There has been an ongoing argument over civility in law for years now, with the simplistic side arguing “don’t be a jerk,” the pejorative “jerk” falling somewhat shy of a definition, and the less sensitive side arguing that a lawyer should be whatever best serves the client, whether that means being civil or, when necessary, hoisting the black flag and slitting throats.

For the most part, the argument is one of sensibilities, where gurus of goodness implore lawyers to be kinder and gentler because it makes lawyers feel better about their career choice. But in an odd California case, Karton v. Ari Design, replete with a number of other influences that won’t be discussed here but shouldn’t be ignored, the Court of Appeals put a price on the question. Continue reading →

[Ed. Note: This page intentionally left blank. This is a family blawg, Seaton.]

There were two things about this particular horrific random attack that made it stand out. The first was that it was caught on video in such a way as there could be no doubt that it was so utterly lacking in any excuse, no matter how manufactured by fertile yet insipid minds, that no one could deny its brutality. The second was the image of the perpetrator of the attack was clear as could be.

The cops might not be very good at investigating crimes where thought and effort are required, but even the NYPD can find a guy when it’s this clear. Especially when they have all his info in their database already. Continue reading →

I’ve told the story a few times, about the cop who made the stop testifying that he smelled unburnt marihuana (that’s how it’s spelled under the New York Penal Law; don’t blame me) emanating from the car.

“Poignant,” the officer replied.

I turned to the judge. “What did he say?” The judge, Herbie Adlerberg, who was actually a former judge, now aged out but sitting as a Judicial Hearing Officer at the Suppression Hearing, knew exactly why I asked. “He said ‘poignant.'” Judge Adlerberg wryly replied, letting me know that he, too, heard it clearly. We both gave each other “the look.” Continue reading →

There is a curious belief that there is some duty on the part of the court to make trials available for all to see from the comfort of their couch, as if this lends legitimacy to a trial that wouldn’t otherwise be tolerable if unless every person who wanted to watch had complete access at their fingertips. It’s not about the case, or even the defendant, but about you, random watcher, and your entitlement. Strange days, indeed.

But without detached explanation, do people understand what they’re watching? The prosecution called the teenage clerk at the store where Floyd passed the counterfeit $20 to testify. While the testimony is proper and necessary as background for what followed, that wasn’t the part that’s being emphasized. Continue reading →

There are still eight (count ’em, eight!) candidates running in the Democratic primary for New York County District Attorney, seeking the chair that once held the behinds of legends like Hogan and Morgy, and most recently warmed by Cy Vance who doesn’t need this crap anymore. The flavors of candidates run the gamut, from prosecutors to public defenders, and whoever pulls down the nomination will eventually win the job, because that’s how Manhattan rolls and the Republicans haven’t even managed to find a sacrificial lamb to run against them.

But one has a little secret that makes her stand out from the crowd, and not in a good way.

Diana Florence touts her 25-year career as a Manhattan prosecutor as her biggest selling point in her campaign to be the borough’s next district attorney. She also aims fierce criticism at her former boss, the departing incumbent Cyrus Vance Jr. , saying he catered to the wealthy and powerful. Continue reading →

Hans Bader wrote in some depth about changes to Virginia’s educational focus, requiring its teachers to demonstrate a “commitment to equity” as part of its performance standard and educational criteria.

This standard is full of vague buzzwords and ideologically-charged phrases that can be used to punish conservative teachers, or reward bad teachers for mouthing politically-correct platitudes. Its adoption will make it even harder to get rid of bad teachers and attract good teachers. Continue reading →

That it was caught on video is fortuitous, a reflection of the reality that much of our world is preserved on video. This provides us with the ability to see what before we could only hear about, have described for us. When we watch it, the brutality is very different, very real.

NYPD says 65-year-old Asian American woman was walking to church this morning when suspect assaulted her and said “f*** you, you don’t belong here.” Happened in front of 360 W. 43rd St. 11:40am. Sources say building security guard not only failed to render her aid… 1/2 pic.twitter.com/ZLtQEHHJci

— CeFaan Kim (@CeFaanKim) March 30, 2021

Continue reading →

Is it the death of hostile environment harassment law? Northwestern lawprof Andrew M. Koppelman argues the point.

Andrew M. Koppelman, John Paul Stevens Professor of Law at Northwestern University, has written about the case as one of “free speech gone wild.” The Sixth Circuit “is being invited to invalidate the entire field of hostile environment harassment law,” he wrote last year in The Hill. If Meriwether prevails, “teachers at public colleges will have a constitutional right to subject their students to bigoted slurs. Much of anti-discrimination law would be deemed unconstitutional.”

Continue reading →

It was almost a tradition, in a dark humor sort of way. You were the victim of a “minor” crime. By “minor,” I mean not minor to you, because you were the victim, but minor to the cops. A hit and run without a dead body? A theft under a grand? Damage to your property? You called the police and were told to come to the precinct and make a report. Sometimes, you needed a police report for insurance purposes. Sometimes you did it because what else were you going to do?

Afterward, you would call up on occasion to ask if they found the perp and they said no. They gently told you that it wasn’t likely they would. What they didn’t tell you is that no one ever looked at your report again. No one ever tried to find the perp. No one ever would. Now they’ve said it out loud. Continue reading →