The American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has rated U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice nominee Elena Kagan as “well-qualified,” the highest mark the committee offers.

Since 1953, the ABA has had a role in reviewing the qualifications of federal court nominees, including Supreme Court nominees.  A committee of 15 members — two from the Ninth Circuit, one from each of the 12 other federal judicial circuits and one who serves as chair — measures the individual’s integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. 

While the standing committee insulates its work from all other activities of the association, ABA president Carolyn Lamm is familiar with the procedures used to evaluate a nominee’s qualifications.  Lamm served as chair of the committee from 1995 to 1996. 

Lamm explained, “In terms of legal competence, you’re looking at legal, analytical ability.  You’re looking at what they’ve written, how they’ve argued, whether they’ve argued — how they’ve done it.  We listen to opponents, or from those on the same side and from judges to find out, how did they do as lawyers and what is their legal ability?”

A comprehensive evaluation is conducted by interviewing a broad spectrum of the legal community, reviewing pertinent materials written by the nominee, and interviewing the nominee personally.  After the evaluation is complete, the findings are assembled into a report which is reviewed by each member of the standing committee who then individually rates the nominee as either “well-qualified,” “qualified” or “not-qualified.”  The majority vote constitutes the official rating of the ABA standing committee.

To merit a “well-qualified” rating, a Supreme Court nominee must be a preeminent member of the legal profession, have outstanding legal ability and exceptional breadth of experience, and meet the highest standards of integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.  Kagan’s well-qualified rating was unanimous with one abstention.

Investigations of nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court differ in respect to other federal nominees in that they are conducted after the president has selected a nominee; they involve all members of the standing committee; a team or teams of law professors examine the nominee’s legal writings; and a group of practicing lawyers with Supreme Court experience also examines the writings.

Kagan currently serves as solicitor general of the United States.  She was nominated to fill the seat of John Paul Stevens, who will step down at the end of the 2009-2010 Supreme Court term.

When asked how the standing committee evaluates nominees who may not have had prior judicial experience, standing committee chair Kim Askew noted, “There are many, many judges who have served on courts who have never been judges and are very effective judges.  We look at what they do and we go to the three criteria — professional competence, integrity, and temperament — and we look at what they have done in their legal careers in the practice of law, which may or may not be on a bench.”

The past five U.S. Supreme Court nominees were also found well-qualified by the committee.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to begin its confirmation hearing for Kagan on June 28.  Kim Askew, the chair of the Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, has been invited to testify relating to the standing committee’s rating.

Peter J. Henning follows issues involving securities law and white-collar crime for DealBook’s White Collar Watch. As Congress works on the final version of the financial regulatory bill, a major change in liability for corporate law firms, accounting firms and investment banks has been inserted into the measure. House members of the conference committee agreed to add a provision offered by Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California, to restore aiding and abetting liability for private securities fraud cases.

The impact of the amendment is significant because it expands the potential defendants in securities fraud class actions to include more than just the company accused of making misstatements or omissions, and these are defendants with deep pockets.

Located in Eugene, the Law Office of Max J Mizejewski defends clients throughout Southern Oregon and the Willamette Valley against criminal charges. Mr. Mizejewski provides an aggressive defense against state and federal prosecutors.

Mr. Mizejewski believes everyone's rights should be protected, and everyone deserves the best possible defense. If you have been charged with a criminal offense, you need to know your rights.  We can defend you against your criminal charges, including the following:

Eugene, Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyer

•Drunk Driving (DUII, DUI, DWI) - including underage drinking and driving, refusing a breathalyzer test, driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and other drug or alcohol related driving offenses
•Criminal Driving Offenses - including manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, assault, hit & run, attempting to elude police, reckless driving and licensure issues
•Drug Crimes - including possession, delivery, and manufacturing of marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, designer drugs and prescription drugs
•Property Crimes - including theft, embezzlement, forgery, fraud, computer crimes and burglary
•Violent Crimes - including menacing, stalking and assault
•Stalking - including criminal offenses and civil actions
For more information about Oregon criminal law, Oregon criminal courts,  the criminal process, or to discuss your criminal charges with an experienced criminal defense attorney, please call 541-505-9872 or contact us online.

BP said Tuesday it has accelerated its process of approving payments for commercial claims related to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, but two Miami law firms representing fisherman said the oil company’s claim forms are flawed.

BP said it approved initial payments toward 90 percent of commercial large-loss claims that have been filed as a result the ongoing oil disaster. The U.K.-based oil giant said it approved payment of 337 checks for a total of $16 million to businesses that have filed claims in excess of $5,000.

This week, the two firms, Grossman Roth, P.A. and Bilzin Sumberg Baena Price & Axelrod LLP, began representing 600 fishermen from the Florida Keys Commercial Fisherman's Association. They warned that BP’s oil spill claim forms are seriously flawed.

“The claim form that BP put on its website is inadequate under the federal Oil Pollution Act,” said Andy Yaffa of Grossman Roth.

“The gaining of full ABA approval is a major achievement and comes after five and half years of dedicated work by the students, staff and faculty of Phoenix School of Law,” says Gene Clark, Interim Dean.  “This national accreditation also validates in an evidenced- based way what we have all worked so hard to achieve and sustain over a period of years —

a school and new model of legal education that is focused on achieving great student outcomes, preparing excellent lawyers who are ready for practice, and committed to serving the underserved.”

The ABA Accreditation Committee gave its positive recommendation to its Council of the Section on Legal Education and Admission in May of 2010.  The school was granted provisional approval by the ABA in 2007, meaning it was in compliance with ABA standards and had a plan to bring the school into full compliance. A school is only granted provisional approval for a maximum of five years.  In order to be granted full approval, a school must demonstrate that it has established full compliance with each of the Standards.

There are only three fully accredited law schools in Arizona:  Phoenix School of Law, the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University and the James E. Rogers College of Law at the University of Arizona.  PSL is Arizona’s only stand-alone law school – not affiliated with a university.  

The Phoenix School of Law demonstrated high benchmarks to win the approval of the ABA’s Accreditation Council, including achieving the highest Bar Exam passage rates in the State for February’s exam; a career placement rate of 97% within nine months of graduation; and receiving the Law School Admissions Council’s “2010 Diversity Matters Award” for its efforts to attract students from racial and ethnic groups underrepresented in the legal profession.

PhoenixLaw is located in one of only 4 major cities (Phoenix, Boston, Denver, and Atlanta) where the law school is situated in the heart of what are a major state’s financial and legal center, entertainment and sports center, state capital and international airport.  

According to the ABA, standards for approval are founded on the fact that law schools are the gateway to the legal profession. There are minimum requirements designed, developed, and implemented for the purpose of advancing the basic goal of providing a sound program of legal education.   The graduates of approved law schools can become members of the bar in all United States jurisdictions, representing all members of the public in important interests.  Law schools must ensure that its graduates understand their ethical responsibilities as attorneys for the quality and availability of justice; receive a basic education of legal theory, legal analysis, reasoning, research, problem solving and other fundamental skills needed for the legal profession; understand the basic principles of public and private law; and understand the law as a public profession calling for performance of pro bono legal services. 

A former secretary for a Hudson Valley law firm has been sentenced to up to 13 years in prison for stealing nearly $700,000 from her employer over a seven-year span.
  
Mary Merten of New Paltz was sentenced Tuesday in Ulster County Court to 4 1/3 years to 13 years and also ordered to pay more than $600,000 to the Kingston law firm where she was employed as a confidential secretary.

The judge who sentenced the 44-year-old Merten noted that her thefts forced one of the victims out of retirement and looted a child's college savings.

She pleaded guilty earlier this year to embezzling from the law firm of Riseley and Moriello.

The $625,000 she was ordered to repay to her victims was the amount agreed to during a restitution hearing.