Tulsa Lawyer Magazine July 2017 by Tulsa County Bar Association

Tulsa Lawyer July 2017

Magazine

Finance & Bankruptcy Law Issue

TULSA LAWYER

In this Issue

A Message from

Matt Farris

July 2017

2016-2017 TCBA President

6 Paralegal News

We Want to Say Thank You!

It's Member Appreciation Month!

Finance & Bankruptcy Law

7 TCBA & TCBF Annual Luncheon Keynote Speaker: Tracy Spears 9 Discharging Tax Debts in Bankruptcy Brian Huckabee 13 2017-2018 Election Results 14 Two Factors that Directly Affect the Value of any Private Business (and Public as Well) Bruno Teles 16 Member Appreciation! 17 FREE CLE Announcement

18 WHEN A CREDITOR’S GOLDEN COACH TURNS INTO A PUMPKIN© Mac D. Finlayson

Art, Writing & Poetry Winners

22 What is Your Risk Appetite for Utilizing an Automatic Telephone Dial System (“ATDS” or “autodialer”)? Sara C. Royster and Piper W. Turner 25 Photo Contest Announced! 26 Personal Injury and Wrongful Death: Part II ~Ken Underwood 27 House Warming Project 28 Grapevine 31

Classifieds

Tulsa Lawyer 1

A Message from the President

Matthew S. Farris NEWS, NEWS, AND MORE NEWS It is a busy time in history for news junkies. As I draft this Tulsa Lawyer Magazine (“TLM”) submission, former FBI Director James Comey is testifying before Congress regarding, among other things, his communications with President Trump prior to being removed as FBI Director. This story and related news stories addressing the functions (and dysfunctions) of the United States government, the pending UK general election, and global acts of terrorism currently dominate the 24-hour news information cycle. However, as for news directed specifically to TLM readers - in case the 24-hour news information cycle has become a bit tedious and/or somewhat predictable depending on your political leaning - I have more news to share.

For the first time in our history, all of the TCBA’s elected officers serving on the Executive Committee are women.1 After working closely with President Elect Christina Vaughn throughout the 2016-2017 fiscal year and as I now wind down my term as TCBA President, I have no doubt that the TCBA is in good hands next year under Christina’s extremely capable leadership together with the assistance of this talented and dedicated group of attorneys serving on the Executive Committee. Congratulations to all those elected to serve on the TCBA Executive Committee and the Board of Directors during 2017-2018.

More good news…as of the date of this submission, the TCBA’s membership rolls stand at 2,130 members. Following last month’s historic news regarding the That number is an increase in membership from last TCBA Board of Directors’ vote to include the vast year. As such, I am both pleased and grateful to have led majority of our association’s CLE programs and this association in a year during which the membership seminars as a membership benefit to all dues paid rolls have increased AND membership benefits have members next year (see page 17 of this publication for expanded. more details), I have additional historic news. TCBA election results have been tallied, and our association’s As I stated in my first TLM submission as TCBA TCBA 2017-2018 leadership is comprised of the President in September of last year, my main goal for the year was to focus on the TCBA membership by following: simply serving our members well. By focusing on TCBA members throughout the year in a variety of President: Christina Vaughn ways (including but not limited to the monthly outings President Elect: Ann Keele enjoyed by many TCBA members organized by TCBA Special Events Committee Chairman Tim Rogers) Vice President: Kimberly Moore and by now providing even more value to TCBA Secretary: Amber Peckio Garrett memberships through the recent vote to include the vast Treasurer: Kara Greuel majority of TCBA CLE offerings free of charge next year; we, as an association, have advanced my goal as Budget Chair: Jim Milton TCBA President.

Past President:

Yours Truly

1 The TCBA Budget Chair is appointed by the Tulsa County Bar Foundation, and the TCBA past president is not an elected position. 2 Tulsa Lawyer

In an effort to express the TCBA’s appreciation for its members and their continuous, selfless dedication of time and talent to our community, I want to again remind TLM readers about the slate of events scheduled in July for TCBA Membership Appreciation Month (see page 13 of the June TLM; see also pages 4 & 16 of this publication for full details). These events are complimentary to TCBA members (the Zoo Family Event is also complimentary for TCBA members’ families) but some events have limited seating, so please remember to make appropriate reservations by calling the Bar Center at 918-584-5243. I hope to see you at one or more of these events during TCBA Membership Appreciation Month.

In other recent legal news, Governor Fallin has signed Senate Bill 661, effective as of November 1, 2017, which significantly expands litigants’ access to dispute resolution via small claims court. SB661 raises the jurisdictional limit from $7,500.00 to $10,000.00 on amounts sought by plaintiffs in small claims litigation. The small claims jurisdictional limit was last raised in 2012, when Oklahoma lawmakers increased the small claims litigation threshold from $6,000.00 to $7,500.00.

Finally, Independence Day is just a few short days away…I hope your 4th of July holiday - which may or may not include Monday July 3rd - is filled with fireworks, figuratively or literally, or both. In any event, enjoy the holiday and don’t forget to join me As for recent legal news - in case you haven’t heard at the TCBA Membership Appreciation Month events - the Oklahoma legal community experienced some held throughout July. The TCBA truly appreciates your turmoil during this past legislative session as a result contributions to our association. of enacted legislation that included an attorneys’ fee shifting provision inserted into a bill affecting actions Sincerely, addressed in 12 O.S. § 95(A). Summarily, HB1470, which originally addressed statute of limitations issues related to causes of action involving sexual abuse, was amended to include a broad fee shifting provision applicable to all actions subject to a limitations period as set forth in 12 O.S. § 95(A). HB1470, as amended, Matthew S. Farris was passed by the Oklahoma Senate and House of TCBA President 2016 – 2017 Representatives, and was then signed by Governor Fallin to be effective as of November 1, 2017. In response to an outcry from the Oklahoma legal community, HB1570 ‘corrected’ HB1470 by, among other things, excluding the ‘loser pays’ provision included within HB1470. HB1570 has now been passed by the Oklahoma Senate 8:30am-5:00pm as well as the Oklahoma House of Representatives, and will become law on November 1, 2017 inasmuch as Mon. - Thurs. Governor Fallin has signed HB1570.2

TCBA Summer Hours 8:30am-12:00pm Friday

2 The final version of HB1570 is accessible at http://bit.ly/2sbo5aV, as of June 9, 2017.

TCBA will be CLOSED Tuesday, July 4th. CELEBRATE FREEDOM Tulsa Lawyer 3

Tulsa County Bar Association Member Appreciation Month July 2017 Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat

14 Headshots 9am-12pm, 1pm-2pm

Pinot’s Palette 7pm-9pm

Headshots 9am-12pm

Ethics CLE w/ lunch 11am-1pm

! 16

Tulsa Drillers 6:30 pm

Headshots 9am-2pm

Headshots 12pm-4pm

“No Suits Allowed” Rooftop party

Tulsa Zoo Family event 6pm-9pm

7:30pm-9:30pm

Mark your calenders and join us! Find us on Facebook to keep up with Tulsa County Bar Association events and news!

4 Tulsa Lawyer

Calendar of Events Details Headshots: Are you needing a professional photo?

Come get a free professional headshot at the TCBA! On July 7 from 9am-12pm, July 14 from 9am-12pm & 1pm-2pm; July 20 from 12pm-4pm; and July 25 from 9am-2pm.

Pinot's Palette: Are you needing some relaxation and fun?

Come paint a fun picture with your TCBA friends. This event is limited to the first 20 TCBA members who register. TCBA members can reserve up to two slots. July 12, 2017 from 7pm-9pm.

Ethics CLE & Lunch: Are you needing some ethics CLE credit?

Come hear OBA General Counsel Gina L. Hendryx present a one hour CLE on ethics. Lunch will be served from 11:00-12:00 with the CLE presentation from 12:00-1:00.

Tulsa Drillers: Are you needing some hometown baseball?

Come watch the Drillers with your TCBA friends. This event has limited registration. TCBA members can reserve up to 2 slots. We will provide the game tickets and $10.00 in Driller bucks for use at concessions. ***This event is limited to 40 so RSVP early to ensure attendance, tickets will be available for pickup at the TCBA the week of July 10.

Zoo Family Event:

Are you needing some fun with your family? Come enjoy a day at the zoo with your family and TCBA friends. This event is a family event. We have secured the Rhino Reserve we will have a meet and greet experience with the Rhinos which includes meeting them, petting them, and taking photos with them. We will have a kid friendly buffet in addition to the adult buffet. We will have a cash bar. The food will be served at 7pm but for members attending this event you can enjoy the zoo the entire day. ***RSVP no later than July 12 to attend this event.

No Suits Allowed Rooftop Party:

Our member appreciation month will conclude with a fun patio event at the Rooftop located on Cherry St. Please dress casually as there are no suits allowed. We will have food and drinks from 7:30pm--9:30pm. Reservations for any of these events can be made by calling the TCBA at 918-584-5243. Tulsa Lawyer 5

Paralegal Section News Back in the day, Summer was the time to hang out with the neighborhood gang and plan biking adventures and other fun activities until it was time to return to school in the Fall. Those days are gone, but there will always be things to plan.

Rhonda Ford, 2017-2018 Vice Chair

as Vice Chairman and Gloria Jones as Secretary. The Paralegal Section for the TCBA had its very first meeting in the Fall of 2010, and we currently have around 36 members. Our meetings/luncheons are generally held on the first Thursday of each month and we invite speakers to enlighten us on various legal topics as well as to learn about social and economic programs which help citizens with legal and substance abuse problems. To the lawyers: this is a great group for your paralegals to belong to and is an excellent resource for guidance, professional support, and mentorship.

The 2017-2018 term of the Paralegal Section of TCBA is off to a great start even before summer began. New officers have been elected, and we have already started planning our activities and events for the coming year. We have also picked the charity project we plan to support. Our new Chairman is Elizabeth “Beth” Nellis, Rhonda Ford (me) as Vice Chairman, and Lorena We are excited about our meet and greet social to be Wensauer is our Secretary. held at 5:30 on August 3rd at Chimi’s Restaurant located We were very fortunate to have Debra Baker as our at 1304 E. 15th Street. We hope to see our members Chairman for the 2016-2017 term, and she accomplished and some new faces as well. Bring along any ideas or many things for our Paralegal Section. Many of us were suggestions you have and join us! on board with her efforts to adopt a family for Christmas and in all, we were able to provide clothing, toys, and Watch for the Paralegal Year in other items to a mom and her three children. In fact, we Review in the August issue! provided more than they asked for! A big “Thanks” for their contributions also to Debbie Woodruff who served

6 Tulsa Lawyer

Tulsa Lawyer 7

Custom solutions. Crafted for attorneys. We understand the complexity of your financial needs. That’s why we have created the Law Financial Solutions Package — a portfolio of custom solutions designed specifically for attorneys. Discover how our concierge level service can accommodate all of your business and personal financial needs. Lauren Allen NMLS ID# 568839

• • • • • • • • •

Custom Mortgage Solutions Higher Loan-To-Value with No PMI for Residential Loans Home Equity Loans Practice Buy-In Loans Unsecured Lines of Credit Stock Secured Lines of Credit Trust and Wealth Management Services IOLTA Accounts Premium Deposit Rates

midfirstprivatebank.com/law-tu 918.293.6891 Member FDIC

TCBA BANKRUPTCY SECTION The Bankruptcy Section gathers bimonthly to hear poetry, enjoy a lunch meal, and discuss substantive bankruptcy issues and cases (in that order). Members are encouraged to engage both sides of their brains as we explore words and ideas that enrich our lives and practices. Our next meeting is on July 27 at noon at the TCBA Board of Directors Room. Please join us. Bankruptcy Section Chair Paul Thomas (918) 581-6687 Paul.thomas2@usdoj.gov

8 Tulsa Lawyer

Discharging Tax Debts in Bankruptcy By Brian Huckabee

Many tax debts are dischargeable in bankruptcy, although some are hopeless. 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a) provides, “A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt —” and then lists exceptions. 11 U.S.C. Section 727(b) provides that, in cases filed under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, “Except as provided in section 523 of this title, a discharge under subsection (a) of this section discharges the debtor from all debts that arose before the date of the order for relief under this chapter . . . .” The reorganization chapters of the Code contain similar provisions. In farm bankruptcies, 11 U.S.C. Section 1228(c) (2) excepts from discharge debts “of a kind specified in section 523(a) of this title . . . .” In chapter 13 cases, 11 U.S.C. Section 1328(a)(2) excepts from discharge debts “of the kind specified in section 507(a)(8)(C) or in paragraph (1)(B), (1)(C), (2), (3), (4), (5), (8), or (9) of section 523(a) . . . .” Chapter 11 excepts “debt excepted from discharge under section 523 of this title” (11 U.S.C. Section 1141(d)(2)) and makes corporate tax exceptions that are similar those provided or referenced in Section 523(a) (11 U.S.C. Section 1141(d)(6)). Therefore, Section 523(a) is the focus of a discussion of exceptions to discharge, including tax exceptions. The first tax exception to discharge might be called the “3-year rule.” Taxes “of the kind and for the periods specified in section 507(a)(3) and 507(a)(8)” are excepted from discharge. 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(1)(A). Section 507(a)(8) pertains to certain debts in involuntary bankruptcy cases and is outside the scope of this article. 11 U.S.C. Section 507(a)(8) refers to “allowed unsecured claims of governmental units, only to the extent that such claims are for . . . (A) a tax on or measured by income or gross receipts for a taxable year ending on or before the date of the filing of the petition —” and then lists three (i through iii) types of tax, the first of which is “(i) for which a return, if required, is last due, including extensions, after three years before the date of the filing of the petition . . . .” In plain words, to avoid this exception, one must wait to file his bankruptcy until three years after April 15 (or 18, depending on how the weekend fell three years ago) or the same date in October if he filed an extension three years ago. The second tax exception to discharge might be called the “240-day rule”. Like the 3-year rule, it traces from Section 523(a)(1)(A) through 507(a)(8)(A). It refers to tax

“(ii) assessed within 240 days before the date of the filing of the petition, exclusive of — . . . (I) any time during which an offer in compromise with respect to that tax was pending or in effect during that 240-day period, plus 30 days; and (II) any time during which a stay of proceedings against collections was in effect in a prior case under this title during that that 240-day period, plus 90 days.” To paraphrase the 240-day rule, to avoid this exception, one must file his return more than 240 days before his bankruptcy, or maybe sooner if an offer in compromise or bankruptcy was pending recently. The third tax exception to discharge might be called the “not-yet-assessed rule”. Like the 3-year rule, it traces from Section 523(a)(1)(A) through 507(a)(8)(A). It refers to tax “(iii) not assessed before, but assessable, under applicable law or by agreement, after, the commencement of the case.” To avoid this exception, one should file accurate returns. Bankruptcy does not prevent examination of returns, and post-petition changes are exceptions to discharge. The fourth tax exception to discharge might be called the “property tax rule.” It traces from Section 523(a)(1)(A) to 507(a)(8)(B), which refers to “a property tax incurred before the commencement of the case and last payable without penalty after one year before the date of the filing of the petition.” This exception has little practical effect, because property taxes secured by real estate are paid off the top in foreclosure sales. The fifth tax exception to discharge might be called the “withholding tax rule.” It traces from Section 523(a)(1)(A) to 507(a)(8)(C), which refers to “a tax required to be collected or withheld and for which the debtor is liable in whatever Continued on page 10... Tulsa Lawyer 9

capacity.” To avoid this exception, one should owe income tax rather than sales or payroll tax. Also, the employer’s half of FICA does not fit this exception because it is not withheld from the employee’s wages.

Finally, case law has developed additional rules. Space limitations here prevent further discussion or annotation, but these rules are critical and create outcomes contrary to those predicted by a simple statutory reading.

The sixth tax exception to discharge might be called the “unfiled return rule.” Section 523(a)(1)(B) refers to certain tax “with respect to which a return, or equivalent report or notice, if required— (i) was not filed or given . . . .” Filing tax returns on time avoids this exception.

Firstly, certain events toll the running of the statutory time periods. Such events include pending bankruptcies and IRS “collection due process” events such as a taxpayer’s request for a hearing. The tolling includes not just the duration of the tolling events, but extra days as well.

The seventh tax exception to discharge might be called the “2-year rule.” Section 523(a)(1)(B) refers to certain tax “with respect to which a return, or equivalent report or notice, if required— (ii) was filed or given after the date on which such return, report, or notice was last due under applicable law or under any extension, and after two years before the date of the filing of the petition . . . .” To avoid this exception, one should file his returns more than two years before his bankruptcy.

Secondly, the IRS’s filing of a “substitute for return” (known as “SFR”, this is an assessment made solely on the taxpayer’s W-2 and 1099 forms due to a protracted failure to file returns) may cause a discharge exception for the applicable tax year that is uncurable by any passage of time or even by the subsequent filing of an actual return.

The eighth tax exception to discharge might be called the “fraud or evasion rule.” Section 523(a)(1)(C) refers to certain tax “with respect to which the debtor made a fraudulent return or willfully attempted in any manner to evade or defeat such tax . . . .” Fraud penalties appearing on the IRS’s tax account transcript would be an alert regarding this exception. Like student loans, child support, and (depending on chapter) other divorce decree obligations, the taxrelated exceptions to discharge are self-activating. The tax authority is not required to preserve the exception by filing an adversary proceeding requesting a determination that the exception exists. In this respect, tax-related exceptions differ from the “bad conduct” exceptions (false pretenses, fraud or defalcation, willful and malicious injury) that are described respectively in 11 U.S.C. Sections 523(a)(3), (4), and (6), which are activated only if the creditor files a timely and successful adversary proceeding objecting to the discharge of the debt. 11 U.S.C. Section 523(c)(1). Interest on non-dischargeable taxes is also nondischargeable. Penalties on income tax debts are dischargeable even if the underlying tax is not, although the IRS takes the position that the same is not true for penalties on withholding tax. In chapter 13 plans, priority tax debts accrue no further interest, but, in chapter 11 plans, they must be paid with interest.

Thirdly, the Tenth Circuit in In re Mallo, 774 F.3d at 1321 (10th Cir. 2014), held that the tax liability for a latefiled return was not dischargeable. In the process, the court stated the rationale that the late filing of the return, not the SFR filing, prevented discharge of the debt. Vigorous debate continues regarding the effect of late-filed tax returns. In conclusion, tax liabilities arising from payroll and sales taxes, fraud, evasion, SFRs, and perhaps late-filed returns, cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. However, with close attention to timing, much tax liability arising from income tax returns can be discharged.

Brian Huckabee is a Tulsa attorney with a practice concentrated in bankruptcy, including business and consumer cases filed under chapters 7, 11, 12, and 13 in the Northern and Eastern Districts of Oklahoma. He serves as an Adjunct Settlement Judge in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma.

If you are interested in contributing to the Tulsa Lawyer contact Larry Yadon, Editor (larryyadon@cox.net) or Michael Taubman (mptaubman@taubmanlawoffice.com) to talk about our future topics or your ideas. 10 Tulsa Lawyer

Lawyer Referral Referral

[law-yer,loi-er][ri-fur-uh l] [ri-fur-uh l] Noun

1. an act of referring a person or individual to the TCBA Lawyer Referral Service 2. a person referred to the TCBA LRS by an attorney. Example “I’m sorry, but that is not an area of the law that I practice in. You need to call the Tulsa County Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service and they should be able to help you. That number is 918-587-6014”. As an attorney you probably often get “cold calls” asking for your help on a wide variety of issues. When you are unable to represent a potential client due to case load, conflict, or practice area please refer them to us.

The TCBA Laywer Referral Service 918-587-6014 www.tulsabar.com

12 Tulsa Lawyer

Tulsa Lawyer 13

Two Factors that Directly Affect the Value of any Private Business (and Public as Well) By Bruno Teles,

Professor at Oral Roberts University, Director of Transition Strategies at CS3 Advisors, Licensed Lawyer in Brazil, MBA in Finance, DBA in Marketing (in progress) Background One of the main differences between a public company and a private company is in the valuation. The market determines a public company’s stock second by second, while private companies do not have a valuation from the market unless they pursue one. This results in a valuation gap between buyers and sellers with the sale of private firms. In a 2016 Pepperdine survey, Investment bankers and business brokers said about one in three of their engagements to sell companies terminated without the deal closing last year. The top “deal breaker” reported by these investment bankers was a valuation gap in pricing. Brokers also reported the valuation gap as one of the top reasons, along with unreasonable nonprice demands by one of the deal parties. In fact, roughly twenty percent of the busted deals for these brokers and bankers were due to a valuation gap.

14 Tulsa Lawyer

According to this same report, about two-thirds of nearly 1,000 business owners, surveyed by Pepperdine University’s Private Capital Markets Project, expect to transfer their ownership in the next ten years. The proper valuation of a business is key to designing the strategy of a company in transition and it is paramount to understand how key factors affect the value of an organization. Two of these factors are free cash flow generation and owner dependency.  Free Cash Flow Generation  Warren Buffet, arguably the most successful investor of all time, developed a strategy for valuing a business that is simple: The main measure of value is free cash flow generation. Warren Buffet points out that what matters the most is the amount of cash a company can provide to its shareholders. This strategy is explained in his best seller The Essays of Warren Buffet: Lessons for Corporate America.

“Managing” or “representing” net earnings in a favorable light can be accomplished with various legitimate accounting methods. However, free cash flows are difficult to “manage.” Many business owners think that tangible assets drive the value of a business. While assets like buildings, machinery, vehicles, and land are important, the key factor is how much cash these assets can generate. For instance, Walmart generated a free cash flow (cash out of operations minus capital expenditures) amount of $20.91 billion according to its last 10k report while Google generated a free cash flow amount of $25.83 billion according to its last 10k report. However, Walmart needed $114 billion in fixed assets to generate its free cash flow, while Google only needed $47.53 billion in fixed assets to generate a bigger amount of free cash flow.  Google’s business model requires far less fixed assets than Walmart to generate the same amount of free cash flow and the results of this fact are represented by the difference in market valuation of the two companies in May 2017:

Walmart: $236.83 billion

Google: $686.57 billion

Free cash flow generation must be THE financial metric to assess the performance of a business.    Owner Dependency Owner dependency is a factor that quickly drives the value of a business down. The higher the owner dependency of a business, the harder it is to sell. Business knowledge and skills must be distributed across key staff members for the possibility of the departure of the owner.

Training an effective and efficient management team that can replace an owner not only provides more release time to a business owner, but it also helps to increase the value of a company.  Conclusion Lawyers should guide their customers who own businesses on how to understand these two factors and work on them in a pro-active way (not reactive way) so they can maximize the value of their business. An exit strategy is a lifetime event and any business owner must be prepared for it. B r u n o Te l e s h a s y e a r s o f ex p ert i s e i m p r o v i n g businesses in various industries. During his career as a lawyer in Brazil, he worked on restructuring energy companies that had been recently privatized, while concurrently performing due diligence of potential acquisition targets. His years in the law industry set the foundation for his work on identifying potential targets and covering all aspects of a merger or acquisition operation. Working with international firms gives him a unique perspective and extended networking when reviewing alternatives for exit strategies. Mr. Teles is a professor at Oral Roberts University, where he teaches Marketing and Finance courses. He received his Master of Business Administration (MBA) in Finance from Oral Roberts University, his Juris Doctor (JD), and practices in the Brazil energy sector, and is also a Doctoral Candidate in Marketing (DBA) at Anderson University.

The acid test if a business is dependent on its owner is: Can I go on a month vacation and be away from my business? Usually, the answer is no because business owners spend too much time working IN the business than working ON the business. Business owners assume an operational role rather than a strategical role. The value of a business decreases considerably if a business cannot function properly without its owner because there is no transferability. The business and the owner become impossible to dissociate one from the other, and this means the business cannot be sold without a considerable discount.

Tulsa Lawyer 15

16 Tulsa Lawyer

Fall/Winter CLE Now Free to TCBA Members The TCBA Board of Directors is extremely excited to announce that the TCBA’s entire live Fall/Winter CLE schedule will be free to all TCBA dues paid members. With the demands on our members’ time and financial resources ever increasing, it is more important than ever that the TCBA provide unquestionable value through unbeatable benefits.

TCBA Board of Directors and Executive Director TCBA members frequently cite the TCBA Annual are committed to providing our members with an Free Spring CLE as the most valuable TCBA member outstanding membership experience at a remarkable benefit. The free Spring CLE provides six hours of value. Be on the lookout for additional new benefit CLE, but is offered only a single day in the Spring. announcements in the coming months. While any free CLE is a good value, the TCBA wanted We would love to have your feedback about the new to do more for our members. free CLE benefit and your suggestions for additional By offering the entire live Fall/Winter CLE schedule ways in which we can improve your membership free to TCBA members, our members will have a experience, so please feel free to contact any TCBA variety of topics from which to choose (last year’s Officer or the Executive Director with your feedback schedule offered over 50 hours on an assortment of and suggestions. topics), will be able to take free CLE on a variety of dates throughout the Fall and Winter, and, will be able to obtain all of their annual required CLE hours for free. Christina Vaughn

2017-2018 Perhaps the best aspect of this new benefit is the financial TCBA President value it adds to a TCBA membership. For example, the member cost of the annual six hour Family Law Seminar and that of the annual six hour Hodgepodge of Criminal Law Nuggets Seminar has been $135 for each seminar. Accordingly, these twelve CLE hours have, in the past, cost members $270 in addition to the cost of membership dues. Beginning in the upcoming membership year (2017-2018), these CLEs and many more will be free to dues paid members; making the cost of membership less than the cost of purchasing the annually required 12 hours of CLE.

TCBA members asked for more and the TCBA has delivered, and we are just getting started. The

TCBA DIRECTORIES

Available exclusively for TCBA Members! You may pick up your copy at the Bar Center during regular business hours. Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 Limit 1 copy per Member If your firm needs more than 10 directories please email Julie in advance. juliec@tulsabar.com Tulsa Lawyer 17

WHEN A CREDITOR’S GOLDEN COACH TURNS INTO A PUMPKIN©

By Mac D. Finlayson

In enacting the Bankruptcy Code, Congress recognized in § 523(a)1 nineteen types of debts that, as a matter of policy, should not be discharged. It is generally held that in order to carry out the rehabilitative aim of bankruptcy law, exceptions to discharge should be limited to those clearly expressed in the statute, excluding by implication those not expressly included.2 “[E]xceptions to discharge are to be narrowly construed, and because of the fresh start objectives of bankruptcy, doubt is to be resolved in the debtor's favor.” See, Bellco First Fed. Credit Union v. Kaspar (In re Kaspar).3 The discharge exceptions of § 523(a)(2) (“fraud”), § 523(a)(4) (fraud or defalcation while acting as a fiduciary, embezzlement, or larceny) and § 523(a)(6) (willful and malicious injury), unlike the remaining exceptions, are not “self-executing,” meaning a creditor must take affirmative action for those three (3) types of debts to be determined to be non-dischargeable. See, § 523(c). 1 Statutory references are to the Bankruptcy Code (Tit. 11 U.S.C., §§ 101, et seq.), all references to rules are to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. 2 In re Mendoza, 16 Bankr. 990, 993, (Bankr. S.D. Calif. 1982); In re

Rule 4007(c) generally provides in this context that a complaint to determine the dischargeability of a debt under § 523(c) shall be filed no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a). On motion of a party in interest, after hearing on notice, the court may for cause extend the time fixed under this subsection, but the motion must be filed before the time has expired. Id. In Daniels v. Cowdin (In re: Cowdin),4 the debtors received a discharge and a creditor sought to untimely file a complaint under § 523(a)(2) seeking to determine the creditor’s claim to be non-dischargeable as having been obtained by fraud, but without having moved to extend the deadline of Rule 4007(c) prior to its expiration, urging that his failure to meet the bar date was warranted, suggesting, as the Court stated, “excusable neglect.” Id., at *9. Cowdin found a failure to act is excused as a result of excusable neglect only in situations where a time period under the applicable law may be enlarged under Rule 9006(b)(3), Fed.R.Bankr.P., citing Jones v. Arross,5 “[b]ecause Rule 4007(c) requires a motion for an extension of time to be filed prior to the expiration of the sixty-day period …, excusable neglect

Cairone, 12 Bankr. 60, 63, (Bankr. R.I. 1981).

4 2002 Bankr. LEXIS 608 (10th Cir. BAP),

3 125 F.3d 1358, 1361 (a Cir.1997).

5 9 F.3d 79, 81 (10th Cir. 1993).

18 Tulsa Lawyer

or equitable factors may not be applied to enlarge the time period. [Internal citations omitted.] [Id., at *9, 10] [Emphasis added to the original.] (Also note, Rule 9006(b)(3) provides the “…court may enlarge the time for taking action under Rules … 4007(c) … only to the extent and under the conditions stated in those rules.)

Sports Innovations (ASI),12 In re Booth.13 Contra, see, In Re Santos. 14 Chanute Prod. Credit Ass’n v. Schicke (In re Schicke),15 simply stated The debtor’s duty to afford due process is counterbalanced by the creditors’ duty to object to the discharge of a debt if it has any notice or knowledge or a Chapter 7 case prior to the expiration of the time limitation set forth in Fed.R.Bankr.P. 4007(c). It is well-established in the Tenth Circuit that upon the receipt of notice or knowledge of a Chapter 7 case, creditors must affirmatively protect their rights by informing themselves of applicable deadlines and timely filing complaints to except their claims against the debtor from discharge. [Note 18 omitted.] The informed creditor’s duty to act timely insures the finality of the discharge granted to the honest and responsible debtor--when the deadline to file dischargeability complaints established under Fed.R.Bankr.P. 4007(c) has lapsed; the debtor is assured that creditors cannot attack the discharge of their individual debts.

Cowdin also found Rule 9006(b)(3) prevents a court from enlarging the time to make a request to extend the 60day deadline, citing Themy v. Yu (In re: Themy), 6 F.3d 688, 689 (10th Cir. 1993). The court may be able to allow a latefiled complaint when the bankruptcy court was responsible for affirmatively misleading a litigant. See, Themy, at 690. See, also, Torrez v. Dickinson (In re: Dickinson)6. In Themy, the court misled the creditor by sending a notice of deadlines that was erroneous, not a trustee, and not resulting from a miscalculation or misunderstanding of the rule and applicable law. The concept of “excusable neglect” (rejected by the Tenth Circuit in the context of § 523(a)(2), (4), and (6) determinations vis-à-vis Bankruptcy Rule 4007(c) noted above), neglect that has been recognized as excusable is limited. See, United States v. Torres,7 (neglect not excusable and appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; convicted defendant failed to timely file his notice of appeal, blaming the failure on his counsel’s misunderstanding of the time deadline), which relied heavily on “[t]he leading case on ‘excusable neglect,’” Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership,8 concluding, in the context of Rule 9006(b), the misinterpretation of a readily accessible, unambiguous rule cannot be grounds for relief as “excusable.” Id., at 1163, 1164. Pioneer rejected the notion that it would be inappropriate to penalize a client for the omissions of its attorney, finding the proper focus to be upon whether the neglect of the client and its counsel was excusable. Id. Moreover, the Rule 4007(c) filing requirements are jurisdictional. See, First Nat’l Bank v. Barnes,9 citing with approval In re Alton,10 Neeley v. Murchison,11 In re American

12 105 Bankr. 614, 616 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 1989). 13 103 Bankr. 800, 802 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 1989). 14 112 Bankr. 1001, 1006, 1009 (Bankr. 9th Cir. 1990). 15

290 B.R. 792, 800 (10th Cir. BAP 2003) .

6 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 31039, *7. 7 372 F.3d 1159 (10th Cir. 2004).

Mac D. Finlayson Eller & Detrich, P.C.

8 507 U.S. 380, 113 S.Ct. 1489 (USSC 1993), 9 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 2835 (10th Cir. 1992) at *3. 10 837 F.2d 457, 459 (11th Cir. 1988) (per curiam). 11 815 F.2d 345, 347 (5th Cir. 1987).

Tulsa Lawyer 19

TCBF Capital Campaign On behalf of the Capital Campaign Committee, The Tulsa County Bar Foundation would like to Thank You for your investment in Your Bar Center’s future!!! The exterior of the building has been completed. If you have not seen the Bar Center in the last few months I encourage you to stop by, get out of your vehicle and walk around so you can see how good the building looks. 

Next, we will begin the planning and design of the interior renovation. No significant improvements have been made to the Bar Center in more than 20 years. We are still raising funds. Please remit the balance of your pledge. If you have not made a pledge or donation contact Chad McLain at 918-359-6600.

20 Tulsa Lawyer

Happy 4th of July!

As we celebrate Independence Day... a little patriotic trivia! ~ Congress proclaimed the Fourth of July a national holiday in 1870, and in 1938 it was established as a paid holiday for federal employees. ~ John Adams was the first President to live in The White House. Taking residence on Nov. 1, 1800.

~ July 4, 1777 - The first Independence Day celebration with fireworks. ~ Our 30th President, Calvin Coolidge was born on July 4, 1872.

~ Three Presidents died on the date of July 4th. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams (both 1826) and James Monroe (1831).

TTTulsa Lawyer 21

What is Your Risk Appetite for Utilizing an Automatic Telephone Dial System (“ATDS” or “autodialer”)? by Sara C. Royster and Piper W. Turner Frederic Dorwart, Lawyers PLLC Overview of TCPA on Autodialers and FCC Order

Hicks v. Client Serv., Inc., No. 07-61822-CIV, 2009 WL 2365637 (S.D. Fla. 2009); Donnelly v. NCO Financial If you are a loan servicer or you perform debt collection Systems, Inc., 236 F.R.D. 500, 502 (N.D. Ill. 2009). activities, you can appreciate the value in utilizing an autodialer for making collection calls. The strict calling The TCPA defines ATDS as equipment which has the requirements imposed on you by various agencies and capacity “A) to store or produce telephone numbers the multitude of debt collection rules and regulations are to be called, using a random or sequential number enough to make streamlining or automating the process generator; and B) to dial such numbers.” 47 U.S.C. extremely attractive. However, these alternatives expose § 227(a)(1). The FCC construes the term “capacity” users to extra risk under the Telephone Consumer very broadly.1 Recently, the FCC reaffirmed its prior Protection Act (“TCPA”). The TCPA is very unforgiving. statements that the TCPA’s use of the term “capacity” in its definition of ATDS does not exempt equipment Under the TCPA, it is generally unlawful for an entity that lacks the “present ability” to dial randomly or to make any call using an ATDS to a cellphone number sequentially, even if it is not used for that purpose. In without consent. 47 U.S.C. §§ 226 (b)(1) and 227(b)(1) the matter of Rules & Regulations Implementing the (A)(iii). Violations of the TCPA can result in statutory Tel. Consumer Protection Act of 1991, 30 F.C.C.R. damages of $500 per violation, and $1,500 for each 7961 (July 10, 2015) (hereinafter referred to as “2015 willful and knowing violation. Unfortunately, for those TCPA Order”). Therefore, any equipment with the using autodialers, the TCPA is ripe for class action requisite capacity to dial randomly or sequentially is an litigation with devastatingly large damage awards autodialer and subject to the TCPA. Id.; See also Bush v. totaling in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Not only Mid-Continent Credit Services, Inc., 2015 WL 5081688 can the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) (W.D. Okla. 2015) (adopting the FCC’s ruling on the bring enforcement actions for violations and impose definition of “capacity”). penalties, but state attorneys general may also bring suits in federal court for actual damages or $500 per Concerns with Consumer Consent violation, with damages tripled for knowing or willful violations. Probably the most heavily scrutinized and high risk requirement under the TCPA is establishing a ATDS Defined consumer’s consent for all autodialed calls or text messages to wireless numbers. The TCPA requires that An ATDS has been described as including: (1) predictive dialers (i.e., equipment that eliminates the need for 1 Note, the issue of capacity has been heavily briefed and adtime dialing numbers and maximizes efficiency using dressed by multiple jurisdictions, as it appears to be heavily factalgorithms to predict when collectors will be free to talk based. Bush v. Mid-Continent Credit Services, Inc., 2015 WL to consumers); and (2) equipment that “dial[s] telephone 5081688 (W.D. Okla. 2015); Cartrette v. Time Warner Cable, Inc., numbers in such a way that no human intervention is 157 F.Supp.3d 448, 456 (E.D.N.C. 2016); Freyja v. Dun & Bradnecessary.”’ Collecting Consumer Debts the Challenges street, Inc., 2015 WL 6163590 (C.D. California) of Change, 2009 WL 1651501, *29 (F.T.C. Feb. 2009); 22 Tulsa Lawyer

callers making all autodialed, prerecorded telemarketing or advertising calls obtain the consumer’s prior express written consent. However, prior express oral consent is also permitted if the call qualifies as an “informational call.” Additionally, it has been established that the issue of consent is an affirmative defense that a defendant must plead and prove. Nelson v. Santander Consumer, USA, Inc., 931 F.Supp.2d 919 (W.D. Wisc. 2013). Clearly, the strongest way to evidence consumer consent is through a written agreement signed by the person who will receive such calls. The agreement must include a clear and conspicuous disclosure informing the signing person, that by signing the agreement, the signer is authorizing autodialed or prerecorded telemarketing or advertising calls or texts. See FDIC Compliance Examination Manual. The agreement must also specify that the person signing is not required to sign the agreement as a condition of purchasing any property, goods, or services. The caller must maintain consent records for a minimum of 5 years. Id. To further complicate the issue of consent, consumers are free to revoke consent “using any reasonable method including orally or in writing.” 2015 TCPA Order. For example, consumers may revoke consent via (a) a consumer initiated call, (b) in response to a call initiated or made by a caller, or (c) at a branch or bill payment location. Id. at ¶ 64. The 2015 TCPA Order clarifies that a called party may revoke consent at any time and through any reasonable means, and that a caller may not limit the manner in which revocation may occur. Id. at ¶ 70. Because consumers may revoke consent in any manner, it is advisable for financial institutions and loan servicers to have mechanisms in place to record and effectuate a consumer’s request to revoke his or her consent. The ability to promptly produce such records on a customer-by-customer basis will be a key factor in the event of litigation. Ultimately, however, recording all calls is likely the only irrefutable evidence that

consent was never revoked. At any rate, this will be a question of fact in litigation which may drive up costs and prevent early resolution through summary judgment or dismissal. Other Risks and Considerations In addition to carefully tracking consumer consent and revocation of the same, there is also added risk when it comes to reassigned cellphone numbers. Because consent must come from the actual recipient of the call, calls to a current subscriber or user of a cellphone number without knowledge of the number’s reassignment is an inexcusable error. Callers with a reasonable basis to believe that they have a valid consent may only make one call after the reassignment to a wrong number. 2015 TCPA Order at ¶ 85. This single call is the caller’s only opportunity to gain or obtain constructive knowledge of any reassignment. Making it even more challenging for the caller, the FCC has stated that the new subscriber has no obligation to opt out of such unwanted calls or even to inform the caller that the number has been reassigned. See Order at ¶ 84. The FCC bases its harsh view on the fact that loan servicers and debt collectors can use commercial services that provide notice of reassignment of cellphone and wireless numbers, which is highly encouraged. Also, jurisdictions have provided some guidance as to what constitutes a “called party” when faced with the question raised by financial institutions and consumer advocate groups. It appears the general consensus among various jurisdictions considers the “called party” to be the current subscriber to the cellphone service or the phone’s user. For example, the Eleventh Circuit found that a call made to a cellphone number which previously belonged to a former bank customer (who never revoked his or her consent to receiving autodialed calls) was actually in violation of the TCPA. Breslow

v. Wells Fargo Bank, 755 F.3d 1265, 1267 (11th Cir. 2014). In that particular case, unbeknownst to the bank, it autodialed the cellphone number belonging to a mother and child who had not consented to being called via an autodialer. Because the bank autodialed the mother/child’s number without that called party’s consent, the court found the bank in violation of the TPCA. Id. Other federal courts have also held that TCPA consent must come from the “called party,” or someone acting on that person’s authority, and that the “called party” is the “current subscriber” to the wireless number called. See Soppet v. Enhanced Recovery Co. LLC, 679 F.3d 637, 643 (7th Cir. 2012); Osorio v. State Farm Bank FSB, 746 F.3d 1242, 1251 (11th Cir. 2014). Rejecting the argument that the intended recipient of the call be deemed the “called party,” the 2015 TCPA Order clarified that the “called party” is “the subscriber, i.e., the consumer assigned the telephone number dialed and billed for the call, or the non-subscriber customary user of a telephone number included in a family or business calling plan.” 2015 TCPA Order at ¶ 73. Using this definition, a caller must have the consent

24 Tulsa Lawyer

of the person it autodials, even if that person is not the intended recipient of the call. Relying on congressional intent, the Third Circuit found that the TCPA’s history demonstrated that Congress intended to provide privacy, peace and quiet to a fairly broad group, including not only intended recipients of prerecorded calls but actual recipients as well. Leyse v. Bank of America National Association, 804 F.3d 316, 2015 WL 5946456 (3rd Cir.). The TCPA “was intended to combat, among other things, the proliferation of automated telemarketing calls (known as “robocalls”) to private residences, which Congress viewed as a nuisance and an invasion of privacy.” Id. at 322. Clearly, there are advantages to using an autodialer, particularly if you perform a high volume of collection work. However, this article summarizes some of the many risks associated with using an autodialer from both a regulatory and litigation standpoint that should be considered. The statutory damages are hefty and can be strictly applied. Also, the cost of litigation is generally very high, as many litigated issues involving the TCPA are questions for the trier of fact.

Tulsa Lawyer 25

Personal Injury and Wrongful Death: New Statutes, Pending Appeals, Current Limitations and Perspectives from the Plaintiff By Ken Ray Underwood Part Two of a Three Part Series

THE LIMITATION ON NON-ECONOMIC DAMAGES 23 O.S. §61.2 It has been fashionable and popular for legislatures throughout the country to limit non- economic damages on personal injuries to some arbitrary amount chosen by a group of people who likely have all of their limbs, their vision and have not been disfigured or suffered a traumatic brain injury. In Oklahoma, this arbitrary amount was determined to be $350,000. Apparently, the legislature concluded there should be a cap on non-economic damages because jurors were simply not capable of making good decisions. The law does provide certain exceptions to the cap on damages if a Defendant acts in reckless disregard for the rights of another, is grossly negligent, acts intentionally or with malice, or commits acts of fraud. The constitutionality of this law is currently before the Oklahoma Supreme Court in the case of Beason v. I.E. Miller Services, Inc., Supreme Court No. 114301 and it is fully briefed and ready for a decision. The Appeal arises from a jury verdict for personal injuries in the amount of $5,000,000 for non-economic damages and $9,000,000 for economic damages. The Trial Court reduced the non-economic damages to $350,000. The jury awarded $1,000,000 for loss of consortium which was also reduced by the Trial Court to $350,000. The pending appeal contends that the law is unconstitutional, denies the Plaintiff equal protection and the right to a Jury Trial and equal access to the Courts. Until this appeal is decided, we are stuck with the cap on damages. Some Oklahoma case law might give lawyers and their clients some hope that the cap would be lifted when a defendant is reckless, grossly negligent or acts with malice. In the case of Graham v. Keuchel, 1993 OK 6, the Oklahoma Supreme Court concluded that failure to type an expectant mother’s blood and give Rhogam was sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude that such actions demonstrated a reckless disregard for patient rights. In the case of Fox v. Oklahoma Memorial Hospital, 1989 OK 38, the court held that forgetting to remove a surgical instrument during surgery could constitute gross negligence. In Murray v. Advanced Asphalt Co., 1987 OK CIV APP 88, the court concluded that the jury should have been instructed on punitive damages where the failure

26 Tulsa Lawyer

to attach a safety chain resulted in a runaway trailer causing a head-on collision which potentially could be viewed by the jury as gross negligence or reckless disregard for the safety of others. In a recent of Gowens v. Barstow, 2015 OK 85, the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that an ambulance speeding through an intersection warranted a trial court finding of reckless disregard for the rights of another. Based upon these cases, it appears as though the line between ordinary care and the want of slight care and diligence required to establish gross negligence as defined in 25 O.S. §§4, 5 and 6 is blurred. It is probably good practice, when warranted by sufficient facts, to plead lack of slight care, gross negligence and reckless disregard for the rights of the plaintiff. To prevail, the plaintiff would need a finding by the court and jury by clear and convincing evidence that the Defendant’s acts were reckless, gross negligence and/or lacking in slight care. If there is an injury warranting an award for non-economic damages in excess of $350,000 then it is highly likely that the jury will be more inclined to find gross negligence, want of slight care, reckless disregard for another’s rights or even malice than if there was a nominal injury or nominal damages. For this reason, it is worthwhile looking at the nature of the liability claim and how to establish gross negligence where indicated. There are many good resources that can help transform simple negligence to gross negligence and enhance the claim and damages. These resources include the book by David Ball on Damages, a Plaintiff Attorney’s Guide for Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases available through NITA; Reptile, by David Ball and Don Keenan; and Rules of the Road by Rick Friedman and Patrick Malone, a Plaintiff Lawyer’s Guide to Proving Liability available through Trial Guides. These books and the corresponding videotapes will provide you with new ideas and potentially transform your next trial to one that focuses on the conduct of the defendant and the broad scope of damages and harms caused by the outrageous failure to use slight care during an activity that resulted in a catastrophic injury. Ken Underwood with his friend Jackson Paulk, DRC

Tulsa Lawyer 27

G rapevine N ews Crowe & Dunlevy recently presented first-year University of Tulsa College of Law student Robert McClendon with the firm’s Diversity Scholars Program scholarship. The program assists a diverse student who qualifies based on academic achievement, financial need and commitment to the law. The $10,000 scholarship is awarded $2,000 per semester for the student’s last five semesters of law school based on satisfactory progress and performance. Crowe & Dunlevy has provided more than $250,000 in scholarships since 2005, with $40,000 awarded to TU Law students since 2012. McClendon received his bachelor’s degree in 2004 from the University of Tulsa, where he graduated cum laude and participated in multiple study abroad opportunities. He earned his Master of Arts in 2006 at Syracuse University, serving as an S.I. Newhouse Minority Fellow and Member of the Association of Black Journalists. McClendon gained professional experience as a news reporter before attending TU Law, where he has excelled academically and is a member of the Black Law Students Association. He has also volunteered for organizations that advocate for refugee issues and that build community across racial lines. Jones, Gotcher & Bogan, P.C. is pleased to announce the Firm’s President, James E. Weger, has been appointed to serve as a member of the Alcoholic Beverage Laws Enforcement (“ABLE”) Commission. Governor Mary Fallin signed the appointment on May 9, 2017, following the Senate’s approval and confirmation of the appointment. Mr. Weger will serve a five-year term ending June 23, 2021. Jim has served as the Firm’s President since 1994, with his practice centering on complex commercial litigation, including EEOC, trademark infringement, environmental, securities, real estate and antitrust. He has received numerous awards and has been involved with numerous civic and charitable organizations. You may read his complete bio at www.jonesgotcher.com.

28 Tulsa Lawyer

Hall Estill, Oklahoma’s leading law firm, with offices in Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Denver, Northwest Arkansas and Nashville, announces the election of Michael J. Lissau to the Executive Committee and Pamela H. Goldberg to the Board of Directors. Lissau joins existing Executive Committee members Michael D. Cooke, Michael T. Keester, James M. Reed, and Larry G. Ball. “Mike and Pam both serve as talented and tenacious leaders,” ManagingaPartner Mike Cooke said. “They are vital assets to Hall Estill’s leadership and will continue to create positive growth within the firm.” Lissau, a shareholder in the Hall Estill Tulsa office, joined the firm in 2001. He has been practicing for 19 years. Additionally, he has been recognized as a Best Lawyer in America in Employment Law- Management and an Oklahoma Super Lawyer in Employment and Labor. Lissau is a graduate of the University of Tulsa College of Law and earned a B.A. in Business Administration from Westminster College. He is involved in the Tulsa County, Oklahoma, and American Bar Associations, as well as The University of Tulsa’s Friends of Finance. He currently serves on the board of the Tulsa Chapter of American Red Cross and is a member of Philbrook Museum’s Young Masters Society. Goldberg, a shareholder in the Hall Estill Tulsa office, began her legal career with the firm in 1987. She is the recipient of the 2010 Leadership in Law award presented by the Oklahoma Bar Association and the Journal Record. In 2013 she was named to the Tulsa Business and Legal News Women of Distinction Class. Goldberg is a graduate of the University of Tulsa College of Law, earned an M.A in Psychology from the University of Tulsa, and a B.A in Psychology from Brooklyn College. She is involved in the Tulsa County and Oklahoma Bar Associations. In addition, she served as a board member for Jenks Public Schools Foundation and continues as an active volunteer for various philanthropic organizations in the Tulsa community.

Send Grapevine items to tulsabarnews@yahoo.com

Rachel Blue, a shareholder with McAfee & Taft and leader of the firm’s Intellectual Property Group, was inducted into the University of Tulsa College of Law Hall of Fame at the Law Alumni Gala on May 13, 2017, in honor of her distinguished contributions to the legal profession and tireless support of TU Law. Blue was also honored with the W. Thomas Coffman Award for Community Service, which is presented to law school alumni who have distinguished themselves in the legal field or other chosen profession at an exemplary level and who embody the high ethical standards and commitment to community service TU College of Law seeks to instill in its graduates. Blue currently serves on the TU College of Law’s Dean’s Advisory Committee and has previously served as chair of the Alumni Relations and Mentoring Committees, president of the alumni association, and a member of the 2003 Dean’s Search Committee. She also played a key role in creating the university’s “Off the Record” program that provides women law students a forum to discuss the career challenges and rewards for women in the legal field with other women from the bench, private practice, nonprofits and industry. Active in the community, serves on the advisory board for Street School, presides over the board of directors for the Tulsa Day Center for the Homeless, and serves as a lector in her parish of Christ the King Catholic Church and as a Cub Scout den leader at Marquette Catholic School.

Hofland also served previously as a Judge Advocate General’s (JAG) Corps officer in the U.S. Navy. During his time with the Navy, Hofland gained significant trial experience prosecuting and defending service members in courts-martial and administrative disciplinary proceedings. A graduate of Notre Dame Law School, he participated in the Notre Dame Legal Aid Clinic and was awarded the A. Harold Weber Moot Court Award. He received his bachelor’s degree in political science and Spanish from Marquette University in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Dispute Resolution Consultants is honored to announce that Joseph H. Paulk has again been included in the internationally recognized publication Chambers & Partners USA, based in London, UK. The publication consists of a listing of objectively verified and peerreviewed legal professionals throughout the world. Mr. Paulk has not only been listed again in its Band 1 category, but he additionally holds the distinction of being listed by Chambers & Partners USA more than any other mediator in the history of Chambers reviews in Oklahoma. Additionally, Mr. Paulk is an active member of the International Association of Mediators based in Toronto, Canada, and the National Association of Distinguished Neutrals, also an international peerreviewed organization. The memberships of these organizations are also by invitation only after extensive vetting of the candidates. Mr. Paulk is the only mediator in Oklahoma, and only one of a handful of dispute resolvers in the entire United States, who holds such distinguished rankings and memberships. Mr. Paulk has also been peer-reviewed listed as AV Preeminent for Attorney Andrew J. Hofland over 25 years. has joined Crowe & Dunlevy as an associate in the firm’s Tulsa office and a member of the Litigation & Share your news with us! Trial and Bankruptcy & Creditor’s Rights Practice Groups. Moving, new jobs, births, Before joining the firm, Hofland served as an Assistant United weddings...let others know States Attorney (AUSA) for the Northern District of Oklahoma. As an AUSA, he represented the United through the States in a variety of complex criminal prosecutions in federal court; including cases involving organized crime, drug trafficking, fraud and internet crimes against children.

Grapevine!

Tulsa Lawyer 29

Crowe & Dunlevy recently announced the addition of Terry L. Watt as attorney in the firm’s Tulsa office and member of the Intellectual Property (IP) Practice Group. Watt, who has a doctorate in geophysics, is a licensed patent attorney with more than 20 years’ experience in IP law, including obtaining, protecting and enforcing IP rights. Watt’s practice incorporates high-tech subject matters and computer and software law. He is adept in preparing and prosecuting patent applications and counseling his clients on a wide range of IP issues. He manages a substantial portfolio of international patents and helps clients secure protection for IP outside the United States. Representative technologies that his clients have requested he seek IP protection for include mechanical and electrical inventions, inventions involving signal processing, geophysical methods, imaging, computer software and physics. Watt also has a background in high-tech oil research and exploration. Prior to practicing law, he worked in research as a geophysicist, where he developed

SECTION CHAIRS ADR/Mediation Bankruptcy

Ron Gore Paul Thomas

Corporate

Vacant

Criminal Law

Marvin Lizama

Employment Law

Stephan Mecke

Bill Searcy

Energy & MineraLaw

Anita Anthony

Family Law

Maren Lively

Health Law

Donna De Simone Philip D. Hixon

Immigration Law

David Sobel

Catherine Coulter

Juvenile Law

Ivan Orndorff

Litigation

Aaron D. Bundy M. Shane Henry

Municipal Law

Steven L. Oakley

Paralegal

Debra Baker

Probate/Estate/Elder

Riley Kern

Solo/Small Firm

Paul McTighe

Tax

Riley Kern

Technology

Teak Hull

Workers Compensation Young Lawyer 30 Tulsa Lawyer

Vacant Natalie Sears

computer algorithms to solve geophysical problems and statistically analyzed complex data sets. Professionally ranked by his peers for his work in IP law, Watt has been selected for inclusion in Chambers USA (2014-17), Oklahoma Super Lawyers (2012-16), Best Lawyers (2010-16) and named Best Lawyers Lawyer of the Year (2014-16) by the same publication.* Watt currently serves as an adjunct professor at Concord Law School teaching upper-level patent and IP law courses. He previously taught trademark, patent and IP law at the University of Tulsa College of Law, statistics and geophysics courses at the University of Tulsa and graduate-level statistics at Oklahoma State University. *Crowe & Dunlevy has no input in the rating methodologies used by Chambers USA, Best Lawyers or Super Lawyers publications.

Classified Ads MoreLawSuites.com 406 South Boulder & 624 South Denver 918-582-3993 or 918-398-5678 Virtual Offices Starting at $180

Mediators & Arbitrators of Oklahoma, LLC Â Jon Starr * Michael Gassett Scott McDaniel * Jack Crews Mark Smiling * David Wilson Scott Ryan * Robert Coffey, Jr. Mark A. Warman * Truman Rucker Peter Erdoes * Jeff Curran Call (918) 693-7850 to schedule you next mediation

C O N TA C T U S www.tulsabar.com PHONE: FAX:

918-584-5243 918-592-02081

446 South Boston, Tulsa, OK 74119-3612

CLUGSTON POLYGRAPH & INVESTIGATING SERVICES FBI National Academy graduate, 25 years law enforcement experience. See our Website at www.clugston-polygraph.com or call (918) 622-7008 for information about our services. Corporate internal investigations, criminal defense, divorce, child custody, loss preventionâ&#x20AC;Ś. We can help answer your questions.

Sections & Committees Contact Jody at 918.584.5243 Ext. 240 jodyg@tulsabar.com Tulsa Lawyer is a monthly publication of the TCBA. The TCBA does not necessarily share or endorse the opinions expressed in the materials published. The views are those of thoughtful contributors. Similarly, advertising does not imply endorsement by the TCBA of products or services or any statements concerning them.

Please send us your news, photos and updates to share with the TCBA Membership!

Tulsa County Bar Association 1446 S. Boston Ave. Tulsa, OK 74119

"Those who won our independence believed liberty to be the secret of happiness and courage to be the secret of liberty." ~Louis D. Brandeis

PRSRTD STD US POSTAGE PAID Pontiac, Illinois PERMIT# 592

Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, (1856-1941)