|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
Louisville Law Examiner Serving The University of Louisville School of Law Community Volume 6, Number 3 Louisville, Kentucky, October 10, 1980 Circulation 4100 Photo by Scott Furkin Pictured are, left, Ann Bailey, Plrtle-Washer winner, and Colleen McKinley, runner-up. Other finalists were Susan McCray, Alice Barnes, Jack Faust, Leo Smith, Don Meade and Lucy Helm. Ann Bailey wins Pirtle-Washer Moot Court Competition By Scott Furkin The Moot Court Board has announced that Ann Leslie Bailey is the winner of the 1980 Pirtle-Washer Appellate Advocacy Competition. Ms. Bailey, a junior in the Day Division, prevailed in six arguments over two days to become the intraschool champion. She will receive a full-tuition scholarship for one semester. Colleen McKinley, a junior in the Evening Division, is the 1980 runner-up, and will be awarded a half-tuition scholarship. This year's competiton took place at the Hall of Justice at Sixth and Jefferson Streets in downtown Louisville. Elimination rounds were conducted on Saturday, September 6, with quarter-, semi-, and final rounds following on Saturday, September 13. Fiftyfour second-year students comprised the largest field of competitors to date, and approximately 15 third-year students assisted as bailiffs. The judges' pool for the preliminary rounds was composed of 48 local attorneys and recent graduates of the law school. Seventeen Jefferson County District and Circuit Court Judges graciously donated their time to preside over the final rounds. Participants and observers agreed that the high quality of judging and realistic courtroom atmosphere combined to make the 1980 competition the most valuable in recent years. The problem for argument was selected last spring by the Moot Court Board for presentment before the Supreme Court in the imaginary state of Abbott. The facts of the hypothetical case concerned the relative rights of natural and prospective adoptive parents and the standard to be applied in custody battles between the two groups. Student advocates were told to prepare arguments for both sides and were given initial side designations about a week before the competition. Each advocate was allotted 15 minutes for oral argument which included extensive questioning from the bench. Students were evaluated on their knowledge of the factual and legal issues, skill in reasoning and use of authority, and overall forensic performance. Moot Court Board President Bill Kenealy congratulated all participants for their efforts and expressed relief that the program ran so smoothly after being postponed in the spring due to scheduling difficulties. Mr. Kenealy acknowledged, however, that last-minute withdrawals by some students posed unanticipated problems: "Certain individuals failed to appear without notifying us first . . . We wish those individuals had arrived as it forced other competitors to argue before the court in what could only be called a ~false round,' "he said. Mr. Kenealy revealed that the Moot Court Board plans to continue having competitions at the Hall of Justice because of its convenient location and authentic judicial character. "Each year (the Moot Court Board) endeavors to improve upon the administrative and educational value of the competition. Despite the incredibly high number of freshmen, we will endeavor to make next year's program at least as stimulating as this year's." Near Record Freshman Class Enrolls in School of Law By Jeff Wade Due to an unexpectedly successful re ·cruiting program at the law school and a computer foul-up somewhere in the East, this Fall's entering class is one of the largest in the history of the school. A total of 236 entering freshmen enrolled in the School of Law in August. One hundred seventy-three entered the Day Division and 63 entered the Evening Division. The class is one of the largest in the school's history, and the number of freshmen in the Day Division is the largest ever. The largest class ever was the class that entered in 1974. However, that class was divided among three divisions: the Day and Evening divisions and a "Twilight Division." Although some variation in the number of admissions from year to year is usual, this year's increase was both unusual and unexpected. Nearly all of the increase occurred in the Day Division, where admissions were up 630Jo from last year's total of 107. According to Professor William Biggs, Chairman of the Admissions Committee, three factors seem to be responsible for the increase. First, the Admissions Committee set a goal of 180 to 200 admissions. If that goal had simply been met, there would have been a significant increase over last year's 167. To attain its goal, the Admissions Committee initially accepted about 300 applicants, assuming that about half of those accepted would ultimately decide to attend law school elsewhere. According to Prof. Biggs, that has become a fairly predictable pattern in past years. This year's applicants, however, did not follow that pattern. The great majority of them, in fact, kept their sights set on U of L and showed up on Belknap Campus in August, ready to begin classes. One factor Prof. Biggs cited as causing more applicants than usual to choose to attend U of L was the recruiting program that was initiated last year. Prof. Biggs noted that the program has proved more successful than anyone had anticipated. The recruiting program, a project of the Admissions Committee, was aimed at students in various colleges throughout Kentucky as well as a few in Indiana. The hope was that some law school aspirants who had not previously considered attending U of L would begin to do so. That hope was apparently realized. The other factor cited by Prof. Biggs as being responsible for U of L's sudden popularity stemmed from problems in the electronic data systems of the Law School Data Assembly Service (LSD AS). LSDAS for many years had its home on the beautiful, sprawling campus of the Educational Testing Service (ETS) in Princeton, New Jersey~ Last year, however, LSDAS was in the process of separating from ETS and moving to Newtown, Pennsylvania. In doing so, it temporarily "lost" some records that were stored somewhere in the bowels of a computer. The "lost" data included records of law school applicants, upon which most law schools depend to make their admissions decisions. When the records had still not been retrieved by April, law schools across the country were faced with the question of whether to begin accepting applicants without having the benefit of all the LSDAS data, or whether to wait until all the data could be retrieved and forwarded. U of L opted for the former course. U of K and Chase, U of L 's biggest competitors for new admissions, chose the latter. The result was that many students who were accepted to all three schools received their U of L acceptance letters far in advance of those from U of K and Chase. By mid-April, LSDAS had begun retrieving and forwarding the data, and by mid-May, U of L had received data on nearly all its applicants. U of K and Chase began sending out acceptance letters in May. By that time, however, many applicants who had been accepted by U of L had made firm decisions to enroll here. And enroll they did! One result of the fat enrollment is that the first year Day students are divided into not only an "A" and a "B" section, but a "Z" section as well. If anyone stands to benefit from this snafu, perhaps it is that unique group of students who got labeled "Z". They're natural underdogs, so maybe they'll try the hardest. Photn b.r Scmt IUrldn Randy Jewell casts his vote for first year SBA representatives. .. .. - '· 2 Louisville l.aw Examiner, October 10, 1980 Louisville Law Examiner EDITORIAL BOARD Elizabeth S. Ward, Editor-in-Chief Tom Schulz, Managing Editor Craig Bell, Associate Editor Frank Bush, Associate Editor John B. Wright, Jr., Business Manager Scott Furkin, Photographic Editor Gerald "Bear" Schray, Artist STAFF Jeffrey L. Wade, Brandeis Brief Editor Mike Brooks, Sports Editor Scott Furkin, Projects Editor Phyllis Malinski Joram Salig John Tate Kevin Ford Jane Atkinson Roy Wyatt Paul Roark Mike Smither Nick Riggs Judge MARLIN M. VOLZ, Advisor Professor ALBERT T. QUICK, Consultant The Louisville Law Examiner is published eight times during the academic year in the interest of the University of Louisville School of Law community. Unsigned editorial opinions are those representing a majority vote of the editorial board and do not necessarily express the views of the School of Law or the University of Louisville. Articles are invited from faculty members, students, and members of the bar who wish to do freelance work, but any proposed article must be cleared in advance with the editor as to topic and length. This is to avoid duplication of coverage and insure that the article will not be beyond workable length for a newspaper format. Address all communications to the Louisville Law Examiner, School of Law, University of Louisville, Kentucky 40208. Phone 502-588-6398. Letter to the Editor ''Brandeis Brief'' Series Emerging Legal Issues Legal and Personal Problems of Surrogate Parenting Katie Brophy is counsel for Surrogate Parenting Associates, Inc., t.m. (S .P.A.). She and Richard Levin, M.D., an obstetrician who specializes in infertility problems, founded S.P.A. in August, 1979. Ms. Brophy received her A.B. and J.D . degrees from the University of Kentucky. She has prior legal experience as an attorney for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company and as Assistant Jefferson County Attorney for paternity and non-support. She is currently with the firm of Triplett and Greene in Louisville. Mr. William L. Fang The Law School Somewhere, US an investment in the firm's future, whether we eventually hire a particular individual or Katie Brophy not. Others give us invaluable insight into Approximately fifteen per cent (15%) of the general population experiences the changing nature of legal education and infertility problems. Another group of people possesses congenital traits, such as the profession as a whole. Still others pre- Tay-Sachs disease or cystic fibrosis , which would predispose their offspring to sent us with an opportunity for invigorating serious physical deformities. Added to the above categories are females with and refreshing dialogue, the value of which Dear Mr. Fang: I was glad to have met with you recently to discuss the possibility of a summer clerkship with our firm . We appreciate your interest but regret that we are not able to ask you to continue the interviewing process. As I am sure you realize, an attorney's time is extremely valuable and a member of a firm has a responsibility both to himself and his associates to be frugal in its expenditure. The immense expense of interviewing the large number of job applicants we see each year, therefore, must be justified in somew ay. -s to th-osesruaents w ose grades, extracurricular activities and personalities make them attractive prospective employees, we tend to view the expense as we feel should not be di scounted. contra-indications to pregnancy, such as heart diseases or diabetes. While this However, on the rare occasion when we latter group may be able to conceive, the risk of carrying a full term pregnancy interview a student whose credentials, de- may be quite high. mean or, conversation, appearance and For many couples with the above problems, adoption was historically the background can in no way justify the amount answer. Today, however, the number of healthy infants available for adoption of time expended on his behalf, we are cer- cannot fill the void of childless couples in the United States and abroad. tain that you will agree that it is only fair When it is the male who is infertile and does not produce sufficient numbers that student b~ billed for the reasona.ble of live sperm, artificial insemination of the female partner (AID) by an anonymous value of that ti.me. Therefore, please fmd sperm donor is often recommended by physicians. On the other hand, where enclosed our. b!ll .for $24·68 (twenty-four the infertility is due to the female's inability to conceive or carry a full-term preg-dollars and Sixty-eight cents), figured at an . . . . . hourly rate or $50 (fifty dollars) and in-- nancy, no altern~tJ~e comparable to A_II~-has~~een available until recently. Now, eluding secretarial, mailing and other costs. however, where .It IS the female who IS mfertile, the couple now can apply for Sincerely yours, surrogate parentmg. Fred R. Milton Surrogate parenting is the reverse situation of the donor insemination pro-cedure.* As a co-founder of Surrogate Parenting Associates, Inc., tm., the only known program routinely providing the surrogate service for individuals in the United States and abroad, I have drafted a number of documents and instituted various procedures for a model surrogate program. The program is designed to protect all parties involved, including (unlike typical reproduction) the child. The following safeguards are used to ensure that the surrogate is properly qualified. 1. The surrogate must be married. 2. The surrogate must have at least one healthy child from her present marriage. You SuRtl! A~• A Lor1 ToM. 3. She and her husband must undergo psychiatric and psychological evaluation by various professionals. 4. The surrogate must produce medical records (including obstetric records). 5. The surrogate must produce all pediatric records relevant to her children to verify that she has produced healthy children. 6. The surrogate and her husband must retain the services of an independent attorney to review the proposed agreements and advise them on the relevant law in Kentucky, relating to the surrogate procedure. 7. The surrogate agrees to complete physical and genetic evaluations (including venereal disease testing). 8. The surrogate and her husband agree to terminate parental rights subsequent to the child's birth. 9. The surrogate, the child and the natural father undergo the following blood tests in order to establish paternity: a. White Cell/HLA b. Red Cell Enzyme c. Serum Proteins d. Blood Group The results of these tests provide the natural father with highly probable evidence that he is in fact the biological father of the child. ~ 10. The surrogate agrees to adhere to various medical restrictions relating to pregnancy, including a total prohibition of alcohol, smoking, and prescribed or non-prescribed medications. In addition, a set pre-natal schedule is mandated. II. The surrogate agrees to undergo amniocentesis if the procedure is medically indicated. The natural father agrees as follows: I. To undergo complete physical and genetic evaluations (including venereal disease testing). 2. To pay all pregnancy-related expenses of the surrogate as well as expenses relevant to her traveling to Kentucky for purposes of insemination, psychiatric examinations, and delivery. 3. To reimburse the surrogate for her attorney's fees. (These fees are not paid (See Surrogate Parenting, Page 3) l.ouisvill{' l.aw F.xamin{'r, Octob{'r 10, 1980 (Surrogate Parenting, Continued from Page 2) directly by the natural father.) 4. To accept the child regardless of congenital abnormalities (assuming the surrogate has complied with her medical restrictions). 5. To pay all court costs incident to the termination of parental rights of the surrogate and the presumptive parental rights of her husband. 6. To make adequate provision either in his will or by life insurance for the protection of the child should the natural father and his wife predecease the birth of the child. The surrogate program cannot guarantee that the natural father will receive the child he desires. A variety of contingencies could prevent such an outcome: 1. The surrogate could decide to keep the child and litigate the issue of custody. One of the most serious consequences for the natural father in this event is that a court may require him to pay child support to the surrogate if she is awarded custody of the child. Child support is a right inherent in the child and as such is probably not waivable by the surrogate in advance. Therefore, the contractual agreement provides that the surrogate will indemnify the natural father for any and all amounts of child support he is required to pay. 2. Just as with any pregnancy, the surrogate program cannot guarantee that the child born to the surrogate will be a healthy child, free of all defects. Nevertheless, we do know that the surrogate has produced healthy children, and is herself healthy. Therefore, the probabilities of a healthy child exceed those for a random selection of the general population. 3. The surrogate program does not warrant that the surrogate selected by the natural father will in fact conceive. But once again, we do know that the surrogate has conceived previously. A fertility "work-up" is done prior to insemination in an attempt to rule out any secondary fertility. In the event the surrogate selected by the natural father fails to conceive after a total of twelve (12) monthly inseminations, the surrogate program will locate and screen a second surrogate for the natural father. 4. The surrogate program cannot guarantee that the surrogate and her husband will voluntarily terminate their respective rights to the child. The fee allocated for the surrogate is placed in escrow at the time the surrogate is signed. The surrogate's fee is not released to the surrogate and her husband until such time as they have voluntarily terminated their parental rights. In addition, the blood testing work must be satisfactory as to paternity prior to the release of the surrogate's fee . CONCLUSION Most people would agree that the most favorable way to produce people is from a biological union between the couple desirous of being parents. Unfortunately in many circumstances that is not possible. The surrogate parenting concept is for individuals who are desperate to have a child biologically related to at least one of the parents. In addition, in this day and age when the possibility of adopting an infant child is for most couples remote, surrogate parenting is now a viable alternative to adoption. But there are numerous legal and personal problems that can arise among the parties in a surrogate parenting arrangement. It is incumbent upon the attorney who promotes such an arrangement to anticipate these potential problems and to prevent them to the extent possible by creating the necessary contractual safeguards. *In surrogate parenting, the couple is matched with a woman (the surrogate) who in essence agrees to carry and give birth to a child for the infertile couple. The surrogate is artificially inseminated by the sperm of the infertile woman's husband so that he will be the biological father of the child. LEGAL PUBLICATIONS LOOSELEAF REPORTERS Be BOUND VOLUMES NEW Be USED-BOUGHT Be SOLD •TAX • CORPORATION • PENSION & PROFIT SHARING • S.E.C. • LABOR & PERSONNEL • BANKING • AFTR 1ST & 2ND. TCMD. USTC & OTHER BOUND PUBLICATIONS TERRY TULLY PRENTICE-HALL REPRESENTATIVE 2800 FIRST NATIONAL TOWER LOUISVILLE. KY 40202 502-585-4091 Dean's Dicta At its meeting on Monday, September 29, 1980, the law faculty voted to change the limitation on outside employment by full-time students from fifteen to twenty hours per week. The change in the "fifteen-hour rule" will no doubt be viewed as a victory for the student body on national and local levels. The precise origin of the rule lies in an interpretation of Standard 305(a)(iii) of the American Bar Association's accreditation standards. The Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, at its August 2-3, 1980 meeting in Honolulu, upon recommendation of the Accreditation Committee, changed its prior interpretation of the standard, so that it now reads: "A student may not work in excess of 20 hours per week while attending a school on a full-time basis. The law school has the burden to show that it has adopted and enforces policies assuring that full-time students devote substantially all working hours to the study of law, including policies relating to class scheduling, attendance requirements, and performance standards. These restrictions also apply during the summer in the same manner as they do during the normal year if the student is enrolled for summer session." The new rule of the University of Louisville School of Law is now in conformity with the ABA rule. The faculty went on record, however, as saying that it did not favor full -time students working twenty hours a week. Rather, its action was based on the proposition that the school should not require more of its students than the ABA does. During the course of the discussion, a number of interesting points emerged: First, some faculty members (probably, a minority) would prefer to have no rule at all. Second, neither the ABA nor the law school has any rule restricting the number of hours that a student in the Evening Division may work. Third, as the result of a student poll, a majority of the students favored a continuation of the fifteen-hour rule as to first-year students, but a change to twenty hours for second- and thirdyear students. Fourth, a minority of the faculty favored a continuation of the fifteen-hour rule for all students, other than those working in the law school. The latter (research and library assistants) would be permitted to work twenty hours, on the theory working outside the school involved some nonproductive travel time, and these students would also be able to study on the job. In prior issues in this space, we have discussed at length the importance of balancing the fundamentals of legal education with practical skills. A sound training in the fundamentals of the law is still the sine qua non of legal education. But the faculty has also recognized that some training in practical skills is essential for one who aspires Dean Harold G. Wren to be an attorney. During recent years, the introduction of the first-year course in Basic Legal Skills, the expansion of the requirements for graduation from eighty-four to ninety semester credit hours, and the introduction of a number of advanced courses in skills training have all been part of the school's effort to increase the amount of professional training that a student receives in the pursuit of the course of study leading to the J .D. degree. Indeed, at the very meeting when the twenty-hour rule was under discussion, the faculty also approved the introduction of Judge Charles M. Leibson's seminar, Practicum in Courtroom Law, for the Summer of 1981. Under the new program, students who have completed the equivalent of four day semesters of law school will be permitted to enroll in the Practicum where they will receive training and experience in the preparation and trial of complex litigation, under the direct supervision of outstanding trial attorneys. Completion of the course in Evidence will be a prerequisite for enrollment in the Seminar. Participation in the seminar involves a full-time commitment during the Summer Session. A number of our students are fortunate in that they receive practical experience through clerking for one of the law firms in Louisville while they are in law school. Most of the firms have cooperated with our school and have recognized that, in the long run, the student who has a solid foundation in the theory of the law, as well as some introduction to its practical aspects, will ultimately make the ablest member of the Bar. We believe that so long as the clerking experience does not so interfere with a law student's studies that it jeopardizes his basic legal education, clerking will often have a salutory effect in developing the "compleat" lawyer. The adoption of the twenty-hour rule is a step in this direction, and it appears that just about everyone in the community - students, faculty, and members of the Bar - will applaud. Harold G. Wren Dean MOVING? Please send us your new address at least four weeks in advance. 3 4 l.ouisvillr taw F:xaminrr. Octohrr 10. 1980 Photo by S<:ott FurAin An architect's model and an artist's concept of the School of Law's future facilities appropriately set the stage for Kevin Delahanty's talk to undergraduates during Pre-Law Day. Construction project ahead of schedule By Frank Bush While the seemingly endless parade of hot sunny days may have displeased some Kentuckians, especially farmers who have suffered crop losses as a result of the sultry weather, it has augured well for the construction project at the University of Louisville School of Law, allowing workers to devote long hours to their construction task. "The project is now moving on or ahead of schedule," says Dean Harold Wren. According to one student: "You can look at the construction site and see how the building is going to look." That news is a welcome message to many U of L students who have witnessed numerous delays since the planning of the new wing began in 1976. The latest was the strike which kept workers off the job for seven weeks during May and June. In an interview, Dean Wren expressed hope that the good weather will continue at least until the construction crew can place a roof over the frame presently being erected. With a roof in place, the workers can do a great deal of inside work during the approaching winter months. The Dean is also hopeful that a successful winter's work will prevent the school from being forced to move its staff and faculty offices and its library out of the law building and into other buildings on the University's Belknap Campus while renovation of the existing building is undertaken. Summer plans called for such a move, but the possibility now exists that needed temporary housing may be created in completed sections of the new wing. Preventing the move is advantageous in two ways, claims the Dean: the functioning of the law school would be kept together under one roof, facilitating smooth administration of the school during the remainder of the construction project, and the space in the university buildings to be provided to the law school for its use would be freed for other university purposes. Dean Wren again expressed his belief that the completed facility will be one of the best in the region. STAFF POSITIONS are available on the Louisville Law Examiner. If you are interested in writing or working with us, stop by our office in the basement of the Law Library, Room 30-8. No previous journalism experience is required. Increased Participation Marks Third Annual Pre-Law Day By Elizabeth Ward Friday, September 26, 1980 was Pre-Law Day at the University of Louisville School of Law. Nineteen college students and seven pre-law advisors from Kentucky and Southern Indiana were guests of the law school as the administration, faculty, staff and students continued the School of Law's recruitment program. Pre-Law Day has other purposes in addition to recruitment: to establish a communications network with the undergraduate pre-law advisors and clubs, which the administration and faculty members will be visiting later in the school year, and to give advisors and potential students a glimpse Into law school life. Associate Dean Norvie Lay was responsible for planning and organizing the Day. He and his staff contacted 24 colleges and universities. Nine schools were represente" for the program; advisors from six schools were unable to locate pre-law seniors; one school wished to come at a later date; three colleges expressed interest in someone visiting their school but were unable to attend. Four did not respond to the invitation at all. The program began with a welcome by Dean Lay and a presentation by Dean Harold G. Wren of the plans for the new building. Dean Wren announced that the construction was progressing ahead of the revised schedule. Student Bar Association President Kevin Delahanty spoke next. He emphasized that graduates of U of L School of Law have a 9307o pass-rate on the Kentucky Bar Examination. He strongly advised undergraduates to keep their GPA's as high as possible and to obtain LSA T study booklets for repeated practice prior to taking the test. Admissions Officer Adah Lovesee gave technical advice to the students about law school applications: deadline March 1, 1981; do not list colleges at which the student has completed less than 10 credit hours; and list only two references who know the student well or who are qualified to evaluate his potential. The highlight of the Pre-Law Day, according to one undergraduate, was sitting in on the Constitutional Law I class. (Constitutional Law I classes taught by Professor Knowles and Professor Quick were visited by the students.) Her "Paper Chase" impression of law school was not completely dispelled as preservation of migratory birds assumed constitutional proportions. After a luncheon and a questions session hosted by Associate Dean Steven Smith, the advisors and students met with the individual faculty members who will be visiting their campus later in the fall for recruitment purposes. Faculty members involved were Ronald Eades, Robert Stenger, Leslie Abramson, Richard Nowka and Linda Ewald. Pre-Law Day concluded with a tour of the School of Law and the Law Library, directed by law students Michael Alexander, Kevin Delahanty, Barbara Hartung, Gail Kaukus, Paul Roark and Elizabeth Ward. Dean Wren and Dean Lay expressed much satisfaction with the response from the undergraduate schools. The positive responses from 20 of the 24 schools contacted was "exactly what we had hoped Pre-Law Day to . accomplish - get those schools thinking in terms of U of L." Pre-Law Day is the first phase of a larger plan of Dean Lay's to continue recruitment efforts. This year faculty members as well as the administration will travel to at least twelve colleges or universities that have requested U of L School of Law to make a presentation to either a pre-law club or interested students. Lawyer Referral and Information Service brings Legal Community Closer to the Public By Mike Smither The Lawyer Referral and Information Service, otherwise known as "LRIS", has become firmly established as both an informative and helpful service to the general public of Louisville and surrounding areas. Established more than a year ago by the Louisville Bar Association in an effort to bring the legal community closer to the public, LRIS provides lawyer referrals to those persons who feel they may need the services of an attorney, yet know not where to begin to select one. The staff of the LRIS has condensed the general field of law into several classifications including consumer affairs, domestic relations, juveniles, real estate, taxation, torts, and wills and estates, among others. There is also a classification designated for Indiana cases. For a fee of $15.00 per classification, a member of the bar may be listed on the panel in any of these classifications for referrals. The panel in each classification is recorded within a computer and the attorneys on each panel receive referrals on a rotation basis. The member of the public seeking a referral is charged a $15.00 referral fee. This fee helps to pay the operating expenses of the service, which is located at the corner of 5th and Market Street in the rear of the Jefferson County Law Library. The person paying the fee is then entitled to a one-half hour consultation with the attorney he is referred to. Should the person choose to retain the attorney, fee negotiation is strictly left up to the attorney's discretion. The LRIS currently has a full-time staff attorney, two assistants and a para-legal/ legal secretary. This staff handles the numerous phone calls the service receives each day and provides those persons who walk-in with information regarding the problems they may have encountered. The staff often refers problems to city or county "help" agencies instead of an attorney due to the fact that many times what the individual needs is counseling, not an attorney. Normally, a person calling for a referral can get an appointment with the attorney that same day, and in emergencies, within a few hours. Calls are also received for referrals from out-of-town attorneys. Another service which LRIS offers is "Tel-Law" which is a library of tapes on legal subjects prepared by local attorneys. The tapes have been written in a manner easily understood by the general public. Although this service is no~ to be used to replace legal advice, it is very helpful for information regarding everyday situations involving the law. By dialing 583- LA WS, a person may listen to a tape concerning such subjects as bankruptcy, jury service, what to do when arrested and the procedure of small claims court, among others. This service was made possible partly due to a grant by the American Bar Association, which considers this one of its "pioneer" projects. Due to the continuing efforts of the Louisville Bar Association to bring the legal community closer to the public, as evidenced by its efforts in establishing the Lawyer Referral and Information Service, the bar may look forward to a better relationship with the people of Louisville and surrounding areas. Louisville l.aw f.'\aminer. O"toher 10, 1980 5 Legal Team Slaughtered atLaGnmge By Kevin Ford As we pulled up to the entrance, my stomach started to do flops. LaGrange State Reformatory! I had heard stories about what an intimidating place it was, but as my cohorts and I were escorted through the front gate, I quickly realized that the stories had highlighted the prison's good points. My stomach quit doing flops long enough for me to utter a barely-audible "no" to the guard's question as to whether I was carrying any "knives, guns, bazookas, grenades or other contraband." The wall guard then chuckled when his fellow guard called up to explain that I was part of the "outside" team that had come to bring the inmates' softball team to its knees. Before the day was through, I would help provide a lot more laughter to the guards and the inmates. "Jeeesssuuzz Christ!!" I thought as I walked through the yard. Some of these guys could kill people just looking at them. Little did I know that on this day the only killing was to be done on the softball field. Once I started warming up, I thought that the day wasn't going to be too bad. First, I learned that several members of the inmates' varsity team weren't going to play. Then, I looked around and found that there was some surprisingly good talent on my team. The team members, all of whom were attorneys (mostly legal aid) or law students, were: Les Abramson, John Schaaf, Stuart Alexander, Alan Schmitt, Dennis Conniff, Joe Gutman, Bobby Butler and two recruits -David Friedman, a legal aid attorney from Shelbyville, and Steve Brannum (#80001), from the prison. The Inmates carried on the usual lawyer I client chit-chat with us as they warmed up, and I was thinking that maybe they were a little overconfident. I should have realized that when someone goes out of his way to be nice to you before a game he is going to try to beat your brains out on the field. We were almost blown off the field in the very first inning. Here is the set up: we lead off, and our first three hitters hit the ball right on the nose. Three good plays by the Inmates and we're on the field. With Les (Abramson) on the mound, I figure we're in good shape because (a) he is an excellent pitcher and (b) he has faced these guys before in an earlier Joss. The Inmates' first hitter, a small man (small compared to the rest of his team), takes one of those moon balls that Les sets everyone to pop up on and pops it into the alley for a homerun. 1-0 Inmates. Two singles later, the Incredible Hulk steps up to the plate. The Hulk is left-handed, and with the right field fence being only 250 feet (approximately) away, I figure he'll plant one over the fence. Well, he planted one about 325 feet to right, but it was straight up. One out, thank God! The next batter, Tiny, is 6 ft. 5 in. and weighs 225 pounds, not including earring. He looks formidable, but because he is right-handed and the left field fence is 400 feet away, I figure we stand a good chance of holding him to a triple. How wrong I was! Tiny took an outside pitch and crushed it over the right field fence and off the second floor of dorm #7. 4-0 Inmates. Two outs later it is 5-0 Inmates. All of the above and then some was the script for the first few innings, but lo and behold we scratched our way back into the game. The then-close score of 13-9 Inmates was due to three factors: (1) we were hitting singles like crazy; (2) the infield, especially Dennis and #80001, was playing well; and (3) Les had moved the outfield practically out to Cincinnati and had refused to give the Inmates anything they could hit near right field. There had been some scary 325 foot fly balls, but we were in good position heading into the sixth. ·· Well, in the bottom of the fifth, the Inmates get a man out. Up steps the Incredible Hulk again. Les had handled him pretty well, so he threw him another high, very, very short pitch. The Hulk actually ran up in the box and hit over the right field fence and on top of the building. The ball (a sponge by this time) traveled at least 350 feet. We continued to battle courageously after the Hulk's satellite, but we lost. 16- 11 Inmates. The team comforted itself with the thought that we had made the inmates work for their victory, and we took the field a second time to play a team comprised of the warden, deputy warden, guards, and Tiny. We had no objection to Tiny's playing for we still had #80001 (Steve) and no one had the guts to tell Tiny he couldn't play. By the time the second game started, the whole yard was watching. (It's kinda hard not to notice people playing softball in the only open space you have.) They were all pro-lawyers, and the team responded with inspired ball to take a 9-4 lead. I credit the inspired play to a pre-game pep talk from the Hulk and his friends. They are very inspiring people. Unfortunately, the team tired or just plain fell apart and the Guards tied it at 9-9. We got two on with one out to start the seventh. There was a deep fly hit to right center. Our runner would tag and make it to third easily, right? Wrong! Your friend and mine, Tiny, was playing right field and he caught the ball going away from the infield, spun and threw a bullet to third. Double play. Who should lead off for the Guards? You guessed it! Tiny, of course. He zapped a single up the middle. A single and an out and he's on third. We walk the bases full to set up the force. Well, the deputy warden hits a short fly to left-center and Robb Butler throws a strike to home. However, Tny takes three strides from third and he beats the throw. 10-9 Guards. As we headed for the gate (lawyers and students only), the Guards and Inmates told us how much they enjoyed having us out. We had to admit we did enjoy it. Why, some of the Inmates even said we were good enough to play for them, and with their talent, that's a real compliment. Unfortunately, my teammates and I can't or don't want to meet their eligibility requirements. Intramural Soccer Team Wins Premiere Effort L'Eagles, the Jaw school's first time entry in the University's Intramural Soccer League, opened its season last Thursday with a resounding 9-0 victory over B.D:A.D.S., a Speed School entry. In recording their lopsided win the L 'Eagles got an unexpected boost from a player' usually associated with sports other than soccer. Rob Hardy, whom most people remember for his basketball prowess, started ingoal and shut out the opposition through the first three quarters. After giving way to Mike Luvisi in goal, Hardy proceeded to terrorize the BDADS goalie with a three goal "hat trick" in the final period. The remainder of the L'Eagles scoring was accounted for by forward Bob Stauble and midfielder Ken Bohnert. Each also had three scores. The opening action was rather scrambly and Hardy was called upon to make several key stops before his teammates got organized and began to dominate the action. Although missing several scoring chances they still managed to hold a 2-0 halftime lead. The offense was able to score at will in the second half. Organizer and team captain Dave Voisinet encourages everyone to join the booster club and become a part of the festivities. Maps and schedules have been placed in the breezeway lounge to help fans get to the field . L'Eagles' next game is at the Brook Street field on Thursday, October 23 at 9 p.m. Photo by Mtuy P«l Front row, left to right: Tom Schulz and Elizabeth Ward; Back row, left to right: Richard Head, Daryl Coffey, Frank Bush, Scott Furkin, and Craig Bell. Sixth Circuit Holds Fall Roundup By Craig Bell The Law Student Division of the American Bar Association, held its annual Sixth Circuit "Fall Roundup" from October 3, to October 5, of this year in Cincinnati, Ohio. The conference, sponsored by the Board of Governors of the American Bar Association, attracted student representatives from law schools throughout the Sixth Circuit. The "Roundup" served as a means of bringing together students from different Jaw schools located within the Sixth Circuit to discuss topics ranging from the general to the specialized. Attending the "Roundup" from the University of Louisville School of Law were Daryl Coffey and Richard Head, representing the Law Student Division and Student Bar Association of the U of L School of Law respectively, Rhonda Richardson and Peter Ebbs represented the Louisville branch of BALSA, while Elizabeth Ward, Tom Schulz, Craig Bell, Frank Bush, and Scott Furkin represented the award winning Louisville Law Examiner. One of the more interesting topics discussed at the "Roundup" was that of the responsibility of an attorney to provide pro bono work for those who cannot afford to retain counsel. Attorney Allen Brown suggested that the present system has failed in this objective and long overdue changes will eventually be forced upon those engaged in the practice of law. It was noted by Mr. Brown that there is considerable debate within the legal profession concerning the best means of providing pro bono services for those in need of them, but Mr. Brown did not take a stand concerning the best method of achieving a proper level of pro bono work by an attorney. He noted two distinct and different methods: to engage in pro bono work oneself or to permit an attorney to contribute to firms engaged in pro bono work as a tax deduction. Susan Sadler, of Drake Law School, spoke on the controversial issue of a person's "right to die." Ms. Sadler advocated the position that any Jaw which makes it illegal for a person to decide when his life should be terminated should be repealed. If implemented Ms. Sadler's proposals would permit euthanasia where a person had requested another to help him achieve his desire to die. A sample "Living Will" was given to all those in attendance. Ms. Sadler would give legal effect to any document made by a person requesting to "be allowed to die." All penalties for any person complying with such a request would be removed if the "Living Will" were given the force of law. A number of seminars were conducted at the "Roundup" of specialized interest to law students. These included seminars on law school honor codes, environmental issues, how to receive grants from the American Bar Association, women's issues, BALSA, and the publishing of the Louisville Law Examiner. The representatives of the Louisville Law Examiner conducted a workshop on the publishing of this newspaper. The Examiner was asked to conduct the workshop because of the many awards it has received from the American Bar Association/ Law Student Division. Each of the Law Examiner's representatives spoke on a . different aspect in the publishing of this newspaper. Representatives of several law school newspapers attended the workshop and commented favorably on the high standards and degree of professionalism exhibited by the Examiner editors and staff. "The mutual confidence on which all else depends can be maintained only by an open mind and a brave reliance on free discussion." -Learned Hand Let us know your point of view. Letters to the editors should be typed and signed. The editors reserve the right to edit letters for space considerations and for clarity. :J I .,. ------------------------------------------------""'='11 Louisville Law Examiner, October 10, 1980 July 1980 Bar Results (Figures furnished by Kentucky State Board of Bar Examiners) Graduates of the University of Louisville School of Law were edged out of having the highest passing percentage by one-tenth of a percent by the University of Kentucky. All three Kentucky schools of law showed a decline in the passing rate as compared to the Spring bar results. University of Louisville School of Law graduates had a pass rate on the July, 1980 bar exam of 89.7% as compared to the Februarv. 1~80 bar results of93.7%. Of those from U of L taking the bar exam: No. No. First-timers Second -timers Third-timers Taking 112 2 3 Passed 105 0 0 Percentage 93. 750fo 0% 0% OVERALL Number Taking 334 87.4% Number Passing 292 UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE Number Taking 117 89.7% Number Passing 105 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY Number Taking 118 89.8% Number Passing 106 CHASE (NORTHERN KY. UNIVERSITY) Number Taking 56 76.7% Number Passing 43 OUT-OF-STATE SCHOOLS Number Taking 43 88.3% Number Passing 38 THE FOLLOWING PERSONS PASSED THE JULY, 1980 KENTUCKY BAR EXAMINATION: Karl Lynn Anderson John Joseph Andris, Jr. Stephen Maurice Arnett Perry Russell Arnold Kenneth Joseph Bader Patricia Wilson Ballard Frederick David Banks Donald Albert Becher Walter Ralph Beck Bonnie Kay Biemer David Alan Black William Bertrand Blackburn William Hartman Brammell Thomas Raymond Brule Robert Ezell Butler II Walter Robbins Byrne, Jr. Philip Harrison Cade Samuel Brownlow Carl Timothy Kirkpatrick Chism, Jr. Mark Wheeler Clevenger Tamara Todd Cotton Grover Simpson Cox Harry Scott Davis Sean Robert Delahanty Douglas Melvin Dowell Bruce Kitredge Dudley Douglas Edward Feldkamp Mark Squires Fenzel Cynthia Ann Field Mary Frances Forrest Joseph Dominic Fowler, Jr. Olivia Ann Morris Fuchs Nancy Jean Gall-Clayton Benjamin Lee Gardner Jan Margaret Glasgow H. Phillip Grossman George Edward Hafling George Alexander Hamilton Michael Ray Hance Cheryl Carpenter Havens Michael Louis Henry Richard Wayne Hill William Alexander Hoback Kevin Michael Horne Kenneth Martin Howard Lisabeth Hughes Rex Lee Hunt A. Thomas Johnson Christopher Wayne Johnson Kenneth Stephen Kasacavage James Donald Kenney Ill Judith Ann Kidwell Margaret Ruth Kramer Patricia Lynn Larkin Diane Gilliam LeRoy Marc H. Levy Maurice Reeves Little David Todd Littlefield Matthew George Livingood Gordon Bruce Long Dorin Edwin Luck Richard Carroll McCarty James Paul McCrocklin Thomas Edward McDonald III James Neal Martin Patrick William Mattingly Kenneth Allen Meng James Earl Morreau, Jr. Michael Dwight Morris Michael Ralph Murphy John David Myles Mary Frances Niccolai Peter Lucas Ostermiller David Charles Payne Earl Gene Penrod Michael Louis Polio Murray Jay Porath Gregory Lee Price Douglas Curtis Ragan Robert Kenyon Rainey David Bruce Reynolds David Keith Rhinerson Henry C. T. Richmond III Henry Vernon Sanders David Bruce Sandler James Marion Shake Elizabeth Rayrior Short Larry David Simon David Alexander Smith John Stafford Sowards, Jr. Scott David Spiegel Jeffrey Robert Sturges Kent Overton Sublett John Edward Swain, Jr. John Carleton Tobin Pamela M. Corbin Trevathan George Townsend Underhill III Douglas Anthony U'Sellis Chris Christian Wakild Eileen Marie Walsh Anna Marie Washburn Robert Ross Waterman Matthew Henry Welch Thomas Benedict Wine Lloyd Gregory Y opp U of L Homecomers to Get ''In the Mood'' - University of Louisville alumni and friends will have the opportunity to get "In the Mood" at Homecoming 1980 festivities Oct. 17-18. for the event, to be held in the Crawford Gymnasium on Belknap Campus, are on a first-come, first-served basis to alumni. Activities begin at 2 p.m., Oct. 17 with the annual meeting of the Alumni Association in the Jefferson Room of the Administration Building on Belknap Campus. The annual Athletic Hall of Fame Dinner will be held at 6:30 p.m. at Executive Inn East. Tickets are $15. The School of Justice Administration alumni will hold a cocktail party and dinner at 6:30p.m. at Masterson's Restaurant. Speed Scientific School alumni and guests will have coffee and doughnuts at 9 a.m., Oct. 18 in the Faculty Dining Room of the Student Center Building on Belknap Campus. A 9 a.m. breakfast will be held in the Jefferson Room for School of Education alumni and guests. College of Arts and Sciences alumni will meet at 10 a.m. for coffee and doughnuts in The Playhouse on Belknap Campus. Alumni and their guests will have an opportunity to see the 1980-81 Cardinal basketball team in action at 10 a.m. for the first scrimmage of the season. Tickets Football-kicking, trivia and hula hoop contests will be a part of the fun and games beginning at 10:30 a.m. under the Alumni Association tent on the Main Oval in front of the Administration Building. A buffet lunch will be served and beverages will be available. Tickets for the lunch are $3.75. A highlight of the tent activities will be a concert by the ll3th U.S. Army Stage Band. The band will be featured "live" from 11 a .m. to noon on WUOL's (90.5 FM) Band Hour. The festivities will conclude with ·the WUOL Big Band Dance at 9 p.m. in the Marriott Inn Convention Center in Clarksville, Ind. Music will be provided by the Pat Whalen Orchestra. Tickets are $8 per couple The Student Homecoming Dance, featuring "Midnight Star," will be at 9 p.m. in Knights Hall, Bellarmine College, Newburg Road. For further information, or to obtain tickets for Homecoming events, contact the U of L Alumni Services Office at 588-6186. Two Memorial Funds Established Marilyn Meredith DougiiiS Ackerman Marilyn Meredith Memorial Fund The University of Louisville School of Law, in cooperation with the family and friends of the late Marilyn Ann Meredith, announces the establishment of the Marilyn Meredith Memorial Fund to aid deserving Evening Division law students at the University. Present plans include an annual textbook stipend or legal reference book award, but may be extended to additional forms of student assistance such as scholarships if sufficient funds are raised. Any individual or organization desiring to contribute to the Fund should send a check or money order, payable to the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc., and marked "For the Marilyn Meredith Memorial Fund'', and addressed to the University of Louisville School of Law, Dean's Office, 2301 South Third Street, Belknap Campus, Louisville, Kentucky 40292. All contributions are tax-deductible and will be administered by the School of Law. Douglas VanderHoof Ackerman Memorial Consumer Law Library Fund A memorial fund has also been established honoring Douglas V. Ackerman, a 1967 University of Louisville School of Law graduate, who died August 1, 1980 in New York City of complications resulting from meningitis. He was a native of Louisville and the son of the late Robert V. Ackerman and Douschka Sweets Ackerman of Louisville. Ackerman, noted as an expert in consumer protection, was assistant attorney general in the Bureau of Consumer Frauds and Protection for the State of New York. He started his legal career with the New York firm of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft but soon devoted himself to public interest law and worked with the South Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation from 1972 to 1978. Contributions to the memorial fund may be made to the Douglas VanderHoof Ackerman Memorial Consumer Law Library Fund in care of Melvyn Leventhal, Director of Bureau of Consumer Fraud and Protection, Attorney General's Office of the State of New York, 2 World Trade Center, New York, N.Y. 10047. Placement News The Life Planning Center is offering a series of job-seeking skills workshops. Workshop will be held Oct. 16, 23, 30 and Nov. 6. The subjects include "Defining a Job Target," "Breaking the Hidden Job Market," "Job Search Correspondence " and "Successful Interviewing." Workshops meet on Thursday from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. The workshops are free to students. To enroll call the Life Planning Center at 588-6927. * * • John Tobin has been accepted by the Army JAG Corps in Washington, D.C. PLACEMENT SCHEDULE_. Oct. 23 Hart, Bell, Deem and Ewing, ·vincennes, Ind. Oct. 27 U.S. Navy Patent Office. Oct. 28 Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs (Louisville). Kent Sublett has joined the Okolona office of the law firm of Frocket and Klingman. "Career Night" to Emphasize NonTraditional Employment Opportunities By Nick Riggs On Wednesday, October 22, 1980, the University of Louisville School of Law will sponsor its annual Career Night in the Law School Building. Career Night is a program which affords an opportunity for all law students to visit and talk with representatives from a diverse range of potential employers of law school graduates. This is not an opportunity for students to apply for positions with a particular employer, but more of an informal way for students to become aware of the expanding career field for law school graduates. Career Night may also aid a particular student in obtaining an insight into the path his or her legal career might follow, and to help the student become familiar with the procedure for obtaining a position in an area of interest. There will be over forty representatives present on Career Night. Each representative will be available for over an hour to meet with any interested student and will attempt to answer any question, whether specific or general, that the student might have concerning a particular career field . This year the Placement Office, under the direction of Phyllis Leibson, is placing an emphasis on non-traditional employment opportunities for law school graduates because of the increasing number of graduates from law schools across the country. In addition to representatives from such traditional employers as law firms, corporations, and local, state, and federal governments, there will be representatives from the energy, insurance, real estate and labor fields. The Career Night program will begin at 7:00 p.m., following a dinner at 5:30 p.m. for all the representatives. Between 7:00 p.m. and 8:00p.m. students may visit with any representative they wish. Each representative will be assigned a room in the Law School Building. Louisville Law E"aminer. October 10, 19!!0 7 NIGHT and DAY NIGHT STUDENTS RESENTED? Student Legal Research Group Receives Largest Assignment Ever By Jane Atkinson Some time after the shock of the first what time of day he teaches, and no night year is over, the night student begins to student worth his salt would want a profesrealize that his presence is resented by many sor to do so. Criticism of night-school inday students. This information typically struction is usually predicated on a belief in reaches him via a former classmate who the inferiority of instruction by the night has switched to day school and has learned school's part-time instructors. first-hand of that resentment. If the trans- Two of my favorite instructors were partferring student has made good grades in his time teachers, and I felt that they knew evening classes, he may be told that his their subjects well, taught them thoroughly, A's have tainted the purity of the full-time and demanded a great deal of the students. students' A's. Any displacement of a day On the other hand, there have been some student from his rank in his class by a for- ineffective part-time teachers. Who in the mer night student is met with some hostility day school is not able to say the same thing and is usually considered to be the result of about his full-time professors? I learned the the night school's alleged lower grading least in a course taught by a full-time prostandard. fessor, yet others are excellent; and there One doesn't want to be in the position of are some whose reputation makes me sorry protesting too much in the no-win debate not to have had a class with them. It is over grading standards. Any discrepancy in realistic to believe that while effectiveness the averages of the two groups can be ex- may vary from teacher to teacher, the cause plained either way: if Group A's average is of the variation is that individual's abilities, higher it can mean that that group did a not necessarily his full-time or part-time better job; if Group A's average is lower, status. (However, the faculty should not then the cause could be the inflated grades shortchange night students by assuming of Group B. anyone can teach a night course; excellent Students best able to compare the two part-time teachers are available and should divisions of the law school - those who be insisted on.) The law school's Student Legal Research Group conducted over 500 hours of research this Fall for the Kentucky Department of Justice as part of a U of L-UKChase effort to analyze 6,000 court decisions concerning the issue of probable cause, according to the organization's Director Talia Liebermann Arik. The U of L students were assigned approximately 3,500 case citations previously obtained through the Lexis system using the key words "probable cause". Their task was to read the cases and identify those which dealt with the issue in substance as opposed to those which only fortuitously contained the key words. A law professor at the University of Tennessee will assign each case a number and "value" according to a pre-designed computer program. The findings will then be studied by a nationwide group of law professors including U of L's Professor Albert Quick. They hope to develop a Mirandatype card to be consulted by police in a checklist fashion prior to making an arrest. It is believed that such a card will reduce the number of dismissals due to a lack of probable cause which results from the difficulty police face in staying abreast of the recent developments in this area. * * * The student Legal Research Group is now accepting applications for the position of Director. The Director's term runs from January through December 1981. Duties include supervision of staff, editing briefs and memos, maintaining contact with practicing attorneys throughout the state, and general administrative responsibilities. Remuneration includes a full tuition scholarship for the semesters of service as well as additional sums for research done. This is an excellent job opportunity as it enables one to sharpen research skills, gain exposure to various areas of law, and establish many contacts in the legal community. Deadline for submission of applicants is November 7. For further information, contact Talia Liebermann or Professor Leslie Abramson . have attended both - assure me that they Another source of disunity is the differhave maintained their grades in both divi- ence between day students and night stusions without having to study harder in dents as general types, a fact which several either. Those. who transfer from night professors have commented about. While school to day school may prefer the com- recognizable differences are subject to panionship of their old nighttime friends, many exceptions and are sometimes hard but they find the academic challenges of to describe, at other times they seem as both divisions are comparable. obvious as the difference between night News-In-Brief Why does the misunderstanding and dis- and day. trust continue? Last month's columnist Night students tend to be older, a great pointed out that it begins with the adminis- many having families to support. Many tration, who apparently consider night stu- have long-established careers; and they bring dents to be stepchildren. If a student is to the classroom a diversity of experience, properly dedicated to becoming a lawyer, it interests, and backgrounds. They are apt to is thought, he should give up everything else participate more in class and to be less intimito attain his goal. If he cannot or is not will- dated by the professor. A poll would probing to do that, then he is somehow less ably reveal that more students in the day deserving of entering the legal profession. division have parents or relatives who are Ideally, all students should be held to the lawyers or judges, and accordingly some same high standards in the fulfillment of day students may be more aware than the requirements and in class preparation and average night student of what lawyers actuexamination. They also should be presumed ally do every day. Often such differing capable of deciding how to spend their out- types of people do not mix well, and each of-class hours -whether in working, study- may perceive the other's dissimilarities as ing, loafing, or drinking beer. Working less shortcomings. may, but does not necessarily, mean studying I don't know which group is the more more. Many times a busy person is able to deserving, studious, or dedicated toward effectively organize his limited time and get professional excellence. No doubt there are more done than those with fewer com- good and bad students -dedicated and unmitments. dedicated, honest and dishonest - in both The administration's preconceived ideas divisions. Why not accept the differences Phi Alpha Delta announces October "Coming Events": On Saturday, October 11, Vinson Chapter will send representatives to a joint meeting with District XI (which consists of the nine Ohio chapters) in Cincinnati. Members interested in attending should contact Tim Scott, Renona Browning, or Scott Furkin. On Friday and Saturday, October 17 and 18 and again on Friday and Saturday, October 24 and 25, P.A.D. will sponsor the annual police car rides in conjunction with the Louisville Police Dept. Interested persons should sign up in the law school breezeway. On Friday, October 24, P.A.D. will hold fall initiation at the Federal Courthouse on 6th and Broadway. Prospective initiates should return applications to Dean Smith's secretary or any P .A.D. officer as soon as possible. * * * The faculty voted on September 30, 1980 to follow the ABA guidelines on student working by approving a 20-hour limitation on full-time law students. * * * are not the only cause of misunderstanding. between the two groups without charac- Results of SBA election: Distrust between day and night students terizing it in terms of fitness to study and First Year Day Representatives are: A_ would probably remain even if all official practice law. There is room for all of us. As Wes Loy; B _ Rosemary Taft; z _ Don prejudice were abandoned. Additional divi- long as equal and high standards are insisted Battcher. Second Year Representatives are sive factors include prejudice toward part- upon, opening the study of law to varying R. Mark Beal and John Webb; third year time instructors and the basic differences types of people can only result in a. strength- representatives are Kathiejane Oehler and between day students and night students. ening, rather than a weakening, of the legal Steve Erikson. Any full-time faculty member who teaches profession. Night Class Representatives are: 1st _ night classes will assure you that he does not (Jane Atkinson is a fourth year night Laurel Knuckles; 2nd _ Harold Storment; alter his academic expectations based on student.) 3rd _Tom Weatherly; 4th_ Jerry Baker. ~============~~~====~~ WOODY'S TAVERN &ALE GARDEN brook & burnett Please pick up one of our Special Calendars at the Law School Library ... Thursdays (Pitchers $1.50) All Day Strict Dress Code (No Disco Apparel) WOODY The Moot Court Board and the Moot Court Freshman Committee for the Evening Division of the Law School have announced that the mandatory rounds of arguments for the division will be held on Saturday, October 25 at the school. The hypothetical cases for this year are Concerned Atheists v. Christian, concerning whether the recognition of a Bible study group by a high school violates the establishment of the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, and State v. Harvey Landfill and Development Co., concerning whether the commerce clause precludes a state from enacting a law that bars importation of toxic waste collected or originating in other states. * * * Third year law student Talia Liebermann was married to Tali Arik on Aug. 31. Mr. Arik is a student at the U of L School of Medicine. * * * Sally Whetzel, wife of third year student Stan Whetzel, gave birth to twin daughters on September 28. Presidential Forum Announced The Sigma Delta Kappa intercollegiate law fraternity has been given permission by Dean Harold G. Wren to sponsor a debate between representatives of the three major presidential candidates. This "presidential forum" is intended for the benefit of the entire law student body. The consensus of the fraternity was that the demands on the law students' time is such that students are not able to adequately follow the election. As future members of the Bar, the fraternity believes it is essential that students be well-informed of the issues involved in this election. Representing President Carter will be Mr. Dale Sights, Chairman, Campaign to ReElect the President in Kentucky; representing Gov. Reagan is Mr. Lawrence E. Forgy, Gov. Reagan's Campaign Chairman in Kentucky; and representing Cong. John Anderson is Joel Goldstein, University of Louisville Professor of Political Science. The debate will be modeled closely after the format of that of the League of Women Voters and will be held at 8:30 p.m. on October 23, 1980 in Strickler Hall on Belknap Campus. It is open to the public. PageS Louisville Law Examiner, October 10, 1980 E!!!!l!!l course materials contain 1,000 PMBE Multistate questions with fully detailed answers. I • 200 PMBE CONTRACTS QUESTIONS ~~:~ • 200 PMBE TORTS QUESTIONS s~~~~' • 150 PMBE PROPERTY QUESTIONS • 150 PMBE CRIMINAL LAW QUESTIONS s~~~~o { • 150 PMBE EVIDENCE QUESTIONS s~~~' • 150 PMBE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW QUESTIONS • PMBE SUPPLEMENTAL COURSE OUTLINES COST: $175 for the complete set of PMBE course materials (including FREE set of PMBE review cassette tapes with the purchase of course materials prior to November 30, 1980) PMBE review cassette tapes may be purchased separately for $49.95. PMBE Tuition Discount Polley: All first and second year students purchasing their PMBE preparatory materials will receive an automatic $175 discount on their subsequent enrollment In our PMBE Mulfistafe Bar Review Course. EAST COAST OFFiCE 743 Spruce Street Philadelphia. PA 19106 (215) 925-0699 ~~l!g MULTISTATE LEGAL STUDIES, INC. TOLL FREE (800) 523-0777 Make 'checks payable to: MULTISTATE LEGAL STUDIES, INC. WEST COAST OFFICE 41 Avenue 19 Venice. CA 90291 (213) 399-9367 743 Spruce Stree1, Philadelphia, PA 19106 o (215) 925-0699 41 Avenue 19. Venice. CA 90291 o (213) 399-9367 Name~-------------------------------------------------------Address ---------------------------------------------------- Ci1y/State/Zip Law School Attended -------------------------------------------Represen1a1ive (if any)·-------------------------------------------- 0 1 am enclosing my $175 check/money order 1o cover the cost of the complete set of PMBE first and second year course materials: 0 1 wish to purchase the PMBE review cassette tapes only. My checklmoney order for $49.95 is enclosed. --- -- ·- - Oct. 14 Oct. IS Oct. 16 Oct. 17 Oct. 21 Oct. 23 Oct. 25 Nov. 4 Nov. 10 CALENDAR OF EVENTS Law Forum/ Embryo Lawyers; Direct and Cross Examination of Witness in Criminal Case; Video tape. CLE; Appeals, Oral Arguments and Brief Writing; St. Catharine College, Springfield, Ky. SBA; Boo and Brew smoker; Woody's. Speed Scientific School; Seminar Basic Law for Engineers, Architects and Managers; Breckinridge Inn. Law Forum /Embryo Lawyers; Introduction and Use of Exhibits; Video tape. " Retirement and Estate Planning and Coping with Inflation," a seminar sponsored by the University of Louisville at Executive West from 9 a.m. to 4:30p.m. Women's Law Caucus; Olga Peers, Speaker; Allen Courtroom at 5:15p.m. CLE; Worker's Compensation; Gilbertsville, Ky. LBA; Irving Younger tapes. Election Day February Kentucky Bar Examination filing deadline. Louisville Law Examiner School of Law Non-Profit Organization U.S. POSTAGE PAID Permit No. 769 Louisville, KY University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky 40208 ----~- John M. Harlan 1 ,· Law Examiner Volume6 Number 3 October 10, 1980 ABA / LSD "Fall Roundup" held in Cincinnati .. . Page 5 July Kentucky Bar Results Announced ... Page 6 Dean Wren, right, talks to undergraduates considering the U of L School of Law at the Annual Pre-Law Day. . .. Page 4
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.
Title | Louisville Law Examiner 6.3, October 10, 1980 |
Alternative Title | Law Student Publications |
Contributors | University of Louisville. School of Law |
Description | The Louisville Law Examiner (1975-1991) was the second of three official University of Louisville School of Law student publications. |
Searchable Text | Louisville Law Examiner Serving The University of Louisville School of Law Community Volume 6, Number 3 Louisville, Kentucky, October 10, 1980 Circulation 4100 Photo by Scott Furkin Pictured are, left, Ann Bailey, Plrtle-Washer winner, and Colleen McKinley, runner-up. Other finalists were Susan McCray, Alice Barnes, Jack Faust, Leo Smith, Don Meade and Lucy Helm. Ann Bailey wins Pirtle-Washer Moot Court Competition By Scott Furkin The Moot Court Board has announced that Ann Leslie Bailey is the winner of the 1980 Pirtle-Washer Appellate Advocacy Competition. Ms. Bailey, a junior in the Day Division, prevailed in six arguments over two days to become the intraschool champion. She will receive a full-tuition scholarship for one semester. Colleen McKinley, a junior in the Evening Division, is the 1980 runner-up, and will be awarded a half-tuition scholarship. This year's competiton took place at the Hall of Justice at Sixth and Jefferson Streets in downtown Louisville. Elimination rounds were conducted on Saturday, September 6, with quarter-, semi-, and final rounds following on Saturday, September 13. Fiftyfour second-year students comprised the largest field of competitors to date, and approximately 15 third-year students assisted as bailiffs. The judges' pool for the preliminary rounds was composed of 48 local attorneys and recent graduates of the law school. Seventeen Jefferson County District and Circuit Court Judges graciously donated their time to preside over the final rounds. Participants and observers agreed that the high quality of judging and realistic courtroom atmosphere combined to make the 1980 competition the most valuable in recent years. The problem for argument was selected last spring by the Moot Court Board for presentment before the Supreme Court in the imaginary state of Abbott. The facts of the hypothetical case concerned the relative rights of natural and prospective adoptive parents and the standard to be applied in custody battles between the two groups. Student advocates were told to prepare arguments for both sides and were given initial side designations about a week before the competition. Each advocate was allotted 15 minutes for oral argument which included extensive questioning from the bench. Students were evaluated on their knowledge of the factual and legal issues, skill in reasoning and use of authority, and overall forensic performance. Moot Court Board President Bill Kenealy congratulated all participants for their efforts and expressed relief that the program ran so smoothly after being postponed in the spring due to scheduling difficulties. Mr. Kenealy acknowledged, however, that last-minute withdrawals by some students posed unanticipated problems: "Certain individuals failed to appear without notifying us first . . . We wish those individuals had arrived as it forced other competitors to argue before the court in what could only be called a ~false round,' "he said. Mr. Kenealy revealed that the Moot Court Board plans to continue having competitions at the Hall of Justice because of its convenient location and authentic judicial character. "Each year (the Moot Court Board) endeavors to improve upon the administrative and educational value of the competition. Despite the incredibly high number of freshmen, we will endeavor to make next year's program at least as stimulating as this year's." Near Record Freshman Class Enrolls in School of Law By Jeff Wade Due to an unexpectedly successful re ·cruiting program at the law school and a computer foul-up somewhere in the East, this Fall's entering class is one of the largest in the history of the school. A total of 236 entering freshmen enrolled in the School of Law in August. One hundred seventy-three entered the Day Division and 63 entered the Evening Division. The class is one of the largest in the school's history, and the number of freshmen in the Day Division is the largest ever. The largest class ever was the class that entered in 1974. However, that class was divided among three divisions: the Day and Evening divisions and a "Twilight Division." Although some variation in the number of admissions from year to year is usual, this year's increase was both unusual and unexpected. Nearly all of the increase occurred in the Day Division, where admissions were up 630Jo from last year's total of 107. According to Professor William Biggs, Chairman of the Admissions Committee, three factors seem to be responsible for the increase. First, the Admissions Committee set a goal of 180 to 200 admissions. If that goal had simply been met, there would have been a significant increase over last year's 167. To attain its goal, the Admissions Committee initially accepted about 300 applicants, assuming that about half of those accepted would ultimately decide to attend law school elsewhere. According to Prof. Biggs, that has become a fairly predictable pattern in past years. This year's applicants, however, did not follow that pattern. The great majority of them, in fact, kept their sights set on U of L and showed up on Belknap Campus in August, ready to begin classes. One factor Prof. Biggs cited as causing more applicants than usual to choose to attend U of L was the recruiting program that was initiated last year. Prof. Biggs noted that the program has proved more successful than anyone had anticipated. The recruiting program, a project of the Admissions Committee, was aimed at students in various colleges throughout Kentucky as well as a few in Indiana. The hope was that some law school aspirants who had not previously considered attending U of L would begin to do so. That hope was apparently realized. The other factor cited by Prof. Biggs as being responsible for U of L's sudden popularity stemmed from problems in the electronic data systems of the Law School Data Assembly Service (LSD AS). LSDAS for many years had its home on the beautiful, sprawling campus of the Educational Testing Service (ETS) in Princeton, New Jersey~ Last year, however, LSDAS was in the process of separating from ETS and moving to Newtown, Pennsylvania. In doing so, it temporarily "lost" some records that were stored somewhere in the bowels of a computer. The "lost" data included records of law school applicants, upon which most law schools depend to make their admissions decisions. When the records had still not been retrieved by April, law schools across the country were faced with the question of whether to begin accepting applicants without having the benefit of all the LSDAS data, or whether to wait until all the data could be retrieved and forwarded. U of L opted for the former course. U of K and Chase, U of L 's biggest competitors for new admissions, chose the latter. The result was that many students who were accepted to all three schools received their U of L acceptance letters far in advance of those from U of K and Chase. By mid-April, LSDAS had begun retrieving and forwarding the data, and by mid-May, U of L had received data on nearly all its applicants. U of K and Chase began sending out acceptance letters in May. By that time, however, many applicants who had been accepted by U of L had made firm decisions to enroll here. And enroll they did! One result of the fat enrollment is that the first year Day students are divided into not only an "A" and a "B" section, but a "Z" section as well. If anyone stands to benefit from this snafu, perhaps it is that unique group of students who got labeled "Z". They're natural underdogs, so maybe they'll try the hardest. Photn b.r Scmt IUrldn Randy Jewell casts his vote for first year SBA representatives. .. .. - '· 2 Louisville l.aw Examiner, October 10, 1980 Louisville Law Examiner EDITORIAL BOARD Elizabeth S. Ward, Editor-in-Chief Tom Schulz, Managing Editor Craig Bell, Associate Editor Frank Bush, Associate Editor John B. Wright, Jr., Business Manager Scott Furkin, Photographic Editor Gerald "Bear" Schray, Artist STAFF Jeffrey L. Wade, Brandeis Brief Editor Mike Brooks, Sports Editor Scott Furkin, Projects Editor Phyllis Malinski Joram Salig John Tate Kevin Ford Jane Atkinson Roy Wyatt Paul Roark Mike Smither Nick Riggs Judge MARLIN M. VOLZ, Advisor Professor ALBERT T. QUICK, Consultant The Louisville Law Examiner is published eight times during the academic year in the interest of the University of Louisville School of Law community. Unsigned editorial opinions are those representing a majority vote of the editorial board and do not necessarily express the views of the School of Law or the University of Louisville. Articles are invited from faculty members, students, and members of the bar who wish to do freelance work, but any proposed article must be cleared in advance with the editor as to topic and length. This is to avoid duplication of coverage and insure that the article will not be beyond workable length for a newspaper format. Address all communications to the Louisville Law Examiner, School of Law, University of Louisville, Kentucky 40208. Phone 502-588-6398. Letter to the Editor ''Brandeis Brief'' Series Emerging Legal Issues Legal and Personal Problems of Surrogate Parenting Katie Brophy is counsel for Surrogate Parenting Associates, Inc., t.m. (S .P.A.). She and Richard Levin, M.D., an obstetrician who specializes in infertility problems, founded S.P.A. in August, 1979. Ms. Brophy received her A.B. and J.D . degrees from the University of Kentucky. She has prior legal experience as an attorney for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company and as Assistant Jefferson County Attorney for paternity and non-support. She is currently with the firm of Triplett and Greene in Louisville. Mr. William L. Fang The Law School Somewhere, US an investment in the firm's future, whether we eventually hire a particular individual or Katie Brophy not. Others give us invaluable insight into Approximately fifteen per cent (15%) of the general population experiences the changing nature of legal education and infertility problems. Another group of people possesses congenital traits, such as the profession as a whole. Still others pre- Tay-Sachs disease or cystic fibrosis , which would predispose their offspring to sent us with an opportunity for invigorating serious physical deformities. Added to the above categories are females with and refreshing dialogue, the value of which Dear Mr. Fang: I was glad to have met with you recently to discuss the possibility of a summer clerkship with our firm . We appreciate your interest but regret that we are not able to ask you to continue the interviewing process. As I am sure you realize, an attorney's time is extremely valuable and a member of a firm has a responsibility both to himself and his associates to be frugal in its expenditure. The immense expense of interviewing the large number of job applicants we see each year, therefore, must be justified in somew ay. -s to th-osesruaents w ose grades, extracurricular activities and personalities make them attractive prospective employees, we tend to view the expense as we feel should not be di scounted. contra-indications to pregnancy, such as heart diseases or diabetes. While this However, on the rare occasion when we latter group may be able to conceive, the risk of carrying a full term pregnancy interview a student whose credentials, de- may be quite high. mean or, conversation, appearance and For many couples with the above problems, adoption was historically the background can in no way justify the amount answer. Today, however, the number of healthy infants available for adoption of time expended on his behalf, we are cer- cannot fill the void of childless couples in the United States and abroad. tain that you will agree that it is only fair When it is the male who is infertile and does not produce sufficient numbers that student b~ billed for the reasona.ble of live sperm, artificial insemination of the female partner (AID) by an anonymous value of that ti.me. Therefore, please fmd sperm donor is often recommended by physicians. On the other hand, where enclosed our. b!ll .for $24·68 (twenty-four the infertility is due to the female's inability to conceive or carry a full-term preg-dollars and Sixty-eight cents), figured at an . . . . . hourly rate or $50 (fifty dollars) and in-- nancy, no altern~tJ~e comparable to A_II~-has~~een available until recently. Now, eluding secretarial, mailing and other costs. however, where .It IS the female who IS mfertile, the couple now can apply for Sincerely yours, surrogate parentmg. Fred R. Milton Surrogate parenting is the reverse situation of the donor insemination pro-cedure.* As a co-founder of Surrogate Parenting Associates, Inc., tm., the only known program routinely providing the surrogate service for individuals in the United States and abroad, I have drafted a number of documents and instituted various procedures for a model surrogate program. The program is designed to protect all parties involved, including (unlike typical reproduction) the child. The following safeguards are used to ensure that the surrogate is properly qualified. 1. The surrogate must be married. 2. The surrogate must have at least one healthy child from her present marriage. You SuRtl! A~• A Lor1 ToM. 3. She and her husband must undergo psychiatric and psychological evaluation by various professionals. 4. The surrogate must produce medical records (including obstetric records). 5. The surrogate must produce all pediatric records relevant to her children to verify that she has produced healthy children. 6. The surrogate and her husband must retain the services of an independent attorney to review the proposed agreements and advise them on the relevant law in Kentucky, relating to the surrogate procedure. 7. The surrogate agrees to complete physical and genetic evaluations (including venereal disease testing). 8. The surrogate and her husband agree to terminate parental rights subsequent to the child's birth. 9. The surrogate, the child and the natural father undergo the following blood tests in order to establish paternity: a. White Cell/HLA b. Red Cell Enzyme c. Serum Proteins d. Blood Group The results of these tests provide the natural father with highly probable evidence that he is in fact the biological father of the child. ~ 10. The surrogate agrees to adhere to various medical restrictions relating to pregnancy, including a total prohibition of alcohol, smoking, and prescribed or non-prescribed medications. In addition, a set pre-natal schedule is mandated. II. The surrogate agrees to undergo amniocentesis if the procedure is medically indicated. The natural father agrees as follows: I. To undergo complete physical and genetic evaluations (including venereal disease testing). 2. To pay all pregnancy-related expenses of the surrogate as well as expenses relevant to her traveling to Kentucky for purposes of insemination, psychiatric examinations, and delivery. 3. To reimburse the surrogate for her attorney's fees. (These fees are not paid (See Surrogate Parenting, Page 3) l.ouisvill{' l.aw F.xamin{'r, Octob{'r 10, 1980 (Surrogate Parenting, Continued from Page 2) directly by the natural father.) 4. To accept the child regardless of congenital abnormalities (assuming the surrogate has complied with her medical restrictions). 5. To pay all court costs incident to the termination of parental rights of the surrogate and the presumptive parental rights of her husband. 6. To make adequate provision either in his will or by life insurance for the protection of the child should the natural father and his wife predecease the birth of the child. The surrogate program cannot guarantee that the natural father will receive the child he desires. A variety of contingencies could prevent such an outcome: 1. The surrogate could decide to keep the child and litigate the issue of custody. One of the most serious consequences for the natural father in this event is that a court may require him to pay child support to the surrogate if she is awarded custody of the child. Child support is a right inherent in the child and as such is probably not waivable by the surrogate in advance. Therefore, the contractual agreement provides that the surrogate will indemnify the natural father for any and all amounts of child support he is required to pay. 2. Just as with any pregnancy, the surrogate program cannot guarantee that the child born to the surrogate will be a healthy child, free of all defects. Nevertheless, we do know that the surrogate has produced healthy children, and is herself healthy. Therefore, the probabilities of a healthy child exceed those for a random selection of the general population. 3. The surrogate program does not warrant that the surrogate selected by the natural father will in fact conceive. But once again, we do know that the surrogate has conceived previously. A fertility "work-up" is done prior to insemination in an attempt to rule out any secondary fertility. In the event the surrogate selected by the natural father fails to conceive after a total of twelve (12) monthly inseminations, the surrogate program will locate and screen a second surrogate for the natural father. 4. The surrogate program cannot guarantee that the surrogate and her husband will voluntarily terminate their respective rights to the child. The fee allocated for the surrogate is placed in escrow at the time the surrogate is signed. The surrogate's fee is not released to the surrogate and her husband until such time as they have voluntarily terminated their parental rights. In addition, the blood testing work must be satisfactory as to paternity prior to the release of the surrogate's fee . CONCLUSION Most people would agree that the most favorable way to produce people is from a biological union between the couple desirous of being parents. Unfortunately in many circumstances that is not possible. The surrogate parenting concept is for individuals who are desperate to have a child biologically related to at least one of the parents. In addition, in this day and age when the possibility of adopting an infant child is for most couples remote, surrogate parenting is now a viable alternative to adoption. But there are numerous legal and personal problems that can arise among the parties in a surrogate parenting arrangement. It is incumbent upon the attorney who promotes such an arrangement to anticipate these potential problems and to prevent them to the extent possible by creating the necessary contractual safeguards. *In surrogate parenting, the couple is matched with a woman (the surrogate) who in essence agrees to carry and give birth to a child for the infertile couple. The surrogate is artificially inseminated by the sperm of the infertile woman's husband so that he will be the biological father of the child. LEGAL PUBLICATIONS LOOSELEAF REPORTERS Be BOUND VOLUMES NEW Be USED-BOUGHT Be SOLD •TAX • CORPORATION • PENSION & PROFIT SHARING • S.E.C. • LABOR & PERSONNEL • BANKING • AFTR 1ST & 2ND. TCMD. USTC & OTHER BOUND PUBLICATIONS TERRY TULLY PRENTICE-HALL REPRESENTATIVE 2800 FIRST NATIONAL TOWER LOUISVILLE. KY 40202 502-585-4091 Dean's Dicta At its meeting on Monday, September 29, 1980, the law faculty voted to change the limitation on outside employment by full-time students from fifteen to twenty hours per week. The change in the "fifteen-hour rule" will no doubt be viewed as a victory for the student body on national and local levels. The precise origin of the rule lies in an interpretation of Standard 305(a)(iii) of the American Bar Association's accreditation standards. The Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, at its August 2-3, 1980 meeting in Honolulu, upon recommendation of the Accreditation Committee, changed its prior interpretation of the standard, so that it now reads: "A student may not work in excess of 20 hours per week while attending a school on a full-time basis. The law school has the burden to show that it has adopted and enforces policies assuring that full-time students devote substantially all working hours to the study of law, including policies relating to class scheduling, attendance requirements, and performance standards. These restrictions also apply during the summer in the same manner as they do during the normal year if the student is enrolled for summer session." The new rule of the University of Louisville School of Law is now in conformity with the ABA rule. The faculty went on record, however, as saying that it did not favor full -time students working twenty hours a week. Rather, its action was based on the proposition that the school should not require more of its students than the ABA does. During the course of the discussion, a number of interesting points emerged: First, some faculty members (probably, a minority) would prefer to have no rule at all. Second, neither the ABA nor the law school has any rule restricting the number of hours that a student in the Evening Division may work. Third, as the result of a student poll, a majority of the students favored a continuation of the fifteen-hour rule as to first-year students, but a change to twenty hours for second- and thirdyear students. Fourth, a minority of the faculty favored a continuation of the fifteen-hour rule for all students, other than those working in the law school. The latter (research and library assistants) would be permitted to work twenty hours, on the theory working outside the school involved some nonproductive travel time, and these students would also be able to study on the job. In prior issues in this space, we have discussed at length the importance of balancing the fundamentals of legal education with practical skills. A sound training in the fundamentals of the law is still the sine qua non of legal education. But the faculty has also recognized that some training in practical skills is essential for one who aspires Dean Harold G. Wren to be an attorney. During recent years, the introduction of the first-year course in Basic Legal Skills, the expansion of the requirements for graduation from eighty-four to ninety semester credit hours, and the introduction of a number of advanced courses in skills training have all been part of the school's effort to increase the amount of professional training that a student receives in the pursuit of the course of study leading to the J .D. degree. Indeed, at the very meeting when the twenty-hour rule was under discussion, the faculty also approved the introduction of Judge Charles M. Leibson's seminar, Practicum in Courtroom Law, for the Summer of 1981. Under the new program, students who have completed the equivalent of four day semesters of law school will be permitted to enroll in the Practicum where they will receive training and experience in the preparation and trial of complex litigation, under the direct supervision of outstanding trial attorneys. Completion of the course in Evidence will be a prerequisite for enrollment in the Seminar. Participation in the seminar involves a full-time commitment during the Summer Session. A number of our students are fortunate in that they receive practical experience through clerking for one of the law firms in Louisville while they are in law school. Most of the firms have cooperated with our school and have recognized that, in the long run, the student who has a solid foundation in the theory of the law, as well as some introduction to its practical aspects, will ultimately make the ablest member of the Bar. We believe that so long as the clerking experience does not so interfere with a law student's studies that it jeopardizes his basic legal education, clerking will often have a salutory effect in developing the "compleat" lawyer. The adoption of the twenty-hour rule is a step in this direction, and it appears that just about everyone in the community - students, faculty, and members of the Bar - will applaud. Harold G. Wren Dean MOVING? Please send us your new address at least four weeks in advance. 3 4 l.ouisvillr taw F:xaminrr. Octohrr 10. 1980 Photo by S<:ott FurAin An architect's model and an artist's concept of the School of Law's future facilities appropriately set the stage for Kevin Delahanty's talk to undergraduates during Pre-Law Day. Construction project ahead of schedule By Frank Bush While the seemingly endless parade of hot sunny days may have displeased some Kentuckians, especially farmers who have suffered crop losses as a result of the sultry weather, it has augured well for the construction project at the University of Louisville School of Law, allowing workers to devote long hours to their construction task. "The project is now moving on or ahead of schedule," says Dean Harold Wren. According to one student: "You can look at the construction site and see how the building is going to look." That news is a welcome message to many U of L students who have witnessed numerous delays since the planning of the new wing began in 1976. The latest was the strike which kept workers off the job for seven weeks during May and June. In an interview, Dean Wren expressed hope that the good weather will continue at least until the construction crew can place a roof over the frame presently being erected. With a roof in place, the workers can do a great deal of inside work during the approaching winter months. The Dean is also hopeful that a successful winter's work will prevent the school from being forced to move its staff and faculty offices and its library out of the law building and into other buildings on the University's Belknap Campus while renovation of the existing building is undertaken. Summer plans called for such a move, but the possibility now exists that needed temporary housing may be created in completed sections of the new wing. Preventing the move is advantageous in two ways, claims the Dean: the functioning of the law school would be kept together under one roof, facilitating smooth administration of the school during the remainder of the construction project, and the space in the university buildings to be provided to the law school for its use would be freed for other university purposes. Dean Wren again expressed his belief that the completed facility will be one of the best in the region. STAFF POSITIONS are available on the Louisville Law Examiner. If you are interested in writing or working with us, stop by our office in the basement of the Law Library, Room 30-8. No previous journalism experience is required. Increased Participation Marks Third Annual Pre-Law Day By Elizabeth Ward Friday, September 26, 1980 was Pre-Law Day at the University of Louisville School of Law. Nineteen college students and seven pre-law advisors from Kentucky and Southern Indiana were guests of the law school as the administration, faculty, staff and students continued the School of Law's recruitment program. Pre-Law Day has other purposes in addition to recruitment: to establish a communications network with the undergraduate pre-law advisors and clubs, which the administration and faculty members will be visiting later in the school year, and to give advisors and potential students a glimpse Into law school life. Associate Dean Norvie Lay was responsible for planning and organizing the Day. He and his staff contacted 24 colleges and universities. Nine schools were represente" for the program; advisors from six schools were unable to locate pre-law seniors; one school wished to come at a later date; three colleges expressed interest in someone visiting their school but were unable to attend. Four did not respond to the invitation at all. The program began with a welcome by Dean Lay and a presentation by Dean Harold G. Wren of the plans for the new building. Dean Wren announced that the construction was progressing ahead of the revised schedule. Student Bar Association President Kevin Delahanty spoke next. He emphasized that graduates of U of L School of Law have a 9307o pass-rate on the Kentucky Bar Examination. He strongly advised undergraduates to keep their GPA's as high as possible and to obtain LSA T study booklets for repeated practice prior to taking the test. Admissions Officer Adah Lovesee gave technical advice to the students about law school applications: deadline March 1, 1981; do not list colleges at which the student has completed less than 10 credit hours; and list only two references who know the student well or who are qualified to evaluate his potential. The highlight of the Pre-Law Day, according to one undergraduate, was sitting in on the Constitutional Law I class. (Constitutional Law I classes taught by Professor Knowles and Professor Quick were visited by the students.) Her "Paper Chase" impression of law school was not completely dispelled as preservation of migratory birds assumed constitutional proportions. After a luncheon and a questions session hosted by Associate Dean Steven Smith, the advisors and students met with the individual faculty members who will be visiting their campus later in the fall for recruitment purposes. Faculty members involved were Ronald Eades, Robert Stenger, Leslie Abramson, Richard Nowka and Linda Ewald. Pre-Law Day concluded with a tour of the School of Law and the Law Library, directed by law students Michael Alexander, Kevin Delahanty, Barbara Hartung, Gail Kaukus, Paul Roark and Elizabeth Ward. Dean Wren and Dean Lay expressed much satisfaction with the response from the undergraduate schools. The positive responses from 20 of the 24 schools contacted was "exactly what we had hoped Pre-Law Day to . accomplish - get those schools thinking in terms of U of L." Pre-Law Day is the first phase of a larger plan of Dean Lay's to continue recruitment efforts. This year faculty members as well as the administration will travel to at least twelve colleges or universities that have requested U of L School of Law to make a presentation to either a pre-law club or interested students. Lawyer Referral and Information Service brings Legal Community Closer to the Public By Mike Smither The Lawyer Referral and Information Service, otherwise known as "LRIS", has become firmly established as both an informative and helpful service to the general public of Louisville and surrounding areas. Established more than a year ago by the Louisville Bar Association in an effort to bring the legal community closer to the public, LRIS provides lawyer referrals to those persons who feel they may need the services of an attorney, yet know not where to begin to select one. The staff of the LRIS has condensed the general field of law into several classifications including consumer affairs, domestic relations, juveniles, real estate, taxation, torts, and wills and estates, among others. There is also a classification designated for Indiana cases. For a fee of $15.00 per classification, a member of the bar may be listed on the panel in any of these classifications for referrals. The panel in each classification is recorded within a computer and the attorneys on each panel receive referrals on a rotation basis. The member of the public seeking a referral is charged a $15.00 referral fee. This fee helps to pay the operating expenses of the service, which is located at the corner of 5th and Market Street in the rear of the Jefferson County Law Library. The person paying the fee is then entitled to a one-half hour consultation with the attorney he is referred to. Should the person choose to retain the attorney, fee negotiation is strictly left up to the attorney's discretion. The LRIS currently has a full-time staff attorney, two assistants and a para-legal/ legal secretary. This staff handles the numerous phone calls the service receives each day and provides those persons who walk-in with information regarding the problems they may have encountered. The staff often refers problems to city or county "help" agencies instead of an attorney due to the fact that many times what the individual needs is counseling, not an attorney. Normally, a person calling for a referral can get an appointment with the attorney that same day, and in emergencies, within a few hours. Calls are also received for referrals from out-of-town attorneys. Another service which LRIS offers is "Tel-Law" which is a library of tapes on legal subjects prepared by local attorneys. The tapes have been written in a manner easily understood by the general public. Although this service is no~ to be used to replace legal advice, it is very helpful for information regarding everyday situations involving the law. By dialing 583- LA WS, a person may listen to a tape concerning such subjects as bankruptcy, jury service, what to do when arrested and the procedure of small claims court, among others. This service was made possible partly due to a grant by the American Bar Association, which considers this one of its "pioneer" projects. Due to the continuing efforts of the Louisville Bar Association to bring the legal community closer to the public, as evidenced by its efforts in establishing the Lawyer Referral and Information Service, the bar may look forward to a better relationship with the people of Louisville and surrounding areas. Louisville l.aw f.'\aminer. O"toher 10, 1980 5 Legal Team Slaughtered atLaGnmge By Kevin Ford As we pulled up to the entrance, my stomach started to do flops. LaGrange State Reformatory! I had heard stories about what an intimidating place it was, but as my cohorts and I were escorted through the front gate, I quickly realized that the stories had highlighted the prison's good points. My stomach quit doing flops long enough for me to utter a barely-audible "no" to the guard's question as to whether I was carrying any "knives, guns, bazookas, grenades or other contraband." The wall guard then chuckled when his fellow guard called up to explain that I was part of the "outside" team that had come to bring the inmates' softball team to its knees. Before the day was through, I would help provide a lot more laughter to the guards and the inmates. "Jeeesssuuzz Christ!!" I thought as I walked through the yard. Some of these guys could kill people just looking at them. Little did I know that on this day the only killing was to be done on the softball field. Once I started warming up, I thought that the day wasn't going to be too bad. First, I learned that several members of the inmates' varsity team weren't going to play. Then, I looked around and found that there was some surprisingly good talent on my team. The team members, all of whom were attorneys (mostly legal aid) or law students, were: Les Abramson, John Schaaf, Stuart Alexander, Alan Schmitt, Dennis Conniff, Joe Gutman, Bobby Butler and two recruits -David Friedman, a legal aid attorney from Shelbyville, and Steve Brannum (#80001), from the prison. The Inmates carried on the usual lawyer I client chit-chat with us as they warmed up, and I was thinking that maybe they were a little overconfident. I should have realized that when someone goes out of his way to be nice to you before a game he is going to try to beat your brains out on the field. We were almost blown off the field in the very first inning. Here is the set up: we lead off, and our first three hitters hit the ball right on the nose. Three good plays by the Inmates and we're on the field. With Les (Abramson) on the mound, I figure we're in good shape because (a) he is an excellent pitcher and (b) he has faced these guys before in an earlier Joss. The Inmates' first hitter, a small man (small compared to the rest of his team), takes one of those moon balls that Les sets everyone to pop up on and pops it into the alley for a homerun. 1-0 Inmates. Two singles later, the Incredible Hulk steps up to the plate. The Hulk is left-handed, and with the right field fence being only 250 feet (approximately) away, I figure he'll plant one over the fence. Well, he planted one about 325 feet to right, but it was straight up. One out, thank God! The next batter, Tiny, is 6 ft. 5 in. and weighs 225 pounds, not including earring. He looks formidable, but because he is right-handed and the left field fence is 400 feet away, I figure we stand a good chance of holding him to a triple. How wrong I was! Tiny took an outside pitch and crushed it over the right field fence and off the second floor of dorm #7. 4-0 Inmates. Two outs later it is 5-0 Inmates. All of the above and then some was the script for the first few innings, but lo and behold we scratched our way back into the game. The then-close score of 13-9 Inmates was due to three factors: (1) we were hitting singles like crazy; (2) the infield, especially Dennis and #80001, was playing well; and (3) Les had moved the outfield practically out to Cincinnati and had refused to give the Inmates anything they could hit near right field. There had been some scary 325 foot fly balls, but we were in good position heading into the sixth. ·· Well, in the bottom of the fifth, the Inmates get a man out. Up steps the Incredible Hulk again. Les had handled him pretty well, so he threw him another high, very, very short pitch. The Hulk actually ran up in the box and hit over the right field fence and on top of the building. The ball (a sponge by this time) traveled at least 350 feet. We continued to battle courageously after the Hulk's satellite, but we lost. 16- 11 Inmates. The team comforted itself with the thought that we had made the inmates work for their victory, and we took the field a second time to play a team comprised of the warden, deputy warden, guards, and Tiny. We had no objection to Tiny's playing for we still had #80001 (Steve) and no one had the guts to tell Tiny he couldn't play. By the time the second game started, the whole yard was watching. (It's kinda hard not to notice people playing softball in the only open space you have.) They were all pro-lawyers, and the team responded with inspired ball to take a 9-4 lead. I credit the inspired play to a pre-game pep talk from the Hulk and his friends. They are very inspiring people. Unfortunately, the team tired or just plain fell apart and the Guards tied it at 9-9. We got two on with one out to start the seventh. There was a deep fly hit to right center. Our runner would tag and make it to third easily, right? Wrong! Your friend and mine, Tiny, was playing right field and he caught the ball going away from the infield, spun and threw a bullet to third. Double play. Who should lead off for the Guards? You guessed it! Tiny, of course. He zapped a single up the middle. A single and an out and he's on third. We walk the bases full to set up the force. Well, the deputy warden hits a short fly to left-center and Robb Butler throws a strike to home. However, Tny takes three strides from third and he beats the throw. 10-9 Guards. As we headed for the gate (lawyers and students only), the Guards and Inmates told us how much they enjoyed having us out. We had to admit we did enjoy it. Why, some of the Inmates even said we were good enough to play for them, and with their talent, that's a real compliment. Unfortunately, my teammates and I can't or don't want to meet their eligibility requirements. Intramural Soccer Team Wins Premiere Effort L'Eagles, the Jaw school's first time entry in the University's Intramural Soccer League, opened its season last Thursday with a resounding 9-0 victory over B.D:A.D.S., a Speed School entry. In recording their lopsided win the L 'Eagles got an unexpected boost from a player' usually associated with sports other than soccer. Rob Hardy, whom most people remember for his basketball prowess, started ingoal and shut out the opposition through the first three quarters. After giving way to Mike Luvisi in goal, Hardy proceeded to terrorize the BDADS goalie with a three goal "hat trick" in the final period. The remainder of the L'Eagles scoring was accounted for by forward Bob Stauble and midfielder Ken Bohnert. Each also had three scores. The opening action was rather scrambly and Hardy was called upon to make several key stops before his teammates got organized and began to dominate the action. Although missing several scoring chances they still managed to hold a 2-0 halftime lead. The offense was able to score at will in the second half. Organizer and team captain Dave Voisinet encourages everyone to join the booster club and become a part of the festivities. Maps and schedules have been placed in the breezeway lounge to help fans get to the field . L'Eagles' next game is at the Brook Street field on Thursday, October 23 at 9 p.m. Photo by Mtuy P«l Front row, left to right: Tom Schulz and Elizabeth Ward; Back row, left to right: Richard Head, Daryl Coffey, Frank Bush, Scott Furkin, and Craig Bell. Sixth Circuit Holds Fall Roundup By Craig Bell The Law Student Division of the American Bar Association, held its annual Sixth Circuit "Fall Roundup" from October 3, to October 5, of this year in Cincinnati, Ohio. The conference, sponsored by the Board of Governors of the American Bar Association, attracted student representatives from law schools throughout the Sixth Circuit. The "Roundup" served as a means of bringing together students from different Jaw schools located within the Sixth Circuit to discuss topics ranging from the general to the specialized. Attending the "Roundup" from the University of Louisville School of Law were Daryl Coffey and Richard Head, representing the Law Student Division and Student Bar Association of the U of L School of Law respectively, Rhonda Richardson and Peter Ebbs represented the Louisville branch of BALSA, while Elizabeth Ward, Tom Schulz, Craig Bell, Frank Bush, and Scott Furkin represented the award winning Louisville Law Examiner. One of the more interesting topics discussed at the "Roundup" was that of the responsibility of an attorney to provide pro bono work for those who cannot afford to retain counsel. Attorney Allen Brown suggested that the present system has failed in this objective and long overdue changes will eventually be forced upon those engaged in the practice of law. It was noted by Mr. Brown that there is considerable debate within the legal profession concerning the best means of providing pro bono services for those in need of them, but Mr. Brown did not take a stand concerning the best method of achieving a proper level of pro bono work by an attorney. He noted two distinct and different methods: to engage in pro bono work oneself or to permit an attorney to contribute to firms engaged in pro bono work as a tax deduction. Susan Sadler, of Drake Law School, spoke on the controversial issue of a person's "right to die." Ms. Sadler advocated the position that any Jaw which makes it illegal for a person to decide when his life should be terminated should be repealed. If implemented Ms. Sadler's proposals would permit euthanasia where a person had requested another to help him achieve his desire to die. A sample "Living Will" was given to all those in attendance. Ms. Sadler would give legal effect to any document made by a person requesting to "be allowed to die." All penalties for any person complying with such a request would be removed if the "Living Will" were given the force of law. A number of seminars were conducted at the "Roundup" of specialized interest to law students. These included seminars on law school honor codes, environmental issues, how to receive grants from the American Bar Association, women's issues, BALSA, and the publishing of the Louisville Law Examiner. The representatives of the Louisville Law Examiner conducted a workshop on the publishing of this newspaper. The Examiner was asked to conduct the workshop because of the many awards it has received from the American Bar Association/ Law Student Division. Each of the Law Examiner's representatives spoke on a . different aspect in the publishing of this newspaper. Representatives of several law school newspapers attended the workshop and commented favorably on the high standards and degree of professionalism exhibited by the Examiner editors and staff. "The mutual confidence on which all else depends can be maintained only by an open mind and a brave reliance on free discussion." -Learned Hand Let us know your point of view. Letters to the editors should be typed and signed. The editors reserve the right to edit letters for space considerations and for clarity. :J I .,. ------------------------------------------------""'='11 Louisville Law Examiner, October 10, 1980 July 1980 Bar Results (Figures furnished by Kentucky State Board of Bar Examiners) Graduates of the University of Louisville School of Law were edged out of having the highest passing percentage by one-tenth of a percent by the University of Kentucky. All three Kentucky schools of law showed a decline in the passing rate as compared to the Spring bar results. University of Louisville School of Law graduates had a pass rate on the July, 1980 bar exam of 89.7% as compared to the Februarv. 1~80 bar results of93.7%. Of those from U of L taking the bar exam: No. No. First-timers Second -timers Third-timers Taking 112 2 3 Passed 105 0 0 Percentage 93. 750fo 0% 0% OVERALL Number Taking 334 87.4% Number Passing 292 UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE Number Taking 117 89.7% Number Passing 105 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY Number Taking 118 89.8% Number Passing 106 CHASE (NORTHERN KY. UNIVERSITY) Number Taking 56 76.7% Number Passing 43 OUT-OF-STATE SCHOOLS Number Taking 43 88.3% Number Passing 38 THE FOLLOWING PERSONS PASSED THE JULY, 1980 KENTUCKY BAR EXAMINATION: Karl Lynn Anderson John Joseph Andris, Jr. Stephen Maurice Arnett Perry Russell Arnold Kenneth Joseph Bader Patricia Wilson Ballard Frederick David Banks Donald Albert Becher Walter Ralph Beck Bonnie Kay Biemer David Alan Black William Bertrand Blackburn William Hartman Brammell Thomas Raymond Brule Robert Ezell Butler II Walter Robbins Byrne, Jr. Philip Harrison Cade Samuel Brownlow Carl Timothy Kirkpatrick Chism, Jr. Mark Wheeler Clevenger Tamara Todd Cotton Grover Simpson Cox Harry Scott Davis Sean Robert Delahanty Douglas Melvin Dowell Bruce Kitredge Dudley Douglas Edward Feldkamp Mark Squires Fenzel Cynthia Ann Field Mary Frances Forrest Joseph Dominic Fowler, Jr. Olivia Ann Morris Fuchs Nancy Jean Gall-Clayton Benjamin Lee Gardner Jan Margaret Glasgow H. Phillip Grossman George Edward Hafling George Alexander Hamilton Michael Ray Hance Cheryl Carpenter Havens Michael Louis Henry Richard Wayne Hill William Alexander Hoback Kevin Michael Horne Kenneth Martin Howard Lisabeth Hughes Rex Lee Hunt A. Thomas Johnson Christopher Wayne Johnson Kenneth Stephen Kasacavage James Donald Kenney Ill Judith Ann Kidwell Margaret Ruth Kramer Patricia Lynn Larkin Diane Gilliam LeRoy Marc H. Levy Maurice Reeves Little David Todd Littlefield Matthew George Livingood Gordon Bruce Long Dorin Edwin Luck Richard Carroll McCarty James Paul McCrocklin Thomas Edward McDonald III James Neal Martin Patrick William Mattingly Kenneth Allen Meng James Earl Morreau, Jr. Michael Dwight Morris Michael Ralph Murphy John David Myles Mary Frances Niccolai Peter Lucas Ostermiller David Charles Payne Earl Gene Penrod Michael Louis Polio Murray Jay Porath Gregory Lee Price Douglas Curtis Ragan Robert Kenyon Rainey David Bruce Reynolds David Keith Rhinerson Henry C. T. Richmond III Henry Vernon Sanders David Bruce Sandler James Marion Shake Elizabeth Rayrior Short Larry David Simon David Alexander Smith John Stafford Sowards, Jr. Scott David Spiegel Jeffrey Robert Sturges Kent Overton Sublett John Edward Swain, Jr. John Carleton Tobin Pamela M. Corbin Trevathan George Townsend Underhill III Douglas Anthony U'Sellis Chris Christian Wakild Eileen Marie Walsh Anna Marie Washburn Robert Ross Waterman Matthew Henry Welch Thomas Benedict Wine Lloyd Gregory Y opp U of L Homecomers to Get ''In the Mood'' - University of Louisville alumni and friends will have the opportunity to get "In the Mood" at Homecoming 1980 festivities Oct. 17-18. for the event, to be held in the Crawford Gymnasium on Belknap Campus, are on a first-come, first-served basis to alumni. Activities begin at 2 p.m., Oct. 17 with the annual meeting of the Alumni Association in the Jefferson Room of the Administration Building on Belknap Campus. The annual Athletic Hall of Fame Dinner will be held at 6:30 p.m. at Executive Inn East. Tickets are $15. The School of Justice Administration alumni will hold a cocktail party and dinner at 6:30p.m. at Masterson's Restaurant. Speed Scientific School alumni and guests will have coffee and doughnuts at 9 a.m., Oct. 18 in the Faculty Dining Room of the Student Center Building on Belknap Campus. A 9 a.m. breakfast will be held in the Jefferson Room for School of Education alumni and guests. College of Arts and Sciences alumni will meet at 10 a.m. for coffee and doughnuts in The Playhouse on Belknap Campus. Alumni and their guests will have an opportunity to see the 1980-81 Cardinal basketball team in action at 10 a.m. for the first scrimmage of the season. Tickets Football-kicking, trivia and hula hoop contests will be a part of the fun and games beginning at 10:30 a.m. under the Alumni Association tent on the Main Oval in front of the Administration Building. A buffet lunch will be served and beverages will be available. Tickets for the lunch are $3.75. A highlight of the tent activities will be a concert by the ll3th U.S. Army Stage Band. The band will be featured "live" from 11 a .m. to noon on WUOL's (90.5 FM) Band Hour. The festivities will conclude with ·the WUOL Big Band Dance at 9 p.m. in the Marriott Inn Convention Center in Clarksville, Ind. Music will be provided by the Pat Whalen Orchestra. Tickets are $8 per couple The Student Homecoming Dance, featuring "Midnight Star," will be at 9 p.m. in Knights Hall, Bellarmine College, Newburg Road. For further information, or to obtain tickets for Homecoming events, contact the U of L Alumni Services Office at 588-6186. Two Memorial Funds Established Marilyn Meredith DougiiiS Ackerman Marilyn Meredith Memorial Fund The University of Louisville School of Law, in cooperation with the family and friends of the late Marilyn Ann Meredith, announces the establishment of the Marilyn Meredith Memorial Fund to aid deserving Evening Division law students at the University. Present plans include an annual textbook stipend or legal reference book award, but may be extended to additional forms of student assistance such as scholarships if sufficient funds are raised. Any individual or organization desiring to contribute to the Fund should send a check or money order, payable to the University of Louisville Foundation, Inc., and marked "For the Marilyn Meredith Memorial Fund'', and addressed to the University of Louisville School of Law, Dean's Office, 2301 South Third Street, Belknap Campus, Louisville, Kentucky 40292. All contributions are tax-deductible and will be administered by the School of Law. Douglas VanderHoof Ackerman Memorial Consumer Law Library Fund A memorial fund has also been established honoring Douglas V. Ackerman, a 1967 University of Louisville School of Law graduate, who died August 1, 1980 in New York City of complications resulting from meningitis. He was a native of Louisville and the son of the late Robert V. Ackerman and Douschka Sweets Ackerman of Louisville. Ackerman, noted as an expert in consumer protection, was assistant attorney general in the Bureau of Consumer Frauds and Protection for the State of New York. He started his legal career with the New York firm of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft but soon devoted himself to public interest law and worked with the South Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation from 1972 to 1978. Contributions to the memorial fund may be made to the Douglas VanderHoof Ackerman Memorial Consumer Law Library Fund in care of Melvyn Leventhal, Director of Bureau of Consumer Fraud and Protection, Attorney General's Office of the State of New York, 2 World Trade Center, New York, N.Y. 10047. Placement News The Life Planning Center is offering a series of job-seeking skills workshops. Workshop will be held Oct. 16, 23, 30 and Nov. 6. The subjects include "Defining a Job Target," "Breaking the Hidden Job Market," "Job Search Correspondence " and "Successful Interviewing." Workshops meet on Thursday from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. The workshops are free to students. To enroll call the Life Planning Center at 588-6927. * * • John Tobin has been accepted by the Army JAG Corps in Washington, D.C. PLACEMENT SCHEDULE_. Oct. 23 Hart, Bell, Deem and Ewing, ·vincennes, Ind. Oct. 27 U.S. Navy Patent Office. Oct. 28 Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs (Louisville). Kent Sublett has joined the Okolona office of the law firm of Frocket and Klingman. "Career Night" to Emphasize NonTraditional Employment Opportunities By Nick Riggs On Wednesday, October 22, 1980, the University of Louisville School of Law will sponsor its annual Career Night in the Law School Building. Career Night is a program which affords an opportunity for all law students to visit and talk with representatives from a diverse range of potential employers of law school graduates. This is not an opportunity for students to apply for positions with a particular employer, but more of an informal way for students to become aware of the expanding career field for law school graduates. Career Night may also aid a particular student in obtaining an insight into the path his or her legal career might follow, and to help the student become familiar with the procedure for obtaining a position in an area of interest. There will be over forty representatives present on Career Night. Each representative will be available for over an hour to meet with any interested student and will attempt to answer any question, whether specific or general, that the student might have concerning a particular career field . This year the Placement Office, under the direction of Phyllis Leibson, is placing an emphasis on non-traditional employment opportunities for law school graduates because of the increasing number of graduates from law schools across the country. In addition to representatives from such traditional employers as law firms, corporations, and local, state, and federal governments, there will be representatives from the energy, insurance, real estate and labor fields. The Career Night program will begin at 7:00 p.m., following a dinner at 5:30 p.m. for all the representatives. Between 7:00 p.m. and 8:00p.m. students may visit with any representative they wish. Each representative will be assigned a room in the Law School Building. Louisville Law E"aminer. October 10, 19!!0 7 NIGHT and DAY NIGHT STUDENTS RESENTED? Student Legal Research Group Receives Largest Assignment Ever By Jane Atkinson Some time after the shock of the first what time of day he teaches, and no night year is over, the night student begins to student worth his salt would want a profesrealize that his presence is resented by many sor to do so. Criticism of night-school inday students. This information typically struction is usually predicated on a belief in reaches him via a former classmate who the inferiority of instruction by the night has switched to day school and has learned school's part-time instructors. first-hand of that resentment. If the trans- Two of my favorite instructors were partferring student has made good grades in his time teachers, and I felt that they knew evening classes, he may be told that his their subjects well, taught them thoroughly, A's have tainted the purity of the full-time and demanded a great deal of the students. students' A's. Any displacement of a day On the other hand, there have been some student from his rank in his class by a for- ineffective part-time teachers. Who in the mer night student is met with some hostility day school is not able to say the same thing and is usually considered to be the result of about his full-time professors? I learned the the night school's alleged lower grading least in a course taught by a full-time prostandard. fessor, yet others are excellent; and there One doesn't want to be in the position of are some whose reputation makes me sorry protesting too much in the no-win debate not to have had a class with them. It is over grading standards. Any discrepancy in realistic to believe that while effectiveness the averages of the two groups can be ex- may vary from teacher to teacher, the cause plained either way: if Group A's average is of the variation is that individual's abilities, higher it can mean that that group did a not necessarily his full-time or part-time better job; if Group A's average is lower, status. (However, the faculty should not then the cause could be the inflated grades shortchange night students by assuming of Group B. anyone can teach a night course; excellent Students best able to compare the two part-time teachers are available and should divisions of the law school - those who be insisted on.) The law school's Student Legal Research Group conducted over 500 hours of research this Fall for the Kentucky Department of Justice as part of a U of L-UKChase effort to analyze 6,000 court decisions concerning the issue of probable cause, according to the organization's Director Talia Liebermann Arik. The U of L students were assigned approximately 3,500 case citations previously obtained through the Lexis system using the key words "probable cause". Their task was to read the cases and identify those which dealt with the issue in substance as opposed to those which only fortuitously contained the key words. A law professor at the University of Tennessee will assign each case a number and "value" according to a pre-designed computer program. The findings will then be studied by a nationwide group of law professors including U of L's Professor Albert Quick. They hope to develop a Mirandatype card to be consulted by police in a checklist fashion prior to making an arrest. It is believed that such a card will reduce the number of dismissals due to a lack of probable cause which results from the difficulty police face in staying abreast of the recent developments in this area. * * * The student Legal Research Group is now accepting applications for the position of Director. The Director's term runs from January through December 1981. Duties include supervision of staff, editing briefs and memos, maintaining contact with practicing attorneys throughout the state, and general administrative responsibilities. Remuneration includes a full tuition scholarship for the semesters of service as well as additional sums for research done. This is an excellent job opportunity as it enables one to sharpen research skills, gain exposure to various areas of law, and establish many contacts in the legal community. Deadline for submission of applicants is November 7. For further information, contact Talia Liebermann or Professor Leslie Abramson . have attended both - assure me that they Another source of disunity is the differhave maintained their grades in both divi- ence between day students and night stusions without having to study harder in dents as general types, a fact which several either. Those. who transfer from night professors have commented about. While school to day school may prefer the com- recognizable differences are subject to panionship of their old nighttime friends, many exceptions and are sometimes hard but they find the academic challenges of to describe, at other times they seem as both divisions are comparable. obvious as the difference between night News-In-Brief Why does the misunderstanding and dis- and day. trust continue? Last month's columnist Night students tend to be older, a great pointed out that it begins with the adminis- many having families to support. Many tration, who apparently consider night stu- have long-established careers; and they bring dents to be stepchildren. If a student is to the classroom a diversity of experience, properly dedicated to becoming a lawyer, it interests, and backgrounds. They are apt to is thought, he should give up everything else participate more in class and to be less intimito attain his goal. If he cannot or is not will- dated by the professor. A poll would probing to do that, then he is somehow less ably reveal that more students in the day deserving of entering the legal profession. division have parents or relatives who are Ideally, all students should be held to the lawyers or judges, and accordingly some same high standards in the fulfillment of day students may be more aware than the requirements and in class preparation and average night student of what lawyers actuexamination. They also should be presumed ally do every day. Often such differing capable of deciding how to spend their out- types of people do not mix well, and each of-class hours -whether in working, study- may perceive the other's dissimilarities as ing, loafing, or drinking beer. Working less shortcomings. may, but does not necessarily, mean studying I don't know which group is the more more. Many times a busy person is able to deserving, studious, or dedicated toward effectively organize his limited time and get professional excellence. No doubt there are more done than those with fewer com- good and bad students -dedicated and unmitments. dedicated, honest and dishonest - in both The administration's preconceived ideas divisions. Why not accept the differences Phi Alpha Delta announces October "Coming Events": On Saturday, October 11, Vinson Chapter will send representatives to a joint meeting with District XI (which consists of the nine Ohio chapters) in Cincinnati. Members interested in attending should contact Tim Scott, Renona Browning, or Scott Furkin. On Friday and Saturday, October 17 and 18 and again on Friday and Saturday, October 24 and 25, P.A.D. will sponsor the annual police car rides in conjunction with the Louisville Police Dept. Interested persons should sign up in the law school breezeway. On Friday, October 24, P.A.D. will hold fall initiation at the Federal Courthouse on 6th and Broadway. Prospective initiates should return applications to Dean Smith's secretary or any P .A.D. officer as soon as possible. * * * The faculty voted on September 30, 1980 to follow the ABA guidelines on student working by approving a 20-hour limitation on full-time law students. * * * are not the only cause of misunderstanding. between the two groups without charac- Results of SBA election: Distrust between day and night students terizing it in terms of fitness to study and First Year Day Representatives are: A_ would probably remain even if all official practice law. There is room for all of us. As Wes Loy; B _ Rosemary Taft; z _ Don prejudice were abandoned. Additional divi- long as equal and high standards are insisted Battcher. Second Year Representatives are sive factors include prejudice toward part- upon, opening the study of law to varying R. Mark Beal and John Webb; third year time instructors and the basic differences types of people can only result in a. strength- representatives are Kathiejane Oehler and between day students and night students. ening, rather than a weakening, of the legal Steve Erikson. Any full-time faculty member who teaches profession. Night Class Representatives are: 1st _ night classes will assure you that he does not (Jane Atkinson is a fourth year night Laurel Knuckles; 2nd _ Harold Storment; alter his academic expectations based on student.) 3rd _Tom Weatherly; 4th_ Jerry Baker. ~============~~~====~~ WOODY'S TAVERN &ALE GARDEN brook & burnett Please pick up one of our Special Calendars at the Law School Library ... Thursdays (Pitchers $1.50) All Day Strict Dress Code (No Disco Apparel) WOODY The Moot Court Board and the Moot Court Freshman Committee for the Evening Division of the Law School have announced that the mandatory rounds of arguments for the division will be held on Saturday, October 25 at the school. The hypothetical cases for this year are Concerned Atheists v. Christian, concerning whether the recognition of a Bible study group by a high school violates the establishment of the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, and State v. Harvey Landfill and Development Co., concerning whether the commerce clause precludes a state from enacting a law that bars importation of toxic waste collected or originating in other states. * * * Third year law student Talia Liebermann was married to Tali Arik on Aug. 31. Mr. Arik is a student at the U of L School of Medicine. * * * Sally Whetzel, wife of third year student Stan Whetzel, gave birth to twin daughters on September 28. Presidential Forum Announced The Sigma Delta Kappa intercollegiate law fraternity has been given permission by Dean Harold G. Wren to sponsor a debate between representatives of the three major presidential candidates. This "presidential forum" is intended for the benefit of the entire law student body. The consensus of the fraternity was that the demands on the law students' time is such that students are not able to adequately follow the election. As future members of the Bar, the fraternity believes it is essential that students be well-informed of the issues involved in this election. Representing President Carter will be Mr. Dale Sights, Chairman, Campaign to ReElect the President in Kentucky; representing Gov. Reagan is Mr. Lawrence E. Forgy, Gov. Reagan's Campaign Chairman in Kentucky; and representing Cong. John Anderson is Joel Goldstein, University of Louisville Professor of Political Science. The debate will be modeled closely after the format of that of the League of Women Voters and will be held at 8:30 p.m. on October 23, 1980 in Strickler Hall on Belknap Campus. It is open to the public. PageS Louisville Law Examiner, October 10, 1980 E!!!!l!!l course materials contain 1,000 PMBE Multistate questions with fully detailed answers. I • 200 PMBE CONTRACTS QUESTIONS ~~:~ • 200 PMBE TORTS QUESTIONS s~~~~' • 150 PMBE PROPERTY QUESTIONS • 150 PMBE CRIMINAL LAW QUESTIONS s~~~~o { • 150 PMBE EVIDENCE QUESTIONS s~~~' • 150 PMBE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW QUESTIONS • PMBE SUPPLEMENTAL COURSE OUTLINES COST: $175 for the complete set of PMBE course materials (including FREE set of PMBE review cassette tapes with the purchase of course materials prior to November 30, 1980) PMBE review cassette tapes may be purchased separately for $49.95. PMBE Tuition Discount Polley: All first and second year students purchasing their PMBE preparatory materials will receive an automatic $175 discount on their subsequent enrollment In our PMBE Mulfistafe Bar Review Course. EAST COAST OFFiCE 743 Spruce Street Philadelphia. PA 19106 (215) 925-0699 ~~l!g MULTISTATE LEGAL STUDIES, INC. TOLL FREE (800) 523-0777 Make 'checks payable to: MULTISTATE LEGAL STUDIES, INC. WEST COAST OFFICE 41 Avenue 19 Venice. CA 90291 (213) 399-9367 743 Spruce Stree1, Philadelphia, PA 19106 o (215) 925-0699 41 Avenue 19. Venice. CA 90291 o (213) 399-9367 Name~-------------------------------------------------------Address ---------------------------------------------------- Ci1y/State/Zip Law School Attended -------------------------------------------Represen1a1ive (if any)·-------------------------------------------- 0 1 am enclosing my $175 check/money order 1o cover the cost of the complete set of PMBE first and second year course materials: 0 1 wish to purchase the PMBE review cassette tapes only. My checklmoney order for $49.95 is enclosed. --- -- ·- - Oct. 14 Oct. IS Oct. 16 Oct. 17 Oct. 21 Oct. 23 Oct. 25 Nov. 4 Nov. 10 CALENDAR OF EVENTS Law Forum/ Embryo Lawyers; Direct and Cross Examination of Witness in Criminal Case; Video tape. CLE; Appeals, Oral Arguments and Brief Writing; St. Catharine College, Springfield, Ky. SBA; Boo and Brew smoker; Woody's. Speed Scientific School; Seminar Basic Law for Engineers, Architects and Managers; Breckinridge Inn. Law Forum /Embryo Lawyers; Introduction and Use of Exhibits; Video tape. " Retirement and Estate Planning and Coping with Inflation," a seminar sponsored by the University of Louisville at Executive West from 9 a.m. to 4:30p.m. Women's Law Caucus; Olga Peers, Speaker; Allen Courtroom at 5:15p.m. CLE; Worker's Compensation; Gilbertsville, Ky. LBA; Irving Younger tapes. Election Day February Kentucky Bar Examination filing deadline. Louisville Law Examiner School of Law Non-Profit Organization U.S. POSTAGE PAID Permit No. 769 Louisville, KY University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky 40208 ----~- John M. Harlan 1 ,· Law Examiner Volume6 Number 3 October 10, 1980 ABA / LSD "Fall Roundup" held in Cincinnati .. . Page 5 July Kentucky Bar Results Announced ... Page 6 Dean Wren, right, talks to undergraduates considering the U of L School of Law at the Annual Pre-Law Day. . .. Page 4 |
Subject |
University of Louisville. School of law University of Louisville--Students University of Louisville--Alumni and alumnae University of Louisville--Faculty University of Louisville--Employees Law students Law & legal affairs Law and legislation--Kentucky Law and legislation--United States Law libraries Legal education Libraries |
Location Depicted |
Louisville (Ky.) Jefferson County (Ky.) |
Date Original | 1980-10-10 |
Object Type | Newspapers |
Source | Various-sized print newspapers published by students of the University of Louisville School of Law. The print edition may be found in the University of Louisville Law Library or the University of Louisville Archives and Records Center. |
Collection | Law Library Collection |
Collection Website | http://digital.library.louisville.edu/cdm/landingpage/collection/law |
Digital Publisher | Law Library of the Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, University of Louisville |
Format | application/pdf |
Ordering Information | The publications digitized in this collection are the property of the University of Louisville School of Law and are not to be republished for commercial profit. To inquire about reproductions, permissions, or for additional information, email lawlibrary@louisville.edu. |
Rating |
|
|
|
A |
|
C |
|
F |
|
G |
|
H |
|
I |
|
J |
|
K |
|
L |
|
M |
|
O |
|
R |
|
S |
|
U |
|
V |
|
|
|