Spotlight 11/1/17

Virginia Law Weekly November 1, 2017

The Law Weekly reached out to affinity group leaders to write for us in a feature we are calling “Spotlight.” Our goal is to give leaders a regular platform to start conversations about issues they are facing, to reflect on the events of August 11th and 12th, and to educate the UVa Law community about their diverse experiences so that we can become better allies to our fellow classmates. If you or your organization would like to be featured, please reach out to us at editor@lawweekly.org.

Elyse Moy '18
(she/her/hers)
President of Women of Color

The term “women of color” is often defined in the negative to describe all women who are not “white.” But this definition, despite its seeming broadness, is inadequate. It does not capture those who are white-passing but do not identify as such. And trying to define this term in the positive raises even more challenges. In the discourse of race, gender, and ethnicity, “women of color” carries several different definitions. For some, only certain Asians are included in this umbrella category. Meanwhile, the U.S. Census Bureau considers “Hispanic” an ethnicity, not a race. In each of these cases, these distinctions are imposed upon individuals. They are based upon an outsider’s perception of identity, ignoring the lived experiences of those who are so labeled. For those who do not fit within the white-black, male-female binaries, and for those whose identity is not readily apparent, such mislabeling can have detrimental effects on one’s self-perception and on establishing truly intersectional solidarity.

Intersectionality is a similarly important concept that is hard to define. In short, intersectionality recognizes that people hold multiple identities. It recognizes that one cannot examine gender in a vacuum—one must also account for aspects such as race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, and much more. It also draws attention to how detrimental monolithic perceptions of identity can be. Our laws and discourse often only address one aspect of identity, while overlooking the overlapping of identities. In doing so, we fail to properly address the reality of discrimination, which operates across gender, racial, and class lines, and with disproportionate force. This oversight allows systemic injustice and inequality to persist.

One way in which we hope to dismantle systemic injustice is through solidarity. Too often, the burdens of oppression and the responsibility for education falls on the shoulders of Black and Brown America. It is time for allies—male, female, and gender nonbinary; white allies and allies of color—to step up in solidarity. Women of Color seeks to provide one such platform for diverse students of UVa Law to come together and speak out against inequality; however, we should also recognize that solidarity does not necessarily ensure unanimity. Sharing one or even several aspects of our identity does not mean that we share the same experiences, the same values, or the same goals. Intersectionality is one tool to highlight and celebrate the differences among us in a productive manner, and solidarity requires constant negotiation of these differences.

In these ways, the intersectionality of our organization is both our challenge and our strength. Again, it is difficult to define exactly what Women of Color is because of our diversity of identities and values. But it is also our strength because we represent a multitude of viewpoints and thus can highlight many different issues.

When Women of Color was revived two years ago by Dana Wallace, she was not sure if there would be enough interest in the organization to keep it going, but her hope for the organization was that it could be as vibrant and strong as it once was. She envisioned creating a supportive space in which women of color could express themselves. She sought to connect students to the resources they needed to do so. After Wallace graduated, we passed the helm to Jasmine Esmailbegui, and continued to work towards achieving that goal. Today, Women of Color is composed of approximately 100 women and men of various backgrounds and races.

As a relatively new organization, Women of Color has focused on growth, visibility, and accessibility. Women of Color tries to plan and get involved in as many events and projects as possible, so that people know a supportive community exists at the Law School and that there is an outlet where people can highlight issues important to them. Women of Color has worked to promote the equality of all women by highlighting the unique struggles faced by women of color. To do so, we have hosted guest speakers who discussed how our criminal justice system and public health systems disproportionately underserve women of color. We hosted law firms and public interest lawyers who could speak to the specific experiences women of color face in the workplace; and we hosted several social events for our members to meet each other and other affinity groups. For example, after 9/11, Women of Color held a discussion series that sought to educate the public about Muslim communities and dispel harmful misunderstandings. And just last year, we hosted a panel that examined the struggles women of color faced in prison and reentry.

Our Constitution holds that the purpose of Women of Color is:

[t]o provide support to the diverse population of women at the law school; to promote the welfare of its members through educational, professional, cultural, and social programs; and to provide a forum for the discussion of issues affecting women of color in the law school and the University community as a whole.

As evidenced by this broad language, Women of Color aims to be an inclusive organization. Regardless of your true pronoun or gender identity, we encourage all those who support the goals and values of Women of Color to join. I am hesitant to further define “Women of Color” and thus unilaterally impose an identity upon our organization. Instead, recognizing that identity is an intensely personal inquiry, I hope to empower students to reclaim it for themselves. I reiterate that Women of Color exists primarily to unite and to serve the students at UVa Law. We hope to amplify the voices of our members and to provide a community through which students can express themselves. And we hope to provide a space through which students questioning their identities and their role in activism can explore how they can better serve their communities. As the students and society changes, so too I hope Women of Color will evolve to address their needs.

---

eam8cf@virginia.edu

This Month in SBA

Virginia Law Weekly October 25, 2017

Toccara Nelson '19
(she/her/hers)
SBA Secretary

Hello!

Welcome to the new monthly SBA article. We’ve decided to do something a little bit different this year. Instead of using this article to conduct a general discussion of what’s going on at the SBA, we want to use this forum to address student concerns shared in our suggestion box. The box is located in Scott Commons right next to one of the student mailrooms. Students can provide their concerns or suggestions anonymously or share their identity if interested in a direct follow-up response from the SBA.

We encourage students to share their suggestions or concerns through our suggestion box initiative. Members of our student community have amazing ideas and significant concerns about improving the law school’s programming, culture of diversity and inclusion, professional resources, and more. We hope to implement these student ideas at a higher rate through this initiative in order to improve UVA Law’s environment for students.

The SBA hopes that our Unity Social on Thursday, October 26 will be a start in facilitating a better atmosphere of learning for students. The SBA’s socials generally have a goal of bringing students together; however, this Thursday’s social has a special emphasis on promoting unity and supporting marginalized students at the law school. The goal is for all members of our community to come together in the spirit of openness and change, and to take responsibility for the environment on our campus.

While the SBA hopes the social will open doors for students of all backgrounds to engage with each other, we recognize that this event can only be a starting point for ongoing change. The SBA recognizes that this event cannot stand alone in promoting inclusion and hopes to continue implementing programming in the future to foster a positive environment. Furthermore, the SBA would like to recognize that there has been an undue burden placed on marginalized members of our community to make their own space at UVA Law. We want to encourage students of all backgrounds to take responsibility for promoting an inclusive environment in our community by attending the programming that is provided by the huge variety of diverse student groups at UVa Law. We hope that the Unity Social can be but one step in this ongoing effort.

The SBA is committing itself to increasing programming that supports marginalized students and to creating an environment in which all students feel comfortable and empowered at UVa Law. The SBA would also like to encourage all members of our community to step up and combat prejudice and bias at the law school and beyond. The SBA plans to organize meetings with student representatives from all organizations during the spring semester to promote a better environment for diverse students within UVa Law. Again, these initiatives are just starting points in improving our campus community so that all students, not just those who are from non-marginalized communities, are placed in the best position to succeed at UVa Law. We encourage students to offer feedback and suggestions regarding how SBA can further promote inclusion at our school.

Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns about our future initiatives through our suggestion box, or email sbasecretary@virginia.edu or sbapresident@virginia.edu. Thank you!

---

tmn2aa@virginia.edu

Hot Bench: Hannah Fraher '19

Virginia Law Weekly October 25, 2017

1. Have you ever had a nickname? What?

Hannah Banana, and unfortunately, Hannah Montana.

2. What is your favorite word?

Sad! (used facetiously and sarcastically)

3. Where did you grow up?

Tampa, Florida. The best (and craziest) state in the Union.

4. What’s the best meal you’ve ever had?

My favorite meal of all time consists of fried chicken, baked beans, corn on the cob, biscuits, and potato salad.

5. If you could meet one celebrity, who would it be and why?

Condoleezza Rice. She is my idol in so many ways and I would be honored to even just shake her hand.

6. If you owned a sports team, what/who would be the mascot?

My cat Al, because he is the best (and cutest) thing on this earth. You can follow him on Instagram at Manx_the_Cat.

7. If you had to pick one song to play non-stop in the background of your life, what would it be?

Taylor Swift’s “Shake it Off.”

8. If you were a superhero, what would your superpower be?

The ability to stop time when I sleep so I don’t end up wasting my whole afternoon with my four-hour ~naps~.

9. What’s something you wish you’d known about law school before coming to UVA?

How important softball is. I could have stocked up on cute knee-high socks before getting here.

10. What did you have for breakfast this morning?

I’m addicted to Special K Red Berries cereal. I have a bowl every morning for breakfast, and sometimes a second one for dinner.

11. What’s your most interesting two-truths-and-a-lie? (And what’s the lie?)

I had purple hair.

I’ve run a 5k.

I once got locked in a porta-potty.

Lie: I’ve run a 5k. I don’t run. At all.

12. If you could live anywhere, where would it be?

If Florida had everything I want and need in life I would happily spend my entire life there, but unfortunately it does not. I plan to live in D.C. after law school, which will be a great adventure.

13. What’s the best (or worst!) PG-rated pick-up line you’ve ever heard?

The best pickup line is classic and simple—”Can I buy you a drink?”

14. What’s the best gift you’ve ever received?

I can’t think of just one, because it’s the little things that people do for no special reason that are the greatest gifts.

15. If the Law School had yearbook awards, what would you want to win?

Most likely to be that annoying person who posts too much in the class Facebook group.

16. If you could know one thing about your future, what would it be?

What job I will have this summer. While the nOGI life was fun, it is a bit stressful not to have even applied for a position yet.

17. Backstreet Boys or *NSYNC?

It’s tearing up my heart that I have to pick just one! I almost cried when *NSYNC reunited and performed at the VMAs so I guess I’ll have to betray half of my heart and pick them.

18. What’s the longest you’ve gone without sleep and why?

I once went on a three-day no-sleep bender which was fueled by copious amounts of coffee and the unfortunate pressure of having to write an entire research paper right before it was due. *Note to my law school professors: I swear this wasn’t for any of your classes.*

19. What’s your favorite thing to do in Charlottesville?

I have gone to twenty-two of the thirty-three wineries on the Monticello Wine Trail in the fourteen months I’ve lived here. I think that speaks for itself. #30in3

20. If you could make one law that everyone had to follow, what would it be?

I’m a fan of less regulation in general, so instead of making a new law, I would require that everyone has to follow the current law that the left lane of a highway is for passing, not traveling, and would impose steep fines for people who don’t follow it.

Court of Petty Appeals: UVa Law Students v. Anonymous Inconsiderate Parker

Virginia Law Weekly October 25, 2017

The Court of Petty Appeals is the highest appellate jurisdiction court at UVa Law. The Court has the power to review any and all decisions, conflicts, and disputes that arise involving, either directly, indirectly, or tangentially, the Law School or its students. The Court is comprised of four associate justices and one Chief Justice. Opinions shall be released periodically and only in the official court reporter: the Virginia Law Weekly. Please email a brief summary of any and all conflicts to jmg3db@virginia.edu.

UVa Law Students v. Anonymous Inconsiderate Parker,

697 U.Va. 150 (2017)

HOPKIN, J. announced the opinion of a unanimous Court.

Dumbass parks his priceless Honda Accord to protect its resale valuePhoto courtesy of Kim Hopkin. — Dumbass parks his priceless Honda Accord to protect its resale value
Photo courtesy of Kim Hopkin.

Today’s opinion considers appropriate remedies against a certain, anonymous1 D3 parker (hereinafter referred to as “Inconsiderate”) who insists on double parking every day. Adhering to the Goluboff Suggestion, the Court notes it has jurisdiction because the plaintiffs and defendant are law students, and the area is adjacent to the Law School. As much as the Court would like to see criminal charges brought against this delinquent,2 the case before us is a civil suit arising out of the tort of intentional irritation. While this tort is related to the intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), it does not involve a horse or a “weak female fainting,” making IIED unavailable for plaintiffs.3 Instead, the tort at issue here is intentional irritation, which is whatever 1Ls put in their generic torts outline plus an element of douchebaggery, which this Court has frequently recognized. See Student Body of UVa v. Thimpson Sacher, 697 U.Va. 100 (2017). The trial court was correct in determining that plaintiffs met all the elements for this cause of action, but erred in dismissing plaintiffs’ right to damages when enjoining future use of the D3 lot by the defendant.

The central facts are not in dispute; indeed the Court’s honorable Justices have been complaining about this on their GroupMe for weeks.4 Inconsiderate consistently parks his silver Honda Accord for his morning classes on the north side of the parking lot with his rear passenger-side tire over the line.5 After conducting a stakeout that lasted longer than the Court is proud to admit, I determined that Inconsiderate is not, in fact, chronically late but rather saunters in after purposefully parking his car in such a way. In the absence of an adequate excuse, Inconsiderate had a duty to park correctly and breached that duty with his douchebaggery, directly causing irritation of other students and damaging them by reserving a parking spot solely for one of his tires. Furthermore, the pompous disregard shown by defendant when he chose a spot close to the front of the parking lot means the trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding the defendant liable of douchebaggery and at fault by clear and convincing evidence.

However, in the interest of fairness, a review of the procedural posture is warranted. Upon witnessing the intentional irritation tort, the Court considered all options and chose to rally the people to confront this hooligan. Unfortunately, all the students approached “had a lot of work to do” and were “really worried about the Court’s fixation on this issue.” So Justice Hopkin, in her individual capacity as a 2L, decided the best option was to commence a class action suit.6 The trial court, while certainly sympathetic, dismissed the damages portion of the case because it “isn’t that scared” of Justice Hopkin and, apparently, doesn’t take bribes.7 The Court of Petty Appeals granted certiorari to remedy this decision. It would have been a summary reversal,8 but the Court decided to take this chance to fully shame both the trial court and Inconsiderate per Professor Joseph Fore’s Treatise on Legal Methods and Rules (publication forthcoming). (“#Appellatetwitter”).

The Court has considered appropriate remedies for a similar issue in Ingles, et al. v. Parkers of Arlington Blvd. and City of Charlottesville, 251 U.Va. 900 (2017). (Plaintiffs “may bring a suit in our lower courts for money damages and injunctive relief . . . Learn to park.”) Therefore, damages are available. This Court, unwilling to trust the traitors in the lower courts, will determine the appropriate amount of damages without remanding. Since the defendant has continually used two parking spaces under the auspices of one parking pass, special compensatory damages are assessed at $576 (the price of an additional D3 parking pass).9 Additionally, plaintiffs have asked for $576 in pain and suffering damages as they feel a parking spot has been stolen from them. The Court is giving plaintiffs the full amount because the Court feels it is fair.10

Furthermore, the element of douchebaggery lends the case to punitive damages. This is allowed under Davies v. Wednesday Keg,12 U.Va. 781 (2015) (“It doesn’t get much more petty than being punitive”) and Smith v. Wade, 461 U.S. 30 (1983) (Reckless indifference can support a finding of punitive damages without proof of malicious intent). Since the Supreme Court has determined that entering punitive damages higher than ten times the amount of compensatory damages violates the Constitution, plaintiffs request $11,520. See State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (2003) (“[F]ew awards exceeding a single-digit ratio between punitive and compensatory damages . . . will satisfy due process”). However, the Supreme Court’s perception of fairness and equity does not bind us. We have the inherent authority to decide for ourselves what is punitive and what is fair. Therefore, we approve punitive damages in the amount of $15,000. The Court takes this chance to restate one of its cardinal and timeless principles: Learn to park.

With regard to the prospective relief granted by the trial court, the Court thinks a mere award of damages doesn’t go far enough. This Court is charged with protecting law students from the continuation of tortious behavior, and we don’t take that responsibility lightly. The Court determined that enjoining D3 lot parking while leaving Blue lot parking available to the defendant would only protect a subclass of law students. Though not facially discriminatory towards financially responsible law students who choose to save money by schlepping a half mile, it would have a disparate impact by forcing only Blue lot parkers to endure his tortious behavior. We, therefore, enjoin Inconsiderate from parking in both the D3 and Blue lots. Inconsiderate has other options, including parking on Arlington Boulevard or Millmont Street taking other forms of transportation,11 or never traveling again.

As for Inconsiderate’s claim that Justice Hopkin should recuse herself from this case due to her passionate involvement, the Court refers to Rule of Petty Procedure 1: “We do what we want.”

MANN, J. concurring.

While Justice Hopkin nobly takes on the burden of being regarded as histrionic in her opinion, I fully share her outrage and applaud her restraint. Passion is not to be minimized as a source of judicial purpose, and certainly there is nothing that rouses the passions of competent motorists more than the errant parker. It is hard to describe the outright disregard for parallel lines that Inconsiderate has perpetrated, not to mention the subsequent inability of anyone to park alongside, or for that matter, down the continuing column of spaces. Such wanton recklessness12 of the repeated acts of crooked parking cannot be tolerated by this Court.

Though I agree with the court that the punishment fits the tort, Inconsiderate should thank his lucky stars to only be facing a fine of $15,000 and a parking lot ban. Had Justice Hopkin or I caught him in the act, he would be followed continuously by two bell-ringing banshees yelling “Shame!” Plus the other stuff.

GOLDMAN, C.J. concurs.

Honestly, if we didn’t let Justice Hopkin write this “unanimous” opinion, she would have quit the paper, and then we wouldn’t have anyone in charge of getting us pizza for our Monday editing meetings.13 Choices were made.

---

knh3zd@virginia.edu

1 Because I don’t actually know his name. Since no one argued the appropriateness of public shaming, the Court saves that question for another day.

2 I had Professor Bonnie for Crim, so I’m not clear on how the Model Penal Code factors into this, but I do know that Inconsiderate is insane. #FreeJoyBaker

3 See Abraham v. Hopkin Torts Final Exam, and companion case Abraham v. Hopkin Torts II Final Exam (“My understanding of why she signed up for another semester is on par with her understanding of basic torts concepts.”).

4 Mostly Justice Hopkin, but other Justices have responded with variations of “ruff stuff” and “Kim, really, you need to find a hobby.”

5 Like, wayyyy over the line.

6 You would be surprised how easy it is to have students sign things in exchange for free food. Actually, you probably aren’t. We’ve seen liberals at Fed Soc events just for the Chick-fil-A.

7 Justice Hopkin will be bringing this up in her PR class next semester for vindication.

8 Because Professor Jeffries insists those are the most insulting.

9 University of Virginia Parking and Transportation, Parking and Transportation Service Rates: 2017/2018 Service Rates, http://www.virginia.edu/parking/information/rates.html#permits.

10 I think this is allowed. And if it’s not, it should be.

11 This Court WILL protect bicycling commuter students if he chains his bike incorrectly. Just let CoPA know at editor@lawweekly.org.

12 There can’t possibly be a soul stupid enough to park so badly with negligence alone.

13 Which happen every Monday at 6 PM in SL279!

Spotlight 10/18/17

Virginia Law Weekly October 18, 2017

If you or your organization would like to be featured, please reach out to us at editor@lawweekly.org.

Kendall Burchard '19
(she/her/hers)
Vice President, Virginia Law Women

Jeannette Rankin, the first woman elected to a national office, began her tenure in the House of Representatives exactly one hundred years ago. Since then, 319 women have represented their states and districts in the House, Senate, or both.1 In our current Congress, 105 of the 535 members of Congress are women. Twenty-one serve in the Senate, and eighty-four serve in the House. Sixty-one women of color have served in Congress to date, and thirty-eight are serving in 2017. In high school, boys and girls report almost an equal interest in politics.2 Then in college, statistically, women’s political ambitions begin to fade.3 Years later, although most women are equally likely to have the same amount of relevant political experience in “feeder” careers as their male colleagues, only 57 percent of women feel qualified to run, as opposed to 73 percent of men.4

The equalizer? Encouragement.

Women respond just as positively as men when encouraged to run for office. But they are less likely to receive this encouragement than their male counterparts, starting in college and extending far beyond.5 Allow me to make up for some lost time—YOU should run. And on Saturday, we’ll tell you how.

Virginia Law Women is excited to partner with the Women in Policy at the Batten School of Public Policy, Women of Color, Feminist Legal Forum, Virginia Law Republicans, and Virginia Law Democrats to bring Running Start’s “Elect Her” to Caplin Pavilion on October 21 at 1 PM. Elect Her is a three-hour crash course in how to run for office and how to support those who run. Last spring, VLW and Women in Policy welcomed founder and CEO of Running Start Susannah Wellford ’98 back to the Law School to address barriers to women running for office. Wellford first asked how many in attendance had considered running for office. As hands began to go up, Wellford’s shock quickly gave way to excitement. “I’ve never had this happen,” she said. “I’ve never had so many women in a room admit they wanted to run. We’ve got a lot to talk about.”

The discussion continues on Saturday. Wellford and her team have specifically tailored Elect Her’s curriculum to help an enthusiastic audience recognize opportunities to serve their communities in the future. After brief introductions, the day will include a crash course in networking, fundraising, and campaigning. After a campaign simulation, we’ll hear from a panel of those who have done it—Delegate Marcia Price, Commonwealth’s Attorney Shannon Taylor, Future Majority Project Director at the Republican State Leadership Committee Neri Martinez, and Delegate Lashrecse Aird will offer a first-hand account on what it’s like to run for office and what it means to serve the public. The panelists will focus on what it is like to run for office as a woman—not as a member of a particular political party. This a bipartisan event intended for everyone, regardless of political persuasion, sex, gender identity, race, ethnicity, religion, or other classification.

When will there be enough women in Congress and in other elected offices? To borrow from Justice Ginsburg’s refined wisdom: “When I’m sometimes asked when will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court] and I say, ‘When there are nine,’ people are shocked. But there’d been nine men, and nobody’s ever raised a question about that.”

You look like a politician, and we’d love to see you run. Get your name on the ballot. Join us on Saturday.

Check in for Elect Her starts at 12:30 PM on Saturday, October 21 in Caplin Pavilion. Events begin sharply at 1 PM. Programming concludes at 4, with a wine and cheese reception to follow. Please see Facebook event or Law Street Journal to RSVP.

---

ktb4xe@virginia.edu

1 Center for American Women & Politics, Women in the U.S. Congress 2017, Rutgers (2017), http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/women-us-congress-2017.

2 Janie Boschma, Why women don’t run for office, Politico (June 12, 2017 5:00 AM), http://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/women-rule-politics-graphic/

3 Id.

4 Id.

5 Id.

Court of Petty Appeals: Anonymous (Whiny) 3L v. Court of Petty Appeals

Virginia Law Weekly October 18, 2017

Anonymous (Whiny) 3L v. Court of Petty Appeals, and justices thereof, in their official capacity, but especially Chief Justice Goldman and Justice VanderMeulen

18 UVa. 642 (2017)

VANDERMEULEN, J., for the Court, in an opinion joined by GOLDMAN, C.J. and ZABLOCKI, J.

This case comes before this Court as part of our original jurisdiction1 from an anonymous, whiny 3L,2 seeking (1) damages against the Court of two opinions for our so-called failure to publish regular decisions or (2) an injunction requiring the Court to publish a best-of compilation of the Court’s best opinions.3 This Court won’t be intimidated by threats of damages4 but is intrigued by plaintiff’s request for equitable relief.

After a rambling, kidnapper-style introduction to her/his complaint, plaintiff gets to the heart of the matter: The Court, by failing to produce opinions in the two issues preceding plaintiff’s complaint has engaged in tortious behavior toward the plaintiff and breached an implied contract between the Court and the students of the Law School. Plaintiff is, to no one’s surprise, wrong on both fronts.

First, the Court will dispense with plaintiff’s spurious tort claim. As everyone knows, torts aren’t real.5 And if they were, plaintiff would find it impossible to show that all the elements of a tort have been met. Plaintiff claims he/she has been a victim of Intentional Affliction of Opinions Unread. Ha! Everyone knows that such a tort requires actual malice of the sort described in New York Times v. Sullivan, 367 U.S. 254 (1964)! To allege that this Court was malicious6—rather than merely lazy—in its refusal to pump out opinions is degrading and probably defamatory.7 Plaintiff’s complaint also lacks a showing of proximate cause. By now, even 1Ls will know that to give rise to a cause of action in tort, an injury must be part of the “harm within the risk” of an action. See That One Case with the Tree and the Truck and the Speeding Guy.8 When the Court declined to publish opinions in its editions of 20 September and 27 September, it did so knowing that it risked having too short a paper. That means the editors have to endure long nights suffering through Justice Jani’s abhorrent music taste. That is the harm within the risk of publishing too few opinions: covers of Disney songs sprinkled with an intolerable mix of Zac Brown and French Montana. The Court could not care less about the delicate feelings of Anonymous 3Ls, even loyal readers like this one.

Next, the contract claim. The Court’s memory of contract law is admittedly fuzzy,9 but it seems clear that the supposed implied contract is void for lack of consideration. The Court’s habit of publishing semi-regular opinions is a gift to the Law School and its denizens, like the benevolent brother-in-law’s promise of a forest shack to his dead brother’s wife in Kirksey v. Kirksey, 8 Ala. 131 (1845).10 Promises to make gifts, of course, are not enforceable as contracts. Despite plaintiff’s valiant efforts to portray her/himself as a victim of contractual malfeasance, no such claim will lie in this Court.

Still, we are not unsympathetic to plaintiff’s desire for decisions from this august body. How would the Law School function without this Court’s tireless dedication to adjudicating the disputes that arise on North Grounds? The Court, therefore, finds that the plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and the case is hereby dismissed. But out of its own magnanimity, the Court will indeed indulge in a “Best of the Court of Petty Appeals” series, to begin the week of 2 November. Congrats, Anonymous 3L.

MANN, J., concurring.

I concur with the majority, and agree that in no way has a tort claim been stated. By consuming this fine publication regularly, plaintiff has assumed the risk that the content might change from week to week, and that Justices11 may be occasionally too hungover to address the myriad issues that come before this court. Plaintiff’s claim of implied contract is straight out of crazy town as well, as no elements of a contract, implied or otherwise, exist. While this fine publication faithfully provides high-brow journalism, the drivel we get in return—mostly angry and misinformed emails – can hardly be construed as consideration.

KENNEDY, J., sitting by designation, concurring in the judgment

I write to specifically rebut the plaintiff’s bizarre presumption that “the fact that [the Court] has or has not had Bodo’s this morning [should not] have an effect on its ruling.” I often find that certain Court pronouncements should take effect on Tuesday with the right to change them on Wednesday. It gives Justices the flexibility to condemn their enemies without making any real decisions. And that is real justice.

---

jmv5af@virginia.edu

1 See Rule of Petty Procedure 8(a): “If someone’s gonna bitch about the Court, we want to hear it directly.”

2 See Virginia Law Weekly, Volume 70, No. 6, 4 October 2017.

3 The Court won’t dignify with a response plaintiff’s request that President Glendon appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Court’s lack of recent decisions. Really? Him? After he LIED TO THE LAW SCHOOL about Duck Donuts? #GlendonsDonuts2017 #NeverForget

4 As if we could write any more of these damn opinions even if we wanted to.

5 Isn’t this roughly your thesis, Professor Ferzan?

6 Yeah yeah, Professor Abraham, we know “actual malice” doesn’t mean “ill will.” Must you continue to remind the Court of its inferiority? Wasn’t our C in Torts II enough?

7 Probably, we say, because we can’t actually remember anything Professor White said about Times, Gertz, or defamation law generally. Something something “public figure.”

8 Remember that one?

9 And consists mainly of references to an impending Canadian invasion and lizard cemeteries. Thanks, Professor Kordana.

10 The Court reserves for another day the question of whether Kirksey’s “female plaintiff loses” rule applies to the Law School generally.

11 No coincidence that Justice Jani couldn’t be found to contribute to this opinion.

Lunch with Joby Ryan: The Original New Shiny Thing

Virginia Law Weekly October 18, 2017

Kim Hopkin '19
(she/her/hers)
Columns Editor

Photo courtesy of content.law.virginia.edu

It’s hard to find a more enthusiastic believer in UVa Law than Joby Ryan, Development and Advancement Officer for the UVa Law School Foundation. Some Law Weekly Staff were lucky enough to catch up with Ryan over lunch and ask him about his time at the Law School, his litigation experience, and why he chose to come back to UVa Law.

Ryan loved his time as a student at UVa Law. He had always been drawn to UVa and almost came to UVa for undergrad like his sister did. Instead, he went to Harvard and earned his A.B. in Government. Ryan was considering staying in Boston for law school, but changed his mind during Admitted Students Weekend (ASW). “Everyone seemed to fit here,” he recalled. When he talked to prospective students at other law schools, they weren’t as excited to attend. His mind was set on UVa after asking students a simple question. “When I asked people [at the UVa ASW] where they would go if they could go anywhere, they said Virginia.” So, he decided to join his dad as a UVa Law graduate.

Ryan certainly didn’t regret that choice. He described the learning opportunities at UVa Law as “an embarrassment of riches.” The class that best prepared him for the future was his Socratic-style 1L Contracts class taught by Professor Kraus, but his favorite was a course called “Biology and the Law.” It brought up new issues that Ryan had never fully considered before including parental rights over inseminated eggs. Ryan also took courses by Professors Coughlin, Ortiz, and (now Dean) Golubuff. His one regret? Although Ryan participated in a myriad of extracurricular at the school, he wishes he had participated in more law related activities. While some of us have experienced Ryan’s entertaining performances during the Libel professor rebuttal, his favorite UVa Law tradition is actually Feb Club. He said, “It’s something unique to UVa Law, and it’s about having fun together.”

As his time at UVa Law came to an end, Ryan had to decide between the Atlanta and the D.C. firm markets. The Atlanta market seemed like a comfortable choice that Ryan would have enjoyed, but the D.C. market opened a sense of ambition within Ryan. Like gravity, the desire to really challenge himself pulled Ryan towards the D.C. market, and he joined Hogan Lovells in 2005. Ryan pushed himself to work hard during his years in private litigation, but he always felt isolated by the type of work lawyers do in actual practice. So, after his first year he joined the recruiting team and got the chance to get out of his office to talk to people. “It was the one thing I do well,” Ryan joked. Soon thereafter, the market crash changed the focus his recruitment. “It changed the entire paradigm of firm practice,” he explained, “because companies had to trim the fat, and legal bills were some of the first things to go.” Still, Ryan persisted and found new growth opportunities.

About seven years into practice, Ryan was having a discussion with some of the partners at his firm about his career projection. While everyone at the firm was supportive of Ryan, the list of accomplishments he would have to achieve in the next eighteen months brought a sense of dread to Ryan. “They were doable, but my palms started sweating—I realized I didn’t want this,” he recalls. Serendipitously, a position at UVa Law Career Services opened up within two days of that wake-up call. Ryan had always wanted to come back to Charlottesville; this combined with the prospect of working with Kevin Donovan made the job undeniable. “It felt like that same sense of ambition when I decided to go to D.C.,” Ryan explained. “Getting to work on a team with that energy and commitment” was what drew Ryan back to UVa Law in 2013. “It’s the best team in the country,” Ryan says.

When asked what he thought his biggest accomplishment was, Ryan first joked about being the namesake for a goldfish before revealing his more personal triumph. “The relationship I built with students and helping them . . . [During OGI], we won more than we lost.” Ryan beamed when describing this. He did credit the fact that “UVa Law students are more three-dimensional, and inherently easier to market to firms” for his success. Ryan then transitioned to the Law School Foundation becoming a Development and Advancement Officer. Ryan describes his job as talking to alums and “encouraging their philanthropic endeavors.” Ever the investigative reporters, we asked if this meant fundraising. Laughing, he agreed that, yes, it involves fundraising, but it gives him the opportunity to fill alums in on what the Law School is doing now and why they should continue to be proud of their alma mater. He describes his job as “making friends and being a resource [for those friends.]” Overall, his job is essential to the Foundation, which is responsible for managing the Law School’s funds.

Ryan asserted earnestly that the Law School community is what sets UVa apart. Speaking as a former Peer Advisor (PA), he urged current PAs to welcome and invite 1Ls, LLMs, and transfers to the community as gatekeepers of this tradition. “You start this [tradition] for the school each year,” he explained. For 1Ls, Ryan encouraged them to “dive in” and diversify their interests. While he thinks you should try as hard as you can in law school, Ryan also stressed the importance of not “doing it at the expense of your life.” As for his remarkable resemblance to a certain LRW Professor, Ryan laughs at all the times people would mistakenly call him the wrong name in the hallway. While he doesn’t take offense to the confusion, he joked that he would like the Law School to know that he “was the original new shiny thing.”

---

knh3zd@virginia.edu

Hot Bench: MacLane Taggart '19

Virginia Law Weekly October 18, 2017

(he/him/his)

1. Have you ever had a nickname?

My name seems to lend itself well to nicknames, so I’ve had a plethora of them. Growing up my dad called me “Mac the Knife” (referencing the Bobby Darin classic) and my siblings called me “Clano” (no cool 1920s connection). In school, I garnered several other nicknames including “Mac Deluxe,” “Big Mac,” “Mac & Cheese,” and “Mac Attack.” I guess being a chubby kid leads to a lot of food tie-ins. Generally, most people call me by my full name or just simply “Mac.”

2. What is your favorite word?

R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Ask me what it means to me.

3. Where did you grow up?

I grew up in East Millcreek, just outside of Salt Lake City, Utah.

4. What’s the best meal you’ve ever had?

I lived in Brazil for a couple years on a service mission and when I was working in a rural area outside of Sao Paulo we often visited with a woman from Rio de Janeiro. In 2012, she made me the best birthday lunch I’ve ever had in 2012. It was steak with caramelized onions, French fries topped with feijao carioca (beans in the style of Rio de Janeiro), fried eggs, and a simple salad. My favorite meal to this day.

5. If you could meet one celebrity, who would it be and why?

I have a big (verging on inappropriate) crush on Emma Watson. I would love to meet her in the hopes that she would instantly fall in love with me, and we would live happily ever after. I think she’s a great actress and am really impressed with how she has used her platform to fight for women’s rights. Pretty sure I would embarrass myself if I ever had the opportunity though.

6. If you owned a sports team, what/who would be the mascot?

I am not very coordinated so although I love playing sports, I am fairly certain my team wouldn’t do very well. So, I’d pick something nerdy like an owl wearing glasses and a graduation cap that would go around encouraging kids to go to college or something.

7. If you had to pick one song to play non-stop in the background of your life, what would it be?

California Gurls (feat. Snoop Dogg) – Katy Perry #westcoastbestcoast

8. If you were a superhero, what would your superpower be?

I have always thought it would be cool to be telekinetic. But if we’re talking “Last Airbender” territory, I’m a total waterbender.

9. What’s something you wish you’d known about law school before coming to UVa Law?

I come from a very blue collar family (my dad loads airplanes and my mom is a high school teacher) and am the first person in my family to pursue a professional degree, so I had zero exposure to law school or the field of law before coming to law school. During 1L, I always thought there was some big secret everybody else knew that I didn’t. I wish I had known that everyone is in the same boat for the most part.

10. What’s your most interesting two-truths-and-a-lie? (And what’s the lie?)

Truth 1: I (disastrously) auditioned for American Idol in Oklahoma City during undergrad. Truth 2: I’ve eaten Domino’s pizza in New Delhi, India. Lie: I am a black belt in Tae Kwon Do (I’m really only a yellow belt with a green stripe).

11. If the Law School had yearbook awards, what would you want to win?

Mr. Congeniality

Hot Bench: Wyatt Kozinski '18

Virginia Law Weekly September 27, 2017

Wyatt Kozinski '18
(he/him/his)

1. Have you ever had a nickname?

Numey. For some reason, my soccer coach thought that I looked like Alfred E. Neuman.

2. What is your favorite word?

Serendipity.

3. Where did you grow up?

TBD.

4. What’s the best meal you’ve ever had?

I once had a delicious meal while travelling with my brother in Barcelona. We were greeted with freshly poured cava, and before the napkins hit our laps, the food started coming. After four or five courses of fresh seafood, a gentleman in coattails simply asked, “more?” We nodded until our stomachs hurt. Those monosyllabic exchanges were the only interaction we had with anyone there.

For a guy who hates talking to his barber, this was heaven.

5. If you could meet one celebrity, who would it be and why?

Norm MacDonald. The man can turn a knock-knock joke into a shaggy dog story and vice-versa.

6. If you owned a sports team, what/who would be the mascot?

Gudetama.

7. If you had to pick one song to play non-stop in the background of your life, what would it be?

As Slow as Possible by John Cage. And I hope to hear the whole thing.

8. If you were a superhero, what would your superpower be?

The power of love.

9. What’s something you wish you’d known about law school before coming to UVA Law?

Professor Jeffries is the kindest man you’ll ever meet.

10. What did you have for breakfast this morning?

A plate of scrambled eggs and cheesy grits, y’all.

11. What’s your most interesting two-truths-and-a-lie? (And what’s the lie?)

When I was in fourth grade, Steven Segal flipped me the bird. I was part of a neo-funk duo called Sexual Factory. I once bench pressed a baby gorilla at a party on a dare.

12. If you could live anywhere, where would it be?

I would live in Florence, and it would be in Colorado.

13. What’s your least favorite sound?

“Thank you for interviewing, we’ll be in touch.”

14. What’s the best gift you’ve ever received?

My striking good looks (see pic).

15. If the Law School had yearbook awards, what would you want to win?

Most likely to interplead.

16. If you could know one thing about your future, what would it be?

The BTC/USD conversion rate on Jan. 1, 2024.

17. Backstreet Boys or *NSYNC?

Next question.

18. What’s the longest you’ve gone without sleep and why?

Once stayed up for three days waiting excitedly in line for an *NSYNC concert.

19. What’s your favorite thing to do in Charlottesville?

Walking Rivanna trail with a good friend.

20. If you could make one rule that everyone had to follow, what would it be?

Be excellent to each other.

Harvey and Irma: How You Can Help

Virginia Law Weekly September 20, 2017

On August 25, Hurricane Harvey made landfall in Rockport, Texas at peak intensity. In Rockport, entire blocks were leveled by the hurricane’s Category Four winds, measuring in at 132 miles per hour. The storm has resulted in eighty-one confirmed fatalities. Across the state of Texas, official aid workers and good Samaritans rescued over 13,000 individuals from the storm and its after-effects. The storm displaced another 30,000 people. Harvey inflicted serious structural damaged to over 48,700 homes throughout Texas, including completely destroying 1,000 residences. Nearly 700 businesses were damaged as well. The storm resulted in billions of dollars in estimated property damage.1

In addition to the storm’s devastating effects on the private well-being of Texas citizens, the consequences of Harvey threaten to stall the second-largest state economy in the United States. Risk Management Solutions analysts believe economic losses could run between 70 and 90 billion dollars.2 A majority of this loss stems from uninsured properties. The implications of storm recovery on Texas’ booming energy industry remain relatively unknown. The country’s most active oil refinery, Motiva, which typically produces 603,000 barrels of crude oil every day, has been shut down due to flooding and environmental concerns since the August 30. As much as thirty-one percent of the total American oil refining capacity has been either disrupted or severely limited since Harvey made landfall. The Houston area alone, known as the energy capital of the world, is capable of refining about 2.7 million barrels of crude oil a day, or fourteen percent of the nation’s capacity.3 Fuel shortages threaten to increase gas prices and decrease resource availability as displaced citizens return to the Houston area. The booming alternative energy industry, specifically in wind energy, is also certain to experience a stall in growth after Harvey. As the people of Texas fight to return to normalcy, a great many organizations have stepped up to help with the relief efforts.

Here at UVa, the Lone Star Lawyers are collecting donations for Texas relief efforts. All donations go to the Greater Houston Community Foundation and the Coastal Bend Food Bank in Corpus Christi, Texas. Venmo donations can be made to the group’s account at the username “@TxHoos.” For those hoping to provide more general forms of relief, Global Giving, the Center for Disaster Philanthropy, and the United Way of Greater Houston have launched Harvey relief funds for the thousands of people displaced or suffering from the effects of the hurricane. These general funds will disperse resources to immediately provide food, water, and shelter. The funds will then transition to fund more long-term recovery efforts, such as the redevelopment of residential and commercial areas. The Center for Disaster Philanthropy emphasizes investing “well rather than investing quickly” to address the greatest needs and gaps in funding that may yet emerge.4 Notably, Houston Texans star J.J. Watt has raised over $30 million for Houston relief efforts through “YouCaring,” a crowd-funding site.

Less than two weeks after Hurricane Harvey devastated Texas and the parts of the Gulf Coast, Hurricane Irma did the same in the Caribbean and southwestern Florida. The storm leveled 90 percent of structures on the islands of Anguilla, Barbuda, and Antigua.5 For the first time in 300 years, there is no one currently living on Barbuda. The large-scale devastation on the U.S. Virgin Islands left more than twenty people dead and thousands of people without power, running water, and cell service. St. John resident Stephanie Stevens reported to NPR that those on the island need security: “We all survived this monster storm. But will we survive the aftermath?”6 On Monday, Hurricane Maria made landfall in the Caribbean threatening the already distressed region. With winds over 100 miles an hour, Maria threatens to displace even more Caribbean residents and damage structures fragilely standing after weathering Irma. Similarly to J.J. Watt, Tim Duncan has started a “YouCaring” account for his native Virgin Islands that is still actively accepted donations.

The continental U.S. also suffered significant damage as a result of the hurricane. Southern Florida felt the brunt of the Category Four Irma as it made landfall. Nearly 6.5 million Florida residents across the state woke up to no electricity the week of September 11.7 The storm also left 10,000 Florida key residents homeless.8 Florida’s economy will experience substantial obstacles after Irma. Damage to Florida’s tropical fruit industry was dramatic with an anticipated 70 to 80 percent drop in crop yield. Recovery efforts in southern Florida will have to focus on both residential and commercial losses.

In response to the overwhelming destruction produced by these hurricanes, many organizations have joined the relief efforts. If you are currently a student looking to help with the hurricane relief efforts, there are several different methods to help those in need. As we’re all students and our surplus funds are often already allocated to G&Ts at Bilt, there is also the option to donate clothing and nonperishable food to affected communities. Students can get online and use GreenDrop, a charitable organization that will pick up clothing, shoes, household items, etc. at a scheduled time and location on behalf of the American Red Cross, the Military Order of the Purple Heart, or the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. All three organizations have pledged that current donations will go towards hurricane relief efforts. Scheduling a pick-up is extremely easy, so clean out your closets, and maybe your pantries too! The Salvation Army is accepting donations of food and water to provide to first responders, as well as coordinating massive feeding efforts for residents. Feeding Texas and many local food banks are also accepting food donations.

Donations will be needed long into the future with thousands of evacuees still displaced from Texas, the southern regions of Florida, and the Caribbean islands. Clean water, food, and clothing will be critical in the resettlement process. Please consider donating money, food, or clothing to the hurricane relief efforts through any of the convenient and reliable organizations currently contributing to relief efforts.

---

jpd5pd@virginia.edu

1 Holmes, Frank, “We Looked into the Effects of Hurricane Harvey and Here is What We Found,” Forbes, 09.05.17.

2 Id.

3 Id.

4 Wamsley, Laurel, “Here’s How You Can Help People Affected by Harvey,” NPR, 08.2017.

5 Wamsley, Laurel, “Here’s How You Can Help People Affected by Harvey,” NPR, 08.2017.

6 Dwyer, Colin, “The Rubble and Recovery of the U.S. Virgin Islands: ‘Will We Survive the Aftermath?” NPR, 09.2017.

7 Associated Press, “A Look at the Damage from Hurricane Irma in the Caribbean,” 09.2017. http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/damage-hurricane-ir

8 Atkins, Katie, “10,000 People in the Keys Left Homeless by Hurricane Irma,” Miami Herald, 09.18.17.

Hot Bench: Siarra Rogers '19

Virginia Law Weekly September 20, 2017

Siarra Rogers ‘19
(she/her/hers)

1. Have you ever had a nickname? What?

I’ve never had one my self-esteem couldn’t handle.

2. What is your favorite word?

Bananas /bəˈnanəs/ adjective outrageous, senseless or extremely silly “That is bananas.”

3. Where did you grow up?

I grew up in Clearwater, Florida. It’s a beach town outside of Tampa Bay.

4. What’s the best meal you’ve ever had?

Whatever I can find on the free food table (within reason, looking at you Panera Bagels).

5. If you could meet one celebrity, who would it be and why?

Jean Claude Van Damme. When I first saw Bloodspot I sat in front of the TV and didn’t take my eyes off the screen. It was the first and last time I haven’t talked through a movie. I like to imagine we would do some splits, kick some palm trees, and maybe get in a workout.

6. If you had to pick one song to play non-stop in the background of your life, what would it be?

“American Girl” – Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers. JK, you know I am talking John Mayer cover here. It’s an anthem.

7. If you were a superhero, what would your superpower be?

The ability to always make myself the center of attention.

8. What’s something you wish you’d known about law school before coming to UVa?

How truly incredible the folks here are. Shout out to my friends!

9. What did you have for breakfast this morning?

Hashbrowns and Advil.

10. What’s your most interesting two-truths-and-a-lie? (And what’s the lie?)

(1) Hulk Hogan lived in my neighborhood, (2) I have been in and won a professional eating contest, and (3) I wrestled in high school. Number two is a lie, the contest was not professional and I took second.

11. If you could live anywhere, where would it be?

I would live in Zion National Park. So, Utah.

12. What’s the best (or worst!) PG-rated pick-up line you’ve ever heard?

“Do you like raisins? How do you feel about a date?”

“Are you a casebook? Because I wanna study you all night.”

14. If the Law School had yearbook awards, what would you want to win?

Teacher’s Pet, gotta get those Letters of Rec.

15. If you could know one thing about your future, what would it be?

I’d like to know which of my classmates will be the president that appoints me to my judgeship.

16. Backstreet Boys or *NSYNC?

On advice of counsel, I would like to utilize my fifth amendment right against self-incrimination.

18. What’s the longest you’ve gone without sleep and why?

I get eight hours a night, baby.

19. What’s your favorite thing to do in Charlottesville?

Going to Bilt three-to-five times a week.

20. If you could make one law that everyone had to follow, what would it be?

I would outlaw Pav construction during the school year. I understand they need to lay new tile on top of other tile, but the water saw has woken me up every day this week and, frankly, I am resentful.

Spotlight 9/20/17

Virginia Law Weekly September 20, 2017

If you or your organization would like to be featured, please reach out to us at editor@lawweekly.org.

Wade Foster '19
(he/him/his)
Vice Chair of Programming, Lambda Alliance

Last weekend, Charlottesville hosted its annual Pride Festival, a time for the LGBTQ+ community to come together, to celebrate, to reflect, and to focus on the challenges still facing our community. Pride, even in Charlottesville, is a multi-day community celebration with events hosted by LGBTQ+ organizations, a festival downtown, and a parade. However, the first Pride wasn’t nearly so cheery or community oriented. The first Pride parade was organized in New York City to commemorate the police raid on the Stonewall Inn and subsequent riots that took place on June 28, 1969. The organizers of the first Pride parade intended it to build visibility and inform the public about the oppression faced by the LGBTQ+ community. Since the initial Pride parade in New York City, the LGBTQ+ community has gained more acceptance, and the focus of Pride has changed to reflect both that acceptance and the challenges still facing our community. Much like the changing tenor and focus of pride celebrations, Lambda has changed over the years to reflect the needs of its members and the challenges facing our community.

The Gay and Lesbian Law Student Association (“GLLSA”) was the first organization at the law school formed for gay and lesbian students. Founded in 1984, GLLSA brought “gay students together for social, political, and educational activities.”1 Shortly after its founding, GLLSA began bringing speakers to the law school to discuss challenges faced by gay and lesbian students and hosted the first “Gay Awareness Week” in 1986. In the early days of GLLSA, the organization took an active role in educating the law school community about the AIDS crisis through a conference entitled “HIV and AIDS in Central Virginia: A Legal and Medical Perspective.” At the time, HIV and AIDS were viewed as an urban disease. Speakers at the conference brought the AIDS crisis home to rural Virginia by focusing on the effects of the AIDS crisis throughout Virginia.

Today Lambda hosts multiple events focused on current issues facing the LGBTQ+ community. In the coming months, we plan to host a panel discussion in conjunction with Virginia Employment Labor Law Association (VELLA) on the Seventh Circuit’s decision that employment discrimination based on sexual orientation violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. We are also planning several events focused on transgender issues and freedom of religion as it impacts LGBTQ+ rights.

Alumni of GLLSA recall the law school as a supportive environment that had a commitment to its lesbian and gay students. This is pretty incredible for the time, but not unexpected from the UVa Law community. One of the key aspects of supporting any minority population is getting to know those individuals and understanding what support looks like. GLLSA was originally founded to help educate the law school community about lesbian and gay issues. Today, Lambda continues to bring educational opportunities to the law school about challenges facing the LGBTQ+ community.

Lambda is planning programming to help our allies understand how they can support LGBTQ+ individuals. As an LGBTQ+ person goes through the coming-out process, they reveal one of the most intimate parts of themselves. We want our allies to be able to support our LGBTQ+ students, both as they go through coming-out process and after they are out. It is important to understand that if an LGBTQ+ individual has entrusted you with this information it is your duty to keep it confidential. It is their decision to come out on their own schedule, not anyone else’s.

Today, much like the early days of GLLSA, Lambda serves a social role for LGBTQ+ individuals to gather and be themselves. Alumni of GLLSA remember the organization as playing an important social function, giving them a “safe space” to let their hair down with people who had similar experiences. This remains a core mission of Lambda today. While the world is more supportive of the LGBTQ+ community than it was when GLLSA was founded, coming out can still be a scary process and it helps to have a readily identifiable community where you can open up and truly be yourself.

GLLSA appears to have changed its name to Lambda Law Alliance sometime in the early 2000’s, the first reference to Lambda in the Law Weekly is in April 2001. The Greek lowercase λ (lambda) was chosen as the symbol for the Gay Activist Alliance in 1969. “The GAA literature explained that the lambda represented ‘a complete exchange of energy--that moment or span of time witness to absolute activity’ in the notation of chemistry and physics.”2 Since then lambda has been adopted broadly as a symbol of the LGBTQ+ community.

The name change from GLLSA to Lambda reflected the increasing “exchange of energy” throughout the organization and the increasing diversity of the membership with students across the LGBTQ+ spectrum including transgender, gender non-conforming, queer, bisexual, and questioning students. It also reflects the changing mission of the organization and the changing state of LGBTQ+ rights in America.

While Lambda continues much of the work GLLSA was founded to do, the mission has grown significantly, Lambda serves as an important career/networking conduit for its members and the legal community. Lambda also strives to be more inclusive of individuals with marginalized identities and aims to raise awareness beyond the walls of the law school.

GLLSA alumni in the late 1980’s did not feel comfortable putting their association with the organization or anything relating to their sexual orientation on applications to law firms. So while they were out at the Law School (or at least to their peers in GLLSA), they went back into the closet when the job hunt began. Fortunately, the legal community today is much more accepting and encouraging of LGBTQ+ students.

In the early days, GLLSA had 15–20 members, some of whom were allies. Today the UVa Law LGBTQ+ community has over fifty out individuals. This is a testament to the support of the law school community that more and more law students feel comfortable being themselves.

Pride is a time to celebrate how far we have come and a time of reflection. Pride is also a time to focus anew on the challenges facing the LGBTQ+ community. While it is amazing how far we have come since GLLSA was founded, it is amazing how much work is left to do. Lesbian, gay and bisexual youth are four times more likely to attempt suicide than their straight peers. Forty percent of transgender adults report attempting suicide.3 LGBTQ+ individuals can still be fired in many states just for being themselves.

These are just a few of the challenges that Lambda will continue educating the law school community about. We are thankful for our straight allies here at the law school and in the broader community joining us to work on these issues. If you want to get involved please reach out, if you are questioning your sexuality or gender identity know that there are students here who will confidentially support you.

*Special thanks to J. Goodwin Bland (’87) and Joe Baker (’87) for sharing their experiences as members of GLLSA for this article.

---

wcf3hy@virgina.edu

1 Glenn Jessee, GALLSA Outlines Gay Awareness Week, 38 Va. L. Weekly No. 19 (March 28, 1986); Law School Briefs, 36 Va. L. Weekly No. 13 (Feb. 3, 1984).

2 http://www.glbtqarchive.com/ssh/gay_activists_alliance_S.pdf

3 http://www.thetrevorproject.org/pages/facts-about-suicide

Hot Bench: Jason Boyle '18

Virginia Law Weekly September 13, 2017

Jason Boyle ‘18

(he/him/his)

1. Have you ever had a nickname? What?

JBo is what my teammates and coach from my college debate team call me.

2. What is your favorite word?

Free.

3. Where did you grow up?

Pilesgrove Township in rural Salem County, New Jersey. Basically, the “garden” part of the Garden State.

4. What’s the best meal you’ve ever had?

The special rolls at Sushi Lounge in Morristown, New Jersey. I especially recommend the Hoboken Roll.

5. If you could meet one celebrity, who would it be and why?

Patrick Stewart. He seems very approachable and I imagine he has a lot of wisdom about life and the world that he would be eager to share. And obviously, because Picard was the greatest captain of all.

6. If you owned a sports team, what/whom would be the mascot?

My sports team would be the Jackalopes. The mascot would appear as a large jackrabbit with deer antlers. I probably wouldn’t attend any of the games, but I would wear the team shirt.

7. If you had to pick one song to play non-stop in the background of your life, what would it be?

Take It from Me, by KONGOS. The sole motivation behind my desire to learn how to play the accordion.

8. If you were a superhero, what would your superpower be?

I would love the power of flight more than anything. I would probably get stuck with something more mundane but practical, like the ability to locate buried potatoes with my mind.

9. What’s something you wish you’d known about law school before coming to UVa?

While it is true that you don’t have to know what you want to do after graduation while in law school, knowing what you want to do, choosing classes and extracurriculars, and networking toward a specific area of law from day one can make a huge difference. The hiring process gives too little room to explore different areas and options while at law school.

10. What did you have for breakfast this morning?

Three scrambled eggs, wheat toast with hummus, and a bowl of plain yogurt with blueberries and granola. Big breakfast is key.

11. What’s your most interesting two-truths-and-a-lie? (And what’s the lie?)

I skipped high school, I’ve run two marathons, and I have millions of views on YouTube. Unfortunately, the marathons are the lie.

12. If you could live anywhere, where would it be?

At the top of Lookout Mountain, located in the foothills outside of Denver, Colorado. But Buffalo Bill Cody already called dibs and claimed it for his gravesite.

13. What’s the best (or worst!) PG-rated pick-up line you’ve ever heard?

“Tell me, how do you like your eggs in the morning?”

14. What’s the best gift you’ve ever received?

When I was very young, one of my older brothers gave me a package of modeling clay as a Christmas gift. I’ve loved sculpting clay ever since. I eventually went on to win Best in Show in the Home Economics category at the Salem County Fair for my sculptures.

15. If the law school had yearbook awards, what would you want to win?

Most Time Spent Meditating at School.

16. If you could know one thing about your future, what would it be?

Whether I’ll ever get the opportunity to travel into space. If I knew this was a possibility, I would work harder towards this goal.

17. Backstreet Boys or *NSYNC?

*NSYNC. Easy. Hands down. No contest. Now excuse me while I go Google search these bands…

18. What’s the longest you’ve gone without sleep?

Thirty-six hours after pulling an all-nighter to pack and fly from Philadelphia to Melbourne, Australia. Planned to sleep on the plane. That was the same trip I learned that I can’t sleep on planes.

19. What’s your favorite thing to do in Charlottesville?

Walk the downtown mall and stop in at the Draft Taproom.

20. If you could make one law that everyone had to follow, what would it be?

Everyone would have to vote in federal elections. “No preference” would be an option on the ballot, but submitting something would be compulsory like it is in Australia.

Court of Petty Appeals: Student Body of UVa v. Thimpson Sacher

Virginia Law Weekly September 13, 2017

Student Body of UVa1 v. Thimpson Sacher2

27 U.Va. 203 (2017)

ZABLOCKI, J., delivered the opinion of a unanimous Court.

The case at bar comes to us on appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, which held this subject matter to be too highly specialized. This matter arises out of events which occurred last Thursday, September 7, during Bar Review and an otherwise generic Thursday night at Bilt. As the entire law school wearily acknowledges, the 2Ls are in the latter phases of OGI, which for many involves offers / offer dinners / accepting offers (note: WE DO NOT WANT TO KNOW WHO YOU ARE). Thimpson Sacher’s was among those offer dinners hosted in Charlottesville. In addition to free food and alcohol, the representatives of Thimpson Sacher plied attendee-offerees with baseball softball hats that from the front appear as ordinary UVa hats.3 This Court supports uninhibited displays of school spirit, no matter how dismally crushed those spirits may be upon game’s end or, you know, one quarter in. However, the backs of these hats were emblazoned with the true name of party “Thimpson Sacher” (see Exhibit 1). Subsequently, the Thimpson Sacher contingent picked up and headed over to the venerable establishment known as Bilt, where, in keeping with the high-falutin’ nature of the establishment, various offerees succumbed to the urge to dance on tables while wearing the afore-described caps.4 This gives rise to the two claims on which this Court now passes judgment.

First, the Student Body of UVa claims trademark infringement under the Lanham Act for unauthorized use of a “V” that is confusingly similar to the UVa logo in connection with promotion of Thimpson Sacher’s services of eliminating happiness from the lives of otherwise content young attorneys (“in the experience of those who have walked through that door, waited in the security line, taken the elevator up, walked through another door, successfully completed a maze of cubicles, and perched upon an uncomfortable chair at a cluttered desk in a shared office . . . Big Law’s true purpose is to make life misery for recent law school graduates, even in comparison to their law school experiences, the provision of legal services being merely incidental to this goal.5 And so this Court finds.” Georgetown University Law Center Graduates 2013-16 v. Big Law, 273 F. 3d. 123 (D.C. Cir. 2017)). The base elements of a trademark infringement action are satisfied by (1) holding of a valid mark, which, it’s an orange “V” and we’re in Charlottesville so not even disputed, (2) having priority (Tommy J., 1743-1826 vs. Thimpson Sacher, founded 188X . . . yeah, math checks out, also undisputed), and (3) likelihood of confusion. This latter element is the source of contention. The Student Body strenuously objects to Thimpson Sacher’s casual appropriation on basis of each likelihood of confusion (“We don’t want people thinking we’re with the miserables over there.”) and dilution (“Do you really not get it? School sucks but we still have a reputation for being happy-ish people.”).

It is unclear from the reception invitation Thimpson Sacher emailed in answer to the Student Body’s complaint whether or not permission was obtained from the school administration prior to customizing and distributing said hats. It is possible that “V” Thimpson Sacher gave up before they started and intended this invitation as a conciliatory outreach, but it wasn’t taken as such and so this Court takes full notice. Regardless, the Student Body disputes the validity of any authorization that may have been given. Being composed largely of current/future employees of competing firms, the Student Body demands a say in the use of a logo that derives value from goodwill that exists because, well, the Student Body is so good, and also because each member thereof pays $60,000 annually for tuition, thereby sustaining the logo. This much being obvious to anyone with the logical capacity of J. Jani a Thanksgiving turkey,6 this Court notes that Thimpson Sacher is equally liable regardless of any attempt to obtain permission because willful ignorance is not a defense. See, something in 1L crim, may that class rot in hell eternally.7 Therefore, on this first claim, this Court finds Thimpson Sacher liable to the nth degree; damages TBD.

The second claim brought by the Student Body against Thimpson Sacher is for inciting douchebaggery among its offerees, who also happen to be members of the Student Body. Though the base elements are the same as those requisite to a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, incited douchebaggery is distinct from IIED in that the emotional distress is determined according to a reasonable person standard rather than the subjective experiences of the victim, whose proximity to the events occurring may be as distant as shared group affiliation. Additionally, the emotional distress suffered can be shame and embarrassment. The tort of inflicted douchebaggery extends from the tort of douchebaggery, in some jurisdictions known as hurt feelings. UVA Law Class of 2022 v. UVA Law Faculty, xx __ xxx (TBD, 2018) (“This Court acknowledges even the iciest of special little snowflakes may suffer on the hot seat of professorial cold calls; truly extreme examples of such may result in liability for the tort known as douchebaggery. However, this Court warns that such liability could result in legend status for the professor and probs backfire against plaintiff-victim, so really, just do the reading—we’re not here to help.”). Regardless, inflicted douchebaggery typically involves pain and suffering (mental, emotional, or otherwise) of a group of three or more people.

The base elements of IIED corresponding to the base elements of incited douchebaggery are easily satisfied by this fact set. Defendant’s intent is clear from embroidery of “V” and its own name in garish orange and white thread; this conduct was outrageous in the extreme, given reasonable knowledge both the group constituting offerees—to get drunk and dance on tables—and of the group constituting non-offerees—the majority of whom are generally nice, not obnoxious folk who would be appalled by the conduct incited; there is enough distress that we have been forced to take judicial notice;8 and now the Student Body as a whole is suffering severe shame at being associated with the actors in the events of September 7. This Court comprising mostly reasonable individuals who are in no way biased by their membership in the Student Body, we do not hesitate in applying a reasonable-person standard and recoiling in horror at the douchebaggy behavior on display on Bilt’s tabletops last Thursday. Parading around your offers of Big Law jobs with full knowledge there are people nearby who neither know nor, more importantly, care to know about your success is the very definition of douchebaggery. While We hesitate to call classmates douchebags, these individuals are certainly guilty of the crime of douchebaggery and We are ashamed at sharing grounds with them.9

Having determined Thimpson Sacher’s liability on both counts, this Court now turns to the matter of damages. Compensatory damages being impossible to determine, this Court will solely award punitive damages, which it acknowledges will do little to assuage the Student Body but tough shit. It is henceforth decreed that should Thimpson Sacher dare to darken our doors during OGI 2018 and onwards, the firm’s representatives shall leave their hats behind and bring not only Bodo’s, but also donuts. And not just any donuts, DUCK DONUTS. Because what’s up with firms bringing bagels and no donuts??

---

amz2ez@virginia.edu

1 Excluding offerees and current/future employees of Thimpson Sacher.

2 A pseudonym to protect against sullying the name of a party not yet shown to bear liability against the wrath of Career Services, those godlike beings who make it rain for us in a way the inhabitants of Mount Olympus only ever aspired to. See In Rem Noah’s Flood.

3 To which, hoo would object?

4 To those who didn’t . . . you have a defense; use it.

5 Congrats on hitting your target, we guess?

6 The logical ones realize it’s Thanksgiving and hide before they can be turned into Thanksgiving turkeys, DUH.

7 Hi Ferzan.

8 Given that we DGAF about all y’all’s bitching and moaning, this says a lot. In fact, it says it all.

9 Unfortunately, charges have not been formally brought against these individuals, so we can only hope that shame at being the source of the Student Body’s shame is sufficient punishment. And karma. She’s a bitch, in case you haven’t heard.

Spotlight 9/6/17

Virginia Law Weekly September 6, 2017

If you or your organization would like to be featured, please reach out to us at editor@lawweekly.org.

Shruthi Prabhu (she/her/hers) '19
Guest Columnist

“Diversity” and “inclusion” are buzzwords I personally was privileged enough to never worry about growing up. Law school changed that. Here at UVa Law, those two words have a robust presence, involving themselves in career prospects and the social environment, an inevitable result of the greater social homogeneity here than that in cities many students are used to. Needless to say, it is a bit of a culture shock for some who come to a place with dissimilar demographics to home. That is where affinity groups such as SALSA, the South Asian Law Student Association, come into play.

Some people have reached out to me to ask about affinity groups have asked me whether there is a problem when it comes to diversity. My response typically consists of an anecdote in an effort to answer as honestly and candidly as possible. In my experience, I’ve found that within an educated population, racism and hurtful words are not malicious; rather, they come from a place of misunderstanding and mild ignorance.

My story is about the 1L career search. Texas, my target geographic preference, has a faster timeline than other states. Consequently, I finished my job search relatively early. I kept the news of the offer somewhat close to me, only divulging its existence to close friends or to those who specifically asked. A couple months into spring semester of 1L, I distinctly remember participating in a conversation about the job search with a group of friends. At the time, I was the only one in the group with a summer clerkship, and no one in that particular group knew that yet. One girl asked me about my summer plans and I told her the truth. Instead of normal responses, such as “congratulations,” “that’s great, good for you,” or even just saying very little and continuing the underlying conversation, her first reaction to me was, “Oh wow, I wish I was a minority.”

“I wish I was a minority.” All my hard work in classes, the networking and cold calls to land interviews with firms in Texas, the extracurricular involvements throughout the year that had led to this position had all been reduced to the color of my skin. I knew the statement was not meant to intentionally hurt me or to dismiss my accomplishments, but hurt and dismiss is exactly what it did. That statement came from ignorance, from the inability to see the countless hours I labored while maintaining a good academic and social standing in order to secure a position in my geographic preference. The worst part: I have heard similar stories before, and I will continue to hear them again until we educate about diversity and inclusion.

I cannot pretend that I have been the victim of racial injustice throughout my life. I consider myself privileged in that regard. However, this event was a slap in the face and made me realize that these problems truly do exist, even in great institutions of law. It was then that I realized the role SALSA played in my life. My community through the organization served as a sounding board for the hurt I was feeling.

The purpose of SALSA is to represent the views of South Asian American students at UVa Law. This purpose is achieved through educational, professional, cultural, and social programs. SALSA provides a forum for the discussion of those issues affecting South Asian American law students and the university community as a whole. Another aim is to help educate and inform the greater community (not just South Asian people) about issues that involve South Asian Americans, since education is one of the quickest solutions to ignorance.

During my time at UVa Law, I have found multiple homes in people and groups, and one of those homes is SALSA. Last year was the organization’s first year of existence. Spearheaded by 3Ls Maya Iyyani and Nimrah Khan with help from 3L Shanthi Rajagopalan and recent graduate Vishal Ganesan, SALSA became a way to form a South Asian community for future students to utilize as home, as well as a conduit to progress at the law school. As a 1L representative my first year working alongside these amazing individuals, and now as the president of the organization, I have been able to participate in discussions, meet like-minded students, and talk with the administration to emphasize the “inclusion” part of the buzzwords, “diversity” and “inclusion.”

The environment at UVA Law is indeed collegial, a wonderful law school where friends want friends to succeed, a place where I would hope no one would intentionally bring another down for looking different than them. My genuine hope for this organization, as well as my hope for other affinity groups, is that one day, they will not only serve as a home for those who seek peers similar to them culturally and physically, but also as an educational asset demystifying diversity and inclusion for those who would benefit from it.

---

snp8dc@virginia.edu

Court of Petty Appeals: Class of 2020 v. Law School Canon

Virginia Law Weekly September 6, 2017

The Court of Petty Appeals is the highest appellate jurisdiction court at UVa Law. The Court has the power to review any and all decisions, conflicts, and disputes that arise involving, either directly, indirectly, or tangentially, the Law School or its students. The Court is composed of four associate justices and one Chief Justice. Opinions shall be released periodically and only in the official court reporter: the Virginia Law Weekly. Please email a brief summary of any and all conflicts to editor@lawweekly.org

Class of 2020 v. Law School Canon, 502 U.Va. 626 (2017)

VANDERMEULEN, J., announced the judgment of the Court in an opinion joined by GOLDMAN, C.J., and HALL and ZABLOCKI, JJ.

The case at bar comes to us on appeal from a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss granted by Judge Kendrick in the lower court. It presents a novel issue of law: may the 1L class, mired in the intractable wilderness of the canonical 1L cases, earn an injunction against the teaching of generations of law school wisdom, in particular, what is known as the “1L canon”? Judge Kendrick granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, made to her on behalf of the faculty by Professor Bonnie, who couldn’t bear the thought of not being able to teach Faulkner, Cunningham, or any of the rest of those weird British cases he uses to teach mens rea.1 In recognition of the Goluboff Suggestion, we note that our jurisdiction over this matter is clear, as it concerns students and faculty of the Law School, and we affirm the court below.

The petitioners, the Class of 2020, apparently already weary of parsing 18th century language2 and reading the phrase “to wit,” base their effort to bar the teaching of legendary pre-1960 cases on a series of claims, each more tenuous than the last. First come the usual suspects: the Eighth Amendment, which they surely do not yet understand (not that they will even after Con Law, lol), and the tort of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (does anyone other than Professor White actually get what this is?). Next are a blizzard of legal and equitable claims so dizzying that this Court is led to believe that some overzealous 1L has been doing too much outside reading3: unconscionability (yeah, right), substantive due process (talk to me when you’ve read Glucksberg), trover (wut), and, most bafflingly, the Rule of Capture based on that “pernicious and incorrigible” fox case. The Court doesn’t even know how to respond to that.

Despite the labyrinthine catastrophe of ill-wrought and contradictory claims made by the petitioners’ representatives in their effort to escape the venerable precedents of their legal ancestors, their claim can be summed up by two sentences from their initial complaint: “The traditional law school canon no longer serves any discernible purpose. It is provincial, outmoded, and, to wit, totally f*cking lame.”4 While this Court is not unsympathetic to the pleas of the Law School’s newest denizens, we feel compelled to affirm Judge Kendrick’s order. Make no mistake: this Court could, of course, enjoin the teaching of the 1L canon and rid North Grounds of Pennoyer v. Neff’s maddening opaqueness for all time.5 We frequently exercise our plenary equitable power to prohibit those activities deemed hostile to the continued functioning of the Law School. See Sitting at Standing Desks v. Standing at Standing Desks, 340 U.Va. 712 (“Sitting at standing desks is hereby absolutely forbidden. What the fuck is wrong with you guys?”) and Class of 2019 v. 1L Professors, 312 U.Va. 600 (2017) (“Nobody wants to see their professors at the Rec. That’s gross.”) But why would we act to deprive these bright-eyed, eager 1Ls of the wisdom of ages past? This Court’s members all read these cases,6 and the years since 1L have blessed us with the sagacity and sophistication to truly appreciate the multi-faceted and timeless wisdom that they alone can . . . lol jk. I don’t remember anything about Pennoyer other than the phrase “quasi in rem,”7 and despite the apparent lesson of Lucy v. Zehmer, several members of this Court regularly engage in attempted real estate transactions while inebriated only to later attempt to renege.8

Nevertheless, both petitioners and respondents fail to grasp the 1L canon’s most essential quality: law students have shitty senses of humor, and without the common bonds of the 1L canon, we would lose a massive chunk of our already-paltry joke material. In order for the members of the Class of 2020 to be fully accepted as members of the community, they, too, must find themselves consumed by self-loathing when, months from now, they make a bad joke about feeling like the horse in Bailey v. West or craft a lousy pun about the scales in Palsgraf. It’s what it means to be a law student. Left bereft of the 1L canon, we would have only the professors and softball to unite us in humor, and, let’s be honest, most of the professors aren’t that funny.9

No, it will not do. This Court has long held to the idea that a thriving law school humor scene is at the heart of what it means to go to UVa. See SBA v. Libel, 342 U.Va. 116 (2017) (“No, A.J., we won’t make Libel stop making fun of you.”) With the fragile state of the humor-dependent lawyerly psyche in mind, this court affirms the holding of the lower court, and orders dismissed petitioners’ claims. Have fun reading Erie, bitchez.

JANI, J., concurring

I join in full the opinion of my colleague Justice VanderMeulen. I write this concurring opinion only to respond to his pernicious accusations. While my learned colleague and erstwhile sectionmate is technically correct that I failed to read Pennoyer, Lucy, and every Torts case prior to Thanksgiving, he knows perfectly well that the fault for that failure lies entirely with my supreme and unmatched dedication to Legal Research and Writing. I doubt Joe Fore has ever seen such an exemplary memorandum of law! In response to Justice VanderMeulen’s libelous accusation of drunk transacting, I would like to remind him that plying fellow students with hard liquor and then inquiring about their family’s foreign real property holdings is ethically questionable and beneath the dignity of this court.

---

jmv5af@virginia.edu

1 Just wait ‘til you get to the insanity defense, seriously.
2 And sometimes earlier; thanks for making us read that 15th century Thorns Case, Professor Abraham, I’ve been super careful about bush-trimming ever since.
3 Color us surprised.
4 The Petty Court notes its appreciation of the 1Ls' talented weaving of pretentious law school language with pointed profanity.
5 See Rule of Petty Procedure #1: We do what we want.
6 With one exception; see Jani, J., concurring.
7 Sorry, Professor Woolhandler, it wasn't you, it was me.
8 Looking' at you again, Justice Jani.
9 It's true, don't @ me.

Spotlight 8/30/17

Virginia Law Weekly August 30, 2017

If you or your organization would like to be featured, please reach out to us at editor@lawweekly.org.

Kimberly Delk (she/her/hers) '19
Vice President, UVa BLSA

A threatening crowd of Neo-Nazis shouts "Blood and Soil" on Grounds August 11, 2017. Photo courtesy CNN.com.

It’s hard to be a person of color in America. It was difficult four hundred years ago when slaves were first brought to this country. It was a slap in the face two hundred and fifty years later when slaves were set free without educational resources. One hundred years ago, it was painful to endure mass lynchings throughout the South and just fifty years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr. sacrificed his life in furtherance of a dream for equality. Sadly, it was equally as onerous on August 11th and 12th to watch Klansmen, white supremacists, and neo-Nazis wave their flags, flaunt their guns, and shout their racist ideologies free from legal retribution.

What made that weekend most difficult was not the physical proof that racism still exists; we already knew that. The events that took place are forever etched into our memory because society, the city of Charlottesville, and the University of Virginia defended free speech for bigots and racists. As a consequence of their actions, inactions, and mis-actions, Black and Brown people were denied their most basic, inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Before James Madison established the First Amendment’s freedom of speech, Charlottesville’s beloved Thomas Jefferson granted a series of inalienable rights to every American. Putting aside Jefferson’s contradictory and hypocritical ownership of slaves at the time, those rights were challenged throughout history by the racism that permeated through Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, gerrymandering, zoning, mass incarceration, maximum sentencing, standardized testing, etc. Unfortunately, the “Unite the Right” rally opened the door to the most herculean tool in racism’s arsenal: fear.

Fear for Life. The protesters shouted “Blood and Soil” throughout the streets of Charlottesville. This Nazi slogan refers to the unification of pure-blooded, Anglo-Saxon people and the acquisition of territory for their people. By also chanting, “you will not replace us” the protesters made it clear that America was theirs for the taking. Considering how the Americas were “taken” in the first place, the only way to fulfill the prophecies of their slogans is to take the land by force: placing the lives of people of color in jeopardy.

Some Americans interpreted these chants as hate speech or just the ignorant opinions of a small group of deplorables. It is imperative to understand that Black and Brown Americans heard real, tangible, life-altering threats. As we tuned into CNN, MSNBC, and FOX, we could feel the heat from a burning cross in our front yards. We could see the noose hanging from an oak tree in our local parks. We could even smell the bonfire used to burn our belongings and possibly our kinfolk. We feared for our lives while the law allowed these protesters to not only promote the supremacy of their race, but also the inferiority of all others. We were forced to bear witness that some Americans do not believe our lives matter.

Fear for Liberty. For all of the students that were in Charlottesville that weekend, we were denied the liberty to leave our homes out of fear. We feared what would happen if we were out there and found ourselves in the wrong place at the wrong time. We wanted the protesters to go home so that we could be free from the cameras, free from the hate, and free from the chaos. To date, our minds are still constrained as we constantly think and talk about what transpired.

While most of the student body was impacted in this way, Black and Brown students were further constrained by fear because we were the targets of their spiteful rhetoric. It was like being a kid standing in the screen door of your home while every bully from kindergarten through twelfth grade told you how worthless you are from your front yard. In a moment of bravery, you may think to go outside and tell the bullies how wrong they are and how successful you will be one day. That bravery fades as you realize you are outnumbered and that those bullies have the upper hand due to privileges and “good ole boy” networks that you will never be a part of.

Fear for the Pursuit of Happiness. The scariest part of that weekend is knowing that everyone who participated in the protest went back to their lives where they serve as CEOs, managers, and employers for people of color. It would be nice to think that the protesters were an isolated group whose ideals only reach the wicked and forgotten members of our society; however, this is not the case. Even though the rallies were extreme portrayals of racism, micro-aggressions and covert racism continue to plague our society when the cameras are off and the protesters are home.

Unfortunately, Black and Brown people have to question whether our neighbors, employers and acquaintances possess similar ideologies. While the rest of America can focus on being a productive member of society, we live in fear of how racism can manifest itself in our individual pursuits of happiness. Therefore, we walk with extra caution in the hallways, and flash a fake smile at the inappropriate comments made by our colleagues. We even offer to take on unwanted tasks just to tear down a stereotype or to convince the team that we are assets and not liabilities. Before the rally, these things were optional. Now, fear of negative repercussions on the job, at school, or in our communities make such precautions mandatory.

With everything that happened that weekend, we still prepared for church on Sunday and work on Monday because fear is exactly what they wanted from us. We contained the fear within our friendships and families while portraying strength and confidence to our coworkers and classmates. We’ll continue to exude such strength because fear will not bring about the prevention tactics, support, and legislation necessary for change.

Yes, the rallies reminded greater America of her past and present issues with acceptance and diversity. Yes, the rallies opened the hearts of millions of Americans who now understand that a post racial society is far in the distance for today’s America. On the other hand, Black and Brown America took those revelations a step further and realized that at any point in time, racists can gather to promote the destruction and extinction of entire ethnicities. If this extremist practice of free speech continues to gain traction and the law does not conform to punish such rhetoric, we fear that the difficulties of fifty, one hundred, and two hundred and fifty years ago will be the realities of the future.

---

vicepresident@uvablsa.org

Hot Bench: Jamaica "Jah" Akande (he/him/his)

Virginia Law Weekly August 30, 2017

1. Have you ever had a nickname? What? My nicknames are “Jah” and “Mayka.” My family is petty.

2. Where did you grow up? I was born, bred, and educated in the capital of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

3. What’s the best meal you’ve ever had? My mother-in-law’s Gujarati styled eggplant and potato curry is to die for.

4. If you could meet one celebrity, who would it be? I have always dreamt of meeting Sanaa Lathan. I am a Love & Basketball fanatic.

5. What’s your favorite book? My favorite book is Beloved by Toni Morrison. It is the one book that touches my soul and shakes me to the core each time that I read it.

6. Cats or Dogs? Dogs– preferably puppies.

7. If you were a superhero what would your superpower be? Power to heal the wounded and broken-hearted.

8. Are you a good dancer? Absolutely. My ancestors are African and Indo-Caribbean. I got it honest.

9. What did you have for breakfast this morning? A banana and iced coffee with almond milk.

10. What’s your most interesting two-truths-and-a-lie? (And what’s the lie?) 1) I started working at 13. 2) I am missing a large portion of my lung. 3) I’ve met President Obama. (#3. I wish!)

11. If you could live anywhere, where would it be? London. I spent three years there and my wife is from there, so it’s a natural fit.

12. Do you sing in the shower? Yes, to country music only.

13. What’s the best gift you’ve ever received? My health. I am so thankful to be able to wake up each morning fully able to enjoy this world and live my life to the fullest.

14. Do you believe the library should install a water feature? Let’s do it. I’m here for the healing power and calming effects of water for our law students!

15. If you could make one law that everyone had to follow, what would it be? Replace the toilet paper after you finish it.

Court of Petty Appeals: Class of 2019 v. 2017 OGI Firms et. al.

Virginia Law Weekly August 30, 2017

Class of 2019 v. 2017 OGI Firms et. al.
8 U.Va 230 (2017)

JANI, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, joined in part by GOLDMAN, C.J., and VANDERMEULEN and ZABLOCKI, JJ.

As we open this term of the Court of Petty Appeals, this Court has the annual opportunity to introduce the newest batch of fresh meat to this Court and its jurisprudence. To the incoming 1L class, welcome.

Today this court addresses a complaint that came to us before the start of the school term. During what is now considered the yearly feat of strength challenge, Dean Donovan tries to carry as many floundering 2Ls as he can manage to a BigLaw job, otherwise known as OGI. The petitioner is the Class of 2019, a group that as a whole qualifies as an eligible class because the withered husks of their bodies in aggregate adds up to about fourteen whole people. The first respondent is, as a group, the Firms of 2017 OGI. (The original complaint did specify several firms that were more complicit than others; however, I am still weighing job offers from a few of these firms, and therefore, I will not allow their good names to be individually slandered. For those who will say that I should recuse myself from this case, you don’t get how this works.) The second respondent is University of Virginia School of Law’s Office of Career Services.

The facts of this case are simple and are as follows: throughout the OGI process many firms manned “hospitality suites” where they provided students refreshments while giving them the opportunity to learn more about the firm. (As an aside, the term “hospitality suite” is unfitting, as no place that mandates attendance should be described as “hospitable.”) The food of choice at many of these suites were bagels. While this Court stands in support of healthy snacks, observers to and historians of the 2017 OGI process will note that the sea of contrived and unconvincing smiles that flooded the halls of Slaughter and Withers-Brown were often propped up by a complex matrix of refined carbohydrates. As such, this Court takes no issue with the complete lack of imagination when it came to food choice. Nevertheless, the complaint does not concern the offering of bagels, but rather the offering of Panera bagels in lieu of our own local and beloved Bodo’s Bagels. The petitioners bring two claims. The first, against the 2017 OGI Law Firms, is that the offering of this fraudulent ‘bagel’ constitutes an intentional infliction of emotional distress. Second, by subjecting students to this harrowing experience, Career Services violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishments. We have decided to consolidate both cases for the sake of efficiency, and because we can.

This court dismisses the first declaration of intentional infliction of emotional distress. This complaint falls apart on the tortious element of duty. Law firms have no duty not to offend the sensibilities of students. If anything, they have an affirmative duty to do so. (Shouts out to the interviewer who asked a student what their “favorite equitable decision case in Property class was.”) The entire fantasy of a BigLaw, $180k firm job, that allows young attorneys to have a work life balance, while engaging in sophisticated legal work in a diverse and collegial environment that students hallucinate on by drinking the free alcohol and finger foods provided to us is an exercise in emotional distress. (Again, full disclosure, I am one of the people who has been running on this proverbial hamster wheel, but to those who know me, the fact that I am willing to exchange my body, mind, and soul for shiny things should be of no surprise.)

The second claim, that Career Services violated students’ rights by subjecting us to a cruel and unusual punishment, stands on more solid ground. Career Services is supposed to be our protectors by talking us off the ledge in our desperate times of need. By forcing us to visit these hospitality suites and choke down the chalky carbohydrates made by corporate drones that they offer (no disrespect to Panera– this court recognizes that it just called your workers corporate drones, but your only real crime here is not being Bodo’s, an establishment that I have eaten at all of two times) Career Services is arguably subjecting us to an arbitrarily painful punishment. Some may argue that asserting an Eighth Amendment violation against our own school is extreme, however, if there is one thing that this court has recognized is that law students will let no opportunity to react extremely to something pass. The facts of this case run congruent to the four principles that constitute a “cruel and unusual punishment” laid out in Justice Brennan’s concurrence in Furman. Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972) (Brennan, J., concurring) (I’m not going to list them out; do your own research.) Nevertheless, two associated yet separate common-law principles sit above all Eighth Amendment case law. The first, Snitches get stiches, and the second, Don’t whine and moan, nobody cares. The claim before us today fails both of these doctrinal tests. If anyone thought that this court would enjoin the Office of Career Services from anything besides dealing with the incoming horde of gunner 1Ls who have already made appointments with career counselors, they were severely mistaken.

So there it is, welcome to the 2017-2018 term of the Court of Petty Appeals, it will only get better from here. Or, maybe not, who knows. Feel free to send any disputes you would like heard to editor@lawweekly.org. We won’t look at them, but feel free to send them anyway. Finally, this court would like to condemn the recent violence in Charlottesville; hate and intolerance have no place in this world, this school, and especially in this court.

Case dismissed.

ZABLOCKI, J., concurring in judgment

I, Justice Zablocki, in whole body and mind, swear that I like Panera bagels and by extension show no loyalty to Charlottesville. Although I have a cat, a wild and noxious beast, which shows my utter lack of judgment, by some mix-up I have been granted a seat on this court. I definitely wrote this opinion, me, Zablocki, J.

VANDERMEULEN, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment

I join nearly in full the opinion of my colleague Justice Jani. I write separately only to note my complete and total opposition to so-called “hospitality suites.” These tools of oppression are so noxious, loathsome, and filled with fidget spinners as to merit their total injunction, should a case seeking such an outcome arise. I depart from Justice Jani’s decision only insofar as it relies on the opinion of Justice Brennan. Professor Woolhandler was very clear that Justice Brennan is never, under any circumstances, to be cited approvingly.

GOLDMAN, C.J., concurring in part and dissenting in part

I concur with Justice Jani’s dismissal of the first claim and note that Bodo’s bagels are superior to all bagels in Charlottesville. I would also suggest that SBA pass a decree stating as such (is that what SBA does?)

As to the second count, and speaking as an employed 3L, I give Career Services total impunity.

HOPKIN, J., recuses herself because, “nOGI, b*tche$.”

---

ahj3ez@virginia.edu

jmg3db@virginia.edu

Hot Bench: Josh Myers

Virginia Law Weekly April 19, 2017

1. Have you ever had a nickname? What? Yes, I have had a nickname. My sister would call me “Bo” growing up, and it is still used occasionally by my family members. It was also the name of one of my great-grandfathers.

2. What is your favorite word? Optimism.

3. Where did you grow up? I grew up in the Little Mountain, South Carolina.

4. What’s the best meal you’ve ever had? I’m a huge fan of shrimp and grits. They are the best in Charleston, South Carolina and cannot be topped.

5. If you could meet one celebrity, who would it be and why? That’s a tough question because I have so many. I would likely go with Sir Ian McKellen or Sir Patrick Stewart because they are both fabulous film and stage actors. I’m not sure that I could choose between them.

6. If you owned a sports team, what/whom would be the mascot? The mascot would likely be a tiger.

7. If you had to pick one song to play non-stop in the background of your life, what would it be? Even though I would like to be a prosecutor, my background song would be Smooth Criminal by Michael Jackson.

8. If you were a superhero, what would your superpower be? I would love to fly, but it would have to be over 100 mph. First, I wouldn’t have to waste money on gas unless it was raining. Second, I could basically go anywhere.

9. What’s something you wish you’d known about law school before coming to UVA? That it is basically an exercise in critical reading and writing for three years.

10. What did you have for breakfast this morning? Raisin-less oatmeal with cinnamon.

11. If you could live anywhere, where would it be? Good question. Probably Rome, because I love classical history.

12. What’s the best (or worst!) PG-rated pick-up line you’ve ever heard? Are you from Tennessee? Because you are the only ten that I see.

13. What’s the best gift you’ve ever received? My hand-made cello, named Sebastian, which I still continue to play to this day. He was made by Sally Mullikin, a fabulous string luthier, in 2005 while she was a student in Newark, England.

14. If the law school had yearbook awards, what would you want to win? Most likely to find buried treasure.

15. If you could know one thing about your future, what would it be? That’s difficult. I would want to know how many children I have.

16. Backstreet Boys or *NSYNC? Backstreet Boys. That’s not even a question.

17. What’s the longest you’ve gone without sleep? Gosh. When making a fourteen-hour trip to Michigan from South Carolina.

18. What’s your favorite thing to do in Charlottesville? Visit wineries.

19. If you could make one law that everyone had to follow, what would it be? Treat others as you would have them treat you. Our world would be a much better place.

20. What’s your earliest childhood memory? My earliest childhood memory is pretending to cook with pots on the steps on my home. I was playing as a chef.

21. What’s your favorite movie quote? My favorite movie quote is as follows: “Our lives are defined by opportunities; even the ones we miss.” -The Curious Case of Benjamin Button