The Jeffersonian

Interested in a great opportunity?

San Diego County Bar Association & Association of Corporate Counsel – San Diego DIVERSITY FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM Website: www.sdcba.org/diversityfellowship.

1. Statement of Purpose

The San Diego County Bar Association (SDCBA) and Association of Corporate Counsel-San Diego (ACC-SD) Diversity Fellowship Program (DFP) is designed for law students that are: (1) First year OR part-time second year; (2) Diverse (that includes a wide range of applicants and fellows); (3) Enrolled in an American Bar Association (ABA)-accredited law school; and (4) In good academic standing.

The Joint ACC-SDCBA Program provides an opportunity for diverse, first-year law students to learn and develop skills that are necessary to be successful in law firm and corporate legal department environments and exposes law firms and corporate legal departments to qualified individuals who might not otherwise have come to their attention. The Program is modeled after similar programs in Sacramento, Puget Sound/Seattle, Cleveland, St. Louis, Columbus, Atlanta, and the Bay Area.

2. Objectives

To DFP Program objectives are to increase diversity in law firm and corporate legal departments, to assist law student career growth, and to create and encourage positive business and legal relationships within the community.

3. Employer Information

The duration of the program is eight (8) to ten (10) weeks or consistent with the employer’s summer internship program. The details of the program are available online (see website above). Each participating employer is requested to compensate Fellows at a rate equivalent to $20 per hour and pay a small administrative fee.  Each participating employer will be responsible for complying with all applicable federal and state wage and hour and employment laws.

The DFP Director and Committee have created an oversight structure and program timeline that includes receptions, networking events, and educational programs where attendance is mandatory for the students.

If interested, please contact: Jeremy M. Evans, DFP Director, San Diego County Bar Association DFPDirector@sdcba.org or (619) 321-4114.

Actually, I have been practicing over 26 years, but, the above title sounded better. I started practicing in 1988, fortunately, I was hired by Jeffery Schwartz, who had been practicing for six months. We both graduated from Western State University College of Law in San Diego, at that time, it was not accredited b y the ABA.

The sparseness of job opportunities at that time were not necessarily because of economics, like today, they were caused by the fact that Western State did not have the Alumni Network, that they do today. The vast majority of graduates, if they did pass the Bar, opened up their own practice. I was lucky to have had a relationship with some students like Jeff Schwartz. We practiced, what is sometimes called "toaster law", that is we took whatever popped up! I always had a desire to do criminal defense, while Jeff liked personal injury and other civil cases.

Although it may be hard for the reader to believe, computers were just beginning to be used in law offices. We still used typewriters, one of the lawyers on our floor actually leased a Xerox machine and everyone used it, paying five cents a copy to the owner. Copy machines at that time were huge affairs on rollers that weighed probably eighty to one hundred pounds. There certainly were no color copy machines. When we typed a letter or a document, we used carbon paper (for those one or two of you that know what that is) for copies. The use of the copy machine was a luxury.

The lawyer that leased the Xerox, had a meeting with the rest of us. He had arranged to also lease a machine that actually sent documents to other people, who had a similar machine. They were originally called transmitters, now they are known as fax machines. The enterprising lawyer charged us fifty cents a page to send documents to other enterprising lawyers. Finally, in about 1990, we were able to afford our own copy machine, made by Pitney Bowes, who also rented us this machine that puts stamps on letters. Things were looking up!

In those early days, email was done through a telephone coupler. It was a devise that had two openings and you put your telephone handset into the two openings. This was plugged into the computer and as you typed, signals were sent through the phone to the other party, who also had their phone in a coupler to receive the message. Those of us who were lucky enough to have computers either IBM style or Macintosh, had to use "floppy disks" as hard drives were not yet in use. The computer held maybe 640 kb. Data was stored in these four inch disks (later 2.5 inch disks) which each held another 640 kb of data. I remember reading the astonishing fact that IBM had developed what was called a hard drive that actually held 10 mb of data. Who could ever need that much?!

Of course all we had in those days was monochrome monitors. There was no such thing as a mouse or Windows. We used the DOS operating system. I am not quite sure we have progressed. By now, the history lesson must be getting less and less exciting. At this point I will advise that you will have to wait for further articles to find out if I ever advanced to a color monitor and Windows.

The Thomas Jefferson School of Law National Trial Team has been busy this fall semester.  The competitions got off to a strong start with the San Diego Defense Lawyers (SDDL) competition held in San Diego. Plaintiff’s counsel Kierre Coghill and Justin Hall competed in the first round while defense counsel Melanie Guillen and Andrew Myers competed in the second round.  “The case was a medical malpractice case, and on the first night, Hall and Coghill were strong in their advocacy and cut through their competition with surgical accuracy” says Mr. Myers. Kierre Coghill, team captain, noted the positive feedback that the TJSL team received from the guest judges.  “The judges commented on how well prepared the teams were and that regardless of who won, all the competitors were sure to be wonderful trial attorneys.”  Although the team did not advance to the last round, their performance was the springboard for the Fall 2014 competition season.

In November, TJSL sent two teams to the American Bar Association Labor and Employment (ABA L&E) Competition held at the Federal Courthouse in Los Angeles, California.  It involved a wage and hour claim made by entertainers against the adult entertainment club they worked at, Bottoms Up Nightclub. TJSL’s first team, Plaintiff’s counsel Leanne Wilder and Ravi Mohan, competed in the morning round.  In the afternoon round, Defense counsel Precious Harrison-Cobb and Thomas Gennaro went against a different school and battled it out.  Ms. Wilder says that “the witnesses being played by the opposing team were very difficult and Thomas and Precious did a fantastic job when the witnesses wanted to fight them on every single question.” 

TJSL’s second team to compete in the ABA L&E competition consisted of Ashley Salas and James White for the plaintiffs, and Katie Smith and Leo Fuentes Varga for the defense.  “This competition really showed us that we can push ourselves to perform at a very high level” says Katie Smith.  She also noted how TJSL left a positive impression on the guest judges.  “We were commended by judges on our team work and our level of professionalism with the other teams.”  Unfortunately, TJSL did not advance to the semi-finals. Ms. Wilder says that “the fact pattern was fun and interesting and we are proud with our performance.”

Football should mainly be an enjoyable sport for players and spectators alike. Sometimes the familiar enjoyment turns into dangerous injuries that result in irreparable effects. Athletes risk more than the mere bruises and broken bones. Specifically, the latest issues surround the dangers of concussions amongst professional players in the NFL. Football related concussions are generally caused by the extreme and consistent impact from knocking into each other. The pattern of repetitive head traumas may result in severe brain damage with long lasting mental and physical health effects. Concussions are part of the most common head-impact injuries, and may often cause traumatic brain injuries, leading to neurodegenerative disorders and diseases.

The buildup of health issues from such traumatic head injuries conjured up a most recent lawsuit against the league. A multi-million dollar class action suit, which covers a class of nearly 20,000 former/retired players, was filed for due to the suffering caused by severe concussion head traumas. The initial $675 million cap on damages for deteriorating mental and physical conditions endured by former players was brought in as a complaint from the devastation of the aftermath of numerous concussions.

On July 7, 2014, a federal judge granted a revised settlement agreement in the class action suit. This included monetary awards capped at $5 million for diagnoses of ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease), Alzheimer’s Disease, Parkinson’s Disease, $4 million for Dementia, and $3 million for certain cases of chronic traumatic encephalopathy or CTE (a neuropathological finding) diagnosed after death. This settlement was used to determine which individuals were rightfully affected and who could recover damages for their injuries. Although an agreement has been settled on, current and future players are unable to benefit from the monetary awards.

However, the lawsuit did not deem as suitable for a number of NFL players who have endured significant struggle in their careers because of these injuries. Many ex-players are suffering from brain damage after retiring, and these injuries will place them in a detrimental state for the remainder of their lives. For some that are currently still part of the NFL, they have to choose whether to become inactive players because the damage of their concussion collisions has caused such drastic effects on their health. Continuing to actively play is no longer an option for them. Thus, there is a detriment to the quality in those players’ daily lives, and they will likely endure future family and personal uphill battles with their physical and mental health.

Kansas City based, Attorney McLain, who represents nearly two dozen former professional football players in a lawsuit regarding their suffering of head injuries stated:

"Our worst fears were realized. We found our players had significant emotional and impulse control problems that according to [Boston University] are tied to head injury. And none of them qualify for awards under the settlement. It's a bogus deal. A fraudulent deal on its face, completely illusory, designed to pay very few people except the lawyers and the players in the most extreme [illness] category. All of these men saddled with neurological problems throughout their lifetimes are not the NFL's concern. The NFL's concern is containing risk, just as if they were [General Motors] and these players are faulty ignitions."

Nearly a third of retired players will develop long-term cognitive issues from head injuries. In addition, the former players will likely suffer depression, anxiety, loss of memory and a list of continued ailments, causing families to suffer in the long run. It certainly begs the question: is this really just a game?

Thomas Jefferson School of Law is one hell of a law school. Believe it or not, we as students are in the hands of pretty awesome people, and in the comfort of a pretty awesome building.

Wayne Dyer once said, “Change the way you look at things, and the things you look at will change.” Apply that to life. Apply it to law school. Apply it to whatever you want; it works. I personally think that what our student body (“we”) needs, as a whole, is to change the way we look at our amazing school.

To state it simply, albeit bluntly, the way we look TJSL right now is absolutely horrible. We have our minds completely consumed with the idea of coming to school to chains on the door, thus preventing another 36-50% of our 3L’s from graduating and passing the bar. I can go on and on for days about both issues, but instead I’ll leave you with this: only YOU can affect the stats; and if you have not heard already, we restructured our deal with the bondholders. TJSL is a fantastic school and, with help from us, the students, it is only going to get better. Want to know how I know? Keep reading...

As this is a school, let’s talk about our professors. Aside from being some of the most well connected members of the community, the faculty members at TJSL are also some of the smartest. Think we have it tough? Try going to law school at Columbia, Yale, Harvard, Stanford, or Georgetown... just to name a few tier one schools. Our professors are literally the best and brightest in the field, and they are doing the very best to see to it that we follow in their footsteps. When professors such as, but not limited to, Golden, Cromer-Young, Herald or Semeraro, make themselves available to us as much as they do, it is very hard not to succeed. So ask yourself, do you want to help raise those bar statistics mentioned above? If so, do your diligence as a student and use these invaluable resources, which have been so graciously handed to you on a silver platter.

What about the building they teach in? According to bestchoiceschools.com and abovethelaw.com (insert grin here), we have the third most impressive law school building in the world! But we need not read articles from two online blogs to know that because we experience first hand how beautiful this school truly is. Could you imagine what it would be like somewhere else – like Cal West’s campus or having to park at USD? We are here every day, so maybe we take it for granted. But next time you find yourself in the highly-resourceful, ergonomically friendly library, or perhaps, in one of the most technologically advanced classrooms in the world, or even at home watching a recorded lecture, take a second to think about how lucky we are to be students in such a state-of-the- art, eco-friendly building.

In three years or less, you will become an (hopefully proud) alumnus of TJSL. You will stand in the same ranks as Leslie Anderson, the billionaire owner of the Houston Rockets, former Wisconsin Senator, Jessica King, and countless others. However, the road to becoming one of those proud alumni is not easy to navigate, and wasting time thinking about our school in a negative light is endlessly counterintuitive, unnecessary, ignorant, and the most distracting thing you can do.

Change the way you look at things, and the things you look at will change. Stop focusing on the negative, and start honing in on the positive (like your Con Law II final). We are in the hands of great professors teaching in a great building, and we are about to become members of a great alumni community. There is absolutely no need to bash, criticize, or worry about our school. Think positively and do your part as a student, and together this community can go places that not even our save-the-day dean, Dean Thomas Guernsey, could imagine. The change starts with us. Do work TJSL.

On Monday, November 3, TJSL’s Criminal Law Society, the Black Law Student Association, and the National Lawyers Guild held a panel discussion on the death penalty in America. Participants (pictured left to right below) were; Investigator, Robert Dean, from the San Diego County District Attorney, Hon. Rudy Gerber (Ret.), Breda Daly, Esq. from the San Diego County District Attorney, Professor John Cotsirilos (USD Law), and our own, Professor Marjorie Cohn.

The participants laid out their positions in typical fashion. The proponents gave testimony about horrible criminals and their impact on victims’ families; while opponents laid out an argument stating that because the western world and other progressive societies do not impose the death penalty on their criminals, as a matter of policy, neither should America.

The proponent’s argument:

Investigator Dean has been a police officer for 40 years. His argument for the imposition of the death penalty stems from his experience witnessing man’s inhumanity to man. He showed a power point displaying some of the many death penalty murders he investigated during his career.

DA Daly opened up about the legal hurdles to imposing the death penalty; namely, that the defendant must meet certain criteria to be charged as such. The defendant must commit murder, and there must be a special circumstance allegation for him or her to be charged with the death penalty. In only two percent of the first-degree murders in California is the death penalty sought. Daly’s chief argument is the defendants who are charged are the worst of the worst; often socio paths, who relish their criminal acts and have no remorse for their “brutal, heinous acts.” She also offered that there are currently 738 people on death row; in 500 or more of those persons charged with the death penalty, there is no issue of guilt, only an issue of punishment. Moreover, there are 16 people who are cleared by SCOTUS to be executed, but the Attorney General is holding up the process because she (AG Harris) is allegedly not moving forward on the issue surrounding the “one drug cocktail” for executions.

The opponent’s argument:

Retired Judge Gerber stated he is a convert against the death penalty. In fact, he worked on the Arizona revision of the death penalty law, with Justice O’Connor, before she served on the Court. In the three main arguments that were proposed in favor of the death penalty, Gerber believes they do not hold water because of the following:

1) The philosophical argument; an eye for an eye. Gerber says this is repudiated repeatedly because we do not take one life for every life that is killed (for example, in crimes of negligent homicide, manslaughter and second degree murder).

2) The empirical argument; where the sentence serves as a deterrent. Gerber states that in over 100 studies the conclusion is that there is no deterrent effect at all on criminals and recidivism. In fact, criminologists believe that four things are necessary for deterrence: the punishment must be swift, certain, painful, and done in public. None of these things are true of the death penalty in America.

3) The therapeutic relief for the victim’s family; there is such a long delay between sentencing and the imposition of the punishment. The wound caused by the crime is reopened to the victim’s family when the criminal is sentenced and executed. Thus, there is no therapeutic effect at all.

Professor Cotsirilos believes the death penalty is a failed policy in the United States. He further his believes by saying that because very country, republic, and democracy in the western world has rejected the death penalty, the public would be safer if the money spent on the death penalty was appropriated in other more tangible ways to prevent crimes. He explains that the death penalty is a “complete violation of everything we stand for in this country” and offers the following in support of the opinion: economic status often determines what type of defense you receive as an accused individual; race and politics are big factors. In fact, in certain counties in California you will be very unlikely to be prosecuted for the death penalty (like San Francisco or San Diego), but even 40 miles north of San Diego you would be more likely to be prosecuted for the death penalty.

The 23 students who attended the panel encompassed a broad cross section of proponents and opponents to the punishment. The question and answer session was lively and informative. Overall, the death penalty will remain a strongly debated issue in this state. Professor Cohn cited statistics that the support is falling, but remains in the majority.

When people ask me where I am from, my immediate reaction is to reply with my diatribe of history: I was born in Coronado, but raised in Iowa since I was five years old. I came back to San Diego during my summers to visit because all of my extended family is here. I’ve lived in San Diego year–round, now, for about three years. I don’t know why I think people care to hear about my entire geographical history. I don’t know why it is so difficult for me to pick a place to say I am “from.” But regardless of that, very soon, part of where I am “from” will include Thomas Jefferson.

I grew up in a small town in Iowa. When I was little, my best friends lived a block away. To be honest, no one in the town lived more than a mile away (unless they had pigs – then they probably lived about five miles away). As I grew up, things slowly changed. I don’t know if it was because I changed, or because the town changed, ormayitwasboth. All of a sudden, the people I loved were catty, and the town I loved seemed to be overrun with the same drama that had caused major rifts in my seventh grade classroom. Now I realize, one of the many reasons I hesitate to say, “I am from Perry, Iowa,” is because I am disillusioned as to the small town life.

I never want to feel that same way about Thomas Jefferson. We, as students, have the opportunity to shape our own experiences here at TJSL. We have the opportunity to shape the experiences of those who will come to school next year, and each year following. We have the ability to shape the opinions of what those around us will say and think about TJSL.

We are all in a stage of uncertainty wondering, will I even get a job? Where will this job be? What if I don’t pass the bar? Will I pass this semester’s classes?

What is not uncertain is that our reputation is exactly what we make of it. We, as students and alumnus, must project to the legal world that we have received a great education and that we are worthy hires. Then, we can create a great TJSL legacy.

We have highly educated professors and ambitious students. We are the only people who can tell the rest of the legal community that TJSL students are the best option to hire. We have to believe in our education. After all, our TJSL is where we will be from sooner than later.

We can have no question about our pride. We must be proud. Not only for ourselves, but for future classes.

Everyone in law school knows how many hours are spent reading, writing papers, rushing to internships, and balancing friends and family. But only a few law students know what it’s like to do all of that and compete for one of TJSL’s co-curricular teams.

Alternative dispute resolution is just what it sounds like: it’s an alternative to litigation. ADR involves negotiation, mediation and arbitration. The team meets each week to develop the skills involved in ADR, and then small teams are selected from within the large group to compete at various events.

On October 11th, ADR teams competed at the Southwestern Law School Entertainment Law Negotiation Competition in Los Angeles. TJSL teams placed well: 2Ls, Harrison Gaines and Misuraca placed in the top 10, and 3Ls Alexander Green and Chelsea Grover placed in the top 20 out of 35 teams from around the country.

“I can't think of any negatives to competing. I really enjoy the opportunity,” said Misuraca. “I tried out for ADR in my first semester of school because I wanted to learn how to properly negotiate. I knew that someday this skill would be invaluable as a basketball agent.”

“I see [ADR] playing a huge role in my future as an attorney because in order to get deals done I will need to apply the strategies I've learned in ADR,” said Gaines. “The Entertainment Competition is synonymous with sports. Therefore, I wanted to make sure I did the competition, as it presented some of the same issues I would see in sports.”

The ADR team enters about two competitions per semester. This gives 8 to 10 members of the large team a chance to compete or coach. One of the most unique things about ADR is that, while the team has a faculty advisor, the students on the team are in charge of its overall success.

Professor Ellen Waldman joined the ADR team this year as its advisor. Professor Waldman’s background in negotiation and mediation help ADR members focus their skill building. But after Professor Waldman steps away, it’s up to the individual teams and their coach or coaches to hone the skills and master the negotiation problem.

So, while Professor Waldman plays an important role in getting the large ADR team up to speed on techniques for negotiation, it’s the team’s coaches who write counter facts, set up spar times, give feed back and boost competitor confidence right up until they sit down to negotiate.

“[The] best part about coaching is seeing the transformation from the first spar to the last,” said Taelor Cole, 2L member. But, Cole added with a laugh, the “worst part about coaching is dealing with the inevitable melt-down from the team.”

Each member’s reasoning for trying out for ADR is similar. We all want to use it later as attorneys. Whether it is as an agent, in business, or in criminal proceedings, the skills we are developing are real world applicable. These are the skills employers most want.

The next event coming up for the ADR team is the American Bar Association’s Regional Negotiation Competition at Chapman School of Law on November 1st. Theo Montgomery, Brandon Theus, Taelor Cole and Puneet Layal, all 2Ls, will compete against teams from around our region on tort related problems. If they make it to the next round, the teams will represent our region in Texas at the national competition in February 2015.

ADR UPDATE: 

Congratulations to the ADR competitors who went to Chapman and represented the TJSL ADR team. They did so well. On Saturday, November 1st, members of the ADR team competed at Chapman School of Law in Orange, CA.

2Ls, Theo Montgomery and Brandon Theus, were coached by 3Ls, Frances Moldanado-Luna and Michelle Evenson. Montgomery and Theus were fluid in their presentations, provided excellent analyses of the strength of their legal positions and posed pointed and useful questions to help their team place 15th overall.

2Ls, Taelor Cole and Puneet Layal, coached by Alex Green and Dane Watson, 3Ls, advanced to Sunday’s semi-finals and ended up placing 4th in the region.

“Getting ready for the final round was nothing short of insane,” said Layal. “We had about 15 hours to prepare for a problem that would normally need 3 weeks for preparation.”

“It was one of the most intense brainstorming sessions I had ever been a part of,” said Layal. “Taelor and I were lucky we had Professor Waldman and our coaches to help us create a strategy that worked really well for us in the finals.”

First place went Berkley School of Law, second went to Southwestern, and third went to Chapman. The National competition will be held in Texas in February.

If you are interested in trying out for ADR email adr@tjsl.edu. If you attended one of the three information meetings, get ready, because ADR tryouts are set for Saturday, November 15th!

As the semester quickly winds down, and we plunge into finals, let’s recap on the wide world of TJ intramural sports. It was an exciting football season full of broken fingers and dynamic plays, but in the end it was 3-Peat that took the championship title. 3-Peat looked like the 1972 Miami Dolphins, dominating the competition and going undefeated. This was 3-Peat’s second championship, as they went back-to-back in hopes of living up to their name and winning again next season.

Now that football has wrapped up, what some consider real futbol has begun. Soccer kicked off right after football finished, and it has picked up right where football left off in the competition department. There is a fiery competition between a few of the Thomas Jefferson soccer teams that carries back to last season. Team America and the TJSL Stallions are full of 3L’s looking to win big and take the crown in their final intramural season. Despite the fierce competition between the Thomas Jefferson teams, Cal West is dominating the standings for the time being, as both of their teams are locked into first and second place half way through the season. There is still plenty of time for all the teams to turn it around, limp into the playoffs, and take down the championship. Good luck the rest of the way.

Soccer is the last sport that will be played this semester, so work on your jump shot over break and be ready for basketball next semester. Good luck to everyone on finals, study hard and kill it.