Downtown Phoenix Sheraton

On Thursday, another in a popular series of networking events for lawyers will be staged in downtown Phoenix. You should consider stopping by.

Hosted by the State Bar of Arizona (Mentor Committee and Young Lawyers Division), it will be held on Thursday, September 18, at the downtown Phoenix Sheraton Hotel, in its District American Kitchen and Wine Bar.

This is the fourth annual such kick-off event, and the previous ones have been crowded and enjoyable affairs.

Here is an image with more particulars:

And here is a map:

Remember how I urged you and your talented lawyer friends to apply for the next class of the Bar Leadership Institute?

If you did—and prevailed—this post may be all about congratulating you.

Here is what the State Bar recently announced regarding the new class. Congratulations to you—or your successful colleagues.

Sixteen diverse attorneys from across the state have been selected to participate in the State Bar of Arizona’s 2014-15 Bar Leadership Institute (BLI).

For the eighth year in a row, the BLI will provide its participants with a nine-month leadership program that will foster their professional growth and enhance their leadership skills.

2014-15 Participants:

• Jazmin Alagha, Law Office of Ray A. Ybarra Maldonado PLC
• Rebekah Bell, Beauchamp Law Office PC
• Yusra Bokhari, Arizona Attorney General’s Office
• Joel Chorny, Pima County Legal Defender’s Office
• Jennison Cox, Microchip Technology Inc.
• J. Daryl Dorsey, American Airlines
• Dominic Gomez, Salt River Pima–Maricopa Indian Community
• John Gray, Perkins Coie LLP
• Danielle Harris, Executive Hearing Office – ADOT
• Claudia Lopez, Alcock & Associates PC
• Magdalena Osborn, Rusing Lopez & Lizardi PLLC
• Afshan Peimani, Titla & Parsi PLLC
• Lizette Rubio, IHC Carrier Solutions
• Laine Sklar, Town of Marana Legal Department
• Barry Stratford, Perkins Coie LLP
• Matei Tarail, Federal Public Defender

Bar Leadership sessions cover topics ranging from leadership, ethics, and career development to conversations with judges, government attorneys, in-house counsel and executives. Participants can receive up to two years of CLE credit.

The 16 participants were selected based on their legal and non-legal community contributions as well as their statements of interest and qualifications. All participants must be active Bar members in good standing. The participants represent a diverse range of racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious communities, among others.

Upon completion, the BLI participants must commit to a full year of active involvement with the State Bar and/or the community.

For more information on the Bar Leadership Institute, contact Elena Nethers at 602-340-7393.

Do these old computer ads represent your current technology thinking? Time to adjust your vertical hold.

Technology can be nervous-making. And who likes to reveal they have some Very. Basic. Questions? Especially in front of a room full of lawyers?

That appears to be the thinking behind a State Bar educational event to be held on October 17. It is called “Technology for Baby Boomers (Part 1): Everything You Wanted to Know about Technology, But Were Afraid to Ask.”

Yes, it says Part 1. It is a series, “designed to answer questions attorneys who are not comfortable with technology might have. Bring your laptop or other device to participate in hands-on exercises during the presentation.”

This first session will address the following topics:

• Introduction to computers, the Internet and operating systems
• Microsoft Office, alternative solutions and add-ons
• Take care of your technology: DIY or outsource?
• “The Cloud”

More detail and registration information are here.

The other sessions in the series follow in November and December. I’ll let you know the topics as soon as I know them.

How enjoyable a snippet can be.

No need to be mysterious. I’m talking about CLE Snippets, those brief-ish video conversations I’ve been having with Arizona Attorney authors. (Read more about them here.)

Last month, I interviewed Ken Motolenich-Salas about his topic: the Washington Redskins trademark cancellations. (You can read his article here.) Fascinating and timely.

Just as fascinating and timely, though, was my dialogue with Anthony Tsontakis yesterday. Fascinating – OK. But timely? That seems surprising, considering Anthony’s topic: a battle over the 1912 judicial nomination of Judge Richard Sloan.

Indeed, our dialogue was timely. Anthony’s article and our conversation focused on how the nomination battle could lead a commentator to say, “No uglier fight was ever made against a man.” Our dialogue reveals just how little we’ve changed in a century. Not a bad lesson to learn in a bruising election season.

I’ll provide links to the videos with Ken and Anthony as soon as I have them.

Anthony Tsontakis (right) and I take a moment before videotaping our conversation about a 1912 nomination battle.

Have you met or worked with in-house counsel who impress you with their skills and approach? Organizers of an annual award event seek your nominations.

Founded by AZ Business Magazine and the Association of Corporate Counsel state chapter, the Arizona Corporate Counsel Award nominations are due by Thursday, October 23.

More detail and a nomination form are here.

Categories include:

• Public company (large and small)
• Private company (large and small)
• Nonprofit company
• Government/municipal/public sector
• Up-and-comer
• In-house law department of the year
• Litigator of the year
• Intellectual property attorney of the year
• Community/pro bono attorney of the year

The Awards Dinner will be held at the Camelback Inn on January 15, 2015.

The State Bar of Arizona is a presenting partner for the program.

Some easy watching for your Monday.

Fastcase has been a free member benefit of State Bar of Arizona members since, well, for years really.

Never ones to rest on their laurels, the Fastcase folks have created a video—90 seconds long—to urge you attorneys to make use of the member benefit.

An aficionado of digital presentations, I’m pleased to see that the Fastcase people have used Prezi (I’m pretty sure) to create their offering. Here it is:

Let me know if it pushes you over the edge and gets you to try it.

Panelists Hon. Joseph Welty, Bill Montgomery and Justice Robert Brutinel discuss mobile devices in the courtroom, Oct. 17, 2014, Phoenix Ariz.

A recent panel discussion on mobile devices in courtrooms yielded surprising agreement on the role of those devices in the justice system. It took the lone media representative on the panel to throw a little cold water on that unified discussion.

I mentioned before the October 17 event, held at the ASU Cronkite School. Tonight, as sad word emerges from the Arizona Republic of its latest round of forced journalist departures, let me give a synopsis of the Arizona dialogue about technology in courtrooms.

The First Amendment Coalition of Arizona event was introduced by journo and educator Mark Scarp (Mark is also the Past President of the Society of Professional Journalists Valley of the Sun Chapter). The panel, moderated by attorney David Bodney, included:

• Justice Robert Brutinel, chair of a Court committee that examined the issue
• Hon. Joseph Welty, Presiding Criminal Judge for Maricopa County
• Bill Montgomery, Maricopa County Attorney
• Criminal defense attorney Jennifer Willmott (and counsel in the Jodi Arias case)
• Cathie Batbie, news director at KVOA-TV (Channel 4-NBC) in Tucson

As previously mentioned, the panel discussed the impact of two rule changes, specifically made to Supreme Court Rule 122.1 (use of mobile devices in courtrooms) and Rule 122 (video, audio and still photography in courtrooms).

ASU Cronkite Journalism School, site for panel discussion of mobile devices in courtrooms, Oct. 17, 2014.

Justice Brutinel led off the conversation by explaining the committee’s thinking. As he sat in the journalism school’s First Amendment Forum, he stated a truism: “There’s a division between the interests of journalists and the interests of justice.”

Initially, he said, the committee considered some drastic approaches. Could a rule simply exclude all digital technology from the courthouse? Could it create a technological wall that prevented its use anywhere in the building?

No, and no, as it turned out. The first would be unworkable and overbearing in numerous ways. And the second would violate FCC regulations.

It wasn’t a slam-dunk, though. Justice Brutinel said that it was hotly contested by the committee, and a full prohibition was argued three separate times. It was finally determined that was not a reasonable position. In fact, there was no good and abiding reason not to allow such devices, with some restrictions.

Guiding the work of the committee, Justice Brutinel said, were certain realities, such as the fact that virtually everyone has a portable electronic device (or three) today. But also discussed among committee members were certain beliefs, held by at least a few: The presence of cameras changes the way people behave (though that effect may wane over time). And it is more difficult than ever before to determine who is a “journalist.”

The answer to the second issue is simple: Courts no longer ask if a person requesting electronic use is part of the media. The same rules apply to all.

L to R: Justice Robert Brutinel, Jennifer Willmott, Cathie Batbie

As David Bodney said, the most important takeaway of the new rules is that you must ask for permission; the judge wants to know if you will interfere in the process, so they want to be asked.

That seemingly simple imprecation was challenged by KVOA’s Cathie Batbie, though. She explained how there appeared to be uniform approaches in the Tucson Superior Courts to disallow cameras, no matter the request. “We’re a visual medium, and the public has a right to that access.”

The dialogue that followed may be the definition of the devil in the details. When many on the panel urged that the press should simply take an appeal to the Court of Appeals, Batbie explained again the reality of a profession that travels faster than one whose holdings are conveyed in a West’s bound volume. Such a litigious approach, while possible, Batbie said, was unlikely to occur—or to be helpful.

“How do you get information to the public when you have these hurdles?” Batbie asked. The answer, she suggested, is “Don’t set rules based on some bad journalists, but on what’s right for the public.”

“You do want people to know what you’re doing every day.”

That statement (or perhaps it was a question) went unanswered.

Judge Welty discussed the “logistical challenges” associated with Rule 122. They are “not insurmountable,” he said, but the initial result was that journalists asked to be at every proceeding, just to be cover their bases. Then, as the date for proceedings approached, media made strategic decisions and often didn’t appear.

The Presiding Criminal Judge was the first panelist to use the phrases “gavel to gavel coverage” and “live-streaming,” developments that clearly troubled numerous members of the panel. Judge Welty called it “presenting trials as TV dramas.”

“I’m not sure it’s journalism; it may be reality TV.”

Bill Montgomery offered, “Is it a modern version of the Roman Circus and just trying to provide entertainment?” (which may have been a statement and not a question)

“This is a business environment that is not healthy to our republic,” Montgomery continued, “and that does not create confidence in our justice system.”

“When someone drives several states to get a prosecutor’s autograph, and when he’s told no, he breaks down, this system is not working.”

Jennifer Willmott, counsel in a case often derided as a Roman Circus, said that “What we want is an honest and fair trial.”

Willmott extended the discussion about media inside the courtroom to the larger world: “Cyberlynchings occur on social media among people who know noting about the case.”

Judge Welty added, “Are [TV stations] producing a TV drama or presenting information about our institutions?” (I think he was being rhetorical.)

Faced with prosecutor, court and defense all wrinkling their nose in distaste at TV coverage of trials (or I should say trial; can you say Jodi Arias?), Cathie Batbie could merely offer, “Streaming video is huge. It’s important to provide that coverage, with safeguards.”

Mark Scarp introduces the panel, including (L to R) moderator David Bodney, Hon. Joseph Welty, Bill Montgomery.

After the event, Montgomery said that the new rules allow for flexibility, and broader understanding of the trial system by the public is a good thing.

But when “talking heads give their theory of the prosecution and they don’t even undertsand the law in our jurisdiction,” they do a disservice to viewers.

“Bad media can affect how people act in the courtroom,” Montgomery added.

So what comes next? Enforcement—and education.

Judge Welty said that Rule 122.1 is “completely technology-driven.” Over the next five years, he said, tools like Google glass and iwatches “will make the curent rule meaningless.” When that happens, he said, “We’ll move to enforcing violations rather than banning devices.”

Finally, he offered a call to action: “This issue behooves the State Bar to put together a program for lawyers on all their ethical responsibilities” in regard to mobile devices in courtrooms.

Who’s in? I do know if the Bar puts on such a seminar, it’ll probably be live-streamed.

State Bar of Arizona Chief Bar Counsel Maret Vessella interviewed by KPHO reporter Dave Cherry

If you’re a lawyer, you may not make it a habit to hire other lawyers (but who knows?). However, a recent news story sheds light on the topic. I found it fascinating, and I encourage you to share it with anyone who’s engaged in an attorney search.

In the story, titled “Research lawyers just like you would contractors,” reporter KPHO Dave Cherry interviews Chief Bar Counsel Maret Vessella. She discusses the importance of checking for a lawyer’s discipline history before you retain someone.

So far so good.

But then she relates a story about a lawyer who got into discipline trouble after a client had already retained him. How many of us think about checking whether our attorney is still admitted to practice after he has already done work for us?

Not often, I’m sure. But I can see how it could be vital.

Go here to see the whole video.

Major medical health insurance is now available through the State Bar of Arizona.

Recently, the State Bar of Arizona entered into an agreement with a company that helps members locate and secure health insurance. I’ve heard from many attorneys over the years who are insurance-insecure, so I hope this is a helpful program.

Open enrollment comes on November 15. So take some time now to explore this program and get your questions answered.

Here is more detail on the program:

“This Health Insurance Exchange can help provide members, their employees, and families with comprehensive major medical insurance coverage. The program is brought to you by AHIX, a division of JLBG Health, the largest health insurance provider to associations in the US.”

“To learn more about the options available to lower your health insurance costs and maintain comprehensive coverage, visit here for an INSTANT online rate or contact JLBG Health at 866.708.6578  for more details, member rates, and a 15-minute phone enrollment.”

Among the multiple features are these:

• Shop multiple quality carriers like: Blue Cross, Aetna, Assurant, Cigna, Humana and many others.
• Apply online or over the phone.
• No medical questions asked.

Read more about it here.

For a set of questions and answers regarding the exchange, click here.

Finally, to get started on or after November 15, go here.

Follow @azatty

On Nov. 21, 2014, volunteer attorneys answered almost 400 calls from Arizona consumers regarding immigration and the November 20 presidential executive order on the topic.

Talk about timely: One day after historic action was taken by President Barack Obama on the topic of immigration, the State Bar of Arizona fielded a call-in program to address the inevitable questions that would arise.

As Alberto Rodriguez reports:

The State Bar of Arizona and Univision 33 hosted a special edition of Abogados a Su Lado (attorneys on your side) public service program on Friday, November 21. In response to the executive order issued by President Obama on Thursday, November 20, both the Bar and Univision organized a phone bank that would help clarify consumers’ questions regarding immigration law, as well as inform them of the initial details regarding the President’s executive order. The following is a recap of the program.

Nine attorneys volunteered their time and knowledge from 5:00 pm until 10:30 pm:

• Emilia Banuelos, Banuelos Law Office
• Tony Colon, Colon & Associates
• Seth B. Draper, Salvatierra Law Group
• Mark Egan, Gunderson Denton & Peterson
• Magaly Fontes, Law Office of Magaly Fontes
• Bruno Gitnacht, Law Office of Bruno Gitnacht
• Ray Ybarra Maldonado, Law Office of Ray Ybarra Maldonado
• Christina Ortecho, Ortecho Law
• Matthew Thomas, Thomas Law Firm

The attorneys answered an astounding 385 calls regarding the President’s executive order and immigration law. This special edition phone bank was extended and offered during a five-and-a-half-hour time period.

Sample consumer questions:

• When will the details be released? When and how do I apply for deferred action?
• What are the specific details regarding the tax returns?
• Does this cancel removal/voluntary departure procedures?
• I got a DUI in the past, does this count as criminal activity?
• How do I prepare? What documents do I need to provide?
• I am already in the process of applying for citizenship, does this affect me?

All volunteers were satisfied with the quality of the questions overall and were excited to have participated in this special edition of Abogados a Su Lado public service program.

We thank Univision 33 for their continued partnership in providing this valuable “Access to Justice” program for the Spanish-speaking community.

Today, I share some good news about the State Bar—and Arizona Attorney Magazine. It involves the Bar’s recognition with the prestigious Award of Excellence in Education from the Arizona Society of Association Executives.

Back in November 2013, you may recall we published the results of an attorney survey that examined Arizona lawyers’ experience with violence in the profession. You can read the story by attorney Stephen Kelson here.

That story was being developed and drafted soon after the horrific murder of attorney Mark Hummels and his client at the hands of an angry man. I wrote about it here.

Following the crimes, the Bar launched a webcast on violence in the legal profession that garnered a national audience.

The Bar’s CEO/Executive Director John Phelps also wrote an op-ed on the topic in the Arizona Republic.

Below you can read the press release about the recent award recognizing all the Bar’s efforts. Please let me know how we should continue to advance the dialogue in the magazine.

Mark Hummels

“The State Bar of Arizona won the Award of Excellence in Education from the Arizona Society of Association Executives (AzSAE) and will be recognized at the organization’s 50^th anniversary gala in December. Each year AzSAE recognizes outstanding programs and projects implemented by associations in Arizona.”

“The State Bar of Arizona was recognized for its “Violence Against Lawyers Education Project,” which transformed the unfortunate shooting death of an attorney into an evaluation and education initiative. The initiative, which surveyed members and ignited dialogue, resulted in two educational components: a 75-minute live webcast with more than 1,000 viewers nationwide and an in-depth article Arizona Attorney magazine regarding violence against attorneys.”

“According to the AzSAE, winning entries are showcased at the AzSAE Annual Awards Celebration and serve as inspiration to other associations.”

John Phelps

“Commenting on the award, State Bar CEO John Phelps said, ‘This award is the result of teamwork and a commitment to excellence by State Bar staff and volunteers. It reflects what we do, day in and day out, in our service to the public and our members.’”

“The AzSAE Annual Awards were held on Dec. 3, 2014, at the Embassy Suites Phoenix-Scottsdale.”

The President’s recent Executive Order on immigration may provide more questions than answers for immigration attorneys … and their clients.

Recently, I have mentioned some efforts by the State Bar of Arizona to provide guidance in the wake of the President’s Executive Order on immigration. And there will be more news on that front later this week (maybe even tomorrow).

In the meantime, I’m pleased to say that there is so much on offer that I entirely missed a 1.5-hour seminar on the topic offered by the CLE Department (and yes, it’s still available online).

Titled (no surprise), “The President’s Immigration Accountability Executive Actions,” it is led by three attorneys as faculty: Ayensa Millan, Alma Montes de Oca, and Ruben Reyes.

Topics include:

• Enforcement Priorities
• Deferred Action for Parents (DAP)
• Expansion of DACA
• New U/T Visas
• 601a Waivers
• Parole in Place
• Visa Modernization

The seminar is available here.

[Note: This article was edited to clarify the role that Ezequiel Hernandez played in regard to the White House. According to Hernandez, he was one of four legal experts from Univision whom the White House spoke with to ensure accurate information was communicated and to communicate the message against fraud; the description of him as “a White House consultant” was inaccurate. I apologize for the error.]

You may recall that one day after the President’s Executive Order on immigration—one day—the State Bar offered an event that included lawyers giving advice on that very topic.

Now, in the week before Christmas, when most of us are devising ways to enjoy the holiday and think less about work, my colleague Alberto Rodriguez passes on news of two more immigration-related events put on by the Bar and partner Univision. One is tonight, and the second is next Monday. No rest for the weary!

(At one of the events, Univision correspondent and attorney Ezequiel Hernandez of Hernandez Global Law Firm will speak. Read more about him here.)

I’ll get to the events in a second, but I’ve got to say: They represent many, many hours of work—to locate attorneys, line up venues, and nail down all of those tiny details that can make or break public gatherings. Congratulations to Alberto and everyone who has had a hand in this.

Ezequiel Hernandez

“The State Bar of Arizona is partnering with Univision Arizona to host two access to justice programs focused on immigration/deferred action. In an effort to inform consumers, dispel myths, and combat consumer fraud, both organizations have come together to offer a 2-hour Abogados a Su Lado phone bank on December 18 and a special immigration session and legal-aid clinic on December 22.”

“On Thursday, December 18, eight volunteer attorneys will answer viewers’ questions during the 2-hour Abogados a Su Lado phone bank from 5 to 7 p.m. on Univision 33.”

“On Monday, December 22, the Bar will host a 30-minute information session that will include an overview of the Bar’s consumer protection services and endorsements (for the Bar) by two nationally recognized immigrant rights organizations. In addition, Ezequiel Hernandez, a Contributor and legal expert for Univision News National Network, will offer a brief presentation on deferred action.”

“Following the presentation, twelve volunteer attorneys will offer one-on-one consultations. The information session and legal-aid clinic will be held from 5:30 to 9 p.m. at Saint Agnes Catholic Church located at 1954 North 24th Street in Phoenix.”

“Univision Arizona will record the information session and legal-aid clinic, which will then be broadcast as a 30-minute immigration special, replacing their evening news—date to be determined.”

The State Bar of Arizona continues to play a significant role in educating consumers about immigration law. It couldn’t come at a better time.

Previously, I mentioned a few events the Bar scheduled in December to help the public understand the ins and outs of the recent presidential Executive Order on immigration. Today, I offer a follow-up to the event held on December 22. Just three days before Christmas, more than a dozen lawyers offered their time and expertise to a packed-to-the-rafters crowd. It was scheduled in a way to accommodate consumers who have jobs and other daytime obligations, so it’s even more impressive that the attorneys attended until 10:00 p.m. Well done and congratulations.

The forum’s format opened with a 45-minute presentation on the topic by attorney Ezequiel Hernandez, followed by the opportunity to speak with individual lawyers.

Keep in mind that the December 22 event followed on the heels of a phone bank organized by the Bar the day after the President’s Executive Order (a phone bank held on a Friday night and that included some dedicated volunteer attorneys).

I can’t help but feel that the Bar is probably a long way ahead of other organizations in regard to educating folks on this breaking topic.

Here’s the update:

Thirteen volunteer attorneys came together on Monday, December 22, to offer free legal advice at an informational session and legal assistance clinic hosted by the State Bar of Arizona and its partner Univision Arizona at St. Agnes Church in Phoenix. This access to justice program, held from 5:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m., was organized to inform consumers, dispel myths, and combat consumer fraud related to immigration law and deferred action.

Approximately 550 consumers attended the access to justice event, and 286 families participated in one-on-one consultations with volunteer attorneys.

The 13 volunteer attorneys were:

• Marysol Angulo, Hernandez Global
• Emilia Banuelos, Banuelos Law Office
• Seth Draper, Salvatierra Law Group
• Judy Flanagan, Judy C. Flanagan, PC
• Lisette Flores, Friendly House
• Jaime Garcia, Garcia Law Group
• Marni Guerrero, Guerrero Jefferies Law Group
• Ezequiel Hernandez, Hernandez Global
• Claudia Lopez, Law Office of Claudia P. Lopez PLLC
• Jose L. Penalosa, Penalosa & Associates
• Cynthia J. Perez,  Hammond Law Group
• Juan Rocha, Rocha Law Office
• Ray Ybarra Maldonado, Law Office of Ray A. Ybarra Maldonado

If ever you wonder about the future of the legal profession, this is the season to answer those questions. For it is in the early part of the year when prognosticators offer their view of the legal economy and the practice area outlook.

Today, I point you to Robert Half and Associates, which surveyed lawyers nationwide on their hiring predictions.

The short takeaway is that 26 percent of lawyers surveyed said they’d be expanding or adding new positions in the coming year. Of course, that means 74 percent said they would not be doing that, so I’m not sure how positive a message that is.

I will post more from RHA below, but I wonder what your own predictions are. In November, we published some of the results from a State Bar of Arizona member survey. There, many of you indicated a mildly positive outlook for the future—though it was certainly not a rave review.

You can read more about that survey here. Does it reflect your own views?

And here again is Robert Half:

“The legal field should see additional hiring in the first half of 2015, new research indicates. Twenty-six percent of lawyers interviewed by Robert Half Legal said their law firm or company plans to expand or add new positions in the first six months of this year. Sixty percent of lawyers said they expect to only fill vacant posts, while 7 percent said they will neither fill vacant positions nor create new ones. Just 1 percent of survey respondents anticipate staff reductions.”

(If you like to see factoids reported via infographic, the company provides a good one here.)

Podcast? Why, sure. Go here.

As the company goes on to report:

Lawyers were asked, “Which one of the following practice areas, in your opinion, will offer the greatest number of job opportunities in the first half of 2015?” Their responses:*

*Total percentage does not equal 100 due to rounding.

Lawyers who cited “litigation” as a response also were asked, “Which of the following areas of litigation, if any, will offer the greatest job opportunities in the first half of 2015?” Their responses:**

**Multiple responses were permitted.

Arizona Summit Law professors Jalae Ulicki (left) and Penny Willrich with Arizona Attorney Editor Tim Eigo, Jan. 20, 2015, after taping of an educational video on mediation as a healing art.

Last week, I got to engage in what has become a highlight of my month: a dialogue with some current Arizona Attorney authors.

The point of the very enjoyable exercise is to create a short video. This partnership with the State Bar of Arizona CLE Department is called “CLE Snippets,” and this month’s authors are Professors Penny Willrich and Jalae Ulicki, both of the Arizona Summit Law School.

The way it works is this: I provide the list of articles for the upcoming month’s issue and chat with Jenn Sonier in the CLE Department. After a little collaboration, we agree on what topic may lend itself well to a brief Q&A video. And the next time we meet in the CLE Center, I try to dress nice, the authors arrive, and Jenn tapes us in riveting conversation.

Well, that’s the plan. Authors Willrich and Ulicki certainly held up their end of the bargain, offering great insight as we discussed their article titled “Lessons Learned From Peacemaking: Mediation as a Healing Art.”

(In what’s become a sort-of tradition, I try to snap a selfie with the authors. This month, the terrific Jenn Sonier did the photographic honors, above.)

I’ll share a link when it’s available. But in the meantime, thank you to our talented authors for taking the time to share their thoughts about an important topic.

Attorney Jennison Cox showing off her well-earned heavy medal after a 1:50-ish half marathon.

If you guessed that I’m writing about the P.F. Chang’s annual Marathon because last Friday was National Chopsticks Day, you’d be mistaken—but it does make it more fun.

My goal today is to heap some praise on those who ran in the State Bar of Arizona team at that recent Asian-restaurant-sponsored event. Called The Bar Flys, the hardy band is headed by team captain David Sandweiss.

As David so generously shared:

“A special salute should go to SBA Bar Flys who ran with me last Sunday: Jennifer Sonier, Nicole Kaseta, Meredith Vivona, Pat Sallen, Lisa Panahi, and Ariel Worth (even though she scratched due to a bad cold on race day). This year’s fundraiser was to benefit the Arizona Summit Law School ‘Return to Community’ scholarship fund.”

Here are some more photos of the team runners:

Bar Fly and attorney Stefan Palys with his daughter in the family reunion area after running the full marathon.

David Sandweiss with past members from different years of the Univ. of Michigan women’s track team. They have their own alumni club and pick one event a year to have a running reunion. This year they chose the Arizona P.F. Chang’s event. One of them, in her low 40s, finished third overall in the women’s half marathon in 1:15. The guy in the red hat photobombed the group.

And as long as you’re interested in that whole national day dedicated to chopsticks, here is some CLE-like material.

(And while we’re on the subject, I got an email this weekend from Pei Wei urging me to celebrate the national day on Monday, when it was really Friday. Somebody somewhere’s got their calendar mixed up.)

News from the State Bar of Arizona:

The State Bar of Arizona’s Board of Governors is accepting applications from non-lawyers from throughout the state to fill one seat on its Board. The application deadline is Friday, March 6, 2015. Participation of public members is essential to the State Bar’s mission of serving the public and its efforts of making sure the people of Arizona have a strong voice in the legal system.

A total of four public members, who serve three-year terms, sit on the 30-member Board. The Board establishes the vision, mission and policies of the association and ensures that there are sufficient resources for its management and operations.

Applicants for the public member positions may be from any county within Arizona and:

• Must be at least 21 years of age
• Must have resided in Arizona for at least three years
• May not be an active or inactive member of any bar association
• May not have, other than as a consumer, a financial interest in the practice of law

Individuals with experience in human resources or finance are especially encouraged to apply.

Members of the Board of Governors attend approximately ten all-day meetings each year. Meetings are usually held on the third Friday of the month at the State Bar’s office in Phoenix. Preparation in advance of the meetings, including review of related materials, is essential. In addition, members attend the Bar’s annual convention in June and a two-day retreat in July. Board members also serve on standing Board committees. Travel and meal expenses are paid for all meetings, but there is no other compensation for service as a Board member.

An application form must be submitted to the State Bar by Friday, March 6, 2015. The form can be found online here or by contacting Nina Benham at (602) 340-7329 or by email at Nina.Benham@staff.azbar.org.

Attorney Mark Bockel poses in the Larsen Gallery, Scottsdale, as photographer John Hall shoots his picture, March 12, 2015.

The annual photo shoot for our Creative Arts Competition winners was held last week, and it looks like it was terrific.

I say “looks” because I was out of town and had to miss it. But that makes me doubly happy that Art Director Karen Holub thoughtfully provided me some “behind the camera” shots. (Which is kind of amazing, as she was herding cats, a photographer, and multiple lawyer-winners.)

All of the professionally shot photos will appear in the May issue of Arizona Attorney Magazine—along with the talented artists’ work. In the meantime, click here to see last year’s winning work.

Thank you to the Larsen Gallery in Scottsdale for hosting our shoot. As always, your space and the work you display are remarkable.

Have a great—and artful—weekend.

Here are a few more shots. (Click them to biggify.)

Lobby at 111. West Monroe in downtown Phoenix

Yesterday, I attended a downtown Phoenix chamber-type luncheon. When I first RSVPed, I was told the location was TBA. But it turned out to be a great choice, and not only because the space is a high-rise going through an adaptive reuse. It’s also my old building.

Well, not mine, of course. My employer’s. For years, the State Bar of Arizona officed at 111 West Monroe. Eventually, the leadership decided to buy rather than lease, and that’s how we ended up near 24th Street and Indian School Road.

And ol’ 111? I miss that building quite a bit. It not only had the midcentury charm that takes you back. It also participated in an urban vibe that is all too rare in Arizona. Our views from the 17th through the 19th floors were often spectacular. And it was nice to stroll out on the street to buy a hot dog or a cup of soup.

Since we moved out, of course, downtown has become even more vibrant (thanks to many great people, many of whom toil at Downtown Phoenix Inc., on whose board I proudly sit).

Yesterday, the event was held in the 19th-floor space, gutted and ready for tenant improvements. But while everything was open, I slipped down a floor to my old office (sigh). And I spied where the Communications Department used to wield our mighty pen (and website, also mightier than the sword).

Afternoon sun in my old office at 111 W. Monroe

And who would’ve guessed, but when I walked up the fire stairs one floor, the door to the roof was open! I enjoyed the breeze and the view, one eye peeled for an angry security guard. But I enjoyed my brief perch over the sixth-largest city in the country.

Below are some more photos, including the old boardroom. (Click to enlarge and widen the images and to view them in a slideshow.)

How many of you attended meetings or events at the old State Bar spaces?