The Wall Street Journal-20080130-Best of the Law Blog - Excerpts from Recent Entries at WSJ-com-s Law Blog
Return to: The_Wall_Street_Journal-20080130
Best of the Law Blog / Excerpts from Recent Entries at WSJ.com's Law Blog
Full Text (862 words)Lawyer's In-Court Reading
Gets Book Thrown at Him
Courtroom sessions aren't always as riveting as Perry Mason episodes, so lawyers sometimes pass the time daydreaming, doodling or even dozing off. One time-killer not recommended, at least in one North Carolina courtroom: reading Maxim, the racy men's magazine. A state-court judge held a lawyer in criminal contempt last week for reading an issue during a court session.
Todd Paris, a solo practitioner in Salisbury, N.C., was seated on a bench in court reserved for lawyers when District Court Judge Kevin Eddinger caught him reading the magazine, according to the contempt order. "Depicted prominently on the cover of the aforesaid magazine was a female topless model," the judge wrote.
Judge Eddinger said that when he gave Mr. Paris a chance to respond, Mr. Paris apologized and "stated in his view the magazine was not pornography, was available at local stores and that he didn't intend contempt."
No matter. Judge Eddinger wrote that Mr. Paris's conduct was "grossly inappropriate" and "patently offensive" and "impaired the respect due" the court. Judge Eddinger slapped Mr. Paris with a $300 fine and a 15-day suspended prison sentence. Mr. Paris and Judge Eddinger both declined to comment.
James Kaminsky, editorial director of Maxim, said he is sending both Judge Eddinger and Mr. Paris a one-year complimentary subscription.
A One-L's Woes
New York Lawyer, a Web site for young associates, recently featured a question from a reader who said he or she received below-average first-semester grades. "I have been very depressed lately," wrote the first-year. "I really want to be a lawyer, but I don't want to do it if I'm not going to be any good at it. Any ideas?"
An advice columnist suggested the student take time for self- assessment and not make any hasty decisions. This blog asked for comment from readers, who generally fell into two camps -- the encouragers and the naysayers.
"The practice of law has virtually nothing to do with what they teach you in law school despite what your first-year property professor might say," wrote one encouraging reader. "If you have street smarts, stick with it, get the degree and apply your common sense."
Naysayers suggested the student take the hit of the first year's tuition and drop out. "Quit now before you are stuck with high loans and no job," wrote one.
Some readers gave more balanced counsel. "If being a lawyer means you want to be rich, respected, and influential, then cut and run." On the other hand, this reader added, "If being a lawyer means you love to write, research and advocate, then keep plodding ahead."
Remembering Barr
Tom Barr, the influential litigator at Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP known for leading the defense of International Business Machines Corp. in its 13-year antitrust battle with the Justice Department, died last week in Santa Barbara, Calif. He was 77 years old.
"Tom Barr really was the founding father of the modern litigation age," said Evan Chesler, the presiding partner at Cravath and Mr. Barr's longtime protege. "He set the standard by which we measure ourselves to this day."
Mr. Barr, a native of Kansas City, Mo., and a former Marine, joined Cravath in 1958 straight out of Yale Law School. He became a partner in 1965 and served for many years as the head of the firm's litigation department.
He was perhaps best known for leading the IBM case, which began in 1969 after the Justice Department accused the computer giant of monopoly. The trial lasted more than five years. IBM produced more than 66 million pages of documents in the case. In January 1982, with a new antitrust regime in place under President Reagan, the government dismissed the case.
In a 1991 interview, Columbia Law professor John Coffee, a Cravath alum who worked on the IBM case, summed up its importance: "In terms of millions of documents, new software systems and thousands of workers -- lawyers, paralegals, outside counsel, in-house counsel -- the IBM case really defined the mega-case."
Lerach Sentence
How long should William Lerach serve in prison? The onetime formidable plaintiffs lawyer, who is scheduled to be sentenced next month, pleaded guilty to conspiring to obstruct justice in connection with alleged kickback payments made by his former law firm, Milberg Weiss LLP, and faces one to two years per a plea agreement.
Exactly how much time is the right amount is now a source of debate within the federal government.
The U.S. Probation Office has recommended 15 months, but in a court filing Monday, prosecutors asked for two years.
A mere 15 months, prosecutors argue, "does not adequately promote respect for the law, nor does it provide just punishment." Mr. Lerach, they say, "now stands in disgrace before the profession of which he considered himself a national leader."
The probation office said it requests 15 months, because in its view Mr. Lerach is subject to an earlier, less-punitive version of the federal sentencing guidelines than the one used by prosecutors.
John Keker, Mr. Lerach's lawyer, said "We obviously think the probation office has it right and [prosecutors] have it wrong."
---
Nathan Koppel contributed to this article.
