LOS ANGELES – Lawyers practicing in the LosAngeles’ federal courthouse knew about Judge JamesIdeman’s delegating work to clerks long before this week’scriticism from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals,according to attorneys on both sides of the appellate caseused to deliver the rebuke.

“Talking to trial counsel, we found an understanding that thejudge on a regular basis used law clerks to do things thatother judges did themselves,” said Joseph P. Mascovich ofOakland’s Crosby, Heafey, Roach & May, whorepresented the respondent, Union Pacific Railroad Co. “Iwas surprised, however, by the caustic and aggressive toneof the panel.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]