Podcasts about administrative office

How would you feel if you needed to go to court or conduct legal business but weren't fluent in the language? Our guests will help us understand court interpreter service in Mississippi: Deenie Miller, Director of Language Access Mississippi Supreme Court and Dr. Javier Gerardo Gómez, Credentialed Court Interpreter. H.B. 1217 became law July 1, 2023. The new laws prohibit Limited English Proficient individuals from being responsible for the costs of court interpretation in all bilingual proceedings for civil and criminal matters. The law also now clarifies that a Limited English proficient individual is entitled to the services of an interpreter in any instance arising out of or pertaining to the individual's involvement in litigation.The Administrative Office of Courts has developed the Mississippi Court Interpreter Credentialing Program. For more detailed information please contact: Administrative Office of CourtsAttention: Deenie Miller, Director of Language AccessPost Office Box 117 Jackson, MS 39205T: 601-359-4469deenie.miller@courts.ms.govFor assistance with interpreters for the hearing impaired, please visit the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf at the following link: https://www.rid.org or https://www.odhh.orgDr. J.G. Gómez, U.S. Army Veteran - Credentialed Interpreter and Translator Language Educator and Technologist - Gómez Language and Culture Services, LLC Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this ILTA just-in-time session, the speaker provided a high-level conversation of how firms should be prepared for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO), which will begin implementing the multifactor authentication (MFA) sometime in mid-May to enhance system security for CM/ECF and PACER.    Resource: PACER - Multifactor Authentication Coming Soon Moderator: @Jack Recinto - Director of Applications, Ice Miller LLP Speaker: @Aaron Fenimore - Security Architect, Thompson Hine LLP Recorded on 05-15-2025.

Send us a textOn this month's episode of Appointed Counsel, the Caitlin Clark of the Indigent Representation team joins Joe Byrd to discuss criminal court claims. Gene Vestal not only has a unique job at the Administrative Office of the Courts as the first line auditor for criminal claims, but also an interesting background. He and Joe Byrd not only go down memory lane, but discuss what he looks for in criminal claims and steps attorneys can take for a smooth process. 

The indigent services team relies on several other departments to accomplish its goal of getting attorneys paid for their services, but in this episode, Joe Byrd sits down with two of the most important people in the process. The fiscal department of the Administrative Office of the Courts join Appointed Counsel to discuss best practices in filing a claim for expenses and the different terms used to define the services of an attorney in indigent representation. 

Youth Court can deal with Children in Need of Supervision, Delinquent Children, and Neglected and/or Abused Children. That takes some special finesse that our guest possesses – attorney Chad King from Thompson Addison. (Who was also our guest for In Legal Terms: Adoption 2024 Tuesday, June 25, 2024)A podcast of interest: In Legal Terms: Foster Care Tuesday, March 21, 2023 with guest: Andrea Sanders, Commissioner for Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services.Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services (CPS)The State of Mississippi Judiciary; Administrative Office of Courts has a great website with authoritative information and links to many aspects of our Youth Court in Mississippi.Families of at-risk or delinquent youth can get help from the Mississippi Department of Human Services Division of Youth Services.Do you need a quick gift for a loved one? How about you print off a copy of the Mississippi Voter Registration Application and gift it with an envelope and a stamp. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, host Joe Byrd explains a specific process that must occur before any proposed expert or investigator begins to work. A process that involves both the trial court and the Administrative Office of the Courts. Joe also gives tips for those claims to not only be approved by the authoritative bodies, but also how to get a claim moved through the process and paid more effectively. This episode is for attorneys. 

September 26, 2024, Question of Ethics Conversation Problem Analysis is an often-overlooked component of decision-making. There are several highly effective business problem analysis models, each tailored for different types of challenges. Some of the most popular models: • Root Cause Analysis which includes techniques such as “The Five Whys” and the “Ishikawa Fishbone Diagram” • SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) • Gap Analysis which includes identifying gaps between where an organization is and where it needs to be, then focusing on areas of improvement. There are several ethical concerns when conducting good problem identification and analysis. • What if you cannot obtain the political buy-in needed to properly analyze the problem? • How do you properly identify and analyze a business problem with a strong political undercurrent? • How do you proceed if a solution is already laid out for you? • When we become operationally aligned with a decision-maker do we run the risk of “preemptive avoidance” where we decide not to initiate a topic because we know it will provoke a negative response? Today's Panel • Samantha Wallis - Deputy Trial Court Administrator, Supreme Court, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho • Rick Pierce - Judicial Programs Administrator, Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Courts • Stacy Worby - State Jury Coordinator for the Alaska Court System • Creadell Webb - Chief Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Officer, 1st Judicial District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Leave a question or comment at ethics@nacmnet,org Join the Question of Ethics Conversation held after the Subcommittee meetings every fourth Thursday of the month at 2:00 pm ET.

Glenn Fine's career-long crusade against corruption might have its roots in his college days. As a point guard for the Harvard basketball team, Fine had his personal best game on Dec. 16, 1978, the same day he interviewed for–and received–a Rhodes scholarship. He put up 19 points against Boston College, including eight steals, and the team nearly eeked out a win against the favored Boston players. A remarkable day.   What Fine would later discover was that mobsters had bribed Boston College players to play worse to keep the game tight and not cover the point spread. Henry Hill and Jimmy Burke–later portrayed by Ray Liotta and Robert De Niro in the movie Goodfellas were part of the point-shaving scheme.   Fine would later be drafted in the 10th round of the NBA draft by the San Antonio Spurs, but it was the anti-corruption law that stuck, not basketball.   Fine took a job out of law school as a prosecutor in Washington, D.C., and joined the Office of the Inspector General at the Department of Justice in 1995. He would go on to serve as Inspector General at the DOJ from 2000 to 2011, then at the Department of Defense from 2015 until 2020. He was one of the five inspectors general fired by then-President Donald Trump in what the Washington Post referred to as the "slow-motion Friday night massacre of inspectors general."   But what do inspectors general do? It's a question Fine wants to answer with his book, Watchdogs: Inspectors General and the Battle for Honest and Accountable Government. In this episode of the Modern Law Library, Fine and the ABA Journal's Lee Rawles discuss the function, history and importance of the position, along with ways Fine believes government oversight can be improved.   As of the book's publication in 2024, there are 74 inspector general offices at the federal level, with more than 14,000 employees. As the IG for the Department of Defense, Fine oversaw the largest office, with some 1,700 employees. Inspectors general conduct independent, non-partisan oversight investigations into waste, fraud, misconduct and best practices, and deliver their reports and recommendations to Congress and the agencies involved. The IGs cannot enforce the adoption of recommendations, but their work acts as the "sunshine" for disinfection, Fine says.   One major recommendation Fine makes in Watchdogs is that an inspector general be established for the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal judiciary, who could perhaps file their reports to the chief justice or the head of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Fine points to judicial ethics concerns and polls finding public trust in the Supreme Court at historic lows, and argues one way to increase public trust is through the transparency provided by an inspector general.   Also in this episode, Fine offers advice for anyone considering a career in public service. Rawles and Fine discuss stories of his own investigations, including evaluating the claims of a whistleblowing scientist at the FBI laboratory and looking into how the infamous double-agent spy Robert Hanssen was able to fool his FBI superiors and pass intel to Soviets and Russians.

Glenn Fine's career-long crusade against corruption might have its roots in his college days. As a point guard for the Harvard basketball team, Fine had his personal best game on Dec. 16, 1978, the same day he interviewed for–and received–a Rhodes scholarship. He put up 19 points against Boston College, including eight steals, and the team nearly eeked out a win against the favored Boston players. A remarkable day.   What Fine would later discover was that mobsters had bribed Boston College players to play worse to keep the game tight and not cover the point spread. Henry Hill and Jimmy Burke–later portrayed by Ray Liotta and Robert De Niro in the movie Goodfellas were part of the point-shaving scheme.   Fine would later be drafted in the 10th round of the NBA draft by the San Antonio Spurs, but it was the anti-corruption law that stuck, not basketball.   Fine took a job out of law school as a prosecutor in Washington, D.C., and joined the Office of the Inspector General at the Department of Justice in 1995. He would go on to serve as Inspector General at the DOJ from 2000 to 2011, then at the Department of Defense from 2015 until 2020. He was one of the five inspectors general fired by then-President Donald Trump in what the Washington Post referred to as the "slow-motion Friday night massacre of inspectors general."   But what do inspectors general do? It's a question Fine wants to answer with his book, Watchdogs: Inspectors General and the Battle for Honest and Accountable Government. In this episode of the Modern Law Library, Fine and the ABA Journal's Lee Rawles discuss the function, history and importance of the position, along with ways Fine believes government oversight can be improved.   As of the book's publication in 2024, there are 74 inspector general offices at the federal level, with more than 14,000 employees. As the IG for the Department of Defense, Fine oversaw the largest office, with some 1,700 employees. Inspectors general conduct independent, non-partisan oversight investigations into waste, fraud, misconduct and best practices, and deliver their reports and recommendations to Congress and the agencies involved. The IGs cannot enforce the adoption of recommendations, but their work acts as the "sunshine" for disinfection, Fine says.   One major recommendation Fine makes in Watchdogs is that an inspector general be established for the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal judiciary, who could perhaps file their reports to the chief justice or the head of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Fine points to judicial ethics concerns and polls finding public trust in the Supreme Court at historic lows, and argues one way to increase public trust is through the transparency provided by an inspector general.   Also in this episode, Fine offers advice for anyone considering a career in public service. Rawles and Fine discuss stories of his own investigations, including evaluating the claims of a whistleblowing scientist at the FBI laboratory and looking into how the infamous double-agent spy Robert Hanssen was able to fool his FBI superiors and pass intel to Soviets and Russians.

Glenn Fine's career-long crusade against corruption might have its roots in his college days. As a point guard for the Harvard basketball team, Fine had his personal best game on Dec. 16, 1978, the same day he interviewed for–and received–a Rhodes scholarship. He put up 19 points against Boston College, including eight steals, and the team nearly eeked out a win against the favored Boston players. A remarkable day.   What Fine would later discover was that mobsters had bribed Boston College players to play worse to keep the game tight and not cover the point spread. Henry Hill and Jimmy Burke–later portrayed by Ray Liotta and Robert De Niro in the movie Goodfellas were part of the point-shaving scheme.   Fine would later be drafted in the 10th round of the NBA draft by the San Antonio Spurs, but it was the anti-corruption law that stuck, not basketball.   Fine took a job out of law school as a prosecutor in Washington, D.C., and joined the Office of the Inspector General at the Department of Justice in 1995. He would go on to serve as Inspector General at the DOJ from 2000 to 2011, then at the Department of Defense from 2015 until 2020. He was one of the five inspectors general fired by then-President Donald Trump in what the Washington Post referred to as the "slow-motion Friday night massacre of inspectors general."   But what do inspectors general do? It's a question Fine wants to answer with his book, Watchdogs: Inspectors General and the Battle for Honest and Accountable Government. In this episode of the Modern Law Library, Fine and the ABA Journal's Lee Rawles discuss the function, history and importance of the position, along with ways Fine believes government oversight can be improved.   As of the book's publication in 2024, there are 74 inspector general offices at the federal level, with more than 14,000 employees. As the IG for the Department of Defense, Fine oversaw the largest office, with some 1,700 employees. Inspectors general conduct independent, non-partisan oversight investigations into waste, fraud, misconduct and best practices, and deliver their reports and recommendations to Congress and the agencies involved. The IGs cannot enforce the adoption of recommendations, but their work acts as the "sunshine" for disinfection, Fine says.   One major recommendation Fine makes in Watchdogs is that an inspector general be established for the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal judiciary, who could perhaps file their reports to the chief justice or the head of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Fine points to judicial ethics concerns and polls finding public trust in the Supreme Court at historic lows, and argues one way to increase public trust is through the transparency provided by an inspector general.   Also in this episode, Fine offers advice for anyone considering a career in public service. Rawles and Fine discuss stories of his own investigations, including evaluating the claims of a whistleblowing scientist at the FBI laboratory and looking into how the infamous double-agent spy Robert Hanssen was able to fool his FBI superiors and pass intel to Soviets and Russians.

With election season in full swing, Tennessee voters had the chance to vote on the retention of an appellate court judge and a Supreme Court Justice in August 2024. Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Matthew Wilson was one of those judges. In this episode of Tennessee Court Talk, Nick Morgan sits down with Judge Wilson in Jackson, TN to discuss the purpose of retention elections, why they are so different and three words his best friend would use to describe him. This episode is for all audiences. Produced and Edited by Nick Morgan, Administrative Office of the Courts

Let's do a quick exercise. How are you feeling? Heart rate good? Optimistic about the rest of the day? Now, how do you feel after I say the words: JURY DUTY? Ugh! What is it about that summons in the mail that makes us cringe so much? The disruption to our schedule? The waiting around? The other jurors?  One thing that certainly doesn't help is the insultingly low pay. Most jurors in the state of Washington have been paid $10 per day since 1959. For people just getting by, serving can be a huge financial burden. And that's contributing to a lack of diversity among jury pools.  Pierce County Superior Court is trying out a way to make serving more attractive… by paying jurors $100 per day, in a first-of-its kind state-funded pilot program, running likely through next May. Thank you to the supporters of KUOW, you help make this show possible! If you want to help out, go to kuow.org/donate/soundsidenotes  Soundside is a production of KUOW in Seattle, a proud member of the NPR Network. GUESTS: Chris Gaddis - Pierce County Superior Court Administrator Laurie Sale - Project Manager with the Administrative Office of the Courts with the Pierce County juror pay pilot program RELATED LINKS:  Pierce County Launches Juror Pay Pilot, New Daily Rate Will be $100 Through May - WA State Courts Pierce County to begin paying jurors $100 a day • Washington State Standard 2023 Statewide juror demographic survey See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

MERCY Communities is celebrating its 25th anniversary with an open house on Oct. 11 from 4-7:00 p.m. at MERCY's Administrative Office at 1344 N. 5th St. in Springfield. Executive Director Amy Voils and Board Member Sister Marilyn Jean Runkel spoke to Community Voices about the organization and its roots with the Dominican Sisters in Springfield. They also shared how transitional and permanent housing reduces homelessness and leads to independent living.To learn more visit: https://www.mercycommunities.org/

In this episode, we focus on the North Carolina judicial system reforms of the 1960s. These reforms created a unified court system that included newly created District Courts, Court of Appeals, and the Administrative Office of the Courts (NCAOC). In the interview, former NCAOC Director and Supreme Court of North Carolina Associate Justice Franklin Freeman interviews two men who helped implement these reforms: Judge James Dickson Phillips, Jr. and Senator Lindsay C. Warren, Jr."The effect of the implementation of the District Court was to abolish all of the courts beneath the Superior Courts – county courts, city courts, and the justice of the peace system," said Warren on the podcast. "The worst thing about the justice of the peace system was that their compensation came from fees they assessed, but in a criminal case they could not assess a fee unless a defendant was convicted." This 2012 interview is part of CJCP's historical video series. A video of this interview can be viewed on the Judicial Branch YouTube Channel.

June 27, 2024, A Question of Ethics Conversation Robert Granzow, Director of the Office of Judicial District Security at the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, talks about safety, security, and dealing with disabilities in the court environment. Equal access to justice can only be realized in an environment of safety and security.  We must ensure the safety of those with and those without disabilities. Disabilities can include, physical, traumatic, psychological, mental illness, congenital birth defects, personality disorders, addictive disabilities, as well as cultural and language differences. We live in a rapidly changing threat landscape. Courts all stakeholders at the table and need to conduct a comprehensive security assessment, preferably using a gap analysis. Courts must have political buy-in from the highest level. We need to make data-driven decisions. Solutions include training in de-escalation and non-escalation; recognizing the signs of people in crisis; using new classes of employees such as court navigators.  We need to consider new innovative and technological solutions such as expanded use of videoconferencing, innovative security wanding techniques, and using AI to identify litigants who are suspicious. You don't want to miss this insightful discussion. Joining the Conversation: Rick Pierce - Judicial Programs Administrator, Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Courts Roger Rand - IT Manager for the Multnomah Circuit Court in Portland, Oregon Courtney Whiteside - Director of the St. Louis County Municipal Court Stacy Worby - State Jury Coordinator for the Alaska Court System Erika Schmid - Supervisor, Multnomah Circuit Court in Portland, Oregon Peter Kiefer - Host of the Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Series Creadell Webb - Chief Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer 1st Judicial District of Pennsylvania Leave a question or comment about the episode at clapodcast@nacmnet.org

Understanding what happens in a courtroom can be difficult. Even more so when English is a litigant's second language. There are services in Tennessee to ensure that every litigant has the access to understand their day in court. In this episode of Tennessee Court Talk, host Nick Morgan sits down with Ryan Mouser, the Language Access Program Manager at the Administrative Office of the Courts. Ryan discusses how interpreters are certified and assigned as well as the need for unique language interpreters in Tennessee. This episode is for all audiences. 

This Day in Legal History: Weimar Republic BornOn July 31, 1919, the Constitution of the German Reich was signed in Weimar, Germany, marking the birth of the Weimar Republic. This constitution established a full democracy in Germany, introducing a President, Parliament, and an independent judiciary to govern the nation. It was a groundbreaking document, making Germany the first nation to grant women the right to vote, thus setting a precedent for gender equality in Europe. The Weimar Constitution aimed to create a balance of power, with the President holding significant authority, including emergency powers, while the Parliament, or Reichstag, was responsible for legislation.The Constitution also enshrined civil liberties, including freedom of speech, press, and assembly, and sought to create a welfare state with provisions for unemployment benefits and worker protections. Despite these progressive elements, the Weimar Republic faced numerous challenges, including political extremism, economic instability, and societal divisions. These issues ultimately undermined the Republic, leading to the rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in 1933, which brought an end to the Weimar era.The Weimar Constitution is often studied as a significant yet flawed attempt at democracy in a turbulent period of German history, highlighting both the potential and vulnerabilities of democratic governance. This event underscores the importance of stable political and economic foundations in maintaining a democratic system.Law school graduates typically pay over $1,000 to take the bar exam, but this fall, they have a chance to earn $1,500 by participating in a beta test for the National Conference of Bar Examiners' (NCBE) new NextGen Bar exam. This revamped exam, set to debut in July 2026, is seeking about 2,200 participants from the 46,000 taking the 2024 bar exam for an October trial run. Researchers will use the prototype to compare results with the current exam and to develop a new national score scale. The trial will also evaluate the effectiveness of individual questions and assist jurisdictions in setting their passing scores.The NextGen Bar exam, developed in response to criticisms that the existing test doesn't reflect actual law practice, aims to be more skills-oriented and less reliant on rote memorization. It will be nine hours long, split over two days, compared to the current exam's 12 hours. The new exam will be administered on computers instead of paper. So far, 21 jurisdictions plan to adopt the new exam between July 2026 and July 2028. The prototype test will be conducted in 32 states on October 18-19 or October 25-26, with sign-ups from August 19-29, targeting graduates from both ABA-accredited and non-ABA-accredited law schools, including first-time and repeat bar takers.Bar exam officials offer law grads $1,500 to beta test revised exam | ReutersMeta Platforms has agreed to a $1.4 billion settlement with Texas to resolve a lawsuit accusing the company of illegally using facial-recognition technology to collect biometric data from millions of Texans without their consent. This settlement, announced on July 30, 2024, is the largest ever reached by a single state. The lawsuit, filed in 2022, was the first significant case under Texas' 2009 biometric privacy law, which allows for damages of up to $25,000 per violation. Texas claimed that Facebook, Meta's subsidiary, captured biometric data billions of times from user-uploaded photos and videos via the "Tag Suggestions" feature, which has since been discontinued.Meta, while pleased with the settlement, continues to deny any wrongdoing and is considering future business investments in Texas, such as developing data centers. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton praised the settlement, emphasizing the state's commitment to holding major tech companies accountable for privacy violations. This agreement was reached in May, just weeks before a trial was scheduled to begin. In a similar case, Meta paid $650 million in 2020 to settle a biometric privacy lawsuit under Illinois law. Meanwhile, Google is currently contesting a separate lawsuit in Texas over alleged violations of the state's biometric law.Meta to Pay Record $1.4 Billion to End Texas Biometric Suit (2)Meta to pay $1.4 billion to settle Texas facial recognition data lawsuit | ReutersThe Senate passed landmark legislation aimed at making social media platforms safer for children, marking significant congressional action to regulate the tech industry for the first time in over 25 years. In a bipartisan vote of 91-3, senators approved two bills to enhance privacy and safety for kids on platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat. The legislation now moves to the House, where its future is uncertain due to a tight legislative schedule and concerns about potential impacts on free speech and user privacy.The push for regulation comes amid growing public pressure to address the mental health risks posed to children by social media, including addictive algorithms and harmful content. The Biden administration, mental health advocates, and parents have been vocal in demanding action. The Senate's overwhelming support is seen as a potential catalyst for House approval.The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) and the Children and Teens' Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0) form the legislative package. KOSA aims to create a "duty of care" for social media companies to prevent harm like suicide and eating disorders by regulating app design features. Violations would be penalized by the Federal Trade Commission. COPPA 2.0 updates a 1998 law to prevent companies from collecting personal information from teens aged 13-16 without consent and bans targeted advertising to kids.Opponents argue that the bills could lead to online censorship, but supporters counter that the focus is on platform design, not content. Senators Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and Ron Wyden voted against the measures, citing censorship concerns. However, co-sponsor Sen. Marsha Blackburn insists the bills are about providing tools for parents and kids to protect themselves online.House Speaker Mike Johnson has expressed interest in reaching an agreement on the proposals. Sen. Richard Blumenthal hopes the House will recognize the urgency of protecting children online and act accordingly.Big Tech Gets Rare Rebuke in Senate With Kids' Privacy RulesA federal watchdog report revealed that judiciary employees filed 17 complaints against federal judges from fiscal 2020 to 2022, highlighting issues like abusive conduct, religious discrimination, and pregnancy-related harassment. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that some judges faced consequences, such as private reprimands or findings of creating hostile work environments. These complaints were processed under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act. Additionally, judiciary employees filed 161 employment dispute resolution complaints, containing over 500 allegations, primarily of discrimination.The report noted a rise in allegations from 124 in fiscal 2020 to 336 in fiscal 2022. This increase could be due to improved trust in reporting mechanisms or the return to in-person work post-pandemic. The GAO emphasized that judiciary employees' protections are similar to those for most federal employees, though some protections are more limited. The judiciary's training materials align with Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) practices, but inconsistencies exist across circuits.The GAO recommended that the judiciary start tracking informal reports of workplace misconduct to better understand and address the scope of the problem. Currently, this data isn't collected, potentially leading to an undercount of incidents. A national climate survey conducted last year might help evaluate policy effectiveness, though its data wasn't ready in time for the GAO report. The Administrative Office of the US Courts cooperated with the GAO study, facilitating interviews with various judiciary personnel despite some delays.It is worth noting that, short of impeachment, there is little that can be done to truly reprimand a federal judge. US Court Staff Filed 17 Complaints Against Judges, Watchdog SaysThe Fifth Circuit Court ruled that Texas can maintain a floating river barrier on the Mexico border, marking a significant victory for Governor Greg Abbott against the Biden Administration. This decision overturns a previous preliminary injunction by a federal trial court, which had ordered Texas to cease work on the 1,000-foot barrier and move it to the riverbank. Judge Don R. Willett stated that the district court erred in its judgment, contradicting long-standing precedent.The case is scheduled to return to the district court for trial on August 6 in Austin, Texas. The ruling also reverses an earlier Fifth Circuit panel decision that had upheld the district court's injunction. Judges Andrew S. Oldham, Priscilla Richman, and James C. Ho provided concurring opinions, with Ho partially dissenting, arguing that federal courts may lack jurisdiction since Abbott invoked the federal invasion clause in response to the immigration crisis.During oral arguments, some conservative judges suggested that the barrier is lawful under the premise that Texas has the right to defend itself against a migrant invasion. Texas has used the invasion clause to justify other border policies that typically fall under federal jurisdiction. Other judges contended that the Rio Grande stretch with the barrier is not navigable, meaning Texas did not violate the federal Rivers and Harbors Act. The barriers have been in place since January, pending the full court's review of the panel's decision favoring Biden.Texas Can Maintain Floating Border Barriers, Fifth Circuit Rules This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Province of Canada CreatedOn July 23, 1840, the British Parliament passed the Act of Union, a pivotal piece of legislation that led to the creation of the Province of Canada. This act merged the colonies of Upper Canada (present-day Ontario) and Lower Canada (present-day Quebec) into a single entity. The Act of Union was a response to the political unrest and demands for reform that had been growing in both colonies, particularly after the Rebellions of 1837-1838.The Act of Union aimed to unify the administrative structures of the two colonies, addressing inefficiencies and fostering a more cohesive government. It established a single legislative assembly, with equal representation from both regions, despite significant differences in their populations and cultural backgrounds. This structure was intended to assimilate the French-speaking population of Lower Canada into the English-speaking majority of Upper Canada, though it often led to tension and conflict.Taking effect on February 10, 1841, the Act marked the beginning of a new political era in Canadian history, laying foundational governance structures that would influence future developments leading up to Canadian Confederation in 1867. The Province of Canada would eventually split into the separate provinces of Ontario and Quebec, but the Act of Union remains a significant moment in the evolution of Canada's political landscape.The Ninth Circuit's updated case management system is being used as a model for the federal judiciary's administrative office to modernize its electronic filing program, according to Chief Judge Mary Murguia. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is collaborating with the Administrative Office of the US Courts to replace the CM/ECF system with a new cloud-based system by the end of 2025. This modernization effort aims to enhance the efficiency of filing legal documents and accessing case information.Since October, the Ninth Circuit has processed all new cases through its Appellate Case Management System, with older reopened cases still using the previous system. This development was a joint effort with the Second Circuit. Judge Murguia noted a significant decline in case filings over the past five years, with the Ninth Circuit now having fewer than 7,000 pending cases—a 23% reduction from 2019 and the lowest number in decades.Ninth Circuit's Case Filing System Used as Model for JudiciaryA New York appellate judge has affirmed that individuals who file complaints against attorneys in disciplinary cases have a First Amendment right to attend related hearings, view pertinent documents, and access some final decisions. This ruling emphasizes the importance of public scrutiny in holding judges accountable, particularly those serving fourteen-year terms appointed by elected governors. The decision, issued by Judge Victor Marrero of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, specifically impacts the New York Supreme Court's Second Appellate Department, which disciplines attorneys based on recommendations from the Attorney Grievance Committee.Judge Marrero asserted that transparency is essential for public trust in the judicial process. However, he allowed an exception for dispositions made by the chief attorney, whose role involves preliminary investigations. These do not need to be public to maintain investigation flexibility and protect attorneys from baseless accusations.The case originated from complaints filed in 2021 against attorneys in the Queens County District Attorney's Office. Despite these complaints being publicized online, none resulted in public discipline. The plaintiffs argued that public access was necessary, while New York City's former corporation counsel claimed it was a misuse of the process for political gain.Marrero dismissed Presiding Justice Hector LaSalle's defense of legislative immunity, ruling that withholding information is not considered policymaking. He also refuted the state's claim that providing access to certain records would necessitate a substantial overhaul of court operations, stating that procedural adjustments, even if cumbersome, are not illegal.New York Judge Peels Back Curtain on Attorney Misconduct CasesThe First Circuit appears likely to uphold a noncompete agreement against a former DraftKings executive, Michael Hermalyn, who sought to join rival sports-betting firm Fanatics. During oral arguments, Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson questioned why California's worker-friendly policies should outweigh Massachusetts' business protections. Hermalyn, who relocated to California, argued for the state's ban on noncompete clauses to apply. However, the contract stipulates Massachusetts law, as DraftKings is based there.DraftKings accused Hermalyn of violating the agreement by joining a competitor and stealing company secrets. Hermalyn's legal team contended that California's interest in attracting workers should take precedence. Conversely, DraftKings' counsel argued that state laws are equal and California's stance should not override Massachusetts' policies.A federal district judge previously prohibited Hermalyn from working for competitors, dismissing his reliance on California law. This case arises amid the Federal Trade Commission's broader move to ban most noncompete agreements, although senior executives are currently exempt.Hermalyn's attempts to establish California residency involved leasing an apartment, buying a car, and other actions. Massachusetts law typically enforces contract terms unless they violate public policy. Hermalyn's counsel asserted California has the most substantial interest in this matter, urging respect for its policies. However, Judge William Kayatta expressed concerns about prioritizing one state's laws over others in similar circumstances.DraftKings' attorney warned that ruling in favor of Hermalyn could enable others to evade contractual obligations by relocating to California, stressing the need to protect Massachusetts businesses from such tactics. DraftKings also alleged Hermalyn's residency claim was a ploy and accused him of downloading sensitive files before departing.DraftKings' Noncompete Clause Meets Supportive First CircuitElon Musk's social media platform, X (formerly Twitter), is being sued by the PR firm Multiply for trademark infringement. Filed in a California federal court, the lawsuit claims that X's use of the "X" trademark for social-media marketing services causes consumer confusion and infringes on Multiply's established trademark rights. Multiply's spokesperson accused Musk of stealing their established identity and stated the necessity to protect their mark in court.X rebranded from Twitter to X last year under Musk's ownership. This rebranding has already resulted in confusion among Multiply's clients, who overlap with X Corp's clientele. Multiply, which has worked with brands like Arizona, Corona, and Liquid Death, adopted the "X" branding in 2019 and holds a federal trademark for its "X" logo. Multiply is seeking an injunction to stop X Corp from using the "X" trademark and is asking for monetary damages. This lawsuit is one among several, as other companies, including X Social Media, have also filed infringement claims against Musk's rebranded platform. The case is DB Communications LLC d/b/a Multiply v. X Corp, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 3:24-cv-04402.X Corp hit with lawsuit from PR firm over 'X' trademark | ReutersIn my column this week, I discuss the pressing need for the IRS to bolster its cryptocurrency compliance measures to close the crypto tax gap and combat illicit activities. Cryptocurrencies are often used for illegal activities, and many tax evaders in the crypto space prefer to remain anonymous to distance themselves from their actions.A recent report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) highlights significant gaps in the IRS's cryptocurrency tax enforcement. By improving compliance, the IRS can enhance transparency in financial transactions, address the crypto tax gap, and reduce illegal activities facilitated by digital currencies.Enforcing cryptocurrency taxes could yield substantial revenue and mitigate black market activities that harm the economy. Despite the potential benefits, the IRS's current efforts are inadequate. The TIGTA report notes that the IRS investigated only 390 cases involving digital currency between 2018 and 2023, with just 224 cases recommended for prosecution. The IRS's broader operation, “Hidden Treasure,” has focused more on training and tool acquisition than on actively pursuing crypto tax evaders.The use of digital currencies has exploded, with over 26,000 different types and a total market value exceeding $1.7 trillion. Estimates suggest that 21% to 40% of US adults have owned some form of virtual currency. Yet, auditing just 390 files is like pulling a few blades of grass from an acre and assuming a complete understanding of the field.Enhanced cryptocurrency compliance can significantly disrupt illicit activities reliant on digital currency anonymity. Cryptocurrencies are linked to crimes such as drug and human trafficking, ransomware, and terrorism. The IRS's $625,000 bounty for cracking the anonymity of Monero underscores the value of identifying cryptocurrency tax cheats.The IRS needs a coordinated approach to data sharing and analysis, leveraging artificial intelligence to handle vast data sets and uncover patterns. Financial or asset tracing, previously unfeasible on a large scale, becomes possible with advanced technology. Form 1040 already asks filers about digital assets; this data should be cross-referenced with information from exchanges and audits, focusing on high-income individuals for maximum audit returns.The TIGTA report emphasizes the urgency for the IRS to develop comprehensive compliance strategies, employing advanced data analytics and collaborating with blockchain analytics firms. The IRS must also work with other agencies to curb illegal cryptocurrency activities. While individual cryptocurrencies may remain untraceable, large transactions leave traces in the traditional banking system, providing crucial data points for analysis.The IRS has ample information on digital currency holders but may lack the context needed to connect taxes owed to individual taxpayers. Contextualizing existing data is key to closing the crypto tax gap and disrupting criminal enterprises reliant on cryptocurrency anonymity.To Improve Crypto Tax Gap, IRS Must Enhance Compliance Efforts This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

How would you feel if you needed to go to court or conduct legal business but weren't fluent in the language? Our guests will help us understand court interpreter service in Mississippi: Deenie Miller, Director of Language Access Mississippi Supreme Court and Dr. Javier Gerardo Gómez, Certified Court Interpreter. H.B. 1217 became law July 1, 2023. The new laws prohibit Limited English Proficient individuals from being responsible for the costs of court interpretation in all bilingual proceedings for civil and criminal matters. The law also now clarifies that a Limited English proficient individual is entitled to the services of an interpreter in any instance arising out of or pertaining to the individual's involvement in litigation.The Administrative Office of Courts has developed the Mississippi Court Interpreter Credentialing Program. For more detailed information please contact: Administrative Office of CourtsAttention: Deenie Miller, Director of Language AccessPost Office Box 117 Jackson, MS 39205T: 601-359-4469deenie.miller@courts.ms.govFor assistance with interpreters for the hearing impaired, please visit the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf at the following link: https://www.rid.org or https://www.odhh.orgDr. J.G. Gómez, U.S. Army Veteran - Credentialed Interpreter and Translator Language Educator and Technologist - Gómez Language and Culture Services, LLC Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

July 16th, 2024, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode In previous podcasts, we have discussed the unprecedented hiring crunch facing our country.  Intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic, it has been characterized by a significant mismatch between the supply of, and demand for young talent.  Despite robust economic recovery efforts, employers in general and courts in particular are struggling to fill empty desks.  All the while, jobseekers are running up against barriers that make traditional careers less attractive.  Throughout this challenge, a question badgers many employers:  What do young job applicants want? Panelists on previous episodes have suggested a lack of flexible scheduling, hybrid work options, and career advancement opportunities as reasons job seekers go elsewhere. Are these the factors now driving job candidates or does it just come down to money?   This month we will take a deeper dive into how courts are scrambling to recruit and retain skilled employees.  Questions we will explore include: What do job candidates want out of a position with the courts? Has criticism of the courts affected recruiting? What can courts do to improve career development for young employees? Do courts promote skills in areas other than administration?  Should we? Today's Panel Richard Abbott, Program Director for Juvenile & Family Services at the Administrative Office of the Courts in Annapolis, Maryland Keenon Simmons, Chief Probation Officer for the Superior Court in Atlantic & Cape May Counties, New Jersey Patricia Norwood-Foden, District Court Administrator for the 15th Judicial District in Chester County, Pennsylvania, Jamie Velazquez, Organizational Development Analyst for the Superior Court in Orange County, California

The simple explanation of the role of an appellate court judge is to determine whether or not the law was applied correctly in the trial court. However, everyone in an appellate courtroom is human and judges strive to understand the situations of the parties in front of them. Some of those situations can be very personal, especially for self-represented litigants. In this episode, host Nick Morgan, Digital Media Lead for the Administrative Office of the Courts sits down with Tennessee Court of Appeals Judge Steve Stafford to discuss the difference between being impartial and understanding tough situations. This episode is for all audiences. 

Inflation isn’t going anywhere, and listeners wanna know what’s up with two of the government’s inflation measures. Today, we’re answering some nerdy econ questions about the consumer price index and personal consumption expenditures price index. We’ll also answer questions about how the Supreme Court gets funded and the ins and outs of joint fundraising committees. Got a question you’d like us to answer? Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voice mail at 508-U-B-SMART! Here’s everything we talked about today: “How does the government measure inflation?” from Brookings “Why the PCE is the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of inflation” from Marketplace “What is the Core PCE price index?” from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis “Courts, Programs, and Other Items Funded by Congressional Appropriations for the Federal Judiciary” from the Congressional Research Service “US judiciary set to receive modest spending boost from Congress” from Reuters “Judicial Compensation” from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts “Inside the Rent Inflation Measure That Economics Nerds Love to Hate” from The New York Times  “A guide to political money: campaigns, PACs, super PACs” from Associated Press “Joint fundraising: A campaign strategy to increase contributions” from Marketplace “Fundraising for Super PACs by federal candidates” from the Federal Election Commission Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap! The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern. We'll have news, drinks and play a round of Half Full/Half Empty.

Inflation isn’t going anywhere, and listeners wanna know what’s up with two of the government’s inflation measures. Today, we’re answering some nerdy econ questions about the consumer price index and personal consumption expenditures price index. We’ll also answer questions about how the Supreme Court gets funded and the ins and outs of joint fundraising committees. Got a question you’d like us to answer? Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voice mail at 508-U-B-SMART! Here’s everything we talked about today: “How does the government measure inflation?” from Brookings “Why the PCE is the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of inflation” from Marketplace “What is the Core PCE price index?” from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis “Courts, Programs, and Other Items Funded by Congressional Appropriations for the Federal Judiciary” from the Congressional Research Service “US judiciary set to receive modest spending boost from Congress” from Reuters “Judicial Compensation” from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts “Inside the Rent Inflation Measure That Economics Nerds Love to Hate” from The New York Times  “A guide to political money: campaigns, PACs, super PACs” from Associated Press “Joint fundraising: A campaign strategy to increase contributions” from Marketplace “Fundraising for Super PACs by federal candidates” from the Federal Election Commission Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap! The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern. We'll have news, drinks and play a round of Half Full/Half Empty.

Inflation isn’t going anywhere, and listeners wanna know what’s up with two of the government’s inflation measures. Today, we’re answering some nerdy econ questions about the consumer price index and personal consumption expenditures price index. We’ll also answer questions about how the Supreme Court gets funded and the ins and outs of joint fundraising committees. Got a question you’d like us to answer? Email makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voice mail at 508-U-B-SMART! Here’s everything we talked about today: “How does the government measure inflation?” from Brookings “Why the PCE is the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of inflation” from Marketplace “What is the Core PCE price index?” from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis “Courts, Programs, and Other Items Funded by Congressional Appropriations for the Federal Judiciary” from the Congressional Research Service “US judiciary set to receive modest spending boost from Congress” from Reuters “Judicial Compensation” from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts “Inside the Rent Inflation Measure That Economics Nerds Love to Hate” from The New York Times  “A guide to political money: campaigns, PACs, super PACs” from Associated Press “Joint fundraising: A campaign strategy to increase contributions” from Marketplace “Fundraising for Super PACs by federal candidates” from the Federal Election Commission Join us tomorrow for Economics on Tap! The YouTube livestream starts at 3:30 p.m. Pacific time, 6:30 p.m. Eastern. We'll have news, drinks and play a round of Half Full/Half Empty.

I'm always honored when Lisa Graves joins me to lend her legal expertise to the discussion about the trials and tribulations of TFG and, of course, the machinations of the once Supreme, now Extreme, Court. Lisa has the bona fides... she served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Policy Development/Legal Policy at the U.S. Department of Justice under Attorneys General Janet Reno and John Ashcroft, Chief Counsel for Nominations for Senator Patrick Leahy on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Deputy Chief of the Article III Judges Division of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts with oversight of the Financial Disclosure Office and more, and as an adjunct law professor at George Washington University Law School. She also worked as the Senior Legislative Strategist for the ACLU on national security and civil liberties, and held other posts. Although Lisa generously shares her knowledge with us on this show, she does so in her capacity as a private citizen. These days, her day job is as the founder and Executive Director of True North Research, a national investigative watchdog group that works with journalists and other researchers to shine a bright light on the dark money fueling regressive agendas targeting vital institutions in our republic, such as our courts and public schools. Graves is one of the nation's foremost experts in exposing how special interests distort public policy and try to thwart the public's interest in a thriving and inclusive democracy and to impede measures to protect our environment and mitigate climate change. I don't run through her CV and experience as often as I should when she's on the show, so I wanted to put it down in writing... Today, Lisa joins me to talk about the beginning of the first-ever criminal trial of a former president, about that former guy's inability to follow the most basic rules of decorum inside a court of law (or anywhere else for that matter), David Pecker's testimony that proves Trump talks about himself when he decries "FAKE NEWS" and more. On the SCOTUS front, tomorrow - the final day they'll hear arguments this term - they'll hear Trump's farce of a claim that he enjoys "absolute immunity" as a former president... of course today, the antediluvian men on the court showed that they believe they should control every aspect of a woman's life, including her health care. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nicolesandler/message

January 25, 2024, A Question of Ethics Conversation Episode Welcome to the latest episode of A Question of Ethics Conversation.  The topic for this discussion is Organization Fairness.  The October 26th, 2023, Question of Ethics Conversation hosted by Samantha Wallis, brought up many interesting questions.  One set of questions revolved around the concept of fairness. We are all dedicated to fairness and take it seriously, Canon1.3 of NACM's Model Code for Court Professionals speaks to fairness.  It reads that the court professional makes the court accessible and conducts his or her business without bias or prejudice. The Model Code actually mentions Fairness nine different times. Fairness, however, is subjective. Everyone has their own idea of what is fair.  What I consider fair may not be the same as how you see things. What are the perceptions of fairness in an organization, particularly a court organization? Employees often express perceptions of fairness, with which we, as managers, might disagree. Although not all employees hold these perceptions, they are common enough that it might be instructive to ask if we, as managers, can craft responses that can convince employees of a different view of fairness.  Can we come up with something more than just saying “the organization has determined the following policy is fair, the topic is not up for debate.” This Conversation recounts three specific perceptions that some employees have. The panel will discuss if there is some sort of response that could persuade employees of the validity of a different concept.  In essence, is there a response that might change “hearts and minds?”    ·         Perception 1 A manager needs to be able to perform the desk work of every employee he or she manages. If he or she cannot, that manager has no right to conduct performance reviews of the employees. ·         Perception 2 Managing employees is just using common sense.  There is no great skill involved in management.  It is ridiculous that courts pay exorbitant salaries to managers for just using their common sense. ·      Perception 3 The employee's manager is not the employee's friend.  If an employee gets into trouble at work and they need an advocate.  The manager will not save them.   Today's Moderator Peter Kiefer: Host of the Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Series Today's Panel   Samantha Wallis: Deputy Trial Court Administrator, Supreme Court, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho Creadell Webb: Chief Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer; First Judicial District, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Stacy Worby: State Jury Coordinator, Alaska Court System, Anchorage Rick Pierce: Judicial Programs Administrator, Administrative Office of the Courts, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania  Join the Question of Ethics Conversation held after the Ethics Subcommittee meetings every fourth Thursday of the month at 2:00 ET.   Email us at: ethics@nacmnet.org

Today's guests, Lisa Colpoys and Mark Chandler, help lead the Filing Fairness Project at the Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession at Stanford Law School. This project is an ambitious, multijurisdictional effort to modernize court filing systems, widen access to courts, and improve the administration of justice by leveraging readily available technology already used in other sectors. Mark was chief legal officer at Cisco for 20 years, leading it to become one of the most innovative legal departments in the world. After leaving the company, he teamed initially with Professor David Freeman Engstrom and Stanford Legal Design Lab leader Margaret Darin Hagan to tackle the gap between the sophisticated tools available in the corporate world and those used by legal aid organizations and self-represented litigants as they navigate the court system. Lisa, who had already been an experienced leader in legal aid for over two decades, joined the leadership team last spring. Lisa previously led Illinois Legal Aid Online, and also worked at the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts and as a consultant to the Michigan Supreme Court Justice For All Project. Today, Lisa and Mark discuss what led them to Stanford, the goals of the Filing Fairness Project, the biggest challenge the project has faced so far, and the need for additional court funding.

April is Help4TN month! In this episode, the hosts of Lady Justice: Women of the court take over Tennessee Court Talk to discuss the Tennessee Justice Bus. Justice Elizabeth D. Walker of West Virginia and Justice Rhonda K. Wood of Arkansas sit down with Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Jeff Bivins and Anne-Lousie Wirthlin, Director of Access to Justice and Strategic Development for the Administrative Office of the Tennessee Courts sit down for a discussion on the Tennessee Justice Bus, the legal law office bringing legal help to rural communities in Tennessee. Justice Bivins and Anne-Louise answer how the justice bus came to be, how it brings lawyers to rural communities and how to schedule a Justice Bus visit. 

Lisa Graves is the founder and Executive Director of True North Research, a national investigative watchdog group that exposes the shadowy machinations of dark money funders like Leonard Leo, Barre Seid, Harlan Crow, Charles Koch, Dick Uihlein, and Rob Arkley, and their front groups. She served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Policy Development/Legal Policy at the U.S. Department of Justice under Attorneys General Janet Reno and John Ashcroft, Chief Counsel for Nominations for Senator Patrick Leahy on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Deputy Chief of the Article III Judges Division of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts with oversight of the Financial Disclosure Office and more. She also launched the award-winning ALECexposed.org investigation, KochDocs, and other projects. Her op-eds have run in the most prominent newspapers and magazines in the country, and she is a frequent guest on MSNBC. From 2009-2017, she led the Center for Media and Democracy.In this discussion with Greg Olear, Graves discusses her work with True North Research, how she shares an alma mater with one of the most notorious dark money maestros, all the stuff that went on during Brett Kavanaugh's FIRST confirmation hearing, the failures of the Roberts Court and John Roberts, the Clarence & Ginni Thomas corruption, and more. Plus: a gift idea!Prevail is sponsored by BetterHelp. Get 10% off your first month at betterhelp.com/gregFollow Lisa:https://twitter.com/thelisagravesTrue North Research:https://truenorthresearch.org/Her 2018 Slate piece about Brett Kavanaugh:https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/judge-brett-kavanaugh-should-be-impeached-for-lying-during-his-confirmation-hearings.htmlAnd the one in TIME:https://time.com/5398191/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-senators/ Subscribe to the PREVAIL newsletter:https://gregolear.substack.com/aboutWould you like to tell us more about you? http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=short

In this episode, the Lady Justices discuss the importance of equal access to justice. They welcome special guests Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Jeff Bivins and Anne-Lousie Wirthlin the Director of Access to Justice and Strategic Development for the Administrative Office of the Tennessee Courts. Justice Walker was live on location in Nashville Tennessee with Justice Bivins and Mrs. Wirthlin. In this special episode, our special guests share about their Tennessee access to Justice Bus. The Justice Bus is a mobile law office that brings technology and legal help to rural and underserved communities across Tennessee. In the lighting round our Lady Justices and special guests share their most used phone app, their favorite country music artist past or present, their lockscreen photos, and lastly their favorite city to visit. For More Information About the Tennessee Justice Bus See the Link Below: https://justiceforalltn.org/justice-bus/  

At a time when legal technology companies are making it easier to access and analyze court documents, what should – and should not – be done to protect confidential court documents that are sealed from public access?   This question came to a head last July, when a federal court in North Carolina took the drastic step of issuing a standing order that effectively banned lawyers in that district from using third-party service providers such as PacerPro, RECAP or DocketBird. That order came on the heels of a memorandum from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts that – while it didn't outright ban the use of such service providers – it did urge courts to warn filers to be cautious about using third-party services and software. Were these actions justified? Is there reason to be concerned about third-party providers? And what exactly is the best way to protect sealed documents?  To answer these questions, the legal tech company PacerPro brought together a panel of experts for a live program presented during the annual meeting of the National Docketing Association in Boston in October. On the panel were:  Josh Blandi, CEO and cofounder of UniCourt.  Sara Collins, vice president of product management, File & ServeXpress.  Gavin McGrane, cofounder of PacerPro.  Snorri Ogata, chief technology officer at Tech Unicorn and formerly chief information officer at the Los Angeles Superior court and, before that, at the Orange County Superior Court, two of the largest court systems in the United States..  I moderated the panel and recorded it for this podcast. Thanks to the panelists, the NDA, and PacerPro for allowing me to do that.  Thank You To Our Sponsors This episode of LawNext is generously made possible by our sponsors. We appreciate their support and hope you will check them out. Paradigm, home to the practice management platforms PracticePanther, Bill4Time, MerusCase and LollyLaw; the e-payments platform Headnote; and the legal accounting software TrustBooks. Legalweek NY 2024, Described as the “one legal event that hits all the marks for information, education, and networking”    If you enjoy listening to LawNext, please leave us a review wherever you listen to podcasts.  

Justice Speaks continues JSI's series of interviews with State Treatment court Association leaders and State Treatment Court Coordinators interviewing Gray Barton, Director of the Administrative Office of the Problem-Solving Courts in Maryland.m This episode is sponsored by Reconnect. 

It's the last week before Christmas and we're still here. With a lot of legal issues popping up on Friday and in our near future, I thought today would be a great day to invite Lisa Graves back to the show. Lisa has those legal bona fides -- she  served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Policy Development/Legal Policy at the U.S. Department of Justice under Attorneys General Janet Reno and John Ashcroft, Chief Counsel for Nominations for Senator Patrick Leahy on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Deputy Chief of the Article III Judges Division of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts with oversight of the Financial Disclosure Office and more, and as an adjunct law professor at George Washington University Law School. She also worked as the Senior Legislative Strategist for the ACLU on national security and civil liberties, and held other posts.  These days, she serves as Executive Director and Editor of TrueNorthResearch.org, where she continues the work she's championed over the years, exposing people and organizations like the Koch Brothers, ALEC, Leonard Leo and others of that ilk. Today we'll talk Rudy, Ruby & Shaye, Clarence & Ginny and the lack of Supreme ethics, Jack Smith and his game of leapfrog the appeals court and more.... --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nicolesandler/message

Christina welcomes Megan from the High Conflict Institute to chat about co-parenting with someone who operates with a repetitive pattern of high conflict. In order to be effective, we have to understand how a high conflict person thinks - so how do they? How do you flip the script to start interacting with them differently? Megan shares some great tools on how to change the way you communicate in your dynamic. Oh and a bonus... she's a stepmom! What would she have done differently? What has helped her stay grounded in who she is? If you're managing high conflict, grab your partner and listen in! About My Guest: Megan Hunter, MBA, is co-founder and CEO of the High Conflict Institute along with author and speaker, Bill Eddy, LCSW, Esq. who developed the high-conflict personality theory. Megan developed the concept of the Institute after eight years in policy, legislation and judicial training with the Arizona Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Courts and five years with the Dawes County Attorney's Office in Nebraska. She is the author and/or co-author of several books on high conflict interactions and co-host of the podcast It's All Your Fault! So much more than a podcast!!! Find me on the Gram ⁠⁠@radicalstepmomspodcast ⁠⁠ Want a little more support? Schedule a 1:1 session or become a Radical Member? ⁠⁠Head to my website!⁠⁠ I am excited for another amazing season! If you would like to be a guest - ⁠⁠apply here⁠⁠! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/radicalstepmoms/message

I tried to keep the title of today's episode light, though I'm feeling anything but. Yes, I was glad to hear that TFG was compelled to testify today, but it was more of the same from this teflon turd who gets away with crap that would find anyone else displaying the same juvenile lack of decorum bound and gagged at the defendant's table. But he does and says what he wants without a care in the world because he knows, as he's stated more than once, he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and get away with it.Trump did make history today, I believe, in that he is the first former Oval Office occupant to stand trial - civil or criminal (and face it, he's got both in the works). And today, history was made, as embarrassing as it is for this country. But we have lots to be ashamed of right now, with more gumming up the works further each day.The always awesome Lisa Graves is back on the show today, sharing her personal observations on this historic day.There's a parade of legal *experts* being trotted out by every cable news channel blaring their skewed take on the days' news endlessly. But I'd listen to Lisa Graves above all others. She's the real deal.Lisa is a DOJ veteran, having served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in both the Bill Clinton and GW Bush administrations under AGs Janet Reno and John Ashcroft/ Alberto Gonzales. She also served in the Senate Judiciary Committee as Chief Counsel for Nominations for Senator Patrick Leahy, as Deputy Chief of the Article III Judges Division of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts with oversight of the Financial Disclosure Office and more, and as an adjunct law professor at George Washington University Law School. She also worked as the Senior Legislative Strategist for the ACLU on national security and civil liberties, and held other posts.These days, Lisa Graves works as the founder and Executive Director of True North Research, a national investigative watchdog group that works with journalists and other researchers to shine a bright light on the dark money fueling regressive agendas targeting vital institutions in our republic, such as our courts and public schools.Today, she'll bring us her personal observations on today's testimony and the sad historic nature of where we are as a nation.

On this day in legal history, September 21, 1981, the United States Senate approved the nomination by President Reagan of Sandra Day O'Connor to the United States Supreme Court–making her the first female Supreme Court justice. O'Connor, who often leaned conservative, used her political experience from her time in the Arizona state Senate to shape her judicial views. She was known for filing concurring opinions that aimed to limit the scope of majority rulings. She faced opposition from the time of her nomination from anti-abortion and religious groups. During her tenure, O'Connor was known for her pragmatic approach and often served as the swing vote in contentious cases. Initially aligning closely with conservative Chief Justice William Rehnquist, her voting record later became more moderate as the Court's composition shifted. She played a pivotal role in key decisions, including those related to abortion rights, affirmative action, and campaign finance.She was involved in landmark cases such as Grutter v. Bollinger, which upheld the constitutionality of race-based admissions to universities, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which preserved the core constitutional precept of Roe v. Wade. O'Connor retired in 2006 but left a lasting impact on American jurisprudence, particularly in her nuanced approach to complex legal issues.O'Connor also had a brief stint in acting, appearing as Queen Isabel in a 1996 Shakespeare Theatre production of Henry V. In a landmark decision, she cast the deciding vote in the 2000 Bush v. Gore case, which ended the Florida vote recount and paved the way for George W. Bush's presidency. She later expressed reservations about the court's involvement in the case.In another historic moment, O'Connor became the first woman to preside over an oral argument in the Supreme Court during the case of Kelo v. City of New London on February 22, 2005. Later that year, at the age of 75, she announced her plans to retire from the bench. Following her retirement, she took on the ceremonial role of the 23rd chancellor of William and Mary College in Williamsburg, Virginia, a position first held by George Washington. Her groundbreaking career remains a significant chapter in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court.The Federal Circuit's active judges have suspended 96-year-old Judge Pauline Newman for one year for failing to undergo medical testing as part of a disability and misconduct investigation. Initiated by Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore, the probe began after Newman allegedly had a cardiac incident and raised questions about her productivity. The investigation is notable for its public nature, a rarity in judicial disability investigations. Legal scholars suggest that such probes may become more frequent as the average age of federal judges has risen to 69.Newman has contested the investigation, framing it as bullying and arguing that it was motivated by her frequent dissents in favor of stronger patent rights. The council stated that Newman's non-compliance with medical tests hampers their ability to assess her fitness for duty. A special committee had recommended the suspension, citing Newman's consistent refusal to cooperate.Newman's lawyer, Greg Dolin, criticized the investigation's procedures and called the renewable suspension "unlawful" under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act. Newman plans to appeal the council's order and has also filed a lawsuit seeking reinstatement. She submitted two medical reports affirming her mental fitness, which the council dismissed as inadequate.The case has drawn public attention, contrasting sharply with Newman's recent accolades at a legal conference. Affidavits from court staff depict her as struggling with memory loss and paranoia, adding another layer of complexity to this unprecedented judicial probe.Embattled 96-Year-Old Judge Suspended in Disability Probe (2)A high-stakes antitrust lawsuit has been filed against the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) by around 1,200 former fighters, including Nate "Rock" Quarry. The suit alleges that UFC confines athletes to perpetual contracts and pays them far less than they would earn in a competitive market. The case has been fast-tracked for trial next spring and is closely watched as it could set a precedent for athletes in various sports to fight for better pay using antitrust law.The UFC, owned by Endeavor Group Holdings, generated a record revenue of $1.14 billion last year and reaches over 900 million households globally. Fighters are required to sign exclusive deals, often including four fights per year. However, the UFC allegedly withholds the last fight in a contract until the fighter agrees to renew, effectively trapping them in a cycle of successive contracts.The fighters argue that the UFC is a "monopsony," a sole buyer in a market, and accuse it of abusing this power. Monopsony cases are rare but have gained attention under the Biden administration. While there are other combat sports promotions, the plaintiffs argue that UFC controls the majority of fighters in nearly all weight classes and has also bought or shut down its rivals.The class action status of the lawsuit increases the risk for UFC, as it could be compelled to pay up to $4.8 billion in treble damages. The case could also encourage athletes in other industries to file similar suits. UFC has petitioned to appeal the class certification, arguing that the court erroneously certified the class.The case also highlights the financial struggles of fighters, who are independent contractors paid per bout. While top fighters can earn millions, most fighters have to fund their own training and equipment, leaving them with little net income. The case aims not just for compensation but also to bring about a change in the sport, offering fighters better terms and ending the cycle of perpetual contracts.UFC Fighters Test Antitrust Law to Escape ‘Perpetual' ContractsThe U.S. federal judiciary has enough funds to operate for at least two weeks if the government shuts down due to a lapse in funding. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts stated that court fees and other available funds could be used to continue hearing cases. Some case deadlines may be rescheduled if federal agency attorneys are not working during the shutdown. If the funds do run out, the judiciary would operate on a limited basis, retaining only the staff necessary for mission-critical work.Current government funding is set to expire at the end of the fiscal year on September 30, putting pressure on lawmakers to reach a deal on a short-term funding bill. Infighting among House Republicans and disagreements between the Republican-controlled House and Democratic-controlled Senate have jeopardized the passage of appropriations bills for fiscal year 2024. House Republicans have proposed allocating $8.7 billion to the federal judiciary for the next fiscal year, while Senate Democrats have proposed $8.56 billion. Both fall short of the judiciary's request for $9.1 billion.Judge Lavenski Smith of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit expressed that a potential government shutdown is a "consistent matter of concern" and that plans are being considered to keep the judiciary operational. The judiciary, which employs nearly 30,000 people, almost ran out of money during the last government shutdown in 2018. The Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) system, used for electronic filing of documents, remained operational during the previous shutdown. The U.S. Supreme Court, which opens its new term on October 2, has used non-appropriated funds in the past to continue short-term operations.Judiciary Has Funds for Two Weeks if Government Shuts Down (1)A legal team that successfully sued Tesla's board of directors for allegedly overpaying themselves is now seeking $229 million in legal fees, amounting to $10,690 an hour. The request was made in a filing in Delaware's Court of Chancery on September 8. If approved, this would be one of the largest fee awards ever resulting from a shareholder lawsuit against a board. The case took several years to build and focused on the compensation paid to Tesla's directors from 2017 to 2020.The 12 director defendants, including James Murdoch and Larry Ellison, had agreed to return $735 million in compensation and forego another potential $184 million. They also agreed to overhaul the board's compensation determination process. The settlement money will be paid to Tesla and indirectly benefit shareholders, making this a derivative lawsuit.The law firms involved in the case estimate the total settlement value at $919 million and are seeking 25% of that sum as their fee. They are also requesting about $1 million in expenses. Partners and staff from the law firms involved have billed thousands of hours on the case.Courts typically review fee requests by balancing the need to reward risk and effort against the risk of a disproportionate windfall that could undermine public confidence in the legal system. David Paige, founder of Legal Fee Advisors, described the fee request as "extraordinary" compared to typical hourly rates for corporate attorneys, which can go up to $2,000.Tesla's directors have not yet objected to the fee request but are expected to do so, according to court filings. A hearing to approve the settlement and the legal fees is scheduled for October 13, and Tesla shareholders have until Friday to file any objections.In 2012, Delaware courts approved an hourly rate that worked out to $35,000 in a Southern Copper shareholder lawsuit, setting a precedent that the outcome achieved should be the focus, not the hourly rate.Lawyers who sued Tesla board for excess pay want $10,000 an hour | ReutersA recent Reuters/Ipsos poll reveals that a majority of Americans, including both Democrats and Republicans, support the ongoing strikes in the auto industry and Hollywood. The poll found that 58% of Americans back the United Auto Workers union's strike against Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis for better pay and benefits. In the entertainment industry, 60% support the strikes by screenwriters and actors for better pay and protections. Among Democrats, the support is especially strong, with 72% backing the auto workers strike and 79% supporting the Hollywood strike. Interestingly, a significant number of Republicans also expressed support for the strikes, despite the party's traditional pro-business stance. The poll reflects a broader trend of increased union activism in the U.S., with 2023 on track to become the busiest year for strikes since 2019.Americans broadly support auto, Hollywood strikes -Reuters/Ipsos pollA U.S. authors' trade group, including renowned writers like John Grisham and George R.R. Martin, has filed a class-action lawsuit against OpenAI. The lawsuit accuses OpenAI of unlawfully training its AI chatbot, ChatGPT, on copyrighted works from these authors. The Authors Guild, which filed the suit, is also concerned that the training data may have been sourced from illegal online book repositories. OpenAI has defended its actions by claiming that the use of internet-scraped training data falls under "fair use" according to U.S. copyright law. The lawsuit is part of a broader legal landscape where AI companies are facing challenges over the data used to train their systems.John Grisham, other top US authors sue OpenAI over copyrights | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

June 20th, 2023, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode Is there another concept in court administration that has been discussed, studied, and analyzed more often than Leadership?  For many the image of a leader that immediately comes to mind is the person who confidently says, “follow me, I know the way.”  It implies that the leader can always be relied upon to “have the answers.”   That image, however, doesn't always work.  Sometimes the outcome is being negotiated and cannot be revealed, sometimes the solution is dictated by someone else.  Examples that come to mind include how to manage flex time and remote work, how to absorb a 10% budget cut, or how to oversee diversity, equity, and inclusion in your court.  This month we're looking at leadership in the courts and how we handle day to day challenges. Today we are going to ask folks who deal with questions of leadership on a daily basis.   Today's Panelists    Stacey Fields, Court Administrator for the Municipal Court in Crestwood, Missouri. Stacey has worked in the judiciary for 12 years. She has been a member of NACM for 5 years and serves on the Conference Development Committee.   Katie Hempill, Office Administrator for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. Katie .  Katie received her bachelor's degree in International Relations from Marshall University and graduated this May with her master's degree in Government studies from the Harvard Extension School.   Lizzie Alipaz, Clerk of Court for the Municipal Court in Timnath, Colorado. Lizzie speaks Spanish, English, German, and Portuguese. She received her Juris Doctor Degree from Universidad Católica Boliviana and Universidad Privada de Bolivia.   Janet Cornell, Consultant and Retired Court Administrator. Janet has over 35 years in court leadership including service in general and limited jurisdiction courts. She is a founding and contributing member to http://www.courtleader.net. She has a Masters in Public Administration from Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, and is a Fellow of the National Center for State Courts, Institute for Court Management in Williamsburg, VA, along with certificates from the Leader Coach Institute, Scottsdale, AZ, and the Leadership Institute for Judicial Education, Memphis, TN.   Rick Pierce, Judicial Programs Administrator for the Pennsylvania Administrative Office of the Courts. Rick has served in the field of court administration for the past 29 years. Prior to his appointment at the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Rick was the district court administrator for Cumberland County. Prior to his 4 ½ year tenure as court administrator, he was the assistant administrator for the 9th judicial district from 1988-1997. A graduate from Washington and Lee University, Pierce received his Masters in Public Administration from Shippensburg University in 1995.

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts keeps the busy system of court dockets running. It has information technology underpinning this work. The Government Accountability Office said the Court lacks a strategic approach to improving its IT staff. For more, Federal Drive host Tom Temin spoke with GAO's Director of Information Technology Acquisition Management, Carol Harris.Full GAO Report Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts keeps the busy system of court dockets running. It has information technology underpinning this work. The Government Accountability Office said the Court lacks a strategic approach to improving its IT staff. For more, Federal Drive host Tom Temin spoke with GAO's Director of Information Technology Acquisition Management, Carol Harris. Full GAO Report Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to Mysteries to Die For and this Toe Tag.I am TG Wolff and am here with Jack, my piano player and producer. This is normally a podcast where we combine storytelling with original music to put you at the heart of mystery, murder, and mayhem. Today is a bonus episode we call a Toe Tag. It is the first chapter from a fresh release in the mystery, crime, and thriller genre.Today's featured release is Duplicity by Shawn Wilson Duplicity was released October 2022 from Oceanview Publishing and is available from AMAZON LINK and other book retailers.About Shawn WilsonShawn Wilson is a produced playwright and author of Relentless, the first novel in the Brick Kavanagh mystery series. She earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Administration of Justice from American University in Washington, D.C. and spent over thirty years working for the U.S. Marshals Service, the U.S. Attorney's Office, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Having traveled on five continents, she is very happy to call Chicago home.TG Wolff ReviewDuplicity is a mystery, the kind I call a “follow along.” Brick Kavanagh is officially retired from the Washington DC police Homicide Squad. Unofficially, he's got a few irons in the fire. The most promising is an airline stewardess named Nora that just might be worth relocating to Chicago. A potential paying gig, Brick is invited to mentor law students through a cold case in their own back yard. Then there is the thing that happens to his partner's wife. For that, everything else can wait.Bottom line: Duplicity is for you if you like appealing characters getting in the weeds of missing persons and cold case mysteries.Strengths of the story. Brian “Brick” Kavanaugh is a strong leading character who you want to succeed. The secondary characters are equally engaging and, always a winner with me, I could keep them straight. The “missing person” and “cold case” storylines hold up front-to-back and then back-to-front. The rapid storytelling style is engaging and keeps you wanting to know what happens next.Where the story fell short of ideal. While there were no plot holes, the main storyline pivoted to resolution on a coincidence, not Brick's actions or deductions. Being a mystery fanatic, I look for the detectives to drive to the solution. In this case, he was more in the right place at the right time, which falls short of ideal. Notably, Brick does drive the solution of the secondary storyline. If it wasn't for him sticking with what should have been a dead-end lead and pressing buttons marked “do not touch” then the status quo would have been sadly maintained.

After a tight first quarter between River Ridge and Blessed Trinity, the Knights made a change to their defensive approach and took off from there in Friday night's 65-47 second-round Class AAAAAA playoff win. The score was knotted at 11-11 through the first eight minutes, with River Ridge coming out in a press. The Titans were able to break it, though, and with their potent guard play, quickly move down the court and score. River Ridge changed its approach in the second quarter and outscored Blessed Trinity 16-2 going into halftime. River Ridge will face off against Marist in the Elite 8 after the War Eagles jumped on Tift County 61-37. Marist beat Blessed Trinity 49-34 earlier this season. In other girls' playoff action, Sequoyah pulled off the rare feat of sweeping a non-region foe in three games when they beat North Forsyth on Friday. Sequoyah jumped out to a 10-0 lead after bringing defensive pressure, forcing turnovers and scoring in those transition opportunities. The Chiefs took care of the ball on their end and knocked down shots. Sayler Davies hit a pair of 3-pointers in the first half, and Addison Ghorley connected on another. With the raucous Raiders' crowd, Sequoyah had to nullify its impact. After falling to Woodstock in the Region 6AAAAAA championship, Sequoyah has now won three straight games, with the last two coming by double digits. The Chiefs will meet Brunswick in the quarterfinals on Tuesday night. The Pirates defeated Woodward Academy in Round 2. With a hobbled Dastin Hart and a substantial size disadvantage, Cherokee's defense rose to the challenge in Saturday's 73-58 home playoff win over Berkmar, sending the Warriors to the Class AAAAAA Elite 8. Cherokee's shooters caught fire early, with Tayden Owens connecting on two straight 3-pointers to start the night. Berkmar went to Mekhi Ragland early in the paint, but the Warriors defended him well throughout the night and denied easy entry passes. Owens was the game's leading scorer with 26 points, followed closely by his backcourt running mate Cameron Pope, who finished at 22 points. Lawrence Sanford pitched in 15 points off the bench. Cherokee moves on to face Carrollton in Round 2, which defeated Parkview 58-56 on Saturday. Top of Form In other boys' basketball action, Etowah coach Jason Dasinger said the first half of Saturday night's high school basketball playoff game was on him. He let the players take over the second half, and that propelled to a 59-42 victory over Pope in the second round of the Class AAAAAA tournament. Aiden Weaver led a trio of Eagles players in double-digits with 16 points. Mason Etter and Brandon Rechsteiner added 15 points apiece. Sixth-ranked Etowah (21-8) moves on to the quarterfinals and will play at No. 2 St. Pius X on Wednesday in Chamblee. St. Pius X beat Lakeside-Evans 62-57 on Saturday. The Magistrate Court of Cherokee County has received a Judicial Excellence Award for Clearance Rate Excellence. The magistrate court received the award Jan. 25 for the 2021 calendar year, the court announced. This marks the fourth year the Cherokee County Magistrate Court has earned the award. The award is presented annually by the Administrative Office of the Courts' Standing Committee on Judicial Workload Assessment to the top 10% of counties in terms of clearance rate (16 counties out of 159). A clearance rate of 100% or greater demonstrates that the court is keeping up with its caseload. Deputy Clerk Elaine Ellis added that “it is truly amazing to see what can be accomplished when a team works together to achieve a common goal.” A former Woodstock High School teacher will serve three years in prison after he pleaded guilty to touching and groping six underage high school students, the Cherokee County District Attorney's Office announced. Ryan Parker McKendrick, 40, entered a negotiated guilty plea to nine counts of sexual assault of a student Feb. 9. Senior Judge C.J. Gober Jr. sentenced McKendrick to 20 years, with the first three years to serve in prison and the rest on probation. Upon probation, he will be under sex offender special conditions, and is forbidden to have contact with the victims or minors under the age of 18. In September 2018, administrators at the school became aware of a text conversation involving McKendrick and two female students that led to an investigation. McKendrick had been the school's chorus teacher since 2007. Investigators with Cherokee County School Police and Cherokee Sheriff's Office determined that many students had experienced similar behavior from McKendrick, prosecutors said. Eight of the victims delivered impact statements at the plea hearing, describing the abuse as traumatizing and a betrayal of trust, according to the district attorney's office. They said they continue to feel self-doubt and insecurity, and they struggle to trust anyone, especially those in positions of authority. Victims said they were relieved that the defendant admitted to the charges by pleading guilty. Holly Springs residents will soon see new playground equipment, as well as a dog park when visiting Barrett Park later this year. The Holly Springs City Council unanimously approved a $16,323 professional design service fee for improvements to Barrett Park Thursday to BM&K Inc. Another design service fee for $12,123 to the same company was approved for maintenance to the Barrett Springs detention pond. Improvements to the park include replacing the current playground equipment with new equipment, as well as replacing the basketball goal and improving the court. The city also plans to add an off-leash dog park, closed in with a chain length fence and connected to water to accommodate canine watering stations. The off-leash dog park will be inside the park on the west side of the gazebo, Holly Springs City Manager Rob Logan said Friday. The project also includes installing drains at the playground and refreshing the site with play-safe mulch, constructing a closed stormwater system from the east boundary of the park to the creek, and resurfacing and striping the parking lot along with the entrance road. BM&K will provide demo plans, a grading plan, drainage design, utility sheet and erosion control, according to city documents. Sequoyah-Con, a three-part miniature convention series hosted by the Sequoyah Regional Library system, will be held at area libraries on March 4, 11 and 18. Two of the three events will be at Cherokee County locations: the R.T. Jones Memorial Library in Canton and the Woodstock Public Library in Woodstock. The conventions are free to participate in and are open to all ages. March 4, the R.T. Jones Memorial Library in Canton is hosting a Pokémon program schedule starting at 10 a.m. that includes Pokémon-themed crafts, scavenger hunts, cross-stitch, paper circuits, terrariums, and more. There will also be two trivia games, one for adults and one for children. The program will end with a Pokémon costume contest from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. On March 11, the next event in the series is a gaming-themed program at the Gilmer County Library in Ellijay. Visitors of all ages are invited to play different games throughout the day, and there will be kid-specific games in the youth activity room. There will be a craft market, Breath of the Wild scavenger hunt, a fan art display and more. The last event, hosted by the Woodstock Public Library, is a cryptids program. The itinerary includes activities begin at 10:30 a.m. and include age-group crafting hours, X-Files trivia, a Pet Semetary stuffed animal craft, ectoplasm slime making and more. Special guests at the Woodstock library include author Delilah Dawson, storyteller Tracy Walker and a representative from Georgia Paranormal Investigations. Walker will be hosting a Bigfoot story time from 10:30 to 11:30 a.m. March 18, open to all ages. Dawson, a published Georgia fantasy and science fiction writer, will be hosting a Q&A panel from 2-3 p.m. Georgia Paranormal Investigations will give a presentation about paranormal activity and ghost hunting from 3:30 to 5 p.m. The library system is also holding a reading challenge on Beanstack where participants can earn badges for reading books related to convention themes. The reading challenge ends March 31.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

November 15th 2022, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode The public's perception of our courts continues to be a topic of concern and curiosity for court professionals. Last month we discussed finding of the National Center for State Courts 2021 State of the State Courts survey that found that public trust in the courts had declined to 64% from a high in 2018 of 76%. This month we will take a deeper dive into several areas of interest: · How much influence does “the ability to be heard in court” affect the public's perception? · Does the public look at the different levels of the court differently? · What role do lawyers play in promoting differing views between general jurisdiction and limited jurisdiction courts? · How does the development of remote hearings play into caseflow efficiency and the public's perception? Today's Cohost Stacy Worby, State Jury Coordinator for the Alaska Court System. In that capacity she is responsible for the coordination and operation of the centralized processes for the court's jury management systems. Additionally, she provides jury procedure training and guidance for personnel in 40 court locations statewide. Today's Panel · The Honorable Yvette Alexander, Judge with the City Court in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Judge Alexander earned a B.A. in Political Science from Grambling State University and earned a J.D. from the LSU Law Center in 1979. After law school, she worked as counsel for the Louisiana State Legislature, Louisiana State Senate, East Baton Rouge Parish Public Defender's Office and was an Assistant Attorney General for the Louisiana Attorney General's Office. · The Honorable Ed Spillane, Judge with the Municipal Court in College Station, Texas. He has served in this position since May 2002. Prior to this, he served as an Assistant District Attorney for Brazos County for eight years and as an associate for the law firm Fulbright & Jaworski for two years. Judge Spillane received his undergraduate degree from Harvard University, and his law degree from the University of Chicago. · Rick Pierce, Judicial Programs Administrator for the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts. Rick has served in the field of court administration for the past twenty-nine years. Prior to his appointment at the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Rick was the district court administrator for Cumberland County. Prior to his 4 ½ year tenure as court administrator. · Kent Pankey, Senior Planner for the Supreme Court of Virginia. Kent received a B.A. in Political Science from Hampden-Sydney College and a J.D. from the College of William and Mary. He is an ICM Fellow (Class of 1999) and a certified ICM instructor for the courses Accountability and Court Performance, Executive Decision Making, Leadership, Modern Court Governance, and Visioning and Strategic Planning. · Sarah Brown-Clark, elected Clerk of Court for the Municipal Court in Youngstown, Ohio. Sarah is a 1971 cum laude graduate of Ohio University with a B.S. degree in English; she also earned her M.A. degree in English from Ohio University in 1972 and earned hours towards a Ph.D. in English from Kent State University.

October 18, 2022 Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode What do we know about how the public views our courts? We know that the public's trust and confidence in courts has been slipping over the years. The 2021 National Center for State Courts State of the State Courts survey found that public trust in the courts along other institutions has been declining for some time. In that survey 64% of respondents said they had either a great deal of confidence or some confidence in their state courts. But that is down from a 2018 high of 76%. That same survey asked, "How much do you agree with the phrase that the state courts provide equal justice to all?" For the first time, state courts were slightly 'under water.' 46% said the phrase described the state courts well or very well, while 47% disagreed. In addition, this year, public confidence in The U.S. Supreme Court (symbolically the paragon of our court system), sank to 25%, down 31 points from its 1988 high. That year 56% had confidence in the Supreme Court. We've asked five individuals, both judges and court administrators, how do their friends and neighbors view the courts and why. We asked them about people they know; people who do not work in the courts. What are we looking to find out? · Has trust and confidence in the courts truly been decreasing? · Do people still rely on the fundamental fairness and impartiality of the courts? · If trust and confidence is decreasing what are the reasons? Today's Cohost Stacy Worby, State Jury Coordinator for the Alaska Court System Today's Panel The Honorable Yvette Mansfield Alexander is the Judge with the City Court in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Judge Alexander earned her B.A. in Political Science from Grambling State University and earned a J.D. from the LSU Law Center in 1979. After law school, she worked as counsel for the Louisiana State Legislature, Louisiana State Senate, East Baton Rouge Parish Public Defender's Office and was an Assistant Attorney General for the Louisiana Attorney General's Office. The Honorable Ed Spillane is the Judge with the Municipal Court in College Station, Texas. Judge Spillane has served in this position since May 2002. He received his undergraduate degree from Harvard University, and his law degree from the University of Chicago. Rick Pierce is the Judicial Programs Administrator for the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts. A graduate from Washington and Lee University, Pierce received his Master's Degree in Public Administration from Shippensburg University in 1995. Kent Pankey is the Senior Planner for the Supreme Court of Virginia where he has worked since 2005. Kent received a B.A. in Political Science from Hampden-Sydney College and a J.D. from the College of William and Mary. He is an ICM Fellow (Class of 1999) and a certified ICM instructor for the courses Accountability and Court Performance, Executive Decision Making, Leadership, Modern Court Governance, and Visioning and Strategic Planning Sarah Brown-Clark is the elected Clerk of Court for the Municipal Court in Youngstown, Ohio. Sarah was first elected to the position November 1999. Sarah is a 1971 cum laude graduate of Ohio University with a B.S. degree in English; she also earned her M.A. degree in English from Ohio University in 1972 and earned hours towards a Ph.D. in English from Kent State University.

In this episode, we take a deep dive into Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 13 and court-appointed work. Our guests Lacy Wilber, Assistant General Counsel, and Amy Park, Support Analyst, for the Administrative Office of the Courts, discuss the ins and outs of filing fee claims. Lacy reviews specific rules surrounding expenses and experts, and Amy details the process of filing for reimbursement. This episode is intended for attorneys.

Featuring:Trey Allen, General Counsel, Administrative Office of the CourtsHon. Richard Dietz, Judge, North Carolina Court of AppealsHon. Samuel J. Ervin IV, Justice, North Carolina Supreme CourtHon. Lucy Inman, Judge, North Carolina Court of AppealsModerator: John Hood, President, John William Pope Foundation

The Hatch Act prohibits political activities by federal employees on the job. It only applies to executive branch agencies. So when the head of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts enacted new rules for that agency's employees that went even further than the Hatch Act, not everyone was on board. Two employees filed a lawsuit. Federal News Network's Eric White spoke with one of the attorneys involved. He's legal director for the D.C. chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, Art Spitzer.

This episode of All Things Judicial  focuses on North Carolina's School Justice Partnerships (SPJs), which are programs designed to keep kids in school and out of court. In the first segment of the podcast, we hear testimonials from judges, school superintendents, a county sheriff, and a district attorney who have partnered to form an SJP in their respective counties. Next, DeShield Greene, court management specialist in the Programs Division of the Administrative Office of the Courts, shares the broad perspective and scope of SJP implementation across North Carolina.An SJP is groups of community stakeholders which typically include school administrators, law enforcement, judges, court system and juvenile justice personnel, and others that develop and implement effective strategies to address student misconduct. SJPs work to reduce the number of suspensions, expulsions, and referrals to the justice system by timely and constructively addressing student misconduct when and where it happens, helping students succeed in school and preventing negative outcomes for both youth and their communities.You can learn more about SJPs and their track record of success by viewing the SJP Fact Sheet on NCcourts.gov.

Staring Wednesday, Aug. 17, the Poth Independent School District will distribute letters to the households of children in the district campuses about eligibility benefits for free and reduced-priced meals and any actions households need to take to apply for these benefits. Applications are also available at each campus or the Administrative Office at 510 Titcomb St. in Poth. Children in households receiving benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or TemporaryAssistance for Needy Families (TANF) are eligible. Additionally, foster children, children who are enrolled in Head Start or Even Start, and those who meet the income guidelines of the...Article Link

The Moneywise Guys Monday, August 1st BE MONEYWISE. Moneywise Wealth Management I "The Moneywise Guys" podcast call: 661-847-1000 text in anytime: 661-396-1000 email: info@moneywiseguys.com website: www.MoneywiseGuys.com Guest: Jim Zervis, Chief Operations Officer for the Kern County Administrative Office website: www.kerncounty.com/government/county-administrative-office/cao   

This episode of All Things Judicial features an interview with former Supreme Court of North Carolina Chief Justice James G. Exum, Jr. Exum earned his law degree from New York University School of Law, served as a superior court judge from 1967–1974, served as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina from 1975–1986, and served as the chief justice of the Supreme Court of North Carolina from 1986–1995.In this 2006 interview conducted by former superior court judge and former director of the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) Tom Ross, Exum reflects on his early life in Eastern North Carolina, career in the state judicial system, and the importance of the judiciary in maintaining a functioning democracy.    "The legal profession and our judicial system are the only place where serious disputes can be resolved according to rationality and mutual principles of law," said Exum on the podcast. "As lawyers, we are all part of the same profession and we have a duty to treat each other as professionals … and we can disagree without being disagreeable."This interview is part of the Chief Justice's Commission on Professionalism's historical video series. A video of this interview can be viewed on the Judicial Branch YouTube Channel.

It's been a busy week, and it's only Wednesday. But today gives us a break in the considerable legal activity this week. Monday was a holiday. Tuesday gave us five new opinions from the Supreme Court in the morning, followed by another mind blowing hearing from the House Select Committee investigating the events surrounding the Jan 6 attack on the Capitol. Things pick up again tomorrow morning at 10ET, as the court will release more end-of-term opinions (still 13 to go as of today), and the House Select Committee convenes its fifth public hearing at 3pm ET. And, for good measure, the Supreme Court will hand down even more opinions on Friday morning, again beginning at 10ET. So there's much to wade through, and I have tons of questions. So I invited my old friend Lisa Graves to join us today. Lisa is my go-to legal expert, and she's perfect to address today's news. Today, Lisa leads True North Research (truenorthresearch.org). Her legal bona fides are more than impressive: She served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Policy at the U.S. Department of Justice in the Clinton Administration, Chief Counsel for Nominations for Senator Patrick Leahy on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Deputy Chief of the Article III Judges Division of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, and as an adjunct law professor at George Washington University Law School. She also served as the Senior Legislative Strategist for the ACLU on national security and testified as an expert before committees in both houses of Congress. In 2018, she helped shape the national conversation on the Brett Kavanaugh nomination. Yeah, you get the idea. So, Lisa is my guest for most of the hour today. We'll talk about the hearings, the Supreme Court decisions, and why the US is the only nation on the planet that seems afraid to prosecute a former president, regardless of how corrupt he was...

May 24, 2022 Kay Radwanski Domestic Violence Court Specialist, Administrative Office of the Courts Video: https://youtu.be/3rlru45DnMg Materials: https://spaces.hightail.com/space/tOuRfKkxm6

Rudy Téllez was born in La Paz-Bolivia. In 1988, the family moved to the Philadelphia area. Rudy obtained his Bachelor's degree in Communications from West Chester University of PA, and his Masters of Education from Kutztown University of PA.He's a court certified, medical certified, and conference interpreter, and serves as an adjunct professor of interpretation for the Master's degree program at La Salle University. Interpreting, he says, has taken him to places like Guadalajara, Mexico, and Medellin, Colombia with paid jobs.In 2019, Rudy organized a small group of interpreters in Pennsylvania to address compensation for court certified interpreters, later, along with 2 other colleagues, they formed the Tri State Language Access Coalition which successfully pushed the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts to update compensation for the first time ever in 14 years. On January 1, 2021 the new compensation began.Tune in and find out more about Rudy Téllez on the podcast that brings you your stories about our profession. Brand the Interpreter!--------------------------------------------Connect with Mireya Pérez, Hostwww.brandtheinterpreter.comFacebookTwitterLinkedInInstagram-----------------------------------------------Connect with Rudy Instagram: RudytellezpTwitter: rudytellezLinkedIn: Rudy Tellez----------------------------------------------SPONSOR INFORMATIONThank you to Liberty Language Services for sponsoring this episode!To learn more about Liberty Language Services, please visit: https://www.libertylanguageservices.com/To learn more about the Academy of Interpretation, go to: https://www.academyofinterpretation.com/ For a limited time only, you can get $10% off all courses when you sign up using the Brand the Interpreter's discount code, AOI10BTI. Visit the Academy of Interpretation on social media:LinkedInFacebookInstagramTwitter

TBA Legislative Updates podcast is now streaming with TBA Public Policy & Government Affairs Director Berkley Schwarz and Adams and Reese attorneys and TBA lobbyists Brad Lampley and Ashley Harbin. This week, lawmakers and the Tennessee Supreme Court bid farewell to outgoing Administrative Office of the Courts Director Deborah Taylor Tate, Gov. Bill Lee made three new judicial appointments and an Brad gives an update on the professional privilege tax.

Maris H. Blechner, M.Ed., LCSW is a well-known and well-respected educator, consultant, and motivational speaker. An adoptive parent, she spent many years in the child welfare field as Executive Director of an adoption agency, and is a wide-ranging speaker and trainer. She is now doing independent work, and has a great deal to offer. Whether teaching at a social work school, training foster and adoptive parents, helping agency staff navigate difficult cases, providing advanced training, or doing a lunch or dinner speech at a wide variety of venues, Maris is helping caregivers of all types learn to take care of themselves. Maris is ready to work.Connect with herhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/maris-h-blechner-8975503/https://www.marisblechner.com/Here's a little about the agency she founded from their website:Since its inception as an accredited non-profit agency in 1987, Family Focus has added its own unique voice to the adoption community with its pioneering philosophies, training and adoption practices. Family Focus's board and staff, many of whom are adoptive parents, share a belief that adoption transforms the lives of children and the families that adopt them.Our Training and Meeting Centers are located in Castleton (near Albany) and Little Neck, Queens - also the location of our Administrative Office. Our mailing address is in Melville, Long Island. We license families from the Capital District through Metropolitan New York City and Long Island to be able to adopt from the foster care system, and we place children from all over the United States. Our agency is also approved in New Jersey and Connecticut.More at:https://www.familyfocusadoption.org/https://www.facebook.com/FamilyFocusAdoption/

Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith calls in to discuss the infrastructure bill, the status of the build back better plan and Greg Snowden, Meridian native and Director of the Administrative Office of Courts joins remotely to discuss the Threefoot hotel.

NMiF senior producer Matt Grubs talks about New Mexico's pretrial detention conundrum with the director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, Artie Pepin. The office recently asked UNM social researchers to evaluate the 2nd Judicial District Court's (Bernalillo County) effectiveness at keeping the right people free until trial, an innocence-before-guilt approach reinforced with a voter-approved 2016 change to the state constitution. While prosecutors and police say New Mexicans are safer with more people locked up as they await a decision on their innocence, Pepin says the study suggests otherwise. Source New Mexico launched it's website more than a month ago. An independent, nonprofit news organization, the organization says it's goal is to shine a light on governments, policies and public officials so readers get the information they need to make choices. We get more on the Source's mission and meet the editorial team (taken from a Facebook Live event). Host Gene Grant Correspondent Matt Grubs Guests: Artie Pepin, director, Administrative Office of the Courts Marisa DeMarco, Source NM Austin Fisher, Source NM Shaun Griswold, Source NM Pat Lohmann, Source NM Chris Fitzimmon, States Newsroom

This episode of All Things Judicial features Alternative Dispute Resolution, highlights the work of the Dispute Resolution Commission, and focuses on the Administrative Office of the Court's promotion of mediation and arbitration in North Carolina. The episode was released today in celebration of Conflict Resolution Day on October 21, and Dispute Resolution Week which is recognized by the American Bar Association as the third week in October. Guests include Judge Phyllis Gorham, Tara Kozlowski, and Maureen Robinson with an introduction given by Chief Justice Paul Newby. "Our state constitution guarantees the courts shall be open and justice is to be administered without favor, denial, or delay. Our alternative resolution groups allow us to make these constitutional promises a reality," Chief Justice Newby said on the podcast. "North Carolina has demonstrated a strong commitment to developing programs which promote dispute resolution in our courts."

Tuesday, September 21, 2021, Court Leader's Advantage Podcast Episode Threats from cyberattacks can be easily ignored by courts. There are many rationalizations: “Our court is too small to worry about cyberattacks” “We have a great firewall that keeps everything out” “Our employees change their passwords every three months just like clockwork” “Everyone has been told not to open suspicious email attachments” Often the perspective can be “We're good” You are good until the morning you fire up your desktop only to find a black screen with the words “pay $50,000 in bitcoin and we will send you the codes to unlock your case management system.” Cyber-experts continue to advise that it isn't a matter of “if,” it is a matter of “when.” In this episode we are talking to court professionals, several of whom have suffered through a cyberattack in their court. We'll be exploring questions including: · How did the court respond to the cyberattack? · What could management have done differently? · What could they have done to have prevented a cyberattack in the first place? · What advice does our panel of experts have for the rest of us? Our panel today includes: Kevin Bowling is the Court Administrator for the 20th Circuit Court in Ottawa County, Michigan Kevin is also co-chair of the National Center for State Courts' Joint Technology Committee and has helped develop three resource bulletins to assist court managers with handling cyberattacks. He is a Past President of the National Association for Court Management, Co-Chair of the DOJ Global Advisory Committee. Kevin received his B.A. in Political Science/Public Administration from Providence College, Providence, Rhode Island; a M.S. in Judicial Administration from the University of Denver College of Law; a J.D. from Thomas M.Cooley Law School in Lansing, Michigan, and is a Fellow of the Institute for Court Management. Julie Hidy is the Court Administrator for the Probate Court in Fayette County, Ohio A graduate of the Supreme Court of Ohio's Certified Court Management Program in 2014, Julia has been seasoned by events such as an extensive conversion of the case management system in 2014, Fayette County's extensive ransomware/malware attack of June, 2019, subsequent case management update in September, 2019, and the COVID-19 global pandemic. As the Fayette County Courthouse never closed during COVID-19, Julia managed a court staff that never worked from home and navigated court-in-session with restrictions and distanced hearings in person. Casey Kennedy is the Director for the Office of Court Information Services at the Office of State Court Administration in Austin, Texas. . Casey is currently the chair of the Court Information Technology Officer Consortium, a national organization of Court IT professionals. He holds a BA in Computer Science from The University of Texas at Austin. Jorge Basto is the Director of IT Programs for the Cherokee County Clerk of Courts in Canton, Georgia. Prior to joining the Clerk's Office, Mr. Basto served as Georgia's Chief Information Officer for 15 years with the Judicial Council's Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC). Jorge is a graduate of Georgia State University. Montrella Jackson is the Court Administrator for the Akron Municipal Court, in Akron, Ohio. She received a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Michigan College of Literature, Science and the Arts and subsequently earned a law degree from the University of Akron School of Law.

Ever feel stuck in your communication with your co-parent? Don't distress! Just listen to this episode with conflict expert Megan Hunter. She gives you strategies and techniques to use when your co-parent is hostile in text, email and social media posts.Guest Info: Megan Hunter is the CEO of the High Conflict Institute, which specializes in helping divorced and separated couples reduce conflict and improve their relationship. She is the co-author of The High-Conflict Co-Parenting Survival Guide among other books and has trained professionals and delivered keynotes to large groups on high conflict behaviors since 2008 in the U.S. and in 7 countries. Megan has strong leadership, policy and training experience during her eight years at the Arizona Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Courts as Family Law Specialist.Links:The High Conflict Institute WebsiteBook: BIFF for Co-Parents: Your Guide to Texts, Emails and Social Media PostsBook: High Conflict Co-Parenting Survival GuideConflict Playbook WebsiteNew Ways For FamiliesBook: Splitting: Protecting Yourself While Divorcing Someone with Borderline or Narcissistic Personality DisorderPodcast Info:Peaceful Co-Parenting Podcast is hosted by Bianca Balogh: mother, co-parent, entrepreneur and former news anchor/reporter. Send Bianca a feedback message, ask a question, suggest a podcast topic or guest. She wants to hear from you! bianca@peacefulparentapp.comDownload Peaceful Co-Parenting Messenger as a tool for better communication with your co-parent here: www.peacefulparentapp.com. Stay Peaceful! 

If you're dealing with a high conflict situation, you NEED this episode! In this episode, Megan Hunter, co-founder of the High Conflict Institute and Conflict Playbook, talks to us about why there's more to high-conflict personalities than meets the eye. And how you, as a stepmom, can deal with them. Megan, along with author and speaker, Bill Eddy, LCSW, Esq. developed the high-conflict personality theory. She foundedthe Institute after 13 years in policy, legislation, and judicial training with the Arizona Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Courts, and the Dawes County Attorney's Office in Nebraska. She is also the founder of Unhooked Books Publishing. Megan has trained professionals across a wide spectrum of professions across the U.S. and 7 countries. She holds an MBA and a B.S. in Business and Economics. She has served as President of the Arizona Chapter of the Association of Family & Conciliation Courts, and the Arizona Family Support Council, and the Nebraska Child Support Enforcement Association. She served 5 years on the Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners. She is the author and/or co-author of several books, including: Dating Radar, Hiring Radar, BIFF at Work, and The High Conflict Co-Parenting Survival Guide. She's also a mom of 3, mother-in-law of 2, and stepmom of 5.   Megan is speaking at The Stepmom Summit August 26-28 and you won't want to miss it. Get on the waitlist and grab your ticket HERE. Connect With Megan At: High Conflict Institute Unhooked Books Instagram: @highconflictinstitute

Get trial advocacy tips directly from the judges of the Juvenile Court in this podcast, excerpted from MCLE's 1/28/2021 program: Juvenile Court Judicial Forum 2021. The full program is available as an on demand webcast or an MP3 here. Get 24/7 instant access to hundreds of related eLectures like this one—and more—with a subscription to the MCLE OnlinePass. Learn more at www.mcle.org/onlinepass.Speakers: Hon. Jay D. Blitzman, Middlesex Juvenile Court (ret.)Hon. Arose W. Nielsen, Administrative Office of the Juvenile CourtHon. Susan V. Oker, Lynn Juvenile CourtHon. Gloria Y. Tan, Middlesex Juvenile CourtHon. James Torney, Barnstable Juvenile Court

Narcissistic, Borderline and Antisocial Personality Disorders are discussed in this episode with conflict expert Megan Hunter, CEO of the High Conflict Institute and Unhooked Media, a book publishing company focused on relationships and conflict resolution. Whether or not your co-parent has a clinically diagnosed personality disorder or just strong traits that are contributing to a high conflict relationship, this episode will give you tips on how to communicate and deal in a difficult situation.Guest Info: Megan is the co-author of The High-Conflict Co-Parenting Survival Guide among other books and has trained professionals and delivered keynotes to large groups on high conflict behaviors since 2008 in the U.S. and in 7 countries. She leads the High Conflict Institute's diverse team of professional staff across three continents. She has strong leadership, policy and training experience during her eight years at the Arizona Supreme Court, Administrative Office of the Courts as Family Law Specialist.Links:www.highconflictinstitute.comwww.highconflictinstitute.com/bookstores/biff-for-coparents www.highconflictinstitute.com/bookstores/high-conflict-coparenting-survival-guidewww.conflictplaybook.comwww.highconflictinstitute.com/new-ways-for-familieswww.unhookedmedia.com/stock/dont-alienate-the-kidsPodcast Info: Peaceful Co-Parenting Podcast is hosted by Bianca Balogh: mother, co-parent, entrepreneur and former news anchor/reporter. Send Bianca a feedback message, ask a question, suggest a podcast topic or guest. She wants to hear from you! bianca@peacefulparentapp.comDownload Peaceful Co-Parenting Messenger as a tool for better communication with your co-parent here: www.peacefulparentapp.com. Stay Peaceful! 

Tuesday, April 20, 2021 Court Leader’s Advantage Podcast Episode It seems that at some point in every class the facilitator utters those words, “communication is key.” We all know however, that communication must be effective to make a difference. So, what is the key to making communication effective? In this episode, we are going to explore communication. How to make it count. How to avoid wasting time for you and your employees. Specifically, we will look at: · How effective has court communication been during the pandemic? · Are there different approaches to effectively communicating with employees, with other justice stakeholders, and with the general public? · How can you obtain employee feedback in the age of Zoom meetings? · What can we learn from our panel of court administrators? About Our Presenters Our Co-Host Alyce Roberts is recently retired as the Special Projects Coordinator for the Alaska Court System. As a member of the court’s senior staff, she was the AOC’s primary liaison with the clerks of court. In this capacity, she was responsible for developing the annual statewide clerks of court conference program, facilitating the sessions and serving as a presenter. Alyce served on the National Association for Court Management’s (NACM) Board of Directors, chaired NACM’s Communication Committee, and she is a Fellow of the Institute for Court Management (2010). Our Panelists Liz Rambo is the Trial Court Administrator (TCA) for Lane County Circuit Court. As the TCA for one of Oregon’s largest courts, Liz is responsible for all non-judicial court functions including budget, human resources, technology, facilities, and business efficiency. Liz Liz graduated with high scholarship from Oregon State University with a BA in history and has an MBA from Portland State University. Rick Pierce is the Judicial Programs Administrator of the Judicial District Operations and Programs Department, has served in the field of court administration for the past twenty-nine years. Prior to his appointment at the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Rick was the district court administrator for Cumberland County. He graduated from Washington and Lee University and received his Masters in Public Administration from Shippensburg University in 1995. Tracy "T.J." BeMent is the District Court Administrator for the 10th Judicial Administrative District of Georgia. The 10th JAD covers the general jurisdiction superior courts in six circuits in 21 counties. He was previously the Court Administrator for the Athens-Clarke County Courts in Athens, Georgia, where he worked with all six levels of trial courts in the county. J.T. received his undergraduate and graduate degrees from the George Washington University in Washington, DC, and completed his ICM Fellowship in spring 2015. As a Court Administrator, Zenell Brown has garnered respect for her ethical leadership and innovation. She has built her approach on three pillars: communication, leadership responsibility and accountability, and diversity and inclusion. Zenell received her Juris Doctor from Wayne State University Law School; she received her Public Service Administration Graduate Certificate from Central Michigan University, her Court Administration Certificate from Michigan State University, and her Certified Diversity Professional from the National Diversity Council-DiversityFirst.

Roughly 150 children found at the U.S.-Mexico border are being housed in the northwestern part of Pennsylvania. The Wolf administration has granted $10.8 million towards STEM education programs in schools. The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts has advised the public to be wary of a phone scam. And bidding on an extremely rare baseball card has hit $110,000. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Kentucky's courts have prepared forms for landlords to help them prosecute evictions efficiently. They call landlords and their attorneys when they don't show up to court. Yet, when the Kentucky Equal Justice Center and other organizations ask for the Courts to provide necessary, important information to Kentuckians facing eviction, the Courts—top to bottom—say they can't because they have to be "impartial." I just totally reject that. Links: * Update on our federal lawsuit (https://www.kyequaljustice.org/post/jefferson-county-eviction-due-process-lawsuit) challenging the constitutionality of the Jefferson District Court's eviction processes (contains links to briefing filed to date) * KEJC's letter to the Kentucky Supreme Court (https://5f301f23-ec36-41bd-8ffd-0c207e64d461.usrfiles.com/ugd/5f301f_ca2100a02dbf48f8b8e55cb4e0304a57.pdf) and Administrative Office of the Courts begging them to provide more information to people facing eviction * AOC's Response (https://5f301f23-ec36-41bd-8ffd-0c207e64d461.usrfiles.com/ugd/5f301f_28d79c6c974a4dfa81e3ff80b3d0a44c.pdf) saying they couldn't provide any additional info because that would be "impartial" * Shinkle v. Turner (https://casetext.com/case/shinkle-v-turner#p420): Kentucky Supreme Court case recognizing that the laws governing evictions in Kentucky are “at least a hundred years old and arguably [are] now ill-suited to the reality of modem landlord-tenant relations” and that these laws are "difficult to apply in the modem court system." Shinkle v. Turner, 496 S.W.3d 418, 420 (Ky. 2016).

The post A partisan, troubling purge for the Administrative Office of the Courts appeared first on NC Policy Watch.

The post A partisan, troubling purge for the Administrative Office of the Courts appeared first on NC Policy Watch.

In this podcast from AHLA’s Women’s Leadership Council, Christy Crider, Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz PC, speaks to James Duff, Director, Administrative Office of the United States Courts. Duff reflects upon his memories of the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an early and prolific pioneer for gender equality.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has a plan to use $750 million dollars of federal coronavirus relief funds to purchase motels and other properties that will be converted into housing for those experiencing homelessness. But, there’s a catch. If the properties are not purchased by the end of the year, the money goes back to the federal government. To find out what this means for Fresno and Bakersfield, Valley Edition Host Kathleen Schock spoke with Anna Laven, executive director of the Bakersfield Kern Regional Homeless Collaborative, Sonia De La Rosa, principal administrative analyst for the Administrative Office of Fresno County, and Matt Levin, housing reporter for CalMatters

Chris Newbold:                Hello and welcome to episode six of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being Podcast Series, “The Path to Well-Being in Law.” I'm your cohost Chris Newbold of ALPS Malpractice Insurance. And our goal here is simple, to introduce you to cool people doing awesome work in the space of lawyer well-being, and in the process build and nurture a national network of well-being advocates intent on creating a culture shift within the legal profession.                                         I'm joined today by my friend and fellow co-chair of the National Task Force Bree Buchanan. Bree, welcome.Bree Buchanan:              Absolutely. Welcome everybody. Glad you're here joining us today.Chris Newbold:                Good. And today we're going to start a move down into the states, and I think our first five or six speakers have really been driven more by some of the national outlook and some of the research that's been done into the lawyer well-being space. And as we know, movements generally are driven by those at the grassroots level who live it day-to-day, who are trying new ideas. In other words, serving as laboratories of democracy or laboratories of new ideas. And in any movement, you need a few leaders, a few examples to jump out in front. And that's exactly what we've seen out of our friends in the Commonwealth of Virginia.                                           Across the country we've seen a swelling of task forces, work groups, round tables coming out of state bars and state supreme courts, and there are some lessons to be learned from the Virginia experience and their roadmap. And there are no two better guests than our duo today, Margaret Ogden who's the wellness coordinator for the Virginia Supreme Court and Tim Carroll who's executive director of the Virginia Judges and Lawyers' Assistance Program.                                           Bree, would you be so kind as to introduce our guests?Bree Buchanan:              Absolutely. Great. Just so excited. Margaret and Tim, thank you for joining us today. What's going on in Virginia really is a shining light for the rest of the states across the country. So we're delighted to have you as the first group of state national task force people on our show.                                           So Margaret Ogden, as Chris said, she's the wellness coordinator in the Office of the Executive Secretary, the Supreme Court of Virginia, which is one of the new positions that's being created by the Lawyer Well-Being Movement. And we have a few other states that are doing that as well. A lawyer by training, Margaret began her career in the Roanoke City Commonwealth Attorney's Office prosecuting criminal cases and then went on to defend criminal cases throughout the Roanoke and New River Valleys.                                           Prior to joining her job where she currently is now, I think this is so interesting, Margaret, you served as the staff attorney for the Pennsylvania Interbranch Commission for Gender, Racial, and Ethnic Fairness. What an interesting position.                                           And then Tim has probably one of the most unusual backgrounds I have seen for a Lawyers' Assistance Program director, and it's been brilliant. I met Tim five, six years ago, and immediately identified him as somebody who has a special kind of knowledge that he brings to the Lawyer Assistance Program that has really enabled them to just take off with the program they have in Virginia.                                           So he's the executive director of the JLAP there. He grew up in Virginia, and then joined the US Air Force after high school. And after 28 years of service and assignments around the world, he retired at Anchorage, Alaska where he became the chief executive officer of a fisheries related business. Fish and lawyers, I don't know. I'm sure you've made a connection there at some point.                                           In 2014, he returned to Virginia and assumed his current role in 2015. Mr. Carroll has an undergraduate degree in history from the University of Alaska and a masters degree in business administration from Virginia Commonwealth University.                                           So Margaret and Tim, welcome. We are so glad you're here. Chris and I always start off our program asking our guests a question about what brought you into this space? Because we really have seen the people that do so much of the work have a passion for it. And so we're really curious about what drives that passion.                                           So Margaret, what brought you to the Well-Being Movement? What experience in your life is a driver behind your passion for this work?Margaret Ogden:            That is a wonderful question, and thank you so much, Bree, for having us just as a preliminary matter. And thank you for that introduction. As you touched on, my last position was a policy position working for the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. And I got very interested in how court policy shapes not just the practice of law but access to justice, a court user experience, and really the lived promise of equal justice under law and how court policy, which might seem on its face kind of neutral and bland, can have a huge impact on that.                                           So the Pennsylvania Interbranch Commission is kind of cool because they appoint from all three branches of state government to look at racial, ethnic, and other marginalized people who may have bias against them in our court system and how policy can be used to combat that. It's a great organization, and it works out of a Supreme Court report from Pennsylvania from 2005.                                           And so when here, the Virginia Supreme Court had put out a report on wellness in our legal profession, I just think it's a fascinating institutional response to seeing how the regulation of our profession, how court and bar policy impacts those people who are actively involved in it. And the wellness of lawyers is so important.                                           I don't mean to only talk about policy. I have what I call a recreational interest in mental health and well-being. I was first diagnosed with anxiety when I was in law school, and working with cognitive behavioral therapy, medication, diet, exercise, creative outlets, I've managed to kind of handle that to varying quality within my law school and early professional career. So I love to talk about this with my friends. This is something that I've been very open with and I think young people... I still consider myself young people. I'm still a young lawyer by the Virginia State Bar's definition of that.                                           So I think that we're seeing a culture shift that is just happening with age in terms of talking about mental health and substance use. I'm also the granddaughter of two alcoholics, so I'm very lucky that I have... I don't mean to say I'm lucky that I have this that runs in my family because certainly these are major issues that face our profession. But I'm lucky that I was raised with an awareness of them. So that when I started to experience these issues within my own life, I could seek expert help because they're really not things that you can deal with on your own, especially if you're in a profession of public trust, like the law. And so that's why selfishly I'm very interested in this.                                           And being a Virginia lawyer, seeing our courts write about this with the level of product that came out of these court reports, the level of thought, research, really data-driven best practices that have been generated, for me it's the perfect intersection of policy wonk and anxiety brain.Bree Buchanan:              That's great. That's great, Margaret. Thank you for sharing that about your life. We really appreciate adding to the story.                                           So Tim, what brings you to the Well-Being Movement and to the LAP, the Lawyers' Assistance Program world? What drives your passion to this work? Because I know you have a passion for it.Tim Carroll:                      Well, first off, Bree, I want to thank you and Chris for inviting us to join in this. And I can't tell you what a joy it is to work with Margaret as we carry this mission forward. We really do have a great team here in Virginia, and I'm very proud of the team and the great work that's happening here.                                           As you said, my path to a lawyer assistance program was a little bit unorthodox if you will. When I came back to Virginia, I was basically retired and I wasn't looking for a job anywhere. And this opportunity crossed my path, and I saw the middle name. So Virginia, the program used to be called Lawyers Helping Lawyers. And somebody put this in front of me, and I thought, "Lawyers Helping Lawyers, what do I know about that? What do I know about the law? What do I know about lawyers?" And as we talked, I got really focused on the middle name of that organization, and that was helping. And I'm at a place in my life where I want to help others, and this is certainly a place to do that.                                           What really drove me towards the wellness, basically harkens back to my Air Force career. When I first joined the Air Force and I won't date myself anymore to say it was in the post-Vietnam era. The Air Force was really in a state of flux from post-Vietnam. And what I saw around me were a lot of people who were drinking, a lot of people who were smoking. I'd go to the chow hall and see the really, quite honestly, not the most healthy food choices that were available. And a good number of my friends who were still involved in drug use while in active duty. I saw a lot of my friends who were falling victim to those vices, and really I lost a few friends as a result of those things.                                           Over the course of my career, the Air Force really transformed itself and really moved more into a well-being and a wellness posture with smoking cessation, deglamorizing alcohol, really taking a hard stand on the drug use, and really transforming the chow halls to basically have a wider variety of healthy choices than unhealthy choices. We saw fitness centers having a newfound focus on the equipment and the programs that were being offered. And I saw a institution, the United States Air Force go from that post-Vietnam era to a wellness era, and that really effected the readiness of the Force, which we needed, as you know for the conflicts that we had in the '90s and beyond. So I saw a massive worldwide institution like the United States Air Force that could make that change in culture and transforming itself.                                           So when I joined the Lawyers Helping Lawyers organization, I saw us as a larger reactive organization. We would kind of play Bop-It. Someone would come to us for help, and we would help them. But we weren't really doing a tremendous amount of outreach and really trying to change why people were coming to us because we were so small. When I joined, I started part-time, had a full-time counselor. And with a staff of 1.5, all's we could do was be reactive. And I saw the proactive side was one that we'd have to embrace the well-being. And I was thrilled when I heard that the ABA was undertaking the National Task Force on Well-Being because I really saw that as an opportunity to transform the culture of the legal profession.                                           And to say that I'm passionate about it would be an understatement. I've lost friends to suicide. I've lost friends to poor eating habits. I've lost friends who were drinking and ultimately cost them their lives. For a profession as critical as the law, something as critical as what we have right here, it wasn't a large leap for me to get passionate about helping our lawyers, our judges, our law students, the entire legal profession in any way that I can.                                           So I'm honored to be here. I'm just a little piece of the puzzle, but that's really how I got here.Chris Newbold:                Yeah, great, Tim. But an important piece of the puzzle. Tim and I have had conversations. My father was career Air Force. So again, I think there are some examples out there for shifts in cultures that need to be studied and evaluated as we think about our path forward in the legal profession.                                           But let's turn our attention to Virginia, and I am a firm believer that leadership really starts at the top. And we've been really I think blessed in Virginia with folks who have seen the need for this issue to come to the forefront. Bree and I, as original kind of members of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being, it was your Chief Justice Don Lemons who really brought the judicial powerhouse I think to the discussion. And I know the reason that we have Margaret in the positions that we do is because some folks I think in Virginia saw a need and then started to develop a plan, bring together the right parties.                                           So Margaret, maybe if you could kind of walk us through how did the Virginia Supreme Court ultimately find its way into launching the Well-Being Committee, and how did that ultimately came some revenue opportunities that created the infrastructure necessary to flow down to the things of the world and other programs in the state? So I'd just love for our listeners to hear about the journey of how Virginia got to where it is today.Margaret Ogdan:            Yeah, of course. And I'm kind of late to the party in this journey because I started in my position on October 25th of 2019, and I will keep that date in my mind forever because five months later our whole profession changed. But we need to back track it up because I am the culmination of many people's efforts, far smarter minds than me, and far larger levers of power needed to be pulled before we even get there. So what you have, as you mentioned, our Chief Justice Donald Lemons sitting on the National Task Force seeing these numbers coming out of these national studies. And I can't thank you all enough for highlighting not just the statistical data but this call to action that goes down to the states. We have some very preliminary data. We want more data, and we also recognize that this might look different in different states. This might look different in different practice areas. Let us empower states to go out and investigate how their state is regulating the profession and what can be done to shift the culture within these laboratories of democracy.                                           So that call was heated in Virginia, and Justice William Mims headed up the Virginia State Supreme Court Committee for Lawyer Well-Being. And that committee drew not just from the judiciary, although all levels are represented there. In fact, a court of appeals, which is our intermediate court of limited jurisdiction. We have the circuit courts, which are our higher level trial courts, and then the general district courts, which traffic, misdemeanors, preliminary hearings. We're recognizing that all of those court actors are facing different occupational risk and seeing different pieces of really lawyer unwellness.                                           So all of those folks we have the law schools. There are eight in Virginia, and all eight of the deans participated in the first law school summit that came out of this report. So it was a ground swell effort amongst academia. And then you also have the regulators, the state bar, ethics council, the disciplinary board coming to bring their expertise to the table and talk about the way the rules of professional conduct and our ethical obligations are playing out with lawyer empowerment.                                           And then finally, you have the private sector attorneys. This incredible organization of folks from bar organization, from employers, representing small firms, large firms, that are all kind of doing their own wellness thing before this even started. They're doing this at a volunteer level. They're taking this on on their own because they've seen these problems. The statistics didn't really come as a shock to people.                                           I think if anything, just anecdotally, we're waiting for the other shoe to drop for people to get more comfortable talking about these problems, and the numbers will probably go up as we destigmatize more of these conversations. But that means that more people will get help, and Virginia did a great job of bringing all these stakeholders together to put out a report that focuses on real tangible recommendations. Things that can be done that signals to the profession that this is a priority and that it's not a burden that you need to add to your already busy life to take care of yourself. That this is a foundation upon which your professionalism and your ethics are based. So much to the point that it's now been added as a comment to Rule 1.1 in our Rules of Professional Conduct that governs competency, that lawyers need to have the physical, emotional, and mental competency to practice law.                                           To see all of these different stakeholders really grasp onto this, and say, "Yes, we think this is important. Yes, we can make changes to our rules and our policies. We're going to hold up the mirror of self reflection. We don't like what we see, and rather than go to despair, we will be called to action." Because here's the other thing, it then required going in front of the General Assembly to get a state bar's due assessment to every active member of the Virginia State Bar. It's $30 a year. It started to be assessed in July 2019, and just because of the way our state government is structured, that required an act of the General Assembly.                                           To me, I love all branches of state government equally. But if someone says, "Margaret, you have to go to the General Assembly and get us money," that's the worst hill to try to climb. But if anything, that shows you how much belief there was in Lawyers Helping Lawyers because that is where the bulk of that funding was dedicated to go. It wasn't just, "Oh, we're going to assess a fund, and who knows what will happen." No. There was a really roadmap in this report that said, "Lawyers Helping Lawyers has been doing this forward since 1984. We believe in them because they're using evidence-based best practices. They have volunteers throughout the Commonwealth who have gone through these issues that have turned their careers around, and all they need is the money to expand." If they build it, they will come. To the point where you convince the General Assembly to do that, I think really shows a strong momentum.                                           And I'm also biased in favor of this because that also funded my position. So if we have Lawyers Helping Lawyers existing as a separate nonprofit, it's not part of the court system. And that's important because confidentiality is prime with these issues. We want people to be comfortable calling up Tim and they know they don't get me. But also it's important that the court bring the weight of its institutional gravitas to say, "Hey, go seek help. Let's destigmatize help seeking behavior. Seek it proactively."                                           So I'm excited to be living in the court and talking about institutional policies, talking education outreach. We've been putting out a bunch of CLEs. Our virtual judicial conferences now have a wellness component. I say virtual. They were virtual this year. Hopefully that will not continue into the future. But more of this kind of generalized health and wellness from an institutional level is what this ground swell of specific recommendations worked up to build.Tim Carroll:                      Margaret, remind me when the report... I'm pretty certain that you were the first state to produce a comprehensive report on well-being, right?Margaret Ogdan:            One of the early ones. I don't want to step on any toes. I know Utah and Vermont put out early ones too.Bree Buchanan:              You guys were first.Margaret Ogden:            Yeah.Bree Buchanan:              Take it. Take it. It's yours.Tim Carroll:                      Remind me of the date there because a lot of our listeners will be tuning in from other state task forces, and I want them to kind of understand. What is so unique I think about what Virginia has done is there's a lot of reports that come out of study and saying, "We need to do this. We need to do that." Really what everyone in Virginia should be so proud of is the fact that you took words and you translated it into action. And oftentimes it doesn't happen with task forces and so forth. Sometimes it's you write, author a report, and you maybe check off some low hanging fruit. But you guys have really systemically changed the playing field of this particular issue as it relates to Virginia.                                           So the report comes out in 2018. You got to think that the most substantive impacts of the reports were... And you already mentioned it. Rule change to the rules of professional conduct, that includes well-being, and a comment to the duty of competence, right?Margaret Ogden:            Mm-hmm (affirmative).Tim Carroll:                      You basically set in play, and we know generally, and Bree and Tim can speak to this firsthand, that lawyer assistance programs around the country are generally underfunded. ALPS is a malpractice carrier we give a good chunk of money to, what was formally Virginia Lawyers Helping Lawyers. But across the country, there's just not enough fuel in the tank for Lawyers' Assistance Programs to have enough impact and really take on not just the safety net but also the big picture realm of well-being. So explain for our audience then, report comes out in 2018. Justice Mims, who is really an unsung hero in all of this, but even Justice Mims, the Virginia State Bar and its leadership, and Lynn Heath produced an occupational risk report that's really critical as well. Kind of talk us through when did the money discussion start? When does it pass the General Assembly? And what ultimately does it do to transform the revenue side that enables us now to do so much more?Margaret Ogden:            I think you're exactly right. I mentioned Justice Mims briefly as the head of this committee, but I want to sing about this hero because I really do think that not only is he just an excellent human being, he's someone with an incredibly nuanced understanding of our Virginia state government. He is one of the few people in the history of our Commonwealth who's held highest positions at the top of each of our branches of government. He served in our state house. He was the Attorney General. So this man understands what it takes to create a culture shift within state government. And I don't know when exactly it goes to the General Assembly. I am still back in Pennsylvania in 2018. But in enough time to get the first bar dues funding assessed in July of 2019 on our annual state bar assessment. And part of this is also very good timing with the Client Protection Fund. That had been doing very well, and so those dues were lowered, which I think makes it more palatable to slightly increase and establish this fund entirely.                                           And then finally, there's this other piece that I want to touch on too is the Virginia Law Foundation and Virginia CLEs contributions because this all works much better when well-being is recognized as a key part of lawyer education, and in Virginia, we have mandatory continuing legal education. And that CLE board was very quick to change their... Well, amend an opinion, Opinion 19, to make it more clear that well-being programming should be approved for CLE credit. And the Virginia Law Foundation, Virginia CLE is one of our largest state providers. They signed on to say, "Hey, we're going to provide a well-being library that we're going to replenish every year online, and we're going to offer two of these free to every lawyer, judge, and law school student in the Commonwealth every year."                                           To me, that shows not just the funding coming from attorneys and going through the General Assembly, but also stakeholders saying, "We're going to be sure that attorneys see the value for their funds hopefully so that it is an easier sell to everyone who is in the bar to take this on collectively." Look, you're getting something out of this even if you yourself are not going to seek the services of Lawyers Helping Lawyers.Bree Buchanan:              So let's bring Tim in on this, and Tim, I was listening to Margaret's earlier answer about what all the work and support for the Lawyers' Assistance Program there in Virginia and with my ears of a former LAP director, and it must be so wonderful to work as an ally with somebody who so gets what an LAP is about.                                           So Tim, what I wanted to ask you is talk about this process of what happened in Virginia from the Lawyers' Assistance Program perspective. How did this come about and how did you all fit into this process?Tim Carroll:                      Yeah. So after the ABA Hazelden Betty Ford, after that survey came out, that was really the call to action. I know the ABA responded to that with the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being. But we didn't sit on our haunches here in Virginia. We said, "What can we do about that?" And we took the numbers out of that survey and overlaid it on Virginia. With our population, we could assume that if the ABA Hazelden study was accurate, that we have upwards of 12,000 attorneys in Virginia who are operating from some level of impairment. And when you can use that as a talking point, you really get people's attention.                                           I'll just insert real quick, thanks to ALPS back in 2014, the College of William and Mary Law School did a survey of Virginia attorneys. And while it wasn't peer reviewed and it wasn't published, I've seen it. And I can tell you that the numbers track very closely in Virginia to what the national report said.Bree Buchanan:              Wow.Tim Carroll:                      So I can speak with confidence so that we have upwards of 12,000 who for one reason or another are operating from some level of impairment. And we looked at what we were doing, what was the LAP doing? And we had on average about 100 new clients a year with our staff of 1.5 and one counselor. That doesn't even begin to scratch the surface. So of course we went with our hat in hand and asked for more money so we could get some more staff. Dollars are tight. You can't expect everybody to just open up their coffers. So we built a business plan based on best practices that we saw around the country with other LAPs, based on what we saw the needs of Virginia being. We didn't put a dollar figure on it until after we had built the plan, and then we said, "What would something like this cost?" Because we wanted to be a best practice lawyer assistance program.                                           We took that to the state bar. We took that to the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association. We took it to the Law Foundation. We pretty much paraded that all over anybody who would listen, and everybody said, "Yeah, that looks really good. That's really nice, but there's not a pathway for funding for that." So when Chief Justice Lemons came back from the National Task Force and he challenged or tasked Justice Mims to head up the committee in Virginia, that committee was... I hope you'll be able to provide a link to the report. It's a profession at risk. It'll outline who all was on that, but take my word for it, it was the key stakeholders in the legal profession around the Commonwealth of Virginia. Some real movers and shakers.                                           The very first briefing that that committee got, after Chief Justice Lemons tasked them, was our business plan. That was the first thing they heard. And gave us the opportunity to pitch the need, to pitch the studies that had been done, and what we proposed to do about it. So that committee really took off with the challenge from the chief to study the National Task Force report and look at ways to implement that in Virginia. And they were armed with our business plan sitting on the side.                                           So it was very fortuitous timing for us, but if you also look at the composition of that committee, there are several former and active board members from the Lawyers' Assistance Program who served on that committee as well. So they knew what they were talking about. They knew the issues at hand and were very obviously, very well-versed in the legal profession of Virginia to be able to make the recommendations that they did.                                           So to say that we were on the sidelines would be wrong. To say that we were in there with our sleeves rolled up would be correct, and that was only because Chief Justice Lemons and Justice Mims invited us to play an active role in that committee. I didn't serve on the committee, but I was an advisor to each one of the subgroups of that committee. They could reach out. We could give them our two cents. We could help guide them through their discussions. And we weren't doing that with a parochial view towards the Lawyers' Assistance Program. We did it with a parochial view towards what's best for the legal profession in Virginia.Chris Newbold:                Yeah. Well, this is a good probably break point here because I think it kind of sets the tone for revenue source in hand, action plan in hand, and kind of where things come with Margaret coming onboard. Let's take a quick break, and we'll come back and hear the rest of the Virginia story.Advertisement:               Your law firm is worth protecting and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and buy coverage, all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.alpsnet.com.Chris Newbold:                All right. Welcome back. And we are talking about Virginia and some of the trailblazing work that Virginia has done on lawyer well-being. Margaret, let's shift the conversation back to you. So the assessments made on Virginia lawyers and that generally, roughly creates about $1 million in revenue annually. I'd be curious as the first wellness coordinator for the Commonwealth, what do you work on? How do you think about your day? And ultimately, what's the game plan? What do you hope to achieve as you think about the allocation of those resources relative to making a difference?Margaret Ogden:            Right. It's smart to think about it in terms of allocation of funds. We have the Lawyers' Assistance Program, formerly Lawyers Helping Lawyers, getting the bulk of that funding allocation every year to expand their staffing. And this doesn't just allow them to provide direct services. It also allows them to really beef up these education and outreach efforts, and that's where my position comes in. Because we recognize that even though impairment is a very large problem in our profession, statistically the majority of lawyers will not themselves become impaired over the course of their career. But we can all do a little better. Even if we are not at the level of relying on substances to get through our day to the detriment of our clients, because of the unique occupational stressors of our profession, we are at greater risk for things like burnout, and that means we need to kind of take on more protective habits on our daily basis to ensure that we're meeting these higher standards.                                           And I think that's where my position comes in is looking at education and outreach on more general health and well-being. I love the Six Areas of Well-Being from the National Task Force report. That's a really great way for me to talk about it to attorneys because I think past workplace well-being efforts kind of have all focused on step challenges or weight loss, really physical fitness, and that can be isolating for a lot of people, particularly attorneys and particularly with an aging population. So I want to be sure that we're talking about wellness holistically, and we're talking about it on an institutional level.                                           I think of Tim and Jim and Barbara and Angeline and Janet, the staff over at the Virginian Judges Lawyers' Assistance Program, five people now, as really having the individuals covered. And I think of my role as the institutions and the stakeholders. Making sure that the associate deans of all of the law schools are talking to each other every month about trends in well-being among their students and what programs are working. This is my favorite monthly conference call, and I just sent out the agenda before this. So I'm very excited about talking. We talk every month, me and the associate deans of the law schools about what they're seeing.                                           In terms of coordinating judicial response, so my position very smartly I think was housed in the Office of the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court. In Pennsylvania, our version of that was called the Administrative Office of the Courts. Think of it as the administrative arm. So HR lives there, court IT. And thinking that wellness is so pervasive that it needs to be part of our administrative function I think is very forward looking.Bree Buchanan:              Absolutely brilliant.Margaret Ogdan:            Yeah. Specifically I'm within our educational services department, and that's the group that puts on our yearly judicial conferences for all of our judges and then a bunch of other groups that the court has some education responsibilities for, like clerks, magistrates, other court personnel. And this is really exciting because having wellness on the judicial conference agenda blows my mind. When we were going to initially be in-person this year, I had an entire Wednesday afternoon of wellness activities. Justice Mims was going to be leading a jogging group. This was really fun to plan activities for the judges because they don't have necessarily the same strict CLE requirements that lawyers do, but showing them that wellness can be something they can incorporate into their conferences, that they take it on almost like a perk. And that it's led by their colleagues, not only does that help us just in terms of budgeting, we're not bringing in really expensive outside experts. But I think things are more exciting when you see your buddies doing them.                                           So we were able to transition that virtually, have a booklet made, and still do a couple Zoom sessions. And it's having the funding and the staffing in place before the pandemic I think was super key because it's much easier to adapt when you already have a person who's working in that space.                                           So law students, judges, and then of course lawyers, they make up the bulk of my outreach efforts, and the court is never going to be entirely taking over continuing education for lawyers. Thank goodness. No, I would never be able to do that on my own. But working with the folks who are doing that. So the Conference of Local and Specialty Bar Associations, presenting to them, and enabling and empowering our local and affiliation bars to incorporate wellness education into their programs. Working with CLE providers to... Especially when we do virtual programming, take into account some well-being. Not back-to-back-to-back in front of a screen, acknowledge Zoom fatigue, build in spaces for people to walk around and get moving.                                           So every day is a little different, which is fun because I am serving a few different audiences, and we are talking about organizational and institutional response to support healthy habits.Bree Buchanan:              Margaret, I love how you're able to come in because you've got that position there, and you're thinking about this obviously every day, and are able to put so much energy in it. And the conference, I looked at the agenda, I read the booklet. It was really impressive and that you have... This is so key, you have this very visible support from the top of the legal profession in the Commonwealth, and that's so key. You guys are so blessed to have that.                                           Tim, I wanted to ask you, what can you share with others, anybody who's working on this, and especially the Lawyer's Assistance Programs, if they want to start some sort of statewide, multi-stakeholder committee, commission, task force, what advice would you give to them?Tim Carroll:                      Yeah, that's a great question. I've actually talked with some of the other directors who have called and asked, "How did you do that?" And I really had to think about, but I didn't have to think very far because it was such a upfront activity that we were involved in. I guess the key to the LAPs is really to accept that for people to trust you, they have to know you. They're not just going to pick up a phone and call 1(800)LAP. They could call 1(800)ADDICTION CENTER. They could call wherever they want, but they have to know us if they're going to trust us. They have to trust that we are competent in what we do. They have to trust that we will hold their confidentiality. And they have to trust that we can help. So that's really the cornerstone of the LAP.                                           We built our business plan from that cornerstone. How do we get out, and how do we get known enough to be trusted? The first step is to have a plan. No one is going to throw money at the LAP if the LAP doesn't demonstrate what they're going to do with it. So the very first step is to build a plan, build a business plan, build a plan. The second step is to engage the stakeholders at every level. At the top, the middle, the grassroots, wherever it is, engage all of the stakeholders so that they buy into that plan. And then of course, have a champion. Our champion was Chief Justice Lemons. I'm going to say our co-champion was Justice Mims. Having those two at the very top of the profession in Virginia looking out for the LAP and looking for how could they make the biggest difference to the entire legal profession and seeing that we were ready to do it, that was really the key to our success.                                           So just basically to summarize it. If you want to do what Virginia do, build a plan, engage the stakeholders, and... Excuse me. Build a plan, engage the stakeholders, and make sure you have a champion somewhere, preferably at the top.Chris Newbold:                Can you spend just a minute on your program has really been transformed through the additional funding. So I want to give our listeners some insight into when you have a... I don't even know how much more revenue you had from before, but obviously you had a plan. Where are you at in your plan, and how has this fuel from Margaret's office and the State's Supreme Court done to transform your program?Tim Carroll:                      Yeah. If we're going to hire people, we have to have money. We have volunteers. Let me get that out there first. The foundation of our program is volunteers. We have not been successful since 1984 up to 2019 without our volunteers. You can't do it with a staff of one; you can't do it with a staff of 1.5. So the way we've transformed what we do includes the volunteers. That piece is constant. It has never changed. What we've done though, volunteers have full-time jobs most often. As any nonprofit has found, getting the time from a volunteer. They're willing to do it, but sometimes they just don't have the time.                                           So what we did was established a... If you're familiar with the geography of Virginia, there's Northern Virginia, which is sometimes referred to as another country. There's Southwest Virginia that really is another country. And if you're going to work in Southwest Virginia, you've got to understand the culture, you've got to understand the geography, you've got to understand what it means to be a lawyer or a judge in Southwest Virginia. When we say Southwest, and if you want to pull out a map and look, that's not Roanoke. Get that clear. It's farther out.                                           So we hired a licensed professional counselor with the moneys that we were given. That I said when I came onboard, the very first dollar that I would spend would be on somebody in Southwest Virginia. So we got Angeline out...Chris Newbold:                Oh, looks like we might have lost Tim. Margaret, you aware of kind of the three areas around Virginia [crosstalk 00:46:14]-Margaret Ogden:            Oh yeah. Definitely. And this is actually kind of a little fun story on my first week of work, I went to far Southwest Virginia. And I say far Southwest because I started my practice in Roanoke, and I made the mistake of saying Roanoke was Southwest Virginia. And the folks out in Grundy, at Appalachian School of Law quickly corrected me because that's another three hours past Roanoke. Virginia is enormous, and Angeline is very cool. She's out there in Rural Retreat. She's from that area. So she's been working very closely with Appalachian, the law school there and also just with serving the population of attorneys there. Because of the nature of the geography, the population is really under resourced area when it comes to mental health and substance use. So I think just having a presence there of someone who is from there and understands that area has been immensely helpful for cultivating that relationship, not just with the law school but with the bar and with the courts there as well.Chris Newbold:                So sounds like the strategy that Tim's organization is employing is more licensed professionals closer to the ground with broader geographic focus on-Margaret Ogden:            Exactly. And having folks who are there who are building those connections with these stakeholders who are already in place. So we have our eight law schools around the Commonwealth. They're great and not just for their education but for their alumni networks and for their educational programming that they send out with their law students.                                           The other piece is bar associations locally and then building relationships with treatment providers locally too. Making sure that mental health professionals are comfortable treating lawyers so that there's this really strong referral network. A lot of people have started calling JLAP not to be in a longterm, monitored, formal relationship. I get to see these numbers in the aggregate every month as part of our reporting. I never see any individual clients of JLAP. This is the great thing about them remaining a separate, independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit. But they are very transparent in their aggregate numbers, so we can see that people call them all the time to just ask, "Hey, I need a therapist in my area who will work with me as an attorney," or, "I need a marriage counselor," or, "Do you have the number for rehab place for my kid?" It doesn't need to always been an intense relationship. JLAP is there for whatever struggle a legal professional is having where they are, and they're developing those local relationships so that they can give people resources in those locations.Chris Newbold:                Excellent. Again, Virginia is such a cool story, right? And it looks like Tim is joining us back for hopefully the final question here. Tim, we successfully passed the baton onto Margaret. We're still rolling. She did great. Let me just ask you one final question, which is you guys are now a year, year and a half, two years into your plan and starting to probably really see results. And I'm sure there have been stumbling blocks and some things that have really surprised you. Just would be curious on lessons learned either the hard way or lessons that you think that are worthwhile for our listeners to hear in terms of things that have been really successful.Tim Carroll:                      Well, I'll piggyback. Don't let your power fail and take your internet with it. Sorry, my apologize for that. I think the lessons that we've learned are to get all of the stakeholders engaged. Really Margaret has been an amazing, amazing addition to our team. From day one, Margaret came down and talked to us about what she viewed her role was, about how we could work together. We do have that clear line of separation in terms of the client load, but we do have an incredible collaboration in terms of outreach, in terms of getting the word out, in terms of being present and support around the Commonwealth. I guess I didn't have a vote in Margaret being in that position, but whoever did hit the gold mine. So if there is a lesson to be learned, make sure that you hire the right person to be your wellness coordinator at the very top.                                           Make sure that you've got constant communication with your stakeholders. The various bar associations, the top level bar associations, the local bar associations continually engage with them to make sure that you're carrying the same message and that you're supporting the needs of their constituency is. I think that those are the most critical things to the success that we have.                                           Of course, our amazing team that I hope Margaret was able to talk about. We just have an amazing group of people. It's a joy to work with and top to bottom, all of the bar associations, the court, state bar, this is just a perfect world here in Virginia.Chris Newbold:                Feels a little bit like a symphony with Margaret as the conductor and when every piece comes together, you can really make some pretty sweet music.Tim Carroll:                      Absolutely, absolutely.Chris Newbold:                Yeah. Well, again, thank you both so much for joining us on the podcast. I'm sure there are listeners who might be interested in contacting you. With your permission, I think we'd like to include your contact information when we post the podcast so the people can contact you directly and hear firsthand the stories. And we certainly will be keeping our eyes on your successes as we continue to move forward because again, we need states like yours to be leaders up front and to be able to kind of demonstrate the type of change that can occur. As somebody who watches Virginia lawyers quite closely, me on the malpractice side, I know that there's a lot of pride in the legal profession in Virginia. And I think that that probably also speaks to why this has become an issue that folks have been about to rally around. There's just a high quality of lawyering that goes on in Virginia, and I think the focus on well-being is a natural compliment.Margaret Ogden:            Oh yeah. Lawyers from Virginia started our country. I'm always proud to be a Virginia lawyer, and I'm also always proud to talk to lawyers from other states and Commonwealths about what we're doing. And also, we'll talk about failures too. The important part of this conversation is honesty and vulnerability. So please share our information, and we will Zoom into courtrooms around our fair country.Bree Buchanan:              Thank you, Margaret.Tim Carroll:                      I would say just unlike my last two jobs, we do not have trade secrets. We are willing to share anything that we have with anyone at anytime. So yes, spread our contact information out. We're at the other end of the phone or the other end of the email. We can help anybody. We're here to be a partner.Chris Newbold:                Excellent. Well, again, thank you both for joining us today. We'll be back with the podcast in a couple weeks. Until then, be well. 

  What do the events surrounding the death of George Floyd mean for human dignity, and how should pro-life Christians respond? In this episode, Human Coalition President Brian Fisher examines the issues of human dignity and the rule of law during a time of racial unrest in America. Helpful resources: NBC News (initial story on the death of George Floyd): USA Today (initial story on the death of George Floyd): CBS News (charges against the police officers): Human Dignity and Bioethics: Essays Commissioned by the President’s Council on Bioethics (Daniel Sulmasy article): Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (Rule of Law definition): “The Briefing” Friday, May 29, 2020 (Albert Mohler quotes on the rule of law): Questions or comments about the show? We love hearing from you! The post appeared first on .

  Court is in session! In part two of a series on the influence of the courts on issues of life and human dignity, Human Coalition President Brian Fisher examines the influence of the highest court in the land – the Supreme Court of the United States. Helpful resources: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (number of cases heard by the Supreme Court): Supreme Court of the United States (Supreme Court process and procedures): The American Bar Association (the different court opinions): Axios (ideological divide of the Court): USA Today (Ilya Shapiro Opinion Column): History.com (Roe v. Wade history): Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School (right to privacy history; Griswold v. Connecticut decision): Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School (Roe v. Wade decision): CBS News (Louisiana abortion law; Rep. Jackson quote): Guttmacher Institute (admitting privileges): Mic (Texas abortion law): CBS News (Louisiana abortion law; Guttmacher Institute study): Guttmacher Institute (study on Louisiana abortion law): NPR (Louisiana abortion law; admitting privileges): Associated Press (April criminal juries court case): USA Today (April criminal juries court case and what it means for the Louisiana abortion law): Ramos v. Louisiana Supreme Court Decision (Kavanaugh concurring opinion): Questions or comments about the show? We love hearing from you! The post appeared first on .

  The most talked about court in the nation is the United States Supreme Court. But what about the lower courts? While less in the spotlight, the lower courts have more influence than you think. In this episode, Brian Fisher discusses the importance of the lower courts on issues of life. Helpful resources: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (basic information about federal courts, judges and process):  Ethics and Public Policy Center (Edward Whelan interview):    Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (number of cases heard by the Supreme Court):    The Washington Post (State abortion bans):    KTAL NBC 6 (Arkansas abortion ban; district judge quote):    WALB News (Tennessee abortion ban; appellate court decision quote):    The Tennessean (Tennessee abortion ban; Judge Bernard Friedman quote):    The Economist (number of federal judges President Trump has nominated):   Questions or comments about the show? We love hearing from you! The post appeared first on .

Over 10 million Americans misused opioids in 2018, which includes over 800,000 heroin users. In 2016, there were more than 64,000 overdose deaths in the United States; in 2017 overdose deaths jumped to over 70,000. This is a number that continues to grow in at least 23 states. Opioid addiction is a crisis that defies age and sex differences; it defies county and state lines; up to now it has defied all attempts to curb this plague. No one questions that opioid addiction is a national crisis and it is not slacking off. Are the nation’s courts ready to take the lead in fighting this epidemic? What needs to be done and who should do it? Judge O. Duane Sloan with the Circuit Court in the Fourth Judicial District of Tennessee and Director Deborah Taylor Tate, head of the Administrative Office of the Courts for the Supreme Court of Tennessee and Co-Chair of the National Judicial Opioid Task Force, will discuss the recent Task Force Report and the efforts by the Nation’s Courts to take the lead in solving this countrywide crisis. Leave a comment or question about the episode at clapodcast@nacmnet.org. About the Speakers Judge O. Duane Sloan is a judge with the Circuit Court in the Fourth Judicial District of Tennessee. In 2019 the Chief Justice of the United States John G. Roberts awarded Judge Slone the National Center for State Courts’ William H. Rehnquist Award for Judicial Excellence, one of the highest judicial honors in the country. He has been recognized for his groundbreaking work helping people with opioid use disorder. Combatting the opioid epidemic is not just a professional commitment for Judge Slone. It’s personal. In 2011, Judge Slone and his wife, Gretchen, adopted an infant son who was born suffering from withdrawals as a result of his birth mother’s opioid use. Judge Sloan is also the 2018 recipient of the National Center for State Courts, “Distinguished Service” Award; the 2017 Tennessee Association of Recovery Court Professionals, “Judges Making a Difference” Award; and the 2016 Tennessee Public Health Association, “Visionary” Award, given for work in reducing incidences of births with Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome, including innovations in rural Tennessee to provide healthy housing and access to prenatal medical and behavioral health care. Deborah Taylor Tate is the Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts for the Supreme Court of Tennessee, the Conference of State Court Administrators and the Co-Chair of the National Judicial Opioid Task Force for state courts across the nation. She is a licensed attorney and Supreme Court Rule 31 mediator, who, in addition to her presently held office, also serves as Distinguished Senior Scholar at the Free State Foundation and Adjunct Lecturer at Vanderbilt University School of Nursing. She was twice-nominated to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) by President George W. Bush and unanimously confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 2005. She served as Commissioner of the FCC until 2009, serving as chair of two Federal Joint Boards overseeing over $7B in advanced telecommunications services. At the time of her presidential appointment, Ms. Tate was serving as the chairman and director of the Tennessee Public Service Commission. Her previous state positions also include executive director of the Health Facilities Commission and as senior staff -assistant General Counsel for then-Governor, Senator Lamar Alexander and a Senior policy advisor to Governor Don Sundquist for mental/behavioral health. . Ms. Tate received both her undergraduate degree and Juris Doctorate (J.D.) from the University of Tennessee and attended Vanderbilt Law School.

Afghanistan is known to most Americans as the site of America’s longest war.  Since 2001, the United States has sent hundreds of thousands of its sons and daughters to fight extremists and hunt-down the perpetrators of 9/11.  But Afghanistan is more than the war. Ambassador Adela Raz has a unique perspective on her country’s rich history and insights about its future. Ambassador Ras is the Permanent Representative and Ambassador to the United Nations.  She began her career with the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) in 2002 before arriving in the United States in 2004 to pursue higher education. In 2013, Ambassador Raz was appointed as the first female Deputy Spokesperson and Director of Communications for President Karzai in 2013 just after working with an international development organization in the United States.  She then became the Chief of Staff at the President’s Administrative Office in November 2014, and was appointed as Deputy Minister for Economic Cooperation at Ministry of Foreign Affairs in March 2016.

Lutherans Outdoors in South Dakota is a ministry of the churches in the South Dakota Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and partners with the Synod regularly, even having the Administrative Office housed in the same building. This past June, the Synod elected a new Bishop, Constanze Hagmaier. We are so excited for her new call as the Bishop because of her strong history with the camps of Lutherans Outdoors in her congregations and as a family camper. Now that she has been in this role for a few months, we thought this is the perfect time to sit down with her to chat about all things camp. Get a glimpse into why she would encourage you to go to camp, and what she will be talking about next summer as one of the Resource Leaders for Family Camp at Outlaw Ranch. Support the show (http://losd.org/donate)

In this episode, LSNJ attorney Anisa Rahim provides an overview of the laws governing language access in New Jersey, beginning with the 1974 federal Lau vs. Nichols case, in which the Supreme Court decided that failure to provide language assistance is a form of national origin discrimination under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This Act was strengthened in 2000 when President Clinton signed an Executive Order requiring federal agencies to give guidance on the required response of state agencies to comply with this mandate. The guidance issued by the Department of Justice provided a model for federal agencies and a detailed analysis of the ways in which interpretation and translation mush be offered, in order to ensure meaningful access to government services and benefits. New Jersey courts have increasingly recognized the importance of language services in state court decisions to comply with due process and civil rights protections. New Jersey’s Administrative Office of the Courts issued a comprehensive Language Access Plan in 2017. The plan outlines best practices for providing language assistance to both limited English proficiency (LEP) individuals and those who are deaf or hard of hearing. Anisa is joined by Al Moreno, an approved court interpreter of the New Jersey Administrative office of the courts and Director of Language Services at LSNJ. In his remarks, Al emphasizes the importance of proper qualifications and training for language services professionals, offering several anecdotes to illustrate the potentially dire consequences of inaccurate interpretation or translation. LSNJ publishes legal rights materials in a variety of languages and promotes them through a variety of platforms, including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and our website, www.LSNJLAW.org. This podcast is available in video format with English and Spanish subtitles (more languages to come) on LSNJLAW and on our YouTube channel, www.youtube.com/LegalServicesNJ. Music Provided By: Kevin MacLeod - Backed Vibes Clean - http://freemusicarchive.org/music/KevinMacLeod/ Nheap - 02 - 5 March - http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Nheap/ Split Phase - 40 - CatchingGlitter http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Split_Phase/ Special Guest: Al Moreno.

Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) has already brought us general business tools that courts can use to assist in automating work, analyzing documents, and conducting legal analysis. As a start, courts will need to put their information into an electronic format that can be used by A.I. tools. They will also need to re-engineer their business practices. Small courts will have to be assertive in making their needs known. But, exactly how will A.I. tools help courts and what will we, as citizens, give up in privacy in order to maximize A.I.’s potential? Alan Carlson along with co-host Rick Pierce discuss how A.I. will be used in the courts and how soon it will be here. About the Presenter Alan Carlson retired at the end of 2016 after working 40 years in state trial courts. He was the CEO (court administrator, clerk of court, and jury commissioner) of the Orange County (CA) Superior Court, the CEO in San Francisco Superior Court, the Executive Officer of the Monterey Superior Court, and the Assistant Executive officer of the Alameda County Superior Court. Mr. Carlson also was president of JMI, Director of Court Services at the CA AOC, and a Staff Attorney at NCSC. Mr. Carlson received a Distinguished Service Award from the California Judicial Council in 2016, the NACM Award of Merit in 2012, and the ABA Robert B. Yegge Award in 2010. He was inducted as a member of the NCSC’s Warren Burger Society in 2012. He received a law degree from Hastings College of Law and a BS in engineering from University of California at Berkeley. About the Co-Host Rick Pierce, Judicial Programs Administrator, has served in the field of court administration for the past thirty years. Prior to his appointment at the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Pierce was the district court administrator for the 9th Judicial District of Pennsylvania, Cumberland County. As judicial programs administrator, he is responsible for implementation of programs and education in court administration at the general and limited jurisdiction court levels. Pierce was elected to the National Association for Court Management Board of Directors in July of 2017 and currently serves as a director and vice chair of the Governance Committee of NACM. Pierce served as the President of the Mid-Atlantic Association for Court Management from 2005-2006.He also served as President of the Pennsylvania Association of Court Management in 2000-2001. A graduate of Washington and Lee University, Pierce received his Master’s in Public Administration from Shippensburg University in 1995.

John Botero, Program Manager with the Administrative Office of the Courts in Georgia

Something a little different on the podcast today: the launch of a special series—the Culper Partners Rule of Law Series. David Kris and Nates Jones, the founders of the Culper Partners consulting firm, have recorded a limited-edition podcast series exploring various aspects of the rule of law, particularly as it relates to U.S. national security and criminal law enforcement. Over the course of several episodes, which we will be dropping into the Lawfare Podcast feed over the coming weeks and months, David and Nate examine topics including legislative and judicial oversight of the executive branch, the rule of law in counterterrorism, the relationship between law, economic security, and national security, foreign relations and the rule of law, and law and politics. Each episode features an interview with a current or former senior government official, or a leader in the private sector. In this first episode, Nate and David talk with Judge John Bates, Senior Judge on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Judge Bates has had a long and distinguished career in government and private practice, including work at two private law firms, as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in DC, and as Deputy Independent Counsel in the Whitewater investigation. Most recently, from 2013 to 2015, he was Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Judge Bates became a federal judge in 2001, and from 2006 to 2013 he served on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, where he was the court’s Presiding Judge beginning in 2009.

Interview with Osvaldo Aviles, Interpreter program Administrator at the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts (AOPC). Links to the summit advertised: Finding the Parallels SummitNovember 9th - Free Welcome ReceptionNovemeber 10th-11th- Skill Building WorkshopInterpreters 4 Agreements Webinar

Appellate advocates are concerned that the tradition of oral argument is falling out of favor in federal appeals courts. According to the statistics from the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, arguments were heard in just 20 percent of cases decided on the merits during the most recent 12-month cycle. That’s down from about 40 percent of cases 20 years ago. In this week's episode, San Francisco bureau chief Ross Todd examines the drop off and talks with James Martin of Reed Smith and M.C. Sungaila of Haynes and Boone about what will be lost if oral argument fades away

Thomas Myers, a management analyst for the problem-solving courts team, explains what the Swift and Sure court program is in its simplest definition — felony probation. In part one, of the Swift and Sure mini-series Thomas provides an overview of the State Court Administrative Office involvement in the program. Stay tuned for next week's episode with Clinton County to learn more about the Swift and Sure court program. SCAO is the administrative agency of the Michigan Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has administrative oversight of Michigan's courts and exercises that oversight through the SCAO.

In today's Federal Newscast, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts establishes a Federal Judiciary Workplace Conduct Working Group to look at what safeguards are in place to protect federal court workers from misconduct and harassment.

Kevin Wayne Johnson is a John Maxwell Team certified speaker, teacher, coach and mentor as of October 2015. John C. Maxwell is a New York Times best-selling author, speaker, and pastor who has written many books, primarily focusing on leadership. Kevin Johnson will discuss "golden nuggets" of leadership; speciifcally how to mentor your staff for growth and development. He will also discuss relationship versus "tasking." Johnson, who is also an author, is a professional in government as well as private industry. For 30 years, he has performed successfully in numerous middle and senior-level positions in the areas of workforce development, training, organizational change, acquisition/procurement, customer service, client relationships, and program management, to include the Departments of Defense and Treasury, the Government of the District of Columbia, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Department of the Army, Defense Logistics Agency, and in the private sector at Vivendi Universal and Reuters America. He has testified before the United States House of Representatives Committee on Small Business and has prepared testimony that was presented before the District of Columbia Committee on Government Operations. Johnson is a graduate of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Graduate School’s Executive Potential Program. During this program, he assisted the Office of Federal Procurement Policy with several procurement reform initiatives that were tied to the National Performance Review under the Clinton Administration. Johnson maintains an active involvement in community service and retains membership in several professional and civic organizations. Growing leaders and leaving a legacy of leadership. That's what this show will explore.

The 2008 Spring Membership Drive at KRFC 88.9 FM presented a great opportunity for the launch of the first Week of Truth campaign, The National The Shell Game Buy In Week of Truth, April 16th – 22nd, 2008.  As I have pledged, Visibility 9-11 will be purchasing 10 copies of The Shell Game, by Steve Alten during the Week of Truth.  As I considered what I would do with these 10 books, it occurred to me that KRFC was right in the middle of their bi-annual fund raising drive and that it might be possible to get on as co-host of Words of Freedom for a special episode of the show.  My plan was to donate the 10 books to the station, offer them as a premium gift to contributors, and have Steve Alten on as a guest to kick off the Week of Truth buy in for The Shell Game.  Long story short, David Peterson at KRFC gladly found me a 30 minute spot during the fund drive.  This interview is a result of that collaboration.I urge all my listeners and supporters to go to www.weekoftruth.org and get involved in The National The Shell Game Buy In Week of Truth. This is a way everyone, for a small expense, can get involved and make a difference.  Special thanks to David Peterson, George Flynn, and everyone at KRFC 88.9 FM in Fort Collins Colorado.  Please take a moment to let them know how much you appreciate their support of 9-11 Truth. Administrative Office 970.221.5075 General Manager (Interim) Chris Kennison, gm@krfcfm.org Development Coordinator Carole Lundgren, carole@krfcfm.org Volunteer Coordinator Brian Hughes, brianh@krfcfm.org Music Director and Live@Lunch Coordinator Dennis Bigelow, dennis@krfcfm.org News Director David Peterson, davidp@krfcfm.org