The Legal Intelligencer Blog

Duquesne Law on Its Way to New Legal Clinic Location

By Gina Passarella
Of the Legal Staff

A new $500,000 grant coupled with other funding sources could mean a new home for Duquesne University School of Law’s clinical programs as early as the start of the next academic year, the school said Tuesday.

The law school received the $500,000 grant from the Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program, an initiative administered by the Pennsylvania Office of the Budget that was developed for the acquisition and construction of regional economic, cultural, civic and historical improvement projects, the university said.

“The RACP funding, when matched with Duquesne University’s financial commitment to the project, will allow us to move forward immediately, hopefully in time to relocate to the new clinic quarters by the beginning of next academic year,” Duquesne Law Dean Ken Gormley said in a statement.

In addition to the RACP grant, the law school received a $250,000 grant in November from the Allegheny County Redevelopment Authority to help purchase equipment and furnishings for the new clinic.

Located at 914 Fifth Ave. in Pittsburgh, the new site for the clinical education program will include client meeting rooms; nearly double the space of the existing law clinic; a conference room for hosting meetings with judges and practicing attorneys; and a moot court room equipped with the latest technology.

The law school’s seven clinical programs — which benefit underserved families, individuals and communities — address the areas of civil rights, community enterprise, federal practice, pro se motions, unemployment, urban development and veterans. The clinic also provides real-estate-related services including general real estate matters, title searches, negotiation and drafting of agreements, preparation of land use cases, zoning issues, mortgage foreclosure matters, property tax assessment appeals, appellate land use practice and participating in public meetings.

“The new clinic, located in the Uptown community, will enable the law school and our students to directly deliver much-needed legal services to citizens in the community,” Gormley said in the statement. “This will enrich our law students’ experience by giving them hands-on training handling real clients and resolving real problems. It will simultaneously enrich the community by allowing Duquesne’s School of Law to become a partner in revitalizing the Uptown corridor by providing services in a key, accessible area of the city.”

Gina Passarella is the senior reporter for The Legal. She can be contacted by email at [email protected] or phone at 215-557-2494. Follow her on Twitter at @GPassarellaTLI.

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Friday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

The top story this morning is U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor speaking as part of the dedication ceremony yesterday for the University of Pennsylvania Law School’s new building, Golkin Hall. As reporter Gina Passarella writes, Sotomayor was quiet on the topic of health care, but did speak about her regret that she never took a clerkship and the benefits she sees in them.

Also above the fold on Page 1, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes about the latest in the priest sex-abuse case, as a 30-year-old alleged victim underwent intense cross-examination yesterday by defense attorney William Brennan.

Below the fold on Page 1, Gina Passarella writes that Dechert has opened an office in Almaty, Kazakhstan with the hire of Chadbourne & Parke’s attorneys there. Dechert made a similar move in 2009, starting a Moscow office by hiring a team of partners from the same firm.

Also below the fold on Page 1, reporter Saranac Hale Spencer writes that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has ruled an imprisoned man’s Fifth Amendment rights weren’t violated when he was denied parole for refusing to admit to sexually assaulting his daughter as part of a state-mandated treatment program.

In more Regional News on Page 3, reporter Zack Needles writes that Thomas More Marrone, the former head of Feldman Shepherd Wohlgelernter Tanner Weinstock & Dodig’s complex litigation and class action department, joined the Philadelphia office of Pittsburgh-based Caroselli Beachler McTiernan & Conboy.

Also on Page 3, a former Cozen O’Connor associate was hit with a 30-month suspension for sham billing practices.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

In a Trusts & Estates column on Page 5, Robert H. Louis writes about solving the unfunded pension puzzle for law firms.

In a Commentary on Page 7, Christie B. Tillapaugh writes about how being a mother has made her a better lawyer.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

How Should We Handle Juvenile Offenders?

By Dan McCormick
For the Legal

As the U.S. Supreme Court debates whether juveniles should be sentenced to life without parole, at the University of Pennsylvania Law School there was a similar conversation: should juveniles even be tried as adults?

On March 16 at the Penn Law Edward V. Spaer Symposium, a panel that included lawyers, a psychologist and a Philadelphia judge discussed the role of age in the criminal justice system. The conversation focused mostly on how to treat serious offenders who are juveniles.

Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Benjamin Lerner, who has been the city’s decertification judge for the past few years, said that since the Direct File Act was passed, the system of certifying juveniles has been “stood on its head.” Psychological reports, which used to be the standard method of determining if a serious offender should be tried as an adult, are now only one issue that the defense must deal with, because now they have the burden of proving that it’s in the “public interest” for the offender to be tried as a juvenile, he said.

Marsha Levick from the Juvenile Law Center pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court is actually moving toward a more scientific approach for juvenile offenders. In recent years, the court has relied on scientific evidence of juveniles’ inability to make proper judgments in its decisions regarding treatment of juvenile offenders, she said.

Dr. Steven Berkowitz spoke further on issues of brain development, arguing that social and family circumstances also need to be considered in the treatment of juvenile offenders because of psychological trauma’s adverse effect on a child’s ability to make judgments.

Yumari Martinez, a lawyer from the Vera Institute Center on Youth Justice, argued that the criminal court system should be the last resort for juvenile offenders. He also said lawyers need to be aware of the disproportionate minority representation of the juvenile justice system.

Finally, R. Daniel Okonkwo of DC Lawyers for Youth, said the juvenile penal system should be treatment-based rather than punitive, because a system based on punishment does not produce juveniles who are prepared to be members of a healthy community. For all the talk of consequences that is raised in the discussion of juvenile offenders, adults need to be conscious of the consequences that their own justice system has on communities, he said.

The panel members agreed that the justice system needs to recognize that juveniles are inherently less capable of making proper judgments and that juveniles subject to traumatic circumstances are even less capable. Together, they advised the auditorium full of law students to remember that their future profession plays an important role in the treatment of young people who have committed crimes. Listen to their stories, the panel said, and keep their best interests in mind.

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Thursday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

The top story this morning is reporter Zack Needles’ look into two recent resignations in the state Department of Environmental Protection, which lawyers say is not uncommon after a change in the gubernatorial administration. Reports by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette regarding the July resignation of longtime regional counsel Diana Stares and the November resignation of her successor, William Darr, indicated that Stares was forced out and Darr’s hiring was a political move that wasn’t properly vetted. But attorneys familiar with the inner workings of the agency told The Legal they were skeptical of allegations that there were nefarious motives behind the moves.

Also above the fold on Page 1, reporter Gina Passarella writes about the struggles faced by Rutgers School of Law-Camden, which suffered a 15-spot drop in the most recent U.S. News & World Report law school rankings. The school is still dealing with the fallout from the proposed merger with Rowan University.

Below the fold on Page 1, The Legal’s newest reporter, Saranac Hale Spencer, writes about an Eastern District of Pennsylvania case in which a judge ruled that allegations that a former chief technology officer sabotaged a planned merger by sending secure information to potential suitors did not bring into play the protections of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

In more Regional News on Page 3, reporter Ben Present writes that a state Superior Court panel has ruled that a lawsuit brought against Parx Casino belongs outside Philadelphia, despite the plaintiff’s wishes.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

On the Paralegals Page on Page 5, Christine M. Flynn writes about TIPS – Trial Issues and Practical Solutions – for paralegals, including formulating a plan, confirming witnesses and checking supplies.

As it is Thursday, this week’s Young Lawyer column is on Page 7, as Michael J. Joyce writes about appreciating the momentum created by smaller victories. The little wins can often turn into bigger wins down the road, Joyce writes.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

Welcome to your Friday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

The top story this morning is a lawsuit filed by Elliott Greenleaf & Siedzikowski against a former partner and his new firm, Stevens & Lee. Reporter Gina Passarella writes that Elliott Greenleaf is suing former Harrisburg officer managing shareholder William R. Balaban and two associates who quit Jan. 31 and Feb. 1 to join Stevens & Lee. The suit alleges that Balaban installed software on the firm’s computers that allows him to have continued access to the firm’s files through the “cloud.”

Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes about a panel discussing forum in mass torts. It has become an important issue recently as the forum in which plaintiffs and their lawyers select to bring mass torts in pharmaceutical and asbestos litigation has taken center stage, including the state Supreme Court’s recent rejection of drugmaker Bayer’s request for the court to exercise its jurisdiction over the most convenient forum for several drug products liability cases brought by out-of-state plaintiffs.

In more Regional News on Page 3, reporter Dan McCormick writes that Villanova graduate and San Diego Padres CEO Jeffrey Moorad is giving $5 million to his alma mater for the creation of a sports law program. Also on Page 3 is a report that Widener University School of Law is among the first battles in a campaign of litigation over alleged deliberate fudging of law school graduate employment statistics.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

In a Litigation column on Page 5, Harrie Samaras and Judy Weintraub write about the dispute resolution clause in mediation.

On Page 7 is today’s Law Firm Technology column, going over 10 important steps to help minimize cybercrime exposure in your firm.

If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.

A Word of Warning

By Barely Legal 
Special to the Legal

My brother announced over the holidays that he is thinking about applying to law schools.

My brother is brilliant. He is also funny and charming and people tell me he is handsome, though I don’t see it. His good looks, charm and smarts have afforded him a pretty directionless life so far, but that has all been catching up with him lately as more and more of his friends settle down.

Still, I love my brother more than I love myself and so I did not take this news well.

In fact, I shouted “no” across the table.

My family all stared at me in stunned silence (we aren’t a large family, and I really did shout) and then my mother asked to see me in the kitchen.

As I walked around the table, I stared wide-eyed at my brother, pleading with him not to do it.

When I got to the kitchen my mother immediately asked me what the hell I was doing.

I tried to explain to her that the last thing she should want is her son to go to law school – that it is expensive and no longer guarantees a job with any security, not to mention if he does get a job, the hours are long, the work is thankless, it is soul crushing and most everyone you work with is a jerk because they don’t have a soul – but she cut me off, saying any direction at this point is welcome from her wayward son and she wouldn’t have me getting in the way.

I could hear my brother in the background explaining to my father that he wouldn’t even have to become a lawyer. He could become a sports agent, or work for the government – law school would just open so many doors for him.

“I just don’t think law school is a good idea,” I murmured, knowing I was defeated by the tone of his voice and the way my mom had crossed her arms over her chest.

“I think he would excel at law school. He’s very bright, you know,” she said.

Here we go.

“His IQ is higher than yours,” she said.

She loves reminding me of that.

She uncrossed her arms and tugged gently on the bottom of her sweater.

“You know what I think? I think you are afraid of him out-shining you.”

I rolled my eyes. Yep. That’s it.

Barely Legal offers humorous monthly musings on what it's really like to work for a law firm. Hint: It's nothing like it is on TV.

Should Graduating College Students Attend Law School?

By Anthony S. Volpe
Special to the Legal

The January/February 2012 issue of The Pennsylvania Lawyer has an interesting debate on the pros and cons of law school for college graduates. While both sides make interesting arguments, it is my humble opinion that both sides missed a critical point. During my 35+ years in the legal profession, I have often been asked to speak with prospective law school students or newly minted lawyers about the profession. My advice almost always starts by asking the same questions: What do you expect from the law and what are you personal views and ambitions?

Whether you focus on the job market and financial aspects of a legal education or on the potential fame and fortune that may be available on the horizon, the decision is always a personal one. I have spoken with students, in both college and law school, who have unrealistic expectations of what follows law school graduation and passing the bar exam. It has been my practice to revert back to the two basic questions asked at the start of the conversation. For the uncommitted individual, the failure to land the prized job upon graduation or to attain the desired fame from the practice may define a life of failure. Conversely, an individual committed to the law may find an interesting position at a lesser salary provides the personal satisfaction one seeks in a professional life. Doing a job the right way may not win public acclaim, but it can be very rewarding.

I do not mean to suggest that students should not dream of future success or even wealth. Rather, it is my point that a focus on either money or fame, regardless of whether it is seen as a pro or con, begins the conversation from the wrong point. Since the ultimate decision to attend or not attend law school is highly personal, there needs to be a realistic assessment of the individual’s expectations and ambitions in view of the pros and cons of the legal profession. It is always possible that an individual may be disappointed in the decision; however, it is better to be disappointed in your decision than to have been steered in either direction by someone that may not take into account your personal views and ambitions. In many ways, this is the same advice we give our children about decisions throughout their lives: Actions have consequences.

Anthony S. Volpe, a shareholder at Volpe & Koenig, has corporate and private practice experience in securing, licensing and enforcing all aspects of intellectual property rights. His patent work includes appeals before the USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and interferences and international trade commission, prosecution of patent applications, rendering opinions regarding patentability and enforcement of patent rights.

Law Schools – Did the Needle Fall Off the Ethical Compass?

By Anthony S. Volpe
Special to the Legal

The recent reports about law schools misreporting the LSAT scores of the incoming class and the job successes of new graduates raise a concern about their ethics and the obligation of those schools to provide ethical education. Despite requiring students to attend ethics classes and speaking frequently of the law being a higher profession and not just an occupation, law schools do not see themselves are being subject to the same rules. While there may be a current clamor to treat law as more of a business than a profession, treating it as a business does not change the ethical criteria that apply to law schools. It is truly an instance where they need to lead by example.

The problem does not appear to be getting better as students are resorting to using their education to sue the law schools. And, the law schools are resorting to fighting on the basis of administrative errors and the fact that enrollment was not a guarantee of career success. Their actions bring shame onto both of them.

Law schools cannot blunt the consequences of their false reports by blaming them on the “administrative” arm of the school. If a school is negligent in its administration, it is guilty of sins of commission and omission. The institution must operate as a law school and it does not exempt departments of any type from ethical obligations. This no more and no less is to be expected from medical, engineering, business or any other school. It is the foundation of any profession or trade. When the business world was racked by ethical violations, law schools did not announce that they were attributable to the accounting department’s reporting process rather than the corporate governance. It is a matter of the whole meeting the obligation.

Likewise, students who aspire to be the guardians of the law cannot excuse themselves by saying they had no idea the economy was stagnant or that the job market was poor. Students at that level need to be responsible for their own decisions. Furthermore, even casual students of economics know that almost all professions are subject to employment cycles. Even a minimum of due diligence would have alerted the students to the current marketplace conditions for law school graduates. Those conditions were being reported in publication of general circulation and in legal publications that were not controlled by the law schools.

Law schools cannot shirk their ethical responsibilities and students cannot shift the responsibility for their decisions onto the law schools regardless of any ethical violation. They both shamed the profession.

Anthony S. Volpe is a founding partner of Volpe and Koenig. He can be reached at [email protected].



Back to School for the Legal Industry?

By Julia Claire
Special to the Legal

In the "good old days," late summer meant bright-eyed law students with stacks of books and eager, freshly suited young associates ready to play lawyer. When the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal took an interest in the legal industry, it was to glamorize large firm salary wars for top grads in terms that would make F. Scott Fitzgerald blush. In six years, much has changed.

Now, law books are downloaded ... by fewer customers. Law school enrollment has dropped 11.5 percent. And will likely drop further as publicity of poor job prospects and Enron-style accounting of employment statistics by law schools reaches a crescendo.

Big Law has cut hiring programs. With a glut of experienced lawyers seeking work, smaller firms have little incentive to invest in the inexperienced. Current headlines echo back to Steinbeck, chronicling a world of lawyers who are unemployed, working in factory conditions and suing their law schools.

Even lawyers on the top floors of high-rent skyscrapers can hear the chopping of the cherry trees as The Economist details the rise of alternative legal models, which employ lawyers trained by the very firms from which they are luring clients. These trends have created a generation of lawyers -- trained with a theoretical education dependent upon unofficial client-financed apprenticeships -- with scarce training opportunities.

Until the stream of new lawyers slows to a trickle, experienced lawyers retire, and the legal education community finally implements a long overdue practical curriculum to preserve their profitable business, we have the question:

What is to be done? Will there be a 'lost generation of lawyers'?

A profession built on ambiguity and "multi-factor" tests has had an ironically singular solution to career preparation: find a job. Out of necessity, many new lawyers are employing a multi-pronged approach. In 2009, the percentage of law school grads immediately going solo increased to 5.5 percent from 3.5 percent. Freshly barred attorneys are using technology to run practices with low overhead and billing rates.

In the best cases,  pro bono work and mentoring fills the significant training gaps, with experienced attorneys swapping practical knowledge and Twitter tips with their younger counterparts. Under- and otherwise employed lawyers are also finding benefits in pro bono work. They gain an opportunity to help others in bad economic situations, while also acquiring experience and a sense of purpose from a degree that could symbolize defeat.

New lawyers are now forced to network and make their own opportunities. This resourcefulness is an important skill for all lawyers -- one that much of the industry previously considered scrappy. Shielding new lawyers from clients and maximizing their billable hours was considered more genteel. With attorneys forced to think entrepreneurially and new legal concepts appearing monthly on site ranging from the Google-backed Law Pivot to the controversial Shpoonkle, few can deny that innovation and entrepreneurship are finally finding their way into a stubbornly static and gated industry.

I'm not claiming that bliss is around the corner for the legal industry, nor that some of the concern from the old guard surrounding these shifts is unwarranted. I'm merely suggesting that those of us who could comprise a lost generation of lawyers have few choices but to follow the advice of FDR: "Do something. If it works, do more of it. If it doesn't, do something else."

Julia Claire, Esq. is a co-founder of Hire an Esquire, which enables law firms and legal departments to locate, manage, and pay freelance attorneys with ease online. In addition to practicing law, she has taught legal writing as an adjunct professor in Temple University Beasley School of Law's International LLM Program and as an online lecturer at Quimbee.com. She can be reached at [email protected].

Fresh Ink: Inside Today's Legal

By Jaime Bochet
Of the Legal Staff

Welcome to your Monday morning round-up of stories in today's edition of The Legal Intelligencer. Click the links below to access stories directly, or head to The Legal homepage.  (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)

Leading the front page this morning, U.S. Courthouse Correspondent Shannon P. Duffy has an interview with Reginald T. Shuford, the new executive director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania. Also available on our website as a complement to the article is a videotaped portion of the interview -- simply click here to view it, or head to the homepage and click on "Featured Video."

Sharing the top of the page, senior reporter Gina Passarella has the localized results of the AmLaw's midlevel associates survey. According to Gina, "The bulk of Pennsylvania firms did a better job keeping their midlevel associates happy this year than they did last year. That comes amid a national picture that presented the lowest associate satisfaction score since 2004, according to the magazine’s 2011 Associates Survey."

Below the fold, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that a Philadelphia judge has ruled the $27.6 million awarded to a woman and her husband who said she was injured while taking part in a promotional video for an artificial knee implant should not be reduced.

Reporter Zack Needles has today's Page 3 Regional News story, reporting that Philadelphia-based Hangley Aronchick Segal & Pudlin is now Hangley Aronchick Segal Pudlin & Schiller, marking the firm's first name change since its founding in 1994.

As always, our People in the News section is on Page 2, and the top stories from our sister publications across the country make up the Page 4 National News section.

Today's Page 5 "Family Law" column is by Albert Momjian of Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis, who asserts that while family law may not make the practitioner a multimillionaire, it certainly is fascinating. Sometimes the facts of the cases are more unusual than the fiction created by soap opera writers. Sometimes the issues are more interesting than the tests created by law school professors.

Page 7 is where you'll find a "Commentary" article from our San Francisco affiliate, The Recorder. Frank H. Wu of Hastings College of Law writes, "I remain convinced that a Juris Doctor degree is an advisable investment. I'd like to explain why. I know, of course, that as a law school dean I have an interest in the matter, yet I have the role that I do because I believe in the professional training we offer and not vice versa."

Have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole? E-mail me or any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal!

Jaime Bochet is the Magazines & Supplements Editor for The Legal. Follow her on Twitter at @JaimeBochetTLI or e-mail [email protected].