 |
 |
| business law section |
|
|
|
|
Commercial Litigation Committee Reports
1. Budget Request for 2004-2005 $5,000 2. Use of Budgeted Funds in 2002-2003Please see report of Business Court Ad Hoc Committee, attached. 3. Next Scheduled Meeting of the Committee The Commercial Litigation Committee does not have a date for its next meeting. Please see report of Business Court Ad Hoc Committee, attached. 4. Council ApprovalN/A 5. Membership The Commercial Litigation Committee has one new member. 6. Accomplishments Toward Committee Objectives Please see report of Business Court Ad Hoc Committee, attached. 7. Meetings and ProgramsPlease see report of Business Court Ad Hoc Committee, attached. 8. PublicationsPlease see report of Business Court Ad Hoc Committee, attached. 9. Legislative/Judicial/Administrative DevelopmentsPlease see report of Business Court Ad Hoc Committee, attached. 10. MiscellaneousPlease see report of Business Court Ad Hoc Committee, attached. BUSINESS COURT AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT PREPARED FOR THE MARCH 3, 2005 COUNCIL MEETING The Business Court Ad Hoc Committee has one new member added to the Executive Committee. The Committee has been working with the Representative Brian Palmer of the Michigan House of Representatives, who intends to introduce a bill establishing a business court this spring. The bill is in the drafting stage. There will be a meeting in Lansing on March 16, 2005 among representatives of the Business Court Committee, Rep. Palmer and others associated with the House to plan strategy for introducing and passing the proposed statute. This will likely include meetings and opportunities for press coverage. The Committee anticipates promoting the proposed statute through the Section, the Bar and members of the judiciary. 1. Budget Request for 2004-2005. The Commercial Litigation Committee requests a budget of $5,000. 2. Use of Budgeted Funds in 2003-2004. The Committee used a portion of its budget for a breakfast meeting of the Committee and for the seminar presented on November 10, 2004 called “Arbitration and Mediation for Business: Is It Working?” 3. Next Scheduled Meeting of the Committee TBD. 4. Council Approval None. 5. Membership Two new members have joined the Committee. 6. Accomplishments Toward Committee Objectives The November 10, 2004 program on arbitration for business was well attended and we received many favorable comments from attendees. We also sent the invitation to everyone in the ADR and Litigation Sections of the Bar. The Committee is considering other ways to cooperate with other sections of the Bar. 7. Meetings and Programs See response to number 2. 8. Publications Materials from the arbitration program were placed on the Section’s web site. 9. Legislative/Judicial/Administrative Developments None. 10. Miscellaneous Report submitted by: Diane L. Akers 1.Next Scheduled Meeting of the Committee Next scheduled meeting of the Committee: November 10, 2004 2.Council Approval None. 3. Membership Four new members have joined the committee over the last few months. Of those four, two have become actively involved in planning the committee’s next program on arbitration and corporate clients, scheduled for November 10, 2004. 4. Accomplishments Toward Committee Objectives Since our last report, the committee has been confirming speakers and making arrangements for our upcoming seminar on arbitration. 5. Meetings and Programs The committee will present a program on the pros and cons of arbitration for corporate clients. The program will take place during the morning of November 10, 2004 and will consist of a panel discussion among approximately five in house counsel. Invitations will go out during the first week of October. The committee also intends to present a program next spring. 6. Publications None. 7. Legislative/Judicial/Administrative Developments None. 8. Miscellaneous None.
The first program would take place during the fall of 2004 and would focus on how technology is changing the relationship between in-house counsel and outside litigation counsel, including electronic communication and methods of permitting in-house counsel to have access to outside counsel's computer network and document management systems. This would be a panel discussion among 4 or 5 in-house counsel and someone knowledgeable in present and future uses of technology. Committee members are presently exploring this subject in more detail. The second program would take place in the spring of 2005 and would focus on arbitration and how well arbitration truly works. Many Committee members think that arbitration is overrated and does not really deliver the advantages contracting parties believe will result from arbitration rather than court litigation. Business Court Ad Hoc Committee Summary The Business Court Committee has continued to explore the possibility of having a business court in Kent County. The Committee is presently working with the administrator of the Kent County Circuit Court to try to determine how many business cases that court has. The Committee has also had additional preliminary discussions with a few judges on that bench. MEMORANDUM
TO: G. Ann Baker, Chairperson FROM: Diane L. Akers RE: Specialty certification meeting DATE: May 18, 2004
On March 23, 2004, I represented the Business Law Section Council at a plenary meeting of the section leadership of the state bar, which was convened to explore whether the bar is interested in certifying specialist attorneys. Presently, 26 states offer some form of specialty certification. The group discussed some of the substantive areas of the law that other states have found to be well suited to specialization. Michigan presently has no special certifications available for lawyers. The Probate and Estate Planning Section, in cooperation with ICLE, offers a "Probate and Estate Planning Certificate Program." Those who complete the program receive a certificate and can advertise that they have this certificate. They cannot, however, use the term "certified," as that has special meaning and requires more than a "certificate." In general, those in attendance at the meeting did not show much support for certification or for a certificate program such as the one offered by the Probate and Estate Planning Section. Attendees questioned whether such programs are cost-effective, whether they truly result in better lawyers and whether a significant number of clients would choose a lawyer based on certification as opposed to other factors. The attendees were asked to go back to their sections and determine whether each section is interested in pursuing a "certificate" program or a more substantial "certification" program.
The Commercial Litigation Committee is planning a dinner meeting for the last week in March 2004. 2. Council Approval None. 3. Membership Over the last several months, four new people have joined the committee. Communications have primarily been through e-mails. 4. Accomplishments Toward Committee Objectives The committee has changed some of its plans since the last Council meeting. In particular, as more people have joined the committee, there have been more divergent views on how the committee can best achieve its goals and what those goals ought to be. Therefore, instead of proceeding with the two programs proposed in the last committee report, the committee is going to review its goals with those members who are actively involved in the committee at this time. 5. Meetings and Programs The committee will consider what kinds of programs to offer at its next meeting later this month. 6. Publications None. 7. Legislative/Judicial/Administrative Developments None. 8. Miscellaneous There have also been some developments in the Business Court initiative. Specifically, the Business Court Committee has learned that funding for the cyber court has been eliminated, which means that the committee cannot proceed in Oakland County by linking with the now cancelled cyber court pilot project. However, the committee has recently been in touch with the new chief judge of the Kent County Circuit Court and is pursuing the possibility of a business court there. Further, the committee intends to approach the Supreme Court again, now that it appears that the cyber court is no longer a possibility. The committee also intends to continue evaluating ways to initiate some form of business court docket in Oakland County, although Oakland County representatives have not been enthusiastic about the possibility if it cannot be done in conjunction with a cyber court.
$5,000 2. Use of Budgeted Funds in 2002-2003 N/A 3. Next Scheduled Meeting of the Committee The Commercial Litigation Committee ("Committee") anticipates meeting(s) to prepare for two programs planned for 2004 but has not selected a date for the meeting(s). 4. Council Approval N/A 5. Membership The Committee has three new members, who attended the Committee meeting on November 20, 2003. Committee members have principally communicated through e-mails. 6. Accomplishments Toward Committee Objectives The Committee has determined to continue focusing on commercial litigation and the relationship between outside litigation counsel and a corporate client, including a client with an in-house counsel staff. The Business Court Ad Hoc Committee has also continued its activities and will pursue establishing a business court, particularly with Oakland County. The Business Court Committee has also continued to work with lawyers and judges in other states. Business Court Committee Chairman Diane L. Akers also served on a panel that discussed business court jurisdiction at a recent national symposium held in Baltimore, called "Taking Care of Business: Business and Technology Courts in the 21st Century." 7. Meetings and Programs The Committee is planning two programs. One will take place in February or March 2004 and will focus on in-house counsel and their relationship with outside litigation counsel. The program will also focus on trends for commercial litigation in the future. The other program will take place in the fall of 2004 and will focus on litigation prevention. The Committee intends to plan this program in conjunction with in-house counsel. 8. Publications The written materials from the symposium contain a written description of business court activities around the country. Diane L. Akers submitted a portion on Michigan's Business Court Ad Hoc Committee as well as the Cyber Court. The materials will be published in the Business Lawyer, the ABA Business Law Section's publication. 9. Legislative/Judicial/Administrative Developments The Committee is awaiting a decision on Cyber Court funding, which should be made soon. In part, the strategy for the Business Court Ad Hoc Committee's ongoing efforts depends on whether Oakland County will be a pilot Cyber Court. 10. Miscellaneous N/A
The Commercial Litigation Committee is planning a meeting to take place in early October to plan for 2003-2004. 2. Council Approval None. 3. Membership Two new members have joined the committee. At its October meeting, the committee will discuss membership. 4. Accomplishments Toward Committee Objectives The committee's activities have principally focused on the business court initiative. The pilot proposal is being presented to the Oakland County Circuit Court Committee on September 8, 2003. The committee is also scheduling a meeting with Kent County. The committee has also been in contact with representatives of the Supreme Court to keep them informed of the progress on establishing a pilot business court or docket. 5. Meetings and Programs See no. 1, 4, above. 6. Publications None. 7. Legislative/Judicial/Administrative Developments The Business Court Committee continues to follow developments in the cyber court statute. At present, the cyber court statute, as amended, has been passed. However, it apparently has no current prospects for funding. 8. Miscellaneous
There is presently no meeting scheduled. 2. Council Approval The Commercial Litigation Committee is requesting that the Council approve funding for a pilot business court in Oakland and/or Kent Counties. The Business Court Ad Hoc Committee has conducted a good deal of research and has engaged in a number of other activities aimed toward establishing some form of a business court in Michigan. Those activities are briefly summarized in the Proposal for Exploration of Pilot Business Court in Oakland/Kent County ("Proposal"), attached to this report. The Business Court Committee believes that the next important step in this process is to involve people who are inside the courts. Therefore, the Committee has prepared the attached Proposal to present to the circuits who have shown the most interest, Oakland and Kent. In the Committee's contacts with circuit courts as well as the Michigan Supreme Court and Court Administrator's Office, many people have asked how much business litigation each county actually has and how many cases may be suited to resolution in a business court. Presently, while both the Oakland and Kent County Circuit Courts have made some initial inquiry to try to answer such questions, they have not made much progress because there is presently no easy way to gather the necessary information. Therefore, the Committee is requesting that the Council consider approving a grant of $5,000 to $10,000 to be used by the Pilot Business Court Administrators to pay for an administrator to review of the business cases presently pending in that court as well as operational issues that may arise should the circuit court proceed to establish a Pilot Business Court. 3. Membership Since the last report, the principal activities have been drafting and revising the Proposal, particularly by members of the Business Court Executive Committee. 4. Accomplishments Toward Committee Objectives Since its last report, the Committee has prepared the Proposal. 5. Meetings and Programs If funding is approved, the Committee is planning to meet with representatives of the circuit courts and Michigan Supreme Court to introduce the Proposal and gain their input. 6. Publications The Committee has not sent publications since the last report. 7. Legislative/Judicial/Administrative Developments N/A. 8. Miscellaneous N/A. PROPOSAL FOR EXPLORATION OF PILOT BUSINESS COURT IN OAKLAND/KENT COUNTY
TO: Chief Judge ______, Oakland/Kent County Circuit Court FROM: Business Court Ad Hoc Committee, Business Law Section, State Bar of Michigan RE: Exploration of Pilot Business Court DATE: May 17, 2003 The Business Court Ad Hoc Committee presents the following proposal for consideration by [Kent, Judges Buth and Kolenda; Oakland, Oakland County Circuit Court Committee]. Background In December 2001, the State Bar of Michigan's Business Law Section Council created the Business Court Ad Hoc Committee ("Committee"), which was charged with exploring whether Michigan, like a number of other states, should establish some form of business court, division or docket. For the past year, the Committee has engaged in a number of activities designed to achieve that end, including the following: (a) Review of the literature. The Committee conducted a review of the literature describing business courts around the country. (b) Contact with business courts around the country. The Committee has consulted with a number of business court "experts" around the country to gain their insight into planning for and operating some form of business court. (c) Informational meetings with attorneys. The Committee sponsored two meetings, each of which was open to all members of the Business Law Section and others who were interested, during which various ideas for a possible business court in Michigan were reviewed. (d) Contact with circuit courts. The Committee contacted five circuit courts to ascertain whether those courts would be interested in exploring the possibilities for a business court within their circuits. Thereafter, representatives of the Committee met with judges and other representatives of the Wayne, Oakland and Kent County Circuit Courts to further explore the issues. (e) Contact with the Michigan Supreme Court. The Committee contacted the Michigan Supreme Court, which asked that it be kept informed of the Committee's activities. (f) Contact with business and legal organizations. Committee representatives have made presentations to a number of business organizations including chambers of commerce and industry organizations such as Automation Alley and the Original Equipment Suppliers Association. Those presentations have been focused on disseminating information about business courts and gaining the input of those organizations and their members. (g) Publications. The Committee has prepared a number of memoranda and other documents that summarize salient aspects of business courts and identify issues to be considered. (Some of those documents can be accessed at www.bodmanlongley.com.) (h) National Council of State Court Judges Committee. The NCSCJ has just formed a Business and Commercial Courts Committee, which is open to any state court judge who is interested. The Committee believes that this organization may be able to provide valuable assistance to the Pilot Business Court Judge and circuit court. Proposal to Explore a Pilot Business Court The Committee believes that it is now appropriate to explore specifically with the Oakland/Kent County Circuit Court whether some form of business court, division or docket ought to be established in that court. Therefore, the Committee proposes the following: 1. Identification of Pilot Business Court Coordinators. The Committee proposes that one circuit court judge and one court administrator be identified as Pilot Business Court Coordinators to lead a review of whether a business court, docket or division would be appropriate for the Oakland/Kent County Circuit Court. The initial task of the Pilot Business Court Coordinators would be to review the amount and type of business litigation presently being handled by the court to determine whether and how a pilot business court, docket or division would be likely to fit within the existing goals and operations of the court. The Pilot Business Court Coordinators also would consider the particular needs and structure of their circuit to identify relevant factors that may affect how a pilot business court could be organized and operated. The Committee will be available to provide assistance in this process. 2. Funding for a Review of Case Load and Assignment Issues. The Committee recognizes that the review of the business litigation within the court will require some administrative time. Therefore, the Committee will obtain funding from the Business Law Section to support the exploration of a pilot business court. The Committee will prepare the specific request in conjunction with the views of the coordinators, and anticipates that the Business Law Section Council will approve a reasonable request for funding. 3. Identification of Desirable Features of a Pilot Business Court. In addition to reviewing case load and assignment issues, the Pilot Business Court Coordinators may consider and make recommendations regarding issues they deem to be important in their circuit court, including how to define a business court case, whether participation should be voluntary, whether trial by jury would be available, whether specific ADR procedures should be utilized in business cases, whether the business court judge would be required to prepare written opinions and, if so, on which matters, what role technology may play in resolving business court cases as well as other issues that appear to the coordinators to be significant. 4. Formulation of a Pilot Business Court Proposal. When the Pilot Business Court Coordinators have concluded their review, the Committee will work with them to prepare a proposal for a pilot business court in that circuit court that is consistent with the results of the review undertaken by the Pilot Business Court Coordinators.
On February 21, 2003, the Business Court Executive Committee held a teleconference to plan activities for 2003. The Committee concluded that, to continue making progress toward the establishment of a business court, division or docket, someone within the court system, ideally a judge who would be interested in becoming a business court judge, must become actively involved in the initiative. Both the Oakland and the Kent County Circuit Courts have expressed interest in pursuing a possible business court. Therefore, starting with those courts seems most appropriate. The Executive Committee determined that we should prepare a proposal that could be presented to the Court Administrators and/or Chief Judges in Oakland and Kent Counties. The proposal would include a short description of features that could be included in a pilot business court plan in each county as well as proposed actions toward that end. The Executive Committee may present to the Business Law Section Council a request for a grant that could provide funding for a court's exploration of a possible business court.
Next scheduled meeting of the Committee: No date has been set at this time. 2. Council Approval None. 3. Membership The Commercial Litigation Committee has maintained contact with members principally through e-mails. As noted in paragraph 5, below, there has been good participation by committee members, particularly in connection with the Business Court Ad Hoc Committee. The Business Court Committee is also in the process of exploring whether to involve other sections of the bar in its activities. As noted in paragraph 5, the committee has been approached by the Real Estate Section about bringing others into the business court group. 4. Accomplishments Toward Committee Objectives The committee has not yet established a business court in Michigan and so intends to continue its efforts. The committee has succeeded in getting a significant number of members of the Section to become actively involved in Section activities and intends to continue those efforts. 5. Meetings and Programs The principal activities of the Commercial Litigation Committee have focused on the Business Court Ad Hoc Committee. The Business Court Committee has engaged in the following activities since it was formed in December 2001: (1) The committee held a general meeting on April 22, 2002, which featured presentations by Rep. Marc Shulman, sponsor of the Cyber Court statute, and Robert L. Haig, nationally recognized leader in the business court activities throughout the country. Approximately 45 members of the Business Law Section attended. (2) The committee presented a program on business courts featuring 4 general counsel from large companies in Michigan, which was attended by approximately 35 people. (3) The Business Court Committee formed an outreach group, which has met three times to plan activities to publicize and build support for a business court. (4) One or more representatives of the Business Court Committee have met with judges in three circuit courts (Oakland, Wayne and Kent), who have expressed some interest in pursuing the possibility of a business docket or division in those circuits. (5) The Business Court Committee has prepared written documents describing business courts in general and the committee's activities, which have been disseminated to a number of businesses, bar sections and committees, industry and trade organizations, chambers of commerce and others. The documents are presently available on Bodman, Longley & Dahling LLP's web site and will be available on the Section's site. (6) The committee has just begun an effort to generate a list of leading businesses and business organizations that support the concept of establishing a business court in Michigan. (7) The committee is presently considering how to involve other sections of the bar. We have been approached by the Real Estate Section and may establish liaisons with that and other sections. (8) The entire group of over 170 people who responded to the initial e-mail solicitation have received periodic e-mail updates on activities of the group. (9) Plans are in place for several articles about the business court to be published in 2003. The committee is planning several meetings or presentations to various groups of in-house counsel, who are extremely important in building support for the business court concept. The committee also expects to continue meeting with business and trade organizations. 6. Publications The Commercial Litigation Committee provided 3 articles in 2002 for the Business Law Section Journal. 7. Legislative/Judicial/Administrative Developments The Business Court Committee is exploring whether pending legislation the proposed statute providing for concurrent jurisdiction in district, circuit and probate courts and a newly introduced version of the Cyber Court statute could provide a vehicle for the establishment of a business court. 8. Miscellaneous Business Law Section Commercial Litigation Committee Propose Budget for 2003 The Commercial Litigation Committee (and the Business Court Ad Hoc Committee) propose a budget of $10,000 for 2003. No dates for meetings have been set. However, the committee anticipates that it may hold two meetings or programs in connection with the Business Court Committee's 2003 activities.
The Commercial Litigation Committee is presenting a program on "Business Lawyers and the Media" on Thursday, March 7, 2002. The speaker is Helio Fred Garcia, a nationally recognized expert in corporate crisis communications and press relations. II. Business Court Ad Hoc Committee On January 2, 2002, members of the Business Law Section were invited to participate in a newly formed ad hoc committee that will make recommendations regarding the establishment of a business court in Michigan. Over 160 people responded expressing interest in serving on or working with the ad hoc committee. Due to the large number of responses, a 7 member Executive Committee was formed. Members are T. J. Ackert, Diane Akers, Daniel Cherrin, Susan Diehl, Karl Fink, Cyril Moscow and William Volz. The Executive Committee has met twice and has gathered a good deal of information about various business courts. There will be a meeting of the entire Business Court Ad Hoc Committee on April 18, 2002 and participants will be provided with written materials in advance to facilitate the discussion. We anticipate that, at the conclusion of the meeting, the group will be able to focus our efforts and determine how to proceed with the project. III. Business Law Journal Three members of the Commercial Litigation Committee, Joe Ahern, Steve Landau and Janet Ziulkowski, are writing articles for the spring 2002 issue.
Business Law Journal. Three members of the committee are writing articles for the Business Law Journal on how technology has affected commercial litigation. "Business Lawyers and the Media." The Committee has retained a speaker, Helio Fred Garcia, who will present a program on "Business Lawyers and the Media." Mr. Garcia is the managing director of Clark & Weinstock, a consulting firm that specializes in crisis communications, public policy consulting, business ethics and corporate responsibility. He is also a professor at New York University and a frequent speaker on crisis management and media relations. Mr. Garcia will address how business lawyers should deal with the media and why business lawyers are sometimes outmaneuvered by more flamboyant lawyers. The half-day program will be held on March 7, 2002 at the Hyatt Regency in Dearborn. Ads for the program will go out to all members of the Business Law Section in early to mid-January 2002.
Diane L. Akers /attachment (Memo re: Third Invitational Bench Bar Conference) MEMORANDUM
TO: Daniel H. Minkus, Chairman FROM: Diane L. Akers RE: Third Invitational Bench Bar Conference DATE: June 7, 2001 On May 24 and 25, 2001, I attended the Third Invitational Bench Bar Conference in Midland. The conference began with a general session highlighting the new millenium. Participants then broke into a number of smaller groups that addressed one of three topics: Redesigning the Court System - Current and Future Trends, Effective Bench/Bar Strategies for Case Management, and Enhancing Confidence in the Bench and Bar. I was in a small group of about 15 judges and lawyers who discussed ways of enhancing confidence in the bench and bar. In general, my group decided that efforts to improve the image of lawyers should be focused both on lawyers' and judges' confidence in each other and the system as well as the public's confidence in the profession and the system. Our group made specific recommendations regarding law related education as one way to change public attitudes toward and about lawyers. We also considered civility to be an important component of judges' and lawyers' confidence in other judges, lawyers and the system in general. On the second day of the conference, everyone met as a large group and representatives of each smaller group presented the group's ideas and recommendations. The second day ended with an address from Chief Justice Maura Corrigan. I think the principal value of this conference is that it allows private sector lawyers, public sector lawyers and judges to exchange ideas openly in an informal session. (For example, all "titles" were abandoned and judges were referred to by their first names only.) There are generally not that many opportunities for such open and informal discussions with judges. I think the principal weakness in the program, which will be improved in the future, is that there was some disorganization. For example, many people (including me) did not receive in advance of the conference the materials regarding what issues would be discussed, what recommendations were made at the Second Invitational Bench Bar Conference and the current status of those recommendations. These invitational bench bar conferences are held every other year. I believe the conference was worthwhile and the Business Law Section should again consider sending a representative to the 2003 conference. If you would like, I will by happy to provide copies of the materials to you and/or the council as well as more specific information about the conference.
Almost 100 people registered for the program, which involved a round table type discussion where prepared hypotheticals were discussed and developed, and the group's photo made the front page of the April 18, 2001 edition of the Detroit Legal News. Diane L. Akers
II. Program on Budgeting for Litigation. The Commercial Litigation Committee sponsored a panel discussion on budgeting for litigation on November 9, 2000 at the Dearborn Inn. The panelists were Douglas E. Brown, GM Legal Staff; Diane M. Soubly, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel - Litigation, Comerica Incorporated; Angelique J. Strong, Corporate Counsel and Assistant Secretary, Frank's Nursery and Crafts; and James C. Zyskowski, Business and Finance, Dow Corning Corporation. Approximately 40 people attended the program, 2/3 of whom were commercial litigators and 1/3 of whom were in-house counsel. Following the program, the committee hosted a cocktail reception. III. Program on Attorney-Client Privilege and the Corporate Client. The Commercial Litigation Committee, in conjunction with the In-House Counsel Committee, will present a program on issues related to the attorney-client privilege where the client is a corporation. Rather than individual presentations by individual speakers, the program will be more of a discussion among the participants based on hypothetical situations created to bring out the difficult and controversial issues that arise in this area. Participants will include outside commercial litigators, in-house counsel, judges and law school professors in the areas of ethics and evidence. The committee intends to offer this program during March 2001.
II. Commercial Litigation Committee Meetings. The Commercial Litigation Committee held its first meeting of 2000 immediately after the In-House Counsel program on February 10, 2000. The Committee now consists of: 1. Joseph Ahern - Stark, Reagan & Finnerty 2. Diane L. Akers, Co-Chair - Bodman, Longley & Dahling LLP 3. Harvey W. Berman, Co-Chair - Bodman, Longley & Dahling LLP 4. Robert Constan - Staver & Souve, PC 5. Michael Fitzpatrick - Stark, Reagan & Finnerty 6. Jennifer Grieco - Sommers, Schwartz, Silver & Schwartz 7. Robert J. Hahn - Cummings, McClory, Davis & Acho 8. Stephen Landau - Jacob & Weingarten 9. George Laska - Caputo Brosnan PC 10. Gene Pyatenko - Evans & Luptak PLC 11. Dan Sharkey - Butzel Long 12. Linda Watson - Cox Hodgman & Giarmarco, PC The Committee generally discussed the kinds of programs and activities that would be of assistance to the Section and the Bar. The Committee plans to meet to discuss the second program for 2000, which the Committee is tentatively planning for May 2000, on Wednesday, March 1, 2000 at the Troy office of Bodman, Longley & Dahling LLP. Harvey W. Berman; Diane L. Akers
The first program. The first program will take place in February or March of 2000 and will focus on the relationship between in-house counsel and outside litigation counsel. As set forth in more detail in the attached description, this program will consist of a panel discussion by about 5 or 6 prominent in-house counsel who hire and supervise outside litigation counsel. The discussion will focus on issues such as how in-house counsel decide whom to retain in litigation matters; what in-house counsel expect from outside litigation counsel; what kind of relationship should develop between in-house and outside litigation counsel; what kind of information or assistance outside litigation counsel need and expect from in-house counsel; pitfalls to be avoided; and other topics raised by attendees and panelists. This program will be presented in conjunction with the In-House Counsel Committee. The first committee meeting. Immediately following the first program (which will last about 2 hours), those interested in serving on the committee will be invited to remain and discuss planning the next program in more detail, other activities the committee should investigate and how to generate greater participation by members of the section and the bar. The group will also decide whether to have a second committee meeting to refine the plan for the second program or conduct the second committee meeting in conjunction with the second program. The second program. The second program will focus on how to market commercial litigation services. This program may include presentations by outside professionals as well as committee or section members. Timing will have to be decided. It could be held in May or September. Diane L. Akers will develop an overview of the second program so that it can be discussed and refined at the first committee meeting in February or March. This may be an afternoon seminar with cocktails afterward. The second committee meeting. The second committee meeting will be scheduled based on the level of interest generated by the programs and ads. If there is enough interest, the committee will meet in May or June to discuss plans for the committee for 2000-2001 as well as plans for a theme issue of the Business Law Journal. Harvey W. Berman; Diane L. Akers |
print this page
