Bringing TogetherThe Best OfBoth Worlds

THEWRITTEN

LAWA LEGAL RESEARCH EXPERT

'.

523 West Third Little Rock. AR 72201(501) 375-6117

Appellant Briefs _ Trial Briefs. Computer Searches. Abstracts. State and Federal Cases

July 1987Vol. 21. No.3

OFFICERS

Richard F. Hatfield. PresidentJohn F. Stroud. Jr .. President-ElectSandra Wilson Cherry. Sec.-TreasurerRandall W. Ishmael. Council Chair

Wm. A. Martin. Executive DirectorJudith Gray. Assistant Executive

Director

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

H. Murray ClaycombJohn D. Eldridge. 1IIRobert S. HargravesDonald K. HarpRonald D. HarrisonJack A. McNultyW. Russell Meeks. 1IIStephen M. ReasonerRobert G. SerioBobby E. ShepherdJames M. Simpson, Jr.Robert R. Wright. 1II

EX-OFFICIO

Richard F. HatfieldJohn F. Stroud. Jr.Don M. SchnipperSandra Wilson CherryI. Thomas RayRandall W. Ishmael

EDITOR

Ruth M. Williams. Director ofCommunications

LCIARKANSAS

SPECIAL FEATURES REGULAR FEATURES

82 The President's Report

A Conversation withJohn F. Stroud. Jr.. 83by Ruth Williams

87 Point of View/Letters

Judge George Howard. Jr.. 90by Phyllis Harden Carter

Guardianship Reform:Five Years of Change.

by Judge Ellen Brantley 100106 Law. Literature & Laughter

108 Disciplinary Actions

110 In Memoriam

112 Arkansas IOLTA Program

115 Judicial Department Report

116 Executive Director's PageThe Arkansas Lawyer (USPS 546-040) ispublished quarterly by the ArkansasBar Association, 400 West Markham.Little Rock. Arkansas 72201. Secondclass postage paid at Little Rock, Ar­kansas. In all counts. POSTMASTER:send address changes to Arkansas BarAssociation. 400 West Markham. LittleRock. Arkansas 7220 I. Subscriptionprice to non-members of the ArkansasBar Association $15.00 per year and tomembers $10.00 per year included inannual dues. Any opinion expressedherein is that of the author. and notnecessarily that of the Arkansas BarAssociation or The Arkansas Lawyer.Contributions to The Arkansas Lawyerare welcome and should be sent in twocopies to the Arkansas Bar Center. 400West Markham. Little Rock. Arkansas72201.

All inqUiries regarding advertisingshould be sent to The Arkansas Lawyerat the above address.

117 Young Lawyers' Update

118 In-House News

ON THE COVER:John F. Stroud. Ir.. of Texarkana.

assumed the position of ArkansasBar Association president at theclose of the Association's 89th AnnualMeeting on June 13. Stroud heads anassociation with 3400 members and abudget of $424.000. and stands firm ina conviction for improved bench/barrelations. He is pictured on the cover

" with his children. from left. Kimball.E John and Tracy. and his wife, Mariet­~ to, on the front lawn of their home. In-g an interview. Stroud said. "I think~ benchlbar relations are good in Ar­ci kansas, but they can be better and I] hope they will be beller at the end ofQ.. this bar year."

Iuly 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/8l

THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT

AYear of MeetingChallenges

In addition, I want to thankMartha M. Miller, the Associa­tion's lobbyist. the Section 01 Taxa­tion emd !be Workers' Compensa­tion Section lor their outstemdingefforts emd each one 01 you whocontributed time emd resources tothe Association's activities. TheAssociation is only as strong as itsmembership emd, as evidenced bythe outstanding work we do on alimited budget, ours is among thestronges\.

This year, the Association lor thefirst time hosted the Southern Con­lerence 01 Bar Presidents. The Con­ference was presic\ed over by DonM. Schnipper and his wile, MmyAnn. Both are to be congratulatedlor being outstanding ambassa­dors emd lor doing a lemtastic job.

President Elect John F. Stroud,Jr.. chaired the new Task Force onCommiltees during the past yearto study and analyze the effec­tiveness 01 our commiltees emd torecommend improvements. Johnemd his wile, Marielta, will needyour support to continue the prog­ress he has already begun. I urgeyou, as I did in my initial column,to contribute some of your timeemd resources to the Association.As with emy worthwhile endeavor,you will gain much more personal­ly emd professionally them you willcontribute.

Finally, I wemtto thank my wile,Sue, and my children, Elizabethemd Jeff, for their sacrifices duringthe past year. I thank Sue, espe­cially, lor her support emd for beingan outstanding ambassador lorthe Association.

It has been a pleasure and a dis­tinct honor to represent the Associ­ation during the past 12 monthsemd lor that I am deeply indebtedto you, the members. 0

the past year through her leadershipand by implementing many policiesand programs. The celebration ofJudith's 20 years with the Associationlast Janumy was a fitting tribute to anextremely capable, conscientious anddelightful lady:

• The entire bar staff. includingWilliam A. Martin, Barbara Tarking­ton. Joyce Bobbitt and Virginia Hard­grave, for doing an excellent job inmaintaining the organization. Aftervisiting with the presidents and execu­tive directors of other associations. Iappreciate our staff so much more. es­pecially in light of our nominal re­sources, and

• Ruth Williams. for our very profes­sional publications and vital mediacontacts.

Outstemding among the commit­tee chairs which met the chal­lenges of the bar year were:

Randall W. Ishmael. chair of the Ex­ecutive Council and Legislative Over­sight Committee;

Vincent W. Foster. Jr.. chair of theJurisprudence and Law Reform Com­mittee;

James M. Moody, chair of the Tort Re­form Committee, and

Johnnie R. Holcomb, chair of the Cor­porate Code Study Committee.

By Richard F. Hatfield

It seems like only last week thebar year begem emd now it's almostover. In my linal report, I wemt toreview the accomplishments 01 thepast year emd thank those who areresponsible lor the success we'veexperienced.

The 1986-87 bar year is best de­scribed as one 01 "meeting chal­lenges." We laced:

• Insurance Crisis Legislation - Nolaws were passed which impacted onthe tort system. This stands as our mostoutstanding achievement;

• Constitutional Amendment 64 ­The Arkansas Bar Association was in­strumental in its passage;

• Membership Development ­Philip E. Dixon did an outstanding jobas chair of the Membership Committeeand recruited 233 new members to ourroster;

• IOlTA - Association membershave been instrumental in assistingSusanne Roberts in implementing thisprogram, the result of efforts by the As­sociation and by Herman L. Hamilton.Ir., in particular:

• Mandatory Continuing Legal Edu­cation - Progress has been made to­ward realizing this goal. A new peti.tion to the Arkansas Supreme Court isin the works;

• New Arkansas Code - This long­term effort by the Association forstatute revision has been led by Wil­liam S. Arnold. With passage of Act 267of 1987 the Code is now a reality;

• Bicentennial of the U.S. Constitu­tion - The Arkansas celebration of thebicentennial of the U.S. Constitution,under the leadership of John P. Gill.culminates on September 17. 1987, and

• Annual Meeting - Walter R. Nib­lock arranged a great program in HotSprings with something for everyone.

The preceding list is not all in­clusive. In addition, I especiallywant to themk the following peoplelor helping us realize our goals:

• Judith Gray. the Association's as­sistant executive director, for directingthe growth of the Association during

821Arkansas Lawyerl)uly 1987

JOHN F: STROUD, JR.

j ohn F. Stroud, Jr., recallsgoing to the courthouse asa young boy to watch and

listen to his grandfather,Judge A. P. Steel, a formercircuit and chancery judge,as he sat on the bench. Those ~

early impressions of law leftStroud sure of his calling.Now, nearly 50 years later,he stands ready to head anassociation with 3400members and an annualbudget of $424,000, andstands firm in a conviction per­haps linked to the past for im­proved bench/bar relations.

What will be the thrust of your year aspresident of the Arkansas Bar Associ­ation?Improved benchlbar relations is oneof the main things I want to see oc­cur during the upcoming bar year. Ithink henchlbar relations are goodin Arkansas, but they can be betterand I hope they will be better at theend of this bar year.In what ways might bench/bar rela­tions be improved?We've lowered the dues and doneother things for judges, such as offerspecial registration fees at ourmeetings. We're slowly coming tothe realization that their salaries

are too low, and I want the bar asso­ciation to do more to address theirneed for pay increases. In addition.I began working last fall on a pro­posal to the Arkansas JudicialCouncil asking them to meet simul­taneously with us in Hot Springs atour 1988 annual meeting and theyhave agreed to do that.What do you see to be the benefits ofa joint meeting?Certainly the opportunity to ex­change ideas, to discuss problemsand to participate socially will besome of the benefits. I just know thatmeeting together provides commu­nication, and communication is theway to solve problems and the wayto prevent something from becom-

By Ruth W11110ms

ing a problem. It's not a caseof let's meet and here are sixproblems we'll solve. It'ssimply that the exchange,both professional and so­cial, between attorneys,judges and their spouseswill be rewarding. We'll dothis on a trial basis in 1988

~ and if it goes welL I think.,.Q that it will be repeated..!1- Will the Arkansas Bar Associ-~ alion actively pursue the cre­~ ation of a Judicial Compen-

sation Commission?

Yes, we're committed to pursuing aJudicial Compensation Commis­sion and offering the bench anyother support that we can. I want oursupport to be often and strong. A pe­tition drive to place a constitutionalamendment for a Judicial Compen­sation Commission on the 1988 bal­lot was discussed in Texarkana atthe Judicial Council's spring meet­ing. It was also thoroughly dis­cussed and approved by the Execu­tive Council at its meeting in May.The bar is ready to assist in any wayand, in fact, to take the lead with theguidance of the Judicial Council.What other goals have you set for thisbar year?I would like to see mandatory con­tinuing legal education in place byJanuary I, 1988. Last year the Arkan-

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/83

50S Supreme Court approved the con­cept of mandatory CLE but did notinitiate the program. The Court'seffort to obtain funding from the leg­islature this year for a new, full­time employee to administer man­datory CLE, legal specializationand the other needs that exist didnot succeed. We need to go forwardimmediately and ask the SupremeCourt to approve the plan previous­ly submitted and to fund this newposition that they feel is necessary.The only way for them to do this is byraising the annual license fee. Thatwill be our recommendation to theCourt. In order to maintain its com­petence, it is incumbent that thelegal profession be required to par­ticipate in and to pay for the pro­gram. I feel the Court, when this isproperly presented to them, will im­plement the program. It's the trendin this country and it's certainlyneeded in Arkansas as well.Will a mandatory CLE program helpimprove the image of lawyers?That will not be the reason foradopting the program, but it prob­ably will be a side benefit. If you aska person if he likes lawyers, he'llusually say he likes his lawyer, thathe has an excellent lawyer, but hecan't say the same for those otherlawyers. It is difficult for the typicalperson to understand how lawyerscan go toe to toe in the courtroomand walk out best friends. There aremany misconceptions about the le­gal profession. I think the schoolsare certainly one good place to startto improve those misconceptions.Many of the Law Day activities in­volve attorneys presenting pro­grams about law and lawyers tohigh school and junior high schoolstudents. We also have a programin our schools in Texarkana thatallows lawyers to tell studentsabout the legal profession and howto go about becoming a lawyer. Themedia is another good place tostart. Almost all of our opinions areformed by what we hear and read. Ifthe media is uninformed or poorlyinformed concerning legal matters,the image of the lawyer will surelysuffer. By and large, what lawyersdo deserves the respect of the pub­lic. It is true that some lawyers arerightfully disciplined or disbarred,but all too often, the public readsthat an attorney is accused but doesnot later read the smaller story if hehas been vindicated.

84JArkansas Lawyerlluly 1987

How will the membership surveyguide the Association's actions dur­ing the upcoming bar year?We need to know what we're doingthat the lawyers like, what we'redoing that they don't like, and, moreimportantly, what we're not doing atall that they want and need, wheth­er it be in CLE or in other areas. Wehope to get some meaningful inputearly enough in this bar year to ap­point special committees or to dowhatever is necessary to respond tothe results of the survey.How would you sum up what it islawyers do?Obviously, they represent theirclients. One of the main virtues oflaw is that it is a way to bring a dis­pute to a conclusion. It may take awhile to get there, but we do havethe mecms to that end through ourtrial and appellate procedures.Thanks to law and law enforcement,we no longer have the Hatfields andthe McCoys feuding from one dec­ade to the next. Law finally puts amatter to rest and that's of vital im­portance, whether we individuallyare pleased with the results or not.We also help clients avoid prob­lems. In fact, that to me is the mostimportant service that attorneysrender.Is service to the needy an inherentpari of the profession?Yes, it always has been and it mustcontinue to be a part of our profes­sional services. In many areas, ithas become an organized part of theprofession. Years ago, I think suchassistance mainfy occurred quietly,one on one. When a person cameinto a lawyer's office who could notpay, he was not charged. In recentyears, public defenders' programs.legal referral services and legal aidassistance programs have been cre­ated. I will stress this year and worktoward substantially improving thebar's participation in a very impor­tant public service program - theInterest on Lawyers' Trust Accountsprogram. Every lawyer in privatepractice in Arkansas can andshould participate in this program.The bulk of IOLTA funds goes tolegal services programs in Arkan­sas to provide legal services to thepoor. We're off to a wonderful startbut we need a much larger partici­pation. I think it's simply a matter oftaking the word to the lawyer andletting him know how simple it is tosign up. We all are also obligated to

give of our time or money to providepro bono services.

Are there some basic CLE programsthat lawyers need regularly?Certainly there are. Lawyers shouldprobobly have some refresher pro­gram every year on legal ethics.Each session of the Arkansas legis­lature results in substantialchanges in the law and thesechanges don't appear in our stat­utes for several months. Followingeach legislative session, attorneysneed to learn what happened andhow it will affect their practice. Inaddition, many lawyers limit theirpractice to some few areas of law. Inlarger firms, that's certainly true.Whether one does or not, he or shesimply must keep up with thechanges in the law that affect them.In addition to numerous programspresented each year by AlCLE (Ar­kansas Institute for ContinuingLegal Education), the Arkansas BarAssociation sponsors substantiveprograms at its annual meeting, theNatural Resources Law Instituteand the Workers' CompensationSeminar. The newest recurring pro­gram is the Trial Practice Seminarpresented each year by the YoungLawyers' Section of our association.Do you think mandatory CLE willhave a weeding-out effect for the pro­fession?I don't think so. I think the main rea­son many lawyers don't currently at­tend continuing legal educationprograms is that they get too busy.They want to attend CLE programs,but the press of business causesthem to cancel or change theirplans. I would be surprised if anysubstantial number of attorneysquit their practice for failure to par­ticipate in mandatory CLE. Whenthe program becomes operationaLthere will undoubtedly be a sub­stantial increase in attendance ofprograms offered by AICLE. All or­ganizations offering CLE will haveto work harder to present more op­portunities for programs, and out­of-state providers will come ingreater numbers and more oftenthan they do now. The Arkansas at­torney should have a great manymore programs from which tochoose.What else can members look forwardto in the coming bar year?We will have several new systemsthat will be printed during this baryear. Many of these will be the re-

STROUD

"1 think bench/bar relations

are good in Arkansas,

but they can be better and I

hope they will be better

at the end of this bar year."

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/85

B6/Arkansas Lawyer/July 1987

Call John Wilmoth at (214) 741-8430 in Dallas.

If you have ...

every live or six years to be sure thatwe don't have members anxiousand ready to serve who are beingappointed to committees only tofind an inactive chair or dormantprogram. That's a grecrt disserviceto the person appointed.Is there a trick to juggling the duties01 president with the duties 01 a lawpractice?II there's a trick I haven't lound it. Itsimply mecms working more hoursevery day and many nights andweekends. I'm lortunate to practicein a law Iirm rather them being asole practitioner. I have law part­ners who can step in and assist mewithout it being too much 01 a bur­den on them, although they may bevery tired 01 that by June of 1988. 0

UNITED STATES TRUSTEEU.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICEKansas City (St. Louis'), Missouri

Salary: $70,500The De pOl tment of Justice, anEqual Oppo·tunity Employer, isseeking an individual lor a 5-yearappointment by the Attomey Gen­eral. to head the U.S. Trustee's 01­lice lor the Region composed of theStates of Arkansas, Nebraska, andMissouri. The U.S. Trustee is re­sponsible lor monitoring the legaland financial aspects of casesfiled under chapters 7, II. 12, emd13 of the Bankruptcy Code; main­taining and supervising a pomel ofprivate trustees; supervising theconduct of debtors in possessionand other trustees; and ensuringthat violations 01 civil and crimi­nal law are detected and relerredto the U.S. Attorney's Office lorpossible prosecution. The success­lui candidate must possess a lawdegree and be admitted to the Ben;,extensive management experi­ence; outstanding academiccredentials. Familiarity withbankruptcy law and accountingprinciples is prelerred. A resumeand completed SF-171 must beaddressed to Mr. Thomas J.Stanton, Director, Executive Ollicelor U.S. Trustees, U.S. Depcntment01 Justice, Room 812-0, HOLCBuilding, Washington, D.C. 20534,and postmarked by September I.1987. NO PHONE INQUIRIES. Inter­views, at the applicant's expense,will be held in Washington, D.C."The exact location for this office hasnot yet been chosen.

•

ciation is not like being elected to alour-year term with a platform. Al­though there is the opportunity loreach president to stress those pro­grams dear to his heart, it is more ofa continuing ellort to keep the goodfrom the previous years and elimi­nate the outdated. Some commit­tees will not be reappointed this baryear as a result 01 work by the TaskForce on Committees last year. Wetook a look and lound that severalcommittees were not serving a cur­rent need. The Task Force will con­tinue one more year to lurther eval­uate the work of some committees.This probably needs to be done

Securities· Imangibles • Machinery and Equipment.

ARTHURANDERSEN

&g);

ATTORNEYS ..Why hire

Arthur Andersen & Co.for your appraisal and

valuation needs?

IIIJ .Real Estate' Closely'Held

• In-depth appraisal, tax and accounting experience• A team with credentials and competence• Multi-industry experience• Extensive resources• Detailed documentation• Proven quality control procedures

Our combination of experience and resources sets us apan andabove others providing appraisal services. By selecting ArthurAndersen & Co., you can be assured of not only a quality product,but also a responsive, efficient team of appraisal professionals withthe resources needed to provide added value.

• family tax planning,• corporate tax (income and property) or• litigation support needs

suit 01 work initiated by Dick Hat­field while he was president lastyear, such as updates 01 the ProbateLaw System and Corporation LawSystem and preparation 01 an Agri.cultural Law System. I have appoint­ed an editorial board lor a new lormbook to be expanded and hopelullybe ready by the 1988 annual meetingin June, I've also appointed commit­tees to prepare a new Debtor/Creditor Handbook. an updated LawOflice Manual and an update 01 L0­cal Court Rules. We'll undoubtedlyhave some programs that will startthis bar year that won't be linished.Serving as president 01 the bar asso-

By Sidney S. McMathand Stephen P. Jordan

POINT OF VIEWILETTERS

TORT REFORM

THE JURY IS OUTIN MORE WAYS

THAN ONE

The French historian and Ameri­can observer Alexis de Tocque­ville, in his classic work Democra­cy in America, told his Europeanreaders, "Scarcely any politicalquestion arises in the UnitedStates that is not resolved sooneror later into a judicial question."Considering the current proposalsbeing put forth by the casualty in­surers in this country to change theAmerican tort system, that propo­sition seems to be reversed.

The critics of our common lawtort system say that civil justice inthe United States is inefficient, er­ratic and excessively expensive.They complain that lawsuits arebeing brought to right every imagi­nable wrong. They decry in print"the litigation explosion" and"excessive" damage awards andhave formulated a package ofchanges to the common law sys­tem which they are heartily foster­ing on state legislatures and Con­gress.

The critics have proposed a veri­table Hydra of legislative changeswhich they would like to see made.The many heads of that Hydra ap­pear as: eliminating joint and sev­eral liability of defendants, regu­lating contingency fees, control­ling class actions, fixing statutorycaps on damage awards, eliminat­ing interest on awards, requiringuniform jury instructions nation­wide, exempting activities thatmeet federal standards from therisk of lawsuits and so forth. Butactually behind the many loudlyhissing heads lies the real snake- a much more insidious creaturethan its public heads - the desireon the part of the so-called reform­ers to diminish the role of Ameri­can juries in tort cases.

Torts is a cosmos not a chaos. Asa distinct field of law, Torts hasidentifiable procedures, methods,purposes and goals. The differ­ence between Torts as a field oflaw and criminal law, for exam­ple, is that Torts has for the mostpart developed as common lawrather than statutory law. Thosewho say that tort law is more a lot­tery than a "rational" system of jus­tice and who seek to make it "ra­tional" by codifying certain partsof it according to codes of their lik-

ing are actually seeking to re-stylea system forged out of experienceand history.

Whatever their announcedmeans, a thoughtful analysisshows that those who are clamor­ing for changes ultimately want toreduce, either by limiting or byoutright abrogating, the role ,andpower of juries in tort cases. Acareful reading of the argumentsput forth by those who want legis­lated changes shows that almostalways a disparaging reference ismade to the civil jury's discretionin fixing liability and awardingdamages.

Casualty insurers, who are theengine and drive train of the cur­rent tort reform movement, claimthat juries' natural sympathieswill usually produce large dam­age awards "without much con­cern for the legal technicalities."They say fear of this fact promptstort defendants into out-of-courtsettlements even in unmeritoriouscases, and these settlements leadto skyrocketing insurance rates,etc. Their articulated, for-public­consumption argument for changeis, "Legislated standards would re­duce inequities." Their largely un­spoken premise seems to be we'vegot to crack down on these juries,

The origin of the jury as a factfinder in civil disputes goes backat least to Henry II (1133-1189). Hen­ry II, it will be remembered, wasthe progenitor of England's com­mon law courts. During Henry II'sreign, a litigant could obtain aroyal writ to have a jury

summoned in land title cases todecide a question. Men were cho­sen from the neighborhood (orshire) who were believed to knowthe facts and were bound to an­swer on their oaths according totheir knowledge. When a party got12 oaths in his favor, he won. ThisTwelfth Century civil jury, or as­size as it was called, was a uniquefeature of the King's courts be­cause only the King could compela man to swear an oath. It becamea very popular feature with thosewho had disputes to settle andplayed no small part in establish­ing the eventual dominance of thecommon law courts as the judicialsystem of England.

As time passed, to prevent cor­ruption of the assize's work. an in­stitute known as attaint devel­oped. Because originally jurorswere men who were supposed toknow the facts and were sworn byoath to divulge them to the court,when the result of a lawsuit wasnot right, it was assumed that thereason was because the jurors per­jured their oaths. Attaint of jurors

Editor's Note:Former Governor Sidney S.

McMath is the senior partner in theMcMath Law Firm in Little Rock.The McMath Law Firm handles per­sonal injury, products liability,medical malpractice and workers'compensation law issues. StephenP. Jordan is a second year lawstudent at Washington & Lee Uni­versity School 0/ Law in Lexington,Virginia.

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/S?

.. , .

• •••..

was an inquiry into a jury decisionby a grand assize (a larger. sepa­rate group of jurors) whereby theoriginal jurors themselves couldbe imprisoned and otherwise se­verely punished if their verdictwas found to be false.

Eventually the role of the jurypassed from that of 12 fact-givers tothat of 12 fact-finders. hence themaxim: Juratores sunt judices factiGurors are the judges of fact).

From its inception and accep­tance. trial by jury was the onlyform of trial used in any courts ofcommon law in England until themid-19th Century. Sir PatrickDevlin. the English jurist. has saidof trial by jury. "its origin is acci­dental and its retention deliber­ate." Blackstone said in his Com­mentaries that trial by jury. "everhas been. and 1 trust ever will be.looked upon as the glory of EnglishI "aw.

As the early colonists came tothis country not all of the features

88/Arkansas Lawyer/July 1987

of the English judicial system werereplicated. but trial by jury was. Infact when the colonies broke fromEngland in 1776. one of the griev­ances listed in the Declaration ofIndependence was that. "The his­tory of the present King of GreatBritain is a history of repeated in­juries and usurpations ... depriv­ing us in many cases of benefits ofTrial by Jury."

After the Revolution. when theConstitution was drawn up in 1787.the Founding Fathers included inthe 7th Amendment the right totrial by jury in common law civilcases in federal courts. The statesalso have recognized and pre­served in their constitutions theright of trial by jury in common lawsuits in state courts. Article II. Sec­tion 7. of the Arkansas Constitu­tion provides that. "The right oftrial by jury shall remain inviolateand shall extend to all cases atlaw. without regard to the amountin controversy ..."

It has been said that justiceposes the problem of how to recon­cile the rigidity of the law with thepopular idea of what is fair andjust. Traditionally. under our sys­tem. juries have played an impor­tant role in tempering the perfectideals of the law to everyday expe­rience. Jurors tend to be everydaypeople and their determinationstend to be the determinations ofeveryday citizens. That is not abad thing. As the English writerG.K. Chesterton put it. "Our civili­zation has decided when it wants alibrary cataloged. or a solar sys­tem discovered. or any trifle of thatkind. it uses up its specialists. Butwhen it wishes anything donewhich is really serious. it collectstwelve of the ordinary men stand­ing around. The same thing wasdone. if 1 remember right. by theFounder of Christianity."

In administering justice. courtsare required to perform two diffi­cult tasks: discovering where the

truth lies between conflictingversions of the facts and applyingto the facts, so found, the relevantlegal principles. Courts must ad­minister equal justice to the richand the poor, the good and thebad, the strong and the weak, tomen and women of every shade ofpolitical belief, to those who enjoyprivileged positions and to thosewho are otherwise despised,feared or even hated. It has alwaysbeen thought in this country thatjuries, made up of persons drawnfrom these various stations insociety, play a desirable part inthis process of arriving at justicefor all.

Plucknett in his famous A Con­cise History of the Common Lawwrote, "... It will be seen tbat in itsorigin the jury is of a representa­tive character; the basis of its com­position in the early days ... wasclearly the intention to make it rep­resentative of the community."Under our constitutional system ofseparation of powers, the votingjury - 12 people having no train­ing in the legal system, chosen atrandom to listen to evidence and todecide - is the judicial branch'sconnection with the Americanidea of government of the people,by the people and for the people.They are little democracies on thelaw in our great big Democracy ofLaw. Judge Learned Hand remind­ed us in one of his opinions, ". . .The verdict of the jury is not theconclusion of a syllogism of whichthey are to find only the minorpremise, but really a small bit oflegislation ad hoc. like thestandard of care."

Of course in the common law tortsystem, the jury always has andstill does play a subordinate roleto the judge. The verdict of thejurors has no legal effect untiljudgment is entered on it. Despitethe contrary impression those whoare pushing for changes in the tortsystem seek to make, the verdict ofa jury, on damages or any otherquestion, cannot change the law.

The reformers cry that juries areoften gullible and can be manipu­lated by slick lawyers. On reflec­tion, there is nothing per se objec­tionable even were that so. As acab driver quoted in the Wall StreetJoumal said, "But that's no problemas long as you've got the slickerlawyer." That a lawyer can have

an effect on a jury is part and par­cel of the adversarial process; it isno reason to change the system.

Also juries, even once judgmenthas been entered on their verdictsby a trial judge, do not have unlim­ited discretion as a matter of law tolevy undue or unsupportableawards. Checks and balances onjuries already exist in the form ofappellate review.

Lest anyone doubt this, hardly abetter example of the fact could begiven than a capsule review of thenewsworthy case of Silkwood v.Kerr-McGee. 485 F. Supp. 566 (1979);667 F.2d 008 (1981); 104 S. Ct. 615(1984); 769 F.2d 1451 (1985). In 1979,after hearing evidence and argu­ments on both sides, a federal juryin Oklahoma awarded Karen Silk­wood's surviving family $10 mil­lion in punitive damages againstthe Kerr-McGee corporation. In1981. the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court ofAppeals struck down the entire $10million. In 1984, the U.S. SupremeCourt by a 5-4 vote remanded thecase to the Tenth Circuit with in­structions that the $10 millioncould be upheld as a matter of law.In 1985, over a strong dissent, theTenth Circuit again reversed the$10 million award. Earlier this yearthe Silkwood family, 12 years, onetrial and three appeals after KarenSilkwood's death, accepted a set­tlement from Kerr-McGee for lessthan $1.4 million - hardly makingit a case of Fiat justitia pereatmunduB.

Unfortunately, the casualty in­surers who are clamoring forchanges in the common law sys­tem seem malcontent with appel­late review as well. In some quart­ers' barely beneath the conversa­tional level, there is grumblingthat "liberal judges and greedylawyers" are "conjuring upschemes for controls on businessthrough the courts." (A good exam­ple of this mindset of some corpo­rate defendants can be seen in theApril 7, 1986, Forbes article, "TheHanging Judges of Business.")

The question is: to satisfy casu­alty insurers and their current con­stituents, should the judicial pro­cess be reformed? Businesses cuelooking at alternate methods ofdispute resolution to avoid civil ju­ries. Overhaul of the common lawtort system with an aim towardlegislatively restricting juries

should not be one of them. At last itis well worth remembering whatBlackstone said about our jury sys­tem and the reform of it in one ofthe most celebrated passages fromhis Commentaries:"(SJecret machinations which maysap and undermine it. however con­venient these may appear at first... these inroads upon this sacredbulwark of the nation are funda­mentally opposite to the spirit of ourconstitution; and though begun intrifles. the precedent may gradual­ly increase and spread to the utterdisuse of juries in question of themost momentous concern." 0

REFERENCES

Baldwin. John. and Michael McConville.Jury Triala. New York. Ox1ord Universi­ty Press. 1979.

Blackstone. Sir William, Commentaries onthe Law 01 England. Philadelphia, LB.Lippincott and Co.. 1832.

de Tocqueville. Alexis. Democracy inAmerica. New York. Vintage Books.1954.

Devlin. Sir Patrick. Trial by Jury. London.Stevens. 1956.

Holmes. Oliver W.. The Common Law.Boston. Little Brown & Co.. 1923.

Insurance Information Institute. The Law­suit Crises. 1986.

lolley. Liability Insurance and the JuryTrial. 751. Louis U.L.J. III (1962).

Kalvem. The Dignity of the Civil Jury. SOVa. L. Rev. 1055 (1964).

"Litigation Explosion:' The Wall StreetJournal. series of articles May-June1986, p.1.

Plucknett. Theodore F.T.. A Concise His­tory of the Common Law. Rochester.N. Y.. Lawyers Co-op Publishing Co..(1936).

Shaffer. Appellate Courts and PrejudicedVerdicts. U. Pitt. L. Rev. I (1964).

"The Hanging Judges of Business:' Forbes.Vol. 137, p. 62. April 7. 1986.

"The Tort Explosion," The New Republic.Vol. 193, p. 4, November 18. 1985.

"Tort Wars: Inswers Push ... Begins toSlow Down." The Wall Street 10urnal.August I. 1986. p. I.

'Who is at Fault," The Memphis Commer·cia! Appeal, July 6, 1986, p. E I.

ACCIDENT RECONSTRUCTIONAND INVESTIGATION

Expert WitnessJ. Larry Williams, Ph.D.

2208 Shoshoni DriveJonesboro, Arkansas 72401

Phone: (501) 972-9222or (501) 972-0167

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyerl89

He's traveled a lifetime highway that hasnot always been level and straight.

Certainly, it has had plenty of unexpectedcurves and sharp turns. But he has negotiated

many of life's unpredictable paths andjourneys exceedingly well.

JudgeGeorge Howard. Jr.

By Phyllis Harden Carter

Judge Howard entered law "onthe heels" of the Browndecision. when "separate butequal" was the policy andpractice in Arkansas.

•••••

During the Twentieth Century, Arkansas lawyers ofAfrican-American heritage have been relativelyfew in number, but their contributions to lhe slate

have been significant. One man who has made a majorcontribution is Federal Judge George Howard, Jr.

Howard has overcome many obstacles to reach theposition of judge. On the way, he has earned respectwithin and outside of the legal profession for his integri­ty, legal skill and strong sense of justice.

Judge Howard summed up his judicial philosophythis way:

"I try diligently to show compassion, to be under­standing. I try to be patient and most of all to see that thevoiceless, the underprivileged, the have nots, the forsak­en and the 'alleged outcasts' are afforded the same op­portunities as those who have - shall we say - unlimit­ed resources or have prestigious beginnings. I think thisis part and parcel of every individual's duty. More is ex­pected of one who has achieved more and this is what Istrive to do in those cases over which I preside."

George Howard has come a long way from his home­town of Pine Bluff, Arkansas. His father was a Baptistpreacher. His mother was a graduate of Arkansas Nor­mal and Mechanical College (AM&N, now the Universityof Arkansas at Pine Bluff) and a school teacher. His child­hood included weekly Sunday school and church wor­ship services.

90IArkansas Lawyer/July 1987

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/91

In 1940, when he was a sophomore at the all-blackMerrill High School, Howard decided to drop out andwork for the National Youth Administration, a federalagency established by Congress at the suggestion ofPresident Franklin D. Roosevelt. A young congressmanfrom Texas - Lyndon Baines lohnson - was in charge ofthe program, designed to develop manpower for defenseindustries during World War II. Howard went to work in a

"Under our system, one'ssocial standing or birth are notthe determining factors in how

much he can achieve."•••••

ball bearing factory in Plainville, Connecticut. In 1943,he was drafted and assigned to the Seabees - the Navy'sconstruction crew - in the South Pacific, where heserved two years and nine months.

While Howard was in the military, the "separate butequal" doctrine was the law of the land. Whites were inexecutive ollicer positions and blacks were, by andlarge, relegated to menial jobs. Howard recentlyrecalled an incident on the U.S.S. Hornet. a convertedtroop carrier, that led to his important decision that heshould and would go to law school.

An order came down that Howard and other blacksailors would not be allowed to use the ship's washroom.Howard spent that same day trying to get to the captain toinquire about the order. He was upset that alter fightingin the war, he and other blacks were being denied an op­portunity to use the washroom. The captain was obvi­ously impressed with Howard's tenacity and as a resultremoved the restriction. In his bunk that night. Howardrealized that the only way he was going to have an im­pact on the status of blacks was to enter the judicialsystem.

"I had no idea it would be so motivative," he said ofthe incident in an interview with the Arkansas Gazette'sGeorge Wells when he became a federal judge.

Howard was eventually discharged from the Navy atMemphis with the rank of coxswain (petty ollicer 3rdclass) and returned to his native Pine Blull at age 21. Backhome, he asked the principal at Merrill High Schoolabout the possibility of re-entering. "Since my principalhad been the one to encourage my friends and me to getinto the jobs program, he realized he should readmit meeven though I was 21 years old," he said.

While completing high school. his chemistryprofessor, the late E.E. Bankston, discovered the futurejudge's interest in the law and encouraged his youngstudent to enroll in the pre-law program at Lincoln Uni­versity in lellerson City, Missouri. Howard followed histeacher's advice and, alter high schooL entered LincolnUniversity to major in political science.

While at Lincoln, the University of Arkansas admittedits first black student. Silas Hunt. In addition, the prohi­bition against blacks attending the University of Arkan­sas law school was rescinded by Governor Ben Laney.Inspired by these events, Howard applied to the lawschool in 1950 and was accepted. His application forhousing on campus was accepted as well.

921Arkansas Lawyerlluly 1987

Judge Howard began his term on theArkansas Supreme Court byremembering he "came from humblecircumstances ...

July 1987/Arkcmsas Lawyerl93

We do more than print the law­we put it into perspective...

University of Arkansas. The firstwas Jackie Shropshire in 1951.George Haley, brother of authorAlex Haley, graduated in 1952, fol­lowed by Wiley A. Branton, formerdean of the Howard University LawSchool in Washington, D.C., in1953.

Howard graduated, as he puts it."on the heels" of the United StatesSupreme Court's landmark deci­sion in Brown v. Board of Educationof Topeka and during a time when"separate but equal" had been thepolicy and practice of Arkansas fordecades.

Howard returned to Pine Bluff tostart his private law practice, onethat lasted 25 years and earnedhim the distinction of being one ofthe three most active Arkansaslawyers in the school desegrega­tion drive of the 1950s and 1960s.The other two were John W. Walkerof Little Rock and Wiley Branton.

Howard's most famous case wasthe desegregation of DollarwaySchool near Pine Bluff in 1962. Hisdaughter, Sarah Howard, then a10th grader, was one of the blackstudents admitted to the school asa result of a lawsuit filed by herfather in U. S. District Court. Shewas the only student to apply totransfer from the all-black Town­send Park School to the whiteDollarway School. Howard said hewanted his daughter to graduatefrom an accredited high school.The black school wasn't ac­credited.

He also represented plaintiffs incases challenging the constitu­tionality of state and municipallegislation designed to hinder theactivities of the National Associa­tion for the Advancement of Col­ored People (NAACP) and the prac­tice of denying blacks service atrestaurants and accommodationsat motels. Howard frequentlyworked for the NAACP Legal De­fense Fund.

Howard served as president ofthe Pine Bluff chapter of theNAACP in 1962 and president of theArkansas State Conferences ofBranches for the NAACP in 1967. In1980, Howard was presented a spe­cial award by the Little Rock chap­ter of the NAACP for his work in civ­il rights.

He was elected president of theJefferson County Bar Associationin 1974.

Southeast ArkansasEd Arnult(513)741-0811

Howard recalls the day he ar­rived at Fayetteville and present­ed himself to the dormitoryofficials. "Everybody was sur­prised," said Howard. Apparently,the University officials did not re­alize that Lincoln University wasan historically black college andhad assumed Howard was white.Since this was obviously not thecase, arrangements were made tohouse Howard with a prominentblack Fayetteville family, theHoovers. But in the spring of 1952,he was permitted to move on cam­pus and live in Lloyd Hall. The fol­lowing October, Howard waselected over two white contendersas president of Lloyd Hall. becom­ing the first black named to astudent elective office at the Uni­versity of Arkansas.

Howard said that while he wasat the University, black lawstudents were not permitted

to attend the annual law banquetuntil their second year. Also,blacks were not permitted to joinlegal fraternities or organizations.

In 1954, Howard became thefourth black to graduate from the

usesFederal Procedural Forms, LEdFederal Procedure Rules ServiceFederal Procedure, L EdBankruptcy Service, LEdImmigration Law Service

Southwest ArkansasDonald Nasser(318) 635-1310

.E.opM~y

.a.-~~

• Plodo.oc\ iabdlly

""""'"J• Cif"~IU

THE LAWVEAS CQ·QPEAATIVE PUBLISHING CO.Aqueduct BUildingRochester. New York 14694

Call for Descr1>oon of Servke.s

Nat"l I·800-624·0905Texas 1·800443·0127

Oftkes in Tyter. AmarilloLubbock. Austin. San Antonio.Dallas. t-iouston and Beaumont

(214) 56&1900

SEAL CORPORATIONoffers it wide range of IeChl"lCal and engmeenngeJq:JertJse In the demandng fJdd offailureanalysls.AI~ IS camed out byecpenerced proIesslClJ\aIengtneerS pn;Mdlng pHrnpt results to dtertsnab~.au- seMCeS ncll.de ltlf" follovMg:

.~~lJOfl

.~""~• ldlXnkJry teillI'Ig lOrd

""""'.. ...."...XVfog.Jlloon~

~IIIIlCP

... both in our law books and our computer data serviceWhether it's with ALR, Am Jur, USCS, LEd-or VERALEX'", our new

computer assisted information retrieval system-your research will go faster andmore efficiently with Lawyers Co-op in your library.

Our law books and our computer research service are made to mesh with eachother and your needs. Let your LCP representative show you what's possibleand affordable in legal research.

Here's what the LCP Total Client-Service Library® offers the Arkansasattorney.Am Jur 2dAm Jur Legal Forms 2dAm Jur Pleading & Practice FormsAm Jur Proof of FactsAm Jur TrialsALR SystemU.S. Supreme Court Reports, L EdContact your LCP representative:North Arkansas Northeast ArkansasLorraine Hall Kent McClain(501)378-7038 (502) 554-8651

941Arkansas Lawyerlluly 1987

Five of the filst blacks to graduate from the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, School of Law, celebrate at a banquet ofthe Arkansas Black Lawyers Association in 1978. They are, from left, Christopher C. Mercer, Jackie L. Shropshire, GeorgeHaley, Judge George Howard, Jr., and Wiley A. Branton.

In 1965, Howard was appointedto the Arkansas Advisory Commit­tee to the United States CivilRights Commission. He served fora period of four years, two as chairof the Committee.

In April 1969, Arkansas GovernorWinthrop Rockefeller appointedhim to a six-year term on the Ar­kansas State Claims Commission.He served as chair of the Commis­sion for four years during the ad­ministration of Governor DaleBumpers. Howard subsequentlywas reappointed to the ClaimsCommission by Governor DavidPryor, on December 10, 1976, for anadditional six years.

Howard's first experience on thebench came one day later, on De­cember ll, 1976, and after Gover­nor Pryor also appointed him toserve as special associate justice

on the Arkansas Supreme Courtwhen Associate Justice Frank Holtdisqualified himself from partici­pating in an appeals case. He be­came the first black appointed by agovernor to serve as a special as­sociate justice. A few weeks later,on January I. 1977, Howard wasnamed to the Supreme Court'sCommittee on ProfessionalConduct.

By the end of the year, on Decem­ber 5, 1977, Howard achieved an­other first when he returned to theSupreme Court, this time throughon appointment to fill the unex­pired term of Associate JusticeElsijane Trimble Roy, who hadbeen appointed to the U.S. DistrictCourt for the Eastern and WesternDistricts of Arkansas.

Howard began his term on theCourt by remembering he "came

from humble circumstances," hetold the Gazette,

"I have a bicycle, and that night 1rode about 20 blocks to the neigh­borhood where 1was reared. 1 justwanted to recall the days 1 playedsandlot ball, the Depression andwhat were really tough days forthe country as a whole. At that time1 couldn't visualize that 1 would bedesignated by the governor to oc­cupy the highest office ever heldby a black in modem times. Then 1

Editor's Note:Phyllis Harden Carter is an assis­

tant city attorney for the city of LittleRock. She received a law degreeflOm Marshall-Wythe School ofLaw, College of William and Mary,in Williamsburg, Virginia, in 1975.She is admitted to the Arkansas andVirginia bars.

luly 1987/Arkansas Lawyerl95

Wntc or Call 10 ~ ad<k,.'tl to the mailing 11101 fUI 01.11 pCIlOl.!K vollulillon commentaries.

CallTHE BUSINESS EVALUATION RESOURCE

VALUATIONS

• Detailed Documentation. In-Depth Experience In • Quality ControlHundreds of ValuationAssignments InMany Industries

lrealized that under our system,one's social standing or his birthare not really the determiningfactors in how much he canachieve or how far he can go in thiscountry."

Howard ended his 13-monthCourt term by performing a mar­riage ceremony for his son, GeorgeHoward III, and Veter Thomas ofLittle Rock in his chambers at thestate Iustice Building.

On July IS, 1979, Governor BillClinton appointed Howardto the newly created Arkan­

sas Court of Appeals. It was inOctober 1980, during his tenure onthe Court of Appeals, that Howardwas nominated by President Jim­my Carter to fill a vacancy on theU.S. District Court for the Easternand Western Districts of Arkansas,the position he presently holds. Atage 56, Howard became the firstblack federal judge in Arkansas lorthe eastern and western districts.

Judge Howard has repeatedlyproven during his legal careerthat, for him, there is no substitutefor hard work, knowledge and astrong and uncompromising senseollairness.

At his swearing-in ceremony up­on being named to the federalbench, Howard said, "This ceremo­ny represents not only a personalaccomplishment for me, my familyand the black people of the state• , , but also a social milestone inrace relations in the state of Arkan­sas." His nomination. he said, was"indicative 01 what can be accom­plished when mankind rises abovehate and lear."

He displays his compassion forthe "voiceless, the underprivi­leged, the have nots and the for­saken" by allowing these litigantsto have access to the judiciary in avery real sense. For example,Judge Howard receives many peti­tions lor writ 01 habeas corpus frominmates of the Arkansas Depart­ment of Correction. These prison­ers contend they have not beenafforded a lair and decent trial orwere deprived equal protection ordue process.

In reviewing these petitions, re­gardless of whether he considers aclaim to be casual or believes ithas some merit. Judge Howard ap­points counsel. even if the petitiondoes not ask for it. He knows thatmany of these inmates are illiter-

• Pannership Interests

• Buy-Sell Agreements• Mergers!Acquisitions• Lost Business

Earnings

• Leveraged Buyouts

• Tax Planning• LitigationsSuppon

• Charitable Gifts• Estate and Gift Taxes• Dissenting Minority

Shareholders

• Intangible AS~l

Appraisals

• Closely-Held Securities.Common Stocks.Preferred Stocks andDebentures/Bonds

• Business Owner Life­Time Planning

• Lost Earnings Analyscl'l

• Private Companies

• Reverse Stock. Splits

• ESOPs• Divorce Proceedings• Fairness Opinions

MERCERCAPITAL

MANAGEMENT, INC.1503 Union Avenue Suite 20 I Memphis. Tennessee 38104

(90 I) 725-0352

Consulting EngineerExpert Testimony

Natural Gas - Petroleum­Chemicals - Aviation

The FRANTZ Co.Joseph F. Frantz. Ph.D.. P.E.7171 Harwin Drive. Suite 202

Houston. Texas 77036Fires Product Contamination Operating LossesExplosions Personal Injury Capital LossesEvaluations Contract Disputes Environmental

Registered Professional Engineer State of Arkansas 3501.Also registered in States of Georgia, Louisiana,

Mississippi. New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas.Court Qualified and Experienced.

(713) 781-8493

961Arkansas Lawyerl)uly 1987

EXPERT WITNESSGRADUATE MECHANICAl ENGINEER 32 yearse~ In desqI. leslng. manufaetunng. super­YrSIOfI and opetallOn Of eqtJlpmerIl Also eXl9l'\SlYeexecutrvfl expenence. 0uaIthed as an expet11n many.-._,

• For1dIft & Holsl:s• Malena! Hardng Eqpt.• ConstNCIIOfl Equ.pmenc• Truc:tts Of at typeS• Heavy Vehdes• Alr1lne Ground Handling Eqpt.• EIectnc Vehicles• Dllchlng Machines• Manulactunng Mad'IIr'l8ry

9 YEARS COURTROOM EXPERIENCE

P.O. Box 3064 Opelika, AL 36803(205) 749-1544

BOBBY O. SMITH, B.S., J.D.President

SMITH-ALSOBROOK& ASSOC.

EXPERT WITNESS SERVICES

• nre consulting• Rimltire explosions• Traffic accident reconstruction

were abused by the police, mostlypersons "in the underprivilegedcategory." He said he never fullyunderstood their situation until hisown "first-hand experience."

As a judge, Howard said he isdetermined that both sidesget fair treatment in his court

80m 2:'12·24. Amanllo. TC\3S;U.S. 3\'). 1').$)·1946: OUahomaStale Unl\'crsJly. 1~19-I9. B SMech. Engmeermg: Unll Rig &Equlpmenl Co. Tulsa. 19-19·1982;Responsible' for all engulttnngfunction!> 1957-1975: FormedConl­pany for Unll Rig in Br.wl 1976.GencrJI Manager. Canadian Oper.alions. 1977; In charge of Unll RigProdUCI Lillgallon 1977-1982.

G.A. Tomlinson P.E.

Weckerllng Scientific LaboratOries. Inc

SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION OFACCIDENTS AND FAILURES

Appliance fires, computer chip failure,construction accidents, asbestos contamination,and vehicle accidents are examples of cases solved.State of the art scientific equipment andtechniques including microscopic analysis. Expertwitness and consultant.

Litigation brochure available.2602 Electronic Lane, Suite 606 • Dallas, Texas 75220. Call 214/353-9494

licer if his client really had beengambling. The second officer in­terrupted and told Howard not toask about the case. An argumentensued and Howard was arrested.

Howard was brought to the jail,where he was told to remove histie, shoestrings and contents fromhis pockets. He was booked for dis­orderly conduct and was photo­graphed and lingerprinted for po­lice files. He was released on a$100 bond and a preliminary hear­ing was set.

Two weeks later, the chargeswere dismissed when the city at­torney presented an affidavit froma white aHorney who had wit­nessed the encounter betweenHoward and the policemen. The at­torney said Howard never saidanything profane.

Howard told the Gazette, "Thiswas really an eye-opener for me."He said that he had representedmany people who contended they

ate and without funds. An inmateon a pro se petition in federal courtis no match for the resources at thedisposal of the attorney general ofthe state of Arkansas.

"We are deceiving ourselves ifwe permit an inmate to come in ona pro se petition when there issome merit to the claims," JudgeHoward said. To those critics whocomplain about trial delays, hisresponse is that ". . . a litigant isnot made for the docket. Rather thedocket was designed to implementand to assist litigants in the prose­cution of cases."

Judge Howard said he wants togive a litigant ample lime topresent his case. His reasoning isthat a litigant has spent money en­gaging a lawyer to prepare hiscase and the lawyer has spent timein case preparation. When a liti­gant comes into the courtroom, "ifI'm impatient and hurrying himalong," said Judge Howard, '" havenot in my judgment afforded thatlitigant his day in court." It is thisphilosophy and practice whichmoved the Arkansas Trial LawyersAssociation in 1985 to present himthe Outstanding Judge Award for1984-85.

Judge Howard admits that ajudge brings to the bench his ex­periences and the circumstancesthat he encountered while grow­ing up. His own background hasgiven him a knowledge of theharsh realities that accompanyracism and prejudice.

This physically small man whois typically described as speakingin a quiet. measured voice. wasarrested in 1969 by two Pine Bluffpolicemen who charged he wasdisorderly and profane - chargesthat were later dismissed.

Howard had gone to municipalcourt for the trial of a man accusedof carrying a large knife. The knifewas used in the defendant's workas a handyman and mover. Thearresting officer told the judge hehadn't prepared his case for thetrial due to his workload and thetrial was postponed. During thesecond hearing, the officer said hewas prepared, but leveled a newcharge that the accused also hadbeen gambling. Howard askedthat the trial be delayed and his re­quest was granted. Afterward, Ho­ward left the building with theofficers. He asked the arresting of-

July 1987/Arkansas Wwyerl97

TRY US FIRST!

J

and that freedom and liberty be­come more than just words or legaldoctrines espoused by judicialscholars. "It means something tome," he said. "I took the oath whenI was sworn in that the law wouldbe applied equally and with aneven hand irrespective of the liti­gant's condition, white or black,rich or poor. It means something tome and I appreciate it."

In 1982, the Arkansas Bar Associ­ation, which denied membershipto blacks until the 1960s. came tothe defense of Judge Howard fol­lowing comments by PulaskiCounty Sheriff Tommy Robinsonthat Howard was a "token" judge.Robinson had been held in con­tempt of court by Howard for fail­ing to obey court orders and endedup in federal custody in a Mem­phis, Tennessee, jail. He was re­leased from federal custody byHoward who said he was satisfiedthat Robinson had purged himselfof contempt of court, but warned,"Don't be deceived by my patience.forebearance and tolerance. Don'tinterpret those characteristics assigns of weakness."

The Association's House of Dele­gates adopted a resolution filed byLittle Rock attorney John 1. Laveycalling for the Association to"condemn" Robinson for violatinga federal court order and for usingracial epithets in statements criti­cal of Howard.

Although Judge Howard is con­cerned about terminating cases onthe docket, it is not his main goal.His supreme objective is to ensurethat when a litigant leaves thecourtroom. whether he wins orloses, he has a feeling that as anAmerican citizen he has beenafforded his rights under the U.S.Constitution. And Howard feelsthat judges as well as lawyershave a unique opportunity tomake democracy - defined interms of fair housing, political andeconomic equality, fair employ­ment and educational opportu­nities - a living reality for allpersons. irrespective of their race,color or social or politicalstanding.

"I suppose the bottom line is ser­vice," said Howard. "When wegive service. the return is invalu­able. We can't evaluate it in termsof dollars and cents. Let us not putgetting ahead ahead of givingservice." D

p.o. BOX 1874·ABOCA RATON. Fl 33429

(305) 388-0055

Phone collect or write

FIDUCIARY RESEARCH, INC.(Forensic Genealogy)

MISSING HEIRS?**

WE FIND HEIRSWORLDWIDEAT OUR OWN

EXPENSETwenty years of prudent service to

the legal, judicial and financial communities

424-A FIDELITY UNION LIFE BLDG.DALLAS, TX 7520'(214) 748-6"0

98/Arkansas Lawyer/July 1987

"

1·800-328-0109(MN, AK 612/228-2450)P.O. Box 64526St. Paul, MN 55164-0526© 1986 \\t:St Publishing Co. 9338·8/9·86

ravenamore:'

call or write today for more information 1 An:::'C'T"l A1 A1'"or to arrange for a free WESTLAW VV.L..:.t..:) 1 .L.C\.VVdemonstration in your office.

ROD P. DURKEE9 Johnnycake LaneLittle Rock, AA 72211Phone: (res) 501/225-3652lillie Rock 501/378-4676

it's

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/99

"If you don't like the weather, justwait." So goes the old saw aboutArkansas' climate. A similarstatement could be made aboutArkansas' guardianship statutes.

1000Arkansas Lawyerlluly 1987

that the existing guardianship law contained seriousconstitutional flaws, particularly in regard to the defi­nition 01 "incompetent." the lack 01 adequate notice tothe alleged incompetent. the lack 01 right to counseland other due process protections.' In the summer 011982, the task lorce completed a draft 01 a proposednew guardianship law which basically adopted theconclusions 01 Sheryl Dicker, an attorney with LegalServices 01 Arkansas and a task force member.' Dickerhad recently addressed a symposium on developmen­tal disabilities and the law in Little Rock held underthe auspices 01 the Arkansas Bar Association's Com­mittee on the Mentally Disabled, Her presentation onguardianship was later published in the UALR LawJournal,

The task lorce's proposed law was endorsed by theCommittee on the Mentally Disabled but. due to a

lack 01 time, was never submitted to the Association'sJurisprudence and Law Relorm Committee to be in­cluded in the Association's legislative pockage. Thedraft was introduced and passed in the 1983 legisla­tive session as House BUi 427 and was signed by theGovernor, becoming Act 345, Apparently there wasvery little opposition to the bill in the legislature.'However, after the passage 01 Act 345, widespread op­position in the legal community surfaced concerningthe requirement 01 a prolessional evaluation 01 the al­leged incompetent (now incapacitated), uncertaintiesover whether a corporate fiduciary could serve as aguardian and confusion over which portions 01 theprior law remained valid, since Act 345 repealed onlythose laws which were inconsistent with it.

Much 01 the disagreement between the supportersand the opponents 01 Act 345 was caused by the diller­ent perspectives they each brought to guardianship.The overwhelming experience 01 those who had draft·ed the act was in working with the mentally retarded;on the other hand, virtually all 01 the attorneys, judgesand bank ollicers who opposed it had dealt primarilywith elderly people for whom guardianship had beensought either with their agreement or at least withtheir acquiescence. Many 01 the opponents saw noreason lor any change in the guardianship law, be­lieving that the prior system had worked very well.

Even those who might not have opposed some 01the substantive changes which Act 345 contained werevery conlused about what guardianship law in Arkan­sas was after it became law. A number 01 discussionswith judges and lawyers in 1983 and 1984 lound a greatvariation in the procedures used in guardianshipproceedings. Some judges allowed proceedingsunder prior law, reasoning that Act 345 merely createda new procedure which was optional. While it'sdoubtful that the legislature intended this result orthat the Arkansas Supreme Court would have upheldit. few guardianships are appealed. Therelore, insome jurisdictions, prior law continued to be used.

O ther courts did not believe that Act 345 merely cre­ated an optional procedure, but they were Ire­

quently uncertain about how to apply it. Issues wereoften raised about the evaluation that was required ­who was competent to make one, what should itsterms be, etc. One issue that initially caused concern

•

- whether a bank could serve as a guardian - wasremoved rather quickly. An attorney general's opinionheld that Act 345 did not repeal prior law which al­lowed a bank to serve as the guardian of the estate(but not the person) of an incapacitated person.'Act 940 of 1985

Almost immediately after the passage of Act 345, aspecial committee of the Association's Probate LawSection began discussing changing the law. Therewere a variety of ideas discussed by the lawyers,judges and bank officers who participated in thecommittee's work. Many favored the outright repeal ofAct 345 and the reinstatement of prior law. Others feltthat some of the criticisms which had been made of theprior law were proper and that some of the changesmade by Act 345 should be retained. The group alsorealized that an effort to seek the outright repeal of theact might be strongly resisted by those who had beeninstrumental in its passage. There was no sentimentexpressed to retain Act 345 in its entirety. .

Ultimately the Section's committee and the Juns­prudence and Law Reform Committee decided on acompromise approach. A draft hill was preparedwhich preserved most of the significant reforms in Act345, incorporated some features of the UniformGuardianship Act and specifically reenacted priorlaw. This bill was presented to the Association'sHouse of Delegates and was approved, becoming partof the Association's legislative package for presenta­tion to the 1985 General Assembly. While there wassome fear that groups advocating the rights of thementally disabled might oppose the legislation, nosignificant opposition materialized. The bill waspassed by the legislature and was signed by the Gov­ernor, becoming Act 940 of 1985.

The significant features of the 1985 legislation,which, with the exception of the temporary guard­

ianship law to be discussed later in this article,remain law today are:

(I) A new definition of "incapacitated:' taken from theUniform Guardianship Act. was contained in the 1985act. The advocates for change in the guardianship lawhad criticized the definition of incompetent in the 1949Probate Code. but the definition of incapacitated con­tained in Act 345 had been criticized by the legal com­munity;

(2) The concept of limited guardianship, which was one ofthe basic goals of the propanents of Act 345, remainedin the new law;

(3) A professional evaluation of the person for whomguardianship is sought was retained. This require­ment, one of the most significant changes Act 34Smade in existing law and one of the most criticized.was accepted by lawyers and judges because of thedetailed specifications which the act set forth. One ofthe mos1 important specifications is that the profes­sional who completes the evaluation does not have tobe present in court, although he or she may be sub­poenaed.. Moreover. the details of what the evaluationshould contain are spelled out with more particularity;

(4) Current law retained the requirement that an "annualreport" on the conditions of the ward be made. but re­moved. Act 345's requirement that the clerk automati­cally set a hearing if the guardian fails to do so. Therequirement of a review hearing every three years asprovided. for in Act 345 also was removed.;

(5) The notice provisions of Act 345 have been retained. inlarge part - the allegedly incapacitated person mustreceive notice and the notice must set forth his or herrights to be represented.. to present evidence, to cross­examine witnesses, to be present. to remain silent andto compel the presence 01 witnesses.' However. 20days' notice is required. under current law. Under Act345. the minimum period was 30 days.

Of course, there are other areas in which Act 345'sprovisions were retained or deleted, but the above listincludes the most significant features of our currentguardianship law. One feature of Act 940 of 1985 wasthat it specifically repealed all prior law and fully setforth all provisions. Therefore, one need not attempt todetermine whether a pre-existing provision isretained. If it is law, it is set forth in the guardianshipstatutes (Ark. Stat, Ann, secs, 57-821 to 57-870 (1985Cum. Supp.)).

Act S35 of 1987

Just as our guardianship law seemed about to entera period of relatIve stability - the only guardian­

ship legislation expected in the 1987 General Assem­bly was for technical corrections to Act 940 - theArkansas Supreme Court decided the case of In theMatter of Loren Evatt.' Evatt involved a challenge tothe temporary guardianship procedure set forth inArk. Stat. Ann. sec. 57-840 (1985 Cum. Supp.).

In the Evatt case, the probate judge had signed anex parte order granting one of Mr. Evatt's relatives atemporary guardianship of his person for 90 days, themaximum period permitted by statute for a temporaryguardianship. After the guardian's appointment. heauthorized the sheriff to pickup the ward. The shenffdid so, and Mr. Evatt was conlined in jail for two days.He was then involuntarily committed to the ArkansasState Hospital. Mr. Evatt did not contest his civil com­mitment, but he did appeal the order of temporaryguardianship. He alleged that the granting of guard­ianship over his person without notice before or imme­diately thereafter violated his right to due process oflaw.

The Supreme Court agreed. While recognizing thatthere are emergency situations in which imminentdanger to the life or property of the allegedly incapaci­tated person could make notice prior to the guardian­ship hearing impossible, the Court held that theward's interest in retaining control of his person andproperty are such that a review hearing must be heldpromptly after the guardianship is established, ifprior notice is not given. In addition, the Court heldthat the notice given in a temporary guardianshipmust be different both in form and in substance fromthat required under section 57-840. (The only specifica-

Editor's Note:Judge Ellen Bran t1ey, a chancellor and pro­

bate judge in the Sixth Judicial District, FourthDivision, is co-author of Probate: The Law inArkansas. She served as a faculty member atthe University ofArkansas at Little Rock Schoolof Law from 1978-86 and is a graduate ofWellesley College and the University ofVirginia,

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyerll03

tion the statute contained was that the temporaryguardian should "forthwith give te;, the incapacitatedperson notice of the appomtment. ) The Court notedthat the statutory provisions goverrung nollce for per­manent guardianships required nollce of the nght tobe represented by counsel. to present evidence, tocross-examine adverse witnesses. to remam sllent, tobe present and to compel the attendance of the profes­sionals who prepared the evaluation required lor theguardianship hearing. In addition to the defects m thecontent of the notice requrred m a temporary guard­ianship, the Court criticized the fact that the guardian,whose interests could be adverse to those of the ward,was to give the notice and that the only time limitationspecified, "forthwith:' was not further defmed.

The Evatt decision was handed down on February 2,1987, during the regular session of the General As­

sembly. In order to prepare legislation for submissionto the legislature, a committee of the Probate Law Sec­tion met to discuss the Court's decision and thechanges it required. Debby Nye, general counsel forthe Department of Human Services, had alreadyprepared draft legislation which the committee usedas a working document.

The general outline for the needed changes hadbeen clearly set out by the Supreme Court in its deci­sion. The Court had even gone so far as to givesamples of legislation in other areas - civil commit­ment, permanent guardianship and protective custo­dy - which did not contain the !laws of the temporaryguardianship statute. First, of course, was the re­quirement that notice must be gIven. The drall, whIchultimately became Act 535 of 1987, required that noticeof the entry of an order of temporary guardianship begiven within 72 hours, with provisions for a hearing tobe held within three working days of the entry of theorder. (Although it's uncertain why the two timeperiods were set forth differently, perhaps it was togive additional time for a court proceeding to bescheduled if the order 01 guardianship was entered ona Friday.) Notice is required to be made on the ward bypersonal service unless the probate court determinesthat such notice carmot be made, in which case noticemust be made to such person as the court directs. Theact further requires that the notice contain all thematters set forth by the Supreme Court. (This was doneby simply specifying that the content of temporaryguardianship notices be the same as in permanentguardianship proceedings.)

Act 535 of 1987 does not apply to proceedings for thetemporary guardianship of a person who is age 14 oryounger. This provision was included since the rightsneeded by an adult over whom guardianship is soughtbecause of alleged incapacity are not needed byminors. Temporary guardianships of minors occurmost ollen in infant adoptions and the requirement 01notice with the right to a hearing at which the ward ­an infant - could appear and cross-examinewitnesses would be useless. Fourteen was selected asthe cutoll age because this is the age at which noticemust be made on a minor for whom permanent guard­ianship is sought, and it seemed wise to be consistent.Act 535 was signed on April L 1987, and contoined anemergency clause, making it immediately ellective.

1000Arkansas Lawyer/july 1987

While Evatt's legal significance was primarily inregard to temporary guardianship, it also was

instructive in regard to permanent guardianshIp. Infinding the notice provisions of the temporary guard­ianship law inadequate, the Supreme Court com­pared them with the notice provisions of the perma­nent guardianship law. Those proVISIons were notthere before passage of Act 345 of 1983. Until its pas­sage, the same notice which the Court found conshtu­tionally inadequate in temporary proceedmgs ap­plied in permanent proceedings as well. It IS qwteclear that if the bar members who opposed Act 345 haddecided simply to seek its repeal and the rein­statement of the prior law, and had succeeded indoing so, that law would have been struck down by theCourt at the earliest opportunity. The wisdom of thecourse selected - preserving the major reforms of Act345 while making its operation easier - looks evenbetter with the hindsight provided by Evatt.Future Outlook

Alter the major changes to the guardianship lawover the last five years, what can we expect for the fu­ture?

First, there is no sentiment, at least in the legalcommunity, for any major changes. Only technicalcorrections have been proposed to the commIttee ofthe Probate Law Section which is currently reviewingthe law. Of course, as the lawyers and judges of Ar­kansas work with the current statute, new problems inits operation may arise.

Second, to a large extent, the whole upheaval inour guardianship law merely rellected a nationaltrend. The "limited guardianship" approach had beenadopted in 19 states before Act 345 was enacted.'While some of the changes which Act 345 made wereabandoned by Act 940, most of the significant onesremained and Arkansas' guardianship law is nowrather typical.

Third, although there is no current impetus for amajor reform, some of the lawyers and judges whoparticipated in the past ellorts to revise the guard­ianship procedures have become mterested m theUniform Guardianship and Protective ProceedingsAct. While there are many advantages in this compre­hensive and well-dralled legislation, it is doubtfulwe'll see any great ellort for its enactment any timesoon since the substance and procedure of our currentlaw seems adequate to most of the people involved inthe procedure. In addition, the ellorts those of us whouse the guardianship law have made in learning, un­learning, drafting and lobbying have left us exhaust­ed for the time being. Therefore, our current law islikely to be with us in form, more or less, for the nextseveral years. 0

FOOTNOTESIDicker. "Guardianship: Overcoming the Last Hurdle to CivilRights lor the Mentally Disabled:' 4 U.A.L.R. L.f. 485, 489.

"Letter from Sheryl Dicker to Jack McNulty, chair of the ArkansasBat Association's Jurisprudence and Law Reform Committee,dated luly 27, 1983.

3Id.4Id.SOpinion of the Attorney General of Arkansas. No. 83-210.'Ark. Stat. Ann. sec. 57-835 (1985 cum. supp.),'291 Ark. 1S3 (987).-Letter from Sheryl Dicker. cited in note 2.

LAW. LITERATURE& LAUGHTER

A lawyer's world is fraught withpicturesque "slanguage." We havebooks to be thrown at people; moneyleft on tables; fruit from poisonoustrees; cows that eat forbidden cab­bage; wells that can't be gone to toooften; bullets to bite, and an ampleamount of bootlicking, brown-nos­ing and certain other descriptiveterms.

Oxymorons. An oxymoron is aconspiracy between words to makesense with contradictions of terms.Classic examples are slow speed,sweet sorrow. deafening silence andterribly happy. Comics over theyears have identified jumbo shrimp.military intelligence and studentdiscipline. to add spice to the con­cept.

There are also one-word oxy­morons, such as freeway. Safeway.freewill. ovenproof and brief. Occa­sionally one encounters a multi­word phrase that boggles the mindwith internal incongruities.

In our nation's Capital in 1983. Ichecked in for a return flight to LittleRock. I was told it had been can­celed. Not to worry, the airlineagent said. My flight would reorigi­nate in St. Louis, to which I would beflown free of added charge. I wasnot about to ask how somethingcould be reoriginated.

I was sure I had found the PlatonicIdeal of one-word oxymoronia.Since the flight had been canceledbefore its scheduled takeoff. I alsowas dealing with preoriginationcancellation. And. since notice hadnot been given to the passengersand the new flight was taking off lat­er in a distant city, I was clearly ex­periencing a unilateral multi­phasic inter-city time-delay post­preorigination cancellation reori­gination.

The legal world has oxymorons:divorce proposal. trial separation,friendly dispute. test case and grandjury. In certain courts, your Honorseems contradictory, as does ad­ministrative procedure in certaingovernmental agencies.

The losing attorney might think

1000Arkansas Lawyer/July 1987

By Vic Fleming

that jury instructions must havebeen oxymoronic. Plea bargain hasa contradictory ring to it. Privilegetax. labor negotiations. UniformCommercial Code. law license ...

Puns. A pun is a "play on words."A famous example of a pun is Jesus'statement, "Thou art Peter (Petros).and upon this rock (petra) I will buildmy church." Matthew 16: 18. It losessomething in the translation fromGreek to English.

People who say a pun is the low­est form of humor are off base, Onescholar has noted, "Puns are good,bad. and indifferent. and only thosewho lack the wit to make them areunaware of the fact."

Shakespeare used puns. Note

Mercutio's line in Romeo and Julietshortly before his death: "Ask for metomorrow and you shall find me agrave man." Or Lady Macbeth'spost-murder statement: "If he dobleed. I'll gild the faces of thegrooms withal; for it must seem theirguilt."

Puns run rampant in the world oflaw and politics. A proposed "anti­abortion" amendment to the Arkan­sas Constitution failed in 1986. Itmust have been a misconception.

The criminal judge with an ac­cused prostitute before him is askedto adjudicate miss behavior. In sodoing he observes the miss' de­meanor. Her lawyer argues. "Myclient's activity did not warrant ar­rest."

In landlord-tenant negotiations,one party capitulates to the other'sdemands. It's the lease he can do. Inthe Supreme Court, one is sure tofind appealing attorneys.

Miscellaneous. The pun and theoxymoron are not alone in the legalworld.

Many metaphors are firmly en­trenched. Litigants have a burden ofproof. Lawyers lead their witnesses.Sometimes verdicts are shocking tothe conscience of the court. Casessurvive motions to dismiss.

Redundancy abounds. Lawyersseldom just say things. They allegeand state. Testators don't leavethings to their heirs, they give. de­vise and bequeath. Grantors grant.bargain. sell and convey property;time periods run from and after adate and judgments are had and re­covered from and against folks.

Then, of course. there is the occa­sional ingenious use of a word thatbaffles all the listeners. The story istold of an attorney who. in hissummation, had used every con­ceivable "epithet of abuse" to de­scribe his party adversary. Stoppingfor an instant to think, he added,"This naufrageous ruffian." Whenfriends later asked the meaning ofthe word, "he confessed he did notknow, but said he thought it sound­ed well." 0

• State andWorldwide Travel

• Surveillance

• Missing Persons

Tommy L. BakerOwner

• General Investigation

• Insurance Defense

• Theft & Fraud Investigations

• Plaintiff Investigations

• Background Checks

• Fonner~kansasState PoliceInvestigator

• Proven Integrity

1523 S. BroadwayLittle Rock, AR 72202

P. O. BOX 1296· CONWAY. AR 72032

Ring: (501) 371-2992. After-hours (501) 329-5862

Litigation support including research. reportwriting and expert testimony addressing

economic. financial and statistical issues.

JOHN PICKETT & ASSOCIATES. INC.Economic Consultants

• VideoDepositions

PRIVATE INVESTIGATION

PH: 376-7770

ooeoeoooeace

ECONOMIC ANDSTATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Data review Business valuationsManagerial prudence Structured settlementsAnalysis of damage estimates arising from tort and contractdisputes

aker~Se~urities

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/l07

DISCIPLINARY ACTIONSFebruary to April

The Arkansas Supreme CourtCommittee on Professional Con­duct from February to April 1987,issued one letter of reprimand,three letters of caution and sevenletters of warning. It also reinstatedthe law license of Barry Watkins ofSpringdale. Watkins' license wassuspended for one year in February1986. The Committee took no actionon 78 informal complaints and voted"no action warranted" on 23 formalcomplaints.

GARNER TAYLOR. JR.Letter of Reprimand

Gamer Taylor, Jr., of Little Rock,was issued a letter of reprimand inApril for violation of Rule 8.4 of theModel Rules of Professional Con­duct involving the reporting of pro­fessional misconduct. According toinformation obtained from theSebastian County Prosecuting At­torney's Office, Taylor was chargedin November 1984, with aggravatedassault following an incident inwhich he fired shots at a taxicab.The charge was reduced and Taylorpleaded guilty to first degree as­sault. In his response, Taylor admit­ted that he was charged with the of­fense and said that he was subse­quently placed on probation for oneyear on the reduced charge. He saidthat the incident occurred after hiswallet and keys were stolen andthat he had no intention of causingharm to the thief or to any otherperson.

MARSHALL CARLISLELetter of Caution

Marshall Carlisle, of Fayetteville,was issued a letter of caution inFebruary for violations of Rules 1.3,involving diligence, and 3.2, involv­ing expediting litigation, of theModel Rules of Professional Con­duct. Carlisle was hired in 1980 torepresent a client and other familymembers in a wrongful death case.In 1982, when contacted by the clientabout the status of the case, Car­lisle said he had allowed the statute

IlJ8IArkansas Lawyer/July 1987

ComplaintsAgainst

AttorneysOn the Rise

A six·year study of disciplinaryactions by the Arkansas SupremeCourt's Committee on ProfessionalConduct shows that the number ofcomplaints filed against attorneysis on the rise. Data collected since1981 indicate that:

• Since 1981. complaints filedagainst attorneys bave increased 42percent;

• Twenty-one percent of all com­plaints filed witb tbe Committee in1981 required affidavits, compared to26 percent in 1986;

• Nineteen percent of complaintsfiled lor action resulted in disciplinaryaction in 1982 and 40 percent resulted indisciplinary action io 1986 - a recordhigb for the period;

• The top fow reasons given for fiI·ing complaints against attorneys are:

- lailwe to perform;- neglect;- lailwe to communicate, and

Editor's Note;The data presented in Tables I

and 11 were collected by Walter R.Nibloc1<, 01 fayetteville, during hisseven yems as a member 01 the Ar­kansas Supreme Court's Committeeon Prolessional Conduct. Ourthanls to Ann R. Henry, chair of theArkansas Bar Association's Proles­sional Ethics and Grievances Com­mittee. lor her assistance inpresenting this data.

of limitations to run. In his responseto the complaint, Carlisle said hehad had very little contact with theclient. He said that he did contactthe insurance company and hadconveyed a settlement offer to theother attorney involved in the case,but the settlement was not accept­ed. Instead, the family wished to lilea lawsuit, he said. Carlisle said he

- misrepresentation.Table I repreRllts the tota1 num­

ber of complaints received by theCommittee's executive secretarysince 1981 and the lolal number ofdisciplinary actions administered.Please note that from 1981 to 1982.reprimands and cautions werecombined. In addition, warningswere DOl approved for use by theCommittee until March 1985.

Initially, inquiries or complaintsagainst lawyers are received bythe Commillee's executive secre­tary. eitber in person or by tele­phone. then investigated. The in­vestigation includes written c0rre­spondence, telephooe calls to theallorneys, complainants andwitnesses involved. checking ofcourt records, personal confer­ences and interviews. Affidavitsare prepared on those complaintsrequiring review by the entireCommillee. Disciplinary actionagainst an attorney is detenn1Dedfollowing informal and formalhearings by !be Commi~.

Table n lists !be complaints re­ceived from 1981 to 1986 by classifi­cation. Sometimes a complainantlists multiple reasons for Beelringdisciplinary action. It is inter­esting to DOle that failure to perfectan appeal and problems with thestatute of limitations - each anightmare for attomeys - appearin the middle of !be list.

As !be evidence suggests, goodcommunications and organiza­tional habits might help keep yourname out of Ibis column.

Review th_ 8lalislics and do alegal checklist to see how yourpractice ratesl

felt no obligation to file the lawsuitbecause no arrangements weremade in advance for his lee or lorthe payment of out-of-the-pocket ex­penses.

CHARLES E. DAVISLetter of Caution

Charles E. Davis, of Springdale,was issued a letter of caution in

TABLE!Complaints Received/Dlsclpllnary Actions Administered

DESCRIPTION 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 TOTALS

Total Complaints 1138 1154 1171 1287 1318 1615 7683(infonnal and fonnal)

Total Fonnal Complaints 238 2S4 271 337 368 415 1883(requiring affidavits)

20S 144 860Complaints Filed for Action 94 108 145 164Total Disciplinary Actions 22 20 33 SO 49 58 232

Reprimands 20 18 13 20 16 31 118Cautions 18 29 13 3 63Warnings 12 16 28Sunenders of Ucense 6 5 ISSuspension I (6 mo.) 2 (J yr.) 3Disbannent Suits 1 2Disbannents 2Cites for Contempt I

Table DComplaints by ClaullicaliOll

1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 TOTALS

Failure to perform 41 as 139 230 56 551Neglect 96 89 137 167 28 517Failwe to communicate with client SO 64 SO ISO 124 438Deceit. fraud. misrepresentation 29 52 74 171 78 404Undue delay 12 20 31 lSI 69 283Fee dispute 39 37 42 112 47 277Failure to tum over file 19 28 34 32 33 146Conflict of interest 19 16 22 24 19 100Incompetence 10 19 22 37 12 100Misappropriation of funds 13 7 14 19 7 60Engaged in illegal conduct 14 36 9 59Failure to perfect an appeal 8 13 12 16 2 51Harassment 10 8 11 11 9 49Failure to pay debts 9 5 12 10 36Allowed statute of limitations to run 5 10 18 2 3SRefusing to withdraw 4 10 14Improper withdrawal 6 4 3 13Acquiring interest in litigation 9 3 12Advertising 7 5 12Communicating with one of adverse interest 4 4 2 10Solicitation 4 4 8Commingling of funds 7 7Limiting practice 5 5Ineffective counsel 4 4Revealing confidential iruormation 2 2Dividing fees with non-lawyer I IPending 52 49 68 68 52 289

February for violation of Rule 1.7 ofthe Model Rules of ProfessionalConduct involving conflict of inter­est. Davis had represented a clientin a 1982 divorce case. The clientand his wife reconciled and the casewas dismissed. Davis later repre­sented the client's wife in a 1984divorce case. In his response. Davis

admitted to representing opposingparties.

GARY PERSONLetter of Caution

Gary Person, of Fort Smith, wasissued a letter of caution in April forviolation of Rule 1.3 of the ModelRules of Professional Conduct in-

volving diligence. Person was hiredto handle a bankruptcy for a clientin January 1986. He told her thebankruptcy had been filed, but theclient learned in March 1986, afterher car had been repossessed, thatPerson had not filed the bankruptcy.Person said the bankruptcy petitionwas filed on April 11. 1986. 0

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/l09

IN MEMORIAM

Joe Edward Purcell

Joe Edward Purcell. aged 63, ofBenton, a political veteran whoserved as attorney general. chair ofthe state Democratic Party, lieuten­ant governor and - for seven days- governor of Arkansas. diedThursday, March 5, 1987.

Purcell twice ran unsuccessfullyfor governor, in 1970 and 1982, butnever let defeat stop him. "The truthis, I've been running (or governor allmy life:' he said in 1982, the Arkan­sas Gazette reported.

While serving as lieutenant gov­ernor in 1979, Purcell was inaugu­rated governor when David Pryorresigned one week before his termas governor expired. to take a seat inthe United States Senate. At the endo( that week, Bill Clinton was inau­gurated as governor and Purcellwas sworn in again as lieutenantgovernor.

Purcell came to the state's atten­tion in 1966 when he defeated the in­cumbent attorney general. BruceBennett. A Democrat, Purcell tookoffice the same year as GovernorWinthrop Rockefeller, a Republi­can, and although they were oltenat odds, both contributed much to

1l00Arkansas Lawyer/July 1987

the cleanup of Arkansas politics.One of his first acts as attorney

general in January 1967 was to file alawsuit against Arkansas Loan andThrift Corporation, a hybrid savingsinstitution that defrauded thou­sands of investors of their savings,the Gazette reported. The company,which had operated with the toler­ance o( Governor Orval E. Faubus'administration, was closed andthree officials were sent to prison,

As attorney general. Purcell wrotethe state's first comprehensive con­sumer protection law and a recodi­fication of the state's election lawsaimed at stemming election (raud.

He remained in that office until1970, when he ran unsuccessfully forgovernor in the Democratic primaryagainst Dale Bumpers and (ormerGovernor Orval Faubus, amongothers, and narrowly missed a run­off. Purcell endorsed Bumpers in therunoff. The next year, with Bumpers'support, Purcell was elected chair ofthe Arkansas Democratic Party, Heserved two terms, resigning in 1974to run for lieutenant governor.

One of his more notable cam­paigns reportedly was for governorin 1982, when he and Clinton de(eat­ed three other candidates in theprimary. He was defeated byClinton in the runoll by a margin o(about 36,000 votes.

After his defeat, Purcell went on tohead Paul Riviere's unsuccessfulcampaign for Congress in 1984 andworked in the successful petitiondrive that year to extend the terms ofconstitutional offices to four years.

Although he stayed out o( thepolitical spotlight (or the most partalter 1982, he continued to practicelaw in Saline County, where he be­gan his political career. (He wasBenton's city attorney from 1955 to1959 and its municipal judge from1959 to 1966,)

Purcell was born at Warren andhad lived at Benton since 1952. Hewas an Army veteran of World War IIand a 1952 graduate of the Universi­ty of Arkansas School of Law, Fay­etteville. He was admitted to the Ar­kansas bar in 1952.

He was a 34-year member of theArkansas Bar Association and was

a member of the American Bar Asso­ciation, the Arkansas Trial LawyersAssociation, the American Legionand the Benton Lions Club.

In 1967 he served as vice-chair ofLaw Day USA in Arkansas and in1976 he served as chairof the state'scommission on the bicentennial ofthe United States.

Purcell served on the board o( di­rectors of the Ouachita Area GirlScout Council from 1963-67, was thedistrict chancellor of Delta ThetaPhi Law Fraternity (or central andsouthern Arkansas from 1971-80 andwas the state chair for the March ofDimes in 1975-76. He was also the di­rector of the Alumni Association ofthe University of Arkansas at LittleRock.

Purcell was a member of the FirstMethodist Church of Benton andserved as chair of its Commissionon Missions, chair and vice chair ofits official board, church trustee, laydelegate to the Methodist AnnualConference and <;hurch lay leader.

Survivors are his wife, Helen HalePurcell; two daughters, Ede Hogueo( Fayetteville and Lynelle Lehmanof Little Rock; his mother, LynellePurcell of Little Rock; a brother, FredPurcell o( Ogden, Utah; a sister, EdeSharkey of Little Rock, and threegrandchildren.

Thomas Lee Cashion

Thomas Lee Cashion, aged 75, ofEudora, died Tuesday, March 31.1987.

Cashion was the former mayor ofEudora, the (ormer Eudora fire chiefand the former president of the Ar­kansas Municipal League.

He was a SO-year member of theArkansas Bar Association, a Navyveteran of World War II and a formerAmerican Legion commander.

Cashion was a Presbyterian.Survivors are his wife, Juanita

Norrell Cashion; a daughter, SusanCashion of Monticello; two sons,Ward Cashion o( Mandeville, La.,and Mark N. Cashion of Eudora, andthree grandchildren.

LEGAL BRIEF PRINTINGPARAGON Printing & Stationery Company has beenprinting briefs for over 35 years. Can we be of serviceto you?311 East Capitol Little Rock 375-1281

Jobe Ennund Hoggard, Sr.

jabe Ermund Hoggard. Sr.. aged71. of EI Dorado. died Saturday,March 21. 1987.

Hoggard served as EI Dorado cityattorney from 1952-1961.

He was born April 23, 1915, at HoI­land, the son of the Rev. j.H. andAnnie Mae Flemming Hoggard.

He was a graduate of HendrixCollege at Conway and received hislaw degree from the University ofArkansas School of Law, Fayette­ville. Hoggard began his law prac­tice in El Dorado in 1948.

He was a 39-year member of theArkansas Bar Association and amember of the American Bar Associ­ation and the Union County Bar As­sociation.

Hoggard was a retired first lieu­tenant in the Marine Corps and aveteran of World War II, receivingthe Distinguished Service Medaland the Purple Heart.

He was a member of the EI DoradoFirst United Methodist Church.

Survivors are his wife, RobbyeNoble Hoggard; a daughter, MarthaAnne Cripe of EI Dorado; a son. jabeE. Hoggard, !roo of EI Dorado; abrother. Kendall Hoggard of Con­way; two sisters. Maxine jones ofFort Smith and Mary Hendrixson ofConway. and four grandchildren.

J. Marvin Holman

J. Marvin Holman. aged 58, ofClarksville, died Wednesday, Feb­ruary 25, 1987.

Holman was a former Clarksvillecity attorney and johnson Countymunicipal judge.

He graduated from Arkansas TechUniversity in 1955 and the Universityof Arkansas School of Law. Fayette­ville in 1959.

Holman served as deputy prose­cuting attorney for johnson Countyfrom I!l)() to 1963.

In 1969 he was elected municipaljudge and served until 1972. He waselected city attorney in 1982. butresigned after being appoin tedmunicipal judge by former Gover­nor Frank White in january 1983.Holman lost a March 1983 specialelection to fill the position perma­nently.

Holman was a 27-year member ofthe Arkansas Bar Association andserved on its Local Court RulesCommittee. He was also a memberof the American Bar Association,the Arkansas Trial Lawyers Associ­ation and the Conway Rotary Club.

He was a member of the Clarks­ville Board of Education in 1965 anda veteran of the Korean War.

Holman was a member of the FirstUnited Methodist Church.

Survivors are his wife. Carol Hol­man; two daughters, Kimberly KayHolman and Andrea Lynn Pearson.both of Clarksville; a son, jamesMichael Holman of Clarksville; abrother, Dr. W.T. Holman of Victoria,Texas; a sister, Donna Moore of Lit­tle Rock, and two grandchildren.

Jerry J. Screeton

jerry j. Screeton. aged 88, ofHazen. died Thursday. March 12.1987.

Screeton was a former state sena­tor and mayor of Hazen and thetown's first municipal judge. He wasa retired lawyer. landowner. build­er and bonker.

A former naval officer, Screetonwas elected at age 27 as countytreasurer in 1926. He was theyoungest person ever to hold aPrairie County office.

Scree ton wen t to Washington.D.C.. in 1930 to serve as administra­tive assistant to former United

States Representative john E. Mil­ler. He studied law by taking corre­spondence courses there andpassed the bar in 1933. He served onMiller's staff until 1936.

Screeton was thought to be a like­ly candidate for Congress from theSecond District seat when Millerwas elected to the U.S. Senate in1937 after the death of joe T. Robin­son. But Screeton chose not to runand Wilbur D. Mills was elected.Screeton then went to Washingtonas Mills' administrative assistant in1939-40.

During World War II, Screeton en­tered the construction business andwas a partner in the Crowley.Screeton and Robinson firm and theBucTon Construction Company. Hebegan a career in bcmking duringthe war.

In 1945. he organized the PrairieCounty Bcrnk and served as its presi­dent until 1983.

Screeton was elected mayor ofHazen in 1942 and served until 1978except for an eight-year stint in thestate legislature.

Screeton was elected to the stateSenate in 1944.

He was appointed to the stateCommerce Commission by formerGovernor Orval E. Faubus. He wasa member of the Central ArkansasPlanning Commission and was theorganizer and a former Boardmember at Producer's Rice Mill atStuttgart.

Screeton was a former member ofthe Hazen Board of Education, a Ma­son, a World War I Navy veteran anda member of the American Legionand the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Screeton was a member of theFirst United Methodist Church.

Survivors are his wife, HazelScreeton; a daughter, Sally Sparksof Hazen, and two grandchildrenand two great-grandchildren. 0

TECHNICAL·EXPERT ENGl·NEER, BSMEIPE - Accidentreconstruction, automotive,machinery, aerospace,small structures. street light­ing, roadside hazards.James Yule. 6600 NW Sweet­briar Lane. Kansas City,MO 64151. (816-741-9441)

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/lll

Arkansas IOLTA Program

First Quarter anExciting Time

1109 North 4th StreetMonroe. LA 71201

318-322-0661

Qua/died and Experienced Expert Witness in Federal,Scate. Municipal and Military Courts.

HANDWRITING EXPERTScientific examination of Handwritten, Typewritten, Printed, Altered.Obliterated, Charred and Office Copier Documents; Ink and PaperAnalysis, Dating and other document related problems. Diplomate ofthe American Board of ForenSIc Document Examiners, Inc. Member ofthe American Society of Ouestioned Document Examiners and theAmerican Academy of Forensic Sciences.

ROBERT G. FOLEYFORENSIC DOCUMENT EXAMINER

• Legal Services of Arkan­sas (22.4 percent), $7,616;

• East Arkansas Legal Serv'~ic~e;'s;--~=================----- -,(17.5 percent), $5,950;

• Ozark Legal Services (13.9 per­cent), $4,726;

• Legal Services of Northeast Ar­kansas (12.1 percent), $4,114,and

• Western Arkansas LegalServices (9.9 percent), $3,366.

The board also granted $3,000 toeach law school in the state forscholarships. It designated onescholarship the "Arkansas BankersAssociation IOLTA Scholarship"

lt2lArkansas LawyerlJuly 1987

By Susanne Roberts and the other the"Arkansas League IOLTA program. Scholarship recipi-of Savings Institutions IOLTA ents will be selected on the basis of

The first quarter of 1987 proved to Scholarship" in recognition of the need, merit and geographical dis-be an exciting time for the Interest substantial contribution of Arkan- tribution.on Lawyers' Trust Accounts pro- sas financial institutions to the As mentioned earlier, the Ar-gram. Lawyers and financial r---------------------, kansas bar favorably respond-institutions continued to join ed to recruitment efforts duringIOLTA and interest earnings the first quarter of the year.grew to more than $30,000. The Our special thanks goes tototal amount collected in 10 Jerry Post of Batesville. Postshort months reached nearly was named recruiter of the$50,000. quarter for swamping the

The Arkansas IOLTA Foun- Foundation's office with en-dation, Inc., board of directors rollment forms, signing up al-met in March and named its most all the lawyers in Bates-first grantees. ville in a two-week period.

The board granted $30,000 to Washington and Benton Coun-the six Legal Services pro- ty lawyers were also over-grams in Arkansas based on whelmingly supportive of thethe percentage of poor people IOLTA program. A visit to Fay-residing in each program's ser- elteville, Springdale, Benton-vice area. The breakdown for ville and Rogers saw the en-each program is: rollment in one week of 40

• Central Arkansas Legal more firms and solo prac-Services (24.2 percent), titioners in the IOLTA program.$8,228; Our congratulations to Her-

man 1. Hamilton, Jr., of Ham­burg, for receiving the C. E.Ransick Award of Excellence.

-----------------------------------------..

Authorized Signatory or Signatories:

The undersigned elect(sl to participate in the Arkansas Interest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts Program (lOLTA) asauthorized by the Arkansas Supreme Court, Under this program, interest on the trust account described belowwill be paid directly to the Arkansas 10LTA Foundation, Inc" rather than being credited to the undersigned:

NOTICETO

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

ZipState

Telephone Number

Address

Lawyer or Law Firm Name

City

Account Number

DATE:

FROM:

ZipState

Financial Institution Name

Address

Telephone Number

City

TO:

Account Name

The funds currently deposited to this account. and all future deposits, should be placed in an interest-bearingaccount subject to negotiable orders of withdrawal. Interest on the average monthly balance in the account. oras otherwise computed in accordance with your standard accounting practice, should be remitted to the AR­KANSAS IOLTA FOUNDATION, INC" 209 W. CAPITOL AVENUE, SUITE 337, UTTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201.The Foundation's tax identification number is 710611874, You are not required to report the interest income (IRSForm 1099), but if you elect to do so, show the Arkansas 10LTA Foundation, Inc, as recipient.

Each remittance must be paid by check at least quarterly. If your institution has trust accounts for more thanone lawyer or law firm participating in this program, you may make a single remittance for all at the sametime. Each remittance must be accompanied by a document which shows the exact allocation of a lump sumpayment among the participating lawyers and firms who have accounts at your institution. This documentrequirement may be fulfilled by choosing one of two methods: I) Enclose a copy of each participating lawyer'sor law firm's account statement that is routinely prepared by your institution with each remittance or 2) Enclosean "Interest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts Interest Remittance Report" with each remittance. We hope that youwill waive any charges in order to benefit Arkansas citizens, but reasonable service and activity charges maybe deducted from each remittance and should be listed on the "Interest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts InterestRemittance Report."

Return this form to:Arkansas 10LTA Foundation, Inc.209 W. Capitol Avenue, Suite 337Little Rock. AR 72201

luly 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/1l3

-------1_1-------IOLTA

ATTORNEY HONOR ROLL(February \, 1987 to April 16, 1987)

STUTTGARTWilliam M. Moorhead

YELLVILLEBearden & Carter D

ROGERSStephen A. GeigleJim JohnsonJames G. LingleyMarian J. WagnerWilliams, Brinton, Jackson & Pace

SPRINGDALECypert, Crouch, Clark & HarwellJeff C. HarperE. Kent HirschRodney P. OwensPenix & TaylorJames O. Strother

POCAHONTASRiffel, King & Smith

PINE BLUFFBetty C. DickeyEugene HuntMaxie G. Kizer

MONTICELLOLegal Services of Arkansas

MENALegal Services of Arkansas

MORRILTONDale Lipsmeyer

LITTLE ROCKAnderson & KilpatrickBarron & ColemanEichenbaum Law FirmGruber Law OfficeMike HulenCollins KilgoreLegal Services of ArkansasMays & CrutcherPerronL Rauls & LooneyMary J. PruniskiWhetstone & Whetstone

LINCOLNBoyce R. Davis

JASPERKaren B. Walker

HOT SPRINGSLane, Muse, Arman & Pullen

JONESBOROPaul E. Hopper

MORRILTONFirst National Bank

FAYETTEVILLELarry R. FroelichWilliam Russell GibsonHanks, Gunn & BorgognoniCurtis E. HogueJill R. JacowayJones & ReynoldsMashburn & TaylorMcAllister & WadeRonald M. McCannRichard L. MillerWalter R. Niblock Law OfficesRichard P. OsborneOzark Legal ServicesJoe B. ReedJim Rose IIILanny K. SollowayRaymond C. SmithJay N. Talley

FORT SMITHJosef V. HobsonShaw, Ledbetter, Hornberger &

Arnold

fAYETTEVILLEMcIlroy Bank & Trust

JASPERNewton County Bank

EL DORADOLegal Services of Arkansas

PINE BLUFf'Savers Federal Savings & Loan

ASHDOWNFirst National Bank

BATESVILLECitizens Bank of Batesville

'First National BankIndependence Federal Bank

'Institutions denoted by asingle asterisk have to date re-mitted interest to the founda­tion without deducting a fee.

FINANCIAL INSTITUTION HONOR ROLL(February 1, 1987 to April 16, 1987)

CAVE CITYBonk of Cave City

ARKADELPHIA'Merchants & Planters Bank

DERMOTTGibson & GibsonDon E. Glover

CONWAYHartje, DuPriest & Collier

CAVE CITYKeith Watkins

BLYTHEVILLEJohn H. Bradley

BENTONVILLEClark & ClarkGocio & DosseyLawrence & HuffmanLittle, McCollum, & GeorgeSkaggs & Chase

BATESVILLESteve BellDavid M. ClarkHarkey, Walmsley, Belew &

BlankenshipHighsmith, Gregg, Hart, Farris &

RutledgeHively & KetzMurphy, Post, Thompson & ArnoldGary Vinson

ASHDOWNHawkins & Metzger

ARKADELPHIAMcMillan, Turner & McCorkle

114/Arkansas Lawyerl)uly 1987

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENTREPORT

Judicial ReformThe Pace Quickens

By R. Christopher Thomas

"Reform of the administration ofjustice is not sport for the short­winded." Arthur T. Vanderbilt

Arthur T. Vanderbilt served aschief justice of the New JerseySupreme Court and president of theAmerican Bar Association. In bothcapacities. he had an intense inter­est in the administration of judicialsystems. both state and federal.

A review of judicial reform in Ar­kansas confirms Justice Vander­bilt's estimate of the pace of judicialreform. However. change in our ju·dicial system has occurred. in­crementally. during the last halfcentury or so.

The following list relates those in­stances where our venerable 1874Constitution has been "reformed."presumably to good purpose. (Therehave been other instances of admin­istrative change in the judicialbranch not founded upon constitu­tional reform. However. because ofthe nature of our Constitution.substantive change within the judi­cial branch typically requires a con­stitutional amendment.)1924 - Amendment 9 - Increased size of

Supreme Court.1936 - Amendment 21 - Allowed prose­

cution by information.1938 - Amendment 24 - Concerned pro­

bate courts.1938 - Amendment 28 - Supreme Court

to regulate practice of law.1956 - Amendment 43 - Legislature to

set judges' salaries.1978 - Amendment 56 - Created Court

of Appeals.1986 - Amendment 64 - Increased

municipal court jurisdiction.This record of incremental change

suggests that. on occasion. a partic­ular "defect" of our Constitutionbecomes so onerous, a remedy is

fashioned. Most of the time. theseconstitutional amendments havebeen referred to the voting public bythe General Assembly.

In recent years. there have beentwo efforts to achieve a comprehen­sive change in the judicial article ofour Constitution. In both instances.those revised judicial articles havebeen part of efforts to enact new con­stitutions. in 1970 and 1980. It isremembered that both proposalsfaired poorly at the polls. Althoughmany of the reforms which werecontemplated by those new articlesare yet to be accomplished. somespecific improvements have been.or are in a position to be. realized.

For example. the creation of an in­termediate Court of Appeals. whichwas accomplished in 1978. was anitem suggested by the proposed ju­dicial article of 1970. Additionally.both proposed judicial articles con­templated a trial court. on the coun­ty level. with expanded jurisdiction.

The recent enactment of Amend­ment 64. which increases the juris­diction of municipal courts in civilcases. goes in that direction. Of im­mediate interest are more recent de­velopments.

First. the Arkansas SupremeCourt has held the juvenile courtsystem to be unconstitutional.Walker vs. State of Arkansas. 291Ark. 43. January 20. 1987. The legis­lature has responded by enactingtemporary legislation. Act 14 of1987. and. more importantly. has re­ferred a proposed constitutionalamendment to the voters. That pro­posed amendment will be consid­ered in November of 1988. and. if en­acted. will allow the General As­sembly to set jurisdiction in maltersconcerning juvenile and bastardyproceedings.

Second. the legislature. in coop­eration with the Supreme Court. hasreferred to the voters a proposedconstitutional amendment on judi­cial discipline. disability and re­moval. This too will be voted on inNovember of 1988. and. if enacted.will authorize the creation of a com­mission to review such matters.

Looking back over all this.changes seem to be occurring at anincreasing rate. Indeed. it is clearthere has been more jurisdictionalchange in the last two years thanduring the preceding 110 years ofthe life of our Constitution. Perhapsthese recent developments aremerely an exception to JusticeVanderbilt's rule. and. in the com­ing years. we will return to the moresedate pace evidenced earlier. Onthe other hand. perhaps this burst ofenergy will continue. leading toadoption of a new judicial articlewhich will deal with many of the un­finished initiatives from thepast. D

luly 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/liS

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S PAGE

Changes at YourLaw Center

By William A. Martin

• Alter 13 years, the original car­pet in your Arkansas Law Centerhas been replaced. The biggestchallenge was picking the color.

A committee of Arkansas BarFoundation and Arkansas Bar Asso­ciation officers and staff came upwith as many color choices as thereare combined members. The morewe looked at what blended with themarble and the wood, the more wewere convinced that the original in­terior decorator, Charles Mounts,had made a good color choice.

For help, we turned to VictorZanovich Interiors. He recommend­ed dusty rose, a color similar to theone we had. The overall effect of thecarpet, marble and wood blendedtogether is pleasing beyond all ourexpectations. Almost everyone whohas visited us seems to enjoy it also.

• We increased the rows ofphotos of Foundation fellows fromthree to four to allow the addition ofat least 100 more portraits of thosewho make a $1,500 contribution.

• A new telephone system withmore lines was installed in yourAssociation's offices. We hope youwill not hit as many busy signalswhen you call our local number, 375­4605. The new phones offer manymore features than did the previouspush-button black phones we rent­ed from AT&T. And, in four years, weshould save enough in rent to ownthe new system.

• Vour Association's staff is in thefrustrating process of learning touse computers. We have two desk­top IBM computers and a Laser Jetprinter. Even our limited mastery ofword processing makes our workmore efficient. We hope to convertour membership records from boxesof cards to a computer's memory in

1161Arkensos Lawyerljuly 1987

the near future. Planning and acautious approach should enableus to be able to recover informationin a usable form.

• With the legislature puttingmoney for the renovation of theGraduate Institute of TechnologyBuilding into Category B of the Rev­enue Stabilization Act. the move ofthe University of Arkansas at LittleRock Law School from the ArkansasLaw Center will probably be de­layed. Someday we must face the is­sue of how to appropriately use theCenter without the law school.Housing legally-related, non-profitorganizations such as the ArkansasIOLTA Foundation, Inc., the Arkan­sas Institute for Continuing LegalEducation, the Arkansas SupremeCourt's Committee on ProfessionalConduct and specialty bar associ­ations may be more acceptable tomember lawyers throughout thestate than would be making thespace available to law firms.

The Foundation's lease with thePulaski County Law Library Boardruns through November 2003 andproduces just enough money to poythe mortgage on the Arkansas LawCenter. When the law school even­tually moves, the Law Library Boardmay seek to have their lease adjust­ed. Although the Foundation mightbe able to gain more income by be­coming an active landlord, it maynot wish to embark on that role.

New Attorney's OathThe Arkansas Supreme Court has

adopted a shortened version of theAttorney's Oath. lt is less detailed,incorporates ethical rules by refer­ence and calls on lawyers to befaithful to their calling and guidedby a spirit of professionalism.

"I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR ANDAFFIRM:

"I will support the Constitution of theUnited States and the Constitution of theState ot Arkansas. and that I will foi th­fully perform the duties of attorney atlaw.

"I will exhibit. and I will seek to main·tain in others. the respect due to courtsend judges.

"I will. to the best of my ability, abideby the Code of Professional Responsibil­ity and any other ethics standards pro·claimed by the courts, and in doubtfulcases I will attempt to abide by the spiritof those ethical rules and precepts ofhonor and fair play.

"} will not reject, from any considera·tion personal to myself. the cause of theimpoverished. the defenseless. or theoppressed.

"I will endeavor always to advancethe cause of justice and to defend andkeep inviolate the rights of all personswhose trust is conferred upon me as anattorney at law."

Such oaths and codes of profes­sional courtesy should cause us tothink about our behavior and may­be even shock us into curing habitsacquired unintentionally. 0

YOUNG LAWYERS' UPDATE

Too Few VolunteersActive in YLS

By J. Thomas Ray

As the outgoing chair of the YoungLawyers' Section. it seems appro­priate to use my last Young Lawyers'Update to reflect on where the Sec­tion has been and the direction itneeds to go in the future.

I became involved in the YLS in1980 at its annual meeting in HotSprings when I was elected to theYLS Executive Council as one of thetwo representatives from the Cen­tral District. Approximately ISyoung lawyers were in attendanceat this meeting and. as memoryrecalls, I was elected by acclama­tion and without opposition simplybecause the only other young law­yer present from the Central Districtnominated me before I could nomi­nate him.

Although I became involved withthe YLS almost by accident. I contin­ued to remain active in it over thenext seven years for two reasons:(l) The YLS is responsible for carry­ing out many extremely worthwhileprojects which I found interestingand rewarding to work on and (2) Myinvolvement in the YLS allowed meto get to know and work with a smallbut extremely dedicated group ofyoung lawyers from across thestate. individuals like H.T. Moorefrom Paragould; Frank C. Elean. IIfrom Harrison; Carl A. Crow, Jr.. andMichael H. Crawford from HotSprings; Richard L. Ramsay fromPine Bluff; Edward Boyce from New­port, and Martha M. Miller from Lit­tle Rock. In working in the YLS. Iquickly discovered that. while alllawyers under the age of 36 who aremembers of the Arkansas Bar Asso­ciation are automatically members,in any given year. only IS to 20 YLSmembers are responsible for carry­ing out all its projects. This situ-

ation has created two majorproblems.

First. it has forced the relativelyfew young lawyers who are activein the YLS to shoulder an extremelyheavy workload. For example.since 1980. the YLS has drafted. pub­lished and periodically updated theSenior Citizens' Handbook, TheGuide to Arkansas Statutes of Limi­tations and the Criminal Law Hand­book: organized and sponsored thefall and spring swearing-in ceremo­nies for new bar admittees; organ­ized and sponsored the annualPractice Skills Seminar for newlawyers. statewide Law Week activ­ities and Trial Practice Seminar.and carried out numerous specialprojects. such as recruiting volun­teers for Arkansas Volunteer Law­yers for the Elderly (AVLE), handlingdisaster relief programs and co­sponsoring the Statewide MockTrial Competition. As a result. overa period of time. active members of

the YLS have suffered burnout fromthe workload.

Second. because of the small poolof active volunteers. the YLS has notbeen able to undertake a number ofextremely worthwhile projectswhich have been successfully im­plemented by young lawyers' sec­tions in surrounding states. Unlessour Section can devise a way to tapa substantially larger pool of volun­teers. it will be difficult for us to ex­pand beyond our current ongoingprojects.

Agree to BecomeActively Involved

In May, the YLS Executive Councilmet to discuss ways to involve moreyoung lawyers in YLS-sponsoredprograms and projects. Mike Craw­ford. the incoming chair. is enthusi­astic and will place great emphasison getting more young lawyers toparticipate in the YLS. In the comingmonths. all young lawyers in the As­sociation will be asked to partici­pate in one or more of the 1987-88projects or programs that we willsponsor. In view of the worthwhilenature of these programs and proj­ects and the opportunity to meet andwork with other young lawyers, Ihope that when you are contacted.you will agree to become activelyinvolved.

Finally. on a personal note. I havegreatly appreciated the opportunitywhich you gave me to serve as chairof the Young Lawyers' Section. I alsowant to give special thanks to JudithGray, Ruth Williams. Virginia Hard­grave and William A. Martin for alltheir hard work. support and assis­tance. Without them, it would be im­possible for the Young Lawyers' Sec­tion to function effectively. 0

July t987/Arkansas Lawyerlll7

IN-HOUSE NEWSLAW SCHOOLS, A.I.C.L.E. AND HOUSE OF DELEGATES

UNIVERSITYOFARKANSASSCHOOLOF LAW,FAYEITEVIllE

By J. w. Looney

Law Week ActivitiesThe traditional activi­

ties of Law Week took onspecial meaning thisyear with the celebra­tion of the naming of thelaw school complex asthe "Robert A. LeflarLaw Center." A fullrange of activities in­volving students, facul­ty and alumni madeLaw Week a specialtime in the life of the lawschool.

• The activities com­menced with the lawschool serving as re­gional host for the Amer­ican Bar AssociationClient Counseling Com­petition. Teams fromOklahoma, Kansas, Wy­oming, New Mexico andArkansas competed forthe regional champion­ship. The University ofWyoming team won thecompetition. The Uni­versity of Arkansasteam, consisting ofLaJeana Jones and Ca­rol Williams, was one ofthe teams in the finalround of the competi­tion. Phi Alpha Deltaheld its initiation andco-hosted a receptionfor the teams with the

US/Arkansas LawyerlJuly 1987

Washington County BarAssociation.

• Federal JudgeMorris S. (Buzz) Arnoldconducted a facultyseminar on curriculumplanning.

• Delta Theta Phi con­ducted a "Constitution­al Bowl" competition forstudent teams. Theteam of Norton Rosen­thal. Mike Stubblefieldand Nancy Rahmeyerwon the competition.

• Arkansas SupremeCourt Chief Justice JackHolt, Jr., and AssociateJustice David Newbernand Judge lim Cooper ofthe Arkansas Court ofAppeals served asjudges in the finalrounds of the intra­school moot court com­petition. The team ofEileen Kradel. KenMcCulloch and BrentSterling, and alternateMichael Barnes. wasselected to represent thelaw school as the na­tional team.

• U.S. Solicitor Gen­eral Charles Fried gavethe Hartman Hotz Lec­ture in Law and the lib­eral Arts. His topic was"Respecting the Law."

• A special luncheonwas held in honor of Dr.Robert A. Leflar's 60years as a facultymember at the Universi­ty of Arkansas and tocelebrate the naming ofthe law school complexin his honor. Presenta­tions were made byMark Pryor, Student BarAssociation president.University of ArkansasChancellor Dan Ferri­tor, U of A System

president Ray Thorntonand U of A Board ofTrustees Chairman Kan­easter Hodges, Jr. For­mer Supreme Court Jus­tice George Rose Smithwas the featuredspeaker.

• The week's activi­ties concluded withLEFLARFEST. sponsoredby Phi Delta Phi - anight of skits and enter­tainment by lawstudents followed by adance.

Faculty PublicationsBob Laurence's co­

au thored book, AStudent's Guide toSales. Letters of Creditand Documents of Title.has been released byMatthew Bender.

Janet Flaccus article,"Handicap Discrimina­tion Legislation: WithSuch Inadequate Cover­age at the FederalLevel, Can State legis­lation Be of Any Help?,"appeared in the Arkan­sas Law Review.

Rod Smolla's reviewsof Miller, "The First lib­erty: Religion and theAmerican Republic,"and Reichly, "Religionin American PublicLife," appeared in Con­stitutional Commentary.A commentary, "HowShould We Celebratethe Constitution?," anda review, "The BurgerYears," both appearedin The New York Times.

John Watkins servedas editor of the ArkansasMedia Law Handbook. apublication of the Ar­kansas Bar Association.His article, "The Arkan­sas Long Arm Statute:

Just How Long Is It?," ap­peared in the ArkansasLaw Review.

Charles Carnes' andGene Banks article,"Share Valuation - AChance for FinancialLiteracy," has been ac­cepted by the CaliforniaWestern Law Review.

Linda Malone hassigned a contract withClark Broadman for abook entitled Environ­mental Regulation ofLand Use.

Jake Looney's article,"What Happens To AnAg Co-op When A Mem­ber Goes Bankrupt?,"appeared in FarmerCooperatives,Other FaCulty Activities

Dr. Robert A. Leflarwas a speaker at the an­nual U of A JournalismDepartment banquetand received a specialDistinguished Achieve­ments Award.

Robert B. Leflar spokeat the Clinical LigandAssay Society's annualconference in St. Louison "Consumer Protec­tion and In Vitro MedicalProducts: A Critical Per­spective on RegulatoryPolicy." He also present­ed testimony during thelegislative session onproposed chemical"right to know" legis­lation.

Joan Chapman pre­sented testimony duringthe legislative sessionon "right to die" legis­lation.

Charles Carnes par­ticipated in a workshopin arbitration trainingand in AICLE's annualLabor Law Institute.

Ray Guzman present­ed a seminar for theWashington County BarAssociation on searchand seizure and con­ducted bar examinationlectures in Baltimore,Denver, Little Rock, LosAngeles, Philadelphiaand San Francisco.

Wylie Davis attendedthe semi-annual meet­ing of the National Con­ference of Bar Ex­aminers Contracts Com­mittee in Charleston,South Carolina.

David Malone spoketo the Political AnimalsClub in Little Rock.

Rod Smolla deliveredtestimony before theUnited States SenateCommittee on Judiciary,Subcommittee on theConstitution. on a newfair housing bill. Hespoke at the AmericanCulture Associationmeeting in Montreal on"Libel and the ChangingAmerican Character;" atthe ABA Conference inWashington, D.C .. on"Libel in the Work­place," and before theInternational Commu­nication AssociationConference in Montrealon the first amendmentand pol-propaganda.He also filmed a pro­gram for television onthe Bicentennial of theU.S. Constitution.

John Watkins wasnamed chair of a CableTelevision Task Forcefor Fayetteville.

Howard Brill wasnamed "Professor of theYear" by the Student BarAssociation. He attend­ed the Central StatesLaw School Associationmeeting in Branson,Missouri.

Jake Looney spoke tothe Franklin CountyCattlemen's Associa­tion and to GammaSigma Delta's annualbanquet on the new taxbill; to the AgronomyClub/Graduate Stu-

dents Association onAgricultural Policy;served. on a site eva.lua­tion team for the Ameri­can Bar Association ofLewis and Clark Col­lege in Portland, Ore­gon, and attended theCentral States LawSchools Associationmeeting in Branson.Missouri.

Don Pedersen, JanetFlaccus, Lonnie Beard,Jake Looney, Mary BethMatthews and LindaMalone conducted aworkshop on "Issues inAgricultural Law" forthe Arkansas ExtensionService LEADER class.

UNNERSITYOFARKANSASAT UTIlEROCKSCHOOL OFLAW

By Paula Casey

West Publishing Com­pany published UniformProbate Code in a Nut­shelL Second Edition, byDean Lawrence H. Ave­rilL Jr.. on April 3, 1987.

Professor Susan Web­ber Wright spoke at theArkansas Bar Associa­tion's Natural ResourcesLaw Institute in HotSprings on February 26to 28. The title of herspeech was "MultipleInterests in Oil and GasOwnership." ProfessorFred Peel spoke to theInstitute on the "1986 TaxReform Act and the Ener­gy Industry."

Professor Peel andProfessor Philip Oliverwere both speakers atthe AICLE Mid-YearMeeting in January.Professor Peel's speech,

"Tax Considerations inChoice of Business Form- Partnership, Corpora­tion, or S Corporation,"and Professor Oliver'sspeech, "Deduction ofInterest Expense andOther ltemized Deduc­tions." were part of aprogram on "How theTax Reform Act of 1986Affects You and YourClient." Professor DentGitchel organized theprogram.

Professor Philip Oliv­er's article, "SystematicJustice: A Proposed Con­stitutional Amendmentto Establish Fixed,Staggered Terms forMembers of the UnitedStates Supreme Court,"will be published in thenext edition of the OhioState Law Journal.Professor Oliver recent­ly offered a continuinglegal education coursein basic income tax forthe general practition­er. The course will beoffered again in the fall.

Distinguished Profes­sor Thomas Morgan ofEmory University Schoolof Law delivered theSpring 1987 Altheimerlecture. His speech,"Screening the Dis­qualified Lawyer: TheWrong Solution to theWrong Problem," will bepublished in the UALRLaw JournaL

Professor Roger Dwor­kin of the Indiana Uni­versity at BloomingtonSchool of Law spoke onApril 9 as part of theAltheimer Science, Lawand Technology LectureSeries.

Professor Dent Gitchelorganized the AmericanBar Association's South­east Regional MockTrial Competition. Thecompetition was hostedby the UALR Law Schoolon February 12 to 14.More than 70 Arkansaslawyers donated theirtime to judge the mocktrials and the circuit and

chancery judges of Pu­laski County allowedthe trials to take place inthe county courthouse.

The law school hon­ored the donors ofscholarships with a re­ception on April 1 at theArkansas Bar Center.

Elizabeth YoungHuckaby hosted a partyin honor of the ArkansasLaw School Alumni ather home on May 2.

The Annual Meetingof the UALR Law SchoolAssociation was held onJune 12 at the ArlingtonHotel in Hot Springs dur­ing the Annual Meetingof the Arkansas Bar As­sociation.

Professor Tim Ken­nedy resigned from thefaculty to accept a posi­tion as the in-house liti­gation coordinator withThe Marley Company,Inc., in Kansas City,Missouri.

Student NotesStudent Bar Associa­

tion President PatriciaLueken was electedgovernor of the Ameri­can Bar Association,Law Student Division's10th Circuit at a meetingin Hot Springs in March.

Kyle Jennings and RodMcDonald participatedin the William and MaryInvitational Moot CourtTournament in Wil­liamsburg, Virginia, inMarch.

The Student Bar As­sociation's AnnualAwards Banquet washeld on March 14. Fol­lowing the banquet andthe presentation of aca­demic awards and stu­dent organizationawards, the studentspresen ted the 1987Spring Follies.

The following stu­dents have been select­ed for the 1987-88 Editori­al Board of the UALRLaw Journal: Mark Hal­ter, editor-in-chief; MaryWiseman, executive ed­itor; Frank Arey, articles

July 1987/Arkansas Lawyer/ll9

editor; Kim Golden, re­search editor; PaulHarrison, survey editor;Jon Taylor, notes editor.and Price Gardner.managing editor.

A.I.e.L.E.NEWS

By Rae Jean McCall

The executive com­mittee of the AfCLEboard of directors. com­prised of PresidentDennis L. Shackleford ofEl Dorado. VicePresident Wayne Boyceof Newport. H. MurrayClaycomb of Warren.treasurer, and James M.McKenzie of Prescott.secretary, met on March12, 1987. Also in attend­ance were William A.Martin, executive direc­tor, and John F. Stroud.Jr., president elect. ofthe Arkansas Bar Asso­ciation. The committeereviewed the progress ofthe corporation for thecurrent fiscal year andrecommended to the en­tire AICLE board, forconsideration a1 its an­nual meeting in June,goals and objectives for

the 1987-88 fiscal year.The following goals

and objectives wereidentified:

(I) To establish a com­prehensive planningapproach to continuinglegal education curricu­lum by initiating pro­gram advisory commit­tees in six practiceareas;

(2) To develop aframework for needsassessment which in­cludes a minimum ofeight focus-group meet­ings to solicit informa­tion from attorneys inspecific practice areas;

(3) To initiate contactwith local bar associ­ations and other legalentities in Arkansas forthe purpose of solicitinginput and involvementof members in CLE pro­gram planning;

(4) To conduct a mini­mum of 90 contact hoursof CLE programming inIive-presen ta t ion for­mat;

(5) To provide a mini­mum of 40 contact hoursof satellite TV program­ming;

(6) To explore alterna­tive delivery systems forCLE programming;

(7) To improve the

quality of CLE programsby:

0) Encouraging programcommittees to initiate theplanning process early;

b) Developing a consis­tent process for the formand structure of course ma­terials;

c) Disseminating infor­mation to faculty on "Howto Make an Elleclive CLEPresentation." and

d) Utilizing evaluationinformation from previousprograms in the planningprocess;

(8) To implement asystem for administer­ing CLE credits for parti­cipants in all AICLE­sponsored programs;

(9) To initiate themarketing of servicesand products in the fol­lowing areas: client ed­ucation, law office staffeducation and in-housetraining services, and

(10) To develop a pro­gram of awards and rec­ognition for outstandingcontributions to CLE ef­forts.

Recognition forPrevious Programs

A great deal of in­debtedness is extendedto the many. many Ar­kansas attorneys whohave volunteered theirtime and talents to de-

velop and present pro­grams for the benefit oftheir professional col­leagues. Special recog­nition is due to:

• Randall G. Wrightof Little Rock for chair­ing the Labor Law andLabor Relations Seminaron April 9-11 at DeGrayState Lodge and Con­vention Center;

• Joseph M. Erwinand John C. Lesse!. bothof Little Rock. for co­chairing the 1987 TaxAwareness Institute: APrimer on Farm TaxationIssues on May I at theExcelsior Hotel in LittleRock;

• Stanley R. Langleyof Jonesboro for chairingthe Financial In­stitutions Law for Law­yers and Lenders Semi­nar on May 15 at theRiverfront Hilton fnn inNorth Little Rock, and

• Michele A. (Mikki)Harrington of Spring­dale for chairing the Lo­cal and State Govern­ment Law Seminar onJune 24 at the ArlingtonResort Hotel in HotSprings.

TOM M. FERSTL, MAl, SREA

Suite 400, Continental Building100 Main St., Little Rock, Ark.

1-501-375-1439

Court Testimony ...Real Estate Counseling ...Feasibility StudiesCommercial and Residential Real Estate Appraisals

Member:Arkansas Bar AssociationArkansas Realtors Assn.

Society of Real Estate AppraisersAmer. Institute of Real Estate Appraisers

1201Arkansas Lawyerljuly 1987

Preview of UpcomingPrograms

The 1987 PracticeSkills Course will beconducted on Septem­ber 2-4 at the Holiday InnCity Center in LittleRock.

Two sessions of a one­day program entitledBasics of Bankruptcyhave been scheduled forSeptember 18 at the Fay­etteville Hilton Inn andfor September 25 at theRiverfront Hilton Inn inNorth Little Rock.

The Fall Legal Insti­tute on October 22-24 atthe Sheraton Inn in FortSmith will concentrateon Legal Aspects of Busi­ness Organizations. 0

FEDERAL PRISONSFacts and Fiction

byR. Wayne Lee, B.A., J.D.

v A 1987 Comprehensive Guide describing the Federal Prisons in the U.S.

v Helpful Hints for Attorneys, Clients, and others in the criminal justice system.

v Many Sample Forms including Pardons, Parole, and Freedom of Information requests.

v A Complete Listing of the Federal Prisons, Federal Courts, and more.

v Informotion About Daily Life in Federal Prisons, "Halfway Houses," and on Parole.

"This book is must reading for all persons involved in the federal justice system."

NO EXPENSE TO THE ESTATE

(print)

WORLD·WIDE SERVICE fOR

COURTS - LAWYERS - TRUST OFFICERSADMINISTRATORS - EXECUTORS

AMERICAN ARCHIVES ASSOCIATIONINTERNATIONAL PROBATE RESEARCH

1350 N. Y. Ave.. N_W.Suite 605

Washington, D.C. 20005

MISSING

AND UNKNOWN HEIRS LOCATED

Address

Name _

City _

State Zip __$---

$---

QUAUfIED AS EXPERT WITNESS INARKANSAS AND

OTHER JURISDICTIONS

P.O. Box Drawer 34117Little Rock. Arkansas 72203

(501) 661-0161Out-ol-state call: 1-800-221-2717

"A Division of Education andResearch Associates. Inc."

SERVING THE LEGAL PROFESSION WITH EXPERTISE IN THEFOLLOWiNG AREAS;

Workmen's Compensation (Lump-Sum Settlement Calculations)Evaluation of Lost Earnings Capacity from Partial or Tolal Perma­

nenl Disability or Wrongful DeathEconomic Valuation of Pecuniary Damages in Business Tort. Con­

tract and Anti-Trust CasesValuation of Minority Stock Holdings in Estate SettlementsEconomic Analysis lor Charters or Branch Applications lor finan­

cial InstitutionsStructured Settlement Pricing and Design

ATTORNEY'S ECONOMICCONSULTANTS

Send __ copies at $34.95:Add $2.00 per copy postage:Allow 6-8 weeks deliveryTOTAL ENCLOSED:

SE D CHECK OR MONEY ORDER TO:Legal Publications of ArkansasP.O. Box 6619No. Little Rock, AR 72116

(Print rorpora1C name e:uctIy:as on certificate of irlCOfJKlr.ltion. add $8.00 for 2- die se:lI.)

Charge: 0 MasterCard 0 Visa D Diners Club 0 American Express

_______________ ZipCode _

SignalurebpiresC:lrd Number

Ccrtificates Signed by President and -;::__;:-__-,----:_-,--,-::-;,-- _(Soo'eUty-TtnSllref, unless Olhe'Wlse specined)

D FederaJ or state non-registrationmuse, ;c, $12.00 extra

o tRe § t244 complete set-rcsol.,dir. min., treatise, law, etc., $4.95 extra

o Overnight Air Courier shipment, add S6.00o I[ prepaying, add $1.50 [orsurface

shipping and handling.

o Please send me your FREE 48 page catalog.L ~~

Ship to: _

__-,-_-,- 0 NPV or 0 PV$ ,.-__,eapitali7.ation $ _aulhoriztd shart5 each

Slale"-- Vear _

The cOI'er or the corporate kil you select is one or the ways your clientsjudge your work. Do your corporate kits make a positive slatementabout the quality or the documenlation Ihey conlain'They do ir you select the Ex libris" kit rrom Excelsior-Legal". The Exlibris' elegant brown padded vinyl cover simulates the texture or finegrained leather. And your client's name is delicately embossed on Ex

libris' spine in genuine 24K gold, providing the look or a finecolleclor's edition on your shelr.

Ex Libris' functional single piece binder design protects yourdent's docunlt:nts IOU, by shielding them against stray dust,rolding and mangling. And the lOP cover fits smoolhly over thekit's base which is secured wilh a reliable Velcro" rastener.

Each Ex Libris kit also includes a corporate seal and matching ponch, 20 lithogrJphed sharecertificates customized for your client's corporation and SO blank rag content sheets or printedminutes and by-laws, OUf exclusive corporate record tickler, mylar reinforced tab indexes withfive posilions and transrer ledger, 8 pages, bound in a separate seclion.Can t:x Libris' cover help you make a positive slatement abont yonr work? Sec ror yourseJr. Re­ceive a fully customized Ex Libris corporale kit or virtually any olher prodncI ror the legal prores­sion within 48 hours. Or sooner. Cali your nearest Excelsior-Legal facility, toll rree, now. Or mail

iii ~celslor-LegQltInc.®We will RUSII your Ex Libris Corporate kit to you in 24-48 hours allow surface rates.r-----------------------------,

TO: EXCElSIOR-LEGAL, INC., P.O. Box 5683, Arlington, TX 76011Call us toll free (800) 433-1700, Texas (817) 461-5993.Please ship: 0 No. to tl3sic Dumt Si950 0 No. 20 with Prinled Minutes and By-Laws $53.00

How tojudgeacorporate kitby its cover