The New York City Bar Association supports passage, without amendment, of sections 1031 and 1033 of S. 1197, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2014, as recently reported out by the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, on a bipartisan vote. Section 1031 clarifies and improves the procedures for transfer or release of Guantanamo Bay detainees to foreign countries. Section 1033 allows for the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to the United States for detention and trial.

In a report, the Association states, “Both provisions are in the best interests of justice and fairness, the reputation of the United States in the international community, national security, and efficiency and economy.”

Section 1031 establishes the procedures for the Secretary of Defense to exercise authority to transfer or release Guantanamo detainees (1) who have been determined under periodic review procedures established by current law to be no longer a threat to national security, (2) whose transfer or release is required by an order of a court or other competent tribunal of the United States, or (3) who have been tried for conduct that also served as the basis for holding them in detention and have either been acquitted or convicted and served their sentence.

“By facilitating the transfer of these detainees, Section 1031 will help further the goal of closing Guantanamo, thereby eliminating a symbol of injustice that has been used as a propaganda tool to recruit terrorists, caused friction with our allies, and undermined our nation’s ability to obtain international cooperation in the fight against terrorism. Closing Guantanamo would help restore America’s reputation as a leader for the protection of human rights and the rule of law,” the report states.

Section 1033 would provide the executive with the option of using the federal courts as an alternative to military commissions to prosecute detainees. Transfers to the United States would be permitted on the Secretary’s determination that they are in the interest of national security and that precautions have been taken to protect public safety. While military commissions would remain an option for use in appropriate circumstances, “experience has shown that the federal courts have been a far more efficient and successful means of prosecuting persons accused of terrorist offenses, that they are more likely to be viewed by the world community as a fair and just process, and that such prosecutions can be carried out without compromising public safety or national security. Federal prosecutions are also not subject to the legal controversies that continue to surround military commissions,” the report states.

The report can be read here: http://bit.ly/18J44MM

 

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

George D. Wolff will join the New York City Bar Association as Executive Director of the Legal Referral Service (LRS), succeeding Al Charne, who is retiring at the end of this month.

Wolff is currently Referral & Information Services Manager at the Oregon State Bar, where he has been since 2007.  He previously worked as a business litigator in private practice in Portland and San Francisco, and was a panelist on the Oregon State Bar’s Lawyer Referral Service before being hired to run it. He has served on several bar association executive committees, as a non-profit board member and Chair, and was active in the California Conference of Delegates. He currently serves as Lawyer Referral and Information Services Editor for the ABA’s Dialogue magazine, and is a former member of the ABA’s Standing Committee on Lawyer Referral and Information Services. Wolff has presented to the National Association of Bar Executives, the National Council of Bar Presidents, and at ABA National Lawyer Referral Workshops.

“As someone who has extensive legal services experience himself, and who is active in the legal referral community, frequently writing and speaking on the topic, George is just the kind of leader we’ve been looking for to succeed Al,” said City Bar Executive Director Bret I. Parker.

“I am thrilled to join such a renowned organization and honored to follow Al Charne, a pillar of the legal referral services community who established the Legal Referral Service as a national leader in the field,” said Wolff. “I look forward to great opportunities ahead in the delivery of legal services.”

The LRS, co-sponsored by the New York City Bar Association and the New York County Lawyers Association and managed by the City Bar, matches callers with vetted attorneys in dozens of legal areas. The service was started in 1946, and Charne has been the Director since 1983.

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The New York City Bar Association has called upon the Obama Administration to designate the Philippines for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) under Section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, due to the destruction caused by the typhoon that struck that country on November 8th.

In a letter to President Barack Obama, City Bar President Carey R. Dunne wrote, “It is clear that the Philippines qualifies under the criteria contained in the statute, e.g., the occurrence of a natural calamity which makes it unsafe for citizens to return. In the immediate past, the Department of Homeland Security has acted quickly to confer Temporary Protected Status in situations where such catastrophes have occurred. Haiti is only the most recent instance of such a designation. El Salvador and Honduras also serve as older examples.”

The letter cites a number of policy objectives that would be addressed by granting TPS, including the continuation and enhancement of relief efforts, not merely for clean-up but also to stave off medical complications from waterborne diseases. “A self-evident source of such funding would flow from remittances by Filipino nationals here in the United States as of the date of the typhoon who could be granted employment authorization pursuant to their TPS status,” the letter states. “Currently, remittances from overseas Filipinos equal nearly 10 percent of the Philippines’ Gross Domestic Product. TPS therefore is not in this instance merely a device for protecting a group of nationals who are physically present in the United States from exposure to the adverse humanitarian effects of being returned to a devastated homeland. It is also a way to put humanitarian principles to work by empowering Filipino nationals temporarily living in the United States to aid in the recovery of their own homeland and to alleviate the tragic consequences befalling the Philippines.”

The letter can be read here: http://bit.ly/1aJfxt3

 

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Providing support to the legal profession has always been one of the primary missions of the New York City Bar Association, and rarely has the profession been in such need of support. If you’re a recent law school graduate, you know the situation all too well, because while law student debt is rising, only one out of two of you are expected to find a full-time job requiring bar passage. For those fortunate to find work, many starting salaries are down, and you are confronting new kinds of challenges driven by ever-increasing cost pressures, competition, new ways of doing business, and career paths different from those that traditionally have been available.

Yet there are also new opportunities, as several legal fields are booming and there is further need for legal services for middle-income families, a demand which is not making the connection with the available supply of lawyers.

In the summer of 2012, I convened the New York City Bar Association Task Force on New Lawyers in a Changing Profession to study these issues and determine how new lawyers can be better prepared in law school and in their early careers to serve clients and realize their aspirations. The Task Force is chaired by Mark Morril and includes eight law school deans, managing partners of large and small law firms, general counsels of Fortune 100 corporations, the New York and Kings County District Attorneys, the New York City Corporation Counsel and the heads of New York City’s legal aid and legal services organizations.

A year later, we have announced our findings along with a number of recommendations, including some programs that will be housed at and/or managed by the City Bar.

The City Bar New Lawyer Institute will provide an introduction to the New York legal community, featuring prominent speakers from government, the judiciary and the rest of the legal community, and will offer a continuing education curriculum designed to equip new lawyers with the practical skills and substantive knowledge they need to advance their careers. Launching in late summer of 2014 and running through the academic year, the program will include training tailored toward a small-firm or solo practice, advice and experience in professional networking and job interviewing, and access to mentorship opportunities. While we expect that the curricula will most likely attract job-hunting graduates, the institute will also be of value to those who are newly employed or who obtain employment during the program year. Since most lawyers can be expected to change jobs several times over the course of a career, even young lawyers with jobs in large organizations will find that the institute provides valuable guidance that may not be available through their first employer.

The City Bar will also develop a “bridge-to-practice program” with several employers—including BNY Mellon, Con Edison, Credit Suisse and Morgan Stanley—who, subject to working out details, will partner with law schools to create opportunities for law students and lawyers just starting out.

Additionally, the Task Force will be asking the New York State Board of Law Examiners and the New York Court of Appeals, along with the wider legal community, to consider a number of specific proposals to reform the bar examination and new lawyer accreditation process. Proposed reforms include reducing the prolonged period between when an applicant takes the exam and gains admission to the bar, and making the exam less about rote memorization and more about practical skills. We will convene a working group to develop specific proposals over the next year.

Last, but most definitely not least, the City Bar is in the initial stages of planning a New Law Firm for Persons of Moderate Means. This new venture is in response to a modern-day paradox, which is that while there is supposedly an oversupply of lawyers in the current market, there is also an enormous unmet legal need among the American middle class. Despite the well-documented fact that having a lawyer greatly increases one’s chance of success, there are literally millions of people in New York trying to resolve their legal problems on their own. The new law firm model would employ mostly new lawyers, with appropriate training and supervision, to provide a suite of services in areas including family law, estate planning, contract drafting, disputes, and small business advice for clients. We will seek to construct a scalable model which could be replicated by others across the country, and which we hope will contribute to a shift in thinking about how new lawyers can develop their careers as they help the unrepresented.

Finally, a new City Bar Council on the Profession will be responsible for the implementation of the Task Force’s proposals and pilot programs, and with keeping these issues front and center. Look for a series of events at the City Bar on these topics designed to engage the bar and the public in shaping the future of the legal profession.

Read the executive summary here: http://bit.ly/1j4CAA9

Read the full report here http://bit.ly/1a4Juo4.

Carey R. Dunne is the President of the New York City Bar Association.

 

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Following more than a year of analysis, the New York City Bar Association’s Task Force on New Lawyers in a Changing Profession today released a report recommending fundamental changes in education and career focus for new lawyers.

In its report, the Task Force—comprised of eight law school deans, the managing partners of law firms large and small, two of the City’s District Attorneys, the New York City Corporation Counsel, the leaders of The Legal Aid Society and Legal Services NYC, five general counsels of large companies, and career services professionals—urges a stronger effort to match the perceived oversupply of lawyers with the unmet legal needs of the middle class, identifies “impediments to innovation” in the legal industry, and announces the launch of four pilot programs to help prepare new lawyers for a changing legal landscape:

  • The City Bar New Lawyer Institute.  A City Bar-run New Lawyer Institute to introduce all new lawyers beginning their careers in New York City to the broader legal community and to provide them access to high-quality training and career support in the early years of practice.
  • “Bridge-to-Practice” Programs.  New and expanded partnerships with major employers, who will work with the City Bar to develop pilot programs to provide training and employment opportunities for law students and new lawyers.
  • Reviewing the Bar Exam.  A City Bar working group to report within a year on potential changes to the way New York State tests the qualifications of those seeking to be licensed to practice law in the state.
  • A New Law Firm for People of Moderate Means.  A new entity, subject to funding, that will develop and pilot a commercially sustainable business model to enable new lawyers to address the unmet civil legal needs of the middle class while developing their own sustainable professional practices.

“For all the hand-wringing about the supposed oversupply of lawyers in the legal market, we should bear in mind that in New York State alone well over two million people per year go to court unrepresented in civil proceedings,” said City Bar President Carey R. Dunne, who convened the Task Force. “We believe there are many in this cohort who could, and would, pay something for legal services if there were a business model that addressed their needs, and that both they and the legal system would be better off if they had representation.”

The law firm pilot designed for clients of moderate means would employ primarily new lawyers who will receive training and supervision to provide a suite of core services in such areas as family law, estate planning, contract drafting, disputes, and small business advice. The pilot will focus on the development of a sustainable and scalable business model that can be adapted elsewhere. “We recognize that this is an ambitious undertaking, implementation of which will depend on the success in attracting significant start-up funding from both within and outside the legal profession, but we believe that the fundamental changes affecting the legal community should cause us to re-evaluate the expectations of our profession and affirmatively seek out ways to re-define success in a new professional landscape,” states the report.

The City Bar New Lawyer Institute is a response to the Task Force’s finding that the current model of legal education often insufficiently addresses many fundamental lawyering skills, and that legal training in any event should be viewed as a continuum that extends beyond law school into the early years of practice. Beginning with the law school class of 2014, the New Lawyer Institute “will offer a year-long continuing legal education curriculum designed to teach new lawyers the practical skills and substantive knowledge necessary for success as a practitioner in New York City, including training and advice targeted to potential small firm and solo practitioners” states the report. “The Institute also will provide advice and experience in professional networking and job interview training. Finally, New Lawyer Institute participants will have access to a series of mentorship opportunities so that they can receive advice on both substantive legal issues and career development.”

“We need the profession to step up and adapt our practices to changing needs, and we should not hesitate to borrow what works in other professions and locations,” said Mark Morril, Chair of the Task Force. “The clinical model in medical education, the specialization and teamwork approach on case studies in business schools, and the practical, on-the-job training new lawyers undergo in the U.K. are all worthy of a serious look by our profession.”

In the Bridge-to-Practice program, employers will partner with law schools to provide experiential learning opportunities for law students and new lawyers. “We emphasize that hands-on experience is not alone sufficient to meet the goal,” states the report. “Ideally, the practical experience should be preceded by academic training so that it is experienced in the context of knowledge of the legal system and processes and some substantive law. It must be accompanied by meaningful supervision and feedback, as well as structured opportunities to reflect on and analyze the experience from a more academic viewpoint.” BNY Mellon, Con Edison, Credit Suisse and Morgan Stanley have agreed to work with the City Bar to develop and implement pilot programs, subject to working out details.

Among the impediments to change in the legal profession, according to the report, is an overreliance on the U.S. News & World Report law school rankings, “which measure the wrong things. In each of the last ten years, more than 170 law school deans have signed a letter ‘publicly condemning the rankings’ for failing to measure many characteristics that define a law school’s worth.” The rankings’ outsized influence has led to an “arms race” as law schools have “felt the need to redistribute scarce law school resources away from education and towards other efforts that will maintain or improve their schools’ rank.”

Other impediments to innovation cited in the report include the ABA Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools, whose “one size fits all” requirements for staffing, libraries and facilities stifle experimentation with low-cost models. And bar exams need to do a better job of  testing the relevant skills needed to be a lawyer in the 21st Century, the report argues. The Task Force also recommends reexamination of the current prohibition on outside investment in law firms; recent loosening of similar restrictions in the UK has lead to a rapid expansion of mass market retail legal services.

The Task Force was formed in the fall of 2012 to address changes in the legal profession, with a focus on the “plight of new lawyers.” According to the ABA, only about half of 2011 and 2012 law graduates were employed full time in jobs requiring bar passage nine months after graduation. The overall employment rate for the class of 2011 was the lowest since 1994. The Task Force was charged with examining whether new lawyers are being given relevant development opportunities in law school and in their early careers so that they are employable, able to realize their aspirations in a reasonable time frame, and ready to serve clients effectively.

The Task Force’s report concludes with the announcement of a City Bar Council on the Profession “charged with the implementation of the Task Force’s proposals, including continued management of the design and operation of our pilot programs, and with ongoing monitoring of and participation in the public debate about trends in the profession. The City Bar will launch a series of roundtables to engage the resources of bar leaders and the organized bar in New York City to facilitate ongoing discussion of the issues addressed in this Report, and to monitor the successful implementation of our recommendations. We contemplate both public and private moderated discussions designed to secure the continuing engagement of the profession in these issues.”

Task Force on New Lawyers in a Changing Profession

NEW YORK CITY BAR ASSOCIATION
Carey R. Dunne, President, New York City Bar Association; Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Mark C. Morril, Vice President, New York City Bar Association, Task Force Chair; MorrilADR LLC
Bret I. Parker, Executive Director, New York City Bar Association
Alan Rothstein, General Counsel, New York City Bar Association
Mathew S. Miller, Task Force Chief of Staff; Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP

TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP
Nicholas Allard, Dean, Brooklyn Law School
Michelle J. Anderson, Dean, CUNY Law School
Steven Banks, Attorney-in-Chief, The Legal Aid Society
Richard I. Beattie, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Laurie Berke-Weiss, Berke-Weiss & Pechman LLP
Bradley Butwin, O’Melveny & Myers LLP
Michael A. Cardozo, New York City Corporation Counsel
Andrew G. Celli, Jr., Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP
Camille Chin-Kee-Fatt, Advisor to the Dean, New York Law School
Sharon L. Crane, Director of Legal Recruiting, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
Anthony Crowell, Dean, New York Law School
Matthew Diller, Dean, Cardozo Law School
Eric J. Friedman, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Eric Grossman, Chief Legal Officer, Morgan Stanley
Charles J. Hynes, Kings County District Attorney
Brad S. Karp, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Don H. Liu, General Counsel, Xerox Corporation
Carmelyn P. Malalis, Outten & Golden LLP
Elizabeth D. Moore, General Counsel, Consolidated Edison, Inc.
Trevor W. Morrison, Dean, NYU School of Law
Barbara Berger Opotowsky, Former Executive Director, New York City Bar Association
Julian Pritchard, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP
Raun J. Rasmussen, Executive Director, Legal Services NYC
Alla Roytberg, Law Firm and Mediation Practice of Alla Roytberg, P.C.
Patricia Salkin, Dean and Professor of Law Designate, Touro Law Center
David M. Schizer, Dean, Columbia Law School
Amy W. Schulman, General Counsel, Pfizer Inc.
Eric Seiler, Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP
Jane C. Sherburne, General Counsel, BNY Mellon
Charles A. Stillman, Ballard Spahr Stillman & Friedman LLP
Kathleen M. Sullivan, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP
William Treanor, Dean, Georgetown University Law Center
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., New York County District Attorney
Wanji J. Walcott, Deputy General Counsel, American Express Company
David B. Wilkins, Director, Program on the Legal Profession, Harvard Law School

Read the Executive Summary here: http://bit.ly/1j4CAA9

Read the full report here: http://bit.ly/1a4Juo4

 

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The New York City Bar Association’s Committee on Professional Ethics has issued an opinion stating that, subject to certain conditions, it is permissible for a New York law firm to designate as “of counsel” a lawyer who is licensed to practice law in New York but resides and practices primarily in a foreign country.

Drawing upon Rules 7.5 and 5.5 of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, Formal Opinion 2013-3 explains that the “of counsel” designation may be made, provided that the of counsel lawyer has a “continuing relationship” with the law firm; the use of the of counsel title is not false or misleading in other respects; and the of counsel lawyer’s practice does not constitute the unauthorized practice of law in the foreign country.

As required by Rule 7.5(a)(4), the of counsel attorney must have a “continuing relationship” with the law firm; a relationship which the Association’s Formal Ethics Opinion 1996-8 describes as “close, continuing, regular and personal.” Ethics opinions that analyze this relationship identify a variety of factors that may be examined to determine whether an of counsel designation is appropriate, including whether the lawyer is actively involved in the firm’s day-to-day affairs and/or cases; the frequency and nature of the lawyer’s communications with the firm; and whether and to what extent the firm’s clients use the lawyer’s services.

Yet, as the Committee notes, because of counsel relationships vary significantly from firm to firm, the fact that some of these elements are not present “does not necessarily make the of counsel designation inappropriate,” nor does the existence of particular factors conclusively determine that an of counsel relationship is appropriate.

The of counsel title must also not be false or misleading in other respects. As Comment [1] to Rule 7.5 states, “a lawyer should be scrupulous in the representation of professional status.” Protecting the public from being misled about the relationship between the law firm and the of counsel attorney is a key consideration, notes the Opinion. “By using the of counsel designation, both the law firm and the lawyer are conveying to the public that the lawyer’s continuing relationship with the firm is close, regular, and personal.”

And finally, states the Committee, if the of counsel lawyer’s practice in the foreign country constitutes the unauthorized practice of law in that jurisdiction, then the law firm must not designate the lawyer as of counsel, citing Rule 5.5(b): “a lawyer shall not aid a nonlawyer in the unauthorized practice of law.”

The Opinion can be read here: bit.ly/1cle0Jq

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The New York City Bar Association has evaluated candidates running in the November 5th general election for Supreme Court, Surrogate’s Court, and Civil Court in Bronx, Kings, New York, and Queens Counties.

In examining candidates for the judiciary, the Committee on the Judiciary of the Association seeks to determine whether the candidate possesses the requisite qualifications for judicial office, such as integrity, impartiality, intellectual ability, knowledge of the law, industriousness, and judicial demeanor and temperament.

The Committee advances two ratings: Approved and Not Approved. Candidates rated Approved have affirmatively demonstrated qualifications necessary for the performance of the duties of the court for which they are being considered.

Bronx County

Supreme Court

Laura G. Douglas Approved
Kevin P. Kuehner Approved
Norma Ruiz Approved
Julia I. Rodriguez Approved
Larry Schachner Approved
Robert D. Siano Approved
John H. Wilson Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate

Civil Court (Countywide)

Paul L. Alpert Approved
Harry Hertzberg Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate

Civil Court (1st District)

Lucianna Locorotondo Approved
Armando Montano Approved

Civil Court (2nd District)

Kim A. Wilson Approved

 

 

Kings County

District Attorney

Charles J. Hynes Approved
Kenneth P. Thompson Approved

Supreme Court

Ross Brady Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate
Kevin A. Finnegan Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate
Bernard J. Graham Approved
Desmond A. Green Approved
Dawn M. Jimenez Salta Approved
Mendy Mirocznik Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate
Ilan Schoenberger Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate
Kenneth P. Sherman Approved
Betty J. Williams Approved

Civil Court (Countywide)

Shawndya L. Simpson Approved
Vincent F. Martusciello Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate

Civil Court (2nd District)

Theresa M. Ciccotto Approved

Civil Court (7th District)

Kathy J. King Approved

 

 

New York County

District Attorney

Peter J. Gleason Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate
Cyrus Vance Jr. Approved

Supreme Court

Debra A. James Approved
Pauline T. Mistretta Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that she possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which she is a candidate
Peter H. Moulton Approved
Anil C. Singh Approved

Civil Court (Countywide)

John J. Kelley Approved
Ann E. O’Shea Approved
Dakota Ramseur Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that she possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which she is a candidate
Mary V. Rosado Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that she possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which she is a candidate

Civil Court (2nd District)

Kathryn E. Freed Approved
Marcy S. Friedman Approved
Adam Silvera Approved

Civil Court (5th District)

Carol Sharpe Approved

Civil Court (7th District)

Denise Dominguez Approved

 

 

Queens County

Supreme Court

John F. Casey Not approved by reason of the candidate’s failure to affirmatively demonstrate that he possesses the requisite qualifications for the court for which he is a candidate
Kerry John Katsorhis Approved
Robert J. McDonald Approved
Barry A. Schwartz Approved
Jeremy S. Weinstein Approved

Civil Court(1st District)

David M. Hawkins Approved

Civil Court (2nd District)

Sally E. Unger Approved

Civil Court (3rd District)

Anna Culley Approved

Note: To ensure the thoroughness and integrity of the ratings process, the City Bar cannot comment beyond what is provided in this release.

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Debra L. Raskin has been nominated as President of the New York City Bar Association. If elected, Raskin will succeed Carey R. Dunne as the 66th president in the Association’s 143-year history. The election will take place at the City Bar’s annual meeting on May 20, 2014. The City Bar also announced its Nominating Committee’s slate of officers and members of its Executive and Audit Committees.

Raskin has been a partner at Vladeck, Waldman, Elias & Engelhard, P.C., which specializes in representing employees in labor and employment law matters, since 1988, having joined the firm two years earlier. From 1984 to 1986, she served as an Assistant Attorney General of the State of New York in the Civil Rights Bureau. After receiving her law degree from Yale in 1977, she worked at the Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago until 1981, and clerked for Hon. Lee P. Gagliardi of the United States District Court, SDNY, from 1982 to 1984.

At the City Bar, Raskin is currently a Vice President, having previously served a full term on the Executive Committee, including a year as its Chair. She also has chaired the City Bar’s Labor and Employment Law Committee. She is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, has taught at Columbia and Fordham Law Schools and has lectured and written on employment law matters for groups including the American Bar Association, the American Law Institute and the New York State Bar Association.

“Over the years that I have been fortunate to work with the City Bar, I have been continually amazed by the breadth and importance of the activities of its members, its staff, and its leadership,” said Raskin. “From commenting on legal issues of critical social importance to serving the public in times of great need to supporting lawyers in furthering the highest values of our profession, the City Bar has made remarkable contributions. I am deeply honored by this nomination and thrilled at the possibility of serving in this new role for this amazing organization.”

David M. Brodsky, of  Brodsky ADR LLC; Carrie H. Cohen, of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, SDNY; and Nancy M. Louden, of the Estée Lauder Companies Inc. were nominated to serve as the City Bar’s three Vice Presidents.

Ona T. Wang, of Baker & Hostetler LLP, was nominated to continue to serve as Secretary, and Hon. Allan L. Gropper, of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court (SDNY), was nominated to continue to serve as Treasurer.

The nominees for the Executive Committee Class of 2018 are Dean Matthew Diller, of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law; R. Nadine Fontaine, of Epiq Systems, Inc. ; Carmelyn P. Malalis, of Outten & Golden LLP; and John F. Savarese, of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. In addition, Brad S. Karp, of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, who was recently appointed to fill a vacancy on the Executive Committee, has been nominated to complete that term, to 2016.

The nominees for the Audit Committee are Robert Buckholz, of Sullivan & Cromwell LLP; Richard Cashman, of Herrick Feinstein LLP; Daniel Kolb, of Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP; Hon. Elizabeth S. Stong, of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court (EDNY); and Mark Stone, of Holland & Knight LLP.

The candidates were nominated by the City Bar’s Nominating Committee: Patricia M. Hynes – Chair, of Allen & Overy LLP; Robert J. Anello, of Morvillo Abramowitz Grand Iason & Anello PC; Hon. Barbara S. Jones, of Zuckerman Spaeder LLP; Mei Lin Kwan-Gett, of Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP; Myrna Perez, of the Brennan Center for Justice; Hon. Rosalyn Heather Richter, of the NYS Supreme Court Appellate Division, First Dept.; and Hon. Stephen C. Robinson, of Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates.

 

Posted in New York City Bar Association | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment