Amendment One Debate Enlivens Fall BOG Meeting

The Board of Governors fell a few votes shy of the two-thirds margin required to carry a motion to oppose Amendment One on the grounds that the language on the November ballot is entirely misleading. The vote was 39 in favor of the motion and 26 in opposition.

In other action at the Fall meeting in Panama City Beach on October 16, the BOG approved proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct; made appointments to the Commission on Continuing Lawyer Competency and the Judicial Qualifications Commission; backed funding of programs for victims of domestic violence and the Georgia Resource Center and a prohibition on transfer fee covenants; and, chose a new auditor.

Amendment One

At issue in the lengthy debate over Amendment One is the following ballot language:

Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to make Georgia more economically competitive by authorizing legislation to uphold reasonable competitive agreements? () YES () NO

As various editorial writers have noted, this ballot language sounds like mom and apple pie, whereas many view the reality of the amendment as sinister. What this amendment would do is strike free-enterprise language in the state constitution barring contracts that defeat or lessen competition to allow employers to use non-compete provisions in employment contracts that would be invalid under the present state law. Here are some links to various editorials explaining more about the pros and cons of this measure:

http://www.11alive.com/bullpen/story.aspx?storyid=155312&catid=379

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2010/10/01/amendment-one-making-georgia-less-competitive/

http://savannahnow.com/opinion/2010-10-08/amendment-1-no

The debate erupted toward the end of the report of the Advisory Committee on Legislation (ACL), despite an earlier 6-5 vote of the Executive Committee to not bring the issue before the Board of Governors (BOG). State Bar President Lester Tate, who said he would have broken a tie to bring the matter to the BOG had that been possible, explained that among the committee’s concerns had been if a position was to be taken on the measure, what would it really mean and what would be the logistics of so doing at this late date—an op ed article, an advertisement, etc. Furthermore, when the proposal was winding its way through the legislature, various State Bar subcommittees looked at the measure, but none referred it to the ACL.

After Board Member Steve Leibel moved that the BOG weigh in on the issue, there first needed to be a determination whether it was germane under Keller v. State Bar of California, 496 U.S. 1 (1990), in which the Supreme Court held that members of a mandatory bar cannot be forced to pay through their membership dues for any bar activities they deem to be political or ideological. Under Keller, the use of a bar's compulsory dues to fund political and ideological activities violates the First Amendment if the activities are not related to regulating the profession or improving the quality of legal services.

Leibel argued that the legislature’s use of misleading ballot language is germane to the practice of law. Leibel asserted that the ballot language not only is unclear, “it is deceiving in a sense.”

Charles "Buck" Ruffin, the treasurer of the State Bar, who had voted at the earlier Executive Committee meeting to bring the matter before the BOG, asserted that the proposed amendment is germane on the merits because it could negate a State Bar rule that prohibits non-compete agreements in the legal profession. Under this measure, he said, lawyers potentially would not be able to bring their clients with them when leaving a law firm. “It’s dangerous to the legal profession,” Ruffin said of its potential effect on the practice of law.

Patrise Perkins-Hooker, an Executive Committee member who had voted against bringing the matter before the BOG, expressed concerns that the issue is being raised too late, since the amendment is already on the ballot and that opposing the measure has the potential to damage the State Bar’s relationship with the General Assembly.

The BOG determined by a voice vote that the matter was germane to the practice of law and then turned to debate Leibel’s motion. Among the concerns discussed were whether the position to be taken on the amendment was to be limited to the misleading nature of the ballot language or whether to go further and address the merits of the constitutional amendment itself because of its potential effect on lawyers in their legal practices.

Leibel declined to accept as a friendly amendment a proposal offered by President-elect Ken Shigley to add a substantive component to the motion to oppose Amendment One. Shigley’s amendment was defeated by the BOG on a separate voice vote.

The vote on Leibel’s motion to oppose Amendment One on the grounds that the ballot language is misleading then went to a voice vote. Tate initially called the voice vote as having carried. But upon a call for a show of hands, the tally was 39 to 26, just three or four votes, depending on how fractions are factored, of the required two-thirds majority.

A follow-up motion by Leibel for the BOG to adopt a policy to have the ACL vet proposed constitutional amendments and to have the BOG take a stand on the propriety of the amendments passed by a voice vote.

Rules of Professional Conduct

Proposed changes to the Rules of Professional Conduct have been headed toward an October 16 vote under a timetable adopted at the June meeting. The schedule called for requests to alter the language of the proposed rules changes to be submitted in writing before September 21 for inclusion in the Board Book. These suggestions, of which there were several, were treated as amendments to the draft revisions and where appropriate (some were withdrawn) were voted on one-by-one before the entire revision was approved by a voice vote.

The present Rules of Professional Conduct were adopted by the Georgia Supreme Court in 2000. Some were based on model rules of the American Bar Association, while others are unique to Georgia. Not long after Georgia updated the rules, the ABA began re-crafting its model rules. The proposed changes pending before the BOG were based in large part on the ABA updates. The proposal calls for 28 of the 61 Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct to be amended, as well as eight procedural rules for disciplinary matters and one Uniform Superior Court Rule. In most cases, according to the State Bar’s general counsel, the amendments are non-substantive clarifications of the existing rule or additions to the comments. The BOG vote sends the proposals to the Georgia Supreme Court, which has the ultimate authority for adoption.

You can link to an executive summary and full text of the proposals from the State Bar’s website:

http://www.gabar.org/news/proposed_amendments_to_the_georgia_rules_of_professional_conduct/

One concern the BOG addressed by adopting an amendment had to do with Rule 3.3, Candor Toward the Tribunal. The initial draft amended 3.3(a)(3) to require that a lawyer take remedial action when s/he knows that the lawyer, a client, or a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence that the lawyer later finds out is false. After considering the comments received about the proposed revision, the Committee voted against revising the Rule and the BOG approved that course of action.

Another revision made by the BOG would eliminate the 30-day moratorium on contacting potentially adverse persons involved in an accident or disaster by deleting subsection (c) from the proposed change to Rule 4.3, Dealing with Unrepresented Person. The current rule prohibits contact with a potentially adverse party for 30 days after an accident or disaster. The proposed change would have allowed contact during the 30 days under certain circumstances. By eliminating subsection (c), the proposed rule is being brought in line with the ABA version of the rule.

The BOG adopted what was termed a “housekeeping amendment” to Rule 4-106, Conviction of a Crime; Suspension and Disbarment. The revision amends the procedure for cases involving criminal convictions. The housekeeping amendment was to make it clear that under some circumstances a review panel review is not automatic, but instead must be requested.

Another revision would keep in place the current version of Rule 4-204.3, Interim Suspension. The proposed change would have allowed the Investigative Panel to recommend interim suspension of a respondent who does not respond to a Notice of Investigation even where the underlying conduct does not carry a penalty of suspension or disbarment. The BOG voted to leave the current rule as it is.

Finally, the BOG added a comment to Rule 1.0, Terminology to state:

The purpose of this rule is to permit a lawyer to use developing technologies that maintain an objective record of a communication that does not rely upon the memory of the lawyer or any other person. See O.C.G.A. §10-12-2(8).

With the aforementioned changes, the BOG voted to send the proposed rules revisions to the Georgia Supreme Court for its consideration.

Appointments

The BOG appointed Joe Whitley and R. Javoyne Hicks White to the Commission on Continuing Lawyer Competency.

The BOG re-appointed Robert Ingram and appointed Lester Tate to the Judicial Qualifications Commission.

Legislation

The BOG voted to continue to support proposals to “modernize” the rules of evidence; to endorse legislation to appropriate $2.5 million for civil legal services in the 2012 fiscal year for low income victims of domestic violence; to endorse funding of $800,000 for the Georgia Appellate Practice and Resource Center, Inc.; and to support a measure that would prohibit so-called “transfer fee covenants.” According to Patrise Perkins-Hooker, these covenants generate fees that run with the title to the property and often are unknown to the purchaser. There are 16 states that have prohibited these covenants, while two have restricted them substantially.

Other Action

The BOG chose Cherry, Bekaert & Holland as its auditor for the next five years. This selection was made after a request for proposals drew 22 responses and three firms were recommended to the State Bar’s treasurer, who met with each of the three finalists before recommending CB&H.

The BOG heard from Past President Linda Klein, who is now the Speaker of the House of Delegates for the American Bar Association. The ABA is scheduled to meet in Atlanta February 9 through 14, 2011, at the Mariott Marquis and the State Bar will be sponsoring a reception on February 13 from 5 p.m. to 6:30.

YLD President Michael Geoffroy told the BOG about outreach to law students to have them become student members of the State Bar, efforts by Just Georgia to revise the Juvenile Code, and that October is pro bono month.

Board Member Gordon Zeese reported that, predictably, Casemaker officials were unhappy that the BOG voted to switch to Fastcase. The Executive Committee considered Casemaker’s concerns and declined to recommend any change from the earlier decision.

Finally, President Lester Tate asked for careful scrutiny of a draft of a report by The Washington Economics Group, Inc. on The Economic Impacts on the Georgia Economy of Delays in Georgia’s State Courts Due to Recent Declines in Funding for the Judicial System. This report is about 40 pages and is in the Board Book (if you want to look at it, let me know and I’ll find a way to get it to you). Members of the Executive Committee will be meeting in the future with the authors and any concerns about the accuracy of their data or findings can be raised with them then.

Interesting Debate Over Misleading Ballot Language On Amendment One

I'll write a full report after the sun goes down. (Hey, I'm at the beach, after all.) There was a really interesting debate among board members on whether to take a stand opposing Amendment One because the ballot language is so misleading and because on the merits it could, if passed, potentially impact the practice of law. The vote on opposing the amendment was 39 to 26, which was not enough to carry the day because a two-thirds vote was required. Seems like 65 is a really low turnout for a board meeting, though it is enough for a quorum. As you can see from the photo, the DeKalb delegation was sparsely represented.

Oct. 16--Preview of coming attractions

Here are highlights of what's coming up during the State Bar of Georgia's Board of Governors meeting on Saturday October 16, followed by a copy of the entire agenda.

Proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct

From my relative-newbie perspective looking at the agenda, it appears that the main issue requiring board action is a bunch of proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct.

I’ve mentioned this before in the blog and have forwarded information about the various deadlines for submitting language changes. Back in June, the board voted to set the following schedule for consideration of proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct:

1) Suggested wording changes must be made in writing and received by the State Bar on or before Tuesday July 20, 2010, for inclusion in the Board's agenda book.

2) Brief discussion of the proposed amendments and any wording changes will occur during the Board's Summer Meeting on Thursday August 12, 2010.

3) Final suggested wording changes must be in writing and must be received by the State Bar on or before Tuesday September 21, 2010, for inclusion in the Board's agenda book.

4) Action will be taken on Saturday, October 16, 2010, at which time no other wording changes will be in order.

So, I’ve tried to keep y’all updated as each of these deadlines approached. At this point, I think it will just be an up or down vote on the proposed changes. (Though, I could be wrong on that.)

While I have not heard from any of you regarding these proposed changes, there are some folks who have weighed in to the State Bar and their comments are accessible through the link in the agenda that was loaded on-line Thursday October 14 and that I have reproduced below. (I note some of these links just get me hieroglyphics. I don’t know if the problem is with the links, the documents loaded by the bar, or the software on my MacBook. But, the link of the comments did work for me.)

What I’m not clear on from the agenda book is whether any of these comments have been addressed in the proposed amendments that we are to be voting on.

This section of the Board Book takes up about 350 pages (of the 549 page book). It would be nice if there was something saying, yes, we took so and so’s comments to heart and changed thus and such. Or is it just that these proposed changes are as previously proposed? This is something I definitely need to track down by Saturday. I will keep you posted.

Legislation

A big chunk of the agenda seems to revolve around various legislative issues, which makes sense in the Fall with the Georgia General Assembly set to convene in January.

These include:

Continued support of proposals to “modernize” the rules of evidence.

A proposal by the Women and Minorities in the Profession Commission for endorsement of legislation to appropriate $2.5 million for civil legal services in the 2012 fiscal year for low income victims of domestic violence.

A proposal by the board of the Georgia Appellate Practice and Resource Center, Inc. for endorsement of continuation funding of $800,000, which would return it to the normative baseline funding level for the years FY 2002-2008. This organization, which provides post-conviction representation to persons sentenced to the death penalty, has suffered budget cuts of 27.5 percent in FY 2009 from $800,000 to 580,000 and further cut later that year to $528,963. For FY 2010, the budget was set at $580,000, but was cut to $551.000. The state-provided budget was supplemented by the Georgia Bar Foundation and the State Bar, but the outlook for FY 2012 looks bleak. Thus, the Resource Center seeks endorsement of its $800,000 budget request.

A proposal by the Real Property Law Section for support of a measure that would prohibit so-called “transfer fee covenants.” These covenants are explained as follows:

Transfer fee covenants provide that, upon each sale of a parcel of property subject to the covenants (e.g., each lot in a subdivisions), a transfer fee (typically equal to 1% of the sales price) must be paid to a private third party (typically the property’s developer or its trustee), who otherwise has no connection to the property or the transactions. The developer or other seller establishes the covenant by either recording a covenant in the local public record or including the covenant in the deed for the property or any portion of it. Typically, these covenants are in effect for 99 years and are applied to residential properties, although they are also of concern in regard to commercial properties. The proposed bill . . . exempts from its proposed prohibition legitimate fees and assessments payable to those associations, requiring, for example, that any fees and assessments be utilized to pay the operating costs of the association and the affected property.

Other Issues

As you can see below, there are other items on the agenda, but these, at least to my newbie eyes, seem more informational, than actionable.

I will let you know if I’m off in that assessment.

Agenda

STATE BAR OF GEORGIA

233rd BOARD OF GOVERNORS MEETING

Saturday, October 16, 2010

9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.

Edgewater Beach & Golf Resort

Panama City, Florida

1) ADMINISTRATION

a) Call to Order: Lester Tate, President

b) Recognition of Past Presidents: Lester Tate

c) Recognition of Special Guests: Lester Tate

d) Roll Call (by signature): Robin Clark, Secretary

e) Minutes of the 232nd Meeting of the Board of Governors, August 12, 2010 (action): Robin Clark

f) Future Meetings Schedule: Lester Tate

2) BOARD ACTION

a) Amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct: Paula Frederick

(1) Special Rule/Procedure

(2) Comments and Suggested Wording Change

(3) Executive Summary

(4) Disciplinary Rules and Procedures Committee's Proposed Amendments

b) Commission on Continuing Lawyer Competency: Lester Tate

(1) Appointment to replace Lester Tate 2011-2013

(2) Appointment to replace Derek White 2011-2013

c) Judicial Qualifications Commission Nominations: Ken Shigley

3) LEGISLATION: Tom Cauthorn, Chair, ACL; Charles Clay, Vice Chair, ACL

a) Rules of Evidence: Tom Byrne, Chair, Evidence Study Committee

b) Funding Request for Victims of Domestic Violence: Allegra Lawrence-Hardy, Chair, Committee on Diversity and Inclusion in the Profession

c) Funding Request for Georgia Resource Center: Brian Kammer, Executive Director, Georgia Resource Center; Rob Remar, Chair, Board of Directors, Georgia Resource Center

d) Real Property Section Prohibition of Transfer Fee Covenants: Patrise Perkins-Hooker, Chair, Real Property Law Section

e) Overview (information): Tom Boller; Rusty Sewell

4) INFORMATION REPORTS

a) Bar Center: Lester Tate

(1) New Auditorium and Conference Room

(2) Marietta Street and Centennial Park Drive Improvements

(3) Spring Street Viaduct Replacement

(4) South Georgia Office's 2nd Conference Room

b) Treasurer's Report: Buck Ruffin, Treasurer

(1) Treasurer's Report

(2) 2011-2012 Budget Timetable

(3) 2009-2010 Auditor: Patrise Perkins Hooker, Chair, Audit Committee

c) Young Lawyers Division: Michael Geoffroy, YLD President

d) Executive Committee Minutes: Bryan Cavan, Immediate Past President

(1) September 10, 2010

ABA Amicus Brief-Red Flags Rule

FDIC Amendment to HR 4173

e) Fastcase Update: Patrick O'Connor, Co-Chair, Member Benefits Committee; Honorable Gordon Zeese, Co-Chair, Member Benefits Committee

f) Washington Economics Group's Economic Impact Report: Lester Tate

5) WRITTEN REPORTS

a) Law Related Education

b) Law Practice Management

c) Office of General Counsel

d) Consumer Assistance Program

e) BASICS

f) Chief Justice's Commission on Professionalism

6) CLOSING

a) Old Business: Lester Tate

b) New Business: Lester Tate

c) Questions/Answers; Comments/Suggestions: Board of Governors; Officers; Executive Committee; Executive Director; General Counsel

d) Adjournment: Lester Tate

Note Sept. 21 Deadline for Suggested Wording Changes to Proposed Amendments to Conduct Rules

Proposed Amendments to the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct Dear Member of the Board of Governors: As you know, the Board has approved a special procedure for consideration of the proposed amendments to the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct. Pursuant to that procedure, final suggested wording changes must bein writing and received by the State Bar on or before Tuesday, Sept. 21, for inclusion in the Board's agenda book. You may view the proposed amendments on the Bar's website by clicking here. Please send changes to: Paula Frederick State Bar of Georgia 104 Marietta St. NW, Suite 100 Atlanta, GA 30303 Fax 404-527-8744 paulaf@gabar.org The Board will act on the proposed draft at the Fall meeting, Oct. 16. Please note the Sept. 21 deadline and submit your suggested wording changes immediately. No wording changes will be accepted from the floor at the meeting on Oct. 16. Thanks for your continued service, Lester Tate President, State Bar

Congratulations Javoyne!

Former District Attorney Gwen Keyes Fleming announced in a farewell email sent to DeKalb County employees Thursday:

Pursuant to statute, I hereby designate my Chief Assistant Javoyne Hicks White as the Acting District Attorney. Ms. Hicks White is a veteran prosecutor who has served in the Griffin and Atlanta Judicial Circuits before assuming the role of my Chief Assistant five years ago. She also has served as a DeKalb County Associate Magistrate Judge and Georgia Assistant Attorney General. She has unparalleled administrative and legal knowledge, superior trial skills and an unwavering commitment to the community. I have no doubt that she will serve admirably in this new leadership role until a permanent replacement is chosen by the citizens of this county during a special election this November.

Congratulations Gwen!

DeKalb DA resigns to take EPA job

By Megan Matteucci

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

6:34 p.m. Wednesday, September 1, 2010

President Barack Obama appointed DeKalb County District Attorney Gwen Keyes Fleming to be the next regional Environmental Protection Agency administrator.

Fleming announced her resignation Wednesday.

Fleming is leaving DeKalb immediately to become the new southeast regional administrator for the federal Environmental Protection Agency, EPA officials told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

As administrator, Fleming will oversee eight states, including Georgia, and six tribal nations, said EPA spokesman Carl Terry.

Fleming was not immediately available for comment.

“She will promote state and local environmental protections and make sure the agency addresses environmental issues of the day,” Terry said.

Fleming took office in January 2005 and became the county’s first African-American female district attorney. Prior to serving as district attorney, Fleming served as DeKalb's solicitor-general.

Fleming's departure comes just months before the corruption trial for former schools' superintendent Crawford Lewis and former chief operating officer Patricia Reid.

As district attorney, Fleming manages 13,000 cases a year and oversees 165 employees. She is a New Jersey native and earned her law degree from Emory University School of Law.

Find this article at:

http://www.ajc.com/news/dekalb/dekalb-da-resigns-to-604731.html

August Board of Governors Meeting Highlights: Note Burning, Shift to Fastcase, Legislative Issues and ABA and Local Awards

Thank goodness the sprinkler system didn't go off when State Bar President Lester Tate set aflame the Bar Center note that Executive Director Cliff Brashier held above a stainless steel bowl full of water.
The note-burning ceremony during the Board of Governors August 12 meeting marked the retirement of the approximately $4.2 million debt on the State Bar's headquarters building at 104 Marietta Street, which had been approved by the board in June.
Leading up to this moment, the board viewed a video featuring highlights of the dedication of the building in 1997 by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy as well a s interviews with past presents and Georgia Supreme Court justices who were instrumental in the decision to purchase the former Federal Reserve Bank building and transform it into the headquarters of our State Bar. Among them, past President Jimmy Franklin who expressed concern that his tenure would be known as the "era of chainsaw Franklin" because his presidency in 2002 was marked by controversy over the removal of trees to expand the building's parking garage.
Tate noted that the purchase of the building for $26 million in 1995 has been a sound investment. The amount of money put into the purchase and restoration amounts to about $600 per member, but was carried out with an assessment of only $200 per member due to grants, such as from the Woodruff Foundation. The building and the land on which it sits are now worth $40 million, Tate said.
Other highlights of the board's August meeting included decisions to switch from Casemaker to Fastcase, a number of legislative issues and the presentation of awards. (Note that the State Bar has put photos of the note burning and other highlights of the meeting on line at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gabar/sets/72157624613841903/with/4898452186/.)



Shift to Fastcase
The board voted to allow the State Bar's contract with Casemaker to expire and to replace it with Fastcase, a research software that is described as easier to use, more versatile, and less expensive.
In debate over this decision, board members expressed concerns ove r the exclusivity provision in the Casemaker contract, which prevents the State Bar from allowing the two services to overlap during the transition from one service to another. In addition, some members of the bar are simply adverse to change, as exhibited in a crude email that a lawyer sent in response to changes made late last year to the log-on procedure for the members only section of the State Bar's website. "The old logon was just fine. why are we doing this [crude word in all caps describing a body part]," the lawyer wrote.
Nonetheless, the Member Benefits Committee and others who tested Fastcase asserted that the fear of transition is ill founded because their experiences testing the new system caused them to decide it is a better product than Casemaker and that the change will be a good one.
State Bar Secretary Robin Clark, who serves as liaison to the Member Services Committee, stated that she had never felt Casemaker produced trusty research results, so she had retained Westlaw for use in her practice. But her research results with Fastcase gave her the same level of confidence that she had with Westlaw. Clark said she became comfortable with Fastcase in about an hour. To those, who in debate suggested that a five-month transition period would be desirable, Clark asserted it will take about five hours to transition, if that long.
Fastcase President Philip Rosenthal said Georgia is the fifth state bar to switch to Fastcase. He said Oregon and West Virginia also have switched over from Casemaker; Arkansas shifted from another provider; and, New Jersey had previously provided Lexis.
Rosenthal said those state bars' switchboards did not light up with calls complaining about the change.
State Bar staffers will be available to help walk members through the new system if they have problems, and will provide training sessions, as has been done with Casemaker.
A side-by-side financial comparison of Casemaker vs. Fastcase shows that the savings to the State Bar will be considerable. The rounded annual cost of Casemaker for 2011 would have been $214,000, while Fastcase is $168,000. Thus, the cost per member is $5.10 for Casemaker and $4 for Fastcase. In addition, Fastcase provides a searchable database of the State Bar's disciplinary rules and cases for no additional charge, whereas Casemaker would have charged $5,800 to create this database, plus a $3,000 annual fee.
The Member Benefits Committee concluded that the savings with Fastcase are approximately $52,000 per year.



Legislative Issues
The board took action on two fronts to address possible legislative action to impose a sales tax on legal services.
The first step was a more general action--a vote to remove the clause "During the time when the legislature is in session" from Standing Board Policy 100, Section 1.03 (c), which authorizes circumstances under which bar leaders can comment on pending or proposed legislation on an emergency basis. With this change, the ability to respond quickly will be available even when the legislature is not is session.
Second, the board voted to oppose a tax on legal services and authorized the State Bar's lobbyists to press forward on that issue, if necessary. This move was taken because the state legislature has created a Special Council for Tax Reform and Fairness for Georgians, which could possibly consider such a tax. The board's actions allow the State Bar to move quickly if the issue of taxing legal services come up.
The board also voted to authorize the State Bar's president to express the board's concerns over consideration being given by some members of the Fulton County Commission to redirecting over $6 million in federal stimulus funds designated for improving courthouse security to other projects, which include a community center, a jail program to combat recidivism and bus stop improvements.
The suggestion for taking a stand on the use of courthouse security funds came from state Rep. Wendell Willard, R-Sandy Springs, who is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Willard spoke briefly to the board after receiving the Judicial Section's "Spirit of Justice Award," which was presented by Senior Superior Court Judge Anne Workman, for his service to lawyers and the judiciary. "We've got to secure that courthouse once and for all," Willard said.

More Awards
The board's summer meeting came on the heels of an American Bar Association meeting in San Francisco in which many of our State Bar's programs were recognized.
The Transition Into Law Practice Program won the E. Smythe Gambrell Professionalism Award, which recognizes projects contributing to the understanding of professionalism among lawyers. The Gambrell Awards were established in 1991 and are named for E. Smythe Gambrell, ABA and American Bar Foundation president from 1955
to 1956. Gambrell founded the Legal Aid Society in Atlanta, where he practiced law from 1922 until his death in 1986.
After TILPP director Doug Ashworth presented the $3,500 check the program received in winning the award to President Tate, David Gambrell, who was president of the State Bar in 1968, said it was "very touching to me" that the Georgia program would receive the award established in his father's memory.
The TILPP program mentors beginning lawyers in their transition from student to professional. Established in 2005, the TILPP pr ogram has become a model for other programs nationally.
In addition, the ABA named Georgia's Younger Lawyer's Division as the number one YLD in the nation for its year led by past Presdent Amy Tuckett Howell.
The board also recognized Eunice Mixon of Tift County, who has been a lay person member of the Investigative Panel since 1997, with an award in her name that will be given annually by the State Bar. This is an award for distinguished service to the bar by a lay person.
An additional new award was created to recognize attorneys who provide outstanding service to veterans and military service members on a pro bono or reduced fee basis. The board also adopted guidelines for attorneys providing legal assistance in this area.



Other Action
Proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct were very briefly discussed. State Bar General Counsel Paula Frederick noted that no comments have been made on the proposal since the annual meeting in June. Note that any final wording changes must be submitted in writing to the State Bar before Tuesday September 21, 2010, so that they can be included in the agenda book. The Board of Governors is scheduled to vote on the proposed amendments at its fall meeting on October 16, 2010.
A judicial poll in which members of the State Bar can evaluate candidates for the Georgia Supreme Court and Court of Appeals has been sent out and must be returned by September 7, 2010.
Justice Harold D. Melton of the Georgia Supreme Court has written to the State Bar's president to seek comments on proposed amendments to the Code of Judicial Conduct concerning recusal rules for judges. These proposed rules are being adopted in response to concerns raised by state lawmakers and others concerning the current recusal rules for judges in relation to campaign contributions. Justice Melton is seeking comment on the proposed rules within 60 days of his July 16, 2010, letter.
Let me or other members of the board know if you have any concerns or questions or need additional information.
(Photos Courtesy of the State Bar of Georgia.)

Preview of Coming Attractions

Here are highlights of what's coming up during the State Bar of Georgia's Board of Governors meeting on Thursday August 12, followed by a copy of the entire agenda.

The board is scheduled to vote on a recommendation to switch the attorney research software it offers to bar members from Casemaker to Fastcase, a move estimated to save approximately $52,000 per year while providing an easier, more intuitive service.

Other items slated for board action Thursday include:

Selection of BPC Finance as the State Bar's recommended broker for various types of insurance;

Adoption of provisional guidelines for attorneys providing legal assistance to veterans and military service members and the creation of an award to recognize attorneys who provide outstanding service in this area on a pro bono or reduced fee basis;

Approval of a policy that would facilitate the bar's ability to comment on pending or proposed legislation on an emergency basis;

A recommendation that the board oppose any sales tax on legal services--a matter that is expected to come up as the Special Council for Tax Reform and Fairness for Georgians reviews the state's income, sales and property tax systems and recommends changes to a special legislative committee of the General Assembly;

Approval of standing committees for the 2010-11 year.

Proposed amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct will be briefly discussed. Note that any final wording changes must be submitted in writing to the State Bar before Tuesday September 21, 2010, so that they can be included in the agenda book. The Board of Governors is scheduled to vote on the proposed amendments at its fall meeting on October 16, 2010.

Having approved at the annual meeting the early payoff of the debt on the State Bar Building, State Bar President Lester Tate is scheduled to preside over a note burning ceremony.

The board's agenda book is 275-pages long, so I'm just attaching below a copy of the meeting agenda to allow you to see what else is scheduled to take place. The bar has conveniently formated some of the items to link to the information in the agenda book.

Let me or other members of the board know if you have any concerns or questions or need additional information.

AGENDA

232nd BOARD OF GOVERNORS MEETING

9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon, Thursday, Aug. 12, 2010

State Bar Building, 104 Marietta St. NW

Atlanta, Georgia

Dress: Business

1) ADMINISTRATION

a) Call to Order: Lester Tate, President

b) Recognition of Past Presidents: Lester Tate

c) Recognition of Special Guests: Lester Tate

d) Roll Call (by signature): Robin Clark, Secretary

e) Minutes of the 230th and 231st Meeting of the Board of Governors, June 18 and 19, 2010 (action): Robin Clark

f) Future Meetings Schedule: Lester Tate; Ken Shigley, President-Elect

g) State Bar Building Note Burning Ceremony: Lester Tate

h) Judicial Section's Legislator Award: Hon. Pamela Boles

2) BOARD ACTION

a) Member Benefits Committee: Hon. Gordon Zeese; Pat O'Connor

(1) BPC Financial as the State Bar's Recommended Broker for:

(a) Disability and Long Term Care (committee recommends yes)

(b) Automobile and Homeowners (committee recommends no)

(c) Business (Office Property & Liability, Workers' Compensation, EPLI) (committee recommends no)

(2) Casemaker v. Fastcase: (committee recommends Fastcase)

Judge Zeese; Pat O'Connor; Philip Rosenthal; Christina Steinbrecker

b) Military Legal Assistance Program: Buck Ruffin, Chair; Norman Zoller

(1) Provisional Guidelines for Attorneys Providing Legal Assistance to Veterans and Military Service Members

(2) Proposed New Award

c) Standing Board Policy 100, Section 1.03 (c): Bob McCormack

d) Special Council for Tax Reform and Fairness for Georgians: Lester Tate

e) Approval of 2010-2011 Standing Committees: Lester Tate

4) INFORMATION REPORTS

a) Legislation: Lester Tate; Tom Boller; Rusty Sewell; Mark Middleton; Charlie Tanksley

b) Treasurer's Report: Buck Ruffin, Treasurer

(1) Treasurer's Report

(2) 2009-2010 Audit

c) Young Lawyers Division: Michael Geoffroy, YLD President

d) Proposed Rules of Professional Conduct: Paula Frederick

e) 2010 Judicial Poll: Lester Tate

f) Proposed Recusal Amendments to the Code of Judicial Conduct, Cannon 3, Disqualification: Lester Tate

g) Executive Committee Minutes: Bryan Cavan

(1) May 13, 2010

(2) July 16, 2010

5) WRITTEN REPORTS

a) Law-Related Education

b) Law Practice Management

c) Office of the General Counsel

d) Consumer Assistance Program

e) High School Mock Trial Program

f) Transition into Law Practice Program

g) Georgia Legal Services Program

h) Lawyer Advertising

(1) New York Bar (Alexander v. Cahill)

(2) Louisiana Bar (Public Citizen v. Attorney Disciplinary Board)

(3) Florida Bar

6) CLOSING

a) Old Business: Lester Tate

b) New Business: Lester Tate

c) Questions/Answers; Comments/Suggestions: Board of Governors; Officers; Executive Committee; Executive Director; General Counsel

d) Adjournment: Lester Tate

Guidelines for Attorneys Providing Legal Assistance to Veterans and Military Service Members

Just received this email from the State Bar's president concering guidelines for the provision of legal assistance to veterans and members of the military. Thought I'd pass it along in case you want to share any concerns that you may have. Also, this is a field of law with which I am not particuarly familiar, so if you are, and there's something special you think I need to know to understand the issue fully, please tell me.

From the President: Matter of interest to your constituents
To: Board of Governors Members in Circuits Near Military InstallationsFrom: Lester TateDate: July 9, 2010
Because some of the lawyers in your circuit may routinely represent service members and veterans, the attached Provisional Guidelines for Attorneys Providing Legal Assistance to Veterans and Military Service Members may be of special interest to you and those lawyers (click here to view the document).
The Executive Committee will be considering these guidelines next Friday, July 16, 2010. Please e-mail president@gabar.org with any comments or advice you may wish to offer no later than Wednesday, July 14, 2010. It is probable that some form of these Guidelines will be presented to the Board at its Summer or Fall meetings.
Thank you for your service.

Sticker Shock

Let me say straight away that I am not complaining about my low income, which is the product my own choices. (My most regular income comes from splitting a law clerk’s salary of $60,000 in a job-share in DeKalb State Court, teaching Mass Communication Law part-time as an adjunct professor for $1,800 a course at Clark-Atlanta University and selling patio furniture and other garden materials for about $13.50 per hour during markets at the Merchandise Mart. Oh, and since I became a certified floral designer, I’ve made close to $100 on floral arrangements.) I can afford to live this way because I am single, I have no children, and my house, in which I have lived since 1983, is paid-for. And, I incurred no debt going to law school part-time and working full-time when I was late in life.

Nonetheless, given that I likely would be the lowest paid lawyer on the Board of Governors, I asked myself before I offered for a position on the board whether I could afford to serve.

In so doing, I looked at the schedule of upcoming meetings, reasoned that all were within driving range of my relatively fuel-efficient and paid-for 2000 Miata, and that low-cost accommodations likely were available at the out-of-town meetings sites. I concluded, particularly given that a couple of the meetings are in Atlanta, where I live, that I could afford to hit the road the few times a year the BOG meetings are away from home.

But what I didn’t figure into my calculations, and what has left me with sticker shock, is the cost of the various activities the bar offers in association with these Board of Governors meetings.

(At the moment, I’m not conjuring up a milder and/or better comparable term for “adding insult to injury.” If there is one, I would use it here.) Adding insult to injury, at least insofar as the State Bar’s annual meeting is concerned, there is a price break for being a judge—as opposed to a much lower-paid governmental lawyer. This really struck me as odd. Reason being, other organizations of which I am a member, such as the American Bar Association and the Georgia Association of Women Lawyers, give price breaks to certain segments of the legal community, but do so along the lines of public service/public interest employment, not simply by the robe.

I cannot fathom what the rationale is for giving judges a break on the price of events, but not doing the same for much lower-paid government employees and public interest lawyers.

Here are examples of the price differentials for the State Bar’s annual meeting. A “full package” of activities for a full-time judge registering before May 14, 2010, was $125 and $140 after that date. This included the opening night festivities, a reception with the Supreme Court, an inaugural dinner, plus a Bloody Mary reception. The price for a lawyer, such as myself, was $250 or $265, depending on the time of purchase. Either way, too rich for my salary. (The “special” resort view hotel rate at the Amelia Island Plantation where the meeting was held was $154 a night. I found a condo, right on the beach a few miles away, that I shared with friends for $50 per night.)

I thought about writing about this at the time, but feared it would be perceived as a whine.

Then, I received the registration form for the August Board of Governors meeting. The BOG meeting is held at State Bar headquarters in Atlanta, which makes it free to me. But there is an optional trip to Chicago afterwards.

I love Chicago, so before I received the price sheet, this seemed very tempting. I lived there until I was twelve. I’ve visited twice as an adult. There are bargain airfares to Chicago. I thought perhaps the State Bar might have negotiated reduced rate hotel fares for this visit and that maybe this would be worth a splurge.

Then I looked at the cost (not including airfare) of this package. For one person (and no break for judges): $1,204!!!!! This is for (at a la carte rates): lodging at the Hyatt Regency for three nights; a Thursday night reception at $168; a Friday breakfast at $46; a CLE (a bargain) at $10; a Friday night White Sox game for $218; a Saturday night dinner for $200; and, a Sunday morning breakfast of $46.

Good Grief!

I can’t even imagine why breakfast would be $46, given that I typically eat yogurt and Cheerios.

And even if I made what seems to me like a humongous judicial salary exceeding $120,000 per year at the Superior Court level or $166,000 at the state appellate court level, I’m not sure that I would pay $218 for a White Sox game. (OK, I am a Cubs fan from way back and back in the day saw Ernie Banks play at Wrigley Field.)

Or $200 for dinner? What in the world is on the menu?

So, it is, that I am going to the BOG meeting at State Bar headquarters in August. And if I decide I want to go back to my old home-town of Chicago for a baseball game, it won’t be on this package.