Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Afternoon Interviews

I missed Robert Lee's interview and came in about half way through Judge Barzee's.

Judge Barzee was on top of the interview, pure and simple. She was asked a couple tough questions and did a great job fielding them. One in particular was how she would prioritize the following three traits in determining who is a great judge: Temperament, Fairness and Courage. At first Judge Barzee said that she would list all three under the category of Humility, and that humility is the most important trait. Justin Sayfie (who has proven to be one of the more vocal and aggressive questioners) felt that she had not answered the question and pushed for a ranking -- the Judge ranked them (1) Fairness, (2) Temperament and (3) Courage. Who can disagree with that?

More so than any applicant I saw interviewed, Judge Barzee appeared to have a conversation with the committee members, rather than an interview.

Judge Gayles came next,

It seemed to me that Judge Gayles faced a bit of an uphill battle with the committee because of his youth and his position as a County Court Judge. Many questions focused on his readiness to become a district court judge. His response was to point out that Judges Huck, Jordan, Seitz, Middlebrooks and Martinez had never been on the bench before being appointed.

Patricia Lowry:

If Judge Gayle's obstacle with the committee was his youth, Ms. Lowery's appeared to be the fact she is not on the bench (not to suggest she looked old -- she did not). Here is a eminently qualified individual, who is at the top of her profession, and I felt the like the committee honed in on the fact that she is not a judge. I wish they would have asked her some questions that brought out her qualifications based on her big law experience.

Another issue that was raised, was something relating to 28 U.S.C. s. 458. Apparently Ms. Lowry is married to a magistrate judge and one of the committee members seemed to suggest the above referenced statute somehow disqualified her from appointment. Were that really the case, one has to wonder why they would have interviewed her.

Kathy Williams:

Equally, or possibly more so then Judge Rosenbaum, Kathy Williams' opening remarks were thoughtful, prepared and on point. To understand Ms. Williams' interview, you have to have a bit of an appreciation for the setting --

The interviews are being conducted in the judge's conference room in the new courthouse. The room is triangularly shaped and there are huge windows on the longer walls. The room has an enormous conference table in the middle with all the members scrunched in, and the interviewee sits on one end by herself. There is some limited spectator seating, perhaps 15 - 20 seats in total, which for much of the day was adequate. When Kathy Williams was interviewed, the place was overflowing with clerks from what seemed like every chamber in the building.

The committee didn't seem to me to be interested whatsoever in whether or not Kathy Williams is qualified to be a district judge, the answer was clearly known by all of them, they seemed only to want to assure themselves that if given the spot, Ms. Williams would be fair to all sides.

One of the funnier points came when Ms. Williams was asked which judge's in the Southern District she admires -- looking up at the room stacked with law clerks, she smiled and said 'hello clerks' and proceeded to identify Judges Markus, Barkett and Dan Pearson. Seeing the way that committee treated Ms. Williams and the way she fielded their questions would make anybody who has any connection to her, even if it is like me by simply being on the CJA panel, proud as hell to have seen her interview.

It was clear that many people contacted the committee members on behalf of Kathy Williams, and had glowing things to say. Ms. Williams took the time during her closing remarks to give what was clearly a very heartfelt thanks to all of them.

Judge Lopez:

Not much to say about the Judge's interview, nobody was questioning his qualifications to sit as a district judge; he carried a genuine air of effortless authority throughout the interview.

Judge Scola:

The committee seemed in awe of Kathy Williams, the committee had a great conversation with Judge Barzee, but with Judge Scola, the committee was completely at ease and relaxed.

Judge Scola was self effacing and demonstrated his quick wit. One of the funniest points was when one of the committee members pointed out that he was on the JNC that sent Judge Scola's name to the governor when the Judge was appointed to circuit court. The judge immediately responded that he is not a superstitious person, but that for some reason he is wearing the same tie today that he did during that interview in 1995! At another point, Georgina Angones said that she had heard so many good things from people about Judge Scola, and asked what Judge Scola thought about the fact that they all ended by saying they would hate to lose him as a circuit judge. Steve Zack quickly said, I'll answer that for you, turned to Ms. Angones and said "get another circuit judge!" Another committee member said he played on the same baseball team as Judge Scola at some point and asked the Judge to confirm that he was a really good player...the Judge smiled, rolled his eyes, looked up and said, 'of course, you were incredible.'

On judicial philosophy, the Judge echoed the sentiment that was expressed by others who are or were trial lawyers like Judge Barzee, and Kathy Williams, that a judge should not inject themselves into a trial, but should allow the lawyers to do their jobs.

Overall, I must say that the process was intense, and very interesting to watch. I encourage you all to go watch the US Atty interviews tomorrow, if you cannot, I will be there and will do my best to let you know what happens.


Morning Interviews

The morning interviews got off to a fast start. Judge Rosenbaum's opening remarks were extremely well thought out and prepared. She clearly captured the committee during her initial presentation.

Some of the committee member's questions were in depth, and others were not very deep. In all, during the course of the 20 minutes or so of questioning, there were good exchanges and you certainly got a feel for the interviewee.

One of the more interesting questions that has come up with a number of the interviewees has been asked by Justin Sayfie -- essentially, the question is whether the interviewee has seen a situation where the law dictates a result that the candidate deems to be unjust and morally wrong. Most of the canidates I saw (I missed Caroline Heck Miller and Judith Korchin's interveiws) stressed the importance of stare decisis and adhearance to the rule of law. Personally, I think there may have been a bit of a missed oportunity to recall the building that they are being interviewed in, and a quote attributed to that great judge who has been cited has having said that "in the Moral Universe, One Is A Majority If Your're Right." Judge Bagley had the most interesting response to it when he noted that he has come upon that situation in his career as a jurist and he tried to frame the issue for the appeallate court -- he was reversed.

Here are some highlights from the interviews I saw:

Judge Rosenbaum:

Judge Roesnbaum stressed the role of a prosecutor is not to obtain convictions, but rather "to do the right thing." I appreciated that, having come from the State Attorney's Office.

Judge Seltzer:

Judge Seltzer was asked by the committee members how the Chief Magistrate Judge is picked (he is next up and Judge Brown is the current Chief). The Judge told the committee that it is by seniority and that he and Judge Brown were sworn in on the same day, but at their judicial swearing in, he said 'Steve, you go first,' and here we are. Judge Seltzer also affirmed his respect for the role of voir dire and said that he beleives the sides should get thirty mintues in selecting a jury.

Judge Bagley:

Unfortunately I missed Judge Bagley's opening remarks, but sitting in the room, you cannot miss that which is obvious to anybody who has appeared in his courtroom -- a calmness and demanor that commands the attention of all present. He was in absolute control of the entire interveiw and it was impressive to watch. When asked what his weakness was, the Judge directly addressed his lack of federal experiance and assured the committee that that fact would not effect his ability to be a federal judge. Nobody present would have doubted him. Judge Bagley also tipped the committee off to what motivated him to enter the law:

The Judge was a student in New York and recieved a summons to appear through the mail for a marijuana charge -- the summons was issued in his legal name, but he was not the right guy...somebody had apparently used his name. When he appeared in court, he was intimidated and frightened. He explained to the presiding judge that he was not right defendant. Luckily for Judge Bagley the police officer who had issued the summons was there and affirmed that he was not the proper defendant. This experiance, more than any other showed Judge Bagley the fairness in the law and led to the launch of his legal career.

Judge White:

By the time Judge White appeared, the committee room was rather full of spectators and I could not hear him very well. I did catch his emphasis on judicial temperment and patience as qualities that he believes are extemely important. Judge White also made a statement that I loved - he said that because of the power that a prosecutor holds, a good prosecutor is the best public defender. Absolutely true.


Well, back to the interveiws, I will post more later.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Guest Blogger Here

David is in trial before Judge Jordan and is unable to cover the District Court interviews tomorrow. I will be guest blogging for David. Unfortunately, I will have to miss several of the morning interviews and am hoping somebody else will provide information on the ones I cannot attend.



Here is the list of the interviewees and their timeslots:
  1. Robin S. Rosenbaum 9:00
  2. Barry S. Seltzer 9:30
  3. Judith M. Korchin 10:00
  4. Caroline Heck Miller 10:30
  5. Jerald Bagley 11:00
  6. Patrick A. White 11:30
  7. Robert W. Lee 12:30
  8. Mary Barzee Flores 1:00
  9. Darrin P. Gayles 1:30
  10. Patricia E. Lowry 2:00
  11. Kathleen M. Williams 2:30
  12. Peter R. Lopez 3:00
  13. Robert N. Scola, Jr. 3:30
  14. Gerald B. Cope, Jr. 4:00
  15. Ana Maria Martinez 4:30

I cannot help but wonder whether to not a 25-minute interview, even with the huge written application involved, is sufficient to determine which of these 15 individuals should get the job. It will be interesting to hear the committee’s questions and the remarks by the applicants.

Monday, July 13, 2009

UBS trial continued till August 3

Prior coverage here. Judge Gold agreed to the parties' request to let them try and work it out.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Looking for blogger to cover interviews

I was planning on covering the interviews for judge and U.S. Attorney this week, but it turns out that I will have to do some real work and will be in court. Any volunteers to go to the interviews and blog 'em? Shoot me an email.

Maybe not on the UBS trial

According to the New York Times, the parties filed a joint motion to continue the case over the weekend in the hopes they can settle:

The Swiss bank UBS and United States federal prosecutors sought Sunday to delay a hearing scheduled for Monday so the two sides could try to settle their closely watched dispute over the release of names of wealthy American clients of the bank who are suspected of offshore tax evasion.

But the postponement request, made in a joint legal filing in a federal court in Florida, came amid fresh threats by the Justice Department that it might impose financial sanctions on UBS and possibly indict the bank should it ultimately refuse to disclose the names if required to do so by a judge.

Judge Gold will hear the motion to continue first thing Monday morning.

Friday, July 10, 2009

Best blog post forever


Paris Hilton is on the stand. And Judge Moreno is getting in on the act. In one exchange, Moreno was puzzled by the title of Hilton's current reality show, "My New BFF." "What does that mean?" he said. After Hilton gave the full title "Paris Hilton's My New Best Friend Forever" the judge remarked "This will be my best case forever." Without missing a beat, Hilton replied "You're my best judge forever."

Hat Tip: Curt Anderson


The trial is being heard by Chief U.S. District Judge Federico Moreno, who reacted with surprise when Hilton gave him a little wave before testifying. "I've never had a witness wave at me before," the judge cracked.
At one point, Hilton was testifying about how full her schedule was during rehearsals for her next film, 2008's "The Hottie & The Nottie," when Moreno interrupted.
"Was it better than this one?" the judge said, referring to "Pledge This!".
"It was really good," Hilton answered with a giggle. Along with the heels, Hilton wore an all-black sleeveless dress tied at the back and sported diamond rings and a bracelet.


UBS trial to start Monday

Lots of press coverage on the case to start Monday here.

I liked this Reuters piece on Judge Alan Gold, who is presiding over the case:

The judge presiding over a high-stakes legal showdown between the U.S. government and Swiss bank UBS AG is seen as a straight-shooter who has not shied away from taking aim at big corporate interests.
Some see Judge Alan Gold of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida emerging as an international mediator as he deals with issues loaded with important foreign policy and financial ramifications, led by U.S. demands for a lifting of Switzerland's treasured bank secrecy laws.
But U.S. attorneys and prosecutors who know him say Gold, a 65-year-old native New Yorker, will studiously avoid doing anything inconsistent with his role as a judge as he handles his biggest and most publicized case since he came to the federal bench in Miami nearly 13 years ago.
"He's about as straight-shooter as they come," said Charles Intriago, a former U.S. federal prosecutor and money laundering expert, who publishes a website for law enforcement officials about asset forfeiture.
"He's the perfect judge for this," he added, referring to the hearing Gold is set to preside over Monday in a suit in which the Justice Department is seeking to force UBS to disclose information on 52,000 secret accounts suspected of being used by wealthy Americans to avoid paying their taxes.
There is little in Gold's record to indicate how he might rule in the case, which experts say could set an important legal precedent since it marks the biggest test ever of Swiss bank secrecy.
Gold grabbed the media spotlight in a business law case once before, when he presided over a class-action lawsuit against Exxon Corp that resulted in a settlement costing more than $1 billion.


Gene Stearns won that case against Exxon. This time around, he's representing UBS.