The University has confirmed the appointments of Victor A. Li as associate professor of law and David Rosenhan as professor of law and psychology.

Professor Li received a B.A. in 1961 and a J.D. in 1964 from Columbia University as well as an LL.M in 1965 and S.J.D. in 1971 from Harvard University. He was a National Defense Language Fellow from 1964 to 1965 and from 1966 to 1967; a Fulbright-Hays Fellow from 1965 to 1966; and a visiting assistant professor at the Michigan Law School from 1967 to 1969. Since 1969, Professor Li has held a joint appointment between the law school and the department of political science at Columbia University as assistant professor of law.

Professor Rosenhan received an A.B. in 1951 from Yeshiva College and an M.A. (1953) and Ph.D. (1958) from Columbia University. He was a psychologist for the Counselling Center at Stevens Institute of Technology from 1954 to 1956; a trainee at the New York Veterans Administration from 1956 to 1958; a lecturer at Hunter College and director of research in the department of psychiatry at City Hospital at Elmhurst from 1958 to 1960; and an assistant professor for the departments of psychology and sociology at Haverford College from 1960 to 1962. He was a lecturer for the departments of psychology and psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania from 1961 to 1964; a lecturer (rank of associate professor) for the department of psychology at Princeton University from 1964 to 1968; and a research psychologist at Educational Testing Service in Princeton, New Jersey from 1962 to 1968. Since 1968 he has been a professor in the department of psychology and education at Swarthmore College. During 1970-71 Professor Li was visiting in the Stanford Psychology Department.

Lawyer-Adviser Project

About 80 Peninsula attorneys have participated during the fall in a new program to acquaint first-year students with different aspects of work in the legal profession. Each met with two first-year students to discuss law practice, and to answer questions.

The program, originated by Edward Hayes, president of the Law Association, and Dean Ehrlich, was designed to give students a better idea of what lawyers do, of the various types of law practice and of the role of lawyers in shaping and applying rules learned in the classroom.

Virginia Birch Retires from Law Review

Virginia Birch, business manager of the Stanford Law Review for the past 20 years, will retire in January, 1972, at which time she plans “to do what comes naturally.”

When Mrs. Birch assumed her position with the Review, it was only four years old. At that time there were 900 subscribers to the Review which published quarterly on a $7200 budget. Members were selected on the basis of first year grades and competition was stiff.

Mrs. Birch has seen the Review grow considerably since joining the staff in 1952. Today, membership is voluntary and open to all second year students who fulfill the necessary prerequisite of completing a publishable piece during the member’s first year on the Review. The subscription list now numbers 1,800 and the publication comes out six times a year. The budget is eight times what it was in 1952.

Mrs. Birch has been an integral part in the development of the Review. Allen Katz, president of the Stanford Law Review for the year 1971-72, describes her contribution as follows: “The best tribute to Mrs. Birch on her retirement is probably the Review itself. .. Her years with the Review have lent a sense of stability and continuity which has made the Review more than an extracurricular activity for many of its members and has helped shape it into an institution worth the long hours and hard work that membership requires.”

The Stanford Lawyer joins with the rest of the School in wishing Virginia Birch an enjoyable retirement “doing what comes naturally.”

Louis I. de Winter — Hague Conference

Louis I. de Winter, dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Amsterdam and president of the Netherlands Standing Government Committee for the Codification of the Private International Law, spoke at the School on October 20. Dean de Winter, an active participant since 1951 in the Hague Conference on Private International Law, and president of the two most recent sessions, outlined the evolution of the Hague Conferences and some of the conventions drafted by the 26 member states. He noted that in 1893 the Netherlands convened a conference at the Hague attended by 17 states. This meeting was followed by four conferences before World War 1. The work was chiefly in the realm of family law but also involved issues of jurisdiction and civil procedure. In 1951 the Statute of the Hague Conference was established providing for a full session every four years. Since then some twenty multilateral conventions have been drafted, about half of which are now in force. Dean de Winter noted that, though the conventions are not always ratified by participating countries, they are often recognized as authority in private international law.

In 1960 a convention with respect to child protection stipulated that the law of the country where the child has his habitual residence governs measures to be taken with respect to the child. Some of the subjects under consideration in 1972 will be (1) alimony, (2) international succession to decedents’ estates and (3) products liability.

Administration of Justice

Hon. Robert F. Peckham, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, and Hon. Sidney Feinberg, Judge of the Palo Alto-Mountain View Municipal Court, discussed aspects of administration of justice on November 10, sponsored by the Law Forum.

Judge Peckham noted that there is a public concern over delay in the courts leading to a lack of confidence in the administration of justice. He went on to say that there are bright spots: for example, Santa Clara’s civil calendar is as current as could be expected. Judge Peckham told the group that the proposal for state courts to follow the federal practice of judges interrogating prospective jurors would alleviate some of the time pressure in our state courts.

Judge Feinberg added that in Santa Clara County 87% of the felony cases go to trial within the 60-day statutory limit compared to the 50% state-wide average. He said that it must be remembered that delays are caused by both parties. Judge Feinberg commented that a form of no-fault insurance may alleviate a great cause of delay–jury trials in personal injury cases.

Alternatives in the Practice of Law

Rose Bird 22 Rose Bird, deputy public defender of San Jose appeared at the Law School on November 11 to discuss women in law and on November 12 to discuss public defender work as an alternative choice in the practice of law. Miss Bird is well known at the Law School because she is in charge of ali student help at the San Jose public defender’s office. Other participants in the Law Forum’s program of speakers on alternative choices in the practice of law were Edgar Luce, Jr. with the firm of Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps of San Diego on October 1, Norton Tooby and Winnie Leads of the Palo Alto Law Commune on October 4, and Garfield H. Horn of Sullivan & Cromwell of New York on October 13. Also included in the program were Christopher Bayley, King County prosecuting attorney on October 15; F. Bruce Kulp who is with Ford Motor Company, on October 21; and William R. Perlik and Robert Gerard of Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering of Washington, D.C., who appeared on October 28, as did Cal Advocates representative Robert Gnaizda.

Problems of Drug Abuse

Don Miller, chief counsel for the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs spoke to Law Wives and interested students of the Law School on November 18. Following an introduction by Professor John Kaplan, Mr. Miller discussed the problems of drug abuse, the effectiveness of the Bureau in controlling the drug market, various enforcement problems and legislative action undertaken in an effort to prevent and control drug abuse.

Williams on Law Revision Commission

Professor Howard R. Williams has been appointed by Governor Ronald Reagan to the California Law Revision Commission. Williams replaces former Stanford Law Pro- fessor Joseph T. Sneed, who resigned from the Commission and the Stanford faculty when he became dean of Duke Law School.

Two Stanford Law School alumni have been named chairman and vice chairman respectively of the Commission. They are John D. Miller ’53, a Long Beach attorney and Marc Sandstrom ’58, general counsel and secretary of the board of San Diego Federal Savings and Loan Association.

The Law Revision Commission consists of two members of the California legislature (one senator and one assemblyman), seven members appointed by the Governor, subject to Senate confirmation, and the Legislative Counsel who is an ex-officio nonvoting member. The Commission’s office has been located at Stanford since its inception in 1953.

The principal function of the Commission is to submit recommendations to the California Legislature for changes in the common law and statutes to bring California law into harmony with modern conditions.

Other Stanford Law School faculty members who have served on the Commission include former professor John McDonough who was executive secretary of the Commission from its inception to 1959 when he became a commissioner, a post he held until 1967. He was vice chairman, 1960-61, and chairman, 1964-65. Between 1954 and 1959, former professor Sam Thurman, now dean of the University of Utah Law School, was a member of the Commission.

Of 90 bills recommended by the Commission, 80 have been enacted. One of two constitutional amendments recommended by the Commission was adopted. The California Evidence Code is also the product of the Commission.

Each of the Commission’s recommendations is based on a research study of the subject matter concerned. Many of these studies are undertaken by specialists in the 23 fields of law involved, retained as research consultants to the Commission. For example, Lowell Turrentine, professor of law emeritus, did a study in 1956 on suspension of the absolute power of alienation. In 1958 Professor John Merryman was the consultant on mortgages to secure future advances; he also did the 1966 work on the good faith improver of land owned by another.

Professor Jack Friedenthal has also been active in the work of the Commission. He prepared a background study and served as a consultant on the 1966 study of imputed contributory negligence. The 1971 Legislature made significant changes in California pleading practice. Professor Friedenthal served as the Commission’s consultant on this study also.

The Commission provides part-time employment to some law students each year. Several of these students have prepared studies for the Commission that have later been published as leading articles. Albert C. Bender ’66 wrote “Additur-The Power of the Trial Court to Deny a New Trial under Conditions that Damages Be Increased.” 3 CALIFORNIA WESTERN LAW REVIEW 1 (1966). Michael J. Matheson’s 1969 study, “Excess Condemnation in California: Proposals for Statutory and Constitutional Change,” appeared in 42 So. CAL. L. REV. 421 (1969).

A major Commission study now in progress, in cooperation with a special committee of the State Bar, is to determine whether the law relating to attachment, garnishment, and property exempt from execution should be revised. Other topics include condemnation law and procedure, right of nonresident aliens to inherit, liquidated damages, child custody, and oral modification of a contract.

Moot Court

The Moot Court Board announced that Hal Lewis and Jim Ware, after arguing successfully in the regional finals, will represent California in the national moot court competition in New York, December 15-17. In addition, for the second year, Jim Ware received a trophy from the American College of Trial Lawyers as the most outstanding oral advocate.

Clerkships

A number of Stanford Law alumni are holding federal and state judicial clerkships for the year 1971-72: Chesney D. Floyd ’67 is clerking for Chief Justice Warren Burger of the Supreme Court; Roger Hanson from Goodell, Iowa is with Judge Herbert Choy of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Also in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is. Steve McKeon of Astoria, Oregon, with Judge Eugene Wright· Eugene Bates of Fort Worth Texas, with Judge Ben. C. Duniway; Ruth Rothmeyer of Hillsborough with Judge Shirley Hufstedler; Sally Schultz Neely of Burbank with Judge Ozell Trask; also with Judge Duniway is W. Richard West, Jr. of Lawrence, Kansas.

Sam Cheris of Brooklyn New York is at the United States Court of Claims. Richard Fink of Palo Alto is clerking with Judge George MacKinnon of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. In the Second Circuit of the Court of Appeals, with Judge Leonard Moore, is Jim Fotenos of Daly City. John Ver Steeg of Evanston, Illinois is with Judge John Godbold of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Five alumni are in the U.S. District Courts in California. Marshall Goldberg of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Mrs. Carole Greene 24 of Palo Alto are with Judge Robert Peckham. In the Central District of California, Hilary Goldstone of Beverly Hills is with Judge William Gray, Vaughn Walker is with Judge Kelleher and John Heaney of Palo Alto is with Judge Lawrence T. Lydich.

Robert Westinghouse, a resident of Stanford, is with Justice Murray Draper of the California Court of Appeal First District. Patrick O’Hare of New York City is clerking for the California Superior Court of San Mateo.

Patricia Cutler of Downey is clerking for the California Superior Court for Santa Clara County.

Barbara Miracle of Rockville, Maryland and Richard Lawry of Olympia, Washington are clerking at the Alaska Supreme Court.

Several members of the Class of 1972 have already accepted clerkships for the 1972-73 term. Stephen M. Feldhaus of Lawrenceburg, Tennesee plans to be with Judge Eugene Wright of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle; Douglas T. Roberton of Chevy Chase, Maryland and Stephen S. Walters of San Diego will clerk for Judge Ben. C. Duniway of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

Allen M. Katz of Saratoga will be with Judge Skelly Wright of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia and James C. Kitch of Wichita, Kansas will be with Judge John Stevens of the Seventh Circuit of Appeals in Chicago. Robert Clark of Long Beach will clerk for Justice John G. Gobbert of the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District. Robert T. Fries of Stanford will be with Judge Robert F. Peckham, V.S. District Court, Northern District of California. Geoffrey Naab of Lakeville, Connecticut will clerk for Judge John W. Kerrigan of the California District Court of Appeal for the fourth district in San Bernardino.

Grant Finances Law-Development Study

by Stephen Boatti T

The following is reprinted from the Stanford Law Journal of December 9, 1971.

The Agency for International Development CAJ.D.) has awarded the Law School a $700,000 grant to finance a vast study of law and development in Latin America and Mediterranean Europe.

Professor John Henry Merryman, who is “principal investigator” for the project, said the 5-year grant was approved last spring and work on it has already begun.

The project is intended to be an interdisciplinary study aimed toward preparing a behavioral, social-scientific description of the legal systems of a number of developing countries.

The specialization of the three original applicants for the grant reflects the breadth of the investigation. Merryman himself is a comparative lawyer; Professor Lawrence Friedman is an expert on law and social science; and Dean Thomas Ehrlich’s field is international law.

Merryman emphasized that the research had nothing to do with war or defense. “There is not, in any sense, direct or indirect American imperialism,” he said. “We are not interested in carrying on a program designed to bring light to the natives. On the contrary, we think we’ve got something to learn from those places. We have not been used or bought by any secret cynical national or international operation.”

The grant, he went on, was phrased in general terms and the professors will decide how to implement the study within the very broad guidelines necessitated by the fact that government money is being spent. A.I.D. also requires annual reports and will receive the data that is finally published from the project. Otherwise there are no strings, he indicated.

The first phase of the study, according to Merryman, involves developing a “research design” out of which specific observations can be developed.

To this end a large number of American and foreign scholars have been assembled. The first step, in tune with the emphasis on law and social change has been the formation of a multi-disciplinary faculty seminar here at Stanford comprising professors from fields including history, business, engineering anthropology and psychology. Its purpose is to make sure “we don’t do stupid, naive, foolish things from a sociological viewpoint,” said Merryman. “Basically, we prepare and read them papers, and they kick us around.”

Perhaps most important is the role to be played by foreign scholars. A distinguished legal scholar from each of the countries to be studied-tentatively Mexico Chile, Peru, Costa Rica, Italy, and Spain-is being invited to Stanford for this spring and summer to work with Merryman and Friedman on deciding how to structure the study.

Then they will return home to do the actual specific national research.

The last two years of the grant will be devoted to correlating and writing up the results. “I expect a whole stream of books to come out of this,” noted Merryman.

Merryman hopes that the reliance on foreign scholars will reduce the danger attendant in groups of Americans unfamiliar with a country going into it and failing to do an accurate study.

“We’re not interested in studying a foreign culture and doing it badly,” he saId. “These scholars are totally acculturated to their societies. But even so, we’re likely to make mistakes, set teeth on edge, and do naive things. This is always so in a cross-cultural study.”