Texas Lawyer Blog

Fashion Fridays: The essential black sheath

All lawyers knew the necessity of certain professional wardrobe basics long before our careers began: black suit, sensibly heeled shoes, fitted white blouse, subtle jewelry.  But many female attorneys’ wardrobes -- even the spectacular ones -- overlook the elegance and versatility of a simple black sheath dress. Perhaps its absence has something to do with not being able to find the right one. Each season, every designer and major retailer reintroduces the black sheath in countless variations in season-specific fabrics. And when draped all by itself over a wooden hanger, the dark, full shape looks anything but flattering. But getting this basic piece right can instantly transform an otherwise stagnant professional wardrobe. Not all black sheaths are created equal. First and foremost, find the right fit. As a guide, think of those who have worn it best, like Michelle Obama (snug fabric with a bit of stretch and an a-line skirt), Audrey Hepburn (structured fabric with a lean, straight skirt) or Laura Bush (lightweight fabric with a belted waist and cap sleeves). Second, keep your existing wardrobe in mind.  Imagine wearing the dress over a favorite blouse or under a favorite jacket. Think of the jewelry, belts and shoes that will particularize it to fit different occasions. Third, buy two. A perfectly fitting black sheath will be in regular wardrobe rotation for years. And when it's reasonably priced, buying a backup can be a smart investment decision. Keep one hanging at the front of your closet among the existing professional basics. Zip the other into a dress bag and store it at the back. You’ll be glad you did.

Kasia Benson is a corporate associate with Andrews Kurth in Dallas. She is also the founder of Wardrobe Peace, which provides sensible, “use what you’ve got” wardrobe consulting services to lawyers and other busy prof

Ronnie Earle running for office -- again

You can’t keep an old politician out of politics. Democrat Ronnie Earle, Travis County’s district attorney for 32 years prior to his retirement in 2008, today filed a treasurer appointment with the Texas Ethics Commission to run for office in 2010, according to the commission’s disclosure filings section. Earle appointed himself as treasurer for his campaign, but he did not indicate what office he plans to seek. But a Facebook page founded by Democratic activists urges Earle to run for governor. An Earle campaign for governor could be interesting. In 1993, Earle obtained a grand jury indictment against U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Republican who was then the state treasurer, for alleged official misconduct and tampering with government records. However, Earle subsequently sought dismissal of the charges. Hutchison has indicated her interest in the governor’s race but has not officially entered as a candidate.
-- Mary Alice Robbins

American Airlines' Gary Kennedy to receive Allies for Justice Award

What does Gary Kennedy, senior vice president and general counsel of American Airlines Inc., have in common with Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, Minority Corporate Counsel Association Executive Director Veta Richardson and U.S. Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga.? They all are winners -- past and present -- of the National Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Bar Association's annual Allies for Justice Award. Kennedy is this year's recipient for his work advancing diversity goals and cooperating with the LGBT community to make that happen at his Fort Worth-based company. “His department’s LGBT-inclusive diversity initiatives have set a standard we hope to see achieved more broadly in the corporate America,” D’Arcy Kemnitz, executive director of the National LGBT Bar Association, says in a June 29 statement. Kennedy, who will receive the award July 31, says his company is a strong supporter of diversity generally and specifically has made a point to include those with different sexual orientations. "American has had a long history of being way out in front, not just in our written policies . . .," Kennedy says. Specifically, he cites the company's much-coveted travel benefits -- discounted airfare for employees and their spouses -- which are extended to all domestic partners, straight or gay. Kennedy, who has been with American for 25 years, the past six as general counsel, says 15 years ago he started GLEAM, an employee-resource group for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and allied employees of American Airlines and American Eagle. In mid-June, 300 attendees celebrated GLEAM's 15th anniversary at the American Airlines C.R. Smith Museum in Fort Worth. "It's one thing to have the policies on a piece of paper," says Kennedy, "but you actually have to live that policy. People have to be able to feel comfortable and that they won't jeopardize their careers by talking about who they were with over the weekend. They have to be able to show up at a company function and bring their partners to the event and know that is not going to influence their careers. In the legal department, I think all the employees generally feel comfortable with that."

-- Miriam Rozen

New chairman and new managing partner at Thompson & Knight

Dallas-based Thompson & Knight announced today that former managing partner Peter J. Riley has been named to the firm’s newly created position of chairman and that Dallas partner Jeffrey A. Zlotky is the firm’s new managing partner. Riley, a partner in the 420-attorney firm’s Dallas office, has served as managing partner since 2001. Zlotky, a corporate partner, joined the firm in 1985 and has served on the firm’s management committee. “Jeff is a strong and respected lawyer, a strategic thinker, and a natural leader who will help guide us through this period of transition across our profession,” Riley writes in a firm announcement. “Jeff offers a wealth of experience in the energy field as well as domestic and international transactions of all types. This background aligns perfectly with both the history and the strategic direction of Thompson & Knight.” In May, Tex Parte reported that for economic reasons the firm had laid off 17 lawyers and 25 support staff in all of its domestic offices including Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston and New York. At that time Riley said that most of the lawyers laid off were midlevel associates in business practice areas. Like other Texas firms, Thompson & Knight also has delayed the start date of its first-year associate class until January 2010. Neither Riley nor Zlotky returned telephone calls seeking comment.

-- Jeanne Graham

Former 3rd Court Chief Justice Kenneth Law agrees to pay penalty

Former 3rd Court of Appeals Chief Justice Kenneth Law has agreed to pay a $4,100 civil penalty that the Texas Ethics Commission imposed on him for state election law violations stemming from his unsuccessful bid for re-election in 2008. J. Woodfin “Woodie” Jones, a Democrat, defeated Law, a Republican, in the 2008 general election. Texans for Public Justice, a government watchdog group, filed a complaint against Law with the ethics commission in September 2008, alleging that he had violated provisions of state campaign finance laws. According to the Order and Agreed Resolution in In the Matter of Wallace Kenneth Law, the commission determined there is credible evidence that Law violated six provisions of the Texas Election Code and two sections of Ethics Commission Rules in his January and July semi-annual reports for 2008. The commission determined among other things, that Law violated Election Code §253.031, which prohibits a candidate from knowingly accepting a contribution or spending money on his campaign prior to appointing a campaign treasurer, and §253.032, which prohibits a candidate from accepting more than a $500 contribution from an out-of-state political committee during a reporting period without disclosing the committee’s Federal Election Code identification number and other information about the committee. Law, who serves as a visiting judge, did not return two telephone calls seeking comment.
-- Mary Alice Robbins

Weil, Gotshal to close Austin office

Weil, Gotshal & Manges today announced plans to close its Austin office by Dec. 1. Kevin Kudlac, a patent litigator and the sole partner in the Austin office will move to the firm’s Houston office, according to a statement from the New York City-based firm. Weil Gotshal says that all 16 lawyers and 11 support staff have been offered opportunities to transfer to the firm’s other offices including its two other Texas offices, Dallas and Houston. Those employees who decide not to relocate will receive transition benefits. As of Jan. 1, Weil Gotshal had 128 lawyers in Texas and 1,365 firmwide, according to Texas Lawyer’s “The Texas 100” poster published April 27. Glenn West, managing partner of the firm’s Dallas office, was not immediately available for comment. 

-- Jeanne Graham

Rice University, NCAA settle with family of athlete who died after workout

The family of Dale Lloyd II, a 19-year-old Rice University football player who died after a team workout in 2006, announced on June 29 that it has settled a suit against the school and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The suit against Rice, the NCAA and others was filed Sept. 23, 2008, in Harris County District Court, Lloyd's death, according to a joint release issued by Rice and the family announcing the settlement, was caused by a complication related to the sickle cell trait, a genetic blood condition. The statement does not disclose the terms of the settlement between the Lloyd family and Rice. The NCAA, represented by Andrews Kurth partner J. Wiley George of Houston, said in a statement that as a result of the settlement, it will recommend to member colleges and universities that they test student athletes to determine if they carry the sickle cell trait. The NCAA also will donate $50,000 to the Sickle Cell Disease Association of America in Lloyd's name and contribute $10,000 to a scholarship fund named after him, among other things. The family was represented by Lanier Law Firm associate Eugene Egdorf of Houston; Rice was represented by Rusty Hardin of Houston’s Rusty Hardin & Associates. The school and the family note in their statement that Rice, which already had agreed to do sickle cell trait testing on its athletes, will lead the way in working with the Lloyd family to help the NCAA make sickle cell trait testing mandatory for college athletes nationwide. Egdorf says that since Lloyd’s death, two other college athletes who were not tested for the sickle cell trait died related to complications from the condition. Egdorf and his clients hope the settlement will prevent future tragedies. The Lloyd family, Rice and the NCAA began a mediation on May 26 and announced the settlement nearly a month later. Egdorf commends the role that former Harris County District Judge Caroline Baker played as mediator. Hardin did not return a telephone call seeking comment.

-- Miriam Rozen

$1.67 billion verdict in Eastern District patent infringement suit

A patent infringement suit involving arthritis medications ended June 29 when a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Marshall returned a $1.67 billion verdict for Centocor Ortho Biotech Inc. against Abbott Laboratories. As the saying goes, everything is bigger in Texas, and that has proven to be true in patent litigation as well. According to Bloomberg.com, the verdict in Centocor OrthoBiotech Inc., et al. v. Abbott Laboratories is the largest patent verdict in U.S. history. Centocor, a wholly owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, and New York University, co-owner of the patent for the prescription medication Remicade, filed suit against Abbott Laboratories and two of its subsidiaries in 2007. In their original complaint, Centocor and NYU alleged that Abbott Laboratories infringed on Patent No. 7,070,775 with Abbott’s Humira.  The jury agreed with the plaintiffs, finding that Abbott willfully infringed on the patent. Kim Taylor, Centocor’s president, writes in a statement, “We are particularly gratified that the jury recognized our valuable intellectual property, finding our patent both valid and infringed.” It’s not over yet, however. Abbott spokesman Scott Stoffel writes in an e-mail, “We are disappointed in this verdict, and we are confident in the merits of our case and that we will prevail on appeal.” Dallas attorney Leon Carter, who handles intellectual property and commercial litigation but was not involved in Centocor, was present for closing argument in the case. Carter, a partner in Munck Carter, says the jury’s verdict is not unrealistic given that the arguments revealed Johnson & Johnson has had $11 billion in sales from Humira over the past four or five years. Centocor and NYU had asked for a $2.2 billion verdict, Carter says.
-- Mary Alice Robbins

Altman Weil CLO survey: corporate law departments to decrease use of outside counsel

During the next 12 months, corporate law departments will decrease their use of outside counsel, according to an annual survey of chief legal officers conducted by legal consulting firm Altman Weil Inc. Forty percent of the corporate lawyers responding to the survey say they will send less work to outside counsel, while 27 percent say they have reduced the size of their own staffs. Altman Weil reports that 183 legal departments responded to the 2009 Chief Legal Officer Survey, or 15 percent of the 1,222 corporate legal departments invited to participate. Most of the respondents, 42 percent, are with corporations with $2 billion to $10 billion in annual revenue, 20 percent are with corporations with revenue exceeding $10 billion and 38 percent work for corporations with revenue of less than $2 billion. Altman Weil, which has conducted the annual survey since 2000, says the 2009 survey results indicate that the move toward alternative or nonhourly billing fees is accelerating. During 2009, 43 percent of the chief legal officers responding to the survey say they will pay more than 10 percent of outside legal fees in nonhourly based fees. In the 2008 survey, 27 percent of the corporate lawyers planned to pay more than 10 percent of outside legal fees in nonhourly based arrangements. The survey, as well as a summary of the survey results, can be found here.

-- Jeanne Graham

Judge accidentally shot in eye with blank during mock takeover of courtroom

For several years, 296th District Judge John L. Roach of Collin County had planned to engage in a mock hostile takeover of his courtroom with county sheriff’s deputies so he would be prepared for such an emergency if it ever occurred, says Roach's court coordinator Laura Thompson. But during a June 27 mock event in his courtroom, Roach, the son of Collin County District Attorney John R. Roach, got a little more realism than he expected. The judge was shot in the eye with a blank that still had gunpowder on it, Thompson says. Roach went to the hospital, had surgery to remove debris from his eye and now is recovering at home -- in some pain but expecting to regain his full eyesight, Thompson says. Roach did not return a telephone call seeking comment. Before the accident Roach had scheduled a week of vacation, Thompson says, so he hasn’t had to cancel hearings. Who shot the judge? Thompson says Judge Roach asked her not to tell reporters that information. “The person already feels bad enough,” she says. But Lt. John Norton in the Collin County Sheriff's Office identifies Bill Jouette as the accidental shooter. Jouette is the son of McKinney solo Barbara Lindsay Jouette. Bill Jouette as well as officers from the McKinney Police Department and members of the Collin County Citizens Academy, a volunteer organization trained by the Collin County Sheriff's Office, all participated in last Saturday's mock hostile takeover, Norton says. Barbara Lindsay Jouette says her son has been advised not to talk to the press; he did not return a telephone call seeking comment.

-- Miriam Rozen

Texas Supreme Court to State Bar board: try again

This sounds like déjà vu all over again. In June 2008, the State Bar of Texas board of directors decided not to make a recommendation to the state Supreme Court on whether the state should have a rule requiring lawyers to disclose whether they carry legal-malpractice insurance. The board took no action after a State Bar task force voted 6-5 against a disclosure rule. The issue did not go away, however. In a June 1 report to the Supreme Court, the Grievance Oversight Committee -- which is appointed by the high court -- recommended that the court adopt a rule that would require lawyers who do not have legal-malpractice coverage to notify clients in writing of that fact. Now, the Supreme Court wants the Bar board to take another look. Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson makes that request in a June 23 letter to Harper Estes, the State Bar’s immediate past president, and Roland Johnson, Bar president. In his letter, Jefferson asks the Bar board to review the Bar task force’s report and make a recommendation before February 2010. Johnson, a shareholder in Harris, Finley & Bogle in Fort Worth, says the Bar board welcomes the Supreme Court’s request and believes the court has given the board a fair time to consider the issue. Johnson says he anticipates the board will vote on the issue at its January 2010 meeting.
-- Mary Alice Robbins

South Texas law grad sues over $1 million challenge

David George, a partner in Houston’s Connelly Baker Wotring, says Dustin Kolodziej’s breach of contract suit against Florida criminal-defense lawyer J. Cheney Mason and Mason’s firm is serious. “It’s not a lark,” George says in an interview this morning. On June 17, Kolodziej, a recent graduate of South Texas College of Law, filed Kolodziej v. Mason, et al. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas in Houston. In his original complaint, Kolodziej presents the following factual background on the case: Mason appeared on NBC’s “Dateline” in December 2006 to discuss the case of his client, Nelson Serrano, who was convicted and sentenced to death in 2006 for the 1997 murders of three people in Central Florida. Serrano’s defense was it would have been impossible for him to have committed the murders and been at the Atlanta La Quinta hotel by the time surveillance video showed him there. Mason argued on the “Dateline” program that Serrano would have had to get off a jet, exit the Atlanta airport and arrive at his hotel five miles away in less then 30 minutes to appear on the video at the time he did. Saying that no one could arrive at the hotel that fast, Mason then issued the following challenge: “I challenge anybody to show me, I’ll pay them a million dollars if they can do it.” As alleged in his complaint, Kolodziej traveled to Georgia in December 2007 to accept the challenge, retraced Serrano’s alleged route and traveled from the plane to the hotel in Atlanta within 28 minutes. Kolodziej alleges he made a video of his trip and sent the video along with a demand letter to Mason. But, as alleged in Kolodziej’s complaint, Mason responded in January 2008 that the challenge was just a joke. Kolodziej further alleges in the complaint that when he wrote to Mason again to demand payment, Mason responded in February 2008 with a threat to pursue criminal prosecution if Kolodziej wrote again. So Kolodziej filed the suit. George says Mason made the challenge and reiterated the challenge on the “Dateline” program. “It’s not a joke,” George says of Mason’s challenge, noting that Mason’s client is on death row. The person who answered the telephone today at Mason’s Orlando, Fla., firm says, after checking with Mason, “There will be no response from this office.”  
-- Mary Alice Robbins

Houston lawyer representing doctor with Michael Jackson when he died

On June 26, Houston criminal-defense attorney Edward Chernoff of Stradley, Chernoff & Alford began representing Dr. Conrad Murray, now the subject of international media attention since the doctor accompanied Michael Jackson to a Los Angeles hospital, where the pop star died on June 25. According to Chernoff spokeswoman Miranda Sevcik, Murray retained Chernoff -- based on a referral from another lawyer -- after the Los Angeles Police Department made a request to question Murray a second time regarding details of Jackson's medical condition. A statement released by Sevcik before that second interview says: "Investigators have made it clear to Mr. Chernoff that Dr. Murray is considered to be a witness to the events surrounding Michael Jackson’s death and he is not a suspect. Dr. Murray hired legal counsel to help guide him through the police investigation process. The law firm was hired to make sure the police investigation is conducted properly. Dr. Murray rode with Michael Jackson to the hospital and made frantic attempts to revive him along the way. Dr. Murray considered himself to be a friend of Michael Jackson and he is very distraught over his death. He will continue to cooperate in every respect." After the police interviewed Murray a second time on June 26, Sevcik wrote in a another statement that the doctor and his lawyer "have met with the LAPD for the 2nd time and have answered every and all questions asked by LAPD in an attempt to help piece together the mysteries surrounding the death of Michael Jackson. The meeting in Los Angeles today with police investigators lasted three hours. During the meeting Dr. Murray helped identify the circumstances around the death of the pop icon and clarified some inconsistencies. Dr. Murray has been in Los Angeles since the death of Mr. Jackson. He rode in the ambulance to the hospital and stayed at the hospital for hours comforting and consoling the Jackson family. Investigators say the doctor is in no way a suspect and remains a witness to this tragedy. Dr. Murray will continue to cooperate fully with the authorities and asks that all keep the Jackson family in their prayers. Dr. Murray was hired by Michael Jackson to accompany him on his concert tour in May of 2009. Dr. Murray has offices in Las Vegas and Houston, Texas. Dr. Murray will remain in Los Angeles until investigators no longer need his assistance with the investigation." The Web site for his firm says Chernoff graduated from the University of Houston Law Center in 1987 and he is a former Harris County assistant district attorney.

-- Miriam Rozen

This Week in Texas Lawyer

Pay plateau: Bad economy = flat salaries and billing rates. But research editor Jeanne Graham finds that firms aren't hesitating to mix it up when it comes to alternative billing arrangements.

Double whammy: Senior reporter Mary Alice Robbins looks into the one-two punch that hit Clark Thomas & Winters.

Inadmissible: Lawyer convicted. Paddle power.

Approach the bench: Not bilingual or even trilingual -- this judge speaks five languages. Senior reporter John Council gets some answers from 179th District Court Judge Randy Roll.

TRFRA-ic: Pastor, 1; city zoning, 0. Senior reporter Mary Alice Robbins looks at the high court's read on religious freedom.

$1.73 billion settlement: A case with high stakes settles. Senior reporter Brenda Sapino Jeffreys hears from the parties.

Newsmakers and Verdicts.

Night of the living dead: The assistant-at-law looks at how micromanagement turns staff into zombies.

I like being a lawyer: A. Clay Graham on why it's awesome to be an attorney.

Conjunctions, contractions and controversy

I’m a little fretful writing this blog. Should I have used a contraction in my last sentence? This question and other finicky details of writing were the focus of a talk by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner at the State Bar of Texas’ annual meeting. The pair discussed how to persuade judges with the written word and in oral argument. Garner, a Texas lawyer and president of a consulting firm teaching advocacy, is co-author with Scalia of “Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges,” available for purchase at the end of their talk for $29.95. Scalia, in his saucy and sarcastic manner, served up quite a few tips. For writing briefs, Scalia endorsed the use of conjunctions at the beginning of a sentence, even starting a sentence with “but.” He regards as “hackneyed” the expressions “fatally flawed” and “Roe v. Wade and its progeny.” As far as the use of contractions, Scalia and Garner have agreed to disagree, but the justice favors leaving them out of briefs. Scalia dubbed them "Jacobin" and argued they “pull everything down to the street level.” He asked rhetorically, “Is any judge going to get mad because you don’t use contractions?” In addition, he said that legal writing with lots of italics tends to read “like a high school girl’s diary.” Perhaps his sternest warning was about citations. Characterize cited precedents accurately: “When a judge sees that you are playing fast and loose with a citation, he is not going to believe the rest of your brief.” Another hot topic: footnotes. Scalia, despite his co-author’s strongly held alternative view, endorsed the use of footnotes -- even to advance arguments -- but he wants citations placed in the text. As for oral argument, Scalia told the lawyers to welcome questions from the bench, to be likable, to enunciate correctly and carefully (particularly justices’ names and any Latin words), and not to glance at the clock when a justice interrupts with a question. He counseled lawyers to look judges in the eye; when faced with a hypothetical panel of nine justices, advocates should not gaze solely at the ninth justice, who may be the swing vote in a 5-4 decision. “He will be embarrassed, and the other justices will be mad,” Scalia explained. His pet peeve: when lawyers respond to a hypothetical example by saying it is “not this case.” Going through his mind at that point, Scalia said, is the thought, “I know it’s not this case, you idiot.” But appellate judges must make decisions that govern many cases, not just the one before them, he explained.
-- Miriam Rozen

Challenging a ban on obscene communications

Is it protected free speech or obscenity? That’s the issue in a motion pending in the Brazos County Court-at-Law No. 2. On June 23, a man charged with the Class B misdemeanor of sending an obscene communication filed a motion to quash the charging instrument. The complaint in State v. Tony M-D Hall, filed March 4 in Brazos County, alleges that Hall made an obscene comment to a woman in a Nov 23, 2007, written communication. As alleged in the complaint, the communication contained a hand drawn vagina and asked if she will allow him to perform cunnilingus on her. Bryan solo Stephen Gustitis, Hall’s attorney, says he thinks the statute under which Hall is charged -- Texas Penal Code §42.07(a)(1) -- is unconstitutional. The statute provides: “A person commits as offense if, with intent to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, or embarrass another,” he initiates a telephone, written or electronic communication in which he “makes a comment, request, suggestion, or proposal that is obscene.” Penal Code §42.07(b)(3) defines obscene as “a patently offensive description of or a solicitation to commit an ultimate sex act.” In his motion to quash, Hall argues that §42.07(a)(1) is unconstitutionally vague because the terms “harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment or embarrass” do not give persons of normal intelligence fair notice that their conduct is prohibited by the statute. Hall further argues in the motion that the statute gives law enforcement officers “unlimited discretion to charge for whatever conduct they choose.” Gustitis says §42.7(b)(3) provides no definition of what is “patently offensive” and that the phrase is open to unlimited interpretations. Brazos County Attorney Rod Anderson did not immediately return a telephone call for comment. 
-- Mary Alice Robbins

Fashion Fridays: Tips for retail therapy in a down economy

A colleague was wearing the most perfect, bright green cardigan the other day. I couldn’t help but comment to her how nice it looked. “Thanks,” she said. “It was a bad-mood impulse buy. I was feeling depressed, so I went to the mall and found this.” I immediately thought of the yellow pencil skirt hanging in my closet, which I found under similar circumstances. Only my skirt, an awkward color that looked great when my mood was sour, has never seen the light of day and likely never will. How did my colleague get it right? A few tips for therapeutic shopping in a bad economy:

• Scan the full-price racks first. It sounds counterintuitive. But more often than not, an impulse clearance rack purchase is a waste of time and money. Part of my skirt’s allure was its incredible discount. I also spent an hour digging through racks and bins to find it. Next time, I’ll avoid the sunk cost (and wasted hour of my life) by taking a quick scan over the regular racks. Stores keep these displays clearer and neater, so I’ll be more likely to find a piece that will help make the most of my existing wardrobe.
• Pass on trendy pick-me-ups. It’s hard to gauge the real world wearability of a sequined tank top or platform shoes when I’m standing in a store full of similar stuff. In tight times I try to stick to the classics — like my colleague’s green cardigan, or a perfect-fit button up blouse — and save the trends for when I have some extra cash in my pocket.
• Spend on your skin. There are days when I just want something new — anything new — to break up a bad mood. Skin care can be a great, justifiable treat. Before heading out to the mall, I’ll take ten minutes to browse popular cosmetic sites and read user reviews. This way, I’m more likely to make an “informed” impulse purchase and use every drop of whatever product I buy.
• Shop your closet. About a month ago, I hauled out the box of warm weather clothes I’d packed last fall. I was so excited to find my favorite linen trousers, leather sandals and other forgotten pieces. Though I’ve had many of these items for years, the fresh perspective made them all feel brand new. Best of all, I didn’t have to spend a thing.

Happy shopping. . .

Kasia Benson is a corporate associate with Andrews Kurth in Dallas. She is also the founder of Wardrobe Peace, which provides sensible, “use what you’ve got” wardrobe consulting services to lawyers and other busy professionals.

Kent resigns again, this time effective June 30

U.S. District Judge Samuel B. Kent of the Southern District of Texas, who is currently serving a 33-month prison sentence after he pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice, now plans to resign on June 30, instead of June 1, 2010. On Wednesday, Kent gave a new resignation letter to Senate Sergeant at Arms Terrance W. Gainer when Gainer served a summons on Kent in prison. On June 19, the U.S. House voted to impeach Kent, and on June 24, several House members delivered Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, which eventually would have held a trial on Kent’s impeachment. The summons was related to the Senate investigation into the case against Kent. Because of the new resignation letter, Kent’s impeachment is up in the air. In a written statement, two House members who managed Kent’s impeachment in the House --  U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and U.S. Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. -- said that after Kent’s new resignation is accepted by the president, the House will decide what further action is necessary. Congress was moving quickly to impeach Kent because he had earlier submitted a resignation letter effective June 1, 2010, which meant he would continue to receive his $174,000 judicial salary while in prison. Goodlatte wrote that he is pleased Kent “finally decided to take himself off of the taxpayers’ payroll.” U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner, D-Wis., wrote in another statement that he hopes the impeachment process “reminds other judges that they are not above the laws they took an oath to uphold.”  Kent’s criminal-defense attorney, Dick DeGuerin, a partner in DeGuerin & Dickson in Houston, could not be reached for immediate comment because he was in court for a bail hearing for another client, R. Allen Stanford, the recently indicted chairman of Stanford Financial Group. Hayden Head, chief judge of the Southern District, says he was made aware of Kent’s new resignation letter. Head says he will meet with other judges in the district after June 30 “about matters related to court management.”

-- Brenda Sapino Jeffreys and John Council

Law deans discuss challenges

You have to wonder why a room full of lawyers who earned their law degrees decades ago would be interested in the challenges faced by law school deans training the next generation of attorneys. But, nevertheless, many of them packed in to see four law deans talk about that topic at the State Bar of Texas’ annual meeting this afternoon at the Hilton Anatole in Dallas. A couple of them said they believe law school should last four years instead of three (uh, would that make tuition go up, too?). Larry Sager, dean of the University of Texas School of Law, said the law school graduate in 2013 will have more of the same problems we have now, like energy and environmental issues, a collapsed economy and high health care costs -- except it will all be worse. Brad Toben, dean of Baylor University Law School, was more concerned with the here and now. He said law schools are great at turning out academics but not necessarily lawyers. That’s because many law school professors see themselves as academics instead of lawyers, he said. Judges routinely tell Toben that young lawyers don’t know how to draft petitions or draw up estates, he said. “We’ve been told young lawyers don’t know how to do it,” Toben says. “Are law schools getting done what needs to be done?” I guess that’s where the fourth year of law school comes in.
-- John Council

Stanford, three execs plead not guilty in packed courtroom

Wearing a bright orange jumpsuit and handcuffs, R. Allen Stanford, chairman of Houston-based Stanford Financial Group, was one of the tallest men in the packed federal courtroom this morning when he pleaded not guilty to fraud and conspiracy charges related to an alleged $7 billion conspiracy to defraud. Three other SFG executives also pleaded not guilty to criminal charges filed against them in an indictment unsealed on June 19 that alleges they defrauded investors who bought about $7 billion in certificates of deposit sold through the Stanford International Bank Ltd. The three others who pleaded not guilty are Laura Pendergest-Holt, chief investment officer of SFG, who was earlier charged with obstruction; Gilberto Lopez, chief accounting officer of SFG; and Mark Kuhrt, global controller for Stanford Financial Group Global Management. Stanford’s bond hearing was continuing in the early afternoon, but the other three defendants are out on bond. A federal prosecutor told Magistrate Judge Frances Stacy of the Southern District of Texas that the fifth defendant named in the indictment, Leroy King, a former administrator and chief executive officer of the Financial Services Regulatory Commission in Antigua, was arrested this morning in Antigua, and the government is attempting to extradite him. Stacy said U.S. District Judge David Hittner set the case for trial on Aug. 25, but all four defendants this morning waived their right to a speedy trial. Stanford’s defense attorney, Dick DeGuerin, a partner in Houston’s DeGuerin & Dickson, told Stacy it will take lawyers a year to prepare for trial, and the trial will last six months. The arraignments attracted a standing-room-only crowd to the small courtroom in the Bob Casey Federal Courthouse. Because of the heat in the room, Stacy told lawyers they were welcome to remove their jackets. Each defendant is charged in the indictment with one count of conspiracy to commit mail, wire and securities fraud; seven counts of wire fraud; 10 counts of mail fraud; and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. It also charges Stanford, Pendergest-Holt and King with one count of conspiracy to obstruct an SEC investigation and one count of obstruction of an SEC investigation.
-- Brenda Sapino Jeffreys