Author: TSA Press

We all have insecurities. We all have feelings of inadequacy. We all have those feelings that drive us to act to assert that we are better. I am awesome, screamed the dust speck.

The problem is when those insecurities have impacts. If you’re taking your insecurities out on others, I have concerns about your soul.

In eighth grade, children attempt to elevate themselves at the expense of others. We are cool. You are not. We are popular. You are not. The goal is to elevate one’s self at the expense of another. That’s the innocence of the insecurity of a child. It’s also the plot to Lord of the Flies.

In law school, it’s narcissistic or, worse, bullying.

In law school, that same behavior is excruciating. People boasting of their grades. People assuring themselves that they are better than the rest of the lot. People suggesting that other colleagues are less than they are. It’s maddening, and it takes an emotional toll on people who are merely trying to learn.

Along with the pettiness comes the gossip. The pettiness comes in terms of social standing, much like junior high. Who do we invite to parties? Who do we slight? Who do we scapegoat for all of our insecurities? Who to start rumors about to feel better about ourselves? Who do we ridicule for errors?  And which colleagues do we pardon for errors because they are friends and think we are smart?

People will boast because they want to stand out. They will recount the fact they have 20 job offers, apparently unconscious of the fact that you have none. And in that process, they will make you feel less than what you are, all the while desperately seeking to feel more than what they are.

How do you avoid becoming like this? How do you avoid feeling shredded by this kind of behavior? It’s difficult, but worth the effort.

1. Be kind. Be compassionate. Realize that if someone is attacking you, absent you causing the issue, the problem is most likely an insecurity. Being kind demonstrates two things. First, you aren’t affected by the mean-spiritedness. Second, you’ll feel better as you reach out to diffuse the issue.
2. Don’t take the bait.  People sometimes like drama. They like to hold power over someone by bullying, belittling, or otherwise diminishing those they see as different. It’s difficult to ignore it (and you shouldn’t if it rises to the level of abuse), but otherwise it is good to take their power away from them.
3. Keep your eye on the prize. Why are you in law school anyway? If you’re there for external validation from other law students, you are there for the wrong reasons. Hopefully, you are there to learn and progress. If that’s the goal, the opinions of colleagues mean fairly little.
4. Surround yourself with less toxic people. The key to law school is to find a group of people who support you. People who want you to win. People who will celebrate your victories and mourn your losses with you. Those are the friends you will make for a lifetime.
5. Monitor your own behavior. It is easy to fall into the same trap as the others. To deride those with different goals. But that is the path to greater insecurity. Instead, remember the language of Henry V: The gentlest gamester is the soonest winner.

Oh, and by the way. Is this column about being a law student, or is it about being a law professor? So difficult to tell.

---

LawProfBlawg is an anonymous professor at a top 100 law school. You can see more of his musings here. He is way funnier on social media, he claims. Please follow him on Twitter (@lawprofblawg) or Facebook. Email him at lawprofblawg@gmail.com.

It’s well-known that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg isn’t exactly a fan of Donald Trump. During his 2016 campaign, she referred to Trump as a “faker,” and described her fears for the U.S. and the high court, saying, “I can’t imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president. For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be — I don’t even want to contemplate that.”

In a recent dissent noted for its “caustic tone,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor echoed Justice Ginsburg’s earlier critiques, telling the legal world how she really felt about the fact that her Supreme Court colleagues are “partly to blame for the breakdown in the appellate process” (i.e., they seem to be bending over backwards to support the federal government’s need for “emergency” relief). As it turns out, that dissent had a perhaps unexpected reader: Donald Trump himself. Not literally, of course — after all, Trump was recently trolled because he “can’t read” — but he apparently took the time to listen to a sound bite from Laura Ingraham’s show on Fox News.

Trump then took it upon himself to parrot Ingraham’s critique on his Twitter megaphone, demanding that both justices recuse themselves from “his” cases:

Here’s the clip that Trump is referencing in his tweet:

Sorry, Mr. President, but as noted by the New York Times, that’s not how this works — that’s not how any of this works.

Maybe this is Trump’s way of killing off the powerful women, since he already predicted that both Ginsburg and Sotomayor would die during his presidency, but it’s highly unlikely that either of the high court’s most liberal justices will be recusing themselves from Trump-related cases any time soon.

Trump Demands Two Liberal Justices Recuse Themselves From His Cases [New York Times]

---

Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Parliamentary Sittings in February 2020

Both Houses of Parliament resumed sitting on Tuesday 11th February after a six weeks’ recess.  They met again last week and will continue this week, with sittings from Tuesday 25th February.

This bulletin starts with a brief indication of the Order Paper for this week and then outlines what happened in both Houses over the last two weeks.  A separate bulletin will cover recently gazetted Acts and Bills.

Coming up in the National Assembly This Week

Privileges Committee Report on Corruption Allegations against MPs

This is item 1 on the agenda.  As the accused MPs have had the opportunity last week to reply to the report presented last week by the chairperson of the Privileges Committee, Senator Chief Charumbira.   Now Chief Charumbira will reply to their responses.

Bills

Marriages Bill  Continuation of the Second Reading debate is item 2 on the agenda.  For progress made over the last two weeks, please see below.

Freedom of Information Bill and International Treaties Bill  These are items 3 and 4 on the agenda – for continuation of Second Reading proceedings that have already started.

Veterans of the Liberation Struggle Bill, Constitutional Court Bill and Zimbabwe Media Commission Bill   These are items 5, 6 and 7 on the agenda – all these Bills are awaiting presentation of the explanatory Ministerial speeches to begin their Second Reading stages.

Other business

Motions  Listed on the agenda immediately after the above Bills, are almost thirty motions are listed for presentation or further consideration.  These include ten new ones specifically asking the National Assembly to take note of and/or adopt Portfolio Committee reports on a large variety of subjects.  Another is the motion calling for the abolition of the death penalty that was presented on 18th February although it is now way down the Order Paper

Question Time will be on Wednesday afternoon.

Coming up in the Senate This Week

Senate

Senators have no Bills to consider.  The only Government business on the agenda is made up of five international agreements for approval of ratification or signature in terms of section 327 of the Constitution.  These agreements have already been approved by the National Assembly:

(1) Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management;

(2) Convention On the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities;

(3) Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency;

(4) Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities;

(5) Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident.

Motions: Other agenda items involve continuing debate on motions carried over from last year, including the motion on the President’s speech opening the session and the motion applauding SADC’s resolution against sanctions.

Question Time will be on Thursday.

In the National Assembly since 11th February

Marriages Bill [link] – Second Reading debate in progress

The Second Reading stage of this Bill began on Tuesday 11th February, continued on Thursday 13th and Tuesday 18th February and is still to be completed.

The Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs opened proceedings with a brief speech [link] outlining the purpose of the Bill and confirming that, in accordance with the Cabinet decision to drop clause 40 on Civil partnerships, he would be seeking the deletion of that clause during the Committee Stage.  Hon Mataranyika, chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, then presented the committee’s report [link] on the public hearings around the country [held by it and other committees] and in written submissions from received from members of the public.  The report contains a number of recommendations for changes to the Bill.  Contributions from individual MPs followed.  These included detailed and helpful contributions from Hon Biti and Hon Gonese.

Education Amendment Bill to go to President minus Senate Amendment

This Bill is a hangover from the previous Parliamentary session, at the very end of which, on 26th September 2019, the National Assembly voted to reject outright the Senate’s deletion of the words “sexual and” from clause 14(k)’s provision for the appointment of “sexual and reproductive health personnel” in schools.  This effectively stalled progress on the Bill pending possible resolution of the disagreement between the Houses.

In the present session, the Bill was duly restored to the Order Paper by vote of the National Assembly on 12th November, along with five other unfinished Bills that had lapsed at the end of the previous session.  No more was heard until 13th February, when the National Assembly – without any debate – approved a motion, presented by the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, that the the Bill “as passed by the National Assembly on 27th August 2019, be presented to His Excellency the President for assent and signature in accordance with provisions of paragraph 6 of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of Zimbabwe on disagreement between Houses”.   What this means is that the Bill will go to the President – and probably be gazetted as an Act – without the Senate amendment, i.e. including the words “sexual and” to which Senators took such strong objection.

In other words, the National Assembly resolved the impasse by overriding the Senate.  So, the Bill provides a rare example of the National Assembly’s use of its power to do so if a disagreement over a Bill is not otherwise resolved in the 90-day period beginning when the Bill was introduced into the Senate [Constitution, Fifth Schedule, paragraph 6(1)].  Day 1, in this case, was 28th August 2019 – so the Minister, in fact, waited for more than the required 90 days before presenting last Thursday’s motion.

The Bill will now go to the President for assent and gazetting as an Act despite the Senate’s objection.

International Treaties Bill [link]

On 20th February the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs delivered the Second Reading speech explaining the need for and purpose of this Bill.  Hon Paradza then presented the report on the Bill prepared by the Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.  The report welcomed the Bill in principle but criticised it on points of detail and called for many amendments.  Debate was then adjourned.

Other Bills given their First Readings and sent to the PLC

The following three Bills were given their first readings on 12th February and immediately referred to the Parliamentary Legal Committee, where they are still under consideration:

Forest Amendment Bill [link]

Financial Adjustments Bill [link] [critically discussed in Bill Watch 66/2019 [link]

National Prosecuting Authority Amendment Bill [link].

Privileges Committee Report on Corruption Allegations against MPs

On 18th and 20th February, The House resumed consideration of the report by the Privileges Committee chaired by Senator Chief Charumbira.  The committee was appointed to inquire into allegations of solicitation of a bribe against four MPs.  [Reminder: The report presented in December 2019 – see Bill Watch 67/2019 [link] – concluded that the MPs had not been proved to have solicited a bribe, but that they had conducted themselves in a manner creating an impression of impropriety by meeting the complainant outside Parliament and at night and should be disciplined for that.].  The MPs concerned now had their chance to put their side and protested vigorously and at some length against the privileges committee’s “grossly unreasonable” adverse findings on impropriety, complaining that they had not been afforded an opportunity to respond to the new charge of impropriety and that the committee’s report did not specify which standing orders or rules it believed had been infringed.  Committee chairperson Chief Charumbira still has to reply to the debate.

Ministerial Statement on Corona Virus

MPs requested a Ministerial Statement on the country’s preparedness in relation to the Corona Virus.  On 20th February the Minister of Health and Child Care obliged [link], and was afterwards asked to clarify several points.

Motion for abolition of death penalty

On 18th February Hon Dorcas Sibanda [MDC-A] presented her motion calling on “the Executive” to abolish the death penalty, in a short but impassioned speech urging all Parliamentarians to become abolitionists and support her campaign.  Hon Kindness Paradza [ZANU PF] seconded the motion, and several MPs then contributed to the debate, with those supporting the motion outnumbering slightly those who supported retention of the death penalty for such as the current machete killers and those who rape and kill small children.  Debate was then adjourned.

Comment:  As Veritas has pointed out in many bulletins, the Constitution leaves it to the Legislature – meaning Parliament and the President – to decide whether or not to maintain the death penalty. A short and simple Act of Parliament could abolish it by repealing the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law Code and the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act. It is not necessary to amend the Constitution. Hon Sibanda and Hon Paradza were, therefore, right when they said the death penalty could simply be abolished by legislative measures to remove it from the statute book.    

Petition to Parliament for Act on Independent Complaints Mechanism as required by Constitution, section 210

On 20th February the Speaker announced that the Portfolio Committee on Defence, Home Affairs and Security Services would consider a petition from Mr E.T. Zimudzi asking Parliament to enact legislation providing for an Independent Complaints Mechanism as required by section 210 of the Constitution.

Comment:  Bravo Mr Zimudzi!  Perhaps Parliament can be relied on to venture into territory where the Executive has feared to tread – and the Constitutional Court has for four years now, without explanation, failed to give judgment in a straightforward case brought by Veritas asking the court to order the Government to comply with section 210 of the Constitution by taking a Bill to Parliament [Rashid Mahiya v Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs et al, CCZ 42/15].

In the Senate since 11th February

The Senate has had no Bills to consider so far this year, something that may change when Bills start coming up from the National Assembly, probably not until next month.  This state of affairs resulted in short sittings, with Senators continuing their contributions to debates on motions previously presented.

Veritas makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied.

Post published in: Featured

In addition to grand larceny and forgery, Nicholas Genovese now also stands convicted of securities fraud, having pleaded guilty to defrauding investors of $11 million in a fake hedge fund. Genovese, of course, recruited his victims by pretending to be the heir to a Long Island pharmacy chain, a tall tale that certainly included no mention of the aforementioned convictions and did include a fake resume full of fake degrees and fake jobs at Goldman Sachs, but also one that also meant a fairly limited number of potential marks: specifically those from the New York area who remembered a drug store that hasn’t existed in 17 years.

The guy everybody loves to hate, Harvey Weinstein, was convicted yesterday after a long, knock-down, drag-out trial. Nobody’s shedding a tear. I compliment the hard work of both sides and the nerve of prosecutors to bring the most extreme charges they could, but also the defense attorneys for defending a man so universally reviled.

This is a sea change. As Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance put it in his press conference immediately following the verdict, “this verdict pulled our justice system into the 21st century.”  He went on to explain. “Rape is rape, no matter what. Whether it’s a stranger in a dark alley, or an intimate partner in a working relationship. Whether it’s committed by an indigent person or a man of immense power, prestige, and privilege. Whether the survivor reports within an hour, within a year, or perhaps never.”

Strong words, fitting for the fight of all sexual assault victims. But let’s not rush to change laws, already strict, or assume the victim is always right and the person accused always guilty.

This was a unique case. Weinstein became the poster boy for the evils of the “casting couch” — powerful men expecting sexual favors from hopeful actresses. It was so common, it became cliché.

But times evolved, and the #MeToo movement was born, along with the realization that the old ways, the winks and nods of men expecting sex in return for favors, were no longer acceptable.

Weinstein was stuck in a time warp. Like the guy who still calls his female colleagues “honey” or expects his “assistant” to dress sexily and bring him coffee, Weinstein never evolved. Decades passed, and he never learned or repented. Even yesterday, as the jury verdict was being read, he reportedly muttered, “But I didn’t rape anyone.”

There have been cries to further extend the statute of limitations on sex crimes beyond what it is — already longer than the five-year limit for most crimes. But the limits are in place for a reason. It’s difficult enough for any accused to confront the power of a state or federal prosecution, but when that prosecution occurs decades after the alleged crime, the accused is hard-pressed to present any defense at all.

The prosecutors won their gambit. The Weinstein conviction proved that sexual assault complainants can be believed no matter the time delay, quid pro quos in the relationship, or lack of corroboration.

Hopefully, this verdict will encourage sex-assault victims to come forward sooner, rather than later. The sooner their complaint is presented, the easier to prosecute and the more likely the predator will be stopped.

Weinstein may have gotten what he’s long deserved — he’s been stopped, humiliated, and no doubt will be severely punished.

He stands in for every man who’s paraded power in exchange for sexual benefit. For every man who’s quipped to women in high positions, “Who’d you sleep with to get here?”

Part of me is gleeful for his fall and the lesson he symbolizes. But part of me is wary. Many men are accused of sexual offenses they did not commit. Their cases have just become that much harder to defend.

---

Toni Messina has tried over 100 cases and has been practicing criminal law and immigration since 1990. You can follow her on Twitter: @tonitamess.

* President Trump has demanded that Supreme Court Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor recuse themselves from cases that involve him. [New York Times]

* A federal appeals court will decide whether to overturn a $4 verdict in a wrongful death case. That’s four dollars, not four million. [USA Today]

* Vanessa Bryant has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the helicopter company involved in the deaths of her husband and child. [Washington Post]

* Justice Thomas has cited himself in a decision he wrote arguing that a precedent also authored by him should be overturned. Kind of difficult to wrap your head around. [Fox News]

* The lawyer who helped Elon Musk fend off a defamation lawsuit is helping to protect Tesla from investors. [Bloomberg]

* An entire murder prosecution is in jeopardy because a court reporter may have written “shot the dude” instead of “shut the door” when transcribing testimony. Sounds like an honest mistake. [Syracuse.com]

---

Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

What percentage of your firm’s billable hours would you say get captured, invoiced, and paid on every month? 

The painful truth is that, for most firms, there is a significant gap between hours worked and revenue collected for that work.

Thankfully, healthy billing practices can combat that gap, helping your firm capture and collect on more of your billable time. In this short article, you’ll learn the 3 essential steps your firm can take to close the gap between hours billed and revenue collected.

Step 1: Make Time Tracking Instinctual

Anyone who works in an office environment faces bothersome, but necessary, daily tasks that stand in the way of getting real work done. For lawyers, there is no more bothersome a task than daily time tracking.  

If you track time on paper, in a spreadsheet, or using a software that’s more than 15 years old, you probably sit down at the end of the day and try to reconstruct your billable time from memory. But what if instead, your time tracking was done for you while accomplishing your daily tasks?

Modern time-tracking software tools discussed in this article are designed to help law firms solve this problem. Many softwares offer time saving features like tracking your time as you work (called contemporaneous time tracking) or the ability to turn tasks and calendar events into time entries. 

Tools like this make your firm’s time tracking instinctual, rather than bothersome, while helping to capture billable hours that may have gone uncaptured otherwise.

Step 2: Simplify Invoice Creation and Distribution

Say it’s the 23rd. Is your firm feeling the end-of-month dread? 

Complicated invoice creation and distribution can hinder a firm’s normal workflow until the bills are sent out, but it doesn’t have to be that way. 

One of the easiest ways to simplify invoice creation is to adopt new legal technology. Software programs that create and send out invoices can, and have, saved law firms hours per month and helped assuage end-of-month dread. 

Take a look at some of the helpful legal billing software discussed in this article. Up to date technologies like these offer features like batch billing, so you can generate all your end of month invoices at the same time. Some offer the ability to send invoices to clients online, saving you from stuffing envelopes or drafting emails.

With these simplifications, end-of-month dread will be banished for good. 

Step 3: Expand Collection Options

Lastly, it’s imperative that law firms take advantage of 21st century payment options in order to ensure that clients are able to pay their legal bills quickly and easily. After all, in 2020 legal consumers expect to have multiple payment methods available to them, and the more methods your firm offers, the more likely legal bills will be paid promptly and in full. 

In this article, you’ll learn about the payment processing tools available to law firms that make it easier than ever for legal clients to pay their bills. 

Using these software programs, law firms are providing their clients with a number of different ways to immediately pay their bills, including credit card and ACH payments.

Improve Your Law Firm’s Financial Performance

Healthy legal billing is just one part of running a successful, profitable law firm. If you’re looking to take your firm’s financial performance beyond billing practices, take a look at How to Run your Law Firm Like a Business. 

This free ebook details the steps you can take to identify blind spots in your firm’s financial performance while using data and technology to make better business decisions.

The flooded area is a confluence point of four rivers namely Simbwambwa, Siakanda, Namapande and Manyenyengwa. As a result the road connecting Binga and Siabuwa has been damaged and is currently closed. Chininga Bridge connecting Nsungwale and Siabuwa and linking with Karoi, Gokwe, and Kariba needs urgent rehabilitation IOM managed to support the DCP with a comprehensive registration of all affected individuals, along with officers from the PA, Red Cross, Save the Children, Action Aid.  Through 16 focus groups discussions and HHs assessments, accurate and timely collection and dissemination of data was provided regarding the internal displacement in the affected area.

16 Villages were assessed (Maneta 1-2-3-4-5-6-8-10-11, Chinomba 2, 3 y 4, Simuchembu 9, Chinga 1, Siyakubulabula) Due to the heavy backlash a total of 215 HHs were affected (967 individuals). Out of the affected, 42% were adults (409) and 58% (588) were children. In addition, 53% (512) were females and 47% (455) male. Among the most vulnerable groups, 165 individuals were consider, 5% Disabled, 21% Widow, Single parents, 19% Orphans, 25% Children under 5, 6% Elderly and 22% Chronically ill. 33 were totally destroyed (15%), 34 partially destroyed (16%) and 148 HH (69%) had crops, fields and items affected. All the houses with damaged infrastructure are on the water way and in need of relocation, their field crops were also washed away. Main crops were: Maize, Sorghum, Millet, Beans, Cotton, Pumpkins, Groundnuts and Okra. Approximately 98% of the interviewed households do not have toilets and they are practicing open defecation.

Highlights: 215 HH affected, 33 totally destroyed, 34 partially destroyed, 16 villages assessed and 33 diarrhea cases Read more

The airline eventually has plans to fly these aircraft to destinations in China and the U.K. but this will have to wait until the leased aircraft are returned.

The Boeing 777s are set to join Zimbabwe’s flag carrier..eventually. Photo: Boeing Dreamscape via Wikimedia Commons

The airline’s administrator, Reggie Saruchera of Grant Thornton, broke the news this weekend. Saruchera added that nine companies have already expressed interest in leasing the two Boeing 777-200ERs. The aircraft both have a carrying capacity of 282 passengers. Details of the identity of the nine companies was not disclosed.

While the aircraft are leased out…

It looks like while the aircraft are being leased out, the airline will take the opportunity to train its flight crew as well as maintenance and ground-handling personnel on the new arrivals. However, whether or not they can do this effectively in the absence of the actual aircraft is a big question.

According to Pindula News, Saruchera said the following:

The national airline will be leasing out the two Boeing 777-200ER aircraft in the immediate, pending re-introduction of international flights to China and London after developing a robust domestic and regional route network…During the lease period, the airline will embark on training of flight crew, maintenance and ground handling personnel.

Saruchera also says that the national airline will use the revenue gained from the 777 leases to buy an additional narrow-bodied aircraft.

Restructuring of Zimbabwe’s airline

Air Zimbabwe was placed under “reconstruction” in October 2018. This was done in order to allow it to clear its debts, which are understood to be more than US$35m owed to foreign creditors.

According to Bulawayo 24 News, settling of the legacy debt would allow the administrator to settle outstanding issues with creditors and remove the airline from reconstruction. With economic turmoil going on inside the country, the airline has also suffered the embarrassment of having its aircraft impounded outside the country due to outstanding debts. In fact, a Boeing 767 belonging to the airline was impounded last October by the Airports Company of South Africa.

The airline’s Boeing 767 was impounded last year in South Africa due to outstanding debts. Photo: Getty Images

Conclusion

While it is all well and good for a country to have an airline of its own – it is debatable whether or not it is a necessity. With the country suffering enormously from hyperinflation and a weak economy, it may be best for the government to put its commercial aviation aspirations on hold and spend money elsewhere.

Do you think Zimbabwe’s government should further invest in getting its national airline back to good health? Or should it focus on other issues instead? Let us know in the comments.

Simple Flying has sent Air Zimbabwe an inquiry email regarding details of the lease. At the time of publishing, we have yet to receive a response. This article will be updated if news comes in.

Post published in: Business