Podcasts about Bar association

NEW: Send us Your Comments!This Week's Topics:Memorial Day Message 2:30Gas Prices Lowest in 20 Years 7:00House Passes “Big Beautiful Bill” 8:30VIDEO: What is in the Bill 10:30Pro-Trump Group Buys Ads for GOP 14:00Biden's $93 Billion Scandal 16:00Trump Golden Dome Defense Plan 19:00Manhattan Project 2 Nuculear Plan  21:30Trump Threatens New Tariffs on EU 25:00Biden Coverup Explodes 26:30Big Questions Need to Be Asked 28:00VIDEO: Megyn Kelly Destroys Tapper 32:00Trump Ends Harvard Foreign Students 36:00DOJ to End DEI with False Claims Act 38:30Must Watch Video: Patel & Bongino 43:30Dem House Rep Charged by DOJ 45:30DOJ Investigates Chicago Mayor 48:00DOJ Looking at Bar Associations 50:00Trump Violates Impoundment Act 53:00VIDEO: Russ Vought on Budget &More 56:00The End of Climate Lawfare 58:30Trump Gets Gas Pipeline in NY 1:03:00Two Innocent Jews Assasinated in DC 1:16:30Trump & Putin Advance Peace Talks 1:20:30China has “Off-Swtich” to America 1:23:00Migrants Now Coming Through North 1:29:30SAVE will Stop Illegals from Voting 1:30:30Only 8 Republican Mayors! Why? 1:33:00MAHA Releases US Health Report 1:38:00Report: Biden Admin Hid Vax Risks 1:39:00Pfizer Delayed Covid Study Release 1:42:00NIH Staff Can't Handle the Truth 1:45:00Kamala's Paid Celebrity Endorsements 1:49:00Black Fatigue Goes Viral 1:53:00Pentagon Accepts Quatary Jet 1:55:00Trump Signs “Take it Down” Act 1:59:00Justice Dept. Ends Consent Decrees 2:01:30Harmeet Dhillon W/Tucker Video 2:04:30Babbit Family Settles for $5 Mill 2:07:30Tom's Closing Message 2:09:30Support the showView our Podcast and our other videos and news stories at:www.WethePeopleConvention.orgSend Comments and Suggestions to:info@WethePeopleConvention.org

     Slam the Gavel podcast welcomes Elizabeth McNeese to the podcast. Elizabeth is an Ohio mother of three who has been advocating for her youngest son since birth as he is a special needs child who will soon be 18.     Advocating isn't new for Elizabeth, who  is speaking out for reform and justice in the court systems. Elizabeth has co-authored legislation and is working with Ohio lawmakers to try and make things better for Ohio's families.      Living close to Columbus, Elizabeth went to the State House and started meeting with lawmakers. Starting five years ago with her first co-authored bill which was well received, as there were 61 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives. It was very popular, however it caught the judiciary and the Bar Association by surprise. They retaliated by creating their own bill and Elizabeth has been battling them to this day.      Liz also got two bills passed that were "equal parenting" bills (200 pages). The judges and the Bar successfully blocked both of them. At taxpayer expense, the Judge's then wrote their own bill (SB174), 400 pages long. Three years ago the Ohio Judicial Conference sent Elizabeth a copy of this bill that was introduced in the senate by two family law attorneys on behalf of the judges. The main judge, Judge Denise McColley, mother of Senate President Robert Mc Colley, who successfully blocked Elizabeth's bill and pitched his mother's bill at the same time. He got two family law attorneys to pick it up and it has gathered momentum. The judges support it. It was a counter bill to what Elizabeth was trying to do with her bill. Essentially SB174 wants to take away Parental Rights.      The public can help Ohio citizens, share information and email legislators and State House.To Reach Elizabeth McNeese: ermcneese@gmail.com and her YouTube channel We The Parents MovieSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)Maryann Petri: dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.comhttps://www.tiktok.com/@maryannpetriFacebook:  https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/guitarpeace/Pinterest: Slam The Gavel Podcast/@guitarpeaceLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maryann-petri-62a46b1ab/  YouTube:  https://www.youtube.com/@slamthegavelpodcasthostmar5536  Twitter https://x.com/PetriMaryannEzlegalsuit.com   https://ko-fi.com/maryannpetri*DISCLAIMER* The use of this information is at the viewer/user's own risk. Not financial, medical nor legal advice as the content on this podcast does not constitute legal, financial, medical or any other professional advice. Viewer/user's should consult with the relevant professionals. Reproduction, distribution, performing, publicly displaying and making a derivative of the work is explicitly prohibited without permission from content creator. Podcast is protected by owner. The content creator maintains the exclusive right and any unauthorized copyright infringement is subject to legal prosecution. Support the showSupportshow(https://www.buymeacoffee.com/maryannpetri)http://www.dismantlingfamilycourtcorruption.com/

This episode examines I Just Didn't Do It, a 2007 Japanese film written and directed by Masayuki Suo. In the film, 26-year-old Teppei Kaneko (played by Ryo Kase) is traveling to a job interview on a packed Tokyo commuter train when a 15-year-old school girl, who was standing in front of him on the train and whom Kaneko hardly noticed, wrongly accuses him of groping (chikan). Kaneko is  arrested. He is advised by a lawyer to plead guilty and pay a small fine, after which he will be freed. But Kaneko maintains his innocence and decides to fight the case, even though he is told that nearly everyone who takes their case to trial in Japan is convicted. The film then documents Kaneko's nightmare odyssey through the Japanese criminal justice system, where he is detained for months and ultimately convicted despite significant problems with the prosecution's case. I Just Didn't Do It provides important insights into the Japanese criminal justice system and a critique of how it operates, including its treatment of the presumption of innocence.Timestamps: 0:00   Introduction2:52     Background on the Japanese criminal justice system5:19      The crime of groping (chikan) in Japan8:57      The pressure to plead guilty17:12     The interrogation of suspects18:46    Criminal defense lawyers in Japan22:31    Why defendants tend to testify at trial23:52    The prosecution's disclosure obligations28:30    How bail operates in Japan31:04    The rotation of judges in Japan34:06    The incentives in favor of conviction38:44    Finding the defendant guilty despite reasonable doubt43:20    The lay judge (saiban) system in Japan46:54    A critique of Japan's treatment of the presumption of innocenceFurther reading:Aronson, Bruce E. & Johnson, David T., “Comparative Reflections on the Carlos Ghosn Case and Japanese Criminal Justice,” 18 Asia-Pacific Journal 24(2) (Dec. 15, 2020)Doi, Kanae, “Inquiry Needed into Japan's Flawed Criminal Justice System,” Human Rights Watch (Nov. 4, 2024)Japan Federation of Bar Associations, “The Japanese Judicial System”Keiichi, Muraoka & Toshikuni, Murai, “Citizens on the Bench: Assessing Japan's Lay Judge System,” Nippon.com (June 26, 2019) Meehan, Susan, “I Just Didn't Do It,” The Japan SocietyLaw on Film is created and produced by Jonathan Hafetz. Jonathan is a professor at Seton Hall Law School. He has written many books and articles about the law. He has litigated important cases to protect civil liberties and human rights while working at the ACLU and other organizations. Jonathan is a huge film buff and has been watching, studying, and talking about movies for as long as he can remember. For more information about Jonathan, here's a link to his bio: https://law.shu.edu/profiles/hafetzjo.htmlYou can contact him at jonathanhafetz@gmail.comYou can follow him on X (Twitter) @jonathanhafetz You can follow the podcast on X (Twitter) @LawOnFilmYou can follow the podcast on Instagram @lawonfilmpodcast

Leticia James faces being disbarred in New York, just as she sues the Trump Administration — again. The Trump Administration is livid over what many deem a failed FAA after Newark New Jersey warns people not to fly into the airport following a 90 second outage. And, the Dems are propping up Kamala for having attended the Met Gala in NYC. Is that really the best look for a party that wants to bill itself as ‘working class’? Those stories and more in today’s Trish Regan Show. LIVE! SUBSCRIBE TO MY CHANNEL: https://Youtube.com/TrishReganChannelBecome a TEAM MEMBER to get special access and perks: ▶️ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBlMo25WDUKJNQ7G8sAk4Zw/join

Podcast discute o décimo quinto episódio da quarta temporada de DS9 O post Balde do Odo #89 Bar Association apareceu primeiro em Trek Brasilis.

We spoke with Attorney Tim Shearin about membership in the CT Bar Association.

Arbitrators and counsel can use artificial intelligence to improve service quality and lessen work burden, but they also must deal with the ethical and professional implications. In this episode, Rebeca Mosquera, a Reed Smith associate and president of ArbitralWomen, interviews Benjamin Malek, a partner at T.H.E. Chambers and former chair of the Silicon Valley Arbitration and Mediation Center AI Task Force. They reveal insights and experiences on the current and future applications of AI in arbitration, the potential risks of bias and transparency, and the best practices and guidelines for the responsible integration of AI into dispute resolution. The duo discusses how AI is reshaping arbitration and what it means for arbitrators, counsel and parties. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Hello, and welcome to Tech Law Talks, a podcast brought to you by Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Group. In each episode of this podcast, we will discuss cutting-edge issues on technology, data, and the law. We will provide practical observations on a wide variety of technology and data topics to give you quick and actionable tips to address the issues you are dealing with every day.  Rebeca: Welcome to Tech Law Talks and our series on AI. My name is Rebeca Mosquera. I am an attorney with Reed Smith in New York focusing on international arbitration. Today we focus on AI in arbitration. How artificial intelligence is reshaping dispute resolution and the legal profession. Joining me is Benjamin Malek, a partner at THE Chambers and chair of the Silicon Valley Arbitration and Mediation Center AI Task Force. Ben has extensive experience in commercial and investor state arbitration and is at the forefront of AI governance in arbitration. He has worked at leading institutions and law firms, advising on the responsible integration of AI into dispute resolution. He's also founder and CEO of LexArb, an AI-driven case management software. Ben, welcome to Tech Law Talks.  Benjamin: Thank you, Rebeca, for having me.  Rebeca: Well, let's dive in into our questions today. So artificial intelligence is often misunderstood, or put it in other words, there is a lot of misconceptions surrounding AI. How would you define AI in arbitration? And why is it important to look beyond just generative AI?  Benjamin: Yes, thank you so much for having me. AI in arbitration has existed for many years now, But it hasn't been until the rise of generative AI that big question marks have started to arise. And that is mainly because generative AI creates or generates AI output, whereas up until now, it was a relatively mild output. I'll give you one example. Looking for an email in your inbox, that requires a certain amount of AI. Your spellcheck in Word has AI, and it has been used for many years without raising any eyebrows. It hasn't been until ChatGPT has really given an AI tool to the masses that question started arising. What can it do? Will attorneys still be held accountable? Will AI start drafting for them? What will happen? And it's that fear that started generating all this talk about AI. Now, to your question on looking beyond generative AI, I think that is a very important point. In my function as the chair of the SAMC AI Task Force, while we were drafting the guidelines on the use of AI, one of the proposals was to call it use of generative AI in arbitration. And I'm very happy that we stood firm and said no, because there's many forms of AI that will arise over the years. Now we're talking about predictive AI, but there are many AI forms such as predictive AI, NLP, automations, and more. And we use it not only in generating text per se, but we're using it in legal research, in case prediction to a certain extent. Whoever has used LexisNexis, they're using a new tool now where AI is leveraged to predict certain outcomes, document automation, procedural management, and more. So understanding AI as a whole is crucial for responsible adoption.  Rebeca: That's interesting. So you're saying, obviously, that AI and arbitration is more than just chat GPT, right? I think that the reason why people think that and relies on maybe, as we'll see in some of the questions I have for you, that people may rely on chat GPT because it sounds normal. It sounds like another person texting you, providing you with a lot of information. And sometimes we just, you know, people, I can understand or I can see why people might believe that that's the correct outcome. And you've given examples of how AI is already being used and that people might not realize it. So all of that is very interesting. Now, tell me, as chair of the SVAMC AI Task Force, you've led significant initiatives in AI governance, right? What motivated the creation of the SVAMC AI guidelines? And what are their key objectives? And before you dive into that, though, I want to take a moment to congratulate you and the rest of the task force on being nominated once again for the GAR Awards, which will be unveiled during Paris Arbitration Week in April of this year. That's an incredible achievement. And I really hope you'll take pride in the impact of your work and the well-deserved recognition it continues to receive. So good luck to you and the rest of the team.  Benjamin: Thank you, Rebeca. Thank you so much. It really means a lot, and it also reinforces the importance of our work, seeing that we're nominated not only once last year for the GAR Award, but second year in a row. I will be blunt, I haven't kept track of many nominations, but I think it may be one of the first years where one initiative gets nominated twice, one year after the other. So that in itself for us is worth priding ourselves with. And it may potentially even be more than an award itself. It really, it's a testament to the work we have provided. So what led to the creation of the SVAMC AI guidelines? It's a very straightforward and to a certain extent, a little boring answer as of now, because we've heard it so many times. But the crux was Mata versus Avianca. I'm not going to dive into the case. I think most of us have heard it. Who hasn't? There's many sources to find out about it. The idea being that in a court case, an attorney used Chad GPT, used the outcome without verifying it, and it caused a lot of backlash, not only from opposing party, but also being chastised by the judge. Now when I saw that case, and I saw the outcome, and I saw that there were several tangential cases throughout the U.S. And worldwide, I realized that it was only a question of time until something like this could potentially happen in arbitration. So I got on a call with my dear friend Gary Benton at the SVAMC, and I told him that I really think that this is the moment for the Silicon Valley Arbitration Mediation Center, an institution that is heavily invested in tech to shine. So I took it upon myself to say, give me 12 months and I'll come up with guidelines. So up until now at the SVAMC, there are a lot of think tank-like groups discussing many interesting subjects. But the SVAMC scope, especially AI related, was to have something that produces something tangible. So the guidelines to me were intuitive. It was, I will be honest, I don't think I was the only one. I might have just been the first mover, but there we were. We created the idea. It was vetted by the board. And we came up first with the task force, then with the guidelines. And there's a lot more to come. And I'll leave it there.  Rebeca: Well, that's very interesting. And I just wanted to mention or just kind of draw from, you mentioned the Mata case. And you explained a bit about what happened in that case. And I think that was, what, 2023? Is that right? 2022, 2023, right? And so, but just recently we had another one, right? In the federal courts of Wyoming. And I think about two days ago, the order came out from the judge and the attorneys involved were fined about $15,000 because of hallucinations on the case law that they cited to the court. So, you know I see that happening anyway. And this is a major law firm that we're talking about here in the U.S. So it's interesting how we still don't learn, I guess. That would be my take on that.  Benjamin: I mean, I will say this. Learning is a relative term because learning, you need to also fail. You need to make mistakes to learn. I guess the crux and the difference is that up until now, at any law firm or anyone working in law would never entrust a first-year associate, a summer associate, a paralegal to draft arguments or to draft certain parts of a pleading by themselves without supervision. However, now, given that AI sounds sophisticated, because it has unlimited access to words and dictionaries, people assume that it is right. And that is where the problem starts. So I am obviously, personally, I am no one to judge a case, no one to say what to do. And in my capacity of the chair of the SVAMC AI task force, we also take a backseat saying these are soft law guidelines. However, submitting documents with information that has not been verified has, in my opinion, very little to do with AI. It has something to do with ethical duty and candor. And that is something that, in my opinion, if a court wants to fine attorneys, they're more welcome to do so. But that is something that should definitely be referred to the Bar Association to take measures. But again, these are my two cents as a citizen.  Rebeca: No, very good. Very good. So, you know, drawing from that point as well, and because of the cautionary tales we hear about surrounding these cases and many others that we've heard, many see AI as a double-edged sword, right? On the one hand, offering efficiency gains while raising concerns about bias and procedural fairness. What do you see as the biggest risk and benefits of AI in arbitration?  Benjamin: So it's an interesting question. To a certain extent, we tried to address many of the risks in the AI guidelines. Whoever hasn't looked at the guidelines yet, I highly suggest you take a look at them they're available on svamc.org I'm sure that they're widely available on other databases Jus Mundi has it as well. I invite everyone to take a look at it. There are several challenges. We don't believe that those challenges would justify not using it. To name a few, we have bias. We have lack of transparency. We also have the issue of over-reliance, which is the one we were talking about just a minute ago, where it seems so sophisticated that we as human beings, having worked in the field, cannot conceive how such an eloquent answer is anything but true. So there's a black box problem and so many others, but quite frankly, there are so many benefits that come with it. AI is an unlimited knowledge tool that we can use. As of now, AI is what we know it is. It has hallucinations. It does have some bias. There is this black box problem. Where does it come from? Why? What's the source? But quite frankly, if we are able to triage the issues and to really look at what are the advantages and what is it we want to get out of it, and I'll give you a brief example. Let's say you're drafting an RFA. If you know the case, you know the parties, and you know every aspect of the case, AI can draft everything head to toe. You will always be able to tell what is from the case and what's not from the case. If we over-rely on AI and we allow it to draft without verifying all the facts, without making sure we know the transcript inside and out, without knowing the facts of the case, then we will always run into certain issues. Another issue we run into a lot with predictive AI is relying on data that exists. So compared to generative AI, predictive AI is taking data that already exists and predicting another outcome. So there's a lesser likelihood of hallucinations. The issue with that is, of course, bias. Just a brief example, you're the president of Arbitral Women, so you will definitely understand. It has only been in the last 30 years that women had more of a presence in arbitration, specifically sitting as an arbitrator. So if we rely on data that goes beyond those 30, 40, 50 years, there's going to be a lot of male decisions having been taken. Potentially even laws that applied back then that were not very gender neutral. So we need, we as people, need to triage and understand where is the good information, where is information that may have bias and counterbalance it. As of now, we will need to counterbalance it manually. However, as I always say, we've only seen a grain of salt of what AI can do. So as time progresses, the challenges, as you mentioned, will become lesser and lesser and lesser. And the knowledge that AI has will become wider and wider. As of now, especially in arbitration, we are really taking advantage of the fact that there is still scarcity of knowledge. But it is really just a question of time until AI picks up. So we need to get a better understanding of what is it we can do to leverage AI to make ourselves indispensable.  Rebeca: No, that's very interesting, Ben. And as you mentioned, yes, as president of ArbitralWomen, the word bias is something I pay close attention. You know, we're talking about bias. You mentioned bias. And we all have conscious or unconscious biases, right? And so you mentioned that about laws that were passed in the past where potentially there was not a lot of input from women or other members of our society. Do you think AI can be trained then to be truly neutral or will bias always be a challenge?  Benjamin: I wish I had the right answer. I think, I actually truly believe that bias is a very relative term. And in certain societies, bias has a very firm and black and white standing, whereas in other societies, it does not. Especially in international arbitration, where we not only deal with cross-border disputes, but different cultures, different laws, laws of the seats, laws of the contract. I think it's very hard to point out one set of bias that we will combat or that we will set as principle for everything. I think ultimately what ensures that there is always human oversight in the use of AI, especially in arbitration, are exactly these type of issues. So we can, of course, try to combat bias and gender bias and others. But I don't think it is as easy as we say, because even nowadays, in normal proceedings, we are still dealing with bias on a human level. So I think we cannot ask from machines to be less biased than we as humans are.  Rebeca: Let me pivot here a bit. And, you know, earlier, we mentioned the GAR Awards. And now I'd like to shift our focus to the recent GAR Life on Technology that took place here in New York last week on February 20th. And to give our audience, you know, some context. GAR stands for Global Arbitration Review, a widely read journal that not only ranks international arbitration practices at law firms worldwide, but also, among other things, organizes live conferences on cutting-edge topics in arbitration across the globe. So I know you were a speaker at GAR Live, and there was an important discussion about distinguishing generative AI, predictive AI, and other AI applications. How do these different AI technologies impact arbitration, and how do the SVAMC guidelines address them?  Benjamin: I was truly honored to speak at the GAR Live event in New York, and I think the fact that I was invited to speak on AI as a testament on how important AI is and how widely interested the community is in the use of AI, which is very different to 2023 when we were drafting the guidelines on the use of AI. I think it is important to understand that ultimately, everything in arbitration, specifically in arbitration, needs human oversight. But in using AI in arbitration, I think we need to differentiate on how the use of AI is different in arbitration versus other parts of the law, and specifically how it is different in arbitration compared to how we would use it on a day-to-day basis. In arbitration specifically, arbitrators are still responsible for a personal or arbitrators are given a personal mandate that is very different to how law works in general. Where you have a lot of judges that let their assistants draft parts of the decision, parts of the order. Arbitration is a little different, and that for a reason. Specifically in international arbitration, because there are certain sensitivities when it comes to local law, when it comes to an international standard and local standards. Arbitrators are held to a higher standard. Using AI as an arbitrator, for example, which could technically be put at the same level as using a tribunal secretary, has its limits. So I think that AI can be used in many aspects, from drafting for attorneys, for counsel, when it comes to helping prepare graphs, when it comes to preparing documents, accumulating documents, etc., etc. But it does have its limits when it comes to arbitrators using it. As we have tried to reiterate in the guidelines, arbitrators need to be very conscious of where their personal mandate starts and ends. In other words, our recommendation, again, we are soft law guidelines, our recommendation to arbitrators are to not use AI when it comes to any decision-making process. What does that mean? We don't know. And neither does the law. And every jurisdiction has their own definition of what that means. It is up for the arbitrator to define what a decision-making process is and to decide of whether the use of AI in that process is adequate.  Rebeca: Thank you so much, Ben. I want to now kind of pivot, since we've been talking a little bit more about the guidelines, I want to ask you a few questions about them. So they were created with a global perspective, right? And so what initiatives is the AI task force pursuing to ensure the guidelines remain relevant worldwide? You've been talking about different legal systems and local laws and how practitioners or certain regulations within certain jurisdictions might treat certain things differently. So what is the AI task force doing to remain relevant, to maybe create some sort of uniformity? So what can you tell me about that?  Benjamin: So we at the SVAMC task force, we continue to gather feedback, of course, And we're looking for global adaptation. We will continue to work closely with practitioners, with institutions, with lawmakers, with government, to ensure that when it comes to arbitration, AI is given a space, it's used adequately, and if possible, of course, and preferential to us, the SVAMC AI guidelines are used. That's why they were drafted, to be used. When we presented the guidelines to different committees and to different law sections and bar associations, it struck us that jurisdictions such as the U.S., and more specifically in New York, where both you and I are based, the community was not very open to receiving these guidelines as guidelines. And the suggestion was actually made to creating a white paper, And as much as it seemed to be a shutdown at an early stage, when we were thinking about it, and I was very blessed to have seven additional members in the Guidelines Drafting Committee, seven very bright individual members that I learned a lot from during this process. It was clear to us that jurisdictions such as New York have a very high ethical standard, and where guidelines such as our guidelines would potentially be seen as doubling ethical rules. So although we advocate for them not being ethical guidelines whatsoever, because we don't believe they are, we strongly suggest that local and international ethical standards are being upheld. So with that in mind, we realize that there is more to a global aspect that needs to be addressed rather than an aspect of law associations in the US or in the UK or now in Europe. Up-and-coming jurisdictions that up until now did not have a lot of exposure to artificial intelligence and maybe even technology as a whole are rising. And they may need more guidance than jurisdictions where technology may be an instinct away. So what the AI task force has created. And is continuing to recruit for, are regional committees for the AI Task Force, tracking AI usage in different legal systems and different jurisdictions. Our goal is to track AI-related legislation and its potential impact on arbitration. These regional committees will also provide jurisdiction-specific insights to refine the guidelines. And hopefully, or this is what we anticipate, these regional committees will help bridge the gap between AI's global development and local legal framework. There will be a dialogue. We will continue, obviously, to be present at conferences, to have open dialogue, and to recruit, of course, for these committees. But the next step is definitely to focus on these regional committees and to see how we, as the AI task force of the Silicon Valley Arbitration Mediation Center, can impact the use of AI in arbitration worldwide.  Rebeca: Well, that's very interesting. So you're utilizing committees in different jurisdictions to keep you appraised of what's happening in each jurisdiction. And then with that, continue, you know, somehow evolving the guidelines and gathering information to see how this field, you know, it's changing rapidly.  Benjamin: Absolutely. Initially, we were thinking of just having a small local committee to analyze different jurisdictions and what laws and what court cases, etc. But we soon came to realize that it's much more than tracking judicial decisions. We need people on the ground that are part of a jurisdiction, part of that local law, to tell us how AI impacts their day-to-day, how it may differ from yesterday to tomorrow, and what potential legislation will be enacted to either allow or disallow the use of certain AI.  Rebeca: That's very interesting. I think it's something that will keep the guidelines up to date and relevant for a long time. So kudos to you, the SVAMC and the task force. Now, I know that the guidelines are a very short paper, you know, and then in the back you have the commentary on them. So I want to, I'm not going to dissect all of the guidelines, but I want to come and talk about one of them in particular that I think created a lot of discussion around the guidelines itself. So for full disclosure, right, I was part of the reviewing committee of the AI guidelines. And I remember that one of the most debated aspects of the SVAMC AI guidelines is guideline three on disclosure, right? So should arbitrators and counsel disclose their AI use in proceedings? So I think that that has generated a lot of debates. And that's the reason why we have the resulting guideline number three, the way it is drafted. So can you give us a little bit more of insight what happened there?  Benjamin: Absolutely. I'd love to. Guideline three was very controversial from the get-go. We initially had two options. We had a two-pronged test that parties would either satisfy or not, and then disclosure was necessary. And then we had another option that the community could vote on where it was up to the parties to decide whether their AI-aided submission could impact the outcome of the case. And depending on that, they would disclose or not disclose whether AI was used. Quite frankly, that was a debate we had in 2023, and a lot changed from November 2023 until April, when we finally published the first version of the AI guidelines. A lot of courts have implemented an obligatory disclosure. I think people have also gotten more comfortable with using AI on a day-to-day. And we ultimately came to the conclusion to opt for a flexible disclosure approach, which can now be found in the guidelines. The reason for that was relatively simple, or relatively simple to us who debated that. Having a disclosure obligation of the use of AI will very easily become inefficient for two reasons. A blanket disclosure for the use of AI serves nobody. It really boils down to one question, which is, if the judge, or in our case in arbitration, if the arbitrator or tribunal knows that AI was used for a certain document, now what? How does that knowledge transform into action? And how does that knowledge lead to a different outcome? And in our analysis, it turned out that a blanket disclosure of AI usage, or in general, an over-disclosure of the use of AI in arbitration, may actually lead to adverse consequences for the parties who make the disclosure. Why? Because not knowing how AI can impact these submissions causes arbitrators not to know what to do with that disclosure. So ultimately, it's really up to the parties to decide, how was AI used? How can it impact the case? What is it I want to disclose? How do I disclose? It's also important for the arbitrators to understand, what do I do with the disclosure before saying, everything needs to be disclosed. During the GAR event in New York, the issue was raised whether documents which were prepared with the use of AI should be disclosed or whether there should be a blanket disclosure. And quite frankly, the debate went back and forth, but ultimately it comes down to cross-examination. It comes down to the expert or the party submitting the document, being able to back up where the information comes from rather than knowing that AI was used. And if you put that in aspect, we received a very interesting question of why we should continue using AI, knowing that approximately 30% of its output are hallucinations and it needs revamping. This was compared to a summer associate or a first-year associate, and the question was very simple. If I have a first-year associate or a summer associate whose output has a 30% error rate, why would I continue using that associate? And quite frankly, there is merit to the question, and it really has a very simple answer. And the answer is time and money. Using AI makes it much faster to receive using AI makes it faster to receive output than using a first year associate or summer associate and it's way cheaper. For that, it's worth having a 30% error margin. I don't know where they got the 30% from, but we just went along with it.  Rebeca: I was about to ask you where they get the 30%. And well, I think that for first-year associates or summer associates that are listening, I think that the main thing will be for them to then become very savvy in the use of AI so they can become relevant to the practice. I think everyone, you know, there's always that question about whether AI will replace all of us, the entire world, and we'll go into machine apocalypses. I don't see it that way. In my view, I see that if we, you know, if we train ourselves, if we're not afraid of using the tool, we'll very much be in a position to pivot and understand how to use it. And when you have, what is the saying, garbage in, garbage out. So if you have a bad input, you will have a bad output. You need to know the case. You need to know your documents to understand whether the machine is hallucinating or giving you, you know, an information that is not real. I like to play and ask certain questions to chat GPT, you know, here and there. And sometimes I, you know, I ask obviously things that I know the answer to. And then I'm like, chat GPT, this is not accurate. Can you check on this? And he's like, oh, thank you for correcting me. I mean, and it's just a way of, you got to try and understand it so you know where to make improvements. But that doesn't mean that the tool, because it's a tool, will come and replace, you know, your better judgment as a professional, as an attorney.  Benjamin: Absolutely. One of the things we say is it is a tool. It does nothing out of its own volition. So what you're saying is 100% right. This is what the SVAMC AI guidelines stand for. Practitioners need to accustom themselves on proper use of AI. AI can be used from paid versions to unpaid versions. We just need to understand what is an open source AI, what is a close circuit AI. Again, for whoever's listening, feel free to look up the guidelines. There's a lot of information there. There's tons of articles written at this point. And just be very mindful of if there is an open AI system, such as an unpaid chat GPT version. It does not mean you cannot use it. First, check with your firm to make sure you're allowed to use it. I don't want to get into any trouble.  Rebeca: Well, we don't want to put confidential information on an open AI platform.  Benjamin: Exactly. Once the firm or your colleagues allow you to use ChatGPT, even if it's an open version, just be very smart about what it is you're putting in. No confidential information, no potential conflict check, no potential cases. Just be smart about what it is you put in. Another aspect we were actually debating about is this hallucination. Just an example, let's say you say this is an ISDS case, so we're talking a little more public, and you ask Chad GPT, hey, show me all the cases against Costa Rica. And it hallucinates, too. It might actually be that somebody input information for a potential case against Costa Rica or a theoretical case against Costa Rica, Chad GPT being on the open end, takes that as one potential case. So just be very smart. Be diligent, but also don't be afraid of using it.  Rebeca: That's a great note to end on. AI is here to stay. And as legal professionals, it's up to us to ensure it serves the interests of justice, fairness, and efficiency. And for those interested in learning more about the SVAMC AI guidelines, you can find them online at svamc.org and search for guidelines. I tried it myself and you will go directly to the guidelines. And if you like to stay updated on developments in AI and arbitration, be sure to follow Tech Law Talks and join us for future episodes where we'll continue exploring the intersection of law and technology. Ben, thank you again for joining me today. It's been a great pleasure. And thank you to our listeners for tuning in.  Benjamin: Thank you so much, Rebeca, for having me and Tech Law Talks for the opportunity to be here.  Outro: Tech Law Talks is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Practice, please email techlawtalks@reedsmith.com. You can find our podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.  All rights reserved. Transcript is auto-generated.

President of the Massachusetts Bar Association, Victoria Santoro, says President Trump's actions target American's constitutional rights.

  William (“Bill”) Jhaveri-Weeks is the founder of The Jhaveri-Weeks Firm, P.C., a law firm in San Francisco that focuses on representing employees in employment disputes.  The firm handles both individual cases and class actions, including harassment and discrimination.  Bill is a member of the Executive Committee of the Bar Association of San Francisco's Labor & Employment Section, was a partner at a class action firm, practiced in Big Law, and clerked for a federal Court of Appeals judge.  Bill graduated with honors from Yale College and NYU Law School.   In this podcast, Bill and Samorn share advice for professionals navigating today's challenging job market.  They dive deep into: Employment law: understanding your legal rights during layoffs, firings, and severance negotiations. Career advice: strategies for career change and job satisfaction and fulfillment. Job market: navigating the current tough job market.   Lawyer happiness: aligning with your personal values, striving for well-being, and achieving work-life harmony. Networking: building essential connections leading to mentorship and job opportunities.   Legal advice: practical guidance for employees facing job insecurity and legal remedies to employers wrongly accusing you of poor performance.   Connect with us: Connect with Bill on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/jhaveri-weeks/ and https://www.jhaveriweeks.com/attorneys-jhaveri-weeks.html.   Follow Samorn on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/samornselim/. Get a copy of Samorn's book, “Belonging: Self Love Lessons From A Workaholic Depressed Insomniac Lawyer” at https://tinyurl.com/2dk5hr2f.  Get weekly career tips by signing up for our advice column at www.careerunicorns.com.  Schedule a free 30-minute build your dream career consult by sending a message at www.careerunicorns.com.   

In this week's episode, Hemma sits down with Patricia Godoy Oliveira to explore her remarkable journey in compliance—spanning leadership roles at Google and Uber to her current position as LatAm Compliance Officer at Gallagher. Join us as Patricia shares how she keeps people at the heart of her compliance strategies, leveraging behavioral science and Trust and Inspire leadership to empower business partners. With practical insights, book recommendations, and a deep passion for ethics and compliance, Patricia offers a refreshing perspective on leading with purpose in this engaging and thought-provoking conversation.  Highlights include:  Navigating personal and professional transitions and reflecting on purpose How to build trust with your regional business teams in a global company Practical tips on incorporating behavioral science into your compliance program Fabulous reading recommendations for thought leadership and continuous learning in compliance Biography "Patricia is the LatAm Compliance Officer for Gallagher. Her career encompasses senior leadership roles at prominent American and Brazilian companies, including her tenure as Regional Chief Compliance Officer at Google and Director of Ethics & Compliance at Uber. Patricia's impactful contributions have garnered repeated recognition, including being named one of the "Most Admired Professionals" in Compliance in Brazil on multiple occasions. A graduate of Instituto Presbiteriano Mackenzie (Law School, Brazil) with a Masters degree (LL.M.) from the University of Chicago (US) and an MBA from Fundação Getúlio Vargas (CEAG, Brazil), Patricia complements her academic achievements with specialized courses in Insurance, Reinsurance and Law. Her profound understanding of both mature and evolving regulatory environments is a testament to her 15 years of experience in the Insurance and Reinsurance industry and 5 years in the dynamic Tech sector. Patricia's pragmatic approach to legal and compliance is grounded in economic and behavioral principles. She empowers organizations to achieve their goals by translating complex challenges into sound business strategies. Her leadership has been instrumental in implementing innovative programs and training initiatives that foster ethical conduct and drive sustainable growth. A respected voice in the field, Patricia actively shapes industry standards through her roles as a lecturer, professor, and at the Compliance Committee of AMCHAM, Brazil Chapter. Her unwavering commitment to ethical business practices is evident in her extensive involvement in various professional organizations, including the Ethics Tribunal of the Bar Association in Sao Paulo and the Global Compact of the United Nations. Patricia's journey exemplifies a dedication to building a more just and responsible business world." Resources Patricia on LinkedIN: https://www.linkedin.com/in/patricia-godoy-oliveira/ Subscribe to her newsletter Etica do Dia a Dia here: https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/%C3%A9tica-do-dia-a-dia-7265210572445548545/ Patricia's Book Recommendations during the show: Carlos Muitos, Gabriel Cabral et al Trust & Inspire, Stephen Covey Thinking Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahnemann Humankind, Rutger Bregman The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt Why They Do It, Eugene Soltes The Heart of Business: Leadership Principles for the Next Era of Capitalism, Hubert Joly

With a new year, came a new executive director of the Connecticut Bar Association. We met Lina Lee and did a deeper dive into the purpose of the CBA and its impact in our state. Image Credit: Getty Images

Listen to two experienced real estate attorneys battle through key aspects of a purchase and sale agreement in front of a live audience receiving CE credit. This segment features Kaitlyn Sayne-Slugg with Stanley Esrey & Buckley and Viraj P. Deshmukh with Cushing, Morris, Armbruster & Montgomery, and is moderated by show host and broker Michael Bull, CCIM.    Bull Realty - Customized Asset & Occupancy Solutions: https://www.bullrealty.com/ Commercial Agent Success Strategies - The ultimate commercial broker training resource: https://www.commercialagentsuccess.com/ Watch the video versions of our show on YouTube! https://www.youtube.com/c/Commercialrealestateshow Follow us at: @BullRealty https://twitter.com/bullrealty @CRE_show https://twitter.com/CRE_show      

GTP hosts Steve Lowery and Yvonne Godfrey delve into the riveting case of Donald Clark vs. the State of Iowa with guest Mel Orchard from the Spence Law Firm. They explore the wrongful conviction of Donald Clark, a school counselor accused of sexual assault in 2009, and the subsequent legal malpractice case against his public defender for inadequate representation. The discussion highlights the significant emotional and physical toll on Clark during his six and a half years in prison, the courtroom strategies employed, and the eventual $12 million verdict for emotional distress.   Remember to rate and review GTP in iTunes: Click Here to Rate and Review   Case Details: The case revolves around a legal malpractice action against a state public defender, who represented a client convicted of sexual abuse. The client, Donald Lyle Clark, was convicted and sentenced to prison. The conviction was affirmed on appeal. However, in postconviction proceedings, the court determined that Clark's defense counsel had provided ineffective assistance and ordered a new trial. The state declined to prosecute, and Clark filed a civil action for legal malpractice against the state as the lawyer's employer. The district court granted partial summary judgment, holding that the finding of ineffective assistance in the postconviction proceedings established counsel's negligence as a matter of law. The jury found the lawyer negligent and awarded Clark $12 million in emotional distress damages. The Supreme Court of Iowa reversed the judgment for emotional distress damages. The court clarified that to recover emotional distress damages for legal malpractice, the plaintiff must prove more than negligence. The court held that the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence that the criminal defense attorney acted with willful and wanton disregard for the client's rights or safety. The court concluded that the district court erred by instructing the jury that negligence was sufficient. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. (Source)   Guest Bio: Mel Orchard Mel Orchard is a trial lawyer, trying cases in the courtrooms across America, for the past 27 years. Mel has litigated and/or tried hundreds of cases in his career and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars in settlement and verdicts for his clients. During his trial career, Mel has been a part of record-breaking civil jury verdicts in various jurisdictions (Wyoming, Arizona, and Iowa). He has also devoted significant time to pro bono work through Lawyers and Advocates for Wyoming, and many local and national charities. In addition to preparing for trial or being in trial, Mel was a senior faculty member and board member at the Trial Lawyer's College in Wyoming and was recently selected to join the Board. Mel also lectures and presents to various legal organizations throughout the country including Bar Associations, Leadership Organizations and has taught Judicial Ethics to various groups of judges. He was Chairman for the Wyoming Commission for Judicial Conduct and Ethics where he served as a member for six years after appointment. Read Full Bio   Links: The Spence Law Firm on Facebook: Spence Law Firm Check out previous episodes and meet the GTP Team: Great Trials Podcast   Show Sponsors: Harris Lowry Manton LLP - hlmlawfirm.com   Free Resources: Stages Of A Jury Trial - Part 1 Stages Of A Jury Trial - Part 2

Jan. 8, 2025 - We are joined in the studio by Domenick Napoletano, president of the New York State Bar Association, who discusses the group's priorities for 2025, including increasing the right to counsel and Medical Aid in Dying. He also weighs in on the budget for the court system and increasing access to guardians.

Today's West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy Podcast for our especially special Daily Special, Smothered Benedict New Year's Day Wednesday, is now available on the Spreaker Player!Starting off in the Bistro Cafe, Jack Smith pulled a surprising move by transferring Trump's Mar-a-Lago espionage case to the US Attorney's office.Then, on the rest of the menu, C-SPAN is set to return to filming Congress this Friday; legal experts slammed Chief Justice John Roberts' yearly whine fest report as ‘chilling and 'disingenuous;' and, the Texas Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit by the Bar Association against the Assistant Attorney General to take away his law license for “dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation” by joining Paxton's challenge of the 2020 election results that Biden won in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.After the break, we move to the Chef's Table where Montenegro extradited a South Korean mogul known as “the cryptocurrency king” to the United States; and, the foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland condemned the violence in Georgia by pro-Vlad authorities against the nation's pro-democracy movement.All that and more, on West Coast Cookbook & Speakeasy with Chef de Cuisine Justice Putnam.Bon Appétit!The Netroots Radio Live Player​Keep Your Resistance Radio Beaming 24/7/365!“It may be safely averred that good cookery is the best and truest economy, turning to full account every wholesome article of food, and converting into palatable meals what the ignorant either render uneatable or throw away in disdain.” - Eliza Acton ‘Modern Cookery for Private Families' (1845)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/west-coast-cookbook-speakeasy--2802999/support.

19. Februar 1996: Kasino-Angestellte aller Planeten, vereinigt euch! Viele Jahre lang musste sich Rom von seinem Bruder Quark, einem der größten Halsabschneider seiner Zeit, ausnutzen und erniedrigen lassen, doch eine akute Mittelohrentzündung ist der Tropfen, der den Schneckensaft zum Überlaufen bringt. Die Belegschaft der Bar gründet eine Gewerkschaft und lehnt sich gegen den Turbokapitalisten auf. In Deutschland: Der Streik, ausgestrahlt am 31. Oktober 1996.

Send us a textIn this inspiring episode of Badass Women in Business, we sit down with Miranda K. Hawkins, President and Owner of Hawkins Gordon, an all-female estate planning law firm, and founder of Miranda K. Hawkins Coaching LLC. Miranda shares how her experience as a top-rated attorney and community leader led her to become a certified professional coach, guiding women professionals through life's biggest transitions.Miranda opens up about overcoming fear, tackling imposter syndrome, and following “positive energy” to create clarity and growth in her life. From balancing her law practice, coaching business, and leadership roles to redefining prenuptial agreements as a tool for clarity—not conflict—Miranda offers actionable advice on building a life and career that align with your values.Whether you're navigating career changes, starting a business, or simply striving to find balance, this episode will inspire you to trust your intuition, ask for support, and embrace the journey with confidence.Show Notes:1. Meet Miranda K. Hawkins:President of Hawkins Gordon (estate planning) & Founder of Miranda K. Hawkins Coaching LLC.Recognitions: Best Lawyers in America, Colorado Super Lawyers, “AV” Martindale-Hubbell Rating.Past President, Colorado Women's Bar Association.2. Estate Planning Essentials:Not just for the wealthy—key during life transitions.Prenuptial agreements: proactive tools for clarity and protection.3. Attorney to Transition Coach:Inspired by her leadership coach during a challenging personal chapter.Supports women through transitions: career, business growth, and leadership.4. Overcoming Fear & Self-Doubt:Challenge assumptions: “What evidence do you have?”Follow positive energy: prioritize what lights you up.5. Balancing it All:Prioritize, set boundaries, and ask for help.6. Supporting Women:Foster confidence and clarity by surrounding yourself with peers and mentors.7. Key Takeaways:Follow the positive energy: Trust your intuition and pursue what excites you.Ask for support: Whether through coaching, mentorship, or community, you don't have to navigate transitions alone.Embrace imperfect growth: Life transitions can feel messy, but clarity comes from taking one step at a time.Connect with Miranda Hawkins:Website: www.mirandakhawkins.comLinkedIn: Miranda K. Hawkins CoachingLaw Practice: Hawkins GordonFinal Thought:Miranda Hawkins reminds us that life's biggest transitions—whether personal or professional—are opportunities for growth. By following your intuition, trusting your energy, and seeking the right support, you can move forward with clarity and confiKeep up with more content from Aggie and Cristy here: Facebook: Empowered Women Leaders Instagram: @badass_women_in_business LinkedIn: ProveHer - Badass Women in Business Website: Badasswomeninbusinesspodcast.com

Watch two experienced real estate attorneys battle through key aspects of a commercial lease negotiation in front of a live audience receiving CE credit. This segment features Chris Troutman with Alston & Bird and Meghan Gordon with Arnall Golden Gregory LLP, and is moderated by show host and broker Michael Bull, CCIM.  ShareFile - Secure, digital solutions to simplify workflows and improve collaboration. https://ShareFile.com Bull Realty - Customized Asset & Occupancy Solutions: https://www.bullrealty.com/ Commercial Agent Success Strategies - The ultimate commercial broker training resource: https://www.commercialagentsuccess.com/ Watch the video versions of our show on YouTube! https://www.youtube.com/c/Commercialrealestateshow Follow us at: @BullRealty https://twitter.com/bullrealty @CRE_show https://twitter.com/CRE_show  

In this mini episode of ALPS In Brief, our Bar & Affinity Partner Strategist Rio Peterson sits down with Angela Armstrong, Executive Director at the Maine State Bar to discuss the importance of bar partnerships, how they create value for members, and the pivotal role bars play in the legal community. — Transcript:  Rio Lane:  Hello everybody. Welcome to this installment, a mini- installment, of the ALPS in Brief Podcast. I am your host, Rio Lane, and I am here today with Angela Armstrong, who is the Executive Director of the Maine State Bar. Hello.  Angela Armstrong:  Hello. Good afternoon.  Rio Lane:  Thank you for joining us.  Angela Armstrong:  Thank you.  Rio Lane:  I'm very happy we got this chance so we're going to sit down and chat and, yeah, I'm excited to learn more about the bar and the impact that partnerships have had on it. Why don't we start with you telling us a little bit about yourself, so what's your background, how did you end up at the bar?  Angela Armstrong:  So I am originally from Maine. I did all my schooling there, and then I went to college in New York, at the United States Military Academy, which then after that I owed five years in the Army. That's the minimum, that's what you owe for going there. And I did that but then near the end I had my first child and my husband was also military and we wanted someone around, that we weren't both getting deployed. So I got out of the military and I got to stay home with my daughter for a year and a half, but then I decided that I needed to go back to work.  Rio Lane:  Oh, weird, awesome.  Angela Armstrong:  Yeah, that's a familiar story. So I got a job at the University of North Carolina at Pembroke, in the chancellor's office, and I was his special assistant, which I could like it to being like kind of his chief of staff. I did that for about four years, and then my husband got out of the military and we moved back to Maine. He's not from Maine but we moved back to Maine to raise our girls. As I was looking for a job, there was an opening at the Maine State Bar Association for the Deputy Executive Director, and the reason I had heard about that was because my dad was an attorney in Maine and he heard about it in the Bar Journal. And so, I wrote to the executive director and said I'd really like to interview for this job. And shortly thereafter, I got the job as deputy. That was back in 2004, so I'm about to celebrate my 20th year this October with the Bar Association. I became the executive director in July, just celebrated my 11-year anniversary in July of 2013, I became the executive director.  Rio Lane:  Oh, awesome, congratulations.  Angela Armstrong:  Yeah, thanks.  Rio Lane:  So you're not a lawyer.  Angela Armstrong:  I am not a lawyer.  Rio Lane:  No, I love it. I love that when I meet executive directors who aren't lawyers by trade, I feel it brings a really unique perspective to the Bar Association. It's really interesting.  Angela Armstrong:  There's a lot of talk about whether you should be or shouldn't be. I think a lot of times you'll find with bar associations that are mandatory, a lot of them tend to be attorneys because of the types of things that happen in a mandatory bar. The Maine State Bar Association is a voluntary bar association, and so you're really running a business. You don't need a law degree to do that and, in fact, sometimes lawyers, they're great lawyers but they're not necessarily great business people. I have my Master's in business administration so it worked out. And I happened to do some reception work at my dad's law firm when I was in high school. I'm sure that helped me.  Rio Lane:  I bet it did. Yeah, that's awesome. Oh, yeah, interesting. Yeah, that is interesting and that's a really good point, it is like running a business, it is a business, yeah, especially for a voluntary bar.  Angela Armstrong:  Correct.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. So in addition to being voluntary, can you tell us a little bit more about the bar?  Angela Armstrong:  Sure. So our bar association that is voluntary is approximately 2,800 members. We've been staying steady around the 3,000 mark for several years now. This year we've seen a little bit of a decline. I think that all the different terms, silver tsunami, whatever you want to call it, aging of the bar ...  Rio Lane:  Silver tsunami?  Angela Armstrong:  Aging of the bar, has really ... I was having this discussion with Chris Neubold actually the other day and it's like we knew it was coming, we've been talking about it for years. But then, COVID kind of stretched things out because people couldn't retire, people are working longer generally. And so, I think we're finally really starting to see that. Plus, in Maine, we are a very old state. If we're not the oldest, we're right up there. And so, we have about 2,800 members. We are currently slotted for a staff of 10. I have seven on staff right now and one that's about to retire so I'm hiring for four positions. My staff is amazing and they work really hard, and they have for the last few years because we've had a lot of long-term employees, and that's really great, until they all start retiring.  Rio Lane:  Yes.  Angela Armstrong:  And then, you're stuck without having anybody and it's really hard to replace those positions. We are one of those states that has a lot of rural areas so we're part of that grouping of states that has issues getting attorneys into the legal desert ...  Rio Lane:  Legal desert, yeah.  Angela Armstrong:  The southern half of our state, basically Portland and south. And then, up the coast is pretty well off but anything north of where I'm from, and Augusta where I live, in the Augusta area, is a lot less. There's a concentration in the Bangor area but majority of our members, at least half, are in the southern half of the state.  Rio Lane:  Wow, got it. Is that one of the biggest challenges you think that the bar is going to have to navigate coming up, is that?  Angela Armstrong:  I think two of our biggest are the amount of retiring attorneys we're going to be having over the next several years, and the rural attorneys because our lawyer referral program is struggling because we can't provide referrals to people in those areas. Now, think times have changed because we can do a lot more through Zoom and through other types of media, but sometimes you just want to be looking at your attorney in the face and talking to them. As I said, we're older.  One of the things that might help us is we're getting a lot of folks that are coming into Maine that are already attorneys, so that may help us fill that gap a little bit, but we're not getting the younger folks staying, and if they are staying, they're still in the southern part of the state. I think those are going to be two really big issues. The other huge issue that Maine is dealing with generally is the indigent defense.  Rio Lane:  Oh, yes.  Angela Armstrong:  It's mandated but we do not have the attorneys to do the work. Several years ago, we, whoever, the royal we, were telling people don't go to law school, we have too many lawyers, there's just too many of you. And you get this debt, and now we're paying for it because we do not have ... There's plenty of work, we just don't have the attorneys.  Rio Lane:  Don't have attorneys, yeah. That's interesting. Do you think there's any type of solution or anything that would help encourage young folks to go to law school? I know Project Rural Practice offers debt forgiveness in exchange. Is that something that you think would work or could be?  Angela Armstrong:  Well, I think, like a lot of states, we're not a very rich state so to speak. We have a lot of people that have homes in Maine but don't live in Maine, and the people that do live in Maine don't have a lot of money. When you live in Maine, you know that you're not going to make as much as somebody in another state doing the same job.  Rio Lane:  Got it, yeah.  Angela Armstrong:  That being said, our legislature doesn't have a lot of money to play with you, and so we have a couple of tax incentives, but it's not for a lot of money if they go into a rural area, and it's not loan forgiveness or anything like that. We just don't have the programs in place in the legislature for that as of right now. I mean, we're struggling enough to deal with the indigent defense issue so I don't foresee that happening anytime soon. And then, as I think with a lot of folks that have these rural counties, even if you can get the attorney to go there, the spouse or the significant other doesn't want to go there because aren't jobs for them. Or if it's a single, they don't have the nightlife, they don't have the chance to meet other people their age or do things. And so, most of the time we see people that were already living in those areas go to school and then come back.  Rio Lane:  Okay, yeah.  Angela Armstrong:  But that's not enough.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Yeah, so absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah, definitely a pretty widely spread issue, which is, yeah.  Angela Armstrong:  More and more states are facing it, I think.  Rio Lane:  Hopefully, someone will come up with a creative cost-effective way to help because ...  Angela Armstrong:  And the law school debt, it's hard, you got to go somewhere where you can make money.  Rio Lane:  It's incredible. Yeah, it kind of blows my mind. I mean, even law school in Canada where I live, it's considered expensive but it's nothing like America, it's a staggering amount of debt that people get saddled with.  Angela Armstrong:  We only have one law school in Maine.  Rio Lane:  Oh, yeah. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Let's shift focus a little bit.  Angela Armstrong:  Okay, I know, it's too much of a downer.  Rio Lane:  As much as I would like to keep talking about it but I think ...  Angela Armstrong:  I'd love to solve all the problems.  Rio Lane:  Yes, if only. So yeah, I did want to shift focus and talk about, what are some of the partnerships that you have? I know that, like many bars, you have a member benefits program, you partner with different vendors and organizations. I'm curious to know what are your thoughts, I guess number one, on a member benefits program? Do you think that's something that is of value to your members?  Angela Armstrong:  I do. That's why we try to poll our members and ask them what is useful for them. It doesn't help us if we're providing a benefit that we think they want but they don't want. And so, for a voluntary bar association it's very important because that's what we have to offer. They don't have to belong to us. We have to show them value for their membership and we're going to show them value by providing them resources, and tools, and discounts that help them in their practice of law. And so, our relationships with, for example, ALPS or our legal research partner, Decisis. There several that are out there. Those are intended to help them with their practice of law and hopefully save them some money and some time. And we want to do the research for them.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, right, absolutely.  Angela Armstrong:  That's what a lot of it is, doing the research for them so that when you say, "Okay, this is what we can offer you," there's choices, but these ones we believe in, these ones we feel like we have a good partnership with. We trust this company, you can too.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And I do think ... I mean, obviously I'm biased because I do partnerships as well. But I have heard from a lot of lawyers often, especially for solos and small firms, something that really is difficult for them is taking that time to vet different providers, different products, different things.  Angela Armstrong:  Huge.  Rio Lane:  It is time-consuming, and especially if you're not used to doing it, it can be difficult to even know where to begin so I think it's definitely something that is appreciated. Yeah. What kind of things do you look for in a partner?  Angela Armstrong:  Communication.  Rio Lane:  Yay.  Angela Armstrong:  And we have those ones that I haven't been in communication with recently and it makes me wonder what are we getting out of this?  Rio Lane:  Exactly, yeah.  Angela Armstrong:  I can't articulate to my members what they're getting if I don't have a good communication with the partner. In recent years, we've started an audit and a lot of it is, I don't even have the right contact information for them because they have turnover just like all of us. And so, if the new person that's coming in, or if they don't get a new person, doesn't contact us, we don't know. And so, sometimes you find out by accident, so communication is key. Trust. Trust that they're going to follow through with what they've promised us and our customers. And customer support, customer support of our members. I've noticed our relationship with Decisis is fairly new, we haven't had that long, and they've been so responsive.  Now that's a lot of technology and so people are struggling. It might be that the Wi-Fi's just not working, but they are willing to talk to them. I know ALPS is the same way. I know our members can call ALPS and talk to somebody. That's huge. I mean, it's great if there's the other pieces where either the partnership provides a discount or something to the member, or if they don't do that but they offer sponsorship dollars for us to help keep our costs lower. Generally, those are always great as well because then we have money to market and do all that stuff. But when you're talking about the intangibles, that's the bigger piece I think, people feel like they're taken care of.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, yeah, which is important.  Angela Armstrong:  Well, that's why you belong to something.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Absolutely, absolutely. So what has your partnership with ALPS been like? Do you feel that we can we communicate?  Angela Armstrong:  Yes. Oh, absolutely. ALPS is really, I think, unique. I mean, obviously unique because of your actual product that you offer, your products, your service that you offer, and I have been very lucky to have the opportunity to come to the ALPS offices and see how things work and meet the people. And you know that they genuinely care. They care about providing service. They care about our members. They don't want to just take the money for the product. They don't want to just say, "We're going to give you coverage but it's about the money." It isn't, it's about the relationships and I think that's one of the hugest benefits that ALPS brings to the table, the biggest benefits, is that it's about relationships. Because, again, it falls back to what I just said, people want to feel like they're being taken care of, our members do. That's why they belong to us because they don't have to belong to us.  Rio Lane:  Yes.  Angela Armstrong:  And so, Maine has endorsed ALPS for years. I mean, it was endorsed maybe around the time I came on board so I've spent probably close to 20 years, if not 20 years, maybe a little more.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. That's a nice long partnership.  Angela Armstrong:  It is a nice long partnership.  Rio Lane:  It is, yeah.  Angela Armstrong:  I know we're small, we are not bringing in tons of money for ALPS or all that, but I think we have a good relationship with ALPS.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, I think so too.  Angela Armstrong:  Yeah, it's been really good.  Rio Lane:  Well, good. I'm happy to hear that because I personally think it's very important that, I mean, as a partner, regardless of your size, size doesn't matter.  Angela Armstrong:  No, it doesn't. I mean, there are big states and small states, all of our attorneys need assistance.  Rio Lane:  Exactly. Exactly. Yeah, and I totally agree. I think at the end of the day it is so important for your members to ultimately feel that they have someone who has their back.  Angela Armstrong:  Correct. Which is what ALPS has always said, we want to have your back.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Which is, yeah, awesome. Well, good. Yeah. Well, good. I'm really glad that we have been a good partner for you and we will continue to be a good partner for you.  Angela Armstrong:  You guys have great communication too ...  Rio Lane:  Oh, thank you.  Angela Armstrong:  Great communication.  Rio Lane:  Thank you. Awesome. So I'm going to wrap up by, I think, just asking, is there anything that you see coming down the pipeline for the bar that you're excited about or have in the works or anything like that?  Angela Armstrong:  Just generally or with ALPS?  Rio Lane:  ALPS generally, either one.  Angela Armstrong:  Well, like I said, I've been doing this for 20 years now and there's a great deal of benefit for having employees that have been in places for a long time, but there's also benefit of getting some new folks in. Like I said, I'm hiring for four positions and we also, on top of that, just have a brand new membership director so I'm going to have some new ideas coming in, some new energy. That's helpful to me too because when you have been doing something for 20 years there are ups and downs.  And so, that is buoying me and I'm very pleased to say that during this visit with ALPS I've learned about the business insurance manager now offering these other things that I think is going to help our members more and give us some opportunity to let them know that there are a lot more options out there in terms of the outside of things. That excites me because when I have something new I can take back to my members, that's great. It's more touch points, it's more information, and it's more of a benefit for them, so I'm very excited about that.  Rio Lane:  Awesome. Well, fantastic. Well, thank you so much. Thanks for taking the time to chat with me.  Angela Armstrong:  Of course, I appreciate the opportunity.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, thank you. It was really great having you out here in Missoula as well.  Angela Armstrong:  I love it out here, I love it out here.  Rio Lane:  It is pretty fantastic.  Angela Armstrong:  I mean, I miss my ocean, like my ocean, but I love it. And my husband, who got to come with me, said if I didn't live in Maine I would live in Montana because he absolutely adores it out here, it's just so much fun.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, that's how I feel. If I didn't live in Canada I'd live in Missoula.  Angela Armstrong:  Yeah, that's great.  Rio Lane:  Awesome. Well, thank you so much, and thank you everybody. We will be back again with probably a longer episode of In Brief next time. But, in the meantime, take care and we will catch you on the flip side. Thank you.   

In this mini episode of ALPS In Brief, our Bar & Affinity Partner Strategist Rio Peterson sits down with Bob Paolini, Executive Director at the Vermont Bar Association to discuss the importance of bar partnerships, how they create value for members, and the pivotal role bars play in the legal community. — Transcript: Rio Laine:  All right. Hello, everybody. This is Rio Laine here, coming to you from ALPS for this installment of kind of a mini In Brief episode that we are doing. And so I am here today with Bob Paolini from the Vermont Bar Association. Hello, Bob. Thanks for joining us.  Bob Paolini:  Good morning, Rio. Thanks for having me.  Rio Laine:  Yeah, it's great to have you here. So you are the executive director of the Vermont Bar Association?  Bob Paolini:  I am,  Rio Laine:  Yeah. Want to tell me a little bit about your background and how you ended up at the bar?  Bob Paolini:  Sure. Well, I'm a lawyer. I practiced in Vermont. I was admitted to the bar in 1973.  Rio Laine:  Wow. Yeah.  Bob Paolini:  I became executive director of the bar in February of 1996.  Rio Laine:  Wow. Yeah.  Bob Paolini:  So I've been in practice for 22 years. During that time, I served in the Vermont House of Representatives for a couple of terms, and then left that position, just went back to practice. And then I saw that this position of ED of the Vermont Bar opened up, and one of the pieces of the qualifications that they were looking for was policymaking work, and I really enjoyed the legislative process when I was a member of the House. It's a part-time legislature. It's really hard to integrate that service with the practice of law at the same time. So I ended up not running for reelection after a couple of terms.  When this position opened up and there was the opportunity to go back into the legislature representing the profession, I applied and I was hired, and I served in that job for 20 years. I left in the spring ... I think it was June of 2016. My successor, who I think you know, Teri Corsones, became executive director. At the beginning she didn't have any legislative experience and I worked part-time with the bar, doing some of that work during our session and helping her get acclimated to that kind of work. And then I stopped doing that.  And then six years later, she left to become Vermont State Court Administrator, so I was asked to come back on an interim basis two years ago this month actually. And after about five months in that position, the board asked me to stay on, which I was happy to do. So, 20 years, six years away, now two years back. That's how I got here.  Rio Laine:  Yeah. Well, that's fantastic. So 22 years kind of in total. Yeah. You obviously really enjoy the bar and working with the bar. What's something that you really like about your work and the Bar Association in general?  Bob Paolini:  We are a small bar, as you know. Maybe we have about 2,300 members of our association. Even though I've had a six-year break, I still know most of those people. Sure, there are a lot of new young lawyers, a lot of lawyers who have moved into Vermont that I don't know, but it's a small group. It's a close-knit group. The staff of six people, half of whom I've hired, half I did not hire, are great. I love working with them. And I really like our board of managers, who really has the welfare of our members at heart. They're really looking to help members improve their practices, improve their lives, and it's just great to work for them and try to represent them.  One of the questions that I was asked in my first interview going back to 1996 was, "Taking this administrative job is going to be so different than practicing law. How do you feel about that?" And I said, "It's not all that different. I mean, yeah, I've got clients now, but now I will have just one client, and that's our profession." And that's worked out for me, and I think for them too.  Rio Laine:  Yeah, that's a really interesting way to think about it, too. I was wondering about the board, and would you say that it's really important to have a board that is invested in the welfare of your members? Would you say that that is a requirement to running things well?  Bob Paolini:  That's a requirement, yes. Yeah, it is. We need the direction. In our case, we have 17 voices, all of whom are in different types of practice. One of whom is a judge, by the way, because we always have a judge on the board, but they all have different perspectives on what the legal profession is about today.  We meet 11 times a year, and I try to get up to date on, "What are you folks seeing? What should we be addressing? What challenges are new?" So as long as we're all dedicated to helping our members and helping protect the profession, as well as helping to protect the public, I think we're doing the right thing.  Rio Laine:  Yeah. What kinds of things are you hearing from the board or even members about challenges that are coming up that they're having to navigate?  Bob Paolini:  Well, clearly in this current climate, the rule of law is a challenge that we all have to address I think. Respect for the law, respect for the court system is something that I think every state bar needs to address.  In Vermont's case, as I said, we're a small bar, but we are a graying bar. Vermont's surrounded by cities like Boston and New York, not literally surrounded, but we're close to those cities, Hartford, Connecticut, Boston, New York City, places where there are greater opportunities for newly minted lawyers. Asking them to come to Vermont, especially if they have a bunch of education debt, is difficult. So the number of new lawyers we have is diminishing. As the bar ages, we lose to retirement every year a handful or more than a handful of lawyers.  So the shrinking bar is a real challenge I think for us. Actually this morning I engaged in a conversation with our board about the small number of lawyers who were applying for an open judgeship in Vermont, and everybody's concerned about that. There's an email chain going back and forth for the last two hours about what are we going to do about this? How do we get qualified people to be judges? So here's another topic for our board meeting next Friday.  Rio Laine:  Right, absolutely. And it seems that the graying bar situation, I mean, it's something that a lot of the bars are dealing with now. There certainly seems to be a larger number of lawyers transitioning out of practice, retiring, than there is coming in to the profession, absolutely.  Bob Paolini:  Yeah. I don't think Vermont's unique in that respect at all. There's technology challenges, where things went to online filing and different things. That drove some of the older members into retirement. I remember when that started and I would get phone calls or emails from our members saying, "I can't learn this whole new system now. I'm done. December 31st I'm retiring."  So yeah, there's that, there's the pandemic, and how many people that drove out of the profession.  Rio Laine:  Oh, 100%. Because I mean, never mind even the technology adoption required for the pandemic, but also just navigating the entire situation. It's a lot. And if you've been practicing for a long time, it's just easier probably to call it in.  Bob Paolini:  I know. As opposed to relearn everything and start over.  Rio Laine:  Yeah, yeah, exactly. Yeah. Would you say that that's similar to the difficulty getting lawyers to practice in rural areas as well, along the same lines, it's just difficult finding people to fill those gaps?  Bob Paolini:  We are definitely seeing that in some of our more remote places in our state. Our state's not big, but there are counties that are not big, but they only have one or two lawyers. And we know and we try to say to new lawyers, "Look, if you want to make the sacrifice and go there, you're going to be it. You're going to be that town's lawyer." It's sort of like thinking back 50 years or more, the local town lawyer, there are towns that that local town lawyer has passed away or has retired, and there's nobody there to take over.  So yeah, we're trying to match those new lawyers with the senior lawyers, I have them spend some time together, and then one retires and one takes over that. But it's a challenge, again, because of college and law school debt, and the fact that salaries are not that high in those rural communities.  Rio Laine:  Yeah, yeah. Fair enough. And for the new members that you do have coming in, are you finding that they're looking for more from the bar than maybe the members that are aging out, they're looking for different types of engagement? Are you finding you're having to adapt or navigate that?  Bob Paolini:  They are definitely looking for something different. And I have to give credit to our Young Lawyers Division because they're great about reaching out, not only to newly minted lawyers, but to law students. And we have one law school in the state, so working with that law school and trying to integrate those folks into the bar.  Yes, their needs now are very different than what I experienced when I started. There was that whole process back then. There's one judge, now retired, who used to say that when he started his first year was carrying the briefcase for his partner. Going to court, just sitting there, but doing that for a year or whatever. That doesn't happen anymore. People don't have the resources to do that like they used to. So there's part of that education, that apprenticeship thing if you want, that's now missing.  Rio Laine:  Got it. Got it. That kind of mentorship piece. Yeah. And I've heard that that is a challenge for young lawyers, and I mean, you're getting into this new profession, it really helps to have some guidance and having to go without makes things much more difficult than they need to be.  Yeah. Yeah. There's definitely lots of things that are needing to be rethought and navigated, but that's always the way it is. There's always going to be something that is a challenge, and then we have to figure it out together, so yeah.  Bob Paolini:  Which makes this position so much fun to be in.  Rio Laine:  Yes, yes.  Bob Paolini:  You got to meet those challenges, there are new things every day. Really, there are new things every day.  Rio Laine:  Yeah. Do you like solving problems?  Bob Paolini:  I do like solving problems. Yeah.  Rio Laine:  Yeah. Yeah, that's fantastic. I think that's a really good way to think about it too, is rising to those challenges every day. And it makes you really a good person to be leading the bar then, because members will need to know that they have somebody who has their interests at heart and wants to help them navigate those things.  Bob Paolini:  Right. right.  Rio Laine:  Yeah. I also love a job that's different every day too. Yeah, it's fantastic. S  I want to shift a little bit and talk a little bit about partnerships. Now, I know that the Vermont Bar has partnerships with different vendors, different groups and organizations, kind of like ALPS, for example. How do those partnerships impact the bar or your memberships? Do you feel like they support the Bar Association?  Bob Paolini:  Well, let's talk about ALPS first.  Rio Laine:  Yeah, okay. Yeah.  Bob Paolini:  ALPS has been a great partner, and I think our most important partner since I started working at the bar 28 ... 6 years, whatever it is, 1996. Since 28 years ago.  This company has always reached out to the Vermont Bar Association and offered help, offered education, offered support. And frankly, even now, if I'm faced with an issue or a question, I call somebody at ALPS and say, "Have you seen this anywhere else? How did that state deal with it? Are there resources there that I can steal from there to help us deal with it?" Yeah, it's been excellent.  Rio Laine:  That's wonderful.  Bob Paolini:  It's been an excellent rapport with this company.  Rio Laine:  Wonderful. Oh, that's really fantastic. And obviously we want that to continue because it's important to us that we're able to support you.  Bob Paolini:  We have working relationships with other associations. I mean, I work closely in Vermont with the Vermont Bankers Association, with the Vermont Realtors Association, with the Teachers Union, in terms of public education and some of the legislative stuff that we need to do that we need support from these other groups that are affected. So we have lots of different partnerships, but the relationship with ALPS is different because they support educating the profession, protecting the profession, and making sure that we have what we need to have in order to not make mistakes.  Rio Laine:  Right, right. Yes. Oh, wonderful. I love to hear that. I guess in a general sense, what types of things do you look for in other partners, other strategic or vendor partners? Is it a willingness to offer that support, to collaborate?  Bob Paolini:  Yeah, it's one thing to endorse a business or a service and tell our members, "Yeah, we've endorsed them. Go contact them." The difference between just doing that and working with a partner such as ALPS, is that we do more than that, and ALPS does more than that. ALPS comes to Vermont and runs classes for us. They provide us information that we probably wouldn't otherwise have. They've helped us with our new lawyers.  We run an incubator program where we bring in lawyers who really want to go out on their own, sometimes right out of law school. And ALPS has a program that helps them get their first-year insurance. And we actually have this incubator program where we meet with these folks in terms of staff conversations once a week for an hour, an hour and a half. And ALPS has appeared remotely at those meetings and answered questions about insurance, and letters of engagement, and just lots of little helpful hints.  Yeah, I think we can't do that on our own. We don't have that expertise. We're a small group of seven employees at our office. But yeah, ALPS really has filled in with the needs that we really probably couldn't meet us in any other way.  Rio Laine:  Oh, that's fantastic. That makes me really happy to hear that. And no pressure because we're at the ALPS office or anything, but oh, that's fantastic. Oh, well, yeah. I'm really, really happy to hear that.  I guess we'll have just a couple more minutes and we'll wrap things up, but what do you see on the horizon for the bar? What are you looking forward to? What's coming down the pipeline? What do you anticipate? Anything really.  Bob Paolini:  Oh, I think we need to look ... I'm not going to be doing this forever.  Rio Laine:  What?  Bob Paolini:  I'm not.  Rio Laine:  I don't know.  Bob Paolini:  So I think we need to ... Let me start over. We have a staff of seven and four of us have been there for 15 years or more. So I think internally we need to prepare for some changes. Not only my position, but my associate executive director's position, a legal services coordinator, and another staff member who does our CLEs, who you know, Laura  Rio Laine:  Laura? Laura, yeah.  Bob Paolini:  Laura, yes. There's a lot of us there that are in sort of almost retirement mode. Of course, I came back from retirement, as I like to say, the board unretired me two years ago. But yeah, I think we need to, and we already have started to prepare succession plans and transition plans.  Yeah, so that's going to be just an internal challenge to our staffing, and it doesn't really affect the profession. It's going to involve the board more in terms of a little bit of management as opposed to just setting policy. They're going to be faced with the challenges of making certain decisions, maybe restructuring, maybe not, but certainly having to hire my successor and then he or she needs to overlap with these other folks who are looking towards retirement. Yeah, so I think we've got some challenges internally.  Rio Laine:  Yeah. A little bit of organizational change. Yeah. Yeah. And that's definitely the way it goes, right?  Bob Paolini:  Exactly.  Rio Laine:  Yeah. If you're not changing, you're not evolving.  Bob Paolini:  [inaudible 00:18:57].  Rio Laine:  Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Wonderful. Well, thank you so much, Bob. Thanks for taking the time to sit down and chat with me. Really appreciate getting to [inaudible 00:19:05].  Bob Paolini:  Thanks for having me. It's great to be here again.  Rio Laine:  Yes. Well, we're so excited to have you, and we are going to be enjoying our Bar Leaders Retreat the next few days. So yeah, looking forward to get to chat with you more.  Bob Paolini:  I'm sure you will.  Rio Laine:  Yeah, yeah. Great.  Bob Paolini:  Yeah, me too. Thank you.  Rio Laine:  Yeah, thank you so much. All right, everybody that wraps it up for today. You will hear from me later more.   

In this mini episode of ALPS In Brief, our Bar & Affinity Partner Strategist Rio Peterson sits down with Mary Jane Pickens, Executive Director at the West Virginia State Bar to discuss the importance of bar partnerships, how they create value for members, and the pivotal role bars play in the legal community. — Transcript:  Rio Lane:  All right. Hello everybody. We are back for another mini-installment of the ALPS in Brief podcast. I am your host, Rio Lane, and I am talking today with Mary Jane Pickens, who's the executive director of the West Virginia Bar. Hi.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Hey, how are you?  Rio Lane:  I'm good. How are you doing?  Mary Jane Pickens:  Wonderful. Very, very happy to be back in Montana. It's a beautiful, beautiful place.  Rio Lane:  Wonderful. Yes. Thank you for joining us. I'm happy you're here too. I love Missoula. It's such a lovely city.  Mary Jane Pickens:  It is. It's fun. We went out and just took a quick walk this morning, and it's a wonderful little place. Lots of good stuff here.  Rio Lane:  It is. It absolutely is. Yeah. So tell me a little bit about yourself, Mary Jane. What's your background, and how did you come to the Bar Association?  Mary Jane Pickens:  Well, I've done a lot of different things. When I first became an executive director, I went to one of the ABA annual meetings, and they had us a boot camp for brand new executive directors, and you had to pick out a song. It was an icebreaker thing, and they would play your song and you were supposed to jump up and say, "That's my song." And my song was Long and Winding Road by the Beatles.  Rio Lane:  Oh, nice.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Because I felt like I had had a rather long and winding road to get to the bar. I graduated from law school. I went to Ohio Northern University, so I did not go to law school in West Virginia. Came back to West Virginia because it's my home, and went into private practice in a small firm, kind of a little boutiquey... We mostly did bankruptcy work. And did that for about 15 years and decided I needed a change and had an opportunity to go to the Insurance Commissioner's office in the state of West Virginia. And shortly thereafter, became general counsel for the West Virginia Insurance Commissioner. And I was there for about 11 or 12 years. And then I went to a large firm, did mostly government relations and lobbying mostly around the insurance industry.  Rio Lane:  Yeah.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Did that for about three years. And then because I love public service, it's where my heart is, I had a chance to go back to the state and be the executive director of the West Virginia Board of Risk and Insurance Management, which provides all of the property and liability insurance for the state of West Virginia, and also simultaneously be the Deputy Cabinet Secretary for the Department of Administration, which provides all the back office-y stuff and services for the rest of government.  Rio Lane:  Oh, wow.  Mary Jane Pickens:  And I was able to be acting cabinet secretary during 2016 during Governor Earl Ray Tomblin's last year, and then had a chance to go to the state bar, and that's where I am now. So it's kind of a long and winding road.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, yeah. That's really interesting. And you've been at the bar for two years?  Mary Jane Pickens:  Yes. I hit my two-year official mark on July 1.  Rio Lane:  Oh, congratulations. Congratulations.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Thank you.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. How are you liking it? Do you find it's a lot different than what you were doing before?  Mary Jane Pickens:  It is a lot different. It's still considered a state agency, but it's in the judicial branch. I've always been in the executive branch, so there's a lot of differences there. But it still is that public service feeling like you have constituents, you have customers, and you're there to help folks. And so that's what I love about it.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, that's fantastic. How do you find working with a board? Because I know you've got a board of folks that helps guide things. Yeah. Do you find that to be helpful, or do you find it's different than...  Mary Jane Pickens:  Well, we had a board at the Board of Risk and Insurance Management, but they were very different. They were rather hands-off.  Rio Lane:  Oh, okay.  Mary Jane Pickens:  So this board is a lot more engaged, which I think is a good thing.  Rio Lane:  Yeah.  Mary Jane Pickens:  We only have four quarterly meetings, but we have very, very involved officers and a very evolved executive committee. So I like it a lot. I think it's... We run the office and we do the day-to-day, but the president of the state bar speaks for the bar. So there's a little bit of separation that I enjoy, and so I feel like I have a lot of really good guidance and support and feedback from the board. I enjoyed it a lot.  Rio Lane:  That's fantastic. You find the board helpful in identifying things that the bar needs to be focusing on like new challenges that might be coming up, things that need to be anticipated?  Mary Jane Pickens:  Yeah, I do. We're on the ground, kind of on the front lines with our members, so we hear a lot and get a lot of those ideas. But our board is elected from 16 different districts all over the state.  Rio Lane:  Got it.  Mary Jane Pickens:  So they come together, and so they're bringing ideas and concerns from the lawyers in their areas because West Virginia is an oddly-shaped state. It can be... When you go to the eastern panhandle, you're almost in Washington DC, and then at Ohio and Kentucky on the other side. So the interests and concerns can be different in those different parts. So the board, I think, is very good at gathering that intel and bringing it back to Charleston and helping out with what we do in the office.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Oh, that's fantastic. It sounds like a good working relationship.  Mary Jane Pickens:  It is. It's very good. We have a really good board.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Oh, that's fantastic. So what are some of the things that maybe your members or the board has brought to your attention that are challenges that you find you're having to navigate this year and the next couple years?  Mary Jane Pickens:  Sure. We here... And I don't think this is uncommon among states. We have a lot of rural areas. We have basically a few... What we consider by West Virginia standards to be decent-sized cities. But there are a whole lot of areas that are what we would consider to be legal deserts. And I think a lot of states have the same issue. So the issues around the rural practitioner, the solo practitioner that's just out in a county where there's not that many people, we need to provide more support to those folks.  And we have put together a rural practice committee, and we're trying to address some of those things, ideally in conjunction with the law school, because the law school at West Virginia University is there to produce lawyers for the state of West Virginia, and elsewhere, but we love it when they stay. And so we're hoping to come up with some ideas to support those lawyers more that are out there actually helping the people. Another big issue, and this is huge right now in West Virginia, and I don't know how this is in other states, but we have a desperate need for lawyers to do guardian ad litem work and abuse and neglect proceedings.  Rio Lane:  Okay.  Mary Jane Pickens:  And a lot of this does come out of unfortunate circumstances around drug use and abuse and families that are really struggling. And we have a lot of children in foster care. And last year... We do regional meetings. We go all around the state in the fall, and we had judges come to all of those regional meetings and speak on pretty much whatever they wanted to talk about. Every single one of them made a desperate plea to the lawyers in the audience to consider taking on guardian ad litem work or doing abuse and neglect legal services because it's such a big need.  Rio Lane:  Oh, wow. And is that something that is funded by the state, those services? Or is it...  Mary Jane Pickens:  It can be through the Public Defender Services Agency, which is an agency I'm very familiar with because it's part of the Department of Administration. So yes, there are public defender corporations around the state that they kind of have some interaction with. And also they just handle appointed work in the public defender system. So they're involved in a lot of that, but it's not enough to meet the need. And you get into these rural counties, and a lot of times the lawyers that are in those counties are the judge, the prosecutor, and the public defender. They're the ones that are there, and you need some others out there. So it all kind of comes together. The challenges kind of overlap.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And do you find that you having a membership that's aging out as well? Is that also something that you're navigating?  Mary Jane Pickens:  A little bit. We're an old state. I mean, generally speaking. Virginia's rather old, and I don't know that it's really getting any younger. So that is a concern. One of the things that... We're planning our annual meeting for 2025, and one of our speakers that we've lined up is going to talk about generational differences and the fact that law firms and lawyers who are more seasoned need to be a little bit more open-minded about younger lawyers and what their expectations are and how to meet their needs and keep them in the state of West Virginia.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Do you find that something that the bar is having to navigate too, is new members, younger lawyers coming in and navigating their expectations and how they want to engage with the bar?  Mary Jane Pickens:  I think so, and that's something that I would like to be able to spend more time on. I don't know that we've gotten very far on that. We do have a young lawyer section, and it has its own board, and so they're kind of on the front lines of that addressing the needs of younger lawyers. But it's something that I think we do need to work on, and I think I probably need to spend more time on that.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. And it's challenging too, as technology shifts, trends shift, needs shift, etc. I mean, I think we could all safely say that upcoming generations do not engage in the same way that past older generations do. I mean, even for myself, I grew up with... I didn't have a computer until I think I was in my 20s. So yeah, it's definitely a new challenge I think that I'm hearing quite a bit about, actually, is how to navigate that. Yeah. What's your membership size? How many...  Mary Jane Pickens:  We have probably, if you counted every single type of member, we would have probably between 8,000 and 9,000, which sounds like a lot. Active in-state lawyers is probably closer to 44, 4,500.  Rio Lane:  Got it.  Mary Jane Pickens:  So we have inactives, active, not practicing. There's all kinds of different membership statuses. But the actual lawyers that are on the ground in the state of West Virginia licensed and practicing is about 4,400 probably.  Rio Lane:  Got it. Got it. Okay. And do you know how many of those are older, how many skew younger, and what that break down is? It's okay-  Mary Jane Pickens:  No, not off the top of my head, although there is a lot of interest in that kind of data, and our IT director has put that type of information together for our Supreme Court and others who have asked for it. So I think it's safe to say, even without having the numbers in front of me, that it's an older group.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Yeah. Fair enough. I want to shift a little bit, talk about partnerships. And so the bar obviously has partnerships with different kinds of organizations, sometimes vendors, sometimes different groups. What are some of the things you look for in a partner that wants to work with the bar?  Mary Jane Pickens:  I think the most important... The thing that makes the relationship, I think, the most valuable and work the best is having a really good understanding of what each other do, or each other does, I guess.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Do, does. Yeah.  Mary Jane Pickens:  And I think just using ALPS as an example, I mean, it's purely kind of by accident, but it's fortunate that I do have the insurance background. It helps a lot because I think I understand certainly the regulatory environment and what an insurance company has to do and the things that they focus on and things. And risk management. At BRIM, we were the risk manager for the state of West Virginia, so I have that mindset, so I think that helps. I think it also helps for your partner to have a good understanding of what you do as a bar, not just selling a product to your members, but understanding, again, what your challenges are, what your members need, what their expectations are. I think it's really helpful to have a partnership with an entity that understands what we do. Strategically, what our goals are, what our mission is, that sort of thing.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, absolutely. I think that kind of helps too when it comes to helping then support your members, and able to provide content or information where maybe there's gaps or that you need a little boost in.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Yeah, absolutely.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. I always like to think about partnership as a much more dynamic... Just much more beyond, well, tell them that we're great and we'll sell to them.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Right. Right.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, it's definitely a team effort, and it's important that values and ideas align.  Mary Jane Pickens:  It sure is. And actually just last week, I got a call from a lawyer in Raleigh County, West Virginia, and he was an older gentleman, and he was closing up his practice. And so he was just looking around for guidance on, what do I do? And the state bar is an agency under our Supreme Court of Appeals, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel is there and the Board of Law Examiners also. We're separate agencies, but all combined, regulate the practice of law on behalf of the Supreme Court. So I said, "Well, why don't you call ODC, the Office of Disciplinary counsel? I'm sure they've got some guidance. I know they've got some information on succession planning on their website," but I didn't have at my fingertips specific information to give him. So I reached out to Mark Bassingthwaighte.  Rio Lane:  Yeah.  Mary Jane Pickens:  He very kindly, and less than 24 hours later, sent me some checklists and a client letter sample and that sort of thing. So I was able to very quickly turn that around and send it to our member in Raleigh County, which I think was probably very helpful. I think it was exactly what he's looking for.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Yeah. Oh, I love that. I love that Mark was able to help with that.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Oh, yeah. Yeah, he's great.  Rio Lane:  He is. He's fantastic. Yeah, he's an incredible resource. I think we're all very lucky to have him.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Yeah.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. So would it be safe to say that your experience with ALPS as a partner has been a positive one?  Mary Jane Pickens:  Oh, it sure has. ALPS helps support our regional meetings, which are very important to us. That's our chance to actually get out of Charleston and go to these places and meet these lawyers where they are. Those are really important to us, and I think our membership really enjoys that, and ALPS helps us in that area. Chris Newbold was able to help us with our strategic planning session last fall, and we were real happy how that turned out because it's doable. I mean, we ended up with a one page, which we loved, because the one before was several pages, and it was very colorful and it had graphs and it had arrows, and it was great looking. But we ended up with something short that really, really, really focused on the things that were achievable over a reasonable period of time, and that we enjoyed that experience. So it's just all kinds of things like that as part of the whole partnership that we've enjoyed.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Oh, I'm really happy to hear that. It's very important to me that a partnership is a good working relationship, and then we're both supporting each other in success because it's not a zero-sum game. It's like, yeah, support the members, support the profession, support each other. Yeah, that's good. So I'm really glad to hear that we're doing that. Yeah. That's fantastic. So I think we've got just a couple more minutes, but I wanted to ask you, what are some, not necessarily challenges, but things that you see kind of coming up on the horizon that you predict maybe the bar or the profession has to... Will have to navigate?  Mary Jane Pickens:  Well, one of the things that is kind of swirling around out there, we're a mandatory bar.  Rio Lane:  Right, yes.  Mary Jane Pickens:  So we're not a voluntary bar. We're mandatory. You have got to be a member of the West Virginia State Bar to practice law in West Virginia. So there are the issues around mandatory bars that you all are probably familiar with. And we try very, very hard to stay on the right side of that line where what we do is germane to the regulatory job of what we do.  Rio Lane:  Yes.  Mary Jane Pickens:  But I think that there's a constant pull because we also want to do charitable events, and we want to support all of our members regardless of their backgrounds and where they come from. And some of those areas can get a little... Have been blurry in other jurisdictions and have resulted in some lawsuits and things. So I think that's a challenge for us is a mandatory bar. And we're always watching out for that because we want to serve our members and do what we're supposed to do, but we also want to make sure that we're on the right side of that doing what we're supposed to do line. So I mean, that's one of them. Some of the others, I think we've kind of mentioned the generational stuff.  Rio Lane:  Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I'm not surprised to hear that either. There's been numerous instances the last few years when a mandatory bar has run afoul of certain things and was deunified, so yeah. Yeah. And that's definitely a challenge, but yeah. Okay. Well, awesome. I think that's really all we got, all we have to chat about, and I really appreciate you coming and just chatting with me, and hearing about the bar and about the partnership and everything. Yeah. So thank you so much.  Mary Jane Pickens:  Oh, I appreciate it. This was a great opportunity. Thank you so much for asking me.  Rio Lane:  Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Happy to have you. And at some point, folks, I will be back with another little mini episode of In Brief. But in the meantime, enjoy your day.   

In this episode, we are joined by Lisa Driendl-Miller, the Executive Director of the Lancaster Bar Association and the Lancaster Law Foundation. With over 25 years of experience as a paralegal, Lisa transitioned into her current leadership role five years ago, bringing a wealth of knowledge and a deep commitment to the legal community. Under her leadership, the Bar Association has undergone a revitalization, with numerous initiatives that have strengthened both the organization and its impact on Lancaster's legal professionals. Lisa shares her journey from paralegal to executive director, discusses the importance of fostering collaboration and access to justice, and highlights the ways she is helping to shape the future of legal services in Lancaster County. Whether you're a legal professional or someone interested in the intersection of leadership and community development, this episode offers valuable insights.

The Government wants to give sexual abuse survivors the power to decide if their abuser gets permanent name suppression. Criminal Bar Association vice-president Sumudu Thode spoke to Corin Dann.

This episode was recorded on July 2, 2024. Scott and Sam discuss the much-anticipated "Bar Association" episode, in which the employees of Quark's bar go on strike in protest of unfair treatment by management. Support the show and find season 5 at: https://www.southpawpod.com/

Yumi Itakura is a feminist theorist and practicing lawyer who runs the Sakura International Law Office in Japan. The conversation delves into Yumi's extensive work on addressing gender violence, workplace discrimination, and sexual harassment, especially for foreign women. We are so fortunate to have Yumi working on these issues to support families and women in particular. If you are wondering what it's like to work in this area or you are in need of legal support for a family matter such as divorce or a gender violence related matter in Japan then this is the episode for you. You can find a full list of Yumi's recommended legal resources and lawyers on the page for this episode on my website. If you enjoyed this episode and it inspired you in some way, we'd love to hear about it and know your biggest takeaway. Head over to Apple Podcasts to leave a review and we'd love it if you would leave us a message here! In this episode you'll hear: How Yumi's work supporting gender violence against foreign women in Japan is her true passion Some recent cases Yumi has worked on which demonstrate the challenges that foreign women face in Japan Yumi's guidance on the four kinds of divorce proceedings available in Japan and what not to select if you are two foreigners deciding to divorce.  Her favourite author, her favourite Hollywood actor and what she would do if she was not a lawyer About Yumi Yumi Itakura, is a feminist theorist and a practicing lawyer admitted in Japan as a bengoshi. She  is at the Sakura International Law office and has been based in Tokyo for 20 years. Yumi graduated from Tsuda University with a BA in International Relations (1994) and did her Diploma at the Legal Training and Research Institute of the Supreme Court of Japan (2005). Yumi was a visiting scholar dispatched from the Japan Federation of Bar Associations to the University of California, Berkeley School of Law to research the U.S Labor system for gender equality in the workplace.  After working in the Tokyo Public Law Office and in a private law firm in Tokyo she took the step to open her own practice. Yumi specializes in family law and labor law. She has worked in the fields of domestic violence, discrimination in the workplace, sexual assault, and harassment for many years through her legal consultation, representing victims in their legal proceedings as well as advocacy activities as a member of Gender Equality Committee of the Japan Federation of Bar Associations. As there is an increasing number of cases where foreign national women living in Japan are also suffering from gender related violence and discrimination in the family and the workplace. They can find it difficult to locate a capable lawyer to help them in Japan. Yumi Itakura is one such lawyer who can provide legal services to foreign clients in both Japanese and English. Yumi is also an adjunct lecturer of labor and employment law at Hitotsubashi Business School of Law. In her spare time, she likes to do yoga and listen to Jazz fusion music. In particular, Yumi is a big fan of Eliane Elias and Pat Metheny Group. Connect with Yumi  Sakura International Law Office: https://skrint-law.com/en/  Links Star Bar Ginza: ​​ https://www.starbar.jp/  Bar Lupin Ginza: http://www.lupin.co.jp/  Natsuo Kirino https://www.amazon.com/stores/Natsuo-Kirino/author/ Connect with Catherine  Linked In https://www.linkedin.com/in/oconnellcatherine/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawyeronairYouTube: https://youtube.com/@lawyeronair

Since the 1963 Gideon decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, the right to a lawyer has been guaranteed to defendants facing criminal charges – even if they can't afford to pay.  Advocates say that guarantee is in  jeopardy in our state because of a lack of personnel. Washington State public defenders are in short supply and that's having cascading effects on the criminal legal system.  The Washington State Bar Association is recommending a counterintuitive solution to the shortage: they want to cap the number of cases that public defenders can take on in a year, but the plan has its detractors.  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: Jason Schwarz, Director of Snohomish County Office of Public Defense and Chair of the Washington State Bar Association, Council on Public Defense Russell Brown, executive director of the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys Relevant Links: Washington State Standard: Can smaller caseloads help Washington fill its public defender ranks? Seattle Times: WA's public defender system is breaking down, communities reeling See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of Dimensions of Diversity, Lloyd Freeman interviews Judi O'Kelley, Chief Program & Policy Officer and Paul Thaler, Chief Development Officer of the LGBTQ+ Bar Association. They discuss their roles and the association's initiatives. The LGBTQ+ Bar Association, with over 1,700 members, advocates for LGBTQ+ rights and organizes the Lavender Law Conference, which is the largest gathering of LGBTQ+ legal professionals. Judi and Paul talk about their respective roles and emphasize the significance of the Lavender Law Conference in recruiting LGBTQ+ legal professionals and promoting inclusivity in the legal profession.This episode also examines the association's advocacy efforts which includes supporting the ban of the LGBTQ panic defense, addressing discrimination against LGBTQ+ jurors, and creating a comprehensive bench guide for LGBTQ+ inclusion in courtrooms. The conversation highlights the importance of allyship, ongoing education, and inclusive policies in the legal profession, while underscoring the need for more progress in LGBTQ+ representation at the partner level. At the conclusion of the episode, Paul encourages listeners to support the LGBTQ+ Bar Association's mission by becoming members and getting involved with local affiliates, emphasizing the importance of building community and advancing LGBTQ+ inclusion in the legal field.Dimensions of Diversity is a podcast created by Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, highlighting diversity in the workplace. Hosted by Lloyd Freeman, Chief Diversity & Inclusion Officer, the podcast features meaningful conversations with industry and community leaders working to advance D&I.

Rundown -   Intro - 00:35   Beth McCann in the Inner Sanctum of Craig's Lawyers' Lounge - 08:07   Troubadour Dave Gunders - 01:25:32   "Some Days" by Dave Gunders - 01:28:04   Outro - 01:33:35   Denver District Attorney Beth McCann makes a historic trip into the Inner Sanctum of Craig's Lawyers' Lounge. She's about to conclude two terms and will be stepping off the public stage, but not without some public expressions, as you will hear.   Beth McCann is a trailblazing figure in Denver's legal landscape. She was sworn in as the city's first female District Attorney on January 10, 2017. Her journey to this historic position reflects groundbreaking achievements and a commitment to public service.   McCann spent her childhood moving frequently due to her father's career as an Army colonel, including stints in Japan and Taiwan. Inspired by feminist role models, she pursued higher education to establish a career. McCann graduated magna cum laude from Wittenberg University in Springfield, Ohio.   Former President Trump is now stirring up hate against lawful Haitian migrants in Springfield, Ohio, and he's telling lies about Aurora, Colorado. McCann assures us that Denver law enforcement will be ready if Trump comes to our neighboring city of Aurora.   Like California AG-Elect Kamala Harris, who was also elected on the first Tuesday of November 2016, Denver DA-Elect Beth McCann felt queasy about our country despite achieving her lifetime pinnacle job. Eight years later, Beth McCann voluntarily surrendered power to her successor, John Walsh (Ep 193), whom she endorsed.    McCann's legal journey began at Georgetown University Law School in 1971, where she was one of only a handful of women in her class. After graduating in 1974, she moved to Denver, becoming only the second female law clerk for Colorado's U.S. District Court Judge Sherman G. Finesilver.   McCann served as a deputy and then Chief Deputy District Attorney in Denver from 1975 to 1982, prosecuting hundreds of cases. In the early 1990s, McCann became Denver's first female Manager of Safety under Mayor Wellington Webb.   For eight years, McCann served as Deputy Attorney General for Civil Litigation and Employment Law for the Colorado Attorney General's Office. McCann was also a four-term elected state representative for HD 8 in Denver, focusing on criminal justice matters and health care reform.   McCann has long been a strong advocate for women in the legal profession. She is a founding member and former president of the Colorado Women's Bar Association, and she explains why most of her new hires are female prosecutors.   Kamala Harris's virtues as a fellow big-city prosecutor are extolled. Beth and Kamala have inevitably faced specific difficult everyday top prosecutor experiences. We agree that Tim Walz is a fine man and educator. We talk with Denver DA McCann about character and leadership.   McCann explains her recent decision no charges will be filed in connection with a deadly shooting in July at an apartment near the University of Denver. https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/du-apartment-intruder-shot-killed/73-a62f1a45-d7ce-49ed-a055-907d65887ed5   According to Denver Police, a resident returned to their apartment inside One Observatory Park around 1 a.m. on  July 21 and was startled by an intruder. The apartment building is on East Evans Avenue, just east of South University Boulevard.   We discuss how Kamala Harris said she'd shoot any intruder into her family home. Beth McCann explains the burden of proof on prosecutors and how she's made thousands of such decisions. https://people.com/kamala-harris-tells-oprah-intruder-getting-shot-if-try-to-break-in-8716045   Show Troubadour Dave Gunders plays hurt, coming off the recovery table from knee replacement surgery and offering his toe-tapping song "Some Days." Some days this week started off bad for NC Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, who had nasty laundry exposed. It could not happen in a better swing state.   The host starts the show by decrying Trump's blaming of the Jews in case he does not get elected. Is he talking to Craig? It appears so. What's he going to do about it? Have friends extract retribution? WTF. Kamala continues to be calm and bright. This episode is hopeful.

Beth Eckhardt, LCSW, PhD in Clinical Social Work and Director of the Nassau County Bar Association Lawyers Assistance Program (LAP), and Annabel Bazante Esq., describe some of the pressures on lawyers and law students, and how the lawyers assistance program can provide free and confidential support, assistance and recovery to them, along with their families and employers. They also discuss why family members, coworkers, employers, colleagues or clients should reach out to the program if they know of a lawyer or law student in need of their services.

President Muhammad Faridi hosts Rich Miller (former Chief of Energy Policy for New York City and former Vice President of Energy and Environmental Law at Con Edison) and Robie Craig (Senior Energy Council at the New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services), Co-Chairs of the City Bar Energy Law Committee. The conversation touches on various aspects of energy policy and its relevance to New York City, including historical perspectives on power generation, the current shift towards clean energy, and the implementation of regulatory mandates such as the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) and the Build Public Renewables Act. Muhammad, Rich and Robie also explore the city's efforts to balance environmental justice with the need for reliable energy supply, the role of Con Edison, challenges posed by intermittent renewable sources, and the steps New York City is taking to support electric vehicle adoption. Access a transcript of this episode here: https://bit.ly/3XhBhtK Want to learn more about the impact of energy decisions and environmental justice? Join us at the City Bar's upcoming programs: The Professional Duty of Lawyers and Bar Associations in Action on Climate on September 23 (https://bit.ly/3XsQhFh) and Economic and Environmental Impacts of State and City Funded Remediation Programs on Environmental Justice Communities in NYC on October 29 (https://bit.ly/3XrirQL). Visit nycbar.org/events to find all of the most up-to-date information about our upcoming programs and events. 00:00 Introduction and Welcome 03:46 Understanding DCAS and Con Edison 11:15 New York City's Energy Landscape 16:58 Historical Perspective: The Birth of Electricity in NYC 23:52 Regulatory Framework and Environmental Justice 35:49 Future of Clean Energy and Transportation in NYC 49:03 Committee Focus and Closing Remarks

Beth Eckhardt, LCSW, PhD in Clinical Social Work and Director of the Nassau County Bar Association Lawyers Assistance Program (LAP), and Annabel Bazante Esq., explain how the program provides free assistance and support to lawyers, law students, and their families if they are trying to fight depression, alcoholism, drug dependence or other issues.

The association for barristers has asked the Attorney-General to investigate Shane Jones after he called a High Court judge a 'communist'. Bar Association president Maria Dew KC spoke to Ingrid Hipkiss.

Our second part of a conversation with Christopher (Chris) Black -- a Canadian attorney-activist, writer, author, community organizer and poet.  Chris Black is a member of the Bar Association of the International Criminal Court and acted as the lead defense counsel before the ICC for Rwanda, later defending Rwanda's General Augustin Ndiniliyimana against dozens of genocide charges leading to his acquittal. He was among the first lawyers to lay war crime charges against NATO for its attack on Yugoslavia, and served as vice-chair of the International Committee for the Defense of Slobadan Milosevic. Other crimes Chris laid down on behalf of the ICC include charges against Rwandan president Paul Kagame on behalf of Congolese groups, and charges against NATO for its invasion of Libya. Chris is currently an executive member of the Canadian Peace Council and Toronto Association for Peace and Solidarity. Chris' articles appear in the Near Eastern Outlook, Global Research and other outlets. He is the author of the novel "Beneath the Clouds: The Struggle for Truth and Justice Can Turn Deadly" and a collection of poems "From a Passing Stranger? He holds a degree in psychology from McMaster University in Ontario and received a law degree, specializing in international law, from York University.  His website is Christopher-Black.com

Christopher (Chris) Black is a Canadian attorney-activist, writer, author, community organizer and poet.  He is a member of the Bar Association of the International Criminal Court and acted as the lead defense counsel before the ICC for Rwanda, later defending Rwanda's General Augustin Ndiniliyimana against dozens of genocide charges leading to his acquittal. He was among the first lawyers to lay war crime charges against NATO for its attack on Yugoslavia, and served as vice-chair of the International Committee for the Defense of Slobadan Milosevic. Other crimes Chris laid down on behalf of the ICC include charges against Rwandan president Paul Kagame on behalf of Congolese groups, and charges against NATO for its invasion of Libya. Chris is currently an executive member of the Canadian Peace Council and Toronto Association for Peace and Solidarity. Chris' articles appear in the Near Eastern Outlook, Global Research and other outlets. He is the author of the novel "Beneath the Clouds: The Struggle for Truth and Justice Can Turn Deadly" and a collection of poems "From a Passing Stranger? He holds a degree in psychology from McMaster University in Ontario and received a law degree, specializing in international law, from York University.  His website is Christopher-Black.com

During radio's classic age, few women had starring roles on dramatic programs outside of soap operas. One such woman was Mercedes McCambridge, who Orson Welles called the world's greatest living radio actress. She starred in the early 1950s crime show Defense Attorney, also known at The Defense Rests. McCambridge was so convincing that she receiving an honorary membership in the Los Angeles Women's Bar Association. McCambridge began her career as a radio actor during the 1930s while also performing on Broadway. She went on to appear in movies and numerous TV shows, winning an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her screen debut in All the King's Men in 1949. You will hear Defense Attorney from 1951, and The Defense Rests from 1952 with Mercedes McCambridge in the title character of Martha Ellis Bryant, a respected attorney who champions the underdog and the unjustly accused. Then Bill Swisher interviews McCambridge on the American Forces Radio Network in 1975. More at http://krobcollection.com

On today's episode of the Justice Team Podcast, Bob is joined by Quincy Booth to discuss how lawyers can make multiple streams of income; specifically having a multi-jurisdictional practice. Quincy is a licensed attorney in California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey (and soon, New Mexico!) state courts where he maintains active memberships with the Barristers, American Association for Justice, Trial Lawyers Associations, Bar Associations, and state-specific Associations for Justice. 

Our guest this week is Moise Nkundabarashi, President of the Rwandan Bar Association. He joins us to discuss his own journey, the  challenges the Rwandan legal system faces and his experience representing reformed terrorist Callixte 'Sankara' Nsabimana in court. YouTube/ @thelongformrwandaListen to the Long Form with Sanny Ntayombya podcast on Apple PodcastsListen to the Long Form with Sanny Ntayombya podcast on SpotifyFollow Long Form with Sanny Ntayombya on Twitter: @TheLongformrwFollow Long Form with Sanny Ntayombya on Instagram: @thelongformrwFollow Long Form with Sanny Ntayombya on TikTok: @sannyntayombyaFollow Sanny Ntayombya on Twitter: @SannyNtayombyaAbout Long Form with Sanny Ntayombya:The Long Form with Sanny Ntayombya is a weekly podcast intent on keeping you up to date with current affairs in Rwanda. The topics discussed range from politics, business, sports to entertainment.If you want to share your thoughts on the topics I discuss use the hashtag #LongFormRw on Twitter and follow us on Twitter and Instagram on our handle @TheLongFormRwBe a part of the conversation.

We're pro-union in a huge way.Emily and Kelly (from the Delusions of Grandeur podcast) join us this week to talk about labor and economics in the Star Wars and Star Trek universe. Emily and Kelly talk about how Han Solo is a stay at home dad. Kenny talks about aesthetics in Star Wars (big surprise). And Aspen explains 401k's to Kenny.Also, Kenny doesn't like Thrawn. #YourBrainThoughtsAreMyBrainThoughts_________________Go listen to Delusions of Grandeur podcast now.Get early, extended episodes on our Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/trekwarspodTheme by Tosin AwofesoSocial Media:https://www.instagram.com/trekwarspodhttps://bsky.app/profile/trekwarspod.bsky.socialWant to ask us questions? Email us at trekwarspod@gmail.com .And leave us a review! https://bit.ly/leave-a-review-trek-wars

Deep Space Nine is rocked by a brand new craze that's sweeping the far distant future - UNIONIZATION! What do our two incredibly loudmouthed leftist tree-huggers have to say about THIS ONE, folks?! (It's mostly jokes like usual, but still) This is the 3rd episode of VidaZen's "Ballroom BLITZ!" Collection as chosen by and voted on our patrons! You can join in and tell us what to watch by becoming a patron today! SUPPORT US ON PATREON WITH YOUR LATINUM! - www.patreon.com/mclasspodcast Need info about the show? Find it at www.mclasspodcast.com Follow us on Twitter: @MClassPodcast And/or follow our personal accounts: @_JeffPennington @henderson1983

We hit episode 400! What did we do for this MONUMENTAL event? Why we had back friend of the podcast, JOHN BILLINGSLEY of course!! And on an episode all about UNIONS! Check it out! --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thenerdtrekpodcast/support

We hit episode 400! What did we do for this MONUMENTAL event? Why we had back friend of the podcast, JOHN BILLINGSLEY of course!! And on an episode all about UNIONS! Check it out! --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thenerdtrekpodcast/support

Soukaina Sourouri is the first Muslim Arab American president of the Staten Island Women's Bar Association. Soukaina shares her remarkable story, from navigating cultural and language barriers as the daughter of Moroccan immigrants to her challenges and triumphs in law school and beyond. Despite difficulties with initial LSAT scores and the COVID-19 pandemic affecting her bar exam plans, Soukaina's perseverance and support from her family enabled her to graduate debt-free and succeed professionally. Join us to learn more about her inspiring journey and her contributions as a leader in the legal community.

Law and Legitimacy (@LawPodDaily) with Norm Pattis and Michael Boyer is LIVE every weekday at 8:00am eastern. . The state of nature doesn't have to be nasty, poor, solitary, brutish and short. Really. . We—ordinary men and women—are populist by instinct, respect tradition, and are curious about how law shapes our lives and expectations. . In a world wrought with divisions and hatred, Law and Legitimacy has situated itself in a watchtower, keeping an ever-vigilant eye on the horizon. . Join us daily for the sight-lines of the day's most controversial events and trends. Norm Pattis and Michael Boyer offer an honest look at issues that matter to those who care about a good society, the rule of law, and the welfare of ordinary men and women. . Go to LAWPODDAILY.COM and SUBSCRIBE to the LAL Newsletter. . Find LAL: https://linktr.ee/PattisPodcast

What’s Trending: The Washington State Bar Association is covering for Bob Ferguson. The latest Washington gubernatorial fundraising data is out. Bob Ferguson sent out a weird brag on Twitter. A barista smashed a hammer into a customer’s windshield after she feel she was threatened. A witness got testy with Senator John Kennedy when being questioned about late-term abortion. // Big Local: Residents in Shoreline are fighting to preserve trees that the City plans to remove to make sidewalks safer. Tacoma is providing 25k dollars to help businesses repair broken windows. The Tacoma Humane Society is getting rid of adoption fees until Sunday to help move their stockpile of animals. // Joey Chestnut has been barred from the 2024 Nathan hot dog eating contest for his partnership with a vegan meats company.

With 37 verdicts of more than a million dollars, few lawyers in America can match the track record of success of New York trial lawyer Judy Livingston.  What's more, many of Judy's verdicts came at a time when few women were trial lawyers.  Join Ben and Rahul for their in-depth interview with Judy in which they explore the sources of the courage and fortitude that fueled her success.  Judy shares accounts of her early trial practice, where she literally had to create a new mold as a woman in the courtroom.  Judy discusses her approach to trying complex medical malpractice cases and connecting with a jury.  She talks about juggling life and the demands of raising a family with a husband who, like her, is a renowned trial lawyer.  If you are a trial lawyer or aspire to be, there is no way you can listen to this episode without feeling inspired.  About Judy LivingstonTop Personal Injury Attorneys | Kramer Dillof Livingston & Moore (kdlm.com) Judith A. Livingston has long been one of the most successful plaintiff's attorneys in the United States. Reserved, methodical and precise, Ms. Livingston has been called “A Legal Legend” by Law Dragon and named one of “The 50 most influential women lawyers in America” by New York magazine. She has been a partner at the law firm of Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore since 1989. Ms. Livingston has won 37 trials with verdicts in excess of $1 million and has negotiated hundreds of settlements that have resulted in payments to her clients of almost a half-billion dollars. She specializes in medical malpractice and personal injury cases. Ms. Livingston is the current President of the Inner Circle of Advocates, an invitation-only group limited to 100 of the best plaintiff lawyers in the United States who possess exceptional qualifications, are experienced and skillful in the handling of courtroom litigation, and who are respected among their peers. She was the first female, and youngest member invited to be a part of this prestigious organization. Judith A. Livingston has the distinction of being named in Best Lawyers magazine for 2011 and 2013 as the New York Medical Malpractice “Lawyer of the Year.” She was cited by the National Law Journal as one of “40 lawyers who have made their mark in the area of health care law,” and she has been listed yearly by New York magazine and Super Lawyers magazine as one of the best lawyers in New York. New York magazine also cited her as one of “the 50 most influential women lawyers in America.” And in every listing, since Lawdragon began recognizing the top 500 lawyers in the United States, Ms. Livingston has been selected as one of the country's top lawyers. In 2022, Judith was inducted into the Maurice A. Deane School of Law Hall of Fame at Hofstra University. Hofstra Law established the Hall of Fame “to honor alumni whose exemplary careers and extraordinary service to the betterment of society have significantly impacted the Hofstra Law community and beyond.” She received the Presidential Medal from Hofstra University and the Fordham Founder's Award in 2014. The former is awarded to “distinguished persons in recognition of outstanding career achievement and professional leadership.” The latter “recognizes individuals whose personal and professional lives reflect the highest aspirations of the University's defining traditions, as an institution dedicated to wisdom and learning in the service of others." A fellow of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, Judith Livingston has participated nationally in lectures and seminars on subjects ranging from trial strategy to women in the courtroom. Ms. Livingston sits on the Board of Directors of the New York State Trial Lawyers Association. She is a member of the American College of Trial Lawyers; the International Society of Barristers; the Bar Association of the City of New York; the American Association of Justice, and the International Academy of Trial Lawyers. From 2006 through 2009, Ms. Livingston was co-president of the Judges and Lawyers Breast Cancer Alert (JALBCA.) She continues on the JALBCA Board of Directors, helping to educate women in the fight against breast cancer. Judith A. Livingston graduated from The State University of New York, Stony Brook, with high honors; and from Hofstra University School of Law in 1979, where she received a J.D. degree and an Honorary Doctor of Laws in 1998. In 2014, Ms. Livingston gave the Commencement address at Hofstra University School of Law, the second time she was given that honor. Bar AdmissionsNew York, 1979 EducationJuris Doctor (J.D.), Hofstra University School of Law, Hempstead, New York, 1979Honorary Doctor of Laws, Hofstra University School of Law, Hempstead, New York, 1998Honorary Degree, Fordham University School of Law, New York, New York, 2015Bachelor of Arts magna cum laude, Honors: With High Honors(B.A.), State University of New York, Stony Brook, New York, 1976 Honors, Awards and Special RecognitionsMaurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University: Inducted into the Hall of Fame, 2022Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Women in Law, Champions of Justice, 2019Citizen's Union: “Gotham Great” Honoree, October, 2017, Gotham Great: “Honoring outstanding leaders who enhance the vitality of New York City.”Feerick Center For Social Justice: “Spirit Of Hope Award”, October, 2016, “Honoring individuals who have dedicated themselves to service and justice.”Hofstra Law School: “Outstanding Women In The Law” Award, April, 2016Hofstra University: Alumnus of The Year, September, 2015Fordham University: “Fordham Founder's Award”, May, 2014, “The highest honor conferred by the University, in recognition of individuals whose personal and professional lives reflect the highest aspirations of the University's defining traditions, as an institution dedicated to wisdom and learning in the service of others.”Hofstra University: “Presidential Medal”, May, 2014, “The highest honor conferred by the University, awarded to distinguished persons in recognition of outstanding career achievement and professional leadership.”Brooklyn A Legal Services Corporation: “Champion Of Justice Award”, November, 2010United Cerebral Palsy – “Women Who Care” Award, May, 2009Best Lawyers®: “Lawyer of The Year”, 2011 and 2013Listed in Best Lawyers in America©, 1993 – presentHofstra University, “Allan Tod Gittleson Society – Inaugural Member”, June, 2013National Law Journal: “Profiles In Power: The 50 Most Influential Women Lawyers”LawDragon Magazine, Named one of the “Top 500 Lawyers In The United States” annually since the inception of the listing (from 2007 through 2017)LawDragon 500, “The Hall of Fame”, November 2015, “To commemorate the 50 lawyers who have made the Lawdragon 500 Leading Lawyers in America each year it has been published.”Super Lawyers®, Named to the Top 10 New York – Metro Lawyers 2020-presentSuper Lawyers®, Named one of the Top 50 Women Lawyers in New York annuallySuper Lawyers®, Named one of the Top 100 Lawyers in New York on an annual basisJudges And Lawyers Breast Cancer Alert – “JALBCA” Leadership Achievement Award, May, 2008NYSTLA, “Civil Justice Honor 2006 Award”, June, 2006United Jewish Appeal – Trial Lawyer's Division “Outstanding Leadership And Contributions On Behalf of The Legal Community And All Humanity” Award, April, 1996Hofstra Law School – Dean's Award For Distinguished Alumnus, November, 1995 Professional Associations and MembershipsInner Circle of Advocates, President, 2022Inner Circle of Advocates, Vice President, 2020 – 2022International Academy of Trial Lawyers, FellowNew York State Trial Lawyers Association, Board of DirectorsAmerican College of Trial Lawyers, MemberInternational Society of Barristers, MemberBar Association of the City of New York, MemberAmerican Association of Justice, Member Pro Bono ActivitiesJudges and Lawyers Breast Cancer (JALBCA), Board Member and Past PresidentNew York State Continuing Legal Education BoardGovernor's Second Judicial Department Screening CommissionAmerican College of Trial Lawyers, New York Downstate Committee Location: New York, New YorkServing all five Boroughs of New York City, Long Island and Westchester County 

In honor of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, we delve into the unique experiences of first-generation attorneys at BigLaw firms. Featuring a distinguished panel from Reed Smith's PAALS (Pacific and Asian American Lawyers and Staff) business inclusion group, Bareeq Barqawi is joined by Thuy Nguyen, Rizwan 'Rizzy' Qureshi, and Julia Peng. These exceptional attorneys share their inspiring journeys, the challenges they faced, the importance of mentorship, and how they balance their cultural identities within the legal profession. The group shares their invaluable insights and advice for aspiring first-generation law students and young attorneys. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Welcome to the Reed Smith podcast, Inclusivity Included, Powerful Personal Stories. In each episode of this podcast, our guests will share their personal stories, passions, and challenges, past and present, all with the goal of bringing people together and learning more about others. You might be surprised by what we all have in common, inclusivity included.  Bareeq: Welcome to Inclusivity Included, Reed Smith's podcast dedicated to exploring diversity, equity and inclusion within the legal profession and across sectors. I'm your host, Bareeq Barqawi, and in honor of May being Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, we have a special episode today highlighting first-generation attorneys at Big Law. I'm thrilled to be joined by three exceptional attorneys from our firm and part of today's panel, Thuy Nguyen, a partner in our real estate group, Rizwan ‘Rizzy' Qureshi, a partner in global Global Regulatory Enforcement Litigation, and Julia Peng, an associate attorney in Global Commercial Disputes. Each of them brings unique perspectives and experiences as first-generation attorneys of Asian and South Asian descent. Thank you all for joining us today.  Rizwan: Thanks for having us.  Bareeq: So to start, can each of you just share a little bit about your background and what inspired you to pursue a career in law? Let's begin with you, Thuy.  Thuy: Thanks, Bareeq. We have to go down memory lane a little bit, but I'll try to keep it concise. As a Vietnamese woman, my family and I immigrated to the United States in 1991. My dad served in the Vietnam War in opposition to the Communist Party. After he served in the war, he was put in what they refer to as re-education camps, which are essentially concentration camps. They put you to work, they tortured you. The idea was to kind of, re-educate you to think the way they thought. He spent a few years there and fortunately for us afterwards, we were able to gain refugee status and come to the U.S. and be protected by the United States government. So my two parents and six kids came to the United States in San Francisco with nothing but the clothes on our back. And we just, my parents set to do a variety of odd and end jobs to support our family. My dad did landscaping. My mom worked at the bakery. She worked at the flea market. She did everything she could get her hands on to feed the six of us. And we were on public assistance. I guess there's no way to really sugarcoat it. And we were, we received food stamps, we received housing assistance. And I remember as a young child, I was fortunate to be able to go to school and pick up English relatively quickly because I was still really young. And so kind of the responsibility I had in my household was taking my parents to the county of public assistance whenever they needed help getting getting food stamps or filling in paperwork for them when it came time for an inspection on our household. And I just remember being really, really terrified every time I had to go to any place of authority and just thinking like, we don't belong here. And I don't want to say anything wrong because I don't want them to reject us. And I just was looking for a profession where I could learn to advocate for myself and for my family, just so we can kind of take away a little bit of that fear and anxiety that I experience every time I go to a court or again, any place of public authority. So I thought a a career in law would be something that could help us overcome some of that anxiety and that fear. And, you know, eight years later, here I am.  Bareeq: Wow. I am actually blown away. What a powerful story, Thuy. Thank you so much for sharing. And I actually came to this country in ‘92, so I can totally relate to coming and having, it's pretty like intimidating experience to come and learn a whole new culture and language, especially what your parents face. So thank you for sharing that. Rizzy, how about you?  Rizwan: Sure. Thank you for having me. And it's funny because Thuy and I have very different backgrounds. My parents are immigrants from Pakistan. I'm a first-generation American, but our backgrounds are also very similar. My parents are immigrants my father grew up very poor he worked his way up and became a veterinarian his his true dream was to be a physician and you know i know that our efforts here on this podcast and there are affinity groups that are BIGs as we call them is always to, steer clear of and and push it against any stereotypes but I'm gonna I'm gonna. Doubled down on a stereotype. I was destined to be a physician, and I was a failure because I did not become a physician. And I mean failure in air quotes. Like my colleague, I was the one, because my parents' English was not their first language, who looked at their very first mortgage document, communicated with their lender to help them understand what kind of risk they were taking by borrowing money to purchase their first home, executing leases on behalf of my father and his family members. And that was my first exposure to, quote unquote, the law. But at the time, all I was was a 12-year-old kid who was trying to help his dad navigate what was otherwise a complex world and complex sort of legal obligations that he had for his various affairs for his family. Not only us, but our extended family. So how did I pursue a career in the law? When I decided to drop AP bio anatomy and physiology when I was in high school, and it literally requested, my father requested a sit down, not with the principal, but also with the superintendent, because it was going to impact the trajectory of my career. I knew that the social sciences, sort of the legal profession, advocacy, helping people was something that was really what made me tick. And sort of the rest is history. You know, I went on to get an undergraduate degree in political science and international relations, did some work at the United Nations on legal advocacy issues. And then felt that the next natural step for me was to go to law school. And I had the privilege to go to Howard University School of Law. And that's really what inspired me to pursue a career in the law. And I don't think it's any different than my colleague. It was my life experience and what I was called upon to do as a child of immigrants and realize that that's where I'm most effective. And, you know, breaking news, my parents are very proud of me and so is my father, but it was a life-changing sort of historic moment when I decided I wasn't going to pursue medical school.  Bareeq: Thank you so much for sharing, Rizzy. I always think it's interesting because as children of immigrants, all of us like end up being these these kid advocates and kid interpreters. And I can relate to you overcoming the obstacles of your culture because actually I always think it's a funny story. We laugh about it now, my dad and I, but my dad used to say, you know, why do you have to go to get your bachelor's degree? You're going to end up being like someone's wife and mother. And I'm like, okay. And that just made me want to prove him wrong. And then he cried at my college graduation. When I graduate top of my class, I always, I always like to remind him of that. Julia, what about you?  Julia: I have a similar story as my colleagues here. I immigrated to America with my parents in 1997. Both my parents were doctors in China, but my dad didn't really speak English at all when we came to America. And so it was an interesting family dynamic to have someone who was a doctor in China now taking on, you know, like dishwashing jobs or waitering jobs at Chinese restaurants, because that's all he could do with his limited English. And so I too was someone who was helping translate for the family and taking on that role. And I thought, I didn't understand the advocacy I was helping to do for my family at the time. And because my parents were doctors, they were very, very insistent that, you know, I would be a doctor and that that's the only career path that made sense for the paying family. And so I actually did make my transition transition to law until my senior year of college. I was pre-med all the way through. In fact, I have a biology degree because my parents are like, you're so close, just get the degree and then you can decide really if you want to be a lawyer or a doctor. So it wasn't until my junior year in college that summer where I went to Peru to intern for two months for my med school applications that I completely realized I'm not cut out to be a doctor. I love the advocacy aspect and I've always enjoyed that even as a child. And my roommate was planning on law school and she She invited me to check out, I guess, back then I went to UCSC and they had a couple of mock one hour classes that undergrads could attend and kind of get the experience of what it would be like to be a law student. And I totally fell in love and I was double majoring in poli sci anyways. And I was like, oh, this is this is a perfect fit for me. And this is exactly what I want to do. But I think like Rizzy, I had to really prove to my parents that this is the route for me and that it was a cause of strife within the family that I was now deviating from the master plan.  Bareeq: Thank you so much for sharing, Julia. And not to even knock the medical profession, because I think it's wonderful if you can do that. But I'm really happy you all ended up attorneys because you're so good at it. So let's talk a little bit about what I kind of referred to as almost like the immigrant identity crisis as you work to adapt and assimilate to culture in America. So balancing cultural identity with fitting into the workplace, it can be challenging. How do you manage this type of balance? And actually, Julia, I'm going to go ahead and start with you?  Julia: Sure. It's something that's still different. So within my family, it's much more like you study, you work hard, and you'll get noticed because of all the work that you have put in. And even now, my parents think the best way forward is always get your straight A's, check all the boxes, but keep your head down and eventually your hard work will pay off. And that's just not how the legal career works. I think that part is definitely a big aspect of it. But I think professionally, I have been encouraged at Reed Smith to get on podcasts like these or to share my opinions, to have these strong opinions that I can exchange and interact with so that it helps me improve as a person, but it also, I feel safe to have, you know, a different personality than what my, I think parents or my family would want to be, which is, oh, you know, you're easygoing and you're, you do your duties to your family and you're a good daughter. But at the end of the day, you're here for your family versus I think I have grown now to become more career-focused. And that's something that I'm also working through.  Bareeq: Thank you for sharing. And I love that aspect of feeling safe enough to bring that identity to the workplace too. Thuy, have you ever felt the need to conform to certain expectations in the workplace? How do you manage your cultural identity?  Thuy: That's definitely a challenge for me. When I was a summer associate going into first year associate, my class was fairly large for San Francisco at the time. There was six of us and I was the only immigrant, came from a diverse background. One thing that I quickly realized was it was very hard for me to network and connect with people, especially at the beginning. With my parents not speaking English, I didn't grow up watching TV or talking about politics at the dinner table, listening to music, having recreational activities like golf or going on vacation with my family. We didn't do or do any of that. And I didn't have those experiences so that I can talk to someone when we see them at the cooler or when we're going around the table and everyone's like, tell us something interesting about yourself. I was always very intimidated and afraid to take up air in the room because I felt like I didn't have anything valuable or interesting to add to the conversation. And I didn't want to talk about my experience or my background, because sometimes it can be very heavy and not really appropriate for like, tell us a fun fact about yourself. And over time, I just had to really push myself outside of my comfort zone and learn new things and just, you know, not be afraid to tell people what I did over the weekend, even if I thought it wasn't interesting, and just not be afraid to share. I feel like that's really kind of shaped my identity at work, just not being afraid to share and then sometimes having to talk about my background and not being afraid that it is who I am. And it's shaped me into the person, the individual, and the attorney that I am today.  Bareeq: I love that. Thank you for sharing. And Rizzy, what about you? How do you navigate your cultural identity in the workplace place?  Rizwan: You know, it's a hard question to answer because in a weird way, I would argue that it ebbs and flows. You know, I'm Rizzy. I am who I am. And I'm very outwardly, I mean, I know that I have a face for radio, which is why I'm on this podcast, but I have a, I look like a child of immigrants. I look like I'm of Pakistani descent. So it's outwardly evident to this homogenous law firm or big law or corporate culture that I'm sort of different. But like my colleagues, I think there's some truth to. You want to find a place in a professional environment where many are not like you. So how do you do that? I'm much farther along in my career. So I have a little bit more, I'll call it courage, admittedly, of being my authentic self. And I don't think I had that courage when I was a young person because I felt like I needed to assimilate to something that wasn't me. But then the other thing that plays an important role here, to give an example, I'm the partner chair of the Muslim Inclusion Committee at Reed Smith. And over the last year, like many people in our community of various religious backgrounds and cultural backgrounds, Muslims are hurting, particularly in light of the Middle East conflict. And what's interesting there is, as a result of that conflict, and this ebbs and flows again, it happened on 9/11 when I was a college student, when otherwise I was just a member of a fraternity who probably was partying too much and just happened to be a brown guy. But then when 9/11 happened, I felt a duty to be more authentically a child of Pakistani immigrants, Muslim American, who represents a group of people here who are not all like the horrible people who hijacked not only planes, but hijacked our peaceful faith and attacked America on 9/11. And I feel the same way in light of this crisis that's occurring in Gaza, which is, I'm a Muslim, and I believe in human rights, and I do believe fundamentally that there's a lot of well-intentioned Muslims who believe in peace and want peace in the region, and our voice needs to be heard. So that's a long way of saying, Barik, it depends on the day, it depends on the moment. Sometimes I feel like, am I not being truly myself all the time? But I'm just speaking for myself. And that's sort of how I've navigated it. And I'm in a different place in my career now where I have, like I said, more courage to be who I am.  Bareeq: I think you bring up such excellent points, which is I don't want to say the word strategic, but sometimes there's an appropriate time to kind of bring up your identity and to add your voice to that conversation. And then there's other times where you kind of just like go with the fold. And that speaks to, I think, being comfortable in the workplace environment, being more confident. And that takes time sometimes, like as you know yourself more than you bring yourself to the table in a really authentic way, given what that environment is or that situation is. So like situational analysis, so to speak. So thank you for sharing that really excellent, excellent examples. I'm going to actually go into a little bit more about, I'm going to go about mentorship. It's often crucial for career development. I would love to hear a little bit about how important mentorship has been in your careers and your journeys. And Rizzy, since we had you end, I'm going to have you start.  Rizwan: Sure. Interestingly, I just was part of a Law360 article on this issue, and it randomly came about, you know, mentorship has been critical to my success, whether as a young person from my father all the way up through aunts and uncles and older cousins and throughout my professional career, from law school through becoming an AUSA at the Department of Justice and back in private practice. is. I rely upon my mentors to this day, and mentors are what I owe a lot of my career to. I did put in a lot of hard work, but, Working with people and understanding from people how the, I won't say sausage, how the kebab is made in the law firm setting is so important to your success. And in that Law360 article, I talked about a seminal moment when I was a young summer associate coming into first year associate and a black partner, or actually he was a senior associate at the time, who recruited me from Howard University School of Law. Late on a Friday, right before a summer event, as you usually have with the Summer Associate Program, which we're in right now, had me do an assignment. And he randomly called me down to his office and asked me to close his door. And my heart dropped because I was like, something's up. And he basically sat me down and said, your work product is absolutely unacceptable. It will never fly in this law firm or any law firm. And if you continue to submit work like this, lazy work like this, you're never going to succeed here. So you might get an offer at the end of the summer, but you won't succeed. To me, I talked to my wife about it to this day. That was such a pivotal moment for me because he was a person I trusted. He's the person I probably got too comfortable with and sort of melded in thinking we needed to get on with our Friday evening activity of which he was going to join me. And I went back to the drawing board. I worked hard, Got him the assignment I needed. And that's been sort of a moment that I continue to cite back to whenever I'm digging deep to do something for clients or for my internal clients or my colleagues is that always, always, always try to work towards the utmost excellence and perfection that you can in your work. You're going to make mistakes. But I'm so thankful for that moment because that individual is now a client of mine, still a dear friend, a big client of the firm. And I think it's a testament to that moment where that mentor, who was of a minority background like me and knew that we had to go the extra mile in this environment because there's so few of us, really kept it real with me. And the fact that he kept it real is one moment to which I owe a lot of my success today. And far too often, in my opinion, whether it's on my white partners or my minority partners, I feel like we often walk on eggshells and don't give appropriate constructive criticism to our mentees. And in the end, the mentees pay for it because folks stop giving them work, they eventually get less busy, and before you know it, they've moved on to somewhere else and we haven't done enough to give them constructive feedback so that they can succeed.  Bareeq: I love that story. Thank you so much for sharing, Rizzy. And I love that it also, I think, probably modeled for you how a mentor should be, which is not just rainbows and, you know, pie in the sky. It's also, you know, keeping it real and making sure you're pushing that person to their success because you see it, right? Thuy, have you found your experience as a first-generation attorney, what have you found in terms of mentorship opportunities and mentorship in terms of your career development?  Thuy: I'm going to take it kind of at a slightly different angle, Bareeq. Going back to my first year as an associate here at Reed Smith, I realized about a month in that I wanted to do transactional work and I was slotted in the litigation group. I came from a law school that was heavily, heavily litigation focused. I did moot court for two or three years until I realized at Reed Smith, I wanted to do transactional work and looking around the office, we didn't have a ton of it. And one day I realized I can't keep doing this. I can't, I need to be billing eight to nine hours a day. And I can't just keep sitting around waiting for work to, to come onto my plate. So I started reaching out to other offices and I reached out to this one partner in Southern California who I won't name. And I said, Hey, I'm very very interested in your practice and transactional work. Is there anything I can help with? And he was hesitant. And looking back, I understand why he might have been hesitant. Someone you don't know who is a very junior associate who is just realizing that she wants to practice transactional law. It is hard to take on someone new under your wing and have to show them the ropes, have to show them how to run a bread line, have to teach them some very basic things. So it took him a while to eventually give me work. So finally, when it came, when the opportunity presented itself for me to help this partner with this assignment, it was my very first assignment with him. So I really wanted to make sure it was polished and it was my best foot forward because I knew that if it wasn't, I was never going to get more work from him and he was probably never going to take another chance on a junior associate again. So thankfully, I did a pretty good job and he still talks about that assignment. To this day, but he was impressed. And one assignment led to another, led to another. And next thing you knew it, I was working for him full time. And I remember during this time, I did many things to get his attention, including flying down to Southern California to see him and see other people that he worked with and called him and emailed him. And I guess all of this is It's just to say sometimes mentorship doesn't fall into your lap. Mentors don't show up on your doorstep. You have to seek them out. And sometimes you have to keep banging on the door to seek them out. But at the end of the day, it's totally worth it. He is now a mentor and a sponsor for me. And I credit all the success I've had at this firm with him taking me under his wing.  Bareeq: I think that's a great example for those that look at mentorship to say, you know, sometimes you have to be really proactive about it and pursue, you know, somebody saying like you have the experience I want to one day, you know, follow in your footsteps. And I love that story. That's fantastic. And Julia, what about you? What about your experience with mentorship in your career?  Julia: To that I think I have to quickly summarize my career, which did not start in big law. So I have been working or I've worked at three law firms. I started an IP boutique litigation firm. And then I realized that wasn't really for me. And then I did plaintiff side law for a little bit. And I love that. But I realized in the long run, that would also probably not be the perfect fit for me. before I made my way to read myth. And I think for every step of my career, I have had mentors and guidance from people within the firm, which I think is really important to rely upon. But I've also luckily had the support of the Asian American Bar Association up in the Bay Area. And for me, that is a really great source of mentorship because you meet people from, you know, all backgrounds, big laws, law, government, and they are such a great resource if you're thinking about, you know, what trajectory is your career going in. If you have some, anything you want to discuss us about your career that you might not necessarily feel as comfortable talking about within the firm. There's a resource for you outside the firm. And so I actually, I guess, want to talk about my experience seeking mentorship and getting help with the Bar Association. And that has been a really good experience for me.  Bareeq: Thank you so much for sharing, Julia. And I also love that you mentioned the Asian Bar Association, because I think that's a great resource. And even thinking outside the box, like what other organizations can I kind of look to to make those connections and relationships? I could definitely talk to you all all day because you have such eye opening experiences that I think so many of us can learn from. But as we wrap up, I guess my last question will be to all aspiring first-generation law students and other first-generation attorneys listening, especially those of diverse background, what advice would you give them? How can they navigate the pressures of feeling the need to go, quote-unquote, that extra mile? Rizzy, I'll start with you.  Rizwan: Yeah, thank you. I'll say going the extra mile, similar to what Thuy was saying, I completely agree, which is you not only go the extra mile in your day-to-day substantive legal work, but you have to think about the bigger picture, building your brand and building your practice. Because before you know it, you may be a summer associate or even a law student and a baby lawyer. And then you have to start building your brand and building your practice and going out there and getting work for your colleagues as well as yourself. self. So to me, it's really about tapping into the network. And I'm not saying your network, because our individual networks are limited. They are who we know, who we went to law school with. But it's so important what some of my colleagues have said. It's like, don't wait for that mentor to come knocking on your door to say, hey, I want to help you. You need to go out there and adopt your own mentors. And I did that and I continue to do that. I mean, young people today and young lawyers today in our world that we live in now have so many resources at their disposal where you can go up and look up a client or you can look up a law firm and you can pretty quickly determine how many degrees of separation you have with that one individual with whom you not only have a interest in their practice, but maybe you have a cultural affinity or connection to them. Leverage that. I never would have gotten my federal clerkship if I did not find out the judge that I wanted to clerk for had a former clerk who knew a buddy I went to law school with. So what did I do? I reached out to that buddy and I said, hey, I'm trying to clerk for Judge Johnson in the Eastern District of New York. Do you know this guy, Jason? He's like, oh yeah, he's my boy. My immediate response to my buddy was, well, he's my boy now. Can we do lunch with him? And the rest is history. And the same goes for my trajectory to the US Attorney's Office. So really take ownership of every facet of your life. We get so tied up as lawyers to be type A, and I have to get the best grades, which you do, and I have to do the best work, which you do. But you can't just be doing your best work and getting your best grades inside of a cave. You need to sort of take that out there and learn from others, leverage relationships so that you can continue to excel in whatever it is you want to do.  Bareeq: Fantastic. Thank you, Rizzy. Julia, what about you? What advice would you be giving to other first-generation attorneys or aspiring law students that are first-generation?  Julia: I think it's really important to keep an open mind and stay curious. So not only do you, I think, have to actively pursue what you want, but I think you still need to keep an open mind to figure out what you do want. Coming from a background where I think my parents just expected me to go excel in whatever career I wanted to do, they were not very understanding when at first I wasn't that excited about immediately going into middle. I wanted to have different experiences before I made my way into big law. And I think there's a lot of opportunities out there for lawyers who want to explore and learn a little bit more about the legal career, about themselves before they transition into big law. And I think that is perfectly acceptable. I know that a lot of Asian Americans just, they want to be the best and that's very commendable, but you can be the best in all sorts of different legal areas.  Bareeq: Yeah. And there's something to be said about being the best for yourself, like best version of you, because it's not good. The best is not going to be for the best for everybody. And really knowing yourself and what what you want to do. And last but not least, Thuy, what are your thoughts?  Thuy: Thanks, Bareeq. I'm going to echo what Rizzy said and just, again, hone in on the importance of going to events. And I don't want to call it networking. I hate that word of just connecting with people and getting to know people because you want to. I think as immigrants, the way we're taught by our parents is you just need to keep your head down, do your best work. And so it's very easy to be in a big law firm where there's a billable hours requirement to say, I'm not going to go to that happy hour. I'm not going to go to that alumni event because I should get this memo out or I should bill another two hours. But you know like Rizzy said one of the more important things is to get to know people it's for your career and this is your career you get what you put into it you know Casey Ryan our Global Managing Partner knows me by name but she doesn't know me because i do i draft a awesome real estate contract she knows me because i go to events when she's in town i go to see her When I'm seeing her, I'm seeing maybe other members of senior management, my own colleagues I grow up with, connecting with them, commiserating with them sometimes. Talking about our families and our dogs, what have you. Just having this community to lean onto to succeed together so that one day, if you need help or if they need help, they're there for you. It just makes this very big firm feel like a much smaller, comfortable home.  Bareeq: I love that. Thank you so much for all this wonderful advice. I know our listeners will really appreciate it. Thank you so much, Thuy, Rizzy, Julia, for sharing your incredible journeys and insights with us today. Your experiences and advice are invaluable to our listeners and to all those aspiring to make their mark in the legal field. Thank you to our listeners for tuning in to Inclusivity Included. Stay tuned for more episodes where we will continue to explore and celebrate diversity, equity, and inclusion. Until next time, have a great rest of the day.  Outro: Inclusivity Included is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. You can find our podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer:This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.   All rights reserved.  Transcript is auto-generated.

The military junta in Burkina Faso extends its military rule for another five years. So does this mean it is consolidating its power?There have been chaotic scenes in Sierra Leone during the Bar Association's ballot for a powerful executive, deeply steeped in the country's politics, and Gen Z's desire for promotion in the South African workplace – what are employers doing to accommodate them?

Welcome to episode 227 of the Grow Your Law Firm podcast, hosted by Ken Hardison. In this episode, Ken sits down with Brooke Lively, President of Cathedral Capital. Brooke emphasizes the importance of data-driven strategies like EOS and scaling up and highlights the crucial steps to prepare a law firm for sale, focusing on clean financials, efficient operations, and staff training. The conversation delves into hiring the right people, implementing proper procedures, and fostering a deliberate culture to ensure consistency, efficiency, and growth within a law firm.   Brooke discovered her passion for helping entrepreneurial lawyers build their firms by working with her father. After getting her MBA in Corporate Finance and Investments at TCU and a quick stint at a hedge fund, Brooke found herself helping her family establish a new firm, which hit the 7-figure mark within 18 months.  Soon thereafter, she started talking to other lawyers who asked, “Can you do for us what you do for your family?”.    That was when she realized that most attorneys aren't running their firms by the numbers.  They are making decisions based on their gut and that causes a lot of anxiety – not to mention a loss of profitability. With that insight, Brooke started Cathcap, a fractional CFO company designed to maximize law firm profitability.   Over the past decade, Brooke and her team have helped hundreds of firms make data driven decisions to drive faster growth and more predictability in their businesses. As a CFO, Brooke looks at every part of a firm that touches the money – and that's the whole firm. This eventually led her to become an EOS® Implementer. Through EOS, Brooke helps firms get clarity on their vision, discipline and accountability to increase traction, and a healthy functional leadership team.   Brooke weaves the technical knowledge of her MBA with her real-world experience to create entertaining speeches that have been heard around the world for groups such as Entrepreneur's Organization, Bar Associations, and at conferences like PILMMA, 360 Advocacy, and the Louisiana Association of Justice. She has written numerous books, including her international best-selling series From Panic to Profit and her latest, Exit On Top. Brooke has been featured in Forbes, CNBC, US News and World Report and has a monthly financial column in Attorney at Work.  She is a frequently requested podcast guest.   1. The Importance of Vision, People, and Data in EOS:         - Ensuring everyone is on the same page about the firm's direction.         - Having the right individuals in the right roles. 2. Addressing Issues and Improving Procedures:         - Identifying and solving problems permanently.         - Documenting processes for consistency and efficiency. 3. Achieving Traction and Alignment:         - Getting everyone aligned and rowing together towards the vision.         - Bringing the vision down to practical implementation. 4. Preparation for Law Firm Sale:         - Creating a timeline for Sale Readiness for clean financials and profitability.         - Creating characteristics of a firm that's a joy to own. 5. Transitioning from Working in the Firm to Managing the Firm:         - Being able to manage the firm with minimal effort.         - Reaching a stage where you're managing managers and not day-to-day operations.   Resources:  cathcap.com https://www.facebook.com/CathedralCapital https://www.linkedin.com/in/brookelively/   Additional Resources:    https://www.pilmma.org/aiworkshop https://www.pilmma.org/the-mastermind-effect https://www.pilmma.org/resources https://www.pilmma.org/mastermind

Soooo, we are not allowed to criticize a judge who makes a LOT of bad decisions?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.