Complete Precedent

FALL 2012 VOL 6, ISSUE 4
Missouri Bar Executive Directors
Past, Present and Future
Sebrina A. Barrett, Wade F. Baker
and Keith A. Birkes
The Missouri Bar
A tradition of leadership
and service
1
Precedent Fall 2012
2
Precedent Fall 2012
PRECEDENT
A
QUARTERLY
PUBLICATION
OF
THE
MISSOURI
BAR
FALL 2012 VOL 6, ISSUE 4
COLUMNS
4
FEATURES
RESPONSIBILITIES
OF THE BAR
A Tradition of Leadership
and Service
Fifty-Four Years of
Service
5
MISSOURI LEGAL
TRIVIA
44
WRITING IT RIGHT
50
IN PRACTICE
In this special issue, bid farewell to
Missouri Bar Executive Director Keith A.
Birkes and greet his successor, Sebrina
A. Barrett. Then read about the myriad
of services provided by your Missouri
Bar and how they have been enhanced
throughout the past 25 years.
Acronyms
Seven Habits of
Highly Effective Advocates
55
ETHICS
59
TRANSITIONS
The Art of Getting Paid
Precedent is published four times per year
(February, May, August, November) by The
Missouri Bar, with offices at 326 Monroe
Street, Jefferson City. The mailing address
is: Post Office Box 119, Jefferson City, MO
65102.
Subscription price is $16.00 per year for nonmembers, with single copies available at a
cost of $6.00 per issue. The subscription fee
for Missouri Bar members is included in each
member’s enrollment fee.
Opinions and positions stated are those of
the authors and not by fact of publication
necessarily those of The Missouri Bar. The
material within this publication is presented
as information to be used by attorneys, in
conjunction with other researched deemed
necessary, in the exercise of their independent
judgment. Original and fully current sources
of authority should be researched.
Keith A. Birkes Gary P. Toohey
Executive Director Editor
MoBAR AT YOUR SERVICE
17
20
25
28
30
36
37
39
40
41
43
MEMBER SERVICES
PUBLIC EDUCATION
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
MEMBER COMMUNICATIONS
PUBLIC SERVICE
TECHNOLOGY
LEGISLATIVE ACTIVITIES
INSURANCE PROGRAMS
MOLAP
MEETINGS
THE MISSOURI BAR CENTER
Precedent Fall 2012
3
RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BAR
Fifty-Four Years
of Service
By Keith A. Birkes
The Board of Governors of The
Missouri Bar hires the executive director of The Missouri Bar. I followed
Wade Baker, who was executive
director for 27 years. Effective January
1, 2013, Sebrina Barrett will succeed
me. Together, Wade and I have served
The Missouri Bar for 54 years. I know
Sebrina will find the position as interesting and rewarding as we have, and I
know her tenure will be lengthy.
Much has changed during my 27
years. The number of lawyer members
has more than tripled and technology
is radically different. The economics
and methods of practice are constantly
evolving. What remains the same is
the deeply satisfying nature of the
legal profession and the wonderful
citizens who make up the membership
of The Missouri Bar.
I was very fortunate to work for
Wade Baker for 10 years before
becoming executive director. Wade
shared the culture and the lore of The
Missouri Bar with me, as I have tried
to do with Sebrina. Longevity and
stability can be a very good thing, and
I think The Missouri Bar has benefited
from the experience and commitment
we have brought to The Missouri Bar.
Sebrina is now the future, and you will
enjoy and benefit from her outstanding
talents.
4
This issue of Precedent charts
some of the changes that have occurred over the past quarter century.
What I remember most vividly are the
presidents, Board members, committee
chairs and the hundreds of outstanding
lawyers I have met and worked with to
make the legal profession in Missouri
as good as possible. Equally as vivid
are the memories and experiences I
have had with members of the staff of
The Missouri Bar. As executive director, I am responsible for this fine group
of professionals, and the skills and
commitment they have brought to The
Missouri Bar are truly remarkable.
In retirement, I plan to do as much
pro bono work as possible, as well as
pursue a number of other interests. I
am looking forward to this next phase
of my life, but what I don’t plan to
change is interaction with Missouri
lawyers and judges. You all are the
best! Thank you.
Keith A. Birkes is The
Missouri Bar’s Executive
Director.
Precedent Fall 2012
2012-2013
Board of Governors
District I
Suzanne Bradley
St. Joseph
W. Douglas Thomson
Maryville
District X
Brett W. Roubal
Springfield
Wallace S. Squibb
Springfield
District II
Neil F. Maune, Jr.
Hannibal
District XI
Bevy A. Beimdiek
St. Louis
James H. Guest
St. Louis
Robert S. Kenney
St. Louis
Mark H. Levison
St. Louis
Hon. Mark H. Neill
St. Louis
Nancy R. Mogab
St. Louis
District III
Max E. Mitchell
Sedalia
District IV
Brian Francka
Jefferson City
Mark Comley
Jefferson City
District V
Hon. Charles Curless
Lamar
Edward J. Hershewe
Joplin
District VI
Erik Bergmanis
Camdenton
District VII
John W. Grimm
Cape Girardeau
Joseph P. Rice, III
Cape Girardeau
District VIII
Douglass F. Noland
Liberty
Tricia M. Scaglia
Independence
Patrick B. Starke
Lee’s Summit
District IX
Hon. Richard Bresnahan
St. Louis
Genevieve M. Frank
Clayton
John R. Gunn
St. Louis
Hon. John F. Kintz
Clayton
J.B. Lasater
St. Louis
Reuben A. Shelton
St. Louis
Joan M. Swartz
St. Louis
Lynn Whaley Vogel
St. Louis
District XII
Thomas V. Bender
Kansas City
P. John Brady
Kansas City
Dana Tippin Cutler
Kansas City
Joel R. Elmer
Kansas City
Gregg F. Lombardi
Kansas City
Walter R. Simpson
Kansas City
Antwaun L. Smith
Kansas City
Mira Mdivani
Kansas City
District XIII
Raymond E. Williams
West Plains
District XIV
Eric J. Wulff
St. Charles
District XV
Robert J. Buckley
Columbia
Eastern District
Nicole Colbert-Botchway
Southern District
Wendy Garrison
Western District
Nimrod Chapel, Jr.
YLS REPRESENTATIVE
Michael E. Gardner
Cape Girardeau
Missouri Legal Trivia
By Joseph Fred Benson
Throughout our history, members of the legal profession have answered the call to public service. This issue is devoted to
members of the bar who have served at the national level. Do you recognize any familiar names?
1. This 1925 graduate of Saint Louis University School of Law served as United States Postmaster General from 1945 to
1947. Was he:
a) William Bond Douglas; b) Robert E. Hannegan; c) William O. Douglas; d) Paul Freund?
2. This former circuit judge for Johnson and Cass counties served as U.S. Secretary of Agriculture from 1919 to 1921.
Who was he?
a) Joshua Willis Alexander; b) Judge James Harvey Birch; c) Grover Cleveland; d) Grover Cleveland Alexander.
3. This member of The Missouri Bar served as Secretary of the Interior from 1889 to 1893. Can you name him?
a) John W. Noble; b) John Turner White; c) James T. Blair; d) Mark Harmon.
4. He graduated from Washington University School of Law in 1949. In 1978, he stepped down from the United States
Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit to become FBI Director. Is he:
a) John C. Danforth; b) Peter Dunne; c) William H. Webster; d) John C. Dunsford?
5. This former judge of the St. Louis Land Court served as Abraham Lincoln’s Attorney General from 1861 to 1864.
Was he:
a) Judge Barton Bates; b) Governor Frederick Bates; c) Judge Hamilton Rowan Gamble; d) Judge Edward Bates?
And, yes, all the Bates’ are family!
6. He was the runner–up in the men’s singles U.S. Tennis Championship in 1898. A graduate of Washington University
School of Law, he went on to serve as Secretary of War from 1925 to 1929. Was he:
a) Dwight Filley Davis; b) Ernest Moss Tipton; c) Harry S Truman; d) Tim McCarver?
7. This 1849 graduate of the University of Louisville School of Law moved to St. Louis. He served as the first U.S.
Secretary of Agriculture from February through March 1889. Can you name him?
a) James Overton Broadhead; b) Henry Hitchcock; c) Abiel Leonard; d) Norman Jay Coleman.
8. This gentleman from Princeton, Mercer County, Missouri served as U.S. Secretary of Agriculture from 1929 to 1933.
Was he:
a) Laurence Mastick Hyde; b) Arthur Mastick Hyde; c) Ben Hyde; d) Albert Clark?
9. This former president of the American Bar Association and St. Louis attorney served as Solicitor General of the United
States from 1910 to 1912. Was he:
a) Franklin Ferriss, II; b) Frederick William Lehman; c) Keith Birkes; d) Jack Wax?
10. This member of The Missouri Bar served as legal advisor to India in 1958 with the diplomatic rank of Ambassador.
Who was he?
a) Judge Noah Weinstein; b) Judge Edward M. Ruddy; c) Rush Hudson Limbaugh; d) Clark Clifford?
11. Bonus Point! This 1928 graduate of Washington University School of Law served as White House counsel to
President Harry S Truman from 1946 to 1950. Can you name him?
a) Clark Clifford; b) Whitney Harris; c) William H. Danforth, M.D.; d) Charles M. Blackmar.
Answers: 1) b; 2) a; 3) a; 4) c; 5) d; 6) a; 7) d; 8) b; 9) b; 10) c; 11) a.
Joe Benson is the archivist at the Supreme Court of Missouri. He may be reached at joe.benson@courts.mo.gov.
Precedent Fall 2012
5
FEATURE ARTICLE
A Few Moments
With Keith Birkes
6
Precedent Fall 2012
FEATURE ARTICLE
On December 31, 2012, Keith A. Birkes
will close the book on a 37-year career of
service to The Missouri Bar – including the
past 27 years as its executive director.
Birkes succeeded Wade Baker as The Missouri Bar’s executive director in 1985. He
and his late wife, Carolyn, have two children.
Daughter Lara received a Fulbright Scholarship and is currently a Fellow at the World
Economic Forum in Geneva, Switzerland.
Meanwhile, son Clayton is a student-athlete
at Southern Boone County High School.
On October 6, Birkes married the former
Kathy Martin.
In this interview, he looks back at his career with The Missouri Bar, the changes he
has seen during that time, and his plans for
the future.
You were quite an athlete at both the high
school and collegiate level, and you’ve continued to be physically active by hiking, canoeing,
hunting, fishing, climbing, etc. Beyond the obvious health benefits, do you find these activities to be helpful in dealing with the demands
of your job?
Absolutely. I think any activity that is competitive has
value to people of all ages, particularly kids when they are
growing up. Understanding the discipline that sports requires, the teamwork, the communication, the coordination,
and the discipline is a wonderful foundation. Being able to
stay in a good as shape as possible, I think, has all kinds
of benefits for your academic pursuits and your ability to
focus and concentrate and make good decisions. I think it
has helped me be a better administrator, a better decisionmaker. I think all of that developed leadership skills and
decision-making skills that have served me very well and
served The Missouri Bar very well. I would like to think
that I am able to make decisions once I have gathered all
of the facts quickly and efficiently, and I think that has also
served The Missouri Bar very well.
What made you decide to pursue law as a
career?
I started studying biology and chemistry in
undergraduate school and liked that, but I didn’t like it as
much as some business and economic courses that I took. I
had a particularly good friend in Bolivar whose father was a
lawyer. He was a very nice man, and I admired his integrity
and his community accomplishments and his family. That
caused me to think that studying law might be something
that would appeal to me. He mentioned that he thought it
might be something that I would enjoy, and I ultimately
agreed with him. After undergraduate school and a year of
working on my master’s degree in business administration,
I entered the University of Missouri-Columbia School of
Law and graduated in the spring of 1973.
How and why did you begin working for The
Missouri Bar in 1975?
When I graduated law school in 1973, my first job was
as assistant general counsel to the State Auditor, who was
John Ashcroft. I enjoyed that work, but a state planning
agency of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, which was a crime-fighting program in the 1970s, was
looking for a lawyer who would supervise the projects that
the agency funded for the court system in Missouri. So I
went to work for them and, during the course of that employment, I became well acquainted with The Missouri Bar.
Actually, the Council on Criminal Justice had two grants
that were provided to The Missouri Bar: one to assist with
the training of prosecutors and one to assist with educating the public about the justice system. So I got acquainted
with all of those folks over here. At one point, Scott Smith,
who had worked here for several years, decided to go into
private practice. So he called me and said, “What would
you think about working for The Missouri Bar?” And I
thought that sounded interesting, based on my contact with
people I respected a lot. So I came over and interviewed,
they offered me a position, and I have been very grateful
ever since.
How did your eventual promotion to executive
director come about?
My initial position with the bar was helping with our
law-related education program. I was director of that program and, as I got better acquainted with the various programs and activities of The Missouri Bar, Wade recognized
that I had some potential for management and he discussed
with me regularly my interests and began sharing with
me the various programs and activities and administrative
approaches that had served him quite well. I had an opportunity to work with all of the officers of the bar in various
capacities, and they asked me if I would be interested in a
Precedent Fall 2012
7
FEATURE ARTICLE
position as director of administration, which was a new position. So, after about two years of dealing with law-related
education, I became the director of administration and dealt
with financial and administrative matters for Wade and
other members of the staff and developed some expertise,
working more closely with the Board of Governors and the
Finance Committee.
Wade announced about five years before his retirement
that he planned to retire at age 65, so some discussion began at that time as to whether I would be interested in that
position. The officers had had a chance to work with me
and view my skills and abilities, so about two years before
Wade retired, I was hired as the deputy executive director
and designated to succeed Wade when he retired at the end
of 1984.
When you became executive director, did you
have specific goals for the organization? If so,
have those goals been met?
Having had the opportunity to work at the bar for 10
years and starting out as a relatively young lawyer, it was
really nice to see how the bar operated, to see a lot of
growth as the numbers of attorneys increased substantially.
All of the other staff members here had perspectives on
how things had been done and understood that it was a
changing environment. Wade understood that his skills and
abilities were maybe different than would be needed in the
future.
We had Selectric typewriters and that was as automated
as it got here. We certainly didn’t have fax machines, we
didn’t have computers, we didn’t have anything that was
automated in any way, shape or form. We had an old Addressograph machine with metal plates that we used to
address every mailing that was sent from The Missouri
Bar. It was a horrible device that shook the whole building, so every time we had a mailing, you’d have all of these
metal addresses that had to pass through the machine that
stamped the address from a metal plate onto the mailings.
Automation was developing – computers, word processing, all kinds of things were changing – and I knew that we
would have to embrace that technology if we were going
to continue to be the leading professional organization that
The Missouri Bar has always been.
During Wade’s 27 years as executive director, it was
considered to be an outstanding organization in every
respect, and was at the cutting edge for bar associations
nationally, without any question. But things change, and
they’ve changed during each of the 27 years that I’ve been
8
executive director. We have embraced technology and
benefited from it in all ways. Everything we do is electronic
now – communications, publications, continuing legal
education deskbooks – everything we do is electronic. We
still do printing on paper – more than we thought we would
be at this time – but our members and the public benefit
from that, and we’ll probably continue to do so for a certain
period of time.
Continuing legal education was an area where the need
and demand was obvious. Early in my tenure as executive director, we looked at mandatory continuing legal
education. The Board of Governors determined that we
should move in that direction, made a recommendation
to the Supreme Court and they agreed, and at that point
CLE expanded exponentially and the staff working in CLE
expanded exponentially. That’s always been something that
I’ve always felt has been extremely important for The Missouri Bar, and we have always been a leader in providing
programs and publications.
Interestingly, that’s been quite dynamic and still is, as
we are seeing more and more programs and competition.
The Missouri Bar has always been the leading provider,
and I hope we will always be the leading provider. But
there is a tremendous amount of competition, which serves
the members of the bar very well, but we have to hone our
skills constantly and we have seen, in publications, that
there is less demand for the type of publications that have
always been considered almost essential to practice law in
Missouri because of the proliferation of other publications
and other information – often available at no cost on the
Internet or at very low cost. We’re going through a transition now to make sure that we are providing publications in
the way that our members want and the future is a little bit
unknown.
I appreciated law-related education from the beginning
and the importance of educating the public, and it remains
essential if not more important now than it was then in
light of the attacks on the independence of the judiciary.
If Missourians don’t understand why the judicial branch
should be impartial and independent and apolitical, then we
haven’t done our job as well as we can in educating them,
so we are putting more and more emphasis on that all the
time. It’s extremely important.
Precedent Fall 2012
FEATURE ARTICLE
You’ve been actively involved in national organizations such as the National Association of
Bar Executives, which you served as president,
and the American Bar Association, where you
were a member and later chairperson of the
Standing Committee on Bar Services and Activities. How have these positions helped you to
do your job here at The Missouri Bar?
It’s really important, and I have always encouraged our
directors and assistant directors to be actively involved in
the National Association of Bar Executives, the American
Bar, and any professional organization that will allow them
to better understand how people with similar positions to
theirs in other states and other communities operate. You
can learn so much from other people who do the same
thing you do. Maybe the circumstances and structure are
somewhat different, but being able to regularly discuss
with other executive directors from around the nation what
they are doing, how they are doing it, what successes and
failures they’ve had, is a tremendous benefit.
What has been the biggest challenge you’ve
I served on NABE’s board of directors and as president,
faced as executive director?
I think it is the constant attack on the non-partisan court
and that gave me a wonderful opportunity over the last 27
years to see how other state bars and metropolitan bars opplan. That has been something that has recurred almost
erate, and become wonderful friends with other executive
annually for the last 27 years I’ve been here, and I know
it occurred before that. It comes from a variety of places
directors. It’s just been wonderfully beneficial.
The ABA is, of course, the largest association of lawyers
at different times, but it has been something that has fairly
in the country – and probably in the world – and havconstantly occurred.
ing been able to be a member of the Standing Committee
The Missouri Bar has consistently supported the Nonon Bar Services and Activities, again, gave me insight
Partisan Court Plan and a system of selecting judges that
is as apolitical as possible. Frankly, politicians and those
into how bar associations around the country and around
who would like to control the courts lust for more control
the world operate. It’s just a great way to make wonderof them. They absolutely resent not being able to control
ful friends, understand what is going on elsewhere, and
contribute to how those groups and the various individuals
the judicial branch. To see politicians constantly trying to
compromise the impartiality of the judiciary has been disap- operate their bars.
pointing and challenging and often expensive for The Missouri Bar to have to struggle against. But we have struggled What is the nature of the relationship between
against it, and we have succeeded in every respect.
the executive director and the leadership of
the bar? Are you a employee who implements
I’m not so naïve as to think that the political interests
policies established by the leadership, a peer
will go away. They will continue to struggle against a
system that they can’t control, and that will be something, I who provides counsel and participates in the
decision-making process, or a little of both?
fear, 27 years from now The Missouri Bar will still be protecting. There may be nothing more important to the justice I think, without any question, probably a lot of both of
system and the citizens of Missouri than protecting a plan
those. The Board of Governors makes the policy for The
that, without question, has been a model for the nation.
Missouri Bar. The Board of Governors hires the executive
director. The Board of Governors has always been interested in what the executive director and the members of the
staff think, and what they suggest. We have all had input
in a variety of ways into the policy decisions. Often, those
When you became executive director, The Missouri Bar had 16,000 members. That number
has nearly doubled during the 27 years you
have been executive director. Has technology
been the key to meeting the needs of this burgeoning membership?
Certainly, it has been the secret to doing it economically
and efficiently. If we still had to mail all of the information that we try to provide to lawyers and the public, we
wouldn’t be able to afford it. So technology has allowed
us to communicate more quickly and more affordably than
the old methods. Maintaining our relevancy and the quality
of the information we provide has been even more important – making sure that what we send is of interest and is
of value and is helping our lawyers to practice efficiently
and professionally and competently, and helping the public
understand their justice system, how it functions, and what
they’re entitled to from that system.
Precedent Fall 2012
9
FEATURE ARTICLE
policy decisions begin with the officers and the staff, collaboratively.
I’ve been very fortunate to have a group of leaders – all
27 presidents that I’ve worked with, and every executive
committee, all of the governors on the Board of Governors
– with whom I’ve been able to communicate, interact, and
consider a variety of alternatives. My opinion has always
been considered when offered, and I have always felt welcome to offer my opinions. Again, anyone in this position
has to understand who makes the final decision, but anyone
in this position who isn’t able to influence that final decision probably isn’t the right person to have the job.
From a position of hindsight, what are the personal or professional skills one needs to perform this job well?
Certainly, knowledge of the profession, knowledge of
the organization, an awareness of the needs of the lawyers
and the public, and an ability to arrive at good decisions
collaboratively. I have always valued the opinions of every
member of the staff of The Missouri Bar when an important
decision is made, and consulting – collaborating – on all
of the important decisions has always allowed me to make
better decisions than I would have if I had tried to do it
myself. You have to have integrity, you have to know what
the rules are – and not break them – and you’ve got to be
able to tell others what the rules are. When they might be
inclined to bend them or not understand what they are, you
have to have the ability to remind them what the rules are.
After you have gathered the necessary facts, it is always
better to make your decisions quickly and timely rather
than to let them agonize. You have to allow enough time
to make sure you understand everything, but once you’ve
done that you’d better make a decision and you’d better
make it quickly. If they can be good decisions, everything
works out great. If they’re not good decisions, then you
don’t get the same result. Again, I’ve been very, very fortunate with the collaboration of so many good staff members
and so many good officers. When I have made a decision
within my discretion, I don’t think I’ve made many bad
decisions, and when I have suggested to the leadership of
The Missouri Bar what I think, quite often they have agreed
with me. I think that, on occasion, I have moved them in
the right direction to make decisions that they might not
have made but for my urging and my influence and my
advocacy for certain positions.
10
Your predecessor as executive director, Wade
Baker, served for 27 years in that position.
Now you are retiring after 27 years. What does
that say about the value of continuity at the top
of the organizational chart?
Continuity, if you can have it and if it is positive and
serves everybody’s interests, and is mutually beneficial, is a
wonderful thing. Continuity is not always positive, however. Turnover at the top of an organization, at the administrative level, takes time and energy and resources that can
draw away from the organization’s primary function. To the
extent that it doesn’t happen any more often than is necessary –and, again, if everybody is happy with the leadership
– then it is a good thing.
I think it is unusual that Wade was here for 27 years, and
now I’ve been here for 27 years. There are a few other bars
around the country with executive directors who have been
in place as long as I have now – I think there are maybe
three or four around the country that have been doing this
with the same organization longer than I have – but it
becomes less frequent than it used to be. I think when Wade
did it, it was fairly common that executive directors served
for extended periods. It’s less common now, but I think
where it works it is a very good thing.
But it doesn’t seem to work as well as it used to, and
there are a lot of factors. During my 27 years, there were
several times when other organizations asked me if I might
be interested in a change, and consider what they were
offering, and I declined every one of those very quickly
because I knew that I liked what I was doing and wanted to
continue doing it. But I also knew, from the day I took the
job, that age 65, for me – as was the case with Wade – was
a perfect time to turn over the reins to someone else. At that
point 27 years ago, for anyone who might have been listening, I said, “Well, I think Wade’s model was a good one,
and that’s what I intend to do if this works out that long,”
and I feel very, very fortunate that it has worked. I couldn’t
have enjoyed it more.
I think I have contributed to the organization in important ways, as Wade certainly did, and I know Sebrina will,
also. The longevity has many, many benefits. It can also
have disadvantages. I would like to think, in the instance of
The Missouri Bar, that the last 54 years of stability has been
a good thing and a lot to be proud of, and I am confident
that Sebrina will provide consistent stability in the same
vein. Whether she stays for that same period of time will be
something that only the future can tell us.
Precedent Fall 2012
FEATURE ARTICLE
In 1997, you undertook a month-long climb of
Alaska’s Mount McKinley, the highest peak in
North America. What persuaded you to undertake such a grueling challenge, and what do
you feel you’ve gained from that experience?
Outdoor activities are something I’ve always enjoyed,
and we started vacationing as a family in the Rocky Mountains when Lara was quite young. We did a lot of hiking,
backpacking, and just enjoyed the mountains and everything that that kind of exercise and scenery provides. Lara
was maybe 12 years old, and we decided, after a couple of
hikes off trails and into fairly high altitude, that it would be
fun to develop some of the technical skills to climb rocks
and ice and snow.
The Colorado Mountain School in Rocky Mountain
National Park was a place that we became familiar with.
Lara and I spent a week at the Colorado Mountain School
learning basic rock and ice climbing skills, and while
we were doing that Lara suggest that climbing Mount
McKinley should be an objective. That was a climb that
the Colorado Mountain School regularly did. They’d take
a group of climbers on an expedition, and we were aware
of that from our experience there. Lara suggested that we
ought to do that, and I agreed, never expecting that she
would really want to do that at a later point in time. But she
kept that thought in mind, and when she was 18 and I was
50, it seemed like the right time to give it a shot and we
did. Fortunately, we made it to the top and back down and
thoroughly enjoyed it.
Again, the competition of that, the decision-making skills
that you develop in extreme circumstances like that, I think
are very, very beneficial in other endeavors. And I think the
self-confidence that you develop from any really challenging activity is just extremely valuable. I think it gave Lara
a tremendous amount of self-confidence, which she has
continued to demonstrate in all kinds of ways. It gave me
tremendous satisfaction to do that with my daughter and, so
far as we know, we are the only father-daughter team that
has climbed Mt. McKinley.
I have offered to take Clayton to the summit. I think I
am still up to that if I got in proper shape, and so far he has
declined the offer in favor of maybe spending a few days
on a beach somewhere. We’ll see – you never know.
I understand that you had one particularly
harrowing moment on the mountain.
The biggest hazards on Mt. McKinley are crevasses. It’s
a huge glacier from the summit all the way to the base. The
glaciers move regularly, and when they move chasms are
created. It snows constantly, and the temperatures are never
above freezing even in the summertime, and are often below zero. Snow falls and covers over these cracks, and you
have no way of knowing where they are. Sometimes they
are partially visible, and sometimes they’re not. You always
probe for them. Whatever climber is in the lead on the rope
team is responsible for probing the snow to determine if
there is a void beneath you and you avoid that. But you
don’t always find them, and sometimes you know they are
there and you cross them on snow bridges that appear to be
stable.
Near the end of our climb, after 20-plus days on the
mountain, we were down to an elevation of about 6,000
feet, and it was a little bit warmer and a lot of snow bridges
were breaking down. We crossed one that we thought was
stable. I was on the first of three rope teams, and the lead
climber went across, but when I was crossing the snow
bridge it collapsed. That’s why you rope up, and the climbers on either end of the rope were able to arrest my fall.
That’s why you carry ice axes, and everybody was trained
in arresting falls, and the other two climbers quickly arrested my fall and pulled me out after about half an hour. I
went down maybe about 15 feet into the crevasse, and there
was probably another 100 or 200 feet below me that didn’t
look very inviting. So they pulled me out and we made it
safely off the mountain none the worse for wear.
What are your plans for the future?
I have a lot of personal interests, a lot of hobbies and
activities that I have been able to enjoy up to a certain
extent while working. One of the things that I have missed
is actually practicing law, providing legal advice. There’s
not a day that goes by that someone doesn’t make their way
to me, through the telephone or walking in, who needs legal
assistance and doesn’t seem to be able to find it because
they can’t afford it or it’s not available. I fully intend to
provide pro bono assistance to a variety of clients, both
civil and likely criminal – nothing complex, but things that
would be of genuine benefit to citizens who can’t afford to
pay for legal services.
I’m also looking forward to all of the outdoor activities
and some indoor activities. I enjoy carving and plan to do
quite a bit of that and all of the things we discussed before
– golf, canoeing, kayaking, hiking, backpacking, some
technical climbing. I’ve told my daughter that I’d climb the
Matterhorn with her before she chooses to leave Switzerland – although she may never leave Switzerland, so that
Precedent Fall 2012
11
FEATURE ARTICLE
may give me plenty of time to accomplish that. But there
are a lot of good mountains in a lot of good places, and I’ll
climb a few of them.
How would you like your legacy to read?
I hope and believe that The Missouri Bar is a better place
for my having spent 27 years here – a total of 37, with 10
years of working for Wade Baker. There is no question that
we have a fabulous staff. If I have done anything right –
again, collaboratively – we have selected a highly competent, highly professional staff that gets the job done for The
Missouri Bar, for our members, and for the public, in every
way possible. I think that although several staff members
are leaving with me – and they’ve done a fabulous job – the
new hires have tremendous potential; those that remain are
absolute professionals and they will continue to benefit The
Missouri Bar in every respect.
I am particularly pleased that it appears that I will leave
the Missouri Non-Partisan Court Plan intact. It pleases me
a great deal that the Non-Partisan Court Plan will remain
intact after 72 years of efforts by politicians and special
interests to hijack it. But we have resisted it. I think I
have provided good leadership over the past few years, in
particular, while the attacks have been particularly pitched,
and encouraging The Missouri Bar to do everything we can
to defeat them. We have done a lot, with a lot of help from
a lot of different people and organizations, but I have been
particularly proud of the officers and the Board of Governors for their steadfast support and willingness to use the
resources of The Missouri Bar to keep politics out of the
justice system. That is the thing, at this moment, of which I
am most proud.
Benefits of Bar Membership
mobar@mobar.org
Substantive Law:
• CLE Programs
• CLE Publications
• Journal of
The Missouri Bar
• Courts Bulletin
• Legislative Digest
• ESQ.
• Fastcase
Practice Management &
Development
• Client Keeper
• Durable Power of
Attorney
• Fee Dispute Resolution
• Law Practice Management
Assistance
• Law Practice Management
Lending Library
12
• Lawyer Referral Service
• LawyerSearch
• Lawyer Trust Fund
Handbook
• Legal Links
• Legislative Activities
• MCLE
• Missouri Case Law
Summaries
• MoBar Net
• Professional Liability
Insurance from The Bar
Plan
• Public Information
Brochures
• Risk Management
• Sample Fee Agreements
• Precedent
Precedent Fall 2012
Career/Personal Development
• Bar Meetings/Conferences
• Committee Membership
• Law-Related Education
• Lawyer Placement Service
• Leadership Academy
• Mentoring Program
• Missouri Bar Foundation
• Missouri Lawyers’
Assistance Program
(MOLAP)
• Pro Bono Services
• Young Lawyers’ Section
• Vacation and Travel
The Missouri Bar Congratulates All Awardees
From the 2012 Missouri Bar/
Missouri Judicial Conference Annual Meeting
Excellence in Legal Journalism Awards
The St. Louis Beacon
The St. Louis American
Bob Watson, Jefferson City News Tribune
YLS Pro Bono Awards
Carlota “Coty” Hopinks-Baul, St. Louis
Sean Murphy, St. Louis
Mandel & Mandel, L.L.P., St. Louis
Tom Cochran Community Service Award
Senator Eric S. Schmitt, Glendale
Liberty Bell Award
Let’s Start, St. Louis
Pro Bono Publico Awards
Gerard “Jay” Harms, Jr., Osage Beach
Steven Streen, Kansas City
Ann Bauer, Clayton
Crista Hogan, Springfield
Roger P. Krumm Family Law Practitioner Award
Patricia “Tricia” M. Scaglia, Independence
Michael R. Roser
Excellence in Bankruptcy Award
John C. Reed, Jefferson City
Legislative Awards
Representative Michael Colona, St. Louis
Representative Chris Kelly, Columbia
Representative Kevin McManus, Kansas City
Representative Todd Richardson, Poplar Bluff
Representative Scott Sifton, Affton
Representative Rory Ellinger, University City
Representative Nick Marshall, Kansas City
Representative Mike Kelley, Lamar
Representative Ryan Silvey, Kansas City
Representative Jay Barnes, Jefferson City
Representative Karla May, St. Louis
Representative Susan Carlson, University City
Defender of Distinction Award
Kevin Locke, Kirksville
Prosecutor of the Year Award
Dan Knight, Columbia
W. Oliver Rasch Award
David M. Kight, Kansas City
Brian J. Christensen, Kansas City
Purcell Professionalism Award
R. Denise Henning, Kansas City
David J. Dixon Appellate Advocacy Awards
Roxanna (Roxy) A. Mason, St. Louis
Brianne N. Thomas, Kansas City
Matthew M. Ward, Athens, OH
Lon O. Hocker Awards
Jamie L. Boock, St. Louis
Carie Allen, Kansas City
Catherine Reade, Springfield
Theodore McMillian Judicial Excellence Award
Hon. J. Edward Sweeney, Monett
President’s Awards
T. Jack Challis, St. Louis
Raymond E. Williams, West Plains
Barbara E. Birkicht, St. Louis
Tina M. Crow Halcomb, Jefferson City
Sandra H. Johnson, St. Louis
Keith A. Birkes, Jefferson City
Spurgeon Smithson Awards
R. Lawrence Dessem, Columbia
Arthur H. Stoup, Kansas City
Hon. William Ray Price, Jr., St. Louis
Precedent Fall 2012
13
FEATURE ARTICLE
Getting to Know
Sebrina Barrett
14
Precedent Fall 2012
FEATURE ARTICLE
Many members of The Missouri Bar are
aware that Keith A. Birkes will be retiring
next month after serving as The Missouri
Bar’s executive director for 27 years. But,
most of the Bar’s members don’t know that,
beginning in January 2013, The Missouri
Bar’s new executive director will be Sebrina
A. Barrett.
Who is Sebrina Barrett? She’s a native
Missourian who received her undergraduate degree from the University of MissouriColumbia, and graduated first in her law
class from Southern Illinois University School
of Law. Prior to becoming the deputy executive director of The Missouri Bar, Ms. Barrett
served as senior director of public affairs and
administrative services for the New York Bar
Association.
I understand that you were born in Missouri.
Could you please provide a little background?
Yes, I was born and raised in Missouri. Our farm, where
we raised beef cattle, is located north of Springfield, between Walnut Grove and Ash Grove. I grew up there with
my younger sister. My mother is an art teacher and, in addition to the farm, my father owns a small masonry business.
This provided ample opportunity for hard work as I helped
my father raise calves and, in the summer, worked as a hod
carrier for him.
What in your life influenced your decision to
become an attorney?
To my knowledge, I am the first attorney in my family.
The greatest influences were probably my involvement in
4-H and the Citizenship Program, which is held in Jefferson
City each year. The Missouri Bar’s Law-Related Education
Department assists with the part of the program allowing
attendees to argue a mock appeal in the Supreme Court. I
played the role of a judge in a mock appeal.
Fast forward several years, and I had the privilege of
clerking for a judge on the Supreme Court of Missouri.
Now I am working at the Bar, which has a long tradition of
partnering with 4-H to put on the Citizenship Program.
Did your personal goals always include the
administrative side of law?
No, they did not. My undergraduate degree from Mizzou
is in agricultural journalism. In law school, and after graduation, I applied those writing and research skills to appellate work. Though, it is no surprise that my career path led
me to an association. Growing up, I was very involved with
and held leadership roles in 4-H, as well as participated
in other organizations, like the FFA (Future Farmers of
America).
What led you to New York? What was your position in the New York State Bar?
My husband, Michael, and I met in law school, and he
found work in upstate New York (Albany) after law school.
He is from New York state and has family there. After
clerking for the New York Court of Appeals and the Appellate Division, Third Department, I spent five years at the
New York State Bar Association, with my final position being Senior Director of Public Affairs. I assisted the officers
with their initiatives and projects, provided oversight of the
media relations department, provided assistance to the New
York Bar Foundation, etc.
What led you back to Missouri?
My parents still live on the farm where I grew up, and it
was important to raise our children close to them.
What intrigued you about this position?
While I didn’t envision myself as a bar executive while
in law school, I absolutely love what I do. The prospect of
returning to my home state and being able to continue to do
the work that I enjoy very much was too good to pass up.
Having now worked at two state bar organizations, how does The Missouri Bar compare?
It is hard to compare the two because the New York State
Bar Association is a voluntary bar, and The Missouri Bar is
a unified bar.
The Missouri Bar has an efficient, hard-working staff,
which enables us to provide excellent service to our members. We are lean, with just under 50 staff members. We
essentially provide the same core services – CLE programs,
publications, lawyer referral, a lawyer assistance program,
numerous meetings and member services – that the New
York bar provides to its 78,000 members with more than
double the staff.
Precedent Fall 2012
15
FEATURE ARTICLE
Every member of our staff wears two or three hats. They
are extremely dedicated to the Bar and take their responsibility to Missouri lawyers very seriously.
You’ve worked closely with outgoing Executive
Director Keith A. Birkes in preparing for this
transition. What have you learned from him
that has better prepared you for the task?
It has been an honor to work alongside one of the
longest-tenured and most respected bar executives in the
country. The past presidents who have worked with Keith
over the past 27 years describe him as a person of honor,
grace and compassion; as someone who treats everyone
with equal respect and who is dedicated to selfless service. I
have observed Keith as he embodied these apt descriptions
over the past two years, and I have learned much during
this transition.
Is it daunting to follow in the footsteps of
someone as nationally respected as Keith?
Assuming the role of executive director of a statewide
bar is an extraordinary responsibility. I am humbled by the
confidence and faith that Keith, the officers and the Board
of Governors have in my abilities.
What do you feel is the role of the executive
director?
The role is multi-faceted. It involves upholding the mission of The Missouri Bar and supporting the many volunteers and staff who work diligently to carry that mission
forward, namely serving Missouri’s lawyers and educating
Missourians about the justice system and rule of law.
Make the connection …
The Missouri Bar has now established an official presence
on three of the most popular social media platforms –
Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter!
Lawyers, judges and colleagues throughout the state – and
around the world – can now connect to The Missouri Bar using these three popular
social media resources. It’s the fast, easy and convenient way to stay abreast of the latest news and services offered by The Missouri Bar. With 24/7 access, information from
your Missouri Bar is always available – wherever you are – via desktop, laptop or smartphone.
Follow The Missouri Bar at:
@Mobarnews
http://www.facebook.com/missouribar
http://www.linkedin.com/company/the-missouri-bar
16
Precedent Fall 2012
MoBar at Your Service
Member Services
While service to its members and the public has always
been a prime imperative of the unified Missouri Bar, for
many years these offerings consisted of a valuable but limited number of options.
By the early 1990s, however, it was clear that an expanding Missouri Bar membership – growing not only in numbers but in demographic diversity – could benefit from an
expanded array of programs and services designed to help
their professional and personal growth and well-being.
To address that need, The Missouri Bar created its Membership Services Department to consolidate and coordinate
existing member benefits while identifying and addressing
new member service needs and opportunities. Creation of
this department has been instrumental in the enhancement
of existing member benefits and the initiation of new offerings.
1991
Law Practice Management Services
In an effort to assist Missouri Bar members in better
managing their practices, a Law Practice Lending Library
– containing many different types of resources on management of a law practice – was established. The service also
included the opportunity for members with questions about
starting or managing a law practice to consult with a staff
practice management advisor. With the growing usage of
computers and related technology within law offices, information concerning law office technology matters became
more prominent.
In conjunction with MoBarCLE, various law practice
management programs were developed, including cuttingedge, live satellite programs that were beamed into communities throughout the state. These programs were well attended and much appreciated by members, especially those
in rural areas.
Since that time, many resources have been developed
to further assist Missouri Bar members in managing their
law firms. Today, much of this treasure trove of valuable
information may be found at the touch of a button through
the Law Practice Management Online Center.
Fee Dispute Resolution Program
The Board of Governors of The Missouri Bar approved
the creation of the Fee Dispute Resolution Program in
an attempt to resolve fee disputes between attorneys and
clients. During the summer of 1991, both lawyer and
non-lawyer volunteers were recruited and administrative
procedures established for the program. The volunteers
were trained in mediation and binding arbitration, which at
that time was a relatively new method to resolve disputes
outside of the courts.
In October 1991, the Fee Dispute Resolution Program
began accepting cases from all parts of the state with the
exception of the St. Louis and Kansas City areas, where
similar local bar programs already existed. However, in
2011 the Bar Association of Metropolitan St. Louis discontinued its fee dispute resolution program, with The Missouri Bar program absorbing that service area.
Since its creation, the Fee Dispute Resolution Program
has helped resolve thousands of fee disputes between lawyers and their clients – and all at no charge to the parties.
MoBar Net Computer Network
See “Technology” section on page 36 for details.
Missouri Lawyers Assistance Program (MOLAP)
See “MOLAP” on page 40 for details.
1996
Complaint Resolution Program
In 1996, The Missouri Bar’s Professionalism Committee
expressed interest in new and innovative ways to improve
professionalism within the legal profession. One of the matters the committee studied was the situation involving complaints filed with the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel
(OCDC) that weren’t serious enough to open an investigation within the formal disciplinary system. The result was
that complainants were simply told that there wasn’t any
resolution to their concern – a situation that infuriated them
and further eroded the image of the legal profession.
Missouri Bar staff alerted the committee to a program
operating in New York City, where clients with less serious
complaints and their attorneys could meet with a mediator
to work through and resolve their problem outside of the
formal disciplinary system. The end result was the Supreme
Court of Missouri’s adoption of Rule 5.10 authorizing the
OCDC to refer disciplinary complaints to a new Complaint
Resolution Program in situations where the parties might
be better served by meeting with a neutral and reaching a
Precedent Fall 2012
17
meaningful resolution of the conflict.
Since its inception, hundreds of complaints have been
resolved through this program.
Solo and Small Firm Conference
See “Meetings” section on page 41 for details.
Missouri Bar Website
See “Technology” section on page 36 for details.
1997-1998
Listservs
“See “Technology” section on page 36 for details.
2005-2006
Lawyer Search
In an effort to assist lawyers in connecting with potential
new clients, the Lawyer Search service was developed. This
service is offered free of charge to Missouri Bar members
who are seeking new clients. Members sign up by indicating their counties of practice and areas of the law in which
they practice. When a member of the public in need of a
lawyer visits the state bar’s website, they can be matched
with a member attorney in their area.
2006-2007
Fastcase
In 2006, the Board of Governors of The Missouri Bar
appointed a task force to look into offering free online legal
research to Missouri Bar members (similar to what some
other state bars were offering). The task force – composed
of a demographically diverse group of lawyers – spent a
year investigating and interviewing providers of such services, and ultimately settled on Fastcase.
Fastcase became available to Missouri Bar members in
June 2007. Members access Fastcase through The Missouri
Bar website by utilizing their bar number and PIN. With
this service, attorneys have free access to the national appellate plan that includes U.S. Supreme Court and federal
circuit court cases, Supreme Court of Missouri and Missouri appellate court cases, state court cases from all 50
states, and more. In addition, Fastcase’s Premium Plan,
offered at the significantly reduced price of $175 per year,
provides access to federal district courts and bankruptcy
courts.
MoBarCLE deskbooks may also be purchased via Fastcase.
18
Lucas Boling to Head
Membership Services
Department
Lucas Boling, who for the past five
years has served as Missouri Bar CLE
Programs Attorney, has accepted the position of Membership Services Director,
effective January 1, 2013.
He will succeed Linda Oligschlaeger,
who is retiring after more than 20 years
of service to The Missouri Bar.
A member of The Missouri Bar staff since 2007,
Boling has gained extensive experience planning
numerous CLE programs and events, including the
annual Family Law Conference. In addition, he has
participated in the planning and execution of the Solo
and Small Firm Conference.
As a nationally recognized CLE planner, he recently
served as co-chair of the planning committee for the
Association of Continuing Legal Education Administrators (ACLEA). In that role, he led the program
planning for ACLEA’s recent annual conference. He
has also served as a speaker at many of these and other
conferences.
Prior to serving The Missouri Bar, Boling’s legal
experience included several government attorney
positions, including Deputy Director at the Missouri
Division of Workers’ Compensation and Unit Chief of
the Governmental Affairs Division of the Missouri Attorney General’s Office. He also spent time in private
practice at Brinker Doyen in Clayton following a judicial clerkship with the late Judge Stanley A. Grimm
at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri.
“Collectively, these experiences position Lucas to
transition into his new role with significant expertise
and knowledge of all facets of the membership director
position, including the planning of the Solo and Small
Firm Conference,” said Deputy Executive Director Sebrina Barrett, who will herself transition into the position of Missouri Bar Executive Director on January 1.
“In addition, Lucas’ varied law-related experiences
and firm grasp of technology will enable him to connect with the diverse membership of The Missouri Bar
and provide a wide range of member resources and
practice management tools,” Barrett added.
Precedent Fall 2012
2008
Lawyer-to-Lawyer Dispute Resolution Program
In an effort to address disputes between lawyers that
often were played out in the press or ultimately generated
disciplinary complaints, the Complaint Resolution Committee created the Lawyer-to-Lawyer Dispute Resolution
Program.
This service, brought to life by a revision of Supreme
Court Rule 5.10, assists lawyers in resolving disputes with
colleagues over money, property, law firm break-ups, or
other professional disagreements. The goal of the program
is to provide an efficient, private, cost-effective and voluntary mechanism for resolving economic and professional
disputes among lawyers through facilitation and binding
arbitration.
Volunteer facilitators were recruited and trained prior to
the program’s commencement in 2008.
2009
Lawyers in a Changing Economy
The Special Committee to Assist Lawyers in a Changing
Economy has been instrumental in providing assistance to
lawyers who are struggling financially or who have few options for employment in the profession.
In addition to providing a specific listing of Missouri
Bar benefits and services on the state bar’s website, other
committee projects have included: a social media effort
that contained a job banks; scholarships to attend the Solo
and Small Firm Conference; a grant from the Missouri
Bar Foundation to assist eligible lawyers in attaining their
annual MCLE hours requirement via MoBarCLE’s financial hardship policy; recommendation of the LawPay and
CoreVault member benefits; develop of a guidebook, in
conjunction with The Missouri Bar’s Leadership Academy,
to help new lawyers transition from law school to the practice of law; and a series of Practical Skills online courses
on the basics of various areas of the law as well as practice
management topics that are currently under development
for lawyers who are starting a practice due to the lack of
employment opportunities.
2009-2010
Getting Back on Track Program
In conjunction with MoBarCLE, MOLAP and the
OCDC, the Membership Services Department developed a
program to concentrate on areas in which lawyers are facing, or have faced, discipline primarily because of a lack of
practice management and communication skills.
The program consists of a one-day seminar that follows
a series of webinars. The webinars are available to any Missouri Bar member who would like to participate; however,
the in-person program is limited to those who are specifically invited to attend by the OCDC.
2010
LawPay Merchant Account
To further assist attorneys in being paid by their clients,
The Missouri Bar offers LawPay Merchant Account as a
member benefit. Through this service, attorneys are able
to accept credit and debit card payments from clients at a
discount. The service complies with ABA and state requirements for managing client funds and correctly handles
earned and unearned fees.
2011
UPS Discount
During 2011, a new member benefit offering discounts
on UPS shipping and at UPS stores was offered to assist
members in cutting overhead expenses.
2012
CoreVault Cloud Backup and Hosting
See “Technology” section on page 36 for details.
Ongoing
Missouri Bar Economic Survey
First produced as far back as 1958, the biennial Missouri
Bar Economic Survey began as a relatively simple survey
handled in-house. In recent years, however, the survey has
been expanded into a wealth of information that provides a
snapshot of the economic footing of the profession.
Although still considered a non-scientific survey, this
project is much broader, more detailed, and relied upon by
many lawyers (and judges) for pertinent economic information in their locales – information that has been especially
valuable during the economic downturn of the past few
years.
Now completed with the assistance of the University of
Missouri, the survey also features an executive summary
that highlights particularly interesting information gleaned
from the overall results.
Jobs for Missouri Lawyers
Known for many years as the Lawyer Placement Service,
this member benefit assists lawyers and graduating law
students in search of legal positions, as well as employers
with positions available. This program is provided at no
cost to lawyers and firms or other organizations with legal
positions to fill.
Precedent Fall 2012
19
This free listing of opportunities contains advertisements from law firms, corporations and other businesses
and institutions with employment opportunities for lawyers.
The listing is available via a link in the state bar’s weekly
electronic newsletter, ESQ, or by visiting the bar’s website
at www.mobar.org. Lawyers may also sign up for home
delivery of a printed listing, which is mailed twice a month.
The success of Jobs for Missouri Lawyers is evident
from analytics indicating that this is the most frequently
accessed page on The Missouri Bar’s website, averaging
1,400 visits per day.
For additional information on any of these services, please
contact Membership Services Director Linda Oligschlaeger
at (573) 638-2258 or via e-mail at lindao@mobar.org.
MoBar at Your Service
Public Education
Public Information
Having established itself as a leading source of information about the justice system and the role of lawyers in
society, The Missouri Bar continues to expand and improve
the resources it makes available to the public and uphold its
commitment to education.
Legal Issues Brochures
The most recognizable product of The Missouri Bar’s
public information program is a series of brochures explaining basic aspect of the legal system. These brochures
are grouped into “resource guides” offering information in
six general categories: client information, probate law, family law, consumer law, business law, and law and the courts.
With more than 50 brochure titles in The Missouri Bar’s
public information library, citizens can find information
about nearly every aspect of the legal system – from traffic
violations to divorce or the need for a will. The Missouri
Bar distributes the resource guides in locales such as libraries, government offices, county courthouses, city halls and
attorneys’ offices, in addition to direct requests from the
public. Missourians receive more than 100,000 copies of
the resource guides each year.
Website
In addition to these printed materials, The Missouri Bar
places a strong emphasis on the use of technology. The
growing importance of the Internet and e-mail has opened
the door to new ways in which to reach the public with
important legal information. The Missouri Bar’s website
20
(www.mobar.org) boasts thousands of pages and documents
detailing virtually every program, activity and service
provided by the state bar. Almost all of this material is
available on the website as a downloadable document. The
Missouri Bar website is an increasingly crucial means of
communicating with Missourians who wish to learn more
about the law and the justice system.
Recognizing the growing importance of the Internet as a
vehicle for distribution of information to the public about
the justice system, The Missouri Bar in late 2011 redesigned its website to facilitate the public’s search for information about legal issues. Those who visit the site will find
prominent links to: help them find a lawyer; gain access to
valuable citizenship education materials of interest to teachers, students and Missouri citizens; and a comprehensive
array of helpful brochures, resources and other information
designed to help Missourians understand their rights, the
law and the justice system.
The Missouri Bar also hosts another website, www.
ShowMeCourts.org, which offers a wealth of information
about Missouri’s judicial system. It includes details about
the structure of the state’s judiciary, the difference between
partisan and non-partisan judicial elections, information for
jurors, and even lesson plans for educators.
Social Media
In addition – in recognition of their growing importance
as a communications resource – The Missouri Bar in 2011
joined the online conversation by communicating through
social media platforms, including Facebook, LinkedIn,
Precedent Fall 2012
Twitter, and YouTube. Through these outlets, the state bar
will be able to carry its message to ever-larger groups of
people.
Tweets and Facebook posts are routine and used to provide the public with additional ways of learning about The
Missouri Bar’s services, projects and resources. Facebook.
com/MissouriBar has more than 700 “likes” and is growing daily, while Twitter.com/mobarnews has more than 500
followers. YouTube is also used to communicate with the
public by sharing video projects.
Working with the News Media
The Missouri Bar understands that, despite its best efforts, it cannot always place information about the legal
system directly into the hands of the public. Accordingly,
The Missouri Bar recognizes the vital role played by the
news media in disseminating timely information to the
general public. The state bar strives to maintain a partnership with print and broadcast journalists to ensure that
Missourians gain a better understanding of their rights and
responsibilities under the law.
Working closely with reporters and news directors to
explore crucial legal issues is the main goal of The Missouri Bar’s media relations efforts. Missouri Bar officers
and members of the Board of Governors often meet with
representatives of the news media to discuss pressing legal
issues of the day. Additionally, The Missouri Bar’s Communications and Media Relations departments serve as
a resource for reporters, fielding questions and arranging
interviews with bar officers.
Staff members also work with the bar’s Media Law
Committee to provide support for such committee projects
as the Media Law Handbook, which was provided to all
media outlets and is also available on the bar’s website.
Likewise, the members of the Missouri Press-Bar Commission – composed of lawyers, judges, broadcasters and
print journalists – discuss issues of concern to the media
and legal community by developing programs and projects
to address these matters. The Commission produces the
News Reporters Handbook and was instrumental in developing the Supreme Court rule allowing cameras in Missouri
courtrooms in selected situations.
Institutional Ads
Each year, the president of The Missouri Bar chooses
three issues/topics to address via the bar’s institutional
advertising campaign. The campaign consists of three
radio and three 30-second television announcements that
are distributed by the Missouri Broadcasters Association.
Through a special public education program available only
to non-profits and governmental agencies, the broadcasters
association guarantees a minimum amount of airtime on its
member stations at an exceptional bargain, ensuring that for
every dollar the bar invests, it receives at least four dollars’
worth of airtime.
Mini Law School for the Public
This program, initiated and coordinated by Board of
Governors member Nancy Mogab of St. Louis, has proven
to be an extremely popular way of increasing public understanding of the law and appreciation of the role of lawyers.
To date, six series of programs have been held at the Saint
Louis University School of Law, each featuring six to eight
evening lectures per session. Courses are taught by experienced lawyers, judges and law professors.
More than 150 participants attend each evening to hear
a two-hour lecture on various laws and the legal system.
Topics include everything from end-of-life decisions to the
Non-Partisan Court Plan and the lawyer discipline system.
Some of the programs have been televised in the St.
Louis area by HEC-TV (Higher Education TV). In addition,
thousands of other St. Louisans learn about this program
through advertisement that promote early registration.
Speakers’ Bureau
The Missouri Bar Speakers’ Bureau was initiated in
2010 to share information about the Non-Partisan Court
Plan. Since then, more than 350 lawyers have signed up as
volunteers to speak to civic, social and service clubs about
Missouri’s judicial selection system that affords all Missourians fair and impartial judges.
Lawyers have reported given more than 250 speeches to
these groups, meaning thousands of community leaders are
hearing the bar’s message to share with their friends and
family.
While the Non-Partisan Court Plan will continue as a
mainstay topic for speakers to discuss, the foundation of
speakers also provides opportunities to speak on other issues of importance to the legal community and their impact
on the public.
Judicial Performance Evaluation
As is the case during every election cycle, an important
public education initiative was undertaken again this year
with completion of the Judicial Performance Evaluation
Survey. Seven committees – each composed of six lawyers
and six non-lawyers – conducted comprehensive reviews of
merit-selected judges seeking retention at the 2012 general
election.
As part of the review process, the committees considered
lawyer evaluations, peer review surveys, juror evaluations,
in-court observation and samples of judges’ written opinions in developing recommendations to “retain” or “not
retain” each of the judges seeking retention.
Precedent Fall 2012
21
The complete results of the evaluations – including the
raw data from surveys, as well as the judges’ written opinions – were posted on The Missouri Bar’s website in early
September, giving voters the chance to educate themselves
about these judges prior to casting their judicial ballot.
For additional information about The Missouri Bar’s
public information efforts, contact Media Relations Director Farrah Fite at (573) 638-2251 (ffite@mobar.org); or
Communications Director Gary Toohey at (573) 638-2222
(garyt@mobar.org).
Citizenship Education
The Missouri Bar has one of the longest-running lawrelated education programs among state bars in the nation.
The driving force behind creation of The Missouri Bar’s
outstanding law-related education program was the late
E.A. “Wally” Richter, who served as the bar’s information
director for many years. Recognized as one of the pioneers
in this field, Richter was also responsible for a joint venture
between The Missouri Bar and the University of Missouri
Extension Division that resulted in lawyers providing lawrelated education to teachers throughout the state during
evening training sessions.
Following Richter’s retirement, various directors of The
Missouri Bar oversaw the law-related education program
as part of their many other duties, including Keith Birkes,
Gary Toohey and Chris Janku. During those years, hallmarks of the program included:
• The Advisory Committee on Citizenship Education,
an oversight group consisting of educators, leaders
in law-related education, and lawyers.
• A quarterly newsletter – Communis Scriputura
(later re-named The Citizenship Educator) – that
kept teachers updated on the latest programs and
materials available from The Missouri Bar.
• An annual one-day professional development
event for teachers about various topics. This event,
funded by the Missouri Bar Foundation, would
attract some 200 teachers from around the state.
• A video lending library that featured videos on a
variety of law-related education topics. Schools
paid only for the return shipping costs.
• A curriculum guide written by Dr. Warren
Solomon, social studies specialist for the Missouri
Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education. The guide contained many ideas for
teaching governmental and legal concepts.
• Various brochures on law-related education topics.
• A partnership with Missouri 4-H to direct the
22
judicial branch portion of the statewide 4-H
conference on government.
These products, services and events created an extensive statewide network and partnerships among teachers,
university and college teacher training programs, law-related education organizations and institutions, and Missouri’s
lawyers and judges.
One factor that has set The Missouri Bar’s law-related
education program apart from those conducted by other
state bars is its commitment to funding of the program.
Many state bars use money received from interest on
lawyers’ trust account (IOLTA) programs to fund their
law-related education efforts. As a result, many law-related
education programs suffered financially when IOLTA monies were affected by lower interest rates. In contrast, The
Missouri Bar’s law-related education program has its own
funding within The Missouri Bar’s budget. In addition, the
Missouri Bar Foundation has been exceedingly generous to
the program.
1994
The year 1994 marked a significant change in The Missouri Bar’s law-related education program. Linda Riekes
of the St. Louis Public Schools – and the director of that
district’s nationally–acclaimed Law and Citizenship program – wrote a grant that would enhance and expand The
Missouri Bar’s law-related education program. The U.S.
Department of Education awarded The Missouri Bar a
three-year, $300,000 ($100,000 per year) grant. With that
money, The Missouri Bar hired Millie Aulbur as its first
full-time director of law-related education. In addition, the
grant monies resulted in:
• Expansion of the video lending library.
• Expansion of the annual Law Day conference.
• Creation, development and implementation of
law-related education in-service programs on
various topics. These in-service presentations
were offered at statewide conferences, regional
professional development events, and local inservice gatherings.
• Expansion of the statewide network.
Although the grant was actually funded for only two of
the three years, The Missouri Bar opted to continue with a
full-time law-related education director and the in-service
opportunities for teachers. This commitment was reflected
in the program’s budget, with the Missouri Bar Foundation continuing to fund the one-day law-related education
conference.
Precedent Fall 2012
1999
In 1999, the law-related education program underwent
a significant expansion of duties. In addition to its other
activities, the program became the state coordinator for the
Center for Civic Education’s various educational programs
– We the People, Project Citizen, and Representative Democracy in America. As state coordinator for these efforts,
The Missouri Bar coordinated activities in all of the state’s
nine congressional districts with the assistance of district
coordinators; distributed the free books made available in
connection with these projects; and staged in-service presentations about the programs, including both regional and
statewide summer institutes.
Coordination of these programs also brought an influx
of grant money – sometimes as much as $110,000 per year.
It also increased the network of teachers that The Missouri
Bar reached from approximately 750 to more than 1,700.
2006-2007
This was another significant period for The Missouri
Bar’s law-related education program. Missouri Bar President Ron Baird made law-related education one of his
priorities, which resulted in the staging of a summit on
civic education that attracted state and national law-related
education leaders.
In conjunction with this renewed focus on law-related
education, the Advisory Committee on Citizenship Education engaged in long-range planning and created a strategic
plan for the program that is evaluated and revised every
year. In addition, the program was re-named The Missouri
Bar Citizenship Education Program and Ms. Aulbur’s title
became Director of Citizenship Education. This change was made to reflect
the national trend toward civics and
citizenship education, and in response
to surveys revealing that many Missouri
teachers thought “law-related education”
was for lawyers, not for teachers.
As part of its strategic planning, the
Citizenship Education Program developed the following mission statement:
2012
This year has proven to be an interesting and challenging
year for The Missouri Bar’s Citizenship Education Program. With the loss of more than $100,000 in grant monies from the Center for Civic Education (which Congress
decided to no longer fund), the Missouri Bar Foundation
stepped in and awarded the program enough money to
continue its longstanding and fruitful partnership with Missouri’s public, private and parochial educators.
Keith Birkes, who is retiring at the end of this year after
37 years of service to The Missouri Bar – including the
past 27 years as executive director – has asked those who
wish to honor him with a retirement gift to consider making a financial contribution to the Missouri Bar Foundation
earmarked for civic education.
What Else Has Changed Since 1994?
The digital age has completely changed how the program
connects with educators. The video lending library became
obsolete and was discontinued. The Citizenship Educator
newsletter was replaced by a webpage on The Missouri Bar
website.
The one-day annual conference has been replaced by a
variety of other in-service opportunities. This has occurred
because, due to severe budget constraints, an ever-diminishing number of schools allow their teachers to attend inservice programs that are offered outside of their districts.
In addition, The Missouri Bar is continually changing its
in-service offerings to reflect trends within the educational
community – alignment with state standards, testing, No
Child Left Behind, core curriculum, etc.
The mission of The Missouri Bar Citizenship Education Program is to promote and encourage the education of
all citizens for a lifetime of responsible
citizenship through programs about the
law, the Constitution and our system of
government.
The news media remains a vital conduit by which the public receives important
information about the justice system.
Precedent Fall 2012
23
2012 and Beyond
As The Missouri Bar’s Citizenship Education Program
continues to enhance teacher appreciation – and, by extension, student understanding – of civic education concepts,
it is also looking toward the future by mixing tried-and-true
endeavors with new and innovative services. For example:
• For more than 10 years, The Missouri Bar
Citizenship Education Program has partnered
with the Missouri Press Association Newspapers
in Education (NIE) program to provide columns
on current law-related education topics. The
bar has produced more than 50 columns on the
Constitution, the judicial branch, the Electoral
College, Veterans Day and on every elected official
at the federal, state and local level. These columns
are used by most of Missouri’s newspapers for their
NIE inserts.
• Through the generosity of the Missouri Bar
Foundation, the program is able to provide an
annual summer institute for teachers; in-services
such as the two-day controversial issues workshop
from the Constitutional Rights Foundation;
continued support of the more than 1,000 teachers
who continue to use the We the People materials
from the Center for Civic Education; and inservices on how to effectively prepare students for
Missouri’s government course.
• The Citizenship Education Program is continually
developing web-based materials and programs.
For example, the program has five years’ worth
of videos of the outstanding scholars who teach
every year at the summer institute. These are being
converted into segments that teachers can use in
their classrooms.
• The Missouri Bar is developing programs on the
rights and responsibilities of citizens in a digital
age. The American Bar Association awarded The
Missouri Bar a $15,000 grant to launch such a
program.
• The Missouri Bar has partnered with HEC-TV in
St. Louis for five years to produce a Constitution
Day program. More than 10,000 students per
year view the programs either live or through
the archived programs. This initiative has been
recognized nationally for its excellence. Plans are
already underway for the 2013 program.
• The Missouri Bar is the state coordinator for
iCivics, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s acclaimed
civic education program.
• The Missouri Bar annually supports the citizenship
programs of 4-H and the YMCA Youth in
Government program by printing materials and
providing lawyers as speakers for their various
activities.
• In conjunction with the Missouri Department
of Elementary and Secondary Education, The
Missouri Bar annually sponsors the Outstanding
Citizen event for 15 outstanding seniors from
Missouri’s public schools.
• The Missouri Bar also annually recognizes
excellence in civic education with the E.A. “Wally”
Richter Award and the Warren H. Solomon Civic
Virtue Award.
For additional information about The Missouri Bar’s
citizenship education program, please contact Director of
Citizenship Education Millie Aulbur at (573) 638-2250 or
via e-mail at milliea@mobar.org.
We’ve taken the plunge!
Members of The Missouri Bar are now able to receive the
Journal of The Missouri Bar electronically.
All members of The Missouri Bar currently receive the
Journal in the traditional printed format. If that delivery
method is satisfactory, you need do nothing. You will continue to receive the Journal via U.S. Mail.
However, if you would prefer to instead receive an electronic version of the
Journal, please let us know by sending an e-mail to: journal@mobar.org.
24
Precedent Fall 2012
MoBar at Your Service
Professional Development
MoBarCLE Programs
In January 1993, there were only seven full-time employees in The Missouri Bar’s Continuing Legal Education
Department, which included employees of CLE Programs
and Publications. In January 2012, the CLE Department
was divided into separate departments – one department for
CLE Programs and one for CLE Publications. Currently,
CLE Programs has seven full-time employees.
In 1993, MoBarCLE Programs planned and produced
about 30 different program topics that were presented at
some 80 on-site educational events in various cities and
towns around the state. The seminars included full-day,
half-day, video replays, and a couple of multi-day programs
in primarily substantive areas of the law. Approximately
250 Missouri lawyers and judges volunteered as speakers
for these programs. During this year, we presented the first
Government Attorneys Institute – the first time a seminar
had been designed specifically for lawyers working for
state government agencies and offices.
The numbers climbed slowly during the next four years.
During this time, almost all of CLE program marketing
was done by direct mail brochures. In 1995, the first twohour telephone seminar was created as a CLE delivery
method. That first telephone seminar was a Legislative
Update, which was held in a hearing room in the basement
of the Capitol building, with all speakers sitting around a
conference table. Today, of the more than 440 CLE events
presented by MoBarCLE annually, about one-third of the
14,000 total attendees participate via telephone seminars.
The faculty members are usually in different cities, states,
– or in some instances in other countries – while making
their presentations.
In 1997, MoBarCLE Programs produced about 40 different program topics. Today, that number has increased to
about 130. The first Guardian ad Litem (GAL) workshops
were created – a 12-hour certification program that allowed
many practitioners to comply with new Supreme Court
Standards to serve as GALs in circuits that required this
training.
In 1998, MoBarCLE Programs added online ordering
and payment capabilities. The CLE toll-free telephone
number was installed for the convenience of our members.
This was also the year that the MoBar Season Pass program
was first offered to Missouri lawyers. Purchasing a Season
Pass allowed members to attend either unlimited MoBarCLE seminars or 10 seminars of their choice. This continues to be a true economic value for many members.
In 1999, e-mail became a very popular way of communicating with our members. Lawyers increased their usage
of e-mail to ask customer service questions, to register for
programs, or to purchase products. MoBarCLE presented
its first live program on the fiber optic network of the University of Missouri-Columbia. The program was designed
to help lawyers working with farmers having financial
difficulties. By year’s end, some 9,000 total attendees had
attended 152 CLE events.
In 2000, MoBarCLE was honored by the Association for
Continuing Legal Education (ACLEA), an international organization of CLE providers, for presenting the fiber optic
seminar entitled, “Representing Farmers in Hard Financial
Times.”
In 2001, MoBarCLE began a campaign to get Missouri
Bar members to “Join In and Sign Up” to become CLE
volunteer speakers, moderators, authors, and reviewers. A
CLE volunteer database was created and is still being maintained today. There are more than 700 members who have
expressed interest in participating in CLE activities and are
selected from this database. At the same time, the first annual Family Law Conference was presented in Lake Ozark
and the “Essentials of Missouri Practice” program debuted
in Columbia.
In 2002, MoBarCLE presented its first live webcast.
The next year, MoBarCLE presented 30 telephone
seminars, and began offering one-hour advanced telephone
seminars with a new partner WebCredenza, Inc. Audio
versions of other MoBarCLE seminars were also made
available. Finally, this year was the first year of the DWI
Symposium, co-sponsored by the Missouri Association of
Criminal Defense Lawyers, held at Lake Ozark.
In 2004, telephone seminars became even more popular.
These afforded the CLE Programs Department the ability to plan seminars quickly to address new legislation
(Missouri Uniform Trust Code) and recent court decisions
(McDonagh – admissibility of expert testimony). Some
245 CLE events were offered during this year, with about
11,500 attendees.
Precedent Fall 2012
25
In 2005, online seminars began to be offered through
MoBarCLE’s Internet partner, LegalSpan. At the 300 MoBarCLE events offered during this year, 13,000 members
participated.
By 2006, webcasts became more popular – allowing registrants to enjoy streaming video and audio of the speakers,
and seminar materials on the computer.
In 2007, MoBarCLE saw the birth of the now very popular “How to Series” telephone seminars. One substantive
law program was presented each month for the entire year,
assisting many members with the very basic information to
practice in various areas of law.
In 2008, “Stepping Up & Stepping Out: The New Lawyer Experience” workshops were created to help bridge the
gap from law school to law practice – just as the “Essentials of Missouri Practice” had replaced the “Practical Skills
Course” many years before. Both a basic and advanced
Missouri Bar Trial College were presented to assist members with “hands-on” trial skills.
In 2009, MoBarCLE celebrated 19 years of working
with the Bar Plan Mutual Insurance Company to present
risk management programs designed to make Missouri
lawyers aware of ethical dilemmas and malpractice pitfalls.
MoBarCLE collaborated with the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel to create an annual law practice management
webinar series and an onsite seminar to assist member with
various remedial needs.
In 2010, major changes were made to MoBarCLE’s
website (www.mobarcle.org). The website became more
user-friendly and a mobile version of program listings was
added. Social networking was used to connect with members through updates on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and
MoBarCircle. The days of exclusive direct mail marketing
with CLE brochures came to an end. MoBarCLE Programs
also added a new feature to the Season Pass program.
Members could now purchase a Basic Season Pass, which
was good for up to five CLE courses. The popular Limited
and Unlimited Passes continued as options as well. The
Basic Pass allowed for those with a more conservative CLE
budget.
Throughout 2011 and 2012, MoBarCLE Programs
realized many dramatic changes in content and delivery
of continuing legal education. The ever-evolving changes
in technology paved the way for significant changes in
the way seminars and materials are delivered to Missouri
attorneys. However, our mission to provide quality CLE
at affordable fees has not changed. Also unchanged is the
constant support and guidance from the Legal Education
Committee of The Missouri Bar.
Today, MoBarCLE presents more than 440 program
events and has more than 14,000 attendees annually. It now
offers almost 240 different seminar titles. Even with the
26
advances of technology, 53 percent of MoBarCLE attendees still prefer face-to-face interaction with their colleagues
and continue to attend on-site CLE events, while 30 percent
enjoy learning via telephone seminars. The other 17 percent
tune in to live webcasts and webinars.
MoBarCLE will continue to evolve along with members’
professional development needs. This busy department
will continue to develop the highest quality content while
researching the latest and most convenient ways to deliver
that content. MoBarCLE looks forward to the next decades
of changes in adult learning and, as always, endeavor to
meet new challenges in the most effective and efficient
ways possible.
For more information about MoBarCLE programs, please
contact Missouri Bar Director of CLE Programs Dee Shepherd at (573) 638-2238 or via e-mail at DeeShep@mobar.
org.
MoBarCLE Publications
In perhaps no other area has the advent of electronic
communication had more of an impact than in the area of
CLE publications. Indeed, as the information below indicates, MoBarCLE publications staff have utilized innovative thinking to take advantage of the many benefits of
rapidly emerging technology. The result has been maintenance of the consistent quality of MoBarCLE publications,
but with reduced production costs and their availability in
formats best suited to their customers – the lawyers of Missouri.
Production
In 1995, production of MoBarCLE publications was still
centered on paper. All editing was done with pencil on paper drafts, and many paper drafts of each deskbook chapter
were printed during this process. Research and cite checking was done from paper sources. Likewise, all files and
correspondence were paper, and printing completed from
paper page proofs.
Soon thereafter, the transition to on-screen editing and
the use of electronic resources for research and cite checking began. In fact, MoBarCLE’s editors use two monitors
so they can view both a manuscript and a research source
simultaneously.
Today, correspondence with authors and reviewers is
overwhelmingly electronic, to the point that paper files are
no longer created.
Printing, meanwhile, is done from electronic files.
Precedent Fall 2012
Products
Prior to 1996, all products produced by MoBarCLE
were paper, including deskbooks in three-ring binders. At
that time, however, MoBarCLE began providing electronic
versions of its publications through Loislaw. Initially, these
were on CD-ROM. Over time this transitioned to online
availability, and CD-ROMs were phased out. MoBarCLE
publications are now available electronically through Fastcase, LexisNexis, and Loislaw. Lawyers can use modern
full-text searching capabilities to locate relevant text in
deskbooks and hypertext links to primary law sources.
Also in 1996, MoBarCLE began offering forms disks
with deskbooks – initially as floppy disks, but eventually
replaced with CD-ROM. In 2005, full-text CD-ROMS were
provided with newly published deskbooks. And, last year,
MoBarCLE began offering smaller publications – called
“guidebooks” – by download or CD-ROM. These guidebooks are affordable, focused, and available in a variety of
formats: softbound print, download, CD-ROM, or a combination of print and electronic formats.
Costs
Much has been done through the years to control and
reduce costs associated with MoBarCLE publications. One
of the first measures was a switch in 1996 from pre-printed
binders to generic binders with spine inserts. With preprinted binders, the binders were limited to one specific
title, edition, and volume. To achieve a reasonable price,
the incentive was to order at the time of publication all of
the binders that were expected to be needed for a particular
volume. This led to waste and inflated storage needs. Using
generic binders allows better cost control, less need for
storage, and little waste.
Another cost saving was the switch from the perfector
– a sheet-fed printing press – to a digital press. With the
perfector, click charges led to an incentive to print in the
first run all of the copies of a particular volume that would
conceivably be needed. This led to the attendant problems
with storage, waste, and inflated costs. Print orders used to
be for 1,000 to 2,000 copies; now, digital printing allows
much smaller print runs of 25 to 100 copies.
Also leading to cost savings was a switch to perfect binding some publications and using softcovers. This was first
done with the Time Limitations deskbook in 1997 and was
extended with the publication of guidebooks beginning in
2011. This move saves the cost of binders and index tabs,
and sharply reduces staff time for shipping.
Marketing
Marketing of MoBarCLE publications was practically
non-existent in 1995, consisting of a page in the annual or
semi-annual program guide. In 1996, MoBarCLE began
sending brochures for each new publication and in 1997 it
published its first publications catalog. That led to the addition of inserts into the mailed brochures. As MoBarCLE
began exploring innovative ways to utilize the member
database, it began sending targeted mailings, which helped
to reduce costs and allowed for more efficient use of advertising dollars.
Technology also led to electronic marketing through The
Missouri Bar’s website and then a separate MoBarCLE
website, which accounts for half of its print orders. Now
much marketing is done through e-mail and social media.
Face-to-face tradeshow marketing had its genesis in the
“CLE Garage Sale” at the annual Solo and Small Firm
Conference. This has led to the creation of mobile displays
that allows a MoBarCLE presence at committee meetings
and enrollment ceremonies. All of these marketing advances help MoBarCLE better serve its members by making
them aware of the resources that are available to help them
in the practice of law.
For more information about MoBarCLE publications,
please contact Missouri Bar Director of CLE Publications
Kent Hopper at (573) 638-2239 or via e-mail at khopper@
mobar.org.
Minimum Continuing Legal Education
(MCLE)
At the request of the Board of Governors of The Missouri Bar, the Supreme Court of Missouri adopted Rule 15
in 1987 to establish a minimum continuing legal education
(MCLE) requirement for Missouri lawyers. The requirement was recommended to the Board of Governors by the
Committee on Mandatory Legal Education.
In 1989, more than 13,000 lawyers filed Annual Reports
to comply with Rule 15 for the initial July 1, 1988 – June
30, 1989 reporting year. For the most recent reporting
year – running from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012 – more
than 27,000 lawyers have filed Annual Reports to comply
with Rule 15. More than 16,000 lawyers filed their Annual
Report electronically, nearly 60 percent of the total.
Rule 15 initially required lawyers actively practicing in
Missouri to complete 15 hours of continuing legal education annually. In 1989, the Board of Governors requested
that the Supreme Court amend Rule 15 to require continuing legal education in professionalism, ethics and malpractice prevention. This amendment was recommended to the
Board of Governors by the Quality and Methods of Practice
Committee.
The amendment required all practicing Missouri lawyers
to obtain three credit hours of professionalism, ethics or
Precedent Fall 2012
27
malpractice prevention credit every three years. Newlyadmitted or reinstated lawyers were required to obtain
three credit hours of professionalism, ethics or malpractice
prevention education within 12 months of admission or
reinstatement.
In 2009, at the request of the Board of Governors, the
Supreme Court amended the professionalism, ethics and
malpractice prevention requirements of Rule 15. The Board
submitted the amendments to the Court upon the recommendation of the bar’s Special Committee to Consider
MCLE Ethics Requirement.
Rule 15 was amended to establish an annual requirement of two years of education in professionalism, ethics
and malpractice prevention credit for all lawyers practicing
in Missouri. Also, Rule 15 now requires lawyers admitted
or reinstated to The Missouri Bar after June 30, 2009 to
obtain two hours of professionalism, ethics and malpractice
prevention education within 12 months of admission or
reinstatement. These amendments to Rule 15 became effective with the July 1, 2009 – June 30, 2010 reporting year.
Rule 15 requires The Missouri Bar to notify the clerk of
the Supreme Court, Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel
and the Commission on Retirement, Removal and Discipline of Judges of the name of each lawyer not meeting
the requirements of Rule 15. As amended by the Supreme
Court in 2005, every lawyer so reported is automatically
suspended from the practice of law.
For more information about the MCLE program and its
requirements, please contact Missouri Bar Director of
Programs Chris Janku at (573) 638-2231 or via e-mail at
cjanku@mobar.org
MoBar at Your Service
Member Communications
The primary purpose of The Missouri Bar is service to its
members. In keeping with that guiding principle, the state
bar recognizes that easy access to timely information is a
vital need for busy attorneys in a fast-paced world. As a result, the organization constantly strives to expand upon and
improve its publications and other forms of communication
to ensure that its members’ needs are met. This includes
embracing new technologies and communications strategies to reach its members.
Website
Of course, the premiere source for instantaneous information is The Missouri Bar’s website (www.mobar.org).
The site includes extensive information related to virtually
every program or service available to members through the
state bar.
Lawyers will find the website’s “members only” section most appealing. Using their bar number and PIN, both
located on their membership card, lawyers may perform a
variety of functions. For example, members can alter their
personal information, join committees or sections, par-
28
ticipate in committee listservs, and choose their preferred
delivery format for various bar publications. Four major
bar publications – Precedent, The Legislative Digest, The
Courts Bulletin and the Journal of The Missouri Bar – are
available in the traditional print version or electronically
via e-mail notification and link. Similar options are available for CLE notices, and delivery options may be changed
in the “members only” section of the website. Additionally,
lawyers may register online for future CLE seminars, order
publications over the Internet, and download public information brochures.
Enhancing the website’s value is a recent redesign and
restructuring. The new version of the site is much more user-friendly, featuring expanded and descriptive drop-down
menus, integrated search capability, and ready access to the
latest news and activities of interest – all incorporated into
an easy-to-follow organization and design. The site also
features an easy-to-find link to the Fastcase legal research
member benefit and useful links to other relevant websites.
In addition, the new website includes enhanced two-way
interactive communication capabilities and offers easy
Precedent Fall 2012
access to the state bar’s enhanced presence
on popular social media platforms such as
Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter.
Listservs
For lawyers serving on Missouri Bar
committees, the creation of litservs for each
committee has greatly facilitated improved
communication among lawyers across the
state. Using this resource, members can exchange information, offer assistance to one
another, provide moral support, and refer
cases outside their geographic area. Figures
indicate that a significant percentage of the
memberships of most bar committees utilize
the committee listservs.
The redesigned Missouri Bar website at www.mobar.org.
ESQ.
A further commitment to easy access to information is
embodied in ESQ, The Missouri Bar’s weekly electronic
newsletter. Each Missouri Bar member whose e-mail address is on record with the state bar receives ESQ every
Friday. Each issue of ESQ includes summaries of every
Supreme Court or Missouri Court of Appeals decision from
that week, as well as links to the full text of those opinions. Practice tips, key governmental press releases, issues
affecting the practice of law, state legal services information, law school alumni news, and upcoming MoBarCLE
programs are also included in each issue. ESQ continues to
draw rave reviews from lawyers who appreciate its timeliness and valuable information.
Courts Bulletin
While ESQ provides weekly summaries of court decisions, The Courts Bulletin specializes in providing more
in-depth reporting on the latest court decisions. Each
month volunteer attorneys, all authorities in their respective
subject areas, prepare case summaries for publication. The
Courts Bulletin is available to all members free of charge
upon request.
Journal of The Missouri Bar
All members also receive bi-monthly the Journal of The
Missouri Bar. The Journal is The Missouri Bar’s official
publication, and a valuable reference tool for attorneys,
with substantive articles on the latest legal issues. Regular
columns, notices of Supreme Court rule changes and more
can be found in each issue. Prior issues of the Journal may
also be found on The Missouri Bar’s website.
Precedent
The newest addition to the roster of regularly appearing
Missouri Bar publications is Precedent, which made its
debut in 2007. Published quarterly, Precedent is a practiceoriented publication with recurring features on such issues
as ethics, practice tips, work-life balance, legal technology,
professionalism, and the business aspects of running a practice. In addition, each issue of Precedent includes one or
more features providing in-depth coverage of timely issues
facing the legal profession or justice system. Precedent is
available to members either in hard copy form or electronically.
Newsletters
Many committees and sections of The Missouri Bar also
regularly publish newsletters – either as hard copies or
electronically – to inform their members of developments
in particular areas of the law. In addition, members receive
special mailings throughout the year for meeting registration, committee materials, and more. The state bar regularly
includes those materials on its website for greater ease of
access and registration.
The Missouri Bar takes pride in bringing printed versions
of these publications to its members via its own in-house
printing facilities. From inception to mailing, Missouri Bar
equipment and personnel are responsible for the development and production of all publications, resulting in
tremendous cost savings and the freeing up of resources for
other programs of interest. To that end, The Missouri Bar
will continue to invest in equipment that will allow it to
more efficiently and effectively meet the individual needs
of its members.
For additional information about The Missouri Bar’s
member communications, contact Media Relations Director Farrah Fite at (573) 638-2251 (ffite@mobar.org); or
Communications Director Gary Toohey at (573) 638-2222
(garyt@mobar.org).
Precedent Fall 2012
29
MoBar at Your Service
Public Service
The Missouri Bar Lawyer Referral
Service
The Missouri Bar has operated its Lawyer Referral
Service since 1974. The objective of the lawyer referral
service is to help make legal services available to
individuals and families in need of a lawyer. Despite
the Yellow Pages, TV commercials, billboards and the
Internet, consumers frequently rely on The Missouri Bar
Lawyer Referral Service. The service links clients to
lawyers throughout the state, except for the St. Louis and
Springfield areas. In those cities, local bar associations
provide referral services.
Nationally, most bar associations sponsor lawyer referral
services. In all, more than 250 public service lawyer
referral services are currently in operation. The American
Bar Association estimates that 19,000 callers per day ask
for a referral somewhere in the United States.
The Missouri Bar Lawyer Referral Services averages
650 telephone calls a month from people who are looking
for attorneys or other resources that are available in
their communities. Most of the callers are not referred to
lawyers; rather, after the callers explain their situation,
they are often referred to various other resources – from
prosecuting attorneys, to social service agencies, or
government services. This is typical of all such services.
Currently, The Missouri Bar Lawyer Referral Service has
225 attorneys from around the state who are participating
in the service. Callers are charged $25 to cover the costs
of the program; in exchange, they receive an up-to-30
minute consultation with an attorney. The attorneys who
are members agree to pay 10 percent of their fees received
that are $200 or over. The Missouri Bar Lawyer Referral
Service registers each year with the Office of Chief
Disciplinary Counsel, and its rules are determined by the
Supreme Court of Missouri.
Who calls the lawyer referral service? People who are
uncomfortable about calling lawyers directly, people who
don’t have the time or patience, people who are not sure
what kind of attorney they need, people who are out of state
and have no idea where to begin, people who want to speak
with someone about their situation, and those who find that
an attorney they’ve contacted has a conflict of interest.
What are some of the benefits of using the lawyer referral
30
service? All the attorneys are in good standing with The
Missouri Bar. Members are required to have professional
liability insurance. There is no law in Missouri that requires
attorneys to have liability insurance, but attorneys who
wish to be a member of the service must have insurance.
All the lawyers in the service are willing to accept new
clients. The attorneys in the service are flexible. Some will
arrange for evening or weekend appointments. Some will
do in-person or over-the-phone consultations. Sometimes a
potential client needs a specific kind of attorney, and some
of our members concentrate in a certain area of law.
The Missouri Bar Lawyer Referral Service serves as
a clearinghouse for the legal community. We acquaint
potential clients in need of legal services with the value of
a consultation and encourage attorneys to recognize their
obligation to provide affordable legal representation and
services to persons in need.
For more information about The Missouri Bar Lawyer
Referral Service, please contact Lawyer Referral Service
Coordinator Suzanne Creech at (573) 638-2248 or via email at screech@mobar.org.
Pro Bono Activities
The Missouri Bar has a long history of supporting initiatives, programs and funding to help those who need access
to justice, but cannot afford to pay for legal counsel. That
commitment and support was enhanced with several new
initiatives during the past two years.
A new pro bono website tops the list. This stand-alone
pro bono-focused site is intended to serve as a central location to link lawyers interested in doing pro bono work with
organizations that serve the needs of low-income individuals who have legal problems and need a lawyer’s help. The
site also lists training opportunities available to lawyers
who perform pro bono work, along with news and resources related to pro bono efforts within the state and nationally.
The site can be found at www.mobarprobono.org.
New and newly-expanded lawyer recognition efforts
were also instituted. These recognition enhancements are
designed to draw attention to and reward more lawyers
for making pro bono an integral part of their practice and,
Precedent Fall 2012
through their example, encourage other lawyers to volunteer their legal skills to help make access to justice a reality
for the low-income population.
A recognition program – the Pro Bono Wall of Fame –
is a new program implemented to recognize lawyers who
voluntarily report at least 40 hours of pro bono work during
a calendar year. Starting last year, 120 lawyers were added
to the inaugural “Wall of Fame” permanently located on the
pro bono website.
Each lawyer whose name appears on the “Wall of Fame”
also receives: a letter of appreciation from the president of
The Missouri Bar and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
of Missouri; a certificate of appreciation suitable for framing; a “40” Wall of Fame lapel pin; and special recognition
through the display of Wall of Fame at prominent venues
such as the Annual Meeting and Spring and Fall Committee Meetings. And, beginning in 2012, those lawyers who
attend the Annual Meeting will have a commemorative ribbon affixed to their badge calling attention to their achievement.
The “Wall of Fame” program was created in conjunction with a newly-launched initiative asking lawyers to
voluntarily report their pro bono hours each year. An online
reporting tool was developed to make it easy for attorneys
to share the number of hours they committed to pro bono
work in a given year, as well as the type of work they performed. The voluntary reporting initiative not only provides
a means to identify the lawyers who have reached the 40hour milestone making them eligible for recognition on the
Pro Bono Wall of Fame, but it also is intended to provide a
measure of the amount of work lawyers in Missouri do to
provide access to justice for the less fortunate.
In 2011, The Missouri Bar expanded its longstanding Pro
Bono Publico Award program. A fourth award was added
to recognize a second outstate lawyer every year. These
awards, which are presented at the Annual Meeting Awards
Banquet, now recognize one lawyer from the Kansas City
area, one lawyer from the St. Louis area, and two lawyers
from outstate Missouri.
In addition to the enhanced recognition efforts of The
Missouri Bar, the Young Lawyers’ Section (YLS) also
developed new recognition initiatives during the past two
years. Starting in 2011, the YLS created three new pro bono
awards, which are also presented at the Annual Meeting.
One award is given to a member of The Missouri Bar in
practice less than four years, and a second award is presented to a member of the Young Lawyers’ Section of the Missouri Bar in practice more than four years. The third award
is given to an organization or firm that actively encourages
its employees and/or members, particularly its young or
newly admitted lawyers, to provide pro bono services.
The YLS also developed an incentive to encourage lawyers to voluntarily report their pro bono hours, providing
lawyers who reach the pro bono hour milestone during a
calendar year with a commemorative gift.
In addition to providing information to lawyers about
opportunities available at organizations throughout the state
via the pro bono website, The Missouri Bar and YLS assist
in recruiting lawyers for pro bono activities through:
• Ongoing recruitment promotional appeals
involving the pro bono website in Missouri Bar
communication vehicles, such as the ESQ weekly
electronic newsletter and Precedent.
• Coordination of disaster relief efforts in the
aftermath of the Joplin tornado and for flooding
in other areas of Missouri in cooperation with the
ABA and other bar associations.
• Maintaining a toll-free telephone access line for
victims and coordinating assistance from calls
received.
• Producing CLE programs that highlight the work
of attorney pro bono services to call attention to the
need, and to encourage others to contribute time
and skills.
• Publicizing requests for pro bono attorney
assistance from other organizations in ESQ.
• Prominently listing pro bono links on The Missouri
Bar website and maintaining a page on the bar’s
website with information and access to key pro
bono resources.
• The addition of a full pro bono/access to justice
CLE track (five programs) at the 2012 Annual
Meeting, providing substantive training to
attendees in areas where there is a significant
need for pro bono services, while also introducing
the lawyers attending the sessions to pro bono
opportunities available and the entities in need of
help.
The Missouri Bar’s active support of YLS pro bono
activities includes:
• The recruitment of lawyers for pro bono services
utilizing the YLS electronic newsletter and a newly
redesigned YLS website.
• The development of a YLS New Lawyer Practice
Management Seminar presented at the Annual
Meeting, which includes encouraging lawyers to
gain practice experience by volunteering for pro
bono work.
Precedent Fall 2012
31
The Missouri Bar also continues an ongoing commitment
to adequate funding for the justice system, which includes:
• Active support for additional funding for the
Missouri Public Defender System (MSPD).
• Strong support of the Missouri Citizens Commission on
Compensation for Elected Officials’ recommendation
to give state judges a pay raise.
• Board recommendation and subsequent Supreme
Court of Missouri action to raise the pro hac
vice fees, and Board approval of a major portion
of annual dues proceeds for the legal services
programs in Missouri.
• CLE programming addressing challenges and
ramifications related to inadequate funding of the
justice system.
• Support of Criminal Code Committee efforts to
reclassify criminal penalties, which could result in
lowering the caseload issues facing the MSPD.
• Board support of legislative action to maintain the
Civil Legal Services Fund filing fees.
Each year, The Missouri Bar’s officers also meet with
Missouri’s members of the U.S. House of Representatives
and Senate, advocating for federal funding that supports
access to the courts and justice system, including adequate
federal funding for Legal Services.
Legislative staff members continually monitor all bills
and/or other measures introduced in the legislature for any
that could have the effect of presenting obstacles to access to justice for those who cannot afford legal counsel,
alerting the Board to such issues for decisions and possible
action.
For additional information about The Missouri Bar’s
activities in support of pro bono services, please contact
Missouri Bar Director of Projects Robert Stoeckl at (573)
638-2225 or via e-mail at rstoeckl@mobar.org.
Young Lawyers’ Section
The Young Lawyers’ Section (YLS) of The Missouri Bar
was created in 1967 to stimulate the interest of recently
admitted lawyers in the objectives of The Missouri Bar, and
to encourage participation in its substantive and procedural
committees. All members of The Missouri Bar who are 36
years old or younger, or who have been admitted for less
than five years, are members of the YLS. Section members
elect representatives from 14 geographic districts to form
the governing YLS Council.
Through public service projects and educational activi-
32
ties aimed at both the public and recently admitted lawyers, the YLS builds strong relationships among young
and newly-admitted attorneys, and develops future leaders
of The Missouri Bar. The YLS also provides a forum for
young lawyer associations within local bars to share their
public service project successes and ideas.
The YLS is the primary public service arm of The Missouri Bar, carrying out public service projects and educational activities throughout the state. Many of these projects
have become annual activities. Public service projects
include programs designed to reduce youth violence, educate students about the Constitution, and explain voting and
the electoral process. Public information brochures include
topics such as young people’s obligations and rights as
they enter the adult world, domestic violence, adoption and
small claims court procedures.
Missouri Bar Committee Involvement
Many members of the Young Lawyers’ Section have
been active in The Missouri Bar’s substantive law committees over the years. The YLS Council has continued its direct involvement in the committees by appointing Council
liaisons to nearly every substantive law committee of The
Missouri Bar. The committee liaisons attend and participate
in the Missouri Bar’s Spring and Fall Committee Meetings
in Jefferson City, and look forward to continued participation in these committees in the future.
Pro Bono Involvement
The YLS Council has continued its involvement with
Missouri Bar pro bono activities this year. Council members have attended the Delivery of Legal Services committee meetings, and the Council has dedicated itself to
promoting pro bono work in the legal profession and assisting the committee in achieving its goal of improving the
delivery of legal services to the public, including matters
related to disabled, elderly, and low-income persons. The
YLS continued its sponsorship of awards for young lawyers
engaged in pro bono service this year.
Disaster Legal Services
The YLS Council, in conjunction with the lawyers of
The Missouri Bar, the American Bar Association and
FEMA, provided free legal services to victims of several
disasters that occurred in Missouri in 2011, including the
St. Louis tornado, major flooding in both southeast and
northwest Missouri, and the Joplin tornado. In addition to
a toll-free legal helpline that was made available to all disaster victims, some members of the YLS Council provided
on-site legal assistance to victims of the Joplin tornado.
Hundreds of Missouri attorneys volunteered to assist hotline callers with disaster-related legal issues ranging from
Precedent Fall 2012
landlord-tenant issues to questions
about insurance and FEMA assistance.
Educational Activities
“We the People. .. The Citizen
and the Constitution” is a national
constitutional study program for
students in grades 4 through 12
that promotes an understanding of
the history and philosophy of the
United States Constitution and the
Bill of Rights, as well as an understanding of democracy and its
The new website of The Missouri Bar Young Lawyers’ Section.
institutions. It is directed by the
Center for Civic Education and funded by the U.S. DeYLS publications include:
partment of Education through an act of Congress. In the
culminating activity for this event, members participate by
• Turning 18: Some Things About the Law You Need to
volunteering to judge mock congressional hearings where
Know
students demonstrate their skills and knowledge of past and
• Adoption Guide
present constitutional issues. The Missouri State Finals are
• New Lawyer Survival Guide
held each January, and the winning school represents Mis• Senior Citizens Handbook (the YLS and The Missouri
souri in the National Finals held in Washington, D.C. The
Bar Foundation both provide funding for the printing of
YLS Council also donates $10,000 annually to help send
the handbook)
the winning team to the National Finals.
The Law Day Essay Contest is co-sponsored by the MisYLS Awards
souri National Education Association, the Missouri Press
Each year, the YLS presents the Tom Cochran CommuniAssociation, and the YLS. The contest invites students in
ty Service Award to a member of the bar whose community
three age categories (grades 4-5, 6-8 and 9-12) to particiservice and professionalism have significantly enhanced his
pate in a law-related essay contest, with U.S. savings bonds
or her community.
awarded to the top three essays in each age group. The win The second YLS award is the Liberty Bell Award, preners are invited to come to Jefferson City for recognition.
sented to a non-lawyer or non-legal organization engaged
The YLS will also be sponsoring the Liberty Day Projin public service activities that enhance the legal commuect, which aims to teach a fifth grade lesson plan on constinity or are dedicated to the advancement of justice.
tutional issues and laws at their local area schools.
Nominations for either of these awards should be sent to
In celebration of Dr. Seuss’ birthday each March, the
Eric Wilson, Legislative Counsel, The Missouri Bar, P.O.
YLS participates in the Missouri National Education AsBox 119, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0119. The nominasociation’s “Read Across America” activity. For this event,
tion should include the name and contact information of
YLS members across the state visit classrooms to read
the nominee, the award for which the nominee should be
Dr. Seuss books to students in an effort to promote youth
considered, and a brief description of the nominee’s public
literacy and demonstrate the joy of reading.
service activities.
Public Information
The YLS also provides authorship and financial support to a number of public service publications available
through The Missouri Bar. In 2011, the YLS provided an
update to the Missouri Bar’s Small Claims Handbook as
well as a major revision of The Missouri Bar’s domestic
violence survivor’s guide – Domestic Violence and the
Law: A Practical Guide for Survivors. The YLS continues
its work to update many of these publications, and is also
working to make many of them available in other languages, including Spanish, Vietnamese and Bosnian. Other
New YLS Website and Social Media
In 2011, the YLS launched its new website at http://
www.mobaryls.org, which provides a variety of resources
for members of The Missouri Bar Young Lawyers’ Section.
The new website includes a statewide calendar of young
lawyer events, information about how young lawyers can
get involved in YLS activities, information about Missouri
Bar resources for young lawyers, and access to YLS publications. The YLS has also created a Facebook page to improve communication with, and outreach to, its members.
Precedent Fall 2012
33
Member Services
Finally, the YLS provides various services to members
of The Missouri Bar, including continuing legal education
programs, a quarterly newsletter sent to all young lawyers
in the state, social events at regional and annual meetings,
and other activities designed to build relationships among
new attorneys, and to encourage young lawyers to interact
with members of the judiciary and the leadership of The
Missouri Bar.
alumni, and others to discuss leadership opportunities and
development.
Upon completion of the group service project in July,
each member of the Leadership Academy commits to two
additional years of active service in The Missouri Bar.
Leadership Academy alums have served as members of
the Board of Governors, committee leaders, YLS Council
members, MoBarCLE volunteer speakers and authors, and
active Missouri Bar committee members.
For more information about The Missouri Bar Young Lawyers’ Section and its activities, please contact Missouri Bar
Legislative Counsel Eric Wilson at (573) 638-2240 or via
e-mail at ewilson@mobar.org
For more information about The Missouri Bar Leadership
Academy, please contact CLE Programs Attorney Lucas
Boling at (573) 638-2244 or via e-mail at lboling@mobar.
org.
Leadership Academy
Client Security Fund
For a dozen years, the Leadership Academy of The Missouri Bar has fostered the development of future bar leaders. Under the leadership of former Missouri Bar President
Michael P. Gunn and Board of Governors member Dana
Tippin Cutler, the Leadership Academy was developed in
2000. In that time, a total of 128 lawyers in 12 classes have
participated in the Academy.
The Academy encourages diversity among the leadership of The Missouri Bar by recruiting and targeting young
or recent admittees (under age 40 or less than 10 years of
practice) to the bar who are already outstanding leaders in
their communities for participation in the program and a
commitment to work for the bar.
The Leadership Academy seeks diversity in gender, race,
area of practice, and locality of practice. The Academy
program anticipates that bringing in attorneys from underrepresented arenas will broaden and strengthen The Missouri Bar.
In the spring of each year, nominations are accepted for
a new Leadership Academy class. Eligible members of
The Missouri Bar may be nominated by attorneys, their
firms or co-workers, and local or specialty bars. Generally, each class is limited to 12 or fewer members to ensure
the goals of the program. After the close of nominations,
all nominees receive applications that they must complete
and return to The Missouri Bar. A committee reviews the
applications and selects the members of the new Leadership
Academy class.
In the fall, the new Leadership Academy class meets at
The Missouri Bar Center in Jefferson City for orientation
and a tour. During the next 11 months, the class attends
workshops, completes a group service project, and meets
with leaders of The Missouri Bar, Leadership Academy
34
Adherence to the standards established by the Missouri
Rules of Professional Conduct is expected from every
member of The Missouri Bar. The Missouri Bar recognizes
that, regardless of efforts to maintain a high degree of competence and ethics among the members of the legal profession, some lawyers fail to meet those standards. To uphold
the integrity and reputation of the legal profession, The
Missouri Bar maintains a Client Security Fund to compensate clients harmed by this small minority of lawyers.
The Board of Governors of The Missouri Bar created the
Client Security Fund in 1966. A six-member Client Security Fund Committee appointed by the Board of Governors
holds hearings on the claims submitted by clients. The
Regulations and Rules of Procedure that govern the Client
Security Fund permit payment of claims only under specified circumstances for certain types of wrongful conduct.
Compensation is not available for fee disputes or cases of
malpractice. As a prerequisite for payment, the attorney
must be disbarred, suspended, deceased, adjudged mentally
incapacitated or medically diagnosed as so mentally incapacitated as to be unable to practice law.
The committee may recommend reimbursement of a
claim in full or in part or may recommend denial or dismissal of a claim. All recommendations by the committee
for payment, denial or dismissal are subject to approval by
the Board of Governors. The Board retains full discretion
regarding payment of any claim.
The committee advises the Office of Chief Disciplinary
Counsel and the Advisory Committee of all payments and
requests that reinstatement of any disbarred or suspended
lawyer be conditioned upon reimbursement of the fund.
The Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel routinely contacts the committee to determine if there have been any
Precedent Fall 2012
PRO
BONO
payments from the fund related to a lawyer applying for
reinstatement.
The fund is maintained by appropriations from the annual enrollment fees paid by each member of The Missouri
Bar. The fund also accrues interest and receives restitution
payments from lawyers seeking reinstatement. The balance
in the Client Security Fund at the conclusion of the state
bar’s fiscal year is retained in the fund for the succeeding
year.
The fund was initially created with a $10,000 appropriation from the Board of Governors. By 1989, the annual appropriation had grown to $20,000. Annual appropriations to
the fund were increased following an actuarial study of the
fund. The 2012 budget of The Missouri Bar appropriated
$214,000 to the fund.
In 1989, payments were limited to 80 percent of the loss
greater than $1,000 and there was a maximum payment
of $20,000 per claim. Payments are now 80 percent of the
amount of the loss greater than $2,500 and the maximum
payment has been increased to $50,000.
For the 10-year period of 1980-1989, 142 claims were
filed and $205,711 was paid to clients. During the immediate past 10-year period of 2002-2011, 747 claims
were received and the amount paid by the Fund was
$1,576,431.47. Some 84 claims have been received in 2012
through October 31.
The Regulations and Rules of Procedure governing the
Client Security Fund and the form submitted to initiate a
claim are available on The Missouri Bar website, www.
mobar.org, under the “Public” tab.
For additional information about the Client Security Fund,
please contact Missouri Bar Director of Programs Chris
Janku at (573) 638-2231 or via e-mail at cjanku@mobar.
org.
Missouri Bar Asks Lawyers to Voluntarily
Report Annual Pro Bono Hours
Missouri Lawyers Lack Recognition for Their Pro Bono Service
Many Missouri lawyers generously help ensure that justice extends to those
less fortunate by making pro bono work an integral part of their practices.
However, this honorable commitment often lacks the recognition it deserves
within the legal profession and is for the most part unknown to the general
public.
Voluntary Reporting Can Change That
The Missouri Bar hopes to change this by asking lawyers to voluntarily
report the number of hours they commit to pro bono work annually. This
reporting will provide valuable information about the collective and individual
pro bono efforts of Missouri lawyers, help the bar better recognize these
efforts, and inspire other lawyers to perform pro bono services. By reporting,
individual lawyers will play a vital role in this effort.
Reporting Your Pro Bono Hours is Quick and Easy
Just go to The Missouri Bar website (www.mobar.org) and follow the link to
the pro bono reporting form. You will need your members-only bar number
and PIN to complete the brief form.
Lawyers can report total pro bono hours for 2011 now and 2012 hours
throughout the year or at year-end.
Precedent Fall 2012
35
MoBar at Your Service
Technology
How far has technology progressed in the past quarter
of a century? A look back to 1985 – when Keith Birkes
became The Missouri Bar’s executive director – offers
valuable perspective.
At that time, The Missouri Bar had reached what seemed
to be the apex of technological progress with the arrival of
a new IBM System 36 computer. The advent of this computer system allowed the state bar to more efficiently and
quickly handle membership lists, develop targeted mailings, identify subscribers for publications, and accounting
functions.
Of course, letters and articles for publications were still
done on typewriters with carbon paper for copies.
How things have changed.
MoBar Net
1991
In 1991, an innovative group of lawyers from The Missouri Bar’s General Practice Committee and Computer &
Technology Law Committee were anxious to develop a
service whereby Missouri attorneys could gain electronic
access to case law by collecting court hand downs and
making them available through a dial-up service.
With the Internet then in its infancy, this proved to be
a challenge. However, in 1992 a contract was signed with
REJIS (Regional Justice Information Service), a quasi-governmental agency in St. Louis that was providing information technology services to police departments in the area.
MoBarNet began by offering online legal research services
to Missouri attorneys that included access to driving records and motor vehicle registrations.
Over time, MoBar Net became a web-based service and
has steadily added access to additional sources of information, including access to municipal court records from St.
Louis and Kansas City. Today, MoBarNet has nearly 1,100
law firm subscribers, representing more than 3,000 individual users.
1996
Missouri Bar Website
The Missouri Bar opened a window to the world when it
introduced its website (www.mobar.org). Almost from the
beginning, the website offered visitors a comprehensive
36
look at virtually all Missouri Bar endeavors, with a variety
of useful information for lawyers, members of the public,
and the news media.
1997-1998
Listservs
During the first Solo and Small Firm Conference in
1996, e-mail was a new and largely unknown form of communication. Nevertheless, one of the conference attendees
collected e-mail addresses from the handful of attendees
who actually had e-mail and formed a group e-mail to keep
in touch with new friends made at the conference. This
group ultimately became known as the “Small Firm Internet Group,” commonly known as “SFIG.”
As the popularity of e-mail grew, the group soon expanded to the point that the host could no longer maintain the
group e-mail and requested that The Missouri Bar consider
taking over operation of the SFIG. Thus was born the first
Missouri Bar listserv.
SFIG remains an extremely popular listserv today – although not the only one. In fact, listservs have been established for every Missouri Bar committee, greatly facilitating committee work and improving communications among
lawyers across the state. Using this resource, committee
members can exchange information, offer assistance to one
another, provide moral support, and refer cases outside their
geographic area.
Website Redesign
2011
The Missouri Bar’s website undergoes an extensive and
complete facelift designed to meet the needs of an increasingly tech-savvy membership and citizenship.
Visitors to www.mobar.org still found convenient access
to comprehensive information about member services,
member benefits, practice resources, publications, legislative issues, committee and section activities, educational
programming, and meetings and events – all mainstays of
the state bar’s previous website.
However, the new site is much more user-friendly, featuring expanded and descriptive drop-down menus, integrated search capability, and ready access to the latest news
Precedent Fall 2012
and activities of interest – all incorporated into an easy-tofollow organization and design.
In addition, the new website includes enhanced two-way
interactive communication capabilities and offers easy access to popular social media such as Facebook, Twitter and
LinkedIn.
For members of the bar, the site includes prompt access
to members-only information, easy-to-find links to such
popular stops as the Fastcase legal research member benefit
and the Jobs for Missouri Lawyers service, as well as useful links to other relevant websites.
Likewise, members of the public who visit the site find a
prominent link to help them find a lawyer; valuable citizenship education materials for teachers, students and Missouri
citizens; and a wide array of helpful brochures, resources
and other information designed to help Missourians better
understand their rights, the law and the justice system.
2012
CoreVault
The Missouri Bar earlier this year initiated an agreement with CoreVault to provide cloud backup, recovery
and hosting solutions at a discounted rate for Missouri Bar
members.
The loss of data can mean the loss of income, liability
or disciplinary issues, and even the loss of one’s practice.
Whether it’s a failed hard drive or a major disaster, a lawyer’s business depends on data being securely stored and
easily retrievable. Use of this service offers lawyers peace
of mind by helping firms reduce costs, minimize risks, and
ensure data availability at all times.
To learn more, visit The Missouri Bar’s website at www.
mobar.org, go to www.corevault.com/mobar, or call (866)
981-5946 for a free, no obligation assessment.
MoBar at Your Service
Legislative Activities
It would seem obvious to say that lawyers have an
interest in the enactment of laws by our state and federal
governments. That comes with the territory, one might say.
Yet, The Missouri Bar’s interest in the activities of the legislative branch goes far beyond simple observation of the
law-making process.
Indeed, throughout its history, The Missouri Bar has
been an active participant in the legislative process, often
leading the way – through its substantive law committees –
in proposing measures to improve the quality of the law for
the benefit of all Missourians. Just as importantly, it has frequently been an active opponent of those items that would
negatively affect the administration of justice, the integrity
of the judiciary, and the dignity of the legal profession.
The result has been direct involvement in many of the
most significant legislative developments involving those
subjects at the heart of the state bar’s agenda: the improved
administration of justice, the independence of our state’s
courts, and access to the legal system for all who need it.
Here is a brief look at a few of the achievements of The
Missouri Bar in the legislative realm during the past 20
years:
1990
In response to the U.S. Supreme Court case of Cruzan
v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, which highlighted the need for a statute authorizing a durable power of
attorney for health care, the Board of Governors approved
legislation to enact a health care surrogate act and to amend
the Durable Power of Attorney law.
Pursuant to the United States Supreme Court decision
in Keller v. State Bar of California, the Board approved a
“Missouri Bar Protest and Dues Refund Procedure” to allow consideration of members’ requests for refunds relating
to activities that allegedly fall outside of the bar’s appropriate legislative scope.
1991
The bar-drafted Durable Power of Attorney for Health
Care Law was passed by the legislature and signed into law
by Governor John Ashcroft on May 17, 1991. With passage
of the law, The Missouri Bar developed a Durable Power of
Attorney for Health Care and Health Care Directive form to
be made available to the public at no charge.
Precedent Fall 2012
37
1994
Legislation to enact a filing fee to support court automation was approved by the Board of Governors. This fee
generates more than $4.5 million annually.
filings in associate circuit court to support legal services, as
recommended by the bar’s Legal Services Funding Committee. The filing fee generates approximately $3.4 million
for Missouri legal services programs annually.
1995-2000
2005
Legislation to secure state funding for legal services
programs from the Department of Social Services was
approved by the Board of Governors. The legislature
thereafter appropriated funding for contracts between the
Department of Social Services and legal services offices for
representation of indigent individuals applying for general
relief for a number of years. The largest amount appropriated from general revenue was $1,503,500 in 2001. Because
of substantial reductions in state revenue, this amount was
reduced to $50,000 in 2002.
The Public Defender Task Force is authorized to hire The
Spangenberg Group to assess Missouri’s public defender
system and to issue a report.
1998
Two proposals offered by The Missouri Bar Criminal
Law Council designed to impact issues relating to the
criminal justice system, developed as the result of mutual
give-and-take between prosecutors and public defenders,
are approved by the Board of Governors. The first creates
a statutory basis for certain high-volume, low-level misdemeanors to be charged as first offense misdemeanors,
thereby abrogating the possibility of incarceration. The second creates a statutory framework for diversion programs
that includes an administrative handling cost to be paid by
the defendant to help support the funding needs of prosecutors. The first proposal is enacted into law.
Legislation proposed by the Family Law Section making changes to the areas of legal separation, child support,
relocation and visitation was approved by the Board of
Governors. The legislation was developed to respond to
“reforms” proposed by fathers’ rights activities that family law experts generally believed would adversely affect
the administration of justice. The Missouri Bar provided
constructive input to legislation passed in 1998 enacting
substantial changes in this area of the law.
2001
The Board of Governors approved proposed legislation
to provide supplemental funding for legal services from
the Tort Victims’ Compensation Fund in the amount of
$750,000. The legislation passed and
this amount was appropriated by the
legislature in 2002. Legal services offices continue to receive 26 percent of
all proceeds paid into the Tort Victims’
Compensation Fund annually.
Changes to the Missouri Bar Protest and Dues Refund
Procedure, in response to a study regarding the proper
role of the unified bar with respect to legislation and other
activities, were approved.
2010
The Board of Governors approves a recommendation
of the Citizens’ Commission on Compensation for Elected
2002
The Board of Governors approves a
$20 dues increase, as well as a recommendation for a $100 pro hac vice
fee and filing fee surcharges of $250
for each circuit court case and appeal
and $10 for each associate case, all
in support of the state’s legal services
programs. The bar dues assessment
and pro hac vice fees generate more
than $500,000 annually.
2003
Passage of a filing fee surcharge
providing for a $20 surcharge on appeals, $10 on circuit filings, and $8 on
38
Precedent Fall 2012
Officials that Missouri judicial salaries be indexed to 80
percent of corresponding federal judicial salaries. The salary increases go into effect on July 1, 2012.
The Board of Governors approves legislation to remove
the sunset provision on Section 477.650, the statute that
provides for the collection of a filing fee to support legal
services.
2011
A Special Committee on Adoption and Termination of
Parental Rights is appointed to respond to issues that surfaced as a result of an immigration/termination of parental
rights case commonly known as the “Baby Carlos” case
that received extensive media attention. In February 2012,
the Board of Governors approved legislation recommended
by this committee relating to enforcement of post-adoption
contracts.
A joint proposal by the Elder Law Committee, Probate &
Trust Law Committee, and Health & Hospital Law Committee to update The Missouri Bar’s Durable Power of
Attorney for Health Care form was approved by the Board
of Governors. The form is also translated into Spanish. The
printed form continues to be distributed to thousands of
Missourians free of charge each year and is also available
to the public on The Missouri Bar’s website.
A subcommittee of the Criminal Law Committee appointed to completely revise the state’s criminal code
completes five years of work and submits its proposal to
the Board of Governors. The proposal was approved and
introduced in both the House and Senate during the 2012
session of the Missouri General Assembly but fails to gain
passage. A joint interim legislative committee was appointed to study the revisions and, upon approval by the Board
of Governors, the code revision will be reintroduced during
the 2012 legislative session.
For additional information about the legislative process
and The Missouri Bar’s role within that process, please
contact Senior Legislative Counsel Catherine Barrie at
(573) 638-2222 or via e-mail at catherineb@mobar.org; or
contact Legislative Counsel Eric Wilson at (573) 638-2240
or via e-mail at ewilson@mobar.org.
MoBar at Your Service
Insurance Programs
During the course of the last quarter century, there have
been significant changes in the insurance programs that
The Missouri Bar has provided to its members. In the late
1950s, The Missouri Bar was one of the first organizations
to offer group major medical insurance to its members. The
state bar was able to offer competitive, high quality major
medical insurance for approximately 20 years before the
marketplace made it impossible for such a relatively small
group to have the leverage necessary to provide competitive medical insurance.
As the opportunity to provide medical insurance to
members faded, a significant opportunity developed in the
legal malpractice area. In the mid-1980s, legal malpractice
coverage available through commercial carriers became
quite volatile. In order to provide a stable, comprehensive
malpractice environment for Missouri lawyers, The Bar
Plan Mutual Insurance Company was born. This company
was formed by The Missouri Bar, but has operated since
its inception as an independent company. The Missouri
Bar continues to endorse The Bar Plan Mutual Insurance
Company because it provides high quality, competitive
legal malpractice insurance to Missouri lawyers. The Bar
Plan has provided stability in what can be a volatile marketplace, and it is the primary insurance product endorsed and
provided by The Missouri Bar.
There are several other insurance products – including
term life, income disability and occasionally several others
– which The Missouri Bar endorses if they are perceived to
be of benefit to our members. However, the primary insurance program remains to be legal malpractice, which The
Missouri Bar has a significant responsibility to provide to
its members.
Precedent Fall 2012
39
MoBar at Your Service
Missouri Lawyers’ Assistance
Program (MOLAP)
Since 1977, attorneys who had personal challenges with
addiction – primarily alcohol – could find assistance from a
group of volunteer attorneys, themselves in recovery, who
made up The Missouri Bar’s Lawyers’ Assistance Committee and the Supreme Court Intervention Committee.
Those resources were supplemented in 1990 when The
Missouri Bar contracted with People Resources, an EAP
(Employee Assistance Program) provider in St. Louis.
Through this company, the state bar was able to offer
assistance to attorneys related to issues beyond alcohol
addiction, including stress, burnout, marital and financial
problems, and more. Modeled after a program initiated by
the Bar Association of Metropolitan St. Louis, law firms
were able to enroll their employees with People Resources
so that, should an employee encounter personal difficulty,
they could confidentially self-refer to a professional counselor through the EAP or the firm could refer the employee
for counseling.
While this was a significant step forward, the Lawyers’
Assistance Committee and the Intervention Committee continued to believe that a professional counselor was needed
on The Missouri Bar staff to coordinate with volunteers and
to provide assessment and coordinate interventions when
necessary. This became a reality when, in 1995, the Board
of Governors approved the hiring of a full-time professional counselor. The first Missouri Lawyers’ Assistance Program (MOLAP) staff director was hired in January 1996.
The Missouri Lawyers’ Assistance Program is a professional, confidential counseling program that serves lawyers,
judges, law students, and their families. MOLAP addresses
depression, substance abuse, marriage and family issues,
40
or any other personal problems that impact professional or
personal well-being. Services are provided free of charge.
The most common reasons for members of the legal profession to seek assistance from MOLAP include substance
abuse, depression, marital/family concerns, professional
stress or burnout, mental health matters, coping with medical concerns, financial strain, gambling problems, and other
personal matters.
MOLAP services include: unlimited access to a licensed
clinical social worker; assessment of problems; counseling;
information and referral; crisis intervention; coaching for
persons of concern and concerned others; and case management.
MOLAP can also assist in coordinating crisis intervention services for individuals and law firms, as well as connecting to lawyer volunteers for peer support. As part of a
proactive presence, MOLAP also provides education and
prevention presentations to bar groups, articles on personal growth via The Missouri Bar’s website, a quarterly
newsletter (available on request), and the annual Lawyers’
Assistance Conference, now in its 17th year.
During 2012, MOLAP reached the milestone of serving
more than 2,000 people.
For confidential assistance from MOLAP, call 1-800688-7859.
For additional information about the Missouri Lawyers’
Assistance Program and its services, please contact MOLAP Director Anne Chambers at (573) 638-2262 or viaemail at achambers@mobar.org.
Precedent Fall 2012
MoBar at Your Service
Meetings
Annual Meeting
The bar year officially ends – and a new one begins
– with each year’s Missouri Bar Annual Meeting. This
meeting hosts a wide array of activities – some are focused
on the business and governance of The Missouri Bar and
Judicial Conference, other activities focus on delivering
excellent quality educational programming for Missouri
lawyers, and still others offer opportunities for lawyers and
judges from diverse segments to gather in social settings
that foster camaraderie and community among the entire
legal profession.
Many years ago, The Missouri Bar and the Missouri
Judicial Conference began having their annual gatherings
at the same time and location. Both groups use the yearly
gathering to conduct business meetings focused on governance and administration issues. Many judicial committees
meet early in the week and The Missouri Bar Board of
Governors meets mid-week. The Board of Governors holds
a business meeting that includes the election of officers and
an executive committee for the following year.
Educational activities take the spotlight during the last
two days of the Annual Meeting, typically featuring more
than 35 CLE programs. The educational program format
includes three plenary sessions to explore cutting-edge,
timely issues that affect the profession, administration of
justice, society and democracy at-large. In addition, 25
individual skill-building sessions in substantive areas of
law are presented in five different tracks each year. While
each track typically has one or more programs that focus
on professionalism/ethics related to a particular substantive area of law, professionalism and ethics is the sole focus
of two early morning program slots. In recent years, the
meeting has also featured a series of three programs specifically designed to help young lawyers bridge the knowledge
and skills gap between law school and law practice. Other
programs are added year-to-year based on particular needs
facing the profession.
Evenings offer social events designed to support an
easily overlooked but vital ingredient underlying a strong
profession, and one that is especially important as individual practices become more and more specialized. Social
receptions on Wednesday evening and Thursday evening
offer an opportunity for lawyers across a wide diversity of
practice areas, firm sizes and backgrounds to gather in a
casual social setting, get to know one another, and reinforce
the value of all members of The Missouri Bar.
Attendees have an opportunity to share a meal and hear
from the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Missouri
at an afternoon luncheon. The annual event ends with an
awards banquet to recognize individuals for their excellence and leadership within the profession.
Ensuring that this gathering is affordable and accessible
to every lawyer is a very important objective. Registration
rates are kept very low, offering an affordable full registration rate that includes tickets to all educational, social
events and meals (the awards banquet is a separately ticketed item). An even more affordable educational programsonly registration rate ensures that every lawyer can afford
to get a year’s worth of MCLE credit. Attendees can choose
from a wide range of very high-quality educational programming and have an opportunity to learn from many
judges and Missouri’s top practitioners who often serve
as faculty. In addition, young lawyers benefit from even
greater discounts, including educational programs-only
registrations available at no cost to our newest lawyers.
For more information about The Missouri Bar Annual
Meeting, please contact Missouri Bar Director of Projects Robert Stoeckl at (573) 638-2225 or via e-mail at
rstoeckl@mobar.org.
Solo and Small Firm Conference
The creation of the Law Practice Management program
in 1991 was an immediate boon to Missouri lawyers – and
especially for solo and small firm lawyers, who face unique
issues and challenges.
To further assist these practitioners, the bar’s General
Practice Committee, Law Practice Management Committee, Computer & Technology Law Committee, and Paralegals Committee began considering the staging of a conference focused on the needs of solo and small firm lawyers.
Bolstered by seed money provided by The Bar Plan Mutual Insurance Company, the debut Solo and Small Firm
Conference took place in April 1996 at the Holiday Inn in
Lake Ozark. With a registration fee of only $99 (includ-
Precedent Fall 2012
41
ing meals), the emphasis was on attracting cost-conscious
solos and small firm lawyers. Some 250 lawyers attended
the initial conference, which included two program tracks
focusing on managing a law practice, technology, quality of
life issues, and substantive programming.
The next year, the conference changed locations – to the
Lodge of Four Seasons – and months, moving to June to
make the event more of a family-friendly experience.
As attendance continued to grow, the conference outgrew the facilities of the Lodge of Four Seasons and moved
to Tan-Tar-A in 2006, where attendance soared to 1,050
attendees. By that time, the program had grown to 8-9
program tracks, computer labs and discussion groups, along
with recreational activities and social outings.
In 2012, the Solo & Small Firm Conference moved once
again, to larger facilities – and a new resort venture for
attendees to explore – at the Branson Hilton Convention
Center.
The Solo & Small Firm Conference has won multiple
awards and been replicated across the United States and
Canada.
For more information about The Missouri Bar Solo and
Small Firm Conference, please contact Missouri Bar Director of Membership Services Linda Oligschlaeger at (573)
638-2258 or via e-mail at lindao@mobar.org.
Spring and Fall Committee Meetings
Jefferson City is the host for the two regularly-planned
meetings of the more than 60 committees and sections of
The Missouri Bar. These committees are largely responsible
for the enormous number of programs and services the state
bar regularly provides to its members and to the public.
Shortly after the start of each new bar year – which
officially begins at the conclusion of the Annual Meeting
– many committees gather in mid-November for the Fall
Committee Meetings. This gathering gives committees the
chance to get organized and map out plans for the bar year
ahead.
In mid-May, committees again gather for the Spring
Committee Meetings. Once again, committee members
from all corners of the state converge on Jefferson City for
a mid-year assessment of progress on committee projects.
At both gatherings, many of The Missouri Bar’s substantive law committees also organize and present educational
programs for their members and others in attendance.
As with all Missouri Bar gatherings, the Spring and Fall
Committee Meetings give members the chance to take
advantage of practical, timely educational opportunities,
contribute to the betterment of the profession and the laws
of our state, and enjoy the camaraderie of colleagues – a
winning formula that enhances both professional and personal enrichment.
For additional information about the Spring and Fall Committee Meetings, please contact Missouri Bar Director of
Projects Robert Stoeckl at (573) 638-2225 or via e-mail at
rstoeckl@mobar.org.
42
Precedent Fall 2012
MoBar at Your Service
The Missouri Bar Center
The Missouri Bar Center continues to meet the ever-expanding needs of the bar membership and staff, furthering
its well-deserved reputation as an attractive and functional
headquarters for the state bar.
Located in downtown Jefferson City, the three-story
main building – completed in 1965 via the donations of bar
members across the state – houses the bar’s media relations, legislative, continuing legal education, meeting planning, citizenship education, and MCLE functions, including
professional and support staffing.
Adjacent to the main building is an annex – purchased in
1986 – that includes the membership records department,
administrative department, lawyers’ assistance program,
membership services department, communications department, and information systems department.
Immediately behind this annex are The Missouri Bar’s
in-house printing facilitates, including printing presses,
collating equipment and labeling machinery. The Missouri
Bar remains one of the very few state bars across the nation
utilizing its own printing operation. Every Missouri Bar
publication – from the Journal of The Missouri Bar to the
popular MoBarCLE deskbooks – is printed, collated, bound
and mailed from this in-house facility.
The print shop’s ability to print all Missouri Bar publications, combined with the organization’s ability to order and
store large quantities of paper, have allowed the state bar to
save hundreds of thousands of dollars each year by avoiding expensive commercial printing costs.
Together, the three buildings that make up The Missouri
Bar Center complex are home to 49 full-time employees,
with additional assistance from part-time help as needed.
Minimal increases in staffing, along with the wise allocation of space throughout the three structures, have allowed
the organization to serve a rapidly growing membership
with ongoing and new services.
Conveniently located at the corner of Monroe and McCarty streets in Jefferson City, the bar’s headquarters is
within easy walking distance of such landmarks as the State
Capitol, the Supreme Court of Missouri, and other state
government buildings.
The Missouri Bar Center also contains conference
rooms and meeting facilities that are available to groups
or individuals for meetings, depositions or other business
functions. In fact, its central location and available meeting
space make The Missouri Bar Center a logical and convenient gathering site for Missouri Bar members with business in the capital city.
In 2013, the Bar Center’s versatility will be enhanced
with construction of an additional floor on the original Missouri Bar building. When completed mid-year, it will offer
additional space for conferences, CLE seminars, meetings,
and other events.
Missouri Bar members are always welcome to tour the
complex or make use of its facilities when they find themselves in Jefferson City.
An architect’s rendering
of The Missouri Bar
Center with the addition
of a new floor in 2013.
Precedent Fall 2012
43
WRITING IT RIGHT
Acronyms
By Douglas E. Abrams
On June 1, 2012, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit decided National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. United States Department of
Energy.1 The three-judge panel held that
the challenged agency determination
violated the Nuclear Waste Policy Act
of 1982.2 Without conducting a valid
cost evaluation required by the Act, the
agency had refused to adjust or suspend
annual fees collected from owners and
operators of nuclear power plants to
cover costs of the government’s longterm disposal of civilian nuclear waste.
The parties hotly contested the case
with servings of alphabet soup. On page
48 of its 58-page brief, for example, the
Association argued: “Although DOE
has not disclaimed its obligation to dispose of SNF, it is undisputed that DOE
currently has no active waste disposal
program. . . . The BRC is undertaking
none of the waste disposal program
activities identified in NWPA § 302(d).
Its existence therefore cannot justify
continued NWF fee collection.”3
On page 24 of its 60-page brief,
the agency countered that “[t]he plain
language of the NWPA . . . provides
the Secretary [of Energy] with broad
discretion in determining whether to
recommend a change to the statutory
NWF fee. . . . In section 302(a)(2) of the
NWPA, Congress set the amount of the
NWF fee – which is paid only by utilities that enter into contracts with DOE
for the disposal of their SNF and HLW.
. . .”4
Get it?
44
Alphabet Soup
The court’s opinion admonished the
parties for “abandon[ing] any attempt
to write in plain English, instead abbreviating every conceivable agency and
statute involved, familiar or not, and
littering their briefs with references to
‘SNF,’ ‘HLW,’ ‘NWF,’ ‘NWPA,’ and
‘BRC’ — shorthand for ‘spent nuclear
fuel,’ ‘high-level radioactive waste,’
the ‘Nuclear Waste Fund,’ the ‘Nuclear
Waste Policy Act,’ and the ‘Blue Ribbon
Commission.’”5
Writing for the unanimous panel,
Judge Laurence H. Silberman instructed
that “[b]rief-writing, no less than ‘written English, is full of bad habits which
spread by imitation and which can be
avoided if one is willing to take the
necessary trouble.’”6 The D.C. Circuit’s
Handbook of Practice and Internal
Procedures flags the bad habit that occasioned the court’s instruction here:
“[P]arties are strongly urged to limit
the use of acronyms. While acronyms
may be used for entities and statutes
with widely recognized initials, such as
FERC and FOIA, parties should avoid
using acronyms that are not widely
known.”7
The confusion created by the parties’
casual use of acronyms appeared particularly stark because Judge Silberman
and his colleagues were not newcomers
unaccustomed to the federal administrative thicket. The D.C. Circuit has been
called “a de facto, quasi-specialized
administrative law court”8 because it
“has exclusive jurisdiction over a variety
of challenges to administrative action
and hears a disproportionate share of
the United States’ administrative law
cases.”9 The court’s “steady diet”10 of
Precedent Fall 2012
federal agency review proceedings includes ones involving the Department
of Energy. The three judges hearing the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act appeal had
served an aggregate total of 59 years
on the court.11
A Rule of Reason
Lawyers’ use of acronyms should be
guided by a “rule of reason” that, in the
exercise of sound judgment, balances
two threshold considerations. On the one
hand, when an acronym recognizable
by the intended audience is fully identified at its first appearance, the acronym
can simplify the writer’s message and
help readers move more easily from
paragraph to paragraph. On the other
hand, as the D.C. Circuit intimates, an
acronym concocted by the writer or
otherwise unknown to most readers can
impede that movement, even with initial
full identification.
Timing and appreciation for a reader’s
ordinary attention span may also matter.
To be fair to the Association and the
agency in the recent D.C. Circuit appeal, the parties’ briefs did fully identify
acronyms the first time they appeared.
In any expositive writing, however,
even apparently recognizable acronyms
fully identified early can leave readers
disoriented when the acronym does not
appear again until several pages later
(perhaps a dozen or more pages later in a
brief, and even several dozen in a book).
Rather than force readers to refresh their
memories by scanning several prior
pages to ferret out the full identification,
the writer applying the rule of reason
might be better off repeating the full
name again.
In the recent appeal, for example,
WRITING IT RIGHT
the parties fully identified the “Nuclear
Waste Fund (NWF)” on page 1 of their
respective briefs. Even if some readers
might be familiar with the acronym,
however, scrapping the shorthand by
repeating the full name a dozen or more
pages later would have better served
the parties’ efforts to communicate effectively with the court.
These basic principles apply not only
in briefs and other submissions written
for courts, but also in articles, monographs, books and other publications
written for a more general readership of
lawyers or non-lawyers.
Submissions to Courts
Judges seasoned in administrative
review decided the recent Nuclear Waste
Policy Act appeal, but judges in general
jurisdiction courts may not initially be as
familiar as counsel with the substantive
law that determines the outcome. As
American law has grown increasingly
intricate and diverse in recent decades,
more and more lawyers have maintained
specialty practices.12 Specialization
means that judges may come from
private or public sector careers that
exposed them regularly to only some of
the ever-expanding constitutional and
non-constitutional law questions that
now shape their dockets. Casual use of
acronyms and other jargon comes with
risks because, according to one federal
district court, writers gamble when they
“presuppose specialized knowledge on
the part of their readers.”13
Reliance on recognized acronyms,
like reliance on other professional jargon, may serve a legal writer’s purpose
when the audience consists solely of
readers trained in the writer’s specialty.
But without this foundation of common
understanding, warns Judge Richard A.
Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the 7th Circuit, “much legal jargon can
obscure rather than illuminate a particu-
lar case.”14
“There is nothing wrong with a specialized vocabulary – for use by specialists,” Judge Posner explained. “Federal
district and circuit judges, however, . . .
are generalists. . . . Lawyers should understand the judges’ limited knowledge
of specialized fields and choose their
vocabulary accordingly.”15
Plain English may warrant counsel’s
particular attention when, as in the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act case, the
court reviews a federal agency decision.
Intricate administrative rules and regulations, grounded as they often are in
sometimes opaque enabling legislation,
can create labyrinths most effectively
negotiated by specialists. In recent
generations, administrative law has
grown “extremely complex,”16 so much
so that Justice Scalia has remarked that
“[a]dministrative law is not for sissies.”17
The practical upshot of administrative
complexity, according to the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, is that
lawyers regularly immersed in an agency’s practice may acquire “insights and
experience denied judges. The subtleties
. . . encased in jargon and tucked into
interstices of the administrative scheme,
may escape us.”18 “It is the responsibilities of the parties to properly educate the
court,” explains a federal district judge,
“not of the court to improperly defer to
an agency decision.”19
Because effective written communication is a two-way street, judges also
should apply a rule of reason when they
consider whether to use acronyms in
lengthy opinions. Casual use of acronyms may unnecessarily break the readers’ flow because the opinion’s primary
audience – the lawyers who handle a
particular case or later seek precedents,
and the clients whose rights and obligations hang in the balance – may also not
be specialists in the field that gives rise
Precedent Fall 2012
to the decision. Justice Elena Kagan is
right that a court preparing an opinion
should strive to “figure out how to communicate complicated ideas to people
who know a lot less than you do about
a certain subject.”20
Writing for a General Readership
Most legal writing targets a discrete
audience readily identifiable in advance,
and early identification may help inform the decision whether and when to
use acronyms in articles, monographs,
books or other writings that seek to reach
a general audience beyond the courts.
An audience of lawyers trained in the
writer’s specialty may be able to digest
acronyms more easily than an audience
of lawyers trained in other specialties,
or an audience of clients or other lay
readers unaccustomed to legal discussion altogether. Analysis that resonates
with some readers may create barriers
for others.
At its best, writing is a dialog, and
not a monolog. Writers may understand
what they mean to say, but the key is
whether readers will also understand and
remain with the text until the end. When
a frustrated reader quits in midstream for
inability or unwillingness to converse
in acronyms or other unfamiliar jargon,
the writer fails in the core mission – to
finish before the reader does. As stage
and screen actress Shirley Booth said
soon after winning an Academy Award
in 1952, “the audience is 50 percent of
the performance.”21
Conclusion: Bridging the
Gap
In court filings and other expression
that applies the rule of reason, the soundest advice for writers is to err on the side
of avoiding overreliance on acronyms.
Unless the writer publishes with greater
grasp of the subject matter than the average reader, the writer should not publish
45
WRITING IT RIGHT
at all. Freewheeling use of acronyms
can create unnecessary, avoidable roadblocks that thwart the writer’s effort to
bridge the gap.
Endnotes
1 680 F.3d 819 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
2 42 U.S.C. §§ 10101-10270.
3 Nat’l Ass’n of Regulatory Utility Comm’rs,
Final Brief of Consolidated Petitioners 48, 2011
WL 5479247 (2012).
4 Nat’l Ass’n of Regulatory Utility Comm’rs,
Final Brief for Respondent 24-25, 2011 WL
5479246 (2012).
5 680 F.3d at 820 n.1.
6 Id., quoting George Orwell, Politics and the
English Language, 13 Horizon 76 (1946).
7 680 F.3d at 820 n.1; Handbook of Practice
and Internal Procedures, United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
43 (2011).
8 Christopher P. Banks, Judicial Politics in
46
D.C. Circuit Court, at xiii (1999).
9 John M. Golden, The Federal Circuit and
the D.C. Circuit: Comparative Trials of Two
Semi-Specialized Courts, 78 Geo. Wash. L. Rev.
553, 554.
10 John F. Manning, Nonlegislative Rules, 72
Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 893, 893 (2004).
11 United States Court of Appeals, District
of Columbia Circuit: About the Judges, http://
www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf/
content/judges.
12 Sol Linowitz, The Betrayed Profession,
ch. 5 (1994).
13 Waddy v. Globus Medical, Inc., No.
407CV075, 2008 WL 3861994 *2 n.4 (S.D. Ga.
Aug. 18, 2008).
14 Miller v. Illinois Cent. R.R. Co., 474 F.3d
951, 955 (7th Cir. 2007).
15 Id.
16 Testimony of Thomas M. Susman on Behalf
of the ABA, Now More Than Ever: Reauthorizing the Administrative Conference, Reforming
Regulation, and Reinventing Government, 8
Admin. L.J. Am. U. 677 (1994). 17 Antonin Scalia, Judicial Deference to Adthe
Precedent Fall 2012
ministrative Interpretations of Law, 1989 Duke
L.J. 511, 511.
18 Watts v. Missouri-Kan.-Tex. R.R. Co., 383
F.2d 571, 583 (5th Cir. 1967).
19 Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v. Shalala, 988
F. Supp. 1306, 1318 (D. Or. 1997).
20 Robert Barnes, Kagan Made Her Mark in
Bold Rookie Term, Wash. Post, Sept. 26, 2011,
at A1 (quoting Justice Kagan).
21 Shirley Booth, News Summaries, Dec. 13,
1954 (winner for Best Actress in Come Back,
Little Sheba; also winner of three Tony Awards,
a Golden Globe Award and two Emmy Awards).
Douglas E. Abrams, a law
professor at the University
of Missouri, has written or
co-authored five books.
Four U.S. Supreme Court
decisions have cited his
law review articles.
Congratulations to the
Newest Members of The Missouri Bar
Congratulations to the following individuals who passed the July 2012 bar examination in Missouri and have completed all other
requirements under Rule 8 for admission to The Missouri Bar.
The names of applicants who passed the bar examination but have not yet completed all other requirements for admission
are NOT published until all requirements have been met. These requirements include the following: (1) receipt by the Board of
Law Examiners of an official transcript verifying that the applicant has been awarded the J.D. degree; (2) receipt by the Board of the
applicant’s certified score of not less than 80 on the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination; (3) approval by the Board of
the applicant’s character and fitness; (4) verification by the Board that the applicant is a citizen of the U.S., an immigrant alien lawfully
admitted for permanent residence in the U.S., or an alien otherwise authorized to work lawfully in the U.S.; and (5) completion of the
educational course on Missouri law.
The list is current as of September 26, 2012.
Mark Andrew Abbott
Steven Andrew Ahillen
Matthew Louis Aiazzi
Ellen Marie Albers
Tania Aldaddah
Dwight Dios Alexander II
Catherine Anne Anderson
Jonathan Bond Anderson
Kevin Brent Anderson
Andrew Gant Appleton
Mary Erica Aquadro
Nathan Jeremy Aquino
Caitlin Olivia Argyros
Judith Maher Asaad
Alexandria Shaheen Assareh
Nathan Matthew Atkinson
Samuel Kyle Atkinson
Alemayehu A. Ayanaw
Nathan Kennedy Bader
Corey Dean Baker
Jessica Rose Baker
Joshua Ryan Baker
Russell Gerald Baker
Michael Brandon Bang
John Richard Barber
Brandon Wayne Bardot
Neil Martin Barron
Sean Colin Barry
Aeric Matthew Bauman
Tymon Lloyd Bay
Sheryl Lynn Bayes-Weiner
Joseph Benjamin Bazzell
Susan Lynne Becker
Richelle Dawn Beckman
Mary Cathleen Beekman
Ambika Behal
Brandon Dean Belt
Sabrina Kay Bennett
Laura A. Bentele
Andrew Thomas Bergman
Jordan Ross Bergus
Peter Charles Biberstein
Douglas A. Biggs
Amanda L. Biondolino
Erin Christina Birk
Andrew William Blackwell
Kerry Gene Blasingim
Joseph N. Blumberg
Kristin Danielle Bobbitt
Gillian Hatfield Boscan
Stephen William Bosky
Paul A. Bouckaert
John Lucas Boyer
Gregory Patrick Boyle
Christine E. Brady
Stephanie Anne Brauer
Jacquelyn Gayle Brazas
Rachel Alyse Breland
Nicole Kristine Bridges
Jennifer Renee Brooks
Latonya Evonne Brooks
Anthony LaSelle Brown
Laura Michelle Browne
Whitney Rachelle Brummett
Ryan Emery Brungard
Matthew Ryan Brunkhorst
Mollie Gentry Mohan Brunworth
Jacqueline Alissa Bryant
Timothy William Burgdorf
Kimberly Ann Burgess
Jeffrey Joseph Burns
Jordan B. Burns
Andrew Michael Buser
Thomas John Bussen
Bradley Scott Byars
James Vincent Campbell
Joshua Nicholas Canavan
Samuel Dale Cardick
Michael Thomas Carey
Emilia Gabrielle Carlson
Brandon Blaine Carney
James Eugene Logan Carter
Sarah Anne Castle
Adrien Joel Caye
Tiffany Danielle Chadwick
Courtney Ruth Chapin
Aaron Joseph Chappell
Elana Levy Charles
Kevin Michael Charochak
Nina Benoist Chasnoff
Amber Jean Cheek
Denise L. Childress
Alexander Brewster Chosid
Emily Lynn Cipra
Benjamin Dylan Clark
Erin Elizabeth Clark
Caleb Joe Clifford
Matthew McKain Clifford
Jonathan Lyn Cloar
Mathews Jenks Coggin
Megan Margaret Collelo
Megan Christine Connon
John Clark Constance
Tyler Stephen Cookson
Cameron Heath Jones Cooper
Alexander James Cornwell
Nicole Therese Solawetz Cortes
Con Curran Coulter II
Kathryn Marie Cox
Patrick Jerome Coyle, Jr.
Jennifer Jean Crancer
Michael James Crawford
Bryce C. Crowley
James David Cruse
Allyson Elisabeth Cunningham
Eric Alton Cunningham III
Katharine Patricia Curry
Christopher Victor Daming
Angie Elora Nadeau Danis
Andrea Jeanette Davidson
Alexander Worth Davis
Jennifer Leigh de Lyon Stralka
Gregory Steven DeLassus
Dzenana Delic
William Edward Diederich III
Dawn Joanna Diel
Jordan Clay Dillender
Crista Magdalen Dittert
Megan Lynn Dittmann
Maria Rose Doedtman
Adam C. Doerr
Katharine Anne Dolin
Precedent Fall 2012
Brian Michael Douglas
Lauren Elizabeth Douville
Patrick Robert Dowd
Austin Thomas Dowling
John Charles Drake
Bradley Russell Drakesmith
Chelsea W. Draper
Ron William Dreisilker
Charles Louis Drury III
Leah Danielle DuRoss
Danielle Patrice DuRousseau
Erin Elizabeth Dunleavy
Alexander Louis Edelman
Thomas Hayden Ehrich
Audra Carol Eidem Heinze
James Patrick Emanuel, Jr.
Elizabeth Elaine Eppright
Anne Daisley Erickson
Anthony Blake Eskridge
Andrew Michael Esselman
Kyle Gehrig Evans
Stephen Joseph Evans
Margaret Claire Eveker
Zachary Thomas Faires
Bradley James Farris
Debra Ann Faulkner
Alexandra Rose Faulstich
Sarah Elizabeth Felts
Adam Andrew Field
Victoria Koger Findley
Shelli Jean Fleharty
Paul Matthew Flucke
Julia Christine Fogelberg
Sean Thomas Foley
Abraham Lee Forth
Eric William Foss
David Patrick Franklin
Gaetana Isabelle Franklin
Keith Patrick Freie
Joshua Kyle Friel
John Calvin Fuchs
Daniel Chase Fundakowski
Megan Ruth Galey
David Munguia Garcia, Jr.
47
Jessica Mary Gasch
Margaret Devereux Gentzen
Allison Robyne Gerli
Stephen Frederick Gerring
Scott M. Gershenson
Nathaniel James Gilbert
Sara Tess Gold
Samuel M Goldenhersh
Kyle George Gottuso
Benjamin L. Gould
Erin Michelle Grabe
Darby Wade Grant
Bethany Joel Graves
Daniel Woodrow Graves
Jacqueline Katrina Graves
Lindsay Goldford Gray
Travis Allen Gray
Lee Edward Greenwald
Cale Allen Griffin
Neal Bryant Griffin
Brian Michael Griggs
Rachel D. Guthrie
Jamie Lauren Hais
Bryon Earl Hale
Dan Bennett Haley
Kimberly Sue Hall
Whitney Marie Hampton
Paul Daniel Hanley
Denise Michele Hanrahan
Amanda Kristine Hansen
Preston Kyle Harmon
Kara Anne Harms
Albert Fred Harris III
Sara Hilary Harrison
Joseph Michael Harvath
Kyle Jared Haubrich
Katherine Elizabeth Haug
Christopher Michael Hawkins
Sheridan Kay Haynes
Kevin Michael Haynie
Matthew Christopher Heger
Julie Stark Hellmich
Benjamin Lee Hembree
Leslie Dean Henke, Jr.
Dirk Jerome Hennessey
Adam Crismon Henningsen
Carlos Antonio Hernandez
Melissa Jane Hernandez Pimentel
Joseph Carl Hietpas
Lawrence Courtney Higgins
Robbie James Hinz
Eric James Hobbs
Julia Michelle Hodges
Amber Marie Hodgson
Peter Joseph Hoffman
Amanda Ellen Hogenmiller
Jane Elizabeth Holstein
Andrew C. Hooper
Ryan Prescott Horace
Malinda S. Horovitz
48
Chelsea Nicole Hubbard
Anne Benton Hucker
Stephanie Elise Hudson
William John Hudson
Jarica Leiane Hudspeth
Michael J. Hufty
John Benton Hurst
Joshua Bradley Hutkins
Jennifer Lei Hyde
John Austin Inderman
Elizabeth Rachelle Insler
Ashley Irwin
Allison Marie Isaak
Candace Renee Jackson
Michael R. Jacobs
Holly Marie Jacoby
Richard Evan Jarrold
Samuel Horton Jeter
Brian E Johnson
Laura Louise Johnson
Mark Thomas Johnson
Akayla Jivonne Jones
Christopher Alan Jones
Sharon Geuea Jones
Susan Elizabeth Jostes
Jason Andrew Julien
Jaeyoung Jung
Andrew Joseph Kabat
Julia Claire Kaltenbach
Brenna Hall Kantrovitz
Julia Mae Katich
Mark Theodore Keaney, Jr.
Stuart Phillip Keating
Austin Joseph Keiser
Christopher Powers Kellett
M. Elizabeth Dyer Kellett
James Brendan Kelley
Kristin Allison Kenney
Brandon Michael Kimble
Timothy Joseph Kingsbury
David George Kirby
Alicia Marie Kirkpatrick
Susan Kalekye Kivuvani
Leigh M. Kline
Jeremy Daniel Knee
Anthony Michael Knipp
Sarah Rupp Kocher
Daniel John Kolde
Jessica Yumi Kong
Daniel Lewis Kordenbrock
Andrew James Kriegshauser
Jason Kumar
Chad Allen Kyle
Jon Paul Lammers
Anna Marie Lammert
David Craig Lane
James John Lang III
Jesse Langford
Timothy Patrick Larkin
Ian Michael Larson
Kristina JoAnn Laughlin-Anson
Lauren Elizabeth Laushman
Neal Joseph Lawless
Nolan Matthew Lawrence
Melissa Quinlan Leavy
Paul Steven Lee
Leilani Rae Leighton
Brenda Kay Leppin
Christine Katherine Lesicko
Kevin Scott Leslie
Amy Leigh Lessman
Aaron Walter Levinson
George Revis Lewis
Jennifer Jean Lindeke
Nathan Asher Lindsey
Christopher Hurst Logan
Ryan Burdett Lonergan
Amy Elizabeth Lopez
Meredith Ann Lopez
Matthew Lawrence Luby
Erin Melissa Lueker
Stephanie Michelle Lummus
Colin Michael Luoma
Bobby Yiu-Tan Lydon-Lam
Christy May Lyon
Sarah Elisabeth Mabry-Caraffa
Candice Nicole Macon
Sasha Noorani Magee
Kenneth John Mallin, Jr.
Aaron Michael Mallonee
M. Christine Markel
Aaron Edward Martin
David Martin
Kelly Ann Martyka
Thor Tobin Mathison
Michael Aaron Matthews
John Mark Mattox II
Jacob Alexander Maul
Jessica Mayo
Lauren Elise McClain
Joseph Daniel McClendon
Tyler Benjamin McCormick
Melissa Ann McCoy
Christopher Michael McCrary
Trisha Elizabeth McCulloch
Conor Robert McCullough
Stacey Rae McCullough
Latrice Nicole McDowell
Meghan Jane McEvoy
Lucas William McFarland
Amanda Sue McGannon
Joseph Michael McGreevy
Griffin Danner McGuirt
Mark McMullin
Vincent Francis McSweeney
Abby Leigh Medin
Jillian Kathleen Meek
Tyler John Merkel
William Henry Metzinger IV
Andrew Robert Meyer
Precedent Fall 2012
Karl Joseph Meyer
Eric Thomas Meyers
Rachel Suzanne Meystedt
Kristin Rae Michael
Brad Edward Miller
Christopher Ryan Miller
Eoghan Patrick Miller
Eric Landon Miller
Trentis Eugene Miller
Kayla Nicole Millsap
Daniel Boone Mitchell
Ryan James Mize
Anna Callan Moench
Jill Elizabeth Moenius
Erica Rose Mohai
David Michael Mohl
Anna Louisa Molitor
Amanda Jo Montee
Curtis William Moore
Joshua David Moore
Justin Chaewoo Moore
Edward Babcox Morris
Chelsea Lauver Mortimer
Gregory Evan Moser
Cory Clifford Mossberger
Joseph Shaun Moy
J. Thomas Mudd
William David Mueller
Asel Mukeyeva
Joseph Krebs Muller
Melanie Marie Myears
Asha Meenakshi Natarajan
Mary Catherine Neff
Brittany LeAnn Newell
Julie Leigh Newman
Ashley Terrell Newport
Iryna Yakovlevna Northrip
Michael Amir Nouri
Jonathan A. O’Dell
Katherine Ann O’Dell
Kristen Michael O’Neal
Oliver Travis Olsen
Cristina Louise Olson
Christopher Jon Omlid
Katherine Lee Opel
Timothy James Opitz
Michael Field Orlowski
David Arthur Osborne
Jacqueline Paige Oster
Kimberlee Joanne Otis
Mary M. Owens
Ross Walker Paczkowski
Anne Lea Parelkar
Emily Michelle Park
Ryan Joseph Parks
Andrew Jack Parmenter
Michele Lee Parrish
Mitesh Vithal Patel
Andrea Michelle Patton
Deborah Lynn Pearce
Christopher Adam Pedroley
Emily Rhoades Perry
Tricia Patten Petek
Christine Anne Peterson
Christopher William Peterson
Long Dinh Pham
Christina Quynh Phan
Christina Phan
Jerina Dominique Phillips
Tyler Scott Phillips
Joshua Michael Pierson
Edward Thomas Pinnell III
Kathleen Pitts
Joseph Gabriel Plaggenberg
Christopher Ryan Playter
Jay Adam Playter
Jessica Rae Plesko
Sarah Anne Pohlman
Warren Raymond Morke Popp
Matthew Dean Quandt
Michael David Quinn
Rebekah Eva Raber
Stephanie Lynn Rados
Holly Elizabeth Ragan
Andrew Ralls
Jordan Ashley Rapoff
Michael Thomas Raupp
Jennifer C. Ray
Rachel Elizabeth Reagan-Purschke
Kathryn Dianne Reeder
Trisha Marie Rehmsmeyer
Kathryn Miranda Reichenbach
Edward Thomas Reilly IV
Collin Paul Renieri
Emery Alton Reusch
Joshua Robert Reznick
Martin Dylan Rice
Alexander Thomas Ricke
Evan Granrath Ridenour
Shannon Dale Rieckenberg
Benjamin Adam Riedel
Ryan Daniel Rippel
Robert Fredrick Ritchie
Gabriel Vincent Roberts
Heath Landon Robins
Mindi Nicole Rodden
Juliane Marie Rodriguez
Camille L. Roe
Alex Nathaniel Rohr
Robert Julio Rojas
Daniel Joseph Romine
Austin Taylor Romstad
Jessica Marie Rooks
Jessica Leigh Ross
Jeffrey Louis Rothstein
Ronald K. Rowe
Danielle Hagenah Rowley
Logan Rutherford
Susan Elizabeth Ryan
Lydia Sage
Marc Alan Saighman
Margaret Ellen Samadi
Anna Genevieve Sandall
Kyle Matthew Sanford
Dominique Savinelli
Thomas Schafbuch
Adam Christopher Schaffer
Craig Wademan Schiller
Elizabeth Kathryn Schilling
Elizabeth Susan Schilling
Daniel Jeffrey Schmitz
Adam Benjamin Schneider
Robert Lawrence Schneiderjohn
Ashley Laurel Schoenjahn
Michael Christopher Schroeder
Emma Ruth Schuering
Tay Ryan Schumaker
Natalie Michelle Schumann
Abigail Jane Schwartz
Sonali Shahi
Joshua Brooks Sheade
Ryan Joe Shernaman
Robert Steven Sherrets
Blake Michael Shier
Lynelle Marie Shockley
Lauren Katherine Shores
Tyler Allan Short
John W. Siedlik
Alexis Lee Silsbe
Ashley Lauren Simeone
Alan Thomas Simpson
Rachel Shannon Sinn
Courtney Ann Sipe
Amanda Sue Ebert Sisney
Sara Jane Skelton
Mark Nathaniel Skoglund
Nicholas Wayne Smart
Brendan Alan Smith
Jordan Anthony Smith
Joshua Joseph Smith
Kailee Jill Smith
Lindsay Smith
Scott Michael Snipkie
Christopher Michael Sobba
Jessica Jenae Sokoloff
Laura Jilayne Sova
Kevin Vincent Spear
Angela Lynn Spitaleri
Andrew Iain Spitsnogle
Sylas Cole Stacy
Vanessa Marie Starke
Caitlin Lee Stayduhar
Andrea Joy Steele
Austin Mitchell Steelman
Amanda Lee Stekloff
Allison Foley Stenger
Melissa Pauline Stephan
Amanda Michelle Sterchi
Peter Todd Stevenson
Cori Ellen Stewart
Walter Joseph Stokely
Kelli Jean Stout
Christopher Steven Stratton
Daniel Allen Stuart
Sheila Renee Stuart
Niklas Lars Stubbendorff
Justin Luke Sullivan
Joshua Ryan Sumner
Mikela Therese Sutrina
Colette S. Sutton
Ana Lisa Swinehart
Francis David Tankard
Angela Gaye Tatro
Benjamin William Tettlebaum
Nicholas John Thielen
Bradley Jordan Thomas
Noah Cartwright Thomas
Clayton Lehr Thompson
Robert Anthony Thrasher
Jeffrey Tyler Thruston
John Paul Torbitzky
Jaclyn Marie Tordo
Eugene Trams
Meghan Loryn Naida Travis
Tiffany Radford Tschudi
Adam David Tucker
Ashley Nicole Twibell
Russell Eugene Utter, Jr.
Hallie Marin Van Duren
Jonathan Daniel Van Duren
Megan Campbell Van Emon
Rebecca Jean Van Zandt
Christine Clayton VanBlarcum
Cory Caldwell VanDyke
Catalina Velarde
Matthew Lawrence Venezia
Katherine Elizabeth Vogt
Jacob Zachary Voss
Kelsey Erin Vujnich
Nauman Wadalawala
Lauren Nicole Wagner
Precedent Fall 2012
Richard Elliott Walker
Morgan Elizabeth Wallace
Ryan Todd Wallace
William Max Waller
David Huffman Ward
Tabatha Michelle Watson
Molly Elizabeth Wayne
Andrew D. Welker
Justin Andrew Welply
Amanda Lynn Welters
Sarah Anne Werner
Jacob Thomas Westen
John Joseph Westerhaus
Laura Kathleen Westerheide
Jennifer Noland Wettstein
Andrew David Wheaton
Jacqueline Michelle Whipple
Gregory Bryon Whiston
Samantha Jo Whited
Joseph Glenwood Whitener
Kyle William Whiteside
Rachel Conrad Whitsitt
Justin Hart Whitten
Allyson Nicole Whitworth
Mark Stephen Wicker
Milton Perry Smiley Wilkins
Jack Riddle Wilkinson
Amy Kristen Williams
Jason Thomas Wilson
Alexandra Elizabeth
Wilson-Schoone
Menachem Winter
Douglas James Winters
Joshua Lee Wiseman
Andrew William Withington
Anna Olivia Wlodek
Rebecca Kaye Wohltman
Michael Steven Wolter
Catherine Ann Wong
Ingrid Mae-Chi Wong
Jessica Kyeong-Mi Woo
Kimberly R. Wood
Laura Marie Wood
Erica Danielle Woods
Scott Edward Yackey
Siho Yoo
Phillip James Richard Zeeck
Christopher Joseph Zellers
Carrie Elizabeth Zemel
Renee Elizabeth Zerbonia
Jennifer Michelle Zimmermann
Essica Morgan Zink
49
IN PRACTICE
Seven Habits of
Highly Effective
Advocates
By Michael D. Murphy
In 1989, Stephen R. Covey published The 7 Habits of
Highly Effective People. There, he described seven habits
that he maintains embody “many of the fundamental
principles of human effectiveness.”1 Millions of readers
have applied Covey’s seven habits to their own lives —
both personally and professionally. But what about the
legal community? Are there certain habits that translate to
effectiveness as a lawyer and to professional success?
Over the past year, in the context of an interview column
that I was writing, I had the pleasure of interviewing
four highly successful attorneys from across the state of
Missouri, all with very different practices, to discuss their
thoughts on the legal profession generally and on trial work
in particular. The interviewees came from outstate Missouri
(Louis J. Leonatti), from the bench (the Honorable Stephen
N. Limbaugh, Jr.), from the plaintiffs’ bar (Maurice B.
Graham), and from a more “urban” practice in Kansas City
(R. Lawrence Ward). As I reflect back on these interviews,
seven “habits” or “attributes” stand out. This article
summarizes the seven attributes shared by these highly
effective advocates.
1. A Commitment to the Law as
Profession Rather Than a Business
John Alan Appleman, in his book Preparation and
Trial, reflected on his career as a trial lawyer, and on our
profession generally. In summing up the nature of trial
work, Appleman noted:
It is apparent that this type of work requires a
particular type and temperament of individual . . .
50
For one to be a successful advocate, he must
combine a knowledge of and sympathy for people,
great physical and moral stamina, quick mental
reactions to unforeseen situations, a faculty
for logical reasoning, and a gift for persuasive
expression of his ideas. He must, also, be intensely
competitive.
But these men are attracted to the arena of combat
by one thing, primarily, which to them is the Holy
Chalice. The all-dominating principle is the high
and shining ideal of Justice. For this they will risk
public disfavor, judicial censure, and even death.
That is why in every forefront of all social and
historical activity, when leadership and action are
demanded, irrespective of the risk entailed, you
will find the advocate.2
However, it is no secret that the public perception of
lawyers has shifted from viewing the practice of law,
along with medicine and the ministry, as a profession
— to the perception of the practice of law as a business.
According to a recent survey conducted by the Atlanta Bar
Association, the public believes that (1) lawyers are more
concerned about money than about justice; and (2) lawyers
are more concerned about winning than they are about the
search for the truth.3
Even those within the legal profession have expressed
concern. For example, attorney Champ S. Andrews wrote
in the Yale Law Journal that:
Precedent Fall 2012
IN PRACTICE
Every year a hoard of young men are entering
the law, far more intent on making money than
on living up to professional standards . . . In the
conduct of cases the old dignity is disappearing.
Hammer and tongs are the approved weapons
nowadays. A lawyer’s word now has to be reduced
to writing by his opponent who has had experience
in repudiated “gentlemanly agreements.”4
Sound familiar? Mr. Andrews published his article in
1908!
Despite this public sentiment, and in many
ways because of it, each of the interviewees
stressed, throughout their interviews, the
importance of recognizing the law as a
profession. Judge Limbaugh made this point
explicitly when he stated:
It is not enough to represent your clients in an
ethical, competent, and civil manner. You must
devote yourself to the notion of the lawyer as
a public citizen, the notion that lawyers are
obligated to use their special talents and training
to give something back to their profession and to
their community. It starts with pro bono publico
service, the representation of those persons who
are unable to pay and extends to service to the
organized bar and even to public service of every
kind. It is this obligation, and the fulfillment of
it, that differentiates the practice of law from a
mere occupation or business and that makes our
profession a noble calling.
2. A Belief in the Value of Mentoring
As a corollary to their respective belief that the law is
a noble profession, each of these lawyers emphasized the
value of mentoring. Each discussed their own mentors, the
impact of those mentors on them both professionally and
personally, and the need for good lawyers to mentor other
lawyers on an ongoing basis.
Again, Judge Limbaugh provided valuable input:
I view mentoring as part of the role of the lawyer
as a public citizen. I see mentoring as a tool for the
professional development of lawyers. The idea is
that more senior members of the bar take on the
role of mentor to the younger members, and to
law students as well. In fact, I think the mentoring
flows in both directions, as the older lawyers
engage the fresh ideas of the younger people. In
my view, mentoring has a dual nature. It is both
proactive and passive. It is proactive when senior
members of the bar take under their wings and
nurture the younger members. It is passive when
senior members of the bar teach by their example
of competent representation, ethical conduct, civil
demeanor, and public service.
Another
“It is easy as a trial lawyer to let
federal judge,
preparation slide and to rest on your the Honorable
experience. But that is not the right Joseph A.
way to do it.”
Greenaway of
— R. Lawrence Ward the 3rd U.S.
Circuit Court
of Appeals, recently addressed the value of mentoring.
Writing in Litigation, Judge Greenaway concluded that:
We need to share our passion for the profession.
If we do not, undoubtedly our profession will
become one unduly populated by fungible drones
— unhappy and miserable with our profession
generally and their existence in particular.
When I think of the future of our profession, the
words of Felix Frankfurter come to mind: “The law
is a jealous mistress.” The import of that phrase is
not merely that the law requires a slavish devotion
and hard work. That is only part of the message.
The law is not just about the work; it is also about
the passion. If we impart that passion to new
members of the bar and those studying law, we
can rest assured that our profession will grow in
respect, stature, and contentment.5
Each of the interviewees shared stories about the
mentoring that they had received as younger lawyers, and
the lessons learned. Many of those “lessons” are described
in more detail in the discussion below.
3. Humility
Humility is defined as “the quality or state of being
humble.”6 Nothing stood out more to me than the humility
that this group of extremely successful individuals brought
Precedent Fall 2012
51
IN PRACTICE
to their respective interviews. Each of the interviews was
filled with the use of words and phrases such as, “I have
been fortunate,” “I was blessed,” “I have received many
blessings throughout my career,” and “I am truly grateful.”
In fact, in talking about case preparation, Larry Ward even
pointed out that “you have to be lucky, too.”
4. A Strong Work Ethic and a Belief in
the Value of Preparation
Politician and lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani devoted an
entire chapter in his 2002 book Leadership to the topic
“Prepare Relentlessly.”7 In reflecting back upon his judicial
clerkship, Giuliani noted that:
Each of them was totally the same about
preparation. They prepared and prepared and
prepared. Each believed, and I believe, that you
must prepare harder, longer, and faster than the
other side. If you do that, you get breaks along the
way. It is easy as a trial lawyer to let preparation
slide and to rest on your experience. But that is not
the right way to do it.
Maurice Graham, in talking about his mentors, noted:
I learned from all of these lawyers that thorough
and complete preparation is a great equalizer. As a
trial lawyer, they taught me that we may not have
control over everything, but we do have control
over the fact that no one can outwork or outprepare you.
One of Judge Lumbard’s rules has served me
particularly well ever since: don’t assume a damn
thing. When I was a clerk to Judge McMahon, he
would frequently repeat that dictum in explaining
5. A Client Service Mentality
how errors arise. Dissecting a blown cross Lewis Carol once stated that “one of the deep secrets of
examination, he’d show how the lawyer failed
life is that all that is really worth doing is what we do for
to ask the right question. Untangling a failed
others.”
argument, he’d point out where someone had
Maurice Graham summed up the collective focus on
forgotten to insert a critical point. The biggest
client service when he stated:
mistake that good lawyers make, he said, was
assuming too much — that the jury would make
First, and I’ve said this before many times, we
inferences, that the opposing counsel would raise
have to recognize that a client doesn’t care how
specific issues, that their own clients wouldn’t say
much we know until he or she knows how much
ludicrous things or behave in some ridiculous way.
you care. We have to do what we do for the right
. . As my own career progressed, I realized that
reasons. If we take on a case for a
preparation —
thus eliminating
“The biggest mistake a lawyer can client, it is important to represent
the need to make
make, whether from the city or the that client as professionally, as
ethically and as competently as we
assumptions —
country, . . . is talking down to the
can. Nothing less is acceptable.
was the single
jury.”
most important
— Louis J. Leonatti Note that having a client service
key to success,
mentality does not mean always
no matter what the field. Leaders may possess
agreeing
with
the
client
or always carrying out the client’s
brilliance, extraordinary vision, fate, even luck.
wishes.
Atlanta
lawyer
Wayne
S. Hyatt captures the essence
Those help; but no one, no matter how gifted, can
of what a lawyer owes a client when he asks:
perform without careful preparation, thoughtful
experiment, and determined follow-through.
What does a professional owe a client? I suggest
that Judge Arnold and Justice Gregory and many
Each interviewee emphasized the importance of a strong
others would say faithfulness, competence,
work ethic and a belief in the power of preparation. For
diligence, good judgment, balance, and a
example, in talking about his mentors Harry Thomson and
willingness to say, “That is not the thing to do.” 8
Jack Kilroy, Larry Ward stated:
52
Precedent Fall 2012
IN PRACTICE
6. A Commitment to Civility in the
Practice
Law professor and trial lawyer Mike Tigar, in his book
Examining Witnesses, says that:
7. A Down-to-Earth Approach to Life
and the Law
Trial lawyer Gerry Spence says that:
The most successful trial lawyers are those who
To be a trial lawyer . . . you must answer the
have not only acquired the requisite technical skills,
question the creature asked
but who have mastered
Alice, “Who are you?”
the highest art of all —
“You
must
devote
yourself
to
the
. . . [T]he answer to that
truly being themselves. I
notion of the lawyer as a public
question moves you toward
think of the old cowboys
citizen, the notion that lawyers are who laughed at the dude
being an effective advocate.
obligated to . . . give something
Moreover, from true rules
who bought a $100
back to their profession and to their saddle for his $10 horse.
of effective advocacy
comes a commitment to
All the known techniques
community.”
dignified, ethical, and
— Hon. Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr. of the great trial lawyers
professional conduct. From
can be deposited in some
this, I conclude that the dignified advocate who
intellectual machine who scored high on the LSAT,
has a sense of self is persuasive. Rambo litigation
stunned the professors at Stanford, and astounded
tactics are impermissible; lawyers should not
one and all with its score on the Multistate Bar
engage in them because they are wrong; judges
examination but who could never convince a jury
should censure them, and, by doing so, will
that water is wet. I know an old-time Wyoming
motivate more lawyers to eschew them. Altruism
lawyer who, after nearly a half century in the
and enforcement aside, such tactics harm you and
courtroom, has never learned the simple techniques
your client.9
of cross-examination, and who stumbles around his
final arguments like a kid trying to explain the dent
in the fender of his father’s new car. Yet he wins
In the fall of 2011, attorney Jeff Brinker, who was then
nearly all of his cases. Over and over he proves to
the president of the Missouri Organization of Defense
the jury he is trustworthy, plainspoken, open and
Lawyers, wrote a “President’s Message” on the subject of
painfully candid, he tells it like it is, with words
“Renewing Civility.” In his column, he drew upon a recent
breaded in the stuff of his soul, and soaked in the
conversation with Maurice Graham, noting that “being
blood of his being.10
civil increases your chances
of success with the Court, the
“Thorough and complete preparation Mike Tigar adds that “the
jury, your clients and other
is a great equalizer. We may not
great advocates of this and
professionals you deal with.”
have control over everything, but
Each of our interviewees echoed
every other time in recorded
we
do
have
control
over
the
fact
history have been students
that sentiment.
that no one can outwork or out For example, Judge Limbaugh
of society and not carnival
noted that his grandfather and
barkers.11
prepare you.”
mentor, Rush Limbaugh, Sr.,
— Maurice Graham The final attribute shared
by these lawyers is what
was also an old-time gentleman lawyer who was
I would refer to as a down-to-earth mentality. That is, of
unfailingly courteous and gracious, and yet those
course, a key to their success.
traits never kept him from being a zealous and
For example, Larry Ward noted that, in trying cases to
forceful advocate for his clients. His kind treatment
juries, “you have to talk to them like they are your long lost
of others was proactive and heartfelt.
friends from high school. Make them understand that you
are just like they are. You have a story to tell them. And
if they listen, they will understand that your story is right,
true, honest, and that you ought to win.”
Precedent Fall 2012
53
IN PRACTICE
Lou Leonatti also emphasized the importance of this
characteristic. Specifically, he commented that:
The biggest mistake a lawyer can make, whether
from the city or the country, with a jury is talking
down to the jury. If the jury gets the impression that
the lawyer believes he is better or more important
than they are, you will lose the case.12
He also added that, as a trial lawyer, it is important to
“know what is going on in the world and how this impacts
the everyday life of a juror.”
Conclusion
In reflecting back on these interviews, and on these men,
the characteristic that stands out the most to me is their
enthusiasm for the practice of law. Each selflessly shared
their time with me, as they routinely do on behalf of the
rest of the bar. It is clear that each of these gentlemen is
proud to practice law and all are proud of our profession
generally.
They are also leaders. At the time of his interview, Lou
Leonatti had just completed his term as the president of
the Missouri Organization of Defense Lawyers. Judge
Limbaugh previously served as the Chief Justice of
the Missouri Supreme Court. Maurice Graham led The
Missouri Bar. And Larry Ward was the long-time leader of
the litigation group at one of the state’s top law firms.
Immortal basketball coach John Wooden, in his book
Wooden on Leadership, talks about how great leaders “use
the most powerful four-letter word.”13 Specifically, Coach
Wooden states: “Although it may sound out of place
in the rough-and-tumble context of sports or corporate
competition, I believe you must have love in your heart for
the people under your leadership. I did.”
54
Clearly, these men have love in their hearts for our
profession. Our profession, in turn, is better because of
lawyers like them.
Endnotes
1 Stephen R. Covey, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People 23
(1989).
2 John Alan Appleman, Preparation and Trial 5 (Coiner Publications,
Ltd. 1967).
3 “Public Perception of Lawyers: Moving the Needle,” February 2,
2011 Presentation by A. James Elliott, W. Seaborn Jones, and Rita E.
Sheffey to the National Conference of Bar Presidents, at 6-7.
4 Champ S. Andrews, The Law. A Business or a Profession?, 17 Yale
L.J. 602, 605 (1908).
5 Hon. Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr., Mentoring—What Is Our Message,
Litig., Vol. 38, No. 3 (Spring 2012) at 61.
6 Langenscheidt’s New College Merriam-Webster English
Dictionary, at 565 (1996).
7 Rudolph W. Giuliani, Leadership 51-52 ( Miramax Books, 2002).
8 Wayne S. Hyatt, A Lawyer’s Lament: Law Schools and the
Profession of Law, 60 Vand. L. Rev. 385, 395 (2007).
9 Michael E. Tigar, Examining Witnesses 465 (2nd ed. 2003).
10 Gerry L. Spence, How to be a Trial Lawyer, Anatomy of a
Personal Injury Lawsuit 5 (3rd edition 1991).
11 Michael E. Tigar, Examining Witnesses x. (2nd ed. 2003).
12 Indeed, Mike Tigar lists “condescension to jurors and
condescension to people jurors identify with” as two of his seven
“deadly sins.” Michael E. Tigar, Examining Witnesses 471 (2nd ed.
2003).
13 John Wooden and Steve Jamison, Wooden On Leadership 80
(McGraw-Hill 2005).
Precedent Fall 2012
Michael D. Murphy, a 1991 Order of the Coif
graduate of the University of Missouri School of
Law, is a partner in the Cape Girardeau law firm
of Osburn, Hines, Yates & Murphy, L.L.C. He has
published a number of articles on trial practicerelated topics.
ETHICS
Precedent Fall 2012
55
ETHICS
56
Precedent Fall 2012
ETHICS
Precedent Fall 2012
57
ETHICS
58
Precedent Fall 2012
TRANSITIONS
How to place an announcement:
If you are a Missouri Bar member and you’ve moved, been promoted, hired an associate, taken on a partner, or received a promotion or award, we’d like
to hear from you. Talks, speeches (unless they are of national stature), CLE presentations and political announcements are not accepted. In addition,
Precedent will not print notices of honors determined by other publications (e.g., Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers, etc.). Notices are printed at no cost,
must be submitted in writing, and are subject to editing. Items are printed as space is available. News releases regarding lawyers who are not Missouri
Bar members in good standing will not be printed. Contact Cynthia Heerboth at (573) 635-4128 if you have questions.
Photographs:
Professional quality photos submitted with your announcement are also printed at no cost. Attach a label with the subject’s name and address on the
back of the photo (do not write on either side of the photo). Group photos are not accepted. Photos may be sent as e-mail attachments to cheerboth@
mobar.org. Photos should have a resolution of 300 dpi in a .jpg format.
Deadlines:
Precedent is published quarterly, in February, May, August and November. The deadline for announcements is the 15th of the month preceding
publication. For example, to place an announcement in the May issue, it must be received by The Missouri Bar by April 15. Send or e-mail your
announcement to: Cynthia Heerboth, Publications Assistant, P.O. Box 119, Jefferson City, MO 65102; cheerboth@mobar.org. Please include your
Missouri Bar membership number.
Springfield Area
John E. Price, a
shareholder of Carnahan,
Evans, Cantwell &
Brown, P.C., has been
honored with a 2012 Gift
of Time Award from the
John E.
City
of Springfield and
Price
the Council of Churches
of the Ozarks. Price was one of 10
volunteers to receive the award for
countless hours contributed to make
life better for friends and neighbors in
the Ozarks.
The Missouri State Public Defender
System announces that Kayja E.
Stanley, formerly with the Monett
office, and Steven E. Kellogg
have joined the Springfield Public
Defender’s office.
Sarah M. Placzek Donelan has
joined the staff of Legal Services
of Southern Missouri. Ms. Donelan
works in the Domestic Violence Unit.
Kansas City Area
MRIGlobal has promoted Reachel
A. Beichley to the position of general
counsel. With the promotion, she joins
the Senior Management Council of the
not-for-profit organization.
Stinson, Morrison, Hecker, L.L.P.
announces the addition of Marc
A. Salle as a partner in the firm’s
corporate finance division and Martin
“Marty” J. Bregman as a partner in
the energy and environmental division.
Daniel P. Goldberg and Kelsey J.
O’Donnell have joined the law firm of
White, Goss, Bowers, March, Schulte
& Weisenfels, P.C. as litigation
associates.
Daniel P.
Goldberg
Kelsey J.
O’Donnell
The law firm of McDowell, Rice,
Smith & Buchanan, P.C. announces
that Robert D. Maher has joined the
firm as a shareholder.
The Family Drug Court in Jackson
County has been selected as one
of five Peer Learning Courts in
an award through the U.S. Justice
Department’s Office of Juvenile
Precedent Fall 2012
Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
The Award of Excellence is designed
to encourage other court systems
across the nation to visit Kansas City
to observe court proceedings, and to
become acquainted with the treatment
programs that are offered.
Christina M. Pyle has joined
Husch Blackwell, L.L.P. as an
associate with the firm’s business
litigation team.
Wyrsch, Hobbs & Mirakian, P.C.
announces that J. R. Hobbs has
been inducted as a Fellow in the
International Society of Barristers, an
honor society of trial lawyers chosen
by their peers based on excellence
and integrity in advocacy. Hobbs
has also been inducted as a Fellow
in the American Board of Criminal
Lawyers, an organization limited to
approximately 250 criminal defense
lawyers throughout the United States.
The Missouri State Public Defender
System announces that Laura G.
Martin has been promoted to district
defender within the Kansas City
Appellate/PCR B office. Damien de
Loyola has also joined that office.
Jeannette L. Igbenebor, previously
59
TRANSITIONS
with the Kansas City Trial office, has
joined the Kansas City Appellate/PCR
A office. Ryan A. Martin, Steven J.
McDowell, Anna M. Lammert and
Tay R. Schumaker have joined the
Kansas City Trial Public Defender’s
office.
Led by Mark E. Emison and
Joseph “Joey” G. Hoflander, the
law firm of Langdon & Emison won
second place among all corporate relay
teams, and first among law firms, at
the Kansas City Marathon benefitting
the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.
There were 11,000 participants.
Martin, Leigh, Laws & Fritzlen,
P.C. congratulates Representative
Kevin J. McManus (46th District)
on receiving The Missouri Bar’s
2012 Legislative Award. This award
is presented to those individuals who
have made significant contributions to
legislation affecting the administration
of justice and the integrity of the
judiciary.
St. Louis Area
The law firm of Brown & Crouppen,
P.C. announces that Andrew “Andy”
Crouppen and Edward “Ed”
Herman have been named partners of
the firm.
Andrew
Crouppen
Andrew F. Babitz has
joined the Overland Park,
Kansas-based law firm of
South & Associates, P.C.
as an associate. Babitz
Andrew F. works in the firm’s
Babitz
foreclosure, bankruptcy
and eviction departments
and is located in the St. Louis office.
The law firm of Lashly & Baer, P.C.
announces that Mark H. Levison has
joined the firm. In addition, Kevin L.
Fritz, an attorney with the firm, has
been elected to the 2012-13 USLAW
Network’s Board of Directors.
USLAW Network is an international
organization composed of more than
108 independent, defense-based law
firms.
Edward
Herman
Greensfelder, Hemker & Gale, P.C.
has been awarded recertification in
Meritas, a global alliance of business
law firms.
60
Kimela R. West has joined Husch
Blackwell, L.L.P. as an associate
practicing health care law. Associate
Wakaba Y. Tessier has joined the
firm’s healthcare group. Additionally,
the firm has been recognized by the
American Health Lawyers Association
for its attorney involvement and
commitment to the organization.
Andrew J. “A.J.” Weissler has
joined the firm’s business litigation
group.
Shirley A. Padmore-Mensah, a
former partner of Husch Blackwell,
L.L.P., has joined the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri as a magistrate judge.
Theresa A.
Phelps
Theresa A. Phelps
has joined Rosenblum,
Goldenhersh, Silverstein
& Zafft, P.C. as a
shareholder.
Precedent Fall 2012
The Bar Plan announces the
addition of Charles S. Coffey as
claims counsel. In addition, Nancy
D. Koors has been added as claims
counsel. Ms. Koors was most recently
an attorney with the law firm of
Brinker & Doyen, L.L.P.
Charles S.
Coffey
Nancy D.
Koorse
The law firm of
Kohn, Shands, Elbert,
Gianoulakis & Giljum,
L.L.P. has elected Mark
J. Bremer to both the
firm’s management
Mark J.
Bremer
committee and to serve
as chairman of the
management committee.
Kurtis B. Reeg, president and
managing partner of Reeg Lawyers,
L.L.C., has joined the mediation and
arbitration panel at United States
Arbitration & Mediation Midwest, Inc.
In addition, Katherine M. Smith has
joined the firm.
Kurtis B.
Reeg
Katherine M.
Smith
The Simon Law Firm announces
that Benjamin R. Askew and Michael
P. Kella have joined the firm’s
intellectual property practice group as
associates.
TRANSITIONS
Brinker & Doyen, L.L.P. announces
the addition of four new associates
– Trenton A. Galetti, Mitchell C.
Newhouse, Allison J. Schultz and
James E. Beal. In addition, Aaron
I. Mandel has been promoted to of
counsel.
Trenton A.
Galetti
Mitchell C.
Newhouse
Allison J.
Schultz
James E.
Beal
Aaron I.
Mandel
The Missouri State Public Defender
System announces that Richard L.
Kroeger, Jr. has been promoted to
assistant district defender within the
St. Louis Trial Public Defender’s
office. Matthew W. Huckeby,
previously in the St. Joseph office, has
joined the St. Louis Appellate/PCR B
office.
Kenneth R. Heineman, Jr.,
formerly with the Rolla office, and
Stephen P. Ranz, formerly with the
West Plains office, have joined the St.
Louis County office. Also joining the
St. Louis County office are Erin M.
Lueker, Warren R. Popp, Matt W.
Vigil and Devin T. Staley. Staley was
formerly with the St. Louis City Public
Defender’s office. John M. Morrison
and Christina E. Carr have joined
the St. Louis City Public Defender’s
office.
as his role in establishing drug courts
and reforming sentencing guidelines.
In addition, Judge Price received
the Herbert Harley Award from the
The Clayton-based
American Judicature Society. This
law firm of Butsch Fields
award is in recognition of his efforts
& Associates, L.L.C.
and contributions to substantially
announces that attorney
improve the administration of justice
Christopher E. Roberts
in Missouri.
has joined the firm.
Christopher E. William M. Corrigan,
Roberts
Jr., an Armstrong
The law firm of
Teasdale partner, has been
Williams, Venker & Sanders, L.L.C.
elected president of the
announces the addition of two new
Law School Foundation
associates – Jennifer L. Dickerson
William M.
of the University of
Corrigan,
Jr.
and Matthew J. Hodge. In addition,
Missouri School of Law.
the firm has been recognized as a
Corrigan has served
Patriotic Employer by the Office of
as the foundation board’s first vice
the Secretary of Defense’s Employer
president since 2009.
Support for the Guard and Reserves
Jia “Holly” You, a
(ESGR). The ESGR’s Patriotic
member of the Armstrong
Employer award recognizes employers Teasdale international
for contributing to national security
practice group, has been
and protecting liberty and freedom by
elected partner. Diane
Jia “Holly”
supporting employee participants.
J. Keefe has joined as
You
of counsel in the firm’s
health care practice
group. Also joining the
firm are new associates
Sheena R. Hamilton,
Matthew D. Lowe,
Matthew J.
Jennifer L.
Sheena R.
Hodge
Jessica M. Mendez,
Dickerson
Hamilton
Patrick J. Coyle, Robert
The Honorable
L. Schneiderjohn, and
William Ray Price, Jr.,
Samir R. Mehta. Mehta
the longest serving judge has also been chosen for
on the Supreme Court
the 2012-2013 Missouri
of Missouri, has joined
Bar Leadership Academy.
Armstrong
Teasdale,
Ms. Mendez has
Samir R.
Wm. Ray
Mehta
been selected to attend
Price, Jr. L.L.P. as a partner in the
firm’s litigation practice
the Latino Leadership
group. Judge Price has also been
Institute, which was created last
honored with the Champion of Justice year by the Hispanic Chamber of
Award from the Bar Association of
Commerce St. Louis Foundation.
Metropolitan St. Louis (BAMSL). The In addition, Ms. Hamilton has been
award recognizes Price’s dedication
selected, for a second consecutive
to judicial excellence and his steadfast year, to be a member of the
support of the Missouri Plan as well
Regional Business Council’s Young
Precedent Fall 2012
61
TRANSITIONS
Professionals Network Leadership
100. Ms. Hamilton was one of 100
recognized from the current group
members. She is a member of the
firm’s employment and labor practice
group.
David G. Harlan,
a partner in Armstrong
Teasdale’s intellectual
property practice group,
has received the Richard
S. Arnold Award for
David G.
Distinguished Service and
Harlan
Lifetime Achievement
from the Association of the Bar of
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th
Circuit.
Armstrong Teasdale partners
Jennifer E. Hoekel and Bill
Zychlewicz are the firm’s newest
members to pass the Nevada bar.
Hoekel is based in St. Louis and
Zychlewicz in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Jeremy M. Brenner,
an attorney with the
firm’s employment and
labor and non-compete/
trade secrets practice
groups, has been
Jeremy M.
elected to the board of
Brenner
directors of St. Louis
Hillel at Washington University. The
organization’s mission it to enrich
the lives of Jewish undergraduate and
graduate students in St. Louis so they
may enrich the Jewish people and
the world. In addition, Brenner has
been named to the Anti-Defamation
League’s Glass Leadership Institute
for 2012-2013.
Lindsey Selinger, a
member of Armstrong
Teasdale’s litigation
practice group, has
become a member of
the Marketing and
Lindsey
Selinger Development Committee
of Prison Performing Arts.
62
The organization involves incarcerated
youth and adults in the performing arts
to inspire intellectual curiosity and
personal development.
Armstrong Teasdale
partner Joan Archer
has been appointed
to the American Bar
Association Section
of Litigation Lexis/
Joan
Nexis Advisory Board.
Archer
In addition, she has
been reappointed as co-chair of the
Litigation Section’s Pretrial Practice
and Discovery Committee and cochair of the Trademarks Section of
the Intellectual Property Litigation
Committee.
Partner Amy LorenzMoser is featured in
the documentary, “The
Perfect Victim,” to be
shown at the St. Louis
Amy
International Film
Lorenz-Moser Festival this month at
Washington University’s
Brown Hall.
The Clayton law firm of Behr,
McCarter & Potter, P.C. has
announced that Jason Kinser has been
named a partner with the firm.
Virginia Wasiuk Lay has been
sworn in as a Special Assistant
Circuit Attorney in the White Collar
Fraud Unit for the St. Louis Circuit
Attorney’s Office. She is the chair
of the Government Solutions Unit
at Hesse Martone, P.C., where she
practices municipal, governmental and
employment law.
Mid-Missouri Area
The Chief Disciplinary
Counsel and the
Advisory Committee of
the Supreme Court of
Missouri have selected
Melinda J. Bentley to
serve as the state’s legal
ethics counsel.
Melinda J.
Bentley
The Missouri State Public Defender
System announces that Kimberly R.
Wallace has joined the Fulton Public
Defender’s office. Natalie T. Hull
and Michelle L. Hinkl have joined
the Columbia Trial Public Defender’s
office. Samuel E. Buffaloe has joined
the Columbia Appellate office.
Elsewhere in Missouri
The Missouri State Public Defender
System announces that the following
attorneys have joined public defender
offices: Elizabeth A. Satchell
(Monett); Christopher J. Smith
(Farmington); Bethany R. Hanson
(West Plains); Sila G. Karacal
(Rolla); Lucas J. Glaesman (Troy);
Shariece L. Canady (St. Joseph);
Ryan D. Reynolds (Nevada); Ella
Boone Conley (Jackson); Samuel D.
Lawrence (Chillicothe); Zachary
H. Armfield (Rolla); Kimberly K.
Pulley (Rolla); Ruth K. Russell
(Harrisonville); Norman C. Napier,
Jr. (Harrisonville); and Sara B.
Bernard (Kirksville). Previously,
Ms. Russell had served with the
Springfield office; Napier with the
Kirksville office; and Ms. Bernard
with the West Plains office.
Pulaski County Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney L. William
“Bill” Hardwick has been selected to
attend The Missouri Bar Leadership
Academy. The organization’s mission
is to recruit, train and retain Missouri
Precedent Fall 2012
TRANSITIONS
attorneys who have been admitted
for 10 years or less for leadership
positions in The Missouri Bar.
Bryan R. Berry announces the
opening of Bryan Berry Attorney at
Law, L.L.C. for the general practice
of law. The new firm is located at
212 South Hickory Street in Mount
Vernon.
Other States
Michael J. Book has joined the
Overland Park, Kansas law firm
of Duggan, Shadwick, Doerr &
Kurlbaum, P.C.
In Belleville, Illinois, George R.
Ripplinger, principal of the law firm
of Ripplinger & Zimmer, L.L.C.,
has been appointed co-chair of the
Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Committee of the Solo & Small
Firm Division of the American Bar
Association.
The Overland Park,
Kansas law firm of
South & Associates, P.C.
announced the addition
of Kara B. Elgin as an
associate in the firm’s
non-judicial foreclosure
department.
Kara B.
Elgin
Timothy E. Grochocinski
announces the formation of
InnovaLaw, P.C. in Orland Park,
Illinois. Grochocinski is the managing
attorney for the new law firm.
Cynthia F. Grimes, a partner with
Grimes & Rebein, L.C. in Lenexa,
Kansas, was selected as the recipient
of the 2012 Robert L. Gernon Award.
The Kansas City CLE Commission
presented the award during the
Midwestern Bankruptcy Institute in
October. Also, Ms. Grimes has been
selected to be the new bankruptcy
judge in the Western District of
Missouri. She is expected to take the
bench in February 2013 following the
retirement of Judge Jerry W. Venters.
Calendar of Upcoming Events
May 10, 2013
Missouri Bar Spring Committee Meetings
Capitol Plaza Hotel, Jefferson City
June 13-15, 2013
Missouri Bar Solo & Small Firm Conference
Hilton Convention Center Hotel
Branson, MO
September 18-20, 2013
Missouri Bar/Missouri Judicial Conference Annual Meeting
Holiday Inn Executive Center, Columbia
Precedent Fall 2012
63
MISSOURI BAR PRECEDENT
The Missouri Bar
P.O. Box 119
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Nonprofit Org.
US POSTAGE
PAID
Jefferson City, MO
Permit No. 312
Feeling the domino effect?
Help is available.
Call MOLAP
800-688-7859
Free and confidential
64
Precedent Fall 2012