The Florida Law Review is a student-edited publication containing articles by legal scholars and works by student members. It is published five times a year in January, April, July, September, and December. Current issues can be viewed online at www.floridalawreview.com.

George H. Starke, Jr. admires a plaque erected in front of a Magnolia tree planted at the entrance to the Levin College of Law to commemorate the 50th anniversary of desegregation at the University of Florida.

The University of Florida Levin College of Law celebrated Constitution Day on Sept. 17 by honoring the civil rights pioneers responsible for changing the course of history for minority students.

“Today we start a new year-long effort to remember and archive the struggle for desegregation,” said Pedro Malavet, UF College of Law professor and chair of the Constitution Day planning committee. “We can not possibly understand the significance of our current, diverse student body unless we remember and acknowledge the truly heroic individual struggle these men and women endured.”

The program featured a presentation by Harley Herman, Esq. of de Beaubien, Knight, Simmons, Mantzaris & Neal, on the life and legacy of Virgil Hawkins.

In addition, a panel discussion was held on the federal constitutional issues in law school desegregation with Kenneth Nunn, Professor of Law; Harley Herman, Esq., de Beaubien, Knight, Simmons, Mantzaris & Neal; Juan Perea, Cone Wagner Nugent Johnson, Hazouri and Roth Professor of Law; and Stephan P. Mickle, U.S. District Judge, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Florida.

In 1949, Virgil Hawkins applied to the UF University of Florida’s law school and was denied entry based on the color of his skin. After nine years of legal battles, Hawkins entered into an agreement with the state to withdraw his application in exchange for a court order to desegregate UF’s graduate and professional schools. This opened the door for George Starke Jr., the first African-American to be admitted to the law school, and the Hon. Stephan Mickle, the first African-American to earn an undergraduate and law degree from the University of Florida.

“In reality, Virgil Hawkins never expected to be the Rosa Parks of Florida or his admission to the UF’s College of Law to be the Ft. Sumter of civil liberties,” said Harley Herman, a UF College of Law graduate, and the attorney who laid the ground work to recognize and honor Hawkins.

On hand for the commemoration, George Starke Jr. told the audience that even though he had never met Virgil Hawkins, he appreciates the sacrifice he made. “Virgil Hawkins made it possible for me to attend law school,” Starke said. “He made it all possible.”

Hawkins’ niece also addressed the audience telling them that Hawkins’ faith provided him with patience and perseverance. “Only those who see the invisible can do the impossible,” said Harriet Livingston. “Virgil Hawkins taught us not to judge a person by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Stephen A. Higginson, associate professor at Loyola University New Orleans.

For the first time in history, the Florida Law Review has published a multimedia article. The article, Constitutional Advocacy Explains Constitutional Outcomes, was written by Stephen. A. Higginson, an associate professor at Loyola University New Orleans. Higginson included 178 links to audio recordings of oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court.

“Very few people are doing that,” Higginson said about multimedia articles. “When I sent it out, virtually all of the law journals said it looks interesting, but we aren’t sure how to do it.”

Larry Dougherty, Editor-in-Chief of the Florida Law Review, said they jumped at the opportunity to break ground with this type of article.

“It changes it completely. I share this experience, but others who read it say — the phrase I keep hearing is ‘It’s so different listening to the arguments,’” Dougherty said. “You can see what Professor Higginson is talking about, you can understand how people shape their arguments, and you can understand how the Justices work with those arguments. Totally different experience, a lot more satisfying.”

After law school, Higginson clerked for former Supreme Court Justice Byron White, which sparked his interest in this area.

Higginson wrote a smaller article for George Mason with audio clips, but he had this larger project in mind.

“My thesis was that the outcomes can only be understood if you go back to attorney advocacy,” Higginson said. “Many of the things stated in the court’s opinion assume immediate familiarity with what was actually disputed between adversarial lawyers.”

Higginson started using audio clips in his constitutional law class to help students understand what the lawyers were arguing.

“You can take almost any landmark Supreme Court case, and if you go back to the arguments, it just comes alive for students,” he said. “It comes alive in terms of the simplicity and power of the argument lawyers make and it comes alive because it’s the human reality of it. To actually hear a lawyer trying to defend something that is pretty unconscionable is an important thing. You can assign accountability for it; often it gets lost in the drier decision that is announced.”

Higginson realizes that most people don’t have time to listen to all 178 of the clips, but he has a few favorites.

“If you’re going to listen to any, listen to that first one (Brown v. Louisiana),” Higginson said. “I like clip number 10; it’s Texas v. Johnson, the flag-burning case. I like clips 81-90 because to me it’s really intriguing to know how Solicitor General [Robert] Bork talked the Court back into allowing capital punishment. Whether you agree with him or not, it’s just saber-like logic.”

Both Dougherty and Higginson see multimedia as an increased part of law review articles in the future.

“I think it has to be [a growing area],” Higginson said. “I watch the effect it has on students in class because it just walks them right into the courtroom. A lot of my article lets you just walk into the courtroom on that day, and you’re there.”

“Professor Weyrauch has been an exceptional teacher and respected and highly productive scholar at this institution for more than 51 years, which is a record of continuous service at one law school which is rarely achieved by anyone anywhere in the nation,” said Levin College of Law Dean Robert Jerry. “This symposium will allow us to examine and honor his impressive body of work and bring it to the attention of a new generation of law students.”

This symposium will provide an opportunity for noted scholars and friends of Professor Weyrauch to reflect upon his academic contributions. Participants will make oral comments on facets of Professor Weyrauch’s work. There is no requirement or expectation of a pre-symposium written work by participants, although the College would be most willing to receive any such writings for distribution at or prior to the symposium.

In addition, the Florida Law Review dedicated their April issue to Professor Weyrauch, which will include an article by Lynn M. LoPucki, Security Pacific Bank Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law, and Bruce W. Nichols Visiting Professor of Law, Harvard Law School, in honor of the distinguished professor.

The symposium will be held on Sept. 29, 2008 from 9 – 11 a.m. in the Chesterfield Smith Ceremonial Classroom (180 Holland). The symposium is open to the public.

He advised students to try to get trial experience early in their careers and to align themselves with good, ethical lawyers.

“What I’ve found over the years is important. You need to try to find someone who does two different things for you,” said Griffis, who handles juvenile court and family cases for the Eighth Judicial Circuit. “Number one — is going to teach you the nuts and bolts of how to litigate, if you need to litigate… The second thing you need to look at is finding a lawyer who is going to be a good mentor, an ethical mentor.”

Griffis said he often recommends law students to work for the state attorney’s office or the public defender’s office after law school just to get some trial experience under their belts.

Griffis also touched on professional responsibility in his speech and was proud that none of his clients in private practice had ever filed a grievance against him with The Florida Bar.

One of the most important things for a lawyer to do is to be up front with their clients about what to reasonably expect, Griffis said.

He said it’s easy to tell when a lawyer has promised their client something that was not going to happen.

“If you promise them something or tell them it’s likely going to happen, and it doesn’t occur, they’re going to hold you accountable for that,” Griffis said. “I can always tell the attorneys that promise more up front, because they’re the same lawyers that get discharged by their clients at the end of their case. They want someone to fight, fight, fight for whatever it is that they’re not entitled to, then at the end, when they have to settle for that, they want to fire their lawyer and go find another lawyer who’s going to get them what they want, notwithstanding the fact that they’re probably not entitled to it.”

Griffis, who was elected in 2006, has enjoyed the transition from private attorney to judge.

“It’s certainly an enjoyable experience. It’s not like most people believe it to be, where you’re calling balls and strikes all day long,” Griffis said. “I find it to be more of a managerial position where you try to find a way to manage your docket and make sure the cases are completed within a certain amount of time. Otherwise your dockets get way out of control and it’s impossible for the litigants to get time in front of the judge.” Griffis especially emphasizes taking care of litigant’s issues as quickly as possible largely because of a bad experience he had as a lawyer.

When Griffis was a lawyer, he represented a client that was wealthy and getting a divorce. The parties had come to an agreement about their property, and Griffis just needed five minutes of the judge’s time to approve the settlement agreement and finalize the divorce.

“My guy called me every day for three weeks because he was dying,” Griffis said. “And I called the judge every day for three weeks, and I couldn’t get five minutes on that judge’s calendar for ten weeks. He would not give it to me. My guy died and left $200,000 in a joint account, and guess where that went? That went to his ex-wife, and there was nothing I could do to stop it. … It affected me so much as a lawyer, that a judge could be that arrogant not to allow me five minutes of his time, that I make my time open. I will stop court any time, take five minutes, I’ll divorce you, and I’ll conclude your case.”