California

Morning Docket: 04.01.13

By

* Can you DIG it?! Well, SCOTUS can’t, at least when it comes to the Prop 8 case, but perhaps that’s what the conservative justices planned all along. You can probably expect a judicial punt on this one. [New York Times]

* The case for cameras at the high court became even more compelling last week, because people just now realized that having to “spend money to see a public institution do public business is offensive.” Damn straight. [National Law Journal]

* Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s new book, Out of Order (affiliate link), didn’t exactly get a glowing review from the NYT’s Supreme Court correspondent, Adam Liptak. It’s a “gift shop bauble”? Ouch. [New York Times]

* Oh, Lanny Breuer, you tried to be all coy by saying you were interviewing elsewhere, but we knew you’d return to Covington. That “vice-chairman” title is a pretty sweet new perk, too. [Legal Times]

* DLA Piper’s bills may “know no limits,” but in-house counsel claim that while the firm’s emails were “flippant,” they won’t have an impact their already meticulous billing review. [New York Law Journal]

* The true love’s kiss of litigation: Bingham McCutchen’s Sleeping Beauty may have found her prince in Judge Vincent O’Neill Jr., because he ruled that the firm won’t be able to compel arbitration. [Recorder]

* It’s really not a good time to be a prosecutor in Texas. Two months after the murder of ADA Mark Hasse, DA Mike McLelland and his wife were gunned down in their home. RIP. [Dallas Morning News]

* Good news, everyone! The class of 2012 — the largest on record, according to the ABA — was only slightly more unemployed than its predecessors. Cherish the little things, people. [National Law Journal]

8 Comments

Supreme Ideals on Procreation: Just Say No to Gray Marriage!

By

[S]uppose a State said that, “Because we think that the focus of marriage really should be on procreation, we are not going to give marriage licenses anymore to any couple where both people are over the age of 55.” Would that be constitutional?

– Justice Elena Kagan, in response to Charles Cooper’s contention that marriage is an institution that’s been historically and traditionally linked to procreative purposes, during yesterday’s oral arguments on California’s Proposition 8.

(This exchange led to a wildly entertaining political ad parody about the dangers of old people marrying, produced by the Daily Dolt. Because if there’s anything that’s “worse” than gay marriage, it’s gray marriage! Please continue reading to see the video; you can thank us later.)

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Supreme Ideals on Procreation: Just Say No to Gray Marriage!”

6 Comments

The Proposition 8 Supreme Court Arguments: Standing and Standing

By

The scene outside One First Street after the argument.

Dearly beloved, we were gathered together at SCOTUS today to argue about these fourteen words: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

But we talked a lot about standing. And we did a lot of standing.

What time did I get to the Court?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “The Proposition 8 Supreme Court Arguments: Standing and Standing”

9 Comments

The Proposition 8 Supreme Court Arguments: A Photo Essay

By

Ed. note: Lawyer and journalist Michelle Olsen, a member of the U.S. Supreme Court bar, attended today’s oral arguments in Hollingsworth v. Perry, the constitutional challenge to the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage in California.

Her write-up of the proceedings will appear shortly. In the meantime, check out the photographs she took while at the Court, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “The Proposition 8 Supreme Court Arguments: A Photo Essay”

5 Comments

One Supreme Benchslap, Coming Right Up!

By

Don’t try to answer my question with your own question.

– Justice Antonin Scalia, in response to Ted Olson’s attempt to ask the justice a rhetorical question during today’s oral arguments on California’s Proposition 8 at the Supreme Court.

(We’ll have additional analysis of the Hollingsworth v. Perry proceedings later today, courtesy of Michelle Olsen of Appellate Daily. You can follow Michelle’s real-time coverage on Twitter.)

8 Comments

Even Supreme Court Justices Have Lesbian Cousins

By

He is a smart man. He is a good man. I believe he sees where the tide is going. I do trust him. I absolutely trust that he will go in a good direction.

– Jean Podrasky, lesbian cousin to Chief Justice John G. Roberts, commenting on her hopes for her cousin’s thinking about the gay marriage cases being argued before the Supreme Court this week.

11 Comments

Morning Docket: 03.25.13

By

‘You may take our false hopes for employment, but you will never take our right to sue!’

* Many have compared the possible outcome of the gay marriage cases to the Roe v. Wade decision, saying that constitutionalizing the right to gay marriage will create a similar culture war. Relax, bro, your bigotry is showing. You won’t be any less married if everyone has equal rights, promise. [New York Times]

* Everyone thought Justice Kennedy was going to be the deciding voice in the Obamacare case, and that didn’t happen, but when it comes to the future of gay marriage, in the words of RuPaul, Kennedy’s got the right amount of “charisma, uniqueness, nerve, and talent” to save the day (at least as far as California’s Proposition 8 is concerned). [Sacramento Bee]

* Meanwhile, people waiting in line outside of the Supreme Court in the hopes of grabbing one of the 50 seats reserved for the public like it’s a Black Friday sale outside of Walmart. Unemployed law grads, just think, you could be getting paid to sleep outside in a tent right now! [The Caucus / New York Times]

* Modern-day legal education is a “failure” in the eyes of this Supreme Court justice. Now don’t get it twisted, Scalia wasn’t referring to the post-graduate employment crisis that we’ve all come know and loathe — he just thinks we need fewer “law and [insert bullsh*t here]“ classes. [Portsmouth Herald]

* Dewey know when we’ll be able to retire this punny phrasing? Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be an end in sight because more than a dozen former partners (including John Altorelli of spy-shagging fame) are still clinging to their claims that the failed firm’s estate owes them money. [Am Law Daily]

* Seeing as Widener’s motion to dismiss as to its allegedly deceptive job statistics was denied, it looks like there’s still time to rally behind the law school litigation cause. Someone on Team Strauss/Anziska needs to go all William Wallace and inspire more would-be plaintiffs to sue. [Law 360 (sub. req.)]

2 Comments

Representing Celebrity Clients Sounds A Lot Like Dealing With Biglaw Partners

By

You’re usually dealing with a spoiled brat. You’re dealing with someone who is very narcissistic, egotistical and used to going through people, and it creates a real challenge.

– Thomas Mesereau, the lawyer who got Michael Jackson an acquittal in his 2005 child molestation trial, commenting on what it’s like to represent celebrity clients during “Celebrities Behind Bars? When Celebrity Clients Are Charged With Crimes,” a panel hosted by the Beverly Hills Bar Association.

3 Comments

Lindsay Lohan’s Lunacy: ‘Mean Girl’ Threatens to Kill Lawyer

By

Oh my god, I’m going to kill you.

– Lindsay Lohan, muttering under her breath in frustration during her court appearance yesterday after her lawyer, Mark Heller — a man who was previously scolded by Judge James Dabney for being “incompetent” as to California law — kept speaking even though the starlet had already directed him to shut up, numerous times.

(Don’t believe us? We’ve got the video to prove it.)

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Lindsay Lohan’s Lunacy: ‘Mean Girl’ Threatens to Kill Lawyer”

15 Comments

California Judge Accused in ‘Quid Pro Quo’ Sexual Affair… With a Law Student?

By

The job market sure is rough right now, but the blow job market is an entirely different playing field. If you really want to be counted as one of those employed nine months after graduation, you’ve got to to put up or shut up — or in this case, put out or get out.

It seems that Scott Steiner, a California judge and adjunct law professor at Chapman University School of Law, allegedly decided to trade sex for job placement opportunities. The woman whom he allegedly entered into an affair with eventually landed a position with the Orange County District Attorney’s Office, the place where he used to work. Steiner used to work in the DA’s Gang Unit, but given the allegations here, the good judge may as well have worked in the Gang Bang Unit.

Oh, and we should probably mention that this woman may have been a law student….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “California Judge Accused in ‘Quid Pro Quo’ Sexual Affair… With a Law Student?”

25 Comments
Page 2 of 27123456...27