 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 
|
|
 |
||||||||||||||||
|
Bar News - November 7, 2003 Morning Mail Addressing New PUC Commissioner's Comments About Lawyers Editor's note: The following letter to the editor was published in the Concord Monitor on Oct. 15, 2003, and also was published in other NH newspapers. I wish Graham Morrison well in his newly confirmed position as a member of the NH Public Utilities Commission. Like any newcomer, he's likely to turn to his colleagues, Chairman Tom Getz and Commissioner Susan Geiger, both lawyers, as he learns the ropes. One of the things I am sure that he will soon gain is a greater regard for the legal profession, which he off-handedly disparaged in an interview with NH Public Radio before his confirmation. Addressing questions about his lack of experience, Morrison said he believed the Commission had too many lawyers on it: "The current commissioners are all lawyers, and lawyers are not generally considered to be fair adjudicators. And they do it for a dollar - they don't generally do it out of a higher meaning." His service on the PUC will soon lead him to see how lawyers - his fellow commissioners, the professional staff and lawyers appearing before him - use their problem-solving and analytical abilities to fairly resolve conflicts between parties with differing interests. Resolving conflicts is something lawyers do well. That's why, for example, more than 300 New Hampshire lawyers each donate an average of four days a year to a court-sponsored mediation program, keeping thousands of cases from coming to trial and thus sparing litigants the trauma and expense of litigation, and saving the taxpayers money, too. Mr. Morrison is likely to discover, as well, that most lawyers are motivated by more than money. Why, if not for a higher purpose, do lawyers agree to represent at no cost 800 to 900 low-income families in urgent civil matters each year through the Bar's Pro Bono Program? Or why are you sure to bump elbows with lawyers if you serve on nonprofit or government boards? The Bar Association has begun documenting the extensive community involvement of lawyers in their communities and we will be sending Mr. Morrison a copy of "Giving Back," our first attempt at presenting some of that information. Mr. Morrison, in the same interview, said he would be taking a "visionary" approach to his service on the PUC. I hope that means he brings an open mind to the job and will fairly consider the contributions of lawyers to government and public service. Russell Hilliard More than a Friend Jim Brink (see In Memoriam on page 6 of the Oct. 17 Bar News) was the most important man in my life. I met him 28 years ago when I was struggling to get sober. There wasn't a day in the summer and fall of 1975 that I didn't see or hear from him. I have always considered myself extremely fortunate to have had him as my sponsor. What I remember most about Jim was his precious presence - when you were with him, he made you feel that you were the only thing that mattered at that moment. Jim founded Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers in Massachusetts and, because he was my sponsor, he inspired me to start a similar organization here in New Hampshire. Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers is completely independent and completely voluntary; we try to institutionalize the support for people who are struggling with dependency. In essence, it is a group of people working together in recovery. I wanted to take this opportunity to remind members of the Bar that Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers meets on the first Tuesday of every month at the Manchester Country Club starting at 6:15 p.m. If you have any questions, call me at 436-8035. John R. Maher Holmes Decision Presents Dilemma Having recently returned from a leave of absence, I just this week had a chance to read the NH Supreme Court's decision in Holmes v. Holmes, www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2003/holme129.htm. From what I was able to discern, the Court accepted that the following activities are restricted to licensed NH attorneys:
Perhaps I have a myopic view of the law, as I spend most of my practice time litigating against the state. I wonder if Attorney General Heed is prepared for enforcing the decision against the sector that most practices law without a license, according to the working definition accepted by the Court. State employees - such as those from DCYF, the Office of Child Support Enforcement and CASA - routinely file pleadings in court that affect important citizen rights. Does the Holmes decision affect those people? I also wonder if the Holmes decision covers routine police applications for search warrants. They certainly are pleadings filed with courts that affect important rights of individuals, and are generally filed by police officers, not attorneys. Are the police now required to file these applications under the signature of an attorney or risk being accused of practicing law without a license? It would seem to me that the ethical dilemma of the Attorney General's Office is clear. One of its jobs is to defend state employees against complaints, legal and otherwise, and the other is to enforce the law. What will the decision be here? Paula J. Werme Article Promotes Gender Stereotypes I write to comment regarding the feature article on "The Ideal Attorney" in the October issue of New Hampshire Magazine. As I read the article, I was pleased to see that Cathy Green, Ruth Ansell and other women practitioners "made the list." However, there was a far greater number of men listed as "tough" and "tenacious," "locked in battle" and other counterproductive adjectives that continue to perpetuate largely false and unflattering qualities of lawyers; qualities that the public at large despises about our profession. Then I turned my attention to the "Legal Work & Whimsy" section. The "Legal Work" apparently is done by the Atticus Finches and Perry Masons out there (20 men), and the "Whimsy" is provided by the opposite sex (five women). My issue of the magazine arrived just a few days before the New Hampshire Women's Bar Association's Annual Fall Reception, which honored two more outstanding New Hampshire women lawyers: Judge Jean K. Burling and Emily Gray Rice. With the exception of New Hampshire Bar News, recognition of the accomplishments and professionalism of these two women was not considered a newsworthy event. (All major state newspapers received press releases about the event, as they do each year.) I'm not sure which is worse: the fact that the source of the survey results were New Hampshire attorneys or that a magazine purporting to represent New Hampshire would recklessly publish such obviously stereotypical garbage. To all those members of the Bar Association who have in recent years questioned why we need a Gender Equality Committee or a Women's Bar Association - THIS IS WHY. All working women: blue, pink, white collar and home workers, deserve to be treated as competent (until proven otherwise), regardless of color, class, familial status, sexual orientation, political connections, advertising purchases in magazines, nepotism and other "influence" factors. The widely held presumption that men are competent (whether or not true) based on their maleness is rebuttable. I intend to cancel my subscription to NH Magazine. To those members of the Bar who participated in this survey by suggesting the names of intelligent, accomplished women lawyers in the dopey, flighty women categories: Please examine your biases. You are way late in getting that women lawyers have been doing outstanding legal work ever since we entered the profession more than 100 years ago, and we will continue to excel, stereotypes notwithstanding. It would be better for you if you accept that. A lot more of our work together as lawyers will get done, and clients will benefit in the end. I hope the magazine will publish an apology to the women who were named (and defamed). Joni N. Esperian, President
|
||||||||
|
Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store New Hampshire Bar Association |
