Sylvia Novinsky, Director, NC Pro Bono Resource Center

This is a time of uncertainty. As lawyers, we are accustomed to, and dare I say it enjoy, rules and process. For many of us, this pandemic has caused our work lives to be turned upside down—most likely our personal lives as well.  

I am watching friends who are medical professionals use their skills and training to serve on the front lines. As legal professionals, we may not view ourselves as front line workers in the same way—but we are. Legal problems are continuing to surface for our neighbors who might not have experience with the legal system. We are their front line access to the legal system!

These are uncertain times for our neighbors that we, as attorneys and paralegals, can help address. Your skills, training, and expertise can make a difference for the public. We can provide legal information and advice that will allow someone to keep their homes, to communicate end of life wishes, to stop abuse in the home, to explain legal options for a small business owner.

Here are some examples of how lawyers and paralegals can help:

• Draft Advance Directives for Medical Personnel

• Provide legal advice for small business owners

• Provide legal advice for nonprofits

• Provide legal advice through Legal Aid of NC’s Lawyer on the Line

• Answer a question through the NC Bar Foundation’s Free Legal Answers

• Provide notary services

The NC Pro Bono Resource Center encourages attorneys and paralegals to provide pro bono legal services—unmet legal needs will continue to arise as this pandemic unfolds.  Please consider sharing your time, training and experience with those dealing with the legal effects of COVID-19.  

Visit ncprobono.org to find out how you can help. Pro Bono Matters!

Andrew Whiteman, Whiteman Law Firm

“In the beginner’s mind there are many possibilities, but in the expert’s there are few.” Thus begins Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind: Informal Talks on Zen Meditation and Practice, a collection of talks presented by Shunryu Suzuki, a Japanese monk who founded the San Francisco Zen Center in the 1950s and helped popularize Buddhist ideas in America. The book has become a modern classic of Zen thought.

The opening line’s simple teaching offers a profound commentary on the tendency of Zen students to become so caught up in the pursuit of spiritual development that they lose sight of what drew them to the Buddhist path in the first place. This idea has many applications to ordinary life. Remembering the magic we felt in the beginning of something can help us persevere when times get tough.

But can we use “beginner’s mind” to maintain a healthy and balanced outlook on law practice? Most definitely! Recalling our earliest experiences with the law reminds us of why we fell in love with it in the first place, before our lives became overtaken by the day-to-day challenges of competing deadlines, client expectations, civic duties and family responsibilities. To illustrate this point, I offer three remembrances that help me restore equanimity when things become chaotic.

I recall clearly the day I decided I wanted to be a lawyer. As a high school senior in Cincinnati, Ohio, I and another student interviewed two lawyers for a class project. The lawyers were on opposite sides of a social issue and agreed to meet with us to discuss their views. After listening to them expound on the merits of their respective positions, I quickly decided that what the lawyers were doing was fascinating. By the end of the second interview it dawned on me that I could do this too! I was just as smart as those lawyers. All I needed was a law school education, a job, and a cause! From this experience, I have always remembered how blessed it is just to be among the few who have the intellectual ability, character and work ethic needed to succeed in our challenging career.

After graduating from law school in 1980, I moved to North Carolina and began my first job with a small general practice firm in Raleigh. I remember vividly my first case in Wake County Superior Court. I was defending a woman who was sued for violating a covenant not to compete. Because I was scared, I thoroughly prepared! As it turned out, my client had the better argument on the facts, and the law was on her side. I presented the evidence and legal authorities to the judge and won the case! My takeaway from this small victory was very profound—our system of justice works! Not only that, it works really well most of the time. A lot of thought goes into the making of our laws, and for the most part they make sense. In the courtroom, evidence is presented according to rules of evidence. We have great judges in North Carolina who work very hard to be fair and make the right decisions. These are not small things! Every day, we should be very grateful for our system of justice.

Another thing I learned very early in my career is that lawyers are, by and large, tremendous people. Bright, earnest, friendly, helpful, capable, dedicated, and civic-minded! Our law licenses state that we were found by satisfactory evidence to possess the upright character and competent knowledge of the law necessary to be admitted to the practice. We live by an oath that states we will uphold the laws and faithfully discharge our duties as attorneys. We govern ourselves by a written code of ethics. It is awesome to be able to work with so many wonderful professional colleagues!

Truth to tell, I am not always this happy. Often, I find law practice to be a tedious grind, difficult and contentious, even on a good day. But I have learned that I am able to restore a joyful and grateful outlook by returning to my earliest experiences with the law. Maybe this technique can work for you, too.

Melissa Dewey Brumback, Ragsdale Liggett PLLC

Professionalism comes in all shapes and sizes. Sometimes, the very same interaction with a professional colleague or opposing counsel can teach you both how to act, as well as how not to act. This is one such story. [Cue “dum-dum” music from Law & Order].

A few years back, I had a case with opposing counsel that I had never worked with before. Let’s call him “Mr. X.” Mr. X and I got along fairly well, and the case was moving along towards trial. And then the fateful day occurred. The Court Clerk emailed about a hearing date for some pending motions. No big deal, right? I responded to the Court Clerk about the matter, while also cc’ing Mr. X. 

During a break in a deposition later that day, I checked my emails. What did I find? Not one, but two very different missives from Mr. X. 

The first email from Mr. X was extremely nasty. He accused me of improper ex parte contact with the Court and stated that my behavior was reprehensible and sanctionable. I was shocked that Mr. X had made such an unfounded accusation.

Then I kept reading. I found Mr. X’s second email, time-stamped about 20 minutes later, which was very conciliatory.  Mr. X had realized that I was only responding to the Clerk, and that I had cc’d him in my communications. He apologized profusely for his initial outburst and the misunderstanding.

This incident has stayed with me over the past few years. Number one, it reminded me to never respond in the heat of the moment and, in any event, never until you’ve read all of your emails!

Number two, however, it made me appreciate Mr. X’s professionalism. Did he make a mistake in the first email? Yes, very much so. However, he owned up to his mistake, in writing, and offered a sincere apology. I’ve seen many folks try to “explain away” their mistakes. Mr. X did not do so. He simply and clearly apologized for going off on me without checking all the facts first. His honest and sincere apology made me respect him a lot more than any sorry excuse he could have come up with.

We managed to later resolve the case, and I had a great working relationship with Mr. X the rest of the case. I know that Mr. X was embarrassed by his initial outburst, but we both had a powerful reminder of the benefits of professionalism. Mr. X, thank you for your willingness to own up to your mistake!

Maria M. Lynch, Lynch & Eatman LLP

The 2019 recipient of the Joseph Branch Professionalism Award is Phyllis B. Pickett. Phyllis is an outstanding lawyer, bar leader, community leader and occasional fountain pen surgeon. Phyllis started her legal career working for Legal Aid in southeastern and northeastern North Carolina. From Legal Aid she moved to Wake County and served as an assistant county attorney for four-and-a-half years. In 1991, Phyllis was recruited to join the staff of the General Assembly, in part because of her expertise in local government law and county issues. She has been a staff attorney at the General Assembly ever since. 

Phyllis serves as the principal legislative analyst and staff attorney for the Legislative Drafting Division. While her initial focus at the legislature was county law, today she primarily handles appropriations and information technology issues, as well as employment law. Employment law is the one constant throughout her legal career. As a legal services attorney she represented plaintiffs, as an assistant county attorney she represented the county as a defendant, and at the general assembly she drafts labor and employment laws. The Legislative Drafting Division is non-partisan, and as a staff attorney Phyllis deals with people from all walks of life with various political viewpoints. 

Phyllis is a double Tar Heel, having obtained her undergraduate degree in 1979 as a history major and James M. Johnson Scholar, then her law degree in 1982. Throughout her legal career, Phyllis has been involved with local, state and national bar associations. At our own Wake County and Tenth Judicial District Bars, Phyllis has served on the Leadership Development Committee, the Nominating Committee and the Grievance Committee. She also served as Secretary of the WCBA and Tenth for two years. 

Phyllis has also held a number of leadership positions at the North Carolina Bar Association.  She has Chaired the Endowment Committee, served on the Board of Governors, has Chaired the Membership Committee, the Administrative Law Section Counsel and served as Co-chair of the Committee on Women in the Profession. Phyllis has also been heavily involved with the American Bar Association where she has chaired the Judicial Division Lawyers Conference and the Perceptions of Justice Steering Committee.  She served on the Standing Committee on the Law Library of Congress and served as Section Advisor to the Uniform Law Commission Drafting Committee on the Uniform Electronic Legal Material Act. 

When asked what she does for fun, Phyllis says “I’m a baby boomer… work is my fun.” She does, however, enjoy traveling with her spouse LaVie. They are active at St. Ambrose Episcopal Church, and Phyllis served four years as a delegate to the annual convention of the North Carolina Episcopal Diocese. 

In writing this piece, I learned a lot about her main hobby. She collects and uses mostly modern and some vintage fountain pens. She is especially fond of Japanese and Italian brands, but apparently there is an emerging brand based here called Franklin-Christoph. She has visited their factory in Wake Forest. She also repairs pens, including performing delicate ink bladder “surgery.” The Triangle has a very active fountain pen community and hosts an annual pen meets in Durham and Raleigh.

Phyllis believes one of the most important aspects of professionalism is mentoring, both being a mentor to others and having mentors your entire career. She cites among others who have been mentors to her, Lisbon Berry and Jim Wall, two civil rights lawyers she admired for their grit. In her mid-career, former Wake County Attorney Mike Ferrell and North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Pat Timmons-Goodson gave her insight and calm in framing issues. Gerry Cohen at the Legislature was always a willing teacher. 

One aspect she loves about the law is working closely with diverse lawyers; not just in terms of gender, race, ethnicity and political views, but also generational diversity. Phyllis says she learns so much from her younger colleagues. They have affected her worldview and her perspective on issues and problems, but I believe she has had an even more profound effect on theirs. 

Cody J. Davis

The story of David and Goliath tells of a military standoff between the Philistines and Israelites. The Philistines greatest warrior, a giant named Goliath, challenges the Israelites to send their greatest warrior to fight him in hand to hand combat. As the story goes, a small shepherd boy, David, inexperienced in battle, is the only volunteer. David prevails over Goliath by stunning Goliath with a strike from a single stone propelled by his sling. With Goliath incapacitated, David beheads the giant, defeating the Philistines.

Malcolm Gladwell’s book "David and Goliath: The Advantage of Disadvantage," illustrates how this biblical allegory reflects our habit of underestimating the value of people based on inaccurate assumptions about or misconceptions of the able and competent person. Goliath and the Israelite army underestimate David’s ability by relying on their understanding of a capable warrior. They assume David’s approach to combat would be similar to theirs, and they fail to consider how David’s skills could be utilized in this battle.

In a similar way, people may discount or fail to accurately perceive the capacity of individuals with disabilities as collaborators, adversaries, leaders, or in a variety of other roles. I believe this is not due to malice but to one’s failure to comprehend how a person with a disability can do what they cannot imagine doing themselves were they to be the one with the disability. This often stems from uninformed, false or harmful perceptions of disability that we rely on in assessing the aptitude and competency of persons with disabilities.

The legal profession is not immune to discrediting the abilities of persons with disabilities. Just as the Israelites and Goliath underestimated David based on their perceptions of a capable warrior, so might we underestimate our colleagues with disabilities based on our perceptions of the capable lawyer. One obvious impact this has on our profession arises in the employment context. When employers fail to understand the competencies of a candidate with a disability, they not only prejudice the candidate, they also deny themselves, their firm or their organization the value of the candidate’s contributions. In the aggregate this reality starves the legal profession of talented lawyers, judges and leaders, stifling the legal profession’s validity in the eyes of the public.

Perhaps less obvious is how a failure to recognize the capacity of persons with disabilities may affect a lawyer’s approach to her work with a colleague or adversary with a disability. In the context of collaboration, a lawyer who underestimates the competency and abilities of a colleague with a disability may fail to ask for contributions to a project. Similarly, a lawyer may believe they must overcompensate for what they think the colleague with disabilities is lacking. Further, a collaborating lawyer may inadvertently place arbitrary limitations on a colleague with a disability by denying them an opportunity to demonstrate their true aptitude.

As an adversary, it would be a great disservice to oneself and one’s client to discount the capacity of a lawyer with disabilities. To do so could result in being ill-prepared for a negotiation, hearing, or trial. This is Goliath’s fatal flaw. He underestimates David as a warrior; thus, he is ill-prepared to match David’s skill. The key to David’s success is his aptness to capitalize on his abilities rather than highlighting his weaknesses. David cannot defeat Goliath by the means the Israelites and Goliath expect him to use. Instead, David takes a different approach to battle, relying on his remarkable skills as a stone slinger.

To avoid the fault of Goliath and the Israelites, we as a profession must refrain from assessing colleagues with disabilities based on our own limited conception of a capable lawyer. In every interaction with a colleague with a disability, we must reach beyond our own understanding of legal practice and be open to learning about myriad  alternative techniques and approaches to practice that colleagues with disabilities offer. It very well may turn out that, through their efforts to conquer some barrier, they have developed more efficient or effective methods that you can use to your advantage.