The Legal Reader

'Stalingrad' Defense Tactics Prove Costly in Divorce Case

Stamford Superior Court Judge Kevin Tierney found himself at a loss for words recently when attempting to describe the divorce trial of Jacqueline Anom and John Ofori-Tenkorang.
So he borrowed a term that, according to his research, had never been used in Connecticut jurisprudence, and only appeared in one other state court opinion: the "Stalingrad defense."

Anom's marriage only lasted 23 months, but the case has been pending 43 months and the bitter divorce trial stretched from Oct. 8, 2003, to Dec. 23, 2004. In a March 10 motion to reargue, the husband contends Tierney's solution is "impermissible palimony and non-contractual property division" between two people who had never been married at all.

This article makes me glad about two things: First, that I don't practice family law; and second, that I've never been married. Details here from The Connecticut Law Tribune via Law.com.

Top Attorneys Tapped for High Court Tech Cases

In a pair of cases this week, the Supreme Court has a chance to dramatically shape the way that many people use and get on the Internet. Scheduled for argument Tuesday are MGM Studios Inc. v. Grokster Ltd. and StreamCast Networks Inc., which could decide whether peer-to-peer downloading of songs and movies violates copyright, and National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services, a struggle to determine which regulatory regime should govern cable Internet services.
"They are two cases that will have huge meaning for the technological development of the country," says Arthur Brodsky of the group Public Knowledge, which advocates for broad public access to technology. Both cases have attracted top intellectual property and telecommunications lawyers from firms around the country, eager to be in on what could be landmarks in the unpredictable history of the digital age.

Details here from Tony Mauro of Legal Times via Law.com.

Shiavo Case Demonstrates Tensions Between Courts, Congress

The sparring in the Terri Schiavo case illustrates a relationship between Congress and the federal courts that has always been contentious. But to many court-watchers, the discourse has reached a new level of hostility. With increasing frequency, Congress is trying to curb the judiciary's power; with equal vigor, the courts are fighting back. As the Schiavo case escalated in the wake of clashes over the Ten Commandments, the Pledge of Allegiance and same-sex marriage, some saw a judiciary under siege.

Details here from Legal Times via Law.com.

NY Surge as Weil Gotshal Profits Hit $1.7m Per Partner

Top 10 US firm Weil Gotshal & Manges is set to break the $1bn (�521m) fees barrier this year as the New York leader unveils double-digit growth in revenue and partner profits for 2004. The results, which underline the increasing gap in partner profits between top US firms and their London rivals, see Weil Gotshal�s 2004 fee income hit $908m (�473m), compared with 2003�s figure of $801m (�417m). The firm�s average profits per partner were up by 13% to $1.7m (�885,000), against 2003�s figure of $1.5m (�781,121).
The results maintain Weil Gotshal�s record of posting annual double-digit growth following sustained US and international expansion that last year included office launches in Munich and Shanghai. The 1,200-lawyer firm is also regarded as having been insulated from the corporate slump of 2001-02 by its market-leading US bankruptcy practice.

Details here from the UK's Legal Week.

Kazaa Case Goes To The Judge in Australia

The trial pitting Australia's recording industry against the makers of Kazaa may be coming to a highly anticipated end. With closing arguments complete, Judge Murray Wilcox of Australia's Federal Court is expected to rule whether or not the makers of the P2P client are liable for copyright breaches and lost income resulting from files being shared across the Kazaa expanse.
According to E-Commerce Times, Judge Wilcox is "troubled" over whether or not Kazaa offers a legitimate reason for its existence.

Details here from webpronews.com.

Asbestos Verdict Against Caterpillar Is a First, Plaintiff Counsel Says

A San Francisco jury says a bulldozer operator with mesothelioma should be paid $2.2 million for his injuries in what a plaintiff attorney calls the first verdict in the nation involving asbestos exposure from Caterpillar Inc. machinery.
Philip A. Harley of Paul, Hanley & Harley said Caterpillar's portion of the judgment should be about $900,000 because the jury found it only partially liable.

According to Harley, plaintiff Daniel Johnson was exposed to asbestos from Caterpillar bulldozers while doing brake work and other maintenance. Harley said in a post-verdict statement that Johnson was diagnosed with mesothelioma in March 2004 and was recently told he will only live another three to six months.

Details here from the Asbestos Litigation Reporter via FindLaw.

9th Circuit: Cause of Action for Copyright Infringement Not Assignable

By a vote of 7-4, en banc Ninth Circuit panel rules that an assignee who holds an accrued claim for copyright infringement, but who has no legal or beneficial interest in the copyright itself, cannot institute a lawsuit for infringement: You can access today's ruling at this link. Interestingly, one of the disagreements between the majority and two of the dissenters is whether today's ruling creates a circuit split: the majority says "no"; the dissenters say "yes."

Stolen verbatim from How Appealing.

Judge Orders Attorneys to Sit in the Corner

In a high-profile murder case that gets more theatrical with each hearing, a Miami-Dade County judge on Wednesday ordered defense attorney Ellis Rubin and his partner to sit in a corner of a courtroom and write letters of apology to the lead prosecutor for allegations of misconduct they have made against her.
As if the schoolhouse-style reprimand wasn't surreal enough, Circuit Court Judge Rosa Rodr�guez issued the order during a hearing in which prosecutors sought permission to have doctors cut into the shoulder of the defendant in the case to retrieve a bullet now pivotal in the case.

Details here from Florida's Sun-Sentinel.

Going Once, Going Twice, Going to Court Over Dispute With eBay

A minor billing dispute between eBay Inc. and one of its customers, San Francisco litigator Richard Hardack, has escalated into all-out war. Their battles began nearly two years ago when eBay suspended Hardack's account amid a $58 disagreement and Hardack took eBay to San Francisco's small claims court -- the first time. He's since filed two more small claims suits against the company, the most recent in February. This week, eBay sued back.

Details here from The Recorder via Law.com.

Judge: Ohio's Anti-Gay-Marriage Amendment Invalidates Domestic Violence Law

The Cleveland Plain Dealer has an article that begins:

Ohio voters who approved a constitutional amendment last fall that denied legal recognition of unmarried and gay couples probably didn't envision the measure being successfully used as a defense in domestic violence cases.

But now Ohio Judge Stuart Friedman has held that part of the domestic violence law is unconstitutional under that amendment, and that the domestic violence law cannot be applied to unmarried people. The voter initiative, known as "Issue 1," added the following to Ohio's constitution:

Article XV Section 11. Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.

Judge Friedman found this amendment directly contradictory to part of the domestic violence law:

Friedman said that because Ohio's domestic violence law recognizes the relationship between an unmarried offender and victim as one "approximating the significance or effect of marriage," it represents a direct conflict with the amendment's prohibition against such recognition and is thus unenforceable.
In the case involving Frederick Burk of Cleveland, who was arrested in February on a charge of domestic violence against a woman [not his wife], Friedman reduced that charge (a fourth-degree felony with a possible prison term of six to 12 months) to simple assault (a first-degree misdemeanor with a maximum six-month jail term).

That's going to make Judge Friedman a very unpopular man. But perhaps this result is well deserved by those Ohio voters who chose to amend their state's constitution to intentionally discriminate against same-sex couples. (article via How Appealing)

In Own Hands, Some Take the Law Too Personally

Pro se is a way of describing people who file lawsuits without attorneys. It is Latin, say the lawyers, for "for self."
Either that, I suspect as someone who used to cover the federal courts, or for "Get out the decoder ring."

Mike Nichols of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writes about the tin-foil-hat crowd that exits at almost every courthouse, including Bart Ross, the man who committed suicide after killing the husband and mother of federal Judge Joan Lefkow. Details are here.

Schiavo Appeal to Reconnect Tube Denied

ATLANTA - A federal appeals court refused early Wednesday to order the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube, denying an emergency request by the severely brain-damaged woman's parents.
The three-judge panel ruled 2-1 to deny the request, a day after a federal judge in Florida also refused a similar appeal.

Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, vowed yet another appeal Wednesday.

That was quick. Details here from the AP. Or read the Court's 2-1 Opinion here.

The majority opinion concludes with this:

There is no denying the absolute tragedy that has befallen Mrs. Schiavo. We all have our own family, our own loved ones, and our own children. However, we are called upon to make a collective, objective decision concerning a question of law. In the end, and no matter how much we wish Mrs. Schiavo had never suffered such a horrible accident, we are a nation of laws, and if we are to continue to be so, the pre-existing and well-established federal law governing injunctions as well as Pub. L. No. 109-3 must be applied to her case. While the position of our dissenting colleague has emotional appeal, we as judges must decide this case on the law.

High Court Appears Unsympathetic to Cochran's Plight

By Tony Mauro, Special to First Amendment Center Online
WASHINGTON � It looks like famed lawyer Johnnie Cochran won't be ridding himself of his personal nemesis anytime soon.

The Supreme Court appeared roundly unsympathetic yesterday [Tuesday 3/22] as a lawyer for Cochran tried to defend an injunction issued by a California judge against Ulysses Tory, a disgruntled former client who picketed outside Cochran's Los Angeles office with signs describing him as a liar, cheat and worse.

The injunction bars Tory, along with his agents and representatives, from picketing or even speaking about Cochran in any public forum, apparently forever. A California appeals court upheld the injunction and Tory, backed by numerous press and free-speech organizations, asked the Supreme Court to strike it down in Tory v. Cochran.

Details here from the First Amendment Center.

Lawyer: Schiavo Ruling Expected Soon

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - Warning that Terri Schiavo was "fading quickly" and might die at any moment, her parents begged a federal appeals court Tuesday to order the severely brain-damaged woman's feeding tube reinserted.
The appeals court didn't indicate when it might rule, but George Felos, the attorney for Terri's husband, Michael Schiavo, told the Associated Press that he expected a decision before daybreak Wednesday.

Before daybreak? A lot of people, including the House of Representatives, President Bush, and District Court Judge James Whittemore and his staff have been logging some extraordinary hours on this case.

Details here from the AP via My Way News.

UPDATE: Thar she blows!

Preliminary Hearing Waived by Ex-District Judge

Our favorite penis-pumping judge is back in the news:

SAPULPA, Okla. (AP) -- A former judge accused of exposing himself during court cases waived his right to a preliminary hearing today in Creek County District Court.
Former Creek County District Judge Donald Thompson is charged with three felony counts of indecent exposure for allegedly using a sexual device called a "penis pump" while presiding over three trials in 2003. Formal arraignment is set for April 18th.

Defense attorney Clark Brewster says Thompson firmly denies the charges and is looking forward to his day in court.

Did they have to say that he firmly denies it? Details here from KOKH 25 FOX TV.