Speeches by Chesterfield - Vol. XIII, 182-191. 1977-1978

VOLUME XIII

SPEECH NUMBER TITLE OR GROUP ADDRESSED

#182 CHARLES MORGAN, JR. CITATION
Fellows of Young Lawyers ABA Award
August 5, 1977 Chicago
ABA Annual Meeting
(Also Introductory Remarks by CS)

#183 REMARKS BY C. SMITH
Investiture Ceremony
Judge Paul Danahy
Before the Second District
Court of Appeals
Main Courthouse, Tampa, Florida
November 4, 1977

#184 INTRODUCTION OF LEON JAWORSKI
University of Florida Homecoming
Banquet (Florida Blue Key)
November 18, 1977
Gainesville, Florida

#185 ADDRESS BY C. SMITH
PINELLAS TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
ANNUAL INSTALLATION DINNER
Pappas Restaurant, Tarpon Springs, Fla.
November 30, 1977

#186 REMARKS BY C. SMITH
NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LEGAL
SERVICES AND .THEi PUBLIC
Grand Ballroom, Fairmont Hotel
New Orleans, Louisiana
December 17, 1977

#187 Address before Graduating Class
University of Tampa
December 18, 1977
"THE OLD SAID: "ENOUGH IS GOOD";
IT IS TIME FOR THE YOUNG TO SAY:
"MORE THAN ENOUGH IS BAD."
(Long Version of Address)

#187(a) Same address as #187
But it is a shorter version
#187(a) is the speech actually
delivered 12/18/77 by Mr. Smith

SPEECHES OF CHESTERFIELD SMITH

SPEECH NUMBER 182

VOLUME XIII

THE FELLOWS

OF

THE YOUNG LAWYERS SECTION

OF

THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

FIRST ANNUAL MEETfNG
August 5, 1977
Ritz Carlton Hotel
Chicago, Illinois

Kirk McAlpin
President, The Fellows
of the Young Lawyers Section
American Bar Association

Daniel J. Piliero, II
Chairman
Young Lawyers Section
American Bar Association

1977 ANNUAL AWARD
OF THE FELLOWS OF THE YOUNG LAWYERS SECTION
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

IN RECOGNITION OF DISTINGUISHED
SERVICE BY A LAWYER

CHARLES MORGAN, JR.

Charles Morgan, Jr. age 47, is in private

practice with his own law firm in Washington, D. C. After

attending the public schools in Birmingham, Alabama, he then

graduated with honors from the University of Alabama, securing

both a B.S. and a LL.B. degree. He is married to the former

Camille Walpole of Birmingham, and they have one son, Charles

Morgan, III, now a student at the University of Alabama. Among

many civic and professional activities, he is a former President

of the Junior Bar Section of the Birmingham Bar Association.

Since he was admitted to the bar of Alabama in 1955,

he has practiced law in Birmingham, Atlanta, and the District

of Columbia. During this past twenty turbulent years, Charles

Morgan Jr. has served as principal trial attorney in multi-

tudinous civil rights and civil liberties cases. In 1963, he

first obtained national attention as the result of a speech

made to the Birmingham Young Men's Business Club on the day

after the Birmingham church bombing in which four children

were killed. Charles Morgan there reached the conscience of

many Southerners, saying that the bombers were "each of us --

each citizen who has not consciously attempted to bring about

peaceful compliance with the decisions of the Supreme Court

of the United States."

Throughout his career, Charles Morgan, Jr. has

focused on cases that most lawyers wouldn't take because they

saw them as too controversial, or too unpopular, or simply as

lost causes. As a Southern lawyer pursuing social and political

change in the South, he did use his insider's credentials

freely -- he had the accent, he spoke the language, he under-

stood the thought processes. But while he as a trial lawyer

personally got along with almost everyone, including judges

and opposing lawyers, professionally he was, and is, a winner,

with the traditional characteristics of the lawyer who seldom

loses: fierce competitiveness, a checker-player's instinct

for strategy, a thorough grasp of the law, a phenomenal

capacity for work, boundless confidence, and the facile ability

to turn a phrase. His style was and is bonafide Southern:

direct, specific, and unequivocal. But Charles Morgan, Jr. is

not now nor has he ever been a Southern lawyer; he is an

American lawyer, committed to the unyielding representation as

an advocate of those multiple Americans who insofar as constitu-

tional rights are concerned have in the main been unrepresented

-2-

or underrepresented.

Charles Morgan, Jr., as plaintiff's attorney,

initiated the case of Reynolds v. Sims, the reapportionment

case requiring one-man, one-vote representation in both

houses of state legislatures which he successfully argued

before the Supreme Court of the United States. In the

University of Alabama desegregation case, he represented

the Negro plaintiffs who gained admission into the University

of Alabama's Huntsville Center despite Governor Wallace's

"stand in the schoolhouse door" in Tuscaloosa.

Charles Morgan, Jr. has served as plaintiff's

attorney in numerous cases to integrate the structures of

justice in the South. Among them is White v. Crook, resulting

in the integration of Lowndes County, Alabama, juries; in

that case, the Alabama statute excluding women from jury duty

(then also similarly existing in South Carolina and Mississippi),

was invalidated in the first application of the Equal Protection

Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to women's rights. He also

served as counsel in more than a score of cases to integrate

the jury systems of counties in Alabama, Florida, Mississippi,

South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia. In Whitus v. Georgia,

which he argued before the Supreme Court of the United States,

racially discriminatory juries selected from racially segre-

gated tax digests were declared unconstitutional. That

decision resulted in the setting aside of at least five Georgia

-3-

death penalty convictions.

In Lee v. Washington, which Charles Morgan, Jr.

also argued before the Supreme Court of the United States,

he obtained what perhaps still is one of the broadest de-

segregation orders ever entered, literally hundreds of

Alabama penal and correctional institutions being required

to integrate their facilities. In that case, the Equal

Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was construed

to cover the rights of Negro prisoners. He thereafter

served as counsel in similar actions to integrate penal

and correctional facilities and public employment in South

Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana.

In Liveright v. Joint Committee, Charles Morgan,

Jr. procured from the United States District Court for the

Middle District of Tennessee the first permanent injunction

by a federal court in the United States against an investi-

gation by a state's legislature. In Hadnott v. Amos, he

successfully obtained from the Supreme Court of the United

States for the nominees of the National Democratic Party of

Alabama (NDPA) a place on the November, 1968, ballot. As a

result, seventeen NDPA candidates were elected to various

local offices in Etowah, Marengo and Sumter Counties, Alabama.

When six black candidates of the NDPA were left off the

November 1968 ballot in Greene County, Alabama, he commenced

a contempt action in the Supreme Court of the United States.

-4-

The Supreme Court called for a new election in Greene County,

with directions that the six candidates be included on the

ballot. On July 23, 1969, the new election was held and the

six candidates represented by Charles Morgan, Jr. were elected.

Truly, Charles Morgan, Jr. has been the lawyer

for the defense of some of the most controversial cases of

our time including: the selective service appeal of the world's

heavyweight champion, Muhammed Ali; the Army's court-martial

of Captain Howard B. Levy; the Army's court-martial of Green

Beret Captain John J. McCarty; the trial involving the

rights to freedom of speech by Edward R. Fields, an officer

of the ultra-rightist National State Rights Party; and the

Georgia General Assembly's exclusion from membership of then

Representative-elect and black activist Julian Bond.

In 1972, Charles Morgan, Jr. became Director of

the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington office. Soon

thereafter, he served as lawyer for the Association of State

Democratic Chairman (those whose telephones were successfully

tapped) in the Watergate Case and related legal proceedings.

Indeed, it was in the Watergate matter that he perhaps made

what will be ultimately recognized as his most lasting mark

in American legal history. Charles Morgan, Jr. is the first

lawyer, or at least one of the first, publicly to advance and

articulate the legal case for the impeachment of President

Richard Nixon. His primary role as the organizer of the

-5-

American Civil Liberties Union impeachment campaign led him

for over a year to roam the entire country with the inde-

fatigable determination and zeal usually associated with a

candidate for nomination as President of the United States --

making speeches, organizing meetings, explaining what impeach-

ment was and how it has been used in the past and why he

thought it essential now. But his nationwide mission was not

to seek office; he sought instead to invoke the constitutional

processes to determine whether the sitting President of the

United States should retain that high office.

While some people, including a few Congressmen,

then criticized the ACLU campaign as only a distractive

intrusion on the legislative-judicial process, the clearer

light of history indicates that it as the first clarion call

had a great deal to do with the gathering public consensus

for impeachment. Charles Morgan, Jr., as its guiding spirit,

worked ardously, long and unceasingly, not to "get Richard

Nixon", but simply to prove to his own satisfaction that the

American constitutional processes would work if given a fair

chance. He is, as he was so aptly entitled by the magazine

Southern Voices in May, 1974, "The Man Who Cried Impeachment

First". Charles Morgan, Jr. who had spent all of his life as

a lawyer witnessing to the utmost his faith in the Constitution

and the Bill of Rights, was of course supremely right then in

his contentment that the collective will of the people eventually

-6-

would be done. Charles Morgan, Jr at the very least in

substantial measure, hetpe4 at that time of constitutional

crisis to make the system work.

Although relatively young, Charles Morgan, Jr.

is already a living legend in the law, a person who lives

by the ethical precepts which historically have guided the

conduct of the truly great lawyers of our past and present.

By his professional conduct, by his very being, Charles

Morgan, Jr. epitomizes that which is very-good about the

free and independent American lawyer. He has been his own

person, and his past indicates that he will be in the future.

His selection as the first recipient of this meaningful award

gives recognition to those who practice law as it should be

practiced -- a high calling for the noblest of people.

Charles Morgan, Jr. verily exemplifies the best in an American

lawyer, one who sometimes is lonely but who never shirks

standing alone.

-7-

IT IS PLEASANT TO HAVE THE TASK OF INTRODUCING

AS THE SPEAKER A LAWYER WHOM I LIKE VERY MUCH AND ONE

WHO HAS IN THE PAST ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS BOTH

INFORMED AND ENTERTAINED ME IN A DELIGHTFUL WAY.

BEFORE DISCHARGING THAT ASSIGNMENT HOWEVER -

I WANT FIRST TO INTRODUCE TO YOU CAMILLE WALPOLE MORGAN -

NOW SOMETIMES KNOWN AS MRS. CHUCK MORGAN WHO BECAME

ENTWINED WITH OUR SPEAKER WHEN BOTH WERE STUDENTS AT THE

UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA.

IN THE MORE THAN TWENTY YEARS

THAT THEY HAVE BEEN MARRIED THEY ALWAYS HAVE BEEN EQUAL

PARTNERS IN FROLIC AND IN WORK; IN SPLENDOR AND IN POVERTY.

IN THE HIGHS AND LOWS THAT ARE THE INEVITABLE LOT OF TRIAL

LAWYERS IN THE CIVIL LIBERTY AREA,

CAMILLE HAS KEPT THE

MONEY WHENEVER THERE W'1AS MONEY; HAS KEPT THE CHECK BOOK

IN BALANCE; THE TAXES PAID; THE CLOTHES CLEAN; THE FOOD

COOKED; THE BEDS MADE; THE PLANE TICKETS MOTEL RESERVATIONS

AND SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS IN ORDER; AND DURING ALL OF THIS

TIME SHE HAS BEEN THE MANAGER OF THE LAW OFFICE.

PERHAPS

TO THE CURRENT DISMAY OF "WOMEN LIBBERS" SHE HAS BEEN HIS.

PERSONAL SECRETARY HIS BATMAN HIS SECOND BANANA AND

HIS CONSTANT COMPANION BOTH IN WORK AND IN PLAY.

CHUCK MORGAN IS A CONFIRMED WORKAHOLIC AND

CAMILLE MORGAN FEEDS HIS HABIT.

THEIR NAY OF LIFE AS A

TEAM SINCE COLLEGE DAYS AT TUSCALOOSA OBVIOUSLY HAS BEEN

SATISFYING AND PRODUCTIVE,

WHATEVER HE IS HE WOULDN'T

BE WITHOUT CAMILLE; WHATEVER CAMILLE IS SHE WOULDN'T BE

-2-

WITHOUT CHUCK.

IT IS MY PLEASURE TO ASK THE WIFE OF

OUR AWARD RECIPIENT MRS. CHARLES MORGAN, JR, TO STAND

AND RECEIVE YOUR GREETING.

I NOW REFER YOU TO THE PRINTED CITATION LEFT

AT EACH PLACEMAT.

IT GIVES IN DEPTH AND DETAIL THE

REASON WHY CHARLES MORGAN, JR. t'fAS SELECTED AS THE FIRST

RECIPIENT OF THE AWARD,

THERE IS LITTLE THAT I CAN ADD

TO IT -- I SHALL NOT TRY.

BUT NOTING FROM THAT CITATION THAT HE GRADUATED

FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA COLLEGE OF LAW -

IT IS

PERHAPS PROPER AS A FLORIDIAN THAT I EXPRESS MY SURPRISE

THAT THE FIRST RECIPIENT OF THIS OUTSTANDING AWARD IS A MAN

WITHOUT A FORMAL EDUCATION.

I ALSO MENTION TO CHUCK

MORGAN THAT BEFORE I CAME TO THE BANQUET TONIGHT I HEARD

ON TV OF THE TERRIBLE FLOOD IN UGANDA; IT WAS REPORTED

THAT OVER 7,000 UGANDANS AND TWO ALABAMA RECRUITERS WERE

DROWNED.

I SUGGEST THAT CHUCK MORGAN OUR SPEAKER IS

SOMEONE WHOM EACH HERE WILL ALWAYS REMEMBER.

HE IS A

MAN OF ACTION A POLITICIAN A PRAGMATIC GRASS-ROOTS

ACTIVIST; BUT HE IS ALSO TRULY AN INTELLECTUAL.

YOU

WILL SOON SEE THAT HE KNOWS THE LAW AND THAT HE KNOWS

WHY THE LAW IS THE WAY THAT IT IS.

YOU CANNOT LONG

LISTEN TO HIM SPEAK WITHOUT BEING IMPRESSED AT HOW WELL

INFORMED HE IS,

BEING A SOUTHERNER MYSELF I MIGHT

UNDERSTANDABLY THINK THAT THE REASON CHUCK MORGAN IS WHAT HE

IS IS BECAUSE HE IS A SOUTHERNER AND THAT SOUTHERNERS QUITE

OFTEN UNDERSTAND THINGS MORE CLEARLY AND MORE QUICKLY THAN

OTHERS.

UNFORTUNATELY FOR THAT THESIS CHUCK MORGAN

DISAVOWS IT.

IN A MAGAZINE ARTICLE IN 1974 HE SAID:

-5-

"I HAVEN'T MADE IT A POINT TO IDENTIFY MYSELF AS A

SOUTHERNER.

I AM SOUTHERN BY HERITAGE AND VIEWPOINT -

BUT I HAVEN'T TRIED TO MAKE MUCH OF THAT ONE WAY OR THE

OTHER.

I'M A WHITE ANGLO-SAXON PROTESTANT SOUTHERNER -

AND I DON'T HAVE ANY GUILT OR SHAME ABOUT IT OR ANY

PARTICULAR PRIDE IN IT.

THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS."

WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS THE WAY IT IS WITHOUT

ANY GUILT OR SHAME BUT WITH SOME PRIDE I PRESENT TO YOU

CHARLES MORGAN, JR.

SPEECHES OF CHESTERFIELD SMITH

SPEECH NUMBER 183

VOLUME XIII

REMARKS OF:

CHESTERFIELD SMITH
LAWYER
LAKELAND, FLORIDA

BEFORE:

CEREMONY CONDUCTED FOR THE
INVESTITURE OF DISTRICT COURT
OF APPEALS JUDGE PAUL DANAHY
BEFORE THE SECOND DISTRICT
COURT OF APPEALS OF FLORIDA

PLACE:

MAIN COURTHOUSE
PIERCE AND KENNEDY STREETS
TAMPA, FLORIDA

DATE:

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1977
11:30 A.M.

TEN MINUTES

DURATION:

AS A TRIAL LAWYER SOMETIMES PRIVILEGED TO APPEAR

BEFORE THIS COURT I TAKE PERSONAL SATISFACTION IN BEING

PERMITTED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE INVESTITURE CEREMONY OF

JUDGE PAUL DANAHY.

THAT PLEASURE ARISES IN PART BECAUSE

OF A LONG-HELD BELIEF THAT THE CALIBER OF A STATE'S JUDICIARY

IS A PRIME YARDSTICK OF ITS CULTURE AND AS I SEE IT JUDGE

PAUL DANAHY WILL BRING ADDED LUSTER TO THIS STATE'S BENCH. IN

A SOCIETY AS SATURATED IN LAW AS FLORIDA IN A STATE WITH SUCH

A BURGEONING POPULATION IN A STATE AS LITIGIOUS AS FLORIDA

HAS BECOME THE CHOICE OF WHICH FLORIDA LAWYER IS TO SIT ON

THE BENCH AT ANY LEVEL ASSUMES PARTICULAR IMPORTANCE AND NOT

SURPRISINGLY ALMOST ALWAYS AROUSES CONTENTION AMONG OTHERS -

AMONG THOSE ALREADY ON THE BENCH AMONG THOSE WHO COMPRISE THE

BAR AND AMONG THOSE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC WHO ARE THEREAFTER

TO BE JUDGED BY THE LAWYER SO SELECTED.

GOVERNOR REUBIN ASKEW HAS APPARENTLY AVOIDED CONTROVERSY BY

SELECTING AS A JUDGE FOR THIS COURT OF LAST RESORT A WIDELY

ACCLAIMED LAWYER AND TRIAL JUDGE APPARENTLY WELL QUALIFIED BY

EDUCATION EXPERIENCE APTITUDE AND CHARACTER TO JOIN THE

ILLUSTRIOUS JUDGES WHO ALREADY GRACE THIS DISTINGUISHED COURT.

WHEN PAUL DANAHY CONCLUDED ONLY ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO

TO SEEK A JUDICIAL POSITION HE ALREADY WAS RECOGNIZED AS

BEING IN THE FOREFRONT OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BAR HE

WAS ACCEPTED BY OTHER LAWYERS AS THE PEER OF THAT SMALL GROUP

OF LAWYERS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BEST QUALIFIED TO SIT AS

JUDGES.

INDEED HIS BROTHERS AND SISTERS AT THE BAR THEN

UNIFORMLY APPRAISED PAUL DANAHY AS A FINE LAWYER A SPLENDID

-2-

IN THIS INSTANCE -

PUBLIC SERVANT AND A GOOD PERSON.

UNDER OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT JUDGES DO OFTEN

PASS ON THE MOST PROFOUND SOCIAL AND POLITICAL QUESTIONS, WE

NEED WE MUST HAVE GOOD LAWYERS TO SERVE AS JUDGES.

THE

DUTY TO ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION AFFECTS THE WHOLE ROLE OF ALL

JUDGES AND IT SUGGESTS TO ME THAT OUR JUDGES SHOULD COME

FROM A DIVERSITY OF BACKGROUNDS.

IT IS MY BELIEF THAT

PAUL DANAHY CAN IN A MATERIAL WAY ADD DIVERSE AND DISPARATE

TALENTS AND QUALITIES TO THIS COURT TALENTS AND QUALITIES

NOT NOW AVAILABLE FROM THOSE JUDGES SITTING ON THIS COURT -

THUS ADDING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUND JUDICIAL CONSENSUS

WHICH THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ARE IN FUTURE YEARS

ENTITLED TO RECEIVE FROM THEIR APPELLATE COURTS,

WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE WANT IN A JUDGE: WE WANT

WISE AND GOOD MEN OR WOMEN WHO HAVE DISTINGUISHED THEMSELVES

BOTH IN THE FIELD OF LAW AND IN THE WIDER PUBLIC CONSTITUENCY -

FOR THAT ESSENTIAL COMBINATION OF WISDOM JUDGMENT AND FAIR-

NESS THAT MUST GOVERN A VIABLE LEGAL SYSTEM.

WE KNOW THAT

THE WORK OF A JUDGE IS BASICALLY REFLECTIVE AND THAT THE CASES

BEFORE HIM OR HER ARE RARELY FLAMBOYANT.

WE KNOW THAT THE

DESIRABLE JUDICIAL QUALITIES INCLUDE MODESTY SCHOLARSHIP -

BALANCE DIGNITY RESTRAINT AND REFLECTION.

AND ALTHOUGH WE KNOW THAT JUDGE DANAHY AS A JUDGE

OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY POSSESSED OR

APPEARED TO POSSESS THOSE QUALITIES AS A TRIAL JUDGE IN

ABUNDANT DEGREE WE ALSO KNOW THAT EVEN THE MOST QUALIFIED

-4-

TRIAL JUDGE WHO ASSUMES AN APPELLATE JUDGESHIP CANNOT WITH

CONFIDENCE AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS NEW JUDICIAL CAREER BE

CALLED A GREAT APPELLATE JUDGE,

"GREAT JUDGE" IS A TITLE

WHICH CAN ONLY BE EARNED EARNED BY YEARS OF DEDICATED

SERVICE.

JUDGE DANAHY AS A TRIAL JUDGE RECEIVED HIGH

MARKS IN THE RELATIVELY SHORT TIME HE SO SERVED.

BUT TO

CALL HIM A GREAT APPELLATE JUDGE NOW WOULD BE A GROSSLY

PREMATURE DECISION WHICH COULD NOT BE BASED ON FACT.

BUT IT IS BOTH PROPER AND APPROPRIATE THAT JUDGE

DANAHY BE EVALUATED FOR HIS POTENTIAL ABILITIES.

HIS

REPORT CARD AS AN APPELLATE JUDGE WILL COME OUT PERIODICALLY -

BUT THE FINAL EVALUATION MUST NECESSARILY AWAIT FUTURE EVENTS.

WHILE EACH OF US HERE TODAY HAVE OUR OWN SPECIFIC IDEAS AND

-5-

JUDGMENTS ABOUT THE JUDICIAL POTENTIAL OF JUDGE DANAHY AS AN

APPELLATE JUDGE HIS PRESENT CAPACITIES AS A LAWYER AS A

TRIAL JUDGE AND AS A PERSON HIS FUTURE PERFORMANCE OF

HONORABLE SERVICE ON THIS COURT IS NOW THE ONLY CRITERIA BY

WHICH THE FINAL APPROBATION OF OUR PEOPLE CAN BE OBTAINED.

INDEED IT IS THE ONLY WAY THAT THE ULTIMATE ACCOLADE

"GREAT JUDGE" CAN BE BESTOWED ON HIM IN YEARS TO COME BY HIS

PEERS.

BUT KNOWINGLY WE ASSEMBLED TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS

INVESTITURE CEREMONY HONORING THIS JUDGE BELIEVING IN VARYING

WAYS THAT HE TO A MARKED DEGREE SEEMS TO POSSESS THOSE

PRECIOUS QUALITIES WHICH IF PROPERLY EXERCISED WILL PERMIT HIM

TO BECOME IN TIME A TRULY FINE APPELLATE JUDGE.

-6-

BY TEMPERAMENT BY DEMONSTRATED CHARACTER BY

DILIGENT AND ARDUOUS LABOR BY DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE -

PAUL DANAHY PRACTICING LAWYER LEGAL WRITER LEGISLATOR -

LAW PROFESSOR TRIAL JUDGE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL -

GOOD CITIZEN APPEARS TO US TO HAVE SERVED THIS STATE AND THIS

COUNTY IN SUCH A WAY THAT HE THROUGH DILIGENT APPLICATION CAN

IN HISTORY JOIN THE MORE MAGNIFICENT OF THE GREAT JUDGES WHO

OVER THE YEARS HAVE GRACED OR NOW GRACE THIS FINE APPELLATE

BENCH,

AS A LAWYER AND OFFICER OF THIS COURT AND AS A

FLORIDA CITIZEN AND AS AN AMERICAN I RELISH BEING A

PARTICIPANT HERE BECAUSE I CHERISH THIS COURT AS AN

INSTITUTION AND AS THE JUDICIAL HOME OF SOME SPLENDID JUDGES

WHO TODAY ARE BEING JOINED BY A MAN WHOM I BELIEVE WILL ALSO

BE A SPLENDID JUDGE,

INDEED I BELIEVE IN TIME A

GREAT JUDGE,

PAUL DANAHY BY THE VERY NATURE OF THE MAN AND

HIS BACKGROUND APPEARS TO US TO HAVE THE HIGHEST POTENTIAL

TO SERVE THIS COURT AND THIS STATE IN SUCH A WAY THAT HE

CAN IN HISTORY JOIN THE MORE MAGNIFICENT OF THE GREAT JUDGES

WHO OVER THE YEARS HAVE GRACED THE APPELLATE COURTS OF FLORIDA.

THANK YOU.

-8-

# /g 3

REMARKS OF:

CHESTERFIELD SMITH
LAWYER
LAKELAND, FLORIDA

BEFORE:

CEREMONY CONDUCTED FOR THE
INVESTITURE OF DISTRICT COURT
OF APPEALS JUDGE PAUL DANAHY
BEFORE THE SECOND DISTRICT
COURT OF APPEALS OF FLORIDA

PLACE:

MAIN COURTHOUSE
PIERCE AND KENNEDY STREETS
TAMPA, FLORIDA

DATE:

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1977
11:30 A.M.

TEN MINUTES

DURATION:

AS A TRIAL LAWYER SOMETIMES PRIVILEGED TO APPEAR

BEFORE THIS COURT I TAKE PERSONAL SATISFACTION IN BEING

PERMITTED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE INVESTITURE CEREMONY OF

JUDGE PAUL DANAHY.

THAT PLEASURE ARISES IN PART BECAUSE

OF A LONG-HELD BELIEF THAT THE CALIBER OF A STATE'S JUDICIARY

IS A PRIME YARDSTICK OF ITS CULTURE AND AS I SEE IT JUDGE

PAUL DANAHY WILL BRING ADDED LUSTER TO THIS STATE'S BENCH. IN

A SOCIETY AS SATURATED IN LAW AS FLORIDA IN A STATE WITH SUCH

A BURGEONING POPULATION IN A STATE AS LITIGIOUS AS FLORIDA

HAS BECOME THE CHOICE OF WHICH FLORIDA LAWYER IS TO SIT ON

THE BENCH AT ANY LEVEL ASSUMES PARTICULAR IMPORTANCE AND NOT

SURPRISINGLY ALMOST ALWAYS AROUSES CONTENTION AMONG OTHERS -

AMONG THOSE ALREADY ON THE BENCH AMONG THOSE WHO COMPRISE THE

BAR AND AMONG THOSE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC WHO ARE THEREAFTER

TO BE JUDGED BY THE LAWYER SO SELECTED.

GOVERNOR REUBIN ASKEW HAS APPARENTLY AVOIDED CONTROVERSY BY

SELECTING AS A JUDGE FOR THIS COURT OF LAST RESORT A WIDELY

ACCLAIMED LAWYER AND TRIAL JUDGE APPARENTLY WELL QUALIFIED BY

EDUCATION EXPERIENCE APTITUDE AND CHARACTER TO JOIN THE

ILLUSTRIOUS JUDGES WHO ALREADY GRACE THIS DISTINGUISHED COURT.

WHEN PAUL DANAHY CONCLUDED ONLY ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO

TO SEEK A JUDICIAL POSITION HE ALREADY WAS RECOGNIZED AS

BEING IN THE FOREFRONT OF THE HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BAR HE

WAS ACCEPTED BY OTHER LAWYERS AS THE PEER OF THAT SMALL GROUP

OF LAWYERS IN HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY BEST QUALIFIED TO SIT AS

JUDGES.

INDEED HIS BROTHERS AND SISTERS AT THE BAR THEN

UNIFORMLY APPRAISED. PAUL DANAHY AS A FINE LAWYER A SPLENDID

-2-

IN THIS INSTANCE -

PUBLIC SERVANT AND A GOOD PERSON.

UNDER OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT JUDGES DO OFTEN

PASS ON THE MOST PROFOUND SOCIAL AND POLITICAL QUESTIONS.

NEED WE MUST HAVE GOOD LAWYERS TO SERVE AS JUDGES.

WE

THE

DUTY TO ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION AFFECTS THE WHOLE ROLE OF ALL

JUDGES AND IT SUGGESTS TO ME THAT OUR JUDGES SHOULD COME

FROM A DIVERSITY OF BACKGROUNDS.

IT IS MY BELIEF THAT

PAUL DANAHY CAN IN A MATERIAL WAY ADD DIVERSE AND DISPARATE

TALENTS AND QUALITIES TO THIS COURT TALENTS AND QUALITIES

NOT NOW AVAILABLE FROM THOSE JUDGES SITTING ON THIS COURT -

THUS ADDING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUND JUDICIAL CONSENSUS

WHICH THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ARE IN FUTURE YEARS

ENTITLED TO RECEIVE -FROM THEIR APPELLATE COURTS,

-3-

WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE WANT IN A JUDGE: WE WANT

WISE AND GOOD MEN OR WOMEN WHO HAVE DISTINGUISHED THEMSELVES

BOTH IN THE FIELD OF LAW AND IN THE WIDER PUBLIC CONSTITUENCY -

FOR THAT ESSENTIAL COMBINATION OF WISDOM JUDGMENT AND FAIR-

NESS THAT MUST GOVERN A VIABLE LEGAL SYSTEM.

WE KNOW THAT

THE WORK OF A JUDGE IS BASICALLY REFLECTIVE AND THAT THE CASES

BEFORE HIM OR HER ARE RARELY FLAMBOYANT,

WE KNOW THAT THE

DESIRABLE JUDICIAL QUALITIES INCLUDE MODESTY SCHOLARSHIP -

BALANCE DIGNITY RESTRAINT AND REFLECTION.

AND ALTHOUGH WE KNOW THAT JUDGE DANAHY AS A JUDGE

OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY POSSESSED OR

APPEARED TO POSSESS THOSE QUALITIES AS A TRIAL JUDGE IN

ABUNDANT DEGREE WE- ALSO KNOW THAT EVEN THE MOST QUALIFIED

-4-

TRIAL JUDGE WHO ASSUMES AN APPELLATE JUDGESHIP CANNOT WITH

CONFIDENCE AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS NEW JUDICIAL CAREER BE

CALLED A GREAT APPELLATE JUDGE,

- "GREAT JUDGE" IS A TITLE

WHICH CAN ONLY BE EARNED EARNED BY YEARS OF DEDICATED

SERVICE.

JUDGE DANAHY AS A TRIAL JUDGE RECEIVED HIGH

MARKS IN THE RELATIVELY SHORT TIME HE SO SERVED,

BUT TO

CALL HIM A GREAT APPELLATE JUDGE NOW WOULD BE A GROSSLY

PREMATURE DECISION WHICH COULD NOT BE BASED ON FACT.

BUT IT IS BOTH PROPER AND APPROPRIATE THAT JUDGE

DANAHY BE EVALUATED FOR HIS POTENTIAL ABILITIES,

HIS

REPORT CARD AS AN APPELLATE JUDGE WILL COME OUT PERIODICALLY -

BUT THE FINAL EVALUATION MUST NECESSARILY AWAIT FUTURE EVENTS.

WHILE EACH OF US HERE TODAY HAVE OUR OWN SPECIFIC IDEAS AND

-5-

JUDGMENTS ABOUT THE JUDICIAL POTENTIAL OF JUDGE DANAHY AS AN

APPELLATE JUDGE HIS PRESENT CAPACITIES AS A LAWYER AS A

TRIAL JUDGE AND AS A PERSON HIS FUTURE PERFORMANCE OF

HONORABLE SERVICE ON THIS COURT IS NOW THE ONLY CRITERIA BY

WHICH THE FINAL APPROBATION OF OUR PEOPLE CAN BE OBTAINED,

INDEED IT IS THE ONLY WAY THAT THE ULTIMATE ACCOLADE

"GREAT JUDGE" CAN BE BESTOWED ON HIM IN YEARS TO COME BY HIS

PEERS.

BUT KNOWINGLY WE ASSEMBLED TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS

INVESTITURE CEREMONY HONORING THIS JUDGE BELIEVING IN VARYING

WAYS THAT HE TO A MARKED DEGREE -.SEEMS TO POSSESS THOSE

PRECIOUS QUALITIES WHICH IF PROPERLY EXERCISED WILL PERMIT HIM

TO BECOME IN TIME A TRULY FINE APPELLATE JUDGE.

-6-

BY TEMPERAMENT BY DEMONSTRATED CHARACTER BY

DILIGENT AND ARDUOUS LABOR BY DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE -

PAUL DANAHY PRACTICING LAWYER LEGAL WRITER LEGISLATOR -

LAW PROFESSOR TRIAL JUDGE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL -

GOOD CITIZEN APPEARS TO US TO HAVE SERVED THIS STATE AND THIS

COUNTY IN SUCH A WAY THAT HE THROUGH DILIGENT APPLICATION CAN

IN HISTORY JOIN THE MORE MAGNIFICENT OF THE GREAT JUDGES WHO

OVER THE YEARS HAVE GRACED OR NOW GRACE THIS FINE APPELLATE

BENCH.

AS A LAWYER AND OFFICER OF THIS COURT AND AS A

FLORIDA CITIZEN AND AS AN AMERICAN,- I RELISH BEING A

PARTICIPANT HERE BECAUSE I CHERISH THIS COURT AS AN

INSTITUTION AND AS THE JUDICIAL HOME OF SOME SPLENDID JUDGES

-7-

WHO TODAY ARE BEING JOINED BY A MAN WHOM I BELIEVE WILL ALSO

BE A SPLENDID JUDGE.

INDEED I BELIEVE IN TIME A

GREAT JUDGE,

PAUL DANAHY BY THE VERY NATURE OF THE MAN AND

HIS BACKGROUND APPEARS TO US TO HAVE THE HIGHEST POTENTIAL

TO SERVE THIS COURT AND THIS STATE IN SUCH A WAY THAT HE

CAN IN HISTORY JOIN THE MORE MAGNIFICENT OF THE GREAT JUDGES

WHO OVER THE YEARS HAVE GRACED THE APPELLATE COURTS OF FLORIDA.

THANK YOU.

-8-

SPEECHES OF CHESTERFIELD SMITH

SPEECH NUMBER 184

VOLUME XIII

REMARKS OF: CHESTERFIELD SMITH
LAWYER
LAKELAND, FLORIDA

BEFORE: FLORIDA BLUE KEY
HOMECOMING BANQUET
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

"INTRODUCTION OF
LEON JAWORSKI"

PLACE: UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA

NOVEMBER 18, 1977

DATE:

ON MAY 24, 1974, WASHINGTON THE CAPITAL CITY

OF THE MOST POWERFUL NATION IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD -

WAS BUZZING.

IN EVERY CONVERSATIONAL GROUP THE

DISCUSSION CENTERED AROUND THE EFFORTS OF THE WATERGATE

SPECIAL PROSECUTOR TO SECURE FROM PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON

CERTAIN TAPES WHICH HAD RECORDED PRESIDENTIAL CONVERSATIONS

BELIEVED TO CONTAIN RELEVANT EVIDENCE IN THE WATERGATE

INVESTIGATIONS.

INDEED THE WASHINGTON STAR HAD HEAD-

LINED JUST THAT VERY MORNING THAT LEON JAWORSKI THE

SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IN AN ABSOLUTELY UNPRECEDENTED LEGAL

ACTION HAD FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

A DIRECT PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI BEFORE JUDGMENT -

ASKING THAT THE DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT THAT THE

PRESIDENT TURN OVER THOSE TAPES BE UPHELD,

RANGED WIDESPREAD AND FULL SCALE -- FROM JUBILATION TO

APPREHENSION AND FEAR.

THAT THIS WAS IT, R

THE PEOPLE EVERYWHERE KNEW

EVOLUTION WAS POSSIBLE --

UNPRECEDENTED POLITICAL STRIFE WAS ALMOST CERTAINLY A

COMPELLING NECESSITY -- THE PEOPLE CONJECTURED -- "WHAT

WILL THE PRESIDENT DO?"

LEON JAWORSKI THIS DAY HAD

BELLIED UP TO THE BUZZ SAW -- WOULD THE PRESIDENT CUT HIM

IN HALF -- WHAT A DRAMA -- A DAY OF MASSIVE HISTORICAL

SIGNIFICANCE TO OUR STURDY NATION.

I HAVE SET THIS STAGE OF WASHINGTON ON MAY 24,

1974 ONLY AS A PREDICATE FOR A PERSONAL TALE. AS PRESIDENT

OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION MY WIFE VIVIAN AND I

THE DIALOGUE

WERE HOSTING A SEATED DINNER AT OUR STATE'S EMBASSY IN

WASHINGTON "FLORIDA HOUSE"

- ON THAT VERY NIGHT FOR THE

CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES AND HIS CHARMING WIFE -

VERA BURGER.

VIVIAN AND I BOTH HAD OTHER DUTIES THAT DAY -

INCLUDING A LATE AFTERNOON RECEPTION FOR THE LAWYER MEMBERS

OF CONGRESS.

WHILE I MYSELF WAS QUITE AWARE THAT

THAT VERY MORNING LEON JAWORSKI HAD MADE HIS BOLD ATTEMPT

IN COURT TO BELL THE CAT VIVIAN HAD BEEN CONCERNED ONLY

WITH TABLEWARE THE CATERER FLOWERS WINE AND SEATING

ARRANGEMENTS.

SHE HAD NO IDEA THAT IT WAS IN ANY WAY AN

UNUSUAL DAY: -- WHILE SHE KNEW OF COURSE WHY LEON JAWORSKI

WAS IN WASHINGTON -- SHE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT IF ANYTHING HE

-3-

WAS DOING THAT DAY TO DISCHARGE HIS ASSIGNMENT.

THE SEATING ARRANGEMENT AT FLORIDA HOUSE CALLED

FOR SIX TABLES WITH EIGHT PERSONS PER TABLE FOR OUR 48 DIS-

TINGUISHED GUESTS INCLUDING SENATORS CONGRESSMEN THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL THE SOLICITOR GENERAL MEMBERS OF THE

SUPREME COURT AND MULTIPLE WELL KNOWN LAWYERS AND JUDGES.

VIVIAN HAD DECIDED PERHAPS QUITE OBVIOUSLY TO PLACE AT

OUR TABLE WITH CHIEF JUSTICE AND MRS. BURGER OUR DEAR

FRIENDS FROM HOME THE SENIOR SENATOR FROM FLORIDA AND

HIS WONDERFUL WIFE RHEA -- AND BECAUSE VIVIAN DIDN'T

REALLY WANT TO BE TOO BOTHERED WITH WASHINGTON PROTOCOL -

SHE KNEW ONLY THAT SHE HAD TO FILL THE TABLE AND SHE LOVED

AND ENJOYED JEANNETTE JAWORSKI SO SHE ADDED AS THE LAST

COUPLE AT OUR TABLE JEANETTE JAWORSKI AND HER SPOUSE.

WHEN OUR GUESTS ARRIVED AND LOOKED AT OUR

TABLE THEY WERE AGOG AND INTRIGUED!

WORK OUT?

HOW WOULD THIS

WOULD THIS SEATING ARRANGEMENT ON THIS DAY

OF ALL DAYS BE A TREMENDOUS EMBARRASSMENT TO THE CHIEF

JUSTICE -- AND TO THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR?

HOW COULD

CHESTERFIELD AND VIVIAN HAVE FAILED TO BE SENSITIVE TO

SUCH A SITUATION?

EMBROGLIO WORK OUT?

HOW WOULD THIS POTENTIAL ETHICAL

THEIR QUESTIONS SOON WERE ANSWERED,

AT AN

APPROPRIATE TIME I CALLED ON THE CHIEF JUSTICE FOR

REMARKS.

WONDERFUL WARM AND CHARMING HUMAN BEING

THAT HE IS HE MADE A FEW. LIGHT PLEASANT STATEMENTS OF

-5-

GREETINGS -- TOLD ABOUT HIS PLEASURE OVER PAST MONTHS AS

HE HAD WATCHED MRS, CHILES CREATE AS THE SUPREME COURT'S

NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR FLORIDA HOUSE AND THEN TO THE

COMPLETE DELIGHT OF ALL ASSEMBLED HE SAID:

"I ALSO AM VERY PLEASED AND HONORED TO BE

SEATED AT THE TABLE WITH MY GOOD FRIEND LEON JAWORSKI.

WHILE I HAVEN'T SEEN HIM MUCH LATELY JUST TODAY I HEARD

THAT HE WAS IN TOWN,"

LEON JAWORSKI CERTAINLY WAS IN TOWN -- AS ALL

AMERICANS DISCOVERED.

PERHAPS IT WOULD SUFFICE IF I SIMPLY

STATED THAT TONIGHT LEON JAWORSKI IS IN TOWN AGAIN -- AS

THE SPEAKER AT THE FLORIDA BLUE KEY BANQUET.

BUT IT IS MY

PERSONAL PRIVILEGE TO SAY MORE -- AND I SHALL EXERCISE IT.

-6-

WHY?

BECAUSE I AS A FLORIDIAN AM PROUD TO PARTICIPATE

IN AN OCCASION WHICH BRINGS TO YOU AS A SPEAKER A

GREAT AMERICAN MY DEAR FRIEND LEON JAWORSKI A MAN

REVERED IN HIS ACHIEVEMENTS ACCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THIS

AGAIN HEALTHY NATION AND CHERISHED BY THOSE WHO KNOW

HIM BEST -- ABOVE AND BEYOND ALL OTHER THINGS -- AS A GREAT

TRIAL LAWYER WHO EMBODIES WHAT I PERSONALLY BELIEVE TO BE

THE SOUL THE IDEAL -- OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION,

CERTAINLY LEON JAWORSKI IS AND LONG HAS BEEN -

A GIANT IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION -- HIS VERSATILE AND

BRILLIANT CAREER AS A TRIAL LAWYER HAS TOUCHED AND ENHANCED

THE LIVES OF ALL PEOPLES IN THIS NATION.

HE HAS BEEN AN

-7-

INSPIRATIONAL LEADER OF THE ORGANIZED BAR SERVING AS

PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION THE HOUSTON

BAR ASSOCIATION AND THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS.

HE HAS BEEN

A BRILLIANT PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF TRIAL

LAWYERS LEADER IN THE AMERICAN JUDICATURE SOCIETY THE

AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE THE AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION THE

SOUTHWESTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION AND INDEED HE HAS HELPED

SHAPE THE CURRENT DIRECTION OF VIRTUALLY EVERY OTHER

IMPORTANT NATIONAL LEGAL ORGANIZATION.

HE BUILT ONE OF

THE GREAT LAW FIRMS IN THE COUNTRY WHICH INCIDENTALLY IS

ALSO AMONG THE NATION'S LARGEST AND MOST PROSPEROUS.

HIS

PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS HAVE BEEN

MULTITUDINOUS -- INCLUDING SERVICE AS THE CHIEF WAR CRIMES

-8-

PROSECUTOR AT NURENBURG AT THE END OF WORLD WAR II AS

A MEMBER OF PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSIONS ON CRIME AND VIOLENCE -

AS THE U. S. MEMBER OF THE PERMANENT (INTERNATIONAL )

COURT OF ARBITRATION AT THE HAGUE AS A SPECIAL ASSISTANT

AND COUNSEL AT VARIOUS TIMES TO BOTH THE UNITED STATES

ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL.

BUT HE

HAS NEVER STOPPED HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

WHILE MOST OF THOSE IN HIS LEAGUE OF ACCOMPLISHMENT AND

HIS STATE OF EMINENCE WOULD HAVE NOW ACCEPTED A LIFE OF EASE -

HE JUST RECENTLY TOOK ON AN ASSIGNMENT WITH THE HOUSE OF

REPRESENTATIVES TO GUIDE AND DIRECT ITS EFFORTS TO UNRAVEL

THE CURRENT CONGRESSIONAL MESS AND ETHICAL DILEMMA COMMONLY

HIS ACCEPTANCE OF THIS DIFFICULT

CALLED "KOREAGATE".

RESPONSIBILITY OF SIGNIFICANT IMPORTANCE TO THE PUBLIC

ACCEPTABLLITY OF THE CONGRESS IS BUT ANOTHER INDICATION

OF THE BREADTH AND DEPTH OF HIS COMMITMENT TO OUR SYSTEM

OF GOVERNMENT AND JUSTICE.

INDEED AS A TRIAL LAWYER MYSELF I KNOW QUITE

WELL THAT THE DIGNITY SCHOLARSHIP AND PROFESSIONALISM

THAT THIS MAN HAS BROUGHT TO THE CAUSE OF HIS CLIENT -

WHETHER THAT CLIENT BE THE PUBLIC OR AN INDIVIDUAL A

PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT HAS BEEN AN UNPARALLELED PUBLIC

BOOST TO LAWYERS EVERYWHERE.

SO TO WIND UP THE CLOCK TO PUT THIS HAPPY

SONG TO AN END I PRESENT TO YOU LEON JAWORSKI A MAN

WHO EMBODIES THE VERY BEST QUALITIES OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION.

-10-

IF I HAD TO SINGLE OUT ONE INDIVIDUAL AND SAY "THIS IS A

LAWYER -- THIS IS EXACTLY THE WAY A LAWYER SHOULD BE." -

MY PICK WOULD BE LEON JAWORSKI.

LEON JAWORSKI THE

GREAT TEXAS TRIAL LAWYER WHO PROVED CONCLUSIVELY TO THE

WORLD IN OUR OWN TIME THAT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

THE HIGHEST PERSON IS NOT ABOVE THE PEOPLE THE HUMBLEST IS

NOT BELOW THE PEOPLE,

-11-

SPEECHES OF CHESTERFIELD SMITH

SPEECH NUMBER 185

VOLUME XIII

if

ADDRESS OF:

DATE:

PLACE:

CHESTERFIELD SMITH
LAWYER
LAKELAND, FLORIDA

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1977
7:00 P.M.

PINELLAS TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION
ANNUAL INSTALLATION DINNER
PAPPAS RESTAURANT
TARPON SPRINGS, FLORIDA

TWENTY MINUTES

TIME:

IT IS A PERSONAL PRIVILEGE ALWAYS TO SPEAK TO

THE TRIAL BAR THE ELITE OF MY PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES.

THERE IS A DEEP SATISFACTION IN BEING A TRIAL LAWYER.

THERE ARE MANY OF US WHO CONSIDER IT THE MOST DEMANDING

ASPECT OF THE NOBLEST OF PROFESSIONS.

WHILE IT IS A

MOST BURDENSOME FIELD OF ENDEAVOR THE REWARDS TO THE

DILIGENT TRIAL LAWYER REMAINS SUBSTANTIAL.

EVERYDAY -

OUR FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS FACED WITH SERIOUS PERSONAL

PROBLEMS SEEK OUT TRIAL LAWYERS AND ALMOST WITHOUT

THOUGHT ENTRUST THEM WITH THEIR PROPERTY WITH THEIR

FREEDOM AND EVEN WITH THEIR LIFE,

THAT TRUST SO

ROUTINELY IMPOSED ON TRIAL LAWYERS BY OTHERS IN MY

PERSONAL BUT ADMITTEDLY BIASED OPINION MAKE TRIAL LAWYERS

A DISTINCTIVE GROUP.

ADMITTEDLY THE TRIAL LAWYER HISTORICALLY HAS

BEEN MALIGNED AND ABUSED,

ANY DEFENSE ON MY PART IS

OBVIOUSLY SELF-SERVING BUT MOST OF THAT CRITICISM IS

NOT WELL-FOUNDED.

MY PERSONAL POSITION WAS EXPRESSED

WELL BY HARRISON TWEED OF THE NEW YORK BAR WHEN HE SAID

ABOUT ALL LAWYERS:

"I HAVE A HIGH OPINION OF LAWYERS.

WITH ALL THEIR FAULTS . . THEY ARE BETTER TO WORK

WITH OR PLAY WITH OR FIGHT WITH OR DRINK WITH THAN

ANY OTHER VARIETY OF MANKIND."

WHILE I AGREE THAT THE

SENTIMENT CAN BE APPLIED TO LAWYERS GENERALLY IT IN MY

JUDGMENT APPLIES WITH EMPHASIS TO LEGAL ADVOCATES -

TO TRIAL LAWYERS.

-2-

LET ME GIVE A FEW HIGHLIGHTS OF THAT AGE-OLD ABUSE

BY THOSE WHO HISTORICALLY HAVE DELIGHTED IN JUMPING LAWYERS:

IN UTOPIA. THOMAS MORE SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED

THAT THERE WOULD BE NO LAWYERS. GEORGE WASHINGTON'S !ILL

PROVIDED THAT DISPUTES ARISING THEREUNDER WOULD BE RESOLVED

BY THREE ARBITRATORS "WHO WOULD NOT HEAR LAWYERS,"

RHODE

ISLAND WHILE A COLONY PROHIBITED LAWYERS FROM SERVING IN

ITS LEGISLATURE,

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE ILLINOIS GRANGE

OF 1872 PROVIDED THAT ANYONE COULD BE A MEMBER IN THE

ILLINOIS GRANGE EXCEPT ACTORS GAMBLERS AND LAWYERS.

PROBABLY THE BEST PUBLICIZED CRITICISM OF OUR

PROFESSION IS FOUND IN CARL SANDBURG'S POEM WHEREIN HE

SAID:

-3-

"---WHEN THE LAWYERS ARE THROUGH

WHAT IS THERE LEFT, BOB?
CAN A MOUSE NIBBLE AT IT
AND FIND ENOUGH TO FASTEN A TOOTH IN?

"WHY IS THERE ALWAYS A SECRET SINGING
WHEN A LAWYER CASHES IN?

"WHY DOES A HEARSE HORSE SNICKER
HAULING A LAWYER AWAY?"

HOW MUCH OF THE PUBLIC'S CRITICISM IS JUSTIFIED?

NO CANDID PERSON COULD DENY THAT ON OCCASION CERTAIN

INDIVIDUAL LAWYERS BOTH TRIAL AND OTHERWISE FAIL TO

MEASURE UP TO RECOGNIZED PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS. IF

THIS WERE NOT THE FACT THE ORGANIZED BAR WOULD NOT SPEND

MANY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF

LAWYER HOURS EACH YEAR IN DISCIPLINARY PROGRAMS.

IN FACT -

HOWEVER-THE DISCIPLINARY PROBLEMS ARE CAUSED BY A SMALL

PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL LAWYER POPULATION.

WHEN WE LOOK AT THE MORE REPRESENTATIVE SIDE OF

THE LEGAL PROFESSION NO OTHER CALLING APPROACHES IN

NUMBERS OR PERCENTAGE THE PARTICIPATION BY LAWYERS IN

COMMUNITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS,

OUR STATE GOVERNMENTS ARE HIGHLY POPULATED W1ITH

LAWYERS,

OVER ONE-HALF OF THE GOVERNORS WHO HAVE SERVED

IN THE LAST 100 YEARS IN THE VARIOUS STATES HAVE BEEN LAWYERS,

PROBABLY TO A GREATER EXTENT OUR FEDERAL GOVERN-

MENT IS MANNED BY LAWYERS IN THE HIGHEST OFFICES AVAILABLE

TO OUR CITIZENS.

TWENTY-FOUR OUT OF THE THIRTY-EIGHT

PRESIDENTS OF THE UNITED STATES HAVE BEEN LAWYERS.

ABOUT

SIXTY PERCENT OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE AND CONGRESS ARE

-5-

REGULARLY MADE UP OF LAWYERS.

IN ADDITION TO THE PUBLIC SERVICE ASPECTS THERE

IS NOT ANOTHER PROFESSION WHERE THE FINEST OF ITS MEMBERS

SPEND AS MUCH TIME EDUCATING THEIR COMPETITION.

ALL OF

US WELL KNOW THAT THE MOST PRODUCTIVE TRIAL LAWYERS ARE

CONTINUALLY CALLED UPON TO WRITE AND TO LECTURE IN CONTINUING

LEGAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS,

THOSE TRIAL LAWYERS SPEND

VALUABLE HOURS THAT OTHERWISE COULD BE CHARGEABLE TO CLIENTS

FOR THE BENEFIT OF OTHER LAWYERS WHO SEEK TO IMPROVE THEIR

OWN LEGAL ABILITIES.

PROFESSIONAL EXCELLENCE IS ESSENTIAL BUT IT ALONE

CAN NEVER BE ENOUGH FOR THOSE TRIAL LAWYERS WHO POSSESS THE

TRADITIONAL IDEALS TO NHICH ALL GREAT LAWYERS HISTORICALLY

-6-

INVOLVEMENT IN BAR ACTIVITIES IMPROVE-

MENT IN THE STRUCTURE OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ENHANCEMENT

OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION AND MODERNIZATION OF THE LAWS

THAT GOVERN OUR STATE AND COUNTRY ARE EQUALLY IMPORTANT,

ABOVE ALL LAWYERS MUST TAKE ALL POSSIBLE MEANS TO ESTABLISH

A RECOGNITION IN OUR CITIZENS THAT THE RULE OF LAW IS NOT

SYNONOMOUS WITH THE STATUS QUO.

A COMMITMENT BY CITIZENS

TO OBEY LAW AND RESPECT ORDER WILL COME ONLY WHEN THEY ARE

CONVINCED THAT RESPONSIBLE OFFICERS ARE DOING THEIR UTMOST

TO REMOVE INEQUITIES AND INADEQUACIES IN THE LAW.

TRIAL

LAWYERS SHOULD DEVELOP IF THEY DO NOT HAVE AN UNRESTRICTED

WILLINGNESS TO BECOME INVOLVED IN THESE ENDEAVORS.

THAT

WAS AND MUST BE THE CONSEQUENCE OF OUR INDIVIDUAL ACCEPTANCE

HAVE ASPIRED.

OF THE MONPOLISTIC PRIVILEGE GRANTED TO US TO ACT AS THE

ADVOCATE OF OTHERS.

IF EACH PERSON WHO IS IN TRIAL PRACTICE WOULD

ASSUME AND DISCHARGE HIS OR HER INDIVIDUAL SHARE OF OUR

TOTAL PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY -- THERE REALLY IS NO

LIMIT TO WHAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED IN THE FORESEEABLE

FUTURE TO IMPROVE THE ADVERSARY SYSTEM OF JUSTICE TO THE

LONG RANGE GOOD OF BOTH LAWYERS AND THE PUBLIC.

AND

I THINK THAT ON AN EVER ACCELERATING BASIS MOST OF THEM

DO -- OR WILL.

INDEED IT SEEMS TO ME THAT BOTH LAWYERS

AND THE ORGANIZED BAR REALLY ARE GETTING BETTER AND BETTER --

AND IT HAS BEEN BOTH FUN AND SATISFYING TO WATCH THEIR

EVOLVING ATTITUDE TO SOCIETAL PROBLEMS PARTICULARLY THOSE

TYPE PROBLEMS WHICH ONLY A FEW YEARS AGO WERE IN THE MAIN

IGNORED.

HOWEVER OF IMMEDIATE SIGNIFICANCE TO THE LEGAL

PROFESSION ARE THE CHANGES NOW UNDERWAY IN ITS REGULATION.

IN RECENT DECISIONS AND IT SEEMS TO ME ALMOST INEVITABLY

IN THE DECISIONS SOON TO COME THE SUPREME COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES HAS UNDERTAKEN A GROWING ROLE IN SUPERVISING

THE PRACTICE OF LAW -- AND CLEARLY SO DESPITE ITS DISCLAIMERS.

THE STATE DOES OF COURSE HAVE A LEGITIMATE INTEREST IN

SEEING THAT THE LEGAL PRACTITIONER HAS THE REQUISITE SKILLS

OF A LAWYER.

THE STATE TOO MUST INSURE THAT SUCH LAWYER

IS SUBJECT TO PROFESSIONAL CONTROLS,

EVEN SO IN ALL

HONESTY IT SEEMS CLEAR THAT IN MAY AREAS THE STATES

-9-

TRADITIONALLY HAVE REGULATED THE PRACTICE OF LAW WITHIN

THEIR BORDERS SO AS TO PRESERVE THE PROFESSIONAL STATUS QUO.

BUT AS I SEE IT CHANGE IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION IS WITH

US AND EVEN MORE DRASTIC CHANGE IS COMING.

UNTIL JUST 12 YEARS AGO A LAWYER IN PENNSYLVANIA

WAS RESTRICTED IN PRACTICE TO THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF ONE

COUNTY.

THE CHANGE TO STATEWIDE PRACTICE WAS BITTERLY

DEBATED OVER A TWENTY-FIVE YEAR PERIOD UNTIL FINALLY THE

CHANGES WERE MADE BY COURT RULE.

RELATED OR SIMILAR

CHANGES ON THE NATIONAL SCENE ARE HERE -- OR AT LEAST

ABOUT TO BE HERE,

AS A MATTER OF PRACTICAL FACT -

WE LONG HAVE HAD A DE FACTO NATIONAL MIGRATORY PRACTICE -

PARTICULARLY SO IN THE TRIAL BAR,

LARGE LAW FIRMS DO

-10-

REGULARLY SEND LAWYERS ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES TO HANDLE

DISCOVERY TO TRY ANTITRUST CASES TO CONSUMMATE A

FINANCING OR SECURITIES ISSUE TO NEGOTIATE A LABOR

CONTRACT TO ARRANGE FOR THE PURCHASE OF LAND OR COMPANIES -

TRULY TO HANDLE PRACTICALLY ANYTHING EMBRACED IN THE TOTAL

SPECTRUM OF LAW PRACTICE.

ALTHOUGH MANY CONTINUE TO PAY

LIP SERVICE TO THE RULE THAT A LAWYER IS A LAWYER ONLY IN

HIS OR HER NATIVE STATE AND IS A LAYMAN AS SOON AS HE OR

SHE CROSSES THE BORDERS OF THAT STATE THAT RULE DEFINITELY

IS FADING AWAY -- AS IT MUST.

INDEED I SUGGEST THAT PRESENT ADMISSION RULES

ARE AN INTOLERABLE RESTRICTION ON THE INTERSTATE PRACTICE OF

LAW AND ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEEDED LARGE NATIONAL LAW FIRMS.

-11-

HISTORICALLY THIS STURDY NATION HAS RESISTED

MOST ATTEMPTS BY THE SEVERAL STATES TO THWART THE CONCEPT

THAT OUR ECONOMIC UNIT IS THE NATION AND ITS COROLLARY

THAT THE STATES ARE NOT SEPARABLE ECONOMIC UNITS.

PERHAPS

ONE MAJOR EXCEPTION HAS BEEN STATE BARRIERS TO THE INTERSTATE

PRACTICE OF THE PROFESSIONS AND PARTICULARLY THE PRACTICE

OF LAW STATE BARRIERS ERECTED AGAINST NON-RESIDENT LAWYERS

SEEKING ADMISSION TO PRACTICE IN A STATE WITHOUT ANY DETERMINATION

BY THAT STATE OF WHETHER THEY ARE BETTER OR WORSE THAN THOSE

INTRA-STATE LAWYERS ALREADY THERE.

I SUGGEST THAT MOST WHO ADVANCE STATE BARRIERS

TO OUT-OF-STATE LAWYER ADMISSION HAVE DONE SO PRIMARILY FOR

ONE REASON:

TO DISCOURAGE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE THE

ENTRANCE OF OUT-OF-STATE ATTORNEYS IN ORDER THAT THE IN-

-12-

STATE LAWYERS DO NOT HAVE ADDITIONAL COMPETITION.

NOT THE CONSUMING PUBLIC WHICH SEEKS THOSE STATE BARRIERS,

THEY COULD CARE LESS.

I AM QUITE CONVINCED MYSELF THAT

THOSE EXCLUSIONARY RULES WERE BOTH INITIATED AND ARE MAIN-

TAINED BY LAWYERS BY THE ORGANIZED BAR A GROUP INTERESTED

IN PRESERVATION WITHOUT CHANGE OF THEIR ECONOMIC MONOPOLY,

OF COURSE THE OBVIOUS SOLUTION FOR AN ATTORNEY

WISHING TO DO BUSINESS IN ANOTHER STATE IS TO BECOME A

MEMBER OF THAT STATE'S BAR.

BUT EVEN FOR A LAWYER WHO

WANTS THEREAFTER TO CONCENTRATE HIS OR HER PRACTICE IN THAT

STATE LONG AND EXPENSIVE PROCEDURES ARE INVOLVED WHICH IN

MANY IF NOT MOST INSTANCES MAKE THAT ADMISSION IMPRACTICAL. FOR

THE LAWYER WHOSE BASIC PRACTICE WILL REMAIN OUTSIDE THAT STATE -

-13-

IT IS

OR WHO BECAUSE OF CLIENT DEMAND WANTS TO PRACTICE IN MULTIPLE

STATES ADMISSION BECOMES ALMOST A PRACTICAL IMPOSSIBILITY.

STATE BARRIERS TO ADMISSION REALLY DESIGNED TO REDUCE

COMPETITION CANNOT LONGER BE PERMITTED UNDER THE GUISE THAT

THE ORGANIZED BAR IS ONLY TRYING TO IMPROVE STANDARDS IN

THE LEGAL PROFESSION.

DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES DICTATE

THAT STATE BARRIERS SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO STAND ONLY IF

ESSENTIAL TO THE REGULATION OF A PROPER STATE INTEREST -

SUCH AS THAT INDIVIDUAL'S ABILITY TO RENDER WITHIN THAT STATE

ADEQUATE AND ETHICAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

IN EVERY AREA OF THE-LAW PRACTICE THERE IS AN

EVER INCREASING NEED FOR THE BROADENING NOT THE NARROWING -

OF THE RIGHT OF INTERSTATE PRACTICE,

LARGE NATIONAL LAW

-14-

FIRMS ALMOST INEVITABLY WILL SOON BE COMMONPLACE.

FACT THEY ALREADY ARE IN OUR LARGER CITIES.

A LEADER IN THE MULTI-OFFICE PRACTICE OF LAW.

FLORIDA IS

IT IS TRUE

THAT COURTS -AND ETHICS COMMITTEES CONFRONTED IN RECENT

YEARS WITH HARD DETERMINATIONS IN ACCOMMODATING MODERN

INTERSTATE PRACTICE WITH TRADITIONAL ETHICAL POSITIONS

FORMULATED FOR THE OLD IMMOBILE COUNTY-SEAT PRACTITIONER -

HAVE GENERALLY WORKED THEM OUT DELICATELY YET PROGRESSIVELY.

BUT AN EXPLOSIVE UNRESOLVABLE ADVERSARY ISSUE IN WHICH A

STATE TRIES UNREASONABLY TO RESTRICT THE INTERSTATE PRACTICE

OF LAW MUST SOON ARISE -- IT WON'T ALWAYS GO AWAY,

WHEN

IT DOES COME IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE LONG RANGE ECONOMIC

VIABILITY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION DEMANDS THAT ONLY A

-15-

DEMONSTRABLE STATE-INTEREST CLEARLY OUTWEIGHING THE

BENEFITS OF A FREE FLOW OF INTERSTATE LEGAL SERVICES BE

ACCEPTABLE CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS FOR A STATE RULE CHILLING

OR INHIBITING IN ANY WAY THE INTERSTATE PRACTICE OF LAW -

BY EITHER AN INDIVIDUAL NON-RESIDENT LAWYER OR BY A LAW FIRM

FROM OUT-OF-STATE,

I ALSO SUGGEST THAT IT IS IN THE INTEREST

OF THE NATION AND THE CONSUMERS OF LEGAL SERVICES OF THAT

NATION THAT THOSE LAWYERS INTERESTED IN INTERSTATE PRACTICE

NOW EMPLOY IN THE LEGISLATURES THE COURTS AND ELSEWHERE

ALL AVAILABLE MEANS NECESSARY TO REDUCE THOSE STATE BARRIERS.

LAW REFORM COMES IN MANY HATS AND MANY COLORS BUT LAW

REFORM THROUGH CONSTITUTIONAL OR STATUTORY CHANGE IS THE

AMERICAN WAY WHEN BY ABUSES ONE STATE REPEATEDLY CAUSES HARM

TO CITIZENS IN OTHER STATES,

THOUGH THE LAWYERS IN ONE

-16-

STATE MIGHT TEMPORARILY BENEFIT FROM STANDING ALONE AND

SHUTTING OUT ALL OTHERS THE LEGAL PROFESSION IN THE LONG

RUN MUST FIND ITS ECONOMIC PROSPERITY IN NATIONAL UNION AND

NOT IN STATE DIVISION AND SELF INTEREST DICTATES THAT LAW

REFORM ON INTERSTATE BAR ADMISSIONS ORIGINATE WITHIN OUR OWN

RANKS.

AS THE WORLD BECOMES SMALLER AND INTERSTATE LEGAL

ACTIVITY INCREASES EACH STATE MUST DESIGN WAYS TO ALLOW QUALI-

FIED AND EXPERIENCED LAWYERS OF APPROVED CHARACTER AND UNDER

PROPER REGULATION TO PRACTICE LAW EVERYWHERE AND ANYWHERE

WITHIN OUR ECONOMICALLY INDIVISABLE NATION.

PERHAPS

CREATION OF A NATIONWIDE LEGAL PROFESSION BY FEDERAL LAW

IS AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION.

THE SUPREME COURT TOO COULD

DO THE JOB ON RECALCITRANT STATES UNDER OUR TRADITIONALLY

-17-

EVOLVING CONSTITUTIONAL CONCEPT BY DECLARING THAT UNDER

EXISTING ECONOMIC CONDITIONS INTERSTATE PRACTICE IS CON-

STITUTIONALLY MANDATED I PERSONALLY HOPE FOR THAT DECISION

SOON BUTTRESSED EITHER BY BALANCING STATE AND FEDERAL

GOVERNMENTAL INTEREST UNDER DUE PROCESS OR EQUAL PROTECTION -

OR UNDER THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL RIGHT TO PETITION RIGHT OF

FREE ASSOCIATION AND RIGHT OF POLITICAL EXPRESSION CLAUSES -

OR UNDER THE GUARANTEE THAT PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES OF

OUR CITIZENS WILL NOT BE INFRINGED OR UNDER THE SUPREMACY

CLAUSE TO PROTECT FEDERALLY CREATED RIGHTS OR BY ANY OTHER

CONSTITUTIONAL DOCTRINE WHICH PRESERVES THE NATION

AS A WHOLE AS THE PROPER ECONOMIC UNIT FOR THE PRACTICE

OF LAW.

WHEN ONE STATE FOR THE ECONOMIC

-18-

PROTECTION OF ITS IN-STATE LAWYERS CAN REFUSE TO GIVE FULL

FAITH AND CREDIT TO THE ORDER OF A COURT OF LAST RESORT OF

A SISTER STATE FINDING A PERSON QUALIFIED TO PRACTICE LAW -

THE ABILITY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION TO SERVE ITS NATIONAL

CLIENTS ADEQUATELY JUST HAS TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY AND GRAVELY

IMPAIRED AND THAT STATE BY ITS ACTS JUST HAS TO HAVE

CHILLED THE FREE FLOW OF INTERSTATE COMMERCE.

I AM CONVINCED THAT ALL LEGITIMATE INTEREST OF

A STATE IN INTERSTATE BAR ADMISSIONS CAN BE PROTECTED

AND STILL NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE RIGHT OF ITS CITIZENS

AND THE CITIZENS OF OTHER STATES TO UTILIZE THE SERVICES

WITHIN THAT STATE OF A COMPETITIVE BUT QUALIFIED LAWYER

FROM ELSEWHERE.

IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME TO ARGUE

-19-

THAT EACH STATE MUST HAVE DIFFERENT RULES ON BAR ADMISSIONS

SO THAT STATE CAN MAINTAIN MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR ITS LEGAL

PROFESSION.

I SUBMIT THAT IT IS NOW TIMELY FOR THE

SEVERAL STATES TO ADOPT CONSISTENT APPROACHES UNIFORM

LAWS AS THEY HAVE DONE IN SO MANY OTHER AREAS WHICH WILL

ALLOW NON-RESIDENT QUALIFIED LAWYERS OF APPROVED CHARACTER

AND UNDER PROPER REGULATION TO PRACTICE INTER-STATE LAW,

BUT OF COURSE THAT IS A MOST CONTROVERSIAL POSITION -

AND CERTAINLY I DO NOT SPEAK FOR THE ORGANIZED BAR ON IT -

NOR DO I SPEAK FOR ANYONE EXCEPT MYSELF,

ACKNOWLEDGING

THAT AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE LAWYERS OF FLORIDA -

AND ELSEWHERE DO NOT AGREE WITH ME I STILL STRONGLY

REITERATE MY BELIEF THAT THE SELF-SERVING ACTIVITIES

-20-

OF LAWYERS IN CHILLING INTERSTATE BAR ADMISSIONS IS OBVIOUSLY

IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH BOTH THEIR EXISTING AND LONG-RANGE

ECONOMIC INTERESTS.

AS AN ASIDE I ALSO SHOULD OBSERVE

THAT LAY MEMBERSHIP ON STATE BAR ADMISSIONS BOARDS JUST

MAKES SENSE TO ME.

AS LONG AS THE ADMITTORS ARE

INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM THOSE THEY ADMIT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE

TO TELL WHEN THE PUBLIC INTEREST STOPS AND SELF-INTEREST

BEGINS,

SINCE I BELIEVE THAT IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE

PUBLIC INTEREST FOR LAWYERS TO RETAIN AT LEAST SOME MEASURE

OF SELF-REGULATORY ABILITY I HOPE THAT THE ORGANIZED BAR

ITSELF SOON HILL INSIST THAT BOTH LAY PERSONS AND LAWYERS

PROMPTLY BE PLACED ON ALL STATE BAR ADMISSIONS BOARDS.

LET ME CONCLUDE BY SAYING THAT THE LITIGATION

-21-

EXPLOSION THROUGHOUT OUR NATION IS REAL IT IS A CURRENT

AND BURGEONING PHENOMENON IT IS WITH US TO STAY,

WHETHER

WE CHOOSE TO ADMIT IT OR NOT THE DEMAND FOR TRIAL LAWYERS

CONTINUES TO EXCEED THE SUPPLY

- AND I PERSONALLY THINK THAT

SUCH DEMAND IS ACCELERATING AND THAT IT WILL NEVER

MATERIALLY LESSEN.

WHY? BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE WRONGS

THAN REMEDIES AND TRIAL LAWYERS ARE SOCIETY'S PROBLEM-

SOLVERS.

UNDOUBTEDLY THERE WILL CONTINUE TO BE PROBLEMS

IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE TRIAL LAWYER POPULATION -- IN

THE ECONOMIC AVAILABILITY OF AN EXPERT TRIAL LAWYER TO MANY

CITIZENS OF LIMITED OR MODERATE MEANS AND IN THE DELIVERY

OF TRIAL SERVICES BY LAWYERS AND THE VARYING AND DISPARATE

STRUCTURES WHICH THE ORGANIZED BAR NOW PROVIDES FOR THAT

-22-

DELIVERY EVEN SO MY EXPERIENCES INDICATE THAT THE

PEOPLE'S DEMANDS TO RESOLVE DISPUTES WITH HIS OR HER

NEIGHBOR AND GOVERNMENT BY ADVERSARY LITIGATION ARE SUCH

THAT THERE APPEARS TO ME TO BE LITTLE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE

SUPPLY OF TRIAL LAWYERS WILL EVER IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE

EXCEED THE MINIMUM DEMAND FOR THEIR SERVICES,

ESPECIALLY

SO IT SEEMS TO ME IS THIS TRUE BECAUSE THE EXPERIENCED

AND PROFICIENT TRIAL LAWYER FACES LITTLE IF ANY -

COMPETITION AS AN ADVOCATE FOR OTHERS FROM THOSE IN OTHER

CALLINGS OR PROFESSIONS WHO SELL PERSONAL SERVICES TO THE

GENERAL PUBLIC.

PERHAPS IT IS FIT AND PROPER AND TIMELY ALTHOUGH

ADMITTEDLY BIASED FOR ME AT THIS AFFAIR TO REITERATE JUST

-23-

HOW GRATIFYING AND PLEASING IT HAS BEEN TO ME TO BE A

TRIAL LAWYER.

OVER THE YEARS I HAVE FOUND THAT MY

FELLOW TRIAL LAWYERS ARE USUALLY FINE PEOPLE AND AS A

RULE EXCEPTIONALLY GOOD CITIZENS.

TRIAL LAWYERS -

THUS ENJOY THROUGHOUT THEIR PROFESSIONAL LIFE ASSOCIATING

WITH PROFESSIONAL PEERS BOTH KNOWLEDGEABLE AND LIKEABLE,

I HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT HE OR SHE WHO SERVES AS A PROFESSIONAL

ADVOCATE HAS AN ELITE CALLING AS THE SENIOR LAWYER IN

A LARGE GENERAL PRACTICE LAW FIRM EMBRACING ALL KNOWN LEGAL

SPECIALITIES I CONFIDENTLY ASSERT THAT TRIAL LAWYERS ARE THE

VERY BEST LAWYERS -- THE VERY BEST,

(THANK YOU.)

-24-

SPEECHES OF CHESTERFIELD SMITH

SPEECH NUMBER 186

VOLUME XIII

REMARKS BY:

BEFORE:

PLACE:

CHESTERFIELD SMITH
LAWYER
LAKELAND, FLORIDA

NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON
LEGAL SERVICES AND THE PUBLIC

GRAND BALLROOM, MEZZANINE LEVEL
FAIRMONT HOTEL
NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA

DATE:

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1977
12:30 P.M. 2:30 P.M.

THIRTY MINUTES

TIME:

SINCE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CONSORTIUM ON LEGAL

SERVICES AND THE PUBLIC BY THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION IN

1973 THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ORGANIZED BAR AS A WHOLE AND

AND THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION IN PARTICULAR IN PROMOTING

GREATER AVAILABILITY AND BETTER DELIVERY OF LEGAL SERVICES

HAVE BEEN PERSONALLY GRATIFYING TO ME IN BOTH DIVERSITY

AND INTENSITY.

I COULD EASILY TODAY ENUMERATE THOSE ACTIVITIES -

TELLING YOU WHAT I THINK TO BE GOOD OR BAD.

BUT INSTEAD -

I CHOSE ANOTHER ROUTE PERHAPS BECAUSE I THINK IT BETTER

THAN MAKING A LAUNDRY LIST OF SUCCESSFUL OR UNSUCCESSFUL

EFFORTS AND PERHAPS BECAUSE I COVET THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE

TO THIS PARTICULARLY KNOWLEDGEABLE GROUP A PET IDEA OF MINE.

IT HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY ESTIMATED THAT AT LEAST

70% OF MIDDLE INCOME AMERICANS ARE NOT NOW ADEQUATELY SERVED

BY LAWYERS.

IT HAS ALSO BEEN ESTIMATED THAT ONLY ABOUT

ONE OUT OF SEVEN POOR OR INDIGENT AMERICANS RECEIVES LEGAL

SERVICES.

BOTH ESTIMATES APPEAR TO ME TO BE TOO LOW -

CERTAINLY THEY ARE CONSERVATIVE.

PERHAPS THE RICH ARE WELL REPRESENTED BY LAWYERS -

ALTHOUGH EVEN THERE I AM NOT CERTAIN.

WHILE MANY SUGGEST

THAT THE ENTIRE LEGAL SYSTEM HAS BEEN STRUCTURED ONLY TO

PROVIDE LEGAL CARE FOR THE WEALTHY.

I PERSONALLY DOUBT

THAT EVEN THE WEALTHIEST OF INDIVIDUALS FEEL THAT THE MEANS -

THE MECHANISMS FOR THE DELIVERY OF LEGAL SERVICES OF GOOD

QUALITY AT REASONABLE PRICES ARE READILY ACCESSIBLE TO THEM,

-2-

BUT ASSUMING THAT THE RICH ARE WELL SERVED BY

LAWYERS BY COMMON ESTIMATE THERE STILL ARE MORE THAN

150000J000 AMERICANS NEITHER RICH ENOUGH TO AFFORD PRIVATE

ATTORNEYS NOR POOR ENOUGH TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR GOVERNMENT

LEGAL ASSISTANCE,

THERE ARE MILLIONS MORE ENTITLED TO

LEGAL AID WHO DO NOT GET IT BECAUSE THERE IS NO GOVERNMENT

LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM READILY AVAILABLE TO THEM.

CONSUMERS ARE UNDERSTANDABLY PRESSING FOR

MORE RAPID DEVELOPMENTS IN THE RESTRUCTURING OF THE LEGAL

PROFESSION AND THE MEANS AND METHODS WHEREBY LAWYERS'

SERVICES ARE DELIVERED.

THEY SEEK GREATER INVOLVEMENT

OF LAY REPRESENTATIVES IN MONITORING LAW PRACTICE.

MEAN-

WHILE THE ORGANIZED BAR HAS HELD BACK BECAUSE OF TRADITIONAL

-3-

DOCTRINES ABOUT REPRESENTATION OF CLIENTS ONE AT A TIME -

ONLY BY LAWYERS AND WITHOUT DISSEMINATION OF PUBLIC

INFORMATION ABOUT WHEN A LAWYER MIGHT BE HELPFUL AND WHICH

ONE TO CHOOSE FOR THAT HELP.

BUT THERE IS NOW INCREASING

RECOGNITION AT A GEOMETRICALLY ACCELERATING RATE BY

COMMUNITY LEADERS AND BY THE ORGANIZED BAR OF THE UNMET NEED

FOR LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE VAST NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HERETO-

FORE HAVE NOT HAD READY ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES,

LEGAL

INSTITUTIONS MUST CHANGE AND GOVERNMENT MUST PROVIDE A

HELPING HAND BY SUBSTANTIALLY ENHANCING IN ALL FEASIBLE WAYS

ACCESSIBILITY TO THE COURTS OR OTHER DISPUTE RESOLVING

MECHANISMS BY BOTH THE POOR AND OTHERS NOW GENERALLY FOR

ECONOMIC REASONS EITHER UN-REPRESENTED OR UNDER-REPRESENTED

THERE.

I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF

LAWYERS ON BOARDS CONTROLLED BY LAWYERS WHICH REGULATE

THE DELIVERY OF LEGAL SERVICES IN FACT ARE IN DIRECT

CONFLICT WITH THEIR OWN ECONOMIC INTERESTS AND THUS AS

AN INSTITUTIONAL DEVICE WHOLLY WRONG.

THE QUESTIONS AND

DIFFERENCES SO OFTEN RAISED BY NON-LAWYERS REGARDING THE

POSITION OF THE ORGANIZED BAR ON LAW REFORM AND PROFESSIONAL

RESTRUCTURING WILL CONTINUE TO BE THE ORDER OF THE DAY UNTIL

SUCH TIMES AS INDEPENDENT NON-LAWYER GOVERNORS AND RULE-MAKERS

ARE PREVELANT THROUGHOUT THE SEVERAL STATES.

WHILE IT IS MY

OBSERVATION THAT IN GENERAL LAWYERS ON LAWYER REGULATORY BOARDS

PLACE THE PUBLIC INTEREST AHEAD OF THEIR OWN LAY MEMBERSHIP ON

-5-

SUCH BOARDS STILL MAKES SENSE TO ME.

REGULATORS ARE INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM THOSE THEY REGULATE -

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL WHEN THE PUBLIC INTEREST STOPS AND

SELF-INTEREST BEGINS.

INDEED THE APPEARANCE OF CONFLICT

MAY SOMETIMES BE WORSE THAN ITS REALITY.

SINCE I BELIEVE

STILL THAT IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE PUBLIC INTEREST FOR

LAWYERS TO RETAIN SOME MEASURE OF SELF-REGULATORY ABILITY I

HOPE THAT THE ORGANIZED BAR ITSELF PROMPTLY WILL PLACE LAY PERSONS

WITH LAWYERS ON ALL LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES SPECIALIZATION

BOARDS ADMISSION BOARDS LEGAL AID AND LEGAL SERVICES BOARDS -

DISCIPLINARY BODIES LEGAL ASSISTANCE TO MILITARY PERSONNEL AGENCIES -

FEE ARBITRATION SERVICES OR OTHER LAWYER GOVERNING ENTITIES.

BUT THAT IS NOT MY THRUST TODAY.

MY TARGET

-6-

AS LONG AS THE

TODAY IS NOT THE ORGANIZED LEGAL PROFESSION AS A COLLECTIVE

ENTITY IT IS THAT INDIVIDUAL LAWYER WHO DOES NOT NOW DO

ANYTHING IN A SUBSTANTIAL WAY TO DISCHARGE HIS OR HER EXISTING

PROFESSIONAL OBLIGATION THAT EACH LAWYER SHOULD WORK TO

INSURE THAT LEGAL SERVICES ARE FULLY AVAILABLE TO ALL AMERICANS.

THE CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY DOES OF COURSE

IMPOSE THAT PROFESSIONAL DUTY IT IS QUITE CLEARLY SET

FORTH IN THE EXISTING ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS.

BUT WHEN

THE DISCIPLINARY RULES ARE CHECKED NO MENTION OF SUCH DUTY

IS MADE NO SANCTION IS SUGGESTED FOR THOSE WHO WHOLLY FAIL

TO DISCHARGE THAT RESPONSIBILITY,

EVEN WORSE IT IS MY

PERSONAL OPINION DISCLAIMERS TO THE CONTRARY NOTHUITHSTADING -

THAT THE LARGE MASS OF LAWYERS NOW DO LITTLE IF ANYTHING

THEMSELVES TO MEET THAT OBLIGATION AND

-7-

PARTICULARLY I THINK THAT TO BE SO FOR LAWYERS IN LARGE

CITIES IN LARGE LAW FIRMS OR SPECIALITY PRACTICE. AS

AN ASIDE I ALSO HAPPEN TO BELIEVE THAT IN MOST INSTANCES

LAWYERS IN RURAL AREAS WHO PRACTICE INDIVIDUALLY OR IN

SMALL FIRMS AS GENERAL PRACTITIONERS DO MUCH BETTER -

ALTHOUGH USUALLY IN AN UNORGANIZED SPORADIC AND

UNSYSTEMIZED WAY.

BUT THE PROSPECTS FOR PROGRESS ARE PROMISING,

OUR CHALLENGE AND PRESENT OPPORTUNITY IS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE

OF CURRENT PROSPECTS TO MAXIMIZE THE PARTICIPATION BY EACH

AND EVERY LAWYER SEVERALLY IN THE DISCHARGE OF THIS

RESPONSIBILITY.

THE DREAM OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION

COLLECTIVELY MUST BE TO PROVIDE EQUAL ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES

-8-

WHILE AVOIDING THE NIGHTMARE OF UNCONTROLLED COSTS AND

UNEVEN QUALITY OF SERVICE.

THAT CAN BE DONE ONLY IF

EACH AND EVERY LAWYER WILL DO HIS OR HER PART.

WHAT CAN THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION DO?

LEGAL SERVICES MOVEMENT ALREADY IS A REALITY.

THE

WHILE

THOUSANDS DO LITTLE OR NOTHING THERE ARE OTHER THOUSANDS

WHO PARTICIPATE IN IT ON AN ALMOST DAILY BASIS,

BUT

WITH CAREFUL NURTURING I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE

THAT THE MOVEMENT DEVELOPS FASTER YET IN AN ORDERLY AND

EFFICIENT WAY.

ADMITTEDLY BEING OVERLY SIMPLISTIC I SUBMIT

THAT THE MAJOR EFFORT OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION MUST

SIMPLY BEGIN FULLY TO IMPLEMENT THOSE GOLDEN PRINCIPLES TO

-9-

WHICH IT HAS ALREADY SUBSCRIBED.

OF THE LAWYER TO ASSIST IN MAKING LEGAL SERVICES FULLY

AVAILABLE SOMETHING ABOUT THE LEGAL PROFESSION AS A

TOTALITY AND THAT OF LAWYERS JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY -

SADLY IS AMISS.

THOSE LAWYERS WHO NOW DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

IN ANY SUBSTANTIAL WAY TO INSURE THE AVAILABILITY OF QUALITY

LEGAL SERVICES AT REASONABLE COST TO ALL AMERICANS MUST BE

MOTIVATED TO PARTICIPATE AS FULLY AS THOSE THOUSANDS WHO

ALREADY DO THEIR PART AND OFTEN EVEN MORE.

WHAT IS THE ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY AND PROFESSIONAL

OBLIGATION OF EACH LAWYER FOR THE DELIVERY OF LEGAL SERVICES

TO ALL?

IS IT TIME FOR EVOLUTIONARY PROGRESS BY IMPOSING

SANCTIONS ON THOSE WHO UNREASONABLY IGNORE THEIR ETHICAL DUTY?

SHOULD THOSE LAWYERS WHO AFTER NOTICE AND HEARING REFUSE TO

-10-

IF IT TRULY IS THE DUTY

DO THE PART SPECIFIED BY THEIR PEER GROUP BE DISBARRED?

I THINK YES!

THERE WILL BE OF COURSE TREMENDOUS

OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSAL I NOW ADVANCE.

BUT IT IS

TIMELY -- THE MECHANISM FOR EFFECTING SUCH CHANGE IS ALREADY

AVAILABLE AND WE SHOULD GO NOW.

ON AUGUST 22, 1977 -

THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AT THE INSTIGATION OF

PRESIDENT BILL SPANN CREATED A SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON

EVALUATION OF PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS CHAIRED BY BOB KUTAK -

A WONDERFUL LAWYER FROM NEBRASKA.

THE COMMITTEE AT ITS

FIRST MEETING REACHED A CONSENSUS THAT THERE EXISTS WITHIN

THE BAR A SOMEWHAT VAGUE THOUGH WIDESPREAD APPREHENSION -

OVER THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CURRENT CODE AND ITS UTILITY -

AND SIMULTANEOUSLY THAT CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN AMONG

-11-

OTHER THINGS TO THE IMPACT OF CONSUMERISM ON THE DELIVERY

OF LEGAL SERVICES.

THE COMMITTEE AT ITS FIRST MEETING

FAILED TO RESOLVE WHETHER A STATEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL

RESPONSIBILITY SHOULD BE MORE MANDATORY THAN PRESENTLY IS

THE CASE OR WHETHER A "RESTATEMENT OF ETHICS" FORMAT MIGHT

BE PREFERABLE LEAVING THE FORM OF ITS FINAL REPORT TO

EVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENTS.

I AM MOST HOPEFUL THAT THE COMMITTEE WILL DO A

SPLENDID AND COMPREHENSIVE JOB.

BELIEVING AS I DO THAT

ITS CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS ARE A FIRST-RATE GROUP INDEED -

ONE OF THE FINEST THAT COULD BE ASSEMBLED I ANTICIPATE

SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN THE PRESENT CODE AND I AM HOPEFUL

THAT ONE OF THEM WILL BE ALONG THE LINES I HERE ADVOCATE

-12-

AS I UNDERSTAND THE COMMITTEE IS HOLDING ITS SECOND MEETING

TODAY IN NEW YORK CITY.

ADMITTEDLY IT IS HARD TO MAKE A LIVING BY WORKING

FREE EVEN IF ONLY FOR A PART OF THE TIME -

AND EVEN IF

SUCH WORK IS LABELED "PRO BONO" OR "PUBLIC SERVICE" OR JUST

"PROFESSIONAL DUTY".

THAT UNDERSTANDABLY IS THE ECONOMIC

REASON THAT LAWYERS OFTEN SIDESTEP WITH RHETORIC THEIR

INDIVIDUAL OBLIGATION TO SEE THAT ALL AMERICANS HAVE AVAILABLE

TO THEM QUALITY LEGAL SERVICES.

BUT BECAUSE AMERICA AND

THE WORLD IS PASSING THROUGH AN EPOCH OF EXTRAORDINARILY

RAPID CHANGE IN ALMOST EVERY ASPECT OF LIFE I SUBMIT THAT

THE TIME HAS NOW COME FOR A RECOGNITION BY THE ORGANIZED BAR

THAT EVERY LAWYER WHO UNREASONABLY IGNORES THE PROFESSIONAL

OBLIGATION FOR AT LEAST SOME FREE PUBLIC SERVICE WARRANTS

-13-

I EMPHASIZE AS I SHALL AGAIN -

"UNREASONABLY IGNORES",

SUCH ETHICAL PROGRESSION BY THE ORGANIZED BAR IS

OBTAINABLE.

IN MY OWN TIME I HAVE SEEN DISCIPLINARY

MEASURES FOR PARTICULAR ETHICAL VIOLATIONS EVOLVE FROM

CLUCKING DISAPPROVAL TO DISBARMENT,

INITIALLY IN MY

EXPERIENCES AS A BAR OFFICIAL I JOINED WITH OTHERS IN

REFUSING TO DISCIPLINE LAWYERS FOR NEGLIGENCE.

THE

PROFESSIONAL INCOMPETENCE OF A MEMBER OF THE BAR WAS NOT

EVEN DISCUSSED THEN AS GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS.

INDEED IT WAS RATIONALIZED THAT TO DO SO WOULD BE CONTRARY

TO THE SUPREME COURT ORDER CERTIFYING THAT LAWYER AS ONE

COMPETENT TO SELL LEGAL SERVICES TO THE CONSUMING PUBLIC,

-14-

PROFESSIONAL SANCTIONS.

ALL OF THAT HAS CHANGED FOR ME AND FOR THE ORGANIZED BAR -

OR AT LEAST IT IS RAPIDLY CHANGING.

THE ETHICAL CODES OF LAWYERS BEING ASPIRATIONAL

STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE AT THE TOP AND BEING

DISCIPLINARY RULES GOVERNING LAWYER CONDUCT AT THE BOTTOM -

HAVE OF COURSE DEVELOPED TRADITIONALLY TO REQUIRE EVER MORE

OF THOSE PERSONS WHO WEAR THE LEGAL MANTLE.

IN MOST

JURISDICTIONS REPEATED OR GROSS NEGLIGENCE BY A LAWYER

NOW WARRANTS THE SEVEREST CENSURE.

NO LONGER DO WE AS

A COLLECTIVE PROFESSION ALLOW MARGINAL LAWYERS REPEATEDLY

TO ACCEPT LEGAL MATTERS WHICH THEY CANNOT COMPETENTLY AND

PROFICIENTLY HANDLE,

IT IS CLEAR THAT MOST LAWYERS AT LEAST ORALLY -

ACKNOWLEDGE SOME
-15-

RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC SERVICE BOTH INDIVIDUALLY AND

COLLECTIVELY BUT THE EXTENT OF ACTIVITIES THAT

WILL DISCHARGE THAT OBLIGATION HAVE YET TO BE DEMARCATED

BY THE ORGANIZED BAR,

PERHAPS THAT LACK OF AFFIRMATIVE

GUIDANCE IS ONE REASON MANY OF OUR MORE ECONOMICALLY SUCCESSFUL

AND PUBLICLY HONORED LAWYERS HAVE DONE LITTLE OR NO FREE

PUBLIC SERVICE DONE LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DISCHARGE THEIR

INDIVIDUAL OBLIGATION TO SEE THAT LEGAL SERVICES ARE FULLY

AVAILABLE TO ALL.

CONCEIVABLY AT LEAST UP TO NOW IT HAS BEEN

ACCEPTABLE TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION AS A WHOLE FOR AN

INDIVIDUAL LAWYER TO RESTRICT HIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ONLY

TO PAYING CLIENTS,

BUT THE SUBSTANTIAL RECOGNITION WHICH

HAS BEEN AFFORDED IN YEARS PAST TO THOSE LAWYERS WHO HAVE

-16-

GROUND AWAY AT THEIR CLIENTS' DEMANDS DAY AFTER DAY AND

YEAR AFTER YEAR TENDING TO THE STORE NEVER LEAVING THE

OFFICE EXCEPT TO GO TO THE BANK MINDING WHAT HAS BEEN

TRADITIONALLY STYLED AS "THEIR OWN BUSINESS" IS UNDERGOING

SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE,

NO LONGER CAN THE LEGAL PROFESSION

COLLECTIVELY MERIT PUBLIC APPROBATION UNDER SUCH A RANDOM

AND HAPHAZARD STANDARD,

THE JOINT AND SEVERAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF LAWYERS

MUST BE AND I SUGGEST EASILY CAN BE TRANSLATED IN A

DEFINED PROFESSIONAL DUTY THAT EACH LAWYER TITHE HIS SHARE

OF FREE PUBLIC SERVICE INCLUDING A REASONABLE PORTION OF

THAT EFFORT TO INSURING THE AVAILABILITY OF A LAWYER TO ALL

WHO NEED ONE.

IF THAT ETHICAL GOAL IS ENUNCIATED THE

-17-

DECISIONAL PROCESS NOW UNIVERSALLY UTILIZED SO SUCCESSFULLY

BY THE ORGANIZED BAR IN ESTABLISHING ETHICAL BOUNDARIES WILL

IN TIME EVOLVE DEFINITIVE GUIDELINES FOR ITS APPLICATION.

THROUGH TRIAL AND ERROR THROUGH EXPERIMENTATION LAWYERS

ULTIMATELY CAN INCORPORATE INTO DECISIONS INTERPRETING THE

CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY THE WHO HOW WHAT -

AND WHEN OF THE SERVICE THAT SOCIETY SHOULD RECEIVE FROM

LAWYERS IN EXCHANGE FOR THE GRANT OF THE EXCLUSIVE PRIVILEGE

TO PRACTICE LAW,

CERTAINLY LAWYERS HAVE INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS

AND PRACTICE DEMANDS WHICH WILL PREVENT THEM FROM BEING

"EQUAL" IN THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO MAKING LEGAL SERVICES

AVAILABLE TO ALL NOW EITHER UNREPRESENTED OR UNDER-REPRESENTED,

-18-

LAWYERS OF NECESSITY MUST BE JUDGED ON THEIR SUBSCRIPTIONS

WITH A FULL RECOGNITION OF DIFFERING CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER

GENERAL ASPIRATIONAL GOALS OUTLINED BY THE ORGANIZED BAR. IT

MIGHT WELL INVOLVE SOME LAWYERS MANDITORILY WORKING TO IMPROVE

THE STRUCTURES FOR DELIVERY OF LEGAL SERVICES HELPING WITH

CIVIL RIGHTS LAW OR POVERTY LAW WORKING AS A DEFENDER OF

THOSE CHARGED WITH CRIME WHO ARE UNABLE TO EMPLOY COMPETENT

COUNSEL PROVIDING COUNSEL TO MILITARY PERSONNEL WORKING

IN A LEGAL AID OFFICE OR REPRESENTING DIFFUSED INTERESTS IN

A PUBLIC INTEREST LAW FIRM IN ADVERSARY PROCEEDINGS.

SINCE

MANY INTERESTS IN FIELDS SUCH AS THE ENVIRONMENT CONSUMER

PROTECTION CIVIL LIBERTIES PRIVACY AND THE POOR CONTINUE

TO BE EITHER NOT REPRESENTED OR UNDER-REPRESENTED BEFORE

LEGISLATURES EXECUTIVE AGENCIES AND COURTS THE

-19-

ISSUE OF MAKING QUALITY LEGAL SERVICES WIDELY AVAILABLE WILL

OF A CERTAINTY BE OF EVER INCREASING IMPORTANCE OVER THE

NEXT QUARTER CENTURY.

THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF A LAWYER'S EFFORTS TO MEET

HIS OR HER PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO ASSIST IN MAKING

LEGAL SERVICES AVAILABLE TO ALL SHOULD NEVER BE EXCLUSIONARY.

THE PARAMETERS MUST BE AS BROAD AND FLEXIBLE AS THE MINDS OF

THOSE WHO WILL DISCHARGE THAT RESPONSIBILITY.

A COUNTY-

SEAT GENERAL PRACTITIONER A LAW PROFESSOR A MILITARY

LAWYER A HOUSE COUNSEL A BAR EXECUTIVE A SPECIALTY

PRACTITIONER A GOVERNMENT LAWYER A JUDGE AND A LARGE-

FIRM CITY LAWYER OBVIOUSLY MUST EACH PERFORM THEIR RESPECTIVE

PROFESSIONAL OBLIGATIONS TO THE PUBLIC IN VARYING

-20-

INDEED A LAWYER'S CONTRI-

BUTION TO THE PUBLIC WEAL MUST NEVER BE JUDGED BY WHAT WAS

ACHIEVED OR BY THE MONETARY VALUE OF THE SERVICE CONTRIBUTED

OR OBLIGATED TO BE CONTRIBUTED.

THAT PRICELESS AND UNIQUE

MEASURE OF PROFESSIONAL DEVOTION CONTRIBUTED TIME SHOULD

BE THE ONLY CURRENCY FULLY ACCEPTABLE IN DISCHARGE OF A

LAWYER'S PROFESSIONAL OBLIGATIONS,

THE BEST WAY FOR THE ORGANIZED BAR TO MEASURE THE

INDIVIDUAL SERVICE REQUIRED OF A LAWYER WILL VARY FROM AREA

TO AREA AND PERHAPS FROM BRANCH OF THE LAW TO BRANCH OF THE

LAW.

IT MUST ALWAYS BE REASONABLE UNDER THE INDIVIDUALS

PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES SANCTIONS SHOULD BE IMPOSED ONLY

IF A RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY DETERMINES THAT THE LAWYER

-21-

AND WIDELY DIFFERING WAYS,

UNREASONABLY IGNORED PROFESSIONAL OBLIGATIONS.

BE MULTIPLE OTHER WAYS THAN THE FEW AREAS THAT I HAVE

SUGGESTED WHICH AS ALTERNATIVES OR SUPPLEMENTS ARE BETTER

SUITED TO BOTH SOCIETY AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION FOR THE

REASONABLE DISCHARGE OF PROFESSIONAL OBLIGATIONS.

ONLY A

BAR DISCIPLINARY GROUP SHOULD DETERMINE WHETHER VARIOUS

ACTIVITIES PERFORMED ON A RECURRING AND SUBSTANTIAL BASIS

ARE AMONG THOSE THINGS WHICH A PARTICULAR LAWYER FREELY

SHOULD HAVE DONE.

IN ALL SUCH DETERMINATIONS DIVERSITY

AND EXPERIMENTATION MUST BE FOSTERED AND SUPPORTED.

IS NO SINGLE APPROACH.

RATHER THROUGH VARIETY THROUGH

EXPERIMENTATION THROUGH EVOLUTION THE ORGANIZED BAR CAN

GAIN A PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE WAYS IN WHICH INDIVIDUAL

-22-

THERE

THERE WILL

LAWYERS MOST MEANINGFULLY MAY DISCHARGE THEIR PROFESSIONAL

DUTY,

THERE ARE OF COURSE INHERENT DIFFICULTIES IN AN

ADJUDICATION OF PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE INVOLVING SUCH

SUBJECTIVE CONSIDERATIONS AS WORK HABITS ORGANIZATION AND

SELF-DISCIPLINE INTELLIGENCE INTEGRITY PERSONAL

CHARACTER AND PROFESSIONAL KNOW-HOW.

HOWEVER PERPLEXITY

IN ENFORCEMENT HAS NEVER PREVENTED THE ORGANIZED BAR FROM

ADOPTING EVER STRICTER STANDARDS NOR SHOULD IT.

THE

PUBLIC TRADITIONALLY DEMANDS HIGHER AND HIGHER STANDARDS

FROM ALL PROFESSIONALS INCLUDING LAWYERS AND THE ORGANIZED

BAR HAS GENERALLY RESPONDED.

YET ENOUGH HAS NOT BEEN DONE,

IT CAN DO MORE BY IMPOSING DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS ON THOSE

-23-

LAWYERS WHO CLEARLY AND ADAMATLY IGNORE IN A CONTINUING

PATTERN THE PROFESSIONAL OBLIGATIONS OF ALL LAWYERS,

MY THESIS THUS IS A SIMPLE ONE:

THE PUBLIC WHO -

GRANTS A SMALL SEGMENT OF THE POPULACE THE EXCLUSIVE

PRIVILEGE OF MAKING A LIVING PRACTICING LAW HAS THE RIGHT

TO DEMAND THAT THOSE SO FAVORED ACCEPT A MEASURED AMOUNT -

PERHAPS A MINIMUM OF ONE-TENTH OF FREE SERVICE TO THOSE

WHO CANNOT OTHERWISE OBTAIN LEGAL SERVICES AS ONE OF THEIR

PRIME PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES AND THE LAWYER WHO

UNREASONABLY REFUSES TO GIVE THAT LIMITED AMOUNT OF HIS

PROFESSIONAL TIME WARRANTS BAR CENSURE.

OF COURSE IN ADDITION TO RESPONSIBILITIES TO

THE PUBLIC THE LAWYER ALSO OWES CORRELATIVE DUTIES TO

-24-

	Table of Contents
	Introduction of Charles Morgan,...
	Remarks of Chesterfield Smith before...
	"Introduction of Leon Jaworski...
	Address by C. Smith at the Pinellas...
	Remarks of C. Smith for the national...
	Address before the graduating class...
	Remarks of Chesterfield Smith for...
	Trial advocacy - A national...
	Public criticism of the judiciary...
	Trial advocacy - A national...
	Is there a need for a national...
	Is there a need for a national...

MILLISECOND	CLASS.METHOD	MESSAGE
0	sobekcm_page_globals.constructor
0	sobekcm_page_globals.constructor	Application State validated or built
0	sobekcm_database.verify_item_lookup_object
0	sobekcm_page_globals.constructor	Navigation Object created from URI query string
0	sobekcm_database.verify_item_lookup_object
0	sobekcm_page_globals.display_item	Retrieving item or group information
0	sobekcm_page_globals.get_entire_collection_hierarchy	Retrieving hierarchy information
0	sobekcm_assistant.get_entire_collection_hierarchy
0	cached_data_manager.retrieve_item_aggregation
0	cached_data_manager.retrieve_item_aggregation	Found item aggregation on local cache
0	item_aggregation_builder.get_item_aggregation	Found 'all' item aggregation in cache
0	system.web.ui.page.page_load (ufdc.page_load)
0	sobekcm_page_globals.constructor.on_page_load
0	html_echo_mainwriter.add_style_references	Adding style references to HTML
0	html_echo_mainwriter.add_text_to_page	Reading the text from the file and echoing back to the output stream
25	html_echo_mainwriter.add_text_to_page	Finished reading and writing the file