By Valerie Mutton
Tag and save to del.icio.us

Increasingly, young lawyers are the vanguard of pro bono efforts in Canada’s legal community. Armed with a strong sense of the law’s tradition of giving back and of the duty to help the least fortunate in our society, they are creating a new 21st-century pro bono tradition. Here are two such lawyers.

Shannon Salter: Making a difference

When Shannon Salter joined the Vancouver firm of Farris, Vaughan, Wills & Murphy in 2006, after clerking with the Supreme Court of British Columbia, she had a goal in mind: to devote part of her practice to pro bono cases. While that may seem at first glance an unusual ambition for a former clerk, she says in fact many of her clerking colleagues felt the same way. “When you work so closely with the judges, you begin to see things from their point of view. You see not just the problems dealing with lay litigants themselves, but the pressure it puts on the court system, and how the judges feel the pressure to ensure lay litigants get a fair trial.”

She has taken her promise to heart, and has been recognized by Pro bono Law BC for her legal work, which has included helping a single mother avoid eviction, as well as completing a successful bail review for another client. She understands that these are frightening situations for her clients and finds providing her expertise to them gratifying. “You are dealing with the basic struggles of life — losing your house, losing your freedom.”

Salter says she feels an obligation to do pro bono work, as a recognition that she was able to go to law school and that taxpayers helped her achieve her goal. She is struck by the fact that rights mean nothing if you do not have the means to enforce them, and that lawyers who do pro bono work can help to make sure that everyone’s rights are meaningfully protected, including the indigent.

She highly recommends that young lawyers take on pro bono work when they can. Salter’s firm recognizes pro bono hours, which creates a firm culture where such work is valued. The firm also has a trial experience program, in partnership with the Salvation Army pro bono clinic, which Salter has found invaluable for developing trial skills. “It gives you the kind of education you don’t usually get as a one-or-two-year call. By the time you are a fifth year associate, you are at ease in a courtroom and have experience.”

She says her favourite pro bono cases are the ones where the clients are organized and knowledgeable, but can’t go any farther because they lack the expertise to navigate the court system. “The times I feel most proud of being a lawyer are when I’m helping people who could not have helped themselves. You have an opportunity to make a huge difference to them.”

Josh Weinstein: Defending the voiceless

Defending the unpopular cause is one of the finest traditions of the Bar, and Josh Weinstein is upholding that tradition by representing some of society’s most disadvantaged — panhandlers.

In June 2005, the City of Winnipeg passed a bylaw which made it an offence punishable by fine or imprisonment to panhandle, even peacefully, in the downtown core. Weinstein was asked by the Public Interest Law Centre of Legal Aid Manitoba to become involved in a pro bono constitutional challenge to this bylaw on behalf of the National Anti-Poverty Association.

“I didn’t have to think twice about getting involved,” he says. “I knew that panhandlers, if handed an offence notice, would never have the finances or the wherewithal to litigate this issue.” But Weinstein didn’t take on the case just for the sake of the interesting legal and societal issues it highlights, but also because of the opportunity for personal growth.

“The most rewarding part of taking on this case, for me, was realizing my own fallibility in how I regarded panhandlers. I tried to boil it down to what it is the problem we have with them, and I think it is discomfort. When people see poverty staring them right in the face, they are very uncomfortable with it. It scares them to see it in the downtown core. But people have to realize that making this conduct illegal is not needed. Instead, people need to look inside themselves and deal with their discomfort.”

In particular, he says, the absurdity of the law struck him. “If my car broke down outside my office and I went up to someone at the bus stop and asked for two dollars to take the bus home, in theory that is illegal. But I guarantee you that I would not be fined, because of the way I look.” Yet a homeless person, he says, who asked for the same two dollars, would likely be charged with an offence, because of the way he looked.

Weinstein says that he hopes other lawyers can be inspired to take on such projects, even though they are time consuming, once they are in a position to donate their time. And if you are looking for something to get you excited about practising law again, perhaps taking on a pro bono case that interests you is the way to do it. As Weinstein says, “I love everything about this case.”

By Steve Matthews
Stem Legal, Vancouver
Tag and save to del.icio.us

Have you heard of Twitter yet? Perhaps not. And hopefully not, as this article is intended to explain one of the latest web tools on our collective horizon.

What you should know is this: politicians in the current U.S. election are leveraging it, news outlets like CNN and CBC are offering headlines that can be mixed into your reading stream, and companies like Southwest Airlines are using it to interact with customers and take feedback.

It’s widely considered the fastest-growing tool of web influence, and will at some point have a trickle-down effect for the legal industry.

Giving you a finite definition of Twitter is tricky. Its use varies greatly, and depends a lot on the individual user. Technically, Twitter is considered a micro-blogging tool. It’s just like regular blogging, but with one significant rule change. After logging in, you are faced with the question “What are you doing?” Just like a blog, you can share exactly what you’re doing, feeling, thinking, reading — but all in less than 140 characters of entry space.

In terms of the options available for legal web marketing, Twitter — or micro-blogging tools generally — is the shortest method of discourse we’ve seen to date. If e-books and web-distribution of publications are at the longer discourse level, and regular blogs are sitting somewhere in the middle, then Twitter is obviously at the far end (short end?) of our continuum.

With Twitter, like most forms of web marketing, the value is found in the big picture and the cumulative effect of using it as but one piece of the web lawyer’s marketing toolbox. Related articles A toolbox for your computer (July 2007) iPods in your practice (June 2007)

So what can you do in such a short space? Actually, quite a bit. Think: chat and discussion, link exchanges, debate, endorsement, or public critique. It’s a big dinner table conversation with peers whom you get to choose. The format is also mobile-friendly, which in my view has had a substantial impact on the site’s growth.

With Twitter, like most forms of web marketing, the value is found in the big picture and the cumulative effect of using it as but one piece of the web lawyer’s marketing toolbox. The selling point I regularly harp on — exposing one’s practice and expertise online — continues to have a big part to play, even though I don’t see Twitter as a replacement for the personal blog. Rather, when used together, the personal blog and Twitter become a very powerful tandem.

The other point to get is this: micro-blogging is as much akin to the discussion at the bar after the conference as it is to seeing the presentation earlier in the day. Blogging success is predicated on having a strong social network (and please, when you hear SN, don’t think Facebook — think relationships!), and in turn, Twitter drives both interest in the ideas you write about, and extends exposure with an after-post discussion.

Putting my web marketer’s hat on for a moment, the value can also be seen in those exchanges leading to further blog-to-blog discussions, ensuing links, and ultimately, better rankings in the search engines because of authentic exchanges, information seeking behaviour, and discussion.

If you’ve looked at Twitter and just don’t get it, you’re not alone. Looking at any one author’s contributions, it’s tough not to call it drivel. The turning point for many is to recognize Twitter for what it truly is — pure personal reaction. That reaction can run the gamut, from academic and insightful to casual and silly — and at times, drivel.

However, I don’t think I’m alone in seeing marketing value in this type of personal reaction: at the very least for understanding and gauging reaction, and at the most for partaking in the process. Reaction is one of the most human elements possible within the online experience. That it exists, and is being documented, continues to have a huge impact for all types of marketing. Twitter is simply the latest example.

Some Quick Tips for Testing Twitter

the first thing to do after signing up is to build a follow list. Check out the follow lists of others. Chances are they already have done the work for you. Click on the follow button next to their profile picture, or at the top of their profile page. Can’t think of anyone? Feel free to follow me. I’m happy to reciprocate. Use the @ symbol followed by the user name (as in @stevematthews) to respond to individual messages, or tweets. Smile and act like you’re having fun.

Steve Matthews is the founder and principal of Stem Legal, a Vancouver-based company dedicated to bringing web visibility to the legal industry, where this article first appeared. He maintains the Canadian Law Blogs List and writes the Vancouver Law Librarian Blog.

By Jordan Furlong
The Canadian Bar Association
Tag and save to del.icio.us

There are a couple of well-known phenomena about legal careers that, when juxtaposed, might give us better insight into how lawyers enter the profession.

The first is the common assumption that a law degree is far easier postgraduate degree to obtain than, say, a medical degree or Ph.D. Would-be doctors spend four years in medical school, which is extremely hard to get into and not exactly easy to graduate from; thereafter, they spend anywhere from three to eight years in internship and residency. To acquire a Ph.D, you need a Master’s (usually two years) and a Doctorate, which is at least another four, and you need to be extraordinarily bright. Other degrees with various specializations can be equally daunting.

Law, on the other hand, requires just three years of law school, and either the passage of a one-time Bar exam (e.g., the U.S.) or the completion of a one-year apprenticeship period (e.g., Canada). Moreover, the failure rate in law school is far lower than in other postgraduate programs. Once you’re admitted, you’re almost guaranteed to graduate and very likely to be called to the Bar soon thereafter, at which point you have the means to stay employed pretty much as long as you want.

Depending on the region where you work, your employer, what kind of law you practise, how good you are at it, and how attached you are to a well-rounded life outside the work sphere, you’ll then generate an annual income ranging anywhere from $30,000 up to millions of dollars. Even if your debt load leaving school is upwards of $100,000, that’s a pretty fine return on investment and a fairly low-risk and low-demand route into what is still a respected profession.

The second phenomenon is the disconnect and dissatisfaction experienced by many new law graduates during their first few years of practice, especially in large firms. A recent Hildebrandt study seriously questioned the perception that big-firm associates are an altogether miserable lot, but many of these lawyers nonetheless experience angst, unhappiness and disillusionment as they make the adjustment from law school and from the promises of flexible, family-friendly environments these firms increasingly make.

Unlike many Boomer partners, I don’t put this unhappiness down to Millennials’ laziness or sense of entitlement. What I think really upsets these new lawyers is the massive gap between expectations and reality, and even more, the deeply unsettling thought that their harrowing experiences as associates are the norm and establish the template for the rest of their legal lives. Thanks to big firms’ omnipresence in law schools, many new lawyers assume that this is the default setting for the legal profession, and this is what they’ll be stuck doing all their lives.

It’s possible we could address both of these phenomena at once. What if we stopped regarding law school graduation and the call to the Bar as the end of the lawyer qualification period? What if we thought of it instead as the midpoint?

Suppose we thought of the legal profession admission process as lasting seven years: three years to get the degree, up to one year to pass through the Bar exam/articling gauntlet, and three more years as “lawyer interns” picking up knowledge, skills, experience and contacts that law schools don’t and can’t deliver. At that point, new lawyers would feel sufficiently confident about the profession and their place in it that they could then really start their careers in earnest — and having paid down a decent chunk of their education debt in the process.

If a person needs three years to understand the law, maybe that person also needs another three years to become equally proficient and comfortable with the law’s practical application, a far more complex subject. If a newly graduated lawyer understood that she was spending her first three years of practice “sorting things out” — that these years could be considered almost an extended work term that has no particular bearing on what she’ll do next — we’d probably have calmer and happier new lawyers.

This isn’t a proposal to extend the actual qualification process to seven years (though there is something to be said for the idea of “lawyer interns,” the more I think of it). I’m just suggesting that if we readjusted new lawyers’ expectations for how long it takes to really understand the profession and their place within in, they’d enter the law feeling less like panicky impostors yoked to the wheel of a narrow type of practice. They’d be better able to put their first few years of practice in perspective and to make conscious choices about the skills and knowledge enhancement they want for the balance of their careers. And our profession might feel a little better about the length of time it takes to really become a lawyer.

Jordan Furlong is Editor-in-Chief of National magazine. This article first appeared in the blog Law21.

By Lois Casaleggi
University of Chicago Law School
Tag and save to del.icio.us

The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law, by Mark Herrmann, ABA Publishing (2006).

The conventional wisdom is that law school teaches you to think like a lawyer but doesn’t teach you how to be a lawyer. In The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law, Mark Herrmann has stepped into the shoes of The Curmudgeon—an experienced lawyer who is not afraid to be direct with his audience—to provide a handbook to fill that void.

Herrmann has been practicing law for more than twenty years and is currently a partner with Jones Day. Writing as The Curmudgeon, Herrmann takes his years of experience and his keen sense of humor and applies them to the task of providing advice and tips that many partners would like new lawyers to understand. Give associates a copy of this book, and let The Curmudgeon do the hard work for you.

The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law, by Mark Herrmann

The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law is a straightforward, practical instruction manual that new associates would be well served to read and take to heart. While a good portion of the book is litigation focused, much of the advice is applicable for all new lawyers. In fact, this book touches on many areas of complaint that we hear in discussions of generational differences in the practice, and it can be seen as a playbook for teaching Millennials in the profession how to work with, and impress the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers to whom they report.

The need for self-discipline is emphasized throughout the book. The Curmudgeon expects associates working for him to care about the work and the clients as much as he does, and associates should edit their work for both substance and style. Topic sentences, proper grammar, and correct spelling all matter, and The Curmudgeon makes it very clear that if he is forced to edit a memorandum or brief because the associate did not do so, he will not be happy and will not want to work with that associate again.

In addition to emphasizing the importance of editing a document, he reminds the reader that he or she must be able to provide a work product that is impeccable and trustworthy. He takes head on the idea that marking a document as a “Draft” provides protection for the author, swiftly dismissing the illusion that providing a “Draft” allows the associate to renounce the materials if the reviewing attorney criticizes the work. “Keep it. Stuff it. I don’t need garbage with an apology. I need answers.” In the chapter on how to write, he provides a “magic formula” for writing a brief and sets forth the proper way to discuss a case. In fewer than ten pages, he gives enough instruction to correct one of the most common criticisms of associate writing, which is that the associate writes like a law student.

The Curmudgeon clues readers in to the fact that one of the main things they need to do is create an internal market for their work. Associates whose work is flawless and who have made themselves indispensible are associates with whom partners want to work and who will succeed. These associates will benefit from this strong reputation by being in demand and, therefore, having the opportunity to choose among assignments and opportunities.

Another section of the book that is applicable across practice areas is the section on etiquette or, in the old-fashioned parlance of The Curmudgeon, couth. His practical and specific rules for handling voice mail and e-mail all come down to the principle that it is important to “respect others’ time and recognize the need for efficiency.” For example, don’t leave a rambling voice mail message that doesn’t include your name or your phone number. Don’t rattle off your phone number so quickly that the numbers become an unintelligible jumble. And, most importantly, if you can advance matters with a brief voice mail, do so.

The guidance provided in this book can be summed up in Herrmann’s discussion of “the single most important rule for a new lawyer... the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Think about everything you do from the other person’s perspective.” An associate who is reliable, thorough, trustworthy, and makes life easier for the lawyers that he or she works for, will go far.

The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law was an enjoyable read, presenting salient advice for success at a law firm with a good dose of humor. Law students and associates would serve themselves well to read this book and put its pointers into everyday use.

Lois Casaleggi is the Senior Director of Career Services at The University of Chicago Law School. She is a member of the NALP Publications Advisory Group, on whose behalf this review was submitted.

The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law can be ordered from the NALP online bookstore.

© The Association for Legal Career Professionals. Reprinted with permission.

Mark Kuiack
The Canadian Bar Association
Tag and save to del.icio.us

The 2008 ABA TECHSHOW served up a bevy of valuable tips for forward-thinking lawyers, including two dedicated tracks for solo and small firms. Here are 10 of the best tidbits of useful information discovered by this TECHSHOW attendee:

• Tame the e-mail beast: Is your inbox out of control? You have to start somewhere. Move everything to a new folder and organize it during some downtime. It’s amazing how liberating an empty inbox can feel. 43Folders.com includes several innovative approaches to e-mail management. (http://www.43folders.com)
  
  
• Get LinkedIn or be left out: As the dust begins to settle after the onslaught of web 2.0 buzzwords heaved at lawyers, LinkedIn is proving to be the real deal for business networking. If you’re still on the sidelines, sign up and start building your list of connections. (http://www.linkedin.com)
  
  
• Get Smart: Worried about saving sensitive data on an easy-to-lose memory key? Ironkey’s military-grade USB flash drive actually self destructs after 10 failed login attempts. Seriously. (https://www.ironkey.com)
  
  
• Get the 411 on DMS, ASAP: With 80 per cent of a firm’s “knowledge” stored in non-structured data or documents, document management systems (DMS) are increasingly essential, especially for performing that all too common “needle in a haystack” search. (http://www.denniskennedy.com/products/free-samples/docmgmt.aspx)
  
  
• Unified Communications is for real: While it’s easy to write it off as the latest Microsoft buzzword, Unified Communications (the convergence of voicemail, e-mail, web conferencing and much more) can have tangible benefits for lawyers and clients alike, by tearing down the silos posed by traditional media. VoIP and Skype are just the tip of the iceberg. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_communications)
  
  
• Meet back at Basecamp: One of the top collaboration and project management sites, Basecamp is also being used by solo and small firms as an extranet to provide clients with access to their case files and more. (http://www.basecamphq.com/)
  
  
• Draft bills your clients will rush to pay: Establish milestones and corresponding expected payments, and use graphics to show progress. Communicate value by using descriptive text—don’t just write “phone call w/ client”; indicate what it was about. Lastly, consider a small discount if a client pays within 10 days. (http://thoughtfullaw.com)
  
  
• Sometimes it is easy being green: How many times have you wasted a printed page for just a few extra lines of a URL, banner ad or legal disclaimer? Enter GreenPrint—software that will actually prompt you before printing the ubiquitous wasted page, and remove it from the queue if desired. (http://www.printgreener.com/)  
  
  
• Stop using inkjet printers for general office use: Think gasoline is expensive? Inkjet ink is much more costly than almost any other precious liquid, including human blood! The ridiculously high cost of ink cartridges, combined with premature ‘ink level low’ warnings, make inkjet printers impractical for printing large volumes of simple documents. (http://reviews.cnet.com/printers/)
  
  
• Double-up on monitors: Dual monitors can increase productivity and pay for themselves in short order. The idea is that by situating programs on different screens, you can save time by reducing clicks and eliminating the need to constantly switch between multiple windows. Plus, you’ll look super cool. (http://jimcalloway.typepad.com/lawpracticetips/2006/07/dual_monitors_m.html)

For more information on ABA TECHSHOW, visit www.techshow.com.

Mark Kuiack is Editor of CBA PracticeLink and a regular TECHSHOW attendee.

By Jim Rossiter
Chair, Young Lawyers-CBA
Tag and save to del.icio.us

Nova Scotia has announced a new debt management program that will allow articled clerks to defer student loan repayments during their articles and bar course.

“If the borrower is in an accredited internship/residency/apprenticeship program, they are able to take advantage of this deferral for the duration required to complete it,” said Karen Casey, minister of education, in a letter to the Canadian Bar Association.

“Law school graduates who are articling or in their bar admissions program would be eligible to apply for this payment deferral.”

The CBA responded with a request for Casey to take “a leadership role” with her fellow ministers across the country and encourage them to institute similar programs for law students in their jurisdictions.

Casey said in reply that Nova Scotia has taken the initiative of sharing details of the new debt management program with the other provinces and territories.

She said the province has extended a helping hand. “We have offered our assistance to the other jurisdictions should they decide to implement such a program themselves.”

A 2006 CBA resolution sponsored by the Young Lawyers – Canadian Bar Association urged federal, provincial and territorial governments to treat articles and bar admission programs as part of the period of study during which interest does not accumulate and payments are not owing on student loans.

The resolution’s preamble recognized escalating tuition costs at law schools and the potential effect on the diversity of law students and the legal profession.

The resolution, passed by the CBA’s National Council in St. John’s, NL, said students completing articles and bar admission programs are required in some jurisdictions to begin repaying their student loans, or those loans accumulate interest, before the student is earning income as a professional.

The news from the Nova Scotia government came in the midst of an ongoing national initiative of the YL-CBA, in co-operation with provincial and territorial branches, to implement the CBA resolution.

The CBA has written to and received responses from most of the ministers. In some cases the CBA is pursuing follow-up steps, including meetings with the minister and government committee appearances.

Provincial letters
Federal letter