New York CLE Course Catalog

Lawyers used to be able to get away with playing dumb. We could conveniently ignore the misdeeds of our clients…we could keep our eyes shut. Not any more. The ABA recently issued Opinion 491 which creates a responsibility to ask questions about our client’s bad deeds…and every lawyer needs to understand. (Rules 1.6, and 1.2 also covered)

Stuart Teicher, Esq., posts some funny stuff while on the road as a CLE teacher. Like most of society he documents his life on FaceBook. But the difference is that most of his posts actually teach some important mental health lessons for lawyers. Join him as he discusses how lawyers are affected by anxiety, compassion fatigue, over-functioning, and more.

One of the sharpest tools in the lawyer’s arsenal is a surprisingly common item. The letter. Whether it’s a demand letter, a note sent during negotiations, or a client communication, your success could be dependent on a piece of correspondence. Join the CLE Performer, Stuart Teicher as he explains how to write a variety of effective letter types.

You’ve heard all the stereotypes about New Jersey? Well, some are true, and some not so much. But you might be surprised by how the myths, realities, and Hollywood fictions about the Garden State teach valuable ethics lessons to lawyers. Join the CLE Performer, Stuart Teicher, Esq., as he explains how his home state illustrates critical ethic lessons for lawyers. Topics include: The value of keeping your mouth shut (Rule 1.6). Communicating with clients safely (Rule 1.4), and more.

In 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was arrested in Birmingham, Alabama for violating the States’ law against mass public demonstrations. From his jail cell, Dr. King penned an important response to clergy-people who criticized the protest that got him arrested. The words from that letter have proved to be among Dr. King’s most important writings and, interestingly, they are relevant to lawyers as well. Join the CLE Performer, Stuart Teicher, Esq., as he evaluates the text of that letter and explains how the content of that critical piece of correspondence can help lawyers improve inclusion in the practice of law.

If a person can be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of a crime, then the criminal-justice system can(doesn’t mean it will) get that person off the streets, at least temporarily, but… What happens when such a person has served his/her sentence, yet we identify that person (hopefully correctly) as still dangerous?… Or, what if we identify a person (hopefully correctly) as dangerous, but that person has not been convicted of a crime? What can the mental-health “system” do? – i.e., what are the legal requirements for short-and long-term involuntary civil commitment?">If a person can be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of a crime, then the criminal-justice system can(doesn’t mean it will) get that person off the streets, at least temporarily, but… What happens when such a person has served his/her sentence, yet we identify that person (hopefully correctly) as still dangerous?… Or, what if we identify a person (hopefully correctly) as dangerous, but that person has not been convicted of a crime? What can the mental-health “system” do? – i.e., what are the legal requirements for short-and long-term involuntary civil commitment?

In this session, Dr. Brian Russell will discuss how the Violence Risk Assessment is used to evaluate individuals for potential violence. He will provide real case examples to provide a clearer understanding how these tools work, where it failed and how it has improved since it's conception.

The Britney Spears conservatorship case has brought a lot of attention to the Conservatorships and Guardianship laws throughout the country. In this program, Dr. Brian Russell uses his expertise to provde some useful legal context to the case, provide lawyers with a better understanding of where the pitfalls are and how they can do right by their clients.

In this program, Dr. Brian Russell will discuss the insanity defense and breakdown it's history and the Supreme Court's most recent decision on the matter.