PAID PE - San Antonio Bar Association
Transcription
PAID PE - San Antonio Bar Association
March-April 2010 Charles L. Smith What Small Businesses Need to Know about Insurance Law Judge Mary D. Román Supreme Court Justice Tom C. Clark T E X A S SAN ANTONIO PERMIT 324 PAID US POSTAGE PRST STD March-April 10 6 Departments Features 6 10 Charles L. Smith By Thomas H. Crofts, Jr. 14 16 Judge Mary D. Román By Amanda Reimherr Buckert 19 Three Reasons to Write for the ABA By Wendy Gerwick Couture 10 What Small Businesses Need to Know about Insurance Law By Thomas H. Veitch Supreme Court Justice Tom C. Clark: A Life of Service By Vincent R. Johnson 5 9 20 President’s Page Have Things Changed? By Carl Robin Teague eFiling in Texas Courts By Justice Rebecca Simmons Federal Court Update By Hon. Nancy Stein Nowak and Nissa M. Dunn 14 16 On the Cover: Charles L. “Charlie” Smith, former president of both the State Bar of Texas and the San Antonio Bar Association. Pictured with his infamous blue chair. Photo courtesy of Hugh Leighton McWilliams Photography. San Antonio Lawyer is an official publication of the San Antonio Bar Association. Send address changes to the Bar Association address above. Views expressed in San Antonio Lawyer are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the San Antonio Bar Association. Publication of an advertisement does not imply endorsement of any product or service. Contributions to San Antonio Lawyer are welcome, but the right is reserved to select materials to be published. Please send all correspondence to [email protected]. Copyright ©2010 San Antonio Bar Association. All rights reserved San Antonio Lawyer 3 March-April 2010 Lawyer 47th annual criminal law institute San Antonio The San Antonio Bar Association 100 Dolorosa, San Antonio, Texas 78205 210.227.8822 Fax: 210.271.9614 Officers/Directors President Carl Robin Teague President-Elect Justice Phylis J. Speedlin Vice President Gary W. Hutton Secretary Andrew L. Kerr Treasurer Justice Rebecca Simmons Immediate Past President Victor H. Negrón, Jr. Directors Priscilla D. Camacho Kristal Cordova Thomson C. Lee Cusenbary Annalyn G. Smith Beth Squires David Stephenson George A. Taylor James M. “Marty” Truss Mexican American Bar Association Dayla Sarai Pepi San Antonio Bar Foundation Jennifer Gibbins Durbin San Antonio Young Lawyers Association Murray H. Van Eman State Bar of Texas Directors Lamont A. Jefferson Allan K. DuBois Bexar County Women’s Bar Association Christine E. Reinhard March 26-27, 2010 DoubleTree Hotel San Antonio, Texas Executive Director Jimmy Allison San Antonio Black Lawyers Association Sonja D. Sims Editors Editor in Chief Hon. Barbara Nellermoe Managing Editor Kim Palmer Articles Editor Sara Murray Departments Editor Leslie Sara Hyman MCLE: 11.75 hours, 2.0 hours ethics Board of Editors Hon. Barbara Hanson Nellermoe, Chair Pat H. Autry, Vice-Chair Sherry M. Barnash Donald S. Bayne Barry H. Beer Bridgett G. Braumbaugh Charles Butts Priscilla Camacho Rudy Castillo Gayla Corley Paul Curl Antoinette Delgado Nancy L. Farrer Stephen H. Gordon Brian C. Hamilton Per Hardy Sam Houston Paul Robert Killen James H. Kizziar Rob Loree Ed Marvin Amy McLin Hugh McWilliams Curt Moy Steve Peirce Donald R. Philbin Rob Ramsey Regina L. Stone-Harris Brent Sykora Katherine A. Tapley Johnny Thomas Elena Villasenor Nationwide Publishing SA 1922 Great Ridge, San Antonio, TX 78248 (210) 381-7664 Publisher - Ron L. Hogue [email protected] Legal Media Production and Photography ● Video Depositions/Forensic Videography ● High-Speed Synchronization ● Mediation Settlement Brochures ● Editing–Linear & Non Linear ● Videography/Photography ● MPEG-1/CD/DVD Conversion ● Video Duplication ● Multi-Camera Video Shoots ● Court Playback ● Slides/Negatives/Prints ● Equipment Rental ● Available for Travel 210-410-0125 [email protected] Proudly Serving Our Legal Community for Over 20 Years Layout by Kim Palmer Managing Editor, San Antonio Bar Association San Antonio Lawyer 4 March-April 2010 By Carl Robin Teague H erb is at the copier. He has been copying for awhile. I am standing next to him. He makes another 25 copies of a page from the brief and hands them to me. I take them to the long office hallway. There, waiting for me, are Colleen and some others. They take the copies and start walking the hallway, dropping a page on top of each of the 25 piles of paper there. (This procedure is repeated over and over.) Our copier is not equipped with a collator/sorter or automatic feeder, so we have to copy pages one at a time. Collators and automatic feeders haven’t been invented yet. This is 1973. I return to Herb and the copier. We’re assembling a brief in Southwest Airlines v. Braniff. Herb Kelleher is General Counsel for Southwest. Colleen Barrett his secretary (who 11/26/07 7:00 PM is Page 1 later became president of Southwest). Herb asks, “How’d you like to buy some Southwest stock?” I reply, “I’d like to but I don’t have any money.” (My baby lawyer salary is $13,200!) Unfazed, Herb says, “I’ll loan you $5,000 to buy the stock. It’s selling for $2 a share.” He doesn’t change my mind: “I don’t think this is the time for me to go into debt. Thank you, though.” (I owe a student loan, and have a wife and young child.) He returns to his copying. I don’t realize I just left millions on the table. Lunch for partners was often at the St. Anthony Club. Jesse, Stanley, Herb Law Office of Appeals Briefed/Argued Error Preservation Dispositive Motions Original Proceedings Jury Charges Research and Seagal were fixtures there during lunchtime. Stanley insisted on a table near a phone jack so someone could bring him a phone if he received a call from a client. I miss the St. Anthony. The office of Oppenheimer, Rosenberg, Kelleher & Wheatley operated about 24/7/365. At night, Herb and Colleen often would take young lawyers still at the office to the St. Anthony, arriving as late as 9. A three piece jazz band would be playing. After dinner, they would all return to the office to continue working. We did not have computers or high speed printers. Most of the secretaries had IBM Selectric II typewriters. If they were fortunate, the typewriter had self correcting tape; otherwise, they practically drowned in liquid paper. Eventually, we added MTSTs and IBM Mag Card machines. The MTSTs required a tower with shelves for storing data tape cassettes about the size of an 8-track tape. Mag Cards used a flat magnetic card instead of a tape to store data. To prepare documents, Reese Harrison used a device with two rollers, around which a magnetic tape belt rotated. His dictation was stored on the belt. Jesse preferred dictating directly to his secretary, who would transcribe from handwritten short hand. I hand wrote all documents. That is the way Herb did it and his way was good enough for me. Years later, after wearing out my writing hand, I forced myself to use dictation Jeff Small Civil Appeals Litigation Support Appellate Mediation 210.496.0611 Flexible Arrangements (Hourly, Contingency, Flat Fee) Not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization [email protected] f: 210.579.1399 San Antonio Lawyer 5 March-April 2010 equipment. I still have not used voice recognition software that automatically transcribes from the dictation. If copies were needed, we used carbon paper. The invention of multiple-page carbon sets, which did not require assembly, was a big deal. Some lawyers still used onion skin. The probate courts required “blue backs” for each document filed. My last day at ORK&W was April Fool’s Day 1985. I leased space from Bob Price and Cheryl Wilson, on S. Presa Street. Soon after I arrived, Bob and I went shopping for word-processing equipment. We each bought AT&T 6300 computers and thought we were avant garde. Years later, when I bought an IBM 286, I asked the salesman to compare the 6300 to the 286. His reply? The 6300 was so slow it would not even appear on a comparison chart. On trips, I used an AT&T “calling card.” It made me feel like a big shot, compared to others who were calling collect and carrying change for the pay telephone. I got my first cell phone about four years ago, only after friends and colleagues complained about difficulty finding me. Now I can’t do without it. After much resistance, I have finally learned how to send and receive emails. Whoever taught me created a monster. I am now on my third lap top, first server, and a netbook for travel. And I’m still trying to catch up. I don’t even have a Blackberry. I won’t get one. Do I seem old to you? Careful. Carl Robin Teague is engaged in the solo practice of law, at his office in San Antonio, from which he focuses on products liability, personal injury and business litigation in Central, South, West, and East Texas. He graduated from UT Austin in 1970, and from St. Mary’s University School of Law in 1973. He is in his 36th year of practicing law, and is the president of the San Antonio Bar Association, and its representative to the ABA House of Delegates. President’s Page ff Ad Have Things Changed? Charles L. Smith By Thomas H. Crofts, Jr. After Thomas Jefferson High School, Charlie Smith applied his aforesaid baseball prowess as a Texas A & M corpsman (and teammate of a future Dodger great, Wally Moon) in the early fifties, graduating in 1953. This was problematic for him in one sense. Over the next halfcentury plus (and counting), he has not quite been able to kick the habit of wagering that Aggie teams would vanquish his sporting colleagues’ alma maters. Fortunately, Charlie’s fortune has not been tied too tightly to the illusory prospects of an Aggie odds-maker. Charlie’s 1953 return to San Antonio for law school commenced not only a remarkable legal career that shows no sign of slowing down, but also the matrimonial union with his likewise-accomplished and much lovelier helpmate Ann Smith (nee Ann McRoberts, who rumor says he had his eye on since crashing a high school party at her house). Taking well to the legal curriculum, Charlie graduated from St. Mary’s University School of Law magna cum laude in 1955. But with his license in hand, Charlie had to put his law practice on hold for two years, while he was on assignment in Korea with the United States Army. How many former presidents of both the State Bar of Texas and the San Antonio Bar Association can you name who could expertly demonstrate from experience how a pitcher grips a screwball differently from a slider or a curveball? You may not be able to name one, but if you have practiced law in San Antonio during the past fifty-two years, chances are you know one — Charles L. Smith. Friends and acquaintances call him “Charlie.” To some of the youngsters at Groce, Locke & Hebdon in the late 70s and 80s, he was also known as “the Cheese” (as in “The Big Cheese”) — with good reason. But that’s getting ahead of the story. When he mustered out as a Captain in 1957, Charlie landed a job in San Antonio as an apprentice to one of the most brilliant lawyers in town — Carlos C. Cadena (later to become Chief Justice of the Fourth Court of Appeals). From 1954 to 1961, Judge Cadena was San Antonio’s City Attorney, and, by that time, he had already demonstrated the stature that would ultimately make him an icon in the San Antonio legal community.1 Charlie served as an Assistant City Attorney for two-and-one-half years. With trial experience under his belt, Charlie joined the firm of Groce and Hebdon in 1960, which later became Groce, Hebdon, Fahey and Smith. Only four years later, he was named the Outstanding Young Man of the Year by the San Antonio Junior Chamber of Commerce. Besides the invaluable mentoring of Josh H. Groce (a noted stalwart of the Texas trial bar), Charlie gained the close friendship of Jack Hebdon, with whom he shared the rewards and tribulations of a long-term law partnership and the management reins of what grew (after the 1973 merger with Kelso, Locke, and Lepick) into one of the largest San Antonio law firms — Groce, Locke & Hebdon.2 In the salad days of the 1970s and 80s, Charlie’s insurance defense work made him a fixture at docket call, where between announcements he masterfully worked the crowd. Affable by nature, he befriended opposing counsel, jurors, bailiffs and court clerks — not to mention judges. Charlie could get away with teasing Judges Charles Barrow and Robert Murray about poor showings on the links and with feigning innocence when Judge Cadena accused him (tongue-in-cheek, I’m sure) of leading trial judges into error. You couldn’t accompany Charlie to lunch at Luby’s without enduring numerous stops along the way for him to visit with someone he knew. It says something about Charlie that he can be found regularly lunching at Schilo’s with good friend Jack Pasqual, who back in the day was a major nemesis on the opposite side of the courtroom. Behind Charlie’s charm lies the mind of a skilled strategist. It is this characteristic that won with juries, that garnered the respect of judges, San Antonio Lawyer 6 March-April 2010 and that endeared him to clients. He was probably the first candidate for State Bar President who utilized diagrammed wallmaps of Texas geography and color-coded pins to leave no vote unasked-for in his successful 1984 campaign for PresidentElect. During the next year, President Smith led the Bar through one of the most profound changes in its history — the adoption of mandatory Minimum Continuing Legal Education. Charlie’s belief in the merit of this then-controversial idea did produce some dissident sarcasm (like “thanks a lot, Charlie”), but twentyfive years later, there can be no doubt that his work for the passage of MCLE was right on target. Thanks a lot, Charlie.3 In-house in the 1970s and early 80s, gentleman Jack Hebdon was the man in charge, but Charlie Smith was the handson boss. He carried out this authority with a low-key but determined exactitude. It cannot be said that Charlie’s partners agreed with each of his management decisions. But who could quarrel with innovations like two-gender/multi-ethnic hiring and enlisting professional legal assistants? In assigning work, Charlie strived to promote efficient organization of litigation files among specialized practice groups. For example, it was his idea that inaugurated the first law firm appellate practice section in San Antonio.4 Charlie’s supervision of the associate ranks at Groce, Locke & Hebdon is the stuff of legend. The storied details of the relationship are beyond the scope of this report, but one memory stands out as illustrative of his position. In the mid 70s, we down-trodden associates were invited periodically to attend the opening segment of the partners’ weekly meetings. Seizing the opportunity, we customarily gathered on the meeting-eve in a small dining room above the Esquire Bar (“the Upper Room”) to formulate a bill of grievances for presentation the next morning when Charlie asked, “Does any associate have something to say?” Thanks to a waiter’s repeated trips up from the bar, eloquent responses were inevitably articulated the night before. But in the sober light of Charlie’s penetrating gaze, they usually were voiced in a few awkward stammers and meek “no sirs.” His ritual conclusion was to ask if we had enough work (I don’t recall his ever asking if we had too much) before dismissing us from the conference room. As things boomed in the 1980s, Charlie had his hands full with the addition of many bright new litigation hires. With them, somebody had to be the “big cheese,” and he was it. Charlie in his A&M baseball days at Kyle Field Most who began under Charlie’s wing would say that his guidance had an unforgettable impact. Charlie was a about them and to greet them warmly. Is it any wonder, then, that Charlie good teacher (certain questions should always be asked of a deponent and has been honored widely and repeatedly? certain things should not be disclosed in The recognitions he has acquired would negotiations). He praised fine work and take a separate edition to enumerate. helped constructively with mistakes. Best Here are just a few: of all, he became a friend who inspired • Lola Wright Foundation Award by caring deeply for his law firm and from the Texas Bar Foundation for the well-being of its lawyers and staff. Outstanding Public Service in the Charlie enthusiastically rallied the troops Enhancement of Legal Ethics; as coach of the firm’s winning softball teams. He and Ann hosted delightful • Lifetime Achievement Award by retreats at the Smith family’s McQueeney St. Mary’s University School of Law; lake house.5 He still has an absolutely uncanny knack for remembering the • Distinguished Law Alumnus names, faces, and situations of spouses, by the Law Alumni Association of children, and significant others, and he St. Mary’s University; always goes out of his way to inquire Judge Cadena taught at St. Mary’s University School of Law for several years before becoming City Attorney. During that time, he argued and won a landmark case in the United States Supreme Court, which established that people could not be excluded from jury service because of national origin. More details can be found in successor Chief Justice Phil Hardberger’s memorial tribute to Judge Cadena published in Volume 62 of the Southwestern Reporter Third Series. 2 In the summer of 1973, this writer applied for a job with the newly formed firm and happily accepted Charlie’s offer to become Groce, Locke & Hebdon’s first associate hire and twentieth attorney (after he deftly negotiated me down from my stated salary requirement). The firm’s size steadily grew to more than one hundred lawyers in 1990. 3 Charles L. Smith’s major State Bar contributions also include two periods of service on the Board of Directors, including the chairmanship in 1980-81. He was on the Board when another landmark event occurred in 1984 -- the adoption of IOLTA. He has also chaired the Commission on Judicial Conduct, as well as the Commission for Lawyer Discipline, and has served on the Board of Disciplinary Appeals. 4 As a result, this writer was converted in the mid-70’s from the latest stint of questionable service in each of the other sections to become the original head of the appellate section (and, for a while, the foot as well). 5 Speaking of family, Charlie and Ann’s own offspring should be recognized. Both Jimmy and Larry were drafted into the law firm’s courier cadre at various times in their teenage and young adult years. Jimmy (Dr. James Smith), who now practices medicine in New Orleans, and wife Monica are the parents of Austin and George. Larry (Lawrence D. Smith) followed the footsteps to law school (SMU), and, having begun his employment-law practice as an associate at Groce, Locke & Hebdon, is now a San Antonio partner in Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart. Larry and wife Kim are the parents of Timothy, Zander, and David. Holly Smith, Charlie and Ann’s daughter, has a career in education for children with special needs. 1 San Antonio Lawyer 7 March-April 2010 • Joe Frazier Brown Award by the San Antonio Bar Association for Outstanding Leadership and Service to Legal Profession and Citizens of Texas; • Carol Lomax Memorial Award by San Antonio Chapter of American Board of Trial Advocates for Exemplary Integrity, Civility and Professionalism; • Outstanding 50-Year Lawyer Award by the Texas Bar Foundation; and • Attorney of the Year by the Texas Aggie Bar Association. Meanwhile, Charlie has litigated more than three hundred jury trials and has handled thousands of all kind of cases. Most things change, of course. Groce, Locke & Hebdon merged with Jenkens & Gilchrist in 1996. Jenkens & Gilchrist ceased to exist in 2007. Now, Charlie is Senior Counsel at Jackson Walker, L.L.P. But otherwise, he does not seem Thomas H. Crofts, Jr. left to have changed all that Groce, Locke & Hebdon in 1991, along with two much. Look on page 8 of your colleagues, to form Crofts, September 2009 Subpoena Callaway & Jefferson as (Vol. LXXXV Number 2). a civil appellate practice There you will see a dapper firm. The firm continues Charles L. Smith holding as Crofts & Callaway his new Community Justice under the leadership of Program file and facing Sharon E. Callaway, with Tom Crofts as “Of the camera with a broad Counsel.” Wallace B. Jefferson was appointed to smile alongside his current the Supreme Court of Texas in 2000 and is now the State’s elected Chief Justice. young protégés. San Antonio Lawyer 8 Above: Charlie with wife Ann at the American Embassy in Paris, during his term as Texas State Bar President. Below: The entire family in Hawaii for Charlie and Ann’s 50th wedding anniversary. March-April 2010 By Justice Rebecca Simmons T exas courts have long struggled with processing the enormous quantities of paper filed every day by attorneys. Even in light of steps taken to limit the discovery filed with the trial court, the court clerks are overwhelmed with the state’s judicial paper trail. The Texas Supreme Court Judicial Committee on Information Technology (JCIT)1 is working on a strategic plan to make electronic filing for both trial courts and appellate courts available statewide within the next decade. Electronic filing, or eFiling, has now been available in some counties for over five years. Currently, 300 courts in thirty-nine counties have eFiling available, and the implementation of eFiling is growing. Courts accept the eFiling of original petitions, as well as pleadings and motions in civil, family, and probate cases. eFiling offers a means to stem the paper tide and save attorneys and the state time and money. This article is designed to answer some questions and, hopefully, alleviate any concerns about the growing adoption of eFiling. How are documents electronically filed? In December 2001, JCIT approved an electronic filing strategy that employs TexasOnline, the official Texas electronic government portal (ww.texas.gov). TexasOnline serves as the hub for the state’s Electronic Filing Manager (EFM), interfacing with each participating county and city and with each participating Electronic Filing Service Provider (EFSP) in the open market. Requirements for an attorney to eFile a document include a computer, a word processor, and Adobe Reader software (which can be downloaded for no fee). Are there charges associated with eFiling? TexasOnline charges a transaction fee (approximately $4.50) to process each filing, and the Texas Department of Information Resources Board of Directors approved a $2 convenience fee collected by the counties for each filing. This latter fee provides a means for local governments to recover any management system or supply costs they may incur in using TexasOnline. Additionally, the EFSPs may also charge a filing fee ranging from $1 to $10 per filing. Therefore, the total cost for filing a document electronically may range from $7 to $16.50 dollars for each filing accepted electronically. What are some of the benefits of eFiling? Attorneys may file twentyfour hours a day, 365 days per year. Moreover, eFiling assists all attorneys, regardless of their location, to effectively file documents. An out-oftown attorney can file pleadings for the same cost as the attorney located in the county seat. Thus, eFiling assists in putting all attorneys on a level playing field in addressing time and distance challenges. Even documents that require a physical signature can be filed electronically by submitting the documents as scanned images. In short, the ease of use and the twenty-four hour court access should increase productivity while decreasing direct staff costs, paper, toner, packaging, and mailing costs. In addition to the obvious savings of paper, electronic files take up less storage space and save trees. Without question, however, the most important advantage is the amount of time saved moving documents and pleadings through the judicial system and its ability to improve client service. How are eFiling documents time stamped for deadline purposes? The time stamp applied to the document is the time the document was electronically submitted, even if the courthouse is closed and the clerk does not accept the filing until a later date. The time-stamped copy is returned to the party filing the document just as it is in the traditional paper filing process. The filer and the attorney of record receive emails San Antonio Lawyer 9 March-April 2010 confirming that the document has been filed with the court. What format is required for a document to be eFiled? EFiling is almost as simple as sending e-mail, but is more secure and reliable. Documents filed in word processor format are converted to Adobe portable document format (pdf). EFiling also feature multiple levels of firewalls and full-time intrusion detection monitoring to provide a secure system for the attorneys and the courts alike. Moreover, the pdf does not show, or allow anyone to view, previous changes or edits to an MS Word document. Information on eFiling and the progress of the JCIT in implementing eFiling is readily available at www. courts.state.tx.us/jcit, www.texasonline. com, www.texasbarcle.com, and www. nicusa.com/html/nic/portals/tx.html. Also, the State Bar of Texas has sponsored several presentations on eFiling including an informative one hour webcast entitled “eFiling in Texas Courts: How to Save Time and Money,” http://www. texasbarcle.com/CLE/COSearchResults. asp, and a free Ten Minute Mentor entitled “TexasOnline eFiling Overview,” http://www.texasbarcle.com/CLE/tyla/ MentorResults.asp?sSearch=K, presented by Dallas attorney Peter S. Vogel. 1 The Texas Legislature established the Supreme Court’s fifteen-member Judicial Committee on Information Technology (JCIT) to assist in developing an electronic filing solution for the State (for further information visit the website at www.courts.state.tx.us\jcit). Justice Rebecca Simmons has served on the Fourth Court of Appeals since May 2005. Prior to that, Justice Simmons served for two years as a Bexar County district judge and practiced trial and appellate law for 20 years. She has served as an adjunct professor at St. Mary’s School of Law for over 10 years. Fourth Court Update eFiling in Texas Courts What Small Businesses Need to Know about Insurance Law By Thomas H. Veitch Overview The insurance world is a world unto itself with insurance companies, agents, brokers, intermediaries, underwriters, re-insurers, independent adjusting firms, surplus lines carriers, risk managers, and all that goes with them. Simultaneously, the insurance world integrates with businesses, large and small, to provide the structure and financial support that moves the wheels of commerce. Without insurance protection, businesses would not be able to function effectively. The insurance world is vast and fraught with legal complexities. The purpose of this article is to provide a general understanding of some insurance law issues that impact businesses in their daily endeavors. Savvy businesses need to be aware of the legal ramifications and concerns in acquiring proper insurance and how to deal with insurance claims when they occur. Dealing with Insurance Agents In General Insurance agents and brokers are the portal to knowledge and guidance in the insurance world. The assistance that insurance agents provide in obtaining proper coverage or dealing with claims is invaluable. Most insurance agents and brokers are extremely professional and knowledgeable; some, however, are not. Business leaders need to be very careful in selecting a competent agent. The purchase of business insurance is not a simple process nor one to be considered lightly. Many large corporations engage risk managers to deal with insurance issues and claims, whereas most smaller business owners do not have this luxury and must prepare themselves on insurance concerns. The failure to obtain proper coverage is a recipe for disaster when a claim occurs. The following are examples: 1. Failure of agent to provide the coverage requested in the application; 2. Gaps in coverage; 3. Inadequate limits; and 4. Endorsements, exclusions, and other coverage limitations. What are the Agent’s Responsibilities? 1. Bad Faith Insurance Law. The so-called “bad faith insurance doctrine” applies to the conduct of insurance carriers in insurance claims litigation arising out of the insurance policy. Because the agent is not a party to the insurance policy contract, this legal doctrine does not apply to agents. However, the Texas Insurance Code and other statutes do still govern an agent’s conduct. 2. Fiduciary Duty. A fiduciary duty imposes a high standard of conduct requiring the fiduciaries (lawyers, for example) to place the clients’ interests above their own. In the absence of some type of “special relationship,” Texas courts do not impose this standard on insurance “agents.” The agent is simply required to meet that standard of care expected of a reasonable and prudent insurance agent under the same or similar circumstances. This is a negligence standard. For example, the agent’s failure to procure coverage that was requested or promised, when properly proven, will constitute negligence. 3. Failure to Procure. An agent has the duty to obtain the coverage requested or inform the policyholder of his inability to do so, allowing the insured to look elsewhere for coverage. Note: Texas case law does not mandate that an agent recommend coverage that an insured has not requested. 4. Explanations of Policy Terms and Conditions. Under Texas law, an agent does not have a legal duty to explain the coverages. But, to the extent they endeavor to do so, the explanations and advice provided must be correct. In the absence of written documentation by the agent or policyholder, this often becomes a “swearing match” in insurance claims disputes and litigation. The key point here is “always document.” San Antonio Lawyer 10 March-April 2010 5. Misrepresentation. Agents may be held liable for negligent misrepresentations or violations of the Texas Insurance Code regarding misrepresentations. However, the policyholder must be able to document and prove such alleged misrepresentations. 6. Placement of Coverage with Insolvent Insurers. Agents have a general duty to do business with insurance carriers that are financially solvent at the time the insurance is placed. Note: Texas courts presume that policyholders should read and understand their insurance policies. The responsibility of the agent for an insured’s uncovered claim will vary, contingent on the facts and circumstances of each case. How to Analyze Insurance Policies Insurance policies are contracts, albeit generally much more complex than most contracts. If you do not understand how an insurance policy fits together, you will never be able to understand the coverage. Most insurance policies contain a number of interrelated sections and provisions which must be read in their entirety to attain a proper understanding. You cannot read isolated portions of the policy and reach proper conclusions. Therefore, because most insurance policies are lengthy and tedious to read, knowing what to look for and where to look will save lots of time. A majority of property and casualty forms are fairly standardized, which makes the job a lot easier once you get the basic format. However, nonstandard forms must be thoroughly studied on a caseby-case basis. Dissecting the Policy by Sections All standard-form property and casualty policies and most nonstandard forms consist of a few definite policy sections. Therefore, a good approach to property and casualty insurance policy analysis is to identify, locate, and understand the purpose of each of the applicable policy sections. The following is a discussion of each of these policy sections: 1. Policy Declarations Page. The declarations are statements as to the parties insured, property covered, policy period, perils covered, and premium cost of the contract. This information is contained in the first page of the policy, which insurance personnel commonly refer to as the “declarations page” or “daily.” Start with the declarations page to determine who is insured, what is insured, and how much insurance exists. 2. Coverage Provided. This is the heart of the insurance contract and contains the insurer’s fundamental promises. In liability forms, this information will be found in the insuring agreements. In property policies, the information is provided in the “causes of loss” section of the policy. The extent of coverage will depend on whether the basic, broad, or special causes of loss form is attached to the policy. 3. Exclusions from Coverage. In property insurance policies, the policy exclusions may take the form of specific loss exclusions or may exclude certain property from coverage. The typical policy will have a section entitled “exclusions,” and another section entitled “property not covered.” In effect, both of these sections constitute exclusions from coverage. Loss to excluded property is not covered, even if the loss is caused by a covered peril. Most liability policies, including auto insurance policies, contain a rather extensive list of standard exclusions for each part of the policy. 4. Conditions. These further explain the contract terms regarding specific items such as suspension of coverage, voidance of the policy, loss provisions, and cancellations. The typical property insurance policy contains a form entitled “Commercial Property Conditions.” It will also contain a form called “Common Policy Conditions.” 5. Endorsements. The purpose of endorsements is to amend or modify the coverage provided in the basic contract forms. These attachments may limit, expand, or clarify coverage, which provides flexibility to fit varying situations. Therefore, it is very important to pay particular attention to policy endorsements in conducting any policy review. Endorsements are commonly referred to as “riders” in life and health insurance policies. 6. Terms and Definitions. Most property insurance policies contain a very limited section on definitions. Conversely, however, virtually all liability policies contain extensive sections on definitions. Although most life insurance policies do not have such a section, major medical and other health insurance policies generally do. San Antonio Lawyer 11 March-April 2010 7. Special Clauses. Some policies, especially life and health insurance policies, do contain some rather standard clauses affecting coverage in special circumstances. For example, suicide clauses, incontestable clauses, and other such provisions are included in virtually all life insurance policies. Rules of Construction for Insurance Policies The preceding section pertained to determining what an insurance policy says. Claims disputes and lawsuits, however, focus on what the language in the policy means (Is the loss covered?). To make this determination, Texas courts have crafted a myriad of rules of construction. The following are examples: 1. The ordinary principles of contract construction are used to interpret policies of insurance. 2. Insurance policy language is given its plain meaning unless an ambiguity exists, which is a question of law for the court. 3. Generally, if a policy is capable of two or more reasonable interpretations, it will be deemed ambiguous. In cases of ambiguity, the courts are compelled to construe the policy in favor of the insured. 4. Under Texas law, the insurer has the burden to prove the applicability of policy exclusions. Factors to Consider When Buying Insurance Application Most commercial insurance policies require the submission of a signed application. It is important to review the application for accuracy before signing it. Misrepresentations in an application are often the basis for actions to rescind or void a policy when claims occur. Quotes and Binders When quotes and binders are received, be sure to review the written documentation. Often, quotes fail to include the same coverage requested in the application. The principle requiring insureds to read their policies applies to these documents as well. Surplus Lines Insurance Surplus lines insurers are nonadmitted carriers. They are authorized, but not licensed, to do business in Texas. Generally, surplus lines carriers are used when standard carriers are unwilling to provide the requested coverage. Surplus lines carriers are unregulated as to their rates and forms. Their policies are not standardized and can vary immensely as to coverage provided, which presents increased exposure to claims problems or denials. Surplus lines policies should always be carefully scrutinized by both the agent and the policyholder. Certificates of Insurance Certificates of Insurance are a frequent source of claims disputes. Certificates are generally issued by insurance agents, although occasionally they may be prepared directly by a surplus lines carrier. Certificates of Insurance are frequently used and frequently abused. People with whom you do business may require a Certificate of Insurance as proof of insurance or vice versa. Certificates of Insurance occasionally misrepresent coverage. The terms and conditions of the insurance policy control coverage and claims determinations in spite of the Certificate of Insurance representations of coverage. When in doubt, the best practice is to obtain a copy of the applicable policy. Agents are often sued for issuing incorrect Certificates of Insurance. Additional Insureds Businesses are often requested to name another company with whom they do business as an additional insured under their policy. There are many types of additional insured endorsements. The mere fact that a company has been added as an additional insured is no assurance that the proper form or coverage has been obtained. When additional insured coverage is required, it is imperative to discuss thoroughly the coverage with your agent and carefully examine the language in conjunction with the contractual requirements for adding this coverage. Document all communications. There are a large number of Texas cases pertaining to additional insured coverage, with varying results. Duties After Loss Duties of Insurer 1. Duty to Defend. Most liability policies impute a duty to defend the insured against claims by third parties. When there are coverage issues, the insurer’s duty to defend becomes problematic. There is no duty to defend if there is no coverage under the policy. The defense coverage is a valuable right under the policy because it provides the cost of defense as well as the carrier’s experience and expertise in supervising the defense of the lawsuit. Under Texas law, the carrier’s duty to defend is determined by applying the allegations in the lawsuit with the terms and conditions of the insurance policy (often referred to as the “Eight Corners Doctrine”). As a consequence, if the allegations contained in the four corners of the pleading are potentially covered within the four corners of the policy, the carrier is obligated to provide a defense even if the alleged facts are known to be false. 2. Duty to Indemnify. The insurer is obligated to pay covered claims up to the policy limits. The duty to pay is based on the underlying facts in the case and in litigated matters may be disputed until a judgment is obtained. 3. Reservation of Rights. The purpose of asserting a Reservation of Rights is to apprise the policyholder of the potential of no coverage for the payment of claims. When coverage issues arise, the insurer may still have a duty to defend the insured under the Eight Corners rule even though it ultimately may not be required to pay the claim. This poses a potential conflict relative to the insurer’s duty to defend and duty to indemnify, which is resolved by a Reservation of Rights letter from the insurer advising the insured that coverage issues may exist. 4. Prompt Payment. Most standard Texas insurance policies contain language requiring prompt payment of claims. This requirement generally tracks language in the Texas Insurance Code to the same effect. The application of these requirements is contingent upon the facts and circumstances of each case and is not as simple or cut-and-dried as some claimants’ lawyers would have it appear. Duties of Insureds 1. Notice of Loss. Most insurance policies require an insured to give prompt or immediate notice of loss. Failure to do so can impair coverage and is almost always raised as a defense in insurance litigation. Even if there is doubt about coverage, all claims should be promptly reported to avoid this problem. The Texas Supreme Court has ruled on several cases pertaining to delayed notice of loss. 2. Suit Papers. Insureds are also expected to remit promptly to the insurance San Antonio Lawyer 12 March-April 2010 carrier, either directly or through the agent, all summonses, citations, notices, and other litigation documents. Again, failure to do so may impair coverage. 3. Cooperation of Insured. Most insurance policies contain provisions requiring the insured to cooperate with the insurance company in establishing and adjusting claims. Cooperation by the insured is generally a strict condition precedent to coverage. Thus, failure to comply can result in voidance of coverage and may be raised as a defense by the insurer. 4. Declaratory Judgment Actions. These lawsuits are often filed by either insurers or insureds asking the court to make a determination of the insurer’s obligations under the applicable insurance policy. As with any litigation, such actions can be very costly and time-consuming. 5. Other Policy Requirements. There are, of course, many other conditions in insurance policies requiring actions by an insured in the event of loss. There are also many policy provisions that simply impact coverage or the evaluation of loss. So, at the time of loss, it is again time to read and study your insurance policy to determine the nature of your claim and issues involved so that you can comply with the policy requirements. Summary Obviously, there are many pitfalls that can arise in both acquiring and maintaining insurance coverage or in processing insurance claims. A knowledgeable and professional insurance agent will play a key role in these matters. Occasionally, however, it will be advisable to involve an insurance law attorney to assist with claims or other insurance law issues. Thomas H. Veitch is a shareholder with the law firm of Langley & Banack, Inc. in San Antonio. He has been associated with the insurance business for over 45 years, serving in claims adjusting, underwriting, sales agent, and branch manager positions prior to commencing the practice of law in 1973. Mr. Veitch has earned the professional insurance designations of CPCU, CIC and CLU in addition to being selected to Who’s Who in American Insurance and Who’s Who in American Law, Best Lawyers in America (Insurance Coverage), and Texas Super Lawyer (Insurance Coverage). He is also board-certified in Estate Planning and Probate Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. Judge Mary D. Román By Amanda Reimherr Buckert “I am a very ordinary person who has an extraordinary job — a wonderful, wonderful job.” W hen Judge Mary D. Román was a little girl, she didn’t think it would be possible to get to where she is today. “When I was growing up, we were very poor, and I thought I would be a nurse, a secretary, or a teacher,” she said with a slight grin. “It never even occurred to me that I could be a lawyer.” Now, she is the judge of the 175th District Court and holds the special honor of being the first elected Hispanic female judge. Román was elected in 1992 and took the bench January 1, 1993. On a recent sunny afternoon, she looked out of her office window at the Cadena-Reeves Justice Center and fondly reminisced about the road that led her to the bench. “I am so grateful to be where I am today and giving back to the community,” she said. “I hope that female judges can be an inspiration for young girls to dream big about their future careers.” Román was born in Victoria and moved to Corpus Christi at the age of five. Until that move, she spoke only Spanish, but she quickly picked up English and was fluent by the first grade. She was an only child up until this age as well, but then embraced her role as the oldest sibling to her four brothers and one sister. While the legal community of Bexar County knows her as Judge Mary Roman, she is Dolores to her family. “Yes, it’s true, my entire family calls me Dolores. It is my middle name, but it is Mary at work,” she said with a slight laugh. Román married at the age of eighteen and lived in California for a few years. By twenty-eight, she was working in a hospital and had four children. She began to attend a junior college at night. “It took four years to do two years of junior college, but I got it done,” she said. The jurist came to San Antonio in 1979 and continued her education at the University of Texas at San Antonio. She is one of the only judges in Bexar County to have received her undergraduate degree from UTSA, graduating in 1980. “When I finished at UTSA, I was a single mother, and I wanted to go to law school. I knew it would be difficult, but I knew that I could,” she said. “I applied to St. Mary’s and decided that if they did not accept me, then I would not go because I did not want to have to move my children.” Román said that it wasn’t always easy to get through school as a working single mother, but she prioritized and made it happen. “I was very focused. I went to school, went to work, and took care of my children. I just stayed focused on my goal and doing what needed to be done at home and for school,” she said. San Antonio Lawyer 14 March-April 2010 After completing law school in 1984 at the age of forty-two, Román spent eight years in the District Attorney’s office, where she found her work with family violence cases most fulfilling. “It was such a great opportunity for me to do the work that I wanted to do and fulfill my goal of working with women’s issues,” she said. In 1986, Román married Ricardo “Rick” Román, an attorney focusing on housing issues at Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid. They met at the apartment complex where they both lived when he was a 3L and she was a 1L. “He was such a support for me in law school and has been ever since. He has truly always supported me in every way. When I told him that I wanted to run for the bench, he didn’t even blink an eye. He just said, ‘Well, what can I do to help?’ I could not have done it without him,” she said with a great fondness in her voice. The Románs enjoy snow skiing, reading, and going out to movies and restaurants. She has four grown children from a former marriage, five grandchildren, and four greatgrandchildren — all under the age of six. “I am very busy at home with my grandchildren and great-grandchildren. They take up a lot of my free time, but I absolutely love having them around and at our home,” she said. “I particularly love cooking the large holiday meals and having the entire family with me.” Román said she felt a real desire to go into law based on her own experiences in court and the impact it had on her family. “I was trying to get child support for myself, and I went to court with my attorney, who was a male. My ex-husband also had a male attorney, and these three men sat in a corner, discussed what to do, and completely left me out. I knew it just shouldn’t work that way, and it said to me that there was a great need for women in law and for the law to focus on women,” she said with firm conviction. “Legal issues that affect children are near and dear to my heart.” She said that another encouragement to go to law school came from her time morning while sipping her morning coffee, she read in the newspaper that Nicholas was no longer going to run; so with thirty days to go, she got her signatures, paid the fee, and was on the ballot. She said Judge Rose Spector, and others, encouraged her and told her not to be afraid. Román says her true legal love is criminal law because of the impact it can have on our society. “To me, public service was engrained in me in my upbringing. It is important that you do something meaningful with your life that helps others in some way,” she added. In 2002, Román began working on implementing the felony drug court program — something that she is very proud of starting. “It can be a great vehicle to give someone who wants to change an opportunity to do so,” she explained. Although Román finds her job on the bench extremely rewarding, there are also difficulties. “I find it hard that I can be pulled in so many different directions. There are some that want us to empty the jails, but we have to be concerned with the safety of our community,” she said. “I think I am very compassionate, but I am also here to do a job that involves the fact that for people who commit crimes, there is a consequence.” Román said she looks forward to remaining on the bench until she retires, and has garnered the respect of her peers and fellow judges. The late Judge Andy Mireles described Román as one of the hardest working judges that he knew and said she never wasted any time. “We came to the judiciary about the same time, and I have known her for a long The jurist said she has a deep gratitude and immense admiration for probation officers and believes in the good that probation can do. “Yes, people in the system have made mistakes, but some just need a chance to go a different direction — especially the younger ones who may have just fallen in with a bad crowd as teenagers. I am so grateful,” she continued, “for all the work and dedication of the probation department, and I have seen it do tremendous things in people’s lives.” Maria Cazares is the court clerk for Román and said it is a joy to work in her court. “She is a very fair judge and, in my opinion, is very good asset to the community. She is fair across the board, but she also personally has a big heart and is very giving,” Cazares said. time,” he said in a November interview. “She has been consistently fair and hard-working throughout her career. I find it amazing to be as dedicated and consistent as she is in her career.” Melissa Barlow Fischer, the General Administrative Counsel for the Criminal District Courts, said she has worked for Román for ten years. “She is the epitome of professional and respectful. I respect her immensely, and I think she works hard for the citizens of Bexar County,” Barlow Fischer added. “She will be the head of the criminal district judges next year, and I am looking forward to working with her on that since she is such an Right: Judge Román (center) with her children Far right: Judge Román with husband Rick working in a law office. “I realized that I was just as bright as the attorney I worked for, and if he could be a lawyer, then so could I,” she said with a laugh. “I never expected to work for a big firm; I did not feel a great need to make a lot of money. Rather, I felt a great need to accomplish something for the good of my community. I always knew I wanted to devote my legal career to helping with issues that affect women, children, and the elderly.” It took a lot of soul searching and praying before deciding to run for the bench, she said. “Judge Chavarria announced he would retire, and I wanted to run, but I did not feel comfortable running against Anthony Nicholas in the Democratic primary.” However, one San Antonio Lawyer 15 March-April 2010 - continued on page 22 - Supreme Court Justice Tom C. Clark: A Life of Service By Mimi Clark Gronlund University of Texas Press, Austin, TX, 2009, 328 pages, 21 b&w photos, tables, $45.00 Reviewed by Vincent R. Johnson The Mists of History Notable figures sometimes inexplicably fade from public memory. However, if they are lucky, they are rescued from the mists of history. This was certainly true of John Adams, who until recently was one of the least clearly remembered of the Founding Fathers. Then David McCullough’s biography (2001) and the related HBO miniseries (2008) breathed such color and vitality back into Adams that he is once again at the front ranks of the nation’s beginning. The story may turn out to be similar for Tom C. Clark (1899-1977). For nearly a quarter century, Clark served at the highest levels of the American legal profession. Truman appointed him twice, first to be attorney general (194549) and then to be associate justice of the United States Supreme Court (1949-67). In those capacities, Clark played a key role in the biggest issues of his time: resistance to Communism, advancement of civil rights, school desegregation, separation of church and state, enforcement of voting rights, protection of the criminally accused, and maintenance of law and order. The “Most Underrated Justice” Perhaps because Clark served with titans on the Supreme Court (Earl Warren, William J. Brennan, Jr., Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, William O. Douglas, and Robert Jackson), he has slipped into the shadows. Clark is the only member of the Warren Court not previously the subject of a full-length biography. But that is certainly not for lack of good material. The new biography of Clark by his daughter, Mimi Clark Gronlund, is a superb step toward reviving the memory of Clark as a significant historical figure. Gronlund’s book, written over three decades, is a loving portrait, but it is also balanced and scholarly. The author has gathered together into an engaging narrative a rich mix of social history, family memories, political events, and legal analysis. Gronlund makes a compelling case for why some scholars and historians have concluded that Clark was the “most underrated justice” of his time. Man of Character Clark, like Truman, was a man of character. He was not afraid to do what he believed was right, even if that disappointed or angered persons San Antonio Lawyer 16 who thought they could count on him to do differently. Truman, for one, was greatly aggrieved by Clark’s vote in the Steel Seizure Case (1952),1 which limited the powers of the president. It is refreshing to read Clark’s story at a time when too many government and corporate lawyers are willing to say “yes” to presidents and clients when they should say “no” and recommend different courses of action. Clark was one of the first boys to earn the rank of Eagle Scout in the United States. He seems to have been true to that form for the rest of his life — an honest, able high-achiever, who showed a remarkable capacity for growth. When one considers Clark’s Boy Scout training and the ideal of “duty to . . . country,” it is not at all surprising that he later championed the interests of the United States by prosecuting the American companies who committed fraud relating to WWII military contracts. Those efforts proved to be a pivotal step in Clark’s career because they allowed him to work closely with then-Senator Truman, whose committee was investigating the same kinds of wrongdoing. March-April 2010 “It is hard to characterize Clark’s judicial record as liberal or conservative. He stood by precedent when it was sound, and overruled it when it was not .... This is what makes Clark such an intriguing figure today, at a time when judicial independence is frequently attacked by partisan interests.” Almost Did Not Graduate The biography is peppered with delightful facts. For example, Clark, the only Texan to serve on the Supreme Court during its first 220 years, was called into the law dean’s office at the University of Texas and was told that he might not graduate because of absenteeism. Fortunately, Clark escaped that sanction due to his superior performance on the exams. However, he then found himself in the same fix that confronts many law students today. There was no plum job awaiting Clark, so he returned to Dallas to work with his father and older brother for several years in an arrangement he described as a “hand-to-mouth [law] practice that was neither lucrative nor satisfying.” Occasional payments in kind for legal services meant that the Clark household acquired miscellaneous pieces of furniture, including a few rugs that became family treasures. On one occasion, a client paid a bill for legal services by doing the Clark family laundry for several months. The contrasts between Clark and his father, “Judge” William H. Clark, are eye-opening and show “how far the apple can fall from the tree.” Judge Clark, once the youngest president of the Texas Bar Association, delivered a courthouse dedication address in 1925, in which he praised segregation and condemned miscegenation. Later, his son Tom voted to abolish segregated elementary schools in the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education (1954). And, in a decision issued on his last day on the bench, Clark joined an opinion holding miscegenation laws unconstitutional in Loving v. Virginia (1967). for the United States in a civil rights case. It was a courageous action long remembered by civil rights pioneer Thurgood Marshall, the man who succeeded Clark on the Supreme Court. A memo that Clark wrote in 1950 to his Supreme Court colleagues shows that while he would not approve “in any manner” the “separate but equal” doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), he was struggling with how to attack it in cases beyond the graduate school context. When Brown v. Board of Education was pending before the Court, Clark indicated that he was willing to overturn Plessy, but argued that it “must be done carefully or it will do more harm than good.” Clark objected to the Brown Court’s use of the phrase “all deliberate speed,” and later said that the language delayed integration for at least fifteen years. A Liberal or Progressive on Race From the beginning, Clark appeared to have the makings of a liberal, or at least a progressive, on race issues. He gave a speech in high school about “Modern Slavery,” though the topic could hardly have pleased the Dallas crowd; had a Jewish roommate at the University of Texas, which resulted in his being blackballed by fraternities for a year; and refused to join the Klan, even though that would definitely have boosted his career as a young lawyer. Years later, as attorney general, Clark filed the first amicus curiae brief Landmark Opinions Gronlund’s book is meticulously researched. The attention given to the milestones in Clark’s career is balanced, professional, and thoughtful. The historical references have the right touch — detailed enough to adequately set the stage politically and culturally, but not so detailed as to force the biographical story off course. Gronlund walks the reader though momentous events, like his visit to the Nuremberg Trials and his Justice Department campaign against juvenile delinquency. Clark was a loyal defender of the San Antonio Lawyer 17 March-April 2010 Warren Court, and he wrote landmark opinions for it. Clark’s most famous opinion was Mapp v. Ohio (1961). In a ruling that still generates controversy today, Mapp held that the exclusionary rule prohibits states from using illegally obtained evidence in court. Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) ruled that constitutionally mandated neutrality on religion prohibited Bible reading at the start of every school day. Clark’s Greatest Mistake Clark’s missteps are neither trivialized nor camouflaged by the author. A chapter is devoted to his involvement with the Japanese internment during WWII as Coordinator of the Alien Enemy Control Program, which Gronlund calls her father’s “greatest mistake.” Gronlund describes her father’s role as that of “implementer rather than decision-maker,” which seems accurate. She notes that, as attorney general, Clark later supported the Japanese-Americans who lobbied Congress for restitution of property they had lost during the internment. Ultimately, Clark recognized and publicly acknowledged that the internment was “entirely unnecessary.” The book also explores Clark’s role in compiling a list of subversive organizations as part of Truman’s loyalty program in the late 1940s. During the era of anti-communist fear-mongering, it was difficult to serve in government. Clark was shocked to discover, while still attorney general, that the FBI had compiled a file on him. Clark’s nomination to the Supreme Court in 1949 was controversial. Some claimed that Clark had definite communist tendencies. Others charged that he was a Truman crony. However, there were no credible objections. Clark was confirmed by a Senate vote of 73 to 8. Family Vignettes The best parts of the book are the vignettes that could be recounted only by a family member who probably had enjoyed hearing the stories more than once. Many law students will empathize with the tale about how Clark, as a student, was saved from embarrassment when he was unprepared in class. Though Clark had been called upon, his only female classmate fortuitously insisted to the professor that it was her turn to recite. On another occasion, Clark and an enterprising classmate set up an official-looking table at the end of the school registration line to gather contact information from students. They compiled the information into booklets, which they sold to local businesses to earn money to make ends meet. When Clark was a lowly special assistant in the Justice Department, he effectively impeached a veteran claiming disability benefits based on back injuries by cross-examining the veteran about the veteran’s recent defense of a strenuous bowling-on-the-green championship, which Clark had witnessed firsthand. Changing Times Some of the stories illustrate how much government and its role have changed. When he became attorney general in 1945, Clark instructed his assistant attorneys general to answer all letters, if possible, within twenty-four hours; and if that was not feasible, to send an immediate acknowledgment followed by a final reply within five days. It is hard to picture such governmental promptness today. Clark also promoted government efficiency and ethical conduct by prohibiting federal attorneys from maintaining private law practices, something now taken for granted. During his time on the Supreme Court, Clark became roving ambassador to the legal profession and legal education. He spoke to groups far and wide at a time when that was not the norm for justices on the high court. Clark had come a long way from when, as a youth, he became so nervous before giving a speech that he fainted. Ramsey’s Appointment The foreword to the book by Gronlund’s famous brother Ramsey Clark offers a fascinating account of how Ramsey came to be appointed attorney general by Lyndon Johnson at the same time that his father, Tom C. Clark, retired from the Supreme Court. It is telling to read what Ramsey knew and did not know about the dual appointment and resignation. The fact that Ramsey was not fully informed seems to have been attributable to the fact that the father on the Supreme Court and son in the Justice Department had managed to avoid conflicts of interest by not discussing with one another important aspects of their work. Ramsey’s appointment forced Clark into an early retirement, though “retirement” is not an accurate description. During that decade of super-activity (1967-77), Clark sat as an appellate judge on every federal circuit and even tried cases as a federal trial judge. More importantly, he devoted his abundant energies to his long-standing interest in improving the mechanisms that undergird the administration of justice. Clark served as the first Director of the Federal Judicial Center, the “think tank” and training center for improving the federal courts. He also headed the implementation of the American Bar Association (ABA) Standards for Criminal Justice, chaired the newly created Judicial Fellows Program (now the Supreme Court Fellows Program), and assisted the National Judicial College, which he co-founded. Legacy in Legal Ethics One of Clark’s post-Court activities involved chairing anABA committee on lawyer discipline, The Clark Committee Report, which decried the “scandalous” deficiencies in enforcement of attorney standards and called for San Antonio Lawyer 18 March-April 2010 immediate action, catalyzed the next four decades of reform in the field of attorney professional responsibility. Even today, virtually every law professor who teaches in the field mentions the Clark Report as a pivotal moment in the history of the American legal profession. Judicial Independence It is hard to characterize Clark’s judicial record as liberal or conservative. He stood by precedent when it was sound, and overruled it when it was not. He affirmed the powers of the government when that was appropriate, and limited those powers when there was a serious risk of abuse. The unifying thread in Clark’s judicial decisions was not ideology, but the honest exercise of independent professional judgment. This is what makes Clark such an intriguing figure today, at a time when judicial independence is frequently attacked by partisan interests. The story of Tom Clark is a great story — interesting, edifying, and worth studying. If Gronlund’s book were the only volume to be written about Clark, it would be a fine legacy, for it is accessible, colorful, and engaging. However, it seems likely that the book will open the door for scholars and historians. There is an extensive collection of Clark’s papers at the University of Texas in Austin and there are additional resources at the Truman Library in Independence, Missouri. Gronlund’s book provides a detailed framework that covers all of the high points of Clark’s story. That will make it easier for others to confidently examine Clark’s role in particular actions and decisions, and the lessons that they hold for lawyers today. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 72 S. Ct. 863, 96 L. Ed. 1153 (1952). 1 Vincent R. Johnson is professor of law at St. Mary’s University School of Law in San Antonio, Texas. The author of several books on tort law and legal malpractice law, he served as a Fulbright Scholar in China and Romania. He crosses paths with Mimi Gronlund at the Supreme Court Fellows Program dinner each winter at the United States Supreme Court, where he was once a Fellow. Three Reasons to Write for the ABA By Wendy Gerwick Couture A s an editor of, and contributor to, various American Bar Association publications, I would like to encourage attorneys to consider writing for the ABA. I certainly do not speak for the ABA, and indeed, the ABA has compiled myriad reasons for lawyers to become involved in the organization. I would like, however, as a new member of the San Antonio Bar Association, to share my list of three reasons to write for the ABA. Then, once I’ve convinced you, I’ll give you a few tips on how to get started. Establish Relationships With Lawyers Across the Country As a new lawyer, the prospect of “networking” filled me with dread. I would have preferred to stay up all night researching an esoteric point of law (yes, I am now a law professor) rather than glad-hand my way through a cocktail party full of lawyers. The ABA gave me the opportunity to network in a different way — by writing. Not surprisingly, considering how busy lawyers are, ABA publications are always looking for willing workers. As a young lawyer, I became an editor of the newsletter published by the Expert Witnesses Committee of the Section of Litigation. In addition to editing the newsletter, I contributed several articles for publication. After a few years, based in part on my work on the newsletter, I was chosen to edit a forthcoming ABA book about expert witnesses. In the process of this ABA work, I have established relationships with many lawyers. In fact, my authorship of this column is, at least in part, attributable to an ABA connection. As newsletter editor, I published several articles submitted by Robin Teague, a well-respected trial attorney here in San Antonio. When I began soliciting authors for the expert witness book project, I immediately contacted Robin, who graciously agreed to contribute a chapter. Then, as coincidence would have it, Robin was elected President of the San Antonio Bar Association the same year that I was appointed to the faculty of St. Mary’s University School of Law, and Robin asked me to write this article. Notably, most of the lawyers that I have met through the ABA live outside of Texas. Perhaps more than other bar activities, publications can easily be coordinated among lawyers in disparate locations. For example, the ABA book that I’m editing has authors from more than 20 states. For purposes of referrals, being the only lawyer in San Antonio known by an out-of-state lawyer can be extremely fruitful. Interestingly enough, now that I have established relationships with other lawyers, both near and far, the prospect of the cocktail party does not seem so intimidating. In fact, it sounds kind of fun. Express Your Point of View With about 400,000 members, the ABA proclaims itself to be “the national voice of the profession.” The ABA’s stated mission when speaking is to “serve equally our members, our profession and the public by defending liberty and delivering justice as the national representative of the legal profession.” The ABA makes its voice heard through ethics opinions, policy statements, amicus curaie briefs, model rules, and registered lobbyists. And indeed, Congress and the courts are listening to that voice. A few recent examples will demonstrate the breadth of the ABA’s influence. On September 15, 2009, the Judicial Conference of the United States approved an ABA-originated recommendation to amend Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 to extend work-product protection to draft expert reports and many San Antonio Lawyer 19 March-April 2010 attorney-expert communications. In 2008, the Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant’s initial appearance before a judicial officer triggers attachment of the right to counsel— noting that this holding is consistent with “the ABA’s position for the past 40 years.” During the 110th Congress, 24 bills were introduced that made explicit reference to the ABA in contexts as diverse as a national domestic violence attorney network, the use of presidential signing statements, and a code of ethics for arbitrators. Of course, your opinion about how best to “defend liberty” and “deliver justice” might not coincide with the ABA’s position. The best way to influence the ABA’s policies is to be an active member of the ABA, including by writing articles read by other ABA members. And the ABA welcomes your voice. One of the association’s stated objectives is to “promote full and equal participation in the association, our profession, and the justice system by all persons.” That includes you. Serve the Bar The law is changing and expanding rapidly. In 2009 alone, Congress enacted at least 125 public laws, and courts issued tens of thousands of opinions. Indeed, since January 1 of this year, Westlaw has published at least 10,000 new federal court rulings and 1,083 new Texas state court rulings. It can be extremely difficult to stay up to date. But, if we all band together to educate each other about changes in the law, we can better the profession. By writing about new developments in your area of practice, you will hone your own understanding, as well as serve your fellow lawyers. Especially in this environment, in which the public’s opinion of law- - continued on page 22 - Federal Court Update By the Honorable Nancy Stein Nowak and Nissa M. Dunn and included that document in a public pleading, court held that defendant violated the protective order and awarded sanctions in the amount measured by the expenses in drafting the motion to seal the improperly filed exhibit and the motion to enforce the protective order. legal conclusions and assigned culpability without providing any basis for that conclusion, but denied insofar as expert allowed to testify on the condition of the location of the accident, the degree to which the conditions contributed to the accident, and whether the location presented a dangerous condition. documents included on privilege deadline for amending pleadings Where motion to reconsider was premised on evidence that had been previously available but not previously presented to the court, normally the court would have denied the motion. Here, because no prejudice resulted from consideration of the evidence, the court exercised discretion to consider the motion to reconsider and granted the same. of inconsistent factual findings and where cases were at very different states of trial preparation. Judge Nowak’s summaries of significant decisions rendered by San Antonio federal judges from 1998 to the present are available for keyword searching at Court Web found at Discovery http://courtweb.pamd.uscourts. Stoffels v. SBC Comm., SA-05-CV-233 Amendments Kinnison v. City of San Antonio, SA-08-CVgov/courtweb/. Full text images XR (Primomo, November 12, 2009) Class action brought by retirees 421 XR (Rodriguez, November 23, 2009) of most of these orders can also be under ERISA. Court granted Court denied motion for leave accessed through Court Web. motion to compel production of to amend that was filed after the log in part after in camera where movant failed to show good If you are aware of a Western District inspection and consideration cause by explaining the late timing, of Texas order that you believe of attorney-client privilege and show why the proposed amendment would be of interest to the local bar work product protection. was important, or explain the lack and should be summarized in this of prejudice to defendant. column, please contact Nissa Dunn Motion to Reconsider by phone at 581-2073 or by email Vladimir v. Pacific Parts, SA-08-CV-819 Consolidation Harris v. Bexar County, SA-08-CV-728 at [email protected] XR (Rodriguez, November 20, 2009) Court acknowledged that it XR (Rodriguez, November 23, 2008) with the style and cause number had authority to reconsider its Court denied motion to consolidate of the case, and the entry date and interlocutory order on defendant’s civil rights cases involving same docket number of the order. motion for summary judgment. parties where there was no danger Expert Report Kinnison v. City of San Antonio, SA-08-CV421 XR (Rodriguez, November 5, 2009) Motion to disqualify expert denied after court reviewed expert’s qualifications and found that there were sufficient facts to support his conclusions. However, court held that without supplementation, the expert’s opinions regarding the value of the subject property was incomplete and ordered expert to supplement report prior to trial. Seal American Registry of Radiologic Tech. v. Bennett, SA-09-CV-767 XR (Rodriguez, November 23, 2009) Court denied request to file motion under seal when movant provided no justification for setting aside public’s common law right of access to court records. Protective Orders Bead Filters Int. v. Mills, SA-09-CV-105 XR (Rodriguez, November 12, 2009) Where defendants’ counsel presented a document marked “for attorney’s eyes only” to his client Motion to Reconsider J & J Sports Productions v. Tawil, SA-09-CV327 XR (Rodriguez, November 30, 2009) Court denied motion to reconsider premised on court’s inadvertent failure to consider untimely response to motion to dismiss where facts failed to support movant’s malicious prosecution or business disparagement claims. Expert Reports Alfieri v. U.S., SA-08-CV-277 XR (Rodriguez, November 20, 2009) Plaintiff sued for injuries from golf cart accident at Fort Sam Houston. Defendant’s motion to exclude expert report granted insofar as expert report included San Antonio Lawyer 20 March-April 2010 Arbitration MPJ v. Aero Sky, SA-09-CV-693 XR (Rodriguez, November 30, 2009) Court accepted recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, rejected request to modify or vacate an arbitration award pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, and confirmed award. Time to appeal Gallegos v. Texas Dept. of Transportation, SA-08-CV-435 XR (Rodriguez, December 2, 2009) Extension of time to file notice of appeal pending resolution of contested bill of costs denied where court held that assessment of costs did not involve reconsideration of any decision on the merits. Amendments Public Health Equipment v. Clarke Mosquito Control Products, SA-08-CV895 OG (Garcia, December 3, 2009, adopting recommendation of Nowak, November 6, 2009) Late filed amendment disallowed where movant presented an inadequate explanation for the lateness of the filing, the proposed amendment did not remedy deficiencies in the complaint, and where allowing the amendment would prejudice defendant, which had already filed its motion to dismiss. Diversity City of San Antonio v. Time Warner Cable, SA-09-CV-869 XR (Rodriguez, December 11, 2009) Motion to remand granted where plaintiff filed petition for writ of mandamus to compel production of business records in state court and defendant removed based on diversity. Court held that the amount in controversy did not exceed the jurisdictional minimums where the object of the litigation was the ability of the City to exercise its right to conduct an audit and not the value that it could receive following an audit. Constitutional Claims Walding v. U.S., SA-08-CV-124 XR (Rodriguez, December 15, 2009) Court held that alleged violations of remedial consent decree did not confer actionable constitutional rights, and that claims premised on alleged violations of consent decree should be presented in an action to enforce that consent agreement rather than in an action for money damages. Attorneys’ Fees Lear Siegler Serv’s v. Ensil Int. Corp, SA-05CV-679 XR (Rodriguez, December 18, 2009) Court awarded attorneys’ fees to party in contract dispute that prevailed on some but not all of its claims, and found that movant had appropriately segregated the hours on the prevailing claims from the hours on those dismissed on motion. here refused to find that the Rule 11 sanction imposed upon this Chapter 7 debtor was premised on conduct that was sufficiently willful or malicious so as to render the sanction a non-dischargeable debt under 11 USC Sec. 523(a)(6). Conflict of Laws Northern Natural Gas Co. v. Sheerin, SA09-CV-709 XR (Rodriguez, December 14, 2009) Defendants moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims premised on fraudulent transfer statute arguing that Rhode Island, not Texas, law applied. Court held that movant had not shown that there was a discernable difference between Texas and Rhode Island law so as to trigger choice of law analysis. Court also held that even though the debt upon which plaintiff’s claim rested remained the subject of pending state court litigation, the debt could support a fraudulent transfer claim. Employment Trevino-Garcia v. U.T.H.S.C., SA-09-CA572 XR (Rodriguez, December 21, 2009) In employment discrimination case, court denied motion to dismiss Rehabilitation Act claim where plaintiff alleged defendant accepted federal funds and enjoyed federal contractor status and granted motion to dismiss claim premised on violation of Executive Order 11246 holding that the Executive Order did not create a private right of action. Bankruptcy; Dischargeability Mann Bracken v. Powers, SA -9-50513 LMC (Clark, December 18, 2009) Although the court observed that a Rule 11 sanction imposed in another court with sufficient supporting findings of fact could serve to collaterally estop a party from litigating the dischargeability of that Rule 11 sanction, the court San Antonio Lawyer Nancy Stein Nowak is a United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Texas. Since 1986, Judge Nowak has summarized significant decisions of the local judiciary for the Subpoena and the San Antonio Lawyer. Nissa Dunn, of the Law Offices of Nissa M. Dunn, P.C., specializes and is board certified in the area of civil appellate law. 21 March-April 2010 Judge Mary D. Román Profile Published by NationWide Publishing SA 1922 Great Ridge • San Antonio, TX 78248 Publisher - Ron L. Hogue [email protected] For information on advertising in the San Antonio Lawyer magazine Call 210.381.7664 The San Antonio Lawyer is published bimonthly by Nationwide Publishing SA, on behalf of the San Antonio Bar Association. Reproduction in any manner of any material, in whole or in part, is prohibited without the express written consent of the Editor in Chief. Material contained herein does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Publisher or its staff. San Antonio Lawyer, the San Antonio Bar Assocation and the Publisher reserve the right to edit all materials and assume no responsibility for accuracy, errors or omissions. San Antonio Lawyer and the Publisher do not knowingly accept false or misleading advertisements, false or misleading editorials and do not assume any responsibility should such editorials or advertising appear. Advertisers’ Index Assn. of Atty. Mediators Jeff Small KelMar & Assoc. Lindemann Productions Tower Life Building Weston Centre 23 5 21 4 2 24 - continued from page 15 excellent public servant.” During her downtime, Román enjoys her quiet time in the morning. “I am a very early riser. I tend to wake up at about 5 a.m. even without an alarm,” she said smiling. “I like to drink my coffee and read the paper. It is an important part of my day to just be calm and reflect.” This early morning ritual is consistent with the fact that Román is a very private person who doesn’t care much for a lot of attention, but she said she understands it sometimes comes with the job. “I am a very ordinary person who has an extraordinary job — a wonderful, wonderful job,” she said before she excused herself to return to the bench. “There is always more work to do, and I am blessed to be doing it.” Amanda Reimherr Buckert, a former journalist with the San Antonio Express-News, is the Coordinator of SABA’s Community Justice Program. Three Reasons to Write for the ABA - continued from page 19 - yers is very low, it is essential that we work together to improve the quality of representation across the board. Get Started Now that you want to write for the ABA, I recommend the following five steps to get started: Step One: Join the ABA, if you’re not already a member. In addition to the opportunity to write for ABA publications, you will receive numerous other benefits–such as discounted CLE, networking events, electronic and paper publications, and service opportunities. Step Two: Identify the sections, divisions, or forums that relate to your practice. There are currently 22 sections (including Business Law, Criminal Justice, Family Law, Law Practice Management, and Litigation), six divisions (including the General Practice, Solo and Small Firm Division and the Young Lawyers Division), and six forums (including the Forum on the Construction Industry). Step Three: Within each section, division, or forum, identify several committees that correspond with your practice areas and interests. For example, within the Section of Litigation, there are 40 committees, including the San Antonio Lawyer 22 March-April 2010 aforementioned expert witnesses committee. (Yes, that was a blatant plug!) Join the committees that interest you. Step Four: Go to the website of each section, division, forum, and committee that you have joined. Identify the leaders, publication editors, and website editors, and volunteer your services. Briefly outline your prior writing and/or editing experience, if any. If you have a topic idea, propose it. If not, ask if they can suggest a topic. Step Five: Accept whatever task is assigned to you, whether it’s a cite-check or a blurb for the website. Complete the task well and on time. Before you know it, you’ll be part of the whirlwind of ABA publications. I look forward to meeting you at a future cocktail party, where — if we have nothing else in common — we can at least chat about writing for the ABA! Wendy Gerwick Couture is an Assistant Professor of Law at St. Mary’s University. She previously practiced at Carrington, Coleman, Sloman & Blumenthal, LLP in Dallas in the areas of securities litigation and white collar crime. ������������������������������������� ������������������� Committed to the mediation process, each of our member lawyers is devoted to the ethical practice of law. Recommended by judges and their fellow attorneys, AAM mediators have conducted over 25,000 mediations since 1989. A model of responsible dispute resolution, as a group we have over 850 years experience in the practice of law. With this much talent and experience, why consider any other mediation source? ������� Dick Alcala Emerson Banack, Jr. Judith Reed Blakeway Leslie Selig Byrd Hope Camp Ben R. Chappell Robert C. Cowan Michael Curry, Jr. John H. Davis Mary Belan Doggett Gerald T. Drought Allan K. DuBois Stephen R. Fogle John J. Franco, Jr. Otto S. Good Sue M. Hall B. Thomas Hallstead Reese L. Harrison A. Chris Heinrichs James N. Higdon Ronald Hornberger Richard H. Ihfe David L. Jackson Gary W. Javore Tom Joseph Douglas D. Ketterman Jerry D. King Joel H. Klein Daniel Y. Kruger Daniel O. Kustoff William H. Lemons Dan A. Naranjo B.F. “Biff” Pennypacker, III Gale R. Peterson Hon. Robert T. Pfeuffer Donald R. Philbin, Jr. Vick Putman Phillip M. Renfro Charles R. Roberts Mark Anthony Sanchez Wade B. Shelton Bernard L. Shub Charles L. Smith Thomas J. Smith Frank R. Southers John J. Specia David S. Stephenson Randolph P. Tower William R. Towns ����������������������� Personal Injury Construction Securities International Employment & Labor Insurance Entertainment Farm & Ranch Appellate Law Intellectual Property Condemnation Wills, Trusts & Estates Real Estate Professional Liability Oil & Gas Family Law Title Insurance Taxation Bankruptcy Consumer Law Business/Commercial Health Care Civil Rights Medical �������������������� contact the San Antonio Local Chapter: Ron Hornberger 70 NE Loop 410, Suite 1100 San Antonio, Texas 78216 210-734-7092 [email protected] ����������� Downtown’s Best Address “Weston Centre captures the best of San Antonio in its design, its style, its location and its amenities. Cox Smith looks forward to continuing to be a lead tenant of Weston Centre for years to come.” James B. Smith Jr. Managing Director Cox Smith Matthews Incorporated “We were initially attracted to the Weston Centre because of the first class quality of the building and its location in the heart of the business community along the beautiful San Antonio Riverwalk. We have remained tenants because of the consistently high level of service that’s provided by all its staff members.” Patrick Tobin, Managing Partner Jackson Walker L.L.P. �������������������������������������������������������������� �����������������������������������������������������������