The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times

Bonus Season!

As bonus season chugs along, a few numbers have come across the desk of the BLT, but of course, we’d like to hear more from the associates out there who want to dish.

Here’s what we’ve got so far. Sidley Austin is paying its New York first-year associates a base bonus of $35,000, plus a little something extra with a $10k special bonus, since apparently the bonus pool was big enough. In Sidley’s D.C. office, we hear first-years are making $20k for meeting the minimum bonus target of 2,000 hours.

Covington is paying the same $35k base plus $10,000 special for first-year associates in New York, but word has it that DC associates don’t get their bonuses until March.

We’ve also heard a rumor that Dickstein Shapiro is slated to announce its end-of-the-year bonuses today, and that Crowell & Moring will be announcing some time within the next week. So if anyone hears anything, don’t be shy — let us know!

Mayer Brown Merger

Mayer Brown announced a merger today with the Asian law firm, Johnson Stokes & Master. Evidently, the “transformational event” mentioned yesterday on the blog, Above the Law, was the merger, not another indictment.

Johnson Stokes & Master is based in Asia with more than 260 attorneys and offices in Hong Kong, mainland China, Thailand, and Vietnam. Mayer Brown, while having a large presence in Europe and the U.S., had only one office in Asia. The combined firm will have approximately 1,800 attorneys, and the merger will be finalized by the end of January.

Mayer Brown has faced some not-so-good news of late after being hit with malpractice suits for its representation of Refco Inc. The plaintiffs allege Mayer Brown helped Refco, a futures trading company, in an “elaborate scheme” to conceal Refco’s debts. And on Tuesday, Mayer Brown partner Joseph Collins was charged with 11 counts of securities fraud, wire fraud, and making false statements in connection with his work for Refco. Collins is now on leave from the firm.

Win In FOIA Fight In Sunshine State

Three newspapers in Florida have won $105,000 in attorney fees from the federal government after a successful Freedom of Information Act fight to obtain public records from the Department of Homeland Security. Holland & Knight partner Charles "Chuck" Tobin, who chairs the firm's national media practice team in the D.C. office, represented the papers and called the court ruling "an outstanding result," The News-Press reported.

The News-Press, the Pensacola News Journal, and Florida Today sued the Department of Homeland Security after it blocked the release of details about the 1.1 million recipients of $1.2 billion in disaster aid after four hurricanes ravaged Florida in 2004. The newspapers lost in a lower court but prevailed before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in obtaining the release of the aid recipients' addresses and payment of attorney fees incurred in the court battle.

Tobin, whose undergraduate degree was in journalism, was a reporter for The News-Press in Fort Myers before he graduated with honors from the University of Florida College of Law. Before joining Holland & Knight, he spent eight years as in-house counsel for Gannett Co., Inc., which owns the three newspapers that filed the FOIA suit.

"After years of withholding records, the government has agreed to pay six figures. The amount speaks for itself," Tobin said. "It's a victory for the First Amendment."

Google Gets DoubleClick

After nearly a year of review, the Federal Trade Commission yesterday approved Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick, an online advertising company. Though the merger stirred up antitrust worries because both companies are market leaders, privacy groups contended that the combined company would have too much access to personal information.

Two of the privacy groups called last week for the FTC’s chairwoman to recuse herself from the DoubleClick proceedings because her former law firm, Jones Day, had a Web page that claimed the firm was representing DoubleClick in the merger not only in Europe but also in the U.S. The groups said that caused a conflict of interest compounded by the fact that the chairwoman, Deborah Platt Majoras, is married to a current Jones Day antitrust partner.

Turns out, the flap was all for naught. The Web page was simply wrong. Jones Day is representing the company in Europe but not in the U.S. See this Legal Times piece for more detail on the firm’s Web page hullabaloo.

As for the merger, the FTC ruled solely on the antitrust aspects of the transaction, but the agency did release a set of voluntary guidelines on privacy. The merger is still awaiting approval in Europe.

Morning Wrap

Trouble for ex-CIA officer?:Last week, former CIA officer John Kiriakou captivated readers and viewers with his candid account of the capture and waterboarding of suspected terrorist Abu Zubaida. Now, the CIA has requested the Justice Department investigate whether Kiriakou illegally disclosed classified information in doing so, reports the WaPo. Though he did not witness the waterboarding first-hand, Kiriakou said he had been given the details by others who were present. Kiriakou’s attorney, Washington solo practitioner Mark Zaid, said it’s common for the CIA to refer such cases to Justice, but that the referrals rarely result in criminal charges.

Bush confident in economy: President Bush says he’s confident the economy is strong enough to avoid a recession, reports the WaPo. Referring to the steps he’s taken to address the housing crisis, such as a plan to freeze interest rates on certain subprime mortgages, the president said at a news conference yesterday that his view of the economy is that “the fundamentals are strong.” His comments are in opposition to the views of many economists who have urged the government to take a harder line to prevent a potential long-term recession.

Killer Lawyer?: New Jersey prosecutors say defense lawyer and former prosecutor Paul Bergin helped facilitate the murder of DeShawn McCray, an important witness in a big drug case. The NYT reports today that according to court testimony from earlier this year, Bergin met with the gang member friends of one of his clients to orchestrate the fatal shooting of McCray. So far, prosecutors have been unable to charge Bergin. Law enforcement officials in New Jersey say the case highlights the growing threat of witness intimidation.

Cocoa No-no?: Unlike a lot of us this time of year, the Justice Department isn’t showing much love for chocolate. The WSJ reports that Justice antitrust enforcers are investigating the pricing practices of the chocolate industry, which is trying to offset higher dairy costs. Though the Justice Department did not comment and the specifics of the inquiry are not clear, price fixing can lead to heavy fines and sometimes prison terms for executives.

Court Security Bill Hits President's Desk

After hammering out differences between companion bills, Congress sent legislation to the White House yesterday that would provide funding to improve the security of federal judges, courthouses, and court personnel. By a voice vote yesterday, the House passed an amended version of a companion bill that was unanimously approved by the Senate on Tuesday.

The Court Security Improvement Act would establish new criminal penalties for the misuse of restricted personal information to threaten or harm judges and their families, witnesses, or court officers. The legislation also includes an additional $20 million per year over the next four years for the U.S. Marshals Service, which protects federal judges in court and on some off-site protection details.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and ranking committee member Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) sponsored the Senate bill, while House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) sponsored the House bill. “I urge the President to sign this vital legislation, introduced 11 months ago, without delay so that we can protect the dedicated judges and other personnel who serve as part of our nation’s justice system,” Leahy said yesterday. “The security of our federal judges and our courthouses around the nation is at stake.”

The White House has already expressed general support for the legislation, which was spurred by the murders of U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow's husband and mother in Chicago by a disgruntled pro se litigant in 2005. For more details about the legislation and Lefkow’s views, read this Legal Times article.

Feeling The Heat

Just in time for the holidays, the American Tort Reform Association has released its sixth annual “Judicial Hellholes” report. Judicial Hellholes — which is trademarked so don’t start your own list — are “places where judges systematically apply laws and court procedures in an inequitable manner, generally against defendants in civil lawsuits,” the ATRA reports.

There was good news and bad news this year. Madison County, Ill., a leading Hellhole during the past five years, rose from the sulfurous depths and is now just on ATRA’s “Watch List” because of reforms made by local judges. But courts in Clark County, Nev., and Atlantic County, N.J., descended into the fiery furnace for the first time. Other winners were perennial favorites, including courts in South Florida, the Gulf Coast of Texas, Cook County, Ill., and the entire state of West Virginia.

The infamous pants suit by former D.C. Administrative Law Judge Roy Pearson Jr. also scored a dishonorable mention from the ATRA. Pearson lost both his lawsuit and his job this year after suing a local dry cleaner for $54 million over a misplaced pair of pants. But Pearson is still seeking justice, or his version of it, in an appeal.

House Hears Testimony on CIA Tapes

In the first public hearing on the CIA’s destruction of taped interrogations, members of House Judiciary Committee sought advice today on whether and how to investigate the agency’s actions.

“There are those who say, ‘Well, they’re gone; there’s nothing we can do about it,’” said Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), who chairs the committee. “I wish I knew that with any particular certainty.”

No such luck. The Justice Department declined an invitation to testify, though a chair was left open at the witness table. There were many other idle seats. Having finished their business last night, most committee members had already left the Capitol. Only Conyers (D-Mich.) and four other democrats attended the hearing. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) showed up to deliver a brief opening statement but left soon after to catch a plane.

The DOJ's absence was in keeping with Attorney General Michael Mukasey's refusal last week to provide congressional Democrats information about the department’s role in the destruction of the tapes. In a letter to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mukasey said it was the department’s practice to withhold information in ongoing investigations to prevent the perception of political influence. ("We've not even gotten a letter," Conyers sniffed.)

Conyers was eager to put Mukasey’s argument to the test on the panel of witnesses, which included two law professors, an expert on international law, and a the head of a human rights organization.

Stephen Saltzburg, a law professor at George Washington University, said that a congressional investigation would not interfere with the Justice Department’s inquiry into the tapes because much about them was already known from the CIA’s own admissions. He counseled the committee to move ahead with its investigation immediately, warning that more delay would make it harder for congressional investigators to reconstruct the events surrounding the tapes’ destruction.

“You’re already looking at two years,” Saltzburg said.

CIA officials have said the tapes were destroyed in November 2005. A. John Radsan, a professor at William Mitchell College of Law and former CIA assistant general counsel from 2002 to 2004, said the tapes’ destruction could have been timed around the Supreme Court’s decision at the time to review a detainee-rights case, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which cast doubt on the administration’s processes at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and eventually led to the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

Moreover, Radsan said, The Washington Post had just published details of the CIA’s network of secret prisons abroad, Sen. John McCain (R-Az.) was leading the charge in Congress for a ban on torture and the Justice Department was backing away from legal memos that endorsed harsh interrogation methods.

“The political lines were changing,” Radsan said. He advocated the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the DOJ’s role in the tapes, but said it was unlikely that either the CIA or department’s actions amounted to obstruction. If anything, he said, a prosecutor would be more likely to bring charges of false statements, based discussions within the CIA, DOJ and White House.

David Rivkin, a partner at Baker & Hostetler and an expert in international law, urged the committee to allow the Justice Department some room to investigate, touting Mukasey’s record as a federal judge. He called the destruction of the tapes a “foolhardy” move on the CIA’s part, but said it was “somewhat unfair” to assume that the Department of Justice was incapable of handling the matter without the congressional oversight.

The Washington Post reported today that the CIA has agreed to comply with lawmakers' requests for documents related to the tapes and will provide officers to testify in congressional hearings. Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, told the Post yesterday that he will schedule a hearing for Jan. 16.

The Justice Department had also asked the courts not to interfere its investigation, but U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy Jr. ignored the request, scheduling a hearing tomorrow morning on whether the agency violated a protective order by destroying the tapes. The request for the hearing was entered by lawyers for a group of detainees at Guantánamo Bay who say the tapes' destruction raises questions about the government’s obligations to preserve evidence.

Sen. Harry Reid's National Security Advisor Joins Steptoe

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s senior national security advisor has joined Steptoe & Johnson’s Washington government relations practice. Richard Verma, who served as a policy advisor to Sen. Reid for the past five years, practiced in Steptoe’s international and technology groups before going to the public sector. He rejoined the firm ten days ago, though he says leaving Sen. Reid’s office was a difficult decision.

“He’s just a great boss,” Verma says of the senator. “He’s quite a guy, and just the right guy for the Senate at this time.”

Still, Verma says after spending the last five years on the Hill, he felt the time was right for a change. “We [the Democrats] had gotten a lot accomplished, we were in the majority, and it seemed like there was a window.” He says using that window to return to Steptoe was a “natural” choice since he never fell out of touch with his friends there.

Steptoe’s Washington government affairs and public policy practice is only a year old. The firm acquired it last December, when it picked up a group of eight attorneys from Collier Shannon Scott, before that firm merged with Kelley Drye. Verma says it’s exciting to be a part of a practice that’s still growing. And while he says he expects long hours at Steptoe, he says his job as Sen. Reid’s senior national security advisor also “was hard to put away when you got home.”

In a press release, Sen. Reid said Verma was “someone whose judgment we relied on during a pivotal time for the Senate.”

Getting Kids To Trial

The D.C. Council unanimously approved emergency legislation Tuesday to ensure speedy-trial rights for all juveniles detained in the District's juvenile justice system. The District previously had provided statutory 45-day speedy-trial rights to juveniles in secure detention but not to youths held in shelters.

The legislation, which seeks to reduce overcrowding in the District's juvenile facilities, will limit the continued detention of juveniles in shelters or secure detention because of delays in prosecution. Council members Phil Mendelson and Tommy Wells introduced the emergency legislation, which requires a study with recommendations before permanent legislation will be considered next year.

“There’s no reason why some kids should be treated different than others and suffer counterproductive delays,” Mendelson said in a statement today. “This not only gums up the works of our judicial system, but it fails our youth.”