Talk:Learned Hand

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Law Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

High

This article has been assessed as high-importance on the assessment scale.

[edit] Influence in Patent?

Learned Hand had a fairly large impact upon US Patent Law and is considered one of the greatest patent judges, so this would be a reasonable addition to the page.

Some of L. Hand's patent opinions: Wright Co. v. Paulhan 177 F. 261 (C.C. S.D.N.Y 1910) (involves Wright Brother's patent on a "flying machine.") Picard v. United Aircraft Corp., 128 F.2d 632, 53 USPQ (BNA) 563 (2d Cir.1942); Jockmus v. Leviton, 28 F.2d 812 (2d Cir. 1928)

Doctrine of Equivalents: Royal Typewriter Co. v. Remington Rand, Inc., 168 F.2d 691, 692 (2d Cir. 1948). —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeWitt (talk • contribs) 23:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by DeWitt (talk • contribs) 23:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Does anyone know of a book this guy wrote about body langauge? Thank you!

- - - - - - - - -

Another question:

Has anyone compiled a list of all Learned Hand's clerks? I think this would be a fascinating group.

208.27.111.121 23:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)interested party

[edit] Image

Can anyone with access to the book from which the image was taken confirm if it is indeed an official portrait, as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Learned_Hand.jpg suspects? --Ec- 22:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wacky Naming Conventions...

This article needs some explanation of why his family went around making puns out of their children's names, like Learned Hand and Noble Hand. Anyone have an explanation they can add? --Kaz 17:54, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

"Learned" was actually his middle name (Billings Learned Hand) and was his mother's maiden last name. It wasn't really a pun at all. "Noble" was another name from a family member. See the first chapter of Learned Hand: The Man and the Judge by Gerald Gunther for more info. Newyorkbrad 01:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The article should explain why he's known by his middle name. Did people actually call him "Learned" on a day-to-day basis? Elliotreed 03:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Why? Being called by middle name is not rare.Jm546 21:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The article should definitely give a brief account of how his name came to be. To the casual reader - who will be a major force if this article goes FA - his name is a key area of interest and one of the more notable things about the man. To leave such an interesting name totally unmentioned in the article would be somewhat perverse. Satisfaction of reader curiosity is important to an FA. I'll do it myself if no one objects. François Metro (talk) 01:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SCOTUS

Was this guy ever considered for the Supreme Court?<<Coburn_Pharr>> 04:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Not as far as I can remember, perhaps out of political reasons.

Felix Frankfurter in particular pushed pretty hard for his nomination throughout the '50s, and he was notable enough to have probably been strongly considered in several instances, but he was never officially nominated. --Ec- 19:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

He was seriously considered several times. See Gerald Gunther, Learned Hand: The Man and the Judge, for detailed discussion including quotations from lots of the original documents. If you can't get hold of the book I'll post more details here, but the book itself is well worth reading. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

This needs to be discussed in the article. Reading between the lines in NYB's response, I gather that he was never actually nominated due to lack of poitical "juice", rather than specificly being ignored. -- llywrch (talk) 17:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Never served on the supreme court

The opening paragraph claimed he was on the Supreme Court but if you check this link you see he was never a Supreme. The rest of the article claims his service and dates correctly but the first paragraph claimed otherwise. Needless to say, I did edit it.

http://air.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=965

Your edit was incorrect; read the original sentence more carefully: "Hand is generally considered to be one of the most influential American judges never to have served on the Supreme Court of the United States." Postdlf 14:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Is this that dude's real name?

YES, this is that dude's real name.

Did he rename himself, or did his parents REALLY REALLY want him to be a lawyer? --Sumple (Talk) 11:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I suppose we should just accept that it's simply the greatest name ever and move on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.132.153.214 (talk) 19:49, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

"Learned" was his mother's maiden name, and yes, his real name was (Billings) Learned Hand. His cousin, Augustus N. Hand, was also a judge on the same courts. Newyorkbrad 00:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm surprised no one has asked how "Learned" was pronounced. A visit to dictionary.reference.com says it is "LUR-nid". I would have guessed that, but not with any sense of certainty.Jm546 21:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Best name EVER --24.227.174.14 (talk) 04:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Free Speech

It would be nice if this article contained more content on Hand's "early" advocacy of free speech in a country that had, apparently, forgotten about that concept. See, e.g., his opinion in Masses Pub. Co. v. Patten, 244 F. 535 (D.C.N.Y. 1917), which, effectively, lost him promotion to the Circuit Court. See, e.g., Christopher M. Finan, From the Palmer Raids To The Patriot Act: A History of The Fight For Free Speech In America (Beacon Press, 2007) at p.29

Also, the reference to Posner seems to me to be totally inappropriate, as Posner didn't attain his law degree until 1962 and didn't begin his academic career until the early 1970s, whereas Hand died in 1961. As far as I know, Posner wasn't "influenced by Pragmatism" to formulate his views on tort theory and the relevance of economic theory to the law. [There is a difference between "being a Pragmatist [with a large "P"], which refers to a particular school (now long defunct) in American Philosophy, and being pragmatic. See, e.g., Chapter 4 of Posner's The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory (Harvard U. Press 1999) where Posner declares himself to be "not interesed" in the traditional concerns of the Pragmatists. Ibid. at p. 227]

Posner was influenced by his colleagues in the Economics Department at the University of Chicago, where he obtained his views regarding the use of economic analysis in law, not by the Pragmatists. OTOH, Hand may have been "influenced by the Pragmatists" as at least two of his undergraduate teachers at Harvard were the leaders of the Pragmatist movement.

[edit] Potential references

For quotes: Wikiquotes

Risker (talk) 14:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Reference to his famous I Am An American Day speech from NACDL: [1]
Reference to his folk song recordings (!): [2]
Harvard's collection of his papers: [3]
Interesting blog post with reference to court opinion on a Learned Hand quotation: [4]
Reference to the Learned Hand medal

ScienceApologist (talk) 14:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copied from NYB's talk page

I probably should ask this on the article talk page, but since people may be watching this page... would this be considered a reliable source? It seems kind of sketchy, but it does make one of the statements that is currently in the intro to the article, but unsourced. (The one about Hand being the most influential judge never to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court; I think it is a correct statement, but obviously a source would be nice, and helpful if FA status is to be achieved.) Neutron (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Not a recommended source, and everything in that blurb is available in at least one other more reliable source. I believe the quote actually comes from the book NYB mentions several times on the article's talk page. I'll copy this exchange over to the talk page of the article. Risker (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Newyorkbrad's FA

As stated at the top of this page, this newly retired editor did not get the FA he apparently wanted. Right now, there isn't an active collaboration effort to nominate any particular articles he might have had an interest in for collaboration. Having said that, I think maybe one of the best tributes to him would be to get one of the articles he was interested in to as high a level as possible. Would anyone here be willing to work on one of the articles the editor was most interested in? Maybe, if we can get it to FA, a template to the effect of why the collaboration was done could be added to the article's talk page. John Carter (talk) 13:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

He really wanted to get Learned Hand up to FA, but I know nothing about law and judges. Thatcher 13:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

John Carter, that is an extremely good and kind idea. :-) FloNight ♥♥♥ 13:57, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Agree! Paul August ☎ 14:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Brilliant idea! For those who don't know about the topic, we can help with refs, formatting, etc. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

As someone with a legal background, I will help with Learned Hand, but it has to wait until after Sunday when my Tribeca Film Festival work ends. User:Cool Hand Luke and User:SWATJester also have legal backgrounds. --David Shankbone 14:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

There is one very good biography of the subject, Learned Hand:The Man and the Judge by Gerald Gunther. I can get it. It's long (about 700 pages), but I can try to get it and read it in the next few days. There are a few other books I can find as well, Learned Hand on Patent Law and Learned Hand's Court, which I can try to get a bit later. But if anyone else has access to these sources, I could doubtless use the help. I ain't exactly familiar with FA's myself. John Carter (talk) 14:28, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure Giano could lend a hand in that regard. Paul August ☎ 18:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I have put the link to the Wikiquote page onto the talk page of the article. There are a few other reference sources mentioned in their article, as well. Also check google books. Will assist with formatting, structure and copy editing. Risker (talk) 14:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

A judge called "Learned Hand"? That strikes me as funny. I will keep an eye out and try and help as well if I get the time. Getting this article to FA is a very good idea. Carcharoth (talk) 17:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

"Learned" was his mom's family name. His full name was "Billings Learned Hand", which, in all honesty, isn't much better. Maybe Michael Learned is related to him, I dunno. John Carter (talk) 20:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

His cousin, also a judge, was named Augustus Noble Hand which maybe even top Learned Hand for sheer coolness. I agree this is a great idea. Learned Hand is one of the most famous judges in American history and there are plenty of sources to help bring that article to featured status (see for example this Worldcat subject search).--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 22:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Seeing how I was supposed to collaborate with NYB on Learned Hand, I guess I should lend a hand with the article writing. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not love)} 19:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I just received an e-mail from NYB saying the three articles he was most interested in were this one, Nero Wolfe, and Judicial disqualification. The Nero Wolfe article falls under Wikipedia:WikiProject Media franchises, a group I am involved in to a slight degree. The other article is completely and utterly beyond my limited, non-legal mind. If any of the rest of you were to be interested in and competent to edit that article, I think it would be more than welcome. I'm still going to try to get the Hand biography tomorrow, however. John Carter (talk) 01:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Judicial disqualification needs globalising, no other way forward and its already been tagged for this. Thanks, SqueakBox 01:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

/me coughs. miranda 02:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, there are three lawyers on this list already—David Shankbone, Swatjester and Cool Hand Luke—so perhaps there can be a division of labour here. The Nero Wolfe article requires some negotiation with other editors who have been very involved in its development to date, so I suggest it be the last one tackled. Perhaps it is now time to start looking at trying to organise this collaborative effort, dividing up for the different articles and the different tasks. I propose the following:

Learned Hand

Research/writing team, divided into

General biography
Legal precedents set/Influence (this probably needs a lawyer to advise on)
Supreme Court issue

Images

Locating further images and getting them uploaded and cleared
Image improvement

Copy editing and cleanup, including MOS and reference consistency

Judicial disqualification

Research to globalise the article (any non-US lawyers or knowledgeable editors willing to help?)
Writing up based on research
Image searches/creation—possibly some graphics if no suitable photos found
Copy editing and cleanup, including MOS and reference consistency

Nero Wolfe

Suggest that some preliminary discussions take place with the article's usual editing team, ensuring they are included in any FA drive.

Just my two cents. I'm up for copy-editing and cleanup of this article. Risker (talk) 03:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

As I told NYB originally, I can work on Learned Hand's life before he entered the legal profession. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not love)} 03:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Might want to start with reading materials and NPR. If anyone lives in NYC, I have no doubt his papers are located there. miranda 08:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I have the Gunther book and will add stuff as I read it. Not a lawyer so probably won't be able to make head or tale of the legal stuff, but though the bio is well written so hopefully the legal aspects are accessible even to the uninitiated! Slp1 (talk) 12:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaning up the picture

The picture used here, Image:Judge Learned Hand 1924-12-02.jpg, needs cleaning up. I think User:Durova does stuff like that, and there are others as well. Carcharoth (talk) 00:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Durova is a good bet for this sort of thing. Sign me up for any copyediting etc. help needed. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 09:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've put about 7 hours into that pic so far (in its high resolution Library of Congress incarnation). The result won't be magical: it has weaknesses in composition and an extremely narrow depth of field: only his shoulder is actually in focus, not his face, and the print is in poor condition. Shoemaker's Holiday spent a lot of time today looking through public domain archives to search for better images. Durova^Charge! 02:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Done this one. Durova^Charge! 08:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

And the lead image. Durova^Charge! 08:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Others done too. Please ping me if more work is needed. Best, Durova^Charge! 09:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Great work!

Is it just me, or does he look younger in 1924 than he did in 1910? qp10qp (talk) 14:01, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

It's probably the blurring to some extent: I doubt Harvard would get the dates wrong. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if we ought to look a bit further into this though: Gunther book has this one [5] as being "probably mid 1930s" (dated 1910 at the moment)and I notice from the record at the Library of Congress record (where it is held) for the younger looking one [6] (dated 1924 at the moment) that there is no date attached to it on the record card at the repository.[7] Slp1 (talk) 19:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

...Hmm. You may be right: Here's all the Harvard information on the 1910 one of those:

        Title:          Learned Hand.
        Work Type:      photographs; portraits
        Date:   n.d.; ca. 1910
        Description:    Three-quarter length formal portrait. Hand is turned slightly left, looking at the camera with hands in his pockets. Inscribed to Charles Wyzanski, Jr.
        Dimensions:     32.2 x 20.8 cm mat; 20 x 12.6 cm image
        Associated Name:        Wyzanski, Charles E. (Charles Edward) (1906 -), recipient
Hand, Learned (1872-1961), sitter
        Topics:         judges; jurists; lawyers
        Materials/Techniques:   photography on paper
        Note:   Inscription: Inscribed in Hand's hand on the plate beneath the photograph, "To Charles Wyzanski Jr. / [illegible] / Learned Hand".
Provenance: Label attaching the photograph to the mat reads, "From / Goodspeed's Book Shop / 7 Ashburton Place Boston, Mass."
Subject: Born Albany, New York, January 27, 1872; B.A. and M.A. Harvard College, 1893; L.L.B. Harvard Law School, 1896; Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 1909-1924; Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1924-1951; Chief Judge of the Second Circuit, 1939-1951; deceased August 18, 1961.
General: Forms part of the Learned Hand visuals collection.
        Repository:     Harvard Law School Library
Record Identifier: olvwork371817

Would he really have given a 4 to 14-year-old a photo? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. [8] would imply 1932 as a likely date. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

You're a good detective! I suppose we should be careful not to get into tooooo much original research, but it is rather satisfying to put the clues together, isn't it?!!! I would suggest following the book and saying "probably mid 1930s". That seems consistent with what you found too. I am also a bit dubious about the 1910 for this one too [9]. The book has a picture of him in 1912 with his three little girls and he looks nothing like this (but quite like the one listed as being 1924). Would you care to investigate, Sherlock? Slp1 (talk) 00:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The Harvard site states that the provenence is unknown, and it was possibly added as part of the move of a picture collection. It also gives the "n.d.; ca. 1910" date as the other one, but this may be from comparison with the circa 1932 one that we dealt with above - I could believe that they're from about the same time.

What this means for picture copyright, I have no idea. Things from before 1989 published in America without a copyright notice are technically not in copyright, but it's hard to say whether these sorts of things count as publishing. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and if it helps, I can read the supposedly "illegible" text. It's written in Greek. Unfortunately, I can't translate it. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 00:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ought to be careful and double check copyright status on that photo if it's really from 1932. If not, could there be an official portrait in public domain? Works for hire of the United States Government would be PD... Durova^Charge! 06:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More stuff

Was looking around, and found that, in addition to the medal pointed out above (the Learned Hand Medal for Excellence in Federal Jurisprudence from the Federal Bar Council), there is a professorship named after him. It is the "Learned Hand Professor of Law" position at Harvard Law School. See Professorial positions at Harvard Law School. Haven't been able to find out when this professorship was started, though.

I was also looking through "what links here" and found the following scraps of information that will need sourcing and verifying (there is more than I have put here, I concentrated on the biographical, rather than legal, stuff):

Elizabethtown, New York - the article says he lived here.
Phi Beta Kappa Society - the article says he was elected Phi Beta Kappa at Harvard in 1893
- Yep. I found an image that confirms that. Image:Learned_Hand_in_Phi_Beta_Kappa_Uncropped.jpg The Harvard University page I got it from - near impossible to direct link, I fear; follow the instructions on the image page. I used a couple images from there as references. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Elliot Richardson - clerked for him.
Captain Marvel (DC Comics) - nice reference there!
Aptronym - he is an example.
Abie's Irish Rose - another nice reference.
Newbold Morris - article says Morris was married to Constance Hand, Learned Hand's youngest daughter.
Hugh Calkins - probably not notable enough to mention him here.
Vincent L. McKusick - another clerk.
John J. Cound - another clerk.

That's about it, but as I said, lots of legal stuff not included there. It would be easy to link to lots of legal articles based on "what links here", and equally to use the biography to talk about ones we don't have articles on, and to go the other way, from here to the legal articles currently linked from here, and provide a link back to here. Making sure to get the balance right, of course. Carcharoth (talk) 11:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Phi Beta Kappa

Could someone better versed in American college life explain to me the Phi Beta Kappa fraternity situation? An earlier version of this article had that "He graduated Phi Beta Kappa". Gunther mentions nothing about PBK in any context, and now Shoemaker's holiday has kindly added a photograph as a source that Hand was a member of PBK during his college years. Is PBK something you join while you are a student, or do you get elected when you graduate as the original text seemed to indicate? An additional question I wonder about is whether pictures and their captions count as reliable sources that we could/should use.--Slp1 (talk) 23:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's not just the image, but also Harvard University's comments on the image. But, yeah, that's really a secondary reference at best, it should be properly ref'd as well. Suffice it to say, being elected to Phi Beta Kappa at Harvard in the 1890s is strong evidence of very high achievement. He would have been getting A's when C really was the average grade, and the average grade of a group of people already highly selected for intelligence by the entry requirements. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree that we need another ref, though probably findable. My real question is still whether it was a fraternity he joined during his undergraduate life (as the text implies at the moment) or whether it is something one gets elected to at graduation, in which case we should move things around a bit. Hopefully somebody who knows about these things can elucidate.--Slp1 (talk) 01:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it was definitely 1893, and I believe he was definitely a student at that time, so.... =) Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

He graduated in 1893, so I am not sure we are much further ahead!! This [10] implies it comes at graduation, I think.Slp1 (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I've been a bit bold based on the source I found... what do you think? The new photos look great by the way! Slp1 (talk) 02:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Learned Hand (1910)

Definitely 1910

I have talked to Harvard University, and they said it's definitely from about 1910, but was enscribed to Charles Wyzanski much later. They've updated the text describing it as well:

Inscribed in Hand's hand on the plate beneath the photograph, "To Charles Wyzanski Jr. / [illegible inscription in Greek] / Learned Hand". The undated inscription was made at a period later than the original production of the photograph. Correspondence between Hand and Wyzanski held at the Harvard Law School Library dates to 1932.

So, I think we're quite safe keeping that picture *wipes brow* Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

And, let's face it, he didn't look that different when he went to Harvard Law School, 1894-96 (front row, second from right)

I am sorry, and with all due respect to Harvard, I am still not convinced. In the Gunther book there is a picture which is dated c 1912 and which must be correct because of the ages of the children in the picture. In the same book, there same photo on the right is reproduced, stating it comes the family collection, and that it is "probably in the 1930s". In 1912 he has jet black hair and non-bushy eyebrows. (Yes I know about hair dye and eyebrow plucking, but it seems a bit unlikely!) Hand looks much younger than this picture supposedly taken 2 years earlier. I myself do not feel that we can plump for the 1910 date when our most reliable source says 20 years later, in addition to the physical evidence. Maybe what we need is an expert in men's suits! I would be glad of others opinions about this: maybe someone else with the Gunther book? Slp1 (talk) 00:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I have the book now and hope to help with the editing soon. It seems to me that Harvard are plum wrong. Why neglect the obvious, that he signed the photo for Wyzanski not long after it was taken? Why on earth would he give a photo of himself to someone twenty-two years after it was taken? As Slp1 says, the book has a picture of a much younger-looking Hand taken in 1912 with his family. The book says that the photo we label "1910" was taken "mid-career, probably in the 1930s". That in itself is enough to justify a change of caption. In my opinion, this is backed up by the fact that Hand is sporting grey-white hair and a suit of the period, with wider lapels than in the 1910s. His eyebrows are also three times as bushy, though that could just be because he hasn't trimmed them. Wikipedia 1, Harvard 0. (My only reservation is that at the age of fourteen, on the evidence of another photo, Hand looked about forty-five.) qp10qp (talk) 22:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Erk, Slp, this book is loooooooooooong! qp10qp (talk) 22:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I've only just seen this. Yes the book sure is long!! And I tend to agree that Harvard is wrong, and was thinking of sending them an email to see if they know that the photo has been published elsewhere with a totally different date attached. Having got to about p. 150 now, I really don't think the sort of guy who would give a 20 year old photo to one of his clerks. I mean, who would do that really? I think one of the problem with the 1930s date, is that it brings some copyright issues, unfortunately.--Slp1 (talk) 23:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kudos

I just wanted to say well done to everyone who's worked so far on this article...you guys are doing a great job. Keep it up! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 07:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What still needs doing?

I've changed the rating to B-class. What more needs doing to get to GA, A or FA class? Is the article comprehensive yet? Do we need more on the legal side of things? Carcharoth (talk) 07:58, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

At a glance, the lead needs expansion. The Influence section is pretty much unsourced, and there are are some stubby paragraph-sentences there that need work. The biographical sections look OK at a glance. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 08:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I think there is lots of work required here, I'm afraid. I am slowly ploughing my way through the bio as my contribution, but since I am only on page 60 and there are 800 pages in the book I have a long way to go! It would be good if someone else could get access to the book and we could split the chapters or something. We also need to do a search for other books/journal articles about him and his legal decisions and incorporate some different perspectives and references. I note that some are available through googlebooks which will help [11]. Any copyediting and improvement of the prose I have added would be gratefully received, this will become especially necessary as topics become increasingly about legal issues and nuances that are something of a struggle for me to understand and thus express clearly.--Slp1 (talk) 11:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing is still pretty poor. It's going to need a lot more references before this hits FA. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The number of sources overall may be a problem, and the fact that so many swathes of text are unsourced. The actual Slp1 (talk) 13:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)volume of sources (20s) is fine, though, for a featured article. Lawrence Cohen § t/e 16:53, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I will obtain some further reference sources to supplement what is already here; there are quite a few although some are relatively obscure. Risker (talk) 18:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

It does need more variety: If it's primarily sourced to one biography, we're going to be torn apart and FAC. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Another problem is that the section "Federal judge" ends with a long sequence of one-sentence paragraphs. They need to be smoothed out into a more connected whole, filling in with more details. Probably also needs divided off into its own section, as much of it occurs after his time as a judge. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Give me a chance, guys! As I said, there is a long way to go in the Gunther book, and so the sourcing and the rephrasing will be done in time, as I get there. But it is true that others will need to look out other sources and contribute these: though FA biographies often rely on relatively few sources, the current limited range will certainly need to be expanded. --Slp1 (talk) 18:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind that the Gunther book is over 800 pages long. I would like to think that the final product will be 50+ KB long. I should be getting the Gunther book in the next few days. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 04:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Excellent news! Slp1 (talk) 11:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The latter two images aren't particularly inspiring...would it be possible to get something more "meaningful" (not sure myself what I'm suggesting, anyone got any cool ideas?) or at least have some more exciting captions? dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 11:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe Image:Learned Hand in Phi Beta Kappa Cropped.jpg? The trouble is that both that picture and Image:Learned Hand Hasty Pudding.jpg and the current one in the article, relate to his time at Harvard. There is room in that section for one more picture, but if we use more than that, you would have to start filling a gallery section at the bottom of the section. Images after 1923 are problematic for copyright reasons, though some free ones may exist. What I tend to do for biographical articles, if you can't get pictures of them throughout their life, is to be a little bit creative and give pictures of people they worked with, or places they lived, or stuff like that. Unfortunately we don't seem to have a picture of Albany Law School, and Image:WTM sheila 0036.jpg is an awful picture of where he worked as a judge. Pictures of The Albany Academy are of later buildings, after he left. The only thing I can justify putting in is a picture of a family member: Augustus Noble Hand. So I'll do that. Carcharoth (talk) 12:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Several problems with this article, and several proposals. For one thing, there's a lot of peacock language that may just be pointless, such as, "Hand's three years at Harvard Law School were stimulating both intellectually and socially." Even if you want to give Hand a hand, that's pretty crass for a FAC. I think that whole section is need of rewriting - not for substance, which seems to be mostly-correct, but to take out all of the hagiographical writing. We can give the man his props without sounding like we ousted our objectivity.

Second As for the "influence" section, I agree that it is predominantly unsourced/borderline OR (which is not uncommon in law related articles). That should be fixed. I would propose that we rename and reorganize the section to reflect Hand's "contributions to the development of American law." That seems to be the goal, anyhow. I can contribute from reliable sources, and non-OR, at least with respect to Hand's contributions to tort law.

Third, would anyone consider a "representative cases" section or subsection to the influence (or "contributions") section that briefly mentioned some of his more notable case contributions? (Suggested criteria for notability being those that are republished in one or more casebooks or mentioned in one or more law review articles?)

That's my three cents. Non Curat Lex (talk) 21:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I've just given this article a pretty thorough copy-editing. Plenty more needs doing. But the first half is much better than the second. Congrats and kudos to Slp1, who I understand is the main editor there! In fact, while I was still on the first half, I was thinking the article could perhaps go straight to WP:GAN. But as the article progresses, it starts becoming much looser.

I have left lots of inline comments and queries. Apologies if that isn't such a helpful format for other article editors, but it's much easier for me. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 07:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for all the improvements. I really appreciate it. It is so helpful to have other eyes see what needs to be done: I just go 'doh' why didn't I think of that?!! I hope you will be able to keep up the help as I plough through the mighty tome.Slp1 (talk) 13:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the idea of a representative (or notable) cases section. If lex is prepared to undertake that, that would be invaluable, since it probably requires a legal specialist.

I now have Gunther, Schick, and Griffith and should be able to start editing constructively next week. Rather than getting in Slp's way on the biography, perhaps I could expand and ref the "influence section". Any other suggestions about how I can be most helpful to begin with? qp10qp (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Is there a case for a section titled "Philosophy" (or something like that) between "Federal judge" and "Influence"? The Griffith book is about that, and it strikes me that a transition is needed between the biography and "Influence", because we should, in my opinion, show what Hand stood for before describing his influence. qp10qp (talk) 16:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

What I am not clear about is how the notable cases, or even the influence section fits in with the bio. I am just about to get started on the some sections of his judgely life, and the cases form a part of this, obviously. We don't want too much repetition, I imagine. I just can't quite visualize it yet, unfortunately. But anyway, I think the influence would be a great place to start, or maybe you and NishKid and I could divide up the chapters of the book into three sections, and get through the book and his life that way? --Slp1 (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I just started reading Gunther's biography. I will expand the early life section. Gunther dedicated over 70 pages for Learned's early life, so I believe we can have a much longer and factfilled section covering Hand's first 25-odd years. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 23:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Mmm. I'm not so sure, myself. I think if the early life gets too detailed, and we continue that through the whole article, then the article is going to be way too long. But anyway, it is up to you.Slp1 (talk) 23:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I do think the article should be expanded significantly in the future. I was thinking that it would be at least twice as long when we're finished. I don't know, maybe that's just me. :/ Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 23:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh I agree completely. There is masses of info missing from his time as a judge. I have already read up to about page 150 and added what I think is a fair summary to the article, but there is still pages 150 to 700 to go. What do you think of the suggestion above of dividing up the book into three sections with Qp10qp so that we don't all have to read the whole book all the way through? Slp1 (talk) 23:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that sounds good. For now, I'll read up to page 150 by myself and fill in some holes in the article. When we're done, we can remove information that might not be needed or we can create subarticles. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 23:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think I'll start at the end of his life and work backwards. And maybe we'll meet in the middle!

Sounds good to me! Slp1 (talk) 21:11, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image removed

I removed Image:LearnedHand.jpg because it is a poor quality picture. I think what we have there is enough now. No need to stretch and try and illustrate the "influences" section. Carcharoth (talk) 13:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Articles etc

I have done a online search for Learned Hand on a legal article database, and have come up with many potential sources, including the two jbmurray added as "further reading" yesterday. I could email electronic copies if anybody is interested and willing to read and integrate useful info into the article. A legal background might be useful for some, though not all of them. If you would like copies, just send me an email from my talkpage. --Slp1 (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

(I'm not really here, but...) If you can put them in the "Further reading" section, with JSTOR links (like I did with the two reviews I added), then those of us who have JSTOR access can easily download them. As and when they're cited (I suggest) we can add them to the "References" section. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] citing cases

It's a detail, I know, but... With the following cases, my suspicion is that there's a formatting inconsistency. I.e. I suspect that they're all from the second circuit, and so the second one should read "159 F.2d 848 (2d Cir. 1947)."

159 F.2d 169 (2d Cir. 1947)
159 F.2d 848 (CA-2, 1947)
69 F.2d 809, 810–11 (2d Cir. 1934)

But really, I haven't the foggiest. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

That's right, "2d Cir." is the proper court abbreviation, not "CA-2." The cite to the 1934 case, btw, includes a pinpoint cite to pages 810-11, so that's alright. Postdlf (talk) 14:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't sure how the case was supposed to be cited. Thanks for clarification. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Senior status

In 1951, Hand assumed senior status, which is a form of semi-retirement.<|ref>Gunther 1994, pp. 586–587</ref|>

I've taken this out for the moment because I cannot find any mention of senior status on the pages referenced, which simply deal with his semi-retirement, as far as I can see. But it is useful information, if this is what happened. Gunther's index doesn't help me. qp10qp (talk) 20:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Page 586 states that Hand retired from "regular active service" as a federal judge. On the next page, Gunther writes that Hand continued to sit frequently on the Second Circuit. Naturally, I thought judge + semi-retirement = senior status. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 21:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

This may be true, but I think we should only put it that way if the source puts it that way. I'll keep looking, in case Gunther says that somewhere else. qp10qp (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

The Federal Judicial Center bio for Hand says he assumed senior status June 1, 1951.[12] Postdlf (talk) 22:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. I've added the information back, but moved the Gunther ref along so that it doesn't purport to ref more than it does. qp10qp (talk) 18:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hand's religion

Alright, this is a section that I planned on including in the article, but I wasn't sure where it belonged:

In May 1886, Hand's father died of cancer. Hand was told of his father's illness until a few days before his death. Hand looked to his religion to help cope with the family tragedy. To his cousin Gus, he wrote, "If you could imagine one half the comfort my religion has given to me in this terrible loss, you would see that Christ never forsakes those who cling to him."^[1] The depth of Hand's religious convictions were in sharp contrast to his agnosticism in later life.

Samuel Hand's death is mentioned briefly in the beginning of the "Early life" section. I was thinking of moving that bit of text around, but it seems Hand's death comes up again in paragraph three of "Early life". Any suggestions of how I can incorporate this into the article? Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 16:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, would we say Hand was Calvinist as a child? Or Puritan? Gunther writes that Lydia Hand is Calvinist, but he also makes a mention of Puritanism on page 11. I'm not familiar enough with these religions to understand the differences. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 16:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)