Terrence Franklin is a founding partner at downtown-based Sacks, Glazier, Franklin, Lodise, McMurtrey & Scheerer, where he works in trusts and estates litigation.
With more than three decades of practice, Franklin works with high-net-worth individuals, charitable organizations, educational institutions and a wide variety of businesses and companies. One of his signature achievements is uncovering a family will from 1846 which liberated his ancestors from slavery, a subject that has become a seminar that he frequently presents.
In an interview with the Business Journal, Franklin speaks to why he was drawn to trusts and estates litigation and how he uses his career to advance the causes he champions.
What sparked your interest in a legal career and how did you land on trusts and estates?
I grew up on the South Side of Chicago, the first in our line to go to college. Teachers told me I had a lot of potential, and I was determined to do something good and important in my life. But the only professions that I could imagine were “doctor, lawyer, professor.”Â
Math isn’t a strong suit, so I set my sights on becoming a lawyer, whatever that might mean.
When I started practicing at BigLaw (Morrison & Foerster) after Harvard Law School, I only expected to do general litigation. But when a partner and senior associate (Bob Sacks, who is still my law partner today) left the BigLaw firm to start a trust and estate litigation practice, the idea of specializing intrigued me. Otherwise, there wasn’t anything that naturally drew or connected me to trusts and estates. Most people I knew didn’t have trust funds supporting them, so this was all new to me.
It took decades before I came to learn of a will contest in my own family in 1846-1847, where my ancestors’ freedom was at stake. So now, looking back, I know that trusts and estates litigation was my destiny.
Why Los Angeles for your career?
In law school, I had fallen in love with a classmate who was from Los Angeles. We spent the two summers before graduating trying out my hometown of Chicago and her hometown of Los Angeles. We both had better prospects for work in Los Angeles, where we raised our two now adult daughters. I’ve lived in Los Angeles much longer than I’ve lived anywhere else and I have been happy to build my career and community here. My former wife and I are still friends and both still practicing law, though we split up years ago and have each found new spouses.
How has your current firm enhanced your career trajectory?
I co-founded Sacks, Glazier, Franklin & Lodise (now Sacks, Glazier, Franklin, Lodise, McMurtrey & Scheerer) in 2001. My career has significantly grown and expanded since then. Working with really bright, caring, effective colleagues in a supportive environment, has allowed me to grow my own practice, and at the same time, given me a platform to develop the practice area of trusts and estates. I get to use that platform to also encourage more people of color, and Black lawyers in particular, to consider trusts and estates as a practice area, and I also use the platform to encourage non-lawyers to be sure to get their estate planning done. Being in the supportive firm has also allowed me to pursue my personal mission to “Bend the Arc of History Towards Justice” by sharing the story of my ancestors’ escape from slavery on various platforms, (for example) a TEDx Talk, podcasts, articles and other creative projects.
Tell me about your first trial win.
My first trial win dates back to a mini arbitration. My BigLaw firm represented a company that had been sued for sexual discrimination by nearly 1,000 women. The federal district court handling the case determined that the most efficient way to handle all of these disparate cases, was to conduct individual arbitrations after focused discovery, because the class members had to establish very specific legal requirements in terms of the timing of their claims, and independent corroboration of the facts. I think I was still a second-year associate. I was so nervous, but I got the opportunity to prepare and examine witnesses in an important case, but in a relatively low stakes environment. I was thrilled when the arbitrator issued her decision in our favor, that the claimant had not satisfied the specific requirements for winning relief. I felt grateful that the firm gave me this experience as a young associate.
Which trial victory are you most proud of and why?
My experience affirms the adage that the cases that go to trial are the ones in which one side or the other has miscalculated the case’s value. So, one of my proudest victories was going to trial in a case involving our client, the trustee of his wife’s family’s trust. His sister-in-law, a beneficiary, didn’t think our client could do anything right. Despite our attempts to dissuade the sister-in-law and her attorney from going to trial, they insisted. As the trial began, the probate judge suggested the other side give serious thought to settling the case – which we did, in a great victory for my client.
How have you and your team incorporated artificial intelligence into your practices and work?
We are excited about the new technology and beginning to experiment, but we are trying to be prudent. Headlines about courts sanctioning law firms for relying on AI-generated briefs without adequate review, along with concerns that certain AI tools may implicate attorney-client privilege or work product protections, have reinforced the importance of maintaining the professionalism and high ethical standards that define our practice.
As we begin using these tools, we have reviewed policies adopted by peer firms and guidance issued by bar associations and professional organizations, like the American College of Trust and Estate Counsel, so we can implement plans to make sure that our clients benefit from the speed and efficiency of AI, without falling into ethical traps.
Does the growth of so-called “nuclear verdicts” and their damage awards concern you?
“Nuclear verdicts” don’t affect our practice in the trust and estate field very much. Generally, the matters handled in the Probate Court don’t include the right to a jury, even though the Probate Court is a court of general jurisdiction. Since judges try our cases, we don’t get nuclear jury verdicts. The only type of cases we see that might involve a jury are conservatorship matters, since the court can’t take away someone’s liberty interests without a right to a jury. But I don’t see many conservatorship cases go to trial, and almost never with a jury.
Do you foresee trusts and estates law having growth potential as families grow older and more complicated?
I don’t think trusts and estates will ever go away as long as people die and are leaving money behind. It seems there is still a huge potential for growth in the practice area. As Baby Boomers and the Silent Generation age and pass away, it is estimated that between $84 trillion and $124 trillion will change hands over the next two decades. With that volume, there are sure to be disputes, and the complexity of the disputes will likely grow proportionately by volume.Â
At the same time, I imagine technologies that make it easier to create fakes of documents, and even people, will present a continuing challenge for the probate laws and the rules of evidence to keep up.
