On the Record

It’s got to be hard to be a judge. Your job is difficult and how well you do it depends a lot on how well your assistants do their jobs.

And when you do get peeved at a staff member and deliver a mini-tirade in open court, it’s in the public record. Eleven years down the line, when the defendant is before the second-highest court in the state and you’ve forgotten the whole episode, the court can issue an opinion containing the testy exchange.

You may be saying to yourself, “Hm, this doesn’t seem like a purely theoretical blog post.” Good eye.

The Court of Special Appeals issued an opinion this week in a case called State v. Latham, which was about an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. During jury deliberations at his trial in 1997, the defendant told Judge John Themelis that a juror had seen him in shackles.

The judge had told the lawyers in the case that they did not have to stay for jury deliberations, but that they should stick close enough to come back within five minutes if called. The judge asked his law clerk to find the lawyer, and this exchange ensued:

The Court: Did you find Eaton? Where is he?

Law Clerk: He said he was still in his office.

The Court: Did you tell him to get here or would you like me to send a sheriff for him? I told him to get here. Did you tell him to come here? You mean you had him on the phone and you didn’t tell me you had him on the phone?

Law Clerk: No, I didn’t because you were releasing the jury.

The Court: Unbelievable. Get him here, Sir. I don’t care what you do, but get him here…. As soon as you get him, tell him to get here immediately. He’ll be here….

(Recess)

Law Clerk: Judge, they’re telling me that he left.

The Court: I can’t believe it. Now what if you have a problem with the jurors, Jim? What are you going to suggest we do then?

It goes on for a little longer. The word “unbelievable” made another cameo. “Great blunder” was in there too.

I called Themelis yesterday to ask him about the exchange. He hadn’t seen the opinion, but he pulled it up on his screen while we were on the phone. He read the exchange out loud, at one point interrupting himself with, “I wish I hadn’t said that.”

“What I was doing, I was taking out my frustration with what happened and I should not have done that…,” he said. “I tend to do that sometimes. It gets so hectic and you’re bombarded with so many things at the same time when you’re trying to move cases along and protect everyone’s rights. It becomes problematic sometimes.

“I wish I hadn’t talked to my clerk in those tones and I’m sure I apologized for it immediately after,” he added.

The Court of Special Appeals, by the way, rejected Latham’s claims and reinstated his conviction.

CARYN TAMBER, Legal Affairs Writer

People just don’t like trial lawyers. And they love to make this perfectly clear by throwing out a lawyer joke or two at cocktail parties. (Why won’t a shark eat a lawyer? Professional courtesy!)

Perhaps recognizing that a name change would result in better PR , the Association of Trial Lawyers of America changed its name to the American Association for Justice in 2006. And just last night, the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association followed suit.

Members voted to change the organization’s name to the “Maryland Association for Justice.”  Member John Bratt explained the change, writing:

“Apparently nobody likes trial lawyers, but everyone is in favor of justice. I guess there’s a reason the Patriot Act wasn’t named the Civil Rights Deprivation Act of 2001.”

I must confess that comment made me laugh aloud. Though I’d never laugh at a lawyer joke (well, it would have to be really amusing…).

Hat Tip: the Baltimore Injury Lawyer Blog.

CHRISTINA DORAN, Assistant Legal Editor

It’s almost Halloween, the scariest day of the year — for labor and employment lawyers.

Litigation lurks around every corner on All Hallow’s Eve, according to a National Law Journal article. Lawyers are darkly warning employers to beware of lawsuit-inducing costumes.

Some of the costumes that could haunt supervisors are obvious, like “sexy nurse” or “French maid.” (I guess sexy prosecutor is out too, huh?) Some of the other costumes likely to make bosses sit-bolt-upright-in-the-middle-of-the-night-screaming panicky are less predictable.

For instance, occult figures like ghosts and goblins are a no-no because they might offend someone’s religious beliefs. And the Obama or McCain mask you planned to wear tomorrow? In a politically charged time like this one, it’s bound to offend. Tarzan, togas and construction workers are also a problem.

But here’s my favorite part of the story:

If the devil slips on his own tail and gets hurt, he could turn around and sue the owner of the premises, [Bryan Cave partner Dennis] Donnelly said. Fat pumpkins can also trigger a slip-and-fall claim.

“The great big pumpkin costume might look great at the party, but if they trip on their way out the door, it doesn’t look so good,” Donnelly said. His advice: “If you’re going to permit wearing costumes, be sure that managers as well as employees are reminded of their responsibility to be circumspect in what they do,” Donnelly said. “I think where employers have sort of run afoul of things is where the holiday spirit sort of overtakes good judgment.”

Uh-oh. No sexy costumes, scary costumes, costumes with a tail, toga costumes, Tarzan costumes, construction worker costumes or giant pumpkin costumes. And the article doesn’t mention it, but I imagine these would pose a problem, too.

Looks like we arrrr all going to have to suck it up and dress like this. (But not this.)

CARYN TAMBER, Legal Affairs Writer

“The most famous 17-hole championship golf course in the country” is not a title you want to use in an advertising campaign. But it’s how The New York Times accurately described the internationally known Winged Foot Golf Club in upstate New York, after one of the holes was determined off-limits.

A state Supreme Court judge issued a temporary restraining order banning play on sixth hole of the club’s East Course after a man whose house abuts the par 3’s putting green sued the because errant golf balls were a threat to his family.

Anthony Pecora moved into the house in 2003. The club cut down several trees between the sixth hole and his house in 2006; since then, he’s suffered $14,000 in damages, including five broken windows this year alone, The New York Times reported. Pecora also had to pay more than $3,300 for emergency surgery after his dog ate a golf ball last year, his lawyer told the Times.

Members, including Donald Trump, are none too happy about the re-designed course. One member stated what seems to me to be the obvious: “If you buy a house on a golf course, you have to assume there may be a couple of errant shots that are going to land in your yard.”

For analysis of the lawsuit, check out the great Norman Chad’s most recent column. Fore!

DANNY JACOBS, Legal Affairs Writer 

The Post had a story the other day on Christian real estate agents who market themselves to other Christians. Not that it’s an exclusive phenomenon — there are Jewish referral networks and agencies that cater to observant Muslims, for example — but in recent years, the Post says, “an increasing number of real estate agents have begun using Christian messages to market their businesses.”

From the article:

Nonetheless, groups such as the Christian Real Estate Network, or brokers such as [Philip] DeLizio, are walking a fine line, even if they use a disclaimer, said Connie Chamberlin, president of Housing Opportunities Made Equal of Virginia, a nonprofit group dedicated to fighting housing discrimination.
“If this said black real estate network, or white real estate network — looking for a white real estate agent to buy or sell a home? — how would that sound?” Chamberlin said. She added that eventually the courts will weigh in. “Some day one of these things is going to be litigated all the way to the Supreme Court — because there is so much of it.”

What do you think? Have you seen this type of religion-centered pitch among lawyers?

CARYN TAMBER, Legal Affairs Writer

350: Number of opinions the 4th Circuit has issued since Sept. 2.
4: Number of those opinions the court deemed worthy of publication.
0: Number published in the last four weeks.

That’s right. Zero.

Even for the 4th Circuit — “known for being stingier with published opinions than any other circuit court,” Deborah Elkins writes from Richmond for our sister blog at Virginia Lawyers Weekly, a lunar month is a long time for a federal appeals court to go without creating anything that can rightly be called precedent.

“Where have all the good cases gone?” Elkins wonders.

Maybe they’re all being cherry-picked by the court’s mediation panel?

Not so, according to the Chief Circuit Mediator William T. Howell; instead, it’s a function of the number of cases on appeal, which “have gone down dramatically over the last three years,” Howell said.

But things may be looking up for court-watchers, Elkins notes. The court is sitting in Richmond this week – and they have more than 60 cases scheduled for oral argument (PDF).

BARBARA GRZINCIC, Managing Editor/Law

A friend of mine drove down to Richmond on Monday to get sworn in to the Virginia Bar.

After taking what some have said to be the hardest bar exam in the nation (yes, he told me that after the exam, even those who took the California and New York bar exams said Virginia’s was by far the hardest), the new admittees were subject to a new form of torture: an almost four-hour-long swearing-in ceremony.

Evidently, in Virginia, every single person must be named before the group swears to uphold the state and U.S. constitutions. And, not only is every single name read, the name of the law school each admittee attended is also read aloud.

My friend tells me that there had to be at least 3,000 people at the ceremony yesterday (he said he was eyeballing it, and in my experience, he doesn’t tend to exaggerate).

Three hours and 45 minutes later, the new admittees were finally released. I guess the Commonwealth of Virginia wants to make sure its attorneys know just how privileged they are to be members of the Virginia State Bar. It was certainly a ceremony my friend will never forget.

CHRISTINA DORAN, Assistant Legal Editor

Where have Maryland lawyers been putting their political money? As Caryn Tamber writes, being a corporate lawyer doesn’t necessarily make you a Republican.

Other lawyers are investing their time in the political process. More than 100 of them across the state are participating in the nationwide, nonpartisan Election Protection program — and that’s in addition to efforts by the Justice Department through the U.S. Attorney’s office, Danny Jacobs writes.

The slow economy is paying dividends for one bankruptcy firm: Cole Schotz, which opened its Baltimore office with three former Saul Ewing lawyers in February, has added two more attorneys and is moving out of its shared suite and into its own space.

International law took center stage at the University of Maryland School of Law, where a former UN high commissioner and the past chief judge of South Africa’s high court took part in a three-day conference on the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Also:

• The search committee to replace UM Law Dean Karen H. Rothenberg said it hopes to bring six candidates to Baltimore around the new year and wrap up its search by March.

• In federal court, repentant businessman/philanthropist Alan Fabian was sentenced to nine years for what prosecutors called two fraud schemes totaling $40 million.

• In Verdicts & Settlements, Brendan Kearney outlines an EEOC settlement that netted $75,000 for a Muslim project manager for commercial landscaper Outside Unlimited Inc.

• It’s not clear where either Senator McCain or Senator Obama stands on the continued concentration of presidential power, Jack L.B. Gohn writes in his column, The Big Picture.

PLUS: A Profile in Leadership featuring retired Judge Andrew Sonner; On the Move; our weekly Law Digest; and summaries of 13 opinions from the Court of Appeals (in two parts), Court of Special Appeals (in three parts) and the federal court in Maryland.

To let us know what you think of these stories, or to suggest others, please respond to this post.

BARBARA GRZINCIC, Managing Editor/Law  

Good morning!

* Ron Miller at the Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog writes that he is OK with Barack Obama’s stand on class-action lawsuits in the third debate.

* “The point is not to insult jurors’ intelligence, but to imprint an image in their memory, and one of the best ways to emphasize and help people remember a point is to repeat it,” says Paul Mark Sandler on The Art of Advocacy blog.

* Oh, please. I could see this Sun story being cute if played tongue-in-cheek, but playing it straight is kind of ridiculous.

* It’s tough for law schools to raise money in this economy, reports The National Law Journal.

* For the “crawl under the covers and don’t come out for three years” file, law firm marketer Larry Bodine sums up a new study indicating that 2009 will be another rough year for law firms.

CARYN TAMBER, Legal Affairs Writer

Ever notice that just about every women’s Halloween costume (and ew, creepy, many little girls’ costumes) in the stores are a) low-cut, b) short, c) tight or d) all of the above?

Just in case this year’s ridiculous crop of sexy witches/sexy prisoners/sexy Snow Whites/sexy Marie Antoinettes (I kid you not, unfortunately) isn’t doing it for you, how about “sexy prosecutor” or “sexy defense attorney”? And is it just me, or does the “sexy judge” costume look like a witch costume with a white wig and no peaked hat? Are they trying to imply something?

Given the times, is it only a matter of time before we start seeing “sexy bankruptcy lawyer” costumes?

I guess we can all be glad that no one’s selling a “sexy managing partner” costume.

HT: Above the Law.

CARYN TAMBER, Legal Affairs Writer