Summer 1974

ChicagoPaul MutherJim NoonanCincinnati, OhioJay DudleyAtlantaPaul O'HearnGary RebackNew HampshireJim TopinkaWaltham, s.Arnold PaulBostonJohn ulhamRay Kwasnic

ewHavenBuzzy Waitzkin

artford, CoBill Bates

ewYork CityBob BrantBrian BellardoJoshua CoopermanAndy DouglasJason EtnireRob GreerRobert H. MillerPhil PollockDavid RabbaGarrett SmithSkip tiverBrick SuskoHaiti re

har errockvil e, Md.

Deborah HandelWashington, D.C.Alan AustinChuck BellMike CavanaughBet y CohenJohn HainesBob McNairShawn MooreDoug MillerBill OtisCharles PaturickJoe PhillipsTom StuenBooker WadeFlorence, ItalyBob Bush

Los AngelesEdgar AndersonFrederick BaronLarry BernsteinMichael-John BiberSteve BiegenzahnLou EatmanTed FournierDennis deLeonReese MilnerRalph NavarroDale NealCarl SchenkerSteve Urbanczyk

ever y ·IsBruce AndelsonChris CuddyUnion CityRalph Arr olaSacramentoConway Collis

tocktonGeorge HartmannSan BernardinoJohn Elliot

i ey HaffnerSan iego

ob CochranWalt CummingsGlorene FrancoSteve ThreadgoldHonolulu

. LeasAl Roodhou ePeter hapiroDenverAllen CoxJim FlynnTyro e oltLa edo, Te asRichardo De AndaMinne polisJeff WatsonOmaha, ebras aBill HollandDes Moines, IowaChris TompkinsSearcy, Ark.Mike O'Neal

ew OrleansMike EaganAndy Lipps

JuneauJoseph DonohueRob JohnsonSeattleWilliam BaronScott EasterMichael HaffertyDick MonroeJim TuneOlympia

im ordPortlandRoss LaybournU eahDennis optowitSan FranciscoJohn d'Alessio

ethami AuerbachSusan BirdLaDoris CordellGordon Davidson

vi Durhamill Grinde

Patrick Kleinarbara Lane

Helene LinkerMaureen McClainJeff OdermanGreg Oxford

ich SingerCarole SpeckelsDavid YanceyBryant YoungS ateoT oma Ow nPalo AltoMartin AronsonRon GrubmanCraig JohnsonLeon SeltzerSteve Scharf

East Palo AltoSue Wil onSan JoseCharles PetersonLos AltosDavid PierceBerkeleyRichard FinkOaklandJim Swanson

) \

Joseph Walter Bingham1878-1973

Emeritus Professor Joseph Walter Bingham diedDecember 15, 1973. He was 95. A graduate of theUniversity of Chicago and its law school, ProfessorBingham joined the Stanford Law faculty in 1907,where he remained until his retirement in 1944.Professor Bingham specialized in property law, con­flict of laws, jurisprudence, and wills. He was apioneer in the field of international law and anauthority on piracy and national off-shore rights.

Professor Moffatt Hancock

many have gone on the bench. But, in 1941, anevent took place involving Professor Bingham and oneof his students that must have brought to himas a teacher a tremendous sense of accomplishmentand satisfaction. In that year the NorthwesternUniversity Law School published a handsome volumecontaining sixteen essays, each entitled, "MyPhilosophy of Law," written by sixteen outstandingAmerican legal philosophers. It was inevitable thatProfessor Bingham would be asked to contribute anessay; what must have brought him profoundand emotional satisfaction was that one of his formerstudents was also chosen to be a contributor:Professor Lon L. Fuller of the Harvard Law School.

Professor Bingham's life work belongs to the wholeworld of legal scholarship, but his memory belongsto the Stanford Law School. For it was here thathe spent virtually his entire professional career. Hewas the kind of teacher that law schools perpetuallysearch for: a productive, creative scholar whoseideas are innovative yet based on such soundpremises that they withstand the blasts of adversecriticism and the onward march of time. Just ashis dynamic personality inspired his students for morethan three decades, the memory of his remarkableaccomplishments should inspire all who teach and allwho learn in this school for many years to come.

)---------------------'(

JOSEPH Walter Bingham, affectionately called byhis students, "Smokey Joe," was a man of greatenergy and extraordinary talents. Consequently, hiscareer had several aspects and his achievements weremany.

At the age of 34, this young Stanford professorsuccessfully challenged some of the basic assumptionsand ,beliefs of the leading American and Englishlegal scholars of his day concerning the lawmakingpowers of judges and the proper functions ofacademic commentators. He was the acknowledgedpioneer of the realist movement, which in subsequentdecades came to dominate legal research, writingand teaching in American law schools and,consequently, to mould the philosophical outlookof many of our judges and advocates. These earlyjurisprudential writings, along with his latersubstantial published contributions to the solution ofdifficult problems of intemationallaw, place himsecurely among the greatest legal scholars of thetwentieth century.

Anyone who has studied Professor Bingham'swriting and become familiar with the rich imagery ofhis several powerful literary styles bas probably,at some time, thought, "What an exciting experienceto have sat in this man's classes!" This inescapableimpression is confirmed by those who had theprivilege of being Professor Bingham's students. Mostof them are now senior members of the bar and

Summer 1974

Editor: Cheryl W. RitchieAssistant Editor: Janet 1. EmbryGraphic Designer: Carol Hilk

Contents

Volume 9, No.2

Moffatt Hancock, Marion Rice Kirkwood Pro­fessor of Law, delivered the euology forEmeritus Professor Joseph W. Bingham at amemorial service on January 23, 1974. Anedited version of the tribute appears at left.

Stanford's Academic Lawyers

Conversations with Earl Warren

The Moral Education of the Lawyerby the Honorable Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr.

Law Alumni Weekend

C.lass Reunions

Faculty News

School News

La\v Societies

Class Notes

2

9

10

12

13

18

22

25

26

Stanford Lawyer is published semi-annually for alumni and friendsof Stanford Law School. Materials for publication and correspon­dence are welcome and should be sent to the Editor.

Cover: Map showing geographical placement of 1974 graduates ap­peared in the student newspaper, Law School Journal, March 14,1974.

PrintingContributed to

Stanford Law Schoolby

Bowne of San Francisco, Inc.1045 Sansome Street / San Francisco, Calif. 94111(415) 981·7882

Bowne of Los Angeles, Inc.1706 Maple Avenue / Los Angeles, Calif. 90015(213) 748-9851

CORPORATE / FINANCIAL PRINTERS / LITHOGRAPHERS

Stanfords Academic LawyersNz'ne faculty members explaIn why they became

law teachers, how they chose their areas of

specializatz'on, how they conduct thez'r classes,

why they enjoy the academic side of law.

Professor Gerald Gunther

I stumbled my way toward law andlaw teaching for very peculiar rea­sons.

I came out of the city highschools of New York near the end ofWorld War II, and, like most of myfriends, headed for engineeringschool with the idea of ultimatelygoing into the service. After threesemesters of engineering school, Ienlisted in the radar program of theNavy, became an electronics tech­nician, and ended up teaching somemath and physics.

The math and physics cameeasily; and it wasn't until I had beenat it for about a year-and whileI was stationed on Treasure Is­land-that it dawned on me thatwhereas most of my friends werebuilding radio sets at night, I wasrunning off to the library to readhistory and philosophy. And I real­ized that I r.eally wouldn't be con­tent to spend the rest of my lifeworrying about radio waves and theinsides of radar transmitters.

2

When I got out of the Navy, Idecided to enroll in a liberal artsprogram at Brooklyn College inNew York. I had no notion aboutwhat I wanted to do, other than tofind something more absorbingthan engineering. One of my re­quired courses in the first semesterthere happened to be PoliticalScience I, taught by a ProfessorKonefsky who was blind and verybrilliant, and his specialty was Con­stitutional Law. He asked me to behis research assistant, so I spentmost of the rest of--my time in col­lege reading to him and doingresearch for him. One of the thingsI did during that time was to readeverything that Justice Frankfurterhad ever written, because SamKonefsky was editing a book ofFrankfurter opinions.

Although I enjoyed my work withKonefsky and found it all very fas­cinating, it still hadn't occurred tome at that time to become a lawyer,because my sense of lawyers wasone of guys who were chasing am­bulances and doing mostly very dullthings, like tax returns. You see, Ihad never known any lawyers-Icome from three centuries of Ger­man butchers, and law as a careerseemed a very distant and unattrac­tive thing. The line of least resis­tance seemed to be to become apolitical science teacher. So, whileI was doing graduate work in polit­ical science at Columbia, I beganteaching political scienoe and Con­stitutional Law courses at Brooklynand City Colleges. Since I taughtprimarily from law school case-

books, however, I soon found myselfrunning into a lot of unfamiliarterms; and I started thinking thatperhaps I should go to law school sothat the non-public law material inthe Constitutional Law cases wouldnot be so mysterious to me. I reallyviewed law school as one thinks ofcastor oil: as an unpleasant experi­ence that would be good for me;and perhaps on,e a bit more interest­ing than continued graduate workin political science.

Consequently, after getting aMaster's in political science, I en­tered Harvard Law School. I soonfound to my surprise, however, thatthe private law subjects, such asContracts, Procedure, and Commer­cial Law, were fascinating after all.And by the time I finished lawschool, I wasn't at all sure as be­tween teaching and practice, and Idecided that I should at least getsome private practice in areas out­side my primary area of interest­Constitutional Law. I then spent ayear clerking for Judge LearnedHand and a year clerking for ChiefJustice Warren, but in betweenthose clerkships I practiced with theWall Street firm of Cleary, Gottlieb.I returned to the firm after the sec­ond clerkship with the intention ofpracticing for three years beforethinking about retwning to teach­ing.

What happened in fact was thatafter a year with the firm I wasinvited to teach at Columbia Uni­versity because the senior Constitu­tional Law man there was retiring.After some agonizing, I decided to

''I really viewed law school as one thinks of

castor oil- as an unpleasant experience

that would be good for me.... "

accept with the understanding thatI could change my mind if I didn'tenjoy it. After a few months atColumbia, I was certain that teach­ing was exactly what I wantedto do.

As a Constitutional Law teacher,I am an undisguised preacher of ad­miration for a document we've beenable to live with for such a verylong time, by and large better thanother countries. I try to instill inmy students a real regard for con­stitutional values, plus a capacityto think about them probingly­with an adequate regard for historyand analysis, and with a combina­tion of the lawyer's traditional toolsand the kind of breadth that a sen­sitivity to the political and socialenvironment can bring to them. Ithink the best practical lawyers arethose who can think with the great­est breadth and depth about theproblems. Therefore, I will teachmaterial on the federal system, eventhough some of the issues do notnow often come up in litigation;and I will also teach material onequal protection or free speech orother issues that come up more fre­quently. I try to teach what willbest give students a feel for how tohandle constitutional issues in courtand out.

In addition to teaching, I dividemyself in various ways. I do somelegal history; yet, I do not considermyself a full-time legal historian.I'm trying to keep my feet in bothcontemporary Constitutional Lawand in legal and constitutional his­tory, although my teaching is pri­marily in the former.

I have been working for sometime on a two-volume history of theMarshall Court from 1815-35, whichis part of a multi-volume series on

the Supreme Court being preparedunder the Oliver Wendell HolmesDevise. That project has turned outto be a massive general historicalundertaking. Moreover, before fin­ishing those, I took on the author­ized biography of Judge LearnedHand. I'm the only one who hasacoess to his papers which cover aremarkable judicial career of overfifty years and a remarkable life ofover eighty years. At the same time,I spend several weeks every yearputting out a supplement to mycasebook on Constitutional Law.I also manage to do some writing oncurrent constitutional problems forthe law reviews. Beyond that, I dovery little.

Professor William F. Baxter

I never thought about teaching untillate in my third year of law school.I had gone through Stanford under­graduate and Law schools on a shoe­string, so I was not only broke butin debt when I finished. I intendedto go into practice, but since the LawSchool offered me more money toteach the first year I was out ofschool than anybody was paying tostart law practice in those days, I

decided to teach. Those first coupleof years were awkward, though, be­cause the students I'd been in classwith the very year before were tak­ing classes from me and, needless tosay, they gave me a rather badtime.

After teaching for two years atStanford, I went to Covington &Burling to practice. I had enjoyedthe teaching, however, and my ex­perience in practice left me troubledby the fact that I never felt I wasable really to get all the way to thebottom of things. The day-to-daydeadlines were such that it seemedI always wound up putting some­thing into final draft when I felt Iwas only three-quarters throughwith it. So after a few years of that,I decided I would be happier in anenvironment where I didn't have tosuppose that I had the answer to aquestion or problem until I'd spentas much time on it as I wanted tospend; and I went back to teaching.

In the beginning my main inter­est was Administrative Law, but Idrifted away from it because whenone talks about Administrative Lawas a subject one is talking primarilyabout the procedural patterns thatthe regulatory agencies follow andthe methods for obtaining judicialreview of what they've done. Andthose doctrines of judicial reviewthemselves are primarily proceduralrather than substantive. As I workedin Administrative Law, I discoveredthat the procedural doctrines abouthow the agencies were to act werereasonably well developed, but itseemed to me that nobody either inthe agencies or in the courts-andindeed, for the most part, in Con·gress-was paying any attention towhat the agencies were doing sub­stantively. The policies could be as

3

''Preparing lor class reminds me 01preparing lor trial-not cross-examination

but direct examination. "

insane as one could possibly imag­ine, but as long as they followed theprocedural rules, nobody seemed tohave any complaint. Therefore, myinterest gradually shifted fromwhether or not the ICC held a hear­ing before they imposed some mon­strous inefficiency on the transporta­tion indiIstry to the substantivepolicies that the various agencieswere imposing and which, for themost part, I then thought were veryill-advised and for the most partI'm now convinced are absolutelyabsurd.

In my classes my objective is toget across the substantive body oflaw involved in a particular area andto make sure the students under­stand the underlying business or in­dustrial problems that are beingdealt with. I try to get the studentsto understand the human behaviorinvolved in the problems under con­sideration. Generally, private partiesare acting in a certain way becausethey are pursuing some private ob­jectives of their own. Then the gov­ernment comes along either throughthe legislature or through someagency, and tries to constrain theirbehavior-telling them not to actthat way anymore. One has tounderstand, then, what purposes thebureaucrats are pursuing; and gen­erally speaking, they'll be pursuingpolicies that advance the interests ofthe bureaucrats. If the student seesthe problem in terms of a completeset of the actors, with some compre­hension of what each of the actorsis trying to accomplish, then it is atleast possible to talk sensibly aboutwhat procedural mechanisms, whatjudicial mechanisms, would interactwith the unfailing endeavor tofeather one's own nest in a way thatproduces better rather than worseoverall social consequences.

4

Associate ProfessorBarbara A. Babcock

When I was five years old I said Iwas going to be a mountain climber,but when I turned six I began say­ing I was going to be a lawyer, andfrom that time on I always said itand always believed it.

Although I practiced for nineyears before going into teaching, Iknew that eventually I would teach.When I was at Yale-and I'm notsure this is at all true today-therewas an unwritten code that whatone should really aspire to be some­day was a teacher; I accepted ituncritically.

I actually started teaching whileI was still running the Public De­fender in Washington, D.C. SomeGeorgetown students were inter­ested in starting a course on Womenand the Law and they asked me ifI would teach it. Since I had beenthinking I should find out about thewomen's movement, I felt thiscourse would give me an opportu­nity to do that. So I taught it atGeorgetown, then at Yale, and laterat Georgetown again. Then I gotinvolved in writing a book on thesubject, which will be published inthe fall.

In the short time that I've beenteaching, one of the things I've feltis that I have a lot more to learnabout it. So far, I've taught onlysmall classes at Stanford, but I oncetaught a class of 160 in CriminalProcedure for a friend at Harvardfor two days. It was more like lead­ing an orchestra than teaching.There wasn't the kind of interchangeI like to have. Generally, I ask a lotof questions. In fact, preparing forclass reminds me of preparing for atrial-not cross-examination but di­rect examination. I spend a lot oftime thinking about the questionsand deciding how to phrase themto make people think and to get outthe information. I don't believe youcan teach students in the sense thatyou can make them learn. That issomething they do on their own. Asa teacher, I try to give students arespect-and even a love-for thegreat traditions of the law and tohelp them appreciate its power andeffectiveness when properly applied.

Professor Victor H. Li

Teaching is attractive to me becauseof the variety of things one can do.I can make changes in my subject

"We examine Chinese society, not merely

to study it in isolation, but rather as a mirror

to look back on ourselves."

matter and research interests; andI have greater control over how Ispend my time-and on what. Inshort, it is very conducive to theway I live.

My family and I spent the sum­mer of 1970 at Stanford. I was reallytaken by the lemon trees behind theSchool. The idea of being able topick a lemon to put in your after­noon tea seemed very civilized. Butapart from the physical attractions,the quality of the Law School andthe quality of the Chinese studiesprogram are both absolutely superb;and all of these things togethermake an unbeatable combination.

For most students taking ChineseLaw, this will be their first-andvery possibly their only-eontactwith China. As such, there is littlepoint in learning about Chinese lawas Chinese law. What I try to do isto point out to law students thatAmerican institutions and methodsreflect certain preferred values,norms, and habits. But one must alsorealize that other societies may havedifferent values and preferences, andmay also have developed alternativeways of handling essentially thesame human and social problems.So we look at a country like Chinawhere things are done differentlythan in America, and we ask whatthey do, why they do it, do s it workbetter or worse, and most impor­tantly, how does it help us under­stand our own legal system and prac­tices. In effect, we examine Chinesesociety, not merely to study it inisolation, but rather as a mirror tolook back on ourselves.

The Chinese Law course tries toshow that solutions and institutionsthat may work well in one societymay not work at all in another whichhas different economic and socialconditions, political situations, and

cultural backgrounds. We try tostress a flexibility of mind on thepart of the students and to empha­size this idea that there are sensibleand viable alternative methods andinstitutions to solving probl ms.

Professor Jack H. Friedenthal

I came into teaching more or lessby accident. While I was in lawschool at Harvard, Phil N,eal, who isnow dean of the University of Chi­cago Law School, was there as avisiting professor from Stanford. Ihad signed up for a course in Com­munications Law with a professorwho became ill; Professor Neal re­placed him. We became friendlyand we talked about Stanford andabout teaching. Consequently, Idecided to come to Stanford toteach. So, unlike many people whospend several years in practice first,I went directly into teaching afterlaw school.

I didn't know, however, how longI would stay in teaching. When I

first came to Stanford I had a one­year contract. I enjoyed the yearvery much. I enjoyed all the activi­ties professors do - teaching, re­search, writing-and I felt that thiskind of work was more my naturalbent than practice would be. I havekept a hand in practice, though, bygoing to court occasionally; andwhile I enjoy it, I doubt that Iwould like it as a steady diet.

Civil Procedure became my areaof specialization much the sameway a practicing lawyer d,evelopshis area of specialization, I suppose.That is, his business tends to be in acertain area so he finds himselfdoing more and more of that typeof business and eventually he be­comes a specialist in it. That's whathappened to me. While I was work­ing on the Harvard Law Review,almost all the work that was as­signed to me was in civil procedureand related areas. As a result, Ibecame very interested in it; andmy first teaching assignment wasalso in connection with civil pro­cedure. This area of law is partic­ularly fascinating because it is ablending of the written rule withsome common-law interpretation ofit and I really enjoy analyzing thissort of material.

Whatever area of law one teaches,however, I think the most importantthing a professor leaves with hisstudents is a sense of confidence indealing with legal materials. I don'tthink we can do too much aboutthe law as it is or might be. Itchanges rapidly-eertainly in someareas it changes rapidly-and onehas to be able to deal with thosechanges. The important thing forany student is to learn to think likea lawyer. How to use legal mate­rials, how to read cases and statutes,

5

"The challenge in law teaching, as I see it, is to

individualize instruction enough so that

each student is on his mettle in classroom work."

how to put together procedural de­vices, how to prepare cases for trial,how to write contracts-all of thesethings stem from an ability to un­derstand the way in which the lawworks. In a manner of speaking, onehas to develop one's sense of smell­to be able to smell out potentialproblems and to tell people what tolook out for. What's more, much oflaw study is just plain reading withcare, and understanding that whatone reads has some specific signifi­cance in terms of a problem thatmight arise or one that has arisenand must be solved.

Lawyers need to know things forspecific problems that face them,but they also need to be able touse this same kind of reasoning tosolve the larger problem - thepolicy-type problem. I believe thatif one's legal reasoning regardingspecific matters is developed, thenone can look at the big picture, thepolicy picture, in the same way. Youcan see both the little and the bigproblems that might arise and Ithink that's important - especiallyfor Stanford Law graduates, because\tve hope that the kind of studentswe have here will not only be quali­fied lawyers in the narrow sense, butmakers of public policy as well.

Professor William Warren

I have always wanted to be ateacher. I can't remember why I'vealways wanted to be one, but Ithink it's difficult to ascribe reasonsto desires like that. When I was incollege I thought about doing grad­uate work in history or politicalscience and teaching that, but I hada long-term ambition to become alawyer as well. And when I went tolaw school, I decided that law wasreally what I wanted to teach.

6

While working for my doctoratein law, I was offered a rather attrac­tive teaching job at a time whenthere were not many jobs available.I accepted it, despite my stronglyheld view that one should neverbecome a law teacher without hav­ing practiced. It took me a longtime to catch up; and over the yearsI have done consulting work and soforth, in an attempt to keep a footin the world of practice.

Commercial Law became my areaof specialization because I was hiredby my alma mater, the University ofIllinois, to replace William Britton,who was then one of the leadingcommercial law teachers in thecountry. I was told that if I ac­cepted the job I would be teachingcommercial transactions and that Icould either take those courses orthey would find somebody else forthe job. My friends commiseratedwith me. Poor devil, they said, whata dead area to get into; nothingever happens in that area. That wasin 1954; and since I started teachingin the commercial law area, I can'timagine a more lively area to be in.

I began teaching in what youmight call the twilight of the Socra-

tic case method era, in whichteachers were expected to be quitestem and to interrogate studentsrigorously in class. The merit of theteacher was somewhat judged byhow effectively he could show thestudent how little that student reallyknew. I think we can say that thismethod of teaching is no longer thenorm. Teaching today comprises afriendlier, more open discussion ofquestions in which the teacher triesto develop ideas with student par­ticipation, but without coercing thatparticipation with threats of humil­iating the student if he does notparticipate.

The challenge in law teaching, asI see it, is to individualize instruc­tion enough so that each student ison his mettle in classroom work. Ifyou can channel a student's ego orself-esteem into his performance,you will get a really remarkablelevel of effort from able students.Moreover, I think it has become in­creasingly clear to students through­out the country that if you want tobe a powerful force in the com­munity, law is perhaps the bestavenue for accomplishing that ob­jective. There is tremendous socialmobility in law. One gaining admit­tance to a top law school and doinggood work at that school finds him­self or herself in a power situationperhaps more quickly than throughany other route. I think studentstoday want to change the world-Ihope they want to change it-andlaw is an excellent avenue for effect­ing change.

Professor Howard R. Williams

All the time I was in law school Ithought about teaching when Igraduated. I wanted to practice first,

"] feel it is extremely important for students

to develop a keen sense of the responsibilities of

the lawyer both to the client and to society."

but I always knew that eventuallyI would go into teaching. One of themore attractive features of teachingis that the law professor is in greatercommand of his time than is thepractitioner. He isn't tied to hisclients' demands. And he has the op­portunity to work on matters whichare of interest to him, rather thanon matters which are of economicinterest to his client.

I began my teaching career at theUniversity of Texas. Among myearly courses were some in RealProperty, which I found very inter­esting. And it happened that theman who was teaching Oil and Gasleft while I was there, so I had theopportunity to teach that as well.The subject was a popular one atTexas and some of the problems in­volved in it, such as ownership ofa producing lease turning upon thedoctrine of worthier title or the ap­plication of the rule in Shelley'sCase, for example, really made someof the doctrines of Property Lawcome alive. As a result, I developeda strong interest in Oil and Gas andhave done most of my writing inthis area.

In my courses I try to make stu­dents aware of the significance ofthe doctrine we are studying in avariety of transactions, and also tomake them aware of the economicrealities of the doctrine in each case.For example, in real estate transac­tions, when we talk about the rightof specific performance in the eventof a breach of contract of purchase,I want them to be aware of whetherspecific performance is a viable rem­edy for the vendor, in terms of tak­ing the land off the market for asubstantial period of time whilewaiting for the suit to be resolved.It may take three to five years forhim to win the suit-if he does win.In this case, then, specific perfor­mance may be a theoretical remedy,but is it a practical one? It is essen­tial therefore, for students to lookat the doctrine in terms of its eco­nomic realities for each specific case.

In addition to an emphasis ondoctrine, my courses also include aheavy ingredient of professional re­sponsibility material, such as discus­sions of the ethical implications ofthe lawyer's conduct or the client'sconduct in a particular case, becauseI feel it is extremely important forstudents to develop a keen sense ofthe responsibilities of the lawyerboth to the client and to society.

Associate ProfessorPaul A. Brest

What attracted me to teaching wasthe opportunity to pursue questionsthat interested me, rather than thosethat a client would happen to bringto a law firm. I practic d for twoy ars doing civil rights law, and whilther were many challenging prob­I ms, I often felt frustrated thatI simply could not-within the con-

straints of practice--pursue an areathat I found fascinating. And some­times I had to work in areas thatI did not find fascinating at all. Thenice thing about teaching is that-

with some limitations-you can teachand do research in whatever areasare of interest to you.

At the moment my main area ofinterest is Constitutional Law. I gotinto this field accidentally. I came toStanford willing to teach virtuallyanything. It just happened that they ar I came th School was under­staff d in Constitutional Law teach­ers and Dean ann asked m if Iwould teach it. It scared me tre­m ndously because, in a sense, itreally isn't one subject but a wholeseri s of subjects. And although thesubj cts have various coherenceswith ach oth r, th y cover a v rybroad field. After I got over theinitial shock, how v r, I decided itwould be fun to teach. I'm now inthe process of doing a ConstitutionalLaw casebook which restructures thecourse quite differently from the wayit has been traditionally presented inlaw schools.

7

"The most important thing any law professor

can give his students is a feeling of

excitement and enthusiasm about the law."

I try in my classes to lead stu­d nts into inquiri s which will stim­ulat th m and to give th m somguidance in pursuing ideas of intel­I ctual valu conn ct d with law.Th gr atest disappointm nt I'vhad in teaching is th rather smallnumber of stud nts who r ally dofind th kinds of issues w tak upin law cours s inter sting for th irown sak . It's not surprising in aprof ssional school that a larg num­ber of th stud nts come to I arn aprof ssion which they will practic .I had xp ct d, though, that a high rperc ntage- v n though th y wantto b practicing lawy rs-would findint llectual v ntur s in th law stim­ulating in th ms Iv s. Som do; andthos ar th on s who rally makteaching exciting.

Professor Moffatt Hancock

I attended law school in Canadaduring the D,epression and had at

8

that time a strong attraction toCriminal Law. I wanted to get a jobas a prosecutor (assistant crown at­torney as one is called in Canada),but that was strictly a political posi­tion and my party lost the electionand was swept out of power. I hadalso thought, however, that I mightgo into law teaching; so when theprosecutor's job fell through, I de­cided to apply for a fellowship tostudy in an American law school fora year, which I did at Michigan. Iwas greatly attracted to the fine li­brary and facilities at Michigan, andI made up my mind that I wouldsomeday be a law professor in theUnited States.

The war delayed my plans a bit,however, because law schools in theUnited States stopped hiring newfaculty. Nevertheless, I was able togo on teaching and writing inCanada, so my career wasn't inter­rupted during those years.

Mter the war I taught at Dal­housie University in Nova Scotiawhere I held the Viscount Bennettchair. There I met my wife. In 1949we were married and I moved tothe University of Southern Cali­fornia. One summer there weresome Stanford students in a Con­flict of Laws course I was giving,who, upon returning to Stanford,mentioned my course to the deanand various faculty members. As ithappened, Carl Spaeth, who wasD,ean, wanted to offer a course inJurisprudence because no one hadtaught it since Joseph Bingham re­tired in '44. Also, Marion Rice Kirk­wood was retiring, so they neededsomeone to teach Property. I under­stand that George Osborne, whowas chainnan of the AppointmentsCommittee, leafed through the di­rectory of law teachers, made a listof people, and noticed that I was

teaching Jurisprudence and LegalHistory at USC and that I had alsotaught Property. My teaching back­ground, combin.ed with the students'reports, led them to invite me toteach a summer course in Property.When I came to Stanford I fell inlove with the campus; it was a lotmore rustic than it is now. So at theend of the summer, when theyasked me to come back, I was veryhappy to do so.

When I retire in 1977, I will havebeen at Stanford for twenty-fouryears; and I will have been a lawteacher for forty. Of course, thestyles in professoring have changeda great deal over th·e years. When Istarted teaching at the University ofToronto I wore a long, black robeand I wrote my lectures out and hadthem before me in a big book.What's more, up until a few yearsago the crusty old professor, like theone portrayed in The Paper Chase,was very much a part of the aca­demic scene. In fact, when GeorgeOsborne (who was one of the greatcrusty professors of all time) retired,I had the ambition of taking overhis role of crustiness. I tried it for afew years, but I found it took toomuch time and energy.

Regardless of one's teaching style,though, I think the most importantthing any law professor can give hisstudents is a feeling of excitementand enthusiasm about the law. Ofcourse, sheer enthusiasm alone isnot enough. The teacher must alsopresent the material in such a waythat the students are able to und,er­stand it, but I think the great test ofthe law teacher is his ability to gointo class year after year and get allworked up and excited about thesame old case he got worked upabout ten, twenty, or even fortyyears ago.

Conversations withEarl Warren

Editor's Note:On July 9, 1974,

G'hief Justice Warrendied at the age of 83.

The Law Forum invited retired Chief Justice Earl Warren to visit theSchool on April 30 to commemorate the twentieth anniversary ofBrown v. Board of Education, the United States Supreme Court decisionthat ended public school segregation.

Chief Justice Warren first spoke informally with Dean Ehrlich andProfessors Gerald Gunther, William Gould, and Barbara Babcockbefore a capacity audience in Annenberg Auditorium.

Professor Gunther, who was a law clerk to the Chief Justice from1954 to 1955, described Brown as "an extraordinarily important event"and the prime stimulus of the civil rights movement.

Professor Gould said that Brown was the principal force in his decisionto become a lawyer: "That decision gave me and other blacks the hopeand belief that the law could address itself to racial injustices in thiscountry and that I as a lawyer could make some contribution to end theold order against which my parents had struggled.... Brown wasimportant to all black people because it gave us hope that we wouldhave our day in court-both literally and figuratively."

Professor Babcock, in assessing the effect of Brown on CriminalProcedure and Women and the Law, said that a criminal-justicerevolution was caused by Brown and its focus on inequality.

Following the professors' comments, the program shifted to aquestion-and-answer period with the Chief Justice. When asked whetherhe felt that criticism of the phrase "all deliberate speed" was justified,the Chief Justice asserted that if he had it to do over again, he would stilluse the phrase. He added that critics of the decree had not offered anysound alternative.

The Ch,ief Justice was then asked to comment on the role of counselin Brown. He observed that in the Supreme Court, as tin other I

courts, "there are some good arguments, some bad; some very good,some very bad." But he stressed that oral arguments are a vital part ofthe Judicial system because the true merit of the arguments arebrought out through questions. He criticized the tendency to eliminateoral arguments as a "disservice to advocacy and the court." He saidthat if there are not enough courts to allow for oral arguments, "thenwe should get enough."

The Chief Justice said he found law clerks "very helpful and veryimportant," but he was not in favor of permanent clerks.

Responding to the query, 'CHow did you feel when President Eisenhowerappointed you to the Court?" the Chief Justice quipped, 'CI felt fine."

The program was followed by a reception, where Chief Justice Warrenmet informally with law students and faculty.

9

T e~oa

~ cat·o ojt e~awyer

Hon. Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr.

The 1974 Herman Phleger Lecture was deliveredon April 11 by Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr. Senior Judgeof the United States District Court for the Districtof Massachusetts, and Herman Phleger VisitingProfessor of Law.

The Herman Phleger Visiting Professorship allowsfor a leading person in the field of law-either inprivate practice or in government-to spend asemester at the School to teach and to provide facultyand students with insights into the legal system andits operations. The professorship was establishedthrough the generosity of Mr. and Mrs. HermanPhleger. Mr. Phleger, an emeritus trustee of theUniversity, is a senior partner in the San Franciscofirm of Brobeck, Phleger and Harrison.

~dO not know with a sufficient certainty andin detail what it is that produces good character andvirtue. We might even be skeptical enough to thinkthat the most virtuous of judges, Benjamin NathanCardozo, was virtuous partly in reaction to his corruptfather who led the Tweed Ring judges in the mostscandalous episode in the whole of American judicialhistory.

So I start out by saying I am not going to give youany answer. I think that anybody who pretends togive you an answer is a charlatan.

What do we know if we know anything about moraleducation? We surely know that the ability to recitemorality has nothing to do with conduct. What weseem to know is that even among the best and bright­est there is a great deal of departure from the higheststandards. And yet, we must not entirely despair. Itis probably true, little as we may like to admit it,that Nietzsche was right; that fear is an importantpart of morality and had we all worn Gyges' ringfrom birth there are very few of us who would haveled saintly lives.

I support the view that it is almost inconceivablethat people will be moral unless at some time theyhave been subject to discipline. Unless there has beensome early period of enforced confonnity, not neces­sarily by the rod, it is not very likely that people willbe governed by much beyond the pleasure principle.

10

From an early platform of discipline, one may moveforward through rational means to a higher level.What is important in moral education is to carrypeople higher, from where they are to a vision ofsomething better. In a kind of Hegelian way, thismay involve a revolt. It has been suggested that truemorality is impossible except you be a revolutionary.It is quite easy to be a conformist. But who said thatwas moral?

The total step-by-step program from discipline tochallenge to freedom moves in the direction of anawareness of justice. It is justice that is the funda­mental problem-at least in a secular world. And itis the awareness of justice and the search for justiceand, if possible, the achievement of it that is morality.Now that, which is the common ground of all callings,is the special ground of the law. If once Philosophyor Theology was the Queen of the Faculty, perhapsLaw is its successor, and even more important in acommunity in which there is no longer a commonreligious faith, creed, or discipline.

What do the law schools now do? Is it not fair tosay that they spend a great deal of their time helpingpeople to see the facts and state them accuratelywithout swindling anybody; either the professor, orthe class, or the person reciting? The best possibleeffort is made to define with exactness, to see theissues, and to cultivate the responsibility of analysislooking forward to judgment.

I think it fair to say that the very structure of legaleducation has a moral quality. But there is some­thing more than that. Every great teacher is a moralteacher, or he is not great. Anybody who studied withPaul Freund and read his books on the SupremeCourt and on Justice; or with Henry Hart and readhis Aims of the Criminal Law or his other writing;or with Benjamin Kaplan and studied Copyright orContracts under him, knows perfectly well that bythe way they approached the problem day by day,the way they elicited from the class the best that inthem lay, they were moral teachers.

But let me make it quite clear. We have beentalking about intellectual influences, and intellectualinfluences by themselves are inadequate. An exces­sively intellectual, competitive world has its owndisadvantages, as the younger generation has beenreminding us these last few years. Beyond the intel­lectual there must be the emotional sense of thesolidarity, the fraternity, the tolerance, the decencywhich make society a community.

~n this law school, which a year or two ago pro­duced the Packer-Ehrlich report, I need not remindyou that we are faced not merely with a great increasein the number of people who are seeking legal educa­tion, we are going into an era in which, in diversways, in different institutions, we shall have a changefrom fhe fonn of legal education that has existed

Excerpts from the 1974 Herman Phleger Lecture

since Langdell's time. We may have many paralegalpeopl . W surely will hav more and more specialists.

It is unthinkable that in the modern world we cantum back from specialization. But specializationoffers a peculiar threat to a unified cor·e or moralpurpose in the law school-or in life. And this is adanger much increas d b cause accompanying spe­cialization, the older small law firms and the individ­ual practitioners become I ss and I ss important. Whotoday becomes an apprentice of a lawyer xcept (andthis is an important ception) the person who be­comes a law clerk to a judg ? I ould point out toyou as not irrelevant the moral impact of certainjudges upon a succession of law clerks who, howeverbright they may have been when they became lawclerks, were more moral men aft rwards. Is it an ac­cident that among Learned Hand's law clerks wereArchibald Cox and Elliott Richardson and DeanEhrlich and Professor Gunther? Is it an accident thatamong Justice Brandeis' law clerks were DeanAcheson, Calvert agruder, H.enry J. Friendly, Pro­fessor Freund, Professor Hart, Professor Jaffe, andProfessor Hurst?

What do I say about the future? I wish I couldsay that I saw some modified apprentice system; butI do not foresee that kind of development. In someplaces perhaps, for some lucky few.

With respect to law schools generally, I have threewholly tentative approaches.

~rst, I think there should be a recasting of thecourse or courses in Jurisprudence. The day of RoscoePound and his categori s and divisions and subdi­visions is long since passed. What would happen,for example, if you set before a class John Rawls'Theory of Justice and spent the time to considerwhether his premises are really valid and whetherthey are in conflict with and, if so, which is right?Examining Justice in a Platonic sense will pass no barexamination; nor will it get you a job; nor will yourprospective employer probably think that you havespent your time wisely. But those ho s·ee furtherthan the cash box will wonder whether it is not ofsupreme importance to know what this law businessis all about.

My second division is easier to support. The youngare a very horizontally-minded gen ration. They knowinfinitely more than people my age do about a thou­sand different areas. But I have a compensating in­terest. I have a vertical interest in history and intradition. As Isaiah said, "to know the rock whenceye are hewn" is an essential of moral or mentalstability.

One learns history by wrestling with particularevents in some d pth. And so far as the lawyer isconcerned, the particular wrestling is generally per­sonal and biographical.

© Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr. Excerpted with pennission.

We don't study in sufficient detail and with suffi­ciently rigid standards those who practice the law.What we ought to be concerned with are not theperfect lives. Let us not spend too much time onCardozo; none of us will be like him. It's much moreus ful to study Lincoln and Brandeis and Buckner­not on of whom would claim for himself perfection,nor be entitled to be awarded that title.

Now what about my third general area. In myjudgment, that has to do with participation by thestudents. Anybody can talk about morality, but prac­tice of morality requires action, which means partici­pation. I do not expect to get many votes from peoplemy age on my view that students should 'have a muchlarger role in connection, not merely with courses andtheir selection, but with faculty and their selection,and discipline and the growth of what Charles AlanWright has called "the constitution on the campus."It is not because I am so eager to get rid of authority.It is because I think that the earlier you can makepeople participate in the institutions of justice andassume an appropriate role therein, the more likelyyou will be to develop their moral character.

G):think I know something about what distinguishesmoral from immoral people, even if I don't knowhow to produce moral people. One thing is intellec­tual rigor. There is no substitute for hard thinkingon moral questions.

Another thing 's certainly candor, an awareness ofone's own faults and limitations. Who illustrates thisbetter than Montaigne? Is it not true that as you readthe Essays you perceive what a moral man this manis with all his lapses? "Though ye sit on the top ofthe world, yet sit ye up on your tail." "A man whonever indulges in excess is a prig." Facing up to whatone is like is of great importance.

And then there is courage; and I don't mean merepluck in the Shakespearean sense, "Money lost, littlelost; honor lost, much lost; pluck lost, all lost." I meancourage in the Periclean sense, "The secret of happi­ness is liberty and the secret of liberty is courage."

We have enormous choice though it may seem mar­ginal. But the moral man is the man who carries ashis constant companions critics of quality who con­stantly measure internally his external conduct. Thoseof us who are fortunate enough to go to great lawschools get such companions as we go through lawschool-such teachers, such peers. If we are fortunatewe carry them as our critics inside us for the rest ofour lives.

It is in that sense that Maitland, in his famous Redelecture on Roman Law in the English Renaissance,must have meant his famous tribute that in the earlyMiddle Ages, Bologna was the great law school; inthe later Middle Ages, Paris; in the beginning ofthe 20th century, Harvard.

In the end of this century, may it be Stanford.

11

ve i If iIf a

Members of the Class of 1958 in arousing revival of their smash hit,New Cases of 1958.

12

Daniel M. f"eeley '40 presents aportrait of John Hurlbut to DeanEhrlich. The portrait, by JohnBohrer, is a gift to the School fromthe Class of 1940.

An amused John Hurlbut enjoysthe evening~s entertainment,performed in his honor.

Law Alumni Weekend/April 5, 1974

as ea very t!C)C)

••

Classes of 1924 and 1929

The Fiftieth Reunion of the Class of 1924 and theForty-fifth Reunion of the Class of 1929 were jointlyheld at Rickeys Hyatt House, Palo Alto. Those inattendance from the Class of 1924 were A. H. Brazil,H. E. Lindersmith, and Reunion Chairman Philip G.Smith. Members from the Class of 1929 includedRobert L. Beardslee, S. M. Saroyan, and Hon. Gus J.Solomon. Associate Dean J. Keith Mann was the fac­ulty guest.

A number of toasts were given during the evening,including one to the lawyers who had survived fiftyyears of law practice and another to the wives of thoselawyers who had also managed to weather fifty yearsof law practice. 1924 Reunion Chairman Philip G.Smith offered a touching tribute to his former class­mates, both living and dead, as he briefly describedthe activities of the many with whom he had keptin contact over the years.

Class of 1934

The Class of '34 held a memorable 40th reunion atRickeys Hyatt House, Palo Alto. An excellent dinner,preceded and succeeded by refreshments and music,kept the party together until long into the night.

Our special guests included Professors George Os­borne and John Hurlbut. We were also honored bythe attendance of Bob Brown, President of the Boardof Trustees, who spent his first year with us beforegoing to Oxford; also by Dean Tom Ehrlich andPresident Richard Lyman later in the evening. Ourdistinguished Judges included Wally Craig of theFederal District Court in Phoenix and Gil Perry ofthe Santa Cruz Superior Court.

Law Alumni Weekend/April 6, 1974

The total attendance was about fifty, which is notbad, considering that in the depression year of ourgraduation our Class only totalled about sixty gradu-ates. Our party included Joe Gordon, from Tacoma;Ed Gearhardt, Bob Cathcart, Bud Hawkins, and DickRyan, from San Francisco; Les McElwain, from Oak­land; Jack Nourse, Tom Sutmer, Keene Watkins, andGeorge and Waddy Shibley from the southland; DaveJacobson, from Atherton; and Wright James, fromBakersfield; with their attractive wives.

During the late evening relaxation the old Stanfordspirit was manifested in Stanford yells, led by WallyCraig in his best cheerleader form. The Ancient As­semblage responded with a lot of pep. We are lookingforward to our next with anticipation and hope thatthose who missed our 40th will be present at our 45th.Nathan C. FinchReunion Chairman

The Reunion Banquet of the Class of '39 was heldin the Oak Room at the Holiday Inn, Palo Alto. The

13

guest of honor was Professor Lowell Turrentine, forwhom the Class has a particularly close tie. DeanMarion Rice Kirkwood was also invited to attend,but for reasons of health found it necessary to miss theevent. A very warm letter of greeting from him wasread by Chairman Whitney.

Those attending were Col. Myron L. Birnbaum,Robert N. and Virginia Blewett, Edward L.. and Shir­ley Butterworth, Carl F. and Bette Dodge, John P.Hearne, Remington and Jean Low, N. Perry and CarylMoerdyke, Jr., Tom and Marilyn Needham, Jerome D.Peters, Jr., Samuel D. and Emeline Thurman, JamesC. and Polly Toothaker, George H. and Isabel Whit­ney, Eben and Mary Whittlesey, Miriam E. Wolff,William H. and Ruth Woodward, Leroy A. and MaryWright, Steve Peters and his guest Joan Anderson.

As befitted the occasion and the company, con­versation was lively and spirited; and under the be­nign but firm direction of Bob Blewett, who was byacclaim elected to serve as Toastmaster of the occa­sion, not only Lowell Turrentine, but each memberof the class was asked to "say a few words." Thestories thus elicited were hilarious and appropriate,ranging in subject matter from an Irish ballad byJohn Hearne to remarks on how it feels to lose anelection by Eb Whittlesey. For all of the class mem­bers it was a memorable evening, and the meetingadjourned amid discussions of plans for the 40th re­union to be celebrated, God willing and the creekdon't rise, in 1979.George H. WhitneyReunion Chair11Uln

Class of 1949 ... Twenty-five years later

Joan Donegan had prudently suggested that secondwives should have a special label on their name tags.That would be to avoid reminiscences about eventsthey had not shared. We didn't get around to that.But weren't the wives all glamorous? I figure if theywear those gr,eat necklines plunging down to there,we get to look at the little pendant that's danglingway down about to here. The Class of 1949 had a

14

great 25th reunion on April 6, 1974. However, Vir­ginia K. Parkinson forgot to bring home her doggybag.

Dave and Debbie Lush from Dingy St. Clair (that'sFrance you know) had to leave the next morning torelieve their 18-year-old from baby-sitting duties backat the water mill. Dave gracefully conceded thatCharlie Cole had really travelled further in comingfrom Australia to make the reunion. Freddie Duttonwas there from Washington, but seems to have leftearly.

Shirley Hufstedler, looking great, was using whatlooked like a Himalyan walking stick. Elmer Sproulsaid Shirley broke her leg in a parking lot. (DoesShirley have to work in a parking lot?) Elmerreceives the largest eyebrows award. Another brokenwarrior showed a lot of class in getting his: BobThompson broke his leg playing tennis, but thenbroke his finger playing basketball with his son whilewearing his leg cast. Hale and Virginia McCowen,down from Ukiah, were house guests of Karl andIrene Bledsoe. Late in the evening Karl was lookingfor the Judge, who must have been in an importantdiscussion because he had his coat off. (I was hopingHale would streak.) Utah was well represented, withErie and Birdie Boorman, Rex and Joanie Lewis, andDick Taylor and his law school daughter, Susan. AlsoDean Sam Thurman who joined us after dinner. Rexis really with it, featuring a cavalry mustache. (So isJoanie, without the mustache.) Best (and I thinkonly) beard at the party had to be Ben Priest's. It sortof vaguely reminds you of some famous movie direc­tor, or maybe D'Artagnan. Barney and Jeanne Favarohad just heard that their twins have been admitted toStanford. Barney refuses to accept donations from hisfriends, but maybe if you could send over a casseroleonce in awhile. Fred and Lorraine Mieke's son Nealalso got the nod from Stanford, but hasn't decidedwhether to accept.

George Pfeiffer nominated Mal Furbush for Young­est Looking, and Mike Bernard put John Donegan inthe running. Somebody thought Bud Clary shouldhave been mentioned. What about George Henzie?

Or Ken Jones? Fred Mielke? Maybe Ray Goodrich?(It is understood, of course, that female members ofthe class are far above this competition.) Of course,there are some others of us that surely would havebeen mentioned for Youngest Looking if anyone hadthought about it. What is white hair? Or no hair?Speaking of hair, the old gray fox, Bob Simpson, hasbeen joined in silvery grandeur by a few others likeSterling Hutcheson, George Andrews, Merlin Baker,Jerry Downs, Bob Foley, Nick Petris, Mel Swift, andJim Tucker. (Let's hear it for that great JackieTucker! ) Jim and Virginia Dixon were big on thedance floor. Jim offered to permit anybody to tug onhis shaggy mane that looks the same as it did in highschool, so I guess he passes the top'per test.

Deans Carl Spaeth and Tom Ehrlich and theirwives, Sheila and Ellen joined us for dinner. Later inthe evening, along with Sam Thurman was JohnHurlbut, fresh from the moving tribute given him thenight before. Gary Bayer was with us for cocktails.

Bagman Charles Purnell announced that the Classof 1949 Reunion Fund had moved way past its goal,totalling over $55,000. Charles did a great job as ourchief fund raiser (may he become head of the UnitedCrusade) . Jane Purnell was glamorous in a blackfilmy thing. (We certainly do give you the fashionnotes, huh?) If the Menlo Gold Club ever wantsto know what happened to pages 1-15 of their tele­phone book, Mal Furbush is the one to ask, becausehe was the one who turned it over to Jim West for atelephone book speech. The main thing I rememberabout Jim's speech is that he expressed the opinionthat Cappy Martin's voice has decreased several deci­bels in magnitude over the years. Can we really ac­cept that opinion? Anyway Cap and Liz were a lotof fun as always. Sitting with them were Zooker andAnnie Sutton.

Dede Clary expressed the opinion that her grand­child is bigger than Ginny Parkinson's. But gee, Dede,yours is older. Dede was in a smart white outfit andGinny's white crocheted dress was pronounced a see­through by lascivious Ed Conn. Not true, lasciviousEd. Jean Conn expressed the opinion to Bob andBarbara Elliott that the neighborhood where Bob andI used to live in San Francisco is being discriminatedagainst. I forget why.

There were a number of opinions expressed duringthe evening with a certain firmness, especially laterin the evening. Sumner Rodriguez denied owning allof Madras, Oregon, an opinion which was being urgedupon him by someone-me, I think. Beverly Barnes,Marnie Furbush (the lemon drop) and Ginny arrivedat a definite opinion about something I forget. NavyDoug Lyon really likes his fishing retreat in Idaho, Iknow that. How about that Nancy Lyon? WinslowChristian was glad there were no formal speeches. Sothere, George Pfeiffer. Lorraine Kongsgard congratu­lated Sam Barnes because his eyes aren't as red as

they used to be. Didn't get to see much of Tom orFoley. I did get to talk a little to Nyna Foley, wholooks smashing.

Mac MacKillop and Suzanne Shaw, Air California'sgift to the Class of '49, came down the peninsula with

Kim and lovely Kathleen Allison. Kim, carefully un­derserving himself all evening in preparation for theBayshore, suddenly said, "I've got a great idea. Let'sgo home." Not so about twenty characters who gath­ered around a table in the dining room and talked'til long after the bar closed.

Not too much dancing went on, more's the pity.However, Irv and pert Clara Rovens did their part.And hunted up the band once when it (they?) tooktoo long an intelmission. I had an enjoyable but shorttalk with Peggy and Judge John Cole. I appeared be­fore John briefly a few years back when he had thatmankilling Law & Motion Department in Los AngelesSuperior Court. Enjoyed talking to Jack and BarbaraHarriman (Jack should have been considered forYoungest Looking), Winslow and Donna Christian,Marilyn Hutcheson (Hi, Sterling), Ed Keller, Daveand Debbie Lush, Charlie Cole, Art and Lil Toupin,Jill Swift (Oh, hi Mel), Clyde Tritt, Bill Wunsch.

Familiar faces in the distance or just quick fellows.(You feel as though you should methodically go fromone to another and talk to each): George Andrews,Ray Goodrich, Merlin Baker, Everett Berbarian,George Bond, Warren and Marie Christopher, CurtDarling, Jim Denebeim. (That reminds me- Jim gaveme his biographical questionnaire at the party-theyall came in so slowly that I gave up trying to havethem ready for the party. But we have most of themnow, and there really will be a Class Book.)

Just saw Jerry Downs briefly. Talked to Tom Filesand Denali when they came in. Bob Foley and I aregoing to get together. So are Seth Hufstedler and I.And a few others. I saw Dick Gausewitz walking by.I think maybe he is eligible for the silver locks group.Barely saw George Bond. Also Phil and Sheila Ehrlich,but that doesn't matter much as to Phil because Ican go take a look at him any time I want to. I guess

15

everybody knows this, but Whispering Phil pro­nounces his name like "Erlick" while Dean Tom pro­nounces his like "Erlish". Solution: don't invite themto the same party.

I got to say hello to Dick Hahn, and just a couple ofwords to Frank HannIg. Wish I had seen more ofGeorge Henzie and Bob Hill (what makes you thinkI am going through the alphabet to write this?) Wewere sorry that Duva Hill couldn't make it becauseshe was in the Midwest (illness in her family).

I just said hello to Roy Jerome and date MarionBrowning. Not even that I'm afraid, to Bill Irvin. Ohyes, Ted Lachman and I are going to get togetheron one of my poaching trips up to Oregon on a law­suit up there.

John Loomis and I talked together with John Hurl­but for awhile. Just saw Ward Mathews and Don Mc­Murchie out of the comer of my eye. I did get tospend some time with Bob and pretty Dolores Pender­grass. (Note to girls: you just get called pretty oncearound here, and after that you have to live onmemories.)

I saw Senator Nick Petris brieBy. Also Joe andMildred Rogers. Somebody said John Sorbo was look­ing for me, but we never got together. Let's see, Johnisn't in the D.A.'s office anymore, is he? Just a helloto Bob and Peggy Taylor and a wave to Dick Tuttle.(Did he wave back? Wonder if he doesn't like rareb f? Oh, of course he must have waved back.) Sil­ver locks club for him, too.

Saw Don and Ida Webster. Ida had suggested weinvite our librarian, Mrs. Gladys Wishard, but Mrs.Wishard had another engagement and couldn't makeit. Not to be forgotten is that I talked to vivaciousMarianne West, who looked great as usual.

It was sly Daryl Pearson who thought we shouldhave Charles Purnell announce the take for the ClassFund. Could Daryl be thinking that another year isyet to come? No, of course not. Why would I thinkthat?

Anyway, everybody seemed to be enjoying ourreunion hugely. Really, all you have to do is hire aplace for all of those wonderful people to get togetherand enjoy each other. Well, maybe also get themsomething to drink. We had over 150 people at thisparty-how about that! More than ever attended anylaw school class reunion. Actually we needed thatmany to break even, but Jim Tucker and I had aplan: if the list had looked kind of slim, we couldfirst jettison the Bowers. Then the hors d'oeuvres.Then the band. And finally the wine.

Hope you got a chance to meet Bryce and MarilynShirley, our reunion aides from Stanford Law School.Also, that was the Editor of the Stanford Lawyer, noless, Cheryl Ritchie, snapping your pictures.

Let's do it again in five years with more people!

Ben ParkinsonReunion Co-Chairman

16

Class of 1954

The Class of 1954 celebrated their Twentieth Re­union at L'Omelette in Palo Alto. Sixteen membersof the Class attended, including Mr. and Mrs. SteveBarnett, Mr. and Mrs. John P. Brogdon, Mr. and Mrs.Stephen Chandler, Mr. and Mrs. Arthur Damon, Jr.,Richard Graham, Hon. Cynthia Holcomb HaIl, Mr.and Mrs. Oscar F. Irwin, Mr. and Mrs. Richard W.Konig, Mr. and Mrs. Charles A. Legge, Mr. and Mrs.M. J. Mirkin, Arnold Shane, Mr. and Mrs. William P.Smith, Mr. and Mrs. Richard B. Snell, Mr. and Mrs.John Sutter, and Robert White. Faculty guests wereAssociate Dean Joseph Leininger and Professor Wil­liam Warren.

Professors Byron D. Sher and Kenneth Scott joinedmembers of the Class of 1959 for their FifteenthReunion at the University Club in Palo Alto. Twenty­six members of the Class and their spouses attended.They included Stephen A. Bauman, Ronald H. Bona­parte, James W. Boyle, Raymond Bright, RichardBromley, James Darrah, Arthur Devlin, David H.Duff, Arnold Brody Haims, John Hanna, Charles J.Heyler, Michael Keady, Edmund T. King, Andrew B.Kjos, James B. Little, Richard Maltzman, Jim Palmer,Rufus Rhoades, James L. Sammet, George Sayre,

Robert C. SchIeh, Hon. Howard L. Swartz, Jack E.Teeters, Ronald Wagner, Vincent E. Whelan, andGeorge Yamasaki, Jr.

n=---------------=n

lU!;............_--iIiiiiiIiiIiIIiClass of 1964

The 1964 Class Reunion was held at the home ofJohn and Barbara McBride in Palo Alto. Over seventypersons were in attendance to exchange stories andshare experiences accumulated in the ten years fol­lowing graduation from Law School. Informal (andbrief) remarks by Dick Farman and faculty guestsGerald Gunther and Jack Friedenthal followed asuperb dinner, especially catered for the occasionunder the auspices of Fred and Barbara Fields. Thedeparture time of the last guests to leave was notdisclosed.Dick FarmanReunion Chairman

Class of 1969

Considering how far-flung our Class members areat this time, we had quite a good turnout-aboutthirty members. The "official" functions of our Classconsisted of an informal outdoor beer party at Ro­sotti's on Saturday afternoon, followed .by a banquetat L'Omelette.

Professor and Mrs. John Kaplan were our guestsat the banquet. Professor Kaplan was his usual en­tertaining self, reminiscing about our class and certainof its members, remarking that George Brown, the"class Maoist" was the only person to wear a vest tothe banquet; and remarking that certain female mem­bers of the Class had become so much more glamor­ous as to be almost unrecognizable.

Vying for the long distance award were Tom Healy(Rochester, New York), who arrived una,nnouncedwith Marty O'Connell; Chuck Murphy and AlexBryner (Anchorage, Alaska); and Bernie Bays (Hono­lulu, Hawaii). Bays wangled a free trip by acting as alegal courier. Murphy, a sole practitioner in Reno,Nevada, related how he had hired an associate who

failed to pass the bar but with Murph's soft heart,'was kept on as a clerk. Luis Nogales was spotted oncampus with the Board of Visitors, of which he is a:member, and related his experiences traveling through:Russia and China as a White House Fellow. Rick:Mallory told the tale of his marriage to Gail Farrell,a glamorous "Lawrence Welk girl." The wedding wasdone in true Hollywood style and videotaped. Bucky:Newell and his wife, Judy, also came up from theLos Angeles area; Bucky is now working in the U.S..Attorney's office and weathers a commute each dayof well over one hour each way.

I.~....---

rJ!Thos Hawley came up from Monterey, where

'rhos is in private practice. Relating their variousexperiences in starting and maintaining law practices'with one or more compatriots in the Bay Area wereIGlen Schofield (accompanied by his wife, Sue), Ron:Romines, Ken Kayes, Gerry Wright, Chuck Kuntz,and Ralph Jacobson. Bob Stern (working in Sacra­;mento as counsel to the elections division of Secretaryof State's office), Bob Charrow (teaching law on the:Peninsula, and Dick Herzog (San Mateo County Dis­trict Attorney's office) were among those in attend­ance at Rosotti's on Saturday afternoon. Bill Hoffmanrelated that he was working in San Francisco in athree-man firm following a brief stint in Washington,:O.C.; and Greg Wilhelm insisted that his job with:National Bank Americard Legal Department in San:Francisco did not entail sending out dunning letters.JDave and Marilee Clark are enjoying their return toStanford where Dave is currently assistant director ofstudies in law and development at the Law School.:Marilyn Norek is working in the Palo Alto City.Attorney's office. Leroy Miller, who came in from:Phoenix, and yours truly from Minneapolis, shared:middle distance honors for attendance at the Reunion.

We were graced with beautiful weather during the'weekend, and I think everyone had a good time. Inaddition to attending some classes at the Law School,nostalgic visits were made to places like "The Goose"and the "0." The new Law School building appearsto be taking shape under the watchful eye of Dean:Ehrlich.JHarry C. Piper III

17

Professor Anthony Amsterdam has published thethird edition of his Trial Manual for the Defense ofCriminal Cases. While collaborating with ProfessorDonald Lunde of the Stanford Medical School inthe development of a new clinical seminar concernedwith the problems of the mentally disordered crimi­nal defendant, Mr. Amsterdam has continued his in­volvement in numerous civil rights litigations dealingwith capital punishment, prisoners' rights, police prac­tices, racial discrimination in education and employ­ment, and other subjects.

In the July 15 issue of Time, Mr. Amsterdam wasnamed one of "200 Faces for the Future," Time's ownportfolio of rising young American leaders.

On December 16 Professor Amsterdam received thefirst Earl Warren Civil Liberties Award from theAmerican Civil Liberties Union of Northern Californiafor his outstanding contributions to civil liberties. InJanuary, he delivered the Oliv r Wendell HolmesDevise Lectur s at the Univ rsity of Minnesota LawSchool. His topic was "P rspectives on the FourthAmendment." The lectur s w re published in theJanuary issue of the Minnesota Law Review.

Associate Professor Barbara Allen Babcock's newbook, Sex Discrimination and the Latv: Causes andRemedies, will be available in the next few months,in time for use in second semester courses in Womenand the Law. The 2,500-page text, co-authored by AnnE. Freedman, Eleanor Holmes Norton, and Susan C.Ross, offers an innovative approach to the study ofWomen and the Law. In addition to cases and otherlegal materials, the volume contains extensive notes,material written by students in Women and the Lawcourses at many schools, magazine articles, plus ma­terial on economics, sociology, and feminist historyto provide background for the cases. Ms. Babcockthinks the text can be used in both law school coursesin Women and the Law and undergraduate coursesin women's studies. It is also a comprehensive refer­ence for practitioners. She hopes that with its pub­lication more schools will include courses on Womenand the Law in their curricula.

On March 30, Professor Babcock gave the keynoteaddress to 800 women attending the Fifth AnnualWomen and the Law Conference in Austin, Texas.

On May 11, she spoke to the Criminal PracticeInstitute in the District of Columbia on the duty of

18

the private bar to aid in the representation of criminalcases.

Associate Professor John H. Barton has received aFord Foundation grant from Stanford University tocomplete his book on the general theory of arms con­trol, examining which domestic and internationalpolitical situations lead to the preservation of peace.

Associate Professor Paul A. Brest was a commentatorat a Conference on Equality and Discrimination atthe University of Chicago on May 3 and 4. The con­ference is co-sponsored by the University of Chicagoand the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith.

Assistant Professor Richard Danzig has been electedto the Harvard Society of Fellows as an IntermediateFellow for the academic year 1975-76. While at Har­vard, Professor Danzig plans to continue a study ofdecision-making in the Supreme Court.

Professor Danzig is writing an article on the FlagSalute Cases of 1940 and 1943, two Supreme Courtdecisions that first held that school children could becompelled to salute the flag and then held the reverse.Using extant manuscript sources, he hopes to illu­minate the process by which the Justices first made uptheir minds and then changed them. The project hasreceived support from the American Bar Foundation,research affiliate of the American Bar Association. Lastsummer the Foundation awarded Professor Danzig afellowship in legal history to aid him in researchingand writing his recently completed article, "Hadleyv. Baxendale: A Case Study in Legal Change."

Professor Danzig continues to be an active con­sultant for the Police Foundation in Washington, D.C.In April he gave a pap r on Innovation in PoliceDepartments at the American Political Science As­sociation Western Regional Meeting.

Dean Thomas Ehrlich published Cyprus 1958-1967:International Crisis and the Role of Law (OxfordUniversity Press) in March. The volume, writtenund r th auspices of the American Society of Inter­national Law, is one of a series that examines therole of international law in government decision-mak­ing during some of the political crises of recent years.

Professor Jack H. Friedenthal published the secondedition of his casebook, ,Civil Procedure, in May.Mr. Friedenthal has been elected a member of theSteering Committee of the Senate of the AcademicCouncil.

Professor Lawrence M. Friedman's book, A Historyof American Law (Simon and Schuster, 1973), waschosen by SCRIBES, The American Society of Writ­ers on Legal Subjects, as "the best book on or aboutlaw" published in 1973. Mr. Friedman's book wasalso nominated this year for a National Book Awardin history. In the April 6, 1974, issue of Nation Pro­fessor Friedman published an article entitled "Societyand Its Enemies: The Tolerance Level for Crime."

Professor William B. Gould is currently completinga book on racial discrimination in labor relations.He is also involved in a $50 million class actionsuit against trucking companies and the Teamstersfor "willful and wanton disregard of the requirementsof civil rights legislation." The suit, brought on be­half of eight minority truck drivers, charges thedefendants have engaged in discriminatory hiringpractices. Last October Professor Gould won an un­precedented $4 million in damages against DetroitEdison and $250,000 against local 223 of the UtilityWorkers of America in another employment discrim­ination case which is now on appeal.

Associate Professor Thomas Grey was selected to re­ceive a summer stipend from the National Endow­ment for the Humanities to facilitate his research ona forthcoming article, "The Natural Rights Traditionin Constitutional Law."

Gerald Gunther, William Nelson Cromwell Professorof Law, has been speaking to a variety of on-campusand off-campus audiences on the constitutional prob­lems of Watergate and the impeachment process, inaddition to pursuing his work on his historical proj­ects and his annual casebook supplement. He hasrecently been appointed to a special nine-membercommittee established by the Los Angeles County BarAssociation to study the legal issues in the impeach­ment process. The committee's findings will be madeavailable to the Association and the public.

Associate Dean J. Keith Mann, along with ProfessorJack Friedenthal, was a member of the Floor Man­agement Committee on the "Statement on AcademicFreedom" for the Stanford faculty. It passed the Sen­ate without dissent.

John Henry Merryman, Nelson Bowman Sweitzerand Marie B. Sweitzer Professor of Law, continuesto direct SLADE, a major multi-national comparativelaw and development research project in Chile, CostaRica, Peru, Mexico, Italy, and Spain. In SeptemberProfessor Merryman will present a paper entitled"Comparative Law As Explanation" at the Interna­tional Congress of Comparative Law in Tehran, Iran.The paper will be published in the volume of U.S.Reports for that Congress.

With Professor Albert E. Elsen of the Stanford ArtDepartment, Professor Merryman offered a course inArt and the Law during the spring term. The teach­ing material used in the course will be published ina book in 1975. Professor Merryman is also editing avolume entitled Stanford Legal Essays, which willcontain essays written by the Stanford Law Schoolfaculty and will be published in 1975 to commem­orate the opening of the new Law School.

Charles J. Meyers, Charles A. Beardsley Professor ofLaw, was chosen President-Elect of the Associationof American Law Schools for the 1974-75 term. Hewill assume the presidency for the 1975-76 term.

On November 11 and 12 Professor Meyers will de­liver the Addison C. Harriss Lectures at Indiana LawSchool. He will discuss the antecedents of the en­vironmental movement and its prospects for thefuture.

Professor Robert L. Rabin has been studying theimpact of reform movements on the legal system.His current project involves an assessment of the roleof public interest lawyers in effecting changes in thelegal system. He is also engaged in a study of theVeterans Administration claims system. At the sametime, he continues to work on his course materials forAdministrative Law. Professor Rabin also retains hisconsulting relationship with the Ford Foundation,evaluating various law-related projects funded bythat organization.

Professor Byron D. Sher was elected mayor of PaloAlto in July by his colleagues on the City Council.He devoted the summer months to researching Con­sumer Protection activities of governmental agenciesat the county and municipal level. In April ProfessorSher gave a speech at the annual meeting of thePeninsula Funeral Society, entitled "Funeral Costs,Funeral Societies and the Law."

Associate Professor Michael Wald has been awardeda Mellon Foundation grant to work on a study of thejuvenile justice system, part of a 24-volume studysponsored by the American Bar Association's Projecton Juvenile Justice Standards.

Professor Li Named to Endowed Chair

Victor Li, one of the leading scholars of Chineselaw in the Western world, was named the first recip­ient of a newly endowed chair in international legalstudies at a meeting of the Board of Trustees onJune 14.

The professorship is named for Lewis Talbot andNadine Hearn Shelton. It was established in 1972with gifts from Talbot Shelton, first vice president ofSmith, Barney & Co., Inc., New York investmentbankers, in honor of his parents, and by funds fromthe Ford foundation to support international studies.

A key faculty member in building Stanford's posi­tion among a handful of major universities studyingthe society and government of contemporary China,Professor Li is chairman of the Masters Prog·ram andAcademic Planning Subcommittee of the Center forEast Asian Studies at Stanford. This fall he will be­come Director of the Center.

Professor Li also chairs the Steering Committee ofthe Bay Area China Education Project (BAYCEP), aproject funded by the National Endowment for theHumanities and by the National Committee onUnited States-China Relations to develop models bywhich the study of China could be appropriately in­troduced into the secondary school curriculum.

19

A graduate of Columbia (B.A., 1961; J.D., 1964)and Harvard (LL.M., 1965; S.J.D., 1971), ProfessorLi joined the Stanford faculty in 1972. He has writtenextensively about China; his most recent work, Lawand Politics in Chinese Foreign Trade, will soon bepublished by the University of Washington Press.

New Faculty Member AppointedMartin R. Glick joined the Stanford Law School fac­ulty as an associate professor on July 1, 1974. Mr.Glick received a B.A. (1961) and a J.D. (1964) fromOhio State University. Since graduation from lawschool Mr. Glick has worked full time in litigation,first with the Civil Rights Division of the UnitedStates Department of Justice in Washington, D.C.,and then with California Rural Legal Assistance, ofwhich he has been Executive Director since 1971. Heis a member of the Ohio and California bars.

At Stanford Mr. Glick will teach primarily clinicalcourses and seminars, which will offer students inten­sive training in basic civil litigation skills.

Visiting Faculty for 1974-75The following visiting faculty members will be teach­ing at the School during the 1974-75 academic year.

Autumn and Spring Term.s:E. Clinton Bamberger, Jr., received a B.S. (1949) fromLoyola College and a J.D. (1951) from GeorgetownUniversity. He served as law clerk to the HonorableCharles Markell of the Maryland Court of Appealsfrom 1951 to 1952. From 1952 until 1960 he was anassociate attorney with Piper and arbury, and wason leave from the firm during 1958-59, when he servedas Assistant Attorney General of Maryland. He be­came a partner in Piper and Marbury in 1960. In1965-66 he was the first National Director of the LegalServices Program of the office of Economic Oppor­tunity, and was President of the ational Legal Aidand Defender Association from 1971 until 1973. He ispresently serving as Vice-Chairman of the ABA's Sec-

tion on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar.Mr. Bamberger has been Dean of the ColumbusSchool of Law, Catholic University of America, since1969.

His courses at Stanford will include Civil Pro­cedure I and II and a seminar in Professional Respon­sibility, which will consider the provision of legalservices in civil matters.

N. William Hines of the University of Iowa receivedan A.B. (1958) from Baker University and an LL.B.(1961) from the University of Kansas, where he wasnotes and comm nts editor of the Kansas Law Review.He served as law clerk to the Honorable Walter A.Huxman, United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Cir­cuit, from 1960 to 1961. He was both a graduatefellow and a teaching fellow at Harvard from 1961to 1962. Professor Hines has been a member of thelaw faculty of the University of Iowa since 1962. Hewas named to the Iowa Foundation Professorship in1973. In recent years he has served as a consultantto the ational Water Commission and to the Admin­istrative Conf rence of the United States.

At Stanford Prof ssor Hin s will be teaching in thefi Ids of Estate Planning and Property.

Autumn Term:

David L. Ratner of Cornell Law School received anA.B. (1952) and an LL.B. (1955) from· Harvard, whereh was article ditor of the Harvard Law Review. Hewas an attorn y with the ew York firm of Sullivanand Cromwell from 1955 until 1964, when he joinedth Cornell Law faculty as an associate professor. Hebecame a professor in 1968. From 1966 through 1968he serv d as xecutive assistant to the chairman ofthe Securities and Exchange Commission in Wash­ington, D.C.; and as chief counsel for the SecuritiesIndustry Study of the Senate Banking Committeefrom 1971 to 1972.

Professor Ratn r s course off rings at Stanford willbe Business Associations I and Current Problems inthe Securities Markets.

Martin R. Glick

20

E. Clinton Bamberger, Jr. N. WiUiam Hines David L. Ratner

Spring Term:Simon H. Rifkind, Herman Phleger Visiting Professorof Law, received a B.S. (1922) from City College inNew York; an LL.B. (1925) from Columbia; aLitt. D. (1950) from Jewish Theological Seminary;and an LL.D. (1962) from Hofstra College. He waslegislative secretary to United States Senator RobertF. Wagner from 1927 to 1933, and a partner in theNew York firm of Wagner, Quillinan & Rifkind from1930 to 1941. He served as federal judge of theSouthern District of New York from 1941 to 1950.From 1957 to 1961 he was a member of the Chicagofirm of Stevenson, Rifkind & Wirtz. In 1961 he wasappointed by the United States Supreme Court asSpecial Master in Arizona v. CaHfornia, the ColoradoRiver case. He was a member of the State Commis­sion on Governmental Operations for the City of NewYork from 1959 to 1961; chairman of the PresidentialRailroad Commission from 1961 to 1962; a memberof the mayor's mediation panel for the New YorkCity teachers strike in 1963; a member of the Boardof Higher Education for the City of New York from1954 to 1966; and co-chairman of the President'sCommission on the Patent System from 1966 to 1967.Since 1950, Mr. Rifkind has been a partner in theNew York firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton &Garrison.

While at the School Mr. Rifkind will be involved inseveral activities: teaching a seminar on the trial ofa law suit; lecturing on various aspects of evidence,procedure, and professional responsibility; and meet­ing informally with students and faculty.

James F. Short, Visiting Professor of Sociology andLaw, received a B.A. (1947) from Denison Univer­sity and an M.A. (1949) and a Ph.D. (1951) fromthe University of Chicago. He joined the faculty ofWashington State University as an instructor ofsociology in 1951. He was Director of the SociologicalResearch Laboratory at Washington State Universityfrom 1962 until 1964, when he became Dean of theGraduate School at the University. In 1968-69 he wasco-director of research for the National Commission

on the Causes and Prevention of Violence. From 1969to 1970 he was a fellow at the Center for AdvancedStudy in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford. Since1970 he has been Director of the Social ResearchCenter at Washington State University. ProfessorShort is currently editor of the American SociologicalReview. He has also been a visiting professor at theUniversity of Chicago, the University of Hawaii, andat Hartwick College in Oneonta, New York.

Professor Short will offer a course entitled "Socio­logical Perspectives on Crime and Delinquency" anda research seminar, which will consider the sociologyof law, crime, and delinquency.

Susan I. Spivak received an A.B. (1966) from BrownUniversity and a J.D. (1969) from the University ofPennsylvania, where she was articles and projectseditor of the University of Pennsylvania Law Review.From 1969 to 1972 she was an associate with Paul,Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison in New YorkCity. Since 1972 she has been an assistant professorof law at Arizona State University.

Ms. Spivak will teach Taxation I and BusinessPlanning.

Visiting Senior Research AssociateBoris I. Bittker, Sterling Professor of Law at Yale,received a B.A. (1938) from Cornell and an LL.B.( 1941) from Yale. He served as law clerk to theHonorable Jerome N. Frank, United States Court ofAppeals, Second Circ it, from 1941 to 1942. He wasan attorney for the Lend-Lease Administration from1943 to 1944, and an attorney for Alien PropertyCustodian from 1945 to 1946. In 1946 he joined theYale Law faculty and has written extensively in thetax field. In 1951 and again in 1955 Professor Bittkertaught summer courses at Stanford Law School. In1960 he spent the summer at the School doing re­search with the Stanford International Legal StudiesProgram.

While on research leave at Stanford this spring,Professor Bittker will offer a course in CorporateTaxation.

Simon H. Rifkind James F. Short Susan I. Spivak Boris I. Bittker

21

Scholarship FundEstablishedTo Honor Alumnus

The Directors of FleetFoundation have announced theestablishment of a scholarship atthe Law School in honor of WalterAmes '21, a long time Directorand President of the Foundation.A $1,500 scholarship will beawarded annually, commencingwith the 1974-75 academic year,to a student selected by theSchool's scholarship committee.

Mr. Ames is a senior partnerin the San Diego firm of Gray,Cary, Ames & Frye. He is amember and past president (1932)of the San Diego Bar Association,a member of the American BarAssociation, and president of thePutnam Foundation.

China Conference"China's Changing Role in the World Economy" was the subject

of a two-day conference held at the Law School on April 19 and 20. Theconference was sponsored by the Stanford Journal of InternationalStudies, in conjunction with the Institute for East-West Studies atStanford and the Northern California World Affairs Council. Eight paperswere presented and discussed in three working sessions. They coveredthree general areas: China's domestic economic development, trade withthe West, and China's role in the Far East. Following the working sessions,the conference was opened to the public for a final session.

Participants from the Law School inclu,ded Professor Victor H. Li, whopresented a paper; Associate Professor John H. Barton, who served ascommentator on one of the papers; and Journal editors, who participatedin all sessions of the conference and acted as moderators in the publicsession. Robert Naon '74 chaired the conference and Bryant Garth '75 wasthe primary planner.

The papers will be published by Praeger Press as a special issue ofthe Stanford Journal of International Studies and, simultaneously, as avolume in the Praeger Special Studies series.

The Journal expects to sponsor future conferences, and under the tennsof the agreement'with Praeger they, too, will be published in the SpecialStudies series.

Moot Court FinalCompetition Held

Tom Lallas '75 argueshis case before JusticesGoodwin, Clark, andByrne.

The Twenty-second Annual Marion Rice Kirkwood Moot Court Competition was held on April 6. First prizewent to Tom Lallas '75 for Best Oral Advocate and Best Brief. The other finalists were Robert Percival '76, who tooksecond place honors; David Kimport '75, and Becky Love '76.

This year's hypothetical case, Masculo v. Generous, was brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act andthe due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It involved lower pension rights for women and denial ofadvanced training to a pregnant employee and her subs quent loss of pensio seniority.

The case was argued before a distinguished panel of judges, which included the Honorable Tom C. Clark,Associate Justice, United States Supreme Court (Retired); the Honorable Alfred T. Goodwin, United States Courtof Appeals, Ninth Circuit; and the Honorable Matthew Byrne, United States District Court, Central District ofCalifornia.

Following the competition, participants attended the Moot Court Banquet, where Mr. Lallas was presented theWalter J. Cummings Award of $300 for first place, and .Mr. Percival was awarded $175 from the Stanford LawSociety of Northern California and Nevada for second place. Mr. Kimport and Ms. Love each received $75.

Law Fund CouncilAnnouncesNew Chairmen

Paul Ulrich andCharles Purnell

Law Schoolilonorsand Prizes: 1974

At the School's eighty-first com­mencement exercises on June 16Dean Thomas Ehrlich announcedthe following honors and prizesfor the 1973-74 academic year.

Charles R. Purnell '49 and Paul G. Ulrich '64 will assume major volunteerresponsibilities for the School's fund-raising efforts, effectiveSeptember 1,1974, start of the new Fund year.

Mr. Purnell will head a national organization of alumni volunteers whoseprimary objectives wiU be to encourage more alumni to becomeBenjamin Harrison Fellows (donors of $2,500 or more) and Nathan AbbottFellows (donors of $1,000 or more). Mr. Purnell is a partner in theSan Francisco firm of Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro.

Mr. Ulrich will be responsible for organizing alumni fund-raising effortsnationwide at all other levels of giving. He is a partner in the firm ofLewis and Roca in Phoenix.

Professor WarrenWins FirstHurlbut Award

Professor William Warren

William D. Warren, William B. and Luna M. Scott Professor of Law,was chosen by members of the third-year class to receive thefirst John Bingham Hurlbut Award for Excellence in Teaching. Namedin honor of John Bingham Hurlbut, Jackson Eli ReynoldsProfessor of Law Emeritus, who taught at the School from 1937 until1971, the award is intended to give special recognition to thosefaculty members who strive, as Professor Hurlbut did, to maketeaching an art.

Professor Warren was selected from among five professors whowere nominated by a committee comprising the President of the LawAssociation, the President of the Law Review, and theEditor-in-Chief of the Law School Journal.

In announcing Professor Warren's selection, Bryant Young, presidentof the Law Association, said, "Certainly Professor Warrenhas demonstrated the dedication and concern for quality classroomteaching that we seek to encourage and commend with this award. Insingling out one professor each year for this special recognition,however, we are in no way criticizing the rest of thefaculty. There are many, many excellent teachers in the Law Schoolworthy of the award." Under the rules governing the administrationof the award, no professor may receive the award twicewithin a three-year period.

Professor Warren, who specializes in Commercial Law, joinedthe Stanford Law faculty in 1972, after thirteeny ars as a professor at UCLA Law School.

Prizes

The Nathan Abbott Prize, for thehighest cumulative grade .pointaverage in the class: Gordon KirbyDavidson.The Urban A. Sontheimer Third-yeat Honor, for the second highestcumulative grade point averagein the class: Alan Karl Austin.The Lawrence S. Fletcher AlumniAssociation Prize, for the studentswho have made outstanding con­tributions to the life of the LawSchool: Craig Winfield Johnsonand Bryant Llewellyn Young.The Carl Mason Franklin Prize inInternational Law, for the studentswho present the most outstandingpapers in International Law:Frances A. Annstrong andCharles D. Siegal.The Frank Baker Belcher EvidenceAward, for the student who hasperformed the best academic workin Evidence: Gordon KirbyDavidson.

Honors

Order of the CoifThird-year students ranking at

the top of the class academicallyand deemed worthy of the distinc­tion are elected to membershipin the Order of the Coif, thenational law school honor societyfor the encouragement of scholar­ship and advancement of ethicalstandards in the legal profession.The Stanford chapter of the Orderwas established in 1912 and has404 members.

The following students wereelected to the Order of the Coiffor 1973-74: Alan Karl Austin,Robert Alan Bush, Gordon KirbyDavidson, Michael Quinn Eagan,William Edward Holland, andJeffrey Mark Oderman.

Stanford To Host 1975 Worn n's Conference

Stanford has been chosen as the site for th Sixth Annual Conference on Women and the Law. Sch duled forarch 1975, the conference will focus on th law's ff ct on worn n in society and on th changing status of

women in the legal profession. More than one thousand women attorneys, law prof ssors, law stud nts, andlegal workers from across the country are expected to attend the three days of speeches, workshops, andseminars, which will cover all aspects of legal practic .

Stanford LawyersOff r Free LegalS rvic s toSenior Citizens

A tty. Michael Gilfix advises client.

Palo Alto attorney Michael Gilfix '73 and three first-year studentshave established a free legal aid office for senior citizens in downtownPalo Alto-the first of its kind in the area. The office is partof a senior citizens service center provided by the City of Palo Alto.

In operation since November, the service has helpedto solve a variety of problems from consumer fraud to divorce cases, butis primarily designed to provide information and referral. If aclient needs a lawyer and the case is either fee generating or excessiv lytime consuming, he or she is referred to the Lawyers Referral S rviceor, when possible, to the county legal aid office. If a seniorcitizen is confused about an insurance, tax, or SocialSecurity problem, he or she can often find a solution right at the office.

Mr. Gilfix notes that the office has had so many requests forhelp with wills that they have appealed to the Palo Alto Bar Associationfor assistance. They are trying to get the Bar Association toestablish a special wills panel composed of volunte r lawyers whowould draw up wills for th ir clients for a nominal fee.

In the few months that the office has been in operation, Mr. Gilfixand his colleagues have discovered that many s nior citiz nsare eith r mbarrass d or afraid to se k legal help. Among the r asonsthey cited for these f elings wer the belief among olderpeople that they cannot afford lawy rs~ fees while living on a fixedincome, the sense that nobody cares about their probl ms, anda sense of pride that inhibits them in asking for help.

Keith Baldwin of Seattle, one of the students who volunteers histime at the office, describes the program as "primarily an effort to h lpout a group of neglected people who know of nowhere lse toturn." Other students involved in the program are JonathanGinsburg of Washington, D.C. and Jim Henderson of ovato.

At present the office is operating without funding, but according tor. Gilfix, "There has been growing interest on the part

of Stanford Law students and the local bar association, so hopefully,the future will include an expansion of services."

People v. Farrell

"A laughing jury will probablynot convict," noted the HonorableWilliam Lanam (Judge of theSuperior Court, San MateoCounty) as laughter escaped thejury room. Steven R. Farrell wasnot convicted.

Sergeants at Law held a mocktrial on April 24 and 25, allowingstudents an opportunity to developtheir courtroom skills. The case,People v. Farrell, was a prosecu­tion for rape. It was chosen tohighlight existing social concernwith inequities in the rape laws.Th entire case was presented onboth days to enable a greaternumber of students to participate.Judge Lanam presided on April24; Judge Lawrence Terry of theMunicipal Court of Santa ClaraCounty presided on April 25.

Prior to the trial participantsattended a seminar conducted byProfessor Barbara Babcock, whichoutlined tactics and problems intrying a rape case. Participantswere also giv n the opportunity toprepare for the trial by video­taping practice s ssions with thewitnesses.

Primary planners for the trialwere Michael Duncheon '75 andLarry Hutt '75.

Mim Miller '74) attorney for theState) examines the prosecutrix.

ArizonaSam P. Applewhite III '52, President

Dean and Mrs. Ehrlich joined mem­bers for cocktails on April 18.

ColoradoJanet MacFarlane '63, President

At the invitation of Janet MacFar­lane, members attended a cocktailparty and buffet on April 19. DeanThomas Ehrlich was the guest ofhonor.

Greater East BayRichard C. Stanton '51, PresidentAt the Society's 1974 annual meet­ing on April 25, Professor WilliamBaxter spoke on "Government Inter­vention in Energy Markets."

NevadaSamuel W. Belford II '62, PresidentBryant Young '74, president of theStanford Law Association and anative of Lovelock, Nevada, showedthe film, "Stanford Lawyer," at adinner meeting on May 3.

Orange CountyPeter C. Bradford '60, President

The Law School film, "StanfordLawyer," was shown at the springmeeting of the Society on May 15.Dean Ehrlich was on hand to reporton activities at the School and todiscuss the new School.

OregonDavid P. Miller '67, President

Professor Howard Williams was theguest speaker at a dinner meetingon May 9. A leading authority inthe field of oil and gas, Mr. Williamsdiscussed "Energy."

PeninsillaMarvin S. Siegel '61, President"The Energy Crisis and Interna­tional Law" was the topic of aspeech delivered by Dean ThomasEhrlich to members at the May 30luncheon meeting.

Santa ClaraJohn F. Foley '56, PresidentProfessor Moffatt Hancock gave hisinformative and highly entertainingtalk on the Duchess of Kingston'strial for bigamy at a March 29luncheon.

Southern CaliforniaJohn W. Armagost '56, President"In the Matter of the Stanford LawSchool 1974; Direct and CrossExamination of Associate Dean J.Keith Mann" was the topic for theMarch 26 gathering of the Society.Following cocktails and dinner,Dean Mann exchanged ideas aboutthe School's curricula and otheracademic matters with members.

Superior CaliforniaWilliam R. Mitchell '47, President

Professor John Kaplan spoke to theSociety about "Non-Victim Crime"at a dinner meeting on May 2.

State of WashingtonJohn L. Patterson '66, President"Energy" was the topic of a lun­cheon meeting held on May 10.Professor Howard Williams led thediscussion.

San Diego-ImperialJ. Sterling Hutcheson '56, President

At the June 18 meeting of the SocietyProfessor Byron D. Sher presented atalk entitled "The Consumer Om­budsman: A New Approach to theUnconscionable Contact."

New YorkDale L. Matschullat '70, President

Former Dean of Stanford La iV

School Bayless Manning met in­formally with Society members onApril 10. Mr. Manning is presidentof the Council on Foreign Relationsof New York City.

Northern Californiaand NevadaHon. Robert F. Peckham '45,PresidentOn March 14 members attended theSociety's first Basic Issues Seminar,which was led by Professor CharlesMeyers and focused on "The PrivateDevelopment of Land and Govern­ment Controls." The second BasicIssues Seminar was held on May 29.Professor William Baxter discussed"What's Ahead for Business Practiceand Business Litigation."

George Stephens Reflects on Year as Chairman

With his term as chairman of the Council of Stanford LawSocieties coming to a close, George Stephens '62 observes:

If one participates in alumni activities, and particularly if hevisits the Law School, two messages come across clearly:(1) the keen interest of the faculty and staff to have input fromthe Law School's alumni; and (2) the excellence and enthusiasmof the faculty, staff, and students of the Law School. This combinationmakes the time spent in alumni activities well worth the effort.

Mr. Stephens is a partner in the Los Angeles firm ofPaul, Hastings, Janofsky &Walker, where he practices exclusivelyin the areas of probate and trust law and estate planning. Inaddition to his service to the Council of Stanford Law Societies,Mr. Stephens also devotes time to lawyer referral service workand is a member of the American Bar Association's StandingCommittee on Lawyer Referral Services. Mr. Stephens lives with hiswife, Gretel, and their two sons, Thad and Ned, in South Pasadena.

25