December 2018 Archives

Welcome to the December 2018 Issue

| No Comments

We are pleased to submit the December 2018 issue of Electronically In Touch. This issue consists of articles on a recent 11th Circuit decision which the court compared to the 1980 Miracle on Ice (only this one fell short), an introduction to NYC Housing Court and how young lawyers can get involved, a practice spotlight on Michael DiFalco, updates from the Family Law and IP Law Sections, a call for Senior Lawyers to join YLS, recommended upcoming NYSBA events, and a listing of all the new members of YLS.

Electronically In Touch is a member driven publication. We welcome submissions from members on any relevant topic, including practice tips, substantive legal articles, case updates, work/life balance, and information regarding upcoming meetings and events. Please submit articles to Justin Batten at jwb413@nyu.edu.

By: Michael DeBlis III, Esq.

The tale of the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team is one that will be recounted for generations: a team of fresh-faced college students with a losing track record took on the Soviets, the greatest hockey dynasty in Olympic history, and won. The 4-3 victory under Coach Herb Brooks was unprecedented, unexpected, and, frankly, unbelievable, showcasing the power of great leadership, a strong work ethic, and a whole lot of heart. Even now, 38 years after the team's triumphant victory against insurmountable odds and the pervasiveness of Communism, the final goal, the miracle on ice that inspired the 2004 Disney film Miracle, stands strong as evidence of the infallibility of the American spirit.

The case of Presley v. U.S. featured a similar uphill climb and a battle of wills. But, when it comes to the power of the IRS, miracles are hard to come by.

The Challenges in IRS Opposition
Presley v. U.S. started, as many cases do, with potential boundary-stepping by the IRS. The Plaintiffs in this case include Michael Presley, Cynthia Presley, BMP Family Limited Partnership, and Presley Law and Associates, the subjects of a 2014 IRS investigation. As a part of their sleuthing, the IRS sent three summonses to Bank of America in 2016 in search of bank statements, transaction records, loan proceeds, and other related information for the accounts held by BLP and Presley Law. Micheal and Cynthia were informed of these summonses, but their clients were not as, according to the IRS, the Presleys were the sole subjects of the investigation.

As lawyers with a presumably sound understanding of the law, the Presleys had a problem with this. Due to the nature of their business accounts, the Presleys believed that allowing the IRS access would violate confidentiality by disclosing private financial information about their clients. In an effort to halt what they considered to be overstepping by the IRS, the Presleys filed a motion to quash the summonses. This, of course, was abjectly dismissed by the district court. The court determined that the summonses were narrowly drawn and in the scope of the IRS' investigation, and that the Presleys' clients had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the records held by the bank.

The Presleys' Fight for Gold
Predictably, the Presleys appealed the decision, but they faced a tough climb from the start. According to the ruling outlined in United States v. Morse, summonses by the IRS are generally uniformly enforced unless they are determined to be "clearly erroneous." In the eyes of the law, these current summonses didn't appear to be blatantly wrong, so the court was by default on the side of the IRS. This is particularly true when United States v. Clarke is taken into account, which states that the IRS has "broad statutory authority to summon a taxpayer to produce documents or give testimony relevant to determining tax liability."

The framework that gives the government the right to issue summonses for taxpayer information was outlined in United States v. Powell, and requires that the IRS:

  • Has a legitimate reason for the investigation
  • Issues summons for information relevant to the purpose of the investigation
  • Is not already in possession of the information requested
  • Has followed all procedural steps as outlined in the tax code

Assuming this process is followed correctly, the responsibility then shifts to the taxpayer to disprove any of the above criteria - a sufficiently large burden to contend with for the average person.

In an unusual twist, the Presleys did not attempt to argue that the IRS didn't comply with United States v. Powell but rather that the Fourth Amendment precludes the government's right to search or seize the requested bank records.

The Right to Privacy (or Lack Thereof)
Privacy is a right under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by the government for any reason. However, were these IRS summonses really a matter of Fourth Amendment magnitude when the Plaintiffs were attempting to make a case on behalf of their clients and not themselves?

In order to support their case, the Presleys argued two things: first, that the Fourth Amendment requires the government to demonstrate probable cause because their legal clients have a reasonable expectation to privacy, and second, that the IRS was obligated to proceed under 26 U.S.C. § 7609(f), which entails issuing John Doe summonses to all affected clients and petitioning the court for an ex parte hearing to move forward with obtaining records.

Despite their best efforts, the court soundly rejected both of these contentions, citing that:

  • The Plaintiff's clients had no reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment as the financial information at the center of this case was already relayed to a third party (the Presleys). By law, information revealed to a third party no longer maintains a Constitutional right to privacy, even if "revealed on the assumption that it will be used only for a limited purpose and the confidence placed in the third party will not be betrayed." Further, these records do not belong to the taxpayers in question - they belong to the bank - and are also not records of confidential communications. The Plaintiffs attempted to argue that the previous rulings used to make these determinations, namely United States v. Miller, which also included the IRS and a bank, did not apply here as the law firm acted as an intermediary, but the courts found this equally irrelevant.
  • There is no need for an ex parte hearing due to compliance with United States v. Powell, which the Plaintiffs did not contest. Further, the use of John Doe summonses under 26 U.S.C. § 7609(f) is also irrelevant, as the clients in this case are not the "person[s] with respect to whose liability the summons is issued" as is specified in this particular code section.

For good measure, the court brought to light an additional Supreme Court ruling: Tiffany v. United States. This particular case, which ruled that the IRS has the right to issue dual purpose summonses that could include information about unnamed third parties, was the court's ace in the hole, effectively scoring the winning goal against the thoroughly trounced Presleys.

No Final Scoring Point
And so, despite the best efforts of the Presleys, the court ruled in favor of the IRS, which presumably went on to finally collect all of the information requested two years ago from Bank of America as a part of the investigation into the Presleys.

While the 1980 Olympic hockey final was an inspiring story of perseverance and faith against all odds, the story in this case ended quite differently. The mighty government prevailed; in 2018, there was no miracle in the courtroom - or on the ice, for that matter, as the Olympic Athletes from Russia prevailed once again in Pyeongchang.

Article originally posted on deblislaw.com.

Michael is a partner in the boutique law firm of DeBlis Law where he specializes in tax law and entertainment law. He graduated from Western Michigan University School of Law in 2007 and later went on to earn his masters in taxation (LL.M.) from Thomas Jefferson School of Law in 2012. As a former public defender, Michael spent nearly eight years cutting his teeth on some of the most serious felony cases to pass through the state courts of New Jersey. He combines a unique blend of left-brain thinking with right brain artistry. When he's not in the courtroom, you can find him on stage performing in any one of a number of theatrical productions. As a professionally trained actor, he's passionate about helping trial lawyers harness the power of persuasion and positive communication in the courtroom in order to connect to the jury on a personal level.

A Primer on Landlord & Tenant Matters in Housing Court

| No Comments

By: Ronald J. Coleman, Esq.

Representing a tenant in a landlord and tenant matter in New York City Housing Court can be a great way for young lawyers to gain valuable litigation and negotiation experience while also contributing to the public good. Although the procedures and practices in NYC Housing Court are somewhat different from other state and federal courts in New York, the experience gained in NYC Housing Court is highly valuable and readily transferrable to other contexts. In order to aid young lawyers in deciding whether to take on such a case, and if so, which type, this Article will briefly discuss four general types of cases in NYC Housing Court: Non-Payment Cases, Holdover Cases, Illegal Lock-out Cases, and HP Cases.1

  1. Non-Payment Cases - A nonpayment case is one which is brought by a landlord to collect a tenant's unpaid rent, and a landlord may also seek eviction for such non-payment.2 This type of case may arise where a tenant is simply delinquent in paying rent, but it is also sometimes brought where a landlord and tenant dispute the correct rent and the landlord seeks to evict the tenant for failing to pay what the landlord believes to be the correct rent.
  2. Holdover Cases - A holdover case is one which is brought by the landlord to evict the tenant or another person in the premises for some reason other than the non-payment of rent.3 A holdover case may have many different variations, such as allegations of the tenant violating a provision in the lease, causing a nuisance, staying in the premises after expiry of the lease, or illegally putting others in the premises.4 Common holdover case types might include:
    • Non-Primary Residence Cases - In these types of actions, the landlord is arguing that a rent-regulated tenant is not using the rent-regulated premises as their primary residence. If proven, the tenant may need to move out. An example of this type of case might be where a landlord alleges that a tenant has moved to another state or country (since such tenant was away for a prolonged period of time or received mail elsewhere), while the tenant asserts that they were actually living in their rent-regulated apartment (or, at most, were very temporarily absent from such apartment for valid reasons).
    • Succession Cases - In these types of cases, the tenant of a rent-regulated premises has passed away and another occupant of such premises--who is a target of the landlord's holdover action--argues that she should have the right to succeed to the deceased tenant's premises. Under certain circumstances, even a non-family member occupant can successfully succeed to a rent-regulated premises. An example of a case of this type might be where a long-time occupant of an apartment--who alleges she was in a loving relationship with the deceased tenant and contributed to the household--seeks to succeed to the deceased tenant's apartment.
    • Clutter Cases - In these types of actions, a landlord is seeking to evict a tenant because the tenant has too many things in the apartment, potentially implicating health and safety concerns. An example of this type of case might be where a tenant has a collection of newspapers or books that fill their entire apartment (including blocking windows and exits).
    • Animal Cases - In cases of this type, a landlord is seeking to evict a tenant because of the tenant's pet(s). This may be because having the pet on the premises is a violation of the lease, because the pet is damaging the premises, or because the pet is creating a nuisance that is adversely affecting other tenants. An example of this type of case might be where a landlord alleges a tenant has more dogs on the premises than provided for in the lease and these dogs are constantly scratching walls and floors, barking loudly and annoying neighbors, and otherwise damaging the premises.
  3. Illegal Lockout Cases - If a tenant has "legally occupied an apartment for at least 30 days (with or without a lease), [the tenant] may not be evicted without a court order awarding a judgment of possession and warrant of eviction against [the tenant]."5 Where a tenant has been forcibly or illegally locked out of their premises, they may seek to bring a proceeding in NYC Housing Court to be put back in the apartment.
  4. HP Cases - An HP case (with "HP" standing for "Housing Part") is an affirmative case brought by a tenant against a landlord for repairs, such as an action to address lack of hot water or heat.6 It is important to note that tenants will also raise repairs issues as counterclaims to actions brought by landlords against them, so such counterclaims may obviate the need for a tenant to bring an affirmative HP case.

I had the privilege of providing pro bono representation to tenants in many of the above types of cases while seconded to MFY Legal Services (now Mobilization for Justice). I found such cases to be extremely rewarding both professionally and personally, and I would suggest that young lawyers seriously consider taking on such matters.

Ronald J. Coleman (RJ) is based in Washington, DC at Georgetown Law, but he remains very active in NYSBA. He is currently the NYSBA Young Lawyers Section (YLS) Co-Liaison to the Entertainment, Arts & Sports Law Section (EASL), and he serves on the YLS and EASL Executive Committees, as well as the EASL Committees on Motion Pictures and Television and Radio.


1. The information in this Article is based on my practice experience, information and guidance from the attorneys and staff at the organization now called Mobilization for Justice, and relevant parts of the NYCOURTS.GOV website (https://www.nycourts.gov/COURTS/nyc/housing/procedural.shtml). Although this Article does not seek to detail all the law one would need to know in order to handle the case types discussed herein, I wanted to at least emphasize the importance of determining at the outset of any case whether the tenant is a rent-regulated tenant--such as a rent-stabilized or rent-controlled tenant--as this can have very important implications for the case.
2. NYCOURTS.GOV, https://www.nycourts.gov/COURTS/nyc/housing/startingcase.shtml.
3. NYCOURTS.GOV, https://www.nycourts.gov/COURTS/nyc/housing/startingholdover.shtml.
4. Id.
5. NYCOURTS.GOV, https://www.nycourts.gov/COURTS/nyc/housing/lockouts.shtml.
6. NYCOURTS.GOV, https://nycourts.gov/courts/nyc/housing/startinghp.shtml.

How I Practice: Michael DiFalco

| No Comments

A conversation with Michael DiFalco - YLS District Representative, Delegate, and Section Liaison.

What do you find most rewarding about being an attorney?

Michael: By focusing on matrimonial and family law matters, I have the privilege of representing truly incredible, but completely ordinary people, who typically are going through one of the worst - if not the worst - periods in their lives. As their counsel from the start of the process through its conclusion, often several years later, I get to actually help people change their lives. Many are faced with arduous challenges, whether it's a dire financial situation or heart-wrenching domestic violence, and I am able to help, and observe people undergo a radical transformation. I find it very rewarding when I'm able to resolve a matter and have a positive impact on a client's life. Often, my guidance results in a derivative benefit for their children. Knowing that I had a mostly positive impact on a family is deeply satisfying.

What do you find most challenging about being an attorney?

Michael: Initially, I allowed the stress of clients' highly personal problems affect my own stress levels. Over the last few years, I've recognized there are usually limits to my ability to help, whether they are legal, logistical, temporal, or emotional. Learning to absorb a client's stress and, if possible, filter it into something productive, has been a critical challenge to practicing law.

Did another lawyer mentor you or advise you on your career path?

Michael: I've worked with my aunt for over 15 years. After high school, she invited me to work in her law office since I was interested in becoming an attorney. We're now law partners. Naturally, she has been instrumental to my selection of a practice area and my development as an attorney. Having someone I can trust absolutely has been incredibly helpful at each point of this journey. I believe that finding a good mentor in your chosen practice area is very important. We advise clients all the time, so we should all recognize how important it is to seek advice, or to provide it, from or to one another.

What advice would you give a young lawyer just starting her or his career?

Michael: Most of the time, the important thing is to put your head down and do good work. Yet, it is vital to lift up your head occasionally to make sure you're not missing the big picture. It's important to contextualize what you're working toward and to make sure that you're having the necessary career-development conversations with your colleagues, your mentors, your bosses, and others who make up your legal and broader community.

If you could dine with any lawyer - real or fictional - from any time in history, who would it be and what would you discuss?

Michael: Right now, Robert Mueller. Politics aside, I would love to discuss the process of building a case with such significant consequences under such public scrutiny.

If you could practice in a different area of the law other than your current area, what would it be?

Michael: I think I would enjoy medical malpractice. Naturally, I am drawn to litigation. I also enjoy representing individuals who need help, so I think working with plaintiffs - or perhaps even defendants - in a liability-based practice area would be satisfying. Med mal seems like an area where I could enjoy the nuances of complex technical issues and expert reports which make each case so fascinating. Maybe it would just be a way of enjoying vicariously the career path I did not choose (medicine).

Closing argument: Why should lawyers join the New York State Bar Association?

Michael: My experience has convinced me that, on average, better lawyers choose to view this profession as a calling beyond the daily practice of law. As a calling, a sense of obligation seemingly draws them to volunteer their time, as well as their minds and hearts, to the profession at large. What this leads to, particularly in the case of NYSBA, is an extraordinarily high concentration of great lawyers who devote a significant portion of their busy schedules to bar association participation through sections, committees, lectures, and more. Nothing can replace the experience of in-person interactions with fellow lawyers who can educate and inspire us all to be better practitioners. Especially for young lawyers, the practice of law is enriched by the many opportunities to learn, to connect with other members, and to serve or volunteer.

The Young Lawyers Section Seeks Senior Lawyers

| No Comments

By: Anne LaBarbera, Esq.

Wait, what? That is right. The NYSBA Young Lawyers Section is looking for greater participation from our senior lawyers. Many readers may be asking the obvious question, "How can you be a Senior Young Lawyer" and for the answer I would direct the reader to the definitions of Senior Lawyer and Young Lawyer.

The Senior Lawyers Section defines a Senior Lawyer as an attorney who is over the age of 55 and the Young Lawyers Section defines a Young Lawyer an attorney admitted ten years or fewer. So with this in mind, it becomes immediately obvious that it is not only possible, but probable that there are NYSBA members who are Senior Young Lawyers.

Former NYSBA Young Lawyers Section liaison Megan O'Toole did some research and found out that more than 600 members of NYSBA qualify to join both the Senior Lawyers Section of the organization as well as the Young Lawyers Section. This research came about as a result of a discussion at a Young Lawyers Section Executive Committee Meeting in which past Chairs Erin Flynn and John Christopher lamented that we have not, in recent memory, been able to have a YLS liaison to the Senior Lawyers because we have not identified a member who is a member of both sections. John Christopher later said, "I don't know if we have ever had [a liaison to the Senior Lawyers] since I started, so if we find one, it may be a first."

And so the search was begun to find at least one Senior Young Lawyer to fill that role. After Megan's research results, there is no chance that we will be satisfied with finding one Senior Young Lawyer to participate in the section. Now that we know there are more than six hundred NYSBA members who fit the description, we have changed the mission entirely from the search for a mythical unicorn who could serve as the elusive liaison to the Senior Lawyers, to a determination to get the word out that Senior Lawyers who are Young Lawyers are welcome at YLS and would be received with enthusiasm to participate in the Section in as many ways as there are Senior Young Lawyers.

We do however hope that one of you will be interested in participating as the liaison to the Senior Lawyers Section so we can have one. Another position that remains open at this time is liaison to the Judicial Section (must also be a Judge and possibly a unicorn), as well delegates to several districts. There is also always room for co-delegates and co-liaisons to the Senior Young Lawyers, so let us know how you want to participate!

To get involved, please contact our NYSBA liaison, Amy Jasiewicz at ajasiewicz@nysba.org.

This article originally appeared in the April 2017 issue of Electronically In Touch.

Section Updates

| No Comments

Here's what's going on around the NYSBA Sections, courtesy of the YLS Section Liaisons.

Family Law
By: Michael DiFalco

The Family Law Section continues to produce excellent CLE programming which can help teach any young lawyer all of the nuances of handling matrimonial matters. Coming in December, FLS is offering the next installment of its incredible Matrimonial Trial Institute VI: Deconstructing Business Valuation Reports, which will be offered around the state and ultimately available online.

The FLS Annual Meeting will be held on January 17, 2019, starting with the section lunch. Featuring the Hon. Lawrence K. Marks as the keynote speaker, the lunch is sure to be a huge hit. The programming for the meeting that afternoon includes Brett Figlewski, the lead attorney in the seminal Brooke case which completely altered the landscape for LGBT parents in custody matters. Even Brooke herself will make a special guest appearance, so this should be a very interesting program. A "visiting" professor, Linda Elrod of Washburn University School of Law, will then lecture on the complexities of UCCJEA and Relocation, and the program will be closed out by the inimitable Bruce Wagner providing everyone's favorite matrimonial update.

At the executive committee level, the FLS is attempting to reach out to young lawyers, and formally created a Young Lawyer Engagement subcommittee. More to follow.

Intellectual Property Section
By: Shruti Chopra

Earlier in the year, the Section announced the selection of two Young Lawyer Fellows - Taylor Moskowitz and Samantha Fink Hedrick as well as hosted another successful iteration of the "Women in IP" program.

The Section had also planned a one-day programming event for Fall 2018, which has now been rescheduled for Spring 2019. Additionally, the Section is working on putting together programming for the Annual Meeting right now.

The Executive Committee of the IPL is also considering a new program called "Lunch with a Judge", where the Section will invite a judge to have an informal conversation with members of the Section on practice before the court.

December Recommended Events

| No Comments

January 14-18, 2019
NYSBA Annual Meeting - This event will take place over five days in Midtown Manhattan. There are numerous Young Lawyers Section events including the YLS Section Annual Meeting and a Bridge the Gap program. Most substantive sections and many committees also have Annual Meetings and events going on during Annual Meeting.
Cost: Prices vary depending on the events you attend. You must pay a registration fee to attend CLE events. To get a full list of prices, start the registration process at the link below. Sign up by December 27th 2018 for early bird pricing!
Time: January 14th to January 18th.

http://www.nysba.org/store/events/registration.aspx?event=AM2019

December 11- 16, 2018
Winter 2018 Bridging the Gap - This CLE event takes place in Syracuse, New York. You can earn up to 16 MCLE credits at this event. This even is suitable for and recommended for transitional attorneys. It has also been approved for California, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey credit.
Cost: This event is $420 for members and $695 for non-members. Lower rates for associates, government, and non-profit attorneys.
Time: December 11th at 9:00 am to December 12th at 5:00 pm.

Tuesday, December 18, 2018 | 1:00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
Making the Best of a Bad Situation: Breach Response

Webinar
1.0 MCLE Credit; 1.0 in Areas Professional Practice

NYSBA Member: $75 | Non-Member: $175

This program is one of a four part Data Breach Webinar Series. You can earn 4.0 MCLE credits by participating in all 4 programs! Four Program Package for NYSBA Members: $200 ($50 per program). Click Here for more information. To register for all 4 programs at the discounted rate, please call our Member Resource Center: 1-866-640-4044.

Data breaches have become an increasingly common - and costly - part of doing business. A consortium of government agencies reported in 2016 that there were around 4,000 ransomware per day that year, and it has been estimated that, by 2019, cyberattacks will cost businesses over $2 trillion per year - which would be a four-fold increase over the cost these attacks imposed just a few years ago in 2015. It is therefore imperative that organizations of all sizes, and in all industries, take proactive steps to address their cybersecurity-related exposure. This webinar series will help your organization do just that.

Topics to Be Discussed Include:
- Highlighting the Key Threats to your Data -
Which, in Addition to Cyberattacks, Include Employee Error, Theft, and Vendor-Related Issues
- Your Legal Obligations to Safeguard that Data
- Practical Guidance on How to Prevent Breaches
- The Process of Investigating and Responding to a Breach

Program Faculty
Damon W. Silver, Esq., Jackson Lewis P.C.

Mark A. Berman, Esq., Ganfer Shore Leeds & Zauderer LLP, Chair, Committee on Technology and the Legal Profession

Sponsored by the Committee on Technology and the Legal Profession, the Law Practice Management Committee and the Committee on Continuing Legal Education of the New York State Bar Association

A full list of all New York State Bar Association Events can be found at www.nysba.org.

December 20, 2018, 7:00 pm
Head Over Heels

The Theater and Performing Arts Committee of the Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section invite you to join them at an evening at Head Over Heels. This event is open to all NYSBA members. We will meet up before the show at a nearby venue for some light fare and networking.

Head Over Heels is the bold new musical comedy from the visionaries that rocked Broadway with Hedwig and the Angry Inch, Avenue Q and Spring Awakening. This laugh-out-loud love story is set to the music of the iconic 1980's all-female rock band The Go-Go's, including the hit songs,"We Got the Beat," "Our Lips Are Sealed," "Vacation," Belinda Carlisle's"Heaven is a Place on Earth" and "Mad About You."

A hilarious, exuberant celebration of love, HEAD OVER HEELS follows the escapades of a royal family on an outrageous journey to save their beloved kingdom from extinction--only to discover the key to their realm's survival lies within each of their own hearts.

Hudson Theatre | 141 W 44th Street | New York, NY 10036

Ticket Pricing: Mid-Orchestra - $89.00

Rear Orchestra - $69.00

Dress Circle - $49.00

Brand New YLS Members

| No Comments

Please join me in welcoming the following new members to the Young Lawyers Section!

Sarah Morrissey, Esq.

Laura M. Zaharia, Esq.

Jarret Bodo

Angela R. Bonica

Jonathon P. Cappiello

Kayla R. Dimatos

John J. Gabriel, Jr., Esq.

Alexander R. Gilbert, Esq.

Gregory W. Keenan, Esq.

Ashley A. Pratt, Esq.

Caitlyn M. Ryan, Esq.

Eduardo R. Sotomayor

Jessica Stoneburner

Dua Tahir

Thomas P. Tlockowski, Esq.

Matthew Jason Zeidel, Esq.

Nayeem Ahmed

Liu Caicun

Alexia E. Campoverde, Esq.

Chen Chen, Esq.

Dejon C. Delpino, Esq.

Zarifah Dixon

James Gregory Mandilk, Esq.

Haitao Lao

Patrick C. Murray, Esq.

Allyson Rivard

Heidi Simpson

Ira Zey

Yuting Zhang

Rosemary Almonte, Esq.

Frank J. Lamonica

Jillian A. Swogier, Esq.

Yeun G. Ahn, Esq.

Harshita Bhatnagar

Bridget A. Boateng

Moronke O. Bolutayo, Esq.

Kayla C. Champagne, Esq.

Kenneth H. Chang, Esq.

Rebecca L. Cohen

Frank DelPesce

Melissa Del Carmen Garcia, Esq.

Sara A. Gardner, Esq.

Jun Han

David C. Hollander, Esq.

Claire Huynh, Esq.

Hyun J. Kim, Esq.

Holly Klarman

Charlotte E. Leduey, Esq.

Sun Y. Lee, Esq.

Callie C. Lefevre, Esq.

Evan W. Lehrer, Esq.

Ji Li

Cooper A. Littlejohn, Esq.

Nicholas Martin

Edgar Mkrtchian, Esq.

Ivy-victoria Otradovec, Esq.

Junyan Luo, Esq.

Jarod F. Proto, Esq.

Claudia Ratner

Kristina Rogan, Esq.

Julina Meilani Schaeffer

Stuart I. Seiden, Esq.

Tripti Singh, Esq.

Paul E. Stote

Joseph W. Tartaglia, Esq.

Margaret M. Toohey, Esq.

Colton D. Tully-Doyle, Esq.

Yuting Wang

De Zhang, Esq.

Join the Young Lawyers Section

| No Comments

Become the voice of newly-admitted and young attorneys in NYSBA. Designed to help make the transition from law school to practice an easier one for newly-admitted attorneys, the Young Lawyers Section connects you with experienced attorneys lending general advice, legal guidance, or expert opinions. Take advantage of educational programs, networking events, and the exclusive Young Lawyers Section Mentor Directory, which is just one of the Section's mentoring initiatives. The Section publishes Electronically In Touch and Perspective. Law students may also join the Section and get a jump start on their careers.

ALREADY A MEMBER OF THIS SECTION? JOIN A COMMITTEE!

Are you interested in volunteering for a Section Committee? Please email Amy Jasiewicz at ajasiewicz@nysba.org and indicate the committees you wish to join. The Young Lawyers Section has the following committees:


  • Executive Committee

  • Communications Committee

  • Community Service and Pro Bono Committee

  • Diversity Committee

  • Law Student Development Committee

  • Long-Range Planning Committee

  • Membership Committee

  • Mentoring Committee

  • Nominating Committee

  • Perspective Editorial Board

Disclaimer

| No Comments

The Officers of YLS and the Editors of Electronically In Touch wish to make clear that the thoughts and opinions expressed in the articles that follow are those of the respective authors and do not necessarily represent the thoughts and opinions of the authors' employers or clients, the New York State Bar Association, Young Lawyers Section, or its Officers or Executive Committee.

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from December 2018 listed from newest to oldest.

November 2018 is the previous archive.

March 2019 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.