Inns of Court. To a lay person, that term conjures up retreats or perhaps some government owned Marriott or Hilton properties.  To those in the legal profession, however, the Inns of Court are a social group of sorts; a combination of learning and laughing.  So, where did they come from and why should someone join?

 The Inns of Court are a group of four institutions historically responsible for the legal education of attorneys in London.  Their governing bodies are known as benches and have the exclusive right to admit attorneys to practice before the bar.  The 4 Inns are known as the Inner Temple, Middle Temple, Lincoln’s Inn and Gray’s Inn. Every Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court is an honorary member of the Middle Temple. 

 The members of the Inn are known as: Masters of the Bench: judges, experienced attorneys and law professors; Barristers: lawyers with some experience, usually upwards of 5 years; Associates: newly admitted attorneys; and Pupils: law students.  The categories are deliberate.  The purpose of the Inn is not only to engage in merriment (though that is the best part), but to learn from one another, to share experiences (though not too many war stories) and to help the next generation of lawyers be better than the last. 

 The first Inn of Court was established in the U.S. in 1980 by Chief Justice Burger at the J. Reuben Clark School of Law at Brigham Young University.  Today, there are over 350 Inns of Court, focusing on different fields of practice ranging from federal litigation to family law.  One of those is right here in our backyard: the Aldona E. Appleton Inn of Court.  The Inn's namesake, Judge Aldona E. Appleton, was appointed to the New Jersey Bench, in Middlesex County, in July of 1958 and was sworn in on September 3, 1958 and retired in 1970 upon reaching mandatory retirement.  She was a member of the newly created Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and only the second female judge appointed to the bench in New Jersey history.  Members of the Middlesex County Bar recall her compassionate and caring approach to resolving family disputes during her tenure as Judge.

The Inn has been 50+ members strong since its inception in 2017. Despite the pandemic, it has continued to meet regularly and put on educational and engaging presentations. It is an opportunity to get together with colleagues once a month during an otherwise isolating time for many.  Many of the issues most of us have been dealing with: Zoom, JEDS, court scheduling, difficult clients, etc., are discussed and oftentimes the judges offer invaluable insider advice.  No specific cases are ever discussed. 

Hopefully if you’ve read this far, you have not only learned a little bit of history about the Inns, but you’re wondering how you can join one.  If you’re interested in family law, there is only one you should be checking into: the Aldona E. Appleton Inn.   
To join or for information, contact:
Lauren A. Miceli, Esq.
Shane and White, LLC
p: (732) 819-9100
e: Send Mail

By now most of us have been in quarantine for 9 months or so. Some were able to return to work on a limited basis, while others unfortunately lost their jobs due to the pandemic. Many married couples who had made the decision to separate or divorce prior to the lockdown are still faced with living together nearly a year later in what can only be described as less than ideal circumstances, while other couples whose marriages might have had small issues are now filing for divorce.

The issue for most divorcing couples is that courts, by and large, have been working remotely since March of 2020. Proceedings have been taking place on Zoom, Teams and telephonically at a much slower pace. Trials and hearings are occurring, but not with the frequency that we would all hope and this creates a backlog of cases in the system. This means that those cases that were scheduled to be heard in April are now being heard in February and so the February cases will be heard in….(well, you get the picture).

So, then what are two people who cannot stand each other, but have to live together because one cannot afford to move out (or refuses to leave), to do? Mediation or arbitration may be the solution at a time like this.

Mediation in family law matters is compulsory in many states. Oftentimes there is a list of trained attorneys or former judges who handle these matters. Some portion (an hour or two) may be complimentary and thereafter there is a set hourly rate. At mediation, the parties (and their attorneys if they have one) meet with the mediator to discuss the issues (child support, equitable distribution, alimony, etc). There is frequently a running between rooms by the mediator and the colloquy “she is at x, would you go to y” in order to get the parties to settle. If the parties resolve their differences usually they leave with a term sheet or some sort of memorandum of understanding and the attorneys will draw up the settlement agreement based on the terms to be circulated for signature and submitted to the Court for finalization. The parties are then divorced.

If the parties are unsuccessful at mediation, they then can return to court for a trial before a judge or they can submit their matter to arbitration. Arbitration can best be described as a private trial. The matter is conducted as formally or informally as the parties agree; they set the rules on the issues to be decided and appealed. The arbitrator hears testimony and renders a decision, just as a judge would in a courtroom. It is essentially a trial, but takes place in a conference room and the arbitrator wears a suit or dress, rather than a robe.

The benefits of both are numerous, especially now. Most high-income individuals do not want their business out in the open; courtrooms are public, so the media can attend. Even for those that are not wealthy, if there is a family business or any other unique circumstance, mediation or arbitration may be better. Finally, mediation especially, gives the parties a sense of power and control over their own lives, which is important when going through something as emotionally charged as a divorce.