WLJ 104.2

2019 VOL. 104 No. 1 & 2

NAWL Pay Equity Connection: Sources of the “Pay Gap”

Also in this Issue: National Association of Women Lawyers 2018 Legal Leadership Summit White Paper

the voice of women in the law | 1

Promoting women in the legal profession.

Creating space for women lawyers.

Leading by example.

Hogan Lovells is proud to support the National Association of Women Lawyers.

Hogan Lovells is an international legal practice that includes Hogan Lovells International LLP, Hogan Lovells US LLP and their affiliated businesses. Images of people may feature current or former lawyers and employees at Hogan Lovells or models not connected with the firm. www.hoganlovells.com Š Hogan Lovells 2018. All rights reserved.

2 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

5 ABOUT NAWL 6 LETTER FROM WLJ EXECUTIVE EDITOR ELIZABETH A. LEVY 8 LETTER FROM NAWL 2018-2019 PRESIDENT SARRETTA C. MCDONOUGH 10 NAWL PAY EQUITY CONNECTION: SOURCE OF THE PAY GAP

By The Pay Equity Taskforce of The National Association of Women Lawyers In nearly every profession, the “pay gap” that exists between men and women has been well documented, and the legal profession is no exception. In order to close the gap between women’s and men’s diverging compensation, it is important to understand the origins of the problem and attempt to solve such issues one by one.

22 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN LAWYERS 2018 LEGAL LEADERSHIP WHITE PAPER

By Jenny R. Yang and Jenny Waters

The National Association of Women Lawyers brought together a small group of top leaders in the legal profession to take part in a strategic planning session to address key barriers to diversity and inclusion in the legal profession. The leadership group included managing partners, practice group leaders, and diversity and inclusion leaders at law firms; general counsel and other senior level in-house counsel; and leaders in the non-profit space.

40 NETWORKING ROSTER 42 NEW MEMBERS 50 THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS

National Association of Women Lawyers 2018 Legal Leadership Summit Whitepaper p. 22

the voice of women in the law | 1

EXCELLENCE IS DIVERSITY Diversity is essential to providing excellence to our clients. Investing in diversity and inclusion is more than smart business—it is who we are. In all respects, we drive excellence and diversity to resolve our clients’ most complex business and legal challenges.

Perkins Coie proudly supports the National Association of Women Lawyers as a 2019 Sustaining Platinum Sponsor. We recognize NAWL’s achievements and share its commitment to the advancement of women in the legal profession.

PerkinsCoie.com/Diversity | Perkins Coie LLP | Attorney Advertising

2019 VOL. 104 NO. 1 & 2

ABOUT WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL EDITOR Karen M. Richardson ART DIRECTOR Woo Bryant EXECUTIVE EDITOR Elizabeth A. Levy EDITORIAL POLICY The Women Lawyers Journal (WLJ) is published for the National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL) members as a forum for the exchange of ideas and information. Views expressed in articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect NAWL’s policies or official positions. Publication of an opinion is not an endorsement by NAWL. Articles about current legal issues of interest to women lawyers are accepted and may be edited based on the judgment of the editor. Editorial decisions are based upon potential interest to readers, timelines, goals and objectives of NAWL as well as the quality of the writing. The WLJ also accepts book reviews related to the practice of law. We reserve the right to edit all submissions.

Send submissions via email to hrogers@nawl.org TO SUBSCRIBE NAWL annual membership dues and sustaining sponsorships include a subscription to the WLJ. Additional subscriptions or subscriptions by nonmembers are available for $55 in the U.S. and $75 outside the U.S. Back issues, where available, can be purchased for $15 each.

CONTACT National Association of Women Lawyers American Bar Center 321 North Clark Street, MS 17.1 Chicago, IL 60654 t 312.988.6186 nawl@nawl.org www.nawl.org

©2019 National Association of Women Lawyers All Rights Reserved Women Lawyers Journal (ISSN 0043-7468) is published quarterly by the National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL)®.

the voice of women in the law | 3

Debevoise proudly supports the National Association of Women Lawyers It has long been our mission to support women within the firm, and just one reason we have had generation after generation of women leaders at Debevoise.

Here’s to the next generation.

To join the conversation about women in the workplace, visit the Debevoise Women’s Review at women.debevoise.com.

4 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

2019-2020 EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

ABOUT NAWL The mission of the National Association of Women Lawyers is to provide leadership, a collective voice, and essential resources to advance women in the legal profession and advocate for the equality of women under the law. Since 1899, NAWL has been empowering women in the legal profession, cultivating a diverse membership dedicated to equality, mutual support, and collective success.

BENEFITS OF MEMBERSHIP • Access to career development and continuing legal education programs at reduced member rates

PRESIDENT Kristin D. Sostowski Newark, NJ PRESIDENT-ELECT Karen S. Morris San Antonio, TX VICE PRESIDENT Jennifer (“Jenny”) A. Champlin St. Louis, MO TREASURER DeAnna D. Allen Washington, DC SECRETARY Peggy Steif Abram Minneapolis, MN

• Opportunities to build a national network via programs that bring women together, opening doors to an array of business development opportunities

ASSISTANT SECRETARY Kristin L. Bauer Dallas, TX

• Leadership development through NAWL Practice Area Affinity Groups, committees, affiliations, and strategic partnerships

IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT Sarretta C. McDonough Los Angeles, CA

• Advocacy via NAWL’s Amicus Committee, which reviews requests for participation as amicus curiae in cases of interest to NAWL members • Community outreach through Nights of Giving • Continued learning and credential-building opportunities with the Women Lawyers Journal® CONTACT NAWL National Association of Women Lawyers American Bar Center 321 North Clark Street, MS 17.1 Chicago, IL 60654 T 312.988.6186 nawl@nawl.org www.nawl.org Women Lawyers Journal®, National Association of Women Lawyers®, NAWL® and the NAWL® logo are registered trademarks.

BOARD MEMBERS AT LARGE Mary Card-Mina

Sima F. Sarrafan

Fairfax,VA

Redmond, WA

Lindsay Carlson

Elizabeth Pagel Serebransky

Los Angeles, CA

New York, NY

Kelly Clark

Julia Simon

Cary,IL

Addison, TX

Paula Hinton Houston, TX

Eva M. Spahn Miami, FL

Elizabeth (“Liz”) A. Levy Cambridge, MA

Mary-Christine (“M.C.”) Sungaila

Leslie D. Minier Chicago, IL

Deborah K. Wright

Orange County, CA

Dallas, TX Concepcion (“Connie”) Montoya New York, NY

Sandra S. Yamate Chicago, IL

Sheila M. Murphy New York, NY

Executive Director Karen M. Richardson Chicago, IL

Gigi Rollini Tallahassee,FL

the voice of women in the law | 5

NOTE FROM THE WLJ EXECUTIVE EDITOR

Sisterhood in Life vs. at Work – Sisters or Strangers?

By Elizabeth A. Levy I’m preparing to moderate a discussion of the new book It’s Not You It’s the Workplace – Women’s Conflict at Work and the Bias That Built It by Andrea (Andie) S. Kramer and Alton (Al) B. Harris (available at andieandal.com). This book examines truths, myths and stereotypes about women and their same-gender interactions in the workplace. It explores reasons for women’s lack of support for one another, even when such support would be mutually beneficial. The word “sisterhood” appears throughout the book and is defined as “a close, powerful, and focused alliance of women”.

As an adult without female siblings I value sisterhood. I’ve deeply yearned for the connection born of women’s shared experiences, and I’m grateful when those connections develop and endure. When we, as young women, go out into the world and inevitably experience firsthand the sobering and often rough realities of life – pregnancies, childbirth, abuse, domestic violence, illness, disability, poverty, divorce, discrimination, harassment, loss of a loved one – we come to understand the sustaining power and promise of sisterhood with other women who have been through similar experiences.

One might assume that sisterhood naturally happens as we recognize one another’s scars. Unfortunately, the sharing of life experience does not automatically foster mutual support among women.

The book discusses the many challenges women face in the workplace – structural, cultural, intersectional - that hinder the development of sisterhood.

I am struck by the apparent fact that workplace sisterhood seems to be so fraught and elusive, whereas life sisterhood develops as naturally as a friendship. Is it the inherently competitive environment of the workplace that makes this so? I’m skeptical: even women competing for the same partner or fighting over custody of their shared children often possess a deep understanding of the other’s position and can readily empathize with the other.

Not so much in the workplace, it seems. Women continue to struggle in their careers for equal opportunity, equal pay for equal work, and appropriate recognition for their achievements, and this struggle, even though nearly universal among working women, does not bind them together so much as further isolate them from one another.

This is the paradox that especially interests me.

Andie and Al have extensively researched and written about workplace conditions and their impact on working women. I hope you will join us for the discussion.

Elizabeth A. Levy

6 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Elizabeth A. Levy is an intellectual property attorney and a pro bono hearing officer for attorney discipline matters with the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers. She is a NAWL board member and liaison to NAWL’s Practice Area Affinity Groups.

LOEB & LOEB llp is proud to sponsor

National Association of Women Lawyers At Loeb & Loeb, our commitment to fostering and maintaining a diverse a workforce is as important as our commitment to every client, case and transaction. With nearly 400 lawyers across eight offices in the United States and Asia, we bring together a unique mix of inclusive, varied perspectives, business savvy, legal acumen and unparalleled industry experience to help our clients succeed in today’s connected world.

Los Angeles

New York

Chicago

5687 National Association for Women Lawyers-rev2.indd 1

Nashville

Washington, DC

San Francisco

Beijing

Hong Kong

www.loeb.com

the voice of women in the law | 7 2/7/2019 11:08:41 AM

A LETTER FROM NAWL 2018 - 2019 PRESIDENT SARRETTA C. MCDONOUGH

President’s Message I joined NAWL over 13 years ago, shortly after the birth of my daughter. Why had I not joined before?

Because I was willing to go along with the inequities I saw in the profession when it was just me. Once I had my daughter, I realized that I was no longer willing to accept the status quo and that I had an obligation to make the profession and the world a more equal and fair place. Even though I had less time (a lot less), I had a purpose and I had a passion that continues to drive me to this day as we, together, work toward true equality of opportunity in our profession.

With this edition of the Women Lawyers Journal, NAWL provides practical tools for achieving pay equity and a white paper outlining the changes necessary to further the progression of women in law firms.

In the end, it’s all about time. It’s about time for pay equity. It’s about time for practical restructuring in law firms to ensure equal opportunities to all attorneys. And it’s about how each of you can use your time to make the real, lasting change our profession needs.

I ask our members to give us a little of your time. Get involved. Join one of our practice area Affinity Groups, join our planning committees for program events held throughout the year, or join our Amicus Committee and contribute to the leading legal scholarship on gender equality.

I hope you enjoy this edition of the Journal and that it inspires you to join with us in furthering our mission to ensure equality in our profession and under the law.

Thank you

Sarretta C. McDonough

Sarretta C. McDonough, a member of the California Bar and a solicitor of England and Wales, serves as Associate General Counsel, Antitrust and Commercial Litigation at Intel Corporation.

She previously worked at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Kirkland & Ellis LLP where she represented multinational clients in connection with competition and corruption issues around the globe. Global Competition Review recognized her in 2018 as one of the leading practitioners in competition and named her a “Future Leader” in 2017. Ms. McDonough received her J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School and her B.A. from the University of California at Berkeley.

8 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Culture | Opportunity | Community

We applaud and support the National Association of Women Lawyers’ commitment to advancing women in the legal profession.

Š2019 Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP | HuntonAK.com

NAWL PAY EQUITY CONNECTION: SOURCES OF THE “PAY GAP”

NAWL Pay Equity Connection: Sources of the “Pay Gap”

By: Kimberly Gdula, Gigi Rollini, Allison Stevenson, and Elyse Velagic

In July 2019, the U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team made international headlines on and off the playing field. Their on-field dominance secured the 2019 World Cup victory, but their off-field fight for pay equal to that of their male counterparts is a battle that continues to rage on. The Team’s demand for equal pay is neither unique to the sport nor unique to the times. In nearly every profession, the “pay gap” that exists between men and women is well documented. The legal profession is no exception. To close the gap between women’s and men’s compensation, it is important to understand that the origins of the problem may arise from one or multiple causes and so will necessitate working through issues one by one.

unintentional problems. The fact that these problems continue to permeate many organizations is the number one reason that women in North America earnabout 77% of every dollar earned bytheir male counterparts.

Firms and organizations should consider how many of the pay gap causes listed below exist within their organizations and consider implementing comprehensive policies with adequate checks and balances to mitigate and eliminate the sources of these often unconscious or

This article is a list of high-level issues highlighting factors contributing to the pay gap, including resources and literature that will aid in obtaining a better understanding and appreciation of the complexity of the issues that cause the pay gap between men and women.

10 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

The emerging era of the #MeToo movement adds greater complexity to these issues, as there is now further concern that men will be more reluctant to mentor, sponsor, or even work closely with women due to a fear that these interactions may have negative ramifications.

Most leaders in law are men, and it is crucial for men to be champions for and mentors to women for them to grow within an organization and for the pay gap to be eliminated.

When you are reading through the list, consider the real-life examples that help to clarify how these issues manifest in everyday/commonplace scenarios. We hope that that the list illustrates that it is not effective merely to track the pay gap and push for parity without addressing the pay gap’s root causes

Mentorship/ Opportunity Gap/ Networks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

Key Points Informal/formal relationships lead to career opportunities and play a key role in advancement and compensation decisions. Mentoring relationships and champions are fundamental to advancing one’s career opportunities, providing good/stretch work, recommendations, and career advice.

The opportunity gap exists as a result of the number of men in management/high profile positions as compared to women. Studies show that people generally prefer to work with individuals who remind them of themselves, and feel more comfortable with, obligated, and loyal to those individuals. As a result, they view similar individuals more positively and trust them more than others and are thus more likely to champion them.

When women have less access to the informal network structures upon which people rely to advance themselves and their friends, the result is continued inequity. Even when women hold jobs of comparable influence and status, studies have shown that women receive less instrumental help from their networks than men.

1 Males Dominate Management Positions 1, 2, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22

These reduced opportunities mean not only less client visibility but also less ability to originate clients, distribute work, or be involved in leadership development opportunities. It also makes it more difficult for women to find sponsors to advocate for them in the partnership elevation process.

Real-Life Examples Sally does not have the same extracurricular interests as her colleague Kyle, an associate with the same level of experience as Sally. Because Mike is a former varsity hockey player and alumnus of an all-boys school, Kyle reminds Mike, a senior partner, of himself. As a result, Mike takes a special interest in Kyle’s career, ensures he receives experience-building assignments, and sings his praises at associate review meetings.

Because there are far fewer senior women at Sally’s firm, she doesn’t get the same level or quality of mentoring. This directly impacts her chances for growth and success.

Key Points Studies show that men dominate managerial positions and, as a result, may not realize or understand how their business decisions can have a negative impact on women. Women are overwhelmingly underrepresented in decision-making positions.

Studies show that about 75% of management committees are made up of men, who often leave it to women to identify issues that impact women. Due to the lack of female representation in management, women’s issues are not often discussed or even identified. It is hard to effect change for the betterment of women if women do not have a seat at the power table.

Moreover, studies show that women who promote issues of diversity are often harmed by doing so, whereas men are given a career boost for promoting issues of diversity. This can act as a deterrent for the few women who are on management committees. These women risk impeding their own career progression by identifying issues that negatively impact women, which perpetuates the cycle of disparity even when women are given seats at the power table.

2

Real-Life Examples Ann is a very talented lawyer, but she is shy and not particularly well known at the firm. Her two mentors, Samantha and Marie, recognize her talents and her significant contributions to their files, but since they are not on the partnership committee, Ann does not get the recognition she deserves and is overlooked for promotions and pay increases.

Ella is the firm’s first reduced-hours income partner. She is scheduled to work Mondays through Thursdays.

The male managing partner schedules the recurring partner meetings on the first Friday of every month, causing Ella to risk being left out of the partnership meetings unless she breaks her agreed-upon schedule.

the voice of women in the law | 11

Assignments/ Origination from Networking 3, 7, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29

Key Points Male lawyers reportedly receive significantly more internal firm referrals for new work and have a higher percentage of origination from internal referrals. As a result, women tend to work on matters that are less high- profile and are even stereotyped into certain areas of the law with a perceived lower level of prestige.

If women are not getting as many file opportunities, and the opportunities they do get are not on the highprofile files, they do not have the same level of reputation leverage within the firm as their male counterparts. This directly impacts the arguments that can be made in favor of their compensation.

Compensation decisions and reviews are based on work done throughout the year, so when women do not have access to the top- level cases, clients, and assignments from the outset, they have a reduced basis on which to challenge pay inequity at the end of the year.

Firm partners and committees must monitor the types of assignments provided to associates in order to ensure equal opportunity for all associates to deliver outstanding results on impactful matters.

3 Slow Progress of Women (as a group) Attaining the Rank of Equity Partner

Real-Life Examples Brandon, a third-year associate, and Peter, a senior partner with control over the firm’s most significant client, share a love of college basketball and spend many a March afternoon at the nearby pub watching these games. During a particularly exciting finish, Peter suggests that while he typically doesn’t trust his client’s key depositions to an associate, he appreciates Brandon’s enthusiasm and brings him into a high-profile case that is about to enter into the heavy deposition phase. After Brandon performs well, Peter starts referring to Brandon as “my guy” and allows him to handle work that a junior partner would typically handle. At the end of the year, Brandon gets recognition both in his review and in his bonus compensation for doing work well beyond his years of experience for Peter’s largest client. Meanwhile, Jill, who spent all of her March afternoons reviewing documents with a team of third-year associates instead of at a pub, gets a perfectly adequate review for ably managing the work she was given. Brandon is placed on the fast track after being viewed as a superstar and continues to receive requests from other partners to take depositions due to his level of experience. Jill is not similarly recognized nor offered comparable opportunities.

Key Points A review of the numbers shows that women are always underrepresented at the equity partner level, and even for those who have achieved such promotions, the progression to advance up the partnership ladder is generally much slower for women as compared to men.

1, 2, 30, 31,32

Witnessing the underrepresentation and the slower path to partnership for women as compared to men can create the internalization of a “stereotype threat” in female attorneys. The stereotype threat implicitly creates feelings of doubt both individually and generally in a female attorney in her ability to achieve equity partnership status. This internalization increases the likelihood that a female attorney will not choose a path to partnership for fear that she will never get there, even if equity partnership is what she desires, and the cycle continues.

Men are promoted to equity partner based on potential to originate business, and women are assumed to not be able to replicate early business development successes. Also, women are often perceived to be less committed to their careers as a result of child-rearing or the potential to have children. As such, this further divides the tracks to equity partnership for men and women.

4 12 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Real-Life Examples Mary is a “Big Law” senior associate at a great law firm. Among the 100 equity partners in the firm, there are only 9 females. As a result, Mary has fewer female champions and mentors to help promote and mentor her. Because she is competing with her male counterparts who have great support from the male equity partners, she decides to go in-house, as the prospect of making equity partner is very slim. This further perpetuates the lack of female presence in equity partnerships.

Origination Credit 1, 2, 3, 5, 23, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37

Key Points Disparity in origination credit is identified as the primary reason for pay gaps among partners. Studies show that client origination and credit for bringing a client in (sometimes referred to as “rainmaking”) plays a significant role in dictating a lawyer’s compensation, and directly impacts a lawyer’s earning power.

The lack of origination stems from many issues, some of which include: • Old boys’ clubs (keeping work within the “in-group” members) perpetuate the origination sharing networks within their in-groups through in-group socialization, often excluding women and attorneys of color from succession or origination-sharing opportunities.

• Old boys’ clubs also impact the assignments systems, which provide fewer opportunities for women to get exposure to high-level matters and direct access to institutional clients because men often prefer to work with those whom they get to know outside of the office and/or those with whom they can identify.

5 Lack of Diversity on Compensation Committees 2, 38, 39, 40, 41

Studies have confirmed that these issues directly impact the opportunity for originating a client and obtaining credit. Moreover, even if a female lawyer does bring in a new client/matter, women receive less credit for work accomplishments (or a job well done/instrumental role played) related to the matter.

Women also report that when disputes arise regarding client origination, male partners sometimes threaten, bully, or try to intimidate them into backing down and walking away—further perpetuating the problem.

Real-Life Examples Helen is not invited to the many male-oriented client events with her male colleagues, such as the firm’s golf day. Mark, a lawyer who has the same amount of experience and graduated from law school the same year as Helen, gets twice as much exposure to the clients and senior male partners because of the social opportunities coupled with the number of senior male lawyers at his firm. As such, Helen does not get the same opportunities to meet clients or deepen client relationships. Mark is given a share of the origination credit for matters referred to the firm by the golfing clients due to his exposure to those clients in social settings.

Key Points Studies show that a more diverse compensation committee will positively impact compensation for minorities. As such, it benefits women and other minorities (including men who are minorities) if the compensation committee that is making pay decisions is diverse. Moreover, studies show that to have a real impact on this pay decision-making in corporate settings, 40% female participation is ideal. However, on average, compensation committees have less than 20% combined female and other minority participation.

Real-Life Examples

6

Jane was an integral part of a case team and, after three years of intense litigation, she achieved a significant settlement on a contingency matter. The firm’s share of the settlement was five times the value of hours put into the case. The male members of the team touted their individual performance in their selfevaluations, and Jane touted the team’s victory. The male members of the team received a discretionary bump in their compensation, but Jane did not. No one on the all-male compensation committee noticed or noted the discrepancy.

the voice of women in the law | 13

Succession favoritism 1, 2, 3, 24, 31, 42, 43, 44

7 Lack of opportunities to participate in client pitches 1, 2, 3, 24, 31, 42, 43, 44

8 Lack of Transparency (other partners’/ associates’ salaries)

Key Points When a partners retire or leave the firm, most law firms allow those partners to unilaterally bequeath their clients’ matters to any attorney(s) of their choosing. Given the previously mentioned relationships and networks and the concentration of men in power positions, these hand-picked successors are predominantely male. This is the case even when a female lawyer may be a better fit for a particular client. The exclusion of women from the internal networks that enable male colleagues to assist each other’s client development and retention efforts is a significant source of the pay gap.

Real-Life Examples For the majority of her career Kathy has worked on developing strong working relationships with one of the firm’s key institutional clients, only to learn when the relationship partner leaves that he has bequeathed the client’s matters to a male income partner, Max, who has not devoted the same time to this client, in order to ensure that the client continues to work with the firm. Max is made equity partner, whereas Kathy is asked to leave since she does not have clients of her own.

Key Points Many firms do not provide women with equal opportunities to participate in client pitches, which prevents them from receiving origination credit and limits their potential for advancement altogether. Moreover, even when women are invited to participate in pitches, they report that despite their participation, they still do not receive a proportionate share of the origination credit.

A major reason for this is that women are often brought to pitch meetings for the purpose of portraying to the potential client that a firm is diverse, but these women (from the team/firm’s perspective) are not seen to be a “true” member of the team. This issue is known as “tokenism” - women are invited to the table simply to be female representatives, not to meaningfully engage in the business acquisition process.

Real-Life Examples John has had his eye on reeling in ABC Corp’s business for years. He sees that there is a new regulation working its way through the FCC that will dramatically impact ABC Corp’s ability to compete in the market.

He calls Susan, a former FCC attorney, and asks her to join him for a pitch. She agrees and convinces ABC Corp that it could benefit from her years of experience on the inside, and as a result, ABC Corp sends its work to the firm. When the origination report comes around, Susan is quite surprised to learn that John has taken full credit for the ABC Corp matter. When Susan raises the issue with him, John claims that his years of work trying to bring ABC Corp into the firm finally paid off, and Susan is overreaching in her request for a share. John is on the compensation committee and has the power to make Susan’s life very difficult, so she drops the matter.

Key Points Without the ability to see what all members of the firm are earning, especially male counterparts, women lose key information and powerful bargaining power to ensure that they are earning a fair salary and/or bonuses.

1, 2

9 14 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Real-Life Examples Lily worked for decades without knowing that she was paid significantly less for doing the same job as her male colleagues because her firm lacked transparency in its salary and bonus structure. There were no members on the compensation committee specifically paying attention to gender pay equity issues and as such, pay inequities were unintentionally cultivated. Each year, the pay gap grew because Lily’s “current salary,” which served as the basis for determining her next compensation level, was lower than that of her male peers. If the compensation system had been transparent, she would have been able to identify the inequity before it compounded.

Hesitance to negotiate/fear of negative gender stereotyping 1, 2, 5, 24, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52

Key Points Many female lawyers are uncomfortable negotiating their own compensation. As a result, women lawyers are reluctant to advocate or express their views to the firm, which often leads firm leadership to believe that women are satisfied with their compensation. Women are often reluctant to negotiate compensation due to fear of backlash from gender stereotypes that do not create the same barriers for their male counterparts. Women who behave confidently or assertively in the workplace tend to trigger strongly negative evaluations from their colleagues and tend to be less popular than men who behave the same way. As a result, fearful of gaining a reputation as “difficult” or being labeled “selfish,” women forego advocating for themselves at all.

Additionally, women tend to avoid showing emotions/negative feelings for fear of being criticized/stereotyped.

Real-Life Examples

10 Pregnancy/ Primary caregiver status seen as a disadvantage. Also, reduced hours/family commitments are a barrier to promotion 2, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59

After a lifetime of being conditioned to be a team player and to be thankful for what she was given, Rachel works up her courage to ask for a salary bump. She comes to her review meeting with market data and a list of her accomplishments over the past few years that place her in a different compensation category from the one she is currently in. Her reviewer is taken aback by her assertiveness and is offended by her implication that she is being undervalued, and from that point on she is internally labeled as a troublemaker. As a result, she has difficulty getting quality assignments from the partners that used to rely on her expertise.

Key Points Women are often viewed as, and frequently take on the role of, primary caregivers for children and/or elderly parents. This leads to some women taking on a reduced-hours schedule, which has been identified as a barrier to promotion. Male partners may also decide to not staff pregnant women or women with children on their matters because men perceive that such women will have less time to dedicate to the matters or will ultimately be leaving the practice as a result of their family choices. Further, many male partners deem that there is little reason to invest in mentoring these women, assuming that they will ultimately leave the profession.

This stigma exists even if women do not have children. Simply being of childbearing age puts women at a disadvantage versus their male peers if their male superiors assume that because females are capable of having children, they will be less committed to the firm and contribute less value than their male counterparts contribute.

Real-Life Examples

11

April is a single mother of two toddlers who has reduced her hours. As a result, some members of her firm believe she can’t handle the bigger matters at work. She does have a fantastic nanny who is willing to work flexible hours as well as overnight and weekends. However, when it comes time to staff an exciting new case that has just come into the firm, April is overlooked based on the assumption that she would not be open to the travel required to cover depositions across the country and attend the trial. George gets the prime assignment and is put on the fast track for partnership.

the voice of women in the law | 15

Lack of “Two-Person Career” benefiting working women 2, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60

Key Points The “most-hours-wins” system that is common in law firms generally disadvantages women because it relies on having a partner at home who can help manage the household while the other person has long hours or inflexible working schedules. This is known as the “two-person career” model, which traditionally has benefitted the men who are working outside the home.

A two-person career is understood to be one that requires the support and involvement of both partners.

While only one spouse is actually employed, it is assumed that the other will also be substantially involved, often in aspects of planning, preparing, and supporting the efforts of the other in his (or her) career. Traditionally, two-person careers have involved an employed husband.

This setup allows the career spouse to spend more time at work and increase their billable hours. Because of the traditional division of labor in a family, women attorneys seldom experience the benefits of the two-person career model. Furthermore, women often take on the burden of home/family/elder responsibilities, which further hurts their ability to attend to work commitments with conflicting home/family demands.

12 Marriage’s negative impact (perception) 2, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59

Real-Life Examples Jack is managing a cross-practice team to get a large long-term deal done and sets a weekly “all-hands” meeting on Thursday at 7pm. Tamera had signed up to coach her son’s soccer team on Thursdays. Her typical schedule involves rushing to leave the office by 6:15 p.m., running to the field to be the first one to practice, and getting home for a quick bite, goodnight, and back to the computer by 8:45 p.m. Losing those precious few moments of the evening with her son for a meeting that could have easily been scheduled during typical working hours makes her rethink the sacrifices she is willing to make for the job.

Key Points Studies have revealed that employed husbands whose wives do not work outside the home or who work part-time are more likely to: • Have an unfavorable view about the presence of women in the workplace; • Perceive their workplace as running less smoothly if there are higher percentages of women; • Find workplaces that have female leaders as less desirable places to work; and • Evaluate female candidates for promotion as less qualified than comparable male colleagues.

All of these perceptions have a direct negative link to pay equity.

Real-Life Examples Tina has been the breadwinner in her family since she graduated from law school, but Bill, whose wife never worked, constantly makes snide comments about all of Tina’s parental failures – missing the PTA coffee, failing to sign up as a room parent, and “outsourcing parenting responsibilities.”

13 16 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Women have a higher number of nonbillable hours 1, 3, 30, 33

Key Points The typical female equity partner bills only 78% of what a typical male equity partner bills. When asked to report total client billable and non-billable hours, however, the total hours for women equity partners exceeded the total hours for men equity partners. The median hours reported for the women were 2,224, while men reported 2,198. The data raise questions about whether committee assignments, hourly billing rates, and the distribution of pro bono hours contribute to disparities in client billings.

These non-billable hours often bring value to the firm, but without advocates on the compensation committee to recognize the value these activities bring to the firm and include that value in calculating compensation, women are likely to see decreased compensation numbers compared to their male counterparts.

All firm committees need diverse perspectives to maximize their effectiveness, but given many firms’ inability to recruit and retain women that will progress to the senior levels, the pool of women available to participate is smaller. Therefore, fewer women carry the burden of this type of work for the firm without being compensated for the impact that work has on billable hours.

14 Bias in the review system 39, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70

Real-Life Examples Kate uses participation on committees as a networking opportunity (given that she’s not usually invited to watch a sports event with her male colleagues). Kate also knows that helping the firm plan large-scale charity events enhances the firm’s goodwill and reputation, so she is happy to help. On most of the committees Kate sits on, she is given administrative roles such as taking notes and organizing logistics. These tasks are time-consuming and eat into the time Kate spends on getting more billable work. Although her contributions are critical to the committees’ work, they are less visible and, therefore, she does not get much credit.

She certainly does not receive any additional compensation for her time organizing committee work.

Key Points Studies show that women are more harshly evaluated than men, especially when it comes to demeanor. Negative feedback with respect to interpersonal communication negatively impacts the current year’s compensation.

Studies also show that men receive more constructive criticism, whereas women do not receive feedback that encourages growth. Constructive feedback pays off for men in future years for having met goals set in prior evaluations.

Real-Life Examples

15

Libby is smart, highly organized, and a stickler for deadlines. As a result, she keeps clients happy with the work product and quick turn-around times. Jeff is very similar to Libby in demeanor and in his expectations for those working with him on a team. When it comes time for associate evaluations, Libby is described as bossy and arrogant, while Jeff is perceived as a confident and competent leader for the same behaviors and characteristics. This perception gets passed around the firm, and as a result, fewer people desire working with Libby than with Jeff.

the voice of women in the law | 17

Lone Wolf Mentality 71, 72

16 Women are Altruistic 73

17 Discrepancy in Billing Rates 74

Key Points One spoken or unspoken concern of those who oppose team business development efforts is that they will be forced to split their “piece of the pie.” To the contrary, research has shown that team business development increases the size of the pie such that individual shares can be unaffected.

As a result of the “lone wolf mentality” that is prevalent in many firms today, women, who are already at a disadvantage when it comes to collaborative business development because of their gender, are given even fewer opportunities to participate in business development with other team members. This further prevents women from receiving business development guidance, mentorship, and training from their superiors, regardless of whether those superiors are male or female.

Real-Life Examples Luke has been a fantastic mentor to Janelle throughout her years as an associate and played an integral role in her elevation to partnership. However, when it came time to mentor her in business development skills, Luke went radio silent, instead focusing more on mentoring and championing for another associate, Billy, who plays with Luke on his hockey team. Luke often invites Billy to client pitches instead of inviting Janelle. Even though the firm adopts a “lone wolf” model with providing origination credit, Janelle does not get the same opportunities to interact with clients in the same way as Billy, leaving her at a disadvantage.

Key Points When it comes to origination credit-sharing, women tend to be more altruistic than their male counterparts in splitting origination credit with other partners.

Real-Life Examples Kelley practices in Dallas, Texas, but recently brought in a client who is headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona.

Kelley associated local counsel in Phoenix to work on the matter. Kelley wanted local counsel to take ownership in achieving a favorable result and creating a sense of trust in the client, so she shared origination credit with the local counsel. Matthew practices in Atlanta, Georgia, but recently secured a client based in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Matthew associated a Tulsa attorney to serve as local counsel, but did not share the origination credit because it was his original relationship that procured the client.

Key Points Studies have shown that: (1) Women are billed out at lower rates than male attorneys; and (2) Women’s work is discounted more often than that of male attorneys.

This is the case even though, as the Sky Analytics White Paper Gender Study revealed, there is no difference between the number of hours the two sexes bill to complete a task or the number of hours they bill per day.

The study also teaches us that the difference between men’ and women’s billing rates – the gap in the rates at which women are billed as compared to men – increases with their seniority. The more senior a woman lawyer gets, the lower her rate will be relative to her male counterpart with the same years of experience, regardless of whether either has taken a leave.

18 18 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Real-Life Examples June has been practicing law for 25 years. Her billing rate is $125 less per hour than James, who also has 25 years of experience. This billing discrepancy started off as a $10 per hour difference 15 years ago but has grown consistently over the years. June has three institutional clients that have been with the firm for 20 years and threatened to pull their business if June increased her rate as much as James was increasing his rate. The firm agreed with June that the value of keeping her clients coming back with more work over the years was worth the slower rate of increase. Meanwhile, James’ clients have continued to pay his ever-increasing rates for single matters.

Endnotes 1 Lauren Stiller Rikleen, Closing the Gap: A Road Map for Achieving Gender Pay Equity in Law Firm Partner Compensation 9 (2013) https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/women/closing_the_ gap.authcheckdam.pdf.

2 American Bar Association, the Women of the Section of Litigation, Lucia E. Coyoca, Gabriella Nourafchan, Mitchell Silerberg & Knupp LLP, You Work Hard for the Money: Negotiating Your Compensation So You’re Paid What You’re Worth (2015).

3 Stanford Law Women in Law Policy Lab Practicum, Retaining and Advancing Women in National Law Firms (2016).

4 Paula A. Patton, Women Lawyers, Their Status, Influence, and Retention in the Legal Profession, 11 Wm. & Mary J. Women & L. 173 (2005).

5 Erin Coe Law360, Women Fight Back Against the Lawyer Pay Divide, (2016).

6 Lindsay Crouse, How the “Shalane Flanagan Effect” Works, https://nytimes.com/2017/11/11/opinion/sunday/shalane-flanagan-marathon-running.html (2017) 7 Katie Abouzahr et al., “Dispelling the Myths of the Gender ‘Ambition Gap,’” Boston Consulting Group, April 5, 2017, https://www.bcg.com/ en‑cz/publications/2017/people-organization-leadership-change-disspelling-the-myths‑of‑the-gender-ambition-gap.aspx.

8 American Bar Foundation and American Bar Association’s Commission on Women in the Profession, First Chairs at Trial: More Women Need Seats at the Table (2015) https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/ marketing/women/first_chairs2015.authcheckdam.pdf 9 Andrea S. Kramer & Alton B. Harris, Breaking Through Bias: Communication Techniques for Women to Succeed at Work (2016), http://a.co/aL64ZQZ 10 Elizabeth Olsen, More Law Degrees for Women, But Fewer Good Jobs, New York Times (2016), https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/30/business/dealbook/more-law-degrees-for-women-but-fewer-good-jobs.html 11 Lara Bazelon, What It Takes to Be a Trial Lawyer If You’re Not a Man, The Atlantic (2018), https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/female-lawyers-sexism-courtroom/565778/ 12 Laura Tieger-Salisbury, Defeating Unconscious Bias in the Workplace: Making Rational Judgements, Bloomberg BNA Accounting Blog (2016) https://www.bna.com/defeating-unconcious-bias-b57982068241/ 13 Shawn Achor, “Do Women’s Networking Events Move the Needle on Equality?” Harvard Business Review, February 13, 2018, https://hbr.org/2018/02/do-womens-networking-events-move-the-needle-on-equality 14 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “Why Male Mentors in the #MeToo Era Must ‘Engage More, Not Run for the Hills,’” Chronicle of Higher Education, June 6, 2018, https://www.chronicle.com/article/Why-Male-Mentorsin-the-MeToo/243601 15 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “Managing the Impressions You Make,” February 16, 2016, http://andieandal.com/managing-impressions-make/ 16 Ellyn Shook & Julie Sweet, When She Rises, We All Rise, Getting to Equal 2018: Creating a Culture Where Everyone Thrives, Accenture (2018).

17 Lauren Zurbrügg and Kathi N. Miner, “Gender, Sexual Orientation, and Workplace Incivility: Who Is Most Targeted and Who Is Most Harmed?,” Frontiers in Psychology 7 (May 2016), 2, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih. gov/pmc/articles/PMC4851979/pdf/fpsyg-07-00565.pdf 18 Marianne Cooper, “For Women Leaders, Likability and Success Hardly Go Hand-in-Hand,” Harvard Business Review, April 30, 2013, https://hbr.org/2013/04/for-women-leaders-likeability-a 19 Melissa Davey, “Workplaces that Consider Themselves Meritocracies ‘Often Hide Gender Biases,’” Guardian, August 24, 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/aug/24/workplaces-that-consider-themselves-meritocracies-often-hide-gender-biases 20 Minority Corporate Counsel Association, The Myth of the Meritocracy: A Report of the Bridges and Barriers to Success in Large Law Firms (2003), http://archive.mcca.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.viewpage&pageid=614 21 Steve Andersen, “How Men Can Be a Great Ally for Women by Breaking Patterns,” April 22, 2017, https://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/how-men-can-be-a-great-ally-for-women-by-breaking-patterns-babb/, accessed on December 31, 2018.

22 Travis Mitchell, Strong Men, Caring Women: How Americans describe what society values (and doesn’t) in each gender, Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends Project (2018), http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/interactives/strong-men-caring-women/ 23 Lauren Stiller Rikleen, NAWL, Women Lawyers Continue to Lag Behind Male Colleagues (2015) 24 American Bar Associated Task Force on Gender Equity and the Commission on Women in the Profession. What You Need to Know about Negotiating Compensation, (2013) 25 Colleen Chesterman, Anne Ross-Smith, and Margaret Peters, “The Gendered Impact on Organizations of a Critical Mass of Women in Senior Management,” Policy and Society 24, no. 4 (2005): 69–91.

26 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “Gaslighting and a Tip Sheet,” January 12, 2017, http://andieandal.com/gaslighting-tip-sheet/ 27 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “Getting Out from Behind the Modesty Veil,” February 2, 2016, https://andieandal.com/getting-behind-modesty-veil/ 28 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “Gender Stereotypes – Part II: ‘Benevolent’ Biases,” January 4, 2016, https://andieandal.com/gender-stereotypes-part-ii-benevolent-biases/ 29 Andrea S. Kramer & Alton B. Harris, It’s Not You, It’s the Workplace: Women’s Conflict at Work and the Bias That Built It (August 2019), https://www.amazon.com/dp/1473697263/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_U_F7gyCbVCMCJHB 30 Destiny Peery, 2017 National Association of Women Lawyers Survey on Promotion and Retention of Women in Law Firms (2017).

31 Kenneth Johnson, “What Corporations Can Learn about Diversity from the Rooney Rule,” Forbes, February 1, 2018, https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2018/02/01/what-corporations-can-learnabout-diversity-from-the-nfls-rooney-rule/#5782077c47de 32 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “The Apple in the Room: Avoiding the Temptation to Buy into Traditional Gender Stereotypes,” Women on Business, April 28, 2017, https://www.womenonbusiness.com/the-apple-inthe-room-avoiding-the-temptation-to-buy-into-traditional-gender-stereotypes/.

33 Joan C. Williams, the Project for Attorney Retention, & Veta T. Richardson, the Minority Corporate Counsel Association, New Millennium, Same Glass Ceiling? The Impact of Law Firm Compensation Systems on Women 9 (2011).

34 Elizabeth Olson, New York Times, A 44% Pay Divide for Female and Male Law Partners, Survey Says (2016) Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/business/dealbook/female-law-partners-earn-44-less-thanthe-men-survey-shows.html 35 Stephanie A. Scharf, Michele Coleman Mayes, Wendi S. Lazar, Law360, Building Momentum For The Pay Equity Movement In BigLaw (2016) 36 Carol Frohlinger, Business Development in the “New Normal”.

37 Jena McGregor, “Even Among Harvard MBAs, Few Black Women Ever Reach Corporate America’s Top Rungs,” Washington Post, February 20, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/ wp/2018/02/20/even-among-harvard-mbas-few-black-women-ever-reach-corporate-americans-top-rungs/.

38 “Maintaining High-Quality, Reliable Financial Reporting: A Shared and Weighty Responsibility,” Keynote Address, 2015 AICPA Nat’l Conf., Chair Mary Jo White (Dec. 9, 2015), available at https://sec.gov/news/ speech/keynote-2015-aicpa-white.html 39 Charlotte Carroll, “What Is the Rooney Rule? Explaining the NFL’s Diversity Policy for Hiring Coaches,” Sports Illustrated, December 21, 2018, NFL, https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/12/31/rooney-rule-explained-nfl-diversity-policy.

40 Andrea S. Kramer & Alton B. Harris, How to Increase Gender Diversity in Law Firms and Legal Departments, Thomson Reuters Legal Executive Institute, (2016), http://legalexecutiveinstitute.com/increasing-gender-diversity-in-law-firms-and-legal-departments/.

41 Jasmine Pierce, “It’s Not Just a ‘Black Thing:’ Black Women in the Law and Issues of Double Identity and Discrimination” (Washington, D.C.: American University, 2011), https://www.wcl.american.edu/index. cfm?LinkServID=7384CA99-92E2-8DE0-B7F541AF4F08CE05].

42 Heidi Gardner, Harvard Study: On Gender and Origination in the Legal Profession, Bloomberg (2016) https://biglawbusiness.com/harvard-study-on-gender-and-origination-in-the-legal-profession/ 43 Ellen McGirl, “How Lawyers Are Working to Change Their Industry’s Diversity Problem,” Fortune, August 30, 2017, www.fortune.com/go/careers/the-mansfield-rule-lawyers-diversity.

44 Andrea S. Kramer & Alton B. Harris, Diversity Initiatives Need to Change in Light of Criticism, ABA Law Practice Today (2017), http://www.lawpracticetoday.org/article/diversity-initiatives-need-change-light-criticism/.

45 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “Why Women Feel More Stress at Work,” Harvard Business Review, August 4, 2016, https://hbr.org/2016/08/why-women-feel-more-stress-at-work.

46 Hannah Riley Bowles, Psychological Perspectives on Gender in Negotiation, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government 13 (October 2012).

47 Andreas Leibbrandt, John A. List, Do Women Avoid Salary Negotiations From a Large Scale Natural Field Experiment, (2012) 48 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “Five Ways to Reduce Workplace Risks,” November 3, 2016, http://andieandal.com/five-ways-reduce-career-risks-workplace-disagreements/.

49 Alice H. Eagly and Steven J. Karau, “Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice Toward Female Leaders,” Psychological Review 109, no. 3 (July 2002): 573–98, https://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~search1/pdf/Eagley_Role_Conguity_Theory.pdf 50 Deanna Paul, ‘We Didn’t Let Girls Do It in the Old Days,’ a Judge Said. ‘Inappropriate,’ a Higher Court Ruled, Washington Post (July 29, 2018) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2018/07/29/wedidnt-let-girls-do-it-in-the-old-days-a-judge-said-inappropriate-a-higher-court-ruled/?utm_term=.f7d58083e443.

51 Liane Jackson, Why Do Experienced Female Lawyers Leave? Disrespect, Social Constraints, ABA Survey Says, ABA Journal (2018) http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/why_do_experienced_female_lawyers_leave_ disrespect_social_constraints_ABA. 52 Madeline E. Heilman and Alice H. Eagly, “Gender Stereotypes Are Alive, Well, and Busy Producing Workplace Discrimination,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1, no. 4 (December2008): 393–98.

53 Anusia Gillespie, The Horrible Conflict Between Biology and Women Attorneys, http://www.abalcc.org/2017/04/05/the-horrible-conflict-between-biology-and-women-attorneys/ (2017).

54 Sylvia Ann Hewlett, “Executive Women and the Myth of Having It All,” Harvard Business Review, April 2002, http://hbr.org/2002/04/executive-women-and-the-myth-of-having-it-all.

55 Joan C. Williams and Marina Multhaup, “How Managers Can Be Fair About Flexibility for Parents and Non-Parents Alike,” Harvard Business Review, April 27, 2018, https://hbr.org/2018/04/how-managers-can-befair-about-flexibility-for-parents-and-non-parents-alike.

56 National Partnership for Women and Families, “Flexibility for Success: How Workplace Flexibility Policies Benefit All Workers and Employers,” accessed February 16, 2019, www.nationalpartnership.org/our-work/ resources/workplace/flexibility-for-success.pdf.

57 Ellen Galinsky et al., Leaders in a Global Economy: A Study of Executive Women and Men (Families and Work Institute, 2003), https://familiesandwork.org/site/research/summary/globalsumm.pdf.

58 Nara Schoenberg, “Hillary Clinton is Waving the Mom Flag in a Professional Setting. Should You?” The Chicago Tribune, July 28, 2016, https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/ct-0728-hillary-mom-strategy20160728-story.html.

59 Lauren Schiller, “Feminist Leader Gloria Feldt Hates All This Talk About Women ‘Having it All,’” Fortune, March 3, 2016, http://fortune.com/2016/03/03/gloria-feldt-planned-parenthood/.

60 Andie Kramer and Al Harris, “Gender Stereotypes Part V: Motherhood Biases,” January 20, 2016, http://andieandal.com/gender-stereotypes-part-v-motherhood-biases-biases/.

61 Sreedhari D. Desai, Dolly Chugh, and Arthur Brief, Marriage Structure and Resistance to the Gender Revolution in the Workplace (March 12, 2012) available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2018259 or http://dx.doi. org/10.2139/ssrn.2018259 62 Anne Donovan, “What PwC Learned from Its Policy of Flexible Work for Everyone,” Harvard Business Review, January 28, 2019, https://hbr.org/2019/01/what-pwc-learned-from-its-policy‑of‑flexible-work-for-everyone.

63 Anne Fischer, “Women: Want a Promotion? Find the Boss Whose Wife Has a Career,” Fortune, August 1, 2012, fortune.com/2012/08/01/women-want‑a‑promotion-find‑a‑boss-whose-wife-has‑a‑career/ 64 Kieran Snyder, The Abrasiveness Trap: High-Achieving Men and Women Are Described Differently in Reviews, Fortune (2014) http://fortune.com/2014/08/26/performance-review-gender-bias/ 65 Shelley Correll and Caroline Simard, Research: Vague Feedback Is Holding Women Back, Harvard Business Review (2016) https://hbr.org/2016/04/research-vague-feedback-is-holding-women-back 66 Paola Cecchi-DiMeglio, How Gender Bias Corrupts Performance Reviews, and What to Do About It, Harvard Business Review (April 12, 2017), https://hbr.org/2017/04/how-gender-bias-corrupts-performance-reviews-and-what-to-do-about-it 67 Andrea S. Kramer & Alton B. Harris, Eliminating Gender Bias in Your Legal Organization’s Performance Evaluations, Thomson Reuters Legal Executive Institute (2016), http://legalexecutiveinstitute.com/eliminating-gender-bias-firms-evaluations/.

68 Andrea S. Kramer & Alton B. Harris, Taking Control: Women, Gender Stereotypes and Impression Management, Women’s Bar Association of Illinois Newsletter, Winter 2014.

69 Andrea S. Kramer & Alton B. Harris, The Goldilocks Dilemma: Why Career Advancement Is So Much Harder for Women Than Men and What Women Can Do to Change That, ChangeThis (2016), https://changethis. com/manifesto/show/141.01.BreakingThroughBias.

70 Danielle Braff, Are Law Firms That Place Great Importance on ‘Cultural Fit’ Merely Perpetuating the Status Quo?, ABA Journal (2018), http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/is_culture_overrated_law_firms.

71 Arin Reeves, One Size Never Fits All (2014).

72 Andrea S. Kramer, Professional Advancement and Gender Stereotypes: The “Rules” for Better Gender Communications, Women’s Bar Association of Illinois Newsletter, Fall 2011.

73 David Rand, Victoria Brescoll, Jim Everett, Valerio Capraro, Helene Barcelo, Social Heuristics and Social Roles: Intuition Favors Altruism for Women but Not for Men, Journal of Experimental Psychology (2016), http://davidrand-cooperation.com/selected-articles/ 74 Dr. Silvia Hodges Silverstein, White Paper/Gender Study, Sky Analytics (2014), http://www.silviahodges.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Sky-Analytics-Gender-study-WP.pdf.

the voice of women in the law | 19

We are proud to support the

National Association of Women Lawyers

20 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Leading by Example We are proud to support the National Association of Women Lawyers and celebrate its commitment to fostering diversity and inclusion in the legal profession.

Find out how Sidley empowers women lawyers at sidley.com/diversity Sidley’s Committee on Retention and Promotion of Women Co-Chairs: Jennifer C. Hagle, Laurin Blumenthal Kleiman, Kara L. McCall and Angela C. Zambrano Attorney Advertising - Sidley Austin LLP, One South Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60603. +1 312 853 7000.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. MN-10234

AMERICA • ASIA PACIFIC • EUROPE

sidley.com

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN LAWYERS

2018 LEGAL LEADERSHIP SUMMIT WHITE PAPER

By Jenny Yang and Jenny Waters

22 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

A Brief Introduction The National Association of Women Lawyers brought together a small group of top leaders in the legal profession to take part in a strategic planning session to address key barriers to diversity and inclusion in the legal profession. The leadership group included managing partners, practice group leaders, and diversity and inclusion leaders at law firms; general counsel and other senior level in-house counsel; and leaders in the nonprofit space. Leading the discussion was Jenny Yang, Strategic Partner at Working IDEAL and former Chair of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Ms. Yang presented research on strategies for making lasting organizational change aimed at attaining the key objective – diversification of the legal profession at every level. The legal leaders applied those concepts to practical solution-building, informed by their change management experience.

NAWL and Jenny Yang collaborated to produce this white paper, which reflects the wealth of knowledge and experience in change management and diversity and inclusion thought leadership contributed by the attendees. The paper concludes with a host of impactful programs and policies that have been implemented by the entities represented at the Summit, many of which can succeed in a range of practice settings.

NAWL hopes that this paper will be a useful tool for leaders in the legal profession as they engage in their own critical thinking about entity-level diversity and inclusion programs and policies within their own organizations.

the voice of women in the law | 23

The Summit attendees first addressed the ultimate question that would guide the solution-building exercises:

WHAT DOES EQUALITY LOOK LIKE?

They answered a workplace that…

01.

Maximizes each person’s strengths

02.

Offers equal access to the same opportunities

03.

Reflects the diversity of our society at all levels

04.

Reduces the tendency to see more negatives in people who don’t look like us

05.

Reconsiders what the profession views as strengths in its leaders, maximizing the value of the differences in what each individual brings to the table

06.

Minimizes each individual’s weaknesses while maximizing each individual’s strengths

07.

Exhibits 50% men/ 50% women in equity partnerships and in leadership

08.

Creates an urgency around allyship and mentorship

09.

Encourages leaders to share something about themselves that will encourage others to bring their authentic selves to work

10.

Better understands and accepts implicit bias and the impact it has on everyone

11.

Ensures that everyone has the opportunity to get engaged without holding back or without being seen as overreaching

24 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Summit attendees identified some of the ACHIEVING EQUALITY in the legal profession: • Creating an environment that invites women and attorneys of color to put themselves “out there” with innovative ideas

most

DIFFICULT

CHALLENGES

TO

• Addressing concerns about one-on-one mentorship between genders, specifically the concern about how others will view those interactions

• Overcoming resistance (often passive) from those with privilege • Facing complexities of cultures and subcultures within the country, profession, and • Overcoming the barrier posed by separate organizations that layer and impact the work spheres of social interaction in which business environment takes place • Creating a comfort level for men to interact • Ensuring equitable budget support for women’s with and present to their professional women business development efforts partners, clients, and team members • Engaging men and women who have ascended to leadership in actively mentoring and sponsoring those who follow

• Creating a welcoming space for interactions across genders, races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, religions, and other elements of difference

• Recognizing that not all women should have to follow the same path to attain leadership • Overcoming the double standards that apply positions when men interact with men and when women interact with men • Encouraging women and people of color to actively take opportunities to advance their • Having the courage to implement the structure careers that has been designed to solve some diversity and inclusion challenges • Leaving diversity and inclusion work to those specifically tasked with that work and not • Determining what positive or negative engaging more broadly across the firm or legal incentives work given the culture of a particular department legal department, company or firm • Creating messaging to make clear that • Convincing individuals in power of the leadership supports the use of diversity and importance of diversity and inclusion work as inclusion policies a priority • Leaving diversity and inclusion to those in the • Effectively employing client pressure to minority who are trying to ascend, and who diversify as a business imperative are oftentimes not yet in positions of power • Overcoming the perspective that because • Overcoming the perspective that a long legacy egregious behavior has been eradicated, of attrition of those the entity is trying to retain diversity and inclusion work is complete creates mentorship/sponsorship/engagement fatigue • Creating psychologically safe space for everyone, not just those who have historically not been heard (creating a culture of 360-degree inclusion) the voice of women in the law | 25

The leaders also discussed as a group ways to OVERCOME SPECIFIC DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION CHALLENGES, including the following:

• Incentivize leaders to encourage use of diversity- and inclusion-supportive policies • Set measurable goals and highlighting those who accept and meet the challenges • Teach the brain science behind implicit biases to gain understanding and acceptance from evidence-based lawyers • Lead table-top exercises that show the thought process of putting together dream teams using pictures and combining complementary attributes • Avoid blame to make everyone part of the solution • Create unscripted time that allows open discussion of any issue, related to an ongoing project or not (i.e., an open forum to discuss team members’ feelings about recent police shootings or any sort of ongoing protests) • Open a high-level discussion about how to communicate policies to ensure that they are as impactful as intended • Create evaluation categories for diversity and inclusion efforts by all attorneys, linked to compensation metrics • Ensure that committee work on diversity and inclusion policies and programs stays confidential until the committee is ready to publicly roll out the policies with a targeted messaging plan • Find the “why” that will motivate strategies for engagement, but couple that with instructions and consequences • Recognize that all people have implicit biases, regardless of their life experiences • Create accountability for recognizing and interrupting implicit biases and making clear that implicit biases also impact majority team members

26 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

The Charge Jenny Yang led a discussion on two key theories of change informed by social science research and experiences in law firms and other organizations as a springboard for our group discussion.

EXPERT INSIGHT: PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY Psychological safety exists when people feel they can offer ideas, ask questions, and suggest different approaches to a problem without fear of negative consequences. By encouraging people to take interpersonal risks by speaking up, psychologically safe environments create a shared understanding that others will give you the benefit of the doubt. Research has shown that reluctance to offer ideas and expertise lies at the root of many organizational failures in the execution of work that requires judgment or collaboration. When teams value sameness and feel threatened by differences of opinion, team members will not feel safe to raise their views1.

When employees do not feel safe, they may see opportunities to improve the workplace or work product, but they do not share them, which harms the organization. Cultivating mindsets that value listening, openness, and diversity is critical.

Although researchers have studied the concept of psychological safety since the 1960s, Google’s analysis of its data on high-performing teams in 2017 drew renewed attention to the concept.

A recent meta-analysis of research in this area by Lance Frazier and colleagues (2017) reviewed over 100 studies of nearly 5,000 groups and identified some key findings.2 Their analysis found that an environment with psychological safety promotes learning and innovation through information sharing, seeking help, and experimentation. In addition, psychological safety is strongly associated with feeling supported by workplace colleagues as well as with role and expectation clarity, all indicators of a well-functioning organization.3 Strategies for creating psychological safety at work include rewarding members of the team when they speak up and actively listening to others. Leaders can have a strong impact by modeling behaviors that promote psychological safety, by being curious, asking questions, and showing an openness to making mistakes.4

1 Amy Edmondson and Jeff Polzer, Harvard Business School, Why Psychological Safety Matters and What To Do About It, September 6, 2016.

2 Wendy Hirsch, Five Questions About Psychological Safety, Answered, Science at Work, https://scienceforwork.com/blog/psychological-safety/ 3 Id. 4 https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2017/11/15/14-ways-you-can-improve-psychological-safety-at-work/#59393efd5610

the voice of women in the law | 27

CREATING PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFE SPACES The small group of Summit attendees produced some notable concepts and actionable approaches for creating psychological safe spaces: CONCEPTS: • All discussions would benefit from a culture of safe spaces, not just conversations about diversity and inclusion • A lack of psychologically safe spaces will drive people to leave or will impede their career progression; on the flip side, the firm or company will lose the innovation engendered by psychologically safe discussion • Those with loud voices do not have a monopoly on good ideas and often drown out the good ideas of others in the room TACTICS FOR ENGAGEMENT: • Train leaders on how to respond to different voices in the room to make the most of the ideas originating from passionate voices that may be written off as frenetic as well as the soft voices that may be written off as meek and the robotic voices that may be written off as unfeeling • Actively moderate discussions to ensure equal access to the microphone • Amplify good ideas that may not have been fully appreciated (with proper attribution) • Reward the efforts and input of different types of voices • Celebrate more than just the big deals to invite others to show their value • Engage in a wellness or engagement survey of both lawyers and staff to determine how well they feel they are being heard and valued and use the results to inform action • Make use of mentorship programs that explicitly create psychological safe spaces • Review management styles and work styles to allow for feedback on the ability to engage different voices • Create avenues to express good ideas outside of structured meetings

28 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

EXPERT INSIGHT: ENGAGING CHAMPIONS OF CHANGE AND MOVING THE MIDDLE During their Summit, leaders explored how to create broader cultural change within their organizations and the legal profession. How do we engage champions of change and reach people’s hearts and minds so that we begin to shift norms in organizations and engage more people in solving these problems?

Harvard University sociology professor Frank Dobbin, and Tel Aviv University sociology associate professor Alexandra Kalev, co-authored an award-winning article called “Why Diversity Programs Fail.”1 After analyzing three decades worth of data from over 800 companies and interviewing hundreds of line managers and executives, the researchers found that the best way to bring managers on board to promote diversity efforts is to enlist managers as champions. A traditional approach that focuses on controlling behavior of managers does not work and can even activate bias or promote backlash and resistance.

Creating an environment where people feel internally motivated to advance diversity and inclusion, rather than feeling forced into it, is critical. The researchers recommend three foundational principles: 1) engage leaders in solving the problem; 2) increase on-the-job contact with different groups; and 3) encourage social accountability – the desire to look fair-minded – by promoting transparency and discussion. By providing organizational leaders insight into the nature of concerns and offering concrete and actionable ways to contribute, managers are more likely to invest time creating opportunities to advance women and attorneys of color in the profession.

Engaging the “moveable middle” within an organization can shift organizational culture. In most change efforts, there will be a committed group of advocates leading the change, but a large majority of those in the workplace will remain in the middle, neither committed nor hostile to the effort. Engaging this middle group of “getable” individuals can shift the norms within an organization so that the majority within the organization is actively supportive of the goal of advancing women and attorneys of color within the organization.

In How Change Happens, Why Some Social Movements Succeed While Others Don’t, Leslie Crutchfield examines the movements behind a number of important long-term social changes—from LGBT marriage equality to tobacco control to Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Crutchfield argues that successful movements focus on a shift in social norms, not just policy reforms. For example, in the marriage equality movement, leaders found that messaging focusing on “rights” motivated those who were already with them, but it did not engage those in the middle. After polling research showed that a focus on “love” connected with people at a deeply human level, the movement refocused on a message that “Love is Love,” and, eventually, grassroots efforts around the country led to a change in marriage laws.

Creating empathy and connecting across core human values is an important component of a broader change strategy. Understanding what motivates those in the middle in your organization is an important starting place.

Engaging the moveable middle is step one of the process. Step two is funneling their newfound engagement into the organizational and systems changes needed to counteract bias and create opportunities for women. Only if founded on these behavioral changes can solution management be successful.

1 Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev, Harvard Business Review (July 1, 2016), https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail.

the voice of women in the law | 29

MOVEABLE MIDDLE Multiple small groups of Summit attendees addressed how to engage the “moveable middle” within their legal departments and firms, first identifying the target constituency and then offering strategies to engage that group to exert their influence on diversifying the organization.

MOVEABLE MIDDLE DEFINITION (LAW FIRMS): In recognition of the pyramid structure of many law firms, the group identified junior to mid-level partners as the group with both horizontal and vertical influence who are more relatable to the younger group of attorneys, but have proven themselves to more senior leaders of the organization; because they touch a significant amount of the work and engage with numerous attorneys at various levels, they can have significant influence through the review process

TACTICS FOR ENGAGEMENT: • Create an atmosphere that embraces diversity and inclusion as a culture requirement • Get the moveable middle to recognize their power and the value they provide in investing in younger attorneys • Identify ways to shine light on the moveable middle’s good work or other ways of incentivizing their efforts • Host a senior associate/junior partner retreat with the goal of empowering them to implement the firm/corporate culture of diversity • Train senior associates/junior partners to exert their power and influence on behalf of women lawyers and diversity priorities • Encourage the moveable middle to create programming in partnership with clients to enhance diversity

30 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

MOVEABLE MIDDLE DEFINITION (CORPORATE LEGAL DEPARTMENT): A broad swath of the firm’s/company’s population – those who are very busy, but their priorities do not include engagement with diversity and inclusion initiatives

TACTICS FOR ENGAGEMENT: • The business case is well-established, but not a motivation; the firm/company needs to identify an emotional reframing (e.g., as with the marriage equality movement) • Consider using the emotional hook of success – everyone wants to feel successful in their individual jobs and as a collective, so redefine success to include diversity achievements • Incorporate diversity and inclusion into corporate or firm value statements • Shift diversity and inclusion projects from D&I-specific groups to top-level management to help drive a change management strategy • Use employee resource groups to create opportunities to engage across levels of seniority, which creates a sense of belonging on the part of the younger attorneys and a sense of obligation to make change on the part of the more senior attorneys, business managers, and business executives • Create a corporate culture in which people see success on diversity and inclusion initiatives as an integral part of their personal career success • Focus on concrete metrics to ensure that company-wide efforts will ultimately lead to your goal of diversification in succession planning.

the voice of women in the law | 31

Operational Design Challenges A final small group of Summit attendees discussed operational design challenges and solutions. Key issues for discussion were succession planning and pay equity. For both issues, the group proposed collaborating between outside and in-house counsel to close the pay gap and increase the number of women and attorneys of color who are in line to succeed to the role of relationship partner.

• In-house counsel should be aware of their outside firms’ succession planning procedure from the beginning • Clients and firms should partner in identifying the attorney who will ascend to the role of relationship partner and clients should request inclusionary consideration of women or people of color on the list of candidates; the transparency will create the foundation for trust in the relationship • Firm lawyers should position themselves to be the client’s goto advisor by being aware of the economic concerns of their clients to better understand how to help them maximize their value • As in the case of succession planning, transparency is a key strategy for closing a pay gap; both transparency in compensation and in key performance indicators • As in the case of succession planning, clients should be aware of and influence the distribution of origination credit for their work • Any legal employer must be thoughtful about review categories and ensure they are, themselves, free from bias and objectively applied • Legal employers should empower women to have conversations about pay equity • Legal employers should analyze their compensation data to identify any gaps and address the underlying reasons for any discrepancies

32 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Proven Operational Design Proposal The summit wrapped up with information sharing on diversity and inclusion programs that leaders have successfully implemented and that have the potential to diversify legal employers and, ultimately, the legal profession. These are practical solutions that can be implemented by any kind of legal employer and many operate in collaboration between multiple partners, including clients. The programs all have one thing in common – they are win-win for the employers who want to increase the bottom line and provide meaningful career opportunities to all attorneys regardless of gender.

Implement a ready now/ready next promotion program to identify potential leaders and develop them over time Offer young associates at law firms a secondment opportunity in which they are assigned a corporate mentor, learn the business, and become a go-to resource for the client when they return to the firm.

Create a summer associate Diversity & Inclusion internship to help create a pipeline of diverse women lawyers. Partner with a client to create a co-internship opportunity and increase the associate’s exposure to different kinds of practices and different kinds of employers. It provides a good opportunity to bond with the firm’s clients.

NAWL partners with Prudential to offer a summer associate opportunity for a 1L woman lawyer.

The intern starts their summer at the LCLD conference with the rest of Prudential’s intern class, spends the summer in a substantive mentoring setting rotating through practice groups, and ends the summer with an “on campus” interview opportunity with Prudential’s outside firm partners.

In-house counsel can set up a pitch competition for a CLE opportunity for its diverse outside counsel, especially for those at the firm who are in the client’s succession pipeline. Once on site, the winner should have the opportunity to spend time with corporate decision-makers after delivering a substantive CLE program to the legal group.

Offer a diverse lawyer retreat for women and diverse attorneys and the firms’ clients, ensuring appropriate representation from firm leadership. Offer programming and networking opportunities to allow for meaningful interaction between the firm’s diverse attorneys and clients.

Bring women’s initiative members together to identify your firm’s challenges for recruitment, retention, and advancement of women lawyers. They should focus on problem identification and assessing what solutions are realistic from a business perspective. The act of getting involved in that process offers women training and leadership opportunities as well as insight into the mindset of a business leader. It also gives the business leaders direct insight into the firm’s unique challenges to allow for targeted problem-solving.

the voice of women in the law | 33

NAWL THANKS the legal leaders who participated in the 2018 Legal Leadership Summit for their time, expertise, and innovative collaboration. These are the kinds of conversations that will allow the legal profession to move from problem identification to problem solving in the diversity and inclusion space.

Jenny R. Yang serves as Strategic Partner with Working Ideal where she advises employers in applying evidenced-based research in the design and implementation of employment practices to prevent harassment, foster respectful workplaces, and promote inclusion and equality of opportunity. Ms. Yang served as Chair of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from September 2014 to January 2017 and as ViceChair and a member of the Commission from 2013 to 2018. Under her leadership, the Commission launched the Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace to identify innovative solutions to prevent harassment at work, strengthened tools for equal pay enforcement, and issued updated retaliation guidance.

Jenny Waters is a former executive director of the National Association of Women Lawyers where she directed the organization’s operations and implementation of the strategic plan. Prior to her work at NAWL, Ms. Waters was a partner at a Chambers-ranked boutique law firm in Chicago handling complex commercial litigation. Ms. Waters graduated from Princeton University in 1998 and earned her J.D. from Northwestern University School of Law in 2002.

34 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

the voice of women in the law | 35

36 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

the voice of women in the law | 37

WINSTON DIVERSITY & INCLUSION

Global Diversity & Inclusion are core values and strategic goals at Winston & Strawn.

Winston’s vision is to cultivate a culture where all talented contributors can have and see a path to long-term success.

Diverse and inclusive teams reflect the world we serve, create a stronger organization, and produce the best results for our clients.

Winston is proud to support the National Association of Women Lawyers.

North America

Europe

38 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Asia

winston.com

the voice of women in the law | 39

NETWORKING ROSTER

The NAWL Networking Roster is a service for NAWL members to provide career and business networking opportunities within NAWL. Inclusion in the roster is an option available to all members, and is neither a solicitation for clients nor a representation of specialized practice or skills. Areas of practice concentration are shown for networking purposes only.

ALABAMA

CALIFORNIA

DC

ILLINOIS

Michelle Camp Kay Camp Freelance Litigation & Legal Consulting 8600 Hearthstone Drive Montgomery, AL, 36117 mcamp@kaycamp.com 310.359.2159 LIT, BSL, APP, CLT

Allison Buchner Kirkland & Ellis LLP 333 S. Hope Street, 29th Floor Los Angeles, CA, 90071 allison.buchner@kirkland.com 213.680.8154 LIT, ILP

Maximilienne Giannelli Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP 910 New York Avenue, North West Washington, DC, 20001 max.giannelli@finnegan.com 202.408.4147 ILP

Kristen E. Hudson Chuhak & Tecson, P.C. 30 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2600 Chicago, IL, 60606 khudson@chuhak.com 773.914.4130 BSL, INS

ARIZONA Julie M. Birk Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner 2 North Central Avenue, Suite 2100 Phoenix, AZ, 85004 julie.birk@bclplaw.com 602.364.7282 BKR, FIN, BNK Stephanie Harper Easterling Law Offices of Stone & Davis PC 8601 North Scottsdale Road, Suite 305 Scottsdale, AZ, 85253 steph@stonedavislaw.com 480.609.1490 FAM, ADR, LIT Sandra Ann Munier Munier Legacy Center / Dream Business By Design, LLC 8194 W. Deer Valley Road, #106-352 Peoria, AZ, 85382 sandramunier777@gmail.com 480.450.5720 EST,CLT Megan Ritenour Gust Rosenfeld PLC One East Washington Street, Suite 1600 Phoenix. AZ, 85004 mritenour@gustlaw.com 602.257.7951 INS , CNS, LIT

Melissa Grant Capstone Law APC 1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA, 90067 melissa.grant@capstonelawyers.com 310.556.4811 CAS, APP, EEO, LIT Sharre Lotfollahi Kirkland & Ellis LLP 333. S. Hope St. Los Angeles, CA, 90071 sharre.lotfollahi@kirkland.com 213-680-8673 ILP, LIT Angela Leann Grant CSE Insurance Group 2121 N. California Blvd, Suite 900 Walnut Creek, CA, 94596 agrant@cseinsurance.com 925.817.6484 INS, COR, CMP Sara Louise Markert Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP 3161 Michelson Dr, Suite 1500 Irvine, CA, 92612 sara.markert@bclplaw.com 949.223.7245 BSL, FIN, BNK, IST Jennifer C. Rasmussen Demler, Armstrong & Rowland LLP 601 California Street, Suite 704 San Francisco, CA, 94108 ras@darlaw.com 416.949.1900 LIT, TOX

COLORADO Julia Loyd DaVita Inc 2000 16th St Denver, CO, 80202 julialoyd1@gmail.com

CONNECTICUT Hailey Rice Connecticut Trial Firm, LLC 437 Naubuc Ave, Suite 107 Glastonbury, CT, 6033 hailey@cttrialfirm.com 860.471.8333 PIL, MED, PRL, WOR

40 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Gwen Green Holland & Hart LLP 975 F St NW, Suite 900 Washington, DC, 20004 gsgreen@hollandhart.com 202.654.6913 INT, CMP Jennifer M. Hayes Jordan IP Law 1701 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC. 20006 jhayes@jordaniplaw.com 202.663.9317 ILP Elizabeth Niemeyer Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP 901 New York Avenue, North West Washington, DC, ,20001 elizabeth.niemeyer@finnegan.com 202.408.4000 ILP, LIT

DELAWARE Kyle Evans Gay Connolly Gallagher LLP 1000 West Street, Suite 1400 Wilmington, DE, 19801 kgay@connollygallagher.com 302.757.7316 BSL Karen Keller Shaw Keller LLP 1105 N. Market St, 12th floor Wilmington, DE, 19801 kkeller@shawkeller.com 302.298.0702 ILP, COM

INDIANA Kasey Elaine Dafoe Semko Law Office 833 West Lincoln Highway, Suite 450 East Schererville, IN, 46375 kasey@semkolaw.com 219.802.5720 CRM, GRD, FAM, EST Emily Suzie Smith Taylor, Chadd, Minnette, Schneider & Clutter P.C. 105 North Washington Street Crawfordsville, IN, 47933 ssmith@tcmsclaw.com 765.918.5029 FAM, MUN, PRB, EST

LOUISIANA Erin Nicole Abrams Sudduth & Associates, LLC 1109 Pithon Street Lake Charles, LA, 70601 erin@saa.legal 337.480.0101 EEO, CIV, FAM, LIT

MARYLAND Vicky Beasley McPherson MedStar Health 10980 Grantchester Way Columbia, MD, 21044 vicky.b.mcpherson@medstar.net 410.772.6697 COR, M&A, NPF, HCA

MINNESOTA FLORIDA Allison E. Campbell Hill Ward Henderson 101 East Kennedy Boulevard Suite 3700 Tampa, FL, 33602 allison.campbell@hwhlaw.com 813.221.3900 RES, TAX, BNK Gigi Rollini Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson 106 East College Avenue Suite 700 Tallahassee, FL,32301 grollini@sternsweaver.com 850.329.4877 APP, LIT, CMP, GOV

Barbara Joan Klas Casepoint LLC 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1900 Minneapolis, MN, 55402 bklas@casepoint.com LIT, COM, CLT Shauna MacDougall 3M Company 3M Center, Building 220 St. Paul, MN, 55144-1000 smmacdougall@mmm.com 651.736.0278 COR, CCL, PRL, ADV

MISSOURI Rebecca McMahon Lathrop Gage LLP 2345 Grand Boulevard, Suite 2200 Kansas City, MO, 64108 rmcmahon@lathropgage.com 816.460.5542 LIT, PIL, PRL, TOL

Jerina D. Phillips Lewis Rice LLC 600 Washington Avenue, Suite 2500 St. Louis, MO, 63101 jphillips@lewisrice.com 314.444.1302 COM, EEO, APP, BSL

Morghan Richardson Davidoff, Hutcher & Citron LLP 605 Third Avenue, 34th Floor New York, NY, 10158 mlr@dhclegal.com 646.428.3119 FAM, ELD, ADO, BSL Bernadette Weaver-Catalana MG+M Law Firm 180 Maiden Lane, Suite 901 New York, NY, 10038 bcatalana@mgmlaw.com 929.378.4800 TOX, PRL

NEW JERSEY Danielle Key Beckett Key Law Group 121 North Black Horse Pike Mt. Ephraim, NJ, 8059 dkey@beckettkey.com 856.312.8780 FAM, LIT, PIL, CRM Nadine Maleski Maleski, Eisenhut & Zielinski, LLC 169 Main Street Flemington, NJ, 8822 Nadine@MEZlawyers.com 908.237.9711 FAM, ADR, ARB,DOM

OHIO Christine Haaker Thompson Hine LLP 10050 Innovation Drive Suite 400 Miamisburg, OH, 45066 christine.haaker@thompsonhine.com BSL, APP, COM, PRL

Tracy Jane Dalton Legility 4950 N. O’Connor Road, Suite 102 Irvine, TX, 75062 tracy.dalton@legility.com 214.883.8031 EEO, M&A, LIT, BSL Shauna Izadi Friedman & Feiger 5301 Spring Valley, Suite 200 Dallas, TX, 75254 sizadi@fflawoffice.com 972.450.7331 BSL, ILP, LIT

Josephine L.Comegna Fasken 333 Bay Street, Suite 2400 Toronto, ON, M5H 2T6 jcomegna@fasken.com 416.865.4454 LIT, TOL, BSL, COM

Emily D. Anderson Pepper Hamilton LLP 620 Eighth Avenue, 37th Floor New York, NY, 10018 andersoe@pepperlaw.com 212.808.2702 CNS Rachel Behar Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law 95 Wall Street., Apartment 1111 New York, NY, 10005 rachelebehar@gmail.com 561.701.7933 COR, INV, FIN, SEC Sandra Langolf Kaufman Borgeest & Ryan LLP 120 Broadway 14th Floor New York, NY, 10271 sandrad348@gmail.com 917.587.8335 MED

TEXAS Sarah Bradbury Stewart Bradbury PLLC 6060 N. Central Expressway, Suite 500 Dallas, TX, 75206 sarah@bradburypllc.com EEO, ADR, SHI, LIT

ONTARIO

NEW YORK

ILP, LIT, BIO, NET Pamela D. Hans Anderson Kill P.C. 1760 Market Street, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA , 19103 phans@andersonkill.com 267.216.2700 INS, COR, LIT, EPA

Tahira Khan Merritt Law Office of Tahira Merritt 8499 Greenville Avenue, Suite 206 Dallas, TX, 75231 tahira@tkmlawfirm.com 214.503.7300 PIL, TOL, LIT

PENNSYLVANIA Deirdre Groenen Bazelon, Less & Feldman, P.C. 716 S. 7th Street Philadelphia, PA, 19147 dgroenen29@gmail.com 267.240.1386 EEO, DIV, LIT Alexandra Haner Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP 500 Grant Street , Suite 4900 Pittsburgh, PA, 15219 ahaner@vorys.com 412.904.7696

Kandy E. Messenger Sprott Newsom Quattlebaum & Messenger, PC 2211 Norfolk, Suite 1150 Houston, TX, 77098 messenger@sprottnewsom.com 713.523.9442 LIT, COM, CON Sondra Sylva Drinker Biddle and Reath, LLP 1717 Main Street, Suite 5400 Dallas, TX, 75248-3835 sondra.sylva@dbr.com 469.357.2531 INS

VIRGINIA Rosanna Carmen Lopez Lopez & Wu, PLLC 1818 Library Street, Suite 500 Reston. VA, 20190 rlopez@lopezandwu.com EEO, LIT, SHI, CIV Neysha Marie Serrano IUBAC 1401 N Taft St , Apt 409 Arlington, VA, 22201 marienmslaw@outlook.com 813.944.9045 EEO

Michelle M. Oneil O’Neil Wysocki 5323 Spring Valley Road ,Suite 150 Dallas, TX, 75254 michelle@owlawyers.com 972.852.8000 FAM, LIT, APP

PRACTICE AREA KEY

CNS

Construction

ERISA ERISA

JUV

Juvenile Law

SPT

Sports Law

ACC Accounting

COM

Complex Civil Litigation

EST

Estate Planning

LIT

Litigation

SSN

Social Security

ADO Adoption

CON

Consumer

ETH

Ethics & Prof. Resp.

LND

Land Use

STC

Security Clearances

ADR

COR

Corporate

EXC

Executive Compensation

LOB

Lobby/Government Affairs

TAX

Tax

ADV Advertising

CPL

Corporate Compliance

FAM

Family

MAR

Maritime Law

TEL

Telecommunications

ANT Antitrust

CRM

Criminal

FIN

Finance

MEA

Media

TOL

Tort Litigation

APP Appeals

CUS

Customs

FRN

Franchising

MED Medical Malpractice

TOX

Toxic Tort

ARB Arbitration

DEF

Defense

GAM

Gaming

M&A Mergers & Acquisitions

TRD

Trade

AVI

Aviation

DIV

Diversity & Inclusion

GEN

Gender & Sex

MUN Municipal

TRN

Transportation

BDR

Broker Dealer

DOM

Domestic Violence

GOV

Government Contracts

NET

Internet

T&E

Wills, Trusts & Estates

BIO

Biotechnology

GRD Guardianship

NPF

Nonprofit

WCC

White Collar Crime

BKR

Bankruptcy

EDR Electronic Discovery Readiness Response

HCA

Health Care

OSH

Occupational Safety & Health WOM Women’s Rights

BNK

Banking

HOT

Hotel & Resort

PIL

Personal Injury

BSL

Commercial/ Bus. Lit.

ILP

Intellectual Property

PRB

Probate & Administration

CAS

Class Action Suits

IMM

Immigration

PRL

Product Liability

CCL

Compliance Counseling

INS

Insurance

RES

Real Estate

CIV

Civil Rights

INT

International

RSM Risk Management

CLT

Consultant

INV

Investment Services

SEC

Securities

IST

Information Tech/Systems

SHI

Sexual Harassment

Alt. Dispute Resolution

CMP Compliance

EDI E-Discovery EDU

Education

EEO

Employment & Labor

ELD

Elder Law

ELE

Election Law

ENG

Energy

ENT

Entertainment

EPA

Environmental

WOR Worker’s Compensation

the voice of women in the law | 41

NAWL WELCOMES NEW MEMBERS

Membership in the National Association of Women Lawyers has many advantages, among them, opportunities for continuing legal education, a subscription to the Women Lawyers Journal, leadership development and professional networking with other members. Please welcome these new members who joined to take advantage of these and the many other member benefits.

Caitlin Abram Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Wendy Badger ECMC Group, Inc. Minneapolis, MN

Randa Adra Crowell & Moring LLP New York, NY

Dani May Baird Dani Baird Comstock Park, MI

Alexandra Alberstadt Perkins Coie LLP New York, NY

Holly Baird PayPal Inc. Austin , TX

Kristina Alekseyeva Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Kelly Jane Balkin Hogan Lovells US LLP Baltimore, MD

Hazel Victoria Alessandrini-Porter Brooklyn, NY

Lauren Barghols Hanna Phillips Murrah P.C. Edmond, OK

Taniesha Alexander Florida A&M University College of Law Orlando, FL

Caroline J. Barker The George Washington University Law School Arlington, VA

Anat Allal Van Ness Feldman LLP Washington, D.C.

Rita F. Barone Purcell, Mulcahy & Flanagan, LLC Bedminster, NJ

Summer E. Allen Alston & Bird LLP Dallas, TX

Lori Bauer Jackson Lewis P.C. New York, NY

Elizabeth Alspector PayPal/Venmo New York, NY

Carole M. Becker McDermott Will & Emery LLP Miami, FL

Alina Ananian Alston & Bird LLP Los Angeles, CA

Naomi G. Beer Greenberg Traurig, LLP Denver, CO

David M. Anderson St. Paul, MN

Kristine Begley Samsung Electronics America Ridgefield Park, NJ

Ariel Anderson Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC Nicole Ankeny Travelers St. Paul, MN Chantelle Ankerman McCarter & English, LLP Hartford, CT Deborah E. Arbabi Crowell & Moring LLP Irvine, CA Judith A. Archer Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP New York, NY Catherine M. Asuncion Klinedinst PC San Diego, CA Eleanor Brooke Atkins McDermott Will & Emery LLP Washington, DC Kate Austin Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America Minneapolis, MN Christine Susan Azar Burford Capital New York, NY

42 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Rachel Behar Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law New York, NY Brigida Benitez Steptoe & Johnson LLP Washington, DC Maria Benvenuto Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY Laurie Berke-Weiss Berke-Weiss Law New York, NY Dayna Berkowitz Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Los Angeles, CA Kritika Bharadwaj McCarter & English, LLP Boston, MA

Julie M. Birk Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP Phoenix, AZ Carolyn Blankenship Thomson Reuters New York, NY Carla Boddy PayPal, Inc. Shaker Heights, OH Kay Bolanos University of St. Thomas School of Law Robbinsdale, MN Yelena Bond Duane Morris LLP Huntingdon Valley, PA Kelly Ann Bonner Duane Morris LLP Philadelphia, PA Sarah R. Boonin Suffolk University Law School Boston, MA Scott J. Bornstein Greenberg Traurig, LLP New York, NY Destiny Lee Bounds Kutak Rock LLP Kansas City, MO Lindsey Boyle Diversity Lab Belvedere, CA Erin Nicole Brady Hogan Lovells US LLP Los Angeles, CA Catherine Elizabeth Bratic Hogan Lovells US LLP Houston, TX Wendy M. Bratten Larson King LLP Saint Paul, MN Kelly Brennan McCarter & English, LLP Newark, NJ Caroline Bressman Nichols Kaster, PLLP Minneapolis, MN Nicole Briody McDermott Will & Emery LLP Chicago, IL

Joan Bibelhausen Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers St. Paul, MN

Linda Broocks Kean Miller LLP Houston, TX Vanessa K. Browder Mayer Brown LLP New York, NY

Bailey K. Bifoss Fisher & Phillips LLP San Francisco, CA

Jessica I. Brown Jennings, Haug & Cunningham Phoenix, AZ

Jessica B. Bigby Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Caroline Frances Brown Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Lindsay Brown Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Kelly Clark Clark Law LLC New Brighton, MN

Ibi Davis-Ossuetta Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Los Angeles, CA

Suzanne M. Bruney The Bruney Firm LLC Philadelphia, PA

Caitlin Cleary Gemini Trust Company LLC New York, NY

Caitlin M. Dean Fish & Richardson P.C. Houston, TX

Raquel Buckley PayPal Inc. Austin, TX

Hilary Hudson Clifton Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Kathleen DeCelie Prudential Financial, Inc. Newark, NJ

Heather Campbell Burgess Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Chicago, IL

Jennifer Cochrane Hogan Lovells US LLP Houston, TX

Bernadette DeCelle McCarter & English, LLP Hartford, CT

Cathy L. Burgess Alston & Bird LLP Washington, DC

Sarah Coe Fish & Richardson P.C. Minneapolis, MN

Vanessa DeCourcy Best Buy Richfield, MN

Rachel Burkhart Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Denver, CO

Erin Catherine Cole San Diego, CA

Susan Frances Dent Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP San Francisco, CA

Michelle Camp Kay Camp Freelance Litigation & Legal Consulting Montgomery, AL Sarah Cansler Alston & Bird LLP Raleigh, NC Lisa Carlson Chicago-Kent College of Law Chicago, IL Alexandra Carlton The George Washington University Law School Washington, DC Ashton Carpenter Alston & Bird LLP Atlanta, GA Carmen Caserta The Law Studio of Carmen Caserta New York, NY Brittainy Cavender Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC Caitlin Ceci S.J. Quinney College of Law Salt Lake City, UT Anne Celestin Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY Linda Chang Alston & Bird LLP Washington, DC Erin Chapman Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC Emma J. Chapman McDermott Will & Emery LLP Washington, DC Jane Chen Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC Yiyang Cheng Hogan Lovells US LLP Philadelphia, PA Sarah J. Choi New York Life Insurance Company New York, NY Anna Chong Alston & Bird LLP Dallas, TX Nyssa P. Chopra Microsoft Seattle, WA

Josephine L. Comegna Fasken Toronto, ON

Linda DeSmyter Davie, FL

Emily Cook McDermott Will & Emery LLP Los Angeles, CA

Christine Deugwillo PayPal, Inc. Baltimore, MD

Gordon Cooney Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP Philadelphia, PA

Carla DeVelder PayPal Inc. Omaha, NE

Cody J. Cooper Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Ekta Dharia MoloLamken LLP New York, NY

Jessica Nicole Cory Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Erica Lindsay DiBella PayPal Inc. Timonium, MD

Danna Cotman ARC IP Law, PC La Jolla, CA

Ariyike Oshunkoya Diggs McDermott Will & Emery LLP New York, NY

Juliet Ann Cox Kutak Rock LLP Kansas City, MO

Sandra DiVarco McDermott Will & Emery LLP Chicago, IL

Megan Cross McDermott Will & Emery LLP Los Angeles, CA

Danielle Dobrusin Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP New York, NY

Allison Crowe McDermott Will & Emery LLP New York, NY

Tracy Lee Donahue PayPal, Inc. Scottsdale, AZ

Patricia Simone Cruz AT&T Miami, FL

Kathleen Donley Cahn & Samuels LLP Washington, DC

Annmarie D’Amour Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP New York, NY

Michelle Donovan Duane Morris LLP San Diego, CA

Kelly A. Dabek Duane Morris LLP Newark, NJ

Christen Douglas McDermott Will & Emery LLP New York, NY

Kasey Elaine Dafoe Semko Law Office Schererville, IN

Marlene M. Duarte McDermott Will & Emery LLP Miami, FL

Tracy Jane Dalton Legility Irvine, TX

Kasie Merlene Durkit Superior Court of the District of Columbia Washington, DC

Gina Damiano Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA

Susan Ambler Ebersole Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Phoebe Dantoin Boston University Brighton, MA

Marc Edwards Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Kalli Nicole Davis Kutak Rock LLP Omaha, NE

Nicholle Edwards Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

the voice of women in the law | 43

NEW MEMBERS LIST Margaret Elliott McDermott Will & Emery LLP New York, NY

Rachel J. Freyman Kutak Rock LLP Little Rock, AR

Irina Goga Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Tara P. Ellis Balch & Bingham LLP Jackson, MS

Debra Frimerman Syngenta Minnetonka, MN

Mark E. Golman Phillips Murrah P.C. Dallas, TX

Catherin M. Essig Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Joanna M. Fuller Fish & Richardson P.C. San Diego, CA

Alexis Gonzalez Gonzalez & Associates Miami, FL

Kyle Evans Gay Connolly Gallagher LLP Wilmington, DE

Jamie N. Furst Alston & Bird LLP Los Angeles, CA

Sarah Goodwin Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Jennifer Buczek Ezring Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP New York, NY

Meaghan Gandy Kutak Rock LLP Omaha, NE

Julia Grabowska Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Afigo I. Fadahunsi Tanenbaum Keale LLP Newark, NJ

Chakameh Ganji Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Los Angeles, CA

Kathryn Graham American University- Washington College of Law Washington, DC

Fran Faircloth Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Kiera S. Gans DLA Piper LLP New York, NY

Noelle Graney Kutak Rock LLP Scottsdale, AZ

Una Chiao-Yi Fan Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Rupinder Garcha Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Melissa Grant Capstone Law APC Los Angeles, CA

Stephanie Fasching Western Michigan University Cooley Law School Tampa, FL

Brenda Cristina Garcia ARM Solutions Camarillo, CA

Meredith Grant Duane Morris LLP San Diego, CA

Meghan Elyse Fenzel Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA

Melissa Gardner Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Deirdre Groenen Bazelon, Less & Feldman, P.C. Philadelphia, PA

Sara Fernandez Rodriguez McDermott Will & Emery LLP Washington, DC

Jordana Garellek Duane Morris LLP New York, NY

Sarah Grotha Travelers St. Paul, MN

Diana C. Fields Kutak Rock LLP Denver, CO

Daniel Garrie JAMS Los Angeles, CA

Catherine C. Gryczan Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Chicago, IL

Rachel Fleeson Hogan Lovells US LLP McLean, VA

Kathleen E. Garvey Sidley Austin LLP Chicago, IL

Sally Gu Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Olga Fleysh Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Kate Gaudry Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP Washington, DC

Bethany M. Gullman Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Washington, DC

Gina M. Foran Duane Morris LLP San Francisco, CA

Gary P. Gengel Latham & Watkins New York, NY

Stephanie Gumm Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Indianapolis, IN

Lara Foster Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA

Sheeva June Ghassemi-Vanni Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA

Jean Gustafson Gustafson Law Office Brainerd, MN

Andrea Melissa Frailey Dykema Gossett PLLC Detroit, MI

Neda Ghomeshi Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Coral Gables, FL

Ava G. Gutfriend Law Office of Ava G. Gutfriend Bronx, NY

Sandra Francis Allina Health Minneapolis, MN

Sarah Ghulamhussain Fenwick & West, LLP New York, NY

Becky Gutierrez Day Pitney LLP Parsippany, NJ

Andrea Fraser-Reid Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Emily Gianquinto McCarter & English, LLP Hartford, CT

Nellie Guzman Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Christina Adriana Fraziero Gemini Trust Company LLC New York , NY

Michelle Gierke Target Corporation Minneapolis, MN

Christine Haaker Thompson Hine LLP Miamisburg, OH

Laura Frederick Laura Frederick Law Austin, TX

Caroline Marie Gieser Alston & Bird LLP Atlanta, GA

Julia Haigney Sullivan & Cromwell LLP New York, NY

Ayana Free Zocdoc New York, NY

Kayce Lee Gisinger Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Kathryn Haines Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Nicole Joy Frethem Minnesota Department of Human Services Shoreview, MN

Megan S. Goddard Goddard Law New York, NY

Erica Halley Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

44 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Genevieve Halpenny McCarter & English, LLP Wilmington, DE

Erin L. Hoffman Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Victoria Joseph Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Kerry Halpern Holland & Knight LLP Philadelphia, PA

Jenny Hu Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Arian M. June Debevoise & Plimpton LLP Washington, DC

Carrie Hammer Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Stephanie Hu PayPal Inc. San Francisco, CA

Theresa Kalathil Gibbons P.C. Newark, NJ

Malak Hamwi Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Esra Hudson Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP Los Angeles, CA

Jane Kalinina Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, NY

Mala A. Harker Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman New York, NY

Kristen E. Hudson Chuhak & Tecson, P.C. Chicago, IL

Rachel Kaminski Hogan Lovells US LLP Baltimore, MD

Kirsten Harmon Davis & Gilbert LLP New York , NY

Angela M. Hughes Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Fort Wayne, IN

Jennifer Kan Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP Armonk, NY

Shannon Harmon Minnesota Women Lawyers, Inc Minneapolis, MN

Patrick Leon Hullum Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Alyse Katz PayPal Inc. San Jose, CA

Ambia Harper Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Michelle Huntley UnitedHealth Group Minnetonka, MN

Suzanne Keppeler Van Ness Feldman LLP Washington, DC

Stephanie Harper Easterling Law Offices of Stone & Davis Scottsdale, AZ

Lilly Icard Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA

Leslie E. Kersey Paul Hastings LLP New York, NY

Theresa A. Harris Richemont North America, Inc. New York, NY

Sara E. Inman Drinker Biddle & Reath Dallas, TX

Olha Khomyak Allstate Brooklyn, NY

Kelly Harris Prudential Financial, Inc. Newark, NJ

Carson A. Jackson Fenwick & West LLP San Francisco, CA

Shannon Kimball Hogan Lovells US LLP San Francisco, CA

Julia A. Hatcher Latham & Watkins Washington, DC

Fran M. Jacobs Duane Morris LLP New York, NY

Lauren Kimmel Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Mauri K. Hawkins State Bar of Arizona Phoenix, AZ

Olivia J. Jahn McDermott Will & Emery LLP New York, NY

Ashley King Hogan Lovells US LLP Los Angeles, CA

Jill Hayman Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP New York, NY

Gina K. Janeiro Jackson Lewis P.C. Minneapolis, MN

Sarah Kitchell McDermott Will & Emery LLP Boston, MA

Nakita Haynes Western Michigan University Cooley Law School Lansing , MI

Marcella M. Jayne Fordham Law School New York, NY

Barbara Joan Klas Casepoint LLC Minneapolis, MN

Erin Healy Day Pitney LLP Parsippany, NJ

Sunny Jeon Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz New York, NY

Karen Chuang Kline Duane Morris LLP Boca Raton, FL

Maggie Hedges Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Marissa John Alston & Bird LLP New York, NY

Priscilla A. Knerr Jaen Virginia Beach, VA

Allix Hellman Perkins Coie LLP New York, NY

Lindsay Johnson Thomson Reuters New York, NY

Janet A. Hendrick Phillips Murrah P.C. Dallas, TX

Carla Johnson Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Indianapolis, IN

Aisha E. Henry Western Michigan University Cooley Law School Lansing, MI

Barbara Jones Minneapolis, MN

Priyanka Kothari Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Katie A. Jones Allstate Northville, MI

Jennifer Kozar Alston & Bird LLP New York, NY

Alicia Grahn Jones Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP Atlanta, GA

Carolyn Kraska Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Victoria A. Joseph Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Christine Corkran Kretkowski McDermott Will & Emery LLP Washington, DC

Cassandra Herivaux Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY Allison B. Hernandez Lozano Smith Sacramento, CA Vincent V. Hilldrup Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP New York, NY

Julie Ko Morgan Stanley New York, NY Laura Ann Komarek Alston & Bird LLP Atlanta, GA

the voice of women in the law | 45

NEW MEMBERS LIST Melissa Kroninger University of California, Irvine Irvine, CA

Christine Lombardo Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP New York, NY

Laura Ann Koewler Marion Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Sarah O’Laughlin Kulik Duane Morris LLP Philadelphia, PA

Federica Lombardo Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Sara Louise Markert Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP Irvine, CA

Elaine Kumpula Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Anne Marie Longobucco Fenwick & West LLP New York, NY

Angela Markle PayPal Inc. Newton, MA

Heena Kumthekar Boston University School of Law Boston, MA

Rosanna Carmen Lopez Lopez & Wu, PLLC Reston, VA

Zaharah Markoe Rivero Mestre LLP Miami, FL

Katherine Kwong Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Stephanie Lopez Hogan Lovells US LLP Wasington, DC

Kathleen A. Marron The Marron Alliance, LLC Minneapolis, MN

Julia Lamanna Hogan Lovells US LLP Denver, CO

Martin James Lopez Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Joselyn Marroquin Kutak Rock LLP Omaha, NE

Mary Lancaster Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Lia C. Lopez Fors | Attorneys at Law Coral Gables, FL

Veronica Mason Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Kelli Lane McDermott Will & Emery LLP New York, NY

Anne Loranger Morgan Stanley New York, NY

Julia Matheson Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Alicia Latchman McCarter & English, LLP New York, NY

Alyson Lotman Duane Morris LLP Philadelphia, PA

Byrona J. Maule Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Emily Lee Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP San Antonio, TX

Deborah Lu Duane Morris LLP New York, NY

Allison McAdam Van Ness Feldman LLP Lafayette, CA

Jennifer Lee Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Kelly Ludwick Chick-fil-A, Inc. Atlanta, GA

Catherine McClure Retired Michigan State Senate Chelsea, MI

Andrea Leider Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Denver, CO

Heidi Lunasin Duane Morris LLP Washington, DC

Dominique McCraney Southern University Law Center Greenville, MS

Nicole Leimer Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Anne Lynch Van Ness Feldman LLP Washington, DC

Kate McDonald McDermott Will & Emery LLP Washington, DC

Sara Lenet Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Shauna MacDougall 3M Company St. Paul, MN

Kelly A. McGuire Kutak Rock LLP Scottsdale, AZ

Danielle Lenth Allstate Sacramento, CA

Meredith Madnick Loeb & Loeb LLP New York, NY

Heather McKee Kutak Rock LLP Denver, CO

Jorgen Lervick Dewitt Mackall Crounse & Moore S.C. Minneapolis, MN

Bendita Cynthia Malakia Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Jennifer McKeown Kutak Rock LLP Fayetteville, AR

Neta Levanon Littler Mendelson P.C. New York, NY

Maria Malas Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Laura McLane McDermott Will & Emery LLP Boston, MA

Debra Levin McCarter & English, LLP Newark, NJ

Anna Marie Manasco Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP Birmingham, AL

Katie Lichty Land O’Lakes, Inc. Minneapolis, MN

Brittny A. Mandarino South Texas College of Law Houston Houston, TX

Samhitha Muralidhar Medatia Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP Atlanta, GA

Laquan T. Lightfoot McDonnell & Associates King of Prussia, PA

Madeleine Mannello Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Fort Lauderdale, FL

Kristen Lin Duane Morris LLP New York, NY

Jessica Mariani McDermott Will & Emery LLP Los Angeles, CA

Lauren Wright Linderman Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Sabina Mariella Sullivan & Cromwell LLP New York, NY

Katrina M. Llanes Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP New York, NY

Irina Marinescu Paul Hastings LLP New York, NY

46 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Kristen Merritt Chicago-Kent College of Law Chicago, IL Susan V. Metcalfe Duane Morris LLP Philadelphia, PA Filomena Meyer Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Los Angeles, CA Tyna Luu Mikulec USAA San Antonio, TX

Ashley Miller Thomson Reuters Chicago, IL

Danielle Andrea Noble Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Huntington Beach, CA

Morgan Perna Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Maura Miller Sullivan & Cromwell LLP New York, NY

Kendra M. Norman Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Lisa A. Peterson McDermott Will & Emery LLP Washington, DC

Christina Miller Affirm, Inc. San Francisco, CA

Lizbeth Ochoa Fisher & Phillips LLP Irvine, CA

Sarah Peyronnel Duane Morris LLP New York, NY

Jennifer L. Miller Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Alvina Ma Oelhafen Alston & Bird LLP Raleigh, NC

Roxane Tiana Picard White & Case LLP New York, NY

Bruce R. Millman Littler Mendelson P.C. New York, NY

Megan O’Flynn Sullivan & Cromwell LLP New York, NY

Amy Pleasance Alston & Bird LLP Atlanta, GA

Devjani H. Mishra Littler Mendelson P.C. New York, NY

Gigi O’Hara Kutak Rock LLP Omaha, NE

Jenna Chelsea Polivy Alston & Bird LLP New York, NY

Mary L. Moore Jackson Lewis P.C. Morristown, NJ

Joanne Oleksyk Crowell & Moring LLP New York, NY

Raymond N. Pomeroy Beveridge & Diamond PC New York, NY

Emily Olson Santa Barbara and Ventura Colleges of Law Santa Clarita, CA

Renata Pompa Prudential Financial, Inc. Newark, NJ

Yetunde Oni Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Emily Pontius Fredrikson & Byron, P.A. Des Moines, IA

Laura Oren University of Houston Law Center Houston, TX

Laura Ponto Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Rachel Orman Travelers St. Paul, MN

Tiffany Posil Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Safa Osmani Hogan Lovells US LLP Boston, MA

Sara Posner Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Molly Pallman Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Morgen D. Potts Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Avery B. Pardee Jones Walker LLP New Orleans, LA

Crystal Prais Fenwick & West LLP New York, NY

Claudia Pare Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Kari Prochaska McDermott WIll & Emery LLP Chicago, IL

Meju Michelle Park Duane Morris LLP Boca Raton, FL

Hanna B. Raanan Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. Costa Mesa , CA

Bhaveeni Parmar Ziosk Dallas, TX

Aradhana Raj PayPal Inc. San Jose, CA

Roshni Patel Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Alexandra Rajic Alston & Bird, LLP Atlanta, GA

Tara Patel Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Siri Rao Crowell & Moring LLP Washington, DC

Rachel K. Paulose DLA Piper LLP Minneapolis, MN

Meghana RaoRane Fish & Richardson P.C. Redwood City, CA

Amie E. Penny Sayler Bassford Remele Minneapolis, MN

Krista A. Reed McDermott Will & Emery LLP New York, NY

Kim Peretti Alston & Bird LLP Washington, DC

Whitney Reichel Fish & Richardson P.C. Boston, MA

Yael Perl Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA

Carly Renkow University of Denver Denver, CO

Beth Wolf Mora Mora Employment Law San Ramon, CA Abigail Bunce Morgan Sidley Austin LLP Chicago, IL Meghan L. Morgan Beveridge & Diamond PC Boston, MA Arlene Morris Morgan Stanley New York, NY Frances Bishop Morris Van Ness Feldman LLP Washington, DC Shefa Moten Texas Law Student Division Houston, TX Michelle E. Moussa Kutak Rock LLP Scottsdale, AZ Paige Muhlestein Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC Cindy Hastie Murray Phillips Murrah P.C. Norman, OK Emily Anne Mussio McDermott Will & Emery LLP Chicago, IL Maria B. Navarro McDermott Will & Emory LLP Miami, FL Carrie J. Nearing Larson King LLP Saint Paul, MN Elan M. Nehleber Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP Orlando, FL Larissa Neumann Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA Sally Trung Nguyen Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Mountain View, CA Ellie Nieves The Guardian Life Insurance Company New York, NY

the voice of women in the law | 47

NEW MEMBERS LIST Iris Rita Richard McDermott Will & Emery LLP Washington, DC

Tracy L. Schovain Duane Morris LLP Chicago, IL

Jessica Brooke Stevens Tuttle Apex, NC

Whittney S. Richardson Kutak Rock LLP Omaha, NE

David Schrader Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP Los Angeles, CA

Catherine H. Stockell Fish & Richardson P.C. New York, NY

Rebecca Monck Ricigliano Crowell & Moring LLP New York, NY

Andee Scioli Kutak Rock LLP Omaha, NE

Luis Suarez Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP Miami, FL

Allyson Riemma McDermott Will & Emery LLP Chicago, IL

Genevieve Elizabeth Scott Center for Reproductive Rights New York, NY

Joanna Summerscales Davis Wright Tremaine LLP New York, NY

Julia Ripple The Vanguard Group, Inc. Valley Forge, PA

Gillian Seaman Sullivan & Cromwell LLP New York, NY

Stephanie Sun Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Megan Ritenour Gust Rosenfeld PLC Phoenix, AZ

Arooba Shakeel Swadron Associates Toronto, ON

Joanne Sur-Young Mayer Brown LLP New York, NY

Lourdes Rivera Center for Reproductive Rights New York, NY

Summra Shariff Twin Cities Diversity in Practice Minneapolis, MN

Catherine Elizabeth Sutton Smith Freed & Eberhard Seattle, WA

Michelli Rivera Fisher & Phillips LLP Atlanta, GA

Aroma Sharma McDermott Will & Emery LLP Menlo Park , CA

Nafees Syed Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP New York, NY

Julie Roach Hogan Lovells US LLP Los Angeles, CA

Megan Huerter Shirk Kutak Rock LLP Omaha, NE

Dona Szak Ajamie LLP Houston, TX

Melissa C. Rodriguez Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP New York, NY

Darsh Singh Van Ness Feldman LLP Washigton, DC

Marianne Tassone Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA

Emma Rodriguez-Ayala Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Chicago, IL

Sarina Singh Alston & Bird LLP Washington, DC

Wendy Thai McCarter & English, LLP Boston, MA

Dana Roizen Debevoise & Plimpton LLP New York, NY

Shandice Theresa Sluch Notre Dame Law School Chicago, IL

Kate Thomas DLA Piper LLP New York, NY

Roza C. Rosner Payne & Fears LLP El Segundo, CA

Lynette Eaddy Smith Chick-fil-A, Inc. Atlanta, GA

Heidi Thomas Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC

Lizette G. Rubio USAA San Antonio, TN

Aletha J. Smith CKB Vienna LLP Rancho Cucamonga, CA

Debra M. Thompson Kutak Rock LLP Atlanta, GA

Debbie Ruskin Kutak Rock LLP Washington, DC

Emily Suzie Smith Taylor, Chadd, Minnette, Schneider & Clutter P.C. Crawfordsville, IN

Alyssa Toft Jackson Lewis P.C. Minneapolis, MN

Sandra Rutova TPG Sixth Street Partners, LLC San Francisco, CA

Susan E. Smith Beveridge & Diamond PC San Francisco, CA

Catherine Tremble Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY

Katherine Sandberg Fisher & Phillips LLP Sacramento, CA

Erica E. Smith Perkins Coie LLP Denver, CO

Sarah Tremer McCarter & English, LLP Newark, NJ

Paulette S. Sarp Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Minneapolis, MN

Suzanne Smith Alston & Bird LLP Atlanta, GA

Amanda Tres Veirano Advogados Jersey City, NJ

Jessica McGahie Sawyer McDermott Will & Emery LLP Los Angeles, CA

Camille A. Smith Alston & Bird LLP Atlanta, GA

Kristen Truver Alston & Bird LLP New York, NY

Karen Marie Scheibe Eliason ACA International Minneapolis, MN

Antoinette Solomon Day Pitney LLP Parsippany, NY

Laura Tsang New York Supreme Court New York, NY

Elizabeth Scheibel Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Nicole Soriano Mayer Brown LLP New York, NY

Shannon Turner Fenwick & West LLP San Francisco, CA

Jean L. Schmidt Littler Mendelson P.C. New York, NY

Grace E. Speights Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP Washington, DC

Latoya Tyson The George Washington University Law School Arlington, VA

Regina Schneider University of Texas School of Law Austin, TX

Shoshana S. Speiser Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP New York, NY

Payvand Sara Vafa DLA Piper LLP Los Angeles, CA

48 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Shruti Vaid University of Iowa College of Law Coralville, IA

Anne Weisberg Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP New York, NY

Saundra Wootton Kutak Rock LLP Los Angeles , CA

Diana Van Leeuwen Hogan Lovells US LLP Boston, MA

Kerry Wenzel Alston & Bird LLP Atlanta, GA

Sabrina Worsham University of Arkansas School of Law Hot Springs, AR

Karen Melling van Vliet Travelers St. Paul, MN

Allison Weyer PayPal Inc. Scottsdale, AZ

Nina Varughese Perkins Coie LLP New York, NY

Mary Willis White Kriss & Feuerstein LLP New York, NY

Laura Venker Alston & Bird LLP Washington, DC

Teri Whitehead LegalEase Solutions LLC West Bloomfield, MI

Lauren Symcox Voth Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK

Keli Whitlock Duane Morris LLP Houston, TX

Vicky Vuong PayPal, Inc. New York, NY

Michelle Wood Wilco Alston & Bird LLP Atlanta, GA

Courtney Walker Lincoln Memorial University Knoxville, TN

Wendy J. Wildung Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN

Beutrice Hill Walker North Carolina Central School of Law Knightdale, NC Courtney Paige Walker Hodges, Doughty and Carson Knoxville , TN Kate Walter EdwardJones St. Louis, MO Li Wang McDermott Will & Emery LLP Los Angeles, CA Andrea Steinberg Warren Alston & Bird LLP Los Angeles, CA Laticia Marie Washington KAPS, Inc. New York. NY Katheryn Marie Wasylik Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Minneapolis, MN Leigh A. Waterman DLA Piper LLP Minneapolis, MN Jewel Watson Prudential Financial, Inc. Newark, NJ Annmarie Webster Allstate Northbrook, IL Jeremy M. Weintraub Schoeman Updike Kaufman & Gerber LLP New York, NY

Laura A. Wilkinson Weil, Gotshal & Manges Washington, DC Raymond Williams DLA Piper LLP Philadelphia, PA Nicole Williams Fish & Richardson P.C. San Diego, CA Alexandra Williamson McDermott Will & Emery LLP Santa Monica, CA Pamela S. Wilson Allstate Williamsburg, VA Sara L. Wilson Boston, MA Natalie Witter Alston & Bird LLP New York, NY Nora E. Wolf Gibbons P.C. New York, NY Tom Wolfe Phillips Murrah P.C. Oklahoma City, OK Patricia Wood Sidley Austin LLP New York, NY

Cara Wulf McCarter & English, LLP Boston, MA Jennifer Wuollet Allianz Life Insurance Company North America Minneapolis, MN Mark Wylie EdwardJones St. Louis, MO Feihong Xu Fenwick & West LLP New York, NY Laura Yens Alston & Bird LLP New York, NY Emily Yi Fenwick & West LLP Mountain View, CA Morey Barnes Yost Alston & Bird LLP Washington, DC Nancy Younan Jardine, Logan & O’Brien, P.L.L.P. Lake Elmo, MN Caryn Young Day Pitney LLP Parsippany, NJ Tianyi Yu Washington University School of Law Saint Louis, MO Angelica Almira Zabanal Duane Morris LLP San Francisco, CA Tayyaba W. Zeb Small Business Administration Fairfax, VA Julia Zenker Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY Xiaobei Zhang Hogan Lovells US LLP Washington, DC Jiaxiao Zhang McDermott Will & Emery LLP Irvine, CA

the voice of women in the law | 49

50 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

WO M E N ’ S I M PAC T N E T WO R K F O R S U C C E S S

Duane Morris is proud to sponsor the

National Association of Women Lawyers The Duane Morris Women’s Impact Network for Success is devoted to the success of our women attorneys.

Through various programs, we exchange ideas, foster and expand business contacts and opportunities, and enhance attorney development to fully realize the talent, knowledge and potential of our women attorneys. WINS salutes the NAWL Women Lawyers Journal as a vehicle for discussing substantive issues impacting women in the law. www.duanemorris.com To learn more, please contact Sandra A. Jeskie at jeskie@duanemorris.com.

Duane Morris LLP – A Delaware limited liability partnership

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP is proud to sponsor the National Association of Women Lawyers and committed to helping women build successful businesses, advance their careers, achieve parity in the workplace, and improve their lives.

DWT.COM/DIVERSIT Y

the voice of women in the law | 51

Women@Kilpatrick

Powerful Skills We help clients create, expand, and protect the value of their businesses and most prized assets. Our women attorneys bring a balance of business savvy, technical skills, and creative thinking to the opportunities and issues our clients face daily. We power through challenges—from the most complex to the routine. We work together to make businesses stronger, smarter, more protected, and more successful. www.kilpatricktownsend.com

© 2019 Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP

Diversity Matters It matters to our communities.

It matters to our profession.

It matters to us.

Latham & Watkins proudly supports NAWL and its mission to advance women in the legal profession.

LW.com

52 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

We are proud to support the

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF

WOMEN LAWYERS in its mission to advance women in the legal profession.

www.morganlewis.com ©2019 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP

Talk is not enough...

It’s time for action Talking about diversity is a good start.

But now it’s time for action.

Working together, we can make the difference.

OUR EXPERTISE. YOUR SUCCESS.

LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS & LITIGATION INSURANCE COVERAGE LITIGATION

PAYNE & FEARS LLP IS PROUD TO BE A SUSTAINING SPONSOR OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN LAWYERS Irvine | Las Vegas | Los Angeles | Phoenix Salt Lake City | San Francisco | Silicon Valley

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN LAWYERS

www.paynefears.com

the voice of women in the law | 53

dlapiperdiversity.com

PAINTING A BRIGHTER FUTURE. DLA Piper believes that a more diverse and inclusive legal profession means a better future for us all. Through our women’s resource group, the Leadership Alliance for Women, and with a flexible approach to work life integration, we strive to provide our lawyers with opportunities to excel.

Stefanie Fogel, 33 Arch Street, 26th Floor, Boston, MA 02110 | Lisa Haile, 4365 Executive Drive, Suite 1100, San Diego, CA 92121 DLA Piper LLP (US) is part of DLA Piper, a global law firm, operating through various separate and distinct legal entities. Further details of these entities can be found at www.dlapiper.com. | Attorney Advertising

2 0 0 0

A T T O R N E Y S

|

3 9

L O C A T I O N S

W O R L D W I D E˚

The Voice of Women in the Law Greenberg Traurig proudly supports the National Association of Women Lawyers.

We share your mission to promote the interests and progress of women lawyers.

G R E E N B E RG T R A U R I G , L L P | AT TO R N E YS AT L AW | W W W.G T L AW.C O M Greenberg Traurig is a service mark and trade name of Greenberg Traurig, LLP and Greenberg Traurig, P.A. ©2019 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. Attorneys at Law. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. Contact: Martha A. Sabol in Chicago at 312.456.8400 / Susan L. Heller in Orange County at 949.732.6810. °These numbers are 32209 subject to fluctuation. Images in this advertisement do not depict Greenberg Traurig attorneys, clients, staff or facilities.

54 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Mayer Brown is proud to support the National Association of Women Lawyers and its efforts to empower women in the legal profession.

Americas | Asia | Europe | Middle East | www.mayerbrown.com

the voice of women in the law | 55

Combining experience, strategic planning, practical recommendations, and business savvy to achieve positive results for our clients.

Schoeman Updike Kaufman & Gerber LLP 551 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10176 (212) 661-5030 155 Willowbrook Boulevard, Wayne, NJ 07470 (973) 256-9000 www.schoeman.com

Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz proudly supports the National Association of Women Lawyers and the Women Lawyers Journal Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz 51 West 52nd Street New York, NY 10019 (212) 403-1000 wlrk.com

56 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org

Since our founding in 1972, Fenwick has been committed to promoting diversity and inclusion both within our firm and throughout the legal profession.

Discover more about our commitment to diversity at: fenwick.com/diversity

Proud Supporter NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN LAWYERS

A Proven Approach performance. presence. pride.

FENWICK.COM

gibbonslaw.com

NJ NY PA DE DC FL Gibbons P.C. is headquartered at One Gateway Center, Newark, New Jersey 07102.

fklaw.com

We Are Proud To Support the National Association of Women Lawyers We applaud and support NAWL’s commiment to advancing the interests of women in the legal profession.

7 Times Square New York, NY 10036-6516 T: 212.833.1100

1 Gateway Center Newark, NJ 07102 T: 973.877.6400

the voice of women in the law | 57

PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE PAID PERMIT #6563 SLC UT 84115

National Association of Women Lawyers American Bar Center 321 North Clark Street, MS 17.1 Chicago, IL 60654

58 | WOMEN LAWYERS JOURNAL | nawl.org