San Francisco Paralegal Association


<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   5   ...   Next >  Last >> 
  • 06/21/2018 12:30 PM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)


    Mt. Diablo Legal

    Est. 1969



    Save the Date and Attend!

    September 8, 2018, 1:05 p.m.

    Deadline to RSVP: 8/18/18 

    Have you ever been to an OAKLAND ATHLETIC'S baseball game before? This is your chance!!!


    Mt. Diablo Legal Professionals Association will be selling Oakland A's baseball tickets to Saturday, September 8, 2018 game vs. Texas Rangers. Game time is at 1:05 p.m. Tickets are only $20 per person, which includes awesome seats for the game AND $6 credit at food/drink concessions. WHAT A DEAL! This is a fundraiser for our Association. So, please invite all your family members, friends and co-workers to join MDLPA for a fun day!


    ***Please RSVP to Natalie Chop, CCLS at or call/text her at 925-984-5418.

    We will also be having a POTLUCK TAILGATE PARTY before the game at 10:30 AM.


    Thank you for your support of our Association!

    Mt. Diablo Legal Professionals Assoc.

    P.O. Box 4253

    Walnut Creek, CA 94596

    (925) 283-5226

    (925) 284-7788


  • 06/21/2018 9:00 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    About this webinar


     It may be the greatest unsolved mystery in the legal practice: the case of the missing 502(d) order. These orders can act as a strong shield against the waiver of privilege or protection when information is inadvertently produced during litigation—providing much more protection than a clawback agreement alone.

    Yet observe the typical courtroom today and such orders will almost never be found. Why?

    Join Judge Andrew J. Peck as he discusses the potential benefits of 502(d) orders, why and how to use them, and why so many lawyers are failing to fully protect client information during litigation.

    About Judge Peck:

    Judge Andrew J. Peck has been a leading name in eDiscovery since 1995, when he was first appointed Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of New York. Just a few months after taking the bench, shortly after O.J. Simpson’s trial concluded and Windows 95 was released, Judge Peck issued a key eDiscovery opinion, ruling that companies must make electronic versions of their computerized data available during discovery.

    In the years that followed, Judge Peck penned several widely influential opinions, from the first opinion approving the use of predictive coding in Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe to a recent warning to the bar over boilerplate discovery objections in Fischer v. Forrest. Judge Peck retired from the bench in March and now serves as senior counsel at DLA Piper.



    Presented by
    Judge Andrew J. Peck, Michael Simon


    Logikcull Webinar: The Adventure of the Missing 502(d) Order



    Webinar: The Adventure of the



    Missing 502(d) Order


    Featuring Judge Andrew J. Peck

    Tuesday, June 26th at 11 AM Pacific // 2 PM Eastern 

    Register Now

    Can't make it? Register anyway and we'll send you the recording!  








  • 06/18/2018 5:50 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    Paralegal Association of Santa Clara County 


    June 21, 2018 @ 6:00 pm


    General Meeting in the Back Room at The Fish Market, 3150 El Camino Real, Palo Alto


    Speaker:  Emily Jones, a Partner at Osborne Clarke and specialist in data privacy



    TOPIC: An Overview of the General Data Protection Regulation

    (So THIS is why I'm getting all those notices about updates to privacy policies.)



    SUMMARY: The implementation of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) on May 25th, 2018 has resulted in many companies revising their policies that effect how personal data is processed. This session will address some of the main issues affecting how US companies process personal data and include tips and practical advice on the GDPR key concepts, consent, and managing service providers and vendors.








  • 06/17/2018 8:50 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    California Lawyers Association 

    Taxation Section & co-sponsor CalCPA present:


    2018 Annual Income Tax Seminar


    Earn 7.5 Hours MCLE Credit, Includes Legal Ethics & Legal Specialization Credit


    Golden Gate University, School of Law
    536 Mission Street, Rooms 2201-2202
    San Francisco, CA 94105

    Register Online - SF



    Schedule | Essential Info | Brochure | Reg Form



    Friday, June 22 Time


    8 a.m.


    8:30 a.m.


    Discussion of changes to international taxation as a result of 2017 tax reform.

    CHAPMAN: Agustin Ceballos, Seltzer Caplan McMahon Vitek Artemiza Q. Schumacher, Rivera & Schumacher, APC

    GOLDEN GATE: Patrick Martin, Procopio William Skinner, Fenwick & West

    8:35 a.m. - 10:05 a.m.


    This program will review the impact of AB 102 & 131 (2017) on California administrative tax appeals. It will start with a review of the creation of the Office of Tax Appeals (OTA) and a discussion of its jurisdiction. Next, it will cover the practical implications of appealing to newly created OTA and the freshman class of Administrative Law Judges. Finally, the presentation will go over the general procedures and time-lines for appeals with OTA and discuss OTA structure and future plans. Extra time for Q&A will be reserved.


    CHAPMAN: Jackie Zumaeta, Assistant Chief Counsel at Office of Tax Appeals

    GOLDEN GATE: Kristen Kane, Chief Counsel at Office of Tax Appeals

    10:10 a.m. - 11:40 a.m.


    11:45 a.m. - 12:15 p.m.


    When representing entities in transactional tax planning, there are many ethical issues to consider before and during the representation, such as identifying the client, avoiding conflicts of interest in joint representation, and the effective use of waivers. This session will focus on these issues and whether it is a good idea to move forward with such representation and what steps should be taken to protect yourself.



    • Kevan McLaughlin, McLaughlin Legal
    • Edward J. McIntyre, Attorney at Law


    • Basil J. Boutris, Vaught & Boutris
    • Matthew D. Carlson, Wagner Kirkman Blaine Klomparens and Youmans, LLP

    12:20 p.m. - 1:50 p.m.


    Discussion of IRC sections 1202 and 1045 regarding the gain exclusion for Qualified Small Business Stock. This topic is particularly important in light of the 2017 tax reform.


    • Mark Morris, LevitZacks
    • Michael C. Friedman, LevitZacks


    • Christopher A. Karachale, Hanson Bridgett
    • Tracy Hom, Realize CPA

    1:55 p.m. - 3:25 p.m.


    The presentation will focus on federal income tax developments in the past year that impact individual taxpayers and closely-held businesses. The first area to be reviewed will be federal tax legislation enacted during the past year. Next, proposed legislation and tax reform will be discussed. The final part of the presentation will review the important cases, rulings, notices, and regulations, including areas that the IRS has targeted for audit and litigation.



    • Lisa Nelson, Law Offices of A. Lavar Taylor LLP
    • Aaron T. Vaughan, KPMG

    GOLDEN GATE: Annette Nellen, Director, MST Program at San Jose State University

    3:30 p.m. - 5 p.m.

    Essential Info

    Printable Brochure

    A printable brochure is available for your convenience.




    Click Here to Register in SF



    Please fill out this form and send to: Program Registrations, California Lawyers Association, 180 Howard Street, Suite 410, San Francisco, CA 94105. Email to:



    In order to pre-register, your form and check, payable to California Lawyers Association, or credit card information, must be received by Friday, June 15, 2018.



    o $145 Taxation Section Members o $240 Non-Taxation Section Members (includes membership in the Taxation Section for 2018) o $75 Current Law Students o $30 Written Materials ONLY on USB drive (includes shipping and handling) **Onsite registration fee is $240 for everyone (if space is available), please register in advance.



    Cancellations and requests for refunds must be received in writing no later than Friday, June 15, 2018 and are subject to a $25 service charge. Refunds will not be available after Friday, June 15, 2018.



    For registration information call 415-795-7025. Telephone registrations will not be accepted. For program content and/or Section information call 415-795-7187.



    For special assistance please call 415 795-7187.



    Onsite registration will be on a space available basis. Call to confirm space availability







    The California Lawyers Association and the Taxation Section are approved State Bar of California MCLE providers.

    CalCPA is the CPE credit certified Provider.


  • 06/16/2018 6:02 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    ABA Journal

    The Modern Law Library

    By Lee Rawles

    Posted June 6, 2018, 7:20 am CDT 



    The Modern Law Library

    How Anthony Comstock's anti-obscenity crusade changed American law (podcast)


    Anthony Comstock

    Anthony Comstock was born in New Canaan, Connecticut in 1844, and died in 1915. Image from Wikimedia Commons.



    From 1873 until his death in 1915, Anthony Comstock was the most powerful shaper of American censorship and obscenity laws. Although he was neither an attorney nor an elected official, Comstock used an appointed position as a special agent of the U.S. Post Office Department and legislation known as the Comstock Laws to order the arrests and prosecutions of hundreds of artists, publishers, doctors and anyone else he felt was promoting vice.


    book cover



    For decades, Comstock was the sole arbiter in the United States of what was obscene—and his definition was expansive, encompassing not just images we’d recognize as pornography today, but also anatomy textbooks, pamphlets about birth control and the plays of George Bernard Shaw. In Lust on Trial: Censorship and the Rise of American Obscenity in the Age of Anthony Comstock, author Amy Werbel explains how Comstock’s religious fervor and backing by wealthy New York society members led to a raft of harsh federal and state censorship laws—and how the backlash to Comstock’s actions helped create a new civil liberties movement among defense lawyers.


    In this episode of the Modern Law Library, Werbel explains to the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles how a fortuitous meeting with leaders of the Young Men’s Christian Association turned Comstock’s path from being a dry goods salesman who liked to make citizen’s arrests to being the country’s first professional censor.


    Werbel also describes what the post-Civil War popular culture looked like prior to the Comstock Laws, the obscenity caselaw that developed, and the response of the legal community to Comstock’s repressive courtroom tactics.



    Download this podcast



    In This Podcast:

    <p>Amy Werbel</p>

    Amy Werbel

    Amy Werbel is an associate professor of art history at the Fashion Institute of Technology in New York. She is a graduate of Harvard and Radcliffe Colleges, holds a PhD Yale University, and is the recipient of fellowships from numerous institutions, including the Frick Center for the History of Collecting, the Smithsonian American Art Museum, the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. She is the author of Thomas Eakins: Art, Medicine, and Sexuality in Nineteenth-Century Philadelphia (2007), Lessons from China: America in the Hearts and Minds of the World’s Most Important Rising Generation (2013), and Lust on Trial: Censorship and the Rise of American Obscenity in the Age of Anthony Comstock (2018).







  • 06/16/2018 6:00 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    ABA Journal

    Legal Rebels Podcast

    May 16, 2018, 8:00 am CDT
    Victor Li



    Legal Rebels Podcast

    From paper to digital documents, Judge Andrew Peck traveled (and set) the discovery trail (podcast)


     Judge Peck

    Andrew Peck


    For litigators accustomed to conducting discovery inside large warehouses surrounded by hundreds, if not thousands, of cardboard file boxes, combing through several forests' worth of paper to find the few relevant documents was like trying to find the needle in the haystack.

    Andrew Peck, a litigator at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison’s New York City office from 1978 to 1995, when he was appointed U.S. magistrate judge for the Southern District of New York, remembers enjoying those days.


    “The Sherlock Holmes enthusiast in me enjoyed looking for the key document, the key piece of paper—and it was always paper—that would blow the case open,” Peck says.


    That doesn’t mean he closed himself off to progress. As electronic data became more prevalent in the 1990s, Peck, an ABA Journal Legal Rebels Trailblazer, wrote a line that would be quoted by judges and lawyers for generations to come. “It is black-letter law that computerized data is discoverable if relevant,” he wrote in Anti-Monopoly Inc. v. Hasbro Inc., a trademark dispute brought by the makers of the board game Monopoly against a stylistically similar game that purported to serve as a response to it. It was one of Peck’s earliest decisions from the bench.


    When new technology came along that promised to let lawyers navigate the electronic discovery process more quickly and efficiently, Peck did not run from it. In 2011, he was invited to give a talk at the inaugural Carmel Valley eDiscovery Retreat about electronic searches and, during his research, learned more about the process that would be called predictive coding, or technology-assisted review. He was immediately intrigued and wrote “Search, Forward,” an article in the October 2011 issue of Law Technology News about how predictive coding was superior to traditional keyword searches.


    “Until there is a judicial opinion approving (or even critiquing) the use of predictive coding, counsel will just have to rely on this article as a sign of judicial approval,” Peck wrote at the time. “In my opinion, computer-assisted coding should be used in those cases where it will help ‘secure the just, speedy and inexpensive’ [quoting from the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] determination of cases in our e-discovery world.”


    Shortly after his article ran, a discovery matter that involved predictive coding came to his desk. Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe & MSLGroup seemed, at first glance, like a run-of-the-mill, employment-gender discrimination case. However, both sides had been willing to use some sort of predictive coding during discovery; they just disagreed about how to go about it, allowing Peck to be the one to issue the kind of judicial opinion approving predictive coding that he’d written about in his article.


    After noting that his opinion seemed to be the first to approve of technology-assisted review in e-discovery, Peck tried to assuage the concerns of anyone still skeptical about its validity or acceptability.


    “What the bar should take away from this opinion is that computer-assisted review is an available tool and should be seriously considered for use in large-data-volume cases where it may save the producing party (or both parties) significant amounts of legal fees in document review,” Peck wrote. “Counsel no longer have to worry about being the ‘first’ or ‘guinea pig’ for judicial acceptance of computer-assisted review.”


    Of course, things don’t always work out so neatly. The Da Silva Moore case kicked around for another three years after Peck issued his groundbreaking opinion. It took many twists and turns. Although Peck’s subsequent opinions on predictive coding, Rio Tinto v. Vale (2015) and Hyles v. City of New York (2016), allowed him to expand on his jurisprudence, he admits that by then he expected use of some sort of technology-assisted review would have been the default position in most e-discovery matters.


    He points out that several factors have combined to prevent TAR’s growth, including the billable-hour model; the lack of desire to be first out of the box; and concerns about fighting protracted battles over seed sets, protocols and nonresponsive documents that would negate any cost savings from using TAR.


    On that front, he’s optimistic that TAR 2.0 will allay many of those concerns. The newer method uses continuous machine learning and algorithmic updating, so that software can find relevant documents more accurately.


    “As people get used to that, there will be more use of TAR,” Peck says. “The case law is such that courts have approved it, so there’s no longer as much fear.”


    Indeed, Peck suggests TAR might be more prevalent than one might think, saying that during his last year on the bench, there were more cases in front of him, as well as anecdotal evidence, that parties were agreeing to use TAR more. “It won’t show up in opinions because there’s no dispute,” he says.


    Peck, who joined DLA Piper in April, two months after retiring from the bench, says he wants to be remembered for more than his trilogy of TAR cases. He points to several IP disputes he handled, as well as a Fair Labor Standards Act case and a securities class action against supermarket chain Fairway as matters he was particularly proud of.


    Because he’s retired from the bench doesn’t mean he’s going to be taking it easy. Peck already has a lot of plans for his new career at DLA Piper, including maintaining an active speaking schedule, consulting on e-discovery matters, arbitrating and mediating disputes, supervising young associates and taking on pro bono cases. He’s also going to indulge in some of his hobbies, including his longtime membership in the Baker Street Irregulars, a Sherlock Holmes literary society, and attending New York Yankees games.


    And he’ll be keeping an eye on new developments in e-discovery and technology, including the General Data Protection Regulation, cybersecurity, the “internet of things” and artificial intelligence.


    “Obviously, artificial intelligence is something that’s being talked about a lot,” Peck says. “We’ll see if it develops faster than predictive coding and TAR did. Time will tell.”


    Download this podcast


    In This Podcast:

    Andrew J. Peck retired as a U.S. magistrate judge for the Southern District of New York in February. He is now senior counsel in the New York office of DLA Piper.






  • 06/10/2018 6:02 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    Bar Association of San Francisco 


    The Litigation Section, co-sponsored by Family Law and Estate Planning Section present:


    Representing Clients with a Perceived Mental Impairment


    June 18, 2018: 12:00 pm - 1:15 pm

    MCLE Credits - 1 H, in Legal Ethics






    Register For Webcast Replay




    Ethical and Practical Challenges:
    How to Effectively Represent a Client with a Perceived Mental Impairment




    Honorable Mary E. Wiss
    San Francisco Superior Court

    Merri A. Baldwin
    Rogers Joseph O'Donnell


    Mark L. Mosley
    Seiler, Epstein, Ziegler & Applegate



    • Steps needed to identify the possible impairment and assess its potential impact upon the representation
    • Clarifying the boundary between decisions the client must make, and those the attorney must make
    • The attorney's options when the client's decisions are materially and adversely affecting his or her legal position
    • When and how to terminate the representation


    Section Chair: Warren Metlitzky, Conrad & Metlitzky



    Online Only




    Program: 12:00 - 1:15 p.m.


    Event Code: R180053



    Questions about our seminars and the registration process?



  • 06/05/2018 4:17 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    Bar Association of San Francisco 


    The Estate Planning, Probate and Trust Section of the Barristers Club presents:


    Trust Distribution: How, Why & When do Trustees Distribute


    June 14, 2018: 12:00 pm - 1:15 pm

    MCLE Credits - 1 H, This is a brown bag luncheon



    Register for this Event



    Trust Distribution: How, Why and When do Trustees Distribute (or not?)




    John Osborn
    Vice President, Regional Trust Manager, Mechanics Bank

    Emily Sides
    Assistant Vice President, Fiduciary Advisory Specialist, Wells Fargo


    Herb Thomas
    Principal Fiduciary, Herb Thomas and Associates



    Deb Kinney
    Partner, Johnston, Kinney, and Zulaica LLP


    The language we use to direct trust distributions matters. Come hear directly from practicing bank trustees to learn how the language we use in our trust distributions is interpreted and deployed. We will explore what language is necessary to effectuate the testator’s intent and wishes. Plus, we’ll discuss how corporate trustees and professional fiduciaries approach ascertainable standards, discretionary distributions, consideration of other resources and standard of living. And of course we’ll touch on HEMS - what does HEMS really mean when it comes to getting money from the trust?




    • An analysis of actual trust distribution language and how it is generally interpreted
    • Will a HEMS standard accomplish your clients’ goals or frustrate them?
    • How to capture the testator’s intent to better inform your trustees
    • Practical insight and experience from bank trustees and private professional fiduciaries


    Section Chairs: Kelsey Quaranto, Quaranto Law & Richard Shu, Solan, Park & Robello



    Printable Flyer ( PDF)




    BASF Conference Center
    301 Battery Street
    3rd Floor
    San Francisco, CA 94111




    MCLE Registration: 11:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.
    Program: 12:00-1:15 p.m.



    BASF Student Member Complimentary
    Section Member $30.00
    BASF Member $40.00
    Government $40.00
    Nonprofit $40.00
    Non-Member $55.00


    Note: All prices increase by $10.00 on the day of the program.


    Event Code: B181256


    Questions about our seminars and the registration process?




    Register for this Event



    Fax or Mail your registration: Registration Form ( PDF)


  • 06/05/2018 4:15 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    Bar Association of San Francisco 


    The Family Law Section of the Barristers Club presents:


    Navigating Custody Evaluations


    June 13, 2018: 5:30 pm - 6:45 pm

    MCLE Credits - 1 H



    Register for this Event





    Register For Webcast



    Navigating Custody Evaluations: A Practical Guide for Attorneys Working with 730 Custody Evaluators in Child Custody Cases




    Dr. Robert L. Kaufman, Ph.D., A.B.P.P.
    Senior Trial Consultant
    Bonora Roundtree, LLC, Trial Consulting & Research

    Dr. S. Margaret Lee, Ph.D.
    Licensed Psychologist



    Lisa Lopez-O’Bara
    Fenchel Family Law



    Attorneys helping clients navigate difficult custodial disputes can attend this panel to hear from seasoned experts, well-versed in the complexities of the formal custody evaluation process. Panelists will provide both an overview of the process, as well as respond to specific questions related to requesting a custodial evaluation, prepping clients for what to expect, and skillfully advocating for your client throughout the process.

    • Best Practices when working with Custody Evaluators
    • Common legal issues in Custody Cases
    • People v. Sanchez issues


    Printable Flyer ( PDF)




    BASF Conference Center
    301 Battery Street
    3rd Floor
    San Francisco, CA 94111






    MCLE Registration: 5:00-5:30 p.m.
    Program: 5:30-6:45 p.m.




    BASF Student Member Complimentary
    Section Member $30.00
    BASF Member $40.00
    Government $40.00
    Nonprofit $40.00
    Non-Member $55.00

    Note: All prices increase by $10.00 on the day of the program.



    Event Code: B181265


    Questions about our seminars and the registration process?



    Register For Webcast



    Register for this Event



    Fax or Mail your registration: Registration Form ( PDF)



  • 06/01/2018 5:00 AM | Denise Bashline (Administrator)

    Bar Association of San Francisco 


    The Litigation Section presents:


    PMQ Depositions: Goals, Strategies and Effective Uses

    June 12, 2018: 12:00 pm - 1:15 pm

    MCLE Credits - 1 H, This is a brown bag luncheon.




    Register for this Event






    Register For Webcast


    Honorable Sallie Kim
    United States Magistrate Judge, United States District Court, N.D. of California

    Heidi Swartz
    Director and Associate General Counsel, Labor and Employment at Facebook

    Evan Nadel
    Litigation Partner at Mintz Levin, San Francisco

    Scott Lawson
    Pennington Lawson LLP

    Depositions of corporate representatives under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) and California Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.230 provide a unique and powerful tool for litigators. Too often, however, this tool is not used effectively and economically. This program will present three different perspectives on the best ways to use, prepare for, and defend corporate depositions—that of the Court, the litigator, and corporate counsel.

    • Best practices for noticing, taking and using PMQ depositions
    • Selecting and preparing your corporate witness/es
    • What does “known or reasonably available” mean?
    • Privilege and work-product issues
    • Use of the PMK deposition at trial


    Section Chair: Warren Metlitzky, Conrad & Metlitzky



    Printable Flyer ( PDF)



    BASF Conference Center
    301 Battery Street
    3rd Floor
    San Francisco, CA 94111




    MCLE Registration: 11:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
    Program: 12:00 - 1:15 p.m.




    BASF Student Member Complimentary
    Section Member $30.00
    BASF Member $40.00
    Government $40.00
    Nonprofit $40.00
    Non-Member $55.00


    Note: All prices increase by $10.00 on the day of the program.


    Event Code: G183103


    Questions about our seminars and the registration process?



    Register For Webcast




    Register for this Event



    Fax or Mail your registration: Registration Form ( PDF)


<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   5   ...   Next >  Last >> 

San Francisco Paralegal Association • 1 Sansome St., Ste. 3500 • San Francisco, CA 94104-4448 • (415) 946-8935 •