Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons^™

The Inside Scoop: What Federal Judges Really Think About The Way Lawyers Write, Kristen Konrad Robbins-Tiscione

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

A recent survey indicates that what troubles federal judges most is not what lawyers say but what they fail to say when writing briefs. Although lawyers do a good job articulating legal issues and citing controlling, relevant legal authority, they are not doing enough with the law itself. Only fifty-six percent of the judges surveyed said that lawyers “always” or “usually” make their client’s best arguments. Fifty-eight percent of the judges rated the quality of the legal analysis as just “good,” as opposed to “excellent” or “very good.” The problem seems to be that briefs lack rigorous analysis, and the …

Now You See It, Now You Don't: Depublication And Nonpublication Of Opinions Raise Motive Questions, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The basis for these comments is a decision last year by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Anastasoff v. United States. The court held that an Eighth Circuit local rule, which authorized nonpublication of opinions and explicitly stated that unpublished opinions were to have no precedential effect, was unconstitutional. The panel, in an opinion by Judge Richard S. Arnold, reasoned that a court rule purporting to confer upon appellate judges an absolute power to decide which decisions would be binding and which would not be binding went well beyond the “judicial power” within the meaning of Article III of …

The Judiciary In The United States: A Search For Fairness, Independence And Competence, Stephen J. Shapiro

All Faculty Scholarship

Alexander Hamilton referred to the judiciary as “the least dangerous branch” because it could neither make nor enforce the law without help from the other two branches of government. In the years since then, however, courts and judges in the United States have assumed a much more prominent role in society. American judges preside over criminal trials and sentence those convicted, decide all kinds of civil disputes, both large and small, and make important decisions involving families, such as child custody. They have also become the primary guarantors of the civil and constitutional rights of American citizens.

The case of …

The Ermine And Woolsack: Disciplinary Proceedings Involving Judges, Attorney-Magistrates, And Other Judicial Figures, David R. Cleveland, Jason Masimore

Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

"On The Make": Campaign Funding And The Corrupting Of The American Judiciary, David R. Barnhizer

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

The thesis offered here is that the cost of judicial campaigns has reached a level where both candidates and sitting judges are shaping their behavior to attract financial and other support. This not only results in distortion of judicial selection by repelling meritorious potential candidates who are unwilling to compromise their principles, but in the capture of judges by special interests willing to finance judicial campaigns. Some argue that the great increase in contributions to judicial candidates simply means that contributors are giving to candidates they feel certain will support their positions. To some extent this is certainly true. But …

Municipal Ethics Remain A Hot Topic In Litigation: A 1999 Survey Of Issues In Ethics For Municipal Lawyers, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

The Chicago Conspiracy Trial: Character And Judicial Discretion, Pnina Lahav

Faculty Scholarship

On October 29, 1969, sometime after two o'clock in the afternoon, following yet another heated exchange with defendant Bobby Seale in a courtroom full of spectators, reporters, and armed guards, Judge Julius Jennings Hoffman turned to a marshal and ordered: "Take that defendant into the room in there and deal with him as he should be dealt with in this circumstance."' Judge Hoffman described the aftermath:

In an attempt to maintain order in the courtroom, the Court thereupon ordered the defendant Seale removed from the courtroom at which time he was forcibly restrained by binding and gagging. The defendant Seale …

Judicial Interference With Effective Advocacy By The Defense, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

A fundamental premise of the American criminal justice system is defense counsel's zealous professional advocacy. Representation of a criminal defendant to be effective must be vigorous. In administering a trial, judges have a duty to ensure a fair and orderly proceeding. On occasion, however, judges overstep the line and impede defense counsel's advocacy functions unfairly. This article describes some of the ways that trial judges may violate legal and ethical standards by improperly interfering with defense counsel's courtroom functions.

A Stalwart At The Bar, Arthur Norman Field

Cardozo Law Review

The New York legal community that Jack Bums found upon his admission to the Bar in 1932 was not given to welcoming all comers. It was changing rapidly. To many leaders of the Bar the change was not a positive one.

In Re Holtzman: Free Speech Or Professional Misconduct?, David W. Wright

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Specifying Grounds For Judicial Disqualification In Federal Courts., Leslie W. Abramson

Faculty and Staff Scholarship

One essential component of equal justice under the law is a neutral and detached judge to preside over the court proceedings. Public confidence in the legal system is maintained when a judge has no interest in the parties, attorneys or subject matter of the litigation. Sua sponte or by motion of a party, a federal judge is subject to disqualification for conflicts of interest on both constitutional and statutory grounds

Judicial Misconduct During Jury Deliberations, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The author considers the two principal types of improper judicial behavior that may occur during the jury deliberation process. Judicial conduct that attempts to place undue pressure on a jury to reach a verdict may include verdict-urging instructions, threats and intimidation, and inquiry into the numerical division of the jury on the merits of the verdict. Judicial participation in private, ex parte communications with jurors may also subvert orderly trial procedure and undermine the impartiality of the jury. Neither kind of judicial conduct may be allowed to compel a verdict from a jury.

Retrospective Justification, Jeffrey Malkan

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Reflections On Client Perjury, Bennett L. Gershman

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Most experienced prosecutors, judges, and defense attorneys would probably agree that perjury in the criminal justice system occurs often. Although the frequency of perjury has never empirically been demonstrated, it is not surprising that with so much at stake, prosecution and defense witnesses would be tempted to fabricate testimony to meet the exigencies of the case. Detecting and dealing with perjurious testimony, however, is another matter. Implicated are complex legal and ethical problems for both prosecutors and defense attorneys. The judiciary's response to these problems, moreover, has largely been formalistic, without enunciating sufficiently clear standards to guide future behavior.

Silence As A Trial Strategy After Strickland And Cronic: Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel?Nic : The Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel?, Jo Ellen Silberstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Federal Courts At The Crossroads, Roger J. Miner '56

Bar Associations

No abstract provided.

The Duty To Criticize The Courts (Ii), Roger J. Miner '56

Judges

No abstract provided.

The Judge, Marianne Wesson

Publications

No abstract provided.

Landmark Communications, Inc. V. Virginia, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Judicial Ethics--Recusal Of Judges--The Need For Reform, Don R. Sensabaugh Jr.

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Judicial Reasoning And Social Change, David Dittfurth

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Emily Post Goes To Court, Vincent S. Dalsimer

Cleveland State Law Review

After a few years of observing attorneys from the other side, rather than the other end, of the counsel table, I have concluded that courtroom etiquette is the most rapidly declining of all of the social or professional graces. Perhaps this is because the fine points of the art are essentially trivia. Perhaps, on the other hand, the laudable modern trend away from the rigidity of procedure and the pre-trial sanctity of the opposing side's theory of the lawsuit has been carried to the point of dropping the facade of courtesy along with the penetration of the shield of the …

Book Note, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Law Review

Donald K. Carroll, Judge of the District Court of Appeal, First District of Florida, has presented in this book a treasure house of materials useful to every judge. Included in it are writings from a multitude of sources, published both in this country and Europe. The book's primary purpose is to provide an anthology of inspirational and helpful literary gems for use by judges in their work; its secondary purpose is to give source materials for preparing speeches or writings on judicial subjects.

A Study In Perfidy, Allan D. Vestal

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.