* Fear not, you can continue the inexplicable and somewhat cheap practice of wearing buttons of your slain loved one when attending the trial of the accused perpetrator. [The Buck Stops Here]
* Think of the occasional theft as a write-off, which of course is moot since you’re not paying taxes anyway. And then rent Traffic, you clueless surburban kid. Disclaimer: I attended a suburban high school (but I never inhaled). [Sui Generis]
* Illinois wants to make it even easier for you to get out of jury duty. [Concurring Opinions]
* The choice of law school over medical school has its roots in our rather iffy math skills; but this is Yale Law, where the career center’s number-heavy cheat-sheet on the whole billable hours thing assumes (correctly) YLS students are the s**t all-around. [Precedent: The New Rules of Law and Style]
* We think that this four-year-old’s parents may have tried explaining the birds and the bees using such technical terms as “special hug.” We’re hoping that he did not use sound effects during the alleged, er, breast nuzzling. [Waco Tribune]
* An additional bullet-point to add to my disturbingly endless “Why Video Games Creep the Hell Out of Me” list. [San Francisco Chronicle]
Breasts
- 9th Circuit, Biglaw, Breasts, Crime, Drugs, Jury Duty, Kids, Non-Sequiturs, Religion, SCOTUS, Sexual Harassment, Supreme Court, Violence, Yale Law School
Non-Sequiturs: 12.12.06
By Stella Q- Animal Law, Breasts, Cyberlaw, Defamation, Free Speech, Hurricane Katrina, Media and Journalism, New Orleans, Non-Sequiturs, Sexual Harassment
Non-Sequiturs: 12.11.06
By Stella Q* I think I may be the only New Yorker who regularly watches local channel NY1 — I just can’t get enough of Pat Kiernan’s deadpan delivery, especially of the more frivolous items. What would he say (and too bad he can’t) about this doctored photo of his colleague “BBB”? [New York Post via Gothamist]
* Because monkeys are people too. [AP via Yahoo! News]
* The lesson learned is to move if you live near a dam. (I am amazed at my restraint in the face of such a punnable word, but hey, this is pretty serious.) [New Orleans City Business via Ernie the Attorney]
* Anyone who hasn’t been ripped on in cyberspace is either in a coma or hasn’t come out of his Y2K bomb shelter. I bet these guys would love to be able to claim a cause of action. [Findlaw]
Back in this comment, Sean Fitzpatrick pointed out a fun fact:
One of those “not so sexy” district court nominations [to be submitted to the lame duck Congress] is of former U.S. Representative Jim Rogan (R-CA), who served as lead prosecutor in Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial in the U.S. Senate.
This escaped our notice, but not that of Al Kamen, of the Washington Post. From In the Loop (a Beltway must-read):
[O]ne of Bush’s nominees, a former House member from California and a “manager” in the effort to impeach and remove President Bill Clinton from office, could very well be confirmed to a federal judgeship, even under a Democratic Senate next year.
James Rogan, who lost his seat in 2000 because of voter unhappiness over his impeachment efforts, was later confirmed by the Senate to head the Patent and Trademark Office. He’s now a Los Angeles lawyer.
And, oddly enough, Rogan’s got support from an unusual group of Clinton backers, including a California judicial vetting committee with members picked by liberal Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.
Kamen wonders: Will Senatrix Hillary Clinton (D-NY) vote for the man who tried to get her and her husband evicted from the White House? She’s known to bear grudges (and voted repeatedly against Michael Chertoff, when he was nominated for executive and judicial branch posts, because of his involvement in the Whitewater investigation).
But then again, check out this cheery photograph of the Clintons and the Rogans, from a White House Christmas party in 1999:
Hillary’s bustline is somewhat drooping in the pic. But that’s not Rogan’s fault, is it?
On Deck Again: One of Democrats’ Favorite Clinton Foes [Washington Post]
Video footage? Still photographs? We’d like to see the record on appeal in this case:
Lawyers for CBS Corp. argued Monday that singer Janet Jackson’s breast-baring at the Super Bowl halftime show in 2004 was unintended, took place without the knowledge of the network, and should not be considered indecent.
CBS is suing the Federal Communications Commission in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, challenging a $550,000 fine issued by the agency over the stunt, which created a national furor.
Third Circuit clerks: lucky dogs. They get to ogle celebrity breasts and call it “research.”
(Yeah, this news is several days old. But it’s the Friday after Thanksgiving, so the bar is set pretty low. Our posts today are going to be even more random than usual.)
Update: The Third Circuit subsequently vacated the FCC fine.
CBS Suing FCC Over Janet Jackson’s Boobgate [Access Hollywood]
Last Friday, something happened that made Walter Olson, the distinguished scholar and “intellectual guru of tort reform,” a very happy man:
“The government on Friday rescinded a 14-year ban on silicone gel implants for cosmetic breast enhancement, a decision praised by some for providing women with a better product but criticized by others who still question their safety. … After rigorous review, the [Food and Drug Administration] can offer a ‘reasonable assurance’ that silicone implants are ‘safe and effective,’ said Donna-Bea Tillman, director of the FDA Office of Device Evaluation.” (Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Daniel Costello, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 18).
Silicone breast implants, available to consumers in most other countries, were driven from the market after a campaign of speculation and misinformation by trial lawyers and allied “consumer” groups, particularly Dr. Sidney Wolfe’s Public Citizen Health Research Group. The campaign resulted in billions in legal settlements over nonexistent autoimmune effects from the devices, none of which had to be repaid even after more careful scientific studies dispelled the early alarms.
We suspect Mr. Olson isn’t the only American male who was gladdened by this news.
FDA ends ban on silicone breast implants [Overlawyered]
F.D.A. Will Allow Breast Implants Made of Silicone [New York Times]
Memorable Quotes from Seinfeld (1990) [IMDb]
* Since a dropped debt doesn’t exactly put a developing country in the black, Bono presumably is counting his pennies to continue to benefit the world’s poorest countries. Or maybe that memorabilia was all that they couldn’t leave behind. (More wordplay abounds. Why is it that even a non-fan like me can think of several puns off the top of her head? Damn that catchy U2 pop.) [MSN]
* Speaking of debt, can you believe it’s almost Christmas/Hannukah/Festivus? Catch this new documentary at a film festival near you, before you break out the plastic. [Consumer Law & Policy Blog]
* Remember when just a good idea could make you a paper millionaire? It’s safe to say that these days, you need a bit more than just a few scrawls on a cocktail napkin. But you’re still going to need this guy to inflate that bubble once again. [Wall Street Journal via Blawg Review]
* This time it’s the passenger suing the airline. And it’s breastfeeding, not alleged sexual acts. Not that we would never equate the beautiful and natural act of a baby pressing its face against the boob area to the less beautiful but equally natural act of a grown man pressing his face against the vaginal area. [Associated Press via MSN]
Look, if you’re going to be an exhibitionist, you need to OWN THAT S**T. No regrets; no looking back. And absolutely no lawsuits:
Once again, second thoughts prove unavailing after modesty is cast to the winds:
“A magazine that published a photograph of a woman baring her breasts at a pig roast for motorcycle enthusiasts did not intrude on her privacy, a federal judge has ruled. Tonya Barnhart sued Paisano Publications LLC, publisher of Easyriders magazine, after it ran the picture of her in its March 2005 issue, claiming unreasonable intrusion, false light invasion of privacy and appropriation of her likeness.”
But U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz of Maryland* ruled against Barnhart on summary judgment. Her behavior “cannot reasonably be said to have constituted a private act,” Motz wrote. “She exposed herself at an outdoor fundraising event open to any members of the public who purchased a ticket.”
Yes, “Tonya” with an “o.” Are you honestly surprised?
Judge Motz rejected Barnhart’s other claims as well:
Her claim that the image presented her in a false light also failed because she never claimed that the picture distorted “her true appearance,” but only that it created the impression she was the sort of person who would consent to posing topless for a magazine, Motz ruled.
Finally, Motz held that Barnhart’s claim for appropriation of her likeness failed because her image has no commercial value.**
No commercial value? That’s way harsh, Tai. Guess they’re real, but not so spectacular.**
* Judge Motz, by the way, is married to Fourth Circuit Judge Diana Motz. Overheard at the Motz house: “Honey, please take out the trash. Don’t make me mandamus you.”
** Yeah, we know: “Maryland courts have held that someone whose picture is taken in a public place at a newsworthy event does not have an appropriation claim.”
So Judge Motz’s ruling does not reflect in any way upon the size or quality of Barnhart’s breasts. And there was no in camera examination of the plaintiff.
Another flasher’s-remorse case loses [Overlawyered]
Judge: Photo of woman baring her breasts didn’t violate privacy [Associated Press
- Admin, Announcements, Biglaw, Breasts, Contests, Gerald Shargel, Hotties, Jon Stewart, Law School Deans, Money, Nauseating Things, Nude Dancing, Reader Polls, Stephen Breyer, Weddings, Week in Review
ATL Week in Review: October 15, 2006
By David Lat
* Our Law School Dean hotties contest is now underway. Vote on the women here, the men here, and the alternate male candidates here.
* Do you know anyone who is currently clerking for Justice Alito? If so, we’d like to hear from you.
* If you’re in law for the money, we recommend Korean transactional practice, at a big firm. You’ll probably make more than you would as a solo practioner or small firm lawyer.
* If money is your top priority, then don’t bother with the law; go work for Goldman Sachs . Partners there take home an average of $7 million a year. And still find time to beat up on small businessmen.
* ATL readers: Not as rich as Goldman Sachs partners. But pretty damn smart.
* Creative ways to get yourself criminally charged: (1) walk around your office buck naked; or (2) walk out of a restaurant without paying (after concluding that your seafood pasta dish was short on the seafood).
* But protesting while topless, that’s okay.
* Lori Alvino and Matthew McGill: We are not worthy. The happy couple tied the knot earlier this month. Their wedding guests included two sitting Supreme Court justices, the chief judge of the D.C. Circuit, and two SCOTUS short-listers. (Yes, we’ve categorized this under Nauseating Things.)
* Some dispatches from the New Yorker Festival: Justice Breyer, with Jeffrey Toobin; legendary criminal defense lawyer Gerald Shargel, along with other experts on the Mafia; and some guy named Jon Stewart.
* There’s a new kid on the ATL block: Meet Stella Q. Welcome, Stella!
Conventional wisdom holds that civil rights and civil liberties “don’t poll well.” Court decisions vindicating them are often wildly unpopular with the public.
We suspect, however, that this ruling by a Florida appeals court may be enthusiastically received:
A woman who was arrested when she exposed her breasts, to protest laws that bar women from publicly going bare breasted, can demonstrate topless as part of a legitimate political protest, an appeals court has ruled.
The 7th Judicial Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 5 upheld a Volusia County judge’s opinion that Elizabeth Book could protest while topless on the city’s Main Street Bridge.
Now prosecutor Scott Blauvelt just needs to figure out what he was “protesting” while walking around his office in the buff.
Fla. Court Upholds Topless Protest [Associated Press via How Appealing]
Earlier: Scott Blauvelt Needs a New Office Chair
The Case of the Naked Prosecutor, and A Brief Note on Owning It
If We Ever Get Arrested, Our One Phone Call Will Be to Orin Kerr
Saline? Silicone? Bronze? Or none of the above?
In response to this post from yesterday, we received the following emaill:
I think you’ve misrepresented the caryatids in the foyer of the Pioneer Courthouse — I believe they’re cedar rather than bronze.
Frequently we just correct errors within the original post (so please refresh your browser right before emailing us about a typo or other mistake). But we felt this correction was worth highlighting given the importance of the subject matter.
In addition, we learned a new word from this email: caryatid. From context, we guessed that “caryatids” was a highfalutin term for “tits.”
But we were wrong. It’s actually an architectural term referring to “[a] supporting column sculptured in the form of a draped female figure.” How about that? A nice bit of trivia, sure to make it into a future Judge Boggs clerkship application quiz.
A challenge for the bored: Work “caryatid” into your next conference call.
(About to chastise us for not relying upon the Oxford English Dictionary? Please buy us an online subscription to the OED before lodging your complaint. Thank you.)
Caryatid [The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language]
Earlier: Lady Justice: They’re Real, and They’re… Spectacular!



