#1) Over?!  Was it over when the lawyers bombed Pearl Harbor?                     Jeannemarie Devolites Davis

In the fall of 2007, State Senator Jeannemarie Devolites Davis was facing a tough opponent in her re-election campaign against Chap Petersen. Petersen is a, gasp, trial lawyer. In a debate at a middle school in Vienna, Virginia, there was a discussion of the Virginia Tech tragedy, and the ability to access mental health records. Senator Davis made the ludicrous statement that if it weren't for all the trial lawyers and the fear of lawsuits, there would be greater access to mental health records and such tragedies could have been avoided. Huh? Let's visit Chap Petersen's Blog to read about this bizarro response:

There was one interesting exchange that deserves some comment.
The moderator asked us a question about the tragedy at Virginia Tech and how we could improve the ability for schools to obtain their students' mental health records.
I spoke first and discussed the need to treat mental illness as a disease and the importance of full disclosure of this student information as a matter of public safety.  Senator Devolites-Davis went next.  To her, the question was an opportunity to bash trial lawyers, because ..... well, I'm a trial lawyer in Fairfax and many lawyers are supporting me.
According to her, the fear of lawsuits under the Federal law "HIPAA" caused the problem.  Trial lawyers sue people under this law and, therefore, doctors are afraid to share information.  These trial lawyers are "running the show."  And they support Chap. Because of the political activity of trial lawyers, she said, "we see the cost ... we saw a real cost in this."  The meaning of "this" in that sentence was clearly the massacre at Virginia Tech. 
Wow.  First of all, the "HIPAA" law (Health Insurance Portability and Access Act) ensures the confidentiality of medical records, not student records.  The law had no impact on the ability of Virginia Tech to get Cho's student records from Centreville High School. 
Secondly, nobody makes money off HIPAA.  According to the Washington Post, the Bush administration received nearly 20,000 grievances under HIPAA in its first three years.  Not a single one led to a civil fine.  Not one.  Third, the lawyers of this nation have done good things and bad things.  But one thing is sure -- we did not cause the tragedy at Virginia Tech.  Period.
It's one thing to make an inaccurate statement during a debate.  That happens.  It's another thing to blame the tragedy at Virginia Tech (even implicitly) on a profession of people who had no connection with it. 

Senator Davis is now ex-Senator Davis. (I sense  a pattern emerging).

On July 1, 2007, Virginia's Civil Remedial Fees for certain traffic offenses (including reckless driving and DUI) became law.  The law, which applied only to Virginia motorists, was extremely controversial and unpopular and of dubious constitutionality.  The General Assembly has since bid this law hasta la vista in 2008. The law received a great deal of national publicity and catapulted Virginia to a first-place ranking in a study of the most expensive states for speeding tickets in the country.

The first two judges to rule on the issue of the constitutionality of these fees were both in the Richmond area.  First, a judge in Henrico County declared the law unconstitutional and a judge in the City of Richmond followed suit.  Ray McAllister, in writing what was otherwise an accurate column about a legitimate news item, decided for no apparent reason to use his headline and the beginning and end of his article to suggest that lawyers would be making a ton of easy money raising this issue. Here are excerpts from the article:

Wouldn't you love to be a lawyer with the new driver-fees law?

Saturday, Aug 04, 2007

By RAY MCALLISTER

TIMES-DISPATCH COLUMNIST

If there's anyone happy with Virginia's new driver fees, it's got to be the lawyers. We no longer have to worry about them going bankrupt. In the past two days, lawyers already have persuaded judges in Henrico County and Richmond to declare the

fee law unconstitutional. The judges agreed it violates the equal-protection clause of the U.S. and state constitutions because it applies only to Virginia drivers and not to out-of-staters. It's "a no-brainer," the Richmond judge declared yesterday.

Tough work, huh?

McAllister then goes on to describe various reactions and to quote a law professor who correctly predicted that ultimately there would be a split among judges on the issue of the law's constitutionality.

(University of Richmond law professor Carl W.)Tobias said yesterday that he thinks it's likely judges will split on the law.

McAllister finishes with one parting blast-

At least there's one thing we can count on: Lawyers will be just fine.

So who were these lawyers in the Henrico and Richmond cases and just how many millions of dollars did they rake in? The two lawyers for the individual in Henrico County were Craig Cooley and Esther Windmueller, who were court-appointed on the case. I believe Virginia pays court-appointed lawyers the king's ransom of 100 whole dollars for misdemeanor charges- that's 50 smackers apiece for Esther and Craig.  So what did they have to do?  Just to get up to snuff on the issues involved in the case, they had to do extensive research on the brand-new law and file a written motion prior to court.  On the first court date, the client misunderstood when he needed to be in court and the case had to be continued.  On the second court date, the judge asked both sides to file written briefs on the issue.  A third court date was set when the judge ruled that the law is unconstitutional.  But that wasn't the end of it.  The prosecutor appealed the judge's decision.  The case was then sent to Circuit Court for, you guessed it, more written briefs and another day in court. By the way, the Circuit Court judge ruled that the law was constitutional.  That means that the case was sent back to the lower court for a trial!

A conservative estimate is that each lawyer spent at least 50 hours on this case.  That's right McAllister chose to go off on lawyers who were seriously making around $1 dollar an hour. But wait, it gets worse.  The lawyer for the defendant in Richmond was Bart Chucker. Bart handled the case pro se- that means he did it for free.  Similarly, the Richmond prosecutor's office appealed the initial judge's decision, and the Circuit Court judge overturned the decision and ruled that the law was constitutional and sent it back to a lower court for trial.

So yes, Ray, it is tough work, huh! Much tougher than "phoning in" another column that is dead wrong about lawyer's fees. Not surprisingly, there were no Pulitzer prizes for the now retired, ex-columnist, but, Ray, come on down, you're a Joker Bobblehead nominee.

(Adapted from article in www.VirginiaDUILawyerBlog.com. Re-printed with permission of myself)

It has been said that the difference between God and a federal judge is that God doesn't think he is a federal judge! For at least one federal bankruptcy judge, the problem seems to be that he liked to think he is a woman. The man with the black robe also had a "little black dress" tucked away in his closet.

Federal judge Robert Somma resigned after being arrested on drunk driving charges when he rear-ended a pickup truck with his Mercedes Benz February 6 in Newbury, Mass. Neither the judge nor the truck driver sustained injury. Officials believe Somma drove from his home in Boston to New Hampshire since no one knew him in that state.

But that wasn't all she wrote. When officers approached the vehicle, they witnessed "hizzoner" powdering his nose while gussied up in a black cocktail dress, fishnet hose and high heels but holding no gavel. The "chamber maiden" kept officers waiting while he fumbled through his purse, pushing aside the lipstick and mascara to find his official picture - the one without the makeup - on his driver's license.

Authorities would not say if there was a precedent in this case. No state "penal code" forbids a man to wear a dress in New England. You just can't be drunk and ram another vehicle in the process.

Before trying to drive himself home that night, the married Somma danced the night away at the Breezeway Pub, known as New Hampshire's "favorite gay and alternative bar," according to the Manchester Union Leader. The judge accepted a plea deal and was given a 12-month driver's license suspension, which could be reduced to six months upon completion of an alcohol awareness program. He paid $600 in fines and penalties but was allowed to keep his party dress and cosmetic accessories.

Was this "honorable" behavior? Apparently the judge-gone-wild didn't think so.

Appointed to the bench by President Bush in 2004, Somma placed himself on immediate leave. The First District Bankruptcy Court announced he will resign on April Fool's Day, 2008. Perhaps his retirement party will be highlighted with the news that he has won the Joker Bobblehead Award.

#5)      New York Governor Eliot Spitzer