DNA testing in the Duke lacrosse rape case found genetic material from several males in the accuser’s body and her underwear — but none from any team member, defense attorneys said in court papers Wednesday.
The papers were filed by attorneys for the three lacrosse players charged, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans. They complained that the information about DNA from other men was not disclosed in a report prosecutors provided earlier this year to the defense.
The testing was conducted at a private laboratory for the prosecution.
“This is strong evidence of innocence in a case in which the accuser denied engaging in any sexual activity in the days before the alleged assault, told police she last had consensual sexual intercourse a week before the assault, and claimed that her attackers did not use condoms and ejaculated,” the defense said.
1. We haven’t read the papers in question, and we don’t know the discovery timetable set in this case. But at first blush, this DNA information sure sounds like evidence that would be subject to disclosure under Brady v. Maryland. When was the prosecution planning on getting around to sharing it?
2. “[G]enetic material from several males,” but none from any of the defendants? ICK. Deeply troubling. And we apologize if you find this gauche or un-PC of us, but we can’t help wondering: Exactly how many is “several”? Lawyers: DNA Not Linked to Duke Athletes [Associated Press via Instapundit] Earlier: The Duke Rape Case: The DNA Evidence
As you can see from the time of our first post of the day, we’ve been in front of our computer for about twelve hours. Our eyes hurt. And we’re hungry.
We need to stand up. Maybe we’ll be really daring and leave our apartment.
Hence this open comment thread. Some of the biggest Biglaws — Cravath, Sullivan & Cromwell, Paul Weiss — have already announced their bonuses. But if Skadden comes along and blows the top off the bonus market while we’re gone, please post it in the comments (along with a link to your source).
We’ll follow up when we return. Thanks.
P.S. We realize this is unlikely. First, Skadden will probably do what everybody else has done, and match the market bonuses (as set last week by Milbank). Second, based on the buzz over at Greedy NY, it seems that a Skadden announcement will probablycometomorrow. Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of bonuses (scroll down)
We’ve been so obsessed with law firm bonus developments that we missed the happy news earlier this week about Courtney Love, one of our most favorite celebrities.
At long last, Love’s legal troubles are behind her. From the music news website liveDaily:
A judge terminated Courtney Love’s probation and dismissed three misdemeanor charges against the singer Monday (12/11), ruling that Love had successfully battled her substance-abuse problems.
Love, 42, sobbed as Los Angeles Superior Court judge Rand Rubin pronounced the ruling that effectively wiped her legal slate clean, according to an Associated Press report.
“Thank you for not taking me into custody,” Love reportedly said in court. “Thank you for giving me an opportunity. You’ve been a good, fair judge. Sorry for crying.”
After the hearing, her lawyer, Howard Weitzman, made this statement:
“Courtney stepped up to the plate, turned her life around and is on the road to releasing her new record and hopefully getting hired to act in films. I’m happy I could help.”
Right now we’re feeling all warm and fuzzy inside. Wonderful news, just in time for the holidays. Congratulations to both Courtney Love, for getting her life and career back on track, and Howard Weitzman, for obtaining such an excellent result for his client.
(Will Weitzman be able to do the same for Nicole Richie? We shall see…)
P.S. We’re not being saracastic in describing Love as one of our favorite celebrities. Her tabloid exploits have led people to overlook the fact that she’s a phenomenally talented singer and actress. Just listen to Celebrity Skin, one of our favorite albums, and Live Through This, which Rolling Stone and Time have both declared to be one of the greatest albums ever (and correctly so).
And don’t forget Love’s remarkable star turn as Althea Flynt in The People vs. Larry Flynt (for which she was nominated for a Golden Globe). It would be great to see her return to acting. Judge ends Courtney Love’s probation, charges dropped [liveDaily] Courtney Gets a “Hole” Lotta Love in Court [TMZ.com]
The latest news is that Morrison & Foerster’s New York office has matched the market bonuses. We’ve checked with our MoFo sources, and this is accurate.
So consider it CONFIRMED. Specific numbers, after the jump.
Earlier today, a reader made this comment:
“Why don’t you just call up all the firms now, instead of waiting for the rumors to appear one by one, so we can get this over with?”
Not a bad idea, given the “Chinese water torture” aspect to tracking bonuses. The only rub is that not all firms have necessarily decided on what they’ll be paying — at least in theory. Rumor is that the Cravath memo wasn’t issued until after the Cravath partnership met. So it’s (theoretically) possible that some firm might pay out above-market bonuses.
But as a practical matter, yes, it’s true: Everybody is probably just going to match market.
In light of all the parallel conduct, maybe there’s an antitrust issue here. But whether you can even get discovery on it depends upon the ruling in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, currently pending in the Supreme Court.
Is “Associate Bonus Watch” less suspenseful than a Hitchcock film? Yes. Is the bonus-tracking game effectively over? Pretty much.
But ABW has been great for our traffic. And who knows, maybe there will be a surprise or two. So we’ll keep following the “news,” even if it consists of every other firm falling into line, until all the top Biglaw shops have announced.
We enjoy reading your comments. Well, some of them. See, e.g., here, here, and here.
But some we find rather mystifying. Like this comment on How Yummy Is Eumi?, our profile of high-powered federal prosecutor Eumi Choi, First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California (San Francisco).
Commenter “Barbara” wrote:
This post, like the SF Weekly article it references, was planted by a group of disgruntled (and racist) former and current AUSAs who constitute the best-coordinated insurgency outside of Iraq. They are a group of uppity Caucasians hell-bent on controlling the U.S. Attorney’s Office. They hate Eumi because she is Asian — and ergo, is not one of them.
Note how this posting focuses on Eumi’s race. Many of the insurgents’ private talk about Eumi is also borderline racist — e.g., referring her as “Dragon Lady.” Interestingly, these insurgent AUSAs who now whine about having to “follow directions” were themselves the most autocratic dictators around during the Shapiro/Mueller administration, when THEY were in power.
Even more interesting is how very little anyone discusses the impoverished morals of the insurgent AUSAs. Four of them had affairs with other AUSAs while married to other people. One of the harshest critics of Eumi and Kevin Ryan left his pregnant wife for another AUSA. Everyone is so fascinated by the fact of a powerful Asian female being under attack that nobody — least of all the legal press, which is incapable of anything other than acting as a mouthpiece for the disgruntled — has paid any heed to the fact that the Caucasian stonethrowers are themselves living in brittle glass houses.
We don’t understand this commenter’s ire towards our post. We praised Eumi Choi as a “tough, smart, no-nonsense” prosecutor, as well as a “strong Asian woman.” We also described her as “fabulous” and “yummy.” What part of that was unclear?
(Also, for the record, we’re Asian ourselves — and were raised by a mom who’s a lot like Eumi Choi. So we obviously have no problems with powerful Asian females or Asian lawyers in positions of power.)
Despite our issues with this comment, we did enjoy the dirt it dished out — especially the allegations of extramarital affairs galore. The U.S.A.O. for the N.D. Cal. sounds as incestuous, fractious, and trashily dysfunctional as “Melrose Place.”
If you have more juicy gossip about the U.S. Attorney’s Office in San Francisco — concerning Eumi Choi, her adversaries, or the battles going on between them — please do share with us.
(Hint to people who want to buy us a Christmas gift: the first season of “Melrose Place” is now out on DVD.) Earlier: How Yummy Is Eumi?
It has been a while since our last round-up of notable moves within the legal profession. So there’s a lot to report today: Law Firm to… Prison?
* Former Milberg Weiss name partner Steven Schulman resigned from the firm to pursue “new ventures.” The most important of these “ventures” will surely be fighting federal charges of making illegal payments to plaintiffs in past cases. Law Firms to In-House:
* Securities lawyer Stephen Cutler is leaving his partnership at WilmerHale to become general counsel of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., the banking giant. From a tipster who works in securities law: “This is a big deal.”
Colleagues of Cutler described the JP Morgan gig to the WSJ Law Blog as a “once-in-a-lifetime” opportunity. Translation: Who wouldn’t want to make mid- instead of low-seven-figures?
* Another WilmerHale departure: J. Kevin McCarthy is taking over as top lawyer of the Cowen Group, an investment bank. Government to Private Sector:
* Former New Jersey Chief Justice Deborah Poritz joins the Princeton office of Drinker Biddle & Reath, as of counsel. She stepped down from the New Jersey Supreme Court in October, after reaching the mandatory retirement age. Government Promotion:
* David Nocenti, current counsel to New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, will become counsel to the governor effective January 1. Academia-Biglaw Alliance:
* Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe, the renowned constitutional scholar and SCOTUS litigator, is entering into a consulting arrangement with Akin Gump.
Akin Gump is developing a Supreme Court practice. Earlier this year, they added young SCOTUS superstar Tom Goldstein to their line-up. Lateral Moves:
* Securities-enforcement lawyer Chuck Davidow, to Paul Weiss (DC), from WilmerHale.
Another loss for WilmerHale — on top of the previously reported departure of Paul Eckert for the White House Counsel’s Office.
Why are so many partners leaving WilmerHale? A Hillary Clinton administration is still two years away.
* IP lawyer Joseph Gioconda, to DLA Piper (New York), from Kirkland & Ellis.
* Corporate lawyer Eric Lerner, to Kramer Levin, from Katten Muchin Rosenman.
* Tax lawyer Thomas Giegerich, to McDermott Will & Emery (NY), from Dewey Ballantine (about to merge with Orrick to form Dewy Orifice). New Partners:
* Bryan Cave: Eleven new partners. Names here.
Due to the sheer number of links today, we’ve placed them after the jump.
No, we’re not talking about that time on “The OC” when Marissa Cooper (Mischa Barton) shared a girl-on-girl kiss with Alex (Olivia Wilde). Rather, we’re referring to a civil rights case currently pending before Judge James Selna, in the Central District of California.
From the L.A. Times (via How Appealing):
Two high schoolers are caught kissing on campus.
Ordinarily, such an incident would garner little attention. But for Charlene Nguon, a smattering of kisses and hugs stolen after school and in between classes led to detention, suspensions, a transfer and a lawsuit.
The reason? That’s what a federal judge in Santa Ana will soon decide.
Nguon says it’s because she was kissing a girl. Ben Wolf, who was then principal of Garden Grove’s Santiago High School, says that’s not the case at all. He insists the problem was that, regardless of whether it was a girl or boy, Nguon continued the kissing despite repeated warnings to knock it off.
And that’s just the tip of this salaciously sapphic iceberg.
Check out the rest, after the jump.
Many of you, especially those of you about to deposit Biglaw bonus checks, will update your résumés at the start of the new year. It’s a common time to jump to a new job, or to start looking for one. In the first few weeks of 2007, expect departure memos to go around like the flu.
But what do you want to do next? Fellow law geeks, your attention please. The man with good taste in chocolate has two positions open in Texas’s Office of the Solicitor General (OSG).
OSG regularly handles high-profile, politically sensitive cases in the U.S. Supreme Court. Most recently, it successfully defended the Texas redistricting plan, defended the Ten Commandments monument on the Texas capitol grounds, and resisted efforts by the International Court of Justice to order reconsideration of U.S. death penalty jurisprudence.
It also regularly participates as amicus in cases in which the State has an interest. Since 2003, OSG has filed over 50 Supreme Court briefs. And, for three years running now, in 2003, 2004, and 2005, the Texas SG’s office has won the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) award for Best Supreme Court Brief.
More details about this exciting opportunity, after the jump.
We have it on very, very good authority that Sullivan & Cromwell has issued associate bonuses that match the market. So consider the rumor from earlier today to be verified.
The only caveat from our source: at the most senior levels, the S&C bonuses do not “top out,” like those at Cravath. As explained by this Greedy NY post:
[A]t S&C there can be a high degree of variability at the highest associate levels, particularly (from what I’ve heard) for those who are told, “you didn’t make it this year, but we hope you’ll stick around and try again.”
But this is just a footnote, relevant only to the most senior of associates. The upshot is that S&C has matched.
So the fat lady has probably sung. At this point, it’s unlikely that anyone will go above market. If any firm was going to top the market, S&C was a good candidate. From a different Sullivan source, who opined yesterday:
I highly doubt we’ll be doubling [as ridiculously rumored by Ritalin Edge]. But I think the general feeling (despite our salary raise) is that there will be mutiny if they match last year’s bonuses. This is especially true given Goldman’s record year and our record M&A year.
Mutiny? Sullivan & Cromwell associates, sharpen those pitchforks. It’s time to storm the barricades at 125 Broad Street. Update: Actually, nix that. The S&C folk are perfectly pleased with their holiday haul:
I think everyone is happy with our bonuses. Any grumblings I heard a few months ago about how great our year is have been replaced with elation at how big our bonuses are.
This is a continuation of our prior post about an event we recently attended at Georgetown Law School, “On Liberty: A conversation between Justice Stephen Breyer and Professor Charles Fried.” For more background about the event, click here.
For the conclusion to our write-up, keep on reading. We bring you a “true confession” from Justice Breyer, as well as Professor Fried’s interesting views on gay marriage.
(Before returning to Harvard Law School, Professor Fried was a justice on the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, the state’s highest court. But he was back in academia when they decided the gay marriage case, Goodridge v. Department of Public Health.)
Our coverage continues, after the jump.
The latest word on the street (per Greedy NY): Sullivan & Cromwell has matched the market with respect to associate bonuses. We are investigating. Update (10:54 AM): We’ve left messages with S&C’s spokesperson and with H. Rodgin Cohen, the firm chairman. We’ll let you know when we hear back from them. Update (12:14 PM): Consider this CONFIRMED. More details, plus the boilerplate of the bonus memo(s), are available here. S&C Matched [Infirmation / Greedy NY]
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Please note that Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney are still in Hong Kong and will stay FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK. We still have a handful of available slots for meetings with our Asia Chronicles fans. If we have not been in touch lately, reach out and let us know when we could meet! There is no need for an agenda at all. Most of our in-person meetings on these trips are with folks who understand that improving a legal practice through lateral hiring is an information-driven process that takes time to handle correctly.
Regarding trends in lateral US associate hiring in Hong Kong, we of course keep much of what we know off of this blog. Based on placement revenue, though, Kinney is having one of our most successful years ever in Asia. We are helping a number of our law firm clients with M&A, fund formation, cap markets, project finance, FCPA and disputes openings. These are very specific needs in many cases, so a conversation with us before jumping in may be helpful. As always, we like to be sure to get the maximum number of interviews per submission, using a well-informed, highly targeted, and selective approach, taking into account short, medium and long-term career aims.
Making a well informed decision during a job search is easier said than done – the information we provide comes from 10 years of being the market leader in US attorney placements at the top tier firms in Asia. There is no substitute for having known a hiring partner since he/she was an associate or for having helped a partner grow his or her practice from zip to zooming, and this is happily where we stand today – with years of background information on just about every relevant person in all the markets we serve, and most especially in Hong Kong/China/Greater Asia. So get in touch and get a download from us this week if we can fit it in, or soon in any case!
The legal industry is being disrupted at every level by technological advances. While legal tech entrepreneurs and innovators are racing to create a more efficient and productive future, there is widespread indifference on the part of attorneys toward these emerging technologies.
When the LexisNexis Cloud Technology Survey results were reported earlier this year, it showed that attorneys were starting to peer less skeptically into the future, and slowly but surely leaning more toward all the benefits the law cloud has to offer.
Because let’s face it, plenty of attorneys are perhaps a bit too comfortable with their “system” of practice management, which may or may not include neon highlighters, sticky notes, dog-eared file folders, and a word processing program that was last updated when the term “raise the roof” was still de rigueur.