Juris Magazine- December, 1970

e e J

J.

Juris DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY, PITTSBURGH, PA.

Duquesne Law

School Newsmagazine

December, 1910 Vol. 4, No • .2

us Is .30.

Iva .cs lay ice

cal lng [la.

ain md

of Ity.

{ell Inty

)Os

nia ~an

hip ine

,n

J

PEACE 01V EARTH

Page Two

EDITORIAL-

SOCIAL INEQUITIES have greatly contributed to te problems of today's ,-. youth. Drug abuse, rebellion on campuses, revolution by young radicals, and youth violence in the cities have had a marked increase in the last decade.

Juris

Unfortunately, these lawbreakers do not seem to fear the consequences of their actions. The laws have little or no effect in the youth's decision to commit such crimes. How can the courts expect to alleviate these problem situations?

DUQuesne

I do not believe the solution can he solved by the courts. The courts solution is remedial. This conditions any potential criminal hy creating fear of harsh punishment if one violates the laws of society. If this fear of punishment is lacking or at least nominal, why should such a remedial approach he expected to be a solution to the problem')

law Schoo!

We should try to understand the reasons why such crimes are committed before we take steps to correet them. Possibly a simple understanding of the cause would help prevent crimes in the future. Though the end result would be the same as the courts advocate, the method of solution would be more preventive than remedial. Therefore, I propose that many of these problems ean be solved by preventive means outside the eourtroom.

Dec"mber, 1910 Vol. ", No.2

EDITOR-Il'f-CHIEF

Robert S. Joseph

Although I have exemplified only four youth problems prevalent in the United states today, I realize many more exist. A general solution of prevention may not be the answer to all these problems, but, I believe that it could help solve some of them.

Auociate EdIto.

Bu&lnesa Manager

William A. Destafano

To help get a better understanding of this article, I have selected one of these problem areas and proposed a practical solution to it. During 1969, there were nearly 50 youths killed in Philadelphia as a result of gang warfare.

Most of those killed were under 20 years old with an average number of 10 minor convictions. While the courts continue to convict, the public demands an end to this senseless violence. How can the judicial system prevent this violence if these young violators do not fear the result?

Frank A. Collins

Feature Ed!tor

N""'B Editor

Joon M. Ridlon

Stanley A. Uhr

CirculaUon Menace ..

Alumni Editor

Stephen J. Marcincin

Thomas N. Silverman

Graphics Arts Editor

Corr"sponding Editor

Larry Wieder

Frederick B. Gieg, Jr.

Advertising Msnsger

First, we must try to understand the environment into which these youths are forced before we can understand why these murders are committed. With little education, inadequate working skills, and little, if any, family life, how can we expect them to be satisfied with SOCiety? They have created a social system different from ".our- soeiety, a sort of world of their own. When one world "invades路 another, violence results. If one of their members is killed or harmed by another gang - the only remedy is revenge. An "eye for an eye" law.

Joel M. Breitstein

Staff Membeu!

David Halier, Chariell Witacoois, Michael J. Bart, Charles Fonzone, Patricia Parella, Frank Keller and Jon A. Berger,

Still they are part of this physical world and must answer to the internal laws of 路our" world. They have failed to COMPREHEND the consequenees of their actions.

Advisors: JOHNJ.SCI ULLO and NICHOLASJ.OEMAS

Pennsylvania spends approximately $10,000 to litigate a case of murder.

Proportionally at least as much money should be spent preventing such problems.

By building eorrective institutions where these youths could get understanding, develop trade skillS, and acquire needed education they could become an asset instead of a burden to society.

Judges should recognize that when one of these juveniles first turns toward a life of crime, it is his duty to see that the youth gets a chance to be corrected.

Since many of these youths have been arrested several times for minor offenses it should be relatively easy to know which youths need help. Instead of reformatory school, put them in these corrective institutions.

JURIS is Duque .Me Law,

" publication of the University School of

Conespondence may be!' addressr-d

to JURIS, School of Law, 500 Forbe 8 Avenue.

Plttob""g", Pennsylvania. 1521<1.

At present there are only four such corrective institutions in Pennsylvania.

Because they are overcrowded, judges are reluctant, if not compelled to refuse entrance to many who eculd benefit by admission. Thus, they are forced to remain in their own world becoming a 路victim" of our society.

Telephone (412) 434-6305

This proposal is only one of the many possible solutions to the "different World- problems that have developed in recent years. By helping these youths to become useful members of 路our world" we could help prevent some of these problems. Let us not be so hasty to criticize these so eaUed "victims" for their actions. Considering the circumstances, are these people really capable of helping themselves?

JURIS

Copyright

e

Duquesne Unive!'fsity. 1969

Pr!nt~d a. NEWS CQIIIP

P.O. Box 471, MonroevUl ... Pa. 15146

December, 1970

Pale Three

Faculty Profile

Raymond F. Sekula

By PATRICIA PARELLA Although he is the youngest member of the faculty, Professor RAYMOND F. SEKULA'S experience in practice, his academic acumen and his enthusiasm make up for his lack of years. He graduated from Duquesne University in 1962 with a degree in accounting and from Duquesne Law School, in 1965. Upon graduation he received a fellowship at the University of Virginia School of Law and there taught Legal method, while working for his L.L.M. in Taxation.

in such outside programs and thereby gain valuable experience, The overwhelming characteristic that he felt Virginia students lack, which our student body has, is a great feeling of comradery. "the students are closer here because they have gone through a tough system together-, and he has observed that even after graduation the bond is still strong.

As a member of the Duquesne faculty, Professor Sekula has shown himself to be versatile. He has taught Corpora andilOw teaches Agency, Evidence, Taxation and Legal Accounting.

Having gone through the Duquesne system of legal education himself, perhaps no one is more qualified to suggest, or more enthusiastic about seeing possible changes for its improvement. One thing that Professor Sekula would like to see abolished is probation. He feels that it isn't fair to let a student get by with a LBO going into his second year. "It is a waste of the student's time and money if he then flunks out in his third year and anyone after the completion of the first year who has an average below l.90 faces an unfair financial and academic burden in his second year, and merely drags out the task of the faculty, i. e., weeding out the unqualified students. - When asked whether he felt it unfair that certain elective courses seemed to give higher grades than others, he replied, "first of all, that every course offered here as an elective has been in my experience worthwhile, and secondly, that if you get rid of probation, you get rid of the problem of people trying to cram into the easier elective courses路 .

When asked what he felt the basic difference is between our law school and the University of Virginia, he replied that the student body there has ,more confidence in themselves than students here. He also noticed that there were more student organizations at Virginia such as, The Virginia Research Group, which does research for lawyers throughout the country. Another organization, The Criminal Research Group, concerned itself with doing research for criminal lawyers as well as indigents. Professor Sekula feels that if the students here had more confidence they would perhaps initiate and participate

Commenting on the locked box system and the presentl grading system, Professor Sekula stressed that both these programs are effective the way they are.

The lock-box is the best system available for leaving claims of faculty subjectivity out of the grading of law school exams. As for the stiff grading system, he fee Is that the people who will be looking at these transcripts after graduation are lawyers themselves and are aware of the strengths and weaknesses of a law school grading system. Usually, he says, when a C plus student has a problem in finding a job, even though he may have been in the top half of his class, a call to the school will usually clear up the problem.

After receiving his degree from Virginia he was offered a position in the noted Pittsburgh trial trim of Dickie, McCamey and Chilcote. As a member of that firm he had the opportunity to work on a famous products liability case, Ferraro v. Ford Motor Company. He then served on the legal staff of West Penn Power and in 1968 joined the facultv here.

lions

JURIS

December, 1970

Like many members of tile faculty and student body, Professor Sekula is not impressed with the phYSical plant of the law school and would hope that someday there will be classrooms more conducive to teaching. Among the more conceivable and valuable changes that he would like to see is an expansion of the legal research program in the first year. He feels that a legal memorandum and an appellate brief should be written and argued in the freshman year. He would also like to see a required legal accounting course in the curriculum or at least three credits of accounting as a prereqUlS1te of admission.

t asked Professor Sekula what adviee he would give to those in the first year of Law School and facing their first set of exams. Again. confidence is what he stressed. The basic problem in the first year is a lack of confidenee. "Most students feel that tIley cannot do well on an exam because they cannot write well, when the aetnal problem is that they haven't begun to think as attorneys. The onlyconcernstudents should have with the mechanics of a law school exam is the extent that they have made coherent, lawyer-like arguments.Besides devoting a great amount of time to the law school, Professor Sekula is active in Westmoreland County, as treasurer of the Democratic Party. He lives in New Kensington with his wife, Kathleen and his two Children, Frank 18 months and Christine age three. He's a member of the New Kensington Zoning Board and was recently elected chairman ofthe Board of Trustees of Westmoreland Community College, which opens in February.

Page Four

D

UQCESNE UNIVERSITY School of Law has won the Regional Round of the 21st Annual National Appellate Moot Court Competition held in Philadelphia on the 17th and 18th of November. Duquesne was represented by third year day students, William Costopoulos and Irwin Lichter. This victory made the Duquesne Law School the first Iitwo-in-a-row" winne~ in the 21 year history of this Regional Competition. Last year's winners, representing Duquesne, were Lorraine Mullen and Michael Reilly.

Duquesne Again Wins Regional Appellate Moot Court Competition

Professor Alfred S. Pelaez

In addition to Duquesne's team victory, Bill Costopoulos won the award for the best oral argument in the competition.

This year's Regional Competition was sponsored jointly by the Philadelphia County Bar Association and the Philadelphia County Association of Young Lawyers. Participating were the Law Schools of Duquesne University, the University of Pittsburgh, American University, Catholic University, Dickinson College, Georgetown University, George Washington University, Howard University, and the UniverSity of Marvland. These schools represented the region consisting of Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and the District of Columbia.

By JON A. BERGER Second Year Night

The team from Duquesne defeated American University, drew a bye, and then defeated Georgetown and Dickinson in succession, Dickinson finishing as runner-up. The final round was judged by Justice Samuel J. Roberts of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Philip H. Strubing of the firm of Pepper, Hamilton and Scheetz in Philadelphia, and Justice Francis L. Van Dusen of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

The question contested in this路 competition was similar to that involved in the recent Caldwell Case in which a reporter for the New York Times refused to either surrender his notes or testify before a federal grand jury concerning confidential interviews with members of the Black Panther Partv.

Under the rules, the contestants were notifie'd just a few minutes before eac:h competition whether they would argue pro or con in the question of whether a reporter must disclose his sources of information in a Court of Law.

JURIS

December. 1970

Director of Appellate Moot Court Program.

In addition to being one of the most competent, the Duquesne team of Bill "Golden Greek- Costopoulos and Irwin 路Pooh" Lichter was probably the most colorful ever entered in the Appellate Moot Court Competition.

"Golden Greek"' is a 26 year old bachelor from Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Educationally, Bill went from Carlisle High School to undergraduate school at Dickinson College ("That sure made the victory in the final round over Dickinson's Law School extra sweet") to Duquesne's Law School where he ranks first in his class and is the recipient of the John Laughlin Scholarship awarded to the third year student who achieves the highest cumulative average in the first two years. He is presently the Editor-in-Chief of the Duquesne Law Heview, Bill served a two year stint in the Army after graduation from Dickinson. Physically the Golden Greek has about run the gamut of poSSibilities in an illustrious wrestling career. Bill was the lightest heavy-weight in the Mid Atlantic Conference as a college wrestler at Dickinson. From there he gained distinction as the runner-up in the FourthArmyDivisionChampionships in 1967. Then Bill went on to probably his greatest wrestling distinction in "losing" bouts with a gorilla, a buffalo, and a bear. Greek still trains and stays in top physical condition presenting, especially with his beard, an impOSing figure around Rockwe 11 Hall.

He attributed a great deal of the victory in Philadelphia to "playing loose".

Page Five

'BiH' Custopuulos and Irwin Lichter.

芦Pooh" Lichter representee! Duquesne in a no less competent and no less colorful manner. Pooh, also a bachelor, age 24, graduated from high school at the University School in the Shadyside area of Pittsburgh and received his undergraduate degree from Duquesne.

He taught for two years at South Hills Catholic High School before entering Law School. Pooh has worked for Neighborhood Legal Services and has acted four years in summer stock. However, his major outside interest is motorcycles which he has raced professionally for four years gaining greatest recognition with a sixth place in the National North-South Morotcycle Championship in Edgewood, New Jersey, For the competition in Philadelphia,_ Pooh mad\? the near ultimate sacrifice, his hair; he sacrificed his flowing hair and mustache because he felt that the judges could probably stand no more than one hirsute contestant per team. Pooh agreed with Greek in crediting 路playing loose" with a great portion of the team's success and said that a high point of the competition was the parties every night.

While both Bill and Irwin emphasize playing loose and flexible in talking of their success. this does not belie the great amount of work and preparation that they put in. Both are accurate, though, when they say that it was not wholly their success, It was a victory of the Duquesne Law School Team over the other schools with Bill and Irwin representing the culmination of the effort. Bill and Irwin gave a great amount of credit and thanks to the entire program and named other team members Henry "Rusty" Miller and Tom Hession, last years winners Lorraine Mullen and Mike Reilly, and Ann Brunner, Julie Burkee. Rita Hogle and Jake Meyers as indispensable. They also cited Dean Davenport and Professor Twerski for their help in drills, exercises. and support; and were high in praise of the i r exceptional leader and coach, Professor Alfred S. Pelaez. In fact, Greek and Pooh said that the key to success was the maximum preparation, cooperation, and encouragement by the faculty and staff. They added that the stiff competition at Duquesne forced them to prepare their arguments and hone their skills enough to win.

While both of Duquesne's representatives played down the magnitude of their achievement, Professor Pe laez commented on the high plane of the competition and congratulated the efforts of the winners and said, furthermore, that he would also have been confident of the chances of winning had Duquesne's alternates represented the School. Pelaez said that both representatives were overwhelming on their feet (further evidenced by Costopoulos' winning the award for the best oral argument) and that while Costopoulos was forceful and Lichter theatrical it was the surfacing of their own personalities.

Professor Pelaez said that a person's own manner is most comfortable, most sincere, and, therefore, most effective in the courtroom.

Duquesne's team was chosen solely by last year's Appellate Moot Court Board, a factor which Professor Pelaez credited with much of the teams success; "Students are the toughest judges of themselves."

Pelaez WOUld, therefore, like to see the Moot Court Program progress into a totally stUdent run program developing even greater pride and esprit de corps.

Bill and Irwin will now go on to represent Duquesne in the national finals to be held in New York, December 16th through 18th. The chief judge of the national finals will be Retired U. S. Supreme Court Justice Thomas C. Clark.

JURIS congratUlates Bill Costopoulos and Irwin Lichter for their success, commends them for the manner in which they have represented the Duquesne University School of Law, and wishes them success in the national finals.

JURIS

December, 1970

tI an

associate

" a summer clerk

J

a part time clerk

"a research assistant contact: Duquesne Placement Service Dean John J. Sciullo

Page Six

h i!

a

tc d

S'

Ul 01

ir

By JOEL M. BREITSTEIN

th

Third Year Day

T is fa er

is

ill

T' tr

wl

THE MOOT COURT PROGRAM - A Proposal

Or-iE DAY, being; in a partkularly candid mood, I went up to Mr. X and tolrl him something I'd been wanting to tell him for a long; time - that he had bad breath. Undaunted he replied, "Well, halitosis is better than no breath at alV With this I could not quibble, but something could be done to improve the situation. This may seem like a rather obtuse way of beginning an article dealing with the Law School's Moot Court program, but I feel the analogy to be an apt one.

It is to the credit of Duquesne, this writer feels, that it has both an Appellate and Trial Moot Court program; it is certainly better than having no program at all. However, the program could be improved to make, it more interesting, meaningful, and instrudional for the student. It could give him not only a flavor of the "real" legal world, but would go a long way toward satisfying a student's need for a workable clinical program in law school.

The Moot Court program as it exists today is broken down into two separate phases. A student in his second year of law school takes part in the Appellate Moot Court program. The first semester is devoted to a series of lectures dealing with the writing of the appellate brief and ending with one lecture on oral argument. The second semester is devoted to the submission of the student's briefs, oral argument, and elimination rounds leading to the selection of four finalists. The finalists then compete in the regional competition, and if successful, the national competition. All students are required to submit one written brief as appe Uant or appellee and participate in the first round of oral argument; for this they get a pass-fail credit. Subsequent rounds are by invitation and are voluntary. No extra credit is given to participants in the subsequent rounds, The third year student is required to participate in the Trial Moot Court program. There is a lecture series designed to equip the student with the fundamental of trial techniques. First year students view two-minute film Clips of accident scenes, and each of these students are deSignated as plaintiff,

JURIS

December, 1970

defendant, or witness. A student sees as three films as different and is remember the facts of each for rounds. The third year not seE> thE> films, interviE'w the first and thE' case, as def"nse or P"''''''''' is prepared from theSE> intE>rviews. ThE' studentattorneys then do battle in a simulated courtroom sE>tting that includes a judge, attorney from AlJE>gheny County who volunteers his sE>rvices), and a jury (non- legal people selected at random by the seconcl-year-student-tipstaff). For his partiCipation, thE> third year student is given a pass-fail credit.

The winners of the first round trials, whether thE>Y like it or not, are required to continue to """'",,,ol'l',nCl' rounds until eliminated in the competition. There are two decisions rE>ndE>red in each case: that decided by the jury on the merits of the case, and that rendered by the judge on the student-attornEY's performance as an advocate.

There is a third aspect that I also consider part of the overall program- writing the legal memorandum in a student's first year of law school. The first year class is broken down into a number of groups, and for the first half of the first semester, the students are given a number of research problems that are graded and commented upon. Toward the end of the first semester, the students are given a fact situation on which the final memorandum is written. This work is graded and the student is given a one-credit grade.

The preceeding paragraphs outline the basic program as it exists at the law school today. This writer has tried to give an objective view of each phase of the program. On the surface it seems like quite a workable system, but beneath the surface are problems and inequities that are detrimental to the prime objects of the program - it's instructional and clinical effectiveness. Let us examine each phase separately to see where some of the problems lie.

The Trial Moot Court program, required in the student's third year, is riddled with holes that decrease its overall value. A fundamental weakness is the lecture series on trial techniques that is designed to equip the student with the rudimentary skills of conducting a courtroom trial. A series of four or five lectures that is not completed until after the first round of trials is over and half the students

er

sp

pa is

no Tr

thE sit api

of bri thE

an or~

is bri litt Th

vie um pn

inc for

thE alt is fir thE pn

Pale Seven

have been elimiIlllted can not turn the uninitiated into an advocate. The lectures that are presented are faulty because you cannot talk trial techniques to a student, rather he must be shown through demonstration the mechanics of trial technique.

dollar sign tacked to the end of it. A grade to a law student is much like a contingent fee to an attorney; the harder he works, the better it can be.

The written memorandum not only carries with it the incentive factor, but it is more instructional

Another fallacy of tire program is making subsequent rounds compulsory on the winner. To some students, being a winner in the first round of competition is a penalty because he is either uninterested in trial work, or fee Is that he has other work that is more important. This lack of interest is reflected in his performance in the subsequent rounds, and students have been known to ~throw¡ a case for fear that they might win and be ,'ompelled to continue. Participation in further rounds flf trial competition should be a privilege entered into by those who have a sincere desire to participate.

than the other programs. There are written assignments handed in by the students periodically throughout the semester and various problem situations are attacked before the final memorandum is written. Students are broken down into a few groups and assigned faculty advisors who grade and discuss the final memorandum with each student in the group.

The evaluation of the student's performance in tlie Trial Moot Court is inequitable and arbitrary.

The attorneys, who graciously act as judges, do Got know what to look for in their evaluation. This is not the fault of the acting judge, but rather the iault of the program for not outlining any objective :criteria for the acting judge to follow. The winner is usually chosen on the subjective feeling of the because he has no other guidelines to follow. attorneys who volunteer their services should be commended. The selection of a winner in the trial arbiter to evaluating the student's performance without some type of objective guideline.

The main objectives of the new proposal are: to have an integrated clinical program that encompasses a student's three years of law school; to place the student in an instructional as well as motivational atmosphere; and to give a graduating senior the feeling that he has been a part of the Duquesne ÂŤFamily" for three years.

I~ limination

I will not go into further detail on some of the other criticisms of the Trial Moot Court, but I will mention them because they are discussed in my proposal for revamping the program. The further criticisms are: 1) the showing of two or three different films to each student who views them as witness, plaintiff, or defendant resulting in gross confusion as to what a student saw in relation to a specific fact situation; 2) the lack of incentive on the part of partiCipating stUdent-attorneys because there is no reward other than a pass-fail credit; 3) the instructional benefit is diminished by all of the foregoing factors.

A second bone of contention centers around the Appellate Moot Court program. This writer does not feel that it harbors as many difficulties as the Trial Moot Court program, but under my proposed plan it, too, would be altered. Perhaps the greatest problem in the Appellate Moot Court program is one that underlies the Trial Moot Court program; the lack of proper instruction in the area that the student is evaluated on - his performance as an appellate-stude nt-attorney â&#x20AC;˘ In the Appellate Moot Court program there is a series of lectures, 99t,t of which are devoted to the writing of the appellate brief. With this I have no qualms, but ironically, the students who are selected as first round winners are evaluated on how they handle themselves in the oral argument. Only one hour out of all the lectures is devoted to the oral argument, and the written briefs, with which the lectures deal, is given very little weight, if any, in the evaluation of the student.

This seems like a rather anomalous situation in view of what the student is evaluated on. This fallacy undercuts many of the good points about the Appellate program. Another Short-coming is the lack of incentive; aU a student receives is a pass-fail credit for participation.

Since this writer feels that the memorandum is the most solid feature of the program as it exists now, it is to be the spring board for my new proposal.

1. THE LEGAL MEMORANDUM SETS THE TRIAL AND APPELLATE PROBLEM. The legal memorandum should be retained in the student's initial year of law school. However, the problem that the student works on for his final memorandum would be the same fact situation that he carries into the Trial Moot Court phase of the program discussed below.

The legal memorandum is graded, and the student receives a one-credit grade for this phase of the clinical program. The format of the course would remain the same as it is now, except for the carryover of the problem into the second year Trial Moot Court.

2. TRIA L MOOT COURT SHIFTED FROM THIRD YEAR TO SECOND YEAR. This would be a major and important change in the program. The problem that the student worked on in his first year as a legal research problem is now carried to the trial stage. This enables the student to follow the logical steps that an attorney follows, proceeding from the 'memorandum stage to preparation for trial. Since he has already researched the law from both Sides, he should be better able to handle and argue his case. Witnesses, plaintiffs, and defendants are drawn from the first year students, but rather than see films, the students are given scripts of facts that they were supposed to have seen from the viewpoint of plaintiff, defendant, or witness. This should eliminate the gross confusion that the films created.

For subsequent rounds different scripts of facts and scenes are given to the students to read. The

The third area, which is not considered part of the Moot Court program by the administration, although this writer feels it is clinical in nature, is the writing of the legal memorandum in a student's first year of law school. In my estimation this is the most instructional and functional of the three programs.

First of all, there is a one credit grade that accompanies this requirement. As petty as it may seem, a student, like Pavlov's Dog, salivates at a reward. I doubt whether many attorneys would take a case unless there was a definite or at least potential

JURIS

December, 1970

.:iecond-year-student attorneys interview their respective parties as previously done, and tile case proceeds as it does now. The tipstaffs are tbird year students instead of second year students. The first round of the Trial Moot Court is mandatory with succeeding rounds being voluntary and invitational. Invitations are extended to all Winners, and the trial judge can recommend that a meritorious loser also be given an invitation. All students who partiCipate in the required first round are given a one-credit grade based on his pleadings, his attendance at lectures, and his overall performance based on the judge's critique. The method of the judge's evalation must also be changed. I propose that the in addition to a copy of the complaint, answer, and other pertinent information, be given a specific critique sheet. This sheet would define specific areas in which the student should be evaluated.

A maximum of ten points would be given for each category - opening, clOSing, direct examination, cross examination, nature of objections, and overall courtroom decorum. This would tend to make the judging more uniform, even though different judges are deciding the cases.

Changing Trial Moot Court to the second year, presupposes a slight change in curriculum; making Evidence a first semester, second year course as opposed to a second semester course. This is accomplished by switching Tax and Evidence.Another academic consideration must be given to the lecture series that accompanies the Trial Moot Court program. I propose that there should be a series of guest lecturers, rather than saddling the task on one lecturer. Each lecture should be devoted to one of the above criteria that is used for judging.

Varying the lecturers would not only give the student different approaches, but should also assure that someone will show up to give the lectures. Since the lecture series would be the first semester and contillited on Page 14

Page

Eiafu

e iturgy You are the drug problem. You ... a living. walking, shooting problem! Never mind that you're a person, too -- a man with a name and not a chemical symbol. A problem's much easier to deal with. So what if drug treatment centers are inca adequately dealing with the problem. So what if arrest.

By ALFRED S. PELAEZ Professor of low Duquesne University School of law

IITHERE'S A warm, pulsating sensation like an orgasm and then, man, it's like nothing matters. You feel drowsy and contented, and troubles roll off your mind. YOU FEEL NORM,A L."

and incarceration haven't done anything to help the problem.

We've got other problems: inflation; the Mediterranean fleet needs some new models to bolster our peacemaking image: ecology: the Penn-Central that government money. But, problems all must he allotted priorities and patiently walt turn. So shoot up, 'problem," shoot up. It takes a long float a warship; build a missel so that its completion will at least coincide with its obsolescence; placate the farmer. railways and airlines with THEIR problem subsidies.

But you pay a price for the luxury of feeling normal. A nd it goes up as you need more and more to forget. Thirty- five, fifty, seventy dollars a day. and you don't get weekends off.

You've got to hustle. You don't have much time. Got to shoot up every six, eight hours or it'll start. The weakness, painfully wide yawns that twist a jaw from its moorings; shivers and sweat. Water spilling from nose and eyes. Cold, clammy goose flesh. Grinding cramps erupting against taut flesh.

Diarrhea. Violent, explosive vomiting. Muscle spasms, kicking feet.

Got to make it on the street. Steal, pimp, deal. Beg. lie. cheaL To feel normal .â&#x20AC;˘. NORMA L. Life is a treadmill. Highs, glorious highs, and lows. Euphoria and despair. Hustling. Filth, deprIvation, infection, disease.

And hunger . â&#x20AC;˘ . incessant, unrelenting hunger for the white powder that keeps the treadmill endless. TO FEEL NORMA L. And you know, every time the high wears off, that you aren't normal - A ND NEVER WILL BE. Hooked. Strung out.

Junkie. CRIMINA L. Shunned and disdained by decent folk, Stalked and caged by the police. Prosecuted by elected officials with images to preserve. Defended and tried by lawyers. judges and peers who would rather wash their hands of the whole foul business. Shoot up. Feel normal while you can.

It's little solace for what lies behind. A nd not enough for what lies ahead.

JURIS

December, 1970

Pilge Nine

If Shoot up and feel normal!

Be thankful for what you've got. Miranda. Escobedo and a host of successors have made it harder to bust you .•. and that means, maybe. a few more trips before the overdose or cold turkey. And, if you are busted, you get a free defense, courtesy of the Sixth A mendment, federal funds and a self- righteous Bar. A free defense . . . and at that it may be overpriced. Bright, eager, dedicated young lawyers who too quickly learn the value of the preparation they haven't the time to make; once starry eyed jousters buckling under impossible caseloads, still drea ming things that never were. but no longer asking "Why not 1"; burned out hulks seeking only to dispose of case after case after case. problem after problem after problem. Judges and lawyers aware of the injustice, rationalizing it into obscurity; refusing to let supervised law students handle some of the load for fear it may be used as grounds for appeaL

And you've got the clinics . . . dispensing everything from methadone and lomotil to cold turkey and cheer if you're strong enough. and reckless enough, to take the first step toward kicking the habit. You can walk into some of them off the street and get instant treatment, Treatment of the symptoms; a drug tha t blocks the high, the era ving for heroin. A nd. after taking from you the only release you have, the only thing that makes existence bearable, they send you back to the squalor. the depression. the frustration. Back to despair and the inevitable cocaine or amphetamine or barbiturates . . . back to anything whose euphoria isn't blocked by the damned drug they gave you. other clinics - the best ones treat people and causes, not symptoms. But it takes months of waiting to be admitted, and not too many junkies have staying power. The wait is long because the good clinics know the problem is not one of chemistry but of psychology, of education, of jobs; of decent housing and enough to eat, of respect, of acceptance. And It takes time, money and people ... good, qualified, sympathetic people . . . to tackle all these problems. Not just a nurse with a needle.

But there aren't enough "good cUnics to go around. And, there IS the crime - the theft, dealing and prostitution. So that makes it right. doesn't it? Forget search and seizure •.• bust that junkie. shake him down. Find the stuff and tell the judge you saw it fall out of his pocket. It's not really lying. We've a job to do. Got to rid the community of this trash, this cancer. So what if the public defender doesn't talk to the junkie until a few minutes before trial. Probably no defense anyway. Nothing to be gained by filing a motion to suppress .•. the cops know how to testify. The lab report is on shaky ground, but what the he11you can SEE this guy's a junkie, can't you? A nd what's the jury to do? Turn this junkie loose to steal again?Already cantt get property insurance in the city. And he might kill someone someday. If it were anything else . . . but HEROIN. We got to make sure he doesn't peddle some of the stuff to our kids.

That makes it right, doesn't it? A nd the judge has his hands tied ... the legislature has made the penalty mandatory in most states up to forty years for three time losers in some places.

So even if he really does believe all that hocus-pocus about only near-psychotics becoming addicts: that it's a disease that may even be caused by, or cause, metabolic change; that jail clearly isn't the answer - what can he do? That makes it alright, doesn't it?

K

Go home, all you peers, and take a stiff belt. And hope you, when your time comes, get cancer or a coronary or sclerosis of the liver, or anything legal. So you'll die with dignity . . . not like the junkie.

And you, junkie. Shoot up while you can. Feel normal. And gain solace from the knowledge that disenchantment, frustration and despair are sweeping the campuses. Bogging down the East.

Hopscotching across the great plains. Creeping into the sheltered villages of the Rockies. Running rampant along the West Coast.

Beyond the ghetto . . . And people live out there. Normal people.

JURIS

December, 1970

Paae Ten

The Grading System. • • a rebuttal areas of interest; they afford an opportunity to investigate possible future careers; and they help broaden one's legal scope. They are not designed to pad averages or beat the system. A pass·fail will encourage the purposes of electives."

By J. STEPH EN KREGlOW

-"I

Y PURPOSE in writing this article Is to respond to and explore the tenets espoused by Mr. William Costopoulous in his article "Grades are a Hassle" which appeared in the October edition of JURIS. t am not in disagreement with the basic proposition set forth in that article, I.e. that the grading system is at best of dubious value and that constant reevaluation and change are needed. However, I must disagree to some extent with this statement: «But the present grading system does not serve the purpose of a grading system ••• " I believe the purpose of a grading system, in the context of legal education, is to evidence levels of competency attained by students facing comparable difficulties over a three or four Year period. The grading system itself provides at least one criterion upon which prospective employers can base their judgment as to hiring.

Furthermore, it allows to some degree, the opportunity for an individual to assess his own comprehension of legal principles. Granted it affords a limited picture, but in terms of analyzing and disgesting r€'latively large amounts of material, distilling and in turn expressing the product of this distillation through an objective written exercise. it furnishes a fairly clear picture of a person's ability to express himself on paper. This picture, based on an objective evaluation, must be said to correspond to and reflect in some degree at least an individual's ability.

Motivation is an immeasurable factor and can never be truly ascertained but the grade one receives whether he works hard or slides through is still an objective evaluation of his ability to express himself in that area by the written word. I do not mean to suggest in anyway that ipso facto the best one on paper will make the best lawyer. Such a conclusion would be naive. Nevertheless, it does reflect one's ability to communicate on paper and this is one of the essential tools of our future profession.

The effect of removing the impact of electives from the total grading system is a good suggestion but I see no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water. As an alternative I submit that the removal of elective grades from the present system and the establishment of a separate grading system for them will lead to a truer evaluation of one's overall ability. In addition this will also present a distinct representation of one's ability in fields he may wish to enter. In essence I am proposing a splitting of the grading system to reflect achievement in the separate areas of required courses and electives, The removal of the impact of electives on the overall grading system combined with a separate evaluation system will only encourage free selection of elective courses.

3. • Appellate Moot Court and Trial Moot Court Should be given more credit and a grade. Many students have an uncanny aptitude, or learned ability, in these areas that goes unrewarded.

Too many students refuse to pursue these fields because of the figurative law of diminishing returns. Though one does not have to be an oral advocate to be a good lawyer, or an eltce lIent lawyer. oral advocacy is a critical part of the legal profeSSion, and as long as it continues to be so, it is the institution's responsibility to foster its development."

I"tc •• , ••

In conclusion I agree with Mr. Costopoulos that the system now existing must be and I flrT'Onp'IV urge the students and faculty to to this problem. The proposals I have mentioned are not submitted as an overall answer to the problem but are set forth to stimUlate discussion and encourage action by those upon whom the responsibility Besall of us. The answer is by no means clear or easy to reach but the difficulty does not diminish in the least the fact that the answer is one essentiai to an equitable and objective evaluation of future ability.

.

Hard day In court?

Relax at

p~ank &

wallY'S

Cocktoils

Mr. Costopoulos suggests certain means which he feels would help to remedy the ineqUity of the system. I agree for the most part with these suggestions but believe a more thorough examination of them is necessary.

1. "Examinations must continue to be taken under the number system. This compels objectivity." There is certainly little, if any, valid disagreement with this proposition because objectivity is essential to any fair ,"valuation of ability,

The appellate moot court and trial moot court programs should receive some weight in terms of a grade, but I do not think that their inclusion into a total grading system would be the proper solution.

Once again we are dealing with a tool of the attorney. his forensic abilities, which to some are essential but to others of limited importance. I submit a separate grading system to be one possible answer but even if such is provided inequities will still exist. This is due to the manner in which these programs are presently set up and their resulting failure to truly reflect one's potential forensic abilities. It would bl" possible, under thl" existing system, for some individuals to be graded on several performances while others would be only on one. Certainly the individual who is able to pr~ress is also able to improve thereby entitling him to receive a better grade. The individual who is unable to continue past the first round would be on on single appearance which may have been poor for anyone of a wide variety of reasons such as nervousness, sickness, uncertainty as to

B~ • .1~ch • ':Dim1R/t 1ahe-()u! $eJlA).ice

2. "The electives should be graded passfait Electives provide for detailed study in

Phone 261·.14,s7

JURIS

kitchen open' 7 a.m. to midnitlht

1033 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh. Pa. 15219

December, 1970

Page Eleven

ABORTIONSocietal Mores Versus Freedom of Choice Professor Robert Broughton

A

BORTION was the subject of a debate sponsored by the Student Bar Association on Wednesday, December 2. An attentive audience, numbering over two-hundred, jammed the Moot Court Room to he~ Professors Robert Broughton and Aaron Twerskl, both of Duquesne, present their views regarding this controversial topic.

By WILLIAM JAMES McKIM Third Year Day

Professor Broughton spoke first. He resolved that the law should not determine whether an abortion may or may not be performed. Recognizing that to define when life begins requires a moral judgment, he reasoned that society. by forcing a woman to remain pregnant, places an unwarranted burden upon her. He maintained that abortion laws reflect society's attitudes toward sex; pregnancy being characterized as a punishment for participation. In short, Professor Broughton views the abortion question as an ethical issue to be dealt with on an individual basis rather than to be regulated by law.

Professor Aaron Twerski

For Professor Twerski the question whether life exists before birth was irrelevant. He maintained that the ~nborn "child" has at least the potential for life.

Arguing that the law must recognize this potential he adm~tted that he was making a moral judgment. He felt that since we all operate within a cultural framework it would be impossible to do otherwise.

Professor Twerski suggested that a society which sanctions abortion "on demand," taking no account of the possibility or potential for life, could easily develop a disregard for human life. He views allowing abortion "on demand" as a steo toward creating a cultural mentality which considers human life expendable.

A Complete Lille oj Lel.!lIl Blullks A Complele Lille oj Supplies for the Lm(' ,"'tudelll

P. O. NALY COMPANY

The debate was one of the best received programs of the academic year. Hopefully, we have witnessed the first of a series of similar programs.

PRINTn-~G

â&#x20AC;˘ ENGRAVING' !>TI\TIONERY

Law & Finance Building

Pittsburgh. Pa. 15219

425 Fourth Avenue

JURIS

Phoaea: 261-0366

December. 1970

261-5841

Page Twelve

DEAN'S CORNER OUR TRADITIONS GROW SLOW'LY, BUT THEY GROW.

S.B.A. Colulnn

By JAKE MYERS Students Gain Admitta nce To Faculty Committees THE FACULTY decision to grant our request far student participation in six committees (Curriculum, Sum mer School. Clinical Legal Eflncation, Facilities Planning, Programs and Library) has bPen received bv the Student Bar Association and thf! student body in general with grl"at enthusiasm.

As of this writing over sixty students expressed a desire to serve on one of the committees. Only nineteen could be chosen.

In lhs:ht of this response, I think it necessary to explain how the Executive Board anticipates the structural change will benefit the student body.

But first a word on the selection of the students to serve on the respective committees. This has been an extremely difficult task and I only hope our decisions have been both fair and competent. We are keenly aware of the precedent we are establiShing and our objectivl"s in formulating a se lection procedure have been to choose the most competent individuals and to keep politics and favoritism out ofthe procedure as much as possible. It must be stated at the outset that while no system of selection can be devoid of the human and emotional factors, the criteria we have concentrated on have been (1) general competence-as much as one can judge a peer with respect to this, (2) divergence of viewpoint - the committee members WILL NOT be blind instrumentalities of the Executive Board or Student Bar President, and (3) experience and apparent interest in the respective areas.

r am pleased to announce that Tamilia has agreed to teach the course Relations. Judge Tamilia is probably the scholar-practitioner in the area of addition to the faculty I think,

The curriculum committee will be evaluating and re-evaluating course offerings at the Law School.

The Committee on Clinical Legal Education is an ad hoc committee that was formed to explore the feasibility of implementing a program at the law school that would enable a law student to gain on the job practical exnerlence, make a contribution to SOCiety, and get credit for his efforts. This concept has worked with great success at some schools and has failed at others. Time will be spent this year trying to determine if it will work at Duquesne.

Given the tremendous movement of towards (' linical training, we have a facultv committee to take a hard-nosed look at Dllquesn~'s I'xisting programs. Professor Sekula has agreed to ehair the committee. We look forward to the work of the Sekula committee.

At the last. faculty invite joint discussi';n with r!:'lDr€!Senta~ti student bodv on several of committees: This is a big forward for and we are hopeful that mutual discussion will our araci!?mir but our facilitate not growth as a family as well.

The Summer School Committee will be exploring the possibility of expanding our infant summer school program, initiated last year, into a full going permanent program that may even appeal to others in the Pittsburgh community.

ahout

The Programs Committee will devote their efforts to designing extra-cirricular academjrally orIented activities that will make the law school more inclusive and broad.

The Facilities Planning Committee will bP receptive to your suggestions as to what improvements can be made in the law school physical plant.

And the Library Committee should be responsive to student suggestions in what improvements might be made in present library facilities including broadE'ning or narrowing the selections; expanding the reserve room hours, etc.

The presence of students on these res pe c t i v e committees will make the student opinion more widely and effectively heard if we make maximum utilization of the system. When you have a suggestion as to a course that should be added or dropped from the curriculum the student member of the Curriculum Committee'should be consulted. It will be his job to consider and discuss your idea with the other members of the Curriculum Committee. This principle is applicable to each of the six committees.

What can the student body expect from the new ,Joint Faculty-Student Committees? While this is not easy to forecast, I think it no exaggeration to say that the very least our viewpoint will be known and considered before any decision is made in any area directly affeding us as students. How effective we are in actually making a decision remains to be seen. It is not unreasonable to assume that the seriousness with which we are taken will be directly related to how seriously we take our new responsibilities.

UUllU"'NIt'

of Over the has bPen much heated rlj""II'~"j,'n box.' Some students have taken the locked box is all that stands between them and a vengeful faculty. It is my opinion and it has to my been my opinion that thos!? knowledge, we have nOlle who are pl?tty and vengeful one way or another work their will. But we of the faculty, who labor and hard to makE, certain that students, in their 2.re given the maximum benefit for Ihe ideas that th('y forth, believe that the locked box is at best questionable. It is my intention. with the advice o.f th" faruity and representatives from the Student. Bar, to design a new procedure which will have both confidence of the student and the of the faculty. This procl"dure will be for the January examination period.

Fina.lly, I wish to congratulate our Moot Conrt Team. This is the second VE'ar in a row that we have won the Regionals. Our tr'aditions gr0w , but they grow, - RONALD R. DAVENPORT

WHERE ARE YOU NOW?

Help keep our mailing list up to date.

NAME ......... ,.......... ,....... ,.. " ... ,.... ,. ,......... _, ..................... ,." ................... .

NEW ADDRESS., ..... ,., ............ " ..... ,..... " .. ,... " .... ,.... ' ....... ,.', .... ,..... . no. $treef

..·..

A cornerstone of this proposal is the tremendous potential the new structure of government at the Law School gives us for practical experience in the art of decision making. We will be a part of the decision and hopefully the assumption of this new responsibility will be followed by a birth of pride in the institution.

The sometimes prevailing feeling of "get in - get out" hopefully will give way to a new feeling of "let's "'0 forward together." This can be the beginning of the ~rosion of unfounded student-faculty distinctions - and the birth of a real learning experience.

······'·~ity

.. "· .. ·· .. ·..··'···"··.. ·'···· ..

.... ·.. ···'· .... '·· .. ········· ..

···'~·;~t~

'·~ip·

.. ·····

FIRM NAME" .............. ,., ....... ,..................................... ,.........................

POSiTION ....... , .......... ,." .......... , ............. ,... ,....... ' ............ ', ........ ,... ' .. ', ... .

Names of otner alumni who may not be on the maiting list.

NAME....•... _.... __ ................. ,..._............... _..__..... _._........... _...._ ......_ ._ .......

,.~_

..... _.. " ...... ••••

no.

~

~.~

.................. _ ....... ,. .... .... ~

street

w~,.

.... ,. ...

city

*~

....... ,.,..

&

......

~

.................. _

state

.... "

... A

_

........... _

. . . . . . . . . . . . "' . . . . . . . . . .

zip

NAME __ .•...•... _........._ ... _ .. _ ..._._ ......_... _........ ,...._..... ___ ....___._

The relationship of the student members of the respective committees with the student body should be explained. Representation was sought in these particular committees in the belief that these areas dirertly affect and interest the students and are not beynnd our individual competence.

'····;;:····' .... ·~t;~···'·················~itY"····· .. ···········'~;;t;;····'····"···~ip········

,

JURIS

--'

December, 1970

Page Thirteen

)W. ~ick

stie

P.A.D. Egan Chapter

lant His lee.

tion ;heo

By JOHN REED, president

at has I to '=

j

te,

t

ttl~

T

HE FA LL Initiation Ceremony, originally scheduled to be held in Judge Brosky1s courtroom in the County Courthouse on October 16th, was held instead in the Faculty Lounge of the Duquesne Union. It seems that the Courthouse had received two bomb threats that day and the door guard would not accept the argument that professional fraternities, :such as PAD. do not actively engage in such activities. Despite this. a successful ceremony was held. PAD is proud to announce that the following brothers were accepted into membership: Hobert Barletta, Miclk'lel Bart, Joseph Blandina, John Byrne, Gary Cassavechia, Frank Garger, Thomas Hession, John Hines, Frank Kelker, Thomas Kratzenberg. Edward Krug, Ronald Kubovcik, Richard Lebovitz, Terry Lerman, David 'McCormick, William l\1cKim, David I\letinko, Henry Perkin, Paul Sutter and William \Vard. In addition, Professor Nick Fisfis was initiated into PAD as an Honorary Faculty Member. Congratulations

ulty 'sne will our

lilU

ier( 'kHj

til',' 10 'ays

lTl" anu ';"t'

lake

arc put )Est

are extended to these new members.

PAD held its traditional Fall Informal Party on :Sov~mb~r 14. At this party two movies were shO\\in. The first W 5 short series of Edgar A llen Poe's classics starring Vincent Price, Peter Lorre, and Rathbone. The second featurt.:was 'Horrors of Dracula." As might have been those of us who are superstitious (since :Sovember l-l Wil:::; the day following Friday the 13th) in the last three minutes of film, as the drama was reaching its climax, just as the hero was about to let ;'OId Drac" have it, the projector bulb out. Now, not much significance was attached to this eVc/,t by the "non- believers" until a mysterious note appeared following Monday in the PAD mialbox. It read, "I vill return," and it was simplytD." In spite of this of evil over good, all brothers and guests enjoyed quieting their nerves with beer and hoagies.

the

, tu till'

tllte tll\:

f

)un

lave but

IRT

~~ lie Yt'Llai tNU! g(p

------------•

i (84!mtuJ

I I I I

@~(Jry~ (8~tfeM

I I I

~

HIP

CAPITALISM

I l·rt·~idenL Nhon look ;i "cr.tnl cour~l'H to prl'parc for lhe CaJifuruL,t Ba.r A"l!<uciation Exam . . in SOl', 1!f:).7. u.~E l\IA(.AZI~E. Nu\', ti, IH't}, page H"! uThe ¥uung Sixun nt yo,.r :-ftudt'nl un,on. dorm, ~tuH mo"OG •. "; mu,H hi" {H:'I;h:1 for in adnlnc0 by H

,

011 retaIl l->rlcP~ <lnd pd)' a returnhblt' tor :.J tul1 c<1.\h rdund

dlM'OUI~t

al..d are in rt'-sJ.ieabl(' cond,tioH_ TIH'r!:'fore

\'011

hav(" 11:1

and groo'i:y posters. are also in hne for' you sell. to me ple,.(:-e ,.;end tor Gumpll"'t.e mforrna tlOn to """",OU,J .... " "0 COLLEGE NOTES '" TEXT"" INC, lSi N. y, 10010. 212 ~ MU 3-8800 icollt:ct caUs not accepted} Name ...

Address.

I I

I

Cay,

State,

<

Ut IV St' hoo!. ,

I

I I I I I

• ------------

The JURIS Staff

JURIS

F<O B

J

):Ie\'\, Y,)rk ;.,litpptHJ; char~t·

peT your 10(:<":1 tax lu;r:-

December, 1970

C:ry Your

n:wafl::, YOIl ClLSiO;l1l'r;-,

Pale Fourteen

THE MOOT COURT PROGRAM - A Proposal continued from Page 7

the trials second, giving the Evidence course a chance to sink in, there would be little chance of the trials proceeding before the lecture series is over.

Hopefully the lecturer would demonstrate via example the topic that he is speaking about, rather than tell the student how to proceed in trial.

3. APPELLATE MOOT COURT IS SIDFTED TO TIDRD YEAR. In the student's senior year of law school he is afforded the opportunity to carry the legal procedure to its conclusion - the final appeal.

The student retains the problem that he has had for the past two years and argues his case on appeal as appellant or appellee. The deSignation of appellant or appellee is fixed as a consequence of the student's performance in his first round of the Trial Moot Court. Accompanying lectures in appellate brief writing would continue in the manner in which they are given now, but more time must be devoted to the oral argument. As was suggested for the Trial Moot Court lectures, guest lecturers could be utilized who perform appellate work in the area.

Oral arguments would be given in the second semester and there would be no subsequent rounds after the first. A one credit grade would be given for the student's written brief with some weight given to his oral presentation and lecture attendance.

This writer feels that the three phase proposal outlined above would give the law school a basis for a strong clinical program. Rather than being disjointed, as is the present system, the new plan would give the student a feeling for the legal process from its initial stage of problem analysis using the legal memorandum; through trial preparation and Jury argument in the Trial Moot Court; and ending with the final stage of appeal in the Appellate Moot Court. An important point is the retaining of the same fact problem for three years to give the student the feeling of personal attachment to the problem and make his clinical experience cohesive.

1 realize that every' new idea has its problems, and this one is no exception. This writer feels that there are three basic ones that come to the f(lrefront under this proposal: 1) What happens to Duquesne's traditional participation in the regional competition if the Appellate practice is shifted to the third year? 2) How can an appeal be taken from the Trial Moot Court to the Appellate Moot Court if

there is no record? 3) Who will bear the burden of the tremendous workload that would accompany a program of this nature? particiating student.

Problem one can be dealt with by propoSing two choices - drop participation in the competition or find some other means of selecting two finalists at the end of the second year. Since the first alternative would be met with vehement oppoSition, I shall concern myself with the second. I propose that a new elective be offered similar to Trial Tacts Appellate Tactics.

This elective would be offered in the second semester of the second year, and would be open to a maximum of twenty students. The students would get intensive instruction in appellate brief writing and tactics of appellate argument. Through a series of intracourse competition the Moot Court Board and the Moot Court Team would be selected. The Board and the Team would be exempted from partiCipation in the third year Appellate Moot Court requirement.

However, the Moot Court Team would earn their one credit in their senior year via the work they do as the team representing the law school in the regional competition, and the Board would receive their one credit grade by serving the Appellate program in an advisory capacity; their duties being to aid the partiCipating students and to help in coordinating the program. This proposal would serve two functions. First, it would give the student inte rested in appellate work an intensified course in that area.

Second, it would enable Duquesne to field an even better prepared Moot Court Team than represents the school at present and would produce a knowledgeahle and a functional Moot Court Board.

Problem two is a bit more difficult to cope with, but still not insurmountable. To take an effective appeal from the Trial Moot Court to the Appellate Moot Court there should be some type of record on which the appeal can be hased. I propose that one trial be selected at random from each of the problem situations, and an actual stenographer or court reporter be used to take a record of the trial.

The three records would be printed and used as the official record for each of the three problems in the Appellate Moot Court. This may not be ideal because each trial is distinct in its evolution in the courtroom, but since the three problem situations are constant in the fact situations, a record from one trial in each prohlem area should serve as an average and therefore, would not be inequitable to the

JURIS

The third problem, mentioned above, deals with the entire program. The proposal of a clincial program at Duquesne presupposes the hiring of a new memher to be exclusively in charge of implementing the program. He would also be the instructor for the Trial Tactics and proposed Appellate Tactics courses. In addition to a new full-time staff member, there might also be a need for some lower reader assistants. Since many DUQuesne ",.. "n,,"'~'" locate in the Pittsburgh area, I would propose offering them the chance to supplement their meagre first or second year income as readers.

The foregoing proposal might not be the ultimate answer, but I feel it merits some serious consideration.

A cohesive clinical program that is recognized as such by the local as well as the national legal community can only serve to bring deserving benefits to the law school and the graduates who partidpatl'd in the program. A clinical program could work at Duquesne as it works at other law schools. It would take careful analysis, planning, and of course, money. But I feel that if the program was recognized as meritorious, the latter would take care of itself through foundations, grants, and other sources.

Because the present Moot Court system has functioned for many years as it currently does today, does not make it the only way it can function. Mr. Justice Holmes stated it this way:

It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that it was laid down In the time of Henry IV. It is still more revolting if the grounds Ilpon which it was laid down have vanished long since and the rule simply exists from hlind imitation of the past.

I think it is time to re-evaluate the Moot Court program at Duquesne and institute some type of clinical program to bridge the gap between the theoretical confines of law school and the real world of the practicing attorney. If we can blend theory and practicality in the law school experience, the transition from law student to attorney will be smoother and more natural. A clinical program will accomplish this ideal.

December, 1970

Page Fiffeen

e

"

j

f

路t f

"

JURIS

December. 1970

Pale Sixteen

Alumni Record by Thomas N. Silverman

L '68 - THOMAS P. RUANE •• • Following his nadua tion from Duquesne Law School in 1968, Mr, huanE' took a position with the United States Department of Justice as a trial attorney for the Antitrust Division.

Currently Mr. Ruane is unrler spec'ial appointment to the l' n it e d S tat e s Attornev's Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans Division and is investi"'ati~ and prosecuting Labor racketeering and other federal criminaloffenses alleged to have occurred in Louisiana.

Mr. Ruane is presently residing in Arlington Vir\\inia.

'*

'*

'"

'"

L '28 - JULIUS J. STRBA •• is a graduate of the Evening- Division Class of 1928. Prior to entering Duquesne Law School, Mr. Strba attended Carnegie Institute of Technology where he majored in engineering. In 1949 he became the Chief Traffic Court Magistrate for the City of Pittsburgh, a position he held for 21 years until his recent retirement in early 1970.

Mr. Strm is an active member in the Syria Temple as well as a long time member of the AlIegheny County Bar ASSOCiation.

'*

* * *

L '62 - ARTIIUR LEBOVITZ received his Undergraduate degree drom Washington and Jefferson Collf'(!f' in 1959 and was a member of the Day DiVision Class of 1962, After a brief tour in the military, he entered privatE' practice in 1964 and since that time has gained experience in \*aluable Community affairs working as a Staff Attorney for the Pittsburgh Legal Aid Society.

L '60 AUGUST DAMIAN , • • Having earned his Bachelor of Arts at Duquesne University in 1955, Mr. Damian from The Law School as a member of the Evening Division Class. He is presently the senior partner in the local law firm of Damian and Damian located in the Grant Building, downtown Pittsburg-h, Mr. Damian also maintains offices on Frankstowll Road in Penn Hills Pa. Attorney Damian's primary legal interests have been directed toward the area of Negligence and associated personal injury practice. He is currently a member of both the American Trial Lawyers Association and the Academy of Trial Lawyers.

Mr. Damain's extra-legal activities include membership in the Sharpsburg Pa. Chamber of Commerce. He has also been a past Law School Representative to tbe Duquesne University Board of Directors ano is currently an active member of the Law School Alumni ASSociation.

He resides with his wife and four children in the Fox Chapel section of PittSburgh.

* '*

* *

L '67 - JEROME MANSMAN ... staifmember of Law Review and served as Student Bar President during his law school career at Duquesne. Fonowing hIs admission to the Bar, Attorney Mansman has engaged in extensive trial practice as plaint1!rs counsel in virtually every phase of personal injury practice. He is presentiy a partner in the local law firm of McCartle and Mansman situated in the Allegheny .

Building, downtown Pittsburgh.

Mr. Mansman has also been instrumental in providing legal services to the community at large and toward that end he is currently Chairman of the AlleO"heny County Bar Assn. Alert Team in addition to s~rving as a' Board member of both the American Trial Lawyers and Young Lawyers Associations.

He reSides with his wife Carol in the Mount Lebanon section of Pittsburgh.

Juris

Duquesne University School of Law 800 Forbes Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219

Mr, Lebovitz is currently a partner in the local law firm of Savage, Finkel, Love and Lebovitz located in The Lawyers Bldg., Pittsburgh Pa.

L '68 - TIMOTHY SULLIVAN Jr. Subsequent to his graduation from Duquesne Law School in June Mr. SuIIivan took a position with Reed, Smith. Shaw and McClay. In Mayofl970 he became an associate in the loeal law firm of Ludwig, Talenti, Wilson and Sullivan located in the Frick downtown Pgh. He also maintains offices on. Broadhello Road in Corapolis. Pa. Although p rim at i engaged in the practice of law, Mr. Sullivan shows a continuing interest in the fields of Labor Law and Labor

Relations.

Aside from his endeavors private Mr. Sullivan derlicates a substantial of his time to the f'n",rOY",ncr local youth organizations and aid <:"I'ipl·,&>" prominent which are: the End Church the Legal Services youth Groups; Young Life etc,

in

In addition to

as the President and Chairman

of the Board of the

C Farm, Mr, Sullivan is a director of the performing Arts SOCiety of Crafton, where he resides with his wife and two chHdren.

*

*'

* *

L '43-JESS ~ptRER , • gradUated from DUQuesne Law School in 1943 after earning his Baccalaureate, Masters and Ph.D. at the University of Pittsburgh.

Since 1945 Dr. Spirer has been a faculty member at the University of Miami located in Coral Gables, Florida, where he is currently Director of the

UniverSity's Guidance and Counseling Center. In addition to his administrative duties atthe University.

Dr. Spirer serves as a Professor of Psychology and Sociology, Among Dr. Spirer's professional credits are his membership in the American Board of Examiners in Professional Psychology, and status as a Diplomate in Clinical Psychology, Dr. Spirer is an active participant in the affairs of the University of Miami Sehool of Law where he is 11 member of the Advisory Committee on Admissions.

Dr. Spirer resides in Coral Gables, Florida v.1th his wife and family.

N"n-Profit O'91f1i:ntion

U. S. POSTAGE

PAID Pittsburgh, Pa. Permit No. 390

As a General practitioner, Counselor Lebovitz shows both awareness and interest in the problems which confront the welfare population and poor people in toto.

He resides with his wife and daughter in the Squirrel Hill section of Pittsburgh.

POSTAGE REQUIRED FOR THIS MAILING MATTER

JURIS

December, 1970