 |
|
|
Blog
|
5/15/2008
Oregon AG canididate Macpherson vows to protect Oregonians  | | Greg Macpherson |
by State Rep. Greg Macpherson
Next January Oregon will swear in a new Attorney General for the first time in a dozen years. Hardy Myers has served the state as Attorney General with great skill and integrity since 1997.
Because no Republican filed by the deadline in March, the winner of the Democratic primary this month will become Oregon’s next Attorney General.
I’m honored to have Hardy Myers’ endorsement in the race to succeed him. But the next Attorney General should not just continue the current work of the Department of Justice he leads.
The Attorney General should respond to the changing threats faced by Oregonians and bring the fresh perspective any organization needs after years under the same leadership.
Internet threats
Some of the new threats to Oregonians come over the Internet. A dozen years ago the Internet was in its infancy. It’s now in a rambunctious adolescence.
Adult sex predators prowl chat rooms in search of underage teens.
Identity thieves and other scammers find victims among Oregon consumers connected to the Internet.
As seniors and lower income people get computers, these vulnerable citizens are exposed to greater risk.
Last year I sponsored a new law making it a specific crime to solicit an underage teen for sex over the Internet. I also passed a law toughening the penalty for high volume identity thieves.
As Attorney General, I will make sure these new laws are enforced. To do so, I will expand the Internet forensics capability of the Department of Justice, a function performed now by just one investigator.
We must be able to find those who prey on our kids and vulnerable consumers. I also will introduce legislation requiring that sex offender registration include the offender’s e-mail address so we can trace attempts to contact victims.
Threats to our landscape
Last year I led the effort to refer Measure 49 to Oregon voters to save our protections for farmlands and open space.
But Oregon’s landscape is threatened by some claimants who assert the right to go forward based on development steps taken before voters approved Measure 49.
As Attorney General, I will challenge invalid development claims to protect farmlands and open space and to assure that landowners are treated the same across the state.
Threats to retirement security
As traditional pension plans disappear, Oregon workers are threatened by loss of their retirement benefits when the stocks in their defined contribution plans drop in value.
Last year I helped pass a new law authorizing Oregon’s Attorney General to act as lead plaintiff in class action lawsuits to recover losses on stocks where fraud is involved.
As Attorney General, I will use this authority to collect from those who defraud stockholders to protect the financial security of retirees.
Threats to air quality
Auto makers are trying to prevent Oregon and other states from implementing cleaner tailpipe emission standards for new vehicles sold in the future.
The Bush administration has sided with the auto makers in trying to block the cleaner standards. As Attorney General, I will challenge this federal interference with a key environmental protection Oregonians have chosen.
In all these areas, and others, I will lead Oregon forward, protecting our state from all the new threats coming at us.
I can be reached about my campaign for Oregon Attorney General at greg@votemac.com or 503-294-9391.
This op-ed was originally published in the West Linn Tidings.
| | | Oregon AG candidate Kroger outlines vision  | | John Kroger |
by John Kroger
I’m John Kroger, and I’m running for Oregon Attorney General because the state needs an experienced lawyer in that office who will aggressively fight for every Oregonian.
I am a law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School and former federal criminal prosecutor. As a prosecutor, I represented the United States in court more than 1,000 times, convicting mafia killers, drug kingpins and corrupt government officials. I also prosecuted crooked Enron executives.
My goals are simple: I will tackle Oregon’s meth crisis, protect Oregon’s environment, defend our civil rights, protect consumers from scam artists and crooked companies and ensure that every parent gets the child support they deserve.
Fighting Meth
Meth is Oregon’s No. 1 crime problem, the largest cause of property crime, identity theft and serious child abuse. As Attorney General, I will work with the legislature, treatment experts, police chiefs, district attorneys and sheriffs to craft a new drug treatment and prevention program for our state.
My vision for better addiction treatment is one of the reasons why Gov. John Kitzhaber endorsed me.
I will revitalize the Attorney General’s organized crime unit, so we can go after the big drug cartels that bring most of the meth into the state from Mexico. To do this, I will draw upon my own successes prosecuting drug dealers, Enron and the mafia.
Protecting the Environment
Right now, every single major river in Oregon has failed federal water quality standards and Portland was ranked the third most toxic city in America by Businessweek magazine.
To me, this is unacceptable. My goal is to make Oregon the nationwide leader in environmental protection once again, as we were in the past. This means tougher fines and jail time for big polluters, so we can hold them accountable once again. My commitment to strong environmental enforcement is one reason why the Sierra Club supports me.
Defending Civil Rights
I am the only candidate in this race with extensive courtroom experience, representing the United States as a federal prosecutor more than 1,000 times and winning every trial and appeal.
If the civil rights and civil liberties of Oregonians are threatened, I won’t send a deputy to court. I will argue the case myself.
I will do everything I can to prevent judges from overturning the landmark pro-choice Roe v. Wade decision. I will also work to see that the recently passed legislation banning sexual orientation discrimination is properly enforced.
Protecting Oregon’s Consumers
As a federal prosecutor, I helped prosecute Enron for all of its crimes. As Attorney General, I will be a true consumer watchdog.
I will create an Internet crimes task force to go after sexual predators and identity thieves, investigate abusive and undisclosed fees by credit card companies and aggressively attack home mortgage fraud.
Child Support
Every year, more than 100,000 single parents in Oregon do not get their child support payments at all or in a timely fashion, and this causes immense hardship to these parents and their children.
We can and must do better. I will do this by revamping the Oregon Department of Justice’s child support division to ensure that Oregon’s children get the support they deserve.
If you have any questions about my campaign, please contact me at 503-224-3316 or kroger@johnkroger.com . You can also visit my Web site at www.johnkroger.com .
This op-ed was originally published in the Lake Oswego Review.
| | |
5/5/2008
Session beneficial for Floridians  | | McCollum |
Today marked the 60th and final day of the 2008 Session of the Florida Legislature. Faced with a plethora of decisions and tasks, our lawmakers worked extremely hard to pass important laws that will better protect Florida's citizens.
I am particularly proud of several pieces of legislation which passed this session that were priorities of mine. With the help of our legislative sponsors and leaders, we significantly strengthened anti-gang measures, gave victims of Florida-based child pornography a voice in court and the right to substantial civil penalties against perpetrators, provided Florida homeowners extra protection against mortgage foreclosure fraud, targeted marijuana grow houses and enhanced penalties against individuals who manufacture or sell counterfeited products.
In addition to passing significant measures which will improve public safety and have important consumer protection enhancements, the Florida Legislature also provided my CyberCrime Unit with the opportunity to continuing our statewide expansion.
This expansion, which will allow us to open offices in Pensacola and Tampa within the next several months, is critical as we work to protect Florida's children from Internet child predators. I am very grateful our lawmakers recognized and re-affirmed our commitment to fight cybercrime.
Florida's legislators have spent the past 60 days working hard on behalf of their constituents and their state, and for this commitment they have my appreciation and sincere respect.
I look forward to the day our priorities pieces of legislation are signed into law and take effect, and I commend the Legislature for another successful session.
Bill McCollum is the Attorney General of Florida.
| | |
4/28/2008
Conway: Ask me anything  | | Conway |
I thank the Herald-Leader for bringing attention to the issues and challenges prosecutors in Kentucky will face after significant cuts to their budgets that will likely result in the elimination of up to 100 jobs from the system.
But while I appreciate the attention to the issue, I am disappointed that neither I nor my office was contacted to respond to false allegations contained in the article.
It quotes Jessamine County Attorney Brian Goettl, the owner and operator of a conservative blog, who implies that the reduction in prosecutors' budgets was due, in part, to my lack of attention to this matter with legislators.
If the reporter had sought a response, he would have discovered that Goettl's claims are baseless. During the transition before I took office, I twice met with Gov. Steve Beshear and his staff regarding the importance of the prosecutors' budgets.
On my second day in office, I, along with the elected leadership of county attorneys and commonwealth's attorneys (which does not include Goettl), again met with Beshear on this issue and requested that prosecutors' budgets be spared from his proposed budget cuts.
Multiple meetings with the House and Senate leaders and budget chairmen followed.
If the reporter had called, he would have had access to the voluminous documentation of our efforts.
Because of the efforts of this office and the leadership of the Prosecutors Advisory Council, members of the House increased prosecutors' budgets by almost $6 million more than the governor proposed. Unfortunately, those increases were not included in the final budget.
In the future, if questions are raised about the way I handle particular matters in this office, I would appreciate the journalistic norm of an opportunity to respond.
Jack Conway is the Attorney General of Kentucky. This editorial was originally published in the Herald-Leader of Lexington.
| | |
4/16/2008
Commonwealth's work has honored victims of Va. Tech shootings  | | McDonnell |
One year later the images remain vivid.
We see the familiar campus buildings of Virginia Tech, a special place for many thousands of Virginians. We see terror on the faces of students and relive that terrible morning. Words are inadequate to describe the emotions. We mourn still over precious lives lost and families forever changed.
We saw horror on April 16, 2007, but we also saw goodness that rushed to fill the void. We saw the greater love that causes one person to lay down his life for others. We saw the injured cared for and the broken comforted. We saw the power of prayer. We saw the resilience of the Virginia Tech community. We have long known of its excellent academic and athletic programs; now we know also the character and compassion of the Tech community.
Since last April, Virginia's leaders have sought to respond properly to this unprecedented tragedy. Changes were needed in our laws and systems, and they are being made. The legislative and administrative reforms that are underway truly are nonpartisan, resulting from the efforts of all three branches of government and the leadership of Virginia Tech. There has been a shared purpose in learning from this tragedy.
Two weeks after the shootings, Gov. Tim Kaine worked with the Office of the Attorney General to craft Executive Order 50, which harmonized state and federal law to prevent gun purchases by those adjudicated mentally ill. Subsequent legislation has codified this executive order.
This initial step was followed by the most significant revision of Virginia's mental health laws in a generation. Dedicated career attorneys from the Office of the Attorney General continued their work with Virginia Supreme Court Chief Justice Leroy Hassell's commission, initiated in 2006, to reform mental health laws and services. They drafted legislation, testified before committees, and provided the necessary research for these reforms.
Virginia's mental health laws have undergone sweeping changes in five key areas: involuntary commitment criteria, mandatory outpatient treatment, procedural improvements, privacy and disclosure provisions, and firearms purchase and reporting requirements. In addition, the mental health system received an infusion of more than $41 million as requested by Gov. Kaine to increase service capacity, particularly at the community level.
The Office of the Attorney General has continued to advise all state agencies of duties and responsibilities under federal law, with particular attention to interpreting the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
This office has provided guidance for crafting a model policy for law-enforcement personnel to provide death notifications with accuracy, sensitivity and respect. Our office and other state agencies have worked closely with Gov. Kaine to facilitate the implementation of numerous recommendations of the Virginia Tech Review Panel, including improving campus safety and coordinating more effective exchanges of information.
These actions by the commonwealth's leaders reflect renewed dedication to the values that have sustained us since that terrible morning one year ago. This year's work manifests our resolve to improve our laws and processes in the face of great tragedy. In so doing, the commonwealth honors the memories of those killed and wounded.
Today we pray again, for all affected, that God's healing hand will touch them anew.
Bob McDonnell is Virginia's attorney general. Contact him at (804) 786-2071.
| | |
11/5/2007
Utilities spoil year-end party, wise up on AG rate-rise fights  | | Rob McKenna |
The closing of a calendar year again brings to state attorney-general watchers that unique annual enjoyment of handicapping the festive square-dancing match-up between big bad utilities trying to raise consumers' rates and fight-the-man AGs trying to stop them.
But some power companies, it seems, are determined to snatch away even that meager ration of reportorial holiday fun. A few have even smartened-up to where they're negotiating rate pacts instead of getting smacked around in court by AGs with an eye on the next gubernatorial vote. Scrooges.
So a shake of the bells at Spokane, WA-based power company Avista, nominated for this year's LNL Grinch Award for their lack of festive spirit. These buzz-killers actually got AG Rob McKenna's Public Counsel Section to agree on a $21.5 million cut in its original rate rise request for 2008, dropping it to $33.5 million, we reported today.
Someone at Avista must have remembered what happened to the utility 10 months ago, when the state's regulating body rejected outright the company's proposed rate-revenue increase of $28.9 million for 2007 after the AG's office opposed. And maybe its rejection two weeks ago of Avista's initially-proposed $55 million increase for next year jogged a few more memories.
What next? More utilities figuring out there's no odds butting heads with ambitious state attorneys-general over grandma's power bill?
Might as well watch College Bowl games.
| | |
10/26/2007
Penn. SC campaign funding chump change beside Great Lakes' spendfests  | | Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Clifford W. Taylor |
Prepare yourselves for an assortment of dire cautionary tales about the corrupting influence of special interest money on supposedly independent-to-a-fault judges. Yep, it's election season.
First target up for popping looks like the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vote due Nov. 6. That one was already a state record-breaker last month, we reported Friay, and now it looks like the four candidates will spend well over $4 million running for two vacancies.
According to the website of campaign-finance watchdog Justice at Stake, we should be very worried about the numbers now coming out of Pennsylvania. Other eastern-based media are now picking up on the race and it looks like becoming a mid-Atlantic bellwether for the pernicious influence of lots of corporate cash on Supreme Court ballots.
But forgive us at LNL if we find it hard to "fear up" over spending of $2 million per bench cushion - not even this close to Halloween.
After all, the hardened veterans around here are more used to figures like $5.8 million total spending per Supreme Court seat. That's what the race between newly-installed Justice Annette Kingsland Ziegler and Linda Clifford drew last spring in Wisconsin.
And you think that's some campaign spending? Try what divided Michigan Supreme Court's Chief Justice, Clifford W. Taylor, thinks will be spent on his re-election bid next year - $20 million. And that's to sit on a bench that's become a national judicial laughing-stock.
So take it easy on the Keystone State, watchdogs - looks like the Great Lakes states are where the real juicy meat's at.
| | |
10/23/2007
Legal Reform Summit Live Blog The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform is holding its eighth-annual Legal Reform Summit today, and I'll be using this blog to bring you those highlights that just don't fit into any of the articles we have planned for today.
Scheduled topics of discussion that are of interest to this site include: Results and recommendations from a recent ILR study regarding the power of state attorneys general; trends in business litigation, featuring attorney Chris Manning (the defender of the dry cleaners who were sued for $10 million after misplacing a pair of pants); and an assessment of the ongoing war between businesses and plaintiffs attorneys.
Speakers include Kathleen Casey, Commissioner of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. She will be discussing the future competitiveness of the country's securities market at approximately 1:15 p.m.
I'll start blogging just as soon as the morning Mt. Dew kicks in.
If you all have any questions, submit them in the comments section. If I know the answer, I'll respond. If I don't, I'll quickly delete your comment and act like the site is malfunctioning (kidding!).
---
10:18 a.m. - OK, time to come clean. I wrote that first blog entry yesterday because I knew traffic coming in to D.C. might be a little troublesome. I never even got around to my morning Mt. Dew (the horror).
Turns out, I was right about the traffic. The Summit even started a little late because so there were so many wrecks and roads closed. It hasn't rained hard in months here, and apparently people forgot how to drive in it.
I showed up to hear Bernard Nash, a partner at Dickstein Shapiro, speak to the power of state attorneys general. Good stuff. A story will be up this afternoon. He even covered a few issues that we normally don't at LNL (to our discredit).
Currently, Chris Manning (of the pants lawsuit) is speaking to consumer protection issues. The clacking of my keyboard may be distracting him, so we'll end this entry here.
---
11:09 a.m. - The business trends portion of the program is wrapping up. We'll have a story detailing Manning's thoughts on consumer protection and Thomas Gottschalk's speech on global climate change.
What won't make the story, you say? What am I missing by not being there, you wonder? Tell me! you plead.
Well, Gottschalk, a partner at Kirkland and Ellis who spoke excellently, lamented the fact that he did not bring a visual aid like Manning (that will be in the story). Gottschalk joked that since global warming cases are fairly new, maybe he should have used a picture of "the tip of an iceberg."
Eugene Goldman, a partner at McDermott Will and Emery, later brought up the famous Stoneridge case that will decide if third parties (like banks, accountants and law firms) can be held liable for a company's fraud. The case is before the U.S. Supreme Court.
He noted that Congress had a chance to clearly define the issue in the 1990s, but gave the power to bring those types of suit to the Securities and Exchange Commission and not plaintiffs attorneys. Obviously, plaintiffs attorneys want that power.
He predicted five justices will affirm the lower court ruling dismissing the case, while Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens will rule in favor of the investors.
Clarence Thomas, Goldman was not so sure about since he did not ask any questions during the Oct. 10 arguments. Stephen Breyer did not participate.
Good stuff so far. Hopefully I'm stunting your productivity at work today.
---
12:16 p.m. - On an empty (and I mean e-m-p-t-y) stomach, I've managed to post the story recapping the litigation against businesses discussion. Go ahead, have a read. I dare you.
The current topic is the influx of U.S.-style class actions into Europe. My reasons for not blogging about it are threefold:
1. I've been up seven hours now and have only had a tiny glass of Coke. Needless to say, I'm hungry;
2. Articles come before blogging; and
3. Through no fault of the speakers, I have no clue what is being discussed.
The key to actually being the dumbest person in a room and not letting on is to play with your phone a lot. Think about it.
And when everybody laughs, smile slightly and don't dare laugh. It makes you seem like you got the joke, but it was still a little below you.
---
1:14 p.m. - I'm alone in the ballroom while everyone is next door for lunch and the presentation of the Legal Reform Awards. The lunch registered a solid 8, with chocolate mousse providing a welcome ending. I even offered the lady from Chrysler sitting next to me $20 for hers. She countered with an offer of chocolates from her purse. No deal was struck.
Filet mignon, roasted potatoes, some weird tomato thing and asparagus were the rest of our meal, in case you're curious. And one of those cups of liquid with a lemon in it. This is the second luncheon I've attended with one of those things, and I still don't know what to do with it.
Let's quickly run down the award-winners so I can get back to writing.
Award for Outstanding Research - Tillinghast Towers Perrin, which is the standard-bearer for formulas used to determine the amount of money our current tort system costs each year.
Award for Outstanding Legal Reform Organization - Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System.
Legislative Achievement Award - Mississippi state Sen. Charlie Ross. I couldn't hear all of his speech. In fact, the only thing I heard was "cold day in hell."
Judicial Leadership Award - Harry Janna of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas. After a gracious introduction by ILR President Lisa Rickard, Janna said, "I don't think my wife would recognize the person you're talking about."
Now he sounds like he's still reeling from the Indians blowing that 3-1 lead to the Boston Red Sox.
---
3:31 p.m. - Right now, Ken Mehlman is talking immigration and its effect on the Republican party. At the National Association of Attorneys General meeting this spring, I decided that John Walsh of America's Most Wanted was the best public speaker I'd ever heard.
Mehlman, though, talks faster than that Micro-machines guy and has an incredible amount of substance behind his words. Every question from the audience he sends the answer right back like a line drive at a pitcher.
He's the former chairman of the Republican National Committee. He graduated Harvard Law and, as his campaign manager, got George Bush reelected in 2004. How do people get that smart?
It reminded me of this piece I watched about Tim Tebow. He's 19 years old, plays quarterback for the University of Florida, is really good, has a national championship, carries a near-4.0 GPA and goes to prisons in his spare time to try and convert convicts into accepting God into their lives.
Here's the rundown on me. I'm 25, play Tecmo Super Bowl on my computer, am not good at it, have trouble waking up before 11 o'clock, can't even spell GPA and go to bars in my spare time to try and convert sober people into drunk people, even if they have to work at 6 a.m. I'm no Tim Tebow, and I'm certainly no Ken Mehlman.
Before he spoke, ILR President Lisa Rickard outlined what she feels are the American Association of Justice's federal legislative goals. AAJ was formerly the American Trial Lawyers Association.
She says it wants to: Eliminate pre-dispute binding arbitration; scale back federal pre-emption laws so more suits land in state courts; expand the False Claims Act and Consumer Product Safety Committee legislation; and create new direct and implied causes of action.
All that's left for the day is a discussion on liability issues in the U.S. Supreme Court. Unfortunately for you, I won't be paying attention because I have one more story to write. Thanks for reading.
| | |
10/17/2007
Richard Blumenthal's perfect world It's probably a pretty safe bet that Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal grew up a Yankees fan, considering he did his best Yogi Berra impression Wednesday.
No, he didn't quote the quotable catcher. There was no "It ain't over 'til it's over" rallying cries over one of his lawsuits. Instead, he offered an original.
"Discrimination among customers should be barred based on income..." he said.
While that sinks in, let me paraphrase the events that led to an elected official actually saying something like that. It's important not to treat that quote as a soundbite, so we must put it in its proper context before really making fun of it.
AT&T has an Internet television service that Blumenthal wants regulated as if it were cable TV. AT&T wants to be known as a video service provider and will not apply for a cable license.
Blumenthal says the video service license will allow AT&T to cherry-pick the wealthiest and most geographically convenient customers. The end of the above statement is "or geography."
"Discrimination among customers should be barred based on income..." -- Do you realize what this could mean for the world?
Can't afford that new house? Really want to vacation in Paris? Solid-gold spaceship? It can all be yours if you hire attorney Richard Blumenthal and his groundbreaking legal theory of income discrimination.
Instead of a can of tuna for dinner, have crab legs. The grocery store cashier won't ask questions. His employer is now terrified of a lawsuit. Heck, when the cashier gets off he'll be allowed to grab a New York Strip. Beats the pants off a Spam and cheese sandwich.
Personally, I'm tired of paying the market price for anything. I spent 16 dollars on razors last night. Maybe I'll just start putting them in my pockets and walking out the door.
And I'll be wearing my "Discrimination among customers should be barred based on income" T-shirt. All it takes is miserable poverty to have a claim for relief against those greedy businesses that charge too much.
And maybe those charged with rape will start using "I was going through a dry spell" defenses, and maybe drug dealers will operate feet from elementary schools because it is closer to their apartment and they didn't feel like walking all that way to the underpass. That gun gets mighty heavy after a few blocks.
"Discrimination among customers should be barred based on income..."
If we follow Blumenthal's words, maybe we can finally build a future where everybody gets what they want.
It was Yogi who said, "The future ain't what it used to be." Guess what else he said.
"If the world were perfect, it wouldn't be."
| | |
10/12/2007
Sympathy for the Devil The New York Times published Thursday a rather infuriating editorial piece that is authored by Adam Cohen and blames the downfall of Mississippi trial lawyer Paul Minor on revenge-minded Republicans.
Minor's the attorney who helped the State in its lawsuit against tobacco companies that led to the 1998 Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement. His firm received $70 million for its work, and Minor has since spent a percentage of his wealth on the campaigns of Democrats. Now he's serving an 11-year sentence for bribing judges.
There is no way I can pick apart Cohen's work as deftly as Walter Olson did at Point of Law. His entry today is a perfect example of critical thought of a complex issue delivered with a style that is as easy to follow as a Snoopy cartoon.
The highlights? Olson recognizing Cohen's column as the suggestion-weighted piece it is and his response to input in the column from one of Minor's attorneys ("no doubt a very objective source," Olson wrote). Cohen, instead, took the attorney's word as gospel.
Paul Minor bribed judges, got rich and got caught. Now he's in jail for 11 years for compromising the public's faith in the judicial system. Cohen argues that his prosecution has helped kill the Democratic party in the state, because trial lawyers are now afraid to stand out in their contributions. They, too, may be convicted without proof by a jury of smelly Republicans.
Yes, Republicans hold a two-seat advantage in the state's Senate, but ask Republican Sen. Charlie Ross what good that is. His bill calling for stricter transparency laws in the Democratic Attorney General's office passed through the Senate, but might as well have been torn to shreds afterward.
It never had a chance in the state's House of Representatives. Why, you ask? Because there are 73 Democrats and only 46 Republicans in the House. The bill died in the House Judiciary Committee. I never received that call from Ross that I requested in an interview to update me on its passage.
"The case intimidated trial lawyers into stopping their political activity," Cohen wrote.
What?
Didn't trial lawyer Richard Scruggs just run a smear campaign against George Dale, the eight-term Insurance Commissioner? Scruggs wasn't even on a ballot. He just wanted Dale out, and he got his wish.
Scruggs bought ad space in newspapers, put out press releases from his Scruggs Katrina Group website and wasn't shy with his words when a reporter called for his viewpoint. He called an elected official, supposedly sympathetic to the same cause that ordered Minor rubbed out, a pig in lipstick.
I don't know if you could call Scruggs intimidated by what happened to Minor.
If Cohen knows his stuff, he would be quick to come back with the fact Scruggs is now facing criminal contempt charges.
Scruggs was ordered to return confidential documents leaked by a pair of former employees to a private insurance company's attorneys, and instead gave them to Attorney General Jim Hood. Then he gave those employees $150,000-a-year salaries.
A U.S. Attorney even declined to pursue the charges until a judge ordered someone else to do it because the evidence against him, the judge thought, was so overwhelming. Hardly sounds like another frame-job, especially considering this is all taking place in Alabama.
In fact, you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone outside of Minor's family, firm and attorneys who think he was the victim of a setup.
It sounds more like the revenge of the courtroom, a man who abused the judicial process so defiantly it eventually turned on him.
| | |
10/11/2007
Wyoming tribe ditches lawyers, wants attorney general instead  | | Ivan D. Posey (far r.) |
Ever wondered whether freelance private attorneys really give citizens a better legal servive than a salaried, elected legal official?
Just ask the Eastern Shoshone Tribe of Wyoming.
The Eastern Shoshone have typically relied on contracted private attorneys to handle their legal affairs. But they recently decided to create the position of tribal attorney general at an annual salary of $80,000-$100,000, AP reported.
The move will naturally save the tribe money, says Business Council Chairman Ivan Posey. But there's more to it than that.
Private attorneys, it turns out, have other clients and thus other priorities. But Posey said the tribe preferred retaining a legal advocate with a vested interest in the tribe and without the encumbrance of other non-tribal legal responsibilities to split time over.
Sounds like a great idea. He might want to let Arkansas attorney general Dustin McDaniel and Oklahoma attorney general Drew Edmondson in on it.
| | |
10/5/2007
Starcher, the columnist Not everyone thinks West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Larry Starcher is capable of straddling the line between objectivity and opinion.
Every journalist has been there. An issue effects you, but you have to find a way to keep your personal views from making their way into the story. Some can do it, some can't. It only takes one word to turn an article into a column.
When a journalist calls dozens gunned down senselessly at Virginia Tech "a tragedy," he or she just compromised themselves. No one will argue it's a tragedy, but it's not their business to decide. Recite the facts, then let the reader or listener decide if it is tragic.
The line is that easy to cross, not only for journalists, but judges and justices. Starcher's veiled shot at an attorney's Pakistani heritage having something to do with why a company hired her to represent it in a discrimination claim brought by a Pakistani former employee, honestly, was OK with me.
He inquired about her heritage, then stated, "That's what I thought."
When I heard about it, I didn't really blink an eye. Maybe Starcher knew someone named Altaf who was Pakistani, so he figured Shareeza Altaf was, too. It didn't matter if that's not what he meant.
Taken literally, as words in a report should be taken, nothing was wrong with it.
But he crossed the line in his response to Colgan's motion for recusal, calling Altaf "window dressing" and an "argument prop."
Later, he claimed he could be fair because he does not have a financial interest in the case.
Oh, OK. All is forgiven, I guess. Nevermind that everything an elected official does concerns, in some way, his or her financial interests. It takes money to get re-elected.
Starcher fell off the fence, now hopefully he'll step away from the bench. It's only one case.
But I guess it all depends on how much Starcher wants Colgan to pay for bringing its "argument prop" along. And maybe this incident, one in a long line, will turn voters sour on Starcher if he runs again next year.
If not, there's always newspaper work. Starcher would probably have to stick to the editorial page, though.
| | |
9/25/2007
Letting Silver State's tarnished judges trawl attorney dockets for donors mars top bench  | | Justice James W. Hardesty |
It's not for nothing that the Nevada judiciary has become known as the dodgiest docket west of the Mississippi.
If you weren't convinced already, take a look at a key piece in new Nevada Supreme Court rules we reported on today. Yep - it does say that judges up for for election "may accept campaign contributions from attorneys who appear before the court or from parties with matters pending before the court."
Most judges (see exception below) would surely not even dream of picking up the phone to hit-up lawyers they've got on the docket before them. But in Nevada, judges are obviously expected to - and now the state's highest bench has given its official approval.
That must surely burn the buns of Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht, who's been pilloried in his state's press for doing this very thing. Texas Watch, for example, has described Hecht as having a "cavalier attitude" towards judicial ethics over accepting such donations.
But the Nevada Supreme Court has its own way of looking at such things. Justice James W. Hardesty, after all, has opposed reforms that would prevent judges from personally soliciting campaign donations, we reported earlier this year. Perhaps not surprisingly, the entire state judiciary has been accused of cronyism and corruption in recent years.
Hecht's donating lawyers, by the way hit 8-for-9 in the cases heard before him once their checks had cleared, we reported in July, and he has taken plenty of heat since. Whether a gambler or not, he likely wishes he had been born in Nevada.
| | | Things never boring with Jim Hood around That Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood gave me 20 minutes of his time in March at the state attorneys general spring meeting, I felt thankful. That he refrained from insulting me, I was even more grateful.
In my previous life, I mostly interviewed high school athletes. After a few years, it was easy to pick up on which ones wanted to promote themselves, which ones were generally nice, which ones were fundamentally unfriendly and which ones just wanted to be left alone.
So if I had to classify Mr. Hood based on our conversation, I would lean to the idea that he's basically just a fairly nice guy -- very engaging, very respectful and very understanding of the job of the reporter (which can be rare).
But when his blood pressure gets raised, something happens. Insults start flying, litigation starts piling up -- he's like The Incredible Hulk of lawyers.
For putting that he is Chief Judge of the state's Military Court of Appeals on his resume, Attorney General challenger Al Hopkins was the latest victim. Hood's camp put on its website today that Hopkins is "all hat, no cattle," meaning he dresses the part of a cowboy but does not play it.
Where does he come up with this stuff?
Earlier this year, I listened in on the press conference during which Hood slammed State Farm, calling them "robber barons." Since I wasn't alive in the early 1900s, that one sent me scampering to wikipedia.org for a definition.
He also called the company, which he sued over Hurricane Katrina coverage, a cult and referred to their practices as "decadent."
The best, though, came at the expense of himself. The initiator of regulation to keep State Farm in his state despite all the litigation he created against it, Hood has also called himself a "free-marketer."
Hood's briefs also make for interesting reading, if you ever find the time. It's not hard to picture him spiking his case files after a win like a football player after a touchdown.
In a little more than a month, we'll find out if his tactics resonate with the people of Mississippi. A lot has changed since he was hired the first time.
If he loses, the world might be a little brighter for State Farm, Al Hopkins and the other targets of his anger. But it will also be a lot dimmer for journalists.
| | |
9/20/2007
Slow down, Rhode Island Unless there is something on the walls at the Flamingo that we should know about, it was good to go to Las Vegas over the weekend and get away from lead paint.
So when I returned to work and discovered I was hopelessly behind everyone who had already written about Rhode Island AG Patrick Lynch's lead paint abatement plan, I decided to read the whole thing and come up with something new.
But did you see the size of that thing?
It was 134 pages thick and chronicles the $2.4 billion cleanup for which three paint companies are responsible. Former Iowa AG and paint spokesperson Bonnie Campbell says Sherwin-Williams, Millennium Holdings and NL Industries will not begin until the appeal is decided.
So why did Superior Court Judge Michael Silverstein order this planning? After instructing the jury to find the companies liable during trial, it's clear he wants this stuff cleaned up as soon as possible. Should the Supreme Court affirm the ruling, it will be good that the planning is already complete.
But what if the Court doesn't? What a colossal waste of time and money. One can only imagine how much effort goes into a 134-page abatement plan.
The writing, the advising, the research. It all might be for nothing, if Rhode Island's highest court stays consistent with the three supreme courts that have let the companies off the hook.
Judge Silverstein should have taken that into account. Sure, he's exerting his control over the lawsuit, but he failed to consider the financial consequences. Rhode Island taxpayers won't get their money back if the abatement plan is scrapped.
| | |
Archives
Want to see more? Try browsing our archives by month.
May '08
April '08
March '08
February '08
January '08
December '07
November '07
October '07
September '07
August '07
July '07
|
|
|
|
|
|
