“In the wake of a disciplinary hearing against a top local prosecutor, the union that represents Santa Clara County prosecutors and public defenders is asking the California District Attorneys Association to sponsor a bill that would essentially curb the power of the state bar to punish all lawyers. …The proposal follows a recommendation by the state bar that Deputy District Attorney Ben Field be suspended from practicing law for three years — a punishment of unprecedented severity against a Santa Clara County prosecutor. Field is charged with committing misconduct in four criminal cases dating back to 1995, including misleading judges, defying court orders and concealing critical evidence from defense lawyers in pursuit of convictions.” The union objects (among other things) to letting disciplinary authorities look that far into the past for bad behavior. (Tracey Kaplan, “Prosecutors seek to curb powers of disciplinary board”, San Jose Mercury News, Nov. 7) (via Legal Ethics Forum).
Posts Tagged ‘California’
Gerry Spence to trial lawyers: “We are the most important people in America”
The Wyoming-based legal gunslinger spoke at the annual conference of the Consumer Attorneys of California, and (U.S. Chamber-backed) Legal NewsLine took down some audience-rousing quotes that went pretty far even by grandiose Spence standards: “We are the most important people in America… I want to ask you which would be more important: If all of the doctors in the country somehow disappeared or all the trial lawyers in America somehow disappeared?” he asked. “We can live without medical care, but we cannot live without justice.” (Chris Rizo, “Spence: Trial lawyers more important than doctors”, Nov. 12).
More from Dan Pero: “Was it just bad timing or some sort of cosmic justice that Mr. Spence made this preposterous claim on Veterans Day?”
November 10 roundup
- Time for another aspirin: Harvard Law’s Charles Ogletree, key backer of lawsuits for slave reparations, mentioned as possible Attorney General [CBS News, BostonChannel WCVB, Newsweek; earlier speculation about post as civil rights chief]
- Calif. law requires supervisors to attend sexual harassment prevention training, a/k/a sensitivity training, but UC Irvine biologist Alexander McPherson says he’ll face suspension rather than submit [AP/FoxNews.com, On the Record (UCI), Morrissey, Inside Higher Ed, OC Register; ScienceBlogs’ Thus Spake Zuska flays him]
- Fan “not entitled to a permanent injunction requiring American Idol singer Clay Aiken to endorse her unauthorized biography” [Feral Child]
- Local authority in U.K. orders employees not to use Latin phrases such as bona fide, e.g., ad lib, et cetera, i.e., inter alia, per se, quid pro quo, vice versa “and even via” [via — uh-oh — Zincavage and Feral Child]
- Participants in 10th annual Boulder, Colo. Naked Pumpkin Run may have to register as sex offenders [Daily Camera, Obscure Store]
- Joins drunk in car as his passenger, then after crash collects $5 million from restaurant where he drank [AP/WBZ Boston, 99 Restaurant chain]
- Election may be over, but candidates’ defamation lawsuits against each other over linger on [Above the Law, NLJ]
- School nutrition regs endanger bake sales, but they’ll let you have “Healthy Hallowe’en Vegetable Platter” instead [NY Times]
Election observations
- Lots of coverage of litigation-reform angles of the election over at my other website, Point of Law (here, here, here, and here). For me the heartbreaker of the evening reform-wise was the surprise defeat of the very fine Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court, Clifford Taylor. He will be sorely missed.
- Interesting perspective from Bill Marler, the Seattle plaintiff’s attorney who’s become well-known for virtually “owning” the issue of food poisoning in the press: “Obama may actually see tort reform as a way to show he is a moderate”. [Jane Genova, Law and More]
- Voters in California and elsewhere ignored the urgings of this site and wrote anti-same-sex-marriage provisions into their constitutions. There are many possible interpretations, but one is that the California Supreme Court will be Exhibit #2,971 toward the proposition that judicial activism does not always improve the well-being of its intended beneficiaries. Garrison Keillor titled one of his Lake Wobegon books We Are Still Married, and Eugene Volokh looks at the question of whether same-sex couples previously wed in California can say that (Nov. 5; more, Dale Carpenter, Jonathan Rauch). In other news, “Yesterday, 57 percent of Arkansas voters decided that the state’s 9,000 children in foster care are better off there than adopted by a gay couple.” [Radley Balko, Reason “Hit and Run”]
- As to Topic A, the presidential election, I’ve decided to retire to the countryside and raise heirloom eggplants. Just kidding! Actually, as one who sat the election out after Giuliani quit the race, I’m happy for my friends and colleagues who are happy, awestruck by the historic moment like everyone else, and hoping for the best (i.e., centrist governance) policy-wise.
We don’t feel competent to handle your hair
If the hairstyling salon is turning away the business because the would-be client has ethnically distinctive hair, is that a civil rights violation? Camera-seeking attorney Gloria Allred will be getting some publicity from Brenda McElmore’s complaint against a J.C. Penney salon in Downey, California (Jezebel, Oct. 30).
P.S. 2:20 p.m. Eastern: Comments were accidentally closed before, but are open now.
Nevada data encryption law
On October 1 a new law went into effect in Nevada requiring businesses to encrypt all “personal identifying information” (things like Social Security and drivers’ license numbers and credit card numbers) of customers in email and “electronic transmissions” more generally. The law has raised concern among, e.g., law offices and medical providers which often work with client documents containing such numbers; it will now be unlawful (say) to email such documents from a professional’s workplace to his or her home office absent encryption. Howard Marks at Information Week (Oct. 13):
Electronic transmission isn’t defined, so one interpretation would include the telephone — so if you forget the password to your online banking account, your bank will have to snail mail or fax you a new one. It does say “to a person outside of the secure system of the business,” so you don’t have to run out and encrypt all your disks like the vendor that brought this to my attention would like.
Don Sears at Baseline (Sept. 19) cites a Las Vegas lawyer on such problems with the law as “the lack of coordination with industry standards and the unclear nature of penalties both criminal and civil” and concludes “once again, the legal system and the IT industry are faced with potentially bigger compliance and liability issues than they probably intended.” At Davis Wright Tremaine’s Privacy and Security Law Blog (Feb. 27), Randy Gainer cites similar (but not identical) mandates moving forward in other states and also notes, “the overwhelming majority of reports of stolen and lost consumer data relate to stored data, not data in transit…. The limited, data-in-transit, encryption mandate in the Nevada statute will therefore do little to stem the tide of stolen and lost consumer data.” Marian Waldmann at Morrison & Foerster (Oct. 2007) notes California’s more sweeping but less specific mandate for businesses to implement and maintain “reasonable security procedures and practices”, and also points out that the determination of whether an out-of-state entity dealing with Nevada residents is “doing business” in the state, and therefore subject to legal mandates of this sort, has been described by the Nevada Supreme Court itself as “often a laborious, fact-intensive inquiry resolved on a case-by-case basis” in litigation. Other commentary: Sidley Austin, Lori MacVittie/DevCentral.
Guestblogger thanks
Thanks to Baylen Linnekin for his guestblogging contributions last week. Be sure to check out his handsomely executed “irreverent food blog”, Crispy on the Outside, whose recent topics include bacon thefts in Lancashire, a new California menu-labeling law, and Quebec’s recent legalization of yellow margarine; of particular interest are his food law and banned categories.
State marriage amendments: thumbs down
This November, voters in California, Arizona and Florida will decide on proposals to amend their state constitutions to include permanent bans on same-sex marriage. A new Field poll indicates that California voters are leaning heavily against that state’s Proposition 8 by a 38 to 55 percent margin, almost double the margin by which the measure was failing in July, despite an intensive “pro” campaign by conservative religious forces. A recent Quinnipiac poll in Florida shows the amendment there still in the lead, but not by the 60 percent majority needed to pass a constitutional change under that state’s law. Arizona voters rejected a ballot measure of this sort two years ago, and opponents have high hopes of defeating it again.
I’ve editorialized repeatedly against these measures in this space and will repeat some of what I wrote four years ago Read On…
September 17 roundup
- Jones Day catching more flak over heavy-handed trademark lawsuit against BlockShopper real estate news service [Levy/CL&P, Ambrogi/Legal Blog Watch, earlier; more, EFF, Plain Dealer]
- California state bar ethics complaint against serial ADA lawyer Thomas Frankovich, mostly over Jarek Molski cases [ABA Journal]
- When suing your community college professor, it’s not a good idea to include death threats [KSAT, Strange in San Antonio]
- Australia: school bans cartwheels, handstands on playground [Oz-ABC via Common Good]
- Myron Levin, whose L.A. Times journalism was known to induce hair-pulling at this site, turns up among plaintiffs in Joe Cotchett lawsuit seeking to eject Chicago meanie Sam Zell from paper’s ownership; and did you know co-plaintiff Henry Weinstein’s a founding faculty member of Chemerinsky’s new ideologically charged UC Irvine law school? [Editor & Publisher Fitz and Jen, Portfolio, PaidContent.org via Class Action Blawg; Forbes]
- Well-known Manhattan criminal defense lawyer arrested on charges of trying to “eliminate” and “neutralize” witnesses against drug dealer client [NYLJ, Greenfield]
- More coverage of Pearson pants appeal [Legal Times “BLT”]
- Swiping Nicole Black’s content and running it without credit on a splog is an ill-advised way to boost NYC services of attorney Michael Rehm [Sui Generis, Greenfield, viaTweet @nikiblack]
- Update on Barnstable harbor dredging blogger defamation suit [Cape Cod Today, earlier]
- “Ten things your lawyer won’t tell you” [five years ago on Overlawyered]
Calif. lawmakers ban workplace bias against medical-pot users
Direct from prohibited to protected-class status, making no local stops: “The idea that the government should just stay out of the matter and leave both private employers and medical marijuana users alone is apparently beyond the comprehension of most California legislators, who think that everything permitted must be made mandatory,” notes Hans Bader. Apparently a narrow exception will be allowed “for ‘safety-sensitive’ positions that employers can prove would ‘clearly’ be highly risky.” (CEI OpenMarket.org, Sept. 8).