LAW FIRM OF THE YEAR Davis Miles McGuire GardnerWelcome readers to another issue of Attorney at Law Magazine Phoenix. As we enter fall, the mad crush of the end of the year, and plans for another year of magazines, I am thankful to everyone who has supported our publication over these last 10 years. 2020, will be a new decade of publication for us. We hope to continue providing you with essential information, intriguing interviews and a break from your daily lives. This issue, we bring you our Law Firm of the Year Davis Miles McGuire Gardner and a look into their unique business model. I hope that you find their innovation inspiring. Within these pages you will also find an interview with an- other outside-the-box practitioner. Mrs. B. Kathleen Gilbert- son, our Industry Innovator, gives us insight into her work as a freelance attorney. This issue also brings you submissions from our long-stand- ing columnists. I hope you enjoy their continued knowledge on varied topics. As always, we are accepting submissions from you on latest trends in your practice, the impact of court decisions, advice on marketing and practice management. Please feel free to reach out to us directly to share your article proposals. Happy reading, Ken Minniti EXECUTIVE PUBLISHER 480-219-9716 KMINNITI@TMMPUBLICATIONS.COM FROM THE Publisher Attorney at Law Magazine is published by: Target Market Media Publications Inc. Copyright ©2019, Target Market Media all rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or part is strictly prohibited. Advertising rates on request. Bulk third class (standard) mail. Although every precaution is taken to ensure accuracy of published materials, Attorney at Law Magazine & Target Market Media cannot be held responsible for opinions expressed or facts supplied by authors. Corporate Office : 5828 North 7th Street, Suite 200 Phoenix, AZ 85014 Phone (480) 219-9716 www.tmmpublications.com • info@tmmpublications.com CONTRIBUTING Editors DAVE KINSEY Ken Minniti PRESIDENT & CEO Howard LaGraffe VICE PRESIDENT Caitlin Keniston EDITOR Jaqueline Dávila GRAPHIC DESIGN Veronica Jauregui ASSISTANT EDITOR Dragana Kartalija ADMINISTRATION Bill Gallagher, DC, CMVI Daniel W. Hager Dave Kinsey CONTRIBUTING EDITORS Katherine Bishop Susan Cushing Frederick Shelton CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Andrew Paul PHOTOGRAPHY Northern Alabama | Atlanta | Chicago | Dallas | Ft. Lauderdale Jacksonville | Los Angeles | Miami | Minnesota North Carolina Triangle | Ohio | Philadelphia | Phoenix | San Antonio Salt Lake City | Middle Tennessee | Washington D.C. BILL GALLAGHER MITCHELL REICHMAN DANIEL W. HAGER 2 ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · PHOENIX· VOL. 11 NO. 7TABLE OF Contents Business Valuation Marital Dissolutions • Shareholder Disputes • Tax Purposes Buy/Sell Agreements Litigation Support Forensic Accounting • Commercial Damages Expert Testimony • Other financial consulting services Brendan J. Kennedy, CPA/ABV/CFF, CVA, ASA Canyon Financial Services, LLC Email: bkennedy@canyon n.com Phone: (602) 363-2698 Website: www.canyon n.com 4 Generation Justice: The Failures of a Broken System By Katherine Bishop 8 4 Mistakes to Avoid When You Need More Time After Receiving an Offer By Frederick Shelton 9 Protecting the Legal Malpractice Statute of Limitations Defense By Daniel W. Hager 10 Davis Miles McGuire Gardner Law Firm of the Year 14 Android 10 Updates: Security and Privacy Considerations By Dave Kinsey 15 B. Kathleen Gilbertson Industry Innovator 19 $0 to $83,000 in No Time Flat By Bill Gallagher, DC, CMVI SPECIAL SECTIONS 20 Talk of the Town 9 15 3GENERATION JUSTICE: The Failures of a Broken System BY KATHERINE BISHOP Dylan was born addicted to drugs. For his safety, he was placed in a fos- ter home at birth, but returned to his parents after just 12 days. Dylan then endured fractures on both sides of his skull, an arm broken in three places, a fractured leg, broken ribs, and soft tissue hemorrhaging in his right chest wall. After torturing the infant, Dylan’s parents threw him to bottom of a 30- foot well to die. The attorneys and staff at Genera- tion Justice read horrifying stories like Dylan’s every day. As part of their mission to advance the legal rights of children, they read about abused chil- dren, missing kids, sexually trafficked children, and kids trapped for years in a system that is supposed to be safe and temporary. It is neither safe nor temporary. Dylan is just one example. Generation Justice aims to mend a system so broken that is leaves chil- dren to die at the hands of known of- fenders. CEO Darcy Olsen founded Genera- tion Justice after an award-winning 16 years in public policy – and with a foster baby on her lap. She founded Gen Justice after witnessing, first- hand, the many failures of the system as a foster mother to 10 children over 10 years. Some of the failures were minor, like preparing for an infant boy foster placement and receiving a baby girl. But some failures can be fatal, like the decision to prematurely place a child back with parents ad- dicted to heroin or meth. The first to come aboard the new organization was Attorney Rebecca Masterson. An accoladed litigator, writer and entrepreneur, Masterson also had a connection to foster care. Her oldest son, Isaac, entered the fos- ter system when he was 4 years old. Thirteen years and 40-some place- ments later, Rebecca adopted him into her family just months before he aged out of foster care. Prior to adop- tion, Isaac believed his best chance at survival after exiting state care was incarceration. Now, he is a member of the United States Army. Olsen and Masterson quickly real- ized that the underlying problem with foster care is that the children lack ad- GEN JUSTICE CHIEF COUNSEL REBECCA MASTERSON AND HER TWO ADOPTED SONS. 4 ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · PHOENIX· VOL. 11 NO. 7equate legal rights and protections. They got to work on strengthening laws for children’s safety and protection and developing laws that place children into families quicker. In less than two years, Generation Justice has spearheaded the two omnibus child wel- fare reform packages in Arizona. This past spring, Georgia followed suit and adopted a Gen Justice model reform. Together, these laws serve over 30,000 children. These laws improve the safety for children in the most dangerous situations, like Dylan, expedite the search for a child’s relatives, and reduce the time to adoption by half for teens, among other advances. Of critical importance, Generation Justice serve as a check on child safety agencies by enforcing the laws and providing free lawyers in abuse cases. The Generation Justice Law Clinic, launched in August 2018, is on track to help more than 200 Arizona foster children this year through direct representation, advo- cacy and advice and trainings. On the horizon for Generation Justice is a push for additional protections for the infants and children devastated by the opioid and meth crisis in the country, like Zaiden Zaiden, 2 years old, was living with known meth users. After 22 calls to 911 and a child safety investigation, law enforcement found Zaiden in his crib, dead. Dehydrated and mal- nourished, Zaiden weighed only 15 pounds. His body showed the telltale signs of physical abuse and his arms were zipped to his sides in a pair of pajamas, the little sleeves tied tightly at his throat, asphyxiated. He was already decompos- ing by the time he was found. Every 15 minutes, a baby like Zaiden is born addicted. These infants are frequently sent home with known drug users with in- adequate protections in place for their safety. Generation Justice asserts that every infant born exposed to illicit narcotics should have judicial oversight to monitor their safety. In addition to the flood of substance-ex- posed infants, Masterson was startled to learn that over 100,000 foster children have gone missing in the last 19 years. Sixty-five percent of child sex trafficking victims recovered from an FBI raid of 70 major cities were children from foster care. Generation Justice added provisions to find and protect missing children and keep them from exploitation to its reform agenda. While Arizona-based, Generation Justice works with legislators and child welfare activ- ists in other states. Gen Justice is developing a blueprint of child welfare laws for other states to adopt and every reform puts the safety and stability of children at the forefront of the law. “We cannot protect Dylan. And we can no longer protect Zaiden,” Olsen says. “But with adequate legal rights and protections, our at- torneys and supporters aim to protect the re- maining half a million abused children cur- rently in foster care.” FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT HTTPS://WWW. GENJUSTICE.ORG/. GOV. DUCEY SIGNING THE CHILD SAFETY BILL WITH REP. BARTO AND C DARCY OLSEN. “With adequate legal rights and protections, our attorneys and supporters aim to protect the remaining half a million abused children currently in foster care.” 5I’ ve been a legal recruiter and negotiated salaries on behalf of lawyers for over 25 years now. I’ve seen countless situations where attorney needed more time to consider an offer. I’ve seen such situations handled expertly and I’ve seen them handled disastrously. Here are the four critical mistakes to avoid in such situations, as well as a couple of strategies that can be employed: No. 1: Make sure your delay isn’t just analysis paralysis Ask yourself, “Am I just over-thinking this?” I’ve seen the most bril- liant people on earth do exactly that. There were no legitimate reasons (e.g. pending offers from competitors etc.) for their delays. They just over-analyzed the situation until it was lost and then found them- selves trying desperately to get back, what they once had. No. 2: Don’t lie. Lies have a way of being discovered and whether they are discov- ered before or after the position has been obtained, doesn’t matter. They create distrust. No. 3: Don’t “ghost” a potential employer. Avoiding calls and emails sends a very clear message that you are both unprofessional and inconsiderate. I recently saw an attorney send his paperwork to a firm after not communicating with them at all for almost two months. Needless to say, the firm declined to extend an offer. No. 4: Don’t make other offers the only reason for buying This doesn’t mean you need to hide the fact you’re interviewing with multiple employers. Nor does it mean that there aren’t effective ways to use competition as a negotiating strategy. You just don’t want them to feel like they are going to be the firm you settled for, after everything else fell through. What about Rule No. 2 you ask? Again, it’s all about how you state things. Here are examples that will display the difference: 4 Mistakes to Avoid When You Need More Time After Receiving an Offer BY FREDERICK SHELTON 6 ATTORNEY AT LAW MAGAZINE · PHOENIX· VOL. 11 NO. 7Don’t: “ Mr. Employer I’d love to give you an answer now but I have offers that should be coming from two of your competitors and I want to see what they come up with first.” Do: “ Mr. Employer I really appreciate this offer and I’m certainly leaning in this direction. I really like the people I’ve met, and I respect your integrity. So I hope you can respect mine. I gave my word to Competitor B that I would at least review her offer before making a final decision. Like I said, it’s a long shot but I did give my word .” See the difference? In the second example, not only is the time likely to be granted, the employer would have to ask that you violate the value of integrity, in order to push for an immediate answer.When needing more time to consider an offer, remember it’s a two-way street. Can- didates will tolerate a company taking months to make a decision but feel often guilty or unprofessional if they request even a modicum of time, to do the same. They shouldn’t. Because the gravitas of such decisions are much greater on the employee than the employer. If a law firm doesn’t get a new lawyer tomorrow, not much changes in the world. But if you commit your career to the wrong firm or company, years of your life can be negatively impacted. If you need more time for legitimate reasons, ask for it. Just be diplomatic and honest. FREDERICK SHELTON IS THE CEO OF SHELTON & STEELE (WWW. SHELTONSTEELE.COM), A NATIONAL LEGAL RECRUITING AND CONSULTING FIRM. SINCE 1993, FREDERICK HAS WORKED WITH ASSOCIATES, COUNSEL, PARTNERS, GROUPS AND COORDINAT- ED LAW FIRM MERGERS & ACQUISITIONS. 7Jaburg Wilk Family Law Group • Parenting Time • Legal Decision Making • Divorce • Legal Separation Our family law attorneys earned their reputation in high-conflict, high-stake divorce cases. They are skillful and knowledgeable in divorce and family law matters. Experience Matters - Certified Family Law Specialist, Super Lawyers, Super Lawyer Rising Stars and Best Lawyers • Mediation • Paternity • Post Decree Modifications • Pre-Marital and Post-Marital Agreements Services 602.248.1000 | jaburgwilk.com | 3200 N. Central Avenue | Phoenix, AZ 85012P roperly understanding the legal malpractice statute of limita- tions is critical to both preserv- ing the defense should a claim ever arise, and to the timing of filing any suit for fees against a client (a last re- sort with a high risk of drawing a re- sponsive malpractice claim). In Arizona, the statute of limita- tions applicable to claims of legal malpractice (and breach of fiduciary duty) is the general negligence stat- ute (A.R.S. § 12-542), under which a claim must be brought within two years after it accrues. Arizona also applies the “discovery rule,” under which the cause of ac- tion only accrues when the plaintiff knows, or by the exercise of reason- able diligence should have known, of the defendant’s wrongful conduct. The client does not have to know what legal theories might apply, just that some acts or omission of the lawyer injured the client. The plaintiff need only know enough facts that would prompt a reasonable person to inves- tigate and discover the full extent of the claim. To help establish the discovery date, any client complaints about a representation should be confirmed in writing, at least in a memo to the file. When confirming a client complaint, follow your malpractice policy’s requirements for reporting circumstances which could give rise to a claim, in order to preserve cover- age should such claims arise. If your policy renewal date is approaching, carefully consider whether disclosure of the client complaint is called for in your renewal application, to avoid later coverage issues based on prior knowledge of a potential claim. For the statute to begin running in malpractice cases, the “discovery rule” requires not only the discovery of facts giving rise to a claim, but that the client discover (or in the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have discovered) that appreciable, non- speculative harm has resulted from the malpractice. For example, a client incurring fees to hire a second lawyer to undo harm caused by a previous lawyer normally constitutes damage that starts the clock running. The full extent of the client’s injury need not be known. On the other hand, nominal dam- ages not reasonably anticipated to result from the malpractice, or which are incurred attempting to mitigate damage, may not be enough to make the cause of action accrue. But once appreciable damage has been suffered, the two-year period starts to run. In Arizona, the statute for malprac- tice claims arising in the litigation context is generally also tolled until the litigation is concluded, at least so long as the attorney who allegedly committed malpractice continues representing the client. The cause of action does not accrue until an ad- verse judgment becomes final, either after a final appellate decision or when the time to appeal has expired. Clients should therefore be sent “end of engagement” letters every time a representation concludes. By documenting the end of the repre- sentation, such a letter can help avoid tolling the statute of limitations based on continuing representation, and help defeat an untimely malpractice claim. On the other hand, be aware that providing additional services after a representation has ended – even af- ter an “end of engagement” has been sent – can establish continuing rep- resentation that may delay accrual of the cause of action and defeat an otherwise valid statute of limitations defense. Proper analysis of the statute of limitations is particularly important if a firm is considering suing a client for fees. Firms should always be cau- tious about suing a client, since doing so will typically generate a respon- sive malpractice claim. Thus, matters should always be carefully evaluated for malpractice exposure before de- ciding whether to sue for fees. Since the breach of contract statute of limi- tations is longer than the legal mal- practice statute (typically six years for breach of written contracts and three years for oral contracts), firms that decide to sue for fees should only file suit after they are confident the mal- practice statute has already run. Malpractice insurers ask about suits for fees in their applications, since they know suits for fees greatly increase the risk of claims. Thus, suits for fees should only be considered as a last resort, and only pursued after all other collection steps have been taken and the file has been carefully reviewed to determine both the run- ning of the statute and the risk of drawing a malpractice claim. Taking effective actions to protect the statute of limitations defense is crucial for reducing the risk and ex- pense of malpractice claims. A well- protected statute defense can lay the groundwork for a successful defense motion for summary judgment in a malpractice case. Taking the statute of limitations into account can also raise issues of when po- tential claims must be reported to mal- practice insurers, and whether it is prudent to sue a client for fees. Daniel W. Hager | Insurance A recognized expert in lawyers’ malpractice prevention and legal ethics, Daniel has provided consultations and risk management services to law firms for more than 20 years. Before joining AHERN as corporate counsel, Dan was a partner at AV-rated Roeca Haas Hager LLP, where he defended lawyers against malpractice and other claims for more than 25 years. AHERN Insurance Brokerage is an industry leader in providing customized insur- ance solutions for law firms. For more information, visit www.AhernInsurance.com. Protecting the Legal Malpractice Statute of Limitations Defense 9Next >