Kim M. Keenan, the principal of The Keenan Firm, took over as the 38th president of the D.C. Bar on June 25, 2009. Selected “Woman Lawyer of the Year” by the Women’s Bar Association in 2007, Keenan was the first woman from the District of Columbia to be elected president of the National Bar Association, and the third to occupy the same post for the Washington Bar Association.

A senior adjunct professor at The George Washington University Law School teaching pretrial advocacy with an emphasis on mediation, Keenan is a graduate of Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service and the University of Virginia School of Law.

What made you choose Georgetown University?
I went to a private Catholic high school, and there was just something special about Georgetown—it was the perfect fit for me. Georgetown’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, one of a few such schools, really appealed to me, and it was at the top. I loved the structure and the opportunity to study in Washington, so I applied early. Once I was accepted in January of my senior year, I never applied to another college. I think my parents guessed that a career involving strategic thinking would be a part of my future. The best part of Georgetown was meeting people from all over the world, which was an enlightening experience.

Were you planning to go into foreign service in some capacity?
I knew I wanted to go to law school; I always wanted to become a lawyer. There was a brief time when I thought about journalism. Ultimately, I felt like I could do both with a law degree.

Did you have any role models or relatives who went into law?
None. Actually, some members of my family were asking, “Why are you going to law school when you have such a great job?” I wanted the creativity and training that a law degree would afford. My mother was a social worker. She would go to court a lot, and she had stories about how lawyers made a difference in a child’s life. So she planted the seed that it’s not just a job called a lawyer and you’re off lawyering, but that you really contribute to improving people’s lives. On the other hand, my dad is a golfer and one of the most competitive people you will ever meet. He taught me that competition brings out the best in you. I am truly a branch of his tree. I love to compete and I love to win—just ask anyone who has ever played Scrabble with me.

Did your devotion to Georgetown extend to attending law school there?
No. I was admitted to Georgetown, it has a great law school, but I decided instead to go to the University of Virginia School of Law. I felt like I needed to get away and go somewhere where my sole focus was law. So I went to Charlottesville, but I took a year off in between.

What did you do during that year off?
I worked for AT&T as an administrative supervisor managing its computer system, which is kind of funny because I did not take a single computer course in college. However, I worked at the U.S. Department of Justice’s data center while in college.

Did you enjoy law school?
“Enjoy” and law school are not often used in a sentence. There were things about law school that I loved. Other times it was challenging—you are immersed in a way of thinking that is not always consistent with your prior education. Eventually, you adjust and begin to like it.

What was your plan upon leaving law school? Was there a particular area of law you wanted to practice?
In my third year I took trial advocacy, and I fell in love with it. For me, it was the high point of law school. Arguing in front of a jury is still my specialty. Convincing a jury that your client deserves to win is deeply gratifying.

My plan was to be a Washington lawyer. Any of my classmates will tell you, “Kim is going to Washington to practice law.” I wanted to be a Washington lawyer more than anything else and, as usual, there was no second choice.

When you finished law school, did you do clerkship?
I clerked for two years for the late Judge John Garrett Penn of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. It was the best job in the world. I spent two years working with someone who has indelibly impacted who I am as a lawyer and as a person. I still try to think about what he would do or how he would approach something. When you clerk, you get to observe some of the best attorneys in the nation at the top of their game. It was a tremendous experience and I am deeply indebted to Judge Penn and his family for sharing their lives with me.

Did this clerkship in any way change how you saw your career in the law?
Well, it was pretty clear that I was going to work in litigation. Once you clerk, a law firm is going to place you in a section that handles litigation. In fact, when I left, I went to work for a very large law firm that had many names. When I began as a summer associate, it was Finley, Kumble, Wagner, Heine, Underberg, Manley, Myerson & Casey—once the second-largest law firm in the country whose partners included former U.S. Senators Paul Laxalt, Russell Long, and Joseph Tydings. In fact, there is a book titled Shark Tank that describes how this huge firm imploded, but in my experience, some of the most wonderful lawyers in Washington worked for Finley, Kumble and its successor firms ending in Washington, Perito & Dubuc. I was there two years in the special litigation section. We handled complex civil litigation, mostly defense; we also did a number of white collar criminal defense cases and some specialty assignments such as pardon applications.

Are there are any cases during your time there that stand out for you?
As a junior associate I had the opportunity to work on complex pro bono matters. One thing that stands out in my mind was a case involving a labor union in Front Royal, Virginia. A number of African American men had been denied entrance to this union, and since all the work came through the union, it effectively prevented these unskilled workers from obtaining jobs. We prosecuted the case on their behalf, alleging discrimination. At the firm, Inez Smith Reid, now an associate judge with the D.C. Court of Appeals, was in charge of our professional development, and she would train and assign associates to perform all of the related litigation tasks such as discovery, depositions, and motions. We gained a lot of experience as new attorneys from our exposure to these rather complex assignments. The firm recognized that the pro bono experience improved the quality of our work for our clients.

Where did you go after you left Washington, Perito & Dubuc?
I wanted to get more hands-on experience, and I planned to work in the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Most of the people in my group were former U.S. attorneys so I needed to get that experience. However, my first mentor, the late Mabel Haden, felt that my personality was more suited to civil litigation. Mabel felt it was time for me to try something new and she always had an insight that would guide you in the right direction. She was a very good friend of Jack Olender [of Jack H. Olender & Associates, P.C., a malpractice law firm]. He called looking for someone to hire and asked Mabel if she had anybody she could recommend. She gave him my name. He offered me the job, and I worked with his law firm for the next 16 years. When you work somewhere that long with the same group of people, it is because you admire them and because you have an opportunity for professional growth.

Did you continue to take on pro bono cases?
Yes. Due to the nature of my practice, most of my pro bono activities have been what I call macro pro bono, as opposed to micro pro bono. When you represent someone, that’s micro pro bono—you have a case and you call the shots. But I have pursued what I call macro pro bono where you are focused on improving the administration of justice for a large group of people. Shortly after I went to work for Jack Olender, I became chair of an organization called the Fair Employment Council of Greater Washington, which investigated claims of employment discrimination. We would pursue litigation, but we would also pursue strategies such as training individuals on how to locate and land a job successfully.

When you have a single-issue nonprofit, you have to come up with ways to make it cost-effective. I began to understand that you have to know as much about organizations and running them as you do about the substantive issues. Mastering employment law was not enough. So we combined with a number of other groups and formed the Equal Rights Center. I am a founding member. The Equal Rights Center addresses housing discrimination, employment discrimination, and disability rights. We also deal with issues relating to public accommodations, so it is like a one-stop shop for addressing civil rights issues impacting the key areas of American life.

What was your first involvement with the D.C. Bar?
About 10 years ago I called Lalla Shishkevish at the CLE [Continuing Legal Education] Program to make an inquiry. While she had me on the phone she asked, “Have you ever thought about teaching the Mandatory Course?” Anyone who knows Lalla understands that telling her no is not an option and she is so gracious that you hang up thinking it was your idea. Needless to say, I continue to teach the “Court Practice” portion of the Mandatory Course, which is basically an introduction to procedural practice for both D.C. Superior Court and U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This is a great experience for anyone who loves teaching. From there, I was invited to join the CLE Committee, which I did, and subsequently, I was invited to serve on most of the Bar’s standing committees.

Several years ago, former D.C. Bar President George Jones asked me to chair the Landlord–Tenant Implementation Committee. This committee was charged with implementing changes that had been recommended by an earlier task force. The next phase of the project was to find ways to make the recommendations a reality. The members of the committee were passionately committed to the need for changes in the landlord–tenant area. The issue was how to prioritize the goals and determine which steps would facilitate the process. With the success of the Family Court Self-Help Center as a background, we decided to create a Landlord Tenant Resource Center. It was a turning point for the project and the committee. The center became the focal point of the project and enabled us to rally a great deal of support from the Superior Court and the legal community.

We reached out to firms that helped with our pilot project, and the firms dedicated both senior and junior lawyers. For me, it was like a mirror of my career; it was the same sort of experience I had when I was a young associate. Words are inadequate to express the profound impact this can have on your career, because if pro bono experience becomes a part of the foundation of your legal training, then it becomes a part of who you are as an attorney. I think at any level, whether you are dealing with a high-powered client or someone who is not as sophisticated, at the end of the day they want you to right some wrong, or make something happen that will have a positive result for the client. It is very gratifying to be able to create those opportunities for young lawyers and to have so many law firms embrace it.

After that I ran for the Bar’s Board of Governors. Each step provided an opportunity to learn more about the Bar—what we do and how we can do it better.

What made you decide to run for Bar president?
As a law student, I wanted to be a Washington lawyer, so for me, serving as president of the D.C. Bar is part and parcel of that. It is also an opportunity to move the organization forward. Each president, I believe, is entrusted with an obligation, to move the ball forward. I have been president of other bar associations, and I felt that this was a natural continuation of my previous work. There are more than 92,000 D.C. Bar members, and as president, you have the opportunity to collaborate with them on issues impacting the profession and the community. It is a tremendous opportunity to use all your skills in one place at one time.

What initiatives do you want to undertake as president? What are your priorities and goals?
We have a lot of tasks on our plate. Some issues such as a new [Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Accounts] IOLTA rule and strategic planning will overlap with the past year and some will take shape during the upcoming year. At present, the biggest objectives have been the relocation of the Bar’s headquarters and the strategic planning initiative started during the term of former president Bob Spagnoletti. This important initiative will produce the Bar’s first strategic plan. I am fully committed to our goal of creating and implementing a meaningful strategic plan for the future of our Bar.

Additionally, we will create a leadership task force. The task force will focus on injecting leadership throughout the problematic activities of the Bar. Many state bar associations have leadership institutes and our task force will look for opportunity to develop and encourage leadership within the Bar, and to collaborate on best practices with the voluntary bar associations.

We will create a new family law task force, focusing on the paternity and child suport and domestic relations areas of the Family Court. The goal is to identify ways to provide unbundled pro bono legal services to citizens of the District of Columbia in these areas.

I also want to use the year to highlight services and activities and the ways they contribute to the professional development of our attorneys. With the state of our economy, we have to be able to say to our members, “Look, we’ve got the law practice management tools that you need to promote your success during these challenging times.”

Do you see any weaknesses that need to be addressed in the Bar?
I would really like to see us do more to let our members know about the services and benefits we have available for them. Generally, our members recognize that we have some great programs, but sometimes they don’t think, “Gee, I should check the D.C. Bar Web site for this law practice management issue, for solo firm boot camp, or call the ethics hotline for this issue.” Illuminating these services in a more concerted manner will benefit the membership.

It is going to be a very busy year. As lawyers, we resolve problems and we are accustomed to making positive results a reality. We will continue this tradition while facing the Bar’s challenges squarely. I am really excited to serve as president and look forward to the coming year.