STRICTLY BY THE NUMBERS:
The distinguished gentleman on the left (Carl Maztal, Esq. ) was admitted to the Bar in 1974. The Sean Connery look-a-like on the right (Ben Daniel, Esq) trained legions of State ASAs before wrapping up his career with the Feds (everyone's entitled to one mistake.) Daniel was admitted to the Bar in 1971.
The Numbers:
They have 81 years of legal experience between them.
There are more judges in the REGJB who were NOT born when these men were sworn into the bar, then were born.
In 1971 The Dow's high was 950 and the low was 790. Federal spending was 210.17 billion and the total national debt was 408.2 billion. The average cost of a new home was $28,300.00. A stamp was .06 cents; gas was .36 cents; a dozen eggs were .53 cents and a gallon of milk was $1.18.
The Colts beat the Cowboys 16-13 in the Super Bowl on January 17, 1971 and Frazier beat Ali in their first meeting in the Garden in NYC in the Fight of the Century. Walt Disney World opened in Orlando, Florida on October 1, and later that month Nixon nominated Lewis Powell and William Rhenquist to the Supreme Court. And Ray Tomlinson sent the first ARP Anet email between host computers ( a few minutes later in his in box he received a solicitation from a Nigerian banker asking to split $16,800,000.00 in unclaimed funds).
The point of all of this is that there is something very valuable in the legal field that Messrs. Maztal and Daniels possess. It's not in any legal books, and you don't get it automatically when the governor calls or when you win an election because you have the right last name.
It's called perspective. Perspective is not experience, it is infinitely more valuable, and you can only get it over time.
See You In Court.
13 comments:
I don't even get a "plug" for the photo?
Even Henny Youngman finally got a "dinner."
To the "Young ASA"... google him.
Special thanks to long time blog reader Mike Catalano for the photo.
Got an email from private counsel over the "holiday" asking for CTS for his client arrested for possessing cannabis. The client only has 19 days in.
I told him that his offer showed no signs of scholarship. Marijuana is illegal. Talk to me at 180.
- Fake Young ASA
Oye. This Blog is going the way of the Broweird Blog with photos around the GJB now. Thank you Michael.
Congrats Rump on another average Sunday, going, 2-3. You are 15-12 on your Sunday picks this year, which is much better than several of the touts I read online.
To the new ASA that posted the other day, you are correct about one thing, the dress of the attorneys around the courthouse. But, if you are a young ASA or PD, making 40k or 42k, right out of law school, and have twice that in loans, then $800 suits are not at the top of your priority list. As for the private attorneys, they would not do well around the civil courthouse, I agree with that.
Big game this weekend Rump as my Noles take the next step toward a BCS with a win over top five Clemson. Then we can put the icing on the cake with a win over the Canes.
did Lurvey and Weisman ever get their pick in for the pool? it seems suspicious now! how many are still in play Rump?
om: Daniel Lurvey
to: HORACE RUMPOLE
date: Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 11:26 AM
subject: RE: PICK
Seahawks please.
Sent from my Windows Phone
from: Kenneth Weisman
to: HORACE RUMPOLE
date: Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 11:51 AM
subject: Re: PICK
signed-by: bellsouth.net
San Francisco
Sent from my iPad
I think I know who the "new" ASA is--the overdressed guy with all the facial hair. He kind of looks like deceased federal judge Roettger. I didn't notice if his shoes were shined though.
I'm loving shumie time
I don't think the response by the Fake Young ASA was that fake. I've had idiotic responses like that from Real ASAs.
(I'm not calling the ASAs idiotic- just the response- and yes there are plenty of good ones)
Any thoughts on today's Arthur Hearing before Judge Colodny on the "FaceBook" homicide case?
The hearing lasted seven hours. The Judge ruled that there was PEPG in the first phase of the hearing.
The Judge then heard additional testimony from several defense witnesses on the issue of Bond. The Judge ruled that she would not grant bond in the case.
On the issue of bond, there was no evidence that the defendant was a flight risk. To the contrary, he called the police and turned himself in.
On the issue of danger to the community, the defendant has lived in South Florida his entire life, and is 30 years old, and has no criminal history of any kind. He had a CWP and was a licensed security guard. Other than the crime alleged, no real evidence to suggest that was otherwise a danger to the community.
On the PEPG, the defense is putting up a self-defense case. They are suggesting that the victim was the aggressor and that she had a history of being the aggressor in the relationship. There is a diary from the deceased that gives credence to that argument. There is video of the crime from a security video inside the townhouse condo. Tough case for the defense here.
Query: The defense attorney suggested to the Judge that an appropriate bond would be "a $150,000 Corporate Surety Bond".
I thought that corporate surety bonds only existed in Federal Court? Can someone provide some insight into that?
I pre-dated Ben at the SAO (a proud graduate of Camp Scola) but he came in the year after our class and was a great source of inspiration. Quite simply, he is a Mensch!
Work on your spelling, boys: Carl Masztal (with an "s") was a classmate of mine (in the night school at UM). Ben Daniel (no "s") was a furriner from Alabama when he began in the SAO. Both great guys; the tribute (other than the spelling of their names) was spot on.
Carl Masztal is the finest lawyer to walk the Justice building. If you're lucky; watch, listen, learn.
Post a Comment