Research Associates
wpe10.jpg (8131 bytes)
Volume 8, Number 4    Our 19th Year April, 2000

Crazy Laws by Dick Hyman (Scholastic, Inc.)

In Carmel, N.Y., a man cannot go outside while wearing a jacket and pants that do not match.

In Massachusetts, it is forbidden to put tomatoes in clam chowder.

BRIEF RELIEF - Matters in Progress

Research issue of U.N. Convention Against Torture - Code of Federal Regulations, Federal Register.

Massachusetts law as to intentional interference with contract.

New York contract and Statute of Frauds.

Statute of Limitations in federal matter where defendant is out of the country and unavailable for service of process.

Issue of entrapment in computer chat room sting.

Truth in Lending issues in automobile rental installment sales contract.

Student’s rights to notice of suspension when suspension is basis for dismissal from school.

Development and answers to interrogatories in personal injury and product liability actions.

PUBLICATIONS OF INTEREST

Rice, Paul R. Attorney-Client Privilege: Continuing Confusion About Attorney Communications, Drafts, Pre-Existing Documents, and the Source of the Facts Communicated. American University Law Review: June 1999, vol. 48, iss. 5, pg. 968.

Masur, Joshua M. Safety in Numbers: Revisiting the Risks to Client Confidences and Attorney-Client Privilege Posed by Internet Electronic Mail. Berkeley Technology Law Journal: Fall 1999, vol. 14, iss. 3.

Scheck, Neufeld & Dwyer. Actual Innocence. Based on a study of 62 DNA exculpations, the writers offer general conclusions about the sources of tainted convictions. Mistaken identifications figured in 84% of the cases; police or prosecutorial misconduct in almost two-thirds.

National Law Journal

Handschu & Kisthardt. Family Law: Religion as a Custody Issue. February 21, 2000.

Starr & Lippner. Employment Law: Restrictive Covenants. September 6, 1999.

Rivas, Nicole C. Employment Law: "Love Contracts." February 7, 2000.

Levenson, Laurie L. Criminal Law: Warrantless Searches. September 13, 1999.

MATTERS OF INTEREST

U.S. Supreme Court

The prosecutor’s comments calling the jury’s attention to the fact that the defendant had the opportunity to hear all other witnesses testify and to tailor his own testimony accordingly did not violate the defendant’s Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. Portuondo v. Agard, 3/6/00.

An anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun, without more, is not sufficient to justify a police officer’s stop and frisk of that person. Florida v. J.L., 3/28/00.

Police cannot routinely squeeze bus passengers’ luggage to check for contraband. This is a "search" for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. In this case Border Patrol agents squeezed a canvas bag in an overhead compartment and felt a brick-like object that turned out to be methamphetamine. The Fifth Circuit upheld the passenger’s conviction, but the Supreme Court reversed. The Court said the passenger had a privacy interest in the bag because, although he may have expected it to be moved or jostled by other passengers, he did not expect it to be manipulated "in an exploratory manner."

The Court has refused to impose a constitutional duty on lawyers to consult with convicted clients about an appeal. But the ruling’s not-so-subtle message is that in "the vast majority of case," lawyers do just that. Roe v. Flores-Ortega, No. 98-1441.

Washington Superior Court

For the first time, a court has ruled that Allstate Insurance Co.’s controversial claims processing policy, which discourages claimants from hiring lawyers, amounts to the unauthorized practice of law. The Judge ruled that Allstate "engaged in the unauthorized, negligent practice of law and breached its fiduciary duties" to the plaintiffs in Jones v. Allstate Ins. Co., No. 99-2-02212-2SEA.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

A school building-use policy prohibiting religious worship or religious instruction was neither unconstitutionally vague nor viewpoint discriminatory. Campbell v. St. Tammany’s School Board, No. 99-31071.

California Court of Appeals

The Court has ruled that a woman has the right to withhold life -- sustaining treatment from her disabled husband even though he is not terminally ill or in a vegetative state. The Court held that she first must prove by clear and convincing evidence that her decision was made in good faith on sound medical advice and took into consideration her husband’s best interests and prior expressed wishes. Conservatorship of the Person of Robert Wendland, C029439.

Massachusetts Supreme Court

Court upholds probate court’s exercise of equity power in granting visitation between a child and a lesbian de facto parent. E.N.O. v. L.L.M., 711 N.E.2d 886 (Mass.), cert. denied, 120 S.Ct. 500 (1999).