Vicki L. Been, Boxer Family Professor of Law at New York University School of Law, addresses UF Law as the Wolf Family Lecture speaker Feb. 28. (Photo by Nicole Safker)

Since New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg took office in 2002, the city has engaged in the rezoning of about 11,000 lots within its limits, which equals about one-quarter of its total land area. Even for one of the world’s largest cities, this is an unusually high level of rezoning, according to Vicki L. Been, Boxer Family Professor of Law at New York University School of Law.

As the guest lecturer for the fifth annual Wolf Family Lecture on American Law of Real Property, Been — who is also the director of the Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy at NYU Law — examined this peculiar situation with her presentation, “Who Controls Land Use Regulation: The Urban Growth Machine versus Homevoters,” Feb. 28 at UF Law.

Been conducted an empirical study that attempted to gain insight into the reasons for such a high rate of rezoning in the past decade in New York City.

“There’s a wide variety of views about what motivates the people who make land use decisions,” Been said at the lecture. “These are members of the planning commission, or the members of the city council that has to vote on planning commission proposals, the mayor, or administrative agencies like the zoning board of appeals.”

These ideas about decision makers’ motivation are usually categorized into several land use theories, Been said. In her study, she chose to focus on two of the most developed and potentially revealing theories: the Urban Growth Machine theory, which is “a sort of unmitigated attempt to grow the city or grow the community,” and the Homevoters theory, which is about “the control that the homeowners have over the land use decisions.”

Been looked at a selection of 100 lots that were rezoned between 2003 and 2009 and compared a number of factors, including whether the lots were “downzoned” (more restrictive), “upzoned” (less restrictive) or “non-FAR zoning” (no major changes in floor-area ratio). The non-FAR zoned areas often required any new construction to be consistent in looks with existing structures.

The study revealed that there was about a 2 percent increase in the housing capacity in New York City, which could accommodate approximately 230,000 people in the next decade, but it is projected that the city will need to be able to accommodate about 1 million people during that time.

The overall results of Been’s study did not reveal a clear-cut conclusion about which theory may be driving the rezoning decisions in New York City. Results show some support for the Urbam Growth Machine theory, while other results lean more toward the Homevoters theory than was anticipated for a city of New York’s size.

Been said the results reveal the difficulties in articulating how theories involving land use politics will play out in practice and caution against any kind of broad presumptions about motivations behind land use decisions.

The Wolf Family Lecture Series was endowed by a gift from UF Law Professor Michael Allan Wolf, who holds the Richard E. Nelson Chair in Local Government Law, and his wife, Betty. Professor Wolf is the general editor of a 17-volume treatise, Powell on Real Property. The treatise is the most referenced real property treatise in the country and is cited regularly by the courts, including several citations in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Wolf family’s strong ties to the University of Florida date back to the 1930s, when Professor Wolf’s father, Leonard Wolf, was a UF undergraduate. Since that time, two more generations of his descendants have made their way to Gainesville to study and work.

Past scholars who have delivered the Wolf Family Lecture in the American Law of Real Property include Thomas W. Merrill, Charles Evans Hughes Professor of Law at Columbia Law School; Gregory S. Alexander, A. Robert Noll Professor of Law at Cornell Law School; Lee Fennel, Max Pam Professor of Law at the University of Chicago; and Joseph William Singer, Bussey Professor of Law at Harvard Law School.

Competitors from left, Andrew Labbe, Dylan Shea, Kelsey Veitengruber, Leigh Anne Siddle, Jordan Peterson and Dan Lazaro stand in front of judges from left, Bradford L. Thomas, Stephanie W. Ray, William Terrell Hodges and Thomas B. Smith.

The 28th annual Maguire Appellate Advocacy Competition impressed law students and legal professionals alike on Friday, Feb. 17, in the Martin H. Levin Advocacy Center courtroom.

Among the many in attendance was a distinguished panel of judges, including Senior United States District Judge William Terrell Hodges (LLB 58) from the Middle District of Florida; First District Court of Appeals Judges Stephanie W. Ray and Bradford L. Thomas (JD 82); and United States Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith (JD 77) from the Middle District of Florida.

The fictional case brought on appeal, Ryan Reed vs. Oliver Porth and Pluribus Health, challenged a state’s power to limit Medicaid coverage to autistic children.

Dylan Shea (2L), and Andrew Labbe (3L) represented the petitioner, while Daniel Lazaro (3L) and Jordan Peterson (3L) represented the respondent. The competitors were also supported by alternates Leigh Anne Siddle (3L) and Kelsey Veitengruber (2L).

While the petitioner and respondent presented their arguments, the judges interjected with questions; a challenge that showcased the oral advocacy abilities of the competitors.

To conclude the competition, Judge Hodges announced Peterson as best oralist and the respondent as best team.

“The presentations were excellent,” Judge Hodges said before announcing the winners.

The Maguire competition is named after Raymer F. Maguire Jr. (JD 15), managing partner of Maguire, Voorhis & Wells, P.A., and UF Law alumnus. In 1998, Maguire, Voorhis & Wells, P.A. merged with Holland & Knight LLP, who continues the tradition of sponsoring the competition.

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network attorneys lead a workshop Oct. 26. (Photo by Andres Farfan)

Attorneys from the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network educated students on the intricacies of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” at a workshop Oct. 26.

The workshop focused on analyzing military laws and their effects on gay people, trans people, and those who are HIV positive by working through fact patterns involving typical issues handled by the SLDN.

SLDN Legal Director Aaron Tax reviewed the things that can trigger “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” or DADT, which are a statements that one is gay, a gay action, or marriage or attempted marriage to someone of the same sex. He went on to discuss various defenses available to someone during a DADT hearing, including protected associational activities and the “queen for a day defense.”

“These defenses sometimes work no matter how bizarre they sound,” said Tax, noting that oftentimes the military wants an excuse to keep someone in service.

David McKean, SLDN Staff Attorney, noted that there is a discrepancy between the application of DADT on men and women in the military. As a practical manner, women have a lot more leeway in actions that “look gay,” but as a practical matter, women are disproportionately discharged for DADT reasons.

“The takeaway is that the DADT is completely arbitrary in its application,” McKean said. “Some people serve 20 years openly, and some never come out.”

SLDN is a national, non-profit legal service, watchdog and policy organization dedicated to ending discrimination against and harassment of military personnel affected by “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and related forms of intolerance.

The American Constitution Society and OutLaw sponsored the event.

Stephen Zack congratulates students on their achievements. (Photo by Joey Springer)

Many students enter law school having routinely aced their classes since they were children. It is, unsurprisingly, a jarring moment when law students realize that As are few and far between in the new environs. But even the vaunted A is not the ultimate mark of law school achievement. Those who receive the highest score in the class are given something extra: a book award.

On Friday, Oct. 8, those students received their book awards, commemorated with a plaque. The ceremony took place immediately after the Criser lecture, meaning that students had the pleasure of receiving their awards from ABA President Stephen Zack.

“We’re so proud of our students who have led our classes as the top student,” Dean Robert Jerry said, “and it’s a great honor to have your award presented to you by Stephen Zack.”

Many of the book awards are sponsored by firms, individuals, or groups honoring a friend. For example, the award for Florida Constitutional Law is given in honor of Bill McBride, and endowed by McBride’s law partner and fellow UF Law grad Bob Bolt, as well as McBride’s wife and gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink.

Other book awards are given in memory of those who have passed, including the award for Advanced Labor Law. The award is given in memory of Rebecca Jakubcin, a 1999 UF Law grad who died after being struck by a drunk driver. The award is sponsored by the law firm of Fisher & Phillips, where Jakubcin was a partner before her tragic death.

Zack ended the ceremony by congratulating the students, family members and award sponsors who filled the Chesterfield Smith Ceremonial Classroom. In his last remarks, Zack invoked the motto of the classroom’s namesake, ‘Do good.’ “Students,” Zack said, “you done good.”

Jeffrey J. Ventrella presents a speech regarding the federal government's treatment of religion. (Photo by Joey Springer)

When considering how the federal government should treat religion, it is important to look at the historical context behind the Constitution to truly understand the intent of the nation’s founders, said the senior vice president of a legal alliance dedicated to defending religious freedom at the University of Florida Levin College of Law Advocacy Center last week.

Jeffery J. Ventrella’s presentation, “What’s God got to do with it?: The Prima Facie Propriety of Public Religious Expression,” was sponsored by the UF Federalist Society and The John Templeton Foundation.

Ventrella explored the topic of the public expression of religion, examining the historical context of the Constitution and the intent of those who framed the religion clause of the First Amendment. The discussion also focused on displays of the Ten Commandments in public venues.

“The question I want to begin with is, ‘Is it obviously the case that displaying the Decalogue is unconstitutional?’” Ventrella said.

He continued by asking whether the Constitution is neutral toward religion, negative toward religion or if it nurtures the public expression of religion.

“I think if we look at the text of the Constitution within its own context historically, we’ll find that there’s a prima facie propriety of public religious expression,” he said.

Ventrella pointed out that there are four separate references to a God or a supreme being in the Declaration of Independence – a key founding document and one to which the Constitution refers.

Additionally, the source material for the Constitution is derived partially from Christian texts, he said. Nine percent of the ideas, quotations and allusions are taken from the Apostle Paul’s teachings; more than Montesquieu or John Locke.

Ventrella explored other instances where the federal government and religion crossed paths, including the Northwest Ordinance of 1789, which stated that as part of the qualifications for a territory to become a state, they must establish publicly funded schools “that teach religion, morality and knowledge,” he said.

He also explained that the “No Religious Test Clause” in the Constitution was not intended to necessarily keep religious views out of government, but rather it was meant to allow people from different Christian sects to work together without their particular denominations causing conflict.

The “Sundays Excepted” clause in the Constitution also seems to acknowledge the influence and importance of religion for those in federal government by not working on the Christian Sabbath. The clause states that the president has 10 days, excluding Sunday, to review legislation.

“The Capitol building, treasury building, war building were places that the federal government permitted religious worship on Sundays,” Ventrella said, which would have made it difficult for much work to be accomplished on that day anyway.

“Separation of church and state? Well, either someone didn’t get it then or someone doesn’t get it now,” he said.

Ventrella then turned to more recent developments, examining two Supreme Court rulings regarding the public display of the Ten Commandments; one ruled in favor and one ruled against displaying the documents in public venues.

“Which one comports with the text and which one comports with the context?” he asked.

In the case of McCreary County v. ACLI of Kentucky, the public display of the Ten Commandments was determined to be unconstitutional. Ventrella said the ruling was based primarily on the court’s determination that there was religious intent behind the display.

“Does the mere reference of acknowledgment to religion comprise establishment?” Ventrella asked. “I don’t think so. I think there’s a key distinction that was missed by the court. I think when a nation forms and decides that rights exist and then it seeks to distinguish itself from other nations, why can’t it state the world view or principles or assumptions that the founders believed whether true or not?”

Conversely, in Van Orden v. Perry, the court ruled that publicly displaying the Ten Commandments did not violate the Constitution because the overall display conveyed a religious and secular message.

Besides Van Orden having a limited legislative history and the fact that the display was financed and donated by a private group, a big deciding factor was the court’s finding that the display was a passive monument, Ventrella said.

Next, Ventrella discussed the importance of remembering that a person’s rights do not come from the state. He warned against that type of thinking, which can lead down a dangerous road toward a totalitarian or communist state. The state exists to protect our rights, which are inalienable, according to the Declaration of Independence, he said.

“Do we want to airbrush away the history, tradition and other things? Or do we want to live in ignorance like they did in the Soviet Union, or do we say ‘no, this comports with our history and traditions’?” Ventrella asked.

“So what’s God got to do with it?” Ventrella asked in closing, “I would say everything if you’re going to answer this question correctly.”

Stephen C. O’Connell Chair and UF Professor of Law Lyrissa Lidsky gave a brief commentary following Ventrella’s discussion.

Lidsky agreed with Ventrella that the nation’s founders did not view symbolic support for Protestantism as being in conflict with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

She also addressed the concept of government neutrality on religion, acknowledging that neutrality can be defined in different ways, but she settled on a definition by University of Virginia Law Professor Doug Laycock, which holds that there should be no coercion or persuasion for or against any particular religion by the government.

“On a personal note, I think that when the government starts sponsoring religion and even sponsoring Christianity, it sends a message to all of us who aren’t Christians that we aren’t full members of society,” Lidsky said. “It’s a predominantly Christian culture, but when the government sponsors religion, it says anyone who is not Christian is a permanent outsider in that culture, and I do think that violates the text of the First Amendment as written. Whatever neutrality means, I think it means that.”

Congratulations! You’ve made it halfway through your legal education. To help you push through finals and to your first winter break, stop by Career Services on Tuesday, Dec. 5, from noon until 2 p.m. for some refreshments and a study break. Bring any career questions if you have them — otherwise, just come to reconnect with your classmates, enjoy some comfort food and relax for a few minutes to commemorate your mid-JD mark.

Reminders for Dec. 2006 Grads

• Pro Bono Certificates: If you completed pro bono or community service hours, please confirm with Career Services that your hours are correct in our database. We are completing final certificates for the semester. Hours turned in late will not be eligible for a certificate until April.
• CCS Exit Interviews: Please call or come by the Center for Career Services to sign up for your 10-minute Career Services Exit Interview or come in during Walk-In Exit Interview times Tuesday-Fridays, 9 a.m. 2 p.m., beginning Dec. 5 and running through graduation. December grads who have not yet accepted a position are strongly encouraged to schedule an appointment with a career counselor. We can help you.
• Cap & Gown Pick Up: Regalia will be available for pick up in the Center for Career Services on Tuesday, Dec. 5, beginning at 9 a.m. If you ordered late, you may need to check with the bookstore for information on when you can expect your cap and gown to arrive.

Ideas for Winter Break

Who will you meet over Winter Break?

Did you know that most jobs are obtained by word of mouth, or who you know? Don’t worry if you don’t know any lawyers personally, they are all around you. While at family events for holiday functions, let everyone know that you are in law school and are looking for a summer or permanent job. Getting a haircut or going to the dentist? Let them know too. There are many stories that we can tell you about students who received job offers through these means. Seek out the local bar association to see if there will be any luncheons or holiday receptions while you are in the area. Take control of your future, go out there and network, yes, network. You will continue to network throughout your entire professional career, so start now.

Complete Your Bar Application

Winter break is ideal to set aside some time to prepare your bar application for submission. While you are home, track down that missing information. We all know how daunting a task it is and finding time to put this information together while keeping up with class work is close to impossible. So, now’s the time.

Volunteer

Whether you are at home or in Gainesville, ’tis the season to volunteer to help others and gain hours toward your Community Service or Pro Bono Certificate.

Informational Interview

Conduct an informational interview of a lawyer or professional in your area to learn about their career path, how they prepared and to seek their recommendations.

Prepare for Next Semester’s Recruiting

Prepare your resume and cover letter. Application deadlines begin right after the first of the year for many opportunities, including government positions, externships, fellowships and OCI. Sample resumes and cover letters are available on the CCS website, and you can email your drafts to a counselor for review. Please note, however, that emailed resumes and letters are still subject to the 48 hour turn around. We will certainly try to get them back to you sooner if at all possible.

Check Out a Non-Law School Textbook from the CCS and Read for Fun

• Kimm Walton’s Guerilla Tactics for Getting the Legal Job of your Dreams, or What Law School Doesn’t Teach You…But You Really Need to Know, or America’s Greatest Places to Work with a Law Degree are good bets.
• Try Never Eat Alone or How to Work a Room: The Ultimate Guide to Savvy Socializing in Person and Online or Choosing Small – Choosing Smart: Job Search Strategies for Lawyers in the Small Firm Market, or
• Thinking of becoming a judicial law clerk? Courtiers of the Marble Palace: The Rise and Influence of the Supreme Court Law Clerk or Behind the Bench are essentials.
• How about Women-at-Law: Lessons Learned Along the Pathways to Success or Should you Marry a Lawyer: A Couple’s Guide to Balancing Work, Love & Ambition, or Dear Sisters, Dear Daughters: Words of Wisdom from Multicultural Women Attorneys Who’ve Been There and Done That, or The Lawyer’s Guide to Balancing Life and Work: Taking the Stress out of Success
• Close to Graduating? Pick up The Legal Career Guide: From Law Student to Lawyer

CCS’ Holiday Hours

The Center for Career Services will be open during regular hours, Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. except for the week that the university is closed — Monday, Dec. 25, 2006 – Monday, Jan. 1, 2007. Regular hours will resume on Tuesday, Jan. 2, 2007.

South Florida Bound?

If you are interested in doing a judicial clerkship or practicing in the South Florida area and can be in Miami on Thursday evening, Jan. 18, 2007, you will want to watch for information upon return from the winter break regarding the Gator Alumni Association Reception at the Florida Bar Mid-year Meeting at Hyatt Regency Miami. Career Services will be able to invite 10 students to attend this event with Gator practitioners and judges.

Externships for Summer/Fall ‘07

The list of Summer/Fall 2007 externship offerings will be available on the web by mid-January before the externship informational meetings. Watch for announcements from Associate Dean George Dawson after the first of the year about externships as Career Services will no longer be administering the externship program. The faculty recently approved revisions to the externship program that have ended the availability of student-created externships. Therefore, no student-created externships will be approved effective summer or fall 2007.

New Titles in CCS

• Law Firm Diversity Programs 2007 by MCCA and Vault
• Empowerment & Leadership: Tried and True Methods for Women Lawyers, ABA Commission on Women in the Profession
• The FBI Career Guide
• Vault Guide to the Top 100 Law Firms, 2007 Edition
• View from the Top: Q&A with Legal Women Leaders
• Vault’s 2007 Law Firm Pro Bono Programs
• Letters to a Young Lawyer by Alan Dershowitz

“We are grateful for Professor Calfee’s continued support and dedication to the training institute, by making time from his busy schedule, traveling over thousands of miles to help the institute on a regular basis,” said Taiwan Minister of Finance Dr. Ho Chih-chin. “We are truly blessed for his willingness and enthusiasm to come to Taipei almost every year since 1986 to provide lectures and seminars on important and timely tax law and tax policy issues to members of this big family, Ministry of Finance, Republic of China. I am also very grateful that Professor Calfee has provided substantial assistance in the design and improvement of the program of the International Taxation Academy, and made great efforts in bringing many leading tax experts around the world to participate in various lectures at the academy.”

Calfee has been teaching at the University of Florida since 1975 in the Graduate Tax Program, which consistently ranks in the nation’s top two in U.S. News World Report’s annual ranking of tax specialty programs. He has also taught as a visiting professor at Leiden University, the Netherlands; Peking University, Beijing, China; Academy of International Tax, Taipei, Taiwan; and University of Montpellier, France. He has published extensively on taxation in tax law journals, particularly on the subject of estate and gift tax, and is a principal author of the book Federal Estate and Gift Taxation, now in its eighth edition, and its supplemental study problem manual. He is a member of the American Bar Association and American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.

“It is very rewarding to teach students in Taiwan,” said Calfee. “They are very enthusiastic and eager to learn, and work hard to understand and retain everything I present to them.”

Calfee received a Bachelor’s of Business Administration (magna cum laude)in 1968 and J.D. in 1982 from Gonzaga University—which awarded him its Distinguished Alumni Merit Award in 1999—and LL.M. in Taxation from UF in 1975. He clerked for the Washington State Court of Appeals 1972-1974, and was UF Law associate dean 1988-1993.

The newest twist was a fence surrounding the protest area and swarming with police officers, making it easier for them to regulate the crowd. John Meehan sees the fence as a mistake by police.

“I thought it backfired,” he said. “It provided much more opportunity for protesters to hang crosses, to hang banners. I thought it was counter productive for the police. It did work for them in a sense because it had the effect of reducing the amount of police they had on staff, but it was absolutely unnecessary. This protest in its entire history has been nonviolent.”

The students participated in the event through the National Lawyers Guild, which joined the legal collective to monitor illegal police practices and make the protesters aware of their rights.

Sara Denny got involved to protect the right to peacefully dissent. She voiced observers’ concerns about potential legal problems. “I was really concerned with freedom of assembly and freedom of speech, and that the police didn’t treat the protestors inappropriately,” she said. “I was expecting intimidation, harassment, just basically violating peoples’ constitutional rights under the law without any kind of consideration.”

The legal observation team manned checkpoints and kept a close watch on the city police, county sheriffs and prison guards monitoring the crowd. Part of the program every year involves members of the crowd crossing the line between Columbus and Ft. Benning and being arrested for trespass, which carries a penalty of up to six months in prison and up to a $5,000 fine. Bail was typically set at $1,000 in past
years. Meehan objects to the stiff bail.

“I think the bail is excessive in that this type of crime, trespassing, normally involves people being released on personal recognizance, as opposed to a thousand dollar bond,” he said.

At last count, 20 members of the crowd had been arrested and faced potential jail time, including a 78-year-old blind man who crossed the fence topped with barbed wire with assistance. Trisha Low was on hand when the first two people were arrested.

“I thought the most powerful part of the protest was seeing the guy and girl holding hands walking through the base for a quarter of a mile before getting stopped,” she said. “They prayed in between the two gates and it was very moving.”

Saturday was a day of peaceful vigil. Nonviolent civil disobedience was on the schedule for Sunday, when the crossings occurred and a reading of the names of victims from South America took place. Following was a solemn funeral march with thousands of members of the crowd adorning the gates with crosses bearing victims’ names.

Both days featured a parade of puppetistas — puppeteers operating huge, colorful puppets signifying such noble ideas as farmers’ rights. The parade concluded with a 16-foot tall face touting democracy made of cardboard and carried by 15 people.

Problems protestors encountered in past years include speakers blasting from behind military gates, illegal searches of protestors and low flying, hovering helicopters, which were a problem this year as well.

“If there are no oral arguments on a given day, I’ll probably have 15 jurisdictional decisions to consider,” Wells said. “After jurisdictional questions are decided, I work through cases trying to develop opinions.” Then there’s preparation for the Wednesday conferences, where the justices come together to discuss circulated opinions.Cases are assigned randomly, and oral arguments are heard in about half of them.

“I have three law clerks,” Wells said. “But I like to do a lot of my own research.”

A proud “Double-Gator” who has been recognized as a Distinguished Alumnus of the University of Florida, Wells earned his bachelor’s in 1961 and law degree in 1964. As an undergraduate, he participated in UF’s homecoming and Florida Blue Key, and was elected to the UF Hall of Fame in 1961.

After graduation, Wells received one of the three highest bar exam scores in the state in 1965, and spoke at the induction ceremony at the Second District Court of Appeals. He practiced in his father’s firm in Orlando 1965-69, then spent a year as a trial lawyer for the U.S. Justice Department. In 1970, he returned to his father’s firm and remained there until 1976, when he formed his own Orlando firm, Wells, Gattis, Hallowes & Carpenter, P.A. He practiced there until 1994, when Governor Lawton Chiles appointed him to the Florida Supreme Court.

He became chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court in July 2000, a position that rotates among the justices every two years, and made history when presiding over cases that came before the court during Election 2000.

During his 28 years of private practice, Wells also found time for civic activities, including involvement in the Orlando Area Chamber of Commerce, Orlando Jaycees, Orange County YMCA, and Professional Division of the United Appeal of Orange County.

“Community involvement is very important,” Wells said.

He feels pro bono work is equally important, and spent 14 years working with the Orange County Legal Aid Society, serving on the Society’s Board of Trustees 1988-89. The society gave him its Award of Excellence in 1989 for outstanding pro bono service. He also volunteered for nine years in the Guardian Ad Litem Program, representing dependent and abused children in court proceedings.

Wells similarly served the legal profession. He participated in the Orange County Bar Association for years, and was president 1989-90. He also served on The Florida Bar’s Board of Governors.

He also manages to find time to give back to his alma mater, serving as president of the Orange County Chapter of UF’s Alumni Association and returns to Gainesville — along with his fellow justices — to judge the Justice Campbell Thornal Moot Court Final Four competition each fall.

Among other credentials, Wells has been a certified mediator in both state and federal courts and was admitted to practice by all Florida courts and several federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.