October 2018 Nuts & Bolts CLE

__________________________________________________________ CLE CLE CLE CLE CLE __________________________________________________________ The State Bar of South Dakota and the Committee on Continuing Legal Education present

Kelsey Knoer, Chair

Friday, October 19, 2018 Red Rossa Pierre, SD __________________________________________________________ CLE CLE CLE CLE CLE __________________________________________________________

The State Bar of South Dakota, The Young Lawyers Section & The Committee on Continuing Legal Education present:

Chair: Kelsey Knoer 8:45 – 9:15 AM

REGISTRATION: Free to Active SD Bar Members, Others: $100

9:15 – 9:30 AM

INTRO TO THE YOUNG LAWYERS SECTION: Tamara Nash, YLS President, Attorney General’s Office, Sioux Falls

9:30 – 10:30 AM

INTRO TO MEDIATION: Robert Anderson, May, Adam, Gerdes & Thompson, LLP, Pierre

10:30 – 11:30 AM

DISCOVERY, SUBPOENAS & CASE PREPARATION: LITIGATION BASICS: Jessica LaMie, Hughes County State’s Attorney, Pierre; Tara Adamski, Adamski Law Office, Pierre

11:30 – 11:45 AM

BREAK – Food Served

11:45 AM – 12:45 PM

LUNCH: LAW PRACTICE MANAGEMENT PANEL: Jenna Howell, Department of Public Safety, Pierre; Robert L. Morris, Morris Law Firm, Belle Fourche; Laura Hensley, Boyce Law Firm, Sioux Falls

12:45 – 1:00 PM

FINDING BALANCE IN YOUR PRACTICE: Tamara Nash, YLS President, Attorney General’s Office, Sioux Falls

1:00 – 2:00 PM

GETTING INVOLVED WITH ACCESS TO JUSTICE: Lindsey Riter-Rapp & Kody Kyriss; Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP; Pierre

THE STATEWIDE SWEARING-IN CEREMONY BEGINS AT 3:00 PM.

Intro to the Young Lawyers Section: Tamara Nash –

2

YLS President, Attorney General’s Office, Sioux Falls

The State Bar of South Dakota An Overview

SBSD Purpose

Cordial intercourse among members

Uphold the honor of the profession

Maintain standards of professional conduct

Aims and objects of the State Bar shall continue to be to obtain the cooperation of all the practicing lawyers in the state in the better administration of justice, and in maintaining a high standard of professional conduct at the bar, to furnish a legal entity through which the considered judgments of its members on matters affecting the judicial system of the state may be ascertained and made available to the courts and the Legislature, to uphold the honor of the profession of the law, to encourage adequate preparation for its practice, and promote cordial intercourse among the members of the South Dakota State Bar. See SDCL 16-17-2.

Quick Facts •

Founded 1897 (South Dakota Bar Association) –

Fun Fact: In 1897, we had 79 members and dues were $2

•

In 1931, became an integrated/unified (mandatory) bar and renamed in 1931

•

Established by statute and Supreme Court rule

•

Current Membership

•

Bar Dues Schedule

–

2,005 active members (appx 1,000 inactive)

–

630 young lawyer members

Membership is all persons entitled to practice law in South Dakota (graduating from an ABA accredited law school, passing the bar exam, and proving proper character and fitness)

Years of Practice

Amount

First Year

$0

1-4 Years

$290.00

5 Years +

$415.00

*Reminder: Failure to pay your dues by January 1st is an automatic suspension from membership.

Governance Structure

Partnerships

Officers

SD Bar Foundation

Bar Commission

Disciplinary Board (D Board) Supreme Court

State Bar

SD CLE Inc.

501(c)(6)

501(c)(3)

Access to Justice, Inc. 501(c)(3)

Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) Supreme Court

Sections

Committees

Board of Bar Examiners Supreme Court

General Membership

Andrew L. Fergel Executive Director andrew.fergel@sdbar.net (605) 224-7554 Nicole Ogan Office Manager nicole.ogan@sdbar.net (605) 224-7554 Elizabeth Overmoe Strategic Plan Coordinator elizabeth.overmoe@sdbar.net (605) 929-5980

State Bar Staff Tracie Bradford Communications Director tracie.bradford@sdbar.net (605) 224-7554 Denise Langley Access to Justice Coordinator access.to.justice@sdbar.net 1-855-287-3510

President Reed Rasmussen (Aberdeen) rrasmussen@sbslaw.net

2018-2019 Officers

Spokesperson for the Bar, runs all official Bar meetings & elected by majority of members of the Bar at annual meeting

President Elect Steve Huff (Yankton) steve@mwhlawyers.com Elected by majority of members at annual meeting & assumes role of President in the President’s absence

Secretary/Treasurer –Andrew Fergel (Pierre) andrew.fergel@sdbar.net Hired by the bar commissioners (full-time position), co-spokesperson for the Bar, generally serves as ED, manages staff, serves as lead lobbyist & oversees budget

Board of Bar Commissioners

•

Composition (13) – – –

•

One commissioner from each of the seven judicial circuits Six “at-large” representatives from the state (no two from same circuit) Elected for three year terms

Operates similar to a board of directors, sets budget & develops bar policy –

Example: changing disciplinary intake from SDSB office to general counsel's (Bob Frieberg) office. ***To find out who your bar commissioner is, visit the SDSB website!

Movers & Shakers

Sections (3)

Committees (37)

Created by Bar Commission when there is sufficient interest by at least 50 members of the bar in a particular field of law

•

Created by the President

•

Committees are composed of Bar members

•

Forum to exchange information & ideas

•

•

Current Sections:

Members are appointed by the State Bar President

•

Examples:

•

Young lawyers Section Real Property, Probate, and Trust Law Section – Public Sector Lawyers Section – –

–

pattern jury instruction, women in law, veterans committee, solo/small practice, diversity & inclusion

YLS Mission & Membership

Young lawyer is defined as SDSB members under 36 years old or admitted to practice law for less than 10 years

YLS Board of Directors

Officers (3)

Board of Directors (9)

General Section Membership

• • • • • •

President- Tamara Nash (Sioux Falls) President-elect -Nate Chicoine (Rapid City) Secretary/Treasurer- Carrie Srstka (Pierre) Representative from each seven judicial districts One at-large representative One law student representative (SBA president)

SDYLS Projects •

Member Services – – – –

–

Statewide Swearing-In Ceremony (fall) Nuts & Bolts CLE (fall) Bootcamp/#Fit2Practice (spring) Hagemann-Morris Young Lawyer Mentorship Coin Program Young Lawyer of the Year Award (summer)

•

Public Services – – –

Veteran’s Legal Clinics (fall & spring) Project Destination (spring) Community Outreach (ongoing)

Next Annual Meeting: June 19-21, 2019 Ramkota Hotel Rapid City, South Dakota This presenter is not a spokesperson for the State Bar of South Dakota. The materials contained are based on the personal experience and leadership of the presenter in the State Bar of South Dakota.

These materials are intended for education and informational purposes only.

Intro to Mediation: Robert Anderson –

2

May, Adam, Gerdes & Thompson LLP, Pierre

1

Robert B. Anderson Mr. Anderson is currently the Senior Partner at May, Adam, Gerdes & Thompson LLP in Pierre. May Adam was founded in 1881, and since that time has provided legal services in a wide variety of areas, including governmental practice, litigation, lobbying, criminal defense, business and commercial work of all types, probate and estate planning, and domestic relations.

Mr. Anderson graduated from the University of Minnesota in 1973 and from the University of South Dakota Law School in 1977. Since that time, he has represented clients with various interests in tribal, state and federal courts. He is a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates and the American College of Trial Lawyers and has served on the Negligence and Tort Law Committee, Disciplinary Board, Client Security Fund and the Judicial Bar Liaison Committee of the State Bar. Mr. Anderson joined May Adam immediately upon graduation from law school in 1977 and has called Pierre home since that time.

In recent years, his practice has focused primarily on representation of state and municipal government risk pools, insurance companies, and the defense of various governmental liability claims including civil rights and other § 1983 claims.

The conduct of mediations has become a substantial part of Mr. Anderson’s practice. He has mediated employment claims, workers’ compensation claims, a variety of commercial disputes, personal injury claims, will contests, various estate and trust disputes, and others.

If he was not practicing law in South Dakota, he would prefer to work as a professional hunter in Africa, although no one has offered him such employment.

MEDIATION AND ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION History of Mediation in South Dakota •

Richard Calkins

•

The Richard Calkins Theory and the development of mediation in the late 1980’s.

•

Personal injury mediation in the late 1980’s – two mediators in South Dakota.

•

Expansion of mediation into worker’s compensation and employment law disputes midto late-1990’s

•

Domestic relations mediation.

•

Status of mediation and mediators today.

Why Mediate?

•

Most litigation today involves substantial risk of “win it all or lose it all.”

•

Risk of losing it all is too much to bear, along with the expense.

The Holy Trinity of Mediation •

Time.

•

Expense.

•

Risk and uncertainty.

Why is Mediation Advisable (Necessary)?

•

One or all attorney’s want their clients to hear an objective view of the case from some third party who may be more influential. Because…

•

Clients’ attitudes towards their own cases are often influenced more by what they hear from their brother-in-law, at the bar, or other people who had second cousins who were involved in exactly the same type of case.

•

Attorneys don’t try as many cases as they did in years past. They often lack the confidence and/or ability to get a case settled independently, on their own.

1

Mediation vs. Arbitration •

Mediation is usually voluntary and there is no requirement that it actually resolve the case.

•

Arbitration generally mandatory (i.e.- required by contractual provisions)

•

Once arbitration is engaged in, it is final, binding and often non-appealable.

South Dakota Adopts the Uniform Mediation Act in 2008 •

In response to increased use of mediation, the legislature adopted the Uniform Mediation Act in 2008, effective July 1, 2008. See SDCL §§ 19-13A-1 through 19-13A-15 inclusive.

•

Definitions: o “Mediation” means a process in which a mediator facilitates communication and negotiation between parties to assist them in reaching a voluntary agreement regarding their dispute. o “Mediation communication” means a statement, whether oral or in a record or verbal or non-verbal, that occurs during a mediation or is made for purposes of considering, conducting, participating in, initiating, continuing, or reconvening a mediation or retaining a mediator (this definition is important because certain statutory privileges attach to qualified mediation communications).

Scope of the Act •

Applies to mediations which parties are required to conduct by statute, a court or administrative rule.

•

Applies to mediations which the parties agree among themselves to conduct.

•

Applies to any mediation where the parties use a mediator.

The Act Does Not Apply to a Mediation: •

Relating to establishment, negotiation, administration or termination of a collected bargaining relationship.

•

Relating to any dispute that is pending under a collective bargaining agreement.

•

Which is conducted by a judge who might make a ruling on the case at a later date (this is very problematic).

2

•

Conducted under the auspices of a primary or secondary school or correctional institution.

Privileged Communications •

SDCL § 19-13A-4 provides that a mediation communication is privileged unless waived or precluded by SDCL § 19-13A-5.

•

Winegeart v. Winegeart, 2018 SD 32. The South Dakota Supreme Court held on a matter of first impression that the Uniform Mediation Act did not permit a mediator to disclose the terms of an alleged oral agreement which had not been reduced to writing or signed by the parties. Such communication was privileged and could not be unilaterally waived by any party or the mediator. This principle and the impact of the decision has far reaching affects and emphasized the importance of a written settlement memorandum signed by the parties at the conclusion of every mediation.

Exceptions to the Privilege •

Certain communications are never privileged. These include, but are not limited to: o An agreement evidenced by a record signed by all parties. o A threat or statement of a plan to inflict bodily injury or commit a crime of violence. o Intentionally used to plan a crime, attempt to commit or commit a crime, or to conceal an ongoing crime or ongoing criminal activity. o The above are similar to the exceptions relating to the revealing of client confidences in the Rules of Professional Conduct.

What Types of Cases Best Lend Themselves to Mediation: •

Domestic relations including custody, visitation, and property division.

•

Worker’s compensation.

•

Employment law claims of all types.

•

Personal injury.

•

Commercial disputes.

All of the above have difference characteristics that lend themselves to mediation.

3

How to Prepare and Present at Mediation •

Always do a pre-mediation statement of some type.

•

This statement can just be a letter or narrative which is probably the most effective for a mediator.

•

Balance between being an advocate for your client in your case but being honest in regard to the strengths and weakness you face. The key to a successful mediation is COMPROMISE. In order to compromise, everyone must be willing and able to recognize the strengths of the other side as well as their own weaknesses.

•

If there are key records, pick them out and provide the mediator with them to further illustrate your pre-mediation narrative statement. o Comprehensive medical reports on causation and damages such as hospital discharge records, opinion letters from physicians, and other key medical records. o Bank records and financial summaries. o Significant photographs. o Psychiatric or counseling records. o Written opinions of retained experts. o Some limited portions of deposition transcripts. o The Court’s opinions on motions or other issues that have been resolved in the pending litigation.

What Not to Do •

Do not send complete depositions – especially several of them.

•

Do not normally send copies of entire pleadings or lengthy interrogatory answers and requests for admission.

•

Do not ever forego a pre-mediation statement prepared just for this case. For example, do not rely on just sending a copy of a prior demand letter if you represent a plaintiff.

•

In summary, a relatively complex case involving a lot of money can often be successfully mediated based on a 5- or 6-page letter sent to the mediator with a few selected records and reports. Other things can be flushed out and discussed during the mediation.

4

•

Anything you tell the mediator is subject to the same general rules that apply to lawyers.

Be honest. Do not misstate your case. Unless it is a situation involving a personal attack, do not make personal attacks.

•

Plaintiffs should never make an initial demand at mediation higher than their prayer for relief in their complaint or higher than their most recent settlement demand to the defendant. There may be exceptions to this rule, but generally, when this happens the mediation is over.

•

Defendants in civil cases should never demean or ridicule the loss or injury which the plaintiff claims to have suffered. Real people have real problems and defendants should not make light of them regardless of the position they are taking at a mediation.

What Happens at the Mediation •

Who is the mediator?

•

Do you need a mediator with special expertise in a certain area or more of a “generalist?”

Do you require a mediator who has been to mediation training or someone who has OJT?

•

Initial conference vs. no conference.

•

The role of the mediator.

•

Who is present.

•

Techniques.

•

All mediations should have some similar characteristics, and remember they are all voluntary and confidential. In order to succeed, people must be flexible and willing to compromise. People need to be reminded of that.

Ethics •

SDCL § 19-13A-9 provides some guidelines regarding a mediators’ disclosure of conflicts.

•

SDCL § 19-13A-7 creates some limitations on mediators’ ability to report or communicate regarding the conduct and result of the mediation.

•

Remember your mother.

•

Edward Bennett Williams.

5

•

The desire to “win” whether at a motions hearing, a trial, or a mediation, is normal, but a “win at all costs” attitude is dangerous.

Conclusion •

Mediations have saved litigants a lot of money. The general theory is that in civil cases, mediations result in Plaintiff’s recovering more often than they would if the cases were tried, but that runaway verdicts are limited and controlled as part of the process.

•

The negative impact of mediations is that the use of mediation has drastically lessened the number of civil cases that go to trial, depriving lawyers of the trial experience.

However, the system isn’t made for lawyers – it is made for lawyers’ clients.

6

Discovery, Subpoenas & Case Preparation: Litigation Basics Jessica LaMie –

2

Hughes County State’s Attorney, Pierre Tara Adamski – Adamski Law Office, Pierre

1

Jessica LaMie Jessica was raised in Mitchell, South Dakota, and attended the University of South Dakota where she earned her B.A. in Criminal Justice. Jessica then moved to St. Paul, Minnesota, where she obtained her J.D. from Hamline University School of Law in 2015.

Prior to her admittance to the South Dakota Bar, in May 2017, Jessica worked for the South Dakota Legislative Research Council as a Research Analyst. After her admittance, Jessica was promoted to Legislative Attorney. During her time with the Legislature, Jessica focused on the policy areas of Alcohol Regulations, Corrections and Juvenile Justice, Criminal Law and Procedure, Domestic Relations, Gun Laws, Law Enforcement, and Social Services.

In the spring of this year, Jessica joined the Hughes County State’s Attorney’s Office as Deputy State’s Attorney. Her current case load includes all the misdemeanor and juvenile delinquency cases for Hughes County.

1

Tara Adamski Tara L. Adamski grew up in Pierre, attended Northern State University as well as the University of Rhode Island before receiving her Bachelor of Arts in speech and political science. She then went on to obtain her Juris Doctorate at the University of South Dakota School of Law School.

Tara’s practice includes criminal defense, juvenile matters, and civil litigation. Tara also is the General Counsel for the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe.

Tara serves as Chair of the Board of Directors for Dakota Plains Legal Services, is a member of the State Bar CLE Committee; former member of the Ethics Committee as well as the former Chair of the Criminal Law Committee. She enjoys serving her community by serving on the Civil Rights Committee for Oahe Inc. as well as Vice-President of the Community Involvement Council.

Anatomy of a Case: Discovery, Subpoenas & Case Preparation Tara Adamski Adamski Law Jessica LaMie, Hughes County Deputy State’s Attorney

Basic Anatomy of a Criminal Case • • • • • •

Arrest/Citation/Indictment Initial Court Appearance/ Arraignment Discovery/ Motions Plea/Request for Trial Trial (Jury or Court) Sentencing

Arrest/Citation/Indictment • Ensure Proper Court Filings ▫ Information v. Complaint (Exhibits 1 and 2) ▫ Warrant Request (Exhibit 2)

• Grand Jury Indictment ▫ Subpoenas (Exhibits 3 and 4)- Typically Law Enforcement Officers and Victims ▫ Service of Process  Sheriff’s Office: Return of Service (Exhibit 5)  Acceptance of Service (Exhibit 6)

Initial Appearance/Arraignment • Defendant is read their Statutory and Constitutional Rights. ▫ Includes: Right to an Attorney

• Defense Attorney will file a Motion for Discovery ▫ Prosecution will turn over police reports, victim’s statement, criminal histories, etc.

Discovery/Motions Standard Prosecution Motions

Standard Defense Motions

• Demand for Notice of Affirmative Defense • Demand for Notice of Alibi Defense • State’s Motion for Reciprocal Discovery • Motion for Third Party Perpetrator Evidence • Motion for Use of Other Acts Evidence 404(b)- Brief in Support • Notice of Intent to Call Expert Witness

• Motion to Inspect Grand Jury Transcript • Proposed Order Granting Motion to Inspect Grand Jury Transcript • Motion to Require Prosecution to Specify Evidence • Motion Regarding Prior Criminal Record, other Prior Wrongs and/or Charged or Uncharged Activities • Motion for Disclosure of 404(b) Evidence SDCL 19-19-404 • Motion for Leave to File Further Motions • Motion to Dismiss – Brief in Support • Motion to Suppress – Brief in Support • Motion for Joinder/Separation

Unique Motions • Three Parts ▫ Motion ▫ Affidavit/Brief ▫ Proposed Order

• Example: Motion for Employment of Private Investigator at Count Expense ▫ Motion (Exhibit 7) ▫ Affidavit (Exhibit 8) ▫ Proposed Order (Exhibit 9)

Helpful Tips • Know your Judge’s Preferences ▫ General Questions  Check UJS https://ujs.sd.gov/Sixth_Circuit/Local_Forms_and_ Policies/judgepreferences.aspx

▫ Specific Questions  Contact Clerk  Contact Court Reporter  Contact Judge

Helpful Tips Don’t Scorch the Earth Adversarial Process doesn’t mean attorneys must treat each other as adversaries.

Law Practice Management Panel: Jenna Howell – Department of Public Safety, Pierre

2

Robert L. Morris – Morris Law Firm, Belle Fourche Laura Hensley – Boyce Law Firm, Sioux Falls

1

Jenna Howell Jenna Howell, a transplanted South Dakotan, received her bachelor’s in political science from the University of Wisconsin-Superior; her J.D., M.A. in History, and Governor’s Leadership Certificate from the University of South Dakota.

After clerking for Justice Zinter on the South Dakota Supreme Court, she went into private practice in both North Dakota and South Dakota. Jenna returned to Pierre to take her current position as general counsel for the South Dakota Department of Public. She is the Department’s only attorney and advises all agencies within DPS: Highway Patrol, Homeland Security, Highway Safety, State Radio Dispatch, State Fire Marshal, Weights and Measures, State Inspections, Office of Emergency Management, Driver Licensing, Victims’ Services, Accident Records, Administration, and the administratively attached 9-1-1 Coordination Board.

In addition to her work in transactional, administrative, constitutional, and appellate law; Jenna also serves as the division director for Legal and Regulatory Services within DPS, spearheads the Department’s legislative efforts, and is the privacy officer for the South Dakota Fusion Center.

When not working, her favorite hobbies include playing music, reading, and traveling.

1

Robert L. Morris Bob Morris is a Rural Lawyer who has practiced law in the “Center of the Nation” ‐ Belle Fourche, South Dakota ‐ since June 1988 and is Co-Chair of the State Bar’s Project Rural Practice Task Force. He is a U.S. Air Force Veteran, serving from 1975 to 1979. In 1984 he graduated from South Dakota State University and is a 1988 Sterling Honor graduate of the University of South Dakota School of Law. Bob is a member of the State Bar of South Dakota, South Dakota Trial Lawyers Association, South Dakota Defense Lawyers Association, American Bar Association, American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA), and is one of eleven (11) South Dakota members of the International Society of Barristers (ISOB), which has worldwide membership of approximately 500 members. He has served as the President of the State Bar of South Dakota, President of the South Dakota Trial Lawyers Association, and President of the South Dakota Chapter of ABOTA. His practice area focuses on civil litigation in the areas of civil rights, insurance, personal injury, and construction litigation. Bob has been admitted to practice in the State of South Dakota; U.S. Federal District Court for South Dakota; 8th Circuit Court of Appeals; 10th Circuit Court of Appeals; Cheyenne Sioux Tribal Court; and Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribal Court. He has been recognized in Best Lawyers in America, Great Plains Super Lawyers, and has an AV® Preeminent Rating from Martindale – Hubbell.

Since 2013, Bob has been in solo practice with Morris Law Firm, Prof. LLC. Prior to going solo, he was the Managing Partner for of an eight (8) lawyer law firm for a two year term.

1

Laura Hensley Laura Hensley is an experienced litigator in a variety of practice industries, including workers’ compensation, insurance defense, and employment law matters. She represents employers and insurers in all stages of workers’ compensation and employment matters, and regularly counsels clients prior to litigation in an effort to obtain a positive outcome for her clients.

Laura also has experience in managing and defending bad faith claims and enjoys using that knowledge to assist and benefit her clients. In her litigation practice, Laura believes in a focused and strategic approach, and uses that approach to benefit her clients through all phases of a contested matter, including settlement and trial.

Finding Balance In Your Practice: Tamara Nash –

2

YLS President, Attorney General’s Office, Sioux Falls

1

Tamara P. Nash Tamara P. Nash is a Special Assistant United States Attorney for the District of South Dakota.

Tamara attended Wayne State College, where she graduated magna cum laude in 2009.

Immediately following college Tamara perused her life-long dream of becoming an attorney and attended the University of South Dakota School of Law, where she graduated with honors in 2013.

Tamara also was the 2013 recipient of the William F. Day Jr., pro bono award, based upon her several law school involvements.

Upon completing her education, Tamara clerked for one year with the Second Judicial Circuit in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. While clerking Tamara had a diverse experience in the law and had the opportunity to be mentored by several members of the judiciary. She successfully drafted several memorandum decisions and orders. She also had the opportunity to work with the judiciary on several high-profile cases, including a death penalty matter.

Following clerking, Tamara achieved her career goal of becoming a prosecutor when she was hired in 2014 to serve as Deputy State’s Attorney for Union County, South Dakota. In her capacity, Tamara prosecuted misdemeanor and juvenile offenses in rural South Dakota. After legislative updates, Tamara created and implemented Union Count’s first juvenile diversion program, which has had a successful start. In spring 2016, Tamara transitioned into her current position as a Special Assistant United States Attorney for the State of South Dakota. In her position, she represents both the federal and state arms of prosecution. Tamara works with both the Attorney General’s Office as well as the United States Attorney Office to prosecute firearm and high intensity drug cases.

Finding Balance in Your New Practice Tamara P. Nash S.D Attorney General’s Office

 1st

year of practice  1-2 years of practice  3-5 years of practice  5 + years of practice

1. How do we find balance in our first year(s) of practice? ď‚Ą Especially

when we may not be where we thought/planned we would be



Know your firm/organization. 

Learn the culture, policies, and dynamics



Use every resource available to you



Market yourself internally and externally!

 Participate!

Find meaningful ways to be heard and contribute  Always be receptive to change/guidance  Let your work speak for itself (work hard)

Remember: the learning curve is steep and often uncomfortable, but work through it!

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Who is your builder (catapult for success)?

Who is your champion?

Who is your collaborator (similar goalsaffinity)?

Who is your companion (unbreakable bond)?

Who is your connector (bridge builder)?

Who is your energizer (offers you a boost)?

Who is your mind opener (challenges you)?

Who is your navigator/GPS (gives advise/guides)?

Change your mind set – open your self to the opportunities!  Be confident enough to go alone  Join groups, committees, boards, and community organizations (get involved)  Be confident in your product (you!)  Perfect your “elevator pitch” – you never know when opportunity will come knocking! 

ď‚ž Work/life

balance means taking time for your mental and emotional health, but not losing sight of work obligations. ď‚ž Work/life balance also is highly individualized. ď‚ž

Bottom line: happy, engaged employees are more productive, more creative, more loyal and more efficient.

 Define

your values and priorities for yourself  Set boundaries (appropriately)  Communicate (directly and honestly) at work and at home  Prioritize at work and home  Be organized and efficient to the best of your abilities

 Be 

mindful of yourself and your needs

mentally, physically, and emotionally

 Don’t

be afraid to ask for help!  Identify distractions (at work and home)  Don’t overcommit  Identify what relaxes and recharges you schedule breaks/MH days in advance

 Find 

mentors

quality over quantity

 Develop

personal networks – diversify!  Seek meaningful feedback  Be open- vulnerability  Have a vision for your career 



who, how, when, where

Capitalize on every opportunity!

“Everything expands to the amount of time I give it.”



LAWYERS CONCERNED FOR LAWYERS



LAWYERS ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE

Individuals concerned about an attorney in their life can call Disability Rights South Dakota for assistance. Help is confidential & independent of Bar. 

Disability Rights South Dakota:  

605-224-8294 800-658-4782 (toll free)

Getting Involved With Access To Justice: Lindsey Riter-Rapp & Kody Kyriss;

2

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP, Pierre

1

Lindsey Riter-Rapp Lindsey Riter-Rapp joined Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP, in January of 2008. Prior to that, she worked as an attorney at the Public Defender’s Office in Rapid City, South Dakota primarily doing criminal defense work. Lindsey also served as a law clerk for the Seventh Judicial Circuit.

Lindsey received a B.A. in English from the University of Nebraska in 1999 and her Juris Doctorate Degree from the University of South Dakota in 2002.

Riter-Rapp is a member of the State Bar of South Dakota and the American Bar Association. She is admitted to practice in the State Court and the Federal District Court for the State of South Dakota.

Her practice areas include litigation and trial work, including both civil and criminal defense, administrative law, family law, lobbying and legislative work. Lindsey has also served as the City Attorney for the City of Pierre since 2008.

Lindsey is serving her third term on the Board of Directors for Capital Area Counseling Services and also serves as the President of the Pierre Education Foundation.

In her free time, Lindsey enjoys cooking, traveling and being outdoors with her husband, Jon, and their three children, Guy, George and Alice.

1

Kody R. Kyriss Kody Kyriss is originally from Lesterville, South Dakota and graduated from Menno Public School.

Kody received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and English from Northern State University in 2014 in which he graduated summa cum laude in honoribus. During his time at Northern State University, he served as President of the student government. Prior to attending the University of South Dakota School of Law in the Fall of 2014, Kody worked in Senator John Thune’s Aberdeen and Washington D.C. congressional offices.

While attending the University of South Dakota School of Law, Kody was a member of the USD Law Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Board as well as the USD Law Trial Team. He also had the privilege of participating in the Volunteer Income Tax Association (VITA) group where he was able to assist the lower-income with their taxes. Kody joined Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP after he graduated from USD Law in 2017.

In his free time, Kody loves to fish, try new food, watch movies, and spend time with his friends, family, and wife, Courtney. Kody’s practice includes business transactions, administrative law, criminal defense, family law and general practice.

GETTING INVOLVED WITH ACCESS TO JUSTICE Lindsey Riter-Rapp and Kody Kyriss Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



A2J was formed by the South Dakota State BAR to supplement the two primarily legal service providers in South Dakota : East River Legal Services and Dakota Plains Legal Services.



A2J was also formed to assist attorneys fulfill their ethical obligation to do pro bono work.



Most clients would be considered lower income.

WHAT IS ACCESS TO JUSTICE (A2J)?

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

HISTORY

1966 Dakota Plains Legal Services 1977 East River Legal Services 1995 Legal Services Corporation wanted each grantee to work with other stakeholders to develop an integrated delivery system to more efficiently and effectively address the needs of indigent people in their state.

2005 Access to Justice, Inc. 2016 Re-branding and process efforts Today A2J is a statewide program based in Pierre, South Dakota, and its primary function is to administer the State Bar of South Dakota pro bono and modest means programs.

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



(1) provide for the coordination of pro bono lawyers to assist poor citizens with their legal problems, thus providing access to justice for those lacking financial resources to hire a lawyer ;



(2) help ensure compliance with lawyer’s ethical obligation to never reject the cause of the defenseless or oppressed;



(3) improve the delivery of legal services to all citizens of the state;



(4) improve the delivery of legal services to the poor; and



(5) provide centralized information, direction and assistance for legal service programs in the State of South Dakota.

A2J WAS CREATED TO… Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

FINANCIAL ELIGIBILITY



Individuals living at or below 125% of the federal poverty guidelines



Survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking or stalking living at or below 150% of the federal poverty guidelines;



And individuals with disabilities, the elderly and veterans who live at or below 200% of the federal poverty guidelines

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

1)

Family

2)

Housing

3)

Consumer

4)

Health

5)

Employment

6)

Education

7)

Estate Planning

CASE ACCEPTANCE PRIORITIES Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

A2J DOES NOT DO… 

Fee-generating cases 

Personal injury, social security, etc.



Criminal Cases



Incarcerated individuals

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



A2J will contact the attorney directly about a prospective case.



If the attorney is interested and the conflict check is clear, A2J will also provide the attorney with copies of any relevant documents.



If attorney wants to accept the case, A2J will provide the client with an attorney-referral letter with instructions to contact the attorney.



Attorney then has an opportunity to sit down with prospective client and see if the case has any merit.



If the attorney is not able to represent client, the client will be referred back to A2J.

THE PROCESS Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



Pro bono clients 

Volunteer attorneys are not paid for the time they spend working on pro bono cases.



However, clients are responsible for all related legal expenses 

Ex: Filing fees, service fees, home studies, mediation, etc.



Deposit

COSTS (PART 1) Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



Modest means (reduced fee) program 

Broadens access to legal services by reducing attorney fees



Eligible clients 

Over-income for pro bono program but still under income guidelines for Modest Means program.



Maximum retainer a participating attorney can collect for a modest means program case is $650



Attorneys can ask for subsequent retainers of $650 once the first retainer is exhausted and the matter has not yet concluded.



Maximum hourly fee is the current state court-appointed fee rate.

COSTS (PART 2) Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



Your representation of your A2J client will be similar to any other client.



Periodically you will be e-mailed by Denise from A2J to check on the status of the case.



When your case has concluded, let her know. 



It will then be documented that your case is concluded.

Keep track of your pro bono hours so that A2J can record them upon conclusion of your case.

WRAPPING UP YOUR A2J CASES Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



“Pro bono” is short for “Pro bono publico” 



“For the good of the people”

The need for legal services among the poor is overwhelming, according to an American Bar Association study. 

40% of low and moderate-income households experience a legal problem each year



Collective civil legal aid effort meets only about 20 percent of these needs



Pro bono cases and services leverage the skills of legal professionals to help those who are unable to afford lawyers



Taking on a few pro bono cases a year allows legal professionals to use their knowledge and skills to give back to people who truly need it.

IMPORTANCE OF PRO BONO WORK Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

CONTACT INFORMATION Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

QUESTIONS? Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



Highest A2J priority



Low-income individuals often need immediate assistance with family legal issues



Main issues 

Child custody



Visitation



Child support



Relocation of a parent

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



Draft and serve a summons and complaint 

Attach a copy of the South Dakota parenting guidelines



Defendant must file an Answer



Relocation of a parent 

Moving parent must provide written notice to other parent



Forty-five days



SDCL 25-4A-17

INITIAL STAGES OF A FAMILY LAW CASE Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



Interrogatories are another major component of child custody or child support cases



Opportunity for both sides to receive more information



Formulate questions that cover specific issues 



Ex: Alleged incidents; Girlfriends or new spouses

Request appropriate documentation 

Pay stubs, Tax returns, Protective Orders, etc.

INTERROGATORIES Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP







Child Custody 

Child’s best interest



Joint physical custody (children spend a substantial amount of time with each parent)



Joint legal custody (parents share decision-making on medical, educational, and religious questions)



Shared custody is usually preferred by courts if viable

Visitation 

Noncustodial parents



South Dakota Parenting Guidelines



Sometimes a parent wants more time than what the SD parenting guidelines offer.



Sometimes visitation is withheld.

Child Support 

Formula based on incomes



Nonpayment of child support does not prevent a parent from seeing his/her child



Modification of child support  

Petitioners can do pro se, but retaining an attorney is likely a better decision Referee hearing

CHILD CUSTODY, VISITATION, AND CHILD SUPPORT Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP





Method(s) of solving child custody, visitation, and child support issues 

Mediation



Parenting Coordinator



Judge

Mediation and Parenting Coordinators are usually best methods 

Cheaper for both parties



Judge’s ruling may be unfavorable

METHODS OF SOLVING ISSUES Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



Mediation is very common and effective at solving family law issues



Neutral 3rd party





Parties choose the mediator



Parties usually split the cost

Courts will order mediations in custody or visitation disputes 

MEDIATION

SDCL 25-4-56



Some circuits require mediations before a judge will hear the case



Once agreements are reached, a formal mediation agreement will be drafted

Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP



Parenting coordinators are another option when mediation is not used



May be better to use when it comes to certain issues 



Ex: Which school for a child to attend

Like mediations, a court may appoint a parenting coordinator to assist the parents in resolving contested issues as it relates to custody and visitation 

SDCL 25-4-63

PARENTING COORDINATORS Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP

QUESTIONS? Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Northrup, LLP