Sacramento Lawyer Magazine

May/June 2013

Robert A. Buccola: www.sacbar.org

CAL-ABOTA Trial Lawyer of the Year

New SCBA Member Benefits and Events On the Horizon

• Employment • Real Estate • Personal Injury

• Class Actions • Banking • Corporate and Partnership Dissolutions

Joe has opened his own practice to concentrate on mediation and arbitration.

His lifetime of experience as a successful trial lawyer has also made him into a highly effective mediator and an insightful and practical arbitrator.

Joe@GenshleaLaw.com O/ (916) 525-8444 C/ (916) 825-9952 400 Capitol Mall / Suite 1750 / Sacramento, CA 95814

F/ (916) 525-8446

www.genshlealaw.com

May/A/JPRIL une 2013 2013 SSACRAMENTO acramentoLL awyer MARCH AWYER

3

SCBA Interim EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Mary J. Burroughs

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Open STAFF EDITOR Heather Cline Hoganson SACRAMENTO LAWYER POLICY COMMITTEE Samson R. Elsbernd Helene Friedman David Graulich Coral Henning Yoshinori H.T. Himel

COURTHOUSE STEPS steps@sacbar.org

4

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

DESIGN & PUBLISHING Mary J. Burroughs (916) 564-3780 mburroughs@sacbar.org PRODUCTION DESIGN Milenko Vlaisavljevic SURFING FROM RIVER CITY Coral Henning (916) 874-6013 chenning@saclaw.org ADVERTISING SALES (916) 564-3780 x210 EVENTS - MEMBER CLASSIFIED ADS (916) 564-3780 x200 • reception@sacbar.org

OFFICERS Bruce Timm - President Stacy Moak - 1st Vice President BJ Susich - 2nd Vice President Angela Lai - Secretary Treasurer BOARD OF DIRECTORS DIRECTORS AT LARGE Sonia Fernandes David Graulich Susan Hill Jason Jasmine Jeannie Lee Jones Katie Patterson William Schuetz Mark Slaughter Sabrina Thomas

Sacramento Law Foundation Stephen Duvernay, saclawfoundation.org

AFFILIATE REPRESENTATIVES Asian Bar Association (ABAS) Kara Ueda Barristers’ Club Monica Hans Capitol City Trial Lawyers Jack Vetter Federal Bar Association Breann Moebius LaRaza Michael Terhorst Leonard M. Friedman Bar Association Jeff Levine Saint Thomas More Society of Sacramento (STMS) Herb Bolz Sacramento Lawyers for the Equality of

SACRAMENTO SACRAMENTO COUNTY BAR BAR ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION MAGAZINE MAGAZINE

Table of Contents

V O L U U M M EE

1 1 1 14 4, , N N U U M M B EB RE R 2

3•

M • A R M CA HY // AJ PU RN I E L

22 0 1 33

LITIGATION LITIGATION 8 A View from the Civil Trial Bench: “Gatekeepers:” A Dramatic Analogy 8 A View from the Civil Trial Bench: Between Expert Testimony and the Movie Ghostbusters Computer Animation Evidence in Jury Trials COVER COVER STORY STORY 16 Francis Robert A. Buccola: Trial the Yearof 16 J. Mootz IIICAL-ABOTA Takes Over as 9thLawyer Dean inofHistory Pacific McGeorge School of Law EVENTS EVENTS 14 9th Annual LSNC Valentine Run Draws Huge Crowd 20 Reception Sets Sponsor andsAttendance Records 22 Bench-Bar The Late Joe Ramsey Honored at SCBA’ Annual Meeting 26 Barristers’ Club Update SECTION & AFFILIATE NEWS 14 Promulgations from the Tax Section COURT NEWS 26 Barristers’ Club Update 28 An Opportunity to Litigate & Serve: 28 SCBA Welcomes New Civil Litigation Section The Eastern District’s Pro Bono Panel 30 SacLEGAL Holiday Party Celebrates 2012 LGBT Election Victories SECTION & AFFILIATE COMMUNITY SERVICE NEWS 24 Administrative s WritsNeed Seminar a Big Success 22 VLSP VolunteersLaw FillSection’ Community 30 Alternative Dispute Resolution Section 17th Annual LAW &Conflict PUBLICResolution POLICY Summer Institute 24 and Public Policy Hosts Academy at & Cheese Reception 32 Law Appellate Law Section 8th Thriving Annual Wine C.K. McClatchy High School COMMUNITY SERVICE 27 Cy Pres Awards Help Support Legal Aid Services DEPARTMENTS 4 Editor’s Message DEPARTMENTS 6 6 President’ President’ss Message Message 12 12 Law Law Library Library News News 13 13 Surfing from River City

32 32 34 34 34 34

Calendar Courthouse Steps Calendar Classifieds Index to Advertisers Index to Advertisers

24

16 16

14

Sacramento Lawyer welcomes letters and and article suggestions fromfrom readers.

Please e-mail them to editor@sacbar.org.

TheThe Sacramento County BarBar Association reserves thethe right Sacramento Lawyer welcomes letters article suggestions readers.

Please e-mail them to editor@sacbar.org.

Sacramento County Association reserves righttotoedit editarticles articles and letters sentsent in for Please contact SCBA 916-564-3780 forfor deadline information, page: and letters in publication. for publication.

Please contact SCBA 916-564-3780 deadline information,faxfax916-564-3787, 916-564-3787,orore-mail e-mailmburroughs@sacbar.org. mburroughs@sacbar.org.Web Web page:www.sacbar.org. www.sacbar.org.

Caveat: Articles and and other work submitted to Sacramento Lawyer become the the copyrighted property of of thethe Sacramento County Caveat: Articles other work submitted to Sacramento Lawyer become copyrighted property Sacramento CountyBar BarAssociation.

Association.Returns Returnsofoftangible tangibleitems itemssuch such as as photographs photographs are by of the Executive Director only, by by pickup at the SCBA office only. arepermission by permission of the Executive Director only, pickup at the SCBA office only.

Gays Lawyers and Lesbians (SacLegal) Women of Sacramento Jeff Edwards Nichole Rapier South Asian Bar Association

Tej Grewal COMMITTEE / SECTION Wiley Manuel Bar Association REPRESENTATIVES Alana Mathews Lawyer Referral and Information WomenService Lawyers(LRIS) of Sacramento Nichole Rapier Peter Kyung Conference of Delegates Andi Liebenbaum COMMITTEE SECTION Indigent Defense/ Panel (IDP) REPRESENTATIVES Kevin Adamson Lawyer Referral and Information Section Representative Service (LRIS) Daniel Yamshon Peter Kyung Voluntary Legal Services Conference Delegates Program of (VLSP) Andi Liebenbaum Victoria Jacobs Indigent Defense Panel (IDP) Kevin Adamson SECTIONS Section Representative Administrative Law Daniel Yamshon Heather Cline Hoganson Voluntary Legal Services Alternative Dispute Resolution Program (VLSP) Ken Malovos Victoria Jacobs

SECTIONS Appellate Law Administrative Law Scott Cameron Heather Cline Hoganson Bankruptcy & Alternative Dispute Resolution Commercial Law Ken Malovos Jamie Dreher Appellate Business Law Law Scott Cameron Sarra Ziari Bankruptcy & Children’s Counsel Diane Wasznicky Commercial Law Environmental Jamie Dreher Law Andrea P. Law Clark Business Family Law Sarra Ziari Russell Carlson Children’s Counsel Health Care Diane Wasznicky Kristen Cerf/JohnLaw Puente Environmental Labor & Employment Law Andrea P. Clark Meredith Packer Family Law Garey ProbateRussell & Estate Planning Carlson Donna L. Courville Health Care Real Property Kristen Cerf/John Puente M. Hunter Law Labor Ian & Employment Tax LawGarey Meredith Packer Ciro Probate & Immordino Estate Planning Donna L. Courville

RealCompensation Property Worker’s Ian M.Marcus Hunter Jason Tax Law

Ciro Immordino COMMITTEES Worker’s Compensation Bylaws Jason Marcus BJ Susich Continuing Education of the Bar Daniel Yamshon COMMITTEES Diversity Hiring and Retention Bylaws Linda Partmann BJ Susich Electronic Media Continuing Education of the Bar Herb Bolz / Katie Patterson Daniel Yamshon FeeHiring Arbitration Diversity and Retention Ken Partmann Bacon Linda Judicial Review Electronic Media Birney HerbPhilip Bolz / R. Katie Patterson Judiciary Fee Arbitration Diane Ken W. Wasznicky Bacon LongJudicial RangeReview Planning TBD Philip R. Birney Membership Judiciary TBD Diane W. Wasznicky Membership Kurt Hendrickson

Pictorial Directory Directory Pictorial Herb Bolz Herb Bolz Sacramento Lawyer Lawyer Policy Sacramento Policy Open Jack Laufenberg Sacramento Lawyer(USPS (USPS0981-300) 0981-300) Sacramento Lawyer is is published bythe theSacramento Sacramento published bi-monthly bi-monthly by County 1329Howe HoweAvenue, Avenue, County Bar Bar Association, Association, 1329 #100,Sacramento, CA95825.

95825.Issn Issn1087-8771.

1087-8771. #100,Sacramento, CA Annual rate:$6.00 $6.00included included Annual subscription subscription rate: in in membership or $24.00 $24.00for fornonmembers. nonmembers. membership dues, dues, or Periodicals paidatatSacramento, Sacramento, Periodicals postage postage paid California.

Sendaddress addresschanges changes California. Postmaster: Postmaster: Send to toSacramento Sacramento Lawyer, Avenue, Lawyer, 13291329 HoweHowe Avenue, #100, #100, Sacramento, CA 95825.

Copyright Sacramento, CA 95825.

Copyright 2013 by 2013 the by the Sacramento County Bar Association.

Sacramento County Bar Association.

Each author’s commentary reflects his/her Each author’s commentary reflects his/her individual opinion only and not that of his/ individual opinion only and not that of her employer, organization with which he/she his/her employer, organization with which is affiliated, or Sacramento Lawyer magazine, he/she is affiliated, or Sacramento Lawyer unless otherwise stated.

magazine, unless otherwise stated.

May/A/JPRIL une 2013 2013 SSACRAMENTO acramentoLL awyer MARCH AWYER

5

President’s Message

New SCBA Member Benefits and Events On the Horizon

D

uring the last few months, your bar association has been working hard to increase member benefits and attract local attorneys who are not currently members. It is my pleasure to highlight some of these efforts.

You have likely seen our new e-newsletter, titled “This Week at The Bar,” which should keep you better apprised of the activities and services provided by the association. In an effort to broaden our reach through technology and to better serve our members, we have put renewed energy behind our E-Media Committee.

These efforts

6

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

have paid dividends, as this committee has recently given our association a stronger social media presence through both Facebook and LinkedIn. The E-Media Committee, currently led by Board Members Herb Bolz and Katie Patterson, continues to pursue new ways to improve our association through the use of technology.

We have planned a number of upcoming events in order to increase fellowship and provide networking opportunities for our members. On May 21st, the association will host a spring member mixer at House

Bruce M. Timm

Kitchen & Bar, which will be free to SCBA members and judges. We will also host the First Annual SCBA Golf Tournament at Del Paso Country Club on June 17th. This event will include lunch, an awards dinner, and a silent auction. Non-golfers are also welcome!

We hope you will attend these events.

Sections are critical to a vibrant bar association. To that end, we held a section leadership meeting on March 26th, where leaders of our various sections gathered at the Sacramento County Law Library to meet and learn new ways to improve their sections.

We soon expect to launch new substantive law sections in the areas of intellectual property, criminal law, and immigration. We also hope to establish a new ethics committee. Following the success of the SCBA’s new Civil Litigation section—which attracted approximately 70 attorneys and judges at its recent inaugural luncheon seminar —we hope that these new sections will attract new members and increase opportunities for existing members.

You may have also noticed that Mary Burroughs has taken over as the association’s interim executive director.

Among many other great things, Mary is responsible for the new e-newsletter.

Mary’s energy and passion for the association will serve us well as we seek to accomplish our aggressive 2013 goals.

As we move forward with all of our new projects, the board is maintaining a fiscally responsible approach.

Thanks to the efforts of SCBA 2nd Vice President, B.J. Susich, we have

revamped our accounting methods and financial reports, making it easier for our board members to monitor the association’s financial position.

Even with the increase in member benefits and opportunities we are undertaking, we expect to end the year in an even healthier financial position than when we began.

Finally, it is with great sadness that we say goodbye to our good friend and mentor, attorney Jean McEvoy. Jean passed on April 14th.

She will be dearly missed by many of us, having touched the lives of literally hundreds of attorneys in our legal community.

For For more more information information visit: visit: www.sacbar.org www.sacbar.org

May /JPRIL une2013 2013 SSACRAMENTO SACRAMENTO acramentoLLAWYER LAWYER awyer MMARCH ARCH /A /A PRIL 2013

777

Litigation

A View from the Civil Trial Bench: “Gatekeepers:” A Dramatic Analogy Between Expert Testimony and the Movie Ghostbusters

T

This article represents the thoughts and opinions of the author and should not be considered court policy or the opinion of other trial judges. Comments should be addressed to HersherJ@saccourt.ca.gov

he 1984 movie Ghostbusters is based on the story of three former Columbia University professors (Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis) turned ‘parapsychologists’ who start a ghost catching business. The film’s central theme is built on the premise that Gozer, an unsavory Sumerian god of destruction, is attempting to enter Earth. Trapped in a physical plane atop a New York City building, Gozer can only be released to wreak havoc once the “Gatekeeper,” occupying the body of actress Sigourney Weaver, connects with the “Keymaster,” Rick Moranis. Before being hired to send Gozer back from where he came and close the gate behind him, the Ghostbusters must convince the mayor and others that their science is not only credible, but worthy of acceptance and use.

The movie’s construct is not so different from that of an attorney who wants the court to allow an expert to present a theory of damages to a jury. As in the iconic Ghostbusters scene where the scientists discuss whether the method they will use to rid the world of Gozer is too speculative and place their client’s interest in danger1, in the courtroom the question is whether the expert’s opinion is too speculative and therefore too dangerous to present to the jury? And as in Ghostbusters, the courtroom gatekeeper2 or judge plays an important role.

Protecting juries from “an array of figures conveying a delusive impression of exactness in an area where a jury’s common sense is less available than usual to protect it.”3 This past Thanksgiving a unanimous California Supreme Court issued Sargon Enterprises v. University of Southern California (2012)55 Cal. 4th 747 (“Sargon”). In its decision the court considered the actions of the judicial “gatekeeper” in keeping speculative expert testimony from a jury in the context of lost profits. The case contains many memorable quotes. The high court clearly decided that it would not “reverse the polarity” or sanction taking any risks on the admission of expert testimony that has no business in a civil damage case involving

8

By Judge Judy Holzer Herscher

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

lost profits. In so doing, it established a framework for counsel and the court to evaluate any challenged expert testimony on the basis of speculation, thus extending its importance beyond a lost profits case.

The plaintiff, Sargon Enterprises Inc.4, is described as a small dental implant company that had net profits in 1998 of $101,000.00.

It patented and obtained government approval for a new dental implant that could be implanted immediately after extraction of a tooth (“immediate load implant”), thereby saving several steps, time and money in the tooth replacement process. In 1996, Sargon entered into a contract with the University of Southern California School of Dentistry to conduct a five-year clinical study of the implant and then publish and distribute the report to dentists. After initial successful clinical trials, the university failed to produce the report. Sargon’s damage expert believed USC’s failure to meet its contractual obligations resulted in, among other things, lost profits of between $200 million and $1 billion for the company.

The Sargon decision deals with the trial judge’s decisions in the second trial of the case. In the first trial, the trial judge excluded all evidence of Sargon’s alleged lost profits on the basis that USC could not have foreseen them. Sargon appealed and the appellate court reversed and ordered a new trial, finding that the trial judge had erred in excluding evidence of lost profits on the ground of lack of foreseeability.5 In the second trial, USC again moved to exclude the opinion testimony of plaintiff’s expert, certified public accountant and attorney James Skorheim, on the basis that any evidence of lost profits would be speculative.

The specific evidentiary challenge was made under Civil Code § 3301 (“No damages can be recovered for a breach of contract which are not clearly ascertainable in both their nature and origin.”) In trial number two, the judge conducted an eight-day in limine evidentiary hearing, and issued a 33-page decision denying admission of the testimony.

The Court of Appeal reversed, and the matter made its way to the California Supreme Court.

Skorheim testified that he reviewed all litigation materials (including deposition transcripts and reports of USC’s damages experts), financial information from Sargon and its competitors (including annual reports), and market analyses of the global dental implant market prepared by Millennium Research Group. Skorheim based his opinion of lost profits on a “market share” approach of the worldwide dental implant market, which he described as hungry for technological change, growth and innovation aimed at shortening healing time, cost, and treatment.

Specifically, Skorheim compared Sargon to six other large, multinational dental implant companies that were the market leaders and reportedly controlled in excess of 80 percent of global sales. His testimony was premised on his belief that there are three market “drivers” in the industry: innovation, clinical studies, and outreach to general practitioners.

He testified that in order to be successful a company must engage in all three. He further opined that had USC completed the contract and distributed it to dental practitioners, Sargon would have garnered substantial future profits in the sale of its innovative dental implant system.6 He testified that Sargon would have garnered between 32 and 58 percent of the available dental implant market, which itself was expected to grow at over 18 percent a year. This would have meant profits of upwards of $1.18 billion for the company.

The trial judge proceeded to deconstruct the basis of Skorheim’s opinion before discarding it in its entirety. Much of the trial testimony and the court’s decision centered on whether Sargon could properly be classified as “innovative” and whether that innovation would lead, or had a very good chance of leading (i.e., a reasonable certainty), to Sargon becoming the market leader over a 10 year period. The relevant portions of the innovation testimony were critical because it was on that basis that Skorheim further testified that: 1) Sargon would have been able to spend the necessary resources to develop other products over time; 2) Sargon’s prior profit levels were not a necessary component

is subject to objection if it does not.

Simulations, on the other hand, of his consideration analysis; 3) Sargon contain as part ofand their creation scienwas enoughortophysical the established tific similar assumptions princiindustry leaders that their profits could be ples to separate and Sargon’ aparts anticipated from the used extrapolate admitted A computer, for profits; and evidence.

4) the total amount of damages under four may alternative damage scenarios example, be programmed to use--a based how innovative the jury found novelon orjust generally unaccepted scientifthe implant to be -- would appropriately set ic, mathematical other principle as the damage figure inorthe range he offered. part of its analysis, or it may adopt a (Sargon, at pgs.755-761.)

The method Supreme of Court heldasthat novel proof parttheoftrial its court properly acted as a gatekeeper in assumptions.

In simulations, experts excluding the testimony. Although sounding are relyingat on novel thereasonable firstthese blushbuilt -- i.e.,in“innovation” oriesanorappropriate assumptions to render their was touchstone to analyze future profitability -- thesimulations Supreme Court opinions.

As a result, usuagreed with the trial judge that the testimony ally require a preliminary hearing and did not meet the tests of Civil Code, § a showing that certain any new or 7 3301 (reasonably lost scientific profits), and 8 or techother utilized assumption Evidence Code §§ 801, subd. (b) and 8029.

“Assume Miss Oklahoma into nique has gained general entered acceptance aincontract to transport her to the Miss the relevant expert community.

In America contest. Assume further that the short, breached simulations must be carrier the contract andtested Miss against themissed rules the for chance admission of new Oklahoma to compete.

Ascientific jury could decide if she was damaged by or physical principles the breach, to the extent damages could be because they contain within them ascertained. Could the jury go further and, substantive evidence.of (Duenas, at pg. based upon testimony experts, decide 20-21 People v. Kelly that, had [citations]; she been allowed to compete, she would Miss 30; Colorado for (1976)have 17 defeated Cal.3d 24, see also the title of decide that People v. Miss Hood,America, supra,or(1997) 53 she would have been second, behind Miss Cal.App.4th pp. 969–970.)

Colorado and atahead of Miss Montana”

into uncritically accepting the version of events depicted in the animation,” innovative was.have been excluded and thusSargon should Yet Skorheim’ s testimony failed to meet under Evidence Code section 352 any foundational standards on this important because value was subfactor and its he probative admitted he personally had stantially by how the probabilino expertiseoutweighed in determining innovative the dentalitsimplant was. First, did nota ty that admission wouldhe create correlate any relationship between historical substantial danger of misleading the revenues, market share, and innovation, thus jury. defense, on borrowing from making The any testimony the importance arguments generally made against simof innovation to profits highly speculative.

The court found that his therefore ulations, asserted thattestimony the animation

tended to give the evidence “a posture of mystic infallibility in the eyes of a createdgave “a delusive impression of exactness in jury, the prosecution's case “an an area where aaura jury’sofcommon sense is less unwarranted scientific certainavailable than usual to protect it.” (Sargon, ty,” was cumulative of other eviat p.and 761-762.) dence.

Duenas, p. 18, disNext, (See according to the at court, Skorheim essentially improperly called upon the cussing theand holdings of People v. Hood, jury to compare “degrees of innovation” and supra, 53 Cal.App.4th at p. 969, and to establish an “innovation pecking order” of People v. but Kelly, supra, 17theCal.3d atreal p. products, failed to give jury any 32, which found that with respect to standards by which they could make those important predicate processes decisions. And because certain scientific -- particu-

(Sargon, at p.764-765.) 10?

Under Evidence Code section 801 subd.

Avoiding “Mystic (b), a trial judge may Infallibility” consider whether the type of information the expert has relied on Animations —based everything is generally accepted in theon field as being from photos to videos and computer both reliable and relevant information.

Under section 802, a the trial ability court may re-creations—have to also sigexamine whether thea information supports nificantly impact juror’s assessment the expert’s reasoning, or whether there is of the “too evidence. make and simply great an They analytical gapreal, between thus more to the senses, what the data and tangible the opinion offered.”

(Sargon, at citations omitted] canp. be771an [additional un-engaging or confusing [also referencing Imwinkelried & Faigman, narrative by a witness. As in all cases Evidence Code Section 802: The Neglected Key where they are profferedLaw -- ofcivil or to Rationalizing the California Expert criminal -the opposing party often Testimony 2009) 42 Loyola L.A. L.Rev. 427, 441.].) objects to animations because of their The Supreme of potential to notCourt onlycompared highlighttwoand the three factors of success that Skorheim illustrateas in more memorable proffered theabasis of his conclusions,way, i.e., butpursuit because of theirstudies potential persuathe of clinical and targeting general practitioners, and noted that all of sive power. the 98 dental implant in the In Duenas the manufacturers defendant agreed field -- including those that had a small the computer wasactivities. an animarket share -- presentation engaged in these mation and not a simulation.

Thus, the court concluded, the crux of the expert’ s testimony on whether would However, he argued thatSargon the animabecome the“likely industry andthe leap frog tion was to leader beguile jurors over the others was based only on how May/A/JPRIL une 2013 2013 SSACRAMENTO acramentoLL awyer MARCH AWYER

9

Litigation “there are no standards or guidelines to determine ‘degrees of innovation,’” the court found the testimony relegated the question of determining potentially more than a billion dollars in damages to pure speculation.” Importantly, it found another basis for denying entry into the courtroom: speculative evidence is not only bad in and of itself, but it is not relevant. (Sargon, supra, 55 Cal. 4th at p. 763-765.)

“A jury can determine if a Ford was defective, because there are objective facts, such as industry standards and standards for safety, as well as a body of case law on the subject of products liability. A jury cannot say if a Ford is a better car than a Chevrolet, because that is subjective and depends upon what the driver wants and what he can afford, among other things.”

(Sargon, at p. 764.)

The California Supreme Court defended the gates against Skorheim’s expert opinion, finding it, as indicated above, essentially irrelevant and speculative. According to the high court, Skorheim’s testimony would have had Sargon transitioning from a threeperson operation to an industry leader with only one product. The court also found the data which formed the basis of the expert’s opinions did not bear any relationship to plaintiff’s historical profits or the profits of any similar existing business. Instead, the opinion of up to a billion dollars in lost profits was based on projections that “are wildly beyond, by degrees of magnitude, anything Sargon had ever experienced in the past,” i.e., profits climbing by 534.4 percent the first year, and by over 157,000% within 10 years. (Sargon at p.762.)

The admission or denial of expert testimony by a trial judge is reviewed at the appellate level for abuse of discretion.

This means the trial court’s decision must appear to be so irrational or arbitrary that no reasonable person could agree with it.

(Sargon, at p. 773.) The specific holding of Sargon is that damages for loss of anticipated profits in a new or unestablished business may be recovered only where the evidence: 1) supports that profits

were reasonably certain to have occurred, based on historical performance or by a comparison to profits of companies similar in size, locality, sales products, number of employees, etc.; 2) shows damages that can be measured by comparison to profits gained or lost by similar businesses operating under similar conditions; and 3) establishes a reasonable, rational basis for measurement or methodology that doesn’t require a jury to take a leap of logic or engage in conjecture.

Perhaps the greater lesson, however, is that logic and common sense still play a vital role in the gatekeeper function of judges and the exclusion of seductive expert testimony.

1. Conversation between Members of the Ghostbusters Team “Speculating” on Reversing the Polarity Flow: Dr. Egon Spengler: I have a radical idea. The door swings both ways, we could reverse the polarity flow through the gate.

Dr. Peter Venkman: How? Dr. Egon Spengler: [hesitates] We’ll cross the streams.

Dr. Peter Venkman: ‘Scuse me Egon? You said crossing the streams was bad!

Dr Ray Stantz: Cross the streams...

Dr. Peter Venkman: You’re gonna endanger us, you’re gonna endanger our client - the nice lady, who paid us in advance...

Dr. Egon Spengler: Not necessarily. There’s definitely a very slim chance we’ll survive. [pause while they consider this] Dr. Peter Venkman: [slaps Ray] I love this plan! I’m excited it could work! LET’S DO IT! 2. See U.S. Supreme Court decisions General Electric Co. v. Joiner (1997)522 U.S. 136, 142; Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (1999)526 U.S. 137, 141. The California Supreme Court has more recently used the term “gatekeeping responsibility.” See e.g., People v. Prince (2007) 40 Cal. 4th 1179, 1225, fn. 8.

3. Herman Schwabe, Inc. v. United Shoe Machinery Corp. (2d Cir. 1962) 297 F.2d 906, 912.

4. While not directly relevant, this author notes that the Sargon in this case is not associated with Sargon of Akkad, whose history entails another epic to rival that of

Reach A Variety of Sacramento Area Professionals ADVERTISE IN Sacramento Lawyer Magazine Call Mary Burroughs (916) 564-3780 x210 or email: mburroughs@sacbar.org • www.sacbar.org

10

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

Gozer the Gozerian. Sargon was an emperor and he conquered the Sumerian city-states in the 23rd and 22nd centuries BC, killed the king, usurped his throne and then went on to conquer Mesopotamia. However, both the case and Ghostbusters had ties to Sumeria.

5. The Supreme Court footnote states: “We express no opinion on the correctness of this ruling, which is not before us on review.”

6. Skorheim testified,“[t]he value of a clinical study to an implant maker is two-fold: It establishes the efficacy of the device and permits entry into the universities where students can be taught to use the device, with the expectation that, upon graduation, they will use the product in their practices.”

Thus, a showing of clinical success through the studies would, in all likelihood, lead to commercial success. (Sargon, supra, 55 Cal. 4th at p. 756.)

7. § 3301. Requirement of certainty: No damages can be recovered for a breach of contract which are not clearly ascertainable in both their nature and origin.

8. § 801. Opinion testimony by expert witness: If a witness is testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to such an opinion as is: (a) Related to a subject that is sufficiently beyond common experience that the opinion of an expert would assist the trier of fact; and (b) Based on matter (including his special knowledge, skill, experience, training, and education) perceived by or personally known to the witness or made known to him at or before the hearing, whether or not admissible, that is of a type that reasonably may be relied upon by an expert in forming an opinion upon the subject to which his testimony relates, unless an expert is precluded by law from using such matter as a basis for his opinion.

9. § 802. Statement of basis of opinion: A witness testifying in the form of an opinion may state on direct examination the reasons for his opinion and the matter (including, in the case of an expert, his special knowledge, skill, experience, training, and education) upon which it is based, unless he is precluded by law from using such reasons or matter as a basis for his opinion. The court in its discretion may require that a witness before testifying in the form of an opinion be first examined concerning the matter upon which his opinion is based.

10. See also additional scenarios on speculation at pgs. 780-781 (professional football team claims lost profits because a certain defensive lineman did not play for it and it lost the Super Bowl); (first time author sues for breach of a contract to publish a novel, and expert testifies it will become a national bestseller, win the Pulitzer prize and spawn a megahit movie).

Law Library News

Spotlight on the Collection: Civil Litigation Series Compiled by Mary Pinard Johnson, Public Services Librarian, Sacramento County Public Law Library

T

he Rutter Group has long been a trusted publisher of practice guides. Titles such as Weil and Brown’s California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial and Hogoboom’s California Practice Guide: Family Law are considered standards. These practice guides are written in an easy-to-use, outline format, making them a favorite with our patrons. While these books are very detailed and heavily annotated, they tend to be light on forms and the practical information often gets lost in extremely detailed discussions of substantive law.

The Rutter Group has begun publishing a second set of practice guides, their “Civil Litigation Series.” Guides in this series are decidedly more practiceoriented, with the focus on procedural information, practice tips, and lots of forms. The Sacramento County Public Law Library’s collection includes all the titles in Rutter’s Civil Litigation Series.

These are all available electronically from the Law Library’s public computers using Westlaw Next.

Bus. & Prof. C. §17200 Practice, by William L. Stern (KFC 553 .A6 B87) This is a practical resource for plain-

609 9th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 916-874-6011 www.saclaw.org www.facebook/saclawlib www.twitter/saclawlibrarian

NEW ACQUISITIONS Estate Litigation (Sound Recording) California CEB KFC210.A75 E88 2012 Drafting & Negotiating Office Leases in an Ever-Changing Market (Sound Recording) California CEB KFC147.C6 D73 2013

12

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

tiffs and defendants in California unfair competition and false advertising cases.

This guide describes the litigants’ rights and remedies, and explains the applicable procedures.

California Discovery Citations, by David N. Finley and Monique C. M. Leahy (KFC 1020 .F56) This one-volume desk reference details the laws and procedural requirements for implementing a comprehensive discovery plan. This title provides easy access to the legal citations necessary to evaluate the propriety of your proposed discovery requests, and to determine the validity of your opponent’s discovery questions and procedures. It also provides detailed checklists and authorities for making and opposing discovery objections and motions.

California Law and Motion Authorities for Civil Cases, by Douglas R. Parker, David N. Finley and Lori L. Maze (KFC 1012 .P37) This two-volume guide provides quick access to the rules, statutes, and selected recent cases for common California civil motion issues. Discussions are organized by motion type, then by

Greenbook: Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction BNI Building News KFC224.3 G74 2012 Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act and Related Laws State of California, Dept. of Developmental Services KFC111.H35 L36 2013 Myron Moskovitz on Winning Appeals and Writs (Sound Recording) California CEB KFC1075.A75 M67 2013 Choosing a Medigap Policy: A Guide to Health Insurance for People with Medicare Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, National Assoc. of Insurance Commissioners KFC591 .C56 2012

subtopics such as statutory authority, grounds, procedural requirements, and leading cases. Unlike many other practice guides, this title includes the relevant portions of the cases and rules rather than just citations for ease of use.

California Law and Motion Model Forms, by Douglas R. Parker, David N. Finley and Lori L. Maze (KFC 1012 .A65 P37) Intended to provide the companion forms for California Law and Motion Authorities for Civil Cases, this forms-set provides sample language and statutory and case citations for more than 400 civil motions. Sample motions include the required notices, memoranda of points and authorities, declarations, orders, and other related forms. A companion CDROM makes it easy to quickly draft your own motions using these samples.

California Motions in Limine, by David N. Finley (KFC 1012 .F56) This one-volume text provides practical information for making and opposing common in limine motions. For each type of motion, the author provides suggested motion text and supporting and opposing authorities. A CD-ROM accompanies this loose-leaf, which provides modifiable electronic versions of the sample motions found in the text.

California Summary Judgment and Related Termination Motions, by Donna Bader and David N. Finley (KFC 1052 .B33) Included in this guide are citations to support and oppose civil motions such as summary judgment, dismissal, demurrer, and motions to strike. Each chapter also provides sample supporting and opposing motions. A CD-ROM accompanies this loose-leaf, which provides modifiable electronic versions of the sample motions found in the text.

Continued on page 23

SurfingFrom from River City: Surfing Surfing From City:

EnforcementSoftware of Judgment Use to Use Screencasting Screencasting Software to Guides from the Law Library Create Online Tutorials Create Online Tutorials Compiled by Mary Pinard Johnson, Public Services Librarian, Sacramento County Public Law Library Compiled Compiledby byRobyn RobynM. M.Moltzen, Moltzen,Public PublicServices ServicesLibrarian, Librarian,Sacramento SacramentoCounty CountyPublic PublicLaw LawLibrary Library The Sacramento County Public Law Library and fill out the memorandum of costs to you may be able to take money from the Civil Self-Help recently introduced a free add it to the total. account. An account held jointly by the Screencasting allows users totoselect any Jing installation.

The free version Screencasting usersYour select any Jing installation.

Theand freehis version hasaa or class called “Howallows to Enforce Judgment judgment debtor or herhas spouse Discover the Debtor’s Assets window ororregion ofof”the maximum record time ofof15 www.techsmith.com/jing.html window region thecomputer computer maximum record timesolely 15minutes, minutes, www.techsmith.com/jing.html in Sacramento County.

The first two classanother person, or held by the judg(Debtor’s Examination) screen and capture but free YouTube Jing screen and recordand and capture everybutincludes includes freehosting, hosting, YouTube Jingisisaafree freeservice servicethat thatallows allowsusers users es, offered inrecord February and March,everyfilled up ment debtor’s spouse, may also be levied. http://www.saclaw.org/pages/debtorthing ininthat publishing capability, MP4, and totocreate thingthat thathappens happens thatarea. area.Often Often publishing capability, MP4,AVI, AVI, and createimages imagesand andvideos videosofofwhat whatisis within hours of their announcement.

The This guide explains the process for levying exam.aspx these screencasts include narration FLV $15.00 go seen these screencasts include narration that FLVmovie. movie. For For $15.00aayear, year,opposing gopro pro a seenon onthe thecomputer computerscreen, screen,and and class was offered again in April when itthat was bank accounts, limitations, and Athen debtor’s examination, also known as an coincides what users on and unlimited coincideswith with what usersare are seeing on andget get unlimitedrecord recordtime timeand and thenshare sharethem themwith withothers othersinstantly instantly videotaped.

It will be placed on seeing our webclaim of exemption. order of examination, is often a preliminary the screen. are frequently other on theshortly screen.

Screencasts are frequently otheroptions. options. onTwitter Twitterand andFacebook.

Facebook.When Whenusing using site soScreencasts that it can be viewed for free. step before initiating collection efforts. This Renew Your Judgment used totocreate tutorials.

For Jing The class teaches judgment creditors the used createonline online tutorials.

Foran an Jingtotocreate createscreencasts, screencasts,users userscan can examination is five a formal courtofproceeding in http://www.saclaw.org/pages/renewexample ofofan record up to Screenr different procedures availablescreencast, under Caliexample aninstructional instructional screencast, record to fiveminutes minutes ofonscreen onscreen Screenr which theup judgment creditor may question judgment.aspx check out the Sacramento County Public video. www.screenr.com fornia forthe collecting judgments, checklaw out Sacramento Countyfrom Public thevideo. www.screenr.com debtor to obtain information about the Money judgments automatically expire Law online Screenr isisaafree, web-based tool debtors’ examinations to wageHow garnishLawLibrary’s Library’s onlinetutorial tutorial Howtoto Screenr free, web-based toolthat that location and value of the judgment debtafter 10 years.

To prevent this from hapRenew Library Online lets users create screencasts without Screencasting Tips and Tricks ments.

The classBooks isBooks aimed at theatgeneral Renew Library Online at lets users create screencasts without Screencasting Tips and Tricks or’s assets, including paychecks and other pening, the judgment creditor can renew http://www.saclaw.org/uploads/media/r installing any software on their comhttp://www.articulate.com/rapidpublic as well as legal professionals, but http://www.saclaw.org/uploads/media/r installing anyfor software http://www.articulate.com/rapidsources of income, bank accounts, stocks the judgment anotheron 10 their years,comallowenewal-screencast.htm puters.

Users just click the record butelearning/how-to-create-screencastsdoes not offer MCLE credit.. . enewal-screencast.htm puters.

Users just click the record butelearning/how-to-create-screencastsand other investments, and personal and ing the judgment creditor to continue ton screen activity is recorded you-can-be-proud-of/ To accompany the class, the Law Library tonand andall all screen activity recorded you-can-be-proud-of/ real property. This procedure may also be collection efforts.

This guide is demonstrates Many options for screencasts has developed new “step-by-step” along from aamicroBefore beginning your screencast you Many optionsseveral forrecording recording screencasts along withnarration narration from microBefore beginning your screencast you used to question a third party who may be how towith complete, file, and serve the reguides on common procedures.

Along with inwill are ininaavariety ranges. phone.

Users can share screencasts on want to read this great article areavailable available varietyofofprice price ranges. phone.

Users can share screencasts on will want to read this great article possession of the judgment debtor’s asnewal forms. our other these areproducts available free Here are aafew Twitter, that practical tips Here areguides, fewdifferent different productsto to to Twitter,YouTube YouTubeororanywhere anywhereelse elseon on that includes practical tipsand andadvice advice sets, orincludes owe debts to the judgment debtor.

After Your Judgment is Paid (Satisfaction all on our website. The new guides include: This check out. the for creating aagreat screencast.

Tips check out. theweb. web.However, However,there thereisisaamaximum maximum forguide creating great screencast.

Tips explains how to schedule and of Judgment) record include recordtime timeofof55minutes. minutes. includeausing usingaagood good microphone, Enforcement of Judgments conduct debtor’s exammicrophone, in Sacramento. http://www.saclaw.org/pages/satis-judgCamtasia recording CamtasiaStudio Studio recordingininaacomfortable comfortablespace, space,and and http://www.saclaw.org/pages/enforceCollect Yourany Judgment fromfrom the Debtor’s ment.aspx http://www.techsmith.com/camtasia.html removing distractions the Snagit http://www.techsmith.com/camtasia.html removing any distractions from the Snagit judgment.aspx Paycheck (Wage Garnishment) Once a judgment is paid, either in full or in Users can record the computer screen to recording environment. http://www.techsmith.com/snagit.html After obtaining a judgment, the judgment Users can record the computer screen to recording environment. http://www.techsmith.com/snagit.html http://www.saclaw.org/pages/wage-garan amount theusers judgment creditor agrees to capture slides, software Snagit allows create step-bycreditor’s next step is to attempt to collect capturePowerPoint PowerPoint slides, software Snagitas allows userstotothe create step-bynishment.aspx accept full payment, judgment credidemos, and pages.

Once step video tutorials docuScreencast-O-Matic what is owed.

The does notrecorded, collect demos, andweb webcourt pages.

Once recorded, step video tutorialsor orhow-to how-to docuScreencast-O-Matic If the judgment debtor is employed, you tor must immediately file an Acknowledgeusers and ments that for interwww.screencast-o-matic.com judgments; the screen prevailing party is responuserscan canedit edit screenrecordings recordings and ments thatcan canbe beused used forboth both interwww.screencast-o-matic.com may be able to collect a portion of his or ment of Satisfaction of Judgment (form camera video by cutting, splicing, and nal and external training.

Price is Screencast-O-Matic is a free, websible for all collection efforts.

However, camera video by cutting, splicing, and nal and external training.

Price is Screencast-O-Matic is a free, webher wages until your judgment is paid in EJ-100) with the court. This form serves as combining with the $49.95 and the software can be based tool allows for one-click the court canclips issue a variety or ordersvideo and combining clips with thepowerful powerful video full. thepayment software bedowndownbased toolthat that allows one-click This guide explains thefor process for a $49.95 receipt and for full of can the judgment editor.

Pricing loaded for both Windows and Mac. screen capture recording on Windows other documents thatat may be used to coleditor.

Pricingstarts starts at$299.00. $299.00. loaded for both Windows and Mac. screen capture recording on Windows wage garnishment as well as some of its and formally closes the case with the court. ororMac without software lect your judgment from the debtor. This Maccomputers computers without software limitations, and discusses opposing a claim If the acknowledgement is not filed within guide is an overview of different proceof exemption.

15 days, the judgment debtor may sue the dures available.

Collect Your Judgment from the Debtor’s judgment creditor for any actual damages, Abstract of Judgment attorney’senvironmental fees and statutory damages. impacts may result from yield-increase entire potential benefits and impacts may result from yield-increase Bank Account entire state. state. This This panel panel explores explores the the plus potential environmental benefits and (Bank Levy) http://www.saclaw.org/pages/abstract-ofThis guide demonstrates how to complete, practices and genetically modified opportunities for renewable energy impacts, and summarizes the various http://www.saclaw.org/pages/bank-levy.aspx practices and genetically modified opportunities for renewable energy impacts, and summarizes the various judgment.aspx notarize, serve, and file the form.

Ifprojects the judgment debtor has discusses adiscusses bank account, crops?

This program sets out the projects on lands, their crops?

This outhow how ontribal tribal lands, their applicable applicablelaws lawsand andregulations. regulations.

Preparing anprogram Abstract ofsets Judgment, Civilthe law currently regulates food and dislaw regulates foodis and disandcurrently Small Claims (form EJ-001) the first cusses law policy step ahow judgment must take inmay order cusses howfood foodcreditor lawand and policy may need totochange challenges to place a lien ontoto a meet judgment real need change meetthe thedebtor’s challenges or to decades. collect a judgment debtor’s ofofproperty the thecoming coming decades. potential recovery in a pending lawsuit.

This guide includes samples and instrucEnergy Development on Energy Development on tions on how to do that.

Tribal Tribal Lands Lands

Adding Costs and Interest to a Judgment Federally-recognized Native Federally-recognized Native (Memorandum of Costs) American communities in California American communities in California http://www.saclaw.org/pages/memo-costs. increasingly are increasingly areexploring exploringthe thebenefits benefits aspx ofofThe modern renewable energy developamount recoverable by a judgment modern renewable energy developcreditor totalTribal amount of the ment on tribal lands. ment onincludes tribal the lands.

Tribal energy energy judgment entered by the court, plus any projects projectscan canpotentially potentiallyincrease increaseselfselfcosts incurred aftereconomic judgment and accrued sufficiency, foster developsufficiency, foster economic interest on the total amount.

Thisdevelopguide ment, provide employment, and conment, provide and conexplains how to employment, calculate the new amount

tribute tributetotoaalow-carbon low-carbonfuture futurefor forthe the

M ay/A /J/A une acramento awyer MMARCH PRIL 2013 AWYER 13 ARCH PRIL2013 2013 SSACRAMENTO ACRAMENTOLL AWYER 13 13

Events

9th Annual LSNC Valentine Run Draws Huge Crowd

M

ore than 1,300 people joined Legal Services of Northern California (LSNC) on February 9th to celebrate the ten year anniversary of the Valentine Run! The day dawned cold and foggy, but by show time the sun was shining and attendees were enjoying some live music from Hannah Kile while checking out the new online registration system provided by Chronotrack. The festive expo area, set up in the Macy’s parking lot at Country Club Plaza Mall, featured vendors such as Whole Foods and Icing on the Cupcake, who brought goodies galore to share. Liberty Mutual supplied the bananas and Boutin Jones contributed all the water for the participants. Small Planet Foods donated 1,500 bags of delicious chips. As always, Jelly Belly candy was a favorite among the young and the young-at-heart alike.

Title sponsors Downey Brand and Seyfarth Shaw anchored the stage area, while Fleet Feet and Scott Shoes showed off the latest in fitness footwear nearby. Making the occasion even more special was the free massage area and the child care area, featuring activities supplied by the Sacramento Children’s Museum. Fundraisertags.com was out at the event with samples of its i.d. tags for runners. There’s still time to order a personalized tag with your finish time or contact info, and a portion of the purchase price will be donated directly to Legal Services Judge Ron Robie & Mrs. Robie of Northern California.

Gary Smith, John Davis - LSNC

14

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

By Lisa Walters, Valentine Run Assistant

Providing entertainment and inspiration for the crowd were Pooh the Clown, Scooter the Spare the Air mascot, Mort the Sport, and Dinger, the Sacramento Rivercats mascot. These lovable characters put a smile on everyone’s faces.

Also smiling big were the TopFinishers of the day: Adam Kovacs came in first place overall, finishing the race in just 19:45 – an average of less than five minutes per mile. Kirsten Schneider was the fastest female with a finishing time of 24:40. In the newest event – The Fastest Attorney Race – Ollie Ehlinger of LSNC won the male division while Stephanie Finelli won the female division!

The 10th Annual Valentine Run awards ceremony was like no other! Miss Central Valley Pre-Teen Hannah Westwood assisted Capital Road Race Management’s Rich Hanna, Downey Brand partner and LSNC Board Member Jeff Galvin, and Seyfarth Shaw’s Kristina Launey in presenting the numerous awards to the top finishers and best-dressed prize winners.

The “Top Dog” in the best-dressed canine competition was Willow, who kept her human companion Kristin Mistron close by her side as she graciously accepted her award.

Also winning a best- dressed individual award was Maria Gonzales, who completed the race in full Valentine’s Day regalia, including a tutu and pink tiara.

After the race, top fundraisers received prize packages that included gift cards from Scott Shoes, Fleet Feet, Pyramid Ale, Hoshall’s Hair Salon, Rubio’s, Total Wine, Panera Bread, Esquire IMAX, the Sacramento Children’s Museum, the Folsom Zoo, the Sacramento Kings, the Cheesecake Factory, and Capital Stage.

Local law firms, who supported the ‘Race for Justice’ with record-level sponsorships, included: DLA Piper, Orrick, Jay

James and Amanda Alliston Murphy Campbell

Awards Presenters Kristina Launey - Seyfarth Shaw. Hannah Westwood. Jeff Galvin Downey Brand

Allen Eisen Law Corporation, Boutin Jones, Wilke Fleury Hoffelt Gould & Birney, Radoslovich Krogh, Murphy Campbell Guthrie & Alliston, Stoel Rives, Poswall White & Cutler, Remy Moose & Manley, Greenberg Traurig, Rothschild Wishek & Sands, Matheny Sears Linkert & Jaime, Segal & Kirby, Wilcoxen Callaham, Allaye Chan Law Group, Low McKinley Balleria & Salenko, Olson Hagel & Fishburn, Cook Brown, Murphy Austin Adams Schoenfeld, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, and the Thomas Law Group. Other sponsors were Bangar Construction, Lincoln Law School, SMUD, Veritext, Ace Attorney Services, JAMS, First Citizens Bank, Sacramento County Bar Association Administrative Law Section, the Sacramento Regional Community Foundation’s Eaton Kenyon Fund, Mark Merin, and Lexis Nexis.

LSNC wishes to extend a huge thank you to all of its participants, vendors, sponsors, volunteers, pledge earners and pledge makers, and to the Sacramento County Bar for their help in promoting the event.

Mark your calendars for the 11th Annual Valentine Run ‘Race for Justice’ on February 8, 2014!

Lisa Walters works for Legal Services of Northern California as the Development Assistant.

May/A/JPRIL une 2013 2013 SSACRAMENTO acramentoLL awyer MARCH AWYER

15

Cover Story

Robert A. Buccola:

T

CAL-ABOTA Trial Lawyer of the Year

he plaintiff was a 9-year old girl who suffered horrific injuries when the rear wheels of a tractor trailer backed over her. The wheels, each weighing up to 4,000 pounds, crushed her pelvis and degloved her legs, vagina and buttocks.

Degloving is where the body’s tissue is literally stripped away from the bone, much like a glove being stripped away from the hand.

As a result, the plaintiff, who was lucky to have survived, was grossly disfigured and would never bear children. Adding to the tragedy was the fact that the driver of the vehicle was the girl’s own father.

During trial, plaintiff’s attorney, noted Sacramento personal injury lawyer Robert A. Buccola, called to the stand one of the plaintiff’s treating physicians, a plastic and reconstructive surgeon who had performed multiple operations on the young girl.

“He was a real hard ass,” the trial judge, Sacramento County Superior Court Judge David W. Abbott, said of the doctor. “Most doctors don’t want to be bothered with the legal process and surgeons can be almost disinterested and detached in court.

This was the kind of guy who didn’t share anything with anybody.

“But somehow Bob was able to get through to this guy,” Judge Abbott said. “The first question he asked the doctor was, ‘You don’t like lawyers, do you?’ to which the doctor replied yes, that he tried to spend as little time with them as possible. But you

16

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

By Jack C. Laufenberg and Rosemary Roberts

Robert A. Buccola

could tell Bob had developed a rapport with this doctor so that he was not just a witness, but almost part of the team advocating for the plaintiff. The doctor had finally met a lawyer he respected and was more than willing to assist.

“The surgeon not only testified about what he saw, what he did and what the outcome was,” Judge Abbot said, “but that he had a daughter of his own about the same age. About two or three times during the examination, the doctor broke down and got emotional.

Bob had found a way to impart to him the value of giving personal testimony.

It was one of the most remarkable things I’ve ever seen.”

At the end of trial, the jury returned a record Sacramento County plaintiff’s personal injury damage award of $24.3 million.

Buccola, 56, has long been recognized as one of the best civil trial attorneys in the state, if not the country.

However, last year it was made official when the California Chapter of the

Cover Story American Board of Trial Advocates (CAL-ABOTA), named him its 2012 California Trial Lawyer of the Year.

It is only the third time in the history or the award, which was created in 1962 to recognize excellence in the field of trial work, that it has gone to a Sacramento attorney. The first Sacramento recipient was the late Mort Friedman in 1988 and the second was Buccola’s law partner, Roger Dreyer, in 2004. It is the first time ever it has gone to a second lawyer in the same firm.

ABOTA, a merit-based association of civil defense and plaintiff attorneys, is a national organization dedicated to the preservation of the jury trial system and the promoting the standards of honor, integrity, civility, courtesy, and ethics in the practice of law. The award is given annually to the CAL-ABOTA member who best exemplifies those principals and who has demonstrated outstanding achievement in the art of trial advocacy. Only about 1,500 of the 176,000 active members of the California State Bar are members of CAL-ABOTA, admission to which is by member vote only.

“Bob Buccola is one of the finest attorneys in California, if not the country,” said Douglas M. DeGrave, president of CAL-ABOTA. “His reputation as an excellent advocate has been built on a solid record of outstanding jury verdicts over a distinguished career. CAL-ABOTA is honored to have such outstanding trial lawyers as Bob Buccola among its members.”

“I’m honored and humbled to have been voted CAL-ABOTA’s…Trial Lawyer of the Year,” Buccola said, “and am grateful to my local chapter members for all their kind support.

It’s not possible to work with a more talented and devoted group of legal professionals from all staffing levels, [including] every lawyer and partner

in our office. Many thanks.”

Buccola received the award at the annual CAL-ABOTA Hawaii Conference in November, which was held on the Big Island at the Mauna Kea Beach Hotel. This was not the first time Buccola has been recognized for his exceptional trial skills. In 1995, he became the youngest member ever to gain admission into ABOTA’s Sacramento chapter. In 1998, he was named Trial Lawyer of the Year by the Sacramento chapter of Consumer Attorneys. He received a similar Trial Lawyer of the Year award from the ABOTA Sacramento chapter in 2001, and in 2005 he was honored as a top-10 litigator and finalist in the statewide Consumer Attorney of the Year Award at its annual convention in Los Angeles.

In October, Buccola was admitted into the prestigious Inner Circle of Advocates, an-invitation-only group of 100 of the best plaintiff’s lawyers in the country. Headquartered in Wyoming, it was founded in 1972 by Tucson, Arizona, attorney Richard Grand to exchange information and promote the highest standards of courtroom competence. The vetting process for admission typically takes two to four years and even Buccola admitted the process could be somewhat daunting, given the fact that they literally talk to every judge and opposing counsel you’ve ever appeared before or had a case with.

“I know several members [of that organization],” said Brooks Cutter, a class-action litigation specialist in Sacramento, “and I can tell you selection in that organization is not simply a matter of a few big verdicts or settlements. It’s truly based upon a career of accomplishment and a record of professionalism and civility and is limited to a tiny number of lawyers from the entire country.”

A native of Sacramento, Buccola

grew up in Carmichael and attended Rio Americano High School.

A two-year “pre-engineering” major before World War II broke out, his father was the director of logistics at McClellan Air Force Base while his mother worked for the Carmichael Chamber of Commerce. His older sister, Gaylene, lives in Nevada and has a teaching credential, but has never taught.

Although his father wanted him to become an orthodontist, Buccola discovered his calling early in life.

Selected as a student lawyer on his 8th-grade Miranda mock trial team, Buccola was bitten by the trial bug early. So successful was their performance that Buccola’s team was chosen to compete in front of the entire 8th grade Arden Middle School class in the school auditorium.

“I thought it was fascinating and loved everything about it,” Buccola said. “I was a naïve little 8th grader and to think you could be on the side of something right – to have a principle you could attach yourself to and persuade others with was just incredible to me.”

In 1978, Buccola graduated from the University of California, Berkeley, with a degree in political science.

After taking a year off to paint houses in San Diego and “make some money,” he chose to attend Pacific McGeorge over Hastings School of Law because he wanted to practice law in Sacramento and knew he would have to work during law school – the cost of living in San Francisco being a tad higher than in Sacramento.

A night student at McGeorge, Buccola worked as a substitute teacher during the week, earning $46 a day, and did plywood siding pre-staining work on weekends the first two years in law school until he got a job clerking for the insurance defense firm of Donahue, Callaham & Hill. Although May/June 2013 Sacramento Lawyer

17

Cover Story he knew he always wanted to be a plaintiff’s attorney, he treasured the experience -- especially when they let him stay after hours and observe their trial preparation work.

In 1983, Buccola graduated from McGeorge and went to work for the Donahue firm, where he got a wealth of experience, including his first jury trial – an auto accident case which he said “you really couldn’t lose.”

Nonetheless, he stayed up all night working on his closing argument and won the case against a much younger Parker White, no less.

In 1985, he left the Donahue firm and went to work for Wade Thompson at the personal injury firm of Thompson & Dreyer. Thompson was Mort Friedman’s old law partner and one of the most unique individuals Buccola said he ever met.

“He had a brilliant mind, a photographic memory and always thought outside the box,” Buccola said. “He was street smart and you were never quite sure if he was more devil or angel. But his heart was in the right place.”

Joe Babich had also recently joined the firm and he, Buccola and Dreyer quickly formed an indelible friendship. “They were my mentors in every way,” Buccola said.

In 1987, the three friends formed their own law firm, which started out with a staff of five, including a single law clerk which they all shared. The idea at the time, Buccola said, was to handle all types of tort cases, large and small, and earn the respect of their opponents. “It’s always been our commitment, “Buccola said, “that big, little, or in between, you have to be ready to try cases when facing offers that are below the value range.”

After 26 years, the firm – now known as Dreyer Babich Buccola Wood Campora, LLP -- has grown to three offices with 26 attorneys and more than 100 employees. It now

18

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

Robert Buccola with Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye at the CAL-ABOTA Hawaii Conference, where Buccola received his Trial Lawyer of the Year award.

reportedly is the largest exclusively personal injury firm in the state.

Buccola himself has recovered more than a quarter of a billion dollars for his clients over the last 26 years.

While the amount of recovery is still important, Buccola said the firm has become more active in the last 10 years in what he calls “conditioned settlements.” A conditioned settlement, he said, is one in which the plaintiff, in addition to receiving monetary compensation, gains the legal right to enforce certain safety procedures that the defendant must implement as part of the settlement.

A case in point, he said, was the 2010 PG&E/San Bruno gas line explosion that killed eight people and destroyed dozens of homes.

Although a number of safety changes arose from the catastrophe, one of the things they were able to secure in the personal injury settlement, Buccola said, was a requirement, enforceable by the plaintiff, that PG&E engage in a “fracture analysis plan” that would tell PG&E when a pipeline should be tested. Although PG&E tested its pipelines prior to the incident, there

were no means for determining when any one pipeline should be tested, with some going as much as 50 years between tests. The fracture analysis plan went far beyond PG&E’s planned safety improvements, Buccola said, and greatly augmented what they submitted to the Public Utilities Commission.

“Frankly, the most impressive results that we’ve been able to obtain… have been by means of a conditioned settlement,” Buccola said. In those instances, “we’ve been able to secure high value settlements for our clients while also ensuring that necessary safety practices were implemented to serve a higher public interest.”

Buccola, who still maintains the friendships of his youth, describes himself as a “blue-collar” kind of guy who enjoys barbequing, camping and fishing. An avid Giant’s fan, he likes to attend games with his son Nick, a freshman at the University of Santa Clara, who attends on a full-ride scholarship.

“I like to tell people he’s the only Buccola who never cost me any money,” Buccola said jokingly.

Cover Story Buccola is a contributing author and lecturer to the Continuing Education of the Bar and teaches tort law and trial practice for a number of legal education organizations, including Consumer Attorneys of California, the National Business Institute, and ABOTA. He is a “special event” fund developer for CASA, a volunteer group which provides court-appointed special advocates for children in foster care proceedings, and a fund developer for the Morals Value Program of Sacramento, a nonprofit organization dedicated to helping poor and underprivileged children.

Buccola likes to credit his partners and staff for much of his success, especially partner Steve Campora, who he says came up with the safety procedure incorporated into the PG&E pipeline settlement agreement.

“If there’s a smarter attorney out there than Steve,” Buccola said, “I haven’t met him yet.”

A little hard work, however, doesn’t hurt either. Buccola, who has a reputation for knowing his cases cold, said he learned early on that trial preparation was a 12 to 16-hour a day process and likens his trial presentations to that of a theater production.

He says juries are typically more forgiving of defendants who make mistakes, while expecting more from plaintiffs suing for money damages.

When a plaintiff exaggerates his or her damages, or fails to pick up the shattered pieces of their lives to the best of their ability, he said, juries can be “horrifically” penalizing. As a result, Buccola says a plaintiff’s attorney must keep his or her credibility at all times. If there are weaknesses in the case, he said, they have to be acknowledged to the jury.

Still, juries have little patience with defendants who engage in cover ups, refuse to accept responsibility

when due, or who overreach and make statements that are less than the full and accurate truth, he said.

“There are moments in a trial,” Buccola said, “when you can feel the jury’s momentum shift from prodefense, to neutral, to where you can sense they are actually ‘rooting’ for the plaintiff in pursuit of justice. It’s a wonderful feeling.”

Buccola marvels at the high cost of litigation today and is proud of the access his firm provides individuals who might otherwise be up against wellfinanced multi-national corporations or large insurance companies. When he first started out in practice, $100,000 in expert fees and other costs seemed like an exorbitant sum. Today, he said, they can spend up to $500,000 or more. Buccola handles a variety of tort actions, including construction site and premises liability cases, vehicle and trucking accidents, product liability, roadway design defects, and consumer class action cases.

With so much at stake, you might think Buccola would be the stereotypical street fighter, giving no quarter and asking none. But his style is exactly the opposite.

“Robert Buccola is one of the best trial lawyers I’ve ever had the pleasure of observing in my 21 years on the bench,” Marin County Superior Court Judge Lynn Taylor said. “He treated all the witnesses respectfully, including those he rigorously cross-examined, made an amazing closing argument without a single note, and was always courteous to the defense and the court.

He was what every judge hopes a trial lawyer who appears before her to be.”

“It’s always been my practice to be cordial and accommodating to opposing counsel, giving them the breaks they deserve – always,” Buccola said. “My style is to be friendly and cooperative, although I’ve found as I get older I have less tolerance for nonsense. I’m never the first to be

Robert Buccola and his son Nick attending a Giant’s game

difficult, but by the same token I don’t suffer in silence while an opponent acts unreasonably. I don’t handle nonsense very well.”

And then, of course, there’s the magic touch with jurors.

“As trial lawyers, we constantly worry about how we treat witnesses in case we offend the jury,” Cutter said. “But Bob has the unique ability to understand when he has the jury’s permission to go after somebody.

Then he does it in a way that’s fair and not personal.

“Bob is a force of nature – a real powerhouse -- when he walks into the courtroom,” Cutter said. “He controls the courtroom and you can see it on the jurors’ faces. They just seem to sit up straighter when he talks. Bob knows the case cold, inside and out, and has a way of engaging the jury.

He is a person who posses the unique combination of confidence and a funny, humble sense of humor. He has a way of getting the jury to trust him so when they bond and form a group they see him as a leader.”

Jack C. Laufenberg is a solo practitioner.

Rosemary Roberts is president of Girl on Point, Inc., a creative services firm.

May/June 2013 Sacramento Lawyer

19

urt of Laurie court espite th the ing to

AB

State rs are

AD

Am

Be

Be

Bu

Convenient Online Gallery with Password Protection

C

Photos Beautifully Retouched

Cr

On Selected Poseblemishes, wrinkles etc.

C

Digital delivery, professional prints or archived onto disk.

D

Online Portfolio: www.charrcrail.com www.charrcrail.me/charrcrail.me/Head_Shots.htm

Jo

Em

Ja

Ja

Photos for reproduction sized to exact specifications. (social media, publications, business cards, prints)

Ke

M

M

N

Ra

SC

SC

Sa

Se

28

SACRAMENTO LAWYER MARCHM /AARCH PRIL 2013 /APRIL 2013 SACRAMENTO LAWYER

27

Le

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION OF BUSINESS DISPUTES

Sc

U

W

Ken Malovos Mediator Arbitrator Referee 3620 American River Dr. Suite 260 Sacramento, CA 95864

La Th Ar ren fir

(916) 974-8600 Business, Commercial, Construction Claims and Defects, Employment, Insurance, Intellectual Property, Malpractice,

In Sa Ma or

Probate, Product Liability and Real Estate Disputes.

Calendar and further information online at: www.malovoslaw.com

20

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

34

SACRAMENTO LAWYER MARCH/APRIL 2013

SC Co ful em

May/June 2013 Sacramento Lawyer

21

Events

Joe Ramsey Honored at SCBA’s Annual Meeting

By Stacy Moak

Annual Meeting’s keynote speaker, Chief Justice of California Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye

T

he Sacramento County Bar Association’s (SCBA) Annual Meeting was held in December at the Sheraton Grand Hotel in downtown Sacramento. Numerous members and distinguished guests made this year’s meeting a great success. Awards were presented, new board members were sworn in and a special tribute was presented to the Distinguished Attorney of the Year.

Incumbent SCBA President June Coleman began the meeting by reviewing events and highlights from the past year. Coleman followed by awarding certificates to those law firms with 100 percent SCBA membership.

There was an impressive total of 27 offices that fully support the SCBA with firm-wide membership.

Vicki Jacobs, managing attorney for Voluntary Legal Services Program (VLSP) presented the 2012 June Black pro bono awards to Katie DeWitt, Jack Killeen, and Analea Patterson. Together, all three honorees contributed a total of over 1000 pro bono hours assisting indigent clients in obtaining probate guardianship of minor children.

Coleman presented the 2012 President’s Award to six SCBA members for their extraordinary efforts and time spent interviewing and evaluating

22

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

candidates for the new SCBA executive director position.

The late Joe Ramsey was also honored at the luncheon as the SCBA’s Distinguished Attorney of the Year.

This award is presented by the SCBA each year to the lawyer who “most exemplifies the best qualities of the legal profession and who, through the practice of law, has made Sacramento a better place to live and work.” Joe Ramsay was all these things and more.

Perhaps best known as a gifted lawyer and mediator, he was also a mentor and solid role model for new attorneys. Former Presiding Justice of the 3rd District Appellate Court Arthur G. Scotland, (Ret.), began the tribute by highlighting Ramsey’s resolve to continue working and living actively as his health declined. Justice Scotland graciously shared some private moments he recently spent with Ramsey and expressed his profound respect for Ramsey’s professional and personal character.

(For a detailed article about the exceptional character and professional life of Joe Ramsey by Justice Scotland, please see this magazine’s November/December 2012 edition).

Continuing the tribute, attorney Dominique Pollara spoke of Ramsey as the ever-present gentleman who treated everyone with exceptional

care. She was followed by attorney Roger Dreyer, whose emotional and personal remarks captured the essence of the honoree. Two of Ramsey’s children, Samantha and Ben, accepted the award on their father’s behalf and thanked the Sacramento legal community for the love and support of their dad. Also in attendance as the SCBA’s most esteemed invitees were Ramsey’s wife, Diane, and several of his family members and friends.

Coleman introduced Chief Justice of California Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye, who was the Annual Meeting’s guest speaker.

Justice Cantil-Sakauye spoke highly of Ramsey’s integrity and reputation as a role model for all attorneys in Sacramento county, leaving an impression on every attendee with her classic captivating style. After addressing the crowd, Justice Cantil-Sakauye swore in incoming SCBA President Bruce M. Timm and other members of the SCBA Board of Directors.

The annual meeting closed with an acceptance speech by Timm, who expressed his gratitude and hopes for the SCBA’s upcoming year. The new president shared his goals for 2013, which include the formation of a court funding task force and a mentorship program.

He also discussed his

Section & Affiliate News intent board to empower the of SCBA Board of advisory comprised an esteemed Directors to ensure that the authority group of lawyers, judges and deans fromto association resides with UCoperate Davis the School of Law and not Pacific any one person but two with McGeorge School orofcommittee, Law. The the board. boards are composed of the following The SCBA wishes to thank all of individuals: the sponsors, distinguished guests, and colleagues for making this year’s annual Steve Boutin meeting a great success.

Boutin Jones Rajiv Dharnidharka Law DLALibrary Piper News Continued from page 12 Stacy Don Elder Litigation,

by Russell S. Orrick,Abuse Herrington & Sutcliffe Balisok (KFC 111 .A34 B35) Scott Gassaway ThisFleury, guide provides details and practice Wilke, Hoffelt, Gould & Birney tips civil actions related to the physical Joe for Genshlea and financial the neglect of the Joe Genshlea abuse Law &and Mediation elderly.

This book provides excellent sample Hon. Judy Holzer Hersher forms, pleadings, and other documents Sacramento County Superior Court used whenJensen litigating elder abuse claims.

Martin

Stephanie Hoit Lee and David N. enced practitioners.

Finley (KFC 1012 .O6 Board members are P37) excited about to accompany the Intended many opportunities andCalifornia benefits Law and Motion Authorities for the section will bring to Civil the Cases and California Law and Motion Sacramento legal community and ModelcivilForms, thiswillbook provides hope litigators become charauthoritative legal arguments, citing ter members and participate in the secstatutes, case law, and legislative tion’s inaugural year. For membership and public policy considerations to

support opposition memorandums. and section information, interested The topics and organization of this practitioners can contact Dan Stouder book mirror those of California Law at dstouder@boutinjones.com. and Motion Authorities for Civil Cases and California Law and Motion Model Steve Boutin and Dan Stouder are shareForms.

A CD-ROM accompanies this holders at Boutin Jones Inc. and practice loose-leaf, which provides modifiable inelectronic the areas ofversions business of andthe real sample estate litigation. oppositions found in the text.

www.ADRSERVICES.org

Federal Porter ScottMotions in Limine, by Stephanie HoitR.Lee and David N. Finley Dean Kevin Johnson (KF 8878 .F43) UC Davis School of Law This desk book provides citations to Erin McDonough federal and statutes for supporting Hansoncases Bridgett and opposing The book is Hon. Kimberly briefs.

J. Mueller organized by evidence type and includes United States District Court, Eastern suggested motion text, supporting District and Deanopposing Francis authorities, J. Mootz IIIand sample motions.

A CD-ROM McGeorge School of Law accompanies this text, which provides modifiable Hon. Fred K. Morrison (ret.) electronic versions of the sample JAMS motions found in the text.

Ron Scholar Federal Kronick Summary MoskovitzJudgment Tiedemannand & Related Termination Motions, by Stephanie Hoit Girard Lee and David Dan StouderN. Finley (KF 8999 .F56) ThisJones desk book focuses on motions Boutin to terminate court proceedings Hon. Brian Van Camp (ret.) under the ADRFederal Services,Rules Inc. of Civil Procedure.

It provides key federal citations for Mike Vergara supporting and opposing motions, Somach Simmons & Dunn including case summaries, statutory Bill Warne excerpts, and federal rules. Sample Downey Brand motions include the required notices, Ben Webster memoranda of points and authorities, Littler Mendelson declarations, orders, and other related forms. A companion CD-ROM makes it Civiltolitigation is theyour “bread buteasy quickly draft ownand motions ter”using of many practitioners, so organizers these samples. believe the section will help fill a longOpposing California Civil Motions standing void for both new and experi- Model Opposition Briefs, by MARCH PRIL 2013 LAWYER M/A ay /J une 2013SACRAMENTO Sacramento Lawyer 29 23

Section & Affiliate News

Administrative Law Section’s Writs Seminar is Big Success

T

The Administrative Law Section hosted all the Sacramento County Superior Court writ judges at its February 13th luncheon, entitled “WRITS!” Participating judges were the Hon. Timothy M. Frawley, Michael P. Kenny, Allen H. Sumner, and Eugene L. Balonon.

Judge Frawley moderated a lively writ discussion, answering or directing the myriad of pre-submitted questions from section members to his writ colleagues on the bench. The questions were focused on two particular types of writs, the traditional writ of mandate (to force an agency to act) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 1085 and the writ of administrative mandate (appealing an agency’s decision) pursuant to CCP section 1094.5. The questions directly addressed the judges’ procedural and substantive preferences. Their answers shed light on the backgrounds of these judges and their perspectives on reviewing petitions and requests for stay. For example, it is easy to forget that all of them are full-time criminal judges throughout the week.

Thus, they have limited time to devote to any given motion or request.

“A lot of what was shared were not ‘secrets’,” explained Nicole D. Hanley, an attorney at Simas & Associates, Ltd. “Rather, the

Administrative Law Section Officers Steve Simas and Heather Hoganson

24

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

Justin Hein

judges are playing by the same rules found in the code and best practices guides. However, the value came from, for example, having Judge Kenny explain his opinion on the importance of adhering to the rule and the real consequences it has had in his own courtroom.”

It was a record crowd for an Administrative Law Section luncheon, with well over 125 attendees and a registration line that extended out to the parking lot. The event went from 11:45 to 1:45 p.m., with Judge Frawley continuing to answer questions and provide his perspective even while walking out to head back to his courtroom.

Officers/organizers Heather Cline Hoganson, Eric Feller, and Steve Simas could not have been happier with the event.

“Blue Prynt has done such a wonderful job in helping us host these events,” said Simas. “So I knew that it was on us to serve up something that the Admin Law section would really respond to. I was thrilled, positively thrilled, when not one or two, but all four writ judges agreed to participate and provide their time.

“It was great to hear the judges’ opinions and recommendations on how each of us can be more effective advocates for our clients,” Simas continued. “Equally fun was bumping into some old colleagues and swapping writ stories with a wider swath of the Sacramento administrative law community.”

Participating Judges (left to right) the Hon. Allen H. Sumner, Hon. Michael P. Kenny, Hon. Timothy M. Frawley, and Hon. Eugene L. Balonon

Justin Hein is an associate at Simas & Associates, Ltd. He is a graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and received his law degree from the University of Wisconsin Law School.

Hein is licensed to practice law in Wisconsin, California, and the U.S. Tax Court.

May/June 2013 Sacramento Lawyer

25

Section & Affiliate News

Barristers’ Club Update Two New Members

By Daniel C. Kim, Barristers’ Media Chair

including her comment on interstate wine shipment law. Megan was also an extern in the chambers of Judge Consuelo Callahan, United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, and served as the student representative on the Dean Search Committee. Megan enjoys yoga and running. She and her husband, Jamie, take advantage of Sacramento’s proximity to Tahoe and the wine country as much as possible.

Katie Nystrom

T

Megan Sammut

he Barristers’ Club of Sacramento is pleased to announce its newest board members, Katie Nystrom and Megan Sammut.

Katie is an associate at Matheny Sears Linkert & Jaime, LLP. Her practice is focused primarily on general litigation, insurance defense, and tort liability. Katie graduated from the University of California, Santa Barbara, with a Bachelor of Arts in Communication in 2007. After college, Katie returned to her native Sacramento to pursue her law degree. Katie graduated from the University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law in 2011, with distinction. While at McGeorge, Katie served on the editorial board of the McGeorge Law Review as chief symposium editor. During her time with the law review, Katie published two articles and coordinated a symposium on the legitimization of marijuana. Katie also interned for the California Department of Resources, Recycling, and Recovery and enjoyed performing as a student associate with the Anthony M. Kennedy Inn of Court.

Katie enjoys yoga, dancing, travel adventures, and laughing with family and friends.

Megan, on the other hand, is an associate at DLA Piper where she practices civil litigation. Megan earned her Bachelor of Arts in English and Communication from Boston College in 2006. After college, Megan joined Teach For America and taught 8th grade English Language Arts in the Bronx for three years. During that time, Megan earned a Masters of Science for Teachers in Adolescent Education from Pace University. She then moved back to California to attend law school at the University of the Pacific McGeorge, where she graduated in 2012, with great distinction, Order of the Coif. During law school, Megan was a primary editor and staff writer on the McGeorge Law Review. She published two articles,

26

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

Upcoming Events: Mediation Seminar and Summer Associates Reception The Barristers would like to take this opportunity to announce two upcoming events. On May 15th, the Barristers will be hosting a seminar entitled, “The Ins and Outs of Mediation” with speakers Steven A. Block, Esq., Ernest A. Long, Esq. and the Honorable Cecily Bond (Ret.).

The speakers will take you through the initial decision to mediate, your preparation for mediation, client preparation, what information to disclose, understanding your opponent’s position, using the joint session productively, private meetings with the mediator, and assuring the settlement is enforceable, among other topics. In these days where alternative dispute resolution is an increasingly important part of litigation, you will not want to miss this opportunity to learn from individuals with decades of experience in mediation. The event will be held from 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. at the law offices of Downey Brand. Please contact Colleen Howard at choward@ porterscott.com to RSVP for the seminar.

In addition to putting on various instructive seminars, such as the aforementioned mediation seminar, the Barristers continue to host numerous social events throughout the year. Among these events, the most highly anticipated and successful event, without question, is the annual Summer Associates Reception. This upcoming reception will be the 21st year in a row where the legal community has honored the summer associates and firms participating in the Sacramento County Bar Association’s Diversity Hiring and Retention Program. The event will be held on Thursday, July 26th from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. at the Park Ultra Lounge at Cafeteria 15L. Please put the event on your calendars and keep an eye out for the upcoming flyer.

If you are interested in serving on the Barristers’ Board of Directors or simply want to become more involved with the Barristers, please contact us at sacbarristers@gmail.com. We look forward to seeing all of you at upcoming events!

Community Service

By Vickie Jacobs, VLSP Managing Attorney

T

Cy Pres Awards Help Support Legal Aid Services

he Voluntary Legal Services Program of Northern California has occasionally been fortunate to receive donations resulting from court ordered Cy Pres distributions. During these times of declining legal aid funding, and the increased client demand for services, Cy Pres awards have been essential to maintaining the services VLSP provides to our indigent clients in the Sacramento region. VLSP’s grants and private donations are currently insufficient to pay the expenses of maintaining the services that VLSP offers.

Cy Pres awards are funds in class action cases that, for a variety of reasons, cannot be distributed to the members of a class action who were the intended beneficiaries. In most instances, these funds consist of residual or unclaimed settlement funds. As VLSP does not participate in class action matters, VLSP has not been a party to any of these cases. We do, however, assist individual clients with legal problems in areas of law that are the subject of the class actions and the law provides that organizations such as ours can be the recipient of such funds.

The California Legislature has explicitly endorsed the use of Cy Pres awards in class action litigation through the enactment of section 384 of the Code of Civil Procedure that allows the payment of any class action settlement residue with interest to “nonprofit organizations providing civil legal services to the indigent.”

This is precisely the mission of the Voluntary Legal Services Program.

If you are counsel for the plaintiff or defense in a class action case pending in California state court, we would greatly appreciate your consideration of the Voluntary Legal Services Program as a

beneficiary of a Cy Pres distribution.

Our mission is simply to provide help to individual clients who cannot afford a lawyer. We believe that our 32 year history of service to the indigent and our positive relationships with the local

courts and legal community make VLSP the perfect match for Cy Pres awards.

If we can provide any further information about our organization, please feel free to contact our Managing Attorney, Vicki Jacobs, at (916) 551-2162.

Ramirez Arbitration & Mediation Services The Hon. Raul A. Ramirez United States District Court Judge, (Retired)

Available in California and Nevada for:

• Settlement Conferences • Mediations • Special Master • Discovery Referee

Over 35 Years Judicial Experience As a Federal and State Court Judge, Mediator and Settlement Conference Judge

Areas of Expertise:

• Employment Litigation • Personal Injury

• Complex Business Disputes • Civil Rights Litigation

Call (916) 558-6185 for appointments and questions www.ramsadr.com for resume & rates 400 Capital Mall, Eleventh Floor, Sacramento, California 95814

May/June 2013 Sacramento Lawyer

27

Court News

An Opportunity to Litigate & Serve: The Eastern District’s Pro Bono Panel

T

he United States District Court for the Eastern District of California has one of the most robust pro bono attorney panels in the country and provides unique opportunities for attorneys to gain federal litigation experience. Although regarded as a model for other courts today, the panel originated on an ad hoc basis with more humble aspirations. The first pro bono panel in the Eastern District was created in 1996 and was known as the “Bradshaw Panel” after the employment case that prompted its formation. The panel’s existence floundered, in part because the court lacked the resources to maintain it.

In 2005, however, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the Eastern District to appoint pro bono counsel in a prisoner’s civil rights case. The need for a functioning pro bono panel became strikingly clear after then-Magistrate Judge Kimberly Mueller contacted numerous law firms and attorneys in Sacramento but was unable to obtain representation in that case and others. In 2005, 2007, and 2010, Chief Judges Levi, Burrell and Ishii, respectively, issued letters encouraging attorneys to serve on the panel. Although the panel began with only thirteen members, by 2009 it had grown to include about one hundred attorneys and now includes 267 attorneys.

Not only does the Eastern District have one of the largest pro bono panels in the country, the Eastern District’s location creates a heightened need for pro bono representation in prisoners’ civil rights cases. Compared to other districts, the Eastern District has a disproportionately high number of prisoner cases because nineteen of the thirty-three state prisons in California lie within the Eastern District’s borders. In 2012, prisoners filed 1,238 civil rights cases in the Eastern District, which totaled twentythree percent of the total civil filings in the district. Most of the prisoner civil rights cases challenge conditions of confinement or allege unconstitutional treatment under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

The growth of the panel in recent years is due in part to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts’ creation of a full-time position to administer the panel and assist appointed attorneys. In April 2009, Sujean Park was appointed as the Eastern District’s first ADR and Pro Bono Program Director, and she continues serving in that capacity today. The support Ms. Park provides for panel members includes answering questions related to appointments, facilitating and coordinating client visits, providing forms, assisting with expense reimbursement procedures, and pairing less-experienced attorneys with an experienced civil rights attorney-mentor. In 2011, the Ninth

28

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

By Breann Moebius and Sujean Park

Circuit recognized Ms. Park’s contributions with the Robert F. Peckham award for excellence in alternative dispute resolution.

The vast majority of the appointments through the pro bono panel are in prisoner civil rights cases, and the number of attorney appointments from the panel has been increasing.

Appointment of counsel through the panel occurs only after the judge or magistrate judge assigned to the case determines that the case has merit and that appointment of counsel is justified.

The Eastern District appointed attorneys in twenty-four cases in 2010, forty-four cases in 2011, and thirty-five cases in 2012.

If the current rate of attorney appointments in 2013 continues through the end of the year, the court will appoint attorneys in approximately sixty cases.

In addition to assisting the court in carrying out its duty to ensure that cases are fairly tried and allowing lawyers to provide significant public service, the panel gives attorneys a unique opportunity to gain federal litigation experience with the prospect of a federal jury trial. For many new associates, the pro bono panel provides the only opportunity to serve as lead counsel on a case and obtain significant trial experience.

Appointments can also occur for a limited purpose, allowing attorneys to gain experience in a discrete area. These limited purpose appointments include drafting or amending a complaint, attending a settlement conference, or conducting the trial. Limited purpose appointments are also used in cases where the inmate needs assistance in researching and briefing a complicated legal issue. Attorneys joining the panel can specify whether they are seeking full-purpose or limited-purpose appointments.

In volunteering to serve on the panel, an attorney can anticipate a request for his or her services in no more than one case every three years. Often times, appointments occur after discovery has closed and the deadline for dispositive motions has expired. The cases generally require counsel to adopt a “lean and mean” approach to quickly and efficiently prepare for trial. Counsel are not, however, expected to bear all the litigation costs in these cases. Through the pro bono program, attorneys can request reimbursement of reasonable out-ofpocket expenses as long as they obtain pre-approval. Attorneys are required to reimburse the fund if they obtain a costs award in the case.

Attorneys should take a pro bono case with the expectation that they will not be compensated for their services. If the client

Sacramento County Bar Association prevails, however, counsel can seek an award of attorney’s fees, subject to the statutory fee award cap for prisoner civil rights cases. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e. Currently, there is no cap on attorney’s fees in cases brought under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Since 2005, the Chief Judge has recognized attorneys who have volunteered for the panel and accepted appointments at the annual Eastern District Conference. In 2009, the Sacramento Chapter of the Federal Bar Association hosted its first annual “Night to Honor Service,” which recognizes attorneys who have accepted appointments. The Federal Bar Association’s “Night to Honor Service” has featured prominent keynote speakers, such as former California Supreme Court Justice Cruz Reynoso and Mike Traynor. In 2012, the “Joe Ramsey Service Award” was created and will be presented annually or biennially to the pro bono panel member who best exemplifies a commitment to public service. The award committee will nominate and select the award’s first recipient in the fall of 2013 and the recipient will be recognized at the “Night to Honor Service.”

The Sacramento Chapter of the Federal Bar Association also hosts an annual § 1983 training for current and prospective pro bono panel members and began co-hosting the program with U.C. Davis School of Law (King Hall) in 2011. Later this year, the Federal Bar Association and King Hall will expand the training program to include a “boot camp” for handling § 1983 prisoner jury trials. King Hall’s involvement in the training is fitting, as its Civil Rights Clinic handles a docket of six to eight prisoner cases, most of which are referred through the pro bono program. The clinic maintains a pleading and brief bank available to pro bono panel attorneys and its student members have been available to assist counsel on appointed cases with legal research. The King Hall Civil Rights Clinic, led by Professor Carter White, will celebrate its twentieth anniversary this fall.

If you are interested in joining the Eastern District’s pro bono panel or would like more information, please contact Sujean Park at (916) 930-4278 or via email at spark@caed.uscourts.gov.

Reach A Variety of Sacramento Area Professionals ADVERTISE IN

Sacramento Lawyer Magazine Call Mary Burroughs (916) 564-3780 x210 or email: mburroughs@sacbar.org

100% Membership Firms These firms have five or more attorneys with 100% membership in the Sacramento County Bar Association

• Boutin Jones, Inc. • Cook Brown LLP • Cuneo Black Ward & Missler • Diepenbrock Elkin LLP • Downey Brand Attorneys LLP • Dreyer Babich Buccola & Wood • Felderstein Fitzgerald Willoughby & Pascuzzi LLP • Goldsberry Freeman Guzman & Ditora, LLP • Gurnee & Daniels LLP • Hefner Stark & Marois LLP • Hiroshima Jacobs Roth & Lewis • Jacobsen & McElroy • Johnson Schachter & Lewis P.L.C. • Kershaw, Cutter & Ratinoff • Klinedist, PC • Knox Lemmon & Anapolsky • Legacy Law Group • Locke Lord, LLP, • Mastagni, Holstedt, Amick, Miller & Johnsen, P.L.C. • Meegan Hanschu Kassenbrock • Murphy Austin Adams Schoenfeld LLP • Palmer Kazanjian Wohl & Hodson, LLP • Radoslovich|Krogh, PC • Remy Moose Manley, LLP • Rothschild Wishek & Sands • Somach Simmons & Dunn • Wagner Kirkman Blaine Klomparens & Youmans May/June 2013 Sacramento Lawyer

29

Section News

T

Alternative Dispute Resolution Section 17th Annual Conflict Resolution Summer Institute

he Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Section of the Sacramento County Bar Association in conjunction with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Center for African Peace and Conflict Resolution at Sacramento State University will present its annual workshop on conflict resolution June 24-28, 2013. Thirty-six hours of MCLE, including four hours of ethics and two hours of eliminating bias are available, together with a certificate upon course completion.

The highly interactive training develops negotiation and mediation skills, giving participants the ability and confidence to manage and effectively resolve disputes in many different contexts. The program combines lecture, videos, role-plays and simulation exercises, facilitated by highly experienced mediators and trainers who impart the theory and methods behind collaborative interest-based bargaining.

Lead trainer Daniel Yamshon has developed and presented several thousand hours of ADR curricula in ten countries on four continents. He has received the Peacemaker of the Year Award, the Africa Peace Award, the Honorable Harold B. Kalina Civil Justice Award and was named one of California’s Super Lawyers in ADR. Mr. Yamshon chaired the State Bar’s ADR Committee’s International Subcommittee, was the founding chair of the Sacramento County Bar’s ADR Section and sits on

the American Bar Association Dispute Resolution Section Ethics Committee. Co-trainer, Dr. Ernest Uwazie, the Executive Director of the Center for African Peace and Conflict Resolution, has headed numerous peace-making projects funded by the World Bank, the US State Department and the United States Institute for Peace. He is a recognized expert on restorative justice and is a widely published scholar in the field.

Among the many topics covered will be conflict theory and practice, conflict assessment, sources and types of conflict, consensus building, cross-cultural communication, negotiation and mediation ethics, breaking impasse, conflict analysis, reducing resistance to proposals, developing offers and counteroffers, and facilitating the negotiations of others, allowing them to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement. The hours are 8:30 AM through 5:00 PM. The cost for the workshop is $645.00, which includes a manual which can later be used as a reference and numerous hand outs. Groups of five or more qualify for a ten percent discount. More information is available at http://www.csus.edu/ hhs/capcr/documents/2013%20conflict%20resolution%20 Training%20workshop1.pdf Ernest Uwazie may be contacted at 916-278-6282 or Uwazieee@csus.edu. Daniel Yamshon may be reached at 916446-4817 or DYamshon@ADRServicesInternational.com.

Conflict Resolution Registration Form Registration Fee: $645.00 (Includes course manual and materials, plus two lunch meals). Check or MasterCard/Visa payments accepted. Make checks payable to: University Enterprises/CAPCR. Refund of payment with penalty before May 1, 2013. No refund after May 1, 2013. (10% discount for a group of 4 or more people). MCLE and CEU’s available upon request. Certificate issued upon completion of workshop. Housing/ hotel/parking information provided upon request and registration. Inquiry: Professor Ernest Uwazie, 916-278-6282, uwazieee@csus.edu. You will be notified upon receipt of registration and fees of the workshop location and other details.

Name:________________________________________________ Mailing Address: _____________________________________________ Phone:________________________________________________ Email:______________________________________________________ Present Profession:______________________________________ Reason (s) for participating in workshop___________________________ How did you hear about us?_______________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Please check: [ ] Housing information

[ ] Other, please specify ______________________________________________________________

Please charge $645.00 to my: [ ] Master card

[ ] Visa

Card#:_____________________________________Exp date: ___________

Name on Card:_________________________________________ Signature of card owner________________________________________

Mail or fax this form with the fee of US $645.00 to: California State University, Sacramento, Attention: Ernest Uwazie 6000 J. Street, Sacramento CA 95819-6085, USA FAX: 916-278-3429; Phone 916-278-6282

30

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

& Affiliate News

rty is memard of cong year CBA. n the qualState. qualebrate U.S. ntally enate zona’s first

s 41st Asiano the ition,

Hansen won a hotly contested District 4 race to become the first openly gay member of the Sacramento City Council.

Despite the roller coaster that was the District 4 election, Hansen was able to attend the annual meeting just a few short days after being sworn in.

Looking to the year ahead, the U.S. Supreme Court will issue its ruling on the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8, as well as the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

In February, SacLEGAL held a continuing legal education event featuring Professors Larry Levine and Courtney Joslin discussing the upcoming Supreme Court cases. This event provided an opportunity for the community to come together in this exciting yet trepidatious time. SacLEGAL looks forward to continuing to serve both the legal community and the broader Sacramento community in the years ahead.

Mallory Lass is an associate attorney with the Goff, ConwaySpatola Law Group, where she focuses on estate planning, probate, and tax issues, especially those affecting LGBT persons.

She currently serves as co-chair of SacLEGAL and treasurer of the SCBA’s Probate and Estate Planning Section.

MARCH/APRIL 2013 SACRAMENTO LAWYER

31

May/June 2013 Sacramento Lawyer

31

Section & Affiliate News

Appellate Law Section Hosts 8th Annual Wine & Cheese Reception

T

By Brendan J. Begley Photos by: Ken Rabiroff

he SCBA Appellate Law Section in January hosted its Eighth Annual Wine and Cheese Reception. Unlike previous years, when the gala was held at either the permanent or temporary courthouse for California’s Third Appellate District, this time the festivities took place in the rotunda of the Matsui Federal Courthouse in downtown Sacramento.

True to its traditions, the event provided an opportunity for law students, practitioners, and professors to mingle casually with trial and appellate court judges and justices. Roughly 60 people took part in the merriment despite somewhat inclement weather that evening. The Appellate Law Section’s newly elected officers, Chair W. Scott Cameron (last year’s treasurer), Vice-Chair Robert “Bob” Lucas, Secreatry Linda Conrad, and Treasurer Peg Carew Toledo, also were in attendance, ensuring a good time was had by all.

Outgoing Appellate Law Section Chair Stephanie J. Finelli graciously passed the torch to the section’s newly elected officers while expressing gratitude to those who

32

made the celebration possible this year. “You all have done such a wonderful job,” she said. “And I want to thank Judge [Connie] Callahan and Judge [Morrison] England and the staff at the federal court for their generosity in providing us with such an elegant setting for this year’s reception.”

While congratulating the section’s new officers, Finelli also thanked outgoing Vice-Chair Sandra T. Uribe and outgoing Secretary Laurel L. Thorpe for their longstanding commitment and contributions to the section. After the event, newly elected Chair Cameron said he looks forward to working with his new colleagues to continue the section’s history of rewarding events.

“I’ve been to nearly all of the Wine and Cheese events, and this year ranks right up there as among the best,” Cameron said enthusiastically. “Since we were unable to use the Third Appellate District’s courthouse this time, we were very pleased to find a comparably majestic venue for the reception.”

Appellate Court Chambers Attorney Shama Mesiwala, Appellate Section Board Member Linnea Johnson, Margaret Alden, and Peggy Headley sample beverages at the gala.

Jennifer Dauer, Eileen Diepenbrock, Mike Heumann, and U.S. District Judge William Shubb taking in the celebration.

Jeff Klink quizzes Stephanie Finelli about the samplings while Appellate Section Vice-Chair Bob Lucas, Arthur Mark, Jay Allen Eisen, Brendon Ishikawa, and Linnea Johnson enjoy their beverages.

U.S. District Judge Morrison England, U.S. Magistrate Judge Allison Claire, Ninth Circuit law clerk Amanda Alley, and Justice Andrea Lynn Hoch socializing at the reception.

Ninth Circuit chambers attorney Rick Schickele, Justice Louis Mauro, and Justice Kathleen Butz sample the event’s offerings.

Former SCBA President Michael Levy, U.S. Chief District Judge Morrison England, and Appellate Section Chair Scott Cameron compare thoughts about the party.

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

Section & Affiliate News

Former Appellate Section Chair Brendan Begley, Ninth Circuit Judge Connie Callahan, and Current Appellate Section Chair Scott Cameron reminisce about clerking in Judge Callahan’s chambers.

Teri Block, Brendan Begley, Scott Cameron, and Stephanie Finelli share some lighthearted fun at the fete.

Stephanie Finelli addresses the attendees in her farewell speech as Appellate Section Chair.

Appellate Section Secretary Linda Conrad, Justice Kathleen Butz, and Appellate Section Board Member Linnea Johnson enjoy the festivities.

Katie Konz, Irena Kachagin, and Carmen Nicole Cox share some laughter with Justice Andrea Lynn Hoch and Justice William J. Murray, Jr.

Justice Art Scotland (ret.) and newly elected Appellate Law Section Treasurer Peg Carew Toledo revel in the merriment.

Cameron also revealed that plans are in the works for the Appellate Law Section to put together a welcome-back “court-warming” party for the Third Appellate District now that it has returned to its historic courthouse. “Watch for more about that later this summer,” he recommended.

The Appellate Law Section wishes to thank those who attended the fete and bids its guests and new officers continued joy and success in 2013.

Brendan J. Begley is a former chair of the SCBA Appellate Law Section and head of the Appeal and Writs Group at Weintraub Tobin Chediack Coleman Grodin Law Corporation. He is also a California State Bar certified appellate law specialist.

I look forward to an opportunIty to work wIth your company and take It to the next level wIth a fresh and effectIve desIgn! photo by pamona purdy

Outgoing Appellate Section Chair Stephanie Finelli, Cami McLaren, and Shama Mesiwala socialize with Justice Art Scotland (ret.).

ticed o n , d e iz n g o c e r be and extraordinary

with

s

graphic design service

milenko vlajsavljevic graphic artist 916.396.8216 m@milenkodesign.com

milenkodesign.com May/June 2013 Sacramento Lawyer

33

Calendar Second Wednesdays - SCBA Barristers serve at St. John’s Shelter for Women. Contact Daniel at dkim@mathenysears.com May 7 Family Law Section presents “Social Media: It’s all about MEC€, Marketing, Ethics & Evidence” with speaker Mark Ressa. Noon, Dante Club. Contact Lindie Newlin at Lindie@ divorcewithrespect.com May 8 Business Law Section presents “Preparing for the California Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Act: Where We Are & Why” with speakers Chris Chediak & Taylor Bentley, Weintraub Tobin, noon-1:15, Firehouse. Contact Sarra Ziari at sziari@pacific.edu or fax 916-739-7279 May 8 St. Thomas More Society Mass & Lunch with Fr. Brendan O’Sullivan, noon-1:15, Hawthorn Suites. Contact stms.sacramento@ yahoo.com May 9 Administrative Law Section Lunch Seminar on Getting Information out of Government (Public Records Act and other laws).

12-2pm, Blue Prynt. Contact Cheyenne at the Bar Office; cazevedo@ sacbar.org or visit https://www.sacbar.org/Calendar May 9 ABAS Law Foundation’s 11th Annual Wine & Food Tasting at Pavilions Courtyard, 6-8:30pm. Tickets at www.abaslawfoundation. org or contact chair Brian Lim at winetasting@abaslawfoundation.org May 13 Real Estate Section presents “The Sacramento Commercial Real Estate Market in 2013: Overview & Outlook” with speakers Josh Schmidt, Dave Planting, Drew Petersen, Ryan DeMar & Randy Getz, 11:45am-1pm, Firehouse. Contact Julie Ehly at jehly@murphyaustin.com May 15 Barristers’ Club hosts seminar entitled The Ins and Outs of Mediation, 12-1pm, Downey Brand. Contact Colleen Howard at choward@porter-scott.com (see article, page 26)

Index of Advertisers ADR Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 23 American Society of Appraisers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 13 Bell & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 15 Berding Weil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 34 Buzz Wiesenfeld . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 31 Charr Crail Photography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 20 Darrel W. Lewis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 7 Embassy Suites Riverfront . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 9 Family Law Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 31 House Kitchen & Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 6 Joe Genshlea Law and Mediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 3 JAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 3 Jay-Allen Eisen Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 7 Ken Malovos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 20 Milenko Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 33 Nielsen & Geenty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 34 Northern CA Collection Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 11 Porter Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 20 Ramirez Arbitration & Mediation Services . . . . . . . Page 27 SCBA Golf Tournament - June 17 . . . . . . . . . . . Back Cover SCBA Spring Mixer - May 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 2 Sacramento Law Library . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 12 Scorpion Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 35 Thomson Reuters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 25 Ueltzen & Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 20 Western Health Advantage/Hutchison Financial . . . Page 31 Women Lawyers of Sacramento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 21 Wilner & O’Reilly Immigration Lawyers . . . . . . . . . Page 15

34

Sacramento Lawyer May/June 2013

May 20 ADR Section presents “Legal Update for 2012 & New Legislation in 2013” with speaker Paul Dubow, Arbitrator & Mediator, noon, Firehouse. Contact Cheyenne at the SCBA office 564-3780 x208 email: cazevedo@sacbar.org May 21 Labor & Employment Law Section Presents “The Alternative Workforce: Retired Annuitants, Independent Contractors and Volunteers” with David Tyra, KMTG. 12-1, Firehouse. Contact Lindsey Ono at 321-4547 or lono@kmtg.com May 21

SCBA Spring Member Mixer, 5-7pm, House Kitchen & Bar (see inside front cover)

May 27 Tax Section monthly meeting at Mulvaney’s, noon-1:30pm, featuring FTB Chief Counsel, Jozel Brunett. Visit https://www. sacbar.org/Calendar to register or contact Ciro Immordino at ciro. immordino@ftb.ca.gov June 6 Joint Section Representatives’ and MCLE Committee meeting, noon, SCBA Office June 17 SCBA Golf Tournament, Del Paso Country Club

(See ad, back cover) June 24-28 ADR Section’s Annual Summer Workshop in Conflict Resolution. Contact Daniel Yamshon at DYamshon@ ADRServicesInternational.com June 27 St. Thomas More Society Feast Day event. Contact stms. sacramento@yahoo.com July 11

MCLE Committee meeting, noon, SCBA Office

July 26 Summer Associates / 21st Annual SCBA Diversity Hiring and Retention Program Reception, 5:30-7:30pm, Park Ultra Lounge (see article, page 26)

SACRAMENTO COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION MAGAZINE

1329 Howe Ave., #100 • Sacramento, CA 95825

ship r o s Spon tunities: or Opp or pons

S Shirt ponsor S or Hat pons r S e l o Eag pons S e i Bird Sponsor Par Sponsor r er Dinn h Sponso nsor Lunc ange Spo sor n ing R reen Spo v i r D nsor ing G Putt ole Spo H

Space is limited CALL TODAY!

Individual Golfer $150 Golf Foursome $600

Announcing FIRST ANNUAL

Sacramento County Bar Association Golf Tournament Monday, June 17, 2013 Del Paso Country Club Site of the 2015 Senior US Open Lunch and Awards Dinner with Silent Auction 11:00am Registration • 12:30pm Shotgun Start Four-Person Team Format / Scramble Festivities include: Silent Auction • Lunch on the course • Driving Range Putting Contest • Raffle • Tee Prizes • Awards Dinner Awards Dinner Emcee: Scott Moak - Public Address Announcer of the Sacramento Kings

Call or Email TODAY for a Registration Packet Sacramento County Bar Association

1329 Howe Ave., Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95825 For more information call 916-564-3780 x200 • Email: reception@sacbar.org