* Representative John Murtha died just one week after having his gall bladder removed. Coincidence? I had to have my gall bladder removed three and a half years ago, I was terrified until they told me they were using “lasers” — like in Star Trek … cool. Sorry commenters, I remain as strong as an ox. [New York Personal Injury Law Blog]

* The South Carolina Subversive Organization Registration Act is offensive on its face. You don’t even have to get into the obvious money grab aspect to become annoyed. [Going Concern]

* Understanding why law school applications continue to rise despite every observable measure of reason and logic might be the last step to finally nailing down a unified theory of everything. Somebody needs to lock Stephen Hawking, Brent Spiner, and Robert Post in a room until they figure this out. [Business Insider]

* Is it time for laid off lawyers to start doing manual labor? I hope not. Above the Truckstop doesn’t seem like it would be as fun to write for. [Law and More]

* InsideCounsel wonders why Baby Boomer partners can be found in the office long after younger associates leave? I’m not entirely sure, but it might have something to do with the fact that the kids understand that a brick and mortar office is just a little bit obsolete. [What About Clients?]

This afternoon, the Federalist Society at the University of Chicago Law School sponsored an interesting debate. It featured Berkeley law professor John Yoo, author of the so-called “torture memos,” and Bob Barr, the prominent libertarian and former congressman, debating the following subject: “Presidential Power v. Civil Liberties in Times of War.”

(Executive power is the subject of Professor Yoo’s new — and well-reviewed — book, Crisis and Command.)

Reports on the proceedings from attendees — plus comment from Professor Yoo, who apparently (although ambiguously) accused the Bush Administration of “incompetence and stupidity” — after the jump.

Maybe Toyota should take a lesson from Bingham McCutchen: don’t try to cut corners when producing a hybrid.

Back in October, Bingham announced that it would be adopting a new “merit-lockstep” hybrid approach to associate compensation. The plan came with the stamp of approval from Bingham partners and associates. And a majority of Above the Law readers also approved of Bingham’s hybrid approach.

Today, Bingham rolled out its hybrid system. The firm is providing true-up, lockstep raises for people who hit 1900 hours. The double bump extends nationally, across all of Bingham’s offices. People who hit 1500 hours will only be getting a single class bump in salary. We understand that only a small percentage of Bingham associates were low enough on hours to be affected by this stratification.

At the low end, people who billed fewer than 1500 hours will have their salaries frozen again.

On the bright side, all of the people who are frozen will have their hours reevaluated in June. If they’re on pace, they’ll get their money.

The Bingham McCutchen lockstep base pay structure is clear and straightforward (see chart after the jump). For bonuses, welcome to the black box that is merit-based compensation.

Last week, we dropped by NY LegalTech to find out What’s on the Mind of the General Counsel.

Three GCs were on the panel: Seth Krauss of Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.; Dawson Horn III of Tyco International; and Jonathan Broder of Conrail. Conrail is, of course, the railroad company. Take-Two is a software and video game company, of Grand Theft Auto fame. Tyco is a well-known manufacturing company, of shower curtain scandal fame.

They provided some insight into the in-house world and what they look for when they hire outside counsel. “”We’re instruction-rich and cash-poor,” said one.

They offered advice to partners and lawyers who want their business. “Know something about me,” said Horn. In other words, Google him. And: “Believe in the cause,” he added.

That’s rather vague. More specific instructions for getting hired by a general counsel, and some advice for fellow GCs, after the jump.

As we previously reported, a sizable portion of the art collection of defunct law firm Heller Ehrman was sold at auction yesterday. The auction took place at Bonhams in San Francisco, before a standing-room-only crowd.

We submitted absentee bids on the following:

• lot 1, Pale Orange Begonia (we bid $500; it sold for $1,159);
• lot 2, Glass of Water (we bid $500; it sold for $671);
• lot 99, Lover of Time (we bid $800; it sold for $1,830);
• lot 210, Bonsai and Bicycle (we bid $1,000; it sold for $4,575); and
• lot 290, Return of the Rice Cooker (we bid $2,000; it sold for $5,185).

All of the items we bid on went for well above their high estimates — bad news for us, but good news for Heller creditors.

So, how much dinero did the auction generate in total?

In October, we mentioned that the giant department store, Macy’s, was having some trouble disposing of its sensitive documents. Reports surfaced that internal documents, some of which included the Social Security numbers of Macy’s customers, were being disposed of on the streets of St. Louis, in lidless containers.

Now, months after the initial, embarrassing incident, Macy’s is doing it again. Missouri Lawyers Weekly reports (subscription):

Sensitive Macy’s records have again been littering the sidewalks of downtown St. Louis.

The records, meant for disposal, included shoppers’ Social Security numbers, employees’ expense reports, memos from the department store’s attorneys and even a letter from a distressed aunt about a foul-mouthed Santa Claus.

Macy’s — and Federated Department Stores, which owns Macy’s — has had months to fix this obvious problem. Their solution? Wait for it… buy lids for the streetside containers!

Details on this clever plan after the jump.

A few months back, the Student Bar Association at Northwestern University School of Law got its panties in a bunch over inappropriate language and the “unthinking use of stereotypes.” Saying that you were “raped” by an exam, for example, was offensive to some on campus, said the SBA. (They preferred that Northwestern students engage only in consensual test-taking.)

At the time, we asked:

Is there an epidemic of vulgarity at Northwestern that the SBA is desperately trying to stop?

Apparently so. The school is gearing up for its Barristers’ Ball, and students are offended by language all over again.

The vulgar words this time?

Here’s some good news about Edward DiDonato, the Villanova lacrosse star and son of a Fox Rothschild partner, who was allegedly shot by Gerald Ung, a Temple University law student. From Lacrosse News:

Former Villanova lacrosse captain Eddie DiDonato has cleared all serious life-threatening obstacles and has been taken off his ventilator following a ninth operation 17 days after being shot six times in an Old City altercation, according to his best friend.

DiDonato, a La Salle College High graduate, remains in the Intensive Care Unit and according to Thomas Jefferson University Hospital officials is still listed in fair condition.

Rob Forster, who has served as the DiDonato family spokesman, said his former teammate on the Explorers’ 2004 state championship team has continued to amaze doctors as well as family and friends with his resiliency. DiDonato was near death after the shootings early on Jan. 17 and survived a major scare 10 days ago when his condition became grave due to an infection.

We’re glad to hear about DiDonato’s improved state. We will keep you posted on his condition.

Meanwhile, a legal defense fund has been set up for the accused shooter, law student Gerald Ung.

A Florida state court judge, Jeffrey Streitfeld, has decided that the largest individual award to a former smoker is excessive. The Daily Business Review (gavel bang: ABA Journal) reports on the good news for tobacco peddler Philip Morris:

Calling the $300 million jury verdict “excessive” and “shocking,” Judge Jeffrey Streitfeld said he would determine a lower award later against tobacco giant Philip Morris USA. He gave no indication when he would rule.

The landmark verdict was reached in November for Cindy Naugle, an emphysema patient who quit smoking in 1993.

There are few things that bother me more than smokers blaming tobacco companies for becoming addicted to their products. Does Philip Morris sell an illegal product? No. Do you need to be galactically stupid to smoke yet not know that smoking is dangerous? Yes. So what is the rationale for suing a company that produces a legal product you’d have to be epically dumb to not know is potentially dangerous?

As a smoker, I feel particularly qualified to say: it’s not Philip Morris’s fault if I get sick. It’s my fault. I take personal responsibility for my own health choices.

Personal responsibility. Seems like a winning argument, doesn’t it? Well, it’s pretty much the argument pursued by Philip Morris’s lawyers. And … it horribly backfired.

Judge Streitfeld has decided to step in to correct the lawyers’ mistake.

* “Justice Hillary Clinton?” Next up in this traffic-whoring Daily Beast series: “Supreme Court Justice Palin?” [Daily Beast]

* Faegre & Benson partner Robert Matthews and his brother died in a small plane crash over the weekend. Matthews had a mid-air collision while piloting a Cirrus SR20 plane, also killing the other pilot. [Denver Business Journal via ABA Journal]

* NYU grad sues the university for revoking his MBA. [New York Post]

* Why do people pass along Internet links? The NYT says “awe.” Judging from our traffic patterns, we’d add shock-and-awe as a secondary reason. [New York Times]

* Keeping the John Edwards sex tape on lockdown. [Raleigh News & Observer]

* The class-action lawsuit headed by former UCLA basketball star Ed O’Bannon against the NCAA can proceed. College athletes are one step closer to compensation for the use of their images and likenesses in television advertisements, video games and on apparel. [New York Times]

* On Larry Lessig, copyrights, and remixing, to the tune of Lisztomania…. [Julian Sanchez]

* Which is not our favorite Phoenix song. Our favorite after the jump…

We first heard about this months ago — back in September, from another speaker at the Lavender Law conference. We didn’t mention it at the time, though, since we’re not that comfortable outing people.

But now that the cat has been let out of the bag — or closet, as the case may be — by the mainstream media, let’s… go there. From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The biggest open secret in the landmark trial over same-sex marriage being heard in San Francisco is that the federal judge who will decide the case, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, is himself gay.

Many gay politicians in San Francisco and lawyers who have had dealings with Walker say the 65-year-old jurist, appointed to the bench by President George H.W. Bush in 1989, has never taken pains to disguise — or advertise — his orientation.

Shocking? Not exactly. Judge Walker is a professionally successful white male, with great job security and a six-figure income, who’s in his sixties — and has never been married. A confirmed bachelor, if you will. Who lives in San Francisco. Umm, yeah.

(On the other hand, we hear His Honor’s favorite drink is a Maker’s Mark Manhattan — a fairly butch beverage, despite the maraschino cherry. We’ll stick with our cosmos, thank you very much.)

So this brings us to the question that Ashby Jones posed over at the WSJ Law Blog earlier today: If Judge Walker is gay, what should we make of that fact?