California Bar Journal
OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA - JANUARY 2001
spacer.gif (810 bytes)

OPINION

spacer.gif (810 bytes)

...Well, Let's Just Say We're Pursuing Every Available Legal Avenue

spacer.gif (810 bytes)

LETTERS

spacer.gif (810 bytes)

Let’s hear some good news

What benefit does it do for the Bar Journal to advise all the lawyers and all the public that might see the Bar Journal that 25 to 35 percent of all lawyers are stressed out either from alcohol or other chemicals and need help? If these facts are true, then certainly the public should not be informed of this by the State Bar that should have at least a little of the interests of the lawyers at heart.

Inside the Journal, the majority of pages are publicly disclosing all of the bad things lawyers have done and how many of them are censored and suspended or disbarred. What purpose does this serve the bar?

If a layman were to read the November issue, the only conclusion that could be reached would be that lawyers are dishonorable people and not worth trusting. Is there any reason why the Bar Journal should add fuel to the current poor public opinion of lawyers?

Richard M. Hawkins
Lake Elsinore

Fear of politics on court

Responding to the article in the December issue regarding the five judges named to the State Bar Court: Your article refers to “a controversial new law observers fear will politicize the court. . . .” Let me see if I can get this straight. San Francisco Judge Nancy Roberts Lonsdale, who sought reappointment, is one of three judges who challenged the Burton legislation. She is then replaced by Jodi Remke, who is appointed by Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, who wrote the legislation and who chairs the  Senate Rules Committee. And Ms. Remke just happens to have been a staff attorney for another Senate committee. Without commenting on Ms. Remke’s qualifications, I can certainly see why there might be some hint of “politicizing” the appointment when Burton comments that she has just the skills and temperament that the “Senate” wants. Not what the people need, not what will fit with the needs of the court, and not with experience which will insure justice and equity for the court’s participants. In fact, unlike some of the other judges, there is no comment that she has any experience which involves the State Bar or its court.

Buster Bradberry
Noblesville, Ind.