The New York City Bar Association will present its 2012 Diversity & Inclusion Champion Awards at a ceremony and luncheon on June 5, 2012. The award recognizes the critical role individual attorneys have played in initiating and sustaining change within their organizations and the overall New York legal community. The award recipients embody the New York City Bar’s Statement of Diversity Principles, which defines diversity as an inclusive concept, encompassing race, color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, religion, nationality, age, disability and marital and parental status.

The 2012 Diversity & Inclusion Champion Award winners are:

Steven Banks
Steven Banks is Attorney-in-Chief at The Legal Aid Society, which has a staff of 1,600, including 1,000 lawyers, and provides legal assistance in all five boroughs in 300,000 legal matters annually through its Criminal, Juvenile Rights and Civil Practices. Motivated by a commitment to represent indigent New Yorkers, Mr. Banks began his career there thirty-one years ago as a Staff Attorney. Throughout his career he has developed a reputation as someone who understands the importance of diversity in the public interest legal model. Towards that goal, working with the Legal Aid management team, the Association of Legal Aid  Attorneys, the Attorneys of Color of Legal Aid, and 1199 SEIU, he has led efforts to implement several diversity initiatives, including revamped recruitment initiatives, innovative investigator and law student internship programs, “Awareness Month” events, and a new mentoring program. Among the Society’s diversity achievements are: two of the three leaders of its Practices are persons of color and two are women; 40% of the Criminal Defense and Juvenile Rights borough management consists of persons of color; diverse applicants made up half of the early offers for the 2012 Criminal Defense staff attorney class; and half of those hired for the 2011 Criminal Defense class consisted of diverse law graduates and attorneys.

Eric J. Friedman
Eric Friedman is the Executive Partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP. Under his leadership, the firm has reinforced its long-standing commitment to attracting, retaining and developing a diverse group of talented lawyers and staff. Since assuming the role of Executive Partner in April 2009, Mr. Friedman was named as one of three “Most Influential” law firm leaders by The National Law Journal.  In addition, Skadden was named the first-ever “Law Firm of the Year” by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in recognition of the firm’s diversity, inclusion and public service efforts. Mr. Friedman is a member of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity, a national organization of corporate chief legal officers and law firm managing partners. He is also the Chair and Trustee of Skadden’s Fellowship Foundation, which provides funding for graduating law students and judicial clerks who are dedicating their careers to providing legal services to underserved members of society.

Don H. Liu
Don Liu is Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of Xerox Corporation, where he is responsible for all of Xerox’s legal and government affairs. Throughout his career, Mr. Liu has been committed to increasing the hiring, retention and promotion of diverse attorneys. This commitment is reflected in his stewardship of Xerox’s legal department and in his leadership and involvement in national and regional diversity organizations. He is an active member and former Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Minority Corporate Counsel Association and is the Vice Chairman of the Asian American Diversity Advisory Council for Comcast Corporation. He also served as the Chair of the In-House Counsel Committee of the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA), which honored him with their ICON Award and Trailblazer Award. He most recently is the recipient of the Leadership Award by the Asian American Bar Association of New York (AABANY) and the Legacy Diversity Award by the American Bar Association’s Council on Legal Education Opportunity.

Lorraine S. McGowen
Lorraine McGowen is a partner in the restructuring practice group at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP. She is also a member of Orrick’s Board of Directors, a former practice group leader and has chaired Orrick’s Diversity and Inclusion Initiative since 2005. As a member of Orrick’s senior leadership, Ms. McGowen has supported the advancement of diverse individuals at the firm through mentorship, leadership and collaboration on successful diversity and inclusion initiatives and policies. Ms. McGowen is an active member of Legal Outreach’s Board of Legal Advisors, and through her advocacy Orrick has supported the program for nearly a decade. She is also on the Board of Directors for Legal Momentum and the New York Lawyers for the Public Interest.  In addition, she is the former Chair of the New York City Bar Association’s Committee on Minorities in the Profession and is currently on the Advisory Committee of the Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice, through which Orrick hosts an attorney participating in the South African Visiting Lawyer Program.

Tickets to the 2012 Diversity & Inclusion Champion Award Luncheon may be purchased on the City Bar’s online event calendar.

For further information please contact Elizabeth Dorfman at (212) 382-6772 or email her.

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The shocking and unacceptable treatment of Chen Guangcheng, a well-known legal advocate, and his family by Chinese authorities reflects the broader problem of harassment of dozens of lawyers in China who represent unpopular clients and causes disfavored by the government.

During 2011 and continuing this year, an unprecedented number of lawyers, legal advocates, and activists in China, in addition to Mr. Chen, were subject to disappearances, arbitrary detentions, physical and mental abuse, intimidation, and harassment. The 2011 crackdown continues to affect Mr. Chen, who is self-taught, and others, including Jiang Tianyong and Tang Jitian, who faced some of the worst abuses during their disappearances. Gao Zhisheng, another prominent human rights lawyer, emerged after a long disappearance in December 2011, only to be returned to a remote prison in Xinjiang. Gao was detained in February 2009, and except for a brief release in March 2010, has been held incommunicado by authorities.

In April 2012, Ni Yulan, a legal activist, was sentenced to a prison term of two years and eight months. Ni has been targeted and harassed by authorities in retaliation for her work on forced evictions and other politically sensitive issues, and has endured multiple prison terms and abuse, including a beating that left her unable to walk. Such beatings of lawyers are by no means rare, as illustrated by the treatment of Chen Guangcheng and his wife, Yuan Weijing, who were beaten in their home on February 10, 2011, by police and state security officials.

These persistent abuses of lawyers for defending unpopular clients contravene both established international law and China’s own domestic laws. During the past several years, the New York City Bar Association has called attention to the situation of lawyers in China and this includes in numerous letters to the Chinese Ministry of Justice and other government officials in China and in the United States. In 2009, the Association undertook a mission to China and published a report detailing its findings and calling attention to the cases of individual lawyers and legal activists who had been detained, abused, charged, or otherwise prevented from undertaking their professional duties as lawyers. The Association has also adopted its own Statement of Principles that expresses our support for the rights of Chinese lawyers.

We urge Chinese authorities not only to investigate the mistreatment of Chen Guangcheng and his wife – and to prosecute those responsible for these abuses – but to end its campaign against all Chinese lawyers representing unpopular clients and causes and to reaffirm the rights afforded Chinese lawyers to practice their profession without interference, harassment, or abuse by national or local authorities. China must also account for and release all lawyers now in detention as a result of their work and recognize that its continuing abuse of lawyers is inconsistent with its claim to be a lawful society deserving of respect by the world community.

 

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A lawyer who receives a letter, fax, e-mail or other communication that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know was transmitted by mistake must promptly notify the sender, pursuant to Rule 4.4(b) of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, and follow any other applicable law. So states a formal opinion from the New York City Bar Association’s  Professional Ethics Committee (Formal Opinion 2012-1).

That said, according to the opinion, several aspects of Rule 4.4(b) require further attention. First, as noted in the New York State Bar Association’s Comments to Rule 4.4(b), documents “include not only paper correspondence but also emails, voicemails and other communications that may be read or transcribed. Nor does it matter whether the sender is a lawyer, a client, a third party, or even a tribunal; in each case, the rule still attaches.”

Second, the rule addresses only the obligations that arise with respect to documents that are “inadvertently sent” and “would not apply if, for example, a lawyer obtained possession of a document that was deliberately sent to the lawyer’s attention (including, for instance, a document obtained, perhaps improperly, and then transmitted by a person other than its original custodian). Those scenarios would implicate different ethical considerations and/or questions of law, and may require a different response,” the opinion states.

Third, the rule requires the lawyer to notify the sender “promptly.” According to the opinion, “This means as soon as reasonably possible, as the rule is designed in part to eliminate any unfair advantage that would arise if the lawyer did not provide such notice.”

The opinion further advises that “Counsel would do well, however, to remember the New York State Bar Association comment that ‘a lawyer who reads or continues to read a document that contains privileged or confidential information may be subject to court-imposed sanctions, including disqualification and evidence-preclusion.’”

The opinion notes that the City Bar’s previous opinion on the topic was issued when the New York Code of Professional Responsibility was in effect, and that the Code contained no provision directly addressing a lawyer’s responsibility with respect to inadvertently sent documents. Lawyers accordingly took guidance from judicial decisions and bar association opinions. The new opinion states, “Formal Opinion 2003-04, which was based on several Code provisions, was issued in that context. In certain respects, it imposed standards of conduct that go beyond the standards indicated by the text of Rule 4.4(b), which, along with the rest of the Rules of Professional Conduct, became effective on April 1, 2009. In particular, Formal Opinion 2003-04 required a lawyer who received a misdirected communication not only to notify the sender, but also, with limited exceptions, to refrain from reviewing the communication and to return or destroy it on request. To the extent that it imposes standards that go beyond the standard indicated by Rule 4.4(b), Formal Opinion 2003-04 is withdrawn. However, there may arise circumstances under which a lawyer, having considered Rules 1.2 and 1.4, determines that conduct that would be consistent with Formal Opinion 2003-04, such as destroying or not reviewing or using the communication, is right under the circumstances. Rule 4.4(b) and the present Formal Opinion should not be construed as per se prohibiting a lawyer from making that determination.”

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The New York City Bar Association participated in the 2012 ABA Lobby Day in Washington, D.C. on April 18 and 19. City Bar representatives met with the New York Congressional delegation, as well as with representatives of Senators Schumer and Gillibrand.

The City Bar expressed support for funding of the Legal Services Corporation at $402 million for Fiscal Year 2013 so that low-income individuals can continue to receive legal representation in civil matters involving basic human needs, such as family, housing and domestic violence cases; passage of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2011, which will allow the continuation of a vital, comprehensive and successful approach to combating violence against women across all states; and the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which will provide full marriage equality for same-sex couples who are now able to marry in New York State but are not considered married for purposes of federal law.

The City Bar will continue to advocate for these core issues, which have been studied and addressed by a large cross-section of committees, including the Council on Judicial Administration, the Domestic Violence Committee, the Sex and Law Committee, the LGBT Rights Committee, and the Pro Bono and Legal Services Committee.

 

ABA Lobby Day
Fourth from left: City Bar Legislative Affairs Director Maria Cilenti. Second from right: City Bar General Counsel Alan Rothstein.
Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

On April 23rd, the New York City Bar Association hosted a public forum called “LGBT Rights as Human Rights: Recent Legal Developments in Africa,” which considered developments in LGBT rights in relation to legislation in Africa that criminalizes same-sex activity or organizing on behalf of LGBT people.

Panelists shared their perspectives on the complex causes of the legislation, including the legacy of colonialism, influence of fundamentalist religious groups, inflammatory political rhetoric and misuse of the media to incite violence against LGBT people. Also considered were the far-reaching effects of the legislation, which go beyond violence and imprisonment to include undermining national HIV and AIDS responses and excluding LGBT people from basic human rights entitlements such as schooling, housing and medical care.

International actors have responded to the legislation with a range of actions, including threatening to withhold foreign aid from countries that institutionalize discrimination against LGBT people. Other responses have included the United Nations’ launch of the Global Commission on HIV and the Law to increase understanding of the effects of anti-gay laws on HIV responses; the consideration of such laws by United Nations treaty bodies during country review processes; and strategic litigation, such as the case against U.S.-based evangelical Scott Lively recently brought under the Alien Tort Statute by the Center for Constitutional Rights on behalf of Sexual Minorities Uganda for Lively’s alleged role in persecuting the LGBT community in Uganda.

The panelists noted that despite the disturbing trend in anti-gay legislation, some countries have rejected the laws as inconsistent with their public health policy, and a few countries in Africa have even decriminalized homosexual activity.

The City Bar has repeatedly noted that it abhors the criminalization of homosexuality, the exclusion of LGBT people from full and equal participation in society, and the draconian criminal penalties, including death, contemplated by certain of the proposed and adopted laws at issue. In February 2010, the City Bar submitted a letter to President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda opposing the Anti-Homosexuality Bill introduced in Uganda’s parliament in October 2009, a version of which was reintroduced this year.  In January 2012, the City Bar submitted a similar letter to President Goodluck Jonathan with respect to the “Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Bill” pending in Nigeria’s parliament. The Association looks forward to continued dialogue with various actors to promote the human rights of LGBT people in Africa and other parts of the world.

Panelists included Boris Dittrich, LGBT Advocacy Director of Human Rights Watch; Bruce Knotts, Executive Director of the Unitarian Universalist United Nations Office; Wade McMullen, Donald M. Wilson Fellow of the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights; Pam Spees, Senior Staff Attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights; Dr. Cheikh Traore of the United Nations Development Program’s Sexual Diversity Team; and Malika Zouhali-Worrall, co-director with Katharine Fairfax Wright of the award-winning documentary “Call Me Kuchu,” about murdered Ugandan LGBT rights activist David Kato. The discussion was moderated by Jordan Backman, Chair of the City Bar’s Committee on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights.

Sponsors included the City Bar’s African Affairs Committee, Christina T. Holder, Chair; Civil Rights Committee, Brian J. Kreiswirth, Chair; International Human Rights Committee, Stephen L. Kass, Chair; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights Committee, Jordan Backman, Chair; Sex and Law Committee, Pamela B. Zimmerman, Chair; Council on International Affairs, Mark R. Shulman, Chair; and the Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice, Alexander Papachristou, Executive Director.

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Vance Center for International Justice and the New York City Bar Association have submitted an amicus brief to the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Chile – Chile’s highest constitutional court – summarizing U.S. federal and state freedom of information laws.

The brief was prepared at the request of Fundación Pro Accesso, a Chilean non-profit, in connection with a case pending before the Constitutional Tribunal involving Chile’s newly enacted freedom of information law. The case involves a request by the City of Melipilla for access to certain e-mails sent to and from Chilean government e-mail addresses regarding government aid following the earthquake of February 27, 2010. The Constitutional Tribunal will address the constitutionality of Section 2, Article 5 of Chile’s Access to Public Information Law, which on its face requires the disclosure of government records.

Chile is the first South American country to deal with access to government e-mails as a transparency matter. This case is therefore highly significant both in Chile and as a precedent in neighboring jurisdictions.

The amicus brief provides an overview of how U.S. federal and state freedom of information laws have been interpreted regarding electronic communications, and provides a legal framework for promoting “the fundamental principle that citizens have a right to access their government’s public documents, while balancing the government’s ability to operate and privacy of governmental employees.” The brief also highlights the “strong presumption in favor of disclosure and clear trend in favor of public disclosure of government communications involving official business, whether or not those communications are made to or from government computer systems,” and urges the Chilean Constitutional Tribunal “to recognize similar principles” in order to “establish a fair and balanced framework governing access to information in Chile.”

Fundación Pro Acceso is an organization dedicated to promoting government transparency as a way of strengthening democratic institutions and human rights in Chile.  Over the past two decades, Chile has served as a regional model for good governance, and Fundación Pro Acceso has followed Chile’s democratic development closely to ensure its continued robust progress through advocacy work such as litigating this case.

The amicus brief was submitted on behalf of the City Bar by its Communications and Media Law Committee, Jonathan Donnellan, Chair; also on the brief were S. Todd Crider, a partner at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP and Vice-Chair of the Vance Center Committee; David McCraw, a member of the Vance Center Committee and the City Bar’s Executive Committee; and Paul Sirkis, an associate at Simpson Thacher. The Spanish version of the brief was prepared by Jonathan A. Lieberman Fernández and Antonio Arias Etchebarne, an associate and international associate, respectively, at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP.

 

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

As I look back on my two-year term as President of the New York City Bar Association, I’m grateful to those who have made my tenure personally and professionally satisfying, namely the Association’s extraordinary membership, staff, and Executive Committee. The scope and scale of the work that gets accomplished at the City Bar, year in and year out, is truly remarkable.

We often say that our committees are the Association, in that they are how the City Bar’s work gets done. Over the past two years, the City Bar’s 150 committees issued nearly 400 reports, produced over 500 events, and spoke out on an enormous range of issues. Among too many highlights to mention them all, we testified before Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman’s Task Force to Expand Access to Civil Legal Services; advocated for raises for New York’s judges; hosted a press conference of over 20 bar groups in support of the marriage equality legislation subsequently enacted in Albany; proposed the creation of mortgage servicer-specific conference parts in New York City’s courts to facilitate the handling of foreclosure actions, which the Office of Court Administration is implementing as a pilot program; advocated for legislation passed by the City Council establishing regulation of process servers; and drafted legislation or made recommendations that became law in the areas of trusts and estates, benefit corporations, and ID theft. We also commented effectively on court rules and a range of tax, financial, health, consumer, and other laws and regulations on the federal, state, and city level.

Due to its historic leadership role and the wide respect it has earned, the New York City Bar is more than just a local bar association, and we demonstrate that regularly by weighing in on national and international issues. We filed amicus briefs opposing restrictive immigration laws in Arizona and Alabama on the grounds that they were in conflict with federal law. We wrote a report and filed a brief opposing Oklahoma’s constitutional amendment banning the use of foreign or Sharia law in state courts. We have written to the highest levels of China’s government to protest the treatment of human rights lawyers there. A Bahraini lawyer wrote to us and posted on our blog to thank us for helping him obtain his release from custody.

In keeping with our longstanding tradition of providing an opportunity for our members to hear from leading government legal officers, we hosted many high-profile speakers over the past two years. Southern District U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara made news in October 2010 when he foreshadowed insider-trading prosecutions. Robert Khuzami gave his first policy speech here after being named Director of Enforcement for the SEC. Other recent speakers have included Pentagon General Counsel Jeh Johnson, New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, and Manhattan DA Cyrus R. Vance Jr.

In response to growing interest among our members, we have recently created three new committees: International Business Transactions, Fashion Law, and White Collar Criminal Law. Under the auspices of the latter, the City Bar will present the First Annual White Collar Crime Institute, a full-day symposium, on May 14th, at which U.S. Attorney Bharara and  Attorney General Schneiderman will be keynote speakers.

With legal services funding being cut, the work of the City Bar Justice Center in providing legal services to those who can’t afford a lawyer has never been more important. In 2011, the Justice Center provided $18 million worth of legal services as it trained and supervised the work of pro bono attorneys, who were able to broaden their careers and improve their skills while helping others. Last year, the Justice Center created and managed quarterly legal clinics at the request of the reopened 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund. The Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice continued its work in Latin America, spreading the pro bono ethos and filing amicus briefs in high-profile human rights cases of regional importance, and in Africa, providing legal support to former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s efforts on the Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation.

In direct service to our members and to the profession, we have grown our Continuing Legal Education offerings, and have presented over 100 programs in each of the last two years in the area of career and professional development. And to help ensure the future vitality of the profession, we have increased our membership among law students, while our Diversity Pipeline Program has expanded its work with high school and college students interested in pursuing legal careers.

With heartfelt thanks to the 24,000 members that make up the New York City Bar Association, I am pleased to report that this historic institution remains fiscally sound, vital in its mission, and true to its founding principles.

Samuel W. Seymour is President of the New York City Bar Association.

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged | Leave a comment

On March 30th, Governor Cuomo and the leaders of the Legislature announced passage of the 2012-2013 New York State budget. The City Bar supported a number of aspects of the budget, which are highlighted below:

  • The Council on Judicial Administration applauds the adoption of the Judiciary’s 2012-2013 Budget Request. The $2.30 billion Judiciary Budget comes in at 0.17% below this year’s spending plan, and will permit the courts to ameliorate some of the measures that have had the most immediate and direct impact on court users after last year’s budget cut. For example, the budget will permit some relaxation of the early closing times at courthouses that were implemented this year, and ease limits on weekend arraignments, small claims court evening hours, and the reduced call of jurors. The Judiciary Budget includes a long-overdue raise in the salaries for judges adopted by the Commission on Judicial Compensation, the first increase in 13 years. Importantly, the Judiciary Budget also provides $25 million for Civil Legal Services funding, an increase over the $12.5 million provided in the last fiscal year.  This funding will help ease a profound human and social toll on the most vulnerable New Yorkers and ameliorate significant burdens on judges and represented parties in cases where litigants must appear pro se.
  • The Committee on Legal Problems of the Aging is pleased that the budget did not include two provisions it had opposed: the elimination of “spousal refusal” rules for both institutional and home based Medicaid cases and the expansion of the definition of the Medicaid estate. The Committee argued that these changes would have adversely impacted some of New York’s most vulnerable citizens and, in some cases, conflicted with existing law. Specifically, eliminating the spousal refusal protection would have caused the non-applying spouse to reduce his/her income and assets to the federal poverty level in order for the applicant spouse to receive Medicaid benefits, with the potential for several negative results. And, expanding the Medicaid estate definition would have caused individuals to prematurely transfer and lose control of their homes and would have resulted in less income being available to help pay for health services during the individual’s lifetime.
  • The Council on Children applauds the inclusion of Governor Cuomo’s ‘Close to Home Initiative’ in the budget, which will allow New York City to take care of lower risk youth in the New York State Office of Children and Family Services (“OCFS”) facility placement system when those youths come from the City. The current OCFS facility placement system typically places children far from their families and communities, is expensive and exposes young people to physical and psychological harm, abuse, and a woeful lack of education and mental health treatment, which results in a stunningly high recidivism rate (there is an 81% recidivism rate for boys). Placing children close to their homes, families, communities and lawyers is not only cost effective, but more humane, providing children access to the vital support networks while still providing the services and supervision they need.
  • In a lead-in to the budget agreement, the Legislature passed legislation which will expand collection of DNA from a wide range of felony and misdemeanor offenders. The Committee on Criminal Advocacy applauds the passage of this legislation because DNA can be used to help prosecutors identify and convict the guilty and defense attorneys exonerate the wrongfully accused or convicted.  We also commend the inclusion of provisions which are designed to clarify and expand a defendant’s ability to ask a judge to order DNA comparisons from existing evidence and existing databases, both pre- and post-conviction. The Public Protection and General Government budget amended the effective date for this legislation, which will now go into effect August 1, 2012.

With 30 scheduled session days left on the legislative calendar, the City Bar looks forward to continuing its advocacy on a number of bills proposed by its committees. A sample of items on our agenda for the remainder of the session includes:

  • Advocating for the creation of a court rule to protect confidential personal information in court filings.
  • Strengthening the trust property and trust fund provisions of the Arts and Cultural Affairs Law as it pertains to the consignment of artwork to art merchants by artists, their heirs and their personal representatives.
  • Updating and providing clarity on state laws regarding the use of service animals by people with disabilities.
  • Supporting legislation that would create the felony crime of aggravated family offense, which can be used to charge abusers who repeatedly engage in domestic violence, as well as legislation that would give greater discretion to judges when sentencing defendants who are survivors of domestic violence.
  • Continuing to support a number of criminal justice proposals aimed at curbing wrongful convictions. While the passage of the expanded DNA database will be an important step toward decreasing the incidence of wrongful convictions in New York, more can and should be done. In that vein, the City Bar supports increasing the use of recorded interrogations, clarifying ineffective assistance of counsel claims and ensuring complete disclosure of exculpatory material.

For more information on these and all of the City Bar’s policy positions, check out our 2012 Legislative Program. You can also visit our Legislative Affairs webpage and follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

 

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment