Justinians Honor Professor Blinka

rsz_danblinkaLast weekend, together with a number of colleagues (including Professor Emeritus James D. Ghiardi and Professors Irene Calboli and Thomas J. Hammer), I attended the Justinian Society’s annual Columbus Day dinner. The society consists primarily of Italian-American lawyers and their families and meets at the Third Ward’s Italian Community Center (which, former Milwaukee County Circuit Court Chief Judge Patrick T. Sheedy, L’48, once remarked, might well have been the “Irish Community Center,” if it had not been for the Lady Elgin disaster in 1860). The evening included the Justinian Society’s honoring our colleague, Professor Daniel D. Blinka, with its annual “Jurist of the Year Award.” The award was presented by Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge John J. DiMotto, with citations also presented by Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson and current Milwaukee County Circuit Court Chief Judge Jeffrey A. Kremers. One who does not know Prof. Blinka can get a sense, from this outline of Judge DiMotto’s remarks, of the remarkable way that Prof. Blinka devotes himself to teaching, scholarship, and service (see also this article from a previous alumni magazine). It was a privilege to be at the event, as well as to be Prof. Blinka’s colleague.

Continue ReadingJustinians Honor Professor Blinka

Law School Hosts Regional Writing Conference

attachment.ashx (29)This weekend, from Friday evening through Saturday, the Law School hosted the Central Region Legal Writing Conference, welcoming more than 100 attendees, not only from the central United States but from all over the country.  The theme was “Climate Change:  Alternative Sources of Energy in Legal Writing,” and those who attended seemed energized by the interesting speakers and lively discussion among faculty who teach research and writing skills.

Professor Alison Julien took the lead in organizing this conference, and several participants (including Mark Wojcik at the Legal Writing Prof Blog) remarked upon how well the event was organized and run.  The biggest testament to its success, I think, is that conference participants have encouraged Marquette to serve as the host school again.

The conference featured a diverse range of interesting topics, and though I was unable to attend every session, the six I attended are representative:  Collaboration in Teaching and Scholarship; Update on Interdisciplinary Skills Scholarship (presented by our visiting Boden Professor of Legal Writing, Michael Smith); The Six Things You Can Do in a Contract; Assigning Clients in Persuasive Writing Assignments; Using Literature to Teach Theme Development in Persuasive Writing, and How to Identify and Counter Logical Fallacies (presented by Prof. Melissa Greipp).  The sessions were informative and thought-provoking, and I left the conference thinking of ways I can improve my teaching and engage in scholarship.

Many thanks to everyone who made the event a success, including, especially, Dean Kearney, Prof. Julien, Sharon Hill, Beverly Franklin, Carol Dufek, and many student volunteers.

Continue ReadingLaw School Hosts Regional Writing Conference

ACS Presentation on 2008-09 Supreme Court Opinions

imagesWith the beginning of the 2009-2010 term of the Supreme Court, the Marquette Chapter of American Constitution Society for Law and Public Policy (ACS) spent a lunch-hour discussing some of the more interesting cases of the past 2008-2009 term. Leading the lunch discussion were Marquette professors Blinka, McChrystal, and Secunda.

Professor Blinka started the lunch discussion with Arizona v. Gant, a 5-to-4 decision written by Justice Stevens and joined by Justices Scalia, Souter, Thomas, and Ginsburg (an odd confederation to say the least).  In Gant, the Court limited the scope of “search incident to arrest.”  The Court held that while police can conduct a warrantless vehicle search “incident to an arrest,” police can only search without a warrant and without consent if the arrestee is within reaching distance of the vehicle or if the officers have reasonable belief that “evidence of the offense of arrest might be found in the vehicle.” Arizona v. Gant 556 U. S. ____, 2 (2009).

Continue ReadingACS Presentation on 2008-09 Supreme Court Opinions