Barrister by day, Bacardi by night

Certiorari this, Playboy!

The Supreme Court, being the highest court of the land, hears 75 cases each term.  Each decision sets precedent, which becomes a binding guidance onto all lower courts, both state and federal.  The Court's impact is so powerful that any nomination onto the Court's bench requires the strictest scrutiny.  Maybe you've heard of Brown v. Board of Education or maybe even Roe v. Wade.  Yeah, those came from the Supreme Court too.  So did Marburry v. Madison and Plessy v. Ferguson.  And now among the line up for this October term ... Marshall v. Marshall.

What the [expletive deleted]?!  Since when did the U.S. Supreme Court decide to consider Anna Nicole Smith's appeal over the future of her late husband, oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall II.  Sure it was a whirlwind romance on Viagra.  He was 89.  She was 26.  But it was love at first site.  And now the Supreme Court has to divy up a divorce case over the remaining $474 million.  Apparently since yesterday.  So what's the issue?  Where's the legal quesiton?  What's a 1L to brief if this ever hits the casebook?  The appeal posed an upmost bland question of whether federal bankruptcy judges have the authority to rule on matters involving wills and estates?  The case is styled, Vickie Lynn Marshall v. E. Pierce Marshall, which at first glance seems rather ordinary until you realize that Vickie Lynn Marshall is none other than, that obnixious Anna Nicole Smith, former Texas stripper , Playboy covergirl, and reality TV show dud.  As long as she doesn't show up to court wearing the outfit below, I'm sure Ginsberg won't throw a fit.

(Yes, I'm aware that only the attorney's appear before the Court)

My new addiction

Su Do Ku

It all started out so innocently.  At first, I was just frustrated because I couldn't figure out what this grid was.  Then, I started seeing patterns and strategies.  Now, I'm hooked.  Look for it your local paper or check out www.sudoku.com. 

True meaning of friendship

Are you sick of all those sissy "friendship" poems that
always sound like Hallmark cards, and never come close
to reality? Well, here is a series of promises that
really speak to true friendship:

1. When you are sad - I will help you get drunk and plot
revenge against the sorry bastard who made you sad.

2. When you are blue - I will try to dislodge whatever
is choking you.

3. When you smile - I will know you've finally had sex.

4. When you are scared - I will rag on you about it every
chance I get.

5. When you are worried, I will tell you horrible stories
about how much worse it could be and tell you to quit
whining.

6. When you are confused - I will use little words.

7. When you are sick - stay the hell away from me until
you are well again, I don't want whatever you have.

8. When you fall - I will point and laugh at your clumsy
ass.

This is my oath...I pledge it till the end. Why, you ask?
Because you are my friend. Send this to 10 of your closest
friends, then get depressed because you can only think of
two, and one of them isn't speaking to you anyway.

Remember: A good friend will help you move. A really good
friend will help you move a body. Let me know if I ever
need to bring a shovel.

Rethinking Roberts

After watching whatever cable channel is featuring the Roberts nomination, I'm come to realize that Roberts is one smooth-talking machine. You should see the way he dances around the senators. He's got me convinced. And after a few more discussions with my legal colleagues, I've come to realize that Roberts isn't too bad of fellow. After all, he's basically a younger version of the late Chief Justice Rehnquist. How much more right will the court sit? Again, it's not like we're looking at Thomas or Scalia. But then this article came across my e-mail from the ABA eReport. It got me thinking that we, as a country, were too blind-sided when only considering Roberts. Clearly there was a more qualified candidate from the mountains to the meadows.

"When President Bush nominated John Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court in July, I must confess that I was disappointed. Sure, Roberts is well-qualified for the court. However, I hoped Bush would have given the job to an even more deserving candidate—me." ...

Read Sean Carter's Chief Complaint: A Better Way to Pick the Supreme Court's Leader.

Origins of Creative Design

In the beginning... He created a mountain, trees, and a midget.

Long before the Sixth Day, there was the All-You-Can-Feast Pasta Tuesday. August 31 marks the religious holiday celebrating the divination of life from the Almighty. Though we were not made in His image or likeness, we must all remember that the blood which flows though our veins once came from the tomato sauce He marinated in. As it was when The Gospel was revealed to the Prophet Bobby Henderson of Oregon. In light of the Kansas State Board of Education's decision to include Intelligent Design theory to be incorporated in science curriculumns, let us remember that it was He must not excluded.

Let us pray that olive our thoughts will be heard and answered.

Ramen.

For more information, visit Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Wikipedia.

Don't give Roberts stripes

Don't get me wrong, Judge Roberts Jr. is a most qualified nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, the highest court in the country. Just looking at his resume says it all - heck, he even clerked for then-Justice Rehnquist. As Justice Roberts, I wasn't planning on throwing much of a fuss because I know that there would be other justices to balance the equation. But as Chief Justice Roberts? I'm having second thoughts.

But at the age of 50, are we ready for someone that to reign as the countries highest judge for the next 30 years? I'm not opposed to the new kid on the block stepping in to fill O'Connor's shoes. I'm not saying it's a bad idea that judges may remain on the bench for a better part of a quarter-century. Rehnquist served for 33 years but only 19 as the chief justice. But I am uneasy at the idea of throwing in a rookie into the All-Star game as the quarterback. I agree with Democratic leader, Senator Reid of Nevada, "now that the president has said he will nominate Judge Roberts as chief justice, the stakes are higher and the Senate's advice and consent responsibility is even more important. If confirmed to this lifetime job, John Roberts would become the leader of the third branch of the federal government and the most prominent judge in the nation. The Senate must be vigilant in considering this nomination."

So what is it about Roberts that I disagree with? Something that he's hiding behind those smug smile of his. Something about his willingness to overturn recent precedent. And if he's anything like Thomas or Scalia ... we might as well be living on Plymouth Rock. The Supreme Court reconvenes for its fall term in October. The clock is ticking but fortuantely, Justice O'Connor won't step down until her successor's been confirmed.

Big Shot Law Clerk

Should I ever make it as a hot shot litigator, I'll attribute my success to working as a family law legal assistant.  I recently picked up a part-time gig with a solo practitioner over in Maryland.  We're involved with employment discrimination (plaintiff side) but most of the cases I've been handed are family disputes (e.g. divorces, custody, visitation, etc., etc., etc.).  As my boss says, I'm throwing you off into the deep end of litigation.  I'm about to get some face time with a client, whose case I'm working on.  It promises to be a rather nasty fight to modify his visitation rights.  He's alleging the ex-wife's interferring with the meager hours he already gets plus the are "material changes in circumstances" that may jeopordize the "best interests of the children".  So I figure, if I can broker deals and settle disputes between two hormone-driven, take-no-prisioner, death-do-you-part, feuding spouses ... how hard can a couple corporations be?

I'm billing out hours ... I'm drafting motions ... The hard part now ... is figuring out how to decorate my office.  Maybe I should bring a plant in.