COA denies Wayne prosecutor's bid to disqualify 36th District Court bench

The Michigan Court of Appeals has turned down Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy's application to disqualify the entire 36th District Court bench from conducting the preliminary examination of Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick.

Kilpatrick is accused of perjury, obstruction of justice and other charges.

The three-page order notes that in two prior cases where an entire judicial bench was disqualified, there was no analysis of the facts or any articulated analysis and, therefore, were of no help in this case.

Analyzing this case under MCR 2.003(B), the COA observed that even if some of the judges may be called as witnesses during the preliminary exam, "MCR 2.003(b)(6) requires the recusal of a judge only when 'the judge or the judge's spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person ... is to the judge's knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.' None of the judges who are proposed witnesses fall within this rule."

Click here for the full text of the order.

On-line lawyer rating service hits Michigan

Avvo.com, an on-line lawyer rating service that premiered to mixed reviews (here, here and here) last June, and weathered a class-action lawsuit filed by attorneys who took issue with their ratings, now includes ratings for Michigan (and Wisconsin) lawyers.

From Avvo's press release last week:

"The new ratings and profiles are immediately available for consumers to view and for lawyers to claim and update for free. Avvo is now available in 15 states and the District of Columbia, and covers approximately 70 percent of licensed attorneys across the country.
"Avvo offers consumers more information and better guidance regarding lawyers and legal issues than has previously been available in one place. Avvo rates and profiles every lawyer, with Avvo Profiles including attorneys' practice areas, work experience, industry recognition, and disciplinary sanctions. Avvo also aggregates and displays client reviews submitted by consumers and peer reviews submitted by attorneys."

How does Avvo calculate its ratings for lawyers? From Avvo's website:

"The Avvo Rating is our effort to evaluate a lawyer's background, based on the information we know about the lawyer. The rating is calculated using a mathematical model that considers the information shown in a lawyer's profile, including a lawyer's years in practice, disciplinary history, professional achievements and industry recognition - all factors that, in our opinion, are relevant to assessing a lawyer's qualifications.
"For some lawyers, the only information we have been able to collect is the publicly available information from state bar associations or other organizations that license lawyers. If that is all we have, then we display an Avvo Rating for the lawyer of either 'Attention' or 'No Concern.' We display the 'Attention' rating if there is information in the licensing records that, in our opinion, you should pay attention to, such as a disciplinary action against a lawyer without offsetting positive information. Otherwise, we display the 'No Concern' rating."

So, how useful is Avvo? I tried popping in the names of a few Michigan attorneys, selected by the highly scientific method of flipping the pages of the Michigan Bar Directory with my eyes closed, stopping and pointing my finger.

I used the "Lawyer Name" search tab on Avvo's home page. There are fields for first and last name, plus a city, state or zip code field. In each case, I used first name and middle initial, if any, last name and "Michigan."

The results were erratic.

For instance, searching for Douglas J. Donaldson, of the Donaldson & Bieganowski firm, produced this from Avvo: "We did not find any lawyers named Douglas J. Donaldson. To help you, we have expanded your search to include lawyers with the last name Donaldson." But, curiously, under this "no find" advisory, his profile was listed nonetheless, with a "No concern" rating. Clicking his profile revealed this information: "23 years since Douglas J. Donaldson was first licensed to practice law in MI," no disciplinary actions, practice areas unknown.

Searching for Stacie R. Behler, listed in the bar directory as "Vice President Public Affairs Meijer Stores," produced the same "no find" advisory. But, like Donaldson, Behler's profile was listed below the advisory. Here's her information: "13 years since Stacie R. Behler was first licensed to practice law in MI," no disciplinary actions, practice areas unknown.

A search for Robert C. Ketola, Robert P. Ketola & Associates, did not produce a "no find" advisory (as should have Donaldson's and Behler's). Clicking Ketola's profile lets you know: "11 years since Robert C. Ketola was first licensed to practice law in MI," no disciplinary actions, practice areas unknown.

Hmmm.

None of the lawyers I searched had a numeric Avvo rating. In fact, it was not that easy to find a lawyer that had a numeric Avvo rating. I searched for every lawyer with the last name "Smith" in Michigan. Avvo returned 276 listings, and by my count, roughly ten percent had a numeric rating.

Hmmm. Hmmm.

Then, just for grins, I tried each of the Michigan Supreme Court justices. A search for Chief Justice Clifford W. Taylor produced the now-familiar "We did not find any lawyers named ..." But there was a profile listing for him. There were "no find" advisories but profile listings for Justices Elizabeth Weaver, Robert P. Young and Stephen J. Markman.
A listing appeared for Justice Michael F. Cavanagh. A search for Justice Marilyn Kelly took me straight to two lawyers named Mary Kelly but did not advise me there was no listing for Marilyn Kelly.

Hmmm. Hmmm. Hmmm.

Justice Maura D. Corrigan's search produced the most curious result. Avvo advised that "Hon. Maura D. Corrigan has not claimed this profile so information may not be current. Here are similar lawyers that may interest you. These lawyers have claimed profiles and provided up-to-date information." The "similar lawyers" (only one was listed) was Shalini Nangia, a Livonia attorney with 7.4/10 rating. I searched both Corrigan's and Nangia's Avvo profiles in vain for something that would justify Avvo's "similar lawyers" linkage.

Hmmm. Hmmm. Hmmm. Hmmm.

Looks like the Avvo folks have a little work to do.

Today is 'Cliche Awards Day'

Let the ceremony begin!

The "Locking The Barn Door After The Horse Is Gone" trophy is awarded to Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick for his new policy directive, released yesterday, which decreed that the text messages and other communications on telephone, text devices and pagers issued to city employees are private.

An attractive "Wouldn't Touch It With A 10-Foot Pole" certificate is presented to the many county prosecutors who have declined the invitation of Kim Warren Eddie of the State Prosecuting Attorneys Coordinating Council to investigate allegations that the head of the Wayne County prosecutor's drug unit lied to jurors and allowed two cops to lie as well to obtain a conviction in a cocaine case. The situation is "complicated," says Eddie.

The "Comforts Of Indoor Plumbing" plaque goes to the 42-2 District Court in New Baltimore, which will open for business Monday in a new, $7.5 million courthouse, complete with its own restroom facilities. The old building didn't have any.

The "Mind Your Own Business" medallion is being presented by the state House of Representatives to Michigan employers who seek to control their employees' legal, off-premises activities. A package of bills has cleared the lower chamber that would prevent, among other things, employers from firing or refusing to hire smokers, skydivers and motorcycle racers.

The "Fear And Loathing" award is bestowed upon Republican Party Chairman Saul Anuzis, who is speculating that Kalamazoo-based billionaire Jon Stryker is preparing to spend some significant cash to oust Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Clifford Taylor in November.

And last, but not least, the "Fish Or Cut Bait" loving cup is awarded to Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer, who is talking a mean game against Taylor but, so far, has not revealed his party's MSC candidate.

Leaders in the Law: Almost everyone will be there

By now, you should have seen, and followed, a link to the Leaders in the Law 2008 Honorees on our website.

Next Thursday, April 24, Michigan Lawyers Weekly, and our sister publication, Midwest In-House, will honor and celebrate these 20 in-house counsel from 11 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. at Laurel Manor, 39000 Schoolcraft Rd. in Livonia. They're being recognized for their outstanding professional accomplishments in the legal community and within their company. The honorees were nominated by colleagues, clients and other legal professionals and were selected by a panel of judges from their profession.

We'd like to report that everyone will be there. Inevitably, there were a few scheduling conflicts. And, as it turns out, one of the honorees, James D. Robb, the General Counsel and Associate Dean of Development and Alumni Relations for Thomas M. Cooley Law School, is also a cast member of A (Habeas) Chorus Line. Robb and the rest of the troupe have an engagement at another event that - ah-hem - is running at the same time as ours.

The show must go on - both of them.

We're pretty sure our food will be better.

We still have a few tickets left. Call 800-678-5297 for more information.

Let's make a deal: White, Murphy nominated to federal bench

In a deal designed to break an 11-year impasse of federal bench appointments involving Michigan nominees, President Bush has nominated Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Helene White to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

White was originally nominated by President Clinton in January 1997, but then-Senator Spencer Abraham (R-Mich) bottled things up and a confirmation hearing never took place before President Bush was first elected in 2000. Bush refused to re-nominate White.

Abraham lost his 2000 re-election bid to Democrat Debbie Stabenow. Long-serving Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich), and the newly elected Stabenow, put up a steady barrage of opposition to Bush's federal judicial picks from Michigan, including the 2006 nominations of Detroit U.S. Attorney Stephen J. Murphy (pictured right) and Troy attorney Raymond Kethledge (pictured left) to the Sixth Circuit.

The bottleneck was cleared yesterday when Bush agreed to withdraw Murphy's Sixth Circuit nomination and nominate White to the federal appeals bench instead. Murphy was then nominated for a seat on the Eastern District of Michigan's bench. To sweeten the deal, there is an apparent agreement to confirm Kethledge's Sixth Circuit nomination.

The Associated Press, The Detroit Free Press and The Detroit News have more details.

MSC Historical Society marks 20th anniversary

Get a rich slice of Michigan Supreme Court history at the Annual Membership Luncheon of the Michigan Supreme Court Historical Society on Thursday, April 24, 2008, at the Detroit Athletic Club.

Things get underway with an 11:30 a.m. reception. There's entertainment by A (Habeas) Chorus Line, and the presentation of the society's Legal History Award to Professor John W. Reed.

If you're interested in Michigan's legal history, you're invited. Tickets are $35. For more information and reservations, contact Angela Bergman, the society's executive director, at (517) 373-7589.

Not exactly what Kilpatrick is looking for

Ralph Sherman is a clever mischief maker.

When the St. Clair Shores resident heard that embattled Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick was starting a legal defense fund and intended to call it the "Detroit Justice Fund," Sherman filed the appropriate papers with the state, paid a $20 registration fee and grabbed the name for himself.

He's already received two donations intended for the mayor: one for $100,000 in play money, and another containing a Chuck E. Cheese coupon and a suggestion that Kilpatrick's mother, U.S. Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, take her son out for a meal.

The Detroit Free Press has the story.

Excuse me, pal, there's a little something missing

"This is a particularly remarkable omission given the name of the tort."

6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Boyce F. Martin, Jr., observing in Heavrin v. Schilling. (In re: Triple S Restaurants, Inc.), that an attorney's complaint against a bankruptcy trustee for outrage and intentional infliction of emotional distress did not allege "emotional distress of any kind, much less of a severe nature."

The parties have been jousting in court for years. In this instance, the attorney claimed the trustee was trying to strong-arm a settlement concerning insurance proceeds by threatening him with a federal criminal prosecution.

Judge Martin said the bankruptcy court did the right thing by booting the complaint and sanctioning the attorney.

Law firm's ice sculpture destroyed

Traverse City artist Steven Berkshire spent a lot of time creating nice-looking ice sculpture, which was commissioned by the local law office of Grand Rapids-based Smith, Haughey, Rice & Rogge.

Meant to be enjoyed by the Traverse City community, the artwork was installed last Friday in front of the firm's downtown office. It was supposed to last as long as there was freezing weather, but by Sunday afternoon, thanks to a thoughtless vandal, it was turned into a forlorn pile of chunks.

The Traverse City Record-Eagle quotes firm partner Robert Tubbs as saying, "[W]e tried to do something nice for the holidays ... obviously it was disappointing someone decided to do that."

A cold-hearted someone, at that.

Michigan Lawyers Weekly names Up & Coming Lawyers

Congratulations to Michigan Lawyers Weekly's 2007 Class of Up & Coming Lawyers!

• Rachel Bissett: Fresh out of law school, this attorney helped Gordie Howe, "Mr. Hockey," resolve a civil stalking suit against his neighbors.
  
  
• Marla A. Linderman: If there's a wrong, no obstacle can stop this crusading young lawyer from making it right.
  
  
• Rolf E. Lowe: This Royal Oak attorney is bridging the gap between health care and labor law, forging a path in a newly emerging practice area.
  
  
• Mark C. Rossman: The challenge of complex litigation plus total client dedication equals a winning combination for this partner of a Troy firm.
  
  
• Michael J. Willis and Shaun P. Willis: Steadfast faith in Jesus Christ is the heart of the young brothers' livelihood - a growing business law practice, loving families and the need to give back.
  

Read their profiles in the Nov. 19 issue.

Time to target lawmakers' hunting break

There's a lot of important work that won't be accomplished in Lansing for the next couple of weeks.

And you can thank the Legislature's annual November hunting/Thanksgiving break for that.

As Laura Berman so puckishly points out in her Detroit News column, the break doesn't have very much to do with legislators heading for the woods and bringing home the venison. Very few have even acquired a hunting license. Some of the non-hunters justify the break as an opportunity for some grassroots work with constituents, or to spend time with families.

Well and good, but this year in particular, the lawmakers' extended break from sessions in the Capitol should give us all plenty to be steamed about.

Unfinished business on an important business tax remains unfinished.

There will be no work on a legislative remedy for the much-battered Jan. 15 primary election. The battle instead moves to the Michigan Court of Appeals in the wake of an Ingham County Circuit Court ruling that declared the primary law unconstitutional in its current form.

The Kreiner fix bill will continue to bob around in the backwaters of the Senate Judiciary Committee. A measure to repeal Michigan's drug immunity law will languish on the Republican side of the aisle.

Some would say these two measures would continue to be ignored even if the lawmakers were actually earning their keep between now and the end of the month. Those who say this would be right. Those who say it's high time to get going on this legislation would be especially right.

In the meantime, a citizens' group is planning organizational meetings in Clarkston this week to push for a petition drive to make official what seems to be the current state of affairs - a part-time Legislature. They need 300,000 signatures to put a proposal on the November 2008 ballot. Plans call for a 90-day limit on session days, dropping the number of lawmakers from 148 to 100, no life-time health benefits, frozen salaries and an extension of term limits for some elected officials.

Throw in a ban on the hunting break and I'll be the first to sign.

A Pakistani strongman thumps the legal system: a courageous response

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
- Dick the Butcher
Henry VI, Part II, Act IV, scene ii

A laugh line with which Shakespeare shares with his audience his supposed contempt for attorneys?

The Bard's recognition that the path to tyranny is best paved with rubble from a wrecked legal system?

There's room for debate about Shakespeare's motivation for penning this line for a script written over 400 years ago.

But it's beyond debate that when you have the raw power to muscle aside judges and lawyers, you have the stage to yourself and the only script that need be followed is the one you write.

That's how it's being played out in Pakistan, where President Pervez Musharraf declared a state of emergency a week ago to "curb extremism." This included placing the country's Supreme Court chief justice under what amounts to house arrest. Critics say this was done to thwart a ruling on the legality of Musharraf's re-election last month while he was (and still is) the chief of the Pakistani Army.

Hundreds of normally staid Pakistani lawyers took to the streets. Police beat them, gassed them into submission and hauled them away.

A half a world away in the United States, attitudes about the legal system are frequently shaped by a "whose-ox-is-being-gored" mentality. Whether lawyers are loved or loathed is often dependent on the result produced, and for whom.

But what if everyone's oxen are being gored by a government strongman?

And a nation's lawyers risk life and limb to tell him he's wrong.

Their courageous stand for the rule of law commands respect and admiration.

Update 11/13/07: State Bar of Michigan President Ron Keefe has issued a statement supporting Pakistani lawyers who have protested against the shutdown of that nation's legal system.

Shocking evidence: Oakland County program helps jurors with trial trauma

Television police dramas routinely feature gruesome crime scenes and postmortems performed in the clinical hush of the autopsy lab.

The small-screen version of violent crime and its gory aftermath is portrayed with a graphic frankness that most of us absorb without blinking. We remind ourselves that it's just actors playing corpses, assisted by skilled makeup artists and remarkably realistic special effects. We sometimes wish they weren't quite so good at their craft.

But the storyline and the actors playing the detectives, scientists and suspects are intriguing. We get frequent breaks to focus on other things, like the newest cars, fashions and personal care products, or to make two-minute runs to the bathroom and the fridge.

All of this helps us overcome our natural aversion to blood and gore and to instead accept it as entertainment. And if we can't handle it, there's always something else to watch.

In the harsh reality of a criminal courtroom, however, the blood and gore are not illusions. The crime-scene and autopsy photos are real. The testimony is real. The dead, the survivors and the horrific details, are real.

And the everyday citizens drafted to be jurors can't change the channel.

In Oakland County this week, reports the Detroit Free Press, a jury will hear a case in which the defendant is accused of shooting his ex-girlfriend in the head while she was sleeping with their baby. He then allegedly returned to scene, soaked the bed with gasoline where the dead woman and the still-alive child lay and set it on fire, killing the child.

Jurors in that case, however, will have the benefit of Oakland County's Juror Debriefing Program. Run by the Common Ground Sanctuary in Royal Oak, trained counselors will be available to help jurors who want help coping with the stress and trauma of dealing with disturbing evidence.

For years, Common Ground has provided assistance to individuals and families in crisis. Program coordinator Margo Eby, writes the Free Press's L.L. Braiser, felt that "[h]elping jurors seemed like the next logical step."

Juror debriefing programs are becoming a national trend as more and more jurors report stress and trauma associated with hearing emotionally grinding cases. The National Center for State Courts has been researching the problem and has a reading list available.

Voter photo ID law gets first test next Tuesday

Michigan's not-so-new law requiring voters to show photo identification gets its first test this Tuesday, Nov. 6, in local elections around the state.

The long, conflicting road to a photo ID law The law was one of several 1996 amendments to the Michigan Election Law. Before the law took effect, then-Attorney General Frank Kelly issued an opinion, in which he said the photo ID requirement violated the Equal Protection Clause. The law lay dormant for eight years. In 2005, it was revived, unchanged, by other election law amendments, effective Jan. 1, 2007. With Frank Kelly's opinion lurking in the background, the House asked the Michigan Supreme Court to answer this question in an advisory opinion: "Do the photo identification requirements contained in 2005 PA 71 violate either the Michigan Constitution or the United States Constitution?" In an order issued in April 2006, on a 5-2 vote, the question the court chose to answer was, "Do the photo identification requirements of Section 523 of 2005 PA 71, MCL 168.523, on their face, violate either the Michigan Constitution or the United States Constitution?" Justice Marilyn Kelly dissented for two reasons. First, the House framed the question too broadly. Second, the question the majority agreed to answer was not the question asked. Justice Michael Cavanagh also dissented. The court issued a 5-2 opinion, which held "that the photo identification requirement contained in the statute is facially constitutional under the balancing test articulated by the United States Supreme Court in Burdick v Takushi." Information from "Michigan's Photo ID Requirement for Voters"

If you don't have such ID, or you do and you left it at home, you can still get a ballot but you must sign an affidavit to that effect.

There's a stiff penalty for lying about the status of your ID, or the lack of one: you could be convicted of perjury, pay a fine of up to $1,000 or spend up to five years in prison, or both.

They're not fooling around.

What's acceptable photo ID? The Secretary of State's office has provided a helpful list.

There's been much speculation about what effect the law will have on voter participation and whether it prevent the evil it was designed to cure - election fraud.

Here's the take of Suzanne Lowe, Michigan Senate Bill Analysis Coordinator, in her article, "Michigan's Photo ID Requirement for Voters." It's in the latest issue of "State Notes: Topics of Legislative Interest."

According to the Secretary of State's office, approximately 370,000 registered voters in Michigan (or about 5.0 percent of all registered voters in the State) do not have either a driver license or an official State identification card. There are no data on the number of voters who also do not have any of the other types of photo ID that the Secretary of State considers acceptable. Of the voters who do have photo ID, there is no way of knowing how many will not bring it to the polls because they forget to or do not know about the law's requirement. It also is not possible to predict how many voters who do not have photo ID, or have it but do not bring it to the polls, will be unable to sign an affidavit because they cannot read or understand the document, or will be unwilling to sign one because they feel intimidated or embarrassed or simply do not want to take the time.

Whether the photo ID requirement actually represents a "barrier to the ballot box," as critics contend, may be known only after the requirement is implemented, and perhaps only after it is enforced during the November 2008 general election. Whether the requirement serves to prevent voter fraud may never be know. Although there have been convictions in Michigan for illegal activity during voter registration drives, there does not appear to be any evidence of the type of in-person polling place voter impersonation that the photo ID requirement might deter. As some contend, this may be because of the difficulty of detecting such activity and catching the offenders. On the other hand, to the extent that such fraud does occur, it is questionable whether the penalty for signing a false affidavit will deter someone who is willing to commit a felony by voting under a false name or impersonating another elector.

Ohio Supreme Court pans Fieger client's $30M verdict

It was the Ohio Supreme Court's turn last week to do what Michigan appellate courts have done several times over the past few years - wipe out a multi-million dollar verdict for one of Geoffrey Fieger's clients.

This time, it was a $30 million jury award for a 20-year-old man who was born with a damaged brain and other serious problems.

The reason the OSC brought the curtain down on the verdict? In part, it was Fieger's "theatrics" in the courtroom.

Now, the trial judge wasn't exactly blame-free either. As recounted by the OSC, the trial judge let Fieger's expert testify, over defense counsel's objection, about medical-care costs far in excess of the figure the expert provided in a written report. And then there was the judge's in-the-hallway off-the-record instruction to jurors, some of whom admitted they saw a newspaper article about the trial. The judge's on-the-spot attempt to unring the bell: he told the jury to disregard what they had read.

When the defense team demanded a new trial, the judge readily agreed. The OSC noted the trial judge's acknowledgement that his miscue with the expert allowed the jury to think about, and award, $15 million in economic damages. And the newspaper article? The judge said he had read it, too, and he could easily see how some of the jurors may have been itching to give Fieger's client a record-breaking award.

Another big influence on the jury, the trial court and the OSC agreed, was the man from Oakland County, Michigan and the way he conducted himself in court.

Some Michigan judges have seen it, said it before Michigan's appellate courts, on occasion, have been extremely critical of Geoffrey Fieger's trial tactics, and have taken him to task for many of the same things discussed in the Ohio courts' opinions. See, Powell v. St. John Hosp., Badalamenti v. William Beaumont Hosp., and Gilbert v. DaimlerChrysler.

The OSC echoed the trial judge's observations that: Fieger was discourteous; there were plenty of theatrics; he interrupted defense counsel; he put his own words into the witnesses' mouths; he mischaracterized evidence to mislead the jury and he brought the forbidden issue of attorney fees into play.

In closing argument, the OSC said, Fieger dwelled on a spoliation-of-evidence claim, even though the trial judge had earlier thrown it out. And he cast the case as an epic struggle between a poor black guy and rich, powerful corporate interests.

In the end, the OSC said the jury did pretty much what Fieger asked: it looked at its $15 million economic damages award on the verdict form and wrote another $15 million in the space for punitive damages.

After the trial judge entered the order for a new trial, the plaintiff's team moved to disqualify him. Apparently, the trial judge had had enough and voluntarily recused himself from further proceedings.

Up in the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, the majority and dissenting opinions reveal that none of the judges were concerned about the trial judge's extracurricular handling of the newspaper article. The majority said Fieger hadn't objected and defense counsel apparently had a private chat with the trial judge about the article. They weren't about to reward a claimed error that defense counsel instigated.

The majority characterized Fieger's performance as zealous representation. "While we agree that plaintiff's attorney does not appear in the transcript to be the most likeable person, we do not find that his conduct rises to the level to justify the granting of a new trial." In contrast, the dissenting judge spent 27 pages detailing what she called Fieger's "manipulative trial technique" and "the extent of his outrageous melodrama" in his closing argument, which, she said, was enough by itself to warrant a new trial.

The majority said the defense team was not contesting liability on appeal, only the super-sized verdict. Because there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's liability finding, there was no need for a new trial. The majority conceded that there were problems with the expert testimony on damages. Remittitur would be the correct remedy. And, "the trial court is in the best position to determine whether a damages award is excessive."

The OSC said the appeals court was looking at the wrong thing. It's not about whether there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict. It's all about the trial court being in the best position to determine whether the jury's verdict "was excessive and given under the influence of passion or prejudice" and whether counsel's misconduct "tainted the verdict." The OSC ruled that if there's competent, credible evidence to answer "yes" to these inquiries, as there was in this case, the trial court does not abuse its discretion by ordering a new trial, and that decision "should remain undisturbed."

A dissenting justice sided with the lower appeals court majority on the issue of remittitur.

He also had this to say:

To order a retrial because of the obnoxious behavior of an attorney does our system of justice no favors - such behavior must be dealt with as it occurs, not after a judge decides that a party may have benefited from it.

The verdict should be knocked down to $10 million, the dissenter said. That's a lot closer to the evidence of economic damages.

And he closed with this zinger:

Should the plaintiff refuse the remittitur, he would be entitled to a new trial. Before that trial, it would be wise for the trial judge to deny any motion for admission pro hac vice filed on behalf of Mr. Fieger.

The case is Harris v. Mt. Sinai Medical Center.

Attorneys barred from this bar: tavern owners say 'No Lawyers'

So, you want a back-yard swimming pool to come home to after a hot, busy day of running a tavern but your neighbor, an attorney, spoils your fun with a lawsuit.

One year and $10,000 later, you've got your pool. Now you want revenge.

You decide you'll use your business to let the whole world know just how you feel about meddlesome members of the legal profession.

The result is Butch and Jody Morrison's Crescent "No Lawyers" Bar & Grill in Boise, Idaho.

"They can't be serious," I thought, but an on-line search gave me some doubts. "No lawyers, no kids, no kiddin'," popped up on one result. "If you practice law ... keep your mouth shut," another warned.

Okay, I had to know more. I called the Crescent and said, "Hi! I'm an attorney and I write for a legal newspaper in Michigan. I have a few questions. Is someone there who could me help out?"

As I sat on hold, I began to think that maybe I hadn't said the right thing.

Pollsters say lawyers and reporters are among the most despised people on the planet. Two strikes against me. I took little comfort while scanning the Crescent's Lawyer Jokes page and ran across this one:

A group of headhunters sets up a small stand near a well-traveled road. The bill of fare is as follows:
Sauteed Tourist $10
Braised Reporter $12
Fried Diplomat $15
Barbecued Lawyer $110
A customer, noticing the great price differential, asked why lawyers cost so much.
The headhunter replied, "If you had ever tried to clean one of those devils, you would understand."

I checked the Crescent's bill of fare, entitled "Legal Brief." Appetizers included a "So-Su-Me Platter" and "Prosecution Prawns." Other choices: "Witness Stand Soups & Salads," "Jailhouse Sandwiches," "Law Firm Specials" and "Courthouse Burgers." There were only a couple of suspicious items. "Lawyer Limbs" are the Crescent's version of chicken wings with hot sauce. And there are "Lawyer Fries," but you'll need to look at the menu yourself for the lowdown on that one.

A bit more browsing on the website started to produce other evidence (an on-line store and a light-hearted history of the Crescent) that this whole "No Lawyers" thing might just be a big tongue-in-cheek joke. That's when the phone line clicked back to life.

The person on the other end apologized for the wait, explained I had called during the lunch hour rush and someone could be available later. A faux pas on my part, I insisted. I forgot about the two-hour time difference between Michigan and Idaho.

But I had to ask the pay-off question.

"So what happens if you actually find out someone is an attorney?"

"We charge 'em a lawyers fee," she deadpanned.

Shaperio Bankruptcy Symposium: all about Chapter 13

There's still time to register for the 3rd Annual Walter Shaperio Bankruptcy Symposium at the Westin Hotel in Southfield this Wednesday, Oct. 17.

Professor Scott Norberg, from the Florida International University College of Law, is all set to tell bankruptcy practitioners about "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: What does Chapter 13 accomplish for debtors and creditors?"

Things get underway at 6 p.m. Chief Judge Steven Rhodes of the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan would love to see you there.

Here's a registration form with all the details.

For more information, call Leslie Berg at (313) 226-7950 or David Lerner at (248) 901-4010.

It's not legit: jury duty calls are scam

You're fairly certain that you haven't received a jury duty summons, but the person on the phone, who claims to be a court official, says that you have, you didn't show up and now the judge is angry enough to issue an arrest warrant.

This can all be cleared up, the caller continues, if you'll just provide your date of birth, your Social Security number and some credit card information.

Hang up! Call the cops and the court the caller claimed to represent, warns State Court Administrator Carl Gromek, pictured on the left.

It's a scam.

The only way Michigan state courts contact prospective jurors is by mail, Gromek said. "Be aware: prospective jurors can call courts, but courts don't initiate those calls. And courts never call prospective jurors to get their financial information."

The Niles Daily Star reports that this scam is currently being run in Berrien County, in the southwest part of the state.

Gromek has these pointers to avoid have your pocket electronically picked:

• Courts do not contact citizens by phone regarding jury duty. Be suspicious if a person calls claiming to be a court official or staff person.
  
• Be skeptical if you are told, "In order to avoid prosecution for missing jury duty, you must provide your social security number now so we can verify your information."
  
• Be suspicious if the person pressures you for immediate action or refuses to send written information for you to review.
  
• Never give out your bank, credit card, or social security information over the phone to someone who calls you.
  
• If you are uncomfortable, hang up, even if the caller threatens prosecution.
  
• Report suspicious calls to local police.
  

We're pretty sure it won't be boring

Dictionary publishers looking to illustrate the word "outspoken" could do no better than by printing the photograph on the right.

That's not-so-instantly-recognizable attorney Geoff Fieger, the hands-down favorite for the title of "Michigan's Most Controversial Attorney Ever," behind the yellow tape. The image is part of "Fieger: Inside Out," a collection of work being displayed by artist Holly Flory at The Print Gallery & Everything Art in Southfield through Nov. 1.

The gallery is located near 12 Mile Rd. and Northwestern Highway. Call 248-356-5454 for more information.

Another form of bankruptcy

They pile up.

More and more keep coming every day.

You know you need to deal with them.

"But what I really need," you think to yourself, "is a fresh start."

We're not talking about a big stack of bills. We're talking about all of that stuff in your e-mail in-box.

We're talking about declaring "e-mail bankruptcy."

Michelle Kessler, in a USA Today article, says that some "prominent techies" are dealing with jam-packed in-boxes "by declaring 'e-mail bankruptcy' - deleting or archiving an entire in-box and starting over."

One guy wiped out a three-year backlog that way.

Drastic stuff, but sometimes desperate situations call for desperate measures.

Kessler writes that Intel, the giant chipmaker, is taking a more measured approach to email overload by declaring "Zero E-mail Fridays." Intel's engineers are being encouraged to pick up the phone instead, or even meet face-to-face with colleagues.

But if a zero e-mail day (or even two) each week doesn't solve your overload problem, the nuclear option of total e-mail bankruptcy may be the answer.

Unless, of course, you're getting this blog fed to you via e-mail. There is such a thing as being overzealous.

We'd prefer that you think of us as an exempt asset, instead.