The Legal Intelligencer Blog

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Wednesday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

The top story this morning is the state Supreme Court ruling that “highly reckless” conduct is an affirmative defense in products liability cases. As reporter Zack Needles writes, it requires defendants to show that a plaintiff’s highly reckless conduct was the sole or superseding cause of the plaintiff’s injuries.

Also above the fold on Page 1, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that attorneys may become mandated reporters of child abuse if one of the recommendations suggested by a task force created in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky and Archdiocese of Philadelphia priest sex-abuse scandals is passed into law.

Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Gina Passarella writes that a federal court refused to disqualify William Pietragallo from representing a defendant in a case in which he had previously contemplated representing the plaintiff.

In more Regional News on Page 3, Zack Needles writes that Spector Gadon & Rosen has started an energy and environmental practice group with the addition of environmental lawyer Kermit L. Rader, who will chair the group.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

In this week’s GC Mid-Atlantic column on Page 5, Julie A. Uebler writes about what employers can do to decrease the risk of employment litigation.

In a Trusts and Estates column on Page 7, Robert H. Louis writes about planning in an uncertain planning environment as we come to the end of 2012.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to email any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Wednesday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

The top story this morning is the state Supreme Court sending the voter ID case back to the Commonwealth Court. As reporter Saranac Hale Spencer writes, challengers to the law won a round yesterday when the justices filed a per curiam order vacating the Commonwealth Court’s decision not to issue a preliminary injunction last month. The state must now prove that nobody will be disenfranchised by the law.

Also above the fold on Page 1, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that complaints about priest sexual abuse claim that Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young assisted the Archdiocese of Philadelphia in efforts to conceal sexual misconduct by its clergy. The firm is not a named defendant in the eight civil lawsuits that were filed.

Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Zack Needles writes that a Connecticut insurer has sued Chartwell Law Offices, seeking a declaratory judgment that it does not have a duty to indemnify the firm against malpractice claims tied to the Bridgeport fire.

In more Regional News on Page 3, a New Jersey firm has been sued over the failed use of an involuntary Chapter 7 petition.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

In this week’s GC Mid-Atlantic column on Page 5, Steven D. Usdin and Nella M. Bloom write about a general counsel’s role in a financially distressed company.

In an E-Discovery column on Page 7, Alice E. Burns writes about using predictive coding as another tool in the arsenal.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

DA Decides to Retry Lynn’s Co-Defendant

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff

The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office has decided to retry James J. Brennan, the former priest who was tried along with Monsignor William J. Lynn in the nation’s first trial of a Catholic Church official on allegations of not using his authority to keep children from harm from sexual abuse by priests.

Though the jury convicted Lynn of endangering the welfare of a child who was sexually abused by former priest Edward V. Avery, the jury was hung on whether Brennan had attempted to rape a teenager and endangered the welfare of that teenager and other youths.

Brennan’s attorney, William Brennan, said that four veteran prosecutors had their best shot and could not make out the charges. William Brennan also said that defending his client, when not tied in with reams of evidence about dozens of other priests accused of sexual abuse, would be easier.

“I should have to fight the fight leveled at my client,” William Brennan said.

Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina, who presided over Lynn’s trial, will not hear James Brennan’s retrial.

“James Brennan used his position as a priest to prey upon and victimize this young man,” District Attorney Seth Williams said in a statement. “It is extremely important that Brennan be held accountable for his crime, not just for his victim but for all victims of sexual abuse.”

Lynn is slated to be sentenced Tuesday.

Amaris Elliott-Engel can be contacted at 215-557-2354 or [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @AmarisTLI.

On Day 8 of Deliberations, Priest Sex-Abuse Trial Jurors Ask About Intent, Conspiracy

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff

As jurors in the Philadelphia priest sex-abuse trial ended their eighth day of deliberations, they asked the trial judge that if endangering the welfare of a child was the result of criminal conspiracy, does that crime have to have been the intent of participants in the conspiracy.

After hearing arguments from both sides’ counsel, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina told them that endangering the welfare of a child is alleged to be the conspiracy between defendant Monsignor William J. Lynn and former priest Edward V. Avery. “The intent does not have to be criminal in nature,” the judge concluded.

Lynn is accused of endangering the welfare of two men who testified they were respectively abused by former priest James J. Brennan, who is maintaining his innocence, or Avery, who pled guilty to the abuse.

Lynn also is accused of conspiring with Avery to endanger the welfare of D.G. and other unnamed youths. Sarmina acquitted Brennan and Lynn of a conspiracy charge levied against both of them regarding M.B.

The Legal is not naming alleged victims.

After Sarmina gave the answer to the jury, Lynn’s defense attorney, Thomas A. Bergstrom, said that he thought telling the jury “the intent does not have to be criminal” would effectively remove the intent element from the jury’s consideration.

Bergstrom’s arguments inspired prosecutor Patrick Blessington to launch into heated criticism of Bergstrom. “I’ve seen better manners in a barnyard,” Blessington said.

Bergstrom retorted, “I’m getting tired of personal attacks on counsel.”

Sarmina did not address the attorneys’ discourse, instead announcing that the jury was ready to go home.

The jury also had asked if the overt act required for a conspiracy could be an act of concealment. Sarmina told them that it could be.

Sharp Exchange Between Lawyers Marks Day Seven of Priest Abuse Trial Deliberations

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff

At the end of the seventh day of jury deliberations in the Philadelphia priest sex-abuse trial, the jury asked for an alleged sex-abuse victim’s two-day testimony to be read back to them, as well as the alleged victim’s mother’s testimony and the interview done by a church investigator with the priest who allegedly abused M.B. The Legal is not naming alleged victims.

Prosecutor Patrick Blessington said “give them what they want,” while the defense attorneys for co-defendants Monsignor William J. Lynn and former priest James J. Brennan said that the jury has to rely on their recollection.

One of Lynn’s defense attorneys, Alan Tauber, said that perhaps the jury would remember that testimony better if the prosecution hadn’t presented two months of “bad acts” or “other acts” evidence, or instances of around 20 priests who are reported to have sexually abused youths as evidence about what Lynn knew regarding sexual abuse by priests.

Blessington retorted that perhaps the jury’s memory would be better if Lynn hadn’t gotten on the stand for “two-and-a-half days of lying.”

Sarmina said that she will tell the jury that they will have to rely on their memory.

The jury already had canonical trial proceedings regarding defendant Brennan’s testimony read back to them, as well as M.B.’s canonical trial testimony.

Brennan’s attorney, William Brennan, said that it seems the jury wants to have all the evidence but the bad acts/other acts evidence read back to them.

The reason that there are 12 jurors, not just one, or two, or three is to have “the meeting of minds … and if they can’t, they hang,” Brennan said.

Lynn is accused of endangering the welfare of two men who testified they were respectively abused by James Brennan, who is maintaining his innocence, or former priest Edward V. Avery, who pled guilty to the abuse.

Lynn also is accused of conspiring with Avery to endanger the welfare of D.G. and other unnamed youths. Sarmina acquitted James Brennan and Lynn of a conspiracy charge levied against both of them regarding M.B.

James Brennan is accused of the attempted rape and endangering the welfare of M.B.

Amaris Elliott-Engel can be contacted at 215-557-2354 or [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @AmarisTLI.

Day 7: Attorneys Argue Over Giving Church Trial Testimony to Jury

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff

When the jury deliberating for the seventh day on the Philadelphia priest sex-abuse trial asked for the canonical trial testimony of alleged victim M.B., defense attorney William Brennan said the testimony should not be given nor read to the jury.

While Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina agreed with Brennan that a hard copy of the canonical testimony cannot be given to the jury under Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 646, Sarmina disagreed that the testimony, while it was not read into evidence to the jury but was admitted into evidence, could not be read to the jury by a court reporter.

The Archdiocese of Philadelphia held a canonical trial regarding the priestly status of defendant James J. Brennan because of M.B.’s allegations of sexual abuse.

William Brennan said that by reading the canonical testimony to the jury “seven days in it gives [M.B.] the chance to reappear, through this beautiful, young court reporter, in this courtroom.”

William Brennan said that he is thinking of this issue as an appellate issue, but Sarmina told him, “Don’t jinx it.”

“It is in evidence,” prosecutor Patrick Blessington argued. “They’re entitled to it.”

Defense lawyer Brennan said that he would not review M.B.’s canonical trial testimony to parse out what might be prejudicial and should be excised out of the concern that he might be boxed in as having given tacit approval of the testimony going to the jury before an appellate court.

The jury had the canonical trial proceedings regarding defendant Brennan’s testimony read back to them for more than two hours Tuesday. M.B.’s canonical trial testimony is set to be read to the jury this afternoon.

William Brennan also expressed impatience with the pace of deliberations, telling the judge that “sometimes you have to say to them in your black robe: ‘Do your job.’”

Monsignor William J. Lynn is accused of endangering the welfare of two men who testified they were respectively abused by James Brennan, who is maintaining his innocence, or former priest Edward V. Avery, who pled guilty to the abuse.

Lynn also is accused of conspiring with Avery to endanger the welfare of D.G. and other unnamed youths. Sarmina acquitted James Brennan and Lynn of a conspiracy charge levied against both of them.

James Brennan is accused of the attempted rape and endangering the welfare of M.B. The Legal is not naming the alleged victims.

Amaris Elliott-Engel can be contacted at 215-557-2354 or [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @AmarisTLI.

 

More Questions, No Verdict in Phila. Priest Sex-Abuse Trial

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff

As jurors in the Philadelphia priest sex-abuse trial undertook a half-day of deliberations, they asked three questions.

They wanted to know if endangering behavior regarding the welfare of children has to be criminal; if a defendant must know if his or her behavior was a crime; and if they could have the testimony of Monsignor Kevin M. Quirk read back to them.

Quirk, a West Virginia judicial vicar who was ordered by a West Virginia judge to comply with a subpoena for his testimony in the sex-abuse trial, was the presiding judge of defendant James Brennan's 2008 canonical trial for allegations that Brennan abused a 14-year-old boy in 1996. Quirk was called to the stand to read into evidence his questioning of Brennan at the canonical trial.

Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina said that endangering behavior does not have to be criminal, but it could be; a defendant does not have to know if his or her behavior was a crime; and that Quirk’s testimony could not be sent back to the jurors under the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure. Then the jury asked for Quirk’s testimony to be read back to them.

While the jury has usually quit for the day by around 4:30 p.m., the read-back of Quirk’s testimony pushed past that time slot.

Monsignor William J. Lynn is accused of endangering the welfare of two men who testified they were respectively abused by Brennan, who is maintaining his innocence, or former priest Edward V. Avery, who pled guilty to the abuse.

Lynn also is accused of conspiring with Avery to endanger the welfare of D.G. and other unnamed youths. Sarmina acquitted Brennan and Lynn of a conspiracy charge levied against both of them.

Brennan is accused of the attempted rape and endangering the welfare of M.B. The Legal is not naming the alleged victims.

Amaris Elliott-Engel can be contacted at 215-557-2354 or [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @AmarisTLI.

Jury Deliberations Continue in Priest Sex-Abuse Case

By Amaris Elliott-Engel
Of the Legal Staff

On the third day of deliberations in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia priest sex-abuse case, the jury asked a series of questions before asking to break for the day around 3:20 p.m.

One of the jurors’ questions was why they must find that one alleged abuse victim and other unnamed minors were endangered, but could find that another alleged abuse victim was the only minor endangered.

The answer is that the statute of limitations applies, but Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge M. Teresa Sarmina, after hearing arguments from prosecutors and from defense counsel, only told the jury that the difference is for legal reasons and that the jury was astute to notice the difference.

Prosecutor Patrick Blessington argued that statute of limitations is a concept that nonlawyers can readily understand, and “I don’t see why you wouldn’t fully inform the jury why.” Not telling them why there is a difference leads to “imagination [replacing] whole facts,” Blessington argued.

Defense attorneys Alan Tauber and Richard Fuschino both argued that it was too late to instruct the jury on statute of limitations.

The case is believed to be the first criminal prosecution in the country of a church official who did not directly sexually abuse a child on charges of causing harm to alleged abuse victims.

Monsignor William J. Lynn is accused of endangering the welfare of two men who testified they were respectively abused by former priest James J. Brennan, who is maintaining his innocence, or former priest Edward V. Avery, who pled guilty to the abuse.

Lynn also is accused of conspiring with Avery to endanger the welfare of D.G. and other unnamed youths. Sarmina acquitted Brennan and Lynn of a conspiracy charge levied against both of them.

Brennan is accused of the attempted rape and endangering the welfare of M.B. The Legal is not naming the alleged victims.

While M.B. is now 30, the prosecution theory is that he and other unnamed youths were endangered as part of a continuing course of conduct.

One of Brennan’s attorneys, William Brennan, said that M.B. is like a “lawn ornament” being brought into the “promised land of ’07,” which is when the endangering the welfare of children statute was changed, by the theory that M.B. and other unnamed youths were harmed as part of a continuing course of conduct.

One of Lynn’s attorneys, Thomas Bergstrom, repeated the argument that they do not think that unnamed and unidentified minors can be endangered, which inspired Blessington to remark that every time Bergstrom “stands up he makes my blood boil” by repeating that argument.

Amaris Elliott-Engel can be contacted at 215-557-2354 or [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @AmarisTLI.

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Monday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

The top story this morning is reporter Zack Needles’ look at what happens when name partners leave small and midsized firms. Maintain internal stability and proper communication are key to moving forward successfully.

Also above the fold on Page 1, reporter Gina Passarella writes that the state Superior Court has ruled a law firm can be bound by a fee agreement a lateral partner made with his former firm. The ruling came in a case in which Keith Erbstein signed an agreement with the Beasley Firm that gave that firm 75 percent of fees in any case Erbstein took with him when he left the firm.

Below the fold on Page 1, Zack Needles writes that a Philadelphia jury has issued a $6.4 million verdict in a wrongful death medical malpractice case.

Also below the fold on Page 1, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that deliberations continued in the priest sex-abuse case.

In more Regional News on Page 3, reporter Saranac Hale Spencer writes that a federal judge deferred to an arbitration panel in the Bear Stearns case.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

On the Law Technology News page, John Edwards writes tips for attorneys on detecting Photoshop fraud.

On the Public Interest page, Mary Anne Lucey writes that Chapter 7 bankruptcy is a powerful legal tool for the poor.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Friday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

The top story this morning is lawyers making closing arguments in the Catholic Archdiocese of Philadelphia priest sex-abuse trial. As reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes, a prosecutor charged that Monsignor William J. Lynn lied to an investigating grand jury and on the stand. The trial is expected to go to jury today.

Also above the fold on Page 1, reporter Gina Passarella writes that Pepper Hamilton has continued its leadership changes by naming a new managing partner. Thomas J. Cole Jr. will be the new MP, effective Jan. 1, 2013, the firm announced Thursday.

Below the fold on Page 1, Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that a Philadelphia jury has awarded $4.2 million for a one-third ownership stake in a granite and marble company with disputed ownership.

In more Regional News on Page 3, Gina Passarella looks at how Pennsylvania firms fared in the Am Law 200 rankings released yesterday. Despite most of the five Pa.-based firms in the second hundred having increases in gross revenue, it was tough sledding to move up the list.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section, including the First Circuit ruling DOMA is unconstitutional.

In a Law Firm Management column on Page 5, Edwin B. Reeser writes about the economic benefits of three different types of lateral hires.

In an Intellectual Property column on Page 7, Lewis R. Clayton writes that trademark owners have gained leverage in keyword ad wars.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.