The Forum

“We’re made of star stuff.  We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.”  The words of Carl Sagan in his series “Cosmos” may not have any relevance to the study of law let alone human rights, but it does have a specific relevance to our existence.  No matter our claimed ethnicity, nationality, religion, or political ideology, we are the heirs of start that went supernova four billion years ago that set our sun alight and jump-started the accretion of material that formed this planet.  Indeed, while we all carry the traits of our parents, we also carry in our bodies the history of the universe and our species.  When dwelling upon these ponderous topics, it seems senseless that human beings engage in visiting brutality and depredations upon others.

Why is it that humans whose melanin had been reduced because of the climate in the northern hemispheres feel it was legitimate to enslave our genetic brothers and sisters in Africa?  Why is it that humans residing in Europe who are made up of the same 46 chromosomes at the genetic level feel compelled to describe another group as subhuman and worthy of a cold and systematic extermination?

There is no legitimate reason.

Yet, in our recent history, humans have engaged in wholesale genocide of their fellow humans based on what could be best described as arbitrary reasons without legitimate basis.  Sitting in Professor Gaffney’s Empty Boxcars viewing tonight at the law school caused me to ponder on this topic.  How can I reconcile the study of law when it was legislation drafted by the German government that set the groundwork for the horror of the Shoah?  The Nuremberg Purity Laws of 1935 outlined who was Jewish and in the same breath, removed their civil rights.  Citizenship was stripped away, property rights eliminated, and the ability to hold a trade revoked.

In the American experience, one has to consider the slave-fugitive laws, and The Antelope and Dred Scott decisions.  Where the law protected the enslavement of Africans; namely that Africans were chattel property.  Chattel property as in the pen you use in class, the computer where you compose your outlines, and the car you drive to class.  That was the definition of a living, breathing human being according to the law, only because they or their ancestors lived on the African continent.   It was defending the right to keep this chattel that lead to the bloodiest war in American history.  Indeed, the Confederate flag is about heritage; the heritage to protect the right of the states to keep humans in lifelong enslavement, defined as chattel no different than the shovel or a hammer.

Yet, in the two examples above, the law was used to support and uphold these actions by other human beings.  In Nazi Germany, an army of lawyers was utilized by the Third Reich to plan and execute the Shoah.  Lawyers and legislators drafted and passed laws that eliminated the civil rights of Jews not only in Germany, but as Professor Gaffney’s Empty Boxcars illustrates, in Bulgaria.  It was through the collaboration of the legal profession that the Nazi war against the Jews was executed.  In our American context, lawyers represented slaveholders in suits to recover their “chattel.”  American jurists supported that “particular institution” in their opinions.

The realization that the law can be used for heinous purposes should cause students and practitioners of the law to sit up and take notice.  We should take note of both those who cooperated with and alternatively resisted the creation and implementation of laws that eliminate civil rights or that define humans merely as chattel.  Their actions provide important lessons: how the law can be co-opted for evil purposes, and how use of the law can overcome those insidious uses.  Just as we should be aware that we are all homo sapiens, heirs to billions of years of cosmological history, we should use this knowledge to apply the law in means to protect and not harm our fellow persons.

Recently, House Budget Committee Chair Paul Ryan R-WI has been taking flak from liberals regarding his recent budget plan which essentially calls for lowering the income tax on wealthiest 1% of the population from 35% to 25%.  Unsurprisingly, all but 4 republicans in the House of Representatives voted in favor of this plan.  This seems like the classic conservative move; make the rich pay less in taxes and then society will benefit via the trickle down economic theory.  The typical liberal response is that making the wealthy pay less is unfair to the poor and middle classes who generally have less money to spend and should therefore pay less to the government in taxes.  This debate over finances is probably as old as Uncle Sam, and does not seem to have a clear cut answer.  However, as Ryan’s strategy currently stands, both political parties seem missing some key points about this plan’s tax implications.

            The wealthiest people in the country are determined by the following calculation which relies on a version of the Total Assets Equation.  This is defined as the sum of: (1) the gross value of owner-occupied housing; (2) other real estate owned by the household; (3) cash and demand deposits; (4) time and savings deposits, certificate of deposit, and money market accounts; (5) government bonds, corporate bonds, foreign bonds, and other financial securities; (6) the cash surrender value of pension plans, including IRAs, Keogh, and 401(k) plans; (8) corporate stock and mutual funds; (9) net equity in unincorporated business, and (10) equity trust funds.  After calculating the following, the following liabilities must be subtracted: (1) mortgage debt; (2) consumer debt including auto loans; and (3) any other debt including nonrecourse debt.

            Notice that in calculating the total assets equation, actual income earned is diminutive in relation to investments.  In terms of financial wealth, the top 10% of America’s wealthiest have 80% to 90% of their wealth locked into stocks, bonds, trust funds, outside business equity, and non-home real estate.  Since the 1940s, this has been the dominant trend amongst America’s wealthy.  Is there any reason why this is the case?  One answer is that investments tend to generate a greater amount of revenue and worth over time than a salary long, and the other answer is long term capital gains treatment. This is especially true when the Code allows cashing in any of these assets after a year will allow the holder of the asset to get hit by a capital gains rate between 20-25%.  The average long term capital gains rate since 1940 has been around 25% for those in the top tax bracket.  Since 2009, however the average long term capital gains rate has increased to 28% for those in the top bracket.  Specifically, long term capital gains rate for the top tax bracket been increased to 25% on real estate have, 28% on collectibles, and 28% on equity.

            Unless Ryan’s plan has some way of changing or lowering long term capital gains (which from the amended text of his proposal does not change), then the rich may effectively end up paying more in taxes.  This seems contrary to trickle down economic theory, and does not seem to equate to a major change in how taxes are currently collected.  One foreseeable change could be that the wealthy may tend to claim more income from salary and less in investments. This is probably unlikely event considering that even if taxed at an additional 3%, investments will generally be more profitable than paid salaries and will be of more value to the wealthy.

By:  Jolene Cieniawski  Editor-in-Chief

This Spring, the Property Law Society provided a valuable service to VUSL students by hosting the Property Law Review Series at the law school.  The objective of the Series was to provide review and question/answer sessions to VUSL students so that they can be better prepared for finals or for this summer’s bar exams.  Each review session was hosted by either a VUSL professor or local attorney who was proficient in land use and property law.  Students who attended the sessions commented that the reviews were a great platform to begin to studying for finals or were a great refresher of property concepts learned in their previous years’ classes.  The review sessions began on Thursday, February 17, 2011, with “Future Interests & Rule Against Perpetuities” led by Professor Linda Whitton.  This was followed by “Leasehold Estates (Landlord/Tenant Law)” on Monday, March 28, 2011, led by Professor Zachary Calo.  The third session was held on April 14, 2011, with “Land Transactions” led by Attorney J. J. Stankiewicz.  The fourth and final review session concluded the series on Friday, April 22, 2011, with “Land Use & Servitudes” led by Professor David Hollenbeck.  Overall, the property review series were a great success and the Property Law Society would like to thank all VUSL students who attended, and would like to especially thank Professors Whitton, Calo, and Hollenbeck, and Attorney J. J. Stankiewicz for devoting their time and efforts toward these sessions.

By:  Jolene Cieniawski – Editor-in-Chief

Picture is in the Forum May 2011 file

On Thursday, April 7, 2011, the Valparaiso University School of Law had the honor of hosting Judge Juan Guzmán Tapia as the featured speaker for the Tabor Lecture, presented by the Tabor Institute on Legal Ethics.  Judge Guzmán addressed the university and the public through two lectures titled:  The Bench and Bar Lecture:  The Ethical and Public Responsibilities of Judges and The Public Lecture: The Ethical and Public Responsibilities of Lawyers.

Judge Guzmán is a practicing attorney in Chile and is a former judge who is best known for his prosecution of many state agents for human rights abuses, including General Augusto Pinochet.  In Chile, and throughout the world, Judge Guzmán has been recognized for his advocacy of human rights and has received Honoary Degrees from the Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium; Oberlin College, Ohio; Haverford College, Pennsylvania; and the Monterey Institute of International Studies.

Judge Guzmán’s lectures focused on the arrest and kidnapping of thousands of Chileans during the 1970s – 1990s and the courts’ denial of numerous habeas corpus petitions concerning these missing citizens.  At a time when the military controlled the government under General Pinochet, citizens were being arrested and/or kidnapped if they showed any sort of resistance or were known to the government to have ideals that opposed to the newly created government.  Most victims were unaware of the reason for which they were being arrested.  The judiciary in Chile continued to exist as it did before the Coup d’ Etat of the government, but was under strict control of the military.  Therefore, tens of thousands of habeas corpus petitions to release prisoners from unlawful detention were denied without judiciary investigation into the alleged places where victims were being held.  During this time, over 3,000 victims were assassinated and over 1,200 disappeared.  According to Judge Guzmán, during this oppression, it was bad taste for judges to investigate too diligently into such matters because many feared being labeled as radical, therefore jeopardizing their legal career and possibly their life.  Therefore, petitions continued to be denied and lives continued to be lost.

In October 1988, Chileans voted in a presidential referendum to end Pinochet’s bid for eight more years as president, and in 1989, Patricio Aylwin Azócar, was elected president and he lead the reconstruction of Chile and the reconciliation of its people.  President Aylwin spoke publicly about the atrocities of the Pinochet administration and the judiciary under its command, saying that the judges who denied the numerous petitions lacked moral courage and had a duty to investigate all claims in an attempt to find the truth.

Ten years later, in 1998, Judge Guzmán gained international recognition for receiving the case brought against Pinochet for the past crimes against humanity.  Judge Guzmán had apprehensions about receiving the case, but felt that as a judge, it was his duty to “give the best of (him)self and to seek the truth and bestow upon the people what was theirs.”  The Court of Appeals of Santiago and the Supreme Court decided that Pinochet should be stripped of him immunity as a current Chilean senator and allowed him to be indicted.    In December 2000, Judge Guzmán formally charged Pinochet for kidnapping during his 1973-1990 dictatorship, and questioned him for two hours in January 2001 after doctors said he was fit to undergo interrogation. That same month, Judge Guzmán placed the general under house arrest.  By the time of his death in 2006, about 300 criminal charges were still pending against him in Chile for numerous human rights violations, tax evasion and embezzlement during his 17-year rule and afterwards.

This incredible story set the platform for Judge Guzmán’s lecture on ethical and public responsibilities of judges, and in his second lecture, of lawyers.  According to Judge Guzmán, if the judges who had wrongfully denied the habeas corpus petitions had had ethics, courage, and honesty, the oppression would have been less deadly and victim’s lives could have been saved.  Although under oppressive control, the judges still had a duty as representatives of the people to seek the truth and to oppose the wrongdoing.  Judge Guzmán further reflected, “we must obtain justice for every person, but we must not use it for purposes that are not just.”  According to Judge Guzmán , in regards to lawyers, the question is:  Do lawyers have the ethical duty to defend people whose rights have been violated by the state?  Judge Guzmán’s answer was that lawyers, too, should seek the truth, and for those especially who advocate for human rights, “defending people whose rights have been violated doesn’t necessarily make a lawyer an activist, or dangerous to society.”

After insightful question and answer sessions with the audience, Judge Guzmán left both lectures with powerful concluding words that not only apply to the ethical duty of judges, but to that of lawyers, as well: “The knowledge of happiness depends on how we serve our neighbor.  By serving him with love, or at least respect, we’ll be giving the best of ourselves, and this performance will allow us to do ethical justice.”

It’s hard to believe that it is time to write the Forum Graduation Special.  This experience has been like no other.  After dedicating countless hours to briefing, researching, writing, studying, and extracurricular activities, it’s hard to fathom the journey coming to an end.  We have all experienced the many emotions law school brings out, but the whirlwind is finally over.  It is scary, but invigorating feeling to know that we will soon be departing the walls of the school and entering the real world.  As I write this article, it is clear that we are not the 1L’s who entered Valparaiso University School of Law three years ago, we are a family that has grown professionally, socially, and intellectually.

Taking the advice of the departing 3L’s in 2008, friends, family and many others, we all had to determine what worked best for our personalities.  When we entered 1L orientation we were told many life-changing stories and were fearful of the drastic changes that lay ahead.  Afraid the time commitment law school requires would end relationships and longtime friendships, we still persevered and despite the initial sacrifices, pushed through and developed new relationships and friendships along with professional and social skills.  We will always remember the countless positive experiences of bonding during nights out at Passtimes, Northside, Pepe’s, Martini’s, Paparazzi, and overnight stays in Chicago.  Overall, the late night study sessions paired with the occasional fun filled weekend, helped prepared us for the world to come. Learning to see the forest and not the trees, or accepting the fact that just because you were an amazing writer in undergraduate, doesn’t mean you’ll get A’s on those first research and writing assignments were valuable lessons learned.  In all, the experiences of law school have prepared us for our amazing futures. 

The 100-Day Red Carpet Party started our count down to the day we have all been patiently awaiting…May 21, 2011.  On April 18th, we took the streets of Valparaiso for the Annual Cane Walk where our Class Advisor, Dean Adams, addressed us.  Just three years ago he welcomed us into the law school and at the Cane Walk, he welcomed us into the legal profession.  While hearing his amazing and encouraging remarks, I realized that this was one of the last good times we would have, and I began to reminisce.  However, the good times are not over, we still have four more events to look forward to which include the Cubs Game, Black and White Ball, the Champagne Toast, and yes, GRADUATION!!!

The Steering Committee worked tirelessly to plan graduation composites, cap and gown fittings, the December Grad Party, 100-Day Party, the Cubs Game, the Cane Walk, and Black and White Ball.  We hope that our classmates have enjoyed all the events so far.  The Steering Committee has devoted so much time outside of studying, working, families, and extracurricular activities to ensure that our graduation events were memorable, successful, and enjoyable.  I would like to give special thanks to:  Mecca Anderson, Lindsay Davenport, Robert Elliott, Kelley Flinn, Megan Ham, Eric Loggin, Karrah Miller, Chirs Nunley, Lizet Rivera, and Artur Zadrozny for making our graduation events extraordinary.  I have enjoyed my experiences as a law student, and I will always cherish my time as Chair of the Class of 2011 Steering Committee.  I will never forget the many lessons I have been taught over the past three years.

On behalf of the Class of 2011, I would like to thank the Faculty and Staff who have counseled us and invested their time and wisdom into our lives.  To the Professors who were interested in us as individuals, offered up their offices as a safe harbor, and wanted to see us progress professionally, and socially, the Class of 2011 sincerely cherishes your support, energy, and dedication.

As stated by Orrin Hatch, “there is a good reason they call these ceremonies commencement exercises. Graduation is not the end; it’s the beginning.”  So with that, I wish the Class of 2011 the best in all of our future undertakings.  Congratulations to my classmates and now, colleagues.

Sincerely,

Roxie Atkins

Chairperson

2011 Steering Committee

This is the last paper of the school year and my last article as a law student.  Soon, my 3L peers and I will leave the nurturing bosom of Wesemann Hall and enter the dangerous world.  Pitfalls and traps abound!  Some of us will come face to face with the usual problems confronting lawyers:  alcoholism, drug addiction and suicide.  Of course, these dangers can come upon as fast and ninja like and take us away while our friends and family sit aghast and unprepared.  But my guess is that they are often more subtle (like a thousand paper cuts or hangnails, or carbon monoxide poisoning).  For those unfortunates among us, these things probably are not what will actually kill us; they’ll only finish us off after we collude with biglaw or “winning the case” to suffocate our soul.  That pesky and insubordinate soul!  How dare it want to live!  How dare it urge us to be with our families!  How childish of it to yearn for leisure.  Doesn’t it know?  There are no such things as human rights!  We have debt!

There are other dangers, ones in which we may not be so complicit.  There are menaces like Muslims and gays!  And we must watch out for others, too, like RINOs and bluedogs, communists and fascists, teabaggers and libtards, baby-killers and women-haters!  Even our friends and family are potential drags; they will all have “favors” to ask of us, something that we could “just help” them with.  Our friends and family are already sketchy.  They bombard us with every email and every joke that has the word “lawyer” in it (Q:  What does a lawyer use for birth control?  A:  His personality!  Q:  How can you tell if it is really cold outside?  A:  A lawyer has his hands in his own pockets).

Everyone is going to look at us with suspicion.  We are despised and misunderstood as a class, and yet we cannot openly acknowledge this because it is a sign of weakness, and weakness doesn’t win!  We must all be Charlie Sheens and pretend like we are winning (google “Lap Dance Lou” to see how the Charlie Sheen analogy could even go further).  But because we must pretend like we are winning, we make others we encounter feel like losers.  And now, by even loosely implying that non-lawyers are losers, I have only reinforced why people don’t like lawyers in the first place.  It is a vicious cycle from which there is no escape.  Nobody knows what we went through.  We deserve our own Title VII style protection in the world at large.

And if all of this isn’t enough to worry about, we are all entering the labor market together—the non-existent labor market.  We’re not mathematicians, but we can figure it out:  five people cannot all get one position.  We love each other, or like each other, or at least think each other nice enough.  But kind feelings only go so far.  Now, we are each other’s competition.  What are the rules for this competition?  What kind of sabotage is permissible?

It is not all gloom and doom (I’m no Glenn Beck, although gold does sound like a good investment).  It’s not too late!  We can save the world and ourselves at the same time; two birds, one stone.  It’s now imperative for Valpo grads to implement Phase II—world domination.

America is a superpower run from Washington.  Chicago now has a foothold in Washington, and Valparaiso has a foothold in Chicago.  Can’t you see how this can be done?  Set aside petty politics and let us together embrace the Chicago machine.  Our strength lies in each other.  We all know—we have been told—that our school is unique because of our writing program.  We have moot-court warriors and rock-star professors!  Let’s take our legal writing pain, our sleepless nights preparing for competitions, and the charismatically charged lectures with which we have been infused for three years and turn it into pure, unadulterated Valparaiso glory.  Let’s out-brief, out-litigate, out-argue, out-sophisticate and out-school all those other complacent law-school graduate-others.

“Yeah, right” you say.  Well I say, “Yeah, right!”  Think about it.  Governors are the top political officials of a state, the executives in charge, and yet how many Illinois governors can even stay out of jail?  We’re smarter than that.  Let’s infiltrate, stay out of jail, activate our sleeper-cells, and ride that gravy train right in to Washington.  Obama set the example and he cleared the path.  We have to jump while the timing is right.  He didn’t wait to get experience.  We shouldn’t wait either.

I know what you are thinking.  Washington doesn’t control America, Wall Street does.  True, but Obama has that covered as well.  He’s working that revolving door.  Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, what?  Really, it’s all there.  All the groundwork is laid.  The Chicago machine is doing its part.  Now it’s our turn.  Chicago has the controlling shares in Washington.  Now, it’s time for a hostile takeover of Chicago.

Job Market 2011 – Making the Most of the Marketplace

By:  Christine Corral, Executive Director – Career Planning Center

Have you been concerned about the job market?  Are you aware of the opportunities available for students and graduates in the 2011 job market?  The news is promising!

Sources such as Robert Denney Associates, Inc. (December 2010), the National Association for Legal Professionals (March 2011), Client Advisory from Hildebrandt Baker Robbins (2011) and Recruiting Trends 2010-2011 from the Michigan State University Collegiate Employment Research Institute are reporting that the employment market is showing a modest rebound.  The collective voice of the current job market trends from these sources follows:

The U.S. economy will continue its recovery even faster than some experts predict and global expansion will continue.  Further, entry-level recruiting is up slightly and there’s an increased need for mid-level associates as the economy begins to recover.

Have I gained your attention yet?  Here’s more positive news, global hiring will increase by 8%.  International markets that you should find of particular interest for expansion include:  Brazil, Russia, India, China, Singapore, Luxembourg and Sao Paolo.  Domestic hiring will increase by 5%.  Domestic markets that you should find of particular interest for expansion include:  Chicago and Texas.

Looking for even more positive news?  You may be asking yourself, “What industries are hiring?”  The industries targeting individuals with master’s and professional degrees include:  manufacturing, information technology, finance/insurance, health services, non-profits and professional services.  Specific practice areas for individuals seeking “attorney” positions include:  regulatory, health care, alternate dispute resolution, white collar crime, bankruptcy, energy, labor and employment, public finance, litigation, immigration and emerging companies.

How have some of these positive changes in the marketplace affected Valparaiso Law?  The Career Planning Center has seen a 23% increase in the number of employment listings this academic year compared to last year – and the year is not over yet.

Next question, Have you been actively applying for employment opportunities?  While the Career Planning Center has seen a respectable increase in employment listings, there has been a decline in the number of applications with some employers only receiving two or three applications.  The Career Planning Center team encourages students and recent graduates to continue to actively apply for employment opportunities as the job market continues its recovery.

Do you feel prepared for your job search?  If you have questions about preparing your job search materials, interviewing, negotiating offers and more, the Career Planning Center team is ready and available to assist.  Please contact the Career Planning Center at 219-465-7814 or visit Wesemann room 125.

May Trivia
Enjoy my last set of trivia questions.
John Bayard
Outgoing Executive Editor

1. Who founded the Order of the Garter?
2. The Indianapolis 500 was first raced when?
3. The Ashley Whippet Invitational World Championship is the world championship of this sport? (Let Rover know)
4. Who is listed in the Guinness Book of World Records for the world’s shortest movie review; his two-star review of the 1948 musical Isn’t It Romantic? consists of the word “No”.
5. Silvio Berlusconi is a member of this Italian political party.
6. Angkor Wat is found in this country?
7. Mike Quade is the current head manager of the Chicago Cubs. Who was the head manager before him?
8. Prince William of Wales obtained a degree from what University?
9. Memorial Day was formerly known as this?
10. What’s my middle name? (Yeah there’s a real trivia question for you)

Answers
1. Edward III
2. 1911
3. Dog Frisbee
4. Leonard Maltin
5. The People of Freedom
6. Cambodia
7. Lou Piniella
8. University of St. Andrews
9. Decoration Day
10. Peter

Chinese Intellectual Property
John Bayard
Outgoing Executive Editor

I was nervous giving an introduction in Chinese. It seems strange now to think about it. Nearly all of the students who attended the presentation did not know any Chinese. If anything I was really worried about how my Chinese language professor would think. In the end, the presentation went well and the native Chinese speakers thought my Chinese were very fluent.
When the new forum staff asked me to write an article about my presentation on Chinese Intellectual Property law I felt it would be more appropriate for someone to write it. However they convinced to write the darn thing since it was well attended and no one else knew anything about the subject.
People asked me why I wrote a 50 page single space paper on Chinese Intellectual Property law I responded by telling them to read the news. Our economy’s future and nation’s prosperity lies in our creativity. The inventions and technologies also well as literature and art are what drives a nation’s prosperity. That creativity must be protected, not just for their creators, but for the nation as a whole. To rebuild America’s economy, we must look to foreign shores for new markets and new opportunities. The emerging economies of China, India, Brazil, etc. provide such new opportunities. Therefore it is important to protect our creativity overseas.
The problem is not that China does not have Intellectual Property laws. It has in fact numerous laws that conform to various international agreement guidelines and World Trade Organization standards. The problem is enforcement. This is not to say that the central government in Beijing does not care about enforcement. Far from it, the central government spends billions each year combating such violations. The real difference is between how the central government acts and how the local provincial leaders and businessmen act. The title of my paper was The Local Snake v. The Mighty Dragon: Enforcement of Intellectual Property in China. An old Chinese saying is the local snake is more powerful than the mighty dragon. This means that a local provincial leader or businessmen is usually more cunning in being able to circumvent laws then the central authority has the ability to enforce them. This has been the case throughout all of Chinese history.
The problem of enforcement is also not unique to China, although its effects is perhaps more profound. For example, a large segment of Americans (in particular younger Americans) download illegal copies of music from the internet everyday. In China 95% of music is illegally downloaded. On University campuses, students can find complete photocopied versions of textbooks that have been illegally copied and are worth pennies compared to the cost of the original.
China’s own innovation and technological development might strengthen enforcement of its Intellectual Property laws. However this remains to be seen. What is certain is that for the protection of jobs here in America, Intellectual Property must be protected and defended everywhere including overseas.

John is a 3L and can be reached at forum@valpo.edu

The final ‘Confessions of 1L’ has given me pause. I can scarcely believe this crazy 1L is just about over. When I announced my intentions to attend law school every person I knew offered a cornel of advice. I ignored some of it, however, I am still struck by the most useful piece of advice I was given. My brother, fountain of all law school wisdom, had warned me that law school would be a little like going back to high school. Of course I rolled my eyes and assured him that I could handle it. Well, it was not so much about handling it but rather trying not to chuckle as his words came true.
It seems to me that every high school cliché has been embodied in my law school experience from the bulletin boards decorated to attract club members to cliques that quickly formed first week. Of course we have the popular kids with their female offshoot of the traveling pack of blonds. They spend more time gossiping and pretending every little thing in their lives matters to everybody around them. There are the quiet ones in the back of the room who refuse to answer questions unless forced. There are the “bros” who are still striving to be too cool for school and still caring about drinking games on the weekend.
There are the Facebook people. They are potentially my favorites at the law school. They are the ones who spend more reading and checking their Facebook page in class than actually taking notes. In fact, they spend so much time on the Facebook that you know more about them then you do about members of your own family. It’s not a habit I wanted before I went to law school. But sometime the computer screen in front of me is more interesting and I cannot help it.
There are so many to list and only a few lines left in this column. So, yes as this school year winds down I am still thinking about all the funny quirks of our class. I can honestly say that the vast majority in our class have been an absolute pleasure to know. And I cannot have imagined my year without the people I have met at Valparaiso. Mostly, I am grateful for the experience of meeting everyone whether or not it has been a major flashback to my far go high school days. So, this is big thank you to each one of you that made a fantastic year and those who read this column. I look forward to next year with everyone.