|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
John M. Harlan Louis D. Brandeis Louisville Law Examiner Serving The University of Louisville Law School Community Volume 2 Number 4 Louisvllle, Kentucky, November 9, 1976 United We Stand? Court Merger -Debated by Don Pearcy and Sara Scott Moore On Monday, Oct. 11, 1976 at 10 a.m., a hearing was held in the Kentucky Supreme Court at Frankfort to decide one of the most .controversial issues to · ever come before the Louisville Bar Association (LBA). A decision was hoped for and exp.ected by the following Friday but to date, no ruling has been made. The issue debated was the proposed combining of the 16 Jefferson Circuit Courts into a "unified" court system as suggested by the Judicial Article which was voted upon by the people of the Commonwealth and passed in 1975. The controversy centers around the repeal of Section 137 of the Kentucky Constitution which was enacted in 1891 and specifically authorized any county with a population of at least 150,000 people to divide its Circuit Court into a Criminal Division and any other branches deemed necessary to facilitate expeditious handling of its caseload. According to LBA President Rick Remmers, who is a spokesman for the unification, section 137 especially established the Criminal Division. The other branches would have to be established by statute or local rule of the court. These other branches could be formed as needed which brought about the divisions of Chancery and Common Pleas. The Legislature then authorized new judges for these courts which today include three Criminal, six Chancery and seven Common Pleas judgeships. Mr. Remmers' position is that the repeal of section 137 by adoption of the Judicial Article (which repealed sections 109-139, 141 and 143) automatically invalidated the existence of the Jefferson Circuit Court's branch system and established a "truly unified Circuit Court throughout the Commonwealth." Judge Charles Leibson of the Third Division Common Pleas, and a spokesman against the unification, catagorically denies this rationale. He agreed that section 137 has been repealed but said that the Jefferson Circuit Court is specifically established by KRS 24.180 so the repeal of the constitutional provision did not disturb the branch system within Jefferson County. Judge Leibson said that the statute is in no way related to the constitution. "A constitutional section was repealed, not a statute," he explained. According to Judge Leibson, the only thing required is that the statute not conflict with a constitutional provision. " Nothing in the constitution says that every circuit court must hear the same types of cases," he said. "Nor is there anything which says that a court system the size of Jefferson should not be divided into 16 courts." The main issue suggested by Judge Leibson is "what will best serve Jefferson County?" He indicated that it is merely a question of policy, nothing more. Regarding the current Supreme Court battle, Mr. Remmers elaborated that initially the Supreme Court Chief Justice . wished to do a way with the branches to help equalize ·the caseloads. It was felt · that the Chancery was working too much while the Common Pleas cases were diminishing. In June, 1976, an order was issued by the Supreme Court which authorized Jefferson Circuit Court Chief Judge Mike MacDonald, to assign all cases as he saw Circu1ation 3500 Photograph by ClwiltoP'* RW.. fit to equalize the workload and to provide for prompt disposition of all cases. Mr. Remmers said that Judge MacDonald was given lee-way to work out his own system. Mr. Remmers conceded that the majority of the Jefferson Circuit judges (Continued on page 6) Profits Out, Bail Bondsmen Bedeviled by Ch-.ick Randall When the controversial legislation prohibiting commercial bail bonding and imposing criminal sanctions on the issuance of bail bonds for profit was passed last February, Kentucky bondsmen vowed to test the· new statute in Court. Don Rigazio of A .. A. Bonding maintained that the legislation was no more than a personal vendetta by Governor Carroll against Jimmy Johnson of Johnson Bonding Co. in Paducah. But after an initial victory in the Jefferson · County Circuit Court, the Kentucky Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the statute and denied a stay of enforcement pending appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Consequently, no commercial bail bonds have been issued since July. Many local. bonding co~panies already have had their phones disconnected. Others are effectively out of business, but must still produce defendants to protecttheir outstanding liabilities. There have been no indictments of bondsmen related to issuance of bail bonds for profit since the statute took effect. Johnson Bonding Co. has gone along with the new law 100 percent, according to Leroy Hayden, company vice president. "We don't solicit, but we still get calls," he said, "and we flatly refuse to issue new bonds." But the company is still sending agents into court daily ·to 0 ensure the presence of defendants. The fact that no money is coming in any longer doesn't make for a very good situation, according to Mr. Hayden. "As vindictive as this nut of a governor we have is, h e's making us keep in business until all liabilities are extinguished," complained Mr. Rigaiio who has some bonds that will not mature · until next November. Claude Benboe, another local bondsman, said that he has $200,000 in liabilities to protect. He explained that he still has to maintain a place of business, pay rent and pay the telephone bill, but has had no money corning in since July. Mr. Rigazio decided to get out ofthe legal battle after the Kentucky Supreme Court handed down its decision. ''The Governor will make it so rough foi: us that it won't be worth pursuing," he said. But other bondsmen are determined to continue challenging the legislation. Johnson Bonding Co. and Claude Benboe have recently retained Atty. Samuel Manly to pursue the matter. "We will continue to flgh.t this in court," Mr. Hayden maintained, "and we have no intention of forgetting it." (Continued on pap 8) On the Inside Brandeis Brief ••••••••••• : • ••••••• p. 2 Calendar of Events ••••••••••••••••• p. 2 ' Leib10n Publishes ••••••••••••••••• p. 3 Quick Publishes •••••••••••••••••• .p. 3 Readmiuions Policy ••••••••••••••• p. 4 Freshman Profile .••••••••••••••••• p. 4 Justice Sternberg ••••••••••••.••••. p. S Lawyers' Market .••••••.•••••••.•• p. S Moot Court ••••••••••••.••.•••••• p. 6 Forum's Speaker •••.••••••••.••••• p. 7 ALI-ABA ••••••••••••••••••••••• ,p. 8 Brandeis Brief On page two, Stephen A. Hubbs discusses dangers of nuclear waste water. ' . 2 Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 1!inUt!lume 1/jaw t~aminer Brandeis Brief D[J [J [J. . . . . . . . . . . . EJrJDD DONALD W. PEARCY Editor-in-Chief ·RUSSELL L. CRUSOTI' Ma11ilging_Editor LEE J. CALARIE Business Manager CHARLES T. RANDALL As110ciate Editor Joseph Castleli Brandeis Brief Editor Sara Scott Moore City Editor Christophez Rivezs Photography Editor K:imneth Golliher News Editor Staff Valerie Salven Articles Editor Ed Mann Alan Paraons Julie Williams 'lUdp MARUN ·M •. VOLZ Advisory Board Prof. LESUE W. ABRAMSON Editnrial Accelerated Depreciation Think back to August. · The law School opened its year with the usual bright shiney faces of the freshman class wandering through the old hallowed halls. However, the hallowed halls didn't look . so old and battered. The iacelift that had lasted more than a year was complete. The halls were bright, the walls were clean, everything looked new. Somehow it made things seem brighter and livelier. That was in August. Today, after only three months of shuffling students and furniture through the renovated halls, the walls have become scuffed, the doorways chipped, the door knobs falling off, and worst, that feeling of brightness has faded. Graffiti on walls is as old as the opposing__ thumb that allowed man to grip a charcoal stick in his cave. Today even the bathroom walls of the new wing have succumbed to the primitive urges of the school's cavemen. The students and faculty were forced to go a full . year without utilizing the main building in order for the renovation to be accomplished. We must ask ourselves. if we can afford to give up the building for that long again if we cannot stay ah~ad of wear and tear as it occurs. The:.· solution lies in two areas: preventive and remedial. The first lies with those who use the building; the second lies with those who are charged with maintaining the building. The students must learn to use, not abuse, the building. Many ofthe- walls are beginning to look as if they have been walked on as much as the floor. At least the floor gets scrubbed every once in awhile; the walls do not. The students should act and encourage others to act in such a manner that reflects a professional school not a junior high school. While much of the destruction that occurs is unnecessary, the fact is that much of the damage remains unrepaired and seemingly unnoticed for months. One wonders if it will take another major renovation before a wash bucket is seen much less a can of paint! The administration must exercise more supervision, not only over the facilities but those charged with maintaining the building on a daily basis. Deterioration is like any other fungus! It starts small, grows quickly and is hard to stop once it has gained a hold. The time to do something is n,ow, before too · much has to be 4one and all is given up for lost. i~l~~--~\,~· -------------·--------------------------~---------------, ;:Jl -:1" 'i?~; Nov. h-13: ;.-. . !! Nov. 15: Nov. 18: Nov. 19: Nov. 25: Dec. 1, 2, 3: Dec. 4-17: Dec. 9-11: Dec. 25: •Dec. 29-Jan. 5: . ,.:__ :: .. CALENDAR OF EVENTS Practical Sldlls Seminar, "Will Drafting and Ptobate," Barren River State Park . Bread and Butter Luncheon, Frank Burke: "Changes in Probate Practice," Rodeway lnn, 12-1 :30 p.m. Brandeis Lecture Series, Leonard Boudin, renowned civil libertarian attorney, Allen Court Room, Belknap Campus, 8:30 p.m. Student Bar Association Smoker, Masterson's Restaurant, 4-7 p.m . - , Thanksgiving Day Reading Days Examination Period Annual Kentucky Tax lnstitite, Galt House. Christmas Day Law Sell6ol Alumni 'j>eruvian carnival" Tour. Nuclear Power Series Look Before You Leap Waste Needs Study Stephen A. Hubbs received his MA. b Engineering from the Speed Scientific School at U of Lin 1974 after which lu. 'NOrked in Water Quality ControL From 1974 to 1975, Mr. Hubb~ -worked with Ten Ech Consulting Engineering, a Louisville based firm. He has lWJrked with the Louisville Water Company since August, 1975. Mr. Hubbs has done extensive study and research in his field and has published an article entitled "Sludge Disposal" in the in the American Waterworks JournaL by Stephen Hubbs All currently operating nucleat power plants unavoidably discharge radioactive elements into the environment. The nature of this discharge is greatly dependent on thi design, construction, and routine operation of the particular plant under consideration. Nuclear power stations currently operating in the United States fall in the generic category of thermal reactors; specifically, Pressurized Water Reactors {PWR's) and Boiling Water Reactors (BWR's). Nuclear reactors comprising a second generic category, the Breeder Reactors, are currently being investigated under experimental conditions. Although small "Breeder's" have· been built, the successful operation of a safe, efficient, full scale plant has not been accomplished in the United States. All nuclear power stations operate similarly to coal-ftred power stations. The major differences are the heat source used to generate steam and the problems associated with nuclear contamination of the environment. Nuclear reactors utilize a strategically arranged matrix of fuel rod "bundles" containing enriched uranium to generate heat. Heat is evolved from the "splitting" of large uranium atoms into smaller "fission product" atoms. The fission products likewise split into smaller "fission product,. atoms. The ftssion products likewise split into smaller atoms until a stable atom is formed. The time required for certain fission products to stabilize is in the order of 100,000 years {plutonium). Fission products are the major concern in environmental discharges from nuclear power plants. Fission products can become incorporated into the liquid discharge of a nuclear power plant in several ways. Small, pinhole defects in the cladding surrounding the fuel rods can leak fission products into the reactor coolant. Even if no pinhole leaks are found in the fuel rods, neutrons penetrating the cladding can activate corrosion products and other chemicals in the reactor coolant. The heat removed from the fuel rods via the coolant (usually water) either directly or indirectly produces steam to power the electric generators. In order to avoid the buildup of corrosion products and other unwanted chemicals in the coolant, a certain percentage of the coolant is replaced regularly with pure coolant. lbis process, termed blowdown, accounts for a large portion of radioactivity that eventually is discharged into the environment. The volume of water resulting in the blowdown depends on the buildup of unwanted chemicals in the coolant, which is often a function of the quality control utilized in the construction of the reactor and the fabrication of the fuel rods. The Radwaste System The blowdown from the reactor and all other radioactive liquids are channeled to the Radwaste System where they are treated to reniove radioactivity. If properly operated, the Radwaste System can reduce the radioactivity from most chemicals to a fraction of their original value. Certain elements (tritium) however, do not lend themselves to treatment. Tritium accounts for most of the radioactivity discharged from a properly operating nuclear power plant. The Radwaste discharge is diluted with low-radioactivity blowdown water from the cooling towers. Radwaste discharges can be continuous, cyclic, or irregular. Monitoring programs devised to access the radioactivity in receiving streams should thus be keyed to the discharge of the Radwaste system if such programs are to give' accurate information on discharged radioactivity. Health Effects of Radioactive Discharges Once radioactive elements are discharged into the environment it is important to · trace the path of specific elements to eventual receptors. This pathway is determined by physical properties of the receiving stream and by biological food chains in the stream ecosystem. In a stream, water current carries the elements downstream while ftsh, algae, bacteria, and other organisms take elements into their systems and concentrate them in tissues, organs, and bones. This process of bioaccumulation is a natural process in organism development. (Continued on page 7) Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 JFL Article Leibson Examines Emotional Distress by Alan Parsons Frequently courts have resorted to arbitrary tests in the determination of tort liability, more in the interests of efficiency and expediency, than in the balancing of the scales of justice. In an article to be published in the December issue of the Law School's Journal of Family Law, Assoc. Prof. David J. Leibson attacks one of these aribitrary tests. The article, entitled "Recovery for Damages for Emotional Distress Caused by Physical Injury to Another," attempts to establish an alternative test that more accurately reflects general tort principles. Mr. Leibson sets out a hypothetical situation wherein a defendant's negligent act results in the death of three children. The mother of the first ch.ild was a witness to the accident and within the zone of danger, The mother of the second child also witnessed the accident but was outside the zone of danger, while the third child's mother learned of the accident only after its occurrence. The question becomes whether a duty is owed to any of these mothers and whether their · mental distress can be differentiated in terms of allowing one to recover and not the others. Mr. Leibson contends that a duty should extend to each of the mothers and recovery should be allowed to each. He enlists the aid of advancements in medical science especially in the field of psychiatry to support his . contentions. In highlighting the article, Mr. Leibson stated that the gross unfairness of the present tests rests on the fact that in an overwhelming majority of jurisdictions, a duty would extend only to the frrst mother and in many of those instances only if she had suffered "physical impact." That each mother has suffered severe emotional distress has always been recognized by common sense, but only recently has medical science been able to document that this distress constitutes a real and substantial injury. A key point is that one would suffer the injury regardless of whether or not the accident had actually been witnessed. Medically substantiated, it would seem reasonable to expect that mental distress would follow from the serious injury or death of a close relative and it remains for the courts to impose a duty to refrain from acts or omissions that would cause such injuries. This duty to refrain from causing injury is a general tort principle and Mr. Leibson sees no sound medical or legal reason to deny its applicability to mental distress cases. The proposed test would create a duty to those persons having a "significant" relationship with the primary victim of the negligence act. Although the significant relationship would normally limit recovery to the immediate family, Mr. Leibson indicated that it could be extended in special circumstances to others as, for example,, fiancees. Even though proving significant relationship and mental distress would be difficult, this is no reason to deny recovery where such proof is possible, he explained. Mr. Leibson's research indicates that in jurisdictions where the tests are presently being liberalized, the expected flood of litigation and fraudulant or frivolous claims has not materialized. The article further asserts that criticism based on such fears represent "policy considerations" grounded on convenience for the court system and blind to ·the ends of justice; Mr. Leibson credits California and Michigan in taking the lead in modernizing the tests. The area of mental distress has been largely ignored in law journals for the past several years. In bringing the state of the law up-to-date, Mr. Leibson remarked that his main hope was to provide practical arguments or, at the very least, encourage the development of viable alternatives to the present archaic tests. Through publishing this article in the Journal of Family Law, Mr. Leibson explained that he was directing discussion to practicing attorneys who are in an ideal position to help accelerate change. Those who know the Law School professor might ask, what a Commercial Code and consumer oriented instructor is doing in tort law. The answer lies in Mr. Leibson's Harvard University LL.M. thesis written on the subject at the request of an attorney friend. 3 In obtaining medical suppOCt for the article, Mr. Leibson interviewed numerous medical specialists in the Boston and Louisville areas including Dr. Harry Kozol recently in the news for his independent psychiatric evaluation of Patty Hearst. Mr. Leibson also gave credit to Ann Oldfather who assisted him in bringing the research up-to-date. A recent graduate of the Law School, Ms. Oldfather now practices with the firm of Wyatt, Grafton and Sloss. Mr. Leibson presently teaches the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and participates as a member of the University Senate Committee on the Allocation of Resources and is a member of the Law School's curriculum committee. He has authored two previous articles appearing in the Uniform Commercial Code Law Journal and the Akron Law Review, both in the Commercial Code area. Quick studies Ky. Criminal Law Decisions by Julie Williams Asst. Prof. Albert T. Quick has analyzed the 197 5-7 6 decisions of the Kentucky Supreme Court in the area of criminal procedure for the Kentucky Law Journal's upcoming Winter edition. Mr. Quick stated that his job, "Was to analyze some of the implications of the decisions. Basically I tried to determine the direction in which the Court appears to be moving and raised questions as to what issues attorneys are most likely to lose." This edition of the Journal is written basically for practitioners. It is intended to be used as a reference to major trends and notable decisions expounded upon by the Court. The Journal staff annually selects authors for each of 12 different areas of the law and pulls out the cases with issues relating to their respective topics. Mr. Quick received 58 cases from which he selected five for major consideration. "I went through and picked out three basic areas. These include search and seizure, harmless error, and the evidentiary use of similar criminal acts against the same victim," he explained. Mr. Quick was particularly concerned with the "plain view doctrine" and its relationship to law enforcement. With experience in training police candidates, he is well aware of the obstacles officers. face in the area of search and seizure. Dissatisfied with the lack of clarification on the part of the Kentucky court Mr. Quick said, "I hope to spell out their [police] participation in order to have a guide to invoke the plainview doctrine - spell it out so that we can say . . ~ .. ·' . .. . [to the officers] , 'now you know the criteria and have no reason to encroach upon Constitutional rights'." Constitutional rights also played a part in Mr. Quick's discussion of third party consent. Citing cases on point, Mr. Quick added, "since the recognition of a valid consent can turn aside the protection of the Fourth Amendment, the Court may in the future want to assess relative interests based on the concept of privacy. It certainly is well-established that an individual's right to privacy, upon which he justifiably relies, is protected by the Fourth Amendment." However, Mr. Quick indicated· that the Court only skirted the issues on the topic of third party consent and suggested that the Court look more to areas of privacy and exclusive use. The Court fared no better in its dealings with judicial error. "The Court did not go far and deep enough," according to Mr. Quick. "This case (Taylor v. Commonwealth) brings into focus the Court's analyzation as to the .- --·- •• .__ • • -- • ....__., .. "., # ~ _,.. .,.,..,r nature of the error and th~ appropriate test to ascertain if the error was harmless. As to the nature of the error, the Court had the choice to classify it as simply a violation of state procedure or law, or as a violation of a right secured by the federal Constitution," he emphasized. "It seems that the Court should have explore!f this question in light of certain recent United 'States Supreme Court decisions," h~ continued. "Here, the question could have been framed in the following terms: Did the restrictions placed on counsel, fall within those that are prohibited by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments?" Mr. Quick explained, "I was also quite concerned with one decision that establishes what appears to be a new rule of evidence,. The . Kentucky appellate court chose not to decide . . . but · instead took this opportunity to point the law in a new direction regarding the evidentiary use of similar criminal acts." Mr. Quick determined that "[I) f the state seeks but one conviction out of a series of similar criminal acts against the same victim, all of the evidence of all the acts midtt as well be treated as and called substantive evidence." It is Mr. Quick's contention that this decision will generate controversy on both a theoretical and practical level Criticism aside, Mr. Quick indicated that there was an overall basic improvement in the application and analyzation by the new Court. "Of course I would always like to see the Court report more facts and have a stronger analyzation of those facts in relation to applying ille law," he concluded. ..- . ~ I .4 Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 Readmission Process Offers Second Chance by Ken GolUher The readmission policy of the Law School can be found on page 25 of the Law School Bulletin. It reads as follows: No student dismissed from the Law School shall ever be readmitted unless a committee on readmissions, to be appointed by the dean, shall fmd that compelling reasons justify his readmission. The committee shall have the · power to set whatever conditions it considers appropriate on readmission. When one reads this as a potential first-year student, it probably is not given much thought. However, few students , make it through their first year without considering the possibility of disqualification or probation. When this passage is re-read with a genuine interest, it sounds rather ominous. Any student at the Law School failing to achieve a grade point average (GPA) of 2.0 on a 4.0 scale for any semester, or who's overall GP A falls below that mark, is automatically placed on probation. According to Prof. W. Scott Thomson, chairman of the Probation Committee, at one time academic probation carried little impact on the student invol~ed. It was the Committee's impression that the students themselves thought probationary status should carry more impact for those involved. "Students did not feel those on probation took it seriously enough. . . the 'student rumor mill' had begun to minimize the seriousness of the matter," he explained. Now when a student's grades fall below the 2.0 mark, he is promptly informed by letter of his probationary status and what performance is required of him First Year Stats before he will be returned to good standing with the Law School. When probationary students enroll for classes, their registration cards must be signed by the chairman of the Probation Committee and the students then receive a second letter telling them their registration has ·been approved. Also, students must check with the Committee twice during the semester to report their progress. Mr. Thomson described the added emphasis on probationary status as the Committee's desire". . . to handle each case before it becomes a trouble spot." If a student on probation receives less than a 2.0 in any semester, he is dismissed from the Law School as is any student who's Fine Frosh Found by Valerie Salven A first-year law class, it seems, is looked upon as being a fairly amorphous collection of students until after the results of first semester examinations are in. Adah Lovesee, admissions director of the Law School, said of first-year classes. "They all come in looking about the same" on paper. She characterized recent . classes in "excellent," but otherwise noted that "they haven't changed too much over the past few years." The first-year Law School class of 197 6-77 fits into this pattern of recent years, but the background statistics of the class show some differences as well as similarities to previous classes. The number of students enrolled in the first-year class, day section, this year was 143. There are 70 first-year students in the evening section. The median Law School Aptitude Test (LSAT) score for the class was in the range of 580 to 585, and the median Grade Point Average (GPA) for previous undergraduate and graduate-level work was 2.9. Although only 10 'per cent of the first-year class is made up of non-resident students this year, as compared to 15 or 20 per cent out-of-state in pre us years, ' a wide range of backgrounds are represented and the class includes alumni from 62 colleges and universities. Ms. Lovese said that the average age is slightly higher than in previous years, 24 for the day section and 28 for the evening section. About one-third of the members of the first-year day class are women - 45 out of the total enrollment of 143-and 16 women are enrolled in the evening division class of 70 members. History and political science were still the two most heavily represented undergraduate majors in the first-year class, but Ms. Lovesee pointed out that science and business majors are enrolling in increasing numbers each year. "It is no longer the case," Ms. Lovesee said, "that a student needs to major in political science or history to enter law school. . . we look for a good, broad background." Asst. Prof. Robert Stenger, a member of the Law School Admissions Committee for the last two years, said that it is difficult to evaluate a class until after the students have taken their first - set of examinations. He speculated that the attitudes of recent law school classes, however, reflect a trend in higher education generally. "There is less interest in public interest law . .. people overall GPA falls below 1.4. Also, a student who withdraws from school while on probation is deemed dismissed. Students wishing to be re-admitted after dismissal must submit a petition to the Office of Student Records and then appear before the Readmissions Committee for a personal interview. According to Mr. Thomson, generally about 15 to 20 students seek readmission each semester, most of whom are people who have spent some time out of school since their disqualification. One student who had been readmitted through this procedure (a third-year student) was candid about his experience. He described the Committee as "Fair, .. they know they're dealing with people, now want to work for the corporations." Mr. Stenger noted the higher proportion of women and lower proportion of non-resident students in this year's freshman class, but said that any long-run trends would probably depend on what available students there are to choose from the total pool of applicants each year. It has not yet been decided whether U of L will attempt to maintain a ceiling of 1 0 per cent on the number of non-resident students admitted each year, but a number of factors must be considered before any policy on the matter can be made. Mr. Stenger added, "We are not sure what other law schools are doing in Kentucky [about non-resident student admissions] . . . nor are we sure that it is constitutional to apply different standards to non-resident applicants." Career Night by Lee Calarie The annual Law School Career Night was conducted on Oct. 21. The program was organized by the Placement Office with the assistance of Judge Marlin M. Volz. Career Night is designed to introduce law school students to . the broad spectrum of opportunities open to persons who hold law degrees. Over forty representatives from various fields attended the program. The representatives supplied information and not used cars." He continued "They're looking for students who've shown the aptitude for success, but who've had personal problems which they've since eliminated." Mr. Thomson, also Chairman of the Readmissions Committee, agreed with this assessment. "We know that the people we deal with are qualified to graduate from law school, at least on paper. If they have been unable to make good grades there must have been intervening circumstances." According to the guidelines, the reasons for readmission must be compelling, but no exact formula exists as to just what constitutes "compelling" circumstances. "We handle each case personally," said Mr. Thomson. The Committee considers whether the student has remedied the problem(s) which first caused his disqualification. Such things as attitude and ability to devote a full time effort to law school are important. Each of the conditions for readmission is also a functionary of the circumstances. Usually students are only given one semester to re-coup their GPA deficiency, but the Committee tries to assign a goal which the students can reasonably attain. The third-year student who discussed his experience said, "They only gave me one semester to bring my accum up and it really put a lot of pressure on me at the time. But, I made it!" Not all those who apply for readmission succeed on their first attempt. "But," said Mr. Thomson, "we never close the door to anyone. . . they can reapply later." He concluded, "People can do a lot of growing up in a year or two and we've had a lot of good people come back and just do super work." answered . questions about employment opportunities available in their respective fields. The program is not designed to provide personal interviews with prospective employers. Rather, the main purpose of the program is to show law students the great variety of employment . opportunities available to them. Several local firms sent representatives, including Wyatt, Grafton & Sloss; Greenebaum, Doll, Matthews & Boone; and Brown, Todd & Heyburn. Also present were representatives of various local corporations which included the Louisville and Nashville Railroad; Standard Oil of Kentucky; Brown and Williamson; and Kentucky Fried Chicken. Representatives from insurance companies and banks also attended. Numerous governmental officials were present to show the variety of employment opportunities available outside of private or corporate practice. Attending were members of federal, state and local prosecuting offices and a member of the local legal aid society. Also present were representatives of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Corps of Engineers; Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Army's Office of Judge Advocate; Kentucky Department of Transportation; and the U.S. District Court and Kentucky Supreme Court law clerks. The employment opportunities available to law students tightens every year. Career Night enables law students to explore those areas which might be of personal iRterest and those areas where employment opportunities ar~ available.-. Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 5 Mirror Image Sternberg Views Past by Russ Crusott Marvin J. Sternberg, Justice of the Supreme Court of Kentucky, began his law studies immediately out of high school. He attended the Jefferson School of Law at night while trying to sell National Recovery Act (NRA) Blue Eagle placards and driving a horse and cart on a bread route by day. Graduating in 1933 at the low point oL the Depression, he struggled along in private practice taking on such tasks as collecting grocery accounts, accepting appointments in Police Court and whatever else his family and friends could direct his way. "It was rough," he remembers. "In Louisville, in 1935, you did what you could." Marriage and a dislike for "cut throat competition" influenced him to move to Jamestown, Ky. in 1935. With help from friends, he started his practice while he and his wife, Lillian, lived in a country hotel. Justice Sternberg described it as "one of those old country hotels where they serve big breakfasts and put it all out . on the table and · everybody eats together." But, he complained, "They charged so much - four dollars per person per week for room and board." Justice Sternberg fondly remembers those days in the country. He learned that "If you want friends, you have to be a friend. Rural people are open-hearted, loving people. During our whole stay in Jamestown, [from] 1935 to 1942, we Ky. Fares Well didn't have to buy a quart of milk or a pound of butter." He explained that, "Country practice is much more leisurely than in metropolitan Louisville." Although he generally did not like to take criminal cases, the Justice's first ease in Jamestown was a murder case at which he was co-counsel. After winning an acquittal, the father of the accused told Justice Sternberg and his co-counsel that they deserved a fee of some sort, so he gave them a dollar to split between them. A few weeks later at another murder trial he and his co-counsel were given $50 to divide. But he said, "In those days the fees were lower, $15 for a divorce . . . people paid what they could." In f957, he took his first stab at public office by running for Judge of the Jefferson Circuit Court, Division Two, Chancery Branch but was defeated. Undaunted, he ran for the same position in 1963 and won. He was re-elected in 1969. He then ran for and was elected to the Kentucky Court of Appeals in 1975. With the Judicial Amendment calling for the creation of the Kentucky Supreme Court, Mr. Sternberg was elevated to the position of a justice of that court. His present term expires in 1983. He responded to the possibility of his running again. "If I am of the same mind then as I am now, I am not going to be a candidate. Mrs. Sternberg and I want to travel and I want to do some hunting and fishing." Bar Results Compared CHICAGO, Oct. 21 - Bar admissions reached a record high for the sixth consecutive year in 1975, the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) reported today. The NCBE, an affiliate of the American Bar Association (ABA), said 34,930 persons were granted permission in 197 5 to practice law in the individual states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Len Young Smith, editor of the NCBE official publication "The Bar Examiner," said the figure has been climbing steadily since 1971 when the total was 20,510. "And based on preliminary figures it appears we're headed for another record year," Mr. Smith said. The admissions boosted the total number of lawyers in the United States to more than 400,000, also a record high. Of the 1975 admissions, 34,144 were by passing a bar examination and 786 were by receiving a diploma. (In five states - Mississippi, Montana, South Dakota, West Virginia and Wisconsin - state university law school graduates are automatically admitted to the bar. Marquette University Law School graduates are also admitted in Wisconsin without taking a bar examination). The NCBE said an additional 12,000 persons failed to pass state bar examinations./ California led in the number of adrnittees with 4,905. New York was second • with 3,413 followed by Florida's 1,933, Illinois' 1,882, Texas' 1,709, Pennsylvania's 1 ,626, Ohio's 1 ,430, New Jersey's 1,281 and Massachusetts' 1,278. Job Market Bleak CHICAGO, Oct. 23 - Newly certified lawyers looking for jobs face a buyers' market, an American Bar Association (ABA) magazine reported today. "As with most professions, legal starting salaries are not keeping up with the cost of living," said James Kilmer of David J. White and Associates, Inc., a Chicago-based management firm, in an article written for "Student Lawyer," official publication of the ABA's Law Student Division. "Supply and demand is the culprit," Mr. Kilmer said. "The lawyer glut is even causing a reduction in the amount of money some firms are offering to new graduates." ·· He said even some of those who graduated in the top 10 per cent of their classes are having trouble finding jobs. In the best position, he said, is the Spanish-surnamed female who graduated in the top quarter of her class; worst off is the white male who graduated in the lower half of his class or is a night-school graduate. Starting salaries this year ranged from $9,600 for a law firm non-patent post in Chicago to $28,000 for a corporation patent position, also in Chicago. This compares with a low of $11,000 and a high of $28,000 last year. The article covered Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, New York City, Philadelphia, Phoenix and Washington, D.C. · "The law has always been an elitist profession, but it is moving into a definite legal Darwinism phase regarding salaries," said Mr. Kilmer. On the newjudicial system set up by the constitutional amendment, Justice Sternberg sees it as "a new era of judicial jurisprudence in Kentucky. It will give the litigant, the people, the opportunity to come closer to the courts. [It will also 1 get rid of the backlog of cases" faced by the appellate courts. Describing the workings of the new Supreme Court, Justice Sternbent outlined how one of the more than 1 ,800 cases a year is handled by the justices. He explained that after the J:>riefs are filed, the chief justice assigns individual cases to each one of the justices including himself. Each justice then studies his cases and applicable law and arguments during the period called a "non-conference week." Here is a complete tabulation: Total Admitted 'Alabama 350 Alaska 112 Arizona 373 Arkansas 204 California 4905 Colorado 561 Connecticut 480 Delaware 50 D.C. 656 Florida 1933 Georgia 917 Guam 15 Hawaii 178 Idaho 119 Illinoia 1882 Indiana 557 Iowa 404 Kansas 343 Kentucky 352 Louisiana 542 Maine 136 Maryland 625 Massachusetts 1278 Michigan 984 Minnesota 640 Mississippi 220 Missouri 651 Montana 97 Nebraska 246 Nevada 102 New Hampshire 94 New Jersey 1281 New Mexico 192 The next week, which is known as a "conference week," the justice presents his disposition and statement of the case. If agreement is reached, he then writes the opinion which is circulated to each of the other justices who either adds comments or signifies his approval on the "kick back sheet." On Friday of the conference week the decisions are handed down. Conference and non conference weeks alternate throughout the term. The new system also reduces the number of cases that can reach the Supreme Court. Unless an offense carries a sentence of "20 years plus," or a motion to by-pass the Court of Appeals is made and granted, all appealed cases must first go through the Court of Appeals. The standard for the granting of a "motion to bypass" is set out in Rule 1.1 7 5 and says that there must be "great and immediate public importance." Justice Sternberg is proud of the Law School and wants it to "expand to meet all the standards of the American Bar Association (ABA) so there will be no . question as to its standing." He commented that, "[We] have a good school, a good faculty and a high class of students." Justice Sternberg supports the Law School strongly and is a director of the Law Alumni Foundation. Also, two of his clerks have been graduates of the Law School. Justice Sternberg was honored in 1974 by the Louisville Bar Association (LBA) as the recipient of its Judicial A ward. He also received the Distinguished Alumni Award from the U of Lin 1975. Total Total Passing Passing Admitted Examination Percentage By Diploma 350 76 0 112 74 0 373 76 0 204 94 0 4905 56 0 561 80 0 480 81 0 50 52 0 656 65 0 1933 83 0 917 55 0 15 94 0 178 83 0 119 83 0 1882 84 0 557 90 0 404 82 0 343 94 0 352 90 0 542 79 0 136 87 ' 0 625 54 0 1278 70 0 984 89 0 640 91 0 59 30 161 651 89 0 38 78 59 246 87 0 102 72 0 94 67 0 128I 74 0 192 68 0 New York 3413 3413 74 NA North Carolina 468 468 90 0 North Dakota 69 69 83 u. Ohio 1430 1430 89 0 Oklahoma 501 501 94 0 Oregon 438 438 83 0 Pennsylvania 1626 1626 81 0 Puerto Rico 411 411 54 0 Rhode Island 112 112 76 0 South Carolina 288 288 93 0 South Dakota 77 13 87 64 Tennessee 476 476 75 0 Texas 1709 1709 90 0 Utah 142 142 89 0 Vermont 75 75 80 0 Virgin Islands 21 21 70 0 Virginia 816 816 77 0 Washington 6<44 644 71 0 West Virginia 138 54 89 84 Wisconsin 548 130 83 418 Wyoming 59 59 92 0 TOTALS 34,930 34,144 . 74 . . 786 6 Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 Unification Disputed probably make "better all-round judges.'' He explained that specialization tends to cause one to lose the broad overview of the law. (Continued from page 1) · were opposed to the consolidation. They argued, in turn, that Judge MacDonald was only authorized, not ordered, to make the unification. . Consequently, in August, 1976, the Supreme Court ordered a merger of the Chancery and Common Pleas divisions but exempted the Criminal Division. Mr. Remmers said that no one liked this, so a request was· made of the Supreme Court to either order a full merger or to leave the courts as they are presently established. According to Mr. ·Remmers, even though the LBA Executive Committee had adopted · a resolution in June which supported the unification, at the hearing, he stipulated that 90 per cent of the Bar would be opposed "because they did not understand the issue." Louisville Atty. James Levin, who also spoke before the Supreme Court in opposition to the merger, said that he presented a petition to the Supreme Court which contained the names of some 250 attorneys and judges who opposed unification. He explained that this was merely a "cross section" and by no means a complete list. Mr. Levin said that there are "probably not 200 lawyers in Louisville who do 90 per cent of the trial work and they are almost unanimously against it [the merger] . " He aruged that if there are any inequities in the caseload within the system, "let us change the inequities, but not change the whole system." According to Mr. Levin, the present system is "so efficient." He said that Jefferson County handles approximately 40 per cent of all cases filed in Kentucky with less than 20 per ce]lt of the j_udg~ in the state. "Why take a good system which is operating and go to chaos?" he asked. A main argument of the opponents to merger is that under the current system, each judge is a specialist in his field. Judge Leibson emphasized the need for this specialization in his argument before the Supreme Court. He pointed out tha't the American Bar Association (ABA) and the Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) have recognized such need of specialization in the legal fields. Each Jefferson Circuit Judge stood for election in the branch where he considered himself best trained, said - Judge Leibson. "Everyone does best what they know and what they like best," he explained. He pointed out that on a particular Friday, his schedule called for a jury trial and five hearings, one of which was a divorce pretrial. The divorce pretrial was "the only task for which I lacked enthusiasm," he said. Judge Mike MacDonald of First Division Common Pleas and a proponent of merger, questioned the need for specialization. "We operate under rules which say there is no distinction between law and equity," he said. He agreed to a need for specialization of practice, but not in the judiciary. Judge MacDonald explained that at one time there was a sharp distinction between law and equity so the Louisville Equity Court was established. "You had Chancellors . . . and Criminal judges and the law made a distinction," he said. However, today much of this procedure is antiquated. According to Judge MacDonald, the Federal System has no Chancery or Common Pleas and no distinction is drafted into the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jefferson Circuit Court, however, retains its divisions while basically using identical rules (Ky. Rules of Civil Procedure). When asked for his opinion of the merger, Seventh Division Common Pleas Judge Thomas Ballantine said that he sees "nothing particularly wrong with it." He indicated, however, that he is "bowing to the inevitable." He said that he recognizes the "political facts of life" and explained . that "If the Supreme Court doesn't merge us, the Legislature will." The judge did say that he feels more comfortable in Common Pleas because "many of the things I do, I do by rote." As to the inequity of the caseloads, Judge Ballantine admitted that in the fall, winter and spring, the case loads of the courts are fairly equal. He indicated that all of the current judges are competent to go under the combined system. "Some have been away so long [from other fields of law] it will ta.ke time to get them back into it, but they will come around," he said. Finally, when posed with. th~ idea of having to leave the Common Pleas branch, Judge .Ballantine lamented, "I'll have to buy me a criminal law book and a book on divorce and throw away my Prosser!" Fourth Division Chancery Judge Richard Revell, indicated that merger will Judge Revell said that unification would "probably help the bench but hurt the litigants" as far as speedy trials are concerned. He believes that the Jefferson Circuit Court is number one in the nation for the speed of case disposition for state courts in communities of comparable size to Louisville. Judge Revell explained that merger will probably cause Jefferson to fall behind this record in that there will be a tendency to dispose of criminal cases first and postpone less urgent civil cases. "There has been a division in Chancery for a long time," he said. "If the population was large enough in the early 1800's, then surely today there must be reason for division in the system." Judge Revell agrees with the idea of specialization and said that the "More judges you have, the more reason to support division." He said that diversity of cases which would be caused by unification, would be interesting, however, "when one does many things, he can never operate as efficiently as when he does only one." Judge Leibson emphasized the "assembly line" process of rapidly turning out cases. ''We are geared to mass production and have to be," he explained. "We are absolutely current with our trials and only a couple of places in the country are like that." He credited this to specialization. By way of explanation, Judge Leibson said that in 1974, the 16 judges in Jefferson County disposed of an average of 970 cases per judge while the judges throughout the rest of the state handled only 617 cases per judge. Judge Leibson said that he was elected to a specific office created by statute, not by the Constitution. He explained that the repealed constitutional section mandated only that civil and criminal courts should be separate in Jefferson County - nothing was said about separating civil into Common Pleas and Chancery. Also, Judge Leibson said that he stood for a specific office - that of Common Pleas Third Division. He questions whether the court by rule can abolish his office. He explained that Common Pleas has a specific meaning and describes a. definite office, not a number as it would be under the merged system. Einally, Chief Judge L. T. Grant of the Fayette Circuit Court was contacted to explain how their system has been. operating since its merger in 1972. Judge Grant explained that until 1972, there were four divisions in Fayette with one judge handling criminal cases and three judges handling civil. As a result, the wnd jury met only four times per year. In 1972, two judges were added to the Fayette Cir~uit to improve the speed of the trials. It was agreed by all judges that each would handle both civil and criminal cases. Because of this, the grand jury now meets each month giving each judge two grand juries per year for which to try all indictments. Judge Grant said that Fayette is able to dispose of criminal trials in 25 to 30 days. "You can pretty well have a trial when you're ready," he said. ' Apparently the lawyers prefer the new system, according to Judge Grant. Also, no difficulty was experienced with the change. Judge Grant emphasized that ''What works here may not work there, so I can't say it is best for them [Jefferson Circuit] . " Each side remains adamant in its position. Mr. Remmers said that he is "very hopeful that a prompt decision [Supreme Court] will be made to coincide with the move to the new Hall of Justice." Judge Leibson, on the other hand, indicated that he believes that the Supreme Court feels it is without authority on which to act and instead a statute will have to be passed. Whatever the outcome, it certainly cannot be said that the losing side did not argue well. Traveling Moot Court Team Competes in Richmond by Ed Mann The U of L National Moot Court Team, comp<>sed of Dee Hill, Cliff Travis, and Bonnie Brown, represented the Law School in regional competition this. past weekend in Riclunond, Virginia. : . Accompanied by. Prof. Larry Knowles, substituting for Prof. Nathan Lord:who was called away due to an illness -in the family, the · team traveled to T. C. Williams School of Law at the University of Riclunond. Competing against teams from Duke, William and Mary, Kentucky, West Virginia, North Carolina, Richmond, Chase, and North Carolina Central in a double elimination tournament, the U of L team won in the frrst round, but lost in · the second. Ms. Hill said that the team felt really good about their frrst victory. The team brief had been written as a petitioner's brief, and they had been originally scheduled to argue the petitioner's side at 6:00 p.m. Thursday evening. A last minute change by officials forced tJ!e team to argue the respondent's side at 8:00p.m. against the University of North Carolina. A frantic two hour session in · the library. resulted, but thc;ir efforts were rewarded. A loss to William and Mary the next day·, however, put an end to their chances for advancement. : The C;lse argued by the competitors concerned a situation · ' in ·which a . corpbration had not complied with state sta,tutes regulating tender offers. Duke placed frrst in the competition and the Univer"sity of Riclunond took second place. The judges for the- competition were local lawyers, many of whom had participated in National Moot Court competition. Unlike some judges in previous years, Ms. Hill felt that the judges were very well-informed on the subject ~-matter Every question asked was meaningful and indicated excellent preparation by the judges, according · to Mr. Travis. When asked about the value' of moot court competition to the average law student, Ms. Hill replied that the moot court competition is a unique oppOrtunity to see what appellate practice is all about. As a result of his experience Mr. Travis ·, said, "I feel more confident now of my ability to handle matters which might come up in practicing law. It was a totally different feeling than the one I had in freshman competition." . ...... . .. .. - . J - •• • • "' ••••• ••• •• " .. . .. . . ............ · -- ·· ~---·---· ... ' ' o <'- __ .,_ ....... .... ... ..._ ....... ~.I 10. ~ o '* ~ • o ~ • • o., • • ,. ' • ~ • o Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 7 Nuclear Power Series Discharge Data Incomplete (Continued from page 2) Often chemicals can be concentrated to several thousands times their concentration in the environment. If a fish accumulated radioactive chemicals from a nuclear power plant and that ftsh in turn was eaten by a human, a critical pathway between the plant and the human population would exist. Such "critical pathways" must be avoided in locating and operating nuclear power plants. The specific health effect exerted by a radioactive element is dependent on the element, its energy levels, and its eventual location within the body. Certain elements have long biological half-lives; thus they are retained in the body for long periods of time. Other elements, such as tritium, pass quickly through the body. Those elements retained in the body for long periods of time usually seek out particular tissues or structures and concentrate at that location. · Strontium and Radium are bone seekers, and as such are concentrated in the bone. This site-speciftc concentration is responsible for localiz~d health effects, as radioactive strontium can be a causitive agent in leukemia, a bone rna-row disease. Radioactive chemicals responsible for such diseases are tightly regulated by federal agencies. The physiological effect of radioactive chemicals results from the disintegration of the chemical in the cell. Once in the body, a radioactive atom may disintegrate, releasing highly energetic ·particles which ionize other atoms in the host cell. Depending on the function of the atom and cell, the resulting alteration can be severe or insignificant. The location of the radioactive atom in the body primarily determines whether a disintegration will exert no effect on the cell or will alter the cell in such a way as to make it malfunction or cease functioning. The eventual fate of the disintegration is a matter of chance or statistics. A radioactive element may become incorporated in the reproductive deoxyribonucleic_ acid (DNA) of the gonads, and upon disintegration alter the genetic message to either an incoherent or wrong form, resulting in a genetic mutation. A disintegration may alter the reproductive process in a body cell, resulting in either a cancerous condition or in a non-cancerous alteration of the cell. Boudin To Lecture Leonard Boudin, a noted civil libertarian and practicing attorney, is slated as the second speaker of the Louisville Law Forum's Brandeis Lecture Series. The address is open to the public and will be presented on Thursday, Nov. 18 at 8:30 p.m. in Middleton Auditorium, Strickler Hall, Belknap Campus. Mr. Boudin's speech entitled "National Security and Freedom of Association" will highlight the suit he filed on behalf of the Socialist Worker's Party and the Young Socialist Alliance against the FBI, CIA and other regulatory agencies. The suit has resulted in uncovering the government sponsored COINTELPRO (counter intelligence disruption program). Its aim according to government memorandum received through the suit's discovery process was "to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize" civil rights organizations and groups opposed to the Vietnam War. Mr. Boudin's career has included defending labor unions in the 1930's and '40s and victims of the McCarthy era witchhunts. More recently his clients have included: Dr. Benjamin Spock, charged with conspiracy to violate selective service laws; Eqbal Ahamad, in a successful defense against charges of conspiracy to kidnap Secretary of State Henry Kissenger (also indicted for the same offense were Father Phillip Berrigan and Sister Elizabeth McAlister); and Daniel Ellsberg who was prosecuted for disseminating the celebrated "Pentagon Papers" to the press. In addition, Mr. Boudin has argued numerous cases before the Supreme Court including the landmark case of Kent v. Dulles, which guaranteed certain passport rights. Miller's 'Reflections' An exaggerated sense of poverty can no longer be an excuse for not seeking academic excellence, U of L President James G. Miller .said during his annual · address to the University Senate Oct. 27 .. Dr. Miller addressed the University community at the Health Sciences Center and again at Belknap Campus. His speech came from the "President's 1976 Annual Report 'Reflections'," which was also] distributed during the gatherings of. University personnel. "Our budget is now basically sound. . . . We must recognize that we can do much to improve our academic program even within our present . monetary constraints," Dr. Miller said. Since U of L is the state's principal urban university, Dr. Miller said it must strive to meet particular needs relevant to the community. Within the last three years, U of L has searched for and appointed eight new deans in degree-granting units. This new leadership has prompted a new look at our decision-making process, Dr. Miller said. Dr. Miller also looks toward better relations with U of L alumni in the future. "The bond we seek with the citizens of Louisville, Jefferson County and Kentucky will never be strong if we cannot form a valued and enduring association with our alumni," he explained. Though U of L is not yet one of the nation's top 100 universities according to the ratings of graduate and professional programs, Dr. Miller said that the University has made remarkable strides in recent years . "We can commit ourselves, once and for all, to the idea that we owe the community nothing less than a first-rate university. Several major state universities around the · country have demonstrated that large size and academic excellence are not incompatible. We, ·too, must choose excellence," he concluded. An increase in the inventory of radioactive elements in the environment will increase the probability of adverse health effects being manifested in· the human population. Such an increase is unavoidable in the operation of nuclear power plants. Accidental Discharges The safety design of nuclear power plants is improving as more is understood about nuclear power generation. However, safety features are often subjected to the human element, an element that is critical in the operation of nuclear facilities. Human errors account for most of the accidents that have occurred in the development of nuclear technology. However, the demanding conditions that materials in nuclear plants are subjected to under normal operating conditions can result in failures that the industry must consider in safety analyses of the plants. Many safety design features of nuclear power plants are back-up systems that have never been tested under accident conditions. Thus, to simulate the effectiveness of critical safety systems, computer models are used. Data generated from these models indicate that nuclear reactors now being planned will be able to withstand severe operating accidents. These computer models have never been calibrated against actual severe accident conditions, and are thus limited in applicability. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not require the nuclear power industry to consider in its environmental analysis the worst possible situation resulting from a nuclear power accident; a core meltdown. Such a condition results from the loss of coolant to the fuel core and the subsequent melting of the fuel rods into a puddle in the bottom of the reactor. Such a condition destroys the geometry of the fuel assembly and causes the uncontrollable discharge of radioactivity into the environment. The normal operation of nuclear power plants usually causes only a slight increase in the amount of radioactivity naturally found in the receiving stream. Regulating federal agencies do not consider this slight increase a threat to public health, based on the concept that below a certain threshold value, radioactivity has insignificant effects on the human body. Some scientists disagree with this concept, arguing that any increase in radioactivity increases the chance for a radioactive element to generate mutagenic or carcinogenic changes in body cells. No conclusive data exists to eliminate either concept. With the continued proliferation of nuclear power plants, the public must accept the increased probability of a severe nuclear accident and the problems associated with long term, low level radioactive discharges to the environment. The law library f'mally near full utilization. The stairway and second floor areas are to be carpeted to reduce noise and improve the study environment. Shelves, carrels and a lounge areaaie being installed in the basement. , { r r ( I 8 Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 ;::AReform Act Seminars !Bondsmen TakeActionl (Philadelphia) - Changes in the estate and gift tax law enacted by Congress in the Tax Reform Act of 1976 require the reexamination of virtually every estate plan drafted prior to enactment. In light of this situation the American Law Institute-American Bar Association Committee . on Continuing Professional Education (ALI-ABA) will offer a new Course of Study on Estate Planning under the New Estate and Gift Tax Law. The program will be presented three times in early 1977: Jan. 6-7 at the Washington Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C.; Feb. 17-18 at the Crown Center in Kansas City, Mo.; and Mar. 10-11 at the. Bonaventure in Los Angeles. This program is designed primarily for the general practitioner who does some planning of modest-sized estates, rather than for the estate planning specialist. The faculty will address itself to a discussion of what difference the new law makes and how the approach to estate planning will shift to maximize taxpayer benefits. The topics examined will be the substantially larger exemption; the increased marital deduction; the unification of estate and gift taxes into one transfer tax; farms and real property interests in closely-held and family businesses; the loss of a stepped-up basis for inherited property; and new provtstons for restricting generation-skipping transfers. For further information, or to register for the course, please contact the Registrar, ALI-ABA, 4025 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104; or telephone (215) 387-3000. The American Law Institute (Continued from page I) American Bar Association Committee on Mr. Manly is ftling a federal suit in the Continuing Professional Education (ALI-ABA) will offer a new course of Western District of Kentucky and is . study which will examine tax shelters in attempting to get an extension of time in light of the new Act. Tax Shelters after which to perfect -an appeal of the the Tax Reform Act of 1976: What Kentucky Supreme Court decision to the Happened and What's Left? will be held U.S. Supreme Court. The initial difficulty Dec. 2-3, 1976, at the International Hotel that Mr. Manly foresees in the federal in New Orleans. court mitiative is the possible res judicata The purpose of this program is to effect of the state court case, which was analyze and discuss the various Reform converted to a class action suit at the Act provisions dealing with shelters and circuit court level. However' if he can to assess the impact of the Act on taxpayers. How far has the Act reached? avoid dismissal, he believes that he may What shelters are covered? What is left by have a good bill of attainder case, and will way of shelter mecluinisms? What should also raise substantive due process issues. taxpayers do by yearend 1976? The bonding companies are seeking All Reform Act areas will be covered: injunctive relief as well as monetary depreciation recapture, limitations on damages. deductions, prepaid interest, partnership In appealing to the U.S. Supreme law changes, the minimum tax, and the Court, Mr. Manley is hampered by time traditional shelters such as real property, limitations and the absence of federal farming, motion pictures, and oil and gas. issues raised in the lower courts. Don H. Additionally, the program will focus upon current shelters, such as commodity Major, the attorney who handled the futures (straddles) and coal leasing. successful circuit court case, the appeal to For further information, please contact the Kentucky Supreme Court, and the the Registrar, ALI-ABA, 4025 Chestnut i 'plication for a stay of enforcement, Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104; or ,...te-le_p_h_o_n_e_<2_1_5_)_3_8_7--3_o_oo_. ___ __,/ Did You Know . · . . 1- explained that he and his colleagues decided not to raise many federal issues in the Kentucky courts as a matter of professional judgment. He said that he relied very heavily on Kentucky' constitutional issues in his argument to the Kentucky Supreme Court. Mr. Major had not been retained to appeal to the Supreme Court, but ftled a notice of appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court for the limited purpose of obtaining a stay of enforcement pending appeal. In other court action, two parallel suits were itled in the Eastern District of Kentucky, one of which was dismissed but the other is still pending. Atty. Stuart Lyon has fJ.led a civil rights class action suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky on behalf of defendants who wish to post commercial bonds. He recently ftled an answer to a motion to dismiss and is currently awaiting a ruling from U.S. Distric~ Court Judge Charles Allen. Tax Shelters Examined (Philadelphia) - The Tax Reform Act of 197 6 is the most important tax legislation since 1969. Because of its broad impact on the taxpayer, attorneys are now facing the formidable task of interpreting and complying with this new legislation. The Freedom of Information Act was originally designed to promote public knowledge of the operations of government. Yet 85 per cent of the lawsujts under the Act are filed by competitors aiming to get access to each others' secrets. The National Labor Relations Board has recently been bedeviled by parties utilizing the Act as a substitute for discovery. There is also much confusion about where the Freedom of Information Act ends and the Privacy Act begins. (Reprinted from ABA/LSD Bi·weekly Bulletin, Oct. 15, 1976) The Louisville Law Examiner is a student organization that is open to all students of the Law School Currently, there are several staff positions available including editorships. While experience is desired, it is not necessary. The cu"ent editors and staff will provide the guidance and training on an individual basis. All interested students tlTe encouraged to attend the regular meetings in the Examiner any young lawyer who has made it through law school and passed the bar deserves the best There are 110 finer law books than West books. They are edited and ' printed for the practicing lawyer. They meet practical needs; answer practical problems, and they always offer maximum ease of movement from one publication to another through the Key Number System, citations and library references. If you're a student soon to practice law or aJready a seasoned practitioner, be sure you give yourself the advantage ·or the best tools an at(omey can have ... West law books. · GEIE PFLUGHIUPT B.S. Northwestern University LL.B. Southern Methodist University WEST PUBLISHII& COIPAifY 584-5058 office in the Annex on Tuesdays at 12:15 or see any editor or staff member for infonnation. llnuisuillt Louisville Law Examiner School of Law · University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky 40208 Non-Profit OfJanization U.S. POST AGE PAID PwmltNo.7. Loul.ti ... Ky. ,. • \ l
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.
Title | Louisville Law Examiner 2.4, November 9, 1976 |
Alternative Title | Law Student Publications |
Contributors | University of Louisville. School of Law |
Description | The Louisville Law Examiner (1975-1991) was the second of three official University of Louisville School of Law student publications. |
Searchable Text | John M. Harlan Louis D. Brandeis Louisville Law Examiner Serving The University of Louisville Law School Community Volume 2 Number 4 Louisvllle, Kentucky, November 9, 1976 United We Stand? Court Merger -Debated by Don Pearcy and Sara Scott Moore On Monday, Oct. 11, 1976 at 10 a.m., a hearing was held in the Kentucky Supreme Court at Frankfort to decide one of the most .controversial issues to · ever come before the Louisville Bar Association (LBA). A decision was hoped for and exp.ected by the following Friday but to date, no ruling has been made. The issue debated was the proposed combining of the 16 Jefferson Circuit Courts into a "unified" court system as suggested by the Judicial Article which was voted upon by the people of the Commonwealth and passed in 1975. The controversy centers around the repeal of Section 137 of the Kentucky Constitution which was enacted in 1891 and specifically authorized any county with a population of at least 150,000 people to divide its Circuit Court into a Criminal Division and any other branches deemed necessary to facilitate expeditious handling of its caseload. According to LBA President Rick Remmers, who is a spokesman for the unification, section 137 especially established the Criminal Division. The other branches would have to be established by statute or local rule of the court. These other branches could be formed as needed which brought about the divisions of Chancery and Common Pleas. The Legislature then authorized new judges for these courts which today include three Criminal, six Chancery and seven Common Pleas judgeships. Mr. Remmers' position is that the repeal of section 137 by adoption of the Judicial Article (which repealed sections 109-139, 141 and 143) automatically invalidated the existence of the Jefferson Circuit Court's branch system and established a "truly unified Circuit Court throughout the Commonwealth." Judge Charles Leibson of the Third Division Common Pleas, and a spokesman against the unification, catagorically denies this rationale. He agreed that section 137 has been repealed but said that the Jefferson Circuit Court is specifically established by KRS 24.180 so the repeal of the constitutional provision did not disturb the branch system within Jefferson County. Judge Leibson said that the statute is in no way related to the constitution. "A constitutional section was repealed, not a statute," he explained. According to Judge Leibson, the only thing required is that the statute not conflict with a constitutional provision. " Nothing in the constitution says that every circuit court must hear the same types of cases," he said. "Nor is there anything which says that a court system the size of Jefferson should not be divided into 16 courts." The main issue suggested by Judge Leibson is "what will best serve Jefferson County?" He indicated that it is merely a question of policy, nothing more. Regarding the current Supreme Court battle, Mr. Remmers elaborated that initially the Supreme Court Chief Justice . wished to do a way with the branches to help equalize ·the caseloads. It was felt · that the Chancery was working too much while the Common Pleas cases were diminishing. In June, 1976, an order was issued by the Supreme Court which authorized Jefferson Circuit Court Chief Judge Mike MacDonald, to assign all cases as he saw Circu1ation 3500 Photograph by ClwiltoP'* RW.. fit to equalize the workload and to provide for prompt disposition of all cases. Mr. Remmers said that Judge MacDonald was given lee-way to work out his own system. Mr. Remmers conceded that the majority of the Jefferson Circuit judges (Continued on page 6) Profits Out, Bail Bondsmen Bedeviled by Ch-.ick Randall When the controversial legislation prohibiting commercial bail bonding and imposing criminal sanctions on the issuance of bail bonds for profit was passed last February, Kentucky bondsmen vowed to test the· new statute in Court. Don Rigazio of A .. A. Bonding maintained that the legislation was no more than a personal vendetta by Governor Carroll against Jimmy Johnson of Johnson Bonding Co. in Paducah. But after an initial victory in the Jefferson · County Circuit Court, the Kentucky Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the statute and denied a stay of enforcement pending appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Consequently, no commercial bail bonds have been issued since July. Many local. bonding co~panies already have had their phones disconnected. Others are effectively out of business, but must still produce defendants to protecttheir outstanding liabilities. There have been no indictments of bondsmen related to issuance of bail bonds for profit since the statute took effect. Johnson Bonding Co. has gone along with the new law 100 percent, according to Leroy Hayden, company vice president. "We don't solicit, but we still get calls," he said, "and we flatly refuse to issue new bonds." But the company is still sending agents into court daily ·to 0 ensure the presence of defendants. The fact that no money is coming in any longer doesn't make for a very good situation, according to Mr. Hayden. "As vindictive as this nut of a governor we have is, h e's making us keep in business until all liabilities are extinguished," complained Mr. Rigaiio who has some bonds that will not mature · until next November. Claude Benboe, another local bondsman, said that he has $200,000 in liabilities to protect. He explained that he still has to maintain a place of business, pay rent and pay the telephone bill, but has had no money corning in since July. Mr. Rigazio decided to get out ofthe legal battle after the Kentucky Supreme Court handed down its decision. ''The Governor will make it so rough foi: us that it won't be worth pursuing," he said. But other bondsmen are determined to continue challenging the legislation. Johnson Bonding Co. and Claude Benboe have recently retained Atty. Samuel Manly to pursue the matter. "We will continue to flgh.t this in court," Mr. Hayden maintained, "and we have no intention of forgetting it." (Continued on pap 8) On the Inside Brandeis Brief ••••••••••• : • ••••••• p. 2 Calendar of Events ••••••••••••••••• p. 2 ' Leib10n Publishes ••••••••••••••••• p. 3 Quick Publishes •••••••••••••••••• .p. 3 Readmiuions Policy ••••••••••••••• p. 4 Freshman Profile .••••••••••••••••• p. 4 Justice Sternberg ••••••••••••.••••. p. S Lawyers' Market .••••••.•••••••.•• p. S Moot Court ••••••••••••.••.•••••• p. 6 Forum's Speaker •••.••••••••.••••• p. 7 ALI-ABA ••••••••••••••••••••••• ,p. 8 Brandeis Brief On page two, Stephen A. Hubbs discusses dangers of nuclear waste water. ' . 2 Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 1!inUt!lume 1/jaw t~aminer Brandeis Brief D[J [J [J. . . . . . . . . . . . EJrJDD DONALD W. PEARCY Editor-in-Chief ·RUSSELL L. CRUSOTI' Ma11ilging_Editor LEE J. CALARIE Business Manager CHARLES T. RANDALL As110ciate Editor Joseph Castleli Brandeis Brief Editor Sara Scott Moore City Editor Christophez Rivezs Photography Editor K:imneth Golliher News Editor Staff Valerie Salven Articles Editor Ed Mann Alan Paraons Julie Williams 'lUdp MARUN ·M •. VOLZ Advisory Board Prof. LESUE W. ABRAMSON Editnrial Accelerated Depreciation Think back to August. · The law School opened its year with the usual bright shiney faces of the freshman class wandering through the old hallowed halls. However, the hallowed halls didn't look . so old and battered. The iacelift that had lasted more than a year was complete. The halls were bright, the walls were clean, everything looked new. Somehow it made things seem brighter and livelier. That was in August. Today, after only three months of shuffling students and furniture through the renovated halls, the walls have become scuffed, the doorways chipped, the door knobs falling off, and worst, that feeling of brightness has faded. Graffiti on walls is as old as the opposing__ thumb that allowed man to grip a charcoal stick in his cave. Today even the bathroom walls of the new wing have succumbed to the primitive urges of the school's cavemen. The students and faculty were forced to go a full . year without utilizing the main building in order for the renovation to be accomplished. We must ask ourselves. if we can afford to give up the building for that long again if we cannot stay ah~ad of wear and tear as it occurs. The:.· solution lies in two areas: preventive and remedial. The first lies with those who use the building; the second lies with those who are charged with maintaining the building. The students must learn to use, not abuse, the building. Many ofthe- walls are beginning to look as if they have been walked on as much as the floor. At least the floor gets scrubbed every once in awhile; the walls do not. The students should act and encourage others to act in such a manner that reflects a professional school not a junior high school. While much of the destruction that occurs is unnecessary, the fact is that much of the damage remains unrepaired and seemingly unnoticed for months. One wonders if it will take another major renovation before a wash bucket is seen much less a can of paint! The administration must exercise more supervision, not only over the facilities but those charged with maintaining the building on a daily basis. Deterioration is like any other fungus! It starts small, grows quickly and is hard to stop once it has gained a hold. The time to do something is n,ow, before too · much has to be 4one and all is given up for lost. i~l~~--~\,~· -------------·--------------------------~---------------, ;:Jl -:1" 'i?~; Nov. h-13: ;.-. . !! Nov. 15: Nov. 18: Nov. 19: Nov. 25: Dec. 1, 2, 3: Dec. 4-17: Dec. 9-11: Dec. 25: •Dec. 29-Jan. 5: . ,.:__ :: .. CALENDAR OF EVENTS Practical Sldlls Seminar, "Will Drafting and Ptobate," Barren River State Park . Bread and Butter Luncheon, Frank Burke: "Changes in Probate Practice," Rodeway lnn, 12-1 :30 p.m. Brandeis Lecture Series, Leonard Boudin, renowned civil libertarian attorney, Allen Court Room, Belknap Campus, 8:30 p.m. Student Bar Association Smoker, Masterson's Restaurant, 4-7 p.m . - , Thanksgiving Day Reading Days Examination Period Annual Kentucky Tax lnstitite, Galt House. Christmas Day Law Sell6ol Alumni 'j>eruvian carnival" Tour. Nuclear Power Series Look Before You Leap Waste Needs Study Stephen A. Hubbs received his MA. b Engineering from the Speed Scientific School at U of Lin 1974 after which lu. 'NOrked in Water Quality ControL From 1974 to 1975, Mr. Hubb~ -worked with Ten Ech Consulting Engineering, a Louisville based firm. He has lWJrked with the Louisville Water Company since August, 1975. Mr. Hubbs has done extensive study and research in his field and has published an article entitled "Sludge Disposal" in the in the American Waterworks JournaL by Stephen Hubbs All currently operating nucleat power plants unavoidably discharge radioactive elements into the environment. The nature of this discharge is greatly dependent on thi design, construction, and routine operation of the particular plant under consideration. Nuclear power stations currently operating in the United States fall in the generic category of thermal reactors; specifically, Pressurized Water Reactors {PWR's) and Boiling Water Reactors (BWR's). Nuclear reactors comprising a second generic category, the Breeder Reactors, are currently being investigated under experimental conditions. Although small "Breeder's" have· been built, the successful operation of a safe, efficient, full scale plant has not been accomplished in the United States. All nuclear power stations operate similarly to coal-ftred power stations. The major differences are the heat source used to generate steam and the problems associated with nuclear contamination of the environment. Nuclear reactors utilize a strategically arranged matrix of fuel rod "bundles" containing enriched uranium to generate heat. Heat is evolved from the "splitting" of large uranium atoms into smaller "fission product" atoms. The fission products likewise split into smaller "fission product,. atoms. The ftssion products likewise split into smaller atoms until a stable atom is formed. The time required for certain fission products to stabilize is in the order of 100,000 years {plutonium). Fission products are the major concern in environmental discharges from nuclear power plants. Fission products can become incorporated into the liquid discharge of a nuclear power plant in several ways. Small, pinhole defects in the cladding surrounding the fuel rods can leak fission products into the reactor coolant. Even if no pinhole leaks are found in the fuel rods, neutrons penetrating the cladding can activate corrosion products and other chemicals in the reactor coolant. The heat removed from the fuel rods via the coolant (usually water) either directly or indirectly produces steam to power the electric generators. In order to avoid the buildup of corrosion products and other unwanted chemicals in the coolant, a certain percentage of the coolant is replaced regularly with pure coolant. lbis process, termed blowdown, accounts for a large portion of radioactivity that eventually is discharged into the environment. The volume of water resulting in the blowdown depends on the buildup of unwanted chemicals in the coolant, which is often a function of the quality control utilized in the construction of the reactor and the fabrication of the fuel rods. The Radwaste System The blowdown from the reactor and all other radioactive liquids are channeled to the Radwaste System where they are treated to reniove radioactivity. If properly operated, the Radwaste System can reduce the radioactivity from most chemicals to a fraction of their original value. Certain elements (tritium) however, do not lend themselves to treatment. Tritium accounts for most of the radioactivity discharged from a properly operating nuclear power plant. The Radwaste discharge is diluted with low-radioactivity blowdown water from the cooling towers. Radwaste discharges can be continuous, cyclic, or irregular. Monitoring programs devised to access the radioactivity in receiving streams should thus be keyed to the discharge of the Radwaste system if such programs are to give' accurate information on discharged radioactivity. Health Effects of Radioactive Discharges Once radioactive elements are discharged into the environment it is important to · trace the path of specific elements to eventual receptors. This pathway is determined by physical properties of the receiving stream and by biological food chains in the stream ecosystem. In a stream, water current carries the elements downstream while ftsh, algae, bacteria, and other organisms take elements into their systems and concentrate them in tissues, organs, and bones. This process of bioaccumulation is a natural process in organism development. (Continued on page 7) Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 JFL Article Leibson Examines Emotional Distress by Alan Parsons Frequently courts have resorted to arbitrary tests in the determination of tort liability, more in the interests of efficiency and expediency, than in the balancing of the scales of justice. In an article to be published in the December issue of the Law School's Journal of Family Law, Assoc. Prof. David J. Leibson attacks one of these aribitrary tests. The article, entitled "Recovery for Damages for Emotional Distress Caused by Physical Injury to Another," attempts to establish an alternative test that more accurately reflects general tort principles. Mr. Leibson sets out a hypothetical situation wherein a defendant's negligent act results in the death of three children. The mother of the first ch.ild was a witness to the accident and within the zone of danger, The mother of the second child also witnessed the accident but was outside the zone of danger, while the third child's mother learned of the accident only after its occurrence. The question becomes whether a duty is owed to any of these mothers and whether their · mental distress can be differentiated in terms of allowing one to recover and not the others. Mr. Leibson contends that a duty should extend to each of the mothers and recovery should be allowed to each. He enlists the aid of advancements in medical science especially in the field of psychiatry to support his . contentions. In highlighting the article, Mr. Leibson stated that the gross unfairness of the present tests rests on the fact that in an overwhelming majority of jurisdictions, a duty would extend only to the frrst mother and in many of those instances only if she had suffered "physical impact." That each mother has suffered severe emotional distress has always been recognized by common sense, but only recently has medical science been able to document that this distress constitutes a real and substantial injury. A key point is that one would suffer the injury regardless of whether or not the accident had actually been witnessed. Medically substantiated, it would seem reasonable to expect that mental distress would follow from the serious injury or death of a close relative and it remains for the courts to impose a duty to refrain from acts or omissions that would cause such injuries. This duty to refrain from causing injury is a general tort principle and Mr. Leibson sees no sound medical or legal reason to deny its applicability to mental distress cases. The proposed test would create a duty to those persons having a "significant" relationship with the primary victim of the negligence act. Although the significant relationship would normally limit recovery to the immediate family, Mr. Leibson indicated that it could be extended in special circumstances to others as, for example,, fiancees. Even though proving significant relationship and mental distress would be difficult, this is no reason to deny recovery where such proof is possible, he explained. Mr. Leibson's research indicates that in jurisdictions where the tests are presently being liberalized, the expected flood of litigation and fraudulant or frivolous claims has not materialized. The article further asserts that criticism based on such fears represent "policy considerations" grounded on convenience for the court system and blind to ·the ends of justice; Mr. Leibson credits California and Michigan in taking the lead in modernizing the tests. The area of mental distress has been largely ignored in law journals for the past several years. In bringing the state of the law up-to-date, Mr. Leibson remarked that his main hope was to provide practical arguments or, at the very least, encourage the development of viable alternatives to the present archaic tests. Through publishing this article in the Journal of Family Law, Mr. Leibson explained that he was directing discussion to practicing attorneys who are in an ideal position to help accelerate change. Those who know the Law School professor might ask, what a Commercial Code and consumer oriented instructor is doing in tort law. The answer lies in Mr. Leibson's Harvard University LL.M. thesis written on the subject at the request of an attorney friend. 3 In obtaining medical suppOCt for the article, Mr. Leibson interviewed numerous medical specialists in the Boston and Louisville areas including Dr. Harry Kozol recently in the news for his independent psychiatric evaluation of Patty Hearst. Mr. Leibson also gave credit to Ann Oldfather who assisted him in bringing the research up-to-date. A recent graduate of the Law School, Ms. Oldfather now practices with the firm of Wyatt, Grafton and Sloss. Mr. Leibson presently teaches the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and participates as a member of the University Senate Committee on the Allocation of Resources and is a member of the Law School's curriculum committee. He has authored two previous articles appearing in the Uniform Commercial Code Law Journal and the Akron Law Review, both in the Commercial Code area. Quick studies Ky. Criminal Law Decisions by Julie Williams Asst. Prof. Albert T. Quick has analyzed the 197 5-7 6 decisions of the Kentucky Supreme Court in the area of criminal procedure for the Kentucky Law Journal's upcoming Winter edition. Mr. Quick stated that his job, "Was to analyze some of the implications of the decisions. Basically I tried to determine the direction in which the Court appears to be moving and raised questions as to what issues attorneys are most likely to lose." This edition of the Journal is written basically for practitioners. It is intended to be used as a reference to major trends and notable decisions expounded upon by the Court. The Journal staff annually selects authors for each of 12 different areas of the law and pulls out the cases with issues relating to their respective topics. Mr. Quick received 58 cases from which he selected five for major consideration. "I went through and picked out three basic areas. These include search and seizure, harmless error, and the evidentiary use of similar criminal acts against the same victim," he explained. Mr. Quick was particularly concerned with the "plain view doctrine" and its relationship to law enforcement. With experience in training police candidates, he is well aware of the obstacles officers. face in the area of search and seizure. Dissatisfied with the lack of clarification on the part of the Kentucky court Mr. Quick said, "I hope to spell out their [police] participation in order to have a guide to invoke the plainview doctrine - spell it out so that we can say . . ~ .. ·' . .. . [to the officers] , 'now you know the criteria and have no reason to encroach upon Constitutional rights'." Constitutional rights also played a part in Mr. Quick's discussion of third party consent. Citing cases on point, Mr. Quick added, "since the recognition of a valid consent can turn aside the protection of the Fourth Amendment, the Court may in the future want to assess relative interests based on the concept of privacy. It certainly is well-established that an individual's right to privacy, upon which he justifiably relies, is protected by the Fourth Amendment." However, Mr. Quick indicated· that the Court only skirted the issues on the topic of third party consent and suggested that the Court look more to areas of privacy and exclusive use. The Court fared no better in its dealings with judicial error. "The Court did not go far and deep enough," according to Mr. Quick. "This case (Taylor v. Commonwealth) brings into focus the Court's analyzation as to the .- --·- •• .__ • • -- • ....__., .. "., # ~ _,.. .,.,..,r nature of the error and th~ appropriate test to ascertain if the error was harmless. As to the nature of the error, the Court had the choice to classify it as simply a violation of state procedure or law, or as a violation of a right secured by the federal Constitution," he emphasized. "It seems that the Court should have explore!f this question in light of certain recent United 'States Supreme Court decisions," h~ continued. "Here, the question could have been framed in the following terms: Did the restrictions placed on counsel, fall within those that are prohibited by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments?" Mr. Quick explained, "I was also quite concerned with one decision that establishes what appears to be a new rule of evidence,. The . Kentucky appellate court chose not to decide . . . but · instead took this opportunity to point the law in a new direction regarding the evidentiary use of similar criminal acts." Mr. Quick determined that "[I) f the state seeks but one conviction out of a series of similar criminal acts against the same victim, all of the evidence of all the acts midtt as well be treated as and called substantive evidence." It is Mr. Quick's contention that this decision will generate controversy on both a theoretical and practical level Criticism aside, Mr. Quick indicated that there was an overall basic improvement in the application and analyzation by the new Court. "Of course I would always like to see the Court report more facts and have a stronger analyzation of those facts in relation to applying ille law," he concluded. ..- . ~ I .4 Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 Readmission Process Offers Second Chance by Ken GolUher The readmission policy of the Law School can be found on page 25 of the Law School Bulletin. It reads as follows: No student dismissed from the Law School shall ever be readmitted unless a committee on readmissions, to be appointed by the dean, shall fmd that compelling reasons justify his readmission. The committee shall have the · power to set whatever conditions it considers appropriate on readmission. When one reads this as a potential first-year student, it probably is not given much thought. However, few students , make it through their first year without considering the possibility of disqualification or probation. When this passage is re-read with a genuine interest, it sounds rather ominous. Any student at the Law School failing to achieve a grade point average (GPA) of 2.0 on a 4.0 scale for any semester, or who's overall GP A falls below that mark, is automatically placed on probation. According to Prof. W. Scott Thomson, chairman of the Probation Committee, at one time academic probation carried little impact on the student invol~ed. It was the Committee's impression that the students themselves thought probationary status should carry more impact for those involved. "Students did not feel those on probation took it seriously enough. . . the 'student rumor mill' had begun to minimize the seriousness of the matter," he explained. Now when a student's grades fall below the 2.0 mark, he is promptly informed by letter of his probationary status and what performance is required of him First Year Stats before he will be returned to good standing with the Law School. When probationary students enroll for classes, their registration cards must be signed by the chairman of the Probation Committee and the students then receive a second letter telling them their registration has ·been approved. Also, students must check with the Committee twice during the semester to report their progress. Mr. Thomson described the added emphasis on probationary status as the Committee's desire". . . to handle each case before it becomes a trouble spot." If a student on probation receives less than a 2.0 in any semester, he is dismissed from the Law School as is any student who's Fine Frosh Found by Valerie Salven A first-year law class, it seems, is looked upon as being a fairly amorphous collection of students until after the results of first semester examinations are in. Adah Lovesee, admissions director of the Law School, said of first-year classes. "They all come in looking about the same" on paper. She characterized recent . classes in "excellent," but otherwise noted that "they haven't changed too much over the past few years." The first-year Law School class of 197 6-77 fits into this pattern of recent years, but the background statistics of the class show some differences as well as similarities to previous classes. The number of students enrolled in the first-year class, day section, this year was 143. There are 70 first-year students in the evening section. The median Law School Aptitude Test (LSAT) score for the class was in the range of 580 to 585, and the median Grade Point Average (GPA) for previous undergraduate and graduate-level work was 2.9. Although only 10 'per cent of the first-year class is made up of non-resident students this year, as compared to 15 or 20 per cent out-of-state in pre us years, ' a wide range of backgrounds are represented and the class includes alumni from 62 colleges and universities. Ms. Lovese said that the average age is slightly higher than in previous years, 24 for the day section and 28 for the evening section. About one-third of the members of the first-year day class are women - 45 out of the total enrollment of 143-and 16 women are enrolled in the evening division class of 70 members. History and political science were still the two most heavily represented undergraduate majors in the first-year class, but Ms. Lovesee pointed out that science and business majors are enrolling in increasing numbers each year. "It is no longer the case," Ms. Lovesee said, "that a student needs to major in political science or history to enter law school. . . we look for a good, broad background." Asst. Prof. Robert Stenger, a member of the Law School Admissions Committee for the last two years, said that it is difficult to evaluate a class until after the students have taken their first - set of examinations. He speculated that the attitudes of recent law school classes, however, reflect a trend in higher education generally. "There is less interest in public interest law . .. people overall GPA falls below 1.4. Also, a student who withdraws from school while on probation is deemed dismissed. Students wishing to be re-admitted after dismissal must submit a petition to the Office of Student Records and then appear before the Readmissions Committee for a personal interview. According to Mr. Thomson, generally about 15 to 20 students seek readmission each semester, most of whom are people who have spent some time out of school since their disqualification. One student who had been readmitted through this procedure (a third-year student) was candid about his experience. He described the Committee as "Fair, .. they know they're dealing with people, now want to work for the corporations." Mr. Stenger noted the higher proportion of women and lower proportion of non-resident students in this year's freshman class, but said that any long-run trends would probably depend on what available students there are to choose from the total pool of applicants each year. It has not yet been decided whether U of L will attempt to maintain a ceiling of 1 0 per cent on the number of non-resident students admitted each year, but a number of factors must be considered before any policy on the matter can be made. Mr. Stenger added, "We are not sure what other law schools are doing in Kentucky [about non-resident student admissions] . . . nor are we sure that it is constitutional to apply different standards to non-resident applicants." Career Night by Lee Calarie The annual Law School Career Night was conducted on Oct. 21. The program was organized by the Placement Office with the assistance of Judge Marlin M. Volz. Career Night is designed to introduce law school students to . the broad spectrum of opportunities open to persons who hold law degrees. Over forty representatives from various fields attended the program. The representatives supplied information and not used cars." He continued "They're looking for students who've shown the aptitude for success, but who've had personal problems which they've since eliminated." Mr. Thomson, also Chairman of the Readmissions Committee, agreed with this assessment. "We know that the people we deal with are qualified to graduate from law school, at least on paper. If they have been unable to make good grades there must have been intervening circumstances." According to the guidelines, the reasons for readmission must be compelling, but no exact formula exists as to just what constitutes "compelling" circumstances. "We handle each case personally," said Mr. Thomson. The Committee considers whether the student has remedied the problem(s) which first caused his disqualification. Such things as attitude and ability to devote a full time effort to law school are important. Each of the conditions for readmission is also a functionary of the circumstances. Usually students are only given one semester to re-coup their GPA deficiency, but the Committee tries to assign a goal which the students can reasonably attain. The third-year student who discussed his experience said, "They only gave me one semester to bring my accum up and it really put a lot of pressure on me at the time. But, I made it!" Not all those who apply for readmission succeed on their first attempt. "But," said Mr. Thomson, "we never close the door to anyone. . . they can reapply later." He concluded, "People can do a lot of growing up in a year or two and we've had a lot of good people come back and just do super work." answered . questions about employment opportunities available in their respective fields. The program is not designed to provide personal interviews with prospective employers. Rather, the main purpose of the program is to show law students the great variety of employment . opportunities available to them. Several local firms sent representatives, including Wyatt, Grafton & Sloss; Greenebaum, Doll, Matthews & Boone; and Brown, Todd & Heyburn. Also present were representatives of various local corporations which included the Louisville and Nashville Railroad; Standard Oil of Kentucky; Brown and Williamson; and Kentucky Fried Chicken. Representatives from insurance companies and banks also attended. Numerous governmental officials were present to show the variety of employment opportunities available outside of private or corporate practice. Attending were members of federal, state and local prosecuting offices and a member of the local legal aid society. Also present were representatives of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; Corps of Engineers; Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Army's Office of Judge Advocate; Kentucky Department of Transportation; and the U.S. District Court and Kentucky Supreme Court law clerks. The employment opportunities available to law students tightens every year. Career Night enables law students to explore those areas which might be of personal iRterest and those areas where employment opportunities ar~ available.-. Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 5 Mirror Image Sternberg Views Past by Russ Crusott Marvin J. Sternberg, Justice of the Supreme Court of Kentucky, began his law studies immediately out of high school. He attended the Jefferson School of Law at night while trying to sell National Recovery Act (NRA) Blue Eagle placards and driving a horse and cart on a bread route by day. Graduating in 1933 at the low point oL the Depression, he struggled along in private practice taking on such tasks as collecting grocery accounts, accepting appointments in Police Court and whatever else his family and friends could direct his way. "It was rough," he remembers. "In Louisville, in 1935, you did what you could." Marriage and a dislike for "cut throat competition" influenced him to move to Jamestown, Ky. in 1935. With help from friends, he started his practice while he and his wife, Lillian, lived in a country hotel. Justice Sternberg described it as "one of those old country hotels where they serve big breakfasts and put it all out . on the table and · everybody eats together." But, he complained, "They charged so much - four dollars per person per week for room and board." Justice Sternberg fondly remembers those days in the country. He learned that "If you want friends, you have to be a friend. Rural people are open-hearted, loving people. During our whole stay in Jamestown, [from] 1935 to 1942, we Ky. Fares Well didn't have to buy a quart of milk or a pound of butter." He explained that, "Country practice is much more leisurely than in metropolitan Louisville." Although he generally did not like to take criminal cases, the Justice's first ease in Jamestown was a murder case at which he was co-counsel. After winning an acquittal, the father of the accused told Justice Sternberg and his co-counsel that they deserved a fee of some sort, so he gave them a dollar to split between them. A few weeks later at another murder trial he and his co-counsel were given $50 to divide. But he said, "In those days the fees were lower, $15 for a divorce . . . people paid what they could." In f957, he took his first stab at public office by running for Judge of the Jefferson Circuit Court, Division Two, Chancery Branch but was defeated. Undaunted, he ran for the same position in 1963 and won. He was re-elected in 1969. He then ran for and was elected to the Kentucky Court of Appeals in 1975. With the Judicial Amendment calling for the creation of the Kentucky Supreme Court, Mr. Sternberg was elevated to the position of a justice of that court. His present term expires in 1983. He responded to the possibility of his running again. "If I am of the same mind then as I am now, I am not going to be a candidate. Mrs. Sternberg and I want to travel and I want to do some hunting and fishing." Bar Results Compared CHICAGO, Oct. 21 - Bar admissions reached a record high for the sixth consecutive year in 1975, the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) reported today. The NCBE, an affiliate of the American Bar Association (ABA), said 34,930 persons were granted permission in 197 5 to practice law in the individual states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Len Young Smith, editor of the NCBE official publication "The Bar Examiner," said the figure has been climbing steadily since 1971 when the total was 20,510. "And based on preliminary figures it appears we're headed for another record year," Mr. Smith said. The admissions boosted the total number of lawyers in the United States to more than 400,000, also a record high. Of the 1975 admissions, 34,144 were by passing a bar examination and 786 were by receiving a diploma. (In five states - Mississippi, Montana, South Dakota, West Virginia and Wisconsin - state university law school graduates are automatically admitted to the bar. Marquette University Law School graduates are also admitted in Wisconsin without taking a bar examination). The NCBE said an additional 12,000 persons failed to pass state bar examinations./ California led in the number of adrnittees with 4,905. New York was second • with 3,413 followed by Florida's 1,933, Illinois' 1,882, Texas' 1,709, Pennsylvania's 1 ,626, Ohio's 1 ,430, New Jersey's 1,281 and Massachusetts' 1,278. Job Market Bleak CHICAGO, Oct. 23 - Newly certified lawyers looking for jobs face a buyers' market, an American Bar Association (ABA) magazine reported today. "As with most professions, legal starting salaries are not keeping up with the cost of living," said James Kilmer of David J. White and Associates, Inc., a Chicago-based management firm, in an article written for "Student Lawyer," official publication of the ABA's Law Student Division. "Supply and demand is the culprit," Mr. Kilmer said. "The lawyer glut is even causing a reduction in the amount of money some firms are offering to new graduates." ·· He said even some of those who graduated in the top 10 per cent of their classes are having trouble finding jobs. In the best position, he said, is the Spanish-surnamed female who graduated in the top quarter of her class; worst off is the white male who graduated in the lower half of his class or is a night-school graduate. Starting salaries this year ranged from $9,600 for a law firm non-patent post in Chicago to $28,000 for a corporation patent position, also in Chicago. This compares with a low of $11,000 and a high of $28,000 last year. The article covered Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, New York City, Philadelphia, Phoenix and Washington, D.C. · "The law has always been an elitist profession, but it is moving into a definite legal Darwinism phase regarding salaries," said Mr. Kilmer. On the newjudicial system set up by the constitutional amendment, Justice Sternberg sees it as "a new era of judicial jurisprudence in Kentucky. It will give the litigant, the people, the opportunity to come closer to the courts. [It will also 1 get rid of the backlog of cases" faced by the appellate courts. Describing the workings of the new Supreme Court, Justice Sternbent outlined how one of the more than 1 ,800 cases a year is handled by the justices. He explained that after the J:>riefs are filed, the chief justice assigns individual cases to each one of the justices including himself. Each justice then studies his cases and applicable law and arguments during the period called a "non-conference week." Here is a complete tabulation: Total Admitted 'Alabama 350 Alaska 112 Arizona 373 Arkansas 204 California 4905 Colorado 561 Connecticut 480 Delaware 50 D.C. 656 Florida 1933 Georgia 917 Guam 15 Hawaii 178 Idaho 119 Illinoia 1882 Indiana 557 Iowa 404 Kansas 343 Kentucky 352 Louisiana 542 Maine 136 Maryland 625 Massachusetts 1278 Michigan 984 Minnesota 640 Mississippi 220 Missouri 651 Montana 97 Nebraska 246 Nevada 102 New Hampshire 94 New Jersey 1281 New Mexico 192 The next week, which is known as a "conference week," the justice presents his disposition and statement of the case. If agreement is reached, he then writes the opinion which is circulated to each of the other justices who either adds comments or signifies his approval on the "kick back sheet." On Friday of the conference week the decisions are handed down. Conference and non conference weeks alternate throughout the term. The new system also reduces the number of cases that can reach the Supreme Court. Unless an offense carries a sentence of "20 years plus," or a motion to by-pass the Court of Appeals is made and granted, all appealed cases must first go through the Court of Appeals. The standard for the granting of a "motion to bypass" is set out in Rule 1.1 7 5 and says that there must be "great and immediate public importance." Justice Sternberg is proud of the Law School and wants it to "expand to meet all the standards of the American Bar Association (ABA) so there will be no . question as to its standing." He commented that, "[We] have a good school, a good faculty and a high class of students." Justice Sternberg supports the Law School strongly and is a director of the Law Alumni Foundation. Also, two of his clerks have been graduates of the Law School. Justice Sternberg was honored in 1974 by the Louisville Bar Association (LBA) as the recipient of its Judicial A ward. He also received the Distinguished Alumni Award from the U of Lin 1975. Total Total Passing Passing Admitted Examination Percentage By Diploma 350 76 0 112 74 0 373 76 0 204 94 0 4905 56 0 561 80 0 480 81 0 50 52 0 656 65 0 1933 83 0 917 55 0 15 94 0 178 83 0 119 83 0 1882 84 0 557 90 0 404 82 0 343 94 0 352 90 0 542 79 0 136 87 ' 0 625 54 0 1278 70 0 984 89 0 640 91 0 59 30 161 651 89 0 38 78 59 246 87 0 102 72 0 94 67 0 128I 74 0 192 68 0 New York 3413 3413 74 NA North Carolina 468 468 90 0 North Dakota 69 69 83 u. Ohio 1430 1430 89 0 Oklahoma 501 501 94 0 Oregon 438 438 83 0 Pennsylvania 1626 1626 81 0 Puerto Rico 411 411 54 0 Rhode Island 112 112 76 0 South Carolina 288 288 93 0 South Dakota 77 13 87 64 Tennessee 476 476 75 0 Texas 1709 1709 90 0 Utah 142 142 89 0 Vermont 75 75 80 0 Virgin Islands 21 21 70 0 Virginia 816 816 77 0 Washington 6<44 644 71 0 West Virginia 138 54 89 84 Wisconsin 548 130 83 418 Wyoming 59 59 92 0 TOTALS 34,930 34,144 . 74 . . 786 6 Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 Unification Disputed probably make "better all-round judges.'' He explained that specialization tends to cause one to lose the broad overview of the law. (Continued from page 1) · were opposed to the consolidation. They argued, in turn, that Judge MacDonald was only authorized, not ordered, to make the unification. . Consequently, in August, 1976, the Supreme Court ordered a merger of the Chancery and Common Pleas divisions but exempted the Criminal Division. Mr. Remmers said that no one liked this, so a request was· made of the Supreme Court to either order a full merger or to leave the courts as they are presently established. According to Mr. ·Remmers, even though the LBA Executive Committee had adopted · a resolution in June which supported the unification, at the hearing, he stipulated that 90 per cent of the Bar would be opposed "because they did not understand the issue." Louisville Atty. James Levin, who also spoke before the Supreme Court in opposition to the merger, said that he presented a petition to the Supreme Court which contained the names of some 250 attorneys and judges who opposed unification. He explained that this was merely a "cross section" and by no means a complete list. Mr. Levin said that there are "probably not 200 lawyers in Louisville who do 90 per cent of the trial work and they are almost unanimously against it [the merger] . " He aruged that if there are any inequities in the caseload within the system, "let us change the inequities, but not change the whole system." According to Mr. Levin, the present system is "so efficient." He said that Jefferson County handles approximately 40 per cent of all cases filed in Kentucky with less than 20 per ce]lt of the j_udg~ in the state. "Why take a good system which is operating and go to chaos?" he asked. A main argument of the opponents to merger is that under the current system, each judge is a specialist in his field. Judge Leibson emphasized the need for this specialization in his argument before the Supreme Court. He pointed out tha't the American Bar Association (ABA) and the Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) have recognized such need of specialization in the legal fields. Each Jefferson Circuit Judge stood for election in the branch where he considered himself best trained, said - Judge Leibson. "Everyone does best what they know and what they like best," he explained. He pointed out that on a particular Friday, his schedule called for a jury trial and five hearings, one of which was a divorce pretrial. The divorce pretrial was "the only task for which I lacked enthusiasm," he said. Judge Mike MacDonald of First Division Common Pleas and a proponent of merger, questioned the need for specialization. "We operate under rules which say there is no distinction between law and equity," he said. He agreed to a need for specialization of practice, but not in the judiciary. Judge MacDonald explained that at one time there was a sharp distinction between law and equity so the Louisville Equity Court was established. "You had Chancellors . . . and Criminal judges and the law made a distinction," he said. However, today much of this procedure is antiquated. According to Judge MacDonald, the Federal System has no Chancery or Common Pleas and no distinction is drafted into the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jefferson Circuit Court, however, retains its divisions while basically using identical rules (Ky. Rules of Civil Procedure). When asked for his opinion of the merger, Seventh Division Common Pleas Judge Thomas Ballantine said that he sees "nothing particularly wrong with it." He indicated, however, that he is "bowing to the inevitable." He said that he recognizes the "political facts of life" and explained . that "If the Supreme Court doesn't merge us, the Legislature will." The judge did say that he feels more comfortable in Common Pleas because "many of the things I do, I do by rote." As to the inequity of the caseloads, Judge Ballantine admitted that in the fall, winter and spring, the case loads of the courts are fairly equal. He indicated that all of the current judges are competent to go under the combined system. "Some have been away so long [from other fields of law] it will ta.ke time to get them back into it, but they will come around," he said. Finally, when posed with. th~ idea of having to leave the Common Pleas branch, Judge .Ballantine lamented, "I'll have to buy me a criminal law book and a book on divorce and throw away my Prosser!" Fourth Division Chancery Judge Richard Revell, indicated that merger will Judge Revell said that unification would "probably help the bench but hurt the litigants" as far as speedy trials are concerned. He believes that the Jefferson Circuit Court is number one in the nation for the speed of case disposition for state courts in communities of comparable size to Louisville. Judge Revell explained that merger will probably cause Jefferson to fall behind this record in that there will be a tendency to dispose of criminal cases first and postpone less urgent civil cases. "There has been a division in Chancery for a long time," he said. "If the population was large enough in the early 1800's, then surely today there must be reason for division in the system." Judge Revell agrees with the idea of specialization and said that the "More judges you have, the more reason to support division." He said that diversity of cases which would be caused by unification, would be interesting, however, "when one does many things, he can never operate as efficiently as when he does only one." Judge Leibson emphasized the "assembly line" process of rapidly turning out cases. ''We are geared to mass production and have to be," he explained. "We are absolutely current with our trials and only a couple of places in the country are like that." He credited this to specialization. By way of explanation, Judge Leibson said that in 1974, the 16 judges in Jefferson County disposed of an average of 970 cases per judge while the judges throughout the rest of the state handled only 617 cases per judge. Judge Leibson said that he was elected to a specific office created by statute, not by the Constitution. He explained that the repealed constitutional section mandated only that civil and criminal courts should be separate in Jefferson County - nothing was said about separating civil into Common Pleas and Chancery. Also, Judge Leibson said that he stood for a specific office - that of Common Pleas Third Division. He questions whether the court by rule can abolish his office. He explained that Common Pleas has a specific meaning and describes a. definite office, not a number as it would be under the merged system. Einally, Chief Judge L. T. Grant of the Fayette Circuit Court was contacted to explain how their system has been. operating since its merger in 1972. Judge Grant explained that until 1972, there were four divisions in Fayette with one judge handling criminal cases and three judges handling civil. As a result, the wnd jury met only four times per year. In 1972, two judges were added to the Fayette Cir~uit to improve the speed of the trials. It was agreed by all judges that each would handle both civil and criminal cases. Because of this, the grand jury now meets each month giving each judge two grand juries per year for which to try all indictments. Judge Grant said that Fayette is able to dispose of criminal trials in 25 to 30 days. "You can pretty well have a trial when you're ready," he said. ' Apparently the lawyers prefer the new system, according to Judge Grant. Also, no difficulty was experienced with the change. Judge Grant emphasized that ''What works here may not work there, so I can't say it is best for them [Jefferson Circuit] . " Each side remains adamant in its position. Mr. Remmers said that he is "very hopeful that a prompt decision [Supreme Court] will be made to coincide with the move to the new Hall of Justice." Judge Leibson, on the other hand, indicated that he believes that the Supreme Court feels it is without authority on which to act and instead a statute will have to be passed. Whatever the outcome, it certainly cannot be said that the losing side did not argue well. Traveling Moot Court Team Competes in Richmond by Ed Mann The U of L National Moot Court Team, comp<>sed of Dee Hill, Cliff Travis, and Bonnie Brown, represented the Law School in regional competition this. past weekend in Riclunond, Virginia. : . Accompanied by. Prof. Larry Knowles, substituting for Prof. Nathan Lord:who was called away due to an illness -in the family, the · team traveled to T. C. Williams School of Law at the University of Riclunond. Competing against teams from Duke, William and Mary, Kentucky, West Virginia, North Carolina, Richmond, Chase, and North Carolina Central in a double elimination tournament, the U of L team won in the frrst round, but lost in · the second. Ms. Hill said that the team felt really good about their frrst victory. The team brief had been written as a petitioner's brief, and they had been originally scheduled to argue the petitioner's side at 6:00 p.m. Thursday evening. A last minute change by officials forced tJ!e team to argue the respondent's side at 8:00p.m. against the University of North Carolina. A frantic two hour session in · the library. resulted, but thc;ir efforts were rewarded. A loss to William and Mary the next day·, however, put an end to their chances for advancement. : The C;lse argued by the competitors concerned a situation · ' in ·which a . corpbration had not complied with state sta,tutes regulating tender offers. Duke placed frrst in the competition and the Univer"sity of Riclunond took second place. The judges for the- competition were local lawyers, many of whom had participated in National Moot Court competition. Unlike some judges in previous years, Ms. Hill felt that the judges were very well-informed on the subject ~-matter Every question asked was meaningful and indicated excellent preparation by the judges, according · to Mr. Travis. When asked about the value' of moot court competition to the average law student, Ms. Hill replied that the moot court competition is a unique oppOrtunity to see what appellate practice is all about. As a result of his experience Mr. Travis ·, said, "I feel more confident now of my ability to handle matters which might come up in practicing law. It was a totally different feeling than the one I had in freshman competition." . ...... . .. .. - . J - •• • • "' ••••• ••• •• " .. . .. . . ............ · -- ·· ~---·---· ... ' ' o <'- __ .,_ ....... .... ... ..._ ....... ~.I 10. ~ o '* ~ • o ~ • • o., • • ,. ' • ~ • o Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 7 Nuclear Power Series Discharge Data Incomplete (Continued from page 2) Often chemicals can be concentrated to several thousands times their concentration in the environment. If a fish accumulated radioactive chemicals from a nuclear power plant and that ftsh in turn was eaten by a human, a critical pathway between the plant and the human population would exist. Such "critical pathways" must be avoided in locating and operating nuclear power plants. The specific health effect exerted by a radioactive element is dependent on the element, its energy levels, and its eventual location within the body. Certain elements have long biological half-lives; thus they are retained in the body for long periods of time. Other elements, such as tritium, pass quickly through the body. Those elements retained in the body for long periods of time usually seek out particular tissues or structures and concentrate at that location. · Strontium and Radium are bone seekers, and as such are concentrated in the bone. This site-speciftc concentration is responsible for localiz~d health effects, as radioactive strontium can be a causitive agent in leukemia, a bone rna-row disease. Radioactive chemicals responsible for such diseases are tightly regulated by federal agencies. The physiological effect of radioactive chemicals results from the disintegration of the chemical in the cell. Once in the body, a radioactive atom may disintegrate, releasing highly energetic ·particles which ionize other atoms in the host cell. Depending on the function of the atom and cell, the resulting alteration can be severe or insignificant. The location of the radioactive atom in the body primarily determines whether a disintegration will exert no effect on the cell or will alter the cell in such a way as to make it malfunction or cease functioning. The eventual fate of the disintegration is a matter of chance or statistics. A radioactive element may become incorporated in the reproductive deoxyribonucleic_ acid (DNA) of the gonads, and upon disintegration alter the genetic message to either an incoherent or wrong form, resulting in a genetic mutation. A disintegration may alter the reproductive process in a body cell, resulting in either a cancerous condition or in a non-cancerous alteration of the cell. Boudin To Lecture Leonard Boudin, a noted civil libertarian and practicing attorney, is slated as the second speaker of the Louisville Law Forum's Brandeis Lecture Series. The address is open to the public and will be presented on Thursday, Nov. 18 at 8:30 p.m. in Middleton Auditorium, Strickler Hall, Belknap Campus. Mr. Boudin's speech entitled "National Security and Freedom of Association" will highlight the suit he filed on behalf of the Socialist Worker's Party and the Young Socialist Alliance against the FBI, CIA and other regulatory agencies. The suit has resulted in uncovering the government sponsored COINTELPRO (counter intelligence disruption program). Its aim according to government memorandum received through the suit's discovery process was "to expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize" civil rights organizations and groups opposed to the Vietnam War. Mr. Boudin's career has included defending labor unions in the 1930's and '40s and victims of the McCarthy era witchhunts. More recently his clients have included: Dr. Benjamin Spock, charged with conspiracy to violate selective service laws; Eqbal Ahamad, in a successful defense against charges of conspiracy to kidnap Secretary of State Henry Kissenger (also indicted for the same offense were Father Phillip Berrigan and Sister Elizabeth McAlister); and Daniel Ellsberg who was prosecuted for disseminating the celebrated "Pentagon Papers" to the press. In addition, Mr. Boudin has argued numerous cases before the Supreme Court including the landmark case of Kent v. Dulles, which guaranteed certain passport rights. Miller's 'Reflections' An exaggerated sense of poverty can no longer be an excuse for not seeking academic excellence, U of L President James G. Miller .said during his annual · address to the University Senate Oct. 27 .. Dr. Miller addressed the University community at the Health Sciences Center and again at Belknap Campus. His speech came from the "President's 1976 Annual Report 'Reflections'," which was also] distributed during the gatherings of. University personnel. "Our budget is now basically sound. . . . We must recognize that we can do much to improve our academic program even within our present . monetary constraints," Dr. Miller said. Since U of L is the state's principal urban university, Dr. Miller said it must strive to meet particular needs relevant to the community. Within the last three years, U of L has searched for and appointed eight new deans in degree-granting units. This new leadership has prompted a new look at our decision-making process, Dr. Miller said. Dr. Miller also looks toward better relations with U of L alumni in the future. "The bond we seek with the citizens of Louisville, Jefferson County and Kentucky will never be strong if we cannot form a valued and enduring association with our alumni," he explained. Though U of L is not yet one of the nation's top 100 universities according to the ratings of graduate and professional programs, Dr. Miller said that the University has made remarkable strides in recent years . "We can commit ourselves, once and for all, to the idea that we owe the community nothing less than a first-rate university. Several major state universities around the · country have demonstrated that large size and academic excellence are not incompatible. We, ·too, must choose excellence," he concluded. An increase in the inventory of radioactive elements in the environment will increase the probability of adverse health effects being manifested in· the human population. Such an increase is unavoidable in the operation of nuclear power plants. Accidental Discharges The safety design of nuclear power plants is improving as more is understood about nuclear power generation. However, safety features are often subjected to the human element, an element that is critical in the operation of nuclear facilities. Human errors account for most of the accidents that have occurred in the development of nuclear technology. However, the demanding conditions that materials in nuclear plants are subjected to under normal operating conditions can result in failures that the industry must consider in safety analyses of the plants. Many safety design features of nuclear power plants are back-up systems that have never been tested under accident conditions. Thus, to simulate the effectiveness of critical safety systems, computer models are used. Data generated from these models indicate that nuclear reactors now being planned will be able to withstand severe operating accidents. These computer models have never been calibrated against actual severe accident conditions, and are thus limited in applicability. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not require the nuclear power industry to consider in its environmental analysis the worst possible situation resulting from a nuclear power accident; a core meltdown. Such a condition results from the loss of coolant to the fuel core and the subsequent melting of the fuel rods into a puddle in the bottom of the reactor. Such a condition destroys the geometry of the fuel assembly and causes the uncontrollable discharge of radioactivity into the environment. The normal operation of nuclear power plants usually causes only a slight increase in the amount of radioactivity naturally found in the receiving stream. Regulating federal agencies do not consider this slight increase a threat to public health, based on the concept that below a certain threshold value, radioactivity has insignificant effects on the human body. Some scientists disagree with this concept, arguing that any increase in radioactivity increases the chance for a radioactive element to generate mutagenic or carcinogenic changes in body cells. No conclusive data exists to eliminate either concept. With the continued proliferation of nuclear power plants, the public must accept the increased probability of a severe nuclear accident and the problems associated with long term, low level radioactive discharges to the environment. The law library f'mally near full utilization. The stairway and second floor areas are to be carpeted to reduce noise and improve the study environment. Shelves, carrels and a lounge areaaie being installed in the basement. , { r r ( I 8 Louisville Law Examiner, November 9, 1976 ;::AReform Act Seminars !Bondsmen TakeActionl (Philadelphia) - Changes in the estate and gift tax law enacted by Congress in the Tax Reform Act of 1976 require the reexamination of virtually every estate plan drafted prior to enactment. In light of this situation the American Law Institute-American Bar Association Committee . on Continuing Professional Education (ALI-ABA) will offer a new Course of Study on Estate Planning under the New Estate and Gift Tax Law. The program will be presented three times in early 1977: Jan. 6-7 at the Washington Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C.; Feb. 17-18 at the Crown Center in Kansas City, Mo.; and Mar. 10-11 at the. Bonaventure in Los Angeles. This program is designed primarily for the general practitioner who does some planning of modest-sized estates, rather than for the estate planning specialist. The faculty will address itself to a discussion of what difference the new law makes and how the approach to estate planning will shift to maximize taxpayer benefits. The topics examined will be the substantially larger exemption; the increased marital deduction; the unification of estate and gift taxes into one transfer tax; farms and real property interests in closely-held and family businesses; the loss of a stepped-up basis for inherited property; and new provtstons for restricting generation-skipping transfers. For further information, or to register for the course, please contact the Registrar, ALI-ABA, 4025 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104; or telephone (215) 387-3000. The American Law Institute (Continued from page I) American Bar Association Committee on Mr. Manly is ftling a federal suit in the Continuing Professional Education (ALI-ABA) will offer a new course of Western District of Kentucky and is . study which will examine tax shelters in attempting to get an extension of time in light of the new Act. Tax Shelters after which to perfect -an appeal of the the Tax Reform Act of 1976: What Kentucky Supreme Court decision to the Happened and What's Left? will be held U.S. Supreme Court. The initial difficulty Dec. 2-3, 1976, at the International Hotel that Mr. Manly foresees in the federal in New Orleans. court mitiative is the possible res judicata The purpose of this program is to effect of the state court case, which was analyze and discuss the various Reform converted to a class action suit at the Act provisions dealing with shelters and circuit court level. However' if he can to assess the impact of the Act on taxpayers. How far has the Act reached? avoid dismissal, he believes that he may What shelters are covered? What is left by have a good bill of attainder case, and will way of shelter mecluinisms? What should also raise substantive due process issues. taxpayers do by yearend 1976? The bonding companies are seeking All Reform Act areas will be covered: injunctive relief as well as monetary depreciation recapture, limitations on damages. deductions, prepaid interest, partnership In appealing to the U.S. Supreme law changes, the minimum tax, and the Court, Mr. Manley is hampered by time traditional shelters such as real property, limitations and the absence of federal farming, motion pictures, and oil and gas. issues raised in the lower courts. Don H. Additionally, the program will focus upon current shelters, such as commodity Major, the attorney who handled the futures (straddles) and coal leasing. successful circuit court case, the appeal to For further information, please contact the Kentucky Supreme Court, and the the Registrar, ALI-ABA, 4025 Chestnut i 'plication for a stay of enforcement, Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104; or ,...te-le_p_h_o_n_e_<2_1_5_)_3_8_7--3_o_oo_. ___ __,/ Did You Know . · . . 1- explained that he and his colleagues decided not to raise many federal issues in the Kentucky courts as a matter of professional judgment. He said that he relied very heavily on Kentucky' constitutional issues in his argument to the Kentucky Supreme Court. Mr. Major had not been retained to appeal to the Supreme Court, but ftled a notice of appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court for the limited purpose of obtaining a stay of enforcement pending appeal. In other court action, two parallel suits were itled in the Eastern District of Kentucky, one of which was dismissed but the other is still pending. Atty. Stuart Lyon has fJ.led a civil rights class action suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky on behalf of defendants who wish to post commercial bonds. He recently ftled an answer to a motion to dismiss and is currently awaiting a ruling from U.S. Distric~ Court Judge Charles Allen. Tax Shelters Examined (Philadelphia) - The Tax Reform Act of 197 6 is the most important tax legislation since 1969. Because of its broad impact on the taxpayer, attorneys are now facing the formidable task of interpreting and complying with this new legislation. The Freedom of Information Act was originally designed to promote public knowledge of the operations of government. Yet 85 per cent of the lawsujts under the Act are filed by competitors aiming to get access to each others' secrets. The National Labor Relations Board has recently been bedeviled by parties utilizing the Act as a substitute for discovery. There is also much confusion about where the Freedom of Information Act ends and the Privacy Act begins. (Reprinted from ABA/LSD Bi·weekly Bulletin, Oct. 15, 1976) The Louisville Law Examiner is a student organization that is open to all students of the Law School Currently, there are several staff positions available including editorships. While experience is desired, it is not necessary. The cu"ent editors and staff will provide the guidance and training on an individual basis. All interested students tlTe encouraged to attend the regular meetings in the Examiner any young lawyer who has made it through law school and passed the bar deserves the best There are 110 finer law books than West books. They are edited and ' printed for the practicing lawyer. They meet practical needs; answer practical problems, and they always offer maximum ease of movement from one publication to another through the Key Number System, citations and library references. If you're a student soon to practice law or aJready a seasoned practitioner, be sure you give yourself the advantage ·or the best tools an at(omey can have ... West law books. · GEIE PFLUGHIUPT B.S. Northwestern University LL.B. Southern Methodist University WEST PUBLISHII& COIPAifY 584-5058 office in the Annex on Tuesdays at 12:15 or see any editor or staff member for infonnation. llnuisuillt Louisville Law Examiner School of Law · University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky 40208 Non-Profit OfJanization U.S. POST AGE PAID PwmltNo.7. Loul.ti ... Ky. ,. • \ l |
Subject |
University of Louisville. School of law University of Louisville--Students University of Louisville--Alumni and alumnae University of Louisville--Faculty University of Louisville--Employees Law students Law & legal affairs Law and legislation--Kentucky Law and legislation--United States Law libraries Legal education Libraries |
Location Depicted |
Louisville (Ky.) Jefferson County (Ky.) |
Date Original | 1976-11-09 |
Object Type | Newspapers |
Source | Various-sized print newspapers published by students of the University of Louisville School of Law. The print edition may be found in the University of Louisville Law Library or the University of Louisville Archives and Records Center. |
Collection | Law Library Collection |
Collection Website | http://digital.library.louisville.edu/cdm/landingpage/collection/law |
Digital Publisher | Law Library of the Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, University of Louisville |
Format | application/pdf |
Ordering Information | The publications digitized in this collection are the property of the University of Louisville School of Law and are not to be republished for commercial profit. To inquire about reproductions, permissions, or for additional information, email lawlibrary@louisville.edu. |
Rating |
|
|
|
A |
|
C |
|
F |
|
G |
|
H |
|
I |
|
J |
|
K |
|
L |
|
M |
|
O |
|
R |
|
S |
|
U |
|
V |
|
|
|