OCTOBER 1984

First American Title Insurance CompanyofMid-America

REGIONAL OFFICE: 100 North Main Building. Memphis. Tennessee 38103 • (901) 52&-4343ARKANSAS: (BOO) 238·6321

SERVING TITLE INSURANCE NEEDS THROUGHOUT MID-AMERICAAffiliated with The First American Financial Corpora,lion

Experience achieved in nearly a centuryof working with the legal profession, is avaluable plus when you calIon the services ofFirst American Title Insurance Company.

.'

As one of the nation's largest and longestestablished title insurers, our resources andexperience are as near as your phone.For real estate assistance, call the FirstAmerican agent or office near you.

October 1984Vol. 18. No.4

THE ARKANSASLAWYER

THE PUBUCATION OF THE ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION

SPECIAL FEATURES REGULAR fEATURESOFFICERS

159 The President's ReportWilliam R. Wilson. Jr.. PresidentDon M. Schnipper. President-ElectAnnabelle D. Clinton. Sec-TreasurerDavid M. "Mac" Glover. Council Chair

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

Director

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

Jack A. McNultyW. Kelvin WyrickGary NutterWilliam Russ Meeks IIIKaye S. OberlagTom OverbeyRobert S. HargravesRobert HornbergerJoe ReedDovid SolomonStephen S. ReasonerJames A. McLarty

Chris Barrier/Outof Context

The Deposition and Reality:Some Suggestions from

and Old-Timer (Sigh!)e. robert wallach

Generations in the Law:The Daggetts of Eastern Arkansas

Robert R. Wright

Women of the Law in Arkansas:A Record of the Past

Frances Mitchell Ross

160 Point of View/Letters

164

167171 Lawyers' Mart

172175 Law. Literature & Laughter

176 In Memoriam

178EX-OFFICIO

William R. Wilson. Jr.Don M. SchnipperDennis L. ShacklefordAnnabelle D. ClintonMartha M. MillerDavid M. "Mac" Glover

EDITOR

A Primer for EvaluatingTax Shelter Offerings

Larry Yaneey 185189 Bulletin

190 Executive Director's Report

191 Young Lawyers' Report

Ruth M. Williams 192 Arkansas Bar Foundation Report

193 In-House News

ON THE COVER:The 1984-85 year began for the Arkansas Bar

Association in June with the election of a newslate of officers following its annual meeting.Pictured on the cover (top row. from left) areExecutive Council Chair David M. "Mac"Glover of Malvern. a presidential appointee,Association President William R. Wilson. Jr., ofLittle Rock. and Arkansas Bar Foundation President Robert 1. Jones III. of fort Smith. Alsopictured (from left) are Judge Annabelle DavisClinton. assuming her third term as the Association's secretary-treasurer. American Bar As~

sodation Delegate Herschel H. Friday andMartha Miller. chairof the Young Lawyers' Section and the newly appointed Associationlobbyist. All three are from Little Rock. Don M.Schnipper of Hot Springs (not pictured) waschosen president-elect.Photo By Pat Patterson

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

197 Index

The Arkansas Lawyer (USPS 546-040) is ~-================================~published quarterly by the ArkansasBar Associo'tion. 400 West Markham. little Rock. Arkansas 72201. Second classpostage paid at Little Rock. Arkansas.Subscription price to non-members ofthe Arkansas Bar Association $6.00 peryear and to members $3.00 per year in·eluded in annual dues. Any opinion expressed herein is that of the author. andnot necessarily that of the Arkansas BarAspociation. 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.

July 1984/Arkansas Lawyer/157

It's Open SeasonOn La ers!

In fact., there's no telling when you'll be hitwith a lawsuit by a dissatisfied client.

Even the most competent attorney cannotalways avoid a suit, and often the wealthiest attorney cannot afford one. Right or wrong. thenumber of claims is growing and the total dollaramount paid out in settlements is growing evenfaster. But we can help. C A and the Arkansas BarAssociation haveworked together to come up with a comprehensive program of professional liability insurancefor its members that can help protect both yourfinancial and proessional future. First, it helpsto minimize the causes of liability suits throughloss prevention programs. Then, it provides financial protection to help guard you againstprofessional and business liability with a maximum of $100,000 per claim ($300,000 annually)after a deductible.

Think you need more? Higher Limits-Up to$5 million-are available for an extra measure ofecurity against large liability lawsuits.

Any case you handle could leave you wideopen to a lawsuit. So, let your Arkansas BarAssociation sponsored Comprehensive LawyersProfessional and Business Liability Plan helpprotect you from financial danger. To find out

ISS/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1984

all the important details, including the exclu-ions, any reductions or limitations and the

terms under which the policy may be continued in force, send the coupon below to the administrator: Rather, Beyer & Harper.362 Prospect Building, Little Rock, Arkansas 72207.Or call (50l) 664-8791.

1---------------------,I II Please send me information for the Arkansas Bar Association II

sponsored Lawyers Professional and Business Liability IInsurance. Send to:

I II Arkansas Bar Association Administrator II Rather, Beyer & Harper I

362 Prospect Building I.1 Little Rock, Arkan as 72207 I

I~~ II II~~ II Addre II II City II Sponsored .j-~~~!) II Stale Zip-- by ~:c::t;~~ I

':j, ...

I ~'t~~ I_______________________ J

THE PRESIDENT'S REPORT

REDUCE 'UNNECESSARY'FRICTION BETWEEN

BENCH AND BAR

By William R. Wilson. Jr.

It seems appropriate to mentionthe last bar year before talkingabout the current one. Past administrations. with the vital assistance of a fine staff. have turnedthe Association over to us with aclean bill of health.

If we can continue to gain inmembership we will not face adues increase in the immediate future. This fact alone places usamongst the "select few" associations across the country-and,again. this is a tribute to the goodstewardship of previous administrations.

The annual meeting in Juneclosed the last Bar year with anoutstanding program on appellateadvocacy. Appellate judges on theprogram gave us insight into thissubject from the other side of thefence and there were appropriatediscussion periods so that practitioners could express themselvesand ask questions.

This subject brings me to the current year. One of the new projectswe are undertaking is theestablishment of trial practiceseminars in various areas of the

state. The primary emphasis willbe on the exchange of ideas between lawyers and judges. Assome of you know, the federalpractice seminars which havebeen held in Little Rock in the pastfew years have been well attendedand well received.

We should do everything we canto reduce any unnecessary frictionbetween the bench and bar. I emphasize the word "unnecessary"since I suppose there will alwaysbe some tension between those ofus who try lawsuits and those whowill invariably rule against usfrom time to time. Nonetheless. aprogram where there can be afrank exchange of ideas, mixedwith a reasonable amount ofsocializing. should go a long wayin maintaining a healthy relationship in our profession. (I am firm inthis conviction even though I amaware of Mark Twain's statementthat, "Constructive criticism is awonderful learning device. it's justthat no criticism leveled at me wasever constructive. ")

Judge John T. Jernigan, of LittleRock. president of the JudicialConference. has asked Judge PerryWhitmore. also of Little Rock, tochair the Judicial Committee towork with the Bar Association inimplementing the trial practiceseminars. Plans aTe on the drawing board for a pilot program in thenear future-more on this later.

The House of Delegates at theannual meeting unanimouslypassed a resolution opposing federal legislation (S. 1714) whichwould permit the FiC to regulatethe licensure and discipline oflawyers. Just in case you thinkyour eyes are deceiving you. I sayagain: "The FiC is pushing legislation which would permit it topre-empt the regulation of the lawpractice by state supreme courts."If this legislation passes, a complaint against you next year couldbe heard by an FiC bureaucrat.rather than by the Supreme Court'sCommittee on Professional

Conduct-<md the bill is precariously close to passing in the Senate.

At this point there is considerable debate as to exactly what S.1714 authorizes or re-authorizes.and. unfortunately. there is stilltoo little certainty as to exactlywhat language should be in anamendment which would preventthis outrageous possibility. (Wecertainly can't successfully arguethat the legal profession should beexempted from price fixing or othergeneral anti-trust regulations. TheHouse resolution recognizes this.) Ican only assure you that your president. along with other presentand past bar officers. are vigorously opposing this legislation,and we are working, on a dailybasis, with our congressionaldelegation and other bar associations. Unfortunately. I cannot giveyou a sanguine report. I can assureyou, however. that your electedofficers have mutually pledged totake hide. hair and all in the struggle.

Outside of this one gloomy prospect, I am happy to report that theship of State of the Association istwo-blocked, and that I. as yourduly elected helmsman. will do mydead level best to "keep 'er steadyas she goes."

When lim West was president afew years back he adopted thetheme. ''I'm Proud to be a Lawyer."I hereby adopt and re-affirm thistheme for this Bar year. A self depreciating sense of humor isbecoming in almost anyone; but letus never shuffle around or apalogize because the profession iscriticized by some. It is a highprivilege. in my judgement. to bein a calling where the rights andproperty of others are placed in ourhands for safekeeping. Our societyhas given us a special place andcharged us with a special trustmay we always keep in mind that"unto whom much is given. of himshall be much required." 0

October 1984/Arkonsos Lowyer/159

POINT OF VIEW/LETTERS

What Shall We Do About Model Rulesof Professional Conduct?

By Judge John A. Fogleman

Ultimately this is a question thatmust be answered by the ArkansasSupreme Court. Amendment 28 tothe Arkansas Constitution eliminated any lingering doubt aboutthe Court's power and responsibility in that regard. Action suasponte by the Court to adopt acomprehensive governing code orto substantially revise an existingcode is too much to expect of it inview of its role in adjudication andprocedural rule-making, in addition to the regulation of the legalprofession. Still in the fastchanging atmosphere that envelopes our world today, extensivere-examination and modernization of existing standards periodically is a necessity.

Watergate focused the attentionof the legal profession upon thenecessity for improvement of itspublic image. Obviously, publicperception of the success of existing self-regulatory systems in producing a high standard of professional conduct was highly unfavorable. As a result, the orgcmizedbar recognized its role in meeting amounting crisis. The American BarAssociation evidenced its sensitivity to the problem by naming acommission which came to beknown as the Kutak Commissionin honor of its energetic and dedicated chairman, whose unfortu-

THE ARKANSAS LAWYERwelcomes point of view articles and letters from readers.The editor retains the right toedit them for space. All correspondence must be signedthough names will be withheld on request. Send to theEditor. Arkansas Bar Association, 400 W. Markham,Little Rock, AR 72201.

l6D/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1984

nate. untimely death precededcompletion of the Commission'sfinal report. A detailed history ofthe six years intervening betweenthe appointment of this Commission and the adoption of proposedModel Rules of Professional Conduct by the House of Delegates ofthe American Bar Association onAugust 2, 1983, would serve no useful purpose. Suffice it to say, theArkansas Bar Association hasappropriately recognized its dutyto the profession and to the Arkansas Supreme Court to considerthese Model Rules as a basis formodernization of the regulationsgoverning the members of the profession. Chair Herschel Friday ofthe Arkansas Bar AssociationCommittee on the Model Rules hasreported to you in the July, 1983,issue of The Arkansas Lawyer ondevelopments in other states, thecomposition and progress of theArkansas committee, and thecategories treated in the Rules. Inthat report, he invited suggestionsand comments from individuallawyers. (Thus far I have receivednone. I take silence to be tacit'approval-or at least a lack of disapproval). In addition, a presentation of the program was made andnumerous copies of the proposaldistributed at the annual meetingof the Association. Several members of the Committee have spokenon the subject to bar groups acrossthe state.

I wish that I could make a definitive statement of my conception ofthe content of the final report ofthis Committee, but years of experience had convinced me of my inability to reliably predict collegialaction when problems are complex. I must satisfy myself (andthose who may read this article)with a statement of some of thebackground problems I perceive.

One might well ask how therecould be any problems in view ofthe years of study by the KutakCommission, its revision of itsrecommendations, the thoroughdebates and resulting amendments made by the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association in both 1982 and 1983. Although the stature, expertise andvaried backgrounds of the participants in this process should giverise to a presumption of suitabilityand appropriateness, your committee has not perceived its mission as one of placing a rubberstamp of approval upon the package presented. We deem thisappropriate in view of the drasticchanges involving both format andrules relating to highly criticalareas. It must be remembered thatthe very process which producedthe ultimate proposal made it aconsensus reached by compromise. Review of that proposal byeach new group tends to reviveevery previous debate in the Commission and in the House of Delegates, as if de novo determinationwas expected. At any rate, it appears that revisions have beenmade in every state in which review has been conducted, eitherby a reviewing committee or by thebar association. Furthermore, virtually every member of our Committee has expressed an objectionto some provision of the ModelRules. Even though completeinformation is not available aboutrevisions made or proposed inother jurisdictions, it appears tome that no state has adopted theModel Rules with significantchange.

So far as I have been able to ascertain, the Model Rules have notbeen adopted by any state courtsand at the last report, committeereview had been completed in only

six states. In five of them; Pennsylvania. Michigan, Missouri. Delaware, Arizona. The matter of adoption is pending before the SupremeCourts of those states without action, according to the best information available to me. It also appears that the Model Rules havesurvived intact only in the U.S.Court of Claims, the TerritorialCourts of American Somoa and theFederated States of Micronesia.An extensive revision of the Codeof Professional Responsibility,with the Model Rules serving as asort of guide,was made in Virginia.This cannot pass as an adoption ofthe Rules, in my opinion.

In sixteen other states, and theDistrict of Columbia, completion ofcommittee review is imminent,with a report to the respective Supreme Courts expected to follow.Arkansas is one of a great pluralityof states in which committee review is not complete. Committeereview, at last report, had not evenstarted in three states; Iowa, Illinois and California. The lack of action nearly a year after House ofDelegates approval by two statesamong the top three in lawyerpopulation and the failure of anystate to adopt the Model Rules isdiscouraging. The fact that theModel Rules have not survived intact in any states where any review has been conducted is distressing.

One of the purposes of modelrules is to achieve uniformity.Even though the drafters of therules (at least the chair of theCommission) felt compelled tostate that there must be latitude foradaption of the national model tolocal tradition, outlooks and practice and predict that the ModelRules will be subject to any necessary modification at the level oflocal implementation. Perhaps thechanges made in other jurisdictions are within the allowablelatitude, but we are in no positionto render judgments. After alLwhat latitude is allowable? Whatrenders modification necessary inlocal implementation? Whenmodifications are made in localimplementation. is necessity to bedetermined by the bearing theywould have on acceptance of someform of the Model Rules by an extraordinary majority of the practicing bar? If so, where is the

boundary between necessity andexpediency? What considerationis to be given to the problem of alawyer whose practice requires action across state border which aleinherent when there is a lack ofuniformity. These questions areillustrative of those with which theCommittee must grapple and seekto find satisfactory answers-thatis answers which give adequateconsideration to necessity for uniformity based upon the ideals established by the consensus ultimately established in the ModelRules and the necessity for modifications to accommodate "localtradition, outlook and practices."

Ido not intend to be a "prophet ofdoom." I am simply attempting todraw attention to the competing influences with which the Committee (and the profession) must deal.The answers can no longer be totally formulated in terms acceptable only to lawyers. In this age ofconsumerism. the interests. notonly of clients but also the generalpublic, must be (and should be)weighed seriously. The seriousness of the problems confronted bythe Committee are exacerbated bythe fact that on original reviewevery member of the Committeefinds one or more of the rulesobjectionable, unsuitable, inappropriate or questionable at thepresent time. As is usual. thetemptation to "second-guess" thedecisions of the ultimate draftersis inevitable but probably nottotally irresistible.

In spite of virtually unanimousacceptance of the new format, theonly state in which final action(Virginia) has been taken rejectedit. I believe that your Committeeagrees that the format of the ModelRules are, in today's world, superior to the Model Code of Professional Responsibility. The lattermade an attempt to distinguishaspirational goals and disciplinary rules by calling theformer Ethical Considerations andthe latter by their correct name, butboth are treated under the headingof a Canon, which was the statement of a very general conceptunder which the Ethical Considerations and Disciplinary Ruleswere categorized. The aspirational Ethical Considerations weredesigned as statements of objectives or principles, but as ideals

basically for guidance and notmandatory. On the other hand, theDisciplinary Rules were mandatory and established a minimumlevel of conduct which called fordiscipline of the lawyer whoseconduct fell below it. Inevitably,there was a blurring of the distinction between the statements ofthe high aspirations and of themandatory minimums, both in theminds of the practicing lawyer andof disciplinary agencies. This wasattributable, at least in part. to thepreamble's invitation to enforcingagencies to find interpretive guidance in the basic principles embodied in the Canons and the objectives reflected in the EthicalConsiderations. This caused problems, which the Model Rulessought to solve by stating rulesexclusively. Basically these ruleswere projected as the basis for disciplinary action. No model canreach perfection, however, andeven the Kutak Commission foundit necessary to compromise thisobjective between the statement oflofty ideals and declaration ofenforceable standards in the formof directives and prohibitions. According to the chair of that Committee, these are accompanied bydiscretionary standards creating"safe harbors" in which a lawyermay safely make reasoned judgments without fear of regulatorypunishment. In the statement of"Scope" in the preamble, the rulescast in the terms "shall or shallnot" are identified as imperativesand those cast in terms of "may"are classified as areas of professional discretion calling for no disciplinary action so long as thelawyer acts within the bounds ofdiscretion or chooses not to act atall. Likewise when comments use"should," no obligations are imposed.

The preamble to the Model Rulescontains a statement which maybe desirable but is subject to question. It is:

Violation of a Rule shouldnot give rise to a cause of action nor should it create anypresumptive that a legal dutyhas been breached. TheRules are designed to provideguidance to lawyers and toprovide a structure for regulating conduct through disciplinary agencies. They are

October 1984/Arkansas Lawyer/l61

not designed to be a basis forcivil liability. Furthermore,the purpose of the Rules canbe subverted w hen they areinvoked by opposing partiesas procedural weapons. Thefact that a Rule is a just basisfor a lawyer's self-assessment. or for sanctioninga lawyer under the administration of a disciplinary authority, does not imply that anantagonist in a collateralproceeding or transactionhas standing to seek enforcement of the Rule.

r consider that statement whollyunrealistic and non-binding, evenupon courts adopting the ModelRules. If the Model Rules of Professional Conduct do not establishstandards for the lawyer-clientrelationship, then what standardsshall the courts apply to determinethe obligation of lawyers in malpractice and breach of con tract actions? Does anyone dream that anopponent can not call for disqualification of an opposing lawyer forconflict of interest or appearanceas a witness on the basis of theModel Rules?

Since the Model Rules must dealwith confidentiality (and whistleblowing?), conflicts of interest(even the problems pertaining torelatives in different firms) andother sensitive areas, carefulconsideration is essential. but wemust view the rules in the light ofthe world we live in and not that of

Editor's Note: Judge John A.fogleman, of Little Rock, is amember of the Association's Committee on ABA Model Rules onProfessional Conduct. He is ofcounsel with the Gill, Skokos,Simpson, Buford and Owen lawfirm. The Committee on ABA ModelRules on Professional Conduct, inaddition to the author. consists ofHershel H. friday, chair, andmembers Philip Anderson, H. William Allen, and John P. Gill, of Little Rock, John F. Stroud Jr. ofTexarkana, Howard W. Brill, offayetteville, and 1. C. Deacon. ofJonesboro. Deacon was liaison tothe Kutak Commission from theBoard of Governors of the American Bar Association. Allen wasliaison from the ABA StandingCommittee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility.

162/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1984

by-gone days. r trust that Arkansaswill move with "deliberate speed,"which I interpret to mean not toofast, nor yet too slow.

If you have a point of view youwant considered. please communicate with a member of theCommittee. (On July 26, 1983, NewJersey became the first state to establish the ABA Rules). 0

LEITERSDear Editor:

I read with interest the "Point ofView/Letters" column by Forrest E.Dunaway entitled "Why Do PeopleHate Lawyers?". The article states,I think. some common observations but misses the main point.The integrity of the legal profession does not depend upon theperceptions of the public, it depends upon the practice and practitioners being observed.

Mr. Dunaway states that "Peo-ple don't understand peopleexpect too much peoplehave ...a misplaced responsibility." He also argues, in regard todrug enforcement and religiousexpression, that, "These pursuitsare totally hopeless since morality, right action and a religiousand philosophical respect for lifewhen enforced by law lead to oppression."

If we accept Mr. Dunaway'spremise, then the perfect legalstate is one of anarchy. The problem that the vast majority of people have with the law profession isprecisely this apparent lack of amoral or ethical base.

Have we so soon forgotten thelessons of Watergate-the legionsof lawyers parading before thepublic contending that a properunderstanding of the law has nothing to do with "morality" or "rightaction"?

This event did seem to triggersome resurgence of interest in the"Canons of Ethics" during my lawschool days at Fayetteville. However, I took no classes on media·tion, philosophy of law, or nonlitigative remedies. (Mr. Dunawaydoes, commendably, point out thetendency for lawyers to escalateconflict between parties.)

If lawyers wish to be seen in thepublic mind as persons of honestyand integrity, then we must under-

stand the law to be a means, andnot an end. The lawyer's briefdoes not define "right and wrong."Our laws reflect the public conscience and basic principles ofmorality ("Thou shalt not kill"?)which our communities and country choose to enforce.

People will trust and respect alawyer who first demonstrates anethical or moral base. There weremany fine attorneys who couldhave served as special prosecutorfor the Watergate investigationLeon Jaworski was chosen because he was a man of unquestioned character and principle.(I would recommend highly hisautobiography, Crossroads.)

There are many dedicated, principled attorneys who are mindlessly slandered with the familiarcastigation of lawyers in general.The Arkansas Bar Association, theChristian Legal Society, and othersuch groups can help that imageby rebuilding a philosophical andreligious base for the practice oflaw.

The problem and the solution isin us, not in the public understanding.John E. Brown III

IMMIGRATIONLAW CLINIC

Founded 1967, green cards. permanent residence. work permits,deportation, all immigration legalmatters. All countries, Telex,foreign attorney contacts. Admitted Federal and U.S. SupremeCourts.

310 Armour Road, Suite 101N. Kansas City, MO 64116

(816) 421-1430 (24 Hours)TOLL FREE

CaNT. U.S. (Except MO)(800) 821-2228

TM

KEEP T.A.B.S. ON YOURFIRM WITH ...

The Attorneys' Billing System

THE PROBLEM: Does Your Firm...1. Spend excessive amounts of time in accounting for

time and preparing statements?2. Consistently send out late statements?3. Let fees and costs "slip through the cracks"?4. Not know where it's accounts receivable stand?

THE SOLUTION: LA.B.S.1. Automated Time and Expense Entry

• Allows fast, efficient time & costs entry.• Minimizes storage and eliminates redundant typing.• Accurate time records, created in less time making your staff more productive.

2. Complete Pre-Billing Information• Allows you to bill automatically or defer billing.• You may write-up, write-down or write-off items to be billed.• You have complete control over the billing process.

3. Effortless Billing• Select from a number of statement formats.

• Very easy to use.

4. Management Reports

• Aged Accounts Receivable• Income Report.• Service Code Analysis by Attorney.• Detailed Account History.

5. AFFORDABLE• May be purchased or leased.• Will run on most office computers.

Contact: Bill Stuckey, Computec • 600 West Main • Russellville, AR 72801 • 501-967-5751

October 1984/Arkansas Lawyer/163

chris barrier/out of contextWill Strunk referred to his origi

nal edition of The Dements of Stylewith deliberate modesty as "the little book." It is indeed brief: evenwith E. B. White's revisions andadditions, the paperback versionbarely spans 100 pages. Its organization is tight and useful. Its indexand table of contents identifycommon problems and point theway to the answers.

Despite Strunk's modesty andthe book's brevity, neither isequivocal on matters ofusage. Choices whichothers might treat asoptions are mandatesfor Strunk. For example. the possessive

. is always formed withan apostrophe and ans--even with names ornouns ending in ssays Strunk.

Firm, but notstuffy ...

He is equally firmabout commas usedwith parenthetical expressions (always usetwo), and those instances w here commasare mere clutter. He isnot. however, stuffy."Bread and butter" isinvariabl y treated as ..being singular and ~

would be awkward if .~

treated otherwise. His ~preferred tools for.&dealing with hyphenated words aTe common senseand a dictionary.

Like Bill Zinsser, Strunk believesin examples and displays a surprising sense of humor. (Thehumor was apparently polished,but not added, by White.) He combines the two in dealing with misused participial phrases: Being ina dilapidated condition, I was ableto buy the house very cheap.

Strunk covers usage in 15 pagesand moves his student on to comMposition, the "first principle" ofwhich "is to foresee or determinethe shape of what is to come andpursue that shape." Build thatshape paragraph by paragraph,says Strunk, avoiding massiveparagraphs and rambling sen-


Strunkand

Whiteand

Me and You

lences which form "enormousblocks of print."

Negatives and dead leaves ...Strunk prefers the active voice to

the passive. Compare There werea great number of dead leaveslying on the ground and Deadleaves covered the ground. The active voice is usually more vividand requires fewer words.

Negatives also drain the juicefrom our sentences, says Strunk.Lawyers apparently use them tosoften or equivocate, but why iswould not be unreasonable to assume preferable to may reasona~

blyassume?Other examples of clustered

clutter which Strunk would ban include the fact that and the reason

for this, Lawyers could also addthis is a case that stands for theproposition that and many others.Strunk's unbending credo: "Omitneedless words."

Common problems. sound advice ...

Strunk has direct, easily remembered advice for commonsituations. How do you punctuateoutside and around an expressionin parentheses contained within asentence? Exactly as you would if

it were not there.

How do you handlequotations, especiallywithin a brief? Specifically, when do you justdouble space and contain wi thin quotes,and when do you single space and doubleindent? There is nomagic in Strunk's response, but there issense: if less than aline in length (just aword or phrase), use

quotation marks. Ifmore (especially complete sentences), single space and doubleindent-but do not

ever forget to drop thequotes once you've indented.

Commonplaces ofcareless writing ...

If the sections on usage, composition and

form do not make you squirm withpainful self-recognition, Strunkprovides a chapter on mistakes.These "commonplaces of carelesswriting" focus on misused wordsand expressions, such as the confusion of allude and elude, allusion and illusion. Who among uscan correctly use both tortuousand torturous? (The first is a stateof being, such as a twisting road.The second is more active, connoting torture itself-which is how Ifeel about trying to remember thedifference.)

How about farther and further? Imay continue to interchange them,but at least I'll know that farther isbest used with distance, furtherwith time or quantity.

Just one clinker ...Only once does Strunk's advice

ring not entirely true. He is understandably uncomfortable withsome efforts to remove the genderbias inherent in generalpronouns--using he or she andhimself or herself when referring toa person in the abstract is necessarily awkward. Strunk contendsthat he encompasses both genders: "He has lost all suggestionsof maleness in these circumstances." He overstates hiscase, and the problem can beavoided in most cases by carefulrephrasing, rather than relying ondubious linguistic androgyny.

Frankly, I don't know if this reflects Strunk's position or White's.(You could compare the first, second and third editions of The Elements of Style to find out. hut Idoubt that the exercise would replace Trivial Pursuit as a source ofentertainment. There are stylisticchanges in the illustrations thatare ohviously White's-Strunkwould have few female lawyers in1935 and John Updike's fictionalcharacter "Rabbit" Angstrom notat al!.)

Jargon, fads and fancies ...Like Zinsser, Strunk ahhors jar

gon, especially made up words,such as those constructed by adding the suffix wise-taxwise,pricewise. salt water taffywise.Fad words vex him too, especiallythose with a pretentious ring-it ispretension indeed which convertsa jail to a correctional facility. aschool house to an educationalfacility. and so on.

According to White, no line ofwork is immune to jargon orchronic misuse of the language. Ifyou choose the language of advertising, you "do so at your peri!. forit is the language of mutilation."Business language's "portentousnouns and verbs invest ordinaryevents with high adventure; theexecutive walks among ink erasers, caparisoned like a knight ...Even the world of criticism has amodest pouch of private words, , ,

White would likely sympathizewith the late Barney Kilgore, who,as editor of the Wall Street Journalwarned his staff: "If I see 'upcoming' in the paper again, I'll bedowncoming. and someone will beoutgoing."

Avoid "rich. ornate prose," cautions White, as it "is hard to digest,generally unwholesome, andsometimes nauseating." Instead.the "approach to style is by way ofplainness, simplicity, orderliness,sincerity."

Keep it simple, stylist ...Once the writer has mastered

brevity and simplicity, stylishwriting may be attempted, passages which White calls those "occasional wing shots" which bring"down the bird of thought as itflashes by." However. until thenthe writer should keep The Elements of Style at hand and Strunkin mind, as quoted in White's introduction:

Vigorous writing is concise. Asentence should contain no unnecessary words. a paragraphno unnecessary sentences. forthe same reason that a drawingshould have no unnecessarylines and machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not thatthe writer make all his sentences short, or that he avoid alldetail and treat his subjects onlyin outline, but that every wordtell. 0

ArkansasAdvance

Annotation ServiceAs a special service to subscribers to the Arkansas

Statutes. The Michie Company publishes the ArkansasAdvance Annotation Service, This legal reference service is keyed to the arrangement of the Arkansas Statutesand provides up-to-date annotations to Arkansas andfederal court cases which apply Arkansas laws. Cumulative pamphlets are published periodically during theinterim between publication of supplements to theStatutes.

3 pamphlets per year $45.00'

THE

=M=I=C=H~IE=~Publishers of the Arkansas Statutes Annotated

for customer service contact:ALLIN R. JONESP.O. Box 1306Conway. Arkansas 72032(501) 327-6526·plus shipping, handling and sales tax where applicable

October 1984/Arkonsas Lawyer/l65

• USCA is complete. Itoffers more comprehensivecoverage of federal casesthan any other federal statutesource.

• It's official. USCA is theonly annotated federaistatute set which follows theofficial text of the U.S. Code,which is prepared by theOffice of the Law RevisionCounsel of the House ofRepresentatives.• USCA works with yourlibrary through West's KeyNumber System and otherlibrary references.

• Only USCA hasconvenient alphabeticalindexes to annotations.


• USCA has superblydetailed master andindividual title indexes.

• USCA contains the full textof important CFR regulations.

• Only USCA providesvaluable Legislative HistoryNotes directing you tospecific pages of the U.S.Code Congressional andAdministrative News.

• USCA is renowned for itseditorial integrity.

Isn't it time you owned UnitedStates Code Annotated? Call yourWest Sales Representative today... or caJl toll-free:1-800-328-9352, Operator 46.

Rodney P. Durkee9 Johnnycake LaneLittle Rock, AR 72211Phone: (res) 501/225-3652Little Rock 501/378-4676Springfield 417/887-3093

WEST PUBLISHING COMPANYso W. Kellogg Blvd.P.O. BOI 43526· St. Paul, MN 55164

"

In the middle of a blindingsnow storm on the highway between Santa Fe andAlbuquerque, the Euro

pean sedan in which I was ridingas a passenger, slid solidly on apatch of ice and directly into thesnow bank by the side of the road.We were but one of a long series ofcars and trucks whose slow motiondeparture from the paved highwaystrikingly resembled a ballet thathad outrun its choreography anddissembled before our eyes.

Almost an hour later the towtruck operator connected the cableto the front axle and returned to hisvehicle on the roadway to commence the winch operation. At that

Editor's Note: e. robert wallach is"one of the truly outstanding triallawyers in the United States," saidJudge Henry Woods in providingThe Arkansas Lawyer with a biographical sketch of the author.wallach, dean of the HastingsCenter for Trial and Appellate Advocacy, Hastings College of theLaw, University of California atSan Francisco, is the author ofmany articles in law reviews, tbeABA Journal and similar publications. He is a professor of law atHastings, former president of theBar Association of San Francisco,former director of the AmericanJudicature Society and is a fellowin the International Academy ofTrial Lawyers. He is special trialcounsel to Feldman, Waldman andKline in San Francisco.

second, an American sedan, occupied by four Nuns, slid out ofcontrol and pinned him betweenits right front fender and the rearleft side of his truck. For the firsttime in my life, I understood theterm "piercing scream." Withoutany recollection of the time involved, my colleague and I ranthrough the snow to his assistance. We came upon himseparated some five feet from thelower portion of his left leg. In lesstime than it has taken you to readthese words his leg was bound bya tourniquet, he was placed in therear seat of a Highway Patrol vehicle, and had left the scene.Standing in the cold night filledwith white snowflakes descendingat a rapid pace were two bloodstained and bewildered lawyers.

I have no doubt that the events ofthat night will ultimately be transcribed by a deposition which willlast a minimum of an hour andmay go on for three times that estimate. Is that necessary? Is it effective? Does it do anything otherthan meet a young lawyer'sobligation to provide a report. ofvirtually the same length as adeposition. to an insurance carrieror a senior partner?

Taking a DepositionTests and articles abound with

descriptions of "how to take adeposition." By and large, conscientious young lawyers everyw here have ascribed to thoserecommendations by interpreting

them as mandatory checklists toconclude lest they somehow be accused of having created an omission which proves fatal to thecause.

Let us begin by understandingthat the underlying purpose of adeposition is to recreate reality. Itis our obligation to secure, with asmuch precision as possible. eventswhich transpired in an amorphous. often instantaneous. andrandom sequence. The ellort to r\,create a series of consecutivefacts, conversations, or relationship must correspond to the realityin which they occurred [without athen-conscious effort to preservethe event for later recall.]

How can we best coalesce theartificial strictures of a deposition,with its insistance upon preciserecall. to the reality of the indefiniteness of the events themselves?

1. Do Not Commence theDeposition Until You Knowthe Event Itself Intimately.

Even if one had never experienced the dynamics of a catastrophic accident in a blinding snowstorm, the application of one's ownintrospective analysis of all of thefacts which had to transpire inthose brief. horrible seconds is animperative before the depositioncan be properly structured. If it isan accident, the reports must bereviewed, photographs observedand often the scene itself visited.In business matters. documentsmust be reviewed. In medical

The Depositionand Reality

Some Suggestions from an Old-Timer

(Sigh! )

bye. robert wallach


cases, the medical recordsanalyzed by a person capable ofunderstanding the meaning beyond their words. In short, thequestioner must be satisfied thatthe actual reality of the event isalready understood before the deposition is commenced. From thatinformation, the questioner musttry to comprehend the relationships that are involved, the pressures which existed, the motivations which produced the language or the actions, and-mostimportantly-the interests whichthe witness seeks to protect orproject. Some of the considerationswhich should immediately be apporent to the questioner that arepresented by the facts of the NewMexico accident include: theunderlying question of just what isnegligent conduct in a weathercondition of that type; how willjurors determine what is reasonable conduct under those circumstances considering their ownexperience; how would a juror'sreaction be affected by the fact thatthe vehicle was being operated bya nun; in what way will the catastrophe of a lost leg to a young working man and father overcome orameliorate what some might describe as an "act of God" defense.(It makes no difference to the triallawyer that such a defense nolonger legally exists-it exists inthe minds of jurors).

2. The Purpose of theDeposition Must BeCarefully Defined.

All to often we enter the deposition believing that the witnessmust be hostile or that our causemust be just. The reality is thatmost laywitnesses have very little"interest" in the outcome and aretruly apprehensive about theirown role in the proceedings. Taking the deposition of a nun whoalready realizes that she has beena participont in an act which hasmaterially changed the life of aninnocent young person shouldcause even the most experiencedlawyer to ponder carefully the approach to be taken. Is the deposition designed simply to record andfix into position the testimony ofthe witness? Is the testimony desired in an effort to caution thewitness of the inadequacies so asto discourage vigorous advocacyby the witness at the time of trial?

ISB/Arkansos Lawyer/October 1984

Is the witness truly hostile or is thetestimony sincerely given but misperceived? Is the witness a liar ormust the questioner concede (evenprivately) that the witness is honorable and the cause which thequestioner represents placed injeopardy? Even with an expertwitness, presumed to be both"interested" and experienced, thelawyer who probes carefully forthat core of intellectual honestywhich most (but not all) expert witnesses possess may well find areservoir of greater candor thanwould otherwise be anticipoted.

3. The Manner of theExamination Must Be

Decided Upon.No purpose is served by hostile

examination until the witness hasdemonstrated hostility to exist.One can never be so certain of awitness' posture as to foreclose theopportunity to gain an alliance. Itis helpful to undertake a full explanation of the purpose and scopeof the deposition. This can accomplish a dual purpose: (1) preserving an important explanatoryfoundation for the questions and;(2) providing the opportunity forthe witness to assume a neutralposition. An introduction that proceeds along these lines may accomplish both purposes.

While I realize that this deposition procedure has beenexplained to you by yourcounsel. let me say a fewwords so we are sure we areboth proceeding on the samepremise. My responsibility isto ask questions and yours isto provide answers as accurate and truthful as are withinyour ability. You are not obli·gated to answer any questionyou do not fully understand.My questions must be both intelligent and intelligible. Ifthey are not. you should refuse to answer them. Ask meto clarify the question untilyou are properly satisfiedthat you understand. Whenyou provide an answer.please be sure it is completeand truthful. This testimonyis given, under oath, just asthough you aTe in a courtroomwith a judge present. Remember that the purpose ofthis deposition is to transcribe the testimony so that it

is available to us at the timeof trial. If your testimony atthat time should vary, in anyrespect. from the testimonyyou've given today, I wouldbe obligated to commentupon that variation and youwould have to explain it. Ifyou do not remember something, tell us. If your answeris based upon something thatyou 'usually do' or 'probablyhappened' rather than yourspecific memory, tell us. Bothtypes of answers are acceptable but we need to know thedifferent basis. If you wouldlike to interrupt this deposition at any time to conferwith your lawyer, either hereor out of our presence, pleasefeel free to do so. If there isanything you do not understand, interrupt the deposition, and ask them to explainit to your satisfaction. My intention is not to trick or deceive you. I simply want to becertain that at the conclusionof this deposition, I fully understand your position andhave your testimony as accurately as you can give it. Now,do you have any questionsbefore we begin?

When an introduction such asthis is made by opposing counselto a witness of mine it often includes an expression to the effectthat if a question is answered, itwill be 'presumed' that the witnessunderstood the question. At thatpoint. it is appropriate for the lawyer to interject that any witnesswho answers the question believes that they understood it, butthat is not necessarily the case.The lawyers should listen attentively and when such a discrepancy appears to occur, interrupt and inquire of the witnessto be sure that the question wasfully understood. While a lawyershould not be constantly interrupting a witness to assist testimony. itis a responsibility to be sure thatthe testimony given is accurateand that the witness is respondingas they fully intend to do. Don't beintimidated by accusations suchas 'throwing a life-line'. At thatsame time, don't abuse the right tointerrupt. A transcript whichshows a lawyer constantly assisting a witness is hardly an impres-

sive reading before a jury.We must all try to anticipate how

a jury is likely to react to the factsas they first hear them. Despite anadmonition to maintain an impartial posture, all of us react initiallyupon hearing a story told. Where isthe "white hat" in that bloodstained saga on a snowy night?Will the loss of a leg, a pregnantwife, and a marginal academicbackground make the plaintiff anautomatic recipient of that firstpositive response when the factsare heard? Will any juror caught inthat moment of uncontrolled horrorwhen a vehicle is no longer responsive to his own direction closetheir mind against any assaultupon the beleaguered nun withwho's own status as a 'victim' ofcircumstances they immediatelyidentify? Not even twenty-fiveyears of trial experience form thebasis for definitive prediction of ajuror's reaction. Yet. it is thecontemplation of those considerations which must precede thecommencement of the depositionand the approach to the witness.

4. Preparation of the Witnessis the Most Important Part of

the Deposition Process.This simple and universally

acknowledged maxim requires afull understanding of the methodsrequired to implement itseffectiveness. Every lawyer mustrecognize that every witness enters the deposition procedure withsome level of apprehension. Sincemost witnesses are undergoingtheir first entry into the process,the preparation time is critical tothe confidence building projectwhich underlies the lawyer's task.At least an hour and a half to twohours is required for all but themost basic of depositions. Whilethe content of preparation is theunderstandable focus, the explanation of the process is anequally important undertaking.That preparation should consist ofa full explanation of preciselywhat is going to happen, who willbe in attendance, where it willoccur, who will be present. andwhat is expected to be accomplished. It is correctly said thatalmost all cases are won or lost inthe deposition phase of litigation.Given the overwhelming numberof cases which settle, the deposition is truly often the only oppor-

tunity the witness has to express apoint of view. There are a numberof goals to be accomplished by thepreparation.

A. Giving the witness confidence in their ability to effectively[be their own advocatel communicate themselves as well as theirposition.

B. Assisting the witness to remember events and factors whichare of importance and which havebeen more recently the subject of alawyer's review of the accumulated documents, medical records,or other necessary supportingdata.

C. Actually taking the witnessthrough a question and answersession which allows foran understanding of the process and an initial articulation of what the witness wishes to state accurately.

D. Evaluating and anticipatingareas of weakness with a view towards formulating honorable andaccurate responses which are consistent with the witness's interests.

E. Establishing by manner of testimony and appearance of the witness an atmosphere of credibilitywhich will reflect favorably uponthe witness and require of thequestioner a favorable report ofthe witness's ability to persuade ajury.

F. Providing the questioner withsufficient information, as well as afavorable impression of the witness, which will permit an earlyevaluation of the rights andresponsibilities with a view towards expediting progress of thecase and its ultimate resolution.

G. Constantly understandingthat the witness's exposure at deposition is probably the only time,prior to trial, in which an opportunity to evaluate the strength oftestimony before a jury will be presented. That impression will bearheavily upon an evaluation of thecase as to value with all of its bearing upon the possibilities ofsettlement or trial.

Remember that 'preparation' includes providing the witness withan understanding of the underlying motivations which a jurymay bring to an evaluation of thefacts. It means explaining how ajury could rationally accept theposition of your opponent. It requires an understanding that an

effective advocate must recognizethe strengths and weaknesses inevery position and that an effective witness must testify in thatsame context if true credibility is tobe established. Even that youngman who wears a prosthetic device borne of the night of tragedywill harbor a cavern of understanding within his intellect for theplight of the woman whose vehiclestruck him. As the injured and innocent plaintiff, he may wish tosublimate that reality. To permithim to do so in the context of hismanner of presentation and his recitation of the facts will only conflict with what jurors will alsounderstand and so separate himfrom their interest in identifyingwith his plight.

5. Stay Out of Verbal ConflictWith Your Adversary.

Only the court reporter profitsfrom endless dialogue betweencounsel. When an objection ismade, and a witness instructed notto respond, there is truly nothingmore to be said by counsel. Theprocedures for certification of aquestion are well understood.

LAW OFFICE FOR SALEin historic

Eureka Springs, Arkansas

$55,000.00 price includes:-office bldg., 4 large rooms

+ bath in renovatedVictorian house, ampleparking

-IBM 100 memorytypewriter

-<:opier, dictating equip.---extensive library

Call: 253-8189 (daytime)253-7889 (evening)

Write: P.O. Box 190Eureka Springs, AR 72632


JOIN OUR FRIENDLY GROUP!

Call Janie Bushman at 372-5122, 212 Center Street

SUITE 800

SUITE 800

CONCLUSIONMore can be said, and should be,

about the subject of depositions.Questions should be short andintelligible; continuity of questions should be maintained unless

frequency with which they occurmay well accurately reflect uponthe adequacy of the preparationfor the deposition.

It is too often said that when awitness makes a mistake, theyhave lied. More often than notthere has been a simple failure ofrecollection which is convertedinto an opprobrious act because ofthe litigation context of the testimony. Because of that reality, itis incumbent upon counsel toundertake the quality of preparation which will avoid, as mucb aspossible, the possibility of innocent error. All too often the client'sfailure of recollection is truly a reflection upon the lawyer's failureto have anticipated or adequatelyreviewed the potential subjectmatter.

We have a mid-town location. In addition to your own office, you would shareour reception room, conference room, kitchen, and your own staff of courtreporters. We are 1/2 block from the law school library and 1 block from theCounty Court House.

Rent a beautiful newly renovated office from us and let us take care of all yourclerical problems. Our receptionist will greet your clients and receive yourmail and packages. Our switchboard operator will answer your calls with yourown name and take your messages, and we will do your stenographic andclerical work on demand.

Has created a prestigious traditional atmosphere for a limited number ofattorneys.

ATTENTIONATTORNEYS

be a more effective opponentshould not be augmented by witness's own counsel. This is still anadversary process. The adversarial reality must be constantlybalanced against the desire toprovide as much information aspossible in order to achieve a resolution of rights without trial.

If counsel is aware of a clearerror made by the witness in thecourse of testimony, an obligationmay then appear to correct the record immediately. Doing so isfrought with hazard unless counsel is very certain that the witnesswill fully understand the error involved and can correct it. It is appropriate, and often essential. thatan interlude be taken in a deposition for counsel to confer with theclient/witness. While opposingcounsel may comment upon suchan occurrence. jurors seldompenalize a lawyer for exercising aright which is essential to the protection of a client/witness's interest. Nonetheless, those circumstances should occur rarely. The

Counsel should courteously agreeto those procedures without therequirement that each questioninvoke the procedural waltz whichthe statute provides. The mostappropriate response simply indicates that the lawyer has given theadvice and believes it to be accurate. If it is not. a judge will say so.At the same time, however, common courtesy and a desire to expedite the litigation process shouldprompt a respectful inquiry fromcounsel of the questioner to determine the stated rationale for thequestion or area of inquiry. If therationale seems even remotely acceptable, serious considerationshould be given to allowing the inquiry with the understanding thatall rights to object at time of trialhave been appropriately reserved.The scope of discovery is broadand that mandate should be respected.

Endless and acrimonious discussion among counsel serves nopurpose. The atmosphere can become so charged as to render thewitness even more vulnerable tolapses of judgment and recall despite the best of preparations.

For reasons which have neverseemed apparent, actual circumstances in which there ale truly novillains but which call for the resolution of rights and responsibilities too often produce an aura ofacrimony between counsel whichis not supported by the underlyingfacts and need play no role inaccomplishing an effective advocacy.

6. Do Not Examine Your OwnWitness Unless it is

Absolutely MandatoryThe opportunity to engage in

re-cross-examination almost always serves as an avenue for additional hostile questioning of subject areas which have either beenoverlooked or seemed less important at the time than they may wellhave been. The function of providing a witness for deposition isnot to provide the questioner withan endless opportunity to peruseevery conceivable aspect of one'scase. Unless a judgement hasbeen made that the developmentof a topic is essential at time ofdeposition in order to properly protect or project the witness's rights,the opportunity of the questioner to


there is a conscious desire to testrecollection by avoiding continuityof sequence of events. [The manner of questioning should be reflective of the type of witness, thelevel of anticipated hostility, theobject which the questioner has inmind; etc.] But this brief essay isnot meant to be an exhaustiveexamination of the deposition process. Rather, one hopes that asense of the importance of the deposition process has been communicated which will encourageevery lawyer to treat the deposition as a unique experience foreach client rather than a routinewhich must be included in thedevelopment of every case. As aprofession, we legitimately criticize other professions for treatingas routine the individual responsibility they have to their patient or client. All too often we seethat the true definition of 'neglect'is a dulled appreciation of the individual's rights by those whohave undertaken to render a service for a professional fee. Lawyers are not immune from thatfossilization. We are required tohave the energies necessary togive each client the benefit of anindividual representation whichfocuses upon the specific problemsthat each case brings to a lawyer'sdesk.

The resolution of the rightswhich arose on that snowy nightwill probably occur in the contextof settlement. How a jury wouldhave reacted to the conflict of unintended acts which produced socatastrophic a result will probablynever be known. How effectivelyeach of the clients is representedwill almost be entirely determinedby the quality of the witnesses during their depositions and the lawyer's judgment as to how jurorswill react to them, to what theyhave said, and to the way theyhave said it. We all know that wellover 90 percent of our cases areresolved by way of settlement.What we must also recognize isthat the accomplishment of an advantageous settlement is as mucha result of a sensitive appreciationof the necessary tactics andstrategies of trial, as reflected inthe deposition process, as arethose skills when employed beforea jury. 0

LAWYERS' MARTclassified advertising for members

BOOKS FOR SALEEQUIPMENT FOR SALE

Complete Law Office AutomationPackage-Hardware: 128K Proces-

FOR SALE: Southwest Reports, sor, 10 Megabyte Disk Drive, 160Southwest Reports 2d, ALR Fed- CPS Printer.eral and Shepherd's Arkansas Software: Time and Billing, Trust

Citations. Ben Arnold 376-4731. Acounting, Docket Contro!. Gen-eral Ledger.Includes: Installation and Train-

From Lawyers' Co-Op: ALR 2d, ing At One Low Price. Must Sell to

ALR 3d, ALR 4th, AM jur 2d, Am jur make room for system Upgrade.

Pleading and Practice Forms, Am FOR INFO: Call jack Finch at (501)

jur Legal Forms, Proof of Facts 1st 376-3700.

and 2nd, Bankruptcy Service. FromMatthew Bender: Products Lia- WANTED TO PURCHASEbility, Damages in Tort Actions,Criminal Law Advocacy, Attor- IBM 6:5 Transcriber dictationneys' Textbook of Medicine, Wein- equipment. Contact Raymondstein's Evidence. Must sell. All Abramsom, P.O. Box 38, Claren-supplemented to date. No interest don, AR 72029, or call 747-3377.financing on Lawyers' Co-op vol-umes. Call or write to Ed Tarvin,700 W. Fourth Street, Suite 200, Lit- POSITIONS AVAILABLEtle Rock, Arkansas 72201. (501)374-1159. Northeast Arkansas law firm with

expanding practice needs asso-ciate with one to three years civil

FOR SALE: SW Reporter Vol. 1-300litigation experience. Strongcredentials required. Reply to The

and Arkansas Reports Vol. 1-267, Arkansas Lawyer. 400 W. Mark-original volumes. Also Arkansas ham, Little Rock. AR 72201.Statutes annotated current thru1983. Contact Lance Larey (918) Position available in Northeast

665-0919. Arkansas law firm. Minimum legalpractice two years. Good salary

West S.W. 2nd. Vols. 351 to current.and fringe benefits. Appointmentwill be had in Little Rock at Bar

Arkansas Digest, current. Write to Center for convenience. Send re-P.O. Box 9053, Bradenton, Florida sume to care of Editor, The Arkan-33505 or call 813-794-3184, even- sas Lawyer. 400 W. Markham, Lit-ings. tle Rock, AR 72201.

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 Questioned Document Examiners and theAmerican Academy of Forensic Sciences.

ROBERT G. FOLEYFORENSIC DOCUMENT EXAMINER

1109 N. 4TH STREETMONROE, LOUISIANA 71201

318-322-0661Qualified and Experienced Expert Witness in Federal.

State, Municipal and Military Courts.


Generations in the Law:A Series

The Daggettsof

Eastern ArkansasOne of the oldest and most prom

inent of the lawyering families ofArkansas is surely the Daggetts ofMarianna. For more than a century the Daggetts have practicedlaw in Eastern Arkansas and havebeen among the leaders of thelegal profession in Arkansas.

Four of the seven current members of the Daggett law firm aredescendants of John MayhewDaggett, who was sent by theUnited States Land Office to Marianna in 1873 to establish and organize the land records for thenewly formed Lee County. Thesefour descendants are W. H. Daggett and limason J. Daggett,grandsons of John Mayhew Daggett, and Jesse B. Daggett II andDoddridge McCulloch Daggett,great-grandsons.

John Mayhew Daggett, a grad- '

Editor's Note: Robert R. Wright isDonaghey Distinguished Professorof Law at the University of Arkansas Law School at Little Rock. Agraduate of the University of Arkansas, Duke University and theUniversity of Wisconsin, he hasserved on the law faculties at bothFayetteville and Little Rock. Hewas dean of the University ofOklahoma College of Law, andhas served on the faculties of theUniversity of Iowa as a visitingprofessor and the University ofCincinnati as a visiting distinguished professor.

In/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1984

byRobert R.

Wright

uate of Brown University and thefounder of the firm, was admittedto practice in 1874 in the first termof the Lee County Circuit Court.Because Lee County was a newcounty which had been carved outof four adjoining counties, John M.Daggett was one of its first citizensand his law firm literally grew upwith the county itself. In 1879, JohnM. Daggett married Olive MayAnderson, the daughter of a wellknown planter in Phillips County.The children of their union wereJesse B. Daggett, Charles EbenDaggett, Maxcy D. Daggett, Amelia Daggett and Olive Daggett.

When they were very youngmen, Charles E.. Jesse B. andMaxcy Daggett went to Avard,Oklahoma, to protect certainMarianna investments in townlots in that newly admitted state.While in that small town in Cherokee country, Charles "Eben" Daggett, although without a formallegal education, studied for andtook the Oklahoma bar examina-

tion in 1908. His performance wasnoted in a letter from the chair ofthe state bar admissions commission of Oklahoma to Judge H. N.Hutton of Marianna, the presidingjudge of the first judicial district ofArkansas:

"Mr. C. E. Daggett ofAvard, Oklahoma, has justbeen examined in connectionwith a class of 51 by thisCommission for admission tothe Bar of the Supreme Court.His grades were the highestin the class. The examinationembraced sixteen subjectsand I examined his papers onmost of the subjects. Theywere exceedingly good andshowed a strong and accurate grasp of the fundamental principles of thelaw. I was much impressedwith the clearness and accuracy with which he expressed himself, and it is myopinion that he possessesunusual ability as a lawyer.His papers possess extraordinary merit."

The Oklahoman expressed regret that his state was about tolose Eben's services to the Bar ofArkansas.

Jesse B. Daggett was admittedto the Arkansas Bar in 1908, thesame year that Eben Daggettpassed the Oklahoma Bar and thesame year that John Mayhew Dag-

gett died. Each one of John's lawyer sons would prove to be a formidable lawyer in his own right.

Jesse B. Daggett was particularly noted for his knowledge andability in the field of property law.His particular forte related to problems which arose from the perambulations of the Mississippiand Arkansas rivers. Here, ofcourse, we come in contact withquestions pertaining to accretion,avulsion and reliction-<rnd withthe evidentiary difficulties associated with such cases, includingthe testimony of foresters, riverpilots, soil scientists, potamologists and lay witnesses and proofderived from river charts, whichevidence changes in navigation,and from various land maps, platsand photographs. The title to suchland and the riparian rights involved were the source of constantlitigation involving such giants ofthe lumber industry as the U. S.Gypsum Company. the AndersonTully Company, the Chicago Milland Lumber Company, and theGrief Brothers Cooperage Corporation. Other involved in this litigation included George B. Cracraft,Sr.. of Helena (the father of ChiefJudge George B. Cracraft, Jr. of theCourt of Appeals), Lamar Williamson of Monticello, and W. H. Daggett (one of the sons of Jesse B.Daggett). Jesse B. Daggett wasalso the father of the types of lawswhich currently govern the creation and operation of drainage districts in Eastern Arkansas. The St.Francis Levee District is a majorexample.

Jesse B. Daggett had two sonswho became members of the firm,W. H. Daggett and Jimason J. Daggett. He also had a daughter,Jessamine Daggett Gist.

Charles Eben Daggett devotedmuch of his practice to the defenseof personal injury suits. Much ofthis involved his representation ofthe Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, which was represented bythe Daggett firm from 1917 to 1981.such representation ceasing immediately prior to the Mo-Pacmerger with Union Pacific and theretirement of )imason J. Daggettas the district attorney for the railroad. This continuous representation of the Missouri Pacific forsixty-four years may have giventhe Daggett firm more seniority

than any other attorneys in therailroad system. John L. Daggett,the son of Charles Eben Daggett,and W. H. Daggett also were involved in this railroad litigation,with )imason Daggett succeedingW. H. Daggett as district attorney.

Active in bar association affairs, Charles Eben Daggettserved as president of the Arkansas Bar Association during hisyears of active practice. This wasin 1923, when he was 38 years old,the youngest man ever to hold thatposition. His son, John L.. servedas president of the Junior Bar Association of the state bar in 1940.Eben was also a delegate to the1917-18 constitutional convention,and his proposals included a unicameral legislature and the use ofthe initiative and referendum forlocal legislation. The proposalswent the same way as the proposed constitution. however.Eben Daggett died in 1954.

Since the death of Jesse B. Daggett in 1963, his sons, )imason J.Daggett and W. H. Daggett, havecarried on the family tradition andhave built upon the foundationprovided them by their forebears.Both have been engaged in a general civil practice and haveearned the respect of their fellowpractitioners as outstanding advocates. !imason Daggett graduated from the University of theSouth at Sewanee, Tennessee,and the University of ArkansasLaw School. W. H. Daggett graduated from the University of theSouth and received his legal education at Boston College and YaleLaw School. None of W. H. Daggett's children became lawyers,but !imason's two sons, Jesse B.Daggett II and Doddridge M. Daggett, are graduates of the University of Arkansas Law School andare members of the firm. Othercurrent members of the firm areJames R. Van Dover, Robert J. Donavan and David W. Cahoon. Otherlawyers who have been associated with the Daggett law firmover the years include). L. (Beck)Shaver of Wynne, a past presidentof the Arkansas Bar Associationand former lieutenant governor ofArkansas; D. S. Plummer, deceased, a former circuit judge; F.P. Fitzsimmons, long deceased, alaw partner of Chief Justice GriffinSmith at the time of his election to

the Supreme Court; John T. Williams. who is retired from activepractice but serves "of counsel" toFriday, Eldredge & Clark of LittleRock (formerly Smith, Williams,Friday & Bowen); and Ronald A.May. a senior partner in Wright,Lindsey & Jennings of Little Rock.

Amelia Daggett, sister ofCharles E. Daggett and Jesse B.Daggett, married Griffin Smith,who served for many years as chiefjustice of the Supreme Court. Theirson, Griffin Smith, and his son,Griffin Smith, Ir.. practice law inLittle Rock. Thus, the Daggettfamily connection extends intoCentral Arkansas as well. GriffinSmith, of course, is a multi-talented individual who is not onlythe author of a form book but alsohas been for many years themoving force behind the Gridironand the author of numerous Gridiron shows.

Olive Daggett, another sister ofJesse B. Daggett and Charles E.Daggett, is the mother of DaggettHoward, a senior member of thelaw firm of Howard, Poe & Bastionof Washington, D.C.. and a formergeneral counsel of the FederalAviation Agency and associategeneral counsel of the U. S. AirForce.

How far into the future the line ofDaggett lawyers will continue remains to be seen, but the youngerDaggett lawyers, Jesse B. DaggettII and Dodd Daggett, each havethree children. Jesse's daughter,Susan Daggett, is a junior atMount Holyoke in Massachusettsand has expressed the intention ofbecoming a lawyer. If she does,she would be part of the fifth generation of lawyers in her immediate family.

In addition to practicing law,the Daggett family, both lawyersand non-lawyers. have been heavily involved in the EpiscopalChurch. (This has been natural.perhaps, since the family tracesits Anglican lineage back at leastto 1526 to Richard Doggett of Suffolk, England, who spelled hisname with an "0" instead of an"a".) Active in St. Andrews Parishin Marianna, the children of Mr.and Mrs. John Mayhew Daggettbuilt a parish house which wasdedicated to the memory of theirparents in 1951. John Mayhew Daggett was one of the founders of the


parish and served for many yearsas secretary of the Diocese of Arkansas under Bishop Henry NilesPearce. W. H. Daggett, in particular. has served in many capacities both in his parish and dioceseand as a member of the Board ofTrustees of the University of theSouth.

The next Daggett lawyer, as hasbeen said, will be part of the filthgeneration of Arkansas lawyers inthe family. Actually, for over twohundred years going back to 1783,there have been members of theAmerican legal profession inevery generation of Daggetts.They have been a great credit tothe legal profession, and the Bar ofArkansas in particular has beenthe fortunate recipient of theirabilities and dedication........

For good measure, here is a personal postscript about the lawyersDaggett. 1had, of course, known oftheir abilities from my own earlylaw practice in Forrest City in thelate 1950's. But in the 1960's, when1 was on the faculty of the lawschool in Fayetteville, I receiveda visit from a former student of

mine whom 1 had taught in political science while 1 was completing my law degree. He told me thathe was writing a book and askedme about a variety of things, including some of a legal nature.One thing he asked about wasfamilies of lawyers-famous "lawyer names" in Arkansas. 1 gavehim a good number, all of whichwould be familiar to the reader,but the one that he liked was Daggett, and part of it came out thisway in the book:

.....Lawyer Daggett can provethe ownership of the grayhorse. He will come alter youwith a writ of replevin.

"All right, now listen verycarefully as 1will not bargainfurther. 1 will take the poniesback and keep the gray horseand settle for three hundreddollars. Now you must takethat or leave it and 1 do notmuch care which it is."

1 said, "I am sure LawyerDaggett would not wish me toconsider anything underthree hundred and twentylive dollars. What you get forthat is everything except the

saddle and you get out of acostly lawsuit as well. It willgo harder if Lawyer Daggettmakes the terms as he willinclude a generous fee forhimself."

"Lawyer Daggett! LawyerDaggett! Who is this famouspleader of whose name 1washappily ignorant ten minutesago?"

.....Lawyer Daggett is theman who forced [the GreatArkansas River, Vicksburg &Gulf Steamship Company]into receivership, said I."They tried to 'mess' withhim. It was a feather in hiscap. He is on familiar termswith important men in LittleRock. The talk is he will begovernor one day."

"Then he is a man of littleambition," said Stonehill."incommensurate with hiscapacity for making mischief.1 would rather be a countyroad overseer in Tennesseethan governor of this benighted state. There is morehonor in it." (Charles Portis,True Grit, pp. 34-35 (1968).) 0

cmI»>CRAWFORD & COMPANYHEALTH AND REHABILITATION SERVICES

PROFESSIO AL SERVICES TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION I THEFOLLOWI G AREAS:

Liability: Evaluation of re-employment potential after partialor total permanent disability

Liability: Evaluation of Residual Employability including LaborMarket Information

Workers' Compensation: Evaluation of Residual Employability,Medical Coordination,Development of IndividualizedRehabilitation Programs, DirectJob Placement

QUALIFIED AS EXPERT WITNESS IN ARKANSAS ANDOTHER JURISDICTIONS


'------------------------- ------

Comprehensive VocationalEvaluations for. Divorce Cases,

Social SecurityDisability Cases,Long TermDisability Cases,Auto o-FaultCases

1501 North University, Suite 764Little Rock, Arkansas 72207(501) 666-0304

Law, Literature & Laughter

What's ina Name Change?Editor's Note: "Law, Literature, &

Laughter" is the brainchild of Victor A. Fleming, a member of theHoover, Jacobs & Storey firm in Little Rock. Vic has been a member ofthe Arkansas Bar foundationWriting Awards Committee since1981. His legal and nonlegal writings have appeared in newspapers, magazines, and legalperiodicals. Readers are invited toshare humorous experiences withVic for exposition in future issues.

BY VICTOR A. flEMING

My good friend T. S. Day of Arkansas Post has become interested in the law of name changes.

His interest stems from the factthat several of his family havehumorous, if not pitiable, namesituations. He has a brother, R. B."Sonny" Day of Lake Village.Sonny's wife is a twin from LittleRock, hai\ing from the family of awealthy doctor by the name ofRainey.

Why Dr. and Mrs. Rainey namedtheir twin daughters Ima and Yurawith no middle names is anyone'sguess. T. S. says they are familynames. Sonny married Ima. Ima'ssister married a fellow by thename of Orville H. Knight of Waycross. Georgia.

To go with her unusual name,Ima has certain Gracie Allen characteristics, notably the screechyvoice and a brain that doesn't always catch the point of anotherperson's remarks. T. S., lapsinginto an impersonation of Imo, tellsthe story of a dialogue with a butler at a fancy party (the butler hadto check the guest list).

" 'Name, madam?'" 'Ima Rainey Day. We're in

vited.'" 'You're a what?'" 'Oh, no, you must mean my sis

ter, Yura Rainey Knight, in Georgia.'

" 'I'm a what. ma'am?'" 'Rainey Day. Rainey Day.'" 'But it's a sunny day.'" 'Really? My husband's name is

Sonny Day, too.' "Suffice it to say there are events

such as the foregoing that havearoused in my friend an interest inthe law of name changes.

The basic law of name changesis very simple: One may changeher name without formal legalproceedings by merely adoptinganother name. Carroll v. Johnson,263 Ark. 280, 565 S.W.2d 10 (1978);Clinton v. Morrow, 220 Ark. 377, 247S.W.2d 1015 (1952). True, there is alaw expressly addressing thename change concept, Ark. Stat,Ann. §§34-801-03, but JudgeFogleman, in the Carroll case, saidthat "little attention need be given[it]." A great deal of attentionshould be given the Carroll case,however. if you have a case wherea parent wants to change the nameof a minor child.

Presumably, the first namechange is that which is recorded inGenesis 17, where God told Abram("Exalted Father") that he wouldhenceforth be known as Abraham("Father of Nations"). Shortlythereafter, in the same chapter ofthe Bible, God changed Abraham'swife's name from Sarai to Sarah("Princess"), when it was decidedthat she would bear children afterall. There are virtually no Biblicallaws addressing name change, so

perhaps God and Judge Foglemanfeel the same way about the needfor a statute in this respect.

I tried to explain to T. S. the easewith which a name change couldbe accomplished. Like severalclients before him, he could notunderstand the common law aboutadopting a new name. Also, hewas unimpressed with the Biblicalhistory I supplied him.

"I want a court order." he said."A judicial declaration that Imaain't Imo anymore. As far as Yurais concerned, well that'll just haveto be Orville's brother's problem."

Assuring him that I would follow statutory procedure for a courtorder, I asked T. S. what Ima andSonny thought about Ima getting aname change.

"You think I ought to talk to 'emabout it?" he asked. "I mean, dothey have to know ahead of time?"

It is lucky I did not try to explainprocedural due process to T. S. thatday. I have not yet heard from Imaor Sonny about a possible namechange. 0


INMEMORIAM

JUDGE HARRELL A. SIMPSON, SR.

Judge Harrell A,Simpson. Sr.

Former Circuit Judge Harrell A.Simpson, Sr., aged 71. of Pocahontas, died Monday, July 9, 1984.

As a special chancellor, Simpson ruled in November 1981. thatthe state's method of financingpublic schools was unconstitutional.

Judge Simpson was appointed aspecial chancery judge in PulaskiCounty in 1980 to hear the lawsuitchallenging the state school finance formula. His 1981 decision,upheld by the Arkansas SupremeCourt in 1983, said that the widedisparity in pupil expendituresamong 371 school districts in thestate was a denial of equal educational opportunity. A special legislative session was called in thefall of 1983 to enact a new stateschool aid formula and other educational reforms.

A native of Evening Shade,Judge Simpson also served as ajudge of the former 16th JudicialCircuit from 1955 through 1978. Heearlier had served two terms asprosecuting attorney and sixyears as a deputy prosecuting attorney from the 16th District.


He was the son of the late JamesMonroe and Laura Harrell Simpson, members of pioneer SharpCounty families. Judge Simpsonattended Arkansas Tech University in Russellville and was graduated in 1938 from the Universityof Arkansas at Fayetteville Schoolof Law.

Judge Simpson served on thefaculty of the National College ofState Judiciary at the University ofNevada in Reno and as presidentof the Arkansas Judicial Council.which is composed of the state'scircuit, chancery and appellatejudges.

He was a member of the stateCriminal Code Revision Commission which completed a draft of anew state criminal code in 1974that was adopted in 1975. andchaired its substantive subcommittee.

Judge Simpson was a member ofthe Arkansas Bar Association for30 years, and was a member of theAmerican Judge's Association,and the First United MethodistChurch.

He was the First Cub Scoutmaster in Pocahontas. was a Mason ofthe KCCH degree and was a pastchair of the March of Dimes.

He is survived by his wife, Mrs.Jeanne Belford Simpson; a son,Harrell A. Simpson, Jr., of LakeHavasu City, Ariwna; a daughter,Anne Belford Simpson of LittleRock; and four grandchildren.

L. V. Rhine

L. V. Rhine, aged 89, of Paragould. died Tuesday, July 24, 1984.

A native of Nebraska, Rhinewas a former municipal judge.owner of the Greene County Abstract Co.. and partner in The BigPicture-the state's first daily offset newspaper.

Rhine moved to Paragould in1927 and was its high school principal for three years. He entered a

law partnership with H. R. Partlowand later with his brother, H. C.Rhine.

The son of Fred and Netta Rhine,he held an Agriculture Degreefrom Kansas State University,studied law at the University ofMissouri and received his law degree from Cumberland Universityat Lebanon, Tenn.

He planted and cultivated theRhine Peach Orchards south ofParagould and for many yearsshipped fruit throughout the MidSouth.

Rhine was a member of the Arkansas Bar Association for 30 yearsand was also a 32nd degree Mason, a member of the ExchangeClub and a 50-year member of theFirst Baptist Church.

He served as president of theChamber of Commerce during itswork to secure the Crowley'sRidge State Park.

Survivors are his wife, Olga;two sisters, Myrl Mueller of Paragould and Margaret Sharone ofMathews, Va.; and, a brother,Fred A. Rhine of Augusta, Kan.

Bob Bailey, Jr.

Bob Bailey, Jr., aged 71. of Russellville, died Tuesday, July 17,1984.

Bailey served from 1949 to 1955as a state senator and from 1947 to1949 as the Russellville policejudge. He was elected municipaljudge in 1966.

A member of the Arkansas BarAssociation for 21 years, Baileyserved on the Legislation and Auditing Committees.

Bailey was a veteran of WorldWar II, a member of DisabledAmerican Veterans, Veterans ofForeign Wars, Scimitar ShrineTemple, the American Legion andwas a 32nd degree Mason.

He was also a member of LittleRock Consistory and the Associated Reformed PresbyterianChurch.

I

l

Survivors are his wife, Mrs.Margaret L. Bailey; a son, BobBailey, of Little Rock; and a grandchild.

Edward Riddick Riffel

Edward Riddick RiffeL aged 72.of Little Rock, died Tuesday. May22, 1984.

Riffel for 20 years assisted theCity of Little Rock in acquiringland for expansion and road rightof-ways.

He did the legal work for buyingthe Wilbur D. Mills Freeway (Interstate 630) right-of-way and for thewidening of Hayes Street. whichbecame University Avenue. Healso was the city's legal representative in several annexationmatters.

Born in Little Rock. he was theson of the late J. K. and MaudeRiddick RiffeL He was a graduateof Little Rock High School and a1934 graduate of Hendrix Collegein Conway. He received a law degree from Georgetown UniversitySchool of Law in Washington. D.C.

In 1940. he was named secretaryof the sta'te Workmen's Compensation Commission.

He was a commissioner in 1946and 1947. and was an appointedPulaski County chancellor from1956 to 1958.

Riffel was a World War II Navyveteran and past president of theFamily Service Agency.

He was a member of the Arkansas Bar Association for 27 yearsand a member of the PulaskiHeights United Methodist Church.

Survivors are his wife. MollyGordy Riffel; a son, Ed R, RiffeLJr., of Conway; a daughter. MollyR. Parrish. of Washington, p.C.; abrother. Jon B. RiffeL of PacificPalisades. Cal.; and two grandchildren.

Justice Lyle Brown

Justice Lyle Brown, aged 75. ofHope, died Tuesday, May 1. 1984.

Justice Brown served as an Arkansas Supreme Court associatejustice from 1967 to 1975.

As an associate justice, he votedin favor of a suit challenging the

constitutionality of a 1928 statelaw prohibiting the teaching ofevolution in public schools. TheCourt upheld the law, with his theonly dissenting vote to be cast.The United States Supreme Courtoverturned the decision a yearlater. ruling that Justice Brownwas correct and the law was unconstitutional.

Before his election to the Supreme Court. he served as judge ofthe Eighth Judicial Circuit for 14years. He was also prosecuting attorney for the circuit for four yearsand mayor of Hope for four years.

A native of Popular Bluff. Mo..Justice Brown was a 1931 graduateof Henderson State University inArkadelphia. and was honored asa distinguished alumnus at theUniversity in 1977.

While at HSU. he was presidentof the student body, a member ofthe debate teams for four years. acheerleader for the HendersonReddies and organized theschool's first band.

Justice Brown attended Southern Methodist University in Dallas, where he received a master'sdegree. He attended LouisianaState University for a doctorate.then returned to Henderson as aninstructor of history and dean ofmen.

He served two terms in the stateHouse of Representatives fromClark County before moving toHope in 1942.

He was a member of the Arkansas Bar Association for 30years. and a member of the Official Board of First United Methodist Church and a past-presidentof the Century Bible Class.

Survivors are his wife. VivianBrown; two daughters, Lyla Lockhart, of Hope, and Phala Riffel ofConway; two sisters. VelmaOrmsby of Poplar Bluff. Mo.. andMrs. Lucien Fowler of Kennett.Mo.; and five grandchildren.

Louis Ingram Watts

. Louis Ingram Watts. aged 68, ofNorth Little Rock. died Sunday.April 29. 1984.

Watts, a native of Monticello.was a retired Air Force officer, aformer state representative and aretired attorney for the state SocialServices Division.

The son of Robert Edward andVertie Mae Shook, Watts was analumnus of the University of Arkansas School of Law and served inthe state House of Representativesfrom Drew County from 1947 to1950.

He was a member of the Arkansas Bar Association for 13 yearsand served on the ConstitutionalReform and Real Estate Committees.

He was also a member of the Retired Officers Association and theAmerican Legion.

Survivors are his wife, EstherHardcastle Watts; two sons. LouisW. Watts, of Fayetteville, andMichael R. Watts. of Arizona; adaughter, Vicki L. Olson. of Dallas, Tex.; two brothers, William J.Watts. Jr.. of North Little Rock; twosisters, Marie Sullivan. of Memphis. and Hazel Allen. of Monticello; and four grandchildren.

Charles T. Richardson. JI.

Charles T. Richardson. Jr.. aged58. of Walnut Springs, Texas. diedTuesday. January 3, 1984.

A native of Smackover, Richardson was the son of the late CharlesT. and Arrean (Bratton) Richardson. Sr.

He graduated from law school inNashville. Tenn.. and practicedlaw in Texarkana before enteringthe U.S. Army and serving duringWorld War II and the Korean War.

After being discharged from theservice, he attended the University of Texas at Austin, receiving aDoctor of Jurisprudence Degreeand a Master's Degree.

Richardson was an attorneywith the El Paso Natural GasCompany for 13 years before retiring and moving to Walnut Springsin 1973.

He was a member of the Arkansas Bar Association for 12 years.and a member of the WalnutSprings First Baptist Church andWalnut Springs Lions Club. Heserved for several years as president of the Walnut Springs SchoolBoard.

Survivors include his wife, SueBonnie Richardson; a son. CharlesT. Richardson III of Wa.ln u tSprings; and a brother. B. T. Richardson of Pittsburgh. Penn. 0


I


A

rom the 18705 to the19209. the period covered by this article.Arkansas' developments for women in

the legal prolession mirrored thoseat the national level. This was atime when altitudes toward andopportunities lor women in publicand prolessionallile altered signilicantly throughout the nation. InArkansas the period opened withlegislation which excludedwomen from admission to the barand closed with the decade lollowing their 1917 admission. This article, after brielly summarizing nationaltrends during this time, willfocus on the entrance of womeninto the Arkansas legal profession.

National Trend•.1870s-19208

For women who sought admission to the professions before thelate 19th century, the obstacleswhich they faced must haveseemed insurmountable. In hisconcurring opinion of 1873denyingMyra Bradwell's suit for a licenseto practice law, United States Justice Joseph P. Bradiey voiced somekey elements of the dominant cultof domesticity.

In this case of Bradwell v. Dllnola. Justice Bradley rellected contemporary thinking when he wrotethat ... "civil law, as well as nature herself. has always recognized a wide difference in the respective spheres and destinies 01man and woman. Man is. or shouldbe. woman's protector and delen-

Record of the PastBy Frances Mitchell Ross

I

~

der. The natural and proper timidity and delicacy which belongs tothe female sex evidently unfits itfor many of the occupations of civillife. The constitution of the familyorganization. which is founded inthe divine ordinance. as well as inthe nature of things. indicates thedomestic sphere as that whichproperly belongs to the domainand functions of womanhood. Theharmony. not to say identity. ofinterests and vie'!'s which belongor should belong to the familyinstitution. is repugnant to theidea of a woman adopting a distinct and independent career fromthat of her husband ... The paramount destiny and mission ofwoman are to fulfill the noble andbenign office of wife and mother.This is the law of the Creator:"

It was widely thought thatwomen, and particularly marriedwomen, should follow private pursuits, not public work; their liveswere defined by duty to home andfamily-the ideology which governed women's lives during muchof the 19th century.

Restricted by the values of thedomestic cult, women seeking alegal career battled other attitudeswhich also hindered them. First.the legal profession was seen asan especially public occupationbecause of the likelihood of courtroom litigation. This fueled theprivate life/public career controversy.' Second. cldmission to professional schools. fast becomingthe standard training ground forthe career oriented. was difficultfor women to achieve in all professional areas. The expectation that

women were destined to be household managers was reasonenough to discourage advancedstudy. In addition. it was commonwisdom in the nineteenth centurythat excessive education woulddamage the female reproductivesystem and would impair women'sability to fulfill their destiny-thebearing of children. Higher education. according to this line of thinking. was not only unnecessary butcould be quite dangerous. At most,it was thought. education forwomen should be limited in scopeand complexity.' Finally. Englishcommon law, the legal tradition ofmost of the states, prohibited theadmission of women to the bar.Each state was consequently required to proVide its own remedybefore it could admit women to itspractice.' In the 18708. barriers towomen's admission seemed allencompassing, resting as they didon arguments drawn from religion,domesticity, biology and existinglegal doctrine.

At the same time, however.cracks in the fabric of the domesticideal appeared and becamenoticeable over the next few decades. Already during the 18708and 1880s a few women in somestates had gained admission totheir state bars either as a result ofcourt decisions or through legislative acts. Even the United StatesSupreme Court admitted a womanto its practice in 1879. By the 1890ssome law schools had begun toadmit women' and by 1910, 40states had admitted women to thepractice of law.'

"You have let thewomen vote. and youmight as well let them

practice law." saidRepresentative Ellisof Randolph County

during a roll call voteadmitting women to

the bar in 1917.

The early victories were oftenwon because women mountedsuccessful campaigns which led tothe reforms !hat admitted them tothe bar.' Also important was awidespread reform movementwhich began around 1900. Reforms of this "Progressive Era"challenged old assumptions andled to significant changes in manyinstitutions.' The status of womenconcerned many reformers and theera saw the revival of a women'srights movement. While goals ofthe women activists varied, important for many of them were suffrage, broader educational opportunity and increased access to theprofessions.' Although Progressivism peaked around 1917 and thewomen's movement lost momentum after the passage of the 19thAmendment." several importantrights for women had been won by


late 1920. They included the rightto vote in federal elections and access to the legal profession in all ofthe states except one."

From the 1920s to the 1960s. em·phasis on domesticity reemerged.Limited career opportunities alsodiscouraged women from enteringthe professions and economiccrisis and war of the 1930s and1940s were further deterrents.Female admissions to the legalprofession declined during thosedecades and it was not until the1960s that that pattern began to reverse. U

Arkansas Women in Law

From the 18708 to the I920s, AIkansas' development was a microcosm of the national picture. In1873, the year of Justice Bradley'sopinion, the AIkansas legislaturepassed Act 88, which read. in part,that "every male citizen of the ageof twenty one years, of good moralcharacter, and who possesses therequisite qualifications of learning and ability, shall be entitled topractice in the courts of thisstate."" A later bill to amend thelaw by omitting the word "male"failed by one vote," and until 1917,women were prohibited from admission to the bar of AIkansas. Arkansas adhered to its exclusionarylaw longer than most of the otherstates. IS

The disabilities which the lawpresented were dramatized by theexperiences of three Arkansaswomen, Lizzie Dorman Fyler ofEureka.Springs, Clara McDiarmidof Little Rock, and Erie Chambersof Little Rock. Each of these womenwas trained in the law althoughnone was entitled to full privilegesof attorneys under the law. Fylerread law in Eureka Springs,"McDiarmid studied law in Michigan before moving to AIkansas,"and Chambers in 1912 became thefirst woman graduate of the University of AIkansas Law Department, then located in Little Rock."

Of the three, Fyler was mostnearly successful in pursuing alegal career despite the law. In1882, Mrs. Fyler applied for andwas denied admission to the bar ofArkansas. In May of 1885, however, Judge Pittman of the fourthdistrict notified her that he hadvoluntarily decided to permit her

lBO/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1984

Clara McDiarmidReprinted with permission of the ArkansasSecretary of State.

to practice under the Constitu·tional provision which permitsanyone to appear in court in person, by attorney or next bestfriend, and that under the lattertitle all the privileges of an attorney would be granted."" This arrangement, according to Mrs.Fyler, met with approval of the entire bar and demonstrated "progress in public spirit."" The yearbefore, she had applied for membership in the AIkansas Bar Association but was denied because ofher sex." Membership requirements stipulated that membersmust be licensed to practice in Circuit Court," a provision which ob·viously excluded women. She wasnone the less invited to attend theAssociation's next annual meeting" and was also asked to deliveran address on "Women at the Bar."Poor health prevented her attendance" and she died late in 1885.By the time of her death she hadassisted in several suits and hadnearly completed her defense in amurder case.:/:5

Clara McDiarmid practiced lawin Kansas before she and her husband moved to Little Rock duringthe Reconstruction period. Shefound that her move cost her twovery dear rights, the right to vote inschool elections and the right topractice law. She devised a creative response to each problem. Asa disfranchised voter, she organized the Equal Suffrage Association in Little Rock and as adisbarred attorney, she offered

free legal service to women.IITennessee native Erie Cham

bers began her legal educationwhile employed as a stenographerin the Little Rock law firm of Moore.Smith and Treiber. After graduation from the University of AIkansas Law Department, she attendedthe University of Chicago LawSchool and in 1913 was namedPulaski County Probation Officer.She remained in probation workuntil 1917 when she began anaffiliation with the ArkansasTuberculosis Association whichlasted until her death in 1941. Sheserved as executive secretary ofthe Association continuouslybeginning in 1919. From 1923 to1925 she also represented PulaskiCounty in the AIkansas legislature, the first female representative elected from the county andthe first woman in the state to besworn in by the House of Representatives. While she never practiced law, she applied her legaltraining to her legislative work.Especially noteworthy was a measure she successfully sponsored"which abolished the husband'sright of courtesy in a wife's estate. 28 At the time the measurepassed, it was particularly newsworthy since it altered importantproperty rights. 28

The experiences of these threepersons illustrate the obstacleswhich faced women who aspiredto the law before 1917. Fyler andMcDiarmid possessed the desirefor a career in the law and the requisite training to practice. Bothwomen were also remarkably willing to persevere in the law in spiteof the 1873 prohibition, whileChambers utilized her knowledgeto promote legal reform. Before1917. few other women were willing to pursue the law against suchobstacles.

In 1917, at the peak of theprogressive reform era, the Arkansas legislature again acted on theissue of women attorneys, thistime to lift the 1873 ban. The legislature had also recently grantedwomen the right to vote in primaryelections,30 responding to themounting state suffrage campaign." While the bill which admitted women to the bar" passedwith a healthy majority, at leastone legislator greeted the changewith less than full enthusiasm.

Goar Lyceum

largest number of female admis- poraries said that "The right of suf-sions to the bar Defore the I970s, frage having been granted towhile the dramatic decline after women by the last Arkansas Legis-the thirties" indicated that prob- lature, it was quite appropriatelems felt nationally were affecting that the Goar Lyceum, always aArkansas as well. leader in things progressive,

The two women who entered the should have a 'Lady President.'Arkansas Law School in 1917 This honor fell to Mrs. R. Lively,achieved records of distinction in who was elected President for thetheir first year. R. Lively, who month of December, 1917, the firstworked as clerk of the State High- time in the twenty five years of theway Commission, was assistant Goar Lyceum for a woman to holdeditor-in-chief of Ark Law, the the office of President .....school annual. She made the Grace Wallace, who was chiefhighest grades in the Junior Class clerk and stenographer in a Littleand was the first woman elected Rock law firm, was junior editor ofpresident of the school's Goar Ark Law and Junior Class presi-Lyceum, a public speaking and dent." Wallace also served as sec-moot court forum for the law stu- retary of the Goar Lyceum for thedents."She"presided with dignity month of January 1918, a positionand ruled with an iron hand,"" which Lively had also filled inand of her election, her contem- October of the previous year."

October 1984/Arkansas Lawyer/l8\

During the roll call vote, Representative Ellis of RandolphCounty, who surprised his colleagues with his affirmative vote,observed with resignation that"you have let the '10men vote, andyou might as well let them practicelaw,un

Once women were legally ableto practice, it was almost a yearbefore the first was admitted to thebar. The most likely explanationfor the delay is that women had notyet prepared themselves forcareers in the law. Adequatepreparation became especiallyimportant in July of 1917 when thestate Supreme Court institutedmandatory examinations as arequirement for the licensing of attorneys. These exams, to be prepared by a court appointed Boardof Examiners, had to be completedwith an "average of 75% in allsubjects" in order for the applicantto pass." This Supreme Court rule,coupled with the new law allowingwomen to practice, encouragedthose who were interested in lawto attend a law school before taking their exams.

Female enrollm'lnt at the state'sonly law school increased in keeping with the new opportunities andstandards. Before 1917, for example, female attendance had beennegligible at the two year Arkansas Law School in Little Rockwhich provided the only formallegal education in the state prior to1924. This school. until 1914 knownas the University of Arkansas LawDepartment but unconnected withthe University after 1914," hadgraduated Erie Chambers andKatherine Burke who finished in1915 and was the school's onlyfemale graduate in active practicein 1920. 30 A few other women mayhave graduated before 1917."After 1917, female enrollments andgraduates increased. Two womenenrolled in the fall of 1917 for theclass of 1919 and four women werein the class of 1920."

In the early years it was clearthat women intended to take advantage of the new opportunitiesin the legal profeJsion. Indicatorsof increased interest came in theform of larger enrollments, close to45 female graduates of the schoolby 1939," and over 100 women admitted to the bar by 1939."Indeed,the decade of the 1930s had the

Grace Wallace R. Lively

Alpha Delta EpsilonWhile women at the Arkansas

Law School performed wellacademically and achieved honors and recognition from theirpeers, they were excluded fromstudent fraternal organizations.Two national men's legalfraternities existed, but when five womenstudents applied for admission toone of them, Phi Delta Alpha, hoping to establish a women's chapter, they were denied because thefraternity did not admit women.Since they knew of no nationalorganization of women lawyers orwomen law students," the fivewomen, who constituted the entirefemale enrollment of the school atthe time, filed a petition in CircuitCourt on March 13, 1920 to incorporate a women's legal fraternity.Two days later the court granted acharter which permitted theestablishment of the Alpha DeltaEpsilon Law Fraternity." Itsfounders intended for the fraternity to become a nationalorganization which would "uniteall women lawyers in the strongbonds of a fraternity.""

Just as women law studentsdemonstrated resourcefulness andcompetence, the women attorneysof the early years brought vigor,interest and capability to the profession. Their career interestswere varied. Some chose privatepractice while others worked in offices of public officials. Severalwere also involved in professionalassociation work. The womenlawyers of this period built arecord of achievement in the profession.

Sarah Shields.1st Woman Admitted to Bar

Sarah Shields, a graduate of theKentucky Law School with postgraduate work from the Cumberland, Tennessee School of Law,moved to Hope only a few monthsbefore her admission to the bar inJanuary of 1918. Shields, Hempstead County's only woman attorney, passed her law examinationat Prescott with a grade of 100,"becoming the first woman in thestate licensed to practice beforethe courts. 51 Shields practiced lawin Hope prior to her marriage, afterwhich she and her husband left thestate. ~2

Mollie Aurelle Burnside, from EIDorado, Arkansas, received her AB


<:;

Alpha Delta Epsilon founders: 1)Mary Blakeney. Little Rock. Ark.: 2)Virginia Darden Moose. Morrilton.Ark.: 3) William Mary James. Ballinger. Tx.: 4) Helen G. Humphrey.Little Rock. Ark.: S) Mollie AurelleBurnside. E1 Dorado. Ark.

degree from the University ofArkansas in 1911." a law degreefrom Arkansas Law School in1920" where she co-founded AlphaDelta Epsilon. 55 and an LLB fromYale in 1925. She was admitted tothe Arkansas bar in 1921. Burnsidewas active in the Democratic Partywhere she served as chairman ofthe Democratic Women's Club. 56

She also served as state directorand as regional director of the National Association of Women Lawyers. 51

Arkadelphia native, Lois Dale,moved with her family to Texarkana in 1902, her family's homefrom that time on. She graduatedfrom Lindenwood College in Missouri in 1909. She later decided onlaw and completed her legaleducation at Tulane in 1920. Dalewas subsequently admitted to thebar and practiced law with W. H.Arnold, Jr. of Texarkana beforepracticing alone. 56 She becameone of the first women members ofthe state bar association when shejoined in 1921. 59 She was appointed juvenile probation officerin 1922 and later became the firstwoman in Arkansas to serve ascounty and probate judge following her appointment by GovernorThomas McRae. The appointmentwon her Lindenwood's first honorary LLD. Dale was later admitted

to practice before the United StatesSupreme Court. She pursued herprivate practice, practicing chieflyin probate and chancery courts,until her father's death in 1927when she retired from practice inorder to handle his large estate. 60

Virginia Darden Moose, a Morrilton native born in 1891. receivedher AB from Hendrix and her MAfrom Vanderbilt. She attendedthe University of Chicago' I andwas a 1921 honor graduate fromArkansas Law School." The onlywoman in her class. she wasSenior Class president, 63 and as aJunior she had co-founded AlphaDelta Epsilon." After graduation,Moose served as assistant attorney general for five years and waslater chief deputy clerk of the U.S.Court, Eastern District of Arkansas. 65 A member of the ArkansasBar Association beginning in1922,66 she served as the Bar Association's vice president for the6th Judicial District in 1936." Shewas the first president of the Arkansas Association of WomenLawyers68 and was also a trustee ofHendrix College. 66

Little Rock attorney Ada MarettCarter. a South Carolina native.received her law degree from Arkansas Law School in 1926. Shewas admitted to the bar in thesame year and practiced until herdeath in 1947. One of the fewwomen lawyers to devote her entire time to law during this period.she served as deputy prosecutingattorney of the 6th Judicial Circuitof Arkansas. In that capacity shewas in charge of domestic relations. 'O

Like many of these women,others who entered law in theseearly years pursued their careerswith diligence and determination.As dedicated attorneys, they alsoparticipated in professional associations. Some made a consciouseffort to work in organizationsspecifically intended to supportwomen in the law. They demonstrated their ability to function in aprofession which only a few yearsearlier had been closed to themand had been thought an inappropriate area for women to enter.Through their work the womenlawyers showed competence andresolve. They left a valuable legacy on which women attorneyshave continued to build. 0

THE SHINING STAR IN TELEPHONE AND MICROCOMPUTER SYSTEMS.

CORPORATE ONE BUILDING, 10025 w MARKHAM STREI:" UTILE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72205, (501) 224·8133301 EAST MAIN STREI:.'T. FLIPPIN, ARKANSAS 72634, (501) 453-88~5 1-800-482-8782

Footnotes

Bradwell v. Illinois, 83 U.S. 130.21 Law,Ed. 442 1873.

~ Barbara J. Harris. Beyond Her Sphere:Women and the Professions in AmericanHistory (Westport: Greenwood Press,1980). 110-112.

) Ibid., 106.4 Ibid, 110..$ Ibid, 112.• Larry Berkson, "Women on the Bench: A

Brief History," Judicature 65 (DecemberJanuary 1982). 290.

, Ibid.. 288-289.• William L. O'Neill. The Progressive

Years: America Comes of Age (N.Y.:Dodd. Mead. 1975). ix.

~ Ibid .. 81.10 Harris. 117.118.1I Berkson, "Women on the Bench: A Brief

History," 290. Delaware's first womanlawyer was in 1923. Information onOklahoma is unavailable. Hawaiiadmitted women by 1888, before it be~

came a territory of the United States andAlaska's first woman lawyer was in 1950.while it was still a territory.

12 Harris. 133-134. 140, 141, 174." A,k. Acts IB73. No. BB. Sec. 760.It Little Rock. Arkansas Ladies' Journal.

November 28. 1885.U Berkson, "Women on the Bench: A Brief

History," 290.II A. Elizabeth Taylor, "The Woman Suff·

rage Movement in Arkansas." ArkansasHistorical Quarterly. XV (Spring 1956), 19.

11 Lura Brown, On the Track and Off theTrain (Little Rock: The Press Printing Co.,IB92). 209.

U Little Rock, Arkansas Democrat. January10. 1941.

II Little Rock. Arkansas Ladies' Journal.November 28. 1885.

20 Ibid.II Proceedings of the Arkansas State Bar

Association (Little Rock: 1884), 46. Thispublication will hereafter be cited asProceedings with date and page number.

22 Proceedings. 1882, 10.n Proceedings. 1884, 46.24 Little Rock. Arkansas Ladies' Journal.

November 28, 1885.2~ Little Rock. Arkansas Ladies' Journal.

December 5, 1885.n Taylor, "The Woman Suffrage Movement

in Arkansas." 21. How active Mrs_McDiarmid's business was under theseconditions is not known. The suffrage as·sociation. organized in 1888, continued tothrive until Mrs. McDiarmid's death in1899. Her death deprived the associationof valuable leadership. and interest insu1frage work declined until new leader·ship emerged about a decade later.Taylor. 21-26.

27 Arkansas Democrat. January 10, 1941.a Ark. Acts 1925 No. 149.a Little Rock, Arkansas Democrat. January

10. 1941.ao Little Rock. Arkansas Gazette. February

28. 1917.31 Taylor. "The Woman Suffrage Movement

in Arkansas." 37·42.3Z Ark. Acts 1917. No. 361.n Little Rock. Arkansas Gazette. February

28. 1917.3. Proceedings. 1917. 136-137.a Harrison Hale, University of Arkansas.

1871·1948 (Fayetteville: University of Ar·kansas Alumni Association. 1948). 184.

n Ark-Law: Year Book of the Arkansas LawSchool. (Little Rock: Arkansas LawSchool. 1919-1920), II. This publicationwill hereafter be cited Ark·Law with yearand page.

31 Arkansas Law School. "List of Alumni,"Catalogue and Announcements for1964.65 (Little Rock: 1965). This publication will hereafter be cited "List ofAlumni." The manner in which thenames are listed in the alumni recordsdoes not always make it possible to determine the gender of the individuaL

" A'k-Law. 1917-1918. pp.4Q.41; 1919-1920.pp.23-24.

U "List of Alumni." The University ofArkansas Law School in Fayetteville.founded in 1924. graduated its thirdwoman in 1939. Arkansas Democrat. De·cember 10. 1977.

.0 Directory of Women Lawyers in Arkansas1980.1981 (Arkansas Association ofWomen Lawyers 1980·1981). N.Y.

41 Ibid." Ark-Law. 1917-191B. 51.4~ Ibid .. 40.u Ibid., 51.u Ibid .. 41.46 Ibid., SO.41 Little Rock, Arkansas Gazette. March 13.

1920... A,k-Law. 1919-1920. 36.49 Ibid .. 36. The success of the fraternity in

achieving its goal has not been determined.

Let our 33 years of solid informationmanagement service work for you,

As the marketing division forNorthern Arkansas TelephoneCompany, we sell only the best intelephone and microcomputer systems.And we stand behind everything wesell with fast, dependable service fromhighly trained, skilled professionals.

Write for our free brochure or call to

~o Little Rock. Arkansas Democrat. January28. 1918. Since the score merited reporting by the paper. it is probable that Ms.Shields' score was 100 on the entireexam,

$1 Berkson, "Women on the Bench: A BriefHistory," 290.

52 Ruth Brunson. Letter, Little Rock. Arkansas, July 27, 1982.

n Bench and Bar of Arkansas (The B. F.Pace Publishing Co., 1935), 31.

u Ark.Law. 1919-1920. 23.55 Ibid., 36.~I Bench and Bar of Arkansas. 31.H Pearl W. Shoudel. ed.. Some Remarkable

Women of Arkansas (Little Rock. Arkan·sas, Co-ordinating Committee for International Women's Year. 1977), 16.

u Proceedings. 1935, 283·284,$9 Proceedings. 1921. 14.40 Proceedings. 1935. 283-284.41 Bench and Bar of Arkansas. 76.nArk-law. 1929·1930, n.p," Ark-Law. 1920-1921. 28." Ark-Law. 1919·1920. 36.1$ Bench and Bar of Arkansas. 76,n Proceedings. 1922. 13.n Proceedings. 1936, 7.U While information on the origins of the

Arkansas Association of WomenLawyers is sketchy. its members indicatethat it was founded in Little Rock probe·bly in 1938 or 1939. Ruth Lindsey. Conver·sation. Little Rock. Arkansas, July 21.1984.

" Proceeding•• 1941. 150·151.70 Proceedings. 1948. 337.

learn how we can make yourinformation management a shiningstar, too.

!.... T~ ~oYa Systems

~ "~R~'TI"(. ""'"",,'" "'>ltllllR" AR~""~"~IIL,"'"j''' l',...r~",

Octobe' 19B4/Arkansas Lawyer/lB3

CRS t. &D affiliate of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORBe

As an Attorney you know how expensive itis to hold onto that residential property forjust 30 extra days. To control your costs intoday's complex market,you need an expert... a Certified Residential Specialist.

More and More Attorneys across the nation are turning to Certified ResidentialSpecialists ... and with good reason!

The CRS is highly educated and has the experience and dedication to make awinning difference. They know their market, both the highs and the lows. Theyknow what it takes to get you, The Attorney, the highest possible price with themost acceptable terms in the shortest possible time. They fit into the equation,

PRICE + TERMS + TIME = COSTS

Not everyone earns a CRS Designation (only one out ofevery 100 REALTORS@becomes one), but through extensive national advertising by the REALTORSNATIONAL MARKETING INSTITUTE@ and the ARKANSAS CHAPTER OFCERTIFIED RESIDENTIAL SPECIALISTS, more and more Attorneys arebecoming aware of this select group.

So, take the uncertainty out of selling. Rely on an expert ... a CertifiedResidential Specialist. After all, we're specialists - just like you!

The CRS is your symbol of excellence-expertise through education and experience.

For a listing of Certified Residential Specialists in your area call:Bev. Kennedy CRS 664-1775 or Hazel Evans CRS 782-7285 or write:Arkansas Chapter of Certified Residential Specialists,Bev Kennedy CRSc/o Rector Phillips Morse, Inc.1501 No. University, Suite 800

Little Rock, Arkansas 72207


• •

EvaluatingTax ShelterOfferings

By Larry Yancey

The scope of this article is limited to a general discussion of theimportant considerations inevaluating tax shelter offerings.Generally such investment opportunities are offered by promoters/developers through offeringsthat are either registered with theSecurities and Exchange Commission and/or state securities regulators, or that are exempted fromsuch registration by one of the private placement exemptions available in securities laws, Theseinvestment opportunities whichprovide substantial tax benefits tothe investors, are commonly offered in the form of a limited partnership interest for a single purpose business endeavor, and includes substantial commissionsand fees to be paid to securitiesbroker/dealers, general partnersand affiliated persons. The limitedpartnership interests are offeredand sold by means of a privateplacement offering memorandum

Editor's Note: Larry Yancey is aprincipal in the law firm of Prince& Ivester, P.A. of Little Rock. Mr.Yancey received his J.D. from theUniversity of Arkansas at fayettevillein 1976 and LL.M. (in Taxation)from New York University in 1978,and is currently the chair-elect ofthe Section of Taxation of the Arkansas Bar Association.

This article marks an effort bythe Section to keep the membership informed and up-to-date ontax law. Articles by other Sectionmembers will appear in subsequent issues of The Arkansas Lawyer.

(or prospectus if the offering is registered with securities regulators)that are designed to make the disclosures necessary for consideration by investors.

The term "tax shelter investment" or "tax sheltered offering"has gained prominence in recentyears and now is generally accepted in the investment community as a generic term for investments that allow the deferral,reduction or change in the character of an investors taxable income. Literally interpreted, it is aninvestment that allows the taxbenefits from a business endeavorto be passed through to passive investors who utilize the benefits tooffset their respective taxable incomes earned from other sourcesof income. The result is a reductionin the investor's overall income taxliability.

The most common business endeavors recognized as offering taxbenefits to passive investors are incommercial or residential real estate, equipment leasing, and oiland gas drilling programs. Other,and more exotic, business endeavors that are recognized as taxsheltered investments include cattle breeding and feeding, horsebreeding, thoroughbred horse racing, ownership of master tapes forsound or video recordings, and research and development projectsfor patentable processes.

The basic concept for offerings oftax sheltered investments is that abusiness endeavor being promoted by a person or entity (generally serving as a general partnerof such endeavor) will raise moneyfor establishing the equity of thebusiness endeavor from passiveinvestors. The tradeoff that the

promoters allow to the investors isthat the investors will receive substantially all of the tax benefits,and the resulting reduction of theinvestors income tax liabilityshould be considered as a cash return from such investment with thepromise or hope that the long-termeconomic value of the investmentwill provide an adequate investment return regardless of tax benefits.

During the same period of timein which the term tax shelteredinvestments has gained prominence, it has also received someadverse publicity, especially fromthe Internal Revenue Service. Mostof the adverse publicity was generated by abusive practices of afew promoters/developers. Notwithstanding the abusive practices of those few, tax shelteredinvestments should be considereda legitimate and proper means ofconducting a business enterprise.The structure of most tax shelteredinvestments allows the ownershipof the business endeavor to bewidely held and the tax benefits ofsuch investment to be shared byall investors. Although not alwayswell received by the Internal Revenue Service, such structures arelegitimate and proper structuresfor business endeavors. Theadmonition of Judge Learned Handshould be remembered when hereminded the federal governmentand taxpayers alike that taxpayersdo not have a patriotic duty tostructure their business affairs insuch a manner as to pay the maximum amount of income tax liability and have every legal right toarrange his or her affairs to reduceincome tax liability so long as suchstructures are legal. substantive


and pursue a valid business purpose (other than reduction of taxliability). '

The admonition of Judge Hand isespecially appropriate in theevaluation of tax sheltered offerings because the most importantpoint for evaluation is theeconomic quality of the investment. Regardless of representations that may be made by promoters, developers or salesmen, itis very rare that the tax benefits ofan investment are solely responsible for the economic success of theinvestment. Tax benefits shouldbe viewed as only one of the elements that constitute the economicquality of the investment. Taxbenefits may enhance a transaction, i.e., tax benefits may makea marginal transaction more palatable or may make a good transaction even better. but tax benefitsrarely are the only reason foreconomic success.

Absent any consideration of taxbenefits. evaluation of the economic quality of a tax shelteredinvestment should include the follOWing considerations:

1. Front-End Costs. Sales commissions, consulting fees, generalpartner fees and management feesmust all be disclosed in offeringmaterial. Substantially all of suchcosts are borne by the investorsbecause such fees are generallypaid from investor's funds. Generally. such amounts are disclosedin sections of the offering materialentitled "Compensation andFees." "Conflicts of Interest." and"Application of Proceeds." There isno good rule of thumb as to thegeneraII y accepted amount offront-end cost. but any offeringinvolving front-end cost in excessof 25% of total capital (investorfunds and long-term debt) shouldbe closely scrutinized.

2. General Partner. The generalpartner is extremely crucial inmost tax sheltered limited partnerships. Typically. the generalpartner has exclusive management control of the business endeavor and has substantial discretion over the use of investor'sfunds. Of course. the general partner has a fiduciary relationship toall the limited partners but. if thegeneral partner lacks financialsubstance, such fiduciary responsibili~ycan become an empty

lSB/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1984

promise. The crucial items to determine about a general partnerinclude net worth and financialstability. history of involvement insimilar business endeavors, general reputation in the businesscommunity, level of experienceand expertise in the area of business to be pursued by the limitedpartnership. and the history ofhandling investor funds. If thegeneral partner is a corporation(which is generally the case). theexecutive officers and board of directors. as well as principal stockholders of the general partner. arevery crucial and such informationshould be identified about the corporate general partner's management team.

3. Sharing of Distributions. Alloffering materials will describethe sharing of distributions between the limited partners and thegeneral partner. Such schedulegenerally provides for substantially all of the distributionsfrom the business endeavor to goto the limited partners. at leastuntil their aggregate capital contributions have been recoupedand. when such is obtained. a differen t percen tage-sharing arrangement will take effect thatprovides a larger share to the general partner. This is typically referred to as the "residual" availableto the general partner and. inevaluating such sharing of the"residual." it should be viewed asa form of bonus allowable to thegeneral partner after the limitedpartners have recouped all of theirinitial investment. Again, no ruleof thumb of acceptable residualsharing can be quoted. but suchresiduals may vary from 20% to50"10 of distributions that will beavailable to the general partner. Ina typical real estate limitedpartnership. such residualsshould not be expected to occur forseveral years after the initialinvestment and generally do notbecome effective until the sale ofthe partnership's real estate ortotal refinancing of the same.

4. Projections. When possible.tax sheltered offerings will includeprojections of cash flow. tax benefits, gross income, and expensesthat can be anticipated by thepartnership. Except in rare instances, projections will alwaysbe included for tax sheltered offer-

ings in real estate or equipmentleasing. Projections may be prepared by a certified public accountant or may be prepared internallyby the general partner. In eithercase, projections are based on certain assumptions, e.g., occupancyrate, insurance premiums, creditworthiness of tenants or lessees,inflation. etc. Generally. projections prepared by an accounting firm are more conservativethan those prepared by a generalpartner internally. and it is important to identify and understandthe restrictions noted on the face ofthe projections. Projections aresubject to question by investorsand investors representatives,and the same should be pursued ifany question or lack of understanding arises. Projections generally include a term referred to as"Internal Rate of Return." (TheInternal Rate of Return is not aclearly defined accounting termand it may mean different things indifferent offerings. Typically. theInternal Rate of Return is the measure of the investor's cash returnfor cash invested. and it includesactual tax savings realized by theinvestor by use of the limitedpartnership's tax benefits.) A closereview of the projections shouldclarify the amount of tax savingsthat are included in the calculationof cash return to the investor as aseparate item from actual cashdistributions from the limitedpartnership. If questions arise during the review of the projectionsand the Internal Rate of Return. itis generally wise to consult an independent certified public accountant for assistance.

5. Risk Factors. Consideration ofthe basic risk factors that shouldbe analyzed for any type of investment cannot be overemphasized. The fact that the investor ispurchasing a vicarious interest inthe business endeavor in the formof a limited partnership interestdoes not reduce the need to reviewthe risk factors in the same manneras though the investor were acquiring the ownership of the business endeavor directly. In the caseof real estate. the items that shouldbe considered are location,management. quality of construction and the general businessclimate of the locale. In the case ofequipment leasing. the credit-

worthiness of the lessee and residual value of the equipment mustbe considered. In an oil and gasdrilling program, the geologicalevaluations of the drill sites andthe prior activities of the contractdriller and operator must be considered. Many times the businessendeavor to be conducted by a limited partnership will be out of theinvestor's general locale andsometimes out of state. In thesesituations it is often helpful todetermine the general reputationand standing in the businesscommunity of those parties whowill directly influence theeconomic viability of the investment. e.g 0' real estate management company. oil and gas contract driller, creditworthiness of along-term lessee, etc. Suchevaluation of risk factors is simplya basic economic considerationthat would be made if the investorwere acquiring direct ownership.and it should also be made even ifthe investor is acquiring indirectownership through a tax shelteroffering.

Tax BenefitsThe tax benefits to be realized by

an investor occur because tax-deductible expenses incurred by andtax credits available to the limitedpartnership are passed through toinvestor/limited partners. Theprimary tax shelter items are taxdeductible items that may not becurrent expenses, e.g.. depreciation, and tax credits that are basedon a percentage of the purchaseprice of property (usually 10"10) andconstitute a direct reduction in taxliability. The primary tax benefitsof typical tax shelter offerings are:

1. Real Estate. The primary expenses that qualify as deductibleitems for real estate include depreciation of real property, interest. real estate taxes. maintenance and upkeep and management fees. Generally, real estateofferings raise only a portion of themoney necessary to acquire theproperty from investors and thelimited partnership will borrowthe remaining funds necessary foracquisition from an independentlending institution. Such financing should be non-recourse financing, i.e .. no personal liability bythe general partner or limi tedpartners for such borrowings and

the lending institution is limited inits recourse upon default to theproperty securing the debt. In fact,if the general partner is personallyliable for such debt and the limitedpartners are not, recent tax legislation will require the limitedpartner investors to forfeit some ofthe tax benefits otherwise available to them.' If the real estateproject involves the rehabilitationof qualifying historic property, aninvestment tax credit may also beavailable but. other than the eligibility of historic property, real estate will not generate any appreciable amounts of investment taxcredit.

2. Equipment Leasing. The primary expenses in equipment leasing are depreciation and interest.The investment tax credit is alsoavailable but only under certainconditions generally requiring theinvestor/limited partnership tohave true economic risk on theresidual value of the equipmentthat is being leased.

3. Oil and Gas. The primary expenses in oil and gas drilling programs are intangible drillingcosts, depletion allowance and

The Arkansas Legislative ReportThe Best Source of Information on the Arkansas GeneralAssembly. The 75th General Assembly will convene In January 1985. In the 60 days that follow, legislation will beconsidered that will affect you and your clients. Let us helpyou stay informed on what the legislature IS doing. Forsubscription information, write or phone us today.

Legislative Reports, Inc.Ken Parker, President

Box 1304 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203

501/661-9934


some depreciation. The taxpayermay elect to treat a substantialportion of the cost of drilling andcompleting an oil and gas well (i.e.intangible drilling costs) as currently deductible items instead ofrequiring capitalization of thesame. Intangible drilling coststypically constitute 60"10 to 75% ofall drilling and completion costs. Ifthe oil and gas drilling and completion is successful and commercial production is obtained, a depletion allowance is allowable asan offset for cash realized from theoil and gas production. The currentavailable percentage depletion is15% per year on the recovery of income from oil and gas production.The amount of drilling and completion costs that are not currentlydeductible as intangible drillingcosts will qualify for depreciationand investment tax credit but suchamounts generally are not large inproportion to the intangible drilling costs.

4. Borrowed Funds. A major advantage of tax shelter offerings isthe use of borrowed funds to makethe investment or, as the term isutilized in the industry, leverage.The "at-risk" rules of the tax lawsseverely limit the advantages ofsuch leveraging. In the event ofreal estate. non-recourse financing is allowable and the investorswill still retain all of the tax benefits otherwise available. However.non-recourse financing is notavailable in any other tax shelteroffering. The use of borrowedfunds by the limited partnership isstill available to enhance the investor's potential economic return.but any sucb borrowings by thelimited partnership must be assumed solely and exclusively bythe limited partners individually.Also, the general partner cannotbe responsible for the repaymentof such debt. Despite a recent attempt by the IRS to limit the availability of leveraging with full recourse to limited partners 3

• it isstill an alternative to total cashoutlays by the limited partner investors for acquisition of the property to conduct the partnership'sbusiness.

Tax Opinion LetterIf an investment offering has any

degree of tax shelter potential, atax opinion letter will be included

ISS/Arkansas Lawyer/October 19S4

as part of the offering documents.Reviewing the tax opinion letterwill generally inform the investorof the tax counsel's view of thepartnership status of the entity (acorporation will generally not produce tax benefits to investors), theadjusted basis of the limited partner's interest in the partnership,the application of the "at-risk"rules to that investment. the taxeffect of the partnership's allocations of income and expenses. theability to qualify for depreciation,investment tax credit, intangibledrilling costs, depletion, and thetax treatment of the payment ofvarious fees by the partnership.

American Bar Association Formal Opinion 346, as revised', andTreasury Department Circular 230require tax counsel to take reasonable steps to assure that all material tax issues are discussed inlight of the facts of the offering andfurther that all tax issues that involve a reasonable possibility ofcontest by the Internal RevenueService are fully presented to theinvestors. Although ABA Opinion346 and Circular 230 are not identical in scope and terminology, thebasic thrust of the requirements ontax counsel are tbat "material taxissues" be fully discussed. Circular 230 includes a broader definition of a "material tax issue" thandoes ABA Opinion 346 and treats a"material tax issue" as any taxissue having a significant effect insheltering income from othersources by providing deductions inexcess of the income to be receivedfrom the investment. or providingtax credits that will reduce the taxliabilities of the investor in excessof the tax liabilities attributable tothe investment, and also includesany other tax issue that could havea significant impact on an investorunder reasonably foreseeable circumstances including penalitiesor interest charges that could beassessed against an investor. ABAOpinion 346 and Circular 230, readtogether, require that tax counselprovide an opinion on the overalltax aspects of a tax shelter offeringand an evaluation of the anticipated tax benefits regardingwhether, in the aggregate, suchtax benefits will more likely thannot be realized by the investor. Iffor any reason tax counsel is un-

able to give a good faith opinion oncertain tax issues, the reasons forsuch lack of an opinion must be setforth.

The Deficit Reduction Act of 1984requires the registration of taxshelter offerings with the InternalRevenue Service if the tax shelteroffering is anticipated to create taxwriteoHs in excess of a 2: I ratioover the initial five-year period ofthe investment. Such registrationwith the Internal Revenue Serviceis not for approval or review. but ismerely a notice registration provision. The new registrationrequirement will also require thetax shelter offering promoter tofurnish the tax shelter identification number to all investors.

Summary, Tax sheltered investments are a legitimate meansof conducting a business thatallow passive investors to enjoythe tax benefits generated in theearly years of such business. Although tax benefits may enhancethe economic value of an investment, such tax benefits should notbe considered a substitute for thebasic considerations of theeconomic value of any investment.Offering materials that are provided to an investor considering atax sheltered investment will include a discussion of the tax aspects of such investment. an opinion of tax counsel and generallyprovide a set of projections for theinvestor to analyze how much andwhen such tax benefits will berealized. In evaluating any taxsheltered investment, it is crucialto remember that tax shelteredinvestments are structured andgeared for high bracket taxpayers.If the prospective investor is not ahigh bracket taxpayer, the suitability of such an investmentshould be carefully considered.

FOOTNOTESI Gregory v. He1vering. 293 U.S. 465(1935).

aUg Helvering v. Gregory. 695 F.2d 809(2d Cir. 1934).

2 Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. §79. andthe Conference Report thereon. directsthe Treasury Department to promulgateregulations to support the IRS position inRev. Rul. 83-151, 1983·43lRS. p.G. and tobe effective for transactions after March1. 1984.

3 Private Letter Ruling 8404012.4 American Bar Association Formal Opin

ion 346 (Revised) issued by the AmericanBar Association Standing Committee onEthics and Professional Responsibilityon January 29. 1982.

BULLETIN

Paralegals: The National and State OutlookBy R. T. Beard

The November, 1983, issue of theAmerican Bar Association Journalcontained a LawPoll Survey entitled, "Use of Paralegals MakesGoad Business Sense." The surveyreflected that 54% of 525 law firmsquestioned emplay paralegals.The article recounts that of thefirms who hire paralegals, 94%stated that the job duties of a legalassistant differ appreciably fromthose of a legal secretary. A paralegal or legal assistant, the articlestated, is primarily involved in themore structured areas of case preparation, such as document organization and case chronologies,but expected and anticipatedduties run from fact investigationthrough the preparation of routinepleadings all the way down to service of process.

Not surprisingly, the ABA Survey found that paralegals wereused more in larger firms in largercities. Interestingly enough, however, the survey reported a significant use of paralegals in lawfirms of three to ten lawyers practicing in areas ranging from 50,000to 250,000 in population.

Presently, there are two national and at least one instate organization involved with paralegals.The national organizations are theNational Federation of ParalegalAssociations and the National Association of Legal Assistants, Inc.Recently, the Arkansas Association of Legal Assistants wasformed.

The National Federation of Paralegal Associations (NFPA) is anorganization of state and localparalegal associations which represents itself as having 32 memberassociations representing between 6,000 and 7,000 paralegalsacross the country. NFPA wasfounded in 1974 in what it sayswas a response to the growing interest in the development of theparalegal profession.

Information regarding the National Federation of Paralegal Associations can be obtained by writing their headquarters at BenFranklin Station, Post Office Box14103, Washington, D.C. 20044.

The National Association ofLegal Assistants, Inc., (NALA) islocated in Tulsa, Oklahoma.NALA's mailing address is Post Office Box 7587, Tulsa, Oklahoma74105. NALA established in 1976 avoluntary certification programbecause of its concern with standards of professional conduct forlegal assistants. Through June ofthis year, NALA had certified 684legal assistants in 42 states, withspecialty certifications in theareas of civil litigation, probateand estate planning, corporateand business law and criminallaw and procedures. NALA hasprepared and distributed a ModelStandards and Guidelines for Utilization of Legal Assistants byLawyers.

On July 6, the Arkansas Association of Legal Assistants announced its formation. AALA listsits main goal as providing a professional organization to supportand encourage the employment oflegal assistants. By their organizational letter of July 6, AALA announced that it would offer educational seminars to legal assistantson a variety of legal topics. JoannaJ. Fitts at The Rose Law Firm, 120East Fourth Street in Little Rock,may be contacted regarding information about AALA.

During 1983, Dennis Shackleford, who was then serving aspresident of the Arkansas Bar Association, recognized the need ofthe organized Bar to become active in the paralegal area. A committee on paralegals was established and Judge Annabelle Clinton and R. T. Beard were appointed co-chair.

'At the 1984 long range planningconference of the Arkansas Bar

Association, it was determinedthat the bar would undertake athree-step process to first educatethe Bar of Arkansas about the usesand benefits of paralegals, ascertain if there is a need and desirefor a certification program forparalegals in Arkansas, and, finally, if such a need and desireexists to formulate a program andplan to initiate and implement acertification procedure.

As demands on a lawyer's timecontinue to increase we must findnew means and methods of extending our productivity. Thelegal assistant or paralegal is theonly logical answer to this perplexing problem of productivity.

All of the information availablestresses the need for the lawyer tounderstand and appreciate thatthe paralegal is not merely a glorified secretary, but must be treatedas a useful and functional appendage of the lawyer in order tobe effective. The paralegal mustbe given office space, dictatingequipment and secretarial assistance. The lawyer may then billfor the paralegal's time at a reduced rate, thereby affording theclient a cost savings and freeingup the lawyer to be more concerned with legal issues than themundane paper shuffling whichseems to account for so much ofevery lawyer's day.

It appears that there is a strongmovement underway throughoutthe country by legal assistants tosolidify their place in the legalcommunity and gain recognitionas legal technicians. The Arkansas Bar Association is committed to monitor the paralegalsituation closely and plans to utilize its resources to educate itsmembership about paralegals,determine the need and desire forparalegals in Arkansas and ifsuch need and desire exists to assist in formulating guidelines forthe use of paralegals by Arkansaslawyers. 0


EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT

'New Look' for Lawyer,News Bulletin and Organizational Directory

By Wm. A. Martin

This issue of The ArkansasLawyer is the third one with the"new look." Also, you have noteda change in the size. content anddesign of the News Bulletin and1984 Organizational Directory. Ihope you find the changes as attractive as I do. The credit belongsto the editor, Ruth Williams, whocame to us last September following three years' service as executive director of the Arkansas Library Association. She is a 1979Journalism graduate of UALR andhas the education, enthusiasmand creative ability to provide theAssociation with outstanding publications. My role is to give herpermission and encouragement totry new ideas.

The Lawyer is turning more toArkansas writers. Our attorneyshave the ability to produce topnotch legal articles and we wantthem to write for our publication.Articles such as the one on courthouses and the "Generations inthe Law" series keep us in touchwith our heritage.

In the January 1984 issue I mentioned we might do a survey aboutthe Lawyer. Since then, I havelearned we usually do not getenough responses from surveysfor them to be statistically valid.Still. with our changes, we wouldlike for you to tell us w hat you likeand don't like, what you wantkept. added, brought back ordropped out. Please drop us anote. Don't let someone else speakfor you because you are silent.

The new pocket size organizational directory is in lieu of thethinner. cumbersome pull out section usually published in the October issue. We trust it will helpyou keep up better with who doeswhat in the Arkansas Bar.


LAWYER REFERRALPHONE

In the July issue, I mentioned theproblems our Lawyer Referral Service has because our ad with the375-4605 number was left out of theYellow Pages of the Greater LittleRock telephone book. Ron Young,an attorney for Southwestern Bell.has been very responsive and wehave the problem with the telephone company satisfactorilyworked out. The Public Information Committee plans some otheradvertising to get the number before the public and we hope ourmembers help let civic clubs andother organizations know of theexistance of the lawyer referralservice and how to call it. including the 800-482-9406 numberoutside Pulaski County.

ANNUAL MEETING

The Annual Meeting in HotSprings in June was a great success. Our members seemed. veryinterested in what the Appellatejudges on the program had to sayand the social events were verypopular. The meeting in 1985 willbe at the Arlington Hotel from June5 through 8. With the legislativelymandated change in the schoolyear in Arkansas, these dates mayconflict with a few graduations,but we could not get a later timefor 1985. We are working on moving the meeting a week later in1986 and beyond.

The Foundation has three newendowed scholarships, one inmemory of Associate Justice J.Frank Holt, and two which wereannounced at the Annual Meetingin honor of Associate JusticeGeorge Rose Smith and Judge J.Smith Henley. If you have notmade the contribution to one ormore of these scholarship funds,

the Foundation would welcomeyour gift. The Foundation wouldalso welcome your gifts to the older scholarships. A list of the lawyers honored by them is in theFoundation column on Page 22 ofthe January 1984 issue of The Arkansas Lawyer. All these endowments need to grow for the incomepaid to law students to keep upwith inflation.

NEW PUBLICATIONS

In the next few months weshould have several new systemsavailable to help in your practice.Watch for announcements of theiravailability. Dean J. W. Looney iscoordinating preparation of anAgricultural Law System whichgoes far beyond just farm law andincludes information on advisinglandowners and financial institutions who make loans to landowners.

Ben Rowland of the Family LawSection has just about completeda second supplement to the Domestic Relations System and William Haught of the Economics ofLaw Practice Section reports thecommittee is within a chapter ofcompleting a supplement to theArkansas Form Book.

We distributed an update to theAppellate Advocacy Handbook atthe Annual Meeting. Before thismagazine is printed, those members who were not registered forthe meeting should have receiveda copy of the update. Since theoriginal handbook was sent to alllawyers then admitted in Arkansas, we sent the update as a convenience along with a request webe paid $15 for it or it be returned. We have the inventory ofthe original books available for a$10 handling fee for lawyers whono longer have theirs or who havestarted practice since it was published. 0

YOUNG LAWYERS' UPDATE

New Officers Elected for 1984-85

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

good, the Section will be focusingmore of its attention during 198485 on projects that will benefitlawyers directly and the publicindirectly. By popular demand,the Section will again co-sponsorwith the Economics of Law Practice Section a half day program inconjunction with the PracticeSkills Seminar on October 20 on"Opening a Law Office."

Other 1984-85 projects for lawyers include the publication of aCriminal Defense Handbook underthe guidance of Sam Perroni. Thehandbook will contain a detailednuts and bolts guide for those notexpert in the field of criminal law.Also, the YLS is planning a basiccriminal defense seminar to beheld in conjunction with the publication of the handbook. 0

U.S. Supreme Court Reports, L EdUSCSFederal Procedural Forms, L EdFederal Procedure, L EdBankruptcy Service, L Ed

THE LAWYERS CO-OPERATIVE PUBLISHING CO.AQUeduct BuddlO9Rochester. New 'tbrk 14694

During recent years, the Arkansas Young Lawyers' Section hasreceived state and national recognition for its programs. Many ofthese programs have been designed for the benefit of the publicsuch as the Senior Citizens' Handbook now in its third edition (fourthprinting).

While continuing support of thiseffort and others for the public

At past-chair Carl A. Crow, Jr.'sinvitation. several of the Sectionpast-chairs attended the AnnualMeeting and received Certificatesof Recognition. It is interesting tonote that most all of these peoplehave continued to be quite activein the Arkansas Bar Associationwith a good number of themserving as its president.

... both in our law books and our computer data serviceWhether it's with ALR, Am Jur, USCS, L Ed-or Auto-Cite@), our computer

formatted research service-your research will go faster and more efficientlywith Lawyers Co-op in your library.

Our law books and our computer research service are made to mesh witheach other and your needs. Let your LCP representative show you what'spossible and affordable in legal research.

.Here's what the LCP Total Client-Service Library@) offers the Arkansasattorney.Am Jur2dAm Jur Legal Forms 2dAm Jur Pleading & Practice FormsAm Jur Proof of FactsAm Jur TrialsALR SystemContact your LCP representative:ArkansasLorraine Hall. (501)378-7038P.O. Box 56305. Little Rock, Arkansas 72215

IIIIlCP

By Martha M. Miller, Chair

Another year began for the Arkansas Young Lawyers' Section inJune during the Annual Meeting inHot Springs with the election of oflicers and Executive Councilmembers. Richard L. Ramsay ofPine Bluff is the chair-elect for1984-85 and Tom Ray of Little Rockwill be serving as the Section'ssecretary-treasurer.

The four new members of theExecutive Council elected to twoyear terms are: Edward Boyce,Newport-Northeast District;Zachary Taylor, Pine BluffSouthern District; Charles Harwell, Springdale-Northwest District. and Charles Cremeen, LittleRock-Central District. The otherfour members of the ExecutiveCouncil who are in the secondyear of their two-year terms are:John Fogleman, West MemphisNortheast District; Pat Burrow,Pine Bluff-Southern District;Mike Crawford, Hot SpringsNorthwest District; and Ann Henderson, North Little Rock-CentralDistrict.

This year:s election of the chairelect was the first under the ByLaws as revised at the AnnualMeeting in June, 1983. Under thenew provision (fashioned after theelection of the president of the senior Bar) any person who wishes torun for the office of chair-electmust submit a nominating petitionsigned by 25 members of the Section 60 days prior to the AnnualMeeting. Only those persons whohave served on the ExecutiveCouncil for the Section or as thechair of a Section committee aTeeligible. Also like the senior Bar,the election of chair-elect is now ona district rotation basis beginningwith the Southern District and followed by Central. Northwest andNortheast Districts in that order.


ARKANSAS BAR FOUNDATION

24 Attorneys Become Fellows In 1983-84

By Robert L. Jones. III

Last year under the able leadership of President Cyril Hollingsworth. the Arkansas Bar Foundation focused on increasingcommunications between theFoundation Board of Directors andFoundation members in severalways. In May 1983, the Foundationbegan the semi-annual publication of the Arkansas Bar Foundation Newsletter. It is the purpose ofthis newsletter to keep Foundationmembers advised of such mattersas finances. coming events, newFellows. scholarships. researchfellowships and memorial gifts. Inaddition to the newsletter a banquet was held, in conjunction withthe January mid-winter Bar Association meeting in Little Rock. Oneof the dinner's purposes was tohonor scholarship and researchgrant recipients. This dinner wasopen to Foundation members andtheir guests. Governor Bill Clintonwas the guest speaker. Over 165persons attended. Because of itssuccess we plan on having a similar dinner at the January 1985.mid-winter meeting.

While solicitation of new Fellows was not a primary goal.· theFoundation is pleased to reportthat during the past year 24 attorneys became Fellows. Any attorney in good standing in this statemay become a Fellow with acontribution to the Foundation inthe amount of $1.500.00 and approval by the Board of Directors. Iwant to encourage all attorneys tobecome a Fellow. Some of youreading this article who desire tobecome a Fellow can write out thenecessary check immediately.Others will find it more convenientto pledge the money over a periodof years and pay installments asthe majority of the present Fellowshave done. Any member of the Arkansas Bar who is interested in becoming a Fellow of the Foundationand who is uncertain as to whatsteps to take should call Robert D.Cabe of Little Rock. chairman of


the Membership Committee. or BillMartin. executive director of theFoundation. at the Bar Center inLittle Rock for further particulars.The Foundation now has 344 livingFellows.

The purposes of the ArkansasBar Foundation include the promotion of educational. literary. scientific and charitable causes. Morespecifically, to improve and facilitate the administration of justice.to promote study and research inthe field of law and the continuinglegal education of lawyers. Naturally. these purposes will befurther enhanced by the additionof Fellows.

The Foundation does have asolid financial base with assetsapproaching $2.000.000.00. Whilethe Foundation is enjoying financial success we are in need of additional operating funds. I encourage each member of the Foundation to consider contributing $50.00or more annually. This additionalcontribution will entitle that person to be designated as a sustaining member. Last year we had 104sustaining members. One of mygoals this year is to increase sustaining memberships.

Foundation scholarships havecontinued to grow in both numbersand in capital value. Face principal of Foundation scholarshipfunds now exceed $159.000.00. Lastyear the Foundation was pleasedto award scholarships to 17 students attending the University ofArkansas School of Law at LittleRock and to 16 students attending

the University of Arkansas Schoolof Law at Fayetteville.

One of the ways the Foundationrecognizes contributions to theadministration of justice and thelegal profession is through thepresentation of awards. This yearthe Foundation and Associationpresented its "OutstandingLawyer" award to Justice John A.Fogleman of Little Rock and its"Outstanding Lawyer Citizen"award to James B. Sharp ofBrinkley. The Foundation and Association also honored Phillip Carroll of Little Rock with the first annual "C. E. Ransick Award of Excellence" for exceptional service tothe legal profession. The "LawyerHumanitarian of the Year"-<I special award-wen t to BernardWhetstone of Little Rock for hiswork with the blind. 0

AMERICANHOME LIFEBUILDING

"Office Suitesdesigned for the

small businessmanand Professional"

• Personalized phoneanswering

• Legal Secretary• Word Processing

Services• Copier Services• Conference Room• Free Parking

1900 North MainNorth Little Rock

Telephone 758-1778

IN-HOUSE NEWSLaw Schools, AICLE and Executive Council

UNIVERSITYOFARKANSASSCHOOL OFLAW ATFAYETTEVILLE

By J. W. Looney

On Saturday, April 28,the School of Law sponsored the first AlumniDay luncheon honoringthe inauguration of theHartman Hotz lectureseries and the lirst lecturer, Chief Justice E.Warren Burger. The luncheon also honored theappellate judges of Arkansas including members of the ArkansasCourt of Appeals, the Arkansas Supreme Court,and the Eighth CircuitCourt of Appeals. Nearly400 alumni and friendswere present for this lirsteffort.

Following the luncheon Chief Justice Warren E. Burger deliveredthe inaugural lecture inthe Hartman Hotz Lectureship Series in Lawand Liberal Arts. Hespoke on issues relatedto prison reform and corrections.

1984 Graduation

The 1984 graduatingclass of 118 (the smallestin recent years) selected

Professor Robert Laurence as speaker. Atceremonies in May,Carol Goforth, RobertHornstein, John Tull andMark Pennington wererecognized as High Honors graduates.

Michael Bennett,Katherine Gay, P. E.Hollingsworth, StephenHough, Richard Masseyand Melody Williams received recognition asHonor graduates.

Robert Hornstein wasselected as the recipientof the Joe C. BarrettCommercial Law Awardin recognition of his accomplishments in commercial law. This awardis sponsored by a bequest in the will of Mr.Barrett to the ArkansasBar Foundation.

Carol Goforth was selected as the recipient ofthe Craig Stearns Awardin recognition of her accomplishments in taxation and estate planningcourses.

Council of LegalEducation Opportunity

Summer Institute

The law school was selected as one of sevenlaw schools in the country to host a Council ofLegal Education Opportunity Summer Institutefor minority and economically disadvantaged prospective lawstudents. Thirty-two students from the southeastern states andPuerto Rico spent sixweeks in intensive training in legal writing,

analytical skills development and in legalmethod. Wylie Davis,Chauncey Brummer,Howard Brill. Ray Guzman, Carlton Bailey,David Newbern, Al Witteand Chris Kelley taughtsessions during the program. Assistant DeanJames Miller served asinstitute coordinator.

New Faculty

One new member isjoining the faculty in thefall. She is Janet A. Flaceus, formerly in practicefor four years in Urbana,Illinois. Professor Flaccus is a graduate ofWheaton College andholds a M.A. and the J.D.from the University ofCalifornia-Davis andcompleted studies for aLL.M. at the University ofIllinois during the summer. She will teach primarily in the area ofcommercial law.

Jake Looney Appointedto USDA Committee

Dean Jake Looney hasbeen selected to serve ona special planning committee to develop aseries of colloquia for theUnited States Department of Agricultureunder the auspices of theC. V. Riley MemorialTrust. a fund devoted tothe enhancement ofunderstanding amongthe various participantsin agricultural and forestry activities.

UNIVERSITYOFARKANSASAT LmLEROCKSCHOOL OFLAW

By John M. Sheffey

News of RecentGraduates

Several members ofthe class of 1984 graduated with distinction.Timothy Willis Groomsand Robert Howard Nunnally, Jr. both graduatedwith High Honors, thehighest distinctionawarded to a graduatingsenior. Honors graduates included GeorgePatrick Nelson, CarylLyn Peeples, Jeanette A.Robertson, LaQuitaKenner Saunders, JoelLynn Taylor and WilliamA. Waddell.

Rosalind R. McClanahan, a May graduate,will spend the next yearstudying at the University of Bristol. Englandunder a Rotary scholarship. Her studies will beconcentrated in international law and will leadto an LL.M. degree. Mrs.Lois Kline, also amember of the Class of1984, will spend the upcoming year in residenceat Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.

October t984/Arkonsas Lawyer/l93

Mrs. Kline will pursue anLL.M. in securities regulation. Mary Harmon. a1983 graduate of the LawSchool. has returned toLittle Rock after receiving her LL.M. in taxationfrom New York University.

LaQuita Saunders. a1984 graduate of the LawSchool and the assistanteditor of the UALR LawJournal. will become agraduate assistant at theUniversity of DenverSchool of Law where shewill pursue an LL. M. intaxation. She has alsobeen selected as the editor-in-chief of the University of Denver Taxation Law Journal.

New Additions tothe Faculty

The Law School hasjust completed a mostsuccessful faculty recruitment year resultingin the addition of fouroutstanding new professors to the faculty.

Richard K. Burke returns to Arkansas fromthe University of SouthDakota where he servedas professor of law and.from 1974 to 1980. dean.Professor Burke receiveda Ph.D. from VanderbiltUniversity and his LL.B.from the University ofArkansas at Fayettevillew here he served as associate editor of the Arkansas Law Review. He hasalso taught politicalscience. engaged in private practice in Helenaand in Tucson. Arizona.and served as DeputyAssistant United StatesAttorney General. in theCriminal Division. from1972- J973. ProfessorBurke has recently completed a text on constitutional privileges andimmunities.

John Ruston Paganjoins the faculty from theMarshall Wythe College

of Law of the College ofWilliam and Mary wherehe was associate professor of Law. ProfessorPagan is a graduate ofWilliam and Mary. andholds a Masters in Literature from Oxford University and a J.D. from theHarvard Law School. Heserved as law clerk toJudge Ozell M. Trask ofthe United States Courtof Appeals for the NinthCircuit. Professor Paganwill teach torts. federaljurisdiction and civil liberties.

W. Dent Gitchell. whohas been in private practice in Little Rock for thepast 15 years and hastaught as an adjunct professor in recent years,has also joined the faculty. He earned his lawdegree at the Universityof Arkansas at Fayetteville in 1969 and servedas managing editor ofthe Arkansas Law Review. During the upcoming year Professor Gitchell will teach Trial Advocacy Evidence andFamily Law.

Timothy J. Kennedycomes to Little Rock fromKansas City. Missouri.where he was an associate attorney with theprestigious firm ofShook. Hardy and Bacon.He received his J.D. withdistinction from the University of Missouri-Kansas City where he rankedfirst in his class andserved on the Law Review. Since graduation.his practice has beenconcentrated in litigation with extensivework on the class actionsinvolving the Hyatt Regency skywalks litigation. Professor Kennedywill teach clinicalcourses and juvenilelaw.

Faculty News

While the Law School

is proud of these additions to the faculty. it regrets that several members of the faculty leftduring the past year.Morris S. "Buzz" Arnoldreturned to the faculty ofthe Law School of theUniversity of Pennsylvania. O. Fred Harris accepted a permanentappointment to the faculty of the University ofCincinnatti School ofLaw. Norman H. Steinbecame the Director ofClinical Programs atHofstra UniversitySchool of Law. and JasonReynolds returned to private practice in Florida.

An article by ProfessorPhilip Oliver. entitled"Section 265(2): A PoorSolution to a NonExistent Problem." hasbeen accepted for publication by The Tax LawReview.

Associate Dean JohnM. Sheffey is a co-authorof the "Annual Review ofSecurities Regulation"which appeared in twoparts in recent editions ofthe Business Lawyer.

Professor Paula Caseyhas been appointed byGovernor Bill Clinton toserve on the Juvenile Advisory Group of Arkansas. She is also servingas reporter to the Arkansas Bar Foundation project for revision of theArkansas CriminalCode. At the annualluncheon of the UALR LawSchool Association. heldin conjunction with theannual meeting of theArkansas Bar Association in Hot Springs. Professor Casey received anaward for her article."Arkansas JuvenileCourts: Do Lay JudgesSatisfy Due Process inDelinquency Cases."which was published inthe UALR Law Journal.

Donaghey Distin-guished Professor RobertR. Wright has been se-

lected as a Fellow of theAmerican College ofProbate Counsel. Theteacher's manual for hiscasebook on land usewill be published shortlyby West PublishingCompany.

Professor Ellen Brantley spoke to the Arkansas Judicial Counsel onrecent developments inArkansas civil procedure. She also spoke onpitfalls to avoid in federal practice at the Federal Court OrientationSeminar sponsored bythe Arkansas Association of Women Lawyers and AICLE. She wasalso elected vice president of AAWL in May.Professor Brantley hasbeen named to a committee to study proposedmodel instructions forcriminal cases promulgated by a committeenamed by the Eighth Circuit.

Assistant Dean Claibourne W. Patty. Jr.spoke to recently admitted lawyers on April 30 atthe orientation programsponsored by the YoungLawyers' Section of theArkansas Bar Association. He also made apresentation on estateplanning before a seniorcitizens' group as part ofthe Law Week observation of the PulaskiCounty Bar Association.

The Law School's library was well represented at both the American Association of LawLibrary's Institute onManagement Skills heldat the University of SantaClara and the AALL Annual Meeting held in SanDiego. Dana Davis. reference librarian atUALR. attended both.and Ruth Brunson andPauline Ghidotti. director of the Law Libraryand assistant to the director. respectively. attended the annual meeting.

194/Arkansas Lawyer/Octaber 1984

A.I.e.L.E.NEWS--

By Claibourne W. Patty, Jr.

CLE ProgrammingIncreases During

Seventh Yearof Operation

The Arkansas Institutefor Continuing LegalEducation (AICLE) hascompleted its seventhyear of operation. Duringthe period July I, 1983, toJune 30, 1984, the numberof programs, the diversity of topics offered andthe overall attendanceby members of the Arkansas Bar Associationand other interested professions have exceededthe previous year.

Statistically speakingAICLE directly sponsored or co-sponsored 22separate programs consisting of a total of 141lecture/demonstrationhours presented to 1,937registrants for an average of 88 registrants perprogram/session. Of thetotal programs, fourwere videotape replaysof the 1983 Fall Legal Institute devoted to thesubject of Debtor/Creditors' Law andSystem Update. Thevideotape regional replays were first introduced in Arkansas during the fiscal year1980-81, and they havecontinued to be generally well received by themembers of the Bar, depending on the subjectmatter and the avoidance of conflicts ofscheduling with localcourt dockets.

By necessity (and nowby tradition) AICLE relieson Association membersto patronize the variousCLE presentations during the Bar year, not only

as registrants but also byparticipating as program planners. programchair-persons or moderators and lecturers andpanelists on course materials, with little or nohonoraria and minimalreimbursement of personalexpenses.Notonlyhave individuals beeninvolved, but variouscommittees and sectionsof the Association haveparticipated during thepast year such as: HealthLaw Committee; Creditors'/Debtors RightsCommittee; Young Lawyers' Section; Section onEconomics of Law Practice; Agricultural LawSection; Taxation Section; Labor Law Sectionand State and FederalSecurities Law Committee. The Federal PracticeCommittees of the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas andthe Arkansas WomenLawyers' Associationhave also participated.

Chair-persons of theYoung Lawyers' Sectionand the Legal EducationCommittee of the Baralso sit ex-officio on theAICLE Board along withBar Association executives, Bar Foundationexecutives and membersof the House of Delegates.

Last but not least, theco-sponsoring lawschools at the Universityof Arkansas at Fayetteville and UALR have provided leadership andprogram planningthrough their prospective deans, who arealso members of theAICLE Board. More importantly, the lawschools have providedgenerous faculty supportas program planners.presiders and participants, as well as authorsof systems and programmaterials.

Security LawShort Course

The program, chairedby Donald T. Jack, Jr ..Esq., of Little Rock, covered the following topics:scope in general of securities law; registrationand exemptions underfederal and state lawand anti-fraud and liability with emphasis ondisclosure, due diligence and malpracticeunder anti-fraud; andremedies. limitations,aider and abettor, control persons and protection available underliability.

The panel of speakers,which included not onlyDon Jack but ArkansasSecurities Commissioner Lee Thalheimer,Esq .. and John Selig,Esq., of Little Rock, chairof the State and FederalSecurities Law Committee, were in attendanceat each of the locations.

After the formal presentation, the panel.which also includedother committee members, concentrated on thefollowing topics: organization of corporations;real estate syndications;additional capitalizationof an issuer; and sale ofbusiness by stock.

Fall Legal Institute

The Fall Legal Institute, at the FayettevilleHilton and the Universityof Arkansas ConferenceCenter, was conductedSeptember 20-21. 1984.This year's Institute,chaired by Dean JakeLooney of the, U of A atFayetteville School ofLaw. coneen trated on thegeneral theme of "Advising Land Owners" withthe following specific

topics covered: interestsin land; natural resources issues; timbertransactions and farmland preservation law;taxation issues; evaluation of land for tax andestate purposes; andrepresenting the financially distressed ownerof agricultural land.

Second Annual HealthLaw Seminar to be

Conducted atRed Apple Inn

The Association'sHealth Law Committeeand AICLE are co-sponsoring a Health LawSeminar at Red AppleInn on October 5-6, 1984,which will include most.if not all of the followingtopics: new changes inmedicare matters pertaining to TEFRA; medical malpractice update;health planning issues;health facility financing;hospital board and staffaccountability; alternative delivery systems including PPOs, HMOsand state regulation;health law anti-trustmatters; and legislativeissues including certificate of need, informedand consent, etc.

Annual Practice SkillsCourse to be Conducted

October 18-20

The 25th annual Practice Skills Course (formerly Bridging-theGap), jointly sponsoredby AICLE and the Association's Young Lawyers'and Economics of LawPractice Sections, will beheld at the Riverfront Hilton, North Little Rock, onOctober 18 and 19 with aconcluding session atUALR School of Law onOctober 20.


ARKANSASBARASSOCIATIONHOUSE OFDELEGATESMEETINGJUNE 9, 1984

The House of Delegates of the ArkansasBar Association held itsannual meeting at theArlington Hotel in HotSprings on June 9, 1984.President Dennis L.Shackleford presided.

The House approvedthe minutes of the lastExecutive Council meeting, the financial statement as of May I. 1984,and Association membership statistics. President Shackleford filedhis President's AnnualReport.

President Shacklefordtook notice that due toinclement weather onJanuary 21. 1984, the absences of the followingHouse members at theJanuary meeting will beautomatically excused:A. F. Thompson, ThomasB. Staley, Jeffrey Pence,William B. Howard, andGary Cotrell.

President Shacklefordannounced that the Association has retainedMartha Miller to act as itslobbyist.

Jack McNulty, chair ofthe Jurisprudence andLaw Reform Committee,presented the proposedLegislative Package asapproved by the Executive Council. The Houseof Delegates approvedthe proposed LegislativePackage.

President-Elect William R. Wilson, Jr. announced the institutionof a pledge card for LAWPAC, which provides fora minimum contributionof $60.00 per year.

Cyril Hollingsworth,past-president of the Arkansas Bar Foundation,reported that the Foundation is seeking thesubmission of proposalsfor support or grants fromthe Foundation. Mr. Hollingsworth also reminded the delegatesthat the Arkansas BarCenter is available foruse by out-of-town attorneys and that memorial gifts may bemade to the Foundation.

Dean Clay Patty, of theArkansas Institute forContinuing Legal Education, reported that a sufficient number of continuing legal educationhours will be available ifCLE becomes mandatory. Arrangements aTebeing made for a satellite network which willprovide a connection toALI-ABA/PLI programs.

Executive Director William A. Martin submittedthe Arkansas Bar Centerreport.

Herschel H. Friday, theAssociation's delegate tothe American Bar Association's House of Delegates, submitted a resolution to the House insupport of a proposedamendment to theAmerican Bar Association's Constitution. TheHouse unanimously endorsed the resolution.The proposed amendment implementschanges in the composition of the ABA's Board ofGovernors and in theprocedure for nominating officers of the Association.

The House unanimously approved the report of the Special Planning Committee on theLong Range PlanningConference and approved the recommendations contained in the report for future action.

Robert Cearley presented the Site's Committee report. A motion to

move the semi-annualmeeting of the Association to the Peabody inMemphis failed. TheHouse approved a motion to table the consideration of a motion recommending that the annual meeting remain atthe Arlington Hotel in HotSprings.

Robert R. Wright. amember of the Resolutions Committee, reported that a constitutional amendment defining the jurisdiction ofcourts will be submittedto the House of Delegatesin the near future.

The House approved aresolution opposing theadoption of the proposedStandard 405(E) submitted by the Section ofLegal Education Admission to the House ofDelegates to the American Bar Association. Itendorsed a resolutionre-affirming its opposition to the FederalTrade Commission'sregulation of the admission to the bar and discipline of lawyers instates where the highestcourt has, and exercises.the authority to regulatethe bar. The House urgedan amendment to pending legislation whichwould limit the FTC'sauthority as set forthabove but make it clearthat the FTC's existingauthority to enforce theanti-trust laws is notthereby abridged.

The House of Delegates approved the proposed budget for theAssociation for 1984-8$,the appointment of thecommittee chairs andmembers to StandingCommittees and theappointment of chair forSpecial Committees forthe year 1984-85.

The caucuses of Delegates reported the election of the following persons to the LegislativeOversight Committee for

1984-85: John D. Eldridge,Gary R. Cotrell, JamesM. Simpson, andMichael R. Landers. CarlA. Crow has been appointed to the Board ofAlCLE. The followingwere elected by theHouse of Delegates asnew Executive Councilmembers: Stephen M.Reasoner, Robert S. Hargraves, William R.Meeks, III, and Jack A.McNulty.

Annabelle Clinton,secretary-treasurer ofthe Association, certifiedthe election of Don M.Schnipper as presidentelect for 1984-85, and theelection of new delegates to the House ofDelegates, 1984-85. Clinton also certified newtenured delegates andABA Delegate HerschelH. Friday.

Clinton was re-electedas secretary-treasurer ofthe Association for1984-85.

The HonorableThomas F. Butt, upon theexpiration of his tenureas a member of theHouse, commented thathis years of experienceas a delegate had beenrewarding. PresidentShackleford presentedJim McKenzie with aplaque for his service aschair of the ExecutiveCouncil. 1983-84.

President William R.Wilson, Jr .. in his State ofthe Association Address,expressed a desire tocontinue further effortstoward a better liaisonbetween the Bench andthe Bar. Further, President Wilson challengedmembers to becomemore actively involved inthe Association.

President Wilson appointed "Mac" Glover aschair of the ExecutiveCouncil for 1984-85.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m.Annabelle ClintonSecretary-Treasurer 0

19G/Arkansas Lawyer/Octaber 1984

COMING ATTRACTION(February 1-2, 1985)

DOMESTIC RELATIONSSYSTEM-Volume 1-Updated

and the newDOMESTIC RELATIONSSYSTEM-Volume 2(Edited by Ben Rowland)

Co-StarringFamily Law Seminar

"THE GROWING FEDERALIZATIONOF DIVORCE"

Headlining: Retirement Benefits;Pension Plans, Bankruptcy and

with panel discussion ofDay v. Day & Gentry v. Gentry

~~

YOUR TICKETS TO SUCCESSORDER FORM

---------------,-------------,----------------,-------------I I I

AGRICULTURAL LAW : DEBTOR-CREDITOR: DOMESTIC RELATIONS: ARKANSAS FORMSYSTEM : SYSTEM : SYSTEM : BOOK

(Available November I I (Volume 1) I

15,1984) : $7500 * : $7500* : $7500 *$5000 * I I I

I I IAdd $3.00 Mailing Charge I Add $3.00 Mailing Charge I Add $3.00 Mailing Charge I Add $3.00 Mailing Charge. L ~ ~ _

'Non-Members of the Arkansas Bar Association add another $50.00$__

$__

$__

$__

TOTAL $,__

AGRICULTURAL LAW SYSTEM

DEBTOR-CREDITOR SYSTEM

DOMESTIC RELATIONS

ARKANSAS FORM BOOK

AddressSend order to: Arkansas Bar Association

400 West MarkhamLittle Rock, AR 72201

Name _


Beginning with Volume 18. theissues of The Arkansas Lawyerwill be indexed annually in thefinal issue of the year. It is hopedthat this service will providemembers with a quick reference tothe articles and columns whichappear in the pages of the Lawyer.

Mike Hankins, director of Arkansas Lawsearch and a researchlibrarian at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock School of LawLibrary, prepared the index forVolume 18. Cases and attorneyshave been indexed for the firsttime--<I real asset for attorneys.

Your comments aheut the indexare welcome. Please write to Editor, The Arkansas Lawyer. 400 W.Markham, Little Rock, AR 72201.

SUBJECT

AdmiraltyAdmiralty Jurisdiction: Executive

Jet through Foremost InsuranceCo. v. Richardson, by James A.George 1:4

AgricultureIn-House News 2: 113In-House News 3:153

AntitrustThe Increasing Risks of Antitrust

Liability, by Patrick R. Jamesand H. Edward Skinner ...3:126

Arkansas Bar AssociationJoint Committee of Arkansas Judi

cial Council/Arkansas Bar Association (President's Report! .. 1:2

Arkansas Bar FoundationScholarships Through the Founda-

tion 1:20

AttorneysThe Arnolds of Southwest Arkan

sas, by Morris S. "Buzz"Arnold 3: 136

The Daggetts of Eastern Arkansas,by Robert R. Wright 4:172

The Image of the Lawyer, by Wm.A. Martin 2:110

Where There Are No Lawyers,There fs No Liberty, by David M.Elderkin 2:53


INDEXTHE ARKANSAS LAWYER

Volume 18

Why Do People Hate Lawyers, byForrest E. Dunaway 3: 120

Women of the Law in Arkansas: ARecord of the Past. by FrancesMitchell Ross .4:178

see also: In Memoriam

Book ReviewFederal Criminal Trials, Re

viewed, by W. H. "Sonny" Dilla-hunty 3:121

The Prin~iplesof Social Order, Reviewed, by W. Christopher Bar-rier 2: 109

Commercial LawLaw School News 1:20

ComputersLawyer's Short Course in Basic

Computer Language, by AshleyS. Lipson 2: 104

Constitutional LawSeparation of Powers in the U.S.

Constitution, by WilliamFrench Smith 1:40

Continuing EducationTask Force on Professional Com

petence (President's Re-port! 2:47

CourthousesCounty Courthouses in the Main

stream of Preservation Efforts,by Jacalyn Carfagno 2:62

Estate PlanningEstate Planning and Will Drafting,

by Rupert A. Stuart 2:54

EvidenceLaw School News 1:20

Federal Employer's Liability ActIn-House News 3:153

CourtsThe Arkansas Court of Appeals:

Was It Worth The Trouble, byJames D. Gingerich 3: 140

In-House News 3:153

Criminal LawCriminal Defense Handbook .. 1:43

DepositionsThe Deposition and Reality: Some

Suggestions from an Old-Timer,bye. bob wallach 4:167

HistoryThe Arnolds of Southwest Arkan

sas, by Morris S. "Buzz"Arnold 3: 136

County Courthouses in the Mainstream of Preservation Efforts,by Jacalyn Carfagno 2:62

The Daggetts of Eastern Arkansas,by Robert R. Wright ..... .4:172

Indian LawIn-House News 3: 153

In MemoriamBob Bailey 4:176Justice Lyle Brown 4:177Donald Paul Callaway 3: 135Melvin Thayer Chambers 2:60J. Frank Holt 1:7C. R. (Dick) Huie 3:134Louis Edward Hurley 1:8John Fred Livingston, Jr. . 2:60James Neal Nutt 1:7L. V. Rhine 4: 176Charles T. Richardson, Jr .4:177Edward Riddick Riffel .4: 177Elton A. Rieves, Jr 3: 134James A. Ross 2:60Judge Harrell A. Simpson, Sr.4: 176Louis Ingram Watts .4:177

InsuranceFirst Party Bad Faith Comes to Ar

kansas, by Rodger A. Glas-gow 2:48

JudiciaryThe Arkansas Court of Appeals:

Was lt Worth the Trouble, byJames D. Gingerich 3:140

Creation ofJudicial CompensationCommission to be Studied(President's Report) 2:47

In-House News 3: 153Joint Committee of Arkansas Judi

cial Council/Arkansas Bar Association (President's Report! .. 1:2

Judicial Critique to be Conducted(President's Report! 3: 119

Land UseIn-House News , 3:154

Labor LawLaw School News 1:20

Law DayPlanned Activities 2:103

Legal EconomicsThe Differences Between Dedi

cated Word Processors and Microcomputers-The BottomLine, by Kline D. Strong ... 1:30

Legal EducationMandatory Continuing Legal Edu

cation (President's Report) .. 1:2Legal MalpracticeAvoiding Legal Malpractice

Claims: Preventing Pitfalls inLitigation Practice, by DukeNordlinger Stem 1:29

Legal WritingStrunk and White and Me and You,

by Chris Barrier (Out 01 Con-text) .4: 164

Write If You Get Work, by ChrisBarrier 3: 122

LibelIn-House News ......•......2: lI3MundamosLaw School News 1:21

Patent LawThe Attorney in General Practice

and the Patent-Related Case,by Marc Sandy Block 1:24

President's ReportABA Model Rules of Professional

Conduct 1:2Creation of Judicial Compensation

Commission to be Stud-ied 2:47

lnterest on Lawyers' Trust Ac-coun~ 1:2

Joint Committee of Arkansas Judicial Council IArkansas Bar As-sociation 1:2

Judicial Critique to be Con-ducted 3:lI9

The Lawyer Explosion 1:3Mandatory Continuing Legal Edu-

cation 1:2Task Force on Professional Com-

petence 2:47ProbateLaw School News 1:20

Prolessional ResponsibilityABA Model Rules of Professional

Conduct (President's Re-port) 1:2

ABA Model Rules of ProfessionalConduct: An Update, by Her-schel H. Friday 3: 146

Avoiding Legal MalpracticeClaims: Preventing Pitfalls inLitigation Practice, by DukeNordlinger Stem 1:29

Contingent-Fee Agreements .. 1:34IOLTA (Interest on Lawyers' Trust

Accounts), by James A. Hol-comb 1:14

lnterest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts (President's Report) .. 1:2

Task Force on Professional Competence (President's Re-port) 2:47

What Shall We Do About ModelRules of Professional Con-duct (Point 01 View) .4:160

Securities LawIn-House News (FacultyNews) .4:195

TaxationEvaluating Tax Shelter Offerings,

by Larry Yancey .4:185In-House News (UALR Faculty

News: Article by Oliver) . .4:194Law School News 1:20

WillsEstate Planning and Will Drafting,

by Rupert A. Stuart 2:54Wrongful DeathLaw School News . .......•... 1:20

CASES

Aetna Casualty & Surety Company v. Broadway Arms Corpo-ration 2:48

Affiliated Capital Corp. v. City ofHouston 3:126

Barger v. Petroleum Helicopters,lnc 1:5

Bradwell v. lllinois .4: 179Carroll v. Protection Marine lnsur-

once Company, Ltd 1:5Catalina Cablevision Assoc. v.

City of Tucson 3:132City of Lafayette v. Louisiana

Power & Light Company ..3:126Community Communications

Company v. City of Bould-•.......................3:1.

Executive Jet Aviation v. City ofCleveland 1:4

Foremost Insurance Company v.Richardson 1:4

Gates v. Reese 3: 130Gold Cross Ambulance and Trans

fer v. City of KansasCity 3:128

ln Re lnterest on Trust Ac-counts 1:14

Kelly v. Smith 1:5L & H Sanitation, lnc. v. Lake City

Sanitation,lnc 3:130

Ledoux v. Petroleum Helicopters,lnc 1:5

Mt. Healthy City School DistrictBoard of Education v.Doyle 1:20

Parker v. Brown 3:126Peytavin v. Government Em

ployees lnsurance Com-pany 1:4

Smith v. Pan Air Corporation .. 1:5Unity Ventures v. County of

Lake 3:127Weinstein v. Eastern Airlines .. 1:4Westborough Mall, lnc. v. City of

Cape Girardeau 3: 127

ATTORNEYS

Allen, H. William 1:2Allen, H. William 1:43Anderson, Philip 1:2Arnold, Richard Lewis " .. , .3: 136Arnold, Richard S 2:lI4Arnold, Richard Sheppard ..3:136Arnold, Sheppard 3: 136Arnold, Thomas Saxon 3:136Arnold, William Hendrick 3: 136Arnold, William Hendrick III 3:136Averill, Dean Lawrence H 1:2Bailey, Bob, Jr. . .4: 176Baker, Charles W 2:lI5Barrier, W. Christopher 2: 109Barrier, Chris 3: 122Barrier, Chris .4: 164Beard, Roy T 2:115Block, Marc A. Sandy 1:24Boe, Tim 1:2Boyce, Edward .4:191Branch, Robert B 1:44Brill, Howard W 1:2Britt, Judge Henry 1:2Brown, Justice Lyle .4: 177Bullion, Judge Bruce 1:3Burnside, Mollie Aurelle .4: 182Burrow, Pat .4:191Calloway, Donald Paul 3: 135Carpenter, Thomas M 1:2, 1:43Carroll, Phillip .4: 192Carter, Ada Marett , .4:182Cearley, Bob 2: lI6Chambers, Erie 4:180Chambers, Melvin Thayer. , , ,2:60Clark, William M 1:43Clegg, Carolyn]. 1:44Clinton, Annabelle 2:lI5Crawford, Mike 2:llICrawford, Mike .4:191Cremeen, Charles .4: 191Crouch, James E 2:lIl


Daggett. Jesse B. III . .4:172. 4:173Daggett. Jimason J. . .4:173Daggett. John

Mayhew 4: 172. 4: 173Daggett. W. H .4:172Dale, Lois .4: 182Deacon. ]. C 1:2Deacon. John C .4:162Dicker. Sheryl 2: 114Dillahunty, W. H. "Sonny" ..3:121EIcan, Frank II 1:2Elcan. Frank C. II 1:44Elderkin. David M. . 2:53Farrar, Clay P.. Jr 1:44Filion, Garvin 1:2fleming. Victor .4:175Fogleman. Judge John A 1:2Fogleman. John 4:191Fogleman, John

A 4:160. 4:161. 4:192Friday, Herschel 1:2. 1:3Fussell. Robert F 2:115Fyler. Lizzie Dorman . .4:178. 4: 180Gill, John P 4:162Gingerich, James D 3:140Gist, Morse U 2: IIIGlasgow, Roger A. . ..•......2:48Glover. Mac 3: 156Glover. Mac 4: 196Goodson. Judge John 1:3Hale. Milas H 1:43Hamilton, Herman L. 1:2Harris, Judge Eugene 1:2Harwell. Charles .4:191Hatfield, Richard F 1:2. 1:44Haught. William D. . 1:44Hearnsberger, Marcia 2: IIIHenderson, Ann .4:191Hendricks, Lowber 2: 115Hickey, Joseph 2:114Hickman. Darrell 1:43Hollingsworth. Cyril 1:2. 1:43Holt, J. Frank 1:7Huie. C. R. (Dick) 3:134Hurley, Louis Edward 1:8Hyden, James W 2:115James, Patrick R 3:126Jones. Terry D 2: 115Jones, M. Samuel III 2:111Jordan, Steve 1:2Kilgore. Collins 1:44Kirkpatrick. Terry R 2:115Kizer, Judge Bernice 1:2Lambert. Robert J 1:43Larrison. James H 1:44Lester. Mark 1:43Linberger. Judge John 1:3Lindsey. Paul E. . 1:2Lipson. Ashley S 2:104Lively. R 4: 181

ZOO/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1984

Livingston. John Fred 2:60Looney. Dean J. W. . 1:2. 1:3McCaskill. Martha Miller 1:43McCollum. Sidney H 1:43McCorkindale. JudgeRobert W 1:3McDaniel. Bobby R 1:44McDiarmid, Clara .4: 180McKenzie, James H 3:156McLarty. Jim 2:116McNulty. Jack A 1:3Matthews. Stephen A 2:116Meeks. Russell 1:2Miller, Martha 3: 151Miller, Martha 4:196Moose, Virginia Darden .4:182Moore. Harry T 1:44Nutt, James Neal 1:7Overbey. Thomas L. 1:44Overbey. Thomas L 2:114Oberlag. Kaye 1:44Overton, William R 2:115Patty, Clay 1:43Paulson. Terry C 1:43Paulson, Terry C 2:111Pearson, Judge Gerald 1:2Perroni, Samuel A 1:43. 1:44Pritchard, Michael F 1:2Raley. Phillip A 1:44Raley. Phillip 2: IIIRamsey, Richard L 1:2. 1:43Ray. Tom 3:151Rhine, L. V. . .4:176Richardson, Charles T., Jr. ..4: 177

ATTORNEYSSEEK POSITIONSHighly talented. hard working

husband/wife attorneys seek torelocate in Arkansas. Outstandingreferences and achievement. Experience primarily in all aspects ofanti-trust. and civil and criminallitigation. but desirous of moregeneralized practice. Interested inestablishing relationship withsale practitioner for small firm.and will bring some business.Contact:

E. Kaplan and K. Curtis4709 W. Braddock Road

Alexandria. Virginia 22311

Ridgeway. Robert. Jr 1:43Ridgeway. Robert D.. Jr 3:151Rieves, Elton A.. Jr 3:134Riffel. Edward Riddick .4: 177Robben, ElizaMth]. 1:43Ross. James A 2:60Sewell. Frank B 1:43Shackleford, Dennis 1:3. 1:43Shackleford. Dennis L. 2:116Shackleford. Dennis L. 3: 119Shackleford. Dennis 3: 156Sharp. James B .4:192Shields, Sarah .4:182Simpson. James M. . 2: IIISimpson, JudgeHarrell A., Sr. . .4: 176Skinner, H. Edward 3: 126Solomon, David 1:3Stripling. Dan 2:114Stroud. John F.. JI. 1:2Taylor. Sammye .......•..... 1:43Taylor. Zachary ........•... .4:191Tedder. Judge Cecil 1:2Vasser. Glen 1:3Vaught. Larry D 2:115Wallace. Grace .4:181. 4:182wallach. e. bob .4:167Waters. Franklin 2: 115Watts. Louis Ingram .4:177Wilson. William R .4:196Womack. Tommy 1:3Woods. Judge Henry .4:167Wyrick. Kelvin 1:2Yancey. Larry .4: 185

TAX ATTORNEYSOUGHT

WANTED-An experiencedtax attorney to assume responsibility of a tax departmentin a growing mid-size law firmin a metropolitan sun-belt city.Send resume to:

P.O. Box 241833Memphis. TN 38124-1833

Inquiries will be kept confidential.

Attention LawyersATTORNEY'S ECONOMICCONSULTANTS

"A Division of Education andResearch Associates. Inc."

SERVING THE LEGAL PROFESSION WITH EXPERTISE IN THEFOLLOWING AREAS:

Workmen', Compensation (Lump-Sum Settlement Calculations)EvalUa1ion of Lost Earnings Capacity from Partial or Total Perma

nent Disability or Wrongful DeathEconomic Valuation of Pecuniary Damages in Business Tort, Con

tracl and Anti-Trust CasesValuation of Minority Stock Holdings in Estate $elliemenlsEconomic Analysis for Charters or Branch Applications lor Finan

cial InstitutionsStructured Settlement Pricing and Design

We Buy

Real

EstateNotes

• Provide liquidil.vfor e"lales,bankruptcies anddivorce'i.

• Convert first and'iecond mortgagesLo cash.

• Personal or businessloans on residentialor commercialproperly.

QUAUFIED AS £XP£RT WrrN£SS INARKANSAS AND

OTHER JURISDICTIONS

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

(SOl) 661-0161Telex: 78-3081

In Arkansas call: 1-800-221-2715Out-of-state call: 1-800-221-2717

Pioneer Financial ServicesFounded 1932

Call 1-800-FOR-LOAN

MISSING

AND UNKNOWN HEIRS LOCATED

NO EXPENSE TO THE ESTATE

WORLD-WIDE SERVICE FOR

COURTS - LAWYERS - TRUST OFFICERSADMINISTRATORS - EXECUTORS

AMERICAN ARCHIVES ASSOCIATIONINTERNATIONAL PROBATE RESEARCH

449 WASHINGTON BUILDINGWASHINGTON. D.C.

SERVICE DIRECTORY

LEGAL BRIEF PRINTINGPARAGON Printing & Stationery Companyhas been printing BRIEFS for over 35 years.

May we be of service to you?

311 East Capitol 375-1281Little Rock

•BEACH ABSTRACT & GUARANTY COMPANY

REPRESENTING:TICOR TITLE INS. CO.

ABSTRACTS-ESCROWS-TITLE INSURANCE100 Center S1. - Little Rock. AR 376-3301

A money making system from the companythat makes Black Beauty® corporate outfits.

NOW, MAXIMIZE YOUR BILLINGSAND CASH FLOWWITH A MINIMUM INVESTMENT.

Excelsior-Legal's Attorney Time andExpense Control System costs only$42.00 yet its unique color coded chargeslips can increase your billable income16% to 40%. These slips provide accurate records of billable time charges anddisbursements as they occur, Dot afterthe fact wben potential billings might beoverlooked or forgotten. Also, your cashflow is improved by using the system'sclient file summary sheets of billablework in progress.

The complete system includes: pegboard portfolio with aluminum writingsurface; 500 time and expense slips withjournal sheets; 20 client file summarysheets; 50 file jackets for storing time!expense slips and small receipts; andinstruction guide. CaL No. 5027,$42.00 complete.

Refills for the system are also availableincluding time and expense slips withjournal sbeets, Cal No. 5025:500-$25.80; 1000-$49.50.

SPECIAL DISCOUNTSORDER TODAYBUY III VOWME AIID SAVE.Order five to nine systems and payonly $39.10 eaclt Order ten or moresystems and pay only $37.80 eacltSOLD STAMPIIISYour narne gold stamped on theportfolio cover for only $1.00 exira,a $4.75 value. If more than onecover is to be personalized, supplyadditional names.

• Color coded time andexpense slips with journalsheets in place. These slipsguide the user and preventcoding errors. Brown area fortime charges; green area fordisbursements. Slips may beused for computer input'

• Alwninum writing surfacefor sharp impressions.

• Attractive, leather-likepegboard portfolio.

Attomey Time and ExpenseControl SystemCat. No. 5027

."• Actual time andexpense slips are7 1/16" x 2 13/16".

-0{

_o.....=~-~--,

• Handy acetatepockets to safely storecompleted time andexpense slips and tohold business cards.

FREE CATALOG

~celsior-Le9QI,Inc: IlierPO Box 5683, Arlington, Texas 76011 • (817) 461-5993

Toll free line 1-800-433-1700Your nationwide source for corporate outfits and law products.Plants and offices: New York, Georgia, Illinois and Texas.

Signatureo Check enclosed, we pay freighlFor delivery in Texas, add sales lax.Ship to: _

Expiration dateCard number

(uS(' S('parate sheet ror additional names, S 1.00 ea.)

Refilll, Time and Expense SlIpl withJournal Sheetl, Cat. No. 5025. Zip _o 500--$25.80 0 1000-$49.50 0 Send free catalol- ARL ~

r----------------------------------------------------------------------------,: Complete Attorney Time &: Expense Cba'1le:

Control System, CaL No. 5027. 0 1-4, 0 Amex 0 MC 0 Visa 0 Diner's Club$42.00 eo. 0 5-9, $39.10 ea. 0 10 ormore, $37.80 eo. Quantity ordered _o One name Bold stamped on portfoliocover, $1.00 additional. Print narne:

Our latest full color catalogdescribes all our law officesystems, corporate outfits andmany other law products.Cbeck box on order fonn.