DOCSLIB.ORG

Motion for Attorneys' Fees

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Motion for Attorneys' Fees Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72 Filed 05/04/21 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 772 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY RICHARD GRISAFI, on behalf of Case No. No.18-8494-JMV-JBC himself and the Putative Class Civil Action Plaintiff, v. SONY ELECTRONICS INC. Defendant. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES AND EXPENSES AND CLASS REPRESENTATIVES INCENTIVE Pursuant to this Court’s December 7, 2020 Preliminary Approval Order, (ECF No. 69) as modified by the Court’s February 3, 2021 Order modifying the schedule, (ECF No. 71) on July 19, 2021 at 11:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the Court shall direct, Representative Plaintiff, Richard Grisafi will move pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(h)and the terms of the Settlement Agreement before the Honorable James B. Clark III, U.S.M.J., for an order awarding attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses to Plaintiffs’ counsel in the agreed upon amount of $418,675.35 as determined in a binding Arbitration conducted by Hon. Stephen Orlofsky (ret.) and a Class Representative Incentive Award in the amount of $10,000 each for the Plaintiff/Class Representative. In support Plaintiff will rely upon the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72 Filed 05/04/21 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 773 Expenses and Class Representative Incentive Award, and the Certification of Bruce H. Nagel in Support of Approval of Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Reimbursement of Expenses with Exhibits. A proposed Order addressing the Attorneys’ Fees will be included in conjunction with the submission of the proposed Final Approval Order at the time when the Final Approval Motion is filed. Respectfully submitted this 4th day of May, 2021. NAGEL RICE, LLP By: /s/ Bruce H. Nagel Bruce H. Nagel, Esq. Randee Matloff, Esq. 103 Eisenhower Parkway Roseland, NJ 07068 (973) 618-0400 Class Counsel Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72 Filed 05/04/21 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 774 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing documents with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. /s/ Bruce H. Nagel Bruce H. Nagel, Esq. Randee Matloff, Esq. 103 Eisenhower Parkway Roseland, NJ 07068 (973) 618-0400 Class Counsel Dated: May 4, 2021 Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72-1 Filed 05/04/21 Page 1 of 33 PageID: 775 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY RICHARD GRISAFI, on behalf Case No. 2:18-cv-08494(JMV)(JBC) of himself and the Putative Class Plaintiff, Civil Action v. SONY ELECTRONICS INC. Defendant. MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXPENSES, AND CLASS REPRESENTATIVE INCENTIVE AWARD Bruce H. Nagel Of Counsel Bruce H. Nagel Randee M. Matloff On the Brief NAGEL RICE, LLP 103 Eisenhower Parkway Suite 103 Roseland, New Jersey 07068 973-618-0400 [email protected] [email protected] Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72-1 Filed 05/04/21 Page 2 of 33 PageID: 776 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ii PREFATORY STATEMENT 1 SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT TERMS 4 A. INCENTIVE AWARD TO THE CLASS REPRESENTATIVES 7 B. AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES TO CLASS COUNSEL 7 PROCEDURAL HISTORY 8 EXPERIENCE OF CLASS COUNSEL 11 LEGAL ARGUMENT 13 POINT I. THE COURT SHOULD GRANT FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ATTORNEYS' FEE PROVISION IN THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 13 A. RULE 23(H) AUTHORIZES AGREEMENTS ON ATTORNEYS' FEES IN SETTLEMENTS 13 B. THE REQUESTED FEE AWARD IS REASONABLE 15 C. APPLICATION OF THE LODESTAR METHOD 16 D. APPLICATION OF GUNTER FACTORS CONFIRMS THAT FEE REQUEST IS REASONABLE 21 POINT II. THE COURT SHOULD GRANT FINAL APPROVAL OF PLAINTIFFS' COUNSELS' EXPENSES 26 POINT III. THE REQUEST FOR CLASS REPRESENTATIVE SERVICE AWARD SHOULD BE APPROVED 27 CONCLUSION 28 -i- Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72-1 Filed 05/04/21 Page 3 of 33 PageID: 777 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases Abrams v. Lightolier, Inc., 50 F.3d 1204 (3d Cir.1995) 26 Boeing Co. v. Van Gernert, 444 U.S. 472 (1980) 21 Charles v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 976 F. Supp. 321 (D.N.J. 1997) 16 Cullen v. Whitman Med. Corp., 197 F.R.D. 136 (E.D. Pa 2000) 28 Doherty v. Hertz Corp., 2014 WL 2916494 (D.N.J. June 25, 2014) 16, 20, 21 GM Pickup Truck, 55 F.3d 768 (3d Cir. 1994) 21, 26 Grisafi v. Sony Electronics Inc., 2019 WI 1930756 (D.N.J. April 30, 2019) 8 Gunter v. Ridgewood Energy Corp., 223 F.3d 190 (3d Cir. 2000) 15, 21, 22 In re Baby Prods. Antitrust Litig., 708 F.3d 163 (3d Cir. 2013) 16, 21 In re Brokerage Antitrust Litig., 579 F.3d 241 (3d Cir. 2009) 20 In re Cendant Corp. PRIDES Litig., 243 F.3d 722 (3d Cir. 2001) 13, 15, 20 In re Diet Drugs Prod. Liab. Litig., 582 F3d 524 (3d Cir. 2009) 19 In re Ins. Brokerage Antitrust Litig., 282 F.R.D. 92 (D.N.J. 2012) 24, 26 In re Merck & Co. Vytorin ERISA Litig., 2010 WL 547613 (D.N.J. Feb. 9, 2010) 19 Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72-1 Filed 05/04/21 Page 4 of 33 PageID: 778 In re Prudential Ins. Co. Am. Sales Practice Litig. Agent Actions, 148 F.3d 283 (3d Cir. 1998) 15, 20, 22 In re Remeron Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litig., 2005 WL 3008808 (D.N.J. Nov. 9, 2005) 24, 28 In re Remeron End-Payor Antitrust Litig., 2005 WL 2230314 (D.N.J. 2005) 28 In re Rite Aid Corp. Sec. Litig, 396 F.3d 294 (3d. Cir. 2005) 20, 24 In re Safety Components, 166 F.Supp. 2d. 76 (D.N.J. 2001) 23, 26 In re Schering-Plough/Merck Merger Litigation, 2010 WL 1257722 (D.N.J. 2010) 16 Ins. Brokerage Antitrust Litig., 297 F.R.D. 136 (D.N.J. 2013) 26 Lanni v. New Jersey, 259 F.3d. 146 (3d. Cir. 2001) 16 Loughner v. Univ. of Pittsburg, 260 F.3d 173 (3d. Cir. 2001) 16 McCoy v. Health Net, Inc., 569 F. Supp.2d 448 (D.N.J. 2008) 13, 22, 23 McDonough v. Horizon Healthcare Servs., Inc., No. CIV.A. 09-571 SRC, 2014 WL 3396097 (D.N.J. July 9, 2014) 19 Mehling v. New York Life Ins. Co., 248 F.R.D. 455 (E.D. Pa. 2008) 23 Milliron v. T-Mobile, 423 Fed. Appx. 131 (3d Cir. 2011) 15 Milliron v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 2009 WL 3345762 (D.N.J. Sept. 10, 2009) 25 Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274 (1989) 16 Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72-1 Filed 05/04/21 Page 5 of 33 PageID: 779 Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Attorney General of the State of New Jersey, 297 F.3d 253 (3d Cir. 2002) 17 Public Interest Research Group of N.J., Inc. v. Windall, 51 F.3d 1179 (3d Cir. 1985) 17 Ursic v. Bethlehem Mines, 719 F.2d 670 (3d Cir. 1983) 15 Statutes 15 U.S.C. § 230 8 18 U.S.C. §1030 8 N.J.S.A. 56:12-15 8 N.J.S.A. § 56:8-2 8 Rules Rule 23(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 13 -iv- Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72-1 Filed 05/04/21 Page 6 of 33 PageID: 780 PREFATORY STATEMENT This Brief and the Certification of Bruce H. Nagel are submitted in support of Plaintiff's Motion for an award of attorney's fees and costs and a Class Representative Incentive Award for Plaintiff, Richard Grisafi. After three years of litigation by Plaintiff's counsel including participating in several motions, engaging in discovery, and engaging in mediation with the well-respected mediator, the Hon. Stephen Orlofsky (ret.), a settlement) was successfully negotiated which provides significant monetary benefits for a class of 118,954 class members. The value of the monetary benefits to the class members is $1,673,298.00. This result was accomplished only after Class Counsel expended over 568 hours of work and had out-of-pocket expenses totaling $8,675.35 with no guarantee of any recovery or receiving any compensation for professional services or reimbursement of their expenses Plaintiffs seek an award of counsel fees and costs in the amount of $418,675.35. This amount was determined in accordance with 12.3 of the Settlement Agreement, by Judge Orlofsky in a binding arbitration, after the parties were unable to resolve the fee issue through negotiations. Additionally, the parties 1 The Settlement Agreement preliminarily approved by the Court appears on the Docket as D.E. 64-3. 1 Case 2:18-cv-08494-JMV-JBC Document 72-1 Filed 05/04/21 Page 7 of 33 PageID: 781 agreed to a Class Representative Incentive Award in the amount of $10,000.00 pursuant to 12.2 of the Settlement Agreement. Significantly, neither the legal fees award nor the Class Representative Incentive Award reduces or impacts the payments available to Class Members, as these payments will be paid by Defendant, Sony Electronics, Inc. ("Sony") separate from the funds available to the class. The parties did not commence negotiations with respect to the legal fees and Class Representative Incentive Award until they had reached an agreement in principle regarding all other material terms of the settlement.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Supreme Court of the United States ------♦
    Nos. 06-1195, 06-1196 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- LAKHDAR BOUMEDIENE, et al., Petitioners, v. GEORGE W. BUSH, et al. --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- KHALED A.F. AL ODAH, et al., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al. --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- On Writs Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The District Of Columbia Circuit --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- BRIEF ON BEHALF OF FORMER FEDERAL JUDGES AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS --------------------------------- ♦ --------------------------------- BETH S. BRINKMANN SETH M. GALANTER AGNIESZKA M. FRYSZMAN KETANJI BROWN JACKSON COHEN, MILSTEIN, HAUSFELD Counsel of Record & TOLL, PLLC MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 1100 New York Ave., N.W. 2000 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. West Tower, Suite 500 Suite 5500 Washington, D.C. 20005 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 408-4600 (202) 887-1500 AUGUST 24, 2007 ================================================================ COCKLE LAW BRIEF PRINTING CO. (800) 225-6964 OR CALL COLLECT (402) 342-2831 i QUESTION PRESENTED Amici curiae will address the following question, which bears on the first question presented in Boumediene v. Bush, No. 06-1185, and the second and fourth questions presented in Al Odah v. United States, No. 06-1186: Whether federal judicial review under
    [Show full text]
  • Leaving the Bench, 1970-2009: the Choices Federal Judges Make
    University of Pennsylvania Law School Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship 12-1-2012 Leaving the Bench, 1970-2009: The hoicesC Federal Judges Make, What Influences Those Choices, and Their onsequeC nces Stephen B. Burbank University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] S. Jay Plager United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Gregory Ablavsky University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Judges Commons, and the Politics Commons Recommended Citation Burbank, Stephen B.; Plager, S. Jay; and Ablavsky, Gregory, "Leaving the Bench, 1970-2009: The hoC ices Federal Judges Make, What Influences Those Choices, and Their onC sequences" (2012). Faculty Scholarship. Paper 405. http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/405 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW Founded 1852 Formerly AMERICAN LAW REGISTER © 2012 by the University of Pennsylvania Law Review VOL. 161 DECEMBER 2012 NO. 1 ARTICLE LEAVING THE BENCH, 1970–2009: THE CHOICES FEDERAL JUDGES MAKE, WHAT INFLUENCES THOSE CHOICES, AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES STEPHEN B. BURBANK,† S. JAY PLAGER†† & GREGORY ABLAVSKY††† © Stephen B. Burbank, S. Jay Plager & Gregory Ablavsky, 2012. † David Berger Professor for the Administration of Justice, University of Pennsylvania. †† Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. ††† Sharswood Fellow in Law and History, University of Pennsylvania Law School; J.D., 2011, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT of NEW JERSEY ______: SOUTH CAMDEN CITIZENS in : Civil Action No
    Case 1:01-cv-00702-FLW-AMD Document 319 Filed 03/31/06 Page 1 of 68 PageID: <pageID> NOT FOR PUBLICATION [306, 315] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ____________________________________ : SOUTH CAMDEN CITIZENS IN : Civil Action No. 01-702 (FLW) ACTION, BARBARA PFEIFFER, : PHYLLIS HOLMES, LULA WILLIAMS, : and SHARON CHRISTIE POTTER, : : PLAINTIFFS, : OPINION : v. : : THE NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF : ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, : BRADLEY CAMPBELL, Commissioner : of the New Jersey Department of : Environmental Protection, in his official : capacity, : : DEFENDANTS, : : &: : ST. LAWRENCE CEMENT CO., L.L.C., : : INTERVENOR DEFENDANT. : ____________________________________: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiffs: OLGA D. POMAR SOUTH JERSEY LEGAL SERVICES, INC. 745 MARKET STREET CAMDEN, NJ 08102 & LUKE W. COLE CENTER ON RACE, POVERTY AND THE ENVIRONMENT 450 GEARY ST., SUITE 500 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 Case 1:01-cv-00702-FLW-AMD Document 319 Filed 03/31/06 Page 2 of 68 PageID: <pageID> For Defendants New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Bradley Campbell, Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection: GARY W. WOLF & STEFANIE A. BRAND OFFICE OF THE NJ ATTORNEY GENERAL 25 W. MARKET STREET PO BOX 112 TRENTON, NJ 08625-0093 For Intervenor Defendant St. Lawrence Cement Co.: BRIAN MONTAG, DONALD KIEL & CATHERINE TRINKLE KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART NICHOLSON GRAHAM LLP ONE NEWARK CENTER 10TH FLOOR NEWARK, NJ 07102 WOLFSON, United States District Judge: Plaintiffs South Camden Citizens in Action (“SCCIA”), Barbara Pfeiffer, Phyllis Holmes, Lula Williams and Sharon Christie Potter (collectively “Plaintiffs”) allege that the Defendant New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (“NJDEP” or “DEP”), and its former Commissioner, Robert Shinn, violated Section 601 of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by granting permits to Intervenor-Defendant St.
    [Show full text]
  • Rutgers University School of Law-Camden
    C O N T E N T S LETTER FROM THE DEAN 1 INTRODUCTION 3 FACULTY, STAFF, AND ADMINISTRATION 7 ADMINISTRATION 23 THE JURIS DOCTOR CURRICULUM 24 THE LAW LIBRARY 29 ADMISSION 29 TUITION AND FEES 31 FINANCIAL AID 33 STUDENT SERVICES 40 ALUMNI 41 COURSE LISTING 42 ACADEMIC POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 61 HONORS 70 GOVERNANCE OF THE UNIVERSITY 71 DIVISIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY 72 INDEX 80 ACADEMIC CALENDAR inside back cover The university reserves the right for any reason to cancel or modify any information, course, or program listed herein. In addition, individual course offerings and programs may vary from year to year as circumstances dictate. Students should check the law school’s web site for current information: www-camlaw.rutgers.edu SCHOOL OF LAW–CAMDEN R U T G E R S, T H E S T AT E U N I V E R S I T Y O F N E W J E R S E Y ear Prospective Student: THE FACULTY THE STUDENTS In 1998, I chose to The law school faculty is Total enrollment at the law submit my application engaged in a dynamic program school is typically between 720 as a candidate for of scholarship, teaching, and and 750 students. About 600 Dthe position of dean of this service to the bar and the com- students attend full time and prestigious law school. I was munity. Rutgers law professors 150 students attend part time. attracted to Rutgers’ School of are internationally recognized The student body is diverse in Law–Camden because of the in fields as diverse as state every respect.
    [Show full text]
  • Twenty-Seventh Annual Report
    ANNUAL REPORT- 2015 New Jersey Law Revision Commission 2 New Jersey Law Revision Commission Twenty-Ninth Annual Report - 2015 3 TWENTY- NINTH ANNUAL REPORT 2015 4 New Jersey Law Revision Commission * Please address comments and questions regarding this Report to: Laura C. Tharney, Executive Director New Jersey Law Revision Commission 153 Halsey Street, 7th Floor Box 47016 Newark, New Jersey 07102 Tel: 973-648-4575 Fax: 973-648-3123 Email: [email protected] Web: www.njlrc.org This Report is prepared for submission to the Legislature pursuant to N.J.S. 1:12A-9. The Report can also be found on the website of the NJLRC at: http://www.lawrev.state.nj.us/annual.html *The above photo of the Gibraltar Building located at 153 Halsey St. is provided by http://www.tysto.com/articles04/q2/jersey.shtml. Cover photo and photos appearing on pages 20, 27, 37, 43 and 48 are included pursuant to a licensing agreement with Shutterstock Inc. The photos of the Commissioners and their representatives are included with the permission of the law firms and law schools with which each is associated. The remaining photos are included pursuant to a licensing agreement with Can Stock Photo, Inc. Twenty-Ninth Annual Report - 2015 5 The New Jersey Law Revision Commission Vision: To enhance New Jersey's long tradition of law revision and to support the Legislature in its efforts to improve the law in response to the existing and emerging needs of New Jersey citizens. Mission: To work with the Legislature toward the clarification and simplification of New Jersey’s law, its better adaptation to present social needs, and the better administration of justice.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 149 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2003 No. 30 House of Representatives The House met at 2 p.m. and was Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Jour- OFFICE OF THE CLERK, called to order by the Speaker pro tem- nal stands approved. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, pore (Mrs. CAPITO). Washington, DC, February 14, 2003. f Hon. J. DENNIS HASTERT, f The Speaker, House of Representatives, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE DESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER Washington, DC. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the DEAR MR. SPEAKER: Pursuant to the per- PRO TEMPORE gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. mission granted in Clause 2(h) of Rule II of The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- WILSON) come forward and lead the the Rules of the U.S. House of Representa- fore the House the following commu- House in the Pledge of Allegiance. tives, the Clerk received the following mes- nication from the Speaker: sage from the Secretary of the Senate on Mr. WILSON of South Carolina led February 14, 2003, at 10:38 a.m. WASHINGTON, DC, the Pledge of Allegiance as follows: That the Senate passed S. Con. Res. 4. February 25, 2003. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the That the Senate passed without amend- I hereby appoint the Honorable SHELLY United States of America, and to the Repub- ment H.R. 395. MOORE CAPITO to act as Speaker pro tempore lic for which it stands, one nation under God, That the Senate passed without amend- on this day.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Courts' Proven Capacity to Handle Guantánamo Cases
    Habeas Works Federal Courts’ Proven Capacity to Handle Guantánamo Cases A Report from Former Federal Judges June 2010 gfhgfh Habeas Works Federal Courts’ Proven Capacity to Handle Guantánamo Cases A Report from Former Federal Judges June 2010 About Human Rights First About the Constitution Project Human Rights First believes that building respect for human The Constitution Project was founded in 1997 to create a rights and the rule of law will help ensure the dignity to which climate for bipartisanship in defense of constitutional rights every individual is entitled and will stem tyranny, extremism, and values. intolerance, and violence. These rights and values include individual freedom, the Human Rights First protects people at risk: refugees who flee presumption that those accused of crimes are innocent until persecution, victims of crimes against humanity or other mass proven guilty, greater transparency, accountability, and human rights violations, victims of discrimination, those whose inclusiveness in government, and respect for the rule of law. rights are eroded in the name of national security, and human On each of the issues we address, the Project assembles a rights advocates who are targeted for defending the rights of bipartisan coalition of respected leaders who create consen- others. These groups are often the first victims of societal sus recommendations for policy reforms. Working with these instability and breakdown; their treatment is a harbinger of influential and unlikely allies, the Project conducts strategic wider-scale repression. Human Rights First works to prevent public education campaigns and helps create the political violations against these groups and to seek justice and majorities needed to transform this consensus into sound accountability for violations against them.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate EXECUTIVE SESSION Place for the First Time Since 1789
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 149 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2003 No. 164—Book II Senate EXECUTIVE SESSION place for the first time since 1789. Last highest grade—the highest grade—on year, we started having a 60-vote the bar exam when she took it. She Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, standard for Federal judges. graduated at the top of her class from Senator HATCH will be on the floor So Priscilla Owen, although she has shortly. Before he gets here, I want to Baylor Law School. She has had an ex- repeatedly and every time, gotten over emplary record both as a supreme talk about one of the nominees who we the required 51 percent, is not sitting will be voting on, once again, with clo- court justice for the State of Texas and on the Federal bench today. No. In- as a practicing lawyer. She is experi- ture votes on Friday. That is Justice stead, this very qualified supreme Priscilla Owen. Justice Priscilla Owen enced. She is qualified. She was ren- court justice of the State of Texas is dered qualified by the ABA system, the has had a vote in the Senate. She has doing her job, doing it very well, serv- had four or five votes in the Senate. committee, and she has been endorsed ing as a supreme court justice in the by Democrats and Republicans If we were adhering to the Constitu- State of Texas, even though she has throughout Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 149 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2003 No. 30 Senate The Senate met at 9:30 a.m. and was SCHEDULE not important enough to be on the called to order by the President pro Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, the floor at this stage. tempore (Mr. STEVENS). Senate will spend the day in executive So I would hope that everyone would The PRESIDENT pro tempore. To- session deliberating, once again, and understand that we are anxious to day’s prayer will be offered by our for the ninth day, the nomination of move on to other judicial nominations. guest Chaplain, Dr. George D. McKin- Miguel Estrada to be a circuit court We are anxious to move on to other ney, of Saint Stephens’s Church of God judge for the DC Circuit. The Senate legislative matters. But as long as in Christ in San Diego, CA. will recess from 12:15 to 2:30 for the Miguel Estrada refuses to answer the weekly party lunches. Between now questions or to submit the memos that PRAYER and the next recess we have a number we have requested, this is going to be The guest Chaplain offered the fol- of important issues that the majority the procedural posture of the Senate. lowing prayer: leader would like to see addressed. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. COR- May we pray together. Therefore, he hopes we can get passed NYN). The Senator from Utah.
    [Show full text]