Utah Bar Journal

Letter to the Editor
President’s Message
Articles:
Staub v. Proctor Hospital – Extending the Cat’s Paw
Ethics and Professional Networking
Groups: Worth the Gas?
Toward Better Communications Between Executives and Lawyers
The Primitive Lawyer
Focus on Ethics & Civility:
Personal Bias
Objecting to Subpoenas in State and Federal Cases Pursuant to Rule
Views from the Bench:
John Adams, David Frakt, and Other Lawyers of Courage
State Bar News
Young Lawyer Division:
Paralegal Division:
Paralegal of the Year

Im just completing my cycle for continuing education. Someone in authority ought to re-examine this entire process. It needs to be more reasonable. When I teach a seminar to attorneys (which requires usually about 15 hours of preparation of a written outline and to teach), or when I write an article for publication (which takes a minimum of 12 hours) or teleconference with attorneys throughout the nation for sophisticated discussion of legal topics, I find I can only count a total of 9 hours for all this activity. (12 hours in a normal cycle). Half of my CLE must be in actual attendance in a meeting with attorneys listening to a lecture on some remote case law. The least effective way of learning is attending a lecture. The best is studying and teaching or writing on a topic. Why are we required to spend half of our time in the least effective learning process?

Secondly, why do we have mandatory CLE in the first place? Most attorneys who are a problem to the Bar and the public (according to the disciplinary section of the Bar Journal) have character defects not knowledge defects. Character defects such as stealing client funds, lying, criminal convictions, fraud, neglecting cases, failure to communicate with clients, etc. These are not knowledge issues. When was anyone disciplined for not knowing how to take a deposition, or how to cross examine an expert or how to file a probate petition? Yet our mandatory (in the classroom) CLE mainly focuses on knowledge issues not character defects. Why dont we have some reasonableness and more liberal interpretations and applications, if we have to have mandatory CLE at all?

Michael L. Deamer

by Robert L. Jeffs

To represent lawyers in the State of Utah and to serve the public and the legal profession by promoting justice, professional excellence, civility, ethics, respect for and understanding of the law.

As President of the Bar, I have reflected on the Bars Mission almost daily. I dont know which of our Bar leaders had the foresight to pen those words, but I think it captures the essence of the goal I hope we all individually and collectively strive to achieve.

by Chris Glauser

In March 2011, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split regarding employer liability for the discriminatory acts of a supervisor who influences, but does not make, a challenged employment decision. In Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 131ÊS.Ct. 1186 (2011), the Supreme Court held that an employer is liable for the discriminatory acts of a supervisor who does not make the final employment decision if the acts of the supervisor are intended to cause an adverse employment action and are a proximate cause, in the traditional tort-law sense, of the adverse action. See id. at 1191-94.

by Timothy P. Daniels

Introduction

A few months ago I opened a solo practice. Almost immediately, I received some good fortune Ð or did I? A neighbor invited me to attend a networking group. There was no membership fee. We just got together to have lunch, talk, and share referrals (if we had any). Upon attending the group, I had some questions about the ethics of my doing so, which led to this article.

by Richard A. Kaplan

Executives and lawyers, as the stereotypes go, think they speak different languages. The executive considers the lawyer a nitpicker and naysayer, who never heard an idea the lawyer liked. The lawyer finds the executive overbearing and bombastic, self-assured to a fault and oddly indifferent to risk. Their conversations are mercifully short, their discussions sadly superficial.

by Alan L. Edwards

It happens to almost all of us at some point. For you it may have been in law school, sitting long hours in the library instead of playing Frisbee on the quad. Or spending hour after billable hour at that high-powered law firm, wondering how to tell your spouse youd be home late again.

The thickening torso. The loss of muscle tone. As Paul Simon aptly put it, Why am I soft in the middle now? The rest of my life is so hard.

For some it was quick up twenty pounds by your first bonus check. For others it was more gradual. But for almost all of us the body demons came and stayed.

by Keith A. Call

What causes the hometeam advantage in sports? Some have suggested various factors, including lack of travel fatigue, the ability to stay at home rather than at a hotel, familiarity with the home field or home court, the actual or psychological advantage of friendly crowd noise, and environmental factors such as weather and altitude.

by Tanya N. Lewis

Introduction

In the course of a civil litigation case, parties are required by rule to disclose documents in their initial disclosures and, if served, in responses to requests for production. See Utah R. Civ. P. 26, 34. But what about obtaining documents from individuals and entities who are not parties to the case? The drafters of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, upon which the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure are based, anticipated a need on the part of civil litigants for documents within the scope and control of witnesses and other third parties. Utah Rule of Civil Procedure 45 was based on that need. See id. R. 45.

by Judge Monroe G. McKay

EDITORS NOTE: The following remarks were made by Judge McKay on April 29, 2011, at the annual Law Day luncheon, sponsored by the Young Lawyers Division. This years Law Day theme was The Legacy of John Adams, from Boston to Guantanamo.

The Tumbuka people of southeastern Africa advise us that even if we are so poor we are reduced to eating pumpkin seeds, we should always share some with a neighbor. What follows is a share of my pumpkin seeds.

ADMONITION

On May 18, 2011, the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court entered an Order of Discipline: Admonition against an attorney for violation of Rules 8.4(b) (Misconduct) and 8.4(a) (Misconduct).

In summary:

An attorney was involved in a domestic violence incident and was charged with Aggravated Assault (Domestic Violence) a third degree felony. The attorney admitted to committing the assault an act of unlawful violence or force that caused substantial bodily injury to a spouse. The attorney pled no contest to an Assault (Domestic Violence) a class A misdemeanor. The plea was to be held in abeyance for twenty-four months based upon completion of certain conditions.

by Angelina Tsu

Today I attended my three-year-old cousin, SophieÕs, dance recital at the Rose Wagner Performing Arts Center. When the stage lit up and it was SophieÕs turn to dance, she just stood there. At first, it seemed like Sophie was just confused by the lights; but soon Sophie began to cry and it quickly became apparent that it was more than a lighting issue. Before the routine ended, Sophie was a sobbing heap of three-year-old girl sitting on the floor. My heart went out to her and I started to laugh. I am embarrassed to say that I laughed so hard I cried.

Congratulations to Patty Allred, Paralegal of the Year for the year 2011-2012. Patty Allred had several nominations. Each expressing her qualities, abilities and attributes to the legal community.

Patty has had nearly three decades of paralegal experience in the legal profession. She has achieved a degree in Paralegal Studies from Utah Technical College, a Bachelor of Science in Psychology and subsequently will be soon receiving a Masters in Criminal Justice and Homeland Security from University of Phoenix. She has been a member of the Utah and National Paralegal organizations over her long career. She is currently working as a Paralegal for Jones, Waldo Holbrook & McDonough.