It didn’t take long for the $50k club to gain another member!
Multiple sources tell us that Weil, Gotshal & Manges decided last night to match the $50,000 clerkship bonus being offered by Sullivan & Cromwell, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, and Paul Weiss.
Who’ll be the next to join this exalted group?
Programming Note: With that exciting news, LEWW is signing off for the week. We’re heading up to New York for some things we can’t get in Alabama: Major League Baseball and Mario Batali.
It’s been an honor and a delight to fill in for David. He’ll be back soon with more on this and other stories. (And of course, LEWW will return with a new wedding column next week.)
* Is this just a perverse case of giving them what they want? [Chicago Sun-Times]
* Or, unless this guy is developmentally disabled or the kid in Mask, is it just about attention? [Des Moines Register]
* Jesse James is the kind of guy you’d want around to deter stalkers. [People]
* Note to father of depressed/anorexic woman: a $77,000 tab is sketchy… but so is free treatment. [Star Tribune]
* Not content with designing god-awful, Talitha Getty-inspired tunics and dressing up like JonBenet on a nightly basis, “socialites” busy their idle hands with a potential lawsuit. [New York Post]
Maybe that’s why they call it “crashing.” A roommate situation goes bad:
Recently I moved out of an undocumented sublet. … [T]he three subletters, myself included, lived at the apartment. A friend of mine crashed on the couch while he established himself in NYC for about a month. He paid for professional cleaning, picked up toilet paper, paper towels, and generally helped out where he could when he could. Now after I have moved out the other two subletters are seeking damages for him staying there. Damages in the neighborhood of ¼ of the rent for three months, treble damages on top of that to cover lawyers fees, and financial reimbursement for the repainting of the room that I stayed in.
To my knowledge, these guys don’t have a pot to piss in. If they had asked nicely for some cash from the guy I’m sure there wouldn’t have been an issue. However, with a lawyer sending certified mail to my work, to say I’m angry would be an understatement. What (if anything) are these guys able stand on in regards to real estate law?
This is the kind of situation that Professor Bob Ellickson, on whom LEWW had a massive crush in law school, would identify as a “love triangle.” Love triangle cases, Ellickson said, are the ones where the parties spent years and years in court fighting over something seemingly trivial, leading the reader to suspect that there was something else going on underneath the facts–some major grudge or mental instability that didn’t make it into the case book.
No, we’re not talking about the penis fish in Assistant Director Skinner‘s member on “Grey’s Anatomy” last night. (Although that was seriously cool.)
Via the Legal Times, we see that Judith Warner has weighed in on the “mommy wars” in her NYT blog, commenting on the genre of anti-stay-at-home-motherhood writing, of which Leslie Bennetts’ “The Feminine Mistake” and Linda Hirshman’s “Get To Work” are the prime examples.
Warner reports that Bennets, who calls non-working wives “parasites,” is the target of an online boycott spearheaded by outraged mommy-bloggers. Warner sides more with the moms than with Bennets:
[T]here is more than one way to provide for one’s family. Sometimes, for a host of reasons, ranging from a spouse’s excessive or erratic work schedule to a child’s special needs, the best way to provide for one’s family is by upping one’s own presence at home. Sometimes it just works out that one parent needs to be at home in order to keep the machinery of life from spinning apart.
Good point. There are no children in the LEWW household, and even so, our machinery of life sometimes teeters perilously close to shutdown. Unfortunately, lawyers know all about “excessive or erratic work schedules.”
A boycott of Bennets’ book may not be necessary, though; the NYT reported Wednesday that despite all the heat generated by the topic, the mommy-wars books generally have dismal sales.
A partner at Gibson Dunn is in the running to be the head of the LSU Law School. But shockingly, Jack Weiss, a media and entertainment lawyer in Gibson Dunn’s New York office, does not have the support of the faculty.
The LSU search committee met in closed session for an hour Thursday before publicly approving Eric Chiappinelli, associate dean at Seattle University School of Law, and Michael Krauss, law professor at George Mason University School of Law in Arlington, Va.
The third finalist named, who does not have approval from a majority of the faculty, is Jack Weiss, a New York partner for Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, a law firm with more than 800 lawyers.
It’s not immediately obvious to us why someone with Weiss’s credentials should be unacceptable to the LSU faculty. He clerked for Warren Burger and John Minor Wisdom, and he has ties to the area, having previously been a partner at a firm in New Orleans. He certainly looks like a law school dean!
More important, isn’t practice at a large firm decent preparation for running a law school, perhaps more so than churning out seldom-read articles in solitude? We suspect that this has something to do with the hostility some law professors harbor toward people who actually practice what they teach (particularly the ones who make good money doing it).
Some of you have questions about this CNN video report on a 19-year-old who’s about to graduate with a 4.0 GPA from the University of Michigan and head off to law school. Here are our thoughts on Nicole Matisse:
* She’s amazingly attractive. Most of those child-prodigy spelling-bee-winner types have thick glasses and an overbite.
* Surely the most pressing question: With a 4.0 GPA from Michigan, why is she going to fourth-tier Wayne State University Law School? Surely she could have gotten into most, if not all, of the top 10 (or 14, or whatever Georgetown is insisting is the cream-of-the-crop number these days). And at 19, she’s old enough to venture a bit further from home.
* What’s up with the typing demonstration? Is words-per-minute now the definitive measure of otherworldly intelligence?
* When asked to name her easiest college class, she responds: “Behavioral Neuroscience.” Showboating, anyone? We stopped liking her at that point in the video.
* How funny is that Wayne State law student being interviewed outside the school? “There’s a good chance I was in the entirely wrong classroom for that test.” The reporter then asks the young man how the prodigy will be regarded at the law school next year. Gee, a 19-year-old hottie brainiac–she’ll probably struggle.
* The reporter’s final comment is a new low in pathetic summings-up: “She won’t be 19 forever. Next February, she’ll be 20.” This just in: The year after that, she’ll be 21.
The brilliant and irascible Judge Alex Kozinski, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, has handed down his opinion on blogs, and it’s scathing. The audio link is down, but Orin Kerr helpfully gives us the juicy bits:
ERIC GOLDMAN: So but what about blogs? . . .
JUDGE ALEX KOZINSKI: I hate them, hateful things.
ERIC GOLDMAN: Why do you hate blogs? . . . .
JUDGE ALEX KOZINSKI: I just think it’s so self-indulgent, you know. “Oh, I’m so proud of what I’m saying, I think the world instantly wants to know what I’m thinking today.” People wake up thinking, . . . . “I wonder what great thoughts have come into his mind this morning that I can feel myself edified by. I can’t really have breakfast — really enjoy my day — until I hear the great thoughts of Howard Bashman!” I don’t think so. I go for months without ever knowing what Howard has to say. So I don’t know. I find it sort of self-indulgent. And I find it grandiloquent. And I find it annoying, particularly if I’m in an audience and people are sitting there typing in their computers.
Why is Kozinski picking on Bashman? How Appealing is the opposite of grandiloquent; it’s essentially a just-the-facts clearinghouse for the day’s news.
If the self-nominated judicial superhottie and recent ATL critic has a beef with grandiloquent blogs, a more fitting target might be the one run by his former clerks, Eugene and Sasha: the verbose Volokh Conspiracy!
We don’t know about you, but we’re despondent about the news that NBC is considering pulling the plug on “Law & Order.” (And we know of at least one L&O fan on the federal judiciary who’d go into deep mourning if McCoy and company got the ax!)
“The mothership is a real discussion,” NBC Entertainment president Kevin Reilly told Variety last week. “Nothing goes on forever.”
Industry insiders use the term “mothership” when distinguishing “L&O” from the other “L&O” shows, but it’s more than that. It’s the detective show that prepped TV viewers to get sucked into all other existing detective shows.
Think about how many truly awful cop/lawyer shows have come and gone since “Law & Order” was born. Remember the one about the AUSAs, with Jennifer Garner’s ex-husband? There were two other short-lived L&O spinoffs: “Law & Order: Trial by Jury,” starring Bebe Neuwirth, and “Conviction”. And worst of all: the atrocious CBS Supreme Court drama “First Monday,” where the Chief Justice would gather his clerks in a huddle before oral argument and say “Let’s go out there and make history!”
So, ATL readers, cancel your glamorous plans tonight and stay home to watch L&O. The alternatives are so much worse. And we don’t want Sam Waterston to have to go back to pitching robot insurance.
* Texas legislature blocks mandatory HPV vaccine that fights cervical cancer. [MSNBC]
* Indian court issues warrant for Richard Gere due to public kiss. [CNN]
* Secretary Rice may assert executive privilege to avoid House subpoena. [MSNBC]
* Review of new Justice Thomas biography. [Newsweek]
* ALJ seeking $65 million in damages from his dry cleaners. [WSJ Law Blog]
Multiple sources have just confirmed to ATL that Paul Weiss has matched the $50,000 clerkship bonus paid by Sullivan & Cromwell and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett.
The head of recruiting called people with outstanding offers today to make the announcement.
From a source:
PLEASE post this news so that it will continue to put pressure on the other NY-based firms. The more publicity ATL gives this, the more buzz there is in the market. It’s a beautiful thing for us lowly law clerks.
Congratulations to Paul Weiss for joining this very select group. We predict that $35k is soon going to start looking pretty paltry in certain quarters.
* It could have been the principle of the matter. Or maybe just the drugs. [AL.com]
* Hugh Grant’s “assault” looks more like a pas de deux, but in any case, this is way more boring than another Divine Brown. [Daily Mail]
* And here I thought that “bible quiz” was just code for blow-job. [Middletown Journal]
* Australia, ultimately settled by British prisoners, seems to have forgotten its origins. [Fox News]
This was forwarded to us by a tipster:
April 25, 2007
To: Boalt Community
From: Dean Christopher Edley, Jr.
It has been a week since the distressing events involving a Boalt student’s threat —a hoax — against the community at Hastings College of the Law. I am writing to let you know that all our actions following the incident have been taken with the intention of securing the safety and well-being of our community and that at Hastings, while respecting the procedural rights of the student.
On Wednesday, April 25, 2007, the Law School filed a complaint with the U.C. Berkeley Judicial Affairs Office against the law student who claimed responsibility for posting the threat on a website. We, the administrative leadership of Boalt, believe that the student’s action is clearly in violation of a number of regulations detailed in the Student Code of Conduct. The case will be adjudicated by Judicial Affairs according to campus regulations. Those regulations prohibit us from disclosing the name of the student against whom we are proceeding.
Based on the facts as we understand them today, we have recommended expulsion. This is based not only on the intrinsic wrongfulness of the act itself, but also the disruption, turmoil and emotional toll on the Hastings community and, to a more limited extent, the Boalt community as well. I have received ample evidence of this through a great many emails, some of them painful to read.
This incident has once again confirmed for me the strength and qualities of the Boalt community. Even in this challenging circumstance, you have engaged in thoughtful and productive discussions. We should all take some pride in this, imperfect though we are.
Christopher Edley, Jr.
Professor of Law and Dean
Does the punishment fit the crime here? Judging by some of the comments to this thread, some readers think expulsion would be an overreaction. Pre-Virginia Tech, what kind of behavior would get you expelled from law school?