University of Wisconsin Law School Forum

Volume XVII Number 2. Fall 1986

Self-Study on Admissions PolicyDean Cliff F. Thompson

The Assault on the Civil Justice SystemRobert L. Habush

Class of 1976 Follow-up Survey

Good News: Report on law School CampaignDavid G. Utley

Profile: Emeritus Professor Maurice LeonWilliam G. Moore

CLEO Summer Institute

International law Journal Flourishes

Faculty Briefs

Notes on Alums

Editor's NoteCover:Memorial Union, Theater Terrace, from anetching by Emeritus Prof Maurice Leon

Bulletin of the University of WisconsinLaw School, published quarterly.

Edward J. Reisner, EditorEarl J. Madden, Design

Publication office, Law School, Universityof Wisconsin, Madison, WI.

Postmaster's note: Please send form3579 to "Gargoyle," University of Wis-consin Law School, Madison, WI 53706.

Subscription price: 50¢ per year formembers. $1.00 per year for non-members.

2

3

6

8

13

1516

1717

18

ISSN0148-9623 USPS 768-300

2

Self-Study on Admissions PolicyDean Cliff F. Thompson

ew members of 1L,whatever their law school,have escaped the classroom warning, "Look tothose on your left and right, because one of them

will be gone by the end of the year:' As an indirect exhor-tation to hard work, the traditional utterance remainssound advice, even though its statistical predictionbecame false long ago. At a meeting held by the nationalLaw Schools Admissions Council for deans, however, thewords took on new life. A speaker cautioned the deansthat the sharp decline in student applications couldthreaten the existence of some law schools. With mali-cious good humor, he paused dramatically, and said tothe deans: "Look to those on your left and right, becauseone of them will be gone by the end of the year:'

Nothing so extreme has occurred yet, but the pre-dicted drop in applications is real. Compared to fouryears ago, applications to the country's 175accreditedlaw schools are one-quarter fewer, and the figures at ourLaw School approximately mirror this trend. Because theUniversity of Wisconsin has substantially more appli-cants than enrollments, we have not had the big prob-lems faced by many schools. For some 15years, the UWLaw School has had a cap of 285 entering students. For afew years after the faculty decided on the limit, therewas talk of the need for another public law school in thestate. But the wisdom of the decision has been confirmedby events, including the absence of any need on our partto panic as we adjust to the national decline in applicants.

In 1985, for example, we had 1407completed applica-tions for the 285 first-year places. Applicants, moreover,are generally those who believe they have records suffi-ciently strong to meet the high standards required foradmission. But a closer look at the admissions' processprovides reasons for our close attention and concern.Using the average ofthe 1977-78 years as a base, the1985applications dropped 29.4%, and the acceptanceswere much less selective. Although non-quantitative fac-tors are important in our decisions for admission, thefirst-year predicted average (FYP)is a significant frame-work for determinations. The FYP is a combination ofthe LSATand undergraduate grade average. This pastyear we had a substantial increase in admissions of per-sons with a FYP of 81 rather than 83. This might seem tobe a small difference until the representative LSATandgradepoint averages for the two groups are noted: for aFYP of 83, the LSATscore is in the 87th percentile andthe gradepoint is 3.42; for a FYP of 81, the LSATdrops tothe 57th percentile and the gradepoint to 3.15.

Because the national downward trend in applicationsis likely to continue, the faculty is undertaking a self-study of our admission policies, in order to plan system-atically before any real problems overtake us. No one can

predict usefully about what might be changed, if any-thing. The issues are many, and complicated, but theenrollment restrictions self-imposed by the faculty willinevitably be considered. These are the 285 enrollmentfigure, and the resident/non-resident admission ratio of80/20. At least three factors are relevant to the first-yearenrollment: the standard and number of applicants; pro-jections as to law-related work; and the availability ofresources to provide a high quality of legal education.Many of the criticisms of legal education in the pastdecade have one feature in common, the need for moreindividualized training. Fewer students might help toachieve what pleas for more resources to handle the cur-rent number of students could never accomplish. As tothe 80/20 ratio, it obviously helps to serve more state res-idents than does the ratio used by other states (Michigan,for example, uses approximately 50/50l. Our ratio, how-ever, was enacted at a time of maximum numbers ofapplications and virtually unlimited numbers of highlyqualified resident applicants. Careful thought must begiven to this and all admissions issues, which are alwayslikely to provoke strong and contradictory sentiments.

An alumni committee will assist the faculty in thestudy and planning: Jeff Bartell (Chair); David Collins;Chief Justice Nathan Heffernan; Howard Pollack;VelPhillips; and Judge John Reynolds. You may havethoughts which you would like to share. Youare cor-dially invited to contact me or Jeff, or any member ofthe committee.

The Assault on theCivil Justice SystemRobert L. Habush

3

{In July, Robert L. Habush, '61, became thefirst Wisconsin lawyer to serve as Presidentof the Association of 'Irial Lawyers. Whileserving as President-elect, he began to takea national stage as spokesperson for attor-neys and consumers in opposition to theinsurance industry. He has appeared acrossthe country and was featured on the frontpage of the Wall Street Journal representinghis 66,000 member association. Mr. Habushhas some strong opinions on the currentinsurance crisis, opinions he shared at theBenchers Dinner, during the Annual SpringProgram. The following article was adaptedby Mr. Habush from his speech to theBenchers.Mr. Habush has been a frequent lecturer

at the Law School, teaching Tnal Advocacyand the Civil Trial section of the GeneralPractice Course.J

There is a war underway, a war on ourclients, on victims, a war on our juries, awar on our judges. In effect it is an attackon the independent judiciary, the bar, anattack on the very structure of the civiljury as embodied in the Seventh Amend-ment and as adopted by all the states ofthis country. The breadth and the inten-sity of this attack is staggering. I have puton tens of thousands of miles in the lastyear or so. I have been all over. I can tellyou that it is pervasive. It has totally pre-occupied my mind as if I am involved ina trial that never ends. It also has givenme some time to reflect between airportsabout how did we got into this.

Reflect with me, take a journey backwith me, through the last couple decadesto see why we got into this situation andhow we can get out. I have the benefit ofhaving started practice in 1961.I startedtrying cases in the decade when theseproducts liabilities cases first started;when the law was in a state of change. I

There is a war underway, a war onour clients, on victims, a war onour juries, a war on our judges.

am able to stand back and look at threedecades of civil litigation practice and getan overview that is helpful.

First and foremost, I do not believethat the tort system is going to be totallydestroyed. I must tell you that it is goingto take some bad bumps and bruises, andit has already. Many of us in this roomhave spent most of our professional livesin a period that I would call the "goldenage in torts." We celebrated decisionswhich opened up new areas for recovery.Weapplauded ourselves and others forverdicts that set new records. We edu-cated and re-educated ourselves at semi-nars until we developed legions of highly

skilled trial lawyers. Our juries werejuries of consumers and the appellatejudges were anxious to respond to soci-ety's wishes as they viewed them. Wetruly were intoxicated with our ownambitions. Wewere trial lawyers. Wecalled ourselves the "gladiators," "equal-izers," "gunfighters." We represented allthe underdogs against the giants. It wasglorious. Our clients benefited, and soci-ety benefited. There were countlessexamples of wrongs that were righted, ofproducts that were made safer, of doctorswho changed their errant practice, ofhospitals that became safer. What thelegendary Ralph Nader was doing in thehalls of Congress, trial lawyers weredoing all over the country in thecourtroom.

Sowhat happened to Camelot? Whenand where did we lose it? Litigationbecame as much an industry as thegroups we were suing. We used more andmore sophisticated techniques. Therewere more of us, and the results werebetter. And we tripped over each otheron the way to the media to trumpet oursuccesses. We provided Jury VerdictResearch with the information of theawards and results; the very data we arenow being wounded with.

The media, of course, only reports thebig verdicts, the sensational. And theyreported the ad damnum clause in com-plaints that were filed that asked for mil-lions in cases that were not worth thatmuch. All this caused a growing publicmisconception that most civil cases arevery large, multi-million dollar cases.

Moreover, some very offensive busi-ness-getting practices, like that whichoccurred in Bhopal or Dallas, disgracedand embarrassed lawyers everywhereand aggravated the media and the public.Offensive and tasteless lawyer advertis-

4

ing further added to the public's percep-tion of a litigious and sue-crazy societyfueled by aggressive attorneys.

We tend to forget that a very smallpercentage of the population has everhad a personal injury case or an autocase, let alone product liability or medi-cal malpractice. The public's perceptionof trial lawyers and the civil justice sys-tem is formed by television and very lit-tle personal experience forms the basis ofattitudes. Polls that have been takenrecently show that trial lawyers havebeen ranked very low among professions,particularly compared to doctors. Peoplebelieve that our primary interest is in ourfees rather than our client's causes. Wewere so busy getting good and helpingour clients that we completely droppedthe ball on public relations.

Offensive and tasteless lawyeradvertising further added to thepublic's perception of a litigiousand sue-crazy society fueled byaggressive attorneys.

There is a striking similarity to theplight of trial lawyers and that of orga-nized labor. Labor, too, lost touch withthe general public and the need to edu-cate them as to the righteousness of theircauses. Witness the fall in popularity oforganized labor and the lack of publicsupport when a local or national unionis under siege.

The origins of the legislative crisisaffecting the tort system really began inthe "no-fault days" in the early 1970's.We tend to forget that a couple dozenstates enacted no-fault statutes in theearly 1970's. In 1975, during "Malprac-tice Crisis I," a couple dozen statespassed various types of medical mal-practice statutes. And in 1977-78, manystates passed products liabilities actswhich rewrote some aspects of thecommon law.

Therefore, many states have beenbruised legislatively in the past, but thecrisis of 1975-76 was basically a medicalmalpractice crisis. It was manageable,and it really provided a catalyst for manystate trial lawyer associations to improvetheir organizations. But the granddaddyof them all is "Crisis 1986."Every seg-ment of society has been adverselyaffected, and I want to tell you that theyare all on our case. After five or six yearsof a savage price war in the commerciallines, the property-casualty industrydecided to play "catch-up" and get evenin one year. In addition to that, they

decided to withdraw from certain mar-kets, such as day care centers, govern-mental units, people who clean up toxicwaste dumps and many others. Many ofthese groups had no prior claims, yetthey were cancelled. Doctors, too, whohad benefited from many years of verylow premiums got bumped very signifi-cantly and were back at the legislatorsasking for help. The physician situationwas further aggravated by a ridiculouslysmall underwriting pool in which, forexample, only 39 neurosurgeons wererated as a rating group in Wisconsin. Inaddition to that, physicians were notexperience-rated. Moreover, doctor disci-pline of incompetents and "repeaters"was absent. All of these groups that hadtheir premiums raised or could not getinsurance anywhere were told by theinsurers that the action was due to: a liti-gious society, juries have gone amuck,huge awards that were like a lottery, andambulance-chasing attorneys plus a pro-liferation of millions of dollar awards.Anecdotes were developed of unusualcases which in each telling got morebizarre and distorted.

What was to be the legislative answer?The agenda included: caps on recoveryof pain and suffering or punitive dam-ages, restriction of plaintiff attorneys'fees, and elimination of joint and sever-able liability. Senator Kasten continuedto press for the reversal of 30 years ofproducts liability progress that protectsconsumers. Coalitions sprang up aroundthe country; coalitions ironically called"coalitions for justice." Divergent mem-bers banded together in groups with onecommon enemy-us-and one agenda-dismantle the civil justice system. Theywere lean, they were mean and theywere well funded. Only a fool would notappreciate the peril that is presently fac-ing the civil justice system. It is truly inharm's way.

The counter-attack has started. Wewere very slow getting out of the gateboth nationally and on a state level. Butour public relations campaign that is nowbeing waged and the information that isnow being distributed has started toshow some results. For instance, recentlyBusiness News, of all magazines, came outwith an article entitled, "The Explosionin Liability Lawsuits Is Nothing But aMyth." They had an editorial that sug-gested that the charges of the insuranceindustry that the litigation system is toblame for their problems is essentiallyunproven. In addition to that more andmore newspapers have started to realizethat perhaps the allegations of a "lawsuitcrisis" were untrue. In an editorial, theSt. Petersburg Times said, "The push totort reform is a cynical scheme to pin the

blame on the courts for the current highcost of commercial liability insurancewhile allowing the insurance industry toescape its own fiscal mismanagement."

Recently the National Center for StateCourts came out with its long-awaitedreport in which its statistician stated that"careful examination of available trialcourt data relating to tort, contract, realproperty rights and small claims casesprovides no evidence to support the existence of a national litigation explosion."

A couple of days ago the GeneralAccounting Office came out with a reportwhich rebuked the insurance industry fOJtheir premium increases, which they saidwere excessive and unnecessary.

Congress has started investigationsof the property-casualty industry. Repre-sentative Peter Redino, of Watergate

After five or six years of a savageprice war in the commercial lines,the property-casualty industrydecided to play II catch-up' I and geteven ill one year.

fame, has indicated that he intends tosubpoena the records of the property-casualty industry. Several other Congress-men have announced that they intend toinvestigate what they call the insurancescandal. Many people in the public sectorare starting to become skeptical.

Amazing as it seems, when our ene-mies started quoting the jury statistics wehad nothing to counter with. Jury VerdictResearch, Inc. is a clipping service thatclips headlines about jury awards. Inaddition, lawyers send in their results,and lawyers are not likely to report losersor the modest results. As a result, thisdata base included only the largest andmost successful cases. In the "averages"they did not have the zeros (losses)or thelow awards. The headline in USA Todaysaid that the average award in a productliability verdict was $1.8million, theaverage medical malpractice award is $1.0million. Those averages are preposterous.A Rand Corporation study, which cov-ered 20 years, indicated that the averageproduct liability award was well under$300,000, and the average medical mal-practice verdict was under $250,000. Themedia was either unaware of these stud-ies or chose to ignore them.

University of Wisconsin Law SchoolProfessors Marc Galanter and Dave Tru-bek had done a major study of litigationin America, published in the UCLALawReview, which studied just how litigiousAmericans were. Do you know what they

discovered? They discovered that on aper capita basis we are no more litigiousthan people who live in Denmark, GreatBritain, New Zealand and that we are lesslitigious than people who live in Yugosla-via. In addition to that Galanter and Tru-bek discovered that the large increase infederal court cases was due to the federalgovernment suing people for reimburse-ment of Social Security, veteran loans andstudent loans, and people suing the fed-eral government for increases in theirSocial Security and disability benefitsthat had been cut out by the Reaganadministration.

Daniels, of the American Bar Founda-tion, released a study recently in whichhe studied punitive damages. He re-ported that punitive damages were rarelyawarded and when they were they werenot as large as "advertised." He statedthat his findings are sufficient to call intoquestion many of the claims made in pro-fessional circles and in mass media aboutthe civil justice system in general.

One of the more dramatic areas ofgeneral product liability litigation is gen-eral aviation. The private aviation manu-facturers, most of whom are located inKansas, have long been advocates ofproduct liability change. In their maga-zine, The Aviation Consumer (March1986),in the editorial entitled, "ProductsLiability: Who is the Real Villain?", theeditor said, "There is persuasive evi-dence that the insurance industry may bea bigger culprit than the legal system buthas erected a facade of innocence andneatly dodged all responsibility."

The National Association for the Edu-cation of YoungChildren said, "If youwant to expose the sham being carried onby the insurance industry, look at childcare." Would it interest you to know thattwo-thirds of the day care centers in thiscountry were cancelled and could not getinsurance and one-third had their premi-ums raised so that they could not affordinsurance. They did a survey and discov-ered that 90% of the day care centers hadnever experienced a claim. Of those thathad, the largest paid claim was $15,000.The study showed that of the premiumspaid by the whole group only 6% waspaid for claims.

As an example of the deceit of insur-ers, consider that since the early 1960's,Wisconsin has had a cap on claimsagainst governmental units of $25,000,now $50,000. There are only two win-dows of responsibility, motor vehicleaccidents and constitutional actions suchas in police brutality cases. Nevertheless,41 counties had their insurance with-drawn recently. This is true throughoutthe United States. In the village of FoxPoint, where I live, the premium was

raised from $25,000 to $260,000 withno claim experience that would justifysuch action.

What if I were to tell you of a hypo-thetical place which has a $180,000 limiton recovery for pain and suffering, hasno contingent fee, has virtually no jurytrials, and the loser pays the attorney feesand costs, and then I were to tell you thatin this insurers' utopia day care centerscould not get insurance, cities could notget insurance, trucking companies couldnot get insurance. Youwould probablysay I am nuts. Such a place exists. Itscalled Ontario, Canada.

I think its time we started address-ing some "sacred cows;' such asclient solicitation, mediation ofsmaller claims, attorney fees, frivo-lous claims and defenses; notbecause we are forced to, butbecause it is right to do so.

The Insurance Service Organizationstated, "The property-casualty insuranceindustry must accept a major responsibil-ity for the current financial situation."Best's Review said, "Trying to increasemarket share and generate greater pre-mium volume to take advantage of rec-ord interest rates spawned a savageprice war."

As if we did not have enough trou-ble, the President of the United Statesdecided to deal himself in as well. TheAttorney General "fed" him some of the"distorted horror stories" and the Presi-dent decided that he should push for tortreform. The President was "appalled" bythe "lawn mower" case. This is one ofthe horror stories: The story goes, accord-ing to the published reports, that an over-weight, elderly man with a history ofheart disease was trying to start his Searslawn mower. It would not start. He keptpulling it and pulling it until he got aheart attack and he successfully suedSears for a $1million. The truth is: hewas a 32-year old doctor in excellentphysical condition with no history ofheart problems. The mower had a defec-tive part in it which made it impossibleto start. After 15 strenuous pulls, he hada heart attack. There was a stipulation

5

that the machine was defective and medi-cal testimony establishing exertion dueto the defect was a substantial factor incausing the heart attack. This is the typeof "horror story" that convinced thePresident of the United States to goahead with tort reform legislation.

It is not enough for the trial bar towork with consumers, to work withactuaries, to accumulate the kind of dataI have quoted, I think its an opportunityfor the trial bar to take a long, hard lookat itself. I think its time we startedaddressing some "sacred cows," such asclient solicitation, mediation of smallerclaims, attorney fees, frivolous claimsand defenses; not because we are forcedto, but because it is right to do so. I hap-pen to believe that 33113% is a reasonablefee in most cases. I believe that it isunnecessary for any lawyer to charge50% contingent fee in any case. I happento believe that lawyers who knowinglyprosecute frivolous claims or defensesshould be punished financially and iftheir conduct becomes a pattern theyshould be dealt with by the licensingauthority. I believe that voluntary alter-nate dispute resolution for smaller casesis both good for the public and lawyersalike. I believe that lawyers should startcontributing time and money not only toLAWPACsbut also to victims' groups andconsumer groups. And I believe thatsome of us who have benefited so wellfrom this system should start givingsomething back, talking to civic groups,to grade schools, and to high schools, andthat associations should create public ser-vice spots for television, not just during acrisis but continuously as a real publicservice.

I cannot predict the outcome of theassault on the civil justice system. I doknow that I and others like myself willget the truth out and that we are hopefulthat any damage will be minimized. Butwe trial lawyers always, like Don Quix-ote, pursue "impossible dreams," butalso like the song, many of us have alsobeaten many an "unbeatable foe." Ialways think of the words of the famousauthor, Raymond Chandler, whodescribes his hero, which in my minddescribes the trial lawyer, when he says,"Down these mean streets a man mustgo who is not himself mean, who is nei-ther tarnished nor afraid." That describestrial lawyers, who will walk the "meanstreets" to preserve the Seventh Amend-ment, the civil justice system, the inde-pendent judiciary and the jury-for if notus-who will?

6

Class of 1976 Follow-up Survey(Back in the early 1970's, UW SociologyProf Howard Erlanger decided to studythe attitudes of law students toward socialchange and pro bono activities. 1b that endhe surveyed the Class of 1976 before theystarted their first year, and again at the endof their second year of study.Kathy Beisel, a doctoral student at the

University of Chicago, has worked with Pro-fessor Erlanger in developing a follow-upsurvey of the class, ten years after gradua-tion. In this first report of her findings, shecompares UW Law School students to thenational norms, and looks at the extent towhich they have retained many of the atti-tudes toward social issues that they hadupon entering Law School.The subject of the study must have been

particularly interesting to Prof Erlanger.In 1979 he too became a UW Law student,graduating in 1981 and has now joinedour faculty.]

In the spring of 1985, the Class of 1976participated in a follow-up of a study inwhich they had taken part in 1973 and1975, at the beginning and middle oftheir legal education. It was clear fromthe two previous surveys that many ofthese graduates had been interested inworking toward social change, donatingtheir legal services, and servicing poorand indigent clients. The current studyreveals that in spite of the usual time andfinancial pressures in the work place,and governmental changes such as cutsto social programs, many members of theClass of 1976 have retained this serviceorientation to some extent. The followingpages summarize the career histories andpro bono activities of these graduates.

Table 1

Number of law School Graduates in Various Job Settings forFirst and Current Job

First Job Current Jobrob Setting Number % Number %

Solo 14 7 22 12Small firm « lOj 48 24 51 29Medium firm (10-30j 48 24 51 29Large firm (>301 15 8 14 8Federal judiciary 4 2 1 .5Federal government 10 5 6 3State/local judiciary 11 6 4 2State/local goverment 33 17 25 14Private Industry 8 4 13 7Private association 4 2 4 2Legal aid/public defender 21 11 9 5Education 7 4 6 3

Subtotal' • 198 102' 179 99.5

Non-legal position 14 36Unemployed 0 2

Total 212 217

• Percents do not add to 100 due to rounding error.•• The column percents are calculated from the lawyer subtotals whichdo not include individuals in non-legal positions. This was done in orderto compare the current sample to other samples of lawyers.

First and Current JobsThe graduates' first and current jobs

are displayed in Table 1. These results arefairly similar to those of a national sam-ple of lawyers who graduated in either1976 or 1977 (ABA Young Lawyers Divi-sion, "National Survey of Career Satis-faction/Dissatisfaction," 1983). In the

national sample, lawyers are somewhatmore likely to be in private firms of morethan thirty lawyers or in private industryand less likely to be in government andservice-oriented jobs like legal aid andpublic defense.

Those law students who expressed .interest in jobs in which they could help

under-represented people were morelikely than their classmates to take theirfirst job with the federal government orin a legal aid or public defender's office(see Table 2). Table 3 shows that a similar,although less pronounced, pattern existsfor current jobs.

7

Percent of Work Hours Graduates Intended to Donate(1973 & 1975) and Percent Actually Donated (1985)

49964

2111

100

3411214

34o

100

165

102

14o

47

23432

107

47

561o9

1716

99

58225

345

101

higher than the national average. Thus,while the initial idealism of the Class of1976 may have faded somewhat, theseinitial intentions can still be recognizedin the graduates' career choices and probono efforts.

661o

112019

116

65226

366

113

Table 4

Table 2

lawyers' Liberal-Reformist Intentions and First JobsLiberal-reformist Intentions

Low HighNumber % Number %

Table 3

lawyers' Liberal-Reformist Intentions and Current JobsLiberal-reformist Intentions

Low HighNumber % Number %

Percent of Work Time Intentions DonationsDonated or Intended 1973 1975 1975to be Donated Number % Number % Number %

0% 1 1 5 4 25 231-9% 43 39 47 43 79 7210%+ 66 60 58 53 6 5

Total 110 100 110 100 110 100

Private practiceFederal governmentLegal aid/public defenderPrivate IndustryOther legal jobsNon-legal jobs

Total

Private practiceFederal governmentLegal aid/public defenderPrivate IndustryOther legal jobsNon-legal jobs

Total

TabSetting

TabSetting

tween the University of Wisconsin andnational samples show that the amountof pro bono work that UW graduateshave done is relatively high. Further-more, the comparisons also reveal thatthe percentage of graduates who are cur-rently in legal aid and public defense is

Donation of Legal TimeThe service orientation of the lawyers

in this study is particularly clear in re-gard to the amount of time they reporteddonating. The amount of legal time thelawyers currently donate was measuredby the question: "During the last 12months, have there been any groups orindividuals for which you have done freeor reduced-fee legal work, such as theScouts, a charitable agency, a legal aidoffice, individual clients or acquaintancesand relatives?" The figures reported forthis question are clearly highter than thefigures reported for a similar question ina national survey. During 1983, approxi-mately 34% of the national samplereported donating an average of five ormore hours per month (including bothwork and non-work hours). Forty-twopercent reported donating one hour orless per month. In this sample of UWgraduates, 51% donated an average offive or more hours per month and 33%reported monthly donations of one houror less.

Although the amount of time the law-yers currently donate is relatively high,in general the amount donated is lessthan the amount they initially intended(see Table 4). Prior to attending lawschool, 60% of the 110 students whoresponded to all three surveys plannedto spend at least 10% of their work timeon pro bono activities. The intention todonate time decreased somewhat duringthe second year in law school with 53%of the students planning to "tithe" on probono work. Currently only 5% of thelawyers report donating 10% or more oftheir work time on pro bono work in thelast twelve months. Twenty-three percentof the sample stated that they did notdonate any time during the last twelvemonths. During the first and secondphases of this study, only one and fourpercent, respectively, planned not todonate any time.

The graduates not only donated lesstime than they had intended, but theirattitudes toward pro bono work havechanged as well. For example, the statisti-cal means for the question "Giving freeor reduced cost legal work to individualsor groups who cannot afford legal help ispart of a lawyer's professional obligation"have declined for those who answeredthe question all three times (n= 1331. Themeans were-4.23, 4.05 and 3.74. Fromthese results one can conclude that expe-riences following graduation led to a lesspositive orientation toward donating legalservices, in regard to both attitude andaction. Nevertheless, a comparison be-

One of the principal goals of theLaw School Campaign was theestablishment of endowed BascomProfessorships to be awarded to theSchool's outstanding teachers andscholars. During the course of thecampaign twelve such professor-ships were endowed. A specialthank you is due to the followingdonors whose generous gifts madethese professorships possible.

AnonymousJefferson Burrus ('32)Evjue FoundationRobert Habush ('61)Foley & Lardner (firm and alumni)William Voss ('29)Sherwood Volkman ('50)

And to the numerous individualcontributors who, collectively,endowed the George Young Profes-sorship in Business Law

In addition, special thanks toJohn Bosshard ('47), Robert B. L.Murphy ('32) and Elisabeth Wilsonwho have arranged to establishendowed professorships in thefuture.

While the establishment of Bas-com Professorships that supportthe teaching and research efforts ofparticular faculty members was amajor goal of the campaign, equallyimportant was the endowment of aresearch fund to which all facultycould apply for support of specialscholarly undertakings. Such anendowment, at the level of a Bas-com Professorship, would providemuch needed flexibility in support-ing work in a variety of legal spe-cialties.

The Law School is especiallygrateful to alumni (and several non-alumni) in the Wisconsin firm ofQuarles & Brady whose generosityhas established the Quarles &Brady Faculty Research Fund.

No fund raising effort could suc-ceed without the support of loyaland dedicated volunteers. Irvin B.Charne ('49) of Milwaukee servedas National Chairman of the drive.His loyalty, dedication and percep-tiveness were vital to the successof the effort, and the Law Schoolis indebted to him for his ableleadership.

In addition, a special thank youis owed to the following law alumniwho helped organize campaignefforts in their communities:john S. Best-MilwaukeeRichard L. Olson-Dane CountyWilliam E. Dye-Racine & Kenosha

CountiesRodney O. Kitte/sen-Green, Rock,

Walworth & Jefferson Countiesjohn R. Holden-Sheboygan,

Calumet & Manitowoc CountiesCarroll B. Callahan-Sauk,

Columbia & Dodge CountiesDanie/ T. Flaherty-La Crosse,

Trempealeau & Vernon CountiesDon R. Herrling-AppletonG. Lane Ware-Marathon Countyjerome T. Bomier-Winnebago

CountyMac A. McKichan,

Sr.-Southwestern WisconsinHaro/d Witkin-Superior AreaGeorge M. Carroll-Eau Claire,

Chippewa, Clark & DunnCounties

Tomas Russell-ChicagoW Thomas Door, jr.-Minneapolis-

St. PaulArnold H. Weiss-Washington, DCDouglas H. Soutar-Feinsinger

Labor Law FundDavid Previant-Feinsinger Labor

Law Fund

RoyWBurnellJack FJon P. AlielrodCorey &. 'Il:ma AylingBradden C, BackerNorman J, BakerGordon K RaldwinThmmy Rarlell Inc,Andrea &; Rcllrrt BaumanJames &. Linda Behnke.Edward R BeierleFrancis V. BemisDavid 1,. Bene!<1fBennett lit Bennet!Alan It BialeekMe & Mrs. Everett

V BidwdlMary & Michael BillsAllred T. l:l!eekWeill!

GemJd J. BlochCarol &. Jtmme Bl\xk[cseph f1 BlockCharks 5 l'llumenfkldRobt'rt F BotlenMillon R. Bnrdt)WRichard J, Bo¥ntlll1Mark 1 BradleyLester W. Brillln ,IfChr!f;to!)ntr Bugl{Barbara BurbachFlorence Burdlt!lJohn w.RidwrdEleJ1il

JunaidCity Bank & 'frnslMarilee M. ClarkeWilliarll T. ComstockGerald & Yvonne ConklinNeiJM,lkiwilrd J.Barbara lit Ted Crahbjohn 1- Crosetto[ames L CJ1l0millgs&twinC.

Dapm

John A DickensAllred l' DiotteThomas Ii DonohoeNaney C, DreherHoward 1- FeldmanJohn E. roresitrMeyer P. FrankConrad FronttT'imnthy PrautschiJames D. FriedmanHerman F, FriedrichH. Daniel GardnerMichael A, GeW'lerry C, GillelieKenneth H. HansonGeorge A, HardyDavid C HertelThomas A. HenHarry G, HoltWillard & Frances HurstDale K Ihlenfeldt[erard J JensenErvin W johnsonJaroslawa JohnsonMorris KaronDr, Merris Keen11 Ann Kernslames M KramonDennis W IaudonJames C MallanJ Keith MannMichael T Ma>onI\lar A Mc Kjchan SrMelli, Walker. I',:r;s" &. RuhlyAnn M Mey,:rho!"rAlpho!1sUS MurphyliJwft;n()' R NashHildegard NeuhauerSan WOn JI.Victor tI. !'almiuiFrancis IlW Stuart l'dW)llii

John R. PelusonDennis W. RaderMichael RemingtonJohn W RoweAndre M. SaltounVictoria 1- SchroederEileen H. SearlsGeorge 1'. ShultzMark W SmithAustin F. SmithJames W SemanRoy D. Stewart JfHerbert L '!erwilligerArb!e 0 ThalackerVernon W, ThomsonPaul [. Tillemanlohn C lhnJesRalph VThmsrlor1 Unioo

Incal toO

$500-$999Leionan C. AaronsEdmundRonaldPamela Il. RarkerConrtlandt D. Barnes

KRamettFL Bell

Robert II L Murphyjames J, Murphyfaui Noelke'rhoums W O'BrienRobert & Karen O'NeillIohert R OherndorferJulin L l'ahnrrCnlin 1), PietzDavid Prev1antJeill! & Stirling PriceMary Hurfh RimeyRudolph P, RegezMichael & Sum ReiterArtlJUl P RemleyWilliam Roseubaum

Fe RothW. Schmidt

Wtllard C. SchwennThomas W SerlvnerArthur AGnrdmrDalr LSamuel /iiI, SorelMark It Sostarich

R Soutar& Dorotby St()fje

t1)11111!1Sulliv'ilnVemon A. SwsnsnnDonald S. 'lhitelman

A. 'lhrktWi11lblkan

Richard HCharles G.Emst j. vouThomas l' wardG. Lane WlfJeArnold R WeissElmer L. WmlerFred WivioHLillian

John RG~orgeMJohnRJames 0,DoJ1il!d It HuggellThomas W HutchisOl1Ronald S,

L.

Corpnmit PtlILtiee instituteRidmrd 11.CummiosJames F, Dalyjames G. DavisJaek R DrWlllHenry H. DillofW ThomasDoM

Wrlllam DyeGenrgr A. EvansFairchild FUOl1dallOl1James A. FeddersenJames J, FelekPeter 0. felterSheldon I finkRobben WMalihew J. FlynnHenry f. FoxBenjamin flreeRohert fI FroehlkeC"meral Moturs FoundationAIeJllnderRaymond I,

MConmd GJames WHamId V.Arthur Hanington

Hart

Wayne l:l Babltr jr.Bartell

$1,000-$4.999Steven R AllenAnonymousAnonymousAnonymousO. Thomas Armstrong [r.John S, AscherLlnyd BarbeeAndrew & Donna BarnesNorman Bassett FnnndatlonTbomas I), Bell

T. BerKanovJc

Jacob L BernheimJoseph M. BernsteinIrvin It CharneChicago Title Insurance Co.Kellh A Clui'>!ilmsenLester S. ClemonsThomas W Elumllll!lJoseph R FilachekFrisch, Dudek &:

Slallery Ltd,William E. GlassnerLanreace It. GoodingDavid J HaseDavid L. KinnamonWarren P, KnowlesBernard S KubateRIJbtrt W LUllDavid L MacGregorJohn K MaciverNeal E. MadismMeissner, Tiemey, Ehlinger

&: WhippRoger C MioahanOwen D. NeeHoward A. PollackLyman A. PrecourtSamndl RechtAHan L SamwnWilli, G SullivanR,)herl K 'ifhanRichard R, ThsrhnerJohn & Sallie VergerontRichard A. WeissGeorge K. Whyte jr,

U5,OOO449,OO9Catherine ItEarle Ii GillInternatiOlral Brotherhood

MleamsitrsCharles Krause FoundationMandOtjl~f\

Wattawa

$5(l,~$99,999&: IArdotr

M, HaightHelen M, SchlougbJuhn &: Patricia Stedman

$l(ltM1OO'$Z49,999Anr)n\'lnnUSRcl:lert &, irma Artr.mMark $, l3ouad)'JeffelWll llurmMorton K Davis

FoundationL Habosh

Milton L MeisterLCOl1ardE ScllmillThomas M.Edna !\It VolkUlllllElisabeth Wilson

$I0,00!)· $24,999Allan W Adams

AndersonIt BarneltK Berkwith

John S. BestFrank LMe & Mrs,

C,¥dlrick

W, CutterL FL Dawes

FeldhalmFoley

IAnrtnt::e C, Hnmmnnd [r,Mr, &: Mrs, R Holden

Dale P. GerdesHeiner Gies<Penny E, Glllen

MarkJay It FrankeSteven J. FrnnzWilliam H, firmer

Paul S. BeckerMhur H. Beermtlilll

Charlene It Boh1Nicholas l Buw£auVictor H, Breilerme1dPatrick A, BrenllalJh1nreter L. BrightbiH

EugenfJnlie K Brown$arnne! L, BruggerWalter J. BruhnJohn S. Bubo!zGnrdon A BubolzRobert H,Michael S. BulaPeler W. BundeGeorge BunnThmnasG,Keith It ButlerRnbert E. ByrneAnne &. Kevill CalkinsRichiwJ J CallawayMe &. Mrs Roderick A

CameronBruce G. CameronDavid It CaskeyRohfrl E. Caltlllath Jr,GinlamsElilallelhLewis J, CharlesMdvin L CharlierDavid L. CharneRoger W CheeverMelissa fLGeorge fLWalttr D H.Arlen C ChriSleilsnnW. lawrence ChurchPranklin W. ClarkeRichard M, ClintonDavid P. CohnOpal &

Michad]Mt & Mrs Hoben

'It ZoellnerHarlan It ZodtnerLulze R Zunrow

C.Zwakman

Mr. 1% Mrs. Stuarl Kjclm &: Linda 'lCe!aerlHarvey L, 1eurner

Thompson

n~$99Wllliam f" Abbot!Lfsttr II AffeldtMrs, Arnon AllenIt E. AndersonEric $, Anderson

of AmoritaR UnderknflerP. Ungemath

!'au! Vall ValkenburgVerex CorporationRichard L Wachv~skiJohn M, WaggoJ1erJohn r,WagnerWllliarn J Waldeffi1Jl1lDomlhy WalkerBarry & Sharnn WallatkPaul W, W.liig[)avid G. WartmanEdward H Wdnberg

fL WelkerV WhaleyV WhelanR While

Susan Wiesnef"l1awleyHarold \'II WilkieEdwin M. WilkieWiJ!ink &, ThompsonAndrew K WilsonJon M. WJlannPamela &; 'Waynf WJ1snn!'aul R. Wysocki

S

1klwarrl A, StierbergerMii::hael W, Stout

Charles E. PrieveRicltaul A, PrimulhDmtkIlliL QualeGlenn H, Quale

T RanneyT, Ransley

Jon &; Mary ReddinDavid Vi ReineckeFrank J. RemingtooMarvin ResnickStella \'II Rewil

W$

Dna S, I!elersnnErnest R Pel:!James R Flier

Martlla l Oloonjoseph It Oloon

Robert G Eva/ISVi(10r s Falk !IIRay C, FeldmanThley It FergusonArthur G FieldHenry k FieldAon 11 Fisher

& Clark

Richard C DeerschRober! Dougherty

G. W Fo.\ler jflame, FrankWilliam IL Frank

W FrazierA Frederick

Michael E FreemanRobert Jl Fr ickerRobert H I'riebertStanley C Fruitsjohn F. GaeblerJeffrey MTbomas G.Garwy, AJ1drrsrm,

& Rylwfgflnberl G Gr,hnCar 1 E GeroldE R Glatfelter CoGlenwood Medical

AssociatioJ1It GklVer

L GoelterPelf! I},

GulrhteinGoldstein

Robert A GorchelsMargarel C. GmceAlexander It GrnntAnn H Gram(J'mhn AMan Gursky

F Hack\Villiam J. Jf

DIt Hammerstrom

Rollert K HankelDavid J HansonR,)bert l' HarlandGllherl L lIarritkRwhaxd GJaJ1e S, HaeenNathan HeffernanThomas It Hefty!'aul J. HeimOrr))] L Helslad

Hr,rltJThrodofr B Hertfl JtPaul B. HtwittNeil L Hobbs\\\lyne L, Horvitz

K

D.ZimmerA. Zimmerman

S.Robert A Zum

&:W Wilson

David M. WiseMrs. Beatrice WisellMargaret &: Robert WolfeRobert W WolfeGlen W WolffLeonard WoodcockDr. Clinton N.

L Wright

W WangDennis P WardGerald T Wa!7'fDStephen L WasOyDiana L. WatermanJames E. WebsterRobert WHelen E.Carrol J.Herbert G.Russell IiRichard {j,Mark &:

A SchweiH.

Brian D St.:ouKatherine M. Seaton·BachFret! C. SeiboldMark A. Seidl

A. SeiserM.

Mrs. Williilfil

PerryHulbert B. l'ink£rronMt &: Mrs. RicllillU J. PlxlellAlan &: lldna PolachecltDuane H. PolivkaDale B. Pope

Thomas A. PfcilerL Pflasterrr

Delta Frlllernily

MertzDouglas Messmann

Alvin IlMeyerVictor M. MeyerMilttill W. MeyerRohert t{ M ruff

Pile:Emeritus Professor Maurice LeonWilliam G. Moore

13

Emeritus Professor Maurice Leon callshis getting into library work "fortui-tous"-occurring by chance. The UWLaw School regards it as fortunate. UnderLeon's auspices, the law library took onits modern form and earned a reputationas one of the better law libraries in thecountry.

Leon had originally set out to be anartist. "When I was a kid," he said, "Istarted out in art school in Milwaukee."He attended classes at night for two yearswhile he worked at the Milwaukee PublicLibrary, but "had to quit because of theDepression in the 1930s."

The Emeritus Professor continuedto work at the Milwaukee library for 11years. At UW-Milwaukee, he started hisundergraduate education which he sub-sequently finished at UW-Madison whenhe was invited by his friend, UW lawlibrarian Philip Marshall, to come towork at the Law School.

Marshall had begun to tailor the lawlibrary to the "Law in Action" philosophythat was emerging from the law facultyat this time. Recognizing that, as a land-grant college, the University was eligibleto be a government document depository,Marshall attained this status for the Uni-versity of Wisconsin.

The documents were sent to the LawLibrary, care of Marshall. "They were pil-ing up as government documents have atendency to do," Leon said, "so whenPhil asked me to help manage them, Icame up, took the exam and got the job."

Leon worked as government docu-ments librarian until World War II, whenhe was drafted. He served in the SouthPacific and returned from service in thewinter of 1945.

He then enrolled in UW and in 1948got his law degree. After finishing school,he debated between entering law practiceand resuming his library work. When an

offer for an assistant professorship camefrom the Public Division of the Univer-sity Library, Leon took it.

It was Professor Jacob Beuscher whogot Leon back to the Law School. "Jakewanted me to come back," the EmeritusProfessor recalled. "He said the LawSchool needed someone in the librarywho really knew the law." Leon took aposition as associate librarian in 1956. Helater became head librarian, a position heheld until his retirement in 1982.

While under Leon's direction, theLaw Library grew to meet the needs of agrowing Law School. Building facilitieswere enlarged, collections were ex-panded, stacks were thrown open tostudents and library systems weremodernized.

The library's celebrated criminaljustice collection was also built up atthis time.

But the Emeritus Professor is espe-cially proud of the Lexis system, a com-puterized legal bibliographical search ser-vice, added to the Law Library in the late1970s. "The Law School was one of thefirst schools in the country to get Lexis,"Leon said.

In 1985 the Law Library supple-mented the Lexis system with Westlaw.

Leon joked about the addition of thebook detection system, a further changein library procedure made during Leon'stime. "After we got the system:' he said,"I would always forget the thing. I'd godashing out to give someone a book, thesystem would go off, and I'd be doubled

14

over the gate. It was enough to makeeveryone snicker, but at least they couldsee that the system was working."

During his tenure with the LawLibrary, Leon also instructed Legal Bibli-ography, a course designed to introduceincoming students to the Law Library,initiated by Phillip Marshall some yearsearlier. When the library obtained Lexis,classes in "Legal Bib" included instruc-tion in its usage. Lexis revolutionizedresearch.

But, Leon said, "back when I went toschool there were kids that bragged theyhad never cracked a law book-themacho image. I always said that a lawstudent who didn't know anything aboutlaw books was like a doctor who didn'tknow anything about anatomy:' Thingshave changed a lot, Leon believes.

"Now with computer assisted legalresearch, it's almost impossible for stu-dents to avoid the library. By the timemost law students graduate, they realizethat they are going to be heading into a

law firm that has Lexis or Westlaw, andwhere research will be their first job.Today there is an emphasis on legalresearch."

Throughout his career with the LawLibrary, Leon tried to shape the collec-tions and the facilities to the specificneeds of the Law School. "We felt weshould go where they were going, and tryto anticipate their needs:' he said.

The Emeritus Professor also took toheart the Wisconsin Idea and applied itto his work in the library. "I always feltthe Law School and the Law Libraryshould have some kind of interest in animpact beyond the Law School proper:'Leon said.

The Law Library has been especiallyhelpful to those in criminal justice. Thelibrary offered, and continues to offer,research materials to those involved inthe legal profession throughout the state:the attorneys general, the prosecutingattorneys, the defense attorneys andthe police.

"The police, for example:' Leon said,had to keep up with a very rapidly chang-ing concept of legal justice. Things hadgone on pretty much the same for 100years, and then all of a sudden the sce-nario of criminal justice changed. Thepolice were bewildered. At the LawLibrary's Criminal Justice Center, policewere offered advice on how to updatetheir manuals to cope with these prob-lems-we had police manuals from allover the country:'

So, for a library to really serve itspurpose, Leon said, it "can never staystatic, you know, it's got to move, changeand adapt:'

When the Emeritus Professor retiredin 1982, he began to travel. He and hiswife, Dorothy, have frequently visitedNorway.

But above all, Leon has returned to hisart. He's been taking courses in drawingand printing, and he now works in a vari-ety of media. "I'm getting into the swingof it after all these years:' he said.

CLEO Summer Institute atthe UW

15

The University of Wisconsin LawSchool again this year participated in theCouncil on Legal Education Opportuni-ties Summer Institutes, regionally runprograms designed to "prepare economi-cally and educationally disadvantagedstudents for law school by exposing themto an intensive six week course of legalanalysis, writing, and research."

Since 1968, CLEO has sponsored, andUW has taken part in, the Summer Insti-tutes. About 70 other American Bar Asso-ciation-accredited law schools also parti-cipated in the annual program.

The Law School served as a host insti-tution, providing housing accommoda-tions and instructional facilities. Law pro-fessors from other participating schoolsstaffed the program.

The Institutes may be applied to onlyby minority and economically disadvan-taged students who have already com-pleted undergraduate work and antici-pate entering law school in the fall.

The CLEO program seeks, above all,to address some of the particular prob-

lems faced by such students. Attrition isone of these.

The Minorities in the Profession Com-mittee of the Young Lawyers Division ofthe American Bar Association has identi-fied a number of reasons for the highattrition rate among minority students.

Among the more prominent reasons, areport said, are "stress at working in anunfamiliar environment ... t differingcultural assumptions, insufficient back-ground in certain crucial skills, and lackof financial means."

Through the Summer Institutes, stu-dents are provided with an opportunityto come to terms with these problems.

The summer programs help to accli-mate students to the rigors of law schooland offer them a preview of course work;students are encouraged to "distinguishbetween legal reasoning and their cul-tural assumptions;" and the developmentof basic legal skills such as legal briefing,writing and research is initiated.

Those students who, during the pro-gram, demonstrate the ability to com-

plete law school successfully, are "certi-fied" and, upon enrolling in a law school,are eligible to receive a stipend fromCLEO. While the amount has not beenlarge, it is a start toward addressing a fur-ther cause of attrition, financial need.

According to Assistant Dean StephenRocha, co-director of the Wisconsin pro-gram along with UW Law ProfessorDaniel Bernstine, only a fraction of theabout 250 students enrolled in the nation-wide program fail certification.

And the Council on Legal EducationOpportunity has said CLEO studentshave "established a highly commendablecompletion record" in law schools.

The Summer Institutes program is"but one way in which racial and ethnicimbalances in law schools and the legalprofession may be offset:' The UW LawSchool is proud of its continuing effortsin these endeavors, and of its 19th yearof participation in the CLEO SummerInstitutes.

16

International Law JournalFlourishesAmerica cannot isolate itself fromevents of international scope, as evi-denced by recent demonstrations ofinternational terrorism, threats to exist-ing nuclear arms control agreements, andInternational Court of Justice rulings.The student at the University of Wiscon-sin Law School has an excellent opportu-nity to explore the legal ramifications ofthese and other international events,while developing legal writing andresearch skills, through the medium ofa unique, student-managed publication,the Wisconsin International Law Jour-nal (WILJ).

In addition to learning about the inter-national legal process and developingexpertise in a particular realm of interna-tionallaw, the student-writer gains theopportunity to publish an article andthereby add to the development of thisfield of law. The student-writer earnsthree credits toward their degree. Fur-ther, he or she earns the opportunity tobecome an editor the following year,enhancing leadership and managerialskills, while earning an additional twocredit hours. Naturally, professional con-tributions on topics of international laware also welcome.

Having just completed the 1985-86academic year, WILJ is en route to estab-lishing itself as a respected and qualitymember of the growing international lawjournal community across the nation.Past members of the Journal can takepride in knowing that UW Law School'squality of excellence has been carried onin each succeeding generation of WILJeditors and writers, exploring new waysto increase and improve upon the Jour-nal's substance, readership, revenue andrespectability.

Under the stewardship of the 1985-86Editor-in-Chief, Chris jaekels, WILJ

achieved such important managerial suc-cesses as its inclusion in the Index ofLegal Periodicals. Senior Editors StephenDeCosse, Dan Waite, Rollie Hanson andother managing, assistant and Note andComment Editors deserve praise for theirinspiration, guidance and patiencetowards student-writers, and for theirtreatment, solicitation and selection ofprofessional writers. Through their workand vision, they have demonstrated tothe UW Law School administration, totheir subscribers, to the alumni, and to

the legal community in general the qual-ity, contribution and importance of aninternational law journal within the Wis-consin Law School curriculum. Thisyear's edition, "Direct Foreign Invest-ment in the United States:' will offerimportant and timely legal analysis in theareas of international financial, realestate and investment portfolio manage-ment, particularly during a time of anexpanding domestic economy. Also thispast year, in conjunction with the Wis-consin International Law Society (WILS)and its President Ami Jaeger, WILJhelped host the 4th Annual WILS Sympo-sium, "The Legal Challenge of Nuclear

Non-Proliferation:' whose proceedingsare to be published by the 1986-87 WILJeditorial staff.

In addition to publishing the proceed-ings of this most important Symposium,the incoming staff, under the direction ofEditor-in-Chief 'less Welch, is planningsome exciting and important changes. Forexample, WILJ is looking at the possibil-ity of two issues this academic year forthe first ti~e. The journal is exploringnew, creative ways to finance its ambi-~ious v~ntures. The Journal is also study-mg an Image change by printing the tableof contents on the outside cover andother marketable additions to its con-tents, all in an effort to expedite its pro-f~ssional utility and increase its competi-tiveness among other international lawjournals.. The process of transforming a younginternational law journal into a respectedchronicler of and contributor to thedevelopment of an international legalstructure is an exciting mission, onewhose responsibility leaves its partici-pants imbued with a greater respect forthe process of law and for their own tal-ents and achievements. The editors vowto continue publishing a quality interna-tionallaw journal, one which reflectscredit to and contributes to its field, andone in which we can all take pride, nowand into the future.

Subscription or article publicationinformation can be obtained by writingto the Wisconsin International LawJournal, University of Wisconsin LawSchool, Madison, WI 53706, or by calling(608) 262-2240.

Faculty Briefs

17

The Legislative Council of the State ofWisconsin has appointed Arlen Chris-tenson as a Public Member on the Spe-cial Committee on Lobby Law Review.The Special Committee was established"for the purpose of examining the effec-tiveness of the current law regulating thepractice lobbying."

Martha Fineman chaired "Feminismand Legal Theory," a conference held inmid-July on the UW-Madison campus.A profile on Fineman is also due toappear in an upcoming issue of theNational Law Journal.

If you saw "Inside the Jury Room" onPBS' "Frontline" this spring, then youmay be aware that the program was pro-duced by UW Law Professor StephenHerzberg.

The hour-long film "represents thefirst time a camera has been brought intothe jury room."

Herzberg undertook the making ofthe film-nearly a four-year endeavor-because he believes the jury system isunder sharp attack.

"Large corporations and the AmericanMedical Association are seeking to limitthe power of the jury:' Herzberg toldMadison's Isthmus shortly before theprogram was aired here April 11. "Theyargue that they are seeking to restrainlawyers; it is not lawyers who make theseawards, it is juries. I want my film tostrengthen the position of the jury. Thisfilm is a call to people to protect juries."

Herzberg said the deliberationsrecorded in "Inside the jury Room" "con-firmed my belief that the American peo-ple are good people. The jury is truly a

buffer between the vast power of the gov-ernment and the people. The Jury is theconscience of the community."

The film was shot in Circuit Courtof Milwaukee.

Margo Melli moderated a discussionentitled "Character and Fitness forAdmission to the Bar" at the 1986ABAannual meeting in New York. The pro-gram "examined whether character andfitness screening should take place and,if so, what constitutes fitness or lack ofgood character, the procedures that couldbe used in making such determinations,and the role of law schools in the pro-cess." Also on the panel was EricaMoeser ('74), director of the Board ofAttorneys' Professional Competence,Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

otes on AlumsJames H. Wakatsuki ('541has beenappointed as Associate Justice of theSupreme Court of Hawaii. Justice Wakat-suki had previously served as a memberof the Hawaiian House of Representa-tives, including two years as MajorityLeader and five years as Speaker of theHouse, and three years as a CircuitJudge.

Jack Aulik ('58) was elected to thebench in Branch 4 of the Dane CountyCircuit Court, Madison, Wisconsin, inApril and assumed his new position inAugust. Aulik has practiced law and livedin Sun Prairie since 1959.

Steven W. Weinke ('661was recentlyelected Circuit Court Judge for Fond duLac County, Wisconsin. Weinke succeeds

Eugene F.McEssey ('49), who served thecounty for 24 years.

Pat Richter ('711has been nameddirector of personnel for Oscar MayerFoods Corp., Madison. Richter was per-sonnel manager for the beverages divi-sion of General Foods, White Plains,New York.

Alan R. Post ('72) has become anassociate with Sorling, Northrup, Hanna,Cullen and Cochran, Ltd., Springfield,Illinois. Post had been with Illinois BellTelephone.

In June, James H. Haberstroh ['75)became a vice president of First Wiscon-sin Trust Co., Milwaukee. Haberstrohjoined the company as an estate tax spe-cialist in 1977.

Robert H. Buesing ('77), a memberof Trenam, Simmons, Kemker, Scharf,Barkin, Frye and O'Neill, Tampa andMiami, has been appointed to the Emi-nent Domain Committee of the FloridaBar. Buesing specializes in constructionlitigation.

Bruce F. Beilfuss ('38), retired ChiefJustice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court,died on August 15, 1986. Chief JusticeBeilfuss was first elected to the ClarkCounty Board and never lost an election,serving 19 years on the Supreme Court.While Chief Justice, Beilfuss is creditedwith bringing the Wisconsin court systeminto the 20th century. The WisconsinLaw Alumni Association honored JusticeBeilfuss with their Distinguished ServiceAward in 1982.

18

Editor's NoteThis issue contains the final report on theLaw School's first Capital Campaign. Ithas been truly exciting to learn howmuch the School is valued by its friendsand alumni. The sum of nearly $7 millionwhich was raised is enormous by ourstandards even if it is not so large tosome other schools. Now we turn ourattention to the Annual Fund, fromwhich funds come to publish and mailthe Gargoyle.

I recently had the opportunity toattend an Association of American LawSchools meeting on alumni relations.Ninety persons with positions similar tomine, representing perhaps 60 differentlaw schools, were in attendance. It wasreassuring to learn that many of us sharecommon problems. And I came awaywith some new ideas and techniques thatshould improve the relationship ourSchool has with its alumni.

The Class of 1986 is now history. Forthose of you who keep track, the numberof graduates of this School is now justover 12,300, including more than 1,400women. In 1972 the number of womenalumni had reached only 197!In fact,more than 75% of all our alumni are cur-

rently on the mailing list to receive thisGargoyle.

As I write this column you probablyare just receiving Vol. 17, No. 1. The mys-tery picture in that issue, showing fourstudents at the SBABookmart, has conse-quently not been identified. Letters relat-ing to the picture in Vol. 16, No.4, a pic-ture taken at bar admission in the 1950's,continue to come in. Many thanks tothese additional contributors: JudgeRudolph Randa, Harry Hinz, Donald Por-ter, Bill Chatterton, Prof. Graham Waiteand John Wickhem. While most of yougot Dean Rundell and Oscar Toebaas cor-rect, I will not list all the "positive" iden-tifications of persons who were also inthe picture.

In this issue, I've made it easy: themystery picture contains only two per-sons and the shot makes the year, 1968,obvious. I've seen other pictures of aCentennial display from 1968, but wouldbe interested in knowing more about it,as well as the identity of these twoobservers. Incidentally, the Law Schoolwill celebrate its 125th anniversary in1993,just seven years from now.