Court of Petty Appeals: Entitled Millennials v. Student Affairs

Virginia Law Weekly September 9, 2020

Entitled Millennials v. Student Affairs
73 U.Va 3 (2020)

Justice Tonseth delivered the opinion of the Court.

“If a hungry little traveler shows up at your house, you might want to give him a cookie. If you give him a cookie, he’s going to ask for a glass of milk.” While no one foresaw Laura Numeroff as the Nostradamus of UVA Law for her illustrious work, If You Give a Mouse a Cookie, her words could not be more poignant or applicable. Driven by hunger, greed, and poverty, the class of Entitled Millennials of UVA Law, hereinafter referred to as “plaintiffs,” leveraged this quote to secure a judgment in the District Court of Petty Appeals in their favor. Awarding of damages against the Office of Student Affairs, in the form of an expanded fruit selection, increased slots for registration, and punishment for repeat participants, goes beyond the scope of the Court’s jurisdiction. Due to the faulty interpretation and application of 1L Cookie Monsters v. UVA, 370 U. Va. 100 (2020), in conjunction with my personal disdain for stare decisis, the decision against Student Affairs and award of damages is vacated. We humbly ask Student Affairs to accept our deepest condolences for this miscarriage of justice.

II.

Hybrid classes, social distancing, mask-wearing, and the close of the Snack Office[1] all greeted students harshly upon their return to Charlottesville in mid-August. In a single ray of sunshine, Kate Duvall and the Office of Student Affairs established a partnership with Bellair Farms to deliver a mix of fresh vegetables, at no cost, to students every Friday.[2] While it is beyond me why anyone would willingly eat vegetables,[3] Student Affairs sponsored forty slots each week until October 6, on a first-come, first-serve basis, with SBA apportioning an additional twenty-five slots.

Plaintiffs complained to the District Court of Petty Appeals on two grounds. First, they claim that Student Affairs ignored their statutory duty to limit people from signing up for multiple slots, rather hoping to rely on the “collegiality” of UVA Law for law students to look out for each other. Further, plaintiffs complain the free produce they received was odd, whether it was a bag of beets,[4] a kohlrabi,[5] a single ear of corn, or assorted small squashes. In stating their claims, plaintiffs rely solely on the 1L Cookie Monsters v. UVA precedent of a breach of contract to get more free food, at their own quality standards.

In 1L Cookie Monsters, Justice Stievater ordered Student Affairs to return “Weekly Wind Downs” and the associated free trays of cookies for 1Ls to enjoy on Friday afternoons. Relying on the UCC and the 1Ls’ detrimental reliance, Justice Stievater in dicta explained that sufficient consideration existed between Student Affairs and 1Ls to create a breach of contract for the failure to provide free cookies. Brief for the Plaintiffs applied this precedent to their situation stating “the cost of tuition, which is still over $60,000 for ridiculous Zoom classes, is consideration enough for a ‘Whole Foods’ style fruit selection. Registering for a slot clearly metered acceptance of the offer, and thus Student Affairs has breached our implied quality standard. Replace cookies with Kohlrabi and the cases mirror each other,” at 24. Oh, how the turn tables.

III.

Respondents willingly ignored the first Petty Rule of Civil Procedure: We do what we want. Law Weekly v. CoPA Copiers, 369 U. Va. 96 (2019). Through our landmark decisions, this Court has consistently shaped events and outcomes in favor of law students to the detriment of the administration. However, these decisions are often left to the whimsy of each Justice, weakening the support for their precedential value. It is thus the words of (a Supreme Court) Justice, Clarence Thomas, that drive my decision to follow and apply the first Petty Rule of Civil Procedure to this case today, “when faced with a demonstrably erroneous precedent, my rule is simple: We should not follow it.[6]”

The class of Entitled Millennials did not detrimentally rely on Student Affairs to provide free vegetables to their elevated standards, as neither did the 1Ls and their Friday cookies.[7] Student Affairs gratuitously provided these options, whether healthy or good for the soul, at their own discretion to generate a rare smile from a student while at school. The plaintiffs attempted to accept, yet demand better gifts[8] from Student Affairs is shameful. If anything, the plaintiffs ought to thank Student Affairs for thinking of them in their time of need. Further, this Court points the plaintiffs to Honor Code Committee v. Fried Chicken Thieves, 72 U. Va. 655 (2020), where blatant violations of the Honor Code not to steal free food is applicable here to slots for vegetables. The ire of the plaintiffs should thus be directed inwards, Lord of the Flies style.

“Emotional distress is a harm within the risk of attending school.” 1L Gunners v. Everyone Else, 324 U. Va. 22, 24 (2019). Just because plaintiffs are already stressed in the first week of September[9] does not mean they can blame Student Affairs for not meeting their astronomical expectations (i.e. beggars can’t be choosers). It is therefore decreed that this Court is no longer bound by stare decisis,[10] that 1L Cookie Monsters v. UVA is overturned as an erroneous abuse of discretion, and every plaintiff owes Lisa or Kate Duvall a handwritten apology.

STIEVATER, B. dissenting.

I confess myself to be bitterly disappointed with the majority’s outcome in this case. For one, this is the Court of Petty Appeals and the Justices who preside over it are similarly petty. Since handing down what I believed to be a landmark holding in 1L Cookie Monsters v. UVA, 370 U.Va 100 (2020), I have come to revel in my unofficial titles of reverence, which include, but are not limited to: King of Cookies, Sultan of Snickerdoodles, and the Chocolate Chip Khan. To be stripped of these so early into my 2L year burns deeply, like a tray of cookies pulled out of the oven with no mitts. Justice Tonseth includes a reference to the fictional Dothraki language from Game of Thrones in footnote five. Perhaps he will recognize this one: The North remembers. So too will the countless cookie monsters that Justice Tonseth has wronged today.

Secondly, Justice Tonseth builds his abominable decision on faulty ground. Indeed, it is ground no sturdier than a crumbly cookie. The decision today concerns the alleged quality of vegetables, which the majority writes the plaintiffs have no legal right to argue over. I need not wade into the waters of this argument. The class in 1L Cookie Monsters did not argue over the quality of cookies, only that they continue to be provided once the contract was formed. My holding recognized this right to continual cookies at Weekly Wind Downs because there was sufficient consideration, in the form of tuition, to form a contract. It did not purport to demand a quality of cookie. The Entitled Millennials before the Court today erroneously imagined 1L Cookie Monsters to provide them a legal argument. That might have been the case if the Bellair Farm Fridays were suddenly discontinued by Student Affairs and no vegetables were available at all, but it is not the case when the vegetables are to their displeasure.

I condemn Justice Tonseth’s disregard for stare decisis and the majority’s crumbly legal reasoning. They were not too mighty to partake in cookie eating themselves last year, I might add. I rebuke the Entitled Millennials for attempting to fly too high as a collective, greedy Icarus in their search for “Instagram-able” vegetables, thereby sacrificing the 1L right to cookies. I lament the loss of my legacy as the Protector of (Baked) Goods. If I can’t use my legal education to secure my friends and myself cookies, what’s this all been for? I dissent.

---

pjt5hm@virginia.edu
bes4cf@virginia.edu

[1] We miss seeing your face 3x a day and still love you dearly Lisa!

[2] See “Friday Farmstead with Student Affairs” email, Kate Duvall, August 17, 2020.

[3] The only green I eat is tiny cilantro pieces on my pizza and the limes in my Coronas.

[4] The 1L recipient of this bag failed to call Dwight Schrute to ask for the best way to utilize these, to his own detriment.

[5] Which I sadly just learned is not part of the Dothraki language, but a part of the cabbage family.

[6] See Clarence Thomas Is Actually Right About Supreme Court Precedent, Slate (last visited September 3, 2020).

[7] But seriously, who would eat kohlrabi? Why can’t you just use lettuce or a regular turnip instead?

[8] Yes, I looked up the rules for gifts from my property outline. It didn’t help my argument, as I must’ve zoned out when Professor Nicoletti talked about them, so let’s appeal to ethos attacks instead. I really should pay attention more.

[9] Same, I keep getting my seat stolen in class because my professors won’t do a seating chart. ☹

[10] It is with my own whimsy I have declared this power. My rule of tyranny begins now.

Hot Bench: Ali Muhammad

Virginia Law Weekly September 9, 2020

Hi Ali! Welcome to Hot Bench! So, I’m sure almost all of our readers have seen you around Grounds, but they might not all know that you are our steadfast security guard. So, when did you first move to Charlottesville?

I moved to Charlottesville in 2007 from Germany.

When did you start working for the University of Virginia?

In 2013.

How did you get started here?

Well, when I first moved here I could not speak English. So, when I got here I took English classes twice a day. I took the beginner’s English course for six months, and then I took an advanced course. I then studied IT and received an Associate’s Degree in IT. Then, I got a job working at UVA as a security guard.

Where are you from?

I was born in Iraq. I was actually born in Baghdad. I left because of the war. I don’t want to be negative ,but because of the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein and because of the First Gulf War I simply could not live in Iraq anymore. That was when life began to get hard, in 1991. I left Iraq for good in 1998. From 1991 to 2003 there was an embargo on Iraq, and so Iraq was unable to get any medication or food whatsoever. Those were very very hard years.

Have you been back to Iraq since?

I went back to Iraq in 2014. I could not stay because it was a nightmare—everything was destroyed. It was worse than it was in 1991 or in 1998. It was very sad. I couldn’t stay for more than two weeks. It was incredibly sad.

Is there anything you miss the most about Iraq? Anything you wish you could bring over?

That’s a good question—I don’t know. It was a good learning experience to live there, but I learned a lot about my culture once I left.

How so?

Well, once I lived in a Western country, I came to wish we had colleges in Iraq, that we had an education system. We could have done very well, but most of the time we just have war. I realized that I felt sorry about the Middle East, and about Iraq, because they never had the opportunity. They never had a choice, and they never had the opportunity to live differently.

What brought you to Charlottesville specifically?

I could not renew my visa in Germany because of the 2003 war in Iraq, so my only choices were to return to Iraq or come to America. I was able to come to America because I was granted refugee status when George W. Bush signed his second order to allow Iraqis to come to America. I was placed in Charlottesville by the American government.

Have you seen many other parts of America?

I’ve been to New York. It was the most amazing thing I’d ever seen—just so huge. I love museums in America, especially the National Museum in D.C. I also love American teachers and professors. They are the best in the world. They teach you to see things from many different perspectives. At Piedmont Community College, my professors were just amazing. My teacher at the Adult Learning Center was absolutely incredible. You know, when you move somewhere, you have culture shock, and the teachers helped me a lot with that.

If you could live anywhere, where would it be?

Germany. I would love to go back to Germany.

You like Germany better?

It was a different experience. They were a lot more laid-back in Germany. Here in the US we work long hours and study a lot. For most of my time in America, I’ve worked two jobs. Life is very expensive in America

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

Ohhh! (laughing). I would go and help the people I know need money in Iraq, and everywhere around the world. I actually play the lottery once a week so I can dream about that.

Weirdest thing you’ve seen on Grounds?

Oh my god, I don’t want to get myself in trouble! The weirdest thing is when people don’t take the opportunity to study here seriously, because when I was the students’ age I would dream about such an opportunity to study as this, which I never had.

What’s something most people don’t know about you?

I can always be there if they need help.

What from your own life experience would you want students to apply?

I would advise young people to move around a lot, live in different places, and have different experiences. As you get older your life starts to get faster and faster, and if you stay in the same place you’ll look back on your life and wonder what happened.

Any last remarks for students?

Don’t be afraid of the future. It’s normal to feel that way, but when you get old you don’t feel scared anymore because you’re used to the feeling, and life is like waves. Sometimes you’re up and sometimes you’re down.

---

aam3q@virginia.edu

Love in the Time of Corona: Abby and Andrew

Virginia Law Weekly September 2, 2020

Ben Stievater ‘22
Events Editor

Although it’s been months, many aspects of our “new normal” continue to present challenges that can be strange and frustrating to face. From sitting next to someone in class to hitting Bar Review, things that once seemed a given feel far away, or at least vastly different behind a mask and six feet apart. We’ve been forced to connect more creatively in our professional, personal, and—we’ll say it, you smokeshows, you—romantic lives. Indeed, like a professor explaining the holding five minutes past the bell, love continues on, so we at the Law Weekly thought it would be intriguing, pleasantly distracting, and (dare we say it) heartwarming to hear how couples and singles alike are handling romance in light of all these changes. You've heard of Love in the Time of Cholera, but get ready for Love in the Time of Corona.

This week's guests are Abby Porter ’22 and Andrew Tynes ’22.

Hi Abby and Andrew! Welcome and thanks for kicking us off this semester. Let's start with some basics. How and when did you two meet?

Abby: Hi, Ben! We met two days before classes started 1L, getting drinks at Sedona with a group of people and then later that week at a party. We spent most of the party talking and became friends. After about a month, we attended another party together as friends, but that night something clicked and there was a clear, natural shift in our friendship toward a relationship. We’ve been officially together since November!

Ah, all roads and relationships lead to Sedona. Let’s talk COVID. What’s your relationship been like during it?

Andrew: Back during spring break, we had been out of town visiting her parents and got back to Charlottesville right as the semester shifted online and things were shutting down. We had to decide pretty quickly what our quarantine situation would look like. We decided to stay put here together. We’ve now spent more of our relationship in quarantine together than not.

Abby: It’s been a (successful) trial-by-fire. We had a good number of friends who were here over the summer that enabled us to have some other social outlets, but we spent a ton of time together and learned a lot about each other in the process.

Pictured: These two beauties lit up the stage at Barrister’s this spring.

Let’s hear it! How would you each describe the other in a word or phrase?

Abby: Andrew is very curious! He loves to experience and explore new things. I’ve learned and experienced a lot of things with him that I normally may have overlooked on my own. The other night we watched a Fellini movie that he had been wanting to watch. I ended up loving it, but wouldn’t have ever thought to watch it had it not been for Andrew.

Andrew: There’s a funny metaphor for our relationship that we talk about a lot. I’m like a whale and Abby is like a barnacle. We have a very symbiotic relationship and are dependent on each other, but in different ways. I’m pretty introverted and would say Abby brings out the extrovert in me when it comes to socializing. On the other hand, Abby is super extroverted, which has obviously been more difficult these past few months. In the absence of those normal social outlets, I think I’ve been able to be a sounding board and guide as she adapts to this more introverted lifestyle we’ve all been living.

That’s dolphinately a good metaphor. Let’s pivot back to Corona for a second. I bet spending all that time together could have been overwhelming. Did you have any practices in place to keep things running smoothly?

Abby: Yes! I think we’re good at sitting together in the same room and doing our own thing, but we would plan out set activities to look forward to each day. I think the separation of those two things helped keep work hours for work. Communication about COVID risks was also crucial. We both realized that because we were quarantining together we had a mutual responsibility to be smart and safe. We made a habit of always keeping each other in the loop and letting each other know if we were ever uncomfortable with respective personal plans.

Andrew: Meetings, networking calls, and big projects at work were fairly easy to do separately. But when things at work were slow, there was definitely a temptation to socialize with each other or do something impromptu. But, going back to the introvert/extrovert dynamic, I occasionally do need time alone to recharge my batteries. She’s the opposite and recharges by being around people. We definitely had to communicate through this difference in personality and practice.

Let’s do a lightning round! Best Charlottesville date spot?

Andrew: Ten. Great sushi and vibe. It’s shockingly fancy and city-like. I love the rural charm of Charlottesville, but Ten flips that on its head and makes you feel like you’ve escaped to Manhattan for the night.

Abby: Lampo! Best pizza in Charlottesville and incredibly cozy.

Favorite memory?

Answer: It’s tempting to pick a big activity or moment, but our favorite times are the little things—sitting on the porch with a glass of wine, drinking coffee, or making new recipes for dinner. There haven’t been a ton of big moments during this summer, but that doesn’t mean that there haven’t been any good ones.

First activity you'll do or place you'll go once all social restrictions are lifted?

Answer: On a micro-level, something fun and around a ton of people—maybe axe-throwing at a brewery. On a macro-level, though, we’ve been planning an eventual trip abroad. We’re torn between Peru, Japan, and Italy.

Last question: What is one thing you would want to say, in public, possibly in front of the whole Law School (or at least our readership), to each other?

Andrew: I would say that Abby is a rare type of moral and ethical person. I think in today’s society it’s easy to either go with the flow or to act out of a desire to impress others via performance. I think it’s very rare to make the right decisions for the right reasons. Abby always acts with righteousness. She’s got a clarity of spirit that draws people to her.

Abby: I would say I value how Andrew comes to everything with passion and an opinion—he genuinely cares about what he believes in and isn’t apathetic about anything. He’s got an admirable, stalwart spirit when it comes to his views, and he stands up for what he believes in. I would also say that I’ve learned a lot of things from him. He thinks outside of the box and isn’t really bound by traditional thinking. He’s an excellent ground-up thinker who isn’t satisfied by band-aid solutions. Finally, I would like to formally apologize for preventing him from finishing The Sopranos this summer by forcing him to watch Parks and Rec every night with me instead.

Many thanks to Andrew and Abby for kicking us off this semester on Love in the Time of Corona! Are you a couple that’s been separated or getting creative during this social isolation period? A single who’s desire to mingle has been curtailed by COVID-19? A platonic friend or member of a family who wants to share how you’ve been making it through this together? Love comes in all shapes and sizes, and we want to hear about it! Email bes4cf@virginia.edu if you or someone you know might like to be featured on Love in the Time of Corona.

---

bes4cf@virginia.edu

Antitrust and Big Tech, Part I: The Path to 21st-Century Technological Transformation

Virginia Law Weekly September 2, 2020

Donna Faye Imadi ‘22
Current Events Editor

Already a year has come and gone since I first happened upon the event “Antitrust in the Digital Economy” as an eager 1L and was inspired to learn and experience all that the legal profession offers us. Writing my first Virginia Law Weekly piece covering the event, titled “Make Antitrust Cool Again: Antitrust in the Digital Economy,”[1] I recall Professor Hockett's passion as he sought to convince his audience that 1) antitrust was “cool;” and 2) it was quite a “big deal” in relation to regulating Big Tech. U.S. antitrust laws that form the foundation of our nation’s free-market economy, prohibiting monopolistic conduct and conspiracies in restraint of trade, are governed mainly by the Sherman Act passed in 1890. (Big Tech refers to Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Apple—the preeminent tech companies of our time.)

It only took my coverage of this one event to sow the seed of intrigue on how “Big Tech” companies influence the social, economic, and political systems that pervade every facet of our lives. Serendipitously, exactly a year has passed since I first learned what the term “antitrust” meant through my reporting. As a 2L, I return, having had the chance to sink my teeth into these issues by working in the Technology Enforcement Division at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). By way of this experience, I feel inclined to report to you that Professor Hockett’s belief about the promise of a career in antitrust law, as well as how antitrust law relates to Big Tech, is correct. Big Tech’s influence is critically important to our lives and antitrust is at the heart of determining how to usher in our 21st-century technological transformation—a technological transformation which not only affects our economy, but our nation’s fundamental democratic processes, international security, and our shared conception of reality itself.

When the unthinkable descended upon the world by way of COVID-19 in mid-March, many things changed in our personal lives. We were stuck in our homes for weeks on end, longing for the “simplicity” of our former grocery runs or restaurant outings. But, we had great resources at our disposal to match the moment. Resources we have come to regard as our “virtual toolboxes.”

Prior to the pandemic, I had felt trepidation about entering a “virtual reality.” I was disinclined to use all of the “tech tools” at my disposal. In fact, I employed any method possible to avoid downloading apps like Venmo or even making purchases online via eBay, Amazon, or Instacart. Yet necessity was the mother of conformity once COVID-19 turned our lives upside down. Many Americans, like myself, who previously did their utmost to avoid being sucked in the digital economy due to concerns about privacy, data, and lack of transparency, were impelled to change course. Paralyzed by the pandemic and stuck at home, we adapted.

For better or worse, our economy was also forced to adapt, markedly impacting 51 million Americans who filed for unemployment as of mid-August.[2] Both producers (workers who are unemployed) and consumers (all of us) thrust to change our habits. On the consumption end, millions of Americans turned to large e-commerce sites such as Amazon for basic commodities (remember the toilet paper catastrophe?). They also turned to Facebook and Google (parent of Youtube), seeking ways to combat the effects of social isolation. Moreover, with over one-hundred million iPhone users in the U.S alone, we spent an incredible amount of time on our phones/devices—downloading apps that became more influential in shaping our conception of the world around us and ourselves.

Our increasing dependence on these digital platforms only exacerbated their power to construct and influence the realities we were siloed into within our homes. This influence was reflected in monetary third quarter earnings reported on July 31. Amazon reported record revenue and profit increases, doubling profits to a record $5.2 billion, far exceeding expectations. Apple also reported a 11% increase in quarterly sales due to strong demand for apps, reliance on remote-work devices, and a lower priced iPhone.

But, this might all seem so obvious to you. “Of course, their earnings increased,” you might think. And why should that be an issue? These tech companies provided us great services in an unprecedented era. Could we have imagined enduring such a catastrophic global event as this pandemic without such technological interconnectedness?

You have a point. Being profitable in America is not a crime. Nor is it a crime to “Be Big.” As House Representative Sensenbrenner said in his opening remarks at the investigative hearing before the House Antitrust Subcommittee, on July 29, 2020, which examined the “Dominance of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google.” “Being big is not inherently bad” and “America should reward the success of its business.” The nearly five-and-a-half-hour testimony of the CEOs of these companies (Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sundar Pichai) demarcated the progress of a nearly yearlong investigation spearheaded by Chairman Cicilline (D-RI). He began the hearing reflecting exactly why being “too big” might be a problem, weighed against those benefits of Big Tech. His statements emphasized the consequences of the abuse of these platforms’ market-power (exacerbated by COVID-19), especially in eLearning, e-commerce, social media, and other essential platforms.

Over the course of the next month, I’ll reflect on my recent experiences at the FTC to illuminate how regulation of Big Tech via our nation’s antitrust laws, or statutory authority, may impact our lives. We’ll turn to the recent Antitrust Subcommittee hearing to do this, then to how antitrust in Big Tech intersects with U.S. international security objectives. Lastly, we’ll focus on how Big Tech is regulating our social processes and conceptions of our communities, especially in light of the recent and upcoming elections.

Big Tech is a BIG issue. Let’s get to it.

---

dfi3un@virginia.edu

[1] https://www.lawweekly.org/front-page/2019/10/2/make-antitrust-cool-again-antitrust-in-the-digital-economy

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/07/16/51-million-americans-are-unemployedheres-the-story-of-the-job-seekers-behind-the-numbers/#39e611956ac1

Court of Petty Appeals: John Does v. Open Bathroom Doors

Virginia Law Weekly September 2, 2020

John Does v. Open Bathroom Doors
73 U.Va 2 (2020)

Justice Jones delivered the opinion of the Court.

We’ve all heard of the open-air office. Great spaces where you can collaborate and be super nosy about your colleagues’ lives. But should this nosiness extend to places you normally don’t want to smell? This court affirmatively answers the question with a no. Just shut the door.

It is Tuesday. You are sitting in the library by the windows facing the JAG school. You’re a 3L, you don’t have a care in the world despite the global pandemic,[1] and so you don’t notice that you’ve sat a little too close to the bathroom. All of a sudden, you see a poor 1L walk past you a little too fast. Tragedy is about to strike. Because this 1L has had too much Chipotle. Now you realize it. The bathroom doors have been kept open. You hear it. At first the sound strikes like a polite car horn when someone hasn’t noticed a traffic light turned green. But then the noise crescendos. You wonder if you’re still hearing the 1L, or if there’s a recreation of the Battle of the Somme going on at the JAG school. The Guns of August continue firing until finally, they stop. But it is not over. Just like World War I, the artillery barrage is followed by noxious gas. A defeated, sad 1L emerges, looking like he wishes his mask covered more of his face. Rumor has it that that 1L switched all his classes entirely online that same day.

Plaintiffs, an entire class of people who suffered just like our poor 1L,[2] filed suit alleging a violation of their fundamental right to privacy, their right to not be heard,[3] and their right to shut the freakin’ door, man. This is not the first time the administration has been reprimanded by this Court for bathroom-related privacy violations. See Students’ Bodies v. The Overbroad Crack in Bathroom Stall Doors, 223 U. Va 281. (2019).

The defendants make several arguments on appeal. First, they argue that open-air bathrooms are necessary to prevent the spread of disease. However, as my travelers on Oregon Trail so tragically discovered when they died of dysentery, bathrooms on the open road are ineffective at preventing the spread of disease. Next, defendants contend that there have been no real damages inflicted on plaintiffs. While the Court’s knowledge of damages is limited (sparky-sparky boom-boom means big cash money, we all know from the Supreme Court’s virtual hearings what a big deal a single flush can become.[4] Finally, defendants muster an equal treatment under the law argument. If plaintiffs’ online Zoom counterparts can use the bathroom in the middle of their classes, then clearly the in-person student must take the same open-air approach or the curve will be thrown off. To which we say: Equality does not apply to bathrooms. That’s why some bathrooms have urinals and their cakes while others go without.

The dissent uses a bunch of fancy words that the Court doesn’t have the energy to pretend it understands now that I’m a 3L.[5] What is a boogie, some kind of French hat? The dissent also brings up the standing of plaintiffs. But in bathroom-related affairs, standing is not the point. The point, in fact, can be accomplished with no standing at all. Therefore, the requirement of standing is waived.

Never has there been such a traumatic bathroom incident since the time I was in kindergarten and the bathroom door broke, locking me in.[6] On that day, I swore to never let something like that happen again if I became a Petty Justice. So, here we are. Injunctive relief is granted, and the doors must close.

TONSETH, J., dissenting.

As this Court’s sole remaining bastion for textualism and the proper administration of the judicial system, I vehemently dissent.

1L Gunners v. Every-One Else, 324 U.Va 22 (2019) provides a baseline rule here: 1Ls always lose. There goes over a third of the plaintiffs here. Further, another third of 2L/3Ls aren’t attending in person, see COVID-19 v. Students, 20 U.Va 20 (2020). This reduces the original class of Plaintiffs to a generous number of three hundred. As this Court has previously ruled, see Lululemon v. Athleta, 315 U.Va 18 (2019), law students are too boujee to wear knock-off workout clothes, let alone use a public restroom. It is obvious the majority has ignored the basic prerequisite for having a case on this docket: standing.

Justice Jones, sitting on his ivory throne as a 3L, relies on the first Petty Rule of Civil Procedure: We do what we want, Law Weekly v. CoPA Copiers 369 U.Va 96 (2019). Apparently, this arrogance also ignores that the plaintiffs have a legitimate claim. This Court has wisely held that “emotional distress is a harm within the risk of attending law school.” 1L Gunners v. Everyone Else, 324 U.Va. 22, 24 (2019).

Ignoring these otherwise rather important procedural aspects, this case is correctly decided on the merits. The Law School’s open-door policy, applying only to bathroom entrances, yet not bathroom stalls or the administration’s offices, is both arbitrary and capricious. If I learned anything from having to trudge through Justice Scalia’s numerous dissents in Con Law, it is that the role of the judiciary isn’t to make policy. However, this decision is based on sheer decency. A right to privacy may be contentious, but law students already struggle enough under pressure. See 1Ls v. Flex Exams, 309 U.Va 73 (2020), (granting an injunction against virtual proctors on 1L spring exams, although the exams were pass/fail, due to the likelihood 1Ls would clam up worse than they do when trying to talk about anything other than law school to friends back home). It would be inhumane to allow the administration to inflict more pressure on students, especially when performance and relaxation is critical here.

But because I can dissent, I do.

---

jmj3vq@virginia.edu
pjt5hm@virginia.edu

[1] An astute reader might question the veracity of this story based on the fact that a 3L is in the library in August. To which we say: “tongue sticking out with eyes closed emoji.”

[2] No sound that emerges from the bathroom when it shouldn’t is too small for a plaintiff to not be included. You might call this the “trickle down” effect.

[3] See Professors Who Cold Call 3Ls v. Feb. Club (2018) (holding that the right to not be heard is fundamental, and, in the case of 3Ls, a social duty).

[4] For an in-depth discussion of who flushed (Justice Breyer), see Ashley Feinberg, Investigation: I Think I Know Which Justice Flushed, slate, May 8, 2020. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/toilet-flush-supreme-court-livestream.html.

[5] Nor does the Court have the energy to maintain consistent pronoun use when referring to myself.

[6] This is a true story. The fire department had to come and everything.

Hot Bench: Lisa Napier

Virginia Law Weekly September 2, 2020

Lisa is the “Snack Office Queen” and Faculty Assistant for Student Affairs.

Hi Lisa! Welcome to Hot Bench! For all our readers who might not know, Lisa holds court in the Student Affairs Office a.k.a. the Snack Office and is the friendly face of Student Affairs. Lisa, can you tell us a little about yourself?

Sure! I’ve been an employee of the University for thirty-two years and all but six of those years I’ve been at the Law School. My first job at the School was in Admissions. I worked there for four years and then I moved to Student Affairs. This was way back when we had only one building.

That’s right! The Law School used to be just Withers-Brown Hall. Was there a dedicated office for Student Affairs back then?

Yes, there was. The Office has really evolved over the years. Dean Harmon was my first Student Affairs Dean; she did a lot with student needs and she actually started the Peer Advisor Program. Just thinking about how that has evolved and grown . . . when we started, there were only twenty Peer Advisors.

When I first started, we dealt a lot with supporting students. Dean Harmon, at the time, had a degree in education and counseling, so she worked with in-house counseling and we worked a lot with people who had needs. We did a small amount with organization type things—at that point, if there was funding, we were not in control of that funding. But now, we have grown! Dr. Gibson is part of our team, and Kate and Dean Davies do a lot of academic counseling. Having the team come together, that was great.

What are some changes you’ve seen in the thirty-two years you’ve worked here?

I think, each year, we always see a difference in each one of the student classes. The difference in personality is just amazing.That’s always a change. And the technology at the school—going from where we started—oh my gosh, what is email? Back then we had two people in IT and when we got our first departmental email, wow. I think the technology is amazing and the [new] building.

In your own work, has that changed or shifted throughout the years?

Oh yeah, when I started, I wasn’t sitting in the same office as the Dean, so when we moved and got the open floor plan, I began to engage more with students. I used to be behind a wall and a little sliding window—like a dentist’s office!

So, colloquially, we all know the Student Affairs Office as the Snack Office. When did that start?

I think when Dean Davies came. At first we had some candy and then we realized it was a great way to get students engaged. Hopefully, we’ll still have people come in even if there are no snacks.

No snacks this year? :(

Yes, for safety, there will be no snacks this year. We miss it! We miss seeing everybody in that capacity.

What is your favorite thing about the Student Affairs Office?

Of course it’s the students—I love helping out any way I can and I love working with you guys.

Let’s do a lightning round!

Favorite place in Charlottesville?

C’ville Coffee—Toan and his wife own it and I love them.

Where is somewhere you haven’t been but would like to go?

You know, I’ve never been out west to Wyoming or Montana.

One song to play in the background of your life. What would you pick?

My go-tos are my Bon Jovi songs. I loved the big hair bands. “Living on a Prayer”—love it!

Pet peeve?

Okay, this will be funny [for Dean Davies]. I have this thing about when people call Dean Davies “Sarah.” It’s a respect thing. Not showing respect is one of my pet peeves.

Favorite phrase?

Bless your heart.

That can go different ways!

That’s true. Mine usually goes the good way.

What do you like to read?

I like mysteries.

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

Be kind to one another.

Where did you grow up?

I grew up local—lived all my life twenty-five miles south of here in Scottsville, Virginia. I grew up on a dairy farm. We lived in a very rural area, I came from a humble background—it was a treat for me to come to Charlottesville. We had wide open playing fields [in Scottsville], it was great. I still live in the area: my husband and I—and Sable, the dog (she’s a four year old Charcoal Lab).

Growing up, what did you want to be?

I wanted to be a teacher. At that time, scholarships weren’t as generous. I had what I needed but no extra—that’s why I went to associate’s college and got my degree in business administration instead.

What’s something most people wouldn’t know about you?

I was an active EMT. My husband and I ran a rescue squad in Scottsville for twelve years. I’m still certified in the state of Virginia, because you never know what might happen. I was motivated because of my brother; he passed of a massive heart attack at thirty-two. And we didn’t have a squad in our rural area. I decided then that that’s what I wanted to do. And then I got hooked and became an adrenaline junkie.

What’s your favorite thing about the Law School?

I think the close-knitness—not just of the students, but the faculty and staff. We’re like a big family and I really love that. I’ve always felt that here.

As our parting shot, what would you like to tell all the students?

We wish you all the very best. Stay safe during all this and I hope to see each and everyone of you very soon. Just stop by and say hello!

---

lnapier@law.virginia.edu

Court of Petty Appeals: Students Learning in Person v. UVA Dept. of Parking and Transportation

Virginia Law Weekly August 26, 2020

Court of Petty Appeals: Students Learning in Person v. UVA Dept. of Parking and Transportation
73 U.Va. 1 (2020)

Justice Re delivered the opinion of the Court.

In these uncertain times,[1] this case requires us to decide whether the district court properly granted summary judgment for a group of students suing the UVA Department of Parking and Transportation (Department) over a $3 to $5 per month increase in the parking permit fees. The students argued that, since their ability to be on Grounds has been significantly restricted, this probably violated something they learned in Contracts as 1Ls. While the situation is rapidly evolving,[2] in light of this Court’s recent decision in Entire Student Body v. School of Law, 72 U.Va. 29 (2020)—which, for reasons passing understanding, established that the Law School can charge students for things it does not provide—we are bound to hold that the district court abused its discretion in granting summary judgment for the students.

During the 2020-2021 academic year, the price of annual parking permits increased $3 to $5 per month. The Department claims that this increase is to “cover the cost of reconfiguring parking lots to ensure that each car can be parked six feet away from other cars, in compliance with new social distancing guidelines.” Brief for Respondent at 27. The class of Plaintiffs consists of students taking in-person classes. They argue, among other things, that because many events on Grounds are canceled, there are fewer classes meeting on Grounds, in-person classes will end before Thanksgiving Break, and changing circumstances may require self-isolation, it is unconscionable to charge the full amount, much less increase the fee.

The district court granted summary judgment for the students and the Court of Petty Parking Appeals affirmed. Transcript of Oral Argument at 2, Students Learning in Person v. UVA Dep’t of Parking and Transp., 68 Parking 2d ___ (Parking 2020) (“Seriously? They’re still charging people for permits? Obviously, we’re going to rule for you guys, but please use your full time. It’s been so lonely. I never thought I’d miss all the parking ticket disputes.”). We granted certiorari and now reverse.

II.

First, we must assure ourselves of jurisdiction. The Department argued that the amount of the increase is too small to amount to an actual harm. To this we reply: too small? As in, too petty? The Department made a perfectly reasonable argument, but petty disputes are our entire docket. The threshold for actual harm in petty court is pretty generous. See, e.g., Bluebook v. 1Ls, 63 U.Va. 164 (2010) (holding that the editors of the Bluebook could sue a group of 1Ls who “negligently failed to italicize the period after id. Or maybe they did italicize it? We don’t know what the rule is and refuse to look it up, but fine, they can sue.”).

III.

In upholding summary judgment, the lower court failed apply our recent precedent in Entire Student Body v. School of Law. The Entire Student Body Court clearly held that the School can charge students for things it does not provide. Students argued that because the admissions literature touted the quality of student life at the Law School, which included “opportunities to attend events, make friends, and network” as well as the quality of the academic experience, which included “access to places to study, opportunities go to professors’ offices, in-person instruction, [blah, blah, blah],” full tuition was not appropriate. Brief for Petitioners at 3, Entire Student Body, 72 U.Va. 22 No. 20-125. The School, which spend most of its brief scrupulously avoiding any mention of the fact that students are still being charged full tuition,[3] slipped up briefly and commented on the question at issue. They argued that tuition should not be reduced since in-person and online classes both “offer the same academic content and ability for students to earn credit.”[4]

In reaching its holding, the Court relied heavily on “well-meaning gestures” performed by the School to hold that the School can still charge students full tuition. For example, the Court noted that the Dean’s Office sent out cards saying that they were “thinking of you during these challenging times” and that at least two professors are still responding to emails and meeting virtually with students to go over exams. Entire Student Body, 72 U.Va. at 30.

Moreover, the Court reached its holding in spite of the fact that the School implicitly acknowledged that it does not only offer academic credit to its students. The record showed that the Administration rejected a proposal from Student Records to redesign the admissions brochure. Student Records said, “Since the only real purpose of law school is to test whether students can navigate labyrinthine requirements from our office, the admissions brochure should just be an 8.5 x 11 sheet of plain white paper saying, ‘If you successfully figure out how to register for all the classes you need to graduate, you will get a J.D.’ To figure out when applications are due, complete the following eighty-seven-step scavenger hunt. Step one can be found here [highlighted screenshot].’”

In this case, the students argued that Entire Student Body should be overturned. But we are bound by stare decisis. This Court’s formulation of that doctrine is clear: The issue is not whether the previous case was correctly decided; the issue is whether we want to re-read the previous case. As a general rule, we do not. 1Ls Writing LRW Memos v. Library, 71 U.Va. 42 (2019) (“Yes, we know we were wrong to say the library didn’t have to stay open 24/7 the day before LRW memos are due, but please stop bringing it up.”). It does not matter that it was a divided court.[5] Because Entire Student Body is controlling, the Department is within its authority to charge students for things not being provided as long as it has performed “well-meaning gestures.”

* * *

We remand this case for further proceedings to determine whether the Department made the sort of “well-meaning gestures” which would satisfy the standard set by this Court in Entire Student Body.

It is so ordered.

---

wdr3mq@virginia.edu

[1] All written communications must now begin with the phrase, “In these uncertain [or unprecedented or trying] times.” See, e.g., the emails in your inbox from every company that has ever gotten your email address.

[2] Written correspondence also must include this phrase. Phrases which notify the reader that the “circumstances/conditions” are “changing/developing” “quickly/on a daily basis” are also acceptable. See Your Inbox supra, at 1.

[3] See also every email from the School since May. Return to Grounds: Information for UVA Law Students, Univ. of Va. Sch. of L., https://www.law.virginia.edu/protected/coronavirus-student/information-uva-law-students (last visited Aug. 24, 2020).

[4] This sentence is not satire. That’s what the University actually said. See FAQs for Students, Univ. of Va., https://studentsonGrounds.virginia.edu/faqs/students (last visited Aug. 24, 2020).

[5] A dissent joined by several justices stated, “What the actual f***! Of course we shouldn’t be getting charged full price! The same credit is being offered?? Are you f***ing kidding me?? That wouldn’t pass even the most forgiving sniff-test for complete and utter b***s**t!! Has everyone completely lost their f***ing minds?? I respectfully dissent.” Entire Student Body, 72 U.Va. at 31.

Hot Bench: Nicole Banton '21

Virginia Law Weekly August 26, 2020

Nicole is the President of Virginia Law Women.

Hi Nicole! Thanks for coming on the first Hot Bench of the year, where we get to know people from the UVA Law community. How was your summer?

It was a fulfilling summer. I volunteered for the Virginia Poverty Law Center’s Eviction Helpline while social distancing in May. Then I worked at Hogan Lovells for eight weeks and returned to K&L Gates this month.

Are you excited to begin your 3L year?

I am so excited! This year is not what anyone pictured, but we’re all making the best of it. I’ve been very happy to meet 1Ls at the summer and orientation events for Virginia Law Women over Zoom.

Yessss, as VLW President, please give us the scoop. What are some of the organization’s plans for the year?

We’ll be doing our flagship events, including Women in Public Service, Women in Big Law, and our Student-Faculty Dinner Series, virtually this year. We’re planning to hold regular community building events (organized by VLW’s VP, Donna Faye Imadi ’22) and professional development events. The events will be on Monday or Wednesday, and we’ll alternate each week so people with different schedules can participate. In a virtual world, relationship building is key. VLW board members are very passionate about building community and making sure everyone stays connected.

The Board hopes to expand inclusion and allyship within VLW. We’re gathering resources for VLW’s website, and we’ll be doing a donation drive to support a non-profit that supports women of color. We’re also expanding VLW’s public service programming, working on a spring public service event. Another great event in the works is a virtual office hour with the Founder and CEO of PracticePro, Niki Khoshzamir. PracticePro partners with top law firms to offer coaching, recruiting, training for diverse 1Ls.

I am grateful for the women on VLW’s Executive Board, their creativity, and their enthusiasm! They are all hardworking, conscientious, and talented.

Sounds like you have a great year planned for VLW! Let’s back up a little bit and learn more about you. Where are you from?

I’m from Silver Spring, Maryland. I grew up in DC area, and I’ve lived all over the East Coast—DC, New York, Boston.

In addition to traveling around the States, you’ve also been around the world. What are your favorite places?

I would say Jamaica, Italy, and Spain. Jamaica, because my mom is from there, and I have a lot of great memories with family there. Italy because I studied abroad there twice. I lived with a host family and loved them. Spain, same scenario, stayed with a host family and really bonded with them. They called me their American daughter.

So, when did you start thinking about law school?

I thought that I wanted to do a PhD actually. But I considered the academic job market and the opportunity cost. And also, I thought I would have more of an impact as an attorney. In my life, I’ve seen a lot of harms fall through gaps in the law and how people suffer for it. I hoped that, as an attorney, I could do something about that and help more people by understanding the law.

What kind of impact do you hope to have as a lawyer?

I’ve been saying since 1L that I want to work at a firm, but I want to do as much pro bono as possible. I’m not sure how many people I can help, but I hope to help as many people as I can. I want to work for survivors of domestic violence, which I was able to do a bit this summer. I especially want to help other people of color because the industry is not built for us and we need to forge a path. It’s not just about my career. There are so many people in the legal industry pipeline. It’s important to think about our collective future.

Let’s do a lightning round!

Favorite food?

That’s a hard one. I’m a huge foodie. Probably cheese, cheese on anything. Also, mediterranean food broadly and Jamaican food.

Favorite place in Charlottesville?

Again, a hard one! I think the BLSA office.

Anti-Stress Hobby?

My pets. I have a dog and a cat who might be a miniature panther, I don’t know. I adopted him from the SPCA, and my family is not convinced he’s not at least part panther.

Favorite word?

Victory! That’s what my name means. (Ancient Greek: Νίκη or Nike)

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

I watched Becoming this summer for a virtual movie night with my mom, and I just ...Michelle Obama is a badass.

Do you have a favorite animal?

Let’s go with dogs. Don’t tell my cat.

If you could tell yourself one thing coming into law school, what would it be?

The advice that I got was to focus on my strengths and what I enjoy instead of on what everyone else was doing and to do the best that I can do. I would tell myself to try to do that. To develop strengths and invest my time in projects that I’m passionate about.

Did you know in 1L that you wanted to get involved with VLW?

Not at all. When I was starting law school, I didn't even know that I was going to join VLW. Kendell Burchard ’19, Manal Cheema ’20, and Chelsea Scism ’19, and many more superwomen at UVA became my mentors. They were so invested in my success and development, and they gave me the support and the drive to get involved. They extended a hand and helped me up the ladder. I wasn’t even going to run for Vice President, but women in the organization reached out and really advocated for me. Because of them, I ended up running, and I was surprised to win.

What I’ve learned firsthand is that women in the organization are genuinely here for each other. We have members who are passionate, creative, and talented. I’ve already met many 1Ls who are excited to get involved. VLW’s first general body meeting will be in mid-September, and new members can run for 1L representative positions.

---

nb3bt@virginia.edu

Love in the Time of Corona: Celebrating 3Ls (Safely)

Virginia Law Weekly April 15, 2020

As both society and the Law School adapt to the new realities and challenges that coronavirus brings, many aspects of life that once seemed a given are in flux. From online classes and grocery shopping to grabbing a drink with friends and hitting the gym, activities as we know them are changing before our eyes due to quarantining and social distancing. So too are love and modern romance. In this serious and anxious time, the staff at the Law Weekly thought it would be intriguing, pleasantly distracting, and (dare we say it) heartwarming to hear how couples and singles alike are handling romance in light of all these changes. You've heard of Love in the Time of Cholera, but get ready for Love in the Time of Corona.

This week’s guests are a gaggle of 3Ls, reflecting on their #love for each other and this place.

Hey y’all! Thanks for coming on Love in the Time of Corona. Let’s get some basics: Who are you and how do you know each other?

The Landing Crew: Nellie Black, Manal Cheema, and Eleanor Schmalzl. We were all section-mates and live together now. Since we’re in quarantine together (but also because we absolutely adore each other), we decided to answer these questions as a group. While some members of the Landing Crew cannot be with us (shout-out to Jordin Dickerson!), they are with us in spirit.

Anna and Kareem: Anna Noone and Kareem Ramadan. We met at a party (yeah, we partied) when Anna was a sophomore in high school, and Kareem was a junior. Eight years later, we reconnected when we were living and working and committed to coming to UVA Law. We ended up in the same section, sitting next to each other in pretty much every class. We started dating in October of 1L.

The Strong, Beautiful Men: We are the Strong, Beautiful Men–Ben Cabranes, Scott Caravello, Sam Connor, Zach Gaver, Jeremy Gordon, Taz Jones, Kevin Leitao, Michael McQueeney, Read Mills, and David Wang. We met in an online chatroom. We then consolidated into two houses, united by Taz’s occasionally irritating social enthusiasm, but pushed apart by Zach’s poorly behaved Husky. [Zach disagrees and insists that Fletcher is a nice boy.]

Some deep 1L roots here! Any favorite memories from your 1L section?

A&K: The very first week of class 1L, one of our professors just failed to show up for class. They barely acknowledged it next time we saw them, just saying “that was weird, hope that doesn’t happen again.” Our section stayed in the room for at least twenty-five minutes before we gave up. It was really unexpected and funny!

TSBM: Not from 1L sections, but learning that Ben does not understand iPhone keyboard shortcuts. Also, storming the Corner after the Wahoos swept the NCAA Tourney in 2019.

Let’s pivot for a second to address the elephant in the room. What do you consider to be the biggest disruption that coronavirus has caused for the Class of 2020?

TLC: The cancellation of everything. In-person classes, everything we were looking forward to, the bar exam, saying goodbye to people who we won’t see for a long time.

A&K: Probably postponing the bar. Other than that, not getting to see our friends again and say bye to them, especially the ones practicing in different jurisdictions than us. We also wanted to go to beach week!

TSBM: Since Bilt and Virg have closed down, no one can go back to get their phones, wallets, or keys.

Have you found any creative ways to deal with these disruptions?

TLC: We all uniformly hate Zoom, so we use it sparingly. We have been working out more to pass the time and get outside, and have been watching lots of Netflix and eating group dinners. We try to stay in touch with people outside the apartment by texting and calling, but it’s weirdly hard to do these days. Maybe it’s too much screen time.

A&K: We won’t get to take grad pictures with our friends…other than that, we have done Zoom happy hours and game nights to keep up with everyone. For people still in town, we have found that going on walks with folks is a responsible way to see each other but stay six feet apart.

TSBM: Well, over on Huntwood Lane, Scott is blasting the heat and audibly doing hot yoga in the living room while Read and Jeremy are in their Zoom class. At JPA, Zach’s Husky, Fletcher, is slowly adjusting to life with Taz’s Husky, Levon, but Michael has moved out for fear of getting caught up in a dogfight. Sam has been hiding out on the beach for weeks now, and David won’t stop throttling the fog machine(s). So no, Law Weekly, we haven’t “found creative ways to deal with the disruptions.” But we have learned to coexist without burning our houses down.

Walking: America’s newest and favorite pastime. Let’s go back down memory lane and do a lightning round. Favorite class/professor?

TLC: Criminal Law with Professor Bonnie.

A&K: We are both Gilbert fans; between us, we have taken a total of six Gilbert classes.

TSBM: Local Business Dynamics and Emerging Craft Brew Technologies, taught by Professor Sheri at Durty Nelly’s.

Favorite experience/involvement at the Law School?

TLC: Our ScoCo monitoring. We had our table of authority. You all know what we’re talking about.

A&K: We were on an inner tube water polo team with a bunch of our friends–shoutout Trent, Laura, Vik, Carter, Henry, Caroline, Ryan, Jordan, Maureen, Megan, and Amanda! We had varying success (the UVA swim team had a terrifying team), but always had a great time.

TSBM: Monthly excursions to Fellini’s for our favorite local band, Chickenhead. Additionally, being the liveliest folks in the building for WWE Live at JPJ [which Law Weekly rightfully noted in a previous ANG column on Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2018, Vol. 71, No. 7].

What will you miss most about your time at UVA Law?

TLC: Our friends, all the good food, hiking trails, Bilt, the snack room, Mandy, the Civil Procedure lunch crew, and just the beauty of this place. It’s a one-of-a-kind city.

A&K: This is the last time we will all be students, so we will miss seeing all of our friends every day. Also, all the food (see: Bang, Thai Fresh, etc.). Also, free polo at King Family Vineyards! As a horse girl, that never got old for Anna.

TSBM: First, our fog machines, and second, our service to the VJIL Editorial Board.

Funniest story?

TLC: Sydney Mark ’20 twerking at every softball game, and screaming at the other team for not playing enough Pitbull. And our section team beating the mercenary team in the fall NGSL playoffs. We can take anybody on a good day.

A&K: We were total Gunners ‘n Roses groupies—we will both miss seeing them at our favorite local bars. Mostly when they sang ABBA.

TSBM: That one time we got on base in softball!

Nicely done! We have one question from our readership directly for the Strong, Beautiful Men: Is it true that at night all ten of you climb into one giant t-shirt and use it as a sleeping bag?

TSBM: No comment.

Pictured: The Strong, Beautiful Men discussing the possibility of finding a t-shirt large enough to use as a communal sleeping bag while still maintaining social distancing guidelines. Photo Courtesy of Ben Stievater ‘22.

I guess we’ll never know, UVA Law. Let’s end on some sap. What has UVA Law meant to you and is there anything you’d like to say to the Law School community at large?

TLC: *sobs uncontrollably* HAGS!

A&K: It will always hold a special place with us, and we can’t wait to come back and enjoy all the places we expected to go this spring. See you guys on the flip side.

TSBM: [UVA Law has meant] learning how to work as a team, like when we all split fried chicken buckets at Wayside; figuring out how to make Scott really angry, as we’ve come to master; watching Michael grow from a boy into a man; and long and romantic Lime rides together in the warm summer breeze.

And that’s a wrap, folks. Many thanks to the Landing Crew, Anna and Kareem, and the Strong, Beautiful Men for helping to spread the love on Love in the Time of Corona! Congratulations to the Class of 2020 on their graduation—we love you, we will miss you, and we are so thankful for everything you brought to this community. This column may be ending with the school year, but be sure to make like The Black Eyed Peas and keep asking yourself “Where is the Love?” during these troubled times. Stay safe, buckle down to round up those Ds on your finals, and cross your fingers that this column doesn’t need to continue this fall. @bes4cf@virginia.edu.

---

bes4cf@virginia.edu

Court of Petty Appeals: Joseph E.X. Otic v. Mittens

Virginia Law Weekly April 15, 2020

Court of Petty Appeals: Joseph E.X. Otic v. Mittens
72 U.Va. 24 (2020)

Justice Re delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case requires us first to decide whether pet cats are legal persons capable of suing and being sued, and second, whether occupying the only suitable location for Zooming constitutes tortious interference with kitty-napping.

Before the most recent full moon,[1] 2L Joseph Edward Xavier Otic reached his limit. Once (and only once) a week, Otic has a fixed obligation: sitting in front of his computer for a class on Zoom. Otic discovered that there is only one location in his apartment (a chair located near a window), where Zoom functions perfectly. Specifically, it is the only location with suitable lighting for those custom virtual backgrounds to work.

But there was one problem: Mittens. Mittens is Otic’s cat, and the Zoom chair is Mittens’ favorite nap spot. Initially, Otic tried moving Mittens. Mittens then commenced a series of behaviors calculated to drive Otic from the chair. No fewer than four times each class, Mittens jumped on Otic’s keyboard and purred. At least twice, this unmuted Otic’s Zoom. When a cat jumps on a keyboard while purring, it sounds pretty weird if you’re on the other end of a Zoom call. The noises embarrassed Otic and alarmed his classmates. Finally, Otic determined that he could no longer successfully Zoom from the chair. Otic moved to a different chair, but found when he tried amusing his professor and classmates with hilarious virtual backgrounds, the images pixelated.

Otic has been trapped in his apartment with Mittens for far too long, and despite being a UVA Law student,[2] he is rather litigious. Because he has had very limited contact with other humans, he decided to sue his cat. The lower court dismissed the case, finding that a cat is not a legal person and therefore incapable of being sued. Otic v. Mittens, 78 Ivy 3d 115 (Ivy Cir. 2020) (“What? No, obviously you can’t sue your cat. Come on, we were watching TV before you came in with this.”). We granted certiorari.

II.

We turn first to whether a cat is a legal person. We have allowed suits against animals when they have invaded the Law School. See, e.g., Frightened 1Ls v. That Snake by the Vending Machines, 324 U.Va. 45 (2019); Hungry 1Ls v. The Mice by the Free Food Table, 301 U.Va. 522 (2011). Because classes are now remote, a pet can be understood to interfere with legal education in a similar way to the snake and mice. Some scholars also argue that when people refer to themselves as a dog/cat mom/dad, they deserve to be open to suits from their pets.[3]

All of this lends support to the theory that pets are legal persons who can sue and be sued under our petty law. Also, cats can get coronavirus.[4] If people can get ’rona, and cats can get ’rona, then cats are people. That’s just science, and we support #Science.

III.

We now turn to the second question, whether Mittens’ conduct constitutes tortious interference. Counsel for Mittens, Ms. Baskin, argues from precedent, “Hey all you honorable cool cats and kittens, I would draw your attention to your holding in 2L Gunner v. Oblivious 3L.” Brief for Respondent at 15, Otic v. Mittens, 72 U.Va. 22 (2020) No. 20-104. It is true that we have dealt with competitions for chairs before. In 2L Gunner, 276 U.Va. 103 (2002), we uncharacteristically ruled in favor of the gunner, holding that despite the 3L’s extremely credible claim of having no clue what ordinarily goes on in the library, the gunner had a vested property interest in the study spot.

But this case is not on point. Mittens claims that Otic lacks a property interest in the chair, and yet Otic is making a tort claim. Our petty common law has long acknowledged that students have the right to see and hear in class. See, e.g., Student in Back Row v. Lomax, 1 U.Va. 279 (1827) (ordering that microphones be invented so students in the back could hear) and Enrollees of Evening Seminar v. Madison, 2 U.Va. 223 (1830) (ordering that electric lighting be invented so students in the two hour evening seminar, “Supreme Court from Jay to Marshall,” could see the professor). And, frustratingly, our cases support a rather unrestricted right to participate in class. See That One Gunner v. Literally Everyone Else in the Class, 32 U.Va. 411 (1843) (upholding the right to at least attempt to impress fellow classmates by asking complicated, irrelevant questions). Our more recent cases point to modified expectations during video meetings. In Lazy Rising-2L v. Career Services, 320 U.Va. 304 (2017), we ruled that students cannot be forced to wear pants in online interviews as long as the prospective employer doesn’t notice.

While these cases were against the school and not against private parties, like a cat, they nevertheless give the sense that students are entitled to observe class without interruption and express themselves in that class. Now that all classes are held remotely, we are forced to apply the petty common law to novel circumstances. Using virtual backgrounds is an essential part of expressing oneself and bringing joy to others, which are implicit in the concept of ordered liberty and are deeply rooted in this School’s history and tradition.

IV.

As a matter of law, cats are legal persons, and it is impermissible to interfere with another’s use of virtual backgrounds. If there were a dispute of material fact, it would be necessary to remand the case. But there is no such dispute. In a deposition with a pet psychic, Mittens stated, “Yea of course I know that’s the only place Zoom backgrounds work. I don’t give a sh*t. It’s my f***ing chair.” R. at 589. It is, therefore, unnecessary to remand this case for further proceedings.

* * *

We order an injunction against Mittens, barring him from attempting to occupy the Zoom chair during class and award damages for Otic in the form of three dead birds, to be procured and delivered by Mittens at Mittens’ earliest convenience. The judgment of the Court of Petty Appeals for the Ivy Circuit is vacated.

It is so ordered.

Calamaro, J., dissenting.

This ploy to acquire three dead birds has resulted in a major and inappropriately large windfall for the plaintiff. Unfortunately, the windfall is a direct result of this court’s obvious error in finding cats to be legal persons, a finding which will have reverberations throughout human, cat, and animal populations. Perhaps the court has been swayed by popular opinion, which is as settled as the changing tides and was most recently swayed by a spate of online documentaries that lend a sympathetic light towards the “struggle” of the members of the felidae family.[5] Either way, cats are not people. They are murderous, godless, apex predators that will never love you and hopes to eat your face one day when you die due to cat allergies.

Luk, C.J., dissenting.

My fellow Justices have each ended up half a mouse short of a complete answer. It is obviously the case that cats have standing to sue under our petty law and equally obvious that cats have superior claims to chairs than any human being, much less a law student. I am saddened by the precedent set today.

---

wdr3mq@virginia.edu
dac6jk@virginia.edu
cl3eh@virginia.edu

[1] The Court has completely lost track of the days of the week during quarantine, but about a week ago there was a full moon, and the occurrences which gave rise to this lawsuit therefore happened less than a full moon ago, which is within this Court's statute of limitations to review.

[2] UVA Law is a very collegial place. See, e.g., every email from Admissions. But actually, it is.

[3] See Andrew Vito, Pet Personhood: A Great Idea, or the Greatest Idea?, 48 Canine Coll. L. Rev. 1, 39 (2008) (“If you give your dog wrapped Christmas presents with her name on it, it is reasonable that she should expect to have standing to haul you before a tribunal if, for example, you deny her access to aquiferous sources of water by repeatedly closing the toilet seat.”).

[4] Cats can catch coronavirus, study finds, prompting WHO probe, Al Jazeera (Apr. 9, 2020), https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/04/cats-catch-coronavirus-study-finds-prompting-probe-200409041642628.html.

[5] See generally Tiger King, (the ill-advised movie) Cats, and Don’t F**k With Cats.

[2] UVA Law is a very collegial place. See, e.g., every email from Admissions. But actually, it is.

[5] See generally Tiger King, (the ill-advised movie) Cats, and Don’t F**k With Cats.

Hot Bench: David Ranzini '20

Virginia Law Weekly April 15, 2020

David is the outgoing Managing Editor of the Law Weekly.

Hiya Dave and welcome to Hot Bench! We’re so glad to catch you before graduation! So, what did you have for quarantine breakfast?

I made frozen oven fries because that’s all that’s left in my freezer, and I drank black coffee because I’m out of cream.

Where are you from?

Waynesboro, Virginia, which is close enough that I can go home, see my folks, and do my laundry, which I frequently do.

What can you tell us about Waynesboro?

It’s a pretty little town, less sleepy nowadays, with two craft breweries, a lot of meth (said the cops in my old karate class, anyway), and a very decent taco truck! It’s a nice community. Pretty much everyone knows my dad—he’s a surgeon and he might have taken everyone’s gallbladders out at some point.

When did you start thinking about law school?

After college, I’m a year or two into the JET Program, I’m teaching English in a village in rural Japan, and I realize that while I’m a good teacher, it’s not really what I love—but I need to find something else that lets me stay in Japan long term. So, I put everything together that I’m good at (research, writing, definitely NOT math) and looked for something that could let me be useful even if I’m a second language speaker. That narrowed the field to international corporate law, which also involves the best things about being a teacher (translating knowledge into a form your audience can use) with the added bonus of being well paid. At that point, I decided I was doing law school. But first, I went and did a LL.M. bilingual program at Kyushu University.

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

It’s not as hard as it looks, honestly. 1L me was very nervous about failing and not getting a job and everything coming apart. I would try really hard to reassure him it was going to work out, and 1L me would not believe it for a second.

Sounds like 1L was a rough time!

Studying for 1L fall exams while my 2L brother Gregory was totally relaxed was just about my lowest psychological point. Only the greatest respect for my brother—the real lawyer in this family.

Let’s do a lightning round!

Favorite food?

Cheese enchiladas.

Favorite place in Charlottesville?

Peter Chang’s.

Anti-Stress Hobby?

Cooking and bicycling. Really, exercise is the thin tissue that separates sanity and insanity for me during exam season.

Are you a good cook? What’s your favorite thing to make?

When I’m stressed, I like to go temporarily insane and make something expensive and complex like tempura. One of my favorite things to make is pasta puttanesca. It’s a quick olive-based sauce—you need four cans, two of tomatoes and two of olives, to make a very simple version. It’s just brilliant for when you’re cramming for finals.

What is your least favorite sound?

The noise that dentists’ drills make, it actually scares the crap out of me.

Favorite word?

Genuinely, I have no idea.

This one should be easier. If you could live anywhere, where would it be?

I would live in Akita Prefecture, Japan, and I would own and run a wildly unprofitable coffee shop in a refurbished thatched farmhouse. I would do pour-over coffee and roast my own beans, chat with my regulars and never make a dime. I would watch the big puffy clouds drift over the rice paddies in the distance and cast shadows on the sea beyond. I would have a windchime on the porch. That is the dream.

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

What’s the song I’ve listened most to on iTunes, let’s see, probably something incredibly embarrassing…“Decks Dark” from Radiohead’s A Moon Shaped Pool.

What’s your spirit animal?

Crows. I like that they’re scrappy, intelligent, and, sometimes, they get a look in their eye, that says they know you’re there and think of you as fellow animals in the struggle. I sympathize with their existence on the edge of society—everyone on a fundamental level has been a crow trying to use a stick to get a cheese doodle out of the trashcan. The trashcan is life. I also like their mortal enemies, the cats.

Where’s a place you’ve never been, but would like to go?

I’ve never been to Sichuan, China, but I’ve always wanted to go—and Taiwan. Those two are probably highest on the destination bucket list. And for years I’ve harbored the desire to get a sailboat and just get out of sight of land. I would love to be surrounded by horizon in all directions and just watch the sun set behind me while I’m on the deck of the boat.

Do you have any sailing experience?

Zero—no wait, some! I went out once and was immediately shipwrecked. Through no fault of my own, the rudder was broken and came off, cartoon-like, in my friend Robert’s hand. It turns out a boat in the wind without a rudder is quickly capsized. I would love to do it again and not flip.

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

“Be nice, think of the other guy” would be a good one. I think everyone secretly wants to make the rule “be nice to me.” I would change that to just “be nice.”

---

dwr7ed@virginia.edu

Tweedledee and Tweedledum: Panopto v. Zoom

Virginia Law Weekly April 8, 2020

Jacob Jones ‘21
Features Editor

Pro-Recorded Lectures

In 1878, the first record player was created. This was the peak of education technology, and no further advances needed to be made past that point. Unfortunately, the Law School does not distribute physical phonograph records to us every week, which would have been my first choice for a recorded lecture method.[1] So instead, we get recorded lectures posted on the interwebs.[2]

Pictured: Frances Denmore (left) recording Blackfoot chief Mountain Chief (right) on a cylinder phonograph for the Bureau of American Ethnology (1916). This is the pinnacle of sound recording technology. Photo Courtesy of Wikipedia.

Have you ever seen that Adam Sandler movie where he gains the power to stop the world around him with a TV remote? Me neither, but I think it’s a cool concept, and I definitely would want that remote.[3] Well, with recorded lectures, you can, indeed, have the power of Adam Sandler in Click (2006), although only to a limited extent.

What powers do you get with this tool of recorded lectures, you ask? Well, for starters, have you ever wanted to rewind ten seconds because your professor is talking impossibly fast? Now you can! Have you ever wanted to make your professor gigantic and make them talk in a deeper voice and more slowly? You can do that too! You can also go in the opposite direction and make your professors smaller and talk fast!

Not only do recorded lectures enable you with special powers, they also disable professors. Ever wanted to not be called on to answer a question in class? Done! Cold-calls are a thing of the past, thanks to this amazing technology we now have. Now your professor can’t see you pick your nose when you’re listening to them! It’s the perfect crime!

Let us also not forget the real power of recorded lectures: You don’t have to interact with human beings. Forget that makeup in the morning, gals, or that hair gel, guys. You don’t even have to put on a shirt. You can eat ice cream for breakfast in bed after waking up at 3 p.m. while learning about torts and stuff. Social norms can go to heck. At the Panopto School of Law, there are no rules.

[1] My second choice would be for the lectures to be provided over a series of TikTok videos, but the Law School has declined comment on my suggestion.

[2] To my one professor who has Zoom classes: I actually do like the class’s Zoom session, please don’t be offended.

[3] First order of business if I had a time-stopping remote: pause the entire world so that I could sleep-in five extra minutes and still be on time for Zoom class.

Christina Luk ‘21
Editor-in-Chief

A Reluctant Defense of Zoom

I have been called by duty to defend the honor of Zoom against the alleged superiority of Panopto lecture recordings. One fanciful observation I would like to make before I proceed is that while the rules of professional responsibility allow one to appeal such a duty when faced with a fundamental disagreement—such as when one finds one’s client’s actions or decisions to be deeply repugnant—the Law Weekly recognizes no such rule.

Anyway. Zoom is clearly the superior of the two services being offered by Law IT for purposes of online learning. One need only to look at the additional software one is strongly encouraged to download and install in the sanctity of one’s personal computer. As reasonable people know, more is better, and therefore more software means a better system and experience. Sure, online lectures may be accessed by some nifty app, but the amount of storage that app takes up is a pittance compared to Zoom’s computational demands.

It’s true that some may complain about connectivity problems, but what is that except to say that Zoom is the most compelling reflection of the problems of our modern day? Zoom is, in microcosm, our lived experiences. Who among us has not worried about the impossibility of true human connection? In a world where we can never be sure if we have been seen or heard, Zoom’s connectivity problems give us something else to focus on. Now, when someone cannot understand us, it is a mechanical failure rather than a personal fault. There is no philosophy or grandeur to Panopto’s connectivity errors, only inconvenience and impotent rage.

As for Zoom’s oppressive watchful eye—the gaze that cannot be avoided or predicted and the digital panopticon—there is a wonderful feature called the off-button. I would encourage anyone who feels the need to change clothes or who wishes to raise from their seated position, having forgotten they did not put on pants, to utilize this clever and remarkable function to its fullest extent. Can Panopto be turned off? Well, yes.

I would be remiss not to mention what some of my peers consider to be Zoom’s greatest strength: the chance to see the adorable pets of our professors and peers. I have mentioned this.

Thus concludes my cogent and sincere defense of Zoom.

---

jmj3vq@virginia
cl3eh@virginia.edu

Hot Bench: Hayley Hahn '21

Virginia Law Weekly April 8, 2020

Hayley is the outgoing president of UVA Law’s American Constitution Society.

Where are you from? Where did you go to college?

I was born and raised in Fairfax, Virginia. I went to college at William & Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia.

Which organizations are you involved in at UVA Law?

I am the outgoing president of the American Constitution Society, a fellow in the Law & Public Service Program, a Peer Advisor (shout-out to Section E!), the incoming Notes Editor for the Virginia Journal of International Law, and a member of the Civil Rights Clinic. I’m also involved with Virginia Law Women and the Public Interest Law Association.

When did you start thinking about law school?

I took a philosophy class fall semester of my freshman year in college that focused on contemporary moral issues. I enjoyed the readings that focused on legal cases, especially those pertaining to social justice issues. Eager to explore these matters further, I pursued independent research and courses related to law. I discovered that I liked the work, so I decided to apply to law school.

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

Avoid trains, cruises, exposed wires, and buildings used to store barrels of flour. Potential torts lurk everywhere. Don’t be like the bargee in Carroll Towing—exercise constant vigilance and be ready to sound the alarm.

On a more serious note: Make time to get to know your classmates and enjoy the beautiful trails around Charlottesville.

You’re interested in Native American law. How did you become interested in that topic?

A college class on American Indian Sovereignty initially sparked my interest in Native American law. More specifically, the course introduced me to the Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”), a vital piece of legislation currently under attack. Inspired by this experience, prior to law school, I conducted research at McGill University on social service and legal protections for Indigenous children in Canada. Unfortunately, in both the United States and Canada, Indigenous children are overrepresented in the child welfare system. However, federal child welfare legislation, such as ICWA, can keep Indigenous children connected to their families, communities, and cultures. In many ways, ICWA is the key to tribal survival.

I am also interested in how the law can advance the rights of Native people and tribes more broadly. Native American law touches on a host of social justice issues, from voting rights to environmental protections. I hope to continue to pursue my interest in Native American law in law school and in practice.

What kind of impact do you hope to have as a lawyer?

I want to secure justice for my clients. I also want to improve the accessibility of legal services. My pro bono experiences in law school have underscored the adverse impacts of the “justice gap” in the United States. So few people can afford legal representation. Through pro bono and public service opportunities, I want to help connect people to the legal services they need, regardless of their ability to pay for services.

Let’s do a lightning round!

Favorite food?

Cheese quesadillas!

Favorite place in Charlottesville?

The Rivanna Trail or Shenandoah Joe.

Favorite song?

“Lovely Day” by Bill Withers.

Favorite anti-stress hobby?

Exercise. (I love running and yoga!)

Which Hogwarts house are you in?

Hufflepuff. I highly value both kindness and snacks.

Fun fact?

I’m a big fan of the Washington Nationals.

Degas or Monet?

Monet.

Williamsburg or Charlottesville?

This is such a tough choice! Both are great places to live and study; however, I must pick Williamsburg. DOG Street is the perfect place to run. Also, the Cheese Shop is better than Take It Away.

Zoom or Panopto?

Zoom. It’s great to see people’s faces, even if only virtually. The pet cameos are also nice.

---

hah4gn@virginia.edu

Love in the Time of Corona: Sam and Maria

Virginia Law Weekly March 25, 2020

Ben Stievater ‘22
Events Editor

This week's guests are Maria Luevano ’21 and Sam Pickett ’21.

Hi Maria and Sam! Welcome to Love in the Time of Corona. Let's start with some basics. How and when did you two meet?

Sam: We met on the first day of class, when I yelled hi to her as we were walking to the Law School. She didn’t respond the first time I said hi, because she was listening to a podcast. I was embarrassed so I just yelled louder (a pattern). We chatted on the way to class and then sat next to each other in Criminal Law. The rest is history!

Where are you both located right now during social isolating szn?

Sam: In Charlottesville! Specifically, we’ve been spending most of our time in Maria’s apartment because she has a TV.

Pictured: Sam and Maria enjoying their pre-quarantine activities. Photo Courtesy of Maria Luevano ‘21 and Sam Pickett ‘21.

What is the biggest way coronavirus has impacted your relationship so far, if any?

Maria: Pre-coronavirus, Sam was really up to date on Twitter memes and would send them to me frequently. Now, I’ve usually seen them already because I’m also spending way too much time on Twitter, so there’s less meme sharing.

Sam: We spend most of our time together anyway, so that part hasn’t been too difficult to adjust to or anything. I think the biggest impact has been our restriction on seeing others.

R.I.P. Meme King Pickett. Let’s jump back to some #romance. How would you describe each other in one word or a phrase?

Maria: Genuine! What you see is what you get, and yes, he’s actually like that 100 percent of the time.

Sam: I would describe Maria as everyone’s best friend.

What is your favorite quality about each other?

Maria: (This was very hard!) Sam is really the most thoughtful person I know. He does it without even thinking, and is so patient and kind to everyone.

Sam: She makes you feel like what you’re saying really matters and that you’re the only one in the room. She’s a very active listener, which is important given how much I talk, LMAO.

Do you each have a favorite memory of each other?

Maria: Honestly, any time we’ve traveled together has been a blast. Sam is the best travel partner and even when we’ve had twelve-hour delays or an unexpected overnight road trip, he manages to keep my spirits up! He’s also very skilled at finding good restaurants on-the-go.

Sam: I think living together in D.C. this last summer. Our friends and family were nervous that it was moving quickly, but it was so much fun experiencing the city with Maria and it was even better to get to come home from work to her!

Call ya boi the Lion King, because I’m feeling the love tonight (technically today, as I type this.) Let’s do another 180° to Corona to cool things down. What’s been the most challenging part about this so far for you both?

Maria: Picking what to watch every night! We spend at least twenty minutes scrolling through various streaming apps before we finally get frustrated and settle on something. There’s almost too many options.

Sam: We are both fairly social people and I think that not being able to hang out with others has left us both feeling down at times. It has made us adjust to a new normal, which has been difficult at times, especially when the weight of the pandemic kind of hits.

Can you share any creative ways you’ve gotten past these challenges?

Maria: We’ve started keeping a list of movies we want to watch together, so that’s the first place I check when we have no idea what to watch.

Sam: Currently we do work at Maria’s apartment during the day and then walk over to my apartment at night. This has given us some separation between home and work now that the library has closed.

Nice! Keeping with the creativity, let’s get abstract. Is there a feeling/sight/smell/color/etc. that you associate with each other? Why?

Maria: I’m sorry this is so lame but just generally, laughing. We laugh a lot together.

Sam: Maria loves mayonnaise and I hate it, so whenever I see mayonnaise I cringe, but I think about Maria too!

Don’t blame you on that cringe. Looking forward, what is the first activity you'll do/place you'll go once all social restrictions are lifted?

Maria: I would love to go to Carter Mountain or a local winery, or even Bilt (lol). It’s finally so nice out I just want to drink outside with my friends basically.

Sam: I would say either to the bar with everyone we know to celebrate the end of the pandemic. Someplace we can all relax and enjoy socializing without the distancing.

Here’s hoping that day comes soon. Thanks for coming on, guys. Before we go, let’s end on a romantic note. What is one thing you want to say, in public, possibly in front of the whole Law School (or at least our online readership), to each other?

Maria: How much he inspires me! He’s so hardworking and he’s a really great boyfriend, friend, PA-the list goes on. He’s the only person who has successfully gotten me to go to the gym on a regular basis. He’s also very levelheaded (unlike me sometimes), so when I’m in tough situations I try to channel what he would do. And then I usually ask him what he would do and then do that. I’m very lucky to have him in my life.

Sam: I would want her to know how much the Law School community values her and how lucky I feel to so often be referred to as “Maria’s boyfriend.” I think even the 1Ls I PA for refer to me that way at this point...

Many thanks to Maria and her boyfriend for being the first featured pair on Love in the Time of Corona! Are you a couple that’s been separated or getting creative during this social isolation period? A single whose desire to mingle has been curtailed by COVID-19? A platonic friend or member of a family who wants to share how you’ve been making it through this together? Love comes in all shapes and sizes, and we want to hear about it! Email bes4cf@virginia.edu if you or someone you know might like to be featured on Love in the Time of Corona.

---

bes4cf@virginia.edu

Court of Petty Appeals: Corona (La Cerveza Mas Fina) v. Coronavirus (El Virus Menos Fino)

Virginia Law Weekly March 25, 2020

Corona (La Cerveza Mas Fina) v. Coronavirus (El Virus Menos Fino)
72 U.Va 21 (2020)

PICKETT, J. delivered the opinion of the Court.

I. Introduction

These past few weeks, the coronavirus has been wreaking havoc on the United States and around the world. It has led to online classes, and canceled trips, graduations, weddings, and more. Yet, there is one victim whose voice has not yet been heard before this court: Corona Beer. In this opinion, the Court finds Corona Beer to be the victim of trademark infringement and defamation of character, and puts an injunction on Coronavirus’s existence, demanding that it cease being a thing, for the love of God, please.

Rare are the opinions that a judge writes knowing they will define his tenure on the Court. I have written over two (2) opinions on this Court[1] and I have a strange feeling that this will be my most memorable one. Is it because I will single-handedly take down the pandemic that has forced us into social isolation and that has left an imprint on all of us that will assuredly haunt us for the rest of our lives? No. It’s because, in a way that would make the Office of Private Practice proud, I will assist a helpless multi-billion dollar brand stave off a threat to its reputation and trademark.

II. Facts

Corona is a beer (a pale lager, to be more specific) produced by Cervecería Modelo in Mexico and owned by AB InBev in Belgium. It is one of the top-selling beers worldwide. Corona is commonly served with a wedge of lime or lemon in the neck of the bottle to add tartness and flavor.

Coronavirus is a virus (a coronavirus, to be more specific). It is widely hated by the general public.

While the two seem completely different, a recent poll found that 38% of Americans would not buy Corona “under any circumstances” because of the coronavirus outbreak. Wow. While we don’t have time to unpack all of that, Corona (the beer) has subsequently reported a loss of $170 million.

Having had enough, Corona Beer has decided to file suit in the Court of Petty Appeals. They knew no other Court would permit them to sue a pandemic, but we are not a regular Court. We are a ~cool~ Court. And so here we are.

III. Trademark Infringement

Trademark infringement is an inherent betrayal of the principles of the United States of America. In our society, we have a right to name something and say that we are the only one who can use that name for a long period of time. It has led Paris Hilton to trademark “that’s hot;” to Beyoncé and Jay-Z attempting to trademark their daughter’s name (Blue Ivy); to Taylor Swift trademarking “This Sick Beat;” to Kylie Jenner trying to trademark “Kylie;” and, to our very own President Donald Trump trying to trademark “you’re fired.” So yes, trademark infringement is serious business.

I looked up the test for trademark infringement online and it is EIGHT steps long. That is absurd and much too long, especially for someone who, despite having more time than he has ever needed on his hands, struggles to accomplish anything given the overwhelming weight of self-dread that fills him anew each morning as he attempts to maneuver the new reality of life in a pandemic.[2] The test also demonstrates too much faith in the American people, who seem to be unable to differentiate between words if they have too many letters in common—see entitled and title; infamous and famous; bemused and amused.

My new test is more attuned to the American sensibility and can be broken down into two factors: (1) Does one party’s name fit into the other party’s name? If so; (2) Did the party’s name that fits have that name first?[3]

My test is also easily applied. In the case at issue, (1) Corona fits into Coronavirus; and (2) Corona came before Coronavirus…at least this global pandemic version of it. Wow, that WAS easy. Coronavirus is clearly in violation.

IV. Defamation of Character

As my mother, Deborah Pickett, once said, “Two things you don’t want compromised: your reputation and your credit.” Is that a strange thing to say? Yes. Is it a strange thing for my mother to say? No. In the United States we hold our reputations near and dear to our hearts—so much so that Taylor Swift named her most recent album Reputation, presumably after Kanye West and Kim Kardashian allegedly defamed her reputation.[4]

As with trademark infringement, I Googled the test for defamation of character. It had only three elements. But, you see, the elements didn’t really lead to the result I wanted and would have required more explanation than I have the patience for. So I took a page out of the United States Supreme Court’s reporter and decided to do what I needed to do to get me to the result I wanted.[5] So the new test for defamation of character is: Does something you do make someone else with whom you are associated look bad?

Is this an easily satisfied test? Yes. But unlike other Courts who are afraid of releasing broad opinions, I am going big. I am not hiding from a “floodgate of litigation;” in fact, I am encouraging it. Those Gunners in your section who constantly raise their hands and give your section a “gunnery” reputation? You could sue them for defamation of your character. See generally, Classmates v. Over-Enthusiastic Class Discussion Volunteers 1330 U.Va. 15, 8 (2019). That person that heats up fish in ScoCo at the same time you heat up your food, making it so that no one knows who warmed up the fish? You could sue. That person who parks badly in the parking lot who makes you have to park badly to adjust, making you look like an incapable driver? You could sue. That person who argues for optional pass/fail because they are more concerned about their GPA than the well-being of the students around them, making UVA look much less collegial? You could sue.

Given Corona Beer’s recent $170 million loss, America’s newfound fear of the delicious imported beverage, and Coronavirus’s above-stated violation of Corona Beer’s trademark, it is fairly obvious that Coronavirus and Corona Beer are associated. But has Coronavirus’s association with Corona Beer made Corona Beer look bad? Coronavirus has terrorized almost the entire world, leading to illness, death, online classes, canceled sports leagues, unemployment, and worse. So yes, I would say that being associated with Coronavirus makes you look pretty bad.

V. Conclusion

In these chaotic times, the judicial system becomes all the more important. It is for this reason that we find it necessary to hold Coronavirus accountable for its shocking and irresponsible behavior. Thus, we hold in favor of the plaintiffs and place an injunction on Coronavirus’s existence, ordering it to, as my mother phrased in a text message to me today, “self-implode,” “self-destruct,” or “render a state of nihilism.” Good touch, Mother.

---

shp8dz@virginia.edu

[1] Four including this one.

[2] Too real?

[3] Also known as the “First-Come-First-Served” Doctrine.

[4] I was going to make that reference lengthier, but there is so much backstory to the Taylor Swift-Kanye West drama that you’re just going to have to look it up yourself. There’s even a new wrinkle with an extended release of the conversation between Taylor and Kanye just being released. Spicy.

[5] See Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000).

Hot Bench: Nicole Pidala '21

Virginia Law Weekly March 25, 2020

Nicole is the outgoing president of Virginia Law First Generation Professionals (VLFGP) and an incoming 3L senator.

Where are you from?

Garrison, New York. It’s about sixty miles north of New York City.

What are some of your goals as a newly elected 3L senator?

UVA Law is a unique place based on the contributions of the student body here. One function of SBA that is particularly important to me is its ability to assist students form new organizations focused on issues or identities that are not represented in other student organizations. SBA has been immensely supportive in helping other students and I start a new organization (Virginia Law First Generation Professionals) over this past year. In my capacity as senator, I would like to help other students develop new organizations and support them as they make their impact on the Law School community.

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

Believe in yourself! Imposter syndrome hits a lot of students here, but we all got into UVA Law and deserve to be here. And spend more time practicing softball!

Favorite food?

Pizza. Lampo is the best in Charlottesville and is doing takeout during quarantine!

Favorite place in Charlottesville?

I love to hike, so Shenandoah National Park or anywhere else in the Blue Ridge Mountains! We’re so fortunate at UVA to have close access to amazing outdoor resources, and I try to take advantage of that in any way I can.

Anti-Stress Hobby?

Sleeping or working out, whichever comes first.

Pet peeve?

The temperature of the WB classrooms. We’re not in Antarctica; please set the classrooms to be above freezing.

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

Pay for law school, then use whatever is leftover to get a beer from Bilt.

Where’s a place you’ve never been, but would like to go?

The Amalfi Coast and all of Southern Italy, including Sicily. Most of my family is from that region of the world, so I’m hoping to take my bar trip there.

What are the Seven Wonders of the Law School?

The community here, even when we’re all stuck in quarantine.
How Mandy knows I want an Americano every morning before I know I want one.
Phone chargers from the library circulation desk.
Laps around the Law School.
Spies Garden, especially in the spring when it gets warm again.
The cow painting in WB.
Reese’s candy in the snack office (and Lisa, of course).

---

ncp6yn@virginia.edu

Court of Petty Appeals: In Re Coronavirus Emails

Virginia Law Weekly March 18, 2020

In Re Coronavirus Emails
72 U.Va. 20 (2020)

JONES, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which PALMER, GLADDEN, TANG, and IMADI, JJ. join. RE, J. and TONSETH, J. filed concurring opinions.

I. Factus Prospectus

This Court does declare, that on the week starting on Sunday, March 8, 2020, and for the weeks thereafter, and maybe even for a few weeks there-before, the complainants’ inboxes did overfloweth with emails related to the current pandemic. After much deliberation and investigation, this Court found that some of the complainants were also found to be email senders, and email senders were found to be complainants as well. As a senior OWLS (Older Wiser Law Student) of this Court, the Justice who scribed this case was found to be one of the few who could have adjudicated this case, as it is well known that OWLS are email-phobic and thus unlikely to read an email and much less send an email. Thus, Justice Jones was found to have no conflicts and to have almost never sent emails. The case was therefore allowed to be appealed from the lower court judgement.[1]

II. Specific Factual Allegations

Complainants allege too many people are sending too many emails and that many of these heretofore emails are filled to the brims with words dry in substance, leaving the reader’s thirst for true information unquenched in a time when there is endless thirst for information in the air.[2] Complainants also allege specifically that Stephen T. Parr, the man who controls the weather, has abandoned his role as canceller of class on snow days in favor of one who sends coronavirus emails. Furthermore, persons and corporations (who are also persons) who have no duty or dealings with the coronavirus have been seen spreading emails faster than any virus could travel. These include the bank, Amtrak (who only announced they will be cleaning their trains), and Finding Rover (which has my cat’s microchip information). Furthermore, every email raised issues of good feelings throughout, making it harder to see what actual information was attempted to be transmitted.[3]

III. Issues Raised

Complainants alleged both tortious interference with inbox management in a time when students are not apt to be able to handle emails, namely during the period known as “Spring Break.” They allege that during this period, they were expecting to simply “chill out” when the dam of emails crashed down upon them like a reservoir into a coal mine.[4] Students have had to create entire folders for certain emails, and they wish to be left in peace and go back to the days when pigeons sent little messages between student inboxes.[5]

IV. Analysis

Considering the causes of action before it, this court weighs heavily on the law of equity and not the law of law, which is tangled before the law of equity. Before all this endemic, systemic pandemic caused a lot of stress in our academic lives, students were free to simply show up to class, hope they learn something, and carry on. Now, students must do a cost-benefit analysis when every email shows up in their inbox, decide if the cost of not reading the email and missing something outweighs the benefits, and wander forth into the great virtual unknown.[6] This is certainly an undue burden by any petty standard, and this Court would be remiss in equity to allow this tortious behavior to continue.

V. Relief

Everyone is ordered to immediately condense all emails into something resembling the hundreds of Campbell’s tomato soup cans crowded into my spare room. In this time of hoarding, let us not treat emails like toilet paper, as something to be collected and held onto for their further value. Emails should be like Chipotle, which is to say consumed as quickly as possible and then having the consequences dealt with later. In addition, injunctive relief is ordered immediately, and all persons are ordered to ask, “Does this need to be sent?” before any emails are sent. DECIDED.

Justice RE, concurring.

I join the Court’s opinion. I write separately to address two other issues, or possibly more than two if I think of anything else while writing this.

First, I would like to note that this is the second time the Administration has granted (at least imperfectly) relief ordered by this Court. In Students v. Over Eager Administration, 369 U.Va. 75, 72 V.L.W. 14, 4 (2020), we held that the School violated students’ right to privacy during Winter Break by sending an email “show[ing] one of [plaintiff’s classmates], smiling on the cover, touting his most recent success and attributing it to ‘not sleeping until 2 p.m.’” Emotional damages were awarded in the form of another week off of school for the entire Law School. Id. While extending Spring Break through Wednesday did not fully fulfill the Court’s order, it nevertheless appears to be a substantial attempt to do so.

The School also largely complied with this Court’s ruling in 1L Cookie Monsters v. UVA, 370 U.Va. 100, 72 V.L.W. 16, 4 (2020). When cookies were no longer made available for 1Ls on Fridays this spring semester, the Court ordered that cookies be reinstated, id., and they were, albeit slowly. See ANG, Virginia Law Weekly, Volume 72, Number 17 (“Thumbs sideways to Student Affairs for the Valentine’s Day goodies. ANG greatly appreciated the sweets, even though ANG didn’t need more excuses to eat cupcakes alone and in sorrow. However, despite the decisive ruling by the Court of Petty Appeals in favor of ANG’s love of cookies, there were no actual cookies provided.”) and then the following week, ANG, Virginia Law Weekly, Volume 72, Number 18 (“Thumbs up to Student Affairs for the return of Cookies on Friday. ANG is unsure of whether it is the sugar high or the absolute power that ANG now wields through ANG’s influence by the Court of Petty Appeals decision that is driving a surely short lived positive attitude.”).[7]

Second, I would like to address toilet paper hoarding. While this was not at issue in the case before us, the Court of Petty Appeals is not bound by any sort of Article III “actual case or controversy” requirement. Since the Court mentioned toilet paper in dicta, I will address the topic. Who honestly needs that many rolls of toilet paper? Having two weeks’ worth of toilet paper seems like it would be more than enough, so is it really necessary to load your shopping cart up with a fourteen-month supply? See Jim Gaffigan, Beyond the Pale at 50:31 (“Ever notice there’s no dignified way to buy toilet paper? You always have to buy it in that multi-pack of like 18 rolls … everyone in the store’s like, ‘Does that guy ever leave the bathroom? What, is he living off of Hot Pockets?’”).[8] Save some for the rest of us.

These are trying times, and we are all called upon to do our duty for the good of all. But our burden for the time being is to stay in our apartments and watch TV. It is a task for which many of us have been training for years. There is reason for hope.

Justice TONSETH, concurring.

I join the Court’s opinion. As the sitting 1L Justice, I’m just happy to be on the winning side for once.

While I concur with the majority in regards to emails, I must respectfully disagree with the concurring opinion regarding toilet paper. While I do not fully condone hoarding, do you know how entertaining it is to see a common house cat tear apart a toilet paper roll? I thought I was watching the Lion King. You bet I bought twenty-four rolls so I can watch my cat manifest her true spirit animal on a daily basis.

---

jmj3vq@virginia.edu
wdr3mq@virginia.edu
pjt5hm@virginia.edu

[1] I cannot tell you what the lower court disposition is, as it was sent via email, and those who have read the opinion thus far know my aversion. Thus, in line with Petty Court precedent (“we do what we want”), I will not do what I don’t want, and thus this review will be de novo.

[2] The esteemed students of UVA law are naturally thirsty (for knowledge), yet in these times their thirstiness is multiplied many fold (thirstiness for knowledge).

[3] There is actual information which would give glee in the hearts of many, such as an announcement of pass-fail, which would raise joy

[4] See That One Torts Case, 123213 Queens Bench (1700’s? IDK.).

[5] Just as the founders imagined. Goodnight Mr. Jefferson.

[6] Career Services emails are exempted from this statement, as the wrath of the mighty K-Don with his hammer of shame for not reading emails is well-known.

[7] The Bluebook may describe how to properly cite an ANG, and though I refuse to open it and check, I did speak with someone on Law Review who said this was probably good enough.

[8] See footnote 1, supra, mutatis mutandis.

Hot Bench: Ray Tang Hou '21

Virginia Law Weekly March 18, 2020

Hi Ray, welcome to Hot Bench! Please tell all our readers where you’re from!

I was born in the middle of Pennsylvania and I grew up in East Brunswick, New Jersey before attending UC Berkeley in California.

How did you like California?

Oh, the weather is perfect, like everyone says, but after five years there, I felt I needed a change. All anyone talks about in the Bay Area is tech! I knew it was too much when a bunch of skaters rolled by in Dolores Park and they were talking tech.

Haha, not a big tech guy?

I just need other things in my life. I can only talk about computer science for so long.

What are you interested in these days?

I’ve always been interested in diplomacy and foreign affairs. Currently, that means international law. You know, one of the first international organizations was the International Sanitary Bureau, established in 1902. That’s topical.

Are you working on anything related to international relations?

Yeah, actually. I’m helping Professor Verdier with research on international governance. I’m also working on a paper on international organization immunities. I just presented the executive summary a few weeks at a conference in Washington, D.C.

What would you say your hometown is best known for?

We had that one gym teacher who tried to take his case to the Supreme Court because he wanted to have the entire football team pray, but the Court denied cert.

When did you start thinking about law school?

I had just taken the Physics GRE and was applying for physics graduate school, when I thought back on all the lab work I had done. I decided that I really didn’t want to do that for another eight years. I started thinking about law school then, haha.

What kind of impact do you hope to have as a lawyer?

I would like to do something low-key but critical, something that involves expertise. I’d like to have my knowledge valued. Hopefully also my judgment, but you know, whether that’s worth anything remains to be seen.

What is your most unusual talent?

Chinese yo-yo. I don’t know anyone who does that around here.

How do you feel about putting pineapple on pizza?

Ehhh, it’s kind of like a sweet tomato in a way. It’s juicy but it’s also got that tang to it.

What’s your most impressive “go to” meal that you can cook?

Taiwanese beef noodle soup. “Taiwan numbah one!”

Favorite food?

Braised eel over rice. In Japan, it’s called a “Unagi Donburi.” I liked normal eel sushi when I was growing up and I was mind-blown when I realized you could just get a giant bowl of it.

Favorite place in Charlottesville?

Ivy Provisions; I like hanging out to eat a sandwich there if I’m not busy. My favorite is the smoked pork and apple sandwich they had before they took out the secret menu. I think it’s called Smoke Out.

What is your favorite meme?

Oh, it’s definitely the butterfly one. Is this a butterfly?

Anti-Stress Hobby?

What do I do when I’m stressed… hmm, what happens if I’m not stressed? I guess it’s YouTube. When I’m stressed, I usually try to get rid of the thing that’s stressing me out first.

Favorite word?

I’m not sure I have one, there’s just too many to pick from. They all have their time to shine. Except the word “the.” You see “the” too much for it to ever be special.

What’s the best type of cheese?

I like Gruyere just because I make Mac ‘n’ Cheese out of it. It’s got a nuttiness to it, and it’s more interesting than cheddar. It’s like going for a font that’s not Times New Roman or Calibri.

What’s your spirit animal?

Turtles. They’re laidback like, “Imma just chill in my pond.” They’re supposed to be wise and steady, which I like.

Where’s a place you’ve never been, but would like to go?

Oh! I’d love to go skiing in Hokkaido, that would be fantastic. I’ve heard that the snow there is phenomenal, and it’s in Japan, so it’s a double win.

What are some fun and interesting alternatives to war that countries could settle their differences with?

Poker. I guess that might be too similar? I suppose poker is at least fair.

What piece of tech do you hope is invented in your lifetime?

3-D image projection, it would be really useful for movies and video-games. Wait, that’s basically holograms then. It’d be like living in Star Wars.

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

Right now? Stay the inside. Happy quarantine everyone. 😊

---

rth8kf@virginia.edu

Law Weekly Faculty Lunch Series: Professor Margaret "Mimi" Riley

Virginia Law Weekly March 4, 2020

Leah Deskins ‘21
Professor Liaison Editor

This week, Drew Calamaro, Lena Welch, and I had the distinct pleasure of sharing a meal with UVA’s one and only Professor Margaret[1] Foster Riley, the University’s only faculty member simultaneously working within the roles of Professor of Law, Professor of Public Health Sciences, Professor of Public Policy, and Director of UVA Law’s Animal Law Program. That’s so many titles that I’ve already forgotten whom I’m writing about. Oh right, Professor Mimi Riley. She has also served on UVA’s Board of Visitors and other leadership groups within the University, and her expertise is in near-constant demand at various agencies in Washington, DC., or so it seems. Her classes at the Law School tend to focus on health-related topics. She has taught the health law survey course, this semester’s health care reform seminar, the food and drug law course, a J-term health-related course, and supposedly a host of other health-related classes. She also teaches the animal law seminar, and she is currently co-teaching an environmental ethics class with Professor Cannon.

Our lunch naturally began with a short conversation about the rise of COVID-19, also known as “coronavirus,” but we very quickly moved onto a much more interesting topic, Professor Mimi Riley herself.

Professor Riley grew up in northern New Jersey, just seven miles north of the George Washington Bridge. She ventured south to Duke for college, spent a year working extremely hard at the Moroccan embassy in Paris after graduating, and then found her way back home for law school at Columbia. Not one of those people who left law school intending to be a law professor, she spent several years in private practice in New York and Philadelphia before accepting a legal writing teaching position at UVA as a temporary gig. One thing led to another, and twenty-five years later, she’s still here.

Professor Riley shared a number of details about her experience teaching at UVA over the years. When she first arrived, the Law School still only occupied what is now the Withers-Brown wing of the building. There was no wood paneling (gasp!), and the lockers more closely resembled something you might see at a high school. The student body was larger, the faculty was smaller, and there were far fewer female members of the faculty (shocker). She noted that, in addition to obvious related changes over the last twenty-five years (a smaller student body, more faculty, more female faculty, and the acquisition of Slaughter Hall after laying siege upon Darden and forcing the MBA students into their definitely-not-as-nice portion of North Grounds adjacent to the North Grounds Rec Center[2]), students at the Law School have become more public service-oriented than they were when she first started teaching.

We also had the chance to hear about Professor Riley’s family influences. Apparently, Professor Riley is the lawyer black sheep of the family. Her dad was a doctor. Her mom worked in a science field. Her sister is a doctor. There might be another sibling who is a doctor. You get the picture. But, as might be obvious, even the allure of commercial litigation and then teaching legal writing could not keep her genes at bay for long. The medical world eventually won out. She has worked on a number of national academy committees on medical-related issues.[3] Her first big research project in health law involved cloning, and she’s currently a member of the Novel and Exceptional Technology and Research Advisory Committee (NExTRAC) at NIH. And, of course, she plays a big role at UVA Law and within the University’s ethics and medical sphere.

When asked how students should approach their futures, Professor Riley suggested that life should be interesting, and students should strive to keep their lives interesting. There are times when the law is just work, and it’s important to look for other outlets, whether this involves doing meaningful pro bono work or something unrelated to the law entirely.

In addition to more academic, professional topics, Lena, Drew, and I wanted to get to know the real Professor Mimi Riley, so we asked the most pressing questions we could think of. We couldn’t help but wonder: (1) What is Professor Mimi Riley’s favorite animal? Coming from suburban New Jersey, it would make perfect sense that Professor Riley’s favorite animal would be among those pets most cherished by suburban households. Indeed, her choice of favorite animal stems from a childhood pet: a pig, one named Mama Cass, specifically. (2) What are her hobbies? Cycling (the indoor and outdoor varieties), traveling and gardening. (3) What are her favorite restaurants in Charlottesville? Fleurie, Little Star, Oakhart Social, and Duner’s. (4) What is her favorite UVA Law newspaper? The Virginia Law Weekly, obviously.

Lena, Drew, and I thoroughly enjoyed our lunch with Professor Mimi, almost as much as we’ve enjoyed her classes. A real gem, UVA Law and the University of Virginia as a whole is lucky to have her on board.

---

lcd4ew@virginia.edu

[1] On the first day of my animal law seminar with her last semester, Professor Riley informed us that, if we’re going to use her first name, we should call her Mimi. Saying Margaret will make you sound like a telemarketer, apparently.

[2] Fine, the last part involves just a little fiction.

[3] Shockingly, I have mostly retained my ability to do math since coming to law school, but it seems to have been at the expense of my ability to comprehend literally anything related to science, so this discussion went completely over my head.

Court of Petty Appeals: Former 1L v. Soon-to-be Helicopter Parents

Virginia Law Weekly March 4, 2020

Former 1L v. Soon-to-be Helicopter Parents
369 U.Va 68 (2020)

CALAMARO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which TONSETH, PICKETT, DESKINS, and LUEVANO, JJ. joins.

Before this court is a complaint filed by the Judge himself, who has seen fit to neither remove nor deny himself the distinct honor and opportunity to rule on this case. The complaint is novel in that it is filed against all PAs who have ever stood up in front of bright-eyed 1Ls and opened their mouths a single time, but the real targets of the complaint are the PAs who reserve a room and call it a “session” of any kind. This complaint is primarily for time-wasting, unnecessarily speaking too much, and foolery. Plaintiff sues for $10 billion dollars, since the Plaintiff cannot get that time back. Reasonable, one would think, given the amount of words that were said.

I. PAs waste our time, and that should be a first-degree crime.

Peer Advisors are the wonderful cheerleaders of the Law School. They truly are an enormous help to both the students and the School, and do it all for free.[1] And yet, I continue to marvel at the fact that, despite doing all of this for free, these PAs are under the impression that the things that come out of their mouths are 100% necessary. Not a single one of them during my 1L year ever turned down the opportunity to speak, even though they had less than nothing to say. Wonderful cheerleaders rarely make wonderful public speakers.

This level of time-wasting is so outrageous that it nears the level of intentionality. The cries of 1Ls, who try to stop their ears for want of silence, are continually drowned out by PAs who start their sentences with “And just to add to that,” or “Piggybacking off of that,” and, worst of all, “My experience was a little different, but...” Inevitably, they say nothing new and ultimately just tell the same story or say exactly the same thing as the other PAs. They do so while oblivious to the 1L cries and with a coldness in their heart that belies the outer sickly sweetness with which they coat their words with.[2]

There is a terrible horror that is felt by every 1L when they realize that, due to social pressure, they cannot simply get up and leave a PA meeting. These feelings of entrapment are often expressed in thoughts like, “Why am I listening to this twenty-five-year-old treat me like a high schooler even though I have more work experience?” But ultimately those thoughts give way to the cold release of acceptance.[3] One 2L recently said, “[I]t felt as though I was drowning in these pieces of advice that didn’t matter, spoken by someone who only wanted to hear the sound of his own voice. I am haunted to this day.”[4] Somehow, though, the PAs forget those feelings and simply forge ahead, wasting everyone else’s time in the process.

All of this is to say that forcing people to sit and listen to PAs “piggyback” off of one another should be a crime of the first-degree. Indeed, this court has previously looked at the filling of giant water bottles as a crime, and most recently (and erroneously in the opinion of this Justice) held that Airpods in one’s ears while walking down the hallways is a crime. Why not tackle problems that are truly worthy of the Court, such as suing PAs for talking too much, or petitioning the School for a Mandy Appreciation Day?[5] As such, I rule in the affirmative that these crimes of speaking too often are crimes worthy of capital punishment or at least social rejection.

II. Who do you think you are for speaking so much, fool?

For all PAs that waste time by telling unnecessary anecdotes, I have one question: Who do you think you are? Who do you think you are, that you would have the audacity—the audacity—to talk more than is necessary while standing in front of a classroom containing two-thirds of your section?[6] Do you know how much time you’ve wasted by wanting to get in that last anecdote, that one last story, that you think might be helpful to other people just because it seems interesting to you? I mean really? Did you really just open your mouth and say “and not to sound repetitive, but...”? What could you possibly have to add that two other people haven’t already said?

Do you really think that you are that interesting that you can belabor the same point that two other people have already made and not make your audience angry for doing so? The second you opened your mouth and said, “piggybacking off of that,” you’ve lost the room’s attention.[7] Perhaps Biblical training should be included in the PA handbook, or at least the verse in Proverbs that says, “Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is considered intelligent.”[8] Indeed, the only thing less important than a sentence that starts with word “piggybacking” is journal tryouts.

As such, I rule that PAs who talk too much are fools, and should pay me $10 billion dollars, which I will distribute in an equitable and fair manner to my fellow law students.[9] Furthermore, any PA that hits the same point that three other PAs have made already should be tried for treason, or, at the very least, socially rebuked in the form of “boos” from the crowd of 1Ls trying to escape the 11:00 a.m. meeting on a Friday. One should never abuse their bully pulpit to spew useless opinions, something this Court abhors and never does. Thus, the Court hopes that PAs will begin to speak less and looks forward to hearing that to be the case going forward.

LUK, C.J., dissenting, in which JUSTICE QUERNER joins.

Today, our esteemed Court forgets one of our most longstanding tenets, namely that “1Ls always lose.” This cannot be circumvented by skillful pleading or the joining of a Justice of this Court to the complaint. The harms at issue are harms done to 1Ls and, as such, we must treat this as case against 1Ls despite the eloquent tirade of Justice Calamaro. I respectfully dissent.

---

dac6jk@virginia.edu
cl3eh@virginia.edu

[1] The lifeblood of the academy is free labor. It is cheap, although, some say so, is its product.

[2] Much like BigLaw recruiters.

[3] Similar to the sensation of warmth your brain tricks you into having as your body freezes to death. In place. Still in the damn PA meeting.

[4] Quoted from the record and definitely not from the mind of the writer of this opinion.

[5] Mandy is a saint.

[6] Incidentally, those in attendance are the oblivious or weaker-willed two-thirds of a section, since the other third has already realized PAs have nothing to say that is life-changing or at least nothing they cannot hear second-hand.

[7] If any of you truly had it to begin with. *muffled Angry Birds sounds come from under the desk*

[8] Proverbs 17:28; See also, Fetty Wap 17:38 - Trap Queen (“Everybody hatin', we just call them fans, though”).

[9] This is simply dicta and not binding—I have no intention of distributing it.