The Transformative Years of the University of Alabama Law School, 1966–1970. Daniel Meador. Читать онлайн. Newlib. NEWLIB.NET

Автор: Daniel Meador
Издательство: Ingram
Серия:
Жанр произведения: Юриспруденция, право
Год издания: 0
isbn: 9781603061537
Скачать книгу
those months gave me an opportunity to reflect on the situation in the law school—what needed to be done there—in a more detached way than I might have done while actively teaching at Virginia. Also, it gave me access to numerous leading English and Scottish law professors and the opportunity, as will be mentioned later, for unusual faculty recruitment. And it broadened and deepened my understanding of the origins of our legal order, inherited from that cradle of the common law.

      Against the background of having been a student in the law school at Alabama from 1948 to 1951, I thought that my experiences since then gave me an understanding of the mainstream of American legal education and a sound basis for analyzing the needs of a high quality law school—a year at the Harvard Law School, eight years on the Virginia law faculty, active participation in annual meetings of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS), and a year amidst English legal institutions. Also, I had served on American Bar Association accreditation committees to evaluate the law schools at Duke and Vanderbilt. I realized, however, that every law school is different and that what should be done at Alabama had to be tailored to the situation there and in conjunction with the faculty.

      The 1960s were challenging times for Americans and especially in Alabama. For its future, the state badly needed enlightened, well-educated leaders. Throughout history, much of American leadership, for better or worse, had come from the legal profession, and so it had been in Alabama. This was impressively shown by some figures: at that time law school alumni constituted about 75 percent of the practicing Alabama bar, the entire membership of the state Supreme Court, 80 percent of the trial and appellate judges, 15 of the 35 state senators, 40 of the 106 state representatives, six of the state’s eight congressmen, both U.S. senators, and the governor. The law school was truly the incubator of Alabama’s public leadership. In my mind, strengthening the school and moving it on to more national recognition was important to provide a high quality legal education for the future, which could possibly be the key to giving the state the leadership it should have. I thought of the school as a kind of West Point for the future leaders in Alabama law and government. This gave me a sense of urgency, with no time to waste, when I arrived in Tuscaloosa and became dean on July 1, 1966.

      At that time, in the wider world of American legal education the University of Alabama Law School was perceived as being in the company of most other Southern state university law schools, which was to say that it was viewed as more or less respectable though not outstanding. But for nearly a hundred years, as the only accredited law school in the state, the school had been an honored institution in Alabama society, supplying the bulk of the legal profession in Alabama. It had long been accredited by the American Bar Association and a member of the Association of American Law Schools. In the eyes of some observers, however, the school had slipped into what could be described as a state of “insular lethargy.” Despite that image, numerous graduates in the late fifties and early sixties—as well as in years gone by—became outstanding lawyers and public servants, proof that real talent will manifest itself. The school’s perceived status in the American legal education community pained me, and I was determined to do something about it. At the outset, it was essential that I get an accurate and realistic assessment of the situation.

      In my student days (1948–51) the school had seemed a livelier place than it did in the summer of 1966. Back then there had been Dean William M. Hepburn, sophisticated and learned, one of my all-time favorite figures in legal education, who left to become dean of the Emory Law School; Herman Trautman, a dramatic teacher of evidence, who left for the Vanderbilt law faculty; Sam Earle Hobbs, an erudite and polished teacher, who left to join his father in law practice; and a couple of young stimulating teachers, whose names I have unfortunately forgotten. Also, the post-war surge of returning veterans continued, providing some colorful and interesting students. But by the summer of 1966 the school had drifted into a quiet period.

      Lack of national visibility was a problem. As far as I could tell, the law faculty took little or no significant part in the activities of major national legal organizations such as the AALS, the American Bar Association, or the American Law Institute.[1] A very few did attend the AALS annual meeting from time-to-time. Lack of adequate travel funds was partly responsible. Moreover, compared to law faculties at what were considered “the best” law schools, published scholarship, with very few exceptions, was slim. [2] That, along with the lack of activity at the national level, meant that the faculty was little-known outside of Alabama. Being known on the national scene was institutionally important in attracting superior students, recruiting able teachers, and aiding graduates in securing positions with law firms and government agencies.

      On the internal side, what I heard from students and former students about their classroom experiences gave me concern about the nature of some of the teaching. Instruction in a good law school is basically reformist. That is, in addition to imparting to students the existing legal doctrines and rules, the reason for every rule needs to be examined and two questions asked: “Does the rule still make sense?” and “Is there a better way?” Perhaps the most important question in law school is “Why?” My sense was that there was not a great deal of this sort of discussion in the Alabama Law School classrooms. There were exceptions, of course. From random student and alumni comments that came to my attention, there appeared to be two or three professors, possibly four (opinions varied), who were considered effective classroom instructors, some viewed as very good.[3] Most of the teaching faculty appeared relatively undistinguished, either in reputation beyond the school or in the classrooms within it. Yet they were good people, and among them there were admirable individuals who were sincerely dedicated to the school and to what they were doing. At the same time, among most, there appeared to be little ambition to alter the situation, to strive to advance the institution. The status quo seemed satisfactory. I was pleased, however, to find a few who appeared ready to join me in moving to a higher plane.

      During my deanship I never publicly voiced criticisms of the existing faculty or of what had gone on before my arrival. I did not want to offend those who were already there. Moreover, I wanted to encourage them to look upon this time as the beginning of a new day for the school, an opportunity to advance our place in legal education. Yet it was essential that I have a clear-eyed awareness of reality in order to know what to do. It made no sense to pretend that all was well.

      I have described here the image and status of the school as I found it so that readers can understand what I did or attempted to do over the ensuing four years, an account of which follows.

      Every aspect of the school deserved attention—its faculty, curriculum, library, student life, and alumni involvement. All aspects had to be dealt with simultaneously, not in sequence. My objective was to move the school to a higher level of quality in every respect—to achieve a degree of national eminence, at least to create the best law school between Charlottesville, Virginia, and Austin, Texas. Why, I asked myself, shouldn’t the law school be regarded in the field of legal education as the football team was regarded in the world of college football? The challenge was daunting and uphill, but without that as the goal I would not have accepted the deanship. At stake, in my mind, was a future bench and bar and public leadership that would take Alabama into a new and better day.

      Underlying all else was the need to secure substantial funding beyond state appropriations, and that was my immediate priority.

       The Law School Foundation and Law Alumni

      A group of interested alumni had established a Law School Alumni Association in the late 1940s. It mailed out an annual placement booklet and an occasional newsletter and held a luncheon at the annual meeting of the state bar. Those were all useful activities that served to foster institutional attachment. But the association had not undertaken any serious fund-raising.

      Before my arrival the most valuable and farsighted step concerning private financial support was the creation in 1961 of the University of Alabama Law School Foundation. It is a nonprofit corporation whose mission is to receive, manage, and expend funds from private sources for the benefit