Home Blog Page 31

There are More Villains than Heroes on The Gifted

0

It is really hard to find any “heroes” on The Gifted. In this fictional world, the United States has enacted harsh anti-mutant laws after a mass fatality incident known as “7-15.” The event was a mutant rights protest that devolved into a riot with thousands killed in Dallas on July 15, 2013. Flash forward to present day where the X-Men are in hiding and the following events are transpiring:

The United States hunts and imprisons mutants based more on their DNA than on their actual crimes with an agency known as Sentinel Services;

The Inner Circle is executing a violent conspiracy to overthrow of the US Government to establish a Mutant Homeland;

A hate group known as the Purifiers call themselves patriots, while marching yelling “You will not replace us,” and engaging in domestic terrorism and armed attacks against mutants; and

The Mutant Underground has gone from a group trying to keep mutants safe to kidnapping and torturing people in order to stop the Inner Circle.

There are no heroes, just those who are committing the least Constitutional violations, crimes, or torts.  

The United States Government

Any agency with the initials “SS” will never be on the right side of history. Arresting people for their race and not because of any actual crimes, is a big jump into tyranny. The theme since the first episode is that Mutants were called dangerous and immediately lost their rights. Laws in this world are designed to protect humans from Mutants, automatically removing any sense of humanity from those being persecuted. 

Mutants arrested wear collars that inflict pain if the mutant attempts to use their powers. There is a good question on how to imprison someone who has super-human abilities, but pain compliance easily invokes issues of torture.

The exact legal arguments are not clearly stated, but there is the undercurrent that Mutants are not human. If that position was taken beyond racism to enacting laws, the Government could argue that Mutants are not “persons” under the 14th Amendment, thus have no legal rights. Provided that human beings and Mutants can have children together, claiming they are two separate species runs into big scientific challenges.

The Government’s treatment of Mutants on its face is race-based discrimination because of the Mutants’ DNA, not because of any actions they have committed. These sorts of laws should not survive strict scrutiny. Moreover, imprisoning Mutants based on race would be a gross violation of the 14th and 5th Amendment Rights to not deprive any of their life without due process of law; a violation of the 4th Amendment warrant requirement for probable cause; a violation of the 6th Amendment right to a trial in any criminal prosecution; and the use of shock collars a violation of the 8th Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment.

The Inner Circle

The Inner Circle’s superpower is proving every negative thing said about them by their enemies right.

Magneto’s influence is heavily seen in the Inner Circle. The Inner Circle had an impressive body count that took a very public increase when one teenage mutant went rogue and killed 37 people. By turning the victims inside out. The Inner Circle was playing a PR game with a forced video confession to expose a discriminatory bank. Unfortunately, that message was totally lost when an angry child soldier put human beings through a blender.

Mass murder aside, the Inner Circle is planning to overthrow the US Government. Every member of that group could be charged with Treason 18 USCS § 2381; Domestic Terrorism 18 USCS § 2331(5); Murder 18 USCS § 1111; Rebellion or Insurrection 18 USCS § 2383; and Enlistment to Serve Against the United States 18 USCS § 2390.

These are not the good guys.

The Purifiers

These guys are REALY not the good guys. The Purifiers are a heartbeat away from chanting with Tiki Torches and wearing white hoods. Ironically, the Purifiers and Inner Circle are committing murder in the name of self-preservation. The Purifiers are racists who attack others, deploy Klan-style tactics to instill fear, and engage in open hostilities against US Citizens because they do not think law enforcement is protecting the human race. The FBI should be hunting these guys down, because they are the monsters of the story.

The Mutant Underground

These are supposed to be the good guys, who have turned from helping people escape oppression to kidnapping and torture. These actions are the definition of “means justify the ends” in order to stop both the Purifiers and Inner Circle. 

The Mutant Underground kidnapped a security expert with physical force, teleportation, and then a getaway car. Prosecuting them for these crimes would test the issue of how teleportation would apply to the definition of kidnapping. The Federal law is broad and includes seizes, confines, inveigles, decoys, abducts, or carries away in the definition. Forcing someone through a teleportation portal would meet the definition of kidnapping as a form of carrying someone away or abduction. See, 18 U.S.C.S. § 1201(a). Physically restraining the detainee and threatening him for compliance would be torture.

With all of these bad acts, who should the audience cheer for? Who isn’t a “bad guy” in this series?

The lesson from The Gifted is how cruelty and discrimination is fundamentally wrong.  Those who are persecuted naturally want to protect themselves from those who will do them harm. This raises the immediate issue of two wrongs do not make a right. Moreover, might does not make right. What this fictional world needs is Professor X, because where everyone is going is down a dark path.

We Made ABA Journal Web 100!

0

The ABA Journal selected The Legal Geeks for the 2018 Web 100. We are deeply honored to be recognized for our blog. This year has been one with amazing memories, with Jessica, Thomas Harper, and I each presenting at different Nerd Nites across the country, with no shortage of movies and TV shows for us to analyze each week.

We proudly organized three mock trials this year, including a competency hearing for Frankenstein’s Creature at San Diego Comic Fest; vindicated Droid Rights at WonderCon; and the Court Martial of Poe Dameron at San Diego Comic Con. We also had amazing panels, including Lawyers vs Kaiju at WonderCon, Judges on Star Wars at SDCC, and Star Wars author Claudia Gray joined us at San Francisco Comic Con.

Many of the lawyers who have participated at our mock trials shared multiple guest posts with us, focusing on Star Wars and Marvel movies.

To borrow from two other esquires, 2018 has been an excellent adventure. Thank you to the ABA Journal, judges, and all of our readers, for making this a year to remember.




















Superman the Movie 40th Anniversary Podcast

0

Superman the Movie opened on December 15, 1978. This film is truly the first superhero movie of the modern era with effects that brought a comic book character to life. Jessica and I sat down to discuss the legal issues in the movie and its legacy on the comic book movies we love today.

 




















Bombed with Lived Turkeys in Cincinnati

0

The classic WKRP in Cincinnati episode “Turkeys Away,” is one of the greatest moments in television history. The radio station had a surprise Thanksgiving promotion that involved a helicopter “setting free” live turkeys from 2,000 feet above the Pinedale Shopping Mall. Unfortunately, the turkeys could not fly.

Dropping Turkeys from a Helicopter is Animal Abuse

There are many ways to prepare turkeys for Thanksgiving dinner. Dropping them from a helicopter is not one of them.

Ohio law states that no person shall needlessly mutilate or kill an animal. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 959.13(A)(1). Dropping a flightless bird from 2,000 feet luckily has not appeared in Ohio case law, but would be the textbook definition of “mutilate.” Reporter Les Nessman described the turkeys hitting the ground like bags of wet cement. There is no question that the turkeys were mutilated by their high velocity impact on pavement and cars.

It was Negligence to Drop Turkeys from a Helicopter 

Station manager Arthur Carlson claimed he thought turkeys could fly. Moreover, he stated his plan “should have worked.” There is a strong argument Carlson was negligent for his plan that resulted in the Pinedale Shopping Mall being bombed with live turkeys.

In order to prove Arthur Carlson was negligent, there first must be a duty; a breach of that duty, and an injury resulting from that breach. Menifee v. Ohio Welding Prods., Inc., 472 N.E.2d 707, 710 (Ohio 1984). The test to determine whether the risk of injury was foreseeable is whether “a reasonably prudent person would have anticipated that an injury was likely to result from the performance or nonperformance of an act.” Id., citations omitted.

Dropping objects out of a helicopter is objectively a dangerous activity that could result in those on the ground being injured. As such, there would be a duty to not drop objects from a helicopter on a parking lot with people. However, Carlson honesty thought turkeys could fly. Was that reasonable?

There is a strong argument that Carlson should have researched whether turkeys could fly, instead of assuming they could. Has anyone seen a flock of turkeys migrate south for the winter? Moreover, since Herb Tarlek purchased the turkeys at a farm, did Carlson think they somehow were kept in pens to avoid flying away?

There is a compelling argument that a reasonably prudent person would not have thrown a second turkey out of a helicopter after seeing the first turkey did not take flight upon release. Even if Carlson had a good faith reasonable belief that turkeys could fly, that belief was no longer reasonable after seeing the first bird in free fall.

Those suffering property damage from turkeys crashing into their cars could recover from Carlson’s negligence, because dropping turkeys out of a helicopter would have been a breach of Carlson’s duty to not drop flightless birds out of a helicopter over a populated area. However, being reasonably prudent would not have made one of the greatest moments in television history.




















Rest in Peace Stan Lee

0

There are very few people who are cultural icons that redefined pop culture. Stan Lee was one such individual who helped inspire imagination and joy for decades. Lee did not do this alone, as other titans such as Jack Kirby, Joe Simon, Steve Ditko, Bill Everett, all were invaluable to creating the pop culture golden age we live in today, especially Jack Kirby.

Stan Lee was a force of nature who represented the best of being a geek. Lee was honored at the first Geekie Awards in 2013, where Lee wowed the crowd with his “Ode to Geeks.” Stan the Man will be greatly missed and his memory will be eternal.




















Could the New Hampshire Bureau for Paranormal Phenomena Just Perform Autopsies?

0

Stan Against Evil is back! The season is off to a strong start as a love letter to The X-Files, Koljack the Night Stalker, and Kaiju movies.

The second episode entitled The Hex Files has Agent Nesbitt of the New Hampshire Bureau for Paranormal Phenomena (NHBPP) performing an autopsy on a demonic victim.

Sheriff Evie asked if they could just go in and perform an autopsy, which raises the issue of who can perform autopsies.

New Hampshire law on performance of autopsies state:

I. If the supervising medical examiner, attorney general, or county attorney deems that an autopsy is necessary, he or she shall direct that one be made. The commissioner of the department of health and human services may, pursuant to RSA 126-A:5, V, request an autopsy of any individual who dies while admitted to, a resident of, or receiving care from New Hampshire hospital, Glencliff home, or any other residential facility operated by the department or a contract service provider.

II. The supervising medical examiner shall have the authority to conduct an autopsy and shall comply with any request by the attorney general, a county attorney, or the commissioner of health and human services to perform an autopsy.

N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 611-B:17.

Agent Nesbitt performed an autopsy without a determination of necessity by the supervising medical examiner, attorney, or county attorney. While Evie is the town sheriff, she does not hold any of the required positions to order an autopsy. While Evie arguably had lawful access to the morgue in her official position, she cannot give permission for an autopsy to be performed. However, Sheriff Evie is in position to ask any of the authorized officials to grant Agent Nesbitt permission to perform an autopsy. Evie could have added that Nesbitt even had her own gloves if the county had budget concerns…




















The Ethical Problems of Changing the name of Nelson & Murdock

0

Season 3 of Daredevil was phenomenal, and easily one of the best seasons of the Marvel Netflix series, or of any show for that matter.

Major spoilers ahead if you have not finished Daredevil season 3! 

Like most viewers who had just finished watching this masterpiece, I began to dissect the ethical issues presented by the protagonists’ plan to partner with Karen Page as they reopen their law firm with the name Nelson Murdock & Page. One of the final scenes of this season reunites Foggy Nelson, Karen Page, and Matt Murdock, as they happily discuss how they triumphed over seemingly insurmountable odds and a near invincible enemy without compromising their core values. It is clear that, despite the trials they have gone through, the battle-weary heroes have grown closer than ever before. In an homage to when he first dreamed up the law firm of Nelson & Murdock, Foggy grabs a napkin and designs a new plaque to memorialize the recreation of their firm. Unlike the original napkin, and in recognition of the struggles and obstacles they have overcome together, this plaque reads, “Nelson Murdock & Page.” This heartfelt moment presents an ethical issue: can a nonlawyer, like Karen, be a partner in a law firm? Karen points this out, and Foggy replies that Karen is “one hell of an investigator.” This, however, does not resolve the problem of whether a lawyer may partner with a nonlawyer, even one that is a skilled private investigator.

Karen pretending to be a lawyer. (All lawyers’ desks have skulls on them).

All lawyers are governed by rules of professional conduct. Foggy and Matt are subject to the New York Rules of Professional Conduct (“NYRPC”) which state, “A lawyer shall not form a partnership with a nonlawyer if any of the activities of the partnership consist of the practice of law.” NYRPC Rule 5.4(b). Rule 5.4 is titled “Professional Independence of a Lawyer” and was instituted to “protect the lawyer’s professional independence of judgment.” [1] The general theory behind subsection (b) is that if a lawyer were permitted to enter into a partnership arrangement with a nonlawyer, the nonlawyer, who is not beholden to the same ethical standards, may negatively impact the lawyer’s representation of clients in order to further the interests of the partnership. Although this rule against nonlawyer ownership has faced opposition in multiple jurisdictions, including New York, it remains in effect. In December 2011 the American Bar Association (ABA) Commission on Ethics 20/20 released for comment a discussion draft proposing a limited form of nonlawyer ownership of law firms.[2] In 2012, the New York State Bar Association House of Delegates responded to this discussion draft reaffirming its opposition at this time to any form of nonlawyer ownership of law firms.[3] Therefore, under the NYRPC Rule 5.4(b) Karen can not partner with Matt and Foggy to form a law firm in New York.

“Sorry, I’m not an avocado”

The dream of Nelson, Murdock, & Page (or Page Murdock & Nelson) is not necessarily over however. There are two ways in which the three could form a partnership, but they are unlikely. First, the three could give up on partnering to form a law firm. NYRPC Rule 5.4(b) only prohibits the partnership of lawyers and nonlawyers when the partnership provides legal services. Matt and Foggy could theoretically sacrifice their careers as attorneys and join Karen as a Private Investigator. Jessica Jones may resent the added competition, but there would be no ethical hurtles. This option is highly unlikely as Foggy and Matt seemed to be looking forward to reviving the glory days of helping the less fortunate in the courtroom and getting paid in chickens.

A slightly more palatable option would involve leaving Hell’s Kitchen, and the entire state of New York for that matter. NYRPC’s Rule 5.4 is based on ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct (“MRPC”) Rule 5.4. Most jurisdictions,[4] including New York, have adopted the MRPC, albeit with some changes. Most changes are relatively small, however Washington, D.C. has made a significant change to Rule 5.4.[5] Washington, D.C.’s Rule 5.4 permits nonlawyers to have an ownership interest in law firms, and has done so for over 20 years.[6] Washington, D.C.’s Rule 5.4 adds a limited exception for firms where the nonlawyer owner provides professional services for the law firm and the following conditions are met:

1) The partnership or organization has as its sole purpose providing legal services to clients;

2) All persons having such managerial authority or holding a financial interest undertake to abide by these Rules of Professional Conduct;

3) The lawyers who have a financial interest or managerial authority in the partnership or organization undertake to be responsible for the nonlawyer participants to the same extent as if nonlawyer participants were lawyers under Rule 5.1; and

4) The foregoing conditions are set forth in writing.[7]

Nelson Murdock and Page would likely be able to meet these conditions. The first requirement is that the nonlawyer with a financial interest in the firm must “perform[] professional services which assist the organization in providing legal services to clients.”[8] Here, Karen would be providing professional investigative services for the firm. The ABA’s Commission on Ethics 20/20 used Washington, D.C. as an example when considering a modification of Rule 5.4. In its discussion draft specifically used “investigators participating in the evaluation of cases and assisting in the evaluation of evidence and development of strategy,” as an example of a professional nonlawyer whose services would be ideally suited for partnership in a law firm. The remaining conditions would likely be easily satisfied as well. They clearly want to start a law practice with its sole purpose providing legal services to clients. Karen will have no problem agreeing to abide by the Rules of Professional Conduct. Matt and Foggy will take responsibility for Karen, and they will have no issue putting this all in writing. The only problem with this option is convincing Matt to leave his beloved Hell’s Kitchen and move to the nation’s capital.

Mr. Murdock goes to Washington.

It is worth noting that forming the firm in Washington, D.C. and keeping an office in Hell’s Kitchen is not an option. This issue was directly treated in a NYSBA Ethics Opinion.[9] In that case a New York attorney sought to either join a Washington, D.C. based firm with a nonlawyer partner or create a subsidiary office in New York for that firm. The Committee concluded that a New York-based lawyer practicing primarily in New York could not be a partner in a Washington, D.C. firm that is partially owned by a nonlawyer. The key factor in the Committee’s reasoning was the location of the majority of the attorney’s legal work. “Occasional litigation in New York” would be permissible, but “if the partnership were created for the very purpose of litigation in New York, establishing it in the District of Columbia would be ineffective to circumvent the New York rules on fee sharing.”[10] Creating a shell firm in Washington, D.C. to circumvent New York’s rules will not work.

Unless the partnership of Nelson Murdock and Page does the majority of its legal work in Washington, D.C. or does not do legal work at all, Matt and Foggy are going to run into ethical trouble if they try to partner with Karen and start a law firm. Until Karen passes the bar, “Nelson Murdock & Page” should probably stay on the napkin.

Only 3 years of school, hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, and a two-day exam away.

[1]          ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 5.4, Comment.

[2]             Jamie S. Gorelick and Michael Traynor, Discussion Paper on Alternative Law Practice Structure, December 2011, https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/ethics_2020/20111202-ethics2020-discussion_draft-alps.authcheckdam.pdf

[3]   http://www.nysba.org/workarea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=26682

[4]   California is the only U.S. jurisdiction which has not adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct as a base for its ethical rules.

[5]   For a full treatment of the differences between jurisdictions, refer to the ABA website, e.g. https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/mrpc_5_4.pdf

[6]   A detailed history of Wasahington, D.C.’s Rules of Professional Conduct may be found here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/dc/narr/DC_NARR_0.HTM

[7]   Washington, D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 5.4(b)

[8]   Id.

[9]   NYSBA Ethics Opinion 1038 (December 16, 2014), http://www.nysba.org/CustomTemplates/Content.aspx?id=53798

[10] Id.