< PreviousIn my last column, I creat- ed a mythical residential real estate law firm called, RealFirm,LLC. It has five employees who sometimes work remotely and leverages Microsoft Office 365 for email and office collaboration. RealFirm wants to Achieve Com- pliance with its cybersecurity system that meets minimum acceptable im- plementation of cybersafety policies, protocols, and controls. We did a Discovery Review and Ini- tial Report for RealFirm that cost $ $5,000-10,000. Now, let’s go over what we found in our Situation Review and discuss steps for Remediation, costs and pri- orities to Achieve Compliance for Re- alFirm, LLC. SITUATION: RealFirm does not have ransomware-proof data backup. Risk: Will have to pay ransom if ransomware installed by hackers, like Estes Park Health did earlier this summer; HIPAA violation. Remediation: Install and configure onto server. Cost/Priority: High-Priority. $3,000 per year. SITUATION: RealFirm does not have at least 18 or more cybersecurity policies and procedures customized to the firm. Risk: Staff does not know what to do if hacked, which increases time-to- detection; for a real-life example take a look at Flipboard, whose customers’ information was accessible to hackers for almost a year. Remediation: Write 18 policies and customize them based on the se- curity controls. Cost/Priority: High-Priority. $5,000 one-time, plus Managed Secu- rity Services of $1,500 per month. SITUATION: The firm does not have enough security controls in place to protect against brute force attacks, such as unauthorized intrusions. The managing partner thought its antivi- rus software was sufficient. Risk: Antivirus is only 5% effective against the latest threats like ransom- ware. Remediation: Install patented multi-layered security. Cost/Priority: High-Priority. In- cluded in above Managed Security Services. SITUATION: The firm did not have an adequate security awareness training program in place to protect against wire fraud scams, social en- gineering, phishing, etc. Firms often cannot provide proof of people going through the training. Risk: Puts your patients’ ePHI at risk, like the 183,000 Presbyterian Health clients who were breached this week. Remediation: Train, test and certi- fy all staff. Cost/Priority: High-Priority. In- cluded in above Managed Security Services. SITUATION: Real Firm is not con- tinuously monitoring/backing up their security logs which is required for compliance. Risk: This is another way hackers will be able to stay even longer in your system. They should be reviewed dai- ly, even on holidays like this Timehop breach demonstrates. Remediation: Install and configure hardware firewall appliance. Cost/Priority: High-Priority. In- cluded in above Managed Security Services. SITUATION: The firm is practicing poor password hygiene. It’s reusing simple passwords on multiple sites. Risk: Easy to hack (80% of all hack- ing related breaches involved compro- mised and/or weak passwords); po- tential HIPAA violation (164.308(a) (5)(ii)(D)). Remediation: Signup for an enter- prise password manager and change passwords to call websites/applica- tions. Cost/Priority: High-Priority. $300/ User/Year for hardware token plus en- terprise password management. Real- Firm has five users so the cost would be $ 1,500 per year. SITUATION: RealFirm is not using multi-factor authentication every- where possible. Risk: Easy to hack; potential HIPAA violation. Remediation/Cost/Priority: High-Priority. Included with most cloud service providers. Custom soft- ware or server-based application may need additional software licenses that range in cost but are around $9/User/ Month. Of course, no cybersecurity plan is foolproof, as the recent hack of 100 million Capital One customers dem- onstrates. The combined cost of getting Real- Firm to compliance could be around $20,000 a year. But without these fixes, RealFirm is ripe for a cyber-attack that could cost as much as $300,000 per client and damage to its reputa- tion that could lead to its demise. This also does not in- clude potential fines for HIPAA viola- tions from the Of- fice of Civil Rights. Case Study: Cybersecurity Fix For Small Firm CRAIG PETRONELLA | Cybersecurity Craig A. Petronella is the CEO of Petronella Technology Group, Inc. (PTG), an internationally trusted IT cybersecurity group that specializes in helping law firms with training, security, and Compliance. Get your FREE phishing email test at FreePhishTest.com. Craig has 30 years’ experience, authored multiple books, including “How Hackers Can Crush Your Law Firm,” and “Peace of Mind Computer Support.” For more information about a cybercrime risk as- sessment call 1-877-468-2721. AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 11“A lot of people call and tell us a story like this: ‘Mom is pretty independent but is in the early stages of dementia, has some memory issues, and my sister recently moved in with Mom or moved Mom to her place, and I don’t know what’s going on,’” explained Raleigh fidu- ciary litigation attorney Lee Laskody. “She is taking Mom to a lawyer, moving bank accounts – I am worried!” These kinds of cases were the impetus for Laskody and Raleigh fiduciary litigation attorney Tom Sparks to launch Fiduciary Litigation Group last year. The firm represents claimants and fiduciaries involved in adverse estate, trust, and guardianship proceedings. They handle cases involv- ing estates of over $200,000. The two attorneys crossed paths practicing at a highly respected Durham law firm that specializes in wills and estates. They identified the need for attorneys who could litigate disputes among family members over the assets in an estate. “Everybody’s perception is their reality,” Sparks said. “In a situation where tempers are short and feelings are brittle, that’s when we get involved. The goal here is not to spend all the money on legal fees. But more making sure that the parties all get the assets. “The one common denominator in 99 percent of our cases is the failure to communicate,” Sparks continued. “It raises suspicions and there’s really no reason for it. Many of our clients are people who discovered that a family member in a position of trust has taken advantage of the situation. This may involve an elderly parent who is vul- nerable, or suspicious changes to a will or trust made right before death.” EVERY DOCUMENT TELLS A STORY “The documents frequently tell the story,” said Sparks. “We tell the parties, ‘I’m not saying you’re right. I’m not saying you’re wrong. I’m just saying here’s what the docu- ments show.’ Most always, we are in a situation where ev- erybody wants mom to be okay. “Our first step is usually to investigate by following the money,” Sparks continued. “We often review bank and fi- Fiduciary Litigation Group DISPUTE RESOLUTION FROM THE HEAD AND THE HEART WRITTEN BY BOB FRIEDMAN PHOTOGRAPHY HEADSHOTS AND CORPORATE TOM SPARKS & LEE LASKODY 12nancial records to find out what is re- ally happening. Sometimes we must file a court proceeding so that we can obtain the financial records. If there is financial exploitation, we take legal action to stop it, remove the offender from their fiduciary role, and return the funds whenever possible.” “The number one kind of abuse that we see is what I have come to call ‘theft by power of attorney,’” said Laskody. “And it’s a horrible way of saying it because sometimes it’s in- advertent, but it is a situation where somebody becomes the attorney-in- fact for an elder person whose health is in decline, and they transfer all of the person’s accounts beneficiary des- ignations, etc. to themselves. Some- times they isolate their mom or dad, and now their other family members can’t reach them by phone. When they come and visit, they’re unwel- come. And this other family member is telling Mom or Dad that everyone else is out to get them or so-and-so is a bad actor.” “Most of the people who do that honestly believe they’re consolidating things for the elderly person,” Sparks said. “They may not trust their sib- lings. But regardless of intent, there are enough of them to keep us busy stopping that abuse, and to the extent that we can, we reverse whatever has been done.” Other issues can arise when the elderly person has not updated their will to reflect a blended family, new family members, or a second mar- riage. TOTAL OPPOSITES Sparks is quick to point out that he and Laskody are almost complete op- posites. Where Sparks is outspoken, a self- described “Navy brat, graduated from Duke School of Law and became an Air Force JAG; Laskody was raised in a quiet community on Long Island. He graduated from UNC School of Law and cut his teeth with a general practice in small- town Graham, North Caro- lina. “When both my parents passed away, I went through the dying process with them, and that changed my think- ing about all the issues that come up around mortality. I decided I wanted to get into elder law,” said Laskody. Sparks is currently going through the challenge of helping manage his father’s estate for his family as his fa- ther struggles with Alzheimer’s. Both said their strategy for their cli- ents is the same as for their own aging family members. “We want their lives to be better. These people have worked hard all their lives, and they obviously have something that somebody’s fighting over,” said Sparks. “We tell the fami- lies, it’s not your money; it’s your parent’s money. If they want to take it out in $1 bills, put it in the front yard, pour butane on it and burn it, they can do that. It is their money.” “So, the fight shouldn’t be about what you’re going to get. It should be about the quality of life that the elder can ex- perience from here moving forward and that’s our focus,” added Laskody. “The challenge for us is that we do this thing that is very analytic. What is the le- gal situation, and what can we do? That part is the head. But I want to approach it with my heart also – to care about people. If you put someone in front of me who’s having some challenging and hard times, I want to think about how we can make this situation better. How can we resolve it for them?” FIDUCIARY LITIGATION GROUP 223 S. West Street, Suite 900 Raleigh, NC 27603 (919) 229-0845 www.fidlitlaw.com TOM SPARKS LEE LASKODY FIDUCIARY LITIGATION LAW FIRM OF THE MONTH Everybody’s perception is their reality, in a situation where tempers are short and feelings are brittle, that’s when we get involved. The goal here is not to spend all the money on legal fees. But more making sure that the parties all get the assets.” AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 13Is It Time to Review Your Firm’s Compensation System? PETER A. JOHNSON, M.ED., JD | Practice Management In a shifting environment in which the profession of law has transitioned to the busi- ness of lawyering, assessments of, and modifications to, compensation sys- tems must be on the table. An integral component of the business model is a compensation system that recog- nizes and rewards behaviors, skills and performances which further the overall strategic goals and objectives of the firm. Firms are recognizing the value of using compensation more effectively as a management tool to increase profitability and growth. Technology allows firms to “look be- hind the numbers” to identify clients, matters, practice areas, and attorneys who add the most to the bottom line. Revising compensation systems, however, has long been a “third rail” issue for law firms. Lawyers are change averse and are reluctant to consider changing an arrangement that worked very well over the years but may not be the best system for the financial health and future growth of the firm. A redistribution of the same profit results in perceived “winners” and “losers.” Convincing attorneys to agree to a new compensation system which pays them less, but is best for the firm, is an uphill battle. REASONS TO CONSIDER CHANGE Perhaps the most compelling rea- son is that the legal landscape has changed dramatically. I remember originating a client during my first year as an associ- ate. I was proud of that success which I shared with the named senior part- ner. You can imag- ine my reaction when the partner literally pointed his finger and said sternly, “We don’t pay you to bring in business, we pay you to do the work. Now get back to your desk!” Unlike years ago, when there was as much business as firms could handle, today there are many more lawyers compet- ing for fewer clients. Client loyalty is eroding, and business development has become almost predatory. Your firm’s clients are your competitors’ targets. Much more time and effort are required to build and sustain cli- ent loyalty. Doing great legal work is no longer sufficient, and clients no longer are reticent to replace their at- torneys and law firms. There are only two ways attorneys can generate fee revenue for a law firm—by originating the work regard- less of who does the work, or by doing the work, regardless of who originates it. For years the debate has been the relative contribution of each. Until fairly recently, most firms favored the working timekeeper. Some firms elected not to track originations be- cause of the potential for divisiveness of the allocation. The pendulum has now swung in favor of the originators. Those firms still paying a premium for working timekeeper receipts run the risk of losing attorneys who are more highly valued by competing firms. They may not be able to retain or attract attorneys who demonstrate origination potential. The stigma once attached to an attorney who “jumped ship” from one firm to another no longer exists. Today, attorneys who have proven to be effective new busi- ness originators have more control over their career paths, and thus can command a higher level of compen- sation. Those attorneys are also more likely to take the call from a recruiter, or a competing firm, if they think they are being underpaid. Compen- sation, therefore, needs to reflect the vagaries of the marketplace where originators have the upper hand. Another reason to rethink existing compensation models is that lawyers who are ascending the partnership ladder are not eager to subsidize the “in-office retirement” of tenured partners who may no longer be pro- ductive. Economic reality makes it unacceptable for a partner to “coast” into his or her retirement by living off previous accomplishments. Un- funded retirements are a vestige of the past. Seniority is no longer a compen- sation criterion in most firms. Peter A. Johnson is founder and principal of Law Practice Consultants, LLC of Newton, MA. Law Practice Consul- tants, LLC offers consulting, coaching and training services that help law firms respond to the challenges of to- day’s highly competitive legal marketplace. Prior to consulting, Peter was a practicing attorney at a 40-person law firm in Boston where he was chair of the compensation committee and, thereafter, managing partner. He works extensively with mid-sized and smaller firms focusing on management, governance, and compensation systems. For more information visit www.lawpracticeconsultants.com. (pjohnson@lawpracticeconsultants.com) To achieve its goals, a firm should have a compensation system that rewards and motivates behaviors, attitudes and performance which are consistent with firm goals and objectives.” ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · NORTH CAROLINA TRIANGLE VOL. 7 NO. 4 14PAY FOR PERFORMANCE— LOOKING BEHIND THE NUMBERS To achieve its goals, a firm should have a compensation system that rewards and motivates behaviors, attitudes and performance which are consistent with firm goals and objectives. Every firm must define success in its own way and identify the types of performance that it seeks to encourage. A compensation sys- tem should promote the long-term success of the firm by providing incentives to all partners to expand the firm’s business and contribute to its profitability. A successful com- pensation plan rewards those who have made the most effective con- tributions. An effective compensation sys- tem must also be tied into part- ner accountability. More firms are scrutinizing what it means to be a partner. What are the minimal contributions partners are expect- ed to make? Each year the bar gets raised and partners no longer are entitled to be paid for non-perfor- mance. Years ago, firms would look at trailing averages of three, then two years. Now firms are adopt- ing a “what have you done for me lately” approach. It is important that all partners agree to be held accountable for their actions. Autonomy must be subordinated to accountability. PLAYING BY MONEYBALL RULES The book (and successful mo- tion picture) Moneyball, by Mi- chael Lewis delved into the way an innovative general manager named Billy Beane transformed the way the game of baseball evaluated tal- ent. Beane believed that statistics trump instinct. Rather than trust the “eye” of experienced scouts to judge a player’s potential, he as- sessed ability based on strictly em- pirical evidence. Using this objec- tive approach, he built a competi- tive team at a fraction of the payroll as other major league franchises. In a similar vein, advances in technology have given us the tools to look behind the numbers that have traditionally been used by law firms as a measure of performance. Where once success was viewed as accumulating the most billable hours and generating the highest gross billings, we can now answer the question, “How much did the firm actually make from this client, practice area, or attorney?” Some firms are looking at the “cost of production” by analyzing partner performance and contri- bution to profit. For example: Two clients each pay a law firm $1 mil- lion per year in fees. Each appears to be a potentially profitable client. If we dig a little deeper, we find that one client required 5,000 hours of attorney and staff time, while the second client was managed using just 2,000 hours of attorney and staff time. Now which client looks more profitable? Which partner should receive more compensation based on this measure of perfor- mance? Analysis of realization must also be a factor in compensation sys- tems— There are three percentages generally looked at—(i)the bill- able value of hours worked to the fees collected from that work, (ii) worked to billed, and (iii) billed to collected. When I chaired my firm’s compensation committee the same partner would come in year after year and boast about his $1.5M “book.” Realization meant noth- ing to him, and he dismissed the criticism that in order to generate the $1.5M he (i) reduced his “A” rate, (ii) then also discounted his “B” rate, (iii) wrote off 10% of the receivable, and (iv) used a dispro- portionate amount of timekeep- ers on those matters. Yet he still demanded to be paid on his gross receipts. It was akin to having auto manufacturers pay their assembly line workers more than the price of the vehicle! How long would a car manufacturer remain in business using similar practices? In my next column, I’ll explain how changes to a compensation structure must reflect the law firm’s culture, history, values and busi- ness objectives. AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 15“Hi, I’m Dan Boyce, rush chair- man, darn glad to meet you,” said Raleigh attorney Dan Boyce with a grin as members of his team filed into the conference room at Nexsen Pruet with smiles and giggles of their own. Boyce brings that same quick wit with a twinkle in his eye to his practice along with gravitas and an incredible wealth of experience in high-stakes litigation from his 35-year career. “I help clients deal with the emotional strain they are under in a moment of crisis. I try to bring a calming influence to the situation and help the client understand there is a light at the end of the tunnel,” said Boyce. “We work on bet-the-company, bet-the-farm, and bet-the-career – high-stakes cases, where everything is on the line,” he continued. “From an early point in my career, I saw what it’s like for my clients to go through that kind of ordeal. Using my experience, I help our trial team un- derstand how to handle high pressure, high-stakes situations better than other attorneys who haven’t been through those kinds of cases.” LEGAL AND LIFE COUNSELOR Boyce’s practice includes representing individuals and businesses before administrative, li- censing, disciplinary and grievance boards; corporate, partnership and business disputes and fraud investigations, including unfair and deceptive trade practices; corporate internal inves- tigations detecting employee malfeasance including embezzlement; and class action lawsuits involving tax, federal contracts and constitutional issues. “I’ve heard that an attorney is both a legal counselor and a life counselor. It’s important to be on a personal level with my clients when they’re dealing with some of the most important moments in their lives,” said Boyce. “In high-stakes litigation, I know my clients are very uncomfortable and unsure on how to proceed. In addition to sorting out the specifics of their legal dispute, I help them understand the judicial system and the formalities, especially in certain courts such as business or federal court. They’ve never been through these situations. Sometimes, humor, at the right time, is the best medicine to put them at ease and make them feel more comfortable with us and with the process. Our team treats our clients just as we would expect to be treated if the roles were reversed.” BUSINESS LITIGATOR OF THE MONTH Dan Boyce When Everything’s on the Line WRITTEN BY BOB FRIEDMAN PHOTOGRAPHY HEADSHOTS AND CORPORATE ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · NORTH CAROLINA TRIANGLE VOL. 7 NO. 4 16VAST SHADOW R. Daniel “Dan” Boyce was born in Fay- etteville and raised in Raleigh. Going into the family business meant stepping into the im- mense shadow of his father, Eugene Boyce. Gene gained success as a trial lawyer and fame as the lead investigator in the Watergate Hear- ings led by NC Senator Sam J. Ervin. “Growing up at the feet of one of the great- est trial lawyers of all time was an extremely positive experience. Even as a young boy, that’s what I wanted to do,” said Boyce. He graduated from Wake Forest Univer- sity with a Bachelor of Arts in psychology. He earned his Juris Doctor from UNC. He lists his father and his father-in-law, Dewey Wells, as his role models. Wells was successful as a trial lawyer, superior court judge, and is in the NC Bar Association Gen- eral Practice Hall of Fame. “From my dad, I learned to never give up. He never backed down from a challenge. He’s known for his belief in the judicial system and his willingness to persevere against all odds. From Dewey, I learned honesty, humility, and integrity. He’s a man of great integrity. I’ve heard people call him the Atticus Finch of the North Carolina Bar,” said Boyce. Boyce practiced with his father for three years then worked in the U.S. Attorney’s office for seven years. He then returned to private practice and worked on class actions, includ- ing administration with his father who was the lead lawyer for two of the largest and most successful settlements in the history of NC ju- risprudence. The Bailey class action which was a federal and state retiree case that settled for $799 mil- lion and the Smith Shaver Class B Lawsuit re- lated to “intangibles taxes” created by the NC Legislature that had taxed owners of stock in North Carolina corporations. That case set- tled for $440 million. “I developed a solid background for class action work from those two cases and there- after I’ve worked on numerous other cases as both a plaintiff and defense attorney,” said Boyce. TEAMWORK IS ESSENTIAL After more than 15 years in a boutique practice, Boyce joined Nexsen Pruet in 2011 because of the ability to draw from a team of attorneys inside the firm with a variety of ar- eas of expertise. “That has allowed us to ex- pand our practice into many different mar- kets,” said Boyce. “Teamwork is essential. I recently needed expertise in tax, corporate governance, real AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 17estate, immigration, and employ- ment issues in the agribusiness, healthcare, and automotive indus- tries for clients who wanted me to represent them. We had lawyers who practiced in those areas.” LITIGATOR OR TRIAL ATTORNEY “There is a distinction between a litigator and a trial attorney. I am BOYCE DRIVING A PORSCHE 944 AT AN NATIONAL AUTO SPORT ASSOCIATION EVENT AT THE VIRGINIA INTERNATIONAL RACEWAY IN AUGUST 2019. ALICE, ROBERT, WILL, CAROLINE, LEAVIE, SARAH, DAN, MILLER, BETTY, KATIE & HUNTER AT BALD HEAD ISLAND, JULY 2018 YOLANADA DAVIS, KEITH BURNS, BOYCE AND BRIDGET BLINN-SPEARS “I help clients deal with the emotional strain they are under in a moment of crisis.” both. A litigator can effectively handle com- plex discovery efforts that may include vo- luminous requests and document dumps. I have received and sent extensive discovery re- quests. But I am also a trial attorney. A great trial attorney takes a complex set of facts and makes it simple for a judge or jury. I hope to be remembered more as a skilled trial attor- ney than as a litigator. “One of the biggest challenges for young at- torneys to becoming good trial lawyers is they seldom experience the highs and lows of tri- al work. Only real courtroom experience can teach you how to fight through a trial whether it’s really dark and nothing falls your way or how to curb your enthusiasm and not overre- act when it turns in your favor. The best trial attorneys I’ve worked with have been in the trenches for years.” LEGALZOOM V. NC STATE BAR Boyce represented LegalZoom when it sued the NC State Bar in 2011. The Bar claimed Le- galZoom was engaged in the “unauthorized practice of law.” LegalZoom’s business model offering online document preparation servic- es was unpopular amongst some lawyers be- cause they viewed it as new and unfamiliar competition. “Some people thought we shouldn’t take on ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · NORTH CAROLINA TRIANGLE VOL. 7 NO. 4 18the NC State Bar and that I was crazy to challenge the licensing organization that holds my law license. We concluded that document preparation on the inter- net was new technology, but not that different from legal forms found in form books, floppy disks, and CD-ROMs. We believed that consumers were enti- tled to create their own doc- uments,” said Boyce. I thought that it was in the best interest of the public to allow those services because many users of online docu- ment preparation services could not afford to hire at- torneys for simple documents,” he added. Plus, LegalZoom had the right to be represented just like any other litigant, even if it was unpopular with some lawyers,” he continued. “Although I was criticized for having taken the case, ultimately the State Bar worked with us and with the help of some slight legislative tweaks the Legislature fixed outdated statutes. The state ultimately agreed that providing online document preparation services does not constitute the unauthorized practice of law.” SPEED RACER As if the daily competition as a trial lawyer isn’t enough, Boyce’s weekend passions are auto-racing and flying lessons. “I’ve taken them up late in life. I joined a racing team. We find old cars that aren’t fit to drive on the road; rebuild them and make them safe and functional; and then see if the cars can survive an entire weekend driving around a track. I’m also taking flying lessons. My family jokes that I have a ‘need for speed,’ and I admit, it’s awfully fun,” said Boyce. Boyce’s wife, Betty, is a retired nurse. They have four children – Robert 27, Sarah, 23, Will, 38, and Hunter, 35. Boyce and Betty have four granddaughters, Leavie, Miller, Alice and Margaret. “I must ad- mit I am more proud of my family than I am of my career,” said Boyce. STILL THE BASICS Boyce said he learned a lot from practicing with his father, but the practice of law today is more complex. “Gene’s known for saying, ‘Let’s just put 12 in the box and let the jury decide.’ He had cases that went to trial without doing much dis- covery. With today’s complex litigation, a lot of our time is spent dig- ging through a million pages of documents until we find the smoking gun,” said Boyce. I learned from Dewey the value of diplomacy and keeping an open mind in negotiations,” Boyce said. “I am honest with my clients, not every case should go to trial. And a good trial attorney recognizes when it’s time to talk settlement.” “I hold true to the basics of hard work, perseverance, passion, com- passion and caring about your clients just as my father and father-in- law did in the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s in the midst of their successful careers. We all believe the bottom line is it takes hard work and preparation be- fore and during trial. I hope I can measure up to their standards.” At a Glance NEXSEN PRUET PLLC 4141 Parklake Avenue, Suite 200 Raleigh, NC 27612 (919) 755-1800 www.NexsenPruet.com BAR ADMISSIONS North Carolina U.S. District Court for the Eastern, Middle and Western Districts of North Carolina U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit U.S. Supreme Court PRACTICE AREAS State and Federal Civil Litigation State and Federal Regulatory Hearings Business Disputes Corporate Internal Investigations · White Collar, Corporate, and Individual Defense EDUCATION Juris Doctor, University of North Carolina, 1984 Bachelor of Arts, Wake Forest University, 1981 CURRENT AND PRIOR MEMBERSHIP AND SERVICES Wake County Bar Association, Board of Directors, Criminal Law North Carolina State Bar, Criminal Section Wake County Academy of Trial Lawyers Julia Ellen Crump Foundation, President Tammy Lynn Center, Board of Directors Wake County Bar Association, Young Lawyers Division, Past President HONORS & AWARDS Fellow, Litigation Counsel of America Board Certified Specialist in State and Federal Criminal Law, North Carolina State Board of Legal Specialization Former Licensed Private Investigator, State of North Carolina AV-Peer Rated, Martindale-Hubbell North Carolina Super Lawyers List, Civil Litigation, Since 2008 Best Lawyers in America, Criminal Defense and Civil Litigation Defense, Since 2007 Board of Governors, Bald Head Island Club AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 19Next >