Thank You for your Support

The results from the election are out and the voters have elected Darrell Mottley to be the next president of the D.C. Bar.  While I am disappointed in the outcome of the election, I know that Darrell will be a fine president.  I would like to thank everyone who helped me with my campaign and endorsed my candidacy.  I could not have done it without you.

I will continue to serve on the D.C. Bar Board of Governors for the next year and I welcome anyone’s comments or concerns about how the Bar can better serve the membership.

Thanks everyone!

The Future is Now

The choices we make today are the legacy we leave for tomorrow.    Each of us came to the legal profession for different reasons and have made individual choices about what kind of law to practice and in what kind of setting.  Some have even chosen to apply the legal knowledge and expertise to other professional endeavors.  Usually these choices only define our individual careers.   Still, there are times  when our individual choices make a great impact on the direction we take collectively as a group, affecting our profession.

The most frequent question I have been asked is “Why do you decide to run for be Bar President?” My response:  For the first time, the Bar has a  strategic plan to take it in a new direction and I want to make that happen.   There is another reason:  I see an opportunity.  With the many challenges brought on by  the largest financial crisis in generations, we, collectively, have a unique opportunity to do something different.

As lawyers we are stewards of our society.  The purpose of the D.C. Bar Association, established by the D.C. Court of Appeals in 1972,  is to ensure that the public responsibility of the legal profession is more effectively discharged.  Among the enumerated goals are: aiding the Court in improving the administration of justice, safeguarding the proper professional interest of the members, fostering lawyer integrity, encouraging formation and activities of voluntary bar associations, serving as a forum for discussion on matters related to the practice of law and providing continuing legal education.  We must determine both individually as lawyers and collectively as a bar association, whether we can more effectively discharge our responsibility to the public.

In evaluating our responsibility to the public, we must consider not only what we do, but how we do it.   Over the course of my campaign, I have spoken with many people  concerned  about the “how.”   Collectively, we are seeking to define how we fulfill the responsibility to the public.  Increased ground support for pro bono services, improved diversity in the professional advancement and retention of lawyers, and reinforced mentorship opportunities for young lawyers have been recurrent themes.   We also are seeking how to accomplish these goals, once they are defined.  Access to resources is a key concern.  Members are seeking online delivery of  resources and guidance on the practical and ethical implications of new business models.   These issues address meeting the individual needs of members but also shape the way in which we, as a profession, practice law.

My vision to build community by engaging members is critical to the future of our profession.  As a community, we decide how we fulfill our responsibility to the public.  If we build a strong voice through discussion forums, accessibility and public outreach, we create a community that defines the profession for the future.  Through this blog I have articulated my views about what that collective vision might be.  If elected, I will look forward to implementing a plan to strengthen the Bar’s ability to fulfill its mission and to define our community’s vision for the profession’s future.

Not too late! Vote in the DC Bar Elections

You can still vote in the DC Bar elections but this is THE LAST WEEK.   Friday is the last day to cast your vote, either online at www.dcbar.org/elections or by sending in your paper ballot.

Old Souls in Recent Grads

A recent segment on NPR, All Things Considered, highlights some frank and forward-looking opinions about the future of the legal profession.  The pundits were not market analysts, political leaders or managing partners of global law firms.  They were all graduating students from Georgetown University Law Center.

A mentor once told me that adversity builds character.   It also makes us wiser than our years.  Listening to the piece about the five law students and their plans after graduation, you hear the  optimism of youth tempered by the sobering realities of the recession.  It has forever changed their futures.  And these young lawyers – as they wisely observe themselves – are among the lucky ones.

When asked about their future in the profession, each of them openly accepted that, with the existing hiring practices in the legal job market, their ship has sailed.   The opportunity for an offer from a law firm with a six-figure salary will be for another generation of law students.  The resigned acceptance of this fact was haunting.

Strikingly, all agreed with the prediction that, in their opinion, the future can only be found through innovation, transformation and change of the profession itself.    This has become a recurrent theme in many legal circles.  The emergence of blogs and social media over the course of the past decade have afforded a platform to many experts and critics of the legal profession to opine about the demise of the practice of law as we know it.  While some have an ax to grind with a former employer or a bad experience with legal representation, the (often irreverent) critiques of the profession strike close to the heart of what is wrong with the practice of law today.

While reasonable minds may disagree on the core causes creating the problems affecting the legal profession, there can be no doubt that this recession has cast light on how business decisions affect the quality of legal representation, the cost of services and the livelihood of lawyers.  The legal press has reported about hiring practices, billing practices, multidisciplinary practice, offshore outsourcing, and most recently onshore outsourcing – just to name a few business decisions that are fundamentally changing the practice of law.   These changes necessarily impact the opportunities for lawyers and their career satisfaction.

It is incumbent upon us to ensure that our legal house is in order.   We must be forward-looking and engage in an honest 360 assessment of the current state of the practice of law and consider how our decisions will not only impact our clients, but the future of the profession.   And in the end, we must be the change we want to see in the world (Ghandi).

Benefits of Association

Every year I look forward to the Women’s Bar Association Dinner.  I always feel a renewed energy as a I step out onto the sidewalk outside of the National Building Museum at the end of the evening.   This year was no exception.

After a rousing keynote by Valerie Jarrett, Nancy Duff Campbell, this year’s woman lawyer of the year and the founder and co-president of the National Women’s Law Center, made an inspiring call to live with purpose.  Her remarks flowed with WBA Foundation President, Diana Savit’s appeal for donations to support its mission to provide grants in support of programs benefiting women and children.  Outgoing WBA President Consuela Pinto and incoming President Holly Loiseau articulated a WBA vision to promote the advancement of women in the legal profession.

At an event like this, the energy in the room is contagious and the conversation inspires reflection on what can be achieved when a group of people come together for a common purpose.   Providing a forum to come together is a major function of bar associations.   Coming together provides an opportunity to exchange ideas and work together to find solutions to common problems.   While educational programs and services make the bar a relevant resource for members, the real vitality and purpose of the organization only comes to light through the participation of members in creating, presenting and using these resources to improve the profession.

One of my goals for the Bar that I have highlighted during my campaign is encouraging increased participation by members in bar activities and programming.   When members participate in activities of the Bar, it enriches the whole community.   We benefit from diverse perspectives.  Participants also benefit by gaining leadership experience, legal knowledge and networking with colleagues outside of the workplace.  Greater participation and more engagement improve the Bar’s resources and strengthen the Bar.

Not Your Grandfather’s CLE

While the internet provides instant access to information and resources the vast majority of us still get an overwhelming amount of our CLE programming in hotel ballrooms across America.   Even with telephone conferences and webinars, CLE programs are,  on the whole, a passive experience:  attendees sit in seats and listen to a panel of experts talk about developments in the law.

The recent DC Bench and Bar Conference this past spring, offered a change of pace.  Two of the programs I attended used electronic poll devices to solicit input from attendees.  Presenters would offer up a question, provide four or five multiple choice responses and ask people to vote on wireless handheld devices.  The aggregated data appeared on a screen and we discussed the answers people gave.  I loved this format not only because I got to give an opinion, but also because everybody’s answers remained anonymous:   if my response was an outlier (or plum wrong) – nobody knew except me.  It was almost like voting for American Idol.

While many places offer CLE “webinars” – very few offer this kind of interactivity.  Yet, the technology is available.   I have conducted legal programs online that have many points of interaction happening at once.  Current technologies can allow for a presenter to be lecturing while receiving questions via a chat forum and collecting response data through an online poll.  One program I’ve used even lets people check in with emoticons (smiley face graphics) so you can tell if people are enjoying the program, confused, or falling asleep.   It takes some getting used to, but it is helpful to attendee and lecturer alike.  An attendee can queue up a question without waiting until the end of the presentation.  The lecturer can gage the interest and knowledge level of the audience and adjust accordingly.

Interactive and online programming is convenient, useful and engaging.  While lawyers have differing comfort levels with technology, there can be no question that technology-assisted programming will become the preferred form of continuing legal education, if not within the next few years, certainly within the next decade.

Tweet or not to Tweet: That is the Question

Above the Law covered the innovative, if not contentious, campaign for president-elect of the DC Bar.  Gabe’s article highlights my plan to put resources at the fingertips of the bar membership by integrating social media tools and other technology.   The social media tool I like best is Twitter – it’s a ticker tape of breaking news and information from resources that I like to follow.  Since I have an app on my phone – it goes where I go.  The American Bar Association and a few of our local voluntary bar associations have Twitter feeds and it is helpful to have updates and late breaking news on cases and other legal information.

Social media is not the only resource the Bar will need to consider.  While the Bar has made a foray into listserves, online programming will be an essential component of raising the visibility of the resources of the Bar.  With 21 programmatic Sections and a nationally-recognized CLE program, educational programs for lawyers is a core activity of the Bar.   Despite the central location of the bar and the convenience of lunchtime and evening programs, it would still be great to listen in over a sandwich at my desk or to tune in after the kids are in bed.

Onshore outsourcing and virtual law practices

With the economy, just about every lawyer I know is looking for new business solutions to manage costs and stay competitive.  Among entrepreneurial lawyers and solos, a popular approach is the virtual law office:  set up a mailing address and an email account – the virtual equivalent to hanging out a shingle.  Larger firms are also looking for innovative ways to become more efficient.  The Washington Post highlighted a recent move to relocate and centralize administrative operations to Ohio, dubbed “onshore outsourcing“.

While these moves can have significant business advantages, there will undoubtedly be questions that arise about the consequences on the practice of law.  What ethical issues are created?  (e.g. where is the practice of law occurring?) and what will these changes mean for the legal community?

One thing that the Bar can be doing is creating opportunity for dialogue on the most effective ways to structure a law practice that is cost-effective and worry-free of ethical issues.   With ethics counsel and a law practice management service, it can provide valuable resources and programming to inform members of possible pitfalls of embarking on innovative approaches to practicing law.  New approaches to the practice of law are going to affect different parts  of the legal community in different ways.   Navigating, identifying and understanding the impact of the profession’s transformation on members will be critical.

Mothers: A perspective missing from the bench?

After reading the paper this weekend, I pondered how the administration of justice would be different if there were more mothers on the bench.  My curiosity was piqued because the Washington Post Outlook section on Sunday highlighted two articles about the composition of the Supreme Court.  One article highlighted that if Solicitor General Elena Kagan is confirmed as the next Supreme Court Justice, all the Justices on the bench will have law degrees from two elite law schools – Harvard or Yale.  The second highlighted that if Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg steps down, none of the Justices are mothers.

We have a consensus – or so I hope – that we want intelligent people serving on the bench.  (As a Hoya lawyer I would take issue with the notion that they all must be from Harvard or Yale.)  Conversely, pointing to the dearth of mothers on the bench challenges our perceptions on how we — as a profession and a society –determine who should administer justice.  There can be no doubt that diversity in our courts provides a range of perspectives to debate and define justice more robustly:  presumably, a system of justice with diversity more accurately reflects the values and norms of our society.   The challenge is defining what that diversity should be and how it should be achieved.

DC Funding of Civil Legal Services

The DC Council Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary has released a recommendation to preserve funding for Civil Legal Services.  Catch the  full report here:

http://dccouncil.us/media/2010%20Budget/5.13.10_CPSJ_Report_re_Civil_Legal_Services_Funding.pdf