DC Dicta has moved – change your bookmarks!

DC Dicta has moved. Please visit us at:

http://lawyersusaonline.com/dcdicta

Change your bookmarks – DC Dicta is moving at noon today!

DC Dicta will move to its new home today at noon, EDT: www.LawyersUSAOnline.com/DCDicta. You’ll be able to find all the archives there as well as all new posts. This site will no longer be updated.

The move comes as Lawyers USA unveils it’s new, revamped website, also at noon.

Also, be sure to check out our new blog focused on news and tidbits from state and federal courts across the nation: Benchmarks, at www.LawyersUSAOnline.com/Benchmarks.

New LUSA site, DC Dicta moves, Benchmarks debuts, and we Tweet!

Big news!

New Lawyers USA website drops tomorrow! Lawyers USA is launching a new and improved website tomorrow April 14, bringing you easier access to more information. The new site will keep you up to the minute on all the latest legal news from around the country, bring you insightful features, and tips to help you run your law practice better. The new, more user-friendly site will also feature podcasts and allow you to keep on top of the news with RSS feeds and breaking news alerts. The address will stay the same – www.LawyersUSAOnline.com – so be sure to check it out!

DC Dicta is Moving! Along with the changes, DC Dicta will get a new URL: www.LawyersUSAOnline.com/DCDicta. Starting tomorrow that is where you will find the latest posts as well as all DC Dicta’s archives going all the way back to its 2007 debut. Be sure you change your bookmarks.

Benchmarks Debuts! Tomorrow Lawyers USA will also launch its latest blog: Benchmarks. Lawyers USA’s legal editor and Benchmarks blogger Pat Murphy will give you the lowdown on recent state and federal court opinions, from the blockbuster rulings to the quirkiest cases. You can find it tomorrow at www.LawyersUSAOnline.com/Benchmarks.

And we Tweet too! Also, Lawyers USA is all atwitter. That’s right, you can follow up on Twitter – and you don’t even have to wait until tomorrow! Do it now: twitter.com/LawyersUSA.

Will the case of the missing pants be taken to the Supremes?

A former administrative law judge who wanted to sue the pants off a local dry cleaners for allegedly losing his trousers has lost an appeal in the case.

Today the D.C. Court of Appeals rejected a bid by Roy L. Pearson Jr. to revive a $54 million lawsuit he filed, claiming that the cleaners breached their “satisfaction guaranteed” promise when his suit pants went missing.

A three-judge panel of the court rejected Pearson’s request for a new trial. Now his only options are to ask for an en banc review by the entire court, or file a petition for certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court. Neither would be all that surprising, given Pearson’s tenacity thus far.

Friend of the Court, Scalia hunting mate

Here’s one straight from the you-can’t-make-this-up file: Justice Antonin Scalia went hunting this weekend with a prominent plaintiffs’ attorney. What’s more, that lawyer just happens to be the author of an amicus brief in the pending case Wyeth v. Levine urging the Court to rule that state court tort claims over FDA-approved drugs are not preempted by federal law.

This little revelation came from the Tex Parte Blog of Texas Lawyer. (HT: Law Blog). Scalia, who was in Texas for a lecture series at Texas Tech University School of Law, joined W. Mark Lanier, who sponsored the lecture, for a little deer hunting. “He’s a big hunter,” Lanier says of Scalia on the blog.  “He’s using this weekend to see if everything is bigger in Texas.”

Ledbetter calls on Dems to pass equal pay act

Lilly Ledbetter, the plaintiff who claimed 19 years of unequal pay based on her gender and won a jury award which was later thrown out by the Supreme Court as time-barred, took the podium at the Democratic National Convention to urge Democrats to make legislation restarting the limitations clock with every unequal paycheck a reality.

In her speech, she blasted the Court’s decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., handed down in the Spring of 2007. “They said I should have filed my complaint within six months of Goodyear’s first decision to pay me less, even though I didn’t know that’s what they were doing,” she said.

“In dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote that the ruling made no sense in the real world. She was right,” Ledbetter continued, decrying the failure of the Ledbetter Equal Pay Act in Congress. “The House of Representatives passed a bill that would make sure what was done to me couldn’t happen again. But when it got to the Senate, enough Republicans opposed it to prevent a vote.”

Ledbetter said presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama “has promised to appoint [Supreme Court] justices who will enforce laws that protect everyday people like me,” she said. “But this isn’t a Democratic or a Republican issue. It’s a fairness issue. And fortunately, there are some Republicans-and a lot of Democrats-who are on our side.”

Friday morning docket: Pre-Memorial Day edition

The justices of the Supreme Court met yesterday in conference, so new decisions and orders are on coming – but not until after the Memorial Day weekend. Congress is technically in session today but no meetings or hearings are scheduled. Sen. Edward Kennedy is relaxing and in good spirits on Cape Cod, which everyone sees as a good thing. And Americans are honoring the nation’s fallen soldiers at Washington’s World War II Memorial (pictured) and in other locations this long weekend. (Photo by Rick Latoff)

Meanwhile,

The House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed former White House adviser Karl Rove as part of its inquiry into the Bush administration’s alleged politically meddling in the Justice Department – allegations that rocked the Department over the last year and led to the resignation of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. (AP)

Meanwhile, the DOJ has a new Criminal Division chief. (BLT)

Congress held a hearing yesterday about the difficulties legal aid practitioners face in providing justice to low-income Americans. It was attended by one lawmaker, and two witnessed testified. (Talk Radio News Service)

So far this term, with 35 cases decided with full opinions, there has been only a single 5-to-4 decision handed down by the Supreme Court. The Times’ Linda Greenhouse explores why. (NYT)

President George W. Bush signed legislation this week designed to protect workers from losing their jobs or being denied health insurance based on DNA testing results that reveal their susceptibility to certain health conditions – and he praised Sen. Kennedy for his work in getting the law passed. (Lawyers USA)

This week a bipartisan majority of the Senate Banking Committee advanced a housing rescue plan earlier this week that would provide federally-backed loans to up to 500,000 struggling homeowners – funded by two of the country’s largest mortgage lenders (Lawyers USA)

For non-profit groups, when the tax man cometh next year, he’s going to want a lot more information about the organizations’ inner workings. (Lawyers USA)

Friday morning docket: Scalia speaks!

With oral arguments behind them, it’s crunch time for the justices of the Supreme Court, who still have many cases to decide before the term ends. They meet in conference today. And DC Dicta was remiss not to mention Justice John Paul Stevens’s birthday in last week’s docket. Stevens turned the spry young age of 88 last weekend. Only Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes graced the bench at an older age – he served until he was 90.

Meanwhile:

Are you still sore about the Supreme Court’s role in the 2000 presidential election? Justice Antonin Scalia has a message for you: “Get over it. It’s so old by now.” You can see his full “60 Minutes” interview with Lesley Stahl this Sunday, but here’s a preview:

The very last oral argument case this term involved the question of what happens in an age discrimination claim when the evidence offered by the employer and employee results in a tie for the factfinder. Well, it looks like the recusal of Justice Stephen Breyer could mean the Court itself could end up in a tie. (ABA Journal)

An invitation to Justice Clarence Thomas to speak at the commencement ceremony at the University of Georgia has sparked controversy. Some students and faculty called the invitation inappropriate given recent problems with claims of sexual harassment as the school. But the school’s president stands by his choice and the Atlanta Journal Constitution agrees. (U.S. News; AJC)

President Bush is less than thrilled with Democratic lawmakers’ housing relief plans. (AP)

The government’s plan to crack down on illegal workers could cost employers more than $1 billion a year and legal workers billions in lost wages, a study commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says. (AP)

Attorney Scalia, for the defense

Los Angeles attorney Marilyn Burkhardt seemed to have a tough task this morning: convincing the justices of the Supreme Court that a defendant in a murder trial should be able to exclude the testimony of the victim because she is unavailable for cross examination, so long as he didn’t kill her for the purpose of making her unavailable for trial.

But she had a valuable asset during oral arguments in Giles v. California: Justice Antonin Scalia, who jumped to her aid several times – even answering questions posed by the other justices for Burkhardt.

At one point Justice Anthony Kennedy was trying to determine what prosecution sought to prove by introducing the victim statements at issue – statements that the she had been choked, munched and threatened by the defendant.

“[It seems] to me that this is responsive to his defense” of self defense, Kennedy said. “And you say: ‘well, it’s his state of mind, and her testimony was general.’ I think it does go to his state of mind.”

Before Burkhardt could respond, Scalia did.

“I’m not following you,” Scalia said. “Is there — is there an exception to the hearsay rule so long as the hearsay is brought in, in rebuttal? Is there a rebuttal exception to the hearsay rule?”

Later, when Justice Stephen Breyer was in the middle of posing of a detailed hypothetical, Scalia chimed in again, poking fun of Breyer’s previous position of Harvard Law School professor.

“He is thinking about Cambridge – and not England,” Scalia quipped, drawing laughter before Breyer continued with his question.

Breyer ended his hypothetical by asking Burkhardt: “So now are we supposed to incorporate all of these things into the Confrontation Clause?”

“Do any of them have anything to do with the Confrontation Clause?” Scalia answered back, leaving Burkhardt to answer simply: “No.”

[Much more after the jump]

Tax day at the Supreme Court

The fact that today is April 15 was not lost on the U.S. Supreme Court this morning.

“Remarkably enough, we have two tax cases to announce today,” said Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr. at the beginning of today’s session, drawing laughs from the audience.

In the first case, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, a unanimous Court threw out a state court ruling that allowed Illinois to tax a portion of Ohio-based MeadWestvaco Corp.’s capital gains from the 1994 sale of Lexis/Nexis. More on that case, MeadWestvaco v. Illinois Department of Revenue, No. 06-1413, here from CNNMoney.

In another case, penned by Roberts, the Court limited to three years the time frame that coal mining units of TECO Energy Inc. can get tax refunds in their dispute with the federal government over coal export tax payments. More here from the Wall Street Journal on U.S. v. Clintwood Elkhorn Mining Co., No. 07-308