“The wrong egg: When a fertility clinic mistakenly placed a client’s sperm in the wrong woman, the man sued for the right to be called the baby’s father; Trouble is, the law says he’s nobody’s daddy.” Salon.com provides this report.

“Michigan’s Controversial Proposition 2, Eliminating Affirmative Action Programs in the State: A Good Example of Popular Constitutionalism?” Scott Gerber has this essay online today at FindLaw.

“Backers want Bush to stick to conservative judicial nominees”: The Fort Worth Star-Telegram provides this report.

McClatchy Newspapers report that “Bush sends Congress a partisan agenda.”

And The New York Times on Friday will contain an editorial entitled “Still Waiting for Bipartisanship” that begins, “The voters sent a clear message last week that they do not want the far right of the Republican Party calling the shots in Washington. But President Bush has ignored the message, resubmitting a group of archconservative, underqualified judicial nominees that Senate Democrats have already said are unacceptable.”

Available online from law.com: An article reports that “Special Interest Cash Hits a Wall in Judicial Elections; Business groups spent millions on judicial races, but with little effect.”

Henry Gottlieb reports that “New Jersey Backs Super/Best Lawyer Ad Ban but Hints at Flexibility in Application.”

And in other news, “Oral Agreement Could Supersede Ski Resort’s Release Form.” My earlier coverage appears at this link.

“Court denies appeal copied from inmate’s letter; Condemned man’s death-penalty writ was featured prominently in Statesman review of legal system”: Chuck Lindell has this article today in The Austin American-Statesman.

“Appeals court weighs dispute between religious sect, Duchesne”: The Salt Lake Tribune today contains an article that begins, “The ongoing legal battle between the Summum Church and Duchesne over the city’s refusal to allow the Salt Lake City-based faith’s principles to be displayed alongside a Ten Commandments monolith landed before a federal appeals court on Wednesday.”

And The Deseret News reports today that “City-monument fight resumes” (via “Religion Clause“).

Unlike the religion that produced the Ten Commandments, Summum is a religion that would have refused to smite Onan, as explained in this earlier “How Appealing” post from July 2002.

The Associated Press is reporting: Now available online are articles headlined “Woman Appeals Sex Suit vs. James Brown” and “Woman Wins Religious Discrimination Case.”

Oh deer! The Daily Telegram of Superior, Wisconsin reported yesterday that “Case presents unprecedented challenge” (via “Obscure Store“). The article begins, “Prosecution of a Douglas County case involving alleged sexual contact with a dead deer may hinge on the legal definition of the word ‘animal.'”

“Judge rips Supermax as a ‘gulag’ ; Court: Prison’s treatment, punishment were cruel.” This article appeared yesterday in The Capital Times of Madison, Wisconsin (via “Althouse“). My earlier coverage appears at this link.

“Court in Denver to rule on gay adoption; Oklahoma is appealing the voiding of a law that bars recognition of adoptions by same-sex couples”: The Denver Post today contains this article about an appeal pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Today’s Third Circuit ruling of note: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit today issued a non-precedential opinion deciding the appeal that I argued on September 26, 2006. My client, a corporate plaintiff-appellant against which summary judgment had been entered in the district court, obtained a reversal on the central issue presented in the case.

As a testament to this age of electronic filing, first word of the ruling came when the Third Circuit’s judgment was posted to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey‘s docket at 12:51 p.m. The Third Circuit itself did not post the decision online until shortly after 3:30 p.m.

“Sitting ducks on the bench”: Today in The Fort Worth Star-Telegram, columnist Linda P. Campbell has an essay that begins, “As a Supreme Court justice, Sandra Day O’Connor exasperated critics by balancing on a reed-thin beam without planting her feet firmly on either side. But in retirement, she doesn’t equivocate in defense of judicial independence. She has crossed the country warning that ‘spurious’ attacks on the judiciary — by politicians and other talking heads — threaten judges’ doing their jobs without fear or favor.”

“Plaintiff-appellant Teresa Anne Henderson brings suit alleging she was subjected to sexual harassment by her high school soccer coach.” So begins an opinion that a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued today. The ruling affirms the grant of summary judgment in favor of the school district and school administration defendants, while describing the soccer coach as “a troubled man who said and did bad things that undoubtedly caused harmful stress in plaintiff Teresa Henderson’s young life.”

“Texas Court Ruling Rebuffs Bush and World Court”: Adam Liptak has this article today in The New York Times.

And The San Antonio Express-News reports today that “Court in Texas says Bush wrong on Mexican cases.”

My earlier coverage appears at this link.

“Bush revives stalled judicial nominations; Six of his conservative judicial picks return, angering Democrats”: David G. Savage has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.

The Washington Post reports today that “Bush Renominates Judicial Picks; Fight With Senate Democrats Over Blocked Candidates Appears Likely.”

And The Washington Times reports that “Bush resubmits 6 for judgeships.”

No live-blogging of today’s law blogging CLE conference: To my surprise, there’s no web access from the CLE venue. As a result, I couldn’t live-blog Jeff Jarvis’s interesting talk from earlier this morning. Jeff, of course, is the author of the “BuzzMachine” blog.