Recently in Law Category

Yesterday, I flew up to Marquette, Michigan, to argue a post-trial motion in a medical malpractice case. Our firm’s appellate department is often called upon to handle appeals after medical malpractice trials, and we often start that off with the post-trial motions.

Despite living in Michigan my whole life, I haven’t been to the Upper Peninsula too much, and certainly not as far north as Marquette, which, by my reckoning, lies maybe five minutes south of the Arctic Circle. It’s farther away from Detroit than places like Chicago or Buffalo, so I took one of those tiny propeller planes. Amy helped me out by becoming convinced that I was going to crash to a fiery death because “those little planes crash all the time.” As if Northern Michigan is littered with commuter planes that went down before making it to Marquette.

With that uplifting reassurance, I set out for the airport at an ungodly early hour, and caught my flight to Marquette, which managed to arrive without crashing into the wilderness. Instead, it landed at the “International Airport” for Marquette, which is, well, kind of in the middle of the wilderness.

Marquette is really a very nice place, except it was very cold and there was snow everywhere. Given how far north it is, though, I almost felt like I should be watching out for polar bears everywhere I went:

ME: Your Honor, in response to plaintiffs’ assertion that …

POLAR BEAR: ROAR!!!

ME: AAAAARRRRGGGHHH!!! Oh my God, it’s EATING MY SPLEEN!!!

PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL: Objection, Your Honor — counsel is bleeding on my files.

Fortunately, nothing like that happened. As for my hearing, it went about as expected. What was really quite cool about the hearing, though, was the courthouse. If you’ve ever seen the movie Anatomy of a Murder, the courtroom in that movie is the one I appeared in yesterday. It is a historic site, and really quite stunning. It looks like something, well, out of a movie. (As an aside, the movie is based on a novel by John Voelker, a former Michigan Supreme Court justice from the Upper Peninsula.)

After my hearing, I made my way back through the wilderness to the airport, where I again boarded what is, in Amy’s mind, a flying death trap for the flight home. It was quite the contrast to flying out of Detroit, which has about three gazillion gates and planes flying in and out all the time. When they print on your Detroit boarding pass to check at the airport to see whether your gate has changed, they mean it (and my flight out of Detroit indeed did change gates). The gate change is also likely to require you to go to a new gate in a different ZIP code. They print the same thing on your Marquette boarding pass, but there’s only two gates there: Gate 1 and Gate 2. They’re right next to each other. Which means gate changes aren’t really a big deal. Also in contrast to Detroit, when we left, we were the only plane leaving. In fact, we may have been the only plane at the airport. No long trip to the runway. And no waiting around for anything (other than, maybe, making sure there were no polar bears on the runway). That was very nice compared to our landing at the Detroit airport, where we ended up taxiing down the runway for what seemed like three hours before getting to the gate.

Jokes about wilderness and polar bears (which don’t really live that far south — I hope) aside, I rather enjoyed my day trip to the U.P. It’s really quite a nice place, somewhere I’d like to visit again. Maybe in July when there’s a little less snow.

How Appealing reports that "Retired judge's conviction at penis-pump trial could give rise to penis-pump conviction appeal." (See my earlier posts on this case here, here, and here).

The ever-annoying and condescending so-called "Center for Science in the Public Interest" has decided that people somehow think that greasy, fried chicken from KFC is health food. This has led CSPI and a retired physician from Maryland to sue KFC seeking an order that either requires KFC to use different oil or put labels up to warn customers of trans-fat contents.

The last time I checked, most, if not all, people knew that fried food is not so good for you. And I don't ever recall the Colonel force-feeding his chicken to hapless passers-by. I have to think that the courts of this country have better than to tell KFC how to cook its fried chicken, or to tell people how to eat. Not that I'm sticking up for KFC. I've been there only once or twice in the last decade, and found it frankly a bit disappointing and not as good as I remember it. And frankly, I'm not anywhere near as fond of breaded, fried food as I used to be (for both health and taste reasons). But that doesn't mean that I like the idea of holier-than-thou types like the CSPI running around trying to get the courts to tell us how to eat, either.

(Via Overlawyered)

Well, it seems the former Oklahoma judge who was accused of using a "male enhancement device" in open court while on the bench (see here and here for my for reports about this) has been convicted of indecent exposure.

And, in an almost "Law & Order"-style twist, the prosecutor made this disturbing presentation during closing arguments:

[Special prosecutor Pattye] High took off her jacket, picked up the pump and said, “You have been told by the defense this pump is broken.

“Well it is not broken,” she said, and she took off her jacket and put the end of the plastic cylinder that allegedly had contained Thompson’s penis to her arm.

High squeezed the handle of the pump and the vacuum created began to suck the skin of her arm into the plastic chamber.

She dramatically dropped the pump handle device, demonstrating the vacuum was strong enough that it clung to her arm.

“See folks, it really does work,” she said.

Not sure I'd have been in a big hurry to stick that thing on my arm.

(Via How Appealing)

Two years ago today, I had this blog post about an Oklahoma judge who was forced off the bench after it was discovered that he allegedly like to do such things as use a, uh, "male enhancement pump," while on the bench.

Well, How Appealing reports that this former judge is now on trial. Among the gems from this posting are such quotes as:

"Jurors received their first look Tuesday at one of the infamous penis pumps former judge Donald Thompson allegedly used while conducting court during 2002 and 2003."

And this:

Sapulpa Police Chief Jim Wall and Capt. Mike Reed testified Tuesday they heard what they believed to be a penis pump while in Donald Thompson's Sapulpa courtroom in 2002.

It always amazes me to see the stupid things that people will do at work that entirely ruin their careers, but this really goes beyond anything I can comprehend.

The Hertiage Foundation apparently felt the burning need to hold an entire panel discussion so that Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff could inform us that Homeland Security is not like the TV show "24."

Well, gee, Mr. Secretary, thanks for that newsflash. Of course, if real life was like 24, the entire federal government would, for no really good reason, have relocated to Los Angeles, where, again for no really good reason, the world's terrorists would focus all of their efforts. And then the Department of Homeland Security would, yet again for no good reason, alternate randomly between entrusting the entire nation's defense to one ultraviolent dude with a man purse and issuing arrest warrants for the dude for no good reason because it mistakenly believed that the dude was doing things wrong or illegally. Even though this guy is always proven right in the end, the Department will repeatedly jump to the wrong conclusion without trusting him.

Oh, and Dave Barry would mock the Department's efforts on his blog.

I won the first case I ever argued to the Michigan Court of Appeals.

And yesterday, I argued my second case to the Court of Appeals. With my boss sitting two rows behind me (she had to argue a case the same day). I don't think too many people have their bosses actually watching them work. It tends to make one a little nervous.

The Detroit News has reported that my old boss, Judge Henry William Saad of the Michigan Court of Appeals has asked to have his name withdrawn from consideration for an open seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

In the article, Judge Saad said that "it made sense for me to step aside." Maybe. I rather think it makes no sense that it came to that. It has become convenient, politically speaking, for some to label Judge Saad as a right-wing extremist who is biased against "workers" and "the little guy." As I learned while serving a judicial clerkship with him, I know that nothing could be further from the truth. And lest one think me biased, I'll remind everyone that such bastions of right-wing extremism as the Michigan Education Association (the state teacher's union), the AFL-CIO, and the UAW endorsed his elections to the Michigan Court of Appeals. In case anyone missed the dripping irony, these are typically quite left-wing organizations that would typically prefer to endorse a ham sandwich as opposed to someone who was truly a "right-wing extremist."

Sadly, partisan politics have won again, and the federal appellate bench has been deprived of a good man and a well-respected jurist.

Well, I made my first appellate oral argument today before the Michigan Court of Appeals. It actually wasn't nearly as terrifying as I thought it would be. The panel asked good questions, and I felt like I had good answers. Can't ask for a whole lot more than that.

I judged my very first law school competition today. It was the American Bar Association Law Student Division's regional Client Counseling Competition. It was hosted by the Moot Court Board at Ave Maria Law School in Ann Arbor. I was one of the three judges in the final round.

The competition involved teams of two law students each, who would basically do a mock initial consultation with a prospective "client." Only the judges and the client knew the scenario and the issues the client wished to discuss -- the students' job was to glean this information from the client and devise a course of action. My job was to serve on the panel of judges that evaluated the three finalist teams. The other two panelists were a longtime trial attorney who is now a prosectuor, and a clinical psychologist. I found that to be an interesting facet of the rules of the competition -- one of the judges is required to be a clinical psychologist, in order to give the perspective of someone who is not a lawyer, but who is trained in issues of gaining the trust of others, and other such interpersonal relationship issues.

Anyhow, not having judged any of the various law school competitions (mock trial, moot court, etc.) I wasn't sure what to expect. All three teams did a great job, however, and I found the final choice to be quite difficult. We weren't told which teams were from which schools until after we picked the winners. After all was said and done, it just so happened that my two law school alma maters, Thomas M. Cooley Law School and the University of Michigan Law School, ended up being the first- and second-place finishers.

All in all, it was a great experience for me (and, I hope, the participants), and I don't think it will be the last time I volunteer to judge such a competition.

So, it's been a while. So much to ramble on about, so little time. I'm sure all two of you who still read this thing regularly have been crushed at the lack of posting.

I basically missed blogging about the entire University of Michigan football season. Which, given the fact that it was the worst season Michigan has had in over 20 years, is probably a good thing, for my blood pressure. Plus many of you have simply taken to reading last year's rants about Lloyd Carr, which are equally applicable now, if not moreso.

I find myself adjusting quite nicely to the private practice of law. Time truly does fly when you're having fun -- it's been almost a year since the end of my clerkship and the beginning of my private practice adventures. The firm I work for continues to be a cool place to work, and I see a lot of interesting cases. My very first oral argument, however, is the same day, in front of the same panel as a case my boss is arguing. That ordinarily wouldn't be a big deal, except for the fact that my boss is probably one of the best appellate attorneys around, her opinion is important to me, and I'm certain that my first oral argument ever will be a lot less Clarence Darrow and a lot more Porky Pig in terms of oratory style. The only way it could get more embarassing is if I somehow forgot to wears pants that day.

The Super Bowl XL in Detroit hype has finally died down here in the Detroit area. It was nice to see Detroit make a good name for itself, though, and the game itself was pretty damn good. Indeed, I know my good friend Ben Kepple was quite pleased with the results.

Don't you hate when you can't think of something good to write for an ending?

Guess WDIV was right.

WDIV-TV in Detroit reports that federal Judge John G. Roberts, Jr., of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. That court is often considered a feeder for Supreme Court justices. Judge Roberts also has the distinction of not being one of the judges discussed as a possible nominee lately.

My old boss's nomination still languishes in the limbo of the Senate judicial confirmation debate, and the recent compromise that left him in the dust, together with the recent retirement of United States Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, don't make it look very promising for Judge Saad. However, the Detroit Free Press reports that "Republicans Seek to Revive Mich. Judge's Nomination."

The article describes the pressure being brought to bear upon Republican Senator John McCain (R-AZ), likely 2008 presidential hopeful and architect of the recent judicial compromise that put two of the "Michigan Four" on the Sixth Circuit. Some Republican leaders here are warning Senator McCain that he might face trouble at the next primary if Judge Saad is not confirmed.

I find the whole thing quite interesting given that many of the judges confirmed under the recent compromise were considered to be quite "extremist," whatever that means, while Judge Saad (any potential biases I might have toward him aside) is arguably one of the least controversial, in terms of his legal acumen and judicial opinions.

While I am not one to endorse threats or blackmail, I do hope that Senator McCain will use his considerable influence to help move this whole mess along.

The Detroit Free Press ran a very interesting article about my former boss, Judge Henry Saad of the Michigan Court of Appeals, one of President Bush's nominees to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Until my very recent transition to private practice, I had the honor and privilege of serving as Judge Saad's law clerk.

As the article points out, Judge Saad has been stuck in the limbo that is the Senate judicial nomination filibuster debate since he was first nominated in 2001, and through his two renominations in 2003, and earlier this year. Indeed, way back in 1992, the first President Bush nominated Judge Saad to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, and that nomination died in committee with the election of President Clinton.

The local NBC affilate just reported that the Senate has reached a compromise with respect to judicial nominations -- hopefully Judge Saad will finally see the resolution of this long, long process.