Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice A Toll-free Teleconference with Online Powerpoint Weds., July 14, 2010, Noon-1:00 pm – 1.0 WA Live Ethics MCLE Credit (Approved) RPC 8.4(d) states that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to “engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.” This broad prohibition appears in many bar complaints. What does it mean? This one-hour ethics teleconference gives specific meaning to the “conduct prejudicial” clause, with reference to decisions of the Washington Supreme Court and the key WSBA Ethics Committee opinions.
Advice & Politics & Consent: Confirmation to the Supreme Court
Thursday, June 24, 2010, Noon – 1:30 pm
Toll-Free Teleconference w/ Web Powerpoint
1.5 Live WA MCLE Credits (Approved)
As the Nation gears up for another grueling Supreme Court confirmation battle over Justice Stevens’ successor, we examine the history of Senate confirmations of Supreme Court nominees, with particular focus on the contentious Brandeis nomination, the 1987 rejection of Robert Bork, and the so-called “high tech lynching” of Clarence Thomas. We conclude with an examination of the orthodox view versus the reality of the job of a Supreme Court Justice, and the ways in which politics undermine serious advice and consent.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010, Noon – 1:30 pm
Toll-Free Teleconference w/ Online Powerpoint
1.5 Live WA CLE Credits (Approved)
The 5-4 decision of the United States Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Comm’n (2010) has been praised as a guarantee of strong protection of political free speech, and criticized as a blow to democratic government. This is a far-reaching and controversial decision that will have consequences for many years to come, both politically, and for attorneys who advise corporate clients. This CLE is designed to inform you about the essential holding and reasoning behind this landmark case, as well as to explore the deeper questions it raises about the nature and purpose of political speech under the First Amendment.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010, Noon – 2:00 pm
Toll-Free Teleconference w/ Online Powerpoint
2.0 Live WA CLE Credits (incl. 0.5 ethics) (Approved)
The trial of Sacco & Vanzetti – two Italian immigrant anarchists tried for robbery and murder in 1921 – was an international cause celebrè at the time, though it is now largely forgotten. As we approach the possible trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, accused mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, the trial and appeals of Sacco & Vanzetti have much to teach us about the difficulties of reconciling our traditional concepts of fair trial with the political overtones of trying terrorists or other political radicals.
Ethics of Communicating with Jurors
A Toll-free Teleconference with Online Powerpoint
Weds., April 28, 2010, Noon-1:00 pm – 1.0 WA Live Ethics MCLE Credit (Approved)
Communication with jurors is one of the most important – and most delicate - tasks undertaken by the trial lawyer. In addition to legal constraints, there are ethical constraints on such communication, starting from the moment a lawyer tries to understand prospective jurors, to the courthouse elevator, to formal arguments during trial, to post-discharge juror de-briefing. This one-hour teleconference with online powerpoint will make sure that the next time you go to trial you are aware of the applicable RPCs, Court decisions and Ethics Opinions on this important subject.
2 Wednesdays, March 17 & 24, 2010 @ Noon
Toll-Free Teleconferences w/ Online Powerpoint
3.5 Live WA CLE Credits (incl. 0.5 ethics)
The first part of this American Legal History CLE explores the tragic conflict between the judiciary and executive over the rights of Cherokees in the 1830’s, which led to the notorious trail of tears. Although Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831) & Worcester v. Georgia (1832) established the basis for modern Indian law, they did nothing to save the Cherokees from a terrible fate, and the events were a harbinger of things to come in the west.
The Trial of Leschi CLE
explores the fascinating drama behind the first murder case reported in
Washington Territorial Reports: Leschi v. Washington Territory (1857).
The Medicine Creek treaty did not provide adequate land for the
Nisquallies, and war broke out soon after Chief Leschi’s disputed “X” appeared
on the document. We will examine
the dramatic events that played out as much in the territorial courtrooms as on
the battlefield – the declarations of martial law, creation of military
tribunals, arrest of Federal judges, murder trials, hung juries, appeal to the
Washington Supreme Territorial Court, and the execution by hanging. According to a historical court of
inquiry convened in 2004 and presided over by Chief Justice Gerry Alexander,
Leschi should never have been tried.
Wednesday, Dec. 30, 2009, 12:30-5:00 pm (reg. opens @ noon), Red Lion 5th Avenue (1415 5th Ave.), Seattle
4.0 Live WA MCLE Credits, including 1.0 ethics (approved)
As RUBRIC nears the end of its first full year as a local provider of quality CLEs, we take this occasion to reprise some of the highlights from 2009. Spanning crucial legal battles from 1735 to 2008, this is an afternoon guaranteed not to put you to sleep!
2009 Washington Judicial Highlights
Friday, December 18, 2009, 12:30 – 5:00 pm, Red Lion Fifth Avenue, Seattle - 4.0 WA Live CLE Credits, including 1.0 ethics (approved)
While you were busy serving your clients the courts were busy cranking out decisions – including many you need to know about. Is there a stack of unreviewed advance sheets under a pile somewhere in your office? No worries – we’ll present the 2009 Judicial Highlights from the Washington Supreme Court and Courts of Appeals, in a way that is both informative and entertaining. This CLE will survey the key Washington State civil and criminal cases decided in 2009 that made new law, overruled prior precedent, significantly extended existing law, and/or dealt with a subject of substantial public interest.
Gun Control After DC v. Heller
A Toll-Free Teleconference w/ Online Powerpoint
April 8, 2010 & Nov. 19, 2009, Noon – 2:00 pm - 2.0 Live WA CLE Credits (approved)
In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court issued the most significant Second Amendment decision in its history – District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), which held that the right to bear arms is individual and personal. On September 30, 2009, the Supreme Court accepted certiorari on several gun control cases raising the issue of application of the Second Amendment to the States. The law of gun control is rapidly and fundamentally changing, and every informed citizen should tune in to find out what is happening. Can your neighbor keep a rocket-propelled grenade launcher? Must guns be allowed into the courthouse? What are the limits on the newly announced Second Amendment rights? This fascinating CLE will put you in the know on one of the most important and controversial legal issues of our time.
A Toll-Free Teleconference w/ Web Powerpoint
Jan. 13, 2010 & Oct. 29, 2009, Noon–2:00 pm - 2.0 Live Ethics CLE Credits
A lawyer must abide by the client’s decisions concerning the objectives of the representation – but what if the client is a minor or has diminished mental capacity? The already complex practice of law quickly grows more complex when it appears that the person who by law steers the ship is unable to understand the nature of the proceeding or is at risk of causing substantial physical, financial or other harm due to diminished capacity. This two-hour teleconference gathers together the key provisions of the RPCs, plus the teaching of the most significant case law and WSBA Ethics Opinions, to examine one of the most difficult issues faced by nearly every lawyer at some stage of their career.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 12:30-5:00 pm, Red Lion 5th Avenue
4.0 Live WA MCLE Credits (approved)
As lawyers, we take the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights as given, the bedrock upon which our legal system is founded. But although we treat them as if they were handed down from on high complete and perfect, in fact they were the product of political and economic struggle and compromise. Furthermore, a full understanding of the Constitution is impossible without some knowledge of our Nation’s false start under the Articles of Confederation. This class provides lawyers with a deeper, more fulfilling vision of our founding documents by placing them in the context of the human struggles that formed them, so that lawyers may continue to play their historic role in keeping them alive.
The jury listens and listens and listens, and when at last it speaks most often it simply renders a verdict without explanation. This CLE offers an opportunity to hear from actual jurors about their impressions of the lawyers, the law and the adversary system – what persuaded them, what turned them off, what they were really thinking that led them to decide one way or another. We will have a panel of distinguished experts on hand to comment on what comes up, and of course you will have opportunities to ask questions. But mostly, we will listen. The jurors are coming because they want us to understand how they see the case. Isn’t that what you really want to know?
Faculty: Hon. Douglass A. North, King County Superior Court Judge; Connie Miller, Jury Consultant; Lou Peterson, Partner, Hillis Clark Martin & Peterson; Jan Eric Peterson, Partner, Peterson Young Putra; Michael Schein, Of Counsel, Sullivan & Thoreson.
Bork & Other 4-Letter Words: Confirmation of Judge Sotomayor
John Marshall:
Soldier, Lawyer, Legislator, Diplomat
Spend lunch with John Marshall – not the lofty Chief Justice you learned about in law school, but the young soldier swept up in the War for Independence, and the young lawyer, struggling to serve his clients and make ends meet. Marshall was 45 years old when he was appointed Chief Justice. Prior to his appointment he had already lived a life full of adventure and accomplishment. This one-hour teleconference, enhanced by online powerpoint, is a fascinating look at Marshall’s early life.
Yes, it’s scary out there. Tens of thousands of jobs lost, both legal and non-legal. Old, trusted clients unable to pay, cutting back on legal services, or even going out of business. New clients scarce as shark’s teeth. Still, every month you need to meet payroll and overhead, not to mention keeping the home fires burning. That's why Rubric LLC has invested in bringing you one of the most internationally acclaimed experts on law office management, Gerry Riskin, to lead a faculty with over a century of combined experience in the business of law. Mr. Riskin will not only speak on "Creating a Powerful Strategic Plan that Will Actually Work," but he will demonstrate implementation of the plan with audience volunteers. “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” said FDR in 1933 at the very depth of the Great Depression, and it is as true today as it was back then. The objective of this CLE is to help you banish fear and survive these tough times by implementing concrete strategies for success.
All men may be created equal, but what about women? At many times in American history, women have been denied the most basic rights, including the right to vote, the right to hold property, the right to work and to retain their earnings, freedom from domestic violence, decision-making in parenting and even custody in dissolution. The structures of legal oppression reveal much about the chameleon we call law – how it reflects the mores of its time. The many tenacious battles for women’s rights are filled with vibrant women and forgotten stories of individual courage that perfectly illustrate Laurel Thatcher Ulrich’s epigram, “Well-behaved women seldom make history.”
All men may be created equal, but it is no secret that our nation has a long history of unequal treatment of certain men and women based on the color of their skin. The study of the law of slavery and Jim Crow may seem obsolete with Barack Obama in the White House (which was built with slave labor), but in fact it gives us deep insight into the nature and limits of law itself, as well as the character of our nation. No attorney practicing in 21st Century multicultural America can afford to be unaware of the Faustian bargain upon which our nation was founded, or the bloody conflicts that resulted, which forever transformed our Constitution.
The New Washington Death With Dignity Act: Law & Ethics
Friday, January 9, 2009, Seattle
6.75 CLE Credits (2.0 ethics)
On November 4th, Washington voters approved the new "Death With Dignity Act," under which competent terminally ill residents are authorized to elect to self-administer a lethal dose of medication under certain circumstances. Powerful issues of law and morality intertwine in this highly personal yet societally significant Act. Are you ready to advise a dying client, a dying person's family members, or health care providers and pharmacists, on their rights, immunities, and potential liabilities, under this important new law? Our impressive faculty will make sure that you are. WSBA #217449.
Founding Documents: From the Declaration to the Articles to the Constitution.
3.25 CLE Credits
Friday, December 12, 2008, 1:00 - 5:00 pm - Seattle
Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 1:00 - 5:00 pm - Olympia
As lawyers, we take the Constitution as a given, the bedrock upon which our legal system is founded. But although we treat it as if it were handed down from on high complete and perfect, in fact it is the product of political and economic struggle and compromise. This class provides lawyers with a deeper, more fulfilling vision of our founding document by placing it in the context of the human struggles that formed it, so that lawyers may continue to play their historic role in keeping it alive. WSBA #213115.
Marbury vs. Madison:
The Rumors Behind the Headlines.
3.25 CLE Credits (1.0 ethics)
Friday, December 19, 2008, 1:00 - 5:00 pm - Seattle
Wednesday, January 28, 2009, 1:00 - 5:00 pm - Olympia
Everybody knows that Marbury vs. Madison (1803) stands for the proposition that the Courts are empowered to strike down acts of Congress that conflict with the Constitution – the hallowed power of judicial review upon which American Constitutional Law is based. But just because “everybody knows” something doesn’t make it right. What if judicial review were already well established at the time of Marbury vs. Madison? What if Marbury vs. Madison is viewed in the context of the ongoing power struggle between the Federalists and the Jeffersonian Republicans? This class is a chance to re-examine our understanding of the first case taught in Constitutional law, and to confront the separation of powers problem inherent in judicial review – a problem as current as Presidential "signing statements". WSBA #213167.