DOCSLIB.ORG

Tax Apportionment Problems Under the Georgia Probate Code by James R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tax Apportionment Problems Under the Georgia Probate Code by James R June 2003 Q Volume 8 Q Number 6 TaxTax ApportionmentApportionment ProblemsProblems UnderUnder thethe GeorgiaGeorgia ProbateProbate CodeCode Quick Dial Attorney Discipline (800) 334-6865 ext. 720 (404) 527-8720 Consumer Assistance Program (404) 527-8759 Conference Room Reservations (404) 527-8712 Fee Arbitration (404) 527-8750 June 2003 Volume 8 Number 6 CLE Transcripts (404) 527-8710 Diversity Program (404) 527-8754 ETHICS Hotline (800) 682-9806 (404) 527-8741 Editorial Board Georgia Bar Foundation/IOLTA (404) 588-2240 Rebecca Ann Hoelting Georgia Bar Journal (404) 527-8736 Editor-in-Chief Lawyer Assistance Program (770) 612-1122 (800) 327-9631 Scott Fain Bertschi W. Fray McCormick Lawyers Foundation of Georgia (404) 659-6867 Elizabeth Lee Branch E. Peyton Nunez Law Practice Management (404) 527-8772 Erin Reynolds Chance Erick H. Rock Membership Records (404) 527-8777 Charles Madden Cork III Cynthia B. Smith Meetings Information (404) 527-8790 Lynda Carney Crum John I. Spangler III Pro Bono Project (404) 527-8763 Professionalism (404) 225-5040 John Michael Gross Robert R. Stubbs Sections (404) 527-8774 Michelle Wilkins Johnson Jerre Bailey Swann Jr. Unauthorized Practice of Law (404) 527-8743 Sarah Howard Lamar Kristin H. West Young Lawyers Division (404) 527-8778 Marcus D. Liner Pamela Y. White-Colbert Manuscript Submissions Advisors The Georgia Bar Journal welcomes the submission of Theodore Harris Davis Jr. unsolicited legal manuscripts on topics of interest to D. Scott Murray the State Bar of Georgia or written by members of the State Bar of Georgia. Submissions should be 10 to 12 Marisa Anne Pagnattaro pages, double-spaced (including endnotes) and on let- ter-size paper. Citations should conform to A UNIFORM Editors Emeritus SYSTEM OF CITATION (17th ed. 2000). Please address unsolicited articles to: Rebecca Ann Hoelting, State Bar Marisa Anne Pagnattaro, 01-02 L. Dale Owens, 87-89 of Georgia, Communications Department, 104 D. Scott Murray, 00-01 Donna G. Barwick, 86-87 Marietta St. NW, Suite 100, Atlanta, GA 30303. William Wall Sapp, 99-00 James C. Gaulden Jr., 85-86 Authors will be notified of the Editorial Board’s deci- Theodore H. Davis Jr., 97-99 Jarry B. Blackstock, 84-85 sion regarding publication. L. Brett Lockwood, 95-97 Steven M. Collins, 82-84 The Georgia Bar Journal welcomes the submission of Stephanie B. Manis, 93-95 Walter M. Grant, 79-82 news about local and circuit bar association happen- William L. Bost Jr., 91-93 Stephen E. Raville, 77-79 ings, Bar members, law firms and topics of interest to Charles R. Adams III, 89-91 Robert H. Walling, 75-77 attorneys in Georgia. Please send news releases and other information to: Joe Conte, Director of Communications, 104 Marietta St. NW, Suite 100, Officers of the State Bar of Georgia Atlanta, GA 30303; phone: (404) 527-8736; James B. Durham President [email protected]. William D. Barwick President-Elect Robert D. Ingram Secretary Disabilities George Robert Reinhardt Jr. Treasurer If you have a disability which requires printed materi- James B. Franklin Immediate Past President als in alternate formats, please contact the ADA coor- Derek J. White YLD President dinator at (404) 527-8700 or (800) 334-6865. Andrew W. Jones YLD President-Elect Headquarters Peter J. Daughtery YLD Past President 104 Marietta St. NW, Suite 100 Atlanta, GA 30303 Communications Committee (800) 334-6865 (404) 527-8700 FAX (404) 527-8717 William H. Dodson II Chairperson www.gabar.org Aasia Mustakeem Vice-Chairperson South Georgia Office 244 E. Second St. (31794) P.O. Box 1390 Tifton, GA 31793-1390 Communications Staff (800) 330-0446 (912) 387-0446 FAX (912) 382-7435 Joe Conte Director Sarah I. Bartleson Assistant Director Daniel L. Maguire Administrative Assistant June 2003 Volume 8 Number 6 Legal 16 Tax Apportionment Problems under the Georgia Probate Code By James R. Robinson Features On the Cover 24 Professionalism in the Principle-CCentered Law Practice By Chief Judge G. Alan Blackburn The Georgia Probate Code as 30 Lawyers: Guardians of Freedom it relates to tax apportionment 4is discussed at length in an By Anthony Lewis article by James R. Robinson. 37 State Bar Navigates Legislature’s ‘Perfect Storm’ See page 16. By Mark Middleton 41 BOG Meets in Masters Territory for Spring Meeting By Daniel L. Maguire 44 Diversity CLE and Luncheon Bring Issues to Light By Sarah I. Bartleson 47 IOLTA Wins Monumental Victory By Len Horton 50 Lawyers Foundation to Award Challenge Grants Departments By Lauren Larmer Barrett 56 Volunteerism in the Profession 4 Letter to the Editor By Sarah I. Bartleson 60 Pro Bono Honor Roll 6 From the President 9 From the Executive Director Annual Fiction Writing Competition 64 The Devil Came Down 12 From the YLD President By Brad Elbein 70 Bench & Bar Publisher’s Statement The Georgia Bar Journal (ISSN-1085-1437) is published six times per year (bi-monthly) by the State Bar of 73 Office of the General Counsel Georgia, 104 Marietta St. NW, Suite 100, Atlanta, GA 30303. © State Bar of Georgia 2003. One copy of each issue is furnished to members as part of their State Bar dues. Subscriptions: $36 to non-members. Single copies: $6. Periodicals postage paid in Atlanta, GA. Opinions and conclusions expressed in articles 75 Lawyer Discipline herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Editorial Board, Communications Committee, Officers or Board of Governors of the State Bar of Georgia. Advertising rate card will be fur- 78 Law Practice Management nished upon request. Publishing of an advertisement does not imply endorsement of any product or serv- ice offered. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to same address. 80 Voluntary Bar 83 Professionalism Page Advertisers Index 88 In Memoriam AAA Attorney Referral Service. 19 LawDocsXpress . 7 ABA Members Retirement Program . 33 Lawyers Direct. 35 89 CLE Calendar Arthur Anthony. 49 LexisNexis . IFC Baker, Donelson . 1 Mainstreet . 13 91 Notices Butterfield Reimer & Associates. 19 Mitchell Kaye Valuation . 14 Daniel Turner Builders, Inc.. 19 Netronics . 19 94 Classified Resources Daniels-Head Insurance . 96 Nextel . IBC Elizabeth Mehlman, J.D., Ph.D.. 11 Prolegia . 39 Florida Detox. 67 Real Estate Exchange Service . 46 Georgia Juris . 79 SoftPro . 21 Georgia Lawyers Insurance Co. 5 South Georgia ADR . 53 Gilsbar . 45 The Georgia Fund . 15 Golden Lantern . 49 West. 33, 43, BC Spoliation Article Omits Critical Issue Dear Editor: plaint, so that all documents, electronically Editor stored or otherwise, would be preserved. We I read with interest the spoliation article by followed with a request for production of Ms. Wallace. However, the article omits a documents. If a defendant — in our case, a critical issue in spoliation: what happens corporation — is reasonably on notice that when a defendant (or a third party) has the litigation has begun or is imminent, it would evidence that the plaintiff must obtain to be a profound tactical mistake to destroy prove his or her case? documents.” The sole possible remedy is an ex parte While the issue in Linnen — and the issue spoliation order. While such orders are not in each of the three cases before the Georgia uncommon in other states, they are rare to judges above — involved proposed ex parte unheard of in Georgia. In three recent spoliation orders against defendants or their attempts to obtain one (using a form pub- counsel, there is no reason why an ex parte lished in the Texas Bar Journal), Superior spoliation order should be (a) limited to par- Letter to the Court Judge Jefferson Davis granted such ties or their counsel, or (b) be considered an motion ex parte (defendant had plaintiff’s onerous order or an unethical effort. I would computer and internal records), Superior hope that in this era of electronically stored Court Judge Doris Downs denied the motion (and erased) documents, that ex parte spolia- ex parte in another case (defendant had pho- tion orders should be no more unusual than tographs of the construction development for requests for in camera inspections of sensi- which plaintiff had not been paid), and Judge tive documents. Cindy Morris granted the motion ex parte in a third case (defendant’s counsel’s computer John T. Longino, MBA/JD records could confirm by date of document [email protected] creation the manual back-dating by defen- Ellijay, GA dant of critical documents), then vacated the Licensed GA FL TX AK order on a claim by opposing counsel that it was “unethical.” I then sought an opinion from the Formal LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Advisory Opinion Board of the State Bar of The Georgia Bar Journal encourages letters to Georgia on the ethics of seeking an ex parte the Editor from its readers on any substantive spoliation order at the commencement of a topic of general interest or concern to the mem- case; they declined to issue an opinion on the bers of the State Bar of Georgia, however, first issue. consideration will be given to letters written in On Nov. 7, 2001, The American Corporate response to material appearing in the Journal. Counsel Association sponsored a roundtable The Board reserves the right to edit letters for content or clarity and to limit the number of discussion (published by law.com) dis- letters on a given topic, as well as the number cussing this issue and the case of Linnen, et al. of letters from any individual correspondent. v. A.H. Robins Company, Inc., et al., No. 97- Letters also may not be published if space does 2307 (Middlesex Super. Ct. June 15, 1999). not permit. Counsel for Linnen was Alex H. All letters should be e-mailed to MacDonald who stated, in that roundtable [email protected] or addressed to: Editor, Georgia Bar Journal, 104 Marietta St.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Remarks on Henry Friendly
    REMARKS ON HENRY FRIENDLY ON THE AWARD OF THE HENRY FRIENDLY MEDAL TO JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR Pierre N. Leval † RESIDENT RAMO CALLED ME a couple of days ago with a problem. Young people today (and this includes young- sters up to the age of 50) apparently do not know who Henry Friendly was or why the American Law Institute Pawards a medal in his name. Would I address those questions to- night? At first I was astonished by Roberta’s proposition. Friendly was revered as a god in the federal courts from 1958 to his death in 1986. In every area of the law on which he wrote, during a quarter century on the Second Circuit, his were the seminal and clarifying opinions to which everyone looked as providing and explaining the standards. Most of us who earn our keep by judging can expect to be de- servedly forgotten within weeks after we kick the bucket or hang up the robe and move to Florida. But for one whose judgments played † Pierre Leval is a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. He delivered these remarks on October 20, 2011, at a dinner of the Council of the American Law Insti- tute. Copyright © 2012 Pierre N. Leval. 15 GREEN BAG 2D 257 Pierre N. Leval such a huge role, it is quite surprising – and depressing – that the memory of him has so rapidly faded. Later, a brief exploration why this might be so. I begin by recounting, for any who don’t know, what some pur- ple-robed eminences of the law have said about Friendly.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS ANNUAL REPORT July 1,1996-June 30,1997 Main Office Washington Office The Harold Pratt House 1779 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10021 Washington, DC 20036 Tel. (212) 434-9400; Fax (212) 861-1789 Tel. (202) 518-3400; Fax (202) 986-2984 Website www. foreignrela tions. org e-mail publicaffairs@email. cfr. org OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS, 1997-98 Officers Directors Charlayne Hunter-Gault Peter G. Peterson Term Expiring 1998 Frank Savage* Chairman of the Board Peggy Dulany Laura D'Andrea Tyson Maurice R. Greenberg Robert F Erburu Leslie H. Gelb Vice Chairman Karen Elliott House ex officio Leslie H. Gelb Joshua Lederberg President Vincent A. Mai Honorary Officers Michael P Peters Garrick Utley and Directors Emeriti Senior Vice President Term Expiring 1999 Douglas Dillon and Chief Operating Officer Carla A. Hills Caryl R Haskins Alton Frye Robert D. Hormats Grayson Kirk Senior Vice President William J. McDonough Charles McC. Mathias, Jr. Paula J. Dobriansky Theodore C. Sorensen James A. Perkins Vice President, Washington Program George Soros David Rockefeller Gary C. Hufbauer Paul A. Volcker Honorary Chairman Vice President, Director of Studies Robert A. Scalapino Term Expiring 2000 David Kellogg Cyrus R. Vance Jessica R Einhorn Vice President, Communications Glenn E. Watts and Corporate Affairs Louis V Gerstner, Jr. Abraham F. Lowenthal Hanna Holborn Gray Vice President and Maurice R. Greenberg Deputy National Director George J. Mitchell Janice L. Murray Warren B. Rudman Vice President and Treasurer Term Expiring 2001 Karen M. Sughrue Lee Cullum Vice President, Programs Mario L. Baeza and Media Projects Thomas R.
    [Show full text]
  • Aviation Law Mark A
    Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 48 | Issue 2 Article 13 1983 Aviation Law Mark A. Dombroff Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation Mark A. Dombroff, Aviation Law, 48 J. Air L. & Com. 453 (1983) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol48/iss2/13 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. Book Reviews AVIATION LAW by Andreas F. Lowenfeld. New York: Matthew Bender & Co., 1981 Edition. pp. 1411. In 1972, Andreas Lowenfeld published the first edition of AVIATION LAW.' In the introduction to that book, Professor Lowenfeld related the challenge presented by Judge Henry Friendly: Some years ago, Judge Henry Friendly, who made his career in large part as a brilliant and imaginative general counsel for Pan American World Airways, reviewed an earlier attempt to collect materials on aviation law by asking whether it made sense to treat this subject at all. "In order to make out a case for separate treatment," he wrote, "it must be shown that the heads of a given subject can be examined in a more illuminating fashion with reference to each other than with references to other branches of law." With respect to the book under review, Judge Friendly's answer was "a resounding no."' Professor Lowenfeld went on to accept the challenge and in the seven chapters of the first edition of AVIATION LAW presented the reader with an overview of the economic, regulatory, tort, and social considerations that have grown up in the law relating to the aviation industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Judical Stratification and the Reputations of the United States Courts of Appeals
    Florida State University Law Review Volume 32 Issue 4 Article 14 2005 Judical Stratification and the Reputations of the United States Courts of Appeals Michael E. Solimine [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Michael E. Solimine, Judical Stratification and the Reputations of the United States Courts of Appeals, 32 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. (2006) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol32/iss4/14 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW JUDICAL STRATIFICATION AND THE REPUTATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS Michael E. Solimine VOLUME 32 SUMMER 2005 NUMBER 4 Recommended citation: Michael E. Solimine, Judical Stratification and the Reputations of the United States Courts of Appeals, 32 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 1331 (2005). JUDICIAL STRATIFICATION AND THE REPUTATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS MICHAEL E. SOLIMINE* I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 1331 II. MEASURING JUDICIAL REPUTATION, PRESTIGE, AND INFLUENCE: INDIVIDUAL JUDGES AND MULTIMEMBER COURTS ............................................................... 1333 III. MEASURING THE REPUTATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS . 1339 IV. THE RISE AND FALL OF
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Genealogy (And Mythology) of John Roberts: Clerkships from Gray to Brandeis to Friendly to Roberts
    The Judicial Genealogy (and Mythology) of John Roberts: Clerkships from Gray to Brandeis to Friendly to Roberts BRAD SNYDER* During his Supreme Court nomination hearings, John Roberts idealized and mythologized the first judge he clerkedfor, Second Circuit Judge Henry Friendly, as the sophisticated judge-as-umpire. Thus far on the Court, Roberts has found it difficult to live up to his Friendly ideal, particularlyin several high-profile cases. This Article addresses the influence of Friendly on Roberts and judges on law clerks by examining the roots of Roberts's distinguishedyet unrecognized lineage of former clerks: Louis Brandeis 's clerkship with Horace Gray, Friendly's clerkship with Brandeis, and Roberts's clerkships with Friendly and Rehnquist. Labeling this lineage a judicial genealogy, this Article reorients clerkship scholarship away from clerks' influences on judges to judges' influences on clerks. It also shows how Brandeis, Friendly, and Roberts were influenced by their clerkship experiences and how they idealized their judges. By laying the clerkship experiences and career paths of Brandeis, Friendly, and Roberts side-by- side in detailed primary source accounts, this Article argues that judicial influence on clerks is more professional than ideological and that the idealization ofjudges and emergence of clerks hips as must-have credentials contribute to a culture ofjudicial supremacy. * Assistant Professor, University of Wisconsin Law School. Thanks to Eleanor Brown, Dan Ernst, David Fontana, Abbe Gluck, Dirk Hartog, Dan
    [Show full text]
  • Previously Released Merrick Garland Docs
    OATH OF OFFICE FOR UNITED STATES JUDGES (ritlc 28, Sec. 453 and Title 5. Sec. 3331. Unltr.d St.aleS Code) Merrick B. Garland I, ...... ............. .. .............. ....... .......... , do solemnly swear (or affinn) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perfonn all the duties . United States Circuit Judge . incumbent upon me as . under the Consucuuon and laws of the United States: and that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic: that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same: that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion: and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So HELP ME Goo. ... ..... u ~~- UL ... .·------_ Subscribed and swo ~ to (or affinned) before me this ....... Al.I. R '.T ~f.. ..... ... ... day of .. 4,pJ? .; ) .. ..................... 19 f.7 . -~ - ~~dL~-~~i ··· .. ..... Actual abode .... .. .< .~'- ~ { :- ~ 11J .~ ...... ..... ... Official station* ........... ...... Date of binh ... · · ·~?:- ... I~<?!~ Exemption 6 I Date of entry on duty .. ... ........ "'Titk lll S<?c. -1~6 u nited St.ate~ Code. as amended. v .o. \.JI·~ Of r"9'110tW'191 Menagemef'W FPM CMplllr IZle et-toe APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS United States Circuit Judge March 20, 1997 (POfition to wlticl appoif!Ud) (Dau o/ appoin~ U. S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, DC (BuNau or Divilion) (Plau of tmp~t) Merrick B. Garland I, ----------------------• do solemnly swear (or affirm) that- A.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreword BJI/CLR Symposium on Charting a Path for Federal Judiciary Reform
    Foreword BJI/CLR Symposium on Charting a Path for Federal Judiciary Reform Jeremy Fogel* A principal mission of the Berkeley Judicial Institute (BJI), which I am privileged to serve as Executive Director, is to “fill a long-standing need to establish an effective bridge between the legal academy and the judiciary.” This mission statement reflects a common perception among both legal scholars and judges that the two institutions often talk past each other, such that the scholars’ analyses are insufficiently grounded in practical reality, while the judges’ perspectives are overly focused on granular detail. BJI’s existence reflects the hope that closer contact and collaboration between the two groups will lead to new and useful synergies. The Symposium on the structure and functioning of the federal appellate courts to which this issue of the California Law Review is dedicated was BJI’s first major public effort in pursuit of this goal. The Symposium brought together diverse thought leaders from academia, the bar, and the judiciary for two days of candid conversation and brainstorming. It expressly encouraged the participants to think big, to imagine how the federal courts might reframe their existing way of doing business to address functional deficiencies and serve their stakeholders more effectively. The results of the thought-provoking discussions are reflected in the seven pieces that CLR will publish: Professors Peter Menell and Ryan Vacca’s Revisiting and Confronting the Federal Judiciary Capacity “Crisis”: Charting a Path for Federal
    [Show full text]
  • Merrick Garland's Nomination to the Supreme Court: Initial Observations
    CRS Reports & Analysis Legal Sidebar Merrick Garland’s Nomination to the Supreme Court: Initial Observations 03/17/2016 On March 16, 2016, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland of the federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court created by the unexpected death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February. As noted in an earlier Sidebar posting, the vacancy has significant implications for the Court, Congress, and the nation as a whole. The scope and nature of those implications depend on who ultimately succeeds Justice Scalia. As a follow up to the previous Sidebar, this posting—one of several CRS projects on Justice Scalia and the Court vacancy —discusses the potential implications of Judge Garland’s confirmation as the newest Justice, were he to be confirmed. It is presently unclear whether, when, or how the Senate might act on Judge Garland’s nomination. Who is Merrick Garland? As the President noted in announcing the nomination, Judge Garland is well known in “law enforcement circles and in the legal community at large.” He has served on the D.C. Circuit, a court President Franklin Roosevelt once described as the “the second most important court in the country,” for nearly two decades and been its chief judge since 2013. Because it is located in the nation’s capital and various statutes grant it jurisdiction over specific matters, the D.C. Circuit is widely seen to issue a greater number of significant opinions each year reviewing the decisions of federal agencies whose rules and practices impact the entire nation more than the other appellate courts.
    [Show full text]
  • A Policy Assessment of the National Court of Appeals William H
    Hastings Law Journal Volume 25 | Issue 6 Article 2 1-1974 A Policy Assessment of the National Court of Appeals William H. Alsup Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation William H. Alsup, A Policy Assessment of the National Court of Appeals, 25 Hastings L.J. 1313 (1974). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol25/iss6/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. A Policy Assessment of The National Court of Appeals By WILLIAm H. ALsuP* M AJOR legislation to relieve the United States Supreme Court of its "overwork" has not been enacted since the Judges Bill of 1925.1 Nor has such legislation been considered since the defeat of the Presi- dent's Court reorganization plan of 1937.2 Nevertheless, it continues to be suggested that the Supreme Court has too many duties to dis- charge all of them responsibly. For example, in 1959 Professor Hart attempted to demonstrate that the justices had to evaluate so many applications for review that they had little time left to decide the merits of the argued cases. 3 Most prominent among the recent alarms is the Report of the Study Group on the Caseload of the Supreme * B.S., 1967, Mississippi State University; M.P.P., J.D., 1971, Harvard Univer- sity; member of Bars of California and Mississippi.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript of the Spoken Word, Rather Than Written Prose
    THE RULE OF LAW ORAL HISTORY PROJECT The Reminiscences of A. Raymond Randolph Columbia Center for Oral History Columbia University 2013 PREFACE The following oral history is the result of a recorded interview with A. Raymond Randolph conducted by Myron A. Farber on January 15 and January 16, 2013. This interview is part of the Rule of Law Oral History Project. The reader is asked to bear in mind that s/he is reading a verbatim transcript of the spoken word, rather than written prose. VJD Session One Interviewee: A. Raymond Randolph Location: Washington D.C. Interviewer: Myron Farber Date: January 15, 2013 Q: This is Myron Farber on January 15, 2013, interviewing A. Raymond Randolph, senior judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, with regard to Columbia's Rule of Law oral history, with its focus on Guantánamo Bay detention camp and related matters. Judge Randolph, the first thing I want to do is apologize for Columbia not having come through with a scholarship for you when you were a young man. I have been authorized to promise you a check for $1,600, but I don't have that check with me. It may be in the mail, directly from Columbia. But we'll get to that in a moment, and what occasions that. Before we start, David Briand, who is the project coordinator at Columbia on this project, asked me to ask you if you had ever gone to the mat with Donald [H.] Rumsfeld. [Laughter] Randolph: I think he was ahead of me.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nomination of Merrick B. Garland to the United States Supreme Court
    REPORT ON The Nomination of Merrick B. Garland to the United States Supreme Court WWW.THEGARLANDRECORD.ORG About Alliance for Justice Alliance for Justice is a national association of over 100 organizations, representing a broad array of groups committed to progressive values and the creation of an equitable, just, and free society. It works to ensure that the federal judiciary advances core constitutional values, preserves human rights and unfettered access to the courts, and adheres to the even-handed administration of justice for all Americans. Through research, advocacy, and public education, AFJ promotes the creation of a diverse judiciary committed to equal justice for all. In addition, AFJ’s Bolder Advocacy initiative is the leading resource on the legal framework for nonprofit advocacy efforts, providing definitive information, resources, and technical assistance that encourages organizations and their funding partners to fully exercise their right to be active participants in the democratic process. For more information on this report, contact AFJ’s Washington headquarters. Alliance for Justice 11 Dupont Circle NW, Second Floor Washington, DC 20036 202.822.6070 All material within this report is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced without the express written consent of Alliance for Justice. © 2016 Alliance for Justice Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 Introduction 3 Biography 5 Overview of Chief Judge Garland’s Judicial Record and Key Findings 6 Access to Civil Justice 8 Civil Rights 8 Administrative Law 9 National
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks by the President Announcing Judge Merrick Garland As His Nominee to the Supreme Court, March 16, 2016
    Remarks by the President Announcing Judge Merrick Garland as his Nominee to the Supreme Court, March 16, 2016 PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good morning. Everybody, please have a seat. Of the many powers and responsibilities that the Constitution vests in the presidency, few are more consequential than appointing a Supreme Court justice -- particularly one to succeed Justice Scalia, one of the most influential jurists of our time. The men and women who sit on the Supreme Court are the final arbiters of American law. They safeguard our rights. They ensure that our system is one of laws and not men. They’re charged with the essential task of applying principles put to paper more than two centuries ago to some of the most challenging questions of our time. So this is not a responsibility that I take lightly. It’s a decision that requires me to set aside short-term expediency and narrow politics, so as to maintain faith with our founders and, perhaps more importantly, with future generations. That’s why, over the past several weeks, I’ve done my best to set up a rigorous and comprehensive process. I’ve sought the advice of Republican and Democratic members of Congress. We’ve reached out to every member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to constitutional scholars, to advocacy groups, to bar associations, representing an array of interests and opinions from all across the spectrum. And today, after completing this exhaustive process, I’ve made my decision. I’ve selected a nominee who is widely recognized not only as one of America’s sharpest legal minds, but someone who brings to his work a spirit of decency, modesty, integrity, even-handedness, and excellence.
    [Show full text]