NEBRASKA PARALEGAL ASSOCIATION IN THIS ISSUE: From the President ..... 1 From the Editor ........... 2 Save the Dates ............ 3 NALA News .................. 5 District I News ............ 6 District II News ........... 7 Client Confidentiality Article .......................... 9 Nebraska Hemp Farming Act ............................. 12 New Members ........... 15 Cambridge Analytica Article ........................ 17 Getting to Know Your Officers ...................... 19 NIST Privacy Framework Update.............. 21
VOLUME MMXIX ISSUE 4
FROM THE PRESIDENT: KIMBERLY BROWN, ACP Greetings! Welcome to the In Brief! Thank you to Casey Ochs, Publications Director, for creating a wonderful informational tool for our organization. She and her team (Amber Roberts and Kim Hansen) put in many hours for our benefit. If you see them around, feel free to show your appreciation for their hard work! Another huge shout out to each of the officers and committee chairs for his or her hard work since installation at NePA’s Fall Seminar. In October, the Board of Directors attended a retreat to get to know each other better, conduct the first Board meeting, and set our goals for the 2019-2020 fiscal year. Life Coach Mandy Kubicek provided a wonderful workshop during the retreat to help us improve cohesiveness within the Board and with our communication skills. A few highlights of the Board’s progress since the retreat include: 1. Pairing of all of NePA’s new members and students with mentors. 2. Completing the entire 2020 Program Year (…more to come later in this issue!) 3. Planning the second annual 2020 Diversity Event co-hosted with the Omaha Bar Association. 4. Completely transitioning the Treasurer’s books and membership lists to their new Officers, Laurie Vik and Teresa Semerena. 5. Organizing and scanning 45 years of NePA historical archives. 6. Completing the 2018-2019 fiscal audit. 7. Hosting three District lunches in October and November. 8. Collaborating with Anthony’s Steakhouse in Omaha to provide the best service and prices possible for NePA’s District I lunches. 9. Improving the website, including the registration and payment processes! 10. Developing a plan to reach out to non-member Certified Paralegals to encourage their membership in NePA. And this is just the beginning! We have many more tasks to complete in the coming year, including a salary and experience survey for Nebraska’s paralegals. We are well on our way to a successful and fun 2020! Please reach out to any of our Board members if you have suggestions for improving our membership, officer duties, or committees. We are always open to suggestions and would love input from each of you. You may call me anytime at 402-636-8253.
Continued on Page 2
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
FROM THE EDITOR Happy Holidays from the Publications Committee! I hope you enjoy this final edition for 2019 and I want to thank the Committee, especially Amber Roberts, for mentoring me on NePA and editing the In Brief with me! Please make a resolution this year to include NePA involvement to your list and getting someone you know to join in 2020. We are always looking for additional help and it’s a great way to get involved with the Nebraska paralegal community!
...AND HAPPY NEW YEARS! SEE YOU ALL IN 2020!
If you have any comments or corrections regarding this issue or suggestions for future content, please forward them to me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Publications Committee Members Casey Ochs, CP Kimberly Brown, ACP Kim Hansen Amber Roberts, ACP
President’s Message continued Finally, I hope that each of you take time for yourself at the end of this year (and decade!) to relax, eat good food, and enjoy your friends, family, and coworkers. I leave you with a few more items that I hope for you… To look for those special moments to make all the other “moments” worth it. To dance like no-one (or everyone) is watching. To sing (in the shower, the car, or at work) like no-one (or everyone) is listening. To look in the mirror and know how brave, intelligent, and funny you are every day. To pay it forward. To be kind…to yourself and to others. Blessings to you as you all celebrate this Holiday Season and the New Year.
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
SAVE THE DATES January 22, 2020: District I - Certified Paralegal: Taking Your Career to the Next Level (Anthony’s Steakhouse, Omaha) February 12, 2020: District II (CLE) - Identity Theft: Protecting Your Identity at Work & Play (Green Gateau, Lincoln) February 26, 2020: District I (CLE) - Going Viral: Social Media Collection and Challenges (Anthony’s Steakhouse, Omaha)
Register for events at:
March 18, 2020: District I (CLE) - Managing Law Firm Records in the Digital Age (Scott Conference Center, Omaha)
April 22, 2020: District I (CLE) - Flood Waters Rising: Bankruptcy & Dealing with the Devastation (Anthony’s Steakhouse, Omaha)
Board Meetings (5:30-7:30pm):
April 29, 2020: District II (CLE) - Advocating for the Victim/Witness (Green Gateau, Lincoln)
January 7, 2020 Whitmore Law Office March 3, 2020 Kutak Rock LLP June 9, 2020 Gavilon August 4, 2020 no location yet October 6, 2020 Kutak Rock LLP
May 15, 2020: Mid-Year Meeting and Spring Seminar (CLE) (Mahoney State Park, Ashland)
June 4, 2020: Diversity event (CLE) (Scott Conference Center, Omaha) August 12, 2020: District II (CLE) - Getting to Know the Civil Division of the Attorney General’s Office (Green Gateau, Lincoln) September 16-17, 2020: Fall Seminar, Recognition Breakfast, and Annual Meeting (CLE) (Scott Conference Center, Omaha) October 28, 2020: District I (CLE) - Notary Tips, Tricks and Things to Avoid (Anthony’s Steakhouse, Omaha)
November 4, 2020: District II (CLE) - Prosecuting Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault Cases (Green Gateau, Lincoln) November 18, 2020: District I (CLE) - Working for Justice for All (Anthony’s Steakhouse, Omaha)
Attention Students and Paralegals! Apply Now for NePA's CP or ACP Scholarships!
CP applicants must: Be a NePA Member Reside in Nebraska or Iowa Meet the NALA CP Eligibility Requirements Complete the Application on NePA's Website Not received any other NePA CP Scholarship
What? $925 - CP Scholarship to cover approved expenses $250-300 - ACP Scholarship
CP Application deadline: August 1 ACP Application deadline: March 1
Where? For more information on eligibility requirements and application procedures, see NePA's Scholarships/Awards webpage: https://nebraskaparalegal.org/ scholarships.php
Questions? Contact: Katie at 402-978-5227 or email@example.com Selection of scholarship recipients shall be made without regard to race, color, creed, sex, age, national origin or marital status
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
NALA NEWS Congratulations to the following members who recently passed the NALA Certified Paralegal Exam or obtained their Advanced Certified Paralegal credential!
Alicia Tutini, CP
Amber Roberts, ACP - Discovery
If you or someone you know is interested in taking the Certified Paralegal Exam please go to nala.org for more information.
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
DISTRICT I NEWS In October, NePA hosted Sara Eliason of the Women’s Center for Advancement. She presented “Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault: Addressing Issues, Decreasing Victims.” Sara educated us that statistics aren’t always reliable, and domestic violence can affect both men and women. She also busted other myths and gave a clear understanding of what domestic abuse can look like. She not only provided clarity, but elaborated on ways to help someone in this unfortunate circumstance. There were twenty-nine members in attendance, as well as four student members and one sponsor. November brought an opportunity for NePA’s members to learn about financial wellness. Kathleen Spence of Operation HOPE, Inc. presented, “Establishing Financial Wellness for Yourself and Your Clients.” She walked the group through a credit and money management workshop. She voiced the importance of knowing your credit score and how to improve that number. She also provided helpful tips for budgeting and addressing debt. Twenty-five members were in attendance and eight non-members. Keep a look out in this issue for the agenda for the upcoming 2020 lunches that will start back up in January. We hope to see everyone there! Please feel free to obtain further information at www.operationhope.org.
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
DISTRICT II NEWS Nicole Hutter, Chief Legal Counsel at the Nebraska State Patrol presented “Serving as a Prosecutor: A Female’s Perspective” at the November 13, 2019 District II luncheon. Nicole served as a prosecutor at the Sarpy County Attorney’s Office prior to joining the Patrol. At the lunch, Ms. Hutter spoke of the many trials and tribulations she experienced working as a female in the "man's world" of prosecution. She also covered many types of cases she handled, the majority being Domestic and Child Abuse, which were very trying for her considering the topics. She felt as if she fought the good fight for many years and enjoyed her time at the Prosecutor's office. She left because she needed a change, partly because she is a mother herself, and also because she wanted to spend more time at home. All in all, the attendees thoroughly enjoyed the presentation and had many interesting questions. The group expressed interest in bringing Ms. Hutter back for a seminar.
Please join us for upcoming luncheons! January 22, 2020: District I (Omaha) Certified Paralegal: Taking Your Career to the Next Level February 12, 2020: District II (Lincoln) Identity Theft: Protecting Your Identity at Work & Play REMEMBER, all those attending luncheons must REGISTER AND PAY to attend. Members are $12 and Non-Members are $17. New members will receive their first lunch for free! All new members must register for the event prior to the deadline, select a meal, and email Courtney Pfeiffer (District I - Omaha) or Deb O’Brien (District II - Lincoln) prior to the luncheon to let them know you’re coming and to mark your lunch as free.
Events are listed on the homepage of the NePA website under NePA Calendar. Find the one you’re looking for and click on it to get further details and register. Please be sure to register for the correct one. District I is Omaha and District II is Lincoln. Once you register, you’ll be taken to a separate page that allows you to pay online through PayPal or provides instructions on where to mail payment. You may also pay with a check (preferred) or cash on the day of the luncheon. If you register correctly, you’ll receive an email confirmation. If you pay online, you’ll receive a second confirmation.
For all questions, please contact: Courtney Pfeiffer, District I Director at firstname.lastname@example.org Deb O’Brien, District II Director at email@example.com
CERTIFIED PARALEGAL: Taking Your Career to the Next Level
Kim Brown, ACP Baird Holm LLP
Cost: Member $12 Non-member $17
January 22, 2020
Anthony's Steakhouse 7220 F. Street Omaha, NE 68127 11:00-11:30 Networking 11:30-12:30 Education & Lunch Register at http://nebraskaparalegal.org by January 17th
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITY: THE BURIED BODIES CASE In the summer of 1973, four college-aged friends set out on a camping trip in New York’s Adirondack Mountains. What happened over the next hours led to a case that generated a national debate about confidentiality between an attorney and client. Commonly referred to as the “Buried Bodies Case,” it is an essential part of law school curriculum that addresses legal ethics and professional responsibility.
The lawyers kept their secret and Garrow’s case proceeded to trial many months later. Under direct questioning, Garrow confessed to Domblewski’s murder, as well as the murders of the two missing women. He also confessed to multiple rapes and abductions throughout upstate New York. The day after Garrow’s testimony, Armani and Belge acknowledged publicly that they had known all along about the murders and the locations of the bodies of the two womRobert Francis Garrow attacked the four camp- en. ers in July 1973, stabbing Philip Domblewski to death while the other three escaped and sum- The attorneys became the target of widespread moned help. After a massive 12-day manhunt, public outrage, including vandalism and death Garrow was captured. Immediately after his ar- threats, and were forced to relocate their famirest, Garrow requested that Frank Armani, a lies to protect their safety. The lawyers insisted general practice lawyer in Syracuse, New York, their duty of confidentiality bound them to prowho had represented Garrow in previous minor tect the information disclosed by their client. matters, represent him in the pending murder The legal community was largely supportive of charge. The court named Armani and Francis Armani and Belge, but the public at large widely Belge, another local lawyer, as Garrow’s ap- distrusted lawyers in a post-Watergate world pointed counsel. and did not see things the same way. Both men lost longtime friendships and saw their law During the pretrial preparation, Garrow admit- practices wither and fail. They were both invested to his attorneys that he had murdered tigated by a grand jury and Belge was ultimateDomblewski. He also admitted to other crimes, ly indicted, as he had been alone when he including abducting, raping, and murdering two found one of the bodies. Belge admitted to females in separate incidents: 16-year-old Alicia moving the remains to better photograph them Hauck and 20-year-old Susan Petz. Garrow de- and was charged with failing to report a dead scribed the locations where he had dumped body and failing to provide it with a decent burtheir bodies. His description was so specific that ial. Those charges were later dismissed by a Belge was able to locate the remains of both trial court judge, who praised Belge for his women and photograph the sites. commitment to his ethical duty as an attorney. People v. Belge, 372 N.Y.S.2d 798 (1975). Armani and Belge told no one of Garrow’s con- The family of one of the victims filed an ethics fession. The female victims were considered complaint against the lawyers with the state missing persons and police suspected Garrow of bar. Four years later, the Committee on Profesmurdering them. Petz’s distraught father con- sional Ethics of the New York State Bar Associafronted Armani at his office, asking whether Ar- tion dismissed the complaint, stating in its opinmani had any information about his daughter. ion that to encourage full disclosure of all poAs a result of this incident, Armani refused mul- tentially relevant facts to his lawyer, a client tiple attempts by Hauck’s father to meet with must have the assurance of confidentiality, “a him. requirement embodied by law in the attorneyclient privilege,” even if those facts may reveal Garrow’s lawyers were faced with the dilemma the commission of prior crimes. A client who of upholding their ethical duty to preserve infor- withholds information from his lawyer “runs a mation told them by their client. They had in- substantial risk of not being according to his full formation that would enable the families of the legal rights.” Opinion 479 (1978). slain girls to know for certain the fate of their daughters and to properly bury the bodies. Ar- Years later, Armani described the ethical conmani also came to the painful realization that flict as “the duty to keep a client’s secrets verhe was acquainted with the father of one of the sus the citizen’s obligation to report crimes.” At victims and that she had been the classmate of play was also a moral duty to ease the suffering Armani’s daughter. of grieving parents, one that was particularly
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITY: THE BURIED BODIES CASE ence on Professional Responsibility, Armani revealed he was not aware in 1973 that there was even a written ethics code for New York lawyers. His guide was the oath he had taken in 1956 when he was sworn in as a lawyer to maintain the confidence of his client’s secrets. Lisa G. Lerman, et al., The Buried Bodies Case: Alive and Well After Thirty Years, 2007 Prof. Law. 19, 29-31 (2007). Armani insists that he is no hero and, if presented with the situation again, would act no differently. Id.
important to Armani as a parent himself. “[T] he fact that I have a dead girl, the fact that her body is there, [measured] against the breaking heart of a parent … it’s a terrible thing to play God at that moment, but in my judgment, and I still feel that way, their suffering is not worth jeopardizing my sworn duty or my oath of office or the Constitution.” Ethics on Trial, reported by Fred Graham for WETA, PBS Video (1986). Armani never questioned the duty imposed by the oath of the office he held to “keep inviolate the secrets of our clients.” He believed the dilemma to be “a question of which is the higher moral good at the moment … the question of the Constitution, the question of even a [expletive] like [Garrow] having a proper defense, having adequate representation, being able to trust his lawyer as to what he says.” Id. Forty-five years later, this case is still relevant to the discussion over a lawyer’s duty of confidentiality to clients. That duty is set forth in Rule 1.6 of the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct. It is believed that the case was a contributing factor to the inclusion of “death and substantial bodily injury” as an exception to the duty of confidentiality under Rule 1.6. Id., p. 22. At the time of Garrow’s trial, his lawyers were governed by New York’s version of the ABA Model Code of Professional Responsibility, which allowed a lawyer to reveal “the intention of his client to commit a crime and the information necessary to prevent the crime,” but not prior acts admitted in confidence. Decades later, in a panel discussion at an ABA Confer-
Reprinted with permission of the National Association of Legal Assistants, Inc. This article originally appeared in the July/August 2018 issue of Facts & Findings. Inquiries should be directed to NALA at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Lisa M. Stone, ACP is a Senior Paralegal with T.D. Williamson, Inc., in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Lisa previously spent 18 years working in employment and litigation practice groups with Hall Estill in Tulsa. Lisa received her CP designation in 1996 and has earned Advanced Certified Paralegal credentials in Discovery and Contracts Administration/Contracts Management. She has a B.A.in Political Science. Lisa has served on the board of the Tulsa Area Paralegal Association in various positions since 2014 and is currently the President. She also serves on NALA’s Certifying Board. Lisa was the Tulsa County Bar Association Paralegal of the Year in 2014 and was a NALA Affiliated Associations Achievement Award recipient in 2017. Lisa can be reached at email@example.com.
Protecting Your Identity at Work & Play Speaker: Ryan Sothan, Outreach Coordinator NE Attorney General's Office
February 12, 2020 11:30 am - 12:30pm
Green Gateau 330 S. 10th St. Lincoln, NE 68508 Cost: $12 Members $17 Non-Members Register at http://nebraskaparalegal.org starting January 22nd
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: A FINTECH LAWERS VIEW ON THE NEBRASKA HEMP FARMING ACT, HEMP, AND BANKING Dear Editor: I am writing today to discuss the Nebraska Hemp Farming Act, the federal 2018 Farm Bill, hemp, hemp derived CBD, and banking services. I had a chance to dig, no pun intended, into the issues a bit further and wanted to provide some additional thoughts and insights. First, with respect to the 2018 Farm Bill (the “Bill”), it does appear that the Bill removed the species Cannabis sativa L. (“C. Sativa”) from the Schedule 1 Controlled Substances List under the Controlled Substances Act. The exemption includes the hemp and cannabinoids (including cannabidiol or CBD) derived from a C. Sativa plant. So, both the C. Sativa hemp and CBD derived from such hemp are no longer illegal under federal law. However, this does not mean that all CBD oil is now legal, as CBD derived from marijuana remains a controlled substance. Even CBD derived from C. Sativa hemp is legal only if the hemp was produced in a manner consistent with the Bill and related agency regulations. For example, in order to be legal, CBD oil can't just be derived from C. Sativa hemp, it must also be sourced from hemp grown by a licensed producer and contain acceptable hemp THC levels in accordance with federal rules and regulations. So how does the Bill affect the banking industry? Well, it still appears that there is some confusion or reticence on the part of banks to offer services to hemp and legal CBD providers. I think this hesitancy mostly stems from the lack of guidance from prudential banking regulators clarifying that banks can now provide services to the industry. There does appear to be push to change this fact, with Senators, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, sending a letter to federal banking agencies reiterating hemp's legality and requesting clarification to ease concerns over lack of access to financial services. In addition to the general confusion that still remains, the other issue that may impact a bank's ability to provide services to hemp and legal CBD providers is state law. Under a prior farm bill, states gained the ability to grow and cultivate and market industrial hemp for research purposes. As part of this earlier farm bill, states started to implement state programs to legalize hemp and engage in research. In terms of offering banking services then, a bank will want to limit its offerings to states that have hemp and/or CBD programs up and running and further limit activities within those states to providers appropriately licensed and compliant with those state programs and laws. What about the federal regulators? The FDIC views the issue as one of "safety and soundness" and customer due diligence. However, my understanding is that the FDIC has also indicated that, in its view, the 2014 FinCEN guidance for banking-marijuana related businesses would NOT apply to businesses engaging in legal hemp related activities.
Based on all of this, it's my view that a bank can likely provide financial services to persons engaged in hemp and hemp derived CBD businesses, but that the offering of such services should be subject to certain restrictions and guardrails including the following: •
Services should only be offered to hemp and hemp derived CBD businesses that operate under an authorized state's program and, similarly, should only be offered in those states that have legalized hemp / hemp derived CBD and have established such programs.
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
NEBRASKA HEMP FARMING ACT CONTINUED •
The bank should consider conducting additional due diligence to minimize the risk that any of its services are being used to bank still illegal marijuana or marijuana derived CBD products, including the following: Ensuring hemp or CBD products are grown / derived from hemp grown in the US and not overseas. Obtaining a certificate of analysis ("COA") with respect to the CBD. The COA will include important information on the CBD and is actually required by some states, such as Indiana, to appear on CBD product labels. In addition, the COA should be based on testing conducted by a lab using methods validated by a national regulatory organization (e.g., the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists). Inquire whether a hemp / CBD provider will transport hemp or CBD across state lines Inquire as to the type of CBD products the business makes / sells Obtain information about the business' suppliers and the suppliers’ licenses, sources of hemp etc. The bank should require the CBD / hemp provider to agree / certify, that they comply with all applicable laws and to report any changes to the bank. Finally, even with all of the above, the bank should still designate CBD / hemp business' it opens an account for as "high risk" for BSA purposes.
I would suggest that a bank that has determined to provide services to hemp / CBD oil businesses should develop a written policy / check lists to incorporate the above procedures into its existing compliance policies.
Reprinted with permission, from the December 2, 2019 edition of Baird Holm’s Technology & Intellectual Property Update. Eli Rosenberg is a member of Baird Holm LLP’s Technology & Intellectual Property Section. Get more information at www.bairdholm.com.
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
ACTIVE Bridget DeLeo - Legal Aid of Nebraska Linda Elliott - Mutual of Omaha Carla Engel - Mutual of Omaha Leia Hildebrand - Baird Holm LLP Rachel Kraft - Kellogg & Palzer, P.C.
DISTANT Buffy Bader - The Buckle, Inc. Marlys Brenning - Jacobsen, Orr, Lindstrom & Holbrook, P.C.
STUDENT Cindy Jarquin - Metropolitan Community College Andrew Lighthall - Doane University
Attention Students! Apply Now for NePA's $500.00 Student Education Award
Who? You! Applicants must be admitted and accepted in a Paralegal Program at an Accredited University, College, Community College or Business College located in Nebraska and have completed one academic term.
$500.00 to apply to your tuition, room and board, fees, or books
For more information on eligibility requirements and application procedures, see NePA's Student web page:
When? Apply now! Application deadline: March 1
Questions? Contact: Joyce at 402.319.7926 or firstname.lastname@example.org Selection of scholarship recipients shall be made without regard to race, color, creed, sex, age, national origin or marital status
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
FTC ISSUES OPINION AND ORDER AGAINST CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA FOR DECEIVING FACEBOOK USERS Keypoint: The fallout from the 2018 Cambridge Analytica incident continues with the FTC’s issuance of this unanimous opinion and order. On December 6, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued a unanimous opinion (the “Opinion”) finding that political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica, LLC (“Cambridge Analytica”) violated Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”) (15 U.S.C. § 45) by engaging in deceptive practices to harvest personal information from tens of millions of Facebook users through a Facebook application called the “GSRApp.” According to the opinion, the GSRApp allowed Cambridge Analytica to obtain personal information from approximately 250,000–270,000 Facebook users who directly interacted with the app (“App Users”), as well as from an additional 50–65 million “friends” of those App Users. To obtain App Users’ consent, Cambridge Analytica falsely represented that the GSRApp did not collect any personally identifiable information. However, Cambridge Analytica proceeded to use the personally identifiable information collected for “voter profiling and targeted advertising purposes.” The FTC also found that Cambridge Analytica violated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield (the “Privacy Shield”) – a pact between the European Union and United States allowing companies to legally transfer data from the EU to the U.S. – by falsely claiming that it was a participant in the Privacy Shield despite allowing its certification to lapse. Moreover, Cambridge Analytica failed to affirm that it would continue to apply Privacy Shield benefits to all personal information received while participating in the Privacy Shield program for as long as it retains such information. Ultimately, the FTC concluded that Cambridge Analytica engaged in false and material, and hence deceptive, practices to harvest personal information by: (1) representing to App Users that it would not collect their identifiable information on the GSRApp; (2) representing that it remained a participant in the Privacy Shield after its certification had lapsed; and (3) representing that it was in compliance with Privacy Shield principles despite its failure to affirm such compliance. The Order requires Cambridge Analytics to cease its deceptive acts and practices in compliance with the following: •
First, Cambridge Analytics is prohibited from participating in the Privacy Shield and from making misrepresentations about the extent to which it protects the privacy and confidentiality of personal information.
Second, Cambridge Analytica must continue to apply Privacy Shield protections to all personal information collected while participating in the program or return or delete the information.
Finally, Cambridge Analytica is required to delete all personal information that it collected through the GSRApp.
This post first appeared December 8, 2019 on the legal blog Byte Back, written by Megan Herr & David Stauss, Husch Blackwell LLP. Reprinted with permission. Get more information at www.huschblackwell.com.
Proud Supporter of the Nebraska Paralegal Association
Business & Corporate | Litigation | Public Finance | Real Estate 1650 Farnam Street | Omaha, Nebraska 68102 | 402.346.6000 kutakrock.com Emerald Sponsor
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
GETTING TO KNOW YOUR OFFICERS - CASEY OCHS, CP What is your current position on the Board? I am on the Publications Committee as the Publications Editor. How did you end up in the paralegal field? When I was in college I babysat for an attorney’s kids and he later asked me if I could help him at his firm at Kasaby & Nicholls. I started off organizing his files and then eventually took on more and more responsibilities. I worked all during college and once I graduated I ended up staying with the legal field instead of teaching! How did you become involved in NePA? I got connected with NePA through Kim Brown and Linda Hess who are paralegals at Baird Holm. They both let me know it was a great way to get involved in the paralegal community and after I achieved my Certified Paralegal credentials I became more interested in joining a committee. What made you decide to join the board? I wanted to help my friends at NePA and work on the Publications Committee to help with content and design of the In Brief. What has been the greatest benefit of being a member of NePA? My colleagues were right, it is a great way to get involved with the paralegal community. I’ve learned a lot from the CLEs available too! What is/was your favorite job? I love my current job at Baird Holm. I’m a litigation paralegal and work on discovery and trial needs for trial attorneys. It is very stressful, but every day is challenging and rewarding! What advice do you have for those looking to enter the paralegal field? There are so many types of law you can get into- so if you can, you should try a few different fields or cases before settling on just one type of law! I started at a small firm first before joining a large firm, I think my experience at a small firm was invaluable. I really got to learn everything that goes into a case and working a variety of different types of Law.
NEBRASKA. THEREâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S NO BETTER PLACE TO THRIVE
Gavilon is a proud sponsor of the Nebraska Paralegal Association!
1331 Capitol Ave | Omaha, NE 68106 | T 402.889.4000
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4
NIST PRIVACY FRAMEWORK UPDATE In September, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) released the preliminary draft of the NIST Privacy Framework (“Privacy Framework”). NIST partnered with stakeholders from the public and private sectors to develop the Privacy Framework. The Privacy Framework is modeled and designed to work in tandem with the NIST Cybersecurity Framework. Like the Cybersecurity Framework, the Privacy Framework is voluntary and utilizes a risk-based approach to address an organization’s privacy needs. By using a risk-based approach as the cornerstone, the Privacy Framework can be used by any organization, regardless of size, complexity, and industry. Because the Privacy Framework is designed for widespread use, it is agnostic to any particular law, industry, jurisdiction, and technology. The Privacy Framework is designed to assist organizations in a variety of ways, including the following: Mapping to Informative References: NIST is in the process of mapping the Privacy Framework to other relevant NIST guidance (e.g., NIST Security and Privacy Controls for Information Systems and Organizations 800 -53 Rev. 5) and anticipates developing mapping for industry sectors and privacy laws and regulations. • Strengthening Accountability: Organizations can use privacy risk assessments to direct its privacy risk management operations and processes by engaging all levels of an organization in the process of privacy accountability. • Establishing a Privacy Program: The enactment of the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) and the California Consumer Protection Act of 2018 (“CCPA”) required many organizations to consider privacy compliance in their corporate risk positions for the first time. Through the Privacy Framework, NIST developed a “ready, set, go” model for such organizations to support the creation of a new privacy program or improvement of an existing program. • Information and System Development Lifecycle: Organizations can use privacy risk
assessments to better understand how data is processed during the entire information and system development lifecycle: creation/ collection, processing, dissemination, use, storage, and disposition/destruction/ deletion. By better understanding these processes, organizations are better positioned to anticipate privacy risks and take appropriate proactive steps. The preliminary draft also contains several example case studies of how organizations could use the Privacy Framework to address their own diverse and unique privacy needs. In the current evolving privacy-regulatory environment, the Privacy Framework is aptly positioned to assist organizations with creating, or improving on, a strong privacy risk management program.
Reprinted with permission, from the December 2, 2019 edition of Baird Holm’s Technology & Intellectual Property Update. Sean Nakamoto is a member of Baird Holm LLP’s Technology & Intellectual Property Section. Get more information at www.bairdholm.com.
VOLUME MMXIX, ISSUE 4