Judicial Reports: LexPress: Judicial Threat Claimed
By Lily Henning
01-25-07
A lawyer claims judicial intimidation, a mommy excuse is treated with (and as) contempt, judicial selection reform opens a insert metaphor here, and a capital case judge hits the delete button on an apology.
LAWYER CLAIMS JUDGE INTIMIDATION
Name that judge! Lawyer Ravi Batra alleges in court papers that an “unidentified jurist” threatened him after he filed a legal malpractice case against another attorney who is now a judge. The unnamed judge “lashed out, in tone, words, gestures and fiat” as she warned Ravi Batra that he would never win another motion or case in Manhattan again because of his lawsuit against George Silver, the Post reports. Batra made the accusation in a motion to move his case to Staten Island. The paper quotes “sources” as saying the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office is looking into the intimidation allegations. Silver says the malpractice charges against him (which allege he didn’t actually file a wrongful death lawsuit as he told the client he did and “faked court document”) are “vague and nonsensical.”
...AND THE DOG ATE MY DISCOVERY
In a follow-up to what we told you yesterday,Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Carol Berkman did indeed find Laura Miranda in contempt, and fined her $1,000. Miranda is supposed to be representing the personal trainer/yoga instructor charged with killing an exotic dancer. The Post dutifully stays on this story, reporting that Miranda had told Berkman that her mother was sick — or now “needs medical tests” — and she couldn’t show up in court. What we didn’t realize earlier this week was that said mother is in . . . Puerto Rico. Jury selection was supposed to have begun Monday.
SELECTION REFORM — TWO-EDGED METAPHOR
It’s not often that the New York Law Journal cuts loose (even a little.) But the lede on its story this morning sums up something snappily that isn’t so easy to sum up snappily: “Whether a genie in a bottle or a ghoul-laden Pandora's box, the Lopez Torres judicial selection case has surely thrown the legal profession into a tizzy.” No one has reached consensus on what to do about judicial reform, but at least there is some (semi)-fruitful kibbutzing going on. Yesterday the New York State Bar Association hosted a summit and the NYLJ notes that to “the extent that there was a consensus it was that the convention system should be reformed to increase both access and transparency, but ultimately the goal is to finally scrap judicial elections in favor of so-called ‘merit’ selection.” Getting to merit selection is the problem. All-out primary elections, tweaking the convention system or a hybrid of what is essentially a convention-plus-primary are all on the table. You can see who favors what in the article, which is subscription-free.
HATE-FREE KILLING
The papers report (we’re looking at the Daily News) that in a grilling yesterday by City Council, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said the fatal police shooting of Sean Bell in Queens last fall didn’t have anything to do with “institutional racism with the NYPD.” Needless to say, Kelly wasn’t too cheerful — particularly when Councilman Charles Barron (D-Brooklyn) suggested he resign.
CAPITAL CASE, JUDICIAL REDACTION
A wrapup in The New York Times brings a lot of perspective to the Ronell Wilson capital murder trial. But judicial editing was perhaps the most interesting facet. Wilson issued an apology yesterday, but Eastern District Judge Nicholas Garaufis ruled on Wilson's statement to the jury line-by-line. Among the statements disallowed: "I know what it means to be a young kid who never had a father figure," and, "When I was growing up, I was thankful for everything anybody would give me." The 12 jurors will begin deliberations on Wilson's fate next week.
Posted by Lily on January 25, 2007 07:00 AM to Judicial Reports