Category: News Feeds

Ed. note: This is the latest installment in a series of posts on motherhood in the legal profession, in partnership with our friends at MothersEsquire. Welcome Emma Smoler to our pages.

When I was younger and announced that I wanted to be a “lawyer and a mom,” conventional wisdom of the day offered this timeline: Go to college, get into law school, land a good job, save money, get married, have a kid.  In that order.  Obviously, nothing is guaranteed, least of all when it comes to having children.  But, practically speaking, it makes sense to get the J.D. before the K.I.D.  Or does it?

I had my daughter while I was in the thick of law school, which meant I was piling up a lot of debt, had no job to pay off that debt (save for a $10/hour research position), and my experience consisted of changing diapers and burping my new assistant.  Somewhere between legal writing assignments and studying for Civil Procedure, I found myself in the labor and delivery unit at Prentice Hospital in Chicago, Illinois.  I was the token pregnant law school student: I graduated on time, and I lived to tell about it.

“How irresponsible,” a person might say to a woman who makes this choice.  Actually, some did.  And yet, men routinely get praised for taking leaps of faith, investing in a future they can’t quite see yet, and having unshakeable confidence in their abilities.  I had male classmates who were married, living on loans, with pregnant wives at home, and no one questioned their choices.  I guess I did not see why I had to put off being a parent if I felt ready at that time.  And so, I didn’t.

Looking back on those somewhat chaotic years, I sometimes wonder how I managed to stay sane and optimistic about my future until I realize that it was precisely because I was young, broke, and inexperienced, that I was open-minded enough to eschew the traditional career model and take a chance on the unknown.  While this path may not be for everyone, I hope that, in sharing my experiences, I can contribute to a dialogue in which working parenthood is normalized, and we explore the many options that lead to a similar outcome.

Here is the good, the bad, and the ugly of what I call the “reverse course career plan.”

The Ugly

Setting aside the inherent ugliness of leaking through my shirt at the end of a three-hour exam, the ugliest part of having a baby in law school was the judgment I felt, whether it was actually happening, or a specter of my own insecurities.  I will never forget the time I waddled into a classroom, hugely pregnant, and the male professor looked at me with confusion and asked, “What on earth are you doing here?”  It may have been an innocent question, but it hurt, and in response, I showed him exactly what I was doing there.  I got an A in his class.  Also ugly were the nights at home when I fell asleep, face first into a law book, while the baby screamed, my husband stressed, and the diapers overflowed the waste bin.  I have since learned that the first few months of new parenthood can be ugly, regardless of the circumstances.  Thankfully, the adjustment period is temporary.

The Bad

The obvious reason for not having a child in law school is that unless you are independently wealthy, it is going to be financially difficult.  Notice, I did not say impossible. When my daughter was an infant, the baby magazines/blogs made me feel inadequate because my shoestring budget prevented me from getting anything but the essentials (which is all babies need, really).  I pined for those cute leather moccasins hawked by a Kardashian, a high-tech stroller, or a baby swing that wasn’t thrifted.  I didn’t sign up for the organized play groups, and a lot of my daughter’s play time was spent rolling on the floor while I studied.  But it wasn’t the worst thing in the world, because I got to spend time with my daughter while at home studying; she survived and thrived, and we are both better for it today.  My tight finances caused me to maintain a laser focus on the task(s) at hand, and the difficult times eventually gave way to easier routines.

The Good

I wish I could tie this up with a pretty bow and report that I effortlessly jumped back onto my desired career path.  But that did not happen right away.  Instead, I watched from the sidelines as my childfree peers advanced far past me, and deservedly so.  I took a number of lower-paying, flex-time jobs.  Looking back now, that flexibility allowed me to have precious time with my daughter, even though I wasn’t advancing on a traditional career ladder.  I didn’t get back into my groove until my mid-thirties, when, coincidentally, many of my lawyer peers were just starting their journey into motherhood.  I look at my friends’ baby photos and part of me wishes I were right there with them, but then again, I am enjoying my thirties with older kids, and that’s also fun.  At the end of the day, no mom can be everything simultaneously, no matter how many magazines or blogs try to convince us otherwise.  It is all a matter of perspective, and you gain a lot of that if you have a baby in law school.

So, here is my perspective today: I am the mother of a witty 11-year-old girl who helped me choose an outfit for my last job interview.  She was in the car with me when I got the call, offering me the job.  We screamed together.  She understood exactly how important this goal was for me, because she was there every step of the way.  As I watch her excel in school, advocate for her friends, stand up against bullies, and speak her mind in class, I would be honored to think that my example played a small part.  I asked my daughter if it was okay to mention her in this article, and her only comment was, “Be sure to disclose that you technically had two brains when you took exams when you were pregnant.”  For the record, it was a serious advantage.

Earlier: Mothers At Law: Achieving Meaningful Success In The Legal Profession

Emma Smoler is a trial attorney in Chicago, Illinois. She graduated from the John Marshall Law School in Chicago in 2009. Emma has served as lead counsel in dozens of jury trials, achieving millions of dollars in settlements and verdicts for her clients. During law school, while also mother of a young child, Emma interned at the Office of the Cook County Public Defender, in the felony trial division. Emma credits that experience with providing her the wherewithal to handle complex legal issues, patience in adversarial environments, and a deep compassion for her clients. When she is not in the courtroom, Emma enjoys long distance running, and bluegrass music.

Move fast and flood things! Clearly that’s the motto of the pack of wall-mounters trying to build the GoFundMe border barrier on the banks of the Rio Grande. We Build the Wall, a Florida group, led by veteran Brian Kolfage, a triple amputee from Arizona whose heroic reputation took a hit after his accounts got banned from Facebook for finding THIS ONE WEIRD TRICK to monetize fake news, hopes to raise a billion dollars to build Trump’s wall. They’ve got the backing of Steve Bannon, Kris Kobach, and a bunch of skeevy dudes who think they’re all that stands between America and Taco Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. So, call now with your bank routing number!

Fresh off a rousing success in New Mexico jamming in a fence and dealing with the permits and massive community objection after the fact, the group set its sights on the fragile ecosystem of Texas’s Lower Rio Grande Valley. Because the only way to make America great again is by clearcutting a three-mile stretch of river bank and slapping up an 18-foot barrier in a floodplain, of course. And they would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren’t for a bunch of badass butterfly enthusiasts delivering a dose of Texas justice.

DON’T MESS WITH THE LEPIDOPTERISTS, MAN. It never goes well.

On Tuesday, Hidalgo County District Judge Keno Vasquez issued a temporary restraining order to halt construction on a privately owned sugarcane farm next to the National Butterfly Center nature preserve. Because — if you’re stupid enough to erect a giant dam 25 feet away from the Rio Grande in the floodplain — your neighbors get flooded, too.

As local activist and researcher Scott Nicol told the Texas Observer, “If their wall goes up beside the Rio Grande, it will dam water, it will likely collapse and be swept away and the resulting tangle of twisted bollards will put lives and property downriver at risk. … Their publicity stunt could kill people.”

Or maybe Big Butterfly is just in bed with the Sinaloa cartel!

When asked about the TRO by the Washington Post, Kolfage initially accused reporters of making the whole thing up, saying, “I would put a 50/50 chance this is fake news, and if it’s not it will be crushed legally pretty fast.”

On Tuesday, he tweeted a video by “Foreman Mike” promising that fencing would start going up in 48 hours.

Alas, Fisher Industries, Trump’s favorite construction company out of North Dakota, which was miraculously awarded a border wall contract by the U.S. government despite the Army Corps of Engineers saying the design didn’t meet government standards, had other ideas. The company says it won’t begin construction in Texas until the International Boundary and Water Commission signs off, and the judge lifts the TRO.

They must be IN ON IT, TOO!

The next hearing is in two weeks, which is probably not enough time for the trees to grow back after Foreman Mike ripped out all the vegetation holding the riverbank in place. As the Texas Observer notes, “In 2008, the Bush administration bought riparian land in Starr County for a wall, but the property vanished into the river during a 2010 flood.” Maybe these carpetbagging geniuses from Arizona, North Dakota, and Kansas could take a break from scream-tweeting pictures of desperate migrants and Google “Texas” + “rainy season” + “floodplain” before their next court appearance. But probably NOT.

Elizabeth Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

* George Zimmerman is suing the family of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer for $100 Million over statements made in a new book. Good luck recovering that. [USA Today]

* A Massachusetts lawyer has been criminally charged and suspended from practice for defrauding clients and lenders of millions of dollars. [Mass Live]

* Melania Trump said that the law professor who invoked Barron Trump’s name at an impeachment hearing “should be ashamed” of her words. [Fox News]

* A Philadelphia lawyer has been disbarred for laundering money for an organized crime family. This attorney took being a consigliere way too far. [Philadelphia Inquirer]

* Sidley Austin and a number of other law firms are being sued for allegedly aiding a Ponzi schemer. [Courthouse News Service]

* Rep. Devin Nunes is suing CNN for $435 Million over allegedly defamatory statements. Wonder if the suit was filed in a state with an anti-SLAPP law… [USA Today]

Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

Today, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) in partnership with United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women (UN Women) illuminated the Rotten Row Magistrates Court in orange – a colour which symbolizes hope and a brighter future, free of violence. It also serves as a means of demonstrating solidarity in eliminating all forms of violence and it is therefore used as the colour of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women.

As part of the commemoration of 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-based Violence under the global theme Orange the World: Generation Equality Stands Against Rape for 2019, the Harare Magistrates Court joins a list of iconic buildings and monuments that have been lit in orange to call for a violence-free future.

The Rotten Row Magistrates Court represents the largest case load of rape a month that pass through the judicial system. By illuminating the court orange during the 16 Days of Activism, the Judicial Service Commission will send a message of its commitment to deliver timely and victim-friendly justice to cases of rape and other gender-based crimes.

Speaking at the event, UN Resident Coordinator, Ms. Maria Ribeiro said, “Without the courts following through with their legislated mandate of swift justice, by enforcing sentencing and ensuring access to the court systems especially for cases of rape and sexual violence, we shall continue to experience the unfortunate impact.”

This event will also mark the beginning of collaborative efforts between UN Women and the Harare Magistrates Court to display educative information on rape and gender-based crimes through the Court’s broadcasts on every 25th day of the month for the coming one year.

Spaces in which women feel safe are shrinking while gender- blind spots in policy implementation and legislation are threatening women’s security making them vulnerable to rape, assault and killing. The increase in cases of rape, assault and abuse of women has been reported in so many spaces and institutions that include churches, schools and workplaces. This therefore calls for accelerated cooperation among different stakeholders.

The commissioning of 16 Days at the Harare Magistrates Court is an intervention that falls under the joint EU-UN Spotlight Initiative programme in Zimbabwe, which is harnessing the financial commitment of the European Union to the tune of USD 34 million to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls in 23 districts in the provinces of Mashonaland Central, Mashonaland West, Manicaland, Matabeleland South, and Harare.

Speaking at the event EU Deputy Ambassador, Mr Thomas von Handel said, “Ending Sexual and Gender Based Violence and harmful practices is a joint responsibility. The EU joins the call to action to act swiftly and decisively act against rape and all other forms of violence against women and girls! We must put an end to all kinds of abuse to reach equality and peace and protect the human rights of millions of women and girls.”

The Spotlight Initiative is being implemented by the UN in partnership with the Ministry of Women Affairs, Community, Small and Medium Enterprises Development and civil society organisations. It endeavours to ensure that all women and girls benefit from adequate legislation and policies, gender responsive institutions, violence prevention programmes, essential services, comparable and reliable data, and strong women’s movements and civil society organisations.

16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence is an annual international campaign that kicks off on 25 November, the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and runs until 10 December, Human Rights Day.

In support of this campaign, under the leadership of the UN Secretary-General, stakeholders across the world call for global action to increase awareness, galvanize advocacy efforts, and share knowledge and innovations.

Post published in: Featured

The American Mega Millions lottery offers the biggest jackpot prize in the world: $285 million USD. That huge amount, which is up for grabs on Friday night, has captured the attention of lottery fans all over the world and amazingly, the winner of this enormous prize could be someone from Zimbabwe.

You may remember that Mega Millions awarded a $1.537 billion USD jackpot to a single, lucky winner in October 2018. The current jackpot is not yet setting records, but winning a $285 million prize would certainly be a life-changer!

There is no need for you to travel to the United States to take a chance on winning the great Mega Millions jackpot. It is possible to play the game by purchasing official Mega Millions tickets online at theLotter.com.

Here’s how you could win a $285 million jackpot from Zimbabwe:

1. Sign up at theLotter.com, the world’s leading online lottery ticket purchasing service.
2. Select the Mega Millions lottery from over 50 lotteries available on the site.
3. Fill out your ticket with your favorite numbers, or use a computer-generated random selection.
4. Indicate how many lines you want to play, or choose to play with a lottery syndicate to increase your chances of winning.
5. Confirm your ticket purchase and you’re eligible to win prizes in the upcoming draw.

How theLotter works

TheLotter is a lottery ticket messenger service. TheLotter uses local agents in the United States to buy official lottery tickets on behalf of its customers from all over the world. A small surcharge is added to ticket prices in order to cover the cost of this service. A copy of the ticket is uploaded to a customer’s account before the draw and along with the site’s email confirmation, customers can rest assured that they have full ownership of their tickets.

At theLotter, customers can purchase tickets to the world’s biggest lotteries including Mega Millions, Powerball, EuroMillions, the Italian SuperEnalotto, EuroJackpot, and more. TheLotter provides a dedicated support team, available 24/7, to help customers with any concerns.

What happens when you win

When you win a lottery jackpot prize at theLotter, the entire amount is yours! No commissions are deducted from winning tickets. Winnings are transferred to your secure, private account and you can withdraw them at any time. If you win a lottery jackpot, however, you many need to travel to the lottery’s offices to collect the prize money yourself. In this case, a lawyer provided to you by theLotter free of charge will assist you in the win collection process.

Over the years, theLotter has paid out more than $97 million in prizes to over 5 million winners from across the globe. The biggest winners at the site have included a woman from Panama who won $30 million playing the Florida Lotto, and a man from Iraq who won a $6.4 million Oregon Megabucks jackpot.

The $285 million Mega Millions jackpot could be won at any time and the next draw is coming up soon. It is totally possible for the next big lottery prize winner to be a resident of Zimbabwe!

For more information how to play Mega Millions online from Zimbabwe, please visit theLotter.com.

Post published in: Featured

— Imani Gandy, senior legal analyst at Rewire, with the reaction shared by a lot of people upon hearing the news that George Zimmerman is suing, inter alia, the parents of Trayvon Martin. Also on the receiving end of Zimmerman’s legal ire is Martin family attorney, Ben Crump; Florida prosecutors Bernie de la Rionda, John Guy, and Angela Corey; trial witness Rachel Jeantel; book publisher HarperCollins; the Florida Department of Law Enforcement; and the state of Florida. The lawsuit alleges widespread “witness fraud,” claiming prosecution witness Rachel Jeantel is “an imposter and fake witness” as detailed in the new film The Trayvon Hoax: Unmasking the Witness Fraud that Divided America.

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

In an essay in the Wall Street Journal, a physician took the medical profession to task for its habit of providing laser-focused disease treatment, while essentially ignoring other needs of the chronically ill. Dr. Arthur Kleinman, a Harvard professor as well as a physician, says in “Treating Disease Is No Substitute for Caring for the Ill” that far too often patients with chronic illnesses are left to fend for themselves to navigate the system. “Disease demands treatment while illness calls out for care,” Kleinman says. He knows whereof he speaks; his wife had Alzheimer’s.

Those with chronic illnesses (nod in agreement if you are one of us, and, yes, I am in that category) often feel as if they are “chopped liver.” (It doesn’t matter whether you like chopped liver or loathe it, you get the point.)

You may be surprised — or maybe not — to read that half of adult Americans have at least one chronic disease.

I wonder if we treat clients in the same way that the medical profession handles disease. Do we hone in on the big money-making cases to the detriment of matters which, while not as lucrative, provide legal knowledge and advice that clients can use in ongoing situations?

I also wonder if clients look at us in the same way that Dr. Kleinman looked at his own profession while seeking help for his ailing wife. If he had trouble, imagine what it is like for us. It’s ironic that he was in the same predicament that nonmedical people face all the time when trying to figure out how to manage a chronic illness.

Lawyers are front and center for our clients when a crisis needs our immediate and all-consuming attention, but when the crisis fades or dies out, when we have won or lost, do we forget to pay attention to a client’s ongoing needs, however mundane they may be? I think a lot of us do, as we may well be more concerned with the big deal or the company lawsuit (and it doesn’t have to be a big company for corporate existence to hang in the balance. Exhibit A is a wage and hour judgment that can and does bankrupt a business).

We are more concerned with outcomes, with results, with numbers than with a client’s ongoing legal needs, prosaic or not so. It’s no surprise that what the client regards as nothing more than a legal hangnail can morph into something far more serious and business-threatening unless attention is paid.

Perhaps some chronic illnesses can be prevented (don’t smoke, drink in moderation, eat healthy, exercise, the usual litany of dos and don’ts), but not all. However, we as lawyers can practice preventive law if the client understands the cost-benefit analysis.

It is, essentially, the client’s risk assessment. How to explain that to the client with the hope that the client is willing to prevent future legal troubles? And if the client is willing, but the lawyer’s response is of the “We’ll get to it when we can” variety — in other words, putting the matter in the “stall box” — then how does the client feel? I think the chopped liver comparison is spot on.

How do we instill in clients the concept that preventive law is good business?  How do we instill that in ourselves as well?

Sometimes it’s too late to prevent the damage, and all that the lawyer can do is stabilize the situation and minimize whatever damage has already been done, to triage. Not an easy task.

Early every January, my tax organizer arrives from my CPA (shudder). The first few pages compose a checklist, asking about any changes since the last year. How many lawyers do something similar for their clients? I would hazard a guess that it’s not enough. How many lawyers use such a checklist as a business development tool? I would imagine not many.

Just like physicians, we focus on solving problems. But, as Kleinman points out, we often just give our clients the bare bones, if that, of what they need.

Many times customers would come into a bank branch, plop down a bunch of documents without a clue as to what they meant or how to use them in their businesses. They expected the branch to give them the advice they sought from lawyers and didn’t get. Not our job, we told them. It is the job of the lawyer to explain what they have and why. It’s like having a chronic condition that needs care but doesn’t get it.

I don’t think that clients get the attention they need. It may be better for the lawyer to wait until a matter blows up, but is that the way it should be? We are in a helping profession, so let’s help and not leave them to navigate by their lonesome.

Jill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for over 40 years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She’s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact — it’s not always civil. You can reach her by email at oldladylawyer@gmail.com.