Judge Terry was presiding over a child custody and support case. The attorneys and the judge began discussing Facebook, and before you know it, the judge and defense counsel became Facebook friends. Big deal, right? Nothing wrong with being friends… There is, however, something wrong with a JUDGE WHO PUBLICLY DISCUSSES HIS VIEW OF THE CASE WITH ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS and an ATTORNEY WHO PUBLICLY KISSES THE ASS OF THE JUDGE, FOR THE JUDGE TO SEE. Seriously, that’s what happened.

During that day at court, the attorneys and Judge were discussing an alleged marital affair. Defense counsel posted something on his Facebook wall asking how to prove it. The Judge then wrote on the lawyer’s wall that he “had two good parents to choose from” and that he “feels that he will be back in court,” meaning, according to the reprimand, that the case would not be settled. Of course, the attorney publicly responded to the Judge’s message: “I have a wise Judge.” Actually, it appears you’re a bunch of bozos. The ex parte facebook communications continued.

The next day, during trial, defense counsel wrote on his wall, “I hope I’m in my last day of trial.” Of course, the judge had to reply, giving a little hint: “You are in your last day of trial.”

This wasn’t like one of those situations where you find yourself in the elevator with your judge. This wasn’t even like being at lunch with your judge. Instead, this was like you and your judge standing on benches across a park from one another, having a conversation with each other via megaphones or loudspeakers. Honestly guys, you must be somewhat intelligent…what the hell were you thinking?

Anyway, the Judge disqualified himself and a new trial will be held. Who friended who is unknown, but really, who cares?

Query: Is it legal or ethically ok to friend an opposing party on Facebook, Myspace, or another social networking site in order to get dirt on them? Does the act of “friending” in and of itself constitute an unauthorized communication?

Tweet This Post

For example, Facebook’s policy is as follows:

“Facebook reserves the right to remove and/or reclaim any username at any time for any reason.”
“If you wish to report that someone’s username infringes your intellectual property rights, please fill out our username infringement form.”

With new social networks being developed on a regular basis (to add to the hundreds or thousands that already exist), social network cybersquatting is likely to gain extensive treatment and attention in the terms of use the networks employ.

Tweet This Post

The GOP isn’t thrilled, to say the least. Justice Obam, err, Sotomayor has shown disfavor in regards to the right to bear arms and to various property rights. She also wrote the 2008 opinion supporting the abolition of a firefighter’s promotion exam since “not enough” minorities qualified for an advancement. I guess Republicans are just upset over Sotomayor’s comments from a 2001 speech, wherein she stated her “hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male [judge] who hasn’t lived that life.” Tell that to George W, who lived it up for years drinking fire water up on snow mountain.

Sotomayor has also vowed to “apply the law,” not to make it up. Let’s see how that goes.

Tweet This Post

Yes, there are other legal blogs out there. Some are good. Some are not so good. Who cares. LegalLunch seeks to be not just a good attorney blog, but the best attorney blog. If we fail, we’ll blame YOU: after all, you could have always told us what legal topics, entertainment news, or what-have-you that you wanted to discuss on our blog.

WHEREFORE, LegalLunch.com respectfully requests that if you want to contribute material, suggest a topic advertise with us, or simply tell us what you love or hate about this legal blog, then contact us.

Tweet This Post