|
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 9, Number 2 Louisville, Kentucky, October 1983 Circulation 5400 Former Congresswoman at U of L Chisholm Urges Lawyers: Safeguard Minority Gains by Yolanda French Much of the social and political progress made by blacks and women in the last decade may be lost if attorneys don't lead the fight to save it, according to former U.S. Representative Shirley Chisholm. Speaking to several hundred people in Strickler Hall on the U of L campus, Chisholm strongly encouraged members of the legal community to become part of a "watchdog team" that would safeguard the legislative gains made by minorities and women. "We don't need any more legislation in the United States of America," Chisholm said. "What we really need is attorneys who have the heart, soul, stamina, guts and audacity to stand up and be counted because they have the special skills necessary to help the people who are fighting for their rights in the courtrooms of this country." Chisholm said it's the responsibility of the legal community to ensure that "multitudinous bits of legislation at the local, state, and federal levels" are properly enforced. "These laws must be implemented across the board so that we come to the fullest kind of realization of the American dream," she said. Chisholm was a specialist in early childhood education and child welfare when she entered politics in 1964 as a member of the New York State Assembly where she served for four years before her election to the U.S. House of Representatives. Her election to the 91st Congress as the Democratic representative from the BedfordStuyvesant area of Brooklyn made her the first black woman member of the House. In 1972, at the Democratic National Convention in Miami, Chisholm became the first black person and the first woman to have her name put in nomination for the Presidency by a major American political party. She received about ten percent of the votes at the convention. After her presidential bid, Chisholm returned to her career as a member of Congress where she served until her retirement in 1982. She has written two books, including Unbought and Unbossed, her autobiography. Chisholm's U of L speech was sponsored by several groups including the Law Forum, the Black American Law Students Association, and the Women's Law Caucus. Lecturing on the "Responsibilities of the Legal Community towards Minorities and Women,'' Chisholm aimed most of her remarks at the law students and young attorneys in the audience. "We are depending on the younger lawyers to complete the dream we've had in this country," Chisholm said. ''Take the hands of the disillusioned and the disenchanted and march in front of them to help them fight for their rights. It's not enough to get your law degree unless you're going to utilize it to help alleviate the suffering in the human condition." Chisholm said the gains of the civil Photo by Crystal Collins On her recent visit to U of L, former Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm encouraged students to help protect gains made by blacks and women in the last decade. rights movement and the women's movement were a long time in the making, requiring the slow building of coalitions in Congress and throughout the country. Many of those gains are being eroded, according to Chisholm, and she said attorneys have a "unique kind of responsibility" to protect those gains. "We need some legal 'profiles in courage' in this country," she said. "Change comes from those who dare and one of the groups who should be daring is the lawyers. The only things you need are daring and confidence." One of the key issues for women in the next few years will be what Chisholm called a "complete restructing of the Social Security and pension systems in America." She said women should get actively involved in making these systems more equitable for women because "it's not high on the agendas of male legislators." Chisholm told the women lawyers and law students in the audience that they don't have to imitate men to be successful. "It's not necessary, my female lawyers, to go into anybody's courtroom and act like a man or talk like a man," Chisholm said. "If feminists have made one mistake, it has been to confuse equality with masculinity. Why should successful women abandon compassion, scorn reconciliation, crave power, get ulcers, maybe even start wars? Why should we emulate the good ole boys?" ''Our goal is not to create a new generation of female chauvinists, but to eliminate chauvinism altogether," Chisholm said. "I look to the feminization of America, where feminine values of peace and reason will guide our daily lives." Eleven Circuit Judgeships Contested . in Election by Todd Hollenbach and Mike Schafer Election Day is November 8 and of particular interest to the legal community are the Jefferson Circuit Court division races to be decided that day. The Circuit Court is one of general jurisdiction, handling all matters not delegated to other courts; i.e., felonies, criminal cases, divorces, civil litigation over $2500, and labor disputes . Jefferson County comprises one Judicial Circuit, with 16 members sitting in as many divisions, facilitating allocation of cases. Five incumbent Circuit Judges are unopposed in their bids for re-election. They are Joseph H. Eckert, Richard A. Revell, John W. Potter, Olga Peers, and the Circuit's Chief Judge Laurence Higgins. In an effort to help voters better understand the candidates in the other races, the Law Examiner has gathered information on their education, legal careers, and other activities: SECOND DIVISION ROBERT E. DELAHANTY, Robert E. Delahanty, age 60, received his JD from George Washington University. Judge Delahanty served as Louisville Police Court Judge from 1970 to 1978, when he was elected to his present position as District Judge. He was first Chief Judge of District Court. Judge Delahanty has served on the Kentucky Judicial Council, and was a member of the Special Task Force to Study the Commonwealth's Legal S.ystem. He has also been a Director of the Legal Aid Society, and was First Vice-President of the Ohio River Valley Safety Council. He is presently on the Board of Directors of the University of Louisville Alumni Association, and Area Chairman for the American Cancer Society. EDMUND "PETE" KAREM Edmund "Pete" Karem, 42, received his JD from U of L Law School in 1968, and practices civil trial law. Mr. Karem has served as Special Prosecutor of the Kentucky Department of Public Safety, has been on the Board of Directors of Kentucky Youth Advocates, Kentucky Association of Trial Attorneys, and is presently on the Board of Overseers of Spalding College. Mr. Karem has held several positions in the Louisville Bar Association, serving as President in 1980. He has also served as Chairman of the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights. THIRD DIVISION CHARLES H. ANDERSON (Incumbent) Charles H. Anderson has been Circuit Judge for the Third Division since 1975. Judge Anderson graduated from University of Missouri Law School, after a stint in the U.S. Marine Corps. · Anderson, 58, was a worker's compensation referee from 1960 to 1968. He then served as staff attorney for Legal Aid until 1970, at which time he was elected judge of the third magisterial district for two terms. Anderson served as a Director of the Family and Children's Agency, and was on the Organizational Committee for the Emergency Medical Service in 1974. He currently is a Director of Action Now, and is a Trustee for the Lincoln Institute in Simpsonville. In 1980 he was honored by the National Bar Association as a Distinguished State Trial Judge. MARTIN E. JOHNSTONE Currently a Jefferson District Court Judge, Johnstone graduated from U of (Continued on page 7) Page2 Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 Louisville Law Examiner EDITORIAL BOARD Judy Hoge Editor -in-Chief Neil Ward Associate Editor Crystal Collins Associate Editor Photography Editor Julie A. Brown Tim Cocanougher John Schaaf Managing Editor Jon Hardy Brandeis Brief Editor Winnie McConnell Night Associate Editor STAFF Yolanda French Todd Hollenbach Mike Schafer David Taylor Joel D. Zakem Professor LAWRENCE W. KNOWLES, Coasulfant The l..o•isville Law Examiner is published six times during the academic year in the interest of the University of Louisville School of Law community. Articles are invited from faculty members, students, and members of the bar who wish to do freelance work. Any proposed article should be cleared with the Editor as to topic and length. Address all communications to The Louisville Law Examiner, School of Law, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40208. · Phone: 502-588-6398. "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. Letter to the Editor Editorial We Need the New Charter to Streamline Government The system of dual governments presently serving Louisville and Jefferson County is sadly outdated and should be reorganized to better serve this community. For several years, neighboring cities such as Nashville, Lexington, and Indianapolis have been reaping the benefits of governments which have been streamlined by reorganization. Meanwhile, Louisville and Jefferson County have plodded on like two lumbering giants, stopping occasionally to butt heads and knock each other down. It's time to get up and put an end to the fragmentation which seems to divide this community on every issue from police protection to economic development. The governments of Louisville and Jefferson County are roughly the same size and serve hundreds of thousands of · the same constituents. The result is duplication, wasted effort, and obvious inefficiency. · When major corporations come to the community, they're met by two governments competing for tax dollars. There are two chief elected officials to get to know, two legislative bodies and economic development offices with which to work, and two sets of regulations to deal with. One government representing the entire community appeals to business and industry and would ultimately benefit all of us as the evidence from neighboring cities proves. In terms of growth in total employment in the 1970's, Louisville grew by 16 percent in the decade, while Indianapolis showed a 30 percent increase in jobs, Nashville a 40 percent increase, and Lexington's employment opportunities grew by a whopping 85 percent. While there are other factors involved, it's obvious these cities are working with more effective tools than Louisville and Jefferson County. The opponents of the proposed new charter have succeeded, to some extent, in · fogging this year's debate with erroneous information which they have dispensed, in many cases, to insure their own self-interests·. For example, politicians in parts of the community oppose the charter because they see it as a direct challenge to their political power bases. The new 27-member countywide commission will give rise to a new group of community representatives who will be in close contact with citizens and will be challenging the entrenched authority of the politicans who have reigned for so long. The end of the fragmentation in this community must start at the top - we must eliminate the institutional competition between city and county governments. It's time to put aside the selfish interests, acknowledge our shared objectives, and begin working together . Law School Committee Revises Regulations Concerning Probation By Judy Ho~e Heleringer Blasts Blackrnun, U. of L. A Law School committee, composed of Professor Jacqueline Kanovitz, Chairman of the Reinstatement and Probation Committee, Professor Carl Warns, and students Marc Murphy and Mike Levy, has approved a revision of the academic regulations pertaining to probation and dismissal. TO THE EDITOR: I was shocked and dismayed (but not really surprised) by the puff piece the Examiner published concerning the recent visit to the law school by Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmon. With Professor Steve Smith lavishing obsequious praise, the law school saw fit to honor the man who wrote the most pernicious Supreme Court opinion since the Dred Scott case. Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion-ondemand in this country, has resulted in the wholly unnecessary destruction of 10,000,000 of our defenseless, pre-born brothers and sisters . This conscienceshocking decision allows an abortion up until the moment of birth, depending on the whim of the "mother" and her physician. In some of our country's finest hospitals, highly-skilled neonatal teams work around the clock to save a prematurely-born infant, while down the hall some heartless abortionist is dismembering and killing a 5,6, or 7-month-old pre-born infant. Is this nightmare really the intended result envisioned by Blackmon and his six concurring brothers ten years ago when they wrote that only (an undefined) "meaningful life" had the right to due process of law? I guess so. Blackmun says, stubbornly, he'd do it again "exactly the same way." The law school should be condemning the author of such a callous decision instead of commending him. And what an insulting affront to the memory of Justice Brandeis, in whose name the award was bestowed on this reprehensible individual, who throughout his long, remarkable life, fought to protect the rights of all citizens, especially those, like the unborn that had no advocates in their behalf. I suppose that , some 130 years ago, Professor Smith would have presided over a similar ceremony honoring Chief Justice Roger Taney for his authorship of the Dred Scott decision, in which the principle that black people were nothing more than chattel was affirmed. Justice Taney, like Blackmun, was also protecting "individual rights" of privacy in his day: that between a master and his property. To be entirely consistent, I think next year's Brandeis award should go to the members of the Indiana Supreme Court who, a year ago, affirmed the right of "parents," "physicians," and "hospitals" in Bloomington to legally starve to death a handicapped newborn infant. When the concentration camps were finally liberated in 1945, the citizens from surrounding communities were forced by Allied soldiers to view the brutal leftovers of the Nazi holocaust. "We didn't know," they said. The damning indictment of Professor Smith and law schools that give awards to the leading proponents of the uncivilized slaughter of our innocent pre-born is that they do know precisely what is occurring and, like the good German burghers, will do absolutely nothing to help stop the flow of so much innocent blood. For the first time, I am profoundly ashamed of the otherwise outstanding law school from which I graduated . Robert L. Heleringer Class of 1976 Editor's Note: The Law Examiner considered it an honor that Justice Blackmun visited the U of L Law School. We would accord similar coverage to a visit by any United States Supreme Court Justice. "This revision doesn't go into effect until 1984-85; it isn't retroactive,'' said Profes sor Kanovitz . "The mtntmum cumulative grade point average necessary to stay in school has been raised from 1.4 to 1.6. Any student whose grade point average is below 2.0 will be on probation, as always ." Under the new standard, if a student on probation is able to earn 2.0 or above the following semester, he will then have an additional semester to remove the balance of his grade point deficiency. Should all such deficiencies still not be made up at the end of the second semester, the student will have a third semester, if, in the Committee's opinion, there is a strong prospect that he will be able to remove all quality point deficiencies by the end of that period. Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 NIGHT and DAY Full-tinte Jobs Mean No Free Tinte By Winnie McConnell according to Handy. "I find it hampering sometimes because I run out They say variety is the spice of life and of hours in a day and I just don't such is the case in the night division of physically have the time with a full-time the U of L Law School where students job," she said. with a wide range of occupations come However, Handy believes working together four nights a week to learn the and going to school helps her grasp the law. "whole big apple" of law. Most of the evening law students are "By working in a banking institution, employed in a variety of full-time jobs -it gives me a frame of reference to study such as nursing, accounting, teaching, cases," she said. "In other words, I am / government and business better able to apply the legal concepts I · administration, public relations, learn to the real world." , 1 banking, insurance and sales. While Because of her present position, \ 1 there are many students who have Handy is interested primarily in the ; . specialized in unusual jobs, there are areas of law related to bank trust three law students who have made functions such as deferred compensation noteworthy strides in exceptional law and decedents' estates. Tom Mapp occupations and still find the energy to For Tom Mapp, a second-year pursue legal careers. evening student, the day usually begins Sharon Handy, a 27-year-old fourth- about 7 a.m. at the Louisville Times, year night student, can be found writing a news story which must be weekdays in the Employee Benefits finished by 8:30a.m. Division of the Liberty National Bank A reporter covering urban affairs, Trust Department. As a trust officer, Mapp reports on taxes, roads and how Handy is responsible for the account government affects people in the administration of certain corporate community. retirement and profit sharing plans for He has worked for the newspaper which the bank serves as trustee, since August, 1981. Before that, Mapp custodian, agent or investment manager. was a reporter in Des Moines, Iowa Handy has worked at Liberty where he grew up. The 27-year-old National Bank since 1978 in various Mapp received his M.A. degree in including assistant vice journalism from the University of Iowa. Sharon Handy president and manager of executive banking services. She graduated that same year from Hanover College in Indiana with a B.A. in theology. Handy decided to obtain a law degree because she thought it would give her more credibility at her present position and provide her with opportunities for advancement and promotion. "Once I began law school I really enjoyed the academic growth it offers," she said. Being an evening law student has its advantages and disadvantages, Mapp has always been intrigued by the legal profession and decided to give it a try. "My friends have persistently told me that I should check it out, but I never gave it much thought until a year ago," he said. "Now I wish I had gone to law school instead of getting my master's degree. I find it amazing that there are so many areas of law which you don't think about when you begin studying." Though he admits it's not easy, Mapp has adjusted to the change of pace which comes with working and going to school. Sometimes he has to return to work after his last night class to be sure his news story makes the newspaper's deadline. "I try to leave my work behind when I come to school and I don't think about law school when I'm at work," said Mapp, explaining how he handles his busy routine. Mapp is undecided about his future career in law. "It really depends on my newspaper career and the opportunities available in law when I graduate," he said. As a first-year student, Brian Brezosky is learning to cope with the initial frustrations of being a freshman. "The biggest surprise to me was the amount of time I need to study and prepare for classes," said the 27 -yearold Brezosky. "A change in my life was necessary in order to stay up with the readings." And finding time to study hasn't come easy for Brezosky, who is a city police officer with the street crimes unit. His job involves the surveillance aimed at catching people in the act of committing robbery, theft and assault. Many times he is sent in as a decoy to apprehend suspected criminals. This demands that Brezosky work at various hours in highcrime areas of the city. "Sometimes I'll work ten days straight before I get one day off," he said. "This makes it difficult for me to prepare for classes. If I feel I'm not ready, I'll be forced to take a vacation day." But Brezosky feels fortunate to be able to attend law school because of his haphazard work schedule. His police supervisor has agreed to let him work around his assigned schedule in order for Brezosky to go to evening classes. "For example, if I'm assigned to work 6 p.m. to 2 a.m., I'll go into work after my last class and work from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m.," he said. A native of Louisville, Brezosky received his B.S. degree from the University of Louisville in police administration. His interest in law developed from his present job. "Through my appearances in court, I became interested in law and thought I would enjoy it," he said. Brezosky is uncertain about the area of law he wants to pursue. "I believe I will have the option of working in a greater capacity with the police department or going on into other opportunities," he said. European Jobs Open to Recent Graduates More than 100 positions will be open to recent law graduates in the 1984 European Law Internship Program conducted by McGeorge School of Law (Univeristy of the Pacific). The post-graduate program, which offers internships in private firms, companies and public agencies throughout Europe, leads to either the Diploma in Advanced International Legal Studies (one semester) or the LLM-Transnational Practice (two semesters). Participants in the 1984 program will benefit from a special arrangement made by McGeorge School of Law with the International Bar Association (IBA). More than 3,000 members of the IBA will convene in Vienna in September, 1984, and participants in the McGeorge program will take part in the conference with delegate fees, transport from the McGeorge campus in Salzburg to Vienna, and lodging in Vienna provided by the school. The law school also will offer summer programs in 1984 in Edinburgh, Scotland, Salzburg, Austria, and Budapest, Hungary. The various 1984 progr~ms mark the beginning of the school1's second decade in Europe. Information on the various international programs may be requested from McGeorge School of Law, 3200 5th Avenue, Sacramento, California 95817. Page3 Class Action Send any news of Law School alumni to the Law Examiner. 1975 ---stuart Pearlman has moved his practice from Bardstown Road to 643 West Main Street in Louisville. He maintains a general trial practice. 1978 Stuart Alexander is associated with the Louisville firm of Tilford, Dobbins, Alexander, and Buckaway where he handles workers compensation, black lung, personal InJury, domestic relations, and business-related litigation. Dennis J. Conniff is a staff attorney with the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet in Frankfort. He is principally responsible for oil shale litigation involving the Cabinet and he also works on coalrelated problems and Cabinet administrative issues such as unemployment insurance, personnel matters, and tort actions. Tom Hectus is now a partner with Gittleman and Barber in Louisville where he does criminal trial work, personal injury defense work for the Transit Authority of River City, federal post-conviction remedies, criminal and civil appeals, child custody and domestic relations appeals. Ken Nevitt is now doing general practice, including workers compensation, with Williams and Palmore in Louisville. 1979 Kate Daugherty is a staff attorney with the natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet in Frankfort. She handles surface mining enforcement and general legal matters for the Cabinet, including contract review, personnel actions, and advising department administrators on legality of proposed actions. Rob Littlefield is now with the Legal Aid Society in Louisville where he is the Managing Attorney of the Rural Division, a staff of six attorneys who, provide services for 14 counties surrounding Jefferson County. He handles landlord-tenant cases, consumer litigation, questions involving entitlement to government benefits, and battered spouse actions. 1980 D. Todd Littlefield is with Western Kentucky Legal Services in Owensboro, which serves a seven county area. He works on cases involving Social Security disability payments, Unemployment Insurance, housing problems, and domestic relations. 1981 Nancy Osborne recently began working with the Legislative Research Commission in Frankfort where she is on the staff of the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee and the Cities Committee. Randy Dooley is a corporate attorney with Humana, dealing with general hospital law, contracts, acquisitions, and medical staff matters. Jim Nitsche is practicing tax law at Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs. After graduating from U of L, he got his Masters in Tax at the University of Miami. John L. Tate is with the firm of Stites & Harbison. He does personal injury work and defends medical malpractice suits. Page4 Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 Brandeis Brief ••• Emplo David Leightty is a graduate of the University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville School of Law. !fe currently ser_ves the City of Louisville Department of Law as Assistant Director of Law for Labor and Employment while continuing to represent individual employees in private practice with Tilford, Dobbins, Alexander & Buckaway. Mr. Leightty was previously an associate of Segal, Isenberg, Sales and Stewart from 1977 to 1982, primarily representing unions in the building trades. Recent annotations, law journal articles, and seminars have recognized an emerging national trend in actions based on. wrongful discharge from employment. The LAW EXAMINER solicited an analysis of how that trend may affect decisions in Kentucky. T.ditionally in Kentucky and in other states, an individual employed without a contract or statute to protect him was considered "terminable at will" in the eyes of the law. Such employees came to be known as "at will" employees. In Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Marshall, 586 S.W. 2d 274 (Ky. App. 1974), a recent statement of that rule appears thus: "The common law rule has always been that a contract of employment is terminable by either party at will, in the absence of some statutory or contractual standard that modifies this rule." 586 S. W .2d at 281. Under that rule, it is often said that an employer normally may fire his employee for a bad reason or no reason at all. An approximation of that statement in Kentucky appears in Gambrel v. United Mine Workers, 244 S.W.2d 158 (Ky. 1952). It is supported by a long line of cases. See Western Union ielegraph Co. v. Ramsey, 216 Ky. 657, 88 S.W.2d 675 (1936); Dysart v. Dawkins Log & Mill Co., 222 Ky. 415, 200 S.W. 706 (1927); Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Offutt, 99 Ky. 427, 36 S.W. 181 (1892). Recently, new trends in contract and tort theories in Kentucky and other jurisdictions throughout the nation have been eroding the traditional view, already curtailed by civil rights statutes expressly limiting the grounds upon which employment decisions may be made. See, e.g., Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 29 U.S.C. 2000e - 2000e-17 (1976); Kentucky Civil Rights Act, Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. Chapter 344 (Baldwin 1979). Individual employees generally have little or no bargaining power with their employers. Rarely, there will be an individual who possesses so prized a skill, or some other quality, that he can bargain on equal terms with prospective or present employers. But such individuals are highly unusual and most who are in such great demand do not long remain employees; more often than not, they form their own businesses. The vast majority of the entertainers and actors who are in a fierce competition for any available jobs; the stars who can choose their parts and hold out for large earnings constitute but a small portion of the entertainment market. And in other professions such as law, individuals who attain a status enabling them to do so, generally either become partners in the firms where they are the first year an arrangement was to be made by which the plaintiff was to become the owner of an interest in the business. After two years the plaintiff would be upon an 'easy road to make some real money.' The above expressions are contained in the writing. From these it may be fairly inferred that the parties intended that the duration of the time for the execution of the contract should continue for at least one year, if not for two." 221 S.W. at 244. The Court's concern with the finding a definite duration of the contract stemmed from the rule then recognized that employment contracts of indefinite term would be found terminable at will. In Putnam v. Producer's Livestock Marketing Ass'n., 256 Ky. 196, 75 S.W.2d 1075 (1934), the Court found that a letter from the employer to the employee, confirming a telephone conversation to the · effect that the employee would be hired at a specified yearly salary and be given moving expenses from Cincinnati to Louisville, constituted a writing which might be an .. ... Individual employees generally have little or no bargaining power with their employers ... employed , or leave their employment and set up offices of their own. The unequal bargaining position between individual employees and employers was a large factor in the development of unions. Employees who alone could be freely replaced by employers, found that organizing in large groups gave them substantially increased bargaining power. A large portion of the national workforce is not unionized, and it is with the individual members of that group, and their employers, that we are concerned here. The recent gains of employees (and the losses of employers) in the field of job rights have come largely in two areas of the law: expanded recognition of individual employment contracts; and growth of the tort of retaliatory discharge contrary to public policy. The validity of individual contracts of employment has long been recognized. Controversy has usually centered on whether a given document constituted a contract of employment at all. In Morris Shoe. Co. v. Coleman, 187 Ky. 837, 221 S.W. 242 (1920), the Court affirmed the decision of the trial court that an employer's letter to a prospective employee proposing that he move from another state to Kentucky for a specified annual salary and the assurance that after two years, the plaintiff would be making "some real money" constituted a contract of employment for at least one year. The contract contained no specific reference to a duration. The Court. however, sought to determine the intentions of the parties, and found in those intentions that there be a one year duration. The Court stated: "The day upon which the execution of the contract came into being was definitely fix(!d. The wage to be paid was One Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars. At the end of employment contract. Although the letter did not expressly state a sped fie duration of employment, the employee contended that the letter showed an intention to employ him for a definite period of one year. The trial court had rejected that contention and dismissed the action. The appellate court reversed the dismissal, holding that, "a yearly engagement may be legitimately inferred from this letter and the circumstance disclosed sufficient to sustain the cause of action." 75 S.W.2d at 1078. In effect, the Court held the letter was sufficient to take the case to a jury. Any alleged contract of employment for a period of a year must comply with the statute of frauds. The Court in Putnam found that the letter, even though it did not expressly state the contract would endure for one year, was sufficient to overcome the statute of frauds challenge. Reported decisions in Kentucky continue to find that a writing contained in a letter discussing various terms and conditions of employment may be sufficient to sustain a jury finding that a contract of employment for a definite period existed. See Humana, Inc., v. Fairchild, 603 S.W.2d 918 (Ky. Appr. 1980). A recent decision of the Kentucky Supreme Court indicates an increased willingness to find limits on employer rights to terminate in contract language which might in earlier years not have been so interpreted. In Higdon Food Service, Inc., v. Walker, 641 S. W .2d 750 (Ky. 1982), the Court fou_nd enforceable the covenant of an employee not to work for competitors of the employer. Part of the consideration for the employee's covenant, the Court found, was an obligation on the part of t.h·e employer to retain .· the employee unless the employer in good faith found the employee's services unsatisfactory. The covenant provided that employment would continue during service "satisfactory to the employer" and would terminate upon any. one of several contingencies including the following: "Whenever the employer in good faith determines that the services of employee are no longer satisfactory to the employer or are no longer needed by employer." 641 S.W.2d at 752. Finding that language imposed a duty on the employer to retain the employee unless the employer in good faith found the employee unsatisfactory, the Court stated: "If the employer has an arbitrary right to discharge the employee - that is, in good faith or bad - what earthly function would it serve to add that if in good faith he determines that the employee's work is not satisfactory he will fire him? We think, rather, that the sensible solution is to construe paragraphs 2.03 and 6.01 together as meaning that the employer's rights to discharge the employee on the ground that his services are not satisfactory, or are no longer neeeded , is subject to the requirement of good faith." 641 S.W.2d at 752. One of the many problems faced by an employee who would assert a contract protecting his employment is that courts in Kentucky have traditionally required any such contract to be for a definite period. Contracts for permanent employment or for an indefinite period of employment were treated as terminable at will by either party. See, e.g., Edwards v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 286 Ky. 341, 150 S.W.2d 916 (1941). Under that rule, an employee who claimed a contract in a personnel manual with a provision forbidding termination except for cause had an enormous problem - the personnel manual would contain no definite period for employment. In a stunning to-be-published decision on August 3), 1983, the Kentucky Supreme Court drastically altered that rule. In Shah v. American Synthetic Rubber Corporation, No. 82-SC-568- DG, slip. op. (Ky. Aug. 31, 1983}, the Court reversed summary judgment against an employee alleging, among other things, that he had been terminated in violation of a contract of employment. The alleged contract entailed a promise from the employer that the employee would become "a permanent employee dischargeable only for cause in accordance with persQnnel policies and procedures" established by the employer, after the employee had served a 90-day probation. The Court held that a contract of indefinite term providing that employment is terminable only for cause would be enforceable, and that it was sufficient consideration for enforcement thereof that the employee performed his employment services or promised to do so. In so holding, the Court acknowledged that the employee's claim of permanent employment would previously have been "fatally defective under the 'employment at will' doctrine to which the courts and law writers have devoted much time." Shah, slip opinion, p.4. But the court noted that the parties had clearly contracted for · permanent employment terminable only Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 ~ment at Will Doctrine Examined Appeals has clearly recognized the tort of retaliatory discharge in a fact situation where the tort has been recognized nearly everywhere it has occurred. In a decision designated to be published, but which has not been published because it is under review by the Supreme Court of Kentucky as of this writing, the Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed a cause of action on the part of an employee fired because he filed a valid Workers' Compensation claim. In Firestone Textiles Company v. Meadows, Ky. App., _S.W.2d_ in many other fact circumstances. Clearly, many of these arguments will be rejected by the courts. Others may receive favorable consideration. The Court of Appeals in Meadows did not touch on discharge in contravention of non-statutory public policy. Thus, at this writing, there is no reported Kentucky decision granting a cause of action to an employee fired in retaliation for testifying against the employer in a court of law. While there is movement in Kentucky courts in the area of recognition of for cause. Citing the protection granted employees under collective bargaining agreements and civil service statutes, the Court found that employers should be free to enter individual contracts granting similar protection: "We join a number of other jurisdictions which hold that parties may enter into a contract of employment terminable only pursuant to its express terms - as 'for cause' - by clearly stating their intention to do so, even though no other considerations than service to be performed or promised, is expected by the employer or performed or promised by the employee." Shah, slip opinion, pp. 5, 6. The decision in Shah will make it considerably easier for an employee alleging breach of a contract of employment to get his claim to a jury. Until Shah, such claims were subject to dismissal if they were not. based on a contract for a definite term. Now, contracts of considerable vagueness may be enforceable. ... Creative counsel will no doubt attempt to apply the Meadows decision in many other fact circumstances ... In addition to expansion of the scope of enforceable contracts, courts have recognized increasing employee rights in the realm of torts; particularly, the tort of "retaliatory discharge," or discharge in violation of public policy. In other j urisdictions, such claims have received steadily increasing attention. Thus, an employer who discharges an employee to punish the employee for testifying against the employer, or to prevent him from doing so, may incur liability. Parnar v. Americana Hotels, Inc., 652 P .2d 625 (Hawaii 1982). Termination for refusal to commit an unlawful act has been held to constitute a cause of action. Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Oil Co., 27 Cal. 3d 167, 610 P.2d 1330, 160 Cal. Rptr. 839 ( 1980). ... In Kentucky, the retaliatory discharge tort has not received the attention it has in other jurisdictions ... (81-CA-2460-MR, 1982), the court, affirming a $25,000 jury verdict in favor of an employee allegedly terminated for filing a Workers' Compensation claim, found that the Workers' Compensation .... Act protect emplovess from retaliatory discharge even though it contains no express language to that effect. The court stated: "[W je are lead to the conclusion that by necessary implication the Workers' Compensation Act manifests a public policy that an employee has a right to be free to assert a lawful claim for benefits without suffering retaliation by his employer in the form of discharge. If it were otherwise, the beneficient purposes of the Act could often be effectively frustrated by merely threatening employees with discharge. A statute need not expressly state what is necessarily implied." Shah, slip opinion, p.5. It is interesting that the court eschewed a pure tort theory, and instead applied contract theory. It found that the provtstons of the Workers' Compensation Act were incorporated into an employment at will contract, and that the employment at will contract had been breached by the employer's retaliatory discharge. The Kentucky Supreme Court has granted discretionary review of the decision of the Court of Appeals, and The courts continue to recognize has received briefs and heard arguments. limits to the retaliatory discharge cause Although the decision from that court of action. In Pierce v. Ortho has not been rendered as of this writing, Pharmaceutical Corp., 84 N.J. 58, 417 it can be expected shortly. A.2d 505 (1980), the court found that a If the decision in Meadows is upheld physician terminated for refusal to by the Supreme Court, and it is the conduct experiments with a new drug opinion of this writer that it will be, the simply because the drug was effect of the decision will extend beyond controversial, was not terminated in fact situations involving Workers' contravention of any public policy. The Compensation claims. For instance, it court rendered this decision in full may be argued that discharge of an acknowledgement of a cause of action employee for lodging a peaceful and for termination contrary to public reasonable grievance with his employer policy, it simply held there was no public is in contravention of Ky. Rev. Stat. policy violated. Ann. §336.130 (Baldwin 1979), which In Kentucky, the retaliatory discharge protects the right of employees to engage tort has not received the attention it has in peaceful collective action. in other jurisdictions. In Scrogham v. It is even arguable that an employee Kraftco Corp., 551 S. W .2d 811 (Ky. who files an action in court against his 1977), the court expressly held that there employer on a non-frivolous basis is no cause of action where an employer should be protected from retaliatory terminates an employee because the discharge because the employee is employee has plans to go to night merely exercising his right to a day in school. . ·- court. Creative counsel will no doubt But recently, the Kentucky Court of attempt to apply the Meadows decision contracts of employment and imposing a liability for retaliatory discharge, there are directions recognized by courts in other ju risdictions that have little likelihood of recognition in Kentucky. For instance, a federal district court in Michigan has recognized the tort of "negligent discharge" of an employee, even though the employee was not fired for a reason against public policy and the decision was not based on contract. In Chambe!!l!lll__ v. _ Bi~s~, l_n_c., 31 E.P.D. (CCH) 33.,367 (W.O. Mich. July 15, 1982), the court found that the employer had a duty of care in providing its employee with an incentive to reform conduct which the employer knew would result in termination if continued. The court expressly found that the employee was discharged for just cause, however' the employer had failed to warn the plaintiff in a job evaluation session that his conduct could lead to discharge. The court found that the employer had thereby committed the tort of negligence. Because Michigan is a comparative negligence state, the court considered not only the alleged negligence of the employer in failing to warn the employee, but also the negligence of the employee in engaging in the reprehensible conduct in the first place. Because the employee had engaged in comparative negligence, the court reduced the award by 83 percent. Nonetheless, the judgment for the employee was $61,354. The decision in Chamberlain is extravagant and has no current analogue in Kentucky law. It is unlikely that appellate courts in Kentucky will adopt anything remotely resembling the rule there. A few courts have recognized a tort where an employer has discharged an employee in an overly abusive manner. These decisions have perhaps a greater chance than the Chamberlain decision of being followed in Kentucky; however, there remains considerable doubt about their aplicability in this state. In Agis v. Howard Johnson Co., 331 Me. 140, 355 N.E.2d 315 (1976), the court found an employer liable for inflicting extreme mental suffering upon a waitress, where the employer fired its waitresses one by one in alphabetical order in an attempt to coerce one or more into confessing to theft or informing on other employees who had been stealing. The plaintiff was PageS the first waitress fired. And in Contreras v. Crown Zellerbach Corp., 86 Wash. 2d 735,565 P.2d 1173 (Wash. 1977), the employer was held liable for the mental suffering of an employee who had been subjected to extreme emotional trauma by the malicious and abusive insults and racial slurs of fellow employees, where the employer had failed to take action to prevent the abuse. Under the right fact circumstances, Kentucky courts might recognize similar torts; however, such causes would appear to be variations on traditional tort theories rather than employment law cases. The foregoing cases have all concerned private employment. There is already a vast body of law concerning termination from public employment. Most of the cases involving public employment have been brought under federal constitutional or various federal statutes. What effect wiJI increased recognition by the courts of pri,·ate employment rights have on litigation concerning public employment? Public employment litigation is likely to be affected more by tort decisions than by contract decisions. Municipalities in Kentucky wiJI probably have the same tort duties imposed upon them that are imposed upon priYate employers. While Kentucky law will not impose tort liability upon a municipality unless the municipality has dealt \\ith the claimant in an individual capacity. Louisville Seed Company v. City of Louisville, 433 S.W.2d 638 (Ky. 1968) and subsequent cases, it seems likely that an employee or former employee of a municipality can successfully argue that he has been dealt with on an individual basis by virtue of his employment and his termination. But it may be more difficult for public employees to maintain claims of employment contracts. Courts in Kentucky have expressed reluctance to impose contract obligations upon publi.: entities where the contracts are other than definite and unambiguous. See. e.g. Boyd Fiscal Court v. Ashland Public Library Board of Trustees, 63~ S.W.2d 417 (Ky. 1982).; Quick v. Cit)· of Louisville, 613 S.W.2d 428 (Ky. App. 1980). Furthermore, many municipalities have enacted ordinances governing the terms and conditions of employment for their employees. Such ordinances sometimes contain grievance procedures or other personnel policies. These ordinances will normally be enforceable on their own terms. I believe that courts will be reluctant to impose tort liabilities which may conflict with these ordinances. Civil Service employees, for instance, are employed pursuant to detailed statutes and regulations. Their employment rights and obligations have been legislatively determined. It is unlikely that courts will interfere with such legislation. · The practical effects of the increased judicial recognition of employee rights may not be universally beneficiai for employees. Certainly, these trends have the potential of imposing undue hardship upon employers. Traditionally, employment rights such .as the requirement -...f just t ..:.:.;e for (Continued on page 6) Page6 Brandeis Brief (Continued from page 5) termination, have been granted only as the result of bargaining, usually collective bargaining, or as the result of legislation. And both bargaining and legislation provide the opportunity for open give and take and compromise on the parts of the two interested sides: employers and employees. When a personnel manual unilaterally promulgated by an employer in an effort to achieve good personnel relations and maximum productivity is found to constitute a contract binding the employer to the terms of its own manual, an obligation has been imposed which was not the result of either bargaining or legislation. Employers, already fearful of liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and similar legislation, and scrambling to adopt personnel policies which would avoid such liability, may argue that employees are being given something for nothing when their contract rights or tort protections are expanded by the courts. Those who, by inclination or ideology, applaud expansion of employee rights and favor increased employee protections as a matter of social policy, may view the employer's dilemma as something well deserved. Regardless of the merits of the two sides of this debate, it is predictable that certain practical adjustments will be made by employers, particularly large employers, in response to these legal trends. The first efforts by employers will be to curtail the possibility that they will be found to have entered contracts with their employees. Employers will revise or even abolish personnel manuals which might impose obligations on them. They will be reluctant to engage in correspondence concerning prospective employment. The words "just cause" and "good faith" are likely to be . eliminated from employee handbooks, and replaced by terms such as ''in the . sole discretion of the employer.'' Some employers may even require employees to enter contracts which expressly acknowledge the terminableat- will status of the employee. Employers may engage in exhaustive screening of applicants for employment under the fear that, once hired, the applicants will be difficult to terminate. Because small employers are less likely to have access to the extensive legal advice available to large employers, who may have house counsel or even house counsel specializing in employment law, small employers stand a better chance of having liability imposed against them than larger employers. The larger employers will take organized and carefully planned action to .limit their liability. Smaller employers will have less opportunity to take such action. And employees, on an individual basis will continue to have little bargaining power against their employers and prospective employers; they will usually be helpless when employers abolish personnel manuals, weaken unilaterally imposed grievance procedures, and demarid that employees or applicants sign acknowledgments of terminable at will status. - Nonetheless, a large number of employees may enjoy increased job security as the result of the judicial trends discussed herein-above. Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 Make Your Own Outlines How to Succeed in Law School: Top Students Reveal Exatn Strategies By Neil Ward Learning how to prepare for a law school exam is a long, agomzmg process. For the first time in the academic life of most students, your success or failure depends on how well you do on a single exam that encompasses voluminous material from a semester of work. Every law student dreads final exams, but the successful ones learn how to manage the problem in order to attain a high class ranking. First-year students are filled with doubts about how they are ever going to learn everything that Farnsworth knows about contracts. They stay in a state of panic about whether to use hornbooks, commercial study aids, old outlines or casenotes. Second and third-year students wonder about their study systems. Could they get better grades by using a different study aid or changing their outline format? To help law students analyze their study habits, the Law Examiner interviewed several high-ranking law students to find out their "secrets of success". Bob Winter, a third-year student and Brandeis Society member, advised students to make their own outlines. Winter pointed out that he is older than a lot of law students, since he served in the Navy before attending law school. He cautioned that his study schedule may not conform with the social lifestyle of many of the younger, unmarried law students. Winter outlines every weekend. When he sits down to make his study gems, he uses a hornbook, a textbook and his class notes. "I use chapter headings and subheadings as the skeleton for my outlines," Winter said. "I take extensive notes in class and as I go through the book, I'm constantly referring to my notes." Winter believes the commercial study aids are too sketchy to fully explain the points of law, so he uses a hornbook to help him outline. "In my outlines, I try to include what the professor says in class, what the textbook says the rule of law is and what the hornbook states," Winter said. "An example is torts; I would put down what Eades says in class about proximate cause, what the Palsgraf case brings out in the text and what Prosser points out in the hornbook." Candace Hill, the top-ranked student in the second-year class, also encouraged students to make their own outlines. Unlike Winter, Hill doesn't refer to hornbooks when making her outlines. "I write down everything the professor says in class. When I make my outline, I use my notes and the textbook," Hill said. Hill believes reading hornbooks is a time-consuming procedure that she doesn't need. She has found that by studying the cases, the notes after the cases; and her extensive notes from class, she can make an excellent outline without any other study aids. "I believe the best thing about outlining is that it puts the material in your own words," Hill said. Rosano Dolle, a third-year student and a Brandeis Society member, also sings the praises of making your own outlines. But unlike Winter who outlines every weekend, Dolle usually does her outlines the month before exams. "I use the textbook, a commercial study aid like Gilbert's or Emmanuel's and my notes to help me outline," Dolle said. "I write down everything the professor says and I put a lot of it in my outline." Dolle explained that she uses the commercial study aids to help her organize her outline. It usually takes her about two days to complete her outline and then she may make some changes as she studies it. Marc Murphy, well-known maker of Murphy's Outlines which many secondyear students have relied on to stay in school, said that while he's glad students have utilized his work, he thinks many students would be better off making their own outlines. He believes the actual making of the outline is the real learning experience. Murphy uses commercial study aids to construct his highly-regarded outlines. "There's an ari to selecting the right study aid," Murphy said. "The best commercial aids vary from class to class. For example, Emmanuel's and Smith's Review are the best for civil procedure. You have to know a little about the course material in order to pick the best study aid, but the most important point is to pick out a particular study aid early and get to know it intimately. Don't get paranoid and buy every outline in the bookstore." However, Gilbert's and Emmanuel's aren't always the answer, according to Murphy. "Some ideas are too abstract to be forced into outline form, even though some commercial outlines try to do it," Murphy said. "When I'm faced with a problem like that, I like to read a Photo by Neil Ward Nutshell. An example of what I'm talking about is perpetuities. The subject doesn't lend itself to simple rules, so by reading a nutshell you can understand the subject as a whole and what the problems are." Constitutional law is another abstract area without concrete rules that might be better explained by a nutshell, he said. · Murphy usually begins making his outlines nine weeks before exams. During his freshman year, he had five classes to outline. With nine weeks to go, he took one week and did nothing but outline contracts. He went to class, but he dido 't prepare for any of his classes except contracts. The next week, he spent the entire time on civil procedure until he finished that outline. With four weeks to go, Murphy had five outlines finished. He then spent the last four weeks updating and improving them. Anne Sharp, S.B.A. President, has a unique way of preparing for exams. Sharp gets together with a group of four or five students and they make their outline as a group. "We've been doing it since our freshman year," she said. "We all bring our notes, then someone brings a hornbook, someone brings a Gilbert's and someone might have a Nutshell. I sit at the typewriter and we go through the book case by case. We discuss each subject thoroughly and I type the outline as we go. It usually takes about two 10-hour days to complete each outline." Sharp said the group usually gets together in mid-November to start their outlining. After the outlining, Sharp prefers to study alone, because studying in •a group makes her nervous. A.s you can see, there are more ways to survive a law exam than there are colors in the rainbow. Individuals have to find what works best for them, but if you'll follow the guidelines of some of U of L's successful students you won't be too far off track. Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 Judicial Races - (Cont.) Directors of the Jefferson County Bar Association, the Louisville Child Abuse Authority and the Adult Consortium. He has received the Continuing Legal Education Award every year since 1979. (Continued from page /) L School of Law in 1975, and practiced until his election in 1977. Johnstone, 34, was awarded Outstanding Young Man of the Okolona Jaycees in 1978. The next year he was elected Chief Judge of Jefferson District Court and in 1980 was the Louisville Bar Association Judge of the Year. FIFTH DIVISION TEDDY B. GORDON A Louisville attorney seeking election, Gordon has had II years experience in general practice, and clerked for the Kentucky Supreme Court for one year. Gordon, 36, graduated from the night division of U of L Law School while teaching at Westport High School. He is a member of the Jeffersontown Optimists. EARL O'BANNON, JR. (Incumbent) Earl O'Bannon has held this judgeship since 1976. A graduate of U of L Law School, he went on to become a · captain in the Judge Advocate General Corps of the U.S. Army. O'Bannon also served as Deputy Commissioner of the Court . A former Board member of the Presbyterian Community Center and Drug Abuse Center, O' Bannon is now a member of the Board of Directors for the University of Louisville Law Alumni Association and a lecturer for the Continuing Legal Education program . SIXTH DIVISION DAVID KAPLAN David Kaplan graduated from the U of L School of Law in 1959, and has over twenty years experience in trial work . Kaplan is 55 . JACK E. MUDD (Incumbent) Jack E. Mudd seeks re-election to the judgeship he has held since 1972. A graduate of U of L Law School , Judge Mudd has practiced law for 25 years. A former Master Commissioner of the Jefferson Circuit Court, and past President of the Louisville Bar Association, Mudd is a member of the American Legion, the 40 & 8 Society, and is on the Board of Trustees of the Catholic Orphan Society of the Louisville Archdiocese. EIGHTH DIVISION WILLIAM E. McANULTY, JR. William McAnulty is presently a judge of the Jefferson District Court , and is seeking election in the eighth division of Circuit Court. A 1975 graduate of the U of L School of Law, McAnulty has been a part-time faculty member since 1976. During 1975-76 he was Ass istant Director of Safety for the City of Louisv ille, and from 1975-78 a Juvenile Court Judge. He is al so a member of the Board of Directors for the United Way, Bellarmine College, Brooklawn and Spalding College. He is a recipient of the Continuing Legal Education Award. CURTIS G. WITTEN (Incumbent) Curtis Witten has been a Circuit Court Judge in Division 12 for eight years. Judge Witten graduated from the U of L School of Law in 1957 and practiced general law for 18 years. In the 1960's he worked as Assistant County Attorney, and has chaired the mental health litigation, now under District Court. NrNTH DIVISION KEN COREY (Incumbent) Ken Corey, age 42, received his J.D. from U of L in 1974. Judge Corey also attended the University of Nevada Judicial College. He has taught Commercial Law at the U of L School of Business and has served as Circuit Court Judge since 1978. Judge Corey was honored with the Distinguished Judicial Service Award in 1981 by the Louisville Bar Association. HERMAN L. HUMPHREY Herman L. Humphrey, age 62, received his LL.B. from U of Lin 1951 and then served two years in the Navy. Humphrey next spent seven years doing insurance claim work and has been in private practice since. In 1973 Humphrey was a part-time commissioner in the Circuit Court and is a past member of the Louisville Exchange Club. TENTH DIVISION DONALD J. ECKERLE Donald J. Eckerle, age 41, received his J.D. from U of L in 1971. After graduation, Eckerle went into private practice, specializing in family law, until taking the District Court bench in 1978. Eckerle has served on the Board of GEORGE B. RYAN (Incumbent) George B. Ryan, age 68, graduated from the U of L School of Law in 1938. Judge Ryan was a Police Court Judge and an Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney before being elected Circuit Court Judge in 1969. He has served as Chief Judge of the Circuit Court, was the Circuit Court Judge of the Year in 1973, received the Outstanding Alumnus Certificate from the University of Louisville in 1978, and received first place in the Kentucky Bar Association Writing Contest in 1978 and 1979. TWELFTH DIVISION DANIEL A. SCHNEIDER Daniel A. Schneider, age 39, received his J.D. from U of L in 1969 and has attended the National Judicial College. Schneider has been a District Judge since 1978 and served as Chief District Judge for 1982-83. He is presently on the Executive Committee of the Louisville Bar Association, Chairman of the Eagle Scouts Association, Vice-President of the Executive Board of My Old Kentucky Home Boy Scout Council, and on the Council of Prevention and Education of Substance Abuse. EDWIN A. SCHROERING, JR. Edwin A. Schroering, Jr., age 54, received his LL.B. from U of Lin 1953. Schroering has served in the Army as an LOUISVILLE BAR AS SOCIA liON JUDICIAL CANDIDATES' POLL Didn "t Circuit Court Highly Not Know Total Division 2 Q~~alilitd QvallfiH .......... Rated (alllfidatt Ballots Robert E. Delahanty 28% 53% 12% 3% 4% 873 Edmund " Pete" Karem 21% 47% 8% 7% 17% 863 Division 3 Charles H. Anderson* 12% 44% 36% 3% 5% 868 Martin E. Johnstone 42% 40% 4% 3% 11% 854 Division 5 Teddy B. Gordon 4% 24% 43% 9% 20% 858 Earl O'Bannon Jr. • 66% 28% 2% 1% 3% 890 Division 6 David Kaplan 3% 18% 59% 7% 13% 857 Jack E. Mudd* 36% 51% 8% 2% 3% 879 Division 8 William E. McAnulty Jr. 57% 32% 5% 1% 5% 875 Curtis G. Witten* 9% 35% 49% 3% 4% 874 Division 9 Ken Corey* 56% 36% 3% 1% 4% 872 Herman Humphrey 13% 44% 11% 5% 27% 851 Division 10 Donald J. Eckerle 13% 38% 30% 6% 13% 861 George B. Ryan* 15% 43% 36% 4% 2% 876 Division 12 Daniel A. Schneider 28% 40% 5% 7% 20% 755 Edwin A. Schroering Jr. 21% 52% 17% 5% 5% 771 Division 14 Joseph G. Leibson 39% 34% 13% 4% 10% 773 James C. Nicholson 15% 28% 43% 5% 9% 758 Division 15 William G. Colson 10% 33% 42% 5% 10% 853 . Benjamin F. Shobe* 38% 47% 10% 2% 3% 886 Division 16 Ellen B. Ewing 26% 50% 15% 3% 6% 864 George H. Kunzman* 13% 36% 42% 4% 5% 870 To.tal attorneys voting: 890. • Denotes Incumbent Page 7 assistant staff judge advocate, been Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky, Assistant Jefferson County Attorney, Commonwealth's Attorney for the 30th Judicial District. FOURTEENTH DIVISION JOE G. LEIBSON Joe G. Leibson, age 52, received his J.D. from U of L in 1953 and his L.L.M. from Columbia in 1977. Since graduating, Leibson has done much trial work. He has taught Trial Tactics at Columbia and U of L, and has lectured for the American Bar Association and the College of Judges. Leibson is a member of the American Trial La_wyers Association, a founding member of the World Association of Lawyers, and a past member of the National Criminal Defense Bar. He is listed in the 1983 edition of the Best Lawyers in America. JAMES C. NICHOLSON James C. Nicholson received his J.D·. from U of L in 1975 and has attended the National Judicial College. Nicholson has been an Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney, a City Attorney, and has been a District Court Judge and in private practice since 1978. He has done work with United Way and the Heart Fund. Nicholson has received the Continuing Legal Education Award. FIFTEENTH DIVISION WILLIAM G. COLSON William G. Colson, age 64, graduated from U of Lin 1950. Colson has been a practicing attorney for thirty years, and a Police Court Judge for the City of Louisville. He has served on several executive committees for the Louisville and Kentucky Bar Associations. BENJAMIN F. SHOBE (Incumbent) Benjamin F. Shobe graduated from the University of Michigan School of Law in 1946. Judge Shobe has served as a Police Court Judge, Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney, and Trial Commissioner before being elected Circuit Court Judge. He has served as Circuit Court Chief Judge and is on the Council for Higher Education. SIXTEENTH DIVISION ELLEN B. EWING Ellen B. Ewing is a second-term District Court Judge seeking the 16th division Circuit Court seat. A 1972 graduate of the University of Louisville School of Law. Ewing, 39, was a member of the Governor's Task Force to Implement a New Judicial Code, and is currently a board member of the Committee for the Prevention of Suicide Among Youth. She participates in the Children in Placement Project dealing with foster children, and was recently appointed to the Governor's Commission on Sentencing and Prison Overcrowding. GEORGE H. KUNZMAN (Incumbent) George Kunzman, 66, is a World War II veteran, and a 1954 graduate of the U of L School of Lw. From 1961 to 1963 he worked as an assistant prosecutor and then served as police court judge for six years. He has served on the Circuit Court bench for 16 years. Judge Kunzman is a member of the Louisville Board of Realtors. Briefs "Reggie" Fellowships Available The Reginald H. Smith Community Lawyer Fellowship (Reggie) Program provides fellowships to pay the salaries of recent law school graduates who work as staff attorneys in various legal services programs. The program is administered by the Howard University Law School and is funded by the Legal Services Corporation. The program offers its fellowship recipients one year of service in one of the 265 Legal Services Corporation funded law offices throughout the United States (including Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Micronesia). Beginning in August of each year, with a starting salary of about $15,000, Community Lawyer Fellows spend up to two years in a neighborhood law office rendering legal services to the poor. Republicans Form Caucus A Republican Law Caucus (RLC) has been formed at the U of L Law School. The group consists of law students and alumni interested in local and state political activities. The RLC says its primary goal is to support and promote area candidates, with an emphasis on alumni candidates. Members have been working locally on behalf of GOP gubernatorial candidate Jim Bunning and his running-mate Gene Stuart, candidate for Lt. Governor. Officers of the RLC include Michael Harned, President, and Michael Lawrence, Vice-President. Anyone interested in joining the organization can contact the RLC at P.O. Box 2048, Louisville, 40201. Employment Law Seminar The Louisville Bar Foundation and the School of Law are sponsoring "Employment Law: Individual Rights and Responsibilities in the Workplace." The seminar, chaired by attorney D. Patton Pelfrey, will be held at the LBF office, 717 W. Main St., Friday, October 28, from 8:30a.m. to 4:30p.m. Homecoming The 1983. Homecoming Program will be held in Room 175 of the School of Law on Saturday, November 5, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. The $15.00 registration fee includes lunch. Will Drafting The Continuing Legal Education office is offering a seminar on Will Drafting and Probate, on November 18 at the Executive Inn in Owensboro, Ky. Contact the CLE office for further detail s. Arbitration in the Coal Industry A seminar on Arbitration in the Coal Industry, sponsored by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service and the U of L School of Law, will be held Monday, October 31, and Tuesday, November I, at the Executive West Hotel in Loui sville. Registration is $60. Further details are available at (502) 367-2251. Eat, Drink and be Scary Mark your calendar for the SBA Halloween party on October 27th at Woody's. According to SBA Social Chairman Tom Stone, free beer, good eats, and an array of awards for various costume categories are just a few good reasons to forget Torts and Code I and come out and play. Live music will be provided by Pam Murphy's group, the Whispering Pines. The fun starts at 8, so dust off the old costume and meet your friends at Woody's! Louisville Law Examiner School of Law University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky 40208 Non-Profit Organization U.S. POSTAGE PAID Permit No. 769 Louisville, KY John M. Harlan Louis D. Brandeis ' . t;ii/ - Louisville~ Law Examiner Volume9 Former U.S. Respresentative Shirley Chisholm speaks at U of L .................. page 1 Background on Judicial Candidates .................. page 1 Merger Necessary to Streamline Government ................. . page 2 ''Brandeis Brief'': Employment at Will ................ .. page 4 How to Succeed in Law School .................. page 6 October, 1983 Number 2
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.
Title | Louisville Law Examiner 9.2, October 1983 |
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 9, Number 2 Louisville, Kentucky, October 1983 Circulation 5400 Former Congresswoman at U of L Chisholm Urges Lawyers: Safeguard Minority Gains by Yolanda French Much of the social and political progress made by blacks and women in the last decade may be lost if attorneys don't lead the fight to save it, according to former U.S. Representative Shirley Chisholm. Speaking to several hundred people in Strickler Hall on the U of L campus, Chisholm strongly encouraged members of the legal community to become part of a "watchdog team" that would safeguard the legislative gains made by minorities and women. "We don't need any more legislation in the United States of America," Chisholm said. "What we really need is attorneys who have the heart, soul, stamina, guts and audacity to stand up and be counted because they have the special skills necessary to help the people who are fighting for their rights in the courtrooms of this country." Chisholm said it's the responsibility of the legal community to ensure that "multitudinous bits of legislation at the local, state, and federal levels" are properly enforced. "These laws must be implemented across the board so that we come to the fullest kind of realization of the American dream," she said. Chisholm was a specialist in early childhood education and child welfare when she entered politics in 1964 as a member of the New York State Assembly where she served for four years before her election to the U.S. House of Representatives. Her election to the 91st Congress as the Democratic representative from the BedfordStuyvesant area of Brooklyn made her the first black woman member of the House. In 1972, at the Democratic National Convention in Miami, Chisholm became the first black person and the first woman to have her name put in nomination for the Presidency by a major American political party. She received about ten percent of the votes at the convention. After her presidential bid, Chisholm returned to her career as a member of Congress where she served until her retirement in 1982. She has written two books, including Unbought and Unbossed, her autobiography. Chisholm's U of L speech was sponsored by several groups including the Law Forum, the Black American Law Students Association, and the Women's Law Caucus. Lecturing on the "Responsibilities of the Legal Community towards Minorities and Women,'' Chisholm aimed most of her remarks at the law students and young attorneys in the audience. "We are depending on the younger lawyers to complete the dream we've had in this country," Chisholm said. ''Take the hands of the disillusioned and the disenchanted and march in front of them to help them fight for their rights. It's not enough to get your law degree unless you're going to utilize it to help alleviate the suffering in the human condition." Chisholm said the gains of the civil Photo by Crystal Collins On her recent visit to U of L, former Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm encouraged students to help protect gains made by blacks and women in the last decade. rights movement and the women's movement were a long time in the making, requiring the slow building of coalitions in Congress and throughout the country. Many of those gains are being eroded, according to Chisholm, and she said attorneys have a "unique kind of responsibility" to protect those gains. "We need some legal 'profiles in courage' in this country," she said. "Change comes from those who dare and one of the groups who should be daring is the lawyers. The only things you need are daring and confidence." One of the key issues for women in the next few years will be what Chisholm called a "complete restructing of the Social Security and pension systems in America." She said women should get actively involved in making these systems more equitable for women because "it's not high on the agendas of male legislators." Chisholm told the women lawyers and law students in the audience that they don't have to imitate men to be successful. "It's not necessary, my female lawyers, to go into anybody's courtroom and act like a man or talk like a man," Chisholm said. "If feminists have made one mistake, it has been to confuse equality with masculinity. Why should successful women abandon compassion, scorn reconciliation, crave power, get ulcers, maybe even start wars? Why should we emulate the good ole boys?" ''Our goal is not to create a new generation of female chauvinists, but to eliminate chauvinism altogether," Chisholm said. "I look to the feminization of America, where feminine values of peace and reason will guide our daily lives." Eleven Circuit Judgeships Contested . in Election by Todd Hollenbach and Mike Schafer Election Day is November 8 and of particular interest to the legal community are the Jefferson Circuit Court division races to be decided that day. The Circuit Court is one of general jurisdiction, handling all matters not delegated to other courts; i.e., felonies, criminal cases, divorces, civil litigation over $2500, and labor disputes . Jefferson County comprises one Judicial Circuit, with 16 members sitting in as many divisions, facilitating allocation of cases. Five incumbent Circuit Judges are unopposed in their bids for re-election. They are Joseph H. Eckert, Richard A. Revell, John W. Potter, Olga Peers, and the Circuit's Chief Judge Laurence Higgins. In an effort to help voters better understand the candidates in the other races, the Law Examiner has gathered information on their education, legal careers, and other activities: SECOND DIVISION ROBERT E. DELAHANTY, Robert E. Delahanty, age 60, received his JD from George Washington University. Judge Delahanty served as Louisville Police Court Judge from 1970 to 1978, when he was elected to his present position as District Judge. He was first Chief Judge of District Court. Judge Delahanty has served on the Kentucky Judicial Council, and was a member of the Special Task Force to Study the Commonwealth's Legal S.ystem. He has also been a Director of the Legal Aid Society, and was First Vice-President of the Ohio River Valley Safety Council. He is presently on the Board of Directors of the University of Louisville Alumni Association, and Area Chairman for the American Cancer Society. EDMUND "PETE" KAREM Edmund "Pete" Karem, 42, received his JD from U of L Law School in 1968, and practices civil trial law. Mr. Karem has served as Special Prosecutor of the Kentucky Department of Public Safety, has been on the Board of Directors of Kentucky Youth Advocates, Kentucky Association of Trial Attorneys, and is presently on the Board of Overseers of Spalding College. Mr. Karem has held several positions in the Louisville Bar Association, serving as President in 1980. He has also served as Chairman of the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights. THIRD DIVISION CHARLES H. ANDERSON (Incumbent) Charles H. Anderson has been Circuit Judge for the Third Division since 1975. Judge Anderson graduated from University of Missouri Law School, after a stint in the U.S. Marine Corps. · Anderson, 58, was a worker's compensation referee from 1960 to 1968. He then served as staff attorney for Legal Aid until 1970, at which time he was elected judge of the third magisterial district for two terms. Anderson served as a Director of the Family and Children's Agency, and was on the Organizational Committee for the Emergency Medical Service in 1974. He currently is a Director of Action Now, and is a Trustee for the Lincoln Institute in Simpsonville. In 1980 he was honored by the National Bar Association as a Distinguished State Trial Judge. MARTIN E. JOHNSTONE Currently a Jefferson District Court Judge, Johnstone graduated from U of (Continued on page 7) Page2 Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 Louisville Law Examiner EDITORIAL BOARD Judy Hoge Editor -in-Chief Neil Ward Associate Editor Crystal Collins Associate Editor Photography Editor Julie A. Brown Tim Cocanougher John Schaaf Managing Editor Jon Hardy Brandeis Brief Editor Winnie McConnell Night Associate Editor STAFF Yolanda French Todd Hollenbach Mike Schafer David Taylor Joel D. Zakem Professor LAWRENCE W. KNOWLES, Coasulfant The l..o•isville Law Examiner is published six times during the academic year in the interest of the University of Louisville School of Law community. Articles are invited from faculty members, students, and members of the bar who wish to do freelance work. Any proposed article should be cleared with the Editor as to topic and length. Address all communications to The Louisville Law Examiner, School of Law, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40208. · Phone: 502-588-6398. "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. Letter to the Editor Editorial We Need the New Charter to Streamline Government The system of dual governments presently serving Louisville and Jefferson County is sadly outdated and should be reorganized to better serve this community. For several years, neighboring cities such as Nashville, Lexington, and Indianapolis have been reaping the benefits of governments which have been streamlined by reorganization. Meanwhile, Louisville and Jefferson County have plodded on like two lumbering giants, stopping occasionally to butt heads and knock each other down. It's time to get up and put an end to the fragmentation which seems to divide this community on every issue from police protection to economic development. The governments of Louisville and Jefferson County are roughly the same size and serve hundreds of thousands of · the same constituents. The result is duplication, wasted effort, and obvious inefficiency. · When major corporations come to the community, they're met by two governments competing for tax dollars. There are two chief elected officials to get to know, two legislative bodies and economic development offices with which to work, and two sets of regulations to deal with. One government representing the entire community appeals to business and industry and would ultimately benefit all of us as the evidence from neighboring cities proves. In terms of growth in total employment in the 1970's, Louisville grew by 16 percent in the decade, while Indianapolis showed a 30 percent increase in jobs, Nashville a 40 percent increase, and Lexington's employment opportunities grew by a whopping 85 percent. While there are other factors involved, it's obvious these cities are working with more effective tools than Louisville and Jefferson County. The opponents of the proposed new charter have succeeded, to some extent, in · fogging this year's debate with erroneous information which they have dispensed, in many cases, to insure their own self-interests·. For example, politicians in parts of the community oppose the charter because they see it as a direct challenge to their political power bases. The new 27-member countywide commission will give rise to a new group of community representatives who will be in close contact with citizens and will be challenging the entrenched authority of the politicans who have reigned for so long. The end of the fragmentation in this community must start at the top - we must eliminate the institutional competition between city and county governments. It's time to put aside the selfish interests, acknowledge our shared objectives, and begin working together . Law School Committee Revises Regulations Concerning Probation By Judy Ho~e Heleringer Blasts Blackrnun, U. of L. A Law School committee, composed of Professor Jacqueline Kanovitz, Chairman of the Reinstatement and Probation Committee, Professor Carl Warns, and students Marc Murphy and Mike Levy, has approved a revision of the academic regulations pertaining to probation and dismissal. TO THE EDITOR: I was shocked and dismayed (but not really surprised) by the puff piece the Examiner published concerning the recent visit to the law school by Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmon. With Professor Steve Smith lavishing obsequious praise, the law school saw fit to honor the man who wrote the most pernicious Supreme Court opinion since the Dred Scott case. Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that legalized abortion-ondemand in this country, has resulted in the wholly unnecessary destruction of 10,000,000 of our defenseless, pre-born brothers and sisters . This conscienceshocking decision allows an abortion up until the moment of birth, depending on the whim of the "mother" and her physician. In some of our country's finest hospitals, highly-skilled neonatal teams work around the clock to save a prematurely-born infant, while down the hall some heartless abortionist is dismembering and killing a 5,6, or 7-month-old pre-born infant. Is this nightmare really the intended result envisioned by Blackmon and his six concurring brothers ten years ago when they wrote that only (an undefined) "meaningful life" had the right to due process of law? I guess so. Blackmun says, stubbornly, he'd do it again "exactly the same way." The law school should be condemning the author of such a callous decision instead of commending him. And what an insulting affront to the memory of Justice Brandeis, in whose name the award was bestowed on this reprehensible individual, who throughout his long, remarkable life, fought to protect the rights of all citizens, especially those, like the unborn that had no advocates in their behalf. I suppose that , some 130 years ago, Professor Smith would have presided over a similar ceremony honoring Chief Justice Roger Taney for his authorship of the Dred Scott decision, in which the principle that black people were nothing more than chattel was affirmed. Justice Taney, like Blackmun, was also protecting "individual rights" of privacy in his day: that between a master and his property. To be entirely consistent, I think next year's Brandeis award should go to the members of the Indiana Supreme Court who, a year ago, affirmed the right of "parents," "physicians," and "hospitals" in Bloomington to legally starve to death a handicapped newborn infant. When the concentration camps were finally liberated in 1945, the citizens from surrounding communities were forced by Allied soldiers to view the brutal leftovers of the Nazi holocaust. "We didn't know," they said. The damning indictment of Professor Smith and law schools that give awards to the leading proponents of the uncivilized slaughter of our innocent pre-born is that they do know precisely what is occurring and, like the good German burghers, will do absolutely nothing to help stop the flow of so much innocent blood. For the first time, I am profoundly ashamed of the otherwise outstanding law school from which I graduated . Robert L. Heleringer Class of 1976 Editor's Note: The Law Examiner considered it an honor that Justice Blackmun visited the U of L Law School. We would accord similar coverage to a visit by any United States Supreme Court Justice. "This revision doesn't go into effect until 1984-85; it isn't retroactive,'' said Profes sor Kanovitz . "The mtntmum cumulative grade point average necessary to stay in school has been raised from 1.4 to 1.6. Any student whose grade point average is below 2.0 will be on probation, as always ." Under the new standard, if a student on probation is able to earn 2.0 or above the following semester, he will then have an additional semester to remove the balance of his grade point deficiency. Should all such deficiencies still not be made up at the end of the second semester, the student will have a third semester, if, in the Committee's opinion, there is a strong prospect that he will be able to remove all quality point deficiencies by the end of that period. Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 NIGHT and DAY Full-tinte Jobs Mean No Free Tinte By Winnie McConnell according to Handy. "I find it hampering sometimes because I run out They say variety is the spice of life and of hours in a day and I just don't such is the case in the night division of physically have the time with a full-time the U of L Law School where students job," she said. with a wide range of occupations come However, Handy believes working together four nights a week to learn the and going to school helps her grasp the law. "whole big apple" of law. Most of the evening law students are "By working in a banking institution, employed in a variety of full-time jobs -it gives me a frame of reference to study such as nursing, accounting, teaching, cases," she said. "In other words, I am / government and business better able to apply the legal concepts I · administration, public relations, learn to the real world." , 1 banking, insurance and sales. While Because of her present position, \ 1 there are many students who have Handy is interested primarily in the ; . specialized in unusual jobs, there are areas of law related to bank trust three law students who have made functions such as deferred compensation noteworthy strides in exceptional law and decedents' estates. Tom Mapp occupations and still find the energy to For Tom Mapp, a second-year pursue legal careers. evening student, the day usually begins Sharon Handy, a 27-year-old fourth- about 7 a.m. at the Louisville Times, year night student, can be found writing a news story which must be weekdays in the Employee Benefits finished by 8:30a.m. Division of the Liberty National Bank A reporter covering urban affairs, Trust Department. As a trust officer, Mapp reports on taxes, roads and how Handy is responsible for the account government affects people in the administration of certain corporate community. retirement and profit sharing plans for He has worked for the newspaper which the bank serves as trustee, since August, 1981. Before that, Mapp custodian, agent or investment manager. was a reporter in Des Moines, Iowa Handy has worked at Liberty where he grew up. The 27-year-old National Bank since 1978 in various Mapp received his M.A. degree in including assistant vice journalism from the University of Iowa. Sharon Handy president and manager of executive banking services. She graduated that same year from Hanover College in Indiana with a B.A. in theology. Handy decided to obtain a law degree because she thought it would give her more credibility at her present position and provide her with opportunities for advancement and promotion. "Once I began law school I really enjoyed the academic growth it offers," she said. Being an evening law student has its advantages and disadvantages, Mapp has always been intrigued by the legal profession and decided to give it a try. "My friends have persistently told me that I should check it out, but I never gave it much thought until a year ago," he said. "Now I wish I had gone to law school instead of getting my master's degree. I find it amazing that there are so many areas of law which you don't think about when you begin studying." Though he admits it's not easy, Mapp has adjusted to the change of pace which comes with working and going to school. Sometimes he has to return to work after his last night class to be sure his news story makes the newspaper's deadline. "I try to leave my work behind when I come to school and I don't think about law school when I'm at work," said Mapp, explaining how he handles his busy routine. Mapp is undecided about his future career in law. "It really depends on my newspaper career and the opportunities available in law when I graduate," he said. As a first-year student, Brian Brezosky is learning to cope with the initial frustrations of being a freshman. "The biggest surprise to me was the amount of time I need to study and prepare for classes," said the 27 -yearold Brezosky. "A change in my life was necessary in order to stay up with the readings." And finding time to study hasn't come easy for Brezosky, who is a city police officer with the street crimes unit. His job involves the surveillance aimed at catching people in the act of committing robbery, theft and assault. Many times he is sent in as a decoy to apprehend suspected criminals. This demands that Brezosky work at various hours in highcrime areas of the city. "Sometimes I'll work ten days straight before I get one day off," he said. "This makes it difficult for me to prepare for classes. If I feel I'm not ready, I'll be forced to take a vacation day." But Brezosky feels fortunate to be able to attend law school because of his haphazard work schedule. His police supervisor has agreed to let him work around his assigned schedule in order for Brezosky to go to evening classes. "For example, if I'm assigned to work 6 p.m. to 2 a.m., I'll go into work after my last class and work from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m.," he said. A native of Louisville, Brezosky received his B.S. degree from the University of Louisville in police administration. His interest in law developed from his present job. "Through my appearances in court, I became interested in law and thought I would enjoy it," he said. Brezosky is uncertain about the area of law he wants to pursue. "I believe I will have the option of working in a greater capacity with the police department or going on into other opportunities," he said. European Jobs Open to Recent Graduates More than 100 positions will be open to recent law graduates in the 1984 European Law Internship Program conducted by McGeorge School of Law (Univeristy of the Pacific). The post-graduate program, which offers internships in private firms, companies and public agencies throughout Europe, leads to either the Diploma in Advanced International Legal Studies (one semester) or the LLM-Transnational Practice (two semesters). Participants in the 1984 program will benefit from a special arrangement made by McGeorge School of Law with the International Bar Association (IBA). More than 3,000 members of the IBA will convene in Vienna in September, 1984, and participants in the McGeorge program will take part in the conference with delegate fees, transport from the McGeorge campus in Salzburg to Vienna, and lodging in Vienna provided by the school. The law school also will offer summer programs in 1984 in Edinburgh, Scotland, Salzburg, Austria, and Budapest, Hungary. The various 1984 progr~ms mark the beginning of the school1's second decade in Europe. Information on the various international programs may be requested from McGeorge School of Law, 3200 5th Avenue, Sacramento, California 95817. Page3 Class Action Send any news of Law School alumni to the Law Examiner. 1975 ---stuart Pearlman has moved his practice from Bardstown Road to 643 West Main Street in Louisville. He maintains a general trial practice. 1978 Stuart Alexander is associated with the Louisville firm of Tilford, Dobbins, Alexander, and Buckaway where he handles workers compensation, black lung, personal InJury, domestic relations, and business-related litigation. Dennis J. Conniff is a staff attorney with the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet in Frankfort. He is principally responsible for oil shale litigation involving the Cabinet and he also works on coalrelated problems and Cabinet administrative issues such as unemployment insurance, personnel matters, and tort actions. Tom Hectus is now a partner with Gittleman and Barber in Louisville where he does criminal trial work, personal injury defense work for the Transit Authority of River City, federal post-conviction remedies, criminal and civil appeals, child custody and domestic relations appeals. Ken Nevitt is now doing general practice, including workers compensation, with Williams and Palmore in Louisville. 1979 Kate Daugherty is a staff attorney with the natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet in Frankfort. She handles surface mining enforcement and general legal matters for the Cabinet, including contract review, personnel actions, and advising department administrators on legality of proposed actions. Rob Littlefield is now with the Legal Aid Society in Louisville where he is the Managing Attorney of the Rural Division, a staff of six attorneys who, provide services for 14 counties surrounding Jefferson County. He handles landlord-tenant cases, consumer litigation, questions involving entitlement to government benefits, and battered spouse actions. 1980 D. Todd Littlefield is with Western Kentucky Legal Services in Owensboro, which serves a seven county area. He works on cases involving Social Security disability payments, Unemployment Insurance, housing problems, and domestic relations. 1981 Nancy Osborne recently began working with the Legislative Research Commission in Frankfort where she is on the staff of the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee and the Cities Committee. Randy Dooley is a corporate attorney with Humana, dealing with general hospital law, contracts, acquisitions, and medical staff matters. Jim Nitsche is practicing tax law at Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs. After graduating from U of L, he got his Masters in Tax at the University of Miami. John L. Tate is with the firm of Stites & Harbison. He does personal injury work and defends medical malpractice suits. Page4 Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 Brandeis Brief ••• Emplo David Leightty is a graduate of the University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville School of Law. !fe currently ser_ves the City of Louisville Department of Law as Assistant Director of Law for Labor and Employment while continuing to represent individual employees in private practice with Tilford, Dobbins, Alexander & Buckaway. Mr. Leightty was previously an associate of Segal, Isenberg, Sales and Stewart from 1977 to 1982, primarily representing unions in the building trades. Recent annotations, law journal articles, and seminars have recognized an emerging national trend in actions based on. wrongful discharge from employment. The LAW EXAMINER solicited an analysis of how that trend may affect decisions in Kentucky. T.ditionally in Kentucky and in other states, an individual employed without a contract or statute to protect him was considered "terminable at will" in the eyes of the law. Such employees came to be known as "at will" employees. In Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Marshall, 586 S.W. 2d 274 (Ky. App. 1974), a recent statement of that rule appears thus: "The common law rule has always been that a contract of employment is terminable by either party at will, in the absence of some statutory or contractual standard that modifies this rule." 586 S. W .2d at 281. Under that rule, it is often said that an employer normally may fire his employee for a bad reason or no reason at all. An approximation of that statement in Kentucky appears in Gambrel v. United Mine Workers, 244 S.W.2d 158 (Ky. 1952). It is supported by a long line of cases. See Western Union ielegraph Co. v. Ramsey, 216 Ky. 657, 88 S.W.2d 675 (1936); Dysart v. Dawkins Log & Mill Co., 222 Ky. 415, 200 S.W. 706 (1927); Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Offutt, 99 Ky. 427, 36 S.W. 181 (1892). Recently, new trends in contract and tort theories in Kentucky and other jurisdictions throughout the nation have been eroding the traditional view, already curtailed by civil rights statutes expressly limiting the grounds upon which employment decisions may be made. See, e.g., Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 29 U.S.C. 2000e - 2000e-17 (1976); Kentucky Civil Rights Act, Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. Chapter 344 (Baldwin 1979). Individual employees generally have little or no bargaining power with their employers. Rarely, there will be an individual who possesses so prized a skill, or some other quality, that he can bargain on equal terms with prospective or present employers. But such individuals are highly unusual and most who are in such great demand do not long remain employees; more often than not, they form their own businesses. The vast majority of the entertainers and actors who are in a fierce competition for any available jobs; the stars who can choose their parts and hold out for large earnings constitute but a small portion of the entertainment market. And in other professions such as law, individuals who attain a status enabling them to do so, generally either become partners in the firms where they are the first year an arrangement was to be made by which the plaintiff was to become the owner of an interest in the business. After two years the plaintiff would be upon an 'easy road to make some real money.' The above expressions are contained in the writing. From these it may be fairly inferred that the parties intended that the duration of the time for the execution of the contract should continue for at least one year, if not for two." 221 S.W. at 244. The Court's concern with the finding a definite duration of the contract stemmed from the rule then recognized that employment contracts of indefinite term would be found terminable at will. In Putnam v. Producer's Livestock Marketing Ass'n., 256 Ky. 196, 75 S.W.2d 1075 (1934), the Court found that a letter from the employer to the employee, confirming a telephone conversation to the · effect that the employee would be hired at a specified yearly salary and be given moving expenses from Cincinnati to Louisville, constituted a writing which might be an .. ... Individual employees generally have little or no bargaining power with their employers ... employed , or leave their employment and set up offices of their own. The unequal bargaining position between individual employees and employers was a large factor in the development of unions. Employees who alone could be freely replaced by employers, found that organizing in large groups gave them substantially increased bargaining power. A large portion of the national workforce is not unionized, and it is with the individual members of that group, and their employers, that we are concerned here. The recent gains of employees (and the losses of employers) in the field of job rights have come largely in two areas of the law: expanded recognition of individual employment contracts; and growth of the tort of retaliatory discharge contrary to public policy. The validity of individual contracts of employment has long been recognized. Controversy has usually centered on whether a given document constituted a contract of employment at all. In Morris Shoe. Co. v. Coleman, 187 Ky. 837, 221 S.W. 242 (1920), the Court affirmed the decision of the trial court that an employer's letter to a prospective employee proposing that he move from another state to Kentucky for a specified annual salary and the assurance that after two years, the plaintiff would be making "some real money" constituted a contract of employment for at least one year. The contract contained no specific reference to a duration. The Court. however, sought to determine the intentions of the parties, and found in those intentions that there be a one year duration. The Court stated: "The day upon which the execution of the contract came into being was definitely fix(!d. The wage to be paid was One Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars. At the end of employment contract. Although the letter did not expressly state a sped fie duration of employment, the employee contended that the letter showed an intention to employ him for a definite period of one year. The trial court had rejected that contention and dismissed the action. The appellate court reversed the dismissal, holding that, "a yearly engagement may be legitimately inferred from this letter and the circumstance disclosed sufficient to sustain the cause of action." 75 S.W.2d at 1078. In effect, the Court held the letter was sufficient to take the case to a jury. Any alleged contract of employment for a period of a year must comply with the statute of frauds. The Court in Putnam found that the letter, even though it did not expressly state the contract would endure for one year, was sufficient to overcome the statute of frauds challenge. Reported decisions in Kentucky continue to find that a writing contained in a letter discussing various terms and conditions of employment may be sufficient to sustain a jury finding that a contract of employment for a definite period existed. See Humana, Inc., v. Fairchild, 603 S.W.2d 918 (Ky. Appr. 1980). A recent decision of the Kentucky Supreme Court indicates an increased willingness to find limits on employer rights to terminate in contract language which might in earlier years not have been so interpreted. In Higdon Food Service, Inc., v. Walker, 641 S. W .2d 750 (Ky. 1982), the Court fou_nd enforceable the covenant of an employee not to work for competitors of the employer. Part of the consideration for the employee's covenant, the Court found, was an obligation on the part of t.h·e employer to retain .· the employee unless the employer in good faith found the employee's services unsatisfactory. The covenant provided that employment would continue during service "satisfactory to the employer" and would terminate upon any. one of several contingencies including the following: "Whenever the employer in good faith determines that the services of employee are no longer satisfactory to the employer or are no longer needed by employer." 641 S.W.2d at 752. Finding that language imposed a duty on the employer to retain the employee unless the employer in good faith found the employee unsatisfactory, the Court stated: "If the employer has an arbitrary right to discharge the employee - that is, in good faith or bad - what earthly function would it serve to add that if in good faith he determines that the employee's work is not satisfactory he will fire him? We think, rather, that the sensible solution is to construe paragraphs 2.03 and 6.01 together as meaning that the employer's rights to discharge the employee on the ground that his services are not satisfactory, or are no longer neeeded , is subject to the requirement of good faith." 641 S.W.2d at 752. One of the many problems faced by an employee who would assert a contract protecting his employment is that courts in Kentucky have traditionally required any such contract to be for a definite period. Contracts for permanent employment or for an indefinite period of employment were treated as terminable at will by either party. See, e.g., Edwards v. Kentucky Utilities Co., 286 Ky. 341, 150 S.W.2d 916 (1941). Under that rule, an employee who claimed a contract in a personnel manual with a provision forbidding termination except for cause had an enormous problem - the personnel manual would contain no definite period for employment. In a stunning to-be-published decision on August 3), 1983, the Kentucky Supreme Court drastically altered that rule. In Shah v. American Synthetic Rubber Corporation, No. 82-SC-568- DG, slip. op. (Ky. Aug. 31, 1983}, the Court reversed summary judgment against an employee alleging, among other things, that he had been terminated in violation of a contract of employment. The alleged contract entailed a promise from the employer that the employee would become "a permanent employee dischargeable only for cause in accordance with persQnnel policies and procedures" established by the employer, after the employee had served a 90-day probation. The Court held that a contract of indefinite term providing that employment is terminable only for cause would be enforceable, and that it was sufficient consideration for enforcement thereof that the employee performed his employment services or promised to do so. In so holding, the Court acknowledged that the employee's claim of permanent employment would previously have been "fatally defective under the 'employment at will' doctrine to which the courts and law writers have devoted much time." Shah, slip opinion, p.4. But the court noted that the parties had clearly contracted for · permanent employment terminable only Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 ~ment at Will Doctrine Examined Appeals has clearly recognized the tort of retaliatory discharge in a fact situation where the tort has been recognized nearly everywhere it has occurred. In a decision designated to be published, but which has not been published because it is under review by the Supreme Court of Kentucky as of this writing, the Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed a cause of action on the part of an employee fired because he filed a valid Workers' Compensation claim. In Firestone Textiles Company v. Meadows, Ky. App., _S.W.2d_ in many other fact circumstances. Clearly, many of these arguments will be rejected by the courts. Others may receive favorable consideration. The Court of Appeals in Meadows did not touch on discharge in contravention of non-statutory public policy. Thus, at this writing, there is no reported Kentucky decision granting a cause of action to an employee fired in retaliation for testifying against the employer in a court of law. While there is movement in Kentucky courts in the area of recognition of for cause. Citing the protection granted employees under collective bargaining agreements and civil service statutes, the Court found that employers should be free to enter individual contracts granting similar protection: "We join a number of other jurisdictions which hold that parties may enter into a contract of employment terminable only pursuant to its express terms - as 'for cause' - by clearly stating their intention to do so, even though no other considerations than service to be performed or promised, is expected by the employer or performed or promised by the employee." Shah, slip opinion, pp. 5, 6. The decision in Shah will make it considerably easier for an employee alleging breach of a contract of employment to get his claim to a jury. Until Shah, such claims were subject to dismissal if they were not. based on a contract for a definite term. Now, contracts of considerable vagueness may be enforceable. ... Creative counsel will no doubt attempt to apply the Meadows decision in many other fact circumstances ... In addition to expansion of the scope of enforceable contracts, courts have recognized increasing employee rights in the realm of torts; particularly, the tort of "retaliatory discharge," or discharge in violation of public policy. In other j urisdictions, such claims have received steadily increasing attention. Thus, an employer who discharges an employee to punish the employee for testifying against the employer, or to prevent him from doing so, may incur liability. Parnar v. Americana Hotels, Inc., 652 P .2d 625 (Hawaii 1982). Termination for refusal to commit an unlawful act has been held to constitute a cause of action. Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Oil Co., 27 Cal. 3d 167, 610 P.2d 1330, 160 Cal. Rptr. 839 ( 1980). ... In Kentucky, the retaliatory discharge tort has not received the attention it has in other jurisdictions ... (81-CA-2460-MR, 1982), the court, affirming a $25,000 jury verdict in favor of an employee allegedly terminated for filing a Workers' Compensation claim, found that the Workers' Compensation .... Act protect emplovess from retaliatory discharge even though it contains no express language to that effect. The court stated: "[W je are lead to the conclusion that by necessary implication the Workers' Compensation Act manifests a public policy that an employee has a right to be free to assert a lawful claim for benefits without suffering retaliation by his employer in the form of discharge. If it were otherwise, the beneficient purposes of the Act could often be effectively frustrated by merely threatening employees with discharge. A statute need not expressly state what is necessarily implied." Shah, slip opinion, p.5. It is interesting that the court eschewed a pure tort theory, and instead applied contract theory. It found that the provtstons of the Workers' Compensation Act were incorporated into an employment at will contract, and that the employment at will contract had been breached by the employer's retaliatory discharge. The Kentucky Supreme Court has granted discretionary review of the decision of the Court of Appeals, and The courts continue to recognize has received briefs and heard arguments. limits to the retaliatory discharge cause Although the decision from that court of action. In Pierce v. Ortho has not been rendered as of this writing, Pharmaceutical Corp., 84 N.J. 58, 417 it can be expected shortly. A.2d 505 (1980), the court found that a If the decision in Meadows is upheld physician terminated for refusal to by the Supreme Court, and it is the conduct experiments with a new drug opinion of this writer that it will be, the simply because the drug was effect of the decision will extend beyond controversial, was not terminated in fact situations involving Workers' contravention of any public policy. The Compensation claims. For instance, it court rendered this decision in full may be argued that discharge of an acknowledgement of a cause of action employee for lodging a peaceful and for termination contrary to public reasonable grievance with his employer policy, it simply held there was no public is in contravention of Ky. Rev. Stat. policy violated. Ann. §336.130 (Baldwin 1979), which In Kentucky, the retaliatory discharge protects the right of employees to engage tort has not received the attention it has in peaceful collective action. in other jurisdictions. In Scrogham v. It is even arguable that an employee Kraftco Corp., 551 S. W .2d 811 (Ky. who files an action in court against his 1977), the court expressly held that there employer on a non-frivolous basis is no cause of action where an employer should be protected from retaliatory terminates an employee because the discharge because the employee is employee has plans to go to night merely exercising his right to a day in school. . ·- court. Creative counsel will no doubt But recently, the Kentucky Court of attempt to apply the Meadows decision contracts of employment and imposing a liability for retaliatory discharge, there are directions recognized by courts in other ju risdictions that have little likelihood of recognition in Kentucky. For instance, a federal district court in Michigan has recognized the tort of "negligent discharge" of an employee, even though the employee was not fired for a reason against public policy and the decision was not based on contract. In Chambe!!l!lll__ v. _ Bi~s~, l_n_c., 31 E.P.D. (CCH) 33.,367 (W.O. Mich. July 15, 1982), the court found that the employer had a duty of care in providing its employee with an incentive to reform conduct which the employer knew would result in termination if continued. The court expressly found that the employee was discharged for just cause, however' the employer had failed to warn the plaintiff in a job evaluation session that his conduct could lead to discharge. The court found that the employer had thereby committed the tort of negligence. Because Michigan is a comparative negligence state, the court considered not only the alleged negligence of the employer in failing to warn the employee, but also the negligence of the employee in engaging in the reprehensible conduct in the first place. Because the employee had engaged in comparative negligence, the court reduced the award by 83 percent. Nonetheless, the judgment for the employee was $61,354. The decision in Chamberlain is extravagant and has no current analogue in Kentucky law. It is unlikely that appellate courts in Kentucky will adopt anything remotely resembling the rule there. A few courts have recognized a tort where an employer has discharged an employee in an overly abusive manner. These decisions have perhaps a greater chance than the Chamberlain decision of being followed in Kentucky; however, there remains considerable doubt about their aplicability in this state. In Agis v. Howard Johnson Co., 331 Me. 140, 355 N.E.2d 315 (1976), the court found an employer liable for inflicting extreme mental suffering upon a waitress, where the employer fired its waitresses one by one in alphabetical order in an attempt to coerce one or more into confessing to theft or informing on other employees who had been stealing. The plaintiff was PageS the first waitress fired. And in Contreras v. Crown Zellerbach Corp., 86 Wash. 2d 735,565 P.2d 1173 (Wash. 1977), the employer was held liable for the mental suffering of an employee who had been subjected to extreme emotional trauma by the malicious and abusive insults and racial slurs of fellow employees, where the employer had failed to take action to prevent the abuse. Under the right fact circumstances, Kentucky courts might recognize similar torts; however, such causes would appear to be variations on traditional tort theories rather than employment law cases. The foregoing cases have all concerned private employment. There is already a vast body of law concerning termination from public employment. Most of the cases involving public employment have been brought under federal constitutional or various federal statutes. What effect wiJI increased recognition by the courts of pri,·ate employment rights have on litigation concerning public employment? Public employment litigation is likely to be affected more by tort decisions than by contract decisions. Municipalities in Kentucky wiJI probably have the same tort duties imposed upon them that are imposed upon priYate employers. While Kentucky law will not impose tort liability upon a municipality unless the municipality has dealt \\ith the claimant in an individual capacity. Louisville Seed Company v. City of Louisville, 433 S.W.2d 638 (Ky. 1968) and subsequent cases, it seems likely that an employee or former employee of a municipality can successfully argue that he has been dealt with on an individual basis by virtue of his employment and his termination. But it may be more difficult for public employees to maintain claims of employment contracts. Courts in Kentucky have expressed reluctance to impose contract obligations upon publi.: entities where the contracts are other than definite and unambiguous. See. e.g. Boyd Fiscal Court v. Ashland Public Library Board of Trustees, 63~ S.W.2d 417 (Ky. 1982).; Quick v. Cit)· of Louisville, 613 S.W.2d 428 (Ky. App. 1980). Furthermore, many municipalities have enacted ordinances governing the terms and conditions of employment for their employees. Such ordinances sometimes contain grievance procedures or other personnel policies. These ordinances will normally be enforceable on their own terms. I believe that courts will be reluctant to impose tort liabilities which may conflict with these ordinances. Civil Service employees, for instance, are employed pursuant to detailed statutes and regulations. Their employment rights and obligations have been legislatively determined. It is unlikely that courts will interfere with such legislation. · The practical effects of the increased judicial recognition of employee rights may not be universally beneficiai for employees. Certainly, these trends have the potential of imposing undue hardship upon employers. Traditionally, employment rights such .as the requirement -...f just t ..:.:.;e for (Continued on page 6) Page6 Brandeis Brief (Continued from page 5) termination, have been granted only as the result of bargaining, usually collective bargaining, or as the result of legislation. And both bargaining and legislation provide the opportunity for open give and take and compromise on the parts of the two interested sides: employers and employees. When a personnel manual unilaterally promulgated by an employer in an effort to achieve good personnel relations and maximum productivity is found to constitute a contract binding the employer to the terms of its own manual, an obligation has been imposed which was not the result of either bargaining or legislation. Employers, already fearful of liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and similar legislation, and scrambling to adopt personnel policies which would avoid such liability, may argue that employees are being given something for nothing when their contract rights or tort protections are expanded by the courts. Those who, by inclination or ideology, applaud expansion of employee rights and favor increased employee protections as a matter of social policy, may view the employer's dilemma as something well deserved. Regardless of the merits of the two sides of this debate, it is predictable that certain practical adjustments will be made by employers, particularly large employers, in response to these legal trends. The first efforts by employers will be to curtail the possibility that they will be found to have entered contracts with their employees. Employers will revise or even abolish personnel manuals which might impose obligations on them. They will be reluctant to engage in correspondence concerning prospective employment. The words "just cause" and "good faith" are likely to be . eliminated from employee handbooks, and replaced by terms such as ''in the . sole discretion of the employer.'' Some employers may even require employees to enter contracts which expressly acknowledge the terminableat- will status of the employee. Employers may engage in exhaustive screening of applicants for employment under the fear that, once hired, the applicants will be difficult to terminate. Because small employers are less likely to have access to the extensive legal advice available to large employers, who may have house counsel or even house counsel specializing in employment law, small employers stand a better chance of having liability imposed against them than larger employers. The larger employers will take organized and carefully planned action to .limit their liability. Smaller employers will have less opportunity to take such action. And employees, on an individual basis will continue to have little bargaining power against their employers and prospective employers; they will usually be helpless when employers abolish personnel manuals, weaken unilaterally imposed grievance procedures, and demarid that employees or applicants sign acknowledgments of terminable at will status. - Nonetheless, a large number of employees may enjoy increased job security as the result of the judicial trends discussed herein-above. Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 Make Your Own Outlines How to Succeed in Law School: Top Students Reveal Exatn Strategies By Neil Ward Learning how to prepare for a law school exam is a long, agomzmg process. For the first time in the academic life of most students, your success or failure depends on how well you do on a single exam that encompasses voluminous material from a semester of work. Every law student dreads final exams, but the successful ones learn how to manage the problem in order to attain a high class ranking. First-year students are filled with doubts about how they are ever going to learn everything that Farnsworth knows about contracts. They stay in a state of panic about whether to use hornbooks, commercial study aids, old outlines or casenotes. Second and third-year students wonder about their study systems. Could they get better grades by using a different study aid or changing their outline format? To help law students analyze their study habits, the Law Examiner interviewed several high-ranking law students to find out their "secrets of success". Bob Winter, a third-year student and Brandeis Society member, advised students to make their own outlines. Winter pointed out that he is older than a lot of law students, since he served in the Navy before attending law school. He cautioned that his study schedule may not conform with the social lifestyle of many of the younger, unmarried law students. Winter outlines every weekend. When he sits down to make his study gems, he uses a hornbook, a textbook and his class notes. "I use chapter headings and subheadings as the skeleton for my outlines," Winter said. "I take extensive notes in class and as I go through the book, I'm constantly referring to my notes." Winter believes the commercial study aids are too sketchy to fully explain the points of law, so he uses a hornbook to help him outline. "In my outlines, I try to include what the professor says in class, what the textbook says the rule of law is and what the hornbook states," Winter said. "An example is torts; I would put down what Eades says in class about proximate cause, what the Palsgraf case brings out in the text and what Prosser points out in the hornbook." Candace Hill, the top-ranked student in the second-year class, also encouraged students to make their own outlines. Unlike Winter, Hill doesn't refer to hornbooks when making her outlines. "I write down everything the professor says in class. When I make my outline, I use my notes and the textbook," Hill said. Hill believes reading hornbooks is a time-consuming procedure that she doesn't need. She has found that by studying the cases, the notes after the cases; and her extensive notes from class, she can make an excellent outline without any other study aids. "I believe the best thing about outlining is that it puts the material in your own words," Hill said. Rosano Dolle, a third-year student and a Brandeis Society member, also sings the praises of making your own outlines. But unlike Winter who outlines every weekend, Dolle usually does her outlines the month before exams. "I use the textbook, a commercial study aid like Gilbert's or Emmanuel's and my notes to help me outline," Dolle said. "I write down everything the professor says and I put a lot of it in my outline." Dolle explained that she uses the commercial study aids to help her organize her outline. It usually takes her about two days to complete her outline and then she may make some changes as she studies it. Marc Murphy, well-known maker of Murphy's Outlines which many secondyear students have relied on to stay in school, said that while he's glad students have utilized his work, he thinks many students would be better off making their own outlines. He believes the actual making of the outline is the real learning experience. Murphy uses commercial study aids to construct his highly-regarded outlines. "There's an ari to selecting the right study aid," Murphy said. "The best commercial aids vary from class to class. For example, Emmanuel's and Smith's Review are the best for civil procedure. You have to know a little about the course material in order to pick the best study aid, but the most important point is to pick out a particular study aid early and get to know it intimately. Don't get paranoid and buy every outline in the bookstore." However, Gilbert's and Emmanuel's aren't always the answer, according to Murphy. "Some ideas are too abstract to be forced into outline form, even though some commercial outlines try to do it," Murphy said. "When I'm faced with a problem like that, I like to read a Photo by Neil Ward Nutshell. An example of what I'm talking about is perpetuities. The subject doesn't lend itself to simple rules, so by reading a nutshell you can understand the subject as a whole and what the problems are." Constitutional law is another abstract area without concrete rules that might be better explained by a nutshell, he said. · Murphy usually begins making his outlines nine weeks before exams. During his freshman year, he had five classes to outline. With nine weeks to go, he took one week and did nothing but outline contracts. He went to class, but he dido 't prepare for any of his classes except contracts. The next week, he spent the entire time on civil procedure until he finished that outline. With four weeks to go, Murphy had five outlines finished. He then spent the last four weeks updating and improving them. Anne Sharp, S.B.A. President, has a unique way of preparing for exams. Sharp gets together with a group of four or five students and they make their outline as a group. "We've been doing it since our freshman year," she said. "We all bring our notes, then someone brings a hornbook, someone brings a Gilbert's and someone might have a Nutshell. I sit at the typewriter and we go through the book case by case. We discuss each subject thoroughly and I type the outline as we go. It usually takes about two 10-hour days to complete each outline." Sharp said the group usually gets together in mid-November to start their outlining. After the outlining, Sharp prefers to study alone, because studying in •a group makes her nervous. A.s you can see, there are more ways to survive a law exam than there are colors in the rainbow. Individuals have to find what works best for them, but if you'll follow the guidelines of some of U of L's successful students you won't be too far off track. Louisville Law Examiner, October, 1983 Judicial Races - (Cont.) Directors of the Jefferson County Bar Association, the Louisville Child Abuse Authority and the Adult Consortium. He has received the Continuing Legal Education Award every year since 1979. (Continued from page /) L School of Law in 1975, and practiced until his election in 1977. Johnstone, 34, was awarded Outstanding Young Man of the Okolona Jaycees in 1978. The next year he was elected Chief Judge of Jefferson District Court and in 1980 was the Louisville Bar Association Judge of the Year. FIFTH DIVISION TEDDY B. GORDON A Louisville attorney seeking election, Gordon has had II years experience in general practice, and clerked for the Kentucky Supreme Court for one year. Gordon, 36, graduated from the night division of U of L Law School while teaching at Westport High School. He is a member of the Jeffersontown Optimists. EARL O'BANNON, JR. (Incumbent) Earl O'Bannon has held this judgeship since 1976. A graduate of U of L Law School, he went on to become a · captain in the Judge Advocate General Corps of the U.S. Army. O'Bannon also served as Deputy Commissioner of the Court . A former Board member of the Presbyterian Community Center and Drug Abuse Center, O' Bannon is now a member of the Board of Directors for the University of Louisville Law Alumni Association and a lecturer for the Continuing Legal Education program . SIXTH DIVISION DAVID KAPLAN David Kaplan graduated from the U of L School of Law in 1959, and has over twenty years experience in trial work . Kaplan is 55 . JACK E. MUDD (Incumbent) Jack E. Mudd seeks re-election to the judgeship he has held since 1972. A graduate of U of L Law School , Judge Mudd has practiced law for 25 years. A former Master Commissioner of the Jefferson Circuit Court, and past President of the Louisville Bar Association, Mudd is a member of the American Legion, the 40 & 8 Society, and is on the Board of Trustees of the Catholic Orphan Society of the Louisville Archdiocese. EIGHTH DIVISION WILLIAM E. McANULTY, JR. William McAnulty is presently a judge of the Jefferson District Court , and is seeking election in the eighth division of Circuit Court. A 1975 graduate of the U of L School of Law, McAnulty has been a part-time faculty member since 1976. During 1975-76 he was Ass istant Director of Safety for the City of Louisv ille, and from 1975-78 a Juvenile Court Judge. He is al so a member of the Board of Directors for the United Way, Bellarmine College, Brooklawn and Spalding College. He is a recipient of the Continuing Legal Education Award. CURTIS G. WITTEN (Incumbent) Curtis Witten has been a Circuit Court Judge in Division 12 for eight years. Judge Witten graduated from the U of L School of Law in 1957 and practiced general law for 18 years. In the 1960's he worked as Assistant County Attorney, and has chaired the mental health litigation, now under District Court. NrNTH DIVISION KEN COREY (Incumbent) Ken Corey, age 42, received his J.D. from U of L in 1974. Judge Corey also attended the University of Nevada Judicial College. He has taught Commercial Law at the U of L School of Business and has served as Circuit Court Judge since 1978. Judge Corey was honored with the Distinguished Judicial Service Award in 1981 by the Louisville Bar Association. HERMAN L. HUMPHREY Herman L. Humphrey, age 62, received his LL.B. from U of Lin 1951 and then served two years in the Navy. Humphrey next spent seven years doing insurance claim work and has been in private practice since. In 1973 Humphrey was a part-time commissioner in the Circuit Court and is a past member of the Louisville Exchange Club. TENTH DIVISION DONALD J. ECKERLE Donald J. Eckerle, age 41, received his J.D. from U of L in 1971. After graduation, Eckerle went into private practice, specializing in family law, until taking the District Court bench in 1978. Eckerle has served on the Board of GEORGE B. RYAN (Incumbent) George B. Ryan, age 68, graduated from the U of L School of Law in 1938. Judge Ryan was a Police Court Judge and an Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney before being elected Circuit Court Judge in 1969. He has served as Chief Judge of the Circuit Court, was the Circuit Court Judge of the Year in 1973, received the Outstanding Alumnus Certificate from the University of Louisville in 1978, and received first place in the Kentucky Bar Association Writing Contest in 1978 and 1979. TWELFTH DIVISION DANIEL A. SCHNEIDER Daniel A. Schneider, age 39, received his J.D. from U of L in 1969 and has attended the National Judicial College. Schneider has been a District Judge since 1978 and served as Chief District Judge for 1982-83. He is presently on the Executive Committee of the Louisville Bar Association, Chairman of the Eagle Scouts Association, Vice-President of the Executive Board of My Old Kentucky Home Boy Scout Council, and on the Council of Prevention and Education of Substance Abuse. EDWIN A. SCHROERING, JR. Edwin A. Schroering, Jr., age 54, received his LL.B. from U of Lin 1953. Schroering has served in the Army as an LOUISVILLE BAR AS SOCIA liON JUDICIAL CANDIDATES' POLL Didn "t Circuit Court Highly Not Know Total Division 2 Q~~alilitd QvallfiH .......... Rated (alllfidatt Ballots Robert E. Delahanty 28% 53% 12% 3% 4% 873 Edmund " Pete" Karem 21% 47% 8% 7% 17% 863 Division 3 Charles H. Anderson* 12% 44% 36% 3% 5% 868 Martin E. Johnstone 42% 40% 4% 3% 11% 854 Division 5 Teddy B. Gordon 4% 24% 43% 9% 20% 858 Earl O'Bannon Jr. • 66% 28% 2% 1% 3% 890 Division 6 David Kaplan 3% 18% 59% 7% 13% 857 Jack E. Mudd* 36% 51% 8% 2% 3% 879 Division 8 William E. McAnulty Jr. 57% 32% 5% 1% 5% 875 Curtis G. Witten* 9% 35% 49% 3% 4% 874 Division 9 Ken Corey* 56% 36% 3% 1% 4% 872 Herman Humphrey 13% 44% 11% 5% 27% 851 Division 10 Donald J. Eckerle 13% 38% 30% 6% 13% 861 George B. Ryan* 15% 43% 36% 4% 2% 876 Division 12 Daniel A. Schneider 28% 40% 5% 7% 20% 755 Edwin A. Schroering Jr. 21% 52% 17% 5% 5% 771 Division 14 Joseph G. Leibson 39% 34% 13% 4% 10% 773 James C. Nicholson 15% 28% 43% 5% 9% 758 Division 15 William G. Colson 10% 33% 42% 5% 10% 853 . Benjamin F. Shobe* 38% 47% 10% 2% 3% 886 Division 16 Ellen B. Ewing 26% 50% 15% 3% 6% 864 George H. Kunzman* 13% 36% 42% 4% 5% 870 To.tal attorneys voting: 890. • Denotes Incumbent Page 7 assistant staff judge advocate, been Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky, Assistant Jefferson County Attorney, Commonwealth's Attorney for the 30th Judicial District. FOURTEENTH DIVISION JOE G. LEIBSON Joe G. Leibson, age 52, received his J.D. from U of L in 1953 and his L.L.M. from Columbia in 1977. Since graduating, Leibson has done much trial work. He has taught Trial Tactics at Columbia and U of L, and has lectured for the American Bar Association and the College of Judges. Leibson is a member of the American Trial La_wyers Association, a founding member of the World Association of Lawyers, and a past member of the National Criminal Defense Bar. He is listed in the 1983 edition of the Best Lawyers in America. JAMES C. NICHOLSON James C. Nicholson received his J.D·. from U of L in 1975 and has attended the National Judicial College. Nicholson has been an Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney, a City Attorney, and has been a District Court Judge and in private practice since 1978. He has done work with United Way and the Heart Fund. Nicholson has received the Continuing Legal Education Award. FIFTEENTH DIVISION WILLIAM G. COLSON William G. Colson, age 64, graduated from U of Lin 1950. Colson has been a practicing attorney for thirty years, and a Police Court Judge for the City of Louisville. He has served on several executive committees for the Louisville and Kentucky Bar Associations. BENJAMIN F. SHOBE (Incumbent) Benjamin F. Shobe graduated from the University of Michigan School of Law in 1946. Judge Shobe has served as a Police Court Judge, Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney, and Trial Commissioner before being elected Circuit Court Judge. He has served as Circuit Court Chief Judge and is on the Council for Higher Education. SIXTEENTH DIVISION ELLEN B. EWING Ellen B. Ewing is a second-term District Court Judge seeking the 16th division Circuit Court seat. A 1972 graduate of the University of Louisville School of Law. Ewing, 39, was a member of the Governor's Task Force to Implement a New Judicial Code, and is currently a board member of the Committee for the Prevention of Suicide Among Youth. She participates in the Children in Placement Project dealing with foster children, and was recently appointed to the Governor's Commission on Sentencing and Prison Overcrowding. GEORGE H. KUNZMAN (Incumbent) George Kunzman, 66, is a World War II veteran, and a 1954 graduate of the U of L School of Lw. From 1961 to 1963 he worked as an assistant prosecutor and then served as police court judge for six years. He has served on the Circuit Court bench for 16 years. Judge Kunzman is a member of the Louisville Board of Realtors. Briefs "Reggie" Fellowships Available The Reginald H. Smith Community Lawyer Fellowship (Reggie) Program provides fellowships to pay the salaries of recent law school graduates who work as staff attorneys in various legal services programs. The program is administered by the Howard University Law School and is funded by the Legal Services Corporation. The program offers its fellowship recipients one year of service in one of the 265 Legal Services Corporation funded law offices throughout the United States (including Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Micronesia). Beginning in August of each year, with a starting salary of about $15,000, Community Lawyer Fellows spend up to two years in a neighborhood law office rendering legal services to the poor. Republicans Form Caucus A Republican Law Caucus (RLC) has been formed at the U of L Law School. The group consists of law students and alumni interested in local and state political activities. The RLC says its primary goal is to support and promote area candidates, with an emphasis on alumni candidates. Members have been working locally on behalf of GOP gubernatorial candidate Jim Bunning and his running-mate Gene Stuart, candidate for Lt. Governor. Officers of the RLC include Michael Harned, President, and Michael Lawrence, Vice-President. Anyone interested in joining the organization can contact the RLC at P.O. Box 2048, Louisville, 40201. Employment Law Seminar The Louisville Bar Foundation and the School of Law are sponsoring "Employment Law: Individual Rights and Responsibilities in the Workplace." The seminar, chaired by attorney D. Patton Pelfrey, will be held at the LBF office, 717 W. Main St., Friday, October 28, from 8:30a.m. to 4:30p.m. Homecoming The 1983. Homecoming Program will be held in Room 175 of the School of Law on Saturday, November 5, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. The $15.00 registration fee includes lunch. Will Drafting The Continuing Legal Education office is offering a seminar on Will Drafting and Probate, on November 18 at the Executive Inn in Owensboro, Ky. Contact the CLE office for further detail s. Arbitration in the Coal Industry A seminar on Arbitration in the Coal Industry, sponsored by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service and the U of L School of Law, will be held Monday, October 31, and Tuesday, November I, at the Executive West Hotel in Loui sville. Registration is $60. Further details are available at (502) 367-2251. Eat, Drink and be Scary Mark your calendar for the SBA Halloween party on October 27th at Woody's. According to SBA Social Chairman Tom Stone, free beer, good eats, and an array of awards for various costume categories are just a few good reasons to forget Torts and Code I and come out and play. Live music will be provided by Pam Murphy's group, the Whispering Pines. The fun starts at 8, so dust off the old costume and meet your friends at Woody's! Louisville Law Examiner School of Law University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky 40208 Non-Profit Organization U.S. POSTAGE PAID Permit No. 769 Louisville, KY John M. Harlan Louis D. Brandeis ' . t;ii/ - Louisville~ Law Examiner Volume9 Former U.S. Respresentative Shirley Chisholm speaks at U of L .................. page 1 Background on Judicial Candidates .................. page 1 Merger Necessary to Streamline Government ................. . page 2 ''Brandeis Brief'': Employment at Will ................ .. page 4 How to Succeed in Law School .................. page 6 October, 1983 Number 2 |
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 | 1983-10 |
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 |
|
|
|