The Supreme Court Shows Off Its Dull Side
Lawyer Blogs
Chief Justice John Roberts once famously and controversially described a judge's role as akin to an umpire who merely calls balls and strikes.
On Wednesday, Roberts offered a new take on that argument in a Supreme Court case about whether lawyers who sued to force changes in Georgia's foster care program could receive extra pay for their efforts.
A federal judge awarded the lawyers an extra $4.5 million on top of the $6 million they were due under a formula. U.S. District Judge Marvin Shoob said their work was the best he'd seen in 27 years on the bench. Georgia appealed Shoob's decision.
Roberts was skeptical of Shoob's reasoning and the argument in defense of the extra money, which the court has previously said could be paid in undefined exceptional circumstances.
"The results obtained under our theory should be what the law requires, and not different results because you have different lawyers," Roberts said.
He said a judge who suggests otherwise appears to be saying, "'If you weren't there, I would have made a mistake on the law.'"
Paul Clement, the former top Supreme Court lawyer for the Bush administration, replied that capable lawyers can affect the outcome, a point not seriously in doubt in a court that regularly hears from the same band of high-priced appellate lawyers.
Finally, Roberts said good-naturedly: "Maybe we have a different perspective. You think the lawyers are responsible for a good result, and I think the judges are."
Clement responded, "And maybe your perspective's changed, Your Honor." Roberts was a top Supreme Court advocate before he became an appellate judge, earning more than $1 million in his final year in private practice.
Related listings
-
NY court hears case against gay marriage benefits
Lawyer Blogs 10/14/2009A Christian legal group seeking to stop New York agencies from recognizing same-sex marriages performed outside the state argued in the state's highest court Tuesday that the practice amounts to a policy decision that requires approval by lawmakers.A...
-
Court to decide constitutionality of bad advice
Lawyer Blogs 10/13/2009Supreme Court justices are questioning whether defendants should expect their lawyers to advise them on all the possible consequences of a guilty plea before it is submitted to a court.Jose Padilla wants his guilty plea to drug charges thrown out. Th...
-
Fla. appeal court again rules against NCAA
Lawyer Blogs 10/13/2009A Florida appellate court again has rebuffed the NCAA's effort to prevent public release of documents on academic cheating at Florida State.The 1st District Court of Appeal late Monday denied the college athletics organization's motions for a reheari...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.