Godzilla, Gojira, either way pretty scary

Happy Change of Venue Friday, the day we take a deserved amble down a path that’s not strictly legal—but a path I’d guess lawyers would enjoy.

Today, I take note of a new release of an old classic film: Gojira, the precursor to what most of us know as Godzilla.

It turns out there’s a lot more to the Gojira story than we would have guessed—so much so that the storied Criterion Collection is re-releasing the original. As the news story notes:

“The highbrow Criterion Collection, which usually traffics in the world of Hitchcock, Truffaut and Japan’s Akira Kurosawa, will add digitally restored editions of Toho Studios’ ‘Gojira’ and the watered-down American version from 1956, ‘Godzilla: King of the Monsters,’ with Raymond Burr, to its prestigious DVD and Blu-ray catalog.

“‘For viewers who grew up on the campy, silly ‘Godzilla’ movies that came later, this 1954 original is going to seem like a shock,’ says film scholar David Kalat, author of ‘A Critical History and Filmography of Toho’s Godzilla Series.’

“‘It’s like the difference between the Adam West ‘Batman’ and ‘The Dark Knight’—the basic premise is the same, but it’s so much darker and more horrific.’”

Yes, Godzilla got its own Hollywood star.

“Horrific”? Well, yes. For it is “a fearful atomic fable from expert filmmakers, a metaphor for the bombing of Hiroshima that ended World War II just nine years earlier.”

Read the whole story here. And have a great weekend.

Not grabby enough? Well, what if you knew that it covers a law—the Leahy–Smith America Invents Act—that altered our patent law system more than at any time since the early 1950s?

The law has not been without controversy. Opponents had said that it would disadvantage small and startup companies—where innovation often arises—and that its approach could make the U.S. patent system irrelevant.

In any case, here is the article by Sheri Qualters titled “Top 10 Things You Should Know About the New Patent Law.” For the article, she contacted practitioners to ask what people need to know about the law enacted on Sept. 16, 2011.

She opens with the top piece of guidance: File Early and Often:

“When first-to-file takes effect on March 16, 2013, it’s critical for inventors to race to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office with high-quality provisional filings, which can be turned into full applications within a year.

“‘They should make sure their initial filing provides good support for all of those features that they’re later going to claim,’ said Steven Koffs, a partner and senior patent attorney at Philadelphia’s Duane Morris. Making additional provisional filings when there’s a significant improvement is also key for important inventions, Koffs said. Speedy filing is equally critical for lawyers concerned about potential liability. ‘The AIA has greatly increased the possibility of malpractice or even just malpractice allegations,’ said William Dippert, a White Plains, N.Y., partner at Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott.”

Keep reading here.

The article, titled “Fees and Client-Trust Accounts: Rule Changes for 2012,” was written by Patricia Sallen, the Ethics Counsel for the State Bar of Arizona. In the piece, Pat gets directly to the point and informs lawyers exactly what they need to know about changes to:

• ER 1.5(b), regarding written fee agreements
• Rule 43, regarding client-trust accounts

Her entire article is online and is worth bookmarking.

Want to be drawn in a little more? Here is Pat’s article opening:

“Charging fees properly. Keeping client property safe. Managing client-trust accounts to the penny.

“Did your palms get sweaty as you read those words?

“For lawyers, those issues are always sources of concern (Am I charging fees ethically?) and anxiety (Am I managing my client-trust account properly?). In 2010, they comprised the fifth most commonly alleged misconduct against lawyers and are typically among the top 10 subjects of calls to the State Bar’s ethics hotline.

“You also may be among the lawyers who in summer 2009 received word they might have to move—on short notice—their client-trust accounts to a different financial institution. You ultimately didn’t have to … but talk about sweat that wasn’t related to summer heat.

“As a result of petitions filed by the State Bar—in part to try to reduce the sweat-inducing factors—the Arizona Supreme Court has amended and clarified rules related to fees and client-trust accounts. The changes take effect in 2012.”

Keep reading here.

The Society is an association of Catholic lawyers. The Catholic Mass they host annually has been held since the Middle Ages. In it, judges, lawyers, law school professors, students and others worship together. As Wikipedia indicates, those at the Mass request guidance from the Holy Spirit for all who seek justice. The event offers “the opportunity to reflect on what Catholics believe is the God-given power and responsibility of all in the legal profession.”

Of interest this year is the priest who has been invited to offer the sermon. Timothy Broglio is “Archbishop of the Military Services, USA.” For those who are not in the church and were wondering, Yes, the Catholic Church does have a leader focused on that particular part of the international congregation. Its website is here.

Coat of arms of the Archdiocese

According to the Archdiocese:

“The Archdiocese for the Military Services was created by Pope John Paul II to provide the Catholic Church’s full range of pastoral ministries and spiritual services to those in the United States Armed Forces. This includes more than 220 installations in 29 countries, patients in 153 V.A. Medical Centers, and federal employees serving outside the boundaries of the USA in 134 countries. Numerically, the AMS is responsible for more than 1.5 million men, women, and children.”

More on this special Archdiocese is here.

Archbishop Timothy Broglio at Al Asad Airbase, Iraq

Archbishop Broglio has served and studied around the world, including in Rome, Paraguay, Ivory Coast, Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico. He has been Archbishop of the Military Services since November 2007. (Read more about him here.)

(I will be unable to attend the Mass, but I’d appreciate hearing from someone who does; I am curious about Archbishop Broglio’s message. I wrote last year about an event sponsored by the St. Thomas More Society.)

Thanks to attorney Denise Blommel for the reminder about the Mass. (Denise is an employment law attorney. More about her and her practice is here.)

Archbishop Timothy Broglio

Our department is slated to be out of our current space by the close of business Monday. It appears that we’re going to make the deadline. So far, so good.

Our move got me thinking back to similar moves I’ve made when I worked in law firms. Mobilizing documents, technology and people can be a Herculean undertaking. And doing it without having productivity dip too severely is quite an accomplishment.

So that got me to wondering:

• How many of you have lived through an office move?
• What would you say is the single best decision you or your firm made to ensure a good move?
• What was the single worst mistake that your firm made?

I’ll keep it all anonymous, of course, but I’d really like to know.

In my office, almost done

In the meantime, here are a few articles on the topic of law office moves. As the first—from Practice Blawg, of the Minnesota State Bar Association—opens:

“Anyone who has recently moved an office or home (or both at the same time) is familiar with the scatterbrainedness that accompanies the general sense of displacement. Having recently experienced the chaos fun of moving myself, I’m sharing my moving checklist here to hopefully simplify the process for someone else.”

Read the whole post here.

And over at Lawbiz, they have some helpful tips on moving your law firm into new space.

Wish us luck this week. We’ll be in our new space by next Monday.

Howard Cabot

In the February issue of Arizona Attorney Magazine, I wrote about Howard Cabot and a great ASU Law School program at which he spoke. But I wanted to add a few things.

(In case you missed it, I pasted in below my editor’s column.)

Howard spoke that evening about the power of the sabbatical to refresh and re-energize. When the idea first started to gain traction at law firms, a bug was discovered in the system: Lawyers who went away for six months to “rest, relax and to get recharged” did not return. Life “on the outside” was simply too appealing. Reducing it to four months (a three-month sabbatical plus a month’s vacation) did nothing to reduce the attrition level. So finally his firm struck an agreement with those desiring a sabbatical: They had to return from their sabbatical and remain for t least two years, or they would forfeit some compensation. Giddyup.

Now, Cabot said, he compiles enough “credits” to take a sabbatical every seven years. Most recently, he took three months off-though he had enough credits for eight.

Before the ASU audience, Cabot was extremely willing to explore his own personal reasons for endorsing the sabbatical:

“The practice of law is difficult—dealing with the billable hour while keeping your family together. I had been at the firm 10 to 13 years, and I was growing short-tempered and was losing my focus.”

Until a firm partner told him, “Go away, Howard. You’re not doing anyone any good here.”

“Is it OK just to go away and golf?” Cabot asked ASU listeners rhetorically. “Yes, if you need to, by God, do it.”

He and his wife made other choices. For the first sabbatical, they traveled abroad to study at Worcester College, Oxford. With their kids, they took the Grand Tour. Most important, though, “We all had breakfast, lunch and dinner together every day. We got to know each other as a family again. It saved us as a family.”

Their second sabbatical involved volunteer work in Eastern Europe, where they were able to trace their Jewish roots.

In those trips, Cabot says he learned a few overarching lessons: Life really goes on (“The world can get along pretty well without you.”). And the sabbatical can be used to prepare clients for new lawyers—after all, life changes.

Fourteen years later, Cabot was in need of another sabbatical, which is when he was approached about Guantanamo litigation.

“You learn as a young lawyer that there is a code for cases to avoid.” This, he saw later, may have been one of those cases. At the time, though, he was asked if he “would mind helping out” on a case that should only require a bit of his supervisorial duties.

The only thing Cabot hadn’t counted on was that his client—Noor Uthman Muhammed—would be one of only 10 detainees who were indicted for war crimes. “Of 800 or so in and out of Guantanamo, he’s 1 of 10.”

To illustrate the seriousness of the situation, Cabot reminds listeners that 5 of the 10 were implicated in the 9-11 attacks.

ASU Law School Interim Dean Doug Sylvester, Center for Law and Global Affairs Executive Director Daniel Rothenberg, and Perkins Coie partner Howard Cabot

Cabot described his work as a lawyer on behalf of his client in that matter. But a unique view into that work may come from Cabot’s son, who is a writer for Esquire Magazine. He wrote two features about his dad—read them here and here.

Back at ASU, Howard Cabot was eloquent as he described his wrestling with ethical dilemmas, as a Jewish American representing a man who opposed the state of Israel and whom the government contended was an enemy of the United States.

Finally, he concluded, “Who but we as lawyers will take on unpopular causes? If we don’t take on the higher issues—like torture and prolonged detention—are we any better than our supposed enemies?”

That case led Cabot and his wife to another sabbatical. As he described his travel pitch, “Let’s go to places that know about unlawful detention and torture: Buenos Aires, Morocco, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia, Sarajevo, Israel, Capetown, Johannesburg.”

To help them prepare for the trip Daniel Rothenberg gave them huge binders of background material. That work by Rothenberg, the Executive Director for ASU’s Center for Law and Global Affairs, allowed the couple to get a running start on their education.

In regard to law-firm sabbaticals, Cabot’s takeaway at his talk was pretty simple: He is a strong advocate of “living a whole life.”

“If the people with you don’t find that important, find different people.”

(More photos for this story are on the Arizona Attorney Magazine Facebook page.)

Here is my column from the February issue:

Please Release Me

Raise your hand if you’d like to take a sabbatical. Anyone?

I write this on the third day of a new year, and my hand is high in the air. Perhaps immediately after a welcome break and a return to work is the wrong time to ask.

The notion of a sabbatical arose thanks to a unique event at Arizona State University. There, a successful large-firm lawyer extolled the virtues of—down time. Will wonders never cease?

The speaker melded the time-off idea with his own experience representing a detainee housed in Guantanamo Bay—quite the synopsis.

Congratulations to Perkins Coie partner Howard Cabot, who joined the topics surprisingly well. He offered candid insights into his own path toward rejuvenation, and even shared what he could about his imprisoned client.

The event was presented by the Center for Law and Global Affairs, and its Executive Director, Daniel Rothenberg, adeptly engaged Cabot in a far-ranging dialogue.

As Cabot called it, the sabbatical is like a schmita—a Hebrew term signifying how it’s best to allow fields to lie fallow for a season so they may regenerate their nutrients (a literal translation is “release”). His experience with lawyer sabbaticals started at Brown & Bain, which had borrowed the idea from Latham & Watkins. At the firm, Cabot said, Jack Brown, Paul Eckstein, Randy Bain and others “developed a culture that saw a lot of good in taking a break.”

In his long career, Cabot is pleased to have taken three extended breaks, each of which involved travel and mind-broadening experiences. His most recent included the representation of a Guantanamo detainee—a release in more than one sense.

Later in 2012, we will publish the results of a unique survey of Arizona lawyers—on their professional happiness. Until then, consider some well-deserved time away, and enjoy the ninth verse of the wisdom of Tao, which Howard Cabot shared:

Fill your bowl to the brim and it will spill.
Keep sharpening your knife and it will blunt.
Chase after money and security and your heart will never unclench.
Care about other people’s approval and you will be their prisoner.
Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity.

In it, reporter Joe Palazzolo examines a unique company structure and muses on the issue of “When a Company Sounds Suspiciously Like a Law Firm.” The companies are legal staffing firms.

As Palazzolo notes, many of these firms go so far as to tout the depth of experience and legal expertise available to customers (clients?). And if they do that, “And if they’re not law firms, then the question is this: What services can they provide without violating regulations that prohibit them from practicing law?”

The question is not a hypothetical one. He points out that a regulatory committee of the D.C. Court of Appeals—the District’s equivalent of a state high court—has drafted an opinion on the matter (“Applicability of Rule 49 to Discovery Services Companies”). You can read it here.

What do you think of the situation? Do you see similar activities in Arizona that give you pause?

Perhaps that matrix has never occurred to you, but the role that dolls have played in forensics may be more palatable. And that is just what is offered in a film screening tomorrow night.

At the Scottsdale Museum for Contemporary Art, the film “Of Dolls and Murder” will explore crime-fighting of a unique variety. As the producers describe it, “In the 30s and 40s before forensics, DNA, and CSI, crime-fighting grandmother Frances Glessner Lee created dollhouses of miniaturized real-life crime scenes. These creations are still used today to train detectives.

This documentary looks at the dioramas, the woman who created them, and their relationship to modern-day forensics.

The film is being screened by No Festival Required Independent Cinema. And while I’m thinking of it, go ahead and “Like” them on Facebook. Its Executive Director is Steve Weiss, and this is just the latest of a long string of amazing films he has brought to Arizona.

Where was I? Oh, yes, be sure to go here for more information on the film. It will be screened on Thursday, January 19, at SMoCA. The cost is $7, and tickets are available either by calling the Museum (480-874-4666) or at the front admission counter. Doors to the SMoCA Lounge open at 7:00 pm, and the film begins at 7:30. Seating is general admission, and a no-host bar is available.

Frances Glessner Lee

The screening is sponsored by Woodesign.

SMoCA’s Lesley Oliver reported that a few experts from the Scottsdale Police Department will attend the screening and the Q&A portion of the evening. As she wrote, “Come meet some real CSI people before we watch this intriguing documentary!”

For at least the past decade, courts local and national have sought to educate the public on the value of an independent judiciary, what is now termed by them “fair courts.” Their efforts are in response to initiatives launched by others to more firmly control the courts and the outcomes that flow from them. Those initiatives—often branded attacks by the courts and their supporters—range from the possible to the unlikely. And in Arizona, 2012 will see even more dialogue on judges and those who select them.

(I’ve written on the topic a few times this year; see here and here.)

This week, an intriguing speaker weighs in on the question at the University of Arizona Law School. There, on Thursday, a former state Supreme Court Chief Justice will speak at the invitation of a student group, the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.

Former Iowa Chief Justice Marsha Ternus

Marsha Ternus was the Iowa C.J., and in 2010 she was at the losing end of a bruising and nationally watched ballot fight. By the time the votes were counted, she and two other sitting justices had been ousted following their ruling in one high-profile case, on gay marriage.

Here is the press release from the school (also found on their Facebook page):

The Increasing Politicization Of Judicial Elections And The Impact On Judicial Independence

The American Constitution Society for Law and Policy (ACS) at the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law is holding an event on judicial independence featuring Justice Marsha Ternus, former Chief Justice of the Iowa Supreme Court. She will discuss the increasing politicization of judicial elections and the impact that has on judicial independence and the fairness and impartiality of judicial decision making.

When: Thursday, January 19, 2012, 12:15 pm – 1:15 pm

Where: Ares Auditorium, Room 164, James E. Rogers College of Law, University of Arizona

Address: 1201 E. Speedway Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85719

Justice Ternus was appointed to the Iowa Supreme Court in 1993 by Governor Terry Branstad and members of the court elected her chief justice in 2006. She was the first woman to serve as chief justice of Iowa’s highest court. Justice Ternus grew up on a farm near Vinton, Iowa and received her bachelor’s degree with honors and high distinction from the University of Iowa. She earned her law degree with honors from Drake University, Order of the Coif, where she was editor-in-chief of the Drake Law Review.

In April 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court, in Varnum v. Brien, unanimously declared the state’s same-sex marriage restriction unconstitutional, making Iowa the third state in the country to allow same-sex marriages. The three justices up for retention in 2010 were then targeted by a well-organized and well-financed campaign to unseat them and in November 2010, Iowa voters removed Justice Ternus and two other justices from office.

About ACS: ACS sponsors speakers, events and policy debates with the goal of providing a progressive viewpoint. ACS is transforming legal and policy debates in classrooms, courtrooms, legislature and the media. Through these efforts, ACS aims to ensure American legal institutions reflect the highest values of our nation and serve the needs of its people.

Tomorrow in Mesa, the Tuskegee Airmen will be recognized for their remarkable accomplishments. The Commemorative Air Force Arizona Wing will take the time to praise at least six of those who still survive.

As the Airmen’s own organization describes them:

“In spite of adversity and limited opportunities, African Americans have played a significant role in U.S. military history over the past 300 years. They were denied military leadership roles and skilled training because many believed they lacked qualifications for combat duty. Before 1940, African Americans were barred from flying for the U.S. military. Civil rights organizations and the black press exerted pressure that resulted in the formation of an all African-American pursuit squadron based in Tuskegee, Alabama, in 1941. They became known as the Tuskegee Airmen.”

As a news story explains, the Saturday event at Falcon Field in Mesa “will include an overview of the history of the Tuskegee Airmen, a group that included 450 pilots and more than 14,000 members of air crews and ground-support units, as well as doctors, nurses and other personnel in the then-segregated U.S. Army Air Corps.”

Also featured will be a documentary, narrated by Cuba Gooding, Jr., titled “Double Victory.” It was made to accompany the January 20 release of the George Lucas film “Red Tails,” which celebrates the Airmen and their contributions.

Members of the Tuskegee Airmen relax during World War II. Arizona members of the group will be honored Saturday (Jan. 14) at a tribute in Mesa.

Lawyer Herb Zinn has been involved with the Commemorative Air Force Arizona Wing Aviation Museum for years, and he was quoted in the news story.

“When ‘Red Tails’ was announced, we thought it would be a moment for us to celebrate these guys in a compelling setting,” said Herb Zinn of the museum, which has a working B-17 bomber and working P-51 Mustang cq fighters like those featured in the film. “These guys were giants, by what they did, aside from their bravery in combat.”

George Lucas

As Zinn explains, the Airmen’s contributions helped pave the way for desegregation, in the military and the nation as a whole.

Click here to purchase tickets to the event.

And for some interesting stories about George Lucas and the (difficulty of) making “Red Tails,” click here and here.

Have a great weekend. I’ll be back Tuesday, after the MLK Holiday.