2011-12 Meeting Minutes
Minutes from prior years

9/22/11 | 10/27/11 | 11/17/11 | 1/26/12 | 2/23/12

MSBA PARALEGAL COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES
Thursday, February 23, 2012

The meeting was convened at 4:15 p.m.
ATTENDEES:   In Person:  Sarah Dannecker, Patti Drury, MSBA President – Brent Routman, Staff Liaison – Nancy Mischel.  By phone:  Mary Fenske, Cindy Costello, DeAnne Brooks, Penny Cierzan, Barb Peppersack, Sally Dahlquist.

Counsel of Sections/Section Chairs
Digest
Bench and Bar
President’s column

Sarah Dannecker will send an email to Janice for another update on the completed utilization manual assignments(what sections are incomplete) and will send out 2 further emails (1 reminder, 1 final) regarding missing assignments

The meeting was adjourned at 5:25.

Minutes prepared by:  Sarah Dannecker
Approved: 

MSBA PARALEGAL COMMITTEE MEETING
MINUTES
Thursday, January 26, 2012

The meeting was convened at 4:15 p.m.

ATTENDEES:   In Person:  Michelle McCullough, Jean Diekmann, Patti Keyes, Staff Liaison – Nancy Mischel.  By phone:  Mary Fenske, Cindy Costello, Helen Federline, Penny Cierzan, Janice Voshoska.

1.)  Meeting Minutes:  One revision noted:  Under NHCC Seminar on Utilization – Costs:  Renae Fry’s law firm would cover the cost of the copies and would also do binding if needed at some point.   Minutes were otherwise approved.

2.) Update on completed assignments for utilization manual: 

Sarah Dannecker sent an email with an update regarding the article revisions and assignments.    Jean Diekmann and Patty Drury will advise Nancy Mischel on status of each and Nancy update through link on the website.  Sarah’s email will be redistributed to everyone.

3.) Review of Solo Attorney/Small Firm calendar of upcoming CLE events.

Michelle checked the calendar and did not note much posted at this date.

This section is working on a 3 part series on litigation – 3 separate topics, over 6 week period covering effective motion practice, evidence and appeals 101.  Hoping to present in February. 

4.) CLE Topic selection.

Discussed what topics we may want to present at the CLE and were in agreement that they should be identified today.  The group decided on the three: 

Family Law:  Mary Fenske will discuss with her instructor.

Solo/Small Firm Panel – 4 attorneys and 4 paralegals; and

Cloud Based Technology.

We do have some names but are looking for more suggestions to provide a variety of speakers.

5.) Sponsors.

Penny will put together a mock up letter and list of sponsors.  Discussed breaking the list down to make calls to the sponsors.  Also, should work on possible script when we do reach out.

6.) Request for MSBA funding.

We have the opportunity to request funding from the MSBA for projects during the next bar year (July 1, 2012 – June 30, 2013).  Nancy is going to put a proposal together for a Paralegal Reception to be held at the MSBA Offices.  We would hold this reception in the hopes of attracting new paralegal members.  We had done this in the past and Helen seemed to recall that we had 50 or so attendees.   We will also include in the budget a request for a give-away of one free paralegal membership to a paralegal attending the reception.  The request must be made in writing by February 1st.  Michelle will send out an email to the committee advising them of this and request any other suggestions from anyone for funding requests to be made asap.

7.) MSBA Committee 36.

This committee was started in response to the unique challenges new law graduates face as they enter the profession, including but not limited to: securing employment, gaining practical professional training, connecting with other members of the legal community, and debt burden.  

Through the work of Committee 36, the MSBA will connect new members of the profession with supportive members of the Minnesota legal community, provide resources, create educational and social programming, and assist new graduates with the transition into the profession for the benefit of the graduates and the profession as a whole.

This could be a wonderful opportunity for our committee to host a short seminar for the initial and future cohorts on paralegal utilization.  Michelle will send an email to Brent about the possibility. 

8.) Other Business.  NA

9.) Next meeting:  February 23, 2012 at 4:15 p.m.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:25.

Minutes prepared by:  Patti Keyes
Approved: 

MSBA Paralegal Committee Meeting
Minutes
November 17, 2011

The meeting convened at 4:15 p.m
ATTENDEES:  In Person:  Sarah Dannecker, Co-Chair; MSBA Staff Liaison:  Nancy Mischel; Members: DeAnne Brooks, September Holmblad, Cindy Costello, Patti Drury, Helen Federline, Barb Peppersack, Jean Diekmann, Patti Keyes.  By phone:  Mary Fenske

1.  Meeting Minutes from October 27, 2011 were reviewed.  One correction – Joan Biebelhausen’s name should be removed from (d) as a potential speaker for solo firms and listed in (e) with Judge Morrow under for Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers in the “Recruit Speakers” section.   Minutes were approved.
2. News, Announcements and Association Updates:
1. The MPA Fall Social is scheduled for this evening. 
2. Meeting of all MSBA committee chairs is scheduled for Tuesday December 6th.  Sarah Dannecker is planning to attend to report updates and projects currently being undertaken by our committee.
3. Current Projects:   

NHCC Seminar on Utilization.

1. Sarah Dannecker has been talking with Renae Fry.  They discussed:
1.  Possibility of promoting advanced topics.  Come up with a list of areas that need attention and would increase visibility of the paralegal role and partnership with attorneys.  What things are relevant to the practitioner?
2.  Using a team approach (paralegal and attorney) for presentation.  Use a dialog between attorneys and paralegals covering how they work together. 
3.  Costs.  Back end:  IT costs should run around $2,000.  Should include 6 hours of web contact available for 6 months to a year after the seminar.  Upfront costs would include marketing, advertising and promotion.  This should be the biggest up front cost.  Renae could copy materials at N. Hennepin for no charge. 
2. Advertising. 
1.   We need to determine the best approach to advertise.  E-blasts, mailing lists, section chairs to get the word out, website link to events, Bench & Bar on calendar.  The more places, the better.  The best bet may be to get the word out to the section chairs.  Sarah will discuss with Brent.  Broadest strategy – target 1000 people with hope of 20 – 30 attorneys signing up to cover costs. 
1.  CLE – should we consider co-sponsoring with CLE committee?  Would help with getting the word out.   Would need to share revenue if we pursue this.
3.  Topics
1.  They need to qualify for CLE credits.  We need to work within a format that is relevant and advanced.  A question and answer session would be required for CLE credit.
2.  Topics to fill a 6 hour time frame.  Or should we shorten to focus on one advanced topic in a 3 to 4 hour time frame.  We could have a morning buffet of various topics, in the afternoon we could focus more on advanced hot topics.  IP and Cloud Based Technology are hot topics.  Or, we could have a panel in the morning covering a variety of areas.
3.  We should determine the length and format and have these topics decided by January or February.
4. Other ideas for topics.  Utilizing a paralegal in general;  Start out with a panel in a variety of areas;  Must have Q & A for any substantive section; How do paralegals provide value?
5. Based on target, what should we present?  Family law (hot topic – neutral evaluators), Personal Injury, Bankruptcy, eDiscovery, Litigation, Probate, Real Estate?

d. Target audience

1.  Determining the target audience will help to determine what topics we should cover as well as format.  Solo, young attorneys and small firms tend to need the help and they tend to be the ones that do not know how to utilize paralegals.
2. Sponsor levels
3. Finalize sponsor levels, work out details and contact sponsors by February or March.
4.  Speakers
1.  Mary Fenske indicated that their Family Law instructor would be willing to present on Family law.
2.  Helen Federline mentioned Bob Woodke from Bemidji is typically a very big draw and his firm is very diverse.  He has done a lot of speaking on solo and small firm issues.

Utilization Outlines

1.   Have received two new outlines.  There are a few still missing.  There may be other topics that we should consider including.
2.  Did not feel we needed Juvenile Law or Special District Law. 
3. Appellate – Helen will check with Bob Woodke to ask him to update.
4. Employee Benefits – Barb Peppersack will check with someone in her office to for updating.
5. Environmental Law – Jean Diekmann will check with someone in her office.
6. General Practice -  Helen Federline will check with someone to update that area.
7. ADR - DeAnne Brooks will look for someone to review. 
8. Public Benefits - September Holmblad will look into.
9. DeAnne Brooks offered to contact Janice to ask her to send an update on where we are as far as the outlines and upload onto the website.  The people that have outstanding outlines due should be emailed.
10. Action Items
1. List of utilization outline materials should be updated.  DeAnne, Janice and Sarah offered to work on.
2. Outline sections should be finished.
3. Determination of CLE credits, topics and target audience should be completed.  Solo, small firms and young lawyers appear to be the best target.
4. The entire committee should peruse websites for ideas and topics should be agreed upon.
5. By February:  Topics and speakers identified and materials submitted.
6. Finalize sponsor levels, work out details and contact sponsors by February or March.

The meeting was concluded at 5:20 p.m.
Next meeting:  Thursday, December 15 at 4:10 p.m.
Minutes prepared by Patti Keyes
Approved: 

- Last Updated 11/16/2009 -