Stanford Law School - Yearbook (Palo Alto, CA)

Page 164 text:

Prosecutor Kaplan questions Narcotics Expert McDonough during the presentation of United States v. Durtz. Iudge Constine ponders the evidentiary problems in the background. During the course of the trial of People v. Hood, a shoplifting case, Prosecutor Tim Flynn shows a People's exhibit to a witness. V' 4 ,afar 1:35591 M W V ,,.. . t. ,V ,,-1,53 , aww wmv-4' ,,,4,,yNwf MMWWWM wwnww , swf'-935 ,, 'f'2 .lwr , x 'Q-Ts.,,,, W K . .Y p ,gig-.i,1v5r', - , - ,H 161

Page 163 text:

Serjeants at Law: A. Levenstein, T. Flynn fPresidentj, M. Gerry, I. Iohnston, I. Petrush, A Pierce E. Wilhite. SERJEANTS AT L W According to last year's Yearbook, this or- ganization is called the Serjeant's Innfejn and began operations during the 1965-66 aca- demic year by conducting more than twelve trials held semi-annuallyf' Pj in which over 50 students participated. In fact, the humble beginnings of the organization date all the way back to 1964, and the cumulative records re- 'veal that the twelfth mock jury trial is an event which will belong to some future year. All this is not to say that the year 1966-67 has been unproductive or uneventful for the Serjeants. The present regime marked its in- ception with a well-attended inaugural ban- quet in the spring of 1966, shortly after the mock trial program was severed from the Moot Court Board's sponsorship. The new organiza- tion accepted its new name, as a mandate from above, and plunged forward into inactivity. It was, of course, the grateful recipient of all the trappings which accompany the imprimatur of the administration, including a generous bud- get and a well-equipped office in the Law Annex. The only things which the organiza- tion lacked were members, officers, advisors, cases, and the faintest idea of how to sustain itself, let alone progress, in the alien world of design and presentation of worthwhile jury trials. Although not unwilling, the Serjeants were quite unable to compromise quality for quan- tity. During the fall of 1966, they presented the successful First Annual Dj Faculty Mock Trial, United States U. Durtz, Professor Kaplan pressed eagerly for the conviction of hapless narcotics addict Larry Durtz, while San Francisco Public Defender james Hewitt and the Honorable judge Donald Constine provided the humor and Dean Keogh and Professors McDonough and Meyers served convincingly as witnesses. Somewhat stunned by this event, the Serjeants fumbled through only one additional trial dur- ing the fall term. Enthusiasm was again sparked by two excellent student trials of People v. Abbott, a clever murder case from the files of the Yale Barrister's Union, and spring term witnessed several well-executed student trials. However, any commentary on the year's ac- tivities must conclude with the observation that all was pretty much a by-product of the organization's efforts to design, for some future year, a program of mock trials derived from a file of interesting, well-tailored cases and con- ducted pursuant to carefully drafted ground- rules. Such a program is well underway and more or less guarantees the eventual success of an effective mock jury trial organization at the Stanford Law School. The interest and contribution of members of the local bench to the beginnings of this program has been sub- stantial, and as student interest and participa- tion mounts, the importance of this practical segment of the legal education will undoubt- edly be realized.

Page 165 text:

JUDICIAL COUNCIL Iudicial Council: E. Wright CChairmanj, D. Ragen, W. Iohnson. The President of the Law Association, with the advice and consent of the Executive Board nominates the members of the Iudicial Council. This body is charged with the enforcement of the Stanford Fundamental Standard of student conduct and the Honor Code for student exam- inations. It also has jurisdiction over all cases PI-II DELT PI-II Miller Inn of Phi Delta Phi, active at Stan- ford Law School since l897, considers its major function that of providing a means of communi- cation both among the three classes and be- tween the students and the faculty. The frater- nity strives to accomplish this end through two means: social functions and programs designed to introduce the members of the Inn to extra- curricular areas of the law. The fraternityis social functions are designed to complement those provided by other Law School organizations and to provide an oppor- tunity for members to temporarily escape the rigors of the classroom by taking advantage of the social resources of the Bay Area. These functions have included such events as a din- involving alleged violations of these principles by law students, with power to make recom- mendations to the President of the University. The Iudicial Council supervises Law Associa- tion elections and may perform advisory or in- vestigatory assignments for other Law School organizations on an ad hoc basis. ner party in Chinatown and a trip to a San Fran- cisco Giants baseball game. Perhaps more important than social activities have been the bi-monthly luncheons with mem- bers of the faculty and guests from the legal profession. These luncheons have now become a popular tradition at the Law School. As an ex-h ample of the guests Phi Delta Phi has invited to these luncheons, the fraternity hosted a mem- ber of the legal staff of Pacific Gas and Elec- tric Company to discuss corporate law practice. Such luncheons have been very successful in providing the members of the fraternity an op- portunity to discuss issues germane to their legal education, law school policy, and the practice of law. Phi Delta Phi. Front Row: I. Huhs, I. North, A. Mendel, L. Allan fHistorianI, H. Iudd CMagistrarI H. Traeger, M. Matheson, M. Harbers, I. Hoak. Second Row: D. Cooper, I. Powers, I. Renton, S Luelf, R. Svaty, D. Dressler, R. McNitt, P. Lubeck, P. Mitchell. Not Shown: L. Levy CExchecquerD T. Harris CCIerkj, R. Arhelger, R. Arthur, B. Budin, D. Davidson, M. Hyde, R. Iack, A. Kovacovich D. Miller, G. Nickel, I. Stalnaker, V. Williams, G. York.