Ground breaking for the long-awaited addition to the law buildingwas an occasion that brought smiles to all faces, as former Dean William D. Warren, Dean Susan Westerberg Prager and Chancellor Charles E. Young turned a ceremonial shovel of earth. [Story in News section inside.)
UCLA L.iw is published al UCLA for alumni, friends, and other members of The UCLA School of Law community. Issued three limes a year. Offices al 405 Hilgard Avenue. Los Angeles 90024. "Postmaster: Send address changes lo Alumni Office, School of Law, 405 Hilgard, Los Angeles 90024."
Charles E. Young I Chancellor
Susan Westerberg Prager / Dean
Michael T. McManus I Assistant Vice Chancellor. PublicCommunications
Joan Tyndall / Director of DevelopmentandAlumni Relations
Ted Hulbert I Editor
Greg Washburn /Editorial Assistant
Valerie Takatani I Art Production
Photography/ ASUCLA Photo Service
Japanese Law's Ramseyer: Puncturing Familiar Myths
by Mark Thompson
As an elementary school pupil in Kyushu, Japan's southernmost island, J. Mark Ramseyer learned to write with Japanese characters beforehecouldwritemuchinEnglish. Whenhisparents,whoareMennonite missionaries, spoke to him in English, he often wouldanswerinJapanese."I'vebeenplayingcatchup in English ever since," says Ramseyer, who joined the UCLA School·of Law faculty last year.
That's a bit of an exaggeration. Ramseyer's English eclipsed his Japanese some time ago. Now, he works hard to maintain what was almost his first tongue. But the work need not, he quickly adds, be very painful. One advantage of living in Los Angeles,heexplains,isthathecanwatchJapanese news on television. That helps him keep his language skills in top form-skills he puts to use in articles he writes for Japanese law journals and thatnextyearhewillputtothetestwhenhespends six months co-teaching a course on business planning at Tokyo University.
Inadditiontoteaching BusinessAssociations (in English] at UCLA, Ramseyer has been working to pass on thoselanguage skills to his students. Each
semester he teaches a class specially designed for students with advanced Japanese language abilities. "We read cases, statutes, and articles in Japanese," Ramseyer explained. "It's tough going, but we get the very best students here at UCLA. By the time they've worked their way through the materials, they have a sophisticated sense of both the Japanese legal language and the Japanese legal systemitself.Thelegalendofthis U.S.-Japantrade is a hot market, and these students will be terrifically well-positioned for it."
A graduate of Harvard Law School and former lawyerwithSidley&Austin,Ramseyerhasdevoted muchofhiscareersofartoexplainingJapan. Don't expect Ramseyer, however, to spin yarns about a strange and exotic land across the Pacific. RamseyerhaslivedinJapanforfifteenyears.Withthat kind of background, he knows Japanese culture well enough to know it's not nearly as different from our own culture as much of the popular literature would have us believe.
Mark ThompsonisacorrespondentfortheSan Francisco Recorder based in Los Angeles, and has written on international law in various journals.
In articles on topics ranging from industrial policy to the regulation of lawyers in Japan, Ramseyer has tried to puncture the myths about the homogeneity and uniqueness of Japanese culture. "It'snotthatculturedoesn'tmatter,becauseculture iscruciallyimportant,"hesays. "It'sthatthereisn't one particular culture or one particular way of looking at things in Japan. Japanese culture is a lotmorediverseandcomplexthanwegiveitcredit for being."
Thestoryabouthowa Confucianethicaloutlook enables docile workers and benevolent industrialists to work together harmoniously creating products of unsurpassed quality, for example, is not what it is made out to be, in Ramseyer's view. "Some Japanese work very hard and are very conscientious, and some aren't. The same is true here," he says. "The Japanese who work hard do so for the same reason that we work hard. They respond to incentives."
SuccessfulcompaniesonbothsidesofthePacific, Ramseyer adds, are those that have created the sorts of incentive structures-including not just financial inducements but a sense of ownership inthecompany-thateffectivelymotivateworkers to excel.
Ramseyer also discounts the view that Japanese governmentbureaucratsarecapableofmoldingthe nation's economy by issuing directives simply because business executives-good Confucians that they are said to be-readily sacrifice private gain for the public good. Hence, if the Ministry of International Trade and Industry suggests that companies phase out steel production and start makingcomputers,industrialistsaresaidtocomply happily.
But Ramseyersayscompaniesthatgoalongwith thebureaucatsdosoprimarilybecauseitisintheir economic interest to go along. Moreover, as Ramseyerpointed outin a 1983 article in the American
Journal of Comparative· Law, the government doesn't always speak with one voice.
In one famous case, for example, the Tokyo appellate court convicted 14 top executives of 12 oil companies for criminal antitrust violations, even though the companies had MITI's approval to engage in a price-fixing scheme by limiting the production of petroleum products. The case was a rare example of an antitrust suit in Japan. But it illustrated the competing interests at work-in this case, the Fair Trade Commission opposing MITI-in a supposedly monolithic government, Ramseyer wrote.
One of the most popular myths about the Japaneseisthattheydon'tuselawyersnearlyasmuch as wedo because suingis virtually taboo in Japan. The Japanese have a deeply-rooted cultural preference for settling their disputes quietly and privately, rather than charging into the adversarial arena of the courts, the story goes. This view of Japan has become a staple in speeches about the American malaise by commentators ranging from Chrysler Chairman Lee Iacocca to Harvard President Derek Bok.It'sanicestory, Ramseyeragrees. But it's simply not true, he says.
"Japan, according to our collective national vision, is a society where lawyers are unimportant, lawsuits are few and the bureaucracy governs by developinganationalconsensus," Ramseyerwrote in a 1983 article in the National Law Journal. "Yet this image of Japan as a place of harmony and cultural'nonlitigiousness'isprimarilyaconvenient myth-an image fostered by those responsible for Japanese nationalpolicytoexplainandprotectthe way in which they govern. If there is a dearth of lawyers and lawsuits in Japan," Ramseyercontinued, "thedearthisthecreaturemoreofdesignthan ofculture."
Inseveralarticles, Ramseyerhasarguedthatthe primary reason the Japanese don't sue is because it doesn't pay to sue in Japan. And it doesn't pay to sue because using the courts takes a very long time and costs a lot. Besides, without juries, verdicts from judges are much more predictable in Japan. Consequently, there are rarely sufficient reasons to justify the expense of going to court.
Many of the institutional mechanisms that encourage litigation in the United States are not present in Japan, Ramseyer pointed out in a 1985 Yale Law Journal article. To begin with, the government "deliberately limits" the number of lawyers by letting only 500 students per year into the government-run Legal Training and Research Institute, the only post-graduate law school in the
country.
Bok, Iacocca and others apparently believe that the United States is the only country where the best and the brightest yearn to become lawyers. Yet, Ramseyer noted that each year, 25,000 or 30,000 Japanese students take the exam required for entrance to the legal training institute. This is, he explained, a higher per capita number of applicantsthanthepercapitanumberofbarexamtakers in the United States.
Further compounding the difficulty that many Japanese would face in finding a lawyer, most members of the bar congregate in the major urban centers of Tokyo and Osaka. Once a would-be litigant finds a lawyer, the costs of legal representation are likely to be high. And Japanese lawyers almost never work for a contingent fee. They often require a very large nonrefundable payment upfront, Ramseyer noted.
Judges are equally scarce. Japan has less than a third the number of judges in the United States, though Japan has more than half the population of the U.S., Ramseyer said. So getting into court can take years. "Compounding the delay, Japanese civil prodecure entitles litigants to a trial de nova on appeal, complete with new evidence, and a full review of legal issues at the Supreme Court," Ramseyer wrote in the Yale Law Journal article. "As a result, the average appealed civil case lasts more than five years, and cases extending over seven to ten years are not unusual."
Besidestheshortageoflawyersandjudges,there are many other barriers to litigation in Japan. For example, the Japanese civil procedure code does not provide for class action lawsuits in which a decision can benefit plaintiffs who did not agree to be a partyin the case, Ramseyer pointed out.
Severe limitations on discovery also take their toll on plaintiffs. "Parties often can demand the production of documents only if they can both demonstrate that they have a substantive legal interest in the documents-as, for example, in a contract between the parties-and point to the identities and locations of the documents," Ramseyer wrote. "This absence of any significant discoverycreatesenormousadvantages,ofcourse,for defendants who control access to information, especially in complex economic cases like antitrust damage actions."
Despiteallthis,thenotionthattheJapanesedon't resort to the courts because they are culturally nonlitigious thrives.Americancommentatorsagog over "mysterious" Japanese ways aren't the only ones who have perpetuated the myth, Ramseyer
says.Themyth'smostferventapostlesaremembers of the Japanese bar,government bureaucrats,and corporate executives who would like to benefit from the scarcity of lawyers under the status quo. For them,the story about the Japanese people's cultural aversion to suing is a convenient motto that they can use to try to help secure their own privileged positions,Ramseyer has written.
"Therhetoricofharmonyandhierarchyjustifies the regulation of the bar by transforming that regulation into a way to minimize the influence of law," Ramseyer noted in an article published lastyearinthe HarvardInternationalLawJournal. "The myths transform a potential price-fixing cartel and privatebureaucratic utility-maximizing strategy," Ramseyer explained,"into a celebration of traditional Japanese values."
Some of Ramseyer's own words about pricefixing cartels in Japan sound as if they might fit in well with the rhetoric of American politicians running on a platform of putting an end to Japan's alleged abuse of free trade.But Ramseyer sees his work as basic research rather than a call to arms. Besides,he disagrees with those who are calling for a trade war with Japan.
"I think sanctions are a mistake.I don't think dumping is the type of thing that really exists," Ramseyer says. "It's a different market in the United States and Japan. Supply and demand curves being what they are,the market price for Japanese goods could occasionally be cheaper in the UnitedStatesthanin Japan.Weshouldn'tcare. That just means that we as consumers can buy things cheaper."
American companies seeking to penetrate the Japanese market will generally face the same barriers that a Japanese newcomer to the field would face,Ramseyer notes.For either company,success will come only after careful preparation over a period of years.American law firms will be the latestAmericancompaniestoconfrontthisreality.
Under the new rules governing the practice of law by foreign lawyers in Japan,many firms are now setting up shop in Tokyo."Some of them will do very well," Ramseyer predicts,"and some of them will lose their shirt and come back.There are a lot of firms that are going there,but they're not all well-prepared.Those that go there hoping
to make a buck quickly,I think,are in for a rude shock." Itis "aterriblyexpensivemarket tocrack, Ramseyerexplains,notjustbecauseofsuchthings as astronomical rents for office space and housing but because it takes so long to establish the important personal contacts.
Though his own intimate familiarity with Japanese culture would be a valuable asset to any American firm wishing to penetrate the Japanese market,Ramseyer is stayingout of the game."Our students canbe theoneswhocleanupinthe Japan trade," heexplained."It'smorefuntometoanalyze and explain what's going on and to teach that to others. What I like to do is add to our basic understanding of Japan without making an evaluation of whetherit's good orbad."
'TmnotatalltryingtocriticizeJapan," Ramseyer adds."What I'm trying to show,in a sense,is that the Japanese are a lot like the rest of us.Within Japan,there are roughly the same percentage of manipulating,scheming,self-interested people as there are here-just as there are roughly the same percentage of kind, thoughtful and considerate people."
The message may be getting through.Ramseyer recalls that back in 1982, a New York Times reporter wrote a piece about the crash of a Japan Airlines DC-8 that went down in Tokyo Bay after the pilot began to hallucinate.Accompanied by a photo of the president of JAL bowing before the family of a victim,the article asserted that few if any of the victims would sue because of their cultural proclivity to settle matters out of court.
More recently,in September,another New York Times reporter wrote an article about a victim of contaminated cooking oil who after 11 years of battlingitoutincourt,settledthecasefor $20,000. The article focused on how costly and time-consuming it istosuein Japanandhow thosebarriers discourage most consumers with a grievance from pursuing their case through the courts.
"Certainly the New York Times' story has changed," Ramseyer says, "which suggests to me that if the New York Timesis coming up with the same story that I've been saying for awhile,then maybeit'stimetochangemytune.What'sthepoint in writing articles if people are already reading it in the newspaper?"D
Two States of Mind: Oral vs. Textual Reasoning
by Paul Bergman Professor of Law
erhapsnophraseis as intriguingto the law school community as "thinking like a lawyer". For law students, it is a source both of conceit and puzzlement. Conceit, for it suggests that they are being immersed in a thought process that is unique to lawyersandsuperiortoreasoningdevicesusedby the masses. Puzzlement, for the distinctions between learning to think lawyerly thoughts and merely learning a body of substantive rules is not always easy to discern.
Law professors are able to give some greater textureto"thinkinglikealawyer." Separatingfrom avarietyofdatathosepiecesofinformationwhich have particular legal significance; understanding the relationship between social policies and legal rules; applying abstract legal concepts to concrete factual settings-such activities seem to describe how one thinks like a lawyer. But on reflection, they more accurately describe the content of what lawyers typically think about. And while that content may be unique to the legal profession, the thinking process in which lawyers engage is little differentfromthatemployedbyagreatmanyother
people,betheyphysicists, philosophersorpolitical scientists. Takeawaythetrappingsofcontentand it turns out that to think like a lawyer is, largely, to think logically and analytically.
Of course, "thinking like a lawyer" seems to describe a systematic legal ideal as well as a personal thought process. In an ideal world, one mightthink,legislators,judgesandevenindividual clients with legal problems would arrive at legal decisions in a rational, logical manner. What is striking, then, is the extent to which the legal system is content with decisions made by people who are not thinking likelawyers.
The most obvious setting in which this is true is the jury trial, described by many commentators as a "bizarre" system. Certainly, the jury trial is acommitmentofimportantlegalrightstolaypeople who typically think very little like lawyers.
The divergence in lawyer and lay thinking, so
Thisarticlehasbeenexcerpted,withProfessorBergman's permission, from his much more detailed discussion of the subject in "The War Between the States (of Mind): Oral Versus Textual Reasoning" 40 Arkansas Law Review 505 {1987}.
"What is striking is the extent to which the legal system is content with decisions made by people who are not thinking like lawyers."
frequently noted in jury trial analyses, is due at least in part to the different contexts in which lawyers and jurors process information. Written text tends to impose on its readers a way of thinkingthatislogicalandabstract.Oraldiscourse, bycontrast, tendstoevokeintuitiveandemotional response. Hence, if trial lawyers and jurors often react differently to evidence, it is not because lawyers have a reasoning ability that is superior to that of jurors, or that the jurors' reasoning process is an impediment to justice. Rather, much of the difference may be attributed to the fact that lawyersthinkabouttheircaseslargelyinatextual context.Jurorsoperateinamediumwhichisalmost entirelyoral, bothinthemannerinwhichevidence reaches them and in the manner in which they evaluate it.
Thereexisttwolargelydifferentmodesofthinking. Eachthoughtmodeischaracterizedbyagroup ofattributeswhich distinguishes itfrom theother. Neither mode is the exclusive province of people with particular backgrounds, experiences or education. Indeed, an individual who engages in rational, logical reasoning at one moment may become emotional and intuitive at the next. But a crucial determinant of the reasoning process one uses is the context, oral or written, in which one is thinking.
Though some would dispute the claim, many legal institutions and procedures are designed to produce rational decision-making. In trial, "relevant evidence" is defined as "evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that isofconsequencetothedeterminationoftheaction more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." Thus, the relevance of evidence to a legal issue depends on the logical application of principles evolved by science or everyday experience.
Logical processes pervade the ideal client counseling session; a leading text on the lawyer-client
counseling process defines "counseling" as "a process in which potential solutions with their probable positive and negative consequences are identified and then weighed in order to decide which alternative is most appropriate." And of course, most rules emerge from legislatures only after roundsofcommitteeandpublichearings.Fromone perspective, then, the legal system is a body of rules and procedures that stand in rational relationship to each other.
Yet, particularly compared to the rigid procedures the scientific community follows, in many ways the legal system tolerates and even encourages decisions made not through the application oflogicbutthroughtheuseofcommonfolkwisdom. The institution of the jury trial, for example, represents a willingness to leave important rights to the "gut instincts" of members of the community.
The oral-textualdistinction mayprovide insight into the extent to which the value of folk wisdom has been implicitly incorporated into any aspect ofthelegalprocess. Rationalityismerelyonevalue among many, and folk wisdom is an important value for the legal system to retain.
The notion that there might ex,ist separate and identifiable processes of reasoning appears, at first, a bit fanciful. We readily understand that substantive legal rules can be broken down into particularelements, justassentencescanbebroken into partsofspeech. Inrecentyears, wehave come to accept that even fluid interpersonal processes suchasdirectexamination, interviewingandcounseling and negotiation can be segmented and classified. Perhaps surprisingly, it appears that classification is possible even of our reasoning processes, though they are wholly internal and often subconscious.
Substantialresearchsuggeststhatwhenwethink about information which is presented to us, we tend to think according to one of two identifiable processes. One process is logical and abstract; the other is emotional and intuitive. As one might surmise, the characteristics of neither process define "thinking" with the same precision that the parts of speech define a sentence. Nor can one set up an orderly path along which thoughts will necessarily travel depending on which process is employed. Nevertheless, each of the two thought processes ismarkedbystyleswhich are internally consistent, andexternallyincompatible. Ifwecannotatthisstagerigidlyclassifythehumanthought processes, we may at least consider that there are two distinct styles of thought.
Scholarly investigation of the different thought
processes began, as did so much else, with Plato. Plato, along with Aristotle, was the first to hypothesizethattheremightexistrulesofintellectual thoughtthatwerequitedistinctfromtheproblems which were being thought about. Plato, after all, was one of the first philosophers to be part of a literate society, in which information was transmitted through written text in addition to oral dialog. He surmised that the use of written text as opposed to oral dialog would affect the way in which people thought. In fact, once he became awareofthedifferingeffectsonthethoughtprocess of written and oral information, Plato decided he much preferred the former to the latter. Plato applauded written text for its ability to produce abstract, logicalthought. Bycontrast, oralteaching was dramatic and tended to produce an emotional response inlisteners.
It is remarkable how closely the findings of modern researchers in a variety of fields echo the distinctions which Plato first delineated. When scholarsinvestigatehowpeoplethink, theyrepeat-
edly develop categories that track those of Plato. As is now widely known, the human brain is divided into two hemispheres, each of which controls different bodily functions in crossed order. That is, the left side of the brain controls the right sideofthebody; therightsideofthebraincontrols the left side of the body. However, the two sides of the brain do not have identical functions. It is likely that complex human mental functions are asymetrically divided between the left brain and the right brain.
Left brain thinking is often characterized as, among other things, deductive, rational, abstract, sequential and analytic. Right brain thinking is intuitive, imaginative, concrete, continuous and wholistic.
When we examine the characteristicsassociated with analytical and intuitive thought, we see how closelytheyparallelwhatwethinkofthedifference between"thinkinglikealawyer"andlayreasoning. Analytic thinking proceeds a step at a time, with eachstepexplicitand reportabletoanother. Moreover, the thinking proceeds with relatively full awarenessoftheinformationoneisthinkingabout. By contrast, intuitive thought usually involves mental maneuvers based on an implicit perception of a total problem, and the thinker arrives at an answerwithlittleif any awareness of the process by which it was reached. The parallels between these definitions, the results of the brain studies and what we usually consider as the difference betweenlayandlawyerreasoningisquiteevident.
Wehaveavailabletoustwoidentifiablydifferent modes of thought. One is abstract and rational; the other imagistic and emotional. Undoubtedly, noneof us uses one thought mode exclusively. The litigator who writes a tightly analytical brief may engage in an emotional negotiation. The law professor who parses each fact of a case in class may make sweeping generalizations during faculty meetings. The judge who analytically separates legalrulesintocomponentelementswhenmarshal-
"Jury instructions ought to be drafted according to the dictates of oral comprehension, not formal logic."
"Trial attorneys may have to become more adept at understanding folk wisdom."
ling evidence may use intuition when determining the credibility of witnesses. Both reasoning processes are necessary to the carrying out of life's tasks. Since we are generally unable to use the thought modes simultaneously, it islikely that the thought method we are engaged in at any given moment is a product of immediate circumstances.
Dichotomies in the law are not hard to develop. One may, for example, consider civillaw vs. criminal law; procedural rules vs. substantive rules; private law vs. public law. A dichotomy which is lesscommon,if no lessstark,is the law as written and thelawasspoken. Probably,whenandifmost of us think of the law at all, we think of a body of written material.
But consider too the ways in which law is oral. Trials, arbitrations, mediations and negotiation procedures, the legal methods by which society tries to resolve disputes, are largely oral. Interviews, through which clients tell lawyers what they have done in the past and what they intend to do in the future, are oral, as are the counseling sessions which frequently follow. Noless than the texts, these oral situations also define what the law is.
But if neither written text nor oral dialog fully defines the law, the issue remains whether they exert influence over how we think about legal questions. "Thinking like a lawyer" describes the abstract, rational thought processes of one who is studying or using law in a written context. On the other hand, oral dialog fosters intuitive, emotional responses to legal issues. This distinction illuminates a number of current legal concerns, and may provide a method of increasing or decreasing the rationality of various aspects of the legal process.
It is fair to say that jurors often have a difficult time understanding the law that is typically delivered to them in the form of jury instructions. Researchers seeking the cause of juror confusion have focused on the jury instruction process itself as a potential culprit.
Typically,judgesgiveinstructionswhichinform and content have been previously approved by
appellatecourts;inmanyjurisdictions,theinstructions have been reduced to "pattern instructions." Suchinstructionsaretheproductsofthecombined written efforts of appellate and trial judges and counsel, and can be expected to state legal principlesinarationalistic,abstractmanner. Butwhen jurors are instructed, they are typically instructed orally.
When researchers test jurors' comprehension of written jury instructions, they test for "sentence meaning," a meaning fixed by written statutory and decisional law. But jurors, who hear the instructions orally, are concerned with "speaker's meaning." They interpret the instructions not accordingtotherulesofabstractlogic,butaccording to the concrete situations of everyday life. To conclude that the jurors misinterpret the instructions, then, begs the question; that conclusion assumes that we value rationality above folk wisdom.
As we might expect, one set of responses to the dissatisfaction with the way that jurors react to jury instructions has been to increase the role of written text intheinstructionprocess.Thus,some judgesactuallygive thewritteninstructionstothe jurors for their reference during deliberations. Court rules authorize trial judges to require jurors to return written special verdicts, or general verdicts accompanied by written responses to interrogatories. The implicit aim of such reforms is to increase the rationality of jury verdicts.
At the same time, there has been a different set of responses, one that seems to value more highly the folk wisdom of jury deliberations. These responses have consisted of suggestions that the language of instructions be changed to reflect oral practice. In one study, juror understanding was at its highest when jurors not only heard the revised instructions, but had an opportunity to orally deliberate. Therefore, the study tends to show that juror comprehension of instructions is highestwhenjurorshaveanopportunitytodiscuss orally instructions whose language is responsive totheoralthoughtprocess.Theresultsofthestudy suggest that in the future, jury instructions ought to be drafted according to the dictates of oral comprehension, not formal logic.
A litigator's judgment about a case is largely logicalandrational. Butasuccessfullitigatormust simultaneouslythinklikeajuror.Theneedtoadapt to both textual and oral reasoning might justly leave litigators feeling a bit schizophrenic. Hence, many attorneys lean towards increasing the rationality of the factfinding system.
If the values of lay rea;oning are considered to be sufficient to offset the demands for increased rationality, trial attorneys may instead have to become more adept atunderstandingfolkwisdom. Certainly many attorneys do emphasize lay reaction to evidence during preparation and trial. For example, some lawyers empanel sample "jurors" during pretrial preparation to gauge their reaction to evidence. Instead of only marshalling evidence on paper, attorneys may describe the evidence orally to friends and associates, to elicit their oral reaction to the oral description.
At trial, mindful of the "system of elimination" thatcharacterizes theoral memory, attorneysmay consciously use questioning techniques that emphasizeimportantevidence, ratherthenbecontent to get certain evidence "in the record". Including evidence in testimony not because it has independentprobativevalue, butbecauseajuror'scommon sense is likely to suggest its presence, is useful if one is cognizant of the oral-textual distinctions. Similarly, the cognitive basis underlying traditional advice such as having witnesses testify in narrative fashion, in their own words, is evident in these distinctions. In all these ways, attorneys whosetrialtechniquesreflectoralreasoningmethodsarelikelytobemoresuccessfulthanthosewho rely on the rational logic of evidence.
Fromamoreglobalperspective, oneseesinmany aspectsofthelawtheepitomeofthemarchtoward literacy that Plato noted millenia ago. Many contracts are enforceable if they are in writing, but
"The law and lawyers need to retain the influence of common sense, emotion and intuition."
not if they are oral. Hearsay on some occasions may be admissible if it is written, but not if it isoral.Traininglawyersinlawschoolsratherthan through apprenticeships gives emphasis to the written aspects of law. Typically, pretrial conferences between counsel and judge, which were formerly largely oral, are now based on extensive written memoranda prepared by each party.
These phenomena are more than coincidental. They reflect the fact that to "think like a lawyer" means that one's thought processes are primarily shaped by the written word. They even suggest the possibility that the low esteem in which the public traditionally holds lawyers arises from a conflict between two different ways of thinking about the world. Our society, most would agree, needs the logic and ability to abstract specific issues which are the specialty of lawyers. But so, too, do the law and lawyers need to retain the influence of common sense, emotion and intuition in the resolution of everyday affairs.D
Dean Prager, David and Dallas Price and Chancellor Young celebrated the establishment of the endowed chair, which is the first to be created at the law school by anindividual alumni gift. David Price is a member of the Class of 1960.
Price Chair Is Established
The David G. Price and Dallas P. Price Chair in Law has been established at the School of Law with an endowment of $500,000. The naming of the chair to honor the Prices was announced by Chancellor Charles E. Young after the Regents of the University approved the named chair at their September 18 meeting in Los Angeles.
The chair will support teaching and research at the School of Law. It is the first endowed chair created at the law school by an individual alumni gift. David G. Price received his law degree at UCLA in 1960 and was a member of the UCLA Law Review.
"This is a magnificent gift for our school," said Dean Susan Westerberg Prager. "The Prices have made the largest single gift in the law school's history, a gift which will significantly recognize outstanding accomplishment and strengthen our ability to recruit and retain an outstanding faculty."
David G. Price is chairman and chief executive officer of American Golf Corporation, which owns and leases golf courses, country clubs and tennis
clubs throughout the United States. Dallas P. Price is co-owner and vice president of the corporation. She is in charge of interior design for all American Golf Corporation facilities through her own company, California Design, Ltd.
The Prices served as Co-Commissioners of Basketball for the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles. They are the parents of five children, including a daughter who is currently a student at the Berkeley campus of the University.
David Price began his career in entertainment law, joining O'Melveny and Myers when he graduated from law school in 1960. As his interests evolved over the years into business law and then into forming his own corporate enterprise, he has continued to place a great value on his law school education. Law school, Price says, taught him how to think and how to analyze issues.
"That'sbeenoftremendousvalue-knowinghow to look at a situation, to ask what makes sense, what are the real issues. As I look back on it," Price said recently about UCLA's law school, "it was terrific."
Withthe David G. Priceand DallasP. PriceChair, the law school now has four endowed chairs.D
Major Gifts to the Law School
Foundations and Corporations
The Ahmanson Foundation
Matthew Bender & Company, Inc.
The Joseph Drown Foundation
IBM Corporation
The J. W. and Ida M. Jameson Foundation
Individuals
Norman Bradley Barker '53
Barbara Boyle '60 and Kevin Boyle
Stephen Claman '59 and Renee Claman
Hugo D. De Castro '60 and Isabel De Castro
Robert E. Decker '57 and Dorothy Decker
Stanley R. Fimberg '60
Arthur N. Greenberg '52 and . Audrey Greenberg
Bernard A. Greenberg '58 and Lenore S. Greenberg
Geraldine Hemmerling '52 and Clifford Hemmerling
Martin Horn '54 and Rita Horn
Marvin Jubas '54 and Fern Jubas
William A. Masterson '58 and Julie C. Masterson
Marsha McLean-Utley '64 and Robert Utley
Josiah L. Neeper '59
Gloria Dee Nimmer
David G. Price '60 and Dallas P. Price
Charles E. Rickershauser, Jr. '57
George P. Schiavelli '74 and Holli C. Schiavelli
Ralph Shapiro '58 and Shirley Shapiro
Henry Steinman '61 and Nancy Steinman
Anonymous (2)
Law Firms
Buchalter, Nemer, Fields, Chrystie & Younger
Haight, Dickson, Brown & Bonesteel
Irell & Manella
Morrison & Foerster
Show of Strength
Thestrong andincreasingsupportof theSchoolofLawbymoreandmore alumni and friends is clearly evidentthroughthefactsreportedhere. Thepastyear'sprogress,bothinthe significant number of major gifts and inthegreatlyincreased number ofindividuals contributing to the Law Annual Fund, gives rich evidence of a caring, nurturing, sustaining community.
The major gifts to the law school through the UCLA Campaign, each listed on this page, now include 22giftsfrom individual alumniinamounts of $25,000 or more. With 31 major gifts in all, the law school now has raised more than $5-million toward its $7.5-million goal.
The participation has increased at all levels. There are now 212 members of The Founders, all listed in these pages, and joining in that generous level of support are 23 new members during 198687; each one has made a $10,000 commitment to the school.
During the year, gifts to the Law Annual Fund exceeded $595,000-an increase of more than $100,000 over the previous year. The most heartening fact here is that the number of individual gifts increased to1655, with more than 300 alumni and friends making gifts for the first time. The 1655 gifts represent 23 percent of all alumni, increased from 19 percent a year earlier.
Thisverysignificant achievementforthe School of Law, of course, is the result of dedicated effort by the class representatives whose names appear in italics at the beginning of each class year in this report. The tremendous effect of these "class reps" canbe seen, forexample,intheC1assof 1968 where Paul Glass called as many classmates as he possibly could; the result is that participation by the Class of '68 more than doubled-from 28 to 65.
The year's highlights include the establishment of two endowed chairs-the David G. Price and Dallas P. Price Chair in Law, which is described ontheprecedingpage,andthe RichardC. Maxwell
Chair, created by a small group of committed alumni. "These alums have our deepest appreciation for helping create such an important way of formally recognizing Dean Maxwell'simmenseimpact on the law school," commented Dean Prager.
A major gift this year from the Joseph Drown Foundation was made to support an intensive program in legal writing and analysiswith special emphasis on minority access to the profession, while the continuing commitment from an anonymous donor has created a Clinical Program En-
dowment at the school.
Endowment funds at the UCLA School of La now have market value close to $2-million, a significant step. But UCLA's situation must also be contrasted with the endowments of other toprank public law schools. Boalt Hall's endowment isnow over $11-million, Virginia'sisatabout $14million,Texas'sis $30-millionand Michigan's $36million. It is through endowment funds that the school's future standing will be made more secure.D
UCLA School of Law Donors, 1986-87
(Fiscal year July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987)
1952
Participation: 58%
Number ofDonors: 22
Total Graduates: 38
Class Representative: Curtis B. Danning
**Arthur Alef
***Laverne M. Bauer
*Maurice W. Bralley, Jr.
*Howard 0. Culpepper
****Curtis B. Danning
***James Fernandes
*Jean Bauer Fisler
***Saul Grayson
****Arthur N. Greenberg
****Richard T. Hanna
****Geraldine S. Hemmerling
****Bruce I. Hochman
*Sidney R. Kuperberg
***J. Perry Langford
****Donald C. Lieb
****John Charles McCarthy
**Frederick E. Mueller
*Sallie Tiernan Reynolds
*Martin J. Schnitzer
*EdwardBrintonSmith, III
**Joseph N. Tilem
****Lester Ziffren
1953
Participation: 27%
Number ofDonors: 11
12
Total Graduates: 41
Class Representatives:
James Doggett
Charles A. Zubieta
***Norman Bradley Barker
Ronald Philip Denitz
*John U. Gall
*James George
*Jerome H. Goldberg
****Ronald B. Labowe
***Donald C. Lozano
*Dorothy W. Nelson
**John F. Parker
*Jack M. Sattinger
****Charles A. Zubieta
1954
Participation: 31%
Number ofDonors: 28
Total Graduates: 90
Class Representative: Carl Boronkay
****Leon S. Angvire
**John A. Arguelles
***Carl Boronkay
****Thomas L. Caps
**Donald K. Denbo
****Seymour Fagan
***Harvey F. Grant
**Harvey M. Grossman
*Dennis D. Hayden
****Martin R. Horn
****Marvin Jubas
*Eugene Victor Kapetan
****Gerald Krupp
**Jack Levine
**Milton J. Litvin
****Martin S. Locke
****Sherwin L. Memel
****Billy Gene Mills
**Gordon Pearce
****Roger C. Pettitt
**Howard W. Rhodes
****Norman A. Rubin
****Donald Allen Ruston
***Bernard Silverman
**William Harold Simon, Jr.
**Donald S. Simons
*Anne P. Toomer
****Robert F. Waldron
1955
Participation: 31%
Number ofDonors: 26
Total Graduates: 83
*Ronald Arthur Burford
****John S. Byrnes
*Alvin Bud Calaf
**Richard B. Castle
****Lee J. Cohen
**John J. Corrigan
*Myrtle I. Dankers
**Herbert Z. Ehrmann
John R. Engman
****Allan S. Ghitterman
**Irving M. Grant
*Earl H. Greenstein
****Samuel W. Halper
**Joan Dempsey Klein
****Edward Lasker
*Forrest Latiner
**Gerald E. McCluskey
*Raymond F. Moats, Jr. E. Allen Nebel
*Bruce I. Rauch
*Graham A. Ritchie
**Richard Schauer
*Harold L. Schmidt
****David Simon
****William W. Vaughn
****Joseph A. Wein
1956
Participation: 30%
Number ofDonors: 21
Total Graduates: 71
Class Representative: Irwin D. Goldring
****John A. Calfas
***William Cohen
**Richard E. Cole
**Harold J. Delevie
****FlorentinoGarza
*Mervin N. Glow
****Irwin D. Goldring
**H. Gilbert Jones
**Kenneth E. Kulzick
*Howard N. Lehman
L. Guy Lemaster, Jr.
****Bernard L. Lewis
****Milton Louis Miller
****Allen Mink
**Norman D. Rose
*Marvin D. Rowen
*Thomas Robert Sheridan
Harvey A. Sisskind
**Herbert J. Solomon
***Norman E. Stevens
**J. Howard Sturman
1957
Participation: 21%
Number of Donors: 19
Total Graduates: 90
Class Representatives:
James Acret
David Glickman
***JamesAcret
*RichardD. Agay
***WalterDavis
****Mathias J. Diederich
**Seymour Simon Goldberg
*Ephraim J. Hirsch
****Jean Ann Hirschi
**Arthur W. Jones
**Roy A. Kates
*Robert A. Knox
*Everett W. Maguire
**Robert A. Memelt
**George J. Nicholas
JackM. Peters
****Mariana R. Pfaelzer
****Charles E. Rickershauser
**Gloria K. Shimer
**Irving A. Shimer
**Wells K. Wohlwend
1958
Participation: 34%
Number of Donors: 42
Total Graduates: 125
Class Representatives:
Wesley I. Nutten, III
John G. Wigmore
***Warren J. Abbott
**Charles S. Althouse II
**HarmonR. Ballin
**Gerald S. Barton
***William Calfas
*Dennis E. Carpenter
*Roland A. Childs
***Daniel Brendan Condon
**Terrill F. Cox
**Norman L. Epstein
****Bernard D. Fischer
*George J. Franscell
****Sanford M. Gage
**Mitchell M. Gold
****Donald A. Gralla
****Bernard A. Greenberg
*Robert A. Hefner
**Harold J. Hertzberg
*Arthur Karma
****RichardL. Kite
****E. P. Kranitz
Richard Laskin
*Zad Leavy
*Bernard Lemlech
****Fred L. Leydorf
****Arthur Mazirow
*Louis Meyers
Henry Barron Niles
***Wesley L. Nutten, III
Alfred B. Ruskin
**Irwin Edward Sandler
***Ronald L. Scheinman
****Ralph J. Shapiro
***Peter Shenas
****Lewis H. Silverberg
*Frederick L. Simmons
****Arthur Soll
**Roland R. Speers
****Lester E. Trachman
****John G. Wigmore
*Hunter Wilson
**Robert L. Wilson
1959
Participation: 24%
Number of Donors: 27
Tola] Graduates: 112
****Founders
***James H. Chadbourn Fellows
**Dean's Advocates
*Dean's Counsel
fDeceased
The Founders
Mr. & Mrs. Richard D. Aldrich
Leon S. Angvire
Mr. & Mrs. Don Mike
Anthony
Julian W. Bailey, Jr.
Donald P. Baker
Norman R. Bard
Sheldon & Martha Bardach
Curtis 0. Barnes
Keenan Behrle
Stanton Paul Belland
Laurence M. Berman
Mr. & Mrs. William M. Bitting
Lonnie C. Blanchard III
Barbara Dorman Boyle
John G. Branca & Family
Sanford Brickner
Mr. & Mrs. Roy M. Brisbois
Skip Brittenham
Dennis C. Brown
Rinaldo and Lalla Shanna Brutoco
Thomas P. Burke
Joe & Sandee Burton
John S. Byrnes, Jr.
Mr. & Mrs. Lee W. Cake
John A. Calfas
Mario Camara
Thomas L. & Sue Caps
John K. and Shirley A. Carmack
Leonard E. Castro
Art & Lynn Chenen
Gertrude D. Chern
Stephen Claman
*Leonard Marvin Angus
****Stanton P. Belland
**Stanley Algie Black
*Jerry A. Brody
****Stephen E. Claman
**Frederick "Pat" Crowell
****Richard N. Ellis
*Leon A. Farley
****David W. Fleming
*John Roger Gramont
Bruce A. Clemens
Lee J. & Joan F. Cohen
Martin Cohen
Cary D. Cooper
Craig D. Crockwell
Michael A. K. Dan
Mr. & Mrs. Curtis B. Danning
Philip D. Dapeer
In memory of Bernard A. David & Zoltan Lebovits
Steven L. Davis
Mr. & Mrs. Hugo D. De Castro
Lucinda & Morris Dennis
M. J. & Dorothy Diederich
Daniel Leonard Dintzer
Richard N. Ellis
William Elperin
Buddy Epstein
Seymour & Florence E. Fagan
Stanley R. Fimberg
Robert James Finger
B. D. Fischer
David W. Fleming
Barry V. Freeman
Douglas K. Freeman
Jack Fried
Ellen B. Friedman
Richard & Susan Fybel
Sanford M. Gage
Gilbert & Sukey Garcetti
Florentino Garza
Allan S. Ghitterman
Paul J. Glass
Bruce S. Glickfeld
Albert B. Glickman
Clarann & Irwin Goldring
Richard Jay Goldstein
Bob & Diane Goon
*George V. Hall
**Michael Harris
*Albert J. Hillman
*Earl W. Kavanau
***Lawrence Kritzer
**Eugene Leviton
**Leslie W. Light
****David Herschel Lund
***Robert Craig McManigal
**Milton B. Miller
William D. Gould
William Graham
Mr. & Mrs. Donald A. Gralla
Arthur N. Greenberg
Mr. & Mrs. Bernard A. Greenberg
Alan N. Halkett
Samuel W. Halper
Richard T. Hanna
John Gardner Hayes
John W. Heinemann
Geraldine S. Hemmerling
Rodney C. Hill
Jean Ann Hirschi
Harriet & Bruce Hochman
Nathalie Hoffman
Paul Gordon Hoffman
Rita & Martin R. Horn
David R. Hoy
J. W. & Ida M. Jameson Foundation
Stanley R. Jones
Michael Stephen Josephson
Marvin & Fern Jubas
Mr. & Mrs. R. L. Kahan
Murray 0. Kane
David S. Karton
Bernard Katzman
James H. Kindel, Jr.
Benjamin E. Kingt
Howard E. King
Stephen Scott King
Richard L. & Iris Kite
Leonard Kolod
Ephraim P. Kranitz
Gerald Krupp
Ronald B. & Trana K. Labowe
Francis J. Lanak
***Josiah L. Neeper
****John H. Roney
***Bernard S. Shapiro
*Robert H. Stopher
****Charles S. Vogel
Stanley Robert Weinstein
****Paul B. Wells
1960
Participation: 35%
Number ofDonors: 38
Total Graduates: 110
****Barbara Dorman Boyle
****Sanford L. Brickner
*:**Roger J. Broderick
;'-uM. Alan Bunnage
Edward & Madeleine
Landry
Richard & Ruth Lane
Edward Lasker
Saul L. Lessler
Dr. & Mrs. Daniel Levenson
Robert S. Lewin
Bernard L. Lewis
Marshall A. Lewis
Robert F. Lewis
Fred L. Leydorf
Donald C. Lieb
Monte E. Livingston
Walt Livingstont & Manna
Martin S. Locke
David H. Lund
Pollock, Bloom & Dekom
James Martin Prager
Susan Westerberg Prager
David Glyn Price
Barnet & Linda Reitner
Stewart Resnick
Steven J. Revitz
Charles E. Rickershauser, Jr.
Nelson C. Rising
John H. Roney
James L. Roper
Marguerite S. Rosenfeld
Leonard M. Ross
Sharon Fesler Rubalcava
Robert M. Ruben
Laurence D. Rubin & Livingston
David J. Mac Kenzie
Philip S. Magaram
Arthur Mazirow
George R. McCambridge
John C. McCarthy
Brenda Powers McKinsey
Marsha McLean-Utley
Sherwin L. & Iris Memel
Jerold L. Miles
Lowell J. Milken
Milton Louis Miller
Billy & Rubye Mills
Iris & Allen Mink
Victor Berkey Moheno
Morgan, Wenzel & McNicholas
Allan S. Morton
Robert M. Moss
Michael M. Murphy
Gregory Soobong Paik
Richard G. Parker
Don Parris
Mr. & Mrs. Roger C. Pettitt
Mariana R. Pfaelzer
****John K. Carmack
*Charles W. Cohen
****Martin Cohen
*George W. Collins
**Dale V. Cunningham
*Robert W. D'Angelo
****Hugo D. De Castro
****Stanley R. Fimberg
**Victor E. Gleason
****Albert 8. Glickman
Edward & Nancy Rubin
Elizabeth A. Cheadle
Norman A. Rubin
Donald A. Ruston
Mr. & Mrs. William A. Rutter
David S. Sabih
Mr. & Mrs. Henley Saltzburg
Richard V. Sandler
Arnold Schlesinger
Herb & Yvonne Schwartz
Fred Selan
Robert S. Shahin
Judith Salkow Shapiro
Mr. & Mrs. Ralph J. Shapiro
Paul & Barbara Shettler
Lewis H. Silverberg
Stuart A. Simke
Daniel I. Simon
David Simon, '55
Kenneth M. Simon
Ronald P. & Donna Slates
Theodore A. Goldberg
***Seymour Goldstein
*Lyman S. Gronemeyer
*Ronald J. Grueskin
****Leonard Kolod
***Mark L. Lamken
**Gary L. Leary
*John George Nelson
**Bruce H. Newman
*Edwin M. Osborne
****David Glyn Price
*Grant E. Propper
*Sherman Rogers
*Amil William Roth
***John R. Schell
****Stuart A. Simke
*William 8. Spivak, Jr.
Leland D. Starkey
*Doris L. Stern
**Richard William Strong
In memory of Matthew H. Small
Wayne W. Smith
Arthur Soll
Bruce H. Spector
Art Spence
David S. Sperber
Henry Steinman
Richard R. & Phoebe J. Stenton
Richard J. Stone
William F. & Joanne M. Sullivan
Lawrence C. Tistaert
E. Paul Tonkovich
Lester E. Trachman
Barry Winyett Tyerman
Mr. & Mrs. Richard Udko
William W. Vaughn
Charles S. Vogel
Michael Waldorf
Robert F. Waldron
Cynthia & Kirk Wallace
Joseph A. Wein
Paul B. Wells
John H. Weston
John Grant Wigmore
Lawrence & Shera Williams
Robert J. Wise
Charles E. Young
Kenneth Ziffren
Lester Ziffren
Daniel Zipser
Charles A. Zubieta
*Stephen C. Taylor
*Emmett A. Tompkins, Jr.
****Robert J. Wise
**Herbert Wolas
****Founders
***James H. Chadbourn Fellows
**Dean's Advocates
*Dean's Counsel
fDeceased
1961
***David A.Leveton
*Geoffrey Philip Wong ***Robert Alan Broder
Stuart K.Mandel ****Thomas P.Burke
Participation: 24% ***Phillip W.Neiman
Number ofDonors: 30 Kermit K.Purcell
Total Graduates: 124
Julius MelReich
Class Representative: **Harvey Reichard
Sheldon G. Bardach **Todd Russell Reinstein
1964
Participation: 31%
***A.Barry Cappello
*Milford W.Dahl, Jr.
**Darryl Arnold De Cuir
Number ofDonors: 37 ****Lucinda S.Dennis
Total Graduates: 120 *Jerome Diamond ****Stewart A.Resnick
Class Representatives: **Stephen C.Drummy ***Karl J. Abert **Richard A.Rosenberg
Everett F. Meiners **Julie G.Finley ****Sheldon G.Bardach ****Henley L.Saltzburg
Davidf. Mac Kenzie *William Johnson Elfving **John A. Altschul **Howard L.Rosoff
*Joseph Edward Gerbac **Richard E. Barnard
Mel Springer
*John L.Angier **James H.Giffen
Richard H.Bein *Foster Tepper ***Sandor T.Boxer **David Jay Golde **Richard H.Berger *Jan P.Vetter ***John R.Browning ****Richard Jay Goldstein **Gary I.Boren **Robert D.Walker ****L.Morris Dennis ****Robert H.Goon
*Donald Jay Boss **Seymour Weisberg ***James D.Devine **Jay W.Heckman ***Arthur Brunwasser **W.Herbert Young ****Daniel L.Dintzer ****Stanley R.Jones *Kenneth Albert Bryant **David J.Epstein George Raymond **Ralph Cassady 1963
Judith A. Schaffert **Gage, Mazursky, Schwartz, Michael E. Salkeld
James C. Scheller, Jr.
Robert Frederick Smith
Jean Spitzer
Robert H. Steinberg
*Tina Lee Tamai
Chestopher L. Taylor
*Renee P. TurkeII
Carl R. Waldman
Lise N. Wilson
***H. Deane Wong
*Michael Yaffa
Naoki Shimazaki
*William E. Simpson
*Stacy Lord Sokol
*James M. Steinberger
*Timothy FrancisSylvester
*Ed Thoits
*Peter C. Thomas
Alison Turner
*Jo Ann E. Victor
Sura L. Weiss
*Kathleen Ann Yocca
Michael R. Schaffert Angelo & Kussman
*Alan J. Siff
***Gray, Cary, Ames & Frye
*Eugene Joseph Smith ****James H. Kindel, Jr.
*Scott Solomon ***William & Renee Klein
**Elizabeth Ash Strode **Lawrence & Harding
*Steve Susoeff Lawyers Alert Press
**Steven A. Swernofsky ****Daniel & Irene Levenson
*Anne Beytin Tarkington ****Manna Livingston
*Karen Africk Wolfen ****Monte E. Livingston
William B. Wong ***Daniel H. Lowenstein
Arnold H. Wuhrman **David Mellinkoff
Bryan Yee ****Morgan, Wenzel & Sharyn R. Yoshimi 1985
Michael M. Youngdahl McNicholas
Anonymous ***Musifilm, Inc.
1984
Participation: 17%
Number ofDonors: 50
Total Graduates: 294
Participation: 18% 1986 ***O'Melveny & Myers
Number ofDonors: 56 ****Pollock, Bloom & Dekom
Total Graduates: 304
Participation: 8% ****Edward & Nancy Rubin
Class Representatives: Number ofDonors: 25 ****WilliamA. Rutter
Bryan K. Fair
Anne Beytin Tarkington
Total Graduates: 297 ***SecurityPacific
Class Representatives: NationalBank
Class Representatives: Robert Noriega ****Mr. & Mrs. Lee A. Small
Paul T. Hayden
Leslie Lurie
*Valerie B. Ackerman
*Christopher B. Amandes
*Robert Barnes
Evelyn D. Aguilar- Marc E. Bercoon
Shimazaki
*John S. Bank
*Bennett A. Bigman
Constance C. Brockelman
Kent Brockelman
*J. Stacie Brown
Bruce C. Catania
*Thomas Mark Bondy
*Rebecca A. Campbell
*Gabriel Colorado
*Susan L. Coskey
*Bradley J. Craig
*Jeffrey D. Davine
*Jonathan Davis
David Polinsky
Stutman, Treister & Glatt
***William D. & Susan C.
*Steven B. Abbott Warren
*J. R. Arnett, II
*Edwin Carney
*Laurie Koontz Davies
*Eric James Diamond
*Daniel Encell
*Joel Friedman
*Scott Gillman
****Charles E. Young
****Founders
***James H. Chadbourn Fellows
**Dean's Advocates
*Dean's Counsel
*Andrew R. Hall fDeceased
OTHER GIFTS
Mr. & Mrs. JohnW. Caughey
Charles English
Los Angeles County Law
Library
Stanley B. Lubman
Gloria Dee Nimmer
Richard C. Rudolph
Gary Schwartz
James L. Swanson
Toyota Motor Sales
In honor of William Alford & Anna Marie Howell
Hyman & Rose Alford
In memory of J. H. Chadbourn
Erika S. Chadbourn
In memory of John Goodwin
David S. Reisman
In honor of Stanley R. Fimberg
W. Michael & Genny Doramus
In memory of Anthony G. Karavantes
John, Barbara & Rebecca Dab
In memory of Matthew Small
Bailey Roberta Deiongh
David I. Schulman
In honor of William Warren
Ronald P. Slates
In memory of Jay Zvorst
John G. Branca
Richard & Mona Neumann
DESIGNATED GIFTS
BENJAMIN AARON FUND
Roderick M. & Carla A. Hills
Mason & Mason
Pepper, Hamilton & Scheetz
Julius & Cynthia Reich
GlennRothner
Taylor, Roth & Bush
MICHAELC. ALBIN MEMORIAL
SCHOLARSHIP FUND
M. S. & Miriam Albin
Mark Baute
Elizabeth McCorkle
Daniel H. & Judith A. Platus
AVIATION LAW LIBRARY COLLECTION
David Bernard Memorial Foundation
IRWIN E. BRILL &RUTH BRILL SCHOLARSHIP FUND
In memory of Dorothy Canfield Fisher & John Fisher & Flora E. Brill
EMERGENCY LOAN FUND
Freda S. Hovden
SANFORD M. GAGE AWARDS
Sanford M. Gage
EVA &NATHAN GREENBERG MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP
Audrey & Arthur Greenberg
MORRIS GREENSPAN MEMORIAL PRIZE
Joseph C. & Ruth G. Bell
HAIGHT, DICKSON, BROWN &BONESTEEL SCHOLARSHIP
Haight, Dickson, Brown & Bonesteel
J.W. &IDA M. JAMESON FUND
J.W. & Ida M. Jameson Foundation
JUBAS/HORN FUND FOR STUDENT SUPPORT
Martin & Rita Horn
Marvin & Fern Juhas
BENJAMIN E. KING MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP FUND
Buchalter, Nemer, Fields, Chrystie & Younger
Colonel R. L. & Elizabeth R. Black
Victoria Stafford Falk
Henrietta King
Mark A. & Diane R. Neubauer
SCHOOL OF LAWLIBRARY ENDOWMENTFUND
George P. & Holli C. Schiavelli
PAULA C. LUBIC MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP
Arthur M. Lubic
Carol Lubic Spitz
GEORGE L. MARINOFF MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP FUND
Elaine Marinoff Good
MORRISON &FOERSTER FUND
Morrison & Foerster
MELVILLE B. NIMMER MEMORIAL FUND
A & M Records, Inc.
Benjamin Aaron
Norman Abrams
Jannette Alexander
Hyman & Rose Alford
William P. Alford & Anna M. Howell
Rosemary P. Anastos
Edith & Frederick Auer
Oscar & Ruth Auerbach
Sharon & Bert Baker
Stephen R. Barnett
MatthewBender & Company, Inc.
Dr. & Mrs. Howard J. Berk
James E. Berliner
David & Melinda Binder
Florence & Julian Blaustein
Craig S. Bloomgarden
Charles & Eva Bluestein
Esther Lerner Brenner
Michael & Roberta Brenner
Mr. & Mrs. Seymour Bricker
David & Helen Brown
Hermione K. Brown
Pearl J. Brown
CBS Law Department
Ernest A. & Veronica D. Chambers
Harlan & Inga Cherman
Saul & Anne-Lise Cohen
Gary 0. Concoff
Norman Cousins
Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman
William & Marjorie Cowley
Hendrik De Jong
Jean de Vellis
Mr. & Mrs. Richard DeRoy
Gina Despres
Richard & Elaine Dubelman
Jesse Dukeminier
Engel & Engel
Donald & Paula Etra
Julian & Carole Eule
Milton & Olga Farbstein
Leonard Feist
Peter Felcher
Jean Firstenberg
Neil & Mary Flanagin
William E. Forbath
Michael Franklin
John A. Frerichs
Alan & Susan Friedman
David A. Gerber
David R. Ginsburg
Harold & Evelyn Gold
Peter & Gloria Gold
Leonard Goldberg
Carole Goldberg-Ambrose
Robert D. Goldstein
Mr. & Mrs. James R.Goldstone
Jean Goodrich
Leo & Anne Marie Grebler
Joel F. Handler
B. C. Hart
Richard W. Havel
Arthur Hiller Enterprises
Ruth J. Hinerfeld
Nathalie Hoffman
Harold W. Horowitz
Edgar & Helen Jones
Walter J. Josiah
Sidney Justin
Irwin Karp
Kenneth & Smiley Karst
Samual & Gerta Katz
Charles A. Kaufman
Susan Keller
Ian Kennedy
John M. Kernochan
Alexander Kolin
Bernard Korman
Hyman & Riva Kosman
Mr. & Mrs. William Lasarow
Jan Greenberg Levine
Dr. & Mrs. Norman D. Levine
Roslyn Regina LibermanGelbart
Harold A. Lipton
Foundation of theLitton Industries
Loeb & Loeb Foundation
Mike & Ann Lorimer
Daniel H. Lowenstein
Dora Majerovic
Paul & Becca Marcus
Rand Marlis
R. E. Martin
Frances & Richard Maxwell
William & Katharine
Mc Govern
J. Thomas & Nancy McCarthy
Ruth & David Mellinkoff
MCA INC.
MGM/UA CommunicationsCo.
Maurice J. Miller
Newton N. Minow
Mitchell, Silberberg & Knupp Foundation
Herbert & Margery Morris
Edward & Fern Mask
Sally S. Neely
David Nimmer
Gloria Dee Nimmer
Valerie & Timothy Nixon
Edmund H. & Collette North
O'Melveny & Myers
Peer-Southern Organization
Andrew Jay Peck
E. Gabriel Perle
Miriam Perloff
Richard T. Peters
William & Mary Reed
Alan Reitman
Roger Richman
Rintala, Smoot, Jaenicke & Brunswick
Saul L. Rittenberg
Arthur & Frieda Rivin
Stuart & Anne Rabinowitz
Milton & Ruth Roemer
Walter & Judy Rosenblith
Stanley Rothenberg
Earl & Ethel Sacks
Richard Schauer
A. Bruce Schimberg
Dorothy M. Schrader
John A. Schulman
Schwab Goldberg Price & Danney
Murray & Audrey Schwartz
Ewing Seligman
Paul P. Selvin
Alan Sieroty
Silverman, Shulman & Slotnick
Harold & LoisSlavkin
David P. & Leslie A. Steiner
George Stevens, Jr.
James L. Swanson
Daniel & Madeleine Taradash
Marjorie Taylor
Adele S. Tierney
James P. Tierney
Howard J. Trienens
J. Ronald Trost
Vance & Anita Van Petten
Charles S. Vogel
Robert & Loraine Vosper
D. William Wagner
Kim McLane Wardlaw
David L. & Adrienne D. Weil
Frank G. Wells
H. Blair White
Dorothy & Stanley Wolpert
Robert & Joyce Zaitlin
Gayle & Mark Zegar
MICHAEL PALLEY MEMORIAL FUND
Gertrude D. Chern
Sidney & Susan Lindenbaum
Ricki & Prentice O'Leary
J. Lewis Palley Charitable Trust
Jonathan K. & Carol S. Palley
Mary F. Palley
WILLIAM A. RUTTER AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE INTEACHING
William A. Rutter
IDA & LOUIS STEIN
MEMORIALSCHOLARSHIP
Clifford A. & Geraldine S. Hemmerling
COMMUNICATIONS LAW PROGRAM
AT&T
Pacific Telesis Foundation
Times Mirror Corporation
LAW FIRM AND CORPORATE MATCHING GIFTS
Aerospace Corporation
AMI, Inc.
Arthur Andersen & Co.
ARCO Foundation
AT&T Foundation
BankAmerica Foundation
CBS Inc.
Citibank
Coca-Cola Company
EG&G Foundation
Emerson Electric Co.
Equitable Life Assurance
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
GTE
Gulf & Western Foundation
Hewlett-Packard
Hughes Aircraft Company
IBM Corporation
Kleinwort Benson Cross Financing, Inc.
Lawler, Felix & Hall
Loeb & Loeb Foundation
MCA INC.
Memel, Jacobs, Pierno, Gersh & Ellsworth
Morrison & Foerster
Motorola Foundation
Musick, Peeler & Garrett
Northwestern Mutual Life
Occidental Petroleum Charitable Foundation, Inc.
O'Melveny & Myers
Pacific Lighting Corporation
Peat Marwick Main & Co.
PriceWaterhouse Foundation
Procter & Gamble
Proskauer, Rose, Goetz & Mendelsohn
Reynolds Electric & Engineering Co., Inc.
Shearson Lehman/American Express
Sidley & Austin
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
Doris Jones Stein Foundation
Sullivan & Cromwell
Synt,ex Corporation
Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.
TRW Foundation
Union Pacific Corporation
US West, Inc.
Ware & Freidenrich
B.T. Warms Up Alumni Day
All Alumni Day, one of the warmer traditions at the school where mini-lectures blend into a barbecue, had some special warmth this fall: an appearance by E.T. Davis, replete with his amazing recall of countless former studentson a first-name basis.
After the barbecue, there was a special presentation to E.T. in recognition of his 26 years of extraordinary service to theSchool of Lawandthe Law Library.
E.T. Davis arrived at the library in 1960, when the schoolwasone decade young. Hebrought with himawealthofexpertise,butsomethingevenmore valuablethanthat."Throughhis26years,"asDean Prager summarized his career in her Alumni Day remarks,"E.T.helpedmorethan6,000lawstudents, making each one of us feel genuinely welcome and 26
important."
"This is a great privilege," E.T. said in his own brief response. "I am extremely grateful." To that, the assembled alumni gave a standing ovation. A red, white and blue motif at the September 27 event reflected the topic of a panel discussion on the selection process for U.S. Supreme Court justices. Speaking were Professors Julian Eule, Kenneth Karst and Jonathan Varat.
Professor William D. Warren gave the Michael Palley Lecture, honoring the memory of Michael Palley of the Class of 1968. Professor Warren describedsomeofthedevelopmentsincommercial law following the Competitive Equality Banking Act. He focused onthe new field of lender liability where, he said, "the law is moving very rapidly."
News
Ground Is Broken For $8-Million Building Project
The breaking of ground for an $8million addition to the law building was celebrated at the construction site in a ceremony October 15, when Chancellor Charles E. Young and representatives of the School of Law joined hands in turning a symbolic shovel of earth.
The construction, adding 22,400 square feet of space for educational programs and offices, is scheduled for completion in March 1989. The law school's clinical education program will benefit in large measure from the building project, which will also add badly-needed faculty offices and two large classrooms to the school's physical facility.
The construction will include a three-story addition at the northwest corner of the present law building (near the James E. LuValle Commons).There will also be a second and third floor constructed over the existing main corridor of the present building.
At the ground breaking ceremony, Chancellor Young spoke of the "very innovative faculty" at the law school whose "interest in bringing change in legal education" hasplaced UCLA nationally in the forefront of a movement toward clinical instruction.
The School of Law, the chancellor continued, has played a vital role in theoveralldevelopment of UCLA and has been "a liberalizing force on the campus."
Dean Susan Westerberg Prager praised Chancellor Young's steadfast commitment to the building project throughout a decade of struggle to win first the legislativeapprovaland later the funding for the construction.
Former Dean William Warren, during whose administration the project
Chancellor Young, Dean Prager and Professors Dukeminier and Warren were among speakers at a ceremony October 15 celebrating the start of construction on the law building addition.
was initiated, said its fruition represents "a critical success to the future of the law school."
Professor Jesse Dukeminier, who has served on the building committee throughout the entire process, noted that his own office will be demolished to make roomfor an elevator shaft. That notwithstanding, he praised the architectural concepts which the addition will embody. Stan Germany, president of the Student Bar Association, said that despite inconveniencesthe constructionmeans to students this year, they can "look forward to challenges which the future holds and to continued growth of the law school."
The occasion's festive tone was set in music by UCLA Latino, a student group. The program began on the front steps of the law building, and then moved to the patio where ground was broken symbolically with the same shovel used at the beginning of construction on the Westwood campus in 1927.
A. C. Martin of Los Angeles is executive architect for the project. M. H. Golden Co.of Pasadena is the contractor.
Two New Faculty Bolster Strength In Criminal Law
Two new members of the law faculty, Professors Peter Arenella and Robert Garcia, have added strength to the area of criminal law.
Peter Arenella comes to UCLA after having taught five years at Boston University, where he was awarded that university's prize for excellence in teaching. He teaches courses in criminal law and criminal procedure as well as seminars in thosefields.
Professor Arenella received his J.0. from Harvard Law School, and after clerking for the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, he practiced criminal law several years and then joined the lawfaculty at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. Among Arenella's publications in criminal Iaware"The Diminished
Peter Arenella
Robert Garcia
Capacity and Diminished Responsibility Defenses: Two Children of a Doomed Marriage," 77 Columbia Law Review 827 (1977) and "Foreward. Rethinking the Functions of Criminal Procedure: The Warren and Burger Courts' Competing Ideologies," 72 Georgetown Law Journal 185 [1983).
Professor Arenella is widely recognized as an expert in substantive criminal law and criminal procedure. Currently he is writing in the field of moral philosophy. He has been interviewed frequently by broadcast networks on Supreme Court decisions and regularly lectures before professional and lay audiences.
Classnotes
The 1950s
Bernard A. Greenberg '58 has become of counsel to the firmof Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman in Beverly Hills.
Paul B. Pressman '58 has joined the firm of McKenna, Conner & Cuneo in
its Orange County office as counsel in the practice of municipal, environmental and real estate law.
John G. Wigmore '58 has become a resident partner in the Los Angeles office of Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro.
The 1960s
He is a fanatical Boston Red Sox fan and a compulsive tennis player.
Robert Garcia graduated from Stanford in 1974 and Stanford Law School in 1978. He was on the board of editors of the Stanford Law Review.
After clerking a year in San Francisco, he joined a major New York law firm and from 1979 until 1983 practiced international, securities and criminal law. Garcia was a cooperating attorney with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund from 1981 until 1983, representing indigent death row inmates.
He served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York in the Criminal Division from 1983 until 1987. During this time, Garcia prosecuted cases involving official corruption, narcotics and organized crime. Garcia has been a member of the Civil Rights Committee of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York and the Stanford Law School Board of Visitors.
Acting Professor Garcia is currently teaching first year criminal law. "It's very rewarding," Garcia says, "because my first year students are very motivated." And, he adds, "the faculty is outstanding. It's wonderful working with experts from many different fields, since you receive diverse viewpoints on any given issue." Garcia's legal interests include evidence, crimes, and law and computers.
Thomas Kallay '62, on leave from Southwestern University, is executive director of the California Appellate Project, which opened its office in Los Angeles in October 1986. The project's primary task is to oversee and improve the quality of representation in indigent felony appeals in the second district of the California Court of Appeal.
Charles R. English '65 has been recently elected vice president/treasurer of the Los Angeles County Bar Foundation, which is the charitable arm of the L.A. County Bar Association. He will serve also on the foundation's board of directors.
Harold J. Stanton '65 spoke at the American Bar Association in New York on the topic of "celebrity goodwill." He practices law with his wife Marian in Encino.
Barry Russell '66, judge of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Los Angeles, received the 1987 Franklin N. Flaschner Judicial Award presented annually by the National Conference of Special Court Judges to a judge who serves in a special trial court. The presentation was made at the ABA Annual Meeting in San Francisco.
E. Eugene Twitchell '66 of Southfield, Michigan, has been elected corporate secretary by the board of directors of the Barton-MalowCompany. He is also serving as vice president of the Michigan chapter of the American Corporate Counsel Association.
Barry A. Fisher '68, as chairman of the ABAReligious FreedomSubcommittee,organizedthe bicentennial showcase "Religion & Politics-The Enduring Constitutional Question," presented al the San Francisco ABA annual convention. He was a featured speaker at the convention. Fisher also has become general counsel to the U.S. Romani Council, political arm of the American Gypsy community.
Jan C. Gabrielson '69 of Walzer and Gabrielson has been elected vice president of membership in the Southern California chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.
E. Barry Haldeman '69 will continue to specialize in entertainment law with the association of the firms of Greenberg,Glusker,Fields, Claman & Machtinger and Haldeman, Peckerman & Stankevich.
The 1970s
Jay Jeffcoat '70, partner in the El Centro office of Cary, Ames & Frye, recently completed a two-year trial and is now embarking on a one-year round-the-world sabbatical with his wife and lwo children.
John Mounier '70 recently moderated the Continuing Education of the Bar program "Evaluating and Proving Damages in Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Cases." He practices in Sacramento with the firm of Hansen, Boyd, Culhane & Mounier, with emphasis on trials of business torts,lender liability and product/ professional liability.
Stanley M. Gordon '71 and Don M. Drysdale '76 have founded the law firm of Gordon and Drysdale in Newport Beach. The firm will specialize in business, real estate, and franchise law. Gordon was formerly general counsel of Coldwell Banker Residential Group, Inc., and Drysdale was generalcounselfor ColdwellBanker ResidentialAffiliates, Inc.
Paul Marcus '71 willreturn to fulltime law teachingafter serving for five years as dean at the University of Arizona College of Law in Tucson.
MAX F. GRUENBERG JR. '70 (left) and FRITZ PETTYJOHN '74 (right) both were elected to second terms in the Alaska House of Representatives. Gruenberg was chosen by his colleagues as House Majority Leader. Pettyjohn, after serving two years in the Alaska Senate, was elected Minority Leader of the House.
George Schraer '71 has left the San Francisco office of the California Public Defender and has opened a private practice in San Diego, specializing in appellate litigation. He recentlyargued (hiseleventhand twelfth times] before the California Supreme Court in People v. Hamilton, a capital case,and People v. May,which concerns the scope of the California Constitution's privilege against self-incrimination.
Henry Barbosa '73, Ronald Vera '73 and Douglas Barnes '79 have joined with three others in forming the law firm of Barbosa and Vera with offices in Los Angeles and Monterey Park. The firm specializes in public law and willconcentratein government regulation, civil litigation, public finance andinternationaltransactions.
Joshua Dressler '73 of the Wayne State University law faculty has authored a treatise, Understanding Criminal Law,published by Matthew Bender. Also published was "Justifications and Excuses: A Brief Review of the Concepts and Literature," 33 Wayne Law Review 1155 (1987). He spoke recently on the subject of moral theory at an Association of American LawSchoolsteachingconferenceat the Universityof North
Carolina. He presented a paper at an American Law Institute conference commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Model Penal Code.
James Lewis Goldman '73 has joined the firm of Sidley & Austin as partner,residentin the Los Angeles office.
Jim Schultze '73 and his wife and two childern have moved to Melbourne, Australia, where he heads up the marketing and business planning practice of Coopers & Lybrand WO Scott.
J. Thomas Oldham '74 of the University of Houston law faculty has written a book entitled Divorce, Separation, and the Distribution of Property which was recently published by Law Journal Seminars Press.
Allen L. Michel '75 and Alan M. Mirman '75, Section 3 classmates in their first year and Moot Court partners in their second year, have joined forces as attorneys; the Santa Monica firm Michael & Cerny has become Michel, Cerny & Mirman. The firm specializes in litigation of business, banking, real estate, professional liability and insurance matters.
Tom Epstein '76 of Santa Monica has
been named vice president, public affairs, of the Disney Channel.
William F. Fahey '76 has been appointed chief of the public corruption and government fraud section for the U.S. Attorney's office in Los Angeles.
Gregory C. Fant '76 and J. David Oswalt '76 are members of the newly formed firm of Quinn, Kully and Morrow in Los Angeles.
Valerie J. Merritt '76 has become a partner in the firm of Kindel & Anderson. She will continue to practice in the area of estate planning and probate.
Suzanne Smith Sorknes '76 has been appointed vice president and general counsel for King Broadcasting Company in Seattle, Washington.
Audrey B. Collins '77 has been named acting head deputy for the Los Angeles District Attorney's Bureau of Branch & Area Operations.
Kenneth J. Fransen '77 has become a founding partner of the law firm of Bolen, Fransen & Boostrom in Fresno, specializing in business, real estate, water and agricultural law.
Suzanne Harris '77 has recently been elected first vice chair of the Los Angeles County Bar's family law section. She served as chair of the section's 20th annual symposium in April and continues in her third year as director of the Los Angeles Superior Court's family law mediation panel.
W. Gregory Day '78 was elected a member of the board of directors and president-elect of the California Organization of Small Bar Associations, Inc. He has joined the firm of Greve, Clifford, Diefenbrock & Paras in Sacramento and will be concentrating on insurance defense law and civil litigation.
David I. Schulman '78 recently delivered a paper on AIDS, law and public policy at the third international conference on AIDS in Washington, D.C. He heads the Los Angeles City Attorney's AIDS Discrimination Unit and has made presentations at the University of Chicago, the Association of American Law Schools' annual meeting, and at the UCLA School of Law.
VICTORIO UHERBELAU '74 is Special Assistant to the President on Legal Mattersand Director of Foreign Affairs in the Republic of Palau, and has represented Palau at annual sessions of the U.N. Trusteeship Council, at South Pacific Commission conferences, and in negotiations between 16 Pacific Island states and the United States whereby U.S. flag purse seiners are licensed to fish tuna in the Pacific region.
He is the author of an article in Tikkun, "Stopping AIDS Euthanasia" and an opinion piece in the Herald Examiner, "AIDS: Right to Privacy, Duty to Warn."
Michael Barclay '79 has become a partner in the firm of Spensley, Horn, Jubas & Lubitz in Los Angeles. He continuesto practicein high technology and patent litigation.
James D. Friedman '79 has been named partner in the firm of Loeb and Loeb in Los Angeles. He specializes in real estate law including leasing, acquisitions and lending.
Deborah A. Pitts '79 has become a member of the firm of Buchalter, Nemer, Fields & Younger. She specializes in insurancecoverage Iitigalion.
The 1980s
Leslie A. Cohen '80 has been made a
shareholder of Levene & Eisenberg. The firm specializes in bankruptcy, insolvency and business reorganization.
Charles S. Goldman '80 has become associated with the firm of Phillips, Nizer, Benjamin, Krim & Ballon.
John G. Petrovich '80 has become a partner in the Los Angeles office of Morrison & Foerster. His practice areas include securities, acquisitions and general corporate law.
Marc D. Alexander '81 has become associated with the firm of McKittrick, Jackson, DeMarco & Peckenpaugh in Newport Beach.
Elizabeth Cheadle '81 has left private practice to accept a position as administrativeassistant to Assemblyman Terry Friedman and run his Sherman Oaks district office. She and her husband, Larry Rubin '71, announced the birth of their second son, Carter Cheadle Rubin, December 22, 1986.
Patrick Cole '81 has accepted a position as correspondent in BusinessWeek magazine's Los Angeles bureau. InSeptember, he was one of ten American journalists to participate in the International Press Institute's U.S.!Japan exchange program in Tokyo. He was formerly the higher education writer at the Akron (Ohio) Beacon Journal.
Chris S. Jacobsen '81 has become associated with the firm of Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison in Los Angeles.
Jeffrey S. Lawson '81 has joined the litigation department of Jackson, Tufts, Cole & Black in San Jose. He will continue topracticebusiness litigation.
Jonathan F. Light '81 has become a partner in the Ventura County firm of Nordman, Cormany, Hair & Compton.
William C. Staley '81 has been named a partner in the firm of Kindel & Anderson.
William L. Twomey '81 and Jay F. Palchikoff '82 have joined as associates in the formation of the new firm of Pettis, Tester, Kruse & Krinsky which specializes in corporate, real estate and tax law. Two-
mey and Palchikoff will continue as general business lawyers, concentrating their practicesin the fields of corporate securities and real estate.
Jane M. Osborne '82 has formed a law partnership, McKnight & Osborne with her husband Terrance R. McKnight. Their offices are located in Century City and practice is devoted lo civil litigation in slate and federal courts.
Larry S. Lee '83 has joined the staff of Associate Justice John Arguelles of the California Supreme Court as a seniorstaffattorney.
Monique C. Lillard '83 has accepted a position as professor of law at the Universityof Idaho School of Law teaching torts and labor law.
Marilyn Martin-Culver '83 has become associated with the law firm of McKenna, Conner and Cuneo in OrangeCounty. She and her husband,Richard Conner, are parents of a daughter born July 5, 1987.
Kenneth B. Hertz '84 and his wife Teri welcomed their first child, Danielle Elizabeth, into the world August 30. He is currently the music lawyer for Walt Disney Pictures.
B.J. Cling '85 is an associate with the New York firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell. She recently had an article on on-camera sex discrimination publishedin the Journal of Law and Inequality and another article accepted for publication in the Women's Right Law Reporter entitled "Rape Trauma Syndrome."
Kenneth D. Freundlich '85 has formed a law partnership, Clinco & Freundlich in Century City.
Karl A. Hofstetter '85 has left the Zurich, Switzerland, law firm Niederer Kraft & Frey to work for one year with Chadbourne & Parke in New York effective September 1987 as a foreign associate.
Stanton C. Marcus '85 is an investment banker with HLHZ Capital, the investment banking subsidiary of Houlinhan, Lokey, Howard & Zukin, Inc., in Century City. He specializes in mergers and acquisitions and private placements for middle market companies.
Arnold H. Wuhrman '85 has joined the firm of Barnes & Thornburg in Indianapolis, Indiana, where he is an associatein thecreditors'rights department.
Rob Noriega '86 has left a Los Angeles firm to practice with his father in Bakersfield.
Rick A. Schroeder '86 and BethC. Ackerman '85 were married October 10, 1987. He is a litigator with Manning, Leaver, Bruder & Berberich, and she is in the labor departmentwith Silver & Freedman in Los Angeles.
IN MEMORIAM
Burton Marks '55, May 1987
Robert Memel '57, July 1987
David H. Friedland '66, July 1987
Elisa Heather Halpern '85, September 1987
Calendar of Events
Thursday, November 19, 1987-A Special School of Law Dinner honoring California Supreme Court Justice John A. Arguelles '54 as Alumnus of the Year, UCLA James E. WestCenter, 7 p.m. reception, 8 p.m. dinner.
December 11-12, 1987-Twelfth Annual UCLA Entertainment Symposium, "Reel of Fortune: A Discussion of the Burning Issues in Film and TV," Ralph Freud Playhouse in Macgowan Hall, UCLA, 2:30-5:30 p.m. Dec. 11 and 9 a.m.-3 p.m. Dec. 12.
Sunday, December 6, 1987-Assistant Dean Michael Rappaport describes the current admissions process in the nation's law schools, with advice for prospective students and their parents, Room 1359 Law Building, 10:30 a.m.
Friday, March 4, 1988-The Annual School of Law Dean's Dinner, UCLA James E. West Center, 7 p.m. cocktails, 8 p.m. dinner.
Two Ways to Become More Involved in Your Law School
1, Ifyournamehasn'tappearedlatelyintheClassnotes. takeamomenttosharesomenewsaboutyourselfforthe nextissue of UCLALaw.
