President’s Message

The CatchlineBULLETIN OF THE ASSOCIATION OF REPORTERS OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS

– 1 –

Fall Executive Board Meeting

(Continued on page 2)

VOLUME XXXII, NO. 1 APRIL 2013

CONTENTS

President’s Message ......................................................... 1Fall Executive Board Meeting Recap............................ 1-2Communications Committee Report ................................ 2Education Committee Report ........................................... 3The Kay Lind Obituary .................................................... 3The Reporter as Defense Contractor ................................ 3Touring the U.K. Supreme Court Building .................. 4-5Washington, DC Visitor Attractions ........................... 6-10

Page

I am greatly looking forward to the meeting here in DCthis summer and am particularly excited about showing ARJDmembers around my city! The planning for DC is comingtogether and I am working hard to make this a memorableannual meeting. We should have an exciting educationalprogram for you, and I am working closely with Lexis, ThomsonReuters, and Loislaw planning some fun outings for our group. Ihope to see you in DC from July 31 through August 5!

The Executive Board’s meeting in November was very fruit-ful. The Board voted in favor of changing the annual meetingschedule to Wednesday through Sunday beginning with theDenver meeting in 2014. This decision was reached followingthe results of a survey conducted last fall among ARJD memberswith respect to the length of our annual meeting: 22 membersvoted in favor of changing the annual meeting format to Wednes-day through Sunday; 9 others voted to keep our traditionalschedule; and one voter abstained. This change will not affectthe ARJD’s hotel selection choices for future meetings, includ-ing the 2014 meeting in Denver. The Board selected the DenverHyatt Regency Hotel for that meeting and Bill Hooks negotiateda contract with them. My thanks to Gary Spivey for conductinga wonderfully thorough site inspection in Denver and to Billfor all his hard work securing the contract.

As part of the contract negotiations for the hotel in Denver,the ARJD was required to obtain meeting insurance for the firsttime. Bill and Susan Williams worked together to negotiate aninsurance contract for our annual meetings, beginning with ourmeeting here in DC. The Board believes that the small costassociated with insurance is more than worth it to protect boththe ARJD and individual members from liability issues. Mythanks to Bill and Susan for their great work on this.

Many of you have heard the sad news that Henry Lind’swife Kay passed away February 22 at the age of 95 fromAlzheimer’s disease. See the separate article in this issue of TheCatchline. We offer our deepest condolences to the Lind family.I am hopeful that Henry Lind, the ARJD’s founder, may be ableto attend the annual meeting this year. It would be a wonderfulopportunity for our newer members to meet our “foundingfather.”

The next Executive Board meeting is scheduled for April 5 atthe US Supreme Court and all members are welcome to attend. Ihope to see some of you there and look forward to seeing the restof you here this summer!

—LEAH A. WALKER

ARJD President

The Executive Board met on Friday, November 16, 2012,in the Natalie Cornell Rehnquist Dining Room at the UnitedStates Supreme Court. Among those present were LeahWalker (ARJD President and Chair of the Education andAnnual Meeting Committees), Bill Hooks (Vice President),Susan Williams (Secretary and External Outreach Com-mittee Chair), Dan Anselmo (Past President), Frank Wagner(Communications Committee Chair), Chris Fallon, WilmaGrant, Michael Slayton, Leo Phenicie, and François Boivin(by telephone conference). Preliminarily, the Boardapproved the meeting’s agenda and (with a minor revision)the minutes of the Annual Meeting in Chicago. The Boardthen considered and approved the reports of the Com-mittee Chairs.

Leah Walker presented the report of Treasurer KevinLoftus for the period of July through November, 2012,which included the Annual Meeting. Leah noted thatexpenses exceeded income for that period and assertedthat, because breakfast was the largest expense in Chicago,a primary concern in selecting hotels for future annual meet-

ings should be ensuring the inclusion of breakfast in theservices the hotels provide. Leah also remarked on past-Treasurer Tim Fuller’s assessment that the president shouldassume a base cost of $5,000 for every annual meeting,excluding costs for audio-visual equipment and taxes. Ageneral discussion of ways to reduce costs of speakers andaudio/visual equipment followed.

The Catchline April 2013

– 2 –

Fall Board Meeting Recap (Contd. from Pg. 1) Communications Committee

Next, Susan Williams reported that the External Out-reach Committee could use additional members. The dis-cussion then moved to the feasibility of a blog to facilitatethe exchange of ideas with non-ARJD groups and indi-viduals and to determine the value of the ARJD’s knowl-edge base. This will be important going forward if wewant to expand attendance at the annual meetings. Alsoconsidered was the possibility of creating an auxiliary mem-bership status to increase revenue, which would includeprivate companies. There was some concern, however, thatthis could conflict with what the bylaws define as mem-bership. Another avenue to increase revenue would be toencourage attendance from more of the Canadian prov-inces and apply special fees for people who want to attendonly the educational component of the meetings.

Leah then informed the Board that Geri Cepeda (Guam)has volunteered to serve on the Education Committee andmoved on to a discussion of potential speakers and pro-grams for the Washington, DC, meeting this summer.Progress on these matters is more fully discussed in theEducation Committee Report in this issue of The Catchline.Frank Wagner then presented the CommunicationsCommittee’s Report. Based on concerns expressed byFrançois that the ARJD Directory included non-ARJDmembers, or members who were no longer active, the Boardtook up a discussion about how to efficiently maintain theDirectory, how often it should be updated, and what publicand private information should be included. It also acceptedCliff Allen’s kind offer to continue to maintain the Direc-tory. Directory matters are more fully discussed in theCommunications Committee story set forth in this issue.

Following this, Bill Hooks stated that the membershipsurvey conducted by the Board revealed a preference forshortening annual meetings, which in the future would be-gin on Wednesday and conclude on Sunday morning. Ac-cording to Bill, our proposal to the Denver hotels for the2014 meeting was for five nights, but our consultant as-sures us that changing to four nights will not affect theterms of any contract we enter. It was therefore agreedthat the annual meeting schedule would be changed. Billalso noted that, based on Gary Spivey’s site visits, the listof potential hotels for the Denver meeting should be re-duced to four: the Downtown Denver Magnolia Hotel, theHyatt Regency Denver, the Westin Denver Downtown, andthe Sheraton Denver Downtown Hotel. The Board elimi-nated both the Magnolia and the Sheraton as ultimatelyunsuitable for our group, as well as the Westin, which raisedconcerns due to high food and beverage minimums. Thus,the Board approved the selection of the Hyatt Regency andthanked Gary for his kind assistance in facilitating the se-lection process. The proposal was seconded and voted forapproval by the Board.

Finally, the Board agreed to consider the questions ofgraduated meeting fees and accelerating the schedule fornegotiating the Nashville meeting at its spring meeting.

—FRANK WAGNER

Prompted by concerns raised by François Boivin, the ARJDExecutive Board, at its Fall meeting on November 16, 2012, discussed the matter fully and authorized the following proce-dures for updating and maintaining the International Directoryof Reporters of Judicial Decisions. The Board also acceptedCliff Allen’s kind offer to continue as Directory Editor.

Yearly UpdateEach year, prior to revising the Directory, the Directory Editor

shall:1. circulate a copy of the then-current Directory at the annual

meeting in order to obtain corrections;2. e-mail everyone on the “blast list” of ARJD members seek-

ing corrected information for their Directory entries;3. e-mail each Reporter of Decisions or comparable official

listed in the current Directory, asking that person to review thelistings for others included under his/her particular jurisdictionand to provide updates;

4. collect each of the Membership forms submittedthroughoutthe past year or in preparation for the Annual Meeting;and

5 . make notes throughout the year memorializing member-ship changes, such as death or succession, that come to the Direc-tory Editor’s attention.

Each September, the Directory Editor shall revise the currentDirectory to include all of the changes and corrections generatedby following the procedures set forth in paragraphs 1–5, above.At his discretion, the Directory Editor may seek proofreading andany other necessary or desirable assistance from other ARJD mem-bers in order to complete the Directory update.

Once the Directory update is completed, the Directory Editorshall see to the transmission of the new master Directory toeveryone on the “blast list” and ensure the master copy is postedon the ARJD Facebook page.

Once the master Directory is completed, the Directory Editor shallstrip all of the personal information—e.g., personal street addresses,e-mail addresses, and home and mobile telephone numbers—that isincluded in the master copy and see to the posting of the resultingpublic version of the Directory on the ARJD Web site.

Triennial Update In addition to completing each of the annual update tasks out-

lined above, every three years the Directory Editor shall contact(by e-mail, telephone, or snail mail) each person or office that is notincluded on the current “blast” list, but is included in the Directory,to ascertain the correctness of all of the person’s or office’s listedinformation. In the case of individuals, the Directory Editor shallalso determine whether they wish to continue being included inthe Directory.

Progress So FarAs of this writing, the version of the Directory that is posted on

the Web site has not been revised since June 1, 2011. Thus, Direc-tory Editor Cliff Allen and I have agreed that we should treat theinitial revision under the new guidelines as a triennial update. Cliffhas proceeded diligently with the task and, with some minor helpfrom myself, is now in the final stages of preparing the 2013 Direc-tory revision. Hopefully, we will complete the work and publish theprivate and public versions of the new Directory by the time thisissue of The Catchline is published or shortly thereafter.

—FRANK WAGNER

The Catchline April 2013

– 3 –

Education Committee ReportWe have begun work on the educational component of the DC

meeting. Ross Davies, of bobblehead fame, will speak to us again,this time about Cranch’s rewrite of Supreme Court cases during theWheaton v. Phillips lawsuits. Derrick Lindsey, the Assistant Reporterof Decisions for the US Supreme Court, has agreed to speak on thecreation of macros that his court uses to increase office productivity.Once again, we will have a workshop with three Reporters speakingabout how they do their jobs. If you are interested in volunteering tobe on that panel, let me know!

We are excited to announce that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg hasagreed to participate in a Question and Answer session with the ARJD!This will cap a lecture from the Curator’s office about the history ofthe US Supreme Court building and tours of the building and theReporter’s office.

The committee is looking at the issue of social media. We hope tohave a presentation on the logistics of using social media (RSS, Twit-ter, Facebook, etc.) that would involve a discussion of IT issues. Ifthere are any Reporters out there whose offices use social media,please get in touch with me. We also think a discussion on the ethicsof using social media to publicize court decisions would be helpful.If anyone is interested in being involved in these discussions, do letme know.

As always, I would love suggestions from each and every one ofyou on speakers, topics of discussion, and general ideas on what youwould like to learn. I think every ARJD member should considerhimself or herself a member of the Education Committee and I lookforward to hearing your thoughts and suggestions.

—LEAH A. WALKER

KatherineWalkerLindOn Friday, February 22, 2013, our

friend and founder, Henry C. Lind,e-mailed the sad news: His dear wife,Kay, had died that morning at age95 of Alzheimer’s disease.

Kay and Henry were married on October 6, 1946. Dur-ing their 66 happy years together, they lived in Cambridge,MA; Cranston, RI; Rochester, NY; and Alexandria, VA. Theyhad three children: Henry C. Lind, Jr. of Novi, MI; EdwardW. Lind of South Orange, NJ; and Katherine L. Gilchristof Burke, VA. The couple also had ten grandchildren andeight great-grandchildren whom they often spoke of fondly.

A native of Providence, RI, Kay was the daughter ofEdward Field Walker and Josephine Danielson Walker. Shewas a 1935 graduate of the Mary C. Wheeler School inProvidence, and, four years later, received her degree fromthe Rhode Island School of Design, where she majored ininterior design. While in Rochester, she worked as aninstructional assistant for the public school system for nineyears. After she and Henry moved to the Washington, DC,area, she worked as a legal secretary for ten years for theAlexandria law firm of Major, Sage & King.

Kay retired in 1983, foreshadowing Henry’s 1987 retire-ment from his position as the 14th Reporter of Decisions ofthe United States Supreme Court. The couple remained inAlexandria until 1990, when they moved to Lake of theWoods in Locust Grove, VA. Kay was a member of Lakeof the Woods Church and the Daughters of the AmericanRevolution. Later, she and Henry moved to the AarondaleAssisted Living Facility in Springfield, VA.

A visitation was held at Aarondale in Kay’s memory onFebruary 26. Chris Fallon and John Fee were among theattendees. A memorial service will be held in early July soKay’s extended family can attend. In lieu of flowers, thefamily requested that donations be made to the Alzheimer’sAssociation, www.alz.org/donate.

Kay’s family and friends will remember her fondly as aloving wife and mother and a devoted and faithful compan-ion. She had a zest for life, cherished her pet dachshunds,and enjoyed her time with her loved ones and many friends.

—FRANK WAGNER

The Reporter as Defense Contractor—A Cautionary Tale

Whenever I’m tempted to hubris by memories of my “glory days”as the Reporter of Decisions at the United States Supreme Court, I tryto think of a story told me by Thomas R. Bruce, Executive Director ofCornell University’s Legal Information Institute.

It seems a young attorney from the US Agency for InternationalDevelopment was on his first trip to an emerging nation. He arrivedat the American Embassy there and was shown into the Ambassador’soffice. A passionate believer in the rule of law, the young lawyer wasthrilled to discover that the office was lined, floor-to-ceiling, withbookshelves holding a complete set of the US Reports. Gushing, theyoung man told the Ambassador how inspiring he thought it was thatvisitors to the embassy could view this tangible proof that the UnitedStates is a Nation of laws. Somewhat sheepishly, however, the Am-bassador informed the young man that it had not been his idea toplace the books on his shelves. Rather, he said, the decision had beenmade by the Embassy’s detachment of US Marines, who were re-sponsible for security. The Marines felt that the US Reports were theonly books in the Embassy’s library that were thick enough to stopbullets fired through the walls from outside the building.

Please accept my apologies, dear readers, if I have told you thisstory before. I really like it, and, anyway, the pickings are pretty slimfor this issue of The Catchline. I have recounted the story many timesboth in person and in print, usually concluding by musing whether itentitles me to add defense contractor skills to my LinkedIn descrip-tion. But there I go again with the hubris. Oh, well. Did I ever tellyou the one about . . . ?

—FRANK WAGNER

The Catchline April 2013

– 4 –

Last September, I made a return visit to London, amongother travels, and was thrilled to be able to visit the new UKSupreme Court building. There are no formal tours of thebuilding, but the public is welcome to visit and view court-rooms that are not in use. The other option is to follow mylead by introducing yourself to the public information of-ficer (Ian was on duty on the day of my visit) and tell himthat you work at the US Supreme Court in order to get himto give you a private tour of the building while trading factsabout your respective courts.

As some of you may be aware, prior to 2009, the UnitedKingdom’s highest court was the Appellate Committee ofthe House of Lords. These Law Lords were members of theUpper House of Parliament, although in modern times theydid not sit with the Lords during political debates or votes. Their decisions were issued as committee reports and handeddown in House of Lords sittings, albeit with only the LawLords taking part. The lack of separation from the politicalbranch of government led some British politicians to be con-cerned about the UK’s potential violation of its obligationto have fair trials under the European Convention on Hu-man Rights. Thus, in 2005, Parliament passed the Consti-tutional Reform Act, which provided, in part, for the estab-lishment of a Supreme Court to ensure a clear separationbetween judges and politicians. The new Supreme Courtwas scheduled to open October 1, 2009.

The establishment of a separate court required a buildingin which to house the court and Justices. The building se-lected sits in Parliament Square, across the street from theHouses of Parliament and Westminster Abbey. It was origi-nally built in 1913 for the Middlesex County Council, whichoccupied the building until 1971, when it became a CrownCourt containing seven courtrooms as well as jail cells andoffices. Renovation began in 2006 and was completed earlyenough for the Justices and their staff to move into the build-ing in August 2009. Comparatively, the renovations of theUS Supreme Court building, built in 1935 and never usedother than as the Supreme Court, have been dragging onwell over 10 years!

The UK Supreme Courtbuilding is built in the neo-gothic style and has lots ofgargoyle figures. There arethree courtrooms inside. Courtroom 1 is the largest andretains the gothic flavor of thebuilding. The walls have por-traits of former Lord ChiefJustices and the lighting is de-signed to resemble medievaltorches. The public bencheshave carvings of the faces ofpast English monarchs whilethe arms of the seats havevarious animals carved into them. It is a gorgeous roomwith enough rich details to occupy the attention of the least-interested member of the public sitting in on oral argument! Courtroom 2, on the other hand, is starkly modern. Thisdeliberate choice was made to reflect the idea that the UK isboth respectful of its past and looking to its future. With theexception of the Supreme Court’s symbol and a very coolclock, the walls are white and bare and the chairs and tablesare what you might find at Ikea. If you haven’t guessed, Ipreferred Courtroom 1.

Courtroom 3 is the home of the Judicial Committee ofthe Privy Council, the court of final appeal for the UK over-seas territories and Crown dependencies and for those Com-monwealth countries that have retained the appeal to QueenElizabeth II in Council or, in the case of Republics, to theJudicial Committee. This courtroom is also in the gothicstyle but is much smaller than Courtroom 1. Miniature flagsof every country and territory that can bring cases to theJudicial Committee decorate the bench. Courtesy of my newfriend Ian, I was able to have my photograph taken sitting inLord Walker’s customary seat at the bench.

There is a three-story library in the building that left mebreathless. It is off-limits to the public, but Ian was able toget me in to take a look. Additionally, there is a café overseenby a bust of Edward VII and an exhibition area that tells thehistory of justice in the United Kingdom and also displaysvarious gifts the court received upon its inauguration. TheCanadian Supreme Court, for example, gifted a lovely marblecarving of two polar bears and the Indian Supreme Courtgifted an ornate Raj-style tea set. On the other hand, the USSupreme Court offered a brick of white marble from thequarry that produced the marble used in that court’s build-ing. I was able to reassure Ian that the marble did lookexactly like the marble I see every day but couldn’t ex-plain to him why we didn’t try to “jazz it up” some like theCanadians!

During my tour with Ian I learned, sadly, that the Justicesno longer have to wear robes, much less wigs, when theyare sitting. They are only obliged to wear their ceremonialrobes on special occasions like the Opening of the Legal

Touring SCOTUK

The Catchline April 2013

– 5 –

Touring SCOTUK (Contd. from Pg. 4)

Year. Their calendar is simi-lar to the US Supreme Court’sbut they have turned the daybefore the First Monday inOctober into a civil celebra-tion of the law whereas in theUS the only celebration of theopening of the Court’s term isthe Roman Catholic “Red Mass” that is held at St. Mathew’sCathedral here in DC. Additionally, the UK Supreme Courtdoes not have a Reporter of Decisions since the Justices andtheir judicial assistants are responsible for editing and pre-paring their opinions for release. Syllabuses or headnotesdo not exist, but a Press Summary is released at the sametime as the judgment itself. These summaries include thecase background, judgment, and reasons for the judgmentwith references to the relevant paragraphs in the judgmentand a note that the summary is not legal authority. Allthe Court’s decisions are available online at http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/decided-cases/index.html. They do have a Registrar similar to the Registrar in Canada. The UK Supreme Court’s proceedings are recorded and avail-able to watch online, and I would encourage you to watchthem if for no other reason than to get a glimpse of the court-rooms: http://news.sky.com/info/supreme-court. Mostcases take up to two days to be heard, although some havetaken over a week, and can be heard by a panel of 5, 7 or 9Justices depending onthe importance or com-plexity of the case. Ianwas frankly shockedthat the US SupremeCourt grants each side30 minutes to presenttheir case.

In all, I had a greattime visiting the UKSupreme Court, made a new friend, and would highly rec-ommend a visit to anyone headed to London.

—LEAH A. WALKER

The Catchline April 2013

– 6 –

Thomas Jefferson Memorial

WASHINGTON2013

LincolnMemorial

Mt Vernon, Alexandria VA

US Botanic Garden ConservatoryUS Botanic Garden

Verizon Center-Basketball

Verizon Center National Postal Museum National Building Museum

The Catchline April 2013

– 7 –

Smithsonian Building United States Capitol

Washington National Cathedral White House-South Lawn Library of Congress

Supreme Court of the United States

ARJDCONFERENCE

2013

Washington,DC

Union Station

The Catchline April 2013

– 8 –

The Catchline April 2013

– 9 –

Smithsonian Castle US Capitol

Vietnam MemorialNational Gallery of Art

Washington Monument

Thomas Jefferson Memorial

The Catchline April 2013

– 10 –

2012-2013 Officers

President: Leah Walker, Supreme Court of the United States

Vice President: William Hooks, NY State Law Reporting Bureau

Treasurer: Truman Fuller (Ret.), Supreme Court of Washington

Secretary: Susan Williams, Arkansas Appellate Courts

Past President: Danilo Anselmo, Supreme Court of the United States

2012-2013 Committee ChairpersonsAnnual Meeting:Leah Walker, Supreme Court of the United States

Communications:Frank Wagner (Ret.), Supreme Court of the United States

Education:Leah Walker, Supreme Court of the United States

External Outreach:Susan Williams, Appellate Courts of Arkansas

The CatchlineEditors:Frank Wagner (Ret.), Supreme Court of the United StatesFrançois Boivin, Office of the Commissioner for Federal

Judicial Affairs CanadaSophie Debbané, Office of the Commissioner for Federal

Judicial Affairs Canada

Newsletter Publisher/Layout & Design:Wilma M. Grant, Supreme Court of the United States

Distribution:Daniel Spurling, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

VOLUME XXXII, NO. 1 APRIL 2013

ARJD Contact Info

ARJD Web site:http://arjd.washlaw.edu/

Catchline (suggestions, comments, and questions):frawgn1@aol.com

ARJD Members’ Facebook page:http://www.facebook.com/groups/members.arjd/

E-mail (to send documents, information or photos for postingon Facebook page):members.arjd@gmail.com

E-mail (to send communications directly to all ARJDFacebook group members via Facebook Wall):members.arjd@groups.facebook.com

E-Mail Address Changesand Corrections?

Please alert us by sending e-mail to: info.arjd@gmail.comThat will ensure you’ll continue to receive The Catchline.

2013 Supreme Court Justices:

Back Row: Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Stephen Breyer,Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Elena Kagan.

Front Row: Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Antonin Scalia,Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., Justice Anthony M. Kennedy,Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aerial View of Jefferson Memorial