Professor Bainbridge...on law, politics, religion, culture & food

This guy makes my skin crawl, a class warfare proponent, windbag, and hypocrite.  I’d be interested to see a run-down of his charitable donations, as well.

“And we’ve developed a whole new set of ideas about what we ought to do about poverty”

What exactly is this supposed to mean?

How do they know he took no pro-bono work?  I don’t report my pro bono work to anyone, despite the fact that I do some every year.  I also don’t report all my charitable donations. 

I like Edwards, although I’d prefer someone with more experience.  Bush,Jr. had little experience, and he’s been a disaster.

I think Biden’s the guy this time around.

If you don’t think Edwards would do a good job, then which other presidential hopeful would be better suited to alleviating the problem of American poverty?

I am an English-American humorist and broadcaster who lives in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, along with John Edwards. In response to his announcement to run, I have set up watch9.blospot.com, to keep a friendly but gently irreverent eye on his Campaign. This is the first post:

“England has David Cameron and Notting Hill. Here in America, we have John Edwards and Chapel Hill - currently my home town in North Carolina.

Both politicians affect a concern for the less fortunate. David talks of Compassionate Conservatism; John of Two Americas - the one rich, the other poor.

John Edwards just announced his candidacy for the Democratic Presidential Nomination in 2008. He did so from the Lower Ninth Ward of New Orleans, the area worst affected by Hurricane Katrina. He tells all and sundry that this is reflective of his genuine concern for the poor in society.

However, what might be more reflective is where he has situated his new Campaign Headquarters: a suburban village in Chapel Hill, which I have lovingly christened the Upper Ninth. As in the houses you can buy there reach into the Upper $900K’s; or the average income is in the Upper Ninth percentile of all Americans…

The HQ itself occupies the upper floor of what can only be described as a luxurious faux rendition of the sort of Mediterranean villa you might find in the smarter parts of Palm Beach, Florida.

The moral, I guess, is: beware politicians who affect concern for an issue, but then have a lifestyle that belies that affected concern.

We have an abundance of that in Chapel Hill, where the ‘progressives’ tend to be what we call Merlot Democrats. There used to be an equivalent in England - the Glenda Jackson, Hampstead set of Champagne Socialists. Have they been overtaken by the Cameron, Notting Hill set of Beaujolais Tories?”

Geoff Gilson, Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Washington Times search:

Your search - “During his career of allegedly championing the helpless, he took no pro bono cases.” - did not match any documents.

Clarification please?

Never mind. I tracked it down.

Using the word “report” for what the Washington Times has done is a bit misleading. What they have done is take a single line from a New York Times story and improve it.

What the Washington Times “reports” (in a 2004 unsigned editorial): “During his career of allegedly championing the helpless, he took no pro bono cases.”

What the New York Times actually wrote:But Mr. Edwards handled no notable pro bono cases, the typical vehicle for lawyers who want to have a larger impact.  (emphasis added)

So here’s my question: Do litigators typically take “notable” pro bono cases? Or are they normally the province of criminal defense attorneys and constitutional law types?

"What the Washington Times “reports” (in a 2004 unsigned editorial): “During his career of allegedly championing the helpless, he took no pro bono cases.”

What the New York Times actually wrote:But Mr. Edwards handled no notable pro bono cases, the typical vehicle for lawyers who want to have a larger impact. (emphasis added)”

In other words, the Washington Times lied. What a shock.

Why do you need to look at his pro-bono record?

all you need to know is look at his brief senate voting record

- He co-sponsored a huge increase in H-1b visas, which gave a death sentence to tech as a path of upward mobility for Americans

- He voted for benefits to illegal aliens, who lower the wages of america’s poor

Then, in other voted

- He voted for the Iraq war

- He voted for the patriot act

The reason to take pro bono cases is not to “have an impact,” but to help people who cant’ afford a lawyer.  These are usually, but not always, small cases and not “notable.” For example, this year I helped a family get some creditors off their back and negotiated a settlement for them that they could pay and the creditors accept.  It took about 5 hours.  I also helped a young married woman (who’s husband was in the US Army in Iraq) fight unfounded criminal charges and got the charges dropped.  It took about 10 hours.  I am certain Edwards had his share of helping out people with legal problems without fees.  Almost all lawyers do, and all trial lawyers I know do quite a bit of it.  It’s not headline grabbing, but it’s part of our responsibility.  How much pro bono do law professors do each year?  Does blogging count?

Edwards is smart, decent, and dedicated to the right things this country needs.  That said, he’s not my first or second choice for President.  He sure would be an improvement over what we have now, however.

Just a thought on the pro bono issue… civil litigators such as Edwards typically require NO money up front from their clients (who frequently couldn’t pay anyway), cover investigation fees and other other expenses, and are only compensated (at a rate of about 30%) when they win a judgment against a defendant.  Any time Edwards lost a case, he also lost a bunch of time and money.

Others have pointed out the fact that you are relying on a quote that is contrary to the fact.  I know that “blogging” isn’t journalism and it is apparent that you don’t care for Edwards, but don’t you think that maybe you should at least do a teeny tiny bit of research before spouting off?

But, setting that aside, the “no pro bono” charge (even if true) is a crock.  Edwards worked on a contingency basis representing people who could not afford to pay lawyers by the hour.  If he lost the case, he still had to pay the costs ahd he was not reimbursed for his time.  He had a number of large med mal verdicts, but working up a med mal case easily costs $250K or more.  So if he lost the case, he had to pay that out of his own pocket. 

Compare this to the typical corporate lawyer at a large firm who pulls down several hundred K a year and then does “pro bono” by volunteering 10 or 20 hours to help the local symphony with some lease revisions or other such “pro bono” work.

Finally, if you had done the slightest bit of research - rather than just regurgitating the first quote that supported your preconceived notions - you would see that Edwards has worked with the Southern Poverty Law Center which - without a doube - does work that is for the good of the public.

I seem to recall seeing some pictures of your new Porsche in your old blog.  What did that set you back - 60 or 80 grand?

I guess you could have bought a very decent Toyota and given 50 grand to provide food, shelter and clothing for a couple of familes for a year.  You know - someoe worthy - not just some “homeless” bum.  Maybe someone who has cancer and can’t work and can’t feed their kids.

But, please do go on and tell us more about the pro bono shortcomings of other people.

How many pro bono cases have you handled prof?

r78: I have no objection to Edwards being rich. Nor did I say that he needs to sell all his worldly goods and give them to the poor. But he has a professional obligation to undertake pro bono work and no source I found indicates he did no significant pro bono work.

John: When I was in practice, I “tithed” by devoting 10% of my time to pro bono work. Since becoming a professor, I’ve let my bar membership lapse, so I can no longer practice law whether for fee or pro bono. Instead, I do volunteer work for my church.

tde: Working with the Southern Povery Law Center may be commendable, but Edwards still had a personal obligation to provide legal services for those who cannot afford it.

Bring those goalposts right back here, Prof. B.

In your original post, you re[eated a flat-out assertion:"During his career of allegedly championing the helpless, he took no pro bono cases.”

Now you’re hedging by saying that “no source I found indicates he did...significant pro bono work.”

Your inability to find a source is not a reliable indication of whether Mr. Edwards has lived up to the ideals of the North Carolina bar.

You don’t happen to teach Evidence, do you?

Put in the words of a more well-known observer: “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

exactly right Mr. Quaker.  “no source I found indicates he did *significant* pro bono work.”

There is no source to find whether a lawyer does any pro bono work.  Where could we look to find that the professor gave 10% of his time to pro bono work?  How would we know if it was “significant” work?  This is a crazy issue to hammer Edwards with.  It’s beneath Professor Bainbridge to keep it going. 

Edwards either has the right ideas, temperment, intelligence and background to be POTUS of he does not.  How much pro bono work he does is not a concern of mine. (although I assume he does more than his share).

I do wish someone would let us know exactly what John Edwards is talking about by making an issue of poverty.  Is it “Great Society” or is it “Points of Light?” Neither goes over well with the voters, the first because it means raising taxes and the latter because it comes off as nagging.