University of Wisconsin Law School Gargoyle Alumni Magazine

Return address:

:lite (jarf/o'j!elaw SchoolUniversity of WisconsinMadison, Wisconsin 53706

53705Second Class Postage Paid at

Waterloo, Wis. 53594

1971 Homecoming TABLE OF CONTENTSLetter from the Dean 2

Dean Res igns 3

Trial Advocacy Course HasThirty Professors 3

Facu Ity Notes 4

Campbell Retires 6

Law School Moot Court Team 7Law School Library 7

What's Ahead for the Classof 74? 8

1971 Graduates Choose, FirstCareers Show Changes 9

What's Going on in LegalEducation? --------------- 10

"Twas ever thus" 14

Could You Pass The Bar Exam-in 1889? ------------------ 14

Bulletin of the University of Wisconsinlaw School, published quarterly.

Vol. 3, No.2 Winter, 1971Ruth B. Doyle, editorPhotos by David Ullrich

Publication office, 213 W. Madison St.,Waterloo, Wis. Second class postage paidat Waterloo, Wisconsin.

Postmaster's Note: Please send form 3579to "Gargoyle", University of WisconsinLaw School, Madison, Wisconsin.

Subscription Price: 50¢ per year for mem-bers, $1.00 per year for non-members.

THE GARGOYLE

The staff is too small, the librarytoo restricted and the building notlarge enough to consider any majorexpansion now, even if it were to beconsidered desirable in the long run.

Nevertheless, Faculty membersreport that teaching is more funthan it has been in several recentyears. Students are alert and well-prepared; classes are lively and in-teresting. Professors are workingharder than ever before, but, gen-erally speaking, enjoying it more.

Cordially,Spencer L. KimballDean

have the capacity to succeed if theytry. The lack of plentiful alterna-tives in employment and the uncer-tain future of other graduate pro-grams prevents some students fromchanging their minds about beinglawyers. The downturn in the econ-omy may possibly improve motiva-tion somewhat. The phase-out ofthe war and the consequent lowerdraft calls is returning some stu-dents to the Law School and per-mitting others to finish withoutinterruption.

We continue to ponder the future-not only of this Law School, butof legal education in Wisconsin andthe country. Can we continue to ex-pand this law school without seriousdeterioration of the quality of oureducation? Is a satellite law schoolprogram providing first year courseson another campus of the newlymerged university a possible solu-tion? Should a new and completelyindependent law school be estab-lished? Can any of these alterna-tives be seriously contemplated in atightening economy, in the light ofthe budget pressures that face thestate?

So far, no alternative is clearlythe appropriate one. No firm an-swers about what the future willbring are available. The Facultytends, at this time, to feel that, tomaintain quality, enrollment mustbe held at its present level andeven, if possible, rolled back a little.

Dear Friends of the Law School,Despite the many changes that

will come about because of themerger of the two systems of highereducation in Wisconsin and despitethe tightening that we feel desper-ately in the budget as it affects us,we are in business as usual at theLaw School, except that there islots more of it.

Although the entering class of340 is smaller than we had an-ticipated (and feared), the total en-rollment of the Law School is nowover 900, and we are bursting at theseams. The attrition formerly expe-rienced between the first and sec-ond years, and, to a lesser extent,between the second and third years,has been much less in 1971-72 thanin other recent years. For instance,the second year class in 1970-71 was17% smaller than the first year classwhich enrolled in 1969-70. Thisyear, the second year class is only7% smaller than the first year classlast year. The third year class in1970-71 was 15% smaller than thesecond year class in 1969-70. Thisyear the third year class is only4.7% smaller than the second yearclass last year.

The smaller attrition rate afterthe first year results from a numberof factors. The very large numberof applications for admission helpsto insure that the students admittedare well qualified academically, and

II THE GARGOYLE

Dean Kimball Announces Intention To Resign

On November 18, Dean SpencerL. Kimball announced to the Fac-ulty and to the Chancellor in a let-ter [below] his intention to resign hisposition as Dean "as soon as prac-tically possible" in order to return toresearch and teaching. Dean Kim-ball requested that the search for hissuccessor begin immediately, andthat his tenure as Dean be terminat-ed no later than September, 1973,when his original appointment ex-pires. He stated to the Faculty thathe hoped a successor can be selectedby September, 1972.

A search and screen committeewill be appointed by the Chancellor,on the recommendations of the LawFaculty and will probably be com-posed of Faculty members and stu-dents.

Dean Kimball's letter to the Chan-cellor follows:

Nov. 18, 1971Chancellor H. Edwin YoungBascom HallCampus

Dear Ed:Simultaneously with the sending

of this letter to you, I am informingthe law faculty of its contents.

Herewith I submit to you my res-signation as dean of this law school,

Dean Kimb.all

in order to return to teaching andresearch. I would like the resigna-tion to be effective as soon as prac-ticably possible. It is important, how-ever, that the replacement processproduce a successor who is complete-ly satisfactory to the law faculty, andit is equally important that there bean orderly transition, without an in-terim acting deanship. For those

reasons, I remain flexible on the ter-mination date, within reason. Ishould add that I have no otherplans than to take my place as aregular member of this faculty andto continue full involvement in itsaffairs.

I have much enjoyed workingwith the law faculty, for whom Ihave great respect and affection.But I feel that I have made the es-sential contributions I am capableof making as dean and that the timehas arrived to arrange for a succes-sor who can corne fresh to the job.Moreover, I feel increasingly theneed to return to teaching and re-search to assure that I keep pacewith the dynamic field of insurancelaw and regulation in which I havebeen interested for so long. Both ofthese are reasons for my action,which is consistent with my long es-tablished and firmly held view thata dean must have strong credentialsas a working scholar to be really ef-fective, and that he should serveonly a limited term in the decanaloffice and return to his primary call-ing while his credentials remainvalid.

With kindest regards,Yours sincerely,Spencer L. Kimball, Dean

Trial Advocacy CourseHas Thirty Professors

Thirty practicing lawyers formthe teaching cadre of Professor Stu-art Gullickson's course in Trial Ad-vocacy during the first semester,1971-72. The course concentrateson the development of one skill-that of examining witnesses, since,according to Professor Gullickson,"this is a skill used by almost alllawyers, ... not just by trial lawyers,and not just in jury trials. It is thecornerstone of the lawyer's skills ina hearing before a court, adminis-trative agency or legislative com-mittee. Probably witnesses are ex-amined most frequently by non-triallawyers in uncontested situations:

THE GARGOYLE

the widow in probate, the wife in adefault divorce, the lender in amortgage foreclosure, the prospec-tive parents in an adoption, thedebtor in a bankruptcy, and thecreditor in a default collection."

The thirty trial lawyers who con-duct the course teach it by demon-stration and example, followed bydiscussion which serves as interpre-tation of the demonstration. Thereare opportunities provided also forthe students, in groups of 4, to meetwith the trial lawyers, and to them-selves practice the examination ofwitnesses under the critical eyes ofthe trial lawyers.

Serving as teaching Faculty dur-ing the first semester of 1971-72are: John M. Moore, Thomas O.

Olson, Donald S. Eisenberg, EarlMunson, Jr., Jack McManus, FrankM. Coyne, Kenneth T. McCormick,William L. McCusker, Robert R.Studt, Bradley D. Armstrong, Brad-way A. Liddle, Jr., Richard A. Hol-lern, Steven J. Caulum, Henry A.Field, Jr., John F. Jenswold, andFrank A. Ross, Sr., all of Madison;David J. Cannon, James M. Shel-low, William M. Coffey, Clifford C.Kasdorf, James J. Murphy, Lau-rence C. Hammond, Jr., and IrvingD. Gaines, all of Milwaukee; JamesE. Brennan, and John C. Wickhem,Janesville; Richard Hippenmeyer,Waukesha; Richard Tinkham,Wausau; Raymond R. Colwin,Fond du Lac; Carroll B. Calla-han, Columbus; Arno J. Miller,Portage; J. Richard Long, Beloit.

III

Professor George Currie, who re-tired from teaching in 1970, is serv-ing this year by appointment of the7th Circuit Court of Appeals asSpecial Master to hear testimonyand make recommendations in adispute between the National LaborRelations Board and FlambeauPlastics.

Prof. Curr.ie

Professor Samuel Mermin pre-sented a paper and presided at around-table discussion at the WorldCongress on Legal and SocialPhilosophy in Brussels during Sep-tember, 1971. Attending the Con-gress were approximately 300 legalscholars and philosophers from allover the world. Relating to theCongress theme, which was LegalReasoning, Professor Mermin's pa-per dealt with Judicial Reasoning:Functionalism, Definition and Con-textual Ambiguity. The discussionover which he presided concernedthe Process of Justification of LegalDecisions. Most of the participants,according to Professor Mermin,were trained in the field of philos-ophy rather than law. "Getting tohear, and to talk to, leading juris-prudents of other countries abouttheir ideas and their current work,"he reports, "was immensely inter-esting and informative."

IV

Prof. Mermin

Prof. Runge

Prof. Lehman

Professor Warren Lehman hasbeen named Smongeski ResearchProfessor for the academic year,1971-72. The Smongeski professor-ship relieves him of teaching dutiesfor the year to permit him toengage in research-his principalproject is in the field of trademarks.

Professor Carl Runge is servingas Chairman of the Department ofUrban and Regional Planning inthe College of Letters and Science.That department, which has work-ing ties with many related depart-ments and colleges in the Universi-ty, including Geography, Economics,Business, Engineering and the LawSchool, offers only graduate de-grees.

Prof. Bunn

Professor George Bunn is actingas Chairman of the Clinical Ad-visory Committee. During 1971-72,over 40 students are enrolled in theClinical Program, in which they getpractical experience for credit.They are assigned to various agen-cies, including Wisconsin Judicare,Dane County Legal Services, the At-torney General's office, and the Wis-consin Public Service Commission.Some are assigned to County andFederal District Court judges andto legislative committees or a spe-cial governor's study committee.

Professor Joel Handler, alongwith Ellen Jane Hollingsworth ofthe Institute for Research on Pov-erty, is co-author of The Deserv-ing Poor, a study of welfare ad-ministration, recently published bythe Markham Publishing Co., Chi-cago.

THE GARGOYLE

Prof. Conway

Pro·f. MacDonald

Professor John Conway and Pro-fessor James MacDonald are co-authors of a new book on Environ-rr:ental Litigation, due to be pub-lished soon by the Extension LawDepartment.

Professor Conway is also the au-thor of a legislative Drafting M an-ual and a book on Procedure andEvidence for the Layman. He isserving this year as a member of theGovernor's Committee on CourtOrganization and of the State Bar-Judicial Council Committee on theRevision of Civil Procedure Rulesand Statutes.

THE GARGOYLE

Professor MacDonald is on half-time leave during 1971-72 to serveon the staff of the Institute for En-vironmental Studies. During the sec-ond semester, he will teach WaterLaw in the Law School, a coursewhich deals chiefly with shore landdevelopment and land use. The In-stitute's program includes both grad-uate and undergraduate courses,most of them interdisciplinary, deal-ing with environmental problems.He is Chairman of the State BarCommittee on Environmental Law.He will offer a course in Environ-mental Litigation during the secondsemester, as he has several timespreviously.

Professor Nathan P. Feinsingerhas embarked on a pilot study ofthe "real" causes of strikes with thegoal of developing bargaining pro-cedures which will lessen the possi-bilities of strikes and bring them toquick settlement if they do occur.The study is designed to examinethe factors which have significantimpact in the calling of a strike,including .the timing of negotiationsand the individual human charac-teristics of the members of negotiat-ing committees. Co-sponsors of thestudy are both federal and statemediation agencies, as well as rep-resentatives of labor and manage-ment organizations. The govern-ment mediators will provide therecords of strikes which will serveas a basis for the study.

On November 22-24 an inspectionof the Law School on behalf of theAssociation of American LawSchools and the American Bar Asso-ciation was conducted. It is twelveyears since the Law School has beeninspected by these two accreditingorganizations. Members of the teamwere: Dean William Lockhart, Uni-versity of Minnesota Law School;Prof. Leon Liddell, Law School Li-brarian, University of Chicago; RitaSimon, Prof. of Sociology, Univer-sity of Illinois; Judge George N.Leighton, Illinois Appellate Court,Chicago.

Prof. Feinsinger

Prof. Jones

Professor James Jones, who isserving this year as Director of theUniversity's Industrial RelationsResearch Institute, as well as Pro-fessor of Law, is co-author of Dis-crimination in Employment, one ofa series of paperbacks published thisyear by the Bureau of National Af-fairs. The series has been preparedby the Labor Law Group with thegeneral subject, Labor Relations and

con't on next page

v

Faculty Notes con'd.

Social Problems. The books are de-signed as teaching aids and sourcematerials for professors of LaborLaw. The Labor Law Group is anorganization of labor law teachers,which has been working since 1947in the preparation of teachingmaterials.

Co-author with Prof. Jones isProf. Robert N. Covington, Vander-bilt University Law School. Othertitles in the series include "Union-ization and Collective Bargaining;""Social Legislation;" "CollectiveBargaining in Public Employment."

PROF. DONALD LARGE waselected by the Faculty at a specialelection on November 4, to succeedProf. William Klein as a Law Schoolrepresentative in the Faculty Sen.ate.

As You Ring Down

the Curtain of

1971

and Set the Stage

for 1972-

REMEMBERTHE

lAW SCHOOLFUND

Contributions Fully

Tax Deductible

VI

Prof. Campbell

CAMPBEll RETIRES

Richard V. Campbell, "Mr.Automobile Accidents," a 40 yearveteran of the Law School Faculty,was granted Emeritus status at thelast meeting of the "old" Board ofRegents on Friday, October 8, 1971.

A Minnesota native, ProfessorCampbell joined the WisconsinFaculty in 1931 after completing hiswork for an SJD as a Sterling Fel-low at Yale. He received his BA andLLB degrees at the University ofMinnesota in 1926, a member ofPhi Beta Kappa and Coif. He spentseveral years in private practice inMinneapolis before going to Yale.

But his whole teaching careertook place at Wisconsin where,alumni will recall, he became oneof the nation's leading authoritieson the law of Torts, and a nation-ally known expert on automobileaccidents.

He is the Editor of a widely usedCasebook on Torts, and a Casebookon Automobile Accidents.

When the Gargoyle asked Profes-sor George H. Young, who was botha student and a colleague of Pro-fessor Campbell, to write a fewwords about him, he paid this trib-ute:

"All of my professional life hasbeen influenced by Richard Valen-tine (Dick) Campbell. He was myteacher, and later, my colleague inthe Law School for twenty years.Although I worked and talked hap-pily with him as a fellow law teach-er, it is as a student of his that Ireceived my deepest impressions. Ifirst experienced, and I use theword "experienced" advisedly, themind of Dick Campbell as a firstyear law student in 1938. The classwas Torts. The first few classes weremystifying, confusing and, althoughI didn't think so at the time, chal-lenging. I, along with other lawstudents of that era (I assume thesame is true today) were fond of en-gaging in lengthy discussions of themerits and demerits and idiosyncra-cies of our Professors. Dick Camp-bell was exciting. Many of us whohad achieved undergraduate recog-nition and even honors by beingable to disgorge in fairly intelligiblelanguage some basic but still reallyimprecisely defined general con-cepts were brought up short by therazor sharp analysis of the mind ofDick Campbell which always emer-ged after what sometimes seemedan eternity of questions met withquestions. He fenced with students,partly for the joy of fencing, whichis something a lawyer should learn,but primarily to ensure that thepointed rapier would be securelyembodied. In short, the man taughtus how to think. I had the greatestrespect and admiration for DickCampbell in 1938. As I got to knowhim even better as a co-worker, myadmiration and respect increased. Ileaned on him heavily as an ad-visor when I was Dean and I havealways been proud to think of himas a dear friend."

HAVE YOU MOVED?

PLEASE LET

US KNOW

WHERE.

GARGOYLE

THE GARGOYLE

AT LAST-lAWSCHOOL LIBRARY TO BEAIR CONDITIONED

During the last week of Novem-ber, work was begun on the air con-ditioning of the Law School Library.New piping, ducts and the installa-tion of cooling units require coreboring through floors and walls. Ina notice to the Faculty and students,Librarian Maurice Leon stated hisregrets for "the noise and dust thatwill ensue." It is anticipated that thework will be completed by March,1972.

The parking lot south of the LawSchool will be closed for at least amonth while the chilled water mainis brought into the building.

Prof. leonlibrarian

LAW SCHOOL MOOT COURT TEAMWINS REGIONAL CONTEST

Left to right: Clayton Russell, Prof. Helstad, Mary Lee Skaff, Clarence Asmus, Lauri Bier, GregPeterson, Prof. Brodie, Paul Hejmanowski.

Shown above are the members of two Moot Court teams which representedthe Law School at the regional tournament. of the National Moot CourtTournament in Chicago on November 6. The regional championship teamwas composed of Miss Bier and Messrs. Peterson and Hejmanowski. Theother Wisconsin team, composed of Miss Skaff and Messrs. Russell andAsmus, reached the semi-finals.

Mr. Hejmanowski was adjudged to have made the best oral argument,and the regional champions submitted the prize-winning brief. The case un-der discussion involved questions of constitutional and military law.

The winning team will participate in the national tournament sponsoredby the Bar Association of the City of New York in New York in December.

In the last 13 years, the Wisconsin Moot Court team has been regionalchampion 6 times. The Law School had a national championship team in1969.

Profs. Helstad and Brodie are serving as advisors to the team.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS-BOARD OF VISITORSMEET ON NOVEMBER 20

A well-attended joint meeting ofthe Board of Directors and Boardof Visitors was held on Saturdaymorning, November 20, in the Fac-ulty Lounge of the Law School. Thetwo Boards heard reports on theABA-AAL's visitation of the LawSchool, which was to occur on No-vember 22, 23, 24, on the currentfinancial aid picture, and admis-sions of the Class of 1974. A pre-liminary report on the current LawSchool Fund drive was discussed.

THE GARGOYLE

The Boards approved a recom-mendation made by an InvestmentsCommittee composed of RobertCurry, Lester Clemons and DeanKimball that endowment and trustfunds be managed by the First Wis-consin National Bank. Also ap-proved was the allocation of $lQ,OOOof WLAA funds for long-term loansto participants in the Summer Pre-admission Program.

The annual visitation of the LawSchool by the two boards wasplanned tentatively for March 24and 25, 1972.

Attending the meeting were Pat-rick Cotter, Milwaukee, Presidentof the Association; A. Roy Ander-son, Robert Curry, Justice NathanHeffernan, Joseph Melli, ThomasZilavy, all of Madison; Irvin Charneand Timothy Frautschi, Milwaukee;John Tonjes, Fond du Lac; JohnMitby and John Whitney, GreenBay; Glenn Coates, Racine; EdwinLarkin, Eau Claire; M. A. McKich-an, Platteville; Dean Kimball, Pro-fessors Arlen Christenson, WalterRaushenbush, Carl Runge; andRuth Doyle, Assistant to the Dean.

VII

THEY COME ••••

s [

WHAT'S AHEAD fOR CLASSOF '74? ENROLLMENTPRESSUREINTENSIFIESMore than 1900 people applied

for admission to the Wisconsin LawSchool in 1971-72. This representsan increase of almost 100% in thelast 4 years. All law schools reportcomparable enrollment pressures, ina time when many other graduatedepartments are suffering markedenrollment declines.

The entering class numbered 340.This is the largest entering groupwithin recent memory. Six hundredforty applicants were offered admis-sion, fewer offers than were madea year ago. Of the 340, 12 are par-ticipants in the Legal EducationOpportunities Program. Includedalso are 42 participants of the 74who completed the Summer Pre-admission Screening Program.

This is not only the largest enter-ing class; it is the best qualified, asqualifications are measured tradi-tionally-in undergraduate gradepoint averages and scores on theLaw School Admission tests. Themedian undergraduate grade pointaverage of those who registered is3.27 (on a 4. scale) compared to3.13 in 1970. The median LSATscore is 629, compared to 620 in1970. In 1968, these were 3.04 and605 respectively.Two hundred forty-one first year

students are residents of Wisconsin.The other 139 hail from 26 statesfrom Massachusetts to California,which produced 3 and 7 membersof the class respectively. Illinois,with 18, and New York, with 17,were the largest non-Wisconsin con-tributors to the class of 1974.The first year class has gathered

con't on page 15

VIII THE GARGOYLE

E TS

THEY GO ...•

THE GARGOYLE

1971 GRADUATESCHOOSE, FIRST CAREERSSHOW CHANGESAlthough there is great change

in national employment patterns inall other professions, lawyers newlygraduated in 1971 experiencedabout the same opportunities astheir predecessors in 1970 and 1969.Where there are differences, theyare largely of degree. For example,about 45% of this year's graduatesentered private practice, comparedto about 44~!o a year ago. But ofthese, about 83% are located inWisconsin, compared to approx-imately 55% in 1970. The tradition-al opportunities are still availableto the new graduates; the locations,the specific assignments havechanged somewhat.The number of recruiters using

the Law School's Placement Ser-vices declined slightly in 1970-71over 1969-70, indicating a slighttightening of the choices availableto the graduates. It appears thatthe number of recruiters in 1971-72 will be about the same as in1970-71.However, the kinds of recruiters

changed considerably, according toMrs. Mary Staley, Director ofPlacement Services. There werefewer from the large city law firms,fewer from business, insurance com-panies and banks, and substantiallymore from law firms in Wisconsincities. This trend continues in 1971-72, she says.As of October 1, 172 graduates(January, June, and August, 1971)had recorded their decisions in thePlacement Office. Twenty grad-uates were either uncertain, or hadnot notified the Placement Officeof their decisions.

can't an page 15

IX

WHAT'S GOING ON IN LEGAL EDUCATION?CHANGES MAY BE COMING

With this article, the Gargoyle hopes to acquaint alumni with some of thepervasive questions confronting all law schools in 1971. The questions, thoughlarge, can be quickly and forthrightly stated. Possible responses are numerousand varied. Only a few of the most talked-about can be covered here.

Confronting the future, all law schools are in the same boat. Those whichare part of the large prestigious universities, whether privately endowed orpublicly-supported, and small schools whether public or private, day schoolsand two-divisional schools (full-time and part-time) are faced with the sameproblems.

Readers will note that all the fundamental problems are inter-related; e.g.though the budgetary problem is a separable one, it is closely related to theproblem of enrollment pressures, as well as student dissatisfactions. Probablynone is solvable by itself.

A limited survey of various proposals can help interested alumni to puttheir own law school in its larger context-as a part of a large institutionalframework called Professional Training in the Law-American style.

THE PROBLEMS-some examples.

1. Compared to graduate andprofessional training in all otherfields, legal education receives mini-mal financial support. Legal educa-tion in America has existed withalmost no major changes in struc-ture for nearly a century. The cur-riculum in early law schools wasadopted, almost intact, from that setforth by Blackstone in his lecturesat Oxford beginning in 1753, whichculminated in his well-known Com-mentaries on the Law of England.The major American innovation,which continues to this day, was theimplementation of that curriculumin the late 19th century through thereading of appellate judicial opin-ions in casebooks, followed by theclassroom dialogue familiar to allof you.

Perhaps one of the chief reasonsthat law schools have continued solong in this uniform pattern is thatlaw schools are, relative to othergraduate disciplines, inexpensive tooperate. It is an efficient format for

x

mass instruction, using large classesand small faculties. Library needsare stable. Despite constant dissatis-faction with the product of the lawschools, there has been little pres-sure from the Bar to provide increas-ing support to improve their per-formance.

Changes now considered desirableand probably necessary to add depthand relevance to the education ofaspiring members of the Bar mustusually be set aside for budgetaryreasons. Developments of new coursestructures and novel methods ofteaching require greater use ofteaching personnel and this involvesadditional funds, because for almosttheir entire history, the law schoolshave been supported only at a levelappropriate to the cheapest formsof mass instruction. New challengescan not be met, nor even seriouslyconsidered.

2. Enrollment pressures continueto mount. Because it is the only pub-

licly-supported law school in thestate, the Wisconsin law school suf-fers more acutely than some of itscounterparts from the mountingpressure on enrollments. Althoughlarge numbers of applicants (resi-dents and non-residents alike) whojust a few years ago would havebeen considered fully qualified forlegal training are now being deniedadmission, the enrollment has risenfrom about 600 in 1968 to 900 in1971, with almost no increase in thesize of the Faculty.

Some privately endowed lawschools rigidly limit size, as do theuniversities of which they are a part.The Wisconsin Law School usesincreasingly stringent admissionsstandards, but nevertheless continuesto grow.

Nationally, the number of studentstaking the Law School Admissiontest has risen from 62,000 in 1968to over 100,000 in 1971. Each per-son in this increasing number isprobably applying to several law

THE GARGOYLE

SOME APPROACHES TO THESOLUTION OF THESE PROB-LEMS.

of time, it is the investment of moneyand the postponement of gainfulemployment that makes the thirdyear so painful to some students.

The proposals and programs brief-ly described below are only a few ofthose currently being discussed. Formany years, the Journal of LegalEducation has, it seems, printed lit-tle except criticisms of legal educa-tion and suggestions for change.

Almost all the recent proposalsshare these focuses: 1) providingmore practical experience for lawstudents; 2) removing third yearapathy either by changing the thirdyear or, often, abolishing it as a re-quirement; 3) recognition of thechanging intellectual and profes-sional needs of lawyers; 4) providinga well-rounded law school experi-ence, including not only the experi-ences to be encountered later in thepractice, but also educational andbroadening opportunities which maynever be available again.

The basic program change is theoffering of a two year degree, JM,for people who do not wish Baradmission. Among these might bepeople whose professional interest isin another field, such as business,journalism, education or court ad-ministration, and who want the legaltraining as an additional back-ground. Of course it does not qual-ify the student for bar admissionunder present rules. The require-ments for entering students are thesame in. the 2 year as in the 3 yearprogram.

The Stanford Plan. The StanfordPlan was the result of nearly twoyears of student, faculty and admin-istration consultation, as well asdetailed analysis of the Stanford fac-ulty and student body. The purposeof the continuous conferences was toinsure that any recommendedchanges would have, not mere acqui-escense, but the enthusiastic com-mitment of all groups involved.

Continuation into the third yearis possible for those who have earnedthe JM. There are many options forthe professionally oriented studentwho continues for a third year.Because all required courses wouldbe completed at the end of 2 years,students can, for example, choose toselect their third year courses en-tirely from the 60 elective coursesoffered at Stanford. They canchoose a Research Program for onefull year's work, under the directand close supervision of 2 facultymembers. Or they can choose anExtern Program, in which one se-mester's credit is offered for sixmonths full-time work in an ap-proved clinical setting, with a secondsemester in residence at the LawSchool.

Other programs are being de-veloped at Stanford to extend theoptions and increase flexibility: (1 )law for undergraduates as a major

con't on next page

***

4. The pressures for change out-lined above become themselves aproblem, when they are confrontedwith built-in obstacles-the accredi-tation requirements of the AmericanBar Association and the Associationof American Law Schools, as wellas requirements for admission to theBar, all of which spell out the num-ber of years (indeed, the number ofweeks, the hours of class per yearand the number of minutes perclass) which are necessary for ap-proval, and thus for bar admission.These constraints on legal educatorsare immensely powerful and limitdrastically the range of possible ex-perimentation.

3. Student dissatisfaction appearsto be present in law schools every-where. Dissatisfaction is observed inall law schools of which we know,and is an uncongenial companion tomounting enrollment pressures. Stu-dents, desiring to be lawyers, appearto consider much of the law schoolexperience as a kind of sentence tobe served. We recognize that thisphenomenon is not entirely new, butits intensity has increased in recentyears. All the various proposals andplans for development and improve-ment take into account this majordifficulty in the present law schools.Since it is most troublesome in thethird year, much of the curricularresponse has been directed to changesin that year;.At Wisconsin, two Fac-ulty members who recently evalu-ated the Clinical Program reportedthat the enthusiasm of the third yearstudents for the program was onlyrelative-it stemmed almost entirelyfrom the fact that it gave them analternative to the traditional thirdyear courses. It was not, in otherwords, that the clinical experiencewas so valuable; it was that theyfound their third year courses so un-satisfying. A few law schools reportthat the disenchantment even sets induring the second year. Partly it is,no doubt, a learned response thatchannels down to second year stu-dents from jaded seniors, rather thanan independent judgment.

schools. The work of admissionsofficers and admission committees ispressurized and increasingly diffi-cult. The problem of providing ade-quate opportunity in this state andin the country as a whole for thosewho wish to study law, who are ca-pable of satisfactory work in lawschools and who are needed in anincreasingly complex profession, inlaw schools that are invariably un-derfinanced, is an urgent one.

The tremendous investment ofstudents' money (both presentlyspent and borrowed, to be paid backin the future) adds a more poignantdimension to the student dissatisfac-tion. It is not only the expenditure

THE GARGOYLE XI

study, perhaps offered in connectionwith other majors; (2) specializedcourses, in summers or seminars orunder sabbatical arrangements, formembers of the practicing Bar (spe-cialization is a reality in California) ;(3) para- professiortal rtraining. J us-tification for para-professional train-ing in the law school is expressed byProf. Thomas Ehrlich in thesewords: "The inevitability of theemergence of para-professionals inlaw does not ensure that it will behandled wisely. In fact, we are in-clined to bet otherwise, unless thelaw schools become involved inplanning and designing the trainingand in setting the standards forpara-professionals. "

Northeastern University. North-eastern is a new law school, attachedto an enormous (70,000 students)urban university in Boston. It has atpresent 250 students, and plans nev-er to admit more than 125 at anytime. The law school operates a fullprogram twelve months a year. Theentering class completes a traditionalfirst year studying taxation, consti-tutional law, contracts, etc., withheavy emphasis on research andwriting on assigned problems. Duringthe summer following the first year,the entering students are dividedinto 2 groups-one group stays inlaw school, the other has assignedwork experience outside the lawschool. From then on, the two groupsalternate in each quarter. Job place-ments, in most cases, are arrangedby the law school, and all jobs havefaculty approval and some super-vision. All class work after the firstyear, during the terms on campus,changes substantially in nature be-cause of the work experience. Classesare small, and all are oriented to thestudy and solution of legal problems.Effort is made to promote the ideaof the Law School as a Community,and there is substantial participationby students in the decision-makingprocesses of the school.

Because Northeastern studentsgraduate with a large amount ofwork experience, and because there

XII

is dose faculty supervision of indi-vidual research and extensive stu-dent participation in small groups,Northeastern feels secure in its com-pletely Pass/Fail grading system. Itis possible to evaluate the work ofstudents for prospective employers,as well as for the students them-selves, in other ways than by grades.

The South Carolina plan. TheSouth Carolina plan was preparedwith a grant from the Ford Founda-tion. As it has evolved, it features ashift from the regular semester-length course to courses of varyinglength, measured in total hours ofinstruction. "Floating" hours areprovided to permit more detailedindividual study of particular sub-jects, or of joint study of relatedsubjects in addition to regular coursework. By reducing the number ofclass hours required in certain fieldsduring the second year, and by shift-ing away from the case book methodof instruction, it is possible to offerabout as many courses in the secondyear as have been available in thesecond and third year combined. Allrequired courses are completed bythe end of the fourth semester, andthe plan proposes to "create a finalyear of study in which the studentassumes the role of a lawyer, butwithin the controlled working en-vironment that enables him to ob-tain the benefits of actual or simu-lated practice on the one hand, andhelpful supervision and counsel onthe other." Clinical experience isrequired for one semester of thethird year. All third year studentsparticipate in small classes andengage in inter-disciplinary studies,combining legal education with busi-ness, economics, political science,etc.

Assuming "the role of the lawyer"does not mean simply accepting aclerkship in a private law firm, since,in the opinion of the drafters of theplan, private practice does not oftenoffer enough variety of experienceto be completely educational. Realexperience must be combined withsimulated experience and with de-tailed research in small seminars.

Admittedly, the difficulties of pro-viding sufficient staff and appro-priate problem-solving materials willplague the program. Also proposedis a central clearinghouse of mate-rials (including audio-visual offer-ings and educational games, amongothers), to which all law schoolsoffering similar programs could goto exchange ideas.

The Proposed Report of the Cur-riculum Study Project of the Asso-ciation of American Law Schools.This is the most sweeping proposalfor curricular change now current.Offered in February, 1971, it is in-tended mainly as a model for lawschools to use in evaluating theirown objectives and programs, rath-er than as a program for adoption.Participating in the work of theCurriculum Study Project were agroup of distinguished law profes-sors, including Professor WilliamKlein of Wisconsin, who has sinceleft us for the University of Califor-nia at Los Angeles.

The premise on which the pro-posal is based is (in its own words)"the abandonment of the illusionthat the law is a unified profession,all members sharing a common edu-cational background."

Merry Christmas to All-And to All a Good Night.

THE GARGOYLE

and that it serves a limited educa-tional purpose; (2) that variety andflexibility must be injected into legaleducation, as in all other educationif it is to meet the challenges of thefuture; and (3) that the new lawyerneeds much more than has beenavailable to him previously, includ-ing training in the skills of lawyeringas well as in substantive law. He alsoneeds the opportunity for deep im-mersion in certain areas of particu-lar interest.

Consequently, it proposed the es-tablishment of 6 different law schoolcurricula, each designed to serve aspecific purpose:

1. Standard Cu 11i cul u m" twoacademic years for the student inter-ested in practicing law in the tradi-tional sense. This is the professionalcore course, but organized in largerbuilding blocks than the traditionalcourses and designed so that notonly different substantive contentbut differing skills are parcelled outamong the courses for instruction.

4. Collegiate Curriculum; for peo-ple not planning careers in law, butin other fields where some legaltraining could be helpful, such asbusiness, journalism or education.

5. Research Curriculum; for stu-dents desiring careers in law teach-ing and legal research. It follows thestandard curriculum and includes asone of its requirements a teachingexperience in the standard curricu-lum.

* * *

Within the Standard Curriculum,6 regular courses are required in thetwo years, each in a basic area (Con-tracts, Property, Business Transac-tions, etc.), and each meeting daily.In addition, each student would berequired to participate in 4 smalltutorial groups, which would con-sume 3/5 of the Faculty time allot-ted to the first two years. Individualstudy according to carefully pre-pared syllabuses and followed bystandard examinations is required in6 other areas of legal study.

2. Special Curriculum; comes aft-er the Standard Curriculum, andusually after some practical experi-ence, in which a student can acquirespecialized knowledge about a par-ticular aspect of law, through indi-vidual study, seminars and examina-tions.

6. Licensing Curriculum; a thirdyear program for graduates of theStandard Curriculum who wish topractice in jurisdictions where threeyears of law school is an absoluterequirement for admission to the Bar.The entire report is built upon theview that two years is enough for-mal training to justify admission tothe Bar. This curriculum is con-ceived as a transitional one becausebar admission authorities would beexpected to accept the two year ideaonly slowly. Although the notion ofa two year course of training forbar admission is a major departurefrom present practice and will atfirst glance seem retrogressive tomany, it can not be dismissed out ofhand. It mayor may not be the rightdirection to move in legal education,but no thoughtful lawyer can affordto dismiss the idea without firstthinking through both the objectivesand achievements of the traditionalthree year course of study. The Re-port is an interesting challenge tothe preconceptions all of us share.

WHAT ABOUT WISCONSIN INTHIS ERA OF CHANGE?

There is no lack of awareness onthe Wisconsin Faculty of the prob-lems of legal education. Some mem-bers of the Faculty, particularlyProfessor John Conway, are out-spoken advocates of the 'two yearlaw school. Some, at great expenseo~effort and time, are teaching verydlffere~tly than they did a few yearsago, usmg problem solving exerciseswhich require a great deal of indi-vidual effort by students and theevaluating faculty members. Inde-pendent reading courses and re-search projects are offered for credit.The Clinical Program, and coursesin Trial Advocacy and GeneralPractice, all of which are familiar toGargoyle readers, have added a nec-essary dimension to the educationalexperiences of students, by teachingpractice skills. Moreover, the con-tent of traditional courses changescontinuously as the world of the lawchanges.

These, then, are some of the moreinteresting proposals. All share somecommon assumptions: (1) that, aft-er the first year, the casebook meth-od of instruction is not very exciting

3. Limited Curriculum; usuallyone year in length. It admits thosewho seek the competence to performlimited legal service, either in acci-dent claims advocacy, criminal ad-vocacy, family and welfare advocacy,or real property counseling. Itsgraduates do not qualify for licensesto practice law. It contemplates theimminent development of para-pro-fessional jobs in the law.

THE GARGOYLE

* * *"Developments at the Wisconsin

Law School will be evolutionary,rather than revolutionary," saidDean Spencer L. Kimball. "Thereare many reasons for this: ( 1) abasic commitment to the traditionsof legal education, which has, over

con't on next page

XIII

[From the Aegis (a campus publication) October 4, 1889]

If you wish to take this test, the Gargoyle will try to persuade some Facultymembers to read and grade your paper.

COULD YOU PASS THEBAR EXAM-IN 1889?

the years, been a good educationalexperience on the whole; (2) a rec-ognition that all proposals to addbreadth and depth to the curricu-lum require substantial budgetaryinvestment in additional staff andfacilities, which will be hard to ac-quire; and (3) the recognition thatmajor change can only take placeafter bar admission authorities areconvinced that it should, for thegates to the profession are tended byothers than legal educators. In prac-tical terms, this means that majorchange requires, first, the convictionof law faculties that it should takeplace-a position riot yet reached-and, second, a concerted effort bythem to convince the Bar and thecourts that it should be allowed. Forthese reasons, change at Wisconsinand elsewhere will undoubtedly beincremental, but the winds ofchange are sweeping through thefield of law and a generation fromnow things will be very different."

«Twas ever thus ... "

Report of Board of Visitorsto U.W. Regents

March 10, 1900Concludes: "We desire, however,

to call attention to the one factthat there is a feeling about thestate, and among many who are thefriends and patrons of the Univer-sity, among many who appreciatethe needs of the institution and itsneed for greater room and otherbuildings, men who take a pride inits success, that the institution iscosting a great deal and is a burdenUPQP the taxpayers, and we thinkit behooves the management to useevery possible economy in the ad-ministration of the affairs of theUniversity, not inconsistent with itsprosperity and progress."

SUPPORTTHE LAW SCHOOL

FUND

-We publish this week the questions pro-pounded hy the State Board of law Examinersat their 15th examination. held at :\iilwaukeeAUll:,,,t 2Gth last. We purpose publishinga few of the lists of questions used by theBonnl in the more recent examinations.

QU"ITWSi yon Al'l'r,lCA~r_ AT ~[ILW.,r:"ltli:.AUOlJ8r26th, 18PIJ.

1. What is equity? What are the grounds ofequitable jurisdiction?

2. Define fraud. 'State the instances offraud,of which equity will take cogniaance.

3. Whatis a passive trust? An active trust?A result ing trust? A constructive trust?

4. Name the chief incidents of partnership.What are the powers and linhilities of partnerswith respect to ~ach other?

5. What is n homestead under the laws ofWisconsin? How is it protected and how may itbe alienated?

6. ""hat was the common law, in respect tothe earnings of a married woman? What chan-ges, if any, have been made in such law by stat-ute in this state?

7. What is a right of way? How may it beacquired?

H. When lands ndjoin a river, to whom doesthe soil of the river presumptively belong?'

9. What is evidence? What is direct and whatcircurnst nut inl evidence?

10. What is eminent domain? By whom andfor what purposes may the power be exercised?

11. State the different kmds of insura nee, andthe general nature of each.

12. What is fee simple? Define a deed. a mort-gage and a lease.

13. When will a parol contract for the pur-chase of laud be specifically enforced by a courtof equity?

14. What is a corporation? Name and definethe different kinds of corporations.

15. What is a will? What are the requIsItesof its valid execution?

16. What is the difference between privity ofcontract lind privity of estate, •

17. What'contracts does the statute offraudsrequire to be in writing?

18. What is a chose in action?19. Draw a complaint upon a promissory

note, against maker and endorser, with verifica-tion.

20. What is the purpose of the pleadings inan action? Name the successive pleadings in anaction under the code and state the office of'each.

21. Who should he made parties to an actionfor the foreclosure of a mortgage? Detail theordinary proceedings in a foreclosure suit whenthere is no answer and there are no infants ornon-residents.

22. What is ajury? What actions under thecode are triable by jury, and what are the func-tions of a judge in such trials?

23. What is a constitution? What is a statute?When they are in conflict which controls?

24. In what action and upon what groundsmaya defendant in an action, be •. rrested andheld to bail? What is the object of such arrest?

25. What IS a bill of exchange? What are thenames by which the different parries tv a bill ofexchange are called? What is the distinetion be-tween an inland and a foreign bill of exchange?

26. Does the law merchant apply to con-tracts between parties who are not and havenot been merchants?

27. Wbat is a bailment? How many andwhat species of bailment are there?

28. What are common carriers? What arethe principal rules governing their liability?

29. What are the absolute rights of individ-uals? What are the principal provisions of ourconstitutions (state and United States) forguarding the right of personal security?

30. In what manner mayan alien become acirieen of the United States?

XIV THE GARGOYLE

WHAT'S AHEAD ...

from page 8

from 104 undergraduate collegesand universities. The University ofWisconsin-Madison, is the almamater of 135. Wisconsin universities(now all members of the newly-merged University of Wisconsin)from which students enrolled are:Eau Claire-5; LaCrosse-2; Osh-kosh-4; Platteville-3; River Falls-1; Stevens Point-I; Whitewater-6. Other campuses of the Univer-sity of Wisconsin at Green Bay, Mil-waukee and Parkside contributed 1,17, and 2 students respectively.

Twenty-seven graduates of pri-vate colleges in Wisconsin havejoined this class. Of these, the larg-est groups are from Beloit (6) ,Lawrence (7), and Marquette (6).

In the entering class, 16 studentswere admitted without receivingundergraduate degrees. Also, thereare 7 transfer students from otherlaw schools, admitted with ad-vanced standing.

About 14% (47) of the registeredmembers of the class are females,compared to a little more than 10%(35) in the class entering in 1970,and 7% (22) in 1969. This increasein the number of entering womenstudents and the small number offemales who graduated in 1971(17), raises the enrollment of wom-en to 10% of the total student body.Increasing interest of women inlaw is part of a rapidly developingnational trend.

It is significant to note that 236women applied for admission thisyear, compared to 138 in 1970, and75 in 1969.

I t appears that the admissionspressure in 1972-73 will be similarto that experienced this year, andthat there will be more rather thanfewer applications for admission.The increasingly high retention inthe 2nd and 3rd years has also con-tributed to over-crowding of theLaw School, with no relief present-ly in sight.

THE GARGOYLE

1971 GRADUATES ...

from page 9

One hundred ninety-two grad-uates forms the largest law schoolgraduating class since the end ofWorld War II.

In the class of 1971, 44 grad-uates entered government service,including the military. Of those sit-uated in government, 20 are locatedin Wisconsin, in state agencies andin county government, usually asAssistant District Attorneys. Twen-ty-two students entered federal ser-vice, and 2 are employed by govern-ment in states other than Wisconsin.In 1970, 28 graduates entered gov-ernment service of a group of 130,and in 1969, government jobs wereselected by 18 graduates. Only 9graduates in 1971 entered govern-ment via the military, and severalof these were fulfilling 4 monthcommitments.

Private practice attracted 77members of the Class of 1971, ofwhom 64 are located in Wisconsin,many in the smaller cities, such asJanesville, Beloit, Eau Claire, Man-itowoc, Stevens Point. Only 6 en-tered business, including banks, in-surance companies and accountingfirms. This may reflect the slow-upof business recruiting as much asthe changing interests of the grad-uates. Three of those in business re-mained in Wisconsin.

Fourteen graduates have accept-ed positions in special programsproviding legal services for thepoor and other disadvantagedgroups. Of these, 5 are ReginaldHeber Smith fellows located inWest Virginia, Denver, Rhode Is-land, Atlanta, and Boston. Othersare in Legal Services organizationsin Dane County, Milwaukee, Kan-sas City. Wisconsin Judicare hasone associate from the Class of 1971.Two have joined Indian Legal Ser-vices in Wisconsin.

Judicial clerkships, in federal andstate courts, claimed fifteen grad-

uates. Five of these are located inWisconsin, in the Federal DistrictCourts in the eastern and westerndistricts, and the Supreme Courtof Wisconsin. Six clerks are locatedoutside Wisconsin in the CircuitCourts of Appeals or Federal Dis-trict Courts. Four graduates ac-cepted clerkships in other state ap-peals courts.

The Chief Clerk of the Wiscon-sin State Assembly is a member ofthe Class of 1971; another memberis a legal counselor and AssistantProfessor of Political Science at oneof the state universities. One grad-uate is working in the University'sbusiness affairs office. Another isworking for the Law Reform Com-mission of Ghana. One is employedin a special project at the Law School,and one is doing further graduatework at the Wharton School of Fi-nance, University of Pennsylvania.

The most startling shift is in theoverall summary. Last year, about40% of the graduates started theircareers in Wisconsin. By September,60% of the 1971 graduates had set-tled in Wisconsin. In addition tothose already settled in Wisconsin,it can be assumed that at leastsome of those currently doing mil-itary service, or acting as clerks tojudges outside the state, or em-ployed by the government, willeventually return to practice closerto home.

xv