Legal Research Gets Spooky

---

Ethan Brown '25
Features Editor

I learned two important things this week.

First, never trust Andrew Allard ’25 to be your advocate at the Virginia Law Weekly’s Monday meeting; despite pleading that he bring up my unavailability to write an article for this week’s issue during article assignments,[1] I now find myself typing furiously on my computer on a beautiful Saturday afternoon, relegated to committing what borders on journalistic malpractice by squeezing out an article as quickly as humanly possible.

Second, there’s a lot of litigation surrounding the holiday that soon approaches us: Halloween. To Andrew’s credit, when he informed me that I was on deck to write an article this week,[2] he gave me a pretty bang-up story idea: to investigate Halloween through the only lens a law student knows how—haphazard searches on Westlaw. The idea came partially from Andrew’s job as a Legal Writing Fellow for Professor Joe Fore, who introduced a new problem for this year’s 1Ls concerning the legal standard for impersonation of a federal official. While I was dismayed to hear that Professor Fore had retired the awesome saga of Chris Hopper’s Hop Lobster persona that dominated my 1L LRW experience, his new fact pattern made me think of a fascinating legal question. How, if at all, does October, and specifically Halloween—a holiday notorious for its elaborate costuming and deception—impact the ability to bring impersonation claims?

This seemed like a great question for about ten seconds. Until I did literally an ounce of research into it on Westlaw and realized that this idea, as hysterical as it sounds, has gone literally nowhere. Unsurprisingly. A quick query on Westlaw for “halloween” /p “false impersonation” yielded precisely zero results. But then my interest was piqued; what if I broadened the search to “halloween” /p “costume”? Then, my friends, things got good.

There are actually so many cases involving Halloween across so many legal fields. Torts, contracts, and criminal law predominate, but there’s a little something for everyone, just like the Halloween trick-or-treat bags of our youth.[3] As if everyone reading this article doesn’t have enough legal research in their life, I’d like to share some of the “bests” of Halloween law with you all. (And by the “bests” of Halloween law, I definitely don’t just mean some of the first several articles that come up on Westlaw.)

First, consider Guyer v. School Board of Alachua County.[4] In this thrilling Florida appellate case, a concerned parent sought a permanent injunction preventing the county’s public schools from displaying imagery of witches, cauldrons, and brooms. Appellants argued that these depictions constituted an endorsement of the Wiccan religion, thus violating the Establishment Clause. The fun-loving Florida District Court of Appeals had none of it, holding that Halloween festivities “serve a secular purpose” that “enhance[] a sense of community” and “do not foster any excessive entanglement between government and religion.”[5] So when you see spooky Halloween decorations around the Law School, thank the brilliant minds of the Guyer court and their like-minded jurists.

Second, consider a classic slip-and-fall accident exemplified by Bellikka v. Green.[6] While I’m not going to get into the granular details of this case, the basic premise is that the plaintiff fell into a large, partially concealed hole on the defendant’s driveway as she trick-or-treated with her preschool-aged children. Tort law aside—1Ls, this is an excellent opportunity to brush up on your premises liability, take notes—reading this case activated my fight-or-flight response. When I was a kid treat-or-treating in suburbia circa 2004, my neighborhood was particularly hilly; it took about ninety seconds to hike up to each house. One house was especially scary because the couple who lived there would purposefully turn off every light along their path and force you to walk up to the front door in total darkness. Some years, they’d dig little divots in the ground next to the path with the goal of tripping you up. I’m not saying I almost peed myself one year in my Mario costume, but I’m not not saying that. All this to say to the plaintiff in Bellikka: I really feel you, dude.

The treasures—or horrors?—continue. There are cases involving people using Halloween trick-or-treat messages to induce fraudulent signatures;[7] litigation over whether certain criminal defendants were above or below the acceptable age of trick or treat;[8] and so on. If you have a few minutes to spare while you’re dressing up for HalloQueen this Friday,[9] go ahead and treat yourself to the splendors of spooky-themed legal research. You (probably) won’t be disappointed.

---
bwj2cw@virginia.edu

---

[1] You might ask why I wasn’t there to plead my own case, but I had another meeting, and I really thought I could trust the man. Devastating.

[2] Again, I cannot reiterate enough how writing a weekly article is literally my only responsibility for the Law Weekly–the hint’s in the name—but I’m truly just so whiny.

[3] Minus the disgusting thirty Tootsie Rolls that I somehow always managed to end up with, ugh.

[4] 634 So.2d 806 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994).

[5] Id. at 808.

[6] 306 Or. 630, 762 P.2d 997 (1988).

[7] Fox v. "John Doe", 12 Misc. 3d 1168(A), 820 N.Y.S.2d 842 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2006).

[8] State v. Watson, 144 Mont. 576, 398 P.2d 949 (1965).

[9] Be there or be square!a

Careers in Immigration Law

---

Ryan Moore '25
Law Weekly Historian

On Tuesday, October 17, the Immigration Law Society and International Refugee Assistance Program hosted an immigration law career panel. The panel featured speakers David Sobral of Montagut & Sobral, PC; Marissa Baer of the Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC); and Hannah Flamm of the International Refugee Assistance Program. Like all good panels, lunch was provided at the beginning[1] of the event. What follows is a condensed and paraphrased summary of what was discussed.

Why practice immigration law? 

Baer works with H-2A farm workers for LAJC. During the farm season, she drives across Virginia to conduct “Know Your Rights” presentations for farm workers. She said it is important for H-2A immigration lawyers to build trust with the community to help workers overcome a fear of retaliation if they report labor violations. During the rest of the year, she works on large, impact litigation and class action projects for LAJC. She has also lobbied the Virginia General Assembly.

During her undergraduate years, Baer interned in a public defender’s office. She was originally interested in the intersection of criminal law and immigration (“crimmigration”), but once in law school, she realized she did not enjoy criminal law. Instead, she focused on immigration and fell in love with it. Baer said she enjoys how immigration law changes all the time, especially between different presidential administrations. The constant change and the fact that immigration law is in a state of flux keeps practice interesting.

Sobral is a private practice attorney who works with clients to obtain visas and green cards. He actually focused on intellectual property law while in school and interned in the Washington Post’s IP law office. Upon graduation, he began working in corporate law before transitioning to in-house work. He stuck with immigration law as he found it more rewarding. While at a firm, he worked on one asylum case and got his “first taste of what it means to change someone’s life.” He won the case, and his client was not deported.

Flamm began her career applying to every job she could find until she finally got an offer. She worked on non-detained, youth-focused removal defense for about two years. She previously worked for a boutique law firm in California that focused on Alien Tort Claims Act litigation. She has also worked on housing rights, tenant side.

What skills do you use on a daily basis? 

Flamm says she experienced a high volume of practice during the Trump administration. So, being able to manage your own workflow and, in essence, be your own “assembly line” is paramount. Organization and preparation are key because immigration litigation is high stakes. She points out that your clients bear the brunt of all your shortcomings in addition to the injustice of the law. Your greatest obligation is to the client. Baer’s favorite class was Spanish, and studying the language offered her the opportunity to travel to Spanish-speaking countries and become immersed in the culture and language. Sobral, initially an intellectual property lawyer, suggests taking immigration law classes and clinics to prepare. He promotes moot court practice to develop your oral advocacy skills. He notes that most representation in immigration courts is on-the-fly oral advocacy.

Q&A

The panel ended with several student questions. I found the discussion between Sobral and Baer on the advantages of practicing immigration law in private practice versus public interest most interesting. Baer pointed out the challenges in private practice of balancing billable hours and profitability with serving your clients. Building trust and a relationship with immigrant communities takes time, which can be looked down upon in high volume private practice. However, Baer misses the opportunity to do direct client services. Non-profit immigration law organizations typically do not do a lot of individual client representation and focus more on impact litigation. Sobral practices immigration law in a small firm, which is common, as most immigration attorneys are solo or small firm practitioners. Like Baer, he stressed the value of direct client services.

Final thoughts

The presenters left the audience with some additional takeaways. Most importantly, the American Immigration Lawyers Association is hosting a conference at George Washington University Law School on November 10, 2023. Registration is done through their website,[2] costs $20 for students, and ends October 27, 2023. Second, for those podcast addicts among us, Flamm recommended the Immigration Review podcast. It has a significant audience, including members of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Finally, a helpful resource for writing immigration law briefs is the Index of Unpublished BIA Decisions.[3] Bookmark this link for future review.

I became interested in immigration law after my internship with the Fairfax County, Virginia Public Defender’s Office last summer. Criminal law and immigration law intersect when individuals without legal immigration status face criminal charges that can jeopardize their ability to remain. In short, certain “crimes of moral turpitude” can render an alien deportable, and public defenders must keep that in mind when they negotiate plea deals with prosecutors. This semester, I am taking Immigration Law and Policy with Professor Amanda Frost, my 1L CivPro professor. I highly recommend her class for those interested in careers in immigration law. Professor Frost will also teach a class on “crimmigration” in Spring 2024 that I plan to take as well.

---
tqy7zz@virginia.edu

---

[1] Take notes, FedSoc.

[2] www.aila.org.

[3] www.irac.net.

Networking at the Annual Firm Mix & Mingle

---

Noah Coco '26
Staff Editor

And thus it began, the initial contact in a nearly year-long courtship ritual that unites aspirational 1Ls with their post-graduation private firm employers. On Tuesday, October 17, over 200 1Ls met at the Grove Ballroom at the Forum Hotel in their crisp professional attire to begin to ingratiate themselves with their potential firm suitors at the Office of Private Practice’s (OPP) annual Firm Mix & Mingle. Nearly forty private firm employers attended, coming from markets as near as Washington, D.C. and Richmond, to the more distant New York, Boston, Dallas, and Atlanta. The firms were represented by approximately eighty practicing attorneys, nearly seventy of which were UVA Law alumni.

The Firm Mix & Mingle is billed as a relatively low-pressure environment to introduce 1Ls to professional legal networking and OPP matchmaking services. Through matching 1Ls to practice areas and markets of interest, these 1Ls were given the opportunity to hear directly from practicing attorneys with direct experience in their areas of interest.

Several weeks in advance of the event, 1Ls made OGI-style bids on the forty available tables of attorneys. To emphasize the main objective of the event, however, OPP did not publicize the firm names until after the assignments were made. Instead, 1Ls were presented with minimalist Hinge profiles of participating firms that listed only their respective markets and practice areas. Participating 1Ls attempted to match with the most promising prospects as they ranked all forty from high to low.

The matchmakers at OPP subsequently assigned 1Ls to four of their highest bids. The 1Ls were given an opportunity to speak directly with attorneys from their matched firms during four rotating twenty-minute sessions at the event. This was followed by an open period of thirty minutes, where the 1Ls were permitted to connect with the attorneys that they were not originally matched with.

The firms’ brilliant plumage intended to woo potential matches was certainly on display throughout the night. Entrants to the Grove Ballroom were greeted with spreads of branded pens, highlighters, and water bottles sprawled across the sea of tables.[1] But the 1Ls, armed with knowledge gathered from their research into their assigned attorneys’ biographies, a list of questions suggested by OPP, and their knowledge of employee interactions also obtained through the counseling of OPP, were equally prepared to impress their potential employers.

For many first-timers in the firm networking process, the experience did, in fact, feel like a round of speed dating. “The attorneys didn’t know anything about us, and often we didn’t know much about the firm,” said Rose Blackwell ’26, “it was a good introduction to how firms explain and show their differences and was a nice way to start thinking about which firms I like or don’t like.” For Blackwell, the event was useful for scoping out the “general vibes” of potential firm matches in her targeted Washington, D.C. market. Although initially a little nervous about managing the perceived “complexities of networking,” she walked away from the event with two great contacts from firms that she met with and additional information from one of the firms about another practice group that she intends to follow-up with.

A fellow 1L, Ryan Keane ’26, attended the Firm Mix & Mingle prepared to explore his private firm employment options for the coming summers and post-graduation. “I got to talk to a good number of people and feel like I learned a lot,” reflected Keane after the event, “it was also a really low stakes environment, so it was a nice way to warm up to the firm process.” For Keane, many positive interactions emerged from the event, and he came away from it with the perception that “[the firms] really want to talk to us [1Ls], which makes the conversations go a lot easier.” He has become reassured in his ability to be more comfortable in firm networking settings going forward.

Some 1Ls, however, were not taken in by the prospect of private firm romance and decided to refrain from Tuesday’s affair. Confident in her non-private firm career path, Kate Harter ’26 used Tuesday evening as an opportunity for a “post-contracts afternoon nap,” followed by some readings in preparation of freeing up her Thursday night for the much less corporate romance of The Golden Bachelor. Harter is planning on becoming a JAG Officer upon graduation and intends on serving in that role or transitioning to government service for the remainder of her legal romantic life—or rather, career. Although she did consider attending the Firm Mix & Mingle “for a brief moment” to get some networking practice, she was ultimately dissuaded after witnessing the intense efforts of her section-mates in preparing for the event.

For those 1Ls who did not participate in the initial courtship practices of the Firm Mix & Mingle, but who still have a desire for private firm matchmaking, more opportunities will become available through the OPP. In particular, such students should remain on the lookout for the City Days series hosted by OPP in the Spring, which will provide similar opportunities to meet with potential firm employers.

---
cmz4bx@virginia.edu

---

[1] And cable adapters, notebooks, straws, chapstick, Tide sticks, tissue dispensers, etc.

Discovering Virginia's Elusive State Fruit

---

Monica Sandu '24
Production Editor

Florida oranges. Georgia peaches. Maine blueberries. Nearly every state has its own official fruit, a symbol of horticultural pride and agricultural delight. But despite living in Virginia since I was three, I recently came to the realization that I had no clue what Virginia’s state fruit actually was! Could it be the huckleberry, like Montana?[1] Was it a variety of apple, like so many other states? Surely it couldn’t be the tomato.[2] I was wrong on all accounts. The state fruit of Virginia? The pawpaw.

Pictured: A cut pawpaw fruit
Photo Credit: Food Network

Ok, so it’s not Virginia’s official state fruit.[3] Virginia doesn’t actually have an official fruit, though it does have, among others, an official beverage (milk), official rock (Nelsonite),[4] and even an official motor sports museum (Wood Brothers Racing Museum and Virginia Motor Sports Hall of Fame).[5] In 2020, to remedy this fruitless oversight, Virginia House of Delegates Representative Elizabeth Guzmán filed a bill proposing the adoption of the pawpaw as the official state fruit of Virginia.[6] But what is the pawpaw?

Bearing the largest edible fruit native to North America, the pawpaw is a small understory tree and “the only local member of a large, mainly-tropical plant family,” according to the National Park Service.[7] The fruit is at peak ripeness in September through late October and resembles a small papaya, with a flavor described as “banana-like with hints of mango, vanilla, and citrus” and a pale yellow pulp that has been called “a natural custard.”[8] One botanist even wrote that pawpaw fruit is “rather cloying to the taste and a wee bit puckery.”[9]

The pawpaw goes by many names, including the “poor man’s banana,” the “Quaker delight,” and the “hillbilly mango.”[10] From Kansas to the Chesapeake and the Great Lakes down to Georgia, the pawpaw’s natural range covers most of the central and eastern United States.[11] For centuries, Native Americans cultivated it for both its fruit and fibrous bark; in fact, the scientific name for the pawpaw, Asimina triloba, comes from the Powhatan word assimina.[12] Chilled pawpaw fruit was said to be one of George Washington’s favorite desserts, and Thomas Jefferson had pawpaw trees planted at Monticello.[13] With such a long history, why do we not see pawpaw fruit besides our peaches and plums today?

The short answer: commercialized agriculture. More specifically, pawpaw doesn’t store well. Even when refrigerated, fresh pawpaw fruit will only keep up to a week, and that time goes down to a mere two or three days at room temperature.[14] Furthermore, the fruit bruises very easily, so it is extremely difficult to ship if not frozen.[15]

It is also worth noting that the pawpaw has been designated a plant of “low severity poison characteristics” because ingesting the fruit’s outer skin or seeds causes stomach and intestinal pain; mechanical separation can easily contaminate the otherwise safe-to-eat pulp.[16] The pawpaw’s leaves can also cause skin irritation.[17] In addition, the tree’s small purple flowers “emit a faint odor of rotting meat or rotting, fermenting fruits” when they bloom, since its pollinators are mostly scavenger insects like blow flies and carrion beetles.[18] Overall, the pawpaw is simply unable to compete with apples, oranges, and other grocery store staples mass cultivated nationwide.

However, that does not mean that the pawpaw of today is useless. Far from it! The tree has “no serious insect or disease problems,” meaning its cultivation requires little to no pesticides.[19] Because they prefer wet soil and “multiply to form dense and well-rooted thickets,” pawpaw trees can protect vulnerable areas from erosion and runoff.[20] Furthermore, areas where the pawpaw grows are less likely to suffer deforestation due to logging since pawpaw wood does not have any real commercial uses.[21]

The pawpaw is an important food source for its local ecosystem. Birds, squirrels, opossums, and raccoons all eat the fruit, while the zebra swallowtail, Tennessee’s state butterfly,[22] feeds exclusively on pawpaw leaves.[23] In contrast, the pawpaw’s irritant sap causes herbivores to stay away.[24] This means that pawpaw trees can be used to restore forest understory in places where deer would otherwise decimate the vegetation.[25]

Pawpaw fruit are also extremely nutritious, with three times the vitamin C of an apple, potassium comparable to a banana, one and a half times as much calcium as an orange, and all of the essential amino acids.[26] They definitely appear to be worth your time…if you can find them. But that, my friends, is a story for another article.

---
ms7mn@virginia.edu

---

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_foods. See also, The Huckleberry Trail.

[2] The tomato is the official state fruit of Arkansas, Ohio, and Tennessee. Id.

[3] Although it is the official state native fruit of Ohio, a totally different category from the state fruit. Id. The pawpaw tree is also Missouri’s official state fruit tree. See, https://mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/field-guide/pawpaw (hereinafter MDC Field Guide).

[4] Named after Nelson County, Virginia, but of no apparent relation to our esteemed professor here at UVA Law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelsonite.

[5] Code of Virginia, §1-510. Official emblems and designations.

[6] https://www.virginiamercury.com/blog-va/pawpaws-may-become-virginias-official-state-fruit-whats-behind-their-rise-in-popularity/.

[7] https://www.nps.gov/articles/pawpaw.htm.

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asimina_triloba.

[9] Werthner, William B. (1935). Some American Trees: An intimate study of native Ohio trees. New York: The Macmillan Company. pp. xviii + 398 pp.

[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asimina_triloba.

[11] https://plants.usda.gov/home/plantProfile?symbol=ASTR.

[12] https://gardens.si.edu/learn/blog/way-down-yonder-in-the-paw-paw-patch/. In 1612, a Jamestown settler transcribed Assimina as “wheat plum.” Other languages’ words for the pawpaw include tózhaⁿ hu in Kansa, umbi in Choctaw and riwahárikstikuc in Pawnee. See, MDC Field Guide.

[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asimina_triloba.

[14] Id.

[15] Id.

[16] https://plants.ces.ncsu.edu/plants/asimina-triloba/.

[17] Id.

[18] MDC Field Guide.

[19] https://www.missouribotanicalgarden.org/PlantFinder/PlantFinderDetails.aspx?kempercode=b500.

[20] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asimina_triloba#Range_and_ecology.

[21] Id.

[22] https://sos.tn.gov/civics/pages/tennessee-state-symbols#insects.

[23] MDC Field Guide.

[24] Id.

[25] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asimina_triloba#Range_and_ecology.

[26] https://web.archive.org/web/20191230230839/https://kysu.edu/academics/cafsss/pawpaw/pawpaw-description-and-nutritional-information/.

Law Weekly Travel Log: Japan

---

Ryan Moore '25
Law Weekly Historian

In all my years of experience,[1] I have learned that very few people want to hear about your vacation, let alone read 800 words on it. Fortunately for me, the Virginia Law Weekly allows me to word vomit up anything I want to write about each week, provided I…sometimes…get my articles in on time. So, this week, you get to hear all about my trip to Japan.

Pictured: A future lawyer
Photo Credit: Ryan Moore '25

I will admit that Japan was never high on my list of places to travel. I have been to over twenty countries, ridden the length of the Trans-Siberian Railroad, and spent months living abroad in Germany. Now that Covid restrictions are largely lifted, I considered traveling to the Middle East, the region of my prior academic study. But my wife and I decided to spend ten days in Japan instead.[2] There are two main reasons why we chose Japan. First, my wife LOVES Japan. Like, “horse girl” levels of love. Second, my brother is currently getting his master's in international relations from a university in Kyoto. Before I was a law student, even before I was a private investigator, I was a graduate student in international relations at the University of Chicago.[3] Knowing firsthand how much of a mistake graduate school is, I wanted to check in on him before it was too late. That is how I found myself driving two hours to Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C. to take a fourteen-hour flight to Tokyo. However, I mostly stayed in Kyoto, the old imperial capital of Japan, with my brother who served as my personal tour guide and money exchanger.

Japan is an island country of 125 million people, 120 million of which were always in line in front of me. Three-fourths of the islands that constitute Japan are mountainous, so most of the major population centers are located on the coastal plains. Japan is prone to earthquakes as it is located on the notorious Pacific Ring of Fire. Unlike my prior vacation to Los Angeles, California, I (disappointingly) did not experience any earthquakes.

Because I am in law school, I had to research the legal system of Japan. The Japanese government operates under a post-World War II constitution promulgated by the United States. Japan is a civil law country largely based on the German legal system. Crime in Japan is famously low; however, “low” crime does not mean “no” crime. What Japan lacks in a murder rate, it makes up for in a high rate of umbrella theft. Everyone steals unattended umbrellas from each other; it’s practically a national pastime. I experienced this firsthand as my umbrella was stolen from the front of a convenience store right before my eyes.[4]

The exchange rate between the dollar and yen makes tourism in Japan cheaper than I expected. The central bank of Japan has struggled for decades to meet its two percent inflation target rate in order to stimulate the economy.[5] Low inflation, combined with a weak Yen and no open container laws meant I could get blasted on $2 tall boys anywhere I wanted. Imagine the freedom of New Orleans’s Bourbon Street but with public streets as clean as a hospital ward.

Speaking of cleanliness, there are what feels like no trash cans in Japan. This might seem counterintuitive at first, but it makes perfect sense. If there are no trash cans, everyone learns not to bring trash with them onto the streets. Thus, no littering. But this also means that many times I finished a beverage or four and was forced to carry the cans around with me for the next hour.

Japan has fully embraced the international appeal of its popular culture. Around the country you can find stores dedicated to Nintendo, Pokémon, One Piece, Pokémon, Capcom, and Pokémon. The Pokémon stores (named “Pokémon Centers” after the video games) are highly popular but are designed as tourist traps. The Pokémon Centers suck in unsuspecting foreign tourists who have fond childhood memories of the video games and TV series. They offer nearly every Pokémon in stuffed or plushie form for the low, low price of around $15 each. They always carry your favorite Pokémon in a deliberate attempt to prey on your sense of nostalgia. Maybe you are jet lagged and too tired to think straight. Maybe Professor Jeffries’s Civil Rights Litigation class is harder than you expected. Maybe you are spending that BigLaw summer associate money before you have actually earned it.

Suffice it to say, you can fit $496 worth of Pokémon items in your carry-on luggage if you pack carefully.

If I had to impart an underlying message to my trip, it would go something roughly like this. We, the class of 2025, are nearly halfway through our law school careers. One day we will graduate, take the Bar, and enter the workforce. Whether you are starting at a private firm or public service, our time and ability to travel will soon both be limited. If there is anything you take away from this article, it is this: Go out, travel, explore, and appreciate the world around you.

---
tqy7zz@virginia.edu

---

[1] And as the president of Older Wiser Law Students, I have a lot of years.

[2] Shout out to Casey Kuhn for planning the entire trip.

[3] I have yet to identify other international relations graduate school refugees. If you are one, my email is in this article.

[4] This is the only instance in which I, an aspiring public defender, would support “tough on crime” policies.

[5] https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2023/05/24/cf-uncertainty-around-japan-inflation-underscores-need-for-nimble-monetary-policy.

Professor Mike Lincoln Talks ECVC

---

Brent Rice '25
Staff Editor

On Tuesday, October 3, Professor Mike Lincoln ’91, Vice Chair of Cooley LLP, ducked out of the office a bit early and began the familiar drive down Route 29 to UVA Law. Now in his twenty-fourth year of teaching a course as an adjunct professor on Emerging Companies and Venture Capital (ECVC for those who Nym), Lincoln was arriving even earlier than his regularly scheduled class to address a large group of students at the invitation of the Virginia Law Emerging Companies and Venture Capital Society. The topics of the conversation included a bit of background into Lincoln’s own career trajectory, life working in ECVC, and a Q&A period for curious students.

Pictured: Professor Mike Lincoln '91
Photo Credit: Cooley LLP

Lincoln’s Background

Lincoln began the night’s conversation the same way he begins his class each semester he teaches, with a PowerPoint deck depicting his wife, children, and dogs, a refreshing change of pace from someone who has ascended to the highest levels in Big Law. His point being, especially in the realm of ECVC, it is impossible to separate your personal life from this type of work. He shared that in the practice of emerging companies, your work is deeply embedded with the relationships you build with founders and their teams. Just as he has met the parents, spouses, and children of his founder clients, so too have his clients met and heard much about the family that is at the heart of Lincoln’s life. In Lincoln’s view, you can’t simply drop your family at the door on the way into the office and pick them back up when you leave.

After graduating from UVA Law, Lincoln began his career in the Washington, D.C. office of Latham & Watkins, practicing as a corporate attorney. After several years, he began to have an itch to work in tech and entrepreneurship, which precipitated a move to the Richmond-based firm of Hunton & Williams (now Hunton Andrews Kurth) where he became Partner. Ever captivated by the potential of the emerging companies market, Lincoln later made the jump to Silicon Valley-based Cooley LLP to co-found the firm's first East Coast office in Reston, Virginia.

Cooley’s Approach to Lifecycle Representation

Next, Lincoln expounded upon his approach to emerging company representation noting that “the goal is to represent not only emerging companies, but unicorn companies that go on to do something big in Lifecycle Representation.” By all accounts, this approach seems to have been successful as evidenced by Cooley’s representation of NVIDIA, Tableau, Zoom, and Uber in their IPOs and, in some cases, eventual sales. Despite the aforementioned examples, Lincoln was quick to clarify that ECVC representation is not limited to tech companies. Rather, it is more about disruption, a drive towards liquidity, access to capital, and growth trajectory. One other interesting practice by Cooley is to allow its attorneys to invest in some of the start-up companies they represent through an affiliated investment fund. According to Bloombergy Law, this practice allowed Cooley attorneys to acquire a roughly $150 million stake in Snowflake Inc., a company for which Cooley LLP handled the IPO.[1]

Why You Should Consider Practicing in ECVC

As for the career prospects in the emerging companies practice area, Lincoln was highly optimistic. For those interested in this practice, he stressed the importance of networking and maintaining relationships with family members, undergraduate, and law school classmates who go on to start or join early-stage companies. Lincoln also emphasized that practicing in the fast-paced environment of emerging companies means that young lawyers can quickly become experts in their field by taking an interest in new technologies and reading up on them, rather than slowly climbing the ladder in the more traditional practice groups. Those who do plan to enter this area should be prepared for entering a high number of time entries as Lincoln noted that there is not much block billing when a typical day might involve working on eight to ten different client matters, rather than just one or two larger blocks.

Lincoln concluded his presentation by once again focusing on the people. He noted, “Law firms and lawyers don’t need to see around corners, they just need to follow the people that can”.

---
wrf4bh@virginia.edu

---

[1] Brian Baxter, Snowflake’s IPO Was a Startup Stock Success For One Big Law Firm, Bloomberg Law (Sep. 30 2020), https://www.bloomberglaw.com/bloomberglawnews/business-and-practice/XLRIN5C000000?bna_news_filter=business-and-practice#jcite.

A Spooky Movie for Every 1L Class

---

Garrett Coleman '25
Managing Editor

For many 1Ls, this spooky season will be one to remember. As midterms and practice exams come to a close, many people realize just how unprepared they are and how much work lies ahead. I was in the same boat, and everything turned out fine, but that does not mean October was at all pleasant. In respect to that gut wrenching dread to which all of us can relate, I decided to analogize each 1L doctrinal to a horror movie or October favorite.

Torts: Hocus Pocus

Torts is the quirkiest of all the doctrinal classes. In my view, the whole field is an exercise in remedying stupid behavior and preventing it in the future. 1Ls have the privilege of reading a series of short stories about young men diving head first into shallow lakes, friends casually driving around town while another is internally bleeding in the backseat, and fireworks being set off in train stations. And, unlike Crim Law, it has an air of humor to it. Learning about stevedores who blow up an entire ship by dropping a single plank makes some of us laugh. This is where Hocus Pocus comes in, since it is the quintessential cult spooky movie. Like Torts, it has a devoted fanbase, and its value comes from its self-effacing nature. It is always pleasant to rewatch and leaves you feeling good.

Civil Procedure: Scream

By this point in the semester, some of you future litigators are coming to the realization that this is the most important class you will take. Its lessons will crop up in every one of your cases and can often be (outcome) determinative. Like Scream, you will appreciate it with age. Civil Procedure also has a touch of self-awareness. When you are not dealing with substantive law but the procedural accompaniments, the law seems a bit more silly. The same can be said of Scream.

Contracts: Midsommar

This is certainly a class I thought I could get through with common sense. Many of the early cases seem pretty basic and nonthreatening. Those days feel like you’re arriving at a nice festival with a group of friends. But then you start to realize that much more was going on in the community of Contracts nerds. All of a sudden, those simple agreements are morphed by fraud, duress, or incapacity. Before you know it, you’ll be bogged down with questions of admissibility of oral modifications. Your arrival in those simple days of consideration and assent will be lost and you will have to live out your days in a realm of uncertainty (maybe I was just bad at Contracts).

Criminal Law: Zombieland

It is the goriest of classes, but you’re not scared or supposed to be. One minute, you will read a case about an incel murderer or a homeless person trying to stick someone with an unsanitary needle. The next, you’ll be evaluating his mental state to determine if he meant it in the worst way or a more acceptable way... This class has so much depraved behavior that you achieve a Buddhist level of desensitization. When I watch Zombieland, I similarly tune out the violence so I can watch a great story of love, nontraditional family dynamics, and the human spirit.

Property: Hereditary

This will be the most unfamiliar to current 1Ls, so here’s a synopsis. Our law comes from England, a country with many archaic rules and extra sons willing to risk it all. So, we have to shoehorn those rules into a modern economy and decide who owns what, how much they own it, when they can take someone else’s stuff, and what happens when they give it to someone else. While some of the cases have a tort-like flair, much of it is a memorization slog. And this is how I feel about Hereditary. It comes from a successful writer and director, is well made, but also terribly uncomfortable to watch. When you prep your outline, you will feel like the girl who has her head ripped off.

Constitutional Law: The Shining

It’s a classic, the only doctrinal that every 1L comes into with some background knowledge of. It is also a great suspense story. Things start off slow with the Commerce Clause and congressional delegation, like how the Torrances take their long drive through the Rockies. But as soon as you reach Loving v. Virginia and Griswold v. Connecticut, you have entered Equal Protection and Substantive Due Process land. That path only ends when Obergefell, Dobbs, and Bruen come bursting through the bathroom door to incite the most heated law school debates. Many of the opinions also have an artistic side that encourages general readership, similar to how The Shining is appreciated by many. The only difference, though, is that many students do not think Con Law has a happy ending with this current Supreme Court. Think of an alternative ending to The Shining where Jack finds his family in the maze.

---
jxu6ad@virginia.edu

An Original Conversation

---

Garrett Coleman '25
Managing Editor

Meghan Flatley '25
Guest Writer

When I first agreed to report on the Originalism 101 event hosted by The Federalist Society, I thought to myself: What law student needs a primer on the defining interpretive methodology of our era? *Perhaps* there are some 1Ls less nerdy than myself. But that certainly does not include Meghan Flatley ’25, who had the privilege–or torment–of sitting next to me in Con Law. There, in the spirit of collegiality, I called her constitutional ideas “laughable,” “absurd,” and “preposterous.” Being the (much more) diligent student that she is, Meghan would often correct my understanding of the record, while probably reporting me as a Papal extremist to the FBI. But we are not here to let facts get in the way of abstract reasoning. The best primer on originalism is a public cage match between two friendly adversaries, one boisterous, the other prepared.

Pictured: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia in Rajasthan, India (1994)
Photo Credit: Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States, via As- sociated Press, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/22/opinion/ruth-bader- ginsburg-antonin-scalia.html

Garrett: Meghan, welcome to the Virginia Law Weekly. I think our conversation should begin by asking what a constitution is for. And, as any self-respecting originalist would, I lob my first volley with a quote from Justice Antonin Scalia: “It is plainly unhistorical . . .  to regard the Constitution as simply a shorthand embodiment of all that is perfect–to think that whatever element of perfection does not appear there explicitly must be contained within more vague guarantees.”[1] In short, I think that the purpose of a written constitution is to preserve a structure of government that puts some fundamental guarantees beyond the reach of fleeting majorities. It is the judicial preservation of that structure that I am concerned with, not the insertion of all conceivable values into our constitutional order.

Meghan: Garrett, thank you for the warm welcome. I look forward to solving all issues of constitutional interpretation. I’m sure we’ll be able to resolve an issue that has been debated for hundreds of years.

Anyway, I have no issue with judicial preservation. But I am not melodramatic enough to think that the country falls apart when we move beyond 1791 or 1868 (you take your pick, since originalism, and its manyiterations, leaves you with more wiggle room than you are willing to admit). So, with that in mind, what are we preserving? What year are we in? Whose perspective are we considering? Or should we do a little bit of both, depending on the persuasion of the justice, to get to the result we actually, personally want? You know, the lovely new test in Bruen[2] that has us in the past and present all at the same time, weaponizing a cherry-picked history to neuter the legislature. So true to the Framers, don’t you think?

Garrett: Pretty simple: We should preserve the law based on its public meaning in the year enacted (let’s leave statutes aside for now, since there are plenty of other considerations at play there). For example, the Fourteenth Amendment meant something to the people who wrote it and the citizens that ratified it through their state legislatures. That democratic choice should be honored by jurists today, as best they can.

To address your Bruen comment, though, I don’t think that it is inconsistent to say that a law can have a fixed meaning with some flexibility for later applications. When the Fourth Amendment guaranteed an individual’s security in her “papers,” it had a public meaning that likely protected private letters. Knowing that, a good judge should be open to applying that liberty to an age in which everyone communicates via cellphone. So, the past gives us the democratically agreed upon meaning, but a judge does not need to hide his head in the sands of 1789.

Meghan: I don’t think we can really describe any constitutional theory as “pretty simple,” especially here when there are plenty of debates about how to even apply originalism. My concern is that this method of interpretation can be—and is—widely abused. Judges are not nearly as good at being historians as they would have to be under such a method. Of course, there are cases where interpretation is easy, but in many other instances the door is left wide open to error and cherry-picking. Moreover, history itself is complicated. Often there is not one easy answer written down hundreds of years ago. Historians frequently disagree on public meaning, but judges frequently select the meaning best molded to their arguments, disregarding competing interpretations and creating a jurisprudence far more subjective than originalists would like to admit.

Regarding your Fourth Amendment comment, how is that not inconsistent? You say we must look to the public meaning, but, suddenly, when originalism and public meaning become inconvenient, we can abstract to create opinions we feel match the results we want. Public meaning is suddenly out the window. What does originalism say about deciding when and where we can abstract, if at all? How do we know when to provide flexibility in some areas while providing fixed meanings in others—without letting personal views and vague reasoning get in the way? What is the source? Such abstraction starts moving us away from originalism and into waters typically disfavored by originalists. Originalism’s various methods of application are highly inconsistent, leaving plenty of room for manipulation. All in all, the more content an originalist is with abstraction, the further he can move away from originalism and “public meaning at the time” to inject his own views, while still trying to use the term to legitimize his opinion.

Garrett: Originalism is not perfect, but it is the best interpretive option out of many bad ones. So, I agree with you that there will always be judgment calls, like choosing a level of generality. What I am defending is the baseline orientation of the judge, that she is trying to preserve something akin to an original public meaning. The risk of cherry-picking certain evidence or abstracting too far is present in every case by every judge. Finding and appointing people who have good judgment is a legislative and executive function, not an originalist one.

To your point on knowing when abstraction is appropriate, we can also turn to contemporary texts like the Federalist Papers or notes from the Constitutional Convention. The Supreme Court recognized this history in Riley v. California,[3] in which Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, stated that “[o]ur cases have recognized that the Fourth Amendment was the founding generation’s response to the reviled ‘general warrants’ and ‘writs of assistance’ of the colonial era.”[4] Understanding that history gives context to the privacy right that the people were enshrining. And it allows us to apply that right to an evolving technological reality while still being faithful to the democratic process that preserved it. When done correctly, the level of abstraction is determined by the historical evidence as well.

But I can acknowledge some truth to the claim that historical research will always be a bit unreliable. That is why, to some degree, originalism is going to be better at calling balls than strikes–the originalist argument is at its clearest when saying something like the Eighth Amendment did not protect against the death penalty because every felony in 1791 was punished by death. That is the sort of evidence that most clearly lends itself to the originalist methodology. But it should always be remembered that originalism is pushing back against the judges who offer no fixed point of reference for their analysis. At least originalists try something.

To wrap this up, I’ll give you the floor again to conclude.

Meghan: Arguing that originalism isn’t great, but at least it’s not like other theories is hardly a glowing endorsement.

My point is that, when public meaning proves unclear or inconvenient, you begin arguing in favor of a theory that looks less and less like originalism. When you abstract that much (especially regarding your Fourth Amendment argument, where you seem to favor analyzing the purpose of the amendment), it’s less like the originalism we know and love (or hate). If you are unsure of this, I am more than happy to lend you my notes from our Con Law class where we discussed this very issue. Perhaps you aren’t as big of a fan of originalism as you let on. Understandable!

It is incumbent upon originalism, as an analytical framework, to account and compensate for the risks and issues it creates; to say this is instead the job of other branches of government is a non sequitur. That “baseline orientation” of the judge is necessarily affected by any problems with interpretation. Why wouldn’t these risks be necessary when analyzing the quality of a theory? If originalism is not up for the job, perhaps it is best to look elsewhere.

Also, I am not sure I understand your argument that, because historical research is unreliable, that makes originalism the best. Why? The example you provide concerning the Eighth Amendment I agree is cut and dry under originalism, but that means it isn’t responsive to the issue of historical ambiguity. If we want a good interpretive theory, we can’t solely examine its easy applications and pat ourselves on the back.

All in all, it seems your personal version of originalism twists with whatever argument you wish to bring forth, even though that’s what you criticize other theories for doing. When there’s clear history of the public meaning at whatever relevant year you choose, that’s the easy answer. But when it’s difficult, you abstract, speaking of baseline orientations that can perhaps illuminate the purpose of the law, twisting originalism into something it’s not to make the answer what you want, avoiding any criticisms by labeling them as irrelevant to the theory.

(Note: I am using “you” generally here. Don’t worry, Garrett, our friendship is intact, but if you think our perspectives are irreconcilable, perhaps, to appease an originalist such as yourself, we should resort to how the Framers might have handled such a disagreement: a duel. Pistols at dawn?)

---
jxu6ad@virginia.edu
zgr9nu@virginia.edu

---

[1] Antonin Scalia, Scalia Speaks 164 (Christopher J. Scalia, et al. eds., 2017).

[2] New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111, 213 L. Ed. 2d 387 (2022).

[3] Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014).

[4] Id. at  403.

The Conservative Case for Criminal Justice Reform

---

Ashanti Jones '26
Staff Editor

Thursday, September 28, the Federalist Society at the University of Virginia School of Law hosted speaker Jason Pye for the society’s event titled “The Conservative Case for Criminal Justice Reform: 5 Years After the First Step Act.” Pye serves as the Director for Rule of Law Initiatives at the Due Process Institute in Washington, D.C., and was a key player in the creation and passage of the First Step Act.[1]

Federalist Society President, Aquila Maliyekkal ’24, stated that under the guidance of Vice President for Speakers, Connor Fitzpatrick ’25, the Federalist Society came into this academic year with a mission to diversify the topics discussed during their speaker events to traditionally non-conservative issues. Maliyekkal shared that the goal of this event was both framing criminal justice reform in a conservative context and celebrating the First Step Act as a bipartisan measure.

“The idea behind this is that the First Step Act was one of the biggest pieces of bipartisan legislation that we've seen in recent years, particularly during a very polarizing administration, which made it unique,” Maliyekkal said. “The fact that you were able to get so much support from both conservatives and liberals around it made it important, and now we’re at the five-year anniversary, so when we were considering events, we generally wanted something different than what we normally do.”

Fitzpatrick opened the event with a brief overview, followed by welcoming Pye to the podium. Pye began his presentation by mentioning a recent, incremental shift towards small scale criminal justice reform in historically conservative states such as Georgia, Texas, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Alabama, but remarked larger reforms are uncommon due to a lack of empathy around the issue.

Pye presented several potential justifications for criminal justice reform that could appeal to a conservative audience. Pye’s main justifications for conservative criminal justice reform were protecting those with untreated addictions and mental health issues from unjustified punishment, fairness in sentencing, returning sentencing power to judges, and the premise of second chances.

On protecting those with untreated addictions and mental health issues, Pye stated some crime is often the result of an untreated addiction, mental health issue, or potentially both. He argued that those suffering from an untreated addiction or mental health issue should not be punished for simply having an addiction, unless those persons commit a violent offense.

“Sending people to prison who have unaddressed addiction issues and mental health issues is fundamentally wrong,” Pye said. “Now, if they commit violent crimes, repeat offenses, we should have a conversation about how to punish those people and the appropriate way to punish them.”

Next, Pye stated conservatives should pursue criminal justice reform to ensure the punishment given is equal to the crime committed to ensure fairness across the system. Pye illustrated his point by discussing the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine adopted by the Federal Sentencing Commission in the 1980s. “1986, Congress passes the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, creates a sentencing disparity of 100 to one,” Pye said. “Five grams of crack cocaine got the same five-year mandatory minimum prison sentences as 500 grams of powder cocaine . . . There is no chemical difference between the two.”

After discussing justifications, Pye explained key provisions of the First Step Act and their effect on criminal justice. Pye focused the most on Title 5 of the Act, which reauthorized the bill’s predecessor, the Second Chance Act of 2007, by reinstating, clarifying, and retroactively applying the federal government’s earned time credits and good time credits systems for federal prisoners.

The good time credit system allowed federal prisoners to earn reductions in their total sentences by demonstrating good behavior, while the earned time credit system allowed federal prisoners to earn eligibility for halfway house or home confinement by participating in rehabilitation programming.[2] Pye shared the title’s biggest effect on the time credit systems was fixing the amount of reduced time a prisoner could earn.

“There was already time credit that existed in federal law,” Pye said. “What we did with the First Step Act was restore congressional intent. Given that you all are law students, I’m sure you’ve heard of Chevron deference. The Bureau of Prisons had their own ‘interpretation’ of what 54 days meant . . . it literally says 54 days in the statue—this is not up for debate, it says that in black and white—but they somehow interpreted that to be 47 days . . . so we fixed that. People who had been denied those seven days of good time credit got them back.”

In closing, Pye also examined recent moves for criminal justice reform at the federal level following the First Step Act. Pye stated while success of recent efforts has been limited, some legislation, such as the Fair Chance Act of 2019 and FAFSA Simplification Act of 2020, have had major effects on the system.

Pye also shared an economic rationale for current criminal justice reform for conservatives. Pye argued conservatives should consider criminal justice reform as an economic necessity to fulfill the need for workers. Pye stated criminal justice reforms such as record expungement could aid in reducing the number of unemployed positions by improving employment rates of formerly-incarcerated persons.

“Production is what drives an economy,” Pye said. “In July 2023, there were 8.8 million job openings for 5.8 million people looking for work. We don’t have enough workers to fill the jobs . . . The unemployment rate for people who have served time . . . in prison is 60% at a minimum . . . Individuals whose records were expunged saw yearly wage gains of nearly $4,300 for men and $4,600 for women.”

---
alj3emz@virginia.edu

---

[1] For context, Pye describes himself as a libertarian, not a conservative.

[2] Nellis Ph.D., Ashley and Liz Komar. “The First Step Act: Ending Mass Incarceration in Federal Prisons.” The Sentencing Project, Aug. 2023, <https://www.sentencingproject.org/policy-brief/the-first-step-act-ending-mass-incarceration-in-federal-prisons/>.

The Dos and Don'ts of Employer Interactions

---

Brooke Boyer '26
Staff Editor

On Wednesday, September 27, Office of Private Practice counselors Marit Slaughter ’09 and Lauren Parker ’08 gave a fun (yes, fun!) presentation on employer interactions. Through skits and illustrative examples, they turned the daunting process of learning about everything from emailing to networking into a lighthearted experience.

Email etiquette and digital footprint

Parker began the presentation where many law students first start interacting with employers: emailing. As unfortunate as it may be for many future Gen Z lawyers, “Email is the language of your chosen profession. It is not texting, it is not ‘insta,’ it is not TikTok,” she said. Because of this, learning how to appropriately write and respond to emails is an essential skill for interacting with firms. To cover the basics, emails have salutations, signatures, and complete, typo-free sentences.

Even when some emails don’t seem to require a response, it is important to thoroughly read the message in order to figure out whether one is expected. Parker suggests getting into the habit of skimming every email, responding if necessary within 24 hours, and separating them into specific folders.

While tone via email can be tricky, it is important to keep in mind that employers can often sense when an email implies an entitled, pushy, or lazy tone. To illustrate this, Slaughter gave examples of common emails students send and Parker then interpreted them as what the firm actually hears. For example, one common email is, “Dear recruiter, I recently applied to your firm. Please send me a status report at your earliest convenience.” According to Parker, what the firm hears is, “Dear recruiter, I am really important. My time is more valuable than yours, and I would like information. Get it to me.” While the email of course did not explicitly say those words, they were implied in the student’s impatient tone. To avoid this pitfall, simply err on the side of showing more gratitude rather than less.

It’s also important to maintain a clean digital presence because employers will be doing their research before hiring someone. Parker recommends Googling yourself and asking: “Do I want employers to see this about me or to see me this way?” With this in mind, maybe the time has finally come to delete that video of you beerbonging at a college party three years ago.

The nuts and bolts of networking

Slaughter prefaced the discussion on networking by saying, “It is a marathon, not a sprint.” It requires taking many, many baby steps rather than large leaps. There are a few primary goals of networking. One goal is to learn things, such as what makes people like a particular practice and what skills it entails. Next, one must be able to articulate their interest in a particular practice and come across as professional and likable in the interview room. Finally, networking serves as practice for forming relationships with future clients. According to Slaughter, networking is a practiced and learnable skill, and the Office of Private Practice has resources on their webpage for students to find strategies that suit them best.

To show the difference between effective and ineffective networking, Slaughter, playing the interviewee, and Parker, playing the interviewer, performed yet another skit. When Parker said, “Tell us a little bit about why you want to work in New York,” Slaughter first responded, “I mean – why NOT New York?” This response is unsurprisingly unlikely to impress an interviewer. “I hear that it’s a great city, and just a place I’ve always wanted to spend time,” is also a less than compelling response. However, Slaughter improved her response by citing the “fast-paced nature of the city” and wanting to be “at the epicenter of the corporate world” to compliment her interest in transactional work as specific reasons motivating her to choose New York City.

Additionally, mastering the handshake is a critical part of the networking process. Parker recommends a firm grip, a couple of shakes, and maintaining eye contact. Importantly, the other hand should not be participating in any way, shape, or form.

Since 1L year is busy, amid maintaining good grades and meeting classmates, while still adjusting to the Law School environment, Slaughter says to let the firms come to you. Participating in events hosted at UVA Law is the easiest way to begin the networking process. Over winter break, though, getting coffee or lunch with employers is more typical. Firms will also host “home for the holidays” events, so keep an eye out for those.

Dress for success

After learning how to act professionally, one has to learn how to dress professionally. It can be difficult to determine what to wear to an event due to the emergence of confusing new styles, like smart casual (?). If a dress code is provided for an event, it is best to follow it. If not, Parker suggests that the best bet is to wear a suit off Grounds and “nice student attire” on Grounds. Also, as a general rule for Zoom meetings, don’t skip the pants.

---
ews6tm@virginia.edu

Lessons from Fall Planting

---

Darius Adel '24
Satire Editor

The bounty of late fall is upon us. If you head to the farmer’s market at the IX Art Park this Saturday, you'll find an assortment of squash, pumpkins, peppers, tomatoes, mushrooms, and an assortment of greens. This is a great time to get fresh vegetables on the table. If you don’t feel like dealing with the hustle and bustle of a farmer’s market, I would also recommend the Barracks Road Farm Market. It’s much smaller, and you can pick up your produce and be out of there in a matter of minutes.

While these options are great, I’ve always been a proponent of growing some of your own food. You can learn a lot by taking something from seed to table, and the satisfaction of eating something you grew yourself makes any meal better. The issue is that most of us weren’t here over the summer and thus are now unable to reap a heavy summer harvest. Luckily, there are plenty of crops you can plant that will grow over the fall and winter.

One of my favorite vegetables I was never able to grow well in sunny California are radishes. Since Charlottesville's weather gets sufficiently cold in the fall and winter, you can continually plant and harvest them this semester. They take little maintenance beyond the occasional watering, mature quickly, and don’t really take up much space. If you have a couple of planter pots, you can easily grow some with just a few square feet of space. The fact that they mature so quickly is really great for a budding gardener, since you can get something on the table in just three to four weeks.

Inevitably though, you’re going to need to learn patience if you want to grow most fall and winter crops. Just like doing readings early in the semester in preparation for a final that is several months away, you’ll need to nurture seedlings you may not be able to eat until late November.

I mentioned in an article last year that Charlottesville is in zone 7a, which is just a label for the type of climate we live in. If you’re ever wondering when or if to grow a crop in town, just look up if it will grow well in zone 7a during the month you’re in. Grow food that you actually want to eat, even if you don't have the perfect conditions. That being said, I do have a few recommendations for late September or early October planting.

Cabbage is really hardy and grows well in the cold weather we’ll be getting soon. If we end up getting some snow this year, they will do just fine. While cabbages are a great cold weather crop, they can take up a lot of space if you just have an apartment balcony to work with. If space is an issue, I recommend growing beets. As long as they have enough space for their roots, you can plant them relatively close together without too much of an issue. Similarly to cabbage, they are pretty frost resistant.

Potatoes may not be the sexiest vegetables, but they are incredibly easy to grow, and you can get a lot of them from a single planter pot. You can buy potato seeds if you want an exotic variety. I’ve done that before, but usually I’ll just take an old potato from my pantry that’s sprouting, cut it up, and bury it in some soil. As long as you keep the plant sufficiently watered, you’ll have a ton of them come spring.

If you really don’t have any outside space to grow vegetables this season, you could always resort to growing herbs indoors. I used to be anti-herb growing for religious reasons, but law school has broadened my horizons. They have a ton of herb growing kits out there, but I’m always a proponent of starting cheap. A bundle of live basil at Harris Teeter is like three dollars. Just separate the individual plants and stick them in a pot of well draining soil in a sunny part of your house, and you’ll have a great edible houseplant. I like to just trim the tops every few weeks and make sure it doesn’t get too tall—just eating whatever I cut off.

I started a garden during 1L as a little non-law related project. Relatively speaking, it’s a pretty low time commitment hobby. You may think that growing produce is a lot of work and that just buying your food at a store is way more efficient. You’re right. But, gardening in a city isn’t necessarily about saving money or being efficient. It's about cultivating a nurturing attitude, practicing patience, living with the seasons, and hopefully learning a bit about the food we eat.

---
dsa7st@virginia.edu

Ranking 1L Section Softball Team Names

---

Stephen Foss '25
Social Media Editor

Decisions by committee are not easy. To make matters worse, when that committee is made up of T-14 law students (who know everything about everything), settling on a solid softball team name is all but impossible. But you did it! You and your section mates picked a name. And some of them suck. So, let’s talk about it.

These rankings are definitive and final. I have sought input from every corner of the Law School to compile these rankings. The criteria are simple: vibes.[1] I don’t know what exactly makes a good softball name, but, as former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart famously said when trying to define hard-core pornography, "I know it when I see it.”[2]

First Place: The Acqu-Hitters (Section A)

This is a rock-solid name. The pun is seamless, not too much of a reach, and not a mouthful. I like it. This name showcases a mastery of the English language and a grasp of the basic concepts of softball—which is what most members of the NGSL also possess.

Second Place: Hoos on First (Section F)

This is a great UVA softball team name. Excellent, even. With references to the school nickname and the classic Abbott and Costello bit, this name is class personified. Throw in some parentheses to emphasize your section letter (i.e., “(F)irst”) and you may have had a title shot.

Third Place: The Hit ’N Runners (Section H)

This is a very good softball name. It makes sense contextually and has a tasteful balance of legal and softball puns. Furthermore, it is also instructive and informative, which is helpful for first time softballers.

Honorable Mention:

Limited Liability Marlins (The LL.Ms)

The longer you stare at this name the sillier it becomes and the less sense it makes. It’s adorable, the intention is there, but it doesn’t really make sense. It’s fine. There is a legal concept involved, there is a baseball team name, and they’re smashed together. But something is missing. But I think it’s really cute.

Somewhere in the Middle:

Legal-Es (Section E)

This name is lacking in the softball department, but it’s sufficiently charming and will probably look good on a t-shirt. It should be noted that, when this name was submitted, the team captains misspelled the word “legal,” which, besides being hilarious, is incredibly worrying.

Grand Slam Jury (Section G)

This is nicely done. It kind of seems like something ChatGPT would churn out if you prompted it to make up a softball name for law students, but it totally works on all the arbitrary levels I am judging this on. The main problem with this name is that it doesn’t roll off the tongue.

J’accuse (Section J)

I get it. I understand the reference. I don’t like it very much, but trusted advisors assure me that this is a great name. As a former section J man, I wish this name resonated more. Besides being fun to say, it leaves me wanting.

Default Judgmitt (Section D)

Look, you checked some boxes, you hit some puns like all names should. However, you somehow managed to fill these check boxes while choosing the most unexciting concept from the least interesting class.[3] That’s where you’ve lost points. And it kind of looks ugly? Again, vibes.

Almost in Last: Benchwarmers (Section B)

This name is overused, lazy, uninspired, underwhelming, lacking, middling, meh. “The Section B Softball Team” would have been better. This is the type of name that someone whose favorite condiment is mayonnaise would pick.

Basically Last: Intent to Harm (Section I)

I might not get it. Truly, I may be missing something. The pun might be going over my head, but I have no idea what Section I is going for here. Did you just regurgitate the last thing you heard in class by accident? As far as I can tell, this name has nothing to do with softball, sports, or the letter I (besides there being an I). Is this a mission statement? Again, maybe I’m missing something. Congratulations on not being dead last—don’t let it go to your head.

Dead Last: Sec C Hoos (Section C)

This is so lame. You are all probably wonderful people, but really? The lot of you got together and decided this was the one? Did you think you nailed it? You did, didn’t you? After Section C of the Class of 2025 dominated the 1L softball scene, it’s a shame to see their progeny stoop to such lameness. Maybe there is some background to this name that I don’t know about and this section is crazy hot.[4] This name is kind of funny, though. But not really.

---
css7aj@virginia.edu

---

[1] If you don’t agree with your section’s ranking, and you have a chip on your shoulder because your section got ranked dead last your 1L fall, join the Law Weekly so you can write next year’s article.

[2] Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964). See also Ted Lasso (Season 1) (before it went downhill).

[3] No disrespect to Civil Procedure, big Michael Collins fan.

[4] Unlikely. The median LSAT for the Class of 2026 was a 171.

Law School Trains for an Active Attacker

---

Sally Levin '24
Staff Editor

On Wednesday, September 13, the Dean’s Office invited the UVA Department of Safety & Security to give a presentation to Law School faculty, staff, and students on active attacker prevention, response, and notification. The training was led by three members of the UVA Threat Assessment Team: University Police Sergeant and Victim/Witness Assistance Program Coordinator Ben Rexrode, Dr. Anna Grace Burnette, Associate Director of Threat Assessment, and Dr. Rachel Slotter, an Emergency Management Coordinator. 

At the end of last semester, a group of 2Ls asked the Law School to host a yearly training in a proposal to the administration regarding safety at the Law School.[1]  The proposal also requested that the Law School host a listening session on campus safety issues, the creation of a campus safety committee with faculty and students, and a concrete emergency plan for students and faculty. It was signed by nearly ninety students and endorsed by the Student Bar Association. In addition to hosting this week’s training session, Senior Associate Dean Stephen Parr will be meeting with the students who submitted the proposal next week. Annie Somerville ’24, one of the students involved in writing the proposal, said she “looks forward to having the opportunity to voice her concerns and collaborate with the Law School administration on campus safety issues.”

Before beginning the training, Rexrode acknowledged the difficulty of the topic, especially given the shooting on Main Grounds last November.[2] He explained that the shooting has had a ripple effect across grounds. While the Threat Assessment Team has hosted active attacker trainings across Grounds for years, more departments and groups have requested trainings since last fall. Rexrode stated that “the purpose of the presentation is to promote education, not to create fear or paranoia.”

Following the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech, Virginia was one of the first states to pass legislation requiring threat assessment procedures in institutions of higher education.[3] The mission of the Threat Assessment Team is to identify, assess, and evaluate potential threats of violence in both academic and medical settings. Burnette explained that the Threat Assessment Team is “working in the grey” because they are gathering information and assessing the credibility of threats before law enforcement is involved.

Next, Sergeant Rexrode discussed responding to active attacker situations. He played the Active Attack Prevention and Response Video, which all students were required to watch via SIS before the start of the academic year.[4]  Rexrode stressed that every building on grounds will have a different response plan, and that we all must do what is best for us as individuals during a violent attack. 

Diddy Morris, the Special Assistant to the Dean, spoke briefly about safety precautions specific to the Law School building. Both she and the other presenters encouraged attendees to identify the emergency exits in different areas of the Law School. She noted that certain classrooms in Brown Hall have interior exits that lead down to the exit near Caplin Auditorium. Classrooms in Slaughter Hall also have connected interior exits in the back of each room. Morris warned that while it might be tempting to evacuate to Spies or Purcell Garden, both should be avoided during an emergency because they are fully enclosed. All classroom doors are also equipped with thumb latches to manually lock the doors from inside.

The presentation also covered the different types of alerts sent via the UVA safety notification system. There are three different types of alerts: UVA Alerts, Community Alerts, and General Communications. A UVA Alert is an emergency notification for situations involving an imminent threat to health or safety. This includes warnings for severe weather, gas leaks, fires, and armed intruders. Community Alerts are required by the Cleary Act and are released by the UVA Police Department when certain crimes are reported on or near University property. General Communications provide awareness and updates about safety issues when there is no ongoing threat. This is the first year the University is sending out UVA Alerts via text message in addition to email.

During the hour-long presentation on Wednesday afternoon, attendees received a Community Alert email reporting shots fired on Preston Avenue and news alerts about an active lockdown situation at the University of North Carolina. These real-time notifications underscore the need for active attacker prevention and response training and the importance of UVA’s safety notification system.

---
ezn3yy@virginia.edu

---

[1] Proposal to Increase Campus Safety at UVA Law (April 19, 2023), https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-BC4CjyVAbvRxVWkdQLezUtMLsj_KQQ-3M_ZzEQ8xic/edit.

[2] Justen Jouvenal & Lisa Grace Lednicer, Timeline: How the U-Va. Shooting Unfolded, Wash. Post (Dec. 26, 2022),https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/12/26/uva-shooting-timeline-what-happened/.

[3] Susan Svrluga & Laura Vozzella, Virginia bills aim to refine how colleges assess threats after U-Va. shooting, Wash. Post (Feb. 17, 2023), https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/02/17/virginia-college-threat-assessment-uva-shooting/.

[4] Active Attack Prevention and Response Video, https://uvapolice.virginia.edu/active-attack-prevention-and-response-video.

A Dandelion Triple-Crown: James Hornsby '24, Dance Icon

---

Ethan Brown ‘25
Features Editor

A few weeks ago, the class of 2026 participated in Dandelion, a perennial fixture of life at UVA Law that brings together 1Ls, 2Ls, and 3Ls for a rousing display of songs, dances, and skits from each 1L and LLM section. Every year, there are at least thirty students at the Law School who can claim the spoils of Dandelion victory—this year, it was the lucky members of Section H. But since Dandelion only invites participation from new 1Ls each September, there is no way to “win” Dandelion more than once. Or at least, so I thought.

It turns out there is one person at the Law School who might have a credible claim to winning Dandelion every year—first as a 1L, and then twice as a peer advisor whose respective 1L sections went on to claim the Dandelion trophy for themselves. James Hornsby ’24 was a part of the class of 2024’s Section C, which won Dandelion in fall 2021. He then was a peer advisor for the class of 2025’s Section H,[1] as well as the class of 2026’s Section H, both of which won Dandelion in their respective years. Since peer advisors are often responsible for helping to guide their sections through Dandelion and provide choreographic insight, Hornsby will have left his mark on the competition when he graduates in May.

What, if anything, has been Hornsby’s unifying influence on the 2021, 2022, and 2023 competitions? And what can that influence tell us about success for future 1L cohorts? Join me as we walk down memory lane for a retrospective look at the Dandelions of years past, with commentary from Hornsby on each of his victories.

Pictured: Section H Cinches Gold at This Year's Dandelion.
Photo Credit: James Hornsby ‘24

2021’s Competition

Hornsby’s first Dandelion win came through his 1L section’s impeccable performance of “Juice,” one of Lizzo’s breakout songs. His section boldly disregarded the tradition that sections pick a song that starts with the same letter as their section, instead opting to subtly style their performance as “juiCe” as an homage to their section’s letter.

The performance itself is a classic, with drops, twirls, and sashays perfectly timed to Lizzo’s clarion call to “blame it on [her] juice.” But looking back it’s hard not to credit Section C’s victory at least partially to Hornsby’s display in the final seconds of the performance, in which he ceremoniously drenched himself in half a gallon of grapefruit juice from the Barracks Road Harris Teeter as his sectionmates crowded around him. It made for a stunning show-stopper, with just the right amount of theatrical camp to cinch that year’s competition.

Hornsby weighed in with his thoughts on his first win two years ago. “This was the first time Dandelion occurred since the beginning of Covid, and we knew we needed to come up with a stunt to make it memorable. You can clearly see that there wasn’t much guidance as the song didn’t match up with any sort of ‘C’ theming, the costumes were nothing but colorful exercise clothes, and the dance was honestly a glorified Zumba dance. Nevertheless, that year all we needed was some grapefruit juice to secure the win. Still, I hesitate to recommend to future 1L sections that they should use grapefruit juice, as it burns the eyes and, unsurprisingly, it isn’t much fun playing softball covered in juice.”

2022’s Competition

Hornsby returned to Park 6 in fall 2022 not as a 1L, but as a peer advisor for the class of 2025’s Section H. And he brought a desire to continue his winning streak to the section as it prepped for Dandelion that year. Your humble author, along with John Henry Vansant ’25, was one of Section H’s softball captains last year tasked with choreographing the section’s routine. Hornsby’s influence was huge. We knew two things from his performance a year earlier. First, victory would come from taking things just a little too far; and second, having people get drenched in some sort of liquid at the end of the skit—grapefruit juice or not—was a game-changer.

And so our section gave its all with a rendition of Britney Spears’s “[Hit Me] Baby One More Time.” Inspired by Hornsby’s juice stunt, our section shotgunned non-alcoholic[2] beer during the final chorus and splattered it across ourselves and audience members. We also dialed up the camp by pretending to spank each other, dressing in drag, and having an uninterrupted ten seconds of hula hooping. It was glorious. Hornsby, as one of our peer advisors, had claimed victory a second time, this time by proxy.

“In my opinion, last year’s competition was the most chaotic of the three I’ve been involved with,” Hornsby said. “It clearly built on the success of Juice the year earlier, but it multiplied its effects by ten as the entire group ended up hosing down themselves (and the audience) with non-alcoholic beer. This is also where we see the beginning of the incorporation of drag elements, cohesive costumes, and pop icons’ influences in Dandelion, as this group masterfully channeled the talents of Ms. Spears.”

2023’s Competition

Hornsby was again assigned to serve as a peer advisor for Section H[3] this fall. Again, his PA section took the crown—making him possibly the first-ever UVA Law student to be involved with a winning Dandelion team three years in a row. Familiar themes came up in this year’s first-place performance.

“This year’s show was the most technically sound of the group, and it was the most cohesive in terms of concept, costuming, and choreography,” Hornsby said. “This year’s group brought together the best elements of the previous two shows, and they came up with the ingenious idea to channel Rihanna’s Super Bowl performance. I am probably most proud of this group as I wasn’t able to give them as much help as the previous two years, and they still managed to absolutely knock it out of the park.”

Looking back on his three years of involvement with Dandelion, Hornsby had a few parting words of wisdom for future 1L sections.

“You have to ‘commit to the bit,’ because the moment you let self-consciousness creep in, you’re sunk. The key to Dandelion is realizing that it’s absolutely ridiculous and that the purpose is to have as much fun with your section as possible.

---
bwj2cw@virginia.edi

---

[1] Executive Editor Andrew Allard ‘25 and myself both were in Section H last year, so clearly there is a culture of Dandelion winningness at the Law Weekly. As if we needed another reason for why our publication is so elite.

[2] We respected the institution of Dandelion so much that we didn’t even smuggle alcohol into the event. You’re welcome, NGSL.

[3] Who I’m sure are great and all, but not as fantastic as last year’s.

Which Law School Event Are You, Based on your Zodiac Sign?

---

Julia D'Rozario ’24
New Media Editor

Welcome back to the Law School Astrology series. Last time, you found out which niche area of the Law School you were, based on your zodiac sign.[1] If you’re wondering why it’s taken me a full year to write Part Two, it’s because I was mobbed by angry Sagittarians after Part One, and it’s taken me this long to build the courage to write again. With that said, keep reading for another woefully uninformed and deeply biased take: Which Law School event are you, based on your zodiac sign?

Gemini (May 21 – June 21)
Feb Club

Geminis are the party animals of the Zodiac, and Feb Club is the biggest (well, longest) party on the Law School calendar. Like Feb Club, you love to socialize, plan events, and are incredibly fun to be around. Also like Feb Club, you’re a mild drain on unsuspecting introverts in your radius. 

Cancer (June 22 – July 22)
Dandelion

Dandelion is a 1L rite of passage. Against your natural inhibitions (and lack of dance skills), you join with your new sectionmates in choreographing and performing a dance in front of what seems like a million strangers. Yes, it’s awkward at first, but you do it in the pursuit of bonding, and you get closer to your section in the process. Cancer, your amiability is your greatest strength. Like Dandelion, your warmth and friendliness mean that you tend to be the first to break the ice, put people at ease, and make friends. And people love you for it!

Leo (July 23 – August 22)
Bar Review

I’ve written before about Leos being hit-or-miss. Half the Leos I know are warm, funny, outgoing, wonderful people. The other half are basically the evil butler in The Aristocats who poisoned the milk and tried to send the kittens to Timbuktu—which is to say, villainous. There’s no in between. Bar Review is similarly hit-or-miss. It’s either a lovely time with friends or the type of night out that leaves you weary, fatigued, and full of regret for the rest of the weekend. Again, no in between.

Virgo (August 23 – September 22)
OGI

I recognize your innate goodness, your personal drive and meticulous organization, and I know that your positive qualities are likely to improve my life in the long run, just as OGI did. Having said that, both an alarming number of Virgos and an alarming number of OGI screeners have made me cry. And I’m still emotionally scarred years later.[2]

Libra (September 23 – October 22)
Foxfield

At every elementary school, there was inevitably a kid who had a crush on Spirit the horse. Think back to your elementary school years, and remember that individual. Now pull up their Facebook page. They’re a Libra, aren’t they?

Scorpio (October 23 – November 21)
Graduation

The reason we’re all here. Fulfilling. Incredible. Radiant. Joyful. Entirely unbiased.

Sagittarius (November 22 – December 21)
Journal Tryouts

At the risk of being mobbed again, I am doubling down. Like you all, journal tryouts are harrowing. Unacceptable. Taxing. Unnecessarily intense. Downright spooky. No further comments at this time.[3]

Capricorn (December 22 – January 19)
The Library Reception

The Library Reception is so underrated. Live music, snacks, and wine in the library? Yes please! My only gripe is that I didn’t even know this event existed until this year. Capricorn, like the bi-annual Library Reception, you’re a hidden gem. Capricorns get a bad rap for being “boring,” but I don’t think you’re boring at all. You’re just low-key—once people get to know you, they see how great you are.

Aquarius (January 20 – February 18)
The Libel Show

I’ve never known an Aquarius who wasn’t incredible, witty, creative, and hilarious. And sort of weird. But in a good way. Like the Libel Show, you’re eccentric and fun to be around. And, to repeat, sort of weird. In a good way.

Pisces (February 19 – March 20)
Barrister’s Ball

Pisceans are known for being the most sentimental of the zodiac. Your friend who gets misty-eyed after one drink and starts telling you that they will find you and befriend you and hang out with you in every lifetime? A Pisces. Well, Barrister’s Ball brings out the Pisces in us all. As the one event of the year that almost everyone attends, it’s one of the few events that overcomes the difficulty of our busy law schedules, putting you and all of your friends in the same room at the same time. It’s kind of beautiful if you think about it. Kind of makes you misty-eyed. Kind of makes you want to find your friends and love them and hang out with them in every lifetime…

Aries (March 21 – April 19)
3@3 Fall

I’m going to be so honest: Your energy is vibrant—unmatched, even—but it’s too much for me in December. Your unbridled zest for life, like the palpable post-exam joy that fills every corner of Rapture after Fall finals, exacerbates my seasonal depression.

Taurus (April 20 – May 20)
3@3 Spring

Spring 3@3 is the laid-back, wholesome counterpart to the ungovernable mass hysteria that is Fall 3@3. The sun is out, the weather is beautiful, and there is a sense of peace in the air. Taurus, like Spring 3@3, you are the very essence of harmony and comfort.

---
jkd2dd@virginia.edu

---

[1] D’Rozario, Julia, “Which Niche Area of the Law School Are You, Based on Your Zodiac Sign,” https://www.lawweekly.org/col/2022/9/21/which-niche-area-of-the-law-school-are-you-based-on-your-zodiac-sign.

[2] See id. (outlining my history of romantic anguish vis-à-vis Virgos).

[3]Disclaimer: If you read my last Astrology article you’ll know that I have one singular Sagittarius mortal enemy. I actually love every other Sagittarius I know. But the Law Weekly lets me publish my astrology opinions even when they’re unreasonable.

5 Signs Your Professor is a Ken

---

Andrew Allard '25
Executive Editor

If you took the initiative to enjoy the summer blockbuster experience that was Barbie, then you are no doubt wise beyond your years and will excel during this semester at law school and beyond. But, if you are like me, you may have nonetheless left the theater feeling bitter and disheartened. To see the Barbieland Supreme Court and to know just how far we are from that utopian tribunal was almost too much to bear. Could I return to the study of law with the burden of the patriarchy crushing me like a ConLaw textbook?

If this was weighing on me, I thought, then it was no doubt a daunting concern for the incoming class of 1Ls. Thankfully, as you will quickly learn, your 2L and 3L classmates are fountains of knowledge and advice. And the Law Weekly, among its many prestigious functions, serves as an archive for the very best of that advice. Think of it as a sort of Library of Alexandria for surviving three years at UVA Law.

Sadly, freeing you of your Barbie-induced yearning for a better world is beyond the earthly powers of even our most talented writers. Here, unlike in Barbieland, speaking truth to power is not a surefire way to save your friends and overthrow Kendom. But much like in Barbieland, the Kens of our world tend to make themselves known. So, without further ado, I give you your most important toolkit for surviving law school: How to identify Professor Ken.[1]

Pictured: Portrait of James E. Coleman, Jr. '51 (aka 'Horse Guy").
Photo Credit: Andrew Allard '25

#1: Your professor always cold calls you at the worst possible moment.

Ah, cold calls. A 1L’s greatest fear. Well, at least for the first week or so. After a few lectures, the eerie veil that shrouds cold calls in mystery tends to fade away. But even a seasoned law student can get caught off guard by an awkwardly timed cold call. This is a favorite of Professor Ken, who, much like Beach Ken, has horrible timing. Right when you’re daydreaming of important things, like your nightly dance party plans, that’s when you’ll get asked about poor Mrs. Palsgraf. This Ken trait is especially dangerous, so be on the lookout. Its known side effects include cellulite and irrepressible thoughts of death.

#2: Your professor has a weird obsession with horses.

“This can’t possibly be a real problem,” you say, your face contorting with fear. And you would be wrong. The Law School is home to horse racing fans, riders, and even that one weird portrait of some guy with a horse.[2] Here in Albemarle County alone, there are nearly 2,000 horses,[3] not to mention that Virginia ranks thirteenth among the states for its horse population.[4] So look out for the one Contracts professor that won’t stop talking about Bascom’s Folly. Probably a Ken.

#3: Your professor drives a Hummer or similar vehicle.

Okay, this one may be a bit of a cheap shot. Sorry to any Barbie Hummer drivers out there. But, we’ve got to look out for ourselves, and driving a Hummer just happens to have a high prevalence among Kens. So, if you’re crossing Massie Road on your way to class and nearly get decked by a Hummer, that’s probably Professor Ken on his way back to his Mojo Dojo Casa House. Go figure.

#4: Your professor walks into class on flat feet.

This one is tricky because it could mean that your professor is a Ken or a distressed Barbie—or if you’re really lucky, Weird Barbie. Nonetheless, you should be on the lookout for flat feet. Thinking your professor might be a Ken? Flat feet are a good way to confirm. Confident that your professor is a Barbie? Flat feet are a good indicator that you should get to know them better. They have clearly weathered some storms to get here and are likely to be a humbling source of wisdom.

#5: Your professor brags about their guitar skills.

If your professor keeps talking about his pick collection, or even worse, actually brings a guitar to the Law School, then that is your sign to run. You should probably pull the fire alarm or something. Flaunting one’s guitar skills shows some seriously dangerous levels of Ken-ergy. If you’re worried that come exam season this professor will want to push you around—well, they will.

So that’s it. Now you know how to find Professor Ken. Now if only someone could figure out how toavoid Professor Ken. Then of course, in Barbieland, there are no Professor Kens, so maybe the best first step is a trip to Venice Beach. Make sure to bring your rollerblades.

---
tya2us@virginia.edu

---

[1] Do not be mistaken: This is **not** a reference to Professor Abraham.

[2] My sources tell me that “horse guy” is none other than James E. Coleman, Jr. ’51. His portrait is located in Brown 126.

[3] U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 2017 Census of Agriculture: Albemarle County Profile (2017).

[4] Data Paddock, https://datapaddock.com/ (last visited Aug. 10, 2023).

OGI Screener from Hell

---

Ethan Brown ‘25
Features Editor

A few weeks ago, the class of 2025 participated in On-Grounds Interviews, a tradition as old as…well, I’m not exactly sure, but presumably as old as something that was born in the early 1990’s[1]. On-Grounds Interviewing, or OGI as it is affectionately known to UVA Law students,[2] is the annual ritual of law firms descending on Charlottesville[3] to recruit rising 2Ls for summer associate positions that will eventually (read: hopefully) turn into permanent offers after graduation.

OGI is basically sorority rush, insofar as that: (a) it involves a lot of small talk; (b) people make seemingly significant decisions based on snap judgments; and (c) it deserves to be the topic of a high-quality HBO Max documentary.[4] Each firm selects candidates to invite back for callbacks based partially on how they perform in a rapid fire 20-minute screener call, which typically involve attorneys from the firm asking only four or five questions of the student before moving on to the next applicant.

What questions do the firms ask? Luckily for anyone interested in private practice, every firm (in my experience, at least) asked the same few questions with shockingly little variation. After responding to them more than twenty times, my responses are permanently seared in my subconscious. I will never be able to hear the words “1L,” “litigation,” “internship,” or “meaningful” again without going into anaphylactic shock and writhing uncontrollably.

 But the temptation was strong, almost irrepressibly so in some interviews, to act up and go off-script. So, if you’re a 1L curious about getting your hands on an incredibly snarky cheat sheet for OGI next summer, read on. Remember to thank me when you don’t have to see OPP for a single counseling appointment this year because with these bad boys, you’re good to go until next July.

“Why are you interested in our firm?”

 Biglaw_lawyer69 said on Reddit that your office in my target market is “fine.” You’re high enough on the Vault rankings that I get enough of an ego boost from working for you but low enough that I’m not intimidated. Your logo and font choice are pretty solid. I also heard that you give out free merch to students who receive an offer, and my wireless phone charger broke last week.

“How have you liked living in Charlottesville?”

Insert thirty-second charming anecdote about how much you like: (a) Bodo’s; (b) hiking; or (c) alt-right rallies. Mention the “great food scene for a small city” thing because it’s the only thing anyone seems to know about Charlottesville.  Then quickly switch gears and add a fifteen-second pitch for why you want to live in an actual city after law school just in case your interviewer is suspicious of your decision to live in the mountains for three years.

“What made you want to go to law school?”

A crippling desire to bug my father just a little bit for always complaining about lawyers when I was growing up. An inability to let go of the prestige-chasing that has driven most of my young adult life. The joy of joining the same profession as such legends like Rudy Guiliani. The chance at being able to affix “esquire” to my email signature.

“We know that many firms have stellar opportunities. How are you keeping them all straight?”

 I’m not. Which one are you again?

“What is your least favorite part about law school?”

Finals are stressful![5]

“Do you have an idea of what you’d like to practice?”

 I’m not sure about corporate/transactional work because I still do not really know what a “contract” is. I guess that leaves litigation and regulatory work, but I know those are extraordinarily competitive slots in my target market of interest. You see my predicament?

“Where do you see yourself in ten years?”

 I dunno, dead from climate change probably?

“What are you looking for in a firm?”

I’m looking for a dynamic, team-driven environment with opportunities for personal growth, professional development, and meaningful social connection. I love being a part of something bigger than myself to provide high-quality work to important clients—and I’m not afraid to put in the work or get my hands dirty in the process. I want to learn from the best and hit the ground running from day one of my summer program.[6]

“Do you have any questions for us?”

Actually, yes, I do—how much does the firm consider the quality of my questions when evaluating my candidacy? Because I feel like anything I ask you sounds unbelievably trite, and you can’t possibly enjoy answering the same question of “wHy DiD yOU choOsE tHiS fIRm?” twenty times over. But to cover my bases, I’ll ask anyway. And I promise to look unbelievably enraptured when you say you chose your firm for its unique culture, strong work opportunities, and exceptional investment in associate development!

---
bwj2cw@virginia.edu

---

[1] For example, our elderly EIC.

[2] It is begrudgingly known as OGI to every person outside of UVA Law who instead refers to the recruiting process as On-Campus Interviewing (OCI).

[3] Yes, I know OGI is virtual now but that really doesn’t fit the metaphor as well.

[4] I recently watched Bama Rush, and phew. She needs a redo.

[5] It’s funny because I actually said this during a screener. Good job, Ethan. What original content!

[6]I’ll let the reader decide whether or not this is AI-generated.

Let's Mock and Roll: Mock Trial Greets New Members

---

Brooke Boyer '26
Staff Editor

On September 5, UVA Law’s Mock Trial Association kicked off the year with a general interest meeting for prospective new members in Slaughter 292. Students learned about what Mock Trial is, its numerous benefits, and what to expect as a member, while eating Chick-fil-A nuggets to their heart’s content. If you didn’t make it to the meeting but are nonetheless curious about Mock Trial, no worries! Read on to learn more about what the organization looks like at UVA Law.

Vice President of Membership Malia Takei ’25 began the meeting by diving into an explanation of what being a member of the Mock Trial Association at UVA Law entails. She described it as an opportunity to “play lawyer” in fake trials prior to actually becoming one. Members build cases in a team consisting of four advocates, establish the facts of the case, file necessary pre-trial motions, make opening statements, and make legal arguments and present them before a “judge.” They also object, and utilize admissible experts, witnesses, and exhibits to back up those arguments. Finally, members conclude their arguments with a closing statement. The trials, which follow the rules of evidence and case law, closely emulate the real thing.

If you’re a confused 1L like me and unsure of the distinction between Mock Trial and Moot Court, don’t fret. Malia made sure to clarify the key differences between the two. While Moot Court takes place at the appellate level in front of a panel of judges, Mock Trial takes place at the trial level with an audience of a single judge and jury. Another important difference is that Moot Court is best described as competitive legal research and writing which includes solely disputes of law, while Mock Trial is essentially competitive story-telling that includes disputes of both fact and law. Finally, Moot Court is most often concerned with civil procedure and constitutional law, while Mock Trial involves the fields of evidence, tort, and criminal law.

Next, Malia combated the widespread myth that Mock Trial is solely for those interested in pursuing litigation. The organization is undoubtedly helpful for those who aspire towards careers primarily in the courtroom because of the hands-on, practical trial experience it provides. However, law students of all interests will reap the benefits that Mock Trial has to offer. It teaches trial advocacy, allows members to hone their public speaking skills and overcome the intimidation of speaking in front of an audience, and strengthens the skill of persuasive story-telling. It provides invaluable experience for students wanting to enter either the public or private sector. 

Mock Trial is also a wonderful way to make new friends! Since members must work together in teams to build and support arguments in trial, teammates are able to bond throughout the process. Aside from meetings and competitions, mixers and other social events are hosted as a way for members to get to know one another outside of the courtroom and in a more personable setting.

New members do not have to worry about not having gained experience in mock trial at their high schools or undergraduate universities. In fact, absolutely no experience is required before becoming a member of the Mock Trial Association. The four mandatory bootcamp sessions led by Army JAG school coaches are designed to teach members everything they need to know before the Skills Showcase, including pretrial and courtroom etiquette on September 13, statements on September 18, direct and cross examinations on September 27, and evidence on October 4. The JAG coaches, who are themselves law students, guide new members through each step and answer questions along the way.

After completing each of the four bootcamp sessions, new members will be able to show off their newly gained knowledge at a Skills Showcase on October 13 and 14. It serves as an opportunity to solidify the skills learned at bootcamp and proudly put them into practice. The Mock Trial Association also competes in a myriad of tournaments each year. The Cavalier Classic Intramural Tournament takes place at UVA Law and is open to all members. However, additional extramural tournaments are available for 2Ls, 3Ls, and other members who have fully completed the Skills Showcase. In the past, members have traveled to tournaments in Washington D.C., New York City, Houston, and Puerto Rico.

Although Mock Trial is a central activity for many students at the Law School, President Anthony Truisi ’25 emphasized that members can make it as much or as little of a time commitment as is needed amid busy class schedules, involvement in other organizations, and the hustle and bustle of everyday life. The organization is meant to be low pressure and not intended to add undue stress to already-full agendas. Participation in extra tournaments is therefore not required (but if you have the time, it’s a great experience!).

That covers it! The registration deadline for Mock Trial unfortunately passed on September 11. However, if you have further questions about becoming involved in the future, reach out to Malia at nfm4de@virginia.edu or Anthony at fmh6ns@virginia.edu.

---
ews6tm@virginia.edu 

I Know What You Did Last Summer

---

Stephen Foss '25
Social Media Editor

“Oh my gosh, so good to see you! How was your summer? Nice, yeah, that’s so great. Yeah. Oh, okay, and do you know what you’re doing next summer? Oh my gosh, that is seriously so great.” This quote is not directly attributable to anyone, but it was overheard in the Law School hallways and shouted into ears at Bar Review enough over  the past three weeks to last a lifetime. This article will serve as a send-off (until this time next year) for the overdone, beaten-to-death, exhausted phrase: “What did you do this summer?”

Gabriel Mahoney ’25 spent his summer as an intern in the criminal section at the Washington, D.C. Office of the Attorney General. Mahoney spent most of his time doing legal research and drafting motions for criminal cases, producing internal memos, and helping with investigations.

Mackenzie Kubik ’25 also spent her summer in the nation’s capital, where Kubik was a judicial intern on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia where she spent most of her time, “observing court proceedings, doing legal research and writing, and gossiping with my co-interns (not necessarily in that order).” 

Nolan Edmondson ’25 worked as a 1L Summer Associate for Kasowitz Benson Torres in New York City. “I was staffed on several research matters relating to securities litigation, labor and employment law in New York State, and New York City tenant's rights.” Edmondson said.  “I had the opportunity to be second-chair for an organization that specializes in representing Manhattan tenants in actions against their landlords and wrote a memo on the possible challenges to a particular landlord's defense for rent back payments. That memo was eventually turned into a motion to dismiss.”

Emily Dioguardo ’25 worked for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Washington Field Office. “I was in the enforcement unit, which meant that I would conduct initial interviews and draft the charge of discrimination for the potential charging parties. I would then monitor that party’s case until it either got closed or passed on to an investigator.”  When Dioguardo was not working, she was, “grabbing a bagel from Call Your Mother, whining about cover letters, or using my mom’s Starbucks app to grab coffee.”

Henry Nowland ’25 worked as a judicial intern in the chambers of the Honorable Judge Lance Africk on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in New Orleans. Nowland worked closely with  Judge Africk and his clerks to draft memos and court orders, and attended most of the trials and hearings that were held during his time in chambers.

In addition to their summer jobs, four of these five 2L’s also ran the gauntlet that is OGI. Further, these generous and all-knowing 2Ls were kind enough to share their wisdom with you, dear reader.

Although OGI may get a bad reputation, not all reviews were negative. “Interviewing was much less painful than I thought it would be!” Dioguardo said. “OGI itself is difficult in that the days are long, and you have to be ‘on’ 24/7. But I found most of the interviews really enjoyable (for context, I love talking about myself).”

When asked about his experience, Mahoney shared, “The interview process was overwhelming at times but also a little bit funny. You get pretty good at answering the same couple of questions in a two-week period.”

As the saying goes, different strokes for different folks[1]. To that end, Kubik emphasized the importance of showcasing what makes you different. “I spent most of my time in interviews talking about a fellowship I did after college where I studied tea. I would recommend trying to highlight anything in your resume that might be unusual, even if those experiences aren’t at all related to law. Attorneys are (usually) human too, and just like the girls you take to Mission[2] on your hinge dates, they’re tired of hearing how you ‘actually have a real impact on politics’ as a Hilltern.™” When asked to offer a “must-do” to current 1Ls, Kubik was quick to add, “Take career advice from the Law Weekly.”

 Despite being told by His Majesty OPP to cut it, Mahoney kept a line about how he raises chickens on his resumé, “I think it was brought up in nearly every interview. It’s obviously the most transferable skill out there to being a junior associate, so it seemed pretty clear to me why it dominated the conversation during my interviews.”

In the same vein of committing OPP taboos, Nowland shared that he did OGI while on vacation in South America. “I took a callback from the floor of a hostel in Suriname. If it remains fully virtual in the years to come, take advantage.”

---
css7aj@virginia.edu

---

[1] My thanks to Noland Edmondson ’25 for this insightful mantra that he, and he alone, coined.

[2] It is unclear if this was a shot at the author of this article or single people in general, but at the Law Weekly we do not condone date shaming.

Presenting Your Law Weekly E-Board

---

---

Monica Sandu ‘24
Production Editor

It’s that time of year again. You’ve no doubt heard more welcome messages by now than you know what to do with. As the last sun-soaked days of summer give way to the pumpkin spice kaleidoscope of fall, students roam the halls of the Law School once more. And, as Production Editor of UVA Law’s oldest and most beloved student newspaper, I would like to also welcome everyone back for another year. While such an article would usually be in the jurisdiction of the Editor-in-Chief, the Law Weekly is thankfully not bound by such trivial matters as the non-delegation doctrine.

For many of you, these are the very first steps on your journey to a law career. Welcome to the LawHoo family! To those who have finished their first year and have returned in triumph, welcome back! You now have standing to sue in the Court of Petty Appeals.[1] For those like myself who now enter their final year, this is a time of jubilation. Congratulations, and welcome back one last time! For those who have come from around the country and around the world, welcome to Charlottesville! We hope you find a home here.

If this is your first introduction to the Law Weekly, stick around! The Law Weekly is UVA Law’s weekly student newspaper. New issues come out each Wednesday, covering everything from Law School updates and current events to humor, satire, and the prestigious Court of Petty Appeals (COPA), where law students air their most serious grievances to this school’s most brilliant legal writers. Whether you read for our journalism, our world-renowned collection of professor quotes, or just for the Sudoku, the Law Weekly has something for everybody. 

Interested in getting involved? Our editorial board is always open to new members! All you have to do is attend three meetings. With many articles being passion projects[2] and others being fantastic opportunities to get involved in the law school events and the community as a whole, there is always something new to write about. And the best part of being on the Law Weekly editorial board? Free pizza.[3] So much that we don’t know what to do with it; we literally give whole boxes away. That heavenly smell on the second floor of Slaughter Hall which sings its siren song at 5:30pm every Monday? It comes from the Law Weekly office (SL279), and you’re invited!

To all 1Ls, 2Ls, 3Ls, LLMs, faculty, staff, and everyone else who is part of the Law School community, the Law Weekly would like to extend the warmest welcome.[4] While the coming year will certainly bring with it challenges, it will also bring times of joy. Everyone is here to help you succeed. From all of us at the Law Weekly, we hope you have a fantastic school year!

P.S. Did I mention we have free pizza?

---
ms7mn@virginia.edu

---

Presenting Your Law Weekly E-Board:

Editor-in-Chief Nikolai Morse is a 3L hailing from Mainz, Germany, by way of sunny Illinois. He graduated from William & Mary in 2015, and after some number of years spent in the finance industry, he came to UVA Law to pursue his true passion: being a corporate lawyer. Nikolai spends most of his free time playing pool in the VIJIL/VLR office, doing yardwork around his home, or enjoying the outdoors in Cville.

Production Editor Monica Sandu is a 3L from Blacksburg, Virginia. She graduated from William & Mary in 2021 with a double major in International Relations and French and has previously served as the Law Weekly’s cartoonist and co-executive editor. She has a passion for crochet and an encyclopedic knowledge of the Eurovision Song Contest.[5]

Features Editor Ethan Brown is a 2L from Northern Virginia. He graduated from William & Mary in 2021 and worked as a legal assistant before law school. In addition to his fantastic satire writing at the Law Weekly, Ethan enjoys long-distance running, getting way too excited about trying new IPAs, and baking tarts and citrus custards.

Executive Editor Andrew Allard is a 2L from Seacoast New Hampshire. He graduated from George Washington University in 2019 and worked as a consultant in Northern Virginia. When he’s not hounding editors to work on the Law Weekly, Andrew is probably listening to NPR or still trying to learn how to pour latte art (please be patient).

Managing Editor Garrett Coleman is a 2L who was born and raised in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to writing for the Law Weekly, he competes in moot court, where he can enjoy having a captive audience, and plays much softball, considering himself to be a 75th percentile player. Outside of legal work and extracurriculars, he enjoys hiking and backpacking, his favorite destination being Nevada Falls in Yosemite.

---

[1] It is a long-standing rule of COPA Procedure that 1Ls always lose (unless it is funnier for them to win).

[2] Last year’s co-executive editor Emeritus dedicated his last semester of law school to writing a series of in-depth articles about different animals. [Citation]

[3] Terms and Conditions apply.

[4] Almost as warm as the fresh pizza we have at every meeting.

[5] She also enjoys writing about herself in the third person.