Last week, the California Supreme Court struck down that state's statutory ban on gay / same-sex marriage. The court was closely divided, issuing a 4-3 decision. Six out of the seven justices were appointed by Republican governors, interestingly enough.

Here's a potentially more accurate way to explain the result in the marriage cases than party affiliation. From an observant -- and self-confessed elitist -- tipster:

I found this breakdown amusing:

Law schools of judges in the majority: Stanford, USC, Berkeley (Boalt) / GW (first in her class at both schools), Stanford.

Law schools of dissenting judges: Hastings, USF, Hastings.

Correlation or causation? I'm just sayin'....

Correlation or causation is a fair question. Did the four pro-gay-marriage justices reach a "better" decision because they went to "better" law schools? Or did their attending elite (read: liberal) law schools make these justices more sympathetic to what Justice Antonin Scalia has decried as the "homosexual agenda"? Feel free to opine, in the comments.

P.S. Ah, who cares about where these judges went to law school? Which ones are the hottest -- or, to put it more crudely, more "do-able"? For some thoughts on this subject, see 23/6 (which has evaluated these judicial hotties in a manner reminiscent of Underneath Their Robes).

Inappropriate Hottie Rundown: California Supreme Court Justices [236.com]

Earlier: Breaking: California Supreme Court Upholds Gay Marriage

In five minutes, at 10 AM Pacific time, the California Supreme Court will hand down its ruling on same-sex marriage. We will update this post -- and fill in the blank in the post's title -- once we have the substance of the ruling.

Update: The opinion is here (PDF -- and thanks, commenters, for the link and excerpts). Reversing the appeals court, the California Supreme Court struck down the state's statutory ban on same-sex marriage. Slip op. at 12:

Under these circumstances, we cannot find that retention of the traditional definition of marriage constitutes a compelling state interest. Accordingly, we conclude that to the extent the current California statutory provisions limit marriage to opposite-sex couples, these statutes are unconstitutional.

Slip op. at 120:

[T]he language of section 300 limiting the designation of marriage to a union "between a man and a woman" is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute, and... the remaining statutory language must be understood as making the designation of marriage available both to opposite-sex and same-sex couples.

Further Update: From the AP:

The California Supreme Court has overturned a gay marriage ban in a ruling that would make the nation's largest state the second one to allow gay and lesbian weddings. The justices' 4-3 decision Thursday says domestic partnerships are not a good enough substitute for marriage. Chief Justice Ron George wrote the opinion....

The case before the court involved a series of lawsuits seeking to overturn a voter-approved law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. With the ruling, California could become the second state after Massachusetts where gay and lesbian residents can marry.

In re Marriage Cases [Supreme Court of California (PDF)]
California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban [AP]
Calif. same-sex marriage ban struck down [CNN]
Pre-Gaming the California Same-Sex Marriage Ruling [WSJ Law Blog]

The divorce trial of James and Dina Matos McGreevey gets under way today. Former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey resigned from the governorship in 2004, announcing that he was a "gay American," who had carried on an affair with a male advisor. The McGreeveys returned to the headlines earlier this year, when a different male aide claimed Mrs. McGreevey had gotten in on some three-way action with him and her husband.

From the New York Post, back in March:

"We called it the Friday Night Special," [former aide Teddy] Pedersen said. The "intense" escapades, he said, usually began with a "couple of drinks" at a local T.G.I. Friday's and culminated in "a hard-core consensual sex orgy" between the three of them at McGreevey's Woodbridge condo.

The three-way action, if true, complicates Dina Matos's claim that she was not aware of Jim McGreevey's homosexuality. From WCBS TV:

The first order of business are closed door proceedings concerning their six-year-old daughter. Jim McGreevey is seeking equal custody.

Dina Matos McGreevey wants $600,000 as compensation for time she would have spent in the governor's office had her husband not resigned in disgrace. She claims she was not aware of his homosexuality.

McGreevey is apparently studying to become an Episcopal priest right now, while his wife was recently called upon to offer analysis of the Eliot Spitzer scandal. So she didn't get to spend those years in the Jersey governor's office -- but now she's a scandal expert and talking head. Isn't that worth something?

McGreevey Divorce Trial Underway Tuesday [WCBS TV]

Earlier: New York and New Jersey in Competition for Dirtiest Governor Sex Scandal

For the record, here's some follow-up on two Bay State lawyers previously discussed in these pages, who have been cleared of the charges against them. At least to some extent.

First, remember Carl Stanley McGee (right), who was arrested after being accused of going down on a 15-year-old boy? Earlier this week, Florida prosecutors decided to drop the case.

Apparently the teen had trouble identifying McGee. But maybe he also learned that it's bad form to complain about getting a BJ. Unless teeth are involved.

Second, remember the handsome Gary Zerola (below right), named a "Most Eligible Bachelor" by People magazine, and accused of rape and attempted rape by three different women? One of the cases against him went to trial, and he was acquitted (back in January; we missed the news when it came out).

A second trial is currently underway. In that case, as reported in today's Boston Herald, Zerola's defense team argues that the victim wanted to shakedown their client for $150,000.

The third incident, which is the one that we wrote about, has not yet gone to trial.

Sex Case Against MA Guv's Aide Dropped [AP]
'Most eligible bachelor' acquitted in attempted rape case [Boston Globe]
Zerola team: Alleged victim sought $150G [Boston Herald]

Earlier: Lawyer of the Day: Carl Stanley McGee
Most Eligible Bachelor Becomes Considerably Less Eligible

It's Friday afternoon, and things are kinda slow. So please forgive the randomness.

Remember Kirkland & Ellis's big gay party from last month, featuring cocktails and hors d’ouevres, but open only to LGBT lawyers? A source at our former firm writes:

Hors d'ouevres? That's nothing! At Wachtell Lipton, the gay partners (and whatever associates/summers are out and proud) go to a verrry nice dinner every year. Last year it was at Per Se.

Magnificent. We've been to Per Se -- on our own dime, not Wachtell's -- and it lives up to the hype.

So if you're summering at WLRK, say that you're gay (whether you are or not). You can always "change your mind" when you return to school in the fall; sexuality is fluid. And Per Se's salmon tartare cornets are to die for!

Earlier: Kirkland & Ellis's Big Gay Party: Discriminatory?

The day is still young, but we already have our Lawyer of the Day -- and we doubt that anyone we hear about later today can steal this honor away from him. Via the Boston Globe:

A top official in the [Gov. Deval] Patrick administration has been placed on unpaid leave because he was arrested in Florida and charged with sexually assaulting a 15-year-old male in a steam room at a $500-a-night Gulf Coast resort.

Carl Stanley McGee, 38, assistant secretary for policy and planning, is scheduled to be arraigned next week for sexual battery in Lee County, Fla.... According to police reports, McGee was arrested Dec. 28 and accused of performing oral sex on the 15-year-old, who was a guest at The Gasparilla Inn & Club, a 95-year-old hotel and championship golf course in Boca Grande.

As they like to say up in Massachusetts, "Thar he blows."

McGee, a former Rhodes scholar and Harvard Law School graduate, was previously a corporate lawyer at the law firm WilmerHale. He was instrumental in the movement seeking to defeat efforts to overturn legalization of same-sex marriage, serving as director of the civic and business outreach efforts of the advocacy group MassEquality.

A year after same-sex marriage became legal in Massachusetts in May 2004, McGee's wedding to John Finley IV was highlighted in the "Vows" section of The New York Times....

Known for his shock of platinum hair, McGee was named one of The Boston Globe's 25 most stylish Bostonians in November. In the article, he described his style as "traditional, but it's also subversive and ironic."

"Traditional," but "subversive." Sort of like married men engaging in steam-room hook-ups?

Good thing Carl McGee isn't running for office. We're reminded of the famous quotation by former Louisiana governor Edwin Edwards, who once boasted that he couldn't lose an upcoming election unless he was "caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."

Update: Just a reminder that these are obviously mere allegations. Sources mentioned in the Globe article said they "were stunned by the news of McGee's arrest and said they do not believe the charges." One colleague of McGee told the paper, "I know it didn't happen."

Further Update: Best comment thus far, from an observant, Spanish-speaking reader: "He was arrested for blowing a 15 year old in... huhuhuh... Boca Grande..."

Key aide to Patrick accused of sex assault [Boston Globe]
John Finley IV and Stan McGee [New York Times]

Not everyone likes Attorney General Michael Mukasey. At Boston College Law School, students are protesting Dean John Garvey's decision to invite Attorney General Mukasey to deliver the school's 2008 Commencement address. See here (Facebook group: "Waterboarding IS Torture"), here, and here.

Why are liberals so unhappy about Mukasey? We'd expect the AG to receive a warmer reception, in light of this happy news, which made the pages of the Washington Post:

Five years after a gay advocacy group was told that it could no longer use the e-mail, bulletin boards and meeting rooms at the Justice Department, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey has reversed that decision and issued a revised equal-employment-opportunity policy barring discrimination against any group.

Mukasey informed leaders of DOJ Pride last week that the department would give it the same rights as all other DOJ employee organizations, said the group's president, Chris Hook. In a statement, Mukasey said the department will "foster an environment in which diversity is valued, understood and sought" and maintain "an environment that's free of discrimination."

Writes a Department of Justice source:

Finally -- now I can celebrate "Pride on Ice" anytime I want! Michael Mukasey gets two snaps in a circle for this decision!

In another sign of libertinism running rampant in the halls of justice, Lady Justice's magnificent metal breastses are no longer covered up, as they were during the repressive Ashcroft regime (during which female DOJ lawyers had to wear burqas to court). But the credit for the breast-baring belongs to Alberto Gonzales.

Attorney General Mukasey Reverses Anti-Gay Policy at Justice Dept [Towleroad: A Site With Homosexual Tendencies]
Attorney General Reverses Curbs On Gay Group at Justice Department [Washington Post]
Boston College Law School Community Members Protests Mukasey [ACS Blog]
Mukasey Invitation Prompts the Question: "What has BC Law become?" [Eagleionline]

We wish we knew how to quit... finding legal angles to every story under the sun. One such story is the recent, tragic death of Heath Ledger, the celebrated young actor.

We've noted the news in passing. Now we offer more substantive, law-related discussion (beyond fleeting references to NYU law students who went from their seminars about Jesus to join the crowd of gawkers assembled outside Ledger's apartment).

1. Rights to remains. Sometimes this can become an issue, as it did in the case of Anna Nicole Smith. Earlier this week, the Ohio Supreme Court heard a case about a law providing that body parts removed during an autopsy are classified as medical waste (which usually results in the incineration, rather than burial with the body).

It fortunately appears this won't be an issue in Ledger's case. Although additional blood and tissue testing still needs to be done, his family will be taking custody of his body, according to the NYT's City Room blog.

2. Pending projects. Heath Ledger's sudden passing raises issues with respect to projects he was involved with. From the Hollywood Reporter:

Of particular importance to Hollywood will be the future of Terry Gilliam's The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, which had very recently begun shooting. After dealing with the shock of losing Ledger to unfortunate circumstances, the film's producers and lawyers will have to consult with their production lawyers and the insurance firm that indemnified the film to decide whether to recast, restage and/or rewrite the film to work around Ledger's absence, or whether Ledger's death presents an irresolvable barrier to completion of the film.

More analysis, including discussion of insurance recovery issues, over here.

3. Funeral protestors. Exact funeral plans for Heath Ledger are not yet known. But when it does happen, it could get ugly. A tipster raises a legal question:

Check out this story [about how members of the antigay Westboro Baptist Church plan to protest at Heath Ledger's funeral, because of his work in "Brokeback Mountain"].

Here's my question. These [SOBs] are saying horrible, offensive, disgusting things. When does the fighting words doctrine come into play, and does the fighting words doctrine protect me if I punch out one of these bastards? Because I would really like to.

Feel free to opine in the comments.

Update: More about that Jesus seminar, from the WSJ Law Blog.

Heath Ledger's Death Leaves Big Legal Question [THR, ESQ. / Hollywood Reporter]
Anti-Gay Church to Protest Ledger Funeral [ABC News]
What Are They Teaching at NYU Law These Days? [Traditional Notions]
Where Were You When? [Concurring Opinions]
The Passion of the Christ: The Trial of Jesus [NYU School of Law]

Why do the gay lawyers land all the fabulous real estate? Just a few days after this installment of Lawyerly Lairs, profiling the palatial pads of two same-sex couples, we learn of a third such couple living large in New York.

A reader sums it up nicely: "This seems right up our alley for Lawyerly Lairs: Manhattan / East Hampton real estate, Yale Law alum (then Paul Weiss before going in-house), Ivy League pedigree on both sides of the same-sex partnership, and shout-outs by the New York Times."

Indeed it is. Read about the charmed life of architect Michael Haverland and lawyer-turned novelist Philip Galanes, follow their successful adventures in NYC real estate (and furniture collecting), and ogle photos of their luxurious Upper East Side and East Hampton homes, in this NYT article.

Starting Over, and Over, and Over [New York Times]
Philip Galanes biography [galaneshaverland.com]

Earlier: Lawyerly Lairs: Gay Gotham Edition

In Chicago, gay lawyers get to attend exclusive parties. In New York, they enjoy a finer prize: luxury real estate.

The law schools of Columbia and NYU have been battling over faculty superstars for several years. And now NYU is bringing out the heavy artillery: multimillion-dollar condo purchases. From the New York Times:

Columbia University, in a never-ending search for a larger campus, has long had an outpost for faculty housing at 455 Central Park West — 53 apartments in an 26-story tower attached to the French Renaissance chateau at West 106th Street.

So it was something of a surprise when a foundation associated with New York University bought a large condominium in the complex. The unit, which cost $5.2 million, is built into one of the huge turrets of the chateau.... The duplex apartment has a round living and dining room with 37-foot high ceilings and Central Park views, along with three more conventional bedrooms.

Sounds fabulous! Who gets to inhabit this fabulous pad?

Find out, after the jump.

Why was Cinderella stuck in the office doing document review, while her wicked stepsisters nibbled on caviar and danced the night away?

Maybe Cinderella worked at Kirkland & Ellis, and her sisters were of the Sapphic persuasion. From a K&E tipster:

The Chicago office of Kirkland & Ellis hosted a "GLBT only" party last night. The email invitation is below.

It's illegal under Illinois law to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation in the workplace. But they shouldn't be expected to know that as attorneys, should they?

Here's the invite:

The GLBT Subcommittee of the Firmwide Diversity Committee cordially invites All Chicago Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender (GLBT) Attorneys and Staff to a Winter Cocktail and Hors d’Ouevres Reception Today, Thursday, January 17, 2008 Sidebar Grille.

221 N. LaSalle
Chicago
5:00 P.M. — 7:00 P.M.

Truth be told, we aren't deeply troubled. Regardless of their technical status under the law, events for lawyers who share common interests happen all the time.

So lighten up, Mr. Tipster! You probably wouldn't have liked the music anyway -- or, for that matter, being ogled by those twinks from IT. And you definitely wouldn't have appreciated being hit upon by that bear from Duplicating.

As a certain ATL commenter might say, "Guys in my high school used to throw special gay parties all the time. They called it Drama Club. It was no big deal."

P.S. A more serious issue is presented by K&E's summer associate diversity fellowship, previously discussed by Professor David Bernstein over at the Volokh Conspiracy.

Diversity Fellowship Program [Kirkland & Ellis]
Illegal Fellowship at Kirkland & Ellis? [Volokh Conspiracy]

A case going to trial next month raises some, er, probing questions. From the NYT's City Room:

Under what circumstances can a patient in an emergency room be forced to submit to a procedure that doctors deem to be medically necessary? That question — and the notion of informed consent — is at the heart of a civil case that is about to go to trial next month in State Supreme Court in Manhattan.

Brian Persaud, a 38-year-old construction worker who lives in Brooklyn, asserts that he was forced to undergo a rectal examination after sustaining a head injury in an on-the-job accident at a Midtown construction site on May 20, 2003. Mr. Persaud was taken to the emergency room at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center, where he received eight stitches to his head.

According to a lawsuit he later filed, Mr. Persaud was then told that he needed an immediate rectal examination to determine whether he had a spinal-cord injury. He adamantly objected to the procedure, he said, but was held down as he begged, “Please don’t do that.”

C'mon, Brian. Why not have a more open mind (among other things)? Don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

As Mr. Persaud resisted, he freed one of his hands and struck a doctor, according to the suit. Then he was sedated, the suit says, with a breathing tube inserted through his mouth.

After Mr. Persaud regained consciousness, he was arrested, then taken — still in his hospital gown — to be booked on a misdemeanor assault charge. Gerrard M. Marrone, who was Mr. Persaud’s lawyer, got the criminal charges dropped, then helped Mr. Persaud file a civil lawsuit against the hospital.

For more discussion -- including additional facts about the case, legal discussion, and comment from the hospital -- check out the full post, by the indefatigable Sewell Chan.

Update: More about involuntary rectal exams from Slate (via WSJ Law Blog).

Forced Rectal Exam Stirs Ethics Questions [City Room / New York Times]
But I Don't Want a Rectal Exam! [Slate]

Remember Stephen Dunne, the aspiring attorney who brought suit after failing the Massachusetts bar exam, blaming it on a question about gay marriage? Well, he's sorry. From the Boston Herald:

Stephen Dunne said he was “embarrassed” for being an “instrument of bigotry and prejudice,” in a letter to the editor and interview in the Jan. 3 edition of Bay Windows, a Boston newspaper serving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered readers.

“By filing a misguided federal lawsuit . . . in respect to the legitimacy of same-sex marriage, I have regrettably perpetuated intolerance and animosity towards my fellow Americans,” Dunne said in his letter. “My religiously based discrimination of gay people was callous and diametrically opposed to America’s core principles of freedom and equality.”

Dunne filed a federal lawsuit in June against the Massachusetts Board of Bar Examiners and Supreme Judicial Court, seeking to prohibit the gay marriage question from being used to compute his bar exam score and from being included on future exams. He argued that answering the “patently offensive and morally repugnant” question, which involved a married lesbian couple who was divorcing, would imply his support of gay marriage and parenting, in violation of his Irish Catholic beliefs and First Amendment rights. He also challenged the constitutionality of the SJC’s 2003 ruling under which Massachusetts became the nation’s first state to legalize same-sex marriage.

So what brought about his change of heart? Does Stephen Dunne have a boyfriend now?

P.S. Speaking of matters gay, we thank Professor Ann Althouse for linking to our personal blog in this post, about Senatrix Clinton as a gay icon.

Update: Additional discussion, including a link to a Q-and-A with Steve Dunne, over at Legal Blog Watch.

Failed bar exam-taker apologizes to gays [Boston Herald]
Law Grad to Gays: 'I Apologize' [Legal Blog Watch]
"Hillary Clinton As A Gay Icon." [Althouse]

In our column for this week's New York Observer, we help you plan an imaginary dinner party. A dinner party, of course, is only as good as the guest list. So we review which colorful characters of the legal world, who made headlines in 2007, should be invited to your festivities.

Think of it as a "year in review" piece, aimed primarily at people who don't read ATL (since most of the names mentioned in the article will be familiar to regular visitors to this site). The potential guests under consideration: Charlene Morisseau, the sassy ex-associate who sued DLA Piper; Aaron Charney, who made S&C "bend over"; and internet celebrity Loyola 2L.

ATL bonus content: Due to space considerations, our write-up of Elana Glatt (née Elana Elbogen) wound up on the cutting room floor. But if you'd like to read it, we've reprinted it after the jump.

Culture of Complaint Spreads Through Law Firms [New York Observer]

If Aaron Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell ever gets turned into a movie, there will be a little epilogue at the end, to inform viewers of the fates of the dramatis personae. Here is our version of it.

Aaron Charney is believed to be happy, spending time with friends, and presumably enjoying those settlement proceeds. No word yet on his future employer (assuming he returns to the work force). Meanwhile, his erstwhile nemesis, partner Eric Krautheimer, passed the California bar and moved out to Los Angeles. He still works for S&C, but now gets to lead more of his own deals.

And what about Gera Grinberg, the former S&C associate who would have been a key witness in the case, who was joined at the hip -- professionally, but not personally -- with Aaron Charney? We've learned two pieces of good news about him:

First, he has landed himself a new job. We understand that he is now the general counsel to a small real estate development company.

Second, on the personal front, here's some news that will put to rest any and all the rumors that he might be gay. Gera Grinberg is engaged (to a woman). His fiancee is a former associate at Kirkland & Ellis in New York, now working in-house for a large hotel company.

Congratulations and best wishes to Gera Grinberg and the future Mrs. Grinberg!

P.S. We still don't know whether he has resolved any of his outstanding issues with S&C. But considering how well Grinberg's life is going right now, both professionally and personally, maybe he should just let bygones be bygones?

Yes, yes, LEWW has been a tad neglectful of our wedding-watching duties. Our full-time job has been, well -- full-time. And then there are all our fabulous society engagements.

Anyway, let's face it: High wedding season ended in mid-October. You know people aren't focusing on weddings when the Times hauls out the perennial "Is the Bride Changing her Name?" article. Yawn. But fear not -- while you're focusing on Christmas shopping and year-end bonuses, LEWW will be watching the weddings.

And here's the latest bunch:

1.) Matthew Morningstar and Alan Van Capelle

2.) Elizabeth Hack and Richard Larach

3.) Allison Hersh and Daniel London

4.) Hayley Lattman and Ryan Geftman

More about these couples, after the jump.

Yesterday the FBI executed a search warrant on the Scruggs Law Firm in Oxford, Mississippi -- the shop of high-flying plaintiffs' lawyer Dickie Scruggs. It wasn't immediately clear what investigation the search was related to. Here's some commentary on the situation that we enjoyed, from David Rossmiller (in brackets, following excerpt from news article):

"This is a surprise to everybody connected to the Scruggs Firm," [lawyer Joey] Langston said, "but I've got to tell you people who are very high profile and very successful have to contend with unpleasantries and this is unpleasant, but we'll contend with it."

[I like the touch of noblesse oblige here -- as if the FBI descending on one's place of business is the same as, say, getting heckled by drunken lumpenproletariat while showing up in top hat and tails to receive an award for charitable giving.]

Now we have a better idea of what the office search was probably about. From the Mississippi Clarion-Ledger:

Multimillionaire trial lawyer Dickie Scruggs has been indicted on charges of conspiring to bribe a judge in the case involving $26.5-million in attorney fees involving Katrina claims....

According to the indictment, Lafayette County Circuit Judge Henry Lackey cooperated with the FBI in the investigation after reporting a bribery overture to authorities.

According to the indictment, Scruggs and others tried to influence Lackey by giving him $40,000 in cash to resolve the attorney fees’ dispute in favor of Scruggs’ law firm. Some of the conversations between Balducci and Lackey were captured on tape.

An interesting observation, from the WSJ Law Blog:

Down in Mississippi, there has been speculation of a connection between the FBI search warrant and this week’s surprise resignation of Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS), Scruggs’s brother-in-law. Lott’s office told the Sun Herald the two events were but a mere coincidence.

Because, you know, it's so much better to have people think you stepped down because of a gay sex scandal, as opposed to your brother-in-law's indictment.

(For the record, the rumors about Sen. Lott and the gay sex scandal appear to be unfounded. See HuffPo and Wonkette -- two sites that would, of course, love for the rumors to be true.)

Scruggs arrested on bribery charges [Clarion-Ledger]
More on FBI search of Scruggs' law offices [Insurance Coverage Law Blog]
Dickie Scruggs Indicted On Federal Bribery Charges [WSJ Law Blog]

Before Thanksgiving, we put up an open thread devoted to discussion of the California bar exam. We're surprised that nobody mentioned this interesting tidbit of news (which we learned about from a tipster via email):

High-powered Sullivan & Cromwell partner Eric Krautheimer, the alleged tormentor of gay associate Aaron Charney, took and passed the July 2007 California bar exam.

Congratulations, Mr. Krautheimer!

Back in April, at the height of the Aaron Charney controversy, it was rumored that Krautheimer was going to be transferred to S&C's Los Angeles office. Some speculated that it was to remove him from the New York office, where Brokeback Lawfirm all went down. But if Krautheimer's move to the West Coast is still going forward, despite the settlement of the Charney lawsuit, we're guessing Krautheimer has his own personal reasons for wanting to move to L.A.

On our earlier post about the move rumors, a commenter called S&C LA wrote: "No truth to this at all. Sorry, this rumor is just that and nothing more." Presumably this commenter thinks that Eric Krautheimer -- a leading M&A lawyer, and a partner making millions of dollars a year, at one of the nation's top corporate law firms -- took California's three-day bar exam just for fun.

It must have been strange for a veteran lawyer, almost 15 years out of law school, to be taking the bar next to newly minted law school graduates -- including 18-year-old Kathleen Holtz. But then again, former Stanford Law School dean Kathleen Sullivan did it -- twice.

On the S&C website, Eric Krautheimer is still listed as based in New York. But expect to see him in L.A. sometime soon, now that he's a member of the California bar.

P.S. On the S&C website, the link to Eric Krautheimer's bio was moved from here to here. Was the firm trying to render all of ATL's links to his bio obsolete? If so, nice try -- but nothing that a site-wide "Find and Replace" can't fix.

July 2007 California Bar Examination Pass List [State Bar of California]

Earlier: Brokeback Lawfirm: Is Eric Krautheimer Headed for Hollywood?

So just how large was the settlement in Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell? Professor Scott Moss argued it was probably modest, while Professor Art Leonard believed it to be more substantial.

Here's some evidence in favor of a larger settlement:

On Saturday at around 5 p.m., I spotted Aaron Charney in a cafe, in the bucolic town of Cold Spring, New York. I would have gone up and talked to him, but I realized who he was too late.

He was dressed in preppy fall wear, very J. Crew, with a wool hat. He was with two friends, and he was joking with them. He looked happy.

Well, how happy? Was it a $500,000 kind of happy, or a $2 million kind of happy?

Earlier: Just How Far Did S&C 'Bend Over' for Aaron Charney?

If you're looking for confirmation of the Clifford Chance bonus announcement we posted yesterday, check out this short article from Legal Week.

In other CC news, the firm is making overtures to LGBT lawyers, in the wake of its own Brokeback Lawfirm scandal. From TheLawyer.com:

Clifford Chance is setting up a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) network just months after settling a sexual orientation discrimination claim from former competition partner Michael Bryceland....

Clifford Chance tax partner Stephen Shea, who has been active in setting up the LGBT group, said the firm established the network to further foster diversity, but also to respond to client demand. As reported by The Lawyer (21 May), JPMorgan now asks prospective panel firms for diversity statistics and companies such as Transport for London are following suit.

This is par for the course -- and in the U.S., too. If you want law firms to focus more on diversity, or if you think they focus too much on it already, you need to look to their clients. Much of Biglaw's current emphasis on diversity is being driven by clients: Fortune 500 companies that want to be able to say they have diverse teams of lawyers handling their legal matters.

Clifford Chance Joins the N.Y. Bonus Wars [Legal Week]
Clifford Chance set to launch gay network [TheLawyer.com]

Earlier: Associate Bonus Watch: Clifford Chance Matches (For the Survivors)