Curt Flood’s lawyer was unprepared

15 Comments

This comes from the “I never knew that” file.

Apparently Curt Flood’s attorney in front of the Supreme Court for his famous — and ultimately ill-fated — challenge of the reserve clause was woefully unprepared. That, via the New York Times, is the story that will be told in a documentary that will air tonight on HBO entitled “The Curious Case of Curt Flood.”

The lawyer was not just any lawyer, though. It was Arthur J. Goldberg, who was a justice on the freaking Supreme Court from 1962-1965, helping (for better or worse, depending on your point of view) take the court in a sharply more liberal direction than it had been in the past. Goldberg crafted decisions on the death penalty and privacy rights, among other things, which continue to help fuel fierce debate to this day.

Say what you want about the merits of those decisions, but you don’t make that kind of mark by half-assing things.  Goldberg had a very bad day representing Curt Flood in 1972, however, and as the story and the documentary explain, it was probably because he half-assed it:

He did not deliver pointed, persuasive arguments. He lost his place. He did not answer justices’ questions directly. He clumsily listed Flood’s season-by-season batting averages. He went past his allotted time. He repeated himself. He spoke as if he did not understand baseball, citing the several “Golden Gloves competitions” Flood won for his excellent work as a center fielder. Brad Snyder, the author of “A Well-Paid Slave,” about the Flood case, wrote that Justice William Brennan cringed at watching his friend’s struggles.

David Stebenne, Goldberg’s biographer, said Goldberg admitted that he had not prepared the way he should have, incorrectly assuming that the justices who had served with him would see the error of sticking by past decisions — and not wait any longer for Congress.

On the one hand, the effect of this may be overstated.  Most appellate judges and their clerks will tell you that, usually anyway, the judges’ minds are made up before the oral argument, based on reading and scrutinizing the legal briefs which have already been submitted.  Oral argument is used to test the preliminary decision that was made, suss out nuances which were unclear from the briefs and that kind of thing.  Sure, the arguments can change a judge’s mind, but if you’re going to strike out on one of the phases of the case, better to have a bad day at oral argument than to submit a bad brief.

That said, you should do neither. A lawyer can win a case if he or she is talented or relatively untalented. A lawyer can win a case if the law is mostly on their side or if they’re fighting an uphill battle. What a lawyer can rarely get away with, however, is being unprepared. It casts a pall on your entire case. It causes the judges to go back and look at that brief and wonder if it really was as good as they thought. It also freaks your client out, and that’s not good.

My guess: Goldberg’s awful, unprepared performance didn’t change the course of the Curt Flood case,* because the justices likely made up their minds beforehand.  But it sure as hell didn’t help.

 

*I don’t have HBO, so someone tell me tomorrow if the documentary comes to any strong conclusion about this.

Marcus Stroman loses no-hit bid in the seventh inning of WBC final against Puerto Rico

Mike Ehrmann/Getty Images
2 Comments

Update (11:57 PM ET): And it’s over. Angel Pagan led off the bottom of the seventh with a line drive double down the left field line off of Stroman, ending the no-hitter. Manager Jim Leyland immediately removed Stroman from the game.

*

U.S. starter Marcus Stroman has held Puerto Rico hitless through six innings thus far in the World Baseball Classic final. The Blue Jays’ right-hander has held the opposition to just one base runner — a walk — with three strikeouts on 68 pitches.

WBC rules limit a pitcher to throwing a maximum of 95 pitches in the Championship Round, so Stroman has 27 pitches left with which to play. If he hits the limit during the at-bat, he can continue throwing to the completion of that at-bat. Needless to say, though, Stroman won’t be finishing his potential no-no.

The U.S. has given four runs of support to Stroman. Ian Kinsler hit a two-run homer in the third inning. Then, in the fifth, Christian Yelich and Andrew McCutchen both provided RBI singles. Update: The U.S. tacked on three more in the top of the seventh when Brandon Crawford drove in two with a bases-loaded single and Giancarlo Stanton followed up with an RBI single.

We’ll keep you updated as Stroman and any pitchers that follow him attempt to complete the no-hitter. Shairon Martis is the only player to throw a no-hitter in WBC history. However, the game ended after seven innings due to the mercy rule, or as it’s known now, the “early termination” rule.

Video: Ian Kinsler homers in WBC final, rounds bases solemnly

Harry How/Getty Images
6 Comments

Ian Kinsler found himself in hot water on Wednesday evening when he criticized the way players from Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic play baseball. It is his hope that kids watching the World Baseball Classic decide to emulate the emotionless way players from the U.S. play baseball as opposed to the exciting, cheerful way players from other countries tend to play the game.

Needless to say, Kinsler’s comments didn’t sit well with many people, but he has the most recent laugh. Kinsler broke a scoreless tie in the top of the third inning of Wednesday night’s WBC final against Puerto Rico, slugging a two-run home run to left-center field at Dodger Stadium off of Seth Lugo.

Kinsler, of course, rounded the bases solemnly which is sure to highlight just how cool and exciting the game of baseball is to international viewers.