A YEAR OF EXCELLENCE IN REVIEW 2007–2008

We are living in one of those recurrent periods in American history when legaland constitutional issues form an important element in the consideration of somany of the major issues confronting our country. As a law school, we have aresponsibility to bring some of the finest minds to campus to challenge andexplore the most important legal and public policy issues of our time. In 2006-2007, Pace Law School sponsored several vibrant and exciting discussions.

In October 2006, we had the privilege to organize and host the annualColloquium of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature andNatural Resources (IUCN) Academy of Environmental Law, the firstconvened in the United States. Over the course of the year, we have examinedan incredibly wide range of subjects: the lessons from Enron, same-sexmarriage, governance reform for prisons, the role of the rule of law in bringingthe West and the Islamic world together, the executive branch’s impact on theattorney-client relationship, the future of private public interest law, resolvingthe conflict between environmental protection and economic development,and others.

The objective of promoting public debate and discussion is higher educationbroadly conceived, and we take it very seriously as a part of Pace Law School’smission. We embrace the challenge of deepening public understanding of thelegal and policy aspects of the challenges facing America.

Dean Michelle Simon

Dean Michelle Simon

MESSAGE FROM THE DEAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Special Lectures and Symposia

Protecting a Fragile Planet:Pace Law School Brings Together the World's Leading Experts on Environmental Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Landmark Torts Case Reargued at Pace Law School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Women and the Art of Negotiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Hamdan v Rumsfeld Attorney Comes to Pace to Discuss Landmark Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Annual Academic Lecture Series

The Prison Crucible: Race and the American Penal System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

“From Silent Spring to Sweltering Summers – The Past and Future of Private Public Interest Law” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Blank Lecture Examines the Executive Branch Exceeding its Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Pace Law Lecture Explores Islam, the West, and the Rule of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Renowned Peacemaker, Theodore W. Kheel, Explores the Conflict between conservatism and Development . . . . . .10

Public Policy Lecture Series

Should State Legislatures Approve Same-Sex Marriage? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Lessons from the Enron Scandal Explored at Pace Law School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Moot Court Competitions

Fourteenth Annual Willem C. Vis Moot Brings Students Together from 178 Universities and 51 Countries . . . . . . . . . .13

Representatives from 65 Law Schools Participate in Pace’s Environmental Law Moot Court Competition . . . . . . . . . .14

Pace Law School Hosts Second Annual Pace International Criminal Court Moot Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Pace Law School Grand Moot Court Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Pace Law School First Year Moot Court Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

1

Last October, hundreds of international delegatesgathered at Pace Law School for one of the year’slargest and most important environmental sum-mits on the planet, a weeklong colloquium thatreaffirmed the school’s stature as an internationalleader in environmental law.

The summit was the fourth annual colloquium ofthe International Union for the Conservation ofNature and Natural Resources (IUCN) Academyof Environmental Law, and the first convened bythe Academy in the United States. From October16 to 20, 2006, academics, judges, legal profession-als, government lawyers, and activists met at theNew York State Judicial Institute on the Pace LawSchool campus to share experiences, forge partner-ships, hatch plans to train a new generation ofenvironmental lawyers, and step up efforts to cre-ate models for enforcement and compliance.

Delegates ended the summit by gathering at theUnited Nations in the Trusteeship CouncilChamber, where they delivered a message to diplo-mats on the urgent need for the international com-munity to strengthen environmental law compli-ance and enforcement.

“This was a reaffirmation of all of the work that hasbeen accomplished since the 1972 Stockholm confer-ence on the human environment,” said Pace LawProfessor Nicholas A. Robinson, founder and chairof the IUCN Academy of Environmental Law.“Stockholm was the first international conferenceever to say that the environment is not just a localproblem, it’s a global problem; and the Academy’scolloquium at Pace was a dramatic demonstration ofthe interdependence of the environmental problemsof the world and our ability to work on them in amutually reinforcing and complementary way.”

Robinson inaugurated and cochaired the first threeIUCN Academy colloquia - in Shanghai in 2003,on sustainable energy law with Professor RichardOttinger; in Nairobi in 2004, on sustainable landuse practices with Professor John Nolon; and inSydney in 2005, on biodiversity protection withProfessor Ann Powers - and the 2007 conference inParaty, Brazil, in June.

The colloquium - cosponsored by the NAFTACommission on Environmental Cooperation(CEC) and by the International Network forEnvironmental Compliance and Enforcement(INECE) - drew more than 220 delegates from 47nations. They represented 65 universities, numer-ous government agencies, and dozens of interna-tional and national organizations, many of themleading the fight to protect natural resources intheir respective countries by suing environmentaloffenders.

Viewed as a step toward building the legal founda-tions for a sustainable world, the 2006 colloquiumcovered a web of complex issues, including domes-tic and international law, trade agreements and theenvironment, the Kyoto Protocol and efforts todiminish greenhouse gases, cross-border river pollu-tion, corporate social responsibility, and the impactof culture and custom on environmental efforts.

Professor Robert F. Kennedy Jr., codirector of thePace Environmental Litigation Clinic, delivered akeynote address that touched on the political bat-tle lines faced by environmentalists. “The worstthing that can happen to the environment is if itbecomes the province of a single political party,”he said. Environmental work should be “nonpar-tisan or bipartisan” and an act stemming fromour character.

Protecting a Fragile Planet:Pace Law School Brings

Together the World’s LeadingExperts on Environmental Law

SPECIAL LECTURES AND SYMPOSIA

Professor Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

“The worst thing that can happen to theenvironment is if it becomes the province of asingle political party,”– Professor Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

2

“The Scales of Justice:A Reargument of Palsgraf v Long Island R.R.”

Pace Law School in conjunction with theHistorical Society of the Courts of the State ofNew York and the Westchester County BarAssociation presented “The Scales of Justice: AReargument of Palsgraf v Long Island R.R.” onNovember 9, 2006, at the New York State JudicialInstitute on the Pace Law School campus.

On April 25, 1924, a man was fighting his way ontoa crowded car of the Long Island Railroad at theEast New York station. A railroad guard attempt-ed to help the passenger board and caused the pas-senger to drop his package. Unbeknownst to theguard, the package contained fireworks. The fire-works exploded, reportedly knocking down scalesat the other end of the platform, which injuredHelen Palsgraf. Mrs. Palsgraf sued the railroadclaiming her injury resulted from the negligentacts of the railroad employee. The jury found forMrs. Palsgraf. The Court of Appeals dismissedMrs. Palsgraf’s complaint, deciding, in an opinionwritten by Benjamin Cardozo, that the relation-ship of the employee’s actions to Mrs. Palsgraf’sinjury was too indirect to make him liable. Thethree-judge dissent, by contrast, saw the case as amatter of proximate cause – Mrs. Palsgraf’s injurycould be traced to the wrong done by the guard inpushing the passenger holding the package ofexplosives. Palsgraf is standard reading for first-year law students in tort law.

The program created a reargument of the appealand review of the Cardozo decision as though itoccurred a few days after the Cardozo decision washanded down. Counsel for Mrs. Palsgraf and coun-sel for the Long Island Railroad Company eachmade arguments peppered with questions from thebench. The distinguished bench then conducted anopen consultation and rendered its decision.

The evening’s emcee was Hon. Albert M.Rosenblatt, Associate Judge of the New YorkCourt of Appeals. Judge Rosenblatt is president ofthe Historical Society of the Courts of the State ofNew York. Participants included Hon. LewisLubell, Supreme Court Justice, White Plains, NY,as attorney for Mrs. Palsgraf; Hon. Robert S.Smith, Associate Judge, New York State Court ofAppeals, as attorney for the Long Island R.R. Co.;and the bench: Hon. Sondra Miller, director, OCAOffice of Family Services (chief judge); Hon.Charles L. Brieant, U.S. District Judge, Southerndistrict; Stephen J. Friedman, dean of Pace LawSchool; Janet A. Johnson, professor of law, PaceLaw School; and Kevin J. Plunkett, Esq., partner,Thacher Proffitt & Wood.

Landmark Torts CaseReargued at Pace Law School

SPECIAL LECTURES AND SYMPOSIA

3

Women and theArt of Negotiation

Do women negotiate differently? If so, how, whyand when? Is this a good thing or bad? How do youbecome and be perceived of as a great negotiator?

On September 27, 2007, Pace Law School’s Centerfor Continuing Legal Education in conjunctionwith the Westchester Women’s Bar Association’sgeneral membership meeting, held a program on“Women and the Art of Negotiation” at the NewYork State Judicial Institute. Panelists included pre-eminent Westchester lawyers Ann FarrisseyCarlson, Kathleen Donelli, Jane Bilus Gould, andLucille Fontana. Moderator Deb Volberg Pagnotta,an experienced employment lawyer who runs theconsulting practice Interfacet, Inc., posed a series ofcontemporary questions and scenarios for the panelto discuss for an audience of nearly 150 legal and aca-demic professionals.

While the panel recognized that there may be someprofound and practical differences in negotiatingstyles between men and women – or, more accurate-ly, from person to person – the participants alsoproffered sound advice on how each lawyer shoulddevelop his or her own style. Each panelist broughther own unique set of experiences and perceptionsto bear, from the practice of employment law tomatrimonial to commercial practice and personalinjury. Negotiation styles and choices may differbased on the substantive area: for example, in mov-

ing along a stalled negotiation, a lawyer/negotiatorin a matrimonial matter may be more likely toinvolve the client in the actual negotiation process,as opposed to a personal injury lawyer who moretypically might handle the negotiations without theclient present.

Discussion ranged from management of clientexpectations and establishing yourself as a reason-able negotiator to overcoming sometimes negativeassumptions about women negotiators. Soundadvice included being patient, honorable, and pre-pared. Perhaps the most intriguing and unexpectedadvice, courtesy of Lucille Fontana, was to bakebrownies if necessary. From the most pragmatic tothe theoretical, the audience found the advice to berich and varied, taking with them practical, real-lifeadvice to use in every area of law and in life.

In closing, the panelists each gave the following sin-gle statement about how to succeed in negotiations:Carlson, “Reputation will go a long way – be your-self;” Donelli, “Power is about preparation;” Gould,“Believe in a kernel of truth of your case;” andFontana, “Never let them see you are afraid.”

SPECIAL LECTURES AND SYMPOSIA

Deb Volberg Pagnotta

“Reputation will go a long way – be yourself”– Ann Farrissey Carlson

4

Hamdan v RumsfeldAttorney Comes to Pace toDiscuss Landmark Case

SPECIAL LECTURES AND SYMPOSIA

“To characterize Hamdan as about the powersof the President and Congress itself misses abig part of the point.”– Professor Neal Kumar Katyal

Professor Neal Kumar Katyal

5

Professor Neal Kumar Katyal, GeorgetownUniversity Law School, came to Pace Law Schoolon April 9, 2007, to discuss Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, acase he won in the United States Supreme Courtthat challenged the policy of military trials atCuba’s Guantanamo Bay Naval Station. Katyalwas honored by the Asian American LawStudents Association and spoke to a group ofabout 80 law students.

On June 29, 2006, the Supreme Court sided withKatyal by a 5-3 vote, finding that President GeorgeW. Bush’s tribunals violated the constitutionalseparation of powers, domestic military law, andinternational law.

“To characterize Hamdan as about the powers ofthe President and Congress itself misses a big partof the point,” said Katyal. “I ask you to forgetabout all of this seventh-grade civics stuff for amoment and instead reflect upon what happenedon that day. This is what I said to the media on thesteps of the Supreme Court following the decision:

Just think of it. What happened today, somelittle guy [with] a fourth-grade educationYemeni, like Mr. Hamdan, who was accusedof conspiring with one of the most horren-dous individuals on the planet, can sue themost powerful man in the world and win inour highest court. That is something that isfundamentally great about America andsomething we should be celebrating to therest of the world. In no other country wouldthis be possible.

Katyal has represented uniformed men andwomen in the Armed Services who challenged theGuantanamo policy. An expert in national securi-ty law, the American Constitution, the GenevaConventions, and the role of the President andCongress post 9-11, Katyal forged a worldwidecoalition of support for his challenge to theGuantanamo policy, including 422 members of theEuropean and British parliaments and several for-mer generals and admirals of the United StatesArmed Forces.

He previously served as National SecurityAdviser in the U.S. Justice Department and wascommissioned by President Bill Clinton to write areport on the need for more legal pro bono work.He also served as Vice President Al Gore’s co-counsel in the Supreme Court election dispute of2000, and represented the deans of most major pri-vate law schools in the 2003 University ofMichigan affirmative-action case, Grutter v.Bollinger.

Katyal clerked for Supreme Court Justice StephenBreyer, as well as Judge Guido Calabresi of theU.S. Court of Appeals. He attended DartmouthCollege and Yale Law School. He has publishedand lectured extensively on topics of constitution-al and national security law, among others. Katyalwon the 2004 National Law Journal pro bonoaward for his Guantanamo work.

Pace Law School Professor Michael B. Mushlinrevealed the “shadow world” of American prisonsin the James D. Hopkins Chair in Law MemorialLecture, March 28, 2007, held at the New York StateJudicial Institute on the Law School campus.

In his lecture, “The Prison Crucible: Race and theAmerican Penal System,” Mushlin, who is the cur-rent James D. Hopkins Professor of Law, exploredthe history of prisoners’ rights, the explodingprison population in the United States, the currentconditions in U.S. prisons, as well as the disparateimpact those prison conditions have on African-American men and their communities.

Facing the two million prisoners in the UnitedStates, 11 per cent of which are African-Americanmen, are conditions such as violence, overcrowd-ing, inadequate medical care, the rise of Supermax,cuts in vocational and educational programs, theincrease in the number of mentally ill inmates, andprison location, which in many cases is tantamountto “banishment.”

Inside what Mushlin called the “prison crucible,”one will find a lack of basic legal protections, harshcounterproductive prison conditions that areimposed on an unprecedented number ofAmericans, and a disproportionate number of thosepeople being African-American. This lack of fair-ness, Mushlin said, “undermines the civil rightsmovement.”

Mushlin said that legally the key to bringing theshadow world into the light is to dismantle the

Prison Litigation Reform Act, which makes it hard-er for prisoners to file lawsuits in federal court; usethe Eighth Amendment “to protect American dig-nity;” overturn Turner v Safley, which involves theconstitutionality of prison regulations; providemeaningful prison oversight; and restore andexpand effective prison programming.

“If the United States is ever to achieve the dreamthat Martin Luther King laid out for us, the path wemust follow surely will take us to all [the prisons inthe country].” If we take that path, “we will trans-form the law of prisoners’ rights and in the processreform the American prison system … a prison sys-tem that is [then] worthy not just of the inmates,but, much more importantly, that is worthy of thisgreat nation.”

Mushlin currently serves as a member of theAmerican Bar Association’s Task Force on theLegal Status on Prisoners and has been nominatedto the New York City Bar Executive Committeefor a three-year term beginning in the 2007-2008year. He previously served on the Committee onFederal Courts of the New York City Bar and waschair of the Association’s Committee onCorrections. He is a member of the Board ofDirectors of the Correctional Association of NewYork and served as its chair for four years. He wasthe Project Director of the Prisoners’ Rights Projectof the Legal Aid Society and Associate Director ofthe Children’s Rights Project of the ACLU.

The Prison Crucible:Race and the American

Penal System

Professor Michael B. Mushlin

“If the United States is ever to achieve thedream that Martin Luther King laid out for us,the path we must follow surely will take us toall [the prisons the country].”– Professor Michael B. Mushlin

6

ANNUAL ACADEMIC LECTURE SERIES

“From Silent Spring toSweltering Summers — ThePast and Future of PrivatePublic Interest Law”

“Groups with big names and advertising budgetsrepresent only one variety of how public interestenvironmental law is being practiced today,”– Professor John E. Bonine

Professor John E. Bonine

7

ANNUAL ACADEMIC LECTURE SERIES

John E. Bonine, professor of law at the Universityof Oregon School of Law, presented the ThirteenthAnnual Lloyd K. Garrison Lecture onEnvironmental Law, on March 19, 2007, at Pace LawSchool. His lecture, “From Silent Spring toSweltering Summers – The Past and Future ofPrivate Public Interest Law,” discussed how thefuture cooling of the planet lies largely in the handsof new lawyers who will be willing to travel whereno guides and no existing trails can take them.

“Groups with big names and advertising budgetsrepresent only one variety of how public interestenvironmental law is being practiced today,” hetold an audience of Pace Law students, professors,and academic and legal professionals. “Publicinterest law is thriving in a small law office insouthwest Colorado and a student law clinic nearthe bayous of southern Louisiana”, he said.Important precedents come from lawyers who goto work in boats in Alaska, as much as they dofrom those in suits and ties in New York orWashington.”

Bonine added that the environmental law move-ment began with private lawyers in the 1950s, morethan a decade before nonprofit law firms existed.He described cases in which private lawyers blazedtrails from the early DDT litigation on LongIsland to the historic Storm King litigation in the1960s. He went on to say: “In the 21st century, bignonprofit law firms generate publicity, have niceWeb sites, and publish their own magazines andnewsletters. But private lawyers and smaller non-profits play an even larger role in developing pub-lic interest environmental law.”

Bonine has devoted his 35-year legal career to cre-ating, implementing, and enforcing environmentallaw. He began in 1972 as a legislative assistant inthe U.S. Senate, continued at the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency where he wasassociate general counsel for Air, Noise, andRadiation, and has taught at the University ofOregon since 1978.

Bonine cofounded the world’s first law schoolEnvironmental Law Clinic in 1978, as well as therenowned Public Interest Environmental Lawconferences. He has litigated extensively, estab-lishing such precedents as obtaining documentsunder the Freedom of Information Act to sue thegovernment, helping initiate and prosecute thefirst cases to protect the Northern Spotted Owl,defending the use of the precautionary principleand “technology-forcing” by the EPA, and requir-ing environmental impact statements to be writtenin plain language and to disclose the worst casepossibilities of projects. He has authored booksand articles on such themes as pollution controland access to justice for citizens.

Since 1983, Bonine has worked to promote the “pri-vate public interest bar,” cofounded the 60-nationEnvironmental Law Alliance Worldwide (E-LAW) in 1989, created a domestic network of 250environmental law enforcers in 1990, and created aworldwide network of 400 environmental law pro-fessors in 1991.

“A lawyer’s ability to vigorously represent his or herclients currently is under attack by the federal gov-ernment,” according to Jonathan Blattmachr, Esq.,who presented the Sixteenth Philip B. BlankLecture on Attorney Ethics at Pace Law School onMarch 5, 2007.

In his lecture, “Suicide of the Guardians: TheExecutive Branch, Tax Regulations, and theAttorney-Client Relationship,” Blattmachr, a part-ner in Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP,explored how the executive branchmay be exceedingits authority in attempting to control aspects of theattorney-client relationship.

Blattmachr cited two Supreme Court cases in partic-ular as increasing executive power. The 1984 case ofChevron USA Inc. v NRDC, which handed legislativepower over to the executive branch and,more recent-ly, the 1997 case of Auer v Robbins, which gave inter-pretive decision to the executive.

In the case of Chevron, he said, “By issuing a regula-tion, which is going to be tested on the basis ofwhether it’s arbitrary, capricious, or inconsistentwith the clear language of the statute, [the executivebranch] can overturn cases, including decisions ofthe Supreme Court.” With this decision, accordingto Blattmachr, the courts have “handed legislativepower from the Congress over to the executivebranch.” The result of which “both undermine thevitality of the legislative and judicial branches ofgovernment and, ironically, harm the executivebranch itself,” he told the capacity audience gath-ered in the Judicial Institute lecture hall.“Particularly in the tax and estate planning con-texts, administrative regulations now intrude into

and attempt to curtail attorney-client communica-tions. These regulations cause lawyers to under-represent clients, and ultimately have a deleteriouseffect on the entire legal profession.”

“To preserve the most fundamental freedoms of ourprofession and our nation, all lawyers must under-stand the consequences of the executive branch’sattempt to aggregate power to itself,” he said.

Jonathan G. Blattmachr, Esq., is a member of theAlaska, California, and New York bars. He hasserved as a lecturer-in-law of the ColumbiaUniversity School of Law and as an adjunct profes-sor of law at New York University Law School. Hecurrently is an adjunct professor at Pace LawSchool, where he teaches Estate & Gift Taxation.Blattmachr is a former chair of the Trusts & EstatesLaw Section of the New York State BarAssociation and he has served on many other com-mittees of the New York State Bar Association andthe American Bar Association. Blattmachr is a fel-low and a former regent of the American College ofTrust and Estate Counsel and past chair of itsEstate and Gift Tax Committee.

He is author or co-author of over 300 articles and fivebooks on estate and tax planning topics, including anew book on Circular 230 published by thePractising Law Institute. He has been designated asa Distinguished Accredited Estate Planner by theNational Association of Estate Planners & Councils.Blattmachr is a co-developer of Wealth TransferPlanning, a software system published for lawyers,which provides specific client advice and automateddocument-assembly for wills, trusts, powers ofattorneys, and other estate planning documents.

Blank Lecture Examines theExecutive Branch

Exceeding its Power

President Stephen J. Friedman and Jonathan G. Blattmachr

“To preserve the most fundamental freedoms ofour profession and our nation, all lawyers mustunderstand the consequences of the executivebranch's attempt to aggregate power to itself.”– Jonathan G. Blattmachr, Esq.

8

ANNUAL ACADEMIC LECTURE SERIES

Pace Law LectureExplores Islam, the West,and the Rule of Law

“The effort to appreciate different legal tradi-tions must begin with locating shared values.”– Dr. Mark D. WeltonDr. Mark D. Welton

9

ANNUAL ACADEMIC LECTURE SERIES

“What is the rule of law and is it a concept onwhich the West and the Islamic world can findcommon ground,” asked Dr. Mark D. Welton dur-ing Pace Law School’s Twenty-First Blaine SloanLecture on International Law on January 26, 2007.Welton, a professor of International andComparative Law and program director forInternational and Comparative Legal Studies atthe U.S. Military Academy at West Point, pro-posed a conception of the rule of law that acknowl-edges both western and Islamic legal history andnorms, and can provide a framework for discourseand understanding between the two legal culturesin his lecture, “Islam, the West, and the Rule ofLaw.”

“The effort to appreciate different legal traditionsmust begin with locating shared values,” Weltontold the capacity audience of students, faculty, andacademic and legal professionals in the JudicialInstitute Lecture Hall. “One value common toboth the western and Islamic legal traditions is therule of law. European and Islamic history informsus that when the rule of law is strong, othervirtues, including human rights, civil society, andeconomic growth, are more likely to thrive.”

However, he stated that the “inherent conceptualdifficulty of deriving a consistent, clear and rela-tively permanent set of rules from the sources ofIslamic law to meet modern social conditions is

perhaps the most important problem facing mod-ern legal scholars and leaders today who seek torenew or expand the scope of the sharia as a basisfor their states’ legal systems.”

In the end, Welton concluded that with the foun-dation of the rule of law, people have a greaterdegree of confidence that the “government and thecourts will enforce the rules fairly when problemsarise. It is these conditions that give people a stakeand confidence in the future of their country.” Hecalled the roots of the rule of law in Western andIslamic cultures a “very good place to start.”

Mark D. Welton, JSD, is professor of Internationaland Comparative Law, and is the program directorfor the major in International and ComparativeLegal Studies. His main area of academic interestis Islamic law and jurisprudence; he also studiescomparative constitutional law and the legal sys-tem of the European Union.

He has published extensively on the subject ofIslamic law and has presented on the subject onnumerous occasions for the New York City BarAssociation; Foreign and Comparative LawCommittee, New York City Bar Association; NewYork National Guard; Royal Netherlands ArmyStaff College; Canadian Judge Advocate General’sCorps Legal Program; and at the College ofWilliam and Mary Law School.

Theodore W. Kheel

Pace Law School welcomed Theodore W. Kheel,one of America’s most distinguished professionalmediators and one of New York City’s most influ-ential public advocates, as guest speaker for theSeventh Annual Gilbert and Sarah Kerlin Lectureon Environmental Law on October 30, 2006. Kheel,who is of counsel to Paul, Hastings, Janofsky &Walker LLP and president of the Nurture NatureFoundation, spoke on “Resolving the Conflictbetween Environmental Protection and EconomicDevelopment” to a capacity crowd of legal and aca-demic professionals and students.

Kheel explained the “bitter conflict” as one that“continues to intensify with environmentalistsoverlooking the cost of the solutions they proposeand developers disregarding environmental con-cerns that adversely impact their bottom lines.”Going into depth on the 1992 United NationsConference on Environment and Development inRio de Janeiro, Kheel detailed the challenges ofsustainable development and its relationship to theenvironment. For example, “environmental andbusiness organizations have no established rela-tionship and they have no obligation to meet witheach other,” as they do in labor and managementdisputes. For the future, some organizations likethe Nature Network are trying to work with devel-opers toward implementing successfully the ideaof sustainable development.

An esteemed lawyer and professional arbitrator,Theodore W. Kheel has participated in the resolu-tion of more than 30,000 labor disputes. His

approach to identifying common ground and hisability to maintain a voice of reason amid manyopposing voices have made it possible for him tosettle some of the most difficult labor disputes ofthe 20th century.

Kheel has been a member of numerous fact-find-ing boards appointed by presidents, governors, andmayors. He gained notoriety early in his career forhis mediation of a strike against the New YorkCity newspapers. His outstanding talent for get-ting the parties of a dispute to think in terms ofsolutions instead of problems has been evident toleaders in the nation’s highest offices, includingPresident Lyndon Johnson, who enlisted his helpin mediating a nationwide railroad dispute. Inrecognition of his long track record in conflict res-olution, the New York Times declared him “themost influential peacemaker in New York City inthe last half-century” and Business Week dubbedhim the “Master Locksmith of DeadlockBargaining.”

Kheel is a 1935 graduate of Cornell University, AB,and Cornell Law School, LLB 1937. He has been amember of the New York Bar Associationsince 1937, and is a member of the AmericanArbitration Association and the Academy ofArbitrators. He is the author of the ten-volumetreatise, Kheel on Labor Law, as well as a book onthe basic principles of conflict resolution, The Keysto Conflict Resolution.

Renowned Peacemaker,Theodore W. Kheel,

Explores the Conflictbetween conservatism

and Development

“The most influential peacemaker in New YorkCity in the last half-century”– The New York Times

10

ANNUAL ACADEMIC LECTURE SERIES

Should State LegislaturesApprove Same-Sex Marriage?

“Rights, benefits, and protections of civilmarriage can further strengthen these families.”– Evan Wolfson

11

PUBLIC POLICY LECTURE SERIES

Moderated by President Stephen Friedman, thislatest installment of the Public Policy LectureSeries pitted David Blankenhorn, founder andpresident of the Institute for American Values,against Evan Wolfson, executive director ofFreedom to Marry, in a debate on whether statelegislatures should legalize same-sex marriage.The event, which was held in the New York StateJudicial Institute on the Pace Law School campus,also aired on C-Span.

In the March 14, 2007, debate, David Blankenhornstressed that everyone should be treated equally, butthat “because children have less of an ability to speakfor themselves and because they’re more vulnerabletheir needs should trump the adult needs in thisquestion.” Blankenhorn claims that it’s not just aboutletting more people into the institution of marriage,but is changing the institution for everyone.

Wolfson, on the other hand, likened this debate tothe laws that prohibited interracial marriage, whichwere eventually overturned. He also cited such pro-fessional organizations as the American Academyof Pediatrics to prove his point that children raisedby same-gender parents fare as well as those raisedby hetero-sexual parents. He went on to say thatthe “rights, benefits, and protections of civil mar-riage can further strengthen these families.”

Both panelists believed that civil unions were notan acceptable alternative; other topics discussedincluded the contradiction between people whosupport gay rights but do not support gay mar-riage; what rights should be given to gay couples -including tax treatment, inheritance rights, immi-gration rights, etc; would same-sex marriage

threaten marriage as an institution; and the publicand private dimensions of marriage.

David Blankenhorn is founder and president of theInstitute for American Values, a private, nonparti-san organization devoted to contributing intellec-tually to the renewal of marriage and family lifeand the sources of competence, character, and citi-zenship in the United States.

Blankenhorn has co-edited five books on marriageand the American family. In 1994, Blankenhornhelped to found the National Fatherhood Initiative,serving as that organization’s founding chairman.Healso serves on the board of directors of the NationalParenting Association. In 1992, he was appointed byPresident Bush to serve on theNational Commissionon America’s Urban Families.

Evan Wolfson is executive director of Freedom toMarry, the gay and non-gay partnership workingto win marriage equality nationwide. Beforefounding Freedom to Marry, Wolfson served asmarriage project director for Lambda LegalDefense & Education Fund, was co-counsel in thehistoric Hawaii same-sex marriage case Baehr vMiike, and participated in numerous gay rights andHIV/AIDS cases.

Citing his national leadership on marriage equali-ty and his appearance before the U.S. SupremeCourt in Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale, theNational Law Journal in 2000 named Wolfson one of“the 100 most influential lawyers in America.” In2004, Wolfson was named one of the “Time 100,”Time magazine’s list of “the 100 most influentialpeople in the world.”

The collapse of Enron in 2001 sent shockwavesthrough the global economy. The company thathad appeared to be recasting the nation’s energysector had achieved miraculous growth over theprevious few years. With a market capitalizationof $65 billion, Enron had eclipsed all but a handfulof U.S. companies. It enjoyed the oversight of ablue-chip board of directors. And yet, within amatter of months, this icon had disintegrated inthe largest bankruptcy in U.S. history.Shareholders - including thousands of employeeswho had their entire pensions invested in Enronstock - were wiped out. In the ensuing fury,Congress passed sweeping legislation to addressalleged oversight failures. Eventually, several sen-ior executives were convicted on fraud and con-spiracy charges and sentenced to prison.

Pace Law School’s September 13, 2006, high profilediscussion asked how well we learned the lessonsof Enron. The first panelist, former U.S. DeputyAttorney Larry Thompson had overseen the gov-ernment’s investigation and formulated the result-ing changes in prosecutorial standards. He defend-ed the so-called Thompson Memorandum fromaccusations that it was too harsh by noting thatregulatory frameworks can address only the lastscandal. He believes that aggressive prosecution ofcompanies and individual officers for fraud pro-vides the best protection to investors.

The second panelist, Raymond Troubh, had servedas a professional director to numerous companiesbefore becoming chairman of the Enron boardafter the collapse. He then led the group of newdirectors who oversaw the internal investigation.Troubh believes that enhanced disclosure and eth-ical standards such as those required by theSarbanes-Oxley regime are not perfect, but thatthey do provide more meaningful guidance forofficers. He believes that investors will be best pro-tected with a regulatory framework that reflectshistorical experience.

Pace Law School former Dean Stephen J.Friedman, who served previously as an SECCommissioner and as general counsel to largefinancial services companies, emphasized the ethi-cal and legal obligations of lawyers to advise theirclients away from shady dealings. Along withTroubh, he emphasized the relevance of these obli-gations for companies such as Hewlett-Packardcurrently facing issues arising out of board mis-takes and missteps dealing with them.

New York Times senior financial correspondentFloyd Norris chaired the session, asking pointedquestions and prompting enthusiastic participa-tion from many of the 100 attendees.

Lessons from theEnron Scandal Explored

at Pace Law School

12

PUBLIC POLICY LECTURE SERIES

Fourteenth AnnualWillem C. Vis MootBrings Students Togetherfrom 178 Universitiesand 51 Countries

13

MOOT COURT COMPETITIONS

Vienna, Austria

The fourteenth annual Willem C. Vis CommercialArbitration Moot sponsored by Pace Law Schoolwas held March 30 to April 5, 2007, in Vienna,Austria. The moot involved a commercial disputeover the sale of five non-conforming primary dis-tribution fuse boards with a purchase price of$168,000.

Law students from 178 universities and 51 countriesparticipated in this year’s moot. Their argumentsran fluidly from the jurisdictional questions(which chamber has jurisdiction and which arbi-tral rules to apply) to the substantive (when andhow should the buyer have notified the seller ofthe nonconformity of his fuse boards).

Winners included the grand winner of the moot,the University of Freiburg (Germany) whose teamalso took home the Pieter Sanders Award for BestMemorandum for Claimant and the Werner MelisAward for Best Memorandum for Respondent; andSteven Wayne Hopkins of Southern MethodistUniversity (Texas) for the Martin Domke Awardfor Best Individual Oralist.

Pace’s own team of Sandra Browne ’07, AnnaLinne ’07, Alex Temple ’08, Neil Kumar ’07, andHsien Hwang ’08 did exceptionally well, thoughdid not advance. The team was coached by LindaWayner of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & FlomLLP & Affiliates and faculty adviser GaylWesterman.

The UN Convention on the Contracts on theInternational Sales of Goods (CISG) provides thesubstantive law, a law perfectly apt for this mootbecause it applies to trade around the world. Forover a quarter of a century, the CISG has provideda common law governing the sale of goods acrossborders. And for much of that time, the Vis Moothas been training new generations of lawyers tocross borders, transcend cultural differences andlevel the playing field for merchants from aroundthe world.

The moot honors the late Pace Professor WillemC. Vis, a distinguished secretary of the UNCommission on International Trade Law. Themoot’s organizer, Professor Emeritus Eric E.Bergsten, also a former secretary of theCommission, assembles many of the most talent-ed practitioners who are dedicated to preservingtheir learned profession.

Winners, Kendrick Wilson and Mika Ikeda,Georgetown University Law Center

Pace Law School hosted over 200 competitors from65 national law schools during the 19th NationalEnvironmental Law Moot Court Competitionheld on February 22-24, 2007. GeorgetownUniversity Law Center’s Mika Ikeda and KendrickWilson faced stiff competition and emerged to winthe three-day moot. A strong effort was shown bythe two finalist teams, Lewis & Clark Law Schooland The University of Memphis School of Law.Washington University School of Law took homethe award for Best Brief. Derek Johnson ofChicago-Kent College of Law received the awardfor the Best Oralist.

The event, administered by a student-run boardand Law School staff, is the premier environmen-tal law moot court competition in the country. Thecompetition provides an invaluable educationalexperience by simulating the process of preparinga legal case and presenting that case to a FederalCourt of Appeals. Students are given a complexenvironmental issue and must file legal briefs sup-porting the position of one of the three parties tothe case. The oral arguments are presented beforepracticing attorneys, who serve as judges in thepreliminary, quarterfinal, and semifinal rounds,and sitting Federal, State, and EPA Board ofAppeals judges in the final round.

Judge Carlos F. Lucero, United States Court ofAppeals for the Tenth Circuit, presided at the finalround of the 2007 competition, together with JudgeRobert S. Smith, State of New York Court ofAppeals and Judge Kathie A. Stein, EnvironmentalAppeals, Board of the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency.

Major donors of this year’s competition wereConestoga-Rovers & Associates, the NationalAssociation of Clean Water Agencies, the ABASection of Environment, Energy, and Resources,and the Environmental Law Institute®.

Representatives from65 Law Schools Participate

in Pace’s Environmental LawMoot Court Competition

MOOT COURT COMPETITIONS

14

Pace Law School HostsSecond Annual PaceInternational Criminal CourtMoot Competition

MOOT COURT COMPETITIONS

15

The Second Annual Pace International CriminalCourt Moot took place from November 9-11, 2006.This first-of-its-kind international moot competi-tion based on the International Criminal Court(ICC) brought 12 universities, including theUniversity of Sierra Leone, to Pace Law School.Professor Michael Scharf delivered the keynoteaddress following a special presentation by film-maker Rex Miller.

The team from Santa Clara University emerged asthe champion after arguing before a distinguishedbench of judges, including former Nurembergprosecutor Benjamin Ferencz; Professor MichaelScharf, director of the Frederick K. CoxInternational Law Center at Case WesternReserve; and former prosecutor at theInternational Criminal Tribunal for the formerYugoslavia Peggy Kuo.

The moot involves a case comprising crimes of aninternational nature set in the context of the ICC.This competition offers students the opportunityto test their written and oral skills in a unique for-mat allowing each participant to take on the role ofprosecutor, defense attorney, and victims’ advo-cate. The goal of the Pace ICC Moot is to expandknowledge and understanding of the role of theInternational Criminal Court and its significancein an ever changing world of conflict by trainingthe next generation of lawyers in this exciting areaof international law.

The Third Annual Pace International CriminalCourt Moot competition will be held at the LawSchool from October 26-28, 2007.

XXXX

The Pace Law School Grand Moot CourtCompetition was held in April 2007. Participationin the Grand Moot Court Competition is by invi-tation and is based on students’ performance dur-ing their first year oral arguments.

This year’s appellant finalists were DelyanneBarros and Fatima Silva and appellee finalists wereLisa Denig and Lindsey Kneipper. Other semifi-nalists included Cari Rincker, Kristen Romano,Samantha Schwartz, and David Strong.

The appellate brief topic asked students to arguewhether or not pre-arrest silence could be used assubstantive evidence of guilt and whether aDistrict Court Judge had authority to order adefendant’s sentence run consecutive to a yet-to-beimposed state court sentence. Both issues are cur-rently being debated and United States DistrictCourts are split in opinion.

Pace Law School hosted esteemed judges and prac-ticing attorneys to judge all rounds of the competi-tion. Presiding over the final round were threejudges who were appointed to the U.S. DistrictCourt for the Southern District of New York: The

Honorable Richard Owen, The Honorable LorettaA. Preska, and The Honorable Stephen C.Robinson. Also presiding were two magistrate andchief magistrate judges from the Southern Districtof New York, The Honorable Naomi ReiceBuchwald and The Honorable Lisa MargaretSmith, and a U.S. bankruptcy judge in the EasternDistrict of New York, The Honorable LauraTaylor Swain.

The Pace Law School Grand Moot Court Teamincluded Gonul Aksoy, Tawny Alvarez, DelyanneBarros, Elizabeth Cassidy, Lisa Denig, Eric Grille,Bevin Casey Gugliucciello, Kris Jannuzi, LindseyKneipper, Dara Lawall, Carriann Lerner,DeniseLeong, Megan McDonald, Joseph Remy, CariRincker, Kristen Romano, Vincent Sayegh,Samantha Schwartz, Anna Sideris, Fatima Silva,David Strong, Gouri Thakur, Robert Yusko, andAnna Zwierz.

Pace Law School Grand MootCourt Competition

16

MOOT COURT COMPETITIONS

Pace Law SchoolFirst Year Moot CourtCompetition

17

MOOT COURT COMPETITIONS

In April 2007, Pace Law School hosted its firstannual First Year Moot Court Competition. Aspart of the regular curriculum all first year stu-dents at Pace Law School are required to write anappellate brief and then participate in oral argu-ments. This year, Pace Law School made partici-pating in oral arguments into a moot court compe-tition where all students competed against eachother and were scored on uniform criteria.

Students argued in front of a variety of esteemedjudges and practicing attorneys who were wellversed in the topics being argued. Based on eachstudent’s average oral argument score, the Top 36students were invited to the final round wherethey had one week to study a bench brief and thenargue once more.

This year’s topic was whether the warrantless col-lection and DNA analysis of blood samples takenfrom all felons is a search that meets a special needunder the Fourth Amendment. The Top 4 studentswere awarded for their hard work and skill withBar-Bri Gift Certificates. As a result of their out-standing performance and interest in the PaceMoot Court program, each of the 36 students wereinvited to participate in Advanced AppellateAdvocacy where they will be intensively trained inadvanced legal writing and the art of oral argu-ment and will participate in the Pace Law SchoolGrand Moot Court Competition in the 2007-2008academic year.

Pace Law School First Year Moot CourtCompetition Top 4 students were Scott McMurry,Christine Paska, Uryashi Sinha, and Jared Ullman.

Pace Law School First Year Moot CourtCompetition Top 36 students were Jessica Gush,Jessica Cardichon, Imraan Farukhi, TaranehHeydary, Anthony Nigro, Daniel Lewis, AnneCarpenter, Joy Honigsberg, Maya Graham, JadeTurner, Adam Jessler, Corey Zymet, StephanieCampbell, Celia Curtis, Laura Schettini, TeresaMilano, Allyson Garner, Mary Rodrigo, AshleyBelin, Paula Anglo, Dana Hoffman, LaneMarmon, Carly Janetty, Damian Puniello,Christopher Byrnes, Rosemary Gleason, RobertMenna, Jonathan Engel, Peter Scutero, DonnaCook, Elijah Fayerman, and Will Hammerstein.

78 NORTH BROADWAY

WHITE PLAINS, NY 10603

(914) 422-4205

www.law.pace.edu

Non ProfitU.S. Postage

PAIDPace University