Split decisions

Federal, state changes to maintenance shake up family law

Federal, state changes to maintenance shake up family law

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer correspondent

New legislation on both the federal and state level is affecting how family lawyers in the Chicago area conduct business.

“All the new legislative changes, both in Illinois maintenance and child support laws and in the federal tax laws and understanding how they all impact each other financially is one of the most important issues facing family lawyers today,” said Janet E. Boyle of Boyle Feinberg Sharma. “So many things that we’ve historically done and have been part of our way of doing things for many years have all of a sudden kind of been turned on their ear.”

Tremors from the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 continue to be felt across the legal field. On Jan. 1, 2019, federal tax law permanently eliminated the ability of the spouse paying spousal maintenance, or alimony, to deduct the maintenance payments from gross income in their federal taxes.

Now, alimony payments are no longer tax-deductible for the maintenance payor and no longer included in the taxable income of the maintenance recipient.

“The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act at the federal level fundamentally sort of altered the landscape of maintenance,” said Brendan Hammer, a partner at Berger Schatz. “Maintenance going forward in new judgments is no longer tax-deductible. That has had an enormous impact on a lawyer’s ability to craft a creative settlement. Maintenance used to be deductible to the payor and includable in income to the payee, but now it is sort of tax-neutral. From a cash flow perspective, that sort of takes pieces off the table in terms of playing with tax treatment to arrive at a mutually advantageous figure.”

Previously, the tax deduction helped soften the blow to spouses reluctant to pay out huge alimony payments. The payor could deduct the payments, and the recipient got more money.

“Before the tax law took effect, high earners especially benefited — if you were taking maintenance dollars and making them tax-deductible at a high tax rate and then making them taxable at a lower tax rate for the payee, then both people ended up with more money because you were taxing the dollars that were being paid at alimony at a lower tax rate than they would be taxed at if the person paying maintenance were paying the tax,” explained Meighan Harmon, managing partner at Schiller Ducanto & Fleck. “For some families, it created a little bit of a tax arbitrage where you could end up with a little bit more net cash to give, to allocate between ex-spouses. Now we have to do the calculations based upon net income as opposed to looking at growth income and taking advantage of that tax arbitrage.”

Read More

Originally published in August 2019 in Chicago Lawyer

 

The new legal eagles

In-house counsel step out of the back office and into the boardroom

In-house counsel step out of the back office and into the boardroom

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer correspondent

In the not so distant past, general counsels were thought of as strictly the “company lawyer,” largely responsible for litigation and doling out reactive legal advice. But in today’s ever more complex and sophisticated regulatory, technological, global and social landscapes, corporate legal leaders, including chief legal officers and general counsel, have leveraged their skills beyond the legal department into the C-suite and boardroom.

“The general counsel today versus the general counsel of 20 years ago is very, very different,” said Alan Tse, global general counsel and corporate secretary at Chicago Fortune 500 commercial real estate services company Jones Lang LaSalle, who serves on the board of the Association for Corporate Counsel.

“Now, we’re called upon to be business strategists and to be the gatekeeper of ethics. To lead compliance for the company, to lead, for the most part, a legal department as well as be part of the executive management team,” he said.

According the Association for Corporate Counsel’s annual 2019 survey of more than 1,600 legal leaders across the globe, chief legal officers and general counsels have more power than ever in their companies, finding that 93% of Fortune 500 chief legal officers report directly to the CEO.

In addition, almost 70% of chief legal officers indicated that the executive team seeks out their advice for business decisions, up 11 percentage points from last year. That means that general counsels are increasingly seen as top-level decision-makers charged not just with protecting the company from legal disaster but also for growing its business and leading its strategic direction.

“When my CEO looks over to me in a meeting and asks, ‘What do you think we should do?’ often that’s not asking me to make just a strictly legal analysis,” said Shelbie Luna, general counsel and vice president of administration at Bickerdike Redevelopment Corp., a nonprofit community development corporation concentrating its current efforts on Chicago’s Northwest Side.

“They are coming to me to make a pragmatic business decision. That decision-making certainly takes into account my legal knowledge, but also what I know that we’re trying to accomplish for the business — a means to an end,” she said.

Melvin Williams Jr., chief legal officer at Chicago Trading Co., stressed it’s of tantamount importance that today’s legal leaders really understand the ins and outs of their company’s business to be able to advise strategic direction.

“Sure, I’m giving legal advice all the time, but I’m also seeing, more and more, that I’m giving judgment advice when the issue isn’t so much a legal concern as much as a strategic business concern,” he said.

“And the better a lawyer understands the business, the better position they are in to advise the business, not just on the legal issues, but also beyond. Even though the law says you can do something doesn’t mean it’s in the best interest of the company’s business. What are the economic and reputational repercussions? What are the consequences?” he said.

Read More

Originally published in July 2019 in Chicago Lawyer

Confidentially speaking

Do confidential settlements protect clients, or hide their secrets?

Do confidential settlements protect clients, or hide their secrets?

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer correspondent

People are talking about not talking.

“Last year alone we probably settled close to $40 million of settlements that were confidential, and it’s become more of an issue,” said Adria E. Mossing of Mossing & Navarre. “This was not happening 20 years ago — you may have had to negotiate a few, but it was very infrequent. Now, frequently, at mediation in particular, the issue of confidentiality comes up.”

Confidentiality agreements are designed to prohibit the parties to a settlement from disclosing the settlement terms and other details. Confidentiality presents numerous challenges for both the legal profession and society as a whole. For instance, how much of a right does the public have when it comes to knowing details of a medical-malpractice case? Or a case involving sexual abuse or harassment? And how much does keeping details secret handcuff attorneys who may be handling similar cases down the road?

Mossing, who began her career defending hospitals and doctors against insurance claims, now works on behalf of injured parties in complex medical-malpractice and personal-injury cases. Last year, her firm obtained settlements totaling more than $42 million, of which more than $35 million were confidential. She said that as the number of confidentiality settlements has risen, so too has her concerns that transparency at medical institutions is being eroded.

“The public needs to know when doctors and institutions do harm,” Mossing said. “Even if you don’t give the name of the institution, getting information out there about the settlement and the facts of the case at least gives patients the opportunity to ask their providers, ‘Is this something I should be concerned of? Do you have policies in place to handle this?’”

She added: “When a case is settled it’s important to be able to tell the public, ‘This catastrophic event happened at this hospital. But now, because of this terrible situation and our efforts to protect the family, now the public is more protected. Policies have changed.”

Read More

Originally published in June 2019 in Chicago Lawyer

Playing defense

Special interrogatories, workers’ comp exemptions and BIPA are three trends to watch in Pritzker’s Illinois

Special interrogatories, workers’ comp exemptions and BIPA are three trends to watch in Pritzker’s Illinois - Photo by Lisa Predko

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer correspondent

Though Gov. Bruce Rauner was thwarted in his efforts to push damage award caps and tort reform, at least civil defense attorneys in Illinois rested easy during Rauner’s four-year tenure, knowing he would not actively work against them. But now that Democrat J.B. Pritzker has been elected governor, what is the defense bar expecting?“The ink isn’t even dry on Pritzker’s swearing-in papers, but we’ve seen a number of bills introduced in the House and in the Senate that are problematic, not only for the business community, but also for the defense attorneys that defend them,” said Brad Nahrstadt, president of the Illinois Association of Defense Trial Counsel (IDC) and partner at Lipe Lyons Murphy Nahrstadt & Pontikis.

Others like Bob Winston, a partner at Brady, Connolly and Masuda who has handled civil litigation matters for about 25 years, are taking a more measured, wait-and-see attitude to the election of the Democratic governor.

“We definitely expect a more liberal approach, but we’ve heard on the defense side that he is reaching across the aisle,” he said. “He has business support, which he needs to move his agenda forward. He doesn’t want to disturb that relationship, so we’re not looking for drastic changes.”

John Eggum, partner at Foran Glennon and vice chair of the defense association’s Legislative Committee, added that much of Pritzker’s agenda does not target areas that would affect the work of defense attorneys.

“The governor’s initiatives have not been very focused on the Judiciary Committees or the legislation that the Judiciary Committees are considering or might consider,” he said. “Pritzker has other priorities and campaigned on issues such as minimum wage and changes to the income tax structure — not really issues we’re concerned about.”

Rather than worrying about the governor, civil defense attorneys should be paying attention to the complete Democratic control of the General Assembly, according to Pat Eckler, partner at Pretzel & Stouffer and chair of the association’s Legislative Committee.

“For us, it’s less about the election of Pritzker and more about the supermajorities in the Senate and the House,” he said. “Even if Pritzker doesn’t want to do what the Senate and the House want to do, they can override anything he might veto. Pritzker will sign what they send him, I expect, but even if he didn’t, even if Rauner had been re-elected, they would be able to override his vetoes because they have super majorities in both houses.”

Read More

Originally published in April 2019 in Chicago Lawyer

Right to repair

New exemptions will allow owners to repair everything from iPhones to tractors — without going to jail

New exemptions will allow owners to repair everything from iPhones to tractors — without going to jail

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer correspondent

Nicholas Percoco, an information security expert and co-founder of THOTCON, an annual nonprofit hacking conference based in Chicago, said that, as a hacker, he welcomes recent changes to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA, that could keep him out of prison.

“DMCA protects the manufacturers, but it really didn’t protect consumers or, especially in my world, did not protect the researchers,” he said. “Before these recent expansions, if you had a passion for doing security research and finding flaws in systems, you could step on the wrong toes and find yourself in jail.”

Last October, the Library of Congress and the U.S. Copyright Office expanded exemptions to the act that lets consumers and independent repair experts “jailbreak” their electronic devices to repair or maintain them. These exemptions to copyright law — which will apply to smartphones, tractors, cars and smart home appliances — enables owners to hack the software embedded on their devices without getting into legal trouble.

“This new ruling means you can’t block people from fixing electronics that they own,” said Nathan Proctor, director of the Campaign for the Right to Repair at consumer-rights organization US PIRG.

Advocates in the “right to repair” movement want people to have the ability to more easily maintain and repair their devices.

Read More

Originally published in February 2019 in Chicago Lawyer

Approaching the bench

Exploring the ‘symbiotic relationship’ between lawmakers and the judiciary

Exploring the ‘symbiotic relationship’ between lawmakers and the judiciary

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer Correspondent

Illinois lawmakers generally emphasize the strict separation of powers between the judiciary and General Assembly.

“The relationship between us and the courts is arm’s length; it’s respectful and we recognize that we are co-equal branches of government,” said House Minority Leader Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs. “But their job is to rule on the laws and determine whether or not they abide with our constitution and nothing more.”

However, cooperation between the courts and lawmakers can be essential to pushing forward key policy and legislation in the state of Illinois, according to other lawmakers and experts.

“On the whole, there’s not enough interplay between the courts and lawmakers,” said former state Rep. Scott R. Drury, D-Highwood. “I’m not saying that the court should dictate what we do, and we certainly shouldn’t dictate to the courts how they should interpret our laws. But there is a symbiotic relationship, obviously, between the judicial branch and the legislative branch. And to the extent that there could be more lockstep cooperation, I think it would help everybody in the long run.”

Read more

Originally published in January 2019 in Chicago Lawyer

Accruing interest

Will the states step up as the federal government rolls back consumer protections? Who’s going to regulate fintech? And what, under Trump, is a bank? A look at the trends affecting banking, financial and tax law

Will the states step up as the federal government rolls back consumer protections? Who’s going to regulate fintech? And what, under Trump, is a bank? A look at the trends affecting banking, financial and tax law

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer correspondent

As the Trump administration continues to loosen federal regulatory oversight, in particular those that protect consumers, what should banking and finance legal professionals be paying attention to?

Here are three areas to keep an eye on as regulatory uncertainty shows every sign of being an ongoing challenge for the banking and finance industry.

How will states react to the federal rollback of regulatory enforcement?

After he was appointed head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau last November, Mick Mulvaney made clear his goal was to “dramatically” shift the agency’s priorities.

“Anybody who thinks a Trump administration’s CFPB is going to be the same as an Obama administration CFPB is being naïve. Elections have consequences,” Mulvaney said at a news conference on his first day on the job.

An Obama-era consumer watchdog agency created in the wake of the financial crisis as part of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB functions as one of the federal government’s main financial services regulators. The agency protects consumers by making sure financial companies are following the law; collecting and responding to consumer complaints; enacting protections to ensure consumers are treated fairly; and promoting financial transparency.

The CFPB has supervisory authority over banks, thrifts and credit unions with assets of more than $10 billion as well as their affiliates. Additionally, the agency has supervisory authority over nonbank mortgage originators and servicers, payday lenders and private student lenders of all sizes. During its seven-year history, the CFPB has taken on everything from the prepaid card industry to the mortgage servicing business.

During his tenure Mulvaney has moved to undermine the agency, including making a budget request of zero dollars this year, and has continually urged Congress to weaken the CFPB. The Trump administration has made a number of moves to diminish the agency’s power, including stripping the CFPB’s Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity of enforcement power. Previously, the office had forced payouts in several well-known cases, including settlements from lenders it alleged had systematically charged minorities higher interest rates.

So how will the states’ attorneys general respond to this rollback on a federal level? According to several legal experts, states, including Illinois, are poised to fill the gap.

Read more

Originally published in November 2018 in Chicago Lawyer

Mediation killers

The top reasons mediations fall apart — and how to avoid them

The top reasons mediations fall apart — and how to avoid them - Lisa Predko

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer correspondent

Imagine it’s mediation day. You’ve been preparing for weeks — or even months. You and one of your clients are on the same page and are working toward one goal: to settle the case.

As you sit in the mediation room and the minutes tick by, though, you begin to realize that one of the key decision-makers on the other side is not going to show up.

According to seasoned mediator Faustin “Frosty” Pipal of Chicago-based Resolute Systems, “that’s the No. 1 mediation killer, in my view.”

Pipal, who primarily oversees personal-injury, product-liability and professional negligence mediations, said that whether it’s an irate brother-in-law, a key insurance adjuster or a disgruntled business partner, the fact that the other side is not there can be a big obstacle to reaching an agreement that all parties are able to live with.

“Though not many of my cases fail, almost 100 percent of those that do, do so because one or the other decision-maker is not physically present at the mediation,” Pipal said. “It’s so important to have all persons involved in the process be in the room, where they can be a part of the give and take of the negotiation.”

“‘Being there’ is the very essence of a mediation and if someone is phoning it in, in my experience, it’s going to be harder to get the case settled,” he added.

And Pipal means that — literally. He recommended against having mediations via telephone or even online. Pipal said bluntly of online cases: “If we move toward online meetings, we’re going to have increased failure rates of mediations.”

Read more

Originally published in September 2018 in Chicago Lawyer

The Year of the Grinnell Woman

Meet our candidates running for public office.

Microphone on stage at an event

Tequia Burt ’98

In 1992 widespread anger caused by the humiliating treatment of Anita Hill during Clarence Thomas’ Supreme Court confirmation hearing by an all-male, all-white panel of lawmakers ushered in the “Year of the Woman.” According to Rutgers’ Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP), that year 29 women filed for U.S. Senate seats, and 11 won their primaries; 222 filed for U.S. House seats, and 106 won their primaries.

Though that doesn’t seem like many today, these numbers had surpassed previous records by leaps and bounds and have had a long-lasting impact on our electoral politics. The 24 women who won election to the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time in November 1992 was the largest number of women elected to the House in any single election. The U.S. Senate saw the first black woman elected and tripled the number of women overall in that chamber.

As of August 2018, 107 women hold seats in the U.S. Congress, comprising 20 percent of the 535 members. Twenty-three women (23 percent) serve in the Senate, and 84 women (19 percent) serve in the U.S. House of Representatives. Five women nonvoting delegates also represent American Samoa, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands in the House.

But there is still work to be done — the United States is far from having equal gender representation in local, state, or federal government. According to recent data compiled by the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the United States ranks 102nd in terms of women’s representation in government. For comparison’s sake, the United States’ neighbor to the south, Mexico, currently ranks ninth.

The United States is poised for another seismic electoral shift. In this powerful #MeToo era, women are taking to the streets to protest what are seen as attacks against basic rights. They are also running for public office in unprecedented numbers, with a few high-profile women shining in the spotlight, such as New York’s Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who defeated an incumbent congressman in her primary, and Georgia’s Stacey Abrams, the first black woman nominated for governor by a major political party in the United States.

According to CAWP’s most recent figures, there are 468 women running for the U.S. House and 51 running for the U.S. Senate as of this writing; these figures well outpace previous records. Moreover, an NBC analysis found more than 40 percent of Democratic House nominees are women, compared to less than 10 percent for Republicans.

“It makes sense that there are more Democratic female first-time office seekers out there right now,” says Barbara Trish, professor of political science. “Given that Republicans dominate state and local offices — with Democrats taking a big hit over the last decade — the door is open for Democratic challengers to those incumbent-held Republican seats.”

So it follows that there are extraordinary numbers of Democratic women throwing their hats in the ring for local, city, and statewide offices for the first time. And, of course, there are Grinnell College alumni among them; at least three have sailed through primaries and will know in November if they are victorious in the general election.

Kayla Koether ’12 leans on fence at a farm in Iowa

Women seeing themselves as contenders

Kayla Koether ’12 seeks to represent the people of Iowa House District 55 in northeast Iowa as a progressive Democrat (kaylaforiowa.com), and is running against an incumbent Republican, Michael Bergan, in November.

“I am running for the Iowa House of Representatives because, for years, I have been troubled by the trajectory of rural Iowa,” Koether says. “It’s become an expectation that young people will leave to pursue their vocations. It’s become more and more difficult to become a farmer or an entrepreneur here.

“For too long the rural exodus has been viewed as ‘inevitable’ and taken for granted by policymakers. But we rural dwellers are dedicated to our places, and we have a vision of strong rural communities. I want to bring that vision to the Iowa Statehouse,” she adds.

Koether says she thinks the reason for the groundswell of women running for public office across the United States is because we are at a crossroad in our country.

“Many people are feeling a call to duty. Those considering a run for public office realize — and have probably realized for some time — that we are nearing the edge of the cliff,” she says. “The need to step up and set a course toward progress on so many levels — economic stability for all, human relationships, health care access, environmental sustainability — hasn’t been so profound since the lead up to the Great Depression.”

Liz Johnson ’88, co-founder of VoteRunLead (voterunlead.org), a nonprofit that trains women how to run for political office, has worked with several Grinnell College alums over the years, including Koether. According to the organization’s recent survey, which polled 750 potential female candidates, 56 percent of those candidates said they don’t think as many women run for office as men because no one has ever encouraged them to run.

Johnson, who is currently a VoteRunLead board member, says this is changing — especially after the results of the 2016 presidential election. Women are no longer waiting for permission or encouragement to become civic leaders, she said. The number of women seeking training from VoteRunLead to run for public office across the country has exploded; the organization has trained more than 12,000 women to run for office since November 2016.

“The 2016 election was a real wake-up call for women across the political spectrum,” Johnson says. “We are realizing we can no longer sit on the sidelines of our democracy and think it will represent us well. And communities are looking for women to run for office, especially local office. The leadership of women incorporates our life experiences, providing a perspective in policymaking that is more inclusive and brings more people to the table to solve complex problems.”

Koether agrees with that sentiment.

“In the past, women in particular didn’t see themselves as candidates because they didn’t fit conventional expectations,” she says. “Now, they have seen that the stakes are too high and the system will not fix itself. They must step up so that we can reach our highest aspirations for a vibrant democracy.”

Laura Clymore Ellman ’87 at a speaking event

Finding the courage to run

Laura Clymore Ellman ’87, a federal compliance assessor at Argonne National Laboratory, is running for Illinois State Senate in the 21st District (ellmanforillinois.com). Ellman, a Democrat who lives in the Chicago suburb of Naperville, Illinois, hopes to unseat incumbent Republican Michael Connelly. Ellman is focused on helping the state of Illinois find its financial footing and fostering its economic growth. The state’s poor financial shape is among the worst in the nation.

She had never really seriously considered running for public office, citing a lack of experience, “but November 2016 happened,” and Ellman says she suddenly felt qualified. “At the time, it was more ‘why not?’ than ‘why?’ run,” she says.

“I never thought it would be me, and I have never been overly politically active. It was just never one of those things I identified myself with.” By Thanksgiving she knew she would run.

“I decided to run for a lot of reasons. For nearly 20 years, out where I live, the ballots were pretty one-sided: uncontested races, all the same party,” she says.  “I’d be frustrated for that one election day, but it never really went beyond that. As I talk to more people, the more convinced I am that we need alternatives; we need to have contrasting opinions on where Illinois is going. Having the same band of people representing us is not in our best interest.”

Grinnell College women up to the challenge

Erin Gonnerman poses by one of her campaign signsEllman was not the only Grinnell College alum who decided to run for public office after the 2016 election. Erin Hennessy Gonnerman ’09, who has already won her race and is now a Two Rivers (Wisconsin) City Council member, did, too. “It was three weeks after Nov. 8, 2016, that I picked up my nomination papers to run for city council,” she says.

Gonnerman, a mechanical engineer at NextEra Energy, says she thinks Grinnell College female alumni are particularly well-suited to running for office.

“Don’t hesitate to run, especially for local offices that can be done while maintaining your full-time job,” she says. “It’s a good way to get involved in the government and help you decide if higher office is something you’d be interested in. City councils and village boards need people with diverse opinions and backgrounds, and they also just need people who are willing to do the work, put the time in, can think critically, and who care about the community.”

Though Grinnell College women may have the strong critical thinking and leadership skills it takes to make good political candidates, they still can face an uphill battle while running. One only need look to the Barbara Lee Foundation’s well-known 2014 report “Keys to Elected Office: The Essential Guide for Women” to see just how difficult it is for women seeking public office.

The guide doesn’t hesitate to show female candidates the cold, hard reality of running. It points out that, when it comes to fundraising, women are often not included in the same well-connected donor circles as their male counterparts. According to the guide, women are judged on their looks, the way they dress, their families — and often have to be more qualified than their male opponents. “Women need to provide more evidence than men of expertise. The first way to relay that to voters is to make an excellent first impression — to hit the ground running and to maintain that momentum throughout the campaign,” the guide states.

Rita Rawson getting sworn inBut none of those factors has stopped Grinnell College women in the past. Rita Rawson ’90 was first elected in 2015 and is in her second term as alderman of the 5th Ward in Davenport, Iowa (voteritarawson.com). She is also the only woman of color on the city council. Rawson says the way women can win is by pinpointing important local issues that citizens feel have been ignored. Rawson has been successful in promoting urban revitalization.

“The older, core neighborhoods have been neglected for decades,” she says. “But after a lot of hard work, urban revitalization is now the council’s No. 1 goal. When I was running, I never had a thought of  ‘I can’t get this done.’ My goal was to always just get it done.”

Her advice to alums currently running for office is to have a vision that you can articulate clearly. “Being yourself and being authentic to your voice and vision, as well as being honest to constituents, is critical.”

Kim Butler smiles at the camera

Participating in our democracy effectively 

Kim MacDonald Butler ’83, a progressive Democrat who lives in Balsam Lake, Wisconsin, is not letting obstacles get in her way of making a difference in her rural community. She is running for Wisconsin State Assembly District 28 against Republican Gae Magnafici (votekimbutler.com). Previously, Butler was set to race against incumbent Republican Adam Jarchow, but he dropped out of the race after losing a special election for the state senate earlier this year.

“I stepped up to run against the incumbent, assuming I would lose, simply to get the issues of jobs, education, health care, and the environment inserted into the discussion. That he decided not to run for re-election is a happy accident,” she says.

Butler initially decided to get politically involved after her children began high school. “Just voting and giving money every once in a while was not getting the results I wanted,” she says.

So in early 2016, Butler joined the Polk County Democrats; by late 2016 she was elected co-chair of the group. However, it was only after being chosen as a delegate to attend the 2016 Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia on behalf of presidential candidate Bernie Sanders that she was truly inspired to run for state assembly.

“There was something about Bernie Sanders that really touched me. Largely it was his focus and speaking on income inequality,” Butler says. “So when he said, ‘Go join your local Democratic party,’ I did. Then he said, ‘Go to your local caucus and make sure everything was fair,’ so I went and eventually moved up and was elected as a delegate for the national convention. It was a really eye-opening experience for me, seeing so many people so passionate about politics.”

For Butler, campaign training has been instrumental in giving her the tools she needs to run for office. The first major training camp she attended was Camp Wellstone, a weekend-long program targeted to grass-roots progressive candidates. “You learn all the things you need to know to be a candidate; how to raise money and win your race,” she says.

After completing a couple of other training programs, she connected with Liz Johnson at a VoteRunLead training camp, which Butler attended to gain more knowledge about running as a female candidate. It was there she also re-connected with Koether, whom she had first met at Camp Wellstone.

Koether says that connecting with fellow Grinnell College graduates was the final push she needed to decide to run for state office.

“It was heartening to run into other Grinnellians, including Kim Butler and Liz Johnson, at the campaign trainings I attended as I was making the decision to run,” she says. “Feeling grounded and part of a supportive community was key in helping me find the courage to put my name on the ballot.”

She continues, “At one of those trainings, a woman told me that running for office is like ‘getting a Ph.D. in life,’ because you hear so many stories and see the world through so many different perspectives. Going out and talking with people in our communities — and helping people find ways to talk to each other — is exactly what I wanted to be doing during these troubled times.”

Ellman adds that you should not let running for office scare you — you have more to contribute than you realize, she says, and the time is now.

“A common belief is that those seeking office have loftier ideals than just normal folks. But maybe now OUR loftier ideals should push us to run,” she says. “If you have considered it but thought the barriers too high, think again. Once you get started and commit, those barriers become much more manageable.”

Ins and outs of corporate counsel

How in-house and outside counsel can work together

How in-house and outside counsel can work together - Lisa Predko

By Tequia Burt
Chicago Lawyer correspondent

More than ever before, corporate legal departments are being viewed as strategic partners by the C-suite. The growth of complex legal and regulatory challenges coupled with increased cyber and data privacy risks have made the counsel from in-house legal teams central to business decisions. No longer considered just cost centers, the operations of the in-house counsel are being aligned with the overall strategic goals of their companies.

Hoping to boost their value and productivity, many in-house legal teams are re-evaluating their relationships with the outside law firms that they hire. According to the Association of Corporate Counsel’s Chief Legal Officers 2018 Survey, which polled 1,275 lawyers in September and November of last year, one in three chief legal officers fired outside counsel for failing to meet expectations in 2017.

Moreover, 43 percent definitely plan or are considering terminating an outside provider or firm in 2018, and, among those who let go of a provider or firm last year, one in 10 in-sourced at least part of the work permanently.

So what does that mean for Chicago-area law firms?

At a minimum, in-house counsel at Illinois-based companies expect outside counsel to be excellent attorneys who are experts in their respective areas of practice. To avoid the chopping block, however, law firms should strive to get a deeper understanding of their clients’ companies so that they are able to overlay a business context to their legal advice. Providing stronger communication, more billing transparency, as well as offering a roster of gender and racially diverse lawyers, are also important.

Read more

Originally published in August 2018, Chicago Lawyer Magazine