Public Legal Services in Times of Distress

While the nation is not (yet?) in an economic depression, our “worsening recession” has catastrophically affected thousands of area families across the social spectrum. For those who were desperately poor a year ago, not much has changed except perhaps for having even less reason to hope — dreams of government bailouts are duly noted. Joining the ranks of the forlorn are middle-class types who are facing foreclosures of their homes, job losses, and attendant legal problems. (Economic distress begets a host of family-related issues, to take just one example). For both the old and the newly poor, to use that term loosely, one of their many problems is how to confront complicated legal problems when they cannot afford legal counsel. In sum, this is a time of increasing demand for legal services by the very people who are least able to afford it. So what, if anything, is being done about it?

It is a point of pride for me to be involved in two institutions that are well aware of these gaps and are doing what they can with limited resources to assist: Marquette Law School and the Legal Aid Society of Milwaukee. Both the Law School and the Legal Aid Society confronted these issues long before the current downturn. Moreover, their focus has not been on criminal representation, important as it is, but on the unmet needs of indigents faced with a raft of traditionally civil legal problems. My purpose is to familiarize those who may not be aware of these efforts as well as to underscore the affinity between these institutions.

Continue ReadingPublic Legal Services in Times of Distress

Halloween Frights

It’s Halloween, so children have dreams of scaring adults, and adults have nightmares about other adults harming children. Lawmakers in Missouri this year have been concerned about a particular kind of harm: sexual offenses against children. They passed a state law that prohibited convicted sexual offenders from having any “Halloween-related contact with children,” and required the offenders to remain at their homes on Halloween night between the trick-or-treat hours of 5 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. unless they have “just cause” for leaving. The law did not define either “just cause” or “Halloween-related contact.” The law also required sexual offenders to turn off any porch lights and to post signs stating “no candy or treats at this residence.”

On Monday a federal judge issued an order blocking most parts of the statute as unclear, leaving in place only the provisions requiring that porch lights be extinguished and that there be a sign announcing that no candy would be given out at the offenders’ residences. Opponents of the law had argued that it was unclear; for example, did it prohibit contact between the sexual offenders and their own children on Halloween even if such contact would not be prohibited on other days? Would a convicted sexual offender have to avoid the decoration section of stores if children were there picking out their pumpkins? Opponents also argued that the law was an unfair double punishment for a crime for which a sentence had already been served.

Did the court make the right decision? I would say yes.

Continue ReadingHalloween Frights

Love, Loss, and Palimony

Today, Law.com reports on a New Jersey appellate court’s decision in Bayne v. Johnson, which involved a palimony claim by a woman who had been a party in a bizarre triangular relationship for almost twenty years.  According to the article, Fiona Bayne, then a 25-year-old flight attendant with British Airways, began a romance with 41-year-old Earl Johnson in 1981. Earl Johnson was married at that time to Carolyn Johnson, a wealthy 61-year-old woman with a string of six failed marriages.  (Earl had three previous marriages when he married Carolyn.)  The marriage was reportedly one of convenience entered into by Carolyn in 1978 so that her three estranged children would not be able to take control of her financial affairs.  As the beneficiary of a trust valued at $11 million, Carolyn had plenty to lose financially if her children had her declared incompetent and took over control of her money as she feared.  Although the couple reportedly agreed to pursue separate lives, Carolyn supported Earl in a lavish lifestyle through the years.

Bayne, who was living in an apartment in the Bahamas provided by Earl (and paid for with his wife’s money), did not know about Earl’s marriage for the first few years of the relationship.  Once she found out, however, she remained in the relationship.  Bayne, Earl, and Carolyn moved to various locations to pursue Earl’s business ventures with Carolyn bankrolling both the business ventures and the lavish lifestyle enjoyed by the three.  

Continue ReadingLove, Loss, and Palimony