Memorial Day

Memorial Day emerged out of the grim shadows of the American Civil War. Before the close of the war, women began decorating the graves of soldiers who had died in battle in that conflict.

The practice quickly spread and a few years later, May 30, 1868 was designated as "Decoration Day" -A day for placing flowers on the graves of both Union and Confederate soldiers throughout the United States

In 1882, Decoration Day became known as Memorial Day and soldiers who died in other wars were also honored. Over the years, it has become a day when all loved ones who have died in war and peace are remembered. In 1971, the United States Congress declaired Memorial Day to be observed annually on the last Monday of May

On this Memorial Day, I remember my uncle and others who gave their lives for our country, but I also pray for those that continue to serve to keep America free, and especially those who currently stand in harm's way. I hope you will join me.

So you want to be a judge....

In a comment to the post below, Anonymous Law Student asks "What's the typical path to becoming a judge? In school, it seems that we are only drilled for becoming associates somewhere on the horizon."

Before I get any farther into answering ALS' question, I should pause for a disclaimer that no matter the court and no matter the state, the process of becoming a judge is inherently political, at least to some extent. In most states, becoming a judge is simply a matter of winning an election so your political skills are at least as important as your legal ability. I don't intend to sound sarcastic when I say that because professional competence (or lack of it) is always a campaign issue but these days elections are won or lost on sound bites as much as anything else.

In states where judges are appointed by either the governor or the legislature, factors such as ethnic and gender diversity, geography and political affiliation are still important criteria in selection, even when political activism is not. Some states have set up judicial nomination commissions that screen candidates to insure that everyone in the pool from which a judge is ultimately selected by a governor or legislature is professionally competent but even when every candidate is qualified, those factors mentioned above are still considerations.

With that disclaimer out of the way, the short answer is that I don't think that there is a typical "career path" as such to being a judge.

The longer answer is that there are different "career paths" depending on what type of judge you are talking about. For example, you can pretty much forget about being a bankruptcy judge if you haven't focused your practice on bankruptcy law or becoming a family court or juvenile court judge if you know little or nothing about family law or domestic relations. Beyond that, I think that I can safely generalize as follows (although I am sure that there are exceptions out there that help prove these points):

If you are interested in sitting on a trial court bench, you will likely not receive serious consideration unless you have a significant amount of experience as a trial lawyer. By "trial lawyer" in this context I mean someone who knows their way around a courtroom where a jury is sitting in the box and who knows the rules of evidence as well as civil and criminal procedure pretty well. That usually means someone with criminal experience as a prosecutor, public defender or criminal defense attorney and/or someone with civil trial experience as a plaintiff's lawyer, legal aid lawyer or a member of a "litigation" section in a law firm. Because state and local bar associations also often have some measure of influence over the selection or vetting process, being well regarded by your peers doesn't hurt either.

If your goal is to sit on an appellate bench, your "career path" has a few more options. Law professors and lawyers who basically had an "office practice" and rarely set foot inside a courtroom are far more likely to be seriously considered for a seat on an appellate court than they would be for one on a trial court. The judges on most state and federal appellate courts that I am most familiar with, have a mix of backgrounds and my court is probably typical in that respect. Although the majority of the members of my court were trial judges and trial lawyers before that, we also have some former trial lawyers who did not previously serve as trial judges, a couple of former law professors and a couple of "office" lawyers with virtually no trial experience before joining my court. I personally think this sort of a mix is a good thing because of the different perspectives represented in each panel.

If you think you look good in black and want some advice, the best that I can give is to urge you to be the best professional you can be, both with respect to your clients and also with respect to your colleagues and the community. As a judge, you will be held to higher standards and if you demonstrate that you already hold yourself to those standards, you will stand out from the crowd when the opportunity comes along. Then it is just a matter of being in the right place at the right time, in other words, the political lightning has to strike you.

I hope this helps. Good luck.

For judges, how much $ is enough?

As the dust begins to settle from Mike Luttig's departure from the Fourth Circuit to Boeing's corporate suites in Seattle, it was inevitable that the debate about judicial salaries would bubble up again, as Southern Appeal notes here.

My two cents worth is that while it would be very nice to make more money, judicial salaries are not out of line in comparison to other upper level government jobs and are certainly much better than the average earnings of those taxpayers who pay those salaries.

As a state judge, I am not paid even what Judge Luttig walked away from but I doubt many of us do the job for the money. I took a pay cut to go on the bench and I have children at home who will soon be entering college, so money is not unimportant. I know I could easily find a job with a law firm that would quickly solve any potential financial problems. Unlike Mike Luttig, I can also safely say that I will never be on anybody's short list for a seat on the Supreme Court. So why do I stay?

I do what I do for several mundane reasons. First, I really enjoy the intellectual stimulation of wrestling with the finer points of the law. Second, I enjoy writing and I find a lot of satisfaction in crafting an opinion that resolves the legal issues between the parties and provides future guidance to the bench and bar. Finally, there are some great quality of life benefits in that you don't have to worry about clients or billable hours and because the job is 90% reading and 10% writing, you can do it anywhere and anytime. This means that the hours are pretty flexible and as long as you have the discipline to keep up with the work flow, I can go to my kids' sporting events, parent-teacher conferences and all those other things I missed before I went on the bench.

Obviously, if the compensation wasn't enough to support my family's basic needs, I would be doing something else but the nature of upper level government service is some measure of financial sacrifice for the greater good. Besides, and I recognize that I may be in the minority on this point, I don't have a big problem with people leaving government service after a while as long as there are good people available to fill the void and while getting them confirmed, appointed or elected may be another story, it doesn't appear to me that there is a critical shortage of highly competent men and women ready and willing to fill vacancies on state and federal appellate courts.

How about a really cool, envioronmentally friendly tree house.

Here is a concept design for the ultimate treehouse.

Loyal HOWT readers know that I find these oddball habitations kind of interesting.

HT to Gizmodo for the link.

R U There? OBTW, IMHO, need rescue or EOL!

Lost at sea, eating squid and drinking rainwater for 22 days, Aussies text message for help.