f/k/a . . .

Don Hutcheson, the Editor/Publisher of the online magazine The Complete Lawyer, is a valued friend of mine. Nonetheless, I have to say this:

TCL is too big — too complete. Every edition has far too many interesting, useful, often challenging, articles and features for me to read and digest. It simply doesn’t leave me with enough time to get my weblog written, friends and family attended to, haiku crafted, and naps taken, so that I’ll feel like a well-rounded (retired) member of the legal profession. And, the topics covered by TCL are almost always too important to ignore.

Case in point: The newly-posted current edition of The Complete Lawyer (Vol. 4 No. 3, May-June 2008), which focuses on A Sound Mind in a Sound Body. It reminds us that “Nearly 75% of TCL readers are at risk for burnout and 45% suffer from high levels of acute stress.”

The burnout is “the result of high levels of stress over time, [and] is associated with fatigue, overwork, and not enough time to get things done.” And, as you lawyer already know, the “Acute stress shows up in anxiety, difficulty concentrating, poor memory, and indecisiveness.”

To help lawyers avoid burnout and anxiety, and achieve a “sound mind in a sound body,” the new issue “focuses on proven antidotes to stress: some are traditional, such as regular exercise and improved sleep; others, like meditation, yoga, and taking cognitive rest breaks during the day, are less mainstream but have proven to be equally effective.” Among the 40+ articles and columns in the current issue, you will find:

• Are You As Stressed As Other Attorneys? by Ellen Moran, et al.

• When You Lose Sleep, Your Work And Health Suffer Dramatically by Thomas M. Heffron (who tells about judges falling asleep on bench, and lots more)
• How To Master Stress by psychologist and career coach Maynard Brusman; and
• Vacations Aren’t Luxuries by Robert Hockett

. . . . and much, much more (including mind-hygiene exercise tips from Idealawg’s Stephanie West Allen). That’s the problem. Frankly, I got tired (and synapses started misfiring) just selecting and listing 10% of the TCL pieces for you. I challenge you to read the entire new edition of TCL and still have energy left to hide your unfinished weekend to-do list, much less to achieve a sound mind and body.

What are we supposed to do tonight? Finish reading the newest TCL, or start preparing our Menudo Soup for Cinco de Mayo? [See our prior post “may 5th menudo” for Cinco de Mayo lore.]

After glancing at the table of contents for the May-June 2008 issue of The Complete Lawyer, our cranky Prof. Yabut was heard mumbling: “What ever happened to the good old days, when a guy could peruse all the good stuff at an online website for lawyers while his first cup of coffee was brewing?”

new issue
of TCL
the sun sets without me

… by dagosan

Some of New York’s black-robed judges are engaging in their version of the Blue Flu, in order to pressure the Legislature to give them (long-overdue) pay raises: They are “recusing” themselves — taking themselves off a case due to bias or a conflict of interest — if a party is represented by a law firm that employs a state legislator (especially Assembly Leader Sheldon Silver’s firm of Weitz and Luxenberg). See Eric Turkewitz’s posting “New York Judges Slowing Cases From Legislators’ Law Firms Over Pay Raise Issue” (NYPILaw Blog, May 2, 2008, with hat tip to Overlawyered.com); and “JUSTICE OF THE CEASE: REVOLT OF ROBES AS STATE JUDGES STALL ‘POL CASES’” (New York Post, April 27, 2008).

Also, see the Advisory Judicial Ethical Opinion (No. 08-76, April 24, 2008), which concluded that the judges’ pay raise lawsuit does not require recusal, but also stated that an individual judge must step aside if he or she has “genuine doubts” regarding the ability to be fair

This time last year, I was chastising Chief Judge Judith Kaye for her tacky use of Law Day Ceremonies to threated a lawsuit to get their pay raise. This year, she is — at least publicly — doing her best to prevent the judicial work slowdown, and deny its existence. See “Chief Judge Writes N.Y. Governor to Deny Work ‘Slowdown’ by State’s Judges” (New York Law Journal/Law.com, April 30, 2008); and “Chief judge cautions against recusals as protest” (AP/Syracuse Post-Standard, May 2, 2008). The AP story says:

Kaye, who after turning 70 will retire at the end of the year, in an e-mail Thursday cautioned them not to refuse to hear lawmakers’ cases as a form of protest. She wrote that “using recusal as a strategy rather than as a matter of individual conscience” would be perceived as retaliatory and weaken their cause.

sua sponte –
her honor
catches me staring

. . . by dagosan

Our rabble-rouser weblog friend Scott Greenfield at Simple Justice disagrees with Judge Kaye, and instead is egging on the judges to “stand up for themselves” and ignore calls to maintain their judicial dignity, because “there’s nothing dignified about poverty.” As I told Scott in a Comment at his website,

It is not a matter of dignity (and you know how often I deride our profession’s Dignity Police at my weblog); it is a matter of duty. No judge has the right to fabricate reasons to recuse himself or herself as they are doing here in order to pressure legislators.

I believe that judicial salaries should be higher, but that does not justify using a judicial variant of the Blue Flu. If pay is intolerably low, then an individual judge should resign. There are dozens of competent lawyers (some making far less now and some much more) who would gladly fill each of their slots on the bench at current salary levels. [Indeed, in many locales across the State — including Schenectady County — fulltime judges are among the highest-paid members of the legal profession (starting at $108,800), and they get plenty of other perks.]

This work action will indeed cause the judiciary (and unfortunately the entire justice system) to lose the respect of the average New Yorker.

My position here is similar to my opposition to the illegal boycott tactics used in Massachusetts by their “bar advocates,” in their fight for higher assigned counsel fees. It may be old fashioned, but I really do hold lawyers and judges to a higher standard than I hold your run-of-the-mill politician or bureaucrat — especially when the dispute really comes down to a matter of money.

My bottom line:

• judges should know better than anyone else that good ends do not justify unethical or coercive means — especially when the “end” (no matter how dressed up in cries of constitutional crisis) comes down to personal financial gain
• if any particular judge “doubts his/her ability to remain impartial” merely because a lawyer works for a firm that includes a NYS legislator, he or she does not have sufficient judicial temperament to stay on the bench and should leave

Hey, it’s Saturday afternoon, and thoughts of haiku (not court hi-jinx) should be on my mind. Before Mainichi News posts its May haiku offerings, here are a pair of poems from its April edition, by two of f/k/a’s Honored Guests. I had planned to post these poems before I decided to write about the judicial slowdown. So, any resemblance to a judge dead or living is purely coincidental.

spring thunder
dust from a slap
on the horse’s rump

…… by w. f. owen - Mainichi Daily News Haiku (April 2008, No. 706)

offshore breeze –
a girl with wild gestures
where the wave breaks

…….. by Jim Kacian - Mainichi Daily News Haiku (April 2008, No. 706)

Pump-Pandering Politicians: It’s great to see that so many news sources and websites are putting a penetrating spotlight on the proposals by the presidential candidates, as well as other federal and state politicians (like Messrs. Bruno and Tedisco in New York), to remove the gas tax over the summer. A Newsday editorial summed it up: “A proposal for such tiny, temporary, iffy savings is a political gimmick, not meaningful relief.” (”No such thing as a free tank: No gas tax for the summer is a bad idea“, April 30, 2008). For more analysis, see:

• “Tax cut could push gas prices higher” (CNNMoney.com, April 29, 2008) “Despite claims from McCain and Clinton, temporary cut in gas taxes could lead to more demand and push prices higher - leaving taxpayers to cover shortfall.”
• “Candidates’ Plans Could Indirectly Raise Gas Prices: Senators Back Steps That Portend Higher Pump Costs,” Wall Street Journal, April 30, 2008
• “Dumb as We Wanna Be” by Thomas L. Friedman (New York Times, April 30, 2008), which opines, “It is great to see that we finally have some national unity on energy policy. Unfortunately, the unifying idea is so ridiculous, so unworthy of the people aspiring to lead our nation, it takes your breath away. . . This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country.”

See the video clip — “Who Can Lower Gas Prices? The Candidates’ Plans: The Gas Squeeze: Will lifting the gas tax provide some relief?” — from Good Morning America/ABCNews (April 30, 2008)

And, listen to analysis on the Gas Tax Holiday from the PBS NewsHour — (April 30, 2008), or read the transcript.

• “Democrats Divided Over Gas Tax Break” by John Broder, The New York Times (29 Apr 2008), which has a description of the presidential candidates’ current and prior positions on gas taxes, and points out (emphasis added):

“The highway trust fund that the gas tax finances provides money to states and local governments to pay for road and bridge construction, repair and maintenance. Mr. McCain and Mrs. Clinton propose to suspend the tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day, the peak driving season, which would lower tax receipts by roughly $9 billion and potentially cost 300,000 highway construction jobs, according to state highway officials.”

update (May 1, 2008): Today’s NYT editorial “The Gas-Guzzler Gambit” also uses the word pander and explains why “it is an expensive and environmentally unsound policy that would do nothing to help American drivers.”

The federal tax on gasoline is 18.4 cents per gallon, about 5% of the average price today. Savvy f/k/a readers probably didn’t have to read an article to wonder why we would expect the oil companies to automatically pass on the savings from a gas tax hiatus. In addition, if you’ve been reading about the plight of many independent gas stations, you might also expect the stations to try to pocket some of the tax savings for themselves. See, e.g., “Stations hope you fill up with more than gas: Fuel is loss leader for many; they make money in convenience stores,” (msnbc.com, April 1, 2008)

If you want to feel even worse about all this, and the related subject of reducing our nation’s gasoline consumption, read a little about the Price Elasticity of Demand for Gasoline; and see “Soaring Gas Prices Will Not Reduce Demand.”

Where do the Presidential Candidates Stand? We’re not naming names (due to our political-punditry hiatus), but see “Clinton Criticizes Obama Over Gas Tax Plan: Knocks Obama’s Opposition To Summer ‘Gas Tax Holiday,’ Which She And McCain Support” (CBSNews.com, April 28, 2008); “Obama Dismisses Gas Tax Holiday: Senator Says Gimmick Won’t Help Consumers, Designed To Get Rivals Through Election” (AP/CBSNews.com, April 29, 2008); and “McCain wants a gas tax ‘holiday.’ It’s a no-brainer, right?,” (The Oil Drum: Europe, April 15, 2008)

update (May 2, 2008): Yesterday, former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joe Andrew, a superdelegate, switched his presidential endorsement to Barack Obama. See “Longtime Clinton ally Joe Andrew defects to Barack Obama” (Los Angeles Times, May 2, 2008) At a news conference Thursday, Andrew said:

“Clinton’s support for a federal gas-tax holiday over the summer was symbolic of a poll-driven candidacy proposing something ‘politically expedient to give a quick pander to Hoosier voters,’ in contrast to what he called the ‘principled’ campaign Obama has run.”

We think the gas-tax-holiday issue can tell us a lot about our so-called leaders. Who is willing to tell us the truth? Who treats voters like adults? Who is worried about the long-run and not just the next election? It also tells us a lot about the voting public: Who will demand a simplistic “solution” even if it might in fact be counter-productive, just to get a few extra bucks in their pocket now.

- for other posts on issues related to gasoline consumption see: post-Earth Day spread: speed limits and efficient driving; Open Letter to Gas Whiners and Another Silly One-Day Gas Boycott

follow-up (May 8, 2008):  There’s an excellent editorial in today’s NYT, “The Tax Trickery Spreads” (New York Times, May 8, 2008)  Among points made:

• “Unfortunately, their [Senators Clinton and McCain] demagoguery is growing into a real problem, setting off a chain reaction of “me too” proposals across the country to suspend state gasoline taxes, which tend to be much larger than the 18.4-cent-a-gallon federal levy. If the pandering spreads, it would go a long way in setting the nation’s energy strategy in precisely the wrong direction.”

• “These ideas share a common purpose: appearing to be doing something to ease hard-pressed voters’ pain at the pump. Not only are they costly, but they will not do that. Suspending the federal tax would cost $9 billion. In New York, the suspension would blow a $500 million hole in state finances. Consumers in some states could benefit from lower state gas taxes because wholesalers could import gas from other states. Still, with refineries producing almost at full capacity, the tax break would prompt a jump in demand that would push up prices.”

If you’ve read and considered all of the above, you surely deserve a treat. Here are more poems from the newest issue of Acorn (No. 20, Spring 2008) — which, among its 100+ poems, contains contemporary haiku by a number of our f/k/a Honored Guest Poets:

nearby clouds
nearby mountains
the rescue helicopter hovers

… by Gary Hotham

a cat at a threshold I can’t see sniffs something I can’t smell

icy night
a saw-whet etches
the silence

………. by jim kacian

spring at last
letting the stallion out
into the pasture

….. by Randy M. Brooks

quick-running brook . . .
a stone from the bottom
lighter than imagined

……………… by paul m.

fumbling
with coat buttons
autumn rain

……………. by Yu Chang

Lightning-cracked rain –
his palm rests against
the bottle’s black label

Dead-end road –
shadows of skinny cows
through old barbed wire

……… by Rebecca Lilly

All Souls
a third day
of candy

………….. by John Stevenson

. . . . . . . 1958 to 2008. . . May 1st is Law Day . .

We’ve pretty much said all we need say about Law Day in prior years — see, e.g., “Law Day, Not Lawyers Day” (2004); “towards a better Law Day” (2005); “lawdy, lawdy another Law Day” (2006); and “Law Day with Chief Judge Kaye” (2007). This year, I’d like to point out that this is the 50th Anniversary of Law Day, which was started with a proclamation by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1958.

In other years, President George W. Bush issued Law Day proclamations a few days before May 1st. In 2005, he did not mention lawyers in his Law Day proclamation, in “Law Day, U.S.A., 2006” he did. Although President Bush has recently recognized Malaria Awareness Day, and Older American Month, along with Loyalty Day (which is also on May 1st) and Education and Sharing Day, there is no Law Day proclamation up at the White House Proclamation Page, as of 4 PM Eastern Time today, April 29, 2008. Some wags might conclude that he likes loyalty and lot more than the rule of law. update (April 30 May 1, 2008, 8 AM): Still no Law Day Proclamation from the White House, but National Physical Fitness and Sports Month did get honored overnight.

Better Late (May 1, 2008, 9:30 AM):  The White House has finally issued its proclamation for Law Day 2008.  It starts: “The right of ordinary men and women to determine their own future, protected by the rule of law, lies at the heart of America’s founding principles.  As our country celebrates the 50th anniversary of Law Day, we renew our commitment to the ideals on which this great Nation was established and to a robust system of ordered liberty.”  And continues, “We pay tribute to the men and women in America’s legal community.”  President Bush also looks toward “a hopeful future as we work to secure the liberty that is the natural right of every man, woman, and child.”

Prof Yabut, having recently watched both Frontline’s “Sick Around the World” and Michael Moore’s Sicko,, and having just read Pres. Bush’s proclamations for Loyalty Day, Older American Month, Education and Sharing Day, Malaria Day, and National Volunteers Week, wonders yet again: How can all those other nations pay for everyone’s health-care and education (and assure month-long vacations to workers) when our rich and caring country fails to do so?

The 2008 Law Day theme at the American Bar Association is The Rule of Law: Foundation for Communities of Opportunity and Equity. The ABA’s Law Day materials explain

Why Is This Theme Important?

Advancing the rule of law helps achieve an
array of public benefits. We all have a stake in
the rule of law, and we all can do our part to
strengthen it.

The rule of law refers to a system of self-
government with a strong and accessible legal
process. It features a system based on fair,
publicized, broadly understood, and stable
laws, and diverse, competent, and independent
lawyers and judges. This foundation is essen-
tial to foster sustainable communities of
opportunity and equity.

Frankly, I’m not too sure what that means, but there are a lot of materials at the ABA Law Day 2008 website to help understand the topic and even teach it to others. If you want to see whether there are Law Day activities in your area, check out their Law Day Events Calendar.

If you like tacky, don’t forget the ABA Law Day Store. (scroll down our 2006 Law Day post for thoughts on the Law Day Store) update (April 30, 2008): Anne at Court-o-rama says: “Not to be outdone by Hallmark, the ABA has a Law Day Store selling Rule of Law yo-yos, mugs, backpacks, balloons, postcards (send one to a despot!), and carabiners: the keychains of the future!!!.”

If you long for the days when Law Day was still celebrated by the Bar as if it really were Lawyers Day, go to the Resources Page of The Billable Hour Company and check out their Legal Holidays and Events Calendar. The calendar is meant:

To help raise the morale of legal professionals by spreading information about all of the federal, state and local holidays that celebrate lawyers and legal professionals.

Since the rest of the world is “not quite ready for Love Lawyers Day,” lawyers may just have to be satisfied with loving themselves.

afterthought (7 PM): KipEsquire at a Stitch in Haste is not happy with Pres. Bush’s proclamation making May 1st a National Day of Prayer, saying “Bush again insults and marginalizes atheists” (hat tip to Ed at BlawgReview)

If you’ve read down this far and are saying to yourself, “hey, where’s the haiku?,” here are a few from the brand new edition of Acorn (a journal of contemporary haiku, that is edited by Carolyn Hall). We’ll share more from Acorn No. 20, Spring 2008, very soon.

a cold cup
from a cold cupboard –
morning moon

… by Peggy Lyles -

pale moon the thinning of days into winter

… by Billie Wilson

here
for now
first snow

…… by John Stevenson

century oak –
waiting it out
inside the drip line

country road
the Nam vet
revs his Harley

…….. by Tom Painting

p.s. Tom’s second poem reminded me of articles I’ve been seeing lately like this one: “older riders adding to motorcycle fatalities” and “rusty baby boomers on bikes.” Be careful out there, Boomers. Don’t forget the rules of law nor the laws of nature (and physics).

Prof. Yabut says: While our Editor is taking his first morning nap, I thought I’d sneak in a quick posting that might violate his Christmas 2007 “no politics” pledge. I’d argue that I’m merely doing a public service by following up on one of the most-visited posts in our five-year history: “Inquiry to Obama on Tort Reform” (Aug. 4, 2004), from which we hoped to find out the position of Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama on tort reform and related issues. [Note: Our Editor is a lifelong Democrat and has recently noted his support for Sen. Obama.]

Reminder: The f/k/a Gang [the Editor and his alter egos] are not “tort reformers” — we do not advocate arbitrary or blanket limits on the size of personal injury awards. We have, however, written extensively on the topic of the standard contingency fee (charging virtually every personal injury client the same percentage fee regardless of how risky or easy the case might be), which we believe consistently extracts excessive fees from clients. See, e.g., our four-part essay on the ethics and economics of contingency fees.

This position has drawn the ire of the so-called “trial lawyers,” “consumer protection lawyers” and “justice lawyers,” who seem to have much power over traditional Democratic politicians (especially those seeking campaign contributions). For example, the supposedly pro-consumer Clinton Administration opposed a bill that would have merely told consumers that they have the right to negotiate the level of a contingency fee. [aside (May 1, 2008): See my Comment #5 below about a reaction to the above mention of standard contingency fees.] Now, finally, let’s go to the point of this posting:

As you probably know, Barack Obama appeared on Fox News Sunday on April 27, 2008 (to the apparent dismay of many liberal bloggers who support negotiating with our nation’s enemies, but are boycotting Fox in order to “delegitimize” it. Please, kids, grow up with all your litmus tests.). Click for a Transcript of Obama on FNS.

For the purpose of this post, what interested us was this exchange between moderator Chris Wallace and Sen. Obama:

WALLACE: Some of your detractors say that you are a paint by the numbers liberal and I’d like to explore this with you. . . . As a president, can you name a hot button issue where you would be willing to cross (ph) Democratic party line and say you know what, Republicans have a better idea here. . . .

OBAMA: . . . I would point out, though, for example, that when I voted for a tort reform measure that was fiercely opposed by the trial lawyers, I got attacked pretty hard from the left.

At Point of Law.com, guest-blogger Carter Wood responded to this brief remark with the posting “Obama Cites His Tort Reform Credentials” (April 27, 2008). Wood notes:

“He’s no doubt referring to his February 2005 vote for S. 5, the Class Action Fairness Act, which passed 76-26. Ted Frank analyzed Obama’s CAFA vote and tort reform record in this December 2006 post, concluding, ‘As a reform supporter, I’m far from convinced that this makes him someone willing to cross the plaintiffs’ bar.’ Senator Clinton voted no.”

In his earlier Point of Law piece, “Obama and liability reform” (Dec. 27, 2006), Ted Frank weighed in on whether Sen. Obama had any tort-reform creds, discussing his vote for what Frank calls “the eminently sensible Class Action Fairness Act.” After noting that “Obama may have annoyed the lunatic left with his vote for CAFA,” Ted says, among other things:

“Obama didn’t participate in the negotiations to get Democratic support, and he voted for every Democratic attempt to eviscerate the bill with amendments. . . Obama didn’t break with the Democrats on any seriously contested tort reform measures: he filibustered medical malpractice reform, and was one of the votes to kill the asbestos reform bill (which effectively failed by one vote) . . . Obama claimed to support medical malpractice reform in his Senate campaign (or, at least, made pro-reform swing voters think that he did), but, then, so did Kerry and Edwards in their 2004 presidential campaign.

“Obama co-sponsored the MEDiC bill with Hillary Clinton; it was a federally-funded variation of the so-called “Sorry Works” proposal . . . But it’s hardly the move of someone daring to flout the trial lawyers who dominate the Democratic Party these days.”

I don’t believe that Barack Obama has ever tried to portray himself as a full-blooded, knee-jerk Tort Reformer. As far as I’m concerned, neither being totally for nor totally against every tort-reform proposal makes good sense or good public policy. The issues raised are complicated and need to be looked at with regard to the legitimate rights of both injured plaintiffs and accused defendants — assuring that all litigants get justice and our justice system is efficient and fair. There is no simple fix that can assure that those truly injured by bad-actors are fully compensated and that defendants are treated fairly both when blame is assigned and when damages are measured.

From my perspective as a consumer advocate and citizen looking for an effective and fair justice system, it seems that: Rabid proponents of tort reform mostly want to pay injured plaintiffs as little as possible, while rabid opponents of tort reform — mainly the “trial” or personally injury bar — want to be able to extract as much money as possible from defendants while assuring the biggest fees possible for plaintiffs’ lawyers.

In this context, I’m pleased that Barack Obama has not totally embraced “tort reform,” and — as a Democrat who worries about interest groups strangling the party and skewing its positions and priorities — am even more pleased that the Senator is unwilling to simply rubber stamp the position of trial lawyers by serving as their mouthpiece, puppet or platitude-peddling political paladin, rather than looking at each issue or piece of legislation on its merits.

I continue to hope that Sen. Obama will produce a comprehensive statement about our litigation system and necessary reforms and restructuring (including the need for full access to the courts). By choosing not to embrace either Tort Reformers or Trial Lawyers, Barack Obama increases his creds as a refreshingly different kind of politician.

Schenectady attorney Brian Mercy evoked tears of joy earlier this week from a client who had been in jail since last August, but was released from a drug charge when the vehicle search was held to be warrantless and illegal. But, Brian wasn’t quite so lucky yesterday with another jail-house dwelling client. According to the print edition of today’s Schenectady Daily Gazette (”Man punches attorney during court appearance,” April 19, 2008, p. B2):

“A man facing a jail assault charge apparently didn’t like the plea offered to him Friday.

“Charles Ardley, 21 [street name “Murder”], who was being held at the Schenectady County jail since last fall, responded by punching his attorney in the face, officials said.

‘He got mouthy with the judge and reached over and punched me in the side of the head,’ said attorney Brian Mercy, who was not injured. ‘I saw it coming.’

. . . “Mercy, who is no longer representing Ardley, said his former client was expected to be charged with contempt and harassment.

“The offer was apparently withdrawn.”

Although I’ve on occasion been tempted to slap a client or two upside the head (a couple divorce mediation husbands come to mind), I’ve never been punched, slapped or even pushed by a client. I have had a couple scary parents of my Law Guardian clients make not-at-all subtle threats when they did not like my opinion as to who should get custody or more visitation, or whether foster care was necessary. [These guys usually had biceps larger than my head.]

What about you, Mr. or Ms. Lawyer? Have you ever been punched or assaulted by a client? Are criminal lawyers more at risk than matrimonial lawyers or estate planners? Let us know with a Comment or a blurb at your weblog.

update (2 PM EDT): Hat tip to Ed of BlawgReview for sending me a YouTube Link to “Lawyer Punched in Face in Court,” on which Dustin Wadsworth shows a clip of a public defender being punched by his robbery-suspect client in a court room in Georgetown, KY. (ABC2Newscast, Feb. 6, 2008). This lawyer (not identified) got walloped.

afterglow (April 21, 2008): Thanks to all the blawgers who have pointed to this posting from their weblogs, including Holden at What About Clients, Gideon at A Public Defender, Kevin at Real Lawyers Have Blogs, and David at Above the Law.

If this post interested you, you might want to take a look at “poorly framed in Schenectady,” where I ask whether a local public defender should have refused to present an obviously-bogus alibi (which included using a photo from a picture frame in pointing to an imaginary perpetrator). If you are the defensive-lawyer type, it might make you want to punch someone (i.e., me).

. . . . . .

streetwalker
with a black eye halo
around the moon

….. by George Swede from Almost Unseen

empty punchbowl
husband and wife
avoid the mistletoe

…… by dagosan

all fools day
my daughter gets in first
with a pinch and punch

…….. by Matt Morden - The Heron’s Nest (June 2001)

new year’s morning
like every other
we punch the clock

………………… ed markowski

mosquitoes
the slap of a beaver tail
at twilight

. . . by Alice Frampton - The Heron’s Nest (Sept. 2005)

singing a song
and slapping his butt…
with a fan

from his hole
the snake pokes his head…
the cat slaps it

swat! swat!
the escaping fly buzzes
with laughter

… by Kobayashi Issa, translated by David G. Lanoue

Non-lawyer Steve Hughes has a weblog of his own and lots of experience in advertising and sales promotion in St. Louis. Yet, he apparently failed to let any members of the blawgisphere know about the launching of the very first National Be Kind to Lawyers Day, which was “celebrated” on April 8, 2008.

Of course, if Steve had Googled or Yahoo!’d “Lawyers Day,” he might have saved himself a lot of effort and felt a bit less ignored. The very first search result is our posting from last September, which suggested that the world is “not quite ready for Love Lawyers Day.” It echoed a theme that we had sounded two years prior, when we pointed to the lukewarm reception for the August 31st event called “Love Litigating Lawyers Day.”

I don’t know why N.B.K.L.D was such a flop (other than the universal dread and dislike of lawyers). Hughes, who has worked with lawyers “for several years in the presentation skills arena,” would seem to have been the right person to launch the Day. According to his weblog, Steve is “the Presentation Guy,” and his bio boasts of years in advertising and sales promotion with top firms. His Hit Your Stride organization — which has the slogan “helping clients create & deliver world-class presentations” — calls itself

“a high-impact communication resource for organizations who want to create, deliver and profit from world-class presentations.”

On March 31st, Hughes and Hit Your Stride put out an upbeat press release for Be Kind to Lawyers Day. The press release said:

Tuesday, April 8th is the first-ever National Be Kind To Lawyers Day and is designed to give an ounce or two of respect to the men and women who daily tip the scales of justice. “In most surveys lawyers rank as the least respected profession and that includes celebrity paparazzi and used car salesmen,” says National Be Kind To Lawyers Day creator Steve Hughes.

It goes on to explain that “The early April date was selected because it is ideally situated between April Fool’s Day and Tax Day April 15th.” Steve adds that “The best part of National Be Kind To Lawyers Day is that people can participate as much or as little as they choose.” Sadly, whether or not they knew it, the American public chose not to participate. As far as I can tell, the holiday went virtually unnoticed. Indeed, I have the feeing that very lawyers received one of the two free Be Nice To Lawyers Day greetings cards from 123greetings.com.

You can click to read more about The N.B.K.T.L. Story, including suggestions — better late than never — on just how to particpate. [One of the better suggestions: “If you can’t abstain, tell your funniest lawyer joke but switch out the lawyer with your profession. (I bet it’s still funny.)” Your Editor bets it’s not quite as funny.] There’s even a page of allegedly “Cool Lawyer Facts.” I’d say most of them — like reminding us that Ozzie Nelson had a law degree — are just room temperature.

All in all, I can’t whip up enough enthusiasm for National Be Kind to Lawyers Day to even come up with a related haiku or senryu poem. Instead, I’ll leave you with the image of Lawyer Appreciation Day that Wiley first presented at Non Sequitur in 1993:

.. larger ..

Even by Schenectady standards for silly and strange legal news (see examples here), the burglary conviction of 50-year-old Gregory Barnes is noteworthy. Last February, after a two-week trial, Barnes was found guilty of three counts of first-degree burglary, plus menacing and harassment charges [for threats and sexual comments to the victim]. According to the Albany Times Union:

“Barnes broke into his sister-in-law’s James Street home and attacked her with a screwdriver in March 2007. At the time, he was high on crack cocaine and incensed at the woman for cutting him off from family activities, Assistant District Attorney Anne Bair said.”

What makes the case peculiar and interesting can be culled from the headlines it garnered in the two major local newspapers: “Burglar convicted after alibi collapses: Defendant tried to pin violent break-in on imaginary criminal” (Albany Times Union, by Paul Nelson, Feb. 22, 2008); and “Burglar gets added time for trying to frame a frame” (Schenectady Daily Gazette, by Steven Cook, April 12, 2008). As the TU explains further:

“Barnes tried to pin his crime on an imaginary person — even providing a photo of a dapper picture-frame model to make his case.

. . . “A few weeks before the trial started, Barnes presented an alibi to his lawyer, public defender Kent Gebert. Barnes gave Gebert a picture of a man he contended was responsible for the crimes against his sister-in-law and gave the man’s name as Wayne Heittleman, Gebert said. That photo was used as an exhibit to bolster the case.

. . . “Gebert said Barnes testified in court that he had only arranged for Heittleman to scare the victim and that Heittleman ‘went beyond the assignment” by burglarizing the place and attacking the woman.”

Public Defender Kent Gebert told the Times Union he initially had no reason to doubt Barnes’ story. Luckily, the prosecutor’s office was not quite as gullible as Gebert. You see, this is the “photo” submitted by Barnes and Gebert to identify the alibi perpetrator:

The TU tells us that “A subsequent background check of Heittleman by county investigator Dave Mantei came up empty,” and “We knew it (photo) was phony, cropped and cut out from some type of catalog, but didn’t know where,” ADA Bair added. Then, serendipity helped uncover the truth:

“As luck would have it, Cathy Dobies, who works in the district attorney’s office, saw the photo in a picture frame while browsing in the Glenville Wal-Mart where her son works.”

The Schenectady Daily Gazette filled out the story in its article today:

“Investigators spent the better part of 12 hours trying to find the man, Bair said. When the photo surfaced, they had immediate suspicions, but had to prove it.

“It was Cathy Dobies, who works in the district attorney’s office, who solved the mystery. She knew she had seen the face and suspected it came from somewhere, but didn’t know where. She checked several advertisements. Then, after work, she went to Wal-Mart.

“Within minutes, she found ‘Mr. Heidleman.’

“ ‘I went to the picture frame aisle and there they were, tons of them,’ Dobies recalled today. . . .

“It turned out the man in the picture was nowhere near Schenectady last March — or apparently ever. Officials called the company that produced the frames and was told he lived in Florida.”

Taking Ms. Dobies’ lead, I headed to the same Wal-Mart store this afternoon, and also quickly found “Mr. H.”, and scanned it for this posting (after spending $1.47 for the frame). The photo is part of the packaging in a series of picture frames with the brand name “megapix,” manufactured by MCS Industries, Inc., and sold at Wal-Mart. It comes on a thin piece of cardboard, in the odd size and shape shown above. There is no way a thinking adult could have been fooled by it.

Acting Schenectady County Court Judge Richard Giardino was clearly correct to be angry about the lies told to judge and jury by defendant Barnes in his courtroom, and right to add years to his sentence. On Friday, Judge Giardino sentenced Barnes — who had a prior burglary conviction 20 years ago — to the maximum 18 years in prison. Per the Daily Gazette:

“As upsetting as this crime is, what is also upsetting to the court is that you came and put your hand on the Bible and lied in front of the jury,” Giardino told Barnes. “You tried to put this off on someone else, and in doing so you damaged the integrity of the whole criminal justice system.”

The prosecutor had only asked for 12 years. Public Defender Gebert had the chutzpah to ask for five years, arguing that Barnes had stayed out of trouble for 20 years, and still has a chance to be a productive member of society.

After the verdict, Gebert told the TU in February that he was “thoroughly ticked off” and that Barnes sheepishly gazed down when he realized the prosecution had refuted his story and had the picture frame to prove it. He also asserted that he:

“wouldn’t knowingly put something in evidence if I knew it was false.”

We’re not doing legal ethics punditry these days here at f/k/a, but I’d like to do a little Concerned Citizen Commentary. Frankly, I don’t buy lawyer Gebert’s excuses — and I would not like to think that the ethical and “professional responsibility” duties of an officer of the court could be so lax as to allow him to look the other way, while his client tried to pin the crime on a picture-frame model. I’m hoping that my weblogging friend Scott H. Greenfield, of the Simple Justice weblog, and many other criminal defense and legal ethics experts [such as the proprietors of CrimProfBlog, Doug Berman at Sentencing Law & Policy, Skelly Wright at Arb& Cap, Mike Frisch at Legal Profession Blog, and maybe even Scott at Grits for Breakfast] will help us sort out Gebert’s obligations. And, I hope some non-criminal lawyers who care about protection of the public and the honor of the profession will also chime in and help us understand what kind of due diligence is due from a criminal defense lawyer confronted with a fishy tale.

Did Gebert “know” the alibi was false and the picture phony? It seems to me he would have to be consciously leaning backwards, averting his gaze, and holding his nose, to avoid seeing the truth. Such willful ignorance is not the same as not knowing. Here are a few of the reasons why I believe no responsible lawyer should have — in the totality of the circumstances — allowed the alibi to go forward:

• Barnes’ victim was his own sister-in-law, who surely could identify her attacker; this raises the alibi threshold in my mind;
• The photo came in a size and on a type of stock paper that is not consistent with home photography — and it plainly looks like a male model (rather than a likely co-conspirator button-man, likely to act as a heavy in crack-head Barnes’ campaign to scare his relatives)
• If Gebert had Googled the name of the so-called actual perpetrator — either “Wayne Heittleman” per the Times Union, or “Wayne Heidleman” per the Gazette — he would have found not one responsive link back in February. Today, the only Google results for either name are articles about this story. Indeed, there appears to be no person ever mentioned in cyberspace with the surname “Heittleman.”

By letting Barnes present that clearly bogus alibi evidence, public defender Gebert did a great disservice to the justice system and to the public and his profession. (Without that alibi, would there have been a two-week jury trial wasting public and private resources?) Of course, as a practical matter, he helped garner the maximum sentence for his client. I hope his managing attorneys have taken note, along with the appropriate bar officials.

after the verdict
the tireless lawyer speaks
in falling snow

first murder trial–
the D.A. arrives
in new gloves

…………………………………………. by Barry George, J.D.

A final thought or two: ADA Anne Bair told the TU that the attempted ruse was “something out of the movies.” My response to that remark is similar to that of Albany area investigator “John D” at his weblog Nobody Move! (”STUPID CROOK TRICKS: EVERY PICTURE TELLS A STORY”, March 2, 2008):

Movies? What movies? Dumb and Dumber? The Jerk? The beauty of this is that it’s a twofer; a stupid crook trick, and a stupid lawyer trick. Too bad we couldn’t have worked in a stupid politician trick for the trifecta. Maybe next time.

This being Schenectady, I doubt the stupid-trifecta will be long in coming.

school photo
the frown my sister
grew into

… by Roberta Beary [honorable mention, penumbra 2004 haiku contest]

school staff photos
an early retirement leaves
a patch of glue

in black and white
the smiles of men
who made it home

…. by Matt Morden, at Morden Haiku
“school staff photos” (Sept. 15, 2007) -
“in black and white” - (Oct. 15, 2006, with photo)

ancient snapshot
their last smiles
for the camera

…. by dagosan [Sept. 1, 2004]

Speaking of cropping, click this image for a creative use of scissors from “ethicalheretic” Michelle Rhea, who does not appear to make haiga, but does often combine photos and poetry.

winter woods
seeing myself
in black and white

old passport
the tug
of my father’s smile

………………….. by yu chang -
“winter woods” - Update Dim Sum 2005/1
“old passport” - UDS, 2001/II; The Loose Thread: RMA 2001

the old days . . .
autumn colors
black and white

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . by andrew riutta - Full Moon Magazine (2005)

family album–
the black and white
of my youth

…. by Jim Kacian - from pegging the wind

home for Christmas
the golden afterimage
of a camera flash

……………. by Alice Frampton

You may have seen a short blurb from the Associated Press or UPI about Ronald Borga’s attempt to use a check “neatly written on three squares of floral print, two-ply toilet paper” to pay his disputed water bill (see, e.g., Newsday, Forbes). You can read a full account about it from the city where it happened in “City man uses toilet-paper check to try to settle water-bill dispute” (Press & Sun-Bulletin, Greater Binghamton, NY, by John Hill, March 27, 2008). That’s Borga in the photo from the Binghamton newspaper (taken by Joseph Geronimo), along with Robert Behnke, the Broome County attorney, who refused to take the check.

Many non-lawyer weblogs pointed to the story yesterday (March 28, 2008), including Republican Storm and Free Money. But, as of 9 AM EDT this morning, you won’t find it yet in the blawgisphere – the thousands of weblogs written, edited or hosted by lawyers, law professors, and law students. I just tried searching for /”toilet paper” check/ at Google’s Blog Search, and not one of the listings was from a blawg. So, I checked Justia’s Blawg Search; then went to Legal Blog Watch; (the newly snazzy-looking) Overlawyered.com, and even Anne Reed’s Deliberations. Not a word on a blawg about this fun, intriguing story — one that could use a lawyer’s perspective to help educate the public.

Heck, I’m retired and never liked or practiced Commercial law, so don’t look to the f/k/a Gang for an instant expert advice explanation of what constitutes a legitimate bill of exchange, negotiable instrument, or “bank draft,” that can be used as a check, or for advice on when a government entity can refuse a home-made check (or the “$2,000 in nickels and dimes” Borgna may be trying to scrounge up). But, maybe the WSJ law blog, or business law professor Stephen Bainbridge could tell us. Or, perhaps one of those smart guys at Prawfsblawg, or the Business Law Prof Blog. I’d settle for a law student who’s recently taken a course on the Uniform Commercial Code [UCC].

Until the experts weigh in, check out this discussion and definition of “check” from the ‘Lectric Law Library Lexicon.

update (11 AM): I’m interrupting a perfectly good Saturday shower to note my vague recollection that Vern Countryman told our class in Commercial Transactions 101, back in the mid-70s, something like: “you can write a check on anything — even toilet paper.” But, don’t quote Vern nor me on that, please. The real question here, of course, is whether a payee has to accept the check when it is proffered (especially when it customarily does accept personal checks, and as here is a government entity), not whether the bank has to honor it.

Meanwhile, you should know, as reported by the Press & Sun-Bulletin that:

An argument that ensued in the sixth-floor county law office grew testy but involved no physical confrontation. It ended with Borgna being peacefully escorted out of the building by a Broome Security officer.

Bill Ullmann, an attorney with the Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City, said the IRS has in the past accepted a check written on a T-shirt as payment for a tax bill. But, because toilet paper is easily destroyed, it may have been difficult to clear the check.

“I can understand why someone would be hesitant to accept a check written on toilet paper,” Ullmann said.

I’ve often heard what a great resource lawyer weblogs are for the public. But, I’m not a believer in that propaganda. Here’s a tale that needs a little legal expertise. Seems to me it’s a perfect time for the profession to show it has a sense of humor and a timely interest in educating the public on topics of interest to the average bloke — and even to cranky ex-lawyers like myself, who can’t quite recall his bar exam prep from three decades ago, and has not kept up on the law of commercial paper. I sure hope someone has written on this in time for George Wallace’s upcoming edition of Blawg Review — # 153 — on Monday [update: which George has –arrggh!– dubbed Blarrgh Review! and imbued with a piratical theme].

unemployed
the uneven edge
of a quahog shell

a spring wind
coins in the cup
of a sleeping beggar

……. by paul m.
“unemployed” - The Heron’s Nest Award (Sept. 2005)
“a spring wind” - The Heron’s Nest (June 2000)

my New Year’s resolution
buy
toilet paper

…… by David G. Lanoue - from Haiku Guy, a novel (Red Moon Press 2000)

borrowed mystery –
toilet-paper
bookmark

…. by dagosan

spring equinox –
the toilet paper roll
off-center

almost payday
the wind tugs at
my pocket

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . by Laryalee Fraser - Simply Haiku Autumn 2006, vol 4 no 3

There may finally be a legal resolution to the case of Casadei v. Skoog, which we first covered here at f/k/a in December of 2004, but which began in a musty basement of a historic house in Schenectady in October of 2003, with a handyman’s discovery of a Hefty bag that purportedly contained over $200,000 in cash. We dubbed it the Musty Money Mob caper, and have long been intrigued by the twisted and twisting tale of consumer folly, financial intrigue, greed, law enforcement incompetence, and lawyer over-reaching. Indeed, we called it “a ready-made, multi-subject law exam question for students, professors or lawyers wanting to show off their issue-spotting skills,” and added, “It’s a tale that leads one to ask: Is there intelligent life in this once prosperous home of Thomas Edison, GE, and legal giants?”

While listening to the 9 A.M. news on WAMC, my local npr station, I learned from their Roundtable newscaster — as amplified in today’s Albany Times Union — that:

“State Supreme Court Justice Vincent J. Reilly Jr. ruled in a written decision dated March 17 that the $177,700 in question does belong to Michael Casadei, owner of the home at 241 Union St. That’s where handyman Kevin Skoog says he found the money while doing work installing a security system in October 2003.”

See “Owner gets back hidden cash stash: Judge rules money found in home by handyman needs to be returned to resident” (by Lauren Stanforth, Albany Times Union, March 25, 2008); and “Judge: Money handyman took from basement belongs to homeowner” (Newsday, march 25, 2008).

The Schenectady Gazette reports: “Reilly noted Casadei testimony that he placed the cash there and Skoog did not have permission to remove it. “Under the circumstances, the cash cannot be considered lost or abandoned property which may be subject to the rights of the finders,’ Reilly wrote.” See “Owner wins cellar cash stash” (March 25, 2008) Skoog’s lawyer Paul Callahan is quoted saying he will ask Judge Reilly to reconsider the decision. Callahan asserts that the judge never considered his written argument.

Actually, even if Judge Reilly’s decision is not appealed, this may not be the final resolution, because Casadei — who has never quite explained where the money came from and why he did not initially contact the Schenectady Police Department over the theft — says there was as much as $210,000 in the bag, $48,500 of which Skoog had quickly spent, and another $32,300 is unaccounted for, but which he wants back from the ex-con handyman.

By the way, my first job after moving to Schenectady in 1988 was a temporary stint as law clerk to Judge Reilly, in Family Court. I’ve never discussed the case with the Judge, but never had much doubt that Mr. Skoog had no right to that money. Also, there is no chance that Judge Reilly failed to consider any pleading filed by Skoog’s lawyer.

The Roundtable’s Joe Donahue asked the question that still bothers me this morning: Why would anyone hide $200,000 in hundred dollar bills in a basement (but leave it in a place where it could be found by a mysterious roving handyman)? Under the fold, I have reprinted our original 2004 posting about the Musty Money Mob, and I guarantee (your money back, of course) you’ll find it an interesting and fun story.

small talk
in the cellar
spring rain

….. by Kobayashi ISSA, translated by David G. Lanoue

(more…)

This year’s Blog Against Theocracy — a project encouraging weblogs to post over Easter weekend in support of Freedom of Religion and the Establishment Clause in the U.S. Constitution (see our prior post) — serendipitously came up on my radar screen right after I had listened to the swearing in of New York’s new Governor, David A. Paterson, last Monday, March 18th. Indeed, after shaking my head over remarks made in the preliminary invocations, I was feeling grateful for our new Governor’s low-keyed reference to the Divinity in his inaugural speech. BAT08 provides a good excuse for trying to explain my discomfort hearing the religious invocations that preceded Paterson’s swearing-in.

Gov. Paterson taking the oath of office.

The ceremony last Monday was opened with two religious invocations — offered by the Rev. Msgr. Wallace Harris, pastor of St. Charles Borromeo Church in Paterson’s home community of Harlem, and by Rabbi Shmuel Lefkowitz of Agudath Israel of America, Brooklyn. You can read the text of Rabbi Lefkowitz’s Invocation for Governor David Paterson at the Yeshiva World website. I have tried repeatedly, but have not been able to find the text of Msgr. Harris’ invocation; that is unfortunate, as his words were the more troubling, and I would like to be able to quote him directly (and invoke perhaps in readers the same squeamishness that I felt).

[larger, or in color; SE Corner, Church & State Sts., Schenectady, NY. photo by David Giacalone 2008]

There’s no way that I can (or want to) get into the legal issues raised by having official public, governmental meetings open with a prayer. Despite believing they are inappropriate in a pluralistic society with an Establishment Clause in its Constitution (and a passel of deists among its Founding Fathers), I cannot envision our having a Supreme Court any time soon that would ban them. See the many postings on invocation issues and lawsuits, at Prof. Howard M. Friedman’s Religious Clause weblog; and this recent article by Michigan News on prayer practices before public meetings in Michigan, for proof there is plenty of discussion and disagreement over the opening of public governmental meetings with prayer or other forms of religious invocation.

Out of respect for the belief of others, I’m willing to sit politely through a short prayer at the start of a special public event without complaining (but probably not without rolling my eyes). However, both of the Paterson inaugural invocations went a bit too far in a nation that came along long after the Divine Right of Kings was put to rest, and that was never into the Mandate of Heaven notion. [pause for a related smile] Each invocation seemed especially quaint to me, as I do not believe in a divine being that intervenes in human affairs — much less in one working behind the scenes to bring chosen people into high political office.

(more…)

BAT08 - Blog Against Theocracy 2008 - is taking place this upcoming Easter weekend, March 21 - 23, 2008 across the blogisphere. Among its organizers are BlueGal and Tengrain of Mock, Paper, Scissors, who designed the logo. (via the greenbelt) They remind us:

The theme [of the blogswarm], like always, is the Separation of Church and State — we are for it. But the variations on the theme are many. . . . This is not a bashing of religion - peeps can believe what they choose, however they choose — but it is a reminder that the Government should keep out of religion, and Religion should keep out of the government.

Over at First Freedom First, you’ll find a Petition asking elected and appointed government officials to make a commitment to the separation of church and state and Freedom of Religion. The f/k/a Gang hopes that many law-related weblogs will participate — especially Constitutional Law heavyweights like Eugene and his posse at The Volokh Conspiracy, the gang at the ACLU Blog, and Howard M. Friedman at Religion Clause, but also the rest of us, who remember just enough about the Constitution to be dangerous, and who know the Religion Clause won’t be preserved by faith alone.

chocolate bunnies –
the hollow ones
eaten last

………………… by dagosan

[SW corner, Schenectady, NY; photo by D. A. Giacalone; original with Bus Station]

Here in Schenectady, we actually have an intersection of Church & State (with a monumental icon of that fickle deity GE looming in the background), and I’m hoping it will inspire me to produce a worthy piece for BAT 2008.  update: See our BAT08 posting, “invoking the Big Kingmaker in the Sky” (March 22, 2008).

The last Religion Clause controversy that I can recall here in Schenectady related to a Muslim Iman giving the prayer invocation at a City Council meeting just before Memorial Day 2005 (scroll down to the “tolerant in Schenectady?” blurb); earlier that year, we also had a crisis related to goat-slaughtering by recent immigrants.

• Yes, our no-political-punditry promise is still in effect. Nonetheless, and consistent therewith we believe, we want to thank Barak Obama for taking the national discourse about race a fews steps higher yesterday with his speech on race. (click that link for a full transcript and video). See See “Mr. Obama’s Profile in Courage” and “Black, White & Gray” in today’s New York Times (March 19, 2008). Update (March 20, 2008): I usually agree with Schenectady Gazette columnist Carl Strock, but dissented in a lengthy Comment to his posting “Obama transcends nothing” at his Strock Freestyle weblog today.
• And, thanks to the new governor of New York, David A. Paterson, for doing the right thing by discussing his prior extramarital affairs. At his press conference yesterday, Gov. Paterson said he wanted to avoid being blackmailed: “I didn’t want to be compromised, I didn’t want to be blackmailed, I didn’t want to hesitate taking an action because the person on the other end might hurt me or my family.” “New Governor and Wife Talk of Past Affairs” (New York Times, March 19, 2008). As we said in our posting on Spitzer last week, sexual misbehavior while in office is especially irresponsible, because it gives “people who are unstable, immature (e.g.,. Monica Lewinski), unsavory or unscrupulous (e.g., organized crime members) the ability to blackmail you for money or political favors.”

[larger]

Spring arrives –
peeps melting
on the dashboard

…………………… by dagosan - poem at Simply Haiku (Vol. 3, No. 4, Winter 2005); haiga photo-poem at MagnaPoets Japanese Form; 1953 photo by Mama G.

• Thanks to Scott Greenfield at Simple Justice for spreading the word and urging participation in BAT08. (And, yes, it was fun seeing one of my photos gracing another weblog. I recently came into possession of a digital camera and have been playing with it around my neighborhood, and posting a few images here at f/k/a — for example here and here. The intersection of Church & State Streets is about 3 blocks from my home.)

“An Almost Life” by Kevin Mednick (The Permanent Press, December 2007; 240 pp; ISBN-13: 978-1579621575; interview with the author; cover image)

Mini-Review: This first novel by lawyer Mednick is fully satisfying and genuinely successful. Its protagonist is a frank, witty, self-deprecating personal injury attorney in a small upstate New York city, who is going through midlife and mid-career crises. If you enjoy novels about (realistic) lawyers and lawyering, or you’re looking to be entertained by characters you care about, while learning a bit about the human predicament and the workings of an important (and often misunderstood) social institution, you should read An Almost Life. Despite having the “rather-be-napping” winter blahs all last week, I finished this book (which has no murderous socio-paths or life-and-death escapes driving the narrative) in two days, reading well past midnight, and wishing it were longer. (scroll down for the full review)

new novel
the sun sets
without me

… by dagosan/ david giacalone, The Heron’s Nest (March 2005)

Kevin Mednick is a plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer in the small Schenectady-NY-based firm of Bendall & Mednick, which has three attorneys and a branch office in Atlanta. His publisher says Kevin’s “legal career includes stints as an Assistant District Attorney, house counsel for an insurance company, associate counsel for a large personal injury defense firm, and law clerk for a County Court Judge.”

Mednick has been with B&M for 15 years. They call themselves “Real Lawyers for Real People” in low-key tv ads and at their informative and purposefully unflashy website. Among lawyers in the New York Capital Region, Bendall & Mednick is known for doing high-quality work in complicated p/i and medical malpractice cases. When I’m asked