State Bar of Texas Blog

No place like home: Bell County Bar and National Adoption Day

holly.wilkerson@texasbar.com (Holly Wilkerson) — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 09:00:00 -0600

The Bell County Bar Association is preparing for their second annual National Adoption Day. This year's theme is "The Wizard of Oz, There's No Place Like Home." A yellow brick road will lead the way to the bench as 32 children will be adopted by 20 families on November 16.

"The purpose of this day is to make it the most special day of their life," Judge Rick Morris (pictured), President of the Bell County Bar said.

Adopted children will receive special gifts to signify their adoptions - engraved necklaces for girls and engraved dog tags for boys. Teddy bears, books, and donated bags of necessities from hospitals will also be presented to the new families. A photographer will take pictures of the new families and each family will receive an 8x10 framed photo of the special day.

Fifteen attorneys, four judges and 20 paralegals have volunteered their time for adoptions and to write wills.

"National Adoption Day is so fun, I should have to pay to take part!" Morris said, "There will not be a dry eye in the room."

Providing access to justice to those who protect our country

holly.wilkerson@texasbar.com (Holly Wilkerson) — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:37:21 -0600

The U.S. Armed Forces protect citizens’ rights, including the right to access to justice. The Houston Bar Association and Houston Volunteer Lawyers Program have found a way to ensure that Houston veterans receive access to justice in return.

Approximately 1/3 of Houston veterans are homeless and many more are living on modest means, unable to afford an attorney. Recognizing the severity of this issue, the Houston Bar Association implemented a program to aid our nation’s heroes. Every Friday from 2:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m., volunteers from the Houston Volunteer Lawyers Program staff a free legal clinic held at the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center. Any veteran who attends receives a free legal consultation. Many times, questions are basic and the legal need is fulfilled. If by chance a veteran has an ongoing legal issue, the Houston Volunteer Lawyers Program determines if the veteran is eligible for free representation and connects qualified veterans with a volunteer attorney.

The attendance at the legal clinics has grown - attorneys are now seeing 30 attorneys a week. As the clinics’ success grew, the Houston Bar has expanded the program to include services at veteran transition homes and other special legal clinics. Houston lawyers agree that the volunteer efforts are very fulfilling and that attorneys are building close bonds with local veterans.

Volunteer attorney Denise Scofield described the relationships, “We know our clients, we receive Christmas cards, announcements about grandchildren, and emails. “

The Houston Bar Association held a training seminar on Friday, November 13 to assist with a statewide initiative. Speakers included volunteer attorneys who have experience siding veterans, Judge Mark Cater who developed the first veterans court in Texas, and executive staff members of the Michael E DeBakey VA Medical Center. The State Bar of Texas will implement a program in June of 2010, Texas Lawyers for Texas Veterans.

Above: On November 13, State Bar Director Allan DuBois of San Antonio discusses his experience handling a VA disability case.

Honoring our nation's veterans

john.sirman@texasbar.com (John Sirman) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:57:17 -0600

The State Bar of Texas extends its deep gratitude to all veterans for their service to our country.

Throughout the year, our Legal Assistance to Military Personnel (LAMP) program recruits volunteer attorneys and legal professionals to assist soldiers and their families with legal issues involving family law, employment, housing, and more. Read more and learn how to volunteer

PLI disclosure hearing report: Austin, November 9

kevin.priestner@texasbar.com (Kevin Priestner) — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:32:05 -0600

The State Bar of Texas Board of Directors held its seventh and final public hearing on whether lawyers should be required to disclose to clients if they carry professional liability insurance. Seven attendees chose to testify publicly — two in favor of requiring disclosure, five opposed to the idea. The Board will vote in January to make a recommendation to the Supreme Court of Texas. The Court sent a letter to the Board asking for its recommendation.

Several State Bar directors participated in the hearing, including Steve Benesh and Randy Howry of Austin; Guy Choate of San Angelo; David Copeland of Midland; and Barbara Young of Temple. State Bar President-elect Terry Tottenham of Austin introduced the meeting. Jonathan Smaby, executive director of the Texas Center for Legal Ethics, moderated. Audio recordings of the seven hearings, as well as background materials, are available at www.texasbar.com/plidisclosure.

Among the points raised during public testimony:

A lawyer who has been practicing for 25 years (at small, medium, and large law firms) and has always carried insurance said he opposed the measure. "The emperor has no clothes," he said. The proposal would have the effect of forcing lawyers to buy insurance if they don't have it now. To have to tell clients that you don't have insurance will lead to clients going elsewhere. I read all the materials on the State Bar website. I read the public survey. Unless I missed it, the survey did not ask whether the presence or absence of insurance would affect the hiring decision. This proposal is being presented as an issue of consumer protection. Follow the money. I saw a billboard on I-10 that said "I sue lawyers." That's the new industry. There's only one ingredient needed for an "I sue lawyers" boom — widespread insurance. This proposal would benefit only lawyers. It will drive up costs. I think it's a bad proposal. I urge the Board to vote against it.
A lawyer who handles legal malpractice claims said the Board of Directors and Supreme Court of Texas should follow the lead of more than 25 states and adopt a disclosure rule. I favor the simplest form of disclosure: post it to the State Bar website. Two-thirds of lawyers already have insurance and will be unaffected. In Virginia, in the first week after insurance disclosure was added to their website, they had 25,000 hits. It will not cost anything. I served on the task force that studied insurance disclosure and had the task of talking to other states. I asked, "What happens? Do people buy insurance?" The answer, overwhelmingly, was, "No." After adoption, there may be a slight spike, but it quickly goes down. The ABA studied the issue and reported "no significant problems." Twenty-five states have this, with 100 years of collective experience. We lawyers are good at finding specters. In 1999, it was the Discovery Rules. They worked out fine. Every time we adopt rules there's a hue and cry. Once we adopt, it's easy. There's no cost involved in insurance disclosure. Seventy percent of consumers say we should do it. If we don't adopt disclosure, the Legislature will act. There was a bill introduced last session. It didn't go anywhere because there was an assumption that the Court was preparing to act.
An administrative lawyer who has been practicing for 29 years opposed the measure. My understanding is that the goal is consumer protection. For 100 years, this has not been a problem. I'm unaware of any outcry. To me, the idea that the Legislature would or would not act is speculation. It makes as much sense to assume it won't. In my years of private practice, I do not recall a single client asking if I had insurance. If they had, I would question whether I wanted to represent them. If we disclose insurance, do we have to disclose other issues? Substance abuse? Health? We have a program that assists those struggling with substance abuse or depression. How long before we require disclosure of that? In my experience with workers' comp cases, it's easier to get a settlement out of insureds than non-subscribers. I'm also concerned about the anti-competitive implications. Where does it end? Do government lawyers have to comply? I oppose the idea and urge the Board to oppose it.
The longtime director of Public Citizen Texas said he has fought with and against the bar on numerous occasions during his career. I think that people assume that lawyers have insurance and that there would be some method for recompense. Mistakes are made. Read the disciplinary actions. Just as lawyers are required to disclose the grievance process they should be required to disclose insurance. Good questions have been raised about complexity, but the key piece is: Are you insured? Whether legislation will be filed, I don't know, but it should. I attend a lot of public hearings. Typically it takes 6 months to 2 years of organizing to turn out 50–100 people. People trust the State Bar to do the right thing. They assume you will be in favor of consumers' right to know. That's the reputation you have.
A sole practitioner who handles primarily estate planning and probate work opposed the measure on economic grounds. I have never had a grievance filed against me and have never been sued. When I left the large firm I was practicing with and obtained malpractice insurance, it was a reasonable premium for the first few years. I have high net-worth individuals as clients. Soon my premiums were doubling every year. I inquired and the answer I got back is that insurance companies don't want to insure those with high net-worth individuals. Finally, I reached the point where, as a matter of principle, I discontinued carrying insurance. I'm not hearing anyone proposing to go to the insurance companies and advocate on my behalf. If this proposal passed, I would be interested to know what the minimum coverage will be. Also, if the proposal passes, I think it's important that website notification will suffice.
A plaintiff's lawyer who has always carried insurance opposed the disclosure requirement. When I first read about it, I thought it sounded like a good idea. I now believe this is a backdoor attempt to curb the rule of law. There's a captive audience: these people have to buy insurance. If I try a case against an insurance company, does it kick me in the backside and raise my premiums so that I can't practice? When they wanted a med-mal overhaul, it worked. There isn't a lot of that today. The fox is guarding the henhouse. Insurance companies aren't going to care about lawyers and it's going to end up hurting the public.
A lawyer who attended the hearing without his mind made up and not intending to testify said he thought he represented the silent majority. We don't have staff. We're constantly cutting the bottom line. When this issue came out, I thought, "This is not a big deal." I carry PLI. Maybe this will actually help me. Some can afford. Some cannot. At the end of the day, clients are not going to know what having insurance means. Does this hurt me? I carry insurance because I don't want clients to suffer. But there's always going to be someone who is unhappy. Maybe this will prompt them to file claims. I don't know of any other profession that does this. Every year, my malpractice rates change. Every year, there's a new stack of papers to go through. If this proposal goes through, it will create an incentive to sue and premiums will go up. Therefore, I will drop coverage. The profession has thrown up too many obstacles. I want people to be treated fairly — including lawyers. At the end of the day, we'll come full circle and what will we really have accomplished?

For more information, including synopses of the previous public hearings, go to www.texasbar.com/plidisclosure.

Random Profile - Steve Collins, Austin

teri.rodriguez@texasbar.com (Teri Rodriguez) — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:48:39 -0600

For Random Profiles, we randomly pick one of our 80,000-plus attorneys, call them, and do a Q&A. We've found that every Texas lawyer has an interesting story. Will yours be next?

Most important career lesson: Integrity matters. Be the same person at home, at work, and in the world. Be consistent.

Bet you didn’t know: I married my high school sweetheart, who was the homecoming queen. We’ve been dating, going steady, broken-up, engaged, or married since she was a sophomore and I was a junior in high school.

Another little known fact: My daughter was homecoming queen 31 years later.

Current Project: Surviving a kitchen remodel.

Favorite TV program: Daily Show

When you are not practicing law, what do you like to do? Drive my Miata, ride my motorcycle, make sawdust.

What do you think is the biggest challenge facing attorneys today? Overcoming the image that we will lie and misrepresent in order to serve our clients.

Family: I am married to Beth, a reading specialist who recently retired from teaching in public elementary schools. I have two adult children, a teacher and a sound engineer.

Areas of practice: Governmental relations; higher education general counsel practice.

Education: B.A., U.T. Austin with Honors (1973); J.D., U.T. School of Law (1976)

Bad habit: Giving the urgent priority over the important.

Culinary talent: Marinara, Alfredo, all things Italian

Community Involvement: Leadership roles in church and our neighborhood association. Formerly active in leadership roles in school district.

Mentors/heroes: H. Malcolm Macdonald (U.T. Government Professor); Bernie Ward (U.T. Law Professor); Pat Currie (a deeply spiritual and gentle lady)

Latest pursuit: Contentment

Favorite saying/quote: “Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle.” Philo Judaeus

Pet peeve: People who think the world is their personal trash can or ash tray.

Secret for staying young: Exercise, reading, involvement.

Favorite album: Blind Faith/ Blind Faith

Favorite place to find albums: My son’s collection of his (and mine)

Favorite movie: Paths of Glory (1957; Kubrick)

The last movie: Up!

Favorite magazine: Popular Mechanics

Favorite sport: High school football

Favorite food: Italian

Collects: Vintage mechanical watches

Generally likes to read: History, including historical fiction. Last book read: American Gospel, Meacham.

Memorable vacation: A month with no plans or obligations.

My favorite weekend retreats are: Kairos Prison Ministry

If I had more time, I would: Ride my motorcycle more.

Best thing about being a lawyer: Being a problem solver.

The part of my job I do best is: Thinking and communicating.

The best piece of advice ever given to you and by whom: People are always more important than stuff. Jack Collins (my dad).

If you could be anyone else for a day, who would it be? I don’t care to be anybody else.

Who is your favorite on-screen or literary attorney, and why? Atticus Finch, because he acted with integrity.

If you weren't an attorney, what profession do you think you would be in? Pastoral care.

What's the turning point that made you decide to become an attorney? High school speech and debate.

Who are the people you admire most, and why? Those people who have learned to be content with whatever their circumstances.

What has changed the most technologically or practice wise since you have been licensed? Having been licensed for 33 years, EVERYTHING has changed technologically. I am barely Westlaw literate; I still prefer BOOKS.

How do you think the practice will change in the next 15 years? As with many other professions, ours will have to learn to deal with the ever-growing abundance of bad information and bad legal advice that circulates on the internet.

Read Steve's Texasbar.com profile

Prizes

It's not every day that you're randomly picked from among 80,000 peers. To commemorate, randomly-profiled attorneys receive a TexasBar.com t-shirt and a law firm link (a $50 value).

Update Your Online Profile

Have you updated your attorney profile lately? Go to MyBarPage on TexasBar.com, log in, and click "Update My Profile."

Once on your MyBarPage on TexasBar.com under the "Update My Profile" section, click "Edit" under "My Directory Options" to add your photo for free. While you're there, consider adding a law firm link too. This is a hyperlink from your profile in our Find-a-Lawyer directory to your own law firm website. At only $50/yr, law firm links are a great way to drive traffic to your site.

Opinions and statements expressed in these profiles are those of their subjects - not the State Bar of Texas.

A Milestone for Legal Ethics in Texas

kelley.jonesking@texasbar.com (Kelley Jones King) — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:43:36 -0600

Happy Birthday to the Texas Lawyer's Creed! The Creed contains principles for civility and courtesy between lawyers and honesty in statements to judges and lawyers and was promulgated in 1989 by both the Supreme Court of Texas and Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

On Thursday, Nov. 5, two former justices of the Texas Supreme Court were on hand to help celebrate the 20th anniversaries of the Texas Lawyer’s Creed and the Texas Center for Legal Ethics and Professionalism at a ceremony at the Texas Law Center in Austin. Former Chief Justice Jack Pope and former Justice Eugene Cook were instrumental in the creation of the Center and the Creed. Also on hand were Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jennifer Elrod, who served as master of ceremonies, as well as current Supreme Court Justices Nathan Hecht, Phil Johnson, Paul Green, and Don Willett.

After several speeches commemorating the anniversaries, those in attendance sang "Happy Birthday" and celebrated with cupcakes and a reception.

“Today we are honoring hundreds of people, those who had vision, raised money [for the creation of the Center], and worked day-to-day to keep that vision alive," said Chief Justice Pope. “The organization is here because of them.”

The November issue of the Texas Bar Journal (www.texasbar.com/tbj) includes a special section about how and why the Creed came into existence. A free 30-minute online ethics CLE on the Creed is available at www.texasbarcle.com. For details on the Center, visit www.txethics.org.

This month in the Texas Bar Journal

kevin.priestner@texasbar.com (Kevin Priestner) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:22:07 -0600

most links point to PDF files

New Disciplinary Rules — The Supreme Court of Texas has published for comment proposed amendments to the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.

Pro/Con: Professional Liability Insurance Disclosure — The Supreme Court has asked the State Bar Board of Directors to recommend whether lawyers should be required to disclose to clients if they carry professional liability insurance. Read some of the arguments for and against the proposal.

20 Years of the Texas Lawyer's Creed — Read one man's observations on the need for the Texas Lawyer's Creed, as well as the personal reflections of some of the lawyers and judges who had a hand in crafting it.

Profiles — Texas lawyers take their passions seriously, as you'll see from stories about El Paso lawyer Gene Semko, who moonlights as a Big 12 referee, and Bellville lawyers John and Taunia Elick, who caught the attention of the New York Times for their collection of historic houses.

PLI disclosure hearing report: Lubbock, October 29

kevin.priestner@texasbar.com (Kevin Priestner) — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:58:51 -0600

Nine lawyers braved cold, wet conditions to testify at a public hearing in Lubbock on whether lawyers should be required to disclose to clients if they carry professional liability insurance. Eight of the nine voiced opposition to a disclosure requirement; one expressed her support. The Supreme Court of Texas has asked the State Bar Board of Directors to recommend whether such a policy should be adopted. The Board will vote in January.

Three West Texas lawyers who serve on the Board of Directors attended the hearing — Guy Choate of San Angelo, David Copeland of Midland, and Kyle Lewis of Dumas. State Bar President Roland Johnson of Fort Worth and his immediate predecessor, Harper Estes of Midland, provided background on why the hearing was taking place and answered questions put to them by members of the audience. Jonathan Smaby, executive director of the Texas Center for Legal Ethics, moderated. Recordings of the Lubbock hearing and the five previous public hearings around the state are available at www.texasbar.com/plidisclosure.

Among the points raised during public testimony:

A representative of the 100-member Lubbock Criminal Defense Lawyers Association spoke against the proposition. The goal is consumer protection, which is a noble goal, he said, but this is an oversimplified solution. In fact, it's a solution looking for a problem. There is no public outcry on this issue. The only people in favor I know of are legal malpractice lawyers, who have a pecuniary interest in the matter. I find the proposal offensive because of the paternalistic aspect. There will be a stigma to solo and small-firm practitioners, especially those who practice criminal defense. Disclosure would be misleading. I can't make sense of these policies and suspect the public won't be able to either. I am also concerned about the impact on pro bono. Consumer protection is a noble goal, but this proposal would only undermine the attorney/client relationship.
A professor at Texas Tech University School of Law who practiced 13 years before joining the faculty, is coauthor of a legal malpractice book, and is a former chair of the Texas Supreme Court Grievance Oversight Committee, but who was speaking only of her personal views, supported requiring insurance disclosure. If you're buying a car and one model has airbags and another does not, wouldn't you want to know that? A lawyer with insurance provides a safety net. Doesn't a family deserve to know that? We know that consumers know how to make informed decisions. It comes down to leveling the playing field. As accomplished professionals, we owe the public that duty. We need to elevate public protection over personal preference. You won't hear from many people who support it, but this is not a popularity contest. Consider the message we will send. Do you want to elevate lawyer self-interest over public protection?
A trial lawyer from Amarillo who is a past chair of the Commission for Lawyer Discipline said requiring insurance disclosure would offer minimal consumer protection. Lawyers already have a fiduciary duty that you disclose important information. That duty is broad and set in case law. It is dangerous to add specific duties on top of the broad fiduciary duty. If lawyers are required to disclose, it follows that they would need to disclose the amount, the deductible, what may or may not be covered, whether the lawyer is current on payments, and on and on. If that plays out, it would needlessly strain attorney/client relationships. Prospective clients are free to ask any questions at the outset. We already have one disclosure requirement -- the existence of the grievance system, which I'm for — we don't need to add another. I am adamantly opposed to putting an insurance disclosure requirement into the disciplinary rules. It has nothing to do with attorney discipline. We would burden of the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel. It would be a bad precedent to add something like this. We have withstood adding politicized rules. The next time something comes up, the temptation will be to just add it to the disciplinary rules.
A self-described "street lawyer" who takes "anything that walks through the door" and served on a grievance committee for five years was opposed to the measure. I'm for ethics and everything to make lawyers better. I've been practicing since 1987 and have never had a client ask whether I have any kind of insurance. If I had, I would not have taken that case. I don't want that client. It's not worth the hassle. Insurance disclosure will leave us like deer with a big target on our backs. Hypothetically, if I donated this facility [the hearing took place in the Donald Hunt Courtroom at the Texas Tech University School of Law Mark and Becky Lanier Professional Development Center] and am self-insured, you're going to punish me? At the other end, you're going to punish those who hang out their shingle? The future of our profession is outside those doors. There's a percentage who will be good lawyers who will not be picked up by law firms. This proposal will hurt them.
A county attorney who spent 33 years as a trial lawyer in Houston, served on the State Bar Board of Directors, and has "handled my share of legal practice cases" opposed the measure. This idea has been rolling around since at least the 1970s. I have never heard a good argument for it. The word that comes to mind is "specious" -- it has the ring of truth but is false. I am astonished that we're talking about this today. It's like trying to slap down creeping socialism. This is a bad idea. I say amen to the speakers before me. Let's kill this thing now and be done with it.
A plaintiffs lawyer in Lubbock who said he's "just a lawyer" and doesn't have the pedigree of the speakers before him opposed the proposal. I do disclose that I carry professional liability insurance during the initial interview. I have never in 33 years had a client -- not one -- ask if I have it. I don't know why it's an issue to the State Bar. I have an idea of why it's important to the Supreme Court. When I tell people, it invites the question: Why are you telling me? It throws muddy water on a good interview. I tell them for a selfish reason: To tell them that I've never had to use it. I don't know why we're here today. I oppose the measure, as does everyone in my office.
The president of the South Plains Trial Lawyers Association said the organization's 50 members are not in favor of insurance disclosure.
A Texas Tech alum, also licensed in New Mexico, who has been practicing for 15 years said the proposal is a matter of grave concern to sole practitioners. Lawyers are very much against this proposal. You don't see this requirement of any other profession. There's no requirement that drivers have a bumper sticker indicating they have insurance. Coverage is protected as a trade secret. New Mexico recently adopted a disclosure requirement. I think this is a horrible idea. I opposed it then; I oppose it now. If disclosure is required, it should be done on the State Bar website. Were it not made public, it would not be made into a bargaining chip. We should not be doing this. I have never had a client ask or be concerned about professional liability insurance.
A young lawyer only a few years out of law school who practices in Tahoka opposed the measure. I went to Baylor for undergrad, SMU for a master's, and Baylor again for law school. I mention this because all three degrees cost a lot of money. Malpractice insurance would be prohibitively expensive. If my clients have to hear that, even if it wasn't an issue when they came through the door, it would become one. That was what I wanted to get away from. I grew up in Dallas. I moved to Tahoka so I wouldn't have to practice in a big firm.

For more information, including the reports of a State Bar task force and Supreme Court committee that previously studied the issue and made recommendations, go to www.texasbar.com/plidisclosure.

Pro Bono Profile: Jim Hunter

patricia.garcia@texasbar.com (Patricia L Garcia) — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 06:30:00 -0600

Jim Hunter knows how fortunate he is. As a volunteer with the Cameron County Community Justice Program, he takes on family law cases. A current client is a terminally ill woman whose husband abandoned her and their three children. “When I look at the problems she has, I know that mine pale in comparison,” says Hunter, a partner in Royston Rayzor in the Rio Grande Valley. “As attorneys, we have been blessed with law degrees and great careers — we have a duty to help people.”

Hunter, who practices maritime, commercial and injury litigation, is serving as the 2009–10 president of the Cameron County Bar Association. He says he is using his presidency as a way to get more attorneys in Cameron and Willacy counties on board to do pro bono work. “My mantra this year is to get lawyers to understand how fortunate we are and that we have an obligation not only to our clients and to the public, but to our profession, to improve the perception of lawyers.”

Hunter plugs pro bono wherever he goes and has been successful in recruiting many attorneys to participate in the Community Justice Program. The beauty in the program, he says, lies in the resources offered to volunteer attorneys not familiar with family law. “The nice things about the program is that we have mentors,” he says. “They make it as easy as possible. We have had lawyers who have never taken a family law case and they end up taking more because they have such a wonderful experience in the program.”

PLI disclosure hearing report: Dallas, October 28

kevin.priestner@texasbar.com (Kevin Priestner) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:19:25 -0600

More than 50 lawyers and members of the public took part in a lively public hearing on whether lawyers should be required to disclose to clients if they carry professional liability insurance. The Supreme Court of Texas has asked the State Bar Board of Directors to make a recommendation on the issue. The Board is soliciting input in advance of its anticipated January 2010 vote on the issue.

The hearing — the fifth in a series of seven around the state — took place at the Belo Mansion, home of the Dallas Bar Association. Several State Bar directors from North Texas were on hand, including Talmage Boston, Beverly Godbey, Tim Mountz, Mark Sales, Steve Bolden, John Jansonius, and Dan Micciche of Dallas; Janna Clarke and Mark Daniel of Fort Worth; Deborah Gagliardi of Arlington; Mike Gregory of Denton; John Hatchel of Woodway; and Chad Baruch of Rowlett. State Bar President Roland Johnson of Fort Worth provided an overview of the issue. Jonathan Smaby, executive director of the Texas Center for Legal Ethics, moderated the discussion. An audio recording of the hearing is available at www.texasbar.com/plidisclosure.

Ten lawyers testified publicly. With varying levels of vehemence, nine expressed opposition to a disclosure requirement while one voiced support for the measure. Other attendees indicated their positions in writing. Of those, 19 opposed making insurance disclosure mandatory while one supported the proposal.

Among the points raised during public testimony:

A sole practitioner with 30 years' experience said she was very strongly opposed to requiring insurance disclosure. I have never had a client ask if I have insurance and I've only had a few ask if I'm board certified. All that they care about is my experience. I've asked colleagues in other fields. Not one said they would ask a lawyer about insurance coverage. No other profession requires this. We deal with people's lives. It's been said this is an issue to promote public protection. I beg to differ: It's a back-door way to require malpractice insurance. As a solo, I've decided not to carry malpractice insurance. I take as much CLE as I can. I would rather put money into a client victims' fund or pro bono. I hope the Supreme Court hears loud and clear: This is not an issue. We don't need insurance disclosure.
A sole practitioner licensed since 1969 said he was totally against the plan. This is the proverbial "camel's nose under the tent." I remember when MCLE was just a good idea. This is another good idea that will go to the extreme. In the abstract, it sounds like a wonderful idea. It will result in endless lawsuits, three-fourths of which won't result in anything. The idea that this would be a grievable matter is another example of government-applied pressure on daily life. The cost will be paid by clients. I don't do true pro bono work; I may charge clients $25/hour or $50/hour so that they invested in the representation. If disclosure is required, that may end. Legal malpractice lawyers are in business to make money. They'll say, "Look, he's a lawyer, he's got liability, sue him!"
A small-firm plaintiffs lawyer in Sherman who carried professional liability for many years said doing so only made him a big target. After 25 years of carrying a $1 million policy, I decided to drop it. The next time I received a letter, I said I don't have insurance and never heard from the lawyer again. After tort reform, doctors are no longer a good target. All we need is a bunch of lawyers with $1 million policies. If disclosure is required, we'd all feel pressured to get policies. I have probably done 1,500 wills. Do I have to track all of them down and disclose? What about a person who comes through door? It's going to be embarrassing for lawyers. I suspect the pressure is coming from the insurance companies.
A Houston lawyer who could not attend the Houston public hearing said he is a proud personal injury lawyer. I was in Dallas to meet with clients. They didn't ask about insurance. They were more concerned with the Supreme Court and the Legislature taking away the right to seek compensation for negligence. You don't see a lot of legal malpractice cases on the books. There's a reason for that. Even if you have insurance, it's incredibly difficult to prove. You have to prove a case within a case. What is this issue about? It's a paternalistic Supreme Court deciding what we should do. It will be a sad day when insurance dictates what's ethical in Texas. What happens if after signing we cease to have coverage? Is that breach of contract? I don't believe this is right. I may be the only lawyer who has pursued a doctor who didn't have insurance. This proposal is misguided and should be rejected.
A former president of the Irving Bar Association whose small firm carries professional liability insurance said the proposal is ridiculous. What is the Supreme Court trying to do? The majority of lawyers are solos or small-firm practitioners. We need to send a clear message to the Supreme Court and the State Bar Board of Directors to strike this down. In my reading, I can't find any other profession that requires this. Please vote against this.
A lawyer who handles legal malpractice cases said that, as usual, he found himself in the minority. The absence of insurance does not stop you from being pursued. I respectfully disagree with the "camel's nose under the tent" analogy. There are many states that require disclosure. From the standpoint of one who sees a lot of people who are unhappy with their representation, I approach this from the perspective of what's best for the client. My experience is that people who have assets they need to protect have insurance. I am sympathetic to the concerns of small-firm practitioners, but I do believe disclosure would benefit clients.
The president of the Tarrant County Bar Association, testifying in his personal capacity, said he is against the proposal. The fact that you disclose today misrepresents what coverage you will have tomorrow. Disclosure would open a Pandora's box. What's going to be next? If i have a $1 million limit, can I not try a $2 million case? If I don't have insurance, does that mean I'm a bad lawyer or a very good lawyer? If a client asks, I absolutely have to disclose. But do I then have to disclose what social organizations I belong to? I also believe there will be disparate impact. What about the criminal bar? You basically can't sue a criminal lawyer for malpractice.
The president of the Ellis County Bar Association, speaking of his personal views, said he had not talked to one person in favor of insurance disclosure. Most have a general practice. What would this mean for a solo with a mixed civil/criminal practice? As a young lawyer, this is just an added burden. Most of the young lawyers I talk to plan on going bare. What if I get a tractor/trailer case that goes above my policy? Do I have to associate with other counsel? Do I have to check files monthly? Quarterly? If it's not broke, don't fix it.
A sole practitioner agreed with previous speakers' comments and underscored the disparate affect disclosure would have on small-firm practitioners and minority lawyers.
A former president of the J.L. Turner Legal Society in Dallas who currently serves as chair of the State Bar Council of Chairs related two questions he had received: "Are there fewer grievances in the states that have implemented insurance disclosure?" "Are there more lawsuits or fewer lawsuits in those states?"

For more information, including the reports of a State Bar task force and Supreme Court committee that previously studied the issue and made recommendations, go to www.texasbar.com/plidisclosure.

Pro Bono Profile: David Grenardo of Houston

joanna.herzik@texasbar.com (Joanna Herzik) — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:00:00 -0600

“It feels strange to be recognized for doing something that you should already be doing,” says David Grenardo. “Not much prodding needs to be done. We all just want to help people.”

When Grenardo graduated from Duke Law in North Carolina, he wanted to help people. So, when he began practicing in Los Angeles, he started doing pro bono work with the L.A. County Bar Association. He also worked for The Alliance for Children’s Rights, San Diego Volunteer Lawyer Program, and Harriett Buhai Center for Family Law.

Grenardo is now a senior associate with King & Spalding LLP in Houston and works from Houston with the Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP) in Austin. He is on the TCRP board, which works with attorneys in private practice on pro bono cases and is currently targeting law firms to get involved. He has received numerous awards for his pro bono efforts, including Texas Civil Rights Project Pro Bono Champion, the State Bar of California Wiley W. Manuel Award, the San Diego Volunteer Lawyer Program Distinguished Service Award, and Harriet Buhai Center for Family Law Pro Bono Panel Volunteer of the Year.

An ex Rice University football player, Grenardo is also on the board of The “R” Association, which helps mentor student-athletes. He tells athletes thinking about becoming attorneys that they have an obligation to help people who can’t help themselves.

Grenardo believes that “what is most important is to do something you’re passionate about – and if you are passionate about something, you can find a way to make it work.” He is passionate about civil rights and first amendment type cases. “Anytime you’re standing up for people who can’t stand up for themselves, that’s a great opportunity. It’s amazing.”

When Grenardo works on his pro bono cases, he feels he is “changing peoples’ lives.” “It’s in the fight; it’s not if you win or lose,” he says. "You take the good, the bad, and do everything you can to help these clients.”

Pro Bono Profile: Chris Wrampelmeier of Amarillo

john.sirman@texasbar.com (John Sirman) — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:21:56 -0600

For Amarillo attorney Chris Wrampelmeier, pro bono work is an imperative. “When you’re given certain blessings, it’s incumbent on you to use them wisely and help other people,” he says.

Wrampelmeier is a family lawyer with Underwood, Wilson, Berry, Stein & Johnson, P.C., where he is a shareholder and responsible for guiding the firm’s associates as they begin their careers. To that end he involves associates in a local legal aid clinic that the firm sponsors, where they gain experience outside their regular practice areas. “I have been pleasantly surprised how, to the man and woman, they thoroughly enjoy working at the clinics and are willing to do it again and again,” he related.

Early in his career, Wrampelmeier became active in the State Bar of Texas Family Law Section, serving as a course director, committee member, and now council member. He combines that service with local pro bono work, including legal clinics where attorneys earn CLE credit by agreeing to take pro bono cases. He says he loves family law, even though he once vowed it was the one area of law he would never practice. “What makes is great is that the people who do family are wonderful, both in Amarillo and around the state,” he says.

Throughout his career Wrampelmeier has handled pro bono cases through Legal Aid of Northwest Texas. The organization named him pro bono attorney of the year in 2001 and 2004.

Wrampelmeier says most of his pro bono clients are very grateful, but receiving thanks is not why he does the work. “Deep in all of our hearts we believe everyone should have the same chance, start at the same line, and pull ahead or fall back due to their own skills or faults - not their economic circumstances,” he says. “Sometimes people just need a level playing field.”

PLI disclosure hearing report: El Paso, October 27

kevin.priestner@texasbar.com (Kevin Priestner) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:05:30 -0600

During the fourth of seven public hearings the State Bar of Texas is holding around the state on whether lawyers should be required to disclose to clients if they have professional liability insurance, all six of the attendees who testified publicly spoke against mandating disclosure. At the request of the Supreme Court of Texas, the State Bar Board of Directors will vote to make a recommendation to the Court during the Board's January 2010 meeting.

The public hearing took place at the El Paso Commissioners Courtroom. State Bar President Roland Johnson attended, as did three members of the State Bar Board of Directors: Jeanne C. "Cezy" Collins and Cori Harbour of El Paso, and Pablo Almaguer of McAllen. Harbor is president of the Texas Young Lawyers Association; Almaguer serves as one of four minority directors on the Board. Jonathan Smaby, executive director of the Texas Center for Legal Ethics, moderated the discussion. An audio recording of the hearing is available at www.texasbar.com/plidisclosure.

Among the points raised during public testimony:

"If coverage becomes mandatory, you can have my bar card," a private practitioner said. It's senseless. Professional liability insurance is a notorious litigation-breeder. It advertises: "Sue me!" My clients are looking at six months in jail on DWI charges, not $40 million contracts. I don't know what good it would do except to send cases to other lawyers. I didn't go to law school to get rich. I went to law school to help people out.
An El Paso lawyer who served on the State Bar Task Force on Insurance Disclosure but was speaking only of his personal views, said that his litmus test is to consider if disclosure is in the best interest of clients. If so, he would vote yes. The answer, however, is unknown. There is no evidence on the issue. The American Bar Association commissioned no studies. The State Bar did a phone survey, but did not ask the questions in a manner to elicit how important insurance disclosure is when considering hiring legal representation. If disclosure is required, it should not take the form of a disciplinary rule. It should be like paying dues or fulfilling MCLE and should be posted to the State Bar website.
A small-firm practitioner in El Paso who handles primarily real estate, probate, and bankruptcy foreclosures said he is strongly opposed to mandatory disclosure. His firm has carried liability insurance since he joined in 1996. There has been one frivolous claim. The types of insurance coverage offered are "all over the map," he said. I don't see a reason for the State Bar to mandate. The coverage is for the lawyer. It does nothing for the client. I've never had a client ask if I carry malpractice insurance. I've questioned all the members of my firm. They all oppose. I polled 14 colleagues, five of whom are board certified. Not one wavered. They were unanimous in their opposition. It is not in the best interest of the client.
A government lawyer who practiced seven years in private practice said he had never had anyone ask about insurance coverage. If so, I'd probably have referred the case, he said. It seems a very adversarial question to start the attorney-client relationship. If there's no benefit, why should we do it? If disclosure is required, it should not follow the Supreme Court Grievance Oversight Committee's recommendation that it be a disciplinary rule. It should be handled administratively.
A sole practitioner said that in his 37 years of practice he had never had anyone bring up the subject of professional liability insurance and never had anyone threaten to sue. As president of the family law foundation in El Paso, he is especially sensitive to the financial burdens it would place on family law practitioners. We're in the hinterlands. We're not trying to divide $100,000 estates. We're trying to figure out who gets custody of the Lone Star Card. Those of us in the trenches would say: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I tell clients, If they have an issue, file a complaint. To add an additional tier to that process is not a good idea.
A sole practitioner who has been licensed for 52 years sees the proposal as an attempt to sell more insurance. I'm not for it. This would result in the further commercialization of the practice of law. I have a part-time practice and am not making enough to pay insurance. This would hurt solos by allowing bigger firms to say, "I've got more malpractice insurance."

For more information, including the times and locations of future public hearings, go to www.texasbar.com/plidisclosure.

Pro Bono Profile: Ken Fuller of Dallas

judy.marchman@texasbar.com (Judy Marchman) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:27:09 -0600

Ken Fuller has been called a “godsend” to the Dallas Volunteer Attorney Program, and it’s easy to see why. He has devoted at least two days of pro bono services per week through DVAP for the past seven years and has won numerous awards for his efforts, including the State Bar’s Frank J. Scurlock Award and DVAP’s Pro Bono Lawyer of the Year.

The honors are more than justified because Fuller’s contributions run deep. A long-time name partner in Koons, Fuller, Vanden Eykel & Robertson, P.C., Fuller has drawn on his years of family law expertise to become a trusted and invaluable mentor to DVAP’s volunteer and staff attorneys. In 2002, he stepped in as a mentor when the program’s mentor staff attorney resigned, then continued to volunteer in various capacities after a full-time mentoring attorney was hired. DVAP staff members have found that attorneys seem more eager to volunteer when they know Fuller will be on hand to help.

Fuller, who has been board certified in family law since 1975, also works with DVAP’s pro se program, which provides classes for low-income persons to learn how to represent themselves in simple family law matters. He has contributed to the written instructions and has helped update the program’s pleadings. In addition, he assists in training volunteer attorneys through various classes offered through DVAP and does not hesitate to refer pro bono cases, especially more difficult ones, to his colleagues.

National Pro Bono Celebration: Oct. 25 - 31, 2009

john.sirman@texasbar.com (John Sirman) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:53:30 -0600

The annual National Pro Bono Celebration is an effort to showcase the difference that pro bono lawyers make to the nation, the justice system, the community, and the clients they serve.

Each weekday this month, this blog has featured Texas pro bono lawyers and their work.

For details on the national celebration, visit CelebrateProBono.org. For information on Texas events and activities, see the website of the Texas Access to Justice Foundation.

In recognition of the celebration, the State Bar of Texas board of directors passed a resolution commending the Texas legal community for its pro bono work and encouraging all bar members to contribute. Read it here.

Random Profile - Stefanie Klein, Dallas

joanna.herzik@texasbar.com (Joanna Herzik) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:00:00 -0600

For Random Profiles, we randomly pick one of our 80,000-plus attorneys, call them, and do a Q&A. We've found that every Texas lawyer has an interesting story. Will yours be next?

Best thing about being a lawyer: Being paid to argue! Aside from that, the best surprise about the practice of law has been the people. Whether the interaction is with opposing counsel, co-counsel, clients, witnesses, or judges, the opportunity to teach, to learn from, to help and be helped by the people around me makes this profession worthwhile.

Favorite saying/quote: “We’ll probably find it if we start picking everything up.”

Family/personal: My husband Alan and I have two teenaged sons, Ian and Graham; one dog; and two cats.

Areas of practice: My practice focuses on commercial and bankruptcy litigation, and related appeals.

Education: I have a B.A. in economics from UT Austin, and a J.D. from SMU.

Community Involvement: I serve on my parish’s finance council. I have also taught religious education at the three-year-old, five-year-old, second grade, and seventh grade level, and, with my husband, been a sponsor couple in our parish’s marriage preparation program.

Favorite magazine: Slate.com

The part of my job I do best is: Advocacy

If you could be anyone else for a day, who would it be? Rachel Maddow

Who is your favorite on-screen or literary attorney, and why? Matthew Shardlake, for his combination of compassion, conscience, and intellect, and for his ability to recognize and admit his mistakes.

Stefanie Klein works at Neligan Foley LLP.

You can also view Stefanie's TexasBar.com profile.

Prizes

It's not every day that you're randomly picked from among 80,000 peers. To commemorate, randomly-profiled attorneys receive a TexasBar.com t-shirt and a law firm link (a $50 value).

Update Your Online Profile

Have you updated your attorney profile lately? Go to MyBarPage on TexasBar.com, log in, and click "Update My Profile."

Opinions and statements expressed in these profiles are those of their subjects - not the State Bar of Texas.

Pro Bono Profile: Ernesto J. Dominguez

patricia.garcia@texasbar.com (Patricia L Garcia) — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:30:00 -0600

The National Pro Bono Celebration is Oct. 25 to 31, 2009. Each weekday in October, Texas Bar Blog will feature a Texas attorney who provides pro bono services in the community. Without lawyers like these, too many of our most vulnerable citizens would go without legal representation. For more on the national celebration, visit CelebrateProBono.org.

Ernesto J. Dominguez admits that for a time, he was a lawyer who was too busy to do pro bono work. Then, he read a pro bono article in the Hidalgo County Bar Association newsletter and something clicked. “I used to say, ‘I don’t have time to do pro bono.’ Then I reached a point in my life — professionally and personally — where I felt that I just needed to give back to my profession,” he says. “I also felt (pro bono) was just a good way to assist someone who needs help.”

Dominguez, a partner in the McAllen firm of Orendain & Dominguez, says he learned about the Community Justice Program (CJP), a partnership between Texas RioGrande Legal Aid and the Hidalgo and Cameron county bar associations, through an article in the Hidalgo County Bar Association newsletter. Modeled after the Community Justice Project in San Antonio, the TRLA program focuses on family law cases, helping those in need of divorces. Interested, Dominguez got involved and quickly became immersed in the world of legal aid. (He even served on TRLA’s board of directors from 1998 to 2002.) Dominguez says he was surprised by how easy it was to volunteer. “Volunteering for the Community Justice Program doesn’t take that much time,” he says, adding that TRLA screens cases and prepares divorce petitions before volunteers work on a case. “(TRLA) makes it as easy as possible for the volunteers.”

Last spring, the Texas House of Representatives passed a resolution honoring Dominguez and his pro bono work. In May, the Hidalgo County Bar Association awarded Dominguez its John E. Cook Pro Bono Award. Dominguez says he’s surrounded by fellow lawyers deserving of the honor and is constantly amazed to see attorneys of all ages participate in the CJP. He hopes to see more attorneys step up to serve those in need. “I try to encourage others to participate in pro bono. In one way or another, you should just do something for somebody.”

Pro Bono Profile: Jeffrey H. Kilgore of Galveston

kevin.priestner@texasbar.com (Kevin Priestner) — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:25:39 -0600

The National Pro Bono Celebration is Oct. 25 to 31, 2009. Each weekday in October, Texas Bar Blog will feature a Texas attorney who provides pro bono services in the community. Without lawyers like these, too many of our most vulnerable citizens would go without legal representation. For more on the national celebration, visit CelebrateProBono.org.

As Texans living along the Gulf Coast can attest, hurricanes teach resourcefulness. For Galveston lawyer Jeff Kilgore, who was president of the Galveston County Bar Association when Hurricane Ike devastated the island, hurricanes can also impart lessons on how to resolve seemingly intractable legal disputes.

Kilgore, who has been practicing law for 35 years, is passionate about access to justice. He was instrumental in establishing the Galveston County Bar Association’s pro bono program and seeks constantly to persuade other lawyers to accept pro bono cases.

Kilgore is also passionate about mediation. A credentialed distinguished mediator, he has served multiple terms as president of the Mediators’ Association of Galveston County, is the current chair of the board of Galveston Mediation Services, and has been an officer of the State Bar Alternative Dispute Resolution Section.

When Hurricane Ike left Kilgore without an office, he made the most of the situation. Even though the hurricane had wreaked havoc on residents’ lives, he and other Galveston lawyers committed themselves to ensuring that residents’ legal needs were as unimpeded as possible. Kilgore spent countless hours coordinating with Lone Star Legal Aid, FEMA, and Galveston County Bar Association members to bring as much normalcy as possible.

He arranged to meet clients in coffee shops or gas stations that had withstood the storm. Out of necessity, he even volunteered to conduct a mediation in his car. While Kilgore’s generosity may be larger than life, his car is a Mini Cooper. When he pointed in the direction of his Mini, the two parties, who had been at each other’s throats, asked for a few moments alone. They quickly settled.

The State Bar of Texas Board of Directors recently passed a resolution honoring Kilgore for his tireless work on behalf of Galveston’s lawyers and residents following Hurricane Ike. With humility and grace, he accepted it on behalf of all of Galveston’s lawyers.

Pro Bono Profile - Lan Nguyen of Houston

teri.rodriguez@texasbar.com (Teri Rodriguez) — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:57:58 -0600

Volunteerism is a family tradition, says Lan Nguyen. “Our parents serve, we serve, and our children will continue to serve since for each of us, a skill was endowed with an expressed obligation to serve.” For instance, shares Nguyen, her sons speak, read, and write five languages and can be found volunteering regularly as translators at several legal clinic workshops sponsored by the Houston Volunteers Lawyers Programs (HVLP).

Nguyen is committed to giving back to a community that gave so much to her family when they first arrived in the U.S. in 1975. “We immigrated to Fairhope, Alabama [from Vietnam] and people were generous with their attitudes and welcome,” says Nguyen, “that was enough to smooth our assimilation process and made that difficult period of our lives easier to handle.”

Many of Nguyen’s cases are handled with the HVLP, however she also handles cases for various local churches, temples and other non-profit groups.

Nguyen is also involved with the Vietnamese LegalLine which she founded in 2001 to help the public get simple legal advice and referrals to helpful resources. The program was established, says Nguyen, because although “Vietnamese immigrants have successfully assimilated into the general community, there are individuals who continue to struggle along the edges of the mainstream community because of the language or cultural barriers.”

Nguyen adds, “To this group of individuals the Vietnamese LegalLine was designed to assist, but to our pleasant delight we have reached more and more individuals even though they were not the ‘intended’ audience.”

Of her pro bono work, Nguyen says, “There are a lot of resources and help available when you are undertaking a pro bono case. Yes, it takes a little time, but the friendships that you make, the goodwill that you create, and the synergy that you contribute will last a lifetime. The returns are priceless.”

Pro Bono Profile: Jeffrey Stocks of Houston

judy.marchman@texasbar.com (Judy Marchman) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:06:20 -0600

The National Pro Bono Celebration is Oct. 25 to 31, 2009. Each weekday in October, Texas Bar Blog will feature a Texas attorney who provides pro bono services in the community. Without lawyers like these, too many of our most vulnerable citizens would go without legal representation. For more on the national celebration, visit CelebrateProBono.org.

Jeffrey Stocks was reading an article about the South Texas Pro Bono Asylum Representation Project (ProBAR) in the October 2006 Texas Bar Journal and saw a list of upcoming training sessions. One was in Houston at the South Texas College of Law that December. He decided to attend. The next year, he took his first case for ProBAR, an asylum case involving a boy from Guatemala named Darwin (pictured with Stocks). Stocks won the case, earning the boy the opportunity to start anew in the United States.

Since then, Stocks has represented eight unaccompanied children in their asylum and Special Immigrant Juvenile status cases (he’s working on cases seven and eight now). In doing so, he’s had to learn about the intricacies of immigration law and working with clients who have come from situations of domestic violence, abuse, neglect, and abandonment.

“These are all unaccompanied minors,” said Stocks, who is a graduate of South Texas College of Law and CEO and owner of Gen-Tech Construction in Houston. “Many do not have family here or any family at all. It takes a lot of gumption for these kids to leave their country at age 15 and come here.”

To handle ProBAR cases, he commutes to the Rio Grande Valley, where children who have made their way from Central and South America are detained at the border. “There is such a need for volunteer attorneys down there. It’s a more remote location, so they don’t have as many resources,” Stocks said.

The cases can take anywhere from six months to a year to complete, but the benefits more than make up for the long hours or commute time. “It’s very rewarding. I stay in touch with every one of [the children] and encourage them to pursue an education. Three from more recent cases were placed in long-term foster care here in Houston, so I get to see them more often.

“The older I get, the more this kind of work is so important to me. This is very compelling to me. This makes a difference. I’m happy to do it.”