I’m a trial lawyer for injured people and businesses at The Beasley Firm. Founded in 1958, we have recovered over $2 billion for our clients through hundreds of verdicts and settlements in excess of $1 million. We’re listed in Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers in America, U.S. News’s Top Lawyers, [...]
Ex Parte Blogging Ethics: A New Way To Make The Supreme Court More Inaccessible and Unaccountable
Dan Markel is "singularly unimpressed" with the arguments in favor of prohibiting newspapers from editorializing about pending cases before the Supreme Court: Over on Balkinization, Eugene Fidell has a post expressing sympathy with the idea that newspapers and others should forbear from trying to influence the Supreme Court on the same day that the Court is going to hear oral arguments in a case. Fidell seems to be persuaded by the gist of this student note in the Stanford Law Review, which raises ethical concerns with "ex parte blogging." With no disrepect to the competent job in the student Note, ... Continue Reading
Great Cases Don’t Always Make Bad Law
As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, Great cases, like hard cases, make bad law. For great cases are called great, not by reason of their importance in shaping the law of the future, but because of some accident of immediate overwhelming interest which appeals to the feelings and distorts the judgment. Northern Securities Co. v. United States, 193 U.S. 197, 400–401 (1904)(Holmes, J., dissenting). That idea seems to be on David Feige's mind when he writes in Slate about the upcoming trial of admitted 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: No jury on this continent is going to acquit their client, ... Continue Reading
Partial Judicial Immunity Granted To Corrupt Luzerne County Judges
Following up on my post of two weeks ago on judicial immunity in the "kids for cash" Luzerne County scandal, Judge Caputo of the Middle District of Pennsylvania issued his ruling yesterday, which holds in pertinent part: For judicial immunity to apply, only two requirements need to be met: jurisdiction over the dispute, and a judicial act. As to the first, a judge is not immune only when he has acted in the “clear absence of all jurisdiction." Stump 435 U.S. at 349 (citation omitted). Second, a judicial immunity extends only to “judicial acts,” not administrative, executive, or legislative ones. Id. at 360-61. ... Continue Reading
Are You Being Properly Joined And Served? Plaintiffs Are Winning The 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b) Removal Debate
"Removal" is the process by which a defendant in a state court case "removes" the case to federal court. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b) makes it sound so simple: Any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the Constitution, treaties or laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties. Any other such action shall be removable only if none of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is ... Continue Reading
The Simple Solution To Judicial Immunity In The Luzerne County Corruption Case
Ashby Jones at the Wall Street Journal reports on absolute judicial immunity: In January, federal prosecutors filed fraud charges against Mark A. Ciavarella and Michael T. Conahan, judges on the Luzerne County, Pa., Court of Common Pleas. Prosecutors alleged that the judges sent numerous juveniles to detention centers over several years in exchange for more than $2.6 million in kickbacks from the former co-owner of two centers. After the criminal charges, several lawyers filed civil suits seeking monetary damages on behalf of dozens of children and their families against the judges and other defendants. They alleged, among other things, that ... Continue Reading
“The Limits of Executive Power” By Professor Robert Reinstein
Prof. Robert Reinstein, my mentor at Temple University Beasley School of Law, has just posted on SSRN a draft of The Limits of Executive Power: Justice Jackson’s concurring opinion in The Steel Seizure Case has taken on iconic status among legal scholars and had been adopted by the Supreme Court as the governing framework for evaluating presidential power. But Jackson’s principles are conclusory, do not rest on any historical foundation, and raise as many questions as they answer. He fails to examine, much less justify, the existence or scope of implied presidential powers, nor does he meaningfully explain the extent ... Continue Reading
The Lawlessness of “Law And Economics”
I admire Judge Posner, one of the flag bearers for the law and economics movement. He is thoughtful, prolific, and has not succumbed to the extraordinary pressure judges feel to guard their actual thoughts and feelings. He is in every sense of the word an open book, and we should be grateful for that. It also makes him the logical target for critics of any of the ideas he champions. Such is the case for my remarks below. I rather enjoyed Posner's latest article, How I Became A Keynesian, which does as good a job as any at summarizing Keynes' core ... Continue Reading
Supreme Court To Decide If Second Amendment Bars State Handgun Laws
The must-read SCOTUSBlog alerts us to the following petition for certorari being granted by the United States Supreme Court: Docket: 08-1521 Title: McDonald, et al. v. City of Chicago Issue: Whether the Second Amendment is incorporated into the Due Process Clause or the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment so as to be applicable to the States, thereby invalidating ordinances prohibiting possession of handguns in the home. Opinion below (7th Circuit) Petition for certiorari (08-1521) Brief in opposition Petitioner’s reply (08-1521) Brief amicus curiae of Arms Keepers Brief amici curiae of Texas, et al Brief amicus curiae of ... Continue Reading
“The Case of the Plummeting Supreme Court Docket” Isn’t Necessarily A Bad Thing
Adam Liptak at the New York Times writes: In the early 1980s, the Supreme Court decided more than 150 cases a year. These days, it decides about half that many. A couple of weeks ago, the Supreme Court advocacy clinic at Yale Law School held a conference to explore the mystery of the court’s shrinking docket. Law professors presented data, theories and speculation. Expensive lawyers told rueful stories about can’t-miss cases that somehow did not make the cut. Some participants blamed the newer justices, others their clerks. Some blamed Congress, saying it is not cranking out enough confusing legislation. And ... Continue Reading
Issues and Briefs in the Major Business Cases in the Supreme Court’s 2009-2010 Term
Business Week points us to the major cases. As Litigation & Trial is a legal, rather than a business, blog, I'm going to take their list of cases but replace their description of each with the actual legal issue at stake, along with links to SCOTUSWiki, which hosts all of the relevant briefs for your reading pleasure: Bilski v. Kappos: Whether a “process” must be tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or transform a particular article into a different state or thing (”machine-or-transformation” test), to be eligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and whether the “machine-or-transformation” test for ... Continue Reading
