Arts Winners of @azatty Displayed as May Facebook Profile Pictures

“Pima County Jail Parking Lot” by John Levy, a photography category winner of the 2013 Arizona Attorney Magazine Creative Arts Competition

Last fall, I wrote about the pleasure I take in Facebook’s then-new broad profile photo. I argued that it could especially be useful for businesses on that social media channel.

The question of whether to keep your message’s delivery unchanging and rock-solid, or to alter it in ways permitted by Facebook, is not an easy question. I pointed out that, as an editor on a monthly magazine, I like to visually feature a snapshot of each month’s cover story.

This is May, though, and I faced the dilemma of representing our arts competition winners. Last year, I decided to curate my own shot (see below). The result was a mass of art supplies surrounding our May issue. I still like it (though opinions may differ).

Arizona Attorney Facebook Screen shot May 2012

This year, though, I tried something else: featuring some of the great visual work that won our prizes.

Therefore, if you go to the Arizona Attorney Magazine Facebook page this month, you will see that the broad cover image changes about six times throughout the month. Those changes give us the chance to display a variety of great work in the categories of photography and painting.

Our page is at http://www.facebook.com/ArizonaAttorneyMagazine

I just changed the image this morning, so it now displays John Levy’s photograph “Pima County Jail Parking Lot.”

To see all the photos, past, present and future, be sure to “Like” us on Facebook. And stop by our photos page to see what else we’ve shown.

Follow @azatty

 

My Last Word Addresses Justice on Tribal Lands

Arizona Attorney’s “End Notes,” from the early 2000s.

One of the biggest challenges every magazine faces is: What do you do with your back page?

Specifically, that means the inside back page, typically the last “edit” page in the magazine, followed by a page or more of advertising. After the cover and the contents page, it is typically the most-read page in a magazine (aside from lawyer discipline, in our case!).

When I started at Arizona Attorney Magazine years ago, we tried a variety of things, including a page dedicated to legal trivia (and even incorporating a quiz), called “End Notes.” But as time went on, we gravitated back to a traditional inside last page with commentary from folks we thought readers would appreciate (or respond to, or both). We call the page The Last Word.

Our “stable” of regularly recurring columnists has varied, but it has stayed the same over the past few years (though we are open to ideas for people to add as a regular columnists; send a note to me at arizona.attorney@azbar.org).

Over time, though, we found that there were more diverse voices among Arizona lawyers that should be shared. These are those people who may have no interest in writing regularly, but who have one great and compelling column in them. They have a message they feel should be conveyed. Aside from a letter to the editor, where is the magazine space for them?

Arizona lawyer Don Bayles. Jr.

That’s when we developed My Last Word—identical in appearance and word count to The last Word, but open to any lawyer who has something to say. (Like all content, submissions are reviewed for appropriateness, timeliness and relevance.)

If you or someone you know is interested in pursuing a column, write to me (arizona.attorney@azbar.org).

The May issue contains a compelling example of My Last Word. Written by Don Bayles, Jr., it addresses the heartbreaking problem of violence against women and girls in Indian reservations. The challenges include jurisdiction and vast distances, and they are substantial.

Here is how Don opened his column:

“Horrific violence toward women and children on southwestern tribal lands continues to disappoint. Up to 90 percent of girls in Hopi villages can expect to be sexually molested, according to a September 2012 interview with Arlene Honanie, the wife of the tribe’s vice chairman. Ms. Honanie said that this happens, at least in part, because offenders are so rarely punished. A nearby advocate for reservation victims offered a similar observation in cases involving the Navajo Nation. Speaking to a New York Times reporter, Caroline Antone said, ‘I know only a couple of people who have not been raped, out of hundreds.’ If these reports are even roughly accurate, the Rule of Law within our adjacent Indian nations has lost credibility. As one human rights leader has said, ‘If you’re not safe, nothing else matters.’”

You should read Don’s entire column, here.

Follow @azatty

 

Generosity Yields One-of-a-Kind Magazine Cover

A few days ago, I happily related a recognition bestowed on two men, Paul Julien and Mark Meltzer, who serve justice in Arizona every day. Much to my delight, there is a cheery follow-up on this Change of Venue Friday.

In that post, I had noted an Arizona Attorney Magazine cover that featured Jeff Schrade, who heads up Education Services at the Supreme Court Administrative Office of the Courts (say that five times fast). At our prodding, Jeff had gamely agreed more than a decade ago to serve as a cover model for us. But this week Jeff also reminded me of another permutation of that cover, one that announced his son’s birth. (That was way back in 2001; Nathan is 12 years old now!)

In my haste, I completely forgot to locate that image and share it. But Jeff was generous once again, so here it is. In this post, you get to see the one and only payment Jeff ever received for being a patient and good-humored magazine model.

First, here is the cover we ran with:

Jeff Schrade on our April 2001 Arizona Attorney Magazine cover … .

And here is the altered cover announcing his son’s birth (now displayed in Jeff’s office):

… and a new cover is born.

Advancing age being what it is, I cannot recall exactly how we developed that cover. Someone with skills way beyond mine had to have done the work. The best Jeff and I can recall, Matt Silverman, the Bar’s former communications head, probably had his finger in the mix. Not to mention our former Art Director, Carl Bezuidenhout, and then-Production Manager (now lawyer) Leslie Ross.

In any case, enjoy your weekend. And know that assistance to a magazine editor may yield great rewards!

Follow @azatty

 

Lawyer–Authors Honored for Their Contributions By @azcourts

This week I heard great news about some of my favorite people: Arizona Attorney Magazine authors.

Besides that admirable distinction, these two men are pretty remarkable in their own right. Paul Julien and Mark Meltzer both serve the Arizona justice system via their substantial positions at the Supreme Court.

Jeff Schrade (left) and Justice Scott Bales (right) present framed Arizona Attorney articles to lawyer-authors Paul Julien (center-left) and Mark Meltzer, April 2013.

As their humble and succinct bios say: “Paul Julien is the Judicial Education Officer for the Arizona Supreme Court, and was chair of the committee mentioned charged with reviewing and proposing changes to the Justice Court rules. Mark Meltzer is a specialist with the Administrative Office of the Courts, and served as committee staff.”

The news came my way from Jeff Schrade, once a colleague at the Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education, and now the Director of the Education Services Division at the Arizona Supreme Court AOC.

Jeff sent the accompanying photo and news about an event at which Court staff recognized the two men for their publication in Arizona Attorney. (I think that should be a tradition at every workplace!) The article they wrote for us provided valuable and timely information about changed rules applying to the much-misunderstood Justice Courts.

You can read the complete article here.

The opening to Paul and Mark’s Justice Court rules story, Jan. 2013.

Here is a bit about the award, in Jeff’s own words:

“Today I gave Paul Julien and Mark Meltzer framed copies of their Jan 2013 Arizona Attorney article about the Justice Court Civil Rules of Procedure. Vice Chief Justice Scott Bales made a special presentation to Paul and Mark at the conclusion of our Limited Jurisdiction New Judge Orientation, which took place this week at the Arizona Supreme Court Judicial Education Center in downtown.”

“The 20 new Limited Jurisdiction judges attending this three-week program gave Paul and Mark a standing ovation, recognizing not only their excellence on this particular project, but their daily efforts to train and provide assistance to limited jurisdiction judges across the state.”

“As you know, Mark and Paul not only wrote about the new rules in the Arizona Attorney, but they lead a committee with a wide representation of justice stakeholders through lengthy process to rewrite the rules. It was an extraordinary effort that produced more accessible and understandable rules, especially for the many pro se litigants appearing before justice courts.”

Jeff Schrade, that handsome devil, graced the April 2001 cover of Arizona Attorney Magazine.

The Court’s recognition is well deserved, but that January article is just the tip of the service iceberg for Paul and Mark. They have helped the state and the Court in countless ways. And here at the magazine, their involvement has gone beyond writing (as Mark also did in our March 2013 issue). They are both go-to people whom I count on for advice and insight on so many topics. Every editor I know has a kitchen cabinet, and I’m pleased to say these two men are reliable and wise members of mine.

A side note: Jeff Schrade, too, has been a part of the Arizona Attorney family, in a very personal way. Way back in our April 2001 issue, when I had helmed the magazine for just three months, we wanted to provide a great visual to front our deep coverage of lawyer marketing and advertising.

Always a great sport, Jeff donned a sandwich board and stood on First Avenue in downtown Phoenix for at least an hour while the photographer, art director and I all helped shepherd passersby around the generous photo-model.

(There were other heroes that day: Two Bar colleagues—Bonnie Lebeck and Natalie Burns— also assisted, by striding past quickly, over and over—backwards!—to provide the necessary blur.)

Adding to the surreality experienced by commuters that morning was the fact that the sandwich board was blank; we would add the desired words to the image of the board at a later design stage. What a mensch!

Jeff recently told me, “For the record, I still proudly display the special cover you made for me welcoming the birth of my son Nathan (who is 12 now) back in 2001!”

We like the cover quite a bit ourselves!

Congratulations again to Mark Meltzer and Paul Julien. Here’s looking to years more collaboration!

Follow @azatty

 

Our Decade of Arts – and Arts Ads

Our current grinning look for the Arts Competition

We’ve hit the 10-year mark for our Creative Arts Competition at Arizona Attorney Magazine. Here is how I drafted the opening to our arts pages in the May 2013 issue (on newsstands soon!):

“10 years is a long time to do most anything. But here at Arizona Attorney Magazine, it stuns us that we’ve been privileged to host our lawyer–artists since 2004. It may not feel like just yesterday that we launched the finest attorney arts competition in the country, but a decade? It’s hard to believe.”

“In those years, we have had the opportunity to enjoy sharing parts of the legal brain beyond pleadings and contracts. And we have been pleased beyond words by the commitment of hundreds and hundreds of lawyers, each of whom answers ‘Yes yes yes’ to the question of whether there is more to life than work work work.”

A lot of amazing occurred in those 10 years. But one thing that struck me was this: What nervous Nellies we were.

When we decided to launch this new initiative early in the 2000s, the Editorial Board and I were concerned that our lawyer–readers would see it as fluff, and that no one would submit. And even if they did, how talented were the lawyers, really?

Pretty funny concerns, I think, now that I look back. But if we want a glimpse at the odd worries that possessed us, we need look only to the evolution of our “call for artists” ads through the years. As you’ll see below in this sample of work, we began with a look that would have fit in a 19th-century paleontology journal. And our categories were strictly legal—and included zero visual-arts content!

Over time, as we saw the popularity of the competition, we loosened up a bit, on our categories and our design. Finally, in the past few years we have posted ads that could be run in any magazine of general circulation.

Write to arizona.attorney@azbar.org and tell me your favorites.

Here is a selection of our ads through the past decade.

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Follow @azatty

 

Jodi Arias Trial and Arizona Noteworthy for Juror Questions

Yesterday, I was looking for something on the CNN website (good luck) when I came across their recently omnipresent viewer-discretion warning about the Jodi Arias trial. Here’s a screen-grab (the big honking arrow is mine, though the station bosses might decide they like it).

CNN’s Jodi Arias trial viewer-discretion warning

I’ve watched a bit of the Arias trial, but not much. Given the questions I’ve received from friends and colleagues around the country (usually beginning, “Let me get this straight …”), it’s helpful for me to know something about the case facts.

Long after those facts are adjudicated, though, the complex legal issues will be debated (probably with no viewer-discretion warning required). And even beyond that, we’ll assess the effectiveness of juror questions.

Yes, there have been a few tawdry inquiries from those colleagues around the country. But more often, I have been surprised at the number of them who have asked about juror questions: “You allow that in Arizona?”

Arizona Attorney Magazine cover, February 2001

Indeed we do, as well as note-taking and some other semi-unique elements.

The number of juror questions posed in this trial may be remarkable, but the fact that they may inquire at all has been a part of Arizona jurisprudence for a long time now.

For some background on that, you should read “O Pioneer,” our 2001 article about then-Judge Michael Dann. He and others were leaders in initiatives to transform the jury process. Other states have participated, but Arizona was (and is) a leader.

Posted on their website, the Arizona Supreme Court has the remarkable original report (from 1994 and 1998) called “The Power of 12.” It’s in two parts, here and here. It was drafted by the Court’s Committee on the More Effective Use of Juries.

For more recent coverage of courts that permit juror questions, go here. As the story opens:

“A small number of states have changed their laws and court rules to allow jurors to ask witnesses questions, either orally or in writing through the judge. Written questions submitted in advanced allow attorneys for both sides to make objections based either on the ground they would violate the rules governing the admission of evidence or would result in prejudice against their clients.”

Michael Dann, former Judge on the Superior Court for Maricopa County

“The states that expressly encourage judges to allow jurors to question witnesses are Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Nevada and North Carolina. Out of these jurisdictions, Arizona, Florida, and Kentucky require that judges allow jurors to ask written questions. The respective highest state courts of Indiana and Kentucky have ruled jurors have a right to ask questions of witnesses.”

But changes like this can lead to unpredictable results. You should read this Washington Post story from 2007, titled “Jurors’ Queries Yield Insights—and Laughs,” which opens with a humorous anecdote showing that jurors may focus on areas that counsel may find irrelevant:

“Former New York Times reporter Judith Miller was on the witness stand yesterday and a juror wanted to know why she had decided to go to jail for 85 days before agreeing to testify about her conversations with I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby.”

“Another juror had a different kind of question for Miller about her notes from a conversation with Libby: Was storing notebooks in a large shopping bag under her desk her standard method for saving her notes?”

“So the jurors asked.”

For trial lawyer readers, have you found juror questions to be a feature that improves the process? Have you found queries annoying? Or have they given you an opportunity to clarify issues that may be blocking a jury decision?

Write to me at arizona.attorney@azbar.org.

Follow @azatty

 

New Technology Newsletter by @AZStateBar Is Out

The State Bar’s electronic newsletter dedicated to technology items has just come out in its winter 2013 issue. As I’ve mentioned before, this quarterly news source provides a wide variety of headlines on topics that may affect your law practice.

Among the stories is a lead item on addressing the digital accounts of the dead.

If you’re interested in the topic, you should turn to the current Arizona Attorney, where Rex Anderson writes on digital assets in estates.

And while you’re at it, do you like how we transformed this month’s Facebook profile picture for Arizona Attorney? The image is below (click to make it bigger and look closely). (We like to change the image every month depending on our cover story.)

Follow @azatty

 

Maybe We’ve Got This “Hate Speech” Thing All Wrong

What follows is my editor’s letter from the January Arizona Attorney Magazine. It’s titled “Speech Disorder,” and I’d welcome any thought on how we address hate speech in this country—and whether a change is in order.

Maybe we’ve got this “hate speech” thing all wrong.

That was the basis of a fascinating debate this past fall, held at the ASU Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. In October, ASU Professor James Weinstein defended the U.S. position against a view espoused by NYU Law Professor Jeremy Waldron.

Generally stated, the American antidote to hate speech is simply … more speech. Our rightful affinity for the First Amendment means that even the most vile words are often met by the phrase (and sentiment), “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” So integral to our psyche is that belief that most of us bristle at the suggestion of a “speech code.”

And yet, Waldron made a compelling argument that the harm from speech can be so poisonous that there are times when it should be stymied. Laws—accepted in many countries—may be drafted to convey an “implicit diffuse assurance” that social peace is a public good.

At ASU and in his book The Harm in Hate Speech, Waldron dissected the hate-group argument that what they are doing is merely advocating a position. No, he insists; the groups really are conveying an action-packed message: “You are not wanted.” And that message is often backed up by the threat of violence.

Morris Dees, Nov. 8, 2012

Those concepts were on my mind in November, at the University of Arizona College of Law annual McCormick lecture, delivered by Morris Dees. The co-founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Dees gave a rollicking speech that of necessity touched on his significant courtroom work on behalf of victims of discrimination. That trial lawyer’s career has been framed in many ways by efforts to end hatred and to alleviate its effects.

But how would his decades of work have differed if our approach to hate speech (which often precedes hate crimes) had taken a path accepted in many other countries? It may be worth considering.

I’m reading Waldron’s book and considering his position. But I take seriously his warning that viewing this as an academic debate may prove deadly. As he glanced around a packed law school hall at a relatively privileged audience, he reminded us that hate speech has real-world impacts.

“We can pretend to be unaffected,” he said. “But we should try to envision ourselves as somebody who has to live his life under this besmirchment, who has to live one’s life in the shadow of these insults.”

What do you think? Write to me at arizona.attorney@azbar.org.

Follow @azatty

 

Tools To Find Legal Experts on the Web

Have you ever had difficulty finding just the right expert to help with your legal case or matter?

Through the years, I’ve heard that from many lawyers. What they need is brains, experience and communications skills, written and oral. That whole package is harder to come by than you might think.

In the spring, we’ll publish our annual Expert Witness Guide in Arizona Attorney Magazine. That guide covers a wealth of subject-matter areas and includes a huge swath of the legal experts prepared to help Arizona lawyers.

You should bookmark our 2012 Expert Witness Guide here.

While you’re at it, what is new with you in the world of experts? What article would you rip out and save on the topic if we ran it in the magazine?

Write to me at arizona.attorney@azbar.org.

The opening to the 2012 Arizona Attorney Expert Witness Guide

And here is another great piece to bookmark. It is extremely well done, by experts Carole Levitt and Mark Rosch. Though it lacks a link to Arizona’s own best expert guide (only kidding, Carole and Mark), it does cover extremely well the topic of “Finding Experts and Verifying Their Credentials on the Web.”

Here is how they open their article:

“When you’re in need of an expert to serve as a witness in your case, to consult on a special matter, or perhaps even to serve as a speaker at your bar seminar, where do you look? Your first instinct may be to use a search engine, or to search a social networking site like LinkedIn, Facebook or Google+. But there are other, deeper places on the Web to find that one right expert you truly need.”

They follow that strong opening with an article you really need to read. Within it are many links that take you to material that could help your practice, today.

I was pleased to learn quite a bit in the article, which appears in the highly bookmarkable Attorney at Work. If that piece gives you any ideas of topics or niches we should cover in Arizona Attorney, be sure to drop me a note.

Follow @azatty

 

Steven Keeva, Inspiring Writer on Law Practice, Dies at 56

Steven Keeva, 2005

Yesterday we got the very sad news that esteemed editor and writer Steven Keeva passed away. Keeva was known for many things, but spurring a movement of lawyers with a book and his magazine columns cemented his legacy.

In 1999, he wrote Transforming Practices: Finding Joy and Satisfaction in the Legal Life. Through that book and his other writing, he aimed to help lawyers find deeper meaning in a profession in which many had grown disillusioned.

Keeva died from the effects of early-onset Alzheimer’s. He was 56.

He formerly served as an editor at the ABA Journal, which ran a heartfelt news story on Keeva by Debra Cassens Weiss yesterday.

Weiss quotes lawyer and blogger J. Kim Wright:

“‘Dozens of people have told me that Steve saved their lives,’ Wright tells the ABA Journal. ‘That they were really all alone and hopeless, and they found his book or they found his column, and literally it saved their lives. He made that huge a difference, and left the planet so early.’”

(You can read more about J. Kim Wright here, and be sure to read her blog, Cutting Edge Law.)

Back in 2001, I had the pleasure to speak with Steve Keeva, as we sought permission to publish excerpts from his book. I found him to be a generous and warm man, one whose work we were privileged to publish in Arizona Attorney.

You can read those excerpts, along with a great story on attorney burnout by Tucson lawyer Peter Axelrod, here. (Peter’s own website can be found here.)

Rest in peace, Steve.

Arizona Attorney covers attorney burnout, July 2001

Follow @azatty