The 2025 AAML Institute for Family Law Associates: A Review and Recommendation, Part 1
Why Every Associate Should Attend the AAML Institute
By William B. Reingold, Jr.
Going into the AAML’s Institute for Family Law Associates, I had already been given orders by my mentor, Lisa Ann Sharpe, to write a review of my experience. My associate-minded, Sisyphean response to Lisa was akin to, “Sure boss, I’ll never stop pushing that boulder up the hill for you.” (I’d like to think Lisa and I have a good working relationship.) But this wasn’t a laborious assignment by any means. I loved the conference, and I loved the people there. And as I’ll lay out in this review, I think any committed associate should take the opportunity to attend this conference in the future.
******
The four-day conference took place in Chicago. I’ll admit I was initially worried about our working environment. It was late June. There was evidently a heatwave bludgeoning the city, and we’d convened at the tail end of it. Because this was a conference bringing together folks from across the country, attorneys from Texas and Arizona and the like were quick to mention that “it’s really not that hot.” The rest of us (less familiar with this punishing concept known as ‘humidity’) begged to differ. In fact, we were warned that the conference room in our hotel is generally cold and to bring a sweater; but just about every speaker during their presentation couldn’t help but comment on how hot it was.
Heat aside, there were about 25 associates attending the “Advanced Course” with me. Most of us have been practicing in the range of 7 to 15 years, making me one of the younger associates at ~4½ years. The conference room was narrow with lots of windows along its sides. The tables where we sat, three per row, offered scant elbow room. Many people printed out the materials sent to us in advance, but there simply wasn’t room for both the materials and one’s laptop to take notes. So the heat from our laptops and close quarters made me concerned that this was going to be a very trying conference.
Don’t worry. This isn’t going to be one big nag; those are all the grievances I have. It’s positive from this point on, and we even moved to a better room on Day 3.
When it came to content, the AAML absolutely delivered. Every presenter was from a different jurisdiction, so there were regular caveats about how they (the presenters) were mostly aware of their own state laws; and yet the vast majority of the content seemed perfectly relevant to anyone regardless of jurisdiction. We covered executive compensation, asset/income concealment, cryptocurrency, military benefits, cross examinations, retirement accounts, trusts and estate planning, business valuations and so on. Presentations were brisk but very informative. Questions were encouraged, and fortunately the associates felt comfortable raising their hands. Ever opportunistic, questions often started along the lines of, “So I have a case where the husband…”; or, for the ethically judicious associates, the questions might begin with a, “Hypothetically, my client has a bad gambling issue…”
Some presentations were more educational than others. You could tell which topics associates cared the most about, because those were the sessions when you could hear us frantically (and loudly) clacking away at our laptops. For example, people were furiously typing notes during the session on taxes; we were all thankful that the very next session on military benefits allowed us to take a break—hardly any clacking. (Not every associate fell into this camp. The guy sitting next to me said his law firm has an in-office CPA for all things tax, and that his firm regularly handles military divorces. He actually helped the speaker a few times with military jargon.) Most of us genuinely wanted to learn about taxes and, by extension, consequences that could arise if you aren’t buttoned up in your Separation Contracts. “I think most family law attorneys are terrified by taxes,” opined Sandy Brooks, who probably looked out at us and saw that our eyes were the size of saucers. But that’s okay, she said. Most of us attorneys aren’t moonlighting as CPAs. We mainly just need to spot the issues. The key is understanding the issues and understanding what questions to ask your expert.
More on this last point: Hire an Expert was the mantra of the conference. For as much material as we covered, it became clear by the third speaker that they wanted us associates to know our limits. As newer attorneys, we tend to take on a lot of smaller cases. And we all know that some of the smaller cases can border on sardoodledom: relatively simple disputes, petty disagreements and not a whole lot of assets to justify the fuss. But, as we bring in larger cases, we will need to put more resources into our efforts, and that often means retaining an expert when warranted. Even financially savvy attorneys should consider forensic accountants or other experts who have software more catered to complicated work needed in these cases.
******
Editor’s note: Stay tuned for Part 2, where Mr. Reingold digs deeper into the case study that tested every associate’s stamina, reflects on the mentorship experience and shares final takeaways — including the advice that hit the hardest and the laughs that helped carry everyone through.