Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2017

Abstract

I must confess that I don’t read law reviews. Of course, I read law review articles, in the course of judicial research and keeping in touch with academic literature in areas of my scholarly interest, but like most judges and lawyers, I don’t have time or interest to just pick up the latest issue of a law review and read it through. I do, however, regularly read the quarterly Ballet Review, a quasi-scholarly journal of reviews and articles about dance. Only once, in some twenty years of reading that publication, has it overlapped my legal interests. The Fall 2002 issue of Ballet Review devoted nearly forty of its then-regular 100 pages to reprinting a judicial opinion: Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum’s opinion in Martha Graham School & Dance Foundation, Inc. v. Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance, Inc. The opinion detailed the judge’s findings of fact and conclusions of law after a bench trial about the disputed ownership of the dance works created by the American choreographer and modern dancer Martha Graham. In a lengthy opinion that affirmed the bulk of Judge Cedarbaum’s rulings, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit commended the judge for her careful analysis of a case whose complexities, the court said, called to mind the title of a Graham work about the myth of Ariadne: Errand into the Maze.

Disciplines

Judges | Law | Legal Biography

Download

Share

COinS