Brief Summary: Cybercrime has become a topic of discussion in the last few years. In this Touro Law Review podcast, Nicole E. Osborne, an Associate at

Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., speaks about her experience and daily life as a member of the firm’s Cybersecurity and Data Privacy Practice Group.

Nicole Osborne began with her journey to this world. Her path was more untraditional and she was in the right spot at the right time. Nicole gives

advice to any student that wants to find a job in this practice area to take any available courses in law school, write a paper on cybersecurity,

or work as an intern in a firm that has such a department. Alternatively, she noted that there are a lot of traditional practice areas that lend

themselves perfectly to cybersecurity such as health care law. Nicole tells us that this is a very unpredictable area because of the phone calls

that can come in any second due to data breaches. Everyday is different and it is a very interdisciplinary area of law. Dean Zakarin then asked

Nicole to specifically discuss data breaches– something Nicole deals with frequently and is very passionate about.

This Podcast featured Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks, where he discussed his role as a magistrate, his path to get there,

and advice to practitioners. Judge Wicks began discussing his various roles and positions as an attorney prior to his judgeship. He first

became acquainted with the federal courts when he clerked for the Honorable Judge Arthur Spatt. Judge Spatt had a large influence on him

and told him to consider becoming a Judge. As Judge Wicks stated, the good things that Judge Spatt did on the bench made it a "calling"

for me to become a Judge. Judge Wicks then spoke to the extremely thorough process of becoming a magistrate judge and the difference

between his role as an Article I judge from that of an Article III judge. He stated the extensive application process, which consists of

two panels, interviews, and an FBI investigation. Additionally, the Judge discussed what cases he personally presides over as well as the

ability for certain cases to agree for him to take over the case instead of district court judge. The Judge also advised how to navigate

discovery disputes, and discussed the reputations of lawyers and how fast those reputations are built in the courts and what battles attorneys

should pick.

When Alexis de Tocqueville wrote, “Scarcely

This Podcast

This Podcast featured Ashley C. Keller who represented the Plaintiff in a recent Supreme Court case, Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (2023).

Dean Rodger Citron moderated this podcast, where he asked Mr. Keller questions about his case, the Court's decision, and other constitutional issues that related.

Mr. Keller is a founding partner of the firm Keller Postman LLC. He focuses on complex plaintiff side litigation and he is also a proud federalist society member.

In this case, he defended a plaintiff regarding the plaintiff's right to sue in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He felt very strongly about this case and only requested

a dollar as his fee to represent the plaintiff. Mr. Keller knew he would get all the way to the Supreme Court with this case and long behold he did.

Lawyer and author Martin J. Siegel discusses his biography of the Hon. Irving R. Kaufman on this week’s Touro Law Review podcast. Kaufman is most well-known today for having presided over the Cold War espionage case of United States v. Rosenberg, in which Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, a married couple, were charged with conspiring to share atomic secrets with the Soviet Union, found guilty by the jury, and sentenced to death by Judge Kaufman in 1951. Two years later, after numerous appeals, the United States executed the Rosenbergs.

Siegel’s biography shows that there was more to Kaufman’s life than the infamous Rosenberg trial. Kaufman, the son of Jewish immigrants, was able and ambitious. His appointment to the federal bench in 1949, at the age of 39, was an extraordinary accomplishment. No less interesting is that after President Kennedy appointed him to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1961, Kaufman became one of the more liberal judges on that court. Nonetheless, even today, the Rosenberg case casts a long shadow over Kaufman’s judicial legacy.

As Siegel discusses with Associate Dean Rodger Citron, the author benefited from the cooperation of Kaufman’s family while writing the book, enabling him to shed light on the judge’s personal life. The podcast concludes with Siegel sharing his thoughts on the relevance of biography in understanding how judges decide cases and, accordingly, how the law develops through judicial decision-making."

On this episode of the Touro Law Review Podcast, we are joined by the Honorable Sol Wachtler, former Chief of the New York State Court of Appeals.

This podcast is moderated by Professor Lauren Wachtler. Judge Wachtler has had an exceptional career. Serving for many years in government,

and as a justice of the New York State Supreme Court, and later elected to the New York Court of Appeals where he served first as an associate

judge and then as its Chief over the course of 14 years.

On this episode of the Touro Law Review Podcast we are joined by guest moderator Professor Lynne Kramer and guest speaker

Anthony LaPinta. Anthony LaPinta is one of the top criminal trial lawyers in the State of New York who served as one of the

defense attorney's representing Michael Valva in the tragic Valva case in Suffolk County, New York. The podcast discussion is

centered around the ability to represent unpopular defendants. Among many other things, Mr. LaPinta explains why he volunteered

to represent Michael Valva and how he was able to defend him against charges relating to the death of his son.

On this Touro Law Review podcast, we are joined by John Belcaster, the General Counsel of MSCHF, a Brooklyn-based art collective. MSCHF (pronounced “mischief”) produces artworks that critique and comment on American culture. The podcast discussion with Belcaster focuses on Jack Daniels Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, a trademark case currently pending before the Supreme Court.  As he explains, MSCHF filed an amicus brief (available here: MSCHF SUPREME COURT AMICUS BRIEF.indd.) in the Supreme Court that, among other things, asked the Justices and their law clerks to draw pictures – and thereby create art. The purpose of the brief, according to Belcaster, is to illuminate the issues raised by Jack Daniels Properties and to persuade the Court to take a broad view of what constitutes protected artistic expression.

This week on the Touro Law Review podcast we are joined by Lisa Gochman to talk about her experience arguing the case, Charles C. Apprendi Jr. v. New Jersey, in front of the highest court in this country -- The United States Supreme Court.