Not everyone likes them, but we can’t do without them, and if we didn’t have them we would probably have to settle arguments, and protect our property, with sticks, stones and guns. That is why it’s always good to have a list of who’s who in the local legal profession. First, though, we’ll cross-examine:
Who compiled the list of top lawyers? Lists are prepared in cooperation with a national firm that specializes in collecting data on lawyers: Woodward/White Inc.
These lists are excerpted from The Best Lawyers in America® 2011, which includes listings for more than 41,000 lawyers nationwide in 91 specialty areas, in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
How was the information collected? Through the years Woodward/White has developed a database of lawyers based on the recommendations of their peers. Each attorney was asked to vote on the lawyers listed in their specialty areas and to nominate new names. When necessary, attorneys’ names from previous lists were deleted based on either changes in their personal circumstances or for not having enough affirmative votes.
What advantage does this system have? It allows peers to vote for peers and isn’t limited to geographic boundaries.
Lawyers in a particular field might be aware of colleagues in the same field in other areas. The system brings a national perspective, within areas of specialization to the voting.
Doesn’t this approach favor older and more established lawyers since they will have had the time to develop a reputation among colleagues? Yes. There is no perfect way to prepare such a list. We think that this is the best way available. Woodward/White has tried to counter that methodological bias. Its recent lists have had a higher percentage of lawyers under 40 and a higher percentage of females than earlier lists. The company concedes that the lists may tend to award visibility and popularity over sheer ability. Lawyers who give lectures and who write articles are more likely to come to the attention of their colleagues than those who work outside the public eye. We would add, however, that those who are recognized from their speaking and writing are obviously making a contribution that would likely prove their worthiness for the list. It might be said that the list tends to represent an appropriate mix of successful power brokers and ‘lawyers’ lawyers.’ The company contends that the list represents, “the most reliable, accurate, and useful guide to the best lawyers in the U.S. available anywhere.”
What question was asked to those attorneys who were surveyed? “If you had a close friend or relative who needed a real estate lawyer (for example), and you couldn’t handle the case yourself for reasons of conflict of interest or time, to whom would you refer them?” Those who were interviewed were promised that their comments would remain confidential. They were also encouraged to cast negative votes.
Are attorneys who are surveyed allowed to vote for someone in their own firm? No. They could place an office colleague’s names into nomination for consideration, but they couldn’t vote for them.
Do attorneys have to pay to be on the list? No, we would not use the list if that were the case.
Who actually conducted the survey? Staff members of Woodward/White. Data was collected for the Best Lawyers in America publication. A localized list is published here.
Is this list by the same company that provided your Top Lawyers list last year? No in 2009 we were not able to use Best Lawyers because of prior contractual commitments on their part. We have used Best Lawyers in all the other years that we have run the feature.
What is the difference between the Best Lawyers list and the one you used last year. Best Lawyers has an evaluation method that’s more in keeping with accepted standard. Also its categorization of specialties is more specific.
When was the survey conducted? It was complete by July 1 of this year. Some attorney may have changed firms or retired since then. We have tried as best as we could to identify those though some may have been missed.
What can you say about these lists? We feel confident about two things: One: There are some worthy lawyers whose names do not appear but whom we hope will make future lists. Two: The people named on this list are all top attorneys.
Christian Coalition challenges a school board
Gus Fritchie | Liability Claims and Insurance-Related Litigation | Irwin Fritchie Urquhart & Moore LLC
When it came time for Gus Fritchie to make a career choice, he knew it was all in the family. “Both of my grandfathers, my father and many of my uncles and cousins were judges and lawyers,” he says. “There was really no question about me following them into the field of law.”
After graduating from Tulane University School of Law cum laude, Fritchie specialized in defending public entities, professional liability and insurance-related litigation. His most interesting and difficult case came with the defense of the St. Tammany Parish School Board in a case filed by the Louisiana Christian Coalition.
“I, along with the Board’s General Counsel Harry Pastuszek, defended the Boards’ Facility Use Policy that prohibited the use of its public school premises for religious uses or instruction,” Fritchie says. “The Christian Coalition filed suit in our local Federal court contending that the policy violated the First Amendment rights of its members to have access to a public facilities that were occasionally used by other non-religious groups.”
Though Fritchie’s team initially lost the case in the District Court, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and upheld the policy as constitutional. “The Fifth Circuit then granted rehearing en banc, before 16 judges of the Court,” he says. “After argument, we won that round 9-7.”
The U.S. Supreme Court then vacated the ruling and remanded the case back to the Fifth Circuit, where a series of strange circumstances threw a wrench in the case. One of the original panel members as well as the original judge had died in the interim; the new judge struck down the School Board policy, stating that it violated the First Amendment.
“The case was difficult because it involved complicated issues of constitutional law, one of my worst subjects in law school,” Fritchie says. “Additionally, opposing counsel were very experienced constitutional lawyers working with the national advocacy group, American Center for Law & Justice.”
Besides the difficulties of the case and the proceedings, the subject matter also caused some dissension. “The case was interesting because we were advocating positions with which many members of the School Board personally disagreed, and there were many twists and turns throughout the various appeals,” Fritchie says. “Moreover, it was probably as close as I will ever be to having an opportunity to argue before the U.S. Supreme Court.”
– Jordan DeFrank
20 years in practice
B.A. from Washington & Lee University – 1978
J.D. from Tulane University School of Law – 1981
Native of Slidell
Prosecuting a media-savvy governor
Pauline F. Hardin | Bet-the-Company Litigation, Commercial Litigation and Criminal Defense: White-Collar | Jones Walker
In the 1980s,when pauline F. Hardin, now a partner at Jones Walker, worked as an Assistant U.S. Attorney, a case landed on her desk involving alleged fraud in awarding licenses for hospitals. Then-sitting governor Edwin Edwards, who had long been plagued by corruption but had always seemed to charm his way out of trouble, was finally indicted along with several other individuals.
Edwards, among others, was accused of using improper influence to obtain certificates from the state to authorize construction of new hospitals in places where Hardin’s team, led by then-U.S Attorney John Volz, says they weren’t needed. Edwards and his co-defendants then re-sold the certificates for millions.
Reluctant to incriminate the popular governor, many of the most significant witnesses were state employees who were “more concerned about what the governor thought.” The defendants hired high-profile attorneys; in the end, Hardin and the three other prosecutors faced approximately 16 powerful defense attorneys. Edwards was also “media-savvy and knew how to appeal to his constituents, who would comprise the jury,” says Hardin.
“We were in trial every day for four months,” recalls Hardin. The trial resulted in a hung jury. “We knew the re-trial would be a challenge,” she says. “But we had to go forward given the evidence.” The re-trial culminated as Edwards was acquitted. “We believed he was guilty and we all have learned that sometimes you have to do what’s right, even if it’s hard to do and takes years of your life,” says Hardin.
Eventually Edwards’ fraudulence would catch up to him; he was later sentenced to a 10-year term for extortion and corruption and is scheduled to be released to a half-way house in January.
“In the end, it was important, because he used the same type of scheme in selling gambling licenses the next time he was governor, and a new set of prosecutors were able to more quickly understand his modus operandi, and his use of the media to influence the case,” says Hardin.
These days, Hardin keeps most of her cases low-profile. “My clients aren’t interested in publicity and want me to handle their issues discreetly if possible,” she says.
Hardin works on five to six cases a day. “I do a lot of internal investigations now for companies that are regulated by the government to assure that they are in compliance with the law,” she says. She teaches at Tulane Law School and serves on various boards. One of the lessons she hopes young attorneys will learn is “If you enjoy what you do, you’ll be good at it, and it will show and be appreciated … In my professional life I hope to continue doing what I’m doing it now, because I enjoy it.”
– Sarah Ravits
36 years of practice
B.A. from Loyola University New Orleans
J.D. from Tulane University School of Law
Native of New Orleans
A case so complex, jury selection lasted 15 months
Charles Gay | MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LAW | Adams and Reese LLC
After years of schooling, studying and preparation, Charles Gay was sworn in as a lawyer in 1976 – and his first case was the very next day. “I was quite concerned for my client due to my lack of any experience,” he says. “But we won the case. I was raring to go for other clients at that point.”
Gay went on to handle a case for the late Michael Jackson, in which Jackson was accused of sexual assault and battery. The case was ultimately dismissed but garnered significant media attention.
His most challenging case, however, was the largest class action suit in the country at the time; it began in 1994 and is still in progress today. Gloria Scott, et al vs. The American Tobacco Company, Inc., et al was a class action suit brought against multiple tobacco companies on behalf of all Louisiana smokers, initially seeking damages of $15 billion. The plaintiffs alleged that the tobacco companies distorted public knowledge of the addictive qualities of nicotine. Gay served as lead council for Philip Morris. Jury selection lasted 15 months because of potential conflicts of interest and the sensitive nature of the case. “(The trial judge) then proceeded to try the case without allowing my clients to cross examine the plaintiffs in the case,” Gay says. “The first phase of the case was based on whether cigarettes were a defective product and whether medical monitoring of smokers was warranted. My client won both issues.”
However, the trial judge ruled that the class did, in fact, have a claim for smoking cessation damages because of the alleged distortion of public knowledge by tobacco companies. “A 2004 judgment ordered defendants to pay $591 million for a 10-year, 12-component, smoking cessation program, plus $350 million for pre-judgment interest,” Gay recalls. “In 2007, the Louisiana Fourth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part, invalidating eight of the 12 program components and ruling that defendants were not liable to smokers whose claims accrued after the Louisiana Product Liability Act (LPLA) became effective on Sept. 1, 1988.”
By April 2010, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal concluded that defendants owed more than $241 million, taking into consideration the number of smokers who had made claims before the LPLA. Defendants requested a stay (temporary stopping of judicial proceedings), which Justice Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court granted on Sept. 24.
The Court may now decide whether detrimental reliance can be proven based on evidence that relates to the class as a whole, rather than allowing defendants to provide evidence from individuals within the class.
This means that even though this complex case began more than 15 years ago, there is still much to be determined.
Gay’s most challenging case may be far from over, but at least it’s been an interesting ride.
– J.D.
32 years in practice
B.A. from Tulane University J.D. from Loyola University School of Law – 1976
Native of New Orleans
Keeping up with changes in estate law
Kenneth A. Weiss | Elder Law, Non-Profit/Charities Law, Tax Law and Trusts and Estates | McGlinchey Stafford
Kenneth A. Weiss is an attorney who protects trusts, estates and wills for individuals, couples and families. He is head of the estate planning practice at McGlinchey Stafford and he sees clients for cases involving tax, business and wealth transfer planning, elder law, charitable gift planning, tax-exempt organizations and matrimonial planning. A money expert, Weiss says that a big part of his job is to “maximize what people can give. A lot of people use trusts to protect money and provide incentives to their families.”
A big challenge for him is discovering and working through the various loopholes created by the ever-changing wealth distribution laws implemented and revised by Congress and the president. Last year, estate tax exemptions were capped at $3.5 million per person, while in upcoming years it could be capped at $1 million. “Some say Congress will come back next year with large exemptions, perhaps back to the $3.5 million range, but the Feds need the money and Congress likes to raise taxes on wealthier people,” says Weiss, a former journalist who has always been interested in government. He attended law school at Tulane during the Watergate era while working at The Times-Picayune here and later as its Washington correspondent. He later received a graduate degree in tax law from George Washington University in Washington, D.C., while working as an editor at Congressional Quarterly.
Weiss’ priority is to create plans for his clients. This involves meticulous planning. “I like to avoid messes,” he says.
“In tax planning, you try and create a plan that won’t be challenged and maximize the amount of money they can leave.”
The estate tax has been described by one professor as a “voluntary tax,” meaning that an individual can plan to avoid or delay it, or he or she can die without a plan and pay it, he explains. “The strategy is to plan to avoid paying any tax when the first spouse dies, and postpone having to pay estate tax until the future when the second spouse dies, when perhaps the exemption from estate tax is higher, or if the estate tax has been repealed,” says Weiss.
“Using that strategy, I have planned estates with assets of more than eight figures – and higher – where not a dime of tax will be paid.”
While crunching numbers and negotiating are part of his career, Weiss enjoys his practice because it allows him to help people. He has written numerous books and articles, and he also teaches at Tulane University School of Law.
He is chair of the Tulane Estate Planning Institute and serves on the planning committee for the Loyola Estate Planning Conference and the Tulane Tax Institute. He is board-certified as a tax specialist and as an estate planning and administration specialist.
“I really get to know my clients,” he says, adding “nothing is more fun than sending in a federal estate tax return when no tax is due.”
– S.R.
Practicing for 30 years
B.A., Tulane University
J.D., Tulane University School of Law
L.M.M., Taxation, The George Washington University Law School
Native of New Orleans
Photographs by CHERYL GERBER
