Vermont Bar Journal, Vol. 40, No. 2 Spring 2016, Volume 42, No. 1 | Page 20

Interview with Bob Paolini

long. So in 1974, when the Defender General’s Office got a grant to establish a juvenile defender’s office, I applied for that
position and was the first juvenile defender.
TC: I had no idea.
BP: I stayed from 1974 through sometime in 1977, in various roles in the defense
system. Juvenile defender, then deputy defender general, then got assigned out to
the Washington County Public Defender’s
Office in Barre, and I guess it was a total
of about 4 years that I did that. And along
the way within the Defender General’s system I met and worked with Charlie Martin
who is an attorney and lives here on Court
Street but practices in Barre. When I left
the Defender General’s Office, Charlie and
I hooked up and formed Martin & Paolini,
where I was from 1977 or 1978, until February of 1996, when I came to the VBA.
TC: Oh. I didn’t realize that you had that
experience in the Defender General’s Office and with the Defender General system.
You would think that Matt Valerio would be
a little more respectful towards you.
BP: No, I would never think that. No.
TC: (Laughing)
BP: During the time when I was in practice with Charlie—so about 30 years ago
now—I was elected to the Vermont House,
where I represented a district that was
made up of Waterbury, Duxbury, Huntington, and Buels Gore.
TC: Now, what year was that?
BP: I got elected in 1986 and then again
in 1988. So I served two terms, all four
years on the House Judiciary Committee,
and the latter two years as vice-chair under
then chairperson, Amy Davenport.
TC: How interesting.
BP: That was one of the highlights of
my career, serving those four years in the
House. I served on the Judicial Retention
Committee, again as vice-chair under the
late John Bloomer, who was the Senate
chair during that time. I credit those four
years, probably more than anything else,
with helping me get this job.
TC: What led you to apply for this job in
1996?
BP: Well, I had left the legislature in
1990, went back into practice and this job
opened up sometime in late 1995. An announcement came out that they were looking for an executive director, and actually
the way the recruitment notice was written, it talked about being engaged in sort
of policy development with the board. I
just thought that was really interesting and
opened the door to being back in the legislature, while really focusing on the issues

20

that affect our profession, the issues that
affect the courts, the issues that affect access to justice. When you are a member of
the legislature, you have to deal with every
issue and people from all sides of things.
I used to joke that on Saturday morning I
couldn’t go to Shaw’s to shop in less than
three hours, because every aisle I went
down, someone was saying “I have been
meaning to call you.” So everything was
a job. A lot of those issues don’t actually
fit your resume, like with me, because I am
not familiar with them. Working for the bar
of which I am part, working for this profession, really attracted me.
TC: Had the VBA been heavily involved
in the legislature before you coming on? I
ask because I think of you as being so connected with the legislature.
BP: It wasn’t really the case up until my
tenure. The VBA hired an outside law firm
as their lobbyist, but it wasn’t exclusive, as
that law firm had a number of clients. So
the VBA had some presence but not the
kind of presence that I developed after I
got here.
TC: Oh, ok, interesting. It sounds like a
big part of what led you to apply for the
position was to be able to be involved on
that level, and in that way, regarding policy
decisions for the bar.
BP: Exactly!
TC: During your practice, were there areas of practice that you enjoyed the most?
What did you find most satisfying about
your career in the legal profession?
BP: Back in those days I did just about
everything. It was a two- or three-person
firm, and basically we did what we knew
how to do. We did a lot of real estate; we
did a lot of family cases; Charlie and I had
a contract to do appeals for the Defender
General’s system, so a lot of my time—not
as much of Charlie’s—but a lot of my time
was spent actually at the Supreme Court.
We had an active appellate practice.
TC: What was your least favorite part
about practicing law?
BP: Just the hassle of just running the
business, and making payroll, and, you
know, the HR work that had to be done,
and the timekeeping. That was the first
thing that everybody said to me when I
moved over here. Everybody said “Well,
you don’t have to keep your time anymore,
so you won’t have to live life in ten to fifteen minute increments.” That was a big
relief. Actually, it took a while for me, and I
bet that is true for you since you left practice. It took a while for me to stop thinking
that way. And for the first couple of years, I
really missed being in a courtroom and being engaged in that, but then that faded.
THE VERMONT BAR JOURNAL • SPRING 2016

TC: The things that you enjoyed the
most, and the things that you enjoyed less,
sort of sums up the practice of law today.
Did you have any trepidation about taking
the job?
BP: I absolutely did, yeah, I absolutely
did. First of all, it was running a statewide
organization. I had never done that before.
It was running a non-profit organization. I
had never done that before. So, yes, I was