The VLW Blog

At the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association annual gathering, the Criminal Law section meeting is a time for war stories, anecdotes and general hilarity. Last week, New Kent Circuit Judge Thomas Hoover recalled a session from the courtroom of federal district Judge D. Dortch Warriner.

As Hoover told it, Jimmy Morris was arguing a point with partner Bill Woods at his side. As Morris pressed on, Woods passed him a note: “The old goat is agreeing with your argument. Don’t blow it. Shut up and sit down.”

Morris persisted regardless, stuffing the note in his pocket. Finally, Judge Warriner stopped him and asked if the note concerned the case at bar. Advised that it did, Warriner then demanded to see the note. Reluctantly, Morris relinquished the paper. Warriner read it, looked down from the bench and stated, “Mr. Morris, this note is well written and you ought to read it again.”

Granted, the General Assembly’s treatment of Court of Appeal Judge Robert J. Humphreys is shameful.

No one seems to suggest that he is unworthy of appointment to a second eight-year term, but he has fallen victim to political infighting that resulted in the failure of the legislature to fill about 30 vacancies and reappoint him and fellow CAV Judge Jean Harrison Clements.

Although technically still in session, the legislature can’t do anything about filling those vacancies until April 23 when it reconvenes. Humphreys’ term expires April 15, so he will be off the bench at least a week.

Assuming that the General Assembly comes to its senses and takes action on the pending judicial appointments, as it is expected to do by the end of May at the latest, there will be no effect on his retirement benefits.

Dire consequences for a “break in service” are largely a myth, according to Brian Goodman, legal affairs and compliance coordinator for the Virginia Retirement System. Humphreys will get credit for any month in which he is employed by the state. Even if he were to have a month with no service, he would lose only that month, and his benefits would continue to accrue with his reappointment, Goodman said.

The second annual Legal Food Frenzy starts Monday and runs through April 11.

The competition among law firms for the Attorney General’s Cup is aimed at raising a million pounds of food, a substantial increase over the 679,000 pounds raised last year.

The drive is being coordinated by the Young Lawyers Division of the Virginia Bar Association and regional foodbanks in the state.

Attorney General Bob McDonnell has issued a statement supporting the competition that includes Web links to the foodbanks.

Andy Block of Charlottesville thinks that too many children accused of crime are getting caught up in the adult justice system, only to be handed juvenile sentences when they emerge from court. Block – a much-honored child advocate – will address the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association this morning at the group’s annual convention at The Homestead.

Block questions “whether Virginia is getting what it wanted” when it dramatically changed the juvenile code in the mid 1990s. The changes of the ’90s were designed to see that the “worst of the worst” juvenile offenders were put on trial as adults. Block suggests that the adult-trial net is being cast too broadly.

Block is the Virginia State Bar’s 2007 Legal Aid Attorney of the Year. He is the founder of the JustChildren advocacy project in Virginia and the Child Advocacy Clinic at the University of Virginia School of Law.

Block says that most youths who are convicted in adult court end up being sentenced as juveniles. While that means they get opportunities for education and rehabilitation, they still are branded as adult offenders. The consequences are significant, according to Block.

Young people convicted of felonies as adults lose their right to vote; they are barred from some student loans; they have difficulty finding jobs. If the crime is a sex offense, the young defendant is required to register as a sex offender. “It creates obstacles,” said Block.

“My hope is that, presented with the right information and given the opportunity to consider and discuss the matter, people might think that there is a better way to do it,” Block said.

It’s official. The civil remedial fees for motorists convicted of driving crimes ended today with the signature of Gov. Tim Kaine on Senate Bill 1 and House Bill 1243.

The emergency legislation provides for refunds for those who have already paid a portion of the fees and excuses them from further payment. It even provides that a license can’t be suspended for failure to pay the fee. Motorists are still liable, however, for the fines and costs associated with the underlying criminal offense.

The law required motorists convicted of traffic felonies and misdemeanors to pay $750 to $3,000 over 26 months in three installments. The fees drew little notice when they were enacted as a relatively small part of a package to fund state transportation projects but was attacked after publicity when it took effect in July. They generated a firestorm of opposition over their high cost and their application to Virginians but not to out-of-state drivers.

It also became obvious that they would generate only a fraction of the $65 million annually they were originally expected to produce.
“In the earnestness of trying to solve the transportation issue, a mistake was made,” said Senator Edd Houck, the sponsor of SB 1. “This was simply the wrong way to go about funding transportation. And today is the day we correct all that.”

The governor issued a press release and another statement explaining it all.

As reported lately, some disgruntled mortgage customers react to foreclosure notices by burning down their homes. A Floyd County woman was not so vindictive, but still ended up facing felony theft charges. According to the Floyd Press, Elizabeth Ann Ledger was accused of yanking light fixtures, appliances, a bathroom vanity and a claw-footed bathtub from her foreclosed home. A misdemeanor plea deal was reached when the parties clashed over how to value the missing fixtures.

Frankly, I am scared to try to say anything funny here. Insert your favorite Chuck Norris fact. Here’s the news item from the Lynchburg News & Advance.

Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor lately has been offering pointed public opinions on various topics, most often on the judicial selection process in the states. Today, at Virginia Military Institute, she turned her sights on military justice. According to this item from the Roanoke Times website, she “chided America’s political leaders for not doing more to establish more clear cut military rules of conduct….”

No word yet on reaction from the VMI Superintendent or Board of Visitors.

What part of de novo don’t you understand?

That was the question the Virginia Court of Appeals had for Colonial Heights Circuit Judge Timothy J. Hauler.

A mother appealed a juvenile and domestic relations district court’s award of custody of her minor child to its father. At the beginning of the custody hearing Hauler told the mother’s attorney, Neil Kuchinsky, that he had read the transcript of the juvenile court proceeding and the result would be the same unless he presented new evidence. And if it is the same, Hauler said, “it is going to cost you client an awful lot of money” in attorney’s fees.

Kuchinsky objected to Hauler’s having read the transcript and unsuccessfully asked him to recuse himself. Hauler noted that the transcript was in the record, “inexplicably” so, appellate Judge Sam W. Coleman III noted, but Kuchinsky said he had not had a previous opportunity to object to its inclusion.

Hauler also awarded custody to the father and assessed attorneys’ fees of $16,918.50 and $2,507.15 in costs, including an award of fees and costs that was higher than the amounts originally awarded in juvenile court.

The CAV panel reversed and remanded the case for trial before a different judge. “[T]he trial judge abdicated his responsibility to independently weigh the evidence, make his own credibility determinations, and decide in the exercise of his sound discretion in which parent custody should be vested so as to serve the best interest of the child,” Coleman wrote in Alexander v. Flowers. “Instead, as a punitive measure for pursuing her right to a trial de novo the court imposed a punitive award of attorney’s fees.”

“Dunder Mifflin” sounds a lot like the name of a law firm, but any fan of NBC’s “The Office” knows that they don’t practice law at Dunder Mifflin, they sell paper.

U.S. News & World Report publishes an annual career guide, and this year, they use the Scrantonians from the TV show to illustrate a number of career pointers. And if you happen to see Michael, Dwight or Kevin (or their equivalents) in the halls of your law firm, keep it to yourself.

Enjoy the video. And please be patient. It takes a few minutes to load once you click.