Legal events


Screen-shot of State Bar Governors election for Pinal County, which closes this Wednesday, May 20.

Screen-shot of State Bar Governors election for Pinal County, which closes this Wednesday, May 20.

A funny thing happened on the way to the forum—the election forum, that is.

This month, elections are open for State Bar of Arizona Board of Governors positions for attorney from Pinal County, which is District 8. If you’re in that district and haven’t voted, get to it; all voting is online, and polls close at 5:00 pm this Wednesday, May 20.

More detail about the election is here.

There are a few noteworthy things about that page. First, the functionality is pretty cool. Clicking on the candidates causes their photos to increase in size and their candidate statement to appear. Nicely done by someone in the Bar’s IT world.

But the other interesting things is about the candidate statements themselves. One of the candidates opted not to post a statement (though he may have sent something to voting attorneys directly, as he is permitted to do). And the other candidate statement—well, I’ll get to that in a minute.

The statements (or lack thereof) surprised me, as we published statements for each of the candidates in the print version of Arizona Attorney. You can read them online here. And below is a screen shot of those statements in the May issue.

Pinal County candidate statements in the May 2015 Arizona Attorney Magazine.

Pinal County candidate statements in the May 2015 Arizona Attorney Magazine.

So the changes in the online versions caught my attention. And in fact, one of the statements takes an election tack I have never seen before. As Bret Huggins writes:

“I find myself in a pleasant predicament. I was nominated for the position of Pinal County representative on the State Bar Board of Governors before I found out Denis Fitzgibbons would be a candidate as well.”

“Denis Fitzgibbons is a wonderful lawyer and a very good man.  Denis would be an excellent representative for all of us practicing in Pinal County.”

“Denis runs a prestigious and successful law firm with his brother Dave in Casa Grande. Their practice is primarily business and civil litigation. The law firm has several lawyers and a quality support staff.”

Mr. Huggins has more to say (and you should read it). But he concludes, “I would not be disappointed in the least if I lose this election to such a strong opponent.”

I will be very interested to see how this election concludes. But has anyone seen such a dialogue in Bar elections? If so, I’d like to know. Write to me at arizona.attorney@azbar.org.

It was Bar events like this one in March that made me wonder: Should we publish more member photos?

It was Bar events like this one in March that made me wonder: Should we publish more member photos?

In my work life, I receive a lot of magazines in the mail. A lot.

Most of them come from other bar associations. Between many other tasks, I strive to at least flip through each one, seeking ideas that spur my own thinking and, perhaps, my own stealing.

One idea I routinely see in others’ magazines is the use of member photos from events. Folks mill about, smile (or not), and the publication is able to capture numerous lawyers every month enjoying and engaging.

Arizona Attorney has never done too much of that—with one exception. When I first started as editor almost 15 years ago, our annual Convention coverage included pages of those party shots. I paged through them, grimaced, and deep-sixed them. No one (and I mean no one) complained.

But as I read other bars’ magazines, I wondered if I was too hasty. Maybe those that publish these photos are on to something. After all, if statistics are right, fewer and fewer people want to belong to associations (or participate if they are in a mandatory organization). Would seeing their own faces or the faces of their colleagues turn that frown upside-down?

Lawyers gather at The Duce Phoenix, on March 26, 2015.

Lawyers gather at The Duce Phoenix, on March 26, 2015.

I asked that question in my May Editor’s Letter. I’m awaiting some feedback from readers to my musings: “If lawyers want to gather and nosh and talk and listen, would they like to see those moments captured in photos? Maybe they would. Perhaps it would be useful and entertaining to find a way to publish some event photos in the magazine, in print and online.”

You can read the whole column here.

I can tip my hand about one thing: At our most recent meeting, the Editorial Board offered a resounding blecccchhh at the idea. They reside firmly in the camp that I have occupied for a decade, believing that seeing what may be the same recurring faces month after month won’t do much for readership.

Hmmm. Well, as I say in my column, it does not have to be a feature of the print magazine; we have an online presence too. Maybe those faces of mingling lawyers would do better in the cloud.

Let me know what you think about member photos (especially if you belong to multiple bars and associations that take varying approaches to the issue). Write to me at arizona.attorney@azbar.org.

Reviewed in the June 2015 Arizona Attorney Magazine: Magna Carta by Dan Jones

Reviewed in the June 2015 Arizona Attorney Magazine: Magna Carta by Dan Jones

Yesterday, I got to CLE Snippet.

If you’re a regular reader of this blog, you know what I mean. I got to have a taped conversation with the author of an upcoming Arizona Attorney article.

The result is a brief-ish video for sale by the CLE Department. I say brief-ish because, though we’ve been told we may speak for as little as 15 minutes, our past dialogues have rambled two to four times beyond that.

What can I say? Our authors are fascinating people, and I get to select the authors and topics I want to sit down with.

Yesterday’s Snippet was with Judge George Anagnost. He is the Presiding Judge of the Peoria Municipal Court. And at the magazine, he’s one of our resident historians and a book-reviewer par excellence.

I have written about his approach to book reviews here.

Our topic this week was Magna Carta. Our jumping-off point was a book the judge reviewed, by Dan Jones. But the conversation ranged farther than that.

Continuing our sort-of tradition, a selfie with the author was a pleasure, snapped this month by my Bar colleague Jenn Sonier. (Thanks!)

Judge George Anagnost (left) and his shorter interlocutor.

Judge George Anagnost (left) and his shorter interlocutor.

When the video and June article are available, I hope you read and watch in tandem. More information, as always, will be on the Bar’s website.

A new icon is available to indicate accessibility in the City of Phoenix.

A new icon is available to indicate accessibility in the City of Phoenix.

This morning, a group gathers in the Phoenix City Hall to announce the launch and allowed use of a new symbol designating accessibility (you can see it above). It’s been a long time coming.

The new icon is described as “reflecting a disabled community that is active, motivated and determined.” Phoenix is the first Arizona city to adopt the icon.

Mayor Greg Stanton will speak at the event at 10:30 a.m. Wednesday. Also offering remarks will be Alisa Blandford, Phoenix Equal Opportunity Department Director; Edward Kim, President & General Manager of Cigna; and Jennifer Longdon, disabled rights advocate (and a neighbor of mine!).

As an Arizona Republic article has explained, Cigna was the company in Arizona that instigated the requested use. The new icon was designed by Sara Hendren, a professor of design at Olin College of Engineering in Massachusetts. She also helped found the Accessible Icon Project, “a group dedicated to providing people with supplies and services they need to make the switch.”

As the Accessible Icon Project so well describes it:

“The symbol does not ‘represent’ people with disabilities, but symbolizes the idea that all people with disabilities can be active and engaged in their lived environment. Our active accessibility symbol helps re-imagine how society and individuals view people with disabilities.”

The Project also provides a timeline of sorts of accessibility icons over time:

Accessibility icons through the years (from the Accessible Icon Project)

Accessibility icons through the years (from the Accessible Icon Project)

Below you can see the symbol that is being phased out (it is called the International Symbol of Access, which was created in 1969). Congratulations to the City of Phoenix for your leadership in this area.

This accessibility icon, designed in 1969, may become less prevalent in Phoenix.

This accessibility icon, designed in 1969, may become less prevalent in Phoenix.

The American response to hateful words is traditionally more words. Is there a better way?

The American response to hateful words is traditionally more words. Is there a better way?

This spring saw a sometimes-troubling dialogue about campus speech erupt. Some of that dialogue was spurred by videotape catching the racist chants of members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity at the University of Oklahoma.

Arizona Republic columnist E.J. Montini wrote about the incident, and some of the reactions he’s gotten.

In it, Montini says he supports the school’s expulsion of students who perform that way. But he got pushback from an ASU student who said all speech should be permitted—even the offensive speech.

First Amendment challenges have never been more challenging.

I’ve written before about the difficulties a free society faces where speech is concerned. And the newest skirmishes remind me of a book I’ve touted in the past: The Harm in Hate Speech, by Jeremy Waldron.

In these United States, we have been taught to believe that (pretty much) all speech should be unregulated. But Waldron points out that the American view is not the only possible course.

Maybe the American view is correct. Maybe the only antidote to horrific speech is simply more speech, as if the latter will shout out the former.

But other nations—even many who have a rule of law we respect—take a decidedly different tack. Their approaches are founded on a belief that the public utterance of hateful speech can cause harm, even if it is not paired with criminal behaviors.

Harm in Hate Speech book cover Jeremy WaldronThose nations could be wrong, and “speech codes” find little support in the United States. But I wonder what would happen if the next time an incident of hate speech makes the national headlines, those in the majority culture took a rhetorical pass and remained silent for a bit. It might be enlightening to hear only from people of color on the topic of how to address hate speech.

Who knows? Their response may be the same, as we are all steeped in an American culture that insists, “I condemn your speech, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

But maybe not. Maybe the response will be more nuanced than simply calling for tolerance and more speech.

It is far too easy for those who are never affected by hate speech (except to find it vaguely distasteful) to insist that such utterances are a sad but necessary part of our republic. As I’ve written before, it is offensive to maintain a position that requires people in minority communities to carry the burden of daily insults so that an American sense of fair play can by upheld.

Sure, everyone’s opinion on hate speech is welcome. But I’d prefer if we gave prime position to those opinions that arise from minority communities. Does hate speech simply “come with democracy”? Or can words alone be such a debilitating harm that they should be addressed and maybe curtailed in some way?

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

Mother's Day banner

The following information may be bad news to you: Yesterday was Mother’s Day.

If you find yourself in the awkward bind of realizing that fact a day late, here’s what I recommend: Read Randy Howe’s touching article in Arizona Attorney Magazine. Then contact your loved one and apologize—more than once. And make amends by sharing the story’s link with her.

Randy’s story and his mother’s evocative and surprising letter of advocacy for her son may heal all wounds.

The heart of the story of Randall Howe—now an Arizona Court of Appeals judge—revolves around his mother’s position in regard to her son’s education, and a letter she sent to the district on his behalf. As he writes:

“Six years old was when children in Colorado started first grade, and my mother believed that I should begin school. The fact that I had cerebral palsy, walked with walker, and had a speech impediment—all of these things she deemed irrelevant to my need—my right—to go to school. Consequently, she enrolled me in the elementary school down the street from our house. School officials had never encountered children with a severe disability before and put her off, requiring that I be mentally and psychologically tested to determine if I was intellectually capable of attending school.”

“Undaunted, she did just that. And from reading the letter, you can see what happened. I went to first grade for four days, until school officials decided that they were unable to give a child with a disability the physical assistance necessary so that he could attend school. My mother—again undaunted—proceeded to petition, cajole and argue with the school officials, and to threaten legal action against the school board to get me the public education that was provided to every nondisabled child in the State of Colorado.”

Here is Randy’s whole story, which I (seriously) suggest you share with friends and family.

The Historic Arizona State Capitol Building as it was being built at the turn of the 20th Century to today. (Photo illustration by Justin Painter, Arizona Capitol Museum)

The Historic Arizona State Capitol Building as it was being built at the turn of the 20th Century to today. (Photo illustration by Justin Painter, Arizona Capitol Museum)

In April, the Arizona Capitol Museum opened a new exhibit titled “Under the Copper Dome: The Creation and Changes of Arizona’s Capitol.” The displays include photographs and a timeline of the Capitol Complex.

As part of the exhibit, the Museum unveiled unveil “a trio of plaques signed by Gov. Raúl Castro, the Legislature, and other officials that have not been on public display since 1976,” according to the Museum.

Admission and parking at the Museum are free.

You can watch this very short teaser for the new exhibit:

And here is a news story about a Museum exhibit focused on former Gov. Raúl Castro (it opens silently, with no sound):

Be sure to follow the museum on Twitter, where you’ll find multiple video interviews in the “Under the Copper Dome” series.

And here is more information as shared via their press release:

“If the walls of the capitol building could talk, they would tell of a territory grown into a thriving state,” said Sec. of State Michele Reagan. “They also would share the story of the important transformations in Arizona government based on the needs of the state’s citizens.”

Arizona Gov. Raúl Castro

Arizona Gov. Raúl Castro

Arizona’s state government is ever changing and chronicled in the evolution of the Arizona State Capitol Complex. Dedicated in 1900, the capitol building has seen its share of lawmakers and been transformed into the Arizona Capitol Museum (AzCM) where thousands of school children from all over Arizona come to connect with their state government, past and present.

“There is no place more appropriate for people to learn Arizona civics,” said Jason Czerwinski, AzCM Assistant Director, “to learn that their government is still changing and that they can make that change happen. This exhibit will be a launch pad for their exploration of Arizona’s government.”

The Arizona Capitol Museum is open Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.; and Saturday, 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Free parking for AzCM guests in Wesley Bolin Plaza at 17th Avenue between Adams and Jefferson Streets. For more information, call 602-926-3620. The AzCM is a branch of the Arizona State Library, Archives, and Public Records, a division of the Secretary of State.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,889 other followers