Legally Bond
Legally Bond
An Interview with Dr. John Coverdale, The Civil Rights Act of 1964
In this special episode of Legally Bond, Kim speaks with Dr. John Coverdale, President of The Center for Workplace Solutions, as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act which was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 2, 1964.
For more information about the Civil Rights Act, click here and here.
Hello and welcome to Legally Bond, a podcast presented by the law firm Bond, schenck and King. I'm your host, kim Wolfe-Price. While we talk about issues pertaining to changes in law and law practice on the podcast, we also talk about issues important to our profession, businesses and society. July 2nd 2024 is the 60th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act. Signed on July 2nd 1964 by President Lyndon B Johnson, this law prohibited discrimination in public places, called for the integration of schools and other public facilities and made employment discrimination illegal. It is thought to be the most sweeping civil rights legislation since Reconstruction and it forbade discrimination in employment based on race and sex.
Speaker 1:So, on today's episode, I am thrilled and honored to have Dr John Coverdale as our guest. John is the president of Center for Workplace Solutions, working with employers in small business, government and education sectors so all businesses, I think, ben and the work focuses on labor arbitration and mediation, workplace dispute resolution, employee learning and professional development. John is, of course, also a professor, teaching in areas that complement all of that. We first met in the other way that John works, which is in speaker, using his knowledge and experience to direct conversations on a variety of topics, including diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging in the workplace. So, john, thank you so much for joining the podcast today.
Speaker 2:Thank you for having me, Kim. It's nice to work with you again.
Speaker 1:Yes, it's always good to work with you too, thank you. So we met almost a year and a half ago and we were asked to speak to the New York State School Attorneys at their annual meeting in the Adirondacks. Our topic was implicit and unconscious bias. And I don't know. I have to say, john, I think we make a pretty good speaking duo.
Speaker 2:I agree.
Speaker 1:I think it was a good conversation. I could keep going with your introduction and explaining your professional background, but I think the listeners would rather hear from you now. So would you mind telling us a little bit about yourself, whether it's your education journey, where you're from, your family background? Whatever you'd like to talk.
Speaker 2:I'm a native Long Islander and still reside on Long Island. I'm the son of educators who sort of migrated from the mid-Atlantic after meeting college and they both became educators. My mother was working here when they got married. So she said to my father I have a job and you don't, so you're going to come up to Long Island and work. And she said there were plenty of teaching jobs, except when he got here he couldn't find any.
Speaker 2:And it's interesting because this part of my family history drives my work to this day, because my father was interviewed over the telephone for a teaching job in 1961, and he was offered employment over the phone and when he showed up to work in this all-white school district they had an emergency board meeting that night or the next night, I don't recall exactly to try to fire him. So you know he looked good on paper. He connected well with the male interviewer, the superintendent, who was also a former college athlete. There was a lot of bonding. The superintendent was a former history teacher. My father was a prospective history teacher. College athlete to college athlete, veteran to veteran, male to male. But when he showed up something happened and they had an emergency school board meeting. But he ended up keeping his job by one vote. There were five members on the board at the time Two voted yay, two voted nay and the president, who didn't vote unless a tie was needed to be broken, voted to keep him so. And he had a spectacular career there. He taught, he coached basketball, varsity basketball, started a football program and, you know, became an administrator principal of that same school.
Speaker 2:You couldn't ask for a better story. But you know I'm here because basically one vote. So it's the importance of an inclusive mindset. You know the bias that can impact decision making, which we discussed when we worked together and did our prior presentation, impact decision-making, which we discussed when we worked together and did our prior presentation. But he probably wouldn't have gotten that job, no matter how qualified he was in 1961, if he had showed up in person for a traditional interview. And that's a powerful thing to remember, not just my story, but all of us that are practitioners and involved in decision-making in the workplace. It's really important to remember the bias that we all suffer from, we all have to work through.
Speaker 1:Right, absolutely. I love hearing that story because of how it ended, but the beginning of it is still shocking, and yet not at the same time right, because we don't bias exist.
Speaker 2:It's a reminder for me I still live in the same town where I grew up in and that school district that my father worked in elected me to be on the school board and reelected me to be on the school board by an even wider margin. I was 30 years old. I was the school board president, the same seat as the person who voted to keep my father in his position, obviously sometime you know, 30 or so years prior. It's an interesting story. His position, obviously sometime you know 30 or so years prior. It's an interesting story. And when my father died in 2013, he was the funeral home was right in this community. I have never seen so many people in my life. I still wake up sometimes thinking I mean, it was two to four, seven to nine. We were not able to leave after the four o'clock ended because there were people waiting and there were so many people. I mean it's just a fascinating story for me personally and, to some degree, professionally.
Speaker 1:Right, that makes sense and you said it informs your work and, if I'm recalling correctly, the district has honored your father as well. Did they name something for him?
Speaker 2:He's in the Hall of Fame. The gym has a nice size plaque above the entrance way with his name on it. There was actually a petition. It didn't go anywhere and he wouldn't have wanted it to go anywhere. But there was a petition to change the name of the high school to his name. I wouldn't have wanted it either and I don't think it was even close to occurring. But it's still touching that. You know, there were I think 2000 or so signatures on this petition and I had to speak to the Board of Education and say I don't want this to go any further.
Speaker 1:And.
Speaker 2:I don't think my father would want it to go any further.
Speaker 1:Now we're being remembered in the gyms where he the gym where he was so involved with kids starting the football program and things like that that makes sense. Knowing that as an educator, how many lives he shaped, that's pretty amazing. So you said it informs your work. Can you tell us a little bit about your educational background and your graduate work?
Speaker 2:That story aside, I actually didn't even want to go to college. That story aside, I actually didn't even want to go to college. I won't bore you with further explanation of the word forced, but I have a master's degree in business administration, a master's degree in human resource management, graduate certificate in organizational behavior and my doctorate is in educational leadership.
Speaker 1:I did not know that, that you had to get a pre-prompted to go.
Speaker 2:Prompted is the good word. Prompted on the end of a foot almost.
Speaker 1:Parents are like we did not do this so that you will not go to school, you will go.
Speaker 2:And both of my parents. My father was the only of seven children only one who attended college. He was the oldest of seven and still the only one that attended. My mother was the youngest of 13. And all of her older brothers and sisters chipped in to send her to college because they were not able to go. So you know, these two people who merged, all they had when they started their journey was this college diploma, you know, but it opened up opportunities for them that they took full advantage of and they both had spectacular careers. I don't want to leave my mom out of this, but she taught for 38 years, was a guidance counselor, she had a spectacular career and then, when she retired from teaching, she started a food pantry in a town here on Long Island called Sayville. So, and when she died about five years ago, they named that food pantry after her. So both my parents have their names on buildings in this community. So it's quite touching really, but it shaped my journey.
Speaker 2:I was always curious about history. My father was a history teacher and one of the things that is interesting about the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is that it's within my lifetime, and I can recall my parents insisted on traveling and we loaded up our Volkswagen. Initially it was a Volkswagen bug and then we got a Volkswagen squareback and you know we thought we had plenty of room in but the the you know they would drive to Canada and drive as far south as Virginia and we had relatives in the Delmarva Peninsula area but they didn't hesitate to get on the road despite the things that were going on in many parts of the country at that time. But I recall them talking about the Civil Rights Act and having conversations I was nosy and, as they say, always in the grown folks conversations but we had the national directory of Howard Johnson's, the Holiday Inn and the Sheridan Hotel chain in our glove compartment in the car at all times because those hotels there were others, but those were the primary hotels that said literally, upon signing of the Civil Rights Act, that they were going to follow it, while that wasn't always the case and, as you know, the Civil Rights Act prohibited discrimination in public accommodations in particular and among other things. So within my lifetime we had this landmark law that benefited me directly, both personally and professionally, and it's one of my earliest memories. So I decided at some point.
Speaker 2:I've always been a student of workplace issues and I decided as a potential topic for my dissertation how we got here. Dissertation how we got here, what part of the social history has influenced our workplace decisions and policies. I wanted to study that, so I did a. My doctoral dissertation was an analysis of affirmative action public policy and its impact in business, schools and municipalities, and part of it was I did an analysis of presidents, united States presidential administrations, from Franklin Roosevelt through George W Bush, to determine what impact their administration had positively or negatively on the history of inclusion and how we got to the Civil Rights Act.
Speaker 2:Because people look at the Civil Rights Act of 64 as one document. And there actually is a history, a fascinating history, where from around 1947 through 1964 and even beyond, if you look at the Voting Rights Act, that there was a discernible effort to address the historical inequalities that our country was struggling with and through. And it is interesting if you look at it from that perspective, from executive orders. Even President Roosevelt signed executive orders, president Truman signed executive orders and then you know. So you see how we got to the 64 Civil Rights Act.
Speaker 2:And then the President Kennedy had not one, but two bills that he submitted to Congress and the first one languished. So he revised it slightly and I think it had been sitting for about a year when he unfortunately was assassinated. And then Lyndon Johnson revised it even further and got the Civil Rights Act as we know it today to pass, in part as an honor for President Kennedy. As a memorial, a Democrat from New York was actually the person who helped draft the bill, emanuel Seller, who's largely credited with pushing the bill through Congress and eventually the Senate.
Speaker 1:I think some of what you said there is so important because you know, when individuals who are perhaps of a different generation than we are, they think, well, it happened, and it just happened in the 60s. But that context of the long road to get there and then also sort of the long road that we're still on in many ways long road that we're still on in many ways 1964, simultaneously it seems like a 60th anniversary is a great thing to celebrate because it's a significant amount of time and yet it does feel like such recent history in the long history of our country Is part of this really about thinking how this all fits together. The work that you talked about, how other presidents really started the conversation Is that an important piece of this?
Speaker 2:Yes, I often tell people that the workplace is a microcosm of society. So in order to understand truly understand the things that are going on in our workplaces, we have to also take a look at the things that are happening externally. So we and the Civil Rights Act, I think, is in addition to being a landmark law it's important to know that this is part of the history I mentioned. You know the executive orders and President Roosevelt, but you know the people, know the March on Washington from 1963.
Speaker 2:Most people don't realize that there was a march on Washington that was planned in 1947, where A Philip Randolph, the president of the sleeping car porters, went and met with President Roosevelt and said if something isn't done to address systemic inequities and discrimination, we're going to march on Washington. I expect we're going to have 100 to 150,000 or so people who attend in Roosevelt. President Roosevelt obviously didn't want that. So we decided that you know we'd be better off to see how the issue could be addressed through an executive order. So that's really the start of the Civil Rights Act in and of itself and that was averted. But then we did have the 1963 March on Washington which in part was planned to encourage Congress to sign and approve or pass this civil rights bill that was languishing.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it was that people using the momentum, or trying to create momentum, I guess I could say, and trying to create urgency around it. I gave a very general overview in the introduction to the podcast of the Civil Rights Act. Would you give your thoughts on the major points of it or your summary of it?
Speaker 2:Well, at its core, it outlawed discrimination based on race and color and religion and national origin, and the bill includes the word sex to represent gender, outlawing gender discrimination. But that was added at the last minute, so there was not initially the intent to include women from discrimination. So that but and I say that not as a criticism, because I'm very passionate about this effort you know that our country, as we're imperfect as a union, but that history is very difficult to ignore, and it's also true that some progress was made, and it's also true that some of that progress was driven by people that didn't look like me. So the other thing that I think the Civil Rights Act received critical acclaim for is what, despite its imperfections and if you look at the EEOC website, there's still complaints on the rise for sexual harassment and racial discrimination. Age discrimination is on the rise, in part because people are working longer and in some cases because they want to, in some cases because they have to, and so now you have again three and a half to four generations in the workplace and there's some real and imagined conflict around that.
Speaker 2:But I think the Civil Rights Act also laid the foundation for where we are today and, as imperfect as the bill is, and again, we're not taking anything away from the progress that has been made. We're still having conversations about sexual harassment. We're still having conversations around equity and racism, and I mean the Civil Rights Act doesn't mention any sexual preference or sexual identity, at which we're having conversations around that today as well. The Supreme Court, four years ago five lose track of COVID said that same-sex marriage is legal. So the journey, depending on how you look at it, if you want to just focus on 1964, but from 1964 to today, even before 1964, we also had the Equal Pay Act in 1963, which drives a lot of our work. So we had 63, 64, 65, the Voting Rights Act, you know. Then we had, in 1978, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, you know, you have the Americans with Disability, you have family medical leave. So all this stems from the Civil Rights Act, stems from the Civil Rights.
Speaker 1:Act Right. It was such an important moment for many reasons, but partially because we finally put down as a country, in some way, imperfect or not that this is important and we codified it as a law. And then a lot I think almost everyone I've spoken to has been part of these other acts that you talked about and part of these other movements has really been grateful to those who pushed for the 1964 Act as setting the stage to make it possible. Is that how you think of it as well?
Speaker 2:I absolutely agree with that and I would summarize it by saying this is all driven by a desire to achieve heightened civility. Prior to the Civil Rights Act, prior to the executive orders we know, we had Jim Crow in the South. Women couldn't vote. Prior to that, couldn't own property, I mean. So this is a moment where you have to assume a positive intention. But as you look from today, 2024 to 1964, even if you just look back that 60-year period the progress has been significant, but it's been in the last 15 to 18 years where there seems to be a focus on heightening civility. There seems to be a focus on heightening civility that discrimination in the workplace is not civil Incivility. Sexual harassment is incivility, and now you have more women in the workplace.
Speaker 2:The demographic in our country has changed, the population has changed and some of the tension that we're experiencing collectively comes from the change that this moment is driving and on one hand, some of it is difficult to process. On the other hand, I believe firmly that better days are coming. The demographic is going to drive that. Do we have first generation of citizens that have seen serious female candidates for president and have seen a family of color living in the White House for eight years, same-sex marriage is now legalized. As time goes on, that's going to create, hopefully, a sustainability that I think most people I won't say all people, but most people want, and I credit the Civil Rights Act for that.
Speaker 2:It in some ways foreshadowed what our potential was as a country. And I mean, you can look at it as it didn't happen organically and it's true it didn't happen organically but would you rather it didn't happen at all, I wonder, in my lifetime, because I don't believe that if President Nixon had won in 1960, that he would have drafted a civil rights bill when might we have had a law like the one we're discussing today? And again, within my lifetime, when might we have had this law? If we had won in 60 and run again in 64 and won, you know, it might have been in the mid-1970s before a law of this magnitude to address systemic and historical inequities and discrimination based on gender and race and ethnicity and national origin would have occurred.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and you mentioned organically, but you know, in some ways it was organic, right. People wanted that civility People. You know there were people who thought this is enough. Equity and equality have to matter, and so those seeds were planted, right? If we're going to use that metaphor Because of the way our process works as a democratic nation, it was a law that had to be implemented, and so they did what they had to do to make sure that became part of our public conversation and discourse, to discuss these issues, because before that it wasn't necessarily even common conversation, was it?
Speaker 2:Right, right, I often watch the video from the March on Washington and there's a couple of things that strike me, and I mean majestically. One is it was the third week in August and everybody had suits and ties on and women had dresses on and I mean, and just that alone I can't imagine today. But, more importantly, there were 250,000 or so people there and there wasn't any problem whatsoever. And there were famous and very popular actors and actresses who were there, who came in support of social change the majority of the people that I've seen on all the videos that I've watched and all the historical documentaries that I've watched and listened to Dr King's magnificent speech.
Speaker 2:But there was a white majority in Washington DC that day, right, and, and you can't ignore that and the actors and actresses yes, sidney Poitier and Harry Belafonte and some other prominent actors of their time were there. But I mean, there were a bunch of people Jim Garner and a bunch of others who were there and spoke and wanted social change, and people took buses from all over the country and buses in those days didn't have air conditioning and so forth. They had to slide the window open and they got out with their suits and ties and dresses on, and they stood in the heat for a couple of hours to engage in what constituted one of the most critical social protests of our time in support of legislation that was languishing.
Speaker 1:Everything about that shows an intentionality like real. I mean to do this it's, you know, not to disparage today's society, but it's not a quick tweet or message or dm, but it was all intentionality getting on the bus, dressing the way they did all, all of that was about the seriousness, wasn't it?
Speaker 2:right and the civility yes, yes. Despite the anger, despite the resentment, despite the passion for social change, despite some people felt marginalized and excluded and the history and so forth, there was not any active incivility the entire day.
Speaker 1:Pretty amazing, powerful, to look at it that way and to see it, I guess, to see it Right. Sometimes we don't take the time to fully see when we're looking back at pieces of history, you know, hear the speech, hopefully we're listening to the powerful words of it, but to pull back and look the whole day.
Speaker 2:And I also think we have to discuss President Kennedy and Kennedy is one of my favorite presidents. I've been to the JFK library I lost count, but I think at 15. And sometimes I just go and sit and think, and the last time I went, which was just a few months ago, I actually started to cry afterwards when I left, walking back to my car, because I had this overwhelming feeling what has happened? You know, where are we now? Here's somebody that came from privilege, that his father was among the wealthiest people in the country Right and he dedicated his life to service. He was astute enough and curious enough about social issues to read that something had to be done, even though he didn't have familiarity with the cause, even though he had, I'm guessing, probably only seen people of color who were servants in his house. And that's such a critical moment in our history because, whoever the occupant was at the White House at that moment, that was the pinnacle of the civil rights movement, I mean, while it had started as far back or as early as perhaps 1947 and sort of picked up momentum in the 1950s during the bus boycott and the things that were going on at the University of Alabama in the early 1960s and in Montgomery. But here's somebody who and yes, his brother Bobby, probably pushed him and you can say he didn't move fast enough and all that was most likely true, but he did move and he did not have to and he wrote, drafted or submitted to Congress not one but two civil rights bills. He also made a magnificent speech about civil rights and I mean and Medgar Evers was shot in his driveway in front of his own wife and kids with where we are today, despite a lot of negatives, I feel good about it, I really do.
Speaker 2:And the George Floyd protest, the Me Too movement, the Time's Up movement, the sexual harassment analysis you know people see sexual harassment and they say, well, clarence Thomas and Anita Hill, and then everybody responds to that and then so there's an ebb and flow. You know Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky and now Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby and a bunch of other people. So we're not sure where this is going to center, but more and more people. I'm also a workplace investigator and a lot of the work that I do actually stems from. I tell people I'm empowered by the EEOC as a workplace investigator and the EEOC was created by the Civil Rights Act. It was established at agency government agency was established in the passage of the Civil Rights Act, established at agency government agencies, established in the passage of the Civil Rights Act. And most of your workplace harassment language stems from the language that's contained the anti-discrimination language that's contained in the Civil Rights Act. So sexual harassment obviously still prevalent, but more and more people understand that it's wrong.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think employers I mean from what you know they understand that this is not civility, this is not the business I want to build.
Speaker 2:Right and I think that's critically important. The George Floyd protests, the same thing. People, and a lot of people, came to me and they clutched their pearls and there were times and maybe that wasn't at my best, but I would say, hey, you've been watching the same. We went to school together. We had the same history classes together. We read the same textbooks. You've been watching the same news channels that I've been watching. I mean, if they come to me in that moment, on one hand, I think it's good that you had an awakening. On the other hand, I say where have you been? Because this is not a new problem, you know, and that's not a political statement, it's not a criticism of the police or whatever. I mean, these sorts of incidents have occurred. There's always been outgroups in our society throughout our history. And what you're saying to me is, because you were not outgroup status, it didn't impact you, you were in group. So I mean, if, after a difficult moment like that, you're more astute, more aware, more empathetic, great, but this is not new development.
Speaker 1:I think you and I have talked about this and I mean, obviously that was a very tragic moment, but not new. One of the things you and I have talked about is that everybody has to be comfortable with feeling uncomfortable. So for those people who came to you, they had to get to a place where acknowledging this is real and happens. They had to get that discomfort and understand in group, out group and accept that moment Right, because sometimes people think well, but not me. But you know, I know I'm part of it, of a societal in group based on some things and not based on others. But you have to be okay with being uncomfortable because that's how we change and grow and maybe that you know I can't speak for JFK, but maybe that was some of the moment for him, right, someone had to point it out.
Speaker 2:Right, right, I mean, I love that about Kennedy. He could have said you know, I'm not going to take, I'm not going to use any of my political capital on dealing with this issue, or I got enough on my plate today and could have said anything, you know, but he listened, he observed, he read there was no, no real political gain for him. It's interesting because during the campaign 1960, nixon versus Kennedy, martin Luther King was arrested and jailed somewhere in the South I think it was Birmingham, I'm not exactly sure and as a candidate, kennedy called Mrs King and asked what can I do? And he used, reportedly used some influence to have King released a day or two later. But the guy sat in prison in the South, arrested for disturbing the peace or whatever it was, you know, after one of those protests. But even that, while he could have been calculated, you know, but you didn't have to do it.
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:And Richard Nixon didn't do it.
Speaker 1:Right. Only one of the candidates sort of stepped forward and said this is a moment in history that I cannot let pass by.
Speaker 2:Right and affirmative action also largely began under President Kennedy that he wanted to address the discrimination in government contracts and people who worked in labor construction and took federal money for their projects and federal funding, you know, were not allowed to discriminate. So during that same period of time, that same block of time, the early 1960s Equal Pay Act and the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act so I think the progress has clearly been. There's a lot of work that still needs to be done and we all have to do some of it. But squarely to the Civil Rights Act, as sort of the foundation of this striving toward civility, and we're still doing it. We're still striving toward it and I have work to do, you and I.
Speaker 2:That was how we bonded, and you know, and that we met for the first time.
Speaker 2:We had spoken over the phone a few times prior to that presentation and I'll admit, even on the drive up I was thinking, was thinking to myself. You know I don't know how this is going to work, but it was a beautiful day, I had some music on and I said we'll just figure out. And I got the vibe from you openness and learnedness and compatibility, and you know we all, when you go to work with somebody, you never know quite what you're going to get. And and right away I was comforted. But we had an active audience who asked a lot of questions and they were interested in it and we had sort of the little surveys, the turn and talk. It was a spectacular experience and the focus was unconscious bias and we weren't heavy handed, we were just trying to get people to understand. There was a room full of attorneys, too right Trying to get people to understand their own biases and position them to be able to help their respective clients in ways that I think are critically important in today's workplace.
Speaker 1:Critically important. Absolutely. Yeah, it was one of those moments where someone sort of put us together to do the presentation and developed to be a really great back and forth and I think we had a powerful presentation. I hope it's not our last one.
Speaker 2:I agree completely.
Speaker 1:So as we wind down today it's sort of in honor, I guess, of the 60th anniversary what are your thoughts as we move towards further civility? What is the next 60 years, or what are thoughts even just for the next year or so?
Speaker 2:I think we have to work through this. This is a pivotal moment. We're very divided and I think it's it's important, it's imperative, really, that we all work through that. There are days when I'm frustrated or I sort of stereotype based on, you know, someone's political beliefs and and vice versa, I'm sure, but I think we all. This is a moment that will help us ultimately be more civil, and we have a generation coming up that hasn't experienced many of the isms that our prior generations have experienced. And you know there's a sustainable. This could be people use the term teachable moment, I use the term sustainable moment that after this, both after it and because of it, we'll have more people.
Speaker 2:People often say to me well, you know, I wasn't there, I didn't do it, I wasn't part of this country's ugly history. We should all just try to get along. I treat everyone the same and all that probably is true, but what I say to people is OK, so you're, so that your children and your grandchildren and your great grandchildren are not tagged with the same sort of either negative historical contributions or or inactions. Can we partner on this particular issue? And most people say I never looked at it from that perspective. Don't you want a better world for your children and your grandchildren, and part of the civility that we're talking about and that we're striving for will, I hope, mean fewer isms and mean more, greater levels of inclusion, and mean less discrimination, and continue to embrace the content and the intent of the Civil Rights Act and understand that we're imperfect, but there are things that can be done to address real and imagined and systemic inequities, and we've done a lot of those things. So that's my hope that we continue.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I appreciate that. I hope that as time goes on you'll come back to speak with us again. It's always a pleasure to have the opportunity to speak with you. I think we do also already have a plan to do this for the New York State Bar Association soon. But I'm grateful for your time and I always enjoy speaking with you and learning from you. I do have to shout out Alison Matthews at Bond for introducing us initially.
Speaker 1:That's true, you know. I think that's fair to say. Thank you to Alison, and I really do look forward to working with you again. John, thank you so much for joining us on the podcast today.
Speaker 2:Thank you, kim, it's been a pleasure.
Speaker 1:Thank you for tuning into this episode of Legally Bond. If you're listening and have any questions for me, want to hear from someone at the firm or have a suggestion for a future topic, please email us at legallybondfbskcom. Also, don't forget to rate, review and subscribe to Legally Bond wherever podcasts are downloaded. Until our next talk, be well.
Speaker 3:Bon, schenick and King has prepared this communication to present only general information. This is not intended as legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. You should not act or decline to act based upon the contents. While we try to make sure that the information is complete and accurate, laws can change quickly. You should always formally engage a lawyer of your choosing before taking actions which have legal consequences. For information about our communication, firm practice areas and attorneys, visit our website bskcom. This is Attorney Advertising.