Gregory Garre

The legendary litigator's retirement offers a window into the evolution of Latham as a firm, litigation as a practice area, and Biglaw writ large.

* Robert Lewis Dear, the man accused in the Colorado Planned Parenthood shooting, had this outburst during a hearing yesterday: “I am guilty, there will be no trial. I am a warrior for the babies. You’ll never know the amount of blood I saw in that place.” [CBS Denver]

* The American Bar Association has approved the merger between William Mitchell Law and Hamline Law to form Mitchell|Hamline Law. Since law school mergers now seem to be a viable option, struggling schools may be able to find a way to survive instead of closing. [Pioneer Press]

* In yesterday’s affirmative action duel at the Supreme Court, Bert Rein of Wiley Rein and Gregory Garre of Latham & Watkins faced off for the second time in Fisher v. University of Texas: The Reckoning. Will SCOTUS kill AA this time? [WSJ Law Blog]

* According to the Rhode Island Commission on Judicial Tenure and Discipline, Judge Rafael A. Ovalles brought his office into disrepute after sexually harassing a female court clerk and sitting in chambers with his hand in his underwear. [Providence Journal]

* A settlement in the “Happy Birthday to You” copyright case has thrust the song into the public domain where it belongs. Now employees at chain restaurants across the country won’t have to sing cheesy soundalike songs to birthday diners anymore. [Reuters]

How did the Obamacare litigants select their Supreme Court lawyers? Josh Blackman, author of Unprecedented: The Constitutional Challenge to Obamacare, reveals all.

The Supreme Court is going to the dogs. Today the justices spent their time discussing how and when police can use drug-sniffing canines.

We've previously written about the mailroom of death at Sullivan & Cromwell. To make a long story short (read our prior posts for the full background), a mailroom mix-up at 125 Broad Street caused an Alabama death-row inmate to miss a deadline for filing an appeal. The Eleventh Circuit rejected the condemned man's attempt to reopen his case. Presumably feeling bad for what had happened, S&C appealed to the Supreme Court. Yesterday, the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Maples v. Thomas. What did the high court have to say?

Last year, we covered a mistake made in a death penalty case by the white-shoe firm of Sullivan & Cromwell. It was a noteworthy development because of the rarity of the occurrence — S&C doesn’t often make mistakes, at least not ones as elementary as missing a deadline — and because of the stakes involved. […]