December January 2017-2018

Official Magazine of the Denver Bar Association

Vol. 40.1 I December/January 2017-18

From Gotham to the Magic City to the Queen City of the Plains, when the Titans of Law and Commerce are at an impasse, the call goes out to the Judicial Arbiter Group, Inc.

Nothing is Black or White

Judicial Arbiter Group, Inc. 2 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

JAG Resolves Shades of Gray

Denver, CO Colorado Springs, CO Birmingham, AL South Bend, IN 1-800-ARBITER www.jaginc.com

DOCKET 5

7

5 7 11 14

11

14

A Message from DBA President Franz Hardy

On the Town: Franz Hardy Interviews U.S. District Court Judge Christine Arguello Collaborative Divorce: What In The World Is Collaborative Divorce?

Inactive Status

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 3

INSIDE 5 A Message From The President 6 Briefly 7 On The Town Chapter Three : An Interview with U.S. District Court Judge Christine Arguello 11 Collaborative Divorce: What In The World Is Collaborative Divorce?

14 Inactive Status 16 Ethics Column: Which Came First — The Person Or The Lawyer

The mission of The Docket is to educate and entertain the Denver legal community — we hope without being sued.

THE DOCKET A Denver Bar Association publication. Views expressed in articles are those of the author and not the views of the author’s employers, the Docket Committee or the Denver Bar Association, unless expressly stated.

Managing Editor: Alexa Drago, adrago@cobar.org Graphic Designer: Clair Smith, csmith@cobar.org Advertising: Brendan Baker, bbaker@cobar.org

24 Law Student Chronicles: Gathering Heap

Docket Committee: Ainsley E. Bochniak, Julie M. Borisov, Jerry R. Bowman, II, Scott H. Challinor, Craig C. Eley. David L. Erickson, Emma E. Garrison, James R. Garts, III, Peter E. Grandey, Ryan T. Jardine, Thomas L. Kanan, Jr, Judith A. Keene, April H. Killcreas, Lauren Lockard, Kyle J. Martelon, Esq, Alicia J. McCommons, Daniel R. McCune, Douglas I. McQuiston, William R. Meyer, Corinne C. Miller, Paul F. Miller, Jr , Barbara J. Mueller, Kaitlin F. Nares, Heather O'Donnell, Gregory D. Rawlings, Sara C. Sharp, Marshall A. Snider, Daniel A. Sweetser, Erica N. Vargas, Anthony J. Viorst, Rachel L. Young

27 Book Review: Seeing Through Legalese

2017–18 Co-chairs: Kaelyn Gustafson and Paul Miller

29 Metro Volunteer Lawyer Mentoring

2017–18 DBA Officers: Franz Hardy, President; Maureen Watson, President-Elect; April Jones, First Vice President; Laura Liss, Second Vice President; Nancy Cohen, Immediate Past President; Daniel A. Sweetser, Treasurer; Jim Fogg, YLD Chair; and Patrick Flaherty, Executive Director

19 The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly: Let's Get Real About It 22 Side Gig: Two Denver Lawyers Patrol The Slopes On Weekends At Loveland Ski Area

30 COLAP Wellness Corner: Legal Avatars: District Attorneys And Public Defenders

IN EVERY ISSUE 33

Legal Affairs

32

Bar Resources

34

Picture This

2017–18 Board of Trustees: Josh Berry, Klaralee Charlton, Sarah M. Clark, Emma Garrison, Ruchi Kapoor, Matthew Larson, Margrit Lent Parker, J. Ryann Peyton and Shannon W. Stevenson Write for The Docket: DBA members are encouraged to send story ideas, photos, tips, and articles for the Docket Committee’s consideration. We are looking for content by Denver attorneys for Denver attorneys, focusing on trends, courts and practice management, in addition to opinion and satire pieces. Please send ideas and member announcements to Managing Editor Alexa Drago at adrago@cobar.org.

The editor has the right to accept and reject submissions at her discretion.

303-860-1115 • dbadocket.org

VISIT THE

DOCKET BLOG

DBADOCKET.ORG 4 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

Copyright 2017. The Docket (ISSN 1084-7820) is published six times a year by the Denver Bar Association, 1900 Grant St., Suite 900, Denver, CO 80203-4336. All rights reserved.

The price of an annual subscription to members of the DBA ($15) is included in their dues as part of their membership. Periodicals postage paid at Denver, CO and additional mailing offices.

POSTMASTER send address corrections to The Docket, Denver Bar Association, 1900 Grant St., Suite 900, Denver, CO 80203-4336.

A MESSAGE FROM DBA PRESIDENT FRANZ HARDY

WHAT EVERY LAWYER SHOULD KNOW ABOUT ACHIEVING SUCCESS. takes years, if not a career. Based upon this, give yourself short term goals that you believe will help you reach your ultimately definition of success. Maybe this year you will write and publish that article showing your subject matter expertise, or join that organization that you eventually hope to get more involved in.

Next year, build further on those prior short-term goals. You will find that these smaller steps lead to the next opportunities. Be sure to write down these short-term goals and periodically assess what you have achieved and, as important, what you have failed to do. Failure is okay (see below for more).

Tell others about your goals. All of us need help to achieve success. Rarely do we do great things on our own. Whether a peer, colleague, mentor, or champion, involve others in your trajectory toward success. It holds you accountable for what you want to achieve. It also allows you to use others as a sounding board for your thoughts and ideas. Furthermore, it allows others to provide advice and counsel based on their own experiences.

We all need the feedback, encouragement, and objectivity that can only be provided when we enlist others to help us.

n the eyes of our broader society, being a lawyer generally connotes success in itself. However, as we all know, this title alone rarely defines what we individually seek to achieve.

Instead, having the title of lawyer seems to be more of a starting point with "success" still a finish line. Here are five steps that I have learned and used over the years to try to measure and reach success.

Determine what success means to you. Like many things, success is in the eye of the beholder. One lawyer's definition of success should not be imposed upon anyone else. If you use someone else’s bar, it may be set too high or too low. Given this, you have to define what success means to you. Maybe it is title, status, income, or all or none of these items. Importantly, realize that the definition will change as your life and career changes.

What may have been your definition in the first year of practice is likely different in the third, tenth, or thirtieth year. That is alright; always be true to your evolving definition, not others’.

Periodically look at where you are. They say, “what gets measured gets accomplished.” Make sure you revisit your short-term goals and definition of success on at least an annual basis. Assessing where you are allows you to be flexible to change your goals based upon the certainty that changes will happen in your life and career. Often times our personal lives and business pursuits change how achievable our goals remain. That's okay, but be objective about what you have and have not accomplished and why. Look at your map to success and make sure you stay on course or change the destination. Use a pencil with an eraser!

Enjoy the ride. I have learned much more from my failures than my achievements. The point of charting a path towards and defining success is not to score 100% or to be perfect. Instead, it is to ensure you challenge yourself despite the trials and tribulations that will inevitably come along the way.

We often do not try because we do not want to fail. Instead, tell yourself that failure is okay, but not trying is not. You will realize that the trip is as important as the destination. Take it all in.

Enjoy the people you meet along the way, embrace all that you learn and accept all of the experiences.

Here’s to your success and the many great experiences that come along the way. D

Develop short-term goals that help shape long-term success. A book I recently read contained the applicable quote, "How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time." Just like any hard endeavor, success does not come overnight. It usually

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 5

BRIEFLY TRIVIA Q: What is the meaning of the Latin phrase cum

grano salis ?

“Always desire to learn something useful.” ~Sophocles Sophocles was one of classical Greeks’ three great tragic playwrights. The best known of his 123 dramas is Oedipus the King. He is credited with several major dramatic innovations and is unsurpassed in his moments of using high dramatic tension and his revealing use of tragic irony.

A:With a grain of salt

Death Of Sophocles, Engraving by S. Pomarede, 1748

Scalia Speaks (Crown Forum, 2017). $18.96.

OF NOTE: Scalia Speaks is the definitive collection of beloved Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s finest speeches covers topics as varied as the law, faith, virtue, pastimes, and his heroes and friends. Featuring a foreword by longtime friend Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and an intimate introduction by his youngest son, this volume includes dozens of speeches, some deeply personal, that have never before been published.

Scalia Speaks will give readers the opportunity to encounter the legendary man more fully, helping them better understand the jurisprudence that made him one of the most important justices in the Court’s history and introducing them to his broader insights on faith and life.

6 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

DID YOU KNOW that sound changes when it snows. It seems quieter right after a snowfall because a blanket of fresh powder is absorbing the sound waves — but once the snow melts and refreezes, it then creates a reflective surface that amplifies sound by allowing it to travel farther than normal.

ON THE TOWN: CHAPTER THREE

An Interview with U.S. District Court Judge Christine Arguello

he was “Professor Arguello” more than 18 years ago when I first met Judge Christine Arguello as a 3L at the University of Colorado Law School. She became and remains an inspiration. From her early upbringing to her famed legal career to her never-ending energy to help the next generation of attorneys, Judge Arguello’s story is the quintessential “American dream.” You are in for a treat.

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 7

HARDY: Judge Arguello, could we start out by you telling us about your personal background?

ARGUELLO: I’m a Colorado native. I was born at home in a lit-

tle town called Thatcher. My dad worked for the railroad, and Thatcher, which is out in the middle of nowhere between La Junta and Trinidad, was a railroad refueling stop. We moved to Pueblo when I was in first grade so my dad could attend barber school. When I was in fourth grade we moved to Buena Vista so he could open a barber shop. We stayed until right before my senior year. It was a wonderful place to grow up, but we were only the second Hispanic family to move there. Despite its name Buena Vista it was not very integrated and that was difficult.

HARDY: When did you know you wanted to be a lawyer?

ARGUELLO: I was 13 years old when this most pivotal moment in

my life took place. As I waited for my best friend, I happened to pick up a news magazine. Leafing through it, I found an article on lawyers and law schools. The text conveyed the sheer power that lawyers exercised in accomplishing societal change and the protection of individual rights. I had never met a lawyer so, until I

I think that the key to anything is living by the Golden Rule: so unto others as you would have them do unto you.

read that article, it had never occurred to me that I could become a lawyer and change the world. I thought, “Lawyers like to argue with people. I like to argue with people. And I usually win my arguments. So, I would be a good lawyer.” The article went on to talk about law schools and what I remember it said was that Harvard was the best. I had no idea where Harvard was, but I said that’s what I wanted for myself — the best.

HARDY: What challenges did you face out of law school?

ARGUELLO: I wanted to be a trial lawyer and I fully intended

to return home to Colorado. Unfortunately the law firms I interviewed with at Harvard kept trying to steer me toward becoming a transactional attorney or an estates attorney. I believe it was because there were very few female trial attorneys back then, and there were no Latina trial lawyers here in Colorado in the late 1970s. I didn’t fit their stereotype of a trial attorney — white male, six-foot tall, imposing in the courtroom, big mean voice. I was a 5’1” Latina who looked to be 16 years old.

I decided that if I wanted to be a trial lawyer, I was going to have to take control of my own destiny My husband and I moved to Miami and I started with a firm where I was the only Spanishspeaking litigator and got some really great cases. They took me under their wing and polished this “diamond in the rough.”

I credit them for making me the lawyer that I became and the 8 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

judge that I am now.

HARDY: Tell us a little about your professional background.

You touched on it, but can you tell us how you got to become a federal judge?

ARGUELLO: When I moved back to Colorado and joined Hol-

land & Hart, my goal was to make partner. Once I made partner, I realized several things. First, I wasn’t able to do the research and writing I loved, because my billing rate was too high. Second, I no longer had a goal to strive toward. Most important, I had a five year-old and a one year-old and I wasn’t spending the time that I wanted to spend with my family. I decided to take on a totally different challenge and joined the faculty at the University of Kansas School of Law so I could continue researching and writing, while also mentoring the next generation of lawyers. When we returned to Colorado in 1999, Ken Salazar, who had been elected Attorney General, called and invited me to join his cabinet. I was able to work out a schedule that allowed me to teach bankruptcy law at CU while also working for the AG’s office.

Working as Chief Deputy for Ken Salazar was the best decision I ever made. Ken is an incredible man from whom I learned so much. The work we did on behalf of the people of Colorado was both challenging and so personally gratifying. And, honestly, I wouldn’t be sitting here talking to you as a federal judge if I had not gone to work for Ken.

HARDY: What perspective do you have as a longtime judge that you may not have had as a practitioner?

ARGUELLO: One of my frustrations when I was a practitioner

was that I would submit a motion to dismiss and it would take a year or two years to get it ruled on. So, I wondered, what are those judges doing over there? In the meantime, either discovery was stayed and memories were fading, or your client is racking up fees for discovery that you won’t need if the dispositive motion is granted. I’ve found out that the case load in the federal court is quite burdensome, so while there are delays, it is not because the judges are not working hard.

HARDY: Is there an over-arching philosophy that you developed over your nine years on the bench?

ARGUELLO: It is the philosophy I always held in both my per-

sonal and professional life — do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I believe that there is nobody in your life that you cross paths with that is not a very important person. As a judge, I want to make sure that the litigants feel welcome in my courtroom and I invite lawyers back to chambers after their first appearance before me. I want them to see me as a person. I tell them I only have two rules in my courtroom. One is that they will treat each other and me and everybody else in this courtroom with respect. And I, in turn, will always treat them with respect.

The second rule is that they are never to come into my courtroom unprepared on their case and I will never go into their case unprepared in my courtroom.

HARDY: Your Honor, you have had many firsts — the first Latina from Colorado to be accepted to Harvard Law School and the first Latina to serve as a federal judge in this district —

do you see yourself as a trailblazer and, if so, do you consider that a responsibility?

ARGUELLO: I do see myself as a trailblazer, but only because I’m

so old (smile). Yes, I do think being the first results in a responsibility and an additional burden one has to carry, especially if you are a person of color. When you are the first, you are setting the standard for the next Latino/a student/judge. I also think I have a responsibility to make sure that, although I may have been the first, I will not be the last. I now need to open doors and help others to reach the same peaks I have.

HARDY: You’re one of the most generous people with your

time and energy that I have encountered, particularly with young people. Where does that come from?

ARGUELLO: I realize that I didn’t get to where I am today all on my own. I believe in paying it forward. Plus, I’m an extrovert and I love mentoring young people because I think it is really important to give guidance where it’s needed.

HARDY: What is Arguello Dream Catchers Law School... Yes We Can?

your own destiny and not let anyone control your career. Third, never let the “golden handcuffs” bind you. Many of the jobs I took after I left Holland & Hart involved significant pay cuts, but I was willing to sacrifice income if it meant an interesting and challenging job. As a result, I’ve had a fabulous career. I am a better judge because I had such a varied legal career and am able to bring so many different perspectives to my role.

HARDY: What advice would you give to an established attorney?

ARGUELLO: I think that the key to anything is living by the

Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Your most valuable possession as a lawyer is your reputation. When I was undergoing the FBI background check before

I am a better judge because I had such a varied legal career and am able to bring so many different perspectives to my role.

ARGUELLO: Law School…Yes We Can is a program that was put

together by Roberto Ramirez, Dermott Lynch, Aria Vaughan, Mark Yonkman, and me in 2014, to advance inclusiveness in the legal profession. Our goal is to equip Colorado high school graduates from diverse backgrounds with the knowledge and contacts they need to become highly qualified applicants for admission to the nation’s best law schools. Each year we admit 15 Colorado high school graduates to the program and we pair them with three mentors — two lawyers and one law student — who will mentor these students through their entire four years of college.

We supplement the mentoring with bi-monthly workshops and exposure programs to develop both soft and hard skills.

Although we have more than 150 lawyers/law students involved with the program, we will be looking for 45 new mentors for the Class of 2018. I would encourage anyone who is interested to go to our website, Lawschoolyeswecan.org.

HARDY: Do you believe that we as a Colorado legal community have made progress in diversity and inclusion?

ARGUELLO: I think we’ve made progress, definitely. Programs

like the Pledge to Diversity, Diversity in the Legal Profession, and the Center for Legal Inclusiveness make me proud to say I am a lawyer in Colorado. But, there is more to be done.

HARDY: What advice would you give to a new attorney?

ARGUELLO: There are a number of things I would tell them.

Don’t take a job just for the paycheck. You want to be able to love the work you do because you’re going to work long and hard hours as an attorney. When you roll out of bed every morning you should be excited to go to work. When you end up at the point that you’re not excited to go to work anymore, it's time to make a change and not be afraid of that change. Change is what makes you grow. The second piece of advice is to take control of

my nomination, a friend told me that one of the agents commented, “Is this woman for real? We can't find anybody who will say anything negative about her.” So, being a zealous advocate on behalf of your client does not mean you need to be nasty and overbearing.

HARDY: When we first met in 1999, you were a lawyer and an adjunct professor at CU Law School, and I was one of your students. Who would have thought that we’d be sitting here today, 18 years later, in your courtroom chambers having this interview for the DBA. Is there a broader lesson for us to take away from where we first met to where we are today?

ARGUELLO: I think that despite the fact that there are thousands

of lawyers in Colorado, it’s a very small legal community. You and I have crossed paths so many times because you’re always giving to the community as well. The broader lesson is that, as a lawyer, you are going to cross paths with many people, which brings us back to the Golden Rule.

HARDY: Is there anything else that you wish to tell the Denver legal community?

ARGUELLO: Well, I think that one of the other messages I’d like

to pass on to especially the younger generation of lawyers is that you don’t achieve success all by yourself. The local bar associations are so important to your future potential and your growth.

They provide you with a community of other lawyers that you can share and interact with. They are there to support you when you want to aspire to do something like become a judge or open up a new non-profit, or whatever other goal you have in mind. So I would encourage young people to get involved with the DBA, the Women’s Bar, the other affinity bars, the CBA. That’s your community. D December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 9

10 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

COLLABORATIVE DIVORCE What in the World is Collaborative Divorce?

ollaborative divorce is a private, voluntary, non-adversarial and contractual approach to resolve a dissolution of marriage without involving the courts. Think of collaborative divorce as settlement discussions with two attorneys working with the parties to problem solve. When the parties reach an agreement, they bring their agreement before a family law judge for solemnization.

The process requires a written agreement between two parties (“Collaborative Participation Agreement”). The parties also sign a collaborative fee agreement to hire their respective attorneys. In the Collaborative Participation Agreement all parties agree to openly share information, including financial and similar disclosures common to the traditional dissolution of marriage. Next, all parties agree to refrain from posturing or threats of litigation. After all, one of the core principles of collaborative divorce is to avoid litigation. Finally, the attorneys are bound to withdraw from representation if the collaborative process breaks down and the parties decide to litigate or one party breaches the agreement. The reason for the disqualification clause is so that a safe negotiating space is created and the parties do not have to worry about one another’s attorneys cross-examining them should they decide litigation is unavoidable.

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 11

Although used throughout the United States and around the world, the collaborative model is greatly underutilized in Colorado. While not appropriate for every case, collaborative divorce has many positive attributes that may make it a great option for divorcing families. By staying out of a courtroom, parties ensure that their personal matters remain confidential. Additionally, the process is relatively efficient and affordable when compared with the traditional litigation approach to divorce. Without the necessity of motions, court appearances, depositions, battling experts and trial preparation, parties to collaborative divorces typically enjoy reduced attorneys’ fees and costs when compared with similar cases that must be litigated. Attorneys receive specialized training in collaborative Law to both understand the practicalities of the model and to change their paradigm from adversarial litigators to effective problem solvers.

Moreover, the process can be interest-maximizing for spouses. With assistance to the family unit from a neutral facilitator, neutral financial advisor, and/or neutral mental health professionals, parties are positioned to focus their attention on the best overall outcomes for their family rather than being pitted against the other spouse with children potentially caught in the middle of a warzone. Both parties enter their collaborative divorce settlements willfully and typically feel that they were allowed much more control over the process and end-result than parties to a litigated divorce. Finally, the process is entirely more comfortable than litigation. Because collaborative divorce operates outside the courts and is more informal, some parties are more at ease throughout the process.

The nature of collaborative divorce requires parties to come into negotiations with reasonable positions and be willing to listen to and work with one another. The process requires some level of trust, even when trust between parties may have broken down during the relationship. Therefore, parties with significant conflict in their relationships or who find themselves with a coercive or abusive partner will decide with their attorneys if the collaborative process is the right fit for their dissolution proceeding. Generally, parties to a collaborative divorce complete the process with a deeper sense of resolution and satisfaction with their divorce proceedings. Post-decree disputes and litigation are virtually non-existent in collaborative cases, likely because both parties and their counsel commit to complete resolution for the interests of the family versus “winning” the divorce case.

ETHICS OF COLLABORATIVE DIVORCE As the collaborative divorce model began to gain traction in the family law community in Colorado, across the United States, at least two ethics committees authored opinions regarding the ethical issues raised by the practice. Colorado’s Formal Ethics Opinion 115, issued February 24, 2007, held that the four-way agreement (signed by both attorneys and both clients) formerly used in Colorado for a collaborative divorce makes the practice per se unethical because it violates Colorado Rule of Professional Conduct 1.7. That rule dictates that responsibilities to third parties may not limit an attorney’s representation. Colo. RPC 1.7(a) (2). Moreover, the four-way collaborative divorce agreement 12 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

requires the attorney to withdraw if the parties cannot reach a resolution. According to this Opinion, the attorney’s contractual responsibility to the other party to withdraw under a four-way agreement is at direct odds with the obligation of adequate representation the attorney has to the client.

In addition, the client cannot waive such a conflict under Rule 1.7(b). This rule requires evaluation of two criteria to consent to a conflict: (1) whether the lawyer believes the conflict will adversely affect representation, and (2) whether the conflict will arise and “materially interfere” with the attorney’s professional judgment. The Colorado Opinion set forth that a client cannot consent to this conflict based on the second of the criteria.

Not only is the likelihood of the conflict significant (occurring anytime the parties will not agree), but the agreement itself interferes with the attorney’s judgment in foreclosing the alternative of litigation.

In response to the Colorado Opinion, the American Bar Association issued Formal Ethics Opinion 07-447 on August 9, 2007. Overall, the ABA Opinion disagrees with the Colorado Opinion because it “turns on a faulty premise.” The ABA Opinion agrees that the four-way agreement creates a responsibility to a third party but disagrees that the responsibility creates a conflict of interest. Additionally, the attorney’s agreement to withdraw does not compromise his or her ability to represent the client. The agreement, in fact, is consistent with the client’s goal of achieving settlement. Because the client enters the representation with settlement as the only objective, withdrawal following a breakdown of collaboration does not materially limit the attorney’s ability to counsel his or her client. Therefore, according to the American Bar Association, collaborative divorce

“ Generally, parties to a collaborative divorce complete the process with a deeper sense of resolution and satisfaction with their divorce proceedings. ”

with a four-way agreement is not unethical on its face because the client begins the relationship with limited objectives and litigation foreclosed. Practitioners outside of Colorado, both throughout the United States and internationally, use four-way agreements in the practice of collaborative Law with no ethical consequences.

It is important to note that as of the date of the ABA Opinion, Colorado was the only state bar that had reached a different conclusion. Taking the Colorado Opinion and the ABA Opinions together, each committee seems to focus on different things. This concept is discussed by Scott R. Peppet, of the University of Colorado Law School, in his article, The (New) Ethics of Collaborative

rado collaborative divorce practitioners do not utilize four-way agreements at all. Instead, practitioners use (1) participation agreements signed only by the divorcing parties, and (2) retention agreements wherein no formal contractual conflict of interest arises. Footnote 11 of Ethics Opinion 115 specifically indicates that if only clients were to sign the agreement there would be no ethical violation.

Today the practice of collaborative divorce law in Colorado is alive and well. Hundreds of family law attorneys and other allied professionals have trained in this model and successfully practice collaborative divorce law. Colorado Collaborative Divorce Professionals (CCDP), the statewide organization supporting practitioners in Colorado, provides annual training and more information regarding the model. Please contact Terri Harrington (th@hbc-law.net) or visit ccdp.org for more information. D

Law, Dispute Resolution Magazine (Winter 2008). In analyzing collaborative divorce, the ABA and Colorado Opinions make different assumptions and premise their opinions on those assumptions. The Colorado Opinion, for instance, assumes the four-way agreement is the only effecting document, while the ABA Opinion assumes the four-way agreement is an additional effecting document.

Regardless, in response to formal Ethics Opinion 115, Colo-

Danaé Woody is the founder of Woody Law Firm, a boutique family law firm in Denver. She is on the Executive Councils of the CBA Family Law Section and Young Lawyers Division and is a member of the Modern Law Practice Initiative and Denver Source for Collaborative Divorce. She can be reached at danae@woodylawllc.com. The author also thanks Terri Harrington and Alexandra Smits for their contributions to this article.

Fastest smartest malpractice insurance. Period.

800.906.9654 GilsbarPRO.com December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 13

INACTIVE STATUS by sarah coleman

fter several years of private practice, I decided to take a career break to be a stay-at-home parent. For two years, I was a Colorado attorney on inactive status. I am now back on active status, but I want to share how I used my legal training and experience during that time and leveraged those activities when I decided to reenter active practice.

There is a large segment of Colorado attorneys on inactive status, and I believe inactive attorneys are a vastly underutilized resource. According to the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel 2016 Annual Report, 34.9 percent of registered attorneys in Colorado were inactive, which amounts to 14,017 inactive attorneys.

Women account for almost 36.8 percent of registered attorneys in Colorado. Interestingly, women account for the same percent of inactive attorneys in Colorado.

Shortly after going on inactive status, I spoke with someone from the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel and mentioned my status change. After congratulating me on this choice, this person said that the statistics on inactive attorneys reentering the legal profession were rather “grim.” Although my career break was open-ended, I knew that it was not indefinite and 14 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

that, at some point, I would feel the itch to return to practicing law. During my career break, I wanted to be engaged in my community and use the skills that I gained through education and experience. I also knew that I didn’t want a gaping hole on my resume and that I needed to keep using my skills for when it was time to reenter the law world. To that end, I sought out experiences and activities where my law license would be a benefit. I would like to briefly share some of these experiences.

First, I designed and taught a four-week course on American government, which I offered for free through my local libraries.

The course covered federalism, Congress, the President and administrative agencies, the judicial branch, due process, fundamental rights and equal protection. It was great fun to dust off my 1L Con Law book and review these legal principles. The turnout for the course was great and I met so many people who were interested in learning more about their government. The library asked me to teach the course again and I am scheduled to do so in early 2018.

From a practical perspective, researching and teaching this course was helpful to my career development in two ways.

Teaching this course boosted my visibility as an attorney within my community. I’ve received several referrals or potential clients simply from teaching and getting my name and face out there. For someone transitioning from inactive to active status, teaching a civics education course might be a great way to gain exposure and make contact with potential clients. It was also a great exercise in communicating complex legal ideas to a lay audience, something that attorneys do every day.

Second, I joined a government commission. I was appointed as an alternate commissioner to my county’s planning commission. In my practice, I sometimes dealt with land use, land conservation or public lands. I have a personal passion for public lands, so serving on the planning commission was an excellent way to combine my personal and professional interests.

The planning commission holds quasi-judicial proceeding, and commissioners are akin to a judge in a judicial proceeding.

Commissioners investigate facts, consider and weigh evidence, apply the land use code, and make decisions or recommendations on specific projects. This experience gave me a renewed appreciation for the role of the neutral arbiter in our system of justice. Sitting "on the other side of the table" as a decision maker, rather than advocate, was interesting and gave me a new perspective on effective advocacy.

Third, I worked with Northwest Colorado Legal Services to update resources available to the public. Although I couldn’t provide pro bono representation while on inactive status, I asked if Legal Services could use the skills of an inactive attorney. Legal Services responded with an enthusiastic “yes!” Legal Services asked me to do a modest amount of legal research and review and update some handouts and frequently asked questions forms that they provide to the public on various topics, such as landlord-tenant issues. This was a good way to engage my research skills while on inactive status. Importantly to me, it was a way to “use my knowledge of the law for the betterment of society and the improvement of the legal system,” as required by the Colorado Attorney Oath of Admission.

Fourth, I served on the board of directors of a local nonprofit organization dedicated to improving water quality. In law

school, I participated in an environmental law student clinic and many of my internships were focused on environmental law. As a board member, I got to see how the laws and programs I studied as a law student were implemented on the ground.

Fifth, I volunteered to write on behalf of organizations and causes that I care about. I wrote blog posts, op-eds, and letters to the editor. This was a great win-win for the organizations and myself. Busy or understaffed organizations were happy to have someone take on these tasks. I was able to dust off my persuasive writing skills. In addition, writing for public consumption helped get my name out to my community and boost my visibility.

Clearly, one does not need to be an inactive attorney, or even an attorney, to engage in most of these activities. But, I found that many people and groups were happy to make use of someone with legal experience, even if I could not provide legal advice.

Truthfully, I gained as much as I gave, and find myself reflecting on these experiences and how they helped me grow as a practicing attorney. D Sarah Coleman is the owner of Coleman Law, which offers on-demand freelance legal services to Colorado attorneys in the form of litigation support and legal research and writing services. She can be reached at sarah@colemanlaw.org.

#EIDELIKE I’D LIKE PEACE OF MIND FOR MY CLIENTS

Experience the Eide Bailly Difference Economic D amag e s Forensic A ccounting & Frau d Inve stig ations Comp uter Forensic s e Dis cover y

303.586.8504 | www. f o r e n si cs. e id e b a illy. c om December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 15

ETHICS COLUMN: Which Came First — the Person or the Lawyer?

I was in an auto accident recently — thankfully, I was fine; sadly, my car was not. It required extensive repairs, which would be paid for by the insurance company that insured the driver who hit me. The question was when they would pay — before the car was repaired or after I paid my deductible and waited for reimbursement. Because we didn’t initially know how bad the damage was, my insurance agent, who knows I am a lawyer, told 16 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

me it might help to hire a lawyer to write a letter on my behalf.

At first I laughed at that — not only am I a lawyer, but I spend my days working alongside some of the best lawyers in town. I need to hire a lawyer to write a letter for me?! And then I realized—of course I would, if it was necessary (thankfully it was not). Not only do I know very little about insurance law, but as the person directly involved, I don’t have the distance or neutrality to make

legally sound arguments about my own situation; no matter how hard I tried to avoid it, emotion would play a part.

This caused me to really think about what happens when lawyers are involved in legal matters, in business dealings, and, generally speaking, in life. When I’m asked to describe myself, lawyer is not always the first word that comes to mind; I’m a person who happens to also be a lawyer. But the reality for many people, in many circumstances, is that we are lawyers first and always, which can lead to complications if we aren’t careful.

If someone sues you or you sue someone else, if you get a divorce, if you have a property dispute, or any other time you may be a party to a case, are you a lawyer even when you aren’t acting as one? What rules apply to you? Why aren’t you a party like any other party?

The Colorado Bar Association’s Ethics Committee recently released Opinion 133 Ethical Duties of a Lawyer Who is a Party to a Matter Speaking With a Represented Party addressing this question. This Opinion primarily interprets Colorado Rule of Professional Conduct (CRPC or Rules) 4.2, which states “[i]n representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a court order.” The application to a lawyer who is selfrepresented in a legal matter is straightforward: when you are representing yourself in a legal case you are both lawyer and client. Therefore, the Rules governing the conduct of lawyers fully apply to you, and you cannot talk to a represented party — even if that party is, for example, your current but soon-to-be-former spouse. It is difficult to think that you cannot pick up the phone to offer a property settlement or a child custody proposal to the person to whom you were married — but if you are representing yourself, and thus “have a client,” and your spouse is represented, then you cannot.

Rule 4.2 applies differently, however, if you are represented by someone else. In that circumstance you are not “representing a client” and are simply a party to a matter, and the terms of the Rule do not apply to you for purposes of that case. Anecdotally, some lawyers and judges feel they should, having witnessed manipulation by lawyer parties toward non-lawyer parties in this context; however, there are other remedies in law — including protective orders — to address that behavior.

What if you form a business relationship with someone — friend, acquaintance, family member? What is your role? If, for instance, you and your college roommate open a bakery, are you merely a party to the transaction and a partner in the bakery, or are you a lawyer? If you just want to bake and sell cookies and do not intend to act as the lawyer for either party or for the company, but you draft the partnership agreement or other relevant documents to save money, are you a lawyer then?

Hopefully it is obvious to you that the answer may be yes.

The case law in Colorado is well settled that the formation of December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 17

the attorney-client relationship is easy to establish. For example, it can exist in the absence of a fee agreement, and you don’t even need to get paid to be deemed someone’s lawyer. Instead, the relationship can be based on the subjective reasonable belief of the client, or the person purporting to be a client.

If you do legal work on behalf of your business you are, arguably the lawyer for the entity. CRPC 1.7(a)(2) states that a lawyer has a conflict of interest if “there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest of the lawyer.” In that circumstance the best thing is to say — in writing — “I am not your lawyer and I have no intention of being your lawyer and I am not necessarily acting in your best interest.” Won’t that be a bit awkward? Probably. But it will likely be less awkward than the discussion you have several years later if the business relationship doesn’t work out and your former partner claims you should have warned her you weren’t her lawyer. The analysis is fact specific, and every circumstance won’t support a claim of attorney-client relationship, but acting prudently at the outset will help minimize the risk.

What if your family owns a business and, again to save money, asks you to do the legal work? What if, for example, you (like me) are terrible at math and you err in drafting a contract in a way that costs your family’s business a substantial sum? Were

you not competent to handle that transaction? CRPC 1.1 requires that lawyers render competent representation; if you don’t know what you’re doing, you should not take it on no matter who asks.

If it is clear the error was yours and harm resulted, can your own family sue you for malpractice? Probably; they might not win, but they can and may try. If one of your family members gets mad enough, can they report you to the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel for taking on a case that you were not qualified to handle? Definitely. You are a lawyer like any other lawyer, you made a mistake, and you arguably caused your client harm. “What?

My family’s small business is my client? I’m just helping them on weekends and evenings as a favor. I don’t even charge them!”

Doesn’t matter! As noted above, the attorney-client relationship is easy to form, and money does not have to change hands. In this circumstance, your family’s small business is indeed your client and you are responsible for ensuring you can render competent representation.

If your marriage fails and you decide to draft the documents for both parties because the matter is straightforward and there are no real disputes, and you persuade your soon-to-be-former 18 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

spouse that it is in his best interest to split the debt — including your law school loans 50/50 — have you acted as a lawyer, or as a party trying to reach a fair deal? If, several years later, he hires a lawyer to advise him regarding a reallocation of support or something similar and that lawyer asks why he was willing to assume debt in the divorce that he arguably wasn’t required to take on (or could have used as a bargaining chip), and he says it was on your recommendation — is that lawyer going to come back and allege that you violated Rule 1.7 by giving advice not in the best interest of your “client”? Is it possible your ex-spouse was your client?

As a more drastic example, if you or a family member is a victim of crime, the perpetrator is known, and authorities urge you to make a pretext call or have an in-person meeting with the perpetrator, either of which you surreptitiously record, are you in violation of the rules as a lawyer? Rule 8.4(c) says you may not act dishonestly, and in Colorado that is interpreted to include recording someone without their knowledge. “Wait,” you say, “I, or someone I love, is a victim of a crime and I want to help catch the person who did it. Are you telling me I may be in violation of the Rules governing the conduct of a lawyer by doing that?”

Unfortunately, the answer may be yes.

When you took the Oath of Admission you agreed to allow the Colorado Supreme Court, and by extension the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel, jurisdiction over your behavior including some private behaviors. Although the facts may be sympathetic, under current interpretations of the Rules you may be in violation. The Colorado Supreme Court recently passed a change to Rule 8.4(c), which allows an exception for investigative conduct that could — arguably — apply to this situation, but it remains to be seen how that will be interpreted and what applicability it could have in this context.

These are just a few examples, but it is easy to see how the blending of lawyer and person make it difficult for us to take off our lawyer hats and live “real life” as just another person without our lawyer selves playing a role in any number of other circumstances. Recognizing this and taking steps to address it serves us well in the long run.

When I went to law school the first thing the Dean told us on our first day was “you will leave here a different person than you arrived.” At the time I thought nthat wasn’t possible But as I think about, and talk with other lawyers about, issues like those discussed here, I realize he was right. I am a different person because now I am paranoid. Lawyers are well served in situations like these to be paranoid. A bit of overthinking and awkwardness in the beginning is worth much peace of mind later if things don’t work out the way you planned. And, if you really think about it, do things ever work out exactly the way you planned? D Amy DeVan is Ethics, Conflicts and Resources Counsel with Wheeler Trigg O'Donnell LLP in Denver. She can be reached at devan@wtotrial.com.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly Let's Get Real About It by david p. hersh

Wellness is a way of living — a lifestyle sensitive and responsive to all the dimensions of body, mind, and spirit, an approach to life we each design to achieve our highest potential for well-being .

Greg Anderson

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 19

As the apprehension mounts over that case — you know, that case — the one you keep pushing to the far corner of your desk, muttering that you will deal with it “tomorrow” — that case you really don’t like — the one that keeps tugging at you and sometimes wakes you up at night — it seems reasonable to take just a little nip of the vodka you keep in the back of your desk drawer.

Just an inch in the coffee cup — something to take the edge off. Then you can deal with that case. Even though you hate the fact you need to drink, you know, deep in your soul, you can’t get along without it. You look at the others in your office and wonder: “Who knows?” Where is that gum?

Your brain just doesn’t seem to function as well as it used to function. Which Rule is that? Who is that calling? You lost your train of thought, again. You have become adept at covering up the fact that you are having a hard time remembering things. People respond to your comments with questioning statements, and you stumble over the time-worn excuses you use: “Oh, sure, sure — that letter — of course . . .” In the quiet moments, you wonder if you are “losing it,” and what should you do about that? How does one “quit” the practice of law without being a quitter? And how would you define yourself if you did? Can you afford to quit practicing, and can your clients afford for you to keep practicing?

Some days it is a real struggle to get out of bed, much less return those telephone calls and email. You seem to be moving in slow motion. Making even the simplest of decisions seems out of reach just now. Anxiety permeates your days. The cloud of depression hangs over you, and when it descends, there is just no escaping it. Hiding is your strongest coping skill. You wonder if everyone feels this way when facing that mountain of responsibilities that is just so daunting you can’t even imagine tackling it.

If any of these scenarios sound familiar to you, you are not alone. Lawyers face many obstacles in the practice of law, and none are more inimical and pernicious than substance abuse, failing abilities at the end of practice and depression or other mental illness. We lawyers suffer from these issues, and others just as serious, in greater proportion than the general population. Given our naturally competitive nature, as well as the serious and significant obligations and duties we owe clients, these “issues” tend to be magnified and wear on our souls as we struggle to fulfill our oath and our promise of greatness.

We all know lawyers who are struggling with mental health, end of practice, and substance issues. Many of us are those lawyers.

I have no objection to yoga for lawyers, century cycling rides, and eating a balanced diet rich in amino acids and macro-nutrients. These are all good things. In fact, meditation, exercise and fuel for the body are all important tools for maintaining wellness. I am purposeful about each of them, and other tools that help promote personal wellness.

20 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

But when I think of wellness for lawyers, my heart turns to the need for us to bring the conversation about substance abuse, mental health and end-of-practice issues out into the open. I have been honored to learn the stories of many brave lawyers who have confided in me about their personal wellness issues.

In doing so, I have come to realize just how pervasive these issues are, even for leaders in our community. Most times, I hear some variance of the “I thought I was the only one” perception. You are not the only one.

As a lawyer in recovery, I have discovered the power of silence. Silence keeps us isolated and handicapped and stripped of the tools and relationships we need to recover. I have also discovered the equally powerful effect of openness. When we are open and transparent about our struggles and what we see, we are then able to do something about those issues.

Wellness for lawyers — at least in this context — requires that we do something like Step One in a classic 12-Step program. We need to acknowledge that our lives have become unmanageable because of something over which we are powerless. In the colloquial, the first step in healing is recognizing/acknowledging that we have a problem. It may be our failing mental health. It may be a substance. It may be anxiety or depression or paranoia.

Whatever we are secretly wrestling with, step one is honestly facing the truth: We have a problem.

MY HOPE IS THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE BAD AND THE UGLY, AS WELL AS THE GOOD IN OUR PROFESSIONAL LIVES. What I have found over the years is that putting words to our “problem” — mine or yours — often brings relief as the veil of secrecy is lifted. When we talk about it, address it, and do something productive to deal with “the problem,” we finally find out we are not alone. A whole bunch of people we know and respect have the same issue, are willing to walk the path with us, and can help lift us up from the pit in which we find ourselves.

One of the great joys I discovered in serving as the president of my local bar association is the platform I was given to speak openly about wellness with other lawyers. The joy came, in large measure, in the relief and appreciation I experienced in the lives of those around me — many of whom wept as they told me how

much of a relief it was to have the public stigma lifted.

And we do fear the stigma. We are afraid to talk about our condition because we are afraid our colleagues, our clients, and the public will mark us with the Scarlet Letter and shun us. We are willing to give away our hope for wellness to preserve our reputation, our image, our pride. This is an illusory bargain, and it keeps us ill.

This fear of stigma has power only as long as we let it have power. For wellness, I urge all Colorado lawyers to be willing to have an open and honest conversation about these issues with those who care about you or about whom you care. Address the elephant in the room. Get it on the table. Do so without judgment. Do so with an eye toward transparency and honesty and wellness.

Talk to a professional. Your health insurance plan likely will pay for you to sit down with a professional and get some good advice. Call the good folks at COLAP — your attorney registration dues have paid for them to be available to help you. Try out a 12-step program meeting. (The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking or drugging.)

Sit down with someone you see wrestling with these issues and in love tell them you care, you see, and you want to share this journey with them. No need to “preach” or “fix them,” just care enough to start the conversation. Break the silence in a nonjudgmental way, let them know you care, and, most importantly, listen.

My hope is that we can talk about the bad and the ugly, as well as the good, in our professional lives. We will only be able to “get healthy” — to pursue wellness as a profession— when we are able to talk about the things that make us ill. The American Bar Association has created a national task force to improve well-being in the legal profession. The report of that task force, chaired by our own James C. Coyle, Esq., provides helpful and thoughtful tools for all stakeholders in the wellness discussion.

It is a great resource for lawyers, law firms, bar associations, and others interested in helping lawyers pursue wellness. Please check out this report at www.americanbar.org/content/dam/ aba/images/abanews/ThePathToLawyerWellBeingReportRevFINAL.pdf .

In my opinion, it is essential that we make a commitment, individually as well as corporately, to have open, frank, honest, loving, helpful conversations around these very important life issues. I invite each reader to join me in making this commitment. D Dave is a trial lawyer with Burg Simpson Eldredge Hersh & Jardine. He and his wife Julie love to SCUBA dive, ride their bicycles, and care about their many friends who are in recovery. Dave is the immediate past president of the Arapahoe County Bar Association. burgsimpson.com/attorney/davidp- hersh/ Anyone who wishes to discuss wellness or recovery, or just needs a friendly chat, is welcome to call Dave at the office (303-792-5595) or on his cellular telephone (303-517-9669). dhersh@burgsimpson.com. © Colorado Lawyer Assistance Program, 2017

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 21

SIDE GIG:

Two Denver Lawyers Patrol the Slopes on Weekends at Loveland Ski Area by adrienne fischer

f you hit the slopes this winter at Loveland Ski Area, you may run into Christina Saunders and Eric Massof (although you probably hope that you don’t). These two are lawyers by day and volunteer ski patrol by weekend. On the weekends, Loveland supplements their full-time pro-patrol with volunteer ski patrollers. Currently, Loveland has a roster of approximately 130 volunteer patrollers.

Christina Saunders is a partner at Sparkman + Foote LLP, where her practice areas include intellectual property, corporate law, and art and entertainment law. She is also on the Board of Directors of the Colorado IP American Inns of Court, and she chairs the Board of Directors at The Gathering Place. Having grown up in Park City, Utah. Christina is also a very skilled skier.

She started skiing at age two, ski raced for two decades, and was on a NCAA Division I ski team in college. Christina likes helping people and seeks out opportunities to give back. In her own words, the volunteer ski patrol is a nice way to harmonize her desire to help other people and her passion and love for skiing.

After spending eight years doing defense work in litigation for large companies in Baltimore, Eric Massof moved to Denver and is currently working in a federal contract attorney position.

As another attorney driven to help others, Eric thought ski patrol was a good way to give back and combine his love for skiing. The medical training is another driver for Eric to join ski patrol. Sev22 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

eral years ago, Eric was rock climbing in a remote area in West Virginia with a friend when his friend fell and shattered his elbow. Being in the middle of nowhere, there was no cell reception. In his own words: “I was fortunate that the guy climbing next to us was an EMT and could talk me through it. There was a feeling of helplessness because I did not have the first clue about how to start helping my friend."

Participating in Loveland’s volunteer ski patrol is a significant commitment; – one doesn’t just walk on. There’s a year of training before you can even start patrolling. Not to mention the tryouts. When Christina’s friend called her to tell her to come try out, she found herself among 30 skiers. She was one of two skiers selected to move on at that tryout to start training for the patrol (there are several per year).

The big challenge is figuring out how to balance the practice of law with ski patrol training. Training includes reading a 1250page text book, eight hours of medical training per week and one weekend day per week of hill training and several exams.

After training is complete, you become a member of patrol. As a volunteer patrol member, you are required to patrol 24-days per season. Massof felt he was able to do the training because of the flexible nature of his current position. “I could not have done this in private practice in Baltimore because of the inconsistent schedule associated with a busy litigation practice.” Christina,

being Partner of a law firm, expressed gratitude because her firm is uniquely supportive of her role with the ski patrol training.

Eric has completed the Outdoor Emergency Care training, which is like an EMT training with an outdoor emphasis. Chris-

tina will complete this training in December. All ski patrollers are trained to identify potential injuries and assess the severity of these injuries so they can provide the proper on-the- hill medical interventions that will allow them to immobilize the injury and transport the patient down the mountain. Some examples of interventions include splinting a wrist injury, immobilizing a suspected dislocated shoulder or even immobilizing a suspected broken femur with traction devices. “The goal is to get someone safely off the mountain to a higher level of care,” Saunders says.

On an average day, a volunteer ski patroller will arrive on the mountain by 7:30 in the morning. Each patroller is then assigend to an area so that every single run is checked out before the resort opens to make sure it’s safe for customers. They check everything from ropes to making sure signs are visible. According to Christina, “the policy is that you will always stop to see if you can be of help to other patrollers - whatever they need - from pulling up ropes so that snow cats could get on the hill, to digging out signs, etc. It’s truly a team effort.” At the end of the day, each patroller is assigned to a lift and to make sure no one is left on the mountain and complete end of day projects. They ensure there will never be a customer left on the mountain at the end of the day, and before everyone can go home all the patrollers must be accounted for as well. It’s been interesting to learn the nuts and bolts of operations. In Christina’s words, “You make sure the mountain is safe again before you put it to bed for the night.”

“Like being a lawyer, being on patrol is problem solving.

You have to go through very methodically to assess an injury or medical emergency. It’s not that different when you get a new matter in your office and have to put together pieces to solve a problem,” says Saunders.

Eric thinks being a lawyer helped during his training. “Being trained as an attorney helps you assume the role of leadership in these scenarios. You have to gather all your facts before you figure out what your course of action will be, and this is the same as a litigator. If you’re an attorney you may miss something if you don’t ask the right question. Here, you can miss something if you don’t do all the steps to the assessment of the patient. Being trained as an attorney has been a huge benefit.”

Outdoor Emergency Transportation (toboggan sled training,) is also a component to the training for hill patrol. Christina values being on the patrol because it’s so engaging. “It gets [her] outside, gets [her] out of the office, it forces [her] to stop thinking about work. You have to be completely present because when you’re trying to get a sled down a double black diamond you can’t think about anything else.” By the way, the sled is about 80-90 pounds unloaded. Add an injured person, and the weight adds up quickly. It’s a good thing Christina is “one of the best skiers on the mountain,” (according to Eric).

There is a technique to get people down the mountain, but you must be a very strong skier to begin with to negotiate the terrain safely. The ski patrol instructor said at the beginning of training, “if you’re in shape now, you will be in the best shape of your life after sled training.” Eric has about 100 pounds on Christina, and she routinely drew straws to take him down in the sled on a double black mogul run.

“Patrol is a community ... It’s a family up there.” There are so many diverse backgrounds: a couple of lawyers, rocket scientists, engineers, retail workers and of course, the pro patrollers — they all come together to help people, and to teach these medical courses and toboggan, mostly all on a volunteer basis.

Christina is looking forward to finishing training to fully join the volunteer patrol this season, and Eric is looking forward to his first full season on the patrol.

To those people who say they don’t have time for anything, but the law - these lawyers say, “You make time for what is important. You can do other things besides practice law. It is not the end all be all to your identity, and you can make time to do something else that is interesting to you.”

Eric and Christina both feel that being on volunteer ski patrol has been one of their all-time favorite experiences. "Learning a new skill later in life and making friends that range from 20-70 year olds all with uniquely different backgrounds. It’s the community, the comradery of these people using their free time to give back on the mountain.” So when you’re on the slopes this year, be kind to the ski patrollers, – you might see them across the table, or in court. D Adrienne Fischer is the founder of Summit Law Solutions, LLC, a law firm dedicated to providing legal solutions to startups, entrepreneurs, and small businesses. She can be reached at info@summitlawsolutions.com.

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 23

LAW STUDENT CHRONICLES: GATHERING HEAP

hen I was applying to law school, I visited a school in the Pacific Northwest. I stayed at an inexpensive little hotel with a full breakfast bar, which included a waffle maker.

One morning after my three-mile stress run (made slightly easier by lower elevation and the desperate need to think about anything but my looming career path), I passed the breakfast bar’s waffle maker. It was overflowing and not in a normal way. Waffle mix seeped from the maker, down the counter and congealed, soaking the cheap blue carpeting. It was a morning waffle catastrophe. I looked desperately around for a tower of napkins or a hotel staff member. Anyone with authority to deal with this problem. Instead, a well-built man about my age already dressed in a full suit came up to the waffle volcano, looked at me sheep24 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

ishly, and smiled an enormous, charmingly self-aware grin.

“I’m going to be a lawyer,” he said.

I’ve worked hard and failed to develop the easy privileged aura of self-deprecatory pride in my three years at school. Maybe it’s a character trait limited to a small–admittedly over-represented in law schools – segment of the American population. For most of the rest of us, and probably some of them, it’s imposter syndrome all the way.

Numerous specialists and lawyers have written about imposter syndrome. Basically, it’s a trait associated with highachieving, highly-motivated people. Imposter syndrome is an often-irrational fear that we are not as smart as everyone around us seems to think. If you’ve spoken to someone you admire for

their achievements for any length of time, odds are they’ve eventually disclosed (perhaps after the third martini) their fear that they have lucked into every opportunity presented to them.

They fear letting everyone down one day because luck will fail them at a crucial moment. They worry constantly that no one listens to the important part of their story—the mentor who took a chance on an unlikely student. The career-making case that could’ve happened to anyone. Sound familiar?

I ended up at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law’s evening program. I told myself I wanted to work in the industry where I would end up while learning the law. I knew many people would come to law school with all-important experience. Political Science majors or high school speech and debate champions. Confident men and women who knew they were on the path for which they were designed. Maybe paralegals who wanted a career upgrade. I was an English major who graduated summa cum laude. I wanted to read and write forever and make a difference to a few people. I had what I thought was a noble goal and a mind trained for absorbing complicated text. I had a little experience with law firms and wanted more. I needed to catch up before everyone saw I didn’t belong.

Law is a demanding field filled with difficult personalities, as anyone who has spent more than a week in the industry knows. I worked at one firm for a little over a year learning about personal injury, then transferred to a commercial real estate and business law firm. That didn’t work out. Meanwhile, I was doing reasonably well in school (not receiving as many A’s as I'd like, but who does?). I was learning but I didn’t feel like I was retaining anything. Then my legal day job ended and I felt like a rug had been pulled out from under me. To avoid falling flat on my face financially, I talked to anyone who would listen, sent out dozens of resumes, and eventually took a job in an industry where I had zero experience: food service.

If I thought it was hard feeling like a future lawyer among amazing legal minds or in a cheap hotel for a campus tour, I had no idea what it would be like in a restaurant. To be fair, I’m not afraid that my coworkers are higher on the curve than I am or know more about law than I do. However, I don’t feel like I’m going to be a lawyer. I feel like one day, I will be a server and until that day, I will crack pepper over soup and salad with a grateful smile. Because I am grateful for the opportunity to work hard and brighten people’s days. I am grateful to turn my legal mind off. I am grateful that the worst thing that can happen is a guest will ask to speak with a manager. I am simultaneously afraid that my lucky breaks ran out and that I will be unable to stumble onto an undeservedly successful career path again.

During my undergraduate studies, I took a Symbolic Logic course. The professor taught us basic symbolic logic and predicate calculus (challenging for a woman who has always considered herself allergic to mathematics). Once, he explained the Sorites Paradox, which I remember as the heap of sand problem.

The paradox identifies the definition problem of a heap of sand.

One grain of sand is not a heap. Two grains of sand are not a heap.

Three grains of sand are not a heap. Logically, it seems that no

amount of sand makes a heap, but this is a false conclusion.

Becoming a lawyer is similar to the heap of sand. I do not feel like a lawyer because I did well in a law class during my under-

Imposter syndrome is an oftenirrational fear that we are not as smart as everyone around us seems to think. graduate studies and am currently doing well in law school. I do not feel like a lawyer because I worked in law firms while enrolled in an ABA-accredited institution. I do not feel like a lawyer because I can pinpoint the errors in Better Call Saul episodes. I do not feel like a lawyer because I do a podcast about law school. I do not feel like a lawyer because I can engage in shop talk about the same five cases we’ve been learning about forever (I’m looking at you, Pierson v. Post and Hawkins v. McGee). But one day, I will be a lawyer.

It’s hard to feel like a future lawyer when working in a restaurant or overflowing the waffle maker. It’s hard to feel like you belong somewhere that high intelligence and strong grasps of deductive reasoning are commonplace, particularly when you feel like an imposter everywhere. Maybe it’s the Sorites Paradox — you feel like an imposter gathering grains of sand until someday, you realize you have a heap and your brain recovers from the cognitive dissonance. What’s beautiful about a heap of sand is that it is also individual grains — clumped and gathered but still distinct. Every lawyer and law student’s path can be read this way: simultaneously an imposter going through the motions and a capable future attorney doing what needs to be done to help people. The important part, I’ve found, is to keep gathering grains of sand as a talisman against imposter syndrome. Because maybe one day, the anxiety will be buried or, better yet, resolved.

D Maria Zalessky is currently a 3L at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law. When she is not in school or studying, Maria interns at Metro Volunteer Lawyers, works at the Ved Nanda Center for International and Comparative Law, and runs food at a restaurant on 16th street in Downtown Denver.

Maria has helped people in Russian and English at various firms and practice areas throughout law school including workers' compensation, personal injury, and commercial real estate transactions.

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 25

26 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

BOOK REVIEW: SEEING THROUGH LEGALESE by mark cohen Seeing Through Legalese is Professor Joseph Kimble’s second book of essays on the use plain of language in law.

Prof. Kimble taught legal writing at the Western Michigan University Cooley Law School for more than 30 years and is the editor of the Michigan Bar Journal’s Plain Language column.

His first book on the topic, Lifting the Fog of Legalese was acclaimed as “superb,” “invaluable,” and “a treasure.”

Seeing Through Legalese collects Prof. Kimble’s more recent essays on plain language. Prof. Kimble structured the book in three parts. Part one focuses on drafting legal documents. Part two is a collection of essays on legal writing in general. Part three consists of transcripts of interviews with Prof. Kimble and of remarks he made in accepting various legal writing awards.

A passionate advocate for eliminating legalese, Prof. Kimble devotes little time to explaining how legalese came to permeate the profession. Instead, he jumps right in by offering practical advice on eliminating legalese and explaining the benefits of doing so.

Prof. Kimble served as a drafting consultant on the project to restyle the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Part one of Seeing Through Legalese explains the legal writing principles employed in that effort and includes numerous side-by-side comparisons so readers can see how the drafters employed plain language principles to simplify and improve the rules. For instance, one principle was to avoid stating the obvious. The prior version of FRCP 56(a) provided, “A party may move for summary judgment in the party’s favor…” The current version provides, “A party may move for summary judgment…” There was no need for the phrase “in the party’s favor” because a motion for summary judgment, by definition, requests judgment in favor of the moving party. No party ever moves for summary judgment in favor of the opposing party.

In part two, Prof. Kimble addresses some myths about plain language in law and offers strong evidence that plain language is more effective than legalese. He then provides tips for improving structure, formatting, and style. My favorite essay in part two is a satirical piece in which Prof. Kimble offers tips on how to avoid plain language in favor of legalese. For instance, “Try to have more than half of every page devoted to footnotes.” And “Strive for an average sentence length of about 35 words. Anything less

will not challenge your reader enough.”

The transcripts of the interviews with Prof. Kimble and of his remarks in part three of Seeing Through Legalese offer an enjoyable review of some of what Prof. Kimble has learned about legal writing in his distinguished career.

Seeing Through Legalese is not a text on legal writing or plain language; however, Prof. Kimble’s book contains sound advice, helpful guidelines and real-world examples. Readers will enjoy the variety and may even find inspiration in Prof. Kimble’s essays.

D Mark Cohen has practiced law for 34 years. He earned his law degree at the University of Colorado and his LL.M. at the University of Arkansas, where he also taught legal writing. His practice emphasizes business litigation. He enjoys helping lawyers and organizations improve legal documents by translating them from legalese into plain English.

A former chairperson of the Advisory Board of The Colorado Lawyer, his many publications include “How to Draft a Bad Contract,” first published in The Colorado Lawyer in August 2015. He can be reached at mark@cohenslaw.com.

COLORADO CHAPTER Check Available Dates Calendars for Colorado’s Top-Rated Mediators & Arbitrators In Seconds...

Join the more than 300 local law offices using the NADN’s server each month to expedite appointment scheduling via

www.COLMEDIATORS.org To learn more about NADN, visit www.NADN.org/about December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 27

You are what you READ! Practitioner’s Guide to Colorado Business Organizations, Third Edition

(Includes an Electronic PDF e-Book - Download from your CLE Dashboard) Managing Editors: Allen E.F. Rozansky and E. Lee Reichert The Practitioner’s Guide to Colorado Business Organizations covers the legal aspects of forming start-up entities in Colorado, with references to federal law, as well. It includes sample forms, tables, and appendices to augment the text, and a comprehensive subject index and tables of authorities.

The guide is designed to provide attorneys with a comprehensive tool for forming and advising start-up business entities during their initial period of business operations, with the goal of creating a single reference guide that accumulates and addresses the issues typically faced by transactional business law attorneys practicing in Colorado.

New 3-volume Edition!

The Third Edition of the Guide has been reorganized, existing chapters have been updated, and there are four new chapters:

• • •

Corporate Governance and Fiduciary Duties

•

Noncompetition, Nonsolicitation and Confidentiality Agreements

Insurance Coverage

Maintenance, Ongoing Review, and Conducting Business Reviews

Like the law itself, this guide is a work in progress to provide for the evolving needs of business law practitioners.

Three Convenient Ways to Order: ONLINE AT: CALL: STOP BY:

www.cba-cle.org In Denver 303.860.0608 Toll Free 888.860.2531 Our office and save on shipping!

CBA-CLE Books: Item Number: ZPGCBB17B CBA Member Price: $239 Non-Member Price: $249 $10 S&H plus sales tax are applied as follows: Denver 7.62%; RTD, 4%; rest of Colorado, 2.9%.

The nonprofit educational arm of the Colorado Bar Association and the Denver Bar Association

1900 Grant Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80203-4303

28 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

METRO VOLUNTEER LAWYERS MENTORING MVL’s mission is “to bridge the gap in access to justice by coordinating the provision of pro bono legal services by volunteer lawyers within the Denver Metro Area to people who could not otherwise afford legal services for their civil legal issues.”

MVL is the centerpiece pro bono program of the Denver Bar Association and co-sponsored by various other local bars including Adams/Broomfield, Arapahoe, Douglas/Elbert, and the First Judicial District. Many Colorado lawyers participate as volunteers to provide civil legal services to those in need who live at or below 150% of the federal poverty guidelines for income. These legal services help to stabilize families, save taxpayer money, reduce the judicial workload, and help people move toward selfsufficiency and full participation in society.

Despite the array of lawyers who assist with its various programs, MVL is always in need of volunteers to take on pro bono and low-fee cases directly, and also to mentor other volunteers who have less experience. Many MVL volunteers find that through their efforts, not only do they feel a sense of reward for helping those less fortunate, they also gain valuable legal experience, advance their reputation, and advance the reputation of the legal profession as a whole. In addition to these rather obvious benefits, volunteering with MVL confers numerous untold benefits.

One such benefit is the opportunity to meet and work with other great attorneys with similar interests in the law. Volunteers range in ability, experience and availability. Opportunities range from micro-volunteering to regular monthly participation, as well as recruiting and mentoring newer lawyers to partic-

ipate in the programs. MVL offers the benefit of having an abundance of readily available work to teach and learn from for the attorney pairs.

Not only does MVL mentor/mentee pairing benefit the individual parties, the community and the state as a whole, it can be used to test an emerging employer/employee match. Colorado has experienced a huge growth in the number of emerging law firms. The MVL mentorship program benefits these new law firms because it allows lawyers to assess the interest, skill, confidence and horsepower of a potential new associate while simultaneously giving back to the community. MVL cases are broad; from preventing evictions to working on domestic relations cases, mentors are both giving back to Colorado and showing potential new associates (in the form of mentees) the pace and quality of work expected by the client, the courts, and your office.

MVL hopes that you will volunteer. Not only are you helping the less fortunate, giving back to the community, and improving the reputation of the legal profession, you are gaining a valuable network for the rest of your legal career. The mentorship program helps new attorneys build their network and gain experience with well-known attorneys while allowing more experienced attorneys to pass their knowledge a new generation and possibly find a potential new hire for their firm. MVL’s pro bono program is beneficial in multiple ways and will always need new volunteers. D James Garts leads the Robinson & Henry family law practice in Denver. He served on the CBA Executive Council and was the young lawyer liaison to the CBA Board of Governors

Financial Assistance for Colorado Lawyers

WATERMAN FUND Provides financial assistance for “aged, infirm, or otherwise incapacitated lawyers who have practiced in Colorado for a minimun of ten years.” denbar.org/members/waterman-fund Waterman Fund 1900 Grant St., Ste. 900 Denver, CO 80203 PHONE 303-824-5319 I FAX 303-861-5274

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 29

COLAP Wellness Corner

LEGAL AVATARS: DISTRICT ATTORNEYS AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS

by sarah myers ll attorneys are avatars for their clients. We represent our clients and their problems, fighting for their best interest and navigating the gauntlet of the legal system for them.

In criminal law, public defenders serve as avatars for the defendant and the rights afforded in the Constitution while district attorneys are avatars for victims of crime and protection of the public. PDs and DAs often find themselves in highly antagonistic roles even though, as attorneys, they have more in common

30 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

than who and what they represent, and despite the fact that their roles are equally vital to our legal system. Even though PDs and DAs are essentially representing two sides of the same coin (ie. justice), their interactions with each other can become unnecessarily contentious, polarized and stressful when they identify so personally with their “avatar role” that they lose understanding, compassion and the “bigger picture” of what the other is trying to accomplish.

It would serve our criminal justice system if the avatars could put down their personal egos and misdirected self-righteousness when working with each other. In an era where the judicial branch of government and its avatars are being called upon to represent the rule of law with heightened maturity and professionalism, we must all contribute to improving the efficacy of the legal system, one that can and should garnish more trust and respect from the public. If PDs and DAs could work in a less toxic environment, the reduction in stress would allow them to make better decisions and improve their cognitive, physical and emotional health. How can we accomplish this when, often, members of each group sees the other as the “enemy” rather than a colleague? Below are perspectives of a public defender and a senior deputy district attorney. They were asked to detail their experiences in their avatar roles and how they have developed a clearer sense of professionalism and wellbeing when working under demanding and contentious conditions.

A Public Defender’s Perspective As a Public Defender assigned to a specific jurisdiction, you get to know the DA's and judges pretty well. You know what a particular DA is likely going to offer and how a particular judge is going to sentence, etc.

I have found if you deal with a specific person, and not deal with the DA’s office as a whole, you are likely to be more successful. Let’s face it: there are good and bad judges, good and bad DAs, and good and bad criminal defense attorneys. Some District Attorneys are looking for personal mitigation and others look specifically at the charged conduct and criminal history. Oftentimes, with this information, you can negotiate from a position of knowledge and understanding by presenting your side of the case that is specifically catered to the DA prosecuting the case.

Certainly, I speak to DAs whom I have known for some time quite differently than I do with a DA that I don’t know. However, in both circumstances being totally honest with everything that you tell them is the best practice.

Some DA's are difficult to deal with because of their personality, or the facts and circumstances of the case are such that any resolution short of trial is unlikely. Understanding this dynamic from the onset is important because it can save you the energy of trying to negotiate extensively with the DA, thus allowing you to channel that energy to other aspects of the case, like preparing for trial. Understanding the perspective of the DA in regard to a certain case can allow you to better prepare a defense and reduce your own stress by determining how best to spend your energy and resources.

Criminal cases are highly emotional and require a deft touch when dealing with the judge, your client, the DA and others. In my mind, being passionate and compassionate are prerequisites to being a criminal defense attorney. However, when you allow your own emotions to influence and dictate how you represent your client, you become a less effective advocate. Knowing the different players that you are going to have to deal with, and where they are coming from, will allow you to craft an effective, persuasive argument that will in turn reduce your stress, improve your emotional health and allow you to represent your

client competently.

While criminal defense attorneys have a tendency to focus on their cases and nothing else, it is important to give yourself a mental health break. It is hard for me to say go to the gym every day because I don’t. What I suggest is to regularly ear-mark time where you get to do the things you enjoy without your work being in the back of your mind. Taking this time will allow you to recharge your batteries, even if for a moment, and ensure that you don’t get burned out in the long run.

A Senior Deputy DA’s Perspective Working for the government is a heavy responsibility. At times, the burden may feel overwhelming. Pressure to win every case is justified by the belief you are keeping the community safe in doing so. However, we must balance this stress with not losing sight of what is important: we are all in this together.

Too often colleagues are wrapped up in this competitive environment. Some offices may actually encourage it. Perhaps it is the “type A” personality that lawyers tend to have. For some, they feel their position is more than a job. They believe that the other side takes drastic measures to hide the truth or thwart justice. To be fair, there are prosecutors and public defenders who have a “win at all costs” mentality. It is those people that “adversaries” have the most trouble working with. This is why I believe it is important to take a step away from wanting to win and remember that what you are doing is a job.

As a prosecutor, I have struggled with wanting to win at all costs (human nature) and I have struggled with defense attorneys who I believe have drifted outside ethical bounds. Ultimately, I cannot change their behavior or attitude, but I can focus on my own. For me, I have found one of the easiest and most effective means of maintaining a courteous demeanor is taking care of myself and remembering the Golden Rule.

Find a physical outlet.

I regularly work out and meditate. Taking care of our physical and mental selves is so important with the tough work we do. We suffer trauma every day because of the horrible things people do to other people. Running, lifting weights, doing yoga or participating in sports all help us disconnect from these horrors and recharge us for the next day.

Take time off.

We work long hours with few true days off. Even on weekends, we think about our cases. With remote access to work email, we never truly disconnect. In order to be our best selves, we must turn it off, at least occasionally. Balance is critical. If you are not connecting with your loved ones, you will be more irritable, less friendly and keener to believing every argument is a personal attack.

Do not take it personally.

We are all doing important work. Go into each case with each opposing attorney believing that they are just trying to do the best they can. Sometimes you get burned and learn, but never take it personally.

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 31

Be civil.

Prosecutors and public defenders do not need to be best friends, but we also should not be enemies. Be conscious of how you communicate with opposing counsel. You can still be true to yourself and your beliefs without disparaging opposing counsel.

If you do not think email will adequately convey your thoughts, pick up the phone and call. When you communicate, lose the personal attacks, they get you nowhere. Stick to the facts and the law. Wins and losses may be important to you, but at the end of the day, all that is left is your reputation. Will it be one of unreasonableness and contention or one of doing your best to do the right thing?

Conclusion.

While this article focuses on DAs and PDs, the adversarial nature of the practice of law exposes most of us to similar circumstances and conflicts. It’s not just DAs and PDs who are needed in the movement to change our legal culture; it’s a quest in which all “legal avatars” must play a role. Our profession can be a stressful one, but we don’t have to take our frustrations out on each other, or treat opposing counsel as if they are personally responsible for the situations in which our clients find themselves. We might be avatars for our clients, but we shouldn’t be behaving as if we are our clients. Instead, we should work together (since

we are the people who truly understand just how stressful the practice of law can be) in ways that are more supportive. We can, at the very least, be professional and civil towards each other.

There are enough examples in our world of adults behaving like children right now, bullying each other and posturing as if they were in the sandbox at school. Surely the legal community can stand apart as role models instead of joining in that sandbox. D Sarah Myers, JD, LMFT, LAC, is the clinical director for the Colorado Lawyer Assistance Program (COLAP) — smyers@coloradolap. org. COLAP provides free and confidential services for judges, lawyers and law students. If you need resources for any issue that is compromising your ability to be a productive member of the legal community (including your well-being), or if there is someone you are concerned about, contact COLAP at (303) 986-3345. For more information about COLAP, visit www.coloradolap.org.

Barbara Ezyk, executive director of the Colorado Lawyer Assistance Program, is the coordinating editor of this series of Wellness articles.

Readers are encouraged to send authors and Ezyk their feedback to the articles. If you would like to suggest a topic or contribute a wellness article, contact Ezyk at bezyk@coloradolap.org.

BAR RESOURCES THE DBA PEER PROFESSIONALISM ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE Are you troubled by rude and unprofessional attorneys? Call Peer Professional Assistance for FREE one-on-one intervention.

PPA has been sponsored by the Denver Bar Association since 1994. Call 303-860-1115, ext. 1, for more information. All inquiries are confidential.

COLAP The Colorado Lawyer Assistance Program (COLAP) is an independent and confidential program exclusively for judges, lawyers and law students. Established by Colorado Supreme Court Rule 254, COLAP provides assistance with practice management, work/ life integration, stress/anger management, anxiety, depression, substance abuse and any career challenge that interferes with the ability to be a productive member of the legal community.

COLAP provides referrals for a wide variety of personal and profes-

sional issues, assistance with interventions, voluntary monitoring programs, supportive relationships with peer volunteers, and educational programs (including ethics CLEs).

For more information, or for confidential assistance, contact COLAP at 303-986-3345 or visit coloradolap.org.

DBA PLACEMENT SERVICE As a membership service of the Denver Bar Association, the Placement Service provides law firms and legal departments of corporations with well-qualified applicants. Its quality approach to cost-effective staffing has made the DBA Placement Service a favorite of the legal community since 1986. It provides temporary, temp-to-hire and full-time employment opportunities for secretaries, paralegals, receptionists, accountants, administrators and office assistants. Contact Mev Parsons or Amy Sreenen at 303-894-0014 or email dbaps@earthlink.net.

SOLACE SOLACE (Support of Lawyers/Legal Personnel - All Concern Encouraged) is a program of the Colorado Bar Association designed to assist those in the Colorado legal community who have experienced some significant, potentially life-changing event in their lives. The sole purpose of the SOLACE program is to allow the legal community to reach out in meaningful and compassionate ways to judges, lawyers, court personnel, paralegals, legal secretaries and their families who experience deaths or other catastrophic illnesses, sickness or injury.

For more information on SOLACE visit cobar.org/solace.

32 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

LEGAL AFFAIRS

The Association of Former Members of Congress honored Dentons' senior advisor David Skaggs at its annual Distinguished Service Awards luncheon in Washington, DC. In naming David its 2017 honoree, the association made note of his serSKAGGS vice in the Marines during Vietnam, his six terms representing Colorado in the U.S. House of Representatives, his co-chairmanship of the Office of Congressional Ethics and his leadership in seeking to have civics re-introduced to the U.S. public school curriculum.

Scott Sandberg joins Spencer Fane. He focuses his practice on commercial litigation with an emphasis on the construction, financial services and franchise industries. With more than 18 years of experience, SANDBERG John O’Brien joins Spencer Fane as Regional Development Managing Partner.

As such, he’ll work with businesses and media throughout the country to help Spencer Fane expand its practice. He focuses his national practice O'BRIEN on banking, agrifinance, agriculture law and transactions, lender liability defense, receivership, creditors’ rights, and bankruptcy.

Jones & Keller is pleased to announce the addition of Kerri Assell. She represents clients with respect to a variety of real estate matters including purchase and sale transactions, leasing, development and financing.

ASSELL Jones & Keller is pleased to announce the addition of Ryan Behrman. He specializes in finance, corporate and securities law. Ryan advises financial institutions, private lenders, and developers in complex joint ventures, BEHRMAN financings, and commercial lending transactions.

Jones & Keller is pleased to announce the addition of Paul Vorndran. Paul represents individuals and companies in actions involving violations of state and federal securities laws, common law fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty VORNDRAN claims, including class actions and shareholder derivative claims.

Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton announced the addition of Evelyn Zhao to the firm’s Denver office. She joins as an associate on the Electronics and Software team in the internationally

recognized Intellectual Property Department. Ms. Zhao’s practice includes patent work involving inventions in the fields of mechanical engineering, electronics, software and business methods.

In October, Minor & Brown, P.C. celebrated its 40th anniversary at Cherry Hills Country Club.

Murr Siler & Accomazzo, P.C. is proud to announce its 25th anniversary. The milestone provides them a wonderful opportunity to reflect on the past and prepare for the trials and triumphs their future. Murr Siler & Accomazzo, P.C. look forward to serving the community for another 25 years and longer.

Doida Law Group, a boutique corporate law firm, announced that senior counsel Fay Matsukage was selected to the Colorado Women’s Hall of Fame Class of 2018.

Welborn Sullivan Meck & MATSUKAGE Tooley, P.C. is pleased to announce the addition of C. John Hegarty to the firm as an associate. His practice will primarily focus on oil and gas transactional matters.

HEGARTY Welborn Sullivan Meck & Tooley, P.C. is pleased to announce the addition of Joshua P. Murphy to the firm as an associate. His practice will focus on oil and gas title matters.

MURPHY

CHANGES Otis, Bedingfield & Peters, LLC is pleased to announce that attorney Jennifer Lynn Peters has been certified as a member of Lawyers of Distinction. Ms. Peters was named a Rising Star by Colorado Super Lawyers Magazine in both 2011 and PETERS 2012, and is a member of the board of directors of CREW Northern Colorado and the Weld Food Bank.

Holzer Patel Drennan is pleased to announce Amy Deveraux has joined their firm as an Associate Attorney. HPD focuses on Trademark and Intellectual Property Law.

If you are a Denver Bar attorney member and you’ve moved, been promoted, hired an associate, taken on a partner, received a promotion or award or begun service on a new board, we’d love to hear from you. Talks, speeches, CLE presentations and political announcements, due to their sheer number, cannot be included. In addition, The Docket cannot print notices of honors determined by other publications (e.g., Super Lawyers, Best Lawyers, etc.) again due to volume. Notices are printed at no cost but must be submitted in writing and are subject to editing and space available. Send all notices to Clair Smith at csmith@cobar.org. Announcements will be placed on a first-come, first-served basis.

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 33

PICTURE THIS FALL BAR ADMISSION CEREMONY On October 30 the Colorado Supreme Court held an Admission Ceremony for the 536 individuals who passed the July 2017 Colorado bar exam. Friends, family, and distinguished members of the legal community gathered at Boettcher Concert Hall to help the new admittees celebrate their achievement. The ceremony included opening remarks from CBA President Dick Gast and the Honorable Marcia Krieger. The Honorable Wiley Daniel, U.S. District Court Senior Judge for the District of Colorado, gave the keynote address. All lawyers then stood to take the Oath of

34 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

Admission, which was administered by Chief Justice Nancy Rice.

Immediately following the ceremony, new lawyers made their way to a reception at Limelight Supper Club hosted by the CBA, DBA, Colorado LGBT Bar Association, Colorado Trial Lawyers Association, Asian Pacific American Bar, Sam Cary Bar Association, Colorado Defense Lawyers Association, American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, and Faculty of Federal Advocates

LAWYERS’ ARTS RECEPTION On October 19, the DBA YLD, CBA YLD, and Docket Committee held a Lawyers’ Arts Reception at Meier’s Skis in Denver. The event gave the Docket Committee and DBA President Franz Hardy a chance to thank all of the entrants in the Docket’s 2017 Arts and Literature Contest for their participation. The CBA and DBA Young Lawyers Divisions also welcomed students and alumni of the University of Wyoming College of Law to the reception.

Attendees enjoyed tacos, drinks, and free tours of the Meier Factory. Guests also had the opportunity to see (or hear) the winning works and mingle with contest participants. Art contest winners were: Yvette Lewis-Molock — drawing and painting; Reid Neureiter — photography; Maha Kamal — fiction; and Andrew Felser — poetry.

1 Fiction: Maha Kamal 2 Drawing and Painting: Yvette Lewis-Molock 3 Poetry: Andrew Felser

DBA AND CBA YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISONS ICE CREAM SOCIAL The DBA YLD and CBA’s “Lawyers with Littles” co-hosted an ice cream social on October 25 at Little Man Ice Cream in Denver. Members and their families gathered on the patio to enjoy their desserts alfresco while celebrating the season and decorating pumpkins. Look for more family-friendly events in the near future from both bar associations.

December/January 2017-18 I The Docket I 35

FRED SKILLERN, ESQ. SPECIALTIES: • Real Estate • Title Insurance • Business/ Commercial

• Construction/ Mechanic Liens • Eminent Domain

410 17 TH STREET, #2440 • DENVER, CO 80202 WEB: jamsdenver.com • PHONE: 303.534.1254 36 I The Docket I December/January 2017-18

• Foreclosure/ Loan Defaults and Workouts • Professional Liability

Dispute Resolution Systems