Memphis Lawyer Volume 39 Issue 1

the magazine of the Memphis Bar Association | Vol. 39, Issue 1, Spring 2022

TOP 5 TIPS:

Taking Depositions in a Post-Pandemic World THIS ISSUE:

BACK IN MY DAY: The Archaic Trope that is Killing the Legal Profession Embracing the Benefits Remote Depositions Bring to the Litigation Process

Memphis Bar Foundation Welcomes Thirty-Two New Fellows

Volume 39, Issue 1, Spring 2022

Our customers are talking . . .

FEATURES

BankTennessee has been a wonderful supporter of the Memphis Bar Association for many years!

6 Back In My Day: The Archaic Trope that is Killing

the Legal Profession

BY NATTALY PERRYMAN, ESQ.

The bankers support the local community, and best of all, they understand the financial needs of legal professionals.

10

Top 5 Tips: Taking Depositions in a Post-Pandemic World

12

The Future of the Legal Profession: Lawyers at a Crossroads

BY MICHAEL MURRAY

BY NICOLE M. GRIDA

23 Embracing the Benefits Remote Depositions Bring

to the Litigation Process

I hope you will give them a call for all of your banking needs!

BY CLARE FOLEY

27

Workplace Survey for Lawyers 45 and Under

Peter Gee, attorney

28

Memphis Bar Foundation Welcomes Thirty-Two New Fellows

Morgan & Morgan 2021 MBA President

31

2022 High School Mock Trial Competition

33

MBA 100 Club

COLUMNS 5

President’s Column

BY TANNERA GIBSON

14

Court Report: Shelby County Circuit Court

17

Court Report: United States District Court

BY STEPHEN LEFFLER

BY DEAN DECANDIA

21 MALS Corner: The Future is Full of Possibilities

and Opportunities

BY CINDY COLE ETTINGOFF

26 CLC Corner: Access to Visitation Programs at the

The Bank for the Legal Community

Community Legal Center

BY TINA LUM PERRUSQUIA

PROUD PARTNER OF THE MEMPHIS BAR ASSOCIATION SINCE 2006

Peter, Thank you for your kind words! We appreciate you and all of our customers.

30 North Second at Court Square

901.525.5533

www.banktennessee.com

We also have offices in East Memphis, Germantown, Collierville, Munford & Ripley.

MEMBER FDIC NMLS #441426

31

Bar Scene

36

People in the News

MEMPHIS LAWYER

2022 MBA Officers

the magazine of the Memphis Bar Association

PRESIDENT'S

Memphis Bar Association Publications Committee Nicole M. Grida, Chair Audrey Calkins Dean DeCandia Maureen Holland Marlinee Iverson Steve Leffler Halle Priester

The Memphis Lawyer is a quarterly publication of the Memphis Bar Association, Inc. with a circulation of 2,000. If you are interested in submitting an article for publication or advertising in an upcoming issue, contact info@memphisbar.org. The MBA reserves the right to reject any advertisement or article submitted for publication.

Tannera Gibson President

Jennifer Sink Vice President

COLUMN

Peter Gee

Past President

By TANNERA GIBSON, MBA 2022 President

2022 Board of Directors Justin Bailey Taurus Bailey Dawn Campbell Lisa Gill Hon. M. Ruthie Hagan Marlinee Iverson Hon. JoeDae Jenkins Justin Joy Lani Lester Andrea Malkin Bobby Martin Matt May Patrick Morris Steve Mulroy

Hon. Gadson William Perry Edd Peyton Hon. Shayla Purifoy Billy Ryan Zayid Saleem Joseph Smith Section Representatives Anne Davis Thomas Greer Thomas Henderson Maureen Holland Ashley Jefferson Daryl Smith

ABA Delegate Lucian Pera AWA Representative April Bostick Law School Representative Donna Harkness NBA Representative Laquita Stokes YLD President Chris Williams

MBA STAFF

Mary Ann Upchurch Executive Director

The Memphis Bar Association 145 Court Ave. Suite 301 Memphis, TN 38103 Phone: (901) 527-3573 Fax: (901) 440-0426 www.memphisbar.org

Adam Johnson

Secretary/Treasurer

Lauren Gooch Membership & CLE Director

Kelly Swan

Communications Director

S

pring is here, and the MBA is going strong thanks to all of you!! Here’s a recap of our first quarter:

In the spirit of hope, positivity, and declining COVID cases, we are excited to announce an in-person Bench Bar for 2022! Get ready for some fall fun in the sun at the Grand Hotel Golf Resort & Spa in Point Clear Alabama from September 29, 2022 through October 2, 2022. Save the Date and register today!

In the spirit of community, we have established the President’s Council! The President’s Council is tasked with identifying and working to resolve one legal issue during the President’s term. I’m excited to announce the 2022 President’s Council: Terrence Reed, Tennessee State Senator Raumesh Akbari, Professor Daniel Kiel, Maureen Holland, County Commissioner Van D. Turner, Ursula Holmes, Melisa Moore, and Bryce Ashby. Thanks to the Council for agreeing to serve our community in this way!

In the spirit of moving forward, we have also established the MBA’s Leadership Scholars program.

MBA Leadership Scholars is a leadership program for 2Ls and 3Ls attending Memphis Law. The application went live on March 23, 2022, and the inaugural program will take place during the fall semester. We kicked off with a mixer with the law school and the SBA, and we’re looking forward to working with the students who are selected for the program!

In the spirit of growth, we expanded the President’s Circle through a new and exclusive partnership. Thanks to all of our President’s Circle sponsors!

We have much more in the works, and we’re looking forward to partnering with many of you and continuing to serve the legal community and the greater community!

As always, we would love to hear from you. Please let us know if there’s an area you believe could be better served! We appreciate your support, and we want to support you. 

L E T ’ S WO R K T O G E T H E R T O PRO T EC T YO UR C L I E N T S ’ I N T E L L EC T UAL PRO PE R T Y.

We are committed to protecting your clients’ IP assets, leaving you to focus on all other legal matters.

Learn more at iplawgroup.com.

PROTECT IT WITH PATTERSON® 5

BACK IN MY DAY: The Archaic Trope that is Killing the Legal Profession

By NATTALY PERRYMAN, ESQ.

A

s a former classmate and fellow duly licensed Tennessee lawyer so eloquently stated recently, “There is no ‘back in my day’, the ‘day’ is today!” He’s absolutely right. “Their day”, “my day”, “our day”- in 2022, it is all obsolete. The only day we all have is today, and today looks very different than what many in the profession are used to.

Back in the day, lawyers were only white Americans.

Back in the day, lawyers were only males. Back in the day, lawyers only came from the elite of the elite and upper echelons of society. Back in the day, lawyers had to take multiple bar examinations if they wanted to practice in multiple states. Back in the day, lawyers were not required to continue their legal education. However, it is rather unfortunate, yet easy to understand, why so many in the profession do not realize times have changed. According to the American Bar Association lawyer demographics from 2021, the profession is still 1 85.4% White, and 63% male.

While we can all be appreciative of the gains that have been made in the profession, we can still be objectively realistic regarding all the work that still needs to be done.

Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law finally has its first Black Dean. The Memphis Bar Association passed the gavel to its first Black Female President. Although these are monumental occasions worth celebrating daily, it is a legitimate tragedy both these milestones happened within the last 365 days. While we can appreciate the rise of LGBTQ+ and non-binary persons in the profession, we can also hold our peers accountable when they vocalize frustrations over having to use preferred pronouns. Difficult conversations are just that – difficult; but difficult is not impossible. So, let’s start.

Professional hazing should be as dead as the patriarchy. We all know it is not, but that does not mean one cannot begin imploring best practices in their work 6

environment immediately. A great place to start is with salaries and employment contracts. Back in the day, $35,000 to $40,000 might have been a dream starting salary. But welcome to 2022 my lovelies, $35,000 to $40,0000 a year does not even begin to compensate, nor justify, attending law school in this millennium. We can all agree times are hard for everyone, but we must also all be realistic with goals and expectations. If you are a sole practitioner or smaller boutique firm and cannot afford a starting associate salary over $40,000, explore other ways to compensate your employees. For some, that may mean hiring a paralegal until the financial capital is acquired to adequately pay a duly licensed attorney.

For others, offering competitive benefits or paying for bar examination fees, or additional state licensing fees are all things that could be attractive for new attorneys.

Long gone are the days of expecting junior associates to put up with pennies, long hours, no benefits and no employment contract. Under those circumstances, why would anyone stay?

Speaking of the great resignation … the legal profession is not exempt. And guess what – the “back in my day” mentality is again largely to blame. Aside from being expected to stay in a toxic work environment because “everyone has to put in their time”, today’s attorneys will not put up with the litany of microaggressions from partners solely out of reverence for their age or status within the firm. As another duly licensed Tennessee colleague told me, she routinely put up with a founding

partner at her previous place of employment constantly telling clients “Oh, you’ll want to talk to Cara because she’s 2 prettier and cheaper than me.” While this partner may have laughed off these comments, they were demeaning and belittling of Cara’s credentials and abilities to do the job well. Of course a first-year associate will be less expensive than a senior partner, but an attorney’s physical attributes should never be a part of the conversation, not even in a joking manner. More importantly, what type of message is that sending to clients?

According to a 2021 Harvard Business Review article, “Employees between 30 and 45 years old have had the greatest increase in resignation rates, with an average increase of more than 20% between 2020 and 3 2021.” In 2020, the median age of American attorneys was 47, with 45% of all attorneys falling between the 4 ages of 25 to 44. You know what demographic also falls within that age range? Millennials! Now more than ever, millennial attorneys are re-thinking what their “careers” should look like. Some attorneys are branding themselves and their marketability by becoming social media influencers, while some attorneys are exploring the world of entrepreneurship with retail boutiques, and other attorneys are leaving the profession altogether because the “back in my day” workhorse mentality just does not align with their chakras anymore. The “back in my day” mentality is not only killing the legal profession – it is also killing us, mentally and physically. We are simply not here for it!

If you have made it this far, you might be asking yourself – “So now what? What are we supposed to do with the information we gain from all of these difficult conversations?” Well, a great starting point is acknowledging that CLEs are simply not enough. Maybe “back in the day”, a law license was enough, but that day is long gone. CLEs are a start, but fifteen credit hours of one’s personal choosing is far from an efficient way to make sure we stay abreast of current trends. On October 18, 2017, the Tennessee Board of Law Examiners filed a petition seeking to amend Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 7 by adopting the Uniform Bar Examination (UBE); which the Tennessee Supreme Court granted per curiam 5 on April 18, 2018. Yet here we are in 2022, and not only do the majority of attorneys in the state not know what UBE stands for, they have no clue how valuable UBE scores can be to their law firm, legal department, or practice. The ability to carry multiple state licenses with

ease is an invaluable resource to not only the attorney, but their employer as well. If you do not know what the UBE is, or have not taken it, I suggest not criticizing anyone who has.

To put a nice little bow on this bar exam conversation, the “back in the day” mentality is no longer applicable to recent test takers. With recent test administrations being remote while two years into a global pandemic, judging recent exam takers and their scores by metrics and mentalities from decades ago simply is not plausible.

Since the world shut down in March of 2020, Tennessee Bar Exam scores have been all over the place. As reported by the Tennessee Board of Law Examiners: For the October 2020 assessment:

5

•

out of 677 overall takers, 74.89% passed

•

out of 567 first time takers, 82.36% passed 6

For the February 2021 assessment: •

out of 306 overall takers, 45.42% passed

•

out of 163 first time takers, 60.74% passed 7

For the July 2021 assessment: •

out of 720 overall takers, 62.36% passed

•

out of 599 first time takers, 70.95% passed

To further put these stats into perspective, the October 2020 assessment was administered remotely (after being canceled and rescheduled several times), and did not result in test takers receiving a true UBE score because it was only a “half test”, with reciprocity only offered in select states. The February 2021 assessment (which I am still dealing with PTSD from), was a fully remote examination, never before implored, and taken under vastly different standards than a traditional examination.

The July 2021 assessment was also remote, but took place over a year into a pandemic that was originally projected to last about eight weeks. Only the most recent February 2022 administration was back in-person. As we await those numbers, I implore you all to imagine what it would have been to take a two-day exam solely in front of a screen with no ability to go back to previous sections, and with the constant fear that if you touched your face or looked away too long, the software would flag your scores and your months of studying would be 7

for naught. NOTHING recent law graduates and newly licensed attorneys have experienced is comparable to anything “back in the day.” Let us not forget that the Class of 2022 only experienced one “normal” semester of law school before the world, and the legal profession, changed as we know it.

My last article, THE INEVITABLE DEMISE OF THE 2020 LAW GRAD: And What Hiring Attorneys Can Do to Help, was written within the first six months of the pandemic shortly after my virtual COVID graduation.

At that time, I had accepted a post-law school position with a small firm, but had not yet sat for the bar exam.

In my previous article, I implored hiring managers and partners to begin rethinking how they approached recent graduates and new attorneys. However, as I approach my one-year mark in the profession, I realize my peers and I are STILL encountering so many of the same aggressions and microaggressions based upon our “status” as recent graduates or newly licensed attorneys. The “back in my day” mentality is archaic and should be done away with.

I would be absolutely miserable if I abided by the “back in my day” standards and did not advocate for myself. I refused to accept a salary less than what I was worth. I refused to stay in a toxic work environment just to “at least put in a calendar year” so there would be no gaps on my resume. I refused to let an employer jeopardize my law

1

Demographics – ABA Profile of the Legal Profession. (n.d.). https://www.abalegalprofile.com/demographics/

2

All names used have been changed for confidentiality purposes.

3

Cook, I. (2021, September 15). Who Is Driving the Great Resignation? Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2021/09/ who-is-driving-the-great-resignation

4

license and put my name and bar number on documents of which I had no knowledge. Now, I am fortunate to work in my desired field where I have awesome growth opportunities, benefits, and a healthy work environment.

And within my first year of licensure! My happiness in my profession is because I always reject the “back in my day” mentality.

Now we can all debate for hours about which phrases should be deleted from the work environment depending on who read what and when. I posit the most important phrase to immediately delete is “back in the day.” All we have is today. To shamelessly edit one of my favorite memes: we cannot go back and change the beginning, but we can start TODAY and change the ending.  Nattaly Perryman is a 2020 graduate of the Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law. She is currently a Staff Attorney at the Tennessee Department of Education where she focuses on issues related to civil rights and non-traditional education programs.

5

Statistics – Tennessee Board of Law Examiners. (n.d.). Retrieved March 13, 2022, from https://www.tnble.org/?page_id=255, July-2020-Oct-Adm-Assessment-Summary-of-Statistics.pdf

6

Id. Feb-2021-Summary-of-Statistics.pdf

7

Id. July-2021-Summary-_of_Statistics-final.pdf

Demographics – ABA Profile of the Legal Profession. (n.d.). https:// www.abalegalprofile.com/demographics/

Disclaimer: This article was prepared by Attorney Perryman in her personal capacity. All opinions and views in this article are personal and belong solely to the author and do not represent those of people, employers, institutions, or organizations the author may or may not be associated with in professional or personal capacity, unless explicitly stated. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any group, association, company or individual. All opinions and statistics are based upon information the author considers reliable.

8

9

TOP 5 TIPS:

Taking Depositions in a Post-Pandemic World

By MICHAEL MURRAY

W

hile much of the world stopped in 2020, the civil litigation process did not. Cases forged ahead and lawyers scrambled to establish new ways of taking depositions and handling proceedings that, for decades, had been routine.

As we start to emerge out of the pandemic, many of the pivots intended as bandages for uncertain times will become permanent changes to the way we conduct and prepare for depositions.If you’re hoping things will just go back to the way they were, you’re probably out of luck. But if you follow these five tips, you’ll be ready to handle any deposition that comes your way in the post-pandemic world.

1. Expect Some, If Not All, Participants to Be Remote Taking depositions remotely may have merely been as a stopgap measure when the world was forced to work from home, but now it is commonplace in the practice of law and likely will continue to be so. In a March 2021 survey, “Remote Proceedings in a Post-Pandemic World,” 83% of responding attorneys said that they would continue to participate remotely in depositions either occasionally or more often. This is a stark increase from pre-pandemic times, in which 87% of those same attorneys reported that they either never or rarely participated in remote depositions. We’re also likely to see an increase in hybrid depositions going forward, as 89% of respondents expected at least one party to attend remotely in the future.

In other words, remote depositions are here to stay.

We should even expect some clients to demand it now that they’ve seen the drop in costs when you eliminate travel and other expenses related to in-person attendance.

2. Increase Your Focus on Security Remote proceedings, and remote work in general, have raised new security concerns and required attorneys to be more proactive in implementing safeguards. In the survey mentioned above, 57% of respondents reported being more focused on and sensitive to the data security provided by deposition vendors.

10

Much like lawyers, cybercriminals did not slow down during the pandemic — if anything, they have been more active than ever. Attackers refined techniques to prey on the fact that people were working remotely, including more sophisticated spearfishing scams and a surge in ransomware attacks. This has made it even more critical to ensure client information and remote proceedings remain secure.

Given this heightened level of activity, many standard business tools like email do not provide adequate security for exchanging sensitive client information or documents. The same is true of the many off-the-shelf web-conferencing tools that have become indispensable for remote proceedings during the pandemic. Not all platforms are created equal, and some require special modifications to meet client confidentiality standards.

Ensure the one you or your vendor uses meets these standards. With proper setup and measures in place, you can be confident while conducting depositions, or even hearings/ trials, remotely.

3. Make Sure You Can Securely Share Files Exchanging exhibits during remote depositions, hearings, or trials is a crucial component that is often not addressed in web-conferencing tools. Additional accommodations must be in place for a way to introduce and distribute exhibits. Ideally, this solution mirrors the

in-person paper process as closely as possible, such as each party getting their own “copy” of the exhibit, exhibits not being revealed until introduced and the ability for an exhibit stamp to be applied. These can often be addressed by an exhibit-specific tool used in conjunction with the web-conferencing platform.

An ideal tool offers a repository to stage exhibits prior to the proceeding — a place for you to privately assemble all potential documents you may need. During the proceeding, exhibits should be introduced, stamped, and distributed to all parties with minimal effort. Most importantly, you will want to familiarize yourself with the software and test it in advance to understand all of its functionality.

4. Get Used to New File Types Working paperless has become far more common as people are working from home. This leads to an increase in the use of native file types in legal proceedings. Exhibits routinely include files such as Excel spreadsheets, video, audio, CAD, and more. Remote exhibit tools usually have the ability to load nearly any type of file and introduce it as an exhibit. However, just like web-conferencing software, not all exhibit-sharing tools are created equal.

Make sure the one you select allows you to introduce native files. This not only saves time trying to convert files, but also retains the integrity of the original file.

Even as we slowly return to in-person proceedings, there will be a place for these exhibit tools to facilitate the exchange of native files. Gone are the days of having to pass a flash drive around the table, hoping no one along the way has malware or manipulates the native files.

Instead, the same exhibit-sharing tools can be used for a seamless, secure delivery of the native files to every party involved, even if everyone is in the same room.

5. Hire a Videographer In a world where most depositions and other court proceedings are likely to be at least partly virtual, video recordings are more important than ever. It will be important to ensure those recordings are admissible as evidence. Decisions are already surfacing that show that 1 using the built-in recording features is not enough. To receive a certified video recording of your proceeding, you will need a certified legal videographer.

The videographer will not only manage the logistics of recording the proceeding, but will also “ensure that a video deposition is properly recorded with established procedures to go on or off the record, limit noise and interruptions, address technical glitches, and frame 2 the camera view on the witness”. Additionally, a legal videographer can produce the recording in a trialready format that can be easily displayed in your trial presentation software.

What We Learned About Taking Depositions Remotely Will Drive Success Post-COVID Many of the “new” tools lawyers are using for remote proceedings have actually been developed over many years. The pandemic simply expedited their maturity and wider adoption, resulting in a permanent change in the legal proceeding landscape. This change brings with it positive aspects such as access to remote witnesses, wider adoption of technology, and better work-life balance due to less travel.

Following the five steps above will put you on the path to deposition success in the post-pandemic world. So the next time you have a remote or hybrid proceeding, make sure to contact your MBA Sponsor, Alpha Reporting, A Veritext Company at 901.523.8974.  1

Alcorn v. City of Chicago, Case No. 17 C 5859 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 20, 2020).

2

Id.

Michael Murray is the Director of Technical and Creative Solutions for Veritext. Mike’s technical expertise includes proficiency in software across the entire spectrum of legal applications. As the former president and founder of the realtime software company, Transcript Manager Pro, he is also an integral member of the Veritext product development team, which is dedicated to examining industry and technological trends in order to create leading edge programs and applications to facilitate the litigation process.

11

The Future of the Legal Profession:

Lawyers at a Crossroads

By NICOLE M. GRIDA

W

hen I began law school almost twenty (20) years ago, the Legal Research curriculum for first year students required us to learn how to do research the way generations of lawyers had learned before us – by using the reporters – and, yet it required us to become proficient in using both LexisNexis and Westlaw to conduct legal research as well. I remember wondering why we had to learn how to do it the “old” way if online legal research was the way of the future. What I have come to appreciate in my 15+ years as a practicing attorney is that the legal profession is often hesitant to embrace technological advancement.

Another memory that comes to mind is traveling to Cincinnati to present at a leadership conference on behalf of my professional legal fraternity, Phi Alpha Delta Law Fraternity, International, in 2011. Upon learning that some of the law students were not able to travel due to an unforeseen conflict, we quickly suggested they “Skype” into the conference. When I told other leaders in the organization what I had done to ensure the law students could attend (over the phone of course), I heard the shock in their voice (and imagined them looking at me like I had a third eye). Fast forward almost a dozen years and that very same leadership conference took place in a hybrid format via Zoom, the law students who attended remotely were able to engage with those who attended in person, and they all received the information necessary to operate their law school chapters.

As other articles in this issue discuss, lawyers only seem to embrace technology when absolutely necessary, or most recently due to a global pandemic. But why is it that some lawyers remain so resistant to change? If I had a dollar for every lawyer who told me you cannot practice law from home over the past two years, I would probably be able to retire now. And yet, as many law firms and legal departments begin to go back to business as usual expecting their attorneys and paraprofessionals to be in the office five days a week, I wonder if they are making a mistake. Not only have lawyers and other legal professionals proven they can do many aspects of their jobs remotely, remote work allows legal departments and law firms to save money on overhead, ensures salaried employees can devote more time to their work instead of their commutes, and provides flexibility so people do not 12

have to take time off to handle unexpected emergencies or choose between coming to work sick or taking a sick day.

Hear me out. I know there is no substitute for doing certain things in person. As a trial attorney, I know you often need to look a witness in his face to “know” if he is lying. I also know that judges sometimes need to put their eyes on an expert who testifies she discredited some of the information provided by the defendant when performing an evaluation. And while I believe it would be almost impossible to try a jury trial remotely, I believe certain types of bench trials and evidentiary hearings should continue to be conducted via videoconferencing.

Long gone is the time when every phase of litigation needs to be done face to face. Just as we can now do all of our legal research from the comfort of our living room couch, we can also handle many other aspects of pre-trial litigation remotely, at least when it comes to civil matters.

Well before the pandemic, I worked as a trial attorney handling personal injury cases throughout West Tennessee.

I did not have a physical office in Memphis, and our main office was in Brentwood. So when I was not in court, client meetings, or depositions, I worked from home. Up until the past two years when COVID-19 forced me to work from home, I had never been as productive as I was during the 13 months I had that job. Therefore, it came as no surprise to me that when forced to handle status conferences, client meetings, depositions, hearings, trials, etc. remotely, lawyers somehow still managed to continue practicing law and were able to move their cases forward.

Our clients were able to see the substantial cost savings of not incurring the expense of their attorneys commuting across town, traveling across the state, or flying around

the country to appear for a 5 minute routine status conference or to defend a short doctor’s deposition.

Additionally, lawyers were able to handle more cases and service more clients because they did not waste as much time commuting or traveling.

When talking to other attorneys in Memphis, I learned that many law firms and legal departments are embracing what they referred to as “flexible work plans.” Further discussions with these same lawyers revealed that some of their law firms and legal departments were requiring their lawyers and other paraprofessionals to report to work on certain days at certain times every week. To me, this is the exact opposite of a flexible work plan and more akin to an “alternative work schedule" where you have certain days in the office and certain days where you can work remotely. Even more troubling to me was that certain law firms and legal departments did not want to share what they were doing as it pertains to allowing remote work.

If some lawyers are more productive working remotely, their employers should empower them to do so. This is not to suggest that all lawyers and paraprofessionals are most productive working from home, but those who can should at least be given the option to do so. At the end of the day, we are all professionals and should be treated as such. As someone who is trying to navigate her next career move, the availability of flexible work options is at the top of my list, and I suspect that I am not alone. Let us not forget, when the Class of 2022 graduates in a few weeks, they will have spent more than half of their law school existence online or in a hybrid format. So why does the legal profession remain so hesitant to embrace the advantages of flexible work plans given all the technology now available to help us to more efficiently represent our clients?

Ironically, when speaking with several local judges, I learned many hope to continue to embrace technology in the courtrooms. A recurrent theme was that status conferences or report dates could almost always be conducted remotely saving the county the cost of transporting defendants, clients the cost of lawyers traveling downtown, and litigants the cost of taking a day off work and paying to park downtown. So if judges understand the need for flexibility in the legal profession, why are some of the lawyers so resistant to it?

Some lawyers expressed a need to be back in the office so they could have team meetings as the reason why flexible work plans could not work for their legal department or law firm. Why do lawyers still have so

many meetings just for the sake of having a meeting?

What if I told you that not every team meeting needed to be in person? Or that you did not need to have a meeting just to say you had one? (I know we have all seen a notebook, coffee mug, or other piece of swag that said “I survived another meeting that could have been an email.”) While I know sometimes you just need to have some face time with your co-workers, does that really need to be every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.? In all seriousness, what if I also told you that lawyers could be just as productive, and in many instances more productive, while working from home some of the time, all of the time, or even occasionally as their schedules and clients’ needs allowed? Would you believe me? Better yet, would you change your law firm’s culture or consider the best way to structure your legal department to ensure that you did not fall victim to the next wave of the Great Resignation because you were not willing to allow your employees to work remotely at least some of the time? I think these are questions the legal profession must confront head on to ensure we meet our lawyers where they are and do not force them to explore other ways to utilize their legal training.

At the end of the day, we all attended college, law school, and many of us have additional post graduate degrees. Do we really need someone to tell us when we need to be in a physical office in order to get our work done and remain productive members of the legal profession? If those with the authority to implement flexible work plans continue to think the answer to this question is always yes, we are going to continue to see talented attorneys leave the legal profession in search of jobs that treat them as professionals capable of getting their work done no matter where they are or what they are wearing.  Nicole M. Grida is a long time member of the Publications Committee of the Memphis Bar Association and currently serves as its Chair. An accomplished trial attorney with private firm and in-house experience who has been a long time supporter of Access to Justice initiatives across the state, Nicole is presently contemplating where the next phase of her legal career will take her.

13

COURT REPORT:

Shelby County Circuit Court

by STEPHEN LEFFLER

covers jury trials from October 2021 through February 2022 DIVISION I: JUDGE FELICIA CORBIN-JOHNSON 1. United Bonding Company v. Robert Woods: November 17, 2021, Breach of Contract, Non-Jury, Michael A. Flexsenhar for Plaintiff, Gerald Green for Defendant, Plaintiff verdict: $3,631.04 2. Omni Property Management v. Leevon Harris: February 2, 2022, Breach of Contract (FED), Non-Jury, Michael A. Flexsenhar for Plaintiff, Defendant Pro Se, Plaintiff Verdict: $10,860.23 3. Orion Federal Credit Union v. Robert Lewellen: February 2, 2022, Breach of Contract (Commercial Loan), Non-Jury, Michael A. Flexsenhar for Plaintiff, Defendant Pro Se, Plaintiff Verdict: $39,097.41

DIVISION II: JUDGE JAMES F. RUSSELL No verdicts on contested cases this reporting period.

DIVISION III: JUDGE VALERIE L. SMITH 1. Linda Kindred. v. Evelyn Townsend: November 19, 2021, Auto Accident, Non-Jury, Phillip A. Stroud for Plaintiff, Richard Sorin for Defendant, Plaintiff verdict: $2,279,019.80 (25% comparative fault to Plaintiff), Net damages: Past Medical Expenses - $536,177.48; Life Care: $406,469.22; Loss of earning capacity: $586,754.25; Loss of consortium: $375.00; Pain and suffering: $1,443,750.00, Reduced to $750,000.00 2. Keith Novick v. Jamal McCall: December 21, 2021, Breach of Contract, Non-Jury, Paul I. Mendelson for Plaintiff, Edd Peyton for Defendant, Plaintiff verdict: $1,559,079.14 (which includes a $30,000.00 attorney fee) 3. Casey, Simmons and Bryant: PLLC v. Edward Rothman, February 7, 2022, Breach of Contract 14

(Legal Services), Non-Jury, Joseph Barton for Plaintiff, Defendant Pro Se, Plaintiff verdict: $4,666.66 ($3,500.00 amount due and $1,166.66 attorney fee)

DIVISION IV: JUDGE GINA C. HIGGINS 1. Irma DeCaballero and Martin DeCaballero v.

Santo Castellano: October 12, 2021, Auto Accident, Jury, Louis Chiozza and Jack Leach for Plaintiff, Robert L. Moore for Defendant, Plaintiff verdict for $3,267.50,

2. Alberto Cancino v. Luis Saucedo: October 29, 2021, Auto Accident (Property Damage), Non-Jury, Edwin C. Lenow for Plaintiff, Daniel J. Mickiewicz for Defendant, Plaintiff verdict: $3,625.00 3. Harpeth

Financial Services, LLC v. Sheila Matthews: November 4, 2021 , Breach of Contract,

Non-Jury, Robert J. Hill, II for Plaintiff, Defendant, Pro Se, Plaintiff verdict: $7,294.19 (includes a $1,500.00 attorney fee)

4. Michelle Bruce v. Cherry Homes, LLC: December 2, 2021 , Breach of Contract (Residential Construction), Non-Jury, Joshua B. Bradley and Kevin A. Snider for Plaintiff, Richard E. Charlton, III for Defendant, Plaintiff verdict: $20,491.62 plus $15,000.00 attorney fees 5. Walnut Gardens Homeowners Association v. Carl Mabry: December 13, 2021, Breach of Contract, NonJury, Peter Baskind for Plaintiff, Defendant, Pro Se. , Plaintiff verdict: $195.25 in unpaid homeowner fees plus $17,500.00 in attorney fees

DIVISION VII: JUDGE MARY L. WAGNER 1. Daphne Rogers v. Tyler Halle: December 13, 2021, Auto Accident, Jury, Shannon D. Elsea for Plaintiff, Craig Flood and Robert L. Moore for Defendant, Plaintiff Verdict: $906.83, Motion for Discretionary Costs granted for $1,529.30

DIVISION VIII: JUDGE ROBERT S. WEISS 1. Hunter Management, LLC v. Maria Smith: November 22, 2021 , Breach of Contract (FED), NonJury, S. Joshua Kahane for Plaintiff, Freda M. Turner for Defendant. , Plaintiff Verdict: $8,380.50 2. Mike Snodgrass v. AHA Mechanical Contractors, LLC: December 30, 2021, Breach of Contract (Fair Labor Standards Act), Non-Jury, Matt C. Gulotta and Steven G. Wilson for Plaintiff, John A. Irvine, Jr. for Defendant, Plaintiff’s Complaint dismissed , Defendant’s Counterclaim dismissed

DIVISION IX:YOLANDA KIGHT BROWN No verdicts on contested cases this reporting period.

2. United Rentals (North America) Inc. v. O’Rane

M. Cornish, Sr. Individually and d/b/a 6C Dahcor Industries, Inc.: December 7, 2021 , Breach

of Contract, Non-Jury, David Mendelson for Plaintiff, Defendant Pro Se, Plaintiff verdict: $25,249.29 (which included an attorney fee of $5,049.85), Judgment based on Requests for Admissions being deemed admitted

3. Michelle Jordan v. Raefael Oliver: December 16, 2021, Auto Accident, Jury, Allen Gressett for Plaintiff, Robert L. Moore for Defendant, Plaintiff Verdict: $2,000.00

DIVISION V: JUDGE RHYNETTE HURD 1. Alexaine Ventures, LLC v. Egal & Associates, LLC: February 10, 2022, Breach of Contract (Commercial Lease), Non-Jury, Brandon F. McNairy for Plaintiff, Jarrett M.D. Spence for Defendant, Plaintiff verdict: $9,882.91

DIVISION VI: JUDGE JERRY STOKES 1. Peggy Bain v. Jonna White: October 27, 2021, Auto Accident, Jury, Elissa M. Coombs and David E. Gordon for Plaintiff, James E. King, Jr. for Defendant, Plaintiff verdict: $79,712.19 15

COURT REPORT:

United States District Court

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE, WESTERN DIVISION covers jury trials from July 2021 through December 2021

by DEAN DECANDIA

DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN T. FOWLKES, JR. 1. Autumn Sanders v. Shelby County Board of Education: Trial from Sept 13, 2021 through September 21, 2021, Attorneys for Plaintiff: Craig Edgington, Charles Mitchell, and Brice Timmons, Attorneys for Defendant: Cheryl Estes, Isaac Lew, Steve Vescovo, Complaint for Violation of Rehabilitation Act, Violation of ADA, Violation of Civil Rights Act, and Retaliation, Verdict for Plaintiff as to reasonable accommodation, Damages: $350,000

DISTRICT JUDGE SHERYL H. LIPMAN 1. USA v. Katrina Robinson: Trial from September 13, 2021 through September 30, 2021, Attorneys for Prosecution: Chris Cotten, Raney Irwin, Scott Smith, Attorneys for Defendant:: Larry Laurenzi, Matthew Jehl, Janika White, Indicted on 4 counts of theft and embezzlement of government property, and 16 counts of wire fraud, Motion for Judgment of Acquittal granted as to theft counts and 5 counts of wire fraud, Verdict: Guilty on 4 counts of wire fraud.

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE SAMUEL H. MAYS 1. Taylor Benoist v. Titan Medical Manufacturing, LLC: Trial from July 13, 2021 through July 16, 2021, Attorney for Plaintiff: Brian Winfrey, Attorneys for Defendant: Gregory Grisham and Jeff Weintraub, Complaint for Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, and Retaliation, Plaintiff verdict for retaliation, Damages: 16

$50,000 compensatory and punitive damages, $228,430 attorney fees, and $7,567 costs.

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE JON P. MCCALLA 1. Anvil International, LLC v. Island Industries, Inc.: Trial from July 26, 2021 through July 30, 2021, Attorneys for Plaintiff: Christopher Burris, Stephen Cummings, Katie Harris, James Taylor, and James Vines, Attorneys for Defendant: John Horne, Complaint for Misappropriation and Unauthorized Use of Trade Secrets, Plaintiff verdict, Damages: $1.5 million 2. Republic Roofing & Restoration, LLC v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.: Attorneys for Plaintiff: Jonathan Bobbitt and William Buckley, Attorneys for Defense: Russell Reviere and Jonathan Stewart, Trial from August 31, 2021 through September 2, 2021, Complaint for Breach of Contract, Plaintiff verdict, Damages: $86,606 plus interest

DISTRICT JUDGE MARK S. NORRIS 1. Jose Encarnacion et al v. Heartland Express, Inc. of Iowa: Attorneys for Plaintiff: William Hackett, Bobby Martin, and Ryan Skertich, Attorney for Defendant: Nick Bragorgos, Trial from July 26, 2021 through July 29, 2021, Complaint for Negligence (Auto) and Respondeat Superior, Defendant admitted liability. Plaintiff verdict for damages., Damages: $50,000 for pain and suffering, $50,000 for future medical expenses, and $100,000 for loss of earnings 17

2. USA v. Michael Shane Rogers: Trial from August 4, 2021 through August 6, 2021, Attorneys for Prosecution: Audrey Calkins and Sean Hord, Attorney for Defendant: Lee Gerald, Indicted for possession of firearm while a felon, possession of ammunition while a felon, possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, and possession of firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking crime. , Verdict: Guilty of possessing firearm and ammunition while a felon.

3. USA v. Martez Wright: Attorneys for Prosecution: Greg Allen and Mark Erskine, Attorney for Defendant: Jocelyn Henderson, Trial from November 15, 2021 through November 24, 2021, Indicted for conspiracy to

possess over 100 grams of heroin, possession of fentanyl with intent to distribute, 5 counts of possession of heroin with intent to distribute, possession of heroin and fentanyl with intent to distribute, 2 counts of possessing a firearm while a felon, and one count of possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, Verdict: Guilty on all counts except one count of possessing a firearm while a felon

2022 Solo/Small Firm CLE & Workshop Series Mark your calendar! 3rd or 4th Thursday of every month, 12 PM – 1 PM. (Dates listed below. No September session held due to Bench Bar Conference.)

DISTRICT JUDGE THOMAS L. PARKER No jury trials reported during this time period

• • • • •

CLEs offered at HALF PRICE for solo/small firm attorneys: $15 vs $30 for all other MBA members Workshops offered for FREE to MBA solo/small firm members.

Solo/small firm attorneys are encouraged to invite their administrative staff and legal support staff when applicable. Attendance is free for those not needing CLE credit.

Hybrid Sessions: To be offered in person and via zoom when possible.

Registration link will be sent out each month in advance of the topic.

*Details subject to change if necessary.

A r B M be m Me nefit Be

Stop manually tracking your time, capture more billable hours, and deliver more value to your clients.

MBA members receive a 30% lifetime discount!

18

Topic

Timing

How to run your law practice successfully for $100 a month!

March 23, 12pm-1pm

Microsoft Office for Lawyers 101

CLE or Description Workshop CLE

Low-cost options for running a firm plus interesting time mining platform.

April 27, 12pm-1pm

Workshop

Focus on Excel and PowerPoint; Office/admin staff encouraged to attend.

Grow Your Practice Through Effective Marketing, Part 1 – Digital Marketing

May 25, 12pm-1pm

CLE

Learn to use social media as a tool to grow your legal practice; as well as basic website enhancements that make a lasting impression with prospects.

Law Practice Finance and Business 101

June 22, 12pm-1pm

Workshop

Being a solo practitioner, handling all aspects of your practice can be daunting. In this 101 course, tailored specifically for the small firms, learn about legal financial resources, Quickbooks, tax savings tips, accounting best practices, and administrative tools that will give you time back to devote to the actual practice of law.

Grow Your Practice Through Effective Marketing, Part 2 – Referral Based Marketing

July 20, 12pm-1pm

CLE

Learn the fundamentals of referral-based marketing, which can in turn put dollars in your pocket!

HR Solutions for the Solo or Small Law Firm Practitioner

August 24, 12pm-1pm

Workshop

Hiring; Addressing Turnover; Staff Training; Alternatives solutions

19

Do You Have a Comprehensive Succession Plan in Place for Your Practice?

October 26, 12pm-1pm

CLE

Local Legal Resources for MidSouth Area Attorneys

November 16, 12pm1pm

Professional and Business Development for the Small Firm Practitioner

December 14, CLE 12pm-1pm

If something happens to you, what happens to your firm?

From succession planning, IOLTA accounts, to helping plan your financial future, learn how you can build a comprehensive plan to ensures your firm’s legacy continues and your clients are protected.

Workshop

Tap into your local legal resources of expert witnesses, paralegal networks, court reporting, and more!

Hear from an esteemed panel of experts across the legal industry on personal & firm growth; wellness; ethics updates, and more.

By CINDY COLE ETTINGOFF, CEO and General Counsel, Memphis Area Legal Services, Inc.

Sponsored by

OFFICE SPACE

MALS Corner: The Future is Full of Possibilities and Opportunities

Downtown Law Offices – Executive Office Center At Peabody Place. 119 S. Main Street, Suite 500, Memphis, TN 38103. Our lease terms are flexible allowing you to rent by the hour, day, month or year. All the services that you need are available including: administrative support services, wired or wireless highspeed fiber Internet access, notary, telephone services, conference rooms and training room. Our meeting room space is ideal for depositions and mediations. The executive suite concept allows you to do business in a cooperative environment without having fixed monthly overhead, by eliminating the distractions and time-consuming business decisions such as office administration and equipment leases. If you want to create a professional appearance for your business, but you are not ready to lease an office, take a look at our virtual office packages. For as little as $185 per month you can have the appearance of a professional office or branch office. Contact Beverly Johnson, 901-312-5000, Beverly@executiveofficecenter.com

D

espite the devastating effects of the pandemic, this is a time of great opportunity and excitement at MALS and MALS is more than optimistic about the future.

Applying some of the lessons learned during COVID, MALS is moving forward with new methods of serving our community. Our vision remains the same – to provide quality legal service to those in need in our community. However, we are actively seeking and exploring opportunities for improving the efficiency of our operations.

COVID opened the floodgates of clients seeking assistance from MALS. While many of the initial requests for assistance involved housing and unemployment benefits, once schools reopened, victims seeking domestic violence assistance skyrocketed further increasing the number of clients in need. COVID also made many clients realize their own mortality resulting in an increase in requests for wills, powers of attorney, and health care directives.

Although the negative impact of COVID on the people served by Memphis Area Legal Services, Inc. cannot be overstated, this has also been a period of great kindness and generosity. We saw many members of the barstep forward as volunteers to help meet the legal needs of our community. In addition, thanks to the fundraising efforts of John and Lisa Bobango and Mary Lauren Bobango Stewart and the tremendous support of the legal and private community, this year’s fundraising efforts enabled MALS to continue serving our community despite some surprising (and harrowing) federal funding uncertainties.

While COVID brought many surprises that were negative, it also offered an unexpected opportunity to

20

rethink how we thought workplaces should operate. It not only changed the way work was conducted, but also challenged us to find new, more efficient ways to work.

For the first time in MALS’ history, employees were allowed to work remotely. After two years of experience with remote work, we now know that working in a hybrid fashion is not only very productive, but also a cost-effective means of operating, so much so that MALS is continuing forward with a revised operational model.

We are relocating and will be operating with a smaller physical footprint, but with a new vigor.

MALS’ foremost challenge has always been how to respond to the needs of our community in a timely, efficient, manner. Prior to COVID, we thought the only means of increasing our ability to serve the public was by increasing our workforce. As a result, payroll has always been MALS greatest single expense. However, using the COVID-generated opportunity to rethink MALS’ operations, we have been exploring automating routine tasks to enable our existing team to extend our abilities to perform work in other areas.

If ever there was a time to rethink operational efficiency and to broaden MALS income base, this is it.

21

Congressional delays in the passage of an appropriations bill struck fear in the hearts of most legal aid organizations because Legal Services Corporation (LSC) is one of the major funders for most legal aid organizations like MALS. However, like COVID itself, the delay in the passage of an appropriations bill that would fund LSC was also an opportunity to examine our methods of operations, identify weaknesses, and to seek and create opportunities.

COVID presented many challenges, but with the help of our volunteers and financial supporters MALS was able to overcome those challenges. COVID presented opportunities and MALS has seized those opportunities to commence refashioning and improving itself to better serve our community. Barbara Rohde’s 1994 poem, “In the Simple Morning Light” well states where, after the jolt of COVID, we all stand - “We stand at the edge of a true wilderness. No one has entered it,

nor worn a path for us. There are no maps. We look toward that great openness in awe of the freedom and possibility before us.” 

Embracing the Benefits Remote Depositions Bring to the Litigation Process1

Cindy Cole Ettingoff is the CEO and General Counsel for Memphis Area Legal Services, Inc. A long time legal services volunteer and supporter, Cindy joined MALS after thirty years of practicing law. In private practice, Ms. Ettingoff represented employers, employees, and unions in litigation, contract negotiations, arbitrations, and mediations.

By CLARE FOLEY

I

f depositions are part of your legal practice, remote depositions are something you are likely used to at this point. As the whole world went into lockdown for the pandemic and travel ground to a halt, remote depositions became the only viable solution if we wanted litigation to proceed.

What originally served as simply a Band-Aid, however, quickly became the norm. Now, even as restrictions continue to ease and more in-person activities are beginning to take place, remote depositions are expected to remain the norm for both court reporters and attorneys.

Remote depositions not only offer a number of benefits and advantages—they also help ensure that you can get the reporter coverage you need to capture the record and create a transcript in light of a workforce shortage.

THE CONTINUED RELEVANCE OF REMOTE PROCEEDINGS IN A POST-PANDEMIC WORLD In the past two years, we have become very comfortable working remotely. Once it was proven that many jobs could be performed as efficiently and effectively remotely as they could in person—if not more so—many people became reluctant to go back to the old way of doing things, particularly when the risks of the pandemic are still very real. In the world of depositions, this is true for attorneys, witnesses, and court reporters.

In addition to convenience, cost savings, and other benefits, remote depositions have come to play a significant role in offsetting the current court reporter shortage. When you opt for a remote deposition rather than requesting an in-person proceeding, you increase your likelihood of securing the coverage you need to ensure your case will proceed on your desired timeline.

THE BENEFITS OF REMOTE DEPOSITIONS Remote depositions offer a number of concrete advantages over in-person depositions, from cost savings to better productivity.

1

22

Given the current court reporter shortage in our country (discussed more fully in the next section) and pandemic-related health concerns with in-person meetings and events, getting coverage for an in-person deposition exactly when you want it is no longer a guarantee. Opting for remote depositions greatly improves the chances that you will be able to secure court reporter coverage and will reduce the likelihood of delays and unavailability.

In terms of costs, the savings you will see when you participate remotely are significant. Remote depositions eliminate costly travel, whether that includes plane tickets or taxis across town. At a time when clients are analyzing legal spend more than ever and pushing back on bills, anything you can do to keep costs down will improve your client relationships and set you apart from your competition.

Many attorneys went into the pandemic fearing that remote depositions would make it more difficult to maintain control over the deposition room, but the opposite has proven to be true. Speaker view and spotlight functions actually make it easier to place the focus

A version of this article was originally published in ABA’s Business Law Today on December 30, 2021.

23

solely on the witness during testimony and eliminate other distractions. Additionally, attorneys are including language in their admonitions and deposition notices that describes the behaviors expected of all participants.

In many instances, the etiquette and behavior in a remote setting are also written into case and trial orders, setting the tone of civility, with a reminder of our ethical obligations. All this goes to say that remote depositions are truly the new normal.

reporting company experienced in hybrid proceedings who has the knowledge to support and advise on best practices. The hybrid approach can also help address the challenges of getting a court reporter scheduled because, if necessary, they can be remote. Locally, Alpha Reporting - A Veritext Company, stands ready to coordinate your next hybrid deposition.

Remote depositions also make it possible for lawyers to use their time more efficiently, because more work can be done in a single day. When everything was in person, it was common for litigators to conduct depositions around the country or spend hours commuting across cities and back to get to deposition locations. Remote depositions can be handled from anywhere, which gives you all that lost time back to be more productive, take on more business, and better serve your clients.

The court reporting industry is experiencing a shortage of reporters that’s not likely to correct itself anytime soon. The National Court Reporters Association predicted a critical shortfall of nearly 5,500 court reporting positions by 2018, and today, we are seeing those predictions were accurate.

It’s also important to not ignore the quality-of-life issues that remote depositions raise. As many attorneys have adjusted to working from home in the past two years, we have gotten used to having a better work-life balance. Most of us will be reluctant to give that up in the future, and remote depositions make it more possible to maintain it.

Remote depositions allow everyone to be nimbler, which is crucial in a world where our day-to-day realities continue to shift. If we carry on doing things the way we have successfully done them for the past two years, litigation will be able to go forward even if participants fall ill or we see another surge in COVID-19 casesagain.

Of the very few depositions that are booked in person these days, a significant number cancel at the last moment because someone gets ill or has a pandemic-related health concern around leaving everyone scrambling to arrange a remote alternative. These last-minute changes bring a layer of stress that few welcome in these times, and strains resources as alternate solutions are set in place.

If there is truly a compelling reason for a deposition to take place in person, hybrid depositions are also an option. Hybrid depositions are where some, but not all, of the participants are remote. While these can be challenging from a technical perspective if they are not set up correctly, a few simple planning steps with your court reporting company can put that to right. A key step to success is knowing where everyone will be and what equipment they need, as well as working with a court 24

THE COURT REPORTER SHORTAGE

The court reporter shortage is mathematically certain to increase in the coming years. In March 2021, the National Court Reporters Association issued statistics saying the average age of a court reporter is 55, and according to the Speech to Text Institute, there are 1,120 stenographers leaving the field every year compared to only 200 entering.

multiple assignments each day as no time is wasted traveling from location to location. If they can continue to work remotely rather than returning to the demands of in-person reporting, it is also possible that many would be more inclined to continue working past the time they might otherwise have elected to retire, helping to stem the current reporter shortage. Pandemic-related health concerns only serve to further support many court reporters’ desires to continue working remotely rather than return to in-person work.

How you choose to schedule your remote depositions can also increase your likelihood of getting coverage despite the shortage. While certain depositions will always be full-day affairs, many are not. If you are looking at a series of two-hour depositions, you might consider scheduling them back-to-back on the same day. The golden rules for scheduling are applicable now more than ever: first, schedule your proceeding as far in advance as possible; and second, make use of the available remote technologies that are designed to assist when all parties

cannot be physically present for a deposition.

With all the continued uncertainties of COVID-19 and the remote work environment we are in, it is unrealistic to think that things will completely go back to normal any time soon. Remote depositions are the new norm, and you should embrace all the advantages they offer.  Clare Foley is a Director of Sales at Veritext Legal Solutions, an accomplished transformational leader, and a renowned speaker who routinely provides CLEs to Veritext clients and addresses at industry events. Clare is also a contributing author to several trade publications.

Attorneys returning to work and expecting to have all their depositions in person may find it challenging to obtain reporter coverage. Remote depositions greatly improved the capacity of court reporters in the last two years, and the same availability simply will not exist once you start factoring in travel time and the other realities of in-person depositions. Remote depositions are a great option when looking to offset that shortage and get the deposition coverage you need, when you need it.

Moreover, for many court reporters approaching retirement, in-person depositions are far more physically demanding than most attorneys may realize. In addition to the transcribing part of the job that you witness, inperson depositions often involve lengthy commutes, hours spent at night preparing rough drafts, lugging mountains of physical exhibits, waiting in line to ship them back to the office, and other such administrative tasks.

Remote depositions have changed all that for the better. Court reporters no longer have to invest hours in commuting, and digital exhibit sharing has eliminated the need for them to physically handle and label exhibits.

Simply put, remote depositions are far less taxing on hardworking court reporters, enabling them to take 25

CLC Corner: Access to Visitation Programs at the Community Legal Center

By TINA LUM PERRUSQUIA

T

he Community Legal Center (CLC) is pleased to announce a new Pro Se Parents’ Clinic for never married noncustodial parents. Under the Pro Se Parents’ Clinic, a noncustodial parent who was never married to the other parent, but shares a child or children with the other parent, may request assistance with a Petition to Set Visitation. The addition of this service is to supplement the services offered by the Office of the Advocate for Noncustodial Parents at the Memphis Shelby County Juvenile Court and is made possible by a grant through the Administrative Office of the Courts.

In order to receive assistance, the noncustodial parent must be under an existing child support order and must meet the financial guidelines for assistance from the CLC. The noncustodial parent seeking services should contact the Pro Se Parents’ Clinic to have an intake conducted to determine qualification to receive services.

Upon acceptance into the Pro Se Parents’ Clinic, the noncustodial parent shall be provided with all of the information necessary to file the Petition to Set Visitation.

The noncustodial parent shall be responsible for the filing fee and the service of process cost.

In addition, the Pro Se Parents’ Clinic offers a Clinic for uncontested divorces where the parties have minor children together. Qualified applicants must meet income guidelines set forth by the CLC. If parties’ receive state assistance, then a child support order must be in place prior to receiving services from the Clinic. Parties cannot own real property or be in a bankruptcy in order to receive services.

The goal of the Pro Se Parents’ Clinic is to create access to visitation, with a heavy emphasis on educating parties about the Permanent Parenting Plan. Parties that have the financial ability per the CLC’s income guidelines to 26

obtain private counsel do not qualify for Clinic services.

Qualified applicants are responsible for a small intake fee, the filing fee, parenting class expenses and court costs.

Workplace Survey for Lawyers 45 and Under

A

s has been highlighted in multiple articles in this issue, the practice of law has changed over the past few decades, especially the past two years. The faster paced and more stressful environment has resulted in significant turnover among young lawyers. In response to this growing trend, the MBA is working to ensure that our legal community is equipped to address the priorities of the next generation of lawyers.

We all value and prioritize things differently, so we are asking that you take the completely anonymous survey HERE to help us identify what motivates you.

Please forward this survey to any colleagues, classmates, and attorney friends in the Memphis area you may know who are age 45 and under. Your input will be used as a tool to shape the future of the legal profession.

The Pro Se Parents’ Clinic strongly encourages members of the private bar who receive phone calls from those who are unable to afford services to provide information about our Clinics to those who would otherwise be unable to proceed with an uncontested divorce with minor children or a Petition to Set Visitation.

Pro Se litigants’ stories are deeply personal and share a common thread. The pro se litigants are all seeking the same goal: closure and the ability to continue on with their life with the freedom of knowing that their future is not forever intertwined with a person with whom they no longer wish to share their future, but with whom they must co-parent..

Clinic services are available in-person or through remote services on Monday, Tuesdays and Thursdays from 9 a.m. until noon, and on Wednesdays from 9 a.m. until 2 p.m. For more information about the Clinic, please contact Tina Lum Perrusquia at 901.677.9774 or tinap@clcmemphis.org.  Tina Lum Perrusquia is the Director of the CLC's Pro Se Parents' Clinic, and has been with the CLC since 2016. She is a 1998 graduate of the Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law, and previously practiced in the areas of juvenile, family, and bankruptcy law.

27

Memphis Bar Foundation Welcomes Thirty-Two New Fellows

E

stablished in 1982, the Memphis Bar Foundation serves as the philanthropic arm of the Memphis Bar Association. It is a 501(c)(3) organization, which provides a platform for attorneys and others in the legal profession to give back to the community through taxdeductible contributions. On March 31, 2022, the Memphis Bar Foundation welcomed thirty-two new Fellows including: Steve Barlow, Steve Barton, David Bourland, Laurie Christensen, Cindy Cole Ettingoff, Ben Fox, Daniel French, The Honorable Ruthie Hagan, Charles Higgins, The Honorable Steve C. Hornsby, Earl Houston, II, Brett Hughes, Mitzi Johnson , Adam Johnson, Richelle Kidder, Ron Krelstein, Josh Lawhead, Matthew R. Macaw, Gabe McGaha, Melisa Moore, Chris Myatt,

Memphis Bar Foundation 2022 Fellows The Foundation annually selects attorneys and judges as Fellows in recognition of their service to the legal profession and community and their adherence to the highest standards of professional conduct. Only approximately 1% of Memphis area attorneys and judges invited to join each year.

Fellows Reception generously sponsored by MBA President’s Circle Partners - Jennifer and Joel Hobson of Hobson Realtors

The Honorable Gadson William Perry, Mary Petrinjak, William King Self, Jr., Carlissa Shaw, Pam Skelton, Steve Snyder , Cynthia Tobin, Glenn Vines, The Honorable Lee Wilson, Peter Winterburn, and Jason Yasinsky.

Chair of the Fellows Selection Committee Terrence Reed (left) and Memphis Bar Foundation President Beth Bradley (right)

Please join us in congratulating the 2022 Fellows. For more information about the Memphis Bar Foundation, please visit our website. Also, we would like to extend a heartfelt thank you to MBA President’s Circle Partner, Hobson Realtors, for generously sponsoring the 2022 Fellows Reception, which was held at The University Club.

2022 Memphis Bar Foundation Fellows

Steve Barlow Josh Lawhead Steve Barton Matthew R. Macaw David Bourland Gabe McGaha Laurie Christensen Melisa Moore Cindy Cole Ettingoff Chris Myatt Ben Fox The Honorable Gadson William Perry Daniel French Mary Petrinjak The Honorable Ruthie Hagan William King Self, Jr. Charles Higgins Carlissa Shaw The Honorable Steven C. Hornsby Pam Skelton Earl Houston II Steve Snyder Brett Hughes Cynthia Tobin Mitzi Johnson Glenn Vines Adam Johnson The Honorable Lee Wilson Richelle Kidder Peter Winterburn Ron Krelstein Jason Yasinsky

Memphis Bar Foundation Board of Directors President - Beth Bradley Vice President - Vincent Miraglia Secretary - Kim Mullins Treasurer - Andrea Malkin Bryce Ashby Phyllis Aluko (Ex Officio) Kevin Bruce Prince Chambliss Amber Floyd Tannera Gibson (Ex Officio) Damon Griffin

28

Hon. Gina Higgins Linda Mathis Mary Hale Morris Terrence Reed Marc Reisman Alex Wharton Will Zoccola

29

2022 HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION

C

ongratulations to St. Mary's Episcopal School and Memphis University School for reaching the finals of the 2022 High School Mock Trial District 14 Competition. Although St. Mary’s took home the trophy, both teams advanced to the State Competition where they represented Shelby County. At the State Competition held in Nashville from March 25, 2022 through March 26, 2022, St. Mary’s Maggie Rosenblum was named the 2nd Best Advocate for the Prosecution while her teammate, Astrid Balink took home 2nd Place as the Best Witness for the Prosecution. Additionally, Forrest Rudd was named MVP for MUS while Mallory Miller earned MVP honors for St. Mary’s. Click here to see the full list of the 2022 State Mock Trial Individual Awards.

Thank you to all the judges and attorneys who volunteered their time and expertise to judge this year’s District 14 Competition. We appreciate the YLD Board for its continued support of High School Mock Trial and all our partners at The University of Memphis, Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law School and Shelby County Courthouse who graciously provided us with the necessary space for six nights of hotly contested trials. A special thank you to the YLD Board Members who served as our Co-Chairs, Rod Watson and Eliza Jones (pictured above right), for organizing this year’s District 14 Competition.

Bar Scene

901.524.5000

30

Probate & Estate Section CLE Sponsored by Raymond James

info@bpjlaw.com

31

Bar Scene

T

Business Law Section Social at Railgarten

he Memphis Bar Association 100 Club recognizes firms that have 100% of their attorneys as members of the MBA. With your support, we are able to deliver quality networking, continuing legal education courses and enriching volunteer opportunities to the Memphis legal community. Whether you are a small firm or a large firm, we want to celebrate your commitment to the legal profession and our community!

Firms with 6 or more attorneys are listed below. We will also be recognizing Solo/Small firms with 5 or less attorneys. Stay tuned!

100 Club Firms Receive: Bar Scene

•

Recognition on the MBA website, Memphis Lawyer quarterly online magazine, and MBA social media channels

•

100 Club Member Logos to display on your firm's communication materials

•

Thank you for your support of the MBA! You make our community stronger.

To become part of MBA’s 100 Club, contact Lauren Gooch.

100 club members

Law School Mixer Adams and Reese, LLP

Leitner Williams Dooley & Napolitan, PLLC

Allen Summers Simpson Lillie & Gresham, PLLC

Lewis Thomason

ALSAC/St. Jude

McNabb Bragorgos Burgess and Sorin, PLLC

Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC Black McLaren Jones Ryland & Griffee, P.C.

Bar Scene

MBA Board Retreat

Memphis Area Legal Services Methodist LeBonheur Healthcare Morgan & Morgan-Memphis, LLC

Burch Porter & Johnson, PLLC

Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart, PC

Butler Snow LLP

Rainey Kizer Reviere & Bell, PLC

Dinkelspiel Rasmussen & Mink, PLLC

Reaves Law Firm

Donati Law, PLLC

Shuttleworth, PLLC

Evans Petree, PC

Siskind Susser, P.C.

Farris Bobango, PLC

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Ford & Harrison, LLP

Williams McDaniel, PLLC

Gerrish Smith Tuck, PC

Wyatt Tarrant & Combs, LL

Glankler Brown, PLLC

Spicer Rudstrom, PLLC

Harkavy Shainberg Kaplan PLC

City of Memphis Law Division

Harris Shelton Hanover Walsh, PLLC

The University of Memphis Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law

International Paper Company Jackson Shields Yeiser & Holt 32

Martin Tate Morrow & Marston, P.C.

Shelby County Attorney's Office 33

You Deserve the Best 800+ LAWYERS. 3,000+ STAFF. $10+ BILLION RECOVERED. Morgan and Morgan-Memphis is a proud supporter of the Memphis Bar Association and all of the programs the MBA does to help the legal community of Memphis.

Specialized. Supportive. Successful.

Morgan & Morgan. It’s America’s Largest Injury Law Firm. With all the firepower, resources, and experience to go up against the biggest companies and fight to get the best results. We’ve seen it all, having specialized in a wide range of case types. Because

PRACTICE AREAS

Personal Injury Car Accidents Slip & Fall Premises Liability Dog Bite/ Animal Attacks

when it comes to choosing

Medical Malpractice

a law firm, size matters. And

Birth Injuries

you deserve the big guns on your side. But don’t take our

Wrongful Death

word for it — these glowing

Workers’

testimonials and verdicts

Compensation

speak for themselves.

Veterans’ Disability Social Security

“I have known the Morgans probably for over 30 years. They really listen and feel the needs of

Disability Mesothelioma

the people that they deal with.” – Howard

RECENT SUCCESS*

$120,000,000

DIAL #LAW

JACOB T. RODGERS V. CITY OF GAINESVILLE D/B/A GAINESVILLE REGIONAL UTILITIES

THE FEE IS FREE UNLESS YOU WIN.®

Car Accident & Auto Injury Lawyers Brian McClain, Jeffrey J. Humphries, Brian Lee *Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

34

Offices Nashville & Memphis

35

D. LEE FLAHERTY The Memphis office of Bass, Berry and Sims has elected D. Lee Flaherty as a Member. Flaherty counsels both publicly traded and privately held companies as well as private equity and venture capital firms in a variety of corporate and securities law matters, including mergers and acquisitions, SEC regulatory reporting and compliance, and corporate governance and corporate finance matters. He works within a range of industries, with a particular focus in the medical device, pharmaceutical, real estate investment trust (REIT) and manufacturing industries.

Prior to joining Bass, Berry & Sims, Flaherty was an associate at Phelps Dunbar LLP. Flaherty earned a law degree from the Mississippi College of Law (2013), a Master of Accountancy from the University of Mississippi (2009) and a B.S. in Business Administration from Mississippi College (2003).

HUGH FRANCIS, IV Hugh Francis, IV has been named as a Member of Rainey, Kizer, Reviere & Bell, PLC. He joined Rainey, Kizer, Reviere & Bell, P.L.C. as an Associate in 2018. Hugh is a member of the firm’s Malpractice Practice Group where he represents physicians, nurses, hospitals, dentists and clinics in medical malpractice litigation.

He has defended health care providers since earning his law degree from the University of Memphis Cecil C. Humphreys

School of Law in 2013. Hugh also has experience working in general litigation defense having represented other professionals accused of civil liability. While in law school, he served as the Executive Director of the Student Bar Association and won the Dean’s Award for Excellence in Legal Writing. Prior to law school, Hugh earned his Bachelor of Arts from Furman University in Greenville, South Carolina. He is a member of the Memphis Bar Association, Tennessee Bar Association, and Mississippi Bar Association.

DANA N. GOOD Butler Snow LLP is pleased to welcome Dana N. Good to the firm’s Memphis office. A member of the firm’s Health Law practice group, Good advises academic medical centers, hospitals, and health systems on health care operations, domestic and international biomedical research, institutional review board and human subjects protections, data registries, biorepositories, and research networks and consortiums. Her career has focused on navigating the full spectrum of legal issues facing hospitals and sponsor-investigators engaged in clinical research and other types of biomedical research collaborations. Good earned her law degree from the University of Kansas School of Law and her bachelor’s degree from the University of Denver.

She is licensed to practice in Kansas and Missouri and her license is pending admission in Tennessee.

SUBMIT YOUR NEWS AND UPDATES

If you are an MBA member in good standing and you’ve moved, been promoted, hired an associate, taken on a partner, or received an award, we’d like to hear from you. We will not print notices of honors determined by other publications (e.g., Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers). Notices are limited to 100 words; they are printed at no cost to members and are subject to editing. E-mail your notice and hi-resolution photo (300 dpi) to kswan@memphisbar.org.

36

JOSEPH HOROWITZ Glankler Brown, PLLC is pleased to announce that Joseph Horowitz has joined the firm as Of Counsel. Mr. Horowitz concentrates his practice in the area of civil litigation. He has represented business owners and individuals in the trial courts, appellate courts, at binding arbitrations, and in mediations. He has significant experience in litigating insurance coverage disputes, representing insurance carriers and insureds in complex coverage claims. Mr. Horowitz has successfully handled personal injury cases and estate matters. He has also litigated consumer protection cases in the trial courts and in arbitrations against companies alleged to have used unfair or deceptive business practices under the Fair Debt Collection Practice Act and Fair Credit Billing Act. He is admitted to practice in Tennessee and New York.

JAKE A. KASSER Glankler Brown, PLLC is pleased to announce that Jake A. Kasser has been promoted to Member of the firm. Mr. Kasser has experience advising clients on the creation, development and implementation of comprehensive estate plans, including wealth transfer techniques and sophisticated tax planning and drafting complex wills and trusts, including revocable trusts, generation-skipping trusts, intentionally defective grantor trusts (IDGTs), grantor retained annuity trusts (GRATs), charitable remainder trusts, life insurance trusts, and other related estate planning documents. He has a J.D. degree from the University of Memphis, Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law and an M.S. degree in Accounting from the University of Memphis.

LUCIAN PERA Lucian Pera, Partner at Adams and Reese, has been named the Michael Franck Professional Responsibility Award recipient for 2022. This award is recognized as one of the top ethics honors of the organization, and given to an individual whose contributions in the professional responsibility field reflect the highest level of dedication to legal professionalism. Lucian will receive the Michael Franck Professional Responsibility Award on June 2, 2022, in Baltimore, during the 47th ABA National Conference on Professional Responsibility.

SHAWN SENTILLES Shawn Sentilles, an intellectual property attorney with more than 25 years of experience, has joined Baker Donelson as Of Counsel. Sentilles represents clients in intellectual property litigation, patent and trademark prosecution, trade secret protection, intellectual property licensing, and due diligence.Prior to joining the firm, he served as in-house patent counsel at a multinational publicly-traded medical device company, where he oversaw intellectual property litigation, patent and trademark prosecution, trade secret protection, intellectual property clearance, acquisitions and divestitures, licensing, and health care compliance.

JAMES T. MCCOLGAN, III Hall Booth Smith, P.C. (HBS) is pleased to welcome seasoned Memphis attorney James T. McColgan, III as Of Counsel to its Memphis office. He brings three decades of legal experience in the fields of healthcare liability defense, including presuit investigation, litigation, and jury trials.

McColgan also has vast experience doing appellate work. Earlier in his career, he prosecuted criminal cases for the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of North Carolina. He served honorably in the U.S. Marine Corps for 14 years as an Infantry Officer and Judge Advocate.

37