New York Times

O happy day! Our New York Times op-ed piece, praising the lavish bonuses bestowed upon Supreme Court clerks, has made the Most Emailed Articles list:
Supreme Court 2 bonus babies Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.jpg
Thanks to all of you who have visited the NYT homepage and emailed this article to your friends and loved ones. And thanks to the bloggers who have linked to our piece and shared their thoughts. E.g.:

1. Jonathan Adler, In Defense of Clerkship Bonuses [Volokh Conspiracy]

2. Ann Althouse, “Harnessing irrational law firm egotism” for the public good. [Althouse]

3. Howard Bashman, The Supreme Court’s Bonus Babies [How Appealing]

To all the curious Althouse commenters, yes, we are of “Philipino [sic]” ancestry.
Hopefully we’ll climb higher than #21. The top ten would be great. We’ll keep you posted!
The Supreme Court’s Bonus Babies [The New York Times]

A more detailed (but equally shameless) plug will follow tomorrow. For now, please check out this article:
supreme court bonus babies Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.jpg
Then email it to, say, fifty of your closest friends. We are desperately trying to crack the NYT’s “Most Emailed Articles” list.
Much thanks. See you tomorrow!
The Supreme Court’s Bonus Babies [The New York Times]

LEWW logo.jpgHoly never-used bread machine, Batman — none of this week’s couples has a Williams-Sonoma registry! What the hell? Is the engaged set abandoning the yuppie respectability of W-S for the groovier vibe of Crate & Barrel?
The answer is yes! They’re also registering for sterling-silver gravy ladles at obscure New Orleans establishments.
Here are the three daring couples who’ve spat in the face of Chuck Williams:

1. Maya Alperowicz and Justin Florence
2. Elizabeth Bangs and Brent Landau
3. Avery Gardiner and Edwin U

More about this week’s couples, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Legal Eagle Wedding Watch 06.09: We Luv U”


gynecomastia male breasts man boobs manboobs Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.jpgWe desperately wanted to write about Alex Kuczynski’s New York Times article on gynecomastia (or, to use a term of art, manboobs).
So we were delighted to find a legal angle to the story:

The price range [for gynecomastia surgery] is $4,000 to $10,000, depending on the complexity of the procedure. The issue of expense, as well as the acceptability of gynecomastia as a medical disorder, was recently addressed in New York when a Long Island man fought Group Health Inc., seeking coverage for his son’s breast reduction surgery.

In April, the appellate division of the State Supreme Court ruled that the insurance company must pay the family $5,000 toward the $7,500 surgery.

Now we just need to get courts to hold that insurance companies must cover breast implants. Then we can officially declare the United States the greatest country on earth.
(More from Gawker over here.)
Update: In response to complaints from commenters, we have made some redactions to the photograph.
A Sense of Anxiety a Shirt Won’t Cover [New York Times]
At Least One Hollywood Agent Had Man Boobs [Gawker]
Gynecomastia [Wikipedia]

Steven Spielvogel Edward Gallion Spielvogel boutique law firms Abovethelaw Above the Law blog.jpgThe New York Times is a world-renowned news publication. It is exceedingly prestigious. Coverage in its pages is highly coveted.
But the Gray Lady may be a bit easy. Why else would she go down on Gallion & Spielvogel, our favorite pair of S&C refugees turned eminently pedigreed barristers?
From this morning’s NYT:

Steven Spielvogel, a lanky 40-year-old lawyer who, with his angular looks and jet black hair, resembles Ric Ocasek of the 1980s band the Cars, has been on something of a tour of his own.

He has been promoting a network that connects small law firms around the country and the world. The idea is to give the better small law firms a way to compete with the big national and global firms.

Since starting the International Network of Boutique Law Firms, in 2004, Mr. Spielvogel has been knocking on doors and setting up lunches to persuade the lawyers at small firms with prestigious résumés to start a local chapter.

The rest of the puff piece proceeds to fellate Steve Spielvogel and the INBLF in print. It’s accompanied by an awesome pic of Spielvogel, striking a pose in Rockefeller Center (and looking like Luke Wilson, to his credit).
But why isn’t Spielvogel in a tuxedo? And where’s his partner in crime, Edward R. Gallion?
More mockery news analysis, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Gallion & Spielvogel Strike Again”

Legal%20Eagle%20Wedding%20Watch%20NYT%20wedding%20announcements%20Above%20the%20Law.jpg“Nobody’s finished, we ain’t even begun” is a good description of our progress on this column over the past few days. We apologize for serving up your weekly dose of LEWW a bit later than usual.
Some good weddings we aren’t writing about this week: another seedling from William Howard Taft’s family tree, hot lesbians, and an Ashley’s Ice Cream heiress.
Here are this week’s featured couples:

1. Kathleen Rubenstein and Hays Golden
2. Serena Hoy and James Reilly
3. Catherine Bennett and Sophien Bennaceur

More about these couples, after the jump.
Also, some of you have inquired about submitting nominations for Couple of the Week from outside the pages of The New York Times. We’re confused. Surely you’re not suggesting that we grant the LEWW imprimatur to the undignified matings of commoners?
(In all seriousness: Although NYT wedding section is the only one LEWW reads religiously, we’d love to hear about notable nuptials our readers spot elsewhere. Just send us an e-mail early in the week.)

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Legal Eagle Wedding Watch 06.03: The Golden Road”

All About Eve 2 Linda Greenhouse Jan Crawford Greenburg Jan Greenburg Jan Greenberg Jan Crawford Greenberg Above the Law.JPGDo we exaggerate the rivalry between Linda Greenhouse, the New York Times’s veteran Supreme Court correspondent, and comely up-and-comer Jan Crawford Greenburg, who covers the Court for ABC News?
Maybe. We have a weakness for the dramatic, in case you haven’t noticed. But even if exaggerated, there’s no denying the tension between these two formidable female journalists.
Linda Greenhouse recently spoke at a litigation department luncheon at Willkie Farr in New York. And in her remarks, she threw down the gauntlet before Jan Crawford Greenburg.
Here’s what La Greenhouse had to say about Supreme Conflict, the bestselling book penned by her young rival (emphasis added):

“In her book, Jan Crawford Greenburg wrote, I think quite improbably and without any evidence, that Justice Thomas is the ideological heavyweight anchoring the conservative side of the court…”

“Jan Crawford Greenburg got a lot of mileage out of that statement in the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere, but I just don’t think it’s true.”

WOW. What did Willkie Farr feed Greenhouse for lunch? Fancy Feast?
An interesting account of the rest of Greenhouse’s remarks, from an ATL reader who was there, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Greenhouse v. Greenburg: The Catfight Continues”

Tiffany ring2.jpgFirst, how delectable is that Tiffany engagement ring currently being advertised all over the NYT wedding pages? So big, so sparkly, so inevitably overpriced! We pity the poor guys who’ll be shelling out their clerkship bonuses for that one.
Second, memo to the New York Times: Since when does summer employment merit mention in the wedding pages? If we once spent Christmas break shoveling David Souter’s driveway, would that get us a write-up? Or is it just that the word “Skadden” makes you all trembly?
Here are this week’s couples (no summer associates here!):

1. Alexis Krock and Grant Mainland
2. Emily Sheehy and Reed Carey
3. Jessica Rodriguez and Emile Lisboa

More on this week’s couples, after the jump.

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Legal Eagle Wedding Watch 5.20: Boy Meets Jersey Girl”

Legal Eagle Wedding Watch NYT wedding announcements Above the Law.jpg
Lawyers are taking over the NYT weddings section like mold on warm cheddar! Once again, we had a tough time picking three contestant couples from the horde of JDs this week. An unusually high number of law firm partners (and a GC) tied the knot (see here, here, and here for some that didn’t make the cut), and partly as a consequence, some younger associate-level couples were left out in the cold. LEWW even had to suck it up and cut one of our law school classmates from the finals!
Here are the carefully selected contestants:

1. Soogy Lee and Nathan Taft
2. Alyssa Qualls and John McCormick
3. Eve Brensike and Richard Primus

Continue reading about this week’s couples, after the jump.
(And if you haven’t already voted, don’t forget about the April Couple of the Month race — we’ll close the poll soon.)

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Legal Eagle Wedding Watch 5.6: Ann Arbor Amour

gun pistol firearm Second Amendment Above the Law blog.jpgLiberal law professors can be pretty predictable in their tastes. Volvo stationwagons. Fair trade coffee. Guns.
Guns? Yes, guns. No, not gunners — guns. Firearms. Bang bang. The good ol’ Second Amendment.
According to a very interesting NYT article, by Adam Liptak:

In March, for the first time in the nation’s history, a federal appeals court struck down a gun control law on Second Amendment grounds. Only a few decades ago, the decision would have been unimaginable.

There used to be an almost complete scholarly and judicial consensus that the Second Amendment protects only a collective right of the states to maintain militias. That consensus no longer exists — thanks largely to the work over the last 20 years of several leading liberal law professors, who have come to embrace the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own guns.

In those two decades, breakneck speed by the standards of constitutional law, they have helped to reshape the debate over gun rights in the United States. Their work culminated in the March decision, Parker v. District of Columbia, and it will doubtless play a major role should the case reach the United States Supreme Court.

Legal academic debate with real-world ramifications? Wow. This truly is newsworthy.
Thoughtful blogospheric reactions from Jonathan Adler, Jack Balkin, Randy Barnett, and Michael Dorf, among others. We were most amused by Professor Dorf, who blog-slaps Liptak, before concluding his post in delightfully catty fashion:

Full disclosure: I spoke with Mr. Liptak last week and expressed skepticism (along the lines described above) about his causal claim. I guess I didn’t say anything quote-worthy.

HA. Hell hath no fury like a law professor not name-checked.
(Sorry, Professor Dorf — not everyone is as susceptible to your charms as Justice Kennedy. You may spend your entire life searching for a jurisprudential romance to match what you had with AMK at One First Street, back in the heady days of October Term 1991.)
A Liberal Case for the Individual Right to Own Guns Helps Sway the Federal Judiciary [New York Times]
Scholarship and the Second Amendment in the Courts [Dorf on Law]
How Liberals Saved the Second Amendment [Volokh Conspiracy]
Scholars and the Second Amendment [Volokh Conspiracy]
The Second Amendment is Embarrassing No More [Balkinization]

Page 23 of 261...1920212223242526