Posts Tagged ‘lawyers’

Fred Rodell archive online

Few American critics of the legal profession have made as big an impression as Fred Rodell, perhaps best known as the author of Woe Unto You, Lawyers (1939, and reprinted since then) and of the funny and still much-read attack on the stylistic failings of law scholarship, “Goodbye to Law Reviews” (Virginia Law Review, 1936, published when he was just 29). Rodell went on to teach at Yale Law where he was one of the school’s best-liked teachers, noted especially for his course on persuasive legal writing, which trained many leading legal journalists; as Charles Alan Wright notes in his obituary appreciation, Rodell was never admitted to the bar and never practiced law.

Now the reform organization HALT has put up a site dedicated to Rodell and his work. Even if, like me, you find much to disagree with in his conclusions, you may be glad you discovered his writing.

Thanks to Australian journalist Evan Whitton for the tip.

“Character” and law licenses

Ontario’s Law Society has rejected a would-be lawyer despite strong academic credentials because of concerns about his character, specifically episodes in which he harassed fellow apartment owners during a condo leadership fight and forged a letter supposedly from an owner. “Character” screening was once a common prerequisite for admission to the American bar, but fell largely into disuse following complaints that it could be subjective and applied unevenly. [Toronto Star]

New Benjamin Barton book, “The Lawyer-Judge Bias in the American Legal System”

A review copy arrived recently and I’ve much enjoyed reading the first chapters. It’s discussed by Larry Ribstein, by Glenn Reynolds, and by Cato’s Dan Mitchell (with special reference to the problem of tax complexity). The publisher’s description:

Virtually all American judges are former lawyers. This book argues that these lawyer-judges instinctively favor the legal profession in their decisions and that this bias has far-reaching and deleterious effects on American law. There are many reasons for this bias, some obvious and some subtle. Fundamentally, it occurs because – regardless of political affiliation, race, or gender – every American judge shares a single characteristic: a career as a lawyer. This shared background results in the lawyer-judge bias. The book begins with a theoretical explanation of why judges naturally favor the interests of the legal profession and follows with case law examples from diverse areas, including legal ethics, criminal procedure, constitutional law, torts, evidence, and the business of law. The book closes with a case study of the Enron fiasco, an argument that the lawyer-judge bias has contributed to the overweening complexity of American law, and suggests some possible solutions.

Earlier on Barton’s book, including a video, here.