An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so. - Mahatma Gandhi

Jury: a group of twelve men who, having lied to the judge about their hearing, health and business engagements, have failed to fool him. - H.L. Mencken

BRIEF RELIEF

Shepardizing and Key Cite Florida authorities.

Memo on whether New Jersey values attach to New York UM policy (New York).

Memo on effect of overnight delivery service handling of cash sent by individual.

Preparation of interrogatories in complex litigation.

Motion and memo to remand matter removed to Federal District Court in Georgia.

Research on notice required to insurance carrier of possible malpractice claim (New York).

Florida law as to equitable distribution of pre-marital trust.

Research regarding "bounty hunters" - State and federal law.

Copies of O.C.G.A. 9-11-23 and 9-11-42 - Search of Georgia statutes as to admission of attorney pro hac vice

Memorandum of law in opposition to plaintiff’s Notice of Verified Petition to Stay Arbitration (New York).

PUBLICATIONS OF INTEREST

Rohrer, Glenn E., et al. Calculation of Blood Alcohol Concentration in Criminal Defendants, American Journal of Trial Advocacy: Summer 1998, Vol. 22, No. 1, pgs. 177-190.

Leahy, James E. Supreme Court Justices Who Voted With the Government: Nine Who Favored the State over Individual Rights, McFarland & Co., 1999.

Sarat, Austin. The Killing State: Capital Punishment in Law, Politics and Culture, Oxford University Press, 1999.

McWhirter, Darien A. The Legal 100: A Ranking of the Individuals Who Have Most Influenced the Law, Citadel Press, 1998. Pp. xi, 396.

MATTERS OF INTEREST
U.S. Supreme Court

(a) - In cases of peer harassment, where the harassment is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively bars the victim’s access to an educational opportunity or benefit, a private damages action may lie against the school board, acts with deliberate indifference to known acts of harassment in its programs or activities. Davis v. Monroe Co. Bd. of Edu., 5/24/99.

(b) - The police violate the Fourth Amendment rights of homeowners when they allow members of the media to accompany them during the execution of a warrant in their home. Hanlon v. Berger, 5/24/99.

(c) - Police officers do not need a warrant to seize someone’s car from a public place if they have probable cause to believe it is subject to laws requiring forfeiture of property linked to a crime. Florida v. White, No. 98-223.

Ninth Circuit

(a) - District Court committed clear error when it excluded evidence of marijuana found in the trunk of a car driven by the defendant where border agents had reasonable suspicion to support an investigatory stop. United States v. Garcia-Acuna, No. 98-10375.

(b) - The Ninth Circuit held that reasonable suspicion cannot rest upon the hunch of an experienced officer, ever if the hunch turns out right. The requirement of objective fact to support an inference of wrongdoing eliminates the need to deal with a police stop that rests on constitutional intuition. United States v. Jimenez-Medina, No. 97-10055.

(c) - Under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(b), the probative value of a seventeen year-old criminal conviction did not substantially outweigh its prejudicial effect and that the court’s error in admitting the conviction for purposes of impeachment could not be said to be harmless. United States v. Bensimon, No. 98-50080.

Fifth Circuit - By placing a bag in an overhead bin on a bus, the defendant knowingly exposed it to the public and, therefore, did not have a reasonable expectation that it would not be handles or manipulated by others. Consequently, an officer’s squeezing of the bag does not constitute a Fourth Amendment search. United States v. Bond, 2/9/99.

Oregon Supreme Court - Courts must use the "best interests of the child" standard in determining custody in a dispute between a biological parent and a stepparent with a child-parent relationship with the subject minor child. If the best interests of the child call for custody to the non-biological parent, then courts must make such award, unless to do so would violate some supervening right belonging to the biological parent. Sleeper v. Sleeper, SC S43959.

Supreme Court of Florida - An insured who was mugged while changing a tire on his truck was entitled to benefits under the personal injury protection portion of his automobile insurance policy. Blish v. Atlanta Casualty Co., No. 92,984.

New York Court of Appeals - New Jersey police officers were not authorized under FRCP 4(d)(1) to execute the Federal arrest warrant upon the defendant in New York. The New Jersey police officers were neither Federal Marshalls nor New York police officers and the "hot pursuit" exception did not apply in this case. People v. LaFontaine, 1998 N.Y.Int. 0158 (Dec. 3, 1998).