White is a senior trial partner at McDermott Will & Emery LLP, where his caseload has focused on complex commercial litigation matters, including antitrust, civil RICO, class actions, contractual disputes, intellectual property, managed care, product liability, securities fraud, and telecommunications.
Through his pro bono work, White has represented clients in cases involving child custody, disability, employment discrimination, habeas corpus issues, housing discrimination, landlord–tenant matters, Section 8 [housing voucher], and sexual harassment.
White is a United States Air Force veteran who received an honorable discharge in 1982. He graduated from Morehouse College in 1984 with a BA in Political Science and received his law degree in 1987 from the University of Virginia School of Law.
After law school, White clerked for Chief Judge G. Thomas Eisele of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
His involvement in the D.C. Bar includes six years of service on the D.C. Bar Board of Governors, where he served on the Budget Committee, Executive Committee, and Finance Committee.
He serves as director and cochair of the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs.
White also is a member of the American Bar Association, the Edward Bennett Williams American Inn of Court, the Fellows of the American Bar Foundation, GAYLAW, the National Bar Association, the National Conference of Bar Presidents, the Washington Bar Association, and the Women’s Bar Association of the District of Columbia. He serves on the board of directors for the Dance Institute of Washington.
Tell
me a little bit about your childhood. Where did you grow up?
Do you have any siblings?
I was born in Crawfordsville, Arkansas. It’s a little town in
northeastern Arkansas that’s located across the Mississippi River
from Memphis. I lived there until I finished high school and joined
the Air Force.
I had a typical upbringing for someone growing up in the rural South in the 1960s and 1970s. The Delta Region of Arkansas is mainly a farming area, and traditionally it has been one of the less economically advantaged areas of the country.
I have a huge extended family and two brothers and two sisters; one brother lives in Charlotte, another in Arkansas, and I have a sister who lives in Detroit, and one who lives in Chicago. My mother lives in Arkansas.
When did you decide you wanted to pursue a legal career?
I didn’t have much exposure [to the legal profession] while growing
up, but I did have an interest in law. But law was only one of the fields
I was interested in pursuing, architecture was actually my first choice.
I even had an architecture scholarship to the University of Arkansas,
but instead of taking that, I joined the Air Force.
While I was in the Air Force I completed two years of college through various universities, but mostly through the University of Maryland. Most of the courses that were offered were liberal arts courses, and I wasn’t able to take the technical courses necessary to study architecture, which meant that when I got out of the Air Force, I would have likely had to transfer into college as a sophomore if I wanted to pursue an architecture degree. But, based on the liberal arts courses I completed while I was in the Air Force, I would be able to transfer into a liberal arts program as a junior. For reasons that I can only smile at now, that one additional year made all the difference in the world to me. So I went with a liberal arts degree at Morehouse College and then attended law school.
Why did you decide to join the Air Force instead of accepting the
architecture scholarship?
In addition to wanting to serve my country, I was interested in living
on my own and traveling, and I thought the Air Force would provide me
with those opportunities.
Where did your time in the Air Force take you?
I took basic training at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, and
I had some technical training at Keesler Air Force Base in Biloxi, Mississippi.
I was stationed at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho for almost
three years, followed by two years at Zweibrücken Air Force Base
in what was then West Germany.
After leaving the Air Force you attended Morehouse College in
Atlanta. Describe the two years you spent there.
It was an amazing time in my life. I would say that the two years I
spent at Morehouse were among the two best years of my life.
The school provided me with the rare opportunity to be in an institutional setting that was truly nurturing, yet scholastically challenging and socially fulfilling. It was just great to be at an institution that catered to me as a young, black male. The school has a legacy of producing African American leaders, and it places a focus on moral development and leadership.
Why did you decide to attend the University of Virginia School of
Law?
I applied to about eight law schools around the country, and Dr. [Robert]
Brisbane, who headed the Political Science Department at Morehouse at
the time, told me—although he wasn’t involved in helping
me decide what schools to apply to, he would have insisted on Harvard—that
I should attend whichever school I was accepted into that had the highest
ranking. UVA was the highest-ranked school that I applied to and that
I was accepted into, so that’s where I went. Dr. Brisbane was
delighted.
UVA was a stark contrast to my experience at Morehouse; I went from a small, African American college in an urban setting to a mostly white major university in the mountains of Virginia, but it was a perfect opportunity for me to grow and expand my horizons. Morehouse prepared me very well for the challenges of law school, and I found it to be academically invigorating. I also made many friends there that I have to this day. It set the stage for my success as an attorney—it truly did.
Did you have a clear idea of what area of law you wanted to be involved
in?
I always wanted to be a trial lawyer. I enjoy the challenge of persuading
a jury or a judge of a position. Oral advocacy is something I find challenging,
invigorating, and intellectually stimulating.
After graduating from law school you clerked for Judge G. Thomas
Eisele, then chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Arkansas. What was that experience like?
The opportunity to work closely with Judge Eisele on a day-to-day basis,
to see and study the work of trial attorneys of all stripes, and to
see the court in action was just an invaluable experience. I think that
clerking at a trial court is probably one of the best professional development
training opportunities that a trial lawyer can have.
You joined Laxalt, Washington, Perito & DuBuc right after finishing
your clerkship. Is that when your involvement in pro bono started?
Yes. Judge Inez Smith Reid of the D.C. Court of Appeals was one of the
firm’s partners at that time, and she was a very strong advocate
for pro bono work and professional development of associates. Judge
Reid involved many of us at the firm in very important and significant
pro bono cases. A considerable number of cases came in through the Washington
Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, so we were
dealing with issues that affected peoples’ livelihoods and their
civil rights. I was impressed by the fact the firm expected and demanded
we handle pro bono matters the same way we would handle a matter for
any other client.
I see in people needing pro bono assistance so much of what I had seen and experienced in my childhood. I always felt that I would be involved in giving back to the community in some way, and I have been fortunate enough to be in professional settings where I could do that.
Are there any particular pro bono cases from your time at Laxalt
Washington that stand out?
The major pro bono case that I worked on during my two years at Laxalt
Washington was a Title VII [which prohibits discrimination practices
in the workplace] case that we handled on behalf of black laborers from
Virginia, who were being denied their rights by a union. That case basically
went on for my entire time at the firm, and it was where I got most
of my initial stand-up experience as a trial attorney—handling
hearings, depositions, interviewing witnesses.
When
did you join McDermott Will & Emery?
Laxalt Washington did not survive the economic downturn of the early
1990s, and the firm folded after I was there for two years. I joined
McDermott almost immediately after leaving Laxalt Washington, and it
was a very smooth adjustment. I interviewed at a lot of firms around
town, but I was impressed by McDermott because I felt that the people
here, in addition to being professionally accomplished, were just good,
decent people whom I would enjoy working with, and that has proven to
be true.
Tell me about the 1995 Terrance Johnson pro bono case.
Soon after I joined McDermott, the Washington Lawyers’ Committee
asked me if I would take the Terrance Johnson case, so I took it to
the firm’s pro bono committee and got approval for it.
The Johnson case was unlike any pro bono case I had ever handled. Mr. Johnson had been convicted of manslaughter and the illegal use of a handgun in connection with the shooting deaths of two Prince George’s County, Maryland, police officers in the 1970s. At the time of his conviction, Mr. Johnson was a slight, 14-year-old child. The police officers took Mr. Johnson into the station while they were processing his older brother on suspicion of larceny. There’s some confusion as to how the events unfolded, but somehow Mr. Johnson wound up in the basement of the police station in handcuffs, and he was being beaten by two police officers, when he got a hold of one of their guns and then fatally shot the officers.
Mr. Johnson was sentenced to 25 years in prison. While serving his sentence, he really improved himself in terms of education and helping other prisoners and became something of a model prisoner, but he had been denied parole four times by the time I got involved in the matter. McDermott took the case on and filed a habeas petition in Maryland Circuit Court to attempt to secure parole for Mr. Johnson. We were successful in gaining parole for Mr. Johnson.
Why do you say it was unlike any other pro bono case you had handled?
Up until that point, and actually since, I had not been involved in
any prisoner pro bono representation. This case was also unusual because
it was highly polarizing and racially charged, and it received a great
deal of attention.
By the time I was working Mr. Johnson’s case, it had been about 17 years since the shootings had taken place, but there was still a great deal of interest in it. There was a feeling among some that Mr. Johnson had not received justice, and there was an equally strong feeling among others that he got a better deal than he deserved and that he should not be allowed to get out of prison. There was a lot of animosity involved.
Outside of the Johnson case, are there any significant pro bono
cases you’ve taken on while at McDermott?
In my time at McDermott I’ve handled a class action case involving
the D.C. Department of Corrections on behalf of female employees who
had been harassed. That stands out in my mind because of the nature
of what those women dealt with at the hands of their employer; getting
relief for them was very important. I’ve handled a Section 8 [housing
voucher] matter that has brought significant relief to large numbers
of individuals.
By the same token, the matters on behalf of individual pro bono clients have been equally significant to me—it doesn’t get any more important than a person’s ability to have shelter or necessary medical care. Given the level of need in our community for legal assistance with the most basic of life’s necessities, each and every case is vitally important.
How do you think McDermott’s commitment to pro bono has changed
since you’ve been at the firm?
The firm has always been very supportive of pro bono, but when I started
working here in 1991, it was a much smaller shop; our trial department
wasn’t that large and trial attorneys do a lot of pro bono. As
we’ve grown, we’ve also increased our commitment to pro
bono to the point that in the past 10 years, we’ve repeatedly
won awards for best pro bono law firm of the year. And it’s not
just the trial attorneys, our transactional attorneys regularly take
on significant pro bono matters. Guy Collier, one of McDermott’s
health care attorneys, runs our pro bono program. Guy also heads the
D.C. Bar Pro Bono Program’s Senior Lawyer Public Interest Project,
which has just been awarded the Frederick B. Abramson Award. We’re
one of the leaders in Washington in providing pro bono services.
You were involved in the creation of your firm’s professional
development program, McDermott University. Tell me about that.
Our professional development department, together with many partners
around the firm, came up with McDermott University, which is a professional
development program for our associates. There’s a mentoring aspect
to it, there’s a substantive aspect, a training aspect, and a
general professional development aspect, and, as part of the process,
we ask our associates to create and maintain a career plan.
The program was created because we knew that as our firm grew in numbers, it would be more and more difficult for our associates to know what was expected of them and what it took to grow as a professional, and it would also be more difficult for associates to get the mentoring everyone has to have in order to be successful.
What we attempted to do, and what I think we have done on a grand scale, is put all of those aspects I mentioned into a formal program that allows our associates to have an idea of what the firm thinks they should be doing in terms of their work and professional development, giving them the opportunity to actually do these things, either through training or real work experience, and making sure that all of them get the mentoring that they need.
Ideally, I think the best mentoring relationships develop organically; however, I don’t think we should leave it to chance, which is why our firm and many other firms have developed formal mentoring programs. The way we practice law nowadays is not the same as when I started practicing. The way I learned the law was by working side by side with a partner or senior associate, going to meetings, going to court, and being involved as case strategy was developed and implemented. Now the economics of law practice don’t always allow for such opportunities. In addition, things move a lot faster today and much of our work is done online. I think we need to have outlets for associates, and all attorneys, to get out from behind the desk and to interact with each other.
Do you think it’s more difficult for young associates today
to get the training and support they need?
I think it’s more difficult for a number of reasons. The pressure
to work hard and to meet ever-increasing billable hours requirements,
together with technological advancements, have made the practice of
law much less personal. Technological advances can be very helpful in
many ways, but, if we’re not careful, they can also isolate us
from one another, leading to fewer mentoring opportunities for our young
attorneys.
How did your involvement in the D.C. Bar come about?
One of my partners here at McDermott suggested that I run for the Board
of Governors, so I did and I was elected. I liked what it presented
to me—it gave me the opportunity to grow in ways I hadn’t
grown before in terms of leadership, and also it exposed me to other
opportunities to serve as well as to the leaders of the Bar who are
already doing things that I aspire to do. I enjoyed serving on the board
so much that I ran again in 2003 and was elected. When my second board
term was expiring I decided I wanted to continue my involvement with
the D.C. Bar, and the best way to do that was to run for president-elect.
What do you want to accomplish during your term as president?
There are several things I would like to focus on as president. I would
like to continue working on issues addressed by previous Bar presidents,
such as mentoring, which Jim Sandman focused on. In the pro bono arena
I would like to bring more attention to the senior lawyer projects,
which John Cruden initiated.
In March our membership approved a referendum which would allow the Bar to lobby in support of the Access to Justice Commission’s initiatives to have the District continue to appropriate public funds for civil legal services for the poor. Last year the Commission successfully lobbied the District to provide more than $3 million for such services. I’m very excited that our members resoundingly have said that the Bar, as an institution, should be actively involved in future efforts to secure this vital funding.
We are also looking at expanding our pro bono initiative beyond the 42 law firms that signed on a few years ago; that work has begun and I’ll be happy to continue to promote that project. These firms, as did the initial 42 firms, will commit to provide pro bono legal services at a specified level.
I would like to bring more visibility to the many existing services and programs that offer real and tangible benefits to our members. For example, the Practice Management Service Committee can really help our solo and small firm practitioners deal with difficult management issues and thereby avoid becoming involved in the disciplinary system. I want to make sure that these practitioners know that they have support.
I’m also looking forward to working with the D.C. Court of Appeals concerning the disciplinary system study report [released by the D.C. Bar Disciplinary System Study Committee] that is currently under its consideration.
What is your view of the report?
I think the committee’s recommendations would be a major step
in enhancing the speed and efficiency of the disciplinary system. I
studied the report closely, and I’m hopeful the D.C. Court of
Appeals will direct that the committee’s suggestions be implemented.
You’ve mentioned in the past that inclusion issues are
important to you. How can we improve the promotion and retention of
women and minorities within the legal profession?
As an African American, gay male, inclusion issues obviously are very
important to me. In my mind, however, inclusion issues go beyond what
is typically thought of as diversity. We have, as members of our bar,
approximately 85,000 of the most talented and most diverse—in
countless ways—attorneys in the nation. To me, inclusion means
taking full advantage of all that human potential and putting it to
work to maximize our service to our clients, our community, and our
profession.
For example, that means ensuring that all of our young attorneys receive the mentoring and professional development opportunities they need to become contributing members of our profession. It also means including our senior attorneys, with their vast and varied experience, in our pro bono work in meaningful ways. It also means finding creative ways to include our members in the existing Bar programs and working with our 31 voluntary bar associations, and others creatively, to deliver more pro bono services.
On the issue of diversity, having diversity within the senior ranks of our legal workplaces is the only real way to ensure continued retention and promotion of women and minorities. I think it’s important for women and minorities to see that others like them have been able to follow a path to success. I think the retention and promotion of women and minorities is a major focus of the profession right now, and I see this focus going hand in hand with our desire to mentor all of our young attorneys. I think that there’s a lot of attention going to those issues, and to the extent that I can speak to those issues in a positive way, I certainly will do that.
Do you think the Bar can play a role in addressing such issues?
I think that when we as a bar are fully utilizing our vast and varied
human resources, we will maximize our ability to serve the community,
our profession, and to aid in the administration of justice, and we
can serve as a model for like-minded individuals, employers, and organizations.
