Advocacy-Matters-Winter-2023

ADVOCACY MATTERS
The Advocates’ Society
WINTER 2023

CONTENTS
05
09
10
11
13
14
Chair Chat
Chloe Snider (she/her), Dentons
Report on Biz Dev for Litigators: Sales is NOT a
Four-Letter Word
Eric Morgan (he/him), Kushneryk Morgan LLP, and Kimberly Potter (she/her), Fasken
“Micro-Mentoring” – Good Things Come in Small
Packages
Nathan Sutherland (he/him), Pink Larkin
Discovering Your TRUE COLOURS
Laura Wagner (she/her), Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Word to the Wise: Imposter Syndrome
Megan Keenberg (she/her), Van Kralingen & Keenberg LLP
The Wrong Stuff Revisited: Tips for avoiding
questions from the bench in 2023
Tamara Ramsey (she/her), Dale & Lessmann LLP
Our Speaker: Michele Romanow, “Dragon” CBC Dragons’ Den and
Co-Founder & Exec Chairman, Clearco
Date: Wednesday, March 8, 2023
Time: 5:30 PM - 6:30 PM (ET)
Location: Toronto, ON
Delivery: Live Online
16
20
24
Reflections on the Appointment of Chief
Justice Tulloch
Compiled by Erin Durant (she/her), Durant Barristers
Practicing Law With ADHD: Call me a JDHD
Devan Marr (he/him), LawPRO
Interview with Melissa N. Burkett LL.M (she/her/elle)
Joe Thorne (he/him), Stewart McKelvey
Editor: Tamara Ramsey (she/her), Dale & Lessmann LLP | tramsey@dalelessmann.com
Deputy editor: Megan Keenberg (she/her), Van Kralingen & Keenberg LLP | mkeenberg@vklaw.ca
The opinions expressed by individual authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the policies of The Advocates’ Society.
Click here to register today!
Advocacy Matters Editorial Team: Nadia Chiesa (she/her), WeirFoulds LLP, Erin Durant (she/her), Durant Barristers, and Joe Thorne (he/him), Stewart McKelvey
2 3
This event is complimentary to both members and non-members.

CHAIR CHAT
The Advocates’ Society is proud to announce a
new online mentoring program exclusively for TAS members.
A key goal of this new mentoring program is to create a simple way for our Junior Members to
feel more connected to their professional community and obtain some career advice from more
experienced members of the bar. This program model is convenient, efficient and effective:
√
√
√
No long-term commitments.
No extensive questionnaires or matching.
No heavy agendas, minute taking or long-term planning.
Just simple connection and conversation for junior lawyers to get some tips and connect with
someone new.
More information is available on
the TAS mentoring
website page.
NEW TAS
MENTORING
PORTAL
Mentee registration for TAS Junior Members
is now open! Click here!
****At this time, the program is only available in English but we are working with Mentorship Rocket to build a bilingual (English and French) site for later in 2023.
Chair Chat
Chloe Snider (she/her), Dentons
“I am human. Politicians are human.” That is how
Prime Minister Jacinda Arden explained why she
would be leaving the post as New Zealand’s prime
minister. Those words struck me, even though of
course they are obvious. They struck me because
even though I too am human, and litigators are
human, we seem to forget this often. In litigation
(maybe in law more broadly), we often do not see
each other’s humanity. Whether that be the humanity
of our colleagues or the humanity of other
counsel; sometimes we forget even our own humanity.
We demand much of each other, and of
ourselves.
I share Honourable Mr. Strathy’s view that this is
at least in part a result of the myth of the litigator
as “a fearless gladiator… Always in control of their
emotions… Powering through long hours of work
with pride and not breaking a sweat under pressure.
Sometimes wounded, but never defeated…”
This gladiator is far from human.
And so Ms. Arden’s words are a helpful reminder
that even the most accomplished, the most capable
among us, are human.
My hope is that the pieces in this edition of Advocacy
Matters and the work of our committee advance
us on our path to seeing litigators, to seeing
each other, as human.
This edition is jam-packed. Importantly, we celebrate
the appointment of Chief Justice Tulloch, with
contributions from Christine Mainville, Dominique
Hussey, Arleen Huggins and Barbara Brown. They
provide reflections on his service to others and
his “measured, compassionate, and intelligent approach
to law”. We are honoured to be able to celebrate
the elevation of Chief Justice Tulloch during
Black History Month.
We also hear from guest columnist Devan Marr.
He writes about practicing law with ADHD. He
provides some helpful takeaways for those with
ADHD, and education for those without.
In our regular column, Word to the Wise, Megan
Keenberg discusses imposter syndrome. No
doubt many new lawyers feel some self-doubt as
they start their careers (I sure did). Megan’s piece
discusses how we might help more junior lawyers
navigate those doubts without prescribing false
4 5

confidence.
If you’re looking for something lighter – check
out The Wrong Stuff Revisited by Tamara Ramsey,
who shares some tips on how to avoid
questions from the bench by using new technologically
to stonewall.
This edition also includes Joe Thorne’s interview
with Melissa Burkett, a senior litigator with
Alberta Justice, Legal Services Division, based in
Calgary and who sits on TAS’s Alberta Regional
Advisory Committee.
Lastly, we share event reports on recent
events hosted by the 10+ Standing Committee,
“Sales is Not a Four-Letter Word”, “Micro Mentoring”
and “True Colours”.
I am very proud of the amazing work that the
10+ Standing Committee has done so far this
year and am looking forward to our upcoming
events and initiatives.
Get Involved!
Interested in getting more involved with TAS?
Applications are now being accepted for our 10+
Standing Committee.
The 10+ Standing Committee (“10+SC”) seeks
engaged, hard-working volunteers to promote
the interests of mid-career advocates through
planning and implementing information and
networking events, administering Advocacy
Matters newsletter and participating in the work
of The Advocates’ Society (the “Society”).
The Society welcomes applications to 10+ SC
from Society members who are about 8 to 20
years of call. Successful applicants will serve a
two-year term starting June 2023. Parental and
medical leaves will be accommodated.
Deadline to apply: March 3, 2023 at 11:59 p.m.
(ET)
APPLY FOR 10+ SC for the 2023/24 TERM
CLICK HERE
Questions? Please contact Steven Frankel at
sfrankel@dwpv.com
6 7
7

CHOOSE FROM CANADA’S TOP
MEDIATORS AND ARBITRATORS
EVENT REPORT
Report on Biz Dev for Litigators:
Sales is NOT a Four-Letter Word
Eric Morgan (he/him), Kushneryk Morgan LLP, and
Kimberly Potter (she/her), Fasken
Carol A. Albert
Carol’s areas of expertise include
construction, landlord and tenant
and municipal law. She is
particularly qualified to case
manage civil actions, and to hear
motions and conduct arbitrations
and references under the
Construction Act. Carol is an
Honourary Fellow of the Canadian
College of Construction Lawyers.
2021-22
J.D., LL.M. (ADR)
Retired Construction Lien Master, SCJ
Barry H. Bresner
Barry is an arbitrator, mediator and
investigator with over 40 years of
experience handling complex
commercial matters. His expertise
includes shareholder/partnership,
contract interpretation,
environmental liability, commercial
insurance and reinsurance &
franchise disputes. Barry is a Fellow
of the Chartered Institute of
Arbitrators.
2021-22
READERS’
CHOICE
On November 1, 2022, the Management for
Litigators working group of the 10+ Standing
Committee hosted a webinar, ‘Biz Dev for
Litigators: Sales is NOT a Four-Letter Word’.
The speakers were Dhawal Tank and Carmelo
Millimaci, business development and sales
coaches. Kim Potter and Eric Morgan moderated
the event.
The presenters focused on how to apply
a sales mindset to building a legal practice.
Dhawal and Carmelo’s comments were organized
around the key concept of a sales funnel.
In a sales funnel there is an initial broad
reach-out to many potential clients. This is
followed by developing deeper relationships
with a smaller and smaller subset of contacts
who are most likely to provide the kind of
work you want.
Applied to a legal practice, at the top of the
sales funnel are activities like speaking and
writing to large groups. You can then follow
up with other speakers, attendees and readers
with more personalized one-on-one engagements.
Other top tips that Dhawal and Carmelo
presented were:
• Undertake a personal inventory to determine
your qualities that set you apart and
articulate your value.
• Make sure your marketing tactics match
your ideal client, for example, by writing
for the publications your ideal clients
read.
• To avoid feeling uncomfortable with business
development, focus on forming authentic
relationships with individuals rather
than simply making ‘asks’, especially of
new contacts.
ADR & MEDIATION CHAMBERS
416.362.8555 • 1.800.856.5154 • booking@adr.ca • adrchambers.com
9

EVENT REPORT
EVENT REPORT
“Micro-Mentoring” – Good
Things Come in Small Packages
Nathan Sutherland (he/him), Pink Larkin
Discovering Your TRUE COLOURS
Laura Wagner (she/her), Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
In October 2022, the 10+ Standing Committee
hosted an online panel discussion about
“micro-mentoring.” Before this session, I had
not encountered the term. Once I heard it,
it clicked right away: it put a name to something
that many lawyers may do to some extent
already (intentionally or not). In short,
“micro-mentoring” involves giving or receiving
mentoring through brief, informal encounters,
rather than formal, long term mentoring relationships.
The panelists who helped attendees explore
this practice were Cynthia Kuehl of Lerners LLP,
Fabio Longo of Longo Lawyers, and Sara Scott
of Stewart McKelvey. From their comments, it
was clear they are all passionate and thoughtful
mentors. During the hour-long panel discussion,
they explored how they think about
and practise micro-mentoring.
A key theme was the ways micro-mentoring
can supplement formal mentoring relationships.
Micro-mentoring is more organic and
flexible. The sessions are usually brief or oneoff
meetings, and therefore easier to fit into
lawyers’ schedules. They can address anything
from advocacy skills, to business development,
to the personal vs professional dynamic. A single
mentor can’t be all things to a mentee –
sporadic micro-mentoring sessions can fill the
gaps.
As lawyers we all know how critical mentoring
is, but how hard it is to do well. That may
be because we ask too much of “formal” mentoring.
The panelists explained that we can be
better mentors and mentees if we look at new
ways to think about mentoring relationships.
End note: TAS launched a new mentoring portal in January 2023 to provide
micro-mentoring opportunities for members. As of the writing of
this piece, the program had over 80 mentors from a variety of practice
areas across Canada. Registration on the site is exclusive to TAS members.
Learn more about this new program here.
On December 14, 2022, the Women Advocates Working Group of the 10+ Standing Committee
hosted the “Discovering Your TRUE COLOURS” program. The workshop was facilitated
by Mary DiCaro, a corporate trainer, coach, and motivational speaker. Before attending the
program, participants completed an online survey answering questions about our working
styles and preferences to determine whether we were Inquiring Green, Organized Gold,
Authentic Blue, or Resourceful Orange – as well as our affinities for each of the other three
colours.
The program was held virtually, which allowed
members from across the country to
attend. We learned about the features of
each personality type, and then using examples
from the audience Mary explained
how various combinations play out. It was
remarkable how spot on her descriptions really
were! As a dominant Gold with Green as
a high second, I like golden rules, and order,
and traditions – but then the Inquiring Green
side of me kicks in and asks “but why?”
Yup, that’s me!
The attendees split into four breakout
groups based on our dominant colour, and
we engaged in lively discussions with our
like-minded peers from across the country.
These small group sessions were fascinating
– we had so much in common, although we
didn’t agree on everything as our secondary
colours sometimes kicked in. But by far the
most eye-opening part of the workshop was
at the end when we all came back together as
a group. Each small group presented about
their colour to the rest of the attendees,
providing an invaluable opportunity to learn
from and understand each other’s points of
view.
For myself, the key takeaways were two-
10
11

fold. First, I learned more about myself – my strengths, and my weaknesses, and how I can
leverage my strengths for the greatest success. Second, I learned more about my peers –
how they might view the world and approach problems differently than I do. Insights from
this session will help me to mentor, lead, and work with people with different dominant
colour traits in a more effective and inclusive manner.
MENTORING
Word to the Wise: Imposter Syndrome
Megan Keenberg (she/her),
Van Kralingen & Keenberg LLP
Imposter Syndrome is a phenomenon first
studied by clinical psychologists Pauline Clance
and Suzanne Imes in 1978. They defined it as
“an internal experience of intellectual phoniness”
felt by their sample of professional women,
despite consistent external validation and
evidence of their success and achievements.
The key here is the persistence of self-doubt
despite external evidence to the contrary.
This term has been bandied around a lot in
the legal profession, mostly attributed to newer
lawyers, especially women. It’s billed as a
crisis of confidence. The posited cure is a power
pose and a pep talk about faking it till you
make it. Crucially, this “diagnosis” omits the
necessary element of external evidence to the
contrary.
External evidence to the contrary is hard to
come by in the early years of practice. It takes
years to build up a successful track record,
and the road to success is often littered with
failed strategies, unforeseen contingencies,
bad ideas, and lost cases. Newer lawyers are
constantly stretched outside their comfort
zones, taking on work they’ve never done before
and responsibilities they’ve never shouldered
before. Feeling like you don’t know what
you’re doing, when you really don’t know what
you’re doing, is not a pathology: it is an accurate
self-assessment.
Instead of prescribing false confidence, let’s
simply accept that it is perfectly normal for inexperienced
counsel engaging in legal tasks
for the first time to doubt themselves. Let’s applaud
their introspection and accurate self-assessment
when they tell us they feel like they
are in over their heads or fearful of missing
something important. Let’s ensure they have
resources available to them to navigate unfamiliar
terrain. Let’s normalize asking questions.
Let’s coach them on how to ask better
questions. Let’s be the safety nets they need
until they are ready – and genuinely confident
– to fly on their own.
12 13

ADVOCACY
The Wrong Stuff Revisited:
Tips for avoiding questions
from the bench in 2023
Tamara Ramsey (she/her), Dale & Lessmann LLP
Tip #6 in the first of the late Justice Catzman’s facetious articles about how to lose appeals
in the Court of Appeal is to never answer a question directly or, better still, at all 1 . In 2023,
as we continue to hold appeals and other court appearances over Zoom there are so many
1 Catzman, “The wrong stuff: How to lose appeals in the Court of Appeal,” The Advocates’ Society Journal, August 2000. Though focussed on appeals,
Justice Catzman’s tips apply much more broadly to help his readers lose in any court or tribunal. The August 2000 issue of The Advocates’ Journal is now
available on the member-only Journal archive page here.
new ways to try to avoid dialogue with the
judge hearing your argument.
Justice Catzman suggests that you avoid
giving a clear, straightforward answer and
to stonewall, stonewall, stonewall. He provides
some helpful tips for stonewalling
such as talking around the question, taking
the judge to lengthy passages from the
evidence that have nothing to do with the
question, rephrase the question in a manner
more to your liking, and making fun of
the question.
When appearing before the court over
Zoom or similar technology, here are some
new ways to use the technology to your advantage
to avoid questions and meaningful
dialogue with the bench:
Avoid “eye” contact. We all know it is not
real eye contact to stare into the camera,
but the best way to avoid the judge’s gaze is
to never look at the camera. If judges cannot
see the whites of your eyes, then they
cannot interrupt your speechifying to clarify
any of the brilliant points you just made.
Look away. This is a variation on avoiding
eye contact. Simply explain to the judge
that you have multiple monitors and that
you will be reading your submissions, uninterrupted,
from a monitor that you have
strategically placed to your immediate right
or left so that the judge gets to see your
best side profile throughout your submissions.
If you want to screenshare any documents,
you can shake things up by using
a monitor on the opposite side and letting
the judge stare briefly at your opposite ear.
The accidental mute. “You’re on mute”
remains the most overused phrase of the
2020s. When a judge asks a question, you
may want to accidentally on purpose hit
the mute button and keep moving your lips.
The judge may forget the question while
you pretend to provide a brilliant, muted
answer.
Freeze. Literally freeze like a deer in the
headlights. Do not move. If you stay frozen
long enough everyone will blame the technology.
When you finally decide to start
moving again simply pick up in your script
where you left off as if the question never
happened.
Fade into the background. While Zoom
has given us the ability to “enhance” our appearance
and add virtual lipstick, you may
want to take advantage of some of the limits
of the technology. Do not buy a ring light
or rely on the overhead fluorescent lights
of your office to keep everything bright. Sit
in front of the window on a sunny day to
obscure your image as much as possible. If
the judge cannot see you properly you can
pretend that you do not see the judge when
they try to ask you a question.
Be a cat. If all else fails, turn on a cat filter.
No judge is going to ask hard-hitting
questions of a cat.
If none of these tips work to avoid questions,
then you may want to clumsily ignore
all virtual etiquette by jumping in to
answer the question before the judge can
finish asking it. If the judge is not able to
finish the question, you can pounce on the
first few words they uttered as a pretense
to simply repeat your weakest argument.
Your goal is to discourage the judge from
attempting to throw you off track by interrupting
you again.
14 15

ROUNDTABLE
Reflections on the Appointment
of Chief Justice Tulloch
Compiled by Erin Durant (she/her), Durant Barristers
On December 19, 2022, Prime Minister Trudeau announced the appointment
of the Honourable Michael H. Tulloch, as Ontario’s new Chief Justice,
stating: “The Honourable Michael H Tulloch is a highly respected
member of Ontario and Canada’s legal community. As he takes on his
new role as Chief Justice of Ontario and President of the Court of Appeal
for Ontario, I wish him continued success. I know he brings a wealth
of experience to the position and will continue to serve Ontarians well.”
Jamaican-born Chief Justice Tulloch is the first Black Canadian
to be appointed to this esteemed position. TAS members Christine
Mainville, Dominique Hussey, Arleen Huggins and Barbara
Brown reflect on Chief Justice Tulloch’s historic appointment.
Christine Mainville (she/her), Henein Hutchison Robitaille LLP: I had the honour
of working closely with our new Chief Justice on his two independent
reviews, one on police oversight and the other on street checks, also
known as “carding”. We met with large segments of the population and
key stakeholders from across the province. The issues we were contending
with were highly charged and very divisive. Emotions ran high. But
Justice Tulloch had an impressive ability to connect with people from all
walks of life and from a variety of backgrounds. And by that, I mean not
only people from marginalized and racialized communities who are too
frequently targeted by police, but also people from the policing community–
from police leaders to front line officers and everyone in between.
Even though he was there to look over their shoulders, judge what they
were doing and how, and clear a pathway for change, all clearly respected
him – a sentiment that was not a given, as many indeed expressed.
Chief Justice Tulloch worked arduously to help all sides gain an understanding
of each other’s perspective, without getting any backs up.
People left our numerous public meetings feeling heard and understood.
Stakeholders left our private meetings and interviews with a belief
that he would deal with the issues fairly and reasonably. He masterfully
dealt with various sensitivities and brought people together,
somehow managing to create some consensus on the divisive issues
he opined upon. Truth be told, it was remarkable. He has an ease with
people – all people – and an ability to talk their language all the while
skillfully bringing them together, or at least closer together. I watched
it happen time and time again and believe he will bring those same
skills in the role of Chief Justice. Not merely as it relates to the members
of the Court, or of government, but as it relates to all Ontarians.
Ed. note: After writing this piece, Madam Justice Christine Mainville
was appointed to the Ontario Court of Justice.
Dominique Hussey (she/her), Bennett Jones LLP: It is terrific to see Chief Justice
Tulloch ascend to his position. Representation is critical, and the fact
that he is the first Black person to assume the role will, of course, have
a significant and positive impact on practising and aspiring lawyers, and
litigants. The Chief Justice’s tenure will not, however, be defined by his
being “the first”, but by his use of his potent combination of skills and
attributes. In addition to being highly regarded for his legal scholarship,
work ethic, thought leadership, public service and fairness, Chief Justice
Tulloch is approachable, compassionate, and generous with his time in
educating, mentoring, and inspiring lawyers and law students, including
those from equity-seeking communities.
16
16 17

Barbara Brown (she/her), Lenczner Slaght: The Chief Justice is an inspiring
example of what it means to serve others through the law.
As the Chief Justice’s law clerk in 2021-2022, I had ample opportunity
to observe his measured, compassionate, and intelligent
approach to the law. I saw firsthand how he navigates the complexities
in cases: the balance between legal principles and reality;
between the proper application of the law and fairness; and
between what the law can do and what it ought to do. I have no
doubt that this approach to the law will translate into his new role.
The Chief Justice does not take this work lightly. He is someone
who believes fervently in the importance of upholding the
just administration of the law and the need to ensure that the
legal system serves us all while making sure due attention is
paid to the groups that need it most. On this point, it is difficult
to capture the momentousness of his appointment as the first
Black Chief Justice of Ontario. His appointment boosts confidence
in the representation of diversity on the bench. However,
one thing must be clear: it is not his race that qualifies
him for the position; it is his exemplary record of judicial excellence
and his commitment to advancing the cause of justice.
I am confident that his complement of good temperament,
practical optimism, and varied experience will serve us all well.
18
Arleen Huggins (she/her), Koskie Minsky LLP: As the first Black
Judge to be appointed to any appellate Court in all of Canada
in 2012, Justice Tulloch exemplifies excellence and diversity.
The importance of Justice Tulloch’s elevation cannot be understated.
He serves the public not only as a judge preserving
the rule of law, but as someone who has lived experience as
a Black immigrant to Canada, with an in-depth understanding
of the historic and current experiences that the Black community
has, and continues to, sustain, including with the justice
system. He has also served as a prominent role model to Black
children and youth as to what is achievable/possible in spite
of the many challenges they face. Racial and Indigenous diversity
is still lacking on the bench in Canada, and is practically
non-existent at the appellate levels, with a few very recent and
notable exceptions. Justice Tulloch has spoken on many occasions
as to the importance of the public seeing judges from
their own communities when coming to the Court. It is a crucial
component of access to justice. We in the Black legal community,
and in the Black community generally, welcome this important
elevation and eagerly await many more appointments
and elevations of Black Judges in Ontario and across Canada.
Registration for Spring 2023 is just a click away!

MENTAL HEALTH
Practicing Law With ADHD:
Call me a JDHD
Devan Marr (he/him), LawPRO
“Why did this happen, Devan?”
It was January 2020. After a series of mistakes on files that occurred in short succession, I was
sitting across from the three named partners of the firm. They were concerned.
“I don’t know. Things just fell through the cracks.” Of course, I knew “how” these mistakes happened.
I could lay out the cascade of events that led to them. But I couldn’t articulate “why” they
happened. Or more importantly, why the same type of mistakes kept occurring over, and over,
and over again. Why couldn’t I get my act together? I left that meeting on the lawyer equivalent of
“probation”. I discussed the meeting with my counselor, who I saw every few months to check in. When
asked the classic question, “how did that make you feel?” I gave a surprising response: “Relieved? I know
where the boundaries are now.” This started a discussion about potential ADHD, which, after some
screening questions and an assessment, ended a few months later with a formal diagnosis. I initially
disclosed the diagnosis to a few key people at the firm. They were supportive. Things improved. I was
no longer “on probation.” Learning about my new
diagnosis finally allowed me to understand the
“why,” and (mostly) avoid those recurring mistakes.
Since then, I’ve become much more open about
my status as a “JDHD.” What follows is rooted
heavily in my personal experience of ADHD, and
by no means am I an expert. However, hopefully
my experience can make someone else’s journey
a little bit smoother.
What is ADHD?
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is a neurological
condition with symptoms arising from
impaired executive functions that can affect all
aspects of a person’s life. People with ADHD tend
to have difficulty with motivation, variable focus,
working memory, and impulse control. ADHD is
a terrible name. It is rarely a “deficit” of attention
that’s the problem. It’s the variability of that attention.
There is no identified “cause”, but it is generally
accepted as being genetic. You’re born with it.
What ADHD isn’t!
It is not a moral failing. It is not a question of “will
power”. It is not a monolith. The severity of ADHD
and its symptoms vary and fall along a spectrum.
Some people have serious impairments early on
in life that require significant support and medication
use. Others may have mild symptoms that
might not result in noticeable impairments until
the complexity of balancing life, work, and everything
else overwhelms their ability to cope. Most
will fall in between.
What are some of the challenges as a lawyer practicing
with ADHD?
ADHD brains do not react to the same stimuli
that might motivate a “neurotypical” person which
generally include importance, rewards, and consequences.
Individuals with ADHD tend to be motivated
by tasks that involve one of three things:
1. Novelty;
2. Urgency; and
3. Challenge.
People with ADHD tend to be very bad at administrative
issues like paperwork, time management,
and organization. Regardless of the type of lawyer
you are, bills, dockets, limitation periods, and persnickety
filing requirements are facts of life. They
also rarely hit one of the three motivating factors
of novelty, urgency, or challenge.
Throughout my practice, I struggled with administrative
tasks, like getting bills out, docketing,
and ensuring we scheduled expert reports. I
would leave them to the last minute, causing the
urgency my brain craved. Sometimes this worked.
Sometimes it didn’t.
20 21

They were amazing mentors, colleagues, and friends. The firm truly believed in work life balance. But
there were structural issues inherent in private practice that made me realize that my practice was not
what I wanted. In my current role, I have never been more engaged in my work. I provide litigation support
for external counsel dealing with repair or defence matters on behalf of our Insureds. Every issue
that comes in is either urgent (“We’re in the middle of a motion and counsel just raised this obscure
procedural issue, help!”), novel (“Counsel just raised Ontario’s Bees Act, help!”) or challenging, (“How can
we get around this limitations issue, help!”).
What are some of the benefits as a lawyer practicing
with ADHD?
While we aren’t all “creatives,” we tend to think
differently, allowing us to come at issues from angles
that may not have been immediately apparent.
When you’re “on” you are really “on”. My best
results or praise from clients and bosses came
when a file crossed my desk that was urgent, novel,
or challenging.
Things I’ve learned:
1. Do more of what you’re good at.
The best work I ever did was on files that were
either urgent, novel, or intellectually challenging.
If there is an area of practice, or a type of assignment,
you find yourself gravitating towards, go
after it. Tell your partners, colleagues, and friends
about it.
2. Get rid of what you’re bad at.
Being a mid-level associate can be difficult enough
as you balance new responsibilities. It is even
worse if you are fighting your brain the whole way
along. Don’t be afraid to delegate. If you know
there is a specific task that you hate to do, figure
out a way to get rid of it so you can focus on the
things you are good at.
3. Figure out what you need to succeed. Ask for it.
When I told my firm I had ADHD, they were supportive
but unsure of what that meant for my
practice. So was I. Despite reading half a dozen
books by some of the biggest names in ADHD
research, I didn’t sit down and really assess what
sort of changes might help me in my practice. Ultimately,
asking for help can be intimidating and
feel like a “big ask,” especially if you feel like you
are underperforming. But it’s not a big ask. It’s a
reasonable accommodation.
4. It’s an explanation, but it’s not an excuse.
As lawyers we have significant duties to our clients.
In my case, ADHD helped me understand
the “why” of my mistakes but did not excuse them.
“Sorry, my ADHD made me forget to file your
Statement of Claim on time” is cold comfort to a
client (or LawPRO). You are responsible for modifying
your practice to protect their interests.
5. You deserve to be happy. Even if it’s somewhere
else.
I left my old firm in September 2022 to join LawPRO
as a research lawyer. I miss my former co-workers.
The Wrap Up
Learning about an ADHD diagnosis later in life hasn’t really changed me. Recognizing its impact has
changed how I handle things or manage my practice. I’m doing more of what I’m good at, less of what I’m
bad at, and figuring out the things I need to succeed. Importantly, being open about it helps combat the
stigma, and has resulted in friendships with other JDHD’s across the country and beyond. And of course,
I wrote this article just a few hours before it was due to be submitted.
22
23

Q. TV/movie lawyer you most relate to and why?
A. Maxine Shaw from Living Single. She was one of the first Black female lawyers that I had ever seen
on TV and she unapologetically wore her hair in braids and locs. Over the years, I’ve become more
comfortable styling my hair how I want to style it; not letting the idea of conformity dictate my choice.
INTERVIEW
Q. Biggest pet peeve?
A. Inconsistent formatting in a document.
Melissa N. Burkett, LL.M (she/her/
elle), Alberta Justice, Legal Services
Division, Civil Litigation
Joe Thorne (he/him), Stewart McKelvey
Q. Pets: Yes? No? What kind?
A. I’ve never really been a pet person but I once had a guinea pig when I was a kid.
Q. What gives you sanity?
A. Music and having a good laugh session with friends and/or family.
Melissa N. Burkett is a senior litigator with Alberta Justice, Legal Services Division, based in Calgary, where
she represents and advises the Crown, ministries, and boards in litigation, administrative, regulatory,
and arbitral proceedings. She is experienced in matters such as judicial reviews, complex commercial
disputes, construction disputes, energy disputes, and environmental liability matters. Melissa has appeared
as lead or co-counsel before all levels of court in Alberta and in Manitoba, the Federal Court of
Appeal, the Federal Court, the Tax Court of Canada, the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and various
tribunals and boards. She also acts as Inquiry Counsel appointed pursuant to the Alberta Fatality Inquiries
Act. Melissa is the recipient of the 2021 Women in Law Leadership Award for Leadership in the
Profession (In-House/Government) and the 2022 Calgary Black Chambers Achievement Award in Law.
Melissa is also a member of The Advocates’ Society Alberta Regional Advisory Committee.
Q. Any pre-game rituals before court?
A. I listen to some particular songs to get in the zone and then I give myself a pep talk before I
head to the hearing.
Q.Podcast recommendation?
A. 99% Invisible. It’s about design and architecture.
24
24 25

Q.Restaurant recommendation for out of
town counsel?
A. I love Bridgette Bar in the Beltline!
Q. During your commute to work you
are...?
A. On the C-train listening to music and scrolling
through Twitter. My commute is only about
25 minutes door to door.
Q. How long from the time you wake up in the morning to the time you first look at your
phone?
A. Around 30 minutes, and only to double check that I haven’t forgotten about a scheduled call
or a meeting that morning.
Q. Most proud moment as a litigator?
A. Probably my first time making submissions solo at an appeal court. I was still pretty junior and
practising in Winnipeg. I was appearing for the first time at the Federal Court of Appeal. When the
Court called for a break, the supervising partner advised the panel that he thought I was doing
great on my own, that I didn’t need him babysitting me, and that he was going to head back to the
office. The panel agreed. That was a pretty cool experience and that’s when it started to click that
maybe litigation really was for me. (It was nice to win that case as well.)
Q. Your best advice for young litigators just starting out?
A. The most important part of advocacy is preparation and knowing your case inside out. Your advocacy
style develops over time, but being prepared will always matter most. Also, be active in your own
development. Seek out as many opportunities as you can and try out as many things as you can.
Q. Most embarrassing moment as a litigator?
A. Pick any one of the many times that I have spilled
coffee on myself during a questioning.
Q. Your key to staying healthy in a
stressful profession?
A. Setting and maintaining boundaries.
Knowing how to (respectfully) defend yourself.
Having hobbies and activities outside
of work. Taking vacation or time off!
Q.You have been recognized with a number of awards in recent years - the 2021 WILL Award
for Leadership in the Profession and the 2022 Calgary Black Achievement in Law Award.
What do these awards mean to you?
A. Both awards are very meaningful to me. As I said during both of my acceptance speeches, I (like many
women lawyers and, especially, women lawyers of colour) frequently enter corporate or legal spaces
and feel unwelcome, uncomfortable, or unsafe. Being nominated for the WILL Award, and then actually
winning it, was some recognition that people like me exist in those spaces, belong in those spaces, and
that there are people who want us in those spaces for what we contribute to the legal profession in Alberta.
With respect to the Calgary Black Chambers Award, I was honestly blown away by the caliber of
winners and nominees in all of the categories. There is a strong and vibrant community of Black people
in Calgary who are doing amazing things in the areas of Medicine, STEM, the Arts, Community Service,
Business and Entrepreneurship, etc. It was great to see it on display. I was honoured that someone
thought that my contributions merited inclusion among that distinguished list.
Q. What word or phrase do you most overuse?
A. I’m told that I start a lot of sentences with “Listen, …” – but never in court, of course.
Q. Have these awards had any impact on how you approach your career?
A. If I’m being honest, though, I don’t think either award has really had any significant impact on
how I approach my career (nor should they). I’ve always felt that lawyers have an obligation to give
back to the legal community and to the general public at large. That hasn’t changed and neither
has my volunteering and community involvement. The goal of having a truly inclusive legal profession
still remains. If being a recipient of these awards helps in normalizing seeing Black people
in the legal profession, great. If it gives a Black lawyer the confirmation and confidence that we
belong, even better. Other than that, I’m more focused on what steps and actions I and others can
contribute to achieving these goals. Both awards are nice to look at though, so there’s that.
Q. Favourite vacay spot?
A. I love exploring cities. NYC is my favourite,
Paris and Amsterdam are close behind.
Q. Preferred social media platform?
A. Definitely Twitter.
Q.We found this video link for your 2022 Calgary Black Chambers Achievement Award. Can
we share it with our readers?.
A. Ah Google… sure…. I’ve come to terms with its existence.
26 27

www.advocates.ca