MISSING AND UNKNOWN HEIRS LOCATED NO EXPENSE TO THE ESTATE
Complete Trust Services For Attorneys And Their Clients
WORLD -WIDE S ERVICE FOR
COURTS - LAWYERS - TRUST OFFICERS ADMINISTRATORS - EXECUTORS
American A rchille:J A:J:Jocialion
7felenfJryJVolion
INTERNATIONAL PROBATE RESEARCH
302 Cherry
449 WASHINGTON BUILDING
Helena, A rkansas 50 1-338-645 1
JA
k
on
(411
WASHINGTON, 0 , c, Member FDIC
Mem b er Fed era l Rese rv e Syst e m
J .J . Wh it e. Pres . • Joh n M. Moye . V _Pres ., & Trust Off icer
:litfe
.!J1l:Jtll'an ce
by
Commercia! Standard Ass e ts ov e r $37,000,000 .00
Agen cie s in 18 stat es Subj e ct to State s up erv is io n e verywh e re
Gen e ral Agent for Th e State of Arkan sa s
Beach Abstract and Guaranty Co. 213 W e st Se cond St ree t Littl e Rock , Arkan sas 72201 Te le phone 376- 3301 Member of Ameri can l a nd Title Ass oc iati o n
()UR NEW If/)/)RESS : ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION ARKANSAS BAR CENTER 400 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR KANSAS 72201
OCTOBER 1974 VOL. 8, NO. 4 THIS IS THE LAST ISSUE IN THE 1974 SER IES.
THE OFFICIAL PUBLICA liON OF THE ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIA liON
~e
Arkansas Lawyer SPECIAL FEATURES
OFFICERS J ames B. Sharp. President Robert C . Compton, Vice-P resident Jam es M . Moody. Secretary-Treasurer
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR C . E. Ransick
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Douglas O . Smith. Jr. Robert H ays Wilhams Thom as F. Butt Julian 8 . Fogleman David Solo mon Wayne Boyce Herm an H ami lton. Jr. John A. Davis, III LeRoy Autrey W ins low Drummond Leona rd Scott Boyce Love
Ex-Officio James B. Sharp Robert C . Compton
An Introduction to Secu rities Law and Practice ............... Walter W. Davidson Some Tax Considerations For Practicing Lawyers : Part III : " Billing Practice" ......... Bruce R. Hopk ins Aegi s .............. . ............................... ' Arkansas Bar Assoc iation Committee Directory . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • .. Arkansas Bar Foundation Committee Directory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . .. Local Bar Association Direc tory. . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . •. . . .. Probate Law Committee Report .....• . ... . .• .. .. ..... Mid-Year Meeting .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . • . . . .. Bridg ing-th e-Gap Seminar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
156
160 172 177 189 191 164 169 170
REGULAR FEATURES President's Report ......•......... . . . . James B. Sharp 155 Juris Dictum ......... . ..................... C. R. Hu ie 175 Leg al Economic s .......... . .. .... Richard A. Will iams 174 Law Sc hool News ...................... . . . . . . . . . . . .. 166 Oyez-Oyez ........ . ......... . ............ B. Ghormley 168 In Memoriam ......................... ............... 176 Executive Council Notes . . ...... . .... James M. Moody 159 Service Direc tory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 181 Cover Story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . • . . . . . . 154
James M. Moody James E. West R. Keith Arman G uy Amsler, Jr.
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE Robert D. Ross Ph il lip E. Dixon C. E. Ransick
Published bi-monthly by the Arkansas Bar Association, 400 West Markham, little ROCk . Arkansas 72201 . Second class postage paid at Little Rock . Arkansas. Subscription price 10 non-members of the Arkansas Bar Association $6.00 per year and to members $2.00 per year included in annual dues. Any opinion expressed herein is that of the author. and not necessarily that of the Arkansas Bar Association , The Arkansas Lawyer, or the Editorial Committee. Contribu tions to the Arkansas Lawyer are welcome and should be sent in two copies to the Arkansas Bar Cen ter. 400 West Markham. Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 . All inquiries regarding advertising shou ld be sent to The Arkansas Lawyer. above address.
October 19741Ark ansas Lawyer/153
Cover Story . . .... . ........ . .. . . . . .. . .
The Waterman Hall Addition • -by J. Steven Clark
BEGINNING OF A NEW ERA Having limped along for several years with grossly inadequate physical facilities, the University of Arkansas School of Law at Fayetteville in January of 1975 will have its new 30,000 square feet East Wing Addition complete. Likewise, it is hoped that a 900 square feet administrative office expansion will be complete by early summer. Total cost of this construction will be approximately $1 ,850,000.00. These expansions are the first to Waterman Hall since its construction in the early 1950's. The critical need for these expanded faci lities has been evident since in 1971 when Waterman Hall , designed to accommodate 275 students, found itself educating 400-plus students. To meet these demands the new improvements on the first floor of the remodeled facilities will include four new administrative offices and additional clerical space. With the ever expanding admissions demand, increased emphasis on placement, and extensive administrative support required , this space will be quickly and fruitfully utilized. Two new seminar rooms will .be added, bringing our total to three. Moreover, office space will be provided for the law review editors and staff, as well as the student bar association , on the first floor. The new addition will house individual lockers for all students, vending machines and telephones. Furthermore, included on the ground level will be a library reading room with study carrels, ten two-person sound-proof typing carrels, and stacks for reference materials. The second floor of the existing building will house the original reading room of the library and have one new faculty office added. The new addition will house the main library reading room and 1S4/Ark ansas Lawyer/Oc tober 1974
offices for the librarian and staff. This additional space will provide a combined seating capacity of 365 students. Stack area wi II be provided to shelve approximately 110,000 volumes. This will allow for a 40,000 volume increase over our present number of volumes in the library. Highlighting the main reading room will be seventy-nine individual student carrels for student use. The third floor of the existing building will be remodeled to include a faculty library and lounge and eight new fac ulty offices along the balcony overlooking the old reading room . The new addition is comprised of five new classrooms. Three classrooms are lecture halls and will accommodate 100 students. The other two classrooms will accommodate 40 students each . Tiered seating will be provided in all of these classrooms. Most of the new and existing facilities will be carpeted , painted and given new draperies. Also, comfort will be provided for all with the central airconditioning and heating of the entire facility. This expansion means for the School of Law an environment conductive for professional education . It means growth potential since new faculty offices will be available, and our attractive facility will aid in the recruitment and retention of faculty personnel. It means an enhancement of our academic program , as adequate and accoustically engineered classrooms will be available. It means a Waterman Hall which is designed to comfortably accommodate the large number of students who are studyi ng here. A dedication date has not been chosen as yet, but the Bar and Alumni are all invited to visit and inspect our fine facility upon its completion after the first of the year. J -.,..
'11SIIIIT'>8
BIPOIT by James B. Sharp
House of Delegates At the meeting of your Bar Association 's House of Del egates on September 19, there were 52 voting members present. They took action on your behalf on one proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution , on 26 proposed changes in the statutes of Arkansas, on one policy making decision of the Bar Association on Legal Education, on a resolution to the President of the U.S. , and on a wide variety of other important matters. The House was in session for 7 1/2 hours and handled these matters with thoroughness and dispatch. While the votes were not unanimous on many of these matters, I am certain that it was the unanimous opinion of all of those present that the decision making authority of the House of Delegates has been as firmly established in the minds of the delegates as it is written in the Constitution of the Bar Association . " Democratization " of your Bar Association is an accomplished fact and is no longer open for valid debate. Your new Constitution is alive and well. Fall Legal Institute All of those attending the Fall Legal Institute, designed and executed by the University of Arkansas School of Law , wi ll attest the uniform exce llence of
the program presented. Our hearty th anks go to Dean Wylie Davis, to Steve Clark , Director of Continuing Legal Education, and to all of the other faculty members, guests and practicing lawyers for their presentations. Law School In my opinion , there was no more important part of the Fall Legal Institute than that presented by Dean Wylie Davis. He intends that great progress be made in the sound, c linical approach to the Law School's part in educating the law student. If realistically almost all of the opportunities for the law school graduates in Arkansas are as individual practitioners, or in partnership with other recent law school graduates, the old approach to training a law student is no longer valid in meeting the needs of today. In answering this problem , Dean Davis has advocated new and imaginative changes to keep from having new lawyers held out to the general public as persons qualified to deliver the necessary legal services, but who in fact are not so qualified. His solutions will require the active support of the faculty and the bar. From a 3-hour meeting between the faculty and your Law School Commi ttee, I am convinced the required support wil l be forthcoming .
J."
October 1974/Ark ansas Lawyer/155
An introduction to Secu rities Law and Practice -Walter W. Davidson (Editorial Note: A second part of this artic le is to be included in the next issue of The Arkansas Lawyer which will disc uss anti-fraud and disclosure requirements, civil liabilities, the need for specialization in registra tion processes exemptions from registration, procedures to perfect certain exemptions, un: lawful evasions of securities laws and th e added duty of counsel in suc h matters.)
In 1973 the Arkansas Bar Association formed the State and Federal Securities Committee which adopted, as its primary objective, improvement of the Arkansas Bar's understanding and practice of state and federal securities laws. This article is designed to serve that purpose in an introductory manner. Hopefully, to the uninitiated, it will provide some general insights into secu rities laws. Like most areas of law, securities laws are couched in relatively simple terms (such as " securities", " offers" , " sales", " underwriter" , " not involving a public offering", " investment intent", etc.) which have hidden historical and technical meanings tied to the remedial purposes of their enactment. A little reading may accordingly be a dangerous thing. While the average practitioner may not feel a present need for awareness of the nuances of securities practice, there is a growing number of legal situations which call securities laws into play. Among others, securities law questions almost invariably arise (although they may often be overlooked) : in the
An Overview of Federal Securities Acts of General Application Comprehensive understanding of federal securities laws is a full time vocation - and unnecessary for the general practice of law. However, a basic acquaintance with the general nature and purposes of such laws is obviously desirable. Whi le the fo llowing summaries are somewhat superficial, they provide an overview of federal securities enactments with general application . Jurisdictionally, all of these Ac ts are keyed to usage of interstate facilities in a liberal way. Securities Act of 1933 - (15 U .S.C. A . Subsections 77a-77aa (1970)) (" 1933 Act") - This enactment basically regu lates the issuance of all securities by an issuer or a control person of an issuer, except as express ly exempted, through a process of full disclosure to be obtained by registration and delivery of a prospectus to the prospective
buyer in connection with the sale. Contains civi l and criminal liabilities for wrongful acts related to any offer or sale of a security utilizing interstate facilities. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.A. Subsections 78a-78hh-l (1970) ) (" 1934 Act" ) - As amended in 1964 (to add issuers with 500 or more security holders and more than $1 mi ll ion in total assets whose secu rities are traded over-thecounter) and in 1968 (to cover tender offers and other take-over si tuations) , this Act was basically designed to regulate persons and practices related to trading (buys and sales) of securities of publiclyheld entities whose securi ties were listed on a national securities exchange, by: (i) setting up the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC " ) wi th broad ru le maki ng, investigative and enforcement powers ;
form ation of any business organi za-
About the author . ..
tion (other than a sole proprietorship or general partnership) ; capitalization of business ventures; the purchase, offer or sale of any " security" (which is broadly defined as discussed hereinafter) ; meetings of security holders of publicly held entities ; corporate and other business reorganizations ; acquisitions of interests in the cumulative amount of 5% of publicly-held entities; control disputes ; management abuse curtai lm ent ; re lations with brokers, dealers, securities salesmen or investment advisers ; and in litigation involving any of the foregoing .
Walter W. Davidson, a 1960 graduate of the University of Arkansas Sc hool of Law, is a member of the firm of Davidson, Plastiras & Horne, Ltd., Little Rock, Arkansas. He has served as Chairman of the State and Federal Securities Committee of the Arka nsas Bar Assoc iation since its formatio n in 1973. In 1969 he served as the Arkansas Securities Commissioner. Mr. Davidson has chaired various advIsory committees on proposed rules for the Arkansas Securities Department.
156/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
(ii) requiring registration with and regu lation of persons engaged in the business of buying and se lling securities (brokers and dealers) by the SEC. securities exchanges and self-regulatory agencies (National Association of Securities Dealers); (iii) supervising securities exchanges and their practices (e.g. New York Stock Exchange. American Stock Exchange); (iv) requiring financial and proxy statement information be provided security holders. and that registration and updating reports be filed wi th the SEC by public ly-held entities with respect to outstanding securities so as to maintain availability of reasonably current information for the investing pu blic and litigation minded investors' counsel (on file and accessible for duplication) ; (v) requiring disc losure in proposed tender offers or other acquisitions of substantial interests in publicly-held entities; and (vi) providing civil (e.g.. SEC Rule 10b-5) and criminal liability provisions (applicable to any purchase or sale of a security uti lizing interstate facilities) which materially decrease common law requirements. with the clear legislative purpose of elevating the standards of conduct in all securities transactions. Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C.A. Subsection BOb-I to 8Ob-21 (1970)) - This law regulates conduct of persons engaged in the business of providing investment advice (excluding bank trust officers. attorneys. accountants. etc. acting within their traditional roles) . Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C.A. Subsection 8Oa-l to BOa-52 (1970) ) (" 1940 Act" ) - Regulates companies engaged in the business of investing in. holding . owni ng or trading securities. Although the principal thrust of the 1940 Act relates to mutual funds
(and other large financial institutions that fall outside the scope of utility. insurance. savings and loan and banking regulations) . it can also apply to the small investment group proposing to make a public offering and to a publicly-held entity that inadvertently becomes owner of in-
vestment secu rities that exceed 40% of its total assets. and is also significant because it contains no intrastate offering exemption from registration. The SEC has issued numerous and comprehensive rules and regulations and is continuously issuing new rules and amending existing ones. Such rules and various other releases set forth the SEC 's construction of the more significant federal laws and procedures for securities practice. There are other federal laws directly related to securities regulation which are under the SEC 's jurisdiction . The foregoing . however. cover the situations most frequently encountered. Overall Regulatory Approach of the Arkansas Securities Act and Rules of the State Securities Commissioner In 1959 Arkansas became one of the first states to adopt the Uniform Securities Act with minor alterations called the Arkansas Securities Act (codified as Ark. Stat. Ann. Section 67-1235 et seq. (1966 Repl.)) (the " Ark . Sec . Act" ) (1966)) which repealed existing securities laws. The Ark . Sec. Act takes an overall approach to regulation of securities matters by: (1) requiring registration, regulation and reporting of persons engaged in the secu rities business in this State including broker-dealers, securities agents, investment
advisers. mortgage loan companies and loan brokers ; (2) the prohibition of broadly defined fraudulent conduct (including disclosure omissions) in connection with the offer. sale or purchase of any security ; (3) the prohibition of any offer or sale of any security without registration or specific exemption therefrom ; (4) the authorization of denial of registration in public offerings on " fair. just and equitable" pricing grounds (which, somewhat questionably. has now been expanded by Rule B.K(5) of the State Securities Commissioner to certain private offerings as
hereinafter discussed) ; and (5) the imposition of civil and criminal liabilities for violations. Jurisdictionally. application of the Ark . Sec. Act is keyed to transactions " in this State" which is defined and explained in Ark. Stat. Ann. Section 67-1260 (1966 Repl.) . See also Uniform Sec. Act, Official Code Comment Section 414. CCH Blue Sky Law Rep. Section 4944. The Ark. Sec. Act is administered by the State Securities Commissioner ("Securities Commissioner" ) with a staff of attorneys. accou ntants and clerical aides. The Securities Commissioner is given broad investigative (Section 67-1253) and order and rule making authority (Section 67-1258) ; and is given enforcement power to deny. suspend or revoke any registration statement (Section 67-1248) . issue cease and desist orders summarily for a maximum of 20 days and apply to the Chancery Court of Pulaski County for injunctive relief without the necessity of bond (Section 67-1254) . Numerous rules and regulations (hereinafter referred to as " Ark. Sec. Rules" ) have been adopted by the Securities Commissioner to implement the more significant provisions of the Ark . Sec. Act. On August 23. 1974 a number of significant additions were adopted effective. for the most part. September 30. 1974. These laws and rules compliment. and to some degree duplicate. federal regulation . Although a number of states have enacted the Uniform Securities Act. there are wide variations in state Blue Sky laws and in the administration thereof. Not all states have such laws. Compliance with one state's laws is no assurance of compliance with federal securities laws or the Blue Sky laws of other states. Omitting laws and regulations that deal with persons directly engaged in the selling end of the securities business (such as brokers. dealers. securities salesmen and investment advisers) and omitting entities otherwise under direct supervision of the State Securities Commissioner or the SEC (such as loan brokers. investment companies. etc.). which are outside the scope of this article. the thrust of the Ark . Sec. Act relates to. (1) anti-fraud and disclosure requirements and (2) registration (or Continued to page 158 October 1974/ Arkansas Lawyer/I S?
Securities Law Continued from page 157
exemption from registration) of securities offers. sales and purchases in this State. This is also the thrust of federal securities laws. It is within these two areas that the general practitioner critically needs to be informed . Legal planning without answers to both of these issues in any securities transaction is imprudent. The Expanding Scope of Securities laws and Rules The meaning of certain terms must be understood to appreciate the broad scope of securities regulation which is constantly expanding. Meaning of the term " security" The term " security" (omitting provisions related to insurance and oil. gas and mining interests) is defined by law as : ". .. (A)ny note; stock ; treasury stock ; bond ; debenture; evidence of indebtedness; certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement ; co llateral-trust certificate ; pre-organization certificate or subscription ; transferable share; investment contract; ... ; voting-trust certificate; certificate of deposit for a security ; ... ; or. in general . any interest or instrument commonly known as a 'security ' or any certificate of interest or partic ipation in . temporary or interim certifica te for. guarantee of. or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase. any of the foregoing . ... " Ark. Stat. Ann. Section 67-1247 (L) (Rep!. 1966). (EmphasiS added) . This definition was taken from and is substantially the same as that used in federal securities acts (15 U.S.C.A. Section 77b. (1) (Section 2 (1) 1933 Act) and 15 U.S.C.A. Section 78c. (a) (10) (Section 3 (a) 10 1934 Act) which in turn were modeled from early state statutes. See Uniform Sec. Act. Official Code Comment Section 401 (1). CCH Blue Sky Law Rep. Section 4931 . The foregoing definition has been liberally and broadly extended to unconventional investment situations by regu latory authorities and the courts. The following cases illus158/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
trate the variety of situations where the question of such meaning has arisen. e.g.. In re Waldstein, 160 Misc. 763. 291 N.Y.S. 697 (1936) (cemetery lots) ; SEC v. Bailey, 41 F. Supp. 647 (S.D. FlA. 1941) (land bearing tung trees); SEC v. Payne, 35 F. Supp. 873 (S.D.N.Y. 1940) (silver foxes ); Stevens v. liberty Packing Corp., 111 N.J. 61. 161 A. 193 (1932) (rabbits); People v. Syde, 37 C.2d 765. 235 P. 2d 601 (Sup. Ct. Ca li .. 1951 ) (moving making project) ; SEC v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc., 497 F. 2d 473 (5th Cir. 1974) (multi-level distribution plan); Nash & Associates, Inc. v. lum's of Ohio, Inc., 484 F. 2d 392 (6th Cir. 1973) (franc hise); and United Housing Foundation, fnc. v. Forman, F. 2d . CCH Fed. Sec. l. Rep. Section 94. 594 (2nd Cir. 1974) (cooperative apartment house) . Some of the leading cases which have developed the meaning of the term "security" include. SEC v. C.M. Joiner leasing Corp., 320 U.S. 344. 64 S. Ct. 120 (1943) ; SEC v. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293, 66 S. Ct. 1100 (1946); Tcherepnin v. Knight, 389 332 U.S. (1967); and SEC v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc. supra. These cases and SEC rulings establish that (a) a liberal. interpretation will be given to the meaning of the word " security" consistent with the remedial intent of securities laws to protect investors; (b) courts will look to the substance and not merely the form of the matter; (c) the economic inducement held out to the investor will guide the determination ; and (d) although the transaction is posed as a sale or lease of land or a product or commingled with minimal efforts of the investor. if it is in fac t a device to obtain an investment with expectation of profits from the efforts of others. courts are likely to rule the interest is a security. Although the Arkansas Supreme Court has not directly ruled on this question. the great weight of authority is consistent with these cases. In the case of Shepard v. State, 439 S.w.2d 627 (Ark . 1969) our Court issued a Substituted Opinion on Rehearing and withdrew its earlier opinion which reflected strict construction concepts in reliance on Steve v. Allen, 5 S.E.2d 844 (N . Car. 1939). Meaning of the term " offer" While it is sometimes assumed that
any conduct short of an actual sale or purchase of a security is inconsequential. many facets of securities law rel ate to " offers." This is true with respect to the civil liability fraud prov iSio ns (Section 67-1256(2Âť . registration reqUirements (Section 67 -1241 ) and certain exemptions from registration (Section 671248(8), (10). (11) and (12Âť under the Ark . Sec. Act. " 'Offer' or ' offer to sell' includes every attempt or offer to dispose of. or solicitation of an offer to buy. a security or interest in a security for value." Ark. Stat. Ann. Section 671247(j) (2) (1973 Supp.) (Emphasis added) . In a proposed reorganization negotiations. agreements or similar communications incidental to formulation of the plan are defined by Ark . Sec. Rules I .H. not to constitute an " offer" or " offer to sell " for purposes of Section 67-1241 (unregistered securities) or Section 671249 (sales literature) . Meaning of the term " sale" " 'Sale' or 'sell ' includes every contract of sale of. contract to sell. or disposition of, or security or in terest in a security for value." Ark. Stat. Ann. Section 67-1247(j) (1) (1973 Supp.) (emphasis added). Certain exceptions and specified inclusions to this definition are contained in Section 67-1247 (j) (e.g .. a pledge. loan . bonus connected with a security purchase. gift of assessable stock. warrants. stock dividends, etc.). See also 15 U.S.C.A. Section 77b(3) (1970) (Section 2(3) 1933 Act) which is substantially a combination of this definition and of "offer" as shown above. Reclassifications of Securities, Mergers, Consolidations and Acquisitions of Assets Historically. Arkansas followed a " no sale" theory in mergers and other reorganizations by definitional exclusion of the terms " offer" and " sale". The effec t of the " no sale" concept was to leave such matters outside the scope of securities regulation . See Ark. Stat. Ann. Section 67-1247(j) (6) (c) (1966 Rep!.) which was repealed at the initiation of the Securities CommiSSioner in 1973. This exclusion was comparable to SEC Rule 133 (revoked January 1. 1973) that also treated reorContinued on page 159
,
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL NOTES By James M. Moody Secretary-Treasurer
With the rapid approach of another session of the Arkansas General Assembly, the Executive Council and House of Delegates placed a high priority on consideration and approval of Bar sponsored legislation at their most recent
meetings on August 3 and September 19.
to counterclaims and to en large in personam ju risdiction under the long arm
crease over this time last year but is down almost two hundred members from
statute . Other billS w hi ch were considered but
June, 1974.
not sponsored by the House of Delegates were a proposed amendment to the Freed om of Information Act. a Uni-
form Act for Multiple State Child Custody
The Bill which received the greatest attention and provoked the most spirited debate was one which would establish a statewide public defender system. In a
Cases. an amendment to make an attempt to purchase intoxicants by a minor a misdemeanor and a proposed cri minal
close ballot, the House of Delegates
All of the bills have been ca refully considered by various commi ttees and organizations within the Bar and will inure to the benefit of every member. The im portan ce of personal contact with individual legislators and urging them to favorably consider these bills cannot be
voted to sponsor the bill after certain modifi cations were made with regard to the publi c defender's salary and expense account. The house also voted to sponsor a bill
which would include assumption of the risk within the comparative fault concept, to sponsor a bill providing that state estate taxes would be payable at the same time as federal estate taxes , to sponsor a bill to amend innkeeper's liability, to sponsor bills to amend the sal aries of retirement benefits of judges and to sponsor other bills amending the procedural laws to permit amendments
Securities law Continued from page 158 ganizations on a " no sale" basis for purposes of exemption from regis· tration but not fraud . Such transactions are now clearly sales under both Arkansas and federal law for both fraud and registration purposes. Effective September 30, 1974, Ark . Sec. Rles: (i) exempt persons par· ticipating in a reorganization from the definition of " agent" (who would otherwise be required to be regis· tered as a broker-dealer) (Ark. Sec. Rules 1.C.); (ii) exc lude communications incident to formu lation of the proposed reorgan ization from the
conspiracy statute.
The afternoon session of the House of Delegates featured a debate between Dean Wiley Davis of the Fayetteville division of the law school and Henry Woods on a proposed reso lution that the Bar Association request the Board of Trustees to establish a day division of the law school in Little Rock in the fall of 1975 or as promptly thereafter as practical. The members of the House continued the debate for some time after the speakers had finished and then voted passage of the resolution by a narrow margin.
The Equal Rights Amendment Resolution giving Bar sponsorship to the pass-
understated.
age of the Equal Rights Amendment
The Arkansas Bar Foundation has been ac tively soliciting con tributions through a scholarship and memorials committee with Jack Davi s as C hairman, The Found ati on has also formed a T rust Committee to handle its funds for investment to maximize their return . The current membership shows an in-
which had been co ntroversial at an earlier meeting of the House passed without debate, The young lawyers section completed a highly successfully Bridging the Gap Seminar under the chairmanship of Vincent Foster. The program was extended to five days instead of the usual two , J - _~
definition of ··offer" or "offer to sell' (Ark. Sec. Rules l.L.) ; (iii) define such reorganizations (Ark. Sec . Rulesl .Q) ; (iv) provide a means for waiver of certain '· fair, just and equitable" considerations generally applied in public offerings in this State, when certain types of reorganizations are involved (Ark. Sec. Rules 5.M); and (v) provide an exemption from registration if the transaction merely involves a change of domicile of a constituent party or a short form merger of a 95% subsidiary into its parent, provided copies of the proxy material, plan of merger and proof of exemption under Ark. Stat. Ann. Section
67-1248(f) (1973 Supp.) and Ark . Sec. Rules 8.K.(1) (a) (b) and (d) are filed . (Ark. Sec. Rules 8.K. (4) ). SEC Rule 145, which became effective when SEC Ru le 133 was revoked , and other related provisions of federal law provide for use of the so called ··wrap·around " proxy state m ents in reorganizations . Thereby , the 1933 Act registration process can be perfected as an adjunct to SEC clearance of otherwise required 1934 Act proxy materials. See SEC Secu rities Act Release No. 5316, CC H Fed . Sec . L. Rep. Section 79 ,015 (January " 1973) .
October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/159
Some Tax ' Consideration s For Practici ng Lawyers Part III : Billing Practice by Bruce R. Hopkins
Mr. Hopkins was a featured speaker at the Arkansas Bar Association's Fall Lega/lnstitute in 1972. His remarks have been updated and are being presented in three Parts on " Deductions," " Depreciation" and" Billing Practices." Part I on " Deductions" appeared in the November 1972 and January 1973 issues of The Arkansas Lawyer. Pari /I on " D&preciation" appeared in the July 1974 Issue of The Arkansas Lawyer. Pari Iff on " Biffing Practice" is printed In this issue. Mr. Hopkins is a partner in the law firm of Williams . Myers and Quiggle of Washington, D.C. He is Co-author of the Chapter, " Federal Tax Considerations for Practicing Lawyers" in the ABA's Lawyers Handbook. and author of several articles for The Tax Lawyer, The Practical Lawyer and the American Bar Association Journal. The Arkansas Bar Association is much Indebted to Mr. Hopkins for his continuing interest in furthering the legal education of its members. A bill for legal services has tax consequences for the client as well as for the lawyer. For the lawyer, of course, the tax consequence is one of gross incame l, while for the client the consequence may be deductibility of the fee. Deductibility of a bill by the c lient may be aHected by such factors as the point in time when it is sent, the services performed , and the period over which the services were rendered . Timing As to timing of a bill. much depends upon whether the c lient used the cash basis or accrual method of accounting.2 If the client uses the accrual method, receipt of the lawyer's bill for services ordinarily will cause an immediate accrual of the liability. If the client is a cash basis taxpayer, as most individuals are, only actual payment of the bill would give rise to any deduction. Sometimes the tax positions of the lawyer and the c lient with respect to the timing of a bill are harmonious. For example, the cash basis client may wish to pay a deductible fee before the end of the year and the lawyer may desire to receive the fee prior to the year's end, anticipating greater income in the following year. Or, an accrual basis client may wist) to have a large fee deductible in a particular tax year, while the lawyer would prefer receipt in the following year. Thus, a bill sent and received in December of one year to such a taxpayer would normally satisfy both parties if the bill is paid in January of the following year. Even with a cash basis client, a bill 160/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
timed in late December so that a check by return mail, dated in December, would arrive after the first of the year would presumably fulfill the objectives of both parties.3 Of course, one can go to extremes in this kind of tax planning and find oneself under attack by the Internal Revenue Service for manipulating tax liability.4 Also the cash basis taxpayer, be it lawyer or client, must be wary of the doctrines of constru ctive receipt and claim of right when arranging payment for services. Under the constructive receipt doctrine, income not actually reduced to one 's possession is constructively received by him in the taxable year during which it is made available to him absent any substantial limitations or restrictions.5 Thus, it is not enough to voluntarily fail to deposit a client's check', although the client's insistence that the check not be cashed because of a temporary lack of funds is probably enough to postpone the taxability! Under the doctrine of claim of right, a cash basis taxpayer may be deemed to have received income where the item of income is received under circumstances establishing a right in the taxpayer to retain the item or use the item absence conditions on such use.8 For the lawyer. the claim of right doctrine may arise in connect ion with prepaid legal fees. In one instance. a lawyer who received a fee from an estate, partially for services to be rendered, was required to include the entire fee in gross income in the year of receipt, even though there was a possibility that a portion of the fee might
have to be repaid to the estate and part of the fee represented payment for future services.9 It must be noted that those doctrines may be a barrier to those who are tempted to manipulate the annual receipt of income by unwarranted shifting of items of income into tax years to minimize tax liability. Form of Bill and Allocation of Fees Concerning the form of a lawyer's bill and the allocation of fees, it is not uncommon for a bill to cover more than one type of service rendered. A portion of the fee may be deductible while the balance is either nondeductible or must be capitalized. Thus, where corporate counsel is retained to perform general services, as wel l as lobbying activities, allocation would likely be necessitated, inasmuch as fees paid for the lobbying activities may be nondeductible. likewise. a lawyer should make an allocation between fees for advice given with respect to tax planning and other, nontax services, so that the fee for the former service will be ascertainable and deductible by the client. lo Deductibility 01 Fees In General Generally, legal fees paid or incurred are deductible by a clien t if they constitute ordinary and necessary business expenses of the client, such as fees for advice on daily business problems.lI Fees may also be deductible as " nonbusiness expenses" if related to the production. collection. management, conservation or maintenance of income-producing property.12 Amounts expended in con-
I
nection with the determination, collection or refund of any tax are also deductible. " Conversely. some legal expenses are entirely nondeductible (such as fees to a plaintiff for a nontaxable recovery in a negligence case), or some may be capitalized and recovered by amortization over a period of years (such as fees for organizing a corporation) . Public Policy Aspect. In considering the general question of when legal fees are deductible. it must be emphasized at the outset th at one former test has been abandoned. This is the " public policy" ' aspect of the question. The public policy test in this area was finally eliminated in 1966 in the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner Y. Tellier.14 In earlier decisions, the federal courts had developed the theory that certain legal expenses were nondeductible on public policy grounds. although otherwise eligible. Principally, it was thought to be contrary to public policy to allow as deductions legal fees incurred in the unsuccessful defense of a civil action brought by the federal government involving an intentional tort resulting in damage to the government. Thus, some examples of nondeductibility included expenses incurred in unsuccessfully defending a criminal prosecution for subornation of perjury and, consequently, in resisting disbarment,15 and expenses incurred in unsuccessfully defending a prosecution for criminal violation of the antitrust laws.16 A significant constriction of the public policy limitation occurred in 1943, when the Supreme Court ruled that legal expenses incurred in the unsuccessful defense of a civil action based upon an intentional tort were not denied deductibility on the grounds of public policy." However. the Tax Court. in 1956. held to the contrary in a somewhat comparable case involving the federal government. 18 Nonetheless, the public policy considerations in this area were eliminated by the Tellier opinion, which held that legal expenses incurred in the unsuccessful defense of a criminal prosecution are deductible, assuming the expenses otherwise qualify. This decision was based in part on constitutional considerations, in that the employment of a lawyer in one 's defense against criminal charges was deemed an exercise of a constitutional right, citing Gideon Y. Wainwright (1963) . The Internal Revenue Service reacted to the Tellier holding in a number of subsequent rulings , such as by ruling that (1) a deductio for legal expenses incurred in the unsuccessful defense of an antitrust prosecu tion would not be contested on public policy grounds,10 (2) legal expenses incurred in an unsuc-
cessful defense of a civi I action brought by the federal government based on an intentional tort were deductible,2o and (3) legal expenses incurred in the unsuccessful defense of a criminal action against a taxpayer for evasion of income taxes by filing a false anf fradulent tax return were deductible.21 The Ori gin Test There are four basic considerations to keep in mind in determining whether a legal fee is deductible: 1. To be deductible, the fee must be ordinary, necessary and reasonable. 2. If the fee is in the nature of a capital expenditure, it must be added to the cost basis of the property. 3. To be deductible, the fee cannot be a personal, living or family expense. 4. As to deductibility, it is the origin of the fees, not their consequence, which governs. The basics of these first three points have been discussed. The fourth point, as to origin versus consequence, deserves a brief examination. The so-called "origin" test was enunciated by the Supreme Court in 1963. 22 The case involved a taxpayer, who in successfully defending against a divorce action, sought to protect certain assets against the claims of his wife. The assets were controlling interest in three franchised automobile dealerships, from which his annual income was almost wholly derived. He was concerned inasmuch as loss of these interests might have cost him his means of livelihood and. because of his wife 's sensational charges of marital infidelity, the automobile dealer might have canceled the franchises . Could it not have been said that this property was held for the production of income, since without the property. the taxpayer would have been denied the means of earning a livelihood? If such were the outcome, the legal fees incurred by the taxpayer in the case would have been deductible. But the Suprem e Court did not so hold. The Court said that deductibility of legal fees incurred in resisting a claim is available only when the claim arises " in connection with the taxpayer's profitseeking acitvities." It is not enough, said the Court, that there would be adverse consequences with respect to the taxpayer's income-producing property from failure to defeat the claim . Thus, it is the " origin and charac ter" of the claim with respect to which an expense was incu rred , rather than its " potential consequences upon the fortunes" of the taxpayer. which is the controlling test of deductibility. Applying these prinCiples to the case at hand, the Court held that the wife 's claims stemmed entirely from the marital
relationship and not from any incomeproducing activity. Consequently, the taxpayer's legal expenses were held to constitu te nondeductible personal expenditures. However, a Federal court subsequently held that the taxpayers expenses were incurred in the defense of his title to the stock and cou ld be added to the stocks' basis.23 This would, of course, reduce the taxable gain on the occasion of a subsequent disposition of the stock. In the intervening decade, the various decisions and rulings in this area have included the following . Legal fees were held deductible where incurred by an incumben t union president, who was defeated for reelection and sued by the winner, who c laimed the official would not act impartially to insure an accurate tabulation of votes. 24 An orchardist who unsuccessfully fought condemnation of his orchard, by seeking to limit the condemnation to the taking of a flowage easement, was held entitled to a deduction for legal fees. 25 Legal fees were held deductible by a salesman for a corporation that made voting machines, who paid the fees to an attorney for advice on state voting laws.26 An Army retiree, who contested the rank and rate of retirement pay at which he had been retired, and recovered back pay which was gross income, was ruled to have incurred deductible legal fees .27 Specific Types of Fees As noted, fees for services related to the production or cOlle'cHon of income, or the management, conservation or maintenance of property held for the production of income, are deductible.28 Thus, fees charged for the fo llowing services are deductible: (1) advice on investments, (2) managing real estate. (3) recovermg damages to income-producing property, and (4) co llecting interest, dividends, rents and other taxable income. It is noted that, for legal fees to be deductible, income need not actually be produced - as long as the matter can reasonably be expected to ultimately either produce taxable income or mini l, mize a deductible loss. The distinctions to be drawn in this area were uniquely illustrated by the Tax Court in 1970. 29 The case involved an individual who, upon turning 21 , renounced his claims to the income and principal of a trust established under his fathers will. Subsequently. he filed a petition to reinstate his interest in the trust. claiming he was mentally ill at the time of the renunciation . He was a.djudged incompetent and a committee was appointed over his property. He was subsequently restored as a beneficiary and began receiving trust income. Here is Continued on page 162 October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/161
Tax Considerations Continued from page 161 how the Tax Court ruled on the deductibility of the legal expenses: (I) the fees paid in connection with the establishment of the committee and to the committee after its creation was ruled deductible,30 (2) the fees paid for services in court were ruled to be nondeductible capital expenditures, the court holding that the taxpayer's interest as income beneficiary and remainderman 01 the trust was a capital asset, and (3) the fees paid for tax services rendered to the committee were deductible.31 Similarly, legal expenses are deductible when incurred in connection with a business transaction, or to preserve a business or its reputation. Th is deduction is basically determined under the general tests of availability of business deductions.32 Litigation need not be involved and deductibility is usually not affected by the outcome of the matter. The deductibility of fees in various fields of practice may be briefly surveyed as follows : (a) Domestic Relations Cases Lawyer's fees and other costs paid by either a husband or wife in connection with a divorce, separation, or decree for support are generally not deductible. as they are considered personal expenses.3J Amounts spent by a spouse in obtaining, collecting or changing alimony, which is taxable to him or her, are deductible as incurred for the production or collection of income. If a husband pays his wife' s fees and expenses in conneciton with such a proceeding , they are not deductible either by the husband or the wife, as the husband is not producing or collecting income and the wife is not paying the amount. 34 Where the deductions are material (and if otherwise practicable). the alimony may be increased to cover the wife's legal fees and expenses so that both the husband and wife can deduct the amounts. No deduction is allowed for property settlements in divorce cases since these claims stem from the matrimonial relationship rather than from income-producing activities.35 However, expenses for tax advice to determine the tax consequences to a taxpayer incident to a divorce are deductible where there exists a reasonable basis for allocating to tax counsel a portion of the legal fees incurred in connection with the d ivorce proceedings.36 (b) Tort Cases Recoveries which are tax-free generally result in nondeductibility to the plaintiff in a tort action of any fees and expenses paid to secure such recoveries.37 However, if the recovery is taxable to the plaintiff (as in a su it for lost profits), the fee is deductible. 162/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
The express interest element received in any suit is income, and the fees alloc ated to this portion of the recovery are deductible, regardless of the cause of action. The fees and expenses incurred in the defense of a suit for malpractice are deductible by the defendant, but not the plaintiff unless the award would be treated as taxable income. Certain business litigation results in some expenses having to be capitalized rather than deducted. For example, expenses incurred in defending one's rights in a trademark are considered as the cost of defending or protecting title to property and thus are not deductible.38 However, a suit for patent infringement by one receiving royalties is non considered as a cost of obtaining or protecting title to the patent, but as seeking further income from the patent; consequently, the fees and expenses incurred would be deductible, and the recoveries would be taxable." The deductibility of a fee by a defendant depends upon whether the tort arose in connection with his trade or business. For example, the defense of a libel action by a newspaper resu Its in deductible fees."'o Similarly, the fees incurred in defending a negligence action by a delivery company in connection with an accident on the route are deductible.41 (c) Criminal Matters Generally, fees and expenses incurred in defending a criminal action are considered nondeductible personal expenses. whether or not the defense is successful. However, where the criminal action arises out of the conduct of the taxpayer's trade or business. the cost of defense - successful or unsuccessful - should be deductible.42 Thus. if a defendant is resisting an indictment or defending an action which is proximately related to his trade of business, the fees and expenses would be deductible. For example. the cost of a defense against a charge of violating a corporate securities act would be deductible, as wou ld the cost of a defense by a lawyer in contesting an indictment for conspiracy involving his law practice. (d) Business Matters Certain business expenditures, as discussed, must be capitalized. A common example is the expense of incorporating and issuing stock. which may be permanently capitalized or capitalized and amortized ratably over at least the first 60 months of the corporation 's existence.43 Likewise. the cost of acquiring or modifying a license or obtaining a franchise are nondeductible capital expenditures. The deductibility of legal expenses incurred in business litigation again depends on the nature of the action.
Generally, if the recovery constitutes income, the expenses incurred in connection therewith are deductible. If the su it is such that property is recovered or title to real property is being protected or defended , the expenses must be cap italized, unless rendered deductible under I.R.C . Section 212. Fees expended in connection with a corporate merger or consolidation should be generally be capi talized. likewise, fees and expenses incurred in the formation of a partnership should be capita lized and will be recoverable upon the liquidation of the partnerShip, through an increase in the tax basis. (e) Real Property Transactions Legal fees incurred in acquiring title to real property, or in clearing or defending title thereto. must be capitalized and added to the basis of the property" If the property constitutes improvements or buildings. a portion of the expenses usually can be recovered through an annual deduction for depreciation. The same prinCiple applies in connection with the acquistion or defense of a leasehold in terest. Fees incurred in drafting and negotiating a lease must be capitalized and amortized over the term of the lease. Simi larl y, fees incurred in extending or modifying a lease must be amortized over the balance of the term. However. payments for the complete termination of a lease generally are deductible. Legal expenses incurred in unseecessfully contesting a condemnation action are capital expenditures,45 which should be subtracted from the amount received for the property.46 Where the taxpayer successfully resists the condemnation , the legal expenses are deductible as ordinary business expenses as long as the property is business property.47 Trend Toward Capitalization The trend in this area does not appear to be faVOring outright deductibility, but rather seems to be indicating an expansion of the capita lization approach. Generally, the captialization question arises in either of two contexts: (1) whether expenses incident to acquisition or disposition of property should be deducted or capitalized, or (2) whether expenses incurred in perlecting and defending title to property should be deducted or capitalized. As to the latter context. regarding title. the cases have generally been resolved in favor of capitalization. As to the acquisition or disposition of property, the courts have generally held that the expenses of a dissenting stockholder, incurred in connection wi th the appraisal of his stock , are deductible because the expenses bore a reasonable and proximate re lationship to the pro-
duction of income from the sale of the stock and to the management of the stock whic h he was holding for the production o f income.48 However, what of the expenses of those who acquire the stock of a dissenting shareholder? The Supreme Court held. in 1970. lhal such expenses must be capitalized. The holding came in two cases , involving both I.RC . Seclions 162 and 212. and in bolh cases the Court invoked the G i lmore origin test. In the Section 162 case , which involved the merger of the Hilton and Waldrof-Asloria hole Is in New York . lhe Hilton corporation paid legal fees in connection with stock appraisal proceedings arising out of the claims of dissenting shareholders incident to the merger. The Court held lhal lhe origin of lhe claims giving rise to the c orporation's expenses arose out of the acquisition of the dissenting shareholders ' stock and hence the expenses were nondeductible capital expenditures.49 In the Section 212 case , individual stockholders paid legal fees in connection with appraisal of the stock of a dissenting minority shareholder. who objecled 10 renewal of the corporation 's charter. Again , the Court found that the expenses were so directly related to the acquisition of the stock that they were required to be capita li zed.5O The Seventh Circuit, in the Hillon case, had held lhal lhe primary purpose of the expenses was the consummation of the merger. But the Supreme Court held that the fees were incurred as part of the process of acquiring the stock and thus were not deductible. The impact of these two decisions is illustrated in an Eighth Circuit decision.51 The case involved litigation expenses incurred for the purpose of conserving the value of stock held as security as the result of an installment sale of the stock. The trial court decision, which came down prior to Woodward , was that the expenses were deductible under I.RC. Seclion 212. Bul lhen Woodward was decided by the Supreme Court and subsequenlly lhe Eighlh Circuit reversed the district court, holding that the expenses constituted nondeductible capital expenditures. The rationale was that the costs were incurred in the disposition of a capital asset. By ilS holdings, lhe Supreme Court has enhanced the vitality of the capital expense approach.52 It was able to do so largely because of the inherent flexibility of the origin doctrine. The doctrine can of1en be used 10 juslify eilher approach and seems to be offering little real assistance towards arriving at the basic goal of distinguishing between deductible, personal and capital expenditures. 53 Ta x Adyice and Litigation Further mention must be made of Section 212(3), whereunder a taxpayer may deduct all ordinary and necessary ex-
penses paid or incurred in connection with the determination, collection or refund of any tax.54 This deduction is not confined to business expenses nor to expenses incurred in the produc tion or collection of income or the management or conservation of income-producing properties. Furthermore, the deduction is not confined to federal income taxes, but also encompasses estate and gift taxes , 55 property taxes , and state or city in come taxes.56 The Internal Revenue Service takes the position that the only deductible expenses and fees with respect to tax advice and litigation are those incurred for preparati on of tax returns, in obtaining refunds, or in c onnec tion with any proceedings involved in determining the extent of any tax liability.57 Accordingly, the Service holds that a nonbusiness expense deduc tion is not allowed for fees for tax planning and advice not involving a current controversy with the government, on the theory that such an expense relates only to future potential tax liability as to which there is no present controversy.58 For example, the Service unsuccessfully contended that an individual found guilty of a tax crime could nol deducl fees paid 10 lawyers for help in determining his tax liability before he knew he was going to be prosecuted.59 A "current tax controversy" includes appraisals required in determining the value of property for income tax purposes. For example, the Service has ruled that a taxpayer can deduct appraisal fees paid to establish the amount of a casualty 10SS60 and to establish the fair markel value of property donaled 10 charity.61 As long as the appraisal is directly related to the determination of value for tax purposes, the Section 212(3) deduclion is available .•' Despite the Service 's position, some courts have allowed a nonbusiness deduction for ruling requests 63 and for tax planning advice relating to current and future years .64 Nonetheless, in order for an expense for tax advice to be deductible, it must relate solely to tax counsel. 65 If the expense is incurred in connection with an activity that is not solely concerned with tax matters, the expense for tax counsel must be properly aliocaled and subslanlialed." Where a life estate is obtained as an heir or donee, there is no deduction for any legal fees incurred.67 However, if the life estate is acquired by a third-party beneficiary, any legal fees incurred are recoverable through a depreciation allowance over the beneficiary' s life expeclancy." Estate Planning There is no express provision in the Internal Revenue Code allowing a deduction for legal fees paid for estate planning as such. Therefore. such fees
would have to be allocated, on the basis of advice and services, as follows : (1) fees pertaining to taxes would probably be deduc tible under I.R .C. Section 212(3). (2) fees pertaining 10 management. c onservation or maintenance of income-producing property would be deductible under I.RC . Seclions 212(1) and (2) , and (3) fees pertaining 10 lhe remainder of these services, such as for the drafting of a will or other dispositive instruments, are not deductible, being in the nature of personal expenses. Attorneys' fees for tax advice in connection with estate planning have been ruled deductible. In the principal case , the services rendered included preparation of wills , establishment of an irrevoc able trust. creation of an insurance trust. dissolution of a corporation and preparation of gift tax returns.69 However, because the attorney failed to maintain adequate time records, the court held lhal 20 percenl of lhe fee was for tax advice and was deductible and that the balance was a nondeductible personal expense. The essence of the court's finding is that " any portion of the legal fee which can be found to be attributable to tax advice, irrespective of its nature, is deduc tible." i.I Foolroole.
1
-.,..
See e g. Victor R. Wold.r. 58 T C 974 (1972)
2 Re9 Section 145t.l{a) 3 See Rev Rul 72-381 , 1972·2 C B. 233 4 See e g Ru ... 11 Mann, 31 TCM 8J8 (1972) Lloyd Pat· terson. 32 TCM 181 (1973) 5 Re9 Sechon 1451 ·2(a) 6 T. A. Granger, 29 T CM 667 (1970) 7 L. M. Fllhcef", 14 TC 792 (1950) 8 North American 01 1Consolidated 'I. Burnet, 286 U 5 417 (1932)
9 Paul B. Huebner, 25 TCM 406(1966) 10 See e 9 RErY Rul 72-545. 1972·2 C B 179 11 Internal Revenue CoOe (he!elnaller ·1 RC I Section 162 12 I RC SectlOrt 212(11 (21 13 I A C Secuon 212(3) (see bfHow) 14 383 US 687 IS Thomas A. Joseph. 26 T C S62 (19561 16 Rev Ru 62·175. 1962-2 CB 50 17 Commissioner 'I. Heininger, 320 US 467 18 David R. Fau., 26 TC 948 19 Rev Rul 66-330 1966·2 CB 44 20 Rev Rul 66-330. 1966-2 C B 44 21. Rev Rul 68-662. 1968·2 CB 69 22 U.S. 'I . Gilmore, 372 US 39 (1963) 23 Gilmore 'I . U.S., 245 F SuPP 363 (N 0 Cal 1965) 24 Jame. B. Carey. 56 T C 477 (1971) 25 Blal". M. Madden. 57 T C 513 (1972) 26 Horace Orew, 31 T C M 143 (1972) 27 Rev Rut 72·169. 1972.1 CB 43 28 IRe Sec110n 212(1). (2) 29 Suler v. U.S., 70·1 USTC Pelf 9389 (SONY 1970) Xl I RC SectIon 212(1). (2). Reg SectIOn 1212·1\1) 31 I A C Section 212(3) 32 I R C Section t62 33 I R C Secllon 262 ~ U.S. v. Davia. 370 US 65 (1962) 35 Gilmore 'I . U.S., 372 US 19 (1 963)
36
37
Rev Rul 72·545 1972·2
CB
179
I R C SecIIOtl 265(1)
Food Fair 01 Vlrgirlia , Inc., 14 T C 1(8911950). cl IRe SectIOn 177 39 Urquhart 'I . Comm.. 215 F.ld 17 (3rd Cir. 1954). 4O. J . Raymond Oyer, J6 TC 456 (1961) 41 San.l(nil.Ary Textile Mill., Inc .. 22 B T A 754 (1931). cl Family Group, nco'I . COmm., 59 T C 660 (1973) 42 Comm. 'I . Tellier. 383 US 687 (19661 43 I R C Sec1l0n 248(a). cl Deering Milliken, Inc .. 59 T C 469 (1972) 44 Reg Sec110n 1 212·1(k). Brawner v. Burnet. 63 F 2d 129 (0 C Clr 1933) 45 Williams 'I. Burnet, 59 F2d 357 (0 C elr 1932) 46 T. J . FOilet, 25 TCM 1390 (1966) 47 L. B. Reak!rt, 29 BT A 1296 (19341 38
Continued on page 165 OClober 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/163
PROBATE LAW COMMITTEE 1973-74 REPORT (Editor's Nofe: This Report was inadvertently omitted from the Committee Reports published in The Arkansas Lawyer, July 1974 at pages 142-151.)
The Arkansas Bar Association had supported, as one of its bills, a statute recommended by the prior Probate Committee designed to simplify dower and curtesy, Basically, this (1) made all interests one third, outright and absolutely, in all property owned at death, both real and personal, regardless of children or creditors; (2) abolished the distinction between ancestral property and new acquisitions; (3) abolished the right of inchoate dower in real property1; and (4) provided (a) for distribution of dower and curtesy interests by the personal representatives, and (b) that title to the real estate would vest on death, subject to the right of the personal representative to sell or possess it as any other real property (preserving the priorities involved). This was introduced in the 1973 session as House Bill 59, and received a 10-4 vote from the Judiciary Committee (11 being needed for a " do pass " ), but no further action was taken . Opposition developed to this bill in certai n segments of the Bar. Although it was felt that the differences could be reconciled , in view of the possible further complications that might be engendered by the " Equal Rights " amendment, if passed, and other matters to be considered by the Committee, it was decided not to take any further action at this time. The primary work of the Comminee for the year 1973-1974 was a study of the Uniform Probate Code, finally promulgated by the Commissioners on State Laws and approved by the American Bar Association in 1969. For this purpose, the Committee was divided into SIJbcommittees , but all recommendations were considered by the Committee as a whole. The opinion was unanimous against any adoption of the Uniform Probate Code in totOt or substantially in toto. It was felt that by and large the existing Arkansas Probate Code provided a quick and workable system of distributing a decedent's assets while balancing the needs of his distributees and those of his creditors. It should be noted that four members of the Committee were Probate Judges, all of whom have served with distinction
164/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
in su ch capacity for years and who have had long and extensive experience with the actual workings of our existing Probate Code. It is also appropriate for the Committee to note to the Bar that our Probate Code is relatively recent - I.e., 1949 - and that this is not true of many states where the adoption of the UPC has been made, or urged. In February, 1940, an article by Professor Thomas E. Atkinson, entitled "Wanted: A Model Probate Code", appeared in the Journal of the American Judicature Society. Thereafter there were years of research, discussion, and drafting by committees of the Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section of the American Bar Association in cooperation with the research department of the University of Mic higan Law School. The final draft of a Model Probate Code emerged from these efforts. In 1946, th is was presented to the Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section of the American Bar Association by its committee on the model probate code and was unanimously approved by that Section. Since that time. various provisions of the Model Probate Code have been adopted or made the basis of legislation in a number of states, and, in part, served as a basis for the Uniform Probate Code itself. The Arkansas Code of 1949 embodies man y of the provisions of the Model Probate Code.' Thus, Arkansas already has been in the forefront with respect to model legislation. Further. since the adoption of our 1949 Code there has been a steady stream of changes designed to improve its administration. It should also be noted that Arkansas actually has already adopted parts of the Uniform Probate Code itself. In 1969 we passed the new Inheritance Code (Act 303, Acts of 1969, Ark. Stats. 61-131 through 61-155) . As will be noted from examination of the Committee Comments to that statute, many of these sections were lifted bodily from the November 1967 draft of the then proposed Uniform Probate Code, even before it was finally promulgated. It is also to be remembered that the UPC consists of eight separate articles and covers some 278 pages, and that its adoption would . in turn, repeal or at least change an almost unbelievably large amount of existing statutory law, much of it already judicially construed . It is interesting to note in this connection that when the new Inheritance Code was enacted , which, as stated, came in
large part from the UPC, to make certain of its effect on our exi sting statutory scheme and judicial deciSions, it was recommended by this Committee for enactment only after time-consuming. painstaking and careful examination extending over several years. And yet this part of the UPC cove red, including introduction and comments, only about 10 pages of the UPC. Many suggested changes in the Uniform Probate Code are already in our law. although not necessarily in that same form . For example. Section 3-511 of the Uniform Probate Code, relating to wills, is nothing else but Section 1 of the Uniform Testamentary Additions to Trust Act, already incorporated in 1963 in our law, Ark . Stats. 60-601 through 604. Section 3-916 of the Uniform Probate Code, relating to apportionment of estate taxes, is basically already in our law, although not in that form , Ark . Stats. 63-150. Many portions of Article II , Part 5, Wills, are already in our law, as are many other portions of the entire article relating to Intestate Succession and Wills. Section 2801 . relat ing to the right to renounce legacies, was under consideration by our Committee last year, but action was deferred. Meantime a complete new renunciation statute has been enacted, anyway, even stronger than that recommended by UPC. There are probably other provisions which essentially are already in our law. Thus. Arkansas already has a strong , progressive code , and both the Bar and the Leg islatu re have always seemed open to suggestions. It was determined, however, that the Committee would try to incorporate the best features of the UPC while retaining the good pOints of our own, and prevent the uncertainty and litigation which would result from adoption of an entire new code. It was proposed that whereve r possible we should streamline and simplify, which ends were not only desirable in themselves, but, hopefully, would tend to reduce the expenses of administration. However. it is to be noted also that in a critique resulting from a three-year study by the State Bar of California it has been intimated that the so-called independent administration sanctioned by the UPC does not result in lower fees . W ith these matters in mind, the Committee has recommended passage of various amendments to our existing code. many of which were suggested by the UPC, and some of which were not. A thumbnail sketch of the various amendments which have been recommended
lor approval lollows. (If the particular section was suggested directly or indirectly by the UPC we have so indicated by those symbcls). t . Amend Section 62-2013(d) to provide that a minor over 14 CQuid waive notice in his own behalf. 2. Amend 62-2804 to permit waiver 01 accoun ting by personal representative on written consent of guardians of incompetent distributees under certain circumstances. (a) (Perm it waiver 01 inventory and/or accounting whenever the testator so provided and if copies of the Federal Estate tax returns were made avai lable to the legatees; but action on this was deferred) . 3. (To be added as 62-2208(1), not substituted for other fee provision) : A personal representative may fix his fees, or the fees of his attorney, accountant, etc. without prior approval, but same shall be subject to approval
of the court as to reasonableness, on motion of interested parties, or the court. (UPC) 4. Section 62-2907(a): General legacies will bear interest at 6% fifteen months after commencement of administration. (UPC) 5. A distributee is liable to return property or money improperly distributed or paid, and a claimant is liable to return money improperly paid. (UPC) 6. Consent to service to recover such money or property shall be deemed to be given by receipt of the distribution from a local executor or administrator, under the long arm statute. 7. Payments not in excess of $1 ,000 may be made to 18-year-old minors, their parents, etc. without court order, and up to $5,000 with court order, without guardian. (UPC) 8. Confinement by a foreign power or disappearance shall authorize appointment 01 a guardian. (UPC) 9. Re-enact Sec. 62-2127 (distribution 01 small estates) with a $15,000 maximum , in lieu of the current $3,000. (UPC) 10. The representative of an estate of a deceased or incompetent personal representative shall have the power to protect the estate until appointment 01 a successor. (U PC) 11 . The limits under the power of attorney under Section 58-504 will be increased to $6,000 per year. 12. Section 62-2201 and Section 57607(e): A non-resident individual may administer a resident decedent's estate or serve as guardian, but bond may not be waived. Waiver of inventory and accounting in certain circumstances has already been
enacted into law. It is felt these changes. together with increase of the " small estates " statute to $15,000, will contribute immeasurably to simplicity of administration. Even if the Bar and the Legislature concur in our recommendation against wholesale adoption 01 the UPC lor the present. it should be obvious from its prior actions that Arkansas will not forever turn her back on it, or any other legislation lor that matter, il lurther study or experiences of other states demonstrate its desirability. Indeed. it is contemplated the studies will be continued, at least to some extent.
J-
Footnot.. 1 There was a com panion bill. House Bill 58, which likewise abolished Inchoate dower under Sec. 34- 1214 , (divorce), but a Wile granted a divorce was sti li only entitled to a Ille estate In real ity 2, See 29 Indiana l aw Journal 341 (1954)
Tax Considerations
Continued from page 163 48 49 50 51 52 53
54 55
56 57 58 59 60 61
62 63 64
65
66 67 68 eg
W.lter S. Heller, 2 T e 371 11943) U.S. 'I . Hilton Holels Corp.. 397 US 560 (1 970 ) Woodw.rd 'I . Comm.. ~7 U S 572 11970) HeIQerson 'I . U.s.. 426 F 2d 1293 1811'1 Clf 1970) I A C Secllon 263 See George Eisler. 59 r C 634 (1973), Ct.", 011 aM RE· lining Corp. 'I . U.S .. 326 F Supp 145 (E 0 W'S 1971 ). a!td 473 F2a 1211 171n elr 1973) See Aev Rul 68-062, 1968·2 C B 69 U.S . .... Bonnyman. 261 F 2a 335 (611'1 Clr 1959) S .H. Farwell. 35 T C 454 (19601 See Comm . .... Schwartl, 232 F 2d 94 (511'1 C,r 1956) Ae ... Rut 58·180 1958·1 C B 153 Comm. w. Schwartl, 232 F 2a 94 (51h Cn 1956) Rev Aut 58·180 1958·' e B 153 Rev Rul 67..461 1967·2 C B 125 Ben R. Stein, 31 T e M 663 (1 972 ) Kauhnan .... U.s., 277 F Supp 807 !W 0 Mo 1963) D.... is 'I . U.S .. 287 F2d 168ICI Cl 19691. Carpenler .... Cl 19641 U.S .. 338 F 2d 366 Rev Rul 72·545 1972·2 C B 179, C.~ ler .... U.S .. 338 F 2a 366 ICI Cl 1964) George .... U.S .. 434 F 2d 1336 ICt Cl 1970). James A. C<Hlins, 54 T C 1656 (1970) Aev Rut n·545. 1972·2 C B 179 Meyer J . Fleischman. 45 T C 4~ (1966), Arthur O. McDon.ld. 52 T C 82 119691 tAC Sec,.on 273. LWeth .... Hoey. 305 US 188 119381 See Marianne C . Elricll , 56 T C goo 119711 Sidney Merians. 60 T C 187119731 acQ 1973-42 I A B 5
(e,
=
FOR SALE Conference Room Furniture
ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION 400 West Markham Little Rock , Arkansas Phone: 375-4605
Book Review
HOW TO MAKE MONEY PRACTICING LAW, by Volney F. Morin, is a book first published in 1966, but the new Finh Edition is as up-ta-date as a new hairstyle. The price 01 $12.95 seems high, but every other page contains a nugget as to how to increase earnings from a law practice. The book is highly readable, practical , and is a great refresher course , from Ivar Publications, P.O , Box 1855, Los Angeles, Calilornia 90028. The author's main thrust - to have a zero accounts receivable balance by the use 01 deposit lees - is intriguing . I cannot see this method working in all stiuations, but any progress would result in a higher collection ratio for fees charged. The author points out that equipment for a modern secretary station will probably cost Irom $10,000 to $20,000, and payments must be met. He clearly explains practical methods of securing legal business and more important, as to how to keep clients after original engagement. The sections on public relations cover involvement with client, staff and other attorneys. These sections should be read and reread by every lawyer in public or private practice. Morin's statements are a unique blend 01 psychological principles and personal experience. I do not agree with the entire outline for the operation of a successful law practice, but the author has some tried and proven methods. The book will make you stop and re-examine your own methods of operation and unless you are a successful genius, you will find some ideas to adapt into your own system. The cost of the book can be earned from better relations with your next client.
- Robert W. McMenamin Member Committee on Public Service & Information 0 Reprinted From Oregon State Bar Bulletin May, 1974
October 1974/ Arkansas Lawyer/165
by Director of Admissions J . Steven Clark played with Mr. John Door and the
ing attorneys , public defenders, and cir-
House Judiciary Committee. She teaches criminal law and runs the clinical programs.
cuit judges throughout the state.
Mr. Mapp is a graduate of the Univer-
sity of Illinois Law School and has previously taught at the Universities of Al-
berta,
Oregon, North
Carolina,
and
Standford. He also practiced law in California for three years and served as a
Foreign Service Officer for the U.S. Department of State. Mr. Mapp teaches property and decedents estates. The Law School is deeply indebted to the Bar Association and the Arkansas
Bar Foundation for the $2,000.00 in scholarship
monies provided for the
school. The substantial portion of these monies is being used in the general law
school scholarship fund . $300.00 of this money has been earmarked for the recipient at each campus selected by his
peers for the Bogle-Sharp award. These Dean Wylie Davis spent the first summer session teaching insurance as a visiting professor at the University of
South Carolina School of Law at Columbia.
The School of law is pleased to welcome back to its faculty Distinguished Professor Emeritus Robert A. Leflar, who is teaching torts and conflicts.
In July Dr. Leliar conducted the Appellate Judges Seminar at New York Uni-
versity School of Law for his 19th year. Over 600 State Supreme Court, State Intermediate Appeals Courts, and U.S. Court of Appeals judges have attended these seminars. In addition , Dr. Leflar's manuscript for
his new book on " Appellate Judicial
awards go to the students selected as those most likely to succeed in the general practice of law. Likewise , our thanks goes out to the Bar Foundation for its financial support of our Law Graduates Brochure and information flyer for the Law School re-
search Pool. Professor Fred Spies was honored this past May with his selection by the University Alumni 's Association for faculty achievement in teaching and research. Professor Spies was one of three professors chosen from the University system's entire staff of professors.
On September 27th a program spon-
Opinions" has been submitted to West
sored by the Student Bar Association and the Law School Liaison Committee
Publishing Company. This should be
of the Bar was presented by Mr. C. B.
available in early December and all royalties will go to the Institute of Judicial Administration , which is sponsoring
Nance on the use of video tape presentations for litigation. Mr. Nance discussed taping depositions and scenes of the crime or accident. Approximately 100 students participated in the program .
the book. Likewise , the School of Law is pleased to announce the addition of two new fa-
culty members, Ms. Hillary Rodham and Mr. Tom Mapp; and five new lecturers, Mr. James Blair, Mr. John C . Everett. Mr.
Jerry Canfield, Mr. John Lineberger, and Mr. Robert Keegan. Ms. Rodham is a Yale Law School graduate. She was most recently en-
166/ Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
The program is a cooperative effort
with federal, state and local funding . It provides needed assistance to officials while giving law students practical exposure to the issues and problems confronted in practice . For the first time law students in the program served as law clerks to circuit
judges. As clerks the students observed all phases of litigation and researched issues brought to the Court for decision. Judges also utilized the clerk 's research abilities to prepare memoranda on areas such as search and seizure law which
could be helpful in future cases. Clerks also helped in drafting materials such as letters to attorneys , jury instructions, and procedural reform bills. Students aided also in docket control and other administrative matters. A number of students worked in offices of prosecuting attorneys and public defenders. These students primarily provided research support to their offices . Students also proved useful in screening complaints , drafting informations, etc . Students who were eligible under Rule 12 were able to receive actual courtroom experience.
The program will continue through the school year in the Fayetteville and Little Rock areas. Geographical limitations preclude the placement of interns throughout the State during the winter mon ths. Those students involved in the program have found it rewarding to the students and to the offices involved. It is anticipated that the program will be continued next year. Offices which have not
already participated will be encouraged to do so. Anyone interested may contact
Elizabeth Osenbaugh at the Fayetteville campus or Ken Gould at the little Rock DiviSIOn.
Moot Court Team Selected Criminal Justice Intern P rogram This summer twenty-seven law students obtained first-hand experience with the Arkansas Criminal justice system through the internship program . T he interns worked in the offices of prosecut-
Steven Carlee, Christopher Williams and Karen Pope have been selected as the members of the Arkansas Moot Court team . The three are all secondyear students who did outstanding work
in the first-year Appellate Advocacy program . Arkansas will compete in the Re-
gion 10 competition in Houston, Texas, the weekend of November 1 to determine the region 's participants in the National Moot Court Competition in New York City. Arkansan Elected Officer in ABA Law Student Division Stark Ligon, a senior at the Fayetteville Division of the University of Arkansas School of Law. was recent ly elected to serve a one-year term as one of two
law student members of the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association. Elected by the National Convention of the Law Student Division of the ABA meeting in Chicago. August 3. Ligon and Ms. Connie Borkenhagen from the University of New Mexico Law School will represent 26,000 student members before the ABA'S legislative body. Their duties include sponsoring and lobbying for law student resolutions in the House of Delegates, promoting greater student participation in the sections and committees of the ABA, and coordination of thirty-five law student liaisons to ABA sections. Ligon. a past sludent liaisen to Ihe ABA Section of Bar Activities, is a native of Arkadelphia and received his education there and at Vanderbilt and the University of Arkansas. He previously has worked for McLarty Leasing Company of Hope. the Arkansas Industrial Development Commission, and on the staff of Governor Dale Bumpers. He is also an officer in the Arkansas National Guard. New Plans Announced for Law Teacher Recruitment The Executive Committee of the Association of American Law Schools announced today its plans for the first Law Faculty Recruitment Conference to be held at the Washington Hilton Hotel in
-20c per word-$5 mini mum-
Lawyers' Mart
SERVICES AVAILABLE ECONOMIC RESEARCH CONSULTANTS. Services available for: Expert testimony (work-life expectancy); Computer assisted trial preparation and presentation ; Cross examination advice on economic matters. R. SCOTT BOAZ, Professor of Economics and Finance, Southern State College, Magnolia, Ark. 71753. BOOKS FOR SALE Arkansas Statutes (complete); Arkansas Reports Vol. 92-143; SW 2d (Ark. only) Vol. 66-502 ; Supreme Court Reports Vol. 52-92A; West's Arkansas Digest (complete). Contact Margaret Ross, 811 Parkway, Conway, Arkansas 72032.
I
Washington. D.C. on Friday. Saturday and Sunday. November 29 and 30 and December 1. 1974. For more than a decade American law schools have used the Association 's Faculty Appointments Reg ister as an important source of prospects for law teacher recruitment. Persons interested in the career opportunities afforded by law teaching have had their curricula vitae entered on standardized forms and included in the Faculty Appointments Register. These forms are available from any of the AALS member schools as we lt as from the Association 's national off ice at One Dupont Circle. NW .â&#x20AC;˘ Suite 370. Washington. D.C . 20036. A nominal registration fee is required. Payment of it entitles each registrant to have his or her curricula vitae included in the Register, which is placed in the hands of each law school dean in the fall . a month before the Recruitment Conference, and in the spring several weeks before faculties make final rcruitment decisions. The closing date for the Register is October 1, 1974. Persons missing this deadline may nonetheless participate in the Conference and have their curricula vitae circu lated to all law school deans in the spring so long as they fu lfil l all registration requirements . ,J,
send ad copy to The Arkansas Lawyer
Used Am . Ju r. 2D, Complete Through Vol. 71 . J_ W_ HALL - 375-9143 U.S. Supreme Court Reporter, Vol. 1-75; U.S. Supreme Court Digest. Vol. 1-15, with Rules, Vol. 16-17; Arkansas Supreme Court Reports, Vol. 1-45; Modern Legal Forms, 5 Vol. ; Other law book series. Must be seen to be appreciated. MRS_ J_ S_ THOMAS, 608 East Main, EI Dorado. AR 71730. Southwest Reporter Arkansas Cases First Series Complete - Second Series thru 476 in bound volumes - advance sheets from 476 to date; Shepherd 's Arkansas Citator; Federal Practice And Procedure (wright & Miller) ; Am . Jur. Legal Forms First And Second ; Medical Atlas For Attorneys ; Arkansas Digest; Am. Jur. Pleadings And Practice Forms & CJS. Contact: Jack Carter, P.O. Box 2044, Texarkana, Texas 75501 , Phone: 214-7942711_ October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/167
Charles S. Howard has opened his office in the Halter Bldg. in Conway. Gary R. GIbbs has opened a new office at 401 ABT Tower Bldg .. Hot Springs. Jerry Mazzantr, formerly of Little Rock . has moved to Lake Village.
by B. Ghormley
Edward B. Dillon, Jr., little Rock. has been elected to the Presidency of Serra International at the World Convention at London in july. William L. Blair has been promoted to Vice President of Wortham Bank & Trust Company. Members of the Garland County Bar Association are studying ways to create a county bar center and library which CQuid be a public facility. After 64 years of law practice. Wallace Townsend , 92 of little Rock , re-
tired July 1. 1974. A seminar for legal secretaries was conducted at Fayetteville in July with Walter & Marjorie Niblock as speakers. Donald King, general attorney for Southwestern Bell in Little Rock . has been promoted and transferred to Pacific Telephone & Telegraph as Assistant Vice President in charge of legal affairs. Jon Oee Lawrence, formerly with Southwestern Bell in SI. Louis. has replaced Mr. King . Jerry Watkins, EI Dorado. will be Chairman 01 the Platform Committee of the Democrat State Convention ' in September at Hot Springs. Jeff Davis, Jr., formerly of Little Rock. has been appointed by the Social Security Administration as an Admi rfi strative Judge to hear claims for " Black Lung " benefits by coal miners or their widows . Terry Kirkpatrick, formerly serving on the House Judiciary Committee impeachment staff, will teach this fall at Drake Law School at Des Moines, Iowa before returning to Arkansas. Gene Matthews, Hot Springs, was speaker at the Garland County Legal Secretaries' August meeting . M. Morrell Gathright and William R. Stringfellow have announced their association for the practice of law under the firm name of Gathright & Stringfellow. LTD .. located in the Fifth Avenue Bldg .. Pine Bluff. 168/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
Bill R. Holloway, Lake Village. was a speaker at the annual meeting of the Alabama Trial Lawyers Association . Former Arkansas Governor Sidney McMath was featured speaker at the July meeting of Sumpter Lodge 4t9. Hot Springs. Gov. Bumpers was the principal speaker at the 28th Annual Convention of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America in San Francisco. J. E. Sanders, Hot Springs, spoke to members of the Multiple Listing Service of the Hot Springs Board of Realtors. Judge J. Hugh lookadoo, Arkadelphia. has completed a four week education course at National College of the State Judiciary. Spitzberg, Mitchell & Hayes, Little Rock law firm . has moved the ir offices to Gaines Place. 3rd & Gaines SI.. LA. Jack T. Lassiter has been appointed as an additional Deputy Public Defender for the Sixth JudicIal District. Michael Castleman , Little Rock . will fill the position vacated by lloyd Haynes as Deputy Public Defender for the Sixth Judicial District. Kenneth Suggs is now a partner with Ralph Patterson & William Lafferty, N. Little Rock. and the firm name has been changed to Patterson. Lafferty & Suggs. Douglas Wood, formerly with Commercial National Bank. Little Rock. has opened a law office at 3523 JFK Blvd .. N. Little Rock . James J. Calloway was promoted to Chief Prosecuting Attorney of Union County and Deputy Prosecuting Attorney of Calhoun County. William J. Smith, Little Rock. has been elected as a Vice President of the Arkansas State Fair and Livestock Show Association and E. M. Arnold, Little Rock. was re-elected as President, serving his 12th year. Richard A. Williams, Little Rock . has been named Chairman-Elect of the newly formed ABA Section 01 Economics of Law Practice. Judge Charles light, Paragould. is to be honored by members of the Northeast Arkansas Bar Group at its fall meeting .
Rodney C. Wade, formerly of FI. Smith. is not associated with Switzer & Switzer 01 Crossett. Michael O. Parker has become associated with Davidson, Plastiras & Horne, LTD in Little Rock . James W. Hyden has become associated with Coleman . Gantt. Ramsey & Cox of Pine Bluff. Bill Hylton has opened a law office in Salem. Ark . James R. Pate, formerly in Little Rock . has joined Jon Sanford in the practice of law at Russellville. Mike Beebe has been named partner in his law firm which now is listed as Lightle, Tedder, Hannah & Beebe. Searcy. John C. Gregg, formerly of Paragould. has joined a law firm in Batesville and the firm name has been changed to Highsmith. Tatum. Highsmith. Gregg & Hart. The U of A School of Medicine has received a gift of $tO.OOO from John T. Haskins, Little Rock , to finance research. James A. Gilker, Ft. Smith. Bill S. Clark and Gaines H. Houston, Little Rock wi ll lead discussions at two management con feren ces on labor relations sponsored by the Associated Industries of Arkansas , Inc.
Federal Ru les of Evidence
Uniform State Law
Evidence
1975 Mid-Year Meeting January 16-18, 1975 Camelot Inn Little Rock, Arkansas
m :So m
a.. x
CD "0 :::JCD 0;4 CD
f\\.l\es Uniform Act
-"<.-"
-a>
(Q
a> Uniform State Law on Evidence October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/1 69
"Practice Skills" Featured In 1974
Bridging-the-Gap Seminar As evidenced by the critique sheets, the 1974 Bridging-the-Gap Seminar was the finest ever offered by the Arkansas Bar Association 's Young Lawyers Section . Vincent W. Foster, Jr. of Little Rock was the Seminar Chairman. The Seminar was expanded to a 5-day " Practice Skills" course, featuring 26 of Arkansas leading judges and active practitioners as speakers and moderators, and use of the trial practice VIDEO tapes from the National College of Advocacy of The Hastings College of Law and the American Trial Lawyers Association .
The " Practice Skills" included coverage of preparation for trial , actual trial, and appellate procedures. Various legal specialities were discussed by legal experts from a " nuts-and-bolts" approach . The Seminar format used the VIDEO tapes with comments by Arkansas Lawyers during the morning sessions. The afternoon sessions featured other Arkansas attorneys discussing their particular fields.
sional Responsibility, Legal Fees and Relationships with Fellow Lawyers;" Byron M. Eiseman, Jr., " Wills, Trusts and Estate Planning ;" Judge Richard Mobley, " Domestic Relations;" S. Hubert Mayes, Jr., " Principies of Direct Examination ;" Guy Amsler, Jr., " Principles of Client Interviewing ;" Jack Holt, Jr., "Establishing and Maintaining a Criminal Law Practice;" Eldon F. Coffman , " Workmen 's Compensation Cases;" Judge Kenneth J. Forrester, " Social Security Hearings and Appeals ;" Charles R. Garner, " Medical Evidence ;" James E. West, " Preparation for Trial ;" Phillip Carroll, " Appellate Procedure : State and Federal Courts; " James L. Sloan , " Chapter 13, and Straight Bankruptcy ;" Michael G . Thompson , " Real Property;" Philip E. Dixon, " Jury Selection;" C. B. Nance, Jr., " Principles of Taking Depositions: The the Strategy and Technique Preparation of Your Client; " Walter W. Davidson , " Corporate and Securities Law ;" George N. Plastiras, " Law Office Management;" Gordon Rather, Jr., " Maritime Law Practice;" Dale Price, " Products Liability - Strategy Case Example;" Robert C. Compton , "The Closing Argument;" Griffin Smith, "Replevin, Garnishment, and Execution; " Justice John A. Fogleman, " What Persuades A Judge."
The Seminar speakers and their subjects were Robert S. Lindsey, "Evaluation and Settlement ;" R. Keith Arman , "The Discovery Tools ;" Edward L. Wright, " Profes-
Association President James B. Sharp, Secretary-Treasurer James M. Moody and Chairman Martin Gilbert of the Legal Education Committee also participated as presiding of-
The Seminar was held on September 10-14, 1974 at the Arkansas Bar Center. The sessions were held in the main classroom of the Little Rock Division of the Law School. The participants also enjoyed two Receptions at the Bar Center at the ends of the first and last days.
HO/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
ficers for some of the sessions. Attendees were able to purchase at a very reduced price the Arkansas Bar Association's Desk Book, which provides a ready reference to many fields of law in Arkansas. The Desk Book is a fine guide to further legal research on these subjects. The need for this type of " Bridging-the-Gap" course for new lawyers was clearly spelled out in the recent survey of those admitted to practice in Arkansas since 1969. Those responding - some 250 out of 700 - unanimously felt that they needed , but lacked , "Practice Skills" as they entered upon their legal careers; and they agreed that such experience was not inc luded in their law school courses. As stated in Asso ciation President James B. Sharp's Report (at page 155), Dean Wylie H. Davis of the University of Arkansas School of Law spelled out at the recent Fall Legal Institute the need for a new approach to clinical education. One of his thoughts is to have the " Bridging-the-Gap" Seminar expanded to two weeks, with the School of Law taking an active part. Only two known programs in other States would equal such a seminar - in New Jersey and in Wisconsin . With the ever increasing number of law school graduates in Arkansas, it may require such seminars twice a year - at Fayetteville and Little Rock - to afford each graduate the needed opportunity to attend a " Practice Skills" institute. II _"ÂŤ-
New 5-Volume Set of Texas Statutes and Codes offers space-saving convenience West Publishing Company, SI. Paul, has announced plans to publish the TEXAS STATUTES AND CODES in a compact, five-volume format. The set will offer the complete text of the statutes and will give a comprehensive, detai led index and special analysis of each code and each title. All five volumes are scheduled for publication in late 1974 and will contain the statutes and codes as amended through the 1973 legislative session . The purpose of this new set is to present in a concise, low cost format the complete TEXAS STATUTES AND CODES for convenient desk-top access or as a companion set to Vernon 's Annotated Texas Statutes and Codes (the " Black Set" ). Th is new edition supersedes the Vernon 's Texas Statutes published in 1948. The new set will meet the need for a compact set of state statutes and codes. It will be supplemented with a bound supplement after each legislative session . Although the price of WEST'S TEXAS STATUTES AND CODES has been set at $250, it may be ordered with a pre-pu blication discount of $50 for a net price of $200 for the five-volume set. For more information , contact your West sales representative or write G. L. Cafesjian, West Publishing Company, 50 West Kellogg Boulevard , St. Paul , Minnesota 55102. /1_,
ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION
"I all morning looking for that case" You might have found it in seconds W'ith the Arkansas Digest
West's Arkansas Digest is designed to find case law fast. It's the busy la wyer's index to your Arkansas Cases. It classifies Arkansas points of law in logical subject matter arrangement-the Key Number System. You need this fast-working "Case Finder" in your library. Get lull details from your West Representative. or write: West Publishing Company, SO W. Kellogg Blvd ., St. Pa ul, Minn. 55102
"lfl"UIIS
cR
Archie C. McLaren, Jr. Directors Plaza-Su ite 202 3035 Directors Row Memphis, Tennessee
38131
Phone: 901 / 744- 8420
• Arkansas Federal ........ .. .. . .. Sheraton Tax Institute Motor Inn November 21 -22, 1974 Little Rock • 22nd Midyear Meeting . . .. .. . Camelot Inn January 15-18, 1975 Bar Center • 14th Oil & Gas Institute . . Arlington Hotel February 26-March 1, 1975 Hot Springs • 77th Annual Meeting ...... Arlington Hotel June 4-7, 1975 Hot Springs October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/ 171
Ed itor's Comment : AEG IS is a feature of the Arkansas Bar Association's educational program concerning docket con trol and oth er areas of high risk experience in professional liability cases.
SA FE GUARDING YOU R PROFESSIONAL FUTURE
To err is human to forgive is not client policy ~
The days when you could enjoy a warm relationship with your client are fast disappearing. Now, most everything is strictly business. All that counts today is results. And if a client doesn't like the results, he'll probably be looking for any conceivable grounds for suit. It happens every da y-and the chance of a client instituting a malpractice claim against you is greater than ever, To your clients, you arC a professional. They expect your 172/Arkansas Lawyer/October t974
business systems to be as professional as you nrc. They simply won't accept carelessness, insufficient case follow-u p or inade路 quate docket control as a valid excuse. Now is the time to carefully examine your case commitments and all your administrative procedures. Not tomorrow. Not next week. Not next month. Do it today and you can prcvent tomorrow's mistakes.
Great partnership: lewis &Clark ... another great partnership:
ARKAnSAS BAR ASSOCIATion & RATHER BEYER & HARPER Working together with CNA/insurance to provide you major protection for professionalbusiness-personal liability and medical expenses. The higher limits of supplemental protection you need in these areas is now available.
new PROfESSionAL LIABILITY PROGRAm • $1,000,000 Professional Business Umbrella • $1,000,000 Personal Umbrella • $25,000 excess medical expense coverage
Want more details? Call or write Arkansas Bar Association Administrator Rather , Beyer & Harper Three Hundred Spring Building Little Rock , Arkansas 72201 (501) 372-4117 October 1974/ Arkansas Lawyer/173
Legal Economics
Automatic Typewriters: A Mixed Blessing Despi te advertising c laims and sales puffery, automatic typewri ters do not provide a guaranteed soluti on to word processing problems. Without adequate preparation and proper use of automatic typewriters, word processing ou tput may actu all y decline. For example, if most of the typing consists of short personalized letters dictated by an experienced lawyer who seldom changes his mind, an accurate typist likely wi ll produce more work on a manual machine than she w ill on an automatic typewriter. Why? Because on an automatic typewriter the letters wil l be typed first in rough draft and then run again in final form. Of course, if the typing consists of the playback of stored materials which have been previously prepared, no typist can keep pace with an automatic typewriter. Since most of the work in a law office will involve both simple correspondence and playback of stored materials, the work flow must be reviewed carefully to maximize the advantages of automatic ecuipment. Unfortunately the lawyer must participate in this analysis. He shou ld not delegate it to his secretary. By all means, he must not re ly upon the salesman of the automatic equipment. Before deciding on the lease or purchase of an automatic typewriter, the attorney shou ld take the following steps: 1. LEARN HOW THE MACHINE OPERATES. While it is not necessary to learn which button to punch, the attorney must learn w hat functions the machine will and will not perform. Without this knowledge, he may acquire the wrong machine or improperly use the one he has acquired. Example: Suppose the attorney has a stored form on magnetic cards w hich are used to prepare a wil l for c lient A. He makes certain revisions on the form to adapt it to the peculiar circumstan ces of client A. Later, when the attorney prepares a will for clien t B, if he " steals" a copy of client A's will and marks the necessary revisions on it, the secretary will soon be
tearing her hair out. Since A's wil l is different from the stored cards, she must go over the draft of B 's will word-by-word and compare it to the playback of the stored cards. If the attorney had made his revisions on a playback of the stored cards instead of on A's wi ll, many hours would have been saved for his secretary and must cost for him . 2. ANALYZE THE WORK FLOW. Typing in a law office may be divided into three diHerent functions : (a) Draft Typing. Most correspondence falls into this category. Automatic typewriters will improve draft typing output where the lawyer constantly revises his dictation or the secretary makes numerous errors. Otherwise automatic typewriters are of little help, and may even be a hindrance. (b) Revisions. Legal briefs wh ich are often revised and contracts which are subject to prolonged negotiation fall into this category. Automatic typewriters will materially improve output. (c) Use Of Stored Materials. Leases, mortgages, wills, trusts, profit-sharing plans, and corporate documents fall into this category. Here is where the automatic typewriter is worth its weight in gold. If the attorney can maximize the use of the automatic typewriter on stored materials and minimize its use for power typing, he will be saving money. Unless every secretary in the office is equipped with an automatic typewriter, however, this diversion of the usual flow of work within an office may c reate problems which should be considered in advance. 3. EVALUATE THE OPERATOR. Having purchased or leased the machine, the lawyer must be sure that it does not sit silently while the cost goes on. Who wi ll train the operator? Is she capable of learning how to use the machine? Will she be happy using the machine? What if she is sick or on vacation and is your only trained operator? Bitter experience has proven that not all manufacturers know how to teach the use of their machine, particularly new models. Not all secretaries enjoy using an automatic typewriter. In fact , a secretary who receives a high volume of te lephone calls may find it impossible to use an automatic typewriter effectively because she constantly loses her place. What is worse, automatic typewri ters may turn out to be a status symbol provided to the secreta ries of more senior partners without regard to ultimate use of the equipment. VÂť,
(Editor's Note: Richard A. Williams of the Wright, Undsey and Jennings Law Firm of Uttle Rock, is the Chairman-Elect of the new American Bar Association Section of Economics of Law Practice. He served four times as Chairman of the Arkansas Bar Association's Legal Education Council (now the Legal Education Committee) and was twice Chairman of ns Computerized Legal Researc h Committee; and he is presently the Chairman of the Paralegal Committee. .. Legal Economics" will be a new Regular Feature of The Arkansas Lawyer. Obviously, Mr. William s is the ideal choice for the column's author.)
174/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
- Richard A. Williams
JURIS DICTUM by C. R. Huie Executive Secretary. Judicial Department
Recent editorial comment in the news media and expressions from a few attorneys have indicated a lack of thorough understanding of Rule 21 recentfy adopted by the Supreme Court. With the thought ;n mind that widespread circulation of the Per Curiam adopting the rule and a few words of explanation clarifying its intent and effect might be in order, I requested Justice George Rose Smith to write a couple of explanatol}' paragraphs to precede the Per Curiam. His comments and a copy of the order follow: On September 3, 1974, the Arkansas Supreme Court adopled a per curiam order, copied below, restricting the future publication of some opinions. The court will continue to write opinions in practically all cases. Unpublished opinions will be public documents - filed in the clerk 's office, available to Ihe news media, sent to the parties or counsel, and indexed in the Arkansas Reports. They will not be published in Ihe Arkansas Reports or in the Southwest Reporter. They cannot be cited. primarily for wo reasons : (1) Experience elsewhere shows that this restriction IS necessary to keep libraries and the bar from having to buy unofficial editions of such opinions; (2) in some instances the statement of facts may be so abbreviated that a lawyer not familiar with the case might be misled as to the scope of the decision. The court 's purpose is to end the publication of opinions having no value as precedents. For example: Now that every indigent defendant in a serious criminal case is entitled to a free appeal , with a free transcript and free legal counsel. the court annually receives scores of such appeals that have no merit. To publish those opinions means that they must be head noted, proofread, and otherwise prepared for publication at Ihe taxpayers' expense, and to be similarly processed by West. Shepard's, C.J.S.. A.L.R .. etc. All that useless labor and expense must ullimately be born by the public and especially by members of the bar. Consequently per curiam orders such as that adopted by our court are becoming commonplace. PER CURIAM. This Court, in harmony wilh similar action that is being laken with increasing frequency by slate and federal courts throughout the nalion, adopts the following revised Rule 21 as a means of eliminating the publication of opinions that are without value as precedents. The broad purposes of the Rule are to contribute to a reduction in the number of published Judicial opinions, to lessen the burdens which the excessive publication of opinions places upon the public and the bar, and to simplify the writing of opinions in cases having no precedential worth. (For a comprehensive discussion of the subject, interested persons are referred to " Standards For Publication of Judicial Opinions," by the Advisory Council on Appellale Juslice (1973) , a copy of which is in the Supreme Court library.)
RULE 21 OPINIONS STANDARDS FOR PUBLICATION - COPIES AVAILABLE 1. Standards For Publication. An opinion of this Court shall not be designated for publication unless: a. The opinion establishes a new rule of law or alters, modifies, or clarifies an existing rule ; or b. The opinion involves a legal or factual issue of con tinu ing public interest ; or c. Th e opinion criticizes existing law; or d. The opinion resolves a real or apparent conflict of authority; or e. The opinion will serve as a useful reference . such as one reviewing case law or legislative history. 2. Applicalion of Standards. Opinions of the Court shall be published only if a majority of the judges find Ihal a standard for publication as set out in section (1) of this Rule is satisfied . Concurring opinions shall be published only if the majority opinion is published. Dissenting opinions may be published if the dissenting ludge determines that a standard for publication as set out In section (1) of this Rule is satisfied , in which event the majority opinion will ordinarily be published. 3. Consideration at Conferen ce. The Court wi II consider the question of whether to publish an opinion at its decisionmaking conference and will at that time, if appropriate, make a tentative decision not to publish. 4. Unpublished Opinions - Designation - Nol To Be Cited Filing - listing In Reports. All opinions that are nol found 10 satisfy a slandard for publication as set oul in section (I) of this Rule shall be marked. Not Designated For Publ ication. Opinions marked. Not DeSignated For Publication, shall not be cited, quoted, or referred to by any court or in any argument, brief, or other materials presented to any court (except in continuing or related litigation upon an issue such as res Judicata, collateral estoppel, or law of the case). Opinions marked, Not DeSignated For Publication, shall be filed in the Clerk 's office as public records and shall be listed in the Arkansas Reports by case number. style. date. and disposition. 5. Copies of All Opinions Available. In every case the Clerk will furnish without charge one typewritten copy of all the Court's published or unpublished opinions in the case to counsel for every party on whose behalf a separate brief was filed . The charge for additional copies is fi xed by statute. (Th is revised Rule becomes effective Seplember 3. 1974.)
J --. October 1974/ Arkansas Lawyer/17S
spending most of his spare time in the study of law and advanced accounting.
In 1932 Mr. Ross was admitted to the practice of law and began practicing the
In memoriam None of us Lives to Himself, and None of us Dies to HimselfRomans 14:7 (RSV)
~oll.owing year in Conway, specializing In Income tax and inheritance tax mat-
ters He was a member of the legal advisory board of Faulkner County Drafi Board from 1943 to 1945, served as a member of the Faulkner County Board of Election Commissioners from 1942 to
1944, was a member of the Green Grove Lodge. Free and Accepted Masons, Conway Chamber of Commerce and Conway Kiwanis Club. He was a mem-
ber of the First United Methodist Church. Thomas Arnold French, Sr.
She is survived by a daughter and five grandchildren.
1891-1974 The passing of Judge T. A. French, June 12th at Baptist Memorial Hospital in Memphis, brought to an end a long and active life. most of It In the Clay County he loved. The 83-year-old Rector farmer-attorney was bUried in the Woodland Heights
sity of Arkansas from 1930 to 1963 and
Cemetery after a memorial service at the
was well known for his generosity in
First Baptist Church in Rector. Judge French began his working career as a public school teacher and taught in several rural schools of Clay County, Arkansas, serving as principal of St. Francis School for three years prior to being elected to the oHice of Circuit Court Clerk in 1924, in which oHice he served two terms. Later he served as county judge during the terms 1928-30, 1936-40 and 1946-52.
helping generations of poor law students to complete school. He specialized in real property and probate law, was a
He passed the bar examination in 1931
and entered into the practice of law in Piggott. He was a member of the Veterans of World War I and the American LegIon, a 32-degree Mason and a member of the Scottish Rite. Judge French is survived by his wife, three sons, a daughter, fIVe grandchildren , two brothers and three sisters.
Ella Mary Boehm West 1904-1974 Mrs. West passed away June 25th at Little Rock. She was born in St. Louis and came to Little Rock In 1928 and during the 1930's served as court reporter and secretary for the Little Rock law firm of Robinson, House and Moses. and
Edward Baylor Meriwether 1898-1974 Edward Baylor (Judge) Meriwether expired at FayetteVille at the age of 76. He was a law professor at the Univer-
member of the Arkansas Bar Associa-
tion Committee that drafied the Arkansas Probate Code which is now con-
sidered a model code for other states. He was also a member of the Washing-
Mr. Ross is survived by his wife, a
daughter, a brother and a sister. Samuel Harvey Gilbert 1884-1974 Samuel Harvey Gilbert of Berryville died on April 11, 1974, at the age of ninety years. Mr. Gilbert was born in Elk City, Kansas on February 1, 1884. He had practiced law for sixty-five years. was a member of the Masonic
Lodge, Shrine and a member of the Lions Club for twenty years. He is survived by his wife. a daughter, a step-daughter, thirteen grandchildren and seven great grandchildren.
ton County and Amencan Bar Associations.
Judge Meriwether held a Ph.B. and an honorary Ll.D. from Shurtles College, an Ll.B. from Washington University and a J. D. from the University of Chicago. He was a Unitarian and a founder of Acacia Fraternity at the Uni-
versity of Arkansas. He held the OeMolay Legion and Cross of Honor and the
DeMolay Recognition Medal. He was born at Alton, Illinois and was a member of the American Association of University Professors. His survivors include a sister. Mrs.
Katherine Heagler of Springdale. Lonzo A. Ross
1895-1974 Mr. Ross died at his home in Conway on June 27th. He was born January 30, 1895, in Wooster, attended public
Glenn Zimmermann
1914-1974 Mr. Zimmerman passed away July
19th at a Little Rock hospital at the age of sixty years . He was born in Lexa in
Phillips County on May 14, 1914 and lived at Hoxie from 1924 to 1927 and moved to little Rock in 1927. He graduated from North Little Rock High School in 1932 and from Arkansas Polytechnic College at Russellville in 1934. He received his law degree from the Ar-
kansas Law School at Little Rock in 1936. He also attended George Washington University in Washington. Mr. Zimmerman worked in the legal division of the federal Agriculture
Department in Washington in 1936 and 1937, then entered private law practice in North Little Rock in 1938. He was elected North little Rock City attorney in 1940
later for the Federal Public Works Administration and the resettlement Ad-
schools in Faulkner County and was
ministration. She received her law degree from 5t. Louis University In 1925, and later served as an acting master in Chancery Court
graduated from Tyler Commercial College in Tyler, Texas, in 1922. He began teaching school before completing high school and attended special courses at
to hear child custody cases. She prac-
the same time In order to complete his
League of Cities for 25 years of service
ticed law to a limited extent with her late husband under the firm name of West
high school work. He taught in the rural schools in Faulkner County, from 1914 until 1920, when he accepted a position as bookkeeper for Traylor Bros., Mount Vernon . In May, 1923, he accepted a
with the Arkansas League. He had a
and West. Mrs. West was a member of the Federal Bar Association, the Arkansas Bar
Association, and the Pulaski County Bar
and served four two-year terms before retiring in 1948. He also served as direc-
tor of the Municipal League for 32 years and the league presented him a 25-year service award in 1967. He also received
the John Sutz award from the National
hand In most legislation for cities ap-
proved in the legislature in the past 32 years and served as editor of the Munici-
pal League's monthly publication.
Association . She was also a member of
position as deputy collector of internal revenue for the district of Arkansas and
Mr. Zimmerman is survived by his widow. his mother, a son and one grand-
Our Lady of Holy Souls Catholic Church.
held that position until November, 1933,
child.
176/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
,
ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION Arkansas Bar Center 400 West Markham Street 375-4605
Little Rock, Arkansas
72201
COMMITTEE DIRECTORY 1974-75 CONTENTS Map - Delegate Districts .. ... ..... .. .. .
. ... .... . . ....... ... ... ..... . . .... .... t78
Map - State Bar Districts ..... . .. . . . . . .
. .... .. . ...... . . . .. . .... .. . .. .. ..... 178
**** Arkansas Bar Association . ..... .. ...•...•.............•...............•..........•... . .. 179 Officers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •.....•.. .............•..... • .. ..... .. 179 Executive Council ....... . . . ... . ....... .. .. . ......... . ........... .... ... . . ... . . .. . ........ 179
Delegate to ABA . . ..... ..• • •• . . . . . .•....••.... . . . . .•.....•. .. . ... .• ......... .• .. .. .••.... 179 Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . • . . .. . .....•.. . . . •.•.. . . 179 House of Delegates ....................... ······· •··· ··•·· .. .. ....•....•.......... .• ..... 180 Association Presidents Since 1899 .......•........ . •.....•.........•....•..... • .... .• ..... 182 Past Presidents Committee ............. .. ............. . • •• .. . •. . .. • .... . . . ... . . . .. . • .. .. . 182 Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • . . . . • . . . . • .
. . ...... • •.. . . . . ... . . . .. .• ... . . 183
Standing Committees .. . ....... ............. .... .. . ....... .. .. ...... ..... .. .. . .. . .......... 184 Special Committees ........•... . ... . ...................•....•..........• . . . .. •.... ....... 184
* * ** Arkansas Bar Foundation ... . .•... .. . . ...................•.•.. . •....•....•...........•.... 189 . ..•... . ......... 189 Officers and Directors . Committees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •• .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . .. . ....•. .. ........ . ...... 190
**** Local Bar Associations and Officers ................. , .................. . .. . .. . ........ ... 191
October 1974/Arkansas Lawye r/l77
.-
.... " .
101 " •
7
, I '"
- 120
-lt19
..1
- ,~
~1
~ ",,,
( " >(,00( "
...
<. It... ...
-,
-"
.........
( ""I..:Ii'
ARKANSAS
#9 '''''0.00 [ - - 1 ,, '''''It, I
Bar AssociaUon Delegate Districts Distrtct Numbers are shown with number sign. Delegate Numbers are shown
~ .
I
below.
-.
(1.'''''
,
.
• ... '00
"".
" ~
,.L
" , ,
NORTHWESr 1, --JDIST~IC;r " ''''''10
, -I
, "
~
..... )
III ~' ....
I
I
I
lr "
_"~"::I
:
r ,0""" ""
.. ' -00
-
.. _..
'-
, r
,
...
~·II"
( '_0,0
~~
-~
- _ .... ,-
,
L
I
i' -~
.-
,
i_.
./
"Ll
( 00 '"
, _ ... 1
,- -
,
"J
,~
---~
....
,_
l
••• )
~.
178/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
-'
,..
ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION STATE BAR DISTRICTS
,
Executive Council President (734·4060) President· Elect (862·3478) Immediate Past President (782-0361)
James B. Sharp P.O. Box 552 Brinkley, Ar 72021 Robert C. Compton 423 North Washington EI Dorado, Ar 71730 James E. West Merchants National Bank Fort Smith, Ar 72901
James M. Moody 2200 Worthen Bank Buildi ng Little Rock , Ar 72201 Young Lawyers Section R. Keith Arman 623 Cen tral Hot Springs, Ar 71 901 Executive Council Guy Amsler, Jr. Donaghey Bu ilding Little Rock, Ar 72201
Secretary-Treasurer
(375-6483) Chairman, (623·3356) Chairman, (372·6175)
NORTHWESTERN STATE BAR DISTRICT Douglas O . Smith, Jr. 1975 Robert Hays Williams 1976 Thomas F. Butt 1977
Fort Smith Russellville Fayetteville
SOUTHERN STATE BAR DISTRICTHerman Hamilton, Jr. 1975 John A. Davis, III 1976 LeRoy Autrey 1977
Hamburg Pine Blull Texarkana
NORTHEASTERN STATE BAR DISTRICT Julian B. Fogleman 1975 David Solomon 1976 Wayne Boyce 1977
West Memphis Helena Newport
CENTRAL STATE BAR DISTRICTWinslow Drummond 1975 Leonard Scoll 1976 Boyce Love 1977
lillie Rock Lillie Rock Lillie Rock
LIAISON NON·VOTING MEMBERS
Chairman, Legal Education Committee ...... .... ....... , ............... Martin Gilbert P.O. Box 8509 Pine Blull, Ar 71601 (534·5221 ) Chairman, Arkansas Bar Foundation .... .. . . .......... .. .. . ... . ..... John F. Stroud 6 State Line Plaza (773.5651) Texarkana, Ar 75501 Executive Director ... . ... . .... ... ... .... ..... C. E. Ransick 400 West Markham Little Rock, Ar 72201 (375-4605)
Delegate to American Bar Association . .. ..... . .. .. .. .. . ......... . Herschel H. Friday 1100 Boyle Building (376·2011) Little Rock, Ar 72201 Arkansas Judicial Representative" . . "., . .. " .. , .... Judge Warren E. Wood Pualski Cou nty Cou rthouse (374·5686) Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Staff Executive Director Administrative Assistant Membership Secretary Secretary
C. E, Ransick Judith H. Gray Barbara Ghormley Aud ley Byers
October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/179
HIIII PRESIDENT
PRESIDENT-ELECT
SECRETARY-TREASURER
Of 1IIIgatli
James B. Sharp P.O. Box 552 Brinkley, Ar 72021 Robert C. Compton 423 North Washington EI Dorado, Ar 71730 James M. Moody 2200 Worthen Bank Building Litile Rock. Ar 72201
IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT
James E. West Merchants National Bank Fort Smith, Ar 72901 CHAIRMAN , EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Guy Amsler, Jr. Donaghey Building Little Rock , Ar 72201 CHAIRMAN, YOUNG LAWYERS R. Keith Arman SECTION 623 Central Hot Springs, Ar 71901
NON -VOTING MEMBERS Past Presidents
VOTING MEMBERS District No_ 1 Sidney H. McCollum P .O . Box 447 Bentonville, Ark. Term Expires 1977 District No. 2 H. Paul Jackson P.O . Box 89 Berryville, Ark . Term Expires 1975 District No. 3 Fines F. Batchelor, Jr. 411 Main Street Van Buren, Ark . Term Expires 1976 Dlltr lct No. 4 Robert Hays Williams 116 S. Denver Russellville, Ark . Term Expires 1977 District No. 5 Nabors Shaw P.O . Box 27 Mena, Ar Term Expires 1977 District No. 6 Otis H. Turner P.O. Box 174 Arkadelphia, Ark. Term Expi res 1975 District No. 7 Joe D. Woodward P.O. Box 727 Magno lia, Ark . Term Expires 1975 District No. 8 Th omas E. Sparks P.O. Box 547 Fordyce, Ark. Term Expires 1976 laO/ Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
District No. 9 Herman L . Hamilton, Jr. P.O . Box 71 Hamburg . Ark . Term Expires 1977 District No. 10 J. Winston Bryant 726 East Page Malvern, Ar Term Expires 1977 District No. 11 J. W . Green P.O. Box 680 Stu ttgart, Ark . Term Expires 1975 District No. 12 John D. Eldridge P.O. Box 479 Augusta , Ark . Term Expires 1976 District No. 13 David Solomon 215 Cherry SI. Helena, Ark . Term Expires 1977 District No. 14 James l. Shaver, Jr. P.O . Box 592 Wynne, Ark . Term Expires 1977 District No. 15 Julian B. Fog leman Bank of W. Memphis W . Memphis, Ark . Term Expires 1975 District No. 16 Bill E. Ross P.O. Box 486 Blytheville, Ark . Term Expires 1975
District No. 17 Gerald P. Brown P.O. Box 726 ParagOU ld, Ark . Term Expires 1976 Di strict No. 18 Wayne Boyc e 206 Walnut SI. Newport, Ar Term Expires 1977 District No. 19 W. D. Murphy, Jr. Fitzhugh Building Batesville, Ark . Term Expires 1976 District No. 20 Gordon F. Engeler. Jr. 7th & South Mountain Home, Ar Term Expires 1977 District No. 21 Edward Gordon, Jr. P.O. Box 558 Morrilton, Ark . Term Expires 1976 District No. 22 LeRoy Autrey 501 East 6th SI. Texarkana, Ar Term Expires 1976 District No. 22 Nicholas H. Patton P.O. Box 1897 Texarkana, Ar Term Expires 1977 District No. 23 Don M. Schnipper 123 Market SI. Hot Springs, Ark. Term Expires 1976
District No. 23 Donald C. Pu llen 623 Central Ave Hot Springs, Ar Term Expires 1977 District No. 24 James V. Spencer. III 305 N. Washington EI Dorado, Ar Term Expires 1977 District No. 24 Richard H . Mays 211 East Elm Street EI Dorado, Ark. Term Expires 1975 District No. 25 John A. Davis P.O . Box 7808 Pine B luff, Ark. Term Expires 1977 District No. 25 Horace J. Fikes, Jr. 414 National Bldg . Pine B luff, Ark . Term Expi res 1975 District No. 26 David N. Laser P.O. Box 1346 Jonesboro, Ark. Term Expi res 1975 District No. 26 Randall W. Ishmael P.O. B ox 1245 Jonesboro, A rk. Term Expires 1976 District No. 27 Walter R. Nib lock 20 East Mountain Fayetteville, A rk. Term Ex pires 1975
Dlslrlcl No. 27 Truman H. Smith 20 E. Center Fayetteville, Ark . Te rm Expires 1976 Dlalrlcl No. 27 Thomas F. Butt P.O. Box 135 Fayetteville, Ar Term Expi res 1977 Dlslrlcl No. 28 Robert T. Dawson Superior Fed . Bldg. Fort Smith, Ark. Term Expires 1975 Dlslrlcl No, 28 Ro bert L. Jones, Jr. Merchants Natl. Bk . Fori Smith , Ark. Term Expires 1975 Dlslrlcl No. 28 Dou glas O. Smith 214 No. Sixth Fort Smith, Ark. Term Expires 1976 Dlstrici No. 28 G. A lan Wooten P.O. Box 1525 Fort Smith, Ark . Term Expires 1977
Dlslrlcl No. 29 Winslow Drummond 2200 Worthen Bank Little Rock, Ark . Term Expires 1975 Dislrlcl No. 29 Edwa rd Lester 2000 Worthen Bank Little Rock , Ark. Term Expi res 1975 Dllirlci No. 29 Dean R. Morley 2900 Percy Machin North Little Rock. Ark . Term Expires 1975 Dlsirici No. 29 Robert D. Ross 401 -300 Spring Bldg. Little Rock, Ark. Term Expires 1975 Dlslrlcl No. 29 Isaac A . Scott, Jr. 2200 Wort hen Bank Little Rock, Ar 72201 Term Expires 1975
District 29 Alston Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Term Expires 1976 Dlslrlcl No. 29 Charles Carpenter 1405 Main Street North Little Rock , Ark. Term Expires 1976 Dlslrlcl No. 29 Robert Faulkner P.O. Box 1958 Li ttle Rock, Ark . Term Expires 1976 Dlslrlcl No. 29 Vincent Foster, Jr. 720 West Third Little Rock , Ark . Term Expires 1976 Dlslrlcl No. 29 Vi rgin ia Tackett P.O. Box 226 1 Little Rock , Ark . Term Expires 1976
LAW STUDENT SECTION DELEGATES UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS SCHOOL OF LAW
Fayetteville Campus ..... . .... • ........ . . Paul B. Young, Jr. 1211 N. Storer, ApI. 61 Fayetteville, Ar 72701
Little Rock Division ...
Dlsirici No. 29 Neva B. Talley-Morris 722 West Markham Little Rock , Ark. Term Expires 1976 Dlalrlcl No. 29 Don F. Hami lton 1550 Tower Bldg . Little Rock , Ark . Term Expires 1977 Dlsirici No. 29 Allan W. Horne 211 National Investors Little Rock, Ar Term Expires 1977 Dlslrlcl No. 29 Boyce Love 1100 Boyle Bldg . Little Ro ck , Ark. Term Expires 1977 Dlalrlcl No. 29 Dale Price 211 Spring St Little Rock , Ar Term Expires 1977 Dlairici No. 29 Wi lliam R. Wi lson, Jr. 711 W. Third SI. Little Rock , Ar Term Expires 1977
. . . . .. Joe Purvis 1414 Scott Street Little Rock, Ar 72202
Service Directory PARAGON Printing & Stationery Company
BEACH ABSTRACT & GUARANTY COMPANY
has been printing BRIEFS for over 35 years. May we be o f service to you? 375-128 1 311 Ea st Capitol Litt le Rock
REPRESENTING : COMM ERCIAL STANDA RD TITLE INS. CO. ABSTRACTS - ESCROWS - TITLE INSURANCE
FAULKNER COUNTY ABSTRACT CO , Robert M. McHenry, Manager • Abstracts • Copying and Duplicating • Title Insurance Service • Laminating Service Over 60 Years Service 13 Oak SI. • Phone 329-2631 • Conway , Ark.
213 W. 2nd 5t. - L i ttle Rock , Ark. - FR 6 -330 1
MELVIN E. FRY 225 -2914 AN ECONOM1C APPROACH TO TOP QUALITY PARA · LEGAL ASS1STANCE
October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/181
Arkansas Bar Association Presldants .Since Organization * U. M. Rose * Henry C. Caldwell * Sterling R. Cockrill · Thomas B. Martin "'George B . Rose "' James F. Reed * Allen Huges * Joseph M . Straylon "' Joseph W. House * William H. Arnold ·John M . Moore "'N . W. Norton ·W. V. Tompkins * Ashley Cockrill "'James D. Shaver ·Charles T. Coleman • Jacob Trieber *Ira D. Oglesby · Charles C . Reid *Thoma. C . McRae • J . H . Carmichael · William H. Martin oW. F. Coleman *J. F. Loughborough * J. V. Walker * C . E. Daggell · 5. H. Mann "'George B. Pugh * T. J. Gaughan oW . T . Wooldridge . J . Merrick Moore * T. D. Wynne
*T. C. Trimble, Jr. *Harry P. Dailey * G sorge A. McConnell
· Paul Jones * Robert E. Wiley * Calvin T. Cotham
Little Rock , Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Little Rock, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Fort Smith , Ark . Memphis, Tenn . Newport, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Texarkana, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Forrest City, Ark . Prescott, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Texarkana, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Fort Smith , Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Prescott, Ark . Little Roc k , Ark . Hot Springs, Ark . Pine Bluff, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Fayetteville, Ark . Marianna, Ark . Forrest City, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Camden , Ark . Pine Blull, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Fordyce, Ark . Lonoke, Ark . Fort Smith , Ark . Little Rock, Ark . Texarkana, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Hot Springs , Ark.
189919001900-01 1901-02 1902-03 1903-04 1904-05 1905-06 1906-07 1907 -08 1908-09 1909-10 1910-11 1911-12 1912-13 1913-14 1914-15 1915-16 1916-17 1917-18 1918-19 1919-20 1920-21 1921-22 1922-23 1923-24 1924-25 1925-26 1926-27 1927 -28 1928-29 1929-30 1930-31 1931-32 1932-33 1933-34 1934-35 1935-36
* J. F. Gautney * Waller G . Riddick * Abe Collins · Harvey T. Harrison N. J. Ganll , Jr. "'Henry Moore, Jr.
· E. H. Wootton Joe C. Barrell * E. A. Henry Lamar Williamson "'Max B. Reid oW. W. Sharp Archie House "'Cecil R. Warner - John H. Lookadoo Terrell Marshall - A. F. Triplell J. L. Shaver - J. M . Smallwood · Shields Goodwin - Eugene A. Matthews Edward L. Wright John A. Fogleman Willis B. Smith Will S. Mitchell Heartsill Ragon Oscar Fendler Louis L. Ramsay , Jr. Bruce T. Bullion Courtney C. Crouch Maurice Cathey William S. Arnold J. Gaston Williamson Robert L. Jones , Jr. J. C. Deacon Paul B. Young Henry Wood. James E. West
J o nesbo ro , Ark . Little Rock , Ark . OeQueen , Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Pine Bluff, Ark . Texarkana, Ark . Hot Springs, Ark . Jonesboro , Ark . little Rock, Ark . M o nticello , Ark . Blytheville, Ark . Brinkley, Ark . Little Rock, Ark . Fort Smith , Ark . Arkadelphia, Ark . Little Rock, Ark . Pine Bluff, Ark . Wynne , Ark . Russellville, Ark . Little Rock , Ark. Hot Springs , Ark . Little Rock, Ark . West MemphiS , Ar f. . Texarkana, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Fort Smith, Ark . Blytheville, Ark . Pine Bluff, Ark. Little Rock , Ark . Springdale, Ark . Paragould , Ark . Crossett, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Fort Smith , Ark . Jonesboro. Ark . Pine Bluff, Ark . Little Rock , Ark . Fort Smith. Ark .
1936-37 1937-38 1938-39 1939-40 1940-41 1941-42 1942-43 1943-44 1944-45 1945-46 1946-47 1947-48 1948-49 1949-50 1950-51 1951-52 1952-53 1953-54 1954-55 1955-56 1956-57 1957 -58 1958-59 t 959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67 1967-68 1968-69 1969-70 1970-71 1971-72 1972-73 1973-74
"' Deceased
PAST PRESIDENTS COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN : PAUL B. YOUNG N. J. Gantt, Jr. Pine Bluff Joe C. Barrett Jonesboro Lamar Williamson Monticello A . F. House Little Rock Terrell Marshall Little Rock J. L. Shaver Wynne Edward L . Wright Little Rock John A. Fogleman West Memph is Willis B . Smith Texarkana W. S. Mitchell Little Rock Heartsill Ragon Fort Smith 182/ Ark ansas Lawyer/Oc to ber 1974
1940-41 1943-44 1945-46 1948-49 1951-52 1953-54 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 t 960-61 1961-62
Oscar Fendler Louis L. Ramsay , Jr. Bruce T. Bullion Courtney C. Crouch Maurice Cathey William S. Arnold J . Gaston Williamson Robert L. Jones, Jr. J. C. Deacon Paul B. Young Henry Woods James E. West
Blytheville Pine Bluff Little Rock Springdale Paragould Crossett Little Rock Fort Smith Jonesboro Pine Bluff Little Rock Fort Smith
1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67 1967-68 1968-69 1969-70 1970-71 1971-72 1972-73 1973-74
Slctllll Criminal law Section Chairman
Vice-Chairman
Secretary
John Achor 308 Pulaski County Courthouse Little Rock. Ar 72201 E. L. Holloway Woods Building Corning. Ar 72422 Omar Greene 210 State Street Little Rock. Ar 72201
Family law Section Chairman
N. Cloyteen Roberts Box 182 England. Ar 72046
Savings And loan Section Chairman
Phil Loh 108 S. Chestnut Morrilton. Ar 72110
Taxation, Trust &Estate Planning Section Chairman
Vice-Chairman
Secretary-Treasurer
Director-at-Large
Ted Drake Box 6038 Pine Bluff. Ar 71601 Harvey Bell 211 National Investors Life Bldg . Little Rock. Ar 72201 Terry Mathews 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock. Ar 72201 Richard Hatfield Box 36 Searcy. Ar 72143
National Resources law Section Spence Leamons Box 248 Fort Smith. Ar 72901 H. Y. Rowe 200 Jefferson Avenue EI Dorado. Ar 71730 Michael F. Mahony 406 Armstrong Building EI Dorado. Ar 71730
Chairman
Vice-Chairman
Secretary
COUNCILMEN 1975 1975 1976
J. H. Evans William J. Wynne Gerald DeLung
1976 1977 1977
Osro Cobb William Eckert Thomas James
Young lawyers Section Chairman
Chairman-Elect
Immediate Past Chairman
Keith Arman 623 Central Avenue Hot Springs. Ar 71901 Sam Highsmith Box 2496 Batesville. Ar 72501 William R. Wilson 711 West Third Street Little Rock. Ar 72201
law Student Section Fayetteville Campus
Co-Chairman
little Rock Division
Paul B. Young, Jr. 1211 N. Storer. Apt. 61 Fayettevi lle. Ar 72701 Co-Chairman Joe Purvis
1414 Scott Street Little Rock. Ar 72202
October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/183
,
Standing Committees JURISPRUDENCE AN D LAW REFORM COMMITTEE H. David Blair, Chairman 1977 Batesville Judge Thomas F. Butt 1975 Fayetteville H. Murray Claycomb 1975 Warren Austin McCaskill 1975 Little Rock G. D. Walker 1975 Jonesboro Dan Burge 1976 Blytheville Oliver M. Clegg 1976 Magnolia Sidney McCollum 1976 Bentonvi lle William R. Wilson, Jr. Little Rock 1976 LeRoy Autrey 1977 Texarkana Ben Core 1977 Fort Smith Winslow Drummond 1977 Little Rock LEGISLATION COMMITTEE Henry Woods, Chairman William Eckert Bi ll Penix Mike E. Wilson Gary Brewer Richard E. Griffin J. E. Lightle, Jr. W. Rudy Moore, Jr. R. Keith Arman Beryl F. Anthony, Jr. David N. Laser Bradley D. Jesson
1977 1975 1975 1975 1976 1976 1976 1976 1977 1977 1977 1975
1976 1975 1975 1975 1975 1976 1976 1976 1977 1977 1977 1977
Eugene L. Schieffler. Chairman Hayes McClerkin Doug las O. Smith, Jr. A. E. Townsend James J. Bayne Eugene A. Matthews, Jr. Larry Samuel Patterson William F. Sherman Joe C. Boone, Jr. H. Watt Gregory, III Hugh A. Kincaid L. Philip McC lendon
1975 1975 1975 1975 1976 1976 1976 1976 1977 1977 1977 1977
West Helena Texarkan a Fort Smith Little Rock Des Arc
Hot Springs Hope Little Rock Jonesboro Little Rock Fayetteville Crossett
LEGAL AID COMMITTEE Little Rock Magnolia Jonesboro Jacksonville
Little Rock Crossett Searcy Springdale Hot Springs EI Dorado Jonesboro Fort Smith
PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND GRIEVANCES COMMITTEE Edward B. Dillon, Jr., Chairman Ray A. Goodwin S. Hubert Mayes, Jr. Joseph W. Segers Otis H. Turner Lem Bryan Tom Gaughan W. D. Murphy, Jr. Comer Boyett, Jr. William C. Bridgforth James W. Gallman Abner McGehee
UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW COMMITTEE
Little Rock Paragould Little Rock Fayetteville
Arkadelphia Fort Smith Camden Batesville Searcy Pine Bluff Fayetteville Little Rock
Oscar Fendler, Chairman Robert B. Gibson David Armstrong Hodges Jerry T. Light Walter A. Niblock Gary P. Barket Harry A. Foltz Carman V. Lavender Claude E. Lynch, Jr. Bart G. Mullis Robinson Socrates Nunn Tilden P. Wright. III
1976 1975 1975 1975 1975 1976 1976 1976 1977 1977 1977 1977
.
Blytheville Dermott Newport Little Rock Fayetteville Little Rock Fort Smith Alanta, GA Osceola Pine Bluff Little Rock Fayetteville
路t路 LEGAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Martin G. Gilbert, Chairman Wayne Boyce Owen Cui Pearce Richard A. Williams Knox Baird Kinney A. D. McAllister James H. McKenzie Herbert C. Rule, III William K. Ball Glenn W. Jones, Jr. Elton A. Rieves, III Don Martin Schnipper
1975 1975 1975 1975 1976 1976 1976 1976 1977 1977 1977 1977
Pine Bluff Newport Fort Smith Little Rock Forrest City Fayetteville Prescott Little Rock Monticello Little Rock West Memphis Hot Springs
SpeCial Committees ANNUAL MEETING COMMITTEE Herschel H. Friday, Co-Chairman Louis L. Ramsay . Jr., Co-Chairman J. C. Deacon William R. Wilson , Jr. Edward Lester
Little Rock Pine Bluff Jonesboro Little Rock Little Rock
AUDITING COMMITTEE John L. Johnson, Chairman
Little Rock
184/ Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
Ohmer C. Burnside. Jr. Ken F. Calhoon Frank H. Cox Byron M. Eiseman, Jr. Paul W. Hoover, Jr. Marvin L. Kieffer Richard J. Orintas Ex Officio: E. L. Cu llum, Jr.
Lake Village Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Jonesboro Little Rock Little Rock
AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMMITIEE Bruce T . Bullion, Chairman Little Rock Charles A. Brown Little Rock William A. Eldredge, Jr. Little Rock Robert L. Jones, III Fort Smith John Fred Livingston, Jr. Batesville William L. Peek, Jr. Texarkana Dale Price Little Rock Edward I. Staten Pine Bluff Sid C. Dabbs Little Rock William Clay Brazil Conway AWARD OF MERIT COMMITIEE H. William Allen, Chairman
lillie Rock
CIVIL PROCEDURES COMMITIEE Paragould Gerald Brown, Chairman Newport Wayne Boyce, Co-Chairman Newport Judge Andrew G. Ponder Fayetteville Judge Thomas F. Bull Little Rock John P. Gill Forrest City Philip Hicky Pine Bluff Stephen A. Mallhews Texarkana Judge Alex G. Sanderson, Jr. Little Rock William H. Sullon Batesville H. David Blair Bentonville Judge William H. Enfield Benton O. Wendell Hall, Jr. Mountain Home Frank J . Huckaba, Jr. EI Dorado Denn is L. Shackleford CLAIMS REVIEW COMMITIEE Cooper Jacow ay , Chairman Joseph L. Buffalo, Jr. Billy S. Clark Harry E. McDemnott, Jr. Richard S. Muse James A. Pale Odell Pollard Ben E. Rice
Little Rock lillie Rock Little Rock Little Rock HOI Springs lillie Rock Searcy Jacksonville
COMPUTER USE BY LAWYERS COMMITIEE Ronald A. May, Chairman lillie Rock Charles A. Beasley, Jr. Fort Smith Herschel W. Cleveland Osceola James N. Dowell, Jr. Little Rock Paul L. Giuffre Fort Smith William Arthur Hough North lillie Rock Hermann Invester Little Rock Bill F. Jennings Magnolia George O. Jernigan, Jr. Little Rock John G. Lile, III Pine Bluff Osceol a Mitchell D. Moore Claibourne W. Patty, Jr. Little Rock Raymond R. Roberts lillie Rock .Burl C. Rotenberry Fort Smith CONSTITUTION AN D BY-LAWS COMMITIEE Winslow Drummond, Chairman Little Rock Judge Thomas F. Bull Fayetteville Philip E. Dixon Little Rock Ju lian B. Fogleman West Memphis EI Dorado Richard H. Mays Brinkley James B. Sharp Henry Woods lillie ROC k CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM COMMITIEE Fayettevi lie Judge Thomas F. BUll. Chairman Little Rock Charles A. Brown Pine Bluff R. A. Eilboll, Jr.
James T. Gooch James R. Hale Judge C. R. Hu ie Judge Richard B. McCulloch Justice Ed F. McFadden Judge Murray O. Reed Patsy A. Robinson Charles B. Roscopf J. L. Shaver, Jr. Thomas E. Sparks William P. Thom pson Charles A. Walls, Jr. Col. John N. Warnock Lou is I. Watts
CONSUMER LAW COMMITIEE Thomas A. Daily, Chairman Honorable James Guy Tucke r. Co-Chairman Harold S. Bemis S. Wooten Epes, Jr. Gary S. Jefferson R. David Lewis H. Clay Moore Richard S. Smith, Jr. Donald J. West Robert C. Vittitow Nicholas H. Patton Lonnie A. Powers Clarence Cash Harry A. Foltz
Arkadelphia Fayettevi lle Little Rock Forrest C ity Little Rock Little Rock Lewisville Helena Wynne Fordyce Fort Smith Lonoke Camden Little Rock
Fort Smith Little Rock Bentonville Helena Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Jonesboro Little Rock Warren
Texarkana Little Rock Little Rock Fort Smith
CREDITORS' RIGH TS COMMITIEE Fort Smith Charles R. Ledbetter, Chairman Little Rock Charles Wayne Baker Robert B. Branch, Sr. Paragould Little Rock James E. Darr, J r. Little Rock Tom F. Lovett Fort Smith Larry R. McCord Little Rock William L. Owen Fayetteville C. Thomas Pearson Little Rock Richard M. Pence, Jr. Little Rock Griffin Smith, Jr. Parag ould Robert F. Thompson James R. Van Dover Marianna Zachary D. Wilson North Little Rock
DEFENSE OF CRIMINAL INDIG ENTS COMMITIEE Don Langston, Chairman Fort Smith John W. Achor Little Rock Judge Edwi n Boyd Alderson, Jr. EI Doraoo Wilbur C. Bentley Little Rock HOI Springs Judge Henry M. Britt Thomas L Cashion Eudora Wilbur H. Dillahunty Little Rock C. Wayne Harris Fort Smith 'Lloyd R. Haynes Little Rock David Armstrong Hodges Newport Dan Kennett Brinkley J. W. Looney Mena Judge Dean R. Morley North Little Rock Col. James W. Murphy Little Rock Cecil B. Nance, Jr. WeJt Memphis Judge Everett Proctor Wynne Arthur Eugene Raff, Jr. Helena Vincent E. Skillman, Jr. West Memphis James L. Sloan Little Rock Julian D. Streett Camden October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/185
DESK BOOK COMMITTEE 路 Wayne Boyce , Chairman Gerald B:own, Vice Chairman P.ichard C. Butler, Jr. 8ert N. Darrow G. Byron Dobbs Ted N. Drake Vincent W . Foster, Jr. L Cooy Hayes Cyril E. Hollingsworth, Jr. Jvdge Richard Mobley Sa:n Hugh Park George E. Pike, Jr. Gordon 'S. Rather, Jr. Robert L. Robinson , Jr. James A. Ross , Jr.
Newport Paragould Little Rock Litlle Rock Fort Smith Pine Bluft Little Rock Fort Sm ith
Little Ro o" Russellville Van Buren Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Monticello
ECONOMICS OF LAW PRACTICE COMMITTEE Robert B. Branch, Sr., Chairman Paragould Helena J. Douglas Anderson Fines F. Batchelor, Jr. Van Buren Harry F. Barnes Camden Ronald L.' Burton Conway W. Dane Clay Little Rock William H. Craig Little Rock Peter G. Estes Fayetteville ';oim I". Fincher North Little Rock Thomas D. Ledbetter Harrison Tom F. Lovett Little Rock Philip K. Lyon Little Rock Mitchell D. Moore Osceola R. Gary Nutter Texarkana Walter R. Niblock Fayetteville Owen Cui PearCe Fort Smith Fred Embry Pickett Ashdown John M. Pittman West Helena Marion J. Starling , Jr. Pine Blut! Hem)' VlJi lkinson Forrest City Richard A. Williams Little Rock Ralph E. Wi lson Osceola Rich ~ rd H. Wootton Hot Springs ENVIRONMENTAL LAW COMMiTTEE Littl e Rock John T. Williams, Chairman Harri ~or. Donald Jce Adams EI Dorado jam'as E. Baine Little Rock James A. Buttry Little Rock Robert M. Cearley, Jr. Hot Springs Elbert Cook Fort Smith Gera! j L. D-r.I..ung Little Rock C liff Jack~on Little Rock .John H Jacobs Little Rock Thomas D. Keys Jonesboro Stanley R. Lang ley Little Rock J5mes M . McHaney Littl e Roc~ VVilliam Leon Patton , Jr. Pine Sluff Joseph A. Strode Crossett Pa'JI Sullins Danvil le John Tatum Norman, OK Dr. Robert R. Wright '.1'
,~.
FEDERAL LEGISLATION AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE E. Charle. Eichenbaum , Chairman Little Rock Fort Smith Johnl S. Dai Iy Hartman ' Hall Fayetteville John Mack Smith West Memphis Little Rock Thomas S. Stone George D. El lis Little Rock Jobn G, Lile, III Pine Bluff Eugene R. Warren little Rock
186/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
Honorary M拢mbers: Senator John L. McClellan Congressman William V. Alexander, Jr. Congressman Wilbur O. Mills Congressman Ray Thornton
ANANCIAL SOURCES COMM ITTEE David Armstrong Hodges. Chairman
Newport little Rock Fayetteville Heber Springs Springdale Little Rock Little Rock Fort Smith Little Rock Little Rock
William H . Bowen
Dean Wylie H. Davis Stephen Choate Courtney C. Crouch Robert Shults Ralph M. Sloan, Jr. C. R. Warner, Jr. James H. Wilkins, Jr. Edward L. Wright, Sr.
GOVERNMENT AND COPORATE AHORNEYS COMMITTEE L. Philip McClendon, Chairman Crossett Charles A. Beasley. Jr. Fort Smith Robert L. 8rown Little Rock Jack Browne Little Rock D. Derrell Davis Little Rock Robert P. Dougherty Fort Smith John Gwatney Little Rock William L. Hopper EI Dorado Donald K. King Little Rock Little Rock James W. Lance Fort Smith Spence A. Leam ons Dewey Moore. Jr. Little Rock Tom Overbey Little Rock GROUP INSURANCE
PLANS , ~P MMITTEE
Eugene J. Mazzanti, Chairman
R. Eugene Bailey Eldon F. Coffman George P. Collier, Jr. Donald Prevallet Benjamin C . McMinn Thomas S. Stone John C. Ward Harlan A. We"er . Charles R. White William Woodyard
Little Rock
Little Rock Fort Smith Memphis Blytheville Uttle Rock Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Hot Springs Little Rock
INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMI TI'EE Joe C. Barrett, Chairman E. Charles Ei chenbaum
Robert B. Leslie Arthur Macom
W. R. Riddell Ralph M. Sloan
Jonesboro Little Rock Little Rock Stuttgart Clarksville li ttle Rock
INTERNSHIP COMMITTEE Professor David R. Hendricks, Jr., Chairman
Rooert D. Cabe J. Steven Clark, Co-Chairman Sidney P. Davis Ray A. Goodwin James L. Hall, Jr. Don F. Hamilton Albert R.. Hanna David .P. Henry Hugh R. Kincaid John Lisle Boyce R. Love A. D. McAllister, Jr. James W. Moore Ben L. Paddock Howard L. Slinkard Ned A. Stewart, Jr.
Little Rock Little Rock Fayetteville
Fayetteville Paragould Pine Bluff Little Rock EI Dorado Little Rock Fayetteville Springdale Little Rock Fayettevi lie Little Rock Fort Smith Rogers Texarkana
JUDICIAL COUNCIL LIAISON COMMITTEE Phillip Carroll. Chairman Little Rock John W. Mann. Co-Chairman Forrest Glty H. William Allen Little Rock M. Steele Hays Little Rock Douglas O. Smith, Jr. Fort Smith JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS COMM ITTEE Hope Albert Graves, Chairman lillie Rock William S .. Mitchell Newport Fred M. Pickens, Jr. Monticello James A . Ross, Sr. Fort Smith Douglas O. Smith, Jr. Ex-Officio Members : James B. Sharp, President Robert C. Compton, President-Elect Guy Amsler, Jr., Chairman Executive Council
Brinkley EI Dorado Little Rock
LABOR LAW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE Little Rock Bill S. Clark, Chairman Fort Smith Edward E. Bedwell Silas H. Brewer, Jr. lillie Rock Robert D. Cabe lillie Rock William E. Funk, Jr. Little Rock Jerry D. Jackson Little Rock Theodore L. Lamb Little Rock James W . Moore Little Rock J. Michael Shaw Fort Smith Jeff Starling, Jr. Pine Bluff LAW SCHOOL COMMITTEE
J . Gaston Williamson, Chairman William S. Arnold Maurice Cathey J. C. Deacon Robert L. Jones, Jr. James E. West Henry Woods Paul B. Young
Little Rock Crossett Paragould Jonesboro Fort Smith Fort Smith Litlle Rock Pine Bluff
LAW STUDENT LIAISON COMMITTEE A. D. McAllister, Jr., Co-Chairman Fayetteville Hermann Ivester, Co-Chairman Little Rock Raymond Abramson, Law Student Fayelleville J. Steven Clark Fayetteville William H. Craig Little Rock Larry Crane Fayetteville Don N. Curdie Little Rock W. Rudy Moore, Jr. Springdale James H. Rice, Jr. Lillie Rock Paul Riviere, Law Student Litlle Rock William A. Storey Fayettevi lle Steven A. White, Law Student Little Rock LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE COMMITTEE Robert L. Jones, Jr., Chairman Fort Smith Elizabeth Brooks Little Rock Bob Dawson North Little Rock Little Rock Jerry W. Faubus Hot Springs Louis J. Longinotti, III Little Rock Eugene J . Mazzanti B. Jeffrey Pence, Jr. Little Rock lillie Rock Louis W. Rosteck LONG RANGE PLANNING COMMITTEE Winslow Drummond, Chairman Little Rock Richard S. Arnold Texarkana William S. Arnold Crossett Wayne Boyce Newport Phillip Carroll Little Rock
Robert C. Compton Ben Core De3n Wylie H. Davis J. C . Deacon Justice Jo~, n Fog leman Alian W. Horne Stephen A. Mallhews David Solomon Henry Woods
El iJorado Fort Smith Fayetteville Jonesboro L!lIle Rock Little ROCk Pine Bluff Helena Little Rock
MARITIME LAW COMMITTEE Gordon S. Rather, Jr., Chairman Kenneth B. Bairn Edward E. Bedwell Edward W. Brockman . Jr. Bert N. Darrow C. Wayne Dowd Ray F. Galloway E. C. Gilbreath Bill R. Holloway D. Mike Huckabay Guy H. Jones, Jr. J. Fred Livingston, Jr. James W. Moore William L. Owen Donald S. Ryan W. R. Riddell Professor James William Spears James W. Steinsick Denver L Thornton W. Lee Tucker Charles A. Walls, Jr. Russell J. Woo ls
"Little Rock
MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE W. D. Murphy, Jr., Chairman William R. Wilson, Jr.. Co-Chairman All members of House of Delegates
Pine Bluff Fort Smith Pine Bluff little Rock Texarkana Helena Fort Sm ith Lake Village Little Rock Conway Batesville Uttle Rock lillie Rock Little Rock Clarksville lillie Rbck BlytheVille EI Dorado Benton Lono~e
Little' Rock
, Batesville lillie Rock
MEMORIALS COMMITTEE Judge Gordon F. Engeler, Jr., Chairman MOLintain Horne Judge Warren O. Kimbrough Fort Smith Edwin R. Bethune. Jr. Searcy Judge Charles W. Light Paragould Judge Melvin E. Mayfield _EI Dorado Judge Terry L. Shell Jonesboro Judge Van B. Taylor Dardanelle Franklin Wilder Fort Smith Judge Ernie E. Wright Harrison PARALEGAL COMMITTEE Richo ..d A. W il liams, Chairman Finis F. Batchelor, Jr. Philip Lyon Mitcheil D. Moore Robert l. Jones, Jr. Jerry Lee Canfield
Little "Ron k Van Buren little Rock lillie Roc!< Fort Smith Fort Smith
PRE-LAW ADVISORS COMMITTEE Judge Darrell Hic :<: :'nan, Ch:::imlar. lillie Rock LeRoy Autrey Texarkana J . W inston Bryant Mai'.. ern J. Steven Clark Fayettevil!e iJon Curdie Little Rock Jay W. Dickey, Jr. , !Pine Bluff Jerry Glover, Law Student Little Rlli:k William D. Haught .', Littie Rock Samuel C. Highsmith Batesville Marvin Holf':13i1 Clarksville Charles R. Ledbetter Fort . Sf:1;th Thomas Ark Monroe Little Rock October 1974/ A,kansa. Lawycr/1S7
Larm ar Pettis Stephen Reasoner James A. Ross, Jr. John Simmons Richard L. Slagle J. Frank Snellgrove, Jr. Neva B. Talley-Morris Allyn C. Tatum Judge Otis H. Turner Frederi ck S. Ursery Robert Hays Williams Judge Paul Wolle Joe W. Woodward James K. Young
Fayettevi lie Jonesboro Monticello Arkadelphia Hot Springs Jonesboro Little Rock Batesville Arkadelphia Little Rock Russellville Fort Smith Magnolia Russellville
PREPAID LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE Richard F. Hatfield, Chairman Searcy Van H. AI bertson Huntsville Silas H. Brewer, Jr. Little Rock Robert M. McHenry, Jr. Little Rock H. W. McMillan Arkadelphia Burl C. Rotenberry Fort Smith Jack Young Little Rock Hunterville Jim H. Boyd Truman E. Yancy Fayetteville PROBATE LAW COMMITTEE John D. Eldridge, Chairman Augusta Judge Alex G. Sanderson, Jr. Texarkana Richard C. Butler, Jr. Little Rock Judge Thomas F. Butt Fayetteville Oliver M. Clegg Magnolia E. l. Cullum Little Rock Thomas A. Daily Fort Smith Mary E. Edmiston North Little Rock Byron M . Eiseman, Jr. Little Rock Julian B. Fogleman West Memphis Pine Bluff F. Dan Harrelson William D. Haught Little Rock A. Leon Helms, Jr. Little Rock Fayetteville Richard Hipp Judge Warren O. Kimbrough Fort Smith Will iam T. Kell y Little Rock Ben C. McM inn Little Rock Clarksville John Patterson Augusta George Proctor Little Rock James H. Rice, Jr. Hope Judge Royce Weisenberger Pine Bluff John L. Rush West Memphis Ralph W. Solan Wynne J. l. Shaver (Bex) Jonesboro James W. Stallcup Fordyce L. Weem s Trussell Little Rock Edward l. Wright, Jr. Little Rock John W. Raines Little Rock Charles C. Owen Lewis H. Mathis Forrest City E. J. Butler PROFE SSIONAL UTILIZATION COMMITTEE William S. Arnold, Chairman Crossett Fletcher Long , Jr. Forrest City EI Dorado Emon A. Mahony Dean Glenn E. Pasvogel Little Rock Jerry D. Pruitt Fort Sm ith James D. Storey Little Rock G. David Walker Jonesboro PUBLIC INFORMATION C O M I\IiITTE~ Paragould Donis B. Ham ilton, Chairman Little Rock Paul B. Benham , III
188/Arkw ,sas Lawyer/October 1974
James A. Buttry John R. Buzbee Jon R. Coleman Bob Dawson Robert T. Dawson Vincent W . Foster, Jr. Jerry Glover, Law Student Omar F. Greene Arlene N. Heath Sam C. Highsmith Jerry W. Looney l. Phili p McClendon James A. McLarty, III Charles E. Plunkett Alvin Schay, Law Student William P. Thompson Larry C. Wallace
Little Rock Little Rock Jonesboro North Little Rock Fort Smith Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Batesville Mena Crossett Newport Camden Little Rock Fort Smith North Little Rock
REAL ESTATE LAW COMMITTEE E. Harley Cox, Jr., Co-Chairman Pine Bluff Marvin D. Thaxton, Co-Chairman Newport J. Drew Avance Little Rock William L. Blair Little Rock William B. Brady Little Rock Robert J. Brown Little Rock Ronald l. Burton Conway Howard G. Cain, Jr. Huntsville Jerry W. Looney Mena Charles D. Matthews Little Rock James H. McKenzie Prescott Max C. Mehlburger Little Rock Sloan Rainwater, Jr. Walnut Ridge Carrold E. Ray Marianna Middleton P. Ray, Jr. Little Rock Herbert C. Rule Little Rock Jay E. Sanders Hot Springs Benny E. Swindell Clarksville William L. Terry Little Rock J. Gayle Windsor, Jr. Little Rock Judge Ernie E. Wright Harrison Elizabeth G. Young Little Rock Nell Powell Wright Mountain Home RETIREMENT PLAN COMMITTEE George N. Plastiras, Chairman Little Rock Robert Branch Paragould Larry W. Burks Little Rock Horace Fikes Jr. Pine Bluff Robert H. Holmes Pine Bluff Clint Huey Warren William T. Kelly Little Rock A. Wyck Nisbet, Jr. Little Rock James A. Pate Little Rock James H. Rice, Jr. Little Rock John L. Rush Pine Bluff Hot Springs Jay E. Sanders SPECtAL COMMITTEE ON CORRECTIONS John T. Lavey, Chairman Little Rock Roy Thomas Beard, III Pine Bluff Odell C. Carter Star City Thomas L. Cashion Eudora Marion S. Gill Dumas Jack Holt, Jr. Little Rock John Lineberger Fayetteville R. W. Laster Little Rock Richard l. Mays Little Rock Judge Robert G. Serio Clarendon Fayetteville Lynn F. Wade Lee Ward Piggott
STANDARDS FOR ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMITTEE Little Rock Jack Holt, Jr., Chairm an Little Rock John W. Achor Little Rock H. William Allen Little Rock Arthur J. Anderson, Jr. EI Dorado Beryl Anthony, Jr. Little Rock Wilbur C. Bentley Searcy Edwin R. Bethune, Jr. Rogers Hardy Croxton Augusta Judge James F. Daugherty Marl<ed Tree Michael Everett West Memphis Judge lindsey J. Fairley Little Rock Robert W. Faulkner little Rock Justice John A. Fog leman Helena Ray F. Galloway Morrilton E. Allen Gordon Little Rock John H. Haley Little Rock J. W. Hall Little Rock Judge M . Steele Hays Newport Kaneaster Hodges, Jr. little Rock CliH Jackson Fort Smith Charles Karr Piggott Comrade W. Knauts Claude E. Lynch, Jr. Osceola Hot Springs Eugene A. Matthews, Jr. Searcy James L. Morgan Little Rock Frank J. Newell North Little Rock Robert L. Pierce Little Rock Dale Price Little Rock James R. Rhodes, III Poncahontas Judge Harrell A. Simpson Nashville Judge Bobby Steel Little Rock Han. James Guy Tucker Fordyce Frank Wynne Jonesboro Wilson F. Webster William R. Wilson, Jr. Little Rock STATE AND FEDERAL SECURITIES COMMITTEE little Rock Walter W. Davidson, Chairman James M. Bryant. II Little Rock Joseph L. Buflalo, Jr. Little Rock Larry W. Burks little Rock Charles J . Giroir, Jr. little Rock
Don T . Jack, Jr. Ernest G . Lawrence, Jr. Emon A. Mahony William L. Patton, Jr. William F. Sherman James H. Wilkins, Jr. William G. Wright
Little Rock Bentonville EI Dorado Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Fort Smith
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Ralph M . Sloan, Chairman Bru ce T. Bullion Charles J. Lincoln Terry L. Mathews Don A. Smith William H. Sutton Louis Tarlowski Joe D. Woodward Rodney C. Wade UNIFORM LAWS COMMITTEE J . C. Deacon, Chairman William S. Arno ld Joe C . Barrett Phillip Carroll Courtney C. Crouch William Marcus Halbrook Robert A. Lellar
Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Little Rock Fort Sm ith Little Rock Little Rock Magnolia Crossett
Jonesboro Crossett Jonesboro Little Rock Springdale Little Rock Fayettevi lle WORKMENS COMPENSATION COMMITTEE Eldon F. CoHman, Chairman Fort Smith Robert D. Cabe Little Rock Troy R. Douglas Fort Smith Robert A. Drew Walnut Ridge Robert Edge Branch T . Fields Little Rock Robert L. Jones, III Fort Smi th Theodore Lamb Little Rock Boyce R. Love Little Rock James H. Larrison Little Rock George E. Lusk, Jr. Little Rock Phillip H. McMath Little Rock Robert R. Marquardt Laurel Springs, N.J . Ronald C. Mills Little Rock Bill Penix Jonesboro Richard A. Reid Blytheville Bill H. Walmsley Batesville
Arkansas Bar Foundation OFFICERS Chairman
Secretary
John F, Stroud, Jr, Ste. 6 State Line Plaza Texarkana, Ar 75501 John p , Gill 400 Gaines Place Little Rock , Ar 72201
Walter R. Niblock P.O. Box 818 Fayetteville, Ar 72701 John A, Davis, III P.O . Box 7808 Pine Blul!, Ar 71601
Vice ~ Chairman
Treasurer
DIRECTORS Robert C. Compton David N. Laser Douglas O. Smith, Jr. Walter R. Niblock J. L. Shaver, Jr. Edward Lester William H. Sutton
1975 1975 1975 1975 1975 1975 1975 Ex-Ollicio
EI Dorado Jonesboro Fort Smith Hot Springs Wynne Little Rock Little Rock
John F. John P. John A. Richard Don M . Charles Thomas
Stroud, Jr. Gi ll Davis, III S. Arno ld Schnipper Roscopl Sparks
1976 1976 1976 1976 1976 1976 1976
Texarkana Little Rock Pine BluH Texarkana Hot Springs Helena Fordyce
James S, Sharp President Arkansas Bar Association October 1974/ Arkansas Lawyer/18g
Irkansas aar Foundation COlllllttaa. AWARDS COMMITTEE EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS Chairman . .. John F. Stroud, Jr. Arkansas Bar Foundation .... President Arkansas Bar Association .. . .James B. Sharp Chairman State Judicial Council .... .... . .. ... .Judge Warren Wood Chairman Association's Executive Council .. . . ..... Guy Amsler, Jr. Chairman Young Lawyers Section .... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R. Keith Arman
Mena little Rock
W . Dent Gitchel
Little Rock
Vincent W. Foster, Jr. Charles E. Plunkett James V. Spencer, III Allen W. Bird, II Bob Dawson
little Rock Camden EI Dorado little Rock North Little Rock
TRUST COMMITTEE
Henry Woods Herschel H. Friday, Jr. Justice John A. Fogleman Philip S. Anderson Edward Lester Dr. Robert A. Lellar Bradley D. Jesson Louis L. Ramsay, Jr. Charles B. Roscopf J. C. Deacon
Texarkana little Rock little Rock little Rock little Rock little Rock Little Rock Fayetteville Fort Smith Pine Bluff Helena Jonesboro
Ex-officio Dean Wylie H. Davis
Fayetteville
Richard S. Arnold, Chairman
J . Gaston Williamson
FINANCE COMMITTEE John L. Johnson, Chairman Walter R. Niblock John P. Gill John A. Davis, III
Jerry W. Looney James R. Rhodes, III
little Rock Fayettevi lie little Rock Pine Bluff
PUBLIC EDUCATION COMMITTEE Donis B. Hamilton, Chairman Paragould Donald C. Pullen Hot Springs James A. Buttry little Rock John R. Buzbee little Rock Paul B. Benham, III little Rock Jonesboro Jon R. Coleman
Scholarships and MIlDorlals C01D1D1tt11
-~---'
AREAS John A. Davis, Chairman Judge Otis H. Turner
John T. Purtle W. Lee Tucker Sidney H. McCollum
Richard A. Reid Searcy W. Harrell, Jr. George F. Hartje, Jr, Lewis E. Epley, Jr.
Robert C. Compton
Walter R. Niblock
A. D. McAllister, Jr. Thomas E. Sparks
John W. Mann Douglas O. Smith, Jr. 190/Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
Pine Bluff Arkadelphia Prescolt Amity Batesville Benton Bryant Bentonville Siloam Springs Gentry Blytheville Camden Conway Eureka Springs Berryville Huntsville EI Dorado Smackover Junction City Strong Fayetteville Prairie Grove West Fork Do Fordyce Hamburg Hampton Warren Forrest City Brinkley Fort Smith Booneville
AREAS
Garvin Fitton Stephen Choate Charles B. Roscopf
Lavace Ozark Clarksville Paris Harrison Heber Springs Tumbling Shoals Helena West Helena
Lexa James H. Pilkinton Don M. Schnipper Randall W. Ishmael
John Frank Gibson, Jr.
John P. Gill, Chairman
Dale Price William R. Wilson , Jr. Boyce Love Guy Amsler, Jr. J. R. Rhodes, III W. W. McCrary, Jr.
Oliver M. Clegg
Marianna Hope Hot Springs Mount Ida Jonesboro Harrisburg Marked Tree Dermott Lake Vil lage McGehee Little Rock Mabelvale Sweet Home Do Do Do Do Do Lonoke Hazen Devalls Bluff Magnolia
f,
AREAS
AREAS Malvern Sheridan Mena Waldron Mountain Home Cotter Horseshoe Bend Salem North Little Rock Jacksonville Cabot Sherwood Nashville Murfreesboro Glenwood Newport Osceola Paragould Walnut Ridge Pine Bluff Dumas England Rison
J . Winston Bryant Nabors Shaw Roy E. Oanuser
Dean R. Morley
Edwin J. Alford
Wayne Boyc e Mitchell D. Moore Robert Branch
William C . Bridgforth
Horace J. Fikes, Jr. Annis l. Berry
Do Pocahontas Corning Rector Rogers Russellville Dardanelle Searcy Augusta McCroy Bald Knob Springdale
Eugene Kelley Ike Allen Laws, Jr. Comer Boyett, Jr.
James
8.
Blair
Stuttgart DeWitt Clarendon Texarkana Ashdown Lewisville Stamps Van Buren West Memphis Walnut Ridge
William M . Moorhead
LeRoy Autrey
Fines F. Batchelor, Jr. Julian B. Fogleman G. Leroy Blankenship
local Bar Associations ARKANSAS ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN LAWYERS Frances Holtzendorff President Dorothy Yancy Howard Vice-President Mary Edmiston Treasurer Alma Lowrey Recording Sec. Mary Measler Corresponding Sec. ARKANSAS COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Claude W. Jenkins Vice-President F. Russell Rogers SeC.-Treasurer Virgil Moncrief BAXTER-MARION COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Gordon F. Engeler, Jr. President James C. Johnson Vice·President Drew Luttrell Sec.·Treasurer BENTON COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Donald Kendall President Sidney McCollum Vice·President John Elrod Sec.·Treasurer BLYTHEVILLE BAR ASSOCIATION Donald E. Prevallett President Bill E. Ross Vice·President John B. Mayes Sec.·Treasurer BOONE·NEWTON BAR ASSOCIATI ON President Buford Gardner Vice·President Kenneth R. Reeves J . Scott Covington Sec.·Treasurer BRADLEY COUNTY BAR ASSOAICTION Robert C. Vittitow President Robert E. Garner Vice·President Robert E. Garner SeC.-Treasurer CARRO LL-MADISON COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Lewis E. Epley, Jr. President H. Paul Jackson SeC.-Treasurer CHICOT COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Sec.·Treasurer
Carneal Warfield W. K. Grubbs, Sr.
CLARK COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President B. W . Sanders Sec.-Treasurer Janice O. Williams CLEB URNE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Leon Reed President Hoyt Thomas Vice-President Mike Erwin Sec.·Treasurer COLUMBIA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Richard Choate President Byron Thomason Vice-President Mike Kinard Sec.·Treasurer CONWAY COUN TY BAR ASSOCIATION President Edmund Massey SeC.-Treasurer Charles H. Eddy CRAIGHEAD COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Randall Ishmael Vice-President Joe C. Boone Sec .·Treasurer Jon R. Coleman CRITTENDEN COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Steve Woods President Dana Davis Vice·President Kent Rubens Sec.·Treasurer CRAWFORD COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Paul Gant Judge David Partain Vice·President Frank Booth Sec.·Treasurer CROSS COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Everett Proctor Sec.·Treasurer J. l. Saver, Jr. EIGHTH CHANC ERY BAR ASSOCIATI ON President Wayne Boyce Vice·President SeC.-Treasurer FAULKNER COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President George F. Hartje, Jr, Vice·President Andre E. McNeil Sec.-Treasurer William Clay Brazil October 1974/Arkansas Lawyer/191
GARLAND COUN TY BAR ASSOCIATION President Eugene Matthews. Jr. Vice-President Sam Anderson Sec.-Treasurer Don Pullen GRANT COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President John W. Cole Vice-President Larry Allen Sec.-Treasurer Haro ld King GREENE-CLAY COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Joe Calvin Vice-President Allred Holland Sec.-Treasurer George Thiel HOT SPRING COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Presidenl Joe W. McCoy Sec.-Treasurer Bob Frazier INDEPENDENCE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President C. T. Bennett Vice-President David Blair Bern ,ce M cS padden Sec.-Treasurer JACKSON COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Gerald Carlyle Vice-President Robert B. Lamb Sec.-Treasurer Max O. Bowie JEFFERSON COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President George Howard Vice-President Eugene Harris John Rush Sec.-Treasurer LAWRENCE-RANDOLPH COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Harry L. Ponder Vice-President Harrell Simpson, Jr. Sec.-Treasurer Tom L. Hilburn LEE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President W. H Daggett Vice-President Carrold E. Ray Sec.-Treasurer Dan H. Felton. III NORTH PULASKI COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President William B. Blevins William A. Lallerty Vice-President Secretary Byron Southern Treasurer Robert Batton NORTHEAST ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION President Bob Branch Vice-President J. L. Shaver. Jr. Sec.-Treasurer Rice Lee VanAusdall OSCEOLA BAR ASSOCIATION President Ralph E. Wilson Vice-President Mitchell D. Moore Sec.-Treasurer C. David Burnett OUACHITA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President John E. Gaughan. III Vice-President Julian Streett Sec.-Treasurer Gene Bramblett PHILLIPS COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Doug Anderson Vice-President John M. Pittman Sec.-Treasurer Betty Anderson
PIKE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Lindell Hile Vice-President Jimmy L. Featherston Sec.-Treasurer Philip M . Clay POINSETT COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President John Henry Vice-President Burk Dabney Sec.-Treasurer Mike Everett POLK COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President James Stoker Vice-President Jerry W. Looney Sec.-Treasurer David Maddox POPE- YELL COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Dale Finley Vice-President Ri chard E. Gardner, Jr. Sec.-Treasurer Mrs. Ruth Teal PULASKI COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Dean R. Morley Vice-President John P. Gill Sec.-Treasurer John M. Bilheimer ST. FRANCIS COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President N. M. Norton Vice-President John W. Mann Sec.-Treasurer Louis Jones. Jr. SALINE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Dan Harmon Vice-President Sam E. Gibson Sec.-Treasurer Howard Holthoff SEBASTIAN COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President S. Walton Maurras Vice-President Robert L. Jones. III Sec .-Treasurer Robert Claar SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION President John Clayton President-Elect Sam Bird SOUTHWEST ARKANSAS BAR ASSOCIATION President Donald Corbin Vice-President John R. Graves Talbot Feild Sec.-Treasurer TEXARKANA BAR ASSOCIATION President Connor W. Patman Vice-President Charles Conway Secretary John Hawk ins Treasurer George W . Lavender UNION COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Wallace M. Moody President Vice-President Albert Hanna Michael R. Landers Sec.-Treasurer WASHINGTON COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION President Walter R. Niblock F. H. Martin Vice-President Sec.-Treasurer Ann Henry WHITE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Jim Hannah President Vice-President H. Robert Edwards. Jr. Lloyd Henry. Jr. Sec.-Treasurer
Arkansas Federal Tax Institute November 21-22, 1974 Sheraton Motor Inn, Little Rock, Arkansas Co-Sponsored By The Arkansas Bar Association And The Arkansas Society Of Certified Public Accountants
192/ Arkansas Lawyer/October 1974
Arkansas Eminent Domain Digest Compil ed b y the U ni ve rs ity of Ark a nsas for the Arka nsas Stat.e Hi g hway Comm ission.
207 Pages
Arkansas statutes Annotated
$9.50*
22 Volumes w ith Cu rre nt Suppleme nt. $175.00 . in the State of Arkansas.
WORKBOOK FOR ARKANSAS ESTATE PLANNERS MITC H ELL D. MOORE. WILLIAM H . BOWEN
A Complete Source for Planning Estates in Arkansas Planned excl usive ly fo r Arkansas lawyers. it is based on the statutes. cases. regulatio ns, a nd tax situations o f the state. This workbook serves as a guide to drafting a simpl e will. testamentary plan ning for benefit of mino r or aged, fo rm s o f property ownership, purposes and techniques o f making gifts. drafting panncrship and business purchase agreements and man y ot her important to pics. The hand y loose· leaf fo rm at ma kes this so urce a unique working tool- an invaluable reference for the Arkansas lawyer.
$35.00*
11 Chapters
REID'S BRANSON INSTRUCTIONS TO JURIES
JONES LEGAL FORMS THREE VOLUMES. 68 C HAPTERS
7 VOLUMES WITH CURRENT SUPPLEMENT
$60. 00*
8125.00*
Cont act Your Bobbs-Me rrill Arkansas Represe ntative, Mr. Joshua E. M c Hughes 920 West 6TH Street
(501 1 376·9131
Ltttle Rock , Ark . 72201
The Babbs-Merrill Company-Inc. 4300 W. 62nd St. / Indianapolis. Indiana 46268 (Any rese/ler " ffee 10 charge whalever prICe II w/,he, for Ollr /:>oolls. '
• Plus shippin g hancllmg dod sales l a .. wh ere ilpphCdble
We care for more Arkansans than anybody. And we're proud of that. BlueCross® Blue Shield ® of Arkansas
We care about people. Arkansas people.
Aphone
youcan
from a big For the fourth consecutive year, the Public Education Committee of the Arkansas Bar Foundation is providing a series of public service announcements on legal subjects to every radio station in Arkansas. A series of six taped messages are sent every two months. We hope you 'll be listening for them. You can playa big part in making sure that these messages are heard by just phoning your appreciation to radio station managers in your area who are using them. If you haven't heard them, a phone call to the manager will provide the encouragement that he might need to put them on the air. Everybody likes to know that their work is being appreciated. Your phone call to local stations can make a difference in improving the effectiveness of the Arkansas Bar's public relations efforts.