Alexa Jacobson Internship Journal

1. Journal #1 a. Date: The internship took place on February 6, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 9:00 to 12:30. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Dohn Williams. d. Biography: Dohn H. Williams attended Florida State University as well as a small local college. e. Areas of law: Dohn Williamss primary focus is on Homicide/Major crimes. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited attorney Dohn Williams in Homicide/Major crimes in the office of the Broward County Public Defender. While we were with Mr. Williams, we watched DVDs of a biopsy(medical examination) of a case he had just received that morning. The case involved a mugging that took place on a golf course. In the end, an African American male was shot and killed. The DVD showed the pictures of his biopsy that determined time and cause of death. In addition, we watched a police deposition of an Irish man. The man was extremely difficult and uncooperative. He was drunk during the deposition and at first refused to speak whatsoever. Once he caved in, he went on and on about how the policeman assaulted him. He was originally found walking around the public nude. The deposition (testimony and questioning of a witness prior to a trial) was rather comical; as the

male was so intoxicated, he began speaking to the table and acting in other ways to indicate his extreme intoxication. The deposition was a true reflection on the person performing the deposition. He became very angry very fast, when he didnt get the cooperation he desired. He became violent and loud and only infuriated the accused and pushed him further away from answering the questions. He was not effective in getting the answers he needed or gaining any useful information. It showed his inexperience in the field and lack of control. In contrast to that deposition, we watched a second one with a more skilled person taking the deposition. The accused was brought in after her and her husband had gotten into a fight. Supposedly, her husband was cheating on her, and she received a call informing her of such. She tried to force him out of the house with a knife, and accidentally stabbed him in the neck killing him. Their three-year-old son was present at the time and watched his father die. In turn, he watched his mother taken away by the police. The women was very subdued and melancholy during the deposition. The person performing the deposition had a very smooth and eloquent style. He was able to get every answer he needed from her without any rage, yelling, or force whatsoever. It was evident that he had a lot of experience. After watching the depo, Mr. Williams told us that he was actually known for his style and used in the most difficult cases to crack witnesses in depositions. g. What I learned: I learned that information taken from biopsy reports can be extremely useful in court as solid evidence. I also learned how important your approach to different situations can affect the outcome or results. This can be useful in not only during a deposition or in the courtroom, but also with any other obstacle. The clear

contrast between the two depos showed how experience and style make a huge impact and can in fact make or break a case.

2. Journal #2 a. Date: The internship took place on February 15, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 1:00 to 5:00. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Andrew Brenner. d. Biography: He went to the University of Texas for undergraduate school and the university of Michigan for law school. He clerked for Norman C. Roettger. Andrew Brenner has worked his way up the firm. He has represented clients in my contract and intellectual property lawsuits as well as product liability and mass tort cases. e. Areas of law: Andrew Brenners primary focus is on commercial litigation. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited Andrew Brenner of Bois, Schiller, and Flexner LLP. There, we heard from him as well as a few of his associates. Mr. Brenner spoke to us about how his firm recruits new employees. He told us that they review the top ten law schools and review the top 10% of each graduating class when considering their new employees. He went on to explain that it was very important to set yourself apart during your college year by participating in mock trial, moot court, interning or even clerking for a judge. His main focus was on strengthening our writing skills. With strong writing, many opportunities can arise such as depos/hearings, trial work/case preparation, and most importantly trying cases. Next, we heard from Steve Zack, who was the youngest member of the Florida bar. From him, I learned that a career in law provides one with the ability to do something incredibly powerful while at the same time having a job where you never have to work. Mr. Zack represented Algore in Bush v. Gore. Unfortunately, they lost at the

Supreme Court level. Mr. Zack also spoke to us about undergraduate studies and informed us that we should make sure to graduate with a strong ability to write and a possible major in English, poly sci, or history. Next we heard from another associate, Shaneese, who went through the steps of preparing a case. After her, we heard from another young associate named James. James highlighted appearance as a very important factor in law. dress to impress, as he called it. He also taught us that when doing legal research you must find the applicable statutes, then match it to the facts, and finally recommend it to the partner of the firm. Next, we heard from Patty. Patty began working for the firm at 17 as a receptionist. Patty spoke to us about managing work and private life. As the mother of a three-year-old daughter, she spoke to us about the important of keeping a strong balance between the two entities in order to maintain a healthy career. Next, we heard from Suarez, who taught us about negligence (Failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another) and strict liability (absolute legal responsibility for an injury that can be imposed on the wrongdoer without proof of carelessness or fault). The difference things he referenced were misrepresentation (An assertion or manifestation by words or conduct that is not in accord with the fact), breach of contract (failure to do something that is required in a contract), and design defects. g. What I learned: From my experience with Mr. Brenner and his associates, I was able to learn more about commercial litigation and civil law. It was really interesting to learn about a different type of law other then criminal law, seeing as that criminal law is by far the most popular and what I am most familiar with. I learned a lot about how to prepare myself for not only law school, but also how to prepare myself to receive

job opportunities. I learned the steps of commercial litigation; the first step is research, followed by witness interviews, then discovery, next is photographs, then relevant law investigating, next is understanding the opposing business, then hiding experts, and lastly is fact discovery.

3. Journal #3 a. Date: The internship took place on February 23, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 8:30 to 12:30. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Angelica Zayas, and a few other attorneys in d. her office. e. Areas of law: Anjelica and the other attorneys primary focus is on first and second degree misdemeanors as well as domestic violence and gang unit. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited the Office of Broward County State Attorney and met with Angelica for a special presentation. While there, we heard from different attorneys from the office. First, we heard from Ross, a U-MIAMI business major graduate. Ross is a certified legal intern who works on first and second degree misdemeanors in county court. He spoke about DUI cases. He told us that 80% of his cases are DUIs which is the number one killer. Next, we heard from Tim, a member of the gang unit. He spoke to us about the increase in electronic trails and the decrease in privacy as gangs become smarter and smarter. More and more gangs are committing white-collar crimes rather than blue ones. Amazingly enough, he said that there have been many movies and books created about his past cases. Tim claimed that less people trust police officers today than back in the day, which makes their jobs much more difficult Next, we heard from Brian, who says he is enriched by serving justice. He worked on the 1960s George Whitman case. Next, we heard from Sullivan, who was in the Domestic violence unit in 1994. Sullivan works on misdemeanors and felonies. She said that not all cases have injuries, surprisingly

enough. She said that most cases go through pre-trial and then the charges are dropped. Next, we heard from another attorney who works on sex crimes and child abuse cases. They spoke about the age of consent, which in Florida is 16. She said that acquaintance rapes were the most common type. g. What I learned: I thought it was really interesting to hear from such a wide range of speakers in age, experience, and division. I learned a lot about how crimes and the matter in which they are committed have changed with modern times and its effect on our legal system. Obvious examples that we spoke about were pornography laws, cyber bullying laws, and texting while driving laws, all of which were enacted due t our technological expansion. I learned that there has been a huge increase of the amount of people drinking and driving. I also became more familiar with gang activity and procedures. I was really shocked to learn that all domestic violence cases do not require injuries. I never realized that merely an unwanted touch that doesnt bruise can still be prosecuted with enough supporting evidence.

4. Journal #4 a. Date: The internship took place on February 28, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 7:00-3:30. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was AUSA Michael Gilfarb. d. Biography: Mr. Gilfarb got his undergraduate degree at the University of Florida and his graduated degree at Washington University at St. Louis. e. Areas of law: Michael Gilfarb works in the United States department of Justice. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited the United States department of Justice with AUSA Michael Gilfarb. With Michael, we went to the Federal Courthouse. There, we watched him do a motion before the judge for a pre trial detention (n Federal Court the Government can ask that someone be held in custody without bond during the pendency of the case) in a drug case. Mr. Gilfarb was extremely eloquent and argued his point very well. He outlined his argument to the judge and then explained each part of his argument and why he believed the judge should rule in his favor. In my opinion, it was the perfect example of good courtroom presence, decorum, style, articulation, preparation, and knowledge of the facts. He showed he knew exactly what he was talking about, what he wanted, and how he thought, he could achieve it. After that, we watched a trial about Medicare fraud. In the case, an older male had been recommending and prescribing medications to more elderly citizens than actually needed it. He knew what he was doing and was intentionally profiting from the business. His wife claimed to know nothing of what was going on and claimed they were living in poverty. She even brought pictures to the courtroom and used them as evidence when she took the stand. The trial was a bit hard to follow at times

since the wife only spoke Spanish. Following the translator got a bit confusing when the judge would speak at the same time. We did not see openings, or closings, only the wifes testimony. When the case went into recess, we were allowed to get up and look around the courtroom, which was really nice and had a modern style. It was covered in very modern technologically including computer screens, monitors, cameras, and many other recording devices. I thought it was very interesting that there was a special camera so that the attorney could blow up documents and easily publish them to the jury without physically walking over there and handing them the exhibits. g. What I learned: I learned how to present oneself in front of the judge in a professional and studious way. I was able to see how preparation and knowledge of the facts truly paid off and presented the attorney with a very strong position. I also learned how modern technology is benefitting the legal profession in making evidence and courtroom procedures smoother and more perceptible for both the jury and judge.

5. Journal #5 a. Date: The internship took place on March 5, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 8:00-12:30. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Mila Schwartreich. d. Biography: Mila is an attorney for the BSO. She is in charge of advising and representing the Sheriff and the agency in legal matters arising from official BSO business. This could include paying back innocent bystanders for damages in a car chase or managing money gained from a drug bust. e. Areas of law: Mila Schwartzreichs primary focus is acting as legal counsel for the Broward County Sheriff Office. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited the Broward County Jail. We started on the first floor and worked our way up. On the first floor, we saw the room where the inmates have their visit with relatives. However, it is not really a visit anymore. Now, there is a camera in front of the relative who sits in a booth on the first floor. The corresponding inmate, wherever he may be, sits in front of a screen and camera in his cell. On each floor, we had to be buzzed through each door in order to continue. There were security personal units at each floor with the keys to unlock the doors. As we went up each floor, two things stood out. First that there were only women in the holding cells. When I asked why, I found out that the Broward County Jail did not house women. The women are brought in and then transferred to other locations. Next, I noticed that each floor of inmates wore different colors. Orange was for the juveniles, who were all housed together. The colors ranged from red to brown to blue to finally, the typical black and white striped maximum-security jumpsuits. Red

indicated that they had violated some type of rule or provision at the jail. The tour guide told us about the different wristbands each inmate wore. Some indicate the inmate was already sentenced and now serving time, while others permitted certain inmates to work for free. They chose to do this in order to have something to do other than sit in the cell. When in the cell, the inmates are divided into two groups and alternate on the time they spend in front of the TV. Majority rules for the channel choice. I found it very unsettling that the inmate's time schedule is largely altered. Breakfast is served at 4:00 a.m. and dinner is at 2:00 p.m. The food comes from a mass producer of jail products and is very small in portion size. A new innovation to the jails has now been instituted however. They can have system accounts in which they can order special items such as sneakers and other conveniences. Most recently, food, such as burgers and fries, have been added. In addition to those charges, the inmates are charged daily for their stay and must pay back all charges as soon as possible or they are free to go. Inmates are provided with needed medications as specified times. Inmates are allowed to have some recreation time outside on the basketball courts. There must always be three guards during this period. g. What I learned: I learned about how the jail system has changed over the years due to both heightened security threats as well as technological innovations. I also learned about the different classifications and appearances of the inmates. In addition I was educated as to inmates privileges and monetary charges.

6. Journal #6 a. Date: The internship took place on March 19, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 1:00-4:00. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Mila Schwartreich. d. Biography: Mila is an attorney for the BSO. She is in charge of advising and representing the Sheriff and the agency in legal matters arising from official BSO business. This could include paying back innocent bystanders for damages in a car chase or managing money gained from a drug bust. e. Areas of law: Mila Schwartzreichs primary focus is acting as legal counsel for the Broward County Sheriff Office. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited the BSO unit with Attorney Mila Schwartzreich. With Mila, we toured all of the BSOs equipment and machinery. First, we saw the airborne equipment. This included the helicopters, both the oldfashioned one and the more modern edition. The sheriff giving us the tour explained to us that the helicopters are used in car chases when trying to search for an accused and close them in. She told us that they sometimes assist nearby counties when their help is needed. In addition, the helicopters were purchased with drug money that the BSO had confiscated in past cases. In each helicopter is the pilot, a backup pilot and EMT. Most of the time the EMT is not needed. The shifts for each of the positions are extremely long. While the helicopters look small from the outside, they are able to hold a minimum of three seats, a stretcher, and medical equipment. Next, we went to the Hazmat department. There we went on the fire truck that the Hazmat team rides

in. The fire truck is in two sections, one larger section with materials and equipment and a smaller section with the driver and passengers. Inside were materials such as gloves, masks, suits, and radars. The Hazmat team deals with anything involving dangerous or unknown chemicals. They can be called to a scene to analyze unknown drugs or cleanup some type of spill. Next, we visited SWAT. We went inside the Swat truck. We learned that there are no armed guns stored in the truck; rather each Swat member is issued their own weapons. The truck had holes that punched out on each side to stick guns out. The truck was also state of the art, bullet proof, and had glass about four inches thick on each window. It also had a circular hole in the top for the SWAT team to better position themselves for gunshot aim. The SWAT team also had another truck with two machine/weapons. One was a very large self-standing shield that up to three people could stand behind. It is bulletproof and has windows. It can be raised to different floors and is used in serious break-ins such as large drug busts or shootouts. They also had a robot like weapon in which one person sits inside and controls. It can move and punch holes in walls. Inside there is computer software and screens so that the controller can see his or her surroundings. This weapon is used to reveal the hiding place in hostage situations or hideouts g. What I learned: I learned a lot about the enforcement aspect of the law rather than the trial aspect, which we normally focus on. I thought it was really interesting and rewarding that the BSO benefits when they do drug busts and illegal seizures. I think that giving them new equipment in turn for their work motivates the entire department and helps to make a more civilized and safe county.

7. Journal #7 a. Date: The internship took place on March 27, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 8:30-12:00. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Eric Schwartreich. d. Biography Mr. Schwartzreich attended Nova Southeastern University earning a Masters in Business Administration. After receiving his M.B.A., he attended St. Thomas University School of Law. e. Areas of law: Eric Schwartzreichs primary focus is criminal defense. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited the Law Office of attorney Eric Schwartzreich, who is a Criminal Defense Attorney of Schwartzreich & Yates. We went to the courthouse and got to watch an attempted burglary case. The case involved one African America who approached a kwik stop and pulled his sweatshirt over his head and tied a bandana over his face. He entered the shop with his gun drawn and was quickly shot down by the cashier who continued to shoot him to be sure he was down. The accused was shot in the mouth and multiple teeth were left behind at the scene, along with blood covered clothing. There is footage of the event from the kwik stop cameras that was shown in open court. The cashier testified and was quite the character. I felt that his ridiculously staged and obviously coached answers seemed unreasonable and unreliable. His answers were clearly provided before the trial by the prosecutors on the case. For example, when asked if there were stickers blocking his view of the ambulance, he stated that there was nothing

impeding his view through the clear glass and he had a plain sight view of what was going on. The prosecutions opening was very strong and after hearing it, I thought it was a closed case. The defense on the other hand, had an opening that wasnt really coherent and I didnt think their defense was applicable. The defense was asserting misidentication. With this, they were claiming that somewhere along the line, there was a switch of defendants in the ambulance or some other unreasonable possibility. This didnt make any sense however, because the accused was accompanied by an officer and was found covered in blood at the scene of the crime. He was caught red handed at the very scene! I was curious as to whether or not the defendant would take the stand however; we did not see the rest of the trial. g. What I learned: I learned a lot about witness preparation or lack thereof it. The jurys disbelief was pretty evident at the witnesss staged responses. I thought the case was pretty clear cut and it was obvious the defendant was guilty however the charisma and character of the prosecutions many witnesses was very distracting and took away from the strength of the case as a whole. This taught me that witness preparation is important in that some is necessary however the testimony must remain natural enough that it doesnt seem so forced and unbelievable that the jury discounts it.

8. Journal #8 a. Date: The internship took place on April 16, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 1:00-4:00. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Heath Eskalyo. d. Biography: Heath Eskalyo is a shareholder of the firm. He is member of the management committee. Heath received his bachelors degree from Ithaca College before earning a law degree from City University of New York e. Areas of law: Heath Eskalyos primary focus is Insurance Fraud, Workers Compensation and construction law. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited the law office of Kelly, Kronenberg, Gilmartin, Fitchel, Bambas and Eskalyo. There we learned about workmans compensation and all of the issues associated with it. The most common occurrence is fake, or fraudulent workmans compensation claims. He told us that more often than not he found some type of evidence, whether it is camera footage or an eyewitness, to disprove and reveal that the plaintiffs injury was nonexistent or extremely exaggerated. This is the new trend in compensation litigation. While at the office, we sat in on a mediation session. The plaintiff in the case claimed that she hurt her arm on the job. At the time of the mediation, she was currently working. Therefore she couldnt seek lost wages. She was informed by her doctor to get a surgery to fix her arm even though she used it daily at work. She declined the surgery. She asked for 60,000 dollars in damages during mediation. Mr. Kronenbergs client was willing to award maximum, 15,000 dollars. The mediation began with both parties in one room with the mediator and us. After speaking openly and proposing each claim, the parties

split up. The mediator first met with the plaintiff to try to get her to minimize her claim. Then the mediator came to us and asked what we would offer in response to the high request of 60,000 dollars. Because the request was so high, Mr. Kronenberg wanted to send a message back to the plaintiff and offered 1500 dollars. It went back and forth like this so on, until finally the mediator explained to the plaintiff that if she did not plan to get the surgery the amount of damages she would be rewarded was exponentially smaller. Mr. Kronenberg is friends with the plaintiffs doctor and had him write on the record a statement stating that he suggested the surgery to the plaintiff and she denied wanting to go through with it. If the plaintiff were to lie and claim she was getting the surgery, she could be awarded a large amount of money and not actually get the surgery. Her insurance however would not cover the surgery in the future because they would see that there was specific money allotted to it. With this realization, the plaintiff reached a more realistic sense and accepted an offer of 10,000 dollars. g. What I learned: I learned all bout mediation and exactly how it works. That is definitely something we never touched on in any of the classes we took in the law track. I thought it was really great that the two parties could resolve the case and settle without having to go to court, incur lawyers fees, and waste even more time.

9. Journal #9 a. Date: The internship took place on April 18, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 9:30-12:30. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Melinda Blostein, Gary Levine, and Howard Finkelstein. d. Biography: Howard Finkelstein received his Bachelors from the University of South Florida. He received his law degree from the University of Miami School of Law. Howard is the elected public defender and is most widely known for his TV sector Help me Howard. e. Areas of law: Melinda Blostein, Gary Levine, and Howard Finkelsteins primary focus is Mental Health Court. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited attorney Melinda Blostein, Gary Levine and Howard Finkelstein in the mental health court in the public defenders office. While in mental health court, we spoke about what makes a person competent. The person must be able to differentiate between who is their adversary and who is in their favor. This meaning, they must understand that the public defender is there to help them and the prosecutor is there to prosecute them. They must be able to understand the fact that they are being charged and what they are being charged for. They must understand the actual charges themselves. They must understand that the judge is neutral and not for or against them. The accused must also comprehend what is and isnt appropriate courtroom behavior. We also learned that the office was originally started by interested judges. The office centralizes all services. People who are

mentally ill or insane must be represented and treated rather then treated as any other criminal. We learned that you could either be incompetent to stand trial or be not guilty by insanity. If that were the case, the accused would be in and out of hospitals for many years and may eventually get off. If they are found incompetent to stand trial, there will be follow up hearings on competency and or commitment. If an individual is found to be incompetent, they are either released into the community, a hospital or jail. Community is the least likely of the three. When government funds become tight, the community programs are the first things to go. This has happened very frequently in Florida and not many programs exist to this day. There are only two community programs in all of Broward County. One of them only has 12 beds. The programs are very selective and difficult to get individuals into. With this in mind, it is very difficult for a public defender to get their client the help they need and the one on one attention that would be most beneficial for them. g. What I learned: I learned a lot about the different facets of mental health court that we touched upon in Criminal Law. It was interesting learning about the different ways one can end up in mental health court as well as hearing from Mr. Finkelstein who is a very motivational speaker. From him, I learned that law is a profession that has a huge possibility and opportunity to be rewarding.

10. Journal #10

a. Date: The internship took place on April 24, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 8:30-12:30. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Marcelo Gomez d. Biography: Marcelo graduated from University of Florida with his degree in law. e. Areas of law: Marcelo Gomezs primary focus is personal injury cases. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited Marcelo Gomez of Schiller, Kessler and Gomez personal injury. With Marcello Gomez, we went to Judge Tobins courtroom where we watched calendar call and special settings. The first calendar call involved a dispute between a man who was hit while riding a bicycle and the person he was suing for damages. The final settlement was for 75,000 dollars, 10 years later. The second calendar call involved a sexual accusation. It was no longer at issue and no further actions were taken. The next calendar call involved a lawsuit involving a condominium association. One party was forced to pay a 550-dollar fine. The next calendar call involved a final disposition. Next was a calendar call in which one party put forth a motion for contempt and a motion to pay attorneys fees. The case involved Bank united and commercial foreclosures. The man claimed he had never received any of the requests for his history of financials and that was why he never turned them over. The opposing party claimed that they were sent multiple times and he was notified multiple times of their due date as well. The next calendar call was special setting. The case involved a woman who was in a hospital and fell down. She

claims to have slipped on 3 dime sized water droplets. The defense was asking for a summary judgment and the plaintiff opposed such a motion claiming that the defense failed to include the fact that a woman came over the plaintiff after her fall and could have possibly been with the cleaning service of the hotel. The information the defense asserted could be used to show negligence in that she failed to clean up the spill or had just recently cleaned it leaving water behind. The defense however when questioned by the judge was unable to prove this because he never questioned such a witness or even investigated the uniforms of the hospital. In addition, the judge relied on case law with the exact same facts in order to pass the summary judgment. With this she ensured that she would not be overruled on the appellate level. Next we watched a felony battery case. In the case a homeless man was beat up by two of his acquaintances who were both homeless as well. The victim was brutally beat up with fist punches and kicks. The prosecutions opening was very strong and used the physical evidence and pictures very well. I thought it was a closed case. One of the defendants lawyers presented a good opening while the others was poorly written. One of them had a clear and applicable defense while the other was grabbing for straws and was all over the place. The well-written one however, was presented in a very meek and monotone way taking away form its strength. The poorly written one was strong in its presentation; the lawyer was forceful, convincing and persuasive. The judge was blatantly leaning towards the defense side in his rulings and continually shut down the victim and cut him off. g. What I learned: From the trial is was very obvious that presentation and preparation are both very important. The perfect mixture of the two is what is called for in a

courtroom. An imbalance will be quickly highlighted if you are against an experienced attorney as the defendants in this case were. I also learned that not all judges will be unbiased and that you just have to move on and let it go.

11. Journal #11

a. Date: The internship took place on April 25, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 8:30-12:30. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Kenneth Kaplan. d. Biography: Kaplan went to Boston University for undergraduate and University of Miami for graduate school. He clerked at the law offices of Terry Rosenblum. e. Areas of law: Kenneth Kaplans primary focus is family law. f. Activity/Observations: Today we visited Kenneth Kaplan in the Family Law division. At first, we visited Judge Binkea, where we watched mediations. In the first mediation, there was a male and his lawyer present. The female had not shown up. Although the male had signed the birth certificate, he wanted a paternity test to be issued because he had now suspicions as to the childs true father. The judge ruled that as long as the mother didnt object, it would be issued without any further thought. The second mediation was simply resolving a date. The third involved an uncontested divorce. The judge did the divorce right then and there and the women walked out of the office single. The fourth mediation included the creation of a parenting plan. This included scheduling the visitation hours as well as child support payments. Because the male had children with another wife who he had also divorced, it became very complicated to calculate how much child support to pay in the current case. The judge informed us that typically, there is a standard formula implemented to determine child support. Legally you can deviate 5% up or down. If it

is more than that, it must be spelled out. Visitation factors into this formula. If the parent paying child support has the child for more than 73 overnights a year, there is a new formula to be applied. Next, we went to dependency court. There, is where judicial review takes place. The dependency court tries to get the kids back with their parents or wherever else they may belong. The court deals with children, whose families cannot take care of them appropriately, causing them to become wards of the state or placed in a different guardianship. In dependency court, we sat before Judge Bristol and watched a status check on a mother who had two kids, each living with their own father at the current time. The mother has a history of drug abuse problems however had had the ability to visit the children without supervision. The mother did not even show up for the status check and had not submitted to random drug testing in a long period time. As a result, her visitation was changed so that she could only see the kids under a supervised watch, which could include either of the fathers. g. What I learned: I learned more about mediation and got to see it in action once again. I learned how mediation in family law works as opposed to workers compensation. I also learned how parenting plans are formed and exactly what is considered in their creation. I never knew that there were actual formulas involved that lawyers were legally obligated to stick to.

12. Journal #12

a. Date: The internship took place on April 30, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 8:30-12:30. c. Attorney: The judge we met with was judge David Haimes. d. Biography: Judge Haimes went to Notre Dame for undergrad and graduate school. He has worked as Assistant U.S. Attorney, Assistant state attorney, Judicial law clerk, Trial attorney, and a judicial law clerk. Judge Haimes has been a part of some of the largest drug busts of his time.. e. Areas of law: Judge Haimes primary focus is criminal law. f. Activity/Observation: Today we visited the Honorable Judge Haimes. When we got to the courthouse we went back into the judges chambers and then into the jury assembly room. After that, we sat in the courtroom and watched the calendar call for Judge Haimes. We had a copy of his docket, including 60 cases, each with a brief summary. We were able to follow along and actually understand what was going on in each case. This was really helpful because every other time weve done calendar call it normally goes so fast that it is extremely hard to follow. With this packet we could see exactly, what each person was accused of, all of their counts, and the exact reason for them being in court. It was interesting to watch the style of each of the attorneys in front of Judge Haimes. Some were extremely laid back while others were very prepared and knew what they were doing. The experience of some of the attorneys was extremely evident as was the lack of inexperience among the younger

attorneys. One case involved a woman who drove into her garage with her two kids. This happened the day after a woman was highly publicized for killing her two kids by driving off a bridge. In another case, a man was arrested for contempt of court after attempting to retrieve his gun that was taken during his sons arrest. In another case, drug tests were ordered to be done on the spot. Judge Haimes told us about the meaning of the different jumpsuit colors, each indicating a different level of crime from orange, to blue, to brown, to red, to black and white stripes. He also emphasized the fact that he did not like to go off the record on sidebar. He said that it was very important that all is on the record for appeals purposes just in case it reached the appellate level. I thought that was very respectable and important seeing as the preserving the record can make a huge difference at the appellate level and any discrepancy could ruin his reputation and good faith. g. What I learned: I learned about the different meanings within the jail system. I also learned more about calendar call and dockets. It was much easier to learn and comprehend what was going on so I got more out of it. It was interesting to watch the proceedings of each case. I also learned about what was and was not efficient as far as attorney attitude, presence, and preparation of their cases.

13. Journal #13

a. Date: The internship took place on May 7, 2012. b. Time: The internship lasted from 12:30- 3:30. c. Attorney: The attorney we met with was Joanne Gelfand, Jason Oletsky, Ael Berger, Catherine, and Tammi. d. Biography: Jason Oletsky went to UMASS Amherst for undergrad and UMIAMI for law school. He started as a sports agent and hated it. He then went into work defending clients who were exposed to asbestos. Last, he ended up in commercial litigation. Ael Berger is an 8th year lawyer and a rising star in NCBJ. He went to University of Florida for both undergrad and graduate school. Catherine went to University of Florida for law school and started as a paralegal in bankruptcy. Tammi attended Tufts for undergrad and UMIAMI for law school. She did two summers at Akerman. e. Areas of law: Joanne Gelfands primary focus is bankruptcy law. f. Activity/Observation: Today we visited Joanne Gelfand of Akerman Senterfit who is bankruptcy law. We spoke with a few attorneys in the Akerman Office. First we heard from Jason Oletsky who is a litigation partner. He goes to court on a daily basis and does business litigation. He defends giant companies and has very complex cases. He said that law was a stressful position as he was always working on his clients wishes and complaints whether it be in the office or at home. He also said that he lived by billable hours, meaning that he had to document every minute afforded to his

clients work and deduct any free time in the middle. He claimed that being a lawyer was like being paid to learn. He explained that in a lot of his cases he has to learn things that he was never required to know or needed to know in the past. Without this information and understanding he could not properly defend or support his clients. One of his current cases has to do with anti delusion rights. Those rights ensure that when more shares are given, current shareholders who have anti delusion rights are guaranteed to be given more shares in order to maintain their current percentage of shares in the company. He emphasized taking math courses in college seeing as that math is an essential element to law. He said to definitely take Business, economics, and finance courses. Next we heard from attorney Ael Berger. He represents banks and creditors and likes to do cases involving code and statutes. He disliked criminal law. He told us about a case in which there was a lean on someones property and he found out that he owned 5 airplanes. Ael had to go through a ton of paperwork in preparation for the seizure and there was protocol to follow. It turned out that the planes were being used for drug transportation so the owner ended up turning over the money in fear for his life. Next We heard from Catherine. She was 1.5 years out of law school. She emphasized personal connection. Tammi emphasized that it was important to go to law school in the city where you wanted to live. At the end of the activity we did a hands on mediation and split up into two groups. The mediation involved a sexual harassment claim at a college. In the end the two parties agreed that the professor would take a semester long leave of absence, take education courses on behavior, pay 60,000 dollars in damages, and give the student an A minus in the class.

g. What I learned: I learned all about bankruptcy law, which is a field I have never touched upon before. It was interesting to get advice from all of the attorneys who were a wide range of ages as to what we should focus on in college and graduate school. I also learned the difference between public companies and private companies. Public allows anyone to buy shares like Apple or Google while private must invite you to get a share like Publix.