Programming note: My son and I will be leaving momentarily to travel to Oriole Park at Camden Yards to watch this evening’s baseball game between the Houston Astros and the Baltimore Orioles. You can access previews of the game via this link. Tonight’s give-away at the game is a Nick Markakis dobblehead doll.

“BCE decision due Friday”: The Toronto Globe and Mail provides this news update.

And Reuters reports that “Canada court to issue BCE judgement on Friday.”

Who owns the idea of Inspector Jacques Clouseau in the film “The Pink Panther”? A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today issued this ruling addressing that question.

“An Unlikely Antagonist in the Detainees’ Corner”: This article appears today in The New York Times.

And Reuters provides a report headlined “October trial set for Canadian at Guantanamo.”

“US court rules against MetLife in benefits case”: James Vicini of Reuters provides this report. Reuters also has articles headlined “Court: mentally ill defendant can’t be own lawyer” and “Supreme Court strikes down California law on unions.”

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania declines to review lawfulness of a preliminary injunction precluding the defendant from dissipating assets to become judgment-proof pending a trial on plaintiffs’ claims: Simply looking at the percentages, a lawyer filing a brief in opposition to a request for discretionary review from the U.S. Supreme Court or a state court of last resort has a great likelihood of success, given the infrequency that such review is granted.

Nevertheless, there are some cases in which a request for review, on its face, has a good chance of being granted, and in that subset of cases the brief in opposition can play an important role.

Last October, I was asked to draft a Brief in Opposition to a Petition for Allowance of Appeal for filing in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in a case in which the petitioner was arguing that the intermediate appellate court’s ruling was contrary to rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court and the courts of seven other States. Among the attorneys for petitioner in that case was someone who until recently had served for many years as a Justice of the Pa. Supreme Court.

As you might imagine, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal, on its face, raised many seemingly persuasive reasons for Pa. Supreme Court review. Fortunately for our side of the case, I thought that the Brief in Opposition that I wrote on behalf of the plaintiffs provided a number of sound reasons for the Pa. Supreme Court to deny review. I was thus pleased to learn that on Tuesday of this week, Pennsylvania’s highest court issued an order denying review.

The Judicial Conference of the United States unanimously asks the U.S. House of Representatives to consider impeaching U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. (E.D. La.): The Times-Picayune of New Orleans provides a news update headlined “U.S. House to consider impeachment trial for Porteous.” The newspaper has posted online yesterday’s communication from the Judicial Conference to the Speaker of the House.

And FOXNews.com reports that “House Panel to Consider Rare Federal Judge Impeachment.”

The Judicial Council of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit had certified this matter to the Judicial Conference of the United States by means of an order issued December 20, 2007.

Today’s U.S. Supreme Court opinions in argued cases: The Court today has issued five decisions in argued cases, leaving ten cases yet to be decided.

1. Today’s first opinion issued in Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Glenn, No. 06-923. Justice Stephen G. Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

2. Today’s second opinion issued in Kentucky Retirement Systems v. EEOC, No. 06-1037. Justice Breyer also delivered the opinion of the Court in this case.This is a 5-4 ruling, with Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Samuel A. Alito, Jr. in dissent. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

3. Today’s third opinion issued in Indiana v. Edwards, No. 07-208. Completing the trifecta, Justice Breyer also delivered the opinion of the Court in this case. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

4. Today’s fourth opinion issued in Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, No. 06-1505. Justice David H. Souter delivered the opinion of the Court. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

5. Today’s fifth and final opinion issued in Chamber of Commerce of United States v. Brown, No. 06-939. Justice John Paul Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court. You can access the decision at this link and the oral argument transcript at this link.

In early news coverage, The Associated Press reports that “Court puts limits on mentally ill defendants“; “Court sides with employee in benefits case“; “Court rules for workers in age bias suit“; “Court rejects California union law“; and “Court finds no age bias in Ky. retirement system.”

And at “SCOTUSblog,” Lyle Denniston has a post titled “Court rules on self-representation; 4 other rulings.”

Would you like to be the next Chief Judge of the State of New York? Today in The New York Sun, Joseph Goldstein has an article headlined “Help Wanted: State Seeking Its Next Chief Judge.”

“After Nine’s Gun Ruling, N.Y.’s Gun Laws May Be Next; City’s Restrictions Described as ‘Good Target’ for Suit”: Joseph Goldstein has this article today in The New York Sun. The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to issue additional opinions in argued cases in about ten minutes from now.

“Rendell’s wife to investigate California judge”: The Philadelphia Inquirer today contains an article that begins, “A panel of federal judges, including Gov. Rendell’s wife, has been appointed to conduct a judicial-misconduct inquiry of a well-known California judge caught up in a flap about sexually explicit images on a Web site bearing his name. The investigation will focus on Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which handles federal appeals for Western states, Hawaii, and Alaska.”

Online at The Los Angeles Times, John Wright has an essay entitled “What porn says about the man: Alex Kozinski isn’t a hypocrite or a disgrace to the judicial bench; He’s normal.”

And Google News has posted online a comment written by Cyrus Sanai.

Available online from law.com: Tony Mauro has an article headlined “Justice Breyer and the Brits.”

And in other news, “At Liberal Confab, Experts Discuss Detainee Issues, the DOJ; American Constitution Society kicks off annual convention with discussions, high-profile guests.”