District of Connecticut Law Clerks Society
a society for current and recent law clerks for the united states district court for the district of connecticut
About the DCLC
Do you have an announcement?
One of the purposes of the DCLC is to keep our members informed and to network with each other. If you have an announcement, including job openings, please contact us at the email addresses below and we will put up a posting for you.
Archives
- June 2010
- May 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- April 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- July 2004
- January 2004
Recent Posts
- Judge Underhill Asked to Determine if Cheerleading is a Sport
- Garber Seeking Attorney General Position
- Behind the Rise and Fall of Philadelphia’s Prison Population
- 4th Annual Investigating Computer Crimes in the 21st Century
- Judge Chatigny Nominated To Seat On U.S. 2nd Circuit Court Of Appeals
- Court Asked to Reverse Ruling on State’s Campaign Program
- Campaign Finance Legislation Under Scrutiny
- Practices of Connecticut State’s Attorney’s Office Under Review
- Lawsuit Granted Class Action Status
- Extensive Reshaping Possible In Federal Judiciary In Connecticut
Categories
℘
Connecticut Judicial News
October 5, 2009
Extensive Reshaping Possible In Federal Judiciary In Connecticut
Potential changes not seen in a generation could take place among the highly sought-after federal and legal positions in the state. At the top of this list are openings for two Connecticut judges on the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. Two or more District Court seats could open in Connecticut depending on who receives the appellate judgeships and whether a sitting Connecticut district judge assumes senior status. Also open are the offices of U.S. attorney and U.S. marshal which usually occurs when there is a change in political parties occupying the White House. The number of open federal positions has not been this large since President Bill Clinton’s election in 1993 when, during his terms in office, he nominated seven U.S. district judges in Connecticut and filled a Connecticut seat on the appeals court. "There seems to be a confluence of opportunity that will allow the president to make an imprint on the judiciary in the 2nd Circuit and in Connecticut for decades to come," said state Sen. Andrew McDonald, co-chairman of the state legislature's judiciary committee. "In the last generation there has never been such an opportunity for shaping the future of the judiciary in Connecticut. The good news is that there is a stellar lineup of potential candidates."
President Barack Obama’s expression of interest in diversifying the federal appeals courts throughout the country has sparked greater interest in predicting nominations among lawyers and political figures following these issues. Sources say that Connecticut's U.S. senators, Christopher Dodd and Joseph Lieberman have written to the White House with regard to the appeals court openings in support of U.S. District Judge Robert N. Chatigny, who conveyed interest in a 2nd Circuit seat. “Several qualified candidates expressed interest in the appellate court and the senators sent their names to the White House for their consideration,” according to a spokesperson for the senators.
In July, a 2nd Circuit seat allocated to Connecticut, opened when Guido Calabresi assumed the status of senior judge. A second seat is likely to open this month when Judge Barrington D. Parker assumes senior status. According to a University of Richmond law professor, there will be twenty-one openings on federal appeals courts throughout the United States, of which, eight replacements thus far - two black men, three white women and three white men - have been nominated by President Obama.
If Chatigny were appointed to one of the two available appellate openings allocated to Connecticut, Obama could balance the appointment of a white man with that of a woman or minority. Some possible candidates are: Joette Katz, an associate justice of the state Supreme Court; Janet C. Hall, a U.S. district judge sitting in Bridgeport; and Susan Carney, Yale University's deputy general counsel.
Another opening could be created if U.S. District Judge Janet B. Arterton, who sits in New Haven, chooses to become senior when she becomes eligible next spring. Judge Arterton has not yet filed notice of any such intentions.
September 16, 2009
Blumenthal Opposes Google Deal on Books
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is requesting U.S. District Judge Denny Chin of the Southern District of New York to amend a proposed $125 million settlement that would allow Google Inc. to create a huge online library of millions of books, claiming the agreement clashes with state laws. According to the Association of American Publishers, the proposed settlement would resolve a class-action lawsuit brought by authors and publishers who had concerns, mostly related to copyright issues, about the Internet giant’s plan to launch Google Book Search.
Blumenthal is concerned that the settlement may skirt Connecticut laws and misdirect charitable funds and unclaimed property. Under the current proposed settlement, funds that Google Book Search generates from works where the copyright holder cannot be located, will go into a Book Rights Registry. Blumenthal believes the registry would have “unfettered, unlawful discretion” to disburse the money. He stated that those who fail to enroll with the registry, or who the registry fails to notify of funds generated by their works, will lose the opportunity to access money that belongs to them. Any unclaimed funds deemed to be within Connecticut’s jurisdiction should, per state law, become property of the state. “This settlement must be amended to protect creative rights as well as our state charities laws,” Blumenthal said. “When authors bequeath proceeds of their hard work to charity, this settlement fails to ensure that the registry respects their intent.”
September 15, 2009
U.S. Attorney Prosecutes Defendants for Trafficking In Navy Rifle Sights
Federal prosecutors from the District of Connecticut have charged three men with trafficking in 50 or more high-tech, optical rifle sights stolen from the U.S. Navy. Five of the sights were eventually purchased in Connecticut by an undercover agent of the federal Defense Criminal Investigative Service. Acting U.S. Attorney Nora Dannehy stated that "Illegal weapons trafficking endangers the lives of our military servicemen and servicewomen overseas, and this office and our federal law enforcement partners are committed to ensuring that sensitive military technology does not wind up in the wrong hands." One of the defendants pleaded guilty Monday at U.S. District Court in Hartford. The other two have yet to enter pleas.
September 14, 2009
Connecticut Lawyer Claims Colleagues' Web Advertising Raises Ethical Issues
Norwich lawyer Zenas Zelotes has filed hundreds of ethics complaints across the country, claiming that improper referrals being made through Internet sites, such as totaldivorce.com and totaldui.com., breach rules against for-profit lawyer referral services.
Connecticut's chief disciplinary counsel, Mark DuBois, has found probable cause against several Connecticut attorneys named in the complaint. He stated that the case raises "fascinating issues" about the use of technology in marketing legal services.
Wick Chambers, chairman of the Connecticut Bar Association's ethics committee, sees technology clashing with codes of a profession steeped in tradition and said "Internet advertising is a big issue for us."
Scott McGowan, a Connecticut attorney named in the case, who advertises on totaldivorce.com, describes the contract he signed as "Google-style, pay-per-click advertising." He stated, "It doesn't make recommendations." "And I'm not getting any kickbacks." A finding of probable cause has not been made against McGowan.
January 16, 2008
Connecticut Computer Crimes Conviction
Priyavrat H. Patel - an IT consultant for Pratt-Read Corp.and a Connecticut resident - has pleaded guilty in federal court to one count of computer intrusion, U.S. Attorney Kevin J. O'Connor said Tuesday.
Patel remotely accessed Pratt-Read's computer servers and deleted files from three of the servers. The servers were rendered inoperable after the deletions.
Patel entered the guilty plea Jan. 10 before U.S. Magistrate Judge Donna F. Martinez in Hartford. Patel faces a maximum
10-year prison term and up to a $250,000 fine when Chief U.S. District Judge Robert N. Chatigny sentences him on March 28. For more details on the story, view the article in Hartford Courant.
August 23, 2007
Legal Wrangling over AT and T's "U-Verse"
AT and T's "U-Verse" is billed as the "evolution of TV programming" offering to its subscribers digitally delivered television through phone lines. While AT and T continues to build its infrastructure to support this technology throughout the state of Connecticut, its efforts have not gone without scrutiny. In fact, the Connecticut Attorney General's Office maintains that AT and T must be subject to the cable franchising requirements. This position was originally rejected by the DPUC. However, after a challenge was brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, a contrary conclusion was reached. That decision is currently subject to reconsideration. For a fuller account of this story, see this article published by the Connecticut Post.
May 14, 2007
Panel Now Set to Hear "Same Sex Marriage" Case
The Hartford Courant has reported that Justice William J. Sullivan has removed himself from the panel set to hear the case of Kerrigan, et al. v. Connecticut Department of Public Health. This case centers on the denial of marriage licenses to various same sex couples in 2004 and 2005. The panel now consists of Justices David M. Borden, who will preside, Flemming L. Norcott Jr., Joette Katz, Richard Palmer, Christine Vertefeuille and Peter Zarella, and Appellate Judge Lubbie Harper Jr. For a fuller account of this matter, see this article posted at www.courant.com.
February 21, 2007
Judge Chase Rogers Nominated to Connecticut Supreme Court
Governor Rell has nominated Judge Chase Rogers to the Connecticut Supreme Court as the next Chief Justice. Judge Rogers currently sits on the Connecticut Appellate Court. Prior to her elevation to the bench, Judge Rogers practiced for many years at Cummings and Lockwood. For a fuller account of this story, please see this article which was posted late yesterday on wtnh.com.
January 11, 2007
White House Resubmits Judge Vanessa L. Bryant's Name for District of Connecticut Vacancy
The Hartford Courant reports today that the White House has resubmitted Judge Vanessa L. Bryant's name among the 33 judicial nominees that issued from the White House this week. Judge Bryant currently serves on the State Court Bench. For a fuller account of this issue, please see this article that was posted on the Courant's website this morning.
January 10, 2007
White House Withdraws Four Names from List of 33 Proposed Federal Judges
With the shift in power in Congress, the White House's January 9th list of 33 proposed federal judges did not contain four candidates who were considered to be controversial nominations by some. Those four individuals include the Honorable Terrence W. Boyle, William J. Haynes II, William G. Myers III, and Michael Wallace. For the complete story, please see this article which was posted on the Los Angeles Times website this morning.
January 9, 2007
Chief Justice Roberts' Year End Report
Chief Justice John Roberts recently issued his year end report which focused primarily on the issue of judicial salaries. In his report, Chief Justice Roberts warned that the issue of judicial pay had "now reached the level of a constitutional crisis" as reported by CNN.com. For the complete story, please see this article on CNN's website.
December 22, 2006
Justice Sullivan Now Agrees to Testify to Connecticut Lawmakers
Citing the fact that the Judicial Review Council has completed its hearing with respect to his conduct, Justice William Sullivan has now agreed to testify before the Connecticut Judiciary Committee with respect to issues related to the delay of the release of a judicial opinion concerning the confidentiality of certain state court records. For additional details see the article posted at theday.com here.
November 17, 2006
Acting Chief Justice Opposes New Amendment
Senior Associate Justice David M. Borden indicated on Thursday that he opposes a proposed amendment to the Connecticut State Constitution that would allow for legislative oversight as to the judicial branch's rules and procedures. Justice Borden stressed the fact that the judiciary was working on its own to improve issues of openness. Justice Borden is currently the acting Chief Justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court. For the complete AP story, see this article.
November 3, 2006
Federal Judges: Overworked and Underpaid
An interesting commentary by John Dean entitled "Underpaid And Overworked: The National Disgrace of Undercompensating Federal Judges, While Allowing Their Workload to Balloon" was posted today at Findlaw. The article touches upon such topics as: 1) underpayment forcing Judges back to private practice; 2) the ever increasing caseload that our Federal Bench must deal with; and 3) the issue of tying Judicial salaries to Congressional salaries. This last issue has been one that the Federal Judges Association has tirelessly worked to rectify. For the complete story, see this article from Findlaw.
November 2, 2006
Connecticut Appellate Court Hears Argument on Justice Sullivan Matter
For two hours on November 1, 2006, seven members of the Connecticut Appellate Court, acting as the Connecticut Supreme Court, heard argument on the dispute involving former Justice William Sullivan and the Connecticut General Assembly. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal argued on behalf of the General Assembly. Attorney Edward Sheehy represented the interests of Justice Sullivan, while Attorney Steven Ecker spoke on behalf of the Judicial Branch. For a more detailed account of the argument, see this article from the Connecticut Post.
November 1, 2006
Appellate Court to Sit as Supreme Court in the Matter of Justice William Sullivan
On Wednesday, November 1, 2006, seven Connecticut Appellate Court Judges were scheduled to assume the role of the Connecticut Supreme Court in the matter of William J. Sullivan, et al. v. Andrew McDonald, et al. The entire Connecticut Supreme Court has recused itself from hearing this matter due to conflicts of interest. Legal scholars claim that never before in Connecticut, or perhaps even the country, has a similar instance occurred. For a detailed account of this case, see this article from the Connecticut Post.
Advisory Committee: Alyssa Esposito, Law Clerk to Judge Fitzsimmons; Krishna Patel, Assistant United States Attorney
Optimized for Mozilla Firefox - This site is best viewed at a screen resolution of at least 1024 x 768.
