Recently South Carolina’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) has taken action against attorneys for their activities outside the context of actual cases if these acts are “conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.” Specifically, they are trying to discipline an attorney for vile blogging. Also recently, a New York Times article discussing United [...]
Archive for the ‘Of Interest to General Public’ Category
Pro se judge shopping
Ever since a local family court judge got defrocked for presiding in a case in which she had an alleged conflict, South Carolina family court judges have often been recusing themselves when there is a claim of conflict, bias, or improper conduct. This has, unwittingly, led to what I label pro se judge shopping, in [...]
Should “vile” blogging be a basis for lawyer discipline?
A news release posted yesterday on the South Carolina Judicial Department website links to a cover story in the ABA Journal, “You’re Out of Order! Dealing with the Costs of Incivility in the Legal Profession,” which profiles Lesley M. Coggiola, disciplinary counsel for the Supreme Court of South Carolina. In this article, Ms. Coggiola notes [...]
Protection from what?
A couple weeks ago I received a phone call that is not very unusual. An anxious mother-to-be had questions about custody. Of particular concern was how she should “protect” her child from the father-to-be, who also happened to be her live-in boyfriend. The obvious question–one I always ask in these situations–is why this child might need [...]
Perhaps he has a 2,000 mile long penis?[1]
A question I am frequently and increasingly being asked by my colleagues is whether modern uses of technology to engage in sexual banter can constitute adultery as a ground for divorce in South Carolina. Sexting, instant messaging, emailing, online role playing games and constant or lengthy phone calls (often assumed to be “phone sex”) have [...]
“Irresponsible procreation” as a defense of DOMA
On October 18, 2012, in 2-1 decision in the case of Windsor v. United States, 699 F. 3d 169 (2nd. Cir. 2012), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) violates equal protection and is therefore unconstitutional. Many Supreme Court watchers believe this [...]
Should there be a cause of action for paternity fraud?
A colleague of mine, T. Ryan Phillips, emailed me an October 1, 2012 Tennessee Supreme Court opinion in the case of Hodge v. Craig, 382 S.W.3d 325 (TN. 2012). That opinion approves a cause of action for paternity fraud within that state. With the rise of paternity testing, this cause of action may become more common [...]
A yellow light for hackers
The rare occasions when I am required to wade into the morass of the federal Stored Wire and Electronic Communications and Transactional Records Access Act (SCA), 18 U.S.C. § 2701 and Wire and Electronic Communications Interception and Interception of Oral Communications Act. 18 U.S.C. § 2501, I find myself hopeless lost and call upon our [...]