Advocacy Matters - Spring 2024

ADVOCACY MATTERS
The Advocates’ Society
SPRING 2024

CHOOSE FROM CANADA’S TOP
MEDIATORS AND ARBITRATORS
John A. Campion
In his more than 50 years of
arbitration, mediation and litigation
across Canada and internationally,
John has developed recognized
expertise in public law and private
law. John has experience resolving
disputes related to commercial,
securities, governance, energy, family
enterprise, class actions, real estate,
public issues, corporate, estates,
human rights and government issues.
Barry H. Bresner
Barry is an arbitrator, mediator and
investigator with over 40 years of
experience handling complex
commercial matters. He has
expertise in disputes related to
shareholder/partnership, contract
interpretation, environmental
liability, commercial insurance and
reinsurance, and franchising. Barry
is a Fellow of the Chartered
Institute of Arbitrators.
416.362.8555 • 1.800.856.5154 • booking@adr.ca • adrchambers.com

CONTENTS
05
07
10
12
15
19
22
24
27
Chair Chat
Steven G. Frankel (he/him), Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP
In Person or In PJs –
the Mid-Career Lawyer Debate
Jordan Glick, Glick Law
Stress is not the enemy. Being stuck is.
Lisa Marie Buccella, Aviva Trial Lawyers
Law Firm Dissolutions:
Canary in the Coal Mine?
Wade Poziomka, Ross & McBride LLP
Justice Delayed (Part II): Long-Term Solutions
Joe Thorne, Stewart McKelvey (he/him), and
Jeff Van Bakel (he/him), Scott Petrie LLP
Word to the Wise:
How to Avoid Mentor Burn Out
Megan Keenberg (she/her), Keenberg & Co
Beyond Borders: Canadian Lawyers’
Perspectives from International Law Firms
Eric Morgan (he/him), Kushneryk Morgan LLP
Listen Up! How to Improve Active Listening
Megan Keenberg (she/her), Keenberg & Co, and
Lisa Marie Buccella, Aviva Trial Lawyers
A Roundtable with the Chairs of the
TAS 2024 Winter Summit: The Big Chill Ottawa
Compiled by Mana Khami (she/her), Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Editor: Megan Keenberg (she/her), Keenberg & Co
Deputy Editor: Joe Thorne (he/him), Stewart McKelvey
The opinions expressed by individual authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the policies of The Advocates’ Society.
Advocacy Matters Editorial Team: Lisa-Marie Buccella, Aviva Trial Lawyers, Jordan Glick, Glick Law, Mana Khami (she/her), Borden Ladner Gervais LLP,
Eric Morgan (he/him), Kushneryk Morgan LLP, Wade Poziomka, Ross & McBride LLP, Jeff Van Bakel (he/him), Scott Petrie LLP 3

Fall Convention 2024
November 13/14 - 17, 2024
Rosewood Baha Mar, The Bahamas
Co-Chairs:
Peter Henein, Henein, Hutchison, Robitaille, LLP
Craig Lockwood, Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt, LLP
Tamara Prince, Cassels, Brock & Blackwell, LLP
The Advocates’ Society Fall Convention is heading back to
the beach in 2024! Join other TAS members this November
at the luxurious Rosewood Baha Mar in The Bahamas for
three or four sun-filled days of relaxation, collegiality and
thought-provoking CPD in a luxurious setting.
Book early so you don’t miss your favourite opportunity
to connect with leaders of the litigation bar from across
Canada. As always, Fall Convention offers an exceptional
CPD program on Friday and Saturday mornings. Could
there be a better way to earn your CPD credits?
We hope to see you there!
Click here to learn more
Generously Sponsored By
Premier Sponsor (Opening Dinner) Breakfast Sponsor Technology Sponsor

CHAIR CHAT
Chair Chat
Steven G. Frankel (he/him),
Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP
This issue of Advocacy Matters is bittersweet
for me because it’s my last issue as Chair of
MASC, before I step off of MASC for good. This
term has really zipped by even faster than I expected
it would. I’m incredibly proud of what
we’ve accomplished together with our Winter
Summit (The Big Chill) in Ottawa as the highlight
of the past 12 months. More than that,
though, I feel privileged to have been involved
with this terrific Committee for the past six
years and to have met so many amazing people
and advocates along the way.
I’m sure I’ve said this before, but through my
work on MASC it’s become clear to me just how
vital mid-career lawyers like us are to the present
and future of the profession. We’re senior
enough to have some influence but we still have
plenty of skin in the game because our best
years are ahead of us. And boy, do we care. Not
just about the administration of justice and the
art of advocacy, but also about our role in the
system, about one another as individuals, and
about ensuring that talented young advocates
have the support systems around them to be
able to excel in the profession.
All of this is reflected in the articles featured in
this jam-packed issue of Advocacy Matters. Joe
Thorne and Jeff Van Bakel deliver Part II of their
series on delay in the civil justice system, this
time focussing on potential long-term solutions.
Jeff and Wade Poziomka have also contributed
a piece on the dissolution of law firms, in the
wake of Minden Gross’ decision to wind down
its operations. Megan Keenberg and Lisa Marie
Buccella have, individually and together, written
three articles that deal with the important
issues of mentor burnout, stress management
and active listening. Mana Khami corralled the
Chairs responsible for staging the Big Chill in a
roundtable discussion about the highlights of
our inaugural Winter Summit and what to expect
for future years with this conference. Eric
Morgan contributed a piece sharing perspectives
from Canadian lawyers who work at major
international firms, and Jordan Glick provided a
fresh look at the age-old (four-year-old?) backto-the-office
versus work-from-home debate.
With that, I will say farewell but not goodbye. I’ll
be at TAS’ End of Term Dinner on June 26, 2024,
and I hope everyone reading this will join me
there. Please come say hi, whether you know me
or not. I also plan to stay involved in the work
of The Advocates’ Society going forward. In the
meantime, I know I leave the stewardship of this
Committee in excellent hands under the leadership
of our next Chair, Sonu Dhanju-Dhillon.
5

THE ADVOCATES’ SOCIETY
2024 END OF TERM DINNER
Wednesday, June 26, 2024 | Fairmont Royal York | Toronto
Keynote Speaker:
The Hon. Robert Rae, PC, CC, OOnt, KC, Ambassador and Permanent
Representative of Canada to the United Nations in New York
We still have a handful of tickets available for the much anticipated
2024 End of Term Dinner, exclusively for TAS Members. End of Term
is returning to the splendour of the Fairmont Royal York Hotel for
2024. The evening will feature a Keynote Address from The Hon. Robert
Rae, PC, CC, OOnt, KC, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of
Canada to the United Nations in New York.
Deadline is June 5, 2024 to book so you don’t miss this elegant evening
of collegiality and celebrating advocacy. End of Term Dinner is ‘THE’
members-only event of the year!
CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION
Generously Sponsored by:
Cocktail Reception Sponsor
Dinner Wine Sponsor
After-Party Sponsors
Coat Check Sponsor

SECTION RETURN TO TITLE WORK
In Person or In PJs – the
Mid-Career Lawyer Debate
Jordan Glick, Glick Law
Last Tuesday I got a call from a colleague whose law firm mandates three in-office days each week
but does not specify which. According to him, his Monday went like this:
Push kids out the door. Run to catch the train. Plug into the workstation. Barely settled at
desk when an urgent message flashes. Jump on a Zoom with a senior partner. So long lunch
plans and chiro appointment.
Urgent injunction. Partial documents from client – the rest forthcoming. Instructed to assemble
team. E-mail assistant and associate. Teams-ed them. Walked by their station and office.
7

Not in. Called them. No answer. E-mailed
and Teams-ed them again. Start doc review
on own. Start sweating.
Around 11, the associate answers. Not an
office day. Very sorry. They are “at an appointment”.
Not in calendar. They will be
back home by 12:30. Stress mounting.
By 12, assistant answers Teams. Sick dog.
Was working from home anyway so thought
he’d punch in a little late. Cratering.
Senior partner wants an update. Likely will cry.
Mid-career litigators have it tough when it
comes to “work from anywhere” policies. We are
often answering up and coordinating down. We
remember the good and the bad of pre-COVID
offices and in-court proceedings. We are told
that flexible work arrangements are preferred
by employees, do not diminish productivity and
are competitively necessary. They also make
work more accessible and equitable. These are
all great, until there is an urgent injunction and
no one is online.
David Milosevic, principle of Milosevic and
Associates, is hoping to buck the trend. He is
currently building out more offices than he has
lawyers in his new space. When complete, his
firm will be fully in-person. As we chat, his office
is abuzz. He believes that in-person firms
hold an unquantifiable advantage. Not having
to coordinate Zoom meetings and Teams invites,
alone, saves so much time.
Goodmans partner Tamryn Jacobson agrees
with David, in part. She tells me that Goodmans,
a firm with a reputation for prioritizing culture
and mentorship while recognizing the benefits
of remote work flexibility, set out to recreate the
magic of their office once it was safe to do so. She
believes Goodmans found the hack. Everyone is
required to be in office for the same three days
each week. This strategy has addressed the significant
downside of an uncoordinated return
to work policy – commuting to work only to find
8

yourself alone and logging into videoconferences
that could have been done in pyjamas. Today,
Goodmans’ lawyers have flexibility on off days
but are guaranteed three days with critical
mass, in-person meetings and bagels.
There are alternatives to return-to-work mandates,
Erin Durant explains. Her firm, formed
in the spring of 2021, has been entirely remote
from the beginning. She notes that her firm
is not alone – Quinn Emanuel, one of the largest
and “most feared” 1 litigation firms in the
world, takes a “work from anywhere” approach.
With the right combination of people, technology,
and a plan for connecting with her team
in place, Erin has built a single cohesive unit of
lawyers and staff across Ontario. She notes that
scalability may be difficult, since remote work
favours team members who can work independently
with less mentorship. Erin does find
her ability to mentor and supervise in a remote
environment is constrained.
Despite different models, David, Tamryn and
Erin enjoy the same vision of a collegial, collaborative
and cohesive firm. Their lessons:
All the good that comes from a physical office
cannot be achieved without critical mass; not
every employee is well suited to work from
anywhere, even if they want to; and working
remote requires tremendous diligence, coordination
and organization to overcome the obstacles
of teams not being physically present.
These lessons are good ones, no matter the
model involved, and perhaps they all point to
that elusive “fit” that firms have always said we
need. Neither model is intrinsically better, but
now more than ever, employees and employers
need to find the right working relationships that
fit their mutual needs and schedules.
Note
1. https://www.quinnemanuel.com/the-firm/news-esvents/quinnemanuel-is-the-1-most-feared-law-firm-in-the-world/
9

HAPPY LAWYER PROJECT
Stress is not the enemy.
Being stuck is.
Lisa Marie Buccella, Aviva Trial Lawyers
Stress, rather than being a necessarily chronic condition, is a normal, neurological, physiological
adaptive response to a perceived threat and it is something that should be managed as a cycle
with a beginning, middle, and end. Otherwise, stress leads to burnout, which is defined by emotional
exhaustion, depersonalization, and a decreased sense of accomplishment, which can have
a long-term impact on physical and mental health.
This is especially true when it comes to emotional exhaustion. Perhaps you’re working long days
with caregiving responsibilities at home, managing an especially adversarial litigation practice, or
10

urning the candle at both ends to meet your
billable target while soliciting new business.
In their book Burnout: The Secret to Unlocking
the Stress Cycle, sisters Emily and Amelia Nagoski
describe burnout as getting stuck in the tunnel
and remaining in a state of chronically elevated
stress for much longer than we are designed to.
This results in wear and tear on our physical,
mental and heart health.
In the same way a stick of dynamite can either
blow up your hand or be used to clear the
path in front of you, stress—which we won’t
ever eliminate completely—can be harnessed
for good. Stress has the power to motivate, activate
and lead to self-improvement.
However, being perpetually stressed is not
sustainable to our overall health and wellness.
Therefore, it is critical to deal with stress in a
way that signals safety to all of our internal operating
systems (digestive, reproductive, immune,
cardiovascular, and musculoskeletal).
Daily physical activity is the most effective strategy
for helping complete the stress cycle from
beginning to end, even something as simple as
jumping or short bursts of moving around. According
to relationship expert John Gottman,
physical affection with a loved one, such as a
“six-second kiss” or a twenty-second hug, have
been found to change hormones, lower blood
pressure and heart rate, and improve mood.
Having a good laugh or cry can also help to regulate
our emotions.
The reassuring news is that you don’t have to
remove all the stressors to feel better. Stress is
not the enemy. Being stuck is. In the words of
Nagoski, “to be well is not to live in a state of perpetual
safety and calm, but to move fluidly from
a state of adversity, risk, adventure, or excitement,
back to safety and calm, and out again”.
If you are interested in learning more about the
stress cycle, I highly recommend reading, Burnout:
The Secret to Unlocking the Stress Cycle.
11

LAW FIRM DISSOLUTION
Law Firm Dissolutions:
Canary in the Coal Mine?
Wade Poziomka, Ross & McBride LLP
Over the past two decades, several well-known law firms suddenly shut their doors. These closures
continue to cause a stir in the legal community and shake the stability and safety that lawyers,
who are typically conservative by nature, crave. The first was Goodman and Carr LLP in 2007.
Heenan Blaikie LLP was next in 2014. And only months ago, Minden Gross LLP – a firm with about
65 lawyers and over 100 staff, dissolved. All three were large, reputable firms with a long history
in the Canadian legal landscape.
To gain insight into these closures, I had the privilege of speaking with Enzo Sallese and Timothy
12

Dunn (two members of the three-person executive
team leading the closure of Minden Gross
LLP) and Norman Bacal (former managing partner
of Heenan Blaikie LLP). We spoke about
law firms and common trends more generally,
as opposed to Minden Gross LLP and Heenan
Blaikie LLP, in particular.
Two common themes emerged in our discussions.
First, without constant attention and focus, law
firms can coast, losing a clear and common sense
of direction over the years, especially when partners
are making healthy money. “Ignorance is
bliss,” says Sallese. “Nobody wants to have hard
discussions when they are making money.” During
a financial downturn, however, all the issues that
could have, and should have, been proactively addressed
previously can rear their ugly heads.
Second, lawyers do not necessarily make the
best leaders. In some law firms, the leaders are
the highest billing partners. But excellence in
attracting and providing legal services to clients
does not necessarily translate into being an effective
law firm manager. “How are managing
partners chosen?” posited Bacal. “How many
hold an MBA degree, or other leadership and
management training? In what other company
would you choose a CEO without leadership or
management experience? Leadership doesn’t
come naturally to everyone and in law schools,
it isn’t taught.” Point taken.
I suspect these themes are common for
many other law firms who have yet to reach
the breaking point. Sallese agrees, and wisely
warns: “I genuinely believe that Minden Gross is
the proverbial canary in the coal mine. If I could
offer one piece of advice to law firms who may
be in a similar situation, it is to look inward, get
a hold of your finances and how each partner is
compensated now while things are positive. Get
your house in order.”
What are some of the warning signs of a potential
closure? “Partners having increased
hushed meetings with one another behind
closed doors,” notes Sallese. Another common
theme is an unusual “quietness” in the firm.
“Trust the staff,” says Bacal. If legal assistants
and law clerks appear unusually stressed, there
is a reason for it.” Another sign is unprecedented
discussions or memos about “cost-cutting”
measures, notes Dunn.
Finally, with respect to advice to law firms
who may find themselves on autopilot while
still earning a healthy profit, Bacal stresses we
need to revisit law firm culture. “The partnership
needs to determine the culture they want.
Is it ‘people over profits’, ‘teamwork over the
individual’, a ‘churn and burn’ profit-maximizing
model, or something else? Grapple with the
overall philosophy and then start building your
tactics. Everything you do should be consistent
with that philosophy.”
Sallese suggests that partners need to start
“acting like owners. Understand what you own,
understand the value you bring to the firm and
the value of your other partners. Keep an eye
on expenses and don’t sit back believing ‘other
partners’ have it under control”.
Dunn makes another important point. “Be
transparent with one another and recognize
that partners can contribute to the overall success
of a firm in different ways. When times get
tough, the value a partner brings tends to become
their revenue exclusively. This can lead
to divisions, resentment, and a lack of cohesion
amongst partners.”
All these points make good sense. Will law firms
learn from these high-profile closures over the
past decade, or continue the status quo while
partners continue to be well compensated? Only
time will tell. Sallese offered a final thought: “If
you were sick, wouldn’t you want to know the diagnosis
sooner rather than later so you could do
something about it? I don’t understand why law
firms would be any different.”
As mid-career advocates, many of us are new
partners and we bring fresh perspectives. We
can help keep our firms on track by asking
thought-provoking questions about culture and
compensation, and challenging the status quo
where warranted.
13

Connect on
the TAS
Mentoring
Portal
The Advocates’ Society has launched a
mentoring program for TAS members
to connect junior lawyers with senior
members for career advice and networking.
There are no long-term commitments,
extensive questionnaires, or heavy
agendas—just simple connections and
conversations. If there’s a fit, mentors and
mentees can choose to connect again.
Click here to learn more or
visit www.advocates.ca

JUSTICE DELAYED PART II
Justice Delayed (Part II):
Long-Term Solutions
Joe Thorne, Stewart McKelvey,
and Jeff Van Bakel, Scott Petrie LLP
Even though we make our living as civil litigators, we spend a lot of time imploring our clients to
avoid the costs and delays associated with litigation. We habitually recommend that clients work
something out directly with the adverse party before resorting to litigation. That said, many disputes
require judicial intervention to come to a final resolution. The endemic delays in our civil justice
system need to be addressed by all stakeholders before the public loses confidence in the system.
In the last issue of “Advocacy Matters”, we published an article called Justice Delayed (Part I),
which addressed court delays and highlighted some practical shorter-term solutions to assist
counsel with getting on the docket. In this issue, we tackle fundamental, long-term solutions that
15

we believe can assist in alleviating the exasperating
delays in the civil justice system.
1. Increasing Resources and
Judicial Appointments
Our federal and provincial governments have
neglected to properly fund the civil justice system
for years.
Healthcare, education, and other social issues
get significantly more media attention, and are
therefore prioritized over the civil justice system
when it comes to policy and spending. This has
led to many open judicial vacancies and an agonizingly
slow process to fill them. In the meantime,
there are not enough judges to handle the
significant existing caseload and the backlog
caused, in part, by COVID-19. A recent Federal
Court decision from Justice Henry S. Brown decried
the record number of judicial vacancies as
a “crisis”. 1 As a corollary, the existing judges are
overworked, under-resourced, and drained. This
creates a knock-on effect where successful lawyers
are not incentivized to leave private practice,
and all its associated amenities, to become
part of an overworked and underpaid judiciary.
2. Increase the Jurisdiction and
Authority of Case Management Judges
Most civil procedure rules provide a case management
judge with the authority to make procedural/interlocutory
orders, if it is appropriate
to do so. There should be no qualifiers on a case
management judge’s authority to issue procedural
and interlocutory orders. Some judges have
recently exhibited a willingness to make relatively
substantive decisions at a case conference, which
is a development that should be applauded. 2
Generally, the discovery process is often the
most expensive and laborious step in the civil
litigation process. Motions dealing with discovery
issues are on every docket in every province,
and can clog up the system. All discovery-related
motions should be addressed by case conference,
without the need for motion records and
Now Available!
Explore LEAP Marketplace
Seamless integration between LEAP and
its companion products gives you everything
you need to run an efficient law firm.
Details & Correspondence Calendar & Tasks Financial Summary Time & Fees General Account Trust Funds Safe Custody
Save &
Close
DETAILS
180025
New
Document
New
Email
Forms &
Templates
Matter New Correspondence
LawConnect Mobile
Microsoft Teams
IN PROGRESS
New
Comment
Import
Share
Document
eSignature
Message
CORRESPONDENCE
Send
Document
Search correspondence
Timesheet
Time & Fees
Legal Accounting & Billing
Microsoft 365 Integration
Support & Training
Secure Document Management
Cloud Solution & Mobility
Automated Court Forms & Precedents
James Stevenson
TYPE ITEM STAFF MODIFIED
Applicant
Ms Sally Penfold
Correspondence
James Stevenson
JS
9:36 AM
Matter type
Property Division
Respondent
Mr Paul Penfold
Respondent's lawyer
Harris & Jacobs Solicitors
Mr Joshua Harris
Client correspondence
181 University Ave, Toronto, ON M5H 3M7
Critical fam law details
Sally Penfold and Paul Penfold Property..
jharris@email.com
Financial Statement
James Stevenson
Your Settlement/Property Affairs
jharris@email.com
Trust Statement
Costs agreement - Property Settlement
James Stevenson
Letter to Mr Penfold
James Stevenson
JS
JS
JS
JS
JS
JS
9:32 AM
Apr 2, 2020
Mar 29, 2021
Mar 29, 2021
Mar 28, 2021
Mar 27, 2021
BOOK A DEMO leaplegalsoftware.ca
sales@leaplegalsoftware.ca | 1-437-900-2140
88 Queens Quay West, 25 th Floor, Toronto ON, M5J 0B6
16

factums. In the event the case management
judge believes the motion is too complicated to
be dealt with by way of case conference, it can
be rescheduled to be heard on the regular motions
list - but only after the case management
judge has performed a gate-keeper function.
3. Increasing Flexibility of Movement
Across Judicial Centres
One of the authors of this article recently argued
a motion in London, Ontario. Oral argument
was not completed within the allocated
time, and another half day was needed. The
presiding judge sits in both Windsor and London,
which meant when selecting dates for the
balance of the motion, the parties could only
pick dates where the presiding judge was scheduled
to be sitting in London, which was months
away. This restriction existed even though the
motion was being heard virtually. The clients
were confounded as to why the judge could not
hear the balance of the motion until the judge
was scheduled to be “sitting” in London, when
the reality was that that judge was going to be
“sitting” in front of their computer.
Delays could be reduced if the courthouses
worked more collaboratively and allowed judges
increased flexibility to hear cases across different
courthouses when judges are assigned
to more than one courthouse.
4. Reducing Time for Oral Argument
Everyone is entitled to their day in court. But
not everyone should be entitled to a full day in
court. Long motions should be the exception to
the rule and granted only with leave and in rare
circumstances. Counsel are required to prepare
detailed facta and written material prior to any
significant contested motion. However, at the
oral hearing, counsel habitually reiterate and
repeat what’s in their written material. The oral
hearing should be dedicated to responding to
the opposing party’s factum, fielding questions
raised by the presiding judge, and grappling with
unresolved issues. This approach could greatly
increase efficiencies, reduce court delays, and
provide the presiding judge with more time to
review the written materials that were filed.
None of these proposals, in and of themselves,
will resolve the endemic court delays
that the public, clients, and lawyers are suffering
through. Systematic and fundamental changes
are necessary - we reiterate The Advocates’ Society
“Call to Action”
However, every potential solution should be
explored. The recommendations in this article
can assist in alleviating some of the issues.
Without a concerted effort by all stakeholders
to address these issues, the public will continue
to have their rights trammelled due to the negative
impacts from the unacceptable delays in
the civil justice system.
We must all continue to strive for a better,
fairer, and more efficient justice system.
Notes
1. Hameed v. Prime Minister and Minister of Justice, 2024 FC 242
2. See Miller v. Ledra, 2023 ONSC 4656 at paras. 31-37.
17

The Atlantic Excellence in
Mentoring Award
The Atlantic Excellence in Mentoring Award honours
advocates who have shown outstanding commitment
to and excellence in mentoring other advocates in
Atlantic Canada.
The Selection Committee will consider the extent to
which the nominee meets the following criteria when
determining the recipient:
• Demonstrates generosity of time and expertise, with a
commitment to mentoring and supporting more junior
advocates;
• Promotes mentees’ career development and
leadership skills;
• Supports and sponsors mentees to provide career
development and leadership opportunities;
• Promotes diversity and inclusion in the profession
through mentorship and sponsorship;
• Shows commitment to mentoring and educational
programs within the profession; and
• Demonstrates a high degree of integrity and
professionalism as a role model for young advocates.
Nominations are now open for The Atlantic Excellence
in Mentoring Award. Nominate a deserving advocate
by June 24, 2024. The award will be presented at The
Advocates’ Society Signature fall program in 2024.
Click here to submit a nomination.

MENTOR BURNOUT
Word to the Wise:
How to Avoid Mentor
Burnout
Megan Keenberg (she/her), Keenberg & Co
Our profession depends on mentorship to train and guide the next generation. Law firms
depend on mentorship to create bonds among colleagues and a sense of kinship in firm culture.
My mission, with this column, is to empower my fellow mid-career advocates to mentor
effectively.
I provide mentorship to about 50 mentees. Some of them work with me. Some share office
space with me. Some are former colleagues. Some are former strangers who reached out through
the TAS Mentoring Portal.
I don’t have the same level of interaction with all of them. I’m in constant daily contact with about
19

five main mentees. And there are about fifteen
long-time mentees that I see several times per
year in person and keep in regular contact by
phone and text. The rest touch base with me
as needed, and I check in from time to time if I
haven’t heard from them. Often there will be a
flurry of calls, meetings and texts around crisis
management, followed by long periods of light
communication.
When I talk about my mentoring activities with
others, the number one question I get asked is:
“How do you find time to do so much mentoring
while also juggling a busy practice? Don’t you burn
out on it?”
The answer may surprise you. No matter how
much time I spend mentoring, I never feel burnt
out. To the contrary, when the pressures of
practice weigh on me, I ramp up my mentoring.
It lifts my spirits and provides a welcome break
from the grind.
Done well, mentoring is a cup filler, not a cup
drainer. Working through problems with my
mentees, helping them articulate what they
want and implement strategies to pursue their
goals, and then watching them soar, energizes
me. I get the thrill of the teacher when my mentee’s
eyes light up with new understanding, the
satisfaction of the coach when they apply what
we worked on together to achieve better outcomes,
and a spark of epiphany when they offer
me a new approach to old problems or a new
perspective I hadn’t considered before. I learn
from them as much as they learn from me. And
I cement what I’ve learned by sharing what I
know and refining and updating that wisdom in
different contexts over time. When I hear about
my mentees effectively mentoring others, the
full circle moment lifts me up.
If you are feeling drained and burnt out by
mentoring, something has gone wrong. Here
are my top three tips for letting mentoring fill
your cup instead of draining it:
1) Weed out mismatches early
Sometimes we choose our mentees, and
sometimes they choose us or are chosen
for us. Where we have a choice, we need to
choose wisely because it’s a big investment.
Choose mentees who are excited about learning
and appreciate your time. Choose mentees
who are coachable or can learn to be
coachable. Choose mentees who don’t look
like you or come from the same place as you,
who offer new ways of looking at legal problems,
business issues and the human condition.
Or, choose mentees who look a lot like
you and come from exactly where you came
from, especially where representation matters.
Choose mentees who share your humour
and your core values (and spend enough time
with them to recognize those commonalities).
Choose mentees who are kind, fun, maybe
a little weird – whatever traits you value in a
long-term relationship. When we are a good
match, a lot of this happens naturally and unconsciously
– you just meet, you click, and you
keep talking. You know, like friends do.
For those you don’t choose, you might not
have immediate chemistry and it can feel awkward
or burdensome at first. That’s okay, these
things can find their legs over time. Give them
a chance to get comfortable with you and give
yourself a chance to earn their trust. Listen,
listen, and listen some more. If you still find
yourself drained by your time together and are
dreading your next lunch, if you just don’t click,
or you don’t like them, refer them to someone
else who might be a better fit for them.
Don’t languish in an unfulfilling mentorship –
you will both suffer for sticking it out.
2) Layer mentoring onto your existing workday
Instead of trying to find extra time to mentor,
I piggyback mentoring onto whatever it is that
I’m doing. If I’m preparing for a court appearance,
I split submissions with my mentee and
we practice together. If I need to make a strategy
recommendation to a client, I include my
mentee in the formulation of the strategy, invite
her to the client meeting to present some
of the recommendations, and we debrief together
afterwards. I have two 30-minute walk-
20

ing commutes to and from the office every day;
these are ideal times to pop in my airpods for
an uninterrupted private chat with a mentee,
away from the office. I set aside time for lunch
every day anyway, so it’s easy to invite a mentee
to catch up over a shared meal. By layering
mentorship onto existing tasks, I’m not working
extra hours - I’m just enriching my current
working (and commuting) hours.
3) Be clear about your boundaries
and expectations
The complaints I hear about mentoring often
center on communication failures. A mentee
emails or calls her mentor on the weekends,
because she doesn’t want to interrupt her
mentor’s work hours. The mentor does not
want to discourage contact but is quietly seething
that her precious free time is taken up with
non-billable work tasks. Or maybe a mentee
is seeking broad guidance, and the mentor
prefers giving practical advice about specific
issues. Maybe a mentor wants to wade into
personal matters in a discussion about work/
life balance, but the mentee is uncomfortable
discussing her private life.
Being clear and straightforward from the
outset about your expectations of each other,
your boundaries, your preferred level of
interaction, your communication preferences
and any off-limits topics (e.g., contentious political
issues, gossip, or personal issues) will go
a long way to prevent those frustrations from
arising in the first place. Your expectations and
boundaries will likely change over time as the
relationship evolves. Keep checking in with
each other proactively to ensure you are on
the same page.
21

WORKING AT AN INTERNATIONAL FIRM
Beyond Borders: Canadian
Lawyers’ Perspectives from
International Law Firms
Eric Morgan, Kushneryk Morgan LLP
Practicing law in Canada does not necessarily mean practicing at a firm with offices only in Canada.
International firms have operated in Canada for decades, either by merging with established Canadian
firms or growing offices from scratch. Working at an international law firm can add interesting
dimensions to a law practice, but also comes with a complex landscape of structures, collaborations,
and conflict management strategies unique to each firm.
One significant allure of working at an international law firm is the opportunity to handle complex,
cross-border cases. Chloe Snider, a litigation partner at Dentons LLP, the world’s largest law
firm by number of lawyers, highlighted the global platform offered by her firm which enables
22

her to engage in diverse legal matters spanning
different jurisdictions. From collaborating with
colleagues in Amsterdam on enforcement of
foreign judgments to working on cross-border
M&A arbitrations with a New York counterpart,
Snider emphasized the enriching experiences
and professional relationships fostered through
these interactions. "These are things I wouldn’t
get to do without the global platform," she said.
Similarly, Jeff Rosekat at Dickinson Wright LLP
(a firm with offices across the U.S. and Canada),
underscored the appeal of working on
cross-border insolvencies, citing the challenging
nature of these kinds of cases. "Having that
strength on both sides of the border means that
we provide a unique seamless approach for clients
who are involved in cross-border insolvencies."
Rosekat noted the firm's goal of providing
a comprehensive North American service to
clients globally, aiming to be a "one-stop North
American shop."
In terms of firm structure and collaboration,
Snider explained that her firm operates as a
Swiss Verein, comprising different partnerships.
Despite this, collaboration is actively encouraged,
with global practice groups and industry
groups facilitating cooperation across regions.
“Some of my closest friends at the firm are from
the U.S. region as a result of file-driven work,
partner meetings and regular Zoom calls.” Similarly,
Rosekat noted his firm's emphasis on collaboration,
describing it as "one firm that just
happens to have a bunch of offices." Rosekat
highlighted that lawyers across offices work together,
not only on cross-border matters but
also in leveraging subject matter expertise to
address client needs effectively.
Regarding managing conflicts, Dentons’ conflicts
are handled at a global level, with a concerted
effort towards streamlining conflict
checks across regions. Dickinson Wright LLP
implements a collaborative approach in their
intake and conflict checking processes.
Working at an international law firm in Canada
offers lawyers a blend of complex legal work
and opportunities for professional growth, while
needing to navigate complex challenges that
come with those opportunities.
23

ACTIVE LISTENING
Listen Up! How to Improve
Active Listening
Megan Keenberg, Keenberg & Co, and
Lisa Marie Buccella, Aviva Trial Lawyers
Active listening is a core communication and analytical skill that is critical to our success as advocates,
advisors, and mentors. It helps us build relationships with colleagues and clients, empathize
with others, and solve problems. When done effectively, it can also take the heat out of tough
conversations with our mentees and de-escalate adversarial exchanges with opposing counsel.
So, what is active listening, and how does it differ from regular (passive) listening? The main distinction
is in the listener’s intention. The active listener’s goal is to profoundly understand the information
that is being imparted to them, the reason why it is being imparted, and the underlying interests
and motivations of the speaker. This is in contrast to the type of listening we more commonly
engage in, which is listening to respond.
24

1. Give your undivided attention
Listening to understand requires the listener’s undivided
attention on the speaker. It is not something
you can do while multi-tasking. It requires a
deep focus. Put your phone down and move away
from your computer screen. Go to a quiet room.
Sit or stand face to face. Not only does facing the
speaker signal your undivided attention, it positions
you to be able to see non-verbal cues that could otherwise
go unnoticed. For some personal or sensitive
discussions, maintaining eye contact may feel too
intense, even invasive. For those situations, try sitting
side by side facing forward together.
2. Pay attention to non-verbal cues
Non-verbal cues tell us as much or more than
the content of what is said. Notice the speaker’s
body language, tone of voice, facial expressions.
Pay attention to pauses and changes in pace or
volume of the speaker’s speech. Take in this information
and let it live beside the content of
what the speaker is saying. Later you can determine
whether there is alignment or discord
between the verbal and non-verbal communication,
and what that might mean, but while
you are listening, just notice it.
3. Pay attention to what is not being said
The speaker may talk around their core message
without hitting on it directly. Try to understand,
based on their non-verbal cues and the verbal
content, what is being left unsaid, and why.
4. Defer judgment
You are listening to understand, not to respond,
and not to judge. Don’t jump to conclusions. Let
the story emerge the way the speaker needs
to tell it. If the speaker feels judgment coming
from the listener, they will clam up.
5. Put yourself in the speaker’s shoes
Try to understand their circumstances and where
they are coming from. Think about why the speaker
is sharing this information with you, what they
want you to do with the information, and why they
are sharing it now. You don’t have to agree with
what they’re saying, you just need to understand it.
6. Give the speaker space
Don’t interrupt. Don’t try to predict what they
are going to say or try to finish their sentences.
Allow the speaker to finish their thoughts and
relay what they need to relay. Don’t take them
off track with your responses or objections.
7. Give the speaker regular feedback
The speaker will be attuned to your reactions to
what they are saying. Try to encourage them to
continue speaking with non-verbal cues like maintaining
eye contact, nodding, leaning in. You can
also interject with verbal encouragement, e.g., “tell
me more about that” or “what happened next?” or
“that must have been hard on you”.
8. Create a mental picture of the story
As you listen, envision the story the speaker is
telling. Situate it in time and space. Notice any
gaps in your picture. This will help you put the
pieces of the story together cohesively, even if
the speaker is not terribly cogent in their speech.
9. Ask clarifying questions
Try to hold your questions until the speaker
has finished speaking. They may be gearing
up to address the points you need clarification
on later. Let them get to it in their own time.
Keep your questions on topic and in line with
the speaker’s core message. If your questions
take the speaker off track, try to retrace the last
thread they were discussing before you interjected
and let them continue.
10. Reflect, reframe, summarize, verify
From time to time, and especially towards the
end of the speaker’s speech, reflect back to
them what you’ve heard in your own words,
e.g., “What I’m hearing from you is that this experience
with the senior partner has left you
feeling underappreciated at your firm, and possibly
concerned about job security. Do I have
that right?” Make sure you verify that your reflections
or summaries are accurate.
25

Erin Durant
Durant Barristers
Jennifer Hunter
Lerners LLP
David Thompson
Carroll Heyd Chown LLP
Brian Duong
Hunter Litigation Chambers
INTERVIEW
A Roundtable with the
Chairs of the TAS 2024
Winter Summit:
The Big Chill Ottawa
Compiled by Mana Khami (she/her),
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
26
Interviewees:
Erin Durant (Lawyer and Founder, Durant
Barristers), Jennifer Hunter (Partner, Lerners
LLP), David Thompson (Partner, Carroll Heyd
Chown LLP), and Brian Duong (Counsel, Hunter
Litigation Chambers)

Q: The 2024 Winter Summit: The Big Chill Ottawa conference was the first destination conference
specifically geared towards mid-career advocates. How did it differ from other TAS
conferences geared towards junior or senior lawyers, like Fall Forum and Fall Convention?
A. Jennifer Hunter: Our focus was on creating content, and engagement, specific to mid-career
lawyers. The session topics were intended to look at familiar topics, such as mentoring and business
development, from the particular lens of someone who has been practicing for 10+ years.
We also wanted to introduce new specific topics, such as entering management for the first time,
and how to be a “Happy Lawyer”. We also wanted to take advantage of peer mentoring, so we built
in a lot of discussion and networking opportunities.
Q: The conference was held in February
2024 at the Fairmont Château
Laurier in Ottawa. Tell us why this
location was chosen, and what made
it an ideal location for the Winter
Summit?
A. Brian Duong: Ottawa is a central
location for delegates from coast to
coast. It is also home to the Supreme
Court of Canada.
Q: What was the most memorable part of the
conference for you, and why?
A. David Thompson: I most enjoyed the
roundtable discussions we had after several of
the panels. It was reassuring to hear from so
many peers that they struggle with the same
challenges, no matter how successful they appear
to be. Everyone was so down-to-earth,
willing to listen and share ideas for dealing
with those challenges.
Q: While the conference focused on programs and discussions surrounding essential leadership
skills, next-level business development strategies, and practice pointers from mid-career
leaders, what other opportunities and events were participants able to take advantage
of during the three-day conference?
A. Erin Durant: The participants benefited from a lot of downtime in Ottawa and were able to
check out Winterlude, attend the Supreme Court of Canada tour, and dine at local restaurants.
There were a lot of new and deepened connections made between advocates at the social events.
Q: What were some of the key takeaways you learned from speakers presenting at the
Winter Summit?
A. Brian Duong: Mid-career lawyers should not hesitate to put their hands up to take on greater
leadership roles within their organizations.
Jennifer Hunter: Take risks. Whether that is putting your name forward for management,
or taking time back from a busy workload, now is the time to build the practice
and the life you want.
27

Q: What programs or events do you hope to see at the next Winter Summit?
A. David Thompson: One of my favourite podcasts tells stories about successful people who
triumph over debilitating career rejection. The Honourable Justice Karakatsanis spoke during her
SCC tour about how she was rejected from the first legal job she applied to, which seemed to resonate
with attendees. It will be really meaningful to have a panel/theme focused on overcoming
perceived rejections, or failures in the legal profession.
Q: What feedback did you receive from conference attendees this year? What were some of
the highlights that people were talking about?
A. Erin Durant: The feedback from the conference was very strong. It was clear that there
was an overdue, and unmet, need for a conference for mid-career advocates. The attendees
appreciated the conference topics, as well as the time and space provided for socializing and
building connections.
The Advocates’ Society
Medal Dinner
Save the Date: October 30, 2024
Honouring Peter H. Griffin, KC, LSM,
Lenczner Slaght LLP

The Patrick D. Schmidt
Future of
Family Law Award
This award was established to honour the late Patrick D.
Schmidt and to promote excellence in the profession by
supporting junior lawyers in their early years of practice
who are choosing to dedicate their practice to family law.
Criteria for the recipient of the award will include a
commitment to:
• furthering excellence in family law, to the highest level
of professionalism in the service of their clients;
• skillful advocacy;
• civility;
• the importance of giving back to the profession
through teaching and/or mentoring;
• giving back to the community whether through pro
bono work or otherwise;
• and a proven commitment to family law practice and a
demonstrated desire to excel as an advocate.
Nominations are now open for The Patrick D. Schmidt
Future of Family Law Award. Nominate a deserving
advocate by July 8, 2024. The award will be presented at
The Advocates’ Society Fall Forum in October 2024.
Click here to submit a nomination.

The Advocates’ Society Annual Alberta Gala
Thursday, April 18, 2024 | Calgary
30
Name, Firm

31

32
www.advocates.ca