For the next generation’s Jack McCoys and Atticus Finches…the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law’s professional development staff just published a blog post with information about pursuing careers in prosecution and public defense.  The information was drawn from a  recent NALP Conference program on these career paths; the program featured remarks from seasoned practitioners in the criminal justice arena.

Golden Gate University School of Law is seeking applications for its Assistant Director for Professional Development position. The Assistant Director will be part of the Law Career Services team and will report to the Associate Dean for Law Career Services and Alumni Relations.

Among other things, the Assistant Director will:

• Provide individual and group advising to students and alumni in the JD, LLM and SJD programs, with particular emphasis on working with graduating students and recent JD graduates. Coach graduates through the job search process, including self-assessment, identifying target employers, developing a professional network and creating effective materials. Critique resumes and cover letters and prepare for job interviews.
• Develop new initiatives to engage recent graduates in the job search process. Conduct outreach to students and graduates to provide ongoing support with job searches.
• Collect data on graduate employment and collaborate with LCS senior recruiting coordinator to manage annual survey/data collection process.
• Provide advice on job search strategies and exploring career options. Organize and present workshops and presentations designed to educate students and graduates about legal career options and job search techniques.
• Write handouts, blog articles, and promotional materials. Write weekly enewsletter for recent graduates. Supervise LCS Graduate Fellow.
• Cultivate and promote job and networking opportunities for students and graduates. Conduct outreach to law firms and other legal employers via in-person visits to generate new employment opportunities for recent graduates. Serve as a liaison between Golden Gate students/alumni and members of the professional community.

To view the full job listing, go to PSLawNet (login required).

By: Steve Grumm

Our neighbors at the Pro Bono Institute are putting on a webinar that focuses on a timely question: as law firm business models evolve in the recession’s wake, how will pro bono programs be affected?  This issue greatly interests me because I used to work at a pro bono clearinghouse in the World’s Most Glorious City.  And here at NALP, many of our law-firm members focus on attorney professional development.  The intersection

The Intersection of Pro Bono and Professional Development

between professional development and pro bono will likely be a very busy place in the coming years.  Increasingly, firms wish to provide hands-on, practical training opportunities for junior associates.  One obvious way to do this is through pro bono; by handling pro bono cases, even junior associates can develop case management/strategy skills, gain courtroom experience, and learn how to build trusting relationships with clients – all opportunities that may not be available to them immediately via fee-paying practice.  So I look forward to focusing more on this issue in the coming months.  And I’m looking forward to the PBI webinar next week. Here’s some detail about the webinar:

Coming up on June 7 at 12:30 p.m. EDT is the webinar, “The Evolving Law Firm Business Model and Its Impact on Pro Bono,” which will examine the changes faced by large law firms and the effect they will have on pro bono. 

Large law firms are changing the way they do business, including major shifts in attorney headcount, recruitment, and compensation; new approaches to professional and skill development and advancement; and shifts in billing arrangements and relationships with corporate clients. More profound changes are likely to come. This timely webinar will review these and other developments and reflect on what the changing economic landscape may mean for pro bono supporters at law firms, legal departments, and public interest organizations. This webinar is the first in the Pro Bono Institute’s Best of the 2011 Seminar/Forum Series.

Speakers include our friends Jim Jones, senior vice president and chief legal officer, Hildebrandt Baker Robbins, chairman, The Hildebrandt Institute (whom we’ve spoken with before, here); and Ron Flagg, chair, Pro Bono and Public Interest Law Committee, Sidley Austin LLP*.

By: Steve Grumm 

The good news for Legal Aid of NorthWest Texas is that, this year, it can look back on 60 years of service to low-income Texans.  From the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram:

The group started in 1951 with $500 and an idea that access to justice was not just for those with deep pockets. At that time, 11 attorneys created the Fort Worth Legal Foundation to give free legal advice and aid to people who could not afford legal services.

The Foundation later evolved into Legal Aid of NorthWest Texas, which has become the fifth-largest provider of legal services in the U.S. It covers 114 counties, with 100 lawyers in 16 offices in North and West Texas. About 2,000 private attorneys also donate their time, providing over 40,000 hours of legal assistance.

The bad news: the organization has recently lost $700K in funding, and it’s working to pay off expenses related to the opening of a new headquarters building in Ft. Worth.

…[T]he timing of the fundraiser could not be better. Last week, Legal Aid officials learned they had lost $350,000 in funding from United Way of Dallas. That news came on top of a loss of $350,000 in the recently approved federal appropriations bill.

Errol A. Summerlin, Legal Aid’s CEO, said the nonprofit has received funding from the United Way since 1957, and losing all of it came as a “total shock.”

By Lauren Forbes

Vermont Law School seeks a Faculty Director for its Environment and Natural Resources Law Clinic (ENRLC) to commence in the summer or fall of 2012, or possibly earlier.   Vermont Law School’s top-ranked environmental program includes a curriculum of over 60 environmental law courses, as well as two advanced degrees in environmental law – the Masters in Environmental Law and Policy (MELP) and the Environmental LLM degree. Between a third and a half of our JD students are enrolled as joint degree students in the MELP program.

The ENRLC forms a key component of the environmental education we offer our students. The program functions as a public interest environmental law firm and gives students the opportunity to hone their skills in real-world cases and projects. The ENRLC is organized into four main program areas – Water and Justice, Coal and Climate, Healthy Communities, and Biodiversity – and we retain the flexibility to take on cases and projects outside these areas as well. The ENRLC’s work includes a mix of litigation, administrative agency proceedings, client counseling, and other forms of environmental advocacy.

The ENRLC Director is charged with administering the ENRLC and supervising its faculty, staff, and student clinicians, including the following general duties and responsibilities:

• Evaluating and selecting new cases and projects in consultation with other ENRLC faculty and staff.
• Consultation with an environmental faculty case selection advisory committee.
• Serving as lead attorney in several cases and projects and providing close supervision and feedback to student clinicians involved in those matters.
• Supervising staff attorneys and student clinicians involved in other cases and projects.
• Overseeing weekly Strategy Sessions (case rounds) and Seminars (workshops on various environmental advocacy topics).
• Developing the program budget for administrative approval.
• Monitoring income and expenditures.
• Raising funds for the program through grants and donations, with the assistance of the administration.
• Developing and maintaining relationships with other environmental clinics and clinical organizations.

To view the full job listing, go to PSLawNet (login required).

By Lauren Forbes

Recently, student loan expert Heather Jarvis shared two very timely and helpful blog posts on Income-Based Repayment,or IBR, an acronym with which this blogette and many other recent grads have become intimately familiar.

Check out “3 Best Things About IBR,” a video in which Heather tells students how to get a grip on student loans.   And to ensure that we’re fully educated, Heather also posted a video about an IBR eccentricity, because IBR is unusual in that a borrower’s monthly payment may be even less than the interest that is accruing each month.  Watch the video to find out what happens to that interest…

By: Steve Grumm

An article on the Southern Maryland Online news site offers a sort of “day in the life of the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center.”  The piece is certainly worth a read for those interested in juvenile justice careers, whether as prosecutors, defenders, or in some other capacity.  The work can be fast-paced and sometimes overwhelming, but it’s immeasurably important. 

It’s 9:30 a.m. at the Baltimore City Juvenile Justice Center, and the hallways are crowded with people. Children are crying. Attorneys are yelling out names of their clients. Teenagers are leaning against the walls, waiting for their turn in the courtroom. A woman asks if anyone has a Motrin.

They’re here for juvenile court hearings or for child welfare cases — custody hearings, foster care and abandonment issues.  

…

A snapshot of a day in juvenile court may seem similar to the adult system, but a closer look reveals the differences. The adult and juvenile court systems grow out of different legal theories.

The juvenile system serves youths 18 and under with the goal of rehabilitation, not punishment. For that reason, most of the court’s terminology is different from the language in adult courts. Juveniles are “adjudicated,” not “found guilty.” They commit “delinquent acts,” not “crimes.”

The records in these cases are sealed to protect youths who may have made some immature mistakes and may never again have any legal problems.

By Lauren Forbes

The Family Court Division of the New York City Law Department is seeking an experienced attorney for the Brooklyn office of its Juvenile Delinquency Prosecution Unit. Attorneys in this unit handle delinquency cases from investigation through trial, with the goal of furthering the best interests of the juvenile offenders, while protecting the public safety of the community. Delinquency attorneys investigate cases where juveniles have been charged with violations of New York State Penal Law. They interview victims and witnesses; make and respond to pre-trial motions and appear daily in Family Court, where they conduct arraignments, suppression hearings and trials.

Applicants must have three years or more of litigation experience and must be an attorney in good standing admitted to practice in New York State. Previous criminal justice, juvenile justice, child welfare or related legal experience is required. Knowledge of Family Court procedure is preferred, as is a demonstrated commitment to public service, organizational abilities, an ability to work as part of a team and excellent interpersonal skills.

To view the full job listing, go to PSLawNet (login required).

By: Steve Grumm

Greetings, Dear Readers, and Happy Friday!  Having returned from the Equal Justice Conference, which featured some terrific programming and offered important insights about trends affecting the legal services and pro bono communities, I give you this week’s Bulletin, which is brimming over with news and developments from all corners of the public interest legal world.

Featured: Georgia’s top jurist goes to bat for legal services funding; hard times for Legal Services of New Jersey; a “corps” of newly minted lawyers to help  unclog the immigration system?; a prosecutor/public defender scuffle ends in a lawsuit; New York gets an IOLA funding windfall, but it’s notably “uninteresting”; former AG Gonzales “disappointed” in himself over politicization of hiring practices; the SEC and CFTC hang the “Help Wanted” sign for lawyers; funding for prosecutors and public defenders in one South Carolina county; stagnant prosecutor salaries are causing problems in Tucson; prosecutor funding ain’t great in Vegas, either; a piece on the public defender’s office in Terra Haute, IN; the Texas AtJ Foundation recognizes four banks as IOLTA all-stars; two LSC board members make the case for funding programs in Virginia and nationwide; in Tennessee, a legal services ED explains how even small federal funding cuts disproportionately impact the poor; questions about indigent defense funding in the Tarheel State.

• 5.26.11 – Carol Hunstein, chief justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia, writes in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution about the funding crisis plaguing legal services providers in the Peach State, and calls upon state and federal legislators to shore up funding: Since 2006, the Georgia Legal Services Program has had to reduce its staff by nearly 10 percent and currently has the resources to help only a tenth of the people who call for legal aid. Georgia Bar Foundation funding for Georgia Legal Services has fallen from a high of $2.9 million in 2009 to $739,300 in 2011. Funding for 2012 could fall as low as $400,000.  In response to the crisis, the Georgia legal community has expanded its volunteer services and financial contributions… Despite these efforts, however, further budget cuts at both the state and federal level are threatening vital programs that provide equal access to justice for the most vulnerable Georgians.  The importance of the rule of law and access to justice cannot be ignored. I can only hope that our state and federal legislators recognize that these are core values that secure the success of Georgia’s families and communities.”

• 5.26.11 – from the New Jersey Law Journal: “Legal Services of New Jersey, with the support of the state’s judiciary and the State Bar Association, went cap in hand to the Legislature on Monday, asking for an increase in its proposed appropriation for the upcoming fiscal year…. Legal Services’ overall budget has dropped from $71.5 million in 2007 to $47.6 million last year, said the organization’s president and general counsel, Melville Miller. The sharpest drop in its source of funding came from the state. In 2007, the Legislature appropriated $29.6 million in 2007. But last year it appropriated only $19.9 million and Gov. Chris Christie has recommended the same amount for fiscal 2012.”  Miller noted that LSNJ has reduced its staff from 720 to 490, and 75 more position cuts may be necessary if no additional funding is forthcoming.  This constriction has drastically reduced LSNJ’s service capacity.  For more on LSNJ’s fiscal woes, see a similar piece that ran in the Newark Star Ledger on 5.23.11.

• 5.25.11 – writing in the National Law Journal, Stacy Caplow, director of clinical legal education at Brooklyn Law School, offers a solution to the “crisis” in the immigration system: a corps of law grads doing two years of service as immigration attorneys.  In laying out the system’s myriad problems, Prof. Caplow offers a startling statistic: as for immigrants in the NY area, “a nondetained immigrant represented by a lawyer had a 74% chance of avoiding deportation, whereas a detained immigrant without counsel had only a 3% rate of success.”  Wow.  Caplow’s solution: [L]et’s create a structured program for…law graduates to provide legal services to poor, unrepresented immigrants while developing skills and knowledge to improve the level of competency of the immigration bar….  We could call it Immig-Corps. I picture recent law graduates being trained and supervised over a period of two years, going to detention centers, to immigration court, interviewing, counseling and representing individuals facing deportation.”  Read the full piece for discussion of how to fund the program.  I’ve got some thoughts on these proposals – not the least of which is apprehension about the risk of downward pressure on already-low public interest attorney salaries.  But that must wait for a longer blog post.

• 5.25.11 – barristers’ brawl? Suffice to say, it started in a scuffle and ended in a lawsuit.  The Chicago Tribune has run a short piece about a lawsuit coming in the aftermath of a courthouse scuffle between a prosecutor and a public defender in Chi-town: “A fight last year between a Cook County prosecutor and a public defender has turned into a legal battle.  Michael McCormick, who was working as a Cook County assistant state’s attorney at the time, alleges in a lawsuit that Henry Hams, who was working as a public defender, followed him out of a courtroom in June 2010, threatened him and then jumped on his back and neck — twisting his neck and causing him to fall to the ground.”

• 5.25.11 – good news: New York State’s Interest on Lawyers Account (IOLA) fund got hefty cash infusion.  Bad news: very little of it comes from interest proceeds.  From the New York Law Journal: “The state’s Interest on Lawyer Account fund is making the same $21.3 million in grants for civil legal services to the indigent [this year compared to last], thanks to another infusion of funding from the courts.”  Interest proceeds remain down by 75% compared to 2007 levels.  Of the $21.3 million, only $6.5 represents interest proceeds.  The remaining $15 million is an appropriation from the judiciary’s budget.  But to end on another good note: “In addition to the $15 million funneled through IOLA, Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman included another $12.5 million in the state budget to support civil legal services.”  Judge Lippman presently holds the coveted title of “PSLawNet Blog’s Favorite State Jurist.”

• 5.24.1 – according to the Blog of the Legal Times, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales expressed “disappointment” in himself stemming from a scandal around political vetting of attorneys and law students who were competing for (non-political-appointment) positions with DOJ.

• 5.24.11 – also according to the Blog of the Legal Times, the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) are looking for some ESQs are various experience levels.  SEC has even retained a headhunter because it’s trying to quickly fill several openings.

• 5.24.11 – it looks like prosecutors in Berkeley will see some more funding from the county.  Huzzah!  After all, someone has to bring Swift Justice to all those good-for-nothing, commune-living, dope-smoking hippie rapscallions…wait…oh…Berkeley, South Carolina.  Our bad.  In any case, the Berkeley Independent reports: “Berkeley County Council has included funding to help assist the solicitor and public defender’s offices in its fiscal year 2011-2012 budget that will be presented to council next month.  Included in the budget is funding that would help Ninth Circuit Solicitor Scarlett Wilson recoup more than $140,000 that was cut from her office’s budget due to the discontinuation of grants from the Department of Justice and the state’s Department of Public Safety.  Also included in the budget is $115,000 earmarked for the public defender’s office.  Without the funding, it is estimated that the county’s public defender’s office would have to close for two months next year or lay off two of its five attorneys.”

• 5.223.11 – stagnant salaries are leading to attorney retention troubles for one Arizona prosecutor.  From to the Arizona Daily Star: Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall has seen so many resignations and retirements over the past three years that 64 percent of her prosecutors have five years’ or less experience in the courtroom.  As with most county employees, LaWall’s staff hasn’t seen a raise in nearly four years, causing many to leave…. Pima County [which is the Tucson area] records indicate the 29 prosecutors hired at $57,000 between 2006 and 2009 are making roughly the same as the nine hired within the last year.”  The $57K starting salary is actually a solid figure, comfortably over the median, national starting prosecutor’s salary of $50K that NALP reported in 2010.  Nevertheless, the attrition of mid-level attorneys is double trouble: not only is the office losing folks who should move into leadership positions, it is also losing on the investment it made in training those attorneys.

• 5.23.11 – Las Vegas-based KLAS has a brief story about apparent underfunding in the local District Attorney’s Office: “While crime is at 2011 levels, the number of Deputy DA’s [is] at 2000 levels…. The DA’s Office handles all the cases coming through the Regional Justice Center, while the Public Defender’s Office handles around 40 percent. The DA’s say they’re concerned budget cuts prevented them from hiring new attorneys over the past three years, while the Public Defender’s Office continues to grow.”  Leaving aside the fact that a straight-up comparison of prosecutor and public defender funding is apples and oranges, we do hope that the District Attorney can address staffing problems.

• 5.22.11 – a Terra Haute Tribune Star article takes a close look at the work of the Vigo County Public Defender’s office, including its funding and service-delivery models, which blend a staff model with assignments to private counsel to represent indigent defendants.  The article also highlights how the recession has made it more difficult for many people to afford criminal defense attorneys, increasing demand for indigent defense services.

• 5.21.11 – a blurb in the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal (great name!) notes that the Texas Access to Justice Foundation honored four local banks with Prime Partner awards for their support of civil legal services. BBVA Compass Bank, First Bank & Trust, PlainsCapital Bank, and Security State Bank were honored for participating in the state’s Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Accounts program. They have higher interest rates on those accounts, and that interest supports legal assistance for low-income Texans.”

• 5.20.11 – writing in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, LSC board chair John Levi and board member Father Pius Pietrzyk argue that, now more than ever, adequately funding LSC is vital to ensuring access to justice for vastly increased numbers of low-income Americans, including Virginians.  LSC’s FY2011 appropriation included a cut of $15.8 million.  This cut’s timing was, well, very bad.  “LSC estimates that the number of people who qualify for civil legal assistance has increased by 17 percent since 2008. These Americans live at or below 125 percent of the federal poverty guideline — an income of $27,938 for a family of four. More than one million Virginians are eligible for LSC-funded services — almost 14 percent of the state’s population.”

• 5.20.11 – Yoder to the Associated Press: “Mistaken your views on funding cuts are!”  (World’s worst Star Wars reference?  Very, very likely.)  Dave Yoder is the executive director of Legal Aid of East Tennessee.  In a letter to the editor of the Knoxville News Sentinel, Yoder takes issue with an AP article that seemed to minimize the impact of recent federal budget cuts, particularly as regards programs helping the poor: “The article fails to point out that the cut in LSC funding was more than 5 percent…. The article fails to recognize that current federal funding is less than half of what it was, when adjusted for inflation, in 1981.  The article fails to point out that funding to LAET from Department of Housing and Urban Development for unlawful foreclosure and eviction prevention and from Department of Justice for domestic violence prevention has also been cut either directly or by the elimination of stimulus funding. The personal, social and economic short and long-term impact will be much greater on low income citizens and on our communities than suggested.”

• 5.18.11 – the Shelby County Star reports on potential funding cuts for indigent defense programs in the Tarheel State: “The state House recently approved the 2011-12 budget which reduces funding for court-appointed private counsel by nearly $11.3 million.  That reduction could mean a difference of as much as $30 per hour [in payments to appointed counsel, which one attorney estimated could fall from $75 to $45.]  Some legislators are also talking about establishing and staffing public defenders’ offices in some counties as a means to save money.

As an Administrative Judge (AJ) of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, the incumbent hears and decides appeals from Federal employees, applicants for Federal employment, and Federal annuitants concerning any matter over which the Board has appellate jurisdiction.

The Administrative Judge’s (AJ) principal duty is to adjudicate appeals. As part of this process, the AJ must perform the following: Conduct prehearing and status conferences in order to explore the possibility of settlement and to narrow and simplify the issues in the case; advise the parties with regard to their respective burden of proof, duties, and responsibilities; oversee the discovery process; advise the parties with respect to settlement negotiations and provide them with help in facilitating that process; conduct hearings (including convening the hearing as appropriate, regulating the course of the hearing, maintaining decorum and excluding any person from the hearing for good reason); and issue initial decisions. The AJ has significant discretion in managing his/her caseload in accordance with Board Policy concerning quality, production, and timeliness. The AJ’s initial decision may form the bases for subsequent precedential Board or court decisions. Depending upon the result of the case, initial decisions also can have significant and lasting effects on the careers and retirements of the affected individuals. This opportunity will be in San Francisco, California.

To view the full job listing, go to PSLawNet (login required).