Louisville Lawyer
Published by The University of Louisville School of Law
VOL. VIII LOUISVILLE, KY .. DECEMBER. 1962 No.2
Highway Research
Contract Announced
By Richard Weisenberger
In early ovember the Kentucky Department of Highways
igned a research contract with the law school. The contract allo­cated
40 000 to the law school. Law School Professor William Biggs
ha been named to head the program.
Professor Biggs
The fir t task will be to extract ma­terials
from the Kentucky Revised
tatute and from all Kentucky case
affecting highway . Thi information
will then be indexed according to ub­ject
matter.
The taff will then compile the first
draft of proposed revisions of the
tate' highway laws and in the sum­mer
of 196:3 'viii submit the e recom­mendations
to the Department of
Highways for the reaction of the ad­mini
trator who will implement the
law. In late ummer it will be sub­mitted
to key legislators for sugges­tions.
The objective is to have the final
draft ready for submission to tl1e 1964
Kentucky Legislature for passage.
Worldng with Dr. Biggs will be
Professor Ralph Petrilli, 1r. David
Thompson, and Mrs. Robert Fonner.
t present four students are assisting
in the research. They are: Charles
Kamuf, Harry Shapiro, Harold Smith
and Robert Thompson.
The staff will occupy tl1e top floor
of Robbins Hall.
Career Day
Will Be Dec. S
The annual Law School Career Day
program will be held on Dec. 5 in the
Allen Courtroom.
Six speakers will headed the event
outlining opportunities for law gradu­ates
in the areas of private, corporate
and government practice.
-------------------------
Stephenson To Head
Kentucky Bar Association
By Art Dillard
Raymond C. Stephenson, Louisville
attorney, will serve as President of the
Kentucky Bar Association in 1964. He
was chosen by the ominating Com­mittee
of the state association in Oc­tober;
and since no further nomina­tion
were made by petition, he will
take the office unopposed.
Juvenile Court Judge Daniel P.
1\larshall, Jr., will serve as President
of the Louisville Bar Association for
1964. Like Stephenson, Judge Mar-hall
was the only candidate to file for
the l()('a] office.
Ray Stephenson
Stephenson, 51, a former President
of the Louisville Bar Association, will
succeed 1962 President William L.
Wilson of Owensboro and will take
office January 1, 1964. He was a
member of the Louisville Board of
Education from 1949 to 1953, and
former attorney for the City of Shive­ly.
He served as special circuit judge
from 1952 to 1955 and since 1955 has
been a State Bar Commissic)11er.
Judge Marshall, 39, was graduated
from the University of Louisville Law
School in 1950. He has been Juvenile
Court Judge for one year, and has
served on the Records Committee of
the Louisville Bar Association.
The U of L National Moot Court representatives were Harry Shapiro, left,
and William Bowman, center. Burt Marton, right, placed third.
Moot Court Team Defeats
UK Then Loses to Nebraska
After defeating the University of Kentucky in early competition,
the Law School Moot Court team lost in a semi-final round to the
University of Nebraska in the regional run-off of the National Moot
Court competition in St. Louis on November 15.
The Law School was represented in
argumentation by ·william Bowman,
1381 South Fourth Street and Harry
Shapiro, 2212 Gerald Ct.; both are
day-school students. The team was
accompanied by alternates Burt Mor­ton
and John Rogers, and Professor
Wallace MacBain.
The representatives were deter­mined
by school-wide oral arguments
held in Allen Courtroom on October
27. Bowman and Shapiro were judged
winners and Morton was placed third.
The judges were: Shackelford Miller,
Judge, 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Ap­peals,
Presiding as C hie f Justice;
Brady M. Stewart, Chief Justice, Court
of Appeals of Kentucky; Morris C.
Montgomery, Associate Justice, Court
of Appeals of Kentucky.
The case centered on an indigent
defendant's right to counsel at a pre­liminary
trial stage when charged wiili
a non-capital offense in the City of
Gomorrah, State of owhere.
After the defendant Mayhem was
arrested for stabbing and wounding a
small child, he was brought before a
police justice and informed of his right
to counsel and a preliminary hearing.
Since, petitioner must pay for his
counsel at the arraignment stage, be­ing
a twenty-one year old migrant
worker and poor, he had to wait until
after his indictment when the state did
assign him counsel. However, petition­er's
only witness, Sid Sickles, died of
cancer prior to his indictment. Peti­tioner
was left without his main de­fense
at his trial.
Petitioner was granted certiorari by
the United States Supreme Court to
consider his contention that he was
entitled to assigned counsel at his
arraignment.
Christmas Dance
To Be Held Dec. 15
The annual Christmas dinner-dance,
sponsored by the Student Bar As­sociation,
will be held on December
15 at the Kosair Shrine Temple, 812
S. 2nd Street.
The dinner will begin at 7:00p.m.,
to be followed by a guest speaker. The
dance will commence at 9:00 p.m.
All members of the bar are invited to
both events at a cost of $10 per
couple.
Two THE LoUISVILLE LAWYER
From The Editors Desk
Will The Worm Turn?
Kentucky is represented in Congress by two Republican Senators and
two Republican Representatives.
There seems to be a conservative movement especially among the youth
in Kentucky evidenced by membership in such organizations as "The John
Birch Society," the "Constitutional Conservatives,'' and various other such
organizations.
The Jefferson County area, including Louisville, the most populated area
in the State, is governed by Republicans.
What do these factors mean today to the leaders of both parties in a
State wruch has tradi-tionally voted as its leaders, members of the Democratic
Party? It seems to indicate that for some reason Kentucky is no longer Demo­cratic
to the extent it once was.
Could it be that as education and other services to the voters improve,
the people are resorting to reason, instead of the rudimentary pulling. of the
level under the "Rooster."? Could it be that today it means something different
to be "Democratic" than it once did? Could it be that the scandals which
have been revealed against various Democrats has spurned .~ dis~u~,t of the
party leaders? Could it be that as young leaders replace the old-hne Demo­crats
such as Governors Chandler, Clements, Combs, Johnson, and Wetherby,
these neophites tend to adopt the tactics of the leaders whom they are replacing,
instead of synthe izing the problems of the party and then developing a some­what
new approach to appeal to the voters?
So as we prepare for the Democratic Primary in May, it could be pre­dicted
that it will "in effect" be the election of the next governor. The general
election next ovmber could be much- closer than previous general elections, ,
although it is doubtful to predict the election of the first Republican Governor
in twenty years at this time.
What is needed in the Democratic Party are leaders who will appeal to
people who are beginning to place reason above party loyalty and demagoguery.
Unless steps are taken in this direction, KEtltucky ~vill have a Republican
Go ernor by 1971, as well as Republican representatives in Congress. Then the
State will without a doubt be Republican. THE WORM THE WILL HAVE
T RNED!
John L. Arnett
A New Approach
Th University of Louisville Law School initiated this year a new ap­proach
to the study of Family Law. Professor Ralph S. Petrilli, acting under a
grant from the Ford Foundation, created the Family Problems Seminar.
Thus far, participants have heralded the adventure as their most stimu-
1ating experience in law school.
Lectures repre enting various academic persuasions have presented their
views as to the problems existing in the family and its needs in the twentieth
century.
The Kent School of Social Work has displayed its ideas along with prac­ticing
psychiatrists and attorneys, Judges from the Jefferson Circuit Court, and
other authorities in the community.
The entire group has gone to the State Office building for an understanding
of public assistance programs financed by both federal and state funds, and to
Central State to see the effects of mental illne s and what is being done to
meet the problem. Small groups have visited, to name just a few places, Jef­ferson
County Welfare Board, Juvenile Court, Jefferson County Circuit Court,
Jeffer on County Probation and Parole Office, and Domestic Relations Court.
Information obtained from these visits is discussed by the entire group in
seminar fashion. Participants are urged to question not only the success of
these various agencies but also the policies which govern them.
The overall success of the Family Problems Seminar is open to speculation;
however, the results seen thus far should be encouraging to both Professors
Petrilli and Thompson.
In time, the Family Problems Seminar may stimulate change in the
method of studying other curriculum.
Law Journal
Subscriptions
Subscriptions for the Journal of
Family Law can be procured by writ­ing
to Allan Weiss, Secretary, Journal
of Family Law, School of Law, Uni­versity
of Louisville, Louisville 8, Ken­tucky.
The charge for a one-year sub­scription
is $3.00 or $1.75 per copy.
-Harry Shapiro
LEGAL ALL-STARS
The law school football team com­pleted
their football season with a
three game winning streak. However,
they began the season with a three
game losing streak, hence the result
was a season record of 3-3. Not bad
for old men!
The Dean's Corner
by Marlin M. Volz
A law school in an urban center has
special opportunities and responsibil­ities.
While its primary function is to
teach and train students for admission
to the bar, its mission is broader and
includes research, graduate and con­tinuing
education for the bar, and an
interest in improving the legal pro­fession,
the law and its various in­stitutions.
The term "Law Center" has
been assumed by some of the law
schools which are undertaking tills
broader purpose. Our ambition is to
become recognized more and more as
one of the leading regional law cen­ters
in America.
The late Arthur T. Vanderbilt,
when Dean of ew York University
School of Law, founded the law cen­ter
movement and gave substance to
the concept by greatly expanding its
program of activities. His motto was:
Organize, Delegate, Supervise, Insti­tutionalize."
During his administration
YU established, among other pro­grams,
the Inter-American Law In­stitute,
the Institute of Judicial Ad­ministration,
and the Citizenship
Clearing House.
Our School is hopeful of emulating
the successful administrative organi­zation
of YU. Recently, Professor
William B. Peden was named as Di­rector
of Continuing Legal Education.
Earlier Professor James R. Merritt had
been appointed as Director of Re-
"To deprive a man of his opinion is
to rob posterity and the existing
generation. If it be right, then they
are deprived of exchanging error
for tndh. If it be wrong, they are
deprived of illuminating the im­pression
of truth as it collides with
error."
-Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis
search. During his absence Professor
William Biggs is acting in this capac­ity.
In order to "institutionalize'' two
of its important programs, the School
is about to establish two separate cen­ters
under the supervision of the law
faculty. Under the direction of Pro­fessor
Ralph S. Petrilli, the Family
Law Center would carry on an ex­panding
program of teaching, re-­search,
community service, and publi­cation
relating to the law and tl1e fam­ily.
The second center, which would
deal with the Legal Problems of Local
Government, would be directed by
Professor Biggs. As you know, he
holds a Ph.D. in Political Science, in
addition to tl1e law degree, and served
for several years as Director of Com­munity
Research, Inc., in Dayton,
Ohio, before joining the faculty. In
both areas the School of Law hopes to
gain national recognition and to ren­der
a needed and worthwhile service
to this region.
These centers and the expanding re­search
program of the School are
made possible by outside grants.
Within recent months we have been
fortunate in securing grants totaling
about $100,000 and we are hopeful
that these will beget others. For office
space for part of its research staff the
School has taken over part of the tl1ird
floor of Robbins Hall, which now
houses the Kent School of Social
Work.
Nine Siudenis To
Receive Degrees
Five seniors will receive their Bach­elor
of Legal Law ( LLB) degrees in
January. They are : John Alvey, Gil­berte
Irizarry, Charles N. Marshall,
John E. Sloane and Joseph Wilson.
Four law students will receive their
degrees of Bachelor of Science in Law
( B.S.L.) at the same time. They are:
William Baker, John Gordinier, Ron­ald
Snyder, and Richard Weisen­berger.
C!1qr 14ouisnillr 14atuyrr
Published by the University of Louisville School of Law Student Bar As­sociation
two times a year for School of Law students, faculty, and alumni.
This issue is mailed to the Kentucky Bar Association members.
Editor-in-Chief ······-·········································--·-·····-·················-.fohn L. Arnett
Associate Editor -····-····················-···························-·-····················Harry Shapiro
News Editor ·································-···-···-·····························-······-···--·Henry Reed
Feature Editor .................................................................. Richard Weisenberger
Circulation Manager ·····································-·····················-······-····---Bob Kohn
Photographer ······--···································-···--·-···········-·-··········-·-·····-Bob Moulton
Faculty Advisor····--··········--···········-··--···--········--·····--··········--·· Wallace MacBain
Reporters -Beniamin Rosenbaum, Tom Mooney, Dick Wilson, George Shir-ley,
Harry Gehring, Art Dillard, Fuad Abu-Zayyad
Circulation: 5,000
THE LOUISVILLE LAWYER Three
M~rder: Recent Changes
In English Law
By Professor Patrick Fitzgerald
:\lurder has never been defined by statute in England. Yet the
last few years have shown far-reaching statutory modifications of
the law of murder. These were the results of mounting hostility to
the u e of capital punishment, of increased dissatisfaction with the
law of criminal insanity and of growing dislike of the notion of
con tructive malice.
In contrast with the e>.:perience of some of the United States,
England ha always retained a fixed penalty for murder. Prior to
1957 conviction for murder automatically entailed sentence of death
and this was a matter where neither judge nor jury had any discre­tion.
The death sentence could be avoided only by the Home Sec­retary's
exercise of the royal prerogative of mercy, whereby the
pri oner could be reprieved and imprisoned for life.
After the second world war there
was a hort period during which all
per ons entenced to death were auto­matically
reprieved. This experiment,
however, was abandoned in view of
public oppo ition, and in 1949 a .
Royal Commis ion was set up to con­sider
whether c a p i t a I punishment
should be limited or modified. This
ommis ion, which investigated among
other thing the que tion whethe"r the
ubstantive law of murder was in need
of alteration and the. problem of the
defense of insanity, reported in 1953
that there was no clear evidence that
the death penalty had any ignificant
effect on the murder rate. It rejected
the suggestions of dividing murder
into degrees and of allo,ving the judge
or jury a d.i cretion as to defen e.
Thou~h the C01mni ion was not di­rected
to consider the broad que tion
whether capital puni hment hould be
retained or abolished, they tated that
this in their view was now the real
is ue. In 1956 the House of Commons
voted that the death penalty should be
aboli hed for murder, but this motion
wa defeated by the House of Lords.
At thi point the government, which
had not approved the original motion,
introduced a compromise measure of
its own, whkh ubsequently reached
the tatute Book as the Homicide Act
1957.
The 1957 Act modified the law of
murde.r in three very important re­spects.
First it abolished the doctrine
of constructive malice. The Act pro­,;
des that "where a person kills an­otl:
er in the course or furtherance of
some other offense, tl1e killing shall
not amount to murder unless done
wi'h the same malice aforethought
(express or implied) that is required
for a killing to amount to murder
when not done in the course or fur­therance
of another offense." The
felony-murder rule, tl1en, was done
away with, and a similar provision
abolished the rule relaxing to con­structive
malice arising from resistance
to arrest. From tl1e Act itself, however,
it was not wholly clear whether mens
rea for murder was henceforth to be
restricted to an intent to kill or wheth­er
it might also include an intent to do
grievous bodily harm; furthermore it
was not clear whether it would also
include in addition to these an intent
to do an act likely to kill a cause
grievous bodily harm, i.e. recklessness.
The first of these problems arose
shortly after the Act became law, in
the case of R. v Vickers ( 1957) 2 Q.
B. 664. Vickers broke into a shop with
intent to steal and on being ap­proached
by a 1rs. Duckett, he struck
her several blows in consequence of
which she died. The defense in this
case contended that there could be no
malice aforetl1ought in the absence of
proof of an intent to kill; that just as it
could no longer be said that he had
malice aforethought, simply because
he was committing burglary, likewise
he could not be said to have malice
aforethought merely because he in­tended
to do grievous bodily harm,
since this intent was the mens rea of
tl1e felonious assault and not of mur­der
itself. The Court of Criminal Ap­peal
rejected tltis argwnent and held
that the rule that malice is implied
from an act done with intent to do
grievous bodily harm was still law and
was unaffected by the Honlicide Act.
(Continued on Page 7)
Family LawCenter
In Planning Stage
The law school is planning to or­ganize
a Center of Fanllly Law in the
foreseeable future.
The objective of the Center would
be to bring various program and dis­ciplines
relating to Family Law into
proper focus under the guidance and
coordination of the law school.
The Center would have as its nucle­us
an Advisory Committee consisting
of community leaders in fields related
to Family Law, with Professor Ralph
Petrilli as the Director.
The work of the Center would
largely be through a teaching program
of internship and seminar contribu­tions;
a research and publication arm
(presently the Journal of Family
Law ) and a series of Institutes on
s u b j e c t s relating to Family Law
planned by an Institute Committee.
Briefing Service Begins
28th Year of Service
. 1...._ .. ____ _.
Members of the Briefing Service are: Seated, Robert Biggs, Chairman;
Standing (l to r) , Hany Shapiro, Tom Mooney, Ronald Snyder, and Norvie
Lay.
The Briefing Service begins its 28th year as a growing institu­tion
at the University of Louisville Law School. Throughout the
years Kentucky attorneys have sent their problems, and in recent
years increasing significantly, to the briefing service for analysis and
assistance. Dr. William Dolson has acted as faculty advisor for the
past two years and his guidance in directing student staff members
has helped make the Briefing Service the respected society it is.
The purpose of the Briefing Service
is twofold:
1. To assist practicing attorneys in
research and evaluation of impor­tant
and intricate legal problems.
2. To give student staff members ex­perience
and training in doing re­search
and giving advice in tl1e
form of memoranda to attorneys.
Student staff members are chosen
on the basis of high scholarship. The
current staff members are: Robert
Biggs, Chairman; orvie Lay; Harry
Shapiro; Carl Henlein; Tom Mooney;
Ronald Snyder; Charles 1 . Marshall;
Martin \Velenken; Ed Rectenwald;
and Charles Rolph.
The success of the Briefing Service
can be measured by tl1e recognition it
has achieved as a helpful tool for
practicing attorneys needing assistance
in solving complex legal problems.
UL Representatives
Attend ALSA
During August the American Law
Student Association held its annual
meeting in San Francisco under the
auspices of the American Bar Associa­tion.
There were approximately 300
delegates attending who were organ­ized
in the twelve judicial circuits.
The University of Louisville Law
School delegates were Harold Smith
and Ronald Snyder. Allan Weiss and
Sanford Norman also attended as al­ternate
delegates. Weiss was recently
named to the ALSA National Moot
Court Committee.
One of this year's highlights was a
demonstration of a legal electronic
brain. The "brain," whose cost is pres­ently
prohibitive, cGnters upon devel­oping
ease in the area of legal re­search
Otl1er highlights were a Medico­Legal
Trial Seminar, which included
discussions of proof of facts in per­sonal
injury cases, problems of psychi­atric
testimony, and the various legar.
definitions of criminal insanity; and an,
address by Supreme Court Justice
Tom C. Clark.
Peden Lectures
At NYU Institute
Law School Professor and former
Acting Dean William Peden was a
lecturer at the 21st Annual New York
University Institute on Federal Taxa­tion,
held November 14. This is an­nually
an outstanding institute on
Federal Taxation in the country.
Professor Peden served on a panel
wltich discussed Partnerships and Sub­chapter
S corporations (tax option
corporations). He lectured on "Prob­lems
Resulting from Death of a Prin­cipal
Partner or Principal Shareholder
in a Subchapter S Corporation."
According to Dean Marlin Volz,
"this is indeed an honor to Professor
Peden personally as well as to the law
school." Few of the lecturers are pro­fessors
and even fewer are professors
from an inland university.
Four
Law Faculty Adds
Five· New Profs.
By Tom Mooney
The 1962-63 School year has seen
five additions to the School of Law
faculty. They are: Professors Patrick
Fitzgerald, John Hanna, W i 11 i am
B i g g s , Robert Fonner, and Scott
Thomson.
Professor Fitzgerald, a visiting Pro­fessor
of Law from t:J:e University of
Leeds, England, will teach courses in
Criminal Law and Jurisprudence dur­ing
his one-year stay at the University
of Louisville. Professor Fitzgerald has
written books on criminal law and pro­cedure
and on civil rights in England.
He is a member of Amnesty, an inter­national
organization working for the
release of political prisoners.
Having retired from Columbia Uni­versity
in 1959, Professor Hanna is
now teaching courses in Commercial
Transactions, Security and Creditors'
Rights. Professor Hanna is the dis­tinguished
author on many books and
articles including, Cases and Mate­rials
on Bankruptcy, Cases and Mate­rials
on Security, Bankruptcy Act An­notated
(with James A. 1acLachlan),
Cases and Materials on Receivership
and Corporate Reorganization (with
James A. MacLachlan), Law of Co­operative
Marketing Associations, and
The American Individual Enterprise
System (with 14 others). He has
erved as a consultant on Article 9 of
the niforrn Commercial Code for the
1 ew York Revision Committee and as
reporter for the American Law Insti­tute
for the Restatement of Security.
Professor Biggs is a 1940 graduate
of the University of Louisville School
of Law and also holds Masters and
Doctorate Degrees in Political Science.
He has taught at the University of
Maryland and at American University.
Since 1959 he has worked for Com­munity
Research, Inc. of Dayton,
Ohio, doing studies on local govern­ment
and higher education. While at
the University of Louisville, Profes­sor
Biggs will direct a study on the
existing laws affecting highways for
the Kentucky Highway Department,
in addition to his usual teaching load.
Professor Fonner holds a degree in
law from Indiana University, and, in
addition, masters degrees in Biology
and Anthropology from the University
of Michigan. During 1957 and 1958,
Professor Fonner served as Consular
Officer in the American Embassy, Ac­cra,
Ghana. He has also been associ­ated
with the firm of Cahill, Gordon,
Reindel and Ohl of ew York City.
Professor Fonner is teaching Future
Interests and Constitutional Law.
Professor Thomson is a 1961 grad­uate
of the University of Louisville
School of Law and spent one year as
a Teaching and Research Associate at
Rutgers-The State University, School
of Law. At present, he is engaged in
the various research programs being
carried on and is teaching Legal Re­search.
THE LOUISVILLE LAWYER
Delta Wives
Plan Events
The wives auxiliary of Delta Theta
Phi Law Fraternity is anticipating an
entertaining and interesting year. The
40-member group has planned many
social events for the current school
year.
The group entertained the wives
of the freshman law students with a
tea followed by a tour of the Law
School conducted by former dean
Absalom C. Russell in September. In
October they sponsored a joint fra­ternity-
auxiliary picnic. The Novem­ber
meeting was enjoyed by all with a
cocktail and dinner party held at
Pryor's Restaurant. Other events
include a buffet d i n n e r in De­cember,
a card party in February, a
dance in March, elections and card
party in April and the annual dinner­dance
in May at Iroquois Gardens for
the benefit of husbands and fraternity
members and their dates.
Officers of the group this year are
Anne Arnett, President; Carolyn Tho­mas,
Vice-President; Laura Mattingly,
Secretary; Nancy Reed, Treasurer;
Beth Coletti, Social Chairman; and
Mrs. A. C. Russell, Auxiliary Sponsor.
Student Lecfures
On Islamic Law
This semester Dr. Fuad Abu-Zay­yad,
day school Freshman from Jor­dan,
is delivering three lectures on
Moslem Law. His lectures are entitled
The Sources of Islamic Law, The Ex­traneottS
Sources of Islamic Law, and
The Moslem Schools of Law.
Marlin M. Volz
Installed President' Of
Legal Organization
Dean of the Upiversity of Louisville
School of Law, Marlin M. Volz, has
been elected President of the National
Organization on Legal Problems of
Education.
He was installed at the group's
Eighth Annual Convention in Des
Moines, Iowa on November 14-15.
Dean Volz has been a member of the
executive committee for many years
and served as Vice-President last
year.
"The chief goal of the NOLPE is
to help school officials understand
their legal responsibilities,'' said Dean
Volz.
Before becoming Dean of the UL
Law School, Dean Volz served on the
law school faculties of the Universities
of Wisconsin and Kansas City. He was
graduated from the University of Wis­consin,
where he received degrees of
BA, BL, and DJS.
Delt's, PAD's Elect Officers
The officers of Delta Theta Phi Fraternity are: ( l to r) First Row, Ronald
Snyder, Vice Dean; and John Arnett, Dean; Back Row Ed O'Connor, Bailiff;
Norvie Lay, Tribune; and Harold Smith, Clerk of the Exchequer.
fraternity News ..
Phi Alpha Delta
The speaker at the rush dinner of
Phi Alpha Delta Law Fraternity meet­ing
was former Governor and Senator
Albert B. Chandler, of Versailles, Ken­tucky.
Chandler spoke on the solidar­ity
of the Democratic Party in Ken­tucky
and about his quest for an un­precedented
third term as Governor.
The October meeting was held at
the Chi Omega Sorority House and in
conjunction with the Sorority.
The fraternity pledged eight new
members this semester. They are: Bill
Ballard, James Brown, Frank Doheny,
Allen Fine Todd Hollenback, John
Palmore, Gary Smith and Doug Logs­don.
Delta Theta Phi
Guest speaker at the September
Rush dinner was Judge Louie Nunn,
cam p a i g n Chairman for Senator
Thruston Morton, who discussed the
practical aspects of attorneys entering
politics and in some instances their
obligations to do so.
In October the guest speaker was
Jefferson County Judge Marlow W.
Cook. Also in October the fraternity
members attended a weiner roast
sponsored by the fraternity's wives
auxiliary.
Thirty-four students pledged the
fraternity this semester. They are:
Sheldon Adler, Kern Alexander, James
Blair, Bernard Blau, Charles Boyer,
(Continued on Page 7 )
THE LoUISVILLE LAWYER Five
Professor Peden to Direct
Continuing Legal Education
Among the new developments at the Law School of most direct
interest to lawyers, particularly in the Louisville area, has been the
appointment of Professor William B. Peden as Director of Continu­ing
Legal Education. o major change in the program is contem­plated
but the appointment does formally recognize Prof. Peden's
ery great contribution to the success of our program in the past,
particularly the tax institute and courses. It is hoped that the close
relationship behveen the Education Committee of the Louisville
Bar sociation and the Law School will continue.
Among the programs which Prof.
Peden is arranging with the help of
the special tax committee under the
chairmanship of Irvin Waterman is
the 5th Annual Kentucky Institute on
Federal Taxation. The ses ions, all of
which will be held in the Brown Hotel
in Loui ville, will be held beginning at
9:30 .:\1 ., Friday, December 7, 1962
and continuing through that day and
evening until aturday noon, Decem­ber
, 1962. As in the past, Jacquin
D. Bierman, New York attorney, will
open the program b reviewing the
"Tax Highlights of the Past Year.''
Prof. Charles . Lyon of , ew York
niversity Law 'chool, a popular
peaker two year ago, is returning to
discus "Dividing a Corporate Busi­ness-
pinoffs and Partial Liquida­tions.''
The banquet speaker is ex-t
d to be The Honorable • 'orrnan
0 . Tietjens, Chief Judge of the Tax
Court of the United States. The com­plete
program with registration form
" as mailed to each lawyer around
the middle of :-\ovember.
Profs Receive
New Degrees
During the past year Professors
William Dolson and William Peden of
the chool of Law f a c u I t y were
awarded additional degree .
Professor Dolson was awarded an
S.J.D. from the University of Wiscon­sin
during the summer session of 1962.
Professor Dolson holds hi B.S. and
LL.B. degrees from the same Univer­sity.
The dissertation submitted by
Professor Dolson for his degree was
entitled, "A 1 ew Look at the Law of
Diffused Surface Water in Wisconsin.''
Professor Peden received his LL.M.
degree in Taxation from ew York
University School of Law in June of
this year. After graduation he received
a letter from the school which stated
in part, "It is not our custom to award
advanced degrees 'with honors' but,
nevertheless, an examination of your
fine academic record prompts me to
write you a little note of congratula­tions."
Professor Peden was granted a
leave of absence to attend ew York
University and while he was there, he
was a Ford Foundation Fellow.
Faculty Members
On Leave
by Robert A. Kahn
If many of the 1962-63 University
of Loui ville Law School faculty mem­bers
seem new to you, don't think
you're in the wrong building on cam­pus!
o less than four veteran mem­bers
of the Law School's full-time
faculty are not on the staff this year.
Their travels are not only carrying
them from coast to coast, but also to
the European continent.
Profe or Carl \\1arns is traveling
monthly from state to state as the
Permanent Arbitrator of the Goodyear
Tire and Rubber Corporation. This
position is considered one of the most
lucrative in the field. In his ca­pacity,
Professor Warns arbitrates
labor disputes from lew York to Los
Angeles and from Seattle to Miami.
Professor Robert Foster is the visit­ing
professor of law for this year at
his Alma Mater, the University of
South Carolina. While there, he is as­sisting
South Carolina by preparing
the Uniform Commercial Code for
future adoption.
Professor James Merritt is on the
faculty of the . University of Leeds,
England. He is serving as a replace­ment
for Professor Fitzgerald, present­ly
on our faculty. Professors Merritt
and Fitzgerald have exchanged every­thing
from home to car for this year.
Finally, P r o f e s s o r Laurence
Knowle is serving as a member of the
United States Civil Rights Comrnis­si(
Jn in 'Nashington, D.C. He will re­turn
to our faculty in September,
1963.
In commenting on the professors
who are absent this year, Dean Marlin
Volz remarked, "Conceding that we
miss these gentlemen greatly, I believe
that their worldly travels and experi­ences
will be of great benefit to our
students of the future, who will re­ceive
knowledge of how the law is
developed and taught in other parts
of our country, and for that matter,
the world.''
Moot Court Officers Elected
Moot Court officers are: seated, Harry Shapiro, President; standing, Ed
Bowman, Vice President; and N. ]. Decamillis, Secretary.
Shapiro Elected
Moot Court Head
Harry Shapiro, day school junior,
was elected President of this semes­ter's
Moot Court Club on September
21.
Edward Bowman and N. J. DeCa­millis
were voted Vice-President and
Secretary, respectively.
The freshman argwnents were held
in early November and the National
1oot Court run-offs were-held in late
October.
County Tuition
Fees Decrease
An almost unprecedented thing hap­pened
this semester at the University.
Tuition for county students decreased
and now both city and county stu­dents
pay the same tuition.
This can be attributed largely to
tl1e efforts of County Judge Marlow
Cook. In an interview with Henry
Reed just afte-r Cook's 1961 election as
Judge, he suggested tl1at the
county supplement the University's in­come
to equalize the tuition burden to
city and county students.
Many University students benefitted
by this aid including numerous law
students. The county government in
general and Judge Cook in particular
are to be commended.
Homecoming Ins:ti:tu:te
Held In November
The Fifth Annual University of
Louisville Law Alumni Homecoming
Institute was held on Saturday, o­vember
10 in Allen Courtroom.
The program began with greetings
from Dr. Philip G. Davidson, Presi­dent
of the University of Louisville,
and from the Hon. Charles W. Dob­bins,
President of the Law Alumni
Association.
The first address was given by
Patrick J. Fitzgerald, Visiting Profes­sor
of Law at the law school this fall
from the University of Leeds, Eng­land.
Professor Fitzgerald discussed
significant recent developments in
English Law.
Following a coffee break an address
was presented by Alfred S. Julien, im­minent
trial attorney from New York
City. His address was followed by a
fifteen minute question and answer
period.
The Law Alumni Luncheon was
held in the Faculty Dining Room at
the University Center after which
Dean Marlin M. Volz reported on re­cent
developments at the law school.
The afternoon address was pre­sented
by John Hanna, like Fitzgerald
a visiting Professor of Law this se­mester.
Professor Hanna is Professor
Emeritus, Columbia University School
of Law and is one of the foremost
authorities in the United States on
Bankruptcy, having w r i t t e n many
books and article~> on the subject as
well as serving on various committees
and boards for revising the various
bankruptcy statutes. Professor Hanna
evolved the significant recent develop­ments
in this field.
The Institute then adjourned to at­tend
the Homecoming Football Game_
Six THE LOUISVILLE LAWYER
Federal Regulation
Of Corrupt Practices
by Arthur L. Dillard
Early American legislation designed to regulate election pro­priety
was patterned after the British Corrupt and Illegal Practices
Prevention Act of 18831 which prohibited two types of campaign
practices. First, "corrupt practices"-e.g., bribing, threatening, or
treating of voters-were heavily penalized, and second, the less
erious "illegal practices"-e.g., transporting voters to or from the
polls-invol ed large fines and disqualification of the offender from
voting for a period of years. The British law received favorable
publicity in the United States shortly after its passage with ew
York becoming the first state to regulate party finances in 1890.2
lthough complete data is not available for Alaska and Hawaii, all
other fo1ty-eight states now regulate party finance in some way
with variation from state to state in details.3
The Pendleton Act of 18834 was the
real beginning of Federal regulation of
campaign fund , for it prohibited as­se
sments and coercion of employees
in the classified civil service. o doubt
the as assination of President Garfield
in 1881 by a disappointed office seek­er
prompted Senator George H.
Pendleton of Ohio to introduce this
bill, which has been described as "one
of the most skillfully devised statutes
ever pas ed by a legislative body."5
Xational banks and corporations
were prohibited by the Tillman Act
of 19076 from making contributions in
Federal elections. A 'ew York legis­lative
inquiry had previously disclosed
large payments to campaign funds by
certain insurance companie . The re­action
to these disclo ure brought
pressure upon Congress to exclude
such business organizations from con­tributing
to campaign funds.7
Congress in 1909 prohibited cer­tain
federal officer from soliciting
campaign funds. It provided that neith­er
congre smen nor judicial, execu­tive,
nor military officers of the United
tates could directly or indirectly so­licit
nor receive any contributions for
an political purpose from any other
officer of the United States receiving
compen ation or payment from tl1e
Treasmy of the United States.
The fir t publicity provision under
uniform national regulation was pro­vided
by the Publicity Act of 1910,9
also known as the McCall Act. All
interstate political conunittees were re­quired
to report all campaign contri­butions
and eJ>.-penditmes, specifying
their source of all contributions of
S lO') or more and all eJ>.-penditmes of
S1 ') or more. It also provided tl1at all
rer<ons other tl1an political commit­tees
spending $50 or more were to re­rort.
I., 1911, the Rucker ActiO repealed
a prrt of the McCall Act but pro­vic1ed
for the filing of reports before
, ,
1 after an election and required
e '·~enditures of senators and repre­ren•
tives to be accounted. Maxin1um
e -p.,ditmes for representatives were
"e' t $5,000 and those of senators at
. "00.
A second Rucker Actll was passed
in 1912 requiring all reports to be
made before a notarial official and
sent to the clerk of the house or sec­retary
of the senate.
In 1925, Federal law regulating cor­rupt
practices in elections existed in
· piecemeal fashion and was composed
of five separate acts of Congress,
passed respectively in 1907, 1909,
1910, 1911, and 1912. Many of the
provisions had become antiquated be­cause
of amendments to the Constitu­tion
and the decision of tl1e Supreme
Court in ewberry et al. v. United
States.l2 In the ewberry decision,
the Supreme Court held that the Fed­eral
limitation upon campaign ex­penditmes
was unconstitutional as ap­plied
to expenditmes made in the
course of a primary election for the
Senate. Although tilis case did not di­rectly
involve the initial act passed in
1907, tl1e decision was construed to
have invalidated all Federal corrupt
practices legislation relating to elec­tions.
The Federal Corrupt Practices Actl3
was adopted in 1925 as the legislative
answer to the Newberry decision. The
measme was a rider to the Postal Pay
and Rate Act which superceded all
previous enactments and covered such
areas as corrupt practices, publicity,
and limitations on amounts and
somces of campaign funds. The Act
applied to congressional elections, but
stated specifically that it "does not in­clude
a primary election, or conven­tion
of a political party."
Not until 1939 did Congress, in the
Hatch Act,14 adopt additional legis­lation
basically affecting federal elec­tions.
The law sought to rectify cor­rupt
practices in three ways: ( 1) pre­venting
coercion and intimidation of
voters ; ( 2) protecting the suffrage of
relief workers; and ( 3) restraining
certain administrative officers and em­ployees
of the federal government
from using their positions to influence
elections and to participate actively in
political affairs. . .
Substantial amendments to the
original act were made by the Hatch
Act of 1940.15 The main changes were
(Continued on Page 7)
When Does A Blockade
Become An Act of War
by Fuad Abu-Zayyad
According to Hyde, war "may be fairly described as a condition
of armed hostility between States,"1 a definition which proximates
the actual conditions better than others. However not every status of
armed hostility can be called war in the technical sense, for intent
is an essential element of a legal definition of war. 2 Failure to
acknowledge intent to make war might mean certain advantages
resulting from the inapplicability of the laws of war. For this reason,
states frequently prefer to describe their forceful actions as "inter­ventions"
rather than war- a possible way of avoiding total involve­ment.
Thus in the absence of adequate me~ns to determine the
status of war, short of a formal declaration, intent must be the
element of determination.
Intent may be inferred from a
state's actions. This inference, how­ever,
is subject to the conditions and
interpretations attached to it by the
community of nations. Thus the Euro­pean
States accepted the blockade of
American Southern ports by the
United States as sufficient evidence
that the Civil War was war in tl1e
legal sense, and consequently assumed
the position of neutrals. The British­German-
Italian blockade of the coast
line of Venezuela in 1902, in order to
bring pressure on the Venezuelan
Government to respect its public
debts. was not considered war.
The application of a blockade in
tin1es of war is a well-understood
operation. In times of peace, however,
unilateral attempts to establish block­ades3
not by way of forcible proce­dure
to resolve some differences with
an offending state but for otl1er pur­poses.
Recent blockades i n c 1 u d e
Egypt's action at Suez in 1951
against Israeli shipping and tl1e action
of the United States Seventh Fleet in
the Straits of Taiwan, 1950-53, to
neutralize Taiwan as between the
Chinese Communist and Nationalist
forces. Needless to say, tilat what may
start out as a pacific-blockade4 may
very well end up non-pacific. The sta­tus
ensuing from a blockade thus de­dending
to a large extent on tile cir­cumstances
and the parties involved.
The majority of the so-called pacific­blockades
have been conducted by big
powers acting individually or in con­cert
against a weaker or lesser power.
War must be distinguished from
forcible modes of obtaining redress
which are held not to be inconsistent
with tl1e maintenance of peaceful re­lations
between the State which in­flicts
tilem and the State which suffers
from them. These methods are some­times
spoken of as reprisals. But tile
term loosely used, lacks distinguishing
acts of war from acts of force commit­ted
in order to prevent war. The bomb­bardment
of tile Chinese arsenal of
Foo-Chow by a French Fleet in 1884,
and the seizure of tl1e island of Mity­lene
by an international squadron in
1905 illustrate the latter. In none of
tilese cases was peace technically
broken, and in all the powers which
resorted to tl1e reprisals received sat­isfaction
for tile acts of which they
(Continued on Page 7)
Law School
To Interpret
Constitution
Professor Scott Thomson
The University of Louisville Law
School has received a grant from
the U. S. Department of Health, Edu­cation,
and Welfare appropriating
$30,000 for the s t u d y concerning
problems of Constitutional interpreta­tion
in the state, community and
school.
This original project by the Law
School is considered to be the first
such federal grant to a university. .
The program will be divided into
two parts. The gathering of data con­ducted
in the field and polling state
and city school systems on policies con­cerning
issues of constitution interpree
tation. The study involves the con­troversy
of religion in schools, but the
question of segregation will not be
included.
In charge of tl1is research project is
Professor Scott Thomson. At the con­clusion
of this survey, Professor Lau­rence
Knowles and his staff will com­pile
the statistical data. They will then
record their conclusions, summarizing
the result in a code book of rules to be
distributed to state and city govern­ments
and schools by the Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, as
a standard for constitutional interpre­tation.
Murder
(Continued from Page 3)
The conviction for murder was up­held.
The econd problem was settled by
the decision in D. P. P. o Smith
( 1961) A. C. 290. A policeman had
jumped on the running-board of
mith' car to see whether stolen prop­erty
was hidden in the car. Smith, to
e cape, drove off and shook the po­liceman
off the car into the path of
oncoming traffic, as a result of which
the policeman was killed. There was
evidence that Smith neither intended
nor knew that serious injury might
r ult from hi conduct, but such evi­dence
was ruled irrelevant. In restor­ing
rnith's conviction, which had
been quashed b the Court of Crim­inal
Appeal, the House of Lords held
that, provided it could be proved that
the accused aimed a voluntary unlaw­ful
act at the deceased, this was mur­der
if a reasonable man in Smith's
hoes would have realized that death
or erious injury was the probable re-.
ult of this act. o case in England in
recent year has touched off such a
controvers as this. Almost all aca­demic
lawyers, many practitioners and
a Jar e ection of the corruriunity
critized the decision. A large number
of practitioner , however, supported it.
The objection to such an objective test
of reckle sness is that most people
consider that it is morally worse to kill
a per n h) n act ' hich the actor
know to be likely to kill or injure than
it is to kill by an act which most peo­ple
would know (but the actor did not
know) to be likely to kill or injure;
and thi moral distinction, it is argued,
hould be reflected in any rational
criminal law. What was not fully
noticed, however, was that the Smith
decision would convict two very dif­ferent
type of criminals. It would re-ult
in the conviction of the man who
in the heat of the moment did not
realize what the consequences of his
act were likely to be. Smith himself
was in thi position, and it is arguable
that people in such circumstances
should stop to think or otherwise
should act at their peril. The decision
would also result in the conviction of
the man, who thru ignorance does not
realize that his act is likely to kill.
For example A, not knowing that
arsenic is lethal, puts some arsenic in
B's drink in order to make him sleepy,
and B dies. Here, although the case is
extremely unlikely to arise, few would
wish to convict A of the same crime
as if he had poisoned B with intent to
kill him. To make the hot-headed act
at their peril is one thing; to ask the
same of the ignorant is another. There
are some grounds of justification for
the former. For the latter there are
none.
Degrees of Murder
The second alteration produced by
the Act was to introduce degrees of
murder. A distinction was made be­tween
capital and non-capital murder.
Murders committed by shooting or by
explosives, and murders committed in
THE LoUISVILLE LAWYER
the course or furtherance of theft are
capital, as are murders done to resist
arrest, murders of police officers in
the execution of their duty and mur­ders
of prison officers by !-'risone.rs.
Capital punishment must also be m­flicted
for repeated murders, provided
that both murders were committed in
Great Britain.
All other murders are now non­capital,
the penalty being life im­prisonment.
The Act also provides that
where there is more than one party
to th e crime of capital murder, only
those who actually cause the death or
inflict harm on the deceased shall be
liable to capital punishment. So where
A and B plan to rob a bank and kill
the cashier if necessary, if then A re­mains
outside waiting in an automo­bile
while B enters and kills the
cashier, A will be guilty only of ordi­nary
murder.
The moral of this compromise legis­lation
would seem to be that if you
must commit murder, do it quietly -
and only once. There is, however,
some rationale for the distinctions
drawn by the Act. The first three
categories of capital murder se.rve to
deter profe~sional criminals, while the
last three afford extra protection to
police and other officers (who in Eng­land
are unarmed.)
Diminished Responsibility
Thirdly the Homicide Act intro­duces
into England a concept bor­rowed
from Scot law, the defense of
dimmished responsibility. If a defen­dant
to a murder charge can show that
at the time of the crime he was suffer­ing
from "such abnormality of mind
(whether arising from a condition of
arrested or retarded development of
mind or any inherent causes or in­duced
by disease or injury) as sub­stantially
impaired his mental respon­sibility"
the offense is reduced to
manslaughter. This clearly benefits the
accused, because while the maximum
sentence for manslaughter is life im­pri
onment, there is the minimum to
the sentence a court can award.
This new defense has done much to
remedy the defects of the law of in­sanity.
In practice it has enjoyed con­siderable
success. In the first twenty­seven
months of its operation it was
raised in 73 cases and succeeded in
53. Moreover the courts have shown
a willingness to interpret the defense
liberally.
Suicide Not Crime
As a postscript to these changes in
the law of homicide, it is worth noting
that the Suicide Act 1961 has further
modified the law by providing that
suicide is no longer criminal. This of
course, means the end of prosecutions
for attempted suicide, and also means
that an aider or abetter to suicide does
not automatically become an accessory
or principal to murder, if the suicide
is successful. To retain some means of
detening people from assisting others
to commit suicide, the 1961 Act pro­vides
that any person who aids, abets,
counsels or procures the suicide of
another will be liable on conviction to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding
fourteen years.
Delta Theta Phi
( Continued from Page 4)
Hudson Edwards, Robert Ewald, Jos­eph
Glass, Gerald Gratton, Edwin
Greenwald, Jim Haag, George Her­man,
Ernest Jasmin, Wayne Kiewert,
William Kochert, Jules Lloyd, William
Lohmeyer, James Lyons, Harry Ma­lone,
Thomas Manby, Wayne McGee,
Manuel Mercado, R o be r t Metry,
Charles Meyers, Edwin Morrow, Wil­liam
Mulhall, Dennis O'Connor, Jos­eph
Ray, Brian Schaeffer, Russell
Scott, Robert Shellman, John Stanger,
Duane Vincent and Fuad Abu-Zayyad.
Blockade
(Continued from Page 6)
complained. Reprisals, considered as
comprising all international acts of
force which are not acts of war, in­clude
a great variety of operations.
Among these "embargos" and "quar­antines"
are examples.
All the forcible modes of obtaining
redress which hover between peace
and war are abnormal, and capable of
abuse. But International Law allows
them, and they are sometimes useful
as a means of bringing pressure to
bear upon weak governments with
less suffering than war would provide.
A powerful State exposed to such
treatment would undoubtedly retaliate
by prompt hostilities.
It is important to note that whereas
the community of nations condoned
wars in the 19th century and attempts
were made for its regulation; at tl1e
outset of the 20th century tl1e League
of Nations outlawed war as an "in­strument
of national policy" without
consideration to acts of force which
came outside the technical definition
of war. The architects of the United
lations Charter, however, while at­tempting
to limit the use of force
unilaterally (Art. 2, Sec. 4 of U.N.
Charter), left enough room for its
use collectively (Art. 42 of the Chart­er).
The question remains whether
the Charter has really outlawed the
use of force or merely required cer­tain
qualifications for its use - thus
leaving it to the interpretation of the
nations involved in particular and the
community of nations in general.
1. IIIC. Hyde, International Law,
C h i e f l y as Interpreted by the
United States, Sec. 597 (Sed.
1947 )
2. Cf. Q Wright, " eutrality and
1 eutral Rights following the Pact
of Paris for the Renunciation of
War," Proceedings of the American
Society of International Law, 1930,
p. 79.
3. Article 42 of the United Nations
Charter renders unilateral blockade
actions inadmissible.
4. This is obviously a contradiction in
terms for blockade is a warlike
activity.
Seven
Corrupt Practices
(Continued from Page 6)
two in number. First, the provisions
restricting the political activities of
Federal officers and employees were
extended to state and local employees
engaged in activities financed in whole
or in part by loans or grants made by
the Federal government; and second,
provisions regulating campaign con­tributions
and expenditures were add­ed,
e.g., no political committee is to
receive contributions or make ex­penditures
in excess of $3 million dur­ing
any calendar year. (But a c~ndi­date
may have as many committees
as he chooses. )
This legislation with all of its de­fects
has remained the basic corrupt
practices legislation today. As stated
in Burroughs and Cannon v. United
States,I6 the existing law is based on
tl1e theory that undisclosed and un­regulated
financing of political cam­paigns
will lead to "the corrupt use
of money to affect elections." Many of
the archaic provisions have given rise
to recent demands for the passage of
new legislation, but such demands
have not been successful.17
In conclusion, the majority of polit­ical
scientists agree that the problem
is a moral issue. Their consensus is
that existing standards of p u b 1 i c
morality condemn corruption in elec­tions
though there is considerable dis­agreement
over what political · pur­poses
and practice are corrupt.
FOOTNOTES
1-46 & 47 Viet., c. 51.
2-H ow a r d R. Penniman, Sait's
American Parties and Elections
(New York: Appleton-Century­Crofts,
Inc., 1948) p. 555.
3-For Kentucky's regulation of cor­rupt
practices, see K.R.S. 123.010
to 123.990.
4-22 Stat. 403 ( 1883) , 5 U.S.C. s s
632 and others ( 1958).
5-Robert C. Brooks, Political Parties
and Electoral Problems (New
York: Harper & Brothers, 1933),
p. 552.
6-Act of January 26, 1907, Ch. 420,
34 Stat. 864.
7 -See 40 Gong. Rec. 96 ( 1905).
8-Act of March 4, 1909, Cr. 320, 3&
Stat. 1075.
9-Act of June 25, 1910, Ch. 392, 36
Stat. 822.
10-Act of August 19, 1911, Ch. 33,
37 Stat. 25.
ll-Act of August 23, 1912, Ch. 350,
37 Stat. 360.
12-256 u.s. 232 (1921).
13-43 Stat. 1070 ( 1925), 2 U.S.C. s s
256 and others ( 1958).
14-53 Stat. 1147 (1939), 18 U.S.C.
s s 594 and others ( 1958).
15-54 Stat. 746 (1940) , 18 U.S.C. s s
595 and others (1958).
16-290 u.s. 534, 548 (1934).
17-See Senate Committee on Rules
and Administration, Federal Elec­tions
Act of 1961, S. Rep. No. 871,
87th Congress, 1st Sess. (1961).
Eight THE LomsVILLE LAWYER
l'ealure: Janel Ryan
Law School Secretary
by Robert Kahn
"Janet, did my scholarship come through?" "Janet, can I take
Con Law II next semester?" "Janet, when will the Dean be back?"
The e and other like questions are propounded daily to Janet
Ryan, forth past five years secretary of the University of Louisville
School of Law. During that period, she has served under three
deans. When she arrived in 1957, Dean A. C. Russell was just con­cluding
his long tenure as head of the Law School. After Dean
Russell retired from this position, Janet then served under Acting
Dean ' illiam Peden. Since 1958, she has been Dean Marlin Volz'
"right-hand woman."
ince beginning her work at the Law
chool, Janet has spent much of her
pare time working toward a Bache­lor's
Degree in Education.
In between mailing a Law School
catalog to a prospective student and
answering phone calls, she noted,
" nfortunately, during my five years
at the Law School, I have not learned
too much law, but I guess if I ever .
have any problems, I shouldn't have
too much trouble finding a capable
lawyer.''
Janet Ryan
In speaking of Janet's value to the
Law chool, Dean Volz explained, "I
believe that her greatest value to the
Law School comes from her willing­ness
to assume responsibility and to
proceed with a minimum of supervi­sion
to dispatch the many and various
duties of the office. She certainly helps
make the job of administering a law
school much easier."
THE LOUISVILLE LAWYER
University of Louisville
School of Law
2301 South 3rd Street
LOUISVILLE 8, KENTUCKY
FORM 3547 REQUESTED
Local Government
Workshop Initiated
Three workshops on the problems of
local government were held this se­mester
at the University Center. The
programs were sponsored by the
School of Law, the Department of
Political Science, and the University
College in cooperation with the Jef­ferson
County Government Confer­ence
and the Local Government Com­mittee
of the Louisville Chamber of
Commerce.
The program was designed to bring
together the officials of neighboring
cities and the governmental agencies
within Jefferson County for discus­sions
of the problems they have in
common.
At each workshop a speaker of na­tional
tature pre ented the problems
and sugge ted implementations. This
was followed by discussion groups
which considered the problems of
local Government in detail.
On October 19, the speaker was Dr.
Charles R. Adrian, Director, Institute
of Community Development, Michi­gan
State University. On ovember 2,
Bernard F. Hillenbrand, Executive
Director of the ational Association of
C o u n t y officials was the speaker.
Samuel Humes, Executive Secretary of
the Metropolitan Washington Council
of Government spoke on ovember
16.
ENROLLMENT INCREASES
Law school enrollment has in­creased
this fall from 177 to 191 stu­dents,
a 7.3% rise over last fall. There
are 93 day and 98 evening students
registered.
Henlein, Smith, Meyers,
Mattingly Head Student Bar
Constitution Study Undertaken
The officers of SBA are: (l tor ) Charles Mattingly, Treasurer; Carl Hen­Zein,
Chairman; Harold Smith. Vice Chairman. Absent when picture was
taken was Charles Meyers.
Shortly after the beginning of the fall semester, elections were
held for the Student Bar Association. The Executive Committee,
consisting of the chairmen of the various Action Committees, the
Chairman of the Briefing Service, and the Editor-in-Chief of the
Louisville Lawyer, elected. the following officers to serve for the __
present school year: Carl Henlein, Junior, Chairman; Harold Smith,
Junior, Vice-Chairman; Charles Meyers, Freshman, Recorder; and
Charles 1attingly, Junior, Treasurer.
The following students were elected
by the student body in a general elec­tion
: Honor Code Committee - Paul
Kleine-Kracht and Don Carmichael,
Seniors; Carl Henlein and Harold
Smith, Juniors; and Robert Metry and
Joe Glass, Freshmen; Membership
Committee - John Arnett, S en ior ;
Charles Mattingly, Junior; and Robert
Ewald, Freshman; Faculty Relations
Committee - Norvie Lay, Senior; Ed
Bowman, Junior; and Fuad S. Abu­Zayyad,
Freshman; Library Commit­tee
- Henry Reed and Robert Biggs,
Seniors; Glenn McDonald and Tom
Manby, Juniors; and "Butch" Blau
and Brian Schaefer, Freshmen; Social
Committee - David Thomas and Bill
Coletti, Seniors; Harry Gehring and
George Herman, Juniors; and Charles
Meyers and Joe Ray, Freshmen; Con­vocation
Committee - Charles Rolph,
Senior; John Vanderburgh, Junior;
and Kern Alexander, Freshman; Build­ing
Committee - Duane Vincent, Sen­ior;
Ronald Snyder, Junior; and John
Stanger, Freshman; Placement Com­mittee
- Stan Baker and Robert Jos­ephson,
Seniors; Tom Merrill and Wil­liam
Katzinski, Juniors; and Wayne
Kiewert and Jim Haag, Freshmen.
In the first meeting of the Executive
Committee, Chairman Henlein ap­pointed
the following students to a
special committee to study and rec­ommend
revisions to the present con­stitution
oJ the Student Bar Associa­tion:
Seniors, Stanton Baker, Donald
Carmichael and John Arnett; Juniors,
Glenn McDonald, Harold S m i t h ,
Harry Shapiro and Carl Henlein; and
Freshmen, Irvin Foley, Joseph Glass
and Ed O'Connor.
Non-Profit Org.
U. S. POSTAGE
PAl D
LOUISVILLE, KY.
Perm.u No. 435