information.com
 

Not dead. Just infirm.

information.com
 

Headlight thanks you for the kind words. Today happens to be Headlight's 40th birthday -- a fact that does not please Headlight at all. So Headlight could use all the kind words he can get. Cheers!

information.com
 

Headlight -- sorry, my bad.

:flag:

AM(have a great 40th)M

Infirmation.com
 

i recently had a misfortune of seeing part of that show on mtv where tucker max is out trying to have sex with the sluttiest women that they could find. once i realized who that pompous ass of a guy was, it was pretty amusing.

i'd think that someone as repulsive as he is would have lower standards for women, but then again he seems about as egotistical as just for fun (hmmm).

ms. naughty diplomat

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Here, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, are the top ten lawyers in the Bay Area:

1. John Keker
2. Jim Brosnahan
3. Joe Cotchett
4. Cristina Arguedas
5. Larry Sonsini
6. Elizabeth Cabraser
7. Dennis Riordan
8. Boris Feldman
9. James Collins
10. Jack Londen

Infirmation.com
 

He was on MTV? What a strange world we live in.


Edited to say, yup, he was on MTV here's an article. http://tampatrib.com/baylifenews/MGACYLDDFCD.html

Hey, I say good for him. I mean there are a lot of jerks in the world, but rarely do they become famous for being so.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Crud. Another year, and I'm not on the list ... Shocking.

Interesting that 9 of them are litigators (excuse me, trial lawyers), with Larry Sonsini as the only "corporate advisor." Though I guess that is easier to evaluate - it's much easier to chalk about the "W" and "L" columns when you're a trial attorney than when you do deals.

C(guessing that only 2 of them can be hired as cheaply as $500/hour)deuced

Article about Musalo on Callaw.com
 

could someone w/ access post the text? thanks!

:help2:

:bounce:

Musalo Article
 

Seeking Shelter

Lawyer's bid to win asylum rights for abused women awaits action by Ashcroft

Jason Hoppin
The Recorder
05-05-2003


When Karen Musalo began teaching refugee law and policy in 1989, she didn't have much to go on. There wasn't even a case book for her specialty, so years later she had to write her own.

After cobbling that tome together, Musalo began to build the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at Hastings College of the Law, a first-of-its-kind project focusing on an area of law that has troubled immigration judges: the nexus of asylum law and women's rights. Now all the work on behalf of those persecuted for their gender -- specifically, victims of domestic violence -- may be coming to a head.

Musalo has a client, Rodi Alvarado Pena, whose case has become intertwined with long-delayed immigration regulations that were first due to be released under ex-Attorney General Janet Reno. Those rules would have provided asylum to women who suffer domestic abuse in countries that turn a blind eye.

After years of delay, many who follow this area of the law expect the regulations to be issued shortly. Though she is hoping that Attorney General John Ashcroft sides with her client, Musalo fears the worst.

For anyone who hears her plea, it is hard to deny that Alvarado deserves a safe haven. When she applied for asylum, she testified to the following: Her Guatemalan husband pushed her head through a mirror, kicked her in the spine, whipped her with an electrical cord and threatened her with a machete. She was beaten before and during rapes that occurred almost daily. She was pistol-whipped and dragged through the streets of her hometown.

When she asked her husband why he was doing this to her, she was told that as a wife, she belonged to him, and he could do with her as he pleased. No amount of pleading stopped him. When she went to stay with relatives, he came after her. Efforts to involve the authorities proved fruitless. So she left.

If Ashcroft, who has taken Alvarado's case under personal advisement, rules against her, the consequences could be devastating not just for those seeking shelter from abusive husbands, but persecuted women worldwide, Musalo said.

"It's important because it will impact gender asylum cases more broadly than those related to domestic violence," Musalo said. "It really does set the standard in terms of whether a social group can be defined by gender . . . and who gets protection."

In addition to legal standards, there is the symbolic power of the case.

"Although it's important for Rodi Alvarado as an individual," Musalo continued, "the fact of the matter is, what the U.S. does on important human rights issues has impact around the world." An adverse ruling "could have a fairly corrosive effect on protections worldwide."

THE NEXT BIG THING

After founding CGRS in 1999 and installing it in an office at Hastings, Musalo has built it through grants and individual donations. Backers include several foundation tilted toward social justice, including the Ford Foundation.

"If we think about what a lot of refugee clients have been through, it's kind of incomprehensible," she said. "It's really a great honor to be doing legal work in that context."

Together with Stephen Knight, Musalo has steered CGRS toward a position of influence by lobbying politicians and pushing gender asylum law in directions courts have been reluctant to go.

Musalo also tries to do what any good public interest lawyer would, identifying litigation that will have an impact and winning the cases.

Her first big win was getting the Immigration and Naturalization Service to give asylum to Fauziya Kasinga. The Togolese woman fled her country to avoid ritualistic female genital mutilation. It was the first time the INS gave asylum to anyone based on gender-specific persecution where the motive wasn't transparently political.

That 1996 win brought recognition to Musalo and the cause. Shortly after, she was named one of the 45 top public interest lawyers in the country by Recorder affiliate The American Lawyer magazine.

Alvarado's case, Matter of R-A-, 3403, is the next big thing.

The United Nations defines a refugee as someone who has been persecuted or has a well-founded fear of persecution, based upon race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion.

Nowhere does it define classes of refugees by gender. "The challenge to women's claims has been for judges to see that the claims are on account of one of the five grounds," Musalo said.

For some groups of women -- victims of widespread rapes in Bosnia, for example -- the crimes against them are part and parcel of political upheaval. Courts have had an easy time granting those victims asylum.

But whether crimes based solely on gender, accompanied by political apathy toward those crimes, can itself be the basis of an asylum claim is law that is still evolving. That's where Musalo comes in.

Both the United Nations and several Western governments recognize gender-based asylum claims. The problem for U.S. courts has been finding a way to fit women into the definition of a "particular social group." In Alvarado's case, her group was defined as women who refuse to live under the domination of men.

An immigration judge sided with her, but the Board of Immigration Appeals reversed. The 10-5 majority was troubled by whether Alvarado's husband was "persecuting" her as the law understands it or whether he was simply sadistic -- victims of "everyday" crimes aren't usually eligible for asylum.

CAUSAL CONNECTION?

Though sympathetic to her suffering, the court wrote, "What we find lacking in this respondent's showing . . . is any meaningful evidence that her husband's behavior was influenced at all by his perception of [Alvarado's] opinion."

This sort of causal connection has long been a requirement in asylum law. But in dissent, several BIA judges argued that the requirement should be loosened.

They used a hypothetical example: Nazi Germany. One shopkeeper decides he's going to run a competitor out of town by bombing his shop. The competitor happens to be Jewish. He may not have anything against Jews at all, but he knows he can get away with it.

In those cases, the dissenters argued, courts should look at the situation that allowed the persecutor to act with impunity. But the majority declined to go that far in their 1999 decision.

Reno then invoked a rarely used privilege of attorneys general and vacated the decision. She directed the INS to issue new regulations regarding gender asylum law and said she would decide Alvarado's case after the new regulations were implemented.

Proposed regulations were issued in December 2000 but they had to go through a public comment period and hadn't become final when the White House switched hands. For 2 1/2 years, asylum lawyers have awaited Ashcroft's final rules.

The attorney general recently announced that he, like Reno, has taken Alvarado's case under his wing. But Musalo and others have heard that Ashcroft intends to scale back the regulations significantly. Musalo has marshaled letters from congressmen and senators urging the AG not to do so.

"In my mind, that increases the chance that Ashcroft might not do what it was he was planning to do," said Musalo.

One of the reasons for the delay is likely the dissolution of the INS. The Justice Department -- which still has jurisdiction over immigration courts -- is working with the Department of Homeland Security -- which now has jurisdiction over immigration policy -- to come up with the new regulations.

They are also part of a larger set of regulations, though Justice Department spokesman Jorge Martinez said gender asylum is a difficult area of the law.

"Some of these things take a long time, some of them not so long," Martinez said. "Obviously, these regulations would not be as simple as others."

But because Ashcroft has personally taken Alvarado's case under advisement, he has broad latitude.

"His role is to interpret the definition of refugee" and whether Alvarado's case applies, Martinez said.

If Ashcroft orders her deported, Musalo promises that won't be the end of it. "Even if Ashcroft decides the Rodi Alvarado case against her, we would go up to the Ninth Circuit and appeal that decision," she said.

And she -- and her Center for Gender and Refugee Studies -- will keep fighting.

"My philosophy for lawyering for society is just understanding that law is not in a vacuum, but law is working with people and working with communities," Musalo said. "There are actually a heck of a lot of people in this country who are deeply concerned about the welfare of women."

Top Ten Lawyers
 

There was more diversity in the next 15 on the list . . . .

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Did someone say diversity? I will leave such discussion to the appropriate thread.:soapbox:

Top Ten Lawyers
 

It's appropriate here, too, IMHO.

There was more diversity in terms of general practice area, but not so much gender, ethnicity or race. Three women in the next 15, making a grand total of 5 out of the top 25. And I think only 2 lawyers were not caucasian? (sorry - don't have the real article in front of me, just trying to remember).

These sort of polls crack me up, though, as they're very similar to the "prestige" rankings - nothing very scientific, more like popularity contests.

C(reminds me of People's 50 Most Beautiful People ... without the hair and makeup stylists)deuced

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Are you saying you didn't like my combover? I'm hurt. And rich and famous, apparently...

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Well, it's better than the spray-on hair you had for a while there. But it might be time to consider using Yul Brynner as a role model.

C(or you could try washing it every so often)deuced

GrayCary Move
 

GrayCary moving to EPA Brobeck Palace.

I find it interesting that this was announced almost a month ago, yet seems (unless I missed it here) to not have generated any comments.

From GC's page ( http://www.gcwf.com/gcc/GrayCary-C/N...n1.doc_cvt.htm ):

Gray Cary is on the Move

Firm to Take Over 5 Floors at University Circle in East Palo Alto



(PALO ALTO, Calif.) April 11, 2003 – In three months, Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich LLP is moving down the street to some fancy new digs. The firm signed a 15-year lease for five floors, and approximately 120,000 square feet, at University Circle in East Palo Alto, including space originally occupied by Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison. The firm anticipates moving into the space on July 1, 2003.



The new space will allow Gray Cary to consolidate its Palo Alto offices, and approximately 150 local attorneys, into one location. Approximately two-thirds of the firm’s attorneys in Palo Alto are currently in two buildings located on Hamilton Avenue in downtown Palo Alto, with the balance in the firm’s Embarcadero Road office.



“It’s an amazing facility, in turnkey condition, with state of the art technology and conference facilities—all at the entrance to Palo Alto,” said Terry O’Malley, Gray Cary’s chairman. “The combination of market economics and the unique circumstances surrounding this property created a once in a lifetime opportunity to secure a signature property at a tremendous capital advantage.”



In addition to its convenient location next to the University Avenue interchange at U.S. 101, the building features a full floor conference facility, advanced wiring for networking computers and communications, and elaborate video conferencing capabilities. The building lobby includes a two-story, 25-foot wide video screen.



“It’s certainly worth noting that all the parties were able to put this transaction together in an extraordinarily fast manner, within two months of the premises’ availability,” said Eric Berson, who represented Gray Cary in the transaction. Berson is chairman and chief executive officer of Washington Realty Group, a national real estate firm that exclusively represents large law firms.



The firm’s address will be 2000 University Circle, East Palo Alto, CA 94303. The owner is University Circle Investors, LLC.



Gray Cary is a national law firm that represents emerging growth and technology companies, with more than 420 attorneys practicing in Austin, Palo Alto, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington, D.C. Clients include public and private companies, ranging from start-up businesses to Fortune 500 corporations.





CONTACTS:

Terry O’Malley, Partner and Chairman, Gray Cary, 619/890-4785

Patrick Bustamante, Senior Marketing Manager, Gray Cary, 650/833-2388

Sleeping Beauty?
 

Is SV dead? Is it just hibernating? Is about to spring back to life? Tom Siebel says we're poised for more growth, Larry Ellison disagrees:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech...eut/index.html

(Spree- harmless CNN story that, par for the course, just has some sound bites without really discussing the issues in any depth).

I disagree with most of the comments made regarding Ellison's statement. Seems to me he's just saying that SV isn't going to go berserk like it did in the late 90s, not that there won't be any growth at all. Everyone seems to be falling over themselves to say "no wait - really, there is going to be some gains in software."

Well, knock me over with a feather, geniuses! Duh! The world is now run on software. Of course there will be some gains in the software. People want to know what sort of software (PLM? OS? open-source?)and whether the job market will pick back up for engineers and business folks.

C(and will it create more work for lawyers?)deuced

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Concur wholeheartedly. Hair and makeup stylists would have been a plus. And the photographs -- most of the top ten looked slightly nervous and self conscious about trying to look so formidable. And Scary Larry, well, he just looked surprised.

AM(where's Tower?)M

Orrick - VLG
 

How far along are these merger [read: acquistion] talks?

not7yS

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Given that most of the "top ten", and probably the "top 25", are in their 50s or 60s, that's not really all that bad. How many women or African Americans do you think were in Keker's or Brosnahan's law school class?

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Considering most law schools then didn't accept women (or, likely, African Americans), not many.

I'll be very interested to see how the numbers change, if at all, in the next several years.

C(in 10 years, I think there will still be mostly litigators, and it will still be predominantly white and male... just wondering when the balance may tip and more diversity will appear)deuced

Orrick - VLG
 

No idea, but VLG has been working with Orrick for years now - whenever VLG's clients needed more corporate work that they didn't or couldn't handle, or more specialized work (tax, employee benefits), they sent the work to Orrick.

With VLG having to close most of its offices, lay off most of its associates (or make the others take paycuts or pro bono outside jobs), and issue a capital call from the partners, I wouldn't bat an eyelash if later today even we heard they were being subsumed into Orrick. I think Craig Johnson has made it clear he doesn't want to go back to Wilson and Larry's world.

C(whether he can peacefully live in Ralph's remains to be seen)deuced

Largest Firm with an office in Napa Valley?
 

I know that Farella Braun & Martel has a "wine country" office. Any others?

danger: merging traffic
 

I merged the Gray Cary Moving thread into this one because it seemed like it belonged here. Tucker Max can stay on his own for a while, IMHO. If you disagree or have other opinions that you would like to express about such things, please PM or e-mail me. Thank you again for your support.

Orrick - VLG
 

You can link to a London article about the potential merger here:
http://weirdofthenews.blogspot.com/2....html#93962494

(it says talks are in the "early stages").

Head(always surfin' the legal press)Light

Orrick-Venture Law
 

Do people think any rainmakers at Venture (meaning the big business generators in the SV office - not sure if that's more than a handful or not) would go back to a firm where the per partner #s likely won't match up to the large equity payouts those attorneys reportedly received in past years? Would they want to work in a place they don't control? Big change.

Orrick-Venture Law
 

Uh, lets see here. Large equity payouts in PAST years or a FUTURE going forward? Um, I want to live in the past! ME ME ME!! Forgot about my future, lets relive the PAST.

Oh boy....

74 Otis Street
 

74 Otis Street
 

7 of 9
 

Hi, thanks.

I've been around, mostly lurking. Just couldn't resist the most recent post.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

C'mon, Deuce -- do you really think it's as bad as all that? Two of the top 10 are lesbians, for goodness sakes.

Would I like to see more balance in the ranks of the most accomplished lawyers? Sure, and everywhere else too. But pretending that this list looks like, say, the 1950s Supreme Court is just not accurate.

As to litigators vs. business lawyers, that won't change, I suspect. I don't think the Chronicle is capable of identifying the "best" business lawyers. "Best" basically means "highest profile" in this survey, and that favors litigators.

Kind of ironic, though, when you think about what the Chronicle has previously said about Sonsini.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

I would refute the negative pregnant, as well. If you knew the kind of conflicts of interest that underlay the relationships between some of those particular lawyers and the press who repeatedly write about them, it would make your heart sick. And I don't mean Deger/Snow, either.

Business journalism is just influence peddling by reporters on the one hand, and a marketing budget item by lawyers on the other hand. But don't let it depress you. We all wind up in the same hell.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Does anyone else understand what the hell Atticus just said?


:shrug: :wtf??:

Top Ten Lawyers
 

"NEGATIVE PREGNANT - Such form of negative expression, in pleading, as may imply or carry within it an affirmative.

This is faulty, because the meaning of such form of expression is ambiguous. Example: in trespass for entering the plaintiff's house, the defendant pleaded that the plaintiff's daughter gave him license to do so and that he entered by that license. The plaintiff replied that he did not enter by her license. This was considered as a negative pregnant and it was held the plaintiff should have traversed the entry by itself, or the license by itself, and not both together. 3. It may be observed that this form of traverse may imply; or carry within it, that the license was given, though the defendant did not enter by that license. It is therefore in the language of pleading said to be pregnant with the admission, namely, that a license was given: at the same time, the license is not expressly admitted, and the effect therefore is, to leave it in doubt whether the plaintiff means to deny the license, or to deny, that the defendant entered by virtue of that license. It is this ambiguity which appears to constitute the fault.

This rule, however, against a negative pregnant, appears in modern times at least, to have received no very strict construction; for many cases have occurred in which, upon various grounds of distinction from the general rule, that form of expression has been free from objection. "

As for the rest, I think he's implying hanky-panky -- but that's just a guess.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Gort, Master of the Guardians, is correct. I meant to say that the news media is equally unqualified to judge the stature of litigators and transactional lawyers alike, because those "high-profile" litigators are, in various ways, in bed with the particular reporters who repeatedly write puff pieces about them. I can't go into details, but I've seen it happen.

I was trying to be coy about it.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Okay, fine, but.... I disagree. I don't doubt that there is some back-scratching going on here (trading of puff pieces for good access to interviews in high profile cases, or money, or a Monica or two, say). But the press does follow litigation, and the people it picks as "best lawyers" at least have the rep. of winning big cases, or at least getting hired for them.

It's a lot easier for the press to tell who comes out ahead in litigation than it is in transactions. This does not provide marvelous insight into who the "best" is, of course, but it gives some shred of information, at least.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

Thanks for the clarification. Was wondering if Trogdor was burninating a little early as post was before 4:20.

AM(...and then I smoke two more)M

Top Ten Lawyers
 

No, no. Trogdor comes in the niiiiiiiiiiiiight! Check out all my majesty:

http://www.the-coolest-stuff-ever.co.../sbe58/aw1.gif

Top Ten Lawyers
 

You people are weird. I like that.

Top Ten Lawyers
 

I obviously was not clear in my posts about this, so I'll try to clarify a bit. I don't mean to say at all that the list looks like the 1950s Supreme Court. Or even the 1978 Supreme Court. I'm cheered that there are at least 2 women on the list of 10, and 5 all told. That is, indeed, better than it could have been. And I believe I stated in an earlier post that I'm not all that surprised by the breakdown of gender and race as many law schools didn't even accept women or minorities until the early '70s (maybe earlier, I don't have the stats at hand) so the pool of women or minorities that would be considered by their peers for such a list is rather small (how you missed that comment from me, Sidd, I do not know... you owe me a drink... hmph!).

My comment was meant to be more general about the legal profession, not just this list (and certainly not a commentary on the Chronicle or necessarily on its methods of surveying for the results - though it still reminds me of the crappy 'prestige' lists that are put out). Simply put, I welcome the day when there are fewer impediments placed in front of women and minorities in our profession with regards to their careers and when the ranks of "the best" aren't nearly de facto white and male only because that's the pool (this is way generalizing, but I hope it's clearer). I see that day coming, as there are many many more women and minorities in law school and becoming lawyers with each year. Thus, in an absolute sense the chance of seeing them on these sort of lists increases.

But, and this is where my skepticism comes in, to get to the point where they would be considered, they obviously need to have had an opportunity to work on some kick ass (term of art) matters. The issue of women and minorities succeeding in firms has been discussed somewhat here, and for the moment I'm going to pass on rehashing that conversation. But many obstacles still exist (they're being slowly eroded, but they're there). And it's tough as hell to get to the 'big time' in criminal work.

So, in 10 years, the breakdown might not be much different. In 20, I suspect it would be much. And do I think that every list needs to be 50-50 men-women, and have every race represented? No. Some years there might be 9 women in the top 10 (in which case I likely will do a little dance of glee in my office), some years 1; some years, there may be only 1 white person on the list, some years, all of them. And yes, perhaps this just happened to be a year with less diversity. I think it just points to a stage we're at in the profession where it's still more white and male at 'the top' than not. Like all professions, that's changing (and yes, I know that some professions have even worse track records than the legal profession... as I'm not a pro football coach and this isn't a chat board for the NFL, at the moment, I'm not concerned with that, but I do acknowledge it).

Totally agree with you there. It's just much more likely to see a lawyer in the news for a high profile case rather than a high profile transaction. Sigh.

Doncha think?

C(probably digging a deeper hole for myself in Sidd's eyes, but what the hell - sometimes the ground needs tilling)deuced

Trogdor the Burninator.