Responsive Law Blog

Laurence Tribe, President Obama's Access to Justice Counselor, addressed the ABA convention last week. After acknowledging the contribution of pro bono attorneys, he pointed out that pro bono assistance alone is not capable of filling the gap in legal needs faced by the poor and middle class. "I would encourage all of you," Tribe said, "to derive satisfaction as well from the less direct, but no less real, relief that we bring to others through the avenue of systemic reform."

Among the reforms Tribe suggests are the revision of UPL laws to allow non-lawyers to provide simpler legal tasks, and the use of technology to establish better self-help centers located in courts and communities. A video of Tribe's complete address is below. Below that, we have transcribed the last several minutes of his speech (from 18:14 to the end), which contain most of his recommendations for systemic reform.

Continue reading "Tribe to ABA: Reform UPL Laws, Expand Self-Help" »

On July 26, Laurence Tribe, President Obama's Senior Counsel for Access to Justice, told an assembly of state supreme court justices that he had "come face to face with the anxiety and desperation of ordinary citizens, who look to our legal system for their fair share of decent treatment" and then told them what they could do to improve access to the courts. We'll be writing more about Professor Tribe's recommendations in the weeks to come, but we'd like to focus here on his comments on pro bono (free) assistance from lawyers.

Tribe recommended that the courts and bars loosen restrictions on unbundled representation and multi-state practice in order to increase opportunities for pro bono representation. He also suggested that courts reconsider their unauthorized practice restrictions so that court clerks could offer more help to self represented parties.

Continue reading "Tribe: We Need Better Unbundling for Pro Bono Lawyers; Responsive Law: ...And for Paid Lawyers Too" »

The Ohio Supreme Court has enacted a rule authorizing the state attorney general to investigate and prosecute UPL cases. Responsive Law supports having UPL cases prosecuted by the attorney general, who represents the people, rather than by the state bar, which represents lawyers. However, the new rule continues to allow prosecutions by state bar UPL committees, allowing the bar to continue to prosecute its competitors.

The new rule also doubles the number of non-lawyer representatives on the UPL board. Unfortunately, this increases the number of non-lawyers on the thirteen member board from one to two, compared to eleven attorney members. Consumers need more than token representation on a board that purports to act in their interest.

Online document preparation has been around for years, and will hopefully continue to thrive, despite the efforts of the organized bar to restrict consumers' access to this low-cost avenue for legal help.

While some lawyers use accusations of the unauthorized practice of law to try to shut down online providers using lawsuits, others have decided that competition is the best way to challenge these providers.

Continue reading "Don't Sue Them; Join Them" »

The American Bar Association's Coalition for Justice has released its Report on the Survey of Judges on the Impact of the Economic Downturn on Representation in the Courts. State court judges nationwide were asked about their courts' caseloads, whether parties were represented by a lawyer, and what impact lack of representation had on individuals and on the court system.

The four types of cases where the most judges reported an increase were foreclosure, domestic relations, consumer issues, and non-foreclosure housing issues. Sixty percent of judges said there had been an increase in self-representation, with only three percent saying reporting a decrease in self-represented parties. Nearly half of the judges said there had been an increase in self-representation among those who did not qualify for legal aid. There was also consensus that the increase in self-representation harms both the courts (78% of judges) and the people who represent themselves (61%).

Continue reading "ABA Recognizes Difficulties of Self-Represented Litigants, Misses Solution" »

The New jersey State Bar Association's Advisory Committees on Professional Ethics and Attorney Advertising issued a joint opinion on March 26th effectively banning lawyers from creating virtual law offices. The decision requires every attorney to maintain a permanent address. This comes as virtual law offices, in which the attorney maintains an online or "virtual" law office and rents office space as needed, are growing in popularity. According to New Jersey State Bar Chief Allen Etish, "[t]he need for a bona fide office is necessary," while acknowledging "that the idea of a virtual office needs more study," noting that virtual law offices are "not totally wild-eyed or preposterous."

It is very good to hear that the New Jersey State Bar is interesting in further examining the use of virtual offices, but in rendering its opinion has shown a reluctance to embrace current trends in legal practice that might help make the law more affordable for consumers. The decision effectively requires an attorney to either maintain a permanent office or to create one in their home, which creates problems for attorneys who'd like to keep a home office, but do not want to use it to meet with clients or to list the address for privacy and security reasons. For consumers, office space contributes to the attorney's overhead, which can increase the costs for that attorney's services. Allowing attorneys to maintain virtual offices would help them provide consumers with lower cost alternatives to a traditional law office.

In a recent commentary on the Wisconsin Law Journal's Blog, Karl Robe noted the increasing popularity of online legal services like LegalZoom, warning that such sites pointed to a trend toward the commoditization legal services. Robe notes that this potential trend toward commoditization "means the profession and its ability to maintain profit margins is in jeopardy of value erosion. Unless more traditional practices and firms enhance their online status to rise above the din, they risk being drowned out of the conversation."

Perhaps things aren't quite as desperate as Robe makes it seem, neither for lawyers or consumers. It is understandable that the legal profession has concerns about its services becoming commoditized; legal advice can be one the most important services a consumer pays for. But just because someone purchases a will online, for example, doesn't make a will a "commodity." There may be a great many people for whom an online will is more than enough to suit their needs. But not everyone will buy their law off the rack, so to speak. And for those individuals, establishing a traditional attorney/client relationship might be the best choice.

Continue reading "Popularity of online law rising" »

Right now, much of the country's attention is focused squarely on Washington DC and on healthcare reform. No matter your political opinion of the bill that just passed the United States House of Representatives late last night, one thing is clear: new laws regarding your healthcare are likely on their way. That bill (which can be downloaded in PDF format here) is very long, very complicated, and may change many things about the way you receive healthcare coverage. One thing is clear: having affordable access to legal services will be as important as ever.

The more the law changes and the more comprehensive and complicated it becomes, the more people without adequate access to the legal system risk being victimized by the law -- regardless of how well-intentioned those laws might be. In a recent national study conducted by The Legal Services Corporation, less than one in five of the legal issues facing low-income legal consumers ever receive attention from a private or legal aid attorney. The study concludes that a likely reason for this is that low-income legal consumers often don't realize the legal implications of some of the issues they face and therefore do not seek assistance, even in the rare instances when it may be accessible to them.

Continue reading "Better living through the law" »

Most lawyers would have you believe that the legal profession's rule preventing the unauthorized practice of law by non-lawyers exists to protect consumers from receiving poor legal advice. To be sure, that is an important goal. Bad legal advice can be devastating to a consumer; possibly resulting in huge financial losses or even jail.

But while the legal profession is right to consider the danger to consumers of poor legal advice, it runs the risk of upholding legal standards to the detriment of making legal services accessible and affordable. Unable to pay for legal services, consumers are forced to make do with whatever help may be available for free; or worse, simply ignore legal problems and hope for the best. There is another solution.

Continue reading "The fall is gonna kill you." »

In a previous blog post, I discussed how the divorce rate had dropped during the recession in part because people simply couldn't afford the cost of a divorce. Consider one way in which those costs could be brought under control for the average consumer. A recent article in LawyersUSA notes a trend toward "unbundled legal services" -- legal services provided on an "as needed" basis. In the article, Attorney Susan O'Brian stated that a full service divorce usually requires a $4,000 retainer, and depending on the complexity of the case and whether there are custody issues, a divorce can cost between $10,000 and $50,000.

"Unbundled" legal services (sometimes called "limited scope" or "discrete task" representation) are certainly a welcome trend in the legal profession and often do substantially lower the costs associated with a divorce, however, O'Brien did note that she still charges $275 an hour for unbundled services. Even purchased "a la carte," legal services carry a hefty price tag and often one that extends beyond what most people can afford -- reason enough to regard unbundling of legal services as only one potential solution to a much bigger legal crisis. Regardless, if you are seeking legal help, consider asking about unbundled services. Not only will you be encouraging a worthwhile trend in how legal services are provided to consumers, but you may also find you're able to afford services you assumed were beyond your reach.

According to The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times , and Forbes, the divorce rate has declined during the recession. Why? In tough economic times, it has simply become too expensive for many Americans to get divorced. As a lawyer quoted in The New York Times quipped: "[w]hy is a divorce so expensive? Because it's worth it," adding that in our current economic climate, "now it better really be worth it." But the expense of exercising such a basic legal right is hardly a joke. And if you can't afford to file for divorce, it is a safe assumption that divorce isn't the only legal right you don't have access to.

While this trend is gaining attention due to the recession, we cannot allow ourselves to be misled into thinking that the recession created this situation. Basic legal services have always been priced out of reach of most Americans. The current economy casts this persistent problem with our legal system in bold relief.

Continue reading "Is Law a Luxury?" »