David Lat is the founder and managing editor of Above the Law. His writing has also appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Observer, Washingtonian magazine, and New York magazine. Prior to ATL, he launched Underneath Their Robes, a blog about federal judges. Before entering the journalism world, he worked as a federal prosecutor in Newark, New Jersey; a litigation associate at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, in New York; and a law clerk to Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. David graduated from Harvard College and Yale Law School, where he served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal. He has received several awards for his work on ATL, including recognition as one of the American Lawyer’s Top 50 Big Law Innovators of the Last 50 Years; one of the ABA Journal’s Legal Rebels, a group of pioneers within the legal profession; and one of the Fastcase 50, "the fifty most interesting, provocative, and courageous leaders in the world of law, scholarship, and legal technology." You can connect with him on Facebook or Twitter.
12:12–unbelievable. I can’t believe anyone voted for Janet with a Part. The AG was never the femme de la femme, but with a part, she’s all man. It really draws out that jaw line in a way that makes me uncomfortable (though that’s probably really just a function of which WSJ artist was on call that day).
Yeah, we know: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales remains in office.* But his days are looking numbered. He’s received the kiss of death — a presidential expression of “confidence” — and even some Republicans are calling for his resignation.
So we have to ask:
If Alberto Gonzales steps (or gets pushed) aside, who should take his place as Attorney General?
We’re rooting for Shanetta Cutlar. But if she doesn’t get tapped, Andrew Cohen floats this interesting idea.
Right now, Patrick Fitzgerald is most well-known for his (successful) work on the Scooter Libby case. This may preclude his selection as AG, given the political hot potato that it turned into — and the embarrassment it caused for the Bush Administration.
But let’s not forget that, setting aside the Libby case, Fitzgerald has the background that one would normally seek in an Attorney General. He’s the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago), one of the nation’s most prestigious prosecutor’s offices, and he has some serious additional credentials.
After graduating from one of our nation’s finest high schools (shameless plug for our alma mater), Pat Fitzgerald went on to Amherst College and Harvard Law School. Before taking over as the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District, he was a line prosecutor in the legendary Southern District of New York. As an AUSA in the SDNY, he worked on some major prosecutions, including the trials of Omar Abdel Rahman and Ramzi Yousef. He has been praised for his work as U.S. Attorney in Chicago.
Thoughts? Nominating Fitzgerald as AG might be kinda crazy, but kinda brilliant. It would change the story line big time, in a way that the White House might welcome.
(Some other random names we’ve heard as possible AG candidates: former Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey; SEC Chairman Christopher Cox; and Judge Laurence H. Silberman, of the D.C. Circuit.)
* It’s a rainy Friday afternoon, not much is going on, and people aren’t paying attention to the news. If you’d like to step down, Mr. Attorney General, there are still several hours of prime resignation time available to you. The Case for Attorney General Patrick Fitzgerald [Washington Post / Bench Conference]
Chef Robert Invine was given a challenging task. He was directed “to prepare a stately array of hors d’oeuvres,” to be served at the Inaugural Ball of Judge Rendell’s husband, Pennsylvania Governor Edward Rendell.
The number of guests: 4,000. The amount of time available to him: 24 hours. Despite the difficulty of the project, Chef Irvine completed his mission.
But we were a little disappointed with the episode, for a number of reasons….
As we head into another weekend, here’s the latest LIST OF SHAME. We’re down to only five firms (Vault 100 ranking on the left, AmLaw 100 ranking on the right):
43. Baker & McKenzie (3)
82. Reed Smith (33)
83. Dorsey & Whitney (68)
86. McGuireWoods (65)
100. Seyfarth Shaw (66)
If any of these firms doesn’t belong on the list, please email us, with supporting documentation (if any).
Please discuss other salary developments in the comments to this post. Thanks.
We thoroughly enjoyed ourselves at last night’s Kennedy Center event, The Trial of Hamlet, presided over by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. It was highly entertaining and quite educational, on a number of subjects: Hamlet, literary criticism, psychiatry, and the art of advocacy, among others.
We’re planning to write more about the evening later. For now, we’ll give you the bottom line: Who won?
The prosecution team consisted of Miles Ehrlich, a former federal prosecutor (and law clerk to Justice Kennedy), and Cristina Arguedas, a California criminal defense attorney. Hamlet was represented by Abbe Lowell, the prominent D.C. defense lawyer, and Catherine Crier, a Court TV host and former Texas state judge. The defense argued that Hamlet should not be held criminally responsible for the killing of Polonius by reason of insanity.
After testimony from psychiatric experts and arguments from counsel, the jury of 12 retired to deliberate. In the end, they emerged deadlocked, voting 6-6 in the case. After receiving the jury’s verdict, Justice Kennedy, without missing a beat, said something like, “Hamlet, please rise. I hereby remand you to the pages of literature, where you will continue to intrigue us for centuries to come….”
Justice Kennedy’s “remand” speech was so eloquent that it sounded scripted. Many audience members were left wondering whether the outcome was rigged — whether the jury was going to be a hung jury no matter what, in order to demonstrate the complexity, ambiguity, and richness of Hamlet as a literary text.
As it turns out, however, the jury vote was NOT rigged. They truly were deadlocked, by the end of their deliberation time (which, due to the schedule for the evening, was admittedly not that long).
And don’t blame Justice Kennedy for their indecision! While the jury was deliberating, AMK was moderating a discussion about the play with the participants in the trial, in front of the Kennedy Center audience.
Despite the frustratingly ambiguous verdict — we must admit, we like our entertainment with closure — we had a good time. More discussion will follow later. If you attended and have thoughts to share, please feel free to email us. Sane or not, Hamlet a hit in Washington trial [Reuters] Earlier: Justice Kennedy and The Trial of Hamlet
Ty Clevenger, a former attorney in the Special Litigation Section (“SPL”) of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, is the one who got the ball rolling with respect to colorful anecdotes about Shanetta Cutlar, the charismatic and strong-willed chief of the Section.
Clevenger sent a letter to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty raising concerns about Cutlar’s leadership of SPL. Shortly thereafter, Clevenger was effectively fired by Cutlar the next day.
As for Clevenger’s letter, the DAG assigned it to Wan J. Kim, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, for a response. Earlier this month, Clevenger received the following from Wan Kim:
Letters to McDonald’s, complaining about insufficient mintiness in Shamrock Shakes,* receive responses evincing greater concern.
Now we understand why Shanetta Cutlar was comfortable enough in her position to wear a tiara to a recent meeting of DOJ section chiefs. We predict she will remain in power at SPL long after Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has left the building (which may not be saying much — but you get our point).
* Yes, Shamrock Shakes are back! We enjoyed one in Miami earlier this week.
More fine blogging from Lavi Soloway — although his latest material is related only indirectly to Aaron Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell.
Remember LeGal, the gay and lesbian lawyers’ association that got itself into a bit of controversy after its (now former) president, Jack Scheich, came out swinging in favor of S&C?
Well, last night LeGal held its big annual dinner. At this gala event, big law firms cough up dough for insurance against anti-gay bias lawsuits tables to show their support for the organization. (We wrote previously about the hideous invitation for the dinner over here.)
We weren’t able to attend last night’s festivities, ’cause we were spending quality time with Justice Kennedy. But Lavi Soloway was there. His party write-up, with photos, appears here.
There was a rumor floating around, several weeks ago, that Aaron Charney was going to make an appearance at the LeGal dinner. We were, for obvious reasons, excited about this possibility. It might have given rise to some deliciously awkward moments — since his former employer and current adversary, S&C, bought a table and turned out in force.
Alas, based on Soloway’s coverage, it appears the answer to “Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner?” was “Not Aaron Charney.” If Charney had been there, surely Soloway — who knows what Charney looks like, having seen him at the big hearing earlier this week — would have mentioned it.
So what happened to poor Aaron? Was he stuck at home, scrubbing floors like Cinderella, while his mean S&C stepsisters danced the night away at the Ritz-Carlton?
Looking ahead, will the Aaron Charney saga have a fairy tale ending? Might Charney’s newfound fame bring him to the attention of a sugar daddy Prince Charming — a boyfriend so rich he can afford to drop his lawsuit against S&C? Will S&C break down and settle the case, placing a glass slipper on Charney’s (presumably large) foot,* thereby transforming him from an unemployed ex-Biglaw associate into a millionaire plaintiff princess?
To find out the answers, just stay tuned to ATL. We will continue to cover even the most trivial developments in this litigation with obsessive zeal.
* We speculate that Charney has large feet because we hear that he’s tall and thin — as you can sort of see from this photo, by Lavi Soloway. NYC Lesbian & Gay Lawyers Hold Annual Dinner [Soloway] Earlier: Beware the Ides of March
As we’ve mentioned before, Lavi Soloway has posted some great coverage of yesterday’s hearing in Aaron Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell. He offers detailed discussion of the arguments before Justice Bernard Fried, his impressions of them, and original photos.
You can access Soloway’s two posts here and here. They’re well worth your time.
Some excerpts, with commentary from us, appear after the jump.
Hey, have you read Above the Law for like one single minute in the past month? If so, you probably know that we’re having this big blogger conference on March 14th at the Yale Club. Yeah, the Yale Club. You’ll be able to recognize me: I’ll be the only big… blogger guy surreptitiously holding a can of crimson spray-paint.
Speaking of coming, you should come. We’ve got CLE and all that. Click here to buy tickets to get CLE credit for listening to bloggers scream about stuff on the internet.
To refresh your memory, details on the panel that I’m moderating — almost entirely sober, mind you — follow.
My panel is called Blogs as Agents of Change, and we’re going to talk about whether all of these spilled pixels are actually making a difference. You know my view… just ask Lawrence Mitchell, but here are the panelists:
So you spent a considerable amount of time courting, selling and maybe even doing some friendly stalking of that attractive lateral partner candidate with a sizable book. After he or she ignored your emails and didn’t return your calls, a few weeks go by and you read a press release in the legal media announcing the recent move to a competing firm.
Rats. Another one got away from you. You cringe when you consider how much time was spent in meetings that did not bear fruit. Your heart aches when recall how you were led to believe this was a marriage made in heaven.
You have been rejected.
The sting of rejection is painful, even for fancy law firms. But you need to find a way that you can turn this disappointment into a legitimate learning experience.
No, this isn’t a pre-party before we come back next fall for the real thing. This IS the real thing. Quinn Emanuel is pushing the envelope on recruiting. The party is now. This is when you meet the partners and associates face to face. This is when we begin the dance that could land you an offer for your second summer BEFORE school starts in the fall.
First: You come to the party. Second: If you like us, you send your resume after June 1, 2014. Third: If we like each other, you get an offer.
We’re not waiting for fall. We’re not doing the twenty minute thing. This party is the real thing!
We hope you’ll join us, and look forward to meeting you.
The traditional job application and interview process can be impersonal, and applicants often struggle to present themselves as more than just the sum of their GPAs, alma maters, and previous work history. ATL has partnered with ViewYou to help job seekers overcome this challenge. ViewYou NOW Profiles offer a unique way for job seekers to make a personal, memorable connection with prospective employers: introduction videos. These videos allow job candidates to display their personalities, interpersonal skills, and professional interests, creating an eDossier to brand themselves to potential employers all over the world. Check it out today!