Ohio

For Supreme Court clerks from October Term 2011, the historic Term of NFIB v. Sebelius (aka “Obamacare”), the hot firm to go to was Jones Day. As Tony Mauro recently reported, the firm hired six SCOTUS clerks from the OT 2011 class, which “may be the most clerks signed up by a single firm from a single term” (although Ted Frank suggests that Kirkland & Ellis might have had seven clerks back in 1995).

UPDATE (3/17/2013, 1 p.m.): Per Mauro, K&E has never had six or seven clerks from a single Term.

Leading litigatrix Beth Heifetz — a former SCOTUS clerk herself (OT 1985 / Blackmun), and a Tina Fey doppelgänger — confirmed that Jones Day paid the going rate in terms of SCOTUS clerkship bonuses: $280,000 (on top of the usual base salary and year-end bonus). One of the new hires, Rachel Bloomekatz, is joining JD’s office in Columbus, Ohio. She should be able to survive out there on half a million (the SCOTUS clerkship bonus plus a fifth-year associate’s salary; she’s a 2008 UCLA Law grad).

But what if you’re in the Columbus office and not a SCOTUS clerk? Don’t expect to be shown the money; instead, you might be shown the door….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Nationwide Layoff Watch: Days Are Numbered for Some at Jones Day”

* Maker’s Mark will not get diluted after all — likely causing a shortage. Start hoarding mediocre bourbon, folks! [Wonkblog]

* If you’ve ever wondered what the Supreme Court feels like to a pro se petitioner, here’s your answer. “Simply put, the Supreme Court uses its desktop publishing and printing guidelines as a weapon against the American public.” So much for “the least dangerous branch.” [Aaron Greenspan]

* “Nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” Russia’s taking that phrase to a whole new level by pushing forward with a criminal tax evasion trial against a dead man. This is the first case of its kind since United States v. Bernie Lomax. [Reuters]

* Is the pressure mounting on the Washington Redskins to change their name? It’s an interesting take, but overlooks one important detail: Dan Snyder is a tone deaf jerk. [Sports Law Blog]

* Computer science students realize that taking collective action to intentionally fail the test was better than trying to pass it. It’s like The Producers of education. And if this grading policy applied to 1Ls, there’d be at least one jerk who defected to ruin everyone else’s curve. [Volokh Conspiracy]

* Ten points to Gryffindor if you know what “tumid” means. Because you’re going to have to know before you pass through Ohio again. [Legal Juice]

I have to make a public confession:

Ten years ago, I co-authored a book that analyzed in all 50 states the existing analogues to the federal multidistrict litigation process. (Some states have analogues; some do not; some have procedures that serve the same purpose through very different mechanisms.)

Don’t scoff! That book served a public purpose, because the information was not then available anywhere else. And it served a business development purpose: If you work at a large firm, you don’t want to defend one-off product liability cases, because the fees won’t bear the big-firm freight. But you do want to defend those silly products cases the instant they transmogrify into mass torts. What’s the point at which the client knows that it is confronting a truly big and bad mass tort? When it’s defending not only a federal MDL, but statewide coordinated proceedings, too. Presto! Time to retain yours truly, the expert in that untrodden field!

Having written the book, my co-authors and I naturally publicized it. We published articles summarizing the substance of the book; explaining how to draft mini-MDL statutes; and, for publication in specific state bar journals, analyses of the mini-MDL processes available in certain populous states. Although I can’t find an online link to the piece, we wrote in a Ohio bar journal that Ohio was the most populous state not to have a formal procedure for coordinating related lawsuits filed in many counties.

Naturally, this triggered some thought in the Ohio bench and bar about whether the state should catch up with the rest of the world. In 2004, more or less, some judicial committee called to solicit my help (and that of my co-authors) in creating a mini-MDL procedure in Ohio.

That’s when I sinned . . .

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Inside Straight: Forgive Me, Readers, For I Have Sinned”


This is cool with the Ninth Circuit.

* Lanny Breuer finally announced his retirement from the DOJ. He’s going back to the private sector, and perhaps Covington and Jenner & Block will duel to see which firm gets dibs. [Thomson Reuters News & Insight]

* You may be wondering if it’s ever constitutional to testify in a drug cartel case while wearing a disguise — namely, a mustache, a wig, and sunglasses. Behold, the Ninth Circuit’s opinion! [WSJ Law Blog (sub. req.)]

* It may be a new year, but suing Biglaw firms never seems to get old. From Blank Rome to White & Case, here’s a thrilling roundup of all suits that have made waves in 2013, a “lawsuit-palooza,” if you will. [Am Law Daily]

* “We are going through a revolution in law with a time bomb on our admissions books.” The entire law school dream is continuing to swirl down the drain at warp speed, and the New York Times is on it! [New York Times]

* Is anyone actually surprised that every single one of Jerry Sandusky’s post-conviction motions was flat-out denied? If so, then it seems you may be in very serious need of a 1-800-REALITY check. [Legal Intelligencer]

* George Zimmerman’s attorney asked a judge to delay his client’s trial because he claims the prosecution is causing problems. Also, he’d kind of like to get paid, but that’s neither here nor there. [Orlando Sentinel]

* If you weren’t aware, there was a law firm office shooting in Arizona yesterday, and one of the wounded is Mark Hummels, a partner with Osborn Maledon. Best wishes for a very speedy recovery! [Arizona Republic]

* When they tell you stop writing when time is called during the bar exam, you STOP FREAKING WRITING when time is called on the bar exam — unless you don’t like bar admission, of course. [National Law Journal]

‘Please explain why I should take money away from widows and orphans.’

Looking for some feedback on this one:

Should judges be allowed to impose fines for the benefit of unrelated third parties outside the jurisdiction?

I touched on this tangentially in my earlier story about Pennsylvania’s pending lawsuit against the NCAA because one of the claims against the NCAA challenged the provision of the settlement that ordered Penn State University, as an institution supported by Pennsylvania taxpayers, to pay a fine that would partially benefit victims of sexual abuse outside Pennsylvania.

But settlements provide more flexibility than judicially imposed fines.

Who could possibly object to forcing criminals to send money to charity? Oh, we can find a guy….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “You Be The Judge: Can Judges Order Fines For Outside Their Jurisdiction?”

Does teacher want to…. plaaaaaay?

Pedophobia, the fear of children, is not something that makes the news very much. It’s not like anybody who suffers from pedophobia gets to have a Facebook account unless they want to be bombarded with terrifying images of other people’s children.

Since we know that pedophilia is a real thing, I totally believe that pedophobia is a real thing. That makes sense.

But, just as I don’t want pedophiles teaching in schools, I’m not sure that a middle school is the best place for a pedophobe.

An Ohio teacher suffering from pedophobia agrees. She’s suing her former school district for failing to accommodate her disability by moving her from a high school to a middle school.

If she doesn’t win her employment discrimination case, maybe she’ll have a claim under the Eighth Amendment….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Lawsuit of the Day: Teacher Claims School Failed To Accommodate Her Pedophobia

There’s no love lost between cops and guys in wheelchairs.

You know things are not going well for the police when a judge uses the citation “U.S. Const. amend. IV.” Not a case interpreting the Fourth Amendment, not a scholarly analysis of search and seizure law, just a straight-up shout-out to the plain text of the constitutional prohibition. It kind of tells you where the judge is going.

Today’s installment of “Why Can’t You Just Get A Warrant” comes out of the Montgomery County courthouse near Dayton, Ohio. According to the judge’s order granting a suppression motion, the police subdued a wheelchair-bound paraplegic and searched his home. And by “subdued,” I of course mean: tackled a man in a wheelchair, handcuffed him, then pretended to be worried about the man’s grabbable area.

Fun times…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Cops’ Fear Of Handcuffed Paraplegic Turns Out To Be Unreasonable”

In the end, that hurts the Democrats, because we throw those votes out. I’ve begged them to stop.

Jane Platten, director of the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections (and a Democrat herself), commenting to the New York Times about fraudulent voter registrations coming from groups associated with the Democrats.

Out in Ohio, a woman’s campaign for reelection as county prosecutor has been marred by vicious rumors about her panties (or the alleged lack thereof). As the account is told, apparently Hocking County Prosecutor Laina Fetherolf experienced a wardrobe malfunction of sorts while in Judge John Wallace’s courtroom. It reminded us of the deposition in which counsel argued over a claim that one attorney’s shirt was so sheer the witness could see her breasts.

But in this case, Fetherolf was wearing a light-colored dress with dark panties, and a judge allegedly instructed her to fix her fashion faux pas. Okay, here’s where the story gets a little absurd. So, like any reasonable woman, Fetherolf reportedly ran to the men’s room (mmhmm), removed her panties (suuure), and returned to the courtroom, commando-style (give me a break).

You’ll never guess what she supposedly did next….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Rumors Continue To Spread About This Prosecutor’s Panties (Or Alleged Lack Thereof)”

You know what would have been awesome? 1996-Bill Clinton versus 1980-Ronald Reagan in 2008. I’m not saying Slick Willy would have beaten the Great Communicator, but it’s always a bad idea to bet against Bill.

* David Lat has a new project that you might want to check out. They’re calling it “clerk lit”; it’s a serialized novel entitled Supreme Ambitions. [FindLaw]

* Concurring Opinions has the unsent emails from the Scalia-Posner flap. It’s the funniest thing since they explained how professors grade. [Concurring Opinions]

* Since a lot of smart kids are not taking the LSAT and applying to law school, maybe this is an opportunity for kids who are not so great at standardized testing to get into a better school than they would have under normal circumstances. Of course, that’s not what I would do. If a bunch of people suddenly start running in one direction, I’m the kind of brother who starts running with them and figures out later what all the fuss is about. [The Careerist]

* Ohio rescinds its early voting directive and asks Sixth Circuit for a stay. [Election Law Blog]

* Charlotte bankers survive the Democratic National Convention. Somehow. [Dealbreaker]

* The problem with owning a gun is that eventually, you are going to give yourself a reason to use it. [NY Daily News]

* Former tennis star ready to return serve at Columbia law school. Obviously, I’m using “star” a little bit broadly since I’m talking about a man who finds himself in the drunken class of 2015. [Dealbook]

* You have to think that Bill Clinton would have made the best trial lawyer ever. “Can you see her? I want you to picture that little girl. [bites lip.] Now imagine she’s white.” [What About Clients?]

Page 3 of 6123456