Kaplan Argues Two Sides

The first program of the year for the Moot Court Board was a model appellate argument. On October 12, 1973, Professor John Kaplan argued both sides of the presidential tapes case before a panel of Justice Stanley Mosk, California Supreme Court, and Judges Robert Peckham and Charles Renfrew of the United States District Court for Northern California. Arguments were based on the briefs submitted by each side in the actual case.

The Stanford Daily introduced its story on the event with the following quotes:

“The only privilege the President has claimed–confidentiality-has clearly been waived,” argued John Kaplan, Esq., counsel for Special Watergate Prosecutor Archibald Cox.

“This is a case,” replied John Kaplan, Esq., counsel for the President, “where satisfying one’s curiosity can place this court in the position of dealing a serious blow, not only to the President, but to the nation as a whole.”

“His arguments were delivered with equal facility, equal enthusiasm, and almost equal conviction. They were addressed, however, to different concerns.

“The argument on behalf of Cox-to release the tapes-rested on a contention that the confidentiality of Presidential conversations has been waived by the President’s permission to his former advisers to testify about the content of those conversations.

“The argument on behalf of the President-not to release the tapes-was based on a much broader conception of Presidential privilege, a much looser conception of ‘confidentiality’ and fear of infringing on the President’s constitutional powers.”

Members of the Moot Court organization also sponsored an oral practice seminar with the help of local attorneys on November 12 to 15.

Environmental Law Society

Thirteen members of the Environmental Law Society worked throughout the summer on three research projects and prepared their findings for publication during the fall.

The projects, funded by grants from the Wallace Alexander Gerbode Foundation, the Alamo Foundation, and the Nicholas B. Ottaway Foundation, Inc., involved studies of growth-control techniques, interstate environmental problems, and California’s Williiamson Act, which provides tax incentives for preserving open space.

This was the fourth summer program conducted by the Society. Past projects have examined urban sprawl in San Jose, highway planning, and private timber regulations. Last year’s California Land Use Primer, a handbook describing ways to control land use, is now in its fourth printing.

The growth control study covered such topics as phased zoning, bans on building permits, and conditions attached to the extension of utilities into new developments. The interstate environmental problems project began with a detailed analysis of the Truckee River System in California and Nevada and explored ways in which developments in one state affect environmental quality in another.

The third project was a continuation of a 1972 Environmental Law Society of the California Property tax system. The students prepared a detailed critique of the Williamson Act and explored alternative methods of preserving open space. They worked closely with the legislative consultant to California’s Assembly Select Committee on Open Space Lands.

Mock Trial

Serjeants at Law held its first mock trial of the year on October 25. The case, Loose v. Loose, dealt with a child custody dispute concerning which of the estranged parents should raise their two children. Bob McNair and John Livingston acted as counsel for plaintiff Randy Friday. The defendant, Debbie Handel, was represented by Diane Balter and Michael Duncheon. The Honorable Sidney Feinberg of the Palo Alto Municipal Court presided. Expert psychiatric testimony was provided by Dr. Robert Malcolm of Stanford, and Barbara Angstman testified as the defendant’s mother.

Primary planners for the trial were Serjeants Board members Kinsey Haffner and Randy Dunn, who assumed the major task of developing and refining all facts and characters involved in the case.

Serjeants at Law provides a forum for law students interested in developing trial-advocacy skills. The trials are unrehearsed and give each student an opportunity to argue within a basic framework of facts.

Alternatives in Practice Program

In an effort to acquaint job-hunting students with the opportunities available outside the usual law firm route, the Law Forum sponsors a series called Alternatives in the Practice of Law. Representatives from organizations such as I.B.M., Pacific Gas and Electric, the California State Court of Appeal, the Natural Resources Defense Council, a district attorney’s office, the Department of Justice, and U.S. Steel hold informal conversations with students on the positions available for lawyers. These are usually done over lunch on a day the representative is interviewing at the School.

During the fall interview season, some 200 employers visited the School. This represented 165 law firms, 25 public agencies and 10 corporations. About 4,000 interviews were held.

International Society Readies for Competition

The International Society is preparing to compete in the Jessup International Moot Court Competition in March. David Clarke, Michael Miller, and Robert Barnard, all third-year students, are in the process of choosing two more members to complete their five-man team. Mindful of the success of last year’s team, which won an award for best brief in the Western Regionals, the Society has high hopes for this year’s team.

Again this year, the Society is contacting Stanford graduates abroad in an effort to secure summer clerkships for law students wishing to work in international law. Last year the Society found jobs for students in England, France, and New Zealand.

Legal Aid Society

The Legal Aid Society officers explain the Society’s program to new students as “an opportunity to help people with their legal problems and to learn a lot about the actual practice of law. Students work with an attorney on all aspects of a case, from initial interview, through investigation and research· and drafting a complaint to actual litigation. Besides the practical benefit of training in legal practice, students also gain a sense of the kinds of legal problems that face poor people.

“Criminal work involves all phases of criminal defense, from interview to appeal. Civil work covers a wide range of problem areas, including landlord/tenant, debtor-creditor relations, consumer cases, and employment problems. Students are expected to work about ten hours a week.”

Susan Nagel

Mrs. Susan Nagel, who joined the Law School staff in 1961, died on September 28, 1973. Mrs. Nagel became Law School Registrar in 1967 and held the post until last year when illness forced her to change positions. During 1972-73 she was administrative assistant to Associate Dean William Keogh. At a memorial service on October 2, Dean Keogh spoke for himself and others. Following are excerpts from those remarks.

“Professionally, Susan was bright, thorough, precise, diligent and possessed of an enormous capacity for driving effort. She was sensitive, she was loyal and oh so very kind-to everyone. Susan brought to the Stanford Law School a formidable strength. She saw beyond the details and understood the administration of this great institution to be a service subordinate to and in direct support of the task of educating law students. She was an administrator who saw excessive red tape or the technical log jam as a failure of administration and not as its necessary byproduct.

“. . . I do not wish that my sentiment alone be recorded. Colleagues, known to you, also wish to share with you their thoughts.

“Professor Charles Meyers states, “Susan was one of those unsung heroes-heroine in her case-of the Law School who make it really work. . . .

“From Professor Gerald Gunther, … She had a sense for the important, she cared about all those around her, she gave a damn for the School and for the human beings that constituted it. …

“Bayless Manning, former dean of the Law School, . . . As registrar and as officer for admissions she was not where the sun of applause often shines. But all of us who shared administrative responsibilities of the School knew how reliant we were upon her knowledge, dependent upon her energy, and indebted for her singleminded dedication to the welfare of the School. . . .

“Professor Keith Mann writes, . . . she was respected by the students because they knew that anyone of them would get a fair hearing; she was diligent, precise, conscientious and orderly….

“Betty Scott says, . . . Her compassion for her fellow human beings-especially those in need-was a second nature with her, seemingly effortless and unassuming.

“Professor Wayne Barnett-It was to her that we turned with whatever problems of administration might confront us; and it was from her that we obtained our relief.

“And Dean Tom Ehrlich, … Day in and day out, she responded to all comers with cheerful good humor backed by careful analysis of the particular problemwhat facts were needed to form the basis for judgment and what policies were involved in making the judgment. . . . She could be counted on-always.”

Clinical Opportunities at the School

During the fall semester, 25 third-year students were away from the Law School on externships, ranging from Palo Alto to Hamburg, Germany and Florence, Italy. The program was begun in 1969-70 with ten students.

Until 1970 the externship program provided the only clinical experience at the School. According to Josep’h Leininger, director of the program, “Students now also have an opportunity to take clinical seminars in defense, environmental law, law enforcement, family and juvenile law, legislation, professional responsibility, trial advocacy, with more direct and continuing faculty supervision of student work than is possible in an externship situation.” Opportunities are also available for directed research in many areas such as corporate regulation.

Externships during the fall were with judges, a police department, two United States senators’ offices, a public defender office, a juvenile probation department, and the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation, among others.

New Law Fund Director

Lloyd W. Lowrey, Jr. joined the staff on August 20 as director of the Law Fund. He graduated from Stanford Law School in 1971, having done his undergraduate work at the University of California. After graduation from the Law School, he joined the General Counsel’s Office of the United States Postal Service. Lloyd and his wife Carol have a baby girl Susanna born August 9, 1973, just before their arrival at Stanford.

Bruce Hasenkamp left his job as staff director of the Law Fund at the end of August.

Gary Bayer, who had been devoting his full attention to the Law School’s capital campaign, will continue that work and will also assume the added responsibility of coordinating the Law School’s fund raising and alumni relations efforts as assistant dean for development.