|Editorial Board 2012 – 2013
Editorial Board 2011 – 2012
Editorial Board 2010 – 2011
Editorial Board 2009 – 2010
Editorial Board 2008 – 2009
Editorial Board 2007 – 2008
Editorial Board 2006 – 2007
Editorial Board 2005 – 2006
Editorial Board 2004 – 2005
Editorial Board 2003 – 2004
Editorial Board 2002 – 2003
Editorial Board 2001 – 2002
Editorial Board 2000 – 2001
Editorial Board 1999 – 2000
Editorial Board 1998 – 1999
Editorial Board 1997 – 1998
Editorial Board 1996 – 1997
Editorial Board 1995 – 1996
Editorial Board 1994 – 1995
Editorial Board 1993 – 1994
Editorial Board 1992 – 1993
Editorial Board 1991 – 1992
Editorial Board 1990 – 1991
Editorial Board 1989 – 1990
Editorial Board 1988 – 1989
Editorial Board 1987 – 1988
Editorial Board 1986 – 1987
Editorial Board 1985 – 1986
Editorial Board 1984 – 1985
Editorial Board 1983 – 1984
Editorial Board 1982 – 1983
Editorial Board 1981 – 1982
Editorial Board 1980 – 1981
Editorial Board 1979 – 1980
Editorial Board 1978 – 1979
Editorial Board 1977 – 1978
Editorial Board 1976 – 1977
Editorial Board 1975 – 1976
Editorial Board 1974 – 1975
Editorial Board 1973 – 1974
Editorial Board 1972 – 1973
Editorial Board 1970 – 1971
Editorial Board 1969 – 1970
Editorial Board 1968 – 1969
Editorial Board 1967 – 1968
Editorial Board 1966 – 1967
Editorial Board 1965 – 1966
Editorial Board 1964 – 1965
Editorial Board 1963 – 1964
Editorial Board 1962 – 1963
Editorial Board 1961 – 1962
Editorial Board 1960 – 1961
Editorial Board 1959 – 1960
Editorial Board 1958 – 1959
Editorial Board 1957 – 1958
Editorial Board 1956 – 1957
Editorial Board 1955 – 1956
Editorial Board 1954 – 1955
Editorial Board 1953 – 1954
Editorial Board 1952 – 1953
Editorial Board 1951 – 1952
Editorial Board 1950 – 1951
Editorial Board 1949 – 1950
Editorial Board 1949, Issue 2
Editorial Board 1949, Issue 1
Editorial Board 1948, Issue 3
Editorial Board 1948, Issue 2
Editorial Board 1948, Issue 1
Editorial Board 1947
THE FOOTPRINT OF RUTGERS LAW REVIEW: TESTIMONIALS FROM OUR ALUMNI
If we think of the Law Review as something which represents Rutgers School of Law, then being an editor of the Review is—as it was to me—a rare and fleeting chance to be a representative of the law school. Law journals are too easily dismissed as impractical and of decreasing importance. Part and parcel with this is the attitude, which reduces a journal to little more than a resume enhancing means to an end for its members. But I do not believe that this self-serving perspective is not the dominant perspective when we speak about the Review, or any of Rutgers’ journals. With my fellow editors, I did my best to focus on the Review’s mission as a legal publication; a simple mindset which helped us focus on the incredible opportunities that appear to those who approach the journal with such simplicity. To offer fresh legal analyses, to report on developments in a useful fashion, and to advance major policy discussions is to make the Review a greater asset to the law school.
In pursuing and editing the content, which accomplishes these straightforward ends, Review editors truly represent the law school, particularly in their recruitment and working relationships with authors. The end result of this process is a first-rate publication. Not a society for high achievers. Not a tacit signal for firms. These things do not help the school. But a useful and integral journal will. In this respect, Rutgers Law Review is and must continue to be a clear reflection of the unique mission of the Law School: to be a top flight public interest institution which prefers to earn its prestige through tireless advancement of law, policy, and the legal profession.
Brian Biglin, ‘11
Senior Articles Editor, Rutgers Law Review, 2009-2011
Associate, Sills Cummis & Gross P.C.
Of all the things I experienced at Rutgers, the most relevant to my career was my land use planning course with Norman Williams—a true national expert in the field. For the past 30 years I’ve been involved in local land use decisions locally in Maryland, now chairing the Montgomery County Council’s land use committee. Even before that, my very first job involved doing real estate transactions and representing Indians in their claim to land in Connecticut. Norman’s class opened my eyes to a world I had never seen. It became my passion and my life! Who knew?
Nancy Floreen, ‘76
Editor, Rutgers Law Review, 1975-1976
Montgomery County Councilmember, At Large, since 2002
I have had the unique perspective of participating in the functions of the Rutgers Law Review for the past 30 years, first as staff member, then as the Editor-in-Chief of Volume 35, and lately as Faculty Advisor. Throughout this period, the Law Review has served the interests of Rutgers Law School, the legal profession, and the public, with the certain sense of the responsibility that is appropriate for student editors entrusted with the publication of our Law School’s flagship academic journal. That responsibility is a serious one—the past 30 years have seen a significant shift in the paradigm for promoting legal scholarship, and the orthodox model of doctrinal discourse has been enlarged, and in some ways superseded, by interdisciplinary approaches, empirical studies, and critical analysis of the previously unquestioned normative principles upon which our legal system is based. Moreover, the traditional manner of publication of legal scholarship has been both transformed but also at times dislocated by the Internet and other electronic media. Editors emeriti of Rutgers Law Review should derive great satisfaction in the knowledge that the traditions of excellence and fidelity to scholarly values flourish in the current generation.
Ronald K. Chen, ‘83
Editor-in-Chief, Rutgers Law Review, Volume 35
Vice-Dean, Clinical Professor of Law, Judge Leonard I. Garth Scholar
It was 1971, nine years after college; I had three young children at home. “Extracurricular” activities did not cross my mind. All I could thing about was getting home after classes and getting back to the books after the children’s bedtimes. I am forever grateful to Professor Robert A. Carter, my first-year torts professor, for suggesting that I write for the Rutgers Law Review competition.
As a member of the Law Review, my experience leading a team to create the next competition piece was mirrored in several later roles: as a Rutgers adjunct professor creating a problem for my appellate advocacy class, as a Bar Examiner writing essay questions, and as the program chair and then President of the Rutgers-Willard Heckel Inn of Court. The Law Review was my first legal team.
The Law Review’s rigorous training in logical thinking and precise expression was invaluable. It encouraged me to strive for excellence and taught me that excellence takes hard work. I certainly did not imagine that I would someday be a judge. But there is no doubt that my Law Review experience formed a solid foundation both for my judicial writing and for the collegiality essential to serving on an appellate panel.
Barbara Byrd Wecker, ‘74
Editor, Rutgers Law Review, 1972-1974
Of Counsel, Greenberg Dauber Epstein & Tucker PC
Retired Judge, New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
Being a member of the Rutgers Law Review has proven to be very valuable to me for a number of reasons. First, because I made the Law Review through the writing competition, the Law Review gave me confidence in my legal writing ability and an opportunity to take my legal writing—and editing—to the next level. In law firms today, legal writing ability is probably the single most important criteria used by partners to evaluate their junior associates. Largely due to my experience on the Law Review, I always felt confident in my ability to produce a quality legal brief or memorandum—no one was going to “out-write” me.
Second, as a member of the Law Review, I received many job opportunities that I would not have otherwise received. The Law Review credential enabled me to compete for jobs against students from the top law schools in the country.
Third, even though my Law Review note was “preempted,” I have frequently utilized the knowledge I gained from researching my topic on Directors & Officers Liability Insurance. When I was writing that note, I certainly did not expect to be reviewing D&O insurance policies in my office 25 years later!
Finally, I was able to forge a number of close friendships with other members of the Law Review. I have remained close friends with two members and have stayed in touch with a number of other members. Thank you, Rutgers Law School!
Brian S. Cousin, ‘88
Senior Editor, Rutgers Law Review, 1986-1988
Partner, SNR Denton US LLP
My time as Editor-in-Chief of the Rutgers Law Review has been rewarding to me in so many different ways, from the time I served in the position until now. Particularly important to me was the Fall 2006 symposium that we put together on the New Jersey Supreme Court decision, Lewis v. Harris, which legalized gay civil unions in the state. Having just recently come out of the closet, the topic was very personal. Nonetheless, it was important that we have an open and honest discussion. We encouraged our contributors to cover every side of the issue, which resulted in some heated moral debates. The experience taught me how to always approach the law reasonably and openly, as well as how to navigate being “out” throughout my career. Both have been especially useful in my current role as a career adviser for law students.
Jason McCann, ‘07
Editor-in-Chief, Rutgers Law Review, 2005-2007
Career Adviser, Boston University School of Law
In 1980 I was selected to be a member of the Rutgers Law Review. What happened after that was a pathway to a fulfilling life with friends, family, and the law. Thirty-two years later, I count among my closest friends those who were my Law Review classmates. We learned how to write. We understood what researching a topic really meant and we learned how to be meticulous both in our search of an answer and the words we put on paper (proofreading galleys gave us the ability to spot an extra comma from a mile away). I met my wife on the Law Review and we raised two great kids who are now young adults.
Among our Law Review friends was Seth Kaplan, then the Articles Editor of the Law Review who went on to be a partner at Wachtell, Lipton, and then an Adjunct Professor of mergers and acquisitions at Rutgers School of Law—Newark. Seth died suddenly a few years ago, and our close knit group of Law Review friends worked to create the Seth Kaplan Memorial Scholarship Committee which now has a $110,000 endowment that will award an annual scholarship to a Rutgers Law Student in Seth’s memory. It is the hope of the Committee that it will help students do what we did 32 years ago; get a start on a career that hopefully will be as rewarding for them as it has been for all of us. We are all beneficiaries of the Rutgers Law Review.
Stuart Kuritsky, ‘82
Editor, Rutgers Law Review, 1980-1982
Partner, Berkowitz, Lichtstein, Kuritsky, Giasullo & Gross, LLC
My time on the Rutgers Law Review was invaluable to me throughout my career. The skills I acquired and the relationships I formed have helped me reach the professional goals I had set for myself. The most lasting effect it has had has been to teach me to dig deeper into any issue and not take anything at face value. I am proud to have been part of this publication.
Mukti N. Patel, Esq., ‘02
Business Editor, Rutgers Law Review, 2000-2002
Assistant Director, Office of Career Services
My name is Diana Terry (known to my classmates as Diana Terry Reindl). Catherine Woodman and I were the Managing Editors of the Rutgers Law Review from 1983-1984. I am a New Jersey native, and a graduate of both Rutgers Law School—Newark and Rutgers College.
My experience as Managing Editor has been helpful in my position as a judge on the Colorado Court of Appeals. We issue a written decision in every case. The first drafts of my opinions are usually written to my specifications by my law clerks. Because I author more than 70 opinions per year, I spend a lot of time editing and rewriting their work product, and preparing certain opinions for official publication, to be followed as precedent by Colorado trial courts and practitioners. These writing and editing skills were honed when I edited law review articles, especially a beast of an article for one of the 1983 editions. I had no idea when I was doing that job that I would wind up publishing hundreds of pages of my own writing in the Pacific Reporter, or that those opinions would be cited in treatises and law reviews around the country.
I was fortunate to serve on Law Review with Editor-in-Chief Maureen Tighe. Maureen is still a close friend, and a wonderful Bankruptcy Court Judge in California. In 2009, Maureen and I, together with three other members of our law school study group, celebrated our 25th anniversary of law school graduation. We rented a large house together in Kennebunkport, Maine, and had a great time reminiscing. All of us are still in the law field and still passionate about what we do.
During that vacation in Maine, I was working on a very complex civil case. I wound up citing extensively to a 1985 Rutgers Law Review article (another monster!) that must have been edited by folks from the class behind me. It was ironic that this would happen during that Maine reunion, as I haven’t ever had any other occasion to cite a Rutgers Law Review article in my years in Colorado.
I very much enjoyed my time at Rutgers and my colleagues on the Law Review.
By the way, I am not the first Rutgers Law Review alum to hold judicial office in Colorado. I believe that former Colorado Supreme Court Chief Justice Joseph Quinn (now retired) also was on our beloved journal, a few decades before me.
Diana Terry, ‘84
Managing Editor, Rutgers Law Review, 1982-1984
Judge, Colorado Court of Appeals
My first memory of Law Review was in the summer of 1988, when I was living on a friend’s couch and for several weeks worked on the Law Review write-on paper amidst pizza boxes and the first Nintendo system. Fortunately, I both made Law Review and Mario saved the princess. A write-on selection process is how it should be (as opposed to selection from grades). From 1988-90, I was on the Law Review, my third year as co-Senior Articles Editor. We were perched on the top floor of the old Law School Building, with a splendid view of Newark, and Manhattan in the distance. The student camaraderie was strong, as was the work ethic. The skills and habits one learns on Law Review transfer well into the working world—hyper-attention to detail, drafting, editing, teamwork, and a steadfast commitment to the final product. Dealing with authors is good, early client experience. Professor Chen and others were always there for guidance, but I was taken then by how a group of students can, working as a team, achieve a result (then beers after the issue goes to print!). I have come to learn that it is much the same with any legal case—a team of lawyers, working together, achieve the objective (hopefully with some laughs along the way).
Looking back, the Law Review was the key aspect of my transition into a working lawyer. This is when I also became a coffee junkie, at the time living off the regular coffee from the van outside, served in those blue Greek coffee cups. Thank you to the Law Review of 2011-12 for bringing alumni together.
Gary Thompson, ‘90
Co-Senior Articles Editor, Rutgers Law Review, 1988-1990
Partner, Reed Smith LLP