Judges Commons^™

Making Stuff Up, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Beginning with an article in this Journal almost thirty years ago, Professor Underwood continues to research and write about legal ethics and litigation. In this Commentary, he offers a witty look at several cases where, in his opinion, the judge allowed improper arguments to the jury.

Kentucky 2006 Judicial Elections, William H. Fortune, Al Cross

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article is a short report on the impact of Republican Party of Minnesota v. White on the 2006 Kentucky judicial campaigns and elections. The series of events leading up to the 2006 elections can be traced to at least 1988.

While the Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee (KJCCC) cannot claim a great impact on Kentucky's 2006 judicial elections, the authors of this Article believe that the committee played a positive role. For the most part, judicial candidates campaigned in a dignified and ethical manner, and refrained from running on issues that might strike a chord with the electorate. Judicial …

What Gets Judges In Trouble, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

I wrote this article to collect some cautionary material about “what gets judges in trouble.” I wanted something I could offer to our state judges, practitioners, and my legal ethics students. While I have never been a judge, and while I have never worked for a judicial conduct organization, I have been a law professor for almost twenty-five years and the chairman of a state bar association ethics committee for fourteen. I am not the kind of person who would refrain from holding forth just because I may not know what I am talking about.

When I started out, I …

A Proposal To Require Lawyers To Disclose Information About Procedural Matters, William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In the absence of a rule clearly requiring disclosure, a lawyer is obligated not to disclose information which is adverse to the interests of a client. However, judges should be able to expect lawyers to disclose information about procedural matters. This Article argues that Model Rule of Professional Conduct 3.3 should be amended to require disclosure of information about procedural matters. Part I describes the events in Potter v. Eli Lilly & Co., a case involving a secret settlement related to Prozac. Part II makes the argument for a rule requiring disclosure of procedural information. Part III describes how …