Tweedledee and Tweedledum: Squirrels

---

Phil Tonseth ‘22
Staff Editor

Pro Squirrels: Squirrels Run the World 

            Squirrels are the true embodiment of the American spirit. Most importantly, they show the true grit that most Americans expect of and cheer for in the underdog. Squirrels are often counted out, left for the vultures as road kill, or seen as vermin. Yet, they survive. Everyday, squirrels wake up, pick themselves up by their bootstraps, and keep going. You are more like a squirrel than you even realize; allow me to enlighten you.

            Law school is all about finding the easiest way to succeed, whether buying supplements, only signing up for afternoon classes, or eating at the free food table every day of the week. Squirrels are similarly resourceful. They learn from an early age how to steal every morsel of food, hence why they look frightened when you see them in the street. They don’t want to get arrested for a petty crime either. Also, they hoard food like it’s going out of style, similar to the kids that take five gummy pouches from the Dean of Snacks.

            Even more applicable, squirrels are quintessential millennials. First, there’re so many of them. You can’t walk down the street around here without running into one, millennials and squirrels alike. Next, they act like they’re environmentally conscious and care about climate change. At least their accidental acorn planting contributes to new trees that produce oxygen, whereas millennials getting Starbucks to stop producing straws, while useful to turtles, doesn’t pack the same punch against climate change. Lastly, when they get lost or scared, squirrels and millennials alike, always run back to their moms in a panic.[1] When a baby squirrel is lost, they become trainable by humans and turn into adorable pets. Millennials just become “influencers.”

            In such increasingly partisan times, squirrels are an animal we can rally around. Sure, they may faze you with their football worthy agility drills in front of your car or efforts to take unhealthy French fries away from you in the park, but they embody all that America stands for. John Winthrop eloquently opined in 1630, “We shall be as a city upon a hill, the eyes of all people are upon us." In establishing the foundation of the United States, the early settlers built this country through grit, hard work, and trees.[2] None of this would have been possible if squirrels hadn’t done their job, planting millions of trees throughout the country to ensure future generations could prosper. The hill that America stands on today isn’t made of acorns, as squirrels would prefer, but, in my humble and unbiased opinion, you have to respect the work that squirrels have put in.

This furry creature has caused a massive rift among the Law Weekly staff.

---

 Ben Stievater ‘22
Staff Editor

Threats from Above: the Case Against Squirrels

            Of all the creatures on God’s green earth, none terrify me more than squirrels. Yes, squirrels. It’s a long story not worth telling that definitely doesn’t involve years of trauma stemming from four-year-old me trying to pick one up only to run screaming for my mom when it lunged at me. The bottom line is that I despise them. I know what you’re thinking— squirrels are harmless, cute even, and this is a ridiculous phobia. You’d be in good company with a majority of people, specifically my sophomore-year-of-college Tinder date, Rachel, who never texted me back after I used her as a human shield while we were walking and a squirrel jumped in front of us. However, in a world where it’s normal to fear snakes and spiders but not these furry demons, I’m here to preach the truth of the animal kingdom: squirrels are public enemy number one.

            Squirrel supporters will often tell you that they are “cute” or “fluffy” due to the fact that they have bushy tails. Shave the tail, however, and what are you left with? A RAT. Without their tails, squirrels bear an almost identical resemblance to their Black Plague-causing cousins. Rats are nearly universally abhorred as dirty and disease-ridden, so why, then, do we tolerate squirrels? Are we so impressionable as to be fooled by decorative evolutionary fluff?

            Perhaps this resemblance alone wouldn’t bother me so much were it not for the fact that squirrels are so prevalent. Rats at least have the decency to stick to alleyways and sewers at night. No, squirrels will just sit there in groups of two or three and stare at you, taunting you with their presence and encroaching on the daytime as they monopolize the acorn trade. Their presence is particularly a problem on college campuses, where a few twisted people, who just want to watch the world burn, feed the squirrels, causing them to become a dangerous combination of hungry and fearless, which is coincidentally also the title of my law school memoir thus far that consists solely of tales of me wandering from room to room in W.B. during lunchtime.

            The most concerning aspect of squirrels, however, is their pure athletic ability. They can jump, scurry, and climb in any direction at what amounts to a FRIGHTENING level of acrobatics. Worse still, they’re total spazzes and impossible to keep eyes on. One second they’re on the ground, zig-zagging to and fro, and the next they’re climbing backward up a tree to the higher ground. It’s over for you if it came to it. The only thing keeping you safe is their magnanimity, and only a fool would trust an acrobatic rat with that short of an attention span and the potential to strike from any angle. So think it through and say no to squirrels, or at least don’t laugh if you see me powerwalking in their opposite direction in the courtyard.

___
pjt5hm@virginia.edu

bes4cf@virginia.edu

[1] I perfected this practice after winning hide and seek in clothing racks at department stores. Don’t worry, I still call my mom weekly.

---

[2] Wood cabins were pretty popular, plus ships were made out of wood. All quite important.

Court of Petty Appeals: Students with Large Water Bottles v. Thirsty Students

---

Students with Large Water Bottles v. Thirsty Students

72 V.L.W. 11 (2019)

On appeal from the Petty Court of Appeals for the W.B. Circuit

Re, Judge, sitting by designation, delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Shmazzle, C.J., and Elicegui, Luk, Schmid, and Ranzini J.J., joined.

JUDGE RE, sitting by designation, delivered the opinion of the Court.

The issue before the Court today plays itself out multiple times a day, at predictable intervals, the four days a week[1] during which classes are held at the Law School: thirsty students, realizing their water bottles are empty five minutes before class starts, flock to the drinking fountains and/or new motion-sensing-electric water bottle fillers, only to encounter a line that will not move fast enough before class starts to get water. The cause of the delay is students with large water bottles who are definitely going to fill them all the way up, no matter how long it takes (and despite that fact that it is unlikely that even someone who had just run a half-marathon in D.C., in July, would actually be able to drink that much water during an 80-minute class period). The question specifically before the Court today is whether the class of Thirsty Students may enjoin the class of Students with Large Water Bottles from filling them up all the way. We hold that they cannot.

I.

Earlier in the semester, various students walked into class, took their seats in W.B. classrooms, and reached for a refreshing drink of water, only to find their water supplies depleted. Each student looked at their phones to see how much time there was before class started. Alarmingly, less than five minutes remained. But because of its natural geography, W.B. is blessed with many places to get water.[2] This was not, after all, a trip all the way to the W.B. coffee shop[3] for a hot beverage. The students arrived at the line and found three students ahead, waiting to fill up personal water storage tanks which they were euphemistically calling “water bottles.”[4] Faced with the bad options of embarrassingly walking into class late or being sort of thirsty for the next hour, the thirsty students sued. They seek to enjoin students with large water bottles from filling them all the way up in the five minutes before class, claiming a substantive due process right to have water in class.

The lower court ruled in favor of the Thirsty Students and enjoined the Students with Large Water Bottles from filling the bottles all the way up within five minutes of class. This created a circuit split with the Court of Petty Appeals for the Slaughter Circuit, which found that students are free to take as much time as they want filling their water bottles. Students Running Late v. Students with Nalgene Bottles, 343 U.Va. 321 (2015) (“Honestly, just stand there pouring water on your hand for all we care.”) We take this case to resolve the circuit split.

II.

It is unclear from Students with Large Water Bottle’s brief what errors the lower court allegedly committed,[5] but because “[w]e do what we want[],” we will be reviewing this case de novo. It’s usually fun to opine on the merits of something.

Thirsty Students claim that there is a substantive due process right to having water in class. Because Students with Large Water Bottles could still fill the bottles part way, the injunction, Thirsty Students argue, will not infringe on the Students with Large Water Bottles’ rights. In response, Students with Large Water Bottles probably[6] cited a Court of Petty Appeals case from last term: Class of 2021 v. Davies, 918 U.Va. 34, 71 V.L.W. 14, 4 (2019). In Class of 2021, the Court considered whether the Administration’s decision to remove the high-quality free cookies and coffee from W.B. on Friday morning[7] without a hearing violated the due process rights of the 1L class. After much expert analysis which the author of today’s opinion skimmed, it looks like the Court held that it was not a violation, writing, “If Dean Davies decides to bring back the coffee, we will, as always, salute her benevolent judgment. But we will not order it.” Id. at 4.

This (purely discretionary) restraint by the Court is admirable, and we impulsively choose to follow it today, though the Court commends Thirsty Students for their substantive due process claim. This theory was later codified as the Court of Petty Appeals’ first Rule of Procedure, and it is certainly welcome in briefs to this Court.

It is also worth noting that based on the course descriptions on the School’s website, Land Use Law might be the most applicable to a water-rights case. But as the author of today’s opinion has not taken Land Use (and given the notice concerns that would arise from actually applying principles from a class taken by so few people), we decline to consider any of these arguments.

Thirsty Students also had a number of pages about water bottle size. A holding which simply limited water bottle size might be sensible, but that would drag us into the realm of policy-making. That sounds like a lot of work, so we decline to do so here.

Absent legislation from SBA, or a royal pronouncement from Dean Goluboff, today’s Court is not inclined to step in with equitable remedies. Though it is worth noting, it would certainly be within the Court’s authority to do so. See Petty Rule of Procedure 1: We do what we want.

*          *          *

Because we do not want this opinion to drag on unnecessarily with neurotic distinctions and unhelpful legal analysis (see, e.g., no U.S. Supreme Court opinion ever), we will conclude the opinion here. While SBA, Dean Goluboff, or non-legal considerations like thoughtfulness are free to step in to address the issue of water-bottle line speed, we decline to do so here.

The judgment of the Petty Court of Appeals for the W.B. Circuit is

Vacated.

___
wdr3mq@virginia.edu

---

[1] The panel comprising today’s court does not include any 1Ls, from whom we have heard rumors of classes meeting on Fridays. As this has not been confirmed by the members of today’s court, who would not dare to darken the doorway of the school after 5 p.m. on Thursday, we only address the water dispute occurring before classes, necessarily meaning Monday through Thursday.

[2] Maybe connected to wells (?), or the natural underground aquifer where the snakes which sometimes visit W.B. live—we are not entirely clear on how plumbing works.

[3] Which the lower courts have erroneously been referring to as “the library.”

[4] In the interest of transparency, we only had time to read Thirsty Students’ brief, but it really did sound like the water bottles were too big, and in any event we are ruling against them, so it’s probably still fair.

[5] Because, again, we only read Thirsty Students’ brief.

[6] See footnotes 4 and 5, supra.

[7] Thus removing the sole reason one might come to school on a Friday.

Club Spotlight: Health Law Association

---

Savanna Williams ‘21
Guest Writer

When I came to law school, it was explicitly with the goal of practicing health law. But in reality, I did not know what this dream of mine looked like. All I knew was that I am passionate about healthcare reform and that I wanted to understand the law generally before attempting to change it.

So, what is health law, anyway?

Health law focuses on the rules and regulations that govern the health care industry. The health care industry includes hospitals, hospital systems, health care providers, insurers, pharmaceutical and device manufacturers, individual healthcare providers, and group providers like nursing homes, psychiatric centers, acute care centers, and health maintenance organizations. Some of the regulations health lawyers work with include the Stark Law, HIPAA, the Anti-Kickback Statute, EMTALA, and individual state privacy laws.

What do health lawyers do?

Health lawyers in private practice work across the full spectrum of law, from litigation to transactional to regulatory work. Healthcare litigation most obviously includes medical malpractice but can also include litigating fraud and abuse claims, reimbursement matters, or antitrust issues. In the transactional realm, healthcare lawyers serve as subject matter expert deal support, evaluating general corporate matters like tax, antitrust, and contract negotiation issues. On the regulatory side, healthcare lawyers might provide guidance on Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse, confidentiality, or health reform issues. Health lawyers also represent healthcare providers before state and federal agencies that regulate the industry.

In the public sector, healthcare lawyers might work for government agencies like the Department of Health and Human Services, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or Veterans Affairs. In-house opportunities include hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, or insurance.

This opaqueness about what health law is comprised of is what drove me to run for president of the Health Law Association. Our goals are to:

·      Explain what health law is;

·      Give students a better view of the different areas of health law;

·      Introduce available health law-related classes; and

·      Promote a healthy law school environment.

Previous Events

This fall, we hosted a meet and greet with the health law-adjacent professors in order to give students, especially 1Ls, an idea of what classes they might take if they were interested in practicing health law. A common area of confusion is when students have an interest in a particular field of law, but they do not know what courses to take in order to reach that goal. We hoped to remove some of that ambiguity by having each of the professors talk about their course offerings in the coming semesters. We hope that this helped with course planning, not just next semester, but for a holistic law school career.

In addition to the professors, we also had Michaela Lieberman, co-director of the Health & Disability Law Clinic, speak about clinic opportunities. This year-long clinic offers students firsthand experience and insight into how health law touches in the individual patient, which we often forget about in the private practice setting where your clients are predominantly health care systems.

I also had the chance to speak at a University Democrats meeting on Main Grounds earlier this semester about the vastness of health law and how to translate an interest in healthcare reform and policy into a legal career. One of my big goals as president is to expand our membership beyond the walls of the Law School, because health law is something that truly touches all of us. Since that meeting, we have recruited regular attendees of HLA events from Main Grounds.

Upcoming Events and Goals

Next semester, we are planning a healthcare reform debate in advance of the March primaries. It goes without saying that healthcare reform is at the forefront of the election news cycle, and we hope to shed some light on the legal status of the Affordable Care Act and the legal implications of candidates’ proposed reforms.

At the Shaping Justice conference, we are co-sponsoring a panel with Lamda that focuses on Disability Rights Advocacy: 30 Years After the Americans with Disabilities Act. We are also co-sponsoring an event on maternal health with If/When/How and another on food labeling with FLAVA. We are always looking for co-sponsorship opportunities, so if your organization is interested in planning something healthcare-focused, please reach out!

___
sbw5va@virginia.edu

Hot Bench: Lena Welch '20

---

Lena Welch ‘20
New Media Editor

Hi Lena, welcome to Hot Bench! Where are you from? 

McLean, Va.

Tell us something about McLean!

Mmmmh, I don’t like it. I do like Chesapeake Bagel Bakery though.

Who will you root for when UNC comes to JPJ Dec. 7?

Don’t be silly. #GoHeels

What’s something at which you’re elite?

Serving up piping hot reality-checks to my friend Harrison or serving up piping hot bakes. Also remembering people’s computing IDs.

Speaking of “hot bakes,” what do you put in your cookies that causes professors to get into a bidding war?

Love.

If you were a kitchen utensil which would you be?

I’m probably a wooden spoon. I’m really traditional, and I think wooden spoons are more useful than people give them credit for.

Best episode of GBBO?

I’m torn between the finales of Nancy’s season (I love Luis) and Nadiya’s season (I love Tamal). Killer finalists, and some of my favorite showstoppers.

Favorite food?

Never met a carb I didn’t like, but let’s say chocolate chip cookies. Also, I’m a big believer in breakfast milkshakes.  

Favorite place in Charlottesville? 

Klöckner Stadium, where they play soccer and lacrosse. It was actually my favorite place at UVA before I came to Law School, because I love watching my teams play there. It’s a beautiful stadium.

What’s your favorite UVA Sport?

I can’t answer that.

What song would play in the background of your life?

Right now, it’s probably the Whitney-Kygo version of Higher Love.

Anti-Stress Hobby? 

Yoga at FlyDog.[1] Or baking. Or hanging with my cat. All of my hobbies are anti-stress hobbies.

What is your favorite yoga pose?

Side angle. I’m big into turning my rib cage to the ceiling.

What do you like to do with your cat Draco?

What don’t I like to do with my cat? He’s my favorite guy.

Pet peeve?

When people do not use a direct address comma.

Catch phrase?

“Catch you on the flippity flip.”

If you could live anywhere, where would it be?

Scotland. I can’t explain why.

What’s one movie that left an impression on you? 

The Peanut Butter Falcon. Absolutely my favorite movie. It’s like someone made a movie just for me.

The Office or Parks and Rec?

The answer has to be The Office, but I recently came up with the phrase “Parks and Rec-ference," so people should start using that. You know what else I do that people should do? Voice-memo my laughter and use it instead of “lol.”

Very cool. So what are you involved in?

Public Interest Law Association, the Program in Law and Public Service, the Virginia Law Weekly, Amici Signatae Linguae (the ASL club), itrek, and I’m an LL.M. PA.

What was your favorite thing about planning PILA?

Well, the Live Auction was the most fun, so I’ll say selecting the items that went into that.

Who is the person at the Law School that you most want to kick in the head?

Bill Re ’21 thought I couldn’t kick him in the head, so he is top of the list.

How do you give people nicknames or, as you like to call them, codenames?

Glad you asked. You take someone’s first and last initials, flip the order, and now come up with a word representing those letters in that order. Ex: Michael Schmid ‘21, MS, SM, Superman (I exclusively call him Superman at Law Weekly meetings).

What’s something you know now that you would tell yourself coming into law school? 

You’ll make some of the best friends of your life. Brag.

What will you miss most about the Law School?

I can’t answer this. It can’t be helped. Classic Daisy Buchannan stuff right there. What will I miss? Um, it’s a real bummer I’m never going to see Jansen VanderMeulen ’19 again.[2]

___
lw8vd@virginia.edu

---

[1] Going to throw Sam Pickett ’21 a bone here for mentioning me in last week’s Hot Bench. I do teach aerial yoga at FlyDog. Come to my classes Saturdays at 4:30 p.m.

[2] Editor’s note: He already graduated...

Letter to the Editor: 11-13-2019

---

Michael Berdan ’22

A Poem About Memos 

’Twas the night before memo and all through Withers-Brown,

All the 1Ls were scurrying, each wearing a frown;

Case printouts were scattered ‘cross library spots,

In hopes the papers themselves would connect all the dots.

The 1Ls did type, fast and furiously,

Not into Word—but their section GroupMe.

“This memo, my dudes!” “This memo! ’Tis hell!”

The messages flew ’til they heard midnight’s bell.

The staff came ‘round to give them the boot,

And the 1Ls crawled to the hall, none appearing too cute.

“Look how many!” one asked. “Pages, you mean?”

“No,” he said, “Look how many likes on my meme!”

So the hours ticked by and the poor 1Ls struggled,

With social life and academics precariously juggled,

When the sun came up, they had a memo completed,

They’d won over the task, tho’ they all looked defeated.

Fourteen pages—no more! That’s just what’s required!

Crest that page break! Submit to Canvas! ‘Fore time has expired!

The 1Ls were left, at the end of our tale,

Saying “Thanks for the LOLs, and thank God it’s pass-fail!”

---

mwb4pk@virginia.edu

Women in Public Service: Paths to Public Interest Careers

---

Marylse Vieira ’22
Donna Fay Imadi ’22
Kathryn Querer ’22 

Pursuing a career in public interest law can be daunting. For a student deciding to pursue big law, the process is structured through OGI, firm events, and standardized career practices. Contrastingly, for public interest careers, there is great variation among the timelines for applications, potential positions, expectations, workloads, and networking opportunities. On Wednesday, October 30, Virginia Law Women, PILA, and LPS hosted an event called Women in Public Service which gave female students an opportunity to learn how to better navigate the challenging process of considering and applying to public interest jobs.

 Two simultaneous panels began at 5:15 p.m., followed by a reception at 6:15 p.m. in the Purcell Reading Room. 

About twenty female students, many of whom intend to pursue a public interest career immediately after law school, attended the panel titled “Starting Strong: Beginning Your Career in Public Service.” The panel consisted of four women who are in various public interest-related careers. 

After each of the panelists introduced themselves and gave a general overview of their career paths, they were asked a series of questions relating to choosing careers, networking, and advice that they would give to students hoping to follow in their footsteps. 

Claire Blumenson ’11, co-founder and Executive Director of School Justice Program (SJP), introduced herself first. SJP is a non-profit that provides legal assistance to older students with disabilities. When asked how current students can network in the public sector, Blumenson advised the panel attendees to reach out to two or three legal organizations each week to set up a 20-minute phone call. Blumenson emphasized that this is a great way to learn about various public interest-related career paths and also make connections with people in the industry. Additionally, Blumenson encouraged students looking to learn more about potential public interest career paths to look to the Equal Justice Works website, which sorts fellows into their areas of practice.

Vivian Kim ’12 spoke next, who spent three years practicing litigation in big law before joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia in 2015. Kim has worked exclusively on matters relating to domestic violence in the D.C. Superior Court over the past year. She advised that enthusiasm is the most valuable attribute that a potential summer intern at the U.S. Attorney’s Office can bring to an interview. Passion and enthusiasm for working within the system is essential to success in this career path. 

Sarah Buckley ’14 then spoke about her work as a trial attorney in the Defense Section of the Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) at the U.S. Department of Justice. Buckley works predominantly on defensive cases under various environmental statutes. She educated students about the value of a working judicial clerkship, as she felt that her experience clerking gave her the opportunity to narrow her legal interests. 

The fourth member of the panel, Cassie Powell, works as a staff attorney at the Legal Aid Justice Center’s JustChildren program. Her interests include public interest and education law, and she currently works representing children in educational matters. In narrowing her career path, Powell emphasized the importance of understanding her personal values, and in shaping her career goals off of these values. For example, finding balance and prioritizing her family has always been of the utmost importance to Powell, so she looked to a career path that would facilitate her pursuit of these personal goals.

For the final ten minutes of the event, the audience had the opportunity to ask questions to the panelists. One student asked about differences in salaries between the public and private sectors, which sparked a lively back-and-forth between the panelists about the tradeoff of salary for career autonomy that accompanies public interest careers. All the panelists ultimately agreed that, while public interest law careers pay significantly less than firm jobs, the personal fulfillment and passion they derive from their careers is well worth a lower salary. 

Many students hope to enter into public service at some point during their legal career. However, working at a private firm for the first few years out of law school can be desirable or even necessary to pay off student debt, provide financially for one’s family, and get high-quality legal training. At the Private Pathways to Public Service panel, four UVA Law alumni discussed their paths from the private sector to public service and gave candid and valuable advice for students hoping to follow similar career trajectories. 

Panelist Sarah Hall ’05 serves as an attorney in the Division of Enforcement at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, where she investigates violations of federal securities laws, insider trading, and fraud. Prior to the SEC, Hall was an insurance coverage litigator at Covington & Burling. Though Hall found the training and mentorship she received at the firm valuable, she noted that insurance litigation was not easily transferable to government service. Despite this, Hall was able to make the move to the SEC in through a social connection, demonstrating her point that networking can be key to finding a job in civil service. Because she knew the public sector was her ultimate goal, Hall also signed up for USA Jobs notifications during her first year in big law and had yearly career check-ins with herself. She recommended students interested in making the transition from private to public service do the same. 

As a public defender for the Western District of Virginia, panelist Lisa Lorish ’08 represents clients on everything from DUIs and minor possession to capital murder, more often on the appellate stage than at trials. Lorish graduated from the Law School in 2008, at which point she became an associate at Sullivan and Cromwell. In 2011, she joined the Charlottesville office of McGuireWoods as a commercial litigator and worked there until beginning her current role in 2014. Lorish recommended students hoping to go into public service be aware of how easy it can be to succumb to the inertia and “golden handcuffs” of firm practice and be ready to potentially relocate for an opportunity that comes along, as flexibility can be crucial to getting hired. 

Representing the prosecutorial side of criminal practice, Kristi O’Malley ’05 is the Deputy Criminal Chief and Chief of the Southern Division at the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland. O’Malley has been at the USAO for nine years, prior to which she worked at Latham and Watkins. O’Malley suggested that students hoping to eventually enter public service choose a firm with an open system of choosing projects, as to not get “pigeon-holed” into a specific, nontransferable legal area. 

The sole panelist employed at a nonprofit, Jennifer Nelson ’11 works as an attorney for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and also serves as co-director of UVA Law’s First Amendment Clinic. Before she worked in public service, Nelson was an associate at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher’s Washington D.C. office. Having graduated law school during the recession, she knew beginning at a firm was a reality. Nelson had always been interested in media law. Nelson urged those who know they will leave the private sector to “be realistic, and keep to a budget” and to focus on paying off debt while at the firm. 

All the panelists endorsed taking advantage of pro bono opportunities that would give young attorneys substantive legal experience, particularly in the courtroom, and show future employers their continued interest in public service. They also all urged those interested in making the career transition to stay in touch with old classmates and colleagues, emphasizing that networking continues to be a primary way to land jobs in different sectors. Frances Skardon ’22, found the event very informative, explaining that it made her feel “more comfortable in making her career choices.” Despite the significant difference in salary between private and public work, the accomplished attorneys on the panel were glad they made the jump from big law to public service and showed that it entirely possible with some forethought and strategy.   

After the panels concluded, students walked over to Purcell Reading Room for a reception accompanied by hors d'oeuvres, drinks, and a speech by Sarah Baker (former Special Assistant to President Obama’s Office of White House Counsel). As a UVA alumna, she delivered an inspiring speech about the path of her career within both the public and private sector. She later inspired the crowd through her message that whichever path one enters first in the legal field, it’s still possible to make a difference whether private or public. 

She also discussed her new organization “We The Action"— a digital platform connecting lawyers to pro bono projects across the Nation, which to date, has built out 8,000 volunteer lawyers. The organization is  “a launching pad for lawyers looking to make a change or dip their toes into work they haven’t previously considered.”

When elaborating on her decisions out of law school to first join a firm, Baker discussed the tension between her passion to “do good” as the kind of person who thought “she’d save the world” as a kid, with knowing the security and stability that a law firm job would provide. “I knew a law firm would be a safe and stable pay. It was the path of least resistance.”

She later tied in how this work on the private sector was critical to her building skills that would eventually aid her in public service work, “I worked alongside phenomenal people building skills that would help me land my first White House job.”

Baker went on to characterize the stereotypes of those who enter the public sector and private sector as “the folks who work in non-profit are selfless do-gooders who champion the oppressed and have to weave their own clothes…those in private are just cashing checks as they laugh and smoke cigars,” the crowd laughed in amusement.

She then posed a question about all the other lawyers who fall in between. “What about the lawyers working to patent medical devices that will save lives? Which bucket do we put them in? What about the people whose parents paid for law school which makes it easier for them to work at a nonprofit does that make them better than someone who needs to pay off their loans?” These were questions on the mind of those who were in attendance of the event.

When asked about her favorite part of the speech, Jacqueline Foley ’21 said “It was so inspiring to see such a powerful woman. When you see all these powerful women on this panel succeeding at the highest level of public service and government it’s like, I can do that too. It’s like ‘you can’t see what you can’t be.’”

Foley went on to say, “So many feel like public service or private is a dichotomy. But the reality is that it’s such a malleable line. You can start in private to pay off loans and there’s no shame in that, you’re not a bad person. You can always decide to go to public service when it’s right. Different circumstances in your own life or in government when they are hiring are all factors. You don't have to have it figured out all right now.”

As Baker later put it, “The point is we all have different circumstances at different times of our lives, reasons for doing the things we do.” As many law students start pondering questions of the future, considerations of practicality that conflict with our passions may be the guiding force of our decision making.

Baker later said, “so often in law but also everywhere else there are all of these unnecessary lines about doing good in the world and who gets to have the moral authority. She says, “It’s a false choice that pigeon-holes us.” Baker closed her remarks to a roaring round of applause saying, “As I see it, anyone can save the world.” 

---

mav3p@virginia.edu

dfi3un@virginia.edu

kmq8vf@virginia.edu

Reproductive Justice 101

---

Maria Luevano ’21

On Thursday, October 31, UVA Law’s chapter of If/When/How hosted an event led by Jeryl Hayes, the Movement Building Director of the nationwide organization. In her role, Hayes works with the organization’s network of law students and legal professionals to champion reproductive justice within and beyond the legal system. Hayes was introduced to the organization as a law student herself, both as a legal intern and as a chapter leader. From Olivia Roat ’21, President of If/When/How’s UVA Law chapter: “Our goal with this event was to give students an opportunity to learn about the fundamentals of reproductive justice and to broaden people's perspective of the type of issues that reproductive justice encompasses. We were so excited to host Jeryl, who not only is extremely knowledgeable but also loves talking to law students. We were also thrilled to have such great attendance.” 

Hayes focused her discussion around the framework of racial justice, which the organization uses for its reproductive justice work. Hayes explained that twelve black women developed the reproductive justice movement in Chicago in 1994 and were influenced by both human rights and social justice work. They did not find a home for their needs within the civil rights or second wave feminist movements at the time. If/When/How continues their work and believes that it is impossible to look at reproductive justice without thinking about racial justice. The organization is committed to centering people of color. This relationship is embodied in their vision of “an essential transformation of the systems and institutions that perpetuate oppression into structures that realize justice, and a future when all people can self-determine their reproductive lives free from discrimination, coercion, or violence.”[1] For them, racial justice is reproductive justice and both are working to ensure that legal rights are accessible to all people.

Hayes further explained that the goal of the reproductive justice movement is about more than reproduction—it includes the right to have children, the right not to have children, and the right to parent the children that you have in a safe and healthy environment. In pursuing these goals, If/When/How works to dismantle discriminatory systems and institutions and create equitable policies and practices in their place. One general way they hope to achieve this is to ensure that everyone has the same level of access to healthcare and healthcare coverage. Hayes then encouraged the audience to consider our own privileges and in turn our own oppressions, related to factors such as race, gender, status (such as immigration status), economics, and more. She explained that in doing so, it will be easier to determine when working in reproductive justice whether to “speak up” and share your unique perspective or ensure that your identity and experience is being represented, or whether to “listen” and use your platform to include others that provide another perspective and may be better suited to speak on the topic. Hayes also implored the audience to be more than allies and take on the role of “co-conspirators” by playing an active part in the reproductive justice movement. She started her close by pointing out the ways in which all of this work can be done through a racial justice lens by centering the most marginalized and lifting up impacted communities, identifying systems of oppression and discrimination, actively fighting against explicit and implicit bias, working within your own community, educating your peers and calling for systemic change, and acknowledging the work of people of color. In the end, Hayes closed with the idea that justice is multidimensional and that there is no one size fits all solution to the many issues they hope to address.

If/When/How’s next event at the Law School will be held on Thursday, November 7 at 1 p.m. and will be a discussion around the June Medical Services v. Gee case which the Supreme Court recently granted cert. The case involves a Louisiana abortion law and that could have a big impact on the future of reproductive rights. If/When/How is bringing together a panel of experts for a discussion about the case and the work that lawyers are doing to challenge laws that limit abortion access. Speakers include Amy Hagstrom Miller, CEO of Whole Woman's Health; Heather Shumaker, Senior Counsel for Reproductive Rights and Health at the National Women's Law Center; Pepis Rodriguez, Litigation Counsel at the Lawyering Project; and Kimya Forouzan, If/When/How Reproductive Justice Legal Fellow at the National Asian Pacific American's Women Forum.

---

ml9gt@virginia.edu

[1] If/When/How organization vision found at https://www.ifwhenhow.org.

Hot Bench: Nicole Agama '21

---

Nicole Agama ’21 

Hey Nicole, thanks for coming to Hot Bench! We heard you were born in Canada. What’s your favorite thing about Canada?

Their public transportation is on rubber wheels and so you can’t speak when you’re on it because your voice is shaking the entire time. I had uncontrollable giggles the first time I went on the train.

What did you do this summer?

I interned for Judge Paula Xinis on the Federal District Court for the District of Maryland.

What was your favorite thing you did that you can tell us about?

I think my favorite thing I worked on was this wrongful detainer case that had to do with this complicated statute where the only case law available was from around the early 1900’s. We had to do a lot of statutory interpretation, and so I got to work a lot with my judge’s clerk and my Judge to try and figure out why it was written the way it was. We had to dive deep into the legislative history, which was really cool.

What are you doing next summer?

I will be working at a firm in D.C. I was actually a paralegal at this same firm and now I get to go back as an attorney, which will be kind of cool and kind of weird! 

What are you involved in around the law school?

I am the Social Programming chair for BLSA, a Lexis Nexis Rep, a PA for Section G (go Section G, best section of the 1L class),[1] a part of the Virginia Innocence Project student group, an Executive Editor for the Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, and I am also an executive board member of Women of Color, and I just recently joined the SBA Diversity Advisory Council.[2]

Wow, that’s a lot! Do you have a favorite one of those commitments (besides being a PA, of course)?

That’s a really hard question, but I think BLSA is extremely, extremely important to me. I think they’re (a) a great organization and (b) one of those groups that is so important to the legal field and the Law School. But I also love my W.O.C. board members and I think my Journal puts out really great literature and so it’s really hard to pick! But I have to rep BLSA.

Now to some fun questions!

What is your favorite word?  

Pragmatic. I think I’m a pragmatic person and also, I just like the way it rolls off the tongue!

What’s the best meal you’ve ever had?

Dim sum in San Francisco or my mom’s crab cakes. 

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

Michelle and Barack Obama. It would be so cool to meet them because they’re such icons, especially as black lawyers.

What’s your favorite hobby to avoid the stress of law school? 

Aerial yoga[3] at Fly Dog!

Where is your favorite place to vacation?

I love London. If I were to move anywhere else, it would be London.

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

I wish that I knew not to care so much about what other people are doing, to not compare myself to others. I also wish I knew that everyone feels the same way I do. Once you start to talk to people, you realize that even your smartest and most secure friends feel insecure about their own stuff.

Backstreet Boys or *NSYNC?

Backstreet Boys—I used to have concerts where I would sing Backstreet Boys songs for my parents.

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

I got a karaoke machine, which I used to sing the aforementioned Backstreet Boys. 

What’s your favorite thing to do in Charlottesville?

I love to go to dinner with friends at different restaurants. And the wineries—especially Barboursville Vineyards.

Where is a place you haven’t been but want to visit?

Tahiti, but I hate flying. 🙁

What are your seven wonders of the Law School?

(1) Danielle Gibbons’ Dog, Max

(2) The BLSA Office

(3) The Lexis Lab[4]

(4) Section C last year (shout out to them)

(5) Section G this year

(6) Studying in the Garden

(7) Mandy

---

nha4zd@virginia.edu

---

[1] The interviewer would like to voice his disagreement with Agama on this point. Section B is by far the best 1L section.

[2] Agama is so involved that she uses a note on her phone to keep track, a fact that embarrasses her and highly entertains me.

[3] Shout out to Law Weekly’s Lena Welch ‘20, who teaches there!

[4] If you walk into the library, it’s to the right next to a classroom.

Exclusive Interview with David Leitch '85 General Counsel of Bank of America

---

Christina Luk ’21
Executive Editor

Grace Tang ’21
Lifestyle Editor

The University of Virginia School of Law had the pleasure of welcoming David Leitch ’85, Global General Counsel for BoA, to North Grounds last week. Leitch is in Charlottesville to visit BoA branches in the region to discuss talk with local management. On October 21, the Virginia Law & Business Society held a Q&A moderated by Professor George Geis, with whom Leitch discussed his extensive experiences working at the nexus of global commerce and law. A podcast can be found online on SoundCloud, courtesy of UVA Law. 

We at the paper took this opportunity to snag an exclusive Law Weekly interview with Leitch. Managing Editor Christina Luk ’21 and Lifestyle Editor Grace Tang ’21 had the opportunity to sit down in ScoCo to chat with Leitch about his impressive and wide-ranging career path, his love for Charlottesville, his memories of the Law School, and his advice for current students. 

Leitch fondly reminisced about his days at UVA Law and his 1L professors Emerson Spies, John Jeffries, and John Robinson. When asked if he played softball at UVA, he told Law Weekly, “I did, I didn’t realize I had a choice! Softball was a very important activity then, and it's taken on more prominence since my time here.” When Leitch was a student, law firm interviews were scheduled throughout the semester, and there would inevitably be students who attended interviews in their softball uniforms or softball games in their suits! Given this and UVA’s stellar softball reputation, it’s no wonder everyone asks us about softball during interviews. Leitch gave us additional insight into another softball tradition, the 1L Dandelion Kick-off, which had its origin in the first softball opening parade while Leitch was in school, called the Dandelion Parade. Leitch found the inaugural parade particularly memorable because George Rennick, a popular automobile salesman who starred in funny commercials, was the parade’s grand marshal.  

Leitch grew up in the suburbs of Philadelphia and attended Duke University for undergrad before arriving at UVA Law, where he pursued a course of study dedicated to litigation. Leitch spoke at length about the many doors UVA Law opened for him, including clerkship opportunities. For example, just two days after Leitch graduated from the Law School, he drove up to D.C. to interview with then Justice Reinquist. Far from having any expectations, Leitch said, he felt privileged to have met Justice Reinquist and said it was a great opportunity to see the Supreme Court from behind the curtain. When his mom received a call the next day from Justice Reinquist’s assistant, Leitch wondered if he had forgotten his umbrella in the office. The news was in fact much better. “It was all so fast,” recalls Leitch. “I graduated on Saturday, interviewed Monday, and by Tuesday I had the job.” 

When it comes to his long and interesting career, Leitch commented that he had “a number of different jobs, each rewarding in different ways,” which is certainly true. After leaving law school, he clerked for Federal Circuit Judge Wilkinson ’72 in Charlottesville and Chief Justice Reinquist on the Supreme Court in D.C. before working at what is now Hogan Lovells LLP. Afterwards, Leitch worked at the Department of Justice alongside UVA professors Barbara Armacost, John Duffy, and John Harrison. While practicing as an appellate lawyer at Hogan, Leitch worked alongside John Roberts, now Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. 

Throughout our interview, Leitch emphasized flexibility and he advised students to be patient and keep an open mind in their careers. “While you don’t need to take every opportunity presented, consider reasonable ‘stretch’ opportunities.” When he graduated from law school at the age of twenty-four, Leitch was set on litigation and wanted to be a federal judge. “I was a young man in a hurry. But take the long view, let things unfold, and really dedicate yourself to what’s in front of you.” In his career, Leitch worked in many legal fields, and he always dedicated time to master his current role. “I didn’t think I would end up in-house, but I was fortunate to work with people who have helped me develop those skills. I was intentional in terms of being open to opportunity, and you never know where it leads.”

Being open to opportunity paid off for Leitch in 2001. “After working as an appellate lawyer for the better part of a decade, I wanted to try something new,” said Leitch. When the opportunity to gain management experience became available as General Counsel of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Leitch took the role. Shortly afterward, 9/11 occurred and Leitch found himself at the center of a national crisis over aviation and safety. Leitch’s work at the FAA led to contacts that helped him find his next job. After eighteen months at the FAA, in 2002, Leitch became Deputy White House Counsel with an office in the West Wing. “It was an incredible opportunity,” recalls Leitch, “and through those experiences, I was offered a position as GC for the Ford Motor Company where I worked for ten years.” Four years ago, Leitch took over his current role as General Counsel at Bank of America. 

Throughout his career in and out of public and private practice, Leitch has found writing to be one of the most important skills, translating across a variety of legal and non-legal positions. “Developing the ability to communicate clearly and concisely to lawyers and non-lawyers through accurate and clear written word is vital. Good legal writing is not about being formal. But whether it is a brief or email, you need to make sure to be understood.” A reputation for integrity and candor is critical as well. “Be careful not to shade the truth to serve your client’s needs, building a reputation takes a long time so you should guard it carefully.” 

For students interested in working in-house, Leitch recommends developing relationships with clients and in-house lawyers. “It sounds obvious, but sometimes, we can be insulated from the actual people on the other side of the table. You should work for people who let you get to know the people you work for and not just the problems.” This is also a great way to learn what it is really like to work at the corporation. 

Since this is Law Weekly, we had to take a page out of Hot Bench and ask Leitch a series of lightning round questions. We learned that Leitch’s favorite food is usually related to the last country he visited. At the time, Leitch was craving Thai food, because he had a local Thai cooking class with his wife and daughter on his last trip. The next destination on Leitch’s bucket list is South Africa, and London is his favorite city outside of the US for its culture, arts, and history. 

In Charlottesville, Leitch recommends the Virginian down on The Corner. He met his wife in Charlottesville and they had some great meals there. Additionally, Blue Moon Diner and Millers Downtown are also local favorites still around today. 

For podcast listeners, Leitch recommended Malcolm Gladwell’s podcast Revisionist History, especially the episode discussing the history of the timing requirement on the LSAT exam. For novel readers, he recommends In Hoffa's Shadow by Jack Goldsmith, who used to teach at UVA Law, or anything by Hampton Sides.

In the fashion of a true UVA Law alum, Leitch was humble, kind, and generous in his advice. He spoke softly and was warm and approachable. He told us he had read last week’s Law Weekly and that he hoped he would be able to pick up another edition before he left Charlottesville. During our interview with Leitch, he talked about a wide range of topics ranging from his experiences at UVA, to his professors, to Jim Ryan’s book, all the way to stories about how final exams used to be taken on typewriters. The common thread tying together each topic is how much Leitch values and appreciates the Law School. It’s clear that Leitch is a big UVA Law fan and that he thoroughly enjoyed being back on Grounds.

When asked what he wanted to tell students at the Law School, Leitch had a simple message, “Savor every moment being at the Law School, and don’t forget to make relationships that will last a lifetime.”

---

cl3eh@virginia.edu

gt5ay@virginia.edu

Bearing Witness: Why We Needed an Exhibit on Lynching

---

Eli Jones
Contributing Writer

The lyrics to the song “Strange Fruit” make a point of contrasting the beauty of natural scenery and the grotesque violence that results after a lynching. This juxtaposition is stark, describing the sweet smell of magnolia flowers blending into the smell of burning flesh. The song is grotesque, disturbing, and haunting, which is exactly why it is such an effective tribute to the crime against humanity that is lynching. Unless an accurate image of such a horrifically violent act is conjured in someone’s head, the concept loses all meaning.

This was exactly what that the Black Law Students Association felt last week as the President of the United States compared his possible impeachment to a lynching on his Twitter account.[1] As students who study the law—and by extension American society and culture over the years—such a comparison was both immensely striking and distressing. We knew such a comparison was neither accurate to the nature of lynching itself, nor sensitive to the atrocities endured. When discussing the matter in our office, our Firm Relations Chair, Nicole Banton ’21, pointed out that some people don’t really know what a lynching looks like.

To address this issue, we decided to create a pop-up exhibit, held in a classroom every morning for three hours a day, three days straight. The finished exhibit, Lynching: An Exhibit on Racial Terror, featured photographs and information on eight separate incidents of lynching, as well as physical artifacts and an electronic interactive map that showed the location of every recorded racial lynching in the United States. The main drive of the exhibit was to provide an educational forum to learn about the widespread practice of lynching in American history and foster a culture that holds individuals accountable for misrepresentations.

The exhibit aimed to be shocking and, we dare say, upsetting. As a society, we can decry comparisons to lynching or talk at length about how awful racism is, but it’s not often that we actually face the blunt reality of what these regimes look like. When you see photographs of women and children laughing at a burning body as if they are watching a sporting event or when you see a souvenir postcard of a lynching jokingly call the man people burned alive “the barbecue we had yesterday,” there is a new level of horror that people feel towards something from which they initially may have felt a great deal of distance.

The legacy of racism and dehumanization of Black people is not something to be invoked lightly, which is why BLSA worked to address the need for this exhibit. I use the word need intentionally, because regardless of what political stripe we fall into, this history is important. Not only important, but vital. As aspiring lawyers, if we cannot look at the full reality of our past, we will never fully be able to adequately address the challenges of today and tomorrow.

This observation is without a doubt the biggest takeaway we wanted people to have from the exhibit. Although President Trump’s tweet was the impetus of this exhibit, this was not about politics or impeachment. This was about Bennie Simmons, Laura and L.D. Nelson, Jesse Washington, John Henry James, Emmett Till, and the thousands more who fell victim to the murderous rage of the lynch mob. Thousands of Black bodies were denied their due process and convicted in the court of public opinion for offending the false notion of white supremacy.

Our country bears the burden of this legacy. Just as every person lays claim to the wonderful and powerful strides towards freedom and justice this nation makes, we each have an obligation to lay claim to the weight of the shameful portions of America’s past that lay on our shared identity. If there is one thing BLSA wants people to remember from our exhibit on lynching, it is to accept the need to reconcile the two.   

---

ejj9yj@virginia.edu

[1] https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1186611272231636992?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Things That Spook Me on Halloween

---

Drew Calamaro ’21
Satire Editor

Hohoho, Halloween is around the corner and I’m already sleep deprived! As someone who just stayed up all night for no reason while being highly unproductive, I am just going to slap together some things that scare me and get to my 800-word minimum this fine Monday morning so I can turn in my article to the Editor-in-Chief who I fear above all else[1] and, ultimately, go to sleep. So here are some things that scare me, and they should scare you too.[2]

Figure 1 a chilling berating doled out by our Editor-in-Chief. The article made it at 6:55 p.m..

The thought of speaking to an undergrad on Halloween this Thursday.

I know a lot of you are little K-JDs, but for anyone who has been out of undergrad for a year or more, or anyone who decided they wanted some real life experience (like by trying to take a day off to go to the dentist and the doctor on a Wednesday), the thought of having a conversation with an undergrad, let alone speak to one, gives me the chills. As someone who prides himself on his ability to converse, words escape me when I meet a 20-year-old. They live in a fantasyland, one where you aren’t in a direct zero-sum competition with everyone your age, and you can eat an entire Domino’s pizza along with a D.P. Dough calzone and not gain weight. I would single out the undergrads for having less substance than the pizza, but there are plenty of uninteresting people in this school to fit that bill as well. It really isn’t about them, but more about me,[1] and my aversion of revisiting my own past. Or it’s that we’re all too drunk to talk coherently at Biltmore at midnight.

The fact that we still act like “Gunners n Roses” isn’t a horrible band name.

I am not commenting on their ability as musicians, I am commenting on a pun I would use ironically to get people to groan in pain. I truly hope this band name is tongue-in-cheek, because the thought that I go to a school that thinks it is a “cool” name is too much to bear. In America, we place value on the vocal minority, and by God I will be the extremist voice on this topic. If it is still meant to be ironically bad, then bravo you got me, “Gunners.” But the proportion of people in law school who neither understand puns nor understand irony[2] if it hit them in the face causes me to worry greatly on this topic. 

I feel nothing when I think about Thanksgiving.

I don’t feel much of anything these days. But Thanksgiving used to be my jam (literally—cranberry). Nowadays, I am too busy and my family is too far away for me to feel sentimental about it. Did you know that all pumpkin in pumpkin cans is actually made out of squash but the FDA allows manufacturers to list it as pumpkin anyways? As if Thanksgiving couldn’t be built off of any more lies. But ultimately, I don’t care, because I am too busy to care, and possibly too sleep deprived. Does this mean that in the future, when I have kids, that I’ll be an absent father who is too busy lawyering around to be there for the holidays? At the moment, I can only assume so. But at least I will have done it for them… surely they’ll realize it someday? I am spooked.

Most times I eat candy from the student affairs office, I am disappointed.

Except for Twix on a good day. And maybe Peanut M&Ms. If you’re not a fan of at least one of those two things, then you’re an untrustworthy person. Also Almond Joys. If you choose regular M&Ms over Peanut M&Ms you should fail the bar. Plain and simple. No lawyer worth their salt (or in this case, sugar! Ha ahhh!) is offering regular M&Ms to people or their loved ones that were diagnosed with mesothelioma. Always look for the offices with Peanut M&Ms—that’s how you know you’re at a high-quality establishment.

The Law School, despite being progressive on many things, has no parental leave policy.

Sure, you can take a leave of absence, and sure I don’t know how a parental leave policy would work in the real world at Law School, but I find this to be interesting. Also, like Thanksgiving, I don’t care since my hypothetical children are used to my absence. They should just be grateful for all I provide them, including my occasional presence.

 Overall, I think that if you feel the same way as me, you should be scared about where your life is going. Essentially, you’re someone who hates young people and well-meaning cover bands, eats only 3 types of candy, doesn’t care for the holidays, and is doing this all without the safety net of a parental leave policy. The bright side is that you can dress up as Ebenezer Scrooge on Thursday and it’ll all make sense. 

---

dac6jk@virginia.edu

[1] Keep in mind this is what it has always been.

[2] Read: self-awareness.

Court of Petty Appeals: Tonseth v. LUKE

---

Tonseth v. LUKE

369 U.Va. 33 (2019)

Introduction

Once upon a time, in a world not so long ago, there was peace.[1] 3 at 3 was actually held at a bar named 3, Crozet Pizza was the best biker bar in Virginia, and The Virginian was true to its roots and traditions. This world has slowly deteriorated, and the last straw has come upon us. Despite ordering an injunction against the renaming of the original 3 at 3 hotspot and ordering damages for every biker who no longer felt at home at what is now Crozet Pizza, both of which failed miserably,[2] this Court is here to try once more to right the wrongs of The Corner. What has gone wrong at The Virginian is nearly unspeakable, but it is the order of this Court to try and right the pettiest wrongs of this esteemed university.

Summary of the Facts

Plaintiff law students brought this case several weeks ago, complaining about the new policy that The Virginian (nicknamed Virg (now nicknamed Less Fun Virg (further nicknamed LFV for short))) has ordered to be followed for the rest of eternity. Sometime in the last few weeks, an accident––a tort, if you will (although members of this Court and 98% of attorneys still aren’t sure what a tort even is)––occurred at what was then known as Virg. Apparently, some undergrad (we’ll call him “Loser Undergrad who ‘K’an’t hang in a bar Engineer (hereinafter, LUKE))[3] was enjoying too many libations and hopped up on a Virg table. Anyone who has been to Virg knows this is not only acceptable but strongly encouraged during late night festivities, so friends of said undergrad gladly welcomed him to the overcrowded, sweaty, and dirty tabletop where unsuspecting visitors likely let their food sit just a few hours earlier. Tragically, these welcoming undergrads had no idea that they were welcoming the demise of all they had ever known.

Once LUKE joined his fellow undergrads on the table, he promptly committed the greatest party foul this Court has ever seen. While the details are a bit hazy (the members of this Court hear that happens when you indulge too heavily in libations, but obviously wouldn’t know as sophisticated law students who can actually handle their liquor[4]), one fact is clear: LUKE fell off the table. LUKE was injured and Virg shortly thereafter became LFV. This formerly fun bar did the unthinkable: It banned late night Corner visitors from dancing on the tables.

The Complaint

Plaintiffs contest that this new policy is despicable, inappropriate, and “straight up bogus.” They contend that LFV does not have proper ownership of the tabletops, since students have adversely possessed these for, like, a long time. Consequently, they argue this action by the bar is not meritorious and unenforceable. They further demand a preliminary injunction requiring LFV to revert back to its former state (aka Virg) by allowing students back on the tops of tables. Finally, plaintiffs assert that LUKE should pay for the harm that he caused students by having to wait even longer in line to get into LFV (no table dancing = more floor space taken up = grumpy bouncers) and must pay such damages by purchasing drinks for everyone at the bar on Halloween.

Analysis 

To win a claim of adverse possession, claimants must prove that their possession was open and notorious, exclusive, hostile, for the required statutory period, and continuous and uninterrupted. The lower court judge, Judge Jones, found that the alleged possession was clearly open and notorious (not sure how much more obvious claimed possession gets than a bunch of kids from NOVA belting out “Country Roads” while stomping their wannabe cowboy boots (aka Sperrys) in bright pink pastel shorts). Further, the lower court found possession exclusive––recognizing plaintiffs as a group in pursuit of a common goal and, for purposes of adverse possession, allowed them to stand as one exclusive unit. Finally, the court below found that possession had occurred for the full relevant statutory period (“a long time,” as claimed in the complaint, sufficed). However, the court ruled against plaintiffs for insufficient evidence regarding the hostility of possession and proof of possession being truly uninterrupted in the relevant sense. 

While this Court respects Judge Jones and his attempt to correctly interpret the law of our jurisdiction, we hereby correct some clearly erroneous findings determined below. The alleged adverse possession was both hostile and uninterrupted in the relevant sense in this Court’s eyes; it follows that the lower court decision must be reversed and the case must be remanded for further decisions as consistent with the rest of this opinion.

The first definition of hostile that appears on Google is “unfriendly, antagonistic.” The definition goes on to define synonyms of hostile, which include both “aggressive” and “belligerent.” This Justice has not yet completed her legislation class, nor has she learned much up to this point,[5] but she does vaguely recall some ability to look at a dictionary definition and, if it seems like one word or phrase somewhere supports the interpretation a judge desires to find, then she can selectively use such word or phrase to advance her own preconceived notions of what is the “right” outcome.[6] Here, I find it hard to believe that anyone could describe students out on a Saturday night on a Virg table as anything but aggressive and belligerent, and hereby find the lower court’s determination clearly erroneous. 

Next, regarding the uninterrupted nature of the alleged adverse possession: While it is true, as Judge Jones points out, that students are not constantly on the tables to show their claim of the property, must one always be in a place one is adversely possessing? Or is the relevant time frame more narrowly defined? Here, plaintiffs don’t contend to have the right to dance on a Virg table at 2 p.m. on a Sunday afternoon; rather, they claim ownership when night life is at its peak––mainly the weekends after 10 p.m. Under this narrower definition of time, clearly plaintiffs would prevail as uninterruptedly possessing the relevant property given the long-standing tradition of table dancing that predates you, me, and this Court as a whole. While this Court doesn’t find Judge Jones clearly erred in his finding, we also subscribe to our well-known Rule 1 of Petty Procedure: “We do what we want.” Therefore, we overrule the lower court and find all the elements of adverse possession met.

Conclusion

This Court vacates the lower court judgment and remands the case for further decision of the case on the merits. We strongly urge the lower-court judge to remember the angry mob that will come for him should he rule against the students, and also recognize that he will be overruled on appeal to this Court if he doesn’t grant an injunction and damages as requested in the original complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

--- 

mes5hf@virginia.edu

[1] Not world peace, don’t get ahead of yourself.

[2] Yes, we are petty about it.

[3] Acronyms are hard, I did my best.

[4] Maybe if we pretend it’s true one day it will happen.

[5] Through the complete fault of her own @Professor_Gilbert you’re great and we don’t deserve you.

[6] #JudicialActivism at its finest.

Hot Bench: Jolena Zabel '21

---

Jolena Zabel ’21

Where did you grow up?

A small town on the Mississippi called Hastings, Minnesota.

What did you do this summer?

I was a law clerk at the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office (HCAO) in downtown Minneapolis. One thing that attracted me to the program is the fact that Minnesota gives rising 2Ls student practice licenses. The program is also filled with incredible mentors and chances to get feedback. These opportunities really helped me grow both in and out of the courtroom this summer.

We heard you had the opportunity to help with a case before the Minnesota Supreme Court. Can you tell us more about that experience?

This summer I helped write the respondent’s brief for a criminal case on appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court. It was a statutory interpretation question involving a lot of grammar. I really enjoyed diving into it and ended up winning a law clerk competition by presenting on its main issue. After the brief was filed, my supervising attorney asked if I would like to return to “second-chair” the argument.

I agreed and came back a few days before the argument in early October. I participated in preparation meetings with other attorneys, talked through the case with the supervising attorney, and got to observe how he prepared for the argument. The night before the argument, it finally clicked that the justices would be questioning arguments for which I was responsible and I would be trying to help someone respond in real time. I felt some nerves, but my supervising attorney and everyone at HCAO were incredibly supportive throughout the process. I also felt really prepared for the experience from Professor Ruth Buck’s Legal Research and Writing class, Criminal Law with Professor Josh Bowers, and Criminal Procedure with Professor Rachel Harmon. 

At the argument itself, I sat at counsel’s table with my supervising attorney. I felt energized being so physically and intellectually close to the proceedings. Adding to the excitement, the Minnesota Supreme Court chose to hear this case on the road, so the argument was in front of around 900 high schoolers in rural Minnesota. After the argument finished, the justices took their robes off and returned to the auditorium stage to answer questions from the students (just not about the case, of course!). I don’t know if other state supreme courts have similar programs, but it was really neat.

 What are you involved in around the Law School?

I’m grateful to be a Co-Chair of Feminist Legal Forum (FLF), a Law in Public Service Fellow and board member, a PILA board member, and a Productions Editor for VJIL. I also love participating in JLSA and First-Generation Professionals. Shout-out to my Legal Research & Writing 1Ls too!

 What are you going to be doing this summer?

I’m crossing the pond to work for Latham & Watkins in London.

FLF seems to be really taking off. Can you talk more about the organization and some cool projects you’ve done with them?

FLF is dedicated to advancing feminist discussion, lawyering, and awareness at the Law School. Already this fall, we held a fundraiser for a local reproductive justice organization, organized a joint response to sexual assault allegations against Justice Kavanaugh, and co-sponsored events with over a half-dozen student organizations. We’re also really proud of our revamped weekly emails and have received lovely feedback. Reach out to myself or my co-chair, Eliza Schultz ’21, to get on the list! We have a few themed potlucks coming up this November (open to anyone in the Law School community) and plan to host a feminist lawyering workshop and book club this spring.

Now, time for some more fun ones:

What is your favorite thing about Minnesota?

I’m so glad you asked! Minnesotans, but the lakes are a close second.

What is your favorite word?

If I had to pick? Coven.

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

Queen Elizabeth II, so I could bring my mom and fulfill her lifelong dream of meeting royalty.

Backstreet boys or *NYSYNC?

Neither, sorry! For a variety of reasons, I basically missed all pop culture of the late 1990s/early 2000s. I actually just learned after Googling this question that “Bye Bye Bye” and “I Want It That Way” are not by the same group. My bad.

Favorite fall activity?

Talking about foliage ad nauseum.  

What are your seven wonders of the Law School?

In no particular order:

1.     The big trees out front, especially this time of year.

2.     Public service community.

3.     Cow painting in Withers-Brown. It reminds me of home!

4.     Every single outdoor study space.

5.     Fruit snacks from Student Affairs.  

6.     Gambini Study Room. The natural light is amazing.

7.     The people, of course!

---

jmz2da@virginia.edu

Hot Bench: Krzysztof Kolakowski '20

---

Krzysztof Kolakowski LLM ‘20

Where did you grow up?

I grew up in Poland, in the countryside not very far from Warsaw, in a tiny village called Wola Wierzbowska … This is probably the first time the name of this place has been mentioned abroad.

What were you doing before coming to UVA Law?

I was working as an in-house lawyer in an international logistics capital group. But I was also helping as a pro bono lawyer with Amnesty International Poland and the Polish Association of Anti-Discriminatory Law.

What was that like?

Intensive, but rewarding. I’ve been practicing law in Poland for over ten years and I was admitted to the Bar in 2011. As an in-house, you are much more connected to the daily business of the company than, say, in a firm.

What made you decide to come here?

I was thinking about pursuing an LLM degree for several years, but I was always either too busy or just couldn’t take the plunge. After participating in a summer program for foreign lawyers in Boston last year, I finally made the decision. I chose UVA Law, because not only did the reputation and academics tick the right boxes, but Charlottesville’s small-town feel was the icing on the cake. Imagine, a small town with both a Whole Foods and a Wegmans! Studying at UVA Law is a great way to develop and meet interesting people. And Virginia is my husband’s home state, so he was also lobbying for it.

You’re the Vice President of LLMs, what is that like?

I love this role. The LLMs are awesome, we’ve only know each other for two months or so but I feel we can already count on each other. I feel privileged that I can support my class and colleagues through the GLSA!

What do you wish the JDs knew about the LLMS?

I could tell a long story here, but I know I should be concise. The LLMs are dynamic and interesting people …. similar to the JDs. I think we all could learn a lot from each other. When I am talking with other LLMs …. I feel like I’m constantly learning about culture, food, politics, law and new languages, including some bad words (very useful) …. We also love having fun! The LLMs are very friendly and open and I would encourage JDs to approach us, even though some of us may be a little shy at the beginning.

What is your favorite English word?

I like “y’all.” I know it’s a southern thing.

What is your favorite Polish word?

“Przyjaciel.” This word is generally translated as ‘friend,’ but it means so much more. In the US, the word friend is used rather broadly. However, in Poland, przyjaciel is limited to very, very close friends, of which we usually have no more than two or three during our whole lifetime.

What’s the best meal you’ve ever had?

My birthday dinner two years ago. We had the best seafood ever.

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

Now, it would be Olga Tokarczuk, a Polish writer who won the Nobel Prize in Literature this year. She is a visionary of tolerance and understanding as well as a great writer.

What is your favorite hobby to escape the stress of law school?

Traveling, I love short and long trips. Changes of scenery help me to relax and recharge.

Where is your favorite place to vacation?

Melbourne, Australia.

What did you eat for breakfast?

Oatmeal with banana and gold kiwi. Plus a cappuccino—can’t start the day without a good coffee.

What is your least favorite sound?

The sound of metal scratching glass.

If you could live anywhere, where would it be?

It would in the southern hemisphere again. Probably New Zealand; there are no snakes there, the landscape is breath-taking, the people are laid back and there are wonderful wineries all over the country.

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

Oranges during Christmas time when I was a child. During the communist times in Poland in the eighties, oranges were very hard to come by and it was really something extraordinary to get them. When I smell oranges I always think about Christmas. Nowadays we take so many things for granted.

What is your favorite thing to do in Charlottesville?

I should say “studying” …. but I think my honest answer would be visiting vineyards in the area. I wish I had more time for that.

Which student organizations have you joined?

I’m on the board of the Lambda Law Alliance and a member of the Virginia Law and Business Society. I am also active in the Polish Student Association—sometimes I need to be active outside of law as well. All these organizations are doing great things.

What was your favorite concert?

I went to the Adele concert in Melbourne. She was amazing!

What is your favorite food?

Nothing can beat my Mom’s vegetable salad–a Polish traditional dish. She was a true inspiration and I miss her very much. Here in the U.S., I really like Pecan Pie—maybe I am becoming a true Southerner.

Do you have a nickname?

Not really, sometimes my friends from Poland call me Krzysiu (diminutive from Krzysztof) or Xtof.

And who is Kaiser?

Kaiser is THE member of our family. He is a beautiful, cream-colored Golden Retriever and he also moved from Warsaw to Charlottesville. He’s cute and he knows it; he uses it with both me and my husband to get whatever he wants—and it usually works ... When you see someone running after a dog around school… it’s probably either me or Michael. He is crazy, but we love him.

———

kk3amq@virginia.edu

Club Spotlight: Lone Star Lawyers

---

Christian Rice’20
Guest Writer

As I write this, it’s 94 degrees in Austin, Texas. But the weather isn’t the only thing that’s hot in the Lone Star State; the Texas legal market is on fire. Law firms are doing everything they can to attract top legal talent to the fastest-growing state in the country;[1] including (at some firms) $25,000 summer associate signing bonuses. Some might say such incentives are nuttier than a port-o-potty at a peanut festival but, with many businesses moving to Texas, the legal market is growing quickly and firms must compete to hire top talent into the state.

It’s no wonder businesses nationwide are moving to Texas; Texas is both the best state for business and the best state to start a business.[2] Texas’s economy has been strong for decades, including through the financial crisis. During the recession, numerous news outlets from the Atlantic to the Houston Chronicle deemed Texas’s economic performance “the Texas Miracle,” as Texas didn’t lose any jobs during the recession and housing prices decreased only briefly before quickly rebounding.

Texas also features world-class food (even beyond life-changing BBQ and Tex-Mex), diverse cultures (Houston has been named the most diverse city in America for several years running),[3] and metropolitan cities with major attractions. Three of the nation’s ten biggest cities are in Texas (Houston, San Antonio, and Dallas), as is America’s fastest growing city (Austin).

As if this isn’t enough reason for businesses and law firms to increase their Lone Star presence, Texas has no state or local income tax. The effective state and local taxes on a $190,000 salary are high in cities like New York City (9.68 percent), San Francisco (9.14 percent), and D.C. (7.18 percent), while Texas’s 0 percent tax rate means employees and attorneys moving to Texas keep more dollars in their pockets. This, combined with lower cost of living, means that Texas’s most expensive city, Austin, is still much cheaper than its out-of-state counterparts. $210,000 in salary plus bonus in Austin is equivalent to roughly $343,000 in D.C., $437,000 in San Francisco, or $525,000 in New York City.[4]

For these reasons and many others, businesses and lawyers are flocking to Texas faster than ever: to Austin for appellate litigation and venture capital; to Dallas for finance and real estate; and to Houston for corporate and energy practices.

As Texas’s business and legal markets have heated up, so has UVA Law’s Texas presence; in the four years since Lone Star Lawyers (“LSL’s”) founding, LSL has grown to some 130 dues-paying members (including 70 1Ls) who want to practice at a big law firm in Austin, Dallas, or Houston.

With such a large Texan contingent, law firms have a strong desire to interact with students at UVA Law. LSL hosts panels and happy hours with attorneys roughly once every three weeks to teach LSL members about different practice areas, what it’s like to be an associate at a big law firm, and how to make a big law application more competitive.

But LSL isn’t solely business: law firms also sponsor regular, members-only events to promote their name. This fall, law firms have sponsored several social gatherings, including a Texas-themed event featuring Texan drinks, BBQ, and Brazos Tacos. Last spring, firms hosted vineyard and axe throwing events to give LSL members the opportunity to interact with attorneys in a more comfortable environment. Law firms have also been generous enough to sponsor LSL merchandise. In the last year, firms have sponsored LSL-branded mugs, sweaters, and softball jerseys for our softball team, the “Rio Grande Slams.”

In addition to law firm and social events, LSL offers a variety of mentorship opportunities. Every LSL 1L is assigned a 2L or 3L mentor to help him or her with the big law firm application process. LSL’s board also hosts office hours roughly once per month in the fall to review resumes and cover letters, conduct mock interviews, and give interview tips. Finally, LSL connects 1Ls to LSL alumni-attorneys in Texas to give more specialized advice when needed.

As we say in Texas, LSL is not “all hat and no cattle.”[5] Interaction with attorneys, mentorship by law students and alumni, and application assistance has made a big difference in LSL members’ big law success; last year, 76 percent of LSL’s 1Ls who sought out a summer associateship in big law were given at least one offer.[6] LSL’s Vice President of Marketing, William Kelly, recently completed the 1L hiring process and says: “LSL is a freaking machine at getting people jobs in Texas. Working at a big firm in Houston last summer, I compared notes with my coworkers from across the top fourteen law schools—they were amazed at what LSL does at UVA and it’s clear that no other Texas law school organization functions even close to LSL’s level.”

Now, LSL is focusing on ramping up its alumni base. New to LSL this year are UVA Law alumni events hosted in Dallas and Houston. Our first alumni happy hour in Dallas featured roughly fifty attorneys, current students, and admitted students, and LSL is planning a similar happy hour in Houston this winter. In addition, LSL’s first newsletter will go out to all LSL alumni in January.

Everyone knows Texas is hotter than a two-dollar pistol, and now that phrase applies to its legal market as well. LSL will continue to serve students interested in the Texas legal market and, hopefully, UVA will remain among the top schools for Texas-bound law students for decades to come. If you are interested in the Texas legal market, please reach out to me at cr6xh@virginia.edu.

I would like to thank LSL’s board members for the many hours of work they put in to make LSL’s success possible: Haley Cambra ’20 as Co-President; Reese Gwinn ’20 as Vice President of Finance and Softball Captain; Garrett Engel ’21 as Vice President of Career Development; Peggy Porter ’21 as Vice President of Social Events; William Kelly ’21 as Vice President of Marketing; Will Brown ’21 as Vice President of Mentorship; and Hunter Bezner ’21 as Vice President of Professional Relations.

——

cr6xh@virginia.edu

---

[1] Texas has been the fastest-growing state in the U.S. by population since 2010. http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/fastest-growing-states/.

[2] https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2019/05/08/texas-best-state-for-business.html; https://www.statesman.com/news/20190708/texas-is-best-state-to-start-business-says-study.

[3] https://www.houston.org/news/houston-still-most-diverse-city-nation-report-finds.

[4] All figures were calculated using Nerd Wallet’s Cost of Living Calculator, which can be accessed at: https://www.nerdwallet.com/cost-of-living-calculator.

[5] “All hat and no cattle” is a saying that means “they speak highly of themselves but don’t have anything to show for it.”

[6] This statistic is based on a survey of 100 percent of LSL’s 1L members in the summer of 2019 and was not developed by UVA Law’s Office of Private Practice.

Court of Petty Appeals: Mindy St. Claire v. SBA

---

Mindy St. Claire v. SBA

323 U.Va 126 (2019)  

Luk, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Shmazzle, C.J., Ranzini, and Schmid, JJ. join.

Justice Luk delivered the opinion of the Court. 

Petitioner Mindy St. Claire filed suit in the lower court to enjoin SBA from hosting Bar Review on Friday nights and to return the event to Thursday nights as was the custom two semesters ago in Fall of 2018. Petitioner Claire asserts that her “weekend starts on a Wednesday” and she “shouldn’t have to wait until Friday to get lit.” Furthermore, Petitioner Claire points out that “Darden’s party nights are on Thursdays and we should totally be on that wavelength to network and stuff.”  

The trial court disagreed and we affirm. Bar Review remains a Friday event.

Under the Petty Constitution, Student Bar Association may delegate executive powers to its subcommittees. And the Programming Committee, pursuant to 21 Code of Petty Regulations § 420(a)(1), was created by SBA to “vouchsafe the mental well-being of law students through programming or whatever,” and, under such directive, the committee has historically held broad agency powers especially when planning events featuring drinks of the “fun” variety. See, Participants with Hangovers v. “The Punch” 430 U.Va 707 (2012) (“The Programming Committee has a very specific role to fill. We have plenty of organizations dedicated to ‘well-being’ and ‘getting jobs.’ We need something dedicated to life, liberty and the pursuit of drink specials.”). As such, the standard of review upon appeal is not only arbitrary and capricious but, pursuant to our decision in the Punch case, plaintiffs must also prove that the committee decision was “uncool.”  

The Court recognizes that our standard of “uncool” has not been further expanded since the seminal Punch case and we take this opportunity now to clear up the confusion that has ensued in our lower courts. “Uncool,” according to Google’s browser dictionary, denotes that which is “not fashionable or impressive.” This definition does not apply, however, where SBA has never held itself out to be either “fashionable or impressive.”  The “uncool” standard is better articulated as “not cool,” whereby “not cool” should be interpreted according to its common usage among students. (“You were assigned a paper over Fall Break? Not cool.”) We amend our petty common law now to reflect this meaningful change and we trust that this clearer standard will confuse no one.  

With that in mind, the Court considers whether the Programming Committee’s decision to hold Bar Reviews on Friday as opposed to Thursday meets the standard of arbitrary, capricious, and uncool sufficient for the Court to intervene. The SBA’s response brief on behalf of the Programming Committee defends the decision to move the event to Friday evenings as “a valid exercise of committee power, backed by some research, which is better than no research.” The record shows that the Programming Committee did indeed solicit feedback from the student body. Although Petitioner Claire argues that Snapchat is neither a legitimate nor rigorous polling mechanism, the legitimacy of a committee’s research method is not a question we consider today.   

SBA’s response brief concludes with a gif of former president Barrack Obama’s face with a pair of technicolored shades sliding repeatedly over his eyes. The Court admires this brief and baller response, which reminds the Court of that most important offshoot to the Petty Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 1: "We do what we want." (See, e.g., GOOGLLE v. Dugas, 9 U.Va 1 (2017) ("Certainly, the defendants cannot mean we do not have the power to create such rules. As Petty Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 1 points out, 'We do what we want.' Implicit in this statement is the power to do whatever we want.") (opinion of HADEN, C.J.). The important offshoot to the rule, “We do what we want,” is of course: “Deal with it.”

In support of SBA’s position, Gunners for 1Ls has filed an amicus brief. The group astutely whines that “1Ls have classes on Friday” and that it would be the height of “uncool” to chill the 1L right to party by returning Bar Review to a “quote-unquote school-night.” The Court abhors the use of scare quotes and would ordinarily write only to censure Gunners for 1Ls for using them. However, despite the Court’s long settled stance that 1L concerns are “mere ephemera,” “shorter lived than a mayfly,” and “generally unimportant,” the Court recognizes that in this particular instance, involving mental well-being and budding alcoholism, 1Ls do have a compelling interest in fostering their own coping mechanisms early on in their careers 1Ls v. Those Who Don’t Care, 14 U.Va. 159 (1986) (“We all know what the legal profession entails. We gotta do our part to get those 1Ls prepped for the hours involved in their future careers and how they deal with the sadness.”).  

In light of the Programming Committee’s historically broad agency power and the legitimate health interests the committee promotes by having the event on Friday, coupled with our distaste for meddling in SBA affairs, we hold that the trial court correctly found that the committee exercised its discretion within the lawful bounds of 21 C.P.R. § 420. As such, we affirm.

Elicegui, J., dissenting.

While my honorable colleague Justice Luk does an admirable job at an attempt to do justice, she fails to correctly apply the “uncool” standard articulated in her opinion. You know what’s not cool? Having Bar Review take up a typical night of the weekend, instead of having Bar Review be an extra night to the weekend. That would definitely be cool and further the Programming Committee’s mission—to help students chillax.  See Punch, 430 U.Va at 707. Programming Committee already furthers their mission on every other Thursday with weekly socials, but sometimes they run out of chicken nuggets. The way I see it, they have two choices. Either buy enough chicken nuggies and have socials every Thursday or make every Thursday chill by moving Bar Review. I would so order if I could. *le sigh*

——

cl3eh@virginia.edu

tke3ge@virginia.edu

On the Road in the Post-Apocalypse: A Problematic Journey Part II

---

Will Palmer ‘21
Staff Editor

Part I of this series can be found online in Volume 72, No. 4 from September 18, 2019

            The Chief of Equals scurried offstage to join the rest of the Blue Checks in their macabre ritual. As directed by Fawkes, the hooded kangaroo bailiffs dragged me and Dennis away, up a set of roughly-carved stairs into a cave set in the face of the nearby cliffside. A pair of doors fashioned from reclaimed scrap metal clanged shut behind us. The macropods snuffled ominously in the fresh darkness and continued to direct Dennis and me forward. A torch crackled and started burning, casting Fawkes’ mask in an even eerier light than usual. Dark eyes observed us from underneath.

            We had walked about a hundred feet into the cave when our escorts abruptly brought us to a halt. I looked up to see a ragged, bone-festooned banner splayed above us, its colors long faded: “Welcome to Our Safe Space.” A stooped, robed man shuffled towards us from an alcove to our side, holding what appeared to be a guestbook borrowed from a Red Roof Inn.

            “Please, ah, if you wouldn’t mind signing into our cooperative living space?” the receptionist queried. Dennis and I looked at each other and burst out laughing. Between guffaws, Dennis managed to hack out, “You guys- hah- really- hah- got the euphemism game- hah hah- down pat, you know that?”

            Fawkes and the kangaroos were not amused. The receptionist appeared to be on the brink of soiling himself, so I took pity on the man and reached for the book. He opened it to a page towards the end and held it out to me. “Do I get a pen? Or a quill or something?” I asked. The receptionist shrank back in fear. From behind me, Fawkes growled, “You shall write in blood, as all the others have.”

            I spun towards him, flustered. “Alright, now, you listen to me, you grimy, Hacktivist-looking jackass. I know you guys are all into this freaky holistic crap but that is just super unsanitary. You know how Lord Byron died? Well, it wasn’t this, but it’s kind of analogous.” *

            “It’s not really that analogous, honestly,” mumbled Dennis.

            I sighed. “Et tu, Brutus?”

            “That’s your chinchilla. My name is Dennis. You’ve known me for, like, seven years, man.”

            “It’s a turn of phrase.” I pricked my finger on a pin the receptionist had produced and looked down to the guestbook.

            I filled in my preferred pronouns and the required list of “subconscious biases,” but paused when I came to the next section: “List Ten Ways You Have Checked Your Privilege in the Past Day.” I looked up at the receptionist, then at Fawkes and the ’roos, then back at the receptionist. “Uh…seriously?” I pointed at the checklist, a drop of crimson slowly falling from my fingertip and spattering across the page. “I haven’t had much time to check my privilege since you did the hipster equivalent of taking us to a CIA Black Site. Only thing you missed was waterboarding us with hoppy IPAs.” No response was forthcoming. Blood dripped onto the paper. “And this part here? My entire voting history? How am I supposed to remember that? Are you saying I’m the only one here who pregamed election day?”

            Dennis looked at me. “Yeah, man. I mean, I’m pretty sure you were. Well, except for Brexit.” Fawkes cocked his head approvingly. I sighed again, defeated, then scrawled “I plead the fifth” in the remaining space before handing the book over to Dennis.

            “I don’t think that’s how the Fifth Amendment works,” Dennis observed.

            “Jeez, why don’t you tell them about all my tweets from 2009 while you’re at it?”

            “Well, there was that one that was pretty bad. You know. The whole Inuit community was pretty upset with you for a while there, if I remember correctly.”

            “How was I supposed to know they held the Narwhal in such particularly high esteem?!” I responded. “I thought those things were extinct!” I paused, remembering. “But yeah, getting death threats in scrimshaw was pretty interesting. I knew those folks had a lot of words for snow, but they have even more for murder.” **

            One of the kangaroos loudly defecated beneath its robes, as if to punctuate my recollections. Dennis held his bound hands up to cover his nose. “Oh, man, that is just heinous. What the hell do you feed—”

            “Please don’t answer that,” I interjected.

            Fawkes abruptly turned to the receptionist and spoke, rubbing the temples of the mask as if fighting a headache. “The macropods appear to have encountered a period of great gastrointestinal distress. Such as to not befoul the soy mines, I shall return them to their pastures. You may complete the registration process for our latest. . .residents.” They spun on their heel and strode up the passageway. The kangaroos hopped after, soiled robes trailing on the floor.  

            As Fawkes and the macropod enforcers disappeared down the hallway, the receptionist seemed to find his spine and adopted a more upright posture, much in the style of an inflatable tube person. He wiped a sheen of sweat from his brow and let out a heavy sigh of relief. “Man, the one with the mask really gives me the willies. Like, how do they eat?”

            Dennis and I looked up from the registration book, confused. “Wait,” Dennis said, “You’re…”

            “Normal-ish?” replied the receptionist. “Yeah. But only when the kangaroos aren’t around. My name is Anthony, by the way. But my lovers call me Carlos.” He took the registration book from Dennis and slid it under his vestments. “Walk with me. I’ll show you to the cooperative living space.”

            A short trek led us to the “co-op”: a poorly lit cavern hacked into the stone, filled with stacks of beds and a haze of cheap incense. We passed several sorry-looking individuals who we presumed to be workers, covered in globs of soy from the mines and lugging heavy pickaxes with them.

            “If you wouldn’t mind waiting here briefly,” Anthony began, “I’ll go and get some uniforms for you. Don’t do anything I wouldn’t do!” He swept out of the room.

            I turned to Dennis. “OK, see, those directions leave us some pretty questionable wiggle room, if I’m not wrong about who that guy is.”

            Dennis ran a hand through his hair. “I don’t think you’re wrong. How’d he end up all the way out here with the crazy brigade?”

            “And more importantly,” I added, “How did he avoid getting canceled?”

            Anthony spoke up from behind us. “Oh,” he said. “I lied. Obviously.”

To be continued…

*Sepsis. It was sepsis.

** If you would like to learn more about the Inuit community, go online and visit: itk.ca

——

wtp7bq@virginia.edu

Court of Petty Appeals: Classmates v. Gunners

---

Classmates v. OverEnthusiastic Class Discussion Volunteer d.b.a Gunners
323 U.Va 142 (2019)

Pickett, J., and Luévano, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Shmazzle, C.J., Elicegui, Luk, Schmid, Jones, JJ. join.

Justices Pickett and Luévano delivered the opinion of the Court.

I

            Despite UVA Law’s reputation for collegiality and friendliness, there remain some students who recklessly misinterpret the school’s unwritten rules and wish to trespass upon classroom interactions to which there is no implied license and no invitation. Given the lack of understanding of the Covenant of the Cold Call, colloquially known as “Minding Your Own Business,” the Court will restore order by condemning the actions of Over-Enthusiastic Class Discussion Volunteers and defining when and how cold calls can be trespassed upon.

II

            On October 3, 2019, plaintiff John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt (hereinafter ‘JJJS’) suffered a common law school misfortune—he was cold called. JJJS, having been cold called just last class, mistakenly believed he was safe “at least until November.”[1] He was so confident in his safety, in fact, that he had chosen to read ahead for Civil Procedure[2] instead of reading for Torts.

            As JJJS searched through his book in a panic to find the paragraph the professor was asking him about, something flickered in the corner of his eye. At first, he thought it would be a fellow student directing him to the mysterious paragraph,[3] as is the typical UVA Law way. But as he glanced over, he quickly realized that it was the section’s Over-Enthusiastic Class Discussion Volunteer (hereinafter ‘The Gunner’) who had made the motion. The Gunner stared JJJS in the eyes and, with an expression akin to that of Scar before pushing Mufasa off the ledge into a herd of stampeding wildebeests,[4] raised his hand to the sky. The professor called on The Gunner, who relieved JJJS of his duties, but the damage was done. Their classmates had witnessed a repeated, reckless disregard for the Covenant of Cold Calling.

            After class, the students quickly gathered together to file a complaint on behalf of JJJS against The Gunner and those like him.[5]

III

The Covenant of Cold Calls, again known as Minding Your Own Business, provides that fellow students may intervene in a cold call only when the professor opens it up to the class or in order to subtly suggest the correct answer to their on-call classmate next to them. The Covenant strictly prohibits students from inserting themselves into an on-going cold call, particularly in order to demonstrate their own close reading abilities and self-perceived mastery of the legal issue in question.

The Covenant of Cold Calls is as old as the Cold Call itself, and it is a principle that has been passed down from Peer Advisors to 1Ls for centuries as part of Common Knowledge. First laid out in the case before a fellow court, Elle Woods v. Vivian Kensington, 317 Harv. 11, 98 (2001), the Covenant of Cold Calls was established as a general standard against making your fellow students look stupid in front of their colleagues. It has since been refined to a set of rules defining the act of Minding Your Own Business. McLovin’ v. Professors Who Don’t Cold Call in Alphabetical Order, 159 U.Va. 13, 3 (2007), first recognized the widely followed rule that classmates will always forget another’s cold call (or at least pretend to) and, if asked after class by the person on call, “Was it as bad as it felt?” always respond with “No! You did great! Plus I was barely paying attention.”

Restatement Twelve of Law School Etiquette expanded this doctrine to protect on-call students from classmates infringing upon their right to answer the question, even after taking a long pause or saying nothing in the hopes that the professor forgets they were on call. Finally, the recent case of 1L Gunners v. Everyone Else, 324 U.Va. 22, 24 (2019), established that, “emotional distress is a harm within the risk of attending law school.” However, in Caesar v. Brutus, 114 U.Va. 19, 31 (1950), this Court clearly carved out an exception for emotional harm at the hands of sectionmates (“Like family, the bond between sectionmates is forged in the fire of 1L, and they are expected to have and protect each others’ backs.”).

The Gunner’s actions were clearly in violation of the Covenant of Cold Calls. Not only did he fail to wait for the professor to open the cold call to the rest of the class, but he also maliciously trespassed upon the cold call of another and willfully embarrassed a sectionmate. While The Gunner attempted to assert a defense of Trying to Move the Class Along, we find that this is the job of the professor, and that there is no place for a student in this duty. The Gunner should have acted like he was similarly confused about the case and comforted JJJS in the aftermath of the bloodbath with words such as, “that was totally unfair” and, “that has to be a tort, we should sue.”

IV

We hold in favor of the plaintiffs and award emotional damages in the form of a round of drinks at Bilt for JJJS and his pals,[6] which is the only proper way to respond to a brutal day of cold calls and make JJJS whole.

---

[1] JJJS alleges, and this Court finds as fact, that his professor used a randomized system and (almost) never cold called someone twice in a row.

[2] And catch up on the new episodes of the Great British Baking Show...but this fact is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

[3] Which, it turns out, was in a footnote. This would constitute a separate violation under the Covenant of the Cold Call, which recommends that professors avoid questions pertaining to footnotes, dissents, and other wildly unfair material found in a casebook. However, the plaintiff has not alleged that complaint today.

[4] See The Lion King (1994). Not the new one, though. It’s just not the same.

[5] The Gunner is also facing criminal charges for “Impersonating a Police Officer” or “Being a Cop,” as filed by his fellow classmates.

[6] OR if JJJS is not a drinker, we remand this case to the lower court in order to find the non-alcohol equivalent.

Club Spotlight: Older Wiser Law Students

---

Peter Cirka ‘21
Guest Writer

I was thirty-four years old the day I began my second career here at UVA Law. Having skimmed the demographic profiles of various schools’ incoming classes, I had applied knowing I’d be among the oldest students of any law school’s incoming class. I had discovered that, typically, half of first-year law students nationwide were twenty-six or older and one out of every five was at least thirty. Even better, I had detected an especially healthy presence of older students at many of my target schools. For example, Northwestern and Temple reliably reported 1L median ages at or above twenty-seven. Both also reported age ranges that typically reached into the forties and fifties. Most promisingly, I learned of a student organization called Older Wiser Law Students (OWLS) that existed at most schools to facilitate social events and professional guidance for students like myself.

When I was accepted at UVA, I was thrilled and grateful for the opportunity to start my second career at one of the country’s elite law schools. But I also knew that UVA’s student body tended towards the younger side as compared to broader trends. In fact, our incoming 1L median age is historically around twenty-four, and our age range rarely reaches beyond the mid-thirties. So, I moved to Charlottesville, navigated orientation exercises, and began the first semester with mixed feelings. Professionally, I had chosen the best place possible. But on a personal level, I knew I would probably meet far fewer students near my age than I might have elsewhere. 

All the more reason, I thought, to swoop in and join UVA’s chapter of OWLS as soon as I was settled in. Better yet, I guessed from the slimmer numbers that I might find an especially tight-knit group (or, at the very least, one that was skilled at knitting). Having already spied a student mailbox owned by “OWLS at UVA Law,” I circled the courtyard at the September Student Activities Fair eagerly. Imagine my consternation, then, when I asked around and learned that the UVA OWLS had actually died off years ago. Sadly, I was told that the mailbox in ScoCo was an empty nest—a mere memorial of some forgotten age when OWLS had prospered at UVA—neglected but, much like the dial-up modems and flip phones of its former owners’ childhood homes, curiously not yet discarded. There was a mailbox, but no Parliament.[1]

My disappointment passed quickly enough. I had landed in Section J, which included not only several students in their late twenties, but a fellow tricenarian. Even better, I quickly realized that, all the way down to the “K-JDs,” my section mates were exceptionally mature. That initial thrill and gratitude I had felt for the chance to attend UVA sustained easily throughout 1L year, undampened by the fact that I stuck out a bit. But a twinge of dissatisfaction persisted. In many ways, a uniquely young character is a great trait for a law school to have. It is humbling to learn alongside some of the brightest young people in the country—people in their early twenties who are thinking, speaking, and writing at a level higher than most mature professionals in any field. But on the other hand, there is a type of perspective that can only be gained through life experience and only appreciated by others who have likewise ventured beyond the walls of academia for some years. I wondered, “With the OWLS retired, what else does our Law School’s community do for older students seeking the type of solidarity I sought—beyond hoping those students are lucky enough to find it in their (randomly assigned)[2] sectionmates? 

I learned that, in some narrower respects, the community was already doing a great job. I connected with UVA Law families and Virginia Law Veterans—thriving organizations whose mailboxes were dust-free. Both groups commonly, though of course not necessarily, draw older students. But given the more niche missions of Families and Vets, there seemed room for an organization that could serve as more of a ‘big tent’ able deliver social events, academic resources, and career guidance for older students from any walk of life. To that end, along with the hard work of several other founding board members, I headed up the official resurrection of the OWLS at UVA Law. 

Energized by some low-key but high-energy self-funded events last spring, including a self-funded SuperbOWL party, the OWLS are soaring in their first official year. We kicked off with a September happy hour at Kardinal Hall, and look forward to hosting several more around town. We’ve also established a mentorship program, which budgets for 1Ls to grab coffee and lunch throughout the year with one of our 2L or 3L members. In October, we hosted a special Career Services event called “Working Your Work Experience,” where Kevin Donovan and Annie Kim generously gave their time to dish specific advice on how to effectively present a prior career in resumes, cover letters, and interviews. And, since some puns are just irresistible, we’ve already cemented the SuperbOWLS party as our annual flagship event. 

We are often asked if there is an “age cutoff.” The answer is a resounding, “No!” Student organizations celebrating various aspects of diversity have a proud tradition of inviting students to join their communities as allies, regardless of whether every student shares that identity. In that tradition, the OWLS welcome all students, of any age, who believe that a law school’s environment and the field of law itself is enhanced by students that bring distinct personal and professional experiences to the law school classroom. 

First and foremost, the OWLS celebrate diversity of experience itself. After all, as Oliver Wendell Holmes put it, “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.” The common law has always looked backward before daring to forge incrementally forward—so, of course, it must have something to look at in the first place. Lawyers, judges, and legislators do not lock themselves away in libraries or chambers to consult wholly logical or theoretical axioms from which to infer some abstract notion of “the law.” Rather, they move through the world itself—personally navigating successes and failures, logging wins and losses, reckoning with war and peace, finding love, and enduring loss—before they purport to advocate, adjudicate, or legislate that world into (fingers-crossed) a better position than the one in which they found it. The OWLS strive to embody Holmes’s reflection. We have merely, perhaps, frontloaded our experiential chapters more than most. We’d like the UVA Law community to know that we are your colleagues and students who, before even realizing that we envisioned a future in the law, went out into the world and learned trades, founded businesses, taught, became parents, studied great art and literature, or served their country, to name only a few of the endeavors proudly populating the resumes of our very own OWLS here at UVA. And most of all, this time, we’re here to stay!

If you’re interested in joining the OWLS list serve, GroupMe, softball team, or any of our great events, President Peter Cirka can be reached at pcc3hq@virginia.edu.

___
pcc3hq@virginia.edu

---

[1] A ‘Parliament’ is the scientific term for a flock of owls.

[2] Ed.’s note: Don’t lie to us, Cordel. There’s no way the same section can have four people who went to the same middle school (see Section A class of 2020) and it be random.

Hot Bench: Jameil Brown '21

---

Jameil Brown ‘21

2L Education Chair for BLSA, Career Development Chair for Lambda, and a member of VLR’s editorial board.

Hi Jameil and welcome to Hot Bench! Let’s get the ball rolling with some fun questions. What’s something most people don’t know about you? 

Most people don’t know that I am a horrible cook. I’ve never sent myself to the hospital or burned anything down, but it’s not great. 

If you could cook one thing really well, what would it be? 

If I could make one thing, I would love to be able to make a Filet Oscar, which is a fantastically seared filet with crab meat and bearnaise sauce on top. 

Do you have a pet peeve?

Candy wrappers on the floor. I don’t know why it bothers me, but if I see one in class, I will shift my books to block my vision. Maybe it’s because I don’t eat candy. 

You don’t eat any candy? 

I literally don’t eat sweets. I don’t have the taste for it. I never ate my own birthday cake growing up. 

What about semi-sweet pastries or pies? 

Nope, not even muffins or donuts. Pancakes are right at the border. 

Do you drink your coffee black? 

I don’t drink coffee, but drinking is different from eating sweets. I like sodas and sweet teas. 

A “sweet tea” man! Any strong opinions about brewing it?

You can’t put sugar in iced tea. If a restaurant has iced tea, it does not have sweet tea. Give me sweet tea or give me death. 

How much sweet tea do you drink?

That doesn’t need to be public information. It’s an abundance. 

Alright, keep your secrets. Can you tell us where you’re from? 

Near Austin, Texas—Leander to be specific. 

Tell us something about Leander!

It’s one of the fastest growing cities in the nation. A new subdivision pops up every time I go back. In 1990, the welcome sign said population is 3,300. As of 2017, we have over 50,000 people. 

Was it an adjustment going from Texas to New Jersey for college?

In some ways, yes. I got to meet so many more people from a variety of cultures and backgrounds than you do in your typical southern suburb. And I definitely had to get used to the cold and snow. But my high school had a great balance of academics, arts, and sports—I found Princeton to be a similar and comfortable environment in that regard. 

I hear you’re headed back there this weekend. Are you attending an event?

I’m going back to Princeton for THRIVE, a semi-regular Black alumni conference. The last one was held when I was a junior in college. It’s exciting to go back as an alumni. There will be a lot of talks and networking receptions, panels about student life and careers, and conversations about being an alum in this context. 

Was the black student community a big part of your life as an undergrad? 

No, actually. I was a member, but I wasn’t an active member. I spent more time exploring my LGBTQ identity. My black identity was important to me, though, and I explored it in other ways. I took a number of African-American Studies courses and I worked with the Carl A. Fields Center for Equality + Understanding on different programming initiatives, especially on issues regarding race.  

How have your experiences here at UVA differed from your experiences at Princeton? 

I will say that there is more of a critical mass at Princeton, where there were still a few hundred people to meet and become friends with. The Law School is much smaller and the percentages still aren’t perfect. It is nice, though, because we all really love each other and we spend a lot of time with each other. We support each other and I like that a lot. But still, there’s not the same breadth of ways to engage. 

When did you start thinking about law school? 

I started thinking about it around my sophomore year of college. I was a computer science engineer for two hot seconds and I found I didn’t have a strong intellectual passion for it. I began taking classes with the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. I started gearing my internships in that way too. I interned for a federal judge and for the headquarters for Legal Aid in New Jersey.

Why computer science? 

I wanted to comfortably make money, haha. 

Let’s do a lightning round! 

Favorite food? 

French fries. I love a good steak fry—the body can scoop up a good amount of ketchup. 

What is your favorite place for steak fries in C’ville? 

Red Robin has steak fries, but it feels cheap to use a chain. The fries are bottomless though. 

Favorite place in Charlottesville? 

The BLSA office. We have a lot of fun in there. 

Anti-Stress Hobby? 

I find sleeping fun. I have nerdier answer—I’m actually a huge fan of the marching arts—Drum Corps, Winter Guard, and any Corps style marching bands. In the fall and winter, I’m usually live-streaming it as I study. 

Interesting! How did you get into the “marching arts” as it were? 

I was a big marching band nerd in high school and I never shook it. I played the trumpet. 

Do you have a favorite Drum Corps? 

It’s hard, probably the Boston Crusaders. 

Favorite word? 

Intersectionality—I think it’s important and not taken seriously enough.

If you could live anywhere, where would it be? 

I would love to live in a warmer version of Chicago or a less rainy version of Amsterdam. 

Chicago is my favorite city in the country. Great food, great nightlife, and fun neighborhoods. 

What is your least favorite sound? 

Crickets are an awful sound. 

What’s one movie that left an impression on you?

Moonlight. 

If you won the lottery, what would you do with it? 

I would definitely buy a number of houses in different locations I would like to be in. 

If you could pick one song to play in the background of your life, what would it be? 

Lust for Life by Drake from his early mixtapes. It’s a good song about balancing reaching your vision of success and your roots that helped propel you there. 

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

Consider other perspectives. 

If you could change anything about the Law School, what would it be?

I wish the average experience of someone who doesn’t fit the typical UVA mold were a little stronger. 

What do you hope to do with your law degree? 

I have dreams and goals about diversifying the legal profession and those goals are better accomplished in certain positions like law firm partnerships. I met a number of black female attorneys who are on the executive committees of their firms and to see how much they put into their work and their goals has been inspiring to me. I think we should ask ourselves: Why are Black people not in the pipeline and not making it to the partner levels? 

What’s your favorite thing about the Law School?

The fantastic Career Services Offices and I’m really happy I came here for that. 

___
jdb4rf@virginia.edu