Letters to the Editor

      A Question of Dignity
      Thank you for highlighting in the January issue the critical problems with our current immigration system, both in the cover article by Bill Blum ["Crossing to Safety"] and in the In Pro Per piece by Itir Yakar ["The Visit"].
      In our day-to-day work as immigration attorneys and advocates, we frequently encounter shameful disrespect for our clients at the hands of immigration judges and immigration officials. How do you explain to a starry-eyed client, who believes that America is the land of freedom and respect for human rights, that some of our government officials forget their professional and human responsibilities and abuse their power?
      I applaud each article that shines light on the flaws in a system that continues to permit such attacks on fundamental fairness.
      Kirsten Schlenger
      San Francisco
     
      For the Record
      Regarding "What Counties Pay Their Lawyers" by Donna Horowitz [January]: The table of salaries for San Diego County is misleading. At the time of the survey, the Public Defender Association had completed its contract negotiations with the county but the Deputy District Attorney Association had not. Now the starting pay is identical.
      Steve Carroll
      Public defender
      San Diego
     
      CORRECTION: The salary survey should have reported that only 151 of 200 authorized positions in the Alameda County District Attorney's office are filled. Also, top pay for nonmanagement attorneys in the Los Angeles District Attorney's office is $134,976?a larger amount was incorrectly reported. California Lawyer regrets the error.
     
      Upon Further Scrutiny
      The article "Under Scrutiny" [ESQ., January] might mislead readers to believe that California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA) actually intended to seek "payment" from Modesto residents in the pending litigation against the city. In fact, no one contends that CRLA, which represents (with co-counsel) 2 of the 14 plaintiffs in that case, expected to or was attempting to seek or receive fees for its work on that case.
      Indeed, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) accusation arises from the fact that the prayers appropriately seeking statutory attorneys fees for our co-counsel inadvertently failed to explicitly exclude CRLA, although CRLA had repeatedly advised that we could not seek or collect such fees.
      Jose R. Padilla
      Executive director, California Rural Legal Assistance
      San Francisco
     
      Clerk Power
      Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed Jeff Bleich's review of Courtiers of the Marble Palace [Books, January]. Bleich's closing comments on the need to study the effect of former clerks on society are spot on.
      Diane Marie Amann
      Professor of law
      UC Davis School of Law
     
      Making a Federal Case of It
      In discussing the differing state and federal rules governing statutory offers of judgment, Professor William R. Slomanson's MCLE article ["Choosing State or Federal Procedure," January] correctly noted that federal practice limits this salutary settlement tool to defendants and cross-defendants cum plaintiffs, but only to a point. That point ends at the state line: In federal diversity cases, California plaintiffs may use California Code of Civil Procedure section 998 to make statutory settlement offers to diverse defendants. Thus, in choosing whether to sue in state or federal court, plaintiffs in diversity actions can remove the unavailability of an early section 998 offer that gets the interest clock ticking from their list of federal dissuaders.
      G. Michael German
      Deputy attorney general
      San Diego
     
      Speaking Out, Remaining Silent
      Thank you for sharing Itir Yakar's views with us [In Pro Per, "The Visit," January]. As a full-time criminal defense practitioner, I hear about this sort of thing daily.
      Hopefully, more people like her will speak out against this wholesale campaign against human dignity in the name of public safety. I sense her trepidation at speaking out but hope that the support of lawyers like me helps her to not worry about the consequences of speaking the truth.
      Eric H. Schweitzer
      Fresno
     
      It's all too easy to give out a lot of personal information to people you believe are lawful authorities. In this case, maybe these guys were. But people may want to consider never giving out any personal information to self-identified "authorities" whose identity they cannot verify with absolute certainty.
      Ann Folsom
      Monterey
     

---