< PreviousLawyers with the best intentions can find themselves unprepared for North Carolina State Bar random audits. With the daily opera- tion of a successful practice, the de- tailed task of monthly and quarterly trust account reconciliation can get lost in the shuffle. Since attorneys are personally bound to their clients by a fiduciary duty, including the highest legal standard of care, accurate han- dling of client trust accounts is crucial as well as required by the NC State Bar. As a trust accountant, I can spot common pitfalls before they result in disciplinary actions resulting from a random audit or other investigations of a trust account by the NC State Bar. MAKE SURE YOUR SOFTWARE IS SUFFICIENT Most lawyers look for practice management software to streamline their daily tasks. Unfortunately, the software may not include the capabil- ity to meet a firm’s monthly require- ments to reconcile the trust bank account because it is marketed “rec- onciliation capable.” This means it may require you to sync with other software to complete monthly bank reconciliations. Without this second product, you may not be able to com- ply with Rule 1.15. DELEGATION AND OVERSIGHT I encourage the separation of ac- counting duties in a firm to minimize the possibility of mistakes, inadver- tence or fraud by ensuring that no one employee unilaterally undertakes or oversees the trust account. Creating internal controls is prudent for your operating bank account, but is even more critical, and required, in a client trust account. You have a fiduciary duty to your clients to protect their funds. NC State Bar Rule 1.15 is de- signed to help you create the internal controls necessary to protect not only the client but also you and your firm. As a rule of thumb, more than one employee should complete the daily, monthly and quarterly tasks for your trust accounts. The same person should not receive client funds, make deposits, enter the deposits into ac- counting software, write checks, sign checks or reconcile the bank accounts. Having one person completing all these tasks is a recipe for disaster. In small firms, it is not uncommon for one lawyer to personally make the client trust deposits. This can result in a false sense of security. While pre- venting embezzlement is often their primary concern, it overlooks the hu- man element of a simple mistake. Example: While doing trust ac- counting for a new client, I discovered that two deposits containing client trust funds were mistakenly depos- ited into the firm’s operating bank ac- count. Because the lawyer personally made the deposit, he was confident that client funds were deposited in the trust account. When the checks were disbursed from the trust account, it caused an over-disbursement of near- ly $50,000. ALL ACCOUNTANTS ARE NOT ALIKE If you broke your leg, would you go see a heart surgeon? If you were having chest pains, would you go to an orthopedic specialist? Of course not. While both doctors are experts in their fields their skills do not overlap. The same is true in the account- ing field. There are a variety of areas of expertise – public tax accounting, project accounting, forensic account- ing or auditing, just to name a few. We are all highly qualified in our re- spective fields, but our expertise may not overlap. Trust accounting has a unique set of rules defined specifically in Rule 1.15, and is not taught in any college accounting degree programs or included in the CPA exam. Example: After being hired to audit an attorney’s trust account, I learned they sent their trust account docu- ments to their CPA every month for nearly 10 years. Sadly, the CPA did not know trust accounting rules and only prepared the traditional bank reconciliation. As a result, the trust account was short, nearly $25,000. FOCUS ON YOUR PRACTICE The two examples above resulted in disciplinary actions by the State Bar against the firms. No attorney wants to see their name printed in The Dis- ciplinary Department of The North Carolina State Bar Journal or have to deal with a costly and time-consum- ing disciplinary action that would fol- low a State Bar audit if the trust fund is non-compliant. If you or your firm lacks the time or expertise to complete these duties properly, consider hiring a company that specializes in trust accounting for law firms. By leveraging the expertise of a trust accountant, you are able to: (1) comply with Rule 1.15; (2) main- tain your trust account properly; and (3) be prepared for an NC State Bar random audit. Giving you the time to focus on representing your clients and build- ing your practice. Common Pitfalls in Your Trust Account DAWN CASH-SALAU | Trust Accounting Dawn Cash-Salau is the owner of Escrow Consulting and Accounting, LLC, specializing in the field of trust ac- counting. Realizing an increasing need for accountants versed in trust account compliance, Dawn established ECA in 2010, serving clients throughout North Carolina. With over 20 years of accounting experience, Dawn is qualified to provide this specialized service due to her concentration in this area. Dawn earned a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration in Accounting at East Carolina University in 1996. In 2008, Dawn was also recognized as Honorary Alumna at NC Wesleyan College. Dawn Cash-Salau, Escrow Consulting and Accounting, Inc., (252) 531-4241, www.trustcompliancenc.com. ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · NORTH CAROLINA TRIANGLE VOL. 8 NO. 2 10What happens to immigra- tion during a global pan- demic, when international travel comes to a screeching halt and the economy worldwide is sud- denly turned on its head? In just a few months, the effects have been far- reaching. INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS Entry into the United States has been suspended of all foreign nation- als who have been in China, Iran, Eu- rope and Brazil within the last 14 days. The ban exempts U.S. citizens (USCs), lawful permanent residents (LPRs), and their immediate family members, but requires them to self-quarantine for 14 days. The Northern and South- ern land borders have been sealed to all non-essential travel. The Depart- ment of State (DOS) issued a world- wide Level 4: Do Not Travel advisory, instructing Americans to avoid all international travel due to the global impact of COVID-19. For the rest of 2020, the president has suspended the entry of immi- grants who ostensibly threaten to steal American jobs during this period of record-breaking unemployment. The proclamation has several exceptions for LPRs, spouses and children of USCs, members of the Armed Forces and their spouses and children, medi- cal and healthcare professionals, EB-5 immigrant investors, and others. On June 22, the president amended the proclamation to carve out an exemp- tion specifically for derivative children at risk of “aging out” and losing their current ability to join their parents if they turn 21 during the ban. The president’s latest proclamation suspends the issuance of many non- immigrant visas to purportedly pro- tect U.S. jobs. This order applies to all H-1B, H-2B, J-1, and L-1 visa appli- cants and their dependents who were outside the United States as of June 24. Those categories include executives, managers, and specialized intracom- pany transferees of multinational cor- porations, high-skilled workers, cul- tural exchange visitors, and non-ag- ricultural seasonal guestworkers. The ban will block up to 525,000 foreign workers and their families through the end of the year, and may be continued “as necessary.” In theory, it provides for exemptions for workers “essential to the U.S. food supply chain” and oth- ers whose entry is deemed to be in the “national interest,” although no guid- ance has been provided to agencies on how to grant an exemption. NO ACCESS TO ASYLUM Along the Southern border, Mi- grant Protection Protocols hearings have been postponed, forcing nearly 60,000 asylum-seekers to remain in Mexico even longer, in inhumane and dangerous living conditions. For those that cannot wait and decide to cross into the country without inspection, Border Patrol agents are processing them in the field instead of at a Border Patrol station. After running their fin- gerprints to check for serious crimes, if none are found, agents return mi- grants back to Mexico in an average of 96 minutes, without a medical exam or a credible fear interview. IMMIGRATION OFFICE CLOSURES United States Citizenship and Im- migration Services (USCIS) field of- fices and application support centers closed to the public and only recently began to slowly reopen in limited ca- pacity. DOS suspended all routine immigrant and nonimmigrant visa services at every U.S. Embassy and Consulate abroad and cancelled all appointments. As a result, no visa in- terviews have been conducted since March 20 except in emergencies. All non-detained deportation hearings were suspended in the immigration courts. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) modified its en- forcement priorities, focusing only on detaining public-safety risks and indi- viduals subject to mandatory deten- tion based on criminal grounds. THE CONSEQUENCES Revenue from USCIS application fees has dropped due to decreased fil- ings. Approximately 13,400 USCIS em- ployees will be furloughed on August 3. USCIS is requesting to dramatically raise fees to compensate for the short- fall. Naturalization interviews and oath ceremonies have been postponed, resulting in hundreds of thousands of immigrants unable to vote in the up- coming election. Premium processing of all employment-based immigrant petitions has been indefinitely sus- pended. Processing for H-1B cap cases has been delayed. The entry of H-2A seasonal agricultural workers was pushed back. Saturated consulates that already had year-long waits for visa in- terviews remain closed with no news of reopening anytime soon. Many of the world’s most talented workers are unable to finalize or renew their visas abroad, trapping them overseas and stranding them from their families and careers. Refugee and asylee admissions have halted completely. More than 2,700 immigrants in ICE custody and about 200 ICE employees have tested positive for COVID-19. Two detainees have died from the virus while in cus- tody, and another shortly after being released. The immi- gration court’s un- precedented back- log of over a million cases continues to snowball. GIGI GARDNER | Immigration Law Gigi Gardner is the Principal Attorney of Gardner Law, PLLC, a boutique immigration law firm in downtown Raleigh. She defends her clients from deportation before the immigration courts, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. She also wins immigration bonds for ICE detainees and advises attorneys of potential immigration consequences in other legal matters, such as criminal defense and family law. Gardner is a native of North Carolina, fluent in Spanish, and holds a Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent Peer Review Rating. For more information, contact her at 919-987-2101, gigi@gardnerlawpllc.com, or visit the firm’s website at www. gardnerlawpllc.com. The Aftermath of COVID-19 on Immigration AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 11On December 4, 2019, UNC School of Law Professor Michael Gerhardt testified at the House Judiciary Com- mittee hearing on the impeachment of President Donald Trump. “If Congress fails to impeach here, then the impeach- ment process has lost all meaning, and along with that, our Constitution’s carefully crafted safeguards against the establishment of a king on American soil,” Gerhardt told the committee. “No one, not even the president, is beyond our Constitution and our laws.” Gerhardt has written extensively on impeachment and has testified before Congress over 20 times including as the only joint witness during the Clinton impeachment hearing. In late February, several weeks after the Senate acquitted Donald Trump, Gerhardt sat down for an interview with Attorney at Law Magazine Ex- ecutive Publisher Bob Friedman. Ger- hardt updated some of his comments July 1. AALM: Did the impeachment pro- cess work? MG: I think it worked as expected, beginning with the House’s impeach- ment of the president. And in the next phase, the Senate acquitted the president. I think the expectation was that the president’s fellow Repub- licans would hold together in both the House and particularly the Sen- ate, where there was never any way it would get close to the at least two- thirds supermajority to convict, and that’s the way it worked out. Clearly, the rise of political parties has complicated if not undermined the effectiveness of impeachment as a check on presidential misconduct. The idea behind the impeachment process is to see whether or not there’s serious enough misconduct that would justify getting more support for removal than just from one politi- cal party. AALM: The question has been raised, is impeachment a political tool or a constitutional tool? MG: It’s primarily a constitutional tool. It’s vested in the authority of Congress, but it’s authorized by the Constitution. So that makes it a con- stitutional process, not your typical legal process and not your typical po- litical process. We’ve had three impeachment trials of presidents, and they’ve all resulted in acquittals. One reason may be that the influence of political parties is just too strong to overcome and therefore it becomes impossible, as a practical matter, for members of Congress to buck their party, either to impeach a president or to convict him. Another reason impeachment may have be- come ineffective is that the consti- tutional requirement of at least two- thirds of senators as the threshold for conviction and removal is practically impossible to meet, and therefore the combination of that rule along with the pull of political parties makes it highly unlikely you’ll ever see a presi- dent removed from office in this way. AALM: Since the outcome of the House impeachment and Senate tri- al were known in advance, why go through the charade? MG: I think the challenge for the Speaker and for the House as a whole was whether to do something about the president’s misconduct or not. The Democratic majority didn’t invent the evidence against the president, and that put the House in a difficult po- sition. Do we do something and just have it end up as it did in the Senate, where the president got acquitted, or do we just do nothing and give the president a pass? I think the House leaders decided this is a constitutional process and we think there’s some- thing bad enough here to justify im- peachment. It may not prevail, but for history’s sake, we will have taken our stand. AALM: The crimes committed by President Trump were very serious so can you ever envision a situation where the constitutional process re- moves a president from office? MG: I think what we’re coming to grips with is the fact that impeach- ment process may not be very effec- tive when it comes to dealing with presidential misconduct. It may mean that we need to think of other ways to deal with serious mis- conduct by a president that are more effective. Maybe what we’re discov- ering is that if a president has strong support in his party and a strong base, he can do pretty much whatever he wants, even if that’s not consistent with the Constitution. Or maybe the Constitution doesn’t matter as much as we thought it did. Has the Role of the President Changed? AALM: Considering the extent of the transgressions by this president, has the role of the president changed immeasurably? Countries with much longer histories than ours see the Trump presidency as just a swing of the pendulum. Is it? MG: It may be just a swing in the direction of an overly strong and dominant president. But, I think there’s more happening than what the president’s base wants. The theory that supports what the president did up until the time of his impeach- MICHAEL GERHARDT UNC Law Professor Testified in House Impeachment Hearings Inside the Trump Impeachment ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · NORTH CAROLINA TRIANGLE VOL. 8 NO. 2 12ment and supports his conduct post impeachment is a theory called the unitary theory of the executive. It’s a theory that conservative lawyers have been putting forward for about 30 or 40 years, and President Trump may be the perfect client, so to speak, to put that theory into effect. So, one thing we might be seeing is this newer conception of the presi- dency that envisions that the presi- dent controls the exercise of all execu- tive power. And Trump himself said, to paraphrase him, “Look, I have all the information that the House wants. But I don’t have to share it with you.” The president controls the entire flow of information within his branch, and he controls firing and hiring people in the executive branch. He can decide for himself whether or not to com- ply with a subpoena, either from the Congress or the courts. That is what the unitary theory of the executive posits. So, the unitary theory of the execu- tive posits a really powerful president, more powerful than I think we’ve seen as of yet in this country. And the question becomes what are the checks against a president who’s unleashed to all that this theory promises? At the same, I think that President Trump has normalized misconduct. And so I’m not sure there’s any mis- conduct that his base or a majority of both chambers of Congress would think is inappropriate for him. Two Different Worlds AALM: The Constitution was writ- ten to prevent the abuses of power committed by King George III. What has brought us 360 degrees to where we are condoning what the founders sought to prevent? MG: There are a lot of dif- ferent factors. One is the rise of political parties that have become like tribes, and for each of the majority parties it’s all win or lose. Second, I think social media, the place where people generally get their information, just rein- forces their opinions. Social media ends up hardening opinions rather than enlight- ening opinion. Third, the Senate has not evolved into the institution that I think the framers had in mind. They saw the Senate as an institution that could rise above partisan politics and check the president when it became necessary and check the president as an essential institutional exercise of its power. But I think what we saw with President Trump’s impeachment and what we may see with any other presi- dent is that allegiance to political party matters more than anything else. AALM: In the period since the ac- quittal, has it been hard teaching con- stitutional law? MG: It’s been much harder to talk to law students and others afterward because typically, what we do in law school as lawyers is we try to think of what the arguments are on each side. I think the constitutional arguments on the president’s side this time were very weak. One indication of that is people in my field of constitutional law were relatively united, conservative and liberal, that there was a problem and this president crossed the line. In- deed, there were no conservative law professors rallying to the president’s side, all the good arguments seemed to go the other way. I think in this situation we just passed through we saw on the one side people who were trying to argue the law, but on the other side, people were just making political points and it became as if the two sides inhabited two different worlds. I think the president’s defense, at least for those who care about the rule of law, was very frightening. He said he may not be subject to any criminal process, not even investigations while he’s in office. Second, he said he did not have to comply with a subpoena even from Congress in an impeachment inquiry. Third, he said he was entitled to keep secret any information that he didn’t want to share, regardless of whether it was entitled to protection in the form of executive privilege or it was evidence he had abused his power or even committed crimes. Fourth, he said he had the power to undermine Congress’s impeachment authority. He could stymie it, he could impede it, he could frustrate it. So, in that cir- cumstance, where was the rule of law? The rule of law appeared to be of no significance in these proceedings. The only real constraint, at the moment, is what those people who voted for him might be willing to put up with. And it seems like they’d be willing to put up with a lot. Is This a Monarchy? AALM: Let’s say that a Democrat wins in November, and Trump de- clares the election a fraud, a fake, and says he’s not leaving the White House. Do you anticipate the Supreme Court upholding the election or siding with the president? MG: So far, he has won nearly ev- ery case his administration in the Supreme Court, and that may reflect the extent to which those people he appointed are going to give him what- ever he asks for. The real shame of all that is to ask the question whether they would ever uphold something a Democratic president did or would they allow President Trump to do it but not a Democratic president. I fear the answer is they would not, and that tells us a lot about what’s happened to the Supreme Court. I think if push came to shove one would expect this Court to side with the president. AALM: So, we have a monarchy? MG: If the shoe fits. I also think what we may be witnessing in the electorate is a generational divide, and it remains to be seen if that is all there is to it or whether there is some- thing else happening that exacerbates the tribal warfare in this country. If the president sees his job as divid- ing people and fanning the flames of tribal dislike, it cannot be good for the country. Courtesy ABC News AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 13With meetings, conferences, and conventions being can- celed by COVID-19, law firms are looking at new ways to com- municate using video conferencing and webinars now and in the future. The bulk of CLEs will be online. Firms forced to switch from in- person meetings and events to online communications have found them to be surprisingly effective and far cheaper than taking a client to lunch or hosting an event in a hotel banquet room. But with any communication that goes through the internet, there is a threat of cybersecurity being compro- mised. If not properly safeguarded, the information being discussed in a video conference or a webinar can be hijacked by a third party. This is a serious consideration if the informa- tion is proprietary or confidential. If a lawyer is talking to a client, to main- tain the attorney-client privilege, they can’t use a video conference applica- tion that is not end-to-end encrypted. An unsecured video conference or webinar can also open the door for a hacker to get into your entire system. For instance, Zoom, one of the more popular of the video conferencing application, has been flagged by the NSC over concerns of spying by the Chinese. END-TO-END ENCRYPTION One of the best ways to ensure cy- bersecurity is to ensure the service you are using is end-to-end encrypt- ed. Some of the solutions use encryp- tion when the video is in transit or at rest. End-to-end encryption is a higher level of security where only the sender encrypts, and only the re- cipient can decode the data. If a third party such is as Zoom is hosting the solution, there is not that end-to-end encryption. Zoom, Microsoft Teams and Skype have this problem. Cisco Web-X of- fers a free account, but you can’t use it for end-to-end until you open a Support Ticket with Cisco Tech and ask that end-to-end encryption be en- abled on your account. I did research on alternatives to Zoom for my company because I have a Zoom account that integrates a lot of other platforms. We can’t use it for some of the sensitive work that we do. I found a company called Signal.org that does one-to-one communication but it won’t work if you want to do two or more people. WEBINARS Webinars that, in some cases, have replaced events such as in-person CLEs can have cybersecurity issues. The solution is using a service that is end-to-end encrypted. You can do a webinar or use Microsoft Teams with- out it being end-to-end encrypted as long as what you are talking about is not sensitive, such as something in the public domain. No matter what software you use for communicating with clients or other attorneys, it is essential that the service be able to provide you with documentation of cybersecurity. This can be critical evidence for your pro- tection in the event of a breach. The same holds true with videoconferenc- ing and webinars if you need end-to- end encryption. The provider should be able to provide you with this docu- mentation. For mid-size firms that will be migrating on a wide-scale from in- person meetings and events to video conferencing and webinars, it may be worthwhile to have a company like mine take a look at the sum of these applications rather than on a piece- by-piece basis as they add these tools. Special offer for Attorney At Law Magazine readers: Call 1-877-468-2721 for a cybersecurity maturity assessment to score your firm for just $500.00! Making Your Video Conferences and Webinars Cybersafe CRAIG PETRONELLA | Cybersecurity Craig A. Petronella is the CEO of Petronella Technology Group, Inc. (PTG), an internationally trusted IT cyber- security group that specializes in helping law firms with training, security, and Compliance. Get your FREE phishing e-mail 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 assessment call 1-877-468-2721. With any communication that goes through the internet, there is a threat of cybersecurity being compromised.” AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 15JOHN TAYLOR, ZAYTOUN AND MATT BELLEW,AVERAGE HEIGHT 6’2”. A TT ORNEY OF THE MONTH “When the judge says, ‘The jury is with the plaintiff,’ that walk between your chair and when you face the jury is as frightening as anything you can imagine,” said Raleigh trial attorney Robert Zaytoun. “That’s why you’ve got to know how you’re going to start. Because once you begin, there’s something miracu- lous about it. The fear of failure becomes emotion. If you can get on a roll, like a shooter does in basketball when they get in a zone, there’s nothing more fulfilling profes- sionally because you become the quintessential advocate for your client.” At 70 years old, Zaytoun is brash, cocky, outspoken and a ham. During our photo- shoot, he commandeered photographer David Tyson’s ladder, climbed to the top, and told his partners to stand next to him. “Take our pic- ture. When I make my opening presentation to jurors, I usually tell them, ‘My partner Matt Ballew is 6’ 8” and my partner John Taylor is 6’5”, so the average height of our firm is 6’2”,” said the 5’6” Zaytoun laughed loudly, adding that the joke was a tribute to his comedic hero Rodney Dangerfield. Zaytoun relishes telling stories, which he does with a dramatic flair. His timing, his ca- dence, the variations in the modulation, and volume of his voice and his oversized gestures are all well-polished. If all the world is a stage, to Zaytoun, so is the courtroom. “From the minute we walk in the courthouse, because there could be poten- tial jurors around, it is theater. However, you cannot be effective if you ramp it up from the minute the first word comes out of your mouth until you sit down after closing arguments,” said Zaytoun. “The best thing you can do when picking a jury is shut up and listen. Listen. It used to be ‘Talk, talk, talk ... this is my case, and my case is better than their case,’” said Zaytoun, who has Ballew do the voir dire. “You don’t try your case in jury selection. That’s old school. You are really deselecting a jury, and you are trying attitudes. It sounds trite, but you are just looking for people who are brutally honest. We want to identify the ‘stealth ju- ror.’ We want to deselect the people who think this is their time to shine, this is their chance to strike one for their idea of justice and will say what seems to be all the right things.” Robert Zaytoun ‘The Jury is With the Plaintiff ’ WRITTEN BY BOB FRIEDMAN PHOTOGRAPHED BY DAVID TYSON ZAYTOUN AND SPCA RESCUE DOG HANK. AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 17There is a school of thought that cases are won or lost in the open- ing statements. “I’ve argued in enough trials to know that’s not true; you’ve got to at least be in the game after your opening statement,” explained Zaytoun. “And you don’t give the jury everything in your opening statement; you want to tease them. You want the jury to be- come the detectives in the case. You want them to solve the crime or find the negligence.” CAREER PATH Robert Zaytoun was born in New Bern, North Carolina. His father, Joseph, served in the Marines in World War II. Prior to the war, he at- tended UNC as an undergrad, where his roommate was Terry Sanford. They remained close friends throughout Sanford’s illustrious career. Growing up, Zaytoun was mesmerized by the stories told by his father’s close friends, including famed lawyers William “Bill” Joslin, Hugh Cannon and Governor Sanford. He had intended to pursue a medical degree, but other seeds were sown, and he was drawn to law school. He earned his Juris Doctor at UNC School of Law. Zaytoun began his career in private practice in Florida, then re- turned to his home state and served four years as an assistant district attorney for Wake County. He reentered private practice and opened his firm in Raleigh in 1982. Much of his early practice was criminal law, but he always wanted to be a plaintiff’s lawyer. Today, the firm of Zaytoun, Ballew & Taylor, handles medical negligence cases, personal injury cases, and, increas- ingly, cases involving excessive force by law enforcement. “After George Floyd’s murder and the protests that followed, I feel bringing excessive force cases are important to separate the good cops from the rogue cops,” said Zaytoun. “Find something in your community that you can do with passion that will change one life.” JOHN TAYLOR, ZAYTOUN, MATT BALLEW AND HENRY ZAYTOUN III AT 2013 UNC LAW ALUMNI ASSOCIATION SCHOLARSHIP GOLF CLASSIC. PHOTO COURTESY OF DONN YOUNG. ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · NORTH CAROLINA TRIANGLE VOL. 8 NO. 2 18THE USE OF SPIES Trial lawyers frequently cite Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War” as an inspiration, with each finding something different to pull from the 1,500-year-old military treatise. Zaytoun’s fa- vorite chapter is entitled, The Use of Spies. “You don’t spy on the defense. It’s not spying on the opposition,” said Zaytoun. “It’s about spying around the opposition. What’s their ter- rain like? Where are their troops deployed, so to speak? What kind of witnesses do they have, and what can we learn about those wit- nesses? So, you do spy on experts. You read everything they’ve ever written. I don’t care who the medical expert is, you can always find something they’ve written that is inconsistent with the position they are taking. “If you can use sugar rather than vinegar, use sugar. You can get people to be very agree- able with you by not attacking them ... espe- cially expert witnesses,” explained Zaytoun. “You’re not going to tell them anything they don’t already know, and if they sense that you do know a lot about what they know, they’ll even bow up more. So, you’ve got to play dumb. ‘You know, Doc, I’m having trouble with this, can you help me understand this?’ That kind of approach to a string of leading questions is amazing if they think they are ac- tually teaching you something. And what they are teaching you is exactly what you want the jury to be taught.” CAN WE USE THE WORD PURPOSEFUL? When asked about the various charities he is involved with, Zaytoun responded, “Can we not use the word charity? Can we use pur- poseful instead? “I have four children and two stepchildren. They all work very hard and they all have pur- poseful lives they are passionate about,” said Zaytoun. He noted that none among them – Katie, 39, Liza, 38, Ford, 38, Adam, 36, Myri- ah, 36, and Tessa, 34 – became lawyers. Nor did he push them to go into the law. “I tell my children, find something in your community that you can do with passion that will change one life.” One of the projects Zaytoun labels as pur- poseful has been working with an Appala- chian ministry in poverty-stricken Phillipi, West Virginia. “The first time I went there with the mission 30 years ago, I got my first dose of resentment from people who don’t want to feel like they are the subject of char- ity. I learned that we needed to give them something to do that was purposeful. Nobody wants to be given something; they want to earn it,” said Zaytoun. ZAYTOUN IN DOMINICAN REPUBLIC WITH MISSION DELIVERING LIGHT KITS. SABBATICAL: ZAYTOUN ON CAMINO DE SANTIAGO PILGRIMAGE IN 2016. AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com 19Next >