By:  Ross Brennan

Columnist

            Garry Marshall, the man who brought you Pretty Woman and who I guarantee you would recognize even if you cannot picture him right off the bat, now brings you Valentine’s Day.  Marshall’s latest take on the RomCom is a funny piece that tells the romantic stories of numerous of people and couples, all of which are nicely intertwined.  Think Crash, but with a much lighter subject matter.

            There really is not a main character in the film, despite the previews that make it appear as if Julia Roberts is the focal point.  Thus, I will try to give you a quick rundown of what is going on and what to expect.  Ashton Kutcher is in love with Jessica Alba.  Jennifer Garner is best friends with Kutcher, but is in love with the very married McDreamy, who plays a doctor (what a stretch).  McSteamy, who plays a pro football player whose story is not-so-loosely based on Brett Favre, is in love with a mystery guest, as are Julia Roberts and Bradley Cooper.  Jamie Foxx and Jessica Biel both hate Valentine’s Day, respectively.  Topher Grace is in love with Anne Hathaway.  Taylor Swift is in love with Taylor Lautner.  Hector Elizondo, another face you would recognize even though you do not know the name, is in love with Shirley MacLaine.  George Lopez is in love with his wife, although we do not get to know her.  And Queen Latifah and Kathy Bates are sprinkled in, but without objects of desire.

            If that was hard to follow, I apologize.  It was the best I could do.  While Valentine’s Day has some sappy moments that are cliché-ridden, there are some genuinely funny parts.  A particularly funny scene involves two high-schoolers who are planning to make this Valentine’s Day extremely special.  As expected, a parent comes home.  Obviously predictable, but still a fresh take on a funny scene.  Jamie Foxx has some good scenes, and Topher Grace shines as a native Hoosier who is now a L.A. transplant.  Viewer beware, there are some jokes that involve Indiana as a punch line.

            Overall I would recommend Valentine’s Day.  For the gentlemen out there, if you have the will power to walk past Edge of Darkness and actually have a seat in the Valentine’s Day theater, you will discover a few jokes you appreciate.  For the ladies, I do not have to tell you that the movie is geared towards your tastes.  Enjoy the 125 minutes of romance, and take it for what it is worth.

Ross is a 2L and can be reached at Ross.Brennan@valpo.edu.

NEWS FLASH:  1L, Adam Claudy is taking over as our Forum movie reviewer next month!!!

MMA Monthly Matchups: March Edition

By Dan D. Hallberg

February was a somewhat uneventful, but still entertaining month of fights, particularly if you enjoy geriatrics getting crushed by other geriatrics. But March has tons of interesting battles, so lets take a look.

5. Miguel Torres (37-2) vs. Joseph Benavidez, WEC 47, 3/4/2010

Miguel Torres is back, and it’s a good thing. It wasn’t too long ago that Torres was in the discussion for top pound for pound fighter in the world. Unfortunately that all faded away after his stunning knockout loss to Brian Bowles. Now he’s trying to get back in the saddle against a tough opponent and top bantamweight fighter in his own right, Joseph Benavidez. Benavidez is a scrambler, ala his teammate Urijah Faber, so it will be interesting to see how he deals with Torres’ jiu jitsu. However, I still think the Bowles loss was a fluke. Torres wins and with it gains a shot at his old title.

4. Champion Georges St. Pierre (19-2) vs. Dan Hardy (24-6), UFC 111, 3/27/2010

This is the lowest I’ve ever ranked a title fight on my list and there is a simple reason why: Dan Hardy has no business fighting GSP. He’s only getting the fight because GSP’s beaten everyone else. I mean, Hardy has a punchers chance, but ever since the Serra loss GSP has been on guard for that. Pretty much Hardy will be taken down again, and again, and again, until he gives up a choke or gets decisioned.

3. Jon Jones (9-1) vs. Brandon Vera (11-4), UFC on Versus, 3/21/2010

For all intensive purposes, Jon Jones DQ loss to Matt Hamill was not a loss, and the UFC is not treating it like one. He takes a serious step up in competition as he faces fellow young gun Brandon Vera. It seems like every time Vera gets close to cracking into title contention he drops the ball. If he doesn’t win this fight it’s going to be hard for him to convince anyone that they should care about him. The thing is, I don’t care about him now, and haven’t seen anything in him to justify the multiple chances that the UFC likes to give him. Jones on the other hand is a highlight reel in the making. Jones by knockout in a pretty spectacular fashion.

2. Frank Mir (13-4) vs. Shane Carwin (11-0), UFC 111, 3/27/2010

Mir shut my mouth a few months back by decimating his last opponent, lets see if he can do it again. The former champ added on an extra 40+ pounds of muscle in an attempt to prepare for the bigger stronger Brock Lesnar. Now we get to see if his methods will work in a test run against the equally big and strong Shane Carwin in a matchup for the Interim Heavyweight championship. Carwin is essentially Lesnar with less wrestling credentials and without the attitude, so this should make for an interesting fight. Despite being wrong last time, I’m going to go against Mir in favor of Carwin. Mir seems to be doomed to be stuck in the “not quite championship material”zone for the rest of his career; this fight will show that.

1. Champion Brian Bowles (8-0) vs. Dominick Cruz (14-1), WEC 47, 3/4/2010

This fight has almost every element one needs to make a great title fight. Both men can throw, both men have great stamina to go into late rounds, both men are lightning fast, and both men are deserve to be where they’re at. Bowles is undefeated and won his title from top pound for pound regular Miguel Torres and Cruz is undefeated at bantamweight, and his only loss came to then featherweight champion Urijah Faber. I’m actually torn on where to go for this one, and when that happens, I have to go with the champ. Bowles pulls out a decision, leading to his rematch against local boy Miguel Torres.

 Dan is a 1L and can be reached at forum@valpo.edu

Professor of Law

Twenty-four Valparaiso University Law students will accompany Professor Derrick Carter to the New Orleans Public Defenders’ Office during spring break. The students will conduct bond hearings, interviews, research, write briefs, and observe death penalty trials. 
Four students will work in the legal aid office with Professor Alan White and the legal aid attorneys.  Professor Geneva Brown will explore work in the Juvenile Defenders’ Office.

Professor Carter can be reached at Derrick.Carter@valpo.edu

Moot Court Executive Board Members

Attention all 1L & 2L’s! Are you looking to become involved with a competitive team next year?  Are you looking to get more practical legal experience beyond the books?  Are you looking to shine and refine both your written and oral advocacy skills?  Then tryout for the Moot Court Society this Spring! Moot Court is a team comprised of second and third year law students who compete in both intraschool and national competitions.  It is an intense and competitive team that requires fine tuned oral argument skills as well as clear and concise writing at the appellate level.   A number of employers require or strongly recommend that potential applicants have this team or law review on their résumés.  

The highlight of the fall semester is the annual Swygert Competition where members receive a legal problem, write an appellate brief and then argue both on and off brief in front of panels of judges.  All members participate in the oral arguments, and judges advance competitors to subsequent rounds based on both their advocacy skills and written briefs.  The number of competitors then decreases for the Sweet Sixteen, Elite Eight, and Final Four rounds.  The final four competitors argue in the final round of competition.   The final round is judged by actual judges and justices.  In fact, two years ago Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia participated as a member of the panel for the final round!  

The second semester mostly involves preparation for national competitions. Team members travel to competitions across the country.  Teams write appellate briefs together, travel to their competition location, and compete against numerous other high profile law schools in the country.  This year, our team placed third in a Trademark competition in Chicago while outshining top law schools!

If you are interested in trying out and hopefully joining this team, please come to our informational meeting during Chapel Break on April 1, 2010 (date subject to change) to learn more and ask any additional questions.  Tryouts will take place April 19^th and April 21^st.  (times TBA). The first round of tryouts involves arguing for 10 minutes on brief.  There will be a cut after the first round of tryouts.  Those who make it to the second round of tryouts will argue 10 minutes off brief.  Those who are successful in the second round of tryouts will become members of the Moot Court Society.

Remember, all are encouraged to tryout and we look forward to seeing YOU at the informational meeting on April 1, 2010.  Please contact Joanna Lekkas (Joanna.Lekkas@valpo.edu) or Erika Nelson (Erika.Nelson@valpo.edu) with any further questions.

We welcome any questions that anyone would like to submit.

1. My girlfriend and I have been together for over a year now but she lives back home which is a couple hours away. I love her to death but I also love this freedom I have here at school. I feel like I’m starting to doubt our relationship. What should I do? Can we really make it work while I’m in law school? From Loving from a Distance.

Of course you can make it work! And to be perfectly honest you should do everything in your power to make it work. The grass always seems greener on the other side and almost NEVER actually is. This freedom that you feel at school probably just means that you need to make sure you and your girlfriend still have your own “things.” Take time to go play basketball or hang out with the guys every once in a while and encourage her to do the same with her friends. If you and your girlfriend spend every waking moment together the walls will quickly close in on you. As for the hesitation you are having in your relationship right now, you can rest assured that you are probably making a mistake if you think you are going to find your soul mate in Valparaiso, Indiana. If you ever decided to date another law student it would probably only take a matter of weeks before you realized you wanted the person you really love back. It is absolutely possible to make things work long distance. You have to make sure you keep yourself focused on your school work during the week and keep yourself occupied in any down time with your good friends here. Make the extra effort to be with your girlfriend on the weekends and it will definitely be worth it in the end. That being said, only you know how you truly feel about your current girlfriend. If you do not see yourself being with her in the long run then there is no reason to drag things on and cause more heartache in the end. Good luck with this decision because it will affect the rest of your life!

2. I have been dating this guy for a few months but I am starting to become concerned about the fact that I feel like I am also dating his family. Does this guy have some sort of separation issue that he will get over or should I take this sign and head for the hills? From

The first thing you have to decide is if you are willing to date someone who is so close with their family. You have to remember that having a close family is probably all they know and it is not their fault. At the same time you are worried about how close your hunky new boyfriend is to his family, he is probably worried about how you are not. The door swings both ways. The main thing is that you both have to be willing to give and take. You have to understand that he is close to his family but he has to be understanding that at the end of the day he is dating you and may be marrying you, not his family. If this guy lives and dies by what his family says and always chooses them over you then that may be a sign that the relationship is not right for you guys. He has to realize that he will never be able to maintain a relationship if he doesn’t start putting the person he loves before everyone else. If you really care about this guy then sit him down and talk to him about it. All good things are worth waiting and fighting for. Be understanding, but be reasonable!

Xoxo
Aphrodite & Ares

Danyel and Megan are both 2Ls and can be reached at forum@valpo.edu

This month I interviewed Professor Sy Moskowitz. Professor Moskowitz has been a Law Professor at Valparaiso University School of Law for over 30 years. Originally he never thought that he would be a Law Professor. His interest was in labor law and civil rights. It is these interests that drove him to become a lawyer. After graduating at Harvard Law, where one of his classmates was Justice David Souter, he started and was the first director of VUSL’s clinical program. During his time as director, he developed an interest in teaching law.
When asked about teaching, Professor Moskowitz said, “Some teachers changed my life and forced me to think about my own ideas. Teachers should make students think about their belief and make them challenge their own beliefs.” Moskowitz added that teaching is a sacred calling.
Moskowitz teaches administrative law, constitutional law, family law, and also teaches family law practicum with a sitting judge. Moskowitz stated that the most important thing students should learn in law school is how to become professional students. “This includes an increased demand upon students and obligations to serve clients with that sense of professionalism.” Moskowitz said. For those students looking for employment, Professor Moskowitz said the more a student is involved with lawyers and the practice of law, the better they know what it means to be a lawyer. His final advice was to 1L’s saying that they should aim at maintaining a balance in life between work and enjoyment in order not to be overwhelmed.
Besides teaching, Professor Moskowitz enjoys a variety of other interests. He enjoys hiking, rafting, camping, and yoga. He also loves listening to music, especially jazz and classical. He still involves himself with some law cases in Indiana.
Originally from New York, Moskowitz has four children of which three are married. He also has four grandchildren. His oldest daughter is a lawyer who works in IP law. His wife was an attorney and later became a nurse and midwife.
“Some of the things I enjoy most about being a teach is being with students and colleagues. I learn about things myself through research and writing and teach people how to learn. I think teaching people how to learn is the most important part of law school. Once students know how to learn, they can go out and learn anything about the law on their own.” Moskowitz said.

John Bayard is a 2L who can be reached at forum@valpo.edu

“This sounds crazy, but my brain seemed to work a lot better when I was pregnant,” says Peterson while laughing.

Peterson, 30, is a second-year student at Valparaiso Univer­sity School of Law in Indiana. With a successful first year un­der her belt, she had planned to try out for her school’s law journal, but giving birth to her daughter during the write-on period nixed that plan.

She says juggling her law school life with her home life is not as difficult as some may think.

“After 5 p.m., I’m a mom,” Peterson says. “I pretend I’m at work from 8 to 5 in the law school. I don’t study at home, which surprises a lot of my classmates. It’s discipline and a time-management thing, and so far it’s working for me.”

Peterson arrived in the United States in 2002 and earned her undergraduate degree in international busi­ness from Johnson & Wales University in Colorado, where she met her husband, who is also from Zimbabwe.

“When I started interna­tional business, I became very interested in globalization and the behavior of U.S. companies when they manufacture goods in third world countries, and my thesis was about that and sustainable development,” Peterson says. “I became interested in rights of people who were being profited off of by big U.S. companies and felt like those were the people who were being forgotten. I want to push for better working conditions for people like that.”

Peterson said she and her husband look forward to mov­ing back to Zimbabwe within the next decade but not too soon. “If we were to go back to Zimbabwe right now, we wouldn’t be able to get jobs,” she explains. “With the trade embargo against Zimbabwe right now, everything is in shambles, and it’s a difficult place to live in at the moment.”

So Peterson plans to finish law school and gain relevant job experience while her hus­band finishes his work to earn a Ph.D. before moving back to Zimbabwe. She dreams of using her law degree at the national level in her home country to help formulate policy with non­governmental organizations to address human rights issues.

“Back in Zimbabwe I want to help with establishing the rule of law,” Peterson says. “I’d like to work to establish a fair and balanced judiciary system that isn’t biased. Right now people are being murdered in Zimbabwe, and victims’ family members have no legal recourse that is working.” In addition to helping people gain better working conditions and have access to a reliable judicial system, Peterson says she also wants to work with charities to provide meals to thousands of children before their school days begin.

Growing up in Zimbabwe with a father who was a road engineer and a mother who was a nurse, Peterson says she and her five siblings had the “best childhood anyone could’ve ever asked for,” even though there was a lot of unrest in the country.

Peterson says there are still relatively safe places left in Zimbabwe, and she looks forward to having her daughter experience the same school systems in which she flourished.

“People in Zimbabwe have a strong sense of community,” she says. “Neighbors love your kids like their own. My husband and I attended boarding school in Zimbabwe, and the educa­tion I received there is compa­rable to good U.S. schools.”

Peterson says she and her husband are hopeful that Zimbabwe will emerge from its economic collapse a bet­ter country in terms of more opportunities for its people, and that its government will provide the basics for its citizens—such as security.

“I’d like for people to know that I was born at the height of my country’s war for indepen­dence, so things like gunfire and burning villages… I’m familiar with those things,” Peterson says. “Living now in a small American town where it’s safe and kids are running around everywhere—it feels like an alternate universe.”

Peterson says she appreci­ates everything the United States has to offer, including its system of institutions of higher learning and its friendly people.

“I really appreciate this country and its people for expanding my mind and helping me to help my home country,” Peterson says.   •

Hays Burchfield

Hays Burchfield is a third-year law student at the University of Mississippi School of Law.

Do you know a distin­guished law student who would make an interest­ing subject for Spotlight? E-mail suggestions and contact information to studentlawyer@abanet.org (subject line: Spotlight).

88 I STUDENT LAWYER I January 2010

www.abanet.org/lsd I American Bar Association

Mock Congressional Debate

Viet Pham

Guest Writer

Valparaiso University has always considered Martin Luther King (MLK)  a very important and significant figure in American history.  The school continually promotes his values and helps to increase the understanding of the ideologies of Dr. King’s teachings during the week of his birthday.  The week comes to a close with the Mock Congressional Debate which was sponsored by the Black Law Student Association (BLSA), Lambda, Veterans Law Society (VLS) and the Multicultural Law Student Association (MLSA).

This year signified the 12th annual iteration of the MLK Mock Congressional Debate.  The issues that are chosen for the debate have typically been ones of great controversy and current importance.  Following this tradition, the chosen issue for this year’s debate was “Guantanamo Bay 9/11 Detainees – Military Tribunal vs. New York Federal Court – Is Attorney General Eric Holder’s choice to prosecute the alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks in New York Federal Court versus a Military Tribunal the right decision for the United States?”

The debate was chaired by John Bayard and consisted of a five-member team for each side.  The team arguing for the New York Federal Court to have jurisdiction consisted of Shantae Landingham, Sakinda Skinner, Amele Booth, Michael Baumert, and Mark Cargualaf, with alternates Monica Jones and Dana Bolden.  The team arguing on the side for Military Tribunal jurisdiction consisted of Ndeto Mwose, Yjimizia Jones, Cristal Babrera, Marlena Ragland, and Jaime Borcic, with alternates Quandra Speights and Wendy Meija.

The debate began with the team advocating for New York Federal Court jurisdiction.  The group of senators supporting this side, began with a discussion of the shortfalls of the military tribunal and the need for the United States to set an example and to act transparently and try the detainees in federal court.  The senators then advocated how the United States should not pick a law that is convenient to the countries’ needs  because the US is part of the Geneva Convention and it must abide by all the rules that are setforth by the Convention.  Finally, the Senators debated how the founders had beliefs in protecting an individual’s life, liberty and property without the due process of the law and how the country cannot throw aside the US Constitution when it is convenient.

In contrast, the group of senators supporting Military Tribunal jurisdiction began their discussion by reinforcing that the United States is at war, specifically a war on terrorism.  The discussion focused on obtaining swift and fair justice on the crimes against humanity which the terrorists have committed.  Next, the group examined and purported that the detainees should not be given the same rights as US citizens and that a floodgate of litigation for alien rights could be opened if the detainees were given rights to adjudicate in federal courts.  This would lead to a bogging down of the courts and risk of a breach of national security.  By allowing detainees to be tried in federal court, it could lead to a heightened risk of further attacks on the US,  a leak of classified information for the trial, and that a Military Tribunal is better able to control such problems.

All members put forth an exemplary job on the debate and the arguments which they put forth.  When you see the participants, make sure to commend them for a job well done!

Viet is a 2L and can be reached at Viet.Pham@valpo.edu.

New Year, New Perspective on Clients and “Interruptions”

By:  Rich Mitchell

Staff Writer

I always love starting a new year—all the opportunities for resolutions to “fill in the blank.”  We hear that many of the resolutions go by the wayside by March, if not sooner.  The new year has provided me with a new perspective on, of all things, “being” a lawyer.  I share it with the hope that others might seek out the opportunities available to experience what it could mean to “be a lawyer.”

With finals over on December 18, I had the opportunity to return to the small, one lawyer  firm that I work for one day per week during the school year.  During the week preceding the start of the spring semester of law school, I worked almost every day of the week, all day.  I was trying to complete about a dozen Section 341 files (required to be sent to bankruptcy trustees prior to their Section 341 meetings with creditors).  Being in the office all day, I saw how unpredictable the office really is.  I felt as if I couldn’t get anything done.  The phone rings all day long.  Clients come in with various problems and concerns, interrupting my train of thought.  I just could not make headway on the files, which have to be accurate and complete, or the trustee continues the 341 hearing, delaying the client’s discharge or plan confirmation.

By Friday, however, I realized that I had been concerned about paperwork, and had lost perspective on the really important stuff that had gone on during the week.  At lunch on Friday, the office staff and I started talking about what we had done during the week.  We had all engaged in trying to find the time to work on our files, motions, and memos and were frustrated with our inability to complete them as quickly as we knew we could do without all the “interruptions.”  But we had also done other things.  For example, we had reassured new clients, who had called in droves, to consult with the attorney about bankruptcy and/or divorce (or sometimes both).  You could sense the clients relaxing, simply by being encouraged by us that they had made the right decision to call the office, and get their questions answered.  People often call us in times of great distress, and as attorneys, it is a great gift to be able to reduce their stress simply through a smile, a handshake, or an encouraging word on the phone.

We had a boyfriend/girlfriend come into the office.  The boyfriend had been through four attorneys and had gotten nowhere with his soon-to-be ex-wife, who was threatening to take one of their five children and move to Alabama.  Within a few hours of consulting with the attorney, a police report had been filed and a restraining order drafted, prohibiting the ex from taking the child out of the state.  They were thrilled to write the check to the attorney to take on the concern.  As it turned out, the ex had also decided to not make payments on their family home, and it had entered the foreclosure process without his knowledge.  A few calls, an appearance filed in Lake County Circuit on the client’s behalf, and the process was halted.  Talk about helping to reduce the man’s stress.

We had a Hispanic gentleman come in on Wednesday whose house was to be sold at sheriff’s sale on Friday.  On Thursday, the bankruptcy was electronically filed in federal court.  We faxed the case number to the sheriff’s office and on Friday, while houses were sold at the sale, our client’s house was not among them.  Again, we not only reduced the man’s stress, we saved his family’s home, at least for now.

And my favorite story of the week was hearing from two of our clients that their two cars had been repossessed on Thursday night.  The attorney dropped everything, e-filed their Chapter 13, and then had me contact the creditors.  I was amazed that within three hours of filing the Chapter 13, I had one of their cars on a flat bed being delivered to their driveway; the other will be delivered on Monday.

We are becoming lawyers.  After this week, that means something qualitatively different to me.  I quoted Dean Curt Cichowski in another article where he said something to the effect of “that’s what this lawyering thing is all about,” in talking about the importance of the law clinic.  I get it now—this “lawyering thing.”  It is not about paperwork.  While that’s important to get done eventually, the “interruptions” are the essence of why we become lawyers.  We change peoples’ lives.  We are counselors, not only in the legal sense of that word, but actually very much in the psychological sense of it as well.  We reduce stress.  We solve problems for people.  And I can’t describe how good it felt to be a part of all that.  I could feel the gratitude from these clients.  I could sense them relaxing.  And when I called to let the client know his car was on its way back to his driveway, and he said, “Thank you for all your help getting this done today,” I knew that I didn’t care that the 341 files weren’t completed.  That’s for Saturday now.

As we start back with a new semester in a new year, I’m going to approach it with renewed enthusiasm for the work we do here in anticipation of the work we’ll do “out there,” where this “lawyering thing” becomes very real and very human.

Rich is a 2L and can be reached at forum@valpo.edu.

The 15^th annual Valparaiso University School of Law Clinic Benefit will be held on Friday, February 26, 2010, at the Valparaiso University Harre Union Ballroom.  This year’s play adaptation is Our Heritage:  A Musical “Revue”.

The Benefit kicks off with a champagne reception at six in the evening, followed by dinner at seven with the performance to follow.   Tickets to this performance cost $100.00, with 70 percent of each ticket going directly to support the Valpo Law Clinics.  The remaining cost of the ticket price is to pay for the dinner.

This year’s production is directed by Piper Bakrevski, music  direction by Chris Stalbaum, and co-produced by Bruce Berner and Laura Dooley, starring students, staff, alumni, and faculty, including Civil Clinic professor Marcia Gienapp, and will have the usual Benefit adjustments for time and to add some law-related humor.

Valpo Law currently has eight clinics, which are designed to provide free legal services to disadvantaged members of the community.  The Clinics provide services in the following areas:  Civil law, Criminal law, Juvenile law, Sports law, Tax law, Domestic Violence, Mediation and Wrongful Conviction.

There is an additional free performance open to students and staff on Thursday, February 25, 7:30 p.m.  No tickets are required.   Both shows are in the ballroom of the new Harre Union.

Sandy can be reached at Sandy.Tengblad@valpo.edu.