From the Wool-sack
| Publication year | 1982 |
| Pages | 3021 |
1982, December, Pg. 3021. From the Wool-Sack
[Young unmatriculated novices]
allured to the trade of Law.
grounding their purposes not on
the prudent, and heavenly contemplation
of justice and equity which
was never taught them,
but on the promising and pleasing
thoughts of litigious terms, fat
contentions, and flowing fees. . . .
Milton,Of Education
In recent months the newspapers have been full of stories by U. S. Supreme Court justices lamenting their worsening case load and the fact that the ever-increasing press of litigation threatens to bring the legal system to a grinding halt. Although I am sure there are some cases which could be more appropriately dealt with outside the courts, it is important that we, who are observers of the judicial system as well as its participants, pass on to the Court our thoughts about the cases now being pursued through the courts which no effort should be made to stop. These cases are the very warp and woof of our society. Although each of us has his or her favorites without which we know the legal system would not be complete, no one will deny that domestic and quasi-domestic relations cases and commercial litigation must continue to be dealt with in the courts.
Proof of the importance of the domestic relations field to our judicial system is demonstrated by two cases which have been very much in the news of late. The first is the case of a woman formerly from California who is now a Harvard instructor in international relations.(fn1) While living in California, she apparently developed the sort of a friendship with an official at the University of California which resulted in her becoming pregnant. Her friend, upon hearing the news, did not respond with the kind of enthusiasm for which plaintiff had hoped and, indeed, went so far as to suggest that it would be better for all concerned if she were to have an abortion rather than a baby. According to one news account, she agreed to this proposal if the university official would agree that they do whatever was required to have a baby sometime in the future. The official apparently agreed, but following the making of that promise, he suffered something akin to "buyer's remorse" and declined to engage in the required conduct. The Harvard instructor, using...
To continue reading
Request your trial