Learning from Leadership

Andrew Cohn: “Justice Is not Only About Outcome, but Also About Process”

Published by tippingthescales on April 17, 2014 | Leave a response

Andrew Cohn is a partner at Wilmer Hale and Co-Chair of its Energy Law Group. His practice includes real estate development and finance, equipment leasing, co-generation, and waste recycling projects. He has served as the chair of the Real Estate Section of the BBA and Co-Chair of its Real Estate Pro Bono Committee, in which capacity he has led his colleagues at WilmerHale to commit to volunteering for the program for 16 weeks per year and spearheaded efforts to serve the needs of the program, including helping to raise funds for a much-needed copier, a laptop computer, paper, pens, signs and more. Recently, he was honored by the BBA at its Housing Court Lawyer for the Day 15th Anniversary. Andrew speaks frequently on construction lending, development matters and Massachusetts water-rights laws, and is a member of the Business Law Section of the American Bar Association, where he serves on the Environmental Controls Committee. He also is a member of the Federal Energy Bar Association and the American College of Real Estate Lawyers.

1. Part of your leadership in the Lawyer for the Day Program was getting WilmerHale on board with a 16-week commitment, and continuing to nudge law firms to keep up their participation. How do you make that approach? What do you think is special about the program that enables this kind of firm participation?

From the outset, my firm was deeply committed to the Lawyer for the Day Program, having helped to work out the details with the judges of the Housing Court. Because the firm has a long-term commitment to public service, it was not difficult to get “buy in” from management and the Real Estate Department. The 16-week commitment was very high, but I gave assurances that it was only for a transitional period because I was confident other law firms would step up and participate in the program. That participation was readily forthcoming from virtually all the law firms I approached in part because of the design of the Lawyer for the Day Program: participants receive advance training from Volunteer Lawyer Project (VLP) experts and then at the Housing Court both GBLS and VLP attorneys are present to provide guidance. All the firms approached saw this as an opportunity for younger attorneys to learn to think on their feet, stretch to deal with new situations and provide a real benefit to pro se litigants.

In almost every instance, there was eagerness, not pushback. For several firms, the question was prior commitments to other pro bono programs and a concern about adequate personnel to cover the weeks to which I was asking them to commit. The people I was talking to were partners or pro bono coordinators at these firms, who were already inclined to be of help, but the program was new at the time and we are always facing limitations of resources. One way around this was to have the firms’ initial participation period be during the summer when summer associates would be available to assist firm attorneys. Part of effective negotiating is selling the positives and acknowledging the difficulties. One of the things that was so important in structuring this program was a very critical sellable commodity: you put in your time, and you are not forced to take the case back to the office. I have to say that Housing Court was very responsive to this arrangement. We do go through the process of checking conflicts – you have to be cautious – but you’re not picking up a representation. In sum, only a very small amount of nudging was required; the fairest description is that there was eager willingness to participate.

2. What do you think participating attorneys – particularly younger attorneys – gain from participating in the program?

One thing I always joke about is that once you go through the VLP training and spend a little time in Housing Court, you will be able to answer all of your friends’ rental apartment questions! You’ll be an expert at Massachusetts landlord-tenant law, and it will stand you in good stead. The other thing is, as a Lawyer for the Day attorney, you’re learning to read and digest facts very quickly. You’ll sit down with a tenant, hear their story and what they have to say, and then you ask to see their papers. Essentially, you’re doing what any lawyer does, but under time pressure, and you have your new knowledge of the Housing Court superstructure and how the system works with all its limitations and parameters. Very often younger attorneys in a firm are part of a team not making the executive decision, but in this environment, the individual attorney is in charge. If you need help there are GBLS and VLP lawyers available, but you are the one assimilating the facts, making a strategic decision, and advising the client. I think you learn better when you are the sole decision-maker.

The participants really find the experience profoundly satisfying – they feel that they’ve done something for others, and that they’ve learned. We couldn’t have had such a successful 15 years of the program if the task was inherently unpalatable to the participants. Instead, it’s very validating.

3. I know that you have personally volunteered with the program as well. Were there any standout moments or stories of being able to assist someone, or any specific interactions you recall, that really drove home to you how valuable the program is?

The many occasions where pro se tenants were able, with pre-hearing guidance and coaching, to present their own cases. Helping them to have their own “voice” was deeply satisfying, to them and to me. They felt like participants, not cogs. The Lawyer for the Day Program has helped me to understand that justice is not only about outcome, but also about process. Also, many tenants who fall behind do so because of health emergencies or loss of a job. Helping them negotiate reasonable settlements which prevent homelessness and put their lives back on track is very worthwhile lawyering.

You also see instances of true grace and character, and learn that not every tenant is an angel and not every landlord is out to cause harm. I remember one memorable session where the landlady was so patient and thoughtful with her tenant, who had been disruptive and had broken property. Instead of pursuing an eviction, the property owner said she knew this would jeopardize the tenant’s Section 8 housing application, and that she would let the tenant remain in the housing while giving 90 days to find a new apartment. The monetary settlement agreed upon totaled only $50 – far less than what was owed. The tenant wept with happiness at the conclusion of the settlement.

Another thing which has hit home for me in this program is that, as a volunteer lawyer, you are creating a balance in which you’re engaged mind-to-mind with the other person. You’re sharing expertise, they’re sharing facts, and you’re helping them to see which facts have traction and which don’t. For example, a tenant might think, “I lost my job so I couldn’t pay rent” has impact – well, that has no legal traction. What stops an eviction is offering a settlement that can make up for some past rent (over time, at an affordable pace), money the landlord wouldn’t see otherwise. Now we’ve shifted from ‘poor me’ to ‘Going forward, how are we going to solve this?’ It’s not about being benevolent, it’s about being an effective lawyer.

4. You have been a member of the BBA’s Real Estate Section in various capacities for a number of years. What has kept you coming back?

One, is maintaining contact with the attorneys at VLP and GBLS who provide ongoing guidance to the program. The high quality of their character, their skill and their willingness to train and explain brings forth my admiration and my desire to be of assistance to them.

Two, the extraordinary opportunity to work with members of the judicial branch. The Public Service Committee of the Real Estate Section which supervises the Lawyer for the Day Program meets regularly with both the clerks and the judges of the Housing Court. Many people in Housing Court are first-timers; the judges know this and give a talk before starting the court session. In what other court does a judge, before they start the proceedings, give you an extensive talk about the process? We always tell attorneys who are new to the program not to miss the judges’ talk. It’s what litigants will hear and will help guide you as to the thinking of the judges. It’s an incredible experience and especially valuable to young lawyers.

Three, a sense of connection to the wider Boston community, and a way to stay alert as a lawyer. Even after many years with the Program, there is always a challenge that is outside my comfort zone and requires alertness, humility and the ability to learn and adapt. This is a wonderful opportunity for lawyers at any stage of their careers, especially for younger attorneys.

5. You have a national practice focusing on real estate, energy, and environmental law, and you have been named to Best Lawyers in America for more than ten (10) years. What advice would you give to attorneys looking to develop and grow their practice?

Learn the fundamentals thoroughly; keep current on evolving laws and regulations; push yourself toward excellence (there’s always a way to make your work product better); and think through transactions from both your client’s perspective and that of the other side; doing so will enable you to combine toughness with fairness. Never want a deal less than your client, but never want it more. Finally, be ready whenever luck comes your way so you can make the most of it.

Judge Robert Foster: “It’s Our Obligation as Lawyers, and My Obligation as a Judge, to Try to Ensure That Everyone Has Equal Access to Justice”

Published by tippingthescales on April 10, 2014 | Leave a response

Judge Robert Foster is an associate justice on the Massachusetts Land Court. Prior to his appointment to the bench, he was a litigation attorney at the firm of Rackemann, Sawyer & Brewster, representing clients in a wide variety of real estate matters. He was a long-time member of the BBA’s Real Estate Section, serving as Co-Chair for its Public Service Committee and for the section at large at various times; he also co-chaired the Delivery of Legal Services Section. Judge Foster is a member of the Boston Bar Journal Board of Editors. He has served on the board of the Massachusetts Legal Assistance Corporation and as a member of the Massachusetts Access to Justice Commission.

1. What did you find the most valuable about being part of the Real Estate Public Service & Pro Bono Committees? Lawyer for the Day at Housing Court was also a project from this part of the Section – what was your involvement in that program?

The most valuable part of these committees was the chance to put in place and oversee the Lawyer for the Day in the Housing Court program – that was our main job when I was there. It was great working with so many to be able to get it done, and it’s wonderful to see how well it’s done…to have a small part in that process was a great privilege.

Lawyer for the Day was an idea bouncing around for a long time in the legal services and pro bono world that, back in 1998, folks at the BBA decided to try to bring to fruition again. A meeting was set up with Chief Justice Daher at Housing Court on December 24, 1998 – I still remember the date. I was there in my capacity as Co-Chair of the BBA’s Delivery of Legal Services (DLS) Section, but the main attendees were BBA President Mary Ryan, the then-head of the Volunteer Lawyers Project, Meg Connolly, Wiley Vaughan, and Sandy Moskowitz, who were there to propose this program that would have lawyers sitting at a table giving advice to both landlords and tenants. We presented it to then-Chief Justice Daher, who had resisted the plan years before. When we explained that it would serve both landlords and tenants, he said he didn’t have a problem with it. We almost fell off our chairs!

At that point, we brought on Harvey Chopp, Chief Justice Daher’s chief administrator, Barbara Zimbel of Greater Boston Legal Services, and Bruce Eisenhutt of the BBO and conducted meetings to work out how the program should look. It started running in 2000 and has been going ever since. All credit goes to the folks who are there every day and making sure the firms are on board, like Barbara and Joanna Allison, and also to Wiley Vaughan, who really set the project in motion. It’s a model program and works perfectly here because you have the combination of Housing Court’s hundreds of cases, and large law firms who can commit to send in attorneys every session. It’s ideal for transactional attorneys, which is why it’s great for the Real Estate Section. I’m just really proud to have been a part of this.

2. You have also been a member of the MA Access to Justice Commission during much of your involvement on these committees; what was the interplay between your work on the Commission, your time on the MLAC Board, and your work at the BBA?

I was appointed as MLAC’s representative to the Commission in 2009 when I was on the MLAC Board. All of these activities had the same goal – we all wanted to increase access to justice for low-income people and to promote civil justice for everyone in the Commonwealth. In MLAC, we dealt a lot with the existing system of legal services programs and how best to run those, raise money for them, support them, and give them ways to increase and maintain services. In the DLS Section, we spent time looking at that system from the BBA point of view, and in the Real Estate Section, created the Lawyer for the Day program. The Commission had people from all parts of the system – there were lawyers, judges, general counsel from business, and those you might call civilians – who tried to look at all aspects of the justice system and promote their mission…without having the power to spend anyone’s money. It was a great group run by Justice Gants and David Rosenberg that came up with ideas to help with issues like what state agencies could do to make it easier for people to work with them, how to get money into the system without using tax dollars, and ways to create new pro bono opportunities. After I went on the bench and had to step down from the Commission, I was on the Trial Court access to justice committee, and we were able to get a training manual for limited assistance representation available to view online.

I’ve been working on this issue almost all my career, and it’s very important to me. It’s our obligation as lawyers, and my obligation as a judge, to try to ensure that everyone has equal access to justice – it’s a fundamental right and principle for us as a Commonwealth, and everyone should be able to vindicate their rights in courts. The people facing barriers to the delivery of justice are our neighbors, friends, relatives, fellow citizens – their rights are just as important as ours.

3. You served as Co-Chair of both the Delivery of Legal Services Section and later the Real Estate Section – how did your experience differ from one to the next?

When I was asked to be co-chair of the DLS Section, I hadn’t been in practice very long – I was sort of shocked to be asked, although I was glad to do it. At first I stumbled along – I hope I learned how to run a meeting, at least! I really did learn how to do things like chair a meeting, put together programs, and form committees from the experience. Otherwise, the Sections have different roles – DLS focuses on access to justice issues, and but also cuts across all the subject matter lines that most other Sections are organized along. In the Real Estate Section, we focused on that particular practice area, but in focusing on that I had a range of things to think about: the different committees, programs, what the Section does, and legislative issues of interest to the real estate bar. I’ll add that it was helpful to have good Co-Chairs, that’s for sure.

4. Can you share a favorite story you like to tell from your time on the bench as a Land Court judge thus far?

I remember a hearing very early on, probably one of the first times I was on the bench, we were discussing a particular property. There was a site plan that the litigants were referring to that I couldn’t see from where I was on the bench, so I said, “Why don’t I just come down and look at it?” I thought the court officer was going to have a heart attack – afterwards she told me, “Please don’t do that, please don’t step off the bench.”

But it reminds me of something I said in my BBJ article reflecting on my rookie year, which was along the lines of, “Lawyers: I see everything you do.” Well, the flip side holds true: they see everything I do. As a judge I have to remember that – you are a public figure from the bench, and you’re in this role where everyone is looking at what you’re going to do and listening to what you say. You have a responsibility to the court and the people before you to take that seriously and fulfill your goal and job as best you can. All the judges I know are aware of this and do that, but I don’t think I realized when I came on what an important responsibility it was. Being a judge is about fulfilling that responsibility to take litigants seriously, listen to them, and treat them fairly; that requires you to show that in your demeanor and hold on to it in everything you do and every gesture you make…and that includes not just waltzing off the bench!

5. Is there anything else you would like to add that we haven’t asked yet?

By virtue of my position as one of seven judges in the Land Court, I’m a leader of the Court, and that means that I have to remember to recognize all the people here and their hard work, and appreciate the enormous amount of support we get. I try to do that, and not take their help for granted.

Suma Nair: “Good Leaders Identify Passionate People Who Want to Give 110% to the Cause…and Then Support Them”

Published by tippingthescales on April 3, 2014 | Leave a response

Suma Nair is an Associate in the Private Client and Trust group at Goulston & Storrs. She provides sophisticated estate and tax planning advice for high net worth individuals, counsels clients regarding charitable giving, and advises generally on family and tax matters involving business and wealth succession. Additionally, Suma represents professional and family fiduciaries in connection with estate and trust administration. She has held a number of positions within the BBA’s Trusts & Estates Section, including Public Service Committee Co-Chair from 2006-2009, Public Policy Committee Co-Chair from 2009-2011, and Section Co-Chair from 2012-present. In the community, Suma is a Board member at On The Rise, on the Corporate Engagement Advisory Board of Birthday Wishes, and a mentor with the Boston Lawyers Group.

1. What initially drew you to tax law and estate planning?

I really fell for the way tax law intersects public policy and human behavior. Tax law creates so many incentives and disincentives for certain behaviors, and so it drives how individuals and entities act and do business. I enjoy puzzles – knowing what the end product should generally look like, but having to fit the pieces together to get there. Tax law isn’t that different. You know your client’s objective, and you need to fit together pieces of the Code to achieve the most tax-efficient result. It’s not always a linear thought process, but that makes it all the more complex and fun.

So at an intellectual level I’m interested in and challenged by tax law issues, but the compelling part of my practice is the human element. Most of the conversations I have with clients are not about taxes, but about family dynamics, leaving a family legacy, and involving and empowering the next generation. As an estate planning attorney, you get to build relationships with clients on a personal level that are very different from the relationships that a corporate lawyer or litigator might have with the same client; you get to be a part of your clients’ personal lives as well.

That’s why I think having a mentor in an estate planning practice is crucial. Senior lawyers in my practice brought me to client meetings and made sure I was responsible for some part of the presentation so that I could start to build the client’s confidence in me, both in my technical skills and in my judgment and counsel. Mentors also asked me to join them for meetings with investment advisors, accountants, insurance consultants and others to help me build my network and become familiar with the non-legal aspects of my practice. These experiences helped me build the skills, relationships and confidence I needed to develop my practice.

2. What has kept you passionate about your work? What would say to younger lawyers – or any lawyers – struggling to find their passion?

What I do for a living appeals to me on both an intellectual and personal level. However, not all lawyers have found this passion. But passion can develop over time as you become more knowledgeable about and experienced in a particular area of law. When you’re a young lawyer, you’re working so hard to just understand the law, but as you become more experienced, you will have opportunities to apply that understanding and directly counsel clients. Clients will not just seek your technical expertise, but your judgment and guidance. Client interaction at that level can be very compelling, but you need to build the foundation to progress to that kind of practice.

If you’re struggling to find that passion in private practice, consider getting involved with your firm’s pro bono projects, joining a nonprofit board, helping write amicus briefs for issues you care about, and joining the BBA. Bring your legal skills to bear on a wide variety of community and social justice projects.

3. You serve as a board member for On The Rise. Can you give some background about the organization and why you got involved? What has this experience taught you about leadership in general?

By my fifth year of practice, I was ready to get involved with community projects outside of law. I asked several people at my firm about their experiences with organizations working in social justice and women’s rights and met with a number of organizations to find the right fit. I wanted to be on a hands-on board and to invest in Cambridge, where I live. Everything came together with On The Rise, a day program for homeless women, most of whom struggle with a number of other issues, such as substance abuse, childhood trauma, mental illness, domestic and other violence and trust issues, which are often the root causes of the cycle of homelessness. We take a holistic view, recognizing that the “cure” isn’t just about getting housing, and we follow the women even after they are housed.

My experiences at On The Rise and the BBA have taught me that success in leadership comes from motivating others to action. Good leaders identify passionate people who want to give 110% to the cause, and then they support and encourage those people so that they’re not taking on a task they have to do, but one they want to do. At its core, On The Rise motivates women who have slipped through the cracks of society to recognize their own self worth and break the cycle of homelessness. As board members, we try to communicate to the advocates and management staff that their work is valuable to society and that they are truly appreciated.

4. You have held a number of roles in the BBA’s Trusts & Estates Section; what has been your favorite part, and for what reasons? Why has it been important for you to stay involved?

I have continued to be an active member of the BBA for the opportunity it gives lawyers to participate in the development of jurisprudence and public policy in a way that isn’t often available in daily practice. I have really enjoyed getting to be a part of the sweeping public policy initiatives that the Section has supported over the years. Massachusetts has been a national leader on a number of social and legal issues, and I’d like to see that continue. For example, I remember when the Bird case came up, the best and brightest minds in our section put together an amicus brief asking the SJC to address the consequences for fiduciaries who acted in reliance of a statute that was later found to be unconstitutional. The Court directly addressed the Section’s concerns in its opinion by providing reassurance and protection for fiduciaries who acted in good faith.

Matt McTygue: “Your Life Will Be a Lot Richer if You Are Doing Something that Includes Giving Back to the Community”

Published by tippingthescales on March 26, 2014 | Leave a response

Matthew McTygue is the Partner-in-Charge of the Boston office of Edwards Wildman Palmer, as well as partner in the Business Law Department and Co-chair of the Debt Finance and Capital Markets Group. He specializes in debt finance and private equity transactions in a variety of industries. Matt is a member of the Firm’s advisory committee and the Boston office diversity and pro bono committees. He also serves as Co-Chair of the BBA’S Summer Jobs Program Committee and is also a Fellow of the Boston Bar Foundation and the Massachusetts Bar Foundation. He has served on the boards of directors and fundraising committees of several local non-profit organizations.

1. You were named Partner-in-Charge at Edwards Wildman early last year; since then, how have you tried to guide the firm’s expansion?

As partner-in-charge of our Boston office, I am working hard at enhancing the firm’s profile in the Boston community, exploring new opportunities for business development, and fostering a supportive and inclusive work environment. Part of this has included undertaking and creating a new series of initiatives. A few of them were my idea, but I’ll admit I’m stealing maybe 80 percent of the ideas from other people. I’ve spent time talking to people about what they care about, and to our professional development director about what we should be doing and how we can help people. It’s been a cooperative process and it’s had some great results. For example, we formed a Boston-based, cross-departmental business development committee to focus on business development initiatives within the greater Boston area. So far, our committee has focused on expanding our current client relationships to additional practice areas and capabilities within our firm. We’re also taking a more proactive approach with lateral recruiting and revitalizing the alumni program, because former colleagues are both potential clients and potential laterals. There’s also a series of brown bag lunches with guests lecturers we’ve hosted to promote a collegial office culture.

A huge aspect of expanding Edwards Wildman’s involvement in the City of Boston has been successfully encouraging lawyers to become more actively engaged and take on leadership positions. In particular, we’re looking to get more women and diverse candidates into positions of leadership. When we see that there are awards or nominations into the general community, we meet to brainstorm about who to put up for it. Programs like the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce’s Executive Leadership Institute and its other leadership programs, LeadBoston, and the BBA’s Public Interest Leadership Program (PILP) all represent identified opportunities to get someone’s name out there or have someone participate in a leadership position. Also, by recognizing and celebrating our leaders for their accomplishments both internally and outside the organization, we are driving greater participation within the firm. For example, this year we had six people raising their hands to apply for PILP – last year, we had one. By driving home that this is important to the firm, it’s making people feel that it’s easier for them to do it; I believe that people would be more willing to take leadership positions if they feel they have that support.

2. Within the firm, you have also served as chair of the Boston office diversity committee and, over the past year, have led public service efforts within the firm. Are these longstanding efforts of Edwards Wildman that you are carrying on? What do you feel it has done for the firm? What level of personal importance do you attach to them?

Edwards Wildman’s Boston office has long supported philanthropic and civic contributions to Greater Boston– as one of the largest law firms in Boston, we have an obligation to give back with community service and pro bono representation. Recently, I’ve focused on increasing these efforts by forming a Boston-based volunteer and community service committee to increase the firm’s participation in these activities on a regular basis and to develop a calendar of events. Through a regular series of “jeans days,” in which employees can donate five dollars to wear jeans to work on designated Fridays, the firm has raised thousands of dollars for charities such as The Greater Boston Food Bank, the American Heart Association, The Albert Schweitzer Fellowship, and Adopt a US Soldier. We prioritize organizations with which our colleagues are actively involved.

One of my favorites, though, was running a gift drive for Bridge Over Troubled Waters, a local nonprofit and client of the firm. We sent out the announcement that the gift drive would be happening, and I tagged three people to run the drive. After this initial announcement there were 60 volunteers, which was awesome, so I sent an email to the organization to let them know. They sent back such a grateful, thoughtful email back that I was really touched. At the end of the week, I forwarded it to the whole firm thanking the volunteers and letting them know that our tremendous support was a real tribute to the character of the firm. Well, when people saw that, I got about 80 more volunteers in the next 20 minutes! There was such a tremendous outpouring, and people felt really great about it. What’s more, the gift list we received from the organization had items like jackets, mittens, scarves – stuff you take for granted, that no kid in a middle-class upbringing would ever think to ask for because they don’t need to. I was so pleased that we could send more gifts than were even asked for.

The volunteer events are also excellent bonding tools, as they allow lawyers and staff at all levels and across practices and industry sectors to have the chance to become better acquainted with their colleagues. When we volunteer at the Greater Boston Food Bank, we go to their location after work, and then we come back to the office, go downstairs, and socialize. It’s a chance to just hang out, talk, and have some laugh – a fun office bonding activity that goes beyond the good work.

On a personal level, these civic contributions are very important to me. I have served on the boards of directors and fundraising committees of local non-profit organizations, including GLAD, Transition House, and the New England Shelter for Homeless Veterans, and have served on the Massachusetts Bar Foundation Grant Advisory Committee. In fact, I was serving on a board when I was a mid-level associate putting in tons of hours, so while it can be hard to find a balance and make it work, sometimes you just have to sacrifice some sleep for the greater good. I would encourage people to get to a board meeting, do that, and then turn the computer back on at home. But being more connected in the community is important if you are looking to stay at a firm longer-term; your life will be a lot richer if you are doing something that includes giving back to the community, rather than simply trying to generate fees and work on client matters.

3. This commitment to diversity seems to tie in very closely with your involvement in the Summer Jobs Committee. How and why did you get started on the committee? Why has this leadership role been important to you?

I have been a member of this committee since 2010, but this is my first year as Co-Chair. The Summer Jobs committee has always had a special place at our firm. Our former managing partner, Jeff Jones, once co-chaired the committee, and my colleague (and former Boston partner-in-charge) Jed Hendrick reached out to me to make sure our firm was represented on this committee. As the former chair of my office’s diversity committee for a number of years, I view this committee and its mission as a natural extension of our firm’s commitment to diversity and building a pipeline of diverse people in the legal profession in Boston. Serving as Co-chair will allow me to personally witness the incredible impact this experience has on students’ lives, as well as help drive participation by law firms and legal departments around the city. I know that the program has so many inspiring success stories. Just at Edwards Wildman, we continue to employ a former intern on a part-time basis as she is working her way through college. I have had other former student interns reach out to me with compelling stories of how this program gave them an edge in interviews and securing employment later in life.

With this in mind, I have to make one last plug for those firms that haven’t participated in the Summer Jobs program – we really strongly encourage you to do so. Doing the program is the only way you can see the real, tangible benefits that we are creating for our community, just by offering somebody a relatively cheap summer internship. I recently got an email from a student who was at Edwards Wildman for two summers. In the email, he wrote that he went to a career fair at his university, and that the executives he met with were amazed at how easy it was for him to initiate conversation. “If it wasn’t for my time in the BBA Summer Jobs program,” he told me, “I never would have been that comfortable talking to these professionals.” It’s truly amazing to hear.

Tom Gallitano: “One Has to Listen More than Talk to Be Successful!”

Published by tippingthescales on March 20, 2014 | Leave a response

Thomas Gallitano, of Conn Kavanaugh Rosenthal Peisch & Ford LLP, practices in the areas of employment law, professional liability, and business litigation. In addition to serving as the firm’s Managing Partner, Tom is Co-Chair of the firm’s Employment Law Practice Group. He has served as the Chair of the MCAD Advisory Board since he was first appointed by Governor Deval Patrick in 2007. He is actively involved in the Boston Bar Foundation (BBF): he has been a member of the Adams Benefit Steering Committee since 2010 and has served as Co-Chair of the Adams Benefit for the past two years. He is also on the BBF’s Board of Trustees and Development Committee.

1. What has been your favorite part about being on the Steering Committee for Adams Benefit? Why has it been important for you to return to that committee?

I first got involved with the Adams Benefit Steering Committee about four years ago when Tony Froio (who now heads up the BBF Development Committee) was Chair. When Tony first recruited me, he told me what a great group of people I’d be meeting and working with, and that certainly has been my experience. Serving on this particular committee provides the opportunity to work closely with the BBF staff, with terrific lawyers, and with many others. There’s this notion that’s the Adams Benefit Committee is made up mainly of lawyers from large Boston law firms. In fact, year after year, the BBF assembles a committee that includes not just lawyers from the larger firms, but also from smaller firms, solo practitioners, in-house counsel, and leaders from the business community. I’m sure I wouldn’t have had the opportunity to develop terrific friendships with my fellow committee members otherwise, and that has made serving on the Adams Benefit Committee a very enriching and rewarding experience.

In terms of why I continue to do it — anyone who has spent time looking carefully at the Boston Bar Foundation’s work can’t help but come back to it year after year. It is one of the few organizations with such an unbelievably expansive reach, with grants going out to a wide variety of legal services and community groups, helping to fund the front line in combating homelessness, assisting domestic violence victims, helping kids and families at risk – really supporting the most vulnerable people in our society. I can’t think of a better use of my “spare time.” Without any reservation, I would encourage lawyers to become members of the Society of Fellows, to attend the annual Adams Benefit, and to take on a leadership role with the Foundation.

2. Can you give some background on the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination and its Advisory Board, which you chair?

There is an interesting story here. The Advisory Board is established by statute – MGL Chapter 6, § 56, the enabling statute for the MCAD itself. For a variety of reasons, the Advisory Board was inactive for many years. Shortly after Governor Patrick was elected in 2006, he reactivated the Advisory Board, and I was asked to chair it.

The Advisory Board is an incredibly diverse group of individuals who share the same commitment: to help make the MCAD as great a government agency as it can be. As you know, the MCAD is the Commonwealth’s chief civil rights agency, which works to eliminate discrimination in employment, housing, education, and public accommodations. The Advisory Board is made up of lawyers and civil rights advocates, and since 2007, the Advisory Board has been providing recommendations to both the Commission and the Governor on how to improve delivery of services at the MCAD. I’ve been an employment lawyer for 25+ years, and this is something I feel strongly about. Everyone benefits – employees, employers, tenants and landlords, and all others who have business before the Commission – when the MCAD is operating smoothly. That’s been our overall objective over the years.

3. What has surprised you the most in your time serving as Managing Partner of your firm?

Serving as Managing Partner really is all-consuming. A managing partner thinks about and deals with day-to-day operational issues, but also must be looking ahead and planning for the future. Not a day goes by that I’m not thinking actively about an ongoing operational issue, about the firm’s future and growth, and about doing the best we can to serve our clients and to exceed their expectations. Despite the time demands, fortunately we have a great administrative team in place, and I am able to continue to work with longtime clients with whom I’ve enjoyed working over the years.

I assumed managing partner responsibilities about 15 months ago, in January 2013, and was quite pleasantly surprised by the number of people from other law firms who called to congratulate me and jokingly to provide condolences, but also offering help. Despite the fact that Boston is a competitive town, nonetheless I found it to be a gracious gesture that many people, including other managing partners, reached out and offered help and a friendly ear.

Being the managing partner of a law firm, of any size, draws on a very wide skill set, among them being a very good listener, being diplomatic, and knowing when to draw diverse views together to propose a path forward. This much is clear – the “two ears and one mouth rule” apply – one has to listen more than talk to be successful!

Randall Ravitz: “The Goal Is Always to Serve the Public Interest and the People of the Commonwealth”

Published by tippingthescales on March 13, 2014 | Leave a response

Randall Ravitz is the Appeals Division Chief in the Criminal Bureau of the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office. He joined the AG’s Office in 2004 as an Assistant Attorney General, during which time he represented Massachusetts in both federal and state court concerning habeas corpus actions and complex state criminal appeals. Prior to working in the AG’s Office, Randall served as a litigation associate at two Boston-based firms. At the BBA, Randall was a member of the third Public Interest Leadership Program class. From there, he was a member of the Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Section, serving as Co-Chair from 2007-2009; the Litigation Public Policy Committee; and Amicus Committee. He has also served as a mentor in the BBA’s Group Mentoring Program.

1. In your time as Chief of the Appeals Division of the MA Attorney General’s Office Criminal Bureau, what have you found are some of the daily challenges or unique aspects that those on the outside might not know you face?

While our division is Criminal Appeals, a lot of what we do is neither criminal nor appeals. We respond to direct appeals of convictions secured by the Attorney General’s office, as well as habeas corpus challenges to convictions secured by any prosecuting office of the Commonwealth. We even handle some civil litigation in the Trial Court or the appellate courts when a government official is sued or subpoenaed in relation to their work in criminal justice system – for example, if someone is suing a District Attorney, we would provide representation. So we practice criminal litigation and civil litigation, in federal and state courts and in the Trial and appellate courts. It’s a real breadth of work.

As far as my own position – beyond that breadth and range of work, I think one thing that people might not be aware of is that as the Division Chief, I’ve moved from just handling my own cases to getting involved in cases handled by all members of the Division, and even other parts of the office. I might be asked to consult in a case or do legal analysis. What that means is that I find myself coming into cases that are primarily handled by other people and having to get a sense of what the issues are with something that I haven’t been involved with from the start. So on one hand it’s challenging because I might be getting there halfway through and need to get up to speed; but it also makes it interesting because I come in at a level where I’m talking with people about the most interesting and thought-provoking aspects of the case. Sometimes I’ll get to participate in the development of legislation or regulations, training within the office, or acting as a liaison at the office with other state agencies – it’s a real variety. I say to a lot of people that every single thing I work on is interesting, and there aren’t a lot of jobs out there where you can say that. I feel like with everything I’m working on, the goal is always to serve the public interest and the people of the Commonwealth. There’s a good feeling that comes with it.

2. As a member of one of the earliest PILP classes, was there any specific moment or experience during the program that has stayed with you the most clearly and/or inspired you the most?

The way I look at it, there wasn’t necessarily a specific moment – it’s more a specific aspect of the program that I found the most valuable. It gave me an introduction to leadership and coordination within the legal community. For example, I had the chance to organize an educational program at the BBA, and my PILP group and I all got a very warm welcome to the BBA and exposure to the organization’s leadership. We saw how it operates and the ways it has an impact on the legal community and the Boston community as a whole. It’s not just a professional association – it’s a force in the community that has an impact on important social issues.

Because I was involved in that, I was invited to be the Litigation Section’s Public Policy Co-chair, and after that, the co-chair of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Section. There too I got to work on projects that I think really had an impact on the community. As the Public Policy Committee Co-Chair, I was involved in drafting and revising proposed changes to court rules – even sitting down at the table with judges to discuss new provisions and having my views heard by them. In the Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Section, I was asked to put together a Steering Committee that ended up including a diverse array of people, and we put on programs about some of the hottest topics out there – the things everyone loves debating in law school but a lot of people don’t necessarily deal with in their practice. Because of my experience at the BBA, I developed an appreciation for the ways that individual lawyers can get involved in shaping the law outside of their cases or clients, and I continue to do that here in the office.

3. Can you explain a little bit about the NAAG Supreme Court Fellows Program? What did you learn there, and how has it helped you since?

I was first nominated within my office to be the office’s representative, and was then selected by the Association as one of six state attorneys nationwide for that year to be a Fellow. During the course of the program, we helped attorneys arguing before the Supreme Court on behalf of a state to prep their oral arguments, including participation in moot courts; we wrote analyses of Supreme Court decisions for a publication that the Association circulates nationwide; and we observed all the arguments before the Court while there. I saw about 40 case arguments, and I wrote a multi-state amicus brief to the Supreme Court.

This was oral and written advocacy as it’s practiced at the highest levels of quality – the attorneys I observed, the ones who argue before the Supreme Court, are some of the best in the country, and they prepare and work incredibly hard in briefing and argument. So it gave me a chance to see how the best of the best do things, and also to see how an argument and strategy develop. Being in on their discussions on what they should or shouldn’t focus on allowed me to see how it all comes together. That’s something that now I’m encouraging members of the division to do – to rethink the way that we prepare for oral arguments and conduct moot courts.

4. Why has the BBA’s Group Mentoring program been something you participated in for multiple years?

The program is a great idea, hands down. There are so many things that I wish I’d been told when I started out practicing law about working in different types of legal offices that aren’t taught in law school. As I said, I’d gotten so much out of the BBA pretty early on that it was a good way to give something back to help the program to be successful. Once I started, it was just fun! All the mentees have been great people who were a pleasure to deal with and eager to get things out of the program. To me, the benefits are obvious, and I think that the people who take advantage of it are smart to do so. It requires time, but prospective mentors and mentees should see it as an investment that will pay off down the road. I do know that at least a couple mentees who were out of work ended up getting jobs that they could trace back to the program, so it is definitely a worthwhile endeavor.

5. Is there anything else not covered yet that we should be sure to include?

Something else that I think I got out of the BBA is how to put together and motivate a team to accomplish group goals. I’m not saying it’s always easy or that I’ve perfected it, but I definitely had a chance to learn more about how to do it and try out some ultimately successful strategies. If you can do that with people who are volunteers, it’s an accomplishment you can bring with you to other situations.

Lee Gesmer: “Finding a Way to Recharge Your Batteries Within the Profession…Is Critical to Career Longevity”

Published by tippingthescales on March 6, 2014 | 1 Response

Lee Gesmer is a founder and partner of Gesmer Updegrove LLP, a Boston-based firm formed in 1986 that focuses on the representation of technology companies and emerging businesses. Lee’s practice focuses on litigation in the areas of business and intellectual property law. He is a former Council member and former Co-Chair of the BBA Intellectual Property Section, as well as the Computer and Internet Law and Business Litigation Committees.

1. What inspired you to take the leap and start your own firm?

My father owned his own business, and I worked for him summers in my teens. He taught me how important it is to work for yourself. He really believed America was the land of opportunity for people willing to take the risk of starting their own businesses. He embedded that idea in me at an impressionable age. When I graduated from law school, my plan was to work for a couple of good firms and get enough experience that I could start my own firm.

I was interested in antitrust in law school and went to a D.C. firm that specialized almost entirely in antitrust litigation. But after a couple of years I became homesick for Boston. After I returned to Boston in the early ‘80s I became aware of what was then called the “microcomputer revolution.” This was back when almost nobody knew who Steve Jobs was, and a “portable computer” was the size of a sewing machine and weighed 30 pounds. I saw that something important was happening and it seemed like the opportunity I was looking for. So I started to get involved in that area of law – we called it “computer law” – and I joined the Boston Computer Society, an influential organization at the time; in fact, when Steve Jobs debuted the Mac, he did so at a BCS event in 1984.

From there I started to meet a lot of people who were becoming involved in the personal computer industry in New England, including a few lawyers. I became more and more convinced that this new industry was an opportunity for a new law firm– almost no one was focusing in this area, and I recognized that we were at an optimal entry point for a firm focused around this new technology. Eventually, two lawyers I’d met (one of whom has since left the firm) decided to form a firm with me. When we started in 1986, there was no other firm in Boston that held itself out as practicing “computer law”. We’ve expanded our practice since 1986, but we’ve always maintained our focus on technology clients.

2. If you were to go back in time to 1986 and tell yourself anything to prepare you for the years ahead, what would it be?

I think that the degree of sheer grit and determination that would be required, the ability to struggle through really challenging times, was something I didn’t recognize in 1986. If I could go back to1986 I’d tell myself: “it’s going to be harder than you think, and you’re going to need a deep commitment in order to succeed. You can’t fold when it gets really hard, and don’t fool yourself, it will get hard.” The firm had very few challenges from 1986 to 2000 – it was mostly clear sailing for those 14 years, with slow, steady growth at first. But in the late ‘90s our clients evolved from software companies to Internet companies along with the Internet bubble. When that bubble crashed in 2000, there was a contraction in our client base. It was a big challenge to adjust to that. It took a deep personal commitment on the part of the firm’s partners to struggle through that period.

In a sense, when the 2008 recession occurred, we were prepared because we’d already been through it once, so it was not as much of a challenge as I think it was for a lot of other firms. We’ve been through two really challenging business contractions – 2000-2002 and 2008 – and having the determination to see the firm through those periods was difficult. I would also tell myself, if I could go back to 1986, “don’t ever assume you have it made.” I mistakenly thought that any challenges would come early in the life of the firm, not after 14 years. I now know there are firms that have shuttered their doors after many decades in business, so you can never take your success for granted.

3. You maintain a personal law blog (www.MassLawBlog.com) – why is it important to you to devote time outside the office to this endeavor? In your opinion, how do personal projects like this shape a leader?

First, let me say that my partner Andy Updegrove maintains a blog (consortiuminfo.org), and I think he is one of the earliest and most prolific bloggers in the nation, as well as a published novelist. So there are two long-time bloggers at our firm.

I started my blog in 2005. I do it not because anybody is asking me to do it – I do it because I like to write. I know that this helps me understand my practice areas far better than what I could accomplish without my blog. I tend to think that you don’t understand something fully until you’ve taught it or written about it. It keeps me up-to-date in my practice area – which is so fast-moving that it’s a constant challenge.

There have been times I’ve been so busy I haven’t written for months, but those periods are rare. I’m always on the lookout for topics that I think I can write about. But there has to be a strong impulse to write on whatever the topic is, whether it’s a case or another legal development – I don’t force the process. At times I’ll go home and knock out a blog post in an evening. The more you do it, the easier it gets.

If you’re going to be a lawyer for decades, there’s a really serious burnout risk. You read a lot in professional journals about burnout in the legal profession. Often, people become bored or complacent, whether they admit it to themselves or not. They lose their enthusiasm and become stale. It’s nice to find a way to recharge your batteries within the profession itself. Finding something that you have real passion for is critical to career longevity. I think that’s a really important part of this job. People who get involved at the BBA get passionate about that, for example, and it serves that purpose; it’s the same with people who do pro bono work. You have to do something for yourself along the way or your career longevity may be at risk. For me, blogging helps fulfill that need.

4. Across the variety of committees and Sections in which you have served at the BBA, what overarching perspective about leadership and the legal community have you gained? What has been important to you to bring to the table?

First off, I have to say that the BBA Council is a very educational experience. The BBA is like a vast machine with an untold number of moving parts reflecting the Massachusetts legal economy, and it takes a long time to put that all together and understand what’s going on. I saw the tremendous commitment that the President, President-elect, and other officers make to the BBA. They have to have a deep passion for what they’re doing, and I really respect that. When you become a Council member, you get exposed to so many issues within the profession from a top-down vantage point, which is something that few lawyers get to see…it’s an invaluable experience.

Being a committee or section co-chair at the BBA required me to do the same thing as when I’m writing a blog: I had to figure out current topics that would be of interest to lawyers in that practice area, and then figure out who could speak on those topics. My co-chair and I had to find those people and persuade them to come to an event, which was no small task. Honestly, there are times when it’s harder to do that than it is to write a blog. You can’t have a brownbag lunch program just because a case was decided. So finding worthy themes, topics, and speakers was often difficult. Having the President of the BBA ask you how many programs you’re planning for the upcoming year brings home the reality that you have to make your committee or section viable, and worthwhile to the BBA as a whole. It was important to me to try to bring a work ethic of creativity and leadership to everything I did with the BBA.

Abim Thomas: “With Governor Patrick, I Learned How Important It Was Not Just to Listen, but Also to Have a Voice”

Published by tippingthescales on February 27, 2014 | Leave a response

Abim Thomas is a counsel in Goodwin Proctor’s Litigation Department and a member of its White Collar Crime and Government Investigations, Securities Litigation, and Gaming, Gambling & Sweepstakes Practices. Abim joined Goodwin Procter in 2012 after serving as Deputy Chief Legal Counsel to Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, and focuses her practice on representing operating companies, entrepreneurs, and investors in the gaming and gambling field. Abim is President of the Massachusetts Black Lawyers Association, serves on the board of the Women’s Bar Foundation and was recently selected by the Women’s Bar Association to serve as a mentor for its Women’s Leadership Initiative. At the BBA, she served as a member of the 2013-2014 Beacon Award Selection Committee and serves on the Board of Editors of the Boston Bar Journal. She is a member of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Services and has worked for the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights in both Boston and San Francisco.

1. Not many attorneys have the opportunity to work directly with the governor — can you share any stories about your time as Deputy Chief Legal Counsel and what you gained from it?

Having the opportunity to work with Governor Patrick meant having the opportunity to learn from an incredible leader. In that job, I learned the importance of listening as well as the importance of having a voice. During meetings, the Governor always made sure to get everyone’s input. He would go around the table and ask everyone for their opinion. He would literally go from person to person! He always made sure to get everyone – no one was skipped – and everyone’s opinion was just as important. His decisions were informed by these opinions. His final decision may have been different from where he started, but if it was, it was because he put such great value in other people’s ideas and appreciated the views they had to offer.

I remember the first time I got the chance to experience this. It’s also the first time I learned how important it was not just to listen, but also to have a voice. At one of my first meetings, the Governor went around the room and asked people for their opinions. To my surprise, they were actually giving them. He got to me and it didn’t even occur to me to give mine – that is, my honest personal opinion. I thought I was there to offer legal advice, unbiased legal advice based solely on the law. So when the Governor got to me, I said, “Oh, I’m just here to make sure whatever decision is made is legal. I don’t have an opinion.” He did what I’ve since seen him do to other people, and what I quickly learned never to have happen to me again: he just tipped his glasses down his nose, peered over them like he didn’t understand why I’d taken that approach, and then quietly moved on. I think it’s safe to say that everyone else probably gave their opinion after that!

It was an important lesson. I learned that to him, my opinion, along with everyone else’s opinion, had value. He appreciates that every decision he makes as Governor has an impact on real people. I’ve always gotten the sense that he feels like he has to make decisions informed by what real people have gone through, and that everyone has their own story and their own perspective. Anyone who’s ever worked with him would agree on what a great leader, mentor, and person he is.

2. What leadership lessons did you learn from past presidents of the MBLA? What do you hope to impart in your own presidency and what legacy are you hoping to leave?

Like the Governor, past presidents of the MBLA taught me to listen to other people’s ideas, because some of the best ideas come from people with different perspectives and experiences than your own. Having that open mind to hear others’ opinions makes for a better outcome than simply running with your own ideas. Past presidents also taught me to be decisive. There are always going to be great ideas and great dialogue, but as a leader, you need settle on a decision and implement it so that you can move the organization forward. This is something that I also learned from working with the Governor. He would approach a decision by making sure there was a great discussion of all of the issues. But whenever the final decision was made, it really was final. No matter what the discussion was that came before, we were all on board to implement that decision. So as an organization, our goal is to come up with solutions informed by different perspectives and then to implement them and drive the organization forward. Every year is an opportunity for any organization, including the MBLA, to get bigger, better and stronger. Everything every past leader of the organization has done has made that possible. I wouldn’t be in this role without them. Big shout-outs to Mo Cowan, Wayne Budd, Richard Soden, Damian Wilmot, Rachael Rollins, and Serge Georges – and all the other MBLA presidents who came before me!

As for a more practical legacy, I wanted to make sure that the MBLA retains the institutional history that it now has on the board. Thanks to past presidents, I and other members have been involved in the organization for several years. We’ve watched what’s worked, what hasn’t worked and come up with new ideas to advance the mission of the organization. Each year, the organization also welcomes new members, new leadership, new ideas and new energy. To keep the great knowledge from the past as a foundation that can be built on, I am asking each committee chair to put together an exit memo that will get passed along to the new committee chairs to help preserve that institutional knowledge. I found that each new leader was often reinventing the wheel. Next year, the new leadership will have the benefit of knowing what worked, what didn’t work, what can be replicated and what ideas maybe didn’t get a chance to get implemented this year. I hope to leave that to the next board so that whether they are returning members or new members, they don’t have to remember or guess at everything that happened over the last year!

3. How has the work and structure of the SJC Committee on Pro Bono Services informed your own personal philosophy on and approach to leadership?

For some background, the Committee is led by Justice Gants and chaired by Sue Finegan of Mintz Levin this year. Damian Wilmot is a former member of the Committee and I suspect floated my name to fill a vacancy on the Committee, which was has been a great opportunity. The Committee is made up of an incredible group of people – representatives from government, private practice, legal services, and the judiciary. As I mentioned earlier, this allows for many different perspectives and many great ideas.

One of the things we do as a Committee is give out the Adams Pro Bono Publico Awards every year. The awards go to firms, companies, and individuals – lawyers and law students – who have done exemplary pro bono work. We also visit area law schools to hear about their pro bono programs. It’s amazing to see young leaders describe the pro bono work they take on in addition to their regular course load. These students are passionate and inspire fellow students as well as practicing attorneys.

The Committee works on getting people interested and committed to doing pro bono. The great thing about the Committee is that it’s focused on doing what you can, with what you have, where you are. No matter where or who you are, you can have an impact through pro bono. This is reflected in the Committee’s various sub-committees that work to get everyone involved in pro bono work – from government lawyers to stay-at-home parents. It’s all about how to engage them and keep them interested in doing pro bono.

4. Is there anything else that’s been important in your experience of leadership that we haven’t covered yet?

I just want to say that no profile would be complete without recognizing my parents. Every day I realize I’m the person I am because of them. They are both amazing leaders in their own right, and they are in completely different universes! My mom is an activist and a leader within that community, and my dad worked for the UN and was a leader in African development — and continues to work in that area, even though he’s retired. As leaders and parents, they were always decisive and understood the importance of speaking with one voice. I’m sure there was a lot of discussion behind the scenes about how to raise us kids, but when a decision was made, it was final!

Kelly Leighton: “When There’s Incivility Present, It Can Inflame a Case That’s Emotionally Charged”

Published by tippingthescales on February 20, 2014 | Leave a response

Kelly Leighton is a partner at Barnes & Leighton, where she focuses on all aspects of domestic relations. Prior to entering private practice, she was a Senior Attorney with Greater Boston Legal Services and spent thirteen years representing low-income victims of domestic violence in family law cases. Kelly serves on the BBA Council and Nominating Committee; she is a past Co-Chair of the BBA’s Family Law Section and the Section’s Policy and Legislative Subcommittee. She was the BBA’s liaison to the Massachusetts Alimony Reform Task Force, which produced the bill that ultimately became the Alimony Reform Act of 2011. Kelly is a member of the Board of Directors for the Association of Family and Conciliation Court’s Massachusetts Chapter, and has long served as a trainer and mentor for the Family Law Project of the Women’s Bar Foundation. She also is a frequent panelist and author on domestic relations topics.

1. From your work on the Alimony Reform Task Force, you’ve helped shape policy that represented a huge change in the law. What are some key pointers you have about reaching group consensus?

All of the members of the Task Force were faced with the possibility that what we produced would become a dramatic shift in the law and present a huge change in the culture of how we viewed alimony, and we recognized how difficult it possibly could be reaching consensus, because there were many people at the table who had different points of view. At the beginning, there was a tension between the interests of recipients and payors. Both sides had legitimate good-faith concerns about what the end product would be; the interests were so different and there were definite tensions in opposite directions. But during that process, what encouraged me was that people had a willingness to listen and be open to whatever issue was being discussed on both sides of the issue, and to be creative as to how to address the concerns. The end result was a negotiated compromise: by the very nature of having two opposite sides and coming to the middle, not everyone gets everything they want or be completely happy with the end result. We reached an agreement that acknowledged concerns people had and addressed them in a way that was acceptable. It was a very cooperative, respectful environment, and we had a very successful process. I think what surprised me was how well that process worked. Participating in a group that was working to achieve compromise, just on a larger scale, was not foreign to any of us, but at the beginning of the process I didn’t know if we’d be able to reach a consensus! As we worked through, both sides’ ability to come together to reach the middle ground and come up with any kind of end result was impressive.

Once we had that result, it went out to the family law bar, and we knew that, depending on the perspective, there were going to be criticisms and the possibility of one side or the other having suggestions. What was helpful for me was letting go of any feeling of ownership; when you have that, it can lead to defensiveness, and without those feelings, it allows for an openness and acknowledgement that the product wouldn’t 100 percent please everyone. It was fair to hear feedback because it represented such a huge change in the law. Because I was able to step back, the criticisms didn’t upset me; hearing those reactions, both positive and negative, was part of my duty on the task force. There needs to be a willingness to listen, explain, respond, and be available to people to talk about this really major shift in the direction of the law.

2. On the topic of being emotionally charged: by all accounts, family law can be challenging in that respect and it’s very personal; how does an effective leader achieve conflict resolution in that kind of context?

In terms of my approach in my practice and how I conduct myself, I think something that can very much affect the ability to reach resolution is the level of professionalism that attorneys exhibit during the process. I firmly believe that a high level of professionalism is key to diffusing the emotion, in terms of exhibiting professional courtesy, upholding civility, keeping emotional distance between the attorney and client’s interests, and maintaining respect for everyone – including opposing counsel and parties. You can effectively represent a client and at the same time treat everyone in the room with respect. That is a baseline that’s necessary and makes it possible to diffuse the conflict, seek a resolution to all of it, and attempt to have everyone step away from the emotional aspects.

If you find yourself in a situation where the counsel is less than civil, and uses nastiness as a tactic, it can really create a downward spiral of conflict. As lawyers, we should at least make conditions present that make it possible to reach a resolution. We’re dealing with clients who are at many times at the worst points in their lives, and if attorneys inject behavior that makes it worse than it already is, then it can fall apart. Years ago I had a case where my client had been in a very high-conflict marriage. I was in court, and the opposing attorney attempted to physically take a court file out of my hands. I was just in shock that he would treat me that way! After the incident, my client turned to me and said, “He treats you the way my husband used to treat me.” There’s no room for that in the profession.

I remember those cases where the attorney was simply not professional, but I also remember the cases that were very difficult, but in which I had a huge amount of admiration for the opposing counsel for their professionalism, which helped the parties reach agreement. When there’s incivility present, it can very much inflame a case that’s emotionally charged. Being respectful can go a long way at helping the parties along to resolve their case.

3. How did you approach starting your solo practice after your time working in legal services? What preparation was necessary, and what did you learn along the way that contributed to your success?

In hindsight, there were many things about my 13 years in legal services that did prepare and help me while starting my own practice. The nature of legal services wasn’t that I could bring clients with me, but what I did bring with me was that I had the great opportunity of practicing with very experienced family law attorneys, and what I learned from them helped me immensely. Over those years, I also built a lot of relationships – not just in legal services, but outside it in the private bar, often through the BBA. After I launched my practice, people were supportive in referring clients to me and answering questions about the private practice of law. I was able to reach out to people who gave me information, guidance, and advice about how to be a businessperson, which you end up having to be. That was incredibly important.

Another great thing was that I had the opportunity to be involved in drafting legislation, such as the work of the Alimony Task Force, as well as a family law bill that would change terminology people use when they talk about the parenting of children. That’s been an idea that’s been floated for years, and I sat with a group from the BBA’s Family Law Section that came up with language agreeable to everybody. I was able to work on projects that helped me form relationships and have had a real impact. I find this type of impact work – work that has had aneffect on law itself, versus work on just individual cases – very gratifying.

I look back to when I started my practice in 2010 and I think, “Was I just so brave to jump off that cliff, or was I just blind?” Sometimes I really don’t know, and I can’t believe I did that! The first 6 months were incredibly challenging and would be for everyone – it’s so frightening in that you don’t know where it’s going to go and whether it will be successful. Thinking back, I am so grateful for the referrals made to me. I have faith now that my practice is working because I was able to build from there. For me, it was the right move at the right point in my career; I think about young attorneys now who are launching practices just out of law school and don’t have those years of experience and collaborative work behind them, and I do everything I can for those who I know, because I know how important it is to learn from other attorneys.

4. Is there anything else about leadership and the law that we haven’t covered yet?

I do want to stress that there is a crisis in legal services funding and there has been for years. At the time I left, there was a serious crisis with my organization and they faced downsizing. I was safe from a layoff, but one of the concerns was that cutting back people meant cutting the staff hired last, who were the youngest and often lawyers of color, and were perhaps the future generation of legal services attorneys. That was the context in which I decided to leave: the forced choice to cut out the newer diverse attorneys with a lot of enthusiasm for the work. Unfortunately, in legal services there is never the staff to meet the demand, and it’s very concerning as it affects access to justice for the people most in need.

Elizabeth Soule: “In Legal Services, Every Day Is a New Adventure…You Just Never Know What’ll Happen”

Published by tippingthescales on February 13, 2014 | Leave a response

Elizabeth Soule is the Executive Director of MetroWest Legal Services, which provides legal advocacy to protect and advance the rights of poor, elderly, disabled and other disenfranchised people in 36 towns throughout MetroWest. Prior, she worked as an elder law attorney for twenty years and led the Benefits Unit of South Middlesex Legal Services. In addition to being a faculty member for the Trial Skills training program at the Center for Legal Aid Education in Boston, she has taught as a visiting clinical supervisor at the Boston College Legal Assistance Bureau and given presentations on many elder law topics in a wide range of contexts.

What is the most difficult decision you have had to make as the Executive Director of MetroWest Legal Services, and how did it turn out?

Probably the hardest thing was making a decision to lay somebody off. You make a lot of tough decisions every day, but reducing staff is really hard. You have to try to weigh what that means for the person, for the office, for morale, for resources – but also weigh it against the inevitability of needing long-term financial stability. There’s nothing good about it no matter how you prepare or present it, but it was something we had to do. You have to separate the action from the person, because it’s not personal to them, although on the receiving end it feels personal to them. I would say to be as transparent and honest as you can with the person, and make sure they understand it’s not tied to their value as an employee; it’s really something entirely separate from that. Make sure they know how difficult it is for you to come to that point, and provide support as they transition into something else – whether people are receptive to that or not varies.

Fortunately we’ve only had one layoff, but we made a decision that we needed to live within our means and sort of build back upward as we could. We’d been lucky to have a pretty healthy reserve, but I think that people thought going forward from the recession of 2009 was going to be a shorter process than it’s turned out to be. Asking your staff to live without raises is hard too, and is not unique to just our programs – there have been salary freezes, furloughs, and other measures. It’s been a very difficult four or five years, and I look forward to a time when we’re not counting pennies quite as closely.

2. Conversely, can you share a story of a situation that has really brought home how crucial your organization’s work is?

I’m sitting in a different seat than I used to, so now I don’t necessarily have clients who are mine so much as I’m supporting the attorneys doing the direct client work. However, there’s the story of one homeless client and her baby daughter – it was interesting because she came to our office on a day when the people who were most expert at homelessness work were at a conference. Between myself and another attorney who was new, we sort of banded together and worked the case, which couldn’t wait for someone to come back a day later. Just seeing how broken the system was in terms of getting someone into shelter, and the obstacles that even legal advocates encounter, you just think to yourself, “if they’re pushing back with me, I can’t imagine how a homeless single mother with a 2-month-old baby is going to advocate for herself.” The two had been sleeping in the hallway of an apartment building the night before, and the mother talked about having to be awake all night so she could quiet her baby if she woke up. At the same time, she was told that if she didn’t have shelter for her baby the next night, DCF would take the baby. It was heartbreaking to see the degree of concern and worry in her – all she cared about was her baby, not herself. We were able to go through the process and make calls to the appropriate state agency, but someone unrepresented would never have been able to get there, known who to call, or understood the regulations and how they should be interpreted.

I spent a good part of that day holding that baby while the other attorney worked with the mom. I have to say, when we prevailed and got her in shelter, it seemed like the biggest deal in the world. Did we think we would be spending that Thursday and Friday doing this? Definitely not! In legal services, every day is a new adventure – you can plan all you want, but you just never know what’ll happen. That case was an ‘a-ha’ moment; when people ask about why I went into legal services and why I stayed, I say, “at least you get to go home at the end of the day feeling like you really made a difference in somebody’s life.”

How does an effective leader balance the emotional aspects of legal services with perhaps the more pragmatic side of work that needs to be done?

It’s not something that you learn overnight, that’s for sure. Sometimes until you’re a part of it or witness it, you might not even know that’s what you’re destined for. Oftentimes we talk about how legal services lawyers walk the line between ‘lawyer’ and ‘social worker,’ because clients have so many needs that seem to surface when they come to a legal services office for help. It’s very difficult to separate those things, and often the best thing to do is listen. Patience is a real top-of-the-line quality to have in legal services, but at the same time you have to assess what you need to proceed with the legal case from the client. Luckily we have a sense of many community resources, sometimes connecting clients to what might be helpful, whether it’s suggesting a counselor or a food pantry – a lot of it is giving information and referrals.

The stories are heartbreaking sometimes, and you don’t want to not feel that. You have to at some human level. But you also have to step back and say, “this is awful; how can I utilize my legal skills to help improve their quality of life measurably?” Nobody’s doing this work for the money or the accolades, but I think it’s based on a real human philosophy of taking care of the poor and making sure they have a fair shot at access to justice. It’s important to have an office of people who are like-minded, and who you can vent to or cry with, because it happens sometimes when it can be overwhelming. To say it doesn’t affect people is not realistic. You have to set boundaries, recalibrate, stay objective, and remember the end-game sometimes. That’s what really fuels you and keeps you from being swallowed up in the emotional details.

In the day-to-day operations of a legal services organization, how do you keep the overarching strategic direction in perspective?

We did some strategic planning three or four years ago, and doing priority-setting like that from time to time is key, as is making sure you’re looking at the big picture for what you want to do and how you want to direct the organization. A lot of what you do day-to-day and the decisions you make regarding grants, funding, and other opportunities of that nature help to drive that, and those help fulfill the plan. At the same time, legal services organizations are lean on staff and resources, so Executive Directors in legal services are much more actively involved in the day-to-day than similar positions in the private sector. At the end of the day for me, it’s about whether what we’re doing is helping to keep the office financially viable, have as much staff as we can, and work efficiently with what we have to deliver legal services to the greatest number clients possible. Whether you’re thinking about grants, fundraising, or new programs, it all comes down to that in some respect.

5. Is there anything else about important to you and your leadership that we haven’t
touched upon yet?

Maybe this is obvious to those of us doing the work and not as much to others necessarily, but there are just way more people who need our help than we can reach because of a lack of resources. I would implore people to get involved in their local legal services offices, whether it’s volunteering their time, providing financial support, or some combination of the two. The private bar is really an integral part of making our offices work and being able to serve more people through those two avenues. It might not seem like a lot, but gestures like writing a check for $100 or volunteering to take a case is a huge help to us, and quite frankly I think that it’s somewhat embedded in the philosophy and duty of a lawyer to serve the community. The private bar probably sees the effects of pro se litigants every day in courts and the challenges they face trying to help themselves – it’s a bigger systemic issue about decreasing the numbers of these pro se litigants, and addressing it would probably achieve quicker outcomes in less time for everyone involved.

1 2 … 4 Next →