Maryland Lawyer Blog

In Wisconsin, a lawsuit will be filed today against the mayor and the City Council of Green Bay president by the Madison-based Freedom from Religion Foundation who opposes the nativity scene the city placed at the entrance of City Hall.

If you ever watched West Wing, one of my 5 favorite shows of all-time, President Bartlett was asked by one of his young aids how the president speaking to Supreme Court justices at Red Mass did not create a separation of church and state problem. (Red Mass is a Catholic Mass celebrated annually by Catholic and non-Catholic lawyers and judges, the most prolific of which is the Red Mass held in October before the Supreme Court's fall session. The Mass held is to seek the Holy Spirit's guidance in the administration of justice in the coming year.) President Bartlett said: “And so how isn't it a Constitutional issue? It is, but sometimes you say, "Big deal." It was the intention not to have a national religion, not to have anyone's religious views imposed on anyone else, and not to have the government encourage a national display of piety as a substitute for real action.”

I realize that many have valid arguments to the idea that any intrusion into church and state is a slippery slope. But at some point, do we have to sweat all of the small stuff? Is anyone really offended by a nativity scene or “In God We Trust” on our currency?

I think we need more people saying “big deal” in our culture today. But I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the Freedom from Religion Foundation is not going to be listening.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (1)

Posted In: Constitutional Law

Bookmark:

U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson sentenced former Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick to 23 months in a federal penitentiary. For more details on the sentencing, you can read the front page of pretty much any newspaper in the country tomorrow.

I love animals and I hate cruelty to any living thing. So I support the sentence and believe, in my world, that it was a rather light sentence. But this blog post is not about that. This blog post is about how human beings should afford others with respect.

Notwithstanding the pain Vick caused his victims, he was also on the wrong side of justice because he failed to treat those dogs to the respect to which they were entitled.

Today, Michael Vick wrongly received a dose of his own medicine from the sentencing judge. Vick's attorneys had requested permission from the judge to allow Vick to change into a suit before the sentencing. What possible harm could this cause? Judge Hudson refused and required Vick to show up before the nation in standard striped prison gear. ESPN reported that as Vick walked down the steps from the lockup, "spectators saw the chain-gang outfit and gasped."

What exactly was the point of this? Sure, the Judge Hudson impressed a lot of people around the country with his toughness and I have a hard time believing he was not considering how his act was going to play around the country in his over-the-top lecturing to Vick. In his book, Judge Hudson praised the manner in which criminals are punished in the Bahamas: "They believed in short periods of intense incarceration with hard labor 16 hours a day, six days a week. They also used caning or whipping for any offense involving violence or injury to the victim. The recidivism rate? Less than five percent. Now that's effective justice."

Michael Vick was blessed to be fast and quick. As a result, he will get a second chance one day. And with that chance will come power over others. Judge Hudson set a poor example for Vick today on the proper exercise of power over others.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (2)

Posted In: Criminal Law

Bookmark:

Maryland Court of Special Appeals Judge Joseph F. Murphy Jr. has been selected to the Maryland Court of Appeals. There have been a lot articles on the choice of Judge Murphy so I won’t bother to analyze the selection here except to say that Governor O’Malley’s choice has been universally lauded by pretty much everyone.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (0)

Posted In: Maryland Legal News

Bookmark:

The Maryland Daily Record reported last week that Judge John Philip Miller has been named Judge in Charge of the Criminal Division of the Baltimore City Circuit Court, succeeding Judge John M. Glynn, who will return to the civil docket.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (0)

Posted In: Criminal Law

Bookmark:

Eric Turkewitz's New York Personal Injury Law Blog has a post on Staten Island's Acting Supreme Court Justice Philip Straniere growing a pretty much out of control beard in protest of New York judges failure to get a raise in nine years from their $135,900 salary. As Eric points out, first year salaries at large New York firms go well beyond the salary of a New York judge.

When I was an associate for a large defense firm, I complained about... pretty much everything come to think of it, which may account for why my tenure was short and unsuccessful (my distaste for pharmaceutical companies didn't help either). But I did not complain about my salary because I always figured if I wanted to make more I could go elsewhere and that was how the free market worked. Maryland judges are paid about the same (here are their salaries) but when a spot becomes available, a long line forms of people who are making a lot more in private practice than they would on the bench. See this post for example. Why? Because it is a very prestigious job both in and out of the legal community, you can make a difference, and because the only client you have to answer to is your own conscious.

Look, I'm mindful of the judge's point. I also support higher judicial salaries because I think it will help recruit and, more importantly, retain good judges. (I also think judges should make more as their tenure increases.) But I don't think growing a beard in protest is the solution and it certainly is not good PR for the legal profession. Believe me, there is not going to be a huge groundswell of public sympathy for the poor judge making only $135,900 with, I'm sure, wonderful benefits, a great pension, etc. If this judge feels that strongly about it, he should leave the bench and go get a job. I'm sure he will find a job paying at least twice that in New York second in the Big Apple. But here's the thing: there are going to be qualified lawyers making three times what this judge is making lining up to take his place.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (0)

Posted In: General

Bookmark:

It is difficult to prove age discrimination in the workplace. Because it is hard to prove the exact factors motivating a supervisor to fire one of his or her employees, many victims of age discrimination hope to illustrate a discriminatory culture in the workplace by offering the testimony of other employees who suffered the same treatment. A recent case now on appeal to the Supreme Court may result in the exclusion of this type of evidence, not only in age discrimination cases, but in cases of race and gender discrimination as well.

In this case, a federal District Court judge in Denver, Colorado refused to allow a 51 year-old woman, who is claming she lost her job due to age discrimination, to present the testimony of five other co-workers she claims were let go for the same reason. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a new trial, stating that this type of evidence is always admissible when other employees under the protection of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act have also lost their jobs. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal filed by Sprint/United Management Company, Ms. Mendelsohn’s former employer, and will decide if this “me too” evidence is admissible. The New York Times reported that the justices in oral arguments on Monday seemed skeptical of this kind of evidence.

If the Supreme Court overturns the 10th Circuit and delineates a rule that does not allow such evidence, its position will be even more extreme than…drum roll please… the Bush administration, which has taken the position- through the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission- that evidence of this type, consistent with the Federal Rules of Evidence, should be admissible when relevant and when it would not confuse or prejudice the jury. If the Supreme Court disagrees, it means that the Supreme Court is becoming more pro-business and anti-plaintiff than the Bush administration. I find this scary.

Whichever way the Court decides, their decision will have a major impact on how future discrimination cases can and will be tried.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (1)

Posted In: Employment Law

Bookmark:

Newsday reports on a recent Nassau County Family Court ruling that found a New York physician who said he donated sperm to a female co-worker as a friendly gesture is the legal father of an Oregon boy and is obligated to pay child support to the college-bound 18 year-old teenager.

In 1988, a New York doctor decided to donate his sperm to a lesbian couple who wanted a child. Regardless of your position on this kind of stuff, it was almost certainly an altruistic gesture. Probably because he had some affection for the woman, he never put in writing that he would have no legal rights or obligations with respect to the child.

The lines between sperm donor and father were first blurred when the doctor allowed his name to appear on the boy’s birth certificate, an unusual choice he decided upon so that the boy would have a better sense of his identity as he got older. The nature of the relationship became even hazier in the following years as the doctor kept in contact with the child, sending him gifts and money and even cards that he signed “Daddy” or “Dad.” (If you are thinking this is all very strange, I’m right there with you.)

Continue reading " Sperm Donor Ordered to Pay Child Support 18 Years Later " »

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (0)

Posted In: Family Law

Bookmark:

According to a St. Louis Dispatch article yesterday, an Illinois State Trooper, whose vehicle crossed a median last month killing two teenagers, had a history of causing serious auto accidents. In 2003, a personal injury victim received $1.7 million in damages after the officer rear-ended his vehicle. Mitchell was also involved in a single-car accident in 2002.

In spite of my liberal leanings, I'm about as pro-police as they come. My sister is a police captain and I have three small children so I'm all about safety on the roads and in our homes. But every time a police officer passes me at 80 mph and then I see that same officer sitting in the median strip a few minutes later obviously in no hurry, I wonder about who is policing the police on driving safely in non-emergency situations.

I believe this problem will eventually be resolved by technology with the monitoring of police car speeds and requiring an explanation or a report for extreme speeds. Reports of accidents like this will expedite the pace of reform.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (0)

Posted In: Auto Accidents

Bookmark:

Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley announced eight new Circuit Court judicial appointments for Baltimore City, Harford County, Howard County, Prince George’s County, Anne Arundel County, and Talbot County.

As reported on the Maryland Lawyer Blog earlier today, District Court Judge Michael Wachs has been elevated to the Anne Arundel County Circuit Court. Governor O'Malley also named the following individuals:

Baltimore City - District Court Judge Emanuel Brown

Harford County - District Court Judge Angela Michelle Eaves

Howard County - Timothy McCrone (current State’s Attorney for Howard County).

Prince George’s County - District Court Judge Crystal Mittelstaedt, District Court Judge Beverly Woodard, and Nicholas Rattal (P.G. County Public Defender's Office).

Talbot County - Broughton Miller Earnest (Managing Partner of the Easton office of DLA Piper).

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (1)

Posted In: Maryland Legal News

Bookmark:

(You can find the Maryland Lawyer Blog's May 13, 2008 update on this case here.)

The Baltimore Sun reports today on the Maryland Court of Appeals consideration of whether Baltimore County District Judge Bruce S. Lamdin should be removed from the bench for inappropriate comments that he made on the record in a number of cases. At issue are Judge Lamdin's negative comments about drug treatment programs and the correctional officers at Maryland prisons, a joke that Baltimore County Circuit Court judges spend their afternoons sipping cocktails rather than working (which might be a harmless joke although I don't know the context), and complaints about Judge Lamdin's cursing.

I'm not defending Judge Lamdin but I suspect that a number of judges - particularly in District Court - would whither under similar scrutiny which leads to some concern that he is being unfairly singled out. Judges typically get a lot of latitude on this kind of stuff which likely means he ruffled the wrong persons feathers either because they had access to power or were tenacious in demanding that the allegations be fully explored.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (0)

Posted In: Maryland Legal News

Bookmark:

Honorable J. Michael Wachs has been appointed to fill the Anne Arundel Circuit Court vacancy resulting from the retirement of the Honorable Joseph P. Manck.

I have only been in front of Judge Wachs once but he has a great judicial temperament and is very well thought of in Anne Arundel County. He should be a great addition to the Anne Arundel County Circuit Court bench.

Posted by Ronald V. Miller, Jr. | Permalink | Email This Post | Comments (0)

Posted In: Maryland Legal News

Bookmark: