5 comments about King of Clubs: Grow Rich in More Than Money.

1. The lives of every person who reads this book will be enriched regardless of their age!!!!! The book is informative, interesting and entertaining! Great gift for anyone in your life! If flows as you read it and you won't want to put it down! Treat yourself to a wonderful experience!!!!!



2. This book is a wildly self-indulgent extension of every cliche in other people's books. It's truly banal. I agree, however, with the reviewer who said it could be worthwhile "for those who do not read a lot."



3. Miss DeLoach truly got into the head of a truly remarkable man! The book has everything, facts, figures, sad and happy times - all laced with humor. Couldn't put it down!



4. The book was bought for my son-in-law, but I couldn't resist reading it first. I am truly glad that I did as it is sure to improve my skills with dealing with people as it will yours when you read it!



5. Reading this captivating book was a pleasure!!!!! I feel as though I personally know this wonderful man now. SUCH AN AUTHOR to capture him!!!!!

5 comments about Archibald Cox: Conscience Of A Nation.

1. This book is not just Watergate revisited. It spans the amazing career of a model lawyer. The book provides insight into important moments in labor, political and legal history, from Mr. Cox's clerkship with Learned Hand, through his service on Truman's Wage Stabilization Committee, to his role with Comman Cause -- and including, of course, Watergate. The book is extensively researched, and includes numerous interviews with key players in Mr. Cox's career. Mr. Cox is Atticus Finch in government. His work, brought out in this book, is a reminder to lawyers that carrying that JD implies a duty to serve.



2. The legal profession has been sinking ever lower in public opinion polls. Archibald Cox's life and character should serve as an aspirational role model for all lawyers. Cox was a participant in may of the major events of the middle third of the twentieth century, and through quiet integrity and commitment he helped shape the consequences of many of those events. Too often the biographies of quiet men have all the appeal of reading the phone directory, but Professor Gormley brings not only the events, but Cox and his character to life. I read this book as an attorney at mid-career, and it inspired me. We do have heros in the profession. There are those in the profession who find success in achievement rather than acquiring money or exploiting self-promotion. After reading this book, I think that this is a man I admire. To most of the public and to many lawyers, the television sterotype is the legal profession. It is not, but the profession would be improved by each of us learning from great lives. Perhaps as an adjunct to ethics courses and CLE lectures, law schools could include in the first year curriculum a legal biography class and state bar associations could require annually that each attorney read a selected legal biography. This book should be among the first to be read by attorneys, professors and students alike. [Unfortunately, there may be those who would promote the books by or about the hucksters and charlatans as "heros" of the profession].



3. An outstanding insight into the life of Cox, which goes far beyond his Watergate notoriety, yet still provides a wealth of info about Watergate, as well.



4. In a time curiously bereft of public heroes, the life and achievements of Professor Archibald Cox of Harvard University stands in bold relief as a reminder of what a man of singular dedication, an ethic of public service, and a lifetime of professional integrity can do to change the course of history. This wonderful biography by law professor Ken Gormley recounts the life and accomplishments of this extraordinary person, a man who stood face to face in opposition to one of the most popular and powerful Presidents of the 20th century and, to his undying credit, never blinked. It is a riveting tale of man whose allegiance was to the simple notion that our nation is one ruled by law and not by individual personality. It also tells the captivating story of man who spent a lifetime serving the American people, living by his principles, and passing them on so memorably as a law professor at Harvard University.

   Cox appears everywhere in the pantheon of modern American accomplishment during his more than sixty year career. He first clerked for the legendary Supreme Court Justice Learned Hand in the midst of the Depression before embarking on a course as a pioneer in public labor law, soon to be asked to serve the federal executive, first as a Special Assistant to the National Defense Mediation Board, and then with the Solicitor General's office. Finally, shortly after the end of the war, he accepted a teaching position with Harvard Law School, where he was destined to become a leading legal expert in labor law. It was in this capacity that he eventually became an advisor to John F. Kennedy, a Harvard graduate and the junior Senator from Massachusetts.

   When Kennedy won the Presidency in 1960, he appointed Cox the position of Solicitor General, giving Cox the opportunity to argue brilliantly before the Supreme Court as the Government's advocate for civil rights reform. He also worked behind the scenes as a mediator during Harvard's internal student troubles in the late 1960s, trying to mend the huge political, philosophical, and educational issues leading to such dynamic student unrest. Yet all of these accomplishments and lifetime enterprises pale in the face of his later involvement as the Justice Department's Special Prosecutor in that newly created post to independently investigate the troubling issues surrounding the Nixon administrations participation in a wide range of suspect activities.

   As such, he was a key figure in the unraveling of the Watergate scandal as well as the subsequent Congressional investigations and impeachment proceedings against Richard Nixon. Instructed to conform, heal to Nixon's dictates or else, to cease and desist from his pursuit of the White House tapes, Cox quite simply refused to be cowed. Of course, he was then fired in the infamous Saturday Night Massacre, in which both Attorney General and his assistant publically refused to fire Cox and themselves resigned from the Administration. Republican toady, Solicitor General Robert Bork had no such scruples or compunctions, and promptly fired Cox. It was this single event of firing Cox that awoke the Congress and the nation regarding Nixon's viability, and this subsequently changed the political equation that eventually led to Nixon's own resignation in August of 1974.

   This is an entertaining, absorbing, and quite literate book, one that takes a fond and pensive look at that most rare of human individuals, a man guided by his dedication to principles and the rule of law. It is also a wonderful up-close and personal look at life inside the confines of the well-furnished parlors of privilege Cox has habituated all his life, based on birth, wealth, and, of course, his extraordinary ability. It is a rare open and honest look at the realities of how America works, often on the quite undemocratic basis of where one happens to go to college and professional study, upon who one knows, and by how well one can rise to the expectations and rules of conduct prevailing in the power elite. This is a splendid book about a rare and admirable man, and one most people can learn from reading. I highly recommend it.




5. I read this book for my Legal Profession class as a first year law student. I enjoyed the book very much. The details of Cox's life were very interesting in addition to what he was most famous for (Watergate). Cox is an excellent embodiment of ethics and professionalism and is a great person which all lawyers should look to as an example.

5 comments about Broken Contract: A Memoir of Harvard Law School.

1. This book is a compendium of irritating whinings by a naive liberal intent on saving the world. I was very much disappointed. Skip. Or borrow the book from the library.



2. If you want to read the story of a guy who thinks it would really be nifty to do important public service work while still pulling down six figures, this is the book for you. Kahlenberg makes law students like myself who are legitimately dedicated to public interest law look like idiots. From tacky comments about distinguished lawyers he labels "sell-outs" for their choice to move to private work to the hilarious account of his (very sincere, I'm *sure*) questioning an interviewer at Arnold and Porter about whether a liberal would feel comfortable at the firm (like they're going to tell you no) the book is pretty useless. Kahlenberg wants you to think he's really upset that he just tried and tried and couldn't get a public interest job, but let's face it -- he went to Harvard Law. If he was the least bit honest at any time, the book would be worth reading. There's no way Coles read this book before agreeing to write the foreword.



3. Broken Contract is the chronicle of Richard Kahlenberg's struggle to justify his classical liberal ideals with the harsh reality of law school: most entering law students have a desire to use the privilege of an education in the law to help the poor and downtrodden of society, "but upon graduating, the vast majority [scramble] to fill the ranks of the nation's top corporate law firms" (from the front flap). Through the framework of his struggle with these powerful opposing forces, Kahlenberg presents us with a fascinating look at Harvard Law School, its culture and the nature of the law education of the late 1980s. He paints a portrait of everyday life as a law student, scrambling for Law Review positions, summer internships, judicial clerkships and ultimately, for a job after graduation.

   As Kahlenberg searches for a job and dogmatically asks each interviewer about the firm's pro bono work (he is interested in little more), he occasionally comes across as an elitist; his sense of noblesse oblige is mildly nauseating. Throughout the book, Kahlenberg operates on the assumption that class-action lawsuits are morally right, that cases brought by poor people are just, that all big corporations are evil, that people have to sell-out to earn big salaries and that "conservatives" are willing to do anything to guarantee the rights of the rich.

   However, don't let these relatively small negative aspects of the book deter you from reading it, even if you identify yourself as a conservative. His larger point is this: "since each of us struggles daily with good and bad impulses, we might want to restructure our social institutions in order to make it a little easier to do good" (235). This book does not target a certain ideology, except perhaps greed. Kahlenberg does not pull any punches and the targets of his criticisms span the ideological spectrum (although he does let a few more land on the right side of the spectrum).

   Broken Contract rates a full four and a half stars. Broken Contract challenged me to think critically about my motivations for attending law school and broadened my perspective on life in general and on the legal community in particular.




4. This book has some strong points, but they are outweighed, in my opinion, by the negatives.

   First, in terms of subject matter, Kahlenberg's very liberal--despite what he may profess, he seems (to a moderate like me) much more liberal than your average Democrat--slant to absolutely everything about which he writes taints the entire book. Apparently, he seems to think that only liberals can provide useful public service or enhance the nation's government. One might think that, with seven years of formal education, Kahlenberg might realize that things are not so black-and-white, and that people of all ideologies can be (and are) public servants dedicated to helping their fellow citizens.

   When it came to the actual structure of the book, I tired of his endless rants on how HLS can change people. Yes, I understand--and can sympathize--with his point, but I prefer not to be absolutely bombarded with a single idea over and over again without so much as a single additional insight after the first 100 pages. Moreover, detailed descriptions of two or three firm interviews were interesting--fascinating, in fact. But having to read what amounted to the same story (with different firms and different attorneys that eventually all blended together) some 20-30 times was tedious at best.

   Once again, I get his point that all corporate firms are the same, that they are extremely successful at attracting HLS students away from public work, and that they work against progressive change and the common good rather than helping the public. But there has to be a less mind-numbingly dull and long-winded--not to mention pretentious and arrogant--way to communicate the point.

   If you absolutely must read this--as you probably should if you have any intention of going to HLS or any other "name" law school--borrow it from the library, but do not waste your money purchasing the book.




5. This book is, well, strange. The author is obviously bright, and possesses at least some degree of self-awareness. Despite this, it seems to have taken him three years to figure out what should have been obvious in three weeks: namely, that he had no desire to study law or to become a lawyer.

   This passage (pp. 130, 131) is typical:

   "What I did care about - or thought I did - was my third class: Poverty Law.... But if poverty law was the right field to go into, (the professor) never convinced us that it was interesting. He said that poverty lawyers should use arbitrary rules to benefit their clients, exploit the loopholes, because 'the poor do not have resources, all they have are the rules'. But the rules were boring. It was not interesting to know that when a rule says you have ten days to file, you do or do not count the days at both ends. But that was what poverty law entailed: knowing the arcane rules involved in such things as meeting income and the asset requirements of various programs. During a break one day, I heard one student tell another, 'This is as bad as tax'. Maybe we were just painfully naïve, but we still held out the hope that doing good, if not remunerative, could at least be interesting".

   Well, law is concerned largely with "arcane rules". What did he expect?

   Kahlenberg's solution to his dislike of law school was to opt for as many non-legal elective courses as possible. Most of these were taught at the Kennedy School of Government, which he greatly preferred: "Its purpose - to take on the great social and political problems of our time, involving issues such as health care, foreign relations, and poverty - was so much more grand than that of the law school (which is concerned with) a narrow field more akin to accounting" (p. 173). Yet even the Kennedy School is attacked for being insuccifiently theoretical: "the school's emphasis on mechanics and management over vision is a perenial concern" (pp. 173, 174).

   Kahlenberg writes, at considerable length, about the need for Harvard Law graduates to perform "public service": a phrase which he never defines but clearly restricts to working in Washington as a staff member for a powerful Senator or an important Senate committee. He fails to explain why this sort of employment is more relevant or admirable than the private practice of law, of which he writes disparagingly (p.155):

   "By the end of the summer, I had come to believe that most high-priced attorneys did not wear white hats or black hats; they wore no hats at all. They just came to work every day to do jobs that were of little social importance".

   I would respectfully suggest the following: (1) the vast majority of jobs in this world can be argued to have "little social importance" (which in any case is an obviously subjective description); (2) the writing of speeches for some hack politician, or policy papers that will be read by few and acted upon by none, is a job of less "social importance" than the provision of legal services to private clients.

   Although I myself am a lawyer, I freely admit that it's not for everyone. Why did it take Kahlenberg so long to figure out that it was not for him?

   It was only at the tail end of his final year, upon deciding not to take the Bar exam or to accept a job with a law firm, that realization set in: "I wondered whether I had gone off the deep end. Being a press secretary had nothing to do with law whatsoever. Had I just wasted three years of my life and a lot of money? Was law school a big mistake?" (p. 223). Yes, Richard, it was.

No comments about With Grit and by Grace: Breaking Trails in Law and Politics - A Memoir.

No comments about From the Barrio to the Bench.

1 comments about Justice Lewis F. Powell: A Biography.

1. Biographies, especially judicial biographies, are typically centered around gossip, amateur psychology, political "message," or numbing minutiae. Dean Jeffries avoids those vices by using the late Justice Lewis Powell as the backdrop for an expert analysis of the gripping issues of Powell's tenure on the Court: the death penalty, privacy rights, poverty law, criminal jurisprudence, race and affirmative action, the First Amendment, etc. He tackles each of them with artful prose and persuasive logic.
   
   By depicting these developments as a panorama rather than a series of close ups, Dean Jeffries offers the educated reader invaluable insights into issues that still dominate our own times. Through the prism of events, we easily come to appreciate the extraordinary skills, energy, and intellect of Justice Powell himself. (We are also drawn to reflect on how hateful the present system of "confirmation by ordeal" truly is.)
   
   This book is perfect as a gift for lawyers and anyone truly interested in understanding the law as the environment in which social policy dwells.

2 comments about Architect of Justice: Felix S. Cohen and the Founding of American Legal Pluralism.

1. This is a major work of intellectual biography written by an associate professor of law at George Washington University here in Washington, D.C. The subject is a real giant in the field of American jurisprudence (and other areas as well) about whom we hear relatively little these days despite his many lasting accomplishments: Felix S. Cohen (1907-1953). I originally read this book because of Cohen's role as an important legal realist during the 1930"s (e.g., "Transcendental Nonsense and the Functional Approach"). I was pleasantly surprised to discover as I read this fine book that this was but one facet of his multi-dimensional activities and contributions.
   
   Because the book is as rich as its subject, it is impossible to touch upon many points in a short review. The key focus of the author is to discuss Cohen and the development of his concepts of pluralism, group autonomy and group power, and how Cohen saw this dimension of American political (and legal) life as a source of important empirically-based values. The book effectively sketches Cohen's early life (and his relationship to his father Morris R. Cohen, the important CCNY philosopher). There is a helpful discussion of Cohen's first book, "Ethical Systems and Legal Ideas." Out of Columbia law, and not wanting to be a full-time academic, Cohen ended up (of all places) at the Department of the Interior where he remained a number of years. He got involved in Interior's role as trustee and administrator for the American Indians. It was within this context that Cohen worked out many of his key ideas about pluralism and decentralization, and he was deeply involved in the so-called "Indian New Deal" reform efforts. He also wrote the key book on Indian law which is still used today, and worked to get Jewish refugees resettled in Alaska or the Virgin Islands. One of the strengths of the book is the author is very effective in relating how Cohen's activities (such as while at Interior) influenced and shaped the development of his thought.
   
   The author also discusses Cohen's post-Interior period in private practice where he handled a number of important Indian cases and continued to develop his efforts to develop a "conscious ethical criticism of law." He also taught law school and wrote or edited several books, including a basic jurisprudential collection with his father. One of the more interesting areas he worked in was attempting to tie the reliance upon precedent to particular values and their origins. His untimely death at 46 foreclosed what could have been amazing further contributions.
   
   It is helpful to have handy when reading this book Cohen's collected articles and reviews edited by his wife, Lucy Cohen--"The Legal Conscience." There is but one problem I encountered with the book. The author, whose research is comprehensive, devotes a good chunk of the book to Indian related themes--since this is what Cohen spent much of his time being involved with. The detail here, as with the rest of the book, is exhaustive. However, if one is not particularly interested in this topic, it can really become a challenge to keep plowing through the extensive discussion. On the other hand, this is the environment that gave rise to much of Cohen's key contributions, and it is essential to understand this context. An extremely and quite extensive bibliography is included. By any measure, a book worthy of its subject.



2. Tsuk Mitchell's remarkable achievement melds political theory, law, philosophy, and our legal treatment of Native Americans into a wonderfully rich and sensitive intellectual biography of one of the last century's leading legal thinkers who, really quite by accident, also became the creator of modern American Indian law. She skillfully and subtly integrates the deep ideas underlying Cohen's different fields of interest and achievement and his early life influences into a coherent theory of legal pluralism as she analyzes, for the first time, his experiences as a second-generation Jewish immigrant, his education at the hands of leading philosophers and law teachers, his relationship with his father who was one of America's leading philosophers, and what he learned while working at the Department of the Interior during the New Deal.
   
   This book is a terrific and enlightening read on its own. It is also, perhaps, the best account of the philosophy underlying our contemporary legal treatment of Native Americans. More than that, the book provides the reader with an alternative legal vision of communal life in an America characterized by great diversity, a vision that had real currency during the first half of the 20th century until it was eclipsed by individualism as our reigning mode of legal thought and action.
   
   The story of Cohen's striving for justice for all, his successes, and his failures, provide important original insights into the development of modern America. Anybody interested in the way American values of acceptance, tolerance, and community can be integrated into a liberal democratic society will find this book must-reading.
   
   Cohen was a man who deserved a biography, and in Tsuk Mitchell he got the biographer he deserved. The American Historical Association certainly knew what it was doing when it awarded this book its prestigious Littleton-Griswold Prize in 2007.

2 comments about Melvin Belli: King of the Courtroom.

1. Mark Shaw's revelatory tale about Melvin Belli is a page turner and fodder for movie . He was an American original who left an indelible mark on how law is practiced in the USA. Only in America could such a colorful and unorthodox person be produced and Mark Shaw's book paints his indelible portrait.
   
   Leda Sanford



2. Author Mark Shaw has gathered a lifetime of curious incidents and facts about a diverse character and assembled a delightful and informative biography. Regardless of your knowledge or interest in the practice or history of law, you will be captivated by the antics of Melvin Belli and his tremendous accomplishments that changed the American legal scene. From the fight against tobacco companies to the defense of Jack Ruby, from his charitable work to his sexual escapades, from his childhood to his sixth marriage, the man hiding behind the celebrity emerges in a colorful, riotous, and somewhat "larger than life" portrayal.

No comments about The Soft Vengeance of a Freedom Fighter, New Edition.

3 comments about v. Goliath: The Trials of David Boies.

1. Most of pieces of Boies border on idolatry. Donovan's work is special because although she clearly admires Boies and his work, she also points out his faults. The best reading in the book includes her digging behind the scenes to reveal what really happens in trials, settlements, and negotiations. While Boies is obviously one of the top trial lawyers in America, he often gets credit for things which are actually the result of other events. Donovan captures this wonderfully.



2. In this insightful and yeomanly researched book, Karen Donovan paints a vivid picture of a man who has achieved iconic status among America's trial lawyers. Thanks to the access granted the author by David Boies, we get not only a ringside seat for some of the last decade's most high-profile trials, including, of course, the one that put the current occupant of the White House in office, but we're there for pre-trial strategy sessions and post-trial dinners as well. Throughout, Donovan maintains a keen-eyed objectivity and isn't afraid to deflate balloons of bravado when need be. All in all, it's a compelling read.



3. Karen Donovan's book is something of a biography, a Grisham novel, a history book, and a litigation primer all wrapped into one. (As a litigator, I'm actually thinking that some of the strategies related in the book would be helpful for me in court.) Thoroughly engaging and entertaining, Ms. Donovan has a great deal of respect for her subject's talents but is careful not to gloss over his significant flaws.