Top Ten Stories for Week Ending October 9, 2009.
Law Practice Management Some BigLaw Leaders Still Ponder: How Low Can Associate Salaries Go?
Oct 6, 2009, 12:07 pm CDT
Top Ten Stories for Week Ending October 9, 2009.
Law Practice Management Some BigLaw Leaders Still Ponder: How Low Can Associate Salaries Go?
Oct 6, 2009, 12:07 pm CDT
Histories of libraries are important because they help to both validate the existence of libraries and authenticate their records of service over time. This is why we are so grateful to our colleague Julie Gick for writing and granting us permission to post her meticulously researched article, HISTORY OF THE NEW YORK COUNTY SUPREME COURT LIBRARIES, on this blog. It includes information about both the Civil Term and the Criminal Term libraries of the New York County Supreme Court and certainly meets the criteria mentioned above regarding the importance of library histories. We encourage you to read this very informative and entertaining article
David Badertscher.
Note: This article has been updated to include additional information provided by the author on October 27, 2008
History of the New York County Supreme Court Libraries
BY Julie Gick*
Beginnings
The New York County Supreme Court Law Library’s enabling statute was Chapter 722, Laws of 1865, effective May 12, 1865, although Griswold gives a starting date of 1852. (1)
The library was first known as the New York Law Library, and justices of the Supreme Court of the First Judicial District were its trustees.
The statute required trustees of the State Library to place in the new library any duplicate books in their possession which they deemed proper and the Clerk of the Court of Appeals was required to send one copy of the printed cases and points in all Court of Appeal cases. Any person who willfully injured any of the books, furniture or property of the new library was guilty of a misdemeanor. The sum of $5000 was appropriated for the use of the library. In 1879 the librarian’s salary was $1,500. The New York Times expressed concern about the court’s expenditures. (2)
Buildings
The law library was first located at 32 Chambers Street. This building is variously known as the Court of General Sessions, Marine Court and City Court. (3) The architect may have been John McComb,Jr. who designed the new City Hall and other buildings in the area.
Architects John Kellum and Leipold Eidlitz designed the Tweed Courthouse, 52 Chambers Street at an estimated cost of $11-12 million. Also known as the Old New York County Courthouse, the library relocated to this new facility when it was completed in 1881. Over the years the library served as a lounge room, reference room, and sometimes as a courtroom. Although a handsome edifice the courthouse suffered from inadequate space and unsanitary conditions. The deaths of several justices and many clerks and court officers had been attributed to a malodorous and pestilential atmosphere pervading certain courtrooms. (4)
After the appellate branch was created effective January 1, 1896, the books and the Supreme Court librarian were assigned to the new court’s temporary quarters on the third floor at 111 Fifth Avenue corner of 18th Street. The Supreme Court Library was replaced by books from other courts, and an assistant librarian was hired to maintain its collection. In 1900 the Appellate Division 1st Department moved to its present quarters at 27 Madison Avenue. James B. Lord was the architect. He completed the building under budget for approximately $630,000. He died of a lingering illness said to be directly caused by a court proceeding. (5)
In 1907 the Emigrant Industrial Savings Bank, located at 49 Chambers Street, purchased the adjoining property at 43 – 47 Chambers Street. An architect named Raymond F. Almirall was hired to design a new building for the entire expanded lot. This was completed in 1912. At seventeen stories it was one of the tallest of the early skyscrapers in the downtown area. On March 15, 1912 the justices of the Supreme Court decided to move their offices and the library to this building. The library was located on the 12th floor. It was 25 x 100 feet and contained 5110 feet of shelving. (6)
The present day New York County Courthouse, 60 Centre Street, was completed in 1927 at an estimated cost of $30,000,000. It was modified into a hexagonal structure from the original plan. The architect was Guy Lowell who in 1913 won a competition for his striking circular design. A week before the scheduled opening, Mr. Lowell died suddenly in Madeira, Spain. This is the home of the Supreme Court Civil Term Law Library. (7)
The New York County Supreme Court Criminal Term Law Library is located in the Criminal Courts Building. This edifice was completed in 1938 at a cost of $14 million, and was designed by architects Wiley Corbett and Charles B. Meyers. Until the merger in 1962 the Law Library served as the library for the Court of General Sessions which had its own impressive history. The first Presiding Judge (then called a Recorder) was James Graham who served from 1683 to 1688. At the time it was discontinued and made part of the Supreme Court in 1962, the Court of General Sessions was known as the oldest continuously functioning criminal court in the United States. (8)
Prior to the creation of the 12th Judicial District Bronx Supreme Court Library was a part of the New York Supreme Court 1st JD. The courthouse was built in 1933 at a cost of $8 million and designed by Max Hausel and Joseph H. Freedlander. It is also known as the Mario Merola Building. (9)
The New York County Courts Public Access Law Library opened February 14, 1995 and provides legal materials and information to the public. It is located at 80 Centre Street. The building, completed 1928-1930 at a cost $6 million was designed by William E. Haugaard, the state architect, under a height restriction so that it would not overshadow the nearby courthouses. (10)
Continue reading
BY: Alison M. Smith, Legislative Attorney, Congressional Research Service (CRS)
September 14, 2009.
SUMMARY OF REPORT:
Through various means, both web based and print, we are monitoring as best we can discussions related to the ongoing health care discussions. Below is an edited and excerpted version of some information we received recently from GalleryWatch in Washington, DC. We would like to share it with you. This updates our earlier posting on the Criminal Law Library Blog
____________________________
You might have noticed over the past little while that the Senate Finance Committee has been marking up a bill to reform our health care system.( see links following this discussion to the October 1 version of the bill from the Finance Committee and to a list dated October 5, 2009 of technical corrections to that bill).
As we becme increasingly dependant on information transmitted and stored in digital formats, ssues related to cybercrime are rapidly becoming central to all areas of the law. This is not stated as a criticism but rather as a fact that must be addressed by whatever means possible, including programs such as the one described below::
The White House announces a Cyberspace Policy review, proclaims a national security concern and appoints a czar; the FTC is about to issue “Red Flag” ID-theft compliance plan mandates; the Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property (CHIPS) units at DOJ and various U.S. Attorney’s Offices are gearing up; and “hacking” and HIPAA prosecutions are on the rise. Get the picture?
Whether you provide compliance/governance advice to corporations, counsel corporations about data breach crisis-response, or defend individuals, getting up to speed on where we are and where we are going is critical. An experienced panel of prosecutors, defense lawyers and cyber-experts will discuss these and other issues.
September 28 – October 2, 2009.
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, October 01, 2009 US v. Torres-Oliveras, No. 07-2720
Sentence and conviction of defendant for drug-related crimes is affirmed where: 1) defendant’s appeal waiver is valid, and thus, direct appeal of his conviction and sentence is not permitted under the terms of the waiver to which he assented; 2) district court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s pro se motion for modification of his term of imprisonment as he stipulated to possession with intent to distribute powder cocaine, and the revised guideline regarding crack cocaine possession was simply not applicable; and 3) defendant’s Kimbrough claim is rejected.
U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, September 28, 2009 Dunlap v. Burge, No. 07-0592 In a robbery prosecution, grant of petitioner’s habeas petition is reversed where the district court erred in failing to accord the deference required by 28 U.S.C. section 2254(d) to the state court’s evaluation of the pretrial identification procedures used by the police.
U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, September 28, 2009 Jova v. Smith, No. 08-2816 In an action by prisoners claiming that defendant prison personnel infringed their right to practice their religion under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed in part where the restrictions imposed on plaintiffs’ practice were justified by powerful security and administrative interests, but reversed in part where defendants did not demonstrate that the religious/meatless alternative menu was the least restrictive means of furthering their compelling administrative interests.
Continue reading
September 28 – October 2, 2009.
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw.
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, September 28, 2009 Chiang v. Skeirik, No. 08-2105
District court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s amended complaint arising from a denial of his petition for a fiancee visa is affirmed where: 1) district court did not err in dismissing plaintiff’s claim that his visa was improperly denied as he failed to state a plausible entitlement to relief; 2) district court did not err in dismissing plaintiff’s Bivens claims as he failed to name any officers in their individual capacities in the first amended complaint and a Bivens claim does not lie against the United States; and 3) district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion to file a second amended complaint as it would have been futile. .
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, October 01, 2009 Remexcel Managerial Consultants, Inc. v. Arlequin, No. 08-1753
In a political discrimination case against a municipality in Puerto Rico, default judgment against defendants is affirmed where the district court did not abuse its discretion in entering the default judgment for repeated discovery violations, and the law of the case doctrine bars defendants’ attempt to re-argue the adequacy of plaintiffs’ complaint.
U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, September 28, 2009 Frontera Resources Azerbaijan Corp. v. State Oil Co. of Azerbaijan, No. 07-1815 In a petition to confirm a Swedish arbitral award against the government of Azerbaijan, dismissal of the petition for lack of jurisdiction is reversed where the district court erred by holding that foreign states and their agents are entitled to rights under the Due Process Clause.
Continue reading
To view the full-text of cases you must sign in to FindLaw.com. All summaries are produced by Findlaw:
September 30 – October 2, 2009.
View FindLaw’s new Case Summary Blog for the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals
CIVIL PROCEDURE, CIVIL RIGHTS, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE Roberts v. Babkiewicz, No. 08-3858 In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging malicious prosecution, dismissal of the action is reversed where it was unclear that the criminal charge against plaintiff that the state dropped was necessarily related to or arose from the same circumstances as the criminal offense to which plaintiff pleaded guilty, and thus it was unclear under Connecticut law whether the dismissal of the underlying criminal offense resulted in a “favorable termination.” ..
ERISA, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW Ladouceur v. Credit Lyonnais, No. 07-4040 In an ERISA action alleging a breach of fiduciary duty based on changes to an employee benefit plan, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where oral promises cannot vary the terms of a written ERISA plan.
Update from the Lexis Alert Service,
October 2,2009
1. People v Ferrer, 1096, 2459/07, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 6779; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6611, October 1, 2009, Decided, October 1, 2009, Entered, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
The People of the State …
… appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Renee White, J.), …
2. People v Garcia, 1088, 1093/07, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 6772; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6612, October 1, 2009, Decided, October 1, 2009, Entered, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
The People of the State …
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Gregory Carro, J. …
3. People v Rivera, 1093, 314/07, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 6776; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6615, October 1, 2009, Decided, October 1, 2009, Entered, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
The People of the State …
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Stolz, J.), …
4. People v Leak, 1085, 6196/06, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 6769; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6616, October 1, 2009, Decided, October 1, 2009, Entered, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
The People of the State …
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard D. Carruthers, …
5. People v Jameson, 1091, 6630/05, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT, 2009 NY Slip Op 6774; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6621, October 1, 2009, Decided, October 1, 2009, Entered, THE LEXIS PAGINATION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING RELEASE OF THE FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION., THIS OPINION IS UNCORRECTED AND SUBJECT TO REVISION BEFORE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
The People of the State …
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel P. FitzGerald, …
Continue reading
Top Ten Stories for Week Ending October 2 2009.
In-House Counsel Citigroup GC Has No Sympathy for Law Firms Seeking Premium Fees
Sep 28, 2009, 08:52 am CDT