, and associate Robert J. Pfister.

Barry Ostrager, by the way, is routinely named as one of the country's top business litigators and trial lawyers. See, e.g., here, here, and here. He's not particularly nice; as one litigator diplomatically observed, Ostrager "doesn't suffer from the need to be loved." But he has been very successful for his clients.

Given Ostrager's stellar reputation, this latest defeat is particularly embarrassing. It's one thing when you litigate a case as best you can, then lose because the law just isn't on your side. It's another thing when a federal trial judge finds you guilty of "garden variety attorney inattention," and then an appeals court affirms, holding that your "attorney inadvertence" -- a charitable phrasing -- does not constitute "excusable neglect." Great litigators, after all, are supposed to be careful, attentive, and detail-oriented.

But this is not Barry Ostrager's only lapse. His failure to pay attention to detail extends to the men's room -- as we have had the misfortune of observing, firsthand.

Read all about it, if you dare -- don't say we didn't warn you -- after the jump.

Some people, like the Overlawyered crew, can't stop bitching about our ridiculously litigious society. They complain that here in the United States, people sue at the drop of a hat, for the most stupid or frivolous of reasons.

But there may be an upside to our culture of litigation. From the AFP:

The leading association of US fashion designers said it would issue guidelines this week on the issue of skinny models. The Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA) will issue its findings to designers, modeling agencies and production companies by the end of the week ahead of castings for fashion week, which begins on February 2....

The former president of the Council of Fashion Designers of America, Stan Herman, last year ruled out a ban on skinny models in New York, saying such rules would expose the organizers to possible legal action.

"It would be the same as banning somebody who's too fat," he told AFP in September. "Those people could sue... I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole."

Indeed. And who'd want to be on the receiving end of such a class action, filed on behalf of every runway model with a sub-18 BMI? If liability is established, damages could be astronomical. As Linda Evangelista famously quipped, those girls "don't wake up for less than $10,000 a day."

So when Anna Wintour says her bedtime prayers tonight, she should thank God for the trial lawyers. They're the only ones standing between her and a bevy of big-boned beauties.

Update: And models aren't afraid of going to court to vindicate their rights. Check out this lawsuit, the subject of a recent Second Circuit ruling.

Doctors Fault Designers’ Stance Over Thin Models [New York Times]
New York fashion group to issue guidelines on skinny models [AFP]
NYC Fashion Week to Ban Twig Girls? [Gawker]

(Yes, this is ridiculously late. But we hope, for the love of God, that you don't rely upon us for real legal news. News aggregation is not our primary purpose, and there are many other sites that do it better and faster.)

* Now that President Ford has passed away, everyone must write the obligatory article about his long-lived SCOTUS appointment, Justice John Paul Stevens. [Chicago Tribune, ABC News, Los Angeles Times, WSJ.com; all via How Appealing]

* State bars tend to give government lawyers a wide berth. So when a bar brings ethics charges against a prosecutor, you know something stinks to high heaven. [Associated Press]

* Videotaping an execution is pretty grotesque. But then again, it's probably no more disturbing than this video. [CBS News]

* You can accuse the Catholic Church of many things; but selective application of their teachings is probably not one of them. The Vatican opposes the death penalty even for Saddam Hussein. [Associated Press]

* Speaking of death penalty cases, the Supreme Court's incredible shrinking docket may be getting even smaller. [SCOTUSblog]

* Biglaw + Racial Issues = Lively Blog Comment Threads. [Overlawyered; WSJ Law Blog]

* Tax lawyers at Cravath aren't the only ones with a weakness for underage girls. [Associated Press]

* Oyez, oyez: Interested in an administrative gig that pays over $150K? The Second Circuit is seeking a new Clerk of Court. [2nd Circuit (PDF) via How Appealing]

* The Volokh Conspiracy wins Best Law Blog. Congrats to the VC crew! [The Weblog Awards 2006 via 2nd Place Winner How Appealing]

* F&@% you, FCC!. [CNN.com]

* And in my-home-state-is-not-completely-backward news... [Jurist]

* If he sold it, Ron Goldman wants the money. [AP via FindLaw]

* Internet illiterate NY Mom, who doesn't know "a kazaa from a kazoo," is dropped from recording industry's suit against her children. [AP via lexisONE]

Our big sibling reports on the departure of high-finance hottie Suzanne Nora Johnson from Goldman Sachs, the obscenely profitable investment bank. Johnson, who served on the firm's 23-member management committee, was the highest-ranking woman at Goldman Sachs.*

And as the WSJ Law Blog notes, in a post entitled Associates, You Too Can Become a Master of the Universe, Johnson is a former lawyer:

Before joining Goldman in 1985, Johnson (USC, Harvard Law) was an associate at Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett and clerked on the Second Circuit.

Anyone know which judge Johnson clerked for? If that jurist is still living, Johnson -- who earned a cool $17.2 million last year (eat your hearts out, Biglaw partners) -- should foot the bill for the judge's official portrait.

(While we're correcting the titles of Law Blog posts, "spritely" should be replaced by "sprightly" back in this post. As far as we know, the elfin Erwin Chemerinsky did not participate in the KSR v. Teleflex argument.)

* Goldman Sachs has no relationship or connection whatsoever with Goldmansex.com -- other than to golden shower rain on that poor website's parade.

Top Goldman Gal Dumps Bank [DealBreaker]
Associates, You Too Can Become a Master of the Universe [WSJ Law Blog]

Earlier: Because $7 Million a Year Isn't Enough for Them

Over the weekend, after spending several days in critical condition, New Haven police officer Dan Picagli passed away. Officer Picagli was the officer who was struck last Tuesday in a traffic accident by Judge John M. Walker, Jr.

Judge Walker sits on the Second Circuit and maintains his chambers in New Haven (where he also teaches at Yale Law School). He was driving home in his sport utility vehicle at the time of the accident.

Officer Picagli, 38, was a 17-year-veteran of the police force and a father of four. He was praised for his service by several public officials, including New Haven's mayor and chief of police. In the words of Mayor John DeStefano, "Officer Picagli was more than a cop. He was someone who brought people together, who created a sense of community... His basic decency will keep his memory vibrant in our city."

A copy of the obituary for Officer Picagli, which we obtained by fax from the New Haven Police Department, can be viewed after the jump. It contains information about funeral arrangements and memorial gifts in lieu of flowers.

ATL sends its sympathies and condolences to the Picagli family.

Injured Police Officer Dies In Hospital [Hartford Courant via How Appealing]
Youth Officer Loses Struggle After Being Struck by SUV [New Haven Register]
Police Officer Dan Picagli [The Officer Down Memorial Page]

Earlier: An Update on Officer Picagli and Judge Walker
Judge John M. Walker Hits Police Officer in Traffic Accident

More details have emerged concerning the accident in which Judge John Walker (2d Cir.) hit a police officer with his SUV. Here's the latest news:

A federal judge in a sport utility ran into a police officer directing traffic in the rain, critically injuring the officer, authorities said Thursday. New Haven police Chief Francisco Ortiz said Senior Judge John M. Walker was "very much distraught"over the Tuesday night crash.

Officer Dan Picagli, 38, was in critical condition Thursday at Yale-New Haven Hospital. He had been wearing a black raincoat and a reflective vest when he was hit, Ortiz said.

Ortiz said Walker is cooperating, and police did not feel it was necessary to test him for drugs or alcohol.

Coincidentally, just last month the New York Law Journal published a rather long article reviewing John Walker's successful tenure as Chief Judge of the Second Circuit. Some excerpts and commentary, after the jump.

* Buttons -- isn't that the new song by the Pussycat Dolls? Yes; but it's also the issue in a case argued before the Supreme Court yesterday. Question Presented: Was a murder defendant’s right to a fair trial violated when the judge allowed relatives of the victim to sit behind the prosecutor, sporting buttons with the victim’s photo on them? [New York Times; Washington Post; Slate]

* A federal judge rules that candidates for the state bench can't be barred from personally soliciting campaign contributions. So let's just shove C-notes down their robes. [New York Times]

* Ex-Enron CEO Jeff Skilling won't take the Martha Stewart approach: he'd like to remain free on bail while his appeal winds its way through the courts. This makes sense: his sentence is likely to be way longer than Martha's brief stay at Camp Cupcake. [Washington Post]

* Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was slumming it earlier this week at the Second Circuit. The Times provides a UTR-esque account of the "mind-numbing" proceedings. [New York Times]

* The Supreme Court heard oral argument yesterday in Cunningham v. California, an important case raising the constitutionality of California's sentencing scheme -- and one that will have implications for other state sentencing systems. (Readers of the tea leaves suggest that Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito may not be in complete agreement with Justices Scalia and Thomas. Who are you calling "Scalito"?) [Sentencing Law & Policy; Los Angeles Times; New York Times]

Another day, another circuit court decision involving a school kid with a wise-ass t-shirt.

Earlier this year, the Ninth Circuit dealt with the case of a kid who wore a T-shirt to school that read, "Be ashamed, our school embraced what God has condemned. Homosexuality is shameful." (The kid lost; and that's why they call it the Ninth Circuit.)

Today, the Second Circuit also ruled in favor of the student, on these facts:

[T]he images depicted on the shirt were a martini glass, three lines of cocaine, a razor blade and a straw. According to the court, the alcohol and drug-related images were intended to portray President Bush as a former alcohol and drug user.

The school allowed a large picture of the president's face, wearing a helmet, superimposed on the body of a chicken. The shirt identified Bush as "Chicken-Hawk-In-Chief." But it demanded that Zachary cover the alcohol and drug-related images. He did so with duct tape on which he wrote "censored."

Zachary and his parents then filed suit claiming that he had been required to cover the images in violation of his free speech rights.

These cases are quite en vogue. And even though the slogan wasn't on his clothing, don't forget the kid with the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner, which Ken Starr is appealing to the Supreme Court.

We like these cases, 'cause they're more interesting than typical appeals court fare. But they must be quite a headache from the perspective of school administrators -- and certainly another argument in favor of dress codes.

Picture this: "Express Yourself," a Project Runway challenge in which the designers would have to produce an "expressive" outfits. Wouldn't that be great?

But don't hold your breath waiting for this. Last year we submitted a feedback form to the Project Runway website, suggesting that they hold a judicial robe design challenge -- with the wild 'n wacky Judge Alex Kozinski as the guest judge. Alas, they haven't gotten back to us.

'Offensive' Speech Gets Narrow Reading at 2nd Circuit [New York Law Journal]
Rehearing on T-shirt is denied [San Francisco Chronicle]
Project Runway [official website]

Wow -- a whole lot of lawyers got married last weekend. And some of them are very impressive people. Like William Michael, a Yale law grad who will be clerking for the prestige-oozing Second Circuit. And Matthew Schwartz, who clerked for Judge Shira Scheindlin (S.D.N.Y.) from 2002 to 2004 -- and lived to tell the tale...

But in order to make it into this week's Legal Eagle Wedding Watch, both members of the couple needed to be lawyers (since Legal Eagle Wedding Watch prefers all-lawyer couples, and things were that competitive this week).

So neither Mr. Michael nor Mr. Schwartz made it past the velvet rope. Here are this week's contestants:

1. Dara Kestenbaum, Scott Freling

2. Elizabeth Oyer, Geoffrey Wyatt

3. Sharmila Sohoni, Christopher Egleson

Find out this week's winner of "Legal Eagle Wedding Watch," after the jump (i.e., click on the "continue reading" link below).