~
-iiiiiiiii
~ -
-1111111111,
FOR THE PRACTICING ATTORNEY
Probate Laws of Arkansas
Arkansas Eminent Domain Digest
Probate Code of Arkansas and other laws of the Arkansas Statutes pertaining to probate practice in one convenient volume.
Arkansas Supreme Court cases on eminent domain com· piled in digest form. Table of Cases; word index.
485 PAGES, HARDBOUND,
,ee, wlttI Supplement
0»00"3.50°
1878-11117 Supplement onl,
112.. 50"
2M 'AOU, HAROIOUND, 11164
Arkansas Blnking Laws
Workbook for Arkansas Estate Planners
A comprehensive one·yolume survey including provisions of the Arkansas Statutes relating 10 banking. 448 PAOES, HARDBOUND, lMe
by Mitchell D. Moore and William H. Bowen Everything lor the estate planner. Checklists. forms, ideas, techniques in convenient looseleaf binder. 11 CHAPTlERS, 1887
Conlact your
125.00'
Ark8nsa~
representative,
Mr. Joshua E. McHughes
Tel. (501)376-9131
IU.OO"
Arkansas Statutes Annotated
L.w PubHshels Since 1855
The Michie Company Bobbs-MemYllaw Publishing
25 volumes (1947) with 1975 Supplements and 1976 Noncumulative Supplement 1225,00' III thl Statl of ",klns. .
'Plus shipping.
ha~llng
Post Office Box 7587 Charlottesville, Virginia 22906
Ind IIlelllx where applicable
ATIORNEY'S PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE LIBRARY by MATIHEW BENDER COMPANY
FORMS PERSONAL INJURY
TiTlE "Current Legal Forms" by Rabkin & Johnson"' "Attorney's Textbook of Medicine" "Products liability"
THE NEEO To Implement 75% of your non·litigatlon ollice business.
To understand and evaluate the Injuries in damage Claims, and prove or d sprove their existence. Table 01 cases on 750 items.
PRICE
NON·INTEREST MONTHLY PAYMENT
$795.00
$595.00
$30.00
543.50
495.00
30.00
312.50
262.50
20.00
600.00
500.00
30.00
LIST PAICE
"Moore's Federal library" Moore's Federal Practice Bender's Federal Forms Weinstein's Rules 01 EVIdence "Bender's Forms of Discovery" Vol. '·10 - Depositlons &. Interrogatories Vol. 11-16 Discovery Procedure and Forms
To build inlo any case - state or lederal -the prOCedural guidance and Interpretation olthe accepted authOrity. Provides lull and proper guidance In state and federal court with court tested forms.
TAX
"Federal Income, Glfl and Estate Taxation" by Rabkin and Johnson
The best safe guard against mistakes in tax planning and SOlving tax prOblems.
550.00
CRIMINAL
"Criminal Delense Techniques LIbrary"
The latest and most successful defense Sirateglel. Complete defenses tor special areas.
517.50
PROCEDURE
William Margrave #43 Lake Side Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72204 (501)568-1841 (Call Collect) (N. E., S.E. & S.w. Arkansas)
I>
m_ MATTHEW BENOER
30 DAY "SPECIAL"
$375.00 (Includes 2 years seNice,
4'4.00
20.00
20.00
Fred Stacy 10162 South Marion Tulsa, Oklahoma 74136 (918) 663-3553 (Call Collect) (N.W. Arkansas)
~pml1
m
VOL. 12, NO.2
THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCiAliON
OFFICERS
Walter R. Niblock. President Wayne Boyce. President-Elect Cyril Hollingsworth. Secretary-Treasurer
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
Don. M. Schnipper John Mac Smith Herman L. Hamilton Charles L. Carpenter G. Alan Wooten Randall W. Ishmael Joe D. Woodward Robert D. Ross Robert L. Jones. III E. Harley Cox. Jr. Tom B. Smith W. Christopher Barrier
EX-QFFICIO Walter R. Niblock
Wayne Boyce Cyril Hollingsworth Herschel H. Friday J. Steven Clark James D. Cypert
Arkansas Lawyer SPECIAL FEATURES Cover StoryContemporary Courtroom Artists Lucy K. Robinson Securities Malpractice Harvey L. Bell The New Systems Approach Fines F. Batchelor, Jr. The Initial Interview E. Robert (Bob) Wallach The Annual Meeting Workers' Compensation Institute Labor Law Seminar
60 66
73 82 80 100 101
REGULAR FEATURES President's Report Walter R. Niblock 58 Juris Dictum C. R. Huie 76 Legal Economics Fran Shellenberger 90 Law School News 78 Oyez-Oyez B. Tarkington 72 In Memoriam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 98 Executive Council Notes Cyril Hollingsworth 71 Service Directory I.B.C. Lawyers' Mart .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 91 Aegis............................................... 97 Addenda C. E. Ransick 103 Ethics . W. Christopher Barrier 92 Contex1 AICLE News Claibourne Patty, Jr. 70 The Arkansas Bar Foundation John P. Gill 68
EDITOR
C. E. Ransick
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE Roben T. Dawson
E. Alvin Schay James M. Moody
PUblished quarterly by the Arkansas Bar ASSOCiation, 400 West Markham. Little Rock. Arkansas 72201. Second class postage paid at Little Rock. Arkansas Sub路 sCrlpllon price 10 non-members of the Arkansas Bar ASSOCiation $600 per year and to members $3.00 per year Included In annual dues Any opinion expressed herem IS that of the author, and not necessarily that of the Arkansas Bar AssoCiation. The Arkansas Lawyer. or the Editonal Committee Contributions to The Arkansas Lawyer are welcome and should be senlln two copies to the Arkansas Bar Center. 400 West Markham. Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 AU Inquiries regarding advertising should be senl to The Arkansas Lawyer. above address.
April 19781Arkansas Lawyer/57
PRESIDENT'S REPORT by Walter R. Niblock
When I ran for the office of presidentelect of your association, I stated that I had no axes to grind and no particular "hot" programs to pursue. I only wanted to move up and serve you as your president. I knew that most presidents, in the one year in the office, could rarely move mountains or instigate brilliant new programs that no one had thought of before. The fact that everything that is done stems from the past and runs in the current and perhaps is fulfilled in the future brings one to the reality that it takes time to do things. Because of this reality, I feel that the fiveyears' budget planning method that has been worked out and approved by the Executive Council will give the continuity necessary from year to year and should greatly enhance the ability of future presidents and the House of Delegates to carry on long-range programs in the best interests of the association.
together, and in an effort to do this, I tried on various occasions to arrange for joint meetings at the Bar Association and the JUdiciary. I felt, and still feel, that it is important that the Bench and the Bar know each other and work together. I proposed that the Judiciary hold its annual meeting at the same time that the Bar Association holds its annual meeting and thus bring the lawyers and the judges together in one grouping. Such an arrangement was not deemed to be feasible this year, but as an alternative, arrangements have been made between the Bar Association and the Judiciary to hold a joint meeling of the House of Delegates with the Judiciary at the April meeting of the Judiciary in Hot Springs to discuss the proposed rules of Civil Procedure. It is anticipated that at our annual meeting, members of our judiciary will be so recognizee by a ribbon on their lapel designating them as members of the jUdiciary, and we hope that a large percentage of them wiD join us there.
this opportunity to express gratitude to Jeff Starling and Russ Meeks and their committee for the outslanding service that they have performed in this highly technical and complicated area. They have spent countless hours in research and in consuitation in preparation 01 the Bar Association's position and petition which was ultimately submitted to the Supreme Court. The case wilt be argued on February 15th and probably decided shortly thereafter. I want to tell you how proud that I am of the Bar of Arkansas in connection with lawyer advertising. There have been only RARE instances in Arkansas where a lawyer has jumped the gun and gone ahead with advertising. The great majority at the members who know that the Supreme Court has the responsibility of determining the rules that apply in Arkansas have abided by the existing law which prohibits advertising and will abide by whatever new requirements are set down by our Supreme Court.
LAWPAC
LEGISLATION
PREPAID
However, in retrospect over the past year, I see some previous projects and matters that have come to fruition. The first that comes to mind is LAWPACwhich has now been actually createe and which is close to being viable. Referring back to my original report to you, I stressed the need for a trust which would be a vehicle for lawyers to become involved in political action to the end that lawyers who are too busy to become legislators themselves would not abdicate their responsibility of leading people but would work to lead people through the political action trust. LAWPAC needs funding, and the funding has to come Itom the members of the Bar. I urge each of you to get in touch with William R. Wilson, 711 West Third St., Little Rock, 72201, and ask him for details on the proposed funding program lor LAWPAC.
By the time this issue of the Lawyer is received, you will have also received a copy of the Bar Association's Legislative Timetable. I urge you to give careful consideration to legislation that you personally are interested in and if you will submit the idea (better yet, a draft) to H. David Blair, the chairman of the Jurisprudence and Law Reform committee, at P. O. Box 2595, Batesville, 72501, within the guidelines established in the notice, the Bar Association will have an opportuni1y to take Ihe necessary action on its part to present Ihese matters before the House of Delegates so that the Bar can establish a position. It is of crucial importance for you to get your proposed legislation to the Jurisprudence and Law Reform commit路 tee as soon as possible.
I am pleased to report that at the last meeting of the House of Delegates, the delegates authorized the expenditure of up to $5,000 towards the finalization of ptans to do a feasibility study on whether we can actually have our own prepaid legal insurance plan instituted in Arkansas. We have felt that it is important that the Association have some control over prepaid legal insurance in Arkansas, particularly in view of the fact that over the past couple of years, there have been any number of schemes come to town who were not willing to meet the requirements of the Insurance Department nor meet the requirements set forth in the "Chicago Amendment" which was adopted by the Arkansas Supreme Court. Truman Yancey's committee has done an outstanding job in getting things organized at this point. I sincerely hope that the Bar will be able to put such a prepaid legal insurance plan into effect at some point in the near future as one more means of affirmatively showing the public that we are trying to effectively deliver legal services to the people.
REFLECTION
LAWYER ADVERTISING BENCH & BAR I had hoped that during my term in office I could bring the Bench and the Bar closer 581Arkansas Lawyer/ April 1978
Lawyer advertising is, at this writing, stili unresolved in "'rkansas. We hope that the matter will be resolved by a Supreme Court determination on the subject. I take
In Arkansas, we have been able to con-
facility in the state of Arkansas which is
the membership to the Association as a
tinue what many bar associalions con路 siderto be an outstanding program 01 ser路
large enough to meellhe needs lor our
resull ollhe member5hl~
annual meeting), June 7th-10th. Henry Is
last year. Tn~ survey Indicated thai the
vice to our members as a voluntary association on a limited budget. The unified bars throughout the country are in great trouble. The Bar in Texas is under fire, having to at this time justify its continuing existence under the "Sunset" law. Other bars are in equal difficulties because they are under the jurisdiction of either the legislature or the state Supreme Court; therefore, they are not free and they are not able to respond as quickly as we can to the needs of the membership. There is a great distinction between a unified bar as opposed to a voluntary bar and from what I have been able to observe in my travels and visits with the surrounding bar associations, we have the great flexibility and we can respond, whereas, the state agency bars such as Texas, Oklahoma, and others do not have that flexibility to respond to its membership needs.
providing our members with an opportunity, unequaled, to attend a super program filled with eight of the superstars in the trial practice area: Robert E. Cartwright, graduate of Boalt Hall Law School, Univ. of Calif., former national president of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, who has lectured extensively to ATLA groups and ABA groups over the years; Gerald Michaud, 1951 graduate of Washburn School of Law, Wichita, Kansas, who has spent a great amount of his time in recent years working the products liability area on drug cases and who has achieved an outstanding reputation as a trial lawyer and lecturer in this field; Bill Colson of Miami, Florida, graduate of the University of Miami School of Law, who also is a former national president of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America and who has enjoyed great success in practice and as a writer and lecturer in the field of tort law; Justice Jim Carrigan of the Colorado Supreme Court. I have had the opportunity to hear him speak on at least one occasion, and I can assure you that justlo be in the room with this man is a high honor; Joseph W. Rogers, Jr. who is considered to be one of the outstanding civil defense attorneys on the West Coast; graduate of Stanford School of Law, 1949; Our own Robert A. Leflar, without peer in the area of Conflicts of Law, will give us an update as the same pertains to torts; James W. Jeans, author of Trial Advocacy, and outstanding trial lawyer; Tom Lambert, editor-in-chief for the Association of Trial Lawyers of America. I submit to you that Henry Woods has arranged for you to be exposed to fhe finest array of talent that could be gathered in America today in the area of trial practice. The meeting is designed to accommodate the wishes expressed by
attendees wanted a solid educational program but at the same time did not want the whole day devoted to educational activities; therefore, the lectures will take place in the mornings; the afternoons will be essentially free and there will be only two dinner-type meetings (the annual banquet and the annual luncheen). If all goes well, the Pulaski County Bar Association's ever-POPular and fun (and funny) gridiron will be back on the scene for Friday afternoon from which we will adjourn to the reception for PresidentElect Wayne Boyce, and from there go to the Majestic Lodge for the annual bar-bque with bluegrass music. We have worked hard to plan a good meeting with fun and relaxation. We hope that you will join us when we will truly have coming from all over the United States THE BEST OF THE BEST in trial practice. You owe It to yourself to hear these fine men and to meet them. Plan now to attend and bring your family. There is something for everyone, so come join us.
THE SYSTEMS One such need of our membership that we have been able to serve was the void that practicing attorneys were faced with because the publishing companies were "avoiding" some responsibilities. We have met that void and filled it by the presentation to the members of our "systems." We have presented systems on corporations, probate, wills and trusts, and we have in the mill systems on creditor's rights, domestic relations and workmen's compensation. I know of no other state that has duplicated the Arkansas Bar Association in this endeavor. The Arkansas Bar has certainly met a need of its membership, and the systems have also served as a means of gaining revenue, without which we would be in serious financial trouble.
DUES INCREASE Although we have been able to hold our membership dues at the present level, we have done so through a means of what amounts to deficit financing and the revenue gained from fhe systems In view of the fact that our membership dues do not carry the full cost of the operation of the Associafion. A membership dues increase is going to be necessary within the next few years, whether we like it or not.
ANNUAL MEETING The item of greatest pride for me is the outstanding, without-peer, educational
program that Henry Woods and his committee has planned for the annual meeting to be held at the old Arlington Hotel in Hot Springs (which incidentally is the only
5urve~ la~en
THANKS Finally, I want to express, pUblicly, my sincere appreciation to the other officers of the Association, the Executive Council and my chairman, James Cypert, the House of Delegates, all the committee chairmen and members, you the mem-
bership at large who have favored me with your input and your encouragement and your friendship; especially, I extend my sincerest appreciation to Col. C. E. Ransick and his "big" staff of two hard-working ladies, a law student who works fulltime, and Mrs. Ransick who works parttime. Thank you all for a good year and a job well done. ~
ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION
Labor Law Seminar
Camelot Inn, Little Rock March 16-17, 1978 Workers' Compensation Institute Camelot Inn, Little Rock March 24-25, 1978
Annual Meeting Arlington Hotel, Hot Springs June 7-9, 1978 Fall Legal Institute Camelot Inn. Little Rock september 14-15, 1978
Aprii 19781Arkansas Lawyer/59
Cover Story - - - - --
CONTEMPORARY COURTROOM ARTISTS
- by Lucy K. Robinson
Curator of Arkansas' First State Capitol, a division of the Department of Arkansas Natural and Cultural Heritage.
Courtroom illustration, an unlikely occurrence in the context of either the courts or the news is, nevertheless, increasingly used in journalism today. It is the subject of a traveling exhibition "Contemporary Courtroom Artists" hosted recently by Arkansas' First State Capitol. The museum, located at 300 West Markham in Little Rock, sought to increase awareness of one little known interface between the judicial system and the public - the work of artist-journalists whose drawings are the only visual record of court proceedings. In a system based so firmly on language, whether written as law and precedent or spoken as examination and argument, a drawing is a unique document. And courtroom drawinys are records for history. They amplify the words of trials with direct images of the people involved and the relationships set up by the courtroom situation. For this reason, illustration of trial proceedings has enjoyed a continuous history in Europe and America, with at least one known example dating to the sixteenth century trial of Mary, Queen of Scots. Courtroom drawings become historic documents; but when they are drawn, they are news. Unique as their contribution is, courtroom drawings as a source of public information seem to belong more in the sixteenth or at best early nineteenth centuries than the twentieth. What keeps this tradition alive - a decided anachronism in the world of photographic and electronic news imagery? The law itself makes courtroom art a necessity. Judicial Canon 35, an amendment to the American Bar Association's Canons of Professional and Judicial Ethics, was adopted in 1937. It prohibits the use of cameras and broadcasting equipment in courtrooms as a result of what was perceived as the media's abuse of such privileges during the Lindbergh kidnapping trial. Trials remain news despite the photographic limitations. The artist, who has not been excluded, fills the need for a visual dimension tothe reporting of this news, although in a manner that has been modified somewhat since the sixteenth century. No longer working for the gazetteer who used an occasional art piece to liven his printed version of the news, the courtroom artist is subject to all the demands of a six o'clock broadcast and getting a story "out on the wires." The deadline is perhaps the most decisive element in the style of contemporary courtroom artists. A drawing must be summary, expressing its subject in a few quick lines, sug60/Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
gestive yet informative (Richard Tomlinson's Artist Howard Brodie at the Pentagon Papers/New York Times Hearings-18 June 1971).
Roberta King, the staff artist for KTHV in Little Rock who is sometimes called upon for courtroom illustration, compares the work to "second draWing," an exercise used in many studio art classes. She may do a partial sketch of background and her subject's body, waiting for him to turn around so that she can quickly draw his face. With two hours the rare maximum in the courtroom and thirty minutes more common, much of the illustration must be supplied back at the station from memory or notes. The short period of effective drawing time in the courtroom is further compounded by the press of other assignments and more deadlines back at the office. INTENSE speed is not the only technical requirement imposed by contemporary media. A newspaper running a courtroom illustration photographs it in black and white in preparation for printing. The draWing must be well structured and of sufficient contrast to reproduce with the visual energy that attracts a reader's eye (Joe Papin's John Calzadilla Pointing to his Kidnappers, July 1974; or Patricia Hearst crying as she listens to S. L.A. Tapes, 17 February 1976).
I •
~.
This fine line quality will not be as successful on the air. Roberta King again provides the information that line work is multiplied to the point of confusion by the television camera, a lesson she leamed with her first courtroom drawing. She now relies on a minimum of line and the lightest markers available which translate dark on the air. Even with these precautions the result may look stiff and she must work to emphasize a motion that will focus, but not bore or fragment, the attention of the viewer. These same principles show up in the work of Betty Wells (Edward Carl Broege and H. Rap Brown-1973; Sergeant Leonard Matlovich-19 September 1975).
Color, of course, is a key factor in drawings for television. It can be deep and intense or light, but will never "air" exactly as it is drawn. So the television artist has the additional requirement of knowing what exact and sometimes opposite effect his technique will produce. Aside from the technical and artistic constraints of same-day broadcast or publication, the courtroom artist must work with a team consisting of a reporter and editor/ news director. The first consideration is whether to cover the trial at all, and then in what depth. An indication of what journalists determine newsworthy is the range of trials from the early 1970s represented in the exhibition at the First State Capitol- the hearings and trials associated with the Watergate affair and other politically involved figures; landmark trials in medical ethics and military procedures; the trials of those accused of violent crimes and/or actions connected with radical social movemets. These are the topics dealt with by the national networks and large city newspapers who have access to full-time court illustrators. In Arkansas, the emphasis is on local events with violent crime the most commonly portrayed. Both KATV and KARK in Little Rock, for example, obtained freelance services to cover the 1975 Porter Rogers trial in Searcy. Gary Long, news director for KARK considers drawings of criminal trials roost important because of the inaccessibility of trial principals to film coverage even outside the courtroom. continued on page 52
April 19781 Arkansas Lawyer/51
COURTROOM ARTIST, continued from page 61
Judy Peterson,. assignment editor for KTHV, sees "art cards" as good variety from film taken outside the courtroom with reporter commentary. It is clear, though, that television regards illustration as a substitute for film of the actual proceedings, and not one that necessarily serves newscasters as effectively or economically. The reporter, too, plays a part, not only because of his deadline and schedule for moving on to another story, but because of the issues that (s)he will choose to elaborate upon. Most often the artist is instructed to draw judge, defendants, attorneys and the jury. Depending on the nature of the trial, spectators related to the defendant or victim will also be assigned. BECAUSE it is a substitute for the action of film and the immediacy of still photography, the drawing must be a totally expressive image. At once an editorial and feature writer, the artist pulls the mood of a trial from a few lines (Meryl Treatner's Richard Sprague P0inting Accusingly to W.A. 'Tony' Boyle-27 March 1974).
Lacking this kind of opportunity and time frame, illustrators can still produce sensitive clues to the emotional quality of the trial through single portraits (Joe Papin's F. Lee Bailey-27 January 1976) or scenes drawn without human Alice Andrews is a freelance illustrator in Little Rock who was hired by KARK to illustrate its coverage of the Gruzen Trial. Her approach was to caricaturize a prominent mannerism of her subject in order to give the drawing the necessary impact for television - the defendant never changing position and doodling on a yellow legal pad; the defense attorney moving almost constantly. For her the limitations of courtroom drawing were appealing, producing "fresh" work that was timely and of interest to a broad public. An ideal way to express the intangible human qualities of trials is to sketch erltire scenes (Marilyn Church's Prosecutor John R. Wing Cross-Examining John Mitchell-15 April 1974; Anthony Accurso's Clerk Playing Testimony-August 1975). This is not always possible, however, due to the constraints of time and physical location. Usually the artist, who works with the permission of the judge, is seated with the press. Occassionally, however, the judge will give artists special privileges as did Judge John Sirica in the Watergate Grand Jury hearings and JUdge Russell Roberts in the Gruzen Trial here in Arkansas. During the latter, Alice Andrews sat first with spectators for good views of the judge and witnesses, then in the area of the court reporter to sketch attorneys and defendant. 62/ Arkansas Lawyer! April 1978
F w. 8~"J"1
subjects (Anthony Accurso's Empty Jury Box-August 1975),
Photo Credits: "Prosecutor John R. Wing Cross-Examining John Mitchell-15 April 1974" • -Huntsville Museum of Art, Huntsville, Alabama Cover photo and other photos of the "Contemporary Courtroom Artists" exhibition - - Clayton Bowles, Little Rock
TRIALS are news for whatever reason, be it the simple curiosity that accompanies aberrant social conduct or a more fundamental curiosity about social limits and the consequences of individual actions, They inform and instruct the individual not only on legal mailers but on his societal context. The radical political and government trials of the '70s, for example, provide a kind of guidepost in the changes occurring in American life. The drawings produced to report any trial are valuable tools in this instruction. They make accessible to the public the workings of a system that may otherwise remain obscured by distance and the necessary decorum of one of our most important social institutions. As graphic images, illustrations of courtroom proceedings give the individual an additional opportunity to mark his place in society. They are of immediate value, as well as of historic significance.
Cover Photo: Artist Joseph Papin's "F. Donald Nixon Testifying-3 April 1974"
Betty Wells' "John Connally at his Triai-1974"
Joseph Papin's "Artists and Writers at Work-1974"
April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/53
WEST ADDS NEW UNIT TO NATIONAL REPORTER SYSTEM West PUblishing Company has announced a new unit, Military Justice Reporter, in its famous National Reporter System. The Military Justice Reporter will report all the decisions of the United States Court of Military Appeals. It will also report opinions of the Courts of Military Review for each of the four services: Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard.
For accuracy and research confidence you need consistency in your case faw headnoting.
The new reporter will have the same size, format and features of other units of the National Reporter System. Among the familiar features to be offered are the Case Synopsis and Key Numbered Headnotes for each case, plus a Table of Cases Reported and a Key Number Digest section. Special cumulative tables will include: Military Cases Cited, Regulations Cited (Service Regulations and Defense Department Regulations), and Manual for Courts Martial Cited.
West's Arkansas Cases gives you iust this kind of consistency.
According to West, it is the first time the decisions of the United States Court of Military Appeals and the Courts of Military Review for each of the four services will be digested and classified under the West Key Number Digest System.
Your practIce Cases offers. him at 11,823 more details ..
The addition of the Military Justice Reporter to the National Reporter System will make available an important additional source of case law to law libraries, law schools and practicing attorneys. Advance sheets are scheduled to be published every two weeks 641 Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
• All cases are analyzed and headnoted by a staff of highly trained and highly skilled editor/ lawyers who utilize the time-tested Key Number System of classification. • Updating a case is an automatic mechanical process with the Key Number System because of its built-in consistency. Arduous searching to be sure a case has not been overruled is eliminated with Wesrs system. • Publishing of bound volumes as well as advance sheets is done by the same publisher. There are no year or more waits to get the bound volumes your convenience demands. • Reporting accuracy is assured through West's policy of case verification before publication and a multi-phase proof-reading operation. deserves the kind of consIstency West's Arkansas Call Elmer P. Roberts al 501/224-5471 or wflle Teton Floresl Dnv'!!. Little A:oc~. AR 72212 today for Including cost which you WIll find to be amazingly low.
beginning in May, 1977. Bound volumes will be published at intervals. West welcomes inquiries concerning the new Military Justice Reporter. You may write to: West Publishing Company, 50 West Kellogg Boulevard, P.O. Box 3526, SI. Paul. Minnesota 55165.
~
WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY
Let's face it, there's no avoiding the inevitable. But, you should have something to say about what happens next. We want you to Iive a long and happy life in the full knowledge that, when the time does come, your spouse and your fami Iy can carryon without having to face
the burden of.red tape and unnecessary taxes on your estate. Call it peace of mind. Call it what you will. The important thing to remember is that Mercantile Bank is here with a lifetime of trust services. So live.
•
Mercantile Banll JONESBORO
Good Bankers ... Good Neighbors MEMBER FDIC
TRUST DEPARTMENT April 19781 Arkansas Lawyer/55
T
ARE YOU INSURED FOR SECURITIES MALPRACTICE PART I. WHAT IS A SECURITY By: Harvey L. Bell Most lawyers are surprised to learn that they are involved in a securities law practice even though they don't practice before the Securities and Exchange Commission or the state blue sky authority. This article is being written in parts to help inform the general practitioner of the periameters of the securities laws. Shocking as it may seem to some, it is possible that the era of the certified public attorney is here and all those professional responsibility standards lawyers have argued for accountants have now come home. The concept of what is a security encompasses all investments and financial transactions, regardless of the labels on the documents. Once a given transaction involves a security, the doctrine of caveat venditor applies, and the buyer, the seller and their respective lawyers are placed in a statutory posture which elevates each to a high standard of dealing. Additionally, the lawyers involved in the transaction are required to affirmatively assure themselves that they are not being used to perpetrate a securities violation. Under the substance over form approach, the following illustrates some of the possible unconventional labels of a security: franchise; distributorship; corporate merger; units of ownership in a limited partnership, joint venture or general partnership; warranty deed wtth a rental management, rental pool or management agreement; guaranteed buyback; savings and passbooks accounts; sale lease-
back; sale of whole lease coupled wnh representations by seller to expiore for minerals; membership in a club; mortgage, deed of trust or contract of sale; vacation time sharing agreement; con-
dominium; animal breeding program; tax shelter; promissory note (personal, pure investment and commercial are included); fractional interests in oil, gas, minerals, patents, copyrights, wrttings, race horses, bulls, shopping centers, apartment houses, books, and other properties or speculations; lannants in common; animal raising contracf (cattle, horses, chinchillas, rabbits, honey bees, beavers, pigs, worms, mink, fox, etc.); patronage arrangements in farm co-ops; real estate bonds, pyramid and multi-level sales plan; advance sums; royalties; assignments; futures contract; options (real estate, minerais, stocks, commodities, etc.); per· centage of profits or profit sharing agree· ment; voting trust certificate; pension or profit sharing plan; collateral trust certificate; units 01 ownership; unit certificate; a
661 Arkansas LawyerlApril 1978
lot in an uncompleted development; cemetery lots; orange grove, tung tree and other farm management investment agreements; and, a scholarship plan or program. These possible labels for securifies are not exhaustive. How these arrangements can become securities ra· suits from looking to the economic substance of a transaction rather than its form.
Numerous ways exist to employ a scheme to defraud in order to obtain money or to use the money or property of others as risk capital in the marketplace. A few of the financing techniques can be illustrated by the following: assume a promoter desires to organize a one million dollar project which will contain one hundred rental units and will cost ten thousand dollars per unit to construct. The rental units could be called condominiums, collages, chalets, apartments, mobile homes, motels or other names. Each unit could be constructed on its own parcel of real estale or in a single structure. In order to raise one million dollars the promoter could utilize the following alternatives: (il The promoter could organize a profit or non-profit corporation and sell each of one hundred persons ten thousand dollars worth of stocks, bonds, notes or a combination thereof; (ii) The promoter could organize a partnership (general, limited or joint venture) and sell each of the one hundred passive investor partners a ten thousand dollar untt of ownership; (iii) The promoter could sell each one 01 one hundred persons a ten thousand dollar investment rental unit. Each in· vestor could take warranty deed title to the property or execute a contract for deed with the appropriate debt instruments. As a part of the investment program, each investor would simultaneously enter into a rental management or lease arrangement
whereby the promoter for appropriate remuniation would manage the prop· erty and turn over rental profits to the investor. This program could be called a sale lease-back, a condiminium, a rental pool or by several other names;
(iv) The promoter could sell four thousand vacationers a two hundred and fifty dollar time sharing lease or vaca-
tion membership arrangement whereby each vacationer has a right to use his particular unit for a specified number of days each year. In each of these examples, the investors are risking their capital in the promoter's venture. It is clear from these examples that if the securities laws were restricted solely to stocks, bonds or notes, then those public investors placing their capital in other investment programs would not be afforded investor protection under the Arkansas Securities Act of 1959, [Ark. Stat. Ann. ยง67-1235 et seq. (Rep!. 1966)]("Arkansas Securities Act"). Such is not the case, however, because the Securities Act contains a broad definition of a security, as follows: "Security" means any note; stock;
treasury stock; bond; debenture; evidence of indebtedness; certificate of
interest or participation in any profit sharing agreement; collateral trust certificate; preorganization certificate or subscription certificate or subscription; transferable share; investment contract; variable annuity contract;
voting trust cetificate; certificate of deposit for security; certificate of interest or participation in an oil, gas
or mining title or lease or in payments out of production under such a IiIle or lease; or, in general any interest or instrument commonly known as "security" or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing. "Security" does not include any Insurance or endowment policy or annuity contract or variable annuity contract issued by an insurance company (emphasis added). The "investment contract", "certificate of interest or participation in any profit sharing agreement" and "evidence of indebtedness" security frequently encompasses those unconventional means utilized by promoters to finance their venture and con artists who steal the money of others through their schemes to defraUd. Also, the "certificate of interest or
participation in an oil, gas or mining title or lease or in payments out of production under such a title or lease" is a broad catch-all for various mineral related investments. The Arkansas Supreme Court judicially acknowledged in Schultz v. RectorPhillips-Morse, Inc., 262 Ark. 769, 552 S.w.2d 4 (1977) at page ,"that regardless of the labels, the Arkansas Securities Act was designed to protect both investors in common stock and those persons who in substance are the investors in the disguised business venture of another. This investor protection is accomplished through the definition of security. The definition should be flexible enough to encompass the endless succession of new and innovative or old and tired promotional schemes, where promoters, by design, seek to risk the money or property of others in their new venture." In recognizing that the Act was remedial legislation which was to be liberally construed, the Court held that units of ownership in a joint venture are securities under certain circumstances. The definition of a security also contains "notes" and "evidence of indebtedness". One view appears to be that all notes are securities. While such "note" securities would normally be exempt from registration under the narrow nine month commercial paper provision, the sale to bank, savings and loans or financial institutions, or the note secured by a real or chattel mortgage exemption, such notes would not be exempt from the antifraud portion of the Act. The magnitUde of this concept can be seen in the case of Mac Andrews & Forbes Co. v. American Barmag Corp., 339 F. Supp. 1401 (D.S.C. 1972). Plaintiff Corporation bought with cash and a series of ten bills of exchange a piece of heavy manufacturing equipment which Plaintiff subsequently discovered did not meet representations. Most lawyers would conclude this was simply a breach of warranty or fraudulent misrepresentation problem. The court held that the bill of exchange was a security and that the Plaintiff's allegation of fraud because of
misrepresentations made in order to get Plaintiff to issue the securities stated a cause of action. It should be noted that the Plaintiff who issued the bill of exchange securities is the one seeking the protection of the anti-fraud protection of the securities law. Professor Long, in his article "Don't forget the Securities Act," 26 Okla.L. Rev. 160, states that "any promissory note given by any person in any transaction is a security and is regulated by the securities acts." Some courts have rejected this view and have looked to the aspects of whether the transaction was commercial or for investment purposes. Lawyers counseling in transactions wherein notes or evidences of indebtedness are involved should inform themselves of the nature of their responsibility under the securities laws. Oil, gas, coal and minerals are additional areas of securities concern for lawyers. For example, each individual oil well has not historically been incorporated whereby stock was sold to finance the drilling venture; instead, investments with labels of fractional undivided interests in were sold to investors. Words like overrides, royalties and many others become a special vernacular known only to those experienced in the industry. Arkansas has a broad definition of these mineral securities. Whole leases or aSSignments can in some circumstances be securities. The securities laws have squarely brought forth a dramatic realization to the bar that nothing less than a high standard of fair dealing is reqUired when a security is involved in a transaction. Where a lawyer participates either as a principal, counselor or advocate, it appears that he may be subsequently placed on the financial carpet if his conduct does not meet certain presently evolving standards. Malpractice insurance for lawyers for certain securities violations normally is no longer covered in the basic policy and a rider is required; once more, the language of the rider may allow loopholes wherein coverage does not exist. The next part of this article will explore the lawyer and his securities malpractice coverage. ' "
Editor's note: In his article, "Recent Developments in Legal Malpractice", in The Arkansas Lawyer (January 1978), Chairman Odell Pollard of the Claims
Review Committee of the Arkansas Bar Association indicated that a sequel on securities coverage would be published in the next issue. Arkansas Securities Commissioner Harvey L. Bell (1974- ) will author the sequel in two parts-the first published here. Mr. Bell received his J. D., University of Arkansas, 1971; and his LL.M., SMU, 1972, in corporation, tax and securities law. He is an associate with the Davidson, Plastiras & Horne, Ltd. law firm at Uttle Rock; member of the Arkansas and American Bar Associations; and Past Chairman of the Taxation, Trust & Estate Planing Section of the Arkansas Bar Association.
HARVEY L BELL
April 19781Arkansas Lawyer/67
ARKANSAS BAR fOUNDA rlON by John P. Gill Chairman
WHAT NAME DO WE GIVE THIS ROOM? The large room in the main floor of the Law Center has never been named. The President's Room has been named the Gantt Room to memorialize a generous gift by Mr. N. J. Gantt of Pine Bluff, the board of Directors' Room has been named by the Foundation, the Rose-Wright Room in honor of the only Arkansas Presidents of the American Bar Association, and the Hall of Fellows has been named, but the main room has never been named. Sometimes called the Great Hall (which is a great misnomer), it was thought this room would bear the name of a principal donor to the Foundation. In time perhaps a donor will come forward; however, in the meantime, the room should be identified. Your comments and suggestions on the name will be appreciated. Please write me at 400 Gaines Place, Little Rock, Arkansas, 72201.
THE NAME'S THE THING Speaking of names, what is the name of your profession? Are you a lawyer? Attorney? Barrister? Solicitor? Counselor? In this age of the identity crisis, maybe the legal profession's identity should be clarified. The Supreme Court has licensed the profession as "Attorney at Law and Solicitor in Chancery". Is the legal profession limited thereby to trials and courtroom activities? Are members of the legal profession limited solely to being practitioners in the courts of law and equity? Black's Law Dictionary, 4th ed. (1951) contains definitions for all of the titles given to the profession from 68/ Arkansas Lawyerl April 1978
time to time. A careful reading of these definitions provides an interesting viewpoint from which to examine attacks on the profession, such as ACORN suggesting disciplinary rules for advertising and the U. S. Supreme Court's prohibition of minimum fee schedules. HopefUlly, the questions raised here will elicit responses from the Bar. We'll find space to publish them if requested. What do we call ourselves?
FOUNDATION FINANCES, I have set forth below a mid-year report on the Foundation's finances. We have not yet reached our goal for this Bar year of a quarter of a million dollar trust fund. The income from the trust fund is vital to the Foundation's program, especially for scholarships, so please double your effects to help meet the goal. One of the finest efforts this year has been that of Immediate Past Chairman John A. Davis. He has succeeded in getting nearly all young lawyers in Pine Bluff to pledge from
$200 to $1000 each. Our thanks go not only to Jack but to the new pledgors. Perhaps other Past Chairman will follow his lead and contact all the young lawyers in their cities, who have not had a chance to support the Foundation. Supportive data is available at the Foundation's offices.
NEW FOUNDATION FELLOWS James P. Baker, Jr. Thomas M. Bramhall Charles L. Carpenter Charles H. Eddy Judith Rogers Herbert C. Rule, III Donaid H. Smith Robert R. Wright NEW SUSTAINING MEMBERS George E. Campbell E. C. Gathings Oliver M. Clegg Ike Allen Laws, Jr. Arthur R. Macom S. Hubert Mayes, Jr. H. Maurice Mitchell Sidney S. McMath
ARKANSAS BAR FOUNDATION INTERIM STATEMENT FY 1977-78 - At December 30,1977 CURRENT ASSETS CASH IN BANK - CHECKING Operat1ng Account Trust Account CASH IN BANK - SAVINGS operating Account Trust Account TOTALS
OPERATING ACCOUNT #05-503-29 #05-513-33
$
#31-2'89-46 #31-776-96
INVESTMENTS Operations Account Trust Account Federal Nat'l. Mortgage Assn. Federal Land Banks Bonds State of Israel Bond U.S. Treasury Notes Federal Horne Loan Banks Bonds U.S. Treasury Bills F.I.C.B. TOTAL - Operating Account TOTAL - Trust Account
431.08
TRUST ACCOUNT $
$ 952.43
1,383.51
27,878.42 28,830.85
$
54,424.94 55,808.45
50,101.75 15,048.12 1,000.00 59,960.00 10,453.49 38,780.83 40,047.50
$ 215,391.69
26,546.52 $
26,977.60
$
-None-
$
$
26,977.60 $ 244,222.54
FIXED ASSETS-
Furnishings & Equipment Less: Accumulated Depreciation Building Less: Accumulated Depreciation Building & Equipment Land & Improvements TOTALS
$
97,848,82
$
$
39,505.72
58,343.10
1,319,998.04 $1,417,846.86 173,590.94 $1,591,437.80
105,343.93 $ 144,849.65 $ 144,849.65
OTHER ASSETS Utility Deposit ACQounts Receivable
1,214,654.11 $1,272,997.21 173,590.94 $1,446,588.15
$
TOTAL ASSETS
10.00 560.00
$1,718,358.29
CURRENT LIABILITIES SCHOLARSHIPS Sharp-Bogle Scholarship Edward L. Wright Lester-Woods Scholarship C. R. Warner Scholarship Harry P. Warner Scholarship Rather, Beyer & Harper Scholarship Misc. Scholarship (Mike Gorman) LONG TERM LIABILITIESBuilding Mortgage Law School Loan Prepaid Lease Income Grant - Arkansas Law Review MEMBERS EQUITY Balance at 30 November 1977 Receipts in Excess of Disbursements Operating Account Trust Account TOTAL LIABILITIES & MEMBERS EQUITY
6,000.00 1,240.50 7,900.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 405.86
$
30,546.36
$ 843,971.95 21,613.21 68,000.00 12,400.00
$
945,985.16
$
741,826.77
$
$ 734,717.81 $( 730.18) 7,839.14
7,108.96
$1,718,358.29
April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/59
AICLE NEWS by Claibourne W. Patty, Jr. Executive Director Arkansas Institute of Continuing Legal Education
Enthusiastic Response Received To Annual Survey Of Attorneys' Continuing Legal Education Interests More than 10% of Arkansas attorneys surveyed (260) responded to the Annual Survey mailed out in December and responses are still coming in. The AICLE Board has reviewed the responses in detail, but I would like to share the significant items with the bar membership at this time. Preference for General Subject Matter. The top twenty sUbjects preferred by the respondants, who usually indicated several on each survey form, are as follows: Wills, Trusts & Estate Planning (113) Evidence (107) Real Estate Transactions (102) Civil Procedure (94) Basic Taxation (88) Trial Advocacy (81) Corporations & Partnerships (76) General Practice Skills (72) Commercial Transactions (68) Workmen's Compensation (67) Creditor & Debtor Law (66) Criminal Law & Procedure (63) Torts, Product Liability (60) Insurance (60) Banks & Bankin9 (57) Family Law (52) Recent Legislation (52) Torts, Collision (50) Appellate Practice & Procedure (45) Advance Taxation (43) Preference for Specific SUbject Matter. Major groups were as follows out of 41 suggestions: Federal Practice, Federal Administrative Law, Recent Federal Legislation; Law Office Management, Economics of Law Practice, Client Counselling; "System" for Tort Law, How to evaluate a case for settlement; Recent Arkansas Decisions and Recent Legislation of interest to general practitioners. Record of Proceedings. Printed materiai (1 04). Audio Cassettes (16), Both (62). Times. Days preferred were: Friday & Saturday (65), Friday (49) and Thursday and Friday (46). Hours preferred were for sessions to begin at 9:00 a.m. (183) and end at 4:30 p.m. (140). Number of days duration preferred were: 1 day (93), 2 days (78), lV, 701 Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
days (40). Locations. Preferences in descending order were: Little Rock Convention Center (165) Resorts such as DeGray, Eden Isle, Eureka Springs or Hot Springs (108) Home or County Seat (64) College campus such as Fayetteville (63) Attorneys responded from approximately 50 different cities in Arkansas. Under the heading of Miscellany, approximately 25% of those responding made a positive statement in support of a summer program of e~her 3-5 days duration at University of Arkansas Campus at Fayetteville or at a resort area. Approximately 20 attorneys made additional comments, Which, along with those under Miscellany, provide the AICLE Board and Program Committee with a better insight into specific areas not covered in the general survey itself. All-in-all, we are grateful to those attorneys who took the time to complete the annual surveys, and we urge those who have not responded to please do so. Longshoremen's Act Compensation Seminar Well Received. There were 55 paid registrants for the one-day seminar on the LONGSHOREMEN'S AND HARBOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION ACT held at the Worthen Bank Building Auditorium in little Rock on December 9, 1977. The seminar was co-sponsored by the Maritime Law Committee of the Arkansas Bar Association, and Gordan S. Rather, Jr. was the program chairman. The 25% response on the evaluation forms was most favorable, and it was suggested that recent developments in this area of compensation law be included in a Admiralty Law seminar. 200 Registrants Attend Midyear Meeting Considering the ice and snow and the threat of more, the attendance at the Midyear Meeting was excellent. Most of the Attorneys and Judges not only from Central Arkansas but from the far corners of the State made their way fa the meeting by Thursday afternoon, and more arrived for the Friday session. All of the Thursday
afternoon Speakers were present, and only one of the panelists on Friday was unable to travel. Such good attendance under adverse conditions indicates great interest in the program, the excellent speakers and the Arkansas Wills & Trusts System. Once again the System itself was the "star" of the proceedings, and the speakers and format were well received. Since apprOXimately 150 registrants were unable to attend due to the adverse weather. AICLE plans to have regional seminars of af least a one-day workshop on the use of the Arkansas Wills & Trusts Form Book this Spring. You will be notified of the dates and places by mail. First Annual Labor Law Institute The Labor Law Committee of the Arkansas Bar Association and AICLE will co-
sponsor
a
seminar
on
Union-
Management Relations, arbitration, wage and hour law, OSHA and discrimination law at the Camelot Inn, Little Rock, Arkansas, March 16-17, 1978. J. Bruce Cross. Program Chairman emphasizes in the program and registration brochure that the seminar deals with a diversity of subjects, but they are all timely and of interest not oniy to the Labor Law Specialist but also to the General Practitioner with business clients or with wage earner clients. The speakers are: Philip E. Kaplan, Charles J. Lincoln, Charles K. Howard, Jr. of Atlanta, Georgia, Royce Weisenberger, J. Dean Speer of the U.S. Department of Labor, Oscar E. DaVis, John W. Walker, John T. Lavey and Philip K. Lyon. Programs In Progress AICLE is working with the University of Arkansas School of Law in Fayetteville on a summer program on Basic Taxation for the General Practitioner, an advanced course on EVidence, and possibly workshops to include such SUbjects as use of Probate and Wills and Trusts Sysfems. Also in preparation is a Fall Legallnstitute on Real Estate Transactions. More details will be available in the next issue of the Arkansas Lawyer and direct mailings to the memberS_I-...
EXEcurlVE COUNCIL NorES by Cyril Hollingsworth Secretary-Treasurer
HOUSE OF DELEGATES HIGHLIGHTS January 21, 1977-Regular Meeting at Mid-Winter Association Meeting in Little Rock Many important issues were addressed by your House of Delegates at this meeting. Resolution on Recodification of Arkansas Statues. After considerable debate on the need for action, the House adopted a resolution again affirming the Association's position that recodification is necessary and urging the Arkansas Statutory Revision Commission to submit an immediate recommendation to the legislative council of the General Assembly that recodification be undertaken by a publishing house with experience in the publication of law books and with computer capability and that copies of the resolution be forwarded to the Governor, to each member of the General Assembly, and to each member of the Arkansas Statutory Revision Commission. It was further resolved that the project of statutory recodification have first priority on any legislative program undertaken by the Association in the year 1978. Proposals on Medical Malpractice. Bill Wilson discussed proposals by the American Bar Association commission on medical malpractice to be considered by the ABA at its February, 1978 meeting, including recommendations for ceilings on awards, deletion of the collateral source rule, and a decreasing maximum contingency fee on a sliding scale basis. After considerable deliberation, a motion carried that the House of Delegates notify the Arkansas delegates to the American Bar Association of the opposition of the Association to any special treatment for medical malpractice cases. Judicial Poll. The House debated and considered the possibility of releasing the judicial poll information in future polls. A motion carried that the House postpone further consideration of the matter until its April meeting. Legal Aid Committee. Vince Foster gave a report on the funding of various legal services programs throughout the state, noting that the committee would recommend three new programs to the Legal Services Corporation serving Northwest Arkansas, South and Southwest Arkansas, and several counties in East Arkansas. Meetings are being held in those localities to institute the programs and establish the Boards of Directors. The Legal Aid Committee also is recommending the idea of a state non-profit corporation to work on legal services programs for the entire state and to apply for all funds. New Format for Annual Meeting. In response to the comments of the membership, there will be more free time
and less luncheon and dinner programs at this year's Annual Meeting. Thursday and Friday afternoons during the Annual Meeting will be free, with optional programs for those desiring the same. Federal Diversity Jurisdiction. The House debated and considered the proposed changes in federal diversity jurisdiction which have been considered by Congress and will be considered by the ABA. The House adopted a resolution opposing any change in federai diversity jurisdiction. Remarks of Chief Justice Warren Berger. The House debated and considered the issue of recent remarks by Chief Justice Warren Berger concerning lawyers, with particular attention to the comments of other bar associations and a proposal to come before the ABA initiated by the Illinois State Bar. Following debate and discussion, a motion carried that the House requests the Arkansas Delegates to the ABA to support a resolution respectfully asking the Chief Justice to obtain and release documention and valid bases for his remarks or to refrain from making the same. Prepaid Legal Services Plan. Chairman Truman E. Yancey of the Association's Prepaid Legal Services Committee presented the Committee's concept for Bar Association sponsorship of a related plan. The concept calls (1) for the establishment of a trust or non-profit corporation under Association control and (2) for administration and marketing by one or more insurance companies. The House voted up to $2000 for a feasibility study to be conducted by an Association member to determine whether any insurance companies would be interested; and directed that the Prepaid Legal Services Committee draft the necessary Articles of Incorporation and supportive documents. Association President Walter R. Niblock pointed out the need for the Association to complete its commitment to make a prepaid legal services plan available not only to the general public, but also to Arkansas lawyers. On December 15, 1975, the Arkansas Supreme Court adopted the so-called "Chiago Amendments" to the Code of Professional Conduct, opening the door for Arkansas lawyers to participate in controlled plans. The recently inacted "Arkansas Insurance Act" places jurisdiction over prepaid legal services plans under the control of the Arkansas Insurance Commission. The Committee is expected to make its final report at the House of Delegates' Annual Meeting on June 10, 1978 during the Association's Annual Meeting. ....... April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/71
OYEZ
•
,, OYEZ ••
by Barbara Tarkington Membership Secretary
Stephen Crain has been named new city allorney for Mountain Home. John Robert Graves has been elected to the board of directors of First Federal SaVings & Loan of Hope. Henry Woods, Little Rock, has been elected to the National Board ot Trial Advocacy. Glen Walker is Cabot's new city allorney. Gregory McKenzie has been appointed deputy prosecuting allorney for the Ozark district of Franklin County. James C. Graves has been appointed the pos~ion as deputy prosecutor for Pike County. John W. Walker, lillie Rock, has filled the expired term of William K. Ball of Monticello on the State Board of Law Examiners. Merry Alice Bost, a 1976 graduate, has been appointed the first public defender to represent indigent youthful olfenders in Pulaski County Juvenile Court. The Senate confirmed the appointment of Larry McCord, Fort Smith, as US Allorney for Western Arkansas. A. Jack Reynolds, Administrator of 51. Vincent Infirmary at lillie Rock, is president-elect of the Arkansas Hospital Association. Hillary Rodham, lillie Rock, was one of five nominated by President Carter to the
Judge H. A. Taylor serving as host judge. Leroy Blankenship, Batesville, has been elected president of the Arkansas Prosecuting Attorneys Association; Wayne Matthews, Pine BlUff, vice-presi· dent; and Mike Kinard, Magholia, secretary. The Supreme Court's Commillee on Professional Conduct has two new members, Jerry W. Cavaneau, Searcy, and Clint Huey, Warren, along with James W. Steinsick, Blytheville; Russell Elrod, Siloam Springs; and C. T. Bennett, Batesville. Ben Core, FI. Smith will serve as its Chairman and Dale Price, Little Rock, as secretary. J. Scoll Brown of London, England, was keynote speaker at a conference held by the Glasgow Bar Association, the only association of trial lawyers in Scolliand. William H. Bowen was the luncheon speaker at the Decem· ber meeting of the Pulaski County Bar Association. Sid 5. McMath, lillie Rock, was guest speaker at the Jasper Legion Post's Veterans Day observance held in
board of directors of the Legal Services Corporation. James E. Baine, El Dorado,
Clay Counties Bar Association. Tom
was elected as Master Inspector on the eight member executive committee of the Delta Theta Phi Law Fraternity at its 1977 Biennial Convention and also at this meeting Justice John A. Fogleman was hon· ored as a recipient of one of three Percy J. Power Memorial Awards. The North Pulaski County Chamber of Commerce has given its Man of the Year Award to Art Givens. The Colonial Chapter of the National Secretaries Association selected Phillip E. Meadows, Harrison, as Boss of the Year. While Judge Murray O. Reed was on vacation Ihis past December, Frances Holtzendorfl, Ben D. Rowland, Jr. and James R. Rhodes, Ill, presided as special chancery judges. Ruby Hurley also presided as special judge for Judge Milas H. Hale ,n Sherwood Municipal Court. Miss Enid TilbUry, 75, of Lonoke, has been reinstated in the Arkansas Bar. The Jelferson County Legal Secretaries Association held ~s annuai Day In Court during October with a mock trial conducted by Don Eilboll and Jim Hall w~h 72/Arkansas LawyerlApril 1978
November. Louis L. Ramsay) Jr.) Pine
Bluff, spoke at a November meeting of the John McAlmont Chapter, OAR. J. Steven Clark, lillie Rock, spoke to the GreeneWynne, Fordyce, spoke at a November meeting of the West Pine Bluff Rotary Club. Thomas Wynne, III, Fordyce, spoke at a November gathering of the Woman's Club of Malvern. Bud Whetstone, lillie Rock, spoke before the Mississippi Trial Lawye,,, Association at their annual meeting concerning worker's
compensation cases. Edward J. Cunningham and Ronald P. Kincaid, Mountain Home, have merged and now
practice under the firm name of Kincaid & Cunningham located at 701 Church St. Robert B. Wellenberger, Monticello, IS now at 203 N. Slemmons. Charles R. Stubblefield, formerly of Arizona, has moved to Texas Randolph C. Jackson
has joined the Ft. Smith law firm Jones, Gilbreath & Jones and their offices have moved to 401 North 7th Street. Charles G. Vaccaro and Eudox Patterson, Hot
Springs, have announced their association with offices at 225 Woodbine. Louis B. Jones, Jr., Forrest City, has opened his law office at 112 S. Izard. Susan E. Jelen, formerly of lillie Rock, has moved
to Memphis. William S. Robinson has joined the NLR law firm Blevins & Pierce T. J. Hively and Wesley J. Ketz, Jr., Batesville, have combined offices at 323 Main SI. and formed a new law firm Hively & Ketz. Charles S. Embry, Jr. has opened his law office on East Main SI. in Gravette. J. Frank Mackey, Jr. has opened his law office at 1970 Union National Bk Bidg. Mike and Connie Mayton have joined the law firm of Rieves & Rieves of West Memphis. Allred E.Thompson, III, formerly of Ash Flat, has opened his Main Street office in Hardy. James W. Hyden has been named a partner in the Pine Bluff law firm Coleman, Ganll, Ramsay & Cox. Greg
McKenzie and Ted Yates of Ozark have merged and formed Yates, McKenzie & Yates with olfices in the McKenzie Jail Building. Dale E. Adams, lillie Rock, is now with the Arkansas Crime Commission in the 1515 Building. Charles E. Smith, Jr., formerly of Texas, is now with the NLR law firm Wallace, Hilburn, Clayton, Wilson & Hankins. G. Christopher Walthall, formerly with the US Army JAG Corps, has joined the Glover Law Offices in Malvern. Pearson & Woodruff, Fayetteville, have· announced two new associ-
ates, Ms. Demaris A. Hart and Charles A. Medearis. Charles A. Hadden, formerly of lillie Rock, has become vicepresident and trust officer with the National Bank of Commerce in Pine Blulf. The Lillie Rock law firm of Walker, Kaplan & Mays has dissolved into the following firms: Walker, Hollingsworth & Jones with John W. Walker, P. A. Hollingsworth & Henry L. Jones, Jr. at 1191 First Nat'l Building; Kaplan, Brewer, Bilheimer & Marks with Phil Kaplan, Silas Brewer, John Bilheimer, Palli Marks & Leon Marks at 1650 Tower Building; Mays & Crutcher with Richard L. Mays & Zimmery Crutcher at 830 Union National Bk Building; Woodson Walker at Union Nalional Bk Building; and James Massey at 500 Tower Building. B. Richard Allen is the new president of the Jackson County Bar Association. Don M. Schnipper is the new president of the Garland County Bar Association with R. Keith Arman as Vice-president and Donald C. Pullen continued on page 74
Fines F. Batchelor, Jr. brought us an outstanding program on the "Systems Approach", but the one thing that many of us were able to understand from this program was that Mr. Wilkins had prepared a system for his home Bar Association, the South Carolina Bar, for which he received nominal compensation and assumed the basic responsibility of preparation.
THE NEW SYSTEMS APPROACH My purpose in this presentation is three-fold, to discuss the new systems approach in Arkansas law pratice in the past, in the present, and in the future. While the ultimate success of this program, or approach, lies with you, its initial acceptance is, to a large extent, determined by your understanding of the concept, its purpose, uses, and limitations. THE NEW SYSTEMS APPROACH IN THE PAST During the summer and early fall of 1975, as the new Chairman of the Economics of Law Practice Committee, I noted a project or projects for the Committee for the 1975-76 Association year needed to be formulated. During the September, 1975 initial Committee meeting, we recognized that Richard A. Williams of our Committee and Association was serv-
ing as Chairman of the Economics of Law Practice Section of the American Bar Association, and that this should be an outstanding time to present an economics program to the Arkansas Bar Association. Since the Midyear Meeting was already committed, we were assigned the major portion of the program for the June, 1976 Annual Meeting. Being the type Chairman I am, Richard A. Williams (Dick to those who know him) was asked to furnish us a program, graciously accepted, and I was then able to forget about the program, knowing that Dick would take care of it. At the Annual Meeting, Dick brought us Mr. Jay Foonberg, who presented an outstanding program not only for young lawyers, but also for those of us who had been in practice for many years, on how to start and operate a successful law practice. Dick and Mr. Robert P. Wilkins
Several of our Association members, some of whom were not members of our Committee, were able to realize that ordinarily the lawyer in general pratice neither has the time nor facilities to prepare systems, but would be most interested in arranging for some of the attorneys who are in a position to prepare systems to prepare Arkansas systems for our Association at a nominal cost, and then the Association make them available, again at a nominal price, to the members of the Bar. This idea took hold, and upon presentation to the House of Delegates, what we believe to be a very ambitious program and investment, the House authorized us to conduct a survey to determine the interest and feasibility of systems being prepared and distributed by the Association. A tentative bUdget was approved for three systems, of $25,000.00 which, incidentally, we felt was a very optimistic and far-sighted program for a small Association such as ours. The survey was conducted, with favorable results and our Committee held a meeting in late July to make initial plans with reference to preparation of systems. Our recommendation was that the author or authors of a system be paid a stipend of $5,000.00, that the systems each be copyrighted and distributed at seminars or special programs presented by the Association. Initially it was felt that the earliest we could hope to introduce the first system would be April 19781 Arkansas Lawyer/73
the Fall Institute of 1977, however, an earlier need arose and our final financin9 was advanced by the Arkansas Bar Association Le9al Education Fund. At the September 16, 1976, House of Delegates meeting, the proposal was presented to the House of Delegates and it authorized the initial system, the Corporation System, to be prepared by Richard A. Williams and George Plastiras, who accepted the task of having this first system ready for the Midyear Meeting in January, 1977. With time deadlines short, we entered January, 1977, with much fear and tremblings. Our fear and tremblings were not relieved in any manner when snow took over the State of Arkansas during most of the month of January. We had a substantial amount of money invested and an untried product ready to present to an Association that we felt was forward looking and ready to accept new and better ideas, but yet, those doubts still remained with us, particularly in view of the fact that most of the highways were still impassable. Fortunately, the highways cleared of snow and ice, the attendance at the Midyear Meeting was outstanding, and our first system, the Corporation System, was an immediate success. Immediately after the close of the Midyear Meeting, attention was focused upon the Probate System, which was offered at the Fall Institute in September, 1977, and this again was a huge success. We were off and running. THE NEW SYSTEMS APPROACH IN THE PRESENT Presently, we are continuing with the distribution of the Corporations and Probate Systems, readying presentation of a new Wills and Trust System at the 1978 Midyear Meeting, nearing completion of a Workmen's Compensation System to be presented in March, 1978, and looking to systems in other areas for the 1978 Fall Institute and thereafter. You are now making use of both the Corporation System and Probate System so that you can help us in evaluating these systems and the future of the systems. THE NEW SYSTEMS APPROACH IN THE FUTURE While the future of the new systems approach is in your hands, as some-
74/Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
what of a dreamer, I like to make my own suggestions and predictions on this most important concept. As I see it, we have not yet scratched the surface of this new concept, but rather have only started downhill from the Dark Ages. We are now beginning to have systems, in various areas of law practice, prepared by some of the most astute of our profession in the particular areas, but you and I, as we start daily using these systems, can add to this expertise, the knowledge, wisdom, and experience which we have had and are gaining in the use of the systems, so that they can, as often as reasonably practical, be updated so that they might be improved in both substantive law and form quality. In short, some 2,500 lawyers using these systems throughout the State will catch errors, ommissions, and improvements which will permit all of us to pool our legal knowledge and experience in improving and making more workable a good work tool. This system work tool, used as a tool, will permit each of us, with a minimum of effort and time, to do a good job of furnishing quality legal services to our clients at a price that is reasonable to both us and our clients. We have, in the short time the Probate System has been in actual use in the State of Arkansas, and in spite of the wonderful job done in preparing it, had pointed out to us some very definite improvements that can be made in some of the forms, and particularly those forms with reference to sale of real estate. It has been pointed out that the various orders with reference to sale of real estate should contain all of the findings and information necessary to show that the sale has been made in strict compliance with the statutes, so that in those items will be picked up in abstracts, and it will not be necessary to also include the petition or other materials. This suggestion and recommendation is quite correct and should be followed in using this tool, and forms modified to include this material. I like to think that this new systems approach will continue to grow so that in the reasonably near future, it will become economically practical to maintain an administrative staff that can constantly work with the production of new systems in new areas, update old systems regularly, and if desired, make printed forms and pre-programed forms for automated
use available to our Bar. No, this staff can never replace the necessary work by the Arkansas attorney, and many contributions which each makes to his profession, but can furnish the administrative backup necessary in order to make this greatly expanded program practical. SUMMARY In summary, the new systems concept as adopted in Arkansas, not only brings to each attorney a nev. tool with which to work, but permits each attorney in Arkansas to make important contribution to the improvement of the program and concept, so that each of us can reasonably furnish a better law product to each of our clients, at a cost which is reasonable to our clients and a return that is reasonable to us. Won't you please join with us in this most important and valuable concept.
f..... OYEZ continued from page 72
secretary-treasurer. Robert C. Marquette is now serving as president of
Crawford County Bar Association and Steven G. Peer is secretary-treasurer.
Roger B. Harrod has been elected president of Clark County Bar Association and Wilson Busby will serve as its secre-
tary.1--...
THE MAYTONS
Rave ~ou aeeounted 'or all the heirs'! Missi... and unknown heirs loeated. NO CHARGE TO THE ESTATE WORLDWIDE SERVICE FOR:
o COURTS o LAWYERS o TRUST OFFICERS o ADMINISTRATORS o
EXECUTORS
research services internalti掳ioR. world路wide probate ,.....rch SUITE 1466E FIRST NATIONAL CENTER. QKLA ClTV, OKLA.""'02
CALL TOLL FREE 1-110110454 4557 OKLA. (CALL COLLECT) 405-232-2320 Our company representative Will
pe happy to
viSit with you .....
April 19781 Arkansas Lawyer/75
............ ----
1111
JURIS DICTUM by C. R. Huie Executive Secretary, Judicial Department
The State Judicial Council held its annual meeting in Helena last October. The Helena Bar, the Helena Chamber of Commerce, the Phillips County Community College and other civic organizations all cooperated to give the State JUdiciary an outstanding example of true Southern hospitality. One of the highlights of the meeting (and there were
several) was the address by David Solomon at the annual dinner at the Helena Country Club. His remarks, directed to both Bench and Bar were concise, cogent, and deserve the careful consideration of the entire profession. With his permission, his comments are carried here for the benefit of those members of the Judiciary and the Bar who were unable to be pre~ent on that occasion.
TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS OF A MEMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT COMMITIEE ON PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT the wives and other guests would be present, and my role was quite different from the posture I was maintaining. Reality set in, and more especially when she reminded me that I was not funny or humorous, and not a traditional banquet speaker.
I am not after dinner speaker, or a before dinner speaker, for that matter. So why am I here before you now? It is the old story of talking and not listening. When Dick Huie first contacted me, the only words I heard of his request were "Speak no more than 10 to 15 minutes to the judges on the professional conduct committee". Really the only words I heard were "Just speak to the judges"; the rest passed me by. What lawyer could refuse such an invitation to speak before all the judges of the State as a captive audience, and for them not to be able to hold the speaker in contempt of court? It was my coming home and announcing to Miriam that J was to speak to the judges, and her response, that made me acutely aware of the situation in which J had become involved. Miriam reminded me that 761Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
Thus what to do in this dilemma? So I attempted to analyze after dinner speeches and speakers, and where I might go for assistance. The format with which we are most familiar, is for the speaker to tell a series of jokes or humorous incidents, then give a dissertation on the assigned subject which would sound quite profound at the time-Jike the pronouncements coming down from Mt. Olympus-or the Justice Building. We are in a profession where we go to experts for assistance, not what we do not always acknowledge that we are complete experts in any field. This then is what I came up with as the most reasonable solution to the problern--get expert assistance for the so called humorous part of the speech. My friend, Prosecuting Attorney Gene Raff, has always admitted to me, in complete modesty and humility, that he is without a peer in speech making, and on any occasion or subject. He furnished some material, but I had to reject it, since I felt it was only appropriate for juries when the
speaker was trying to get a conviction. This I did not need since my audience was already convicted-they were elected judges. Next, why not go to The Bench for help. Judge Tom Butt, an old friend, and of course outside my immediate practice area, came to mind. On reflection, I knew his material would not be satisfactory, because it would of necessity start an argument and be controversial: again something I did not need. Then why not go to the top-The Supreme Court. They are my friends, at least on all but decision days when they relegate me too frequently to some other status. Justice George Rose Smith-since this is not April 1st, and I felt he had reached his zenith with that famous decision, he was out. Justice John Fogleman-Dick Huie had been quite specific and cautioned me as to the time alloted to me, and in no event was I to be too verbose. John's material would have to be at least 20 pages long to set up the fact situation for the humorous story, before we got to the point of what it was supposed to be about. He was also out. Chief Justice Harris. I was afraid that his stories would not do for a mixed group such as this. Remember
that you can interpret this statement of mine two ways-which ought to get me off the hook.
So the conclusion was reached to forego the usual format and get on with the "Profound Remarks". My subject according to Dick Huie is the "Trials and Tribulations of a Member of The Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct". For some of you in the audience, I might explain that this is a group of seven lawyers from various parts of the State appointed by the Court to attempt to see that lawyers live up to the Canons of Ethics in their practice. The Committee handles complaints of professional misconduct, and when the situation warrants, files disbarment proceedings in the appropriate court. It is the arm of The Court which initiates discipline of lawyers. As to the "Trials and Tribulations", I can truthfully state, that these can be grouped in two categories: 1. Trials-you are only dealing with lawyers. 2. Tribulations-when not dealing with lawyers, you are dealing with judges.
I was appointed to the Committee at a time when its work load was picking up and changes were needed. It soon became evident that the Committee needed paid personnal to implement its activities. We tried a part time executive secretary, and then found the work load justified full time help, an executive secretary who is not a member of the committee. The Court established the existing arrangement with the support and urging of the Arkansas Bar Association. It is not utopia in this area, but it has and is working, and The Bar, and more particularly large segments of the Public, know their grievances will be adequately and carefully investigated and acted upon, and not a "We Take Care of Our Own" atmosphere. My 7 year term was a real eye opener to me of what can and is happening on the practice of law. I found the sins of omission were much more prevalent than the sins of commission in clients complaining about the conduct of their lawyers. The ulimate fact and glaring truth is the lack of communication on the part of the lawyers with their clients, not only as to the cost of services and fees, but as to the work progress or lack of it.
•
One of the things I hope will come about in the future is the education in this field the committee could provide to the practicing attorneys. I do not think ethics can be instilled in anyone by this Committee, but an understanding and awareness on the part of lawyers as to the Canons, and pitfalls confronting the practicioner, can be most helpful. There is a great difference in taking a course in law school in this area, from being subjected to practical every day situations when you get out in the big world. Actuality as opposed to theory. As to the problems in the Committee's Functioning under the Rules adopted by the Supreme Court, one of the most serious is the failure of lawyers and sometimes judges to bring to the attention of the Committee, through its executive secretary, of situations that need investigation. Perhaps we have been brought up that to snitch is bad form, but this is an entirely different situation. It is an obligation we owe to the public. It is our professional duty. Moreover, it is a violation of the Canons not to so act in such situations. One other problem as far as attorneys are concerned, is their failure to give an honest opinion to a person or client who claims to have been mistreated by another attorney, when it is obvious that the first attorney is not guilty of professional misconduct. The second attorney, for whatever motive, sends the allegedly aggrieved person to Taylor Roberts, causing all the wheels to go into motion needlessly. The situation I am referring to is primarily where a case had been lost and the client naturally feels he should have won. Since there is usually one winner and one loser in any litigation, this can generate a lot of unhappiness, but not of necessity professional misconduct. We have the same obligation to attempt to stop the needless charges against a fellow lawyer as to start an investigation of the worthwhile ones. This gets me to the problem the Committee, at the time I was a member, felt the strongest aboutthe failure of the courts to show strength and firmness in determining the punishment and discipline in disbarment cases. My opinion is that this is an area in which deterrents can
be successful, and is quite different from any philosophy as to the care and treatment of people who violate the criminal law. The license to practice law is given to those who have had advanced education, and carries with it priviledges and responsibilities. In my mind, the discipline meted out needs to be firm and much more commensurate with the offense that has been evidenced in the past deci¡ sions of the various courts. We are facing an almost complete revolution in the practice of law in the coming years, not only in the number of lawyers, but the rules under which we will practice. Advertising is here to stay with all of its problems. Prepaid legal services and specialization are two other major areas to be dealt with. With the changes, come the prob¡ lems. The work of the Professional Conduct Committee will increase greatly with the changes, and it is necessary for it to have the full support of The Bar and Bench. The need for firm, adequate discipline to those who break the rules is a must to enable our profession to grow as it should, and keep and gain the respect of the public.
So much for the so called profound part. I am reminded that my first case before the supreme court was a loser, and I asked Mr. Carl Stevenson for knowledge and advice in order to file a petition for rehearing. He advised me, and then told me such was a waste of time and effort, since only once in a lifetime could a lawyer expect the rehearing petition to be granted, and the court to change its ruling. About eight years ago, there was a memorable week for me. My once in a lifetime rehearing petition was granted, and the Chief called to say The Court wanted to appoint me to this Committee, if I would serve. This time I was not talking when I should have been listening, but accepted though ignorant of what lay before me. Thus I close with sincere thanks to The Court for subjecting me to an education that could not have been received in any other manner, and to have been a part of a real challenge. My thanks to all of you for putting up with these remarks. ~
April 19781 Arkansas Lawyer/n
LAW SCHOOL NEWS Assistant Dean James K. Miller Assistant Dean Susan Webber
SCHOOL OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS, FAYETIEVILLE A "Scriveners Symposium" was held in Waterman Hall on November 18. Speakers and their topics were: Justice George Rose Smith, "Good English in Appellate Brief Writing," Chancellor Thomas F. Butt, "Pleadings and the Use of English," and Professors Milton Copeland, David Newbern, and Richard Atkinson, "Drafting of Selected Instruments." The symposium was sponsored by the Arkansas Bar Foundation, the Sehool of Law, and the Division of Continuing Education, University of Arl<ansas, Fayetteville. The Robinson Senate of the Delta Theta Phi Law Fraternity won the Fraternity's Scholarship Cup for the 1976-77 school year. The cup is awarded annually to the student chapter which attains the highest posijive differential between the average grade of ijs membership and the all-school average.
cently promulgated Standards of Judicial Conduct. In November and December, Dr. Leflar undertook an evaluation of the worl<s of the Washington Court of Appeals. After visiting at Seattle and Tacoma for several days, he prepared a report on the intemal operating procedures of that Court, for use by the Court in reorganizing its work with four additional judges in 1978.
published by the Institute for the Development of Indian Law, Washington, D. C. The article is part of a larger work that Fairbanks submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for his LL. M. degree from Columbia University.
Professor Rafael Guzman presented a program on Arkansas Model Jury instructions in Criminal Cases at the annual meeting of the Arl<ansas Prosecuting Attorneys Association in December. Professor Guzman was co-author of three chapters of the Arkansas Prosecutor's Trial Manual (1977). He recently received a University of Arl<ansas Service Award in recognition of 10 years service to the University.
in Arkansas."
On December 2, Dr. Robert A. Lellar
Professor Robert Fairbanks has written
addressed the Arizona Judicial Conference at Phoenix on matters connected
an article that appears in the October
with judicial conduct and ethics. He is member of the American Bar Association committee which is preparing new procedures for the enforcement of the re-
issue of the American Indian Journal. The article is entitled "A Discussion of the Nation-State Status of American Indian Tribes: A Case Study of the Cheyenne Nation," The American Indian Journal is
On November 12, Professor Howard Brill spoke to the Board of Directors of Ihe Arkansas Association of Legal Seretaries. His topic was "The Future of the Paralegal Professor Robert Knowlton recently addressed a meeting of the Fayetteville Rotary Club. His topic was "The Bakke Case." On November 10, Professor Milt Copeland discussed the Bakke case with prelaw students at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. John F. Graves, a first-year student from Springdale, Arkansas, has been awarded a special Indian Fellowship by the Department of Health, Education and welfare. The scholarships are awarded on a nationwide competitive basis to qual路
ified applicants pursuing professional degrees. His is the first ever presented to a UA student.
SCHOOL OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK This spring the law school will be awarding for the first time an Edward L. Wright scholarship to a deserving student selected by the law school financial aid committee. The Edward L. Wright Scholarship Fund is a $20,000 fund established for the UALR School last year. The fund was begun by the law firm of Wright, Lindsey and Jennings with a donation of $12,500. Additional gifts of $2,500 each were made by Pulaski Federal Savings and Loan, Worthern Bank and Trust Company, and Winburn Tile Manu781Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
facturing Company. Mr. Wright served on the boards of directors of these firms. Mr Wright, who died on February 1, 1977, had a very distinguished career. He was the senior partner of Wright, Lindsey and Jennings, he was president of the Arkansas Bar Association in 1957-58 and president of the American Bar Association in 1970-71. In 1963 the Arkansas Bar Foundation honored him with its Outstanding Lawyer Award. Mr. Wright was a great lawyer and a great man. He was always interested in
legal education and the development of young lawyers. He was a great help to our law school, and Ihe law school is very happy to accept this fitting and lasting tribute to him. Renovation of the Old Federal Building, which has been underway for several months, is now nearing completion and classes are now being held there. This building, which is included in the National Register of Historic Buildings in America, was constructed in 1881 , and additions to ij were built through the early 19OOs. The
administrative offices of the law school, student lounges, a library reading room for study, several faculty offices and offices for student organizations are housed in the building. We are extremely grateful for the $20,000 the Arkansas Bar Association contributed for the renovation effort. This contribution helped toward the $100,000 raised in addition to the original state appropriation and federal matching funds.
On January 10 and 11 Dean Robert K. Walsh was part of a two-person team which inspected the University of louisville School of law in louisville, Kentucky on behalf of the Accreditation Committee and Council on legal Education of the American Bar Association. This was a special inspection and the other team member was Dean Craig W. Christensen of Syracuse University College of law. On December 2 Dean Walsll and Byron Eiseman both spoke at the Southeast Arkansas legal Institue held in Monticello. Mr. Eiseman spoke on the estate and gill tax provisions in the Tax Reform Act of 1976, and Dean Walsh spoke concerning the delevopment of the UAlR School of law. The UALR law Journal, Vol. 1, No. I, is scheduled to be available by February. Annual subscriptions are available for $g.oo within the United States and posessions, and subscriptions to foreign addresses are $10.00. Mulliple subscription
discounts are available in certain circumstances. Checks for subscriptions should be made payable to "UAlR law Journal". Correspondence should be addressed to: Business Manager, law Joumal, UAlR School of law, 400 West Markham Street, Uttle Rock, Arkansas 72201. The principal lead article of the issue is an article by Professor Fred W. Peel, Jr. entitled "An Approach to Income Tax Simplification". Professor Peel has been on the law school faculty since August, 1976. He has
chaired numerous continuing legal education programs on tax law throughout the United States and is a former partner of the Washington D. C.law firm of Miller and Chevalier. Also in this issue is the First Annual Survey of Arkansas law.
FACULTY NOTES Associate Professor Glenn Pasvogel was a panelist for the Seminar on Sunshine, sponsored by the Arkansas Humanities Program. Other panelists were Dr. leslie M. S. Griffith, Associate Professor of Philosophy at UAlR; Bill Clinton, Attorney General of Arkansas; and Carol Griffee, a reporter for the Arkansas Gazette. Programs were held on November 2 and on December 8, and the
subject was the Arkansas Freedom of , Information Act.
LAW SCHOOL ASSOCIATION MEETS; ELECTS RUTH BRUNSON PRESIDENT
Assistant Professor Lynn Hogue's article entitled "East Lake and Arlington Heights: New Hurdles in Regulating Urban Land Use?" was published in the fall, 1977, issue olthe Case Western Reserve Law Review. Professor Hogue also read a paper in Columbia, South Carolina, at the Reynolds Conference on South Carolina legal History, sponsored by the Southern Studies Program and the University of South Carolina School of law. His topic was "Uterary Allusions in Trotfs Grand Jury Charges." Assistant Professor O. Fred Harris attended an equal employment opportunity law conference held on November 17 and 18 in New Orleans and sponsored by the American Bar Association National Institute on Equal Employment in the law. Several eminent legal scholars and practioners inthe field of Equal Employment law made presentations on a wide range of topics. Donaghey Distinguished Professor Robert R. Wright is conducting a series of national institutes on bankruptcy and corporate reorganization for the ABA Section of General Practice as part of the ABA National Institutes Program. The first national institute, entitled "Saving the Sick Business," was held at Washington, D. C. on November 19. The second national instiMI' on the same subject was held in San Francisco at the Fairmount on January 21. The national institute for the regioo including Arkansas will be held in Dallas in March, and another will be held in Chicago in June. Professor Wright also attended the fall meeting of the Council of the General Practice Section of the ABA in Colorado Springs, and will attend the Council meeting at the ABA midyear convention in New Orleans on February 10-12. At New Orleans he will also attend meetings of the Standing Committee on Professional Career Development, of which he is a member, and of the Standing Committee on Continuing legal Education, of which he is an advisory member. Assistant Dean Susan Webber was on the program for the Women Business Ownership Seminar sponsored by the Smalf Business Administration on November 5 at UAlR. Her topic was "Forms of Business Enterprise." The annual meeting of the American Association of law Schools was held in Altanta, Georgia, December 27-30. Attending from our law school were Professors Fenton Adams, l. lynn Hogue, Robert Marquis, Arthur G. Murphey, Glenn Pasvogel, Robert A. Wright, III, Assistant Dean Susan Webber and Dean Robert K. Walsh.
The UAlR law School Association held its first mid-year luncheon meeting on Thursday January 19, 1978 at the Camelot Inn in little Rock. More than 50 alumni and friends of the law school heard remarks by Professor Ruth H. Brunson, who was elected president of the organization at a meeting of i1s Board of Directors held earlier that morning. Featured speakers at the luncheon included Robert K. Walsh, Dean of the UAlR School of Law, and little Rock attorney William Nash, former Dean of the Arkansas law School. The UAlR law School Association operated informally until lis recent incorporation under Arkansas law as a non-profit association. Other officers elected at the mid-year meeting include: Gayle Windsor, President-elect; Sheffield Nelson, Vice-President; James W. Spears, Scretary; and Claiboume W. Patty, Jr., Treasurer. The Association was organiZed to support the academic program and other activities of the School of law through a variety of alumni projects. The Association includes all former students and graduates of the five law schools which have operated in little Rock in unbroken succession for nearly 100 years: The little Rock law Class, before 1892; the University of Arkansas law Department, 18921916; the Arkansas law School, 19161968; the little Rock Division of the University of Arkansas School of law, 19651975; and the UAlR School of law, since 1975. Membership in the Association is also open to other friends of the school. In addllion to the inilial officers, other directors of the Association installed at the mid-year meeting include: Annabelle Clinton, Judge Tom F. Digby, David A. Hendrick, Jr., P. A. Hollingsworth, Senator Max Howell, Hermann Ivester, B. Frank Mackey, Jr., Arthur G. Murphey, Jr., William Nash, Sam Perroni, William Stringfellow, Frahk B. Whitbeck, and Elizabeth C. Young-all of little Rock-and Ralph C. Barnhart, Fayetteville; Michael R. Bearden, Osceola; David W. Cahoon, Marianna; Eldon F. Coffman and James M. Dunn, Fort Smith; Phillip B. Farris, Batesville; M. Morrell Gathright, Pine Bluff; William D. "Doug" Glover, Forrest City; R. W. Hobbs, Hot Springs; Howard Hopkins, New York City, New York; Michael M. Kinard, Magnolia; Judge J. H. lookadoo, Jr., Arkadelphia; Max R. Parrish, Jr., Washington, D. C.; and Judge Van B. Taylor, Dardanelle.
Association membership currently numbers about 400 graduates and
friends.~
April 1978/Arkansas lawyer179
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION "@he 'Pl3ed
WI @he
PJJed~ w~
dTo ~/ /
-HENRY WOODS CHAIRMAN ANNUAL MEETING HENRY WOODS
"\
JIM R. CARRIGAN ROBERT E. CARTWRIGHT
JAMES W. JEANS
JOSEPH W. ROGERS, JR.
DENVER
to-OU/)<~
KANSAS CITY
,I
~~
GERALD L. MICHAUD
{)/}W
0/
tkjl;ned~ kM~~-
80th ANNUAL MEETING ARLINGTON HOTEL HOT SPRINGS, ARKANSA JUNE 7-10, 1978 ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION
jtIan
to-
atWJuI.
.,
II
-WALTER R. NIBL-OCk OCIATION PRe==SIDEN-
~
WALTER R. NIBL~CK BILL COLSON
80/ Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
________
~
__
Apnl19781Arkansas La .....:.....-....l.--..::..:::.....-~
er/81
_
THE INITIAL INTERVIEW
or "IT'S ALL DOWNHILL FROM HERE" by E. ROBERT (BOB) WALLACH
My name is Bob Wallach. I am a practicing trial lawyer, and I am also priviledged to be a Professor of Law at Hastings. It is from both of these backgrounds that I want to chat with you about a subject that may seem initially out of place in a program on Advocacy. All of us have the image of the advocate. We all understand what the public expects to see. We all watch sufficient
television in most of America, spoken in grade schoolese, to see what is the "advocate" in the lay mind. But for lawyers-where we spend most of our time as trial lawyers, as advocates, is in our offices dealing with people. Every one of us recognizes that most of our cases in litigation end up settling before they ever reach the court. Whether it is personal injury or criminal law, industrial or business litigation, most of us aim toward some compromise that will attain a
measure of protection for our clients, and avoid complete capijulation if our position
that all of us have. As a matter of fact, all that I have to tell you is born of 14 years 01 trial and error, my own and others, that I have observed.
I believe it is inexcusable to permit a client to regulate litigation. Who is the expert? Who has the knowledge? Who has the expertise? Who understands the juries? Who knows the jUdge? Who knows the caliber of defense counselor plaintiffs counsel? Given that set of circumstances, it is just not proper to permit a client to make a mistake in deciding whether or not he or she should gamble on the vagaries 01 lijigation. It is as important to avoid that mistake as it is to prepare your client properly for the deposijion, or yourself for trial. But how are you going to acquire that kind of relationship, that level of control?
is weak. In order to accomplish that, we find ourselves in a very ambivalent role. Nobody comes to us, wijh great exceptions, because they want to. We are not, as we all now know, the world's most popular profession, and people don't seek us out, especially in personal injury lijigation, because they want our company, but because they need us. We are, without a doubt, a necessary evil. So we begin with an aura that is often less than a cordial foundation for what is at least in my jUdgement, the true purpo"'; of the inijial interview-the development of a relationship of trust and rapport which will permit you to exercise control over your client. How often, in your experience, all of your experiences, have you heard a lawyer say, generally after his or her third San Francisco martini, "Boy, I told that client to take that offer, but he (she) just wouldn't listen to me." That is inexcusable, and I say that recognizing that I have doroe ij myself, and
First of all, we have to eliminate what is a fairly prevalent belief among many lawyers, and that is another saying we have all heard. Generally it will be under the same circumstances as the first one. Some attorneys say, "Things are going all right. I really like the practice of law. There is really nothing the maner with it-except
the clients." And that is the aura that many lawyers communicate, that the client is a necessary conduij toward earning a living, to~ard accumulating those aggrandizements and material wealth which are, after all, exactly Why you went to law school. But with that kind of atmosphere we can expect nothing but the same in retum, and Indeed we have watched in the last ten years a great many people come to believe that there is nothing the matter with the Law-except the lawyers. How do we build t is degree of confidence? First of all, there are certain kinds of clients whom I think we have to recognize we may not be able to deal with effectively at a I. , have categorized them, and I am a great one for generaliZing, which
means, with all candor, that I just may be wrong here and there. I call the first one The Operator. He or she is the professional. He or she may be the cab driver or the longshoreman (woman). He (she) is the person whose exposure to litigation is long and tried and constant. His (her) buddies, his (her) coworkers, they all know about lawsuits. They know about rearend accidents. They know about contingent fees. They know about insurance companies, and they know about lawyers. He or she is all too often simply making you his (her) conduit to obtain some dollars from somebody else, and if that is what it is all about, then that is not enough. That is the kind of individual that you must be extremely wary of, and that is the kind of individual you may end up serving, in the least acceptable status of the term. There is The Venter. This is a person-and I doubt that there is such a word-who comes into an office and who vents all of life's disappointments on you, on the defendant, on the doctor in a malpractice case, on the big corporation in a products case. All of life's disappointments, frustrations, all of the expectations which were never realiZed, become fo-
cused on this one case, and that is another individual to be very wary of, because you are never going to satisfy the true user, compensate the basic harm that has been done. Those people often also enjoy the attention of a lawsuit, and really do not want the lawsuit to end. They want the lawyer, they want the doctor, they want all of the drama which gives them an opportunity to feel they have finally attained that worth to which they were initially entitled to in life. There is The Escapist. This is often the person who comes in, and all of his or her life has held a mundane, difficult, unrewarding job. Of course, of late you find many sociologists wrijing about the frustrations of the young wijh the automated society, and it is often the young who do rrt this category of the escapist. This lawsuij
82/Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
-----.!....--_--:-
J
is a way out. You can say it is a way to retire if you are a defense lawyer. You can be more compassionate and say it is an escape from reaiity. But whatever it is, it is not the injury or the recovery that really motivates them as much as ~ is the opportunity to avoid responsibility.
major problems in control, and it is for that reason we turn now to the dullest of subjects, how do we acquire that control?
The Commander. This is generally a dynamic individual: the vice president of a corporation, the real estate broker, the man or woman used to running himself or herself and others, very often a hustler, who insist that they know exactly what has to be done about this case, and you are nothing more than the simple holder of the magic words which will enable them to exercise their power over the outcome of that case.
First of all, the iawyer must dominate, not aggressively, not powerfully, but persuasively. I suggest that the initiai interview should always-and, again, only with those exceptions that are mandatory-aiways be held in an office, your office preferably, where you can establish the atmosphere that indicates that you are at home in your own environment and, not incidentally, that others are somewhat uncomfortabie in your environment, thereby making themselves less sure.
There is The Aristocrat, almost always the wealthly or the pretenders to wealth, who insist upon describing their right to recovery, as though they are insulted to be included in that category of peoplegenerally the poor, the minorities, and the downtrodden-who would deign to be injured. The perfect defense juror, believe me. And, finally, The Reluctant Client, and here I have mixed emotions, because many of them are very decent, fine people, who all their lives have visualized themselves as being too respectable to be in a lawsuit, too respectable to sue, too respectable to want money from somebody else, and here they are by force of circumstances in your office.
The pressures of practice are not going to give you a second chance. it you do not establish this kind of control initially, you are likely never to acquire it. In the course of average litigation, especially personal injUry litigation, you don't see a client very often. You may see them at the initial interview; you may see them for depo preparation; you may see them for discussions of settlement; you may see them for preparation for trial, over a two or three year period or, if you are exceptionally fortunate, a six or eight or nine month period. The pressures of practice are never again going to allow you that some degree of intimary and leverage which exists when the client comes to you, stricken by this new and untoward event, and very much in need of help.
Now, all of these people present to you, to all of us,
One final comment. Before discussing the interview itself. When you are looking at a client and you are saying to yourself,
"Gee, one of these categories bob mentioned the other day," you might also say to yourself, "Do I like him or her?" Because if you don't like him or her, the chances of a jUry liking him or her, or a judge, or defense counsel, who are so important in determining whether or not a proper evaluation is placed on the case, are going to like him or her-And if you don't, remember it is always the lawyer's first impression of the case that should guide him or her. We all become advocates when we prepare, and our jUdgement becomes less acute.
What about the interview itself? Let me discuss with you some very dry things, most of which you already know. First of all, let us not constantly impress our client with what important lawyers we are. It is not necessary that the secretary come in four or five times during the interview and tell us some important fact, and it is not required that the phone ring regularly so we can communicate all the important matters we are engaged in. What is important is that for an hour and a half, which I find to be the acceptable time for almost any case, large or small, we turn off those phones and ask the secretary to leave the door closed, and spend a little time concentrating on that client alone. Remember, in doing this, that lawyers have another great failing, all of us. We are great talkers. Don't forget to be good listeners, especially in that first interview. continued on page 84
EDITOR'S NOTE: Bob Wallach was a featured speaker-panelist on the Association's successful Civil Trial Practice Institute a few years ago. He also "pinch hit" as the after-dinner speaker-giving one of the warmest and best-received talks ever before the Arkansas Bar. He is a practicing lawyer, a professor of law and consultant to the Dean at Hastings College of Law. It is not possible here to list all his professional, academic and "pro bono" activities. His recent publications are many, including co-authorship of the California Tort Guide. This will be the first of three articles published in The Arkansas Lawyer, and has been adapted from a "Trial Advocacy" talk by Mr. Wallach. We have not edited the article for publication-mainly to give the reader the personal touch of a Bob Wallach. The next two articles will be "Interviewing the Client" outline in detail and "The All-Purpose, Bargain-Basement Final Argument".
Bob WallaCh April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/53
THE INITIAL INTERVIEW, continued from page 83
It helps a great deal for a client to walk out believing that he or she has had an opportunity to say iust about everything one wanted to say, not that they were rushed out, or not that they never got a word in edgewise. In doing this, of course, you are going to help yourself gain an impression of these people. So you have a quiet interview of an hour and a half, and then you want to take it down. You want to record it. You say, "Now, don't bother me with that kind of silly comment. i am not here for all that." And yet in the last 14 years I have looked at literally hundreds of notes of first interviews taken by other lawyers, and I find the name of the client on yellow foolscap, an address in handwriting, the date of the accident, dla, date of accident; name of doctor; Vs for the intersection where it happened; maybe the name of one witness, if you are lucky; a notation here or there about occupation, and that is it. That's all there is. That is all he or she really knows. From that you build disaster. So you begin, first of all, with taking down lots of information. How? I personally take notes. I like to write. I have poor handwriting, but I like to write because I like the client to see me saying "Wait a minute, let me take that down." so they know I am paying aftention. Some lawyers have a secretary in to take dictation, I am told. It seems great for TV, but not very economic for most of us. Others transcribe on dictating equipment, tape recorders. I suppose there is nothing wrong with that. We seem to be increasingly moving toward the transcription deVice, much to the concern, I guess, of a good many of us. Maybe the average person's fear of that kind of recording is being allayed. But I find most people a little hesitant about talking into a recording
machine. Others use a form, and I have seen some marvelous forms, and I am sure you have, regular booklets, everything: doctors, bills, specialists, prior accidents, subsequent accidents, domestic background, everything, all the things you should inquire on. I think those have a very worthwhile place. But they are also very dangerous, because it is so easy in the practice of law to have someone come in, shake their hand, hand them a booklet and send them out, after they have signed their name, of course.
So I hesitate about that. More and more I hesitate about those devices which separate us farther and farther from our
client. I understand now you find offices using paralegal personnel to interview the 841 Arkansas Lawyer! April 1978
client, so that even more the great trial lawyer becomes that image in the distance. Others are using videotape, in which I am a great believer for educational and trial practice purposes, but I wonder about the offices where the client comes in and is introduced to a videotape, which then tells them all they have to know about the laWSUit, and advises them at the conclusion of the tape that they will be admifted, deigned to be admifted to the lawyer's office for the finai act, to sign the contract.
Now, what do we cover in the interview itself? Let me go over these things very rapidly, if I may, because you have probably known them all, but I think it is important to mention them. (The "Interviewing The Client" outline will be published in the next issue of The Arkansas Lawy.er.) First of all, I start with the premise that it is important to acquire as much personal information about the client as possible. Now, what do you want? You want a full name. You want maiden names. You want all names by which they are known. You want age and birth dates and driver's license number, so you can run them through the necessary channels of state government for prior driving records, if that is what you are interested in. You want all of the marriage background, and the marriage background is very important in determining what kind of stabie individual you have. Of course, in this society I suppose i might be SUbject to criticism from the young for having made that statement, but I still think it is a reasonably reliable indicator. You want to know as much about their occupation, and I don't mean their current occupation. I mean their occupations. It is one thing to have a man or woman come in with a severely injured arm who was a carpenter. It is another thing to know if he or she has been a carpenter oniy four years, and before that was a accountant. All this intormation you obtain is because you want to know how to evaluate the case for setliement and for trial, and you can't do that if you don't know this event affected this individual, not another, not somebody that somebody lectured on, but that client sifting in your office who wants individual appreciation.
You want to know, in terms of their employment, about co-workers and supervisors who can speak about their capabilities, so you know you have some good iay testimony as to the extent of the lost, what kind of workers they were.
You want to know as much about the accident as you can. You say, 01 course
th~
that is true, but I don't mean the date, time and the place. I mean you want to know all that happened that day. It is not enough to know that your client was in an intersection collision at 6:45 in the evening on his way home uniess you know that he got off work at 4:30, and you want to know where he was from 4:30 to 6:45, at what bar. And it is then you want to find out, not at deposition or trial. So you want to know, and my general rule is, about the entire day's activities, what went on. You can do this in five minutes with some, and it will take an hour with others. You want to know not only where the accident was, by you want to know how familiar they were with the area, because you may want to look for witnesses in the surrounding area. Witnesses fali in two categories. It is all too easy to look at the police form and see witnesses, but what you are also interested in are those secondary witnesses who may have come up after the scene, and whom your client would never recall six months or nine months or two years later, but who may have made very vital observations as to bruises on the head, for example, when you are claiming retrograde amnesia, or as to skid marks, or as to complaint of neck pain when your client didn't go to a doctor for a week after the accident. So you want to try and get that information from them while they remember it. They may not know names, but they may be able to say, "He came out of that white house on the corner," or "She was a stout lady." So when your investigator makes his inquiry he has some insight as to where to look.
I suppose the most serious area of inquiry for you in the initial interview is the prior injury. A very close friend of mine who was an extremely prominent defense lawyer once said to me that defense lawyers do not win lawsuits, claimants' lawyers lose them. I think there is much truth in that, paticularly with the prior injury.
As you all know, plaintiffs do not make mistakes. Plaintiffs lie. Peopie don't forget about prior injuries, and that is the way they will be portrayed before a jury. So it is important to elicit ali prior medicai knowledge from your client. That doesn't mean saying to them, "Have you ever been in an accident befor~?" because they think "automobile accident". They don't think "slip and fall", or in the house, or on the job. And you don't say to them, "how has your health been these past ten years?" You say, "What hospitals have you been in?
What doctors have you seen? What maladies have you received medication for?" Thereby eliciting that little obscure event that may in tum be a major factor in your case.
How do you evaluate the credibility? I have certain little rules.
I remember one instance where the client very persuasively told us there was no prior injury to the low back at any time, and that a hospitalization had related to female surgery some years before. This was true. But when we obtained the records, she had slipped and fallen on the way to the bathroom and had a week's physical therapy on the low back. II had nothing to do wllh the injury that she currently had, but can you imagine what would have happened when she testified to no prior back injury and then those facts were developed?
Number one, I do not ask the sensitive questions until I believe we have established some kind of relationship and rapport. I often iet the client do the taiking rather than me. Then, we finally get down to some of the matters which may be difficult-for example, in a death case, were they ever really married. There are an awful lot of people who live in common law marriage. Or "Did you ever really separate?" and it is remarkable how many people really did. The difficult questions. You have established some kind of a relationship which will permit you to ask them.
Which, of course, leads me to a collateral observation. It is no good getting this information and then doing nothing with it. So when you are obtaining this information, obtain it with this thought in mind: It is essential that you have this information before the witness testifies under oath in deposition or in trial. So obtain the medical records from the hospitals and from the doctors. Get enough information so that you can confirm what your client has told you, that they have no prior injuries or, if they do, they are inconsequential.
r
Now, there is another device to obtain that information. A very good friend who is a lawyer in Los Angeles says that there are two ways to induce or motivate the client to give you knowledge of prior injuries. One is fear and the other is greed. He is not what you call an euphoric practitioner of law. The fear technique is "If you don't tell us, they'll find out through that index bureau, and they will bomb us with it at the time of trial, because insurance com-
panies are omnipotent," which I am beginning to think they are, "and they will find out." That usually works. The other technique is greed. It Is a little more sophisticated argument. You say to them, "Let me tell you about an interesting rule of law that has come down through the ages. It is called 'The defendant takes the plaintiff as he finds him,' and let me explain to you how, if you actually had an injury, and the injury made you more susceptible to the injury which you have now, your injury may be worth more than II was if you hadn't had the previous injury," He or she says, "Oh, is that right?" and out comes the previous injury. However it comes out, but sure it comes out. Remember also that in obtaining this information you have to regard the credibilrty of your client. This is such a simple truism. But wait a minute.
And then, when I ask them, we try to say, "Look, I ask you to treat me as you would treat any close friend, because if I cannot help you as a friend, I cannot help you as a lawyer." There are certain other devices which should be followed. I very seldom interview a husband with a wife present. I very seldom interview a wife with the husband present, and certainly never prepare them for depositions together or permit them to sit in one another's deposition. I follow this same rule with the adult and child, after establishing this kind of rapport with the adult involved. Surprisingly, it is almost never that the parent says, "No, I want to sit in," or the husband and wife say, "Wait a minute." They understand perfectly, and it is remarkable how often they are relieved to have the separation. This does, I think, insure a great deal of credibility which you might not othelWise obtain initially. In talking about the injury, don't just enumerate the injuries. Find out about them. When did the ncek begin to hurt? When did the headache begin? When did the low back first manifest itself? Where were all the abrasions and contusions? Because, when you draft the complaint, you are going to put in all the injuries, and if you leave out a knee injury and subsequently they develop and unstable knee, and no one has complained to you about any bruising of the knee in striking it on the brake handle or the dash at the time of the interview, you may have substantial difficulty in establishing the relationship between accident and injury. So the simple rule is to start at the top of the head and end up at the bottom of the feet, and nothing is too trivial.
That is the maxium. Nothing is too trivial to record.
Beware of the client who says to you, "I hurt all over after the accident," which may be true, but even if it is true, It sounds terrible. It is important to get them to segregate those areas that are hurt and those areas that weren't hurt. Maybe that is more important, because, again, what you are doing is helping them to build an aura of credibility which will permeate that entire lawsuit, so that when they are evaluated by defense counsel in deposition, or by jury at trial, or by arbitrator in uninsured motorist cases, all through has run a consistency of credibility which means that this is a deserving person. And we all know that if we do not believe that the individual is a deserving person, we are going to have a substantial amount of difficulty persuading anyone else that they deserve any recovery or any compensation. Now, these things that we have talked about I promised you were not exciting. But they add up, of course, to what we are talking about, and that is success. That is victory. That is dollars, if you will excuse my orientation as a plaintiff's lawyer. It certainly adds up on the defense side with the same qualities of success in terms of representing your client. After you have done all this, you come to a part of the interview with which many lawyers are in disagreement with me. Certainly they are fine lawyers, and I respect their disagreement, and you should evaluate accordingly whether you accept this advice or not. Over these past 14 years I have been priVileged to represent a great many people, some prominent, most what we euphemistically call the common man or woman. And between the two, I would choose the latter every time. And there is a tendency in the practice of law to think that, because we are experts and professional people, we cannot open up the doors to the inner sanctum to the common man or woman.
On the contrary, give the client credit for enough intelligence to understand what you are telling him, because of he or she doesn't have II neither will the jury. I talk to every client about their case, about the negligence and the rule of law. about contributory negligence and the assumption of risk if that residual defense remains. I try to help the client understand why one county is better than another county for plaintiffs; why this defense lawyer or this insurance company is better or less able than another, or more generous or less generous; why there are so many vagaries in litigation, which makes justice an elusive main ingredient. I don't brag that these are things of virtue for us, but continued on page 86
April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/85
THE INITIAL INTERVIEW,
continued 'rom page 85 they are realities; and that is what the client wants to know. And I have found, not unsurprisingly, that a great many clients understand these things as well as .. any lawyer. Another thing I try to do IS not sign off by telling them what a great lawsuit they have. I think it is a mistake to obtain the client's confidence by telling them what a great lawyer you are, what a great lawsuit they have, and how much money they are going to get from it. If that is the kind of
motivation that your cltent reqUires to have you as a lawyer, you will have a most difficult time indeed.
I for one do not believe in the adequate award! In my experience there is no such thing. There is just not enough money for a paraplegic, or a death, or a coma, or a whiplash. And I tell them "We will attempt to get for you the finest settlement we are able to obtain. You have the Initial guarantee of a signed agreement which predicates our fee upon our recovery for you, but beyond that we hope you feel some sense of conlidence in our integrity and will accept our personal assurance that we will try to do a competent and fair job for you." And if we have estabhshed a relationship of credibility so that the client will believe in us, nothing more need be said. Clients used to say, "What is my case worth?" And I used to say to them, before the advent of modern miracles, "That would be like asking your doctor if your lovely, pregnant wife is going to have a boy or girL" Nowadays they can tell, if you want to undergo test. But the client understands the point. And you leave them with the understanding that you will do a job for them, guaranteeing nothing, because nothing in law or litigation is assured. Having done that, you ask them to sign the contract. I prefer a printed contract so that every client knows Ihey are being treated exactly alike. Many lawyers used a typed contract. Under no circumstances should you use a written contract. I explain the entire contract to them, and ask them to keep a copy, which invariably impresses the client with your own reliability. Remember, that once the interview is over, the number one criticism that clients have of lawyers is that they can never get hold of them. "They don't return my phone calls. I never know what is happening in my lawsuit. I never hear from them." And so it is part and parcel of theis first interview to remember the fOllOW-Up. Now, I talked to you about the initial interview, and now I am going to talk to you, if I may, 861 Arkansas Lawyerl April 1978
in conclusion, about one other purpose of the initial interview.
There is a need, with all due respect I suggest to you, to counsel against litigation. This is such an anonymous society Ihat there is a measure of conscience to be served by the lawyer beyond simply advocacy as we customarily use the term. There are some cases which should never be taken, and not just because Ihe damages are not great enough, or the liability is not good enough, but for other valid reasons. You spend a lifetime learning and perfecting the skills of advocacy. But let us remember that the art of advocacy is a dual responsibility. It is, of course, the represenlation of the client, but the only justification of the system as we know It IS that, through the art of conflicting advocates, we will obtain the proper balance of rights and responsibilities. That is also our responsibility. We will attain justice, a term which, like patriotism, many of us are too sophisticated to comment upon vocally, and yet that is what it is all about. There is too much advocacy as it is. There is too much of an attitude that the role of the lawyer is simply to play tournament champion to conflicting points of view, regardless of the merits, regardless of the controversy, regardless of the damage it does to the parties or the bystanders. We have an obligation not only to litigate but to hannonize, to hannonize adverse elements. Our goal cannot always be victory for our side. It is already the hallmark of this generation. Consider turning down the case where you know the damage is just too de minimus for litigation: A child who falls and hurts himself at school while under the care and custody of fine teachers who are underpaid and overworked, and where the injury is not permanent with a major disability to the child. Balance the responsibilities between that child and society. Turn down the case where you know that parental neglect is going to be an issue. In many dart-out cases, tried over
and over and over and over again,
band who comes in when his wife has died of cancer, and who left her under the care of a general practitioner before taking her to a surgeon, and now wishes he had done differently, and wants you to vindicate him by crucifying the general practitioner. Turn down the case where you know hard and bitter longrange feelings will result: The neighborhood lawsuit; or the elderty woman in a convalescent home who was pennitted to roll out of bed because the guard rails were down, and fractures her hip-dear liability and yet where IS she going to go for that kind of care and treatment? Who is going to care for an elderly woman? What good is the money going to do her? There are cases to be turned down. We all recognize the venerable image of the advocate, that brilliant expounder of the art of cross-examination; that eloquent individual who commands the emotions and inner reactions of juries; that decisive, quick-witted courtroom artist; that individual with gifts of florid phraseology and fine words. Let us also elevate to prominent status as advocate that individual who possesses compassionate concern for the client and who can with gentleness and grace defect people from confrontations that may produce more emotional distress and disturbing introspection than any laWSUit can justify. Let us elevate to prominent status as Advocate that individual who can enter litigation and conclude it successfully in the representation of the client's interests without feeling a need 10 accomplish the ultimate SUbjugation of his or her rival, allowing all parties to preserve some dignity, some measure of fairness, allowing as many participants in the litigation as possible to go on to future events without the pall of bitter and utter defeat resting with them forever. What I am trying to say, and I think ~ is part and parcel of what we should be doing as Advocates, is to remember that VICTORY NEED NOT BE TOTAL TO BE COMPLETE, AND THAT THERE IS MORE TO VICTORY THAN CONQUEST.
"If we could read the secret history of
throughout this land of ours, and lost over
and over and over again, lost on the issue of did the mother property watch the child before he ran out from behind the car into the street. Is that the kind of exposure a mother should have. Turn down the case where the client comes to you because he looks for someone to blame other than himself, the hus-
our enemies, we should find in each life, sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostilities." Longfellow ~
CODE Of PROfESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY Cannon 8 A Lawyer Should Assist in Improving the Legal System ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS EC 8-1 Changes in human affairs and imperfections in human institutions make necessary constant elerts to maintain and improve our legal system. This system should function in a manner that commands public respect and fosters the use of legal ramedies to achieve redress of grievances. By reason of education and experience, lawyers are especially qualified to recognize deficiencies in the legal system and to in~iate corrective measures therein. Thus they should perticipate in proposing and supporting legislation and programs to improve the system, without regard to the general interests or desires of clients or former clients. EC 8-2 Rules of law are deficient if they are not just, understandable, and responsive to the needs of society. " a lawyer believes that the existence or absence of a rule of law, substantive or procedural, causes or contributes to an unjust result, he should endeavor by lawful means to obtain appropriate changes in the law. He should encourage the simplification of laws and the repeal or amendment of laws that are outmoded. Ukewise, legal procedures should be improved whenever experience indicates a change is needed. EC 8-3 The fair administration of justice requires the availability of competent lawyers. Members of the public should be educated to recognize the existence of legal problems and the resultant need for legal services, and should be prOVided methods for intelligent selection of counsel. Those persons unable to pay for legal services should be provided needed services. Clients and lawyers should not be penalized by undue geographical restraints upon representation in legal matters, and the bar should address itself to improvements in licensing, reciprocity, and admission procedures consistent with the needs of modern commerce. EC 8-4 Whenever a lawyer seeks legislative or administrative changes, he should identily the capacity in which he appears, whether on behalf of himself, a client, or the pUblic. A lawyer may advocate such changes on behalf of a client even though he does not agree w~h them. But when a lawyer purports to act on behalf of the public, he should espouse only those changes which he conscientiously believes to be in the public interest. EC 8-5 Fraudulent, deceptive, or otherwise illegal conduct by a participant in a proceeding before a tribunal or legislative body is inconsistent w~h fair administration of justice, and it should never be participated in or condoned by lawyers. Unless constrained by his obligation to preserve the confidences and secrets of his
client, a lawyer should reveal to appropriate authorities any knowledge he may have of such improper conduct. â&#x20AC;˘ EC 8-6 JUdges and administrative officials having adjudicatory powers ought to be persons of integrity, competence, and suitable temperament. Generally, lawyers are qualified, by personal observation or investigation, to evaluate the qualifications of persons seeking or being considered for such public offices, and for this reason they have a special responsibility to aid in the selection of only those who are qualified. It is the duty of lawyers to endeavor to prevent political considerations from outweighing judicial f~ness in the selection of judges. lawyers should protest eamestly against the appointment or election of those who are unsuited for the bench and should strive to have elected or appointed thereto only those who are willing to forego pursuits, whether of a business, political, or other nature, that may interfere with the free and fair condiseration of questions presented for adjudication. Adjudicatory officials, not being wholly free to defend themselves, are ent~led to receive the support of the bar against unjust criticism. While a lawyer as a c~izen has a right to cmicize such officials publicly, he should be certain of the merit of his complaint, use appropriate language, and avoid petty cmicisms, for unrestrained and intemperate statements tend to lessen public confidence in our legal system. Criticisms motivated by reasons other than a desire to improve the legal system are not justified. EC 8-7 Since lawyers are a vital part of the leg", system, they should be persons of integrity, of professional skill, and of dedication to the improvement of the system. Thus a lawyer should aid in establishing, as well as enforcing: standards of conduct adequate to protect the pUblic by insuring that those who parctice law are qualified to do so. EC 8-8 lawyers often serve as legislators or as holders of other public offices. This is highly desirable, as lawyers are uniquely qualified to make significant contributions to the improvement of the legal sys1em. A lawyer who is a pUblic officer, whether full or part-time, should not engage in activities in which his personal or professional interests are or foreseeably may be in conflict with his official duties. EC 8-9 The advancement of our legal system is of vital importance in maintaining the rule of law and in facilitating orderly changes; therefore, lawyers should encourage, and should aid in making, needed changes and improvements.
DISCIPLINARY RULES (3) Accept any thing of value from any person when the DR 8-101 Action as a Public Official. lawyer knows or it is obvious that the offer Is for the (A) A lawyer who holds public office shall not: purpose of influencing his action as a public official. (1) Use his public position to obtain, or attempt to obtain, DR 8-102 Statements Concerning judges and Other Ada special advantage in legislative matters for himself jUdicatory Officers. or for a client under circumstances where he knows or (Al A lawyer shall not knowingly make false statements of it Is obvious that such action is not in the pUblic infact concerning the qualifications of a candidate for terest. election or appointment to a Judicial office. (2) Use his public position to influence, or attempt to in(8) A lawyer shall not knowingly make false accusations fluence, a tribunal to act in favor of himself or of a against a judge or other adjUdicatory officer. client. April 19781 Arkansas lawyer/87
LAW DAY 1978 The Law: Your Access to Justice By H, Wiiliam Allen
As this issue of The Arkansas Lawyer is being distributed to the members of the Arkansas bar, Law Day 1978 should be about a month away. This relatively new inst~ution of a day set aside to celebrate the law has developed into one of the greatest vehicles the bar has to generate public education about the law and legal institutions and to garner some well needed (and deserved) public relations for the profession. Law Day was conceived in 1957 by Charles S. Rhyne, a WaShington, D. C. lawyer and then president of the American Bar Association. Law Day is now set aside on May 1 of each year by joint resolution of Congress and Presidential proclamation as "a special day of celebration by the American people in appreciation of their liberties" and as an occasion for "rOOOOl路 cation to the ideals of equality and justice under law." Allhough sometimes misconstrued as a "be kind to your lawyer day", Law Day is not a day set aside for lawyers, but a day to encourage every citizen to think about the central role ot law in our society. "The Law: YOUR Access To Justice" This year's theme is an appropriate and timely one-'The Law: Your Access to Justice." Citizens today enjoy more rights, greater access to our courts. and more ways and means of equitably resolving
disputes than ever before. Increased accessibility to justice is evident in part from the fact that the nation's 88/ Arkansas LawyerlApril 1978
courts are handling more cases than at any previous time in our history. The bar's efforts in lawyer referral services and pre-paid legal service plans have expanded the delivery of legal services. Joint bar and govemmentat efforts have made legal services more available to low income persons through the creation of and increased funding for the Legal Services Corporation and through courtappointed legal defenders. Furthermore, our rapidly changing sociological, economic, technological and environmental conditions over the recent past have resulted in a virtual "law explosion' , with the writing of new laws and the expansion of existing ones to meet the challenges of the times. In 1963, 500 million dollars in claims were filed in the area of products liability. In 1975, 50 billion were filed. There has been expansion in laws affecting pollution, rights of privacy, individual rights of women and children, and consumer protection. There are also many new spheres protected by law through the work of more than one hundred different federal administrative agencies which cover such diverse areas as health, welfare, public housing, education, the environment, parole and prison grievances, occupational safety, equal employment opportunity and energy con路 trol. Yet in spite of the expansion of legal rights and greater utilization of our legal institutions described above, a legitimate question still remains as to whether we
have adequate "access to justice" in this country. Court Caseloads The increased caseload of the courts which was cited above as evidence of greater utilization also threatens to cripple access to the courts in many jurisdictions. More than 170,000 new cases were filed in federal courts in 1976 and estimates are that close to two million new cases
were filed in state and iocal courts. The larger the case load, the slower the judicial process. The backlog for federal courts in 1976 was close to 160,000 cases. While we have been acutely aware of the federal court situation through our own experience in Arkansas, we are by and large quite fortunate with the docket situations in our circuit and chancery courts. The crunch of cases in most jurisdictions has provoked Chief Justice Burger and no doubt many lawyers to counsel potential litigants to "try to stay out of court." The congestion may well be a reflection of a virtue of our courts, i.e., that they are engaged in a calm, deliberative and thorough process of protecting human rights. Yet the person who for years has been waiting in line and can't get his case heard doesn't believe he has effective access to justice. A number of solutions have been proposed to attack this problem, most of which are hard doses to swallow. E.g., taking diversity cases out of the federal courts, taking domestic relations matters out of
the realm of the courts, limiting appeals available from judicial decisions, and doing away with jury trials for most noncriminal matters. Another more palatable solution is for the bar to draw the public's atlention and tax dollars toward improving the courts that we have and adding additional capacity where needed. The Cost Another seemingly insurmountable problem is that of making legal services available and affordable to the majority of Americans. The rich and well-to-do are generally aware of their need for legal services and have no trouble obtaining them. The poor are being increasingly assured of legal services through government programs. But there is a vast segment of the population between these extremes and whether it has "access to justice" has been the number one issue in the bar in recent years.
,
Again, a major factor is the changed social conditions, Most people now live in urban or metropolitan communities where professionals are anonymous except within the professions themseives and circles closely connected with them, This means that finding a lawyer and evaluating him through the traditional means of doing so, i,e., through his community stature, has become difficult, if not a practical impossibility, for the average person. The cost of litigation on behalf of the average citizen has become prohibitiveiy high. Cases simple enough to be within the client's means may well not be worth a lawyer's time, Cases complicated enough to justify a lawyer's involvement are frequently beyond the client's means except where a contingent fee arrangement is feasible or when the cost is externally underwritlen, as in liability insurance. The result is that advocacy may be becoming obsolete as far as middle income people are concerned.
This problem must be viewed with the perspective of some economic facts of life. A lawyer's time is expensive. Although accurate, up-to-date information on lawyer income is not available, the most recently available figures indicate that lawyers on the average earn around $30,000 per year. II overhead is assumed to be 50% of net profit, a lawyer must gross $45,000 per year or $30 per billable hour if he has 1500 billable hours per year. This means that any client service that takes about three hours-inclUding initial interview, problem analysis, action and close out-must be charged at $100. Since many client services can't be billed at this rate, or must be writlen off entireiy, the cost of services actually paid for is substantially higher.' Lawyer Surplus Yet while there are legal needs of the moderate income person which are undoubtedly going unmet, we have the seemingly paradoxical situation of a flooded market of lawyers. The law schools are churning out 30,000 graduates a year and the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that legal jobs are available for only slightly more than haif, One outspoken critic of our current system of delivery of legal services, Miss Sandy Dement of the National Resource Center for Consumers of Legal Services, was quoted in ari article appearing in the January 29, 1978, issue of the Arkansas Gazette as follows: "We have a tremendous number of lawyers. We have a vast market. But we have only the crudest distribution system, There's no mechanism for bringing them together." However, simply bringing the lawyer and the moderate income persons together doesn't necessarily lessen the cost of legal services. Furthermore, the increase
in graduating lawyers doesn'f in itself mean that lawyers' income, or the cost of legal services will eventually go down. The cost of lawyers' services cannot be materially reduced from the level mentioned above. Lawyers have skills that can be employed in non-legal work, such as business and public administration, at compensation comparable to what the average lawyer earns from practice. When the returns of practice fall, lawyers will leave practice for other pursuits. Solutions The solution to the cost problem will not come from advertising (although, hopefully, advertising will assist persons to more intelligently select a lawyer) but only through minimizing the amount of direct lawyer time involved in prOViding a specific legal service. Fortunately the bar is giving a high priority to the problem of cost. Law office economics has become a well developed management science of its own. Specialization is being carefully studied and cautiously implemented in several jurisdictions. Pre-paid legal insurance is being experimented with in various forms and recruitment and training of paraprofessionals has become increasingly systematic. In conclusion, we have come a long way in providing "access to justice" through lawyers and courts in recent years, but considerable challenges face us as a profession now and in the years ahead.
'''Legal Services for the Average Citizen", a discussion paper for the National Conference on Legal Services and the Public, December 16 and 17, 1977.
"BENCH & BAR" LAW DAY CHAIRMEN Judge Gerald Brown, Circuit Judge of Arkansas' Second Judicial District, and Attorney H. William Allen of Little Rock have been appointed Judicial Law Day Chairman and State Law Day Chairman, respectively.
H. William Allen
Gerald Brown
April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/89
LEGAL ECONOMICS by Fran Shellenberger
THE SOLUTION TO OFFICE DEADLINE CRISESSOME REMINDER SYSTEMS THAT WORK One aspect of law office environment seems to be universal--<:ontinuing and recurring crises due to deadline pressures. Lawyers want to create good public relations and client goodwill by providing services in a business like and timely manner; they are aware of the criticism afforded lawyers who prolong or delay legal matters due to forgetfulness or procrastination. Lawyers are also acutely aware that they can be sued for malpractice because of "failure to accomplish certain tasks within the time limitations prescribed by law.'" The problem is a simple one; lawyers often do not allow sufficient lead time in the preparation of legal documents or sufficient time for the secretary to complete her part of the job, hence the familiar law office scene--rushing to complete promised work or to meet a critical filing date. Every field in law pratice has its own "significant dates": the due dates for filing an answer, interrogatories, a tax return Or any of the statutes of limitations. To gain control over the many law office deadlines all that is needed is a simple reminder system that works--one which is immediate and automatic, is simple to operate and which allows sufficient lead time for all persons involved in the preparation of the work. One lawyer said to me, "What I need is a system that tells me what I need to do today, tomorrow and next week so that I can plan how to use my time effectively." Following are several simple reminder systems. I have personnally used them in the past at one or more of the five law firms in four states where I have worked either as a legal secretaty or office manager. All of them are simple to operate, immediate and automatic, and will tell you what you need to do today, tomorrow and next week so that you can organize your time effectively. 1. File Notation. In this simplest of all reminder systems, sometimes called a "pull date" system, the lawyernotes on the front of the file folder the date he wishes a file returned to him. The secretary or file clerk then notes the name of that file on the appropriate date on a desk calendar. Each day the secretary or clerk pulls the files listed for that day and places them on the lawyer's desk for review. The advantages of this system are its simplicity and ease of operation. Its disadvantages are that it limits the reminder system to file reminders. Also, if several months pass before the filp. "pull date" comes up, the lawyer will have forgotten why he wanted to see the file. To get around that limitation, however, the lawyer can include an abbreviated 901 Arkansas Lawyerl April 1978
message along with the reminder date, such as "rec'd reply re settlement?" so that when the file appears the message appears also--right on top of the file. 2. Looseleaf Notebook Calendar. All you need to implement this excellent reminder system is an B'hx11 looseleaf 3-ring notebook with tabs prepared for the months of the year and looseleaf pages marked for each day of the year, including weekends and holidays. In use, both the lawyer and secretary make notations of various reminders on the looseleaf pages. Each day the secretary presents that day's reminders, either the originals or photocopies, to the lawyer for review. The reminders can be checked off or crossed out at the time they are carried out. Some advantages of the looseleaf notebook calendar are 1) it is simple and easy to operate; 2) it is easy to install and maintain; 3) extra pages can be added wherever necessary; 4) the calendar can be set up for any time periods desired--1 yr. or 5 yr; 5) the lawyer can easily look ahead several weeks or months if necessary to reivew his upcoming work load; and 6) the BV. by 11 pages allow plenty of room for detailed reminders. Notebook calendars of this type are suitable for the solo practitioner or the small firm. They may be kept for each lawyer by his secretary or centralized to serve several lawyers. Some disadvantages of the notebook calendar are 1) it is unsuitable for large firms due to the large number of entries; and 2) it is unsuitable for confidential reminders. 3. Perpetual Calendar. All you need to install this system is a 3x5 card box, some index cards, two sets of monthly dividers ( one for this year and one for next year) and divider cards for each of 5 years. You'll also need a receiving tray in your office. Here's how it works: Lawyers or secretaries write reminders on the cards, using a format similar to the one shown in Fig. 1. The "come up" date for the reminder should appear at the top, followed by the name of the file, the reminder itself, the initials of the person writing the reminder and the initials of the person to whom the reminder is directed. The cards can be either plain or professionally printed. Reminder cards are routed to the receiVing tray during the day. At the end of the day the clerk or secretary responsible for maintaining the system files the cards by the come-up date appearing at the top. At the beginning of each day, the calendar clerk pulls, sorts and delivers that day's cards. Ideally, the daily reminder cards appear on the
COME UP DATE:
_
FILE NAME:
_
REMINDER:
YOUR INITIALS
DELIVER REMINDER TO: FIGURE 1
lawyer's desk even before the daily mail. The lawyer reviews the reminders, discarding those where no action is necessary and retaining the others in a prominent spot on his desk where they remain until the reminder is carried out. This system can be used for any type of reminder, professional, personal or even confidential (since the only person handling the cards is the calendar clerk). It can be
used to remind yourself or others of anything and everything at any time. Used imaginatively, it becomes an effective office communications tool. It is so successful that you'll soon find yourself inundated with reminder cards. You'll then need a more streamlined system, which follows, to give you control over the ever growing stack of reminder cards appearing daily. 1. Use color coded cards for certain types of reminders, such as red for urgent deadlines, the type you can be sued for if you miss; blue for personal, non-client reminders such as birthdays and anniversaries; orange for recurring or repetitive reminders which can be returned to the system, such as an annual file review, Will or estate review, corporate annual minutes or weekly staff meetings. This color coding brings urgent matters to the lawyer's attention quickly rather than allowing an urgent message to be buried in a stack of cards. 2. Some fields of practice, such as probate and collections for example, require reminders which are the same for each file in that field. The preparation of these reminders can be incorporated into the file opening process, thereby assuring the lawyer of receiving the needed reminders while relieving him of the task of writing cards for each new file. This perpetual calendar is described in more detail in THE LAWYER'S HANDBOOK, American Bar Association, The Institute of Continuing Legal Education, 1975. It can be used successfully by the solo practitioner or small firm. Large firms can also use the system, but would probably require a full time clerk to operate it. However, if a full time continued on page 93
Lawyers' Marl 20c per word
$5 minimum
BOOKS FOR SALE
WANTED TO BUY
Complete, current set of USCA-Like new. Exactly the same content as new set. $750.00 plus freight.
New Law office needs legal materials for library. Call Don Chinula-372-4623.
Pearce, Robinson & McCord P.O. Box 1584 Fort Smith, Arkansas 72902 (501) 782-8813
**
SW & SW2nd (Arkansas Cases) Call Ralph G. Brodie - 376-2327
OUT OF TOWN AFFILIATION Washington, D.C. attorney, LL.M. (Tax), tax court clerkship, seven years private practice in tax, erisa and administrative law, author of several publications, seeks to establish or to join a Washington, D.C. office of an Arkansas Law Firm. Address replies to Arkansas Bar Association.
FOR SALE - LAW LIBRARY Southwestern Reporter I & II, Arkansas Cases current to date; West's Modern Legal Forms with current pocket parts; Arkansas Digest with current pocket parts; 3 Book cases; Excellent condition. Contact S. Wayne Mooney, 404 Market, Harrisburg, Arkansas 72432 (501) 578-2422.
EQUIPMENT FOR SALE Xerox 914 Copy Machine; one year old; Book copier. Call Gus Allen (501) 375-9143 or 664-6298 after 5:00 p.m. April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/91
CONTEXT By W. Christopher Barrier Chairman, Public Education Committee Arkansas Bar Foundation
THE CLIENT AS CONSUMER The attorney-client relationship is central to the way we think and feel about practicing law. It can be deeper than simple friendship and more enduring than marriage. Few of us would be willing to consider the rendering of legal services as falling in the same category as the cutting of hair or the repairing of one's car. It is therefore understandable that we do not often think of our clients as consumers of our services, services which we offer for sale and for which they pay us money. However, with the advent of lawyer advertising, it is critical, both to our own well-being, and to the proper rendering of our services, that we look at our profession from the standpoint of the clienVconsumer. "How to Choose a Lawyer" One place to seek this perspective is an article in the May, 1977, issue of Consumer Reports, entitled "How to Choose a Lawyer (and what to do then)". Obviously, few of us will need this particular knowledge, but the article is enlightening as to the problems people have in choosing a lawyer, and, perhaps more important, as to what people expect of their lawyer and lawyers generally. The article suggests, of course, that you (the client) talk to friends who have had legal problems similar to yours, to get their "frank appraisal" of their own lawyer and a cost estimate. It also suggests use of lawyer referral services, but makes two criticisms-there are usually no real minimum qualifications for getting on a referral list, and many services do not try to match up particular client problems with specialists in the field. (Both criticisms are at least partially applicable to our own Service.) Interviewing the lawyer... Once you have several prospects, CR suggests questioning each one thoroughly (which may not be very practical if the temporary support hearing is next week and you've just been served). CR suggests a probing most lawyers would find discomfitting-Do you handle this kind of case? How often? What else qualifies you to handle such matters? How quickly do you return calls? How much is this likely to cost? Will you charge me lawyer rates for work a paralegal does or will you pass on the savings to me, your client? CR does suggest that price alone shouldn't control the decision, especially beyond, for instance, drafting a simple deed-but, it also suggests that, if the lawyer you want charges too much, negotiate (gasp) with him and maybe he'll do better! It further suggests that your agreement, both as to fee and the work, be committed to writing (for which perhaps client and lawyer should hire lawyers). 92/Arkansas Lawyerl April 1978
"I, lawyer, hereby agree..." Such agreements should state in detail how the fee will be computed; how long the work should take; and who will pay what costs, says CR. They should also obligate the lawyer to answer questions; consult on significant decisions; forward copies of pleadings and the like; and let the client know if additional work not contemplated by the initial agreement or fee arrangement appears necessary. "Nonsense", says the lawyer, "I either do all those things or my clients already know them!" Good for you. But, if you're not so sure, what will the interviews and agreements do for you? My friends, they will make you money and save you grief, even if that is hardly what Consumer Reports had in mind. If you set your method for fee computation realistically to begin with, and your client fully understands it, you will avoid, at least sometimes, an almost universal lawyer experiencEl---{;utting a fee in response to a client's outcry. Too many lawyers initially estimate fees at an unrealistically low level to avoid running off the client, when they could have been realistic, gotten the larger fee and kept the client happy, all at the same time. "I'll get to that first thing tomorrow..." As to time estimates, I am sure most lawyers would prefer to avoid deadlines entirely. However, most time management experts contend that voluntarily setting realistic deadlines (and giving them some weight by announcing them to partners or clients) is an essential element of productivity. And if you prove to your clients that you in fact honor deadlines, you get three benefits-they will accept more remote but reliable deadlines, giving you the time you need; they will leave you alone in the meantime; and they will be understanding when you must occasionally miss one. "Put that in writing..." But, you don't really need a written document to obligate yourself to keep your client informed, to consult with him, and to do his work expeditiously. Self-interest should impose its own burdens, and such efforts can become part of your routine. Similarly, fee arrangements don't require formal contracts. Even Consumer Reports would probably agree that a letter serves just as well and is really more appropriate, although a formal contract document makes sense in some cases. Everybody wins... What CR is suggesting, perhaps without meaning to, is that the lawyer is better off when a client has a clear idea
ahead of time as to what his fee is going to be. He's better off if he explains the computation again when the bill is sent. He's much better off if his client knows all the things being done in his behalf. And he's even better off if his client has some idea of how he does them-with forms, automatic typewriters, etc. The more the lawyer's clients know and understand him, the more they will trust him, as few clients remain for whom their lawyer is an oracle, never to be questioned. This new breed of clienVconsumers may seem harder to represent at first and, quite frankly, eR's almost adversary view of the lawyer-client relationship seems to overstate the case. But, for the most part, the suggestions are simply aimed at greater understanding (and fewer misunderstandings) between clients and lawyers, and relate to standards which we should already be observing. If a client is not willing to pay a certain size fee, the lawyer should know it before he beings the work. And even if lawyers don't like the idea of the interview (although it has always happened and appears to be done increasingly), the lawyer is much better off if he knows in advance what the client expects of him.
LEGAL ECONOMICS Continued Irom page 91
clerk is available to be responsible for the firm's calendar, other refinements may be added to the system, such as the grouping of reminders by practice area or by court. The clerk can also provide a follow-up check on each reminder or check to see that urgent malters are routed to someone else in a lawyer's absence. An unexpected benefit of the notebook or perpetual calendar system is the ability to identify peak work load periods, thereby allowing redistribution of the work if necessary and alerting the lawyer to schedule new work before or after that period, The main purpose of any reminder system is to assist the lawyer in planning his time so that his work load can remain current, so that all deadlines are met and so that clients are served in a timely manner. The lawyer using a reminder system gains peace of mind by gaining control of his work. At the same time he improves the office environment by reducing deadline crises for himself and his staff. Footnote: THE LAWYER'S HANDBOOK, American Bar Association. The Institute of ContinUing Legal Education, Ann Arbor, MI, 1975, C5-39. ~
YOUR LAW DAY EFFORT
"OK, 1'1/ take this model. . .now let's talk about warranties on ft, the service contract and credft terms. .. "
Not so different after all. .. Remember one thing: the new breed of clienVconsumers are the same folks you've been representing all along (and hopefully some folks have previously been too timid or misinformed to find a lawyer). They may simply want to know more about their lawyer (and about lawyering) than they did before. Letting them find out will be good for them, for their lawyer, and for our profeSSion. ~
EDITOR'S NOTE: Wah the January 1978 issue of The Arkansas Lawyer, four (4) "slicks" on the HEAR VEl column were printed tor use by local newspapers in Arkansas. The local fawyer and the local bar association were asked to bring these "slicks" to the attention of their local newspapers. Four (4) new "slicks" on tha HEAR VEl column follow on the next two pages. Chairman W. Christopher Barrier of the Arkansas Bar Foundation's Public Education Committee has done a fine job in this connection. Help The Bar with this pUblic relations effort-get in touch wfth your local newspapers.
April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/93
L
HEAR YEt
HEAR YEt
The Arkansas Bar Fou ndation
The Arkansas Bar Foundation
OKAY ...
""""4"-:"':':' :
::zt::::::::;:::;::}::::::;:::;:::::::::j
DUH PASS WOlDS IS "ROlAND SALES路
ba.rrier Question: AI and Butch planned to hold up the Third National Bank, but a detective overheard their final discussion in a bar and arrested them. They were tried and convicted, without ever starting the hold-up itself. Spike also worked out an elabo路 rate one-man plan for such a hold-up, but it fell into the hands of the police. He was arrested, tried and released. What's the difference?
Question: Stanley Sniffer lived downwind from the Breath 0' Spring Cologne Factory and Rendering Plant. Every afternoon, the vats containing rejected cologne formulas were emptied, engulfing Stanley in an overpowering cloud of aromas. He complained to the Arkansas Department of Pollution Control & Ecology. The factory claimed that the fumes were harmless and weren't that bad, even if a little strong, so they weren't really "pollution." Can Stanley get any relief?
Answer: Answer: AI and Butch were not guilty of attempted robbery, but they were guilty of conspiracy to commit the crime. Spike worked alone, so until he actually began the attempt, he had committed no crime.
Emissions don't have to be harmful as such to constitute pollution. Odors so strong or so noxious as to interfere with normal enjoyment of life are subject to regulation under Arkansas law, and Breath 0' Spring can be compelled to control them.
This feature presents general legal principles and problems and should not be taken as a legal opinion or advice. which can only be given by a lawyer after considering af! relevant facts and circumstances. Additional general information on 8. number of legal subjects is, however, available in pamphlet form without charge. Inquiries in this regard should be addressed to: The Arkansas Bar Association, 400 West Markham. Uttle Rock, Ar路 kansas 72201
This feature presents general legal principles and problems and should not be taken as a legal opinion or advice, which can only be given by a lawyer after considering af! relevant facts and circumstances. Additional general information on a number of legal subjects is, however, available in pamphlet form without charge. Inquiries in this regard should be addressed to: The Arkansas Bar Association, 400 West Markham, Uttle Rock, Ar路 kansas 72201
941Arkansas LawyerlApril 1978
HEAR YEt
HEAR YEt
The Arkansas Bar Foundation
The Arkansas Bar Foundation
Question: Stariley Student, age 21 and a senior at State U., tells the registrar to send his grades to him, not home. Stanley's father commands the registrar to send copies to him. "After all, I'm paying for it," says father. What result? Answer:
The registrar can send the grades to Stanley's parents only with Stanley's consent, as he is an adult. Who pays makes no difference.
This feature presents general legal principles and problems and should not be taken as a legal opinion or advice, which can only be given by a lawyer after considering all relevant facts and circumstances. Additional general information on a number of legal subjects is, however, available in pamphlet form wffhout charge. Inquiries in this regard should be addressed to: The
Arkansas Bar Association, 400 West Markham, Uttle Rock, Arkansas 72201
Queslion: Dan Damp lived at the boltom of a wooded hill side. During hard rains, he would get a few trickles through his yard, but nothing serious. However, Mammoth Developers cleared the hillside for an apartment project. Now when it rains, Dan Damp gets a deluge. Does Dan Damp have any remedy? Answer:
No. Traditionally, property owners may take reasonable steps to fend off surface water from their own land, and increasing the run-off on adjoining owners as a result of land clearing or development is ordinarily not actionable. Dan Damp is up the creek.
This feature presents general legal principles and problems and should not be taken 8S a legal opinion or advice, which can only be given by a lawyer after considering all relevant facts and circumstances. Additional general information on a number of /egal subjects is, however, available in pamphlet form wfthout charge. Inquiries in this regard should be addressed to: The Arkansas Bar Association, 400 West Markham, UN/e Rock, Arkansas 72201
April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/95
Are Vou Willing To Pay The Price?
It could bea bigone!Il's not
uncommon for attorneys to be hit with suits by clients who feel badly served. Whether the grievance is real or imaginary, the jury may be generous ... to the plaintiff. In view of the grmving number of claims and the vast amounts paid in settlement, the time may come when the only practicing attorney will be a well-protected attorney. CNA and the Arkansas Bar Association have worked together to come up with a comprehensive program of professional liability insurance for its members that can help protect both your financial and professional future. First, it helps to minimize the causes ofliability suits through loss prevention programs. Then, it provides financial protection to help guard you against professional and business liability vo'ith a maximum ofSl00,OOO per claim ($300,000 annually) after a deductible. Think you need more? Supplemental protection of$l,OOO,OOO for business and professional coverage is also available. 96/Arkansas Lawyerl April 1978
Ifyou can't afford the price of a lawsuit, it's time to learn more about your Association sponsored Comprehensive Lawyers Professional and Business Liability Plan, including the exclusions, any reductions or limitations and the terms under which the policy may be continued in force. Just send the coupon below to the administrator: Rather, Beyer & Harper.
Please send me information for the Arkansas Bar Asso路 ciation sponsored Lawyers Professional and Business Liability Insurance. Send to:
Arkansas Bar Association Administrator Rather, Beyer & Harper Suite 362, Prospect Building, 1501 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72207. Or caU (501) 664-8791. Name'
_
Firm
_
Address' Cily,
_ _
â&#x20AC;˘
Editor's Comment: AEGIS is e feature of the Arkansas Bar Association's educationaf pr0gram concerning docket controf and other areas of high risk experience in professional liability cases.
SAFEGUARDING YOUR PROFESSIONAL FUTURE
Words spoken may flyaway... the pen leaves its mark! the problem
An insured attorney represented a client in the handling of a tax lien on the title of her home. The attorney called the County Clerk's office and was told that the tax redemption period expired on April 1. However, when he went to the court house on March 26 to make payment, he was informed that the tax redemption period had expired on March 16. Subsequently, the lien holder requested payment of one-half the value of the house to prevent the seeking of a tax deed. The client initiated a claim against the attorney for his failure to act before the redemption period had expired.
the result
The attorney was clearly liable for his failure to act before the redemption period had expired. Settlement was made with the lien holder through the attorney's professional liability insurance carrier.
advice
Check carefully all dates that require action. Do not rely on verbal information. Request and obtain written copies of documentation.
April 19781 Arkansas Lawyer/97
In Jlemortam They that deal truly are His delight. Proverbs 12:22
WILLIAM HENDRICK ARNOLD, JR.
BROOKS BRADLEY
WILLIAM ROY PENIX, JR.
William H. Arnold, Jr., 84, senior member of the Texarkana law firm of Amold, Arnold, Lavender & Rochelle, Ltd., died November 6,1977. He had practiced law in the Texarkana area for six1y-one years with his father, brothers and sons. He won a Cecil Rhodes Scholarship from Arkansas, became a student at University College, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, in the fall of 1914 and there studied jurisprudence. He was a World War I veteran. Mr. Arnold served as Secretary of the Rhodes Scholarship Committee for Arkansas and as Chairman of the Board of Examiners for Admission to the Bar of the Arkansas Supreme Court. He was a member of the Order of the Free and Accepted Masons; the Texarkana Post of the American Legion (first post commander); and American and Arkansas Bar Associations and State Bar of Texas. He was married to Grace Hendricks, who died in 1960. Survivors include two sons, William H. Arnold, III and Thomas S. Arnold; a brother, Richard L. Arnold; two sisters, Mrs. Allan A. McCurdy and Mrs. George Booker Ellis; and four grandchildren.
Brooks Bradley, 78, of Little Rock, died November 19, 1977. He received his law degree from Arkansas Law School at Little Rock in 1930. He was a Mason and a Shriner; a member of the American, Arkansas, and Pulaski County Bar Associations. Mr. Bradley was a Fellow, Patron and one of the main supporters of the Arkansas Bar Foundation. He was a member of the Grace Presbyterian Church. Survivors include his wife, Pauline M, Bradley; a brother, R. L. Bradley; and three sisters, Mrs. Lawrence Witherspoon, Sr., Mrs, Frank Milwee, and Mrs, Frank Lyon, Sr.
Roy Penix, 86, who had practiced law in Jonesboro for more than 60 years, died January 3, 1978, In recent years, he had been a member of the Penix, Penix & Mixon law firm with his son, daughter-in-iaw and grandsonin-law, He received his law degree from University of Arkansas in 1915. He was a state representative and had served Jonesboro as mayor, city attorney, deputy prosecuting attorney and a member for ten years with the school board, Mr. Penix was a World War I veteran and a founder and first commander of the Pickett Post of the American Legion of Jonesboro. He was a member of the Lions Club, Elks Club, Arkansas and Craighead County Bar Associations, the Craighead County Historical Society, the Razorback Lettermen's Club and the First United Methodist Church. He was married to Billie Broadaway, who died in 1968. Survivors include his two daughters, Nancy Christopher and Julianne SprUill; a son, Bill Penix; a brother, Nathan Penix; two sisters, Ellen Penix and Dorothy Norris; nine grandchildren and three great grandchildren.
981 Arkansas Lawyerl April 1978
CARNEAL WARFIELD III
Carneal Warfield III. 74. of Lake Village. died November 26. 1977. He received his law degree in 1930 and had served three terms in the General Assembly. Was a deputy prosecuting attorney and in 1941 was elected Chicot County Judge. Mr. Warfield was a member of the Board of Arkansas School for the Deaf and Blind for 25 years and served as Secretary of the Chicot County Democratic Central Committee. He was a member of the Arkansas Bar Association. Chamber of Commerce. Elks. and a Mason. Survivors include his wife. Anna Ruth Hart Warfield; two daughters. Mrs. Forest Arnold. Jr. and Miss Carnelia Warfield; eight grandchildren; and seventeen great grandchildren.
JUDGE CLAUDE REID GEORGE
C. R. George. 71. of Danville. died December 24. 1977. He received his law degree from the University of Arkansas in 1928. He had served Yell County and the Fifth Judicial District as judge, deputy prosecuting attorney and city attorney. Mr. George was SecretaryTreasurer of the Yell County Democratic Party for over 25 years and was a member of the American, Arkansas and Pope-Yell County Bar Associations. He was a 32 Degree Mason. a Shriner. a member of Danville Lodge #41 and Danville First United Methodist Church. Survivors include his wife. Fanny Blanche Compton George; a son, Dr. Compton George; a daughter. Mrs. Charlie Richison; and five grandchildren.
JOHN LITTLE McCLELLAN ARKANSAS LAWYER UNITED STATES SENATOR 1896-1977
April 19761 Arkansas Lawyer/99
WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSTITUTE MARCH 24, 1978 CAMELOT INN, LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS (Fourth in the series of System-Oriented Seminars following the Corporation System, the Probate System, and the Wills & Trusts System.)
Norwood, the new Arkansas Workers' Compensation System and the Workers' Compensation Institute are "odds-on" favorites!
introducing the new
ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION SYSTEM
OHVAS
(Norwood Phillips and Bud Whetstone who authored the system together with the three commissioners, Allyn C. Tatum, John E. Cowne, Jr., and Jimmie D. Clark, and Woodrow W. Bassett, the Chairman of the Workers' Compensation Committee of the Arkansas Bar Association, will participate in the introduction and explanation of the system.)
ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION 400 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 100/Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
orEZ 路 0 rEZII MARCH
S M T WT F S
MARK YOUR CALENDAR NOW
1 234
5678~11
12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
FOR THE
SPRING LEGAL SEMINAR March 16-17, 1978 Camelot Inn, Little Rock
FIRST ANNUAL LABOR LAW INSTITUTE Union-Management Relations, Arbitration, Wage & Hour Law, OSHA and Discrimination Law
ARKANSAS INSTITUTE OF CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION
April 19781 Arkansas Lawyer/101
-JOB NOTICE-
The Legal Aid Bureau of Central Arkansas is seeking an Executive Director whose responsibilities include administration of over-all Bureau activities, recruiting and employing qualified personnel, securing funds and maintaining fund levels sufficient to meet program needs, maintaining positive relationships with community groups, bar associations and other organizations, coordinating the legal work of the program and other general administrative work. Three years experience as a licensed attorney and interested in the legal problems of poor people are the minimum qualifications. Salary negotiable to $30,000.00 and good fringe benefits. Applications should be received by May 1, 1978. Send to William L. Massey, Acting Director; Legal Aid Bureau of Central Arkansas, 209 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201. An Eaual Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer.
$2,500.00
REWARD For the headnotes of a case that was ordered to be placed in the advanced sheets of the Southern Reporter on a one time basis. The Federal Advance sheets also contains the case or the headnotes. The case was reported in the annual pocket parts of the Florida Digest. The file was ordered to be sealed, fictitious names were to be used. The case involves an order declaring a purported assignment invalid which involved property deeded to a man's grandson to be delivered when the grandson reached a certain age. The case was to be indexed in a special way. The headnotes also appeared in the decenial digest. The Court was requested not to report the case, but ordered it reported on a limited basis because the father had invoked venue. The case could be a Federal District Court case transferred to Florida for trial. The property is probably in Georgia. The Florida Courts, Federal and State have been contacted. The case was probably decided in approximately 1960. This reward payable only one time and to the first person or persons furnishing the information.
CONTACT Ingram P.O. Box 4921 311 West Monroe St. Jacksonville, Florida 32201
1021Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
MEMORIAL GIFTS "It is more blessed to give than to receive." However, a member profits both ways with a memorial gift to the Arkansas Bar Foundation. One's gift is a beautiful way of honoring a former colleague and friend. The gift is noted in the Foundation's Memorial Book and, of course, is tax deductible. The family of the deceased is most appreciative of such remembrance.
. ,
One may record the Memorial Gift in two ways, viz.: (I) The new Memorial Cards have just been furnished each member for direct mailing in one's own business envelope to the family of the deceased. Thus, the family will be immediately notified of the thoughtfulness of the donor. The check is sent to the Foundation at the same time for notation in the Memorial Book. Additional Memorial Cards are available upon request. It is emphasized that these are new-type cards - never before available. (2) Memorial gifts may be sent directly to the Arkansas Bor Foundation, with request that the Foundation send a memorial acknowledgement to the family of the deceased, naming the contributor but not specifying the amount given. The memorial cards are formal and promptly delivered upon receipt of the memorial gift. Either way is most appropriate. One's thoughtfullness in making a memorial gift to the Arkansas Bar Foundation will not only meet with the complete approbation of the members of the family of the deceased, but will at the same time provide the Foundation with funds to carryon the noble purposes for which it has been dedicated.
â&#x20AC;˘
-
1
ADDENDA by C. E. Ransick Editor
ETHICS COMMITIEES ESTABLISHED (The fof/owing article was published in the Amicus Curiae publication aftha Arkansas Judiciaf Department (July 1977 issue) and is reprinted here with permission of Judge C. R. Hula, Executive Secretary of the Arkansas Judiciaf Department.)
Two Acts were passed by the General Assembly this past session regarding judicial ethics and qualifications. Act 418 of 1977 establishes a Judicial Qualifications Commission to investigate violations of laws or canons of ethics and mental or physical disability of Judges of Municipal Courts, Mayors Courts, Police Courts and Justice of the Peace Courts. The Commission's membership will be as follows: one licensed attorney from each congressional district (Arkansas has four districts), to be elected by the licensed attorneys in each district, one qualified voter from each district, to be elected by the members of the State General Assembly representing such district, and one circuit or chancery judge appointed by the Governor to serve as Chairman. Act 418 establishes staggered seven-year terms for members of the Commission, and sets forth general procedures under which the Commission shall operate. Basically, the procedure is as follows: if, after a complaint is filed with the Commission by a private citizen and, following an investigation and private hearing, the Commission determines that probable cause exists fordiscipline or removal of a jUdge, it will file a bill of charges with the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court then hears and determines the bill of charges and, upon a finding by majority of the court that a judge should be disciplined or removed, The Court may discipline, suspend, remove or retire the judge. The Court is also given authority to establish rules for implementing Act 418 of 1977, and the Act is by its provisions cumulative and not in lieu 01 impeachment or other criminal and civil proceedings. Act 853 of 1977 establishes a Judicial Ethics Committee to aid and advise the General Assembly in matters concerning impeachment of members of the judicial branch under Article 15 of the state constitution. The Committee's membership is to consist of five persons, to serve staggered four-year terms, one to be named by the Governor, two to be named by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the two to be named by the Senate Committee on Committees. The Act also provides for employment of a Director to aid the Committee in its activities. While Act 853 ostensibly applies to Municipal Judges as well as to Justices of the Supreme Court and Circuit and Chancery Judges, the Attorney General in Opinion No. 77-133 has advised the Judicial Department that, since the impeachment power of the General Assembly does not extend to municipal judges, the provisions of Act 853 do not apply to Municipal Judges. Thereford, Act 418 covers complaints involving Municipal Judges. Act 853 is qUite lengthy and comprehensive in its provisions, and should be read in its entirety. Copies of the Act may be obtained on request from the Judicial Department. Also, it should be noted that the Attorney General's opinion states that Act 418, insolar as it attempts to apply to Justices of the Peace, is in direct conflict with Article 7, section 27 of the state
constitution. That section provides jurisdiction in circuit to remove township officers from office and, since a justice of the peace is a township officer, the Attorney General is of the opinion that Act 418 would not apply to justices of the peace. Copies of either of these Acts and the Attorney General's opinion are available on request. (Editor's Note: Judge Huie advises that as of February 1, 1978, the Judicial Department is working on the procedures for Act 418; none of the committeepeopfe on either committee has been appointed or elected; and the Arkansas Legislature has appropriated no funds for the committees' use.)
LAW CONFERENCE TO DEVELOP APPROACHES TO INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS Over 6,000 judges, lawyers, law professors, and law students Irom more than 140 nations will convene in August to consider a wide range of current international issues such as deep seabed resources, terrorism, and international environmental laws. The occasion is t~e Eighth World Conference of the World Peace Through LawCenter and its affiliated organizations. Meeting this year in Manila, capital of the Philippines, the Conference promises to be the largest non-governmental law meeting ever. The beginning of the Conference will be marked on August 21, 1977, with the prociamation of World Law Day around the globe. The congress continues until August 26, when Conference Resolutions on the various international issues will be considered by the World Assembly. As in the past seven World Conferences, participants will be confronting the critical problems facing the world community with a view toward putting forth practical solutions based upon the rule 01 law. Panels of the world's leading experts will be addressing such vital subjects as the law 01 the sea, regUlation 01 world trade, mercenaries, terrorism, implementation of internationally protected human rights, and international environmental law. This Conference, more than any other, will recognize the enormous growth of transnational law in the past 25 years as it focuses upon the role of the U.N. specialized agencies and other intemational organizations in the world community, and upon their law-making activities. The growing cooperation among members of the world's legal community will also be reflected in the Conference Program as jUdges, lawyers, law professors, and law students exchange ideas on the extension of legal services to the poor, legal education, congestion of national courts, increasing use of the World Court, taxation and regUlation of multinational corporations. Other subjects are also under consideration and the agenda will only reach its final form after suggestions are received lrom the world legal community. Following the practice established in 1971 at the Fifth World Conference in Belgrade, a Demonstration Trial will be held. Dealcontinued on page 104 April 1978/Arkansas Lawyer/103
ANNUAL MEETING
ADDENDA continued from page 103 ing with the explosive issue of the unilateral exploitation of deep seabed resources pending the conclusion or entry in force of a law of the sea treaty, the Manila Trial promises to be one of the highlights of the Conference. Because the World Conference has signfficant human and professional objectives, its agenda has been constructed to meet the basic criteria of the Federal Tax authorities for professional meetings.
INSURANCE ADMINISTRATOR Rather, Beyer and Harper, the Association's Group Insurance Administrator, has moved to Su~e 362, Prospect Building, 1501 N. University, Uttle Rock, Arkansas 72207, w~h new office phone number (501) 664-8791.
DISCIPLINARY ENFORCEMENT The Professional Ethics and Grievances Committee of the Arkansas Bar AssociatIOn has been requested by Mr. Taylor Roberts, Exective Director of the Supreme Court Professional Conduct Committee to prepare and furnish the Court Committee with a list of lawyers from around the State who would be willing to be called upon by the Court's Committee from time to time when needed to represent the Committee in Circuit or Chancery Court to file and try suspension and disbarment proceedings. About five years ago, the Chairman of the Association's Committee solicited the committee to obtain a list of lawyers, and was partially successful. In a number of areas, the committee did secure the names of five or six lawyers who were willing to serve. However, Mr. Roberts advises that over the years he has called upon most of these lawyers at least once. Additionally, some of the lawyers who volunteered have relocated or gone out of the private practice of law. Mr. Roberts advises that the Supreme Court Committee has requested that another effort be made to secure at least two lawyers in every County seat who would be willing to be called upon to serve the Committee as counsel. For your information, the Supreme Court Committee is authorized to pay attomey fees for such representation under guidelines from the Supreme Court, w~h compensation being based on agreements with the Committee taking Into account the
fact that such representation is at least, in part, a public service by attorneys. The mere fact that the lawyer consents to have his (or her) name included does not mean that the lawyer may be called upon or, if called upon, is committed to the handling of any particUlar suspension or disbarment proceeding. It is, of course, understood that if contracted by the Committee a lawyer may decline to accept any assignment for reasons of conflict of interest, close personal contacts with accused, and other valid reasons. As a general rule, a lawyer who accepts such an assignment will be furnished a transcript of the proceedings before the Committee upon which the Committee reached its determination. These transcripts have been held to be admissible in evidence in Circuit and Chancery Court. Normally, the facts are well developed and the scope of the service would consist of a review olthe transcript, the dralting of a complaint, and a trial of the proceeding before the court. Any Association member, who wishes to volunteer in this connection, should contact: Chairman E. B. Dillon, Jr. Professional Ethics and Grievances Committee Arkansas Bar Association 1550 Tower Building Utile Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 375-9151 104/Arkansas Lawyer/April 1978
~足
We are greatly impressed with the quality of the program for the BOth Annual Meeting, June 7-10,1978, at the Arlington Hotel, Hot Springs, Arkansas. (1) We know of no other Bar program w~h nine (9) of the top lawyers and legal authorities. The printed program will be in the mails on about April 15th. We have actually changed the printed program format in order to bring to our members a complete review olthe nine. Take time to check the program carefully. Plan to reg ister early. (2) The Annual Meeting program is the greatest value in the Country-not only from the professional and social vantage points-but also from the cost. Members will pay only $75 for the program, the "Gridiron", the Annual Banquet, Ihe Luncheon, the Dance, the Receptions, the Coffee Breaks, the Continental Breakfast, and the various meetings. A similar "Products Uability" program, without all the niceties, is charging $225.00, plus $25 for spouse's registration. We added "similar" because that program cannot compare to the Annual Meeting. (3) Attendees should not overlook the optional programs on Thursday and Friday afternoons. These Video and Panel presentations will include three (3) simultaneous programs on Criminal Law, Business Law, and Personal Injury. Chairman Henry Woods personally selected the Video from the Hastings - ATL National College of Trial Advocacy latest tapes. The Association's Young Lawyers section, with Chairman J. Steve Clark and Co-Chairman Rick Beard, is handling these optional programs. (4) The "Gridiron" requires no introduction. Whether "Bar Wars" or other, President Bill Terry of the Pulaski County Bar Association and Impresario Bill Blair promise a great production and performance. Our only concern is whether there will be sufficient seating for the expected crowd. (5) We are going to have "Blue Grass" as the Bar B-O, Majestic Lodge, Lake Hamilton to close out the social part of the "happening". We are keeping the band leader "under cover" until the Bar B-Q. (6) The Ladies' Program, the Sports Tournaments, and the Young People's Program will be an added dimension to the main SesSK>nS.
(7) We expect to have some 50 separate group meetings. These are related to the future development of the Arkansas Bar Association. Included, of course, is the Annual Meeting of the Association's House of Delegates. These meetings are open to the membership. Plan to attend those of your interest and choice. (8) The Arlington Hotel-to be fully appreciated-must be compared to the hotels used by other Bar Associations for their meetings. Such comparisons favor the Arlington, not only for courtesy, service, facility and convenience, but also costwise. $50 to $90 per day is now the common rate for convention hotels. And most think that they are doing you a favor. (9) Again, remember that "the best of the best are coming to Arkansas".
f.......
1
ATTORNEY'S ECONOMIC CONSULTANTS "A Division of Education and
Fred Myers Company Myers Investigation Agency
Research Associates, Inc." SERVING THE LEGAL PROFESSION WITH EXPERTISE IN THE FOLLOWING AFjE~S: Workmen's Compensation (Lump-Sum Settlement Calcula. tions) Evaluation of Lost Earnings Capacity from Partial or Total Permanent Disability or Wrongful Death Economic Valuation of Pecuniary Damages in Business Tort. Contract and Anti-Trust Cases Chapter 10 & 11 Bankruptcy Reorganization Plans Valuation of Minority Stock HOldings in Estate Settlements Valuation of Future Earnings Capacity for Stock Issuance Economic Anal~sis for Charters or Branch Applications for Financial Institutions
QUALIFIED AS EXPERT WITNESS IN ARKANSAS AND ALL OTHER JURISDICTIONS 1209 Rebsamen Park Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 (501) 661-{)161
PROFESSIONAL INVESTIGATORS Fred Myers, Owner and Manager 14 Years Private Investigation Experience Former Police Officer Member, World Association of Detectives Former President, Arkansas Private Investigators Association • Gtlltrll Inftslll.tloll Smite • Emplo,.. TlMft In"slil.tion • "inlftl '.rsons l"ft'lil.IIOII • CllIIslllI.tlon Servic. • I,f,rllttes Furnished
Call ...
DAY OR NIGHT
372·1809
TOWER BUILDING/UTILE ROCK
"-EDGE WI ~edl' To Itbillt.in Hi.h ',olusion.1 Studlrds - M«.lty 1M [tll/· aB, - For TIM 'ClOd Of Our St.t., Our CGUnlry Inc! Our Cn.nls.
Service Directory MISSING PARAGON Printing & Stationery Company has been printing BRIEFS for over 35 years. May we be of service to you? 311 East Capitol 375-1281 Linle Rock
**** BEACH ABSTRACT. GUARANTY COMPANY REPRESENTING:
COMMERCIAL STANDARD TITLE INS. CO. ABSTRACTS-ESCROWS--TITLE INSURANCE
AND UNKNOWN HEIRS LOCATED NO EXPENSE TO THE ESTATE
WOR lO-WI DE SERViCE FOR
COURTS - LAWYERS - TRUST OFFICERS ADMINISTRATORS - EXECUTORS
213 W. 2nd St - Little Rock. AM<. - FA 6-3301
J. George Owen
****
Sales Representative Shepard's Citations, Inc. 405 Andover Lane Ballwin, MO 63011 Telephone 314/227-5514
-A-me,.ican -A-,.chil/e:J -A-:J:Jocialion INTERNATIONAL PROBATE RESEARCH 449 WASHINGTON BUILDING WASHINGTON. D. C.