The Supreme Court this afternoon announced its November oral argument calendar. Notably, the court will be sitting at the Stanley Mosk Library & Courts Building in Sacramento for the first time in several years. The building underwent an extensive renovation that began in 2009.
One of the arguments will be in another high-profile bar admissions matter. After a September argument in In re Garcia, regarding whether an undocumented immigrant can be granted a law license, the court will now hear about the bar admission application of Stephen Glass, whose former career as a journalist ended in disgrace. [Disclosure: Jon Eisenberg, of counsel to Horvitz & Levy, is one of Glass’s attorneys.]
The court will hear the following cases on November 5 and 6 (with the issue(s) presented as stated on the court’s website):
People v. Biane: Can a defendant be charged with both offering a bribe to another person and aiding and abetting the receipt of the bribe by that person?
People v. Duff: [This is an automatic appeal from a March 2002 judgment of death. The court’s website does not list issues for such appeals.] (Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye is recused; Presiding Justice Judith McConnell of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One, will be a pro tem justice on the case.)
In re Glass: Considering the applicant’s extensive misconduct, is there sufficient evidence of rehabilitation to support the State Bar Court recommendation that he be admitted to the practice of law? (Justice Liu has recused himself; Justice Richard Mosk of the Second District Court of Appeal will be taking his place. Justice Mosk will hear the matter in a building named after his father, former Supreme Court Justice Stanley Mosk.)
Assessor for County of Santa Barbara v. Assessment Appeals Board No. 1: Under Revenue and Taxation Code section 62.1, what is the proper method for determining the assessed value of the real property interest in a mobilehome park after a transfer of a membership interest in the nonprofit corporation that owns the park? (Justice Baxter is recused; Justice James McIntyre of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One, will sit in his place.)
Donkin v. Donkin: Did any of the proposed challenges to the disposition of the trust at issue in this case trigger the trust’s no contest clause? Can a challenge that is founded on an alleged breach of fiduciary duty by a trustee violate a no contest clause?