We’re back from today’s hearing in Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell. In terms of entertainment value, it was a bit of a disappointment.
It was a pretty straightforward proceeding. No salacious accusations of destroyed hard drives; no mystery lawyers popping out of the audience to join in the fun; no mention of attorney disciplinary proceedings. Just arguments from counsel, with a lot of mumbled questions from Justice Bernard Fried (who really needs to speak into his microphone — or turn it on, maybe).
There were no rulings from the bench on any of the motions. Justice Fried took everything under advisement — and promised a ruling on at least one of the motions “shortly.” (We may have a more detailed report later; but really, there wasn’t much to write home about.)
For us, the most exciting part of today’s proceedings was getting to meet plaintiff Aaron Charney, in the flesh. We approached him during a break and introduced ourselves. He shook our hand, but didn’t say more (and seemed nervous). His voice was high, thin, a bit fey.
As for his appearance, we thought he wasn’t as cute as he is in photos. We also thought he looked older than we expected. But we chatted with two fellow spectators during a break, and they voiced the opposite views. They thought he looked more attractive in person, and younger in person than in photographs.
Here’s a picture we took of Aaron Charney exiting the courthouse:
Aaron Charney 60 Centre Street Above the Law blog.JPG
Unfortunately, he has his eyes closed (as we did at several points during the soporific proceedings). But you can see his crisp grey suit, baby blue shirt, and red necktie (Ferragamo is our guess). Perhaps he assembled this elegant ensemble at a Charney’s Shop?
Earlier: Brokeback Lawfirm: How Long Will This Spectacle Go On?

Aaron Charney 2 headshot Aaron B Charney Aaron Brett CharneyIn response to our earlier request for information about how plaintiff Aaron Charney is supporting himself while his discrimination and retaliation case against Sullivan & Cromwell goes forward, we received a VERY interesting tip:

“I don’t have specific knowledge but I lived on Charney’s freshman dorm floor at Georgetown (he left after only one semester, transferring to a community college in Syracuse and then Syracuse University and later Brown).”

“His parents own Charney’s, a men’s clothing store in Manlius, NY, which I presume is quite successful. He received generous monthly checks from his parents and other relatives and I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re at least partially supporting him again now.”

Great stuff. Our reactions:
1. Why did Aaron Charney leave Georgetown after just one semester? Very, very weird. Did he have some kind of “issues” while he was there?
2. Charney was at a community college for a while? ICK.
3. A correction to our tipster’s report. Aaron Charney’s family doesn’t own just one successful men’s clothing store, but a small chain of such stores — as previously mentioned in Bob Kolker’s profile. So we aren’t surprised to hear that Charney comes from a well-off background.
4. Has anyone purchased clothing at a Charney’s shop? What brands or labels do they carry? What is the shopping experience like? Is it the Barney’s or Louis Boston of Syracuse?
Charney’s Shop [Syracuse - Citysearch]

naomi campbell Above the Law Legal Tabloid.GIFUnless required to do so as part of court-ordered community service. But even when scrubbing toilets, she still looks like a million bucks. From the NYT:

First there was a cry, then a murmur, and finally a swoon. Naomi Campbell, the millionaire fashion model, emerged yesterday from a grimy Department of Sanitation garage in a floor-length evening gown, marking the end of her court-ordered community service.

She waved with her right hand, pulled up the shimmering silver gown with her left, smiled for the cameras and then ducked into her Rolls-Royce limousine, a silver Phantom costing at least $340,000. She did not say a word.

This runway girl was definitely “working it” — with a broom:

From 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., she swept, mopped and wiped at the garage, which has garbage and recycling facilities. She received no preferential treatment, [Sanitation Department officiall Albert] Durrell said. Ms. Campbell ate pizza from Grimaldi’s in Brooklyn, like the others in her work crew.

Yes, Mr. Durrell acknowledged, Ms. Campbell did clean toilets. No, he said, she did not have to be taught how to use a mop or broom. Ms. Campbell “was on her hands and knees at some point cleaning the walls and floors on the second floor,” he said.

One of Campbell’s community service colleagues described her as “wonderful” and “a pleasure to work with.” Who says rehabilitation is dead?
After 5 Days of Mopping and Scrubbing, What Else Would a Model Wear? [New York Times]
Nice and clean [New York Daily News]
The pleasure’s all mine, Naomi [New York Daily News]

Yes, we did catch Judge Marjorie O. Rendell on the Food Network earlier this week (see screenshot above). As we previously mentioned, she recently appeared on Dinner: Impossible, in her capacity as First Lady of Pennsylvania.

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….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Advice for Clerkship Seekers: Bring Duck and Apple Wontons to Your Interview With Judge Rendell”

* “I even got out of community service, suckers!” [AP via HuffPo]
* And somewhere, a torts professor is drafting his “false imprisonment” hypo for upcoming final exams. [Detroit Free Press]
* This is the problem with straight fashion designers. (Serious Note: Sexual violence is one of the few things I NEVER make light of, but I personally see this as a classic he-said/she-said, with a little statutory, which I consider — rightly or wrongly — malum prohibitum, thrown in for good measure.) [Yahoo! News]
* Train wrecks, on the other hand, are free-for-all’s: Lindsay Lohan’s dad is now a free man, and in the past, he’s been such an inspiration in helping her to lay off drugs and to cope with familial dysfunction that there’s no telling what he’s capable of as a redeemed man. [The Showbuzz]

* Even in Berkeley, it’s a little bit about the money. And by a little bit, I mean a lot. If you want to be a PD in spite of higher student loans, just apply for a Sandy Cohen Public Defender Fellowship. The OC may be off the air, but some indie law kid is bound to follow up with another pop-culture inspired tie-in. [Nuts & Boalts; Los Angeles Times]
* Smallish firms where named partners are actually still alive and employed should think about adopting a generic boy band-esque name (Menudo LLP?) to avoid the awkwardness that ensues after a member is unceremoniously kicked out (or hits puberty). [The BLT: Blog of the Legal Times]
* Let us take back toddler cuteness! I do question visible make-up and the whole Vogue Bambini aesthetic on the under-5 set, but aren’t you glad that unlike real life, that little girl’s bikini top isn’t totally off-center? [eitb24 via Drudge Report]
* This is not a joke (à la SNL fake commercials/Games Magazines fake ads of yesteryear). [Feminist Law Professors]

Karolina Kurkova pic photo.jpgPlease read this. Here are your study questions:

1. “How did a Goldman Sachs banker earn only $115,000?” (This one was from Professor Caron.)

2. “How can she afford to give away this much to charity — does she have a sugar daddy wealthy spouse?”

3. “So what exactly does $55,000 in secondhand clothing look like?”

(On that last item, maybe we should ask our little sibling, Fashionista.)
P.S. With respect to the title of this post: Yes, we realize that the charity in question, Housing Works, funds its programs by running a high-end thrift store — it’s not giving designer duds directly to homeless people. We’re just taking a little poetic or blogospheric license; please cut us some slack.
Tax Court: Goldman Sachs Investment Banker With $115k Salary Can’t Take $55k Deduction for Charitable Donation of Used Clothing [TaxProf Blog]

Our prior post about the propriety of wearing a shirt with a button-down collar with a suit provoked vigorous debate in the comments.
The sentiment in the comments was, on balance, running against this look. And we personally disfavor it as well. But in our reader poll, a majority of you deemed this pairing acceptable:
ATL poll results button down shirt suit Above the Law Blog.JPG
So the button-down-shirt proponents have prevailed. But considering the closeness of the vote, you might want to avoid this look if you can, out of an excess of caution.
P.S. Commenter Sartorialist, are you reading this? If so, can you email us? We’d like to ask you something. Thanks.
Earlier: Button-Down Shirts With Suits: Hot or Not?

Last week we posted this photo, with captions:
“Speaking of asking people out, have you ever seen a tax law professor bust a move?”
Paul Caron Shari Motro TaxProf Blog  Above the Law.JPG
“Well, now you have.”
For the record, these captions can be read in more than one way. Was Professor Paul Caron hitting on Professor Shari Motro (profiled here)? Or was it the other way around?
Within the legal blogsophere, Professor Caron is a total rock star. And what’s a rock star without groupies?
(Digression: Speaking of Professor Caron, he has prepared this handy list of teaching fellowships for aspiring law professors. It’s a great resource for those of you interested in legal academia.)
By the way, after we chastised Professor Caron for wearing a button-down shirt with a suit, the good professor wrote us as follows:

I showed my students your comment about the button down shirt and asked them to vote on whether your fashion sense was correct about button down shirts with suits — maybe it is a Midwest v. East Coast thing (or perhaps they were just sucking up to me), but the students voted 85% v. 15% in favor of the button downs.

Update/clarification: We can’t believe we even have to do this. But for the record, a “button-down shirt” refers to a shirt with a button-down collar.
Time for an ATL reader poll:

Earlier: Writing About the Law: A Correction, and Photographs

* Jurors become instant BFF over testimony of an intimate and sexual nature. [Los Angeles Times]
* Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel]
* Turns out you actually can’t dance if you want to. [Newsday]
* As kids, my brother and I were familiar with only this constitutional amendment because of the “Second Amendment = Two arms” mnemonic aid. (We knew other things, okay?) [Volokh Conspiracy]
* Faux fur is, more often than not, real fur. As in real dog fur. So who is going to cast the first stone (or, rather, paint bucket) at Anna Wintour now? [San Francisco Chronicle]
* It’s getting hot in herre. [MSN]
* “Innocence most often is a good fortune and not a virtue.” One thing’s for sure — if you’re being tried for a crime, you’re SOL. [PrawfsBlawg]

Page 29 of 351...252627282930313233...35