Bar Briefs
Bar Briefs
DBA Board of Trustees
2024-2025
Hon. MicHael J. newMan
President
JaMie H. Greer
First Vice President
Jeff T. cox
Second Vice President
Joanna l. Garcia
Secretary
VicToria l. nilles
Treasurer
Jennifer l. BroGan
Member–at–Large
ToBy K. Henderson
Member–at–Large
erin B. Moore
Member–at–Large
cHrisTopHer M. wolcoTT
Member–at–Large
anne p. KeeTon
Immediate Past President
JoHn M. ruffolo, ex officio
Bar Counsel
Jennifer oTcHy, ex officio Chief Executive Officer
BAR BRIEFS is published by the Dayton Bar Association, 109 N. Main St., Ste 600, Dayton, OH 45402–1129, as its official publication for all members. Comments about this publication and editorial material can be directed to the DBA office. The DAYTON BAR BRIEFS is published September/October through May/June.
Paid subscription: $30 / year
Library of Congress ISSN #0415–0945
Jennifer Otchy
Chief Executive Officer
Shayla M. Eggleton
Director, Communications & Membership
Phone: 937.222.7902
www.daybar.org
The contents expressed in the publication of DAYTON BAR BRIEFS do not reflect the official position of the DBA.
Columns:
It's a Strange New World, But Still the Same
By Jamie H. Greer Esq., 1st Vice President | Bieser Greer & Landis LLP
We Need a New Courthouse! By The Honorable Mary L. Wiseman | Montgomery County Common Pleas Court
DESK
Charles "Chuck" Geidner Esq. Flanagan Lieberman & Rambo By Professor Ericka C. Curran | UDSL "Do I Have
Submitting
Managing Large Property
By Sean P. McCormick Esq. & Kelsey J. Mincheff Esq. | Thompson Hine LLP
Top 10 Technology Issues to Watch for in 2025 By Zachary S. Heck Esq. | Taft Law When Irregularity is a Necessity
By Christopher M. Wolcott, Esq. | Taft Law
Anthony C. Satariano Esq. Ferguson Legal Group, Ltd By John "JP" Jarecki, Esq. | Taft Law Continuing the Series:
By Nicholas D. Seger Esq., Assoc Prof of Academic Success | UDSL Professionalism in the Law: Early Career and Beyond By Katherine Holman, Esq. | WilmerHale
Braver Angels: Bridging the Political Divide By Kelly Zimmerman, Braver Angels Ohio State Coordinator
FARUKI+ is a premier business litigation firm with offices in Dayton and Cincinnati.The firm’s national practice handles complex commercial disputes of all types, including class actions; antitrust; securities; unfair competition (trade secrets and covenants not to compete); employment; advertising, media and communications; attorney malpractice; data privacy and security; intellectual property and product liability. While its trial practice is national, the firm has always been, and continues to be, committed to the local legal community.
Thompson Hine LLP, a full-service business law firm with approximately 400 lawyers in 7 offices, was ranked number 1 in the category “Most innovative North American law firms: New working models” by The Financial Times. For 5 straight years, Thompson Hine has distinguished itself in all areas of Service Delivery Innovation in the BTI Brand Elite, where it has been recognized as one of the top 4 firms for “Value for the Dollar” and “Commitment to Help” and among the top 5 firms “making changes to improve the client experience.” The firm’s commitment to innovation is embodied in Thompson Hine SmartPaTH® – a smarter way to work – predictable, efficient and aligned with client goals.
It's a Strange New World, But Still the Same
WhenI started working at the firm as a law student in 1988, the fax machine had just begun to be utilized by law firms. It felt revolutionary at the time. Somehow, a letter could go into a machine at one location and miraculously show up in a curled-up piece of rice paper in another office. The office practice at that time was to immediately copy anything that came out of the fax machine as the ink on the rice paper would usually fade away in a day or so. It was the first time in history that a lawyer could expect an answer to his or her letter the same day it was sent.
When I was a kid, my brother, sister, and I would often stop by the office while we were touring around town having our Sunday Funday with Dad. I remember what a big deal it was when the firm got its first copying machine. As kids, we just thought it was cool to copy pictures of our hands, face, etc. To the lawyers and staff at Bieser, Greer & Landis, it had to also have seemed revolutionary. Before then, the only way to copy a letter was to put carbon paper behind the original in a typewriter. Dad has always joked that the secretaries back then were extremely strong as they had to type hard enough to get through multiple layers of carbon paper so the appropriate representatives could get copied on a letter or document.
When you think about it, developments like the typewriter and carbon paper must have also seemed revolutionary at the time they were introduced into the practice of law. Going back to the 19th century, the lawyer’s main tool for written communication was a pen and ink well. Needless to say, the handwriting back in those days was much better than what we see today.
Each of these moments in time must have seemed like the practice of law was entering into a “Different World.” I am writing this article just after attending the DBA lunch honoring those who have practiced for 50 years. I found it interesting hearing from these seasoned lawyers as to what the practice was like when they began back in 1974. In addition, I have had the blessing of practicing with my Dad, David Greer, for the last 34 years and have heard his perspective many times as to what the practice was like when he started practicing 62 years ago in 1962.
For all these changes, which were revolutionary, from well before I set foot on this Earth to my admission in 1990 when the fax machine was a buzz, the one constant I have always heard is that the Dayton Legal Community was different than the others. It was collegial, professional and the Courts were well-run. If you were lucky enough to be a lawyer in this community, you were, indeed, blessed.
A week after authoring this article, the lawyers in my firm will attend the DBA New Admittee Reception to celebrate our newest attorneys, who just passed the bar. This is a great event that celebrates all our new admittees and is generally well-attended. As I reflect on the beginning of my journey as a lawyer and those I have heard and learned from throughout the years, the one thing that has been constant is the Dayton Legal Community. My perspective is that where we practice has remained the same due to many different factors. The first is the mentorship of the lawyers and judges that have come before us. As a community, we are civil, professional and work together well. In my experience, that’s much more than most legal communities can say. Another factor is social. We actually like each other and like spending time with one another. Our interactions make us proud to be lawyers and fortunate to work in such
By Jamie H. Greer Esq. Bieser Greer & Landis LLP
First Vice President jhg@biesergreer.com
a great community. You do not need to go far to come to the conclusion that both our county and Dayton Federal Court are the best around. Thanks to culture set by legends such as Judge Carl Kessler and Judge Walter Rice, our courts are the envy of every other community in the state. Finally, it is the DBA that is the glue that holds this all together to help both celebrate and preserve the community and culture that has evolved through the decades.
I represent the third generation to practice at my firm, the fourth generation to practice in Dayton and the seventh generation to practice since my great, great, great grandfather began practicing in 1823. During my career, I have had the privilege of being surrounded by mentors such as Howard Krisher, Mike Krumholtz, Dave Williamson, John Haviland and, of course, my father. Those relationships along with my relationship with many other judges and lawyers have reinforced in both my mind and heart what a great place this is to practice law.
Since entering the practice of law at the time of the fax machine revolution described above, there have been many other significant technology changes and advancements during my practice that have made me pause to think our legal world is changing. These things include the following:
• The use of computers in the practice of law from research, to billing, to administration.
• The changes in legal advertising.
• The development and evolution of private mediation and arbitration.
• The use of cell phones.
• The development of the internet.
• The use of websites for law firms.
• The use of email.
• The end of paper discovery and development of electronic discovery.
• The use of electronic filing.
• Tort reform.
• The use and capability of I-phones.
• Virtual meetings and depositions.
For almost all of these developments, I ask myself, “How am I going to deal with this? Is it going to change everything?” The answer has been reassuring and constant in each and every case. Although things seemed strange and new as the practice acclimated itself to these changes, for the most part, the practice has stayed the same. The reason for this is that we all go through these changes together as a legal community. We mentor and learn from each other, and work through things as professionals should. It’s our legal community that remains the same and it’s our culture that always perseveres.
Sounds like the newest big change that will affect us all is artificial intelligence (“AI”). At this point, I frankly do not know much about AI, but it sounds both strange and scary to me. It’s pretty easy to go down the slippery slope of worries from plagiarism, to billing fraud, to the deterioration of good legal writing. However, I am comforted by everything else our legal community has been through together and I know that no matter how much things change, in the end, they will remain the same.
Promoting Civics Education:
Judge Newman's Continued Commitment to Engaging the Public
As part of Judge Newman's ongoing mission to promote civics education, he was honored to attend the opening ceremony of the “Justice & Democracy Center” at the Federal Courthouse in St. Paul, Minnesota. This new initiative aims to engage the public in understanding the justice system, with a similar center in development at the neighboring Minneapolis federal courthouse. Justice Sotomayor attended the event, offering remarks and leading a private tour for local intermediate and high school students, where she answered their questions about the federal courts and her role as a Supreme Court Justice. "It was a truly moving experience, and I am grateful to have been part of it."
Judge Newman also spoke at the national “Defending the Judiciary Conference” at Duke Law School in early November, where he addressed the importance of civics education. Pictured with several distinguished judicial colleagues, including Judge Paul Grimm (ret.), Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute;
Judge Beth Bloom, co-creator of the "Civil Discourse & Difficult Decisions" civics program; Judge Karoline Mehalchick, president-elect of the Federal Bar Association; and Judge Esther Salas.
Judge Newman outside the federal courthouse in St. Paul, Minnesota on Oct. 21st.
“Defending the Judiciary Conference”at Duke Law School in early November.
Judge Newman and Chief Justice Sutton at the Bench Bar Conference: The Fabric of Our Legal Community on Nov. 8th
“Justice & Democracy Center” exhibits at the Federal Courthouse in St. Paul, Minnesota.
CIVICS & CIVILITY
Charles F. Geidner
Flanagan, Lieberman & Rambo
Ihad the privilege of speaking with Charles “Chuck” Geidner for this month's Barrister of the Month feature. Mr. Geidner’s modesty was immediately apparent as he took my call and seemed surprised at the recognition and immediately insisted I call him “Chuck”. The DBA recently celebrated Chuck for his over 50 years of practice in the Dayton community. Chuck worked with the Ohio AG’s office as a student and transitioned to a Special Counsel role in the Dayton area after law school. He was an assistant prosecutor for 16 years and has extensive experience in probate, domestic relations, civil litigation, business law, and collections. Chuck represents his clients with dedication, compassion, knowledge, and expertise. He earned his law degree at Ohio State University and has worked with prestigious firms such as Flanagan, Lieberman, Hoffman & Swaim, Withrow Hutton & Geidner, and Lutz Geidner and Hahn. He is currently at Flanagan Lieberman and Rambo.
Chuck has enjoyed mentoring and supporting new attorneys. Brent Rambo has worked with Chuck since January of 2004, just two months after he passed the bar exam. Brent had this to say about Chuck:
“He took me under his wing and has been a mentor, if not a father figure since. He is intelligent and kind and remains, even at this point in his career, dedicated to the needs of our clients. He taught me that the client is more important than the bottom line and that every case needs to be treated as the most important, regardless of how much money it will cost us. He is humble and would probably rather not be in the spotlight, although he is definitely worthy of it.”
Chuck is an active member of the Dayton Bar Association and the Ohio State Bar Association. Still, he now considers himself a bit of a snowbird with a second home in Sarasota, Florida. Chuck and his wife Faye, of 42 years, enjoy traveling and spending time with their
seven grandchildren ( all in the Dayton area). They enjoy taking River Cruises and have taken many. A particular favorite was a cruise down the Danube River, as he enjoyed learning about the area's rich history. Chuck also enjoys golfing and attending UD Flyer’s games; in fact, he was getting ready to head to one the evening of our call. (He enjoyed a great match as UD upset Marquette that evening with a 71-63 win! Go Flyers!)
Chuck and his wife had a boat for 20 years and enjoyed boating on Lake Erie. He also keeps himself busy serving on the board of two homeowners associations with his home in Florida and the Dayton area. He has also been a member of the Sycamore Country Club since 1984 and has served on its board and as board president.
Chuck’s commitment to service extends beyond the courtroom and into his local community. He is deeply involved in charitable organizations, lending both his time and expertise to causes that make a real impact. Whether volunteering for local legal clinics or assisting with fundraising efforts for regional nonprofits, Chuck’s generosity reflects his dedication to giving back. His belief in the power of community is also evident in his involvement with local youth sports programs, where he has coached and mentored young athletes over the years. This sense of responsibility to the next generation—whether in the legal field, in sports, or in daily life—has shaped Chuck into not only a respected lawyer but a cherished mentor and friend to many.
It was an honor speaking with Chuck and learning about his many contributions to the community. I am grateful that he continues to split his time as a "snowbird" between Dayton and Florida, enriching both places with his presence.
By Professor Ericka Curran UDSL ecurran1@udayton.edu
DBA Event Recap
November 8: 32nd Annual Bench Bar Conference Co-Chairs, Hon. Helen Wallace, Kristine Comunale, DBA CEO Jennifer Otchy & DBA Pres. Judge Newman.
October 30: 50 Year HonoreeLuncheon
Honorees in attendance: Charlie Faruki, Ed Kress, Joeseph Moore, Dwight Brannon, Alan Schaeffer & Peter Stephan.
December 10: Holiday Luncheon
25 Year Honorees in attendance; Attorney Blue Sullivan receives GDVLP Volunteer of the Year Award; Jimmy Leach Jazz Trio plays.
December 5: Champagne Toast New Admittee Reception DBA 1st VP, Jamie Greer leads toast for over 20+ attorneys newly admitted to the bar.
“Do I Have Insurance For This?”
By Co-Chairs: Sean P. McCormick Esq.
Thompson Hine LLP
Tips for Submitting and Managing Large Property Claims
Florida insurers have reported nearly $5.2 billion in payouts related to Hurricanes Helene and Milton, according to data from the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation. The two hurricanes resulted in 436,167 claims, of which 27.7% were closed without payment. This raises the question of what steps a business should take in making an insurance claim after sustaining losses from a natural disaster or similar event.
The first step after a property loss is to understand what coverage may be available to you. This article will focus on first-party commercial property insurance. However, every policy is different, and there may be other liability or specialty coverages available for certain losses. Understanding the coverage limits, triggers for coverage, and exclusions applicable to your policy will assist you in making a claim to your carrier.
At a threshold level, commercial property insurance covers direct physical loss or damage to covered buildings and personal property, subject to policy exclusions. For example, most standard form property insurance policies do not
cover loss or damage caused by or resulting from flooding. In addition to coverage for physical damage to property, the next most common type of coverage triggered by a loss is business income and extra expense. While business income is relatively self-explanatory and encompasses income lost due to the impairment of the insured’s operations, extra expense can be more amorphous. For example, in evaluating your claim, consider potential costs for cleaning services, additional labor, rental equipment, temporary transportation or freight charges, and any other necessary expenses incurred in an attempt to continue operations over and above the expenses normally incurred.
Assuming the scope of the loss exceeds the deductible or self-insured retention under your policy, the second step is to provide notice to the insurer that you are making a claim. Typically, the claim notice requirements will be found in the General Conditions portion of the policy, and will set out the specific requirements for what that communication should include and where and to whom it should be sent. In putting together the notice of claim, it is important to
Kelsey J. Mincheff Esq. Thompson Hine LLP
outline the relevant facts and tie them to specific policy language providing coverage. The insured should include in the notice the description of the property involved, the specific time and place of the loss, names and addresses of available witnesses, and if there has been any loss or damage that may trigger business income or extra expense insurance.
Each policy differs, but an insured should pay special attention to the timing requirements for submitting a claim and be sure to fulfill all notice requirements set forth in the policy. This is even more critical in the context of property damage the nature of which could change rapidly. In such a circumstance, an insured will want to notify the carrier immediately so that the insurer has an opportunity to investigate the loss as soon after the event as possible. Any late notice could result in the insurer claiming it suffered prejudice and rejecting all or portions of the claim.
If you are not sure whether the claim is covered, then as a general matter, it is always best to err on the side of submitting the claim.
continued on page 9
You will never receive coverage for a claim that is not made, and with the severity of the impact from storms like Hurricane Milton and Hurricane Helene, it is likely the market at large will already be affected by premium increases regardless of whether a claim is submitted.
Following submission of the claim, the insured next should take all measures to protect the covered property from further loss or damage and keep a record of all expenses incurred in protecting such property. In addition, if you are trying to recover losses for business interruption or extra expense, you will need to gather documentation of the insured’s financial status prior to the loss as well as any evidence of lost income post-dating the loss. It is important to note that if the insured is reasonably able to continue business operations following the loss, it must do so as quickly as possible. Most commercial property policies will require the submission of a sworn proof of loss within 90 days of the date of loss.
That the insured has a duty to cooperate with the insurer throughout the entirety of the claims process. This may include, but is not limited to, responding to requests for inventories of damaged property, permitting the insurer to inspect damaged property, allowing the insurer to examine the insured’s books and records, and, in some instances, allowing the insurer to examine a representative of the insured under oath.
Following its receipt of the claim and having conducted its investigation, the carrier is required to provide a written response either accepting coverage for the claim, rejecting coverage for the claim, or accepting coverage for all or part of the claim subject to a reservation of rights. Commonly known as a “Reservation of Rights” or “ROR” letter, this communication should highlight any exclusions the insurer intends to rely on and should provide the insured with an idea of what parts of the claim may present an issue.
Reservation of rights letters are oftentimes very difficult for a layperson to accurately interpret. If the insured has any question about the insurer’s
coverage position, then he or she should consult an experienced insurance coverage attorney. It can be the case that having independent coverage counsel review your policy and the insurer’s reservation of rights may give the insured an opportunity to push back on the carrier’s position, resulting in additional coverage. For example, the vast majority of property policies will include policy endorsements, which alter the scope of coverage provided. It is not uncommon for insurers to either misinterpret, miss, or ignore the import of these endorsements in analyzing the insured’s claim.
As is true with any contract, the specific terms of each insurance policy vary and must be analyzed in light of the specific facts underlying each loss. Especially when dealing with a large casualty event, best practice is to engage experienced coverage counsel as soon as you are aware a claim is likely to be made to assist in the claims process as well as to advocate on your behalf if necessary.
We’re sharp, but we never cut corners.
Your success is uniquely yours. We will work with you to understand the challenges and endeavors to strengthen your financial future. That’s why you deserve better than a pre-cut, one-size-fits-all wealth plan. Our team works to understand you and your goals to craft a strategy that fits your priorities and preferences to a tee. The LCNB Wealth team is here to help you plan for the future, manage your portfolio, and assist with trust and estate services. OUR TEAM CONSIDERS YOUR STRATEGY FROM EVERY ANGLE
Thank you to the following Summer 2024 / December 2025 DBA CLE & Event Speakers!
Verjine Adanalian
Second Chance Project of OH
Mary Amos Augsburger
OSBA Chief Executive Officer
Candace Anderson
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
Cassandra Andres-Rice
Foos & Lentz
Jocelyn Armstrong
OSBA Director of Inclusion
Harry Beyoglides
DBLHCK Law Office
Judge David Brannon
Montgomery County Probate Ct
Jennifer Brogan
Bieser Greer & Landis
Jennifer Brumby
Taft Stettinius & Hollister
Judge Julie Bruns
Montgomery County Juvenile Ct
Christopher Conard
Coolidge Wall
Kaitlyn Cooper Meeks
Sebaly Shilltio + Dyer
Kristine Comunale
Montgomery Cty Public Defender's Ofc
Jeffrey T. Cox
Faruki PLL
Michelle Daniel
The Lifestyle Technique
Judge Steven Dankof
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
Catherine Dempsey
Legal Aid of Western OH
Judge Elizabeth Ellis
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
Judge Christopher Epley
Second Dist Ct of Appeals
Emily Feaver
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
Chief Magistrate
Gina A. Feller
Montgomery County Juvenile Ct
Amy Ferguson
Michael's House
Benjamin Flowers
Ashbrook Byrne Kresege
Nathaniel Fouch
Sebaly Shillito + Dyer
Magistrate Judge Caroline Gentry
U.S. Dist Ct, Southern Dist of OH
Alysia Goss
Montgomery County Public Defender's Office
Susan Gottschalk
Artemis Center
Nick Gounaris
Gounaris Abboud, LPA
Jessica Greene
Assistant City Manager, Oxford
Dave Greer
Bieser Greer & Landis
Jamie Greer
Bieser Greer & Landis
Summer Hawks
GDVLP
Jeff Hazlett
Mediator/Arbitrator
Zachary Heck
Taft Stettinius & Hollister
Sarah Hippensteel Hall, Ph.D
Miami Conservancy Dist
Judge Angelina Jackson
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
John "JP" Jarecki
Taft Stettinius & Hollister
Matthew Jenkins
Jacox, Meckstroth & Jenkins
Deztany Johnson
Pickrel, Schaeffer & Ebeling
Anne Keeton
Bruns, Connell, Vollmar, and Armstrong
Jane Keiffer
Artemis Center
Magistrate Kathleen Lenski
Montgomery County Juvenile Ct
Gary Leppla
Leppla Associates
Kyle Lennen
Lennen Law LLC
Judge Ronald Lewis
Second Dist Ct of Appeals
John Lintz
Second Dist Ct of Appeals
Judge James F. Long
Kettering Municipal Ct
Kystle Marko
Krystle Marko Law
Magistrate Brandon McClain
Dayton Municipal Ct
Marcella McHenry
Pickrel Schaeffer & Ebeling Co., LPA
Andrew Meier
Smith, Meier & Webb
Judge Kimberly Melnick
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
Judge Michael Merz
U.S. Dist Ct, Southern Dist of OH
Wayne Miller
Legal Investigation Services
Judge Mary Montgomery
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
Erin Moore
Green & Green
Ricky Murray
Montgomery County Prosecutor's Office
Judge Michael Newman
U.S. Dist Ct, Southern Dist of OH
Sarvani Nicolosi
Legal Aid of Western OH
Judge Timothy O'Connell
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
David Pierce
Coolidge Wall
John Pinard
Pinard and Bryan Law Office
Judge Gerald Parker
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
Terry Posey
Porter Wright Morris & Arthur
William Price
Elk & Elk
Amanda Resler
OHRise
Kristina Rainer
Roberson Law
Judge Walter Rice
U.S. Dist Ct, Southern Dist of OH
Paul Roderer
Roderer Law Office
Alessandra Rose
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
John Ruffolo
Ruffolo Stone & Stone
Judge Peter Silvain
U.S. Dist Ct, Southern Dist of OH
Jill Sink
Beavercreek Township
Louis Sitler
Wood, Herron & Evans
Judge Susan Solle
Montgomery County Common Pleas Ct
Aaron Sorrell
Assistant City Manager, Huber Heights
Eli Sperry
Flanagan Lieberman & Rambo
Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton
United States Ct of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Judge Michael L. Tucker
Second Dist Ct of Appeals
Mark Tuss
Popp & Tuss
Anthony VanNoy
The VanNoy Fim
Judge Helen Wallace
Montgomery County Juvenile Ct
Madeline Weiler
UD Center for Leadership
Judge Jeffrey Welbaum
Second Dist Ct of Appeals
Chief Magistrate Lisa Wiseman
Montgomery County Probate Ct
Judge Timothy D. Wood
Montgomery County Domestic Relations Ct
Sarah Worley
Dungan & LeFevre
Magistrate Ebony Wreh
Dayton Municipal Ct
Top 10 Technology Issues to Watch for in
By Zachary S. Heck, Esq. Taft Law ZHeck@taftlaw.com
Hard to believe, but 2025 is here. And what goes best with a new year? A countdown list!
I spoke at the DBA’s Corporate Counsel Section meeting on the topic of the Top 10 legal technology issues that in-house counsel should have on its radar for 2025.
This list is comprised of issues I see in my practice, read about in the news, and emphasize at conferences and symposiums I have attended. Without further ado, here are the top ten issues that are likely to have an impact over the coming year.
10: Increase in Data Processing Agreements.
To begin with, expect to see an increase in the number of data processing agreements or information sharing agreements that come across your desk. This uptick will likely be driven by two factors. First, the European Union is poised to update its Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) during the second quarter of 2025. These SCCs form a standardized agreement issued by the European Commission and are a heavily relied-on tool when transferring personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) to countries the Commission determines lack adequate data protection laws, such as the United States. These SCCs are often a vehicle to renegotiate Master Service Agreements and Saas Agreements – which means that you will likely see more of them in 2025. Second, by January of 2025, at least 14 states will have effective data privacy laws regulating how data may be processed and by whom. These states include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. This increase in legislation will no doubt lead more companies to get serious about revising or instituting data processing agreements to address domestic transfers of information.
9: Changes in Text Message Marketing.
Effective January 27, 2025, the FCC will use the “lead generator loophole.” Essentially, businesses seeking to market through automated text messages must obtain consent from the consumer for one identified seller at a time and ensure its marketing messages to that consumer are “logically and topically related” to that platform where the consent was obtained. For businesses engaged in this marketing practice, it will be crucial to abide by the FCC’s latest restrictions in this space.
8: Work from Home/Hybrid.
In 2024, approximately 22 million workers in the United States work from home full-time. By 2025, this number is expected to increase to 32.6 million. An additional 53% of workers in the United States have reported working in a hybrid manner, splitting time between the office and working remotely. These numbers make one thing clear: remote work isn’t going away, even as we move into the post-COVID era. Issues arise from this work arrangement, however. For example, the real or perceived decrease in productivity associated with employees who work from home has led some employers to turn to “bossware” – software programs designed to track employee output and focus. Before instituting such software, however, employers should ensure that they are not inadvertently violating any of their state’s wiretap laws or other restrictions on digital surveillance. The continued prevalence of employees being permitted to work from home will give rise to other issues, too, such as virtual harassment and bullying, and the need to provide employees with home-office setups and to reimburse them for the same. Additionally, employers should be aware of the unique information security challenges that arise from a remote or hybrid work environment.
7: Regulatory Technology.
Moving into 2025, there is likely to be a sharp increase in the offerings of RegTech solutions for in-house counsel. “RegTech” – short for “Regulatory Technology” – refers to software that is utilized to improve the way businesses manage regulatory compliance. Although this technology can often make life easier for in-house counsel, it is not without its pitfalls. For example, the integration of these technologies with existing systems often presents challenges with compatibility and security. Additionally, reliance upon RegTech for audit and recordkeeping requirements presents both value and risk. Before acquiring new continued on page 13
RegTech solutions, it will be crucial for in-house counsel to review and negotiate the warranty and indemnification provisions of agreements in this space very carefully.
6: Cookies and Pixel Tracking Technology.
Businesses utilizing “cookies” and similar online tracking technologies should be aware of new regulations in this space that will have an outsized impact in 2025. Website tracking tools are facing scrutiny at the state and federal levels. At the state level, many jurisdictions, such as Washington, Connecticut, Maryland, and Nevada, are enacting consumer health data laws that require explicit disclosure of these technologies. Additionally, the Federal Trade Commission issued a circular on website tracking disclosures, reminding of the privacy and security risks related to the use of online tracking technologies integrated into their websites. To make this landscape even riskier for businesses, there has been an increase in Plaintiff’s Bar activity with respect to pursuing claims under wire-tapping statutes, profiting off of businesses for non-compliance.
5: ACH/Wire Fraud.
Unfortunately, certain perennial risks are likely to continue to rear their heads as we move into 2025. One of these evergreen issues is wire fraud. In 2023 alone, business losses due to fraud topped a whopping $10 billion, up 14% over 2022. This increase is alarming but unsurprising, considering the increased sophistication of threat actors. Additionally, instances are often not detected for 90-120 days, when businesses begin taking a close look at their aged A/R. But by then, it is often too late to recover funds that were diverted to threat actors. As a result, in-house counsel should make sure that their organizations have strong training programs and policies in place to make employees aware of these threats. Employees should never authorize wire instruction changes through email alone and should scrutinize any changes in banking information.
4: Biometric Fraud.
Biometric technologies – security systems relying on biological markers such as fingerprints, facial features, or retinal patterns – are usually considered the gold standard for security. However, these biometric systems are increasingly easier to spoof by using masks or false copies of fingerprints. These spoofs can lead to serious security issues in the workplace, from unauthorized access to a company’s most sensitive information to fraud at the time clock. It should also be noted that Biometrics are directly regulated in a limited number of locations, including Illinois, Texas, Washington, and New York City. Companies utilizing this technology should be aware of all applicable regulations in this space.
3: Ransomware.
Unfortunately, ransomware will continue to be a problem moving into 2025. In fact, several trends conspire to make ransomware an even larger threat than it has been in recent years. For example, many threat actors are shifting their focus from IT departments to OT (Operational Technology) segments of an organization. They do this to cause on-the-ground, real-world disruption to a company’s physical operation to exert maximum pressure on a company to give in to a ransom demand. In this way, hackers are able to not only lock a company out of its data – but also grind its processes to a halt. These attacks can significantly impact operations for 15-30 days, causing enormous harm. Companies in the manufacturing and construction sectors are the largest targets for these attacks.
2: Deepfakes & Shallowfakes.
You may think that deepfakes (digital content augmented to make it appear as though a celebrity or politician is saying something outrageous) or shallowfakes (digital content slightly altered to achieve a more subtle, yet still misleading, effect) are only a problem in the entertainment space or in our political environment. Unfortunately, these technologies are presenting an elevated security threat at both a corporate and personal level. For example, audio spoofs of high-level executives could be used to convince lower-level employees to divert company funds to a threat actor’s bank account. These technologies are developing at a rapid pace and enable threat actors to prey on a target’s familiarity with the voice on the other line. However, despite the enormous issues posed by deepfakes, the solution can be relatively simple. Companies can institute a “passphrase” that must be used before major decisions are made or funds are expended. This way, your organization can minimize the risk of being tricked by a deep- or shallow-fake.
1: Generative AI in the Workplace.
It should come as no surprise that artificial intelligence in the workplace has made an appearance on this list. Generative artificial intelligence technologies have proliferated and become more sophisticated at a pace that even many experts have failed to anticipate. While these tools can enhance employee productivity, there are several pitfalls that in-house counsel, in particular, should be wary of. To begin with, an acceptable AI use policy is essential for any business organization, whether the organization wants to promote the use of generative AI or not. The threats that this technology may pose – the threat of leaked data, IP risks, and bias in employment decisions – are too severe to ignore. Instituting an Acceptable AI Use policy is a great first step towards guarding against some of these dangers. Additionally, these policies will likely only become more necessary as jurisdictions such as the European Union, Colorado, and Utah adopt AI laws – with many more jurisdictions likely to join them in the coming years.
The late Herbert M. Eikenbary granted the bulk of his estate to fund Grants and Loans to lawyers underthe age of 35 who practice/reside in Montgomery County. These Grants and Loans are to aid young, deserving lawyers who
When Irregularity
is a Necessity
In March 2024, the 6th Circuit decided, as a matter of first impression for the Circuit, “when under § 207(f) of the FLSA do an employee’s job duties ‘necessitate’ irregular hours.” i
Producers Services Corporation (“PSC”) is an oil fracking business that employs oilfield technicians to perform various duties related to PSC’s well servicing operation.ii A class of current and former oilfield technicians (“Plaintiffs”) filed suit against PSC under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), alleging that PSC failed to pay them the appropriate overtime premium for all hours worked over forty per week.iii PSC responded by claiming that it paid Plaintiffs following a Belo plan, which is “a statutorily authorized exception to the FLSA’s overtime provisions that allows an employer to pay a fixed salary to employees who work fluctuating hours.” iv Plaintiffs moved for and were granted summary judgment after the trial court found that PSC could not establish one of the four prerequisites to a valid Belo plan because Plaintiffs’ irregular schedules were not by necessity and instead where due to factors that were entirely within PSC’s control.v PSC appealed from that ruling.vi
Under the FLSA, employers must pay employees 1.5 times their regular rate of pay for each hour over 40 that the employee works in a single work week.vii As an exception to that general rule, however, the FLSA allows employers to set up an alternative arrangement
to pay employees a guaranteed weekly wage for all hours worked up to 60.viii This so-called Belo planix exception was established by Congress “‘to provide stable salaries for employees whose work weeks fluctuate and who would otherwise face financial burdens from below-normal work weeks.’” To qualify its alternative compensation arrangement as a valid Belo plan, an employer must satisfy the four pre-requisites set forth in the FLSA: (1) the employee must work pursuant to an individual contract or collective bargaining agreement; (2) the employee’s job duties must “necessitate irregular hours of work;” (3) the employee’s contract must specify a regular rate of pay for hours up to 40 per week and an overtime rate of pay equal to 1.5 times the regular rate for hours over 40, and (4) the employee’s contract must provide a weekly pay arrangement for up to 60 hours based on the specified rates. Only the second of these prerequisites was an issue in Jones, specifically because the parties agreed that the Plaintiffs maintained irregular hours and whether the irregular hours Plaintiffs worked were “necessitated” by their job duties.
In addressing this issue, the Sixth Circuit started with the plain language of the statute and opined that it “might suggest that any irregular hours to which an employer subjects his employees are “necessitate[d]” by the employee’s duties since the ordinary workplace hierarchy instructs that an employee’s duties include heeding the direction of his or her employer.”xiii
By Christopher M. Wolcott, Esq. Taft Law CWolcott@taftlaw.com
But when it dug deeper and expanded it’s analysis, the Sixth Circuit found that “this rather simplistic view of § 207(f) accords with none of the extra-statutory sources that help inform [the Court’s] understanding of the Belo plan exception.”xiv For example, in both of the Supreme Court Cases that led to the adoption of § 207(f), the employees at issue (newspaper employees in one and oil well servicing employees in the other) “worked ‘substantially fewer hours as well as substantially more than the statutory forty-hour standard because of the unpredictable irregularity inherent in the nature of the their duties.’”xv The necessity of the employees’ irregular hours was thus based upon the nature of their occupation and not on “the mercurial preferences of their boss.”
The remaining interpretive sources that the Sixth Circuit consulted were in the same vein. The Department of Labor’s regulations state that § 207(f) applies only to situations in which “[t]he nature of the employee’s duties [are] such that neither he nor his employer can either control or anticipate with any degree of certainty the number of hours he must work from week to week.”xvi And other courts that have confronted this issue have concluded that “‘necessitate’ suggests more than mere cause-and-effect between an employee’s schedule—presumably dictated to him by his employer—and the hours that he works.”
continued on page 17
Based on all of that, the Sixth Circuit ultimately held that:
[F]or purposes of 29 U.S.C. § 207(f), an employee’s job duties “necessitate” irregular hours when the inherent nature of the employee’s work—i.e., the inalienable qualities of his industry, profession, or specific position—place the employee’s hours beyond either his or his employer’s powers to control or predict.xviii For the instant case, that decision meant a remand to determine a disputed issue of fact over whether the irregularity of the plaintiff’s hours were predictable or controlled by PSC.xix But for employers in the Sixth Circuit in general, it means that the availability of the Belo plan exception to the FLSA’s overtime requirements is much more limited and should be utilized with caution.
i Jones v. Producers Service Corporation, 95 F.4th 445, 448 (6th Cir. 2024).
ii Id.
iii Id.
iv Id.
v Id.
vi Id.
vii 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1).
viii Id. at § 207(f).
ix The plan derives its name from the 1942 Supreme Court case, Walling v. A.H. Belo Corp, 316 U.S. 624, 62 S.Ct. 1223, 86 L.Ed. 1716 (1942), that partially inspired Congress to enact § 207(f). See Jones, 95 F.4th at 449, n. 4.
x Id. at 449 (quoting Donovan v. Tierra Vista, Inc., 796 F.2d 1259, 1260 (10th Cir. 1986)).
xi Id. (citing 29 U.S.C. § 207(f)).
xii Id. at 450.
xiii Id.
xiv Id.
xv Id. (quoting Foremost Dairies, Inc. v. Wirtz, 381 F.2d 653, 656 n.5 (5th Cir. 1967)); see also Fleming v. A.H. Belo Corp., 121 F.2d 207, 215 (5th Cir. 1941), aff’d sub nom. Belo, 316 U.S. at 635 (newspapers); Walling v. Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co., 331 U.S. 17, 21, 67 S.Ct. 1056, 91 L.Ed. 1312 (1947) (oil well servicing).
xvi 29 C.F.R. § 778.405.
xvii Jones, 95 F.4th at 451-42 (citing Donovan v. Tierra Vista, Inc., 796 F.2d 1259, 1260 (10th Cir. 1986); Donovan v. Brown Equip & Serv. Tools, 666 F.2d 148, 154 (5th Cir. 1982)).
xviii Id. at 452.
xix Id. at 452-54.
Ferguson Legal Group, Ltd. Anthony C. Satariano Esq.
By John "JP" Jarecki, Esq. | Taft Law | JPJarecki@taftlaw.com
You don’t need to dig very deep to discover that Anthony Satariano has all the markings of an outstanding advocate. Of course, there are the accolades—even a shallow canvassing of the many awards and citations earned by Anthony throughout his academic career make him stand out. But Anthony will be the first to tell you that brilliance is not solely responsible for his accomplishments; to those, he credits his tenacity, endurance, and willingness to fully commit to the task ahead. It’s a winning combination of talent and unrelenting hard work that make Anthony the outstanding attorney that he is today.
Anthony was the prototypical high-achieving law student. His accolades largely speak for themselves. During law school, he received six CALI awards (given to the student with the highest overall grade in the course), argued as a member of the Moot Court Team, gained experience as a teaching assistant, and was the Chief Justice of the Honor Council. Anthony also served as a Dean’s Fellow— a position in which second and third law students are paired with anxious 1Ls to offer mentorship as they navigate the considerable learning curve of law school. As Anthony’s service as a Dean’s Fellow foreshadows, mentoring the next generation of lawyers is important to him— but more on that later.
Anthony finished second in his class at the University of Dayton School of Law, graduating magna cum laude. Mr. Satariano also served as Editor-in-Chief of the University of Dayton Law Review. As I know firsthand, that is a job which, for all its prestige, comes with its unique challenges and the occasional sleepless night. But if it isn’t clear by now, Anthony is no stranger to hard work or challenges. Indeed, he lives for them.
During law school, Anthony also served as a Judicial Extern under Judge Thomas Rose of the
with both research and opinion drafting. His time with Judge Rose was uniquely impactful in Anthony’s development, however, in that it exposed him to the world of criminal law and ignited a passion for that work that burns brightly today. By the time Anthony graduated law school, he could have gone anywhere he wanted, and had offers from several national law firms. Yet Anthony knew what he wanted—and that was to practice at a high level while saving time for his wife, Aubrey, and his two children, Charlie and Rowan. He found that perfect balance at Ferguson Legal Group, LTD, where he began practicing in November of 2018.
At Ferguson Legal Group, LTD, Anthony’s practice focuses primarily on family law and criminal defense. In family law matters, Anthony is not afraid to be aggressive, but always keeps his clients’ goals in mind when approaching each case. And in criminal defense cases, Anthony enjoys advocating hard for his clients while finding innovative solutions to their unique problems. As practitioners in these areas of the law know all too well, family law and criminal defense clients are often facing life-changing legal outcomes. A parent may lose custody of their child, and a citizen may lose their liberty. As he has developed as a talented advocate, Anthony has never lost sight of the humanity of his clients and is a compassionate listener. Anthony has a mantra: my every day is their most important day. While Anthony may have thirty hearings in any given month, he knows that for any specific client, their one hearing means the world to them. Anthony always reminds himself of this reality.
Outside of law practice, Anthony is a busy
man. He is a member of the Greene County, Dayton, Ohio, Florida, Federal and American Bar Associations. He is also a member of the Sons of Italy and the Greene County Fish and Game Association. Anthony is a past President of the Networking Pros Chapter of Business Networking International and has filled numerous roles in the local bar such as Grievance Committee Member and Bar Association Treasurer. Additionally, Anthony serves as the town solicitor for a local village, and as counsel for the board of directors of a local nonprofit.
Anthony is passionate about mentoring law students and early-career lawyers. To that end, he works with the University of Dayton’s bar passage program to grade student bar essay responses. Ferguson Legal Group also takes externs from UDSL during the academic year, and Anthony makes it a point to offer constructive feedback to externs to help them hone their writing and analytical skills. In short, Anthony is proud of his alma mater— and strives to ensure that UDSL graduates have the tools they need to pass the bar and begin productive careers.
In his free time, Anthony and his family enjoy getting out and exploring the beautiful scenery the Miami Valley offers, including Glen Helen Nature Preserve and Cox Arboretum. He is also a Steelers fan (we won’t hold that against him) and enjoys watching games, Terrible Towel in hand, with family.
For all his accomplishments, Anthony is just getting started. That winning combination of talent and unrelenting hard work is paying off, and the outcomes he has secured for his clients speak to that fact. Anthony understands that no matter the area of law, he can succeed by working hard and focusing on the client’s needs in a compassionate way. And there can be no doubt that he will continue to do just that.
United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Under Judge Rose, Anthony worked on various federal matters and assisted
Continuing the Series: The Remarkable Reemergence of the University of Dayton School of Law
The Evolution of Legal Education at the University of Dayton
The year 1974 marked a pivotal moment in the history of legal education in Dayton, Ohio. After a four-decade hiatus, the University of Dayton School of Law (UDSL) reopened its doors, reigniting a legacy dormant since the Great Depression. This momentous occasion did not merely represent the revival of a program, but a testament to the unwavering commitment of visionary leaders, dedicated faculty, generous benefactors, and a community that recognized the vital role of legal education in society.
The Road to Revival
The original University of Dayton College of Law closed in 1933 due to the severe economic impacts of the Great Depression. For years, the absence of a law school in Dayton left a void in the region’s legal landscape. By the early 1970s, Dayton evolved into a thriving city, and the demand for a local institution to cultivate legal talent became increasingly apparent.
The catalyst for reopening the law school emerged when a group of entrepreneurs announced plans to establish a private, nonuniversity-affiliated law school in Dayton, under the name “The Dayton Law School.” They claimed that their Board of Trustees included every leading lawyer and judge in the Dayton area. This development spurred the University of Dayton’s leadership into action. Recognizing the significance of this moment, University President Father Raymond Roesch swiftly formed a feasibility committee to explore the potential of reviving the law school within the University.
Mobilizing Community Support
One does not simply establish a law school. It represents an ambitious and arduous longterm endeavor that requires substantial financial backing, as well as incredible human capital and support. The Dayton community responded in spades to the idea of reestablishing the school as UDSL. The Kettering Fund, established by inventor and philanthropist Charles F. Kettering, made a significant initial contribution of $500,000 in 1973. This substantial donation set the momentum for the fundraising campaign and encouraged further strong community support.
The Beerman Foundation followed suit with a $100,000 grant in 1974. In total, the fledgling school secured over 25 gifts, amounting to approximately $900,000. This sum translates to about $6.4 million today. This impressive show of support from businesses, foundations, and individual donors ensured that UDSL had the necessary resources to operate self-sufficiently through at least 1977.
Building the Foundations
With adequate funding secured, the focus shifted to assembling a capable administrative team and faculty. The University of Dayton appointed Dr. Norman George acting dean, with Dr. Barth Snyder tasked with closely assisting the monumental task of recruiting faculty members and setting up the law school’s operations. One of their early critical hires was Oscar Trelles, a Juris Doctor with a Master of Science from the University of Toledo, who took on the challenge of developing the law library—a cornerstone for any reputable law school.
Trelles, who had recently been appointed President of the Ohio Regional Association of Law Libraries, immediately took on the task of establishing a robust collection of legal texts.
Recognizing the school’s financial constraints, Trelles sought innovative solutions, such as attempting to purchase books damaged in a fire at Temple University’s law library in 1973 and soliciting donations of legal texts from alumni. These efforts, combined with strategic acquisitions, enabled UDSL to meet and exceed the required volume count for accreditation. The law library began its journey with approximately 60,000 volumes and, within just three years, grew to an impressive 125,000 volumes.
To further strengthen the library’s capabilities, Trelles hired John D. Zimmerman as an assistant professor to support the fledgling library’s operations. Their combined efforts ensured that students and faculty had access to essential legal resources from the outset. At this premoderninternet time, law faculty and students relied almost exclusively on these volumes to perform their legal work.
Securing Leadership
Dr. George and Dr. Snyder knew that they needed to find a strong dean to steer the law school toward accreditation and long-term success. After an exhaustive search, the school found the strong and resilient leader it needed in Richard L. Braun. Dean Braun brought a wealth of experience and a distinguished background to the position. A Stanford University alumnus, he served as a Marine Corps fighter pilot during World War II and the Korean War, earning the Distinguished Flying Cross for his valor. As recalled in The Hall of Valor Project, Braun displayed the utmost skill and bravery for his fighting in World War II, from January 5th through February 15, 1944:
Exhibiting aggressiveness of spirit, expert leadership and extraordinary calmness and coolness at all times he shot down during the Rabaul Campaign, five enemy aircraft under the most adverse circumstances of enemy
continued on page 21
fighter opposition and concentrations of anti-aircraft fire, and yet was outstanding in his primary assignment of affording protection to our bombers. He displayed the characteristics of an excellent airman, and his cool courage and conscientious devotion to duty were an inspiration to the men serving under him and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.
Following his military service, Braun transitioned into the legal field, holding positions such as Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center and Southwestern University Law School. He also served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General at the U.S. Department of Justice and as Dean of the University of Detroit School of Law. His leadership and vision were pivotal in navigating the complexities of accreditation and establishing the law school's academic standards.
Facing Initial Challenges
Reopening UDSL was not without its hurdles. The school lacked American Bar Association (ABA) accreditation at the outset, had a faculty composed largely of local judges and practitioners with less teaching experience, and had no upper-level students to mentor the inaugural class. These factors placed immense pressure on the first cohort of students and faculty to set high standards and build the school's reputation from the ground up.
One significant challenge was earning full ABA accreditation. While UDSL received provisional accreditation upon opening, it had to demonstrate compliance with rigorous standards to achieve full accreditation. This process required meticulous planning, adherence to academic criteria, and a commitment to excellence across all facets of the institution. The failure to attain accreditation would mean the failure of the new school of law.
The Inaugural Class and Pioneering Spirit
The first class of students who enrolled in 1974 were true pioneers. Many were individuals who needed to stay in Dayton due to family commitments or those who might not have met the admission criteria of other law schools. They took a leap of faith by joining a newly reopened law school without a fully established track record. Their determination and hard work were instrumental in creating student organizations, such as the Student Bar Association and various affinity groups, laying the groundwork for a vibrant campus life.
Recognizing the importance of establishing a law review to enhance the school’s academic stature, students like Thomas Whelley and Barbara P. Gorman played instrumental roles in launching the University of Dayton Law Review. Despite initial skepticism from Dean Braun—who believed it might be premature—they persisted. A compromise was reached to publish an “intramural” issue initially, allowing the law review to demonstrate its capability while mitigating the risk of premature exposure.
The founding students faced the enormous administrative workload of building a law review without institutional knowledge or upper-class mentors. Their lack of experience was overshadowed by their determination and work ethic. They attended conferences, learned the basics of law review operations, and laid the foundation for what would become a prestigious scholarly publication.
Community Impact and Future Outlook
The reopening of UDSL had a profound impact on the Dayton community and the broader legal profession. It filled a critical gap in legal education within the region and provided opportunities for aspiring lawyers who preferred to study locally. The support from local businesses, philanthropists, and legal professionals underscored the community’s investment in nurturing legal talent and upholding justice.
Figures like Judge Walter H. Rice of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio played significant roles in supporting the law school’s revival. Judge Rice, along with others, recognized that Dayton represented “nothing less than the very best large city in the entire State of Ohio in which to practice law.” The engagement of legal stalwarts like Judge Rice lent credibility and reinforced the importance of reestablishing a law school in Dayton.
Looking ahead, the foundations laid during this pivotal period positioned UDSL for continued growth and success. The collaborative efforts between the university, donors, faculty, and students created a resilient institution poised to adapt and thrive in the evolving landscape of legal education.
The next article will explore the ways in which the legal community continued to come together to support the fledgling UDSL. It will focus on those administrators, faculty, staff, and community members who made the survival and ultimate expansion of UDSL possible.
The author welcomes your comments and notes regarding this article and future articles. Please email the author directly at nseger1@udayton. edu.
By Nicholas D. Seger Associate Professor of Academic Success University of Dayton School of Law nseger1@udayton.edu
Professionalism in the Law: Early Career and Beyond
Professionalism. It’s a concept every attorney knows, but not every attorney defines the same. This divide is often most apparent between newer attorneys and seasoned attorneys. On October 9th, 2024, The Women in Law section of the Dayton Bar Association hosted a forum, Professionalism in the Law: Early Career and Beyond, to help attorneys, particularly newer attorneys, excel in their careers as legal professionals. Panelists included Madeline Weiler, Senior Associate Director for the UD Center for Leadership, who served as both moderator and panelist, Anne Keeton, Partner at Burns, Connell, Vollmar, and Armstrong, and Jennifer Brogan, Partner at Bieser Greer. These accomplished women offered their insights into what they look for when interviewing and working with newer attorneys, times they provided and received constructive feedback, and the importance of why and how to give constructive feedback to newer attorneys. Here are some takeaways for attorneys on professionalism and tips for success at every stage of their career:
1. Be prepared: Jennifer began by saying when she’s interviewing prospective new attorneys, it’s nice to see when they have done their own research on the firm and come prepared with questions. Coming prepared with questions helps show the interviewer the new attorney is interested in the firm, and the position for which they are interviewing. Prior research and being prepared also allows new attorneys to see for themselves the firm brand and type of culture the firm cultivates. Being prepared also allows one to put their best foot forward. Anne described this to mean not only doing your research, but also being deferential to the court and being professional with colleagues. Anne reflected, when she was first practicing, she would look for attorneys who impressed her and tried to emulate those professionals. Anne encouraged new attorneys to do the same; it’s a great way to identify and learn what makes a person successful in the legal profession.
continued on page 23
By Katherine Holman, Esq. WilmerHale
Katherine.Holman@wilmerhale.com
Co-Chairs & Panel Speakers: Joanna Gisel, Jennifer Brogan, Anne Keeton & Joanna Garcia
2. Be on time: Jennifer also stressed punctuality is important too and something she looks for in new attorneys, as it is an important skill to have, especially in the court room. This includes arriving at meetings and court appearances on time, as well as getting back to judges and other attorneys in a timely fashion.
3. Be open to feedback (giving and receiving):
Many new attorneys coming out of law school or working in a law firm for the first time may only have been exposed to praise for their work product. Entering the legal field as an attorney may be one of the first times they receive what could be perceived as negative feedback. Jennifer recounted a time where she worked so hard on a brief at the request of a partner and felt she had nailed it! However, when she got the brief back after the partner reviewed it, she found the brief covered in red ink, with a dreaded “Please see me” written on the top. She took a moment to collect herself from the worry before meeting with the partner. In the end, Jennifer realized the benefits she received from that constructive feedback and ultimately learned not to take changes or suggestions to her work product personally, as the partner was helping her advance her skills.
Anne agreed feedback should not be taken personally. Rather, feedback should be looked at as an opportunity to improve your craft. Experienced attorneys want to see new attorneys do well because they care about them and because it’s good for the profession. She stressed the importance of learning from the feedback provided to grow as an attorney. If a young attorney continuously ignores feedback, it shows they don’t care, and they may stop receiving feedback. Madeline reinforced the importance of feedback by saying if a new attorney isn’t receiving feedback, that should be cause for concern.
The forum ended with words of advice from the panelists. Jennifer encouraged young attorneys to themselves be vulnerable, be comfortable not being “the smartest person in the room,” and ask questions. New attorneys don’t know everything, and that’s ok! What’s important is continuing to show you want to learn and excel. Anne stressed the value of getting involved in the legal community. This includes getting to know your fellow attorneys and finding a mentor whose career you admire and reaching out to them for advice. To those looking for a good way to get involved in Dayton’s legal community, The Women in Law continues with their advocacy of female attorneys on March 7th, 2025, when they host a symposium focused on empowerment and overcoming imposter syndrome, and how attorneys’ skills can serve their communities at large. Visit daybar.org soon to register!
social justice
BRAVER ANGELS: Bridging the Political Divide
This article is one of a series from the DBA’s Social Justice Initiative to inform our membership about, and encourage their participation in, many of the non-profits in our community that address issues of “social justice.”
If you would like to suggest a non-profit for us to highlight, please contact Chris Albrektson at the DBA.
By By Kelly Zimmerman, Braver Angels Ohio State Coordinator
With a contentious 2024 election season just behind us, political polarization has been and continues to be an “unwelcome guest” for many Americans. The deep divisions of American politics are well-known at this point. Experiences of strained and broken relationships due to political differences are commonplace. The heartbreaking realization is that none of this is surprising anymore. Most people recognize the toxic impact of political polarization, but few know what to do about it.
Fortunately, organizations exist that are focused specifically on this problem. One such organization is Braver Angels. Braver Angels is a national, cross-partisan, primarily volunteer organization dedicated to political depolarization. By encouraging and facilitating conversations between individuals who might otherwise avoid or distrust one another due to their political beliefs, Braver Angels seeks to repair the torn social fabric of the United States.
The Birth of Braver Angels
Braver Angels was founded shortly after the 2016 election by a small group of concerned citizens from both sides of the political spectrum who recognized the growing sense of "us versus them" that was taking hold in American political life. It was becoming more difficult for people to even talk across those divides without resorting to stereotypes, name-calling, or worse. Braver Angels was established to change this dynamic. Their goal was clear: to find a way to bring liberals and conservatives together to engage in respectful, productive conversations that focused on understanding rather than confrontation.
Southwest Ohio played a critical role in the inception of Braver Angels. David Lapp, one of the three co-founders of the organization lives in Lebanon, Ohio, and was instrumental in organizing the first two Red-Blue Workshops that took place in Southwest Ohio in late 2016 and early 2017. The first Braver Angels Alliance (the Braver Angels term for local chapters) was formed by participants of these workshops to continue the work of depolarization in their communities.
The Mission of Braver Angels
Braver Angels mission is to bring Americans together in order to bridge the partisan divide and strengthen our democratic republic. Its vision is an America with a respectful embrace of political disagreements, where civic friendship flourishes and competing perspectives strengthen our nation. Through embracing values of respect, humility, honesty, and responsible citizenship, the organization’s goal is not to change people’s views on issues, but to change their views of each other.
The Braver Angels Way
Braver Angels’ guiding principles are called the “Braver Angels Way”:
We state our views freely and fully, without fear.
We treat people who disagree with us with honesty, dignity and respect. We welcome opportunities to engage those with whom we disagree.
We believe all of us have blind spots and none of us are not worth talking to.
We seek to disagree accurately, avoiding exaggeration and stereotypes. We look for common ground where it exists and, if possible, find ways to work together
We believe that, in disagreements, both sides share and learn.
In Braver Angels, neither side is teaching the other or giving feedback on how to think or say things differently.
Programs & Workshops
Braver Angels organizes workshops and events designed to foster civil discourse and enable depolarizing political conversations. There are two main types of workshops – Skills-building and Engagement. Skillsbuilding workshops allow participants to learn and practice communication skills that focus on listening to understand rather than to respond, asking genuine questions out of curiosity rather than “gotcha” questions, and offering their perspectives in a way that the other person is more likely to
continued on page 25
hear. Engagement workshops bring together balanced groups of conservative-leaning and liberal-leaning participants to interact in structured dialogues that encourage participants to listen to each other’s perspectives, share their personal stories, challenge assumptions without engaging in hostile debate, and potentially discover areas of common ground.
In addition to workshops, Braver Angels offers debates that focus on a specific, often controversial issue. A Braver Angels debate is not your typical debate. Instead, it employs a special parliamentary format that encourages everyone to speak or ask questions, ensures civility in disagreement, and strives for learning and better understanding for all.
Braver Angels Alliances
Braver Angels also has a network of more than 110 local Alliance groups across the country, allowing people to engage with each other and bridge divides in their own communities. Alliance groups are led by equally balanced “Red” and “Blue” co-chairs. These Alliance groups host events, dialogues, and workshops, providing ongoing opportunities for individuals to apply and practice the Braver Angels Way.
Braver Angels in Ohio
Braver Angels has an active presence in Ohio with established Alliance groups in the Cincinnati and Northeast Ohio/ Cleveland areas. Additionally, a group in the Columbus area is in the early stages of development and has been organizing events in central Ohio for about a year. Plans for 2025 include exploring and building Braver Angels' presence in the greater Dayton area.
Moving Forward: How You Can Get Involved
Braver Angels’ work is far from done. While the organization has made significant progress, the political divide in the U.S. remains a formidable challenge. Please consider visiting the Braver Angels website at braverangels.org where you can join as a member for as low as $12 per year and explore opportunities to get involved. If you are interested in learning more about opportunities to engage locally or are interested in helping to build Braver Angels' presence in the Dayton area, please feel free to contact me at kelly@braverangels.org.
We Need a New Courthouse!
By The Honorable Mary L. Wiseman
Montgomery County Common Pleas Court - Gen Div
Mary.Wiseman@montcourt.oh.gov
The Montgomery County Courts Building, located at 41 North Perry Street (“CPC Courthouse”), which houses the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court, General Division, among others, is obsolete. Its obsolescence began decades ago as the square footage, functionality of the space, and security features of the building, built in 1964, failed to meet the growing and modern needs of the General Division and other tenants. For the past many years, but especially over the past two years, the General Division has been sounding an alarm about its lack of space and dysfunctional, unsafe quarters to the County to no avail. The County’s status quo of neglect and indifference towards the CPC Courthouse is to the great detriment of the General Division and its Constitutionally mandated
mission, and is an affront to the many interested stakeholders in our justice system.
The General Division has over 170 staff positions, but approximately 85 employees are inconveniently housed a half-mile away in the Reibold Building, which is located at the corner of Main and Fourth Streets. In both the CPC Courthouse and Reibold Building, the office space and environment for General Division employees is far too cramped and deficient. Critical new staff positions – for which funding has been approved – go vacant because there simply is no more available office space. One modestly sized conference room in the basement of the CPC Courthouse must accommodate larger meetings for all of the tenants from not only the CPC Courthouse, but also from the adjacent Dayton-
1. There are no holding cells available in the CPC Courthouse for jail inmates awaiting courtroom events on the third and fourth floors;
2. There are no jury assembly rooms, forcing prospective jurors to mingle in hallways with counsel, parties, and witnesses while waiting for the voir dire process to begin;
3. There are no attorney-client consultation rooms, resulting in highly confidential, privileged conversations taking place in public hallways and stairwells, within earshot of adversaries;
4. There are no waiting rooms or other spaces to separate litigants awaiting a court appearance. A litigant seeking a civil stalking or sexual conduct protection order, for instance, must sit in a public
Montgomery County Courts Building (“DMC Building”), which houses, among others, the Dayton Municipal Court. The mail room of the CPC Courthouse doubles as the room for the General Division’s computer servers. Other storage space is non-existent.
Probationers must trek between the CPC Courthouse and the Reibold Building to attend probation appointments, court mandated programs, and court appearances, adding hassle, hurdles, and expense to an already difficult task of maintaining compliance with the Court and terms of probation.
In addition to the lack of space and the dysfunctional, unsafe layout of the facility, the CPC Courthouse lacks many features that such a building needs. For example:
hallway on a bench just a few feet across from or even next to the person from whom the litigant seeks protection;
5. There are no lockers or other secure space for Public Defenders or other attorneys to secure files, coats, umbrellas, or the like while they perform their legal duties in multiple courtrooms;
6. The CPC Courthouse is woefully deficient regarding ADA standards, creating insurmountable challenges for those with mobility impairments or using a wheelchair; and
7. Essential, core functions of the General Division are strewn across multiple buildings, such as the DMC Building and Reibold Building.
continued on page 27
These examples are no small inconveniences. Rather, they are disabling, intolerable, and an assault upon the dignity and integrity of the courts, and the ability of the judicial branch to fulfill its essential duties. With no effort or initiative taken by the County to meaningfully address the outdated CPC Courthouse, the General Division has resorted to self-help measures afforded to it under the law. In November 2024, the General Division ordered the Montgomery County Law Library to vacate the fifth floor of the CPC Courthouse by February 28, 2025. By ordering the Law Library to relocate out of the CPC Courthouse, the General Division can then occupy that exceptionally large, underutilized space which is desperately needed to meet some of the essential needs described above. The County should have ample space, outside of the CPC Courthouse, for the relocation of the Law Library. Indeed, the County recently built a new municipal courthouse in Trotwood, shuttering an entire municipal court building in New Lebanon. Either facility should now be available for a wide variety of governmental uses.
Finally, but also most importantly, a new Courthouse is needed on an immediate basis, because the current CPC Courthouse is unsafe. The structural design of the CPC Courthouse forces incompatible groups of people to share corridors, elevators, and bathrooms when common sense, not to mention multiple security studies, recommends that these groups be separated. For example, a single elevator is used for transporting jail inmates along with jurors, judges, and judicial staff. Back hallways are shared by in-custody defendants, jurors, judges, and judicial staff. When jury rooms are occupied, judges and those defendants in custody wait in line together to use the same set of bathrooms in the back hallway. Each of these groups – custodial defendants, jurors, judges, and judicial staff -should have separate and secure elevators, hallways, and bathrooms. Bailiffs and Court Security Deputies perform an impressive logistical ballet to try to prevent unwanted or unsafe collisions or interactions in these tight, shared spaces, but the ongoing risk of calamity remains. A very long list of additional security shortcomings with the General Division quarters is possible, but cannot be divulged here without risking the exploitation of those unaddressed security defects.
Suffice it to say, the judges of the General Division’s bench believe that their lives are at risk each and every day at the CPC Courthouse due to the unaddressed security flaws inherent in this obsolete building.
The cost of a new Courthouse will be high, no doubt. Fortunately, there is land available right across Second Street from the CPC Courthouse that is currently being used as a parking lot. Despite the anticipated high cost of a new Courthouse, compare that to the value of the judicial branch in our Constitutional democracy. Do we want the judicial branch crippled due to a neglected, aged building? Space limitations? Security threats and safety deficiencies?
Please hear the voice of the entire General Division bench proclaiming that we are but one small incident, human error, or security oversight away from a Courthouse catastrophe that could result in serious harm or death to judges, staff members, employees, or others visiting the CPC Courthouse. We need a new Courthouse, because law and justice must thrive, not be suffocated or threatened by outdated, outmoded, and unsafe facilities.
The next time you visit the CPC Courthouse, take note of the crumbling sidewalks. Pay attention to the disintegrating curbs. Look at the shadows and stains of past graffiti on the front façade. Observe the obvious changes to the Courthouse since 1964 – entrances/exits closed due to security, a once spacious lobby now crowded with security machinery, and the large number of daily visitors beyond the imagination of the building’s original architects and designers in the early 1960s. Eye the tattered and faded County flag that flies atop the pole at the northwest corner of Perry and Second Streets, proclaiming the County’s responsibility for the conditions you find.
This external blight is but a small glimpse at the massive problems that must be immediately addressed with the CPC Courthouse. The County’s seat of justice, home to its Common Pleas Courts, needs a new Courthouse.
The DBA Board of Trustees have recently approved the following for DBA Membership:
ATTORNEYS:
Teresa M. Durrani
TJDLegalAdvocacy
Katrina Fulmer
WilmerHale - Discovery
Joshua Lightner
Lightner Law, LLC
Justin Marks
Surdyk Dowd & Turner Co., LPA
Sean McBee
Resonant Science, LLC
Katelyn N. Miller
WilmerHale - New Business
Daniel A. Niswonger
Green & Green Lawyers
Ashlyn N. Warsitz
Legal Aid of Western Ohio
Steven Weiser
Paul Hastings LLP
Aria Witty
WilmerHale - Discovery
LAW SCHOOL GRADS:
Cody P. Vandegrift
Phi Sigma Pi
LAW STUDENTS:
Dana K. Anderson
Dennis Kostin
Kathleen Lynch
Jacinta Edmondson
Jessika Folley
Michael Frazier
Abigail R. Hall
Allison Parker
Andrew J. Schoen
Autumn Stamos
PARALEGAL STUDENTS:
Lauren McLagan
Persephone Moraites
Kelsey Shannon
Lydia Simpson
Kate Teleha
Janyece Wingard
Alyson Williams
Savannah Williams
The DBA is proudly serving 1,400 members!
New Year, New Giving
The Dayton Bar Foundation (DBF) is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization and serves as the giving arm of the Greater Dayton Legal Community. Your contribution will enable the DBF to continue to fulfill its mission of funding innovative local organizations in their quest to improve our community by promoting equal access to justice and respect for the law. In the past few years your contributions helped to fund grants to:
•adVocaTes for Basic leGal equaliTy (aBle)
•GreaTer dayTon VolunTeer lawyers proJecT (GdVlp)
•law & leadersHip insTiTuTe
•leGal aid of wesTern oHio (lawo)
•wills for Heroes
Greater Dayton Volunteer Lawyers Project (GDVLP)
The Making JusT ice accessible: The Power of Pro Bono Volunteerism
Every day, countless individuals in our community face overwhelming civil legal challenges without the resources to afford an attorney. They face evictions by unscrupulous landlords. They stand in court in front of their abusers to try to secure protection orders for their own safety. They go into hospice care without the benefit of a will or advanced directives, with no family to care for their needs. Every day, too many of our friends and neighbors face these challenges alone. Civil legal aid is overburdened with limited resources and ceaseless requests for help. Pro bono organizations like the GDVLP stand as the last line of defense for these families.
To our current volunteer attorneys, law students, paralegals, and paralegal students: THANK YOU! Your time, expertise, and compassion transform lives. Each case you take on, each clinic you attend, each question you answer for our staff paralegals, not only impacts your client but strengthens our justice system and reinforces the principle that access to legal help should never depend on one’s ability to pay. You are the champions of fairness, ensuring that justice isn’t reserved for those with deep pockets.
Consider the story of Ms. Johnson*, a senior woman whose only shelter during an Ohio winter was a tent. A volunteer lawyer stepped in to advocate for her, helping her secure housing and ensuring she had the stability and dignity she deserved. Then there’s the courage of Maria*, a domestic violence survivor who, with the help of a volunteer attorney, escaped her abuser, obtained a protection order, and began building a new life free from fear. Or perhaps Mr. & Mrs. Goodwin*, a senior couple who were both ill and in need
By Summer Hawks Esq. Executive Director, GDVLP
of advanced directives to help their families make difficult end-of-life decisions. These aren’t just cases—they’re lives forever changed because someone like you chose to give their time and expertise.
Still, the need is great. While your efforts have provided critical relief to so many, there are countless people waiting for someone to hear their story, to advocate for them, and to fight for their rights.
This is where you—our broader legal community—can step in. Volunteering your time and talents isn’t just an act of service; it’s a profound way to reconnect with why many of us entered the legal profession: to make a difference. Whether you can offer an hour a month, take on a single case, or assist behind the scenes, your contribution matters.
Beyond the satisfaction of knowing you’ve made a difference, pro bono work offers unique opportunities for growth. You’ll develop new skills, broaden your experience, and collaborate with others who share a passion for justice.
Let’s work together to close the justice gap. Volunteer today and join the movement to ensure everyone—regardless of their financial situation—has access to legal help when they need it most.
For more information on how to get involved or to share your volunteer story, contact us at 937-461-3857 or email me at summer@gdvlp.org. Together, we can ensure justice for all.
*Names have been changed but the stories are real.
MEMBERS ON THE MOVE
Judge Chris Epley was reelected the Presiding and Administrative Judge of the Ohio Second District Court of Appeals for 2025 by Judges Welbaum, Tucker, Lewis and Huffman. The Second District includes six counties: Montgomery, Greene, Clark, Miami, Darke, and Champaign counties. As Presiding Judge, Judge Epley presides over oral arguments in the court room and chairs general meetings of the court. As the Administrative Judge, Judge Epley is responsible for the administration, docket, and calendar of the Second District Court of Appeals. Judge Epley joined the Court of Appeals in February 2021. He served as Presiding and Administrative Judge for the court in 2024. Judge Epley is active in the bar associations that make up the Second District, serves on the Ohio Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism, and is a faculty member of the Judicial College.
Bieser, Greer & Landis, LLP is pleased to announce that Amber R. Mullaly has been elected partner effective January 1, 2025. After receiving her Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Pennsylvania and her J.D. from the University of San Diego School of Law, Amber started her legal career in California in 2014 before moving to Ohio. Amber eventually joined the Montgomery County Prosecutor’s Office where she handled hundreds of felony cases and developed substantial trial experience over a period of four years. Amber has continued her trial practice at Bieser, Greer & Landis with a focus on the defense of hospitals, doctors and other medical professionals.
At its recent annual meeting, the Ohio Chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates (“ABOTA”) elected Brian L. Wildermuth, Esq. of Subashi, Wildermuth & Justice as its President for 2025. In addition, the Ohio Chapter presented the Michael F. Colley Award to Nick Subashi. The Michael F. Colley award honors the legacy and leadership of Mike Colley, a highly respected attorney who practiced in the Columbus area for many years. The criteria for the Michael F. Colley Award are as follows: “The recipient is chosen for his/her service to the trial bar, leadership to his/her colleagues, an extraordinary standard of professional conduct, and total dedication to the ideals of mutual respect for all and the preservation of the Right to Trial by Jury.”
After 85 years of serving the Dayton, Ohio area, Holzfaster, Cecil, McKnight & Mues LPA will cease operations on December 31, 2024. They sincerely thank you for your trust over the years. Following the firm's closure, attorneys Robert "Chip" Mues and Gary M. Hruska will continue providing legal services under "MuesLaw" at the same location. Reach them at (937) 293-2141 or visit www.MuesLaw.com for more details.
109 N. Main St., Suite 600 Dayton, OH 45402–1129
ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED
Our communications are proactive and provide essential insights designed to reduce stress and anxiety around a mistake bringing an end to your practice. This brings peace of mind and allows you to focus on your primary responsiblity... practicing law.
