Dubitante

They have finally released the registration results for next year (after two months!) and my schedule is crap. Apparently, my strategy failed. To complicate things further, one of classes I did get into conflicts with the LRW class I'm one of the Fellows for, so it will need to be dropped. In addition, I was able to get my top choice for Spring, but not the prerequisite for it in the fall; either I need to get into the pre-req or it will have to be dropped, as well. Basically, my schedule as it stands is worthless and a whole lot of tweaking will have to occur during the add/drop period... We'll have to wait and see, I guess.

Here's where it stands now:
Fall
Admin Law
Evidence
Law Fellow
(Need Corporations here) UPDATE: Got Corps (although not with my desired prof)

Spring
Securites Reg
Trademark & Unfair Competition
International Law
Law Fellow
Plus one more class: Labor?, Antitrust?, Tax?, who knows? UPDATE: Added Decedents' Estates & Labor Law as space holders.

We saw Fahrenheit 9/11 last night and it was pretty good, as far as unabashedly one-sided op-ed pieces go. Moore, as is his M.O., draws a lot of conclusions, but fails to make many connections (A=C, but very little in the way of B). Also, I felt the film's narrative was undermined by Moore's digressions into his tangential vendettas. But, overall, the message was clear. And it was definitely eye-opening. However, when you're spoonfed only one side, it's tough to leave the theatre with any new (and defensible) opinions. Some of Moore's points are incontrovertible; others are pretty weak. Nonetheless, I think the film is definitely worth checking out; while it doesn't offer "the answer" and won't change the election, hopefully, it will open a dialogue between all Americans about what our leaders are really doing in Washington... Unfortunately, those who might benefit the most from such a dialogue will never see the film.

For those still interested, AmbImb offers a much more thorough post about the film (from which I stole most the links for this post) or you can check out the film's unofficial blog here, or some other articles here or here.

I couldn't help but smile when I heard of Cheney's outburst; and all this time I thought he was a robot. The news also left me sometwhat confused. You'd think he'd be happy and it'd be W on edge. Go figure.

In other news, The Honorable Alberto Gonzales, counsel to President Bush, came to the Courthouse today for a lunch/speech/q&a session. I was fairly impressed. He seems pretty smart and is quite adept at dodging questions. Plus, the knot in his tie (a double-windsor, I think) was something to be admired.

As of today, it's been one month since I last smoked a cigarette. And, as anyone who has spent more than an hour or two with me can attest, such an achievement is nothing short of a small miracle.

I smoked alot. A pack or more a day. For the last 9 years. And my longest previous smoke-free stretch during that time was 8 days (and that was more 8 years ago!).

So far, quitting hasn't been as bad as I feared it would be. It hasn't been a barrel of laughs, mind you; but, it's been tolerable. The strongest cravings have pretty much passed, and now it's mostly my deeply engrained habits which cause the most trouble. Sometimes, I still instinctually reach into my pocket for a pack when I finish eating, or complete a writing assignment, or get on the phone, or receive some good news, or receive some bad news, or get off the Metro escalator, or just about anything. I've been using 3-4 nicotine lozenges a day, which helps take the edge off, and am starting to cut back on those. Hopefully within another month, I'll be completely nicotine free. We can hope.

I'm far from ready to call myself a non-smoker, but one month is a good start. If I can keep it up, I may actually live long enough to pay back my loans...

Grades are finally in. I'm pleased.

For those of you who pay any attention to what I am "Currently Reading" (see right), you may have noticed The Illuminatus! Trilogy, an 800+ page paranoid "epic," has disappeared after barely a week. Unfortunately, I had neither the patience nor the time for this sprawling, at times incoherent, diatribe. I really wanted to like it (I'm always up for a good conspiracy theory), and I gave it 100 pages or so to convince me, but I simply wasn't up to the task... I've now moved on to Mark Haddon's much lauded debut, hoping for better results. I'm a firm believer that first novels are often an author's best work (See, e.g., Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye; Dave Eggers' Heartbreaking Work....); hopefully, Mr. Haddon won't let me down.

In other book news, I just finished Eats, Shoots & Leaves by Lynne Truss, a fantastically interesting and consistently funny treatise on the sad state of proper punctuation. I can now sleep more easily, knowing I am not alone in my involuntary proof-reading of all I lay my eyes on. At some point, I plan to post some of her especially entertaining passages; in the meantime, I highly recommend the book for all my fellow "sticklers" out there...

The Most Shocking (although, sadly, not surprising) Thing I Learned At Work Today:

In the 10 months the clerks have been working in chambers, having seen 100's of criminal cases come and go, NOT ONE DEFENDANT HAS BEEN A FIRST-TIME OFFENDER! That's right, every single one had prior convictions. To be fair, part of the reason for this is that many of the first-timers or petty offenders are brought across the street (to the municipal court), but the statistic is still an eye-opener. So much for rehabilitation...

Guns and drugs, guns and drugs, guns and drugs, G-d bless D.C.

Like so many 2Ls-to-be out there, I've been spending recent days culling down the firms coming to campus for Interview Week. The first cuts I made were based solely on geography. Not interested in NY, the Midwest, the South, or the Southwest. That leaves me with the West Coast and DC. And I'm not entirely sure about DC.

I like it here for the most part. And there are ton of ostensibly good firms. But, the weather sucks. Today's meteorological madness may have sealed the deal for me. As I began my walk to the metro station after work, the sky was clear. Five minutes later and halfway there, clouds had moved in. A few moments later, it began to rain. Hard. This freak storm (a few days before the start of summer) was stronger and dumped more rain than any storm I have ever seen in 20 years in California. My umbrella was no match for its ferocity. My suit and shoes were drenched instantly. It was miserable. These summer storms, coupled with the heat and humidity which oppresses the region, are gradually making DC a far less desirable location to begin my career.

I will probably still preference plenty of DC firms (there simply aren't enough West Coast firms coming to campus), but I will also be applying to a few more West Coast firms which don't participate in OCI. We'll see how it turns out. But, I suppose I ought to wait until my 2nd Semester grades come in (next week?) before I get too far ahead of myself.

Overheard tonight on the series premiere of North Shore (Fox's futile attempt to replicate the magic that is "The OC").

Some Girl: "Can I ask you a question? Do you want to do it or what?"

Ahhh...isn't that sweet? And 15 minutes later came this little gem:

Idiot A: "She's been jocking me since she got here." ....
Idiot B: "I can verify that."

Fantastic. I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict that this show will be lucky to last the Summer. What makes "The OC" great is that it walks the fine line of absolute absurdity with its melodrama and teenybopper slang, but does so with a sense of humor and the self-awareness that it neither is nor is trying to be a serious drama. Fox's latest piece of crap draws no such distinction...

Of course, plenty of freaks out there disagree...

Today, the Judge swore me in. I pledged to uphold the Constitution and a variety of other things. I wasn't expecting such a formality for a summer internship, but it was an interesting experience, nonetheless.

In other internship news, court was more exciting than usual today. The discussion ranged from mass fornication in RFK stadium to the various types of attorney sanctions. With regard to the latter, the Judge chastized an attorney to such a degree that the entire courtroom must have felt a bit uncomfortable and I desperately tried to avoid looking the browbeaten attorney in the eye.

Word to the wise: if you want to avoid costly sanctions (both personal and evidentiary) and/or being compelled to withdraw from any pending cases before a judge and/or being barred from appearing in a judge's courtroom ever again, don't wantonly deny court orders for over a year and then attempt to justify it with feeble excuses.

Home from work on this National Day of Mourning (It's a shame about Ray Charles...), I have some time to comment on my first days interning for a federal judge.

So far, the experience has been phenomenal. I'm in and out of the courtroom all day, seeing everything from the mundane (status hearings) to the somewhat exciting and often contentious (motion hearings) to the truly eye-opening (sentencing hearings), with some full trials on the horizon. The variety of cases that come before the District Court are astounding. From guns and drugs (and the full range of criminal cases) to the panoply of civil claims (contract, discrimination, general torts, etc.). The judge and his clerks are phenomenal in their vast knowledge of the law in these incredibly diverse areas. It's truly inspiring.

The workload is intense. 15-20 new motions come to the court each day. Many of these can be dispensed with quickly, but some require siginificant amounts of time. My primary responsibility is the so-called "six-month list." Twice year, all federal courts are required to resolve any motions which have been pending for more than six months. Right now, chambers has about 100 such motions (and that's far less than many other judges!).

I am assigned a particular case and then review the various pending motions, research the law behind them, and write a memo to the judge outlining my recommendation for their dispensation. The judge reviews my memo and will either approve my recommendation (in clear cut cases) or will call me in to chambers to grill me on my analysis and reasoning before making a decision. Once the judge decides the motion, I draft an order announcing the court's decision. After some revision, following additional give and take with the judge and his clerks, the judge will sign the order and it will be entered into the electronic filing system where it instantly becomes part of the case record and each side's attorneys are immediately notified of the outcome.

The clerks took it easy on me this first week, only giving me one motion to wrestle with. I finished the memo yesterday and am awaiting the judge's response. In the meantime, I am on to the next case. It's fascinating.

Perhaps the most eye-opening aspect my work thus far has been the prevailing mediocrity in the legal profession. In the two cases I've dealt with, the four lawyers are all equally inept. Misspelled words (including the Judge's name!), missing or incorrect punctuation, inaccurate quotations, incomplete, incorrect, or nonexistent citations, poor grammar, broken syllogisms and fatally flawed arguments (I see your A, I see your C, but where is your B?), and countless other examples of genuinely bad lawyering.

In one case, plaintiff's lawyer's mistakes (filing suit in the wrong court under the wrong law) will cost the plaintiff the opportunity to ever have her day in court (the statute of limitations under the proper law has run). Some of these lawyers are solo practitioners, some work for prestigious "Big Law" firms, some work for the government, some are general counsel for major corporations, all are equally inept (or, at the very least, careless). It's shocking. I think the problem must be systemic. I refuse to believe these attorneys can't write a decent brief or perform very basic research; they simply don't! Undoubtedly, these documents are written at the very last moment and apparently there isn't the time to proofread or adequately research the issues. The trend is troubling.

I talked with the clerks about it and they warned me not to expect it to get any better, and reminded me that the poor lawyering of others should make me feel good about the type of lawyer I intend to be. I suppose, but that doesn't make the incredible mediocrity any easier to swallow. On we trudge...

For those of you out there slaving away pro bono in a judicial internship, here's a surefire way to make your time in chambers more enjoyable.

The next time the judge offers his opinion to you about something mundane, e.g. "Restaurant X has the best sandwiches" or "I'm sure you'd enjoy Movie X" (but not "this case is directly on point for your assignment"), promptly respond with: "I'll be the JUDGE of that."

Such a quip is guaranteed to get a few chuckles from the judge. Of course, this depends on your judge...

I typically try to avoid spewing my political views on this blog. However, I simply couldn't pass this one up, even if it is leaning far more left than I do. That said, check out Osama Bin Lotto (any proceeds supposedly benefit public schools). NOTE: Turn down the sound if you're at work...

Thanks to Brent @ BAER for the link.

So I was watching the Scripps National Spelling Bee tonight. (OK. I realize that probably sounds like the nerdiest thing someone could possibly do. But, they show it on ESPN so I count it as a sport; plus, the fantastic film Spellbound got me hooked.)

With only two contestants left, the show's announcers listed the various prizes the winner receives. I quote: "...the Encyclopaedia Britannica gives them a set, along with a CD for the computer. 'Cause they're all so computer illiterate..." I kid you not, the idiot host said "ILliterate." I Tivo'd it to be certain. Sure enough, illiterate. Hosting the National Spelling Bee. The irony is overwhelming.

By the way, the winning word was "autochthonous," an adjective meaning indigenous, native, or aboriginal.