 |
 |
« December 2006 | Main | February 2007 »
Thursday, January 11, 2007 - 19:22:02
Ethics Schmethics
I went to watch oral argument today at the Supreme Court. Court of Appeals Judge Wendell Griffen is suing to force the Judicial Discipline Commission t o have an open hearing. The Supreme Court, which might hold 150, was full, where normally its just a handful of press and the law clerks. The most interesting part to me was that an appeals court judge was representing himself before the Supreme Court. Two of the judstices had to recuse because they had run against Griffen previously. As Judge Griffen said, the facts are not in dispute. He very publicy spoke his mind on several topics including, a judge's freedom of speech rights. For speaking his mind, he has been cited multiple times by the discipline committee. He won his last case because the rules were somewhat vague. They have made the rules more clear and the discipline committee is again after him.The bigger issue is clear, does a judge have a right to speak about any issue he wants to without fear of reprimand or censure? But the issue today was far more technical--and all that was discussed was whether the next hearing has to be open. I enjoyed watching the discipline committee attorney ( who I used to work with) dance around the questions. Over and over he was asked what is the government's interest in keeping the hearing secret? Over and over he dodged the question and tried to make up hypothetical situations where secrecy would be needed. I could see his point but in this case - where the judge wants all the facts to come out, where by law the facts will all be released immediatley after the hearing, and where there are no witnesses needing confidentiality - there is no need for secrecy I agree. The better answer was that the commission could not arbitrarilhy make this hearing public without giving the same right to all judges. Judge Griffen claimed that due process requires a fair haring but also an open hearing. I don't think this is true because there are many secrety type of hearings, juvenile hearings, grand jury hearings, and others. I also didn't agree with h is freedom of information argument - because he was in effect arguing on behalf of the press and public, not for himself. Without a doubt, Judge Griffen is one of this state's most intellectual judges. The point they were arguing was limited but it was far more interesting than most cases, ( such as mine) you will see in the Supreme Court.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 16:09:40
Wendell Griffen Oral Argument Tomorrow
For any of you true legal nerds out there -- if you want to see an interesting case come to the Arkansas Supreme Court ( 625 Marshall behind the Capitol ) tomorrow before 9:00 A.M. and you can catch Judge Wendell Griffen's appeal of his Judicial Discipline case. It will be heavy on first amendment arguments and without a doubt sparks will be flying, although they will be very polite sparks, I have no doubt.
Oral Argument Schedule
| January 11 9:00 am. |
Judge Wendell Griffen v. Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission, an original action
|
06-1392 |
If you want to see a very boring case I have my own Supreme Court oral argument the next week -- but fortunately, I'm the attorney and not the defendant. I'm just glad it wasn't today - I was more than a little hungover after the Governor's Gala.....
Thursday, January 04, 2007 - 15:10:37
Crazy Lawsuit of the Week
Crazy Lawsuit of the WeekLets say I just got married ( at this rate, a diminishing prospect) and the day after the wedding I'm off to Aruba. Like some people I know, lets say I have some regrets over the marriage because, for example, it was planned after a tequila shooting contest the week before. If, during our cruised, I encourage my new wife to join me in a re-enactment of a scene from Titanic. Then, I "accidently" let go of her - sending her into the Caribean at 3 a.m., to surely drown. Just keep this fact pattern in mind before looking at this article. A newlywed wakes up on a cruise ship after having passed out after, a night of heavy drinking. Her husband is nowhere to be found. Of course, he was very intoxicated himself. What to do? Apparently you sue the cruise liner and settle for 1 million dollars. I'd have to know more about the case -- but what could the cruise ship have done negligently and what can they do differently in the future to keep drunk passenders from taking a leap off the side? Maybe some chain link fences? I'm no tort reform advocate, but this is one that is just plain wrong.
Cruise Co. to Pay $1M to Man's Estate
Jan 04 11:48 AM US/Eastern
NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) -- Royal Caribbean Cruises has agreed to pay more than $1 million to the estate of a Connecticut man who vanished from his honeymoon cruise of the Mediterranean in 2005.
The Florida-based company will pay $950,000 to the estate of George Allen Smith IV and reimburse his widow, Jennifer Hagel Smith, for legal costs up to $110,000. Hagel Smith will start a fund in memory of her husband with an initial donation of $25,000 that the cruise line will match, according to a copy of the settlement obtained by The Associated Press.
The agreement was to be filed Thursday afternoon in Greenwich Probate Court, which must approve the deal. Royal Caribbean and Hagel Smith reached the settlement last June, but terms were not disclosed until Thursday.
Smith, 26, of Greenwich, disappeared July 5, 2005, from Royal Caribbean's Brilliance of the Seas between Greece and Turkey after an apparent late night of drinking. The FBI has been investigating, but no one has been charged and no body has been recovered.
Hagel Smith noted that the settlement also gives her access for the first time to records kept by the cruise line, including vessel logs, security reports, door activity records, photographs, witness statements and correspondence with the FBI.
"My single goal continues to be to find answers regarding how George died," Hagel Smith said in a statement. "Reaching a settlement in this case in no way shuts down the investigation. This proposed settlement provides the certainty of obtaining additional meaningful information surrounding George's death in a timely manner, which is very important to me."
Hagel Smith said $100,000 will go to her attorney for investigative costs and another $60,000 will be paid to forensic expert Dr. Henry Lee to continue his investigation.
"I hope it will be recognized that my loyalty to George and his memory can never be measured in media appearances, allegations, lawsuits, or dollars and cents," said Hagel Smith, who appeared on "The Oprah Winfrey Show."
Under state law, Hagel Smith will be entitled to the first $100,000 and 75 percent of the balance of the settlement after estate bills are paid, according to her attorney, Elizabeth Byrne. Smith's parents will be entitled to 25 percent of the balance after the initial $100,000 is paid to his widow, Byrne said.
Maritime law limits settlements to economic damages such as lost wages, rather than other damages such as pain and suffering, Byrne said.
Hagel Smith's settlement caused a rift with Smith's parents and sister, who sued Royal Caribbean, accusing the company of a cover-up that hindered the investigation. The cruise line denies any wrongdoing and does not admit to any liability for Smith's disappearance in the settlement with Hagel Smith.
The lawsuit by Smith's family was dismissed in November, but Smith attorney Brett Rivkind has filed an amended complaint.
Hagel Smith was found passed out on a floor far from the couple's cabin, the cruise line has said. She says she has no recollection of what happened and has said she passed an FBI polygraph test.
Royal Caribbean said when it reached the settlement with Hagel Smith that it wanted to "provide closure and move forward."
The case prompted congressional hearings and new legislation to tighten requirements for reporting when passengers disappear.
Royal Caribbean shares traded on the New York Stock Exchange Thursday morning at $43.60, up 12 cents. The stock has traded between $32.47 and $46.77 over the past year.
 |
  |
| © 2004 - 07 Arkansas Times. All Rights Reserved. |  |
