• Home

Civil homework help

DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE 1

DRUG AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE 6

Drug and Substance Abuse

Course

Date

Many countries are afflicted by the overuse of prescription drugs. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent each year on drug misuse prevention, treatment, and law enforcement initiatives around the world. Even though drugs pose a threat to many different civilizations, they can be effectively combated. An examination of the social consequences of drug usage is offered in this paper, along with suggestions for potential solutions. Nations and communities alike are affected by drug abuse, which has a wide range of repercussions. It is possible to perceive the bodily and psychological consequences clearly (Winters, 2018). Addicts are unable to participate in society in a meaningful way because of their addiction. Because of this, their families are harmed. In some cases, they may even wind up in the hospital or require expensive medical treatment. This has a second consequence in terms of criminality. The police will have to commit a significant amount of resources to the fight against smuggling and drug trafficking. The money produced from drug trafficking goes directly into the coffers of organized crime and the mafia’s underbelly.

Addiction has a devastating effect on families all around society, as is well known. The effects on a person’s life might be profound if their spouse or parent is a drug user. As a result, you may face financial difficulties (due to job loss or money being diverted to fuel the habit). It can also lead to irresponsible behavior, putting the safety of the family in jeopardy (McCance-Katz, 2019). When a member of the family is afflicted by an addiction, the entire family is affected.

In many cases, domestic violence stems from substance misuse inside a partnership. It’s possible for a person to become addicted on all sides of a fight, not just the abuser.

Minors cannot be prevented from taking inhalants or other hazardous legal narcotics since it would be impossible to prevent them from doing so. One action is unlikely to be effective on its own; instead, a coordinated strategy can have the greatest impact on lowering drug usage as the field progresses over time.

A comprehensive community prevention plan to address youth use of dangerous legal goods is comprised of three evidence-based preventative intervention components: community mobilization, environmental interventions, and prevention education at the school level. We intend to incorporate the most recent and extensive research on sickness prevention measures into these components. Through the use of this technique, effective community mobilization can help to promote prevention efforts and increase the number of people in the community who participate in prevention activities and actions to reduce the use of dangerous legal products among children and adolescents, such as alcohol (Nieweglowski, 2018). Adequate community participation is required for a multi-pronged prevention plan, which may include environmental measures as well as a preventative program aimed specifically at schools.

Assessment of the community’s level of preparedness. Whether or not legal products, such as those that are inhaled or eaten by teens, can be kept from being abused is a topic of great concern. Several studies have demonstrated that there are nine stages of community readiness: non-awareness; denial; uncertainty; preparation; initiation; stabilization; confirmation/expansion; and a strong sense of community ownership at the beginning of each stage. To determine the level of community readiness, it may be necessary to interview people who are knowledgeable about certain health or social issue as well as the norms of the community.

Building on and Extending the Existing Framework To effectively mobilize the entire community in the fight against a health or social issue, coalitions or alliances comprised of key leaders, agencies, and organizations can be formed. In addition, training and technical assistance should be made available throughout the early stages of development or restructuring projects. This could be accomplished by employing a part-time community prevention organizer (CPO) who will adhere to a set of responsibilities and deadlines to mobilize people outside of the base (Kristjansson, 2020). Even if they are only part-time CPOs, any CPO can identify key leaders and supporters who will support the initiative regardless of their position.

Preparation and implementation of a game strategy A community’s preventative action plan should include specific activities and methods that can be implemented. To persuade local leaders and businesses to participate in community-based preventive efforts, it is vital to engage in media advocacy. It is known as “media advocacy” when the strategic use of local media and other kinds of public communication is used to achieve an important social or public policy aim (Kristjansson, 2020). By collaborating with local media channels, such as radio and television stations, as well as newspapers and magazines, public health challenges and potential solutions are brought to the public’s attention.

Maintaining high standards of performance while also figuring out ways to take feedback and discuss results The evaluation and dissemination of outcomes are critical for assuring the growth of communities. The findings of a long-term evaluation should be shared with preventive activists and other relevant community leaders, if possible. Depending on the accomplishments of coalitions or partnership members who have set a baseline in terms of community readiness or capacity building, training, and technical assistance could be provided. Preliminary research findings on children’s use of potentially dangerous legal objects, as well as the results of future evaluations, can excite the interest of members of the public. Last but not least, preventing children from abusing dangerous legal substances requires a comprehensive strategy that stresses strong interagency structures, formal links, resources, and prevention.

 

References

Winters, K. C., Botzet, A. M., & Lee, S. (2018). Assessing adolescent substance use problems and other areas of functioning: State of the art.

McCance-Katz, E. F. (2019). The national survey on drug use and health: 2017. Substance abuse and mental health services administration.

Nieweglowski, K., Corrigan, P. W., Tyas, T., Tooley, A., Dubke, R., Lara, J., … & Addiction Stigma Research Team. (2018). Exploring the public stigma of substance use disorder through community-based participatory research. Addiction Research & Theory26(4), 323-329.

Kristjansson, A. L., Mann, M. J., Sigfusson, J., Thorisdottir, I. E., Allegrante, J. P., & Sigfusdottir, I. D. (2020). Development and guiding principles of the Icelandic model for preventing adolescent substance use. Health promotion practice21(1), 62-69.

Civil homework help

Intro

Civic Engagement & Social Capital

Generational Engagement

Civic Engagement and Social Inequities

Public Participation

Public Participation Skills

Informal

Arenstein’s Ladder

1

Arenstein’s Ladder

Arnstein, Sherry R. “A Ladder of Citizen Participation,” JAIP, Vol. 35, No. 4, July 1969, pp. 216-224.

Empowerment and Disempowerment

Intro

Civic Engagement & Social Capital

Generational Engagement

Civic Engagement and Social Inequities

Public Participation

Public Participation Skills

IAP2’s Engagement Spectrum

2

Intro

Civic Engagement & Social Capital

Generational Engagement

Civic Engagement and Social Inequities

Public Participation

Public Participation Skills

Informal

Participation Types

Thick

Extensive facilitation and discussion

Thin

Passive and invitational

Conventional

Posted invitations (may not be accessible to all)

Deliberate recruitment and issue framing (“Why are we here?”)

Action plan or extensive, actionable education for long-term engagement

Providing/Eliciting data or resources

Often located in gathering spaces (off or online)

Informational with little access to decision-makers

Agenda and space for input is strict and small

Intro

Civic Engagement & Social Capital

Generational Engagement

Civic Engagement and Social Inequities

Public Participation

Public Participation Skills

Participation Methods- Classification- Frewer/Rowe

Public

Public

Public

Facilitator

Facilitator

Facilitator

Communication

Consultation

Participation

Intro

Civic Engagement & Social Capital

Generational Engagement

Civic Engagement and Social Inequities

Public Participation

Public Participation Skills

Participation Methods- Classification- Communication

Public meetings

Briefings

Telephone

Direct electronic contact

Fact Sheets

Web Sites

Social Media

Information Repositories

Newsletters

Kiosks

Press and media

Community performance

Mobile messaging

Local partnering

Intro

Civic Engagement & Social Capital

Generational Engagement

Civic Engagement and Social Inequities

Public Participation

Public Participation Skills

Participation Methods- Classification- Consultation

Interviews

Focus Groups

Study Circles

Public Meetings/Hearings

Workshops

Appreciative Inquiry

World Cafes

Charrettes

Computer Assisted Processes

Voting/Ballots

Written comments

On-line input

Intro

Civic Engagement & Social Capital

Generational Engagement

Civic Engagement and Social Inequities

Public Participation

Public Participation Skills

Participation Methods- Classification- Participation

Consensus workshops

Advisory boards

Web-based processes

Computer assisted processes

Citizen juries

Low Participation

High Inclusion

High Participation

High Inclusion

Low Participation

Low Inclusion

High Participation

Low Inclusion

Intro

Civic Engagement & Social Capital

Generational Engagement

Civic Engagement and Social Inequities

Public Participation

Public Participation Skills

Axis of Engagement Practices

Participation

Inclusion

Low

High

Low

High

Civil homework help

Based on the class lectures and discussions, videos we watched in class and the articles
provided under this assignment develop a well-organized 2-3 page double spaced essay that
discussed the causes and impact (short-term and long-term) of the Attica riots. Please make
sure to address the following issues in you essay:

• what caused the riot
• why the Attica riot is so well known and has become a “battle cry” for prisoners
• what were the short-term impacts of the riot on prisons, corrections offices and

the overall prison system
• what were the long-term impacts of the riot on prisons, corrections offices and

the overall prison system
• what lessons were learned from the riots (if any)
• what was the successes and failures relate to the riot
• how does Attica of the 1970 compare with Attica of today
• what if anything still needs to be done today to fix things? Be specific in your

suggestions.

MAKE SURE TO WATCH VIDEOS BELOW AND USE INFORMATION FROM THEM !

Civil homework help

PCS 2010, HIS 2520, PS 2830

Social Justice Activism Week 3

Collective Identity:

The Lesbian Feminist
Movement encourages

women to engage in wide
ranges of social and

political actions designed
to challenge, influence

and take control of
dominant systems.

Protesters with signs, Miss America protest, Atlantic City, 1968 (left: Carol Giardina)

1979 March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights

Mary Daly
Author of ‘Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism

Angela Davis,
Author, Educator, Activist, Black Panther Party Movement

Marsha P. Johnson
Co-founder Street Transvestite Action

Revolutionaries (S.T.A.R)

“Women are not inherently passive or peaceful.
We’re not inherently anything but human”.

~ Robin Morgan

“You cannot, you cannot use someone else’s fire.
You can only use your own. And in order to do

that, you must first be willing to believe that you
have it.”

~Audre Lorde

1979 March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights

Protesters at Stonewall
Stonewall Inn in New York’s Greenwich Village, June 28, 1969.

Frances E.W. Harper,
Early Black Lesbian and Bisexual Writer

Lesbian Feminism is a cultural movement that
was most vigorous during the 1960’s, 70’s,
80’s as well as presently.

The Lesbian feminist movement, a
subset and collective Identity (sub-merged
networks) of feminism that emerged in the
mid-to-late 20th century in the conjunction of
the women’s movement, the gay rights
movement and the sexual revolution.

Lesbians played a prominent role in many new
feminist organizations, helping to organize for
equity:

• workplace
• home
• courts

The first wave of women’s movements came
between 1840-1925. The main battles these
women fought for were:

• right to vote
• higher education
• employment
• right to own property after marriage

The second wave of women’s
movements was between 1960-1995.
Radical feminism: Also known as the
women’s liberation movement.

Radical feminism:

Radical feminists believe that the oppression of women
is the doorway to all other forms of oppression.

These members are very committed to equality and
utilize many techniques to make their meetings equal
for all those in attendance.

They wanted to raise attention about the oppression of
women and to demand changes in where women
distinctly stand in society and also in relationships.

The third wave of women’s movements is still active today. It
includes women of all backgrounds and economic situations.

Six features are a part of this wave:
1. Recognizing differences among women: Fight for the rights of all

women, women are not just one big group. Differences between
women including sexual orientation, class, race, body shape, and
ability.

2. Building coalitions: Other groups to work with in the fight for
women’s rights. Alliances are built with men’s rights groups and
other groups.

3. Engaging in everyday resistance: The second wave passed many
laws giving rights to women and to people of other races. Laws are
not being followed through upon on a personal level. People still make
racist and sexist jokes on a daily basis. Third wave feminists
challenge all sexist or racist jokes and comments.

4. Being media savvy: Third wave feminists are able to use media
both to learn information about what is happening but also to spread
their ideas.

5. Embracing aesthetics and consumerism: These feminists believe
that women can be strong and be sexy at the same time. It is not
inherently bad for women to buy fashionable clothes and look
beautiful. They encourage women to explore their sexuality for
themselves, not for others.

6. Individualism: Third wave feminists focus on individuals having
their own goals and identities. Women are very diverse, not of a
single political agenda.

• The lesbian feminist movement evolved as as social
movement community (collective identity) at the national level
through connections between local communities in decentralized
and fragmented social structures.

• The lesbian feminist movement organized and mobilized
through political actions to criticize homophobia within the
women’s movement as their platform and cultivated political
strategies as a form of resistance.

Two types of participatory social movement
organizations (SMO’s) are:

• Mass protest organizations – advocate for
social change through protest and
demonstration.

• Grassroots organizations – tend to work
through existing political structures to promote
social change

Not all grassroots radicals are the same. The
radicals according to Della and Porta’s research
account evolved into the more militant type.

• This is due in part to the way radicals are in
contact with law enforcement as well as their
ability to build trust among tightly knit groups.
This is only one type of radical.

Here, we’ll identify four types
of radicals or routes that
activists can take as they

expand into radicals.

Opportunistic Radicals:

Are opportunistic due to the fact that
their activities are constrained in terms
of what they can accomplish by
themselves and tend to steer clear of
violent forms of activism.

Coordinated Radicals:

Are identified by close associational
ties and the support facilitative of high-
risk activism, as well as by a rational
approach towards violence and
unlawfulness.

Militant Radicals:

Are like the coordinated radicals, are
able to form tight knit affinity groups,
their embrace of more extremist
approaches often puts them at odds
with their less radical peers.

Loner Radicals:

Are loners, or lone-wolf radical. Loners,
like the opportunistic radicals are
unable to find an affinity group.

Like the militants, they share the
impression that they are hunted and
oppressed bylaw enforcement, and that
extreme methods are the best solution.

Key Concepts to note from Week 3 textbook readings, Lesbian
Feminist Movement in Frontier’s in Social Movement Theory

• Collective Identity (Identity-Oriented Paradigms)

• Consciousness (cognitive frameworks)

• Collective Identity (sub-merged networks)

• Boundaries (dominant groups social, cultural,
economic, political, multiple systems of domination)

• Collective Identity (Negotiation, personal
transformation, expressive action )

• Resource Mobilization (Collective Identity, Collective
Action, Collective Behavior)

Key Concepts to note from Week 3 textbook readings, Cycles of
Protests Frontier’s in Social Movement Theory

• Cycle of Protests (Temporal, Clusters, Spatial, Emergent)

• Social Movement Organizations (SMO’s)

• Master Frames (frame alignment, frame resonance)

• Collective Action Frames (injustice, problems/issues
exposed, immoral, signaling)

• Dynamics of the Cycle of Protest (Tactical, Shape, Decline)

Key Concepts to note from Week 3 textbook readings, Collective
Identity and Activism Frontier’s in Social Movement Theory

• Structural and Network Activism

• Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action

• Rational Actors

• Free-Riders

• Three Stages of Development of Social Movements:
Participation (Networks, Existing and New Members
and Collective Identity)

Class,

Please read all textbook assign reading for this
week, watch all of the video clips/documentaries
and read supplemental articles, specifically:

Women’s Culture and Lesbian Feminist Activism-
A Reconsideration of Cultural Feminism Author(s)-
Verta Taylor and Leila J. Rupp.pdf

Week 3 Discussion Questions:
Class,

In material’s covered in Week 3, all textbook readings assignments to
date. Remember, this includes all film/documentaries and video clips.
You will not be to successfully participate in the class discussion board
forum without reviewing all of the textbook readings and supplemental
reading located in Week 3 content module.

1. Please identify what wave(s) of feminism (lesbian or not) that appeared
in the documentary, “BBC Documentary Women’s Liberation
Movement”. Did you notice any overlapping waves? If so, please provide
an example of what you noticed.

2. In the journal article, Women’s Culture and Lesbian Feminist Activism-
A Reconsideration of Cultural Feminism Author(s) – Verta Taylor and Leila
J. Rupp, what underlying theme of collective action was prevalent in
comparison to the brief videos, “Gay Rights March Part 1-3 and
Stonewall 40 years Later”.

Week 3 Discussion Questions continued:

3. Please identify one of the four types of radicals or routes
that social activists took that expanded in to radical(s) from
a historical perspective in the video, “The Lesbian and
Feminist Movements and the article, “The waves of
feminism, and why people keep fighting over them,
explained” and “BBC Documentary Women’s Liberation
Movement”. Please provide one example of each of the
above videos in your response.

Please note: I’m looking for your varying perspectives and not just (1) one in
your critical analysis discussion board forum response and also to your fellow
classmates responses.

End of Slides Only Presentation

Civil homework help

Description of the Contract (overview description of the transaction)

Description of the Consideration Exchanged (explain who received what)

Bi-lateral or Unilateral Contract

Executed or Executory Contract

Did the UCC ARTICLE 2 OR 2A apply? Why/why not

(Do not address other ARTICLES in the UCC—Just Article 2 & 2A) [assume for our purposes both parties to the contract are defined as “merchants” for UCC purposes when filling out this chart]

Oral or Written Contract

Was there a breach of the contract? If so, explain the remedies you could sue for.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Civil homework help

Resource Mobilization Theory and the Study of Social Movements Author(s): J. Craig Jenkins Source: Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 9 (1983), pp. 527-553 Published by: Annual Reviews Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2946077 Accessed: 07-02-2020 05:11 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual

Review of Sociology

This content downloaded from 141.217.20.120 on Fri, 07 Feb 2020 05:11:46 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Ann. Rev. Sociol. 1983. 9:527-53

Copyright ? 1983 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved

RESOURCE MOBILIZATION

THEORY AND THE STUDY OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

J. Craig Jenkins

Department of Sociology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211

Abstract

Resource mobilization theory has recently presented an alternative interpreta tion of social movements. The review traces the emergence and recent con troversies generated by this new perspective. A multifactored model of social movement formation is advanced, emphasizing resources, organization, and political opportunities in addition to traditional discontent hypotheses. The McCarthy-Zald (1973) theory of entrepreneurial mobilization is critically assessed as an interpretation of the social movements of the 1960s-1970s, and the relevance of the Olson (1968) theory of collective action is specified. Group organization is argued to be the major determinant of mobilization potential and patterns. The debate between the Gerlach-Hine (1970) and entrepreneurial theories of social movement organization is traced in terms of historical changes in the social movement sector and the persistence of organizational diversity. A model of social movement politics is outlined, building on Gam son’s (1975) theory of strategy and Tilly’s (1978) polity theory by emphasizing political alliances and processes shaping success and failure. Piven & Cloward (1977) are correct that disruptiveness leads to success and that disruptions can be mobilized without formal organization; they are wrong in asserting that formal organization is necessarily incompatible with mobilization. The future development of resource mobilization theory lies in two directions: extending the polity theory to deal with different states and regimes, including the development of neo-corporatism, and providing a more sophisticated social psychology of mobilization.

527

0360-0572/83/0815-0527$02.00

534 JENKINS

“participation revolution” in American politics but merely reflected improved

facilitative conditions for professionalized mobilization. Professionals and

college students with discretionary time schedules and income, liberal institu-

tions with “slack” resources, and pervasive mass media that could be coopted

by enterprising movement entrepreneurs were the major factors behind the

stormy 1960s. Evidence on political trends, however, indicates a virtual

explosion of unconventional mass political participation between 1960 and

1974. Figure 1 shows that the number of protest demonstrations and riots

escalated dramatically, peaking in the 1967-1972 period. This “participation

revolution” was, in turn, undergirded by a general increase in the mobilization

for unconventional politics as the number of political ideologues increased

from 1% of the citizenry in the 1950s to 19% in 1972, then declining to 7% in

1976 (Nie, Verba & Petrocik 1980:367), membership in political organizations

expanded from 2.8% in 1956 to a peak of 4.4% in 1974 (Survey Research

Center & Davis et al 1981), and political activists involved in nonelectoral

activity rose from 5-12% in the 1950s to 15-20% in the late 1960s and early

1970s (Campbell et al 1960:51-2; Converse 1972:332-6; Rosenau 1974:44-

86; Milbrath & Goel 1977:18-19). Simultaneously, mobilization for routine

politics declined as voter turnout slowly declined, partisan independence

rose, and general distrust of elected officials and major institutions

260

240

220

200

180

160

140

1 20

1 00 Demonstrat ions-:

80

60 -Riots

40

20

.

kD tD tD s tD tD s s~D ~

a an m in th ts,

Figure I Demonstrations a

This content downloaded from 141.217.20.120 on Fri, 07 Feb 2020 05:11:46 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

This content downloaded from 141.217.20.120 on Fri, 07 Feb 2020 05:11:46 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

This content downloaded from 141.217.20.120 on Fri, 07 Feb 2020 05:11:46 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Civil homework help

Everyone enters hundreds of contracts a month——-but you probably don’t realize it.  If you buy fast food, that is a contract.  If you drop off your laundry to be cleaned at the dry cleaners, that is a contract.  If you ordered something off of a website, that is a contract. 

You should first list 10 contracts you have entered into since the beginning of the term.

· For this assignment fill in the following Contract Characteristics chart.

Civil homework help

Discussion: Self-Check—Evaluate Your Understanding of Guidelines 3-4 (10 points)

Discussion Overview

This discussion forum will help you evaluate your research and writing skills.

Grading


This discussion is worth 10 points.  Use the attached rubric to determine if you are meeting the objectives of the assignment for full credit.


Note: You will not be able to view the posts of your classmates until you submit your initial post.

Deliverables

Your participation in the discussion forum, including:

1. A clear, specific, and detailed response to the initial question(s) below

2. Clear, specific, and detailed, responses to at least two other students’ posts

Step 1

Post the following: What are your obligations under these Guidelines? What real life scenario do you believe you could encounter as a paralegal in which Guidelines 3-4 will apply? How will you adjust your workplace activity based upon these Guidelines? What other questions or comments do you have about these Guidelines?

Step 2

Read other students’ posts and respond to at least two of them.

Tips to Successfully Complete the Discussion:

1. Use the attached Rubric to determine whether your original post and replies include the necessary detail to successfully complete this assignment.

2. Important Note: Be sure to write an original post. Do not copy and paste answers that you locate elsewhere whether in the course materials or on the Internet. If you do want to refer to your lesson materials or Internet sources, you must give credit to that borrowed information and provide basic citations. The goal here isn’t perfect citation, but rather to make sure that you follow the student’s and paralegal’s ethical duties to give credit for information borrowed from other sources. If you want to use exact words and phrases as part of your answer use quotation marks, but your response should still be primarily in your own words. Only then will you demonstrate that you understand the material covered. If you have any questions, please reach out to your instructor.

3. Consider this: When a client, managing attorney, or judge asks a paralegal a question, the paralegal cannot simply hand that individual an outside source. A paralegal can refer to the source, but he/she still must answer the question in his/her own words and demonstrate confidence and skill in the topic at hand.

Civil homework help

Discussion Rubric

Accomplished

40-30

Satisfactory

29-25

Unsatisfactory

24-0

Quality of Content

(75% Weight)

Post/Reply: Student is responsive to the discussion prompt. Student shows accurate and in-depth/applied knowledge of the material. Content is detailed and clear. Correct citations used.

Post/Reply: Student is mostly responsive to the discussion prompt. Student shows accurate knowledge of the material. Content is somewhat detailed and clear. Mostly correct citations used.

 Post/Reply: Student is minimally responsive to the discussion prompt or skims the surface of the assignment. Student shows limited or inaccurate understanding of, or ability to apply, the material. Content is vague and lacks detail. Incorrect citations or citations are missing.

Grammar and Netiquette

(25% Weight)

Post/Reply: Student uses complete sentences, correct spelling, punctuation, & grammar. Word usage is appropriate and clear. Student observed proper netiquette expressing viewpoints, disagreements, alternative views or questions in a courteous, respectful way.

 Post/Reply: Student is reasonably clear and generally grammatically correct. Student observed proper netiquette expressing viewpoints, disagreements, alternative views or questions in a courteous, respectful way.

 Post/Reply: Post/Reply is unclear and poorly written in terms of grammar. Student did not observe proper netiquette. Student was not respectful of opposing viewpoints.

 

 

 

Content (x 75%):

Grammar/Netiquette (x 25%):

Final Score:

This rubric is adapted from “Example of a Discussion Board Rubric,” Patrice Torcivia Prusko, IT@Cornell, URL: https://it.cornell.edu

Civil homework help

Guidelines
for the

Utilization of Paralegal Services

American Bar Association
Standing Committee on Paralegals

ABA Model

ABA Model

Guidelines

for the

Utilization of Paralegal Services

____________________________________________________

American Bar Association

Standing Committee on Paralegals

Guidelines

Copyright ©2018 American Bar Association

All rights reserved. The American Bar Association grants permission for reproduction of this
document, in whole or in part, provided that such use is for informational, non-commercial
purposes only and any copy of the materials or portion thereof acknowledges original
publication by the American Bar Association and includes the title of the publication, the name
of the author, and the legend “Copyright 2018 American Bar Association. Reprinted by
permission.” Requests to reproduce materials in any other manner should be addressed to:
Copyrights & Contracts Department, American Bar Association, 321 North Clark Street, Chicago,
Illinois 60654; Telephone (312) 988-6102; Facsimile: (312) 988-6030; E-mail:
copyright@americanbar.org.

ISBN: 978-1-64105-321-1

The materials contained herein represent the opinions of the authors and editors and should
not be construed to be those of the American Bar Association unless adopted pursuant to the
bylaws of the Association. Nothing contained herein is to be considered as the rendering of
legal advice for specific cases, and readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their
own legal counsel. These materials are intended for educational and informational purposes
only.

Produced by the Standing Committee on Paralegals.

Page 1

ABA MODEL GUIDELINES FOR THE

UTILIZATION OF PARALEGAL SERVICES©

Preamble

The Standing Committee on Paralegals of the American Bar Association drafted,

and the ABA House of Delegates adopted, the ABA Model Guidelines for the Utilization of
Legal Assistant Services in 1991. Most states have also prepared or adopted state‐specific
recommendations or guidelines for the utilization of services provided by paralegals.1 All of
these recommendations or guidelines are intended to provide lawyers with useful and
authoritative guidance in working with paralegals.

The Standing Committee’s intent in updating the Model Guidelines is to include
legal and policy developments that may have taken place since the last update in
2012. A Table of Contents and a Table of Authorities have been added, and the
Commentary is now phrased in a “reader‐friendly” style. The Standing Committee is of the
view that these and other guidelines on paralegal services will encourage lawyers to utilize
those services effectively and promote the continued growth of the paralegal profession.2

The Standing Committee has based these 2018 revisions on the American Bar
Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct (hereinafter “Model Rule”) but has also
attempted to take into account existing state recommendations and guidelines, decided
authority and contemporary practice. Lawyers, of course, are to be first directed by Model
Rule 5.3 in the utilization of paralegal services, and nothing contained in these Model

1
In 1986, the ABA Board of Governors approved a definition for the term “legal assistant.” In

1997, the ABA amended the definition of legal assistant by adopting the following language: “A legal
assistant or paralegal is a person qualified by education, training or work experience who is employed
or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation, governmental agency or other entity who performs
specifically delegated substantive legal work for which a lawyer is responsible.” To comport with
current usage in the profession, these guidelines use the term “paralegal” rather than “legal
assistant;” however, lawyers should be aware that the terms legal assistant and paralegals are often
used interchangeably.

2
While necessarily mentioning paralegal conduct, lawyers are the intended audience of these

Guidelines. The Guidelines, therefore, are addressed to lawyer conduct and not directly to the
conduct of the paralegal.

Page 2

Guidelines is intended to be inconsistent with that rule.3 Specific ethical considerations and
case law in particular states must also be taken into account by each lawyer that reviews
these guidelines. In the commentary after each Guideline, we have attempted to identify
the basis for the Guideline and any issues of which we are aware that the Guideline may
present. We have also included selected references to state and paralegal association
guidelines where we believed it would be helpful to the reader. Model documents from
two national paralegal associations are referenced throughout this publication. These
documents are the National Federation of Paralegal Associations (NFPA), Model Code of
Ethics and Professional Responsibility and Guidelines for Enforcement [hereinafter “NFPA
Guidelines”];4 and the National Association of Legal Assistants (NALA), Code of Ethics and
Professional Responsibility [hereinafter “NALA Ethics”].5 Rather than continually reference
the web address for these documents throughout the publication, they are provided here:

National Association of Legal Assistants (NALA): www.nala.org
(http://www.nala.org/code.aspx)

National Federation of Paralegal Associations (NFPA): www.paralegals.org
(http://www.paralegals.org/associations/2270/files/modelcode.html

3
The ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 amended several of the Model Rules referenced in

this publication, including Rules 1.1, 1.4, 1.6, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, in 2012. The amendments to Model Rule 5.3
changed the words “nonlawyer assistants” to “nonlawyer assistance” in the title and amended the
Comments to Model Rule 5.3. These changes are meant to highlight that lawyers have an obligation to
make reasonable efforts to ensure that all nonlawyers that assist them act in a manner that is
consistent with the attorney’s professional obligations – whether paralegals /assistants within the
firm or others employed from outside the firm (outsourcing). The Committee does not believe these
changes affect the way that Rule 5.3 is applied to paralegal practice.

4
The NFPA Model Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility was initially adopted in

1993. The revision used in this publication was made on June 9, 2006. The current version is
available on the NFPA web site indicated above.

5
The NALA Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility was originally adopted 1975, and

revised 1979, 1988, 1995, and 2007. The 2007 version is used in this publication. The current version
is available at the web site referenced above.

Page 3

Table of Contents

The Guidelines
Guideline 1: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4

A lawyer is responsible for all of the professional actions of a paralegal performing
services at the lawyer’s direction and should take reasonable measures to
ensure that the paralegal’s conduct is consistent with the lawyer’s obligations under the
rules of professional conduct of the jurisdiction in which the lawyer practices.

Guideline 2: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
Provided the lawyer maintains responsibility for the work product, a lawyer may
delegate to a paralegal any task normally performed by the lawyer except those tasks
proscribed to a nonlawyer by statute, court rule, administrative rule or regulation,
controlling authority, the applicable rule of professional conduct of the jurisdiction in
which the lawyer practices, or these Guidelines.

Guideline 3: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
A lawyer may not delegate to a paralegal:

(a) Responsibility for establishing an attorney‐client relationship.
(b) Responsibility for establishing the amount of a fee to be charged for a

legal service.
(c) Responsibility for a legal opinion rendered to a client.

Guideline 4: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10
A lawyer is responsible for taking reasonable measures to ensure that clients, courts,
and other lawyers are aware that a paralegal, whose services are utilized by the lawyer
in performing legal services, is not licensed to practice law.

Guideline 5: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
A lawyer may identify paralegals by name and title on the lawyer’s letterhead and on
business cards identifying the lawyer’s firm.

Guideline 6: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12
A lawyer is responsible for taking reasonable measures to ensure that all client
confidences are preserved by a paralegal.

Guideline 7: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 14
A lawyer should take reasonable measures to prevent conflicts of interest resulting from
a paralegal’s other employment or interests.

Guideline 8: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 17
A lawyer may include a charge for the work performed by a paralegal in setting a charge
and/or billing for legal services.

Guideline 9: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 18
A lawyer may not split legal fees with a paralegal nor pay a paralegal for the referral of
legal business. A lawyer may compensate a paralegal based on the quantity and quality
of the paralegal’s work and the value of that work to a law practice, but the paralegal’s
compensation may not be contingent, by advance agreement, upon the outcome of a
particular case or class of cases.

Guideline 10: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 20
A lawyer who employs a paralegal should facilitate the paralegal’s participation in
appropriate continuing education and pro bono publico activities.

Page 4

GUIDELINE 1: A lawyer is responsible for all of the professional actions of a
paralegal performing services at the lawyer’s direction and should take reasonable
measures to ensure that the paralegal’s conduct is consistent with the lawyer’s
obligations under the rules of professional conduct of the jurisdiction in which
the lawyer practices.

COMMENT

▪ Guideline 1 principles are incorporated within all guidelines.

The Standing Committee on Paralegals (“Standing Committee”) regards Guideline 1 as a
comprehensive statement of general principle governing the utilization of paralegals in the
practice of law. As such, the principles contained in Guideline 1 express the overarching
principle that although a lawyer may delegate tasks to a paralegal, a lawyer must always
assume ultimate responsibility for the delegated tasks and exercise independent
professional judgment with respect to all aspects of the representation of the client.

▪ Application of the Model Rules and Ethical Considerations of the Model Code

Under principles of agency law and the rules of professional conduct, lawyers are
responsible for the actions and the work product of nonlawyers they employ. Model Rule

5.36 requires that supervising lawyers ensure that the conduct of nonlawyer assistants7 is
compatible with the lawyer’s professional obligations.

Ethical Consideration 3‐6 of the Model Code encourages lawyers to delegate tasks to
paralegals so that legal services can be rendered more economically and efficiently. Ethical
Consideration 3‐6 further provides, however, that such delegation is only proper if the
lawyer “maintains a direct relationship with his client, supervises the delegated work, and
has complete professional responsibility for the work product.” The adoption of Model
Rule 5.3, which incorporates these principles, reaffirms this encouragement.

6
The Model Rules were first adopted by the ABA House of Delegates in August of 1983.

Almost all U.S. jurisdictions have adopted the Model Rules to govern the professional conduct of
lawyers licensed in those states. However, because a few jurisdictions still utilize a version of the ABA
Model Code of Professional Responsibility (“Model Code”), these comments will refer to both the
Model Rules and the predecessor Model Code (and to the Ethical Considerations (hereinafter “EC”)
and Disciplinary Rules (hereinafter “DR”) found under the canons in the Model Codes). In 1997, the
ABA formed the Commission on Evaluation of the Rules of Professional Conduct (“Ethics 2000
Commission”) to undertake a comprehensive review and revision of the Model Rules. The ABA House
of Delegates completed its review of the Commission’s recommended revisions in February 2002.
Visit https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/policy.html (last visited June
13, 2018) for information regarding the status of each state supreme court’s adoption of the Ethics
2000 revisions to the Model Rules as well as copies of both the model rules and model code.

7
See supra note 3 regarding a change to the terminology in Rule 5.3 effective in 2012.

Page 5

▪ Lawyers must instruct paralegals on professional conduct rules and supervise
paralegals consistent with the rules.

To conform to Guideline 1, a lawyer must give appropriate instruction to paralegals
supervised by the lawyer about the rules governing the lawyer’s professional conduct, and
require paralegals to act in accordance with those rules. See Comment to Model Rule 5.3;
see also National Association of Legal Assistant’s Model Standards and Guidelines for the
Utilization of Legal Assistants, Guidelines 1 and 4 (1985, revised 1990, 1997, 2005)
(hereafter “NALA Guidelines”).

Additionally, the lawyer must directly supervise paralegals employed by the lawyer to
ensure that, in every circumstance, the paralegal is acting in a manner consistent with the
lawyer’s ethical and professional obligations. What constitutes appropriate instruction and
supervision will differ from one state to another and the lawyer has the obligation to make
adjustments accordingly.

GUIDELINE 2: Provided the lawyer maintains responsibility for the work product, a
lawyer may delegate to a paralegal any task normally performed by the lawyer
except those tasks proscribed to a nonlawyer by statute, court rule, administrative
rule or regulation, controlling authority, the applicable rule of professional conduct
of the jurisdiction in which the lawyer practices, or these guidelines.

COMMENT

▪ Many tasks may be delegated to Paralegals so long as they are properly supervised.

The essence of the definition of the term “legal assistant” first adopted by the ABA in 19868
and subsequently amended in 19979 is that, so long as appropriate supervision is
maintained, many tasks normally performed by lawyers may be delegated to paralegals. EC
3‐6 under the Model Code mentioned three specific kinds of tasks that paralegals may
perform under appropriate lawyer supervision: factual investigation and research, legal
research, and the preparation of legal documents. Various states delineate more specific
tasks in their guidelines including attending client conferences, corresponding with and

8
The 1986 ABA definition read: “A legal assistant is a person, qualified through education,

training or work experience, who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, governmental
agency, or other entity, in a capacity or function which involves the performance, under the ultimate
direction and supervision of an attorney, of specifically‐delegated substantive legal work, which work,
for the most part, requires a sufficient knowledge of legal concepts that, absent such assistant, the
attorney would perform the task.”

9
In 1997, the ABA amended the definition of legal assistant by adopting the following

language: “A legal assistant or paralegal is a person qualified by education, training or work
experience who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation, governmental agency or
other entity who performs specifically delegated substantive legal work for which a lawyer is
responsible.”

Page 6

obtaining information from clients, witnessing the execution of documents, preparing
transmittal letters, and maintaining estate/guardianship trust accounts. See, e.g., Colorado
Bar Association Guidelines for the Utilization of Paralegals (the Colorado Bar Association
adopted guidelines in 1986 for the use of paralegals in 21 specialty practice areas including
bankruptcy, civil litigation, corporate law and estate planning. The Colorado Bar Association
Guidelines were revised in 2008); NALA Guideline 5.

▪ Paralegals may not, however, engage in the unauthorized practice of law.

While appropriate delegation of tasks is encouraged and a broad array of tasks is properly
delegable to paralegals, improper delegation of tasks will often run afoul of a lawyer’s
obligations under applicable rules of professional conduct. A common consequence of the
improper delegation of tasks is that the lawyer will have assisted the paralegal in the
unauthorized “practice of law” in violation of Model Rule 5.5, Model Code DR 3‐101, and
the professional rules of most states. Neither the Model Rules nor the Model Code defines
the “practice of law.”10 EC 3‐5 under the Model Code gave some guidance by equating the
practice of law to the application of the professional judgment of the lawyer in solving
clients’ legal problems. This approach is consistent with that taken in ABA Opinion 316
(1967) which states: “A lawyer . . . may employ nonlawyers to do any task for him except
counsel clients about law matters, engage directly in the practice of law, appear in court or
appear in formal proceedings as part of the judicial process, so long as it is he who takes the
work and vouches for it to the client and becomes responsible for it to the client.”

▪ Generally Paralegals may not appear before adjudicative bodies.

As a general matter, most state guidelines specify that paralegals may not appear before
courts, administrative tribunals, or other adjudicatory bodies unless the procedural rules of
the adjudicatory body authorize such appearances. See, e.g., State Bar of Arizona,
Committee on the Rules of Prof’l Conduct, Opinion No. 99‐13 (December 1999) (attorney did
not assist in unauthorized practice of law by supervising paralegal in tribal court where
tribal court rules permit non‐attorneys to be licensed tribal advocates).11 Additionally, no
state permits paralegals to conduct depositions or give legal advice to clients. E.g.,
Guideline 2, Connecticut Bar Association Guidelines for Lawyers Who Employ or Retain
Legal Assistants (the “Connecticut Guidelines”); Guideline 2, State Bar of Michigan
Guidelines for Utilization of Legal Assistants; State Bar of Georgia,

10
The ABA formed a task force in 2003 to examine the various state definitions of the

“practice of law.” The report of that task force, as well as related resources are available on the ABA

web site at the following URL:

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/task_force_model_definition_pra
ctice_law.html (last visited on June 13, 2018).

11
It is important to note that pursuant to federal or state statute, paralegals are permitted to

provide direct client representation in certain administrative proceedings. While this does not obviate
the lawyer’s responsibility for the paralegal’s work, it does change the nature of the lawyer’s
supervision of the paralegal. The opportunity to use such paralegal services has particular benefits to
legal services programs and does not violate Guideline 2. See generally ABA Standards for Providers
of Civil Legal Services to the Poor Std. 6.3, at 6.17‐6.18 (1986).

Page 7

State Disciplinary Board Advisory Opinion No. 21 (September 16, 1977); Doe v. Condon,
532 S.E.2d 879 (S.C. 2000) (it is the unauthorized practice of law for a paralegal to conduct
educational seminars and answer estate planning questions because the paralegal will be
implicitly advising participants that they require estate planning services). See also NALA
Guidelines II, III, and V.

▪ The “practice of law” is defined by the states.

Ultimately, apart from the obvious tasks that virtually all states agree are proscribed to
paralegals, what constitutes the “practice of law” is governed by state law and is a fact
specific question. See, e.g., Louisiana Rules of Prof’l Conduct Rule 5.5 which sets out specific
tasks considered to be the “practice of law” by the Supreme Court of Louisiana. Thus, some
tasks that have been specifically prohibited in some states are expressly delegable in others.
Compare Guideline 2, Connecticut Guidelines (permitting paralegal to attend real estate
closings even though no supervising lawyer is present provided that the paralegal does not
render opinion or judgment about execution of documents, changes in adjustments or price
or other matters involving documents or funds) and The Florida Bar, Opinion 89‐5
(November 1989) (permitting paralegal to handle real estate closing at which no supervising
lawyer is present provided, among other things, that the paralegal will not give legal advice
or make impromptu decisions that should be made by a lawyer) with Supreme Court of
Georgia, Formal Advisory Opinion No. 86‐5 (May 1989) (closing of real estate transactions
constitutes the practice of law and it is ethically improper for a lawyer to permit a paralegal
to close the transaction). It is thus incumbent on the lawyer to determine whether a
particular task is properly delegable in the jurisdiction at issue.

▪ The key to successfully complying with Guideline 2 is proper supervision.

Once the lawyer has determined that a particular task is delegable consistent with the
professional rules, utilization guidelines, and case law of the relevant jurisdiction, the key to
Guideline 2 is proper supervision. A lawyer should start the supervision process by ensuring
that the paralegal has sufficient education, background and experience to handle the task
being assigned. The lawyer should provide adequate instruction when assigning projects
and should also monitor the progress of the project. Finally, it is the lawyer’s obligation to
review the completed project to ensure that the work product is appropriate for the
assigned task. See, e.g., Spencer v. Steinman, 179 F.R.D. 484 (E.D. Penn. 1998) (lawyer
sanctioned under Rule 11 for paralegal’s failure to serve subpoena duces tecum on parties
to the litigation because the lawyer “did not assure himself that [the paralegal] had
adequate training nor did he adequately supervise her once he assigned her the task of
issuing subpoenas”).

▪ Consequences of failure to properly delegate tasks to or to supervise a paralegal
properly.

Serious consequences can result from a lawyer’s failure to properly delegate tasks to or to
supervise a paralegal properly. For example, the Supreme Court of Virginia upheld a

Page 8

malpractice verdict against a lawyer based in part on negligent actions of a paralegal in
performing tasks that evidently were properly delegable. Musselman v. Willoughby Corp.,
230 Va. 337, 337 S.E. 2d 724 (1985); see also C. Wolfram, Modern Legal Ethics 236, 896
(1986). Disbarment and suspension from the practice of law have resulted from a lawyer’s
failure to properly supervise the work performed by paralegals. See Matter of Disciplinary
Action Against Nassif, 547 N.W.2d 541 (N.D. 1996) (disbarment for failure to supervise
which resulted in the unauthorized practice of law by office paralegals); Attorney Grievance
Comm’n of Maryland v. Hallmon, 681 A.2d 510 (Md. 1996) (90‐day suspension for, among
other things, abdicating responsibility for a case to paralegal without supervising or
reviewing the paralegal’s work). Lawyers have also been subject to monetary and other
sanctions in federal and state courts for failing to properly utilize and supervise paralegals.
See In re Hessinger & Associates, 192 B.R. 211 (N.D. Cal. 1996) (bankruptcy court directed to
reevaluate its $100,000 sanction but district court finds that law firm violated Rule 3‐110(A)
of the California Rules of Professional Conduct by permitting bankruptcy paralegals to
undertake initial interviews, fill out forms and complete schedules without attorney
supervision).

Finally, it is important to note that although the attorney has the primary obligation to not
permit a nonlawyer to engage in the unauthorized practice of law, some states have
concluded that a paralegal is not relieved from an independent obligation to refrain from
illegal conduct and to work directly under an attorney’s supervision. See In re Opinion No.
24 of the Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law, 607 A.2d 962, 969 (N.J. 1992) (a
“paralegal who recognizes that the attorney is not directly supervising his or her work or
that such supervision is illusory because the attorney knows nothing about the field in
which the paralegal is working must understand that he or she is engaged in the
unauthorized practice of law”); Kentucky Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 3.700 (stating that “the
paralegal does have an independent obligation to refrain from illegal conduct”).
Additionally, paralegals must also familiarize themselves with the specific statutes
governing the particular area of law with which they might come into contact while
providing paralegal services. See, e.g., 11 U.S.C. § 110 (provisions governing nonlawyer
preparers of bankruptcy petitions); In Re Moffett, 263 B.R. 805 (W.D. Ky. 2001) (nonlawyer
bankruptcy petition preparer fined for advertising herself as “paralegal” because that is
prohibited by 11 U.S.C. § 110(f). Again, the lawyer must remember that any independent
obligation a paralegal might have under state law to refrain from the unauthorized practice
of law does not in any way diminish or vitiate the lawyer’s obligation to properly delegate
tasks and supervise the paralegal working for the lawyer.

Page 9

GUIDELINE 3: A lawyer may not delegate to a paralegal:

(a) Responsibility for establishing an attorney‐client relationship.
(b) Responsibility for establishing the amount of a fee to be charged

for a legal service.
(c) Responsibility for a legal opinion rendered to a client.

COMMENT

▪ The lawyer must establish and maintain a relationship with the client to ensure that
the client can effectively participate in the representation.

Model Rule 1.4 and most state codes require lawyers to communicate directly with their
clients and to provide their clients information reasonably necessary to make informed
decisions and to effectively participate in the representation. While delegation of legal tasks
to nonlawyers may benefit clients by enabling their lawyers to render legal services more
economically and efficiently, Model Rule 1.4 and EC 3‐6 under the Model Code emphasize
that delegation is proper only if the lawyer “maintains a direct relationship with his client,
supervises the delegated work and has complete professional responsibility for the work
product.” NALA Ethics Canon 2, echoes the Model Rule when it states: “A paralegal may
perform any task which is properly delegated and supervised by an attorney, as long as the
attorney is ultimately responsible to the client, maintains a direct relationship with the
client, and assumes professional responsibility for the work product.” Most state guidelines
also stress the paramount importance of a direct attorney‐client relationship. See New
Mexico Rule 20‐106. The direct personal relationship between client and lawyer is critical to
the exercise of the lawyer’s trained professional judgment.

▪ The lawyer must set fees, and discuss the basis for fees, directly with the client.

Fundamental to the lawyer‐client relationship is the lawyer’s agreement to undertake
representation and the related fee arrangement. The Model Rules and most states require
lawyers to make fee arrangements with their clients and to clearly communicate with their
clients concerning the scope of the representation and the basis for the fees for which the
client will be responsible. Model Rule 1.5 and Comments. Many state guidelines prohibit
paralegals from “setting fees” or “accepting cases.” See, e.g., Pennsylvania Eth. Op. 98‐75,
1994 Utah Eth. Op. 139. NALA Ethics Canon 3 states that a paralegal must not establish
attorney‐client relationships or set fees.

▪ Paralegals may communicate directly with the client, so long as they do not interpret
or expand upon the attorney’s legal advice.

Model Code EC 3‐5 states: “[T]he essence of the professional judgment of the lawyer is his
educated ability to relate the general body and philosophy of law to a specific legal problem
of a client; and thus, the public interest will be better served if only lawyers are permitted
to act in matters involving professional judgment.” Clients are entitled to their lawyers’
professional judgment and opinion. Paralegals may, however, be authorized to
communicate a lawyer’s legal advice to a client so long as they do not interpret or expand
on that advice. Typically, state guidelines phrase this prohibition in terms of paralegals
be

Civil homework help

Chapter Outline

9.1 What Is Diversity, and Why Is Everybody Talking About It?
9.2 Categories of Diversity
9.3 Navigating the Diversity Landscape

9.4 Inclusivity and Civility: What Role Can I Play?

Introduction
Student Survey
How do you feel about diversity, equity, and inclusion? These questions will help you determine how the
chapter concepts relate to you right now. As you are introduced to new concepts and practices, it can be
informative to reflect on how your understanding changes over time. We’ll revisit these questions at the end
of the chapter to see whether your feelings have changed. Take this quick survey to figure it out, ranking
questions on a scale of 1–4, 1 meaning “least like me” and 4 meaning “most like me.”

1. I’m aware of the different categories of diversity and the various populations I may encounter.
2. I think we sometimes go too far in trying to be sensitive to different groups.
3. I think nearly everybody in our society has equal opportunity.
4. It’s not my role to ensure equity and inclusiveness among my peers or colleagues.

You can also take the Chapter 9 survey (https://openstax.org/l/collegesurvey09) anonymously online.

Figure 9.1 (Credit John Martinez Pavliga / Flickr / Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC-BY 2.0))

9

Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence

About This Chapter
In this chapter you will learn about diversity and how it plays a role in personal, civic, academic, and
professional aspects of our lives. By the end of the chapter, you should be able to do the following:

• Articulate how diverse voices have been historically ignored or minimized in American civic life, education,
and culture.

• Describe categories of identity and experience that contribute to diverse points of view.
• Acknowledge implicit bias and recognize privilege.
• Evaluate statements and situations based on their inclusion of diverse perspectives.

9.1 What Is Diversity, and Why Is Everybody Talking About It?

Estimated completion time: 34 minutes.

Questions to Consider:

• Historically, has diversity always been a concern?
• What does it mean to be civil?
• Why do people argue about diversity?

“For the vast majority of my life, I thought being an Asian-American—who went through the Palo Alto
School District—meant that I was supposed to excel in academics. But, in reality, I did the opposite. I
struggled through college, both in classes and in seeking experiences for my future. At first, I thought I
was unique in not living up to expectations. But as I met more people from all different backgrounds, I
realized my challenges were not unique.

“I began capturing videos of students sharing their educational issues. Like me, many of my peers lack
the study skills required to achieve our academic goals. The more I researched and developed videos
documenting this lack of skill, the more I realized that student identities are often lost as they learn
according to a traditional pedagogy. I began documenting students’ narratives and the specific
strategies they used to overcome difficulty. Once we can celebrate a diverse student body and showcase
their strengths and identities as well as the skills necessary to excel academically, my hope is that
students of all backgrounds can begin to feel that they belong.”

—Henry Fan, Foothill College and San Jose State University

S T U D E N T P R O F I L E

284 Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence

This OpenStax book is available for free at http://cnx.org/content/col30990/1.7

What Would Shakespeare Say?

Figure 9.2 (Credit: Sourced originally from Helmolt, H.F., ed. History of the World. Dodd, Mead and
Company, 1902 / Perry-Castañeda Library, University of Texas at Austin / Wikimedia Commons / Public
Domain).

In our classroom, everyone is the same…

Consider a classroom containing 25 college students and their instructor. In this particular class, all of the
students and the instructor share the same racial group—white. In fact, everyone in the class is a white
American from the Midwest.

The instructor is leading the class through reading a scene from William Shakespeare’s drama Romeo and
Juliet. As students read their parts, each one is thinking carefully about the role he or she has been given.

One of the male students wonders what it would be like to read the part of Juliet; after all, men originally
played the part in Shakespeare’s day. The young woman reading Juliet wonders if anyone would object to her
taking the role if they knew she was a lesbian. What would it be like, she wonders, if Romeo, her love interest,
were also played by a woman? One reader strongly identifies as German American, but he is reading the part
of an Italian. Another student has a grandmother who is African American, but he looks like every other white
student in the room. No one recognizes his mixed-race heritage.

After the students finish reading the scene, the instructor announces, “In our classroom, everyone is the same,
but these days when Shakespeare is staged, there is a tendency for nontraditional casting. Romeo could be
black, Juliet could be Latina, Lady Montague could be Asian. Do you think that kind of casting would disrupt the
experience of seeing the play?”

In this case, the instructor makes the assumption that because everyone in the class looks the same, they are
the same. What did the instructor miss about the potential for diversity in his classroom? Have you ever made
a similar mistake?

Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence 285

Diversity is more than what we can recognize from external clues such as race and gender. Diversity includes
many unseen aspects of identity, like sexual orientation, political point of view, veteran status, and many other
aspects that you may have not considered. To be inclusive and civil within your community, it is essential that
you avoid making assumptions about how other people define or identify themselves.

In this chapter we will discover that each person is more than the sum of surface clues presented to the world.
Personal experience, social and family history, public policy, and even geography play a role in how diversity is
constructed. We’ll also explore elements of civility and fairness within the college community.

One important objective of civility is to become culturally competent. Culturally competent people understand
the complexity of their own personal identity, values, and culture. In addition, they respect the personal
identities and values of others who may not share their identity and values. Further, culturally competent
people remain open-minded when confronted with new cultural experiences. They learn to relate to and
respect difference; they look beyond the obvious and learn as much as they can about what makes each
person different and appreciated.

These concepts tie closely to Chapter 8: Communication, particularly the section on Emotional Intelligence and
Overcoming Barriers to Communication.

W H A T S T U D E N T S S A Y

1. Do you think the diversity of your school’s student body is reflected in course offerings and campus
activities?
a. Yes
b. Somewhat
c. No

2. How comfortable are you when discussing issues of race, sexuality, religion, and other aspects of
civility?
a. Extremely comfortable
b. Somewhat comfortable
c. Somewhat uncomfortable
d. Extremely uncomfortable

3. Do you generally feel welcomed and included on campus?
a. Yes
b. No
c. It varies significantly by class or environment.

You can also take the anonymous What Students Say surveys (https://openstax.org/l/collegesurvey6-12)
to add your voice to this textbook. Your responses will be included in updates.

Students offered their views on these questions, and the results are displayed in the graphs below.

Do you think the diversity of your school’s student body is reflected in course offerings and campus
activities?

286 Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence

This OpenStax book is available for free at http://cnx.org/content/col30990/1.7

Why Diversity Matters
The United States of America is viewed the world over as a leader in democracy and democratic ideals. Our
nation, young by most standards, continues to evolve to make the freedoms and opportunities available to all.
Where the benefits of citizenship have been imperfect, discord over issues related to civil rights and inclusion
have often been at the center of the conflict.

Figure 9.3

How comfortable are you when discussing issues of race, sexuality, religion, and other aspects of civility?

Figure 9.4

Do you generally feel welcomed and included on campus?

Figure 9.5

Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence 287

To understand the importance of civility and civil engagement, it is necessary to acknowledge our country’s
history. The United States is a country born out of protest. Colonists protesting what they felt were unfair taxes
under King George III was at the foundation of the Revolutionary War. Over time, many groups have been
given their civil liberties and equal access to all that our country has to offer through that same spirit of
protest and petition.

Figure 9.6 (Credit: Carl Campbell / Flickr / Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC-BY 2.0))

The United States is often described as a “melting pot,” a rich mixture made up of people of many colors,
religions, abilities, etc. working together to make one great big stew. That is the image generations of
Americans grew up learning, and it is a true one. The United States is a nation of immigrants, and cultural
influences from around the world have added to its strength.

Historically, however, not all contributions and voices have been acknowledged equally or adequately. Some
groups have had to struggle to have their contributions acknowledged, be treated fairly, and be allowed full
participation in the civic life of the country. Entire populations of people have been oppressed as a part of the
nation’s history, something important for Americans to confront and acknowledge. For example, in what is
known as the Trail of Tears, the U.S. government forcibly removed Native Americans from their homelands and
made them walk to reservations; some had to travel more than 1,000 miles, and over 10,000 died on the
journey. Further, in an act of forced assimilation, Native American children were taken from their families and
placed in schools where they were not allowed to practice cultural traditions or speak their Native languages.
This practice continued as late as the 1970s. As a result, many Native American languages have been lost or
are at risk of being lost.

The slavery of Africans occurred in America for close to 250 years. Much of the wealth in the United States
during that time came directly from the labor of enslaved people; however, the enslaved people themselves
did not benefit financially. During World War II, Japanese Americans were placed into internment camps and

288 Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence

This OpenStax book is available for free at http://cnx.org/content/col30990/1.7

considered a danger to our country because our nation was at war with Japan.

For many years, all women and minority men were traditionally left out of public discourse and denied
participation in government, industry, and even cultural institutions such as sports. For example, the United
States Supreme Court was founded in 1789; however, the court’s first female justice, Sandra Day O’Connor,
was not appointed until 1981, almost 200 years later. Jackie Robinson famously became the first African
American major league baseball player in 1947 when he was hired by the Brooklyn Dodgers, although the
major leagues were established in 1869, decades earlier. The absence of white women and minorities was not
an accident. Their exclusion was based on legal discrimination or unfair treatment.

These are all examples of mistreatment, inequality, and discrimination, and they didn’t end without incredible
sacrifice and heroism. The civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s and the equal rights movement for
women’s rights in the 1970s are examples of how public protests work to bring attention to discriminatory
practices and to create change. Because racism, anti-Semitism, sexism, and other forms of bias and
intolerance still exist, civil engagement and protests continue, and policies must be constantly monitored.
Many people still work to ensure the gains these communities have made in acquiring the rights of full
citizenship are not lost.

Diversity refers to differences in the human experience. As different groups have gained in number and
influence, our definition of diversity has evolved to embrace many variables that reflect a multitude of
different backgrounds, experiences, and points of view, not just race and gender. Diversity takes into account
age, socioeconomic factors, ability (such as sight, hearing, and mobility), ethnicity, veteran status, geography,
language, sexual orientation, religion, size, and other factors. At one time or another, each group has had to
make petitions to the government for equal treatment under the law and appeals to society for respect.
Safeguarding these groups’ hard-won rights and public regard maintains diversity and its two closely related
factors, equity and inclusion.

A C T I V I T Y

Our rights and protections are often acquired through awareness, effort, and, sometimes, protest. Each
one of the following groups has launched protests over discrimination or compromises to their civil
rights. Choose three of the groups below and do a quick search on protests or efforts members of the
group undertook to secure their rights. To expand your knowledge, choose some with which you are not
familiar.

Record the name, time frame, and outcomes of the protest or movements you researched.

The groups are as follows:

• Veterans
• Senior citizens
• Blind or visually impaired people
• Muslims
• Christians
• LGBTQ+ community
• Hispanic/Latinos
• People with intellectual disabilities

Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence 289

The Role of Equity and Inclusion
Equity plays a major part in achieving fairness in a diverse landscape. Equity gives everyone equal access to
opportunity and success. For example, you may have seen interpreters for deaf or hard of hearing people in
situations where a public official is making an announcement about an impending weather emergency.
Providing immediate translation into sign language means that there is no gap between what the public
official is saying and when all people receive the information. Simultaneous sign language provides equity.[1]

Similarly, many students have learning differences that require accommodations in the classroom. For
example, a student with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) might be given more time to complete
tests or writing assignments. The extra time granted takes into account that students with ADHD process
information differently.

If a student with a learning difference is given more time than other students to complete a test, that is a
matter of equity. The student is not being given an advantage; the extra time gives them an equal chance at
success.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA, 1990) is a federal government policy that addresses equity in the
workplace, housing, and public places. The ADA requires “reasonable accommodations” so that people with
disabilities have equal access to the same services as people without disabilities. For example, wheelchair lifts
on public transportation, automatic doors, entrance ramps, and elevators are examples of accommodations
that eliminate barriers of participation for people with certain disabilities.

Without the above accommodations, those with a disability may justly feel like second-class citizens because
their needs were not anticipated. Further, they might have to use their own resources to gain equal access to
services although their tax dollars contribute to providing that same access and service to other citizens.

Equity levels the playing field so that everyone’s needs are anticipated and everyone has an equal starting
point. However, understanding equity is not enough.

• Undocumented immigrants
• Little people
• College students
• Jewish Americans
• Farm workers
• Wheelchair users

1 https://www.nad.org/resources/american-sign-language/community-and-culture-frequently-asked-questions/

290 Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence

This OpenStax book is available for free at http://cnx.org/content/col30990/1.7

Figure 9.7 Equality is a meaningful goal, but it can leave people with unmet needs; equity is more
empowering and fair. In equality portion of the graphic, people all sizes and a person who uses a wheelchair
are all given the same bicycle, which is unusable for most. In the equity portion, each person gets a bicycle
specifically designed for them, enabling them to successfully ride it. Credit: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation /
Custom License: “May be Produced with Attribution[2]”)

When equity is properly considered, there is also inclusion. Inclusion means that there are a multiplicity of
voices, skills, and interests represented in any given situation. Inclusion has played a major role in education,
especially in terms of creating inclusion classrooms and inclusive curricula. In an inclusion classroom, students
of different skill levels study together. For example, students with and without developmental disabilities study
in the same classroom. Such an arrangement eliminates the stigma of the “special education classroom”
where students were once segregated. In addition, in inclusion classrooms all students receive support when
needed. Students benefit from seeing how others learn. In an inclusive curriculum, a course includes content
and perspectives from underrepresented groups. For example, a college course in psychology might include
consideration of different contexts such as immigration, incarceration, or unemployment in addition to
addressing societal norms.

Inclusion means that these voices of varied background and experience are integrated into discussions,
research, and assignments rather than ignored.

Our Country Is Becoming More Diverse
You may have heard the phrase “the browning of America,” meaning it is predicted that today’s racial
minorities will, collectively, be the majority of the population in the future. The graph from the Pew Research
Center projects that by the year 2065, U.S. demographics will have shifted significantly. In 2019, the white
population made up just over 60% of the population. In 2065, the Pew Research Center predicts that whites will
be approximately 46% of the population. The majority of Americans will be the non-white majority, 54%
Hispanic/Latinos, blacks, and Asians.

2 https://www.rwjf.org/en/library/infographics/visualizing-health-equity.html#/download

Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence 291

Figure 9.8 United States demographics (or statistical characteristics of populations) are changing rapidly. In
just over 35 years, the country as a whole will be a “majority minority” nation, with ethnic/racial minorities
making up more than half of the population. (Credit: Based on work by the Pew Research Center.)

What does this mean? It could mean that the United States begins accepting Spanish as a mainstream
language since the Hispanic/Latino population will be significantly larger. It could mean a changing face for
local governments. It could mean that our country will elect its second nonwhite president. Beyond anything
specific, the shifting demographics of the United States could mean greater attention is paid to diversity
awareness, equity, and inclusion.

Education: Equity for All
Education has been one of the most significant arenas for social change related to our rights as Americans.
And the effects of that change have significantly impacted other power dynamics in society. You need look no
further than the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954) to see how our nation has
responded passionately in civil and uncivil ways to appeals for equity and inclusion in public education.

For much of the 20th century, African Americans lived under government-sanctioned separation better known
as segregation. Not only were schools segregated, but Jim Crow laws allowed for legal separation in
transportation, hospitals, parks, restaurants, theaters, and just about every aspect of public life. These laws
enacted that there be “whites only” water fountains and restrooms. Only white people could enter the front
door of a restaurant or sit on the main level of a movie theater, while African Americans had to enter through
the back door and sit in the balcony. The segregation also included Mexican Americans and Catholics, who

A N A L Y S I S Q U E S T I O N

How should the United States prepare for its projected demographic shift? What changes do you
suppose will take place as part of the “browning of America”?

292 Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence

This OpenStax book is available for free at http://cnx.org/content/col30990/1.7

were forced to attend separate schools. Brown v. Board of Education was a landmark Supreme Court case that
challenged the interpretation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The case
involved the father of Linda Brown suing the Topeka, Kansas, board of education for denying his daughter the
right to attend an all-white school. Oliver Brown maintained that segregation left his black community with
inferior schools, a condition counter to the equal protection clause contained in Section I of the 14th
Amendment:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or
enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process
of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

There was widespread heated opposition to desegregated education across the country. Passions were even
more severe after Brown v. Board of Education was won by the plaintiff on appeal to the United States Supreme
Court. In effect, the case changed the power dynamics in America by leveling the playing field for education.
No longer were white schools (and their better resources) legally segregated. In principal, there was
equity—equal access.

Debates in the courtrooms surrounding Brown were passionate but professional. Protests and debate in those
communities directly affected by the decision, especially in the South, were intense, violent confrontations that
demonstrated the height of incivility. One thing you may notice about uncivil behavior is the difficulty most
have looking back on those actions.

Figure 9.9 After the Brown v Board of Education decision, Americans pursued their rights for equal
education in other districts. In Arkansas, a group of teenagers, which would come to be known as the Little
Rock Nine, were blocked from entering a formerly whites-only school. Facing angry protestors, the state
governor, and even the National Guard, the nine students finally took their rightful place in the school after a
judge ruled in their favor and President Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne Division to secure the situation.
(Credit: Courtesy of the National Archives, sourced from The US Army / Flickr / Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC-BY))

Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence 293

Educational institutions like colleges and school districts are critically important spaces for equity and
inclusion, and debates around them remain challenging. Transgender students in America’s schools face
discrimination, harrassment, and bullying, which causes nearly 45 percent of LGBTQ+ to feel unsafe becuase of
their gender expression and 60 percent of to feel unsafe due to their sexual orientation. Many of these
students miss school or experience significant stress, which usually has a negative impact on their grades,
participation, and overall success.[3] In essence, this hostility creates inequality. Regardless of individual state
or district laws on bathroom use and overall accommodation, federal law protects all students from
discrimination, especially that based on categories such as gender. But implementation of these federal
protections varies, and, in general, many outside the transgender community do not fully unerstand,
empathize with, or support transgender rights.

How can the circumstances improve for transgender students? In other societal changes throughout our
nation’s history, court decisions, new legislation, protests, and general public opinion combined to right past
wrongs and provide justice and protection for mistreated people. For example, in 2015, the Supreme Court
upheld the right to same-sex marriage under the 14th Amendment. Just as African Americans publicly debated
and protested educational inequality, the gay community used discusion, protest, and debate to sway public
and legal opinion. Proponents of gay marriage faced fervent argument against their position based on religion
and culture; like other minority groups, they were confronted with name-calling, job insecurity, family division,
religious isolation, and physical confrontation. And as has often been the case, success in achieving marriage
equality eventually came through the courts.

Legal remedies are significant, but can take a very long time. Before they see success in the courts or
legislatures, transgender students in America’s schools will continue to undergo harsh treatment. Their lives
and education will remain very difficult until people from outside their community better understand their
situation.

Debates: Civility vs. Incivility
Healthy debate is a desirable part of a community. In a healthy debate, people are given room to explain their
point of view. In a healthy airing of differences, people on opposing sides of an argument can reach common
ground and compromise or even agree to disagree and move on.

However, incivility occurs when people are not culturally competent. An individual who is not culturally
competent might make negative assumptions about others’ values, lack an open mindset, or be inflexible in
thinking. Instead of being tolerant of different points of view, they may try to shut down communication by not
listening or by keeping someone with a different point of view from being heard at all. Out of frustration, a
person who is uncivil may resort to name-calling or discrediting another person only with the intention of
causing confusion and division within a community. Incivility can also propagate violence. Such uncivil reaction
to difficult issues is what makes many people avoid certain topics at all costs. Instead of seeking out diverse
communities, people retreat to safe spaces where they will not be challenged to hear opposing opinions or
have their beliefs contested.

Debates on difficult or divisive topics surrounding diversity, especially those promoting orchestrated change,
are often passionate. People on each side may base their positions on deeply held beliefs, family traditions,
personal experience, academic expertise, and a desire to orchestrate change. With such a strong foundation,
emotions can be intense, and debates can become uncivil.

Even when the disagreement is based on information rather than personal feelings, discussions can quickly

3 2017 National School Climate Survey, GLESN. https://www.glsen.org/research/school-climate-survey

294 Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence

This OpenStax book is available for free at http://cnx.org/content/col30990/1.7

turn to arguments. For example, in academic environments, it’s common to find extremely well-informed
arguments in direct opposition to each other. Two well-known economics faculty members from your college
could debate for hours on financial policies, with each professor’s position backed by data, research, and
publications. Each person could feel very strongly that they are right and the other person is wrong. They may
even feel that the approach proposed by their opponent would actually do damage to the country or to certain
groups of people. But for this debate—whether it occurs over lunch or on an auditorium stage—to remain
civil, the participants need to maintain certain standards of behavior.

Civility is a valued practice that takes advantage of cultural and political systems we have in place to work
through disagreements while maintaining respect for others’ points of view. Civil behavior allows for a
respectful airing of grievances. The benefit of civil discussion is that members of a community can hear
different sides of an argument, weigh evidence, and decide for themselves which side to support.

You have probably witnessed or taken part in debates in your courses, at social events, or even at family
gatherings. What makes people so passionate about certain issues? First, some may have a personal stake in
an issue, such as abortion rights. Convincing other people to share their beliefs may be intended to create a
community that will protect their rights. Second, others may have deeply held beliefs based on faith or cultural
practices. They argue based on deeply held moral and ethical beliefs. Third, others may be limited in their
background knowledge about an issue but are able to speak from a “script” of conventional points of view.
They may not want to stray from the script because they do not have enough information to extend an
argument.

A C T I V I T Y

1. Describe a time when you could not reach an agreement with someone on a controversial issue.
2. Did you try to compromise, combining your points of view so that each of you would be partially

satisfied?
3. Did either of you shut down communication? Was ending the conversation a good choice? Why or

why not?

Chapter 9 Understanding Civility and Cultural Competence 295

Rules for Fair Debate

Figure 9.10 You’ll participate in classroom or workplace debate throughout your academic or professional
career. Civility is important to productive discussions, and will lead to worthwhile outcomes. (Credit: Creative
Sustainability / Flickr / Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC-BY 2.0))

The courtroom and the public square are not the only places where serious debate takes place. Every day we
tackle tough decisions that involve other people, some of whom have strong opposing points of view. To be
successful in college, you will need to master sound and ethical approaches to argument, whether it be for a
mathematical proof or an essay in a composition class.

You probably already know how to be sensitive and thoughtful when giving feedback to a family member or
friend. You think about their feelings and the best way to confront your disagreement without attacking them.
Of course, sometimes it’s easier to be less sensitive with people who love you no matter what. Still, whether in
a classroom, a workplace, or your fa

Civil homework help

THE MEANING OF DIFFERENCE
American Constructions of Race and Ethnicity, Sex and
Gender, Social Class, Sexuality, and Disability
A Text/Reader

Seventh Edition

Karen E. Rosenblum
George Mason University

Toni-Michelle C. Travis
George Mason University

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd iros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd i 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

THE MEANING OF DIFFERENCE: AMERICAN CONSTRUCTIONS OF RACE AND ETHNICITY, SEX AND

GENDER, SOCIAL CLASS, SEXUALITY, AND DISABILITY, SEVENTH EDITION

Published by McGraw-Hill Education, 2 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10121. Copyright © 2016 by McGraw-Hill Education.

All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Previous editions © 2012, 2008, and 2006. No part of this

publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system,

without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education, including, but not limited to, in any network or other elec-

tronic storage or transmission, or broadcast for distance learning.

Some ancillaries, including electronic and print components, may not be available to customers outside the United States.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 DOC/DOC 1 0 9 8 7 6 5

ISBN 978-0-07-802702-4

MHID 0-07-802702-0

Senior Vice President, Products & Markets: Kurt L. Strand
Vice President, General Manager, Products & Markets: Michael Ryan
Vice President, Content Design & Delivery: Kimberly Meriwether David
Managing Director: Gina Boedeker
Brand Manager: Courtney Austermehle
Director, Product Development: Meghan Campbell
Product Developer: Jamie Daron
Marketing Manager: Alexandra Schultz
Director, Content Design & Delivery: Terri Schiesl
Program Manager: Faye M. Herrig
Content Project Managers: Kelly Hart, Danielle Clement, Judi David
Buyer: Susan K. Culbertson
Design: Studio Montage, St. Louis, MO
Cover Image: © James Brey/Getty Images/RF
Compositor: Lumina Datamatics, Inc.
Typeface: 10/12 Times Roman
Printer: R. R. Donnelley

All credits appearing on page or at the end of the book are considered to be an extension of the copyright page.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Rosenblum, Karen Elaine.

The meaning of difference: American constructions of race and ethnicity, sex and gender, social class, sexuality, and disability /

Karen E. Rosenblum, George Mason University, Toni-Michelle C. Travis, George Mason University.—Seventh Edition.

pages cm

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-0-07-802702-4 (pbk.)—ISBN 0-07-802702-0 1. United States—Social conditions—1980- 2. Cultural

pluralism—United States. I. Travis, Toni-Michelle, II. Title.

HN59.2.R667 2015

306.0973—dc23 2014036324

The Internet addresses listed in the text were accurate at the time of publication. The inclusion of a website does not indi-

cate an endorsement by the authors or McGraw-Hill Education, and McGraw-Hill Education does not guarantee the accu-

racy of the information presented at these sites.

www.mhhe.com

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd iiros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd ii 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

iii

KAREN E. ROSENBLUM is a professor of sociology at George Mason

University in Fairfax, Virginia. She has served as the university’s vice

president for university life, was the founding director of its women’s studies

program, and was a Fulbright Lecturer in Japan and South Korea. Professor

Rosenblum received her PhD in sociology from the University of Colorado,

Boulder. Her areas of research and teaching include sex and gender, language,

and deviance.

TONI-MICHELLE C. TRAVIS is a professor of government and politics at

George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. Travis received her PhD in

political science from the University of Chicago. Her areas of research and

teaching include race and gender dimensions of political participation,

Virginia politics, and American government. She is a former chair of the

African American Studies program and has served as the president of the

National Capital Area Political Science Association and the Women’s Caucus

of the American Political Science Association. In addition, Professor Travis

has been a fellow at the Rothermere American Institute, Oxford University.

A political analyst, she is a frequent commentator on Virginia and national

politics.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd iiiros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd iii 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd ivros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd iv 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

v

Preface xi

SECTION I— CONSTRUCTING CATEGORIES
OF DIFFERENCE

FRAMEWORK ESSAY 2

WHAT IS RACE? WHAT IS ETHNICITY?

1. “Race” and the Construction of Human Identity

Audrey Smedley 51

2. Who Is Black? One Nation’s Defi nition

F. James Davis 61

3. The Evolution of Identity

The Washington Post 70
Personal Account: A Loaded Vacation

Niah Grimes 71

4. Real Indians: Identity and the Survival of Native America

Eva Marie Garroutte 71

5. An Interlocking Panethnicity: The Negotiation of Multiple Identities among

Asian American Social Movement Leaders

Dana Y. Nakano 80

Personal Account: I Thought My Race Was Invisible

Sherri H. Pereira 89

6. Latino Racial Choices: The Effects of Skin Colour and

Discrimination on Latinos’ and Latinas’ Racial Self-Identifi cations

Tanya Golash-Boza and William Darity, Jr. 89

CONTENTS

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd vros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd v 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

vi Contents

7. Whiteness as an “Unmarked” Cultural Category

Ruth Frankenberg 101

8. Plus Ça Change . . . ? Multiraciality and the Dynamics of

Race Relations in the United States

Frank D. Bean and Jennifer Lee 107

Personal Account: The Price of Nonconformity

Julia Morgenstern 114

Personal Account: Basketball

Andrea M. Busch 115

WHAT IS SEX? WHAT IS GENDER?

9. The Olympic Struggle over Sex

Alice Dreger 115

10. All Together Now: Intersex Infants and IGM

Riki Wilchins 117

11. Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society,

and Neurosexism Create Difference

Cordelia Fine 123

WHAT IS SOCIAL CLASS?

12. What’s Class Got to Do with It?

Michael Zweig 127

13. The Silver Spoon: Inheritance and the Staggered Start

Stephen J. McNamee and Robert K. Miller Jr. 131

Personal Account: I Am a Pakistani Woman

Hoorie I. Siddique 135

14. The Great Divergence: America’s Growing Inequality

Crisis and What We Can Do about It

Timothy Noah 137

WHAT IS SEXUALITY?

15. Sexual Fluidity: Understanding Women’s Love and Desire

Lisa M. Diamond 142

16. The Biology of the Homosexual

Roger N. Lancaster 147

17. The Heterosexual Questionnaire

Martin Rochlin 158

WHAT IS DISABILITY?

18. Disability Defi nitions: The Politics of Meaning

Michael Oliver 159

Personal Account: Invisibly Disabled

Heather L. Shaw 163

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd viros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd vi 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

Contents vii

19. What Wounds Enable: The Politics of Disability and Violence

in Chicago

Laurence Ralph 163

20. Ethnicity, Ethics, and the Deaf-World

Harlan Lane 176

SECTION II— EXPERIENCING DIFFERENCE

FRAMEWORK ESSAY 194

RACE AND ETHNICITY

21 . Formulating Identity in a Globalized World

Carola Suárez-Orozco 225

Personal Account: Hair

Sarah Faragalla 236

Personal Account: The Americanization of a Reluctant Vietnamese-American

Hoai Huong Tran 239

22 . Latinos and the U.S. Race Structure

Clara E. Rodríguez 242

23 . Everybody’s Ethnic Enigma

Jelita McLeod 248

Personal Account: My Strategies

Eric Jackson 249

24 . From Friendly Foreigner to Enemy Race

John Tehranian 251

Personal Account: Master Status: Pride and Danger

Sumaya Al-Hajebi 258

SEX AND GENDER

25 . The Privilege of Teaching about Privilege

Michael A. Messner 261

26 . Proving Manhood

Timothy Beneke 267

Personal Account: Just Something You Did as a Man

Francisco Hernandez 271

27 . “I’m Not a Feminist, But . . .”: Popular Myths about Feminism

Penny A. Weiss 272

SEXUALITY

28 . Dude, You’re a Fag: Adolescent Male Homophobia

C. J. Pascoe 277

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd viiros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd vii 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

29 . Gendered Sexuality in Young Adulthood: Double Binds and

Flawed Options

Laura Hamilton and Elizabeth A. Armstrong 287

Personal Account: Living Invisibly

Tara S. Ellison 297

30 . Sexual Orientation and Sex in Women’s Lives: Conceptual and

Methodological Issues

Esther D. Rothblum 297

SOCIAL CLASS

31 . Cause of Death: Inequality

Alejandro Reuss 303

32 . Why Are Droves of Unqualifi ed, Unprepared Kids Getting into

Our Top Colleges? Because Their Dads Are Alumni

John Larew 307

Personal Account: That Moment of Visibility

Rose B. Pascarell 312

33 . The Myth of the “Culture of Poverty”

Paul Gorski 313

DISABILITY

34 . Public Transit

John Hockenberry 317

35 . “Can You See the Rainbow?” The Roots of Denial

Sally French 325

36 . Not Blind Enough: Living in the Borderland Called Legal Blindness

Beth Omansky 331

Personal Account: A Time I Didn’t Feel Normal

Heather Callender 337

SECTION III— THE MEANING OF DIFFERENCE

FRAMEWORK ESSAY 340

RACE AND ETHNICITY

37 . Fourteen Key Supreme Court Cases and the Civil War Amendments 359

38 . Blink in Black and White

Malcolm Gladwell 390

Personal Account: Just Like My Mama Said

Anthony McNeill 395

39 . Safe Haven in America? Thirty Years after the Refugee Act of 1980

David W. Haines 395

viii Contents

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd viiiros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd viii 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

40 . Hispanics Are Forgotten in Civil Rights History

Nicholas Dauphine 398

41 . Balancing Identities: Undocumented Immigrant Asian American

Students and the Model Minority Myth

Tracy Poon Tambascia, Jonathan Wang, Breanne Tcheng,

and Viet T. Bui 399

Personal Account: Let Me Work for It!

Isabelle Nguyen 402

42 . Segregated Housing, Segregated Schools

Richard Rothstein 403

SEX AND GENDER

43 . Many Faces of Gender Inequality

Amartya Sen 405

Personal Account: He Hit Her

Tim Norton 410

44 . The Not-So-Pink Ivory Tower

Ann Mullen 411

45 . The Gender Revolution: Uneven and Stalled

Paula England 415

SEXUALITY

46 . Sex Education and the Promotion of Heteronormativity

Tanya McNeill 424

Personal Account: Learning My Own Privilege

Mireille M. Cecil 432

47 . Gaga Relations: The End of Marriage

J. Jack Halberstam 432

48 . Queers without Money: They Are Everywhere. But We Refuse

to See Them

Amber Hollibaugh 439

SOCIAL CLASS

49 . Rethinking American Poverty

Mark R. Rank 443

50 . Tearing Down the Gates: Confronting the Class Divide

in American Education

Peter Sacks 447

51 . Wealth Stripping: Why It Costs So Much to Be Poor

James H. Carr 452

Contents ix

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd ixros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd ix 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

DISABILITY

52 . Disability Trouble

Bradley A. Areheart 456

53 . Learning Disabilities: The Social Construction of a Special

Education Category

Christine E. Sleeter 468

54 . (Re)Creating a World in Seven Days: Place, Disability, and Salvation

in Extreme Makeover: Home Edition
Emily Askew 473

SECTION IV— BRIDGING DIFFERENCES

FRAMEWORK ESSAY 482

55 . Adolescent Masculinity in an Age of Decreased Homohysteria

Eric Anderson 492

56 . What Can We Do? Becoming Part of the Solution

Allan G. Johnson 502

Personal Account: Parents’ Underestimated Love

Octavio N. Espinal 506

57 . In Defense of Rich Kids

William Upski Wimsatt 507

Personal Account: Where Are You From?

C.C. 511

58 . Uprooting Racism: How White People Can Work for Racial Justice

Paul Kivel 511

Credits C-1

Index I-1

x Contents

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd x 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

xi

The Meaning of Difference is an effort to understand how difference is con-
structed in contemporary American culture: How do categories of people come to

be seen as “different”? How does being different affect people’s lives? What does

difference mean at the level of the individual, social institution, or society? What

difference does “difference” make? What is shared across the most signifi cant
categories of difference in America—race, sex/gender, sexual orientation, social

class, and disability? What can be learned from their commonalities? That The
Meaning of Difference is now in its seventh edition makes us hopeful that this
comparative approach can be useful in understanding American conceptions and

constructions of difference.

ORGANIZATION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
The Meaning of Difference is divided into four sections. Each section includes an
opening Framework Essay and a set of readings, with the Framework Essay pro-

viding the conceptual structure by which to understand the readings. Thus, the

Framework Essays are not simply introductions to the readings; they are the “text”

portion of this text/reader.

The fi rst section’s Framework Essay and readings describe how categories of

difference are created; the second considers the experience of difference; the third
examines the meanings that are assigned to difference, focusing especially on
education, ideology, law, and public policy; and the fourth describes what people

can do to challenge and change these constructions of difference.
Each of the readings included in the volume has been selected by virtue of its

applicability to multiple categories of difference. For example, F. James Davis’s

conclusions about the construction of race (Reading 2) could be applied to a

PREFACE

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xiros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xi 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

xii Preface

discussion of sexual identity or disability. How much of “x” does it take to locate

someone as gay or straight, disabled or nondisabled, Middle-Eastern or American?

Carola Suárez-Orozco’s discussion of identity formation in a globalized world

(Reading 21) can be applied toward an understanding of racial identity formation

and even to the formation of identities tied to sexuality. Similarly, Michael Oliver’s

rendering of an alternative Survey of Disabled Adults (Reading 18)—which

parallels Martin Rochlin’s classic Heterosexual Questionnaire (Reading 17)—

serves as an example of the insights that can be gained by a change of perspective.

In all, our aim has been to select readings that help identify both what is unique

and what is shared across our experiences of difference.

DISTINGUISHING FEATURES
Five features make The Meaning of Difference distinctive:

• First, it offers a conceptual framework by which to understand the common-

alities among these categories of difference. This encompassing conceptual

approach makes The Meaning of Difference unique.
• Second, no other book provides an accessible and historically grounded discus-

sion of the Supreme Court decisions critical to the structuring of these categor-

ical differences.

• Third, The Meaning of Difference has been designed with an eye toward the
pedagogic diffi culties that often accompany this subject matter. In our experi-

ence, when the topics of race, sex and gender, social class, sexual orientation,

and disability are treated simultaneously , as they are here, no one group can be
easily cast as victim or victimizer.

• Fourth, no other volume includes a detailed discussion and set of readings on

how to challenge and change the constructions of difference.

• Finally, The Meaning of Difference is the fi rst book of its kind to incorporate
disability as a master status functioning in ways analogous to the operation of

race and ethnicity, sex and gender, sexual orientation, and social class.

HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE SEVENTH EDITION
This edition includes twenty-seven new readings, one new personal account,

and, in Reading 37, a discussion of two important new Supreme Court Cases:

U.S. v. Windsor (2013), which established federal recognition of the rights of
married same-sex couples and Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affi rmative
Action, Integration and Immigration Rights and Fight for Equality By Any
Means Necessary (BAMN) (2013), in which the Court upheld an amendment
to the Michigan state constitution banning affi rmative action in public employ-

ment, education, or contracting.

New to this volume are several readings that focus on education as a key site

for the construction of difference and inequality. Paul Gorski considers how the

myth of the culture of poverty affects teachers; Tracy Poon Tambascia , Jonathan
Wang, Breanne Tcheng, and Viet T. Bui refl ect on the impact of the model minority

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xiiros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xii 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

Preface xiii

myth on undocumented immigrant Asian American university students; Tanya

McNeill details the promotion of heterosexual monogamy in the policies of pub-

lic schools; Peter Sacks describes the processes by which, over the last thirty

years, American higher education has come to exclude poor and working-class

students; and Christine Sleeter places the emergence of the idea of learning

disability in the context of the educational reforms of the 1960s and 1970s. In

combination with John Larew’s timeless article on legacy admissions at elite

universities and coverage of several Supreme Court cases about affi rmative action

in higher education, we believe the volume now allows faculty the opportunity

for concentrated focus on education should they choose that.

Several readings new to this edition focus on the dramatic increase of economic

inequality in the United States and the still-unfolding outcomes of the Great

Recession. In “The Great Divergence,” Timothy Noah describes the nature and

extent of U.S. inequality; in “Wealth Stripping,” James Carr details the effect of

predatory “alternative” lending such as pay-day and auto-title loans; in “ Rethinking

American Poverty,” Mark Rank considers the structural factors that shape relatively

high rates of American poverty; and in “(Re)Creating a World in Seven Days,”

Emily Askew analyzes the messages about social class and disability embedded

in ABC’s hit television show Extreme Makeover: Home Edition .
In addition to the inclusion of new readings, we have, as always, concentrated

on updating the Framework Essays, as these are the “text” portion of this text/

reader. We aim for essays that offer a conceptual structure for thinking about (and

teaching) this material, but in this edition in particular we thought of the essays

as a place in which to grapple with how, increasingly, American constructions of

difference appear to be both fl uid and stable.
To highlight some of the changes in this edition, the fi rst framework essay now

considers the effects of our 21st century mapping of the human genome—an

accomplishment that many predicted would be the death knell of the idea of race.

What we see instead is that race is surprisingly resilient in both popular opinion

and science, albeit now framed and profi tably marketed as “geographic ancestry.”

In contrast to this persistence, however, the essay also examines the ways that

ideas about race have broadened, especially as revealed by the use of multi-racial

self-identifi cations. As discussed in this essay, increased breadth and fl uidity also

appears to characterize gender and sexuality categorizations, for example in the

increased visibility and acceptance of those who identify as transgender and the

emergence of bisexuality as a viable scientifi c and self-identifi cation category.

In this edition, the second Framework Essay gives special attention to the idea

of intersectionality, that is, the interaction of stigmatized statuses. Long a topic
in women’s studies scholarship, we have tried to make this complicated idea more

accessible to students while also showing the practical consequences of

acknowledging, or failing to acknowledge, intersectionality. Updates to the third

Framework Essay have included the topics of intermarriage and residential

segregation. The readings in the third section—focused on education, ideology,

law, and public policy—are now organized into the master-status subsections used

throughout the book.

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xiiiros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xiii 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

Several readings from the previous edition have been retained not only because

of their wide popularity among students and faculty, but also because they are

classics in the fi eld. Included in this category are F. James Davis’s “Who Is Black?

One Nation’s Defi nition”; Ruth Frankenberg’s “Whiteness as an ‘Unmarked’

Cultural Category”; Michael Oliver’s “Disability Defi nitions”; Sally French’s

“Can You See the Rainbow?”; John Hockenberry’s “Public Transit”; C. J. Pascoe’s

“Dude You’re a Fag”; and Malcolm Gladwell’s “Blink in Black and White.” We

also believe several readings new to this edition will become classics: Cordelia

Fine’s “Delusions of Gender”; Lisa Diamond’s “Sexual Fluidity”; Laurence

Ralph’s “What Wounds Enable”; David Haines’s “Safe Haven in America?”;

Amartya Sen’s “The Many Faces of Gender Inequality”; and Eric Anderson’s

“Adolescent Masculinity in an Age of Decreased Homohysteria” all have this

potential.

SUPPLEMENTS

Instructor’s Manual/Test Bank

An Instructor’s Manual and Test Bank accompany this volume. In this edition,

we have added a special section of advice on how to teach this material. Instructors

can access this password-protected material on the website that accompanies the

seventh edition of The Meaning of Difference at www.mhhe.com/rosenblum7e .

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Many colleagues and friends have helped us clarify the ideas we present here.

David Haines has been unfailing in his willingness to help Karen think through

conceptual, technical, and ethical dilemmas. She could not imagine a colleague

more supportive or wise. Theodore W. Travis provided insight on Supreme Court

decisions, their relationship to social values, and their impact on American society.

Since this project fi rst emerged, Victoria Rader has been generous in sharing her

knowledge as a teacher and writer. Her wisdom especially guided our develop-

ment of the “Bridging Differences” section. We are also grateful to our colleague

and friend Beth Omansky for helping us understand the critical relationship of

disability to our work. As a friend and friendly editor, none could be better than

Sheila Barrows. Finally, we owe thanks to our students at George Mason University

for sharing their experiences with us.

For this edition, we again convey our appreciation to Joan Lester and the Equity

Institute of Emeryville, California, for their understanding of the progress that can

be made through a holistic analysis.

Jamie Daron of McGraw-Hill and Melanie Lewis of ansrsource shepherded this

volume to completion. Fred Courtright’s work on acquiring permissions was espe-

cially appreciated. As in previous editions, McGraw-Hill proved itself committed

to a thorough review process by putting together a panel of accomplished scholars

xiv Preface

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xivros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xiv 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

with broad teaching expertise. All offered detailed and insightful critiques, and

we are much in their debt:

Naomi Greyser, University of Iowa

Shepherd M. Jenks, Jr., Central New Mexico Community College

Earnest Perry, University of Missouri

Gloria L. Rowe, Cincinnati State Technical and Community College.

Karen Rosenblum

Toni-Michelle Travis

George Mason University

Preface xv

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xvros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xv 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

ros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xviros27020_fm_i-xvi.indd xvi 01/09/15 12:32 PM01/09/15 12:32 PM

1

S E C T I O N I

CONSTRUCTING CATEGORIES

OF DIFFERENCE

ros27020_sec01_001-050.indd 1ros27020_sec01_001-050.indd 1 01/08/15 7:23 AM01/08/15 7:23 AM

2 SECTION I: Constructing Categories of Difference

FRAMEWORK ESSAY
In this book we consider how difference is constructed in contemporary American
society. We explore how categories of people are seen as signifi cantly different

from one another and how people’s lives are affected by these conceptions of

difference. The four sections of the book are organized around what we consider

to be the key questions about difference: how it is constructed, how it is experi-

enced by individuals, how meaning is attributed to difference, and how differences

can be bridged.

We believe that race, sex, social class, sexuality, and disability are currently

the primary axes of difference in American society—they are also what social

scientists would call master statuses. In common usage, the term status means
prestige or esteem. But for social scientists, the term status refers to positions in
a social structure. In this sense, statuses are like empty slots (or positions) that

individuals fi ll. The most obvious kinds of statuses are kinship, occupation, and

age. At any time an individual occupies multiple statuses, including those of race,

sex, social class, sexuality, and disability.

This latter set of statuses—the ones we focus on in this book—are signifi cantly

more powerful than most other social statuses. Social scientists refer to these as

master statuses because they so profoundly affect a person’s life: “in most or all
social situations master status will overpower or dominate all other statuses. . . .

Master status infl uences every other aspect of life, including personal identity.”
1

These master statuses may be said to “frame” how people are seen by others—

especially strangers—as well as how they see themselves and much of what they

experience in the world.
2
This does not mean, however, that people always under-

stand the impact of the master statuses or “frames” that they occupy. Indeed, much

of this book is about recognizing that impact.

This text will explore similarities in the operation of these master statuses.

Although there are certainly differences of history, experience, and impact, we

believe that similar processes are at work when people “see” differences of

color, sex and gender, social class, sexuality, and disability, and we believe

that there are similarities in the consequences of these master statuses for

individuals’ lives. Nonetheless, there are risks in our focus on similarities

across master statuses, not the least of which is the assumption that similarity

is a better ground for social change than a recognition of difference.
3
Thus,

our focus on similarities across master statuses is literally only one side of

the story.

Racism, sexism, homophobia, and diversity have been pervasive topics for dis-

cussion in American society for at least the last fi fty years. Although the substance

of these conversations has changed in many ways—for example, the term diversity
once fl agged the need for equal opportunity but now functions more as a market-

ing tool—the intensity around most of these topics persists. Many Americans have

strong opinions on these subjects, and that is probably also the case for readers

of this text. Two perspectives—essentialism and constructionism—are core to this

book and should help you understand your own reaction to the material.

ros27020_sec01_001-050.indd 2ros27020_sec01_001-050.indd 2 01/08/15 7:23 AM01/08/15 7:23 AM

Framework Essay 3

The Essentialist and Constructionist Perspectives

The difference between the constructionist and essentialist perspectives is illus-
trated in the tale of the three umpires, fi rst apparently told by social psychologist

Hadley Cantril:

Hadley Cantril relates the story of three baseball umpires discussing their professi

Civil homework help

4/28/2019 No, a paralegal is not a lawyer: A few things to keep in mind

https://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/blt/2007-01-02/kao.shtml 1/5

myABA | Log In

Business Law Today

Volume 16, Number 3 January/February 2007

No, a paralegal is not a lawyer
A few things to keep in mind

By Frances P. Kao

Let’s face it: A paralegal can definitely represent added value for your legal practice. But beware the
possibility of bumps in the road.

Many recent articles, books and seminars have used economic analyses to demonstrate the financial
benefits that paralegals can bring to a law practice. Less frequently discussed are the ethical
boundaries that lawyers working with paralegals must observe. These ethical rules are ignored at a
lawyer’s peril since violating them can bring significant financial and reputational harm to both the
lawyer as well as the firm.

Potential pitfalls can arise starting from the hiring decision and throughout the duration of the
lawyer-paralegal relationship. However, a lawyer’s ethical obligations when working with paralegals
are relatively straightforward and, with some care, need never be the cause of an unpleasant
discussion between the lawyer and his governing bar disciplinary committee.

So you’re gonna hire a paralegal.

Jane Hendrick, a lawyer with a five-person firm, has just hired Bob Worth, a paralegal, to assist with
the firm’s general nonlitigation work. Bob Worth is currently employed by Smith & Smith, another
small firm in the same city. Prior to being hired by Jane Hendrick, Bob Worth had been supporting
the lawyers at Smith & Smith in a small asset-purchase transaction on behalf of Atkins Co. The
seller, Baily Ltd., is represented by none other than Jane Hendrick. At the time she hired Bob, Jane
did not know that Bob had been working on the Atkins/Baily deal from the Smith & Smith side.

On Bob’s first day, he hears that Jane is representing Baily and he tells her that he was the one that
had been assisting the lawyers doing due diligence and had taken notes at several meetings
between Atkins and the lawyers from the Smith law firm. Jane likes it that Bob already knows
something about the transaction and tells him he can work on the deal with her. Having a general

Follow ABA

Home

Membership

Committees

Events & CLE

Publications

Section News

Initiatives & Awards

About Us

Contact Us

ement

JOIN THE ABA

JOIN THE ABA

SHOP ABA

SHOP ABA

CALENDAR

CALENDAR

MEMBER DIRECTORY

MEMBER DIRECTORYMembership ABA Groups Diversity Advocacy Resources for Lawyers Publishing CLE Career Center News About Us

4/28/2019 No, a paralegal is not a lawyer: A few things to keep in mind

https://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/blt/2007-01-02/kao.shtml 2/5

understanding of the rules on ethical conflicts, Jane purposely assigns Bob to the task of finalizing
and preparing the closing documents because this does not require that Bob make use of or
otherwise disclose any privileged information that he received while working at Smith & Smith.
How’s Jane doing so far?

Guideline 1 of the ABA Model Guidelines for the Utilization of Paralegal Services (Utilization
Guidelines) provides that “a lawyer is responsible for all of the professional activities of a paralegal
performing services at the lawyer’s direction and should take reasonable measures to ensure that
the paralegal’s conduct is consistent with the lawyer’s obligations under the rule of professional
conduct . . . .” In turn, Rules 1.7 through 1.10 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct
(Model Rules) impose specific obligations on lawyers with respect to conflicts and imputations of
conflicts.

Given that conflicts rules would prohibit a lawyer from working on the opposite side of a continuing
matter, it is clear that a paralegal likewise may not do so. The paralegal also cannot work on a
matter adverse to a former client for whom he previously worked if the two matters are substantially
related and confidentiality may be jeopardized.

Most law firms would never take the risk of hiring a new lawyer without screening those lawyers for
conflicts because the principle of vicarious disqualification imputes the potential new lawyer’s
conflicts to everyone in the firm — thereby, disqualifying the entire firm from a particular transaction
or representation. However, many lawyers and law firms do not screen paralegals or other
nonlawyers for conflicts even though the same principles of vicarious disqualification apply.

As a matter of good ethical practice, all potential new hires should be screened for conflicts at the
time the firm makes an offer of employment and that offer should be contingent on the results of
that conflict check. The paralegal should be asked to provide written detail of every individual or
entity for whom the paralegal provided services. This disclosure would then allow the hiring firm to
determine whether there are conflicts between the hiring firm’s business and the paralegal’s prior
work.

Moreover, irrespective of size, all firms should have, and should rigorously enforce, written policies
regarding avoidance of ethical conflicts, how to check for conflicts and, in the event of a potential
conflict, the importance of setting up ethical walls to prevent the disclosure of confidential
information.

Discovering potential conflicts early is critical because it gives the hiring firm several options. First,
the firm can decide if it wishes to obtain consents or conflict waivers from the affected clients.
Second, the firm can erect an ethical wall to protect against the communication of confidential
information from the new employee to others in the firm. Third, the firm can just decide not to hire
the paralegal with the conflict.

If no conflicts checks are ever made and the paralegal is hired, the lawyer or law firm runs the risk
of being entirely disqualified from representing the client on the particular transaction. In this era of
increasingly competitive law practice, this is certainly an unsettling prospect.

All in a day’s work.

Jane wants to make good use of Bob’s experience in drafting company bylaws, articles of
incorporation, board minutes and the ministerial aspects of incorporating a company. She thinks
that by giving Bob substantial responsibility and treating him as a full member of the legal team, she
can increase Bob’s job satisfaction. Bob appreciates Jane’s trust in him and always does his best for
all of Jane’s clients.

Jack Jameson, the founder of Conrad Inc. and a potential new client, calls Jane’s office to ask about
forming a new corporate entity as a Conrad Inc. subsidiary. Jane is out of town but Bob invites Jack
to talk things over. During the first in-person meeting between Jack and Bob, Bob is asked whether
the corporation should be formed in Delaware or New York; Jack also tells Bob that speed is of the
essence.

Bob tells Jack that the entity could be most quickly and efficiently formed in Delaware. Jack,
impressed with Bob’s professionalism, says “great, let’s get it done.” Bob tells Jack that he has to
sign the form retention agreement for all new clients and Jack does so.

Once Jack leaves the office, Bob drafts standard articles of incorporation and also fills in the form-
book company bylaws and sends them directly to Jack for his approval. A day later, after Jack gives
the nod to these documents, Bob electronically completes the necessary filings to incorporate the
new entity. Bob’s provided terrific client service and Jane should be very pleased, right?

Not exactly. All states prohibit the unauthorized practice of law and have an ethics rule like Rule 5.5
of the ABA Model Rules, which prohibits lawyers from aiding another person in the unauthorized
practice of law. Although what constitutes the unauthorized practice of law differs in specifics from
state to state, there are generally three things that every state — as well as Guideline 3 of the

4/28/2019 No, a paralegal is not a lawyer: A few things to keep in mind

https://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/blt/2007-01-02/kao.shtml 3/5

Utilization Guidelines — prohibits a paralegal or other nonlawyer from doing.

First, a paralegal may not establish the attorney-client relationship. Second, a paralegal may not
give legal advice. Third, a paralegal may not appear in court on behalf of a client — and this
prohibition covers the taking and defending of depositions and the signing of pleadings or other
papers to be filed in court.

Limited exceptions to this third prohibition exist; for example, certain federal and state agencies,
certain tribal courts and certain state courts under local rules permit nonlawyers to make
appearance on behalf of clients.

In addition to these three hard and fast rules, it is incumbent on the lawyer, not the paralegal, to
determine what constitutes the practice of law in her jurisdiction. Lawyers should keep in mind that,
in some jurisdictions, any exercise of independent legal judgment constitutes the practice of law.

A lawyer avoids running afoul of the prohibition against aiding in the unauthorized practice of law
through proper delegation and supervision of paralegals. Supervision is key because the lawyer is
responsible for the actions of any paralegal that she employs and proper supervision gives both the
lawyer and the client confidence that the paralegal is taking substantively and ethically proper
actions.

Proper delegation and supervision begins when selecting qualified persons as paralegals. A paralegal
can be qualified either by education (there are some several hundred paralegal education programs
that are approved by the American Bar Association) or by experience or a combination of both.

Second, proper delegation and supervision means that a lawyer should match the paralegal’s skill
set with the task that needs to be done. For example, one should not delegate real estate closing
tasks to a litigation paralegal unfamiliar with real estate transactions or assign inexperienced
paralegals to tasks without appropriate instruction. A lawyer can both ensure having qualified
paralegals and provide proper supervision by providing orientation and continuing training programs,
either formal or on-the-job, for the paralegal.

Third, a lawyer should properly guide the paralegals’ work. This means that adequate instructions
should be given when assigning a new project to a paralegal. Moreover, the lawyer should also
monitor the progress of each assignment to ensure that the paralegal is proceeding on the right
track.

Most important, proper supervision requires that the lawyer review the paralegal’s work product. It
is not enough that the paralegal has performed a particular task dozens of times and will likely again
perform the task properly. The lawyer must review the substantive work and be available to the
paralegal to provide guidance in even routine assignments. Permitting a paralegal to issue work
product on a substantive assignment without a lawyer’s review can constitute aiding in the
paralegal’s unauthorized practice of law.

As a general matter, lawyers should implement policies to avoid putting their paralegals into difficult
positions relative to client demands. For example, lawyers should implement a policy requiring their
paralegals to identify themselves to new callers or visitors as paralegals who are not licensed to
practice law. For small firms, the firm may want to use the standard engagement letter to clearly
identify the lawyers and the paralegals.

Paralegals should also be periodically reminded to defer all legal issues to the lawyers. These
procedures would comport with Guideline 4 of the Utilization Guidelines that requires lawyers to take
“reasonable measures” to ensure that clients, courts and other lawyers are aware that an individual
working with the lawyer is a paralegal and not licensed to practice law.

For both the lawyer and the paralegal, there are practical ramifications to engaging in and aiding in
the unauthorized practice of law. In most states, unauthorized practice of law is a misdemeanor
offense. Accordingly, the paralegal can be charged with a violation of law. That means that the
paralegal can be subject to an injunction against future conduct and, possibly, civil penalties.

For the lawyer, if the governing disciplinary organization determines that the lawyer failed to
properly supervise or otherwise aided the paralegal in the unauthorized practice of law, the lawyer
may be subject to penalties such as public censure, injunction, civil penalties, disgorgement of fees
and even suspension and disbarment. Also, because a paralegal’s work merges into and becomes
the lawyer’s work, a lawyer will be held liable for the malpractice of the paralegal working under his
supervision. Being charged with malpractice is one of the most severe reputation blows that a
lawyer can experience.

Silence is golden.

Bob is married and his wife, Carol, is also a paralegal. Carol has brought work home and has told
Bob about a particularly tricky research project she has been assigned. Bob has done this type of
research before in working with one of Jane Hendrick’s clients and knows that the result is highly

4/28/2019 No, a paralegal is not a lawyer: A few things to keep in mind

https://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/blt/2007-01-02/kao.shtml 4/5

fact dependent. He tells Carol the important underlying facts of the matter that he worked on and
also reveals the name of the client for whom he undertook the assignment.

He and Carol then share details of both his previous assignment and the areas of similarities with
her current assignment. Bob thinks nothing of telling his wife the details that the client shared with
him — he is confident that his wife will not share these discussions with anybody else.

The attorney-client privilege and the ethical obligation of client confidentiality extend to the
paralegal and all nonlawyers working with the lawyer. Rule 5.3 of the Model Rules provides that
lawyers who are partners in a firm, who have comparable managerial authority or who have
supervisory authority over nonlawyers “shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the person’s
conduct is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer.” An analogous provision exists
in Guideline 6 of the Utilization Guidelines.

The effect of Model Rule 5.3 is that lawyers are responsible for nonlawyers’ violations of the ethical
rules if they order or ratify the act, or are partners or supervisors of the nonlawyer and fail to take
timely remedial action on the conduct.

As a practical matter, lawyers must implement policies to protect client information and to train their
paralegals about the importance of client confidentiality. This obligation of confidentiality extends to
all types of client information including documents, files and computer security. As an initial step in
implementing confidentiality policies, the lawyer may want to ask that each paralegal sign a
confidentiality agreement that prohibits the paralegal from revealing any client information and that
sets forth penalties for breach of that commitment, including termination of employment.

Lawyers should also highlight issues arising from new technology including placing restrictions on
sending electronic materials directly to opposing counsel and the implementation of measures to
ensure that previous drafts of documents cannot be accessed. Key to this effort is the routine use of
built-in software features or custom programs that eliminate meta-data or lawyer notations from
electronic copies of documents.

Lawyers should further consider training paralegals on limiting the number of recipients of e-mail
communications sent to clients and others to avoid wide dissemination and inadvertent disclosure of
client information.

Further, it is important to inform paralegals and other nonlawyers that client confidentiality should
be a pervasive concept. For example, client matters should not be discussed on the elevator. After
all, who else is in the elevator and might be listening in? Information from or about the client should
not be discussed at home with a spouse or a significant other even if the person is confident to a
moral certainty that the information will go no further.

Lawyers also need to stress that, in the event of inadvertent disclosure, be it through erroneously
sent e-mail, mislaid documents or otherwise, the paralegal needs to immediately inform the lawyer
of the inadvertent disclosure rather than ignoring the disclosure and hoping that no ill results follow.
The earlier the lawyer learns of the inadvertent disclosure, the earlier that steps can be taken to
remedy the problem including informing the receiving party of the inadvertent disclosure and
requesting the return of the disclosed materials.

Finally, on termination of employment, lawyers should remind the departing paralegal of her
continuing obligation to maintain the client confidences learned during the course of the paralegal’s
employment.

Time is money.

Bob Worth is a terrific paralegal but is not a particularly organized record keeper. He often forgets to
keep a detailed record of the matters he worked on and the amount of time that he spent on specific
matters. He routinely turns in a month’s worth of time entries on the last day of the month and
“estimates” the amount of time he thinks was spent on each client’s matter.

He believes he tends to underestimate the time for each client and when he cannot exactly recall
what task he performed, he writes in as a time description “attention to corporate transaction.”
Since Bob’s estimates are fair, there is no concern for Jane, right?

Paralegals and lawyers should follow the same rules when it comes to time keeping and billing. Just
like all professionals in the firm, a paralegal must follow careful procedures in keeping track of work
time including making accurate daily time entries with a detailed description of the task undertaken.

Keeping track of working time is important for both the law firm and for the client. The law firm
should be fairly compensated for work performed on behalf of the client. Conversely, the client
should only have to pay for work actually performed and time actually expended — clients should
never be billed for duplicate time, excessive time or “guesstimated” time.

Accurate time keeping and proper task description are particularly important for those lawyers who

4/28/2019 No, a paralegal is not a lawyer: A few things to keep in mind

https://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/blt/2007-01-02/kao.shtml 5/5

Back to Top

routinely file fee petitions. With respect to such petitions, courts mandate accurate and detailed time
records and, in case lawyers think appropriate delegation is unimportant, courts will often disallow
fees requested for paralegals for functions that are considered clerical or secretarial in nature. Also,
some courts will lower the rate of compensation if a lawyer performs work that should have been
delegated to a paralegal.

More rules about money.

At the end of the year, Bob approaches Jane and tells her he needs to be compensated more than
his agreed-on salary because he has worked a lot more hours than he originally anticipated when he
came to the firm. Also, during the course of the year, Bob had referred several new clients to Jane.
He asks Jane to give him either a referral fee a share of the fees earned from the clients he referred
to Jane.

Jane tells him she will think about it and indicates that she is in favor of such an arrangement. After
all, Jane gives referral fees to other lawyers who refer clients to her — what is different about doing
the same for Bob?

The fact that Bob is not a lawyer is critical to Jane’s analysis. A lawyer may not split fees with
nonlawyers. Moreover, referral fees are strictly prohibited. What can be done, however, is for lawyers
to implement a compensation plan that includes bonuses or other amounts based on the individual
nonlawyer’s productivity or based on the firm’s profitability.

There is little doubt that a paralegal is a critical member of the legal team and helps to make a
lawyer’s practice more efficient and profitable. To enjoy these benefits, however, lawyers must focus
on proper supervision. Supervision can result in early problem spotting, enhance the proper training
of nonlawyers, and give comfort to clients that proper attention is being paid to their substantive
work. Supervision is also central to avoiding malpractice and violating state law and ethics rules.

After all, it is the lawyer’s obligation to ensure that the paralegal is properly screened, adequately
trained, performs appropriate tasks, maintains high ethical standards and produces a competent
work product.

Resources

For more information about working with paralegals, visit the Web site of the American Bar
Association’s Standing Committee on Paralegals (www.abaparalegals.org).

Or, consult the very informative book, Concise Guide to Paralegal Ethics, by Therese A.
Cannon (Aspen Publishers, 2006).

Also, virtually all state and local bar associations have programs or sections relating to the
use of paralegals.

Kao is a partner in the Chicago office of Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP. Her e-mail is
fkao@skadden.com. She was the chair of the ABA Standing Committee on Paralegals from 2004 to
2006.

FOR THE PUBLIC

ABA-Approved Law Schools

Law School Accreditation

Public Education

Public Resources

RESOURCES FOR

Bar Associations

Government and Public
Sector Lawyers

Judges

Law Students

Military Lawyers

Non-US Lawyers

Public Interest Lawyers

Senior Lawyers

Solo and Small Firms

Young Lawyers

STAY CONNECTED

Twitter

Facebook

LinkedIn

ABA Career Center

Contact Us Online

Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Privacy Policy | Your California Privacy Rights | Copyright & IP Policy | Advertising & Sponsorship | ABA | © 2015 ABA, All Rights
Reserved

Civil homework help

#4: Creating the Affirmative Case

1. Proposition:
The California State Board of Education must uphold mask mandates to prevent
the spread of Covid-19 among staff and students at California K-12 public
schools.

2. Context:
After a long debate between health officials, the board of education, and parents,
California has decided to lift its mask mandates in public schools.

3. Harms:
a) Unvaccinated exposure- Unvaccinated staff or students could expose

themselves or others to Covid
b) Unprotected immunocompromised- Immunocompromised staff and

students would not be protected against others who may carry the virus,
resulting in more extreme symptoms.

4. Inherency:
a) School Shutdowns- Covid will spread rapidly among staff and students

causing future shutdowns at schools
b) Risk of Hospitalization and Death- Immunocompromised staff and

students could be at greater risk of hospitalization or death.
5. Plan: See proposition
6. Solvency:

a) Reduced Transmission Rates- Vaccinated and unvaccinated will continue
wearing masks, reducing transmission rates of covid

b) Protection from masks- Immunocompromised staff and students will be
protected by others wearing masks.

7. Advantages:
a) Other illnesses spread slowed- cases of other illnesses commonly spread

in school, like the flu, can be prevented
b) Teaches good practice- Students can learn how to protect themselves

from getting sick in the future by knowing how to social distance, wear a
mask, wash hands, etc.

#5: Creating the Negative Response:

1. Opposition to affirmative plan: The California State Board of Education must
uphold mask mandates only for unvaccinated and/or immune-compromised
persons in schools.

2. Context: Although mask mandates are starting to be lifted and the threat of
COVID is still present, it is important to make an effort to return K-12 education
back to an optimal learning environment without masks.

3. Harms:
a) The continued spread of covid-19- if masks were completely taken out of

schools, covid would continue spreading, including both the
unvaccinated/immunocompromised and break through cases of the
vaccinated

b) Lack of Social Skills- masks get in the way of kids socializing and
recognising cues from others.

4. Inherency:
a) If no plans happen- School shutdowns and risk of hospitalization/death,

especially for those that are unvaccinated and/or immunocompromised
b) If the affirmative plan happens- the learning environment will remain less

than optimal due to the barriers the masks pose to communication and
social cues.

5. Counterplan: see opposition to affirmative plan
6. Solvency:

a) Unvaccinated/Immunocompromised wear masks-Those who are
unvaccinated will still have to wear a mask in order to prevent the spread
of COVID to those with an increased chance of hospitalization and death.

b) Better Socialization for kids- Unlike masking everyone in schools, most
kids will be able to go about their school day as normal, and be able to
interact fully with others without masks in the way

7. Advantages:
a) Unvaccinated/immunocompromised protected- the unvaccinated and the

immunocompromised will still have protection against COVID through the
use of wearing a mask.

b) Socialization- normal interaction will be prioritized in K-12 education with
the counter plan

Civil homework help

Guidelines
for the

Utilization of Paralegal Services

American Bar Association
Standing Committee on Paralegals

ABA Model

ABA Model

Guidelines

for the

Utilization of Paralegal Services

____________________________________________________

American Bar Association

Standing Committee on Paralegals

Guidelines

Copyright ©2018 American Bar Association

All rights reserved. The American Bar Association grants permission for reproduction of this
document, in whole or in part, provided that such use is for informational, non-commercial
purposes only and any copy of the materials or portion thereof acknowledges original
publication by the American Bar Association and includes the title of the publication, the name
of the author, and the legend “Copyright 2018 American Bar Association. Reprinted by
permission.” Requests to reproduce materials in any other manner should be addressed to:
Copyrights & Contracts Department, American Bar Association, 321 North Clark Street, Chicago,
Illinois 60654; Telephone (312) 988-6102; Facsimile: (312) 988-6030; E-mail:
copyright@americanbar.org.

ISBN: 978-1-64105-321-1

The materials contained herein represent the opinions of the authors and editors and should
not be construed to be those of the American Bar Association unless adopted pursuant to the
bylaws of the Association. Nothing contained herein is to be considered as the rendering of
legal advice for specific cases, and readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their
own legal counsel. These materials are intended for educational and informational purposes
only.

Produced by the Standing Committee on Paralegals.

Page 1

ABA MODEL GUIDELINES FOR THE

UTILIZATION OF PARALEGAL SERVICES©

Preamble

The Standing Committee on Paralegals of the American Bar Association drafted,

and the ABA House of Delegates adopted, the ABA Model Guidelines for the Utilization of
Legal Assistant Services in 1991. Most states have also prepared or adopted state‐specific
recommendations or guidelines for the utilization of services provided by paralegals.1 All of
these recommendations or guidelines are intended to provide lawyers with useful and
authoritative guidance in working with paralegals.

The Standing Committee’s intent in updating the Model Guidelines is to include
legal and policy developments that may have taken place since the last update in
2012. A Table of Contents and a Table of Authorities have been added, and the
Commentary is now phrased in a “reader‐friendly” style. The Standing Committee is of the
view that these and other guidelines on paralegal services will encourage lawyers to utilize
those services effectively and promote the continued growth of the paralegal profession.2

The Standing Committee has based these 2018 revisions on the American Bar
Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct (hereinafter “Model Rule”) but has also
attempted to take into account existing state recommendations and guidelines, decided
authority and contemporary practice. Lawyers, of course, are to be first directed by Model
Rule 5.3 in the utilization of paralegal services, and nothing contained in these Model

1
In 1986, the ABA Board of Governors approved a definition for the term “legal assistant.” In

1997, the ABA amended the definition of legal assistant by adopting the following language: “A legal
assistant or paralegal is a person qualified by education, training or work experience who is employed
or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation, governmental agency or other entity who performs
specifically delegated substantive legal work for which a lawyer is responsible.” To comport with
current usage in the profession, these guidelines use the term “paralegal” rather than “legal
assistant;” however, lawyers should be aware that the terms legal assistant and paralegals are often
used interchangeably.

2
While necessarily mentioning paralegal conduct, lawyers are the intended audience of these

Guidelines. The Guidelines, therefore, are addressed to lawyer conduct and not directly to the
conduct of the paralegal.

Page 2

Guidelines is intended to be inconsistent with that rule.3 Specific ethical considerations and
case law in particular states must also be taken into account by each lawyer that reviews
these guidelines. In the commentary after each Guideline, we have attempted to identify
the basis for the Guideline and any issues of which we are aware that the Guideline may
present. We have also included selected references to state and paralegal association
guidelines where we believed it would be helpful to the reader. Model documents from
two national paralegal associations are referenced throughout this publication. These
documents are the National Federation of Paralegal Associations (NFPA), Model Code of
Ethics and Professional Responsibility and Guidelines for Enforcement [hereinafter “NFPA
Guidelines”];4 and the National Association of Legal Assistants (NALA), Code of Ethics and
Professional Responsibility [hereinafter “NALA Ethics”].5 Rather than continually reference
the web address for these documents throughout the publication, they are provided here:

National Association of Legal Assistants (NALA): www.nala.org
(http://www.nala.org/code.aspx)

National Federation of Paralegal Associations (NFPA): www.paralegals.org
(http://www.paralegals.org/associations/2270/files/modelcode.html

3
The ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 amended several of the Model Rules referenced in

this publication, including Rules 1.1, 1.4, 1.6, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, in 2012. The amendments to Model Rule 5.3
changed the words “nonlawyer assistants” to “nonlawyer assistance” in the title and amended the
Comments to Model Rule 5.3. These changes are meant to highlight that lawyers have an obligation to
make reasonable efforts to ensure that all nonlawyers that assist them act in a manner that is
consistent with the attorney’s professional obligations – whether paralegals /assistants within the
firm or others employed from outside the firm (outsourcing). The Committee does not believe these
changes affect the way that Rule 5.3 is applied to paralegal practice.

4
The NFPA Model Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility was initially adopted in

1993. The revision used in this publication was made on June 9, 2006. The current version is
available on the NFPA web site indicated above.

5
The NALA Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility was originally adopted 1975, and

revised 1979, 1988, 1995, and 2007. The 2007 version is used in this publication. The current version
is available at the web site referenced above.

Page 3

Table of Contents

The Guidelines
Guideline 1: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4

A lawyer is responsible for all of the professional actions of a paralegal performing
services at the lawyer’s direction and should take reasonable measures to
ensure that the paralegal’s conduct is consistent with the lawyer’s obligations under the
rules of professional conduct of the jurisdiction in which the lawyer practices.

Guideline 2: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
Provided the lawyer maintains responsibility for the work product, a lawyer may
delegate to a paralegal any task normally performed by the lawyer except those tasks
proscribed to a nonlawyer by statute, court rule, administrative rule or regulation,
controlling authority, the applicable rule of professional conduct of the jurisdiction in
which the lawyer practices, or these Guidelines.

Guideline 3: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
A lawyer may not delegate to a paralegal:

(a) Responsibility for establishing an attorney‐client relationship.
(b) Responsibility for establishing the amount of a fee to be charged for a

legal service.
(c) Responsibility for a legal opinion rendered to a client.

Guideline 4: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10
A lawyer is responsible for taking reasonable measures to ensure that clients, courts,
and other lawyers are aware that a paralegal, whose services are utilized by the lawyer
in performing legal services, is not licensed to practice law.

Guideline 5: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
A lawyer may identify paralegals by name and title on the lawyer’s letterhead and on
business cards identifying the lawyer’s firm.

Guideline 6: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12
A lawyer is responsible for taking reasonable measures to ensure that all client
confidences are preserved by a paralegal.

Guideline 7: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 14
A lawyer should take reasonable measures to prevent conflicts of interest resulting from
a paralegal’s other employment or interests.

Guideline 8: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 17
A lawyer may include a charge for the work performed by a paralegal in setting a charge
and/or billing for legal services.

Guideline 9: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 18
A lawyer may not split legal fees with a paralegal nor pay a paralegal for the referral of
legal business. A lawyer may compensate a paralegal based on the quantity and quality
of the paralegal’s work and the value of that work to a law practice, but the paralegal’s
compensation may not be contingent, by advance agreement, upon the outcome of a
particular case or class of cases.

Guideline 10: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 20
A lawyer who employs a paralegal should facilitate the paralegal’s participation in
appropriate continuing education and pro bono publico activities.

Page 4

GUIDELINE 1: A lawyer is responsible for all of the professional actions of a
paralegal performing services at the lawyer’s direction and should take reasonable
measures to ensure that the paralegal’s conduct is consistent with the lawyer’s
obligations under the rules of professional conduct of the jurisdiction in which
the lawyer practices.

COMMENT

▪ Guideline 1 principles are incorporated within all guidelines.

The Standing Committee on Paralegals (“Standing Committee”) regards Guideline 1 as a
comprehensive statement of general principle governing the utilization of paralegals in the
practice of law. As such, the principles contained in Guideline 1 express the overarching
principle that although a lawyer may delegate tasks to a paralegal, a lawyer must always
assume ultimate responsibility for the delegated tasks and exercise independent
professional judgment with respect to all aspects of the representation of the client.

▪ Application of the Model Rules and Ethical Considerations of the Model Code

Under principles of agency law and the rules of professional conduct, lawyers are
responsible for the actions and the work product of nonlawyers they employ. Model Rule

5.36 requires that supervising lawyers ensure that the conduct of nonlawyer assistants7 is
compatible with the lawyer’s professional obligations.

Ethical Consideration 3‐6 of the Model Code encourages lawyers to delegate tasks to
paralegals so that legal services can be rendered more economically and efficiently. Ethical
Consideration 3‐6 further provides, however, that such delegation is only proper if the
lawyer “maintains a direct relationship with his client, supervises the delegated work, and
has complete professional responsibility for the work product.” The adoption of Model
Rule 5.3, which incorporates these principles, reaffirms this encouragement.

6
The Model Rules were first adopted by the ABA House of Delegates in August of 1983.

Almost all U.S. jurisdictions have adopted the Model Rules to govern the professional conduct of
lawyers licensed in those states. However, because a few jurisdictions still utilize a version of the ABA
Model Code of Professional Responsibility (“Model Code”), these comments will refer to both the
Model Rules and the predecessor Model Code (and to the Ethical Considerations (hereinafter “EC”)
and Disciplinary Rules (hereinafter “DR”) found under the canons in the Model Codes). In 1997, the
ABA formed the Commission on Evaluation of the Rules of Professional Conduct (“Ethics 2000
Commission”) to undertake a comprehensive review and revision of the Model Rules. The ABA House
of Delegates completed its review of the Commission’s recommended revisions in February 2002.
Visit https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/policy.html (last visited June
13, 2018) for information regarding the status of each state supreme court’s adoption of the Ethics
2000 revisions to the Model Rules as well as copies of both the model rules and model code.

7
See supra note 3 regarding a change to the terminology in Rule 5.3 effective in 2012.

Page 5

▪ Lawyers must instruct paralegals on professional conduct rules and supervise
paralegals consistent with the rules.

To conform to Guideline 1, a lawyer must give appropriate instruction to paralegals
supervised by the lawyer about the rules governing the lawyer’s professional conduct, and
require paralegals to act in accordance with those rules. See Comment to Model Rule 5.3;
see also National Association of Legal Assistant’s Model Standards and Guidelines for the
Utilization of Legal Assistants, Guidelines 1 and 4 (1985, revised 1990, 1997, 2005)
(hereafter “NALA Guidelines”).

Additionally, the lawyer must directly supervise paralegals employed by the lawyer to
ensure that, in every circumstance, the paralegal is acting in a manner consistent with the
lawyer’s ethical and professional obligations. What constitutes appropriate instruction and
supervision will differ from one state to another and the lawyer has the obligation to make
adjustments accordingly.

GUIDELINE 2: Provided the lawyer maintains responsibility for the work product, a
lawyer may delegate to a paralegal any task normally performed by the lawyer
except those tasks proscribed to a nonlawyer by statute, court rule, administrative
rule or regulation, controlling authority, the applicable rule of professional conduct
of the jurisdiction in which the lawyer practices, or these guidelines.

COMMENT

▪ Many tasks may be delegated to Paralegals so long as they are properly supervised.

The essence of the definition of the term “legal assistant” first adopted by the ABA in 19868
and subsequently amended in 19979 is that, so long as appropriate supervision is
maintained, many tasks normally performed by lawyers may be delegated to paralegals. EC
3‐6 under the Model Code mentioned three specific kinds of tasks that paralegals may
perform under appropriate lawyer supervision: factual investigation and research, legal
research, and the preparation of legal documents. Various states delineate more specific
tasks in their guidelines including attending client conferences, corresponding with and

8
The 1986 ABA definition read: “A legal assistant is a person, qualified through education,

training or work experience, who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, governmental
agency, or other entity, in a capacity or function which involves the performance, under the ultimate
direction and supervision of an attorney, of specifically‐delegated substantive legal work, which work,
for the most part, requires a sufficient knowledge of legal concepts that, absent such assistant, the
attorney would perform the task.”

9
In 1997, the ABA amended the definition of legal assistant by adopting the following

language: “A legal assistant or paralegal is a person qualified by education, training or work
experience who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation, governmental agency or
other entity who performs specifically delegated substantive legal work for which a lawyer is
responsible.”

Page 6

obtaining information from clients, witnessing the execution of documents, preparing
transmittal letters, and maintaining estate/guardianship trust accounts. See, e.g., Colorado
Bar Association Guidelines for the Utilization of Paralegals (the Colorado Bar Association
adopted guidelines in 1986 for the use of paralegals in 21 specialty practice areas including
bankruptcy, civil litigation, corporate law and estate planning. The Colorado Bar Association
Guidelines were revised in 2008); NALA Guideline 5.

▪ Paralegals may not, however, engage in the unauthorized practice of law.

While appropriate delegation of tasks is encouraged and a broad array of tasks is properly
delegable to paralegals, improper delegation of tasks will often run afoul of a lawyer’s
obligations under applicable rules of professional conduct. A common consequence of the
improper delegation of tasks is that the lawyer will have assisted the paralegal in the
unauthorized “practice of law” in violation of Model Rule 5.5, Model Code DR 3‐101, and
the professional rules of most states. Neither the Model Rules nor the Model Code defines
the “practice of law.”10 EC 3‐5 under the Model Code gave some guidance by equating the
practice of law to the application of the professional judgment of the lawyer in solving
clients’ legal problems. This approach is consistent with that taken in ABA Opinion 316
(1967) which states: “A lawyer . . . may employ nonlawyers to do any task for him except
counsel clients about law matters, engage directly in the practice of law, appear in court or
appear in formal proceedings as part of the judicial process, so long as it is he who takes the
work and vouches for it to the client and becomes responsible for it to the client.”

▪ Generally Paralegals may not appear before adjudicative bodies.

As a general matter, most state guidelines specify that paralegals may not appear before
courts, administrative tribunals, or other adjudicatory bodies unless the procedural rules of
the adjudicatory body authorize such appearances. See, e.g., State Bar of Arizona,
Committee on the Rules of Prof’l Conduct, Opinion No. 99‐13 (December 1999) (attorney did
not assist in unauthorized practice of law by supervising paralegal in tribal court where
tribal court rules permit non‐attorneys to be licensed tribal advocates).11 Additionally, no
state permits paralegals to conduct depositions or give legal advice to clients. E.g.,
Guideline 2, Connecticut Bar Association Guidelines for Lawyers Who Employ or Retain
Legal Assistants (the “Connecticut Guidelines”); Guideline 2, State Bar of Michigan
Guidelines for Utilization of Legal Assistants; State Bar of Georgia,

10
The ABA formed a task force in 2003 to examine the various state definitions of the

“practice of law.” The report of that task force, as well as related resources are available on the ABA

web site at the following URL:

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/task_force_model_definition_pra
ctice_law.html (last visited on June 13, 2018).

11
It is important to note that pursuant to federal or state statute, paralegals are permitted to

provide direct client representation in certain administrative proceedings. While this does not obviate
the lawyer’s responsibility for the paralegal’s work, it does change the nature of the lawyer’s
supervision of the paralegal. The opportunity to use such paralegal services has particular benefits to
legal services programs and does not violate Guideline 2. See generally ABA Standards for Providers
of Civil Legal Services to the Poor Std. 6.3, at 6.17‐6.18 (1986).

Page 7

State Disciplinary Board Advisory Opinion No. 21 (September 16, 1977); Doe v. Condon,
532 S.E.2d 879 (S.C. 2000) (it is the unauthorized practice of law for a paralegal to conduct
educational seminars and answer estate planning questions because the paralegal will be
implicitly advising participants that they require estate planning services). See also NALA
Guidelines II, III, and V.

▪ The “practice of law” is defined by the states.

Ultimately, apart from the obvious tasks that virtually all states agree are proscribed to
paralegals, what constitutes the “practice of law” is governed by state law and is a fact
specific question. See, e.g., Louisiana Rules of Prof’l Conduct Rule 5.5 which sets out specific
tasks considered to be the “practice of law” by the Supreme Court of Louisiana. Thus, some
tasks that have been specifically prohibited in some states are expressly delegable in others.
Compare Guideline 2, Connecticut Guidelines (permitting paralegal to attend real estate
closings even though no supervising lawyer is present provided that the paralegal does not
render opinion or judgment about execution of documents, changes in adjustments or price
or other matters involving documents or funds) and The Florida Bar, Opinion 89‐5
(November 1989) (permitting paralegal to handle real estate closing at which no supervising
lawyer is present provided, among other things, that the paralegal will not give legal advice
or make impromptu decisions that should be made by a lawyer) with Supreme Court of
Georgia, Formal Advisory Opinion No. 86‐5 (May 1989) (closing of real estate transactions
constitutes the practice of law and it is ethically improper for a lawyer to permit a paralegal
to close the transaction). It is thus incumbent on the lawyer to determine whether a
particular task is properly delegable in the jurisdiction at issue.

▪ The key to successfully complying with Guideline 2 is proper supervision.

Once the lawyer has determined that a particular task is delegable consistent with the
professional rules, utilization guidelines, and case law of the relevant jurisdiction, the key to
Guideline 2 is proper supervision. A lawyer should start the supervision process by ensuring
that the paralegal has sufficient education, background and experience to handle the task
being assigned. The lawyer should provide adequate instruction when assigning projects
and should also monitor the progress of the project. Finally, it is the lawyer’s obligation to
review the completed project to ensure that the work product is appropriate for the
assigned task. See, e.g., Spencer v. Steinman, 179 F.R.D. 484 (E.D. Penn. 1998) (lawyer
sanctioned under Rule 11 for paralegal’s failure to serve subpoena duces tecum on parties
to the litigation because the lawyer “did not assure himself that [the paralegal] had
adequate training nor did he adequately supervise her once he assigned her the task of
issuing subpoenas”).

▪ Consequences of failure to properly delegate tasks to or to supervise a paralegal
properly.

Serious consequences can result from a lawyer’s failure to properly delegate tasks to or to
supervise a paralegal properly. For example, the Supreme Court of Virginia upheld a

Page 8

malpractice verdict against a lawyer based in part on negligent actions of a paralegal in
performing tasks that evidently were properly delegable. Musselman v. Willoughby Corp.,
230 Va. 337, 337 S.E. 2d 724 (1985); see also C. Wolfram, Modern Legal Ethics 236, 896
(1986). Disbarment and suspension from the practice of law have resulted from a lawyer’s
failure to properly supervise the work performed by paralegals. See Matter of Disciplinary
Action Against Nassif, 547 N.W.2d 541 (N.D. 1996) (disbarment for failure to supervise
which resulted in the unauthorized practice of law by office paralegals); Attorney Grievance
Comm’n of Maryland v. Hallmon, 681 A.2d 510 (Md. 1996) (90‐day suspension for, among
other things, abdicating responsibility for a case to paralegal without supervising or
reviewing the paralegal’s work). Lawyers have also been subject to monetary and other
sanctions in federal and state courts for failing to properly utilize and supervise paralegals.
See In re Hessinger & Associates, 192 B.R. 211 (N.D. Cal. 1996) (bankruptcy court directed to
reevaluate its $100,000 sanction but district court finds that law firm violated Rule 3‐110(A)
of the California Rules of Professional Conduct by permitting bankruptcy paralegals to
undertake initial interviews, fill out forms and complete schedules without attorney
supervision).

Finally, it is important to note that although the attorney has the primary obligation to not
permit a nonlawyer to engage in the unauthorized practice of law, some states have
concluded that a paralegal is not relieved from an independent obligation to refrain from
illegal conduct and to work directly under an attorney’s supervision. See In re Opinion No.
24 of the Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law, 607 A.2d 962, 969 (N.J. 1992) (a
“paralegal who recognizes that the attorney is not directly supervising his or her work or
that such supervision is illusory because the attorney knows nothing about the field in
which the paralegal is working must understand that he or she is engaged in the
unauthorized practice of law”); Kentucky Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 3.700 (stating that “the
paralegal does have an independent obligation to refrain from illegal conduct”).
Additionally, paralegals must also familiarize themselves with the specific statutes
governing the particular area of law with which they might come into contact while
providing paralegal services. See, e.g., 11 U.S.C. § 110 (provisions governing nonlawyer
preparers of bankruptcy petitions); In Re Moffett, 263 B.R. 805 (W.D. Ky. 2001) (nonlawyer
bankruptcy petition preparer fined for advertising herself as “paralegal” because that is
prohibited by 11 U.S.C. § 110(f). Again, the lawyer must remember that any independent
obligation a paralegal might have under state law to refrain from the unauthorized practice
of law does not in any way diminish or vitiate the lawyer’s obligation to properly delegate
tasks and supervise the paralegal working for the lawyer.

Page 9

GUIDELINE 3: A lawyer may not delegate to a paralegal:

(a) Responsibility for establishing an attorney‐client relationship.
(b) Responsibility for establishing the amount of a fee to be charged

for a legal service.
(c) Responsibility for a legal opinion rendered to a client.

COMMENT

▪ The lawyer must establish and maintain a relationship with the client to ensure that
the client can effectively participate in the representation.

Model Rule 1.4 and most state codes require lawyers to communicate directly with their
clients and to provide their clients information reasonably necessary to make informed
decisions and to effectively participate in the representation. While delegation of legal tasks
to nonlawyers may benefit clients by enabling their lawyers to render legal services more
economically and efficiently, Model Rule 1.4 and EC 3‐6 under the Model Code emphasize
that delegation is proper only if the lawyer “maintains a direct relationship with his client,
supervises the delegated work and has complete professional responsibility for the work
product.” NALA Ethics Canon 2, echoes the Model Rule when it states: “A paralegal may
perform any task which is properly delegated and supervised by an attorney, as long as the
attorney is ultimately responsible to the client, maintains a direct relationship with the
client, and assumes professional responsibility for the work product.” Most state guidelines
also stress the paramount importance of a direct attorney‐client relationship. See New
Mexico Rule 20‐106. The direct personal relationship between client and lawyer is critical to
the exercise of the lawyer’s trained professional judgment.

▪ The lawyer must set fees, and discuss the basis for fees, directly with the client.

Fundamental to the lawyer‐client relationship is the lawyer’s agreement to undertake
representation and the related fee arrangement. The Model Rules and most states require
lawyers to make fee arrangements with their clients and to clearly communicate with their
clients concerning the scope of the representation and the basis for the fees for which the
client will be responsible. Model Rule 1.5 and Comments. Many state guidelines prohibit
paralegals from “setting fees” or “accepting cases.” See, e.g., Pennsylvania Eth. Op. 98‐75,
1994 Utah Eth. Op. 139. NALA Ethics Canon 3 states that a paralegal must not establish
attorney‐client relationships or set fees.

▪ Paralegals may communicate directly with the client, so long as they do not interpret
or expand upon the attorney’s legal advice.

Model Code EC 3‐5 states: “[T]he essence of the professional judgment of the lawyer is his
educated ability to relate the general body and philosophy of law to a specific legal problem
of a client; and thus, the public interest will be better served if only lawyers are permitted
to act in matters involving professional judgment.” Clients are entitled to their lawyers’
professional judgment and opinion. Paralegals may, however, be authorized to
communicate a lawyer’s legal advice to a client so long as they do not interpret or expand
on that advice. Typically, state guidelines phrase this prohibition in terms of paralegals
be

Civil homework help

Student Learning Objectives:
● Students will prepare outlines for the debate topics which they did not

write about in their debate brief.

Instructions:
● Working with your debate partner, students will prepare basic debate

outlines for the other debate topics. For example, if one student wrote
about COVID-19 Mask Mandates and the other student in the partnership
wrote about Censorship in School for their debate briefs, then the partners
would prepare debate outlines for the Ukraine and Judge Ketanji
Brown-Jackson SCOTUS Nomination topics.

● The debate outlines for this assignment should include all of the stock
issues for debate. Here is a basic debate outline:

1. Topic:
1. Harm 1:
2. Harm 2:
3. Inherency 1:
4. Inherency 2:

2. Plan
1. Proposition
2. Solvency 1:
3. Solvency 2:
4. Advantage 1:
5. Advantage 2:

● It would be to the benefit of the student if they also included pieces of
evidence with the document. Keep in mind, the more prepared you are
now will benefit you later in the assignment.

● Each of the partners should upload both debate outlines to this
assignment page.

Civil homework help

Ethics Training and Policing

As an employee of the police department, your actions are guided by the following principles: justice, excellence, humility, and harm reduction. The department’s goals focus on preventing and fighting crime, community policing, and harm reduction. The goals are pursued via time-tested tactics, available research, innovation, training, and partnering with the community.

As a police employee entrusted by the community to protect the entire community (police department employees and community members alike), officers strive to display the values outlined in the illustration below: 

Figure 2

Common Police Department Values (Seattle Police Manual) 


Common police department values including justice, excellence, humility, harm reduction, and service.

References

The Seattle Police Manual. (n.d.). The Seattle Police Department’s Code of Ethics. Seattle Government. 

Weekly Resources and Assignments

Review the resources from the Course Resources link, located in the top navigation bar, to prepare for this week’s assignments. The resources may include textbook reading assignments, journal articles, websites, links to tools or software, videos, handouts, rubrics, etc.

0 %0 of 1 topics complete

Show data table for This chart displays the number of completed topics versus the total number of topics within module Week 8..

List of Topics and Sub-Modules for Week 8

· Week 8 – Assignment: Assess the Quality and Availability of Ethics Training in a Police Organization

Assignment

 

Top of Form

 

Bottom of Form

This week, you will develop a position paper based on the following prompt:

Police officers receive enough training to achieve the higher standard of morale and ethics.

To develop your paper, please choose a police department in the United States. For the department, please discuss the following:

· Demographics of the Department

· Demographics of the community served

· Ethics training within the department

Length: 5-7 pages, excluding the title and reference pages

References: Include a minimum of 5 scholarly references.

The completed assignment should address all the assignment requirements, exhibit evidence of concept knowledge, and demonstrate thoughtful consideration of the content presented in the course. The writing should integrate scholarly resources, reflect academic expectations, and current APA standards, and adhere to the Northcentral University’s Academic Integrity Policy.

Civil homework help

Please watch the video (or read the transcript) and answer the following questions about the documentary. 

A Crime of Insanity Transcript: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/crime/etc/script.htmlLinks to an external site.

A Crime of Insanity Video: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5ixsy1Links to an external site.

1. What signs of psychological problems emerged for Ralph Tororici? And when did they emerge?

2. Why did the prosecutor have trouble finding an “expert” to testify against Ralph?

3. Why didn’t the prosecutor allow Ralph to plead guilty and be sent to a hospital?

4. What is the competency standard?

5. What was the “Rush Limbaugh” approach for the prosecution?

6. What did Cheryl Coleman say is the most important job of a trial lawyer?

7. What kind of evidence and approach did the prosecution rely on to demonstrate Ralph was legally sane?

8. According to Coleman what role does morality play in law?

9. What challenges does this kind of case present for rational choice theory?

10. Do you agree more with the Judge (this was a good example of justice) or with Coleman (this was not justice)? Why do you feel that way?

Civil homework help

1 (Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2017

Syllabus

NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Syllabus

CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

No. 16–402. Argued November 29, 2017—Decided June 22, 2018

Cell phones perform their wide and growing variety of functions by con-
tinuously connecting to a set of radio antennas called “cell sites.”
Each time a phone connects to a cell site, it generates a time-stamped
record known as cell-site location information (CSLI). Wireless carri-
ers collect and store this information for their own business purposes.
Here, after the FBI identified the cell phone numbers of several rob-
bery suspects, prosecutors were granted court orders to obtain the
suspects’ cell phone records under the Stored Communications Act.
Wireless carriers produced CSLI for petitioner Timothy Carpenter’s
phone, and the Government was able to obtain 12,898 location points
cataloging Carpenter’s movements over 127 days—an average of 101
data points per day. Carpenter moved to suppress the data, arguing
that the Government’s seizure of the records without obtaining a
warrant supported by probable cause violated the Fourth Amend-
ment. The District Court denied the motion, and prosecutors used
the records at trial to show that Carpenter’s phone was near four of
the robbery locations at the time those robberies occurred. Carpen-
ter was convicted. The Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding that Carpen-
ter lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the location infor-
mation collected by the FBI because he had shared that information
with his wireless carriers.

Held:
1. The Government’s acquisition of Carpenter’s cell-site records

was a Fourth Amendment search. Pp. 4–18.
(a) The Fourth Amendment protects not only property interests

but certain expectations of privacy as well. Katz v. United States, 389
U. S. 347, 351. Thus, when an individual “seeks to preserve some-
thing as private,” and his expectation of privacy is “one that society is

2 CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES

Syllabus

prepared to recognize as reasonable,” official intrusion into that
sphere generally qualifies as a search and requires a warrant sup-
ported by probable cause. Smith v. Maryland, 442 U. S. 735, 740 (in-
ternal quotation marks and alterations omitted). The analysis re-
garding which expectations of privacy are entitled to protection is
informed by historical understandings “of what was deemed an un-
reasonable search and seizure when [the Fourth Amendment] was
adopted.” Carroll v. United States, 267 U. S. 132, 149. These Found-
ing-era understandings continue to inform this Court when applying
the Fourth Amendment to innovations in surveillance tools. See, e.g.,
Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27. Pp. 4–7.

(b) The digital data at issue—personal location information
maintained by a third party—does not fit neatly under existing prec-
edents but lies at the intersection of two lines of cases. One set ad-
dresses a person’s expectation of privacy in his physical location and
movements. See, e.g., United States v. Jones, 565 U. S. 400 (five Jus-
tices concluding that privacy concerns would be raised by GPS track-
ing). The other addresses a person’s expectation of privacy in infor-
mation voluntarily turned over to third parties. See United States v.
Miller, 425 U. S. 435 (no expectation of privacy in financial records
held by a bank), and Smith, 442 U. S. 735 (no expectation of privacy
in records of dialed telephone numbers conveyed to telephone compa-
ny). Pp. 7–10.

(c) Tracking a person’s past movements through CSLI partakes
of many of the qualities of GPS monitoring considered in Jones—it is
detailed, encyclopedic, and effortlessly compiled. At the same time,
however, the fact that the individual continuously reveals his loca-
tion to his wireless carrier implicates the third-party principle of
Smith and Miller. Given the unique nature of cell-site records, this
Court declines to extend Smith and Miller to cover them. Pp. 10–18.

(1) A majority of the Court has already recognized that indi-
viduals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the whole of their
physical movements. Allowing government access to cell-site rec-
ords—which “hold for many Americans the ‘privacies of life,’ ” Riley v.
California, 573 U. S. ___, ___—contravenes that expectation. In fact,
historical cell-site records present even greater privacy concerns than
the GPS monitoring considered in Jones: They give the Government
near perfect surveillance and allow it to travel back in time to retrace
a person’s whereabouts, subject only to the five-year retention poli-
cies of most wireless carriers. The Government contends that CSLI
data is less precise than GPS information, but it thought the data ac-
curate enough here to highlight it during closing argument in Car-
penter’s trial. At any rate, the rule the Court adopts “must take ac-
count of more sophisticated systems that are already in use or in

3 Cite as: 585 U. S. ____ (2018)

Syllabus

development,” Kyllo, 533 U. S., at 36, and the accuracy of CSLI is
rapidly approaching GPS-level precision. Pp. 12–15.

(2) The Government contends that the third-party doctrine
governs this case, because cell-site records, like the records in Smith
and Miller, are “business records,” created and maintained by wire-
less carriers. But there is a world of difference between the limited
types of personal information addressed in Smith and Miller and the
exhaustive chronicle of location information casually collected by
wireless carriers.

The third-party doctrine partly stems from the notion that an indi-
vidual has a reduced expectation of privacy in information knowingly
shared with another. Smith and Miller, however, did not rely solely
on the act of sharing. They also considered “the nature of the partic-
ular documents sought” and limitations on any “legitimate ‘expecta-
tion of privacy’ concerning their contents.” Miller, 425 U. S., at 442.
In mechanically applying the third-party doctrine to this case the
Government fails to appreciate the lack of comparable limitations on
the revealing nature of CSLI.

Nor does the second rationale for the third-party doctrine—
voluntary exposure—hold up when it comes to CSLI. Cell phone lo-
cation information is not truly “shared” as the term is normally un-
derstood. First, cell phones and the services they provide are “such a
pervasive and insistent part of daily life” that carrying one is indis-
pensable to participation in modern society. Riley, 573 U. S., at ___.
Second, a cell phone logs a cell-site record by dint of its operation,
without any affirmative act on the user’s part beyond powering up.
Pp. 15–17.

(d) This decision is narrow. It does not express a view on matters
not before the Court; does not disturb the application of Smith and
Miller or call into question conventional surveillance techniques and
tools, such as security cameras; does not address other business rec-
ords that might incidentally reveal location information; and does not
consider other collection techniques involving foreign affairs or na-
tional security. Pp. 17–18.

2. The Government did not obtain a warrant supported by proba-
ble cause before acquiring Carpenter’s cell-site records. It acquired
those records pursuant to a court order under the Stored Communi-
cations Act, which required the Government to show “reasonable
grounds” for believing that the records were “relevant and material to
an ongoing investigation.” 18 U. S. C. §2703(d). That showing falls
well short of the probable cause required for a warrant. Consequent-
ly, an order issued under §2703(d) is not a permissible mechanism for
accessing historical cell-site records. Not all orders compelling the
production of documents will require a showing of probable cause. A

4 CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES

Syllabus

warrant is required only in the rare case where the suspect has a le-
gitimate privacy interest in records held by a third party. And even
though the Government will generally need a warrant to access
CSLI, case-specific exceptions—e.g., exigent circumstances—may
support a warrantless search. Pp. 18–22.

819 F. 3d 880, reversed and remanded.

ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which GINS-
BURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. KENNEDY, J., filed a
dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS and ALITO, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J.,
filed a dissenting opinion. ALITO, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which
THOMAS, J., joined. GORSUCH, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

_________________

_________________

1 Cite as: 585 U. S. ____ (2018)

Opinion of the Court

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 16–402

TIMOTHY IVORY CARPENTER, PETITIONER v.

UNITED STATES

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF

APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

[June 22, 2018]

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS delivered the opinion of the
Court.

This case presents the question whether the Govern-
ment conducts a search under the Fourth Amendment
when it accesses historical cell phone records that provide
a comprehensive chronicle of the user’s past movements.

I

A

There are 396 million cell phone service accounts in the
United States—for a Nation of 326 million people. Cell
phones perform their wide and growing variety of func-
tions by connecting to a set of radio antennas called “cell
sites.” Although cell sites are usually mounted on a tower,
they can also be found on light posts, flagpoles, church
steeples, or the sides of buildings. Cell sites typically have
several directional antennas that divide the covered area
into sectors.

Cell phones continuously scan their environment look-
ing for the best signal, which generally comes from the
closest cell site. Most modern devices, such as
smartphones, tap into the wireless network several times

2 CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES

Opinion of the Court

a minute whenever their signal is on, even if the owner is
not using one of the phone’s features. Each time the
phone connects to a cell site, it generates a time-stamped
record known as cell-site location information (CSLI). The
precision of this information depends on the size of the
geographic area covered by the cell site. The greater the
concentration of cell sites, the smaller the coverage area.
As data usage from cell phones has increased, wireless
carriers have installed more cell sites to handle the traffic.
That has led to increasingly compact coverage areas,
especially in urban areas.

Wireless carriers collect and store CSLI for their own
business purposes, including finding weak spots in their
network and applying “roaming” charges when another
carrier routes data through their cell sites. In addition,
wireless carriers often sell aggregated location records to
data brokers, without individual identifying information of
the sort at issue here. While carriers have long retained
CSLI for the start and end of incoming calls, in recent
years phone companies have also collected location infor-
mation from the transmission of text messages and rou-
tine data connections. Accordingly, modern cell phones
generate increasingly vast amounts of increasingly precise
CSLI.

B
In 2011, police officers arrested four men suspected of

robbing a series of Radio Shack and (ironically enough) T-
Mobile stores in Detroit. One of the men confessed that,
over the previous four months, the group (along with a
rotating cast of getaway drivers and lookouts) had robbed
nine different stores in Michigan and Ohio. The suspect
identified 15 accomplices who had participated in the
heists and gave the FBI some of their cell phone numbers;
the FBI then reviewed his call records to identify addi-
tional numbers that he had called around the time of the

3 Cite as: 585 U. S. ____ (2018)

Opinion of the Court

robberies.
Based on that information, the prosecutors applied for

court orders under the Stored Communications Act to
obtain cell phone records for petitioner Timothy Carpenter
and several other suspects. That statute, as amended in
1994, permits the Government to compel the disclosure of
certain telecommunications records when it “offers specific
and articulable facts showing that there are reasonable
grounds to believe” that the records sought “are relevant
and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.” 18
U. S. C. §2703(d). Federal Magistrate Judges issued two
orders directing Carpenter’s wireless carriers—MetroPCS
and Sprint—to disclose “cell/site sector [information] for
[Carpenter’s] telephone[ ] at call origination and at call
termination for incoming and outgoing calls” during the
four-month period when the string of robberies occurred.
App. to Pet. for Cert. 60a, 72a. The first order sought 152
days of cell-site records from MetroPCS, which produced
records spanning 127 days. The second order requested
seven days of CSLI from Sprint, which produced two days
of records covering the period when Carpenter’s phone was
“roaming” in northeastern Ohio. Altogether the Govern-
ment obtained 12,898 location points cataloging Carpen-
ter’s movements—an average of 101 data points per day.

Carpenter was charged with six counts of robbery and
an additional six counts of carrying a firearm during a
federal crime of violence. See 18 U. S. C. §§924(c), 1951(a).
Prior to trial, Carpenter moved to suppress the cell-site
data provided by the wireless carriers. He argued that the
Government’s seizure of the records violated the Fourth
Amendment because they had been obtained without a
warrant supported by probable cause. The District Court
denied the motion. App. to Pet. for Cert. 38a–39a.

At trial, seven of Carpenter’s confederates pegged him
as the leader of the operation. In addition, FBI agent
Christopher Hess offered expert testimony about the cell-

4 CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES

Opinion of the Court

site data. Hess explained that each time a cell phone taps
into the wireless network, the carrier logs a time-stamped
record of the cell site and particular sector that were used.
With this information, Hess produced maps that placed
Carpenter’s phone near four of the charged robberies. In
the Government’s view, the location records clinched the
case: They confirmed that Carpenter was “right where the
. . . robbery was at the exact time of the robbery.” App.
131 (closing argument). Carpenter was convicted on all
but one of the firearm counts and sentenced to more than
100 years in prison.

The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed. 819
F. 3d 880 (2016). The court held that Carpenter lacked a
reasonable expectation of privacy in the location infor-
mation collected by the FBI because he had shared that
information with his wireless carriers. Given that cell
phone users voluntarily convey cell-site data to their
carriers as “a means of establishing communication,” the
court concluded that the resulting business records are not
entitled to Fourth Amendment protection. Id., at 888
(quoting Smith v. Maryland, 442 U. S. 735, 741 (1979)).

We granted certiorari. 582 U. S. ___ (2017).

II

A

The Fourth Amendment protects “[t]he right of the
people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The
“basic purpose of this Amendment,” our cases have recog-
nized, “is to safeguard the privacy and security of individ-
uals against arbitrary invasions by governmental offi-
cials.” Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of
San Francisco, 387 U. S. 523, 528 (1967). The Founding
generation crafted the Fourth Amendment as a “response
to the reviled ‘general warrants’ and ‘writs of assistance’ of
the colonial era, which allowed British officers to rum-

5 Cite as: 585 U. S. ____ (2018)

Opinion of the Court

mage through homes in an unrestrained search for evi-
dence of criminal activity.” Riley v. California, 573 U. S.
___, ___ (2014) (slip op., at 27). In fact, as John Adams
recalled, the patriot James Otis’s 1761 speech condemning
writs of assistance was “the first act of opposition to the
arbitrary claims of Great Britain” and helped spark the
Revolution itself. Id., at ___–___ (slip op., at 27–28) (quot-
ing 10 Works of John Adams 248 (C. Adams ed. 1856)).

For much of our history, Fourth Amendment search
doctrine was “tied to common-law trespass” and focused on
whether the Government “obtains information by physi-
cally intruding on a constitutionally protected area.”
United States v. Jones, 565 U. S. 400, 405, 406, n. 3 (2012).
More recently, the Court has recognized that “property
rights are not the sole measure of Fourth Amendment
violations.” Soldal v. Cook County, 506 U. S. 56, 64
(1992). In Katz v. United States, 389 U. S. 347, 351 (1967),
we established that “the Fourth Amendment protects
people, not places,” and expanded our conception of the
Amendment to protect certain expectations of privacy as
well. When an individual “seeks to preserve something as
private,” and his expectation of privacy is “one that society
is prepared to recognize as reasonable,” we have held that
official intrusion into that private sphere generally quali-
fies as a search and requires a warrant supported by
probable cause. Smith, 442 U. S., at 740 (internal quota-
tion marks and alterations omitted).

Although no single rubric definitively resolves which
expectations of privacy are entitled to protection,1 the

——————
1 JUSTICE KENNEDY believes that there is such a rubric—the “proper-

ty-based concepts” that Katz purported to move beyond. Post, at 3
(dissenting opinion). But while property rights are often informative,
our cases by no means suggest that such an interest is “fundamental”
or “dispositive” in determining which expectations of privacy are
legitimate. Post, at 8–9. JUSTICE THOMAS (and to a large extent
JUSTICE GORSUCH) would have us abandon Katz and return to an

6 CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES

Opinion of the Court

analysis is informed by historical understandings “of what
was deemed an unreasonable search and seizure when
[the Fourth Amendment] was adopted.” Carroll v. United
States, 267 U. S. 132, 149 (1925). On this score, our cases
have recognized some basic guideposts. First, that the
Amendment seeks to secure “the privacies of life” against
“arbitrary power.” Boyd v. United States, 116 U. S. 616,
630 (1886). Second, and relatedly, that a central aim of
the Framers was “to place obstacles in the way of a too
permeating police surveillance.” United States v. Di Re,
332 U. S. 581, 595 (1948).

We have kept this attention to Founding-era under-
standings in mind when applying the Fourth Amendment
to innovations in surveillance tools. As technology has
enhanced the Government’s capacity to encroach upon
areas normally guarded from inquisitive eyes, this Court
has sought to “assure[ ] preservation of that degree of
privacy against government that existed when the Fourth
Amendment was adopted.” Kyllo v. United States, 533
U. S. 27, 34 (2001). For that reason, we rejected in Kyllo a
“mechanical interpretation” of the Fourth Amendment and
held that use of a thermal imager to detect heat radiating
from the side of the defendant’s home was a search. Id., at
35. Because any other conclusion would leave homeown-
ers “at the mercy of advancing technology,” we determined
that the Government—absent a warrant—could not capi-
talize on such new sense-enhancing technology to explore
——————

exclusively property-based approach. Post, at 1–2, 17–21 (THOMAS J.,
dissenting); post, at 6–9 (GORSUCH, J., dissenting). Katz of course
“discredited” the “premise that property interests control,” 389 U. S., at
353, and we have repeatedly emphasized that privacy interests do not
rise or fall with property rights, see, e.g., United States v. Jones, 565
U. S. 400, 411 (2012) (refusing to “make trespass the exclusive test”);
Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 32 (2001) (“We have since decou-
pled violation of a person’s Fourth Amendment rights from trespassory
violation of his property.”). Neither party has asked the Court to
reconsider Katz in this case.

7 Cite as: 585 U. S. ____ (2018)

Opinion of the Court

what was happening within the home. Ibid.
Likewise in Riley, the Court recognized the “immense
storage capacity” of modern cell phones in holding that
police officers must generally obtain a warrant before
searching the contents of a phone. 573 U. S., at ___ (slip
op., at 17). We explained that while the general rule
allowing warrantless searches incident to arrest “strikes
the appropriate balance in the context of physical objects,
neither of its rationales has much force with respect to”
the vast store of sensitive information on a cell phone. Id.,
at ___ (slip op., at 9).

B
The case before us involves the Government’s acquisi-

tion of wireless carrier cell-site records revealing the
location of Carpenter’s cell phone whenever it made or
received calls. This sort of digital data—personal location
information maintained by a third party—does not fit
neatly under existing precedents. Instead, requests for
cell-site records lie at the intersection of two lines of cases,
both of which inform our understanding of the privacy
interests at stake.

The first set of cases addresses a person’s expectation of
privacy in his physical location and movements. In United
States v. Knotts, 460 U. S. 276 (1983), we considered the
Government’s use of a “beeper” to aid in tracking a vehicle
through traffic. Police officers in that case planted a
beeper in a container of chloroform before it was pur-
chased by one of Knotts’s co-conspirators. The officers
(with intermittent aerial assistance) then followed the
automobile carrying the container from Minneapolis to
Knotts’s cabin in Wisconsin, relying on the beeper’s signal
to help keep the vehicle in view. The Court concluded that
the “augment[ed]” visual surveillance did not constitute a
search because “[a] person traveling in an automobile on
public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of

8 CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES

Opinion of the Court

privacy in his movements from one place to another.” Id.,
at 281, 282. Since the movements of the vehicle and its
final destination had been “voluntarily conveyed to anyone
who wanted to look,” Knotts could not assert a privacy
interest in the information obtained. Id., at 281.

This Court in Knotts, however, was careful to distin-
guish between the rudimentary tracking facilitated by the
beeper and more sweeping modes of surveillance. The
Court emphasized the “limited use which the government
made of the signals from this particular beeper” during a
discrete “automotive journey.” Id., at 284, 285. Signifi-
cantly, the Court reserved the question whether “different
constitutional principles may be applicable” if “twenty-four
hour surveillance of any citizen of this country [were]
possible.” Id., at 283–284.

Three decades later, the Court considered more sophis-
ticated surveillance of the sort envisioned in Knotts and
found that different principles did indeed apply. In United
States v. Jones, FBI agents installed a GPS tracking de-
vice on Jones’s vehicle and remotely monitored the vehi-
cle’s movements for 28 days. The Court decided the case
based on the Government’s physical trespass of the vehi-
cle. 565 U. S., at 404–405. At the same time, five Justices
agreed that related privacy concerns would be raised by,
for example, “surreptitiously activating a stolen vehicle
detection system” in Jones’s car to track Jones himself, or
conducting GPS tracking of his cell phone. Id., at 426, 428
(ALITO, J., concurring in judgment); id., at 415
(SOTOMAYOR, J., concurring). Since GPS monitoring of a
vehicle tracks “every movement” a person makes in that
vehicle, the concurring Justices concluded that “longer
term GPS monitoring in investigations of most offenses
impinges on expectations of privacy”—regardless whether
those movements were disclosed to the public at large.
Id., at 430 (opinion of ALITO, J.); id., at 415 (opinion of

9 Cite as: 585 U. S. ____ (2018)

Opinion of the Court

SOTOMAYOR, J.).2
In a second set of decisions, the Court has drawn a line

between what a person keeps to himself and what he
shares with others. We have previously held that “a per-
son has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information
he voluntarily turns over to third parties.” Smith, 442
U. S., at 743–744. That remains true “even if the infor-
mation is revealed on the assumption that it will be used
only for a limited purpose.” United States v. Miller, 425
U. S. 435, 443 (1976). As a result, the Government is
typically free to obtain such information from the recipient
without triggering Fourth Amendment protections.

This third-party doctrine largely traces its roots to
Miller. While investigating Miller for tax evasion, the
Government subpoenaed his banks, seeking several
months of canceled checks, deposit slips, and monthly
statements. The Court rejected a Fourth Amendment
challenge to the records collection. For one, Miller could
“assert neither ownership nor possession” of the docu-
ments; they were “business records of the banks.” Id., at
440. For another, the nature of those records confirmed
Miller’s limited expectation of privacy, because the checks
were “not confidential communications but negotiable
instruments to be used in commercial transactions,” and
the bank statements contained information “exposed to

——————
2 JUSTICE KENNEDY argues that this case is in a different category

from Jones and the dragnet-type practices posited in Knotts because the
disclosure of the cell-site records was subject to “judicial authorization.”
Post, at 14–16. That line of argument conflates the threshold question
whether a “search” has occurred with the separate matter of whether
the search was reasonable. The subpoena process set forth in the
Stored Communications Act does not determine a target’s expectation
of privacy. And in any event, neither Jones nor Knotts purported to
resolve the question of what authorization may be required to conduct
such electronic surveillance techniques. But see Jones, 565 U. S., at
430 (ALITO, J., concurring in judgment) (indicating that longer term
GPS tracking may require a warrant).

10 …

Civil homework help

1

TO: Plaintiff Weltee Wolo through her counsel, Tyler W. Brennan, Tyler W. Brennan Law,

LLC, T3 Building, 323 N. Washington Avenue, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55401.

Pursuant to Rule 34 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant Whispering

Pines Assisted Living, Inc. (“Whispering Pines” or “Defendant”) requests that Plaintiff Weltee

Wolo (“Wolo” or “Plaintiff”) produce and permit Whispering Pines to inspect and copy the

following documents, electronically stored information, and things, within thirty (30) days of the

date of service hereof.

In responding to the following requests, unless the context indicates otherwise, you are to

construe them in light of the following:

DEFINITIONS

1. The term “Document” shall have the broadest meaning which can be ascribed to it

pursuant to Rule 26 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure. Among other things, the term

“Document” refers to and includes any written, printed, typed or other graphic matter of any kind

or nature, all computer materials, processes, data and compilations thereof from which information

can be obtained, including, but not limited to, papers, letters, correspondence, telegrams, inter-

STATE OF MINNESOTA

DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF ANOKA TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Case Type: Employment

Weltee Wolo,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc.,

Defendant.

Court File No.

The Honorable

DEFENDANT’S REQUESTS FOR

PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO

PLAINTIFF (SET I)

2

office communications, memoranda, notes, notations, notebooks, reports, records, minutes of

meetings, schedules, tables, charges, transcripts, publications, scrapbooks, diaries, E-mail,

electronic mail, voice mail, electronic bulletin board postings, tabulations, vouchers, accounts,

statements, affidavits, abstracts, agreements, contracts, diaries, calendars, plans, specifications,

drawings, sketches, photostats, photographs, charts, graphs and other similar objects, and any kind

of transcript, transcription or recording of any conversation, discussion or oral presentation of any

kind, and any information stored on, and reproducible in documentary form from a computer or

other electronic, magnetic, optical or laser based information storage device, including but not

limited to floppy disks, hard disks, tapes, backup tapes, CD-ROM, DVD’s, USB drives, thumb

drives, external data storage devices, handheld PC’s, or PDA’s and any drafts, revisions or

amendments of the above, in the possession or within the control of Plaintiff, her attorneys or

agents, or known by Plaintiff to exist, including materials deemed to be subject to any evidentiary

privilege. The term “Document” specifically includes Electronically Stored Information.

2. “Electronically Stored Information” or “ESI” shall include all electronic

information permitted to be discovered under Rule 34 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure,

including, without limitation: Internet web pages, word-processing documents, spreadsheets,

presentation documents, graphics, animations, images, email (including attachments which shall

be kept with the email), instant messages, text messages, voice mail, audio, video, and audiovisual

recordings, databases and database subsets, and other user or machine-created computer files or

other digital information which is stored on computer networks, servers, computer systems,

desktop computers, laptop computers, home computers, the Internet, an Intranet, archives, discs,

CD’s, diskettes, drives, zip drives, tapes, cartridges, flash drives, and other external storage media,

personal digital assistants, handheld wireless devices, smart phones, cellular telephones,

3

blackberries, pagers, iPhones, iPads, iPods, and voicemail systems. All of the ESI requested herein

shall be produced with all metadata preserved.

3. The term “Communications” means all forms of oral, written, and nonverbal

communication, including, but not limited to, communications taking place face-to-face, via

telephone, facsimile, electronic mail, voice mail, electronic messaging (e.g., instant messaging),

or by means of correspondence, letters, statements, or otherwise.

4. The term “Person” refers to and includes natural persons, corporations,

partnerships, proprietorships, joint ventures, unincorporated associations, trusts, estates,

governments (and agencies thereof), quasi-public entities, and other forms of legal entities.

5. The terms “reflecting,” “concerning,” “evidencing,” “referred to,” “related to,”

“regarding,” “depicted,” or “displayed” mean and include, without limitation, regarding, showing,

reflecting, referring to, alluding to, responding to, relating to, connected with, commenting upon,

with respect to, consisting of, comprising, constituting, discussing, recording, or in any way

touching upon or pertaining to.

6. The singular form of a word shall also refer to the plural, and words used in the

masculine, feminine, or neuter gender shall refer to and include all genders.

7. “And” includes the disjunctive “or”; “or” includes the conjunctive “and.”

8. “Defendant,” “Whispering Pines,” or “WPAL” shall refer to Whispering Pines

Assisted Living, Inc., as well as its agents, attorneys, or anyone acting or purporting to act on its

behalf.

9. “You” or “Your” shall refer to Plaintiff Weltee Wolo, as well as her agents,

attorneys, or anyone acting or purporting to act on her behalf.

4

10. “Plaintiff” or “Wolo” shall refer to Plaintiff Weltee Wolo, as well as her agents,

attorneys, or anyone acting or purporting to act on her behalf.

11. “Complaint” shall mean the Complaint filed and served by Plaintiff in the above-

captioned matter, and any subsequent amendments thereto.

12. “Answer” shall mean the Answer served by Defendant in the above-captioned

matter, and any subsequent amendments thereto.

DOCUMENT-SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

13. You are requested and required to produce each Document designated below that

is within your care, custody, or control or otherwise available, including Documents in the

possession of your attorneys, accountants, advisors, or other persons directly or indirectly acting

for you or with you. If all Documents requested cannot be produced in their entirety, produce each

Document requested to the extent possible, specify the reason for the inability to produce the

remaining Documents, and state whatever information or knowledge you have regarding the

unproduced Documents. If you maintain that any Document has been destroyed, set forth the

contents of the Document, the location of any copies of the Document, the date of and reason for

such destruction, and the name and address of all persons who ordered, authorized, or participated

in such destruction.

14. If any Document is withheld from production on the basis of privilege or otherwise,

identify each such Document and the grounds upon which production of each Document is being

withheld. Include:

(a) the date;

(b) the author;

(c) the type of Document;

5

(d) the addressee(s) or other intended recipient(s);

(e) the title, heading, or other designation numerical on the Document; and

(f) the privilege type and basis for the privilege.

15. These Requests shall be deemed continuing so as to require supplemental responses

if ACA obtains further information between the times responses are served and the time of trial.

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

REQUEST NO. 1: All Documents and Communications that You referred to, relied

upon, consulted, or used in any way to draft the Complaint, Your Initial Disclosures, and/or Your

responses to Defendant’s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff.

REQUEST NO. 2: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting any of the allegations in the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 3: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant failed to pay You for Your accrued,

unused vacation time, as set forth in paragraphs 9 and 35–38 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 4: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant’s stated reason for terminating You is a

mere pretext for discrimination and reprisal and/or has no factual basis, as set forth in paragraphs

14–15 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 5: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant failed to pay You earned wages within

24 hours of Your demand, as set forth in paragraphs 19 and 31–34 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 6: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant’s decision to terminate Your employment

6

otherwise occurred under circumstances that give rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination,

as set forth in paragraphs 20–24 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 7: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant took adverse actions against You in

reprisal to activity protected under MHRA, as set forth in paragraphs 25–30 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 8: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting your allegation that other employees of Defendant were similarly

situated to You, but treated more favorably than You, as set forth in paragraphs 25–30 of the

Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 9: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to, and/or

reflecting any and all complaints of any kind that You allege to have made to Defendant at any

time.

REQUEST NO. 10: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to, and/or

reflecting any and all reports of discrimination and/or reprisal that You allege to have made to

Defendant at any time.

REQUEST NO. 11: Journals, diaries, calendars, appointment books, agendas,

notebooks, and notes written or maintained by You from 2018 through and including the present

relating to or referring to any of the allegations in the Complaint and/or Your employment with

Defendant.

REQUEST NO. 12: All Documents and Communications relating to Your employment

with Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc. and any change in Your employment status, job

duties, promotions, and/or job transfers, including but not limited to all contracts, agreements,

memoranda, policies, handbooks, complaints filed, performance reviews, performance

7

improvement plans, warnings, disciplinary actions, termination notices, resignation letters, and

reports that are related to any of the allegations in the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 13: All Documents that are the property of Whispering Pines Assisted

Living, Inc. or that you removed or directed to be removed from Whispering Pines Assisted Living,

Inc.’s premises, including but not limited to its physical premises and computer systems.

REQUEST NO. 14: All Documents relating to, referring to, supporting, and/or refuting

the alleged discriminatory culture which existed in the workplace, as alleged in paragraph 12 of

the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 15: All Documents and Communications submitted to or received from,

the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Minnesota Department of

Human Rights (MDHR), and/or the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic

Development (DEED), including but not limited to documents relating to any charges of

discrimination and/or applications for unemployment benefits that You have made since 2016.

REQUEST NO. 16: All Documents and Communications relating to any administrative

charge or proceeding or lawsuit to which You were a party within the last ten years relating to

Your employment with any Employer that rely on or are similar or related to the factual allegations

or claims at issue in this lawsuit.

REQUEST NO. 17: All Documents and Communications relating to any complaint of

harassment, discrimination, or retaliation that you alleged against any employer within the last ten

years.

REQUEST NO. 18: All Documents and Communications relating to Your efforts to seek

employment from December 11, 2020, through and including the present, including but not limited

to any resumes, applications for employment, cover letters, reference letters, job inquiries, offers

8

of employment, employment agreements, independent contractor and consulting agreements or

arrangements, job advertisements or postings, rejection letters, and any other communications with

any Employer.

REQUEST NO. 19: All Documents and Communications relating to the termination of

Your employment from any Employer, whether voluntary or involuntary, occurring at any time

after the end of Your employment with Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc.

REQUEST NO. 20: All Documents and Communications relating to any training or

education that You have applied for or received from December 11, 2020, through and including

the present.

REQUEST NO. 21: Documents sufficient to show any income or other compensation

received by or owed to You, including but not limited to paychecks, paystubs, invoices, settlement

payments, statements of work, Form W-2s, Form 1099s, social security benefits, social security

disability benefits, unemployment insurance benefits, workers’ compensation benefits, and long-

term or short-term disability benefits from December 11, 2020, through and including the present.

REQUEST NO. 22: Your federal and state income tax returns for the tax years 2020

through and including the present, including all supporting documentation.

REQUEST NO. 23: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting Your claim for damages in this lawsuit, including but not limited to

documents relating to the claim for damages as set forth in paragraphs 20–38 of the Complaint,

your initial disclosures, and/or the calculation of damages claimed.

REQUEST NO. 24: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting any injuries, including physical, mental, and emotional injuries, You

allegedly sustained as a result of Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc.’s conduct from 2018

9

through and including the present, including but not limited to all medical records and

psychotherapy notes.

REQUEST NO. 25: Completed and executed authorization forms for the release of

medical records and psychotherapy notes for each physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, therapist,

social worker, or other healthcare professional identified in response to Interrogatory Number 11

of Defendant’s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff with whom You have consulted and/or from

whom You have received or sought treatment.

REQUEST NO. 26: All Documents and Communications relating to and/or referring to

each expert you intend to call as a witness at trial, including but not limited to all Documents and

Communications sent to or received from each expert, resumes, curriculum vitae, and reports.

REQUEST NO. 27: All affidavits, sworn statements, notes, and other documents sent to,

received from, or otherwise relating to any person you intend to call as a witness at trial, either in

person, through deposition testimony, or through an affidavit regarding, referring, and/or relating

to any claim or allegation in this Action.

REQUEST NO. 28: All affidavits, sworn statements, and communications regarding,

referring, and/or relating to any claim in this Action.

REQUEST NO. 29: All social media postings relating to any of the allegations in the

Complaint, including but not limited to postings on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, YouTube,

Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, blogs, wikis, and other social media sites.

REQUEST NO. 30: All Documents and Communications that contain or otherwise relate

to facts that you contend refute, in any way, any of Defendant’s defenses in this Action.

REQUEST NO. 31: A complete copy of all the Facebook information from January 1,

2018, to the present, for any Facebook account currently or previously maintained by You. You

10

can download a complete copy of such information by logging into each applicable Facebook

account, choosing “Settings & Privacy,” choosing “Settings,” choosing “Your Facebook

Information,” and then choosing “Download Your Information.” On the “Download Your

Information” page, you can then select the date range of January 1, 2018 to the present, selecting

a Media Quality of “High” or “Medium,” and selecting “HTML” as the Format before clicking

“Create File.”

REQUEST NO. 32: All Documents identified in Section 2 of Your Initial Disclosures.

Dated: November 19, 2021 SPENCER FANE LLP

By: /s/ Randi J. Winter

Randi J. Winter, #0391354

Jose A. Castro, #0399696

100 South Fifth Street, Suite 2500

Minneapolis, MN 55402

Telephone: (612) 268-7000

Facsimile: (612) 268-7001

rwinter@spencerfane.com

Attorneys for Defendant Whispering Pines Assisted

Living, Inc.

Civil homework help

1

TO: Plaintiff Weltee Wolo, Pro Se, 3140 Northdale Blvd NW, Coon Rapids, Minnesota

55433, welteewolo26@gmail.com.

Defendant Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc (“Defendant”), as and for its answers,

responses and objections to Plaintiff’s Interrogatories to Defendant (First Set) states as follows:

GENERAL OBJECTIONS

1. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek information

protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product doctrine, other applicable privilege, or

information that is protected by the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, federal law, or

Minnesota law.

2. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are overly broad in

terms of time and/or scope, unduly burdensome, oppressive, vague, ambiguous, harassing, and/or

unreasonable.

3. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek information not

relevant to any party’s claims or defenses, and are not proportional to the needs of the case,

considering the importance of the issues at stake in the actions, the amounts in controversy, the

parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the

STATE OF MINNESOTA

DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF ANOKA TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Case Type: Employment

Weltee Wolo,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc.,

Defendant.

Case No. ___________________

DEFENDANT’S ANSWERS TO

PLAINTIFF’S INTERROGATORIES TO

DEFENDANT (FIRST SET)

2

discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery

outweighs its likely benefit.

4. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek information that is

already within Plaintiff’s possession, custody, or control, and is already within the knowledge of

Plaintiff.

5. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are more appropriately

directed at a third party.

6. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they: (i) seek information

that is beyond the scope of discovery allowed pursuant to the Minnesota Rules of Civil

Procedure and/or other discovery guidelines; or (ii) seek to impose upon Defendant duties or

obligations beyond the scope of the applicable rules or governing authorities. Defendant does

not acquiesce, object to, and decline to be bound by Plaintiff’s definitions and instructions to the

extent that such definitions and instructions seek to impose burdens or obligations on Defendant

beyond those imposed by the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure.

7. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they assume or require

Defendant to reach or state a legal conclusion.

8. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories as premature to the extent they seek

Defendant’s ultimate factual or legal contentions prior to the close of discovery.

9. Defendant has not completed their investigation or discovery regarding the

relevant facts. Accordingly, Defendant’s responses are based upon information known to

Defendant as of the present date and subject to the reservation of rights set forth below.

10. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek discovery of

confidential, trade secret, proprietary, financial, or commercially sensitive documents or

information, the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of the constitutionally-

3

protected right of privacy or could result in substantial competitive injury to Defendant’s

employer or breach by Defendant of an obligation to another to maintain such information as

confidential.

11. All of the General Objections set forth herein are incorporated by reference into

each and every specific Answer to each of Plaintiff’s Interrogatories, and all of the General

Objections shall have the same force and effect as if set forth fully therein. In the interest of

clarity, certain objections may be referred to specifically with respect to a particular

Interrogatory, but the failure to specifically restate a General Objection shall not be construed as

a waiver of any such objection, nor shall such lack of an objection be deemed an admission that

Defendant possess any of the information needed to respond to a particular Interrogatory.

DEFENDANT’S RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

Defendant makes the objections and responses herein without waiver of and with express

reservation regarding:

(a) all questions as to competency, relevancy, materiality, privilege and admissibility as
evidence for any purpose, of its response or subject matter thereof, in any subsequent

proceeding in, or the trial of, this or any other action;

(b) the right to object to the use of any of said responses, or subject matter thereof, in any
subsequent proceeding in, or the trial of, this or any other action;

(c) the right to object on any ground at any time to a demand for further response to these
or any other discovery requests or other discovery procedures involving or relating to

the subject matter of the Interrogatories herein answered; and

(d) the right at any time to revise, correct, add to, or clarify any of the responses provided
herein.

DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY NO. 1:

Identify all individual who provided information, were consulted, or participated in the

preparation of the Answer to these Interrogatories, and specify the particular Answer(s) for which each

person was consulted, furnished information, or participated in preparing.

4

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1:

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General Objections, Defendant answers as

follows: Sharon Compton and Breanne Engberg were consulted in connection with the

preparation of the Answers to these Interrogatories. Jaclyn Vados also previously furnished

information used in the preparation of the Answers to these Interrogatories.

INTERROGATORY NO. 2:

Identify all individuals whom you believe have any information or knowledge, or claim

to have the same, with respect to any facts or matters relating to the allegations made in Plaintiffs

Complaint or Defendant’s Answer. With respect to each individual, state the subject matter of

their knowledge, the date, place, and circumstances that Defendant obtained the knowledge, and

whether a statement was taken, and the individual’s address and telephone number.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is vague

and ambiguous. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is unduly

burdensome. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information

that is already within Plaintiff’s possession, custody, or control, and is already within the

knowledge of Plaintiff. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks

information protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to the persons identified in the parties’ Initial Disclosures

served in this matter, who may have personal knowledge and/or information relating to the

allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint and the litigation in this matter. Further, individuals

identified in documents produced by the parties and individuals identified during any witness

deposition testimony may have personal knowledge or information relating to the allegations in

5

Plaintiff’s Complaint and the litigation in this matter. Defendant reserves the right to supplement

this response as discovery is ongoing.

INTERROGATORY NO. 3:

Identify all documents known to you which you know or believe may contain facts or

information related to the claims asserted in Plaintiffs Complaint or Defendant’s Answer.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome, particularly because it purports to require Defendant to

identify “all documents” that may contain any facts or information whatsoever related to any of

the claims asserted in Plaintiff’s Complaint or Defendant’s Answer. Defendant also objects to

this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information that is already within Plaintiff’s

possession, custody, or control, and is already within the knowledge of Plaintiff. Defendant

further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-

client privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific

and General Objections, Defendant answers that the documents identified in the parties’ Initial

Disclosures may contain facts or information related to the allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint

and the litigation in this matter. Further, documents identified and produced by the parties and

documents identified during any witness deposition testimony may contain facts or information

related to the allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint and the litigation in this matter. Defendant

reserves the right to supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

INTERROGATORY NO. 4:

With respect to Plaintiff, state the date of her original hire, all employment end dates, all

employment rehire dates, and her salary or rate of pay during each period of employment

beginning in 2017 – present, her total earnings for her entire employment, all

promotions/raises/bonuses/demotions received, all job titles, and all fringe benefits received

including holidays vacation pay, pension plans, and insurance/benefit programs.

6

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome, particularly regarding the scope and time of materials sought.

Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks information that is not relevant to any

party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Defendant also objects

to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information that is already within Plaintiff’s

possession, custody, or control, and is already within the knowledge of Plaintiff. Defendant

further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-

client privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific

and General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

To the best of its present understanding and believe, Defendant believes that Plaintiff was

first hired as a Certified Nurse Assistant (“CNA”) in 09/2010 at a rate of $10.55/hr. This rate was

then increased to $13/hr. Plaintiff voluntarily left in 04/2016. Plaintiff’s second employment

period began on 06/15/2018, again as a CNA, at a rate of $16.50/hr. Plaintiff voluntarily left on

10/13/2018. Plaintiff’s third employment period began on 01/22/2019, again at $16.50/hr.

Plaintiff went on maternity leave in 04/2019. Plaintiff voluntarily left on 10/15/2019. Plaintiff’s

fourth employment period began on 02/24/2020, as a Team Lead, at a rate of $20/hr. Plaintiff

voluntarily left on 5/15/2020, purportedly due to COVID daycare issues. Finally, Plaintiff’s fifth

employment period began on 10/24/2020, as a CNA, at a rate of $17.50/hr. Further, documents

produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 33.03 may contain relevant facts or

information.

INTERROGATORY NO. 5:

Identify each employee, officer, or agent of Defendant who was consulted or participated

in the decision to terminate Plaintiffs employment with Defendant. Include the individual(s) full

name, title, dates of employment, and reason for separation from Defendant, if applicable.

7

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Seeks confidential and

sensitive non-party personnel information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense.

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant

answers as follows:

Vice President Sharon Compton, Director of Nursing Jacklyn Vados, HR Representative

Sadie Stoll, and RHIT Sonja Johnson were consulted with and/or participated in the decision to

terminate Plaintiff’s employment in December 2020.

INTERROGATORY NO. 6:

Identify all of Plaintiffs direct or indirect supervisors when she worked at Defendant.

Include the individual(s) full name, current and all previous job titles and dates of each, the

reason for separation from Defendant, if applicable.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is vague

and ambiguous as to the term “indirect supervisors.” Defendant further objects that this

Interrogatory seeks confidential and sensitive non-party personnel information that is not

relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Subject

to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as

follows:

CNAs typically report to nurses, who in turn report to the Director of Nursing. During

her last stint of employment, Plaintiff would therefore have reported to RN Dawn Hirsch and

Director of Nursing Jacklyn Vados.

8

INTERROGATORY NO. 7:

Identify all individuals at Defendant who were ever subject to the direct or indirect supervision

of any individual responsive to Interrogatory No. 5 or 6 since January 1, 2016. Include the individual(s)

full name, current and previous job titles and dates of each, the reason for separation from Defendant, if

applicable.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 7:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome, as Defendant has nearly 100 employees and dozens, if not

hundreds, of additional former employees during the time period sought by this Interrogatory.

Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks information that is not relevant to any

party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Defendant also objects

to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks highly sensitive and confidential non-party

personnel information. See, e.g., Onwuka v. Federal Express Corp., 178 F.R.D. 508, 517 (D.

Minn. 1997) (“[T]he proper balance, between the privacy interests of non-party third persons,

and the discovery interests of a party litigant, is to assure that only those portions of the pertinent

personnel files, which are clearly relevant to the parties’ claims, are open to disclosure and, then,

subject to an appropriate Confidentiality Order as the circumstances require.”). Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant is available, through its counsel, to meet and confer with Plaintiff regarding a

revised version of this interrogatory that is narrowly tailored for the disclosure of relevant

information, if any, about non-party employees, from a shorter time frame, following the entry of

an adequate protective order preserving and ensuring the confidentiality of any sensitive and/or

confidential non-party information.

INTERROGATORY NO. 8:

For the period from January 1, 2017 to the date of your response, identify every

employee at Defendant. As to each employee, state their name, title, dates of employment,

9

whether they have worked remotely over the past 2 years, name of direct supervisor, and the

reason the employee separated from Defendant, if applicable.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the

needs of the case. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks highly

sensitive and confidential non-party personnel information. See, e.g., Onwuka v. Federal

Express Corp., 178 F.R.D. 508, 517 (D. Minn. 1997) (“[T]he proper balance, between the

privacy interests of non-party third persons, and the discovery interests of a party litigant, is to

assure that only those portions of the pertinent personnel files, which are clearly relevant to the

parties’ claims, are open to disclosure and, then, subject to an appropriate Confidentiality Order

as the circumstances require.”).

INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

Identify the individual(s) who assumed any of Plaintiffs job duties after her termination

until the date of your response and state the individual’s date(s) of employment, age, race,

position, and the reason for the employee’s separation from Defendant, if applicable.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant to this Interrogatory on the grounds that

it seeks highly sensitive and confidential non-party personnel information. Defendant further

objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is not relevant to any party’s

claim or defense. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections,

Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant is available, through its counsel, to meet and confer with Plaintiff regarding

this interrogatory.

10

INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

Identify all statements Defendant has obtained in any form from any person regarding

any of the events or happenings concerning Plaintiffs employment and termination of

employment with Defendant. For each such statement, identify:

a. the content and/or substance of the statement;
b. whether the statement was oral, written, before a court reporter, recorded or otherwise

preserved;

c. the name, address, and telephone number of the person from whom such statement
was taken; and

d. the date, time, and location of the statement.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory as it seeks

a legal conclusion regarding the meaning of the term “statements.” Defendant further objects to

this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege or

work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General

Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to documents produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R. Civ.

P. 33.03 that may contain relevant facts or information. Defendant reserve the right to

supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

Identify all formal and informal document retention policies in effect from January 1, 2017 to

the date of your response, that relate to any documents responsive to Plaintiff’s discovery requests.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory as it seeks

information that is not relevant or reasonably related to admissible evidence. Defendant further

objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-client

privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

11

Defendant retains employment-related documents for periods of time required under

applicable state and federal law. In addition, Defendant implemented a litigation hold in

connection with this lawsuit.

INTERROGATORY NO. 12:

Identify all possible sources of electronically stored information (ESI) that include any

documents responsive to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents and/or these

interrogatories. As to each, state:

a. the hardware utilized,
b. the software utilized,
c. the location of the source,
d. the custodian of the source,
e. whether the source is keyword searchable,
f. whether the source is indexed and/or catalogued,
g. the location of any index or catalog,
h. the type of documents available on the source,
i. the employees who use the source in Defendant’s course of business, and
j. the business purpose of the source

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the

needs of the case. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and

ambiguous. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory is an improper, compound

interrogatory. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections,

Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant maintains an office iPhone that may contain responsive text messages with

Plaintiff. In addition, Defendant uses Gmail as its e-mail service provider. Individual computers

in Defendant’s possession, custody, and/or control may also contain responsive information.

Defendant reserves the right to supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

12

INTERROGATORY NO. 13:

Identify all statements that you allege or believe constitute, contain, describe, or reflect an

admission against the interest of Plaintiff.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory as it seeks

a legal conclusion. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks

information protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to the documents produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R.

Civ. P. 33.03 that may contain relevant statements. Defendant reserve the right to supplement

this response as discovery is ongoing.

INTERROGATORY NO. 14:

Identify each instance in which Plaintiff received a performance review during her

employment.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 14:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is vague

and ambiguous. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory as seeking information that is not

relevant to any party’s claim or defense. Defendant further objects to the extent this

Interrogatory is overbroad and unduly burdensome, in that it seeks documents over a 10-year

period when Plaintiff did not maintain continuous employment with Defendant. Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to the documents produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R.

Civ. P. 33.03 that may contain relevant facts or information. Defendant reserve the right to

supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

13

INTERROGATORY NO. 15:

Identify each employee handbook in effect during Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant

and, for each handbook identified, identify the dates during which that handbook was in effect.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the

needs of the case. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory because it is overbroad and

unduly burdensome, in that it seeks all handbooks in effect over the course of a ten-year time

period when Plaintiff did not maintain continuous employment with Defendant. Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to the documents produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R.

Civ. P. 33.03 that may contain relevant facts or information, including the employee handbook

from January 2019, which was in effect during Plaintiff’s final two years of employment with

Defendant.

INTERROGATORY NO. 16:

Identify and describe in detail each instance in which Plaintiff complained of

discrimination to Defendant.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 16:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is already within Plaintiff’s possession, custody, or control, and is already

within the knowledge of Plaintiff. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant answers that the documents produced by Defendant pursuant to

Minn. R. Civ. P. 33.03 contain relevant facts and information. Defendant is also aware that

Plaintiff formally filed a charge of discrimination on 12/26/2020, labeled EEOC #26E-2021-

00059. Defendant reserve the right to supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

14

INTERROGATORY NO. 17:

Identify all employees who were employed in the same position as Plaintiff.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 17:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome due to being indefinite as to time period, and because it seeks

information relating to approximately 60 current employees and dozens, if not hundreds, of

former employees. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks information that is not

relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case.

Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks highly sensitive and

confidential non-party personnel information. See, e.g., Onwuka v. Federal Express Corp., 178

F.R.D. 508, 517 (D. Minn. 1997) (“[T]he proper balance, between the privacy interests of non-

party third persons, and the discovery interests of a party litigant, is to assure that only those

portions of the pertinent personnel files, which are clearly relevant to the parties’ claims, are

open to disclosure and, then, subject to an appropriate Confidentiality Order as the circumstances

require.”).

INTERROGATORY NO. 18:

For each individual identified in your answer to Interrogatory No. 17, please provide the

following:

a. The employee’s date of hire;
b. The employee’s starting wage;
c. The employee’s race;

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 18:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome due to being indefinite as to time period, and because it seeks

personnel information relating to approximately 60 current employees and dozens, if not

15

hundreds, of former employees. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the

needs of the case. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks highly

sensitive and confidential non-party personnel information. See, e.g., Onwuka v. Federal

Express Corp., 178 F.R.D. 508, 517 (D. Minn. 1997) (“[T]he proper balance, between the

privacy interests of non-party third persons, and the discovery interests of a party litigant, is to

assure that only those portions of the pertinent personnel files, which are clearly relevant to the

parties’ claims, are open to disclosure and, then, subject to an appropriate Confidentiality Order

as the circumstances require.”).

INTERROGATORY NO. 19:

State whether you paid Plaintiff her earned but unpaid PTO at the time of her termination.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 19:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory to the

extent it seeks a legal conclusion. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant as follows:

Plaintiff was not entitled to the payout of any “earned but unpaid PTO” at the time of her

termination in December 2020. The operative policy in effect at the time of Plaintiff’s

termination states as follows:

Termination Policy Regarding Vacation Pay

An employee who voluntarily terminates employment will only be paid for

accrued vacation time; provided a two week, written notice is given. Unused

vacation time may not be used as part of an employees [sic] 2 week notice.

Unused vacation pay will be processed and paid out in the subsequent payroll pay

periods.

16

Plaintiff did not voluntary terminate her employment, and she did not provide a two week,

written notice in advance of voluntary termination. See also documents produced pursuant to

Minn. R. Civ. P. 33.03.

INTERROGATORY NO. 20:

Describe in detail your investigation into the all

Civil homework help

COURT CASES INSIGHTS 2

Court cases insights

Indiana Tech

7/08/21

Court cases insights

Question 1. What was the case about? the case is about the deportation of eight appellants, who are soon called before an immigration judge. The appellants are children of 10-17 years. The DHS’s (Department of Homeland Security) lawyer argues for the children’s extradition. (US Courts. (2016). However, no attorney stances with the youngsters, and each child are thus needed to plead to the allegations against him/her and are given chance to make lawful contentions and exhibit proof on their own behalf. This is because each child has attempted to acquire lawyers via pro bono services but has not obtained anyone to take their lawsuits. The appellants deferentially appeal the court to accord them relief.

Question 2. Did the trial hold true to your expectations?  Yes. According to (Reyes, N. (2019), “Though a complaint contests by a Rule 12(b) (6) motion to dismiss require not to offer detailed factual allegations, it must provide more than labels and conclusions and encompass more than a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action”. Thereby, the appellants must show more than just conjecture of a right to relief. True to this, in the judging on a request to terminate, the court assumed that the veracity of the appellants’ factual claims and drew all- rational implications in the appellant’s favor. The court had to answer whether the truths in the operative pleading adequately indicated a “plausible” justification of relief.

However, according to (Braaten, D. (2021), “the respondents contended that as ‘arriving’ or ‘non-admitted immigrants, the plaintiffs had no ‘procedural due-process liberties in the Fifth Amendment.” The respondents’ contention is not per the authorities they quote. This is because under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as revised by the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (“IIRIRA”), an immigrant is “removable” if (a) he/she was not permitted to the US and is “inadmissible” in the 8 U.S.C. § 1182a or (b) he/she was permitted to the US and is “de-portable”

Question 3, What stage of the trial process did you observe?  I observed the opening proceedings and the examination of evidence stages of the Motion for preliminary injunctive relief

Question 4. What was the outcome? In contrast to the appellant’s proposal, notification to each class affiliate in the current subject was neither practicable nor necessary. Since the court lacked authority to accord class-wide injunctive reprieve, and since the plaintiffs could not opt-out of the trial, the plaintiffs were thereby not directly impacted by the certification at that time. Due to this, the court coincided with the respondents that theof what notification, if any, must be offered to the plaintiffs must be deferred until the evidences of the plaintiff’s legal right-to-counsel allegations are settled.

Question 5. What did you learn about the trial process? In the trial, I have learned that the respondents did not debate the ability or numerosity of the class representatives to safeguard the interest of the plaintiffs sufficiently and fairly. (Reyes, N. (2019). Moreover, the respondents did not seem to contend that children under a particular age are unable of performing pre se in exclusion trials. These children are seemingly incapable, from the financial point of view, to feed, house, or cloth themselves, and in most circumstances, they will be living with a guardian or parent. Owing to this, the respondents’ standing in this matter appeared to include, instead of the minor’s personal skills, the part that a guardian or parent can and must serve in the exclusion trials.

References

Braaten, D., & Braaten, C. N. (2021). Children seeking asylum: Determinants of asylum claims by unaccompanied minors in the United States from 2013 to 2017. Law & Policy43(2), 97-125.

Reyes, N. (2019). The Psychology Surrounding Legal Standards of Competency and Representation for Children in US Immigration Court.

US Courts. (2016). F.L.B. et al v. Lynch et al. Western District Court. Civil Rights. Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief. https://www.uscourts.gov/cameras-courts/flb-et-al-v-lynch-et-al

Civil homework help

PRODUCTION PLAN

PRODUCTION PLAN 4


Semiannual Production Plan

MBA 690

February 20, 2017

Semiannual Production Plan – Coca-Cola Company

The production plan created will be a semiannual one (6 months), using notional demand and inventory. Notional demand is the aggregate goods quantity that will be demanded if all the markets are to be in equilibrium during the period the production plan is to be valid (Stevenson & Sum, 2002). The labor hours consumed will also be estimated. In addition, there will be an estimate of the number of worker requirements with consideration for the standard work week, current inventory levels, receipts of new inventory during each month, and varying demand levels for each month of production.

Given an estimated notional demand of 19500 units, the average notional demand should be 19,500/6 which is equal to 3250 per month (Dey, Cheffi, & Nunes, 2014). To produce these units per month given a standard labor rate of 0.64, the workforce required will be:

3250*0.64 = 2080 units.

Units per hour given 160regular hours available = 2080/160 = 13 workers.

Opening Inventory: 2500 units

Current workforce: 14

Regular hours available: 160

Overtime hours available: 20

Standard of Labor: 0.64

Month

1

2

3

4

5

6

Demand

500

6000

2000

1500

4000

5500

Production

3250

3250

3250

3250

3250

3250

Cumulative Demand

500

6500

8500

10000

14000

19500

Cumulative Production

3250

6500

9750

13000

16250

19500

Excess Units

2750

0

1250

3000

2250

0

Units Short

0

0

0

0

0

0

Since the workforce that is needed is 13 workers, the company will have to lay off one worker to minimize costs while maximizing profit.

The table below shows the estimated production costs:

Cost

Per Unit ($)

Total Cost ($)

Materials

40

40*19500 = 780000

Labor

10

10*19500 = 195000

Laying off

1000

1000*1 = 1000

Total Cost

976000

The semiannual production plan above shows that the total cost of production for the six months period is $976,000.

References

Dey, P. K., Cheffi, W., & Nunes, B. (2014). Production Planning & Control. PRODUCTION PLANNING & CONTROL25(9), II.

Johnson, L. A., & Montgomery, D. C. (1974). Operations research in production planning, scheduling, and inventory control (Vol. 6). New York: Wiley.

Stevenson, W. J., & Sum, C. C. (2002). Operations management (Vol. 8). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.