• March 14, 2011

The Star Tribune has reported Hennepin County District Judge Mary Defresnes’ ruling rejecting a challenge to the state’s 13 year-old DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act).

The same day’s Strib reported a significant legal triumph for Fury, a Lake Elmo, Minnesota Chrysler car dealer.  The DOMA story named plaintiffs’ lawyer, Peter Nickitas.  The Fury story seemed to tell of a significant (but costly ($500,000)) legal victory, but does not name the victorious lawyers or firms.

(1) How are these editorial decisions made (when to name to the lawyers/law firms)?  “Dealer’s choice”? (Does the lawyer get to decide?)   (2) Have a look around the internet about Peter Nickitas.  Presumably this is Peter J. Nickitas, the only Minnesota-licensed Peter Nickitas that Minnesota Litigator could find. (3) Ever notice that Minnesota Litigator frequently links to documents (for example, it would post Judge Dufresnes’ ruling if it had it), the Strib…not so much?  (Almost never.)  I wonder why.  Is the Strib’s mission to disseminate information or not?

One site calls Nickitas a “Best Lawyer in Minneapolis.”  Another site ominously suggests Mr. Nickitas merits your “attention” and references that Peter James Nickitas has been cited for professional misconduct (without any description of what he has been found to have done).

While Minnesota Litigator makes no claim to be a data-mining wizard, it does take a little time, a little sleuthing, to get to the bottom of Nickitas’ disciplinary history.

Arguably, neither the public nor Mr. Nickitas is fairly or well-served by the internet’s nearly random pieces of atomized “information” about him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *