Alabama State Bar

Ala. chief justice backs bill that could have stalled her career
By PHILLIP RAWLS, The Associated Press
March 31, 2008

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — Alabama's first female chief justice is supporting a bill that would set experience requirements for the state's judges even though it would have prevented her appointment as a judge three weeks after becoming a lawyer.

"To make better decisions on the bench, you need to have practiced law," Chief Justice Sue Bell Cobb said in an interview Monday.

Cobb is backing a bill by Rep. Paul DeMarco, R-Homewood, that would set minimum experience requirements for people to become judges after Jan. 1, 2009. The bill requires three years experience as a licensed lawyer before becoming a district judge, five years before becoming a circuit judge, and 10 years before becoming an appellate court judge like Cobb.

DeMarco, a Birmingham lawyer, said attorneys need experience before deciding life or death issues in criminal cases or making child custody decisions in divorces.

The House passed DeMarco's bill 98-0 on Thursday. But his bill still must win approval in the Senate and be signed by the governor to become law.

Currently, Alabama is one of 16 states that have no experience requirements for any level of judgeship. Some of those states set minimum age requirements, but Alabama doesn't do that either.

Alabama's lack of requirements worked in Cobb's favor on Nov. 5, 1981, when then-Gov. Fob James appointed her to a district judgeship in Conecuh County, where she grew up. At the time, the 25-year-old Cobb had been licensed to practice law for three weeks.

Some older lawyers referred to her as "this young girl."

It was a much different time for Alabama's judiciary, Cobb said.

"The resident lawyers in Conecuh County didn't want the position because it paid so little," she said.

Cobb said as best she can recall, she started off making somewhere between $22,000 and $24,000 annually.

District judges now receive $114,892 to $143,571 annually from the state, depending on their years of experience.

"Times have changed. We have lawyers who want these positions because the pay is competitive," Cobb said.
Times have also changed for Cobb. As a district judge, she traveled across the state to help counties in need of a fill-in judge. She used that experience to get elected to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals in 1994 and re-elected in 2000.

In 2006, she became the first woman elected chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. As chief justice, her duties include overseeing Alabama's court system statewide.

Escambia County Circuit Judge Bradley Byrne, president of the Alabama Circuit Judges Association, said most judges already meet the experience requirements outlined in DeMarco's bill, but the bill is still a good idea.

Byrne, a 1979 graduate of the University of Alabama Law School, had 6 1/2 years of experience when he was elected to his judgeship in 1986. That would exceed DeMarco's requirements.

Byrne said Alabama requires lawyers to have at least five years of experience in criminal defense work before they defend a capital murder defendant who could face a death sentence.

"It just makes sense a circuit judge should have experience, too," he said.

DeMarco's bill has been endorsed by the Alabama Bar Association. It has no announced opponents. But the Alabama Senate does not move as fast as the House.

The Senate has been slowed by stalling tactics all session, and Sen. Phil Poole, D-Moundville, is threatening to filibuster bills sponsored by any House Republicans who helped block a $1 million appropriation he sought last year for a Tuscaloosa County road project. DeMarco is among those on Poole's list, but he's not worried.

"I'm optimistic that at the end of the day, those issues will get resolved and we can pass this bill," DeMarco said.
- - -
New rules for judges – [Editorial]
The Huntsville Times
Monday, March 31, 2008

Suppose you are an 18-year-old whiz kid who has managed to get through law school early. You've passed your bar exam. And you've bought a house in Alabama.

It's going to be tough, perhaps, convincing potential clients that you have the experience and expertise to represent them in court. So you may have to resign yourself to the fact that, for the time being, salary and status are going to be works in progress.

Or you can run for judge.

Not just district judge either. Heck, you can run for the Alabama Supreme Court. You've got all the legal qualifications to do so. And since few people really pay attention to these races, you just might luck up and win.

That could change if another one of those unanimously adopted House bills can make it through the Slough of Despond aka the Alabama Senate.

A bill by Rep. Paul DeMarco, R-Homewood, would establish experience criteria for judicial candidates - something Alabama doesn't have and most other states do.

DeMarco, who is gaining a reputation as a good-government defender with bills like this one and efforts to give the Alabama Ethics Commission more clout, wants people on the bench who have more than an academic acquaintance with the law.

In his plan, district judges would have to have worked as lawyers for three years and circuit judges for five years. To be a member of one of the state's appellate courts, a judge must have practiced law for 10 years.

To say that Alabama's requirements don't meet a minimum muster is an easy call. When in doubt, check Mississippi. That state says appellate judges must be at least 30 years old and trial judges 26 and all must have five years practicing law.

DeMarco's bill doesn't set an age threshold. It should. And, of course, it doesn't deal with Alabama's most egregious problem when it comes to picking judges - the exorbitant cost of partisan campaigns.

That's work for further down the road.
Right now, let's take the small step forward that DeMarco's plan offers.

The fact is, as the Homewood representative notes, it's easier to qualify as a judge in Alabama than it is to serve on some city councils. That underscores the need for minimum qualifications, which these criteria certainly are. They should have been in place a long time ago.
- - -
Minimum requirements long overdue – [Editorial]
The Montgomery Advertiser
March 30, 2008

Judges wield a lot of authority, even life-and-death authority, so it clearly makes sense to set some minimum requirements for serving as a judge. Nevertheless, Alabama essentially has none. That would be remedied by a bill that cleared the House -- without a dissenting vote -- last week.

Currently, the only requirements are that one be a resident of the state, a licensed attorney and at least 18 years old. Under such lax rules, it is possible for someone with next to no legal experience to become a judge, which is hardly a comforting prospect.

Legislation by Rep. Paul DeMarco, R-Homewood, would change that. The bill, which passed the House 98-0, establishes minimum standards for judgeships.

DeMarco's bill would require three years of experience as a licensed attorney for service as a district court judge. This is the lowest rung on the state judicial ladder, but by no means an insignificant post.

To serve as a circuit judge, one would need a minimum of five years as a licensed attorney. Given the importance of the cases that can be heard in circuit court, that surely should be the absolute rock-bottom number. A good case could be made for raising it. Among other powers, an Alabama circuit judge can sentence a defendant to death.

The requirements are highest, as they should be, for the state's three appellate courts -- the Court of Criminal Appeals, the Court of Civil Appeals and the Alabama Supreme Court. Service on these courts requires 10 years as a licensed attorney.

"Everyone should want their judges to have at least a minimum level of experience," DeMarco said in an interview with The Associated Press. Who could argue with that?

Most other states have minimum requirements for judges, and it is easy to see why. Florida requires five years of experience for trial judges and 10 years for appellate judges. Georgia requires seven years experience and a minimum age of 30 for any judgeship. South Carolina requires eight years of experience and a minimum age of 32.

The bill has the support of the Alabama Bar Association. Bar President Sam Crosby told AP "Common sense requires that these judges meet minimum legal experience requirements before undertaking their judicial duties." Again, who could argue with that?

Of course, a few years in the practice of law is not a guarantee of stellar, or even competent, service on the bench. It does, however, ensure that a judge has had at least some real-world exposure to the law, that the law is not an abstraction to him or her, but a critical part of the societal structure that can have huge implications for Alabamians' lives.

Many things go into the making of a good judge. Legal experience is decidedly one of them, and requiring at least a minimum level of it is more than justified. The Senate should promptly pass this bill.
- - -
Judicial reforms are much needed – [Editorial]
Tuscaloosa News
March 30, 2008

A judge can hold the power of life or death over a person convicted of a capital crime. A judge's order can shut down a multi-million-dollar industrial project.

In Alabama, however, it's easier to qualify for a judicial position than it is to seek a place on some city councils. That's why the Legislature should support a bill to raise the bar for judicial posts by establishing some minimum qualifications.

Currently, the only requirement for service as a judge in Alabama is that a person be at least 18 years old, a licensed attorney and resident of the state.

A bill sponsored by Rep. Paul DeMarco, R-Homewood, would add some experience to those scanty qualifications. It would require that a person serve for at least 10 years as a licensed lawyer in Alabama or another state before serving on the Alabama Supreme Court, the Court of Civil Appeals or the Court of Criminal Appeals.

Circuit judges would be required to have at least five years of experience as a licensed attorney and district judges would have to have three years of experience as a lawyer.

The Alabama Bar Association supports the proposal. Alabama is one of only a handful of states that do not require judges to have served as licensed attorneys for a set period.

This is not the only state bar proposal regarding the judiciary that deserves the Legislature's backing. For years, the bar has called for an amendment that would end the state's costly partisan judicial elections.

Under its merit selection plan, a broad-based judicial nominating commission and a judicial evaluation commission would be formed. When there is a vacancy on an appellate court, the nominating commission would nominate three people, one of whom the governor would appoint.

When an appellate judge's term expires, the judicial evaluation commission would publish its report, and the judge would stand for retention election.
- - -
House passes bill to require minimum qualifications for judges
By BOB JOHNSON, The Associated Press
March 27, 2008

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — The Alabama House passed a bill Thursday that sets minimum standards for serving as a judge in Alabama.

The bill by Rep. Paul DeMarco, R-Homewood, would require that an individual work for 10 years as a licensed lawyer in Alabama or another state before serving on the Alabama Supreme Court, the Court of Civil Appeals or the Court of Criminal Appeals.

The bill would require that circuit judges have five years experience as a licensed attorney and that district judges have at least three years experience as a lawyer.

The bill passed the House 98-0 and now goes to the Senate for debate.

Currently the only requirement for serving as a judge in Alabama is to be at least 18-years-old, a licensed attorney and a resident of the state.

DeMarco, a Birmingham attorney, said Alabama is among a handful of states that do not require that judges served previously as licensed attorneys for a period of time. He said it's easier to qualify to be a judge in Alabama than it is to serve on some city councils.

In Mississippi, appellate and trial judges are required to have five years experience as an attorney. Georgia requires that appellate and trial judges have seven years experience as an attorney.

The bill has been endorsed by the Alabama Bar Association.

Bar Association President Sam Crosby of Mobile said a judge can sentence a person to death or shut down a major industrial project.

"Common sense requires that these judges meet minimum legal experience requirements before undertaking their judicial duties," Crosby said.

If it becomes law, the new minimum standards would not take effect until Jan. 1 and would not apply to candidates for judgeships in this year's elections.

"Everybody should want their judges to have at least a minimum level of experience," DeMarco said.
- - -

Judge OK with suspension - DeLaughter won't challenge panel's recommendation amid judicial-bribery allegations

Jerry Mitchell, The Jackson Clarion-Ledger (Mississippi)

March 26, 2008

Task force

The Mississippi Bar on Tuesday authorized a task force to strengthen confidence in the legal system. The public is invited to submit comments, suggestions and recommendations by mail to Task Force, The Mississippi Bar, P.O .Box 2168, Jackson MS 39225-2168 or e-mail info@msbar.org. The deadline for comments is April 7.

- - -

Nothing stands in the way of the state Supreme Court approving a judicial watchdog's request to temporarily suspend Hinds County Circuit Judge Bobby DeLaughter pending a review of complaints that he was corruptly influenced in his rulings.

DeLaughter said Tuesday he won't fight the request the Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance filed with the court last week. Two complaints have been filed against him, one of them involving Mississippi trial lawyer Dickie Scruggs, who recently pleaded guilty to attempting to bribe another judge.

In a brief filed last week, commission Executive Director Brant Brantley wrote the purpose of a temporary suspension is not to punish DeLaughter but to preserve public confidence in an independent judiciary.

DeLaughter responded Tuesday in a letter: "If the Judicial Performance Commission and Mississippi Supreme Court believe that my temporary suspension, pending a decision after a hearing, will in some measure restore that confidence, in a spirit of good faith and cooperation with the ... commission, I will not challenge that temporary suspension, and I look with the greatest anticipation to my chance to be heard."

DeLaughter annually has about 1,200 cases assigned to his docket.

Disbarred Booneville lawyer Joey Langston has pleaded guilty to scheming to influence DeLaughter to rule in 2006 in favor of Scruggs, whom his former law partner, Bob Wilson, had sued in a legal-fees dispute involving asbestos litigation.

The Justice Department's Public Integrity Division has seized documents in the case and is interviewing lawyers as part of its continuing investigation into DeLaughter, Scruggs and others.

Scruggs and four others have pleaded guilty to involvement in a scheme to bribe Lafayette County Circuit Judge Henry Lackey last year to rule in Scruggs' favor in a legal-fees dispute involving Hurricane Katrina litigation. Scruggs could still be charged in the Wilson case.

Langston said Scruggs gave a $3 million "reverse contingency fee" in the Wilson case, and Langston said he split that with DeLaughter's former boss, one-time District Attorney Ed Peters, and former state Auditor Steve Patterson.

Disbarred New Albany lawyer Timothy Balducci testified flatly that DeLaughter had been bribed in the Wilson case in exchange for consideration of a federal judgeship. Balducci said Scruggs called his brother-in-law, then-U.S. Sen. Trent Lott, to telephone DeLaughter about the judgeship. Lott recommended someone else for the position.

In 2005, a federal magistrate judge ordered Scruggs to pay $17 million to another former partner, Alwyn Luckey, for legal fees in that asbestos litigation. But DeLaughter found in 2006 that Wilson owed no more than $1.5 million that Scruggs had belatedly paid.

Balducci also testified DeLaughter shared proposed orders with Scruggs' attorneys before they were filed.

DeLaughter has said he ruled according to law and never took a bribe.

Scruggs' attorney, John Keker of San Francisco, has said Scruggs "didn't corruptly influence Judge DeLaughter."

No charges have been filed against Peters.

On Tuesday, DeLaughter pointed out this is the first time in 21 years that his professional ethics have been questioned.

In the 1996 film, Ghosts of Mississippi, Alec Baldwin portrayed DeLaughter as the assistant district attorney who prosecuted Byron De La Beckwith, who assassinated Mississippi NAACP leader Medgar Evers in 1963. In 1994, Beckwith was sentenced to life in prison, where he died in 2001.

In 1999, then-Gov. Kirk Fordice appointed DeLaughter as a Hinds County judge. Three years later, DeLaughter began serving as a Hinds County circuit judge.

In his letter, DeLaughter said, "I believe with all my heart in the system, and therefore place complete trust in the commission and the (state) Supreme Court to give these matters dispassionate and considered fair judgment, guided by the rules and the law. "

Jackson lawyer Bill Kirksey, who represented Wilson and filed one of the complaints against DeLaughter, called Tuesday a "sad day." Kirksey - who once practiced with DeLaughter and has known him for 31 years - said it's a little late for DeLaughter "to be talking about confidence in the judicial system when he has done so much to destroy that confidence."

- - -

Law, not religion, rules in court- [Editorial]

The Montgomery Advertiser

March 26, 2008

With the discredited former Chief Justice Roy Moore relegated to the margins of Alabama politics, one might think that the improper injection of personal religious beliefs into judicial actions also has been safely set aside. One would be wrong, as the actions of a south Alabama circuit judge have made all too clear.

Once again, an Alabama judge has tried to turn a courtroom into a place of worship, intentionally stepping over the critical line separating church and state, willfully moving from the application of the secular law that is the only legitimate law to be followed in an American courtroom to a public display of religiosity as blatant as anything Moore ever devised during his time as the "Ten Commandments judge."

Covington County Circuit Judge Ashley McKathan is now under well deserved scrutiny for a courtroom episode last month. Due to a principled recusal by another judge because of a working relationship with one of the parties, McKathan had been assigned to hear a case in Monroe County involving a dispute over a church's records.

Reports in the Press-Register and a complaint lodged with the American Civil Liberties Union indicate that McKathan called all of those in the courtroom -- about 100 people -- into a prayer circle. At one point in his prayer, the judge fell to his knees.

It is important -- indeed crucial -- to understand the real issue here. Actions such as this, as did Moore's display of a Ten Commandments monument in the state Judicial Building, arouse a lot of emotion in people. Many Alabamians take their religion seriously.

But no one is questioning the sincerity of McKathan's religious beliefs or the right he -- and every other American -- has to practice his religion as he chooses in private life. What is being questioned -- and rightly so -- are his actions in a state courtroom, in a proceeding governed by the laws of the United States of America and the state of Alabama, in his role as a judicial officer of the state.

The courts are the arbiters of our society, the guardians of justice under the law. Any citizen, of any faith or none, is entitled to the fair administration of the law, without regard to the religious beliefs of the judge. The court has a solemn obligation to address the matters before it in the context of the law.

The law. Not the Ten Commandments. Not the Bible. Not the religious beliefs of the judge, be he Anglican or atheist, Baptist or Buddhist.

When a judge's actions step outside those bounds, that judge begins to operate in an extra-legal, extra-judicial fashion that undermines the courts as impartial arbiters of the law.

McKathan has made such missteps before. He has appeared in court wearing a robe with the Ten Commandments stitched on it. That sort of in-your face injection of personal religious belief into official conduct should never be seen as courageous. It is anything but that. It is instead an abuse of authority, a conscious ignoring of the importance of upholding not only the dignity, but also the integrity of the bench.

Some may view McKathan as a sort of insignificant mini-Moore who may be safely disregarded. To do so, however, is to allow the dangerous countenancing of a deliberate breach of that vital wall of separation between church and state. That is a far too perilous path for any Alabamian to condone.

- - -

Justice for Sale – [Op-ed]

By JAMES SAMPLE, The Wall Street Journal

March 22, 2008

Certain American values transcend partisan divisions. One is that money should not influence the courts. But with record sums pouring into judicial elections, the ideal of due process is giving way to a perception of pay-to-play justice.

This is not a matter of red versus blue. Seventy-six percent of Americans believe that campaign contributions influence judicial decisions, according to a 2001-2002 survey by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and American Viewpoint; 46% of state court judges agree, according to a written survey by the same organizations. Separate recent empirical studies in the New York Times and the Tulane Law Review support the proposition that contributions not only correlate with decisions, but alter them.

John Grisham's latest bestseller, "The Appeal," is a shadowy tale of a chemical company that buys a favorable legal ruling by funding the election of the judge who makes it. Farfetched? Not according to West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Larry Starcher. In a scathing opinion last month, he decried a "cancer" of moneyed influence in his court, asserting that "John Grisham got it right when he said that he simply had to read The Charleston Gazette to get an idea for his next novel."

The citizens of 39 states elect some or all of their judges. These contests have become costly arms races. An investigation by the Los Angeles Times, "In Las Vegas, They're Playing with a Stacked Judicial Deck," revealed that even Nevada judges running unopposed collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions from litigants. The report noted that donations were "frequently" dated "within days of when a judge took action in the contributor's case."

Business interests and trial lawyers both lay out campaign cash to ensure that sympathetic judges are elected. Both sides attempt to manipulate courts; business just happens to be better at winning. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce got involved in 13 judicial races in 2004 and won 12. Nationwide in 2006, business donors contributed twice as much to state supreme court candidates as attorneys, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.

Consider three recent episodes in light of the American Bar Association's requirement that judges disqualify themselves whenever their "impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

Lloyd Karmeier, the winner of a $9.3 million campaign for the Illinois Supreme Court in 2004, was supported by $350,000 in direct contributions from employees, lawyers and others directly involved with the insurer State Farm and/or its then pending appeal, and by an additional $1 million from larger groups of which State Farm was a member, or to which it contributed. Almost immediately upon taking the bench, he cast a vote ending proceedings on a $456 million claim against State Farm. A St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial put it this way: "Although Mr. Karmeier is an intelligent and no doubt honest man, the manner of his election will cast doubt over every vote he casts in a business case."

Wisconsin Justice Annette Ziegler declined, in December, to recuse herself from a case involving Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, which spent $2 million -- more than her Ziegler's own campaign -- supporting her 2007 win. In light of that decision, as well as additional revelations that Justice Ziegler had ruled on 11 cases involving a company for which her husband was a director, editorials around the state called for her to step down from the case, and even from the bench. Not coincidentally, all seven of Wisconsin's Supreme Court justices, a broad majority of Wisconsin's public, and even a plurality of self-identified "very conservative" Wisconsin voters support public financing of judicial elections.

In November, West Virginia Chief Justice Elliot Maynard voted in a 3-2 majority to overturn a $76 million judgment against the companies of coal executive Don Blankenship. In January, photos surfaced depicting Messrs. Maynard and Blankenship vacationing in the French Riviera while the appeal was before the court.

The court is now reconsidering the case -- a dispute with mining companies on both sides. Justice Starcher, who criticized Mr. Blankenship's influence, disqualified himself and urged still a third justice, Brent Benjamin, to do the same. Justice Benjamin, whose 2004 campaign benefited from over $3 million of Blankenship's support, has refused to step down.

Justice Starcher (who asserts the actual amount of Blankenship's support for Justice Benjamin was $4 million) wrote bluntly: "Just think about it -- $4 million! I know hardly a soul who could believe that a justice who benefited to this extent from a litigant could rule fairly on cases involving that litigant or his companies."

In the long term, we all lose when any decision reinforces suspicions that the biggest donor, not the best case, wins. Reforms range from commission-based appointment systems, to publicly financed campaigns, to more rigorous recusal rules. Without such measures, stories like "The Appeal" will fill non-fiction shelves.

Mr. Sample is an attorney with the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and co-author of "The New Politics of Judicial Elections 2006" (Justice at Stake, 2007).

- - -

Grisham's Judicial Appeal

By COLLIN LEVY, The Wall Street Journal

March 20, 2008; Page A18

Truth may be more complicated than fiction, but try telling that to John Grisham. The bestselling author of legal thrillers, Mr. Grisham has built his career on sensational stories with real-world political undertones. Wallpapering airport bookstores now is his latest book "The Appeal," which spins the tale of a corrupt chemical company CEO trying to "buy" a judge to get a better verdict. This is possible, the story goes, because the system of judicial elections has made justice itself impossible.

Within days of the book's release, critics of judicial elections began to connect it to examples of real-life corruption. Mr. Grisham himself says his story has "already happened" in West Virginia. Others have tried to link the book's intrigue to next month's Supreme Court election in Wisconsin, where a controversial judge is facing a strong challenge for re-election, helped in part by business groups.

Mr. Grisham has plenty of allies in his crusade among liberal interest groups, who insist that judicial elections somehow represent a blight on the rule of law. Chief among them are groups funded by billionaire activist George Soros. His Open Society Institute is now making donations to dozens of groups seeking to sway the judicial selection process in states from Illinois to North Carolina, as well as funding national groups like Justice at Stake.

The model preferred by Messrs. Soros and Grisham is known to fans as "merit selection," a method already in use in more than 20 states in some form. Under this plan, an appellate judicial commission selects a slate of judges from which the governor must choose. Intended to keep politics out of judicial appointments, judicial commissions have become agents of politicization themselves, steadily tilting state court systems to the left.

Power inevitably comes to reside in the hands of the state's trial lawyers, who end up sitting on the commission. And that means lawyers pick the judges before whom their cases will appear -- a conflict apparently lost on Mr. Grisham, a former trial lawyer himself. One of the most heated battles has been in Missouri, where three of the judicial commission's seven spots are held by trial lawyers with specialties in medical malpractice, personal injury and product liability.

Missouri commission members have also been a prolific source of contributions to Democratic candidates at the presidential and state level, most notably Attorney General Jay Nixon, a darling of the trial bar. Mr. Nixon is aiming to replace Republican Governor Matt Blunt, who has said he will not run for re-election. Last year, Gov. Blunt called for reform of the judicial commission after he was presented with a slate of Supreme Court nominees designed to force his hand in appointing a justice who didn't share his principles or those of the voters who elected him.

Mr. Blunt is not the only governor who balks at being dictated to by panels of trial lawyers. Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen, a Democrat, has also been on the record calling his state's version of the Missouri Plan over-politicized and unfair. In 2006, after the commission repeatedly resubmitted a Supreme Court nominee he had rejected, Gov. Bredesen accused the commission of "trying to force people down my throat."

In a result that might surprise Mr. Grisham, a 2007 Harvard study actually found that judges who are elected directly by voters are overall less corrupt than those who win their robes through other methods of selection. Direct election may raise concerns about campaign contributions and the appearance of influence, but it also has the virtue of accountability to the electorate. Though judges in Missouri stand for so-called "retention" elections, these are little more than uncontested pageants. Judges already have the weight of incumbency on their side by the time they face the voters -- and it shows. No appellate court judge has ever lost a retention election in Missouri.

Fans of the judicial commission approach claim that it removes the selection process from the hands of "special interests." At the end of the day, however, the problem isn't the power of business groups, like the fictional chemical company in his novel. Trial lawyers in each state are the ones with the financial and organization incentive to work year-in and year-out to shape the local judiciary to their liking.

That's true, of course, even under an elective system, where trial lawyers donate to candidates they like. But while campaign donations and the possibility of corruption go with all elective office, elections at least provide transparency and accountability. Without checks and balances, Thomas Jefferson once wrote, the judiciary was sure to become a "Despotic branch." To move in the Grisham/Soros direction of picking judges behind closed doors only takes things further from our democratic ideals. Then again, maybe the Soros-funded groups believe panels of Soros-approved experts should appoint our presidents and legislators too.

----

Raising the bar on the bench - [Editorial]
The Birmingham News
Wednesday, March 19, 2008

THE ISSUE: State legislators next week should pass a bill that would require judges to have at least a few years of legal experience.

Given a choice, most of us would prefer that a judge not be the least experienced person in the courtroom.

But in Alabama, there's no guarantee the judge hearing your divorce case or lawsuit or criminal trial will have any legal experience at all. A person can pass the State Bar one day and the next day become a judge - even a judge on the Supreme Court.

That's crazy.

A bill by state Rep. Paul DeMarco, R-Homewood, is a suitable remedy. It would require three years of time as a licensed lawyer for someone to be appointed or elected as a district court judge, five years experience as a lawyer for the circuit court level, and 10 years experience for state appeals courts.

These are reasonable standards, and they are in line with what's required in a number of other states, including most of the states surrounding Alabama. The House could vote on this bill as early as next week, and it should do so.

To be sure, legal experience alone doesn't ensure quality on the bench. All experience isn't equal, and what makes people successful as lawyers doesn't necessarily make them good judges.

There are cases where experienced lawyers didn't turn out to be such hot judges. And there are cases where very inexperienced lawyers have become great judges. Alabama's current chief justice, Sue Bell Cobb, was appointed as a district judge when she was just three weeks out of law school. She went on to a distinguished judicial career that has spanned more than a quarter century.

But as a rule, rookie lawyers aren't the best-prepared or -qualified to hold these powerful and important jobs.

As DeMarco points out, lawyers representing defendants facing the death penalty are required to have practiced law for five years, but the judges presiding at their trials aren't required to have a lick of legal experience. How weird is that?

Nonetheless, the Legislature has passed up chances before to set minimum standards for judges. Part of the issue in the past has been concern about meeting the experience requirements in rural areas with smaller pools of lawyers. DeMarco said that concern was addressed this year by reducing the experience requirements for district judges from five years to three.

If the compromise improves the chances of the bill passing this year, it's well worth it. There's no good reason to reject this bill, which would apply to judges elected or appointed starting next year.

Citizens affected by what happens in our court system - and that includes all of us, whether we have cases pending or not - want reasonably experienced people calling the shots.

It's not too much to ask. State legislators should say yes to this reasonable bill.

- - -

Cobb: Judicial reform needed
By Kerry Whipple Bean, The Brewton Standard
March 17, 2008

When a New York reporter called Sue Bell Cobb shortly after her 2006 election as the first female chief justice in Alabama, she was expecting a question about how it felt to break such a barrier in her home state.

Instead, the reporter wanted to know how it felt for Cobb to have won the most expensive judicial race in the nation. "The big money and mudslinging is having a negative effect" on the public's trust of the courts, Cobb told members of the Brewton Area Chamber of Commerce Thursday.

Cobb is pushing legislation to remove some of the big money influence on judicial races. Alabama is one of only seven states that have partisan judicial elections.

Cobb is backing two bills in the Legislature this session. One would remove party labels from judicial candidates - instead of running as Democrats or Republicans, candidates would not be under any party affiliation.

Cobb is also supporting a bill that would reform public financing of judicial elections. Under that legislation, no one - not an individual, political action committee or business - could give a judicial candidate more than $500 for his or her campaign.

She encouraged chamber members to be supportive of the reform measures.

"These changes are not going to happen without the support of the business community," she said. "It's time to look for a better way."

- - -

Requirements should be met
Mobile Press-Register - [Letter to the editor]
Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Part of the mission of the Alabama State Bar is to improve the administration of justice in Alabama. One of the bills introduced this session in the Legislature will help fulfill this mission by improving the qualifications of state court judges in Alabama.

To my knowledge, this bill - HB464 - has the support of all of the lawyer legislators, and bipartisan support from Republicans and Democrats. It is sponsored by Reps. Paul DeMarco, Yusuf Salaam, Jeff McLaughlin, Cam Ward, Christopher England, Marc Keahey, Tammy Irons, John Robinson, Marcel Black and Benjamin Lewis. The bill was approved by the House Judiciary Committee on Feb. 28. Sen.Roger Bedford and others will be sponsoring this bill in the Senate. The bill mandates minimum experience requirements for state court judges (requiring lawyers to have a law license for three years to serve as a district judge, five years to serve as a circuit judge and 10 years to serve as an appellate judge).

Currently, any lawyer appointed to defend a death penalty case in Alabama is required to have five years of criminal law experience. On the other hand, the circuit judge hearing the case can have had a law license for only one day.

Circuit judges in the Alabama state judicial system have general jurisdiction and hold a powerful position. With the stroke of a pen, a circuit judge can sentence a citizen to death or shut down a major industrial project (like the ThyssenKrupp project or the Northrop Grumman-EADS project). Common sense requires that these judges meet minimum legal experience requirements before undertaking their judicial duties.

All Alabama Citizens stand to benefit from such a change.

Samuel N. Crosby
President, Alabama State Bar
Daphne
- - -

Retired Federal Judge Pointer Dead at 73
The Associated Press
March 15, 2008

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (AP) - Retired U.S. District Judge Sam C. Pointer Jr., who received death threats because of his rulings forcing school integration in Birmingham during nearly 30 years on the bench, has died. He was 73.

Pointer died Saturday at a hospital after suffering from an illness, said his wife, Paula. He had retired from the court about eight years ago and joined the Birmingham law firm of Lightfoot, Franklin & White.

"The legal community revered Judge Pointer for both his brilliance and his wonderful temperament," said Chief U.S. District Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn.

Pointer issued controversial decisions as Birmingham struggled to desegregate its school systems in the 1970s. He ordered the busing of children to achieve integration in the Jefferson County schools.

Because of threats on his life during the school cases, he was placed under round-the-clock protection by deputy U.S. marshals. Pointer also presided over the complex litigation of some 26,000 silicone-gel breast implant lawsuits in the 1990s.

President Nixon named Pointer in 1970 to the bench for the Northern District of Alabama, the state's largest federal court district, in 1970. He served as chief judge of the district from January 1982 until November 1999.

In addition to his wife, he is survived by a son and a daughter.
- - -

Judge facing ethics inquiry wins Alabama Supreme Court ruling
By GARRY MITCHELL, The Associated Press
March 14, 2008

MOBILE, Ala. (AP) - The Alabama Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling Friday blocked an attempt by the Alabama State Bar to discipline a Clarke County judge accused in a wide-ranging judicial ethics complaint while he's in office, saying the discipline must wait until he leaves the bench. 's action against Circuit Judge Stuart DuBose, who serves Washington, Clarke and Choctaw counties, is related to charges pending against DuBose by the Court of the Judiciary. The Judicial Inquiry Commission made 60 separate allegations against DuBose in January, covering his conduct on the bench and as a private lawyer before he took office in January 2007.

The Supreme Court ruled that DuBose is entitled to have the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him by the State Bar stayed until he's no longer serving as a circuit judge. DuBose could not be immediately reached for comment Friday.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Champ Lyons of Mobile wrote, "Treating the rule as preventing the State Bar from disciplining a judge for conduct that occurred before taking office gives the judge an unwarranted immunity. "

Lyons urged a rewriting of the State Bar's rules on disciplinary procedure to "protect the public from judges who were unethical lawyers and relieve this court of further embarrassment from the absurd consequences of its own rules."

Earlier this week, DuBose filed his formal response to the ethics allegations to the Court of the Judiciary, claiming he had "diminished capacity" during the period covered by the allegations as a lawyer.

He has been on paid leave since the complaint was filed. It's unclear when the Judicial Inquiry Commission will rule on the case. If convicted, he could be removed from office.

Among other allegations in the judicial ethics complaint, DuBose is accused of drafting a will as a private attorney for Joseph L. Sullivan, giving his entire estate in Washington County to a caregiver seeking the will, without ever meeting the dying man. Sullivan signed the will on April 11, 2003 and died on April 29, 2003, according to court records. His heirs later contested the will and a dispute between the caregiver and DuBose erupted over the attorney's fees.

The case involving $2.5 million, including stock and land, shifted from Washington County to Mobile County's court.

An anonymous complaint to the State Bar led to its attempt to discipline DuBose. On Oct. 4, 2006, DuBose pleaded guilty to violating the State Bar's rules and was suspended from the practice of law for 45 days. But the state Supreme Court ruled that the penalty wasn't sufficient.

Elected circuit judge in November 2006, DuBose took office on Jan. 15, 2007 and the next month challenged the State Bar's disciplinary action, arguing, among other things, that the Bar was "divested of its jurisdiction" to discipline him once he became an incumbent circuit judge.

In its Supreme Court petition, the Bar argued that even though DuBose may hold judicial office, he still remains on the roll of attorneys and must be a member of the bar in order to hold judicial office. The Bar also argued that it was taking disciplinary action before DuBose became a judge.

On Friday, the divided high court, citing the rules, denied the Bar's petition.
- - -

Local attorneys reward local heroes
By Greg Phillips, Dothan Eagle
March 6, 2008

Dothan Police Capt. Steve Parrish doesn't consider himself a hero. The Alabama State Bar Association does.

Parrish was one of many Houston County first responders to attend the first day of the Dothan area's "Wills for Heroes" program at the Dothan Civic Center Thursday.

"Wills for Heroes" is a statewide initiative sponsored by the Alabama State Bar aimed at providing firefighters, law enforcement officers and medical personnel with free wills, advanced healthcare directives and power of attorney. The program has come to Dothan for the first time, with sessions held Thursday and Friday at the civic center.

"The officers in Dothan are very humbled and excited that this service is being provided to them," Parrish said. "Being a first responder is an inherently dangerous job, even though most of us don't consider it dangerous on a day-to-day basis."

Several local attorneys volunteered their time to provide the service, including Hamp Baxley, who coordinated the event locally. "First responders provide a valuable service for very nominal pay," Baxley said. "This is a very small thing we attorneys can do to give them a service that would normally cost a good bit of money."

For Southern Junction volunteer firefighter Vickie Stephens and her husband, Todd, the program arrived at just the right time. "This, for me, falls at a hard time in my life. I just lost my business partner, and he didn't have a will or anything," Stephens said. "If something happens to me or my husband, our wishes need to be honored."

Alabama is the fourth state to adopt the program, which developed after the events of Sept. 11, 2001. "First responders are in a high-risk profession, and of all the police and firefighters involved in 9/11, less than 12 had wills," said Linda Lund, director of the state's Volunteer Lawyers Program. "Everyone should have a will, but when you take on risks each day, it's even more essential."

Parrish won't argue. "Anytime you have a job where you might not come home at the end of the day, it's nice to know you're providing for your family," he said.

For volunteer workers like Stephens, the program serves as a reward of sorts.

"We don't have to pay fees for this just like we don't get paid for saving someone's house," Stephens said. "They're giving us a free service for our free service, so it's like everything is coming full circle."

Some local police officers are just happy to be on the good side of attorneys for a change.

"We as police are used to looking at attorneys on the other side of the room, so this is a nice service," Parrish joked.

Baxley said the program will provide services to between 60 and 70 of the several hundred eligible workers.

"We'll provide wills, power of attorney and living wills for 20-to-25 percent of those eligible," Baxley said.

According to Baxley, the state bar hopes to make "Wills for Heroes" an annual event that can serve even more workers.

"We're the only one in the state who reached out to volunteer departments, and there's a greater need with them, (because) volunteer departments are the largest (group of first responders) in the state," Baxley said. "We're feeling through the process, and it's possible this could even be a twice-a-year event."
- - -

Houston will receive award
Eufala Tribune
March 10, 2008

Eufaula native and former Supreme Court Justice J. Gorman Houston, Jr., will receive the Brewer-Torbert Public Service Award Tuesday.

According to a press release from the Alabama Appleseed Center for Law & Justice, the award is given annually to an individual in Alabama who has demonstrated a substantial commitment to public service and the improvement of the lives of the citizens of Alabama. The award is given in honor of founding board members Albert Brewer and Bo Torbert.

Houston, who is currently a partner at Lightfoot, Franklin and White, LLC, was chosen for this award "as one of Alabama's pre-eminent jurists and distinguished members of the State Bar and for his long-standing commitment to the law and good government. The Alabama Appleseed Board also chose Justice Houston for this award in recognition of his courageous and wise leadership in managing the crisis at the Supreme Court during his tenure as acting chief justice.

"He has committed both his time and resources in many areas of public service, including constitutional reform, indigent defense reform and equal access to the courts. Justice Houston was appointed to the Alabama Supreme Court in 1985, where he served with distinction for 20 years."

After his appointment to the Supreme Court, he continues to serve his home communities in Eufaula and Montgomery while working on projects throughout the state. Houston has been married for more than 50 years to Martha M. Houston and they have two children and three grandchildren.

Houston will receive the award tonight at 5:30 p.m. at a reception at the Harbert Center in Birmingham. Co-Chairs of the event are Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Drayton Nabers and Birmingham attorneys Sam Franklin and Jim Hughey. Former Governor Albert Brewer will be present for the event.

The public is invited to attend this event.
- - -

Scruggs and Spitzer embarrassments
Hattiesburg American (Mississippi)
March 16, 2008

Sex, money, power and greed. All the ingredients of a good summer read or a television mini-series. But this wasn't a work of fiction. It was reality.

The downfall of two legal giants served as bookends for the week, beginning Monday with New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer being outed for his tryst with a high-priced call girl. It ended on Friday with powerful Mississippi attorney Dickie Scruggs pleading guilty to conspiracy to bribe a judge.

Enough has been written about Spitzer's resignation as New York governor after a federal investigation of a prostitution ring snared him.

But Scruggs is another matter.

This is a man who not only made millions but hundreds of millions of dollars filing lawsuits against the asbestos and tobacco industries.

A Navy veteran who still pilots his private jet, Scruggs pleaded guilty to conspiring to bribe Lafayette County Circuit Judge Henry L. Lackey, who was presiding over a dispute between Scruggs and other lawyers over $26.5 million in legal fees from a settlement of Hurricane Katrina cases.

What are we to make of these unfortunate cases?

First of all, we don't think Spitzer and Scruggs are representative of the nation's bar, although they should have their own chapters in every book of lawyer jokes.

We agree with a comment from Hattiesburg attorney Carey Varnado on Friday after news of Scruggs' plea spread.

"The public should realize it's not an indication of widespread dishonesty in the legal profession," Varnado said. "The judge who was the target of the bribery attempt and the prosecutors are much more representative of the basic honesty and integrity of the profession."

We agree that Lackey is the shining star in this whole sordid affair. He could have taken the $50,000 bribe and made his decision in the case.

Instead, he reported the bribe offer to federal authorities and participated in an undercover operation that led to the arrest of Scruggs, his son, Zach, attorney Timothy Balducci, former state Auditor Steve Patterson, attorney Sidney Backstrom and attorney Joey Langston.

All except Zach Scruggs, who is scheduled to go on trial, have pleaded guilty in the investigation.

Scruggs, a Pascagoula native was memorialized in the 1999 movie "The Insider." He is the brother-in-law of former U.S. Sen. Trent Lott, a Republican. But Scruggs was a key money player in Democratic Party politics.

In the 2007 elections, he spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in a successful effort to defeat longtime state Insurance Commissioner George Dale, accused by Scruggs of being too close to the insurance industry.

Now Scruggs, 61, faces a possible five years in prison and the loss of his attorney's license.

He has brought shame to himself, his family, his state and his profession.
- - -

Free will drafting available to Dothan Police and Fire departments and emergency personnel
The Dothan Eagle
Mar 05, 2008

First responders from the Dothan Police and Fire departments, and emergency medical personnel, can meet with local attorneys to have wills drafted free of charge from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Thursday at the Dothan Civic Center. An additional clinic will be Friday.

These services are available as part of the Alabama State Bar's statewide initiative known as "Wills for Heroes." The project provides free simple wills, advance healthcare directives and powers of attorney to firefighters, law enforcement officers and emergency medical personnel. Wills for Heroes is a pro bono program coordinated by the state bar's Volunteer Lawyers Program. Members of the Houston County Bar Association have signed up to help.

First responders should bring family information (spouse, children, grandchildren, other descendants), asset information (bank accounts, retirement plans, IRAs, real estate, stocks, bonds, life insurance policies) and debt information (mortgage and loan balances).
- - -
3 lawyers recommended for judgeship
By Stephanie Taylor, Tuscaloosa News
March 5, 2006

The governor has two months to choose a new Tuscaloosa County Circuit Judge from a short list of candidates.

The nine-member Tuscaloosa County Judicial Commission met Monday and recommended three attorneys, Brad Almond, Cooper Shattuck and Dennis Steverson, for the position left vacant when Judge Steve Wilson retired Jan. 31.

"We're fortunate to have the caliber of individuals who applied and are willing to serve," said Circuit Judge John England, presiding judge of the sixth circuit and president of the commission. "This is the best that the bar has to offer, who applied, so we're blessed as a circuit and as a community."

England wouldn't say how many people submitted resumes, or say who they were. He did say that there were at least five. The commission voted Saturday morning and chose the top three. All three candidates pointed to their legal experience. Almond, 42, said that his experience in civil and criminal law gives him the experience needed for the bench.

"I've got a great diversity of experience," he said. "I've represented doctors in malpractice cases, I've represented defendants charged with capital murder. I've seen a lot of different cases. I think that would be a benefit to me." Almond has been married to Tuscaloosa City Councilwoman Cynthia Almond for 17 years and practiced law for that long. The majority of his practice is devoted to jury trial litigation in state trial and appellate courts. His civil experience includes representing individuals and companies in cases involving medical malpractice, wrongful death, product liability, construction law, fraud, breach of contract, trademark infringement, negligence, negligent entrustment, premises liability and surface water rights. He also has represented insurance companies in cases including fraud and other disputes.

In the criminal courts, Almond has represented defendants in four capital murder trials in Tuscaloosa and Fayette counties since 2000 and post-trial representation of several Alabama death row inmates. He also has represented companies and individuals in corporate formation, contract negotiations, partnership negotiations, will preparation and other personal matters.

"This is something I've always thought about doing. I think I would enjoy serving in this manner," he said.

He received undergraduate degrees in history and political science from Barton College in North Carolina in 1987 and his law degree from the University of Alabama in 1990. He has worked with his current firm Almond & Cheshire, LLC, since 2003.

Shattuck, 42, also graduated from the UA School of Law in 1990. He earned his undergraduate degree from the Georgia Institute of Technology in 1987 and has been a shareholder at Rosen Harwood, P.A., since 1998. He specializes in business litigation, fidelity and surety, business and employment law, mediation and arbitration and general civil trial and appellate practice.

He said he inherited a desire to serve the community from his grandfather, Roland Cooper, who served in the Alabama Legislature for 26 years.

"This would enable me to do something for our community that puts the skills and expertise I've learned to use," he said. "Being a judge is about helping people -- by giving them a level playing field. I can't imagine a higher calling than that."

Steverson, 50, has experience on both sides of the bench. Former Gov. Don Siegelman appointed Steverson to serve in 1999 when England served on the state Supreme Court. The Supreme Court appointed him to serve as a special circuit judge in 1995 and 1996 to assist with the back-log of domestic relations matters, child support cases and juvenile court matters. As a special probate judge since 1995, he presides over civil commitment hearings in Tuscaloosa County and acts as Greensboro's city attorney. He is a Stillman College graduate who earned his law degree from the UA. Steverson worked as an assistant Tuscaloosa County district attorney from 1982 to 1989 and started his own practice in 1990.

He concentrates on civil, domestic relations and federal trials, juvenile matters, wills and estates, administrative hearings an d criminal cases, including defense of death penalty cases. Self-employed, he runs the Law Office of Dennis Steverson.

"This is a great opportunity to serve the community," he said "I think I have the temperament to render fair and impartial judgements."

All three attorneys have served as members and in leadership roles in numerous civic and professional organizations.

Gov. Bob Riley will appoint one of the three to serve as Circuit Judge in May.
- - -

Paseur to focus on state race - Lauderdale County judge will retire April 1 to pursue Supreme Court seat
By Dana Beyerle, Montgomery Bureau, Times Daily
March 1, 2008

Lauderdale County District Judge Deborah Bell Paseur said Friday she is retiring with two years left in her term to devote full time to her statewide Supreme Court race.

Paseur said she'll retire from her fifth term effective April 1. "It's always hard to leave," Paseur said in a telephone interview. "It's time to pass the baton to someone new."

Paseur, 56, said she plans to qualify as a candidate for Supreme Court when the Democratic Executive Committee opens qualifying today for the June primary.

She's the only announced Democrat for the Supreme Court seat held by Republican Justice Harold See, who said he isn't seeking re-election. Greg Shaw, a Republican judge on the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, said he'll seek See's seat.

Gov. Bob Riley will have to name Paseur's successor.

"We'll start the selection process as soon as we receive a letter of resignation," said Riley spokesman Todd Stacy.

It's not immediately clear whether there will have to be a special election to fill the position or Riley's appointee will be able to serve until Paseur's term ends in January 2010.

Voters in November will consider a constitutional amendment creating a local judicial selection panel but it would pass too late to recommend nominees for Riley to consider.

In 1980, Paseur was the first elected female judge in Lauderdale County. Paseur said she announced her decision at a Friday breakfast meeting of the Lauderdale County Bar Association.

"I didn't feel like I could continue to take a state salary while running so I decided this," she said. "This is bitter-sweet. We are a court family here, one of the most wonderful (attorney) bars in the state."

Florence attorney Larry Moore attended the breakfast meeting. "Obviously we're going to miss her," Moore said. "She's been there for 27 years and I practiced in front of her for 25 years.

"She's done a fine job, she's a very honorable, honest lady and an excellent judge and good Christian and truly believes in the justice system and that comes out in her rulings," said Moore. "I hope our loss will be the state's gain."

Paseur makes $143,572 annually, according to the Retirement Systems of Alabama. She'll draw $107,679 when retired. - - -

State court seat most watched race - [Op-ed]
Steve Flowers, The Brewton Standard
February 28, 2008

With the start of the New Year, the presidential juggernaut bolted out of the gate with a cavalcade of early contests culminating with Super Tsunami Tuesday on Feb. 5, which included us in Alabama. The race for the White House has clear frontrunners earlier than ever in history. The early primaries have definitely had a winnowing effect. The process has weeded out the wheat from the chaff.

Even though the presidential race will dominate 2008 politics, we do have some state races this year. The highest profile race will be for the one seat open on our state Supreme Court. Justice Harold See is retiring. See saw the court see saw during his tenure. His election was the high profile ice breaker that broke the stronghold that the plaintiff trial lawyers had on the Alabama Supreme Court.

The court was all Democratic and all trial lawyer-oriented. We were indeed the most high profile bastion of large punitive judgments in America. Time magazine rightfully labeled us "Tort Hell." Alabama's business community, with help from corporate America, came off of their pocketbooks and got serious about changing our legal dilemma. See won with business backing and became the first Republican on the court.

After See it became a snowballing avalanche. Now, a decade later, our Supreme Court is made up of eight Republicans and one Democrat. It was nine out of nine until Sue Bell Cobb took back one of the seats for the Democrats in 2006. Our Civil Court of Appeals is all Republican. Indeed, Alabama's voters have clearly decided that they prefer Republicans on their state courts.

This voting trend appears to be as entrenched as our tendency to vote Republican for president. The practice of Alabamians voting for Republicans for the court has not been lost on the plaintiff trial lawyers. They are discretely backing their candidates in the GOP primary.

The Alabama business community takes these judicial contests seriously today. They do not want to relinquish control. They do not want to go back to the days of tort hell.

It appeared early that Jim Main, the governor's finance director, might be the frontrunner for See's seat. However, the business community quickly stymied that effort. They saw Main as a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Main had been a partner in the plaintiff law firm of Jere Beasley, Alabama's No. 1 plaintiff trial lawyer. Shortly after the Alabama Civil Justice Reform Committee endorsed Main's opponent, Greg Shaw, Main dropped out of the race. The business community's choice of Shaw made him a prohibitive favorite.

Greg Shaw and his wife have a unique place in state history. They both were elected statewide together on the same ballot in 2006. Samantha Shaw was elected state auditor at the same time Greg was to the Court of Appeals. Samantha Shaw is the quietest state official I have ever witnessed. She inaudibly runs the State Auditor's Office without any fanfare or publicity. Unlike other lower state office holders of the past and present, she does not constantly deluge the state with self-serving promotional propaganda.
- - -
Legislators get bar's ear on lawyer discipline
By John Monk, The State (South Carolina)
March 5, 2008

Two House members pressing to take the power to regulate lawyers away from the State Supreme Court have won a meeting with an American Bar Association committee visiting Columbia.

The committee is in town reviewing the state's lawyer discipline system. Chief Justice Jean Toal requested the review more than a year ago, long before the questions were raised about the court's handling of a bar exam controversy.

The lawmakers, Reps. Kris Crawford, R-Florence, and Ted Pitts, R-Lexington, will meet with the ABA committee Friday.

The inner workings of the state judiciary have gotten statewide attention since November. At that time, news reports disclosed the Supreme Court had quietly thrown out a section of last July's bar exam, a move that reversed the grades of 20 people who flunked the exam.

Those 20, now lawyers, included children of prominent state officials and law clerks to state judges.

The Supreme Court, the final authority in the matter, said the grade changes were made because of scoring errors. It has declined requests from The State for detailed information on its decision.

"I just believe when you look at any branch of government, there should be checks and balances and divisions of power," said Crawford, a physician. He is lead sponsor of a bill that would remove lawyer regulation from the Supreme Court's supervision and place it under the S.C. Department of Labor Licensing and Regulation.

LLR regulates other S.C. professions, including medicine and architecture. Part of the executive branch under Gov. Mark Sanford, its decisions can be appealed to the judiciary branch of state government up to the Supreme Court. But lawyers' regulatory and disciplinary procedures, from start to finish, stay within the judiciary branch.

"We are glad to have (the lawmakers) talk to the committee," Toal said Tuesday.

But the committee really isn't set up to hear observations on proposed changes in the law, she said.

"If they want to see me, if they want to conduct hearings, that is the way to approach it," she said, adding she would be glad to provide information to lawmakers about practices in other states.

The Supreme Court has paid a fee to the ABA to finance the committee's evaluation. The ABA unit evaluates various states' legal disciplinary systems.

Toal did not know how much the committee's study would cost. Asked if its report would be made public, Toal said she won't know until the report is done, but added, "I imagine some sort of results would be made public."

Crawford said he hopes a Judiciary Committee subcommittee, where his bill now is, will soon hold hearings on the matter.

Pitts, a real estate broker, wants the results of the ABA committee's findings to be made public.

"Our legal system is the foundation of this country, and the general public just wants to make sure everybody is treated fairly and equally," Pitts said.
- - -
Judiciary: Task force positive step for reform - [Editorial]
Jackson Clarion Ledger (Mississippi)
March 6, 2008

If the judicial bribery scandal in Mississippi has dealt a blow to the standing of the Magnolia State's legal profession, the Bar has now struck back with equal force.

This week, Mississippi Bar President Bobby Bailess of Vicksburg announced the appointment of a "Task Force to Strengthen Confidence in the Legal System." Its duty is to "examine our legal system and make recommendations" to ensure the honesty, fairness and impartiality within the judiciary.

The panel could be dismissed as an attempt to whitewash a system irredeemably tarnished by the scandals involving some of the state's best known lawyers. But this is a long-needed endeavor. It should address the increasing special-interest influence of contributions to judicial candidates, the coziness of lawyers with judges, whether judges should be elected or appointed.

Chaired by Bill Goodman of Jackson, the panel has two names that stand out: former Gov. William Winter and former Mississippi Supreme Court Justice Reuben Anderson. Both Winter and Anderson are revered for rock solid integrity and public service.

Also serving are: Patricia Bennett, Jackson; Judge Lisa Dodson, Gulfport; Don Dornan Jr., Biloxi; Barry Ford, Jackson; Deborah Gambrell, Hattiesburg; Billie Graham, Laurel; Bill Liston, Winona; John Clark Love Jr., Kosciusko; Judge Kent McDaniel, Brandon; Harold Mitchell Jr., Greenville; Guy Mitchell III, Tupelo; Colette Oldmixon, Poplarville; Judge Edward Patten Jr., Hazlehurst; and Briggs Smith, Batesville.

The panel is to give a report on possible reforms by year's end, Bailess says.

The task of strengthening confidence in the judicial system at this point is daunting.

Oxford lawyer Dickie Scruggs is tangled in a web of allegations that extends across the state.

Attorney Timothy Balducci is accused of giving $40,000 to a Calhoun County judge at the behest of Scruggs regarding $26.5 million in fees from Hurricane Katrina lawsuits. Balducci has pleaded guilty, along with former State Auditor Steve Patterson, to conspiracy to bribe a judge.

Scruggs, his son Zach Scruggs and Sidney Backstrom face federal conspiracy charges in connection with the alleged bribery scheme. Scruggs, his son and Backstrom have denied any wrongdoing.

Joey Langston, who once represented Scruggs, has pleaded guilty in federal court to conspiring with Scruggs in a scheme to influence a Hinds County Circuit judge.

The task force has its work cut out for it.
---