Dispute Resolution Surges Forward at Marquette

As reported by the university yesterday, I am delighted to announce that the Dispute Resolution Program at Marquette continues to receive national acclaim.  With over ten years of dispute resolution programming and curricula at the Law School, we continue to grow by leaps and bounds.  In any given year, we have close to 150 students in our various dispute resolution classes and clinics.  Two years ago, we created the Client Skills Board, a board mirroring the traditional Moot Court Board, that oversees law student participation in the non-moot-court competitions, including the ABA Client Counseling Competition, ABA Negotiation Competition, ABA Representation in Mediation Competition, and the invitational ICC International Commercial Mediation Competition held in Paris.  Marquette students can now participate in two different intramurals (in negotiation and in mediation advocacy) to be selected for one of the two teams representing the Law School at the regional ABA competitions.  In addition to our past history of winning teams in mediation competitions, in the last two years we won the regional competitions in the ABA Client Counseling Competition. 

Continue ReadingDispute Resolution Surges Forward at Marquette

In America You Can’t Buy Justice. But You Can Rent It.

In our final Law Governing Lawyers class, we had an extended discussion of proposed ABA rules strongly encouraging—if not requiring—minimumpro bono work by members of the bar (or law school students). What prompted this was our reading on the unmet need for legal services.  Among the indigent, those seeking immigration or asylum, and the mentally ill, legal services are virtually unobtainable. 

This is especially true for civil actions; at least in criminal actions an attorney can be appointed for an indigent client.  Civil representation for disadvantaged clients, in contrast, is often unaffordable.  When they can afford it, the lawyer is usually one whose entire client base is barely able to afford any fee.  Such attorneys mean well but be struggling with humongous case loads and limited resources.  My basic legal processes are infeasible for them, especially a thorough investigation or discovery.  While trying to help so many in need, they may be unable to provide any client with truly competent or adequate representation. 

Legal clinics (such as our own venerable Marquette Volunteer Legal Clinic) try to fill the gap, but often such clinics can only offer advice and direction.  They cannot or do not provide representation.

Against this backdrop, the ABA House of Delegates has considered and rejected changes to Model Rule 6.1 that would require lawyers to provide at least 50 hours of pro bono work per year, with a relatively cheap hourly buy-out.  There are of course, always mechanistic complaints: how would compliance be recorded? how would the requirement be enforced? what would the penalty be?  These can be worked out.

The real problem seems to be other complaints that are more philosophical.  What can a lawyer accomplish in 50 hours per year?  Would forced-labor representation be substandard?  Shouldn’t lawyers be able to avoid practicing in skill-areas they don’t want to practice in?  And why are we picking on lawyers?  Do doctors or plumbers have to do pro bono work?

Continue ReadingIn America You Can’t Buy Justice. But You Can Rent It.

Wisconsin Court Affirms Arbitration Award of Reinstatement

In a very interesting decision by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals last week, the Court upheld an arbitration award against the large household goods store Menard’s for employment discrimination against, wait for it, its own in-house lawyer.  As reported in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel,

Menard Inc. must reinstate a woman it fired as vice president and general counsel over a pay dispute, 3rd District judges for the state Court of Appeals said in a decision released Tuesday.

Dawn M. Sands filed a lawsuit in Eau Claire County citing the Equal Pay Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act. She claimed gender-based pay discrimination, asserting that similarly situated male employees were paid more.

A three-person arbitration panel found in her favor and awarded compensatory and punitive damages. The panel also ordered Menard to reinstate Sands with a specific salary and bonus. Menard balked and asked the appellate court to overturn an order by Eau Claire Circuit Judge Paul J. Lenz that had upheld the arbitration panel.

Continue ReadingWisconsin Court Affirms Arbitration Award of Reinstatement