Drugs

Roofiegate Resolved: Bingham Vindicated Prevails, Complaint Dismissed

By

date rape drug.jpgAs we’ve previously noted, when it comes to disputes between lawyers and their former firms, there are several sides to every story. For example, compare Yolanda Young’s claims against Covington & Burling with the firm’s response (PDF).
We try to cover both sides of these controversies. Having previously covered Roofiegate — aka Moor v. Bingham McCutchen, a complaint filed by ex-associate Michelle Moor against the firm, alleging that she was slipped a date rape drug at the firm’s holiday party — we now bring you this update.
The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) has dismissed Michelle Moor’s complaint:

Based upon the Commission’s investigation, the Commission is unable to conclude that the information obtained establishes a violation of the statutes. This does not certify that the Respondent is in compliance with the statutes. No finding is made as to any other issues that might be construed as having been raised by this complaint.

Details, plus a link to the Commission’s ruling, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Roofiegate Resolved: Bingham Vindicated Prevails, Complaint Dismissed”

Sign up for the Above the Law newsletter

Subscribe to our free daily email and get breaking news, commentary, and opinions on law firms, lawyers, law schools, lawsuits, judges, and more.

Non-Sequiturs: 02.06.09

By

Michael Phelps pot marijuana bong.jpg* In case you are wondering, I’m in the foreground on the right in this artist’s depiction. [Courtoons]

* Are doctors now more hated than lawyers? That probably depends on how sick you are. [What About Clients?]

* Should you friend your boss on Facebook? [Corporette]

* It might be in poor taste, but Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s surgery was the opening bell on the Kagan v. Sotomayor steel cage match. [CQ Politics]

* Michael Phelps lost one of his sponsors, after being photographed smoking from what looked like a marijuana pipe. ESPN is doing 24/7 analysis about what this means for Phelps, kids, and America. I’m sure Katie Couric is going to get involved soon. Thank God I only smoke tobacco, drink alcohol and caffeine, eat red meat with lots of salt, take whatever Pfizer tells me I need, and gamble away all of my disposable income. A real role model follows the law! [Popsquire]

Bong Water: The Uncontrollable Substance

By

My best friend's bong.jpgWe expect ATL friend Mark Herrmann at Drug and Device Law to weigh in on this matter fully and with much glee. But in the meantime, we wanted to alert the more botanical subset of our readership of some breaking news: if the cops surprise you, you don’t have to drink the bong water. At least not in Minnesota … unless of course you want to.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals has decided:

Because the post-use by-product of a methamphetamine bong is created through drug use and not prepared for the purpose of drug use, sale, or manufacturing, the water contained in the post-use by-product is not a mixture as defined in § 152.01, subd. 9a.

That is very interesting news, but don’t tell the kids. Hilarity will ensue, trust me.

For instance, you might be able to get somebody to do this:

[A] police officer testified–at a contested omnibus hearing–that drug users who are indigent or who do not have a readily available source for drugs retain the water from a methamphetamine bong for future consumption either orally or by injection. The officer testified that he knew of drug users who had consumed bong water containing methamphetamine.

God I miss college.

Anyway, after the jump, if bong water is distinguishable from a controlled substance, what is it comparable to?

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Bong Water: The Uncontrollable Substance”

Pls Hndle Thx: The Chronic

By

[Ed Note: Do you have a question for next week? Send it in to advice@abovethelaw.com]

pls hndle copy 2.jpgDear ATL,

As a 3L, coasting through his last year of school, I find the occasional moment to partake in a bit of “relaxation” by way of an unmentioned illegal plant.

I’m wondering though, other than a question about this on the Bar application, would I be subject to any type of drug testing for the bar or at my post-bar big law firm? Do firms ever drug test their employees?

– Panama Red.

Dear Panama Red,

If you show up to work with bags of White Castle or pester secretaries with questions about where your car’s at, firms may demand a drug test (based on boilerplate paperwork you fill out at the outset of your job permitting them to do so), and they can fire you without cause anyway. But as far as I know, no law firms routinely test associates for drugs, and neither does any bar-related process.

However, firms do prohibit associates from moonlighting or engaging in activities that would be detrimental to the business or reputation of the firm. Practically speaking this means you’ll have to get off Phish tour (editor’s note: they’re not reuniting, give up the ship) and turn in that ridiculous shell necklace from Hollister. The hemp one, too. God, this is embarrassing.

Since it would have only taken a Google search for you to have answered your own question, I’ll take your email as a cry for help and give you some actual advice. You need to lay off the weed and focus on passing the bar and keeping your job. Also, I see you didn’t get the memo about how everybody switched over to coke. Um, yeah. AWKWARD.

Your friend,

Marin

After the jump, Marin passes the blunt to Elie, who’s wearing a “Take Me Drunk I’m Home” t-shirt.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Pls Hndle Thx: The Chronic”

I Hear That ‘Magic Circle’ Powder Is Killer

By

pacino plays biglaw associate.JPGBack in the eighties, the popular myth was that all Manhattan attorneys had a leather briefcase, a good blue pen, and a Scarface-sized bowl of cocaine on their desk. Sadly, by the time I got to Biglaw the briefcase had been replaced by a canvas bag with a gaudy firm emblem emblazoned on the side like the mark of the beast. The nice pen was replaced with a desktop computer designed to block The Onion. And the coke was replaced by the marvelous ephedrine they used to put into Red Bull.

But perhaps London attorneys are poised to relive the NYC glory days. A new study reports that hard drug use is on the rise in the U.K.:

One partner claims he knows “people who just make a phone call from their office and nip down to reception to pick up their delivery” — something that happens in every big law firm, he claims.

The survey, by the magazine Legal Business, also says that there is evidence of “cocaine clubs” in law firms’ basements and of partner-led games of poker and taking cocaine with clients. But it also finds that law firms are ignorant or indifferent to the problem. One lawyer is quoted: “I spanked £100,000 on cocaine in one year and no one noticed.

If a partner ever invited me to a coke and poker party I would still be in rehab a practicing attorney today.

The key similarity between Britain today and the America of yesterday seems to be the total professional indifference to drug use:

The legal profession, unlike other classic professions such as medicine and teaching, does not give a damn, as long as you are profitable.

Well, nobody wants a coked-up doctor trying to save you from a cocaine overdose. And nobody wants a coke-head teaching your kids. But if a little nose candy is going to make you work longer, why would partners particularly care what you do on the side?

Because you could die? Because partners care about your health? Right. You could be the last unicorn and you’d still bill 100 hours a week if there was work to be done.

Substance abuse problems that span the ocean after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “I Hear That ‘Magic Circle’ Powder Is Killer”

Lawsuit of the Day: Is Sexual Assault Supposed to be Part of the Tour?

By

Starline Hollywood Tour.jpgFive women embarked on Starline’s Haunted Hollywood Tour, expecting to hear celebrity tales of sex, drugs, and depravity. But it sounds like they inadvertently signed up for an immersion tour, with a guide who was drunk, high, and verbally and sexually abusive. Now they’re suing.

From Courthouse News Service:

Five women say their host on a Starline Tours of Hollywood sexually pawed them while drunk or on drugs, called them “ni***rs” and “bitches,” urinated in a man’s front yard, lay down in the street with his shirt off, sexually attacked one woman while the other four yelled at him to stop, and assaulted them.

Maybe they should have been tipped off when their guide showed up in a “run-down, smoking Cadillac.” They claim they thought the car and depraved behavior were all part of the Halloween theme of the tour. Until the guy started to sexually assault one of them.

TMZ [PDF] got its hands on the complaint [PDF]. We’ve posted some choice excerpts after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Lawsuit of the Day: Is Sexual Assault Supposed to be Part of the Tour?”

Potheads Are The New Protected Class

By

medical marijuana protected class.jpgEverybody wants to be a part of a protected class. Trust me, it’s great fun (right up until the moment I try to get a cab home in the rain tonight). But unless you are a racial minority, a woman, or have suffered some sort of horrible disability, the joys of having to go through years of costly litigation to secure a job you never should have been fired from in the first place are unknown to you.
Unless you live in California. The state legislature passed a bill that would require employers to hire medical marijuana users.
Now this is a protected class that all races can get behind. It has been well established that white people like marijuana. According to leading experts:

Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should [you] ever imply that people just smoke weed to get high, they do it for medical/spiritual/social reasons, etc, or that there are any negative consequences. This will likely alienate you from white people.

I’m somewhat surprised that all Californians are not united in song over this gross extension of governmental authority. Alas, Hans Bader at OpenMarkets.org writes:

The idea that the government should just stay out of the matter and leave both private employers and medical marijuana users alone is apparently beyond the comprehension of most California legislators, who think that everything permitted must be made mandatory.

Way to use logic to ruin it for everybody, Mr. Bader
Banned or Required, With Nothing In Between [OpenMarkets.org via Overlawyered]

Clarification: Pepper Hamilton Did Commit an Email Screw-Up…

By

email e-mail small message microsoft outlook Above the Law.JPGBut it didn’t result in a front-page New York Times story on the Zyprexa settlement talks. Apparently reporter Alex Berenson had independent knowledge of the settlement negotiations, and this knowledge was the basis for his story. Details over at Drug and Device Law.
In our brief and breezy post, we never claimed that the email error triggered the NYT story. But we did link to other sources that mistakenly suggested this. So if you read the original post, be sure to read this correction / clarification.
Update: Actually, the correction may itself require correction (or at least clarification). See here.
It Wasn’t Pepper’s Fault! Berenson Confirms [Drug and Device Law]
Earlier: ATL Practice Pointer: When Emailing Super-Sensitive Settlement Information, Double Check the Recipient List

Morning Docket: 01.31.08

By

* New accounting rules for M&A. [DealBook]
* Lilly contemplates $1 billion payment to settle civil and criminal investigations relating to its marketing of Zyprexa. [New York Times]
* NYPD officer accused of pimping child. [MSNBC]
* Ex-priest jailed for murder via exorcism. [CNN]
* Indiana man arrested for making his own crosswalk. [The Indy Channel]
* Nader takes steps toward another run for the presidency in 2008. [Bloomberg]

Morning Docket: 01.29.08

By

* Resignation in Detroit text-message scandal (previously discussed here). [Detroit News]
* A proud American tradition unknown in the rest of the world: bail for profit. [New York Times]
* Legal luminaries at the SOTU. [WSJ Law Blog]
* Trial begins in alleged microwaving of infant. [CNN]
* TRO against Patriots’ Moss extended until after Super Bowl. [SI]
* Mortgage crisis may affect litigation departments. [WSJ Law Blog]
* U.S. jails Colombian FARC leader. [BBC]

Roger Clemens Injects A Defamation Suit Into the Mix

By

Roger Clemens William Roger Clemens Above the Law blog.jpgThanks to the many readers who have alerted us to the lawsuit that Roger Clemens just filed against his ex-trainer. From the AP:

Roger Clemens beat Brian McNamee to court, filing a defamation suit against the former trainer who claimed to have injected him with performance-enhancing drugs.

Clemens filed the suit Sunday night in Harris County District Court in Texas, listing 15 alleged statements McNamee made to the baseball drug investigator George Mitchell. Clemens claimed the statements were “untrue and defamatory.”

“According to McNamee, he originally made his allegations to federal authorities after being threatened with criminal prosecution if he didn’t implicate Clemens,” according to the 14-page petition, obtained early Monday by The Associated Press.

You can review the petition here (PDF). One tipster writes:

Some miscellaneous notes: it will be interesting to see if Clemens is considered a “public figure.” Further, something I didn’t know about, even as a life-long New Yorker – Clemens was initially drafted by the New York Mets. Intriguing.

We’d think that Clemens would definitely qualify as a public figure. But given our line of work, we like to think of everyone as a public figure. In the internet age, we are all public figures now.
P.S. Thanks to the many readers who applied to serve as ATL’s sports columnist. We are reviewing the many submissions and will select a columnist by the end of this week.
Clemens files defamation lawsuit against ex-trainer McNamee [AP]
Clemens v. McNamee: Complaint (PDF) [ESPN]

Dude, Where’s My Pot?

By

marijuana pot cannabis doobie Above the Law blog.jpgWith the police, who pulled you over for a traffic infraction. But the good news is that you’re getting it back. From CBS:

Eight grams of medical marijuana seized from a Garden Grove man during a traffic stop must be returned to him, according to an appeals court ruling directing local law enforcement to uphold state, not federal law.

A three-justice panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal [in California] weighed in on the issue in a published decision that sets precedent for future cases on similar issues.

The marijuana, which belonged to Felix Kha, 22, was confiscated during a traffic stop on June 10, 2005.

The city of Garden Grove tried to argue “that to the extent state law authorizers or mandates the return of Kha’s marijuana, it is preempted by federal law.” The appeals court didn’t see it that way:

Kha’s attorneys argued that the 10th Amendment to the Constitution effectively prohibits federal interference with California’s medical marijuana laws, and the three-justice panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal agreed.

The justices found that because, under state law, Kha was lawfully entitled to possess the marijuana, “due process and fundamental fairness dictate that it be returned to him.”

Indeed. Pass the bong, Your Honors!
P.S. The headline that CBS gave to the story is wrong. It was a state court, not a federal court, that issued the ruling.
Federal Court Rules Pot To Be Returned To Driver [CBS]