AGENDA. I. Call to Order Ceci Berman, Chair. Introductions. Chris Carlyle, Chair-Elect Duane Daiker, Vice-Chair Kristin Norse, Secretary/Treasurer

Transcription

1 AGENDA APPELLATE PRACTICE SECTION EXECUTIVE COUNCIL MEETING January 22, :30 a.m. Hilton Orlando Lake Buena Vista Call-In: Participant Pin: # I. Call to Order Ceci Berman, Chair II. Introductions Chris Carlyle, Chair-Elect Duane Daiker, Vice-Chair Kristin Norse, Secretary/Treasurer III. Approval of Minutes - (Exhibit A) IV. Chair s Report Overview of Key Events Since Last Meeting A. DCA Judges Conference B. EC Meeting in October V. Treasurer s Report Kristin Norse A. Financial Statements - (Exhibit B) VI. Old Business A. Appellate Advocacy Intensive Skills Workshop Jessie Harrell VII. New Business A. Budget - (Exhibit C) B. Central Florida Diversity Mentoring Picnic

2 C. New Council of Sections Representative D. Nomination for The Florida Bar Foundation s 2015 Medal of Honor E. FLREA High School Moot Court Competition - (Exhibit D) VIII. Bar & Section Committee Reports A. Council of Sections Nick Shannin, Representative B. The Florida Bar CLE Committee - Tony Musto, Representative C. Continuing Legal Education Jessie Harrell, Chair D. Outreach Committee - Tom Ward, Chair E. Pro Bono Sarah Lahlou-Amine, Chair F. Programs Kimberly Kanoff Berman, Chair G. Public Advocacy/Legislation Nick Shannin H. Publications Kimberly Jones, Chair 1. Pro Se Handbook Bretton Albrecht, Editor 2. The Record June Hoffman, Editor 3. The Guide Rebecca Creed, Editor 4. Florida Bar Journal Articles Brandon Christian I. Website Jonathan Streisfeld, Chair J. History V. Hendricks, Historian

3 IX. Announce Next Meeting A. June 25, 2015 Executive Council Meeting (Boca Raton Resort & Club) X. Adjournment

4 Exhibit A

5 Appellate Practice Section of the Florida Bar Executive Council Meeting October 9, 2014, via videoconference Minutes Attendees At the First District Court of Appeal: Hon. Stephanie Ray, Thomas Hall, Robert Rivas, Adam Tanenbaum, and JoAnn Shearer. At the Second District Court of Appeal: Ceci Berman, Duane Daiker, Kristin Norse, Tyler Pitchford, Fran Toomey, Kimberly Jones, Valeria Hendricks, Ezequiel Lugo, Chris McAdams, Sarah Lahlou-Amine, Matthew Conigliaro. At the Third District Court of Appeal: Elaine Walter, Karla Perkins, Caryn Bellus, Tony Musto, Jack Reiter, Hon. Richard Suarez, Bretton Albrecht, Roy Wasson. At the Fourth District Court of Appeal: Tom Ward, Sarah Weitz, Daniel Bushell, Robin Bresky, Siobhan Shea, Samuel Walker, James Nutt, Jack Aiello, Kimberly Kanoff Berman, Jonathan Streisfeld, Melynda Melear, Hon. Alan Forst, June Hoffman. At the Fifth District Court of Appeal: Chris Carlyle, Derek Angell, Jessie Harrell, David Knapp, Carrie Ann Wozniak, Calianne Lantz. I. Call to Order Ms. Berman called the meeting to order at 12:06. II. Introductions Ms. Berman introduced Chris Carlyle, Chair-Elect; Duane Daiker, Vice Chair; Kristin Norse, Secretary/Treasurer. She welcomed the attendees, and the attendees introduced themselves. III. Approval of minutes Ms. Berman called for approval of the minutes. Mr. Musto noted that on page 4, Judge Shepherd s name was misspelled. Judge Ray noted that on page 5, item 3, the minutes reference Judge Stephanie May. This should be Judge Melanie May. Judge Suarez moved to approve the minutes subject to these changes. Ms. Lahlou-Amine seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. 1

6 IV. Chair s report Ms. Berman reported on the Section s recent events. As a recap of the annual meeting, the Section had the moot court finals and discussion with the Florida Supreme Court. Thanks to Chris Carlyle who did a nice job handling the questions with the Florida Supreme Court. The Section s meetings and this event were very well attended. The Section was very energized and the events were a success. Ms. Berman asked Ms. Kanoff Berman to speak about the dessert reception as part of her programs report, out of turn. Ms. Kanoff Berman reported that the dessert reception was held at the annual meeting in Orlando and the theme was I Want Candy. There was a great turnout. There was DJ music, 80 s images in the background, and 80 s themed desserts and candy. The Section raised about $21,000 in sponsorships. The expense was minimal. As the new programs chair, she looks forward to planning the next dessert reception in Boca. Ms. Berman thanked Ms. Kanoff Berman. The final financial figures on how the Section did on the dessert reception are not yet available. But she knows the Section did well. Ms. Berman reported that the Adkins Award and the Pro Bono Award were presented at the annual meeting. John Hamilton won the Adkins Award and Judge Van Nortwick won the Pro Bono Award. It was nice to be able to present these awards to the recipients. Ms. Berman next reported that in July, she and Mr. Daiker attended the Florida Bar Section Leadership Conference in Tallahassee. The conference is held every other year and continues for two days. It was a great conference. Mr. Daiker reported the conference was held on a Thursday and Friday in July. He and Ms. Berman attended because Mr. Carlyle had previously attended this conference. It began with a dinner held on Thursday night, and they sat at a table with Florida Bar President Greg Coleman and were able to speak with him. The next day was a full day of activities that included a tour of bar facilities and presentations on CLEs, CLE approvals, budgeting, diversity, and other topics of interest to section leaders. The Conference was chaired by our section s own Matt Conigliaro, who serves as Chair of the Council of Sections. It was a great experience. We should send two more people to the next conference, which is presented every two years. Ms. Berman asked Mr. Carlyle to report on the BLSE Leadership Meeting that he attended. Mr. Carlyle stated that he attended the BLSE Leadership Meeting in Orlando last month. It was a two-part program. In the morning, the BLSE has their meeting and talks about the various ways they are improving and achieving some uniformity in testing. In the afternoon, there was a leadership conference. Matt Conigliaro was involved in this conference also, and Greg Coleman attended and spoke on behalf of the Bar. The leadership conference brought 2

7 together all people involved in the BLSE, and the various committees, and some other section leaders. They discussed concepts like uniformity and ways to improve it. They discussed the medical model of certification and whether that was appropriate in the legal context. Mr. Conigliaro spoke about the Council of Sections. It was a good conference and very interesting. Website updates. Ms. Berman reported that she, Mr. Streisfeld, Lisa Graham, Ms. Bellus, and other folks, have worked hard to update the website. There was a lot of out-of-date contact information that was corrected. If members see anything that is not current, please let section leadership know. From now on, members are responsible for maintaining their own contact information. The passwords for the Guide and the Record were removed. This is to make it more readily available to a wider audience, which would in turn provide more exposure for authors, and make more authors interested in publishing. V. Treasurer's Report Ms. Norse reported that the financials for September 2014 appear at page 15 of the agenda as part of Exhibit B. The current fund balance is $405,675, which is an increase for the year of $35,207. Page 16 and 17 show the revenue and expenses for September and for the year to date, as compared with the budget. The section has already collected over 97% of anticipated section dues. At the same time, because it is early in the fiscal year, the section has spent only about 25% of projected expenses. The fund balance continues to increase as revenues exceed expenses. VI. Old business Ms. Harrell reported on the Appellate Advocacy Intensive Skills Workshop. This is an intensive workshop that takes place over several days. It is typically instructed by DCA judges from around the state. Judge Melanie May is working on this, and is very excited and enthusiastic about it. She has spoken with Nova Law School, and the school is willing to host. There are a couple of other former judges who will serve on the faculty again. Tom Elligett has volunteered to update materials, which is the most time-intensive element. Ms. Harrell and Judge May have a conference call to discuss the workshop on Monday. It will be held in July or August Ms. Berman thanked Ms. Harrell for her work on this. VII. New business A. Upcoming CLEs Ms. Harrell reported there is a full lineup of upcoming CLEs. The first is the Appellate Practice Certification Review on January 15. Then there is Practicing Before the Third District Court of Appeal on February 6 that is being chaired by Dan Rogers and Mark Hick. They are well ahead of schedule. There was some discussion of revenue sharing. They have now agreed that the Dade County Bar Association will solicit separate sponsors for their coffee in the courthouse, but those sponsors will be recognized at the cocktail reception for this event. 3

8 The Section had discussed moving away from the hot topic CLE to instead present a joint criminal appellate CLE. Ms. Harrell and Ms. Lantz are working on that. It looks like May would be a good date. They should know within the next week if that can be accomplished. Hot topics has not been profitable, or well attended, recently. It makes sense to reach out to other practice areas that are less represented to try to facilitate CLEs that include them. Practicing Before the First District Court of Appeal is scheduled for April 10. Ms. Harrell is co-chairing that with Judge Makar. This is the topic that may require a vote. The First District wanted to give a discount to government lawyers as there are a high percentage of government lawyers in Tallahassee and who practice before this Court. This is a very meaningful seminar, where attendees get to interact with judges in a way that doesn t happen in other CLEs. The Section agreed that it would like to do that, but the Florida Bar does not permit such discounts. The Section needs to consider an alternative. The First District has an Inn of Court that would be willing to administer a scholarship program to give government lawyers scholarships to attend this event. At the same time, the inn doesn t have its own funds. Perhaps the section could give the inn grant, say $1,000, for them to award the scholarships. This would be a service to the government lawyers in Tallahassee. The Court aspires to provide this access, although they are not mandating it. The Court would proceed with the seminar regardless of the vote. A possible downside is the possibility of setting a precedent, particularly for other CLEs involving the courts. Historically, the Section has made money on this CLE. The Section did the CLE three years ago and made $5,000. So this is within the budget, but up for the Section to decide if this is how it would like to spend the money. Ms. Harrell invited discussion. Mr. Knapp asked how the scholarship would be administered, and how much it would reduce the price for the government attorneys. Ms. Harrell responded that the section would give the money to the Inn of Court, and the inn would administer it. Ms. Harrell assumes there would be something on the sign-up sheet to indicate the attendee was a government lawyer on scholarship. She doesn t know exactly how much it would reduce the price. If the $1,000 was divided into 10 scholarships, it could cut the cost in half by making the price $100 instead of $200. The inn might want to get a feel for how many people might be interested before it decides how to divide up the funds. The exact details of administration would be up to them. Ms. Shea explained that the Section has done this in the past. The section has had scholarships in past years for the Advanced Appellate Advocacy Seminar. Part of the purpose of the section, and an objective of the section, is to get more involvement from government lawyers. Ms. Shea thinks this is a perfect use of section funds. She would move that the Section sponsor at least $1000 for government lawyers. This is exactly what section CLEs are designed to accomplish. Ms. Berman commented that she supports the idea also. If Ms. Shea s motion is to be considered, she would offer a friendly amendment. The officers have discussed this, and are concerned that it would be unwieldy for the section to administer the scholarship program. Instead, the inn should be responsible. The proposal would be to just give the inn a grant so that they could provide scholarships. The grant would be to the First District Inn of Court for the purpose of funding scholarships for this CLE. The section would give the amount, say $1,000, to the inn. The section would not get into the nuts and bolts of the program how many 4

9 scholarships are awarded, how people apply, how the inn awards them, etc. The cost to attend the CLE is about $200 per person. The grant and resulting scholarships would simply reduce the price for some government lawyers. The money for attending the CLE would flow into the section, and the section would not have any other bookkeeping responsibilities relating to the scholarships. Mr. Musto asked if it would make more sense, rather than to give the Inn $1,000 and have that same money come back as registrations that require the section to give a percentage to the Bar, to instead give them the equivalent of $1,000 credit, and let the people just sit in. They would not need to be registered and the section would not have to give a portion to the Bar. Mr. Carlyle asked if that suggestion would mean those attendees would not get CLE credit for the program. Mr. Reiter expressed concern whether that approach would be proper because the section must be up front about registrations. Is the grant approach acceptable under Bar rules? And to address Mr. Musto s point, could the section approach the Bar to ensure it was not effectively taxed on the attendees that came on scholarship? Ms. Berman responded that the section had not approached the Bar on the issue of whether it could receive an offset for scholarship registrations. But the officers have spoken about how to approach the First DCA s concern and whether the section could take this approach. This seemed the cleanest way to accomplish the goal. On the one hand, the section would be paying money to do it this way. On the other, the section would not run afoul of any Bar rules. If there is any concern about transparency or how the money is used, the section can talk that through and work it out with the First DCA. Ms. Berman is not sure the Bar would care about this approach, given that it only prevents the section from giving government discounts. Mr. Conigliaro opined that the Bar would not care if the Section gave a grant to the inn that was then used to disburse scholarships for the program. He does think it would care if attendees were not registered through normal channels. Mr. Conigliaro asked who would determine eligibility for the scholarships, because there are recurrent discussions on who qualifies as a government lawyer. Ms. Berman responded that the First District Inn of Court would make that determination. They are the most interested party. Mr. Reiter commented that he thinks this is a good idea. And he understands the section would not want to administer the program. But, the grant should be an opportunity to increase visibility for and recognition of the section, and perhaps a way to increase membership. Will there be a name associated with the grant? Will it be identified as section funds? Has there been any thought as to how this could be used to increase membership? Ms. Berman responded that there has not been much discussion on those points. Rather, the issue arose because this is something the First DCA and the inn wanted to make available. Both were putting a lot of work into the event and assisting with the reception and CLE. The 5

10 First DCA is hosting a dinner the night before. They are putting in a lot of leg work but not sharing in any revenue. The thought was to work together with them to help them accomplish their goal of increasing access for government lawyers. That is how the discussion got started. Ms. Harrell stated that one of her concerns is whether the Bar would object to the section specifically giving scholarships for government lawyers in light of their prohibition of giving a discount to government lawyers. This approach seems to avoid those concerns. Mr. Carlyle added that the section would benefit by getting government lawyers to attend the CLE who would not otherwise do so. The section s name is on the seminar. At the beginning of the seminar, someone could urge attendees who are not members of the section to join. He doesn t think more is needed. The Court wants it, and the inn wants it. It is good to get government lawyers there. And $1,000 is a relatively nominal amount. He doesn t think it necessary to go through machinations with the Bar to see if the section could get money back. Ms. Lantz commented that to her understanding, the only prohibition the Bar has is against offering a discount to attendees. The cost of the seminar, if you want CLE, is set by the Bar and there is nothing the section can do. If anyone were allowed to go at a lesser cost, the section would have to make that differential up to the Bar. Mr. Musto commented that many government lawyers are not concerned with the CLE credit because they get that in-house. Mr. Streisfeld is in support of the idea. Given the amount of money the section has, is there a way to do this so everyone attending the program could pay less rather than having a specific class of only government lawyers who get the discount? Ms. Berman stated that there are some government lawyers attending the meeting at the Second DCA that are concerned with obtaining CLE credit. Ms. Toomey noted that there are government lawyers who are members of the section. There may also be government lawyers who are members of the inn. Do inn members get preference over section members? Could that raise concerns? Ms. Berman responded that the issues people are raising are the types of issues the section hopes to avoid by giving the grant to the inn, permitting them to administer any scholarships, and then requiring that attendees are registered at full price. There will be no discount, and everyone who attends must be registered. She agrees with Mr. Carlyle that the amount of $1000 is nominal. Ms. Harrell has explained the concern about precedent. Here there is a minimal grant for a specific purpose and concern. But, if Mr. Streisfeld s recommendation were accepted of opening this up across the board for a discount, the concern over precedent may be more well-founded. The suggestion here is for a one-time donation. Mr. Wasson moved to amend the motion to put one string on the grant to the Inn of Court: That in setting the criteria for the scholarship, the inn give preference to section members. 6

11 Ms. Shea would accept that as a friendly amendment. Ms. Berman points out that procedurally, there would need to be a second on the initial motion. At this point, there needs to be some clarity about exactly what motion is on the table. Ms. Shea s motion is for the Section to issue a grant of $1,000 to the First DCA Inn of Court to aid that organization in fulfilling its purpose of opening access for government lawyers to attend the CLE, Practicing Before the First DCA. Mr. Ward seconded the motion. Mr. Wasson moved to amend the motion to give the guidance to the inn that in administering the grant, they give preference to section members. Mr. Reiter offered that he is concerned about putting any conditions on the grant. Mr. Wasson has a good suggestion, but it conflicts with the principle idea that this is a grant for a program the section does not want to administer. Ms. Berman agreed that she would propose a grant without any strings attached. Mr. Hall also agreed that there should be no restrictions on the grant. But does that mean that the section should not restrict the inn by requiring them to give the scholarships to government lawyers? And is the grant limited to scholarships for this CLE? Otherwise the section is giving the inn $1,000 it could use in any way. Ms. Harrell is not in favor of putting the amended restriction on the grant. But it is fair to say that the money must be used for the purpose it was requested: To assist government lawyers who want to attend this CLE. Otherwise there is no reason to give this money. Judge Forst noted that he and Judge Ray had a CLE for the labor section and wanted to get government attorneys involved. They did a low-cost CLE for $60 with a brown bag lunch at the Bar building. Then they applied the CLE cost to membership in that section. They knew they wouldn t make money, but it would increase government attorneys involvement and membership. So an alternative would be to keep the cost for the CLE low enough that an individual could afford it. Mr. Wasson withdrew his proposed amendment to Ms. Shea s motion. Ms. Berman proposed a friendly amendment. The motion would be that the Section issue a grant of $1,000 to the First DCA Inn of Court to assist the Inn in fulfilling its purpose of increasing access for government attorneys to attend the Section s CLE, Practicing Before the First DCA. Ms. Shea accepted this as a friendly amendment. Ms. Toomey asked if the section s grant would be mentioned to recipients. 7

12 Ms. Berman responded that the section would suggest the inn do so. Judge Suarez asked that if the inn understood what the grant was for, was there really any concern it wouldn t use the grant for that purpose? If not, these concerns may be moot. Ms. Berman responded that there were no such concerns. Mr. Hall agreed that the inn would use the grant as intended, and opined it should be given as much flexibility as possible, including possibly including legal aid lawyers in its program. Ms. Hendricks seconded the friendly amendment. The motion passed unanimously. To wrap up the discussion on CLE, Ms. Harrell reported that Wendy Loquasto did a great job putting on three outreach CLEs in Tallahassee. They were not designed to be money makers, but the section earned $1,400 and 125 people attended very low-cost CLEs. If anyone else is interested in doing similar local programs, Ms. Harrell would suggest they speak with Ms. Loquasto to learn how she organized these. Ms. Harrell also thanked Tyler Pitchford and Chris Donovan for their work in presenting the monthly teleconference CLEs. Every month except for March is lined up. If anyone is interested in speaking in March, let them know. B DCA Judge s Conference Ms. Berman reported that the section has been invited to return and participate in this conference for Judge Ciklin called Ms. Berman to invite the section to attend. The date for the conference is Tuesday, September 8 to Thursday, September 10 for section members. It will be held at the Sawgrass Marriott in Ponte Vedra. There will be a reception on Tuesday evening that the Judges would like the section to host as it has done in the past. The section will assist with the Education Committee for the conference, which is chaired by Judge Levine. Mr. Carlyle and Mr. Daiker will be the liaisons to that committee. The section looks forward to participating in this conference again. C. Other new business Ms. Berman reported that the YLD has a mentoring program for law students, and we need people willing to act as mentors. The applications are due October 17. Information is available at the YLD website for those who might be interested. Ms. Berman urged members to consider helping out. Mr. Hall commented that when a person signs up to be a mentor, they are supposed to indicate their area of practice. Appellate practice is not listed as an option. He has spoken to a member of the YLD board to see if they can remedy that. 8

13 Ms. Berman stated that the section budget is in the works and will be presented soon. A working draft will be put together over the next week. The budget should be distributed before the end of the year. A vote on the budget will be held by . Mr. Carlyle reported that he received an from the UCF Legal Studies Department. They are hosting a moot court event and need volunteer judges. This is targeted to undergraduates around the country. It is scheduled for November 7 and 8. If anyone is interested in participating, they should contact Mr. Carlyle. VIII. Bar and Section Committee Reports A. Council of Sections - John Hamilton No report. B. The Florida Bar CLE Committee - Tony Musto Mr. Musto reported that the next week he would be representing the section at the CLE Committee Retreat. They will discuss the issue he mentioned in the summer about CLE splits. This was previously changed from sections getting a smaller percentage of the gross, to a system where the section gets a larger percentage of the net. At the same time, the net figure was calculated after a number of expenses were deducted by the Bar that were more general expenses (as compared to CLE-specific ones) that sections did not anticipate. Any proposed changes, however, will have to go through the Council of Sections. C. Continuing Legal Education - Jessie Harrell This report was provided above. D. Outreach Committee - Tom Ward Mr. Ward reported that the section has received quarterly reports from its liaisons. The reporting numbers were down, in part because Ms. Berman and Ms. Ward are in the process of appointing new liaisons. The committee continues to work to get the word out about the section through these liaisons and relationships. A written report is also attached as Exhibit A. Ms. Berman noted Mr. Ward had done an excellent job with the appointments and thanked him for that. E. Pro Bono - Sarah Lahlou-Amine Ms. Lahlou-Amine reported the committee continues to work on its existing project, receiving referrals from legal aid organizations and the Florida Supreme Court. The referrals from the legal aid organizations have been a little slow lately, and the committee has received more referrals directly from litigants directly. The committee continues to work with Florida Legal Services, which has been a wonderful partnership. FLS does the screening for those 9

14 referrals, and they have agreed to provide money for transcript and other costs. The committee also gets informal referrals from some of the DCA clerks offices. The committee has been in discussions with some law schools about partnering with them on pro bono projects, particularly Barry University. Thanks to Amie Kozan for that effort. A new opportunity that the committee is working on involves CLE presentations to legal aid organizations throughout the state. This is a nice alternative for some volunteers. Ms. Lahlou- Amine thanked David Karp, who is heading up that effort. The first presentation will hopefully be in early 2015 to the Legal Aid Service of Broward County. Ms. Lahlou-Amine stated that Carrie Ann Wozniak has taken over as vice chair for this committee, and Ms. Lahlou-Amine will pass the torch into her capable hands next year. Ms. Berman thanked Ms. Lahlou-Amine for her work on this committee. F. Programs - Kimberly Kanoff Berman This report was provided above. G. Public Advocacy/Legislation - Nick Shannin A written report is attached as Exhibit B. H. Publications - Kimberly Jones Ms. Jones stated that each of the editors for the publications would provide their own reports, except for Brandon Christian, the editor of section submissions to the Florida Bar Journal. As of his last report, however, those submissions were on track. He is always seeking additional articles if anyone has a topic they would like to cover. 1. Pro Se Handbook - Bretton Albrecht Ms. Albrecht reported that revisions to the Pro Se Handbook were going well. Revisions for all but two chapters have been submitted, and Ms. Albrecht and the assistant editors are in the process of reviewing and finalizing them. They are waiting for the Florida Supreme Court to rule on proposed rule amendments that will affect a number of chapters. There is quite a bit more work to do, but it is progressing well. The tentative goal is to have a new edition completed by January The Record - June Hoffman Ms. Hoffman stated that she hoped everyone enjoyed the September issue of The Record. The fall issue is in place to send to the Bar, but she is awaiting one more article from an author before sending it to the Bar for formatting. That should occur within the next week. Depending on the time it takes for the Bar to format the publication and send it back, the issue may go out in a couple of weeks. 10

15 Ms. Hoffman reported that she is putting together an outline for the spring issue. There will be a meeting on that next week and anyone interested in writing is encouraged to participate. The deadline to submit articles will be February 1, with an anticipated publication date in March. 3. The Guide - Rebecca Creed Ms. Harrell reported for Ms. Creed. The Guide is no longer password protected. Ms. Creed wanted to recognize the work of the web designer, Lisa Graham, who helped update the pages for the First, Second, Third, and Fifth DCAs, as well as the Florida Supreme Court and the Eleventh Circuit. She also wanted to thank Laura Triplett, Jay Yagoda, Carrie Ann Wozniak, and Stephanie Varela for their work. Anthony Stella will be updating the Fourth DCA s page. The Guide has a new assistant editor. That would complete a full update in what Ms. Creed hopes is a very readable and easy-to-use format. 4. Florida Bar Journal Articles - Brandon Christian No report other than Ms. Jones statements above. I. Website - Jonathan Streisfeld Ms. Berman thanked Mr. Streisfeld for his work and quick response time on and website updates. Mr. Streisfeld reported that everything is running smoothly. The updates that Ms. Creed provided were very helpful. Ms. Albrecht and Mr. Pitchford are helping with the update of the Pro Bono Handbook. Mr. Pitchford is also looking at how to permit automatic updates that would save the section time and expense. If anyone needs any information on the website or for distribution, let him know. J. Historian - Valeria Hendricks Ms. Berman stated that Ms. Hendricks has sent in a report on the History Committee, which is getting off the ground. Ms. Hendricks thanks Caryn Bellus, who asked her to do this project. The committee is in the process of updating the website s history page since Everything is updated except 2011 and Dawn has agreed to update 2011 and A volunteer is still needed to summarize The work is almost complete. Ms. Berman noted the history page looks great and will have all of the information in one place. She thanked Ms. Hendricks. Ms. Hendricks also thanked Jared Krukar for updating this time also. 11

16 IX. Next meeting: January 22, 2015, Hilton Orlando Lake Buena Vista Ms. Berman reminded members of this upcoming meeting and to keep their eyes out for budget and other committee s. X. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 1:16 p.m. 12

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Cici Berman, Chair Appellate Practice Section Nicholas A. Shannin, Chair Legislation and Public Advocacy Committee DATE: October 9, 2014 RE: Report of the Legislation and Public Advocacy Committee Report of the Committee: As noted at the Annual Meeting, this election year has been a quiet one for purposes of House Bills or other legislative actions that could impact either the judiciary or appellate practice in general. The only exception is the presence on the General Ballot for November 4, 2014, of Amendment Three, entitled Florida Prospective Judicial Vacancies. The amendment raises the issue of whether we amend the Florida Constitution to clarify that if a governor and a member of the Florida Supreme Court are both destined to have their terms expire the same day, the outgoing governor, not the incoming, gets to make the appointment. Nearly every major newspaper in Florida that has written an opinion regarding the amendment has urged voters to vote no. These papers ranging from Palm Beach and Orlando to traditionally conservative publications such as the Lakeland Ledger and the Panama City News Herald. Accordingly, information regarding that amendment has adequately gotten to the newspapers and to the public. No direct action by the Florida Bar or this Committee is therefore required or recommended at this time. The Committee recognizes, however, that the lull may simply be the calm before the storm. An article from the neutral Florida Trend on Domino Effects, from the November electoral results, said this about the courts [s]ome top Republicans in the legislature want to resurrect controversial plans to curb the power of state courts but only if Scott, who would likely support such efforts, is reelected. Florida Trend, October 2014 Issue, p. 54. This quote is provided, of course, not with regard to how members should consider voting in the November election, but instead solely to raise the awareness that the work of this Committee may well increase dramatically in We will be prepared if it does so. NAS/mhf

38 Exhibit B

39 APPELLATE PRACTICE SECTION NOVEMBER 2014 FINANCIAL STATEMENT OVERVIEW YTD REVENUE: $86,604 YTD EXPENSES: $31,006 YTD NET: $55,598 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE: $370,468 TOTAL CURRENT FUND BALANCE: $426,066 Total Current Membership: 1380 Members

40 Report : 1 of 1 Page : 3 Program : YAZAPFR Unaudited Statement of Operations Date : 12/09/14 User id : JSMITH ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Time : 11:03:49 November YTD Actuals Actuals Budget Percent Budget Total Appellate/Advocacy Law ============================ Sect Dues 80 53,840 55, Affil Dues Total Dues Income Net 80 53,840 55, Legal Span On-line * CLE Courses 3,821 25,964 20, Cospons Share , Sect Differential 320 1,720 6, Spons Reception 0 2,250 12, Member Srvc Prog 1,135 6,860 12, Investment Alloc 909-4,138 9, Other Income 6,185 32,764 78, Total Revenues 6,265 86, , Credit Card Fees Employee Travel 0 0 1, Phone/Direct , Internet Charges Postage Printing Membership Supplies Photocopying Judges Trav Annl Mtg 0 0 1, Officers Travel Exp Committee Exp 0 0 1, General Meeting , Board Or Council Mtg Annual Mtg , Midyear Mtg 0 0 3, Section Service Prog 0 2,204 7, Moot Court 0 0 1, Awards 0 0 1, Website 686 2,786 8, Council Of Sections Operating Reserve 0 0 7, Miscellaneous 0 0 1, CoSpons Exp , Course Credit Fee Total Operating Expenses 1,275 6,192 75, Section Mgmt Fee 18 23,330 24, Mtgs Admin 0 0 1, Graphics & Art 0 1,484 1,

41 Report : 1 of 1 Page : 4 Program : YAZAPFR Unaudited Statement of Operations Date : 12/09/14 User id : JSMITH ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Time : 11:03:49 November YTD Actuals Actuals Budget Percent Budget Total Appellate/Advocacy Law ============================ Total TFB Support Services 18 24,814 27, Total Expenses 1,293 31, , Net Operations 4,972 55,598 31, Fund Balance 0 370, , Total Current Fund Balance 4, , , * * * * * End of listing * * * * *

42 Exhibit C

43

44

45

46 Exhibit D

47 Florida High School Moot Court Program Request The Florida Law Related Education Association, Inc. celebrated thirty years of service to the education, legal, and judicial communities statewide this past year and is now embarking upon its next three decades of service in FLREA has continued to offer unique, lawfocused programs and academic competitions for students as well as professional development opportunities for teachers addressing the courts and the Constitution. Working with the Supreme Court of Florida and The Florida Bar, FLREA has contributed to public education efforts at all levels from elementary to adult programs. Curriculum development, training, showcases, and law-related competitions are part of the unique landscape of services offered by FLREA to help educate students and the public at large about the judicial branch, the state courts, and the American legal system. We are grateful for the continued assistance of The Florida Bar Appellate Practice Section in providing financial support for the high school moot court competition. Last year, all seven of Florida s Supreme Court Justices participated in the final round of competition and heard oral arguments from the top two high school appellate teams. Clips from the final round of competition can be found on the FLREA website at under programs and moot court. The competition provides two stages of review including evaluation of briefs and the oral argument phase. New rules this year will limit the number of briefs submitted by an individual teacher. This will help ensure greater quality of briefs prior to submission to the state coordinating body. Case materials for the 2015 competition have been posted along with applicable rules. FLREA recognizes the Appellate Practice Section for its involvement and contributions on our moot court web page as well as in the moot court case materials and at all competition festivities. FLREA is requesting a financial contribution of $1,500 to assist with awards and the state competition ceremonies. The direct program expenses including DCA competitions and the state finals cost in excess of $20,000 excluding staff time as well as student travel expenses. With these additional costs, full program costs rise to over $50,000 annually. We are seeking additional sponsors this year due to rising costs. Additionally, FLREA has great need for additional coaches for schools. If section members are interested in serving as coaches or participating as an appellate brief judge, please contact Annette Boyd Pitts at staff@flrea.org. The FLREA website includes current dates for the state finals and case materials as well as preparatory videos and other important information.