5 comments about Making My Mark: The Story of a Man Who WouldnÆt Stay in His Place.

1. Marvin Arrington's life and the history of the City of Atlanta have been inextricably intertwined for the last six decades. In fact, almost all of the individuals that have shaped Atlanta as it transitioned from a provincial segregated town into an international city have at some point crossed Atlanta's favorite native-born son. Arrington's Making My Mark is an illuminating behind-the-scenes account of the New South's emergence and a frank account of personal triumph against the odds by a ground-breaking Atlanta lawyer.



2. Judge Marvin S. Arrington has been fixture in Atlanta, GA legal and political circles for more than thirty years. I expected his autobiography to be another in a long line of inspiring tales about tough warriors in the AFrican American quest for dignity, respect and inclusion. The title should have been my clue that it is much more. It is a saga of how his extraordinary life mirrors that of his beloved and iconoclastic city. Just as Atlanta rose from its ashes to become an international hub that defies its southern roots, Arrington forged his path from obscurity to a place of honor on the right side of Atlanta history. From the early chapters, where he offers a riveting picture of his early life in the neighborhood fictionalized in Tom Wolfe's Atlanta-based novel, to the later ones, he builds on the theme of refusing to stay in the place unjustly assigned to him by his city, his circumstances and his culture. A virtual who's who in law and politics endorsed this book including Pres. Jimmy Carter, Sen. Sam Nunn, Mayor Shirley Franklin, Ambassador Andrew Young, and Gov. Douglas Wilder. Tom Wolfe also lent his name. This book has been added to my collection of African American biographies. It is written in a narrative style that makes it accessible to a wide range of audiences, informative to multiple disciplines and enjoyable for re-reading over time.



3. This book should be assigned reading for every fifteen year old. The story of Marvin Arrington is proof that poverty and apparent lack of oppuritunity can be overcome.
   
   Martin L. Fierman
   Madison, Ga



4. I first met Marvin Arrington when I was a college senior and editing the Emory Wheel and he a second year law student, though I doubt he remembers that. We had many encounters after that and I had the opportunity to follow quite closely his legal and political career for many years. Yet as close as I felt I knew him, it was not until reading his memoir that I better understand the inner soul of this gentle and committed man. I thanked him for writing it, because as a son of the south and as a white man who had many friends who were Black Georgians, it wasn't until I heard or read the stories Maynard Jackson, Vernon Jordan,
   Andrew Young, and Marvin Arrington told in their personal memoirs that I felt I had understood my own time with them. Whether a reader knows him personally or not, I enthusiastically encourage people to read this well-told narrative of growing up in the Jim Crow and post-Jim Crow south. That Marvin has brought his unique and heartening experiences to the courtroom and has had children follow him into the law is an evolution that could have been expected, but nonetheless still very gratifying.



5. Marvin Arrington has crafted a lucid and accessible narrative that details his experiences growing up in Jim Crow Atlanta. In addition to describing his rise to the presidency of the Atlanta City Council, he offers many anecdotes from his childhood that give an idea of just how painful racism can be through the eyes of a young boy. Throughout, he encourages his readers to learn from his example of hard work, which is fortified by his experience growing up in public housing projects, attending segregated schools, and working a wide variety of jobs. Then, having integrated Emory Law School's full-time division along with his friend (current U.S. District Court Judge) Clarence Cooper in 1965, he carries forth the lessons of his youth to the legal profession. He would later partner with famed civil rights attorney Donald Hollowell to form Arrington & Hollowell, one of the top 10 black law firms in the nation. He is currently a Superior Court Judge in Fulton County, Georgia, having been elected in 2003.
   
   Arrington's book is both the story of one man's personal odyssey through hardship and success, as well as a short history of the city of Atlanta.
   Thanks to his involvement in politics, his book sheds light on other major figues in Atlanta life with whom he had frequent contact, such as Q.V. Williamson, Maynard Jackson, and Andrew Young. Thanks to his wealth of experience, Arrington also gives an impressive insight into the duplicitous nature of city politics, culminating in his loss to Bill Campbell in the 1994 Atlanta mayoral election. In October 2008, Campbell will be completing a stint in federal prison for tax evasion.
   
   The lessons that one can glean from his autobiography are just as relevant today as they were more than four decades ago. Arrington's recent collaboration with Bill Cosby in addressing the myriad problems plaguing urban communities has only helped to buttress his timely message. I agree with other reviewers that this book should be required reading for middle school and high school students thanks to its power and relevance.

No comments about The Memoirs of Chief Justice Earl Warren.

5 comments about Fighting for Dear Life: The Untold Story of Terri Schiavo and What It Means for All of Us.

1. The heinous death of the most famous resident of Florida 's Woodside Hospice certainly leaves me baffled - to say the least. My understanding is that the hospice movement has grown incredibly over the past two decades - largely due to Medicare reimbursement. Eligibility for Medicare hospice services requires certification by two physicians that a patient's terminal illness limits life expectancy to six months - at tops. How on earth was Terri Schiavo ever accepted into a hospice?
   
   From attorney David Gibbs, I have learned that Terri Schiavo was far, far more responsive and interactive than America was led to believe. Yet, her cognitive level should not have determined whether she received food and water! Mr. Gibbs refers to a 2004 statement by Pope John Paul II, which seemed directly related to the immorality of how Terri was treated: "the administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act."



2. This book was fantasically written and a true eye opener of the real facts! I was very saddened of the outcome, but it really makes you wonder...are all of your affairs are in order???



3. I have read comments and reviews elsewhere that say "Fighting for Dear Life" unfairly demonizes Michael Schiavo. I have to wonder if these people actually read this book, as the book shows no more demonization of him than what he clearly brought upon himself.
   
   The justification for Michael's "right to die" case was that Terri wasn't really "there" anymore. Recall, however, that it was Michael who barred press coverage from Terri's room. It was Michael who kept visitors to an absolute minimum, right up to the end. It was Michael who exercised the strictest control over what the American public would see - and not see - of Terri. Why? If Terri was so self-evidently "not there anymore," why would he demand such restrictive coverage of her? Privacy? Dignity? I don't think so...if she was no longer "there," there was neither dignity nor sense of privacy left to violate.
   
   If the accounts in this book are true, the reason for Michael's actions are obvious: Terri actually WAS "there" right up to the end, and Michael fully knew it. If the lawyer's accounts of Terri's capacities are true, letting the press in for unrestricted coverage would have blown Michael's entire case out of the water, and for all I know may have opened him up to all kinds of trouble. Best case scenario, he would have come out as the villain many people have long suspected he is.
   
   So if you've read this book you have a choice to make: disregard this book as a pack of lies written by an ambulance chaser carrying on a vendetta for a bitter, grieving, vengeful family...or decide that Terri Schiavo really was "there" but was forced to die anyway.
   
   Had the accounts contained in this book been made public two years ago, I believe this case would have ended differently.



4. Every single one of us has a terminal body. Some of just have healthier terminal bodies. And some of us--like my newborn son--need substantial assistance to do something as simple as eating.
   
   I don't expect my home state to order the withholding of nutrition to my son. But that is what the state of Florida--or, rather, one unchecked judge in Florida--ordered for someone else who could not feed herself: Terri Schiavo.
   
   David Gibbs represented Terri Schiavo's parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, in the later stages of that tragic event in our nation's history. His account of that event, Fighting for Dear Life, brings to heart and mind again the maddening outcome, which has already seemingly faded so quickly from our nation's conscience. As Gibbs tells it, it is his story of:
   
   "Why I fought for Terri.
   Why I'd do it again.
   And why I'd fight for you too."
   
   Gibbs can't tell us why Terri Schiavo had to die. No human can. But Gibbs does tell us that Ms. Schiavo had minimal cognition; that her parents loved her and wanted nothing more than to care for her; that her husband had broken his marriage vows; that he refused to allow her to see the outside world or to allow the outside world see her; that he did not spend a dime of the medical malpractice judgment on her rehabilitation, despite telling the jury he would do so; that the only evidence of her supposed wish to die was her husband's and his family's hearsay statements, that the judicial system failed her, and that she died a painful, unnecessary death.
   
   Few real life stories have such distinct Good Guys (Gibbs, the Schindlers, Ms. Schiavo herself, Governor Jeb Bush, President Bush, the Florida legislature, and the U.S. Congress) and Bad Guys (Michael Schiavo, George Felos, Judges George Greer and James Whittemore) as this one. If you care about life issues, and on the pro-life side, you will clinch your fists all over again.
   
   Especially appreciated is the final five chapters, which are essentially a written sermon explaining the global importance of what we allowed to happen to Terri Schiavo. One can hope that Ms. Schiavo's story as told in Fighting for Dear Life will revive all of us again to a culture of life.



5. I purchased this book after reading Mark Fuhrman's Silent Witness. The passion which David writes with is profound. I found this book an amazing account of the injustice served on Terri. While I enjoyed reading it I had to take breaks occasionally because it was so intense and disturbing. How could something like this actually happen in the U.S.? I knew our justice system was flawed but I had no idea how much power one person could have and that someone could be killed through judicial homicide. This book will certainly have you thinking.

2 comments about Judge Dave and the Rainbow People.

1. It's not every day that you read a book containing the full text of a consent agreement between parties to a health statute dispute and still find it very enjoyable. It's just as uncommon for a federal appeals court judge to write a book about the time he oversaw the peaceful assembly of thousands of middle-aged hippies in the woods of North Carolina. But that's what Judge Dave and the Rainbow People is about.

   The Rainbow People are not an organization as such. They're just whoever shows up around Independence Day each year at a place on federal land decided the year before. The people who show up are mostly baby boomer ex-hippies trying to relive the Summer of Love. They come by the thousands, get naked, and live in the woods for weeks. Invariably, the Forrest Service comes after them.

   In 1987 the Rainbow People converged on Nantahala Forrest in Western North Carolina. It wasn't long before the State tried to evict them under a sanitation law that was arguably unconstitutional. The case ended up before Judge Dave, who was a circuit court judge at the time.

   The result is an endearing account of how a conservative judge faced 15,000 decadent hippies (and at least one elephant), the ACLU, snarky law clerks, a ticking clock, and his own Senate confirmation to the D.C. Circuit in the background, and still managed to avoid catastrophe by avoiding a ruling on the law. Judge Dave is sincere and admits up front that this was one case where the results, and not the letter of the law, drove his decision. The alternative was a possible showdown between thousands of until-then peaceful gatherers and state troopers. I guess he made use of judicial discretion.

   Judge Dave got to visit the Rainbow camp a couple of times while he assessed the problem and later monitored the implementation of the agreement he brokered between the two sides. These visits account for much of the book and Judge Dave recounts them with a wonderful understated dry wit. "That weekend, July 4th occurred on Saturday as scheduled," he recalls in one part.

   You learn how tolerant Judge Dave is. Not in the modern meaning of the word, which holds that everyone's wonderful, but as originally defined: "to allow without prohibiting" even if one strongly disagrees. You also learn how truly peaceful the Rainbow People are and how this allowed tolerance to work. Finally, you learn that Judge Dave found himself staring at the naked ladies quite a bit!

   I would recommend this book, especially to lawyers, law students, and hippies (quite the niche). The only real critique I have is that at the end of the book, one of the Rainbow leaders shares his memories in 20 pages. I bet this was done to provide some sort of "equal time", but it doesn't add much and is actually a bit distracting. After finishing Judge Dave's hilarious and fair account of the gathering it's odd to go through a flat mini-review of what you just read. But hey, judge for yourself. Happy trails!




2. This book is, as President Teddy Roosevelt would say, DELIGHTFUL.
   For fellow judges, lawyers, and law students, it is a rare look into the judicial decision making process of a federal jusge. Judge Sentelle tells the story (laced with humour) of how he used appropiate judicial restraint and fairness to solve a complex civil case.
   As you follow his actions during the course of this case, you will see this judge exhibits humility, wisdom and common-sense judgment----virtues that all federal and state judges should have.
   Thanks, Your Honor, for an enjoyable and worthwhile book.

4 comments about John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court (Southern Biography Series).

1. John Marshall, our nation's fourth Chief Justice, served from 1801 until 1835. He was appointed by President John Adams in one of the last and most significant acts of his administration.

   Professor Kent Newmyer has written a comprehensive account of the great Chief Justice's career. The account is admirably researched and documented, drawing extensively on a new edition of Marshall's papers. It includes careful analyses of Marshall's leading opinions. Most importantly, Professor Newmyer gives a thoughtful discussion of Justice Marshall's place on the Court and on the importance of his vision of the United States for our history.

   The book includes a good discussion of Marshall's role in the Revolutionary War, as a successful lawyer in Virginia, and as a landowner and extensive land speculator. But most of the book consists of a discussion of Marshall's career on the Court, his opinions, and the manner in which he shaped the Court as an institution.

   While Newmyer admires his subject greatly, I found this a very balanced account. He allows that Justice Marshall did not always meet his own stated goals of separating law from politics and notes how Marshall's activities as a land speculator seemed to play a critical role in several of his leading opinions.

   The discussion begins with Marbury v Madison and its role in the doctrine of judicial review. It continues with a thorough discussion of Marshall's role in the treason trial of Aaron Burr, through a discussion of the great opinions construing the Commerce Clause and Contracts Clause of the Constitution, through the Cherokee Nation opinions that Marshall wrote near the end of his tenure which established the foundation of American Indian Law. (Professor Newmyer considers these decisions Justice Marshall's proudest moment.)

   The book considers Marshall's attitudes towards and opinions dealing with slavery. There is also a discussion of a series of polemical articles Justice Marshall exchanged with critics following the decision in McCollough v Maryland. Marshall's critics feared that he was giving too expansive a power to the National Government as opposed to the States. In fact, at the end of his career, Justice Marshall feared his life work had been overtaken by events with the rise of the democracy, a strong state rights movement, and the Presidency of Andrew Jackson.

   Professor Newmyer sees Justice Marshall as a Burkean conservative in a new world. Marshall interpreted the Constitution broadly, yet flexibility to allow the development of individual, and national commerce and enterprise. Yet he was devoted to institutions and strongly inclined to accept the world as he found it rather than make it over in accordance with abstract principles (as he accused the supporters of the French Revolution of doing.) Newmyer writes:

   Marshall spoke as a Burkean conservative, or as much of one as American circumstances allowed. He was repelled by reductionist abstractions as well as abstract idealims, even when it was couched, as was much of southern constitutionalism in terms of a mythical past. He worked from the 'given', accepted the world as it was, relished 'the disorder of experience" to borrow a phrase from Charles Rosen." (p.351)

   Justice Marshall was not an original thinker, but he took the text of the Constitution, together with the Federalist, and molded it and the Court's interpretive role in a way that is with us today. He remains America's great Chief Justice. There is much for the interested reader to learn and to think through in Professor Newmyer's fine study of Justice Marshall.




2. John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court written by R. Kent Newmyer is a biography about the fourth Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Marshall. This is not just an ordinary biography, but a biography with feeling, deep understanding andcomprehensive knowledge of Marshall.

   This book is, by far, the most extraordinary biography, and paints a portrait of Chief Justice Marshall, the man, with perception and details , at the same time the author does an exhaustive biography of the jurisprudence of the Marshall Court.

   John Marshall, (1801-1835) was appointed to the Supreme Court by John Adams as he was leaving office. A last minute appointment and second cousin to Thomas Jefferson, Marshall served in some of the most formative years that the has ever seen. Marshall wanted to bring the court into the central picture of the government and reigned in the court from the fringes of government, Consolidating the authority of the court making the Supreme Court the final arbitor when it came to constitutional.

   John Marshall was a man equal to Jefferson when it came to the challenges of office and was equally skilled at the crafting law that supported the emerging American market economy. It was Jefferson and Marshall, however who symbolized and personalized the competing constitutional persuasions of the age and brought them into explosive focus. Each had taken a stand on the great foreign and domestic issues of the 1790's; each had conflated those issues into a dispute over the meaning of the Constitution. When fate and ambition made Jefferson president and Marshall chief justice, the institutional stage was set for what is one of the most creative confrontations in American constitutional history. At stake was not just the position of the Supreme Court in American government but the place of law in republican culture.

   Can you imagine being there when Marshall was giving the oath of office to Jefferson... when the new chief justice administered the oath of office to the new president on March 4, 1801. With his hand on the Bible held by Marshall, Jefferson swore to uphold the Constitution, Marshall was sure sure he was about to destroy.

   This book has an engaging narrative and you seem to read the information quickly and with ease, the author's prose is extremely well-written. As for the historical information it is spot-on even the court cases are found on a listing in the back of the book. Marshall was more than a chief justice, he was priciple in the forming a United States. Marshall's institutional accomplishments are found in this impressive study. For a one volume book... this is the most comprehensive... Marshall was the most representative figure in American law. This book is well worth the money ans should be in the library of all who study American History.




3. Maybe I'm getting spoiled with the recent output of historical profiles that have the narrative quality of great fiction, like Caro's LBJ series, Chernow on Hamilton, and McCullough's books on our founding. Given that high bar, Newmyer's history of Marshall is a very difficult read.
   
   This book plods along. When discussing a principle the court dealt with Newmyer often makes it impossible to keep track of what year or even decade he's referring to, making it difficult to put the principles discussed into the proper context, especially political context. I also felt the book was very biased, glorifying his conservative nationalism without really defining why his brand of nationalism should be considered conservative rather than liberal or even non-ideological.
   
   This book would prove helpful in a Constitutional Law class discussing certain principles and their historical development, especially the rise of Corporations, but only with the guidance of a Professor who knows the era and Marshall's court well and only in small doses. I'm a sucker for books about our founding ideals and the history of our framers, but this was torture and with no obligation to finish this book, I finally gave up about ¾ of the way through, which I rarely do.



4. Newmyer does a masterful work with his book `John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court'. This is more that just a standard history of John Marshall. Newmyer focuses on the legal nuances of Marshall's opinions and also the complexity of his mature jurisprudence during the development of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was then and is still today overshadowed more by Marshall than any other Justice. Marshall was the conservative nationalist who envisioned a theory of "Cooperative Federalism" between the States and the Federal Courts. He felt that the Constitution was not a code of laws but a written document that declared itself to be the supreme law of the land. He sought to keep constitutional questions, of a legal nature, the exclusive right of the Supreme Court and not left up to the States and the political parties of the day. This placed him at odds with Jefferson and would result in a decade long battle to make constitutional interpretation the business of lawyers and judges not politicians. Marshall feared localized states representative's potential abuse of power. He considered the Union to be in danger from states interpreting the Constitution with all their associated cultural localisms. Newmyer unfolds Marshall belief that "the states constitute parts of the Union; they are members of one great empire, sometimes sovereign, sometimes subordinate". His vision was to make the court a legal institution guided by legal interpretation and avoid politics. Combining this with fair-minded judges aided by time-tested rules of interpretation, to ascertain the meaning of constitutional language, would resolve every major national or states issue. Marshall's Supreme Court constitutional interpretation monopoly was not to be. Times and doctrines were to change or even evaporate away removing the Court from the center of government and placing it, not ahead, but competing along side the other government branches. Jefferson/Jacksonian democracy would prevail over Marshall's conservatism. However Marshall's stamp on American law would be forever made as well as his help in laying the foundation for the sound establishment of the Constitution.
   
   There is a lot to digest and consider in the book. Newmyer expects readers to start this book with a good base knowledge of the Constitution and other documents like the Judicial Act of 1789 etc. This was one area where I felt the footnotes could have helped and covered better. Newmyer does a great job in weaving Marshall's common sense straight-forward personality into this study. From judicial review down through contracts law, a picture of Marshall emerges. Here is the Federalist Statesman, Common-law Lawyer, Revolutionary Soldier, Lawyer-legislator, Ratifier of the Constitution and Virginia's son. Well worth reading and adding to the history shelf.

No comments about The International Judge: An Introduction to the Men and Women Who Decide the World's Cases.

5 comments about Proceed With Caution: A Diary of the First Year At One Of America's Largest, Most Prestigious Law Firms.

1. The appendix in the back of this book, titled "Starting Salaries for New Associates at the 250 Largest Law Firms in America" explains it all -- it's difficult for the top-performing law students, often saddled with thousands of dollars of student loan debt, to pass up the signing bonuses, six-figure salaries, and tremendous prestige of big-city large-firm practice, especially when the salaries are often triple or quadruple what one could earn in the public service or government law. Keates is somewhat aware of the drawbacks of big firm practice, yet like many given the opportunity, he goes for the "brass ring" anyway. It doesn't take long for Keates to discover that he hates his job -- and this diary details the path by which his disillusionment about the glamour of the law is dispelled. He quickly discovers that big firm practice can be a 24/7 commitment, being on the hook to fickle partners, fickle clients, and fickle judges, all of which can be extremely stressful. Keates discusses the incidence of depression in lawyers, how one in ten lawyers thinks of suicide at least monthly. The solution to Keates' situation is apparent early on -- move on, find a different job in the law, change fields completely, but that would take the courage to give up the security of the huge paycheck, the Porsche 944, the prestige.



2. I would never even consider going to law school after reading this book. The excerpts from the author's diary enable readers to see through the veneer of prestige associated with large-firm law practices and understand what life is really like at a top law firm. For years, I've been hearing that lawyers are often highly dissatisfied with their jobs and lives, despite the high salaries and professional prestige. Until I read this book, though, no one could effectively articulate the specific reasons WHY lawyers tend to be so unhappy (other than the long hours they often work). This book finally fills that void by slowly building the case, chapter by chapter, against life in a large law firm. Through his diary entries, Keates does a fantastic job of describing not only why he is professionally and personally dissatisfied, but also HOW his dissatisfaction affects him over time.



3. This book does a great job of informing people in high school, college, and anyone else thinking about going to law school what practicing law in a prestigious law firm is actually like. The book is an easy read because each chapter begins with an entry from the author's journal, and then focuses on a particular aspect of a large-firm legal practice. The journal entries provide startlingly personal and realistic insights into a top lawyer's lifestyle, while the chapters describe what lawyers really do on a daily basis. The book effectively offers the information that people need in order to make an informed decision about whether to go to law school.



4. An excellent book for lawyers who WANT to be lawyers and effective advocates is "Common Sense Rules of Advocacy for Lawyers," by Keith Evans. Great book for new associates and 3Ls.

   Mr. Evans practiced as a trial lawyer in California for many years after a decade as a barrister in England. He also taught as an adjunct law professor and gave many presentations to American Inns of Court.

   Common Sense Rules of Advocacy for Lawyers is published by TheCapitol.Net, and more information about Evans' book is available on Amazon: search Amazon for ISBN 1587330059

   If you want to be an excellent attorney and an effective advocate, you should buy Common Sense Rules of Advocacy for Lawyers. If you're miserable and want company, buy "Proceed With Caution."




5. I'm investigating careers in the legal field, and I got this from a friend of mine. The book is honestly written and straightforward. However, it must be approached for what it is: a first-job perspective from a 26-27 year old student, fresh out of a grueling 7 or 8 years of law school and academia in general, with no real-world job experience and some highly idealistic preconceptions of how things should work. He gets a job in a top-flight high paying law firm in NYC (apparently, a Hollywoodesque big-time scenario for a lot of young lawyers) and documents his work experiences, interaction with fellow workers, and life in general in an engaging journal-entry style. This is definitely a one-sitting read.
   
   I think it's a valuable read for anyone interested in a law career, especially if interested in working for a firm. It documents one scenario from a junior associate's perspective who worked for one large firm in NYC. From Keates' standpoint, I have come to understand that while the salary and perks might be initially very appealing, the job experience can be horrifying.
   
   I completely disagree with the reviewer who thinks this is a "be-all, end-all" decision-making reference for law school (if reading this book scares you away from practicing law in entirety, maybe you shouldn't be approaching law school in the first place). Keates helped me to think about one possible work scenario out of hundreds that a law degree might make possible, and I'm grateful for the knowledge. If you're a 3rd year law student and your goal is to become a JA and make $90,000 your first year at a big law firm, maybe you should read this.
   
   Also recommended is Susan Estrich's How To Get Into Law School (ISBN 1594480354), which discusses not only the approaches to get into law school but career paths and law practice in general.

2 comments about A Matter of Law: A Memoir of Struggle in the Cause of Equal Rights.

1. When reading about the history of the NAACP's and the Legal Defense Fund's struggle for human rights, we tend to hear more about Thurgood Marshall and not enough about Robert Carter, who was a integral part of the fight. After many years, Robert Carter has shared his perspective with us.
   
   Tales from Carter's childhood and schooling are simply stated. Given the discrimination and hardship with which he grew up, these tales are more aptly labeled, "simply understated. His accomplishments through adversity are clearly laudable, but we don't get all the detail we would hope for. He does discuss a falling out between Marshall and him, and he also discusses grabs for power as Thurgood left. However, we don't get this level of detail on the cases.
   
   Regardless of the level of detail, this is a very informative read. I would recommend that anyone wanting to know more about our continuing struggle with civil rights should read this book.



2. Judge Robert Carter gives a blow by blow account of the legal fronts of the civil rights struggle: the personalities involved, the infighting among them, the battles won, lost, and nearly neglected. Brown v. Board is well-told elsewhere, while other struggles receive overdue attention (e.g., the battle for the NAACP to preserve its member lists from scrutiny by officials striving to break the organization's back).
   
   Carter perceives himself as the uncharismatic technocrat of the struggle, an unheralded leader in a fight who was unceremoniously jettisoned from its core despite his impressive contributions.
   Accordingly, his account is that of a dutiful documentarian, rather than a labor of love, and the writing suffers for a dearth of passion.

3 comments about Shattered: In the Eye of the Storm.

1. This book gives an overall view of what truely happened from the time Nicole and Ron's tragic death occured to the time O.J.'s ridiculous first trial took place. I admire Faye Resnicks courage and strength for standing up for her beautiful friend and for what she believes in. Nicole was a colorful person full of life and love, and here Faye shows reality and honesty in the aftermath of Nicole's death. Many people took advantage of this awful crime to benefit professionally or financially, and here Faye tells it like it is.



2. The title of my review says it all. Resnick is obviously a very strong woman to bite her lip and tell the heartbreaking stories behind her best friend Nicole's marriage/death, as well as the justice sytem's betrayal of American trust with it's handling of OJ. She not only describes it all in great specific detail, but shows the emotion' and feelings she had toward it all, making us feel as if we were right there with her through all of it; that is where the strength of 'Shattered' (and of 'Shattered's' ability to so well expose the untruths and injustices of the whole Nicole/OJ mess) truly lies. I do wish one thing, though-that she could have written more about Ron Goldman and his involvement in all of it because I never have been able to find out much about him. Great book, Ms Resnick!



3. The truth about how the "Dream Team" was able to buy justice via their questionable-indeed, deplorable- tactics. I admire Ms. Resnick a lot because of her courage and willingness to tell the truth about what went on in and behind "The Trial Of The Century". A must-read.

3 comments about Lawyer: A Life Of Counsel And Controversy.

1. This is a remarkable autobiography. I highly recommend it, especially to those considering entering the legal profession.
   Liman is a superb writer who's easy-to-read style makes reading the book both an enjoyable and worthwhile experience. Most importantly, Liman vindicates the legal profession by stressing the important contribution that good lawyers can offer to society. He also provides interesting insight into his role as a defense lawyer in the Michael Milken case and as a key player in the investigations of the Attica Prison riot and the Iran Contra scandal.

   Regards,

   Hans Perl-Matanzo
   (...)




2. Arthur Liman was a tremendous lawyer and citizen of this country. He was one of the more cognitively brilliant lawyers of the past 50 years, and possessed a social conscience of the highest order.

   Unfortunately, something is simply missing in this autobiography. I found it uneven and incomplete. The quality of the book simply doesn't match the quality of the person.




3. As an entering student at Yale Law School, the Liman Foundation gave each and every one of us a hardcover copy of this, Arthur Liman's treacly memoir. It took me until my third year to read it; I missed nothing.

   Liman's career is utterly unworthy of a memoir; it is the sort of career than anyone of my colleagues at Yale could have with very little effort and even less ambition. Liman happily spends his life at the teat of corporate America; his "public service" is two quick resume-building years as an Assistant U.S. Attorney, and then he retreats back to the big-firm partnerhsip track.

   Any interesting experiences in the corporate world are happily ommitted; he mentions anti-semitism briefly when covering his college years at Harvard, and then never mentions it again. His later-career public service is reserved for high-level work on government committees, but after years of amassing vast sums as a corporate lawyer, he never says, "That's enough," and always returns to his million-dollar partnership at his big firm.

   He bellyaches at how much worse big firms are now than they were in the 50s when he was starting out, yet offers no examples of anything he did to help change the oppressive status quo.

   I must admit I am glad I read this miserable little book, if only to discover what kind of lawyer I never want to become.