Especially the communication I received yesterday in response to the post I did on the donnybrook Division D judicial race between Hilary Landry and Scott Schlegel via the Telefunken U47 which said:
The victim that is speaking on the commercial for Hilary Landry also made a commercial for Debbie Villio in her 2006 race against Donnie Rowan – same victim, same case, almost the same exact script. Buisson was also Villio’s manager.
This person is speaking of the TeeVee commercial and mailer disseminated by Team Landry featuring Cathy Sheppard Jacob, whom evidently surfaces in every Greg Buisson run judicial campaign to trash one or the two remaining candidates, invariably associated with the District Attorney’s office by local political custom. Ms Jacobs appears to be a paid shill monetizing a messy divorce beginning with the first Debbie Villio campaign for Judge.
That’s well and good, Landry was a distant second in the primary election and taking the low road works or else political candidates wouldn’t do it. That said, while Scott Schlegel plays the part of squeaky clean assistant prosecutor I hear this from a lawyer that whose opinion I trust:
I think Schlegel will be a bad judge for plaintiffs
He may be – there is a Landry Ad running saying how the overwhelming majority of the cases heard in the 24th JDC are civil cases, an area of the law an assistant criminal prosecutor would have little experience. More often than not these criminal type lawyer cats tend to default to some simple minded Heartland Institute talking point and use it as a major part of the heuristics process involved with adjudicating a civil case. What you end up on the other end is something like Versai Management v Clarendon America Insurance Company et al and that is not justice folks.
Regardless Team Landry is pulling out all the stops as the campaign heads into the final stretch. The food fight should be fun to watch.
Sop is fluent in Louisiana while I, on the other hand, know little more than I’ve learned from college football and Hurricane Katrina about the State – barely enough to recognize the name Martin Feldman when I read the Fifth Circuit’s February 19, 2009 Opinion in Versai Management v Clarendon America Insurance Company et al.
Feldman is a Federal District Judge in the Eastern District of Louisiana with a biography so contrary to the Fifth’s reversal in part of his decisions in this care that I felt the need to know “who dat” this judge who made these decisions. Is he the reportedly “Intelligent, Pompous, egotistical, pushy, arrogant, unfair, no empathy for poor people and workers who come before him, his heart is with business” or the scholar:
“… a visiting lecturer at Cambridge University, and an Honorary Master of the Bench of the Inner Temple Inn of Court, London. Judge Feldman is a member of the Advisory Committee of the American Association for the Advancement of Science…”[who]… “was a lecturer in Constitutional Law and war powers at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Public Administration…Princeton University’s Distinguished Visiting Jurist in the James Madison Program of American Ideals and Institutions…and has been a guest lecturer at Amherst College in constitutional interpretation and the philosophy of the Rule of Law”?
Whether he is both or either, Judge Feldman has been a familiar name to the members of the Firth Circuit since at least 1984 – the year the Fifth Circuit reversed his Decision in Louisiana World Exposition Inc v. R Logue because his “order did not dispose of all the matters before the District Court”. What matters more than many times Feldman’s decisions have been appealed since that first year following his appointment to the federal bench is what those decisions that have been reversed suggest about Judge Feldman. Continue reading ““Who Dat” Judge Martin Feldman – the 5th Circuit’s Opinion in Versai v Clarendon”