Expert Opinions

Jurors have a unique perspective on our legal system. Recently, I had the opportunity to speak with someone who served on a jury this fall in California Superior Court. He had some suggestions as to how things could have been handled differently. We at IAALS hope judges and attorneys are listening. These techniques are already in use in many courtrooms across the country—but not all.

At our 2nd Annual Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers Conference, we honored Bill Henderson with our Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers Award. Afterward, he delivered a keynote address (video here) focused on the significance of the role played by legal educators and the change that is coming. Talking about his own experience with a professor as a later-in-life college senior, he said that educators have the power to "flip the switch."

The ETL survey found that many law schools have been making changes in their curricula, and among the prominent areas of change are the curricula in the second and third years of law school and the introduction or expansion of course work focused on practical skills (especially the creation of new clinics and certificate programs). We need research that looks at such programs in detail to see what difference, if any, that they make.

We all know the story here: law graduates are having difficulty getting jobs after spending a good chunk of money on tuition. So, what are we to do? We must change the nature of teaching and the programs taught to address two key issues: (a) the standard methodology of law school instruction is failing (the Socratic method); and (b) whatever is being taught at law schools does not interest employers post-graduation.

Many jurisdictions around the country have implemented alternative processes that are designed to provide litigants with speedy and less expensive access to civil trials. These programs generally involve a simplified pretrial process and a shortened trial on an expedited basis. This new resource offers a summary chart of the various programs nationwide and specific details for each.

One of my primary responsibilities as Counsel to the Chief Justice of the Colorado Supreme Court is to start and maintain dialogue among Colorado's law schools, bench, and bar in an effort to find and promote commonality among their efforts to improve our state's legal profession. Naturally, then, I was interested in attending the 2013 Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers conference, which sought to connect the legal academy and members of the legal profession.

Over the past few years, IAALS has been tracking the Colorado Civil Access Pilot Project, along with numerous other rules projects across the country. These efforts are aimed at providing greater access to civil justice and at better achieving the goals of a just, speedy, and inexpensive civil justice system. This new publication explores various factors for the successful creation and implementation of new rules and processes, laying the groundwork for future developments.

The front lines of electronic discovery are moving beyond the federal courts. In a world where everyone with a smart phone is an ESI custodian, the problems of e-discovery affect all types of litigants in all types of cases. E-discovery has arrived in the state courts, and the problems there are every bit as big, and every bit as complicated, as they are in federal court. On September 19th and 20th, state court judges and e-discovery experts from around the country gathered to discuss the challenges that e-discovery poses for state courts.

In 2012, North Carolina was the only state with contested judicial elections in which voters were provided with performance evaluations of the judicial candidates—both sitting judges and challengers—on their ballot. It is fairly common for bar associations to offer ratings of sitting judges standing for retention or reelection, but this was the first instance of which IAALS is aware where a bar association also evaluated judicial challengers. Since 2012, the NCBA has also offered a voluntary, confidential evaluation program for new judges.

Part of what we do at IAALS is to convene people who have different viewpoints around a particular topic—in hopes that areas of consensus will emerge from the dialogue. We convened one such group last spring, comprised of ideologically and experientially diverse participants, on the subject of judicial selection and the attributes we want in our judges. Focused on a simple question, "What are the most important characteristics or qualities of a judge," there was remarkable unanimity around the room.

The Honoring Families Initiative has released a white paper on the role of courts and communities in separation and divorce. Designed to spark national conversation and encourage collaboration between different disciplines, the paper sets the stage for our work in the years to come. Central to the premise of the paper is that the needs of children and families effected by divorce or separation have changed drastically, the system has not been able to keep pace, and the needs of children and families are increasingly not being met.

If the current law school model is dilapidated, then it requires real structural and architectural changes. Legal education (finally) must cater to the needs of students and teaching them the knowledge, skills, and values required to serve clients. However, to reinvent legal education in a meaningful way, law schools must involve and elevate their former second-class citizens on the faculty, who already teach, and have long taught, in the way that would represent real change in law schools.