The Legal Reader^™

Lawyer Hopes F-Word Means 'Forgiven,' Asks Court to Lift Sanctions

The lawyer who was hit with sanctions for failing to rein in a foul-mouthed client is now asking a federal judge for permission to drop the client and begging for the sanctions imposed on him to be lifted.

The Feb. 29 decision by U.S. District Judge Eduardo C. Robreno in GMAC Bank v. HTFC Corp. imposed sanctions of more than $29,000 on attorney Joseph R. Ziccardi of Chicago and his client, Aaron Wider, whose alleged misconduct included dropping 73 "F-bombs" during his deposition. The ruling created a sensation in the blogosphere as a slew of commentators linked to the decision as the latest example of a litigant gone wild.

Robreno found that Wider, the chief executive officer of HTFC, engaged in "hostile, uncivil, and vulgar conduct, which persisted throughout the nearly 12 hours of deposition testimony."

Wider used the word "fuck" or variations of it 73 times during the deposition, Robreno noted, and the video shows that his lawyer at one point "snickered" at his client's conduct.

Details here from The Legal Intelligencer via Law.com.

Right to Confront Dildos

From Above The Law comes the Florida case in which the defendant Tyrrell:

[F]irst argues that his “right to due process and right to confront witnesses” was violated because the state did not produce the [sex toys] that were the subject of the July 23 and August 2 orders....

Tyrrell contends that the trial court erred in failing to let him show the victim a dildo lineup.

As David Lat at AboveTheLaw.com put it:

If that doesn't violate the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause, which guarantees a criminal defendant the right "to be confronted with the [dildos] against him," we don't know what does.

For Law Wonks Only

Got time to kill? How Appealing recently pointed me to Bryan Garner's interviews with eight-out-of-nine sitting Supreme Court justices regarding their tips on written and oral advocacy. I found them fascinating and enlightening listening.

Among the most surprising things: Justice Scalia was asked who he thought was the greatest Supreme Court justice in terms of opinion writing. He identified Justice Robert H. Jackson as his favorite, and named Justice Jackson's eloquent dissenting opinion in Korematsu v. United States, 321 U.S. 760 as a particular favorite. This took me by surprise because . . . . First, Justice Jackson was very "liberal," at least in terms of championing individual rights. Second, the dissent Justice Scalia mentions as his favorite can almost be read as a screed against the current Bush Administration's attempts to circumvent the Constitution in support of the "war on terror." Not quite what I would have expected from Justice Scalia . . . .

Assault Rap for Rough Handshake

FBK wants you to know:

A Florida lawyer has been charged with assault for over-vigorously shaking the hand of a fellow attorney. Kathy Brewer Rentas, 49, shook the hand of Assistant US Attorney Jennifer Keene so hard her arm was nearly ripped out of its socket, a court official said.

Moments before, Ms Keene successfully prosecuted Ms Brewer Rentas' husband.

Anthony Rentas was accused of violating the terms of a probation order for supplying cocaine, and sentenced to 90 days of house arrest.

After the hearing in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Mrs Brewer Rentas insisted on shaking the prosecuting lawyer's hand. In shaking it, she nearly floored Ms Keene with the vigour of her hand-action.

"With Keene in hand, Brewer made an upward, then a quick downward motion and pulled Keene toward the ground moving her forward, almost causing Keene to fall to the ground," said a court security officer.

Alicia Valle, a spokeswoman for the US Attorney's Office, said assaulting a federal officer was a serious matter and that Mrs Brewer Rentas would be prosecuted "vigorously".

"As a member of the bar, she should know better," she said.

Mrs Brewer Rentas was freed on Friday on $100,000 (£50,000) bail, after spending a night in solitary confinement, and ordered to undergo psychological examination. She was also ordered to stay away from Mrs Keene, and faces up to a year in prison if convicted of assault.

Mrs Brewer Rentas says she did not intend to cause any harm.

Details here from the BBC.

Lawyer Misses Client’s Murder Trial, Says He’s on Sabbatical

A Las Vegas personal injury lawyer known for his colorful commercials failed to show up last week to defend a client accused of murder, telling a prosecutor he was on sabbatical out of state.

Glen Lerner left a voice mail with a county prosecutor saying he wouldn’t return to defend the client, and "if the judge wants to sanction me, she can sanction me," the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports.

Law professor Martin Geer of the University of Nevada told the newspaper that the judge overseeing the case could hold Lerner in civil or criminal contempt of court for missing the trial. “It's an outrageous thing to do," he said. "A lot of judges would have issued a warrant for his arrest immediately,” he said. “I've seen it happen when someone is late."

Lerner, who calls himself the Heavy Hitter, told the Review-Journal in an earlier article that he is in Pennsylvania writing a book and re-examining his life. "I've been living the life of a rock star for so long," he said.

He said he had tried to reach a deal with the prosecutor in the murder case, and when it didn’t work out, he asked for more time to prepare for trial. "I'd rather be sanctioned than railroad my guy into accepting 25 years in prison," he said.

Details here from the ABA Journal.

Neuborne Holocaust-Suit Fee Flap Again Rears Its Ugly Head

Loyal Law Blog readers will remember the controversy surrounding Burt Neuborne, the NYU law professor who was awarded $3.1 million by a federal judge for his work administering a $1.25 billion settlement between Swiss banks and Holocaust survivors. A number of Holocaust survivors and lawyers thought he asked for too much money for what should’ve been pro bono work; Neuborne, and Judge Frederic Block, felt the award was justified. (Neuborne had also received a $4.4 million fee in an earlier Holocaust lawsuit.)

Neuborne’s back in court asking for $299,419 in interest to cover the two years during which his fee was delayed by objections from the survivors. If approved, the interest would be paid out of the survivors’ settlement fund. Here’s the NY Sun story, and Law Blog background on the fee flap.

Said a leading protestor of Neuborne’s initial fee request, David Mermelstein from a suburb of Miami, Fla., said: “Shocking is not the word for it. Disgusting is not the word for it. Chutzpah is too nice a word to say about the thing. After getting $3 million, to have the guts to ask for interest?” Another survivor, Leo Rechter of Queens, told the Sun: “He’s setting a precedent on greed.”

Details here from Peter Lattman at the Wall Street Journal Law Blog.

Partner Offers $10K Bounty for Blogger’s Identity

A Chicago lawyer who is being criticized, along with his law firm, in an anonymous Internet blog supposedly authored by a fellow attorney has offered a $10,000 reward to anyone who can provide him with the identity of "Troll Tracker."

The anonymous blogger, who claims to be "just a lawyer; interested in patent cases but not interested in publicity," has criticized Raymond Niro and his 30-lawyer IP boutique, Niro Scavone Haller & Niro, for representing clients who own patents but don't necessarily make products. Instead, the firm earns licensing fees from users of the patented technology—and potentially sues users if they don't pay up, explains the Chicago Tribune.

Although Troll Tracker claims a First Amendment right to criticize the firm anonymously on the blog, Niro says the blogger should take responsibility for his or her views. Plus, he points out, knowing the identity and affiliations of the blogger likely would affect the way that readers perceive the Troll Tracker's critique.

Details here from the ABA Journal.

Who’s Cuddly Now? Law Firms

IN the last two decades, as working schedules became flexible, and even accounting firms, of all places, embraced the mantra of work-life balance (at least on paper), there was one unbending, tradition-bound profession: the law.

That is why it is so remarkable to watch the legal world racing — metaphorical black robes flapping — to catch up.

Over the last few years and, most strikingly, the last few months, law firms have been forced to rethink longstanding ways of doing business, if they are to remain fully competitive.

As chronicled by my colleague Alex Williams in the Sunday Styles section earlier this month, lawyers are overworked, depressed and leaving.

Less obvious, but potentially more dramatic, are the signs that their firms are finally becoming serious about slowing the stampede for the door. So far the change — which includes taking fresh looks at the billable hour, schedules and partnership tracks — is mostly at the smaller firms. But even some of the larger, more hidebound employers are taking notice.

Details here from the New York Times.

Charge Against Ex-Boxer Dropped When Witness Shows Up Drunk

PORTLAND, Maine -- A felony charge against a former women's boxing champion from South Portland was dropped when the alleged victim showed up in court too drunk to testify.

The prosecutor said she was reluctantly dropping the elevated aggravated assault charge against Margie Dunson, who could have faced up to 20 years in prison. Instead, she will not have to do any additional jail time.

Dunson, 57, who held the world welterweight title in 1977 and 1978, was accused of stabbing John Jackson in the chest during an argument while they were drinking and watching the Super Bowl last year at Dunson's home.

District Attorney Stephanie Anderson said Jackson appeared drunk when he arrived at the Cumberland County Courthouse, and a test revealed that his alcohol content was 0.12 percent, which is above the legal limit for driving.

Details here from the AP via WMTW.com.

Santa Barbara Paper Illegally Fired Union Backers, Judge Says

A judge has ruled that the Santa Barbara News-Press committed flagrant violations of federal labor laws when it fired eight journalists for engaging in union activities, and he ordered that the newspaper rehire the former employees.

Evidence presented during a 17-day hearing last summer shows "the News-Press' widespread, general disregard for the fundamental rights of the employees," Administrative Law Judge William G. Kocol wrote in a 75-page decision issued last week.

Kocol ruled in a case brought by the National Labor Relations Board, which accused the paper of retaliating against employees who planned to join a division of the Teamsters union.

"This decision really is all-encompassing; it's everything we wanted it to be," said Melinda Burns, who worked for the paper for 21 years before she was fired in October 2006.

"It's a clean sweep," union attorney Ira L. Gottlieb said.

Attorneys for the News-Press and its publisher, Wendy McCaw, said Monday that they were "extremely disappointed" with the ruling and that the paper "will exhaust all possible appeals and fully expects to achieve justice through that appellate process. The matter as a whole is in its infancy." McCaw referred requests for an interview to her attorneys.

Nonetheless, some observers who have objected to McCaw's handling of the newspaper she bought in 2000 were quick to applaud Kocol's ruling.

"I don't know whether there's going to be an immediate practical effect, but the psychic impact of this and the symbolic impact is enormous," said Lou Cannon, the longtime Washington political columnist and Reagan biographer who lives outside Santa Barbara.

"You had all of these people who were really fine journalists and they were just thrown out in the street for no reason."

Happy New Year to unions and journalists everywhere! Details here from the Los Angeles Times. My earlier posts about this dispute are here and here.

Public Defender Builds Injection Case

FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) — One of the biggest capital punishment cases to come before the U.S. Supreme Court in a generation was put together largely by a young, fresh-out-of-law-school member of Kentucky's overworked and underpaid corps of public defenders.

David Barron, 29, filed an appeal on behalf of two Kentucky death row inmates, arguing that the three-drug cocktail used in lethal injections across the country can cause excruciating pain, and thus amounts to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution.

After three years of long hours on Barron's part, the Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments in the case on Jan. 7.

"I can't believe I've got a case before the Supreme Court and I'm not even 30 years old," Barron said.

This is the first time in more than a century that the high court will address the legality of a method of execution. Thirty-six states use lethal injection, and executions across the U.S. have come to a halt in the meantime.

Barron, an assistant public defender, arrived in Kentucky in 2004, just over a year out of law school, to represent some of the worst of the worst — death row inmates. He was admitted to the Kentucky bar in July of that year, and filed his lethal-injection challenge the following September, employing a strategy he had tested out in other jurisdictions.

Details here from Brett Barrouquere of the Associated Press.

Lawyer Finds Redemption in Helping Poor

He used to be one of them. Now an attorney, he's dedicated to helping drug addicts and skid row residents.

Legal aid lawyer Louis Rafti was leading a group of law students on a tour of skid row when he saw it in the corner of a homeless shelter.

The cot. The very one, he could swear it was, that he had slept on during his last night on the row a few years before.

Rafti froze. He didn't say a word, but a sense of wonder overwhelmed him.

Wonder that he did not have a crack pipe in his hand. Or a needle in his arm. That he had a home, a job, a life.

These days, Rafti is a pugnacious housing rights lawyer for the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, known for his take-no-prisoners advocacy on behalf of the poor and disabled.

What many of his clients and colleagues don't know is that until six years ago, Rafti was a homeless cocaine addict. He contracted HIV from dirty needles. He watched friends die. He would get cleaned up, only to relapse and return to the streets.

Now, at age 49, dressed in sensible shoes and a dark polo shirt, he is back on the streets of skid row -- this time as a lawyer for the kind of person he once was.

Details here from the Los Angeles Times.

Trial Delayed Due to LSU-Ohio St. Game

Justice can wait until after the LSU game. A state judge near the home of the Tigers has agreed to postpone a trial scheduled to start on the same day LSU plays Ohio State in the BCS national championship game.

Stephen Babcock, an attorney defending Imperial Casualty Insurance Co. in a lawsuit over a car crash, requested the delay because he has tickets to the Jan. 7 game at the Superdome in New Orleans. He and other LSU fans have rented out the second floor of a Bourbon Street bar for a pre-game tailgate party.

In his written request for a new trial date, Babcock refers to Ohio State as "Slowhio" ("due to their perceived lack of speed on both sides of the ball") and notes that Allstate, sponsors of the Sugar Bowl, are not a party in the insurance case.

"All counsel to this matter unequivocally agree that the presence of LSU in the aforementioned contest of pigskin skill unquestionably constitutes good grounds therefor," Babcock wrote. "In fact we have been unable through much imagination and hypothetical scenarios to think of a better reason."

Babcock, whose law office is in Baton Rouge, said lawyers for the plaintiff in the case also have tickets to the game.

Details here from the AP via the San Francisco Chronicle.

Control Sought on Military Lawyers

Bush wants power over promotions

The Bush administration is pushing to take control of the promotions of military lawyers, escalating a conflict over the independence of uniformed attorneys who have repeatedly raised objections to the White House's policies toward prisoners in the war on terrorism.

That sure worked well when the target was United States Attorneys. How freakin' dumb are these people? Details here from Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe. (via How Appealing)

Bill Would Penalize Judges Leaving for High-Paying Jobs

Monday in The Daily Journal of California, Lawrence Hurley will have an article that begins, "Congress may be offering federal judges a major pay raise for the first time in 16 years, but lawmakers are also embracing a plan to deter senior judges from taking high-paying jobs in the private sector."

The article can be accessed here via How Appealing.

There Goes the Judge

Just how low does a California judge have to go to be forced out of his or her job? The state's eleven-member Commission on Judicial Performance is responsible for answering that question. And, in fact, the commission rarely rules that a judge deserves to be bounced from the bench. Since 1960, this independent agency has publicly reproved 17 judges, admonished 48, and censured 41—but it has removed only 23.

The commission archives on those discredited 23 do not reveal any instances of murder or even malicious malfeasance. But they do record plenty of bad language, bad attitudes, and most of all bad judgment. Here are five of the state's most colorful tales of judicial indiscretion—with plenty of lessons on how far (and easily) the mighty may fall.

The astonishing (and amusing) details are here from California Lawyer magazine.

The Man That Got Away

Judges dreamed of having Barack Obama as their clerk. Why did he turn them all down?

Among prominent federal appeals court judges in the 1990s, Barack Obama was known as “the one who got away.”

In 1990, Obama had been elected the first African-American president of Harvard Law Review, which made him a blazingly hot prospect as a law clerk for one of the top federal appeals judges, who in turn would almost certainly send him on to the Supreme Court as a clerk.

But with a remarkable certitude that still amazes his friends and elders, Obama said no to all that, preferring to return to Chicago after graduating in 1991 to resume community and civil rights work and to write a memoir that turned into a best seller, Dreams from My Father. Now, only 16 years later, the junior Democratic senator from Illinois is a top contender for the presidency of the United States.

Eschewing a possible Supreme Court clerkship could stand as Obama’s biggest “road not taken,” a decision that would have taken him on a path toward a top law firm, law school faculty, or judgeship.

Instead, Obama plunged into Illinois politics, charting a trajectory that could put him in the position of appointing Supreme Court justices as president — or, in an alternative scenario floated recently by The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin and the Chicago Tribune’s Clarence Page, serving on the Supreme Court as Hillary Clinton’s first appointee.

Details here from Tony Mauro of Legal Times. (via How Appealing)

Contractor, Homeowner at Odds Over Fortune Found in Bathroom Walls

Most folks are happy to reach into the pocket of a little-used jacket and find a long-forgotten $10 bill.

Multiply that feeling by 18,200 and you will understand how Lakewood home-improvement contractor Bob Kitts felt when he pulled a giant cache of Depression-era cash from the walls of an 83-year-old Cleveland home he was renovating.

As he was ripping plaster from bathroom-wall studs, Kitts found bundles of bills totaling $182,000 wrapped in pre-World War II Plain Dealer news pages and tucked into boxes. The money is in such good condition, and some of the bills are so rare and collectible, that one currency appraiser valued the treasure at up to $500,000, Kitts said.

But there's a hitch:

The walls from which Kitts pulled the money aren't his walls. The house isn't his house. Nobody knows for certain whose money it is.

Yet Kitts claims it as his own. He and his lawyer have dusted off an obscure, centuries-old legal doctrine called "treasure trove" - a common-law finders-keepers provision - that they believe gives him top claim to the wealth.

DNA Test Clears Man After 27 Years

A man enjoyed freedom Tuesday after a DNA test proved he did not commit a 1979 rape. John Jerome White, 48, left Macon State Prison on Monday evening.

"I'm just thankful that this is behind me," White said at a news conference Tuesday morning with the Georgia Innocence Project, which had worked to free him. "When I first started out, I wondered why this happened to me," he said, breaking into tears. "I just saw it as something that had to happen because I wasn't living a moral life."

The investigation led to the arrest Tuesday of James Edward Parham, 54, of Manchester, who was on the state's Sex Offender Registry for a 1985 rape conviction, Georgia Bureau of Investigation spokesman John Bankhead said. He was being held in the Meriwether County jail on charges of rape, aggravated assault, burglary and robbery.

A sheriff's office employee declined to say whether Parham had an attorney, and there was no immediate response from the public defender's office. There was no answer on a telephone listed at the address given for Parham in a GBI news release.

White is the seventh Georgia convict to be cleared by DNA evidence, said Aimee Maxwell, director of the Atlanta-based Georgia Innocence Project. In every case, the men were wrongly convicted on eyewitness accounts.

"This case does point out the fallibility of eyewitness identification," Maxwell said.

Detail here from the AP via the San Francisco Chronicle.

Judge's "Shocking" Words at Meeting Lead to Censure

Clark County Superior Court Judge John Wulle has been censured for "demeaning, offensive and shocking" behavior at a training conference last year.

Wulle, 57, appeared before the state Commission on Judicial Conduct on Friday in SeaTac.

The judge and seven other people from Clark County, including a deputy prosecuting attorney, a juvenile probation officer and a defense attorney, attended "Planning Your Juvenile Drug Court," July 24 to 28, 2006, in Los Angeles.

According to a nine-page document posted on the commission's Web site, Wulle used profanity, made an obscene gesture in response to a request to lower his voice, and referred to Clark County's group facilitator as "the black gay guy" while at the Los Angeles event. Also, after the facilitator said, "Clark County gets a star" for finishing an assignment, Wulle said, "I don't need a star. I'm not a Jew."

Several witnesses said Wulle smelled of alcohol, according to the censure order.

Details here from The Seattle Times.

Attorney Who Made Up Kidnapping Had 'Meltdown,' Husband Says

A pregnant Ohio attorney who admitted that she fabricated her kidnapping left her family behind because she "experienced a meltdown," her husband said Tuesday.

She never was abducted last week outside Toledo's juvenile court building or forced into a vehicle, said police Capt. Ray Carroll.

Instead, she drove by herself to the Atlanta area, where she was found three days later outside an amusement park, investigators said.

Karyn McConnell Hancock, 35, a former city councilwoman, had been having psychological issues for several years, her husband said Tuesday.

"She experienced a meltdown and attempted to handle those matters without the assistance of professional help," said Lawrence Hancock. "Karyn elected to leave everything because she felt that she was unable to continue."

Police said at a news conference Tuesday that she recanted the story Monday after meeting with investigators for about eight hours. Hancock will likely be charged with making a false police report, said Police Chief Mike Navarre.

Details here from the AP via Law.com.

Solo Convicted in Sex Scam

A San Antonio, Texas, jury has convicted solo Mary S. Roberts on five counts of theft stemming from allegations that she helped her lawyer-husband appropriate $155,000 from four men with whom she had affairs in 2001.

The jury returned its verdict Dec. 10 after a weeklong trial. Judge Sid Harle of the 226th District Court scheduled Mary Roberts' sentencing for Feb. 4, 2008. Each theft count is a second-degree felony punishable by two to 20 years in prison.

In 2005, a Bexar County grand jury indicted Ted and Mary Roberts on theft charges based on allegations that after the wife had sexual liaisons with four men, the husband threatened them with litigation unless they compensated him for emotional distress. A second grand jury reindicted the couple in 2006, naming in the indictment the four men from whom the couple appropriated money.

In March, a jury convicted Ted Roberts of three theft charges for taking money from two of the men. The jury sentenced him to five years in prison.

Details here from Texas Lawyer via Law.com. My earlier posts about Ms. Roberts and her exploits are here and here.

Court Supervision of Attorney Ordered due to Lack of Civility

A New York judge has ordered court supervision of a lawyer for "objectionable conduct" toward a female opposing counsel who he said had a "cute little thing going on" during a deposition.

According to transcripts of the deposition, Thomas B. Decea of Danzig Fishman & Decea in White Plains also called Michelle A. Rice of Arkin Kaplan & Rice "hon" and "girl" and asked her why she was not wearing a wedding ring.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Carol Edmead ruled last week in Laddcap Value Partners, LP v. Lowenstein Sandler, PC, 600973-2007, that a special referee would oversee all future depositions in the case to monitor Decea's conduct and that all depositions would take place in the courthouse.

The judge said Decea's behavior reflected gender bias as well as "a lack of civility, good manners and common courtesy." She said the appointment of a referee was a means of "guarding against future objectionable conduct" by Decea.

Details here from the New York Law Journal via Law.com.

High Court Justices to Review Detainees' Rights Under Habeas Corpus

Former Solicitor General Seth P. Waxman has always worked to ensure that the great writ of habeas corpus does not become an empty shell. On Wednesday, Waxman will argue in the Supreme Court what is perhaps the most important habeas case in modern history. He will tell the justices that the Military Commissions Act of 2006 violates the suspension clause of the U.S. Constitution insofar as it bars Guantanamo Bay detainees from access to the writ of habeas corpus.

Details here from Marcia Coyle of the National Law Journal via Law.com.

Cops: More Smoke Toad Venom to Get High

I am not making this up:

KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — Law enforcement authorities have discovered that people are willing to go to great lengths to get high, including a troubling new method that features a frightened toad.

"Toad smoking," which is a substitute for "toad licking," is done by extracting venom from the Sonoran Desert toad of the Colorado River. The toad's venom — which is secreted when the toad gets angry or scared — contains a hallucinogen called bufotenine that can be dried and smoked to produce a buzz.

In October, a Kansas City man was charged with possessing a controlled substance after Clay County authorities determined he possessed a toad with the intent to use its venom to get high. . . .

[W]hile smoking toad venom might sound extreme, an even more disturbing method to get high possibly includes sniffing fermented human waste. Vicky Ward, manager of prevention services at Tri-County Mental Health Services in Kansas City, said she has read e-mail warnings about a drug called jenkem.

The drug is made from fermented feces and urine.

Details here from the AP.

Man Sentenced to Six Years for Threats Against Judges

An Orange County man was sentenced to more than six years in state prison Monday for making criminal threats against two judges he believed were conspiring against him.

Richard Senator, 52, of Stanton was convicted this year of making the threats against William Whitely and Norman Delaterre, both state workers' compensation judges, after unfavorable court rulings on a claim stemming from a back injury Senator sustained in the late 1980s.

Prosectors said Senator told Whitely in his chambers that he had prison contacts who would "punish" the judge. They also said Senator accused Delaterre in e-mails of being a terrorist who would have to be punished accordingly.

So far, so good. But the money quote:

Senator served six years in prison on a prior conviction for making criminal threats against a judge, commissioner and attorney in 1997.

Details here from the Los Angeles Times.

Bay Area Counties Toughest on Black Drug Offenders

San Francisco imprisons African Americans for drug offenses at a much higher rate than whites, according to a report to be released today by a nonprofit research institute.

In a study of nearly 200 counties nationwide, the Justice Policy Institute found that 97 percent of large-population counties have racial disparities between the number of black people and white people sent to prison on drug convictions.

The institute, which is based in Washington, D.C., and researches public policy and promotes alternatives to incarceration, says whites and African Americans use illicit drugs at similar rates. But black people account for more than 50 percent of sentenced drug offenders, though they make up only 13 percent of the nation's population.

San Francisco locks up a higher percentage of members of the African American community in drug cases than any other county in the study. In the county, 123 people out of every 100,000 are sent to state prison each year for drug offenses. Of those, whites are incarcerated at a rate of 35 per 100,000 white people, while blacks are incarcerated at a rate of 1,013 per 100,000 black people.

"It is not that San Francisco is sending a lot of people to prison for drug offenses, it is that the people they are sending are black," said Jason Ziedenberg, executive director of the institute. "An average citizen who uses drugs in San Francisco has a pretty low chance of going to prison, but if you are African American, the chances are fairly high."

That's not good. Details here from the San Francisco Chronicle.

Court: Have a Strong Cup of Coffee Handy Before Reading Further

In an unpublished opinion in an insurance coverage/construction defect case involving competing contractual "subrogation waivers" issued today, the California Court of Appeal advised as follows:

Appellate counsel for both sides have done an outstanding job, resulting in briefs that have been more than ordinarily helpful to the court. The fact remains that the issues are far from enthralling; they demand an almost microscopic examination of dry, lengthy contract documents. As we embark on the resolution of these issues, then, we think it only fair to suggest that the reader might want to be sitting in a comfortable chair, with a cup of strong coffee nearby.

American Guarantee and Liability Ins. Co. v. ADP Marshall, Inc. (CA4/2, Dec. 4, 2007) No. E041182 (Richli, J.).

Sperm Donor Targeted for 'Dad' Signature

A New York man, who donated his sperm to a friend years ago is now facing a child-support order after signing his gifts with the moniker "Dad."

The unidentified Nassau County man, who helped a coworker give birth to a baby boy 18 years ago, was hit with the child-support order after sending his biological son several gifts and cards signed "Dad," the New York Post reported Sunday.

His attorney, Deborah Kelly, said her client had only wanted to help the college-bound teen and now was being targeted for his good will.

"It really is no good deed goes unpunished," Kelly said.

"When people do things they think are being done with good intentions and there is an agreement and one of the party reneges on the agreement, it is certainly disconcerting."

The man reportedly orally agreed not to have any rights or responsibilities in the boy's life when he made his sperm donation.

The Post said a Nassau County Family Court judge has ruled against conducting a paternity test in the unusual case, stating it could be traumatic to the teenager.

Details here from UPI. Just one more reason for me to stay indoors, with the blinds drawn, wearing three condoms at all times.

Judge Slams FBI Fishing Expedition at Amazon

How would you feel if you bought a book through Amazon and then found out your book purchasing records had been turned over to the FBI? Would it make you think twice about shopping at Amazon in the future? Amazon think so, and it turns out, so does a federal judge (order, PDF).

The FBI is going after one Robert B. DeAngelo, a former Madison, WI, official who has been indicted on tax evasion and mail and wire fraud charges, Cnet’s Declan McCullagh reports. It seems DeAngelo ran a healthy little used book and CD business out of city offices. He kept his costs low by using city computers and city warehouses.

So to get the goods on DeAngelo, the FBI wants to talk to some of his customers. Not that they suspect the customers were involved or were victimized by the scheme, but to get information to nail DeAngelo. So they issued (or rather the grand jury issued) a subpoena to Amazon for information on every one of DeAngelos customers. Eventually the subpoena was changed to 120 customers, 30 for each year under investigation.

Amazon felt the request infringed on their customers’ First Amendment privacy rights and moved to quash the subpoena. Specifically Amazon argued you have a First Amendment right to keep your book-buying history private. The government argued there is no such privacy right.

Judge Stephen Crocker held that there is a “cognizable First Amendment right” in such privacy, which can be balanced with the government’s need for information by having Amazon contact DeAngelo’s customers and ask for volunteers to talk to the FBI.

Details here from ZD Net.