Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2014 Midyear Assembly Meeting
Chicago, IL Swissotel
February 8, 2014 Zurich A-D, 1st Floor, Event Centre
ASSEMBLY MATERIALS
Table of Contents Assembly Agenda ................................................................................................. 3 Resolution Debate Items and Consent Calendar ............................................... 7 2013 Annual Meeting Minutes .............................................................................. 9 1YL YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION .......................................................... 15
CLE Model Rule Resolution: This resolution urges the Standing Committee on Continuing Legal Education (SCOCLE) to amend the Model Rule for Continuing Legal Education (MRCLE) to include requirements for new lawyer training focusing on practice skills, the business of law, career development, and health issues.
2YL YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION .......................................................... 44 In-House Counsel Pro Bono Resolution: This resolution encourages all state and territorial-barring jurisdictions to enact rules that would permit in-house attorneys to practice law in pro bono matters in the jurisdiction where they work without being licensed to practice law in that particular jurisdiction.
3YL YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION .......................................................... 52 Law School Accountability Resolution: This resolution asks Congress and the US Department of Education to establish various benchmarks to (1) slow the increase in law school tuition; (2) limit the debt burden of law school graduates; (3) enhance access to the legal profession, particularly for minorities and traditionally
disadvantaged groups; and (4) better equip lawyers to provide quality legal services to the public.
4YL YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION .......................................................... 60 Veterans Law Institutes/Clinics Resolution: This resolution encourages all American law schools to create Veteran Law Institutes/Clinics to assist veterans with their legal needs.
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION ASSEMBLY
Saturday, February 8, 2014 Swissotel – Chicago, IL 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
AGENDA
OPENING REMARKS Call to Order Myra L. McKenzie-Harris, YLD Assembly Speaker, Bentonville, AR
Presentation of the Colors ROTC Detachment 195 Honor Guard, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL National Anthem Law-cappella, Chicago, IL Pledge of Allegiance William Kruse, Chair, YLD Corporate Counsel Committee, Washington, D.C. Invocation Tommy Preston, Vice Coordinator, YLD Member Service Project Team, Columbia, SC Credentials Report Dave Scriven-Young, YLD Assembly Clerk, Chicago, IL
Explanation of Assembly Mission, Delegate Duties and Standing Rules; Adoption of the Assembly Standing Rules and the Assembly Agenda Myra L. McKenzie-Harris, YLD Assembly Speaker
Approval of Minutes of 2013 Annual Meeting Assembly Lacy D. Durham, YLD Secretary-Treasurer, Dallas, TX Presentation of Consent Calendar Myra L. McKenzie-Harris, YLD Assembly Speaker
List of Resolutions on Consent Calendar:
102B Business and Supplier Policies on Labor Trafficking and Child Labor (Submitted by the ABA Section of Business Law): This resolution urges the American Bar Association to adopt the black letter ABA Model Business and Supplier Policies on Labor Trafficking and Child Labor, dated February 2014 and urges businesses to adopt and implement their own business and supplier policies on labor trafficking and child labor that are consistent with the ABA Model. 106 Judicial System Security Protocols (Submitted by the ABA Standing Committee on Judicial Independence): This resolution asks the American Bar Association to urge all state,
Upated as of 02-05-2014
local, and territorial legislative bodies and governmental agencies to adopt laws and policies providing for the development and funding of adequate judicial system security protocols to promote access to the fair and impartial administration of justice and to prevent acts of violence related to the justice system. It further urges state, local, and territorial courts to engage in comprehensive reviews of each court’s respective judicial system security needs, to create and regularly review judicial system security protocols that fulfill those needs, and to seek the funding necessary to implement those protocols. 107 Right to Food Resolution (Submitted by the ABA Commission on Homelessness & Poverty and the ABA Section of Individual Rights & Responsibilities): This resolution urges local, state, tribal, territorial and federal government to promote the human right to adequate food and nutrition for all through policies to increase funding, and development and implementation of strategies to prevent infringement of that right. The Resolution also urges the United States government to make the realization of a human right to adequate food a principal objective of U.S. domestic and foreign policy. 110 Medicare Observation Resolution (Submitted by the ABA Senior Lawyers Division and the ABA Commission on Law & Aging): This resolution calls for support of the Improving Access to Medicare Coverage Act of 2013 – (HR 1179) (S 569), or similar legislation. The legislation amends the Medicare Act’s definition of “post-hospital extended care services” to clarify that time spent in the hospital in observation status counts toward the three–day prior hospital stay prerequisite for Medicare Skilled Nursing Facility coverage.
ASSEMBLY ROLL CALL PRESENTATION Bob Carlson, Chair, ABA House of Delegates, Butte, MT REPORT OF THE YLD CHAIR-ELECT Andrew Schpak, YLD Chair-Elect, Portland, OR DEBATE Resolution 1YL
CLE Model Rule Resolution: This resolution urges the Standing Committee on Continuing Legal Education (SCOCLE) to amend the Model Rule for Continuing Legal Education (MRCLE) to include requirements for new lawyer training focusing on practice skills, the business of law, career development, and health issues.
Pro: Chris Fortier, Member, YLD Resolutions Team, Oakton, VA Con: Ryan Blay, Kenosha, WI
REPORT OF YLD CHAIR Mario A. Sullivan, YLD Chair, Chicago, IL
Upated as of 02-05-2014
PRESENTATION The ABA Fund for Justice and Education
Gene Vance, Lexington, KY
PRESENTATION Mike Burke, Chair, ABA Section Officers Conference, Washington, D.C. DEBATE Resolution 2YL
In-House Counsel Pro Bono Resolution: This resolution encourages all state and territorial-barring jurisdictions to enact rules that would permit in-house attorneys to practice law in pro bono matters in the jurisdiction where they work without being licensed to practice law in that particular jurisdiction. Pro: Michael Bergmann, YLD ABA House of Delegates Representative, Chicago, IL Con: Emmanuelle "Regine" Francois, Vice Director, YLD Affiliate
Assistance Team, Rockville, MD PRESENTATION James Silkenat, ABA President, New York, NY PRESENTATION William Hubbard, ABA President-Elect, Columbia, SC DEBATE Resolution 3YL
Law School Accountability Resolution: This resolution asks Congress and the US Department of Education to establish various benchmarks to (1) slow the increase in law school tuition; (2) limit the debt burden of law school graduates; (3) enhance access to the legal profession, particularly for minorities and traditionally disadvantaged groups; and (4) better equip lawyers to provide quality legal services to the public. Pro: Daniel Thies, Member, Truth in Law School Education Task Force
and YLD Liaison to the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, Chicago, IL
Con: PRESENTATION ABA Day in Washington, D.C. (April 8-10, 2014)
Linda Klein, Chair, ABA Day Planning Committee, Atlanta, GA DEBATE Resolution 4YL
Veterans Law Institutes/Clinics Resolution: This resolution encourages all
Upated as of 02-05-2014
American law schools to create Veteran Law Institutes/Clinics to assist veterans with their legal needs. Pro: Joshua Roman, YLD District 34 Representative, Ridgewood, NJ Con: Andrea Ciobanu, Indianapolis, IN
NATIONAL OUTSTANDING YOUNG LAWYER AWARD
Chris Rogers, YLD ABA House of Delegates Representative, Dallas, TX
Brittany Byrd, Dallas, TX (Finalist) Keya Koul, Albuquerque, NM (Finalist) Jason Sengheiser, St. Louis, MO (Winner) PRESENTATION ABA Solo, Small Firm, and General Practice Division
The Honorable Jennifer Rymell, Chair, ABA Solo, Small Firm, and General Practice Division, Ft. Worth, TX
PRESENTATION
Roula Allouch, Co-Coordinator, YLD Public Service Project Team, Cincinnati, OH Beth Palmer, Co-Coordinator, YLD Public Service Project Team, Charleston, SC
INTRODUCTION OF CANDIDATES FOR OFFICE
Secretary: Mark Nichols, Fort Lauderdale, FL and Anna Romanskaya, San Diego, CA Assembly Clerk: Stefan Palys, Phoenix, AZ Treasurer: Samuel Edmunds, Mendota Heights, MN and Christina Liu, Chicago, IL House of Delegates Representative: Myra L. McKenzie-Harris, Bentonville, AR Nominating Committee Representative: Mario A. Sullivan, Chicago, IL Board of Governors Representative: Erica Grinde, Missoula, MT
2014 YLD SPRING CONFERENCE Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 15-17, 2014 Erica Grinde, YLD Conference, Program and Products Director Marla Presley and Erin Hamilton, Pittsburgh Host Committee ADJOURNMENT
Upated as of 02-05-2014
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION ASSEMBLY
2014 MIDYEAR MEETING Chicago, IL
DEBATE ITEMS
REPORT SUBJECT 1YL CLE Model Rule Resolution: This resolution urges the Standing Committee on
Continuing Legal Education (SCOCLE) to amend the Model Rule for Continuing Legal Education (MRCLE) to include requirements for new lawyer training focusing on practice skills, the business of law, career development, and health issues.
2YL In-House Counsel Pro Bono Resolution: This resolution encourages all state and
territorial-barring jurisdictions to enact rules that would permit in-house attorneys to practice law in pro bono matters in the jurisdiction where they work without being licensed to practice law in that particular jurisdiction.
3YL Law School Accountability Resolution: This resolution asks Congress and the US
Department of Education to establish various benchmarks to (1) slow the increase in law school tuition; (2) limit the debt burden of law school graduates; (3) enhance access to the legal profession, particularly for minorities and traditionally disadvantaged groups; and (4) better equip lawyers to provide quality legal services to the public.
4YL Veterans Law Institutes/Clinics Resolution: This resolution encourages all American
law schools to create Veteran Law Institutes/Clinics to assist veterans with their legal needs.
CONSENT CALENDAR
REPORT SUBJECT 102B Business and Supplier Policies on Labor Trafficking and Child Labor (Submitted
by the ABA Section of Business Law): This resolution urges the American Bar Association to adopt the black letter ABA Model Business and Supplier Policies on Labor Trafficking and Child Labor, dated February 2014 and urges businesses to adopt and implement their own business and supplier policies on labor trafficking and child labor that are consistent with the ABA Model.
106 Judicial System Security Protocols (Submitted by the ABA Standing Committee on
Judicial Independence): This resolution asks the American Bar Association to urge all state, local, and territorial legislative bodies and governmental agencies to adopt laws and policies providing for the development and funding of adequate judicial system security protocols to promote access to the fair and impartial administration of justice and to prevent acts of violence related to the justice system. It further urges state, local, and territorial courts to engage in comprehensive reviews of each court’s respective judicial system security needs, to create and regularly review judicial system security protocols that fulfill those needs, and to seek the funding necessary to implement those protocols.
107 Right to Food Resolution (Submitted by the ABA Commission on Homelessness & Poverty and the ABA Section of Individual Rights & Responsibilities): This resolution urges local, state, tribal, territorial and federal government to promote the human right to adequate food and nutrition for all through policies to increase funding, and development and implementation of strategies to prevent infringement of that right. The Resolution also urges the United States government to make the realization of a human right to adequate food a principal objective of U.S. domestic and foreign policy.
110 Medicare Observation Resolution (Submitted by the ABA Senior Lawyers Division
and the ABA Commission on Law & Aging): This resolution calls for support of the Improving Access to Medicare Coverage Act of 2013 – (HR 1179) (S 569), or similar legislation. The legislation amends the Medicare Act’s definition of “post-hospital extended care services” to clarify that time spent in the hospital in observation status counts toward the three–day prior hospital stay prerequisite for Medicare Skilled Nursing Facility coverage.
The full text of the ABA House of Delegates Resolutions on the ABA YLD Consent Calendar
can be viewed, printed, or downloaded at the following site: http://www.americanbar.org/groups/leadership/2014-chicago-midyear-meeting.html
1
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION ASSEMBLY MINUTES Friday, August 9, 2013
Palace Hotel – Grand Ballroom
Call to Order The American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division 2013 Annual Assembly convened on Friday, August 9, 2013 at 1pm at the Palace Hotel in San Francisco.
Presentation of the Colors
Presentation of the Colors by the United States Coast Guard Base Alameda Color Guard.
Pledge of Allegiance District 31 Representative Jeanne Grove recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
National Anthem District 25 Representative Anita J. Barksdale performed the National Anthem.
Invocation Keya Koul, Chair of the Young Lawyers Division of the New Mexico Bar Association, gave the Invocation.
Explanation of Mission of the Assembly and Introduction of Officers Assembly Speaker Jennifer Daugherty MacPhail gave an overview of the agenda for the Assembly and introduced the officers.
Credentials Report Assembly Clerk Myra L. McKenzie gave the Credentials Report. She reported that she has certified 203 delegates. Assembly Speaker Daugherty stated that any motion to reopen certification should be made at this time. A motion to reopen certification was made and seconded. Delegate certification was reopened.
Approval of Minutes of 2013 Midyear Meeting Assembly Secretary-Treasurer Andrew M. Schpak moved that the reading of the minutes be waived and that the minutes be adopted as published. The motion was seconded and passed.
Adoption of Agenda and Consent Calendar
Assembly Speaker Jennifer Daugherty MacPhail presented the resolutions on the consent calendar to the Assembly: 5YL, 100A, 100B, 101, 109, 110, 111A, 111B, 113A, 113B, 113C, 113D, 113E, 117.
Adoption of Standing Rules and Rules of Debate Assembly Speaker Jennifer Daugherty MacPhail provided an overview of the Rules of the Assembly and that the rules are posted on the Assembly website page. Assembly Speaker Daugherty MacPhail moved for the adoption of the Standing Rules. The motion was seconded and passed.
2
AFFILIATE ROLL CALL National Conferences Team Coordinator Francine Bailey welcomed everyone to the Assembly and each state provided a brief catch phrase. Federal and Military Bar, Washington State, and Michigan were recognized as having the best catch phrases.
DEBATE Resolution 1YL
District 2 Representative Dana Hrelic moved for the adoption of Resolution 1YL. The motion was seconded. The Resolution urges the ABA to: (1) review its accreditation standards in order to remove barriers to innovation in legal education; and (2) to encourage and facilitate ABA-accredited law schools to require all students to participate in at least one academic grading period of practical legal skills clinical experiences or classes through the use of, for example, local legal aid service providers and school-sponsored clinics, in order to receive their law degree. Liaison to Standing Committee on Judicial Independence Hon. Lee Bussart Bowles spoke in opposition to the Resolution. Chair-Elect of the Law Student Division Mathew Kerbis read a letter written by Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, enthusiastically supporting the proposed resolution. The motion passed.
OUTSTANDING YOUNG MILITARY SERVICE LAWYER AWARDS Federal & Military Bar District Representative Lieutenant Michael O. Walker introduced the awards. The award recipients are:
• U.S. Army: MAJ Aimee M. Bateman • U.S. Navy: LT Allison Ward • U.S. Air Force: MAJ Ryan N. Hoback • U.S. Marines Corps: Capt Jason P. Brown • U.S. Coast Guard: LT Aaron Casavant
PRESENTATION Council for the Fund for Justice and Education Chair of the Fund for Justice and Education Palmer G. Vance II discussed the work of the FJE. The FJE is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year. The FJE’s theme this year is “Change starts with one.” The FJE is vital to the funding of public service programs of the ABA. The YLD Council has achieved 100% participation in each of the last eight years. That leadership is critically important and much appreciated.
DEBATE Resolution 2YL Vice-Chair, ABA YLD Women in the Profession Committee Laura Lattman moved for the adoption of the Resolution. The motion was seconded. This Resolution urges law schools to offer students access to foreign language (including sign language) classes as an elective and substantive law classes taught in a foreign language and urges law firms to provide employees with access to foreign language (including sign language) classes. District 15 Representative Christopher Niro and District 8 Representative Emmanuelle Regine Francois spoke in opposition to the Resolution. The Resolution failed.
3
PRESENTATION ABA YLD Section Connect
Vice-Director of the ABA YLD Membership Board Mark D. Nichols provided an overview of ABA YLD Section Connect, which introduces members of the YLD to the sections, divisions, and commissions of the ABA. Nichols also recognized Membership Director Rachel Kopp and staff member Tracy Kaempf for their hard work on this program.
DEBATE Resolution 3YL ABA YLD District 22 Representative and TILSEC Member Jason Sengheiser moved for the adoption of Resolution 3YL. The motion was seconded. This resolution urges ABA-accredited law schools to report accurate financial data to prospective law students so that each prospective law student can make a fully-informed decision as to whether or not he or she should attend law school. Vice-Chair of the Minorities in the Profession Committee and YLD Scholar Michael Redondo spoke in opposition to the Resolution. The motion passed.
ROSNER & ROSNER YOUNG LAWYERS PROFESSIONALISM AWARD Assembly Clerk Myra L. McKenzie served on the selection committee for the Rosner & Rosner Young Lawyers Professionalism Award and introduced the Chair of the Center for Professional Responsibility Honorable Barbara Kerr Howe. Judge Howe presented the Award to Tyronia M. Smith.
DEBATE Resolution 4YL Affiliate Newsletter Editor and Resolutions Board Member Kara Johnson moved for the adoption of Resolution 4YL. The motion was seconded. The Resolution encourages all state, local, and specialty bar associations that currently have a section or division specifically dedicated to young or new lawyers to maintain that section or division. Kari Petrasek also spoke in favor of the Resolution. The motion passed unanimously.
REPORT OF ABA YLD CHAIR Chair Christopher A. Rogers thanked the Assembly for the opportunity to serve as Chair. Chair Rogers also talked about the excitement he felt in getting to talk with bar leaders from around the world. He talked about CareerLine Live! and CareerAdvice Live!, which have combined to help over 2500 young lawyers. Chair Rogers then recognized all of the young lawyer volunteers who helped him realize his goals for the year.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION: STARS OF THE YEAR Chair Rogers awarded Star of the Year Awards to the following individuals:
• Membership Director Rachel Kopp • Editor of the Young Lawyer Philip Long • Communications Director Kristi Bergemann Rothell • Diversity Director Min Cho • Administrative Director Kimber Gallso • Public Service Director Lacy Durham • Committee/Liaison Director: Membership Entities Stefan Palys
4
• Conferences, Programs and Products Director Jill Hasegawa
INTRODUCTION OF NEW OFFICERS AND CONSTITUTIONAL REPS Speaker Jennifer Daugherty MacPhail introduced the new officers and constitutional representatives:
• Secretary-Treasurer: Lacy L. Durham, Dallas, TX • Assembly Clerk: David Scriven-Young, Chicago, IL • House of Delegates Representatives: Christopher A Rogers, Dallas, TX and Jennifer Daugherty
MacPhail, Minneapolis, MN • Board of Governors Representative: Min K. Cho, Orlando, FL
PRESENTATION Section of Litigation
Chair of the Section of Litigation Bill Bay talked about the work of the Section of Litigation and the number of YLD members who have become active in the Section after “aging out” of the YLD.
ADJOURNMENT/RECESS The meeting recessed at 4:30pm.
OPENING & INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Call to Order
Assembly Speaker Jennifer Daugherty MacPhail called the meeting to order at 9:07am on Saturday, August 10, 2013.
AWARDS OF ACHIEVEMENT PRESENTATION Affiliates Director & Chief Judge Erica Grinde presented the Awards of Achievement. The winners for best newsletter were the Texas Young Lawyers Association, the South Carolina Bar Association Young Lawyers Division, the Kansas Bar Association Young Lawyers Section, and the Dallas Association of Young Lawyers. The winners for best minority project were the Texas Young Lawyers, the State Bar of Michigan Young Lawyers Section, the Tennessee Bar Association Young Lawyers Division, and the Chicago Bar Association Young Lawyers Section, The winners for best Service to the Public project were Texas Young Lawyers Association and the State Bar of Michigan Young Lawyers Section, The Dallas Association of Young Lawyers, the Allegheny County Bar Association Young Lawyers Section, and the Utah Bar Association Young Lawyers Division. The winners for best Service to the Bar project were the Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference, the Minnesota State Bar Association-New Lawyer Section, the Arkansas Bar Association Young Lawyers Section, the Barristers Club of San Francisco, the Allegheny County Bar Association Young Lawyers, and the Amarillo Young Lawyers Association. The winner for the Outstanding Service to the Bar Project was the Minnesota State Bar Association – New Lawyer Section. The winners for Best Comprehensive Programming were the State Bar of Georgia Young Lawyers Division, the North Carolina Bar Association Young Lawyers Division, the Connecticut Bar Association Young Lawyers Section, the Chicago Bar Association Young Lawyers Section, and the Austin Young Lawyers Association. American Bar Endowment President Christopher L. Griffin presented the Outstanding Public Service
5
Project Award to the Utah State Bar Young Lawyers Division for their program Help RISE.
PRESENTATION ABA President-Elect James R. Silkenat congratulated the Assembly members on their good work and public and member service programs. President-Elect Silkenat talked about the need to provide practical skills and experience to new lawyers while meeting the needs of people with legal issues who cannot afford lawyers. He also talked about initiatives to place lawyers in rural parts of the country.
PRESENTATION ABA President Laurel G. Bellows talked about the need for gender equity and the initiatives the ABA has launched this year to further that goal. The Gender Equity Task Force has published action plans that can be viewed on the website. President Bellows praised the work of the YLD and particularly the CareerLine Live! program.
CHILD ADVOCACY AWARDS PRESENTATION Chair-Elect Mario A. Sullivan announced the Young Lawyer Recipient, Lauren K. Pfeil. Chair-Elect Mario A. Sullivan also announced the Distinguished Lawyer Recipient, Andrew Cain.
DEBATE Resolution 6YL Resolutions Team Member, Credentials Board Member, and Social Media & Online Team Member Courtenay R. Dunn, moved for the adoption of Resolution 6YL. The motion was seconded. This resolution urges federal, state, territorial and local officials and school administrators, after analysis of reported data on incidents on bullying, to adopt a uniform definition of “bullying” and “protected class” in their respective statutory, administrative, and school policies and encourages the adoption of peer-to-peer mentoring programs, school counseling, and/or mediation programs for the use students, teachers, and administrators on the effects of bullying. The motion passed.
PRESENTATION ABA House of Delegates Chair Robert M. Carlson informed everyone that the House of Delegates will convene at 9am on Monday, August 12, 2013. Chair Carlson reminded everyone that former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton will receive the ABA Medal. Chair Carlson also explained the change by Rules and Calendar to the definition of “cosponsor.” There will be a new category called “supporter.” In addition, the House of Delegates materials will start being circulated electronically.
PRESENTATION 2013 ABA YLD Fall Conference: Phoenix, AZ, October 10-12, 2013
Phoenix Host Committee Chair Stefan Palys and Affiliates Director Erica Grinde provided a preview of the 2013 Fall Conference. We will be staying at the Biltmore Hotel. Registration is open.
PRESENTATION ABA President-Elect Nominee William Hubbard greeted the Assembly. President-Elect Nominee Hubbard called the YLD the conscience of the ABA and talked about how important the YLD is to the livelihood of the ABA. He also talked about his desire to work with young lawyers to create professional development and CLE programming and then distribute it to ABA members across the country.
6
President-Elect Nominee Hubbard shared a preview of the anniversary of the Magna Carta and the programming and events being organized around that event. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS – PASSING OF THE GAVEL Chair Christopher A. Rogers again acknowledged the Stars of the Year. Chair Rogers also thanked the current and recently-departed staff for all their hard work and effort. Assembly Speaker Jennifer Daugherty MacPhail introduced the passing of the gavel ceremony. Incoming YLD Chair Mario A. Sullivan then provided a preview of the 2013-2014 bar year. Incoming YLD Chair Sullivan talked about the Member Service Projects, including Starting Points, Ask An Experienced Lawyer, Career Checkpoint, CareerLine Live Series, Career Development Initiative, TYL, Touch 10,000, and Section Connect. He also talked about the new YLD Emerging Leaders Program and the new YLD Student Haiku contest. Incoming YLD Chair Mario A. Sullivan also introduced the 2013-2014 Public Service Project: Bullyproof: Young Lawyers Educating and Empowering to End Bullying and premiered the promotional video.
CLOSING Assembly Speaker Jennifer Daugherty MacPhail gave her closing remarks and passed the gavel to Incoming Assembly Speaker Myra L. McKenzie.
ADJOURNMENT A motion to adjourn was made and seconded. The motion passed and the Assembly adjourned at 11:39am.
1YL American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division
Recommendation and Report to the Assembly of the Young Lawyers Division
Resolved, that the American Bar Association’s Model Rule on Continuing Legal Education (MRCLE) be amended to include training requirements for new lawyers in their first year of practice (see next page);
Further Resolved, that the American Bar Association Young Lawyers Division (ABA YLD) urges state and territory bars create a rule for new lawyers to complete courses covering basic substantive legal skills within their MCLE requirements for a reporting year;
Further Resolved that the ABA YLD urges state and local bar associations with such programs to evaluate their new lawyer programming to confirm that the programming meets the needs of today’s new lawyers;
Further Resolved that these programs teach new lawyers elements of successful writing, public speaking, client interview techniques, alternative dispute resolution, court operations, and overview the business side of law including marketing, accounting, finance, and management
Further Resolved that these programs should cover a variety of fundamental substantive legal disciplines, as well as non-substantive networking skills and education concerning mental and physical health issues that may disproportionately affect our profession.
1YL SECTION __: NEW LAWYER TRAINING ALL LAWYERS IN THEIR FIRST REPORTING CLE PERIOD OF BAR ADMISSION SHALL COMPLETE 50% OF THEIR INITIAL REPORTING PERIOD CREDITS TO NEW LAWYER EDUCATION. THESE COURSES SHALL COVER ETHICS AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE RELATED TOPICS, PRACTICAL SKILLS, AND THE BUSINESS OF LAW ISSUES. LAWYERS WITH EXPERIENCE ADMITTED TO THE BAR VIA RECIPROCITY OR WAIVER FROM AN AMERICAN JURISDICTION WILL BE EXEMPT FROM THIS REQUIREMENT. BAR ASSOCIATIONS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE THIS COURSE AT AN ECONOMICAL PRICE FOR NEW LAWYERS AND DISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS WIDELY AS POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE FOR NEWLY ADMITTED LAWYERS IN FAR REACHING CORNERS OF THEIR JURISDICTIONS. COMMENT: Given the changing legal profession, newly admitted lawyers receive fewer opportunities for skills training from their employers and clients. As a result, they must go elsewhere for the professional development activities they were once able to receive in house. These activities are crucial to keeping new lawyers in the practice of law. Local, state, specialty, and national bars are best positioned to provide these opportunities. The new lawyer courses set forth in this Rule contribute to setting the tone for a lawyer's career, create an important first impression of the profession, and instill the fundamentals of a competent, ethical, and healthy practice. Topics on which new lawyers generally seek guidance include practice skills such as legal writing, client interviewing, court operations, or negotiation fundamentals, ethics including mental health issues, and business of law skills such as accounting, firm operations, marketing, finances, and management. New lawyers also seek career guidance when they begin their careers, particularly with work/life balance and career development. State and Territory bars take a variety of approaches to bringing this material to new lawyers. Some states have mandatory mentoring programs where new lawyers shadow experienced lawyers performing regular practice tasks and conducting discussions of such tasks. Other states require the completion of credits in courses the bar deems as new lawyer training credits. Additional states require the completion of a daylong skills and ethics course, sometimes called a Bridge the Gap program. Finally, other states and local bars have programs covering new lawyer training topics. Many lawyers license through reciprocity with another state or territory bar. Lawyers with five years of experience in an American bar should be exempt from this requirement because these lawyers are deemed to have the fundamentals of the practice.
1YL As the employment rate of new lawyers and average starting salaries remain low, courses of this nature should be affordable, respectively. Bar Associations may want to consider a sliding scale cost based on employment or practice setting. This requirement is not meant to be a barrier to entry into the profession but to support new lawyers transitioning into the profession. Bar associations should facilitate wide distribution of the program including recording these programs, publishing them for viewing on the Internet or through portable media to be sent to new lawyers practicing in remote regions of the jurisdiction. Online repositories provide web space for content providers to store their content and the ability to distribute the content as they desire.
1YL
ABA YLD Recommendation Form
Submitted by: Chris Fortier
1) Summary of Recommendations
This resolution urges the Standing Committee on Continuing Legal Education (SCOCLE) to amend the Model Rule for Continuing Legal Education (MRCLE) to include requirements for new lawyer training, focusing on practice skills, the business of law, and career development issues. The resolution also urges state bar regulators to set up new rules regarding new lawyer education, creating this requirement within the lawyer’s MCLE requirements for the reporting year.
State and local bar associations are in a particular position of power because of their reach to new solo practitioners, small firms, and associates at medium sized firms who may not have a budget for professional development. The most this resolution would add to the bottom line for each bar would be a video camera to record any basic substantive legal skills programs a bar may present. Server space could be found through a free video site such as YouTube or Vimeo.
2) Date of Approval by submitting entity
N/A
3) Has this been submitted previously?
No.
4) Any Division or ABA policies on this topic?
None
5) Require immediate action at the next level?
No, the fully revised MRCLE will present within the next two years. Our amendments will be included in the final resolution from the Standing Committee on Continuing Legal Education. The resolution only requires action through the YLD.
1YL 6) Status of legislation at next level?
N/A
7) Cost to the Association
Minimal. The amendment to the model rule will be pushed by members including young lawyers on the Standing Committee for Continuing Legal Education. This resolution will be powered with volunteer support to assist state or local bars interested in implementing new lawyer programming. Staff support would come in the form of answering technical questions or referring interested parties to other mentoring bars for assistance. Additionally, the ABA currently shares such programs as the Career Development Initiative, which could provide a basis for each state to launch its basic skills programming.
8) Disclosure of conflict of interest
Chris Fortier was the ABA YLD Career Development Initiative Coordinator for the 2011-2012 bar year and has been involved with YLD Bootcamp programming in the 2012-2013 bar year. He also has been involved in getting a new basic substantive legal skills program set up in his home state of Virginia. He previously served as the Young Lawyers Division liaison to the Standing Committee for Continuing Legal Education.
9) Referrals
None.
10) Contact Information
Chris Fortier
10218 Bushman Drive, #102
Oakton, VA 22124
(757)880-1019
1YL
REPORT AND FINDINGS
Introduction
The State Bar of Wisconsin, in its 2011 Challenges Facing the Legal Profession Report, recounted a trend we have seen for years:
The recent economy has greatly impacted the ability of new law students to receive practical, hands-on training to develop their skills to enter the practice of law. In highlighting that law firms were once richer teaching environments, Martha Solinger, co-general counsel for Lehman Brothers Holdings observed, ‘The training system is different because the pressure on lawyers to get clients and bill time has ratcheted up.’ This pressure has reduced the opportunities for new lawyers to spend time with older lawyers and osmotically learn from them. While law students over the ages remain eager for such opportunities, the realities of practice, both at the governmental and private levels, have left practitioners with little time to dedicate to providing these opportunities to law students.1
This resolution urges the SCOCLE to amend the MRCLE to include training requirements for new lawyers with a focus on practice skills, the business of law, and career development. The resolution also calls on state and local bar associations to address the issue not only for these new attorneys but for the sake of their clients, who deserve quality and competent representation. These new attorneys need to know what questions to ask of whom, how to market their practices, and how to get information to make the best possible decision. For those bar associations that have such new lawyer training programs, this resolution asks those bars to review their curriculum to make sure that the programs fit their newest lawyers’ needs. For bars without such programming, this resolution urges these bars to consider adding such programming to their calendar.
Background of Legal Market for New Lawyers
In the 1963–64 academic year, some 49,000 students were studying in 136 law schools in the United States; by contrast, in the 2009-10 academic year, 154,549 students attended 200 law schools.2 Employers hired fewer law graduates throughout the 2000’s, creating a seventeen year low 87.6% employment rate among respondents in 2010. 68.7% of those jobs required bar passage.3 These numbers were down from the Class of 2005, who had an 89.6% employment
1 State Bar of Wisconsin, Challenges to the Legal Profession Committee. Challenges Facing the Legal Profession. July 2011. Pages 22 and 23. 2 Kellog, Sarah. “The Transformation of Legal Education.” Washington Lawyer, May 2011. Found at http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/resources/publications/washington_lawyer/may_2011/legal_education.cfm 3 “Class of 2010 Graduates Faced Worst Job Market Since Mid-1990s: Longstanding Employment Patterns Interrupted.” June 1, 2011. National Association of Legal Placement. http://www.nalp.org/uploads/Classof2010SelectedFindings.pdf.
1YL rate with 74% of those jobs requiring bar passage4, and from the Class of 2000 with a 91.5% employment rate with 77.4% of those jobs in the legal sector.5
The nation’s law schools produced 43,735 law graduates nationally in the year 2011, yet only 55% of those graduates had jobs upon graduation, and 28% of graduates reported either unemployment or underemployment.6 These unemployed or underemployed graduates are more than likely not engaging with the bar for personal or financial reasons. For example, such a graduate may not feel welcome at a bar association event because of the shame of unemployment or the feeling that they may get rejected by employed members of the bar. Similarly, attending bar events may not be financially feasible for the unemployed or underemployed. Those that do engage with the bar do so with financial limits or credibility problems preventing them from obtaining a career in the law. In 2010, the ABA YLD passed the Truth in Law School Education (TILSE) resolution, which urged schools to include the above-referenced employment data, data on the actual cost of law school education on a per credit basis, and data on the average cost of living expenditures incurred while attending law school on their websites, in their catalogues, and in their acceptance notices sent to applicants for admission.7 The ABA YLD continues to study and recommend action based on the TILSE resolution. Now this resolution takes the next step with helping new graduates gain practical and professional skills to find work and endure this difficult market and beyond.
Need for New Lawyer Legal Skills Programming
Many of new lawyers who do not obtain employment will set out on their own and become solo practitioners. Solo practice has grown along with the number of new lawyers without employment, with the market seeing the highest number of new lawyers starting practice since 1994. While employment as sole practitioners from 2000 to 2005 rose from 2.7% to 3.2%, the rate of new lawyers opening their own firms doubled to 5.9% in 2010 and 6.1% in 20118. While the percentage may seem small, the numbers add to 2665 reported new firms opening up in 2011 and 2428 new solo firms opening in 20109. That is a minimum of over 5000 new firms run by solo practitioners with two years of practice experience or less as of December 1, 2012. Similarly, new lawyers entering practices sized between two and ten lawyers, with better
4 “Market for New Law Graduates Up — Approaches 90% for First Time Since 2001.” National Association of Legal Placement. July 18, 2006. http://www.nalp.org/2006marketfornewlawgraduatesup. 5 “Employment of New Law Graduates Exceeds 90% for Second Year in a Row.” National Association of Legal Placement. July 23, 2001. http://www.nalp.org/2001employmentnewlawgrads. 6 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/opinion/sunday/an-existential-crisis-for-law-schools.html 7 Resolution YL 111B, 2010 8 “Class of 2011 Has Lowest Employment Rate Since Class of 1994.” National Association of Legal Placement. July 2012. http://www.nalp.org/0712research 9 Assuming 41,156 new graduates in 2010. See “Class of 2010 Graduates Faced Worst Job Market Since Mid-1990s: Longstanding Employment Patterns Interrupted.”
1YL mentoring resources but still limited training resources, made a similar dramatic jump from 33% in 2008 to 44% in 201110.
The large number of new attorneys opening solo firms or entering small firms with minimal training resources exposes a gap with skills training. Without these basic skills, these attorneys may put themselves and their clients at risk with poor advice, a misfiled document in the courthouse, a missing contractual provision that may save a small business client a load of headaches, or worse, an unknown but missed deadline that permanently bars a client from recovering damages. One attorney who has worked with a mentorship program in her home state bar discussed the number of young attorneys calling asking the basic questions of lawyering11. This attorney was astonished at the lack of resources the young attorneys had. Another attorney the mover of this resolution knew opened a law practice last year only to close that law practice 18 months later as they consistently felt on their own. This attorney was left to figure out accounting, marketing, retaining clients, and filing documents in court, amongst other fundamental issues12. These stories, unfortunately, are all too common.
William Treanor, Vice President and Dean of Georgetown Law School, made this observation while giving an interview with the District of Columbia Bar’s magazine about how law schools must adapt to trends in the market. However, he acknowledges a shortcoming of law school education:
Classically, law schools taught people to think like a lawyer. That was what the Socratic Method was about. It trained people very well, but for one part of what lawyers do. It didn’t train them to write, problem solve, and exercise judgment.13
New attorneys need such programming to answer the basic questions of lawyering, questions that more senior members of the bar may not have the time or resources to answer.
New Lawyer Skill Training Programs
This Resolution urges SCOCLE to amend the MRCLE to include and urges state and local bar associations to implement various types of substantive and non-substantive legal skills training for new lawyers. The goal is to provide fundamental skill training, so while the decision on what type of programming may and should ultimately be determined by each state or local bar association, the type of programming may include the below general categories.
1. Elements of Successful Writing
10 “Class of 2011 Has Lowest Employment Rate Since Class of 1994.” National Association of Legal Placement. July 2012. http://www.nalp.org/0712research 11 A 2010 conversation with a young attorney at an ABA event. 12 A 2012 conversation with a young attorney at a Virginia State Bar event. 13 Kellog, Sarah. “The Transformation of Legal Education.” Washington Lawyer, May 2011. Found at http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/resources/publications/washington_lawyer/may_2011/legal_education.cfm
1YL The largest component of a lawyer’s work product is his or her writing, as seen in briefs, memos, contracts. Additionally, more informal communication takes place over email, instant messenger, and text message. Courses can take a more basic route and refresh students on the basics of written communication or can specialize on creating quality legal products for clients and the court.
2. Public Speaking
Lawyers advocate their positions in front of different audiences and need to be able to vary their speaking style to these audiences. Good oral advocacy skills include identifying the audience, customizing the message to the audience, figuring out what points the audience will identify, and how to use the voice and the body to bring the message to the audience.
3. Client Interview Techniques
Clients come to lawyers to help them solve their problems or prevent future problems from limiting their plans. The initial client interview is critical in forming the business relationship and further interviews will shape a trial strategy or a negotiation. Programs that focus on the art of the question pay great dividends for lawyers and clients. Such skills will allow lawyers to create and implement a strategy for interviewing a potential client, determining a course of action, and figuring out whether to represent a potential client.
4. Alternative Dispute Resolution
Clients come to lawyers because they want their problems solved. While most new lawyers know about the world of litigation, they may not know alternative means of dispute resolution, including mediation, negotiation, and arbitration. Programs that introduce these methods of dispute resolution and establish basic skills begin to enable a new lawyer to consider all options for solving a client’s problem.
5. Law Practice Management/Business of Law
Lawyering is not about, research, writing, speaking, and interviewing. Law firms are businesses with finances, employees, servicers, workflows, and reputations. Clients have their goals, budgets, processes, and reputations. A lawyer who is conscious of the business and can apply the principles of business has an advantage not only with law practice management but with connecting with a client to provide better, more individualized service.
6. Mental and Physical Health
New lawyers enter the world of practice knowing little about how their bodies or their brains will react to the practice of law, mainly the sedentary, high-pressure, high stress work. In the first year, lawyers are focused on their work, creating for long hours and quick decisions. Physical health programs will normally focus on diet and exercise, with the goal of creating healthy living
1YL habits. Additionally, mental health programming should identify signs and symptoms of mental health problems, their effects on ethical decision making, and how to treat these problems. Additionally, lawyers should learn how to manage mental health problems through either prevention techniques or coping mechanisms.
Appendix I presents a state by state analysis of what each American jurisdiction requires for lawyers in the first year of practice. A substantial majority of jurisdictions require something in the first year; however, the contents widely vary. A few states have a full mentoring program with meetings and tasks. Other states have coursework focusing on practice skills, a few more have ethics-focused requirements, and a few more combine these requirements into one course.
Some local bar associations may not have a significant new lawyer population to develop in-depth, detailed training programs in each of these categories. However, this Resolution still urges those bar associations to consider implementing appropriate new lawyer training commensurate with the resources available and new lawyer population. Indeed, this is why this Resolution leaves it to the bar associations to finalize the type of programming it feels would best benefit its new lawyers.
Resources for State and Local Bar Associations to Create Programming
I. ABA
The ABA has developed numerous programs, making some of them available online for the public to view and for bars to use in developing their new lawyer substantive training curricula.
A. The Career Development Initiative
Michael Bergman, ABA YLD Chair of 2011-2012, explored the landscape of programming nationwide and could not locate a one-stop shop for career development related programming. Therefore, he came up with the idea for the Career Development Initiative (CDI). The ABA YLD partnered with the ABA Career Center to co-sponsor and develop a series of teleconferences, live seminars, and website postings that focused on various aspects of a young lawyer’s career, whether the young lawyer is a new graduate or more experienced and looking to transition into a new field of practice. The CDI highlighted a different career path each month and provided a virtual library of resources relevant to each topic for YLD members. Topics included: incorporating pro bono into your career, pathways to the bench (becoming a judge), expanding your practice, becoming a professor, joining the JAG Corps, going solo, making partner or going in-house, joining the government, building an international practice, alternative career paths, careers in alternative dispute resolution, and going from law student to lawyer.
In 2012, the CDI continued with resources related finding the first job, budgeting time, and presenting the best attitude in the workplace.
B. YLD Bootcamp
1YL Bootcamp covers the essential survival skills a young lawyer must have to navigate the profession and its people. This program took place over 2010 in three teleconference programs and three in-person programs in one sitting at the 2010 ABA Midyear Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia. In 2010, these programs included: “Entering Unknown Territory: Choosing a Career Path,” “Accepting Your Mission: Getting the Most Out of Your First Job,” “Earning Your Stripes: The Nuts & Bolts of Networking,” “Serving Your Comrades: How to Become a Superstar Associate,” “Honoring the Judicial Veterans: Advice from the Bench,” and “Leading the Troops: Considerations Before Starting Your Own Practice.”
In 2012, Bootcamp returned with a double program at the 2012 Fall Meeting in Charleston, South Carolina with sessions dedicated to finding the first job and getting the most out of the first job. Attendees to the 2013 Spring Meeting in Minneapolis, Minnesota will also have the opportunity to participate in the YLD Bootcamp.
C. ABA Commission on Law and Aging’s Elder Law Essentials
The ABA Commission on Law and Aging sponsors a quarterly webinar through the ABA CLE Division on “Essentials of Elder Law.” The program introduces aspects of elder law practice, getting a new practitioner up to speed on the substance and delivery of elder law practice. Topics as of August 2011 have included adding elder law to your practice, essentials of Medicare, elder law ethics, and elder abuse and exploitation, undue influence, Medicare and Medicaid issues, health care advance planning, and others.14
D. ABA Business Law Section’s Institute for the Young Business Lawyer
Before one of the Section’s meetings, sections members and other prominent business law practitioners gather to deliver a one-day packed CLE program dedicated to educating young lawyers on the basics of business law practice. Young lawyers spend the day learning about the practice and business side of the business law and gain skills and contacts through networking events during the day and after during the Section’s meeting and programs in the following days. 2012 Programs included “Confessions of a Deal Maker,” “Strategic Litigation Planning and Case Assessment for the New Lawyer,” and “Where do I Go from Here? Professional-Development Strategies for Young Lawyers Trying to Get to the Next Level of Their Careers” amongst others. Materials and audio for all programming dating back to 2004 is available on the Business Law Section’s web site and is available on demand for section members.
II. State and Local Bar Study of the Issue
Numerous state and local bar associations have studied this issue on their own and have created a variety of solutions, many including bridge the gap or new lawyer training programming solutions. New York City Bar Association released their study on the issue and proposed four
14 ABA Commission on Law and Aging, Informational Report to the House of Delegates, August 2011.
1YL solutions to the problem including the City Bar New Lawyer Institute, which will introduce all new lawyers beginning their careers in New York City to the broader legal community and to provide them access to high-quality training and career support in the early years of practice. They also will partner with major employers to provide further “Bridge-the-Gap” training and employment opportunities for new lawyers. The New York City Bar has also urged a review of the bar exam and a new law firm focusing on the needs of those of moderate means, a population that does not qualify for legal aid but cannot afford lawyers.15
The issue has also received extensive study in Idaho16, Virginia17 and Massachusetts18. The Boston Bar Association has also provided extensive study on this issue.19
III. Examples of Current State and Local Bar Association New Lawyer Programming
The examples in the Appendix to this Resolution show some of the different approaches taken by state and local bars to solving the new lawyer training problem. Some of these bars make the training mandatory20 and others are completely voluntary. Each of these programs offers new and young attorneys a path and a skill set to endure their first years in practice. Such programs include the basics of practice, the business of law, career planning, and health and wellness based programs.
Conclusion
Jon M. Garon said it best in his January 2013 ABA Journal Online article, “Reshaping Legal Education to Match the New Normal:”
Lawyers must understand the consequence of their own financial statements, balance sheets and capital accounts. Other business skills including human resource management, marketing, risk management, organizational behavior, leadership and strategic planning are all part of a lawyer’s professional management of her firm and essential to being an effective resource for her client.[…] Successful lawyers understand that clients seek lawyers to solve complex issues that have legal, regulatory, logistical and economic attributes. Context for the legal issues is essential to properly understand the nature of the problem and to recommend appropriate strategies for resolution.
This resolution aims to give new lawyers these skills and urges bars to address the “new lawyers set out on their own” problem by encouraging more basic substantive legal skills in bar 15 http://www.nycbar.org/44th-street-blog/2013/11/14/new-york-city-bar-association-task-force-calls-for-changes-in-education-and-career-focus-for-new-lawyers-report-announces-pilot-programs-and-urges-focus-on-unmet-middle-class-legal-needs/. November 14, 2013. 16 https://www.uidaho.edu/~/media/Files/orgs/Law/About/statewide/Conclave-Document.ashx 17 http://www.vsb.org/site/members/20th-anniversary-conclave 18 http://www.massbar.org/media/1246788/beginning%20the%20conversation.pdf 19 http://www.bostonbar.org/docs/default-document-library/future-of-prof-task-force.pdf 20 A number of states have new lawyer skill or substantive training requirements including Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Ohio, Utah, and Washington
1YL programming and by urging bars with such programming to evaluate their effectiveness and outreach. New lawyers who want to improve their skills and gain the basic competence to be effective practitioners will take advantage of these skills training sessions. A “yes” vote to this resolution encourages bars to keep these opportunities available for all lawyers.
1YL
Resolution 1YL
Appendix I
New Lawyer Training Requirements by State/Territory
1YL
State Requirements Notes Ethics Skills
Alabama X New bar admittees must take a six-hour professionalism course
within the first year of their admission. (New Admittees Information)
Alaska X No special requirements for new admittees
http://www.alaskabar.org/servlet/content/mcle.html
Am. Samoa
No special requirements for new admittees http://www.asbar.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article
&id=2225&Itemid=259
Arizona X
Newly admitted members and registrants are required to attend, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule, the State Bar's professionalism course within the first year of admission or registration, unless exempted. This course, which is a one-time only requirement, is a live event, 4.25 hours duration. The course is offered only in Arizona (Phoenix and Tucson). It is not available online, and no other course substitutes for the program. http://www.azbar.org/cleandmcle/mcle/mandatoryprofessionalismc
ourse
Arkansas
No special requirements for new admittees but there is a one hour of ethics requirement for all lawyers.
https://courts.arkansas.gov/rules-and-administrative-orders/rules-for-minimum-continuing-legal-education
California X
No special requirements for new admittees (as of November 2012) Elimination of Bias in the Legal Profession requirement
Detection/Prevention of Substance Abuse or Mental Illness requirement
http://mcle.calbar.ca.gov/Attorneys/Requirements.aspx Proposal to require skills courses before graduation and after
graduation in addition to pro bono work http://www.calbar.ca.gov/AboutUs/News/ThisYearsNewsReleases/
201317.aspx
Connecticut
Connecticut does not have a CLE requirement. See http://www.americanbar.org/publications_cle/mandatory_cle/mcle_
states/states_a-k/connecticut.html.
Colorado X
Mandatory “Practicing with Professionalism” Course http://www.cobar.org/index.cfm/ID/20232/CONTENT/Rules/Accredi
tations/
Delaware X Perspective lawyers must complete five month clerkship before
admission to the bar. In this clerkship, the perspective lawyer must complete 29 tasks under the supervision of an experienced lawyer.
1YL Can be completed in a law office, court, or public sector setting.
Explanation.
District of Columbia X
New lawyers must complete a six hour professionalism course consisting of the code of professional conduct, an introduction to
pro bono, and an overview of practice in the DC Courts and Administrative systems (More Here)
Florida X X
New lawyers required to complete Basic Skills Course Requirement (some exemptions may apply) and Practicing with
Professionalism Course Requirement.
Georgia X X
Transition into Law Practice Program required for all entering private practice in Georgia. Consists of one day program plus group mentoring sessions. Has skills and ethics components.
Other requirements for public sector employees.
Guam X No special requirements for new admittees
http://guambar.org/cle-rules
Hawaii
The MCPE requirement is waived for the calendar year that you are admitted to the Bar. However, pursuant to RSCH Rule 1.14,
this waiver does not modify the requirement that you must complete the Hawaii Professionalism Course mandated by the
Hawaii Supreme Court no later than December 31 of the following year of election of active status. As an added bonus, upon
completion of the Hawaii Professionalism Course you will earn 4.5 MCPE credits, 3 of which may be carried over into the next year to
be used towards your annual requirement. http://www.hsba.org/MCLE_FAQs.aspx#code18
http://hsba.org/resources/8/MCLE/RSCH%20Rule%2022%2012.27.12.pdf
Idaho X X
According to Rule 402 (f) of the Idaho State Bar Commission Rules, each attorney is required to attend a practical skills seminar within twelve months of admission to the Idaho State Bar.
http://isb.idaho.gov/licensing/mcle/mcle_requirements.html
Illinois X X
All new lawyers must complete a 15-hour MCLE requirement with a six hours of basic practice skills (fulfillment with course or mentor setting approved by Professionalism Commission) plus nine hours of CLE in lawyer’s choice OR six hours of the basic skills course,
the mentoring program plus three hours of CLE in lawyer’s choice.
Indiana X The New Lawyer Requirement is as follows: Newly admitted attorneys must complete a minimum of 36 credit hours designated as appropriate for new lawyers within the first three years. Six of the 36 hours must be
1YL from the Commission-Accredited Six-Hour Applied Professionalism
Course; and newly admitted attorneys must complete a minimum of six hours per year. See http://www.in.gov/judiciary/cle/2337.htm.
Iowa X X
All new lawyers must complete eight hours of new lawyer education courses consisting of practice skills, ethics (one hour),
and introduction to the court system.
Kansas X All new lawyers must complete the Orientation to Kansas Practice
Course within the six months of bar admission.
Kentucky X X
Supreme Court Rule 3.652 – All lawyers in their first year of practice (exceptions for those waiving into Kentucky) must take a
New Lawyer Program with two hours of ethics and two hours of law practice management courses.
Louisiana X
The compliance requirement for attorneys admitted in 2012 is 12.5 hours, including 8 hours of ethics, professionalism or law office
management, which can be earned in the year of admission or the following calendar year.
http://www.lascmcle.org/requirements.asp#2nd
Maine x
Every attorney must complete eleven hours of CLE each year, with one hour being dedicated to ethics/professional responsibility. See
http://www.mainebar.org/cle_maine.asp.
Maryland X
Requirement to complete Professionalism Course
Piloting a mentoring program for new attorneys
Started new lawyer training course that includes a full day of skills training plus two online courses of attorney’s choosing
Massachusetts No mandatory CLE. See http://www.massbar.org/cle.
Michigan Michigan does not have a CLE requirement at this time.
Minnesota X
Forty-five hours every reporting period with hours in ethics and bias elimination. See
http://www.mbcle.state.mn.us/MBCLE/pages/rules.asp.
Mississippi No special new lawyer training requirements.
Missouri X
Rule 15.05(e) now requires lawyers admitted or reinstated to The Missouri Bar after June 30, 2009 to obtain two hours of
professionalism, ethics and malpractice prevention education within 12 months of admission or reinstatement. (Source).
Missouri Bar YLS presents Stepping Up and Stepping Out: The New Lawyer Experience, focused on giving new lawyers practical
skills not taught in law school for several different substantive
1YL areas of law.
Montana X
No special requirements for new admittees Of the five (5) credit hours in ethics, one hour must be satisfied by a program on the relationship between a lawyer’s professional responsibilities and substance abuse, chemical dependency, or debilitating mental condition.
http://www.montanabar.org/associations/7121/files/clerules.pdf
Nebraska No special new lawyer training requirements.
Nevada X
The first years of a lawyer's practice are a critical time in the development of professional habits, practices and character.
To foster this transition newly admitted attorneys with less than five years' experience must participate in Transitioning into Practice (TIP): A Mentor Program for Nevada Attorneys.
TIP is designed to provide transitional support to newly admitted attorneys as they enter practice.
http://www.nvbar.org/tip
http://www.nvbar.org/node/89
New Hampshire X
New Hampshire has ongoing CLE requirements of both substance and ethics pursuant to Rule 53. New lawyers may not have to
complete requirements during first year due to bar admission date. See http://www.nhbar.org/nhmcle/summary-of-rule-53.asp.
New Jersey X X
Every active lawyer is required to complete twenty-four credit hours of continuing legal education every two years. Of those twenty-four credits, at least four credits must be in ethics and/or professionalism. A newly admitted lawyer must obtain fifteen credit hours in any five of the following nine subject areas during the newly admitted lawyer’s first full two-year compliance period: New Jersey basic estate administration; New Jersey basic estate planning; New Jersey civil or criminal trial preparation; New Jersey family law practice; New Jersey real estate closing procedures; New Jersey trust and business accounting; New Jersey landlord/tenant practice; New Jersey municipal court practice; and New Jersey law office management. See http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/cle/newlyadmitted.pdf.
New Mexico X
No special requirements for new admittees https://www.nmmcle.org/rules/article_2.asp
https://www.nmmcle.org/faq/faqs.asp#question_2
New York X X
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education for Newly Admitted Attorneys in the State of New York is a transitional continuing legal education program designed to help recent graduates and newly admitted attorneys become competent to deliver legal services at
1YL an acceptable level of quality as they enter practice and assume primary client service responsibilities. The Program seeks to help the newly admitted attorney establish a foundation in certain practical skills, techniques and procedures, which are and can be essential to the practice of law, but may not have been adequately addressed in law school. It includes courses targeting ethics and professionalism, skills, practice management and areas of professional practice. 32 hours required. See http://www.nycourts.gov/attorneys/cle/programrules.pdf.
North Carolina X
All new attorneys need to the take the 12-hour North Carolina State Bar Professionalism for New Admittees Course in their first
year.
North Dakota X X
Every licensed attorney in North Dakota must report 45 hours of CLE, including 3 hours in the area of professional responsibility,
every 3 years. See http://www.sband.org/Resources%20for%20Lawyers/newAdmittee
s.aspx.
Northern Marianas Islands
X
Every attorney admitted after July 1, 2002 shall attend and complete a course in Professionalism sponsored jointly by
the Commonwealth Supreme Court and the CNMI Bar Association
http://www.cnmilaw.org/pdf/court_rules/R15.pdf
Ohio X X
New lawyers are required to complete 12 hours of new lawyer training in their biennial reporting period. Three of the 12 hours
must be in professionalism and the remaining nine hours can be in practice skills. Courses have to be designated “new lawyer
training courses to count.” Can fulfill some of the requirement in a one-on-one setting with a more experienced lawyer mentoring the
new lawyer.
Oklahoma No special new lawyer training requirements.
Oregon X X
New admittees shall complete 15 credit hours of accredited CLE activity in the first reporting period after admission as an active member, including two credit hours in ethics (including one in child abuse reporting), and ten credit hours in practical skills. New admittees admitted prior to December 31, 2008 must also complete one access to justice credit in their first reporting period. New admittees admitted on or after January 1, 2009 must also complete a three credit hour OSB-approved introductory course in access to justice. The MCLE Administrator may waive the practical skills requirement for a new admittee who has practiced law in another jurisdiction for three consecutive years immediately prior to the member’s admission in Oregon, in which event the new admittee must complete ten hours in other areas. https://www.osbar.org/_docs/rulesregs/mclerules.pdf
1YL
Pennsylvania X X
In addition to regular CLE requirements, new lawyers must take Bridge the Gap course (consisting of 4 CLE hours) prior to 1st compliance deadline as dictated by the PA CLE Board. See
https://www.pacle.org/about/rulesregs.asp.
Puerto Rico No special new lawyer training requirements.
Rhode Island X X
All new lawyers must complete Rhode Island Bridge the Gap (but for attorneys waiving in to RI after 3+ years of practice). See http://www.courts.ri.gov/AttorneyResources/mcle/PDFs/FAQ-
attorneys.pdf.
South Carolina No formal course requirements but all new lawyers required to
participate in new lawyer mentoring program.
South Dakota South Dakota does not have a CLE requirement.
Tennessee No special new lawyer training requirements.
Texas X
All new lawyers must take the Guide to Basics of Law Practice Course that includes ethics and law practice management
components.
Utah X
Mandatory New Lawyer Training Program, will receive 12 CLE hours at the end of the program. Mentorship driven but specific
curriculum is directed.
Vermont X X
Every lawyers must complete twenty hours every two years including two hours ethics. See
http://www.vermontjudiciary.org/lc/d-BBELibrary/MCLERules.pdf.
Virgin Islands No special new lawyer training requirements.
Virginia X
New lawyers must complete a six hour professionalism course consisting of lawyer ethics and mental health classes
Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference started Professional
Development Series, a voluntary program with weekly videos providing practice tips, business tips, career development
broadcasts, and health programs
Washington X X
All prospective lawyers need to complete four hours of videos (Preadmission Education Program) on basic practice skills, law
office management, ethics, and the introduction to the bar and the court system.
West Virginia X X
Has a mandatory “Bridge the Gap” program, with 210 minutes required education on general West Virginia practice and 100
minutes at lawyer’s choice of practice area skills
1YL
Wisconsin Thirty hours every reporting period including three hours ethics/professional responsibility. See http://wicourts.gov/.
Wyoming X
Each new admittee to the Wyoming State Bar shall complete, within the first year after admission, a six-hour continuing legal education course. The course shall be conducted by the Wyoming State Bar and shall be available at least three times a year, at such times and places as the Wyoming State Bar may designate. No other course or courses may be used to satisfy the requirements of this subsection. The course shall cover the following criteria:
General procedures, with focus on Professional Conduct Rules 1.1 (competence), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4 (communication), 1.5 (fees), 1.7, 1.8 and 1.9 (conflicts of interest) and 1.15 (safeguarding property); courtroom professionalism, civility, and other litigation-related matters; and the function of the Wyoming State Bar and Bar Committees including the Member Assistance Program. 3.0 hours; and
A course on Wyoming specific law, which shall be developed under the authority of the Board of Law Examiners. 3.0 hours. http://www.courts.state.wy.us/CourtRules_Entities.aspx?RulesPage=CLE.xml
1YL
Resolution 1YL
Appendix II
Sample Basic Substantive Legal Skills Programs
1YL
Philadelphia Bar Association Young Lawyers Division’s Bootcamp, Lunch and Learn Series
The program brings experienced lawyers and judges into one room for one day and covers new lawyer concerns such as getting through the job interview, learning how to deal with a judge and the court’s staff, dealing with the business side of running your firm, and developing the good habits to succeed in the first job. The program is the basis for the American Bar Association YLD’s Bootcamp program presented in 2010 and updated in 2012.
The Lunch and Learn Series serves a regular brownbag lunch program where attorneys get matched with a local non-profit board of directors to shadow the board’s operations through its meetings and regular operations. The lawyers receive education on how non-profit organizations work from learning how to read financial statements, and gaining insight on board decision-making. Attorneys in the program meet regularly and have speakers who discuss the concepts they are learning.
http://www.philadelphiabar.org/page/YoungLawyersDivision
1YL
Philadelphia Bar Foundation’s Board Observer Program
Young lawyers apply and get placed with a legal service provider’s board of directors to observe their operations and meetings. The young lawyers get to review the documents board members review, including financial statements, contracts, and proposals. Last year was the inaugural year of the Program. According to the Program’s application, its goals are:
1. To help young lawyers develop leadership skills; to provide them the chance to serve their community; to enable them to network with others in the legal field; and to give them the opportunity to learn about board membership without incurring the costs of officially joining a board. 2. To create connections between legal services organizations and the local law firms and other legal entities that employ the young lawyers participating in the program and to give these organizations the benefit of the time and energy a young lawyer brings. 3. To create a cohort of young lawyers who will continue to work with legal services organizations throughout their careers and who will become advocates for the Philadelphia public interest legal community. We hope that program “alumni” will remain connected to each other and to the program even after their participation ends by, among other things, becoming mentors to future BOP participants.
1YL
New York City Bar Association’s Professional Development Workshop Series
This series of monthly in person CLE classes “provides attorneys with critical training to help them succeed as they transition into more senior roles.” Admission is free to all bar members and program sponsors. Topics have included (or will include):
• Business development
• Communicating concepts in meetings and on the phone,
• Ethics of using smartphones, tablets, and other technology, and
• Translating concepts from the meeting to the final contract.
http://www.nycbar.org/career-development/professional-development-series
1YL
Washington State Bar Association’s Preadmission Education Program
Before admission to the bar, new bar admittees are required to learn more about the practice of law. The WSBA requires attendance at a live seminar or watching three videos of past programming related to basic lawyering skills. New bar admittees have the option of viewing three out of a number of videos on topics such as:
• Managing Your Legal Career
• Maintaining your reputation
• Do’s and Don’ts of Appearing in King County Superior Court
• Basic Law Office Management
http://www.wsba.org/WSBA-CLE/New-Lawyer-Education/Preadmission-Education-Program
1YL
Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference’s Professional Development Conference
This one day conference focuses on lawyer skills relevant to practice. Participants receive six hours of credit on skills, practice management, and ethics topics. The program is optional and open to all lawyers.21 The program has expanded recently to include two simultaneous locations and will add a third location next year. Past sessions at this conference included:
• Successful Writing
• The Exceptional Oral Presentation
• Establishing Your Legal Practice
• Effective Legal Research
http://www.vsb.org/site/conferences/ylc/professionalism-development-conference
http://www.vsb.org/docs/conferences/young-lawyers/pdc2012.pdf
21 Virginia has a mandatory program that is ethics based and focuses on decision-making, mental health, and substance abuse issues. The Professional Development Conference is not that program.
1YL
Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference’s Professional Development Series
This series aims to produce on-demand training videos for new lawyers without employment or new lawyers who work in law firms without professional development opportunities. Programs produced locally, from other bar associations, and the ABA YLD, release weekly. The subjects generally include practice skills, the business of law, career development, and physical and mental health. Topics will include client interviewing, marketing law practice, nutrition, and exercise, amongst other topics.
http://www.vsb.org/site/conferences/ylc/pds
1YL
San Antonio Young Lawyers Association (SAYLA) Trial Skills Luncheon Series and Competition
Designed for lawyers new to litigation, the program consists of monthly luncheon series where prominent litigators, judges, and experts discuss specific portions of litigation practice such as discovery, opening and closing arguments, witness examination, and jury selection, amongst other topics.
Every year, SAYLA holds a trial skills competition that aims to develop and sharpen trial skills. Judges volunteer their time to serve as lawyers participate in a single day, multiple round, elimination style mock trial tournament attracting attorneys from San Antonio and the surrounding counties.
2YL
1
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION
AND AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
STANDING COMMITTEE ON PRO BONO AND PUBLIC SERVICE
RECOMMENDATION AND REPORT TO THE ASSEMBLY OF THE YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION
RECOMMENDATION
RESOLVED that the American Bar Association urges the appropriate governing bodies of states and territories to enact a rule permitting and encouraging in-house counsel already authorized to engage in the practice of law, while in the exclusive employment of an organization in a state in which they are not licensed, to participate in the provision of any and all pro bono legal services in that state offered under the supervision of an organized legal aid society, a state/local bar association project, a court-affiliated pro bono program, or a member of the Bar of that state who is also working on the pro bono representation.
2YL
2
“[I]n a time when the need for legal services among the poor is growing and public funding for such services has not kept pace, lawyers’ ethical obligation to volunteer their
time and skills pro bono publico is manifest.” Mallard v. U.S. Dist. Court for S. Dist. of Iowa, 490 U.S. 296, 310 (1989).
REPORT
ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 6.1 provides that: “Every lawyer has a
professional responsibility to provide legal services to those unable to pay.”1 To date, forty-nine states, the Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia have adopted the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct.2 In so doing, they have demonstrated an understanding of the importance of delivering pro bono legal services and have accepted the responsibility of urging attorneys within their boundaries to deliver these services. This mission seems easy enough to embrace and indeed most attorneys reading this report are likely familiar with both local and national calls for pro bono legal assistance. In fact, many attorneys reading this report probably make a point of regularly donating their skills and time to their local communities in an effort to aid those in need of but unable to afford legal services. These attorneys should be commended and their efforts applauded.
But what about the attorneys whose practice, by its very nature, precludes their engagement in any pro bono legal services in the state in which they work and reside? This group of attorneys – in-house counsel with a multijurisdictional practice – has the time, skills, resources and desire to give back to the communities in which they practice but, in many states around the country, is precluded from doing so because of a lack of authorization in their resident state’s rules of professional conduct. This resolution aims to fill that gap to allow in-house counsel already authorized to engage in the practice of law, while in the exclusive employment of an organization in a state in which they are not licensed, to participate in the delivery of pro bono legal services in that state. This resolution serves as a critical step toward the ultimate goal of facilitating the provision of pro bono legal services by all attorneys, regardless of the nature of one’s practice.
The Need for Pro Bono Legal Services
The need for pro bono legal services is tremendous. Statistics show at least 40% of low- and moderate-income households nationwide experience a legal problem each year.3 Approximately half of low- and moderate-income American households are facing
1Model Rule 6.1, Voluntary Pro Bono Publico Service. It also provides that “a lawyer should aspire to render at least 50 hours of pro bono public legal services per year” and that “a substantial majority of the 50 hours” should be to persons of limited means or to organizations that support the needs of persons of limited means. See id.
2See http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/ model_rules_of_professional_conduct/alpha_list_state_adopting_model_rules.html (last visited on Nov. 22, 2013). California is the only state that has not modeled its rules of professional responsibility and conduct after the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Id.
3See Probono.net, at http://www.probono.net/ (last visited on Nov. 25, 2013).
2YL
3
one or more situations that could be addressed by the civil justice system each year.4 Almost 71% of low-income households are not finding their way to the justice system.5 In moderate-income households, that number is closer to 61%.6 The most common legal needs of low- and moderate-income American households pertain to personal finances, consumer issues, housing (both owned and rental), and other real property.7 Low- and moderate-income households most often try to handle their legal needs on their own as self-represented litigants.8 Indeed, as has been noted recently by the Attorney-in-Chief of Legal Aid Society in New York City, “It’s a very real problem that confronts low-income families and individuals. The need really is limitless.”9
Despite this overwhelming need for legal services, studies show that the collective civil legal aid effort is meeting only about 20% of the legal needs of low-income people.10 Allowing multijurisdictional in-house counsel to serve this need will help improve the access to justice for those in low- and moderate-income households.
In-House Counsel to the Rescue
ABA Model Rule 5.5 was amended in 2002 to allow for the temporary multijurisdictional practice by in-house counsel in any state their employer-client wishes as long as they are in good standing in their home state of bar admission and do not take on any other representations.11 Specifically, it provides:
(d) A lawyer admitted in another United States jurisdiction or in a foreign jurisdiction, and not disbarred or suspended from practice in any jurisdiction or in a foreign jurisdiction, may provide legal services through an office or other systematic and continuous presence in this jurisdiction that:
4American Bar Association, Consortium on Legal Services and the Public, Legal
Needs and Civil Justice: A Survey of Americans – Major Findings from the Comprehensive Legal Needs Study (1994). Although this study was published in 1994, it remains the only national study performed examining the nature and number of unmet legal needs across the country. It is still widely respected and its findings are still relevant and accurate even today, nearly twenty years later. See Legal Services Corporation, Documenting the Justice Gap in America: The Current Unmet Civil Legal Needs of Low-Income Americans (Sept. 2009), at http://www.lsc.gov/ sites/default/files/LSC/pdfs/documenting_the_justice_gap_in_america_2009.pdf.
5See supra note 4. 6See supra note 4. 7See supra note 4. 8See supra note 4. 9James C. McKinley, Jr., Rule Change Could Ease “Justice Gap” for the Poor,
New York Times, Dec. 2, 2013, at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/nyregion/rule-change-could-ease-justice-gap-for-the-poor.html?_r=1& (last visited Dec. 6, 2013).
10See supra note 3. 11Corporate Pro Bono, Multijurisdictional Practice: In-House Counsel Pro Bono, at
page 1, at http://www.cpbo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/MJP-Article-April-2013.pdf (last visited on Nov. 22, 2013).
2YL
4
(1) are provided to the lawyer’s employer or its organizational affiliates; are not services for which the forum requires pro hac vice admission; and, when performed by a foreign lawyer and requires advice on the law of this or another jurisdiction or of the United States, such advice shall be based upon the advice of a lawyer who is duly licensed and authorized by the jurisdiction to provide such advice; or (2) are services that the lawyer is authorized by federal or other law or rule to provide in this jurisdiction.
Model Rule 5.5 (d). Subsection (e) of Rule 5.5 requires that the foreign lawyer “be a member in good standing of a recognized legal profession in a foreign jurisdiction, the members of which are admitted to practice as lawyers or counselors at law or the equivalent, and are subject to effective regulation and discipline by a duly constituted professional body or a public authority.” Many states have adopted Model Rule 5.5 or similar language, effectively allowing for the multijurisdictional practice of in-house counsel in their borders.12 The problem is that not all of these provisions include an exception allowing those attorneys to perform pro bono legal work in their resident employer-client state. This resolution looks to solve this problem by asking the ABA to encourage all appropriate bodies in states containing such multijurisdictional provisions to adopt an exception allowing pro bono legal work by in-house counsel.
Summary of Current Practice Rules
Currently, thirty-one (31) jurisdictions provide for the provision of pro bono legal services by in-house counsel not licensed in the jurisdiction. The following is a summary13 of practice rules applicable to in-house counsel providing pro bono legal services:
• 18 jurisdictions allow attorneys licensed out-of-state or in-house counsel working under the state’s unauthorized practice of law exception or in-house admission rules to perform pro bono legal work, if those attorneys are “associated with” or “affiliated with” approved legal services organizations.
• 7 jurisdictions allow attorneys licensed out-of-state or in-house counsel working under the state’s unauthorized practice of law exception or in-house admission rules to perform pro bono legal work, if those attorneys are “associated with” or “affiliated with” approved legal services organizations and with the supervision of a locally-licensed attorney.
• 4 jurisdictions allow in-house counsel working under the state’s unauthorized practice of law exception or in-house admission rules to perform pro bono legal work, if “associated with” or “affiliated with” approved legal services or with the supervision of a locally-licensed attorney.
12See supra note 2, at page 1. 13This information can be found at Corporate Pro Bono, Pro Bono Institute,
Multijurisdictional Practice: In-House Counsel Pro Bono (2013), at http://www.cpbo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/MJP-Article-March-20131.pdf.
2YL
5
• 3 jurisdictions allow registered in-house counsel to perform pro bono work under their limited licenses without restriction other than the local professional rules of conduct.
• 19 jurisdictions that are silent with regard to in-house counsel who are not locally licensed providing pro bono legal services.
A chart providing a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction analysis is appended to this Report.14 It should be noted that Hawaii and Montana do not make exceptions or allowances for non-locally licensed in-house counsel.15 There are, however, other states that do not make these types of exceptions but do have rules allowing non-locally-licensed out-of-state attorneys, under certain circumstances, to provide pro bono legal assistance.16
14See supra note 12. The chart indicates that there are 2 jurisdictions that allow registered in-house counsel to perform pro bono work without restriction and 20 jurisdictions that are silent. This recently has changed with New York’s adoption in December 2013 of a rule permitting in-house counsel to perform pro bono work without restriction. See McKinley, Jr., supra note 9 (New York Times article). The statistics here reflect this recent change.
The nineteen states that currently have no rules regarding whether in-house counsel who are not locally licensed may engage in pro bono legal services are:
• Alabama • Alaska • Hawaii • Idaho • Indiana • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Michigan • Montana • Nevada • New Hampshire • Oklahoma • South Dakota • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Wyoming
15See supra note 12. 16See supra note 12, listing West Virginia as not allowing for non-locally licensed
in-house counsel to practice within its borders, but allowing out-of-state attorneys, upon application, to provide pro bono legal assistance in all causes in which he or she is associated with an organized legal services or public defender program sponsored,
2YL
6
Therefore, the fact that a state does not make an exception for non-locally licensed in-house counsel does not preclude that state from enacting a rule allowing non-locally licensed in-house counsel from performing pro bono legal work within its borders under certain circumstances.
Conclusion
There is undeniably an overwhelming need to provide pro bono legal services in this country and statistics show that it is not being met. In-house attorneys have the desire, the skills and the opportunities to provide pro bono legal assistance; they simply need the authorization to do so. This resolution provides at least a partial solution to addressing this unmet need by encouraging uniformity among states in allowing non-locally-licensed in-house counsel authorized to engage in the practice of law with their corporate employer to further engage in and deliver pro bono legal services in their communities
Summary
This resolution will enable the ABA to facilitate and urge the appropriate governing bodies of American states and territories to enact rules permitting non-locally-licensed in-house counsel already authorized to engage in the practice of law to engage in pro bono legal services in their communities. It offers that such engagement in pro bono legal services be under the supervision of others who are locally-licensed to foster teamwork and to provide guidance and advice regarding local custom and law. Respectfully submitted, ABA Young Lawyers Division and ABA Standing Committee on Pro Bono and Public Service December 2013
approved or recognized by the Board of Law Examiners. An attorney can only practice under this rule for 36 months. Id.; see also W. Va. Admission to the Practice, Rule 9.0.
2YL
7
ABA/YLD RECOMMENDATION GENERAL INFORMATION FORM
Submitting Entity: ABA Young Lawyers Division Resolutions Team and ABA Standing
Committee on Pro Bono and Public Service Submitted By: Dana M. Hrelic, ABA YLD Resolutions Team 1. Summary of Recommendations:
The recommended resolution will enable the ABA to facilitate and urge the appropriate governing bodies of American states and territories to enact rules permitting non-locally-licensed in-house counsel already authorized to engage in the practice of law to engage in pro bono legal services in their communities. It offers that such engagement in pro bono legal services be under the supervision of others who are locally-licensed to foster teamwork and to provide guidance and advice regarding local custom and law.
2. Date of Approval by Submitting Entity:
3. Has this or a similar recommendation been submitted to the Assembly or ABA previously?
No. 4. Are there any Division or ABA policies that are relevant to this recommendation
and, if so, would they be affected by its adoption?
Yes. Resolution 121A – adopted at the 2006 Annual Meeting: Urges solo and small firm attorneys, larger law firms, corporate law departments and government and military law offices to encourage their lawyers, partners as well as associates, to serve their communities through pro bono and public service activities consistent with applicable rules of professional conduct and adopts Pro Bono Policies and Procedures, dated August 2006, to provide their lawyers with opportunities to do pro bono work and to adopt specific internal policies and procedures to support such work.
Resolution 102A – Adopted at the 2009 Annual Meeting: Urges corporate counsel to work with the corporation and outside counsel to waive certain limited positional conflicts in areas related to mortgage, bankruptcy and consumer finance in order to reduce the number of pro bono matters declined by outside counsel due to conflicts, so long as the waivers are not inconsistent with applicable rules of professional conduct.
Neither would be affected by this recommendation’s adoption.
2YL
8
5. Does this recommendation require immediate action at the next Assembly? If so, why?
Yes. If passed, it will be brought before the ABA House of Delegates at the
2014 Annual Meeting in Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Status of Legislation (if applicable):
Not applicable. 7. Cost to the Association:
None. 8. Disclosure of Conflict of Interest (if applicable): None. 9. Referrals:
None.
10. Contact Persons (Prior to the meeting):
Dana M. Hrelic 860/522-8338 90 Gillett Street Hartford, CT 06105 [email protected]
11. Contact Person (Who will present the report to the Executive Council and/or Assembly) Dana M. Hrelic (see above)
3YL
1
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION
RECOMMENDATION AND REPORT TO THE
ASSEMBLY OF THE YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION
RECOMMENDATION
RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association urges Congress and the Department of Education to establish reasonable and effective benchmarks for successful law school debt repayment by a law school’s graduates that the law school must meet to maintain its eligibility to enroll students receiving federal student loans. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association urges Congress and the Department of Education to develop these benchmarks to attain the goals of (1) slowing the increase in law school tuition; (2) limiting the debt burden of law school graduates; (3) enhancing access to the legal profession, particularly for minorities and traditionally disadvantaged groups; and (4) better equipping lawyers to provide quality legal services to the public.
3YL
2
REPORT
I. Tuition and Debt
The average yearly tuition at a private law school in 2012 was $40,634, and for residents at a public law school, $23,214.1 Combined with living expenses, which often exceed $20,000 a year, books and other fees, the typical private law school student will pay in excess of $65,000 per year to get a legal education, and a typical public law school student will pay about $50,000 per year.2 As a point of comparison, the median household income in the United States in 2012 was $51,371.3 That means that in any given year the median American household could put its entire income toward funding law school and still not be able to cover a private law school education.
To make matters worse, tuition continues to increase at levels far outpacing inflation.
Indeed, private law schools have increased tuition by a factor of four in real (inflation-adjusted) terms between 1971 and 2011.4 Public law schools similarly have increased tuition for residents by nearly a factor of four in only the last two decades.5 Those increases are stunning, indicating that law schools have little restraint when it comes to the cost of legal education.
To be sure, the so-called “sticker price” for law school often is not the amount that
students actually pay after the application of scholarships and other tuition discounts. As a result, perhaps a more accurate measure of the cost of law school is the average debt load of recent graduates. Here too, however, the picture is grim. According to ABA statistics, the average 2012 graduate of a public law school borrowed $84,600, and the average 2012 graduate of a private law school borrowed $122,158.6 Significantly, those figures do not include interest that may accrue before graduation, undergraduate debt, and debt from loans to study for the bar exam.7 After tallying up all of these other costs, it is not uncommon for law school graduates to carry a debt burden of between $150,000 and $200,000, and many carry much more.8
1 Am. Bar Ass’n, Law School Tuition, 1985-2012, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/
administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/statistics/ls_tuition.authcheckdam.pdf (last visited Nov. 29, 2013).
2 For information on the total cost of attendance at various law schools, see the 2014 ABA LSAC Official Guide to ABA-Approved Law Schools (2013), available on the LSAC website at https://officialguide.lsac.org/release/OfficialGuide_Default.aspx.
3 AMANDA NOSS, U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, HOUSEHOLD INCOME: 2012, at 3 (2013). 4 Paul Campos, The Crisis of the American Law School, 46 U. MICH. J.L. REFORM 177, 178
(2012). 5 Id. 6 Am. Bar Ass’n, Average Amount Borrowed, 2001-2012, http://www.americanbar.org/content/
dam/aba/administrative/legal_education_and_admissions_to_the_bar/statistics/avg_amnt_brwd.authcheckdam.pdf (last visited Nov. 29, 2013).
7 ILL. STATE BAR ASS’N, FINAL REPORT, FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE IMPACT OF LAW SCHOOL DEBT ON THE DELIVERY OF LEGAL SERVICES [hereinafter ISBA DEBT REPORT]
3YL
3
The weight of this debt on young lawyers attempting to begin their careers and on the legal profession as a whole is crushing. First, the high cost of a legal education creates additional barriers to entry for Blacks and Hispanics, who generally receive less support from their families to attend law school.9 The rapid rise in law school tuition is therefore one of the factors holding the legal profession back from embodying the full spectrum of diverse backgrounds in America. Additionally, the burden of law school debt can distort the employment choices of young attorneys. Small firms, particularly those in rural areas, face greater difficulty hiring and retaining competent attorneys. Fewer lawyers are able to sustain a career working in low-paying public interest jobs. Lawyers burdened by debt face greater pressures and temptations to violate ethics rules, and often have less time available for pro bono work. The overall result is that the quality of legal services that the legal profession provides, particularly to low and middle-income Americans, suffers.10 II. The Problem There are a variety of explanations for the persistent ability of law schools to raise tuition at rates far exceeding inflation for the past several decades. Declining support for public schools from state legislatures, the rise of practice-oriented legal education, declining faculty-student ratios, and significant increases in faculty compensation to compete with private sector opportunities are all no doubt part of the explanation. Nonetheless, there is little doubt that an overriding factor is the nearly unfettered access that law schools enjoy to federal funds. So long as the federal government provides a blank check, law schools can raise their tuition with near impunity, confident that their students will be able to pay the price by taking out more federal loans.11 As a recent report by the Illinois State Bar Association explains:
The market pressure on law schools to keep tuition affordable is significantly blunted . . . by the generous lending policies of the federal government. To date, the federal government has allowed nearly any student enrolled in a recognized educational program to borrow amounts limited only by the cost of attendance. To remain eligible to enroll students receiving federal student loans, moreover, an institution need meet few requirements other than remaining accredited by a recognized accrediting agency. As a result, the federal government will fully fund the
13 (2013), available at http://www.isba.org/sites/default/files/committees/ Law%20School%20Debt%20Report%20-%203-8-13.pdf.
8 Id. 9 Id. 10 For an in-depth look at the impact of law school debt on the careers of young lawyers and on
the quality of legal services that the profession provides to the public, see ISBA DEBT REPORT, supra note 7.
11 For a detailed explanation of this phenomenon, see Michael Simkovic, Risk-Based Student Loans, 70 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 527 (2013), and BRIAN Z. TAMANAHA, FAILING LAW SCHOOLS 126-34, 177-81 (2012).
3YL
4
education of any person who gets into law school, independent of the employment outcomes that the law school’s graduates achieve and of their ability to repay the taxpayers’ money.12
As a result, law schools face little financial pressure to rein in the cost of tuition or to ensure that their students graduate with manageable debt loads. III. The Solution To combat this problem the federal government should impose reasonable outcome-based requirements on schools to maintain eligibility to enroll students receiving federal funding. There are a variety of ways that rules could be structured to ensure that schools are graduating students who can meet minimum employment and debt-repayment outcomes. Fortunately, however, the federal government need not reinvent the wheel in this area. The Department of Education has recently released “Gainful Employment” regulations for for-profit schools that provide a template for potential rules for law schools.13 Under the newly proposed rules,14 for-profit schools must meet specified metrics measuring the default rates, debt-to-earnings ratio, and loan repayment rates of students enrolled in their programs. For example, one metric looks at the total amount of all outstanding principal owed by all of a school’s borrowers in a particular year. If the total amount of the principal is lower at the end of an award year for that group of borrowers than it was at the beginning of the award year, a school passes the metric. Otherwise, it fails, and a school with a loan balance that fails to decrease for three straight years losses its eligibility for federal funds. Another potential metric could require that a certain percentage of borrowers from a school avoid default on their loans within three years of entering repayment. Yet another could require that the average debt payments of a school’s graduates not exceed a certain percentage of discretionary earnings.15
12 ISBA DEBT REPORT, supra note 7, at 39-40 (footnotes omitted). Note that the federal lending programs allow law students to borrow under the federal graduate PLUS program, which allows students to borrow an unlimited amount up to “the student’s estimated cost of attendance, minus . . . other financial aid.” 20 U.S.C. § 1078-2(b).
13 See Paul Fain, Further on Gainful Employment, INSIDE HIGHER ED, Nov. 12, 2013, available at http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/11/12/feds-release-tighter-proposed-language-gainful-employment-rules. The Department of Education originally proposed a version of the Gainful Employment regulations in 2011. See Jean Braucher, Mortgaging Human Capital: Federally Funded Subprime Higher Education, 69 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 439, 465-72 (2012) (describing the regulations). Subsequently, the District Court for the District of Columbia vacated the rules on the ground that the Department had not adequately articulated the rationale behind them and that they were therefore arbitrary and capricious. See Ass’n of Private Colls. & Univs. v. Duncan, 870 F. Supp. 2d 133, 154 (D.D.C. 2012). The court’s opinion affirmed the statutory power of the Department to issue such regulations, however, leading to the Department’s recent attempt to re-promulgate them. Id. at 149.
14 The full text of the proposed rules is available at http://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/ hearulemaking/2012/draft-regs-session2-11813.pdf (last visited Nov. 29, 2013).
15 For a description of the rules, see BEN MILLER, NEW AM. FOUND., NEW GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT LANGUAGE IS OUT AND IT’S TOUGHER THAN BEFORE (2013), available at http://www.edcentral.org/ed-may-have-just-released-the-strongest-gainful-employment-proposal-yet/.
3YL
5
Significantly, as currently written, the Gainful Employment rules also include protection for current students and graduates of schools that are at risk of falling short of the metrics and of losing their eligibility for federal funds. These protections include a requirement that schools in danger of failing pay their graduates to bring down their average debt to a level where the school can meet the requirements of the regulations.16
A Gainful Employment rule applicable to law schools could adopt any or all of these features, with the requirements set at appropriate levels for law schools. Moreover, appropriate adjustments to the rules could account for the unique circumstances of law schools. For example, the metrics could be lowered for schools with a certain percentage of graduates employed in legal aid or government jobs, which traditionally do not pay as well as the private sector. Similarly, the metrics could be lowered for schools enrolling a certain percentage of minority students, thus protecting schools with a historical mission of providing access to the legal profession to disadvantaged students. In that way, the regulations would not jeopardize the advances in diversity that the legal profession has made.17 The purpose of this resolution is not to work out all of the details of a reasonable, effective, and just set of Gainful Employment regulations applicable to law schools. Instead, this resolution aims to endorse the general principle that law schools should not be allowed to increase their tuition indiscriminately on the backs of taxpayers without facing some accountability for their use of funds.
If such regulations were adopted, law schools would be forced to lower their tuition and the debt burdens of their graduates, or else face declining enrollment and likely closure. With their debt burden lightened, graduates would then be freer to accept jobs in government or with legal aid agencies, who would then have an easier time retaining talented lawyers. As a result, the quality and quantity of legal services that the profession provides to the public would increase.18 IV. Conclusion The YLD has traditionally worked diligently to improve the plight of young lawyers facing unmanageable debt loads and a difficult employment market. For all of its efforts to help current young lawyers, solving this problem in the long term requires addressing the root of the problem: the rapid and incessant increase in law school tuition. This resolution aims to arrest that
16 Id. 17 Implementing this proposal would likely require congressional action. Current law allows the
Department of Education to implement the Gainful Employment regulations only with respect to “program[s] of training to prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation,” a category that does not include all graduate programs. Compare 20 U.S.C. § 1001(a), with 20 U.S.C. § 1002(b)(1)(A)(i), and 20 U.S.C. § 1002(c)(1)(A). Accordingly, the ABA’s efforts to impose accountability on law schools in this area require lobbying Congress to grant the Department of Education authority to develop Gainful Employment regulations for law schools receiving federal funding.
18 For a detailed explanation of the effect of law school debt on the quality and quantity of legal services that the profession provides to the public, see ISBA DEBT REPORT, supra note 7.
3YL
6
increase by imposing reasonable requirements on law schools that are eligible to enroll students receiving federal funds.
3YL
7
ABA/YLD RECOMMENDATION
GENERAL INFORMATION FORM
Submitting Entity: ABA/YLD Truth in Law School Education Task Force Submitted By: Daniel Thies, ABA/YLD Liaison to the Section of Legal Education and
Admissions to the Bar 1. Summary of Recommendations: The ABA should lobby Congress and the Department of Education to develop reasonable
benchmarks for successful debt repayment by a law school’s graduates that the law school must meet to maintain eligibility to enroll students receiving federal student loans.
2. Date of Approval by Submitting Entity: Approved December 11, 2013 by the ABA/YLD Truth in Law School Education Task Force 3. Has this or a similar recommendation been submitted to the Assembly or ABA previously? None of which I am aware. 4. Are there any Division or ABA policies that are relevant to this recommendation and, if so, would
they be affected by its adoption? None of which I am aware. 5. Does this recommendation require immediate action at the next Assembly? If so, why? Yes. The ABA House of Delegates will likely consider a proposal in February to create a Task
Force to consider issues surrounding the financing of legal education. These recommendations may influence the work of that Task Force, and will most effectively do so if they are passed in February.
6. Status of Legislation (if applicable): N/A 7. Cost to the Association: None. 8 Disclosure of Conflict of Interest (if applicable): None. 9 Referrals:
3YL
8
None 10. Contact Person (Prior to the meeting): Daniel Thies ABA/YLD Liaison to the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar Sidley Austin LLP 1 South Dearborn Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 853-7571 Fax (312) 853-7036 [email protected] 11. Contact Person (Who will present the report to the Executive Council and/or Assembly)
Daniel Thies ABA/YLD Liaison to the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar Sidley Austin LLP 1 South Dearborn Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 853-7571 Fax (312) 853-7036 [email protected]
4YL
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION
GOVERNMENT, MILITARY & PUBLIC SECTOR LAWYER’S COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION AND REPORT TO THE ASSEMBLY OF THE YOUNG LAWYERS DIVISION
RECOMMENDATION
RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association encourages all law schools to create Veterans Law Institutes for the purpose of ensuring that all veterans, especially those who are unemployed or are otherwise financially strained, have unfettered access to legal services. FURTHER RESOLVED, that where a particular law school lacks the necessary human and financial resources to create a stand-alone Veterans Law Institute, said school is urged to instead service the legal needs of qualifying veterans through a new or already existing legal clinic.
4YL
REPORT
“Many Veterans do not know what direction to go. . .”
On 9 November 2013 more than eighty U.S. Veterans were fortunate enough to receive much needed legal assistance from a clinic organized by the Veterans Legal Assistance Project (VLAP) whose home is Hofstra University School of Law in Hempstead, New York. To date, the clinics run by the VLAP have assisted over one hundred and fifty veterans who might not otherwise have been able to obtain such services. Indeed, one disabled Navy veteran summed it up best when he stated that “[t]he services [the clinic] provided for veterans is outstanding [because] [m]any veterans do not know what direction to go, and I cannot picture anyone leaving here without a smile on their face. I left with tears of joy.”1 I. Why such Institutes / Clinics are Needed – By The Numbers.
1. High Unemployment Rate. Recent data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that the jobless rate for all U.S. veterans was 6.9 percent in October 2013. While this rate was just below the national average, the below chart (compiled by the Council of Economic Advisers)2 shows that the unemployment rate for recent veterans (those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan) was around 10 percent in October 2013:
1 http://law.hofstra.edu/news/articles/2013/11/veterans-clinic.html 2 http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/11/08/employment-situation-october
4YL
The high unemployment rate among recent veterans was not a one-time occurrence. In 2012, the Congressional Research Service noted that the unemployment rate for recent veterans exceeded the national and overall veteran rates during the last four years.3
2. Cumulative Effects. Perceived biases in hiring practices, a younger demographic of veterans entering the workforce and disability issues have all been identified as factors contributing to the high unemployment rate for recent veterans. Regardless of the cause, the high unemployment rate has had a staggering effect on the overall veteran population. Once veterans return home, they often face a host of challenges directly related to being unemployed:
a. Poverty.
A 2010 study revealed that “[m]ore than 1.4 million veterans are living below the poverty line, and another 1.4 million veterans are living just above it—numbers that have likely not yet peaked given the tepid recovery from the Great Recession and the large number of service members expected to leave active duty in the near future.”4
b. Foreclosures.
Veterans are disproportionately likely to experience mortgage problems and, as discussed below, homelessness. Since the 2008 recession, more than 20,000 active-duty veterans and reservists have lost their homes. Moreover, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency reported that ten leading financial institutions may have unlawfully foreclosed on the mortgages of nearly 5,000 active-duty members of the U.S. military in recent years.5
c. Homelessness.
Veterans are also more likely to become homeless. According to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans, veterans make up 7 percent of the population; however, they account for nearly 13 percent of the total adult homeless population.6
Given the economic difficulties faced by many veterans, it is imperative that the legal community offer assistance to this vulnerable section of the population.
II. Current Models. To date, some law schools have already heeded the call to serve veterans and have either stood up Veterans Law Institutes aimed at that end or have provided legal services to veterans as part of an already existing clinical program. The approach taken by each of these schools is very instructive and each provides a viable model from which other schools can draw ideas that will assist them in standing up their own programs.
3 https://opencrs.com/document/R42790/2012-10-23/ 4 Broken Promises: The Need to Improve Economic Security for Veterans, available at http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=628ca26b-7433-4fca-8f53-aa713eb3e756. 5 http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/military/2011-02-04-1Avetforeclosures04_ST_N.htm. 6 http://nchv.org/index.php/news/media/background_and_statistics/
4YL
1. Stetson University College of Law: Stetson has a functioning Veterans Law Institute (VLI) which encompasses the Veterans Advocacy Clinic (VAC) Pro Bono Service Initiatives. The VAC program focuses its efforts on assisting qualifying veterans appeal a decision of a denial of disability benefits by the Veterans Administration while the Pro Bono Initiative seeks to assist currently deployed military members by assisting them in obtaining free legal assistance for legal problems that they may face within the Tampa Bay, Florida area. In addition, Stetson’s VLI is also able to offer referrals and other resources for those veterans facing legal issues outside of the Tampa Bay area.7 2. Thomas M. Cooley School of Law: Thomas M. Cooley’s program, entitled Service to Soldiers: Legal Assistance Referral Program, launched in 2007 and aims to assist service members in both Michigan and Florida resolve non-military legal problems that they may face after returning from deployment. The program has three components:
1) Volunteer attorneys, students, and staff assist JAG officers in briefing deploying troops on their rights under the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act (USERRA) and the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), and with creating wills and powers-of-attorney for those who need them. 2) Returning troops of E5 rank and below who are experiencing non-military civilian legal problems are matched with participating attorneys for free representation. 3) Program volunteers educate the legal and veteran communities through publications and presentations. This program coordinates the voluntary efforts of hundreds of attorneys and Cooley students, faculty, and staff members and works closely with military leadership to ensure eligible service members are aware of the resource.8
3. University of Detroit Mercy College of Law: The University of Detroit Mercy College of Law has stood up both a Veterans Law Clinic (VLC) (with an appellate component) as well as what the school terms “Project SALUTE.” The VLC focuses its efforts on having students assist qualifying veterans in disability cases and to that end, students practice before the Department of Veterans Affairs. The appellate component assists disabled veterans and their survivors by enabling students to prepare cases to be heard before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Detroit Mercy’s “Project SALUTE” program further assists veterans by holding legal clinics both in Michigan as well as the rest of the United States. This program’s goal is to provide far reaching assistance to veterans seeking assistance with their disability and / or pension claims. The project also trains volunteer attorneys in order to prepare them to represent veterans before the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.9 4. Hofstra University School of Law: Hofstra ensures veterans are provided with much needed legal assistance through its Veterans Legal Assistance Project (VLAP). The VLAP was started by students who realized that there was a need for such a service within the local community. Before students are permitted to assist veterans faculty at the school conducts a required training
7 See http://stetson.edu/law/veterans/legal-help-for-veterans.php and http://stetson.edu/law/veterans/pro-bono-services-initiative.php 8 http://www.cooley.edu/probono/programs.html 9 http://www.law.udmercy.edu/index.php/academics1/clinics
4YL
which was designed to prepare student-volunteers to assist their clients. To date, the VLAP has hosted two successful clinics, the most recent having taken place on 9 November 2013 where it serviced over eighty veterans. The next clinic is scheduled to take place in March 2014. During each clinic, in addition to the student volunteers, veterans also obtain a free consultation with an attorney that specializes in such areas such as VA benefits and claims, family law, social security disability, employment, USERRA, housing, bankruptcy, debtor/creditor matters, landlord-tenant disputes, elder law, tax, wills, estates, Medicare and Medicaid.10 5. Widener University School of Law: Widener has had a functioning Veterans Law Clinic (VLC) since 1997 and the program was significantly expanded in 2006. The VLC’s mission is to provide:
free legal assistance to veterans residing in Pennsylvania and Delaware and surrounding areas with meritorious VA claims resulting from a denial of benefits by their Regional Office. The VLC also engages in community outreach, providing wills and other estate documents to low-income veterans, sharing best practices with other clinics around the country, and recruiting and training local attorneys willing to take on veterans’ cases pro bono.11
Given a recent increase in its qualified personnel, the VLC is also able to assist veterans in a broad range of civil legal issues including: benefits, housing, expungements, discharge upgrades, and consumer law, as well as health and social services case management. 6. Yale Law School: In fall 210, Yale Law School launched its Veterans Legal Services Clinic (VLSC) in order to assist Connecticut’s over 250,000 military veterans obtain much needed legal services. The VLSC enables students to:
represent veterans and their organizations in a wide variety of litigation and non-litigation matters related to their military service or return to civilian life. Over time, the clinic expects to assist veterans with housing, employment, health care, foreclosure, and immigration and other issues, in addition to VA benefits and discharge upgrades.12
7. The John Marshall Law School: In 2006 three J.D. candidates recognized that veterans were having extreme difficulty navigating the Veterans Benefit Administration Claims process and with faculty support began the Veterans Legal Support Center & Clinic (VLSC). The VLSC handles all aspects of the claims process; from intake to the appellate level where required. In order to ensure veterans are adequately represented, the VLSC recruits, trains and manages a network of pro bono practitioners. In the years since its inception, the VLSC has expanded it devotion to assisting veterans by becoming involved in court programs at both the state and federal level. Indeed, with a grant from the Department of Justice, the VLSC has been able to stand up the Justice Involved Veterans Initiative which operates independently within the VLSC and which has four main
10 http://law.hofstra.edu/news/articles/2013/11/veterans-clinic.html 11 http://law.widener.edu/Academics/ClinicalProgramsandProfessionalTraining/Clinics/VeteransLawClinic.aspx 12 http://www.law.yale.edu/about/12740.htm
4YL
objectives: (1) to continue working with the newly created Illinois Veterans Treatment Courts and to study the outcomes of similar courts throughout the U.S.; (2) to work with federal magistrates in implementing a holistic approach to aid veterans at the Federal Enclave Misdemeanor Court; (3) to provide a centralized source of information about the relationship of domestic violence to post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain disorder; and (4) to replicate the VLSC at other law schools throughout the U.S.13 8. Harvard University: Harvard’s Legal Services Center, recognizing the over-arching need of veterans to have access to legal assistance, especially those of limited means, has started a clinic in order to ensure that such needs are met. Currently, the clinic assists veterans in the following areas: discharge upgrade and correction of military records cases; veterans benefits cases before Veterans Administration Regional Offices, the Board of Veterans Appeals, and the U.S. court of Appeals for Veterans Claims; and representation of veterans, family members, or both in other matters involving access to healthcare, financial assistance, and similar life necessities. Harvard has recognized that “[p]roviding representation in these various areas of practice is especially important given the dramatic growth in the number of new veterans, the aging of the overall veterans population, the complexity of the legal issues, the depth of need, and the gaps in existing services.” In addition to the assistance provided to low income veterans, students also benefit by obtaining significant hands-on experience in representing veterans in various areas of the law while concurrently attaining much need lawyering skills that will benefit them long after graduation.14 9. Chapman University: In order to meet the legal needs of veterans, Chapman has stood up the Institute for Military Personnel, Veterans, Human Rights & International Law. The Institute not only engaged in scholarly research in relevant topical areas, but also pursues litigation on behalf of military members and veterans. The “litigation arm” of the Institute is AMVETS legal clinic15 and, according to the Institute’s website, it has been successful in “recovering millions of dollars in benefits, judgments and settlements for its clients.”16 In addition to pursuits involving litigation, the AMVETS arm of the Institute also is tasked with providing legal assistance to veterans and in such a capacity the Institute represents these individuals in the following areas: Discharge Upgrades, Traumatic Service Group Life Insurance Appeals, VA Benefits Appeals, and issues arising under the Service Members Civil Relief Act.
The Institute’s founder and Executive Director, Professor Kyndra Rotunda, has published two textbooks and has another forthcoming. Her first book, Honor Bound: Inside the Guantanamo Trials (Carolina Academic Press, June 2008), was followed by her textbook, Military and Veterans Law, published by Thomson/West Publishing - the first textbook of its kind, geared to the growing number of Military and Veterans Legal Clinics in the country.17
13 http://www.jmls.edu/veterans/clients/index.php 14 http://www.law.harvard.edu/academics/clinical/lsc/clinics/veterans.htm 15 AMVETS Legal Clinic is a cooperative effort with AMVETS Department of California, a non-profit organization that is committed to veterans and community service and that funds the AMVETS Legal Clinic. The clinic is housed on the Chapman University Campus. 16 http://www.chapman.edu/research-and-institutions/military-law-institute/ 17 Id.
4YL
10. Emory University School of Law: Beginning in February 2013 a student-founded veterans clinic began operating at Emory servicing the needs of the more than 200,000 veterans living in the Atlanta, Georgia area. The clinic enables student volunteers to work directly with experienced practitioners in ensuring veterans are provided free legal representation in matters involving disability benefit claims and appeal hearings. In addition, the clinic also accepts cases involving pension claims, claims for increased rating before the regional office of the VA, total disability claims, request to reopen a claim denied by the VA, issues with VA healthcare and VA determinations of incompetency, applications for discharge upgrades and records corrections, employment law claims and representations, correction of criminal records, consumer law and real property matters.18 III. Conclusion. Given the over three million veterans living in the United States, there exists a clear and present need for those veterans, especially those experiencing financial hardship, to have access to no cost legal services. In order to assist in meeting that end, it is incumbent on the American Bar Association to encourage all law schools to stand up Veterans Law Institutes, or in the alternative, clinics; in order to ensure that these veterans have easier access to the legal services that many so desperately need. The ten models cited and described in this report not only show that some schools have realized the need for such services and have answered this call, but also illustrate what kinds of programs have worked for other schools—as such, they provide an admirable framework for other schools to emulate and expand upon. All veterans have put their lives on the line in the service of their country and we owe it to them to ensure that legal services are attainable for those that have found themselves in financial straits. Joshua A. Roman, Vice-Chair ABA/YLD Government, Military & Public Sector Lawyer’s Committee 8208 Hangar Loop Drive MacDill AFB FL 33621 (813) 828-9292 [email protected] Courtney T. Joiner, Vice-Chair ABA/YLD Government, Military & Public Sector Lawyer’s Committee 300 Fannin Street, Suite 3201 Shreveport, LA 71101 (318)-676-3600 [email protected] 18 http://www.law.emory.edu/centers-clinics/volunteer-clinic-for-veterans/legal-assistance.html
4YL
Summary The recommended resolutions will ensure that the ABA supports the legal needs of veterans by encouraging all law schools to stand up Veterans Law Institutes or, in the alternative, Veterans Clinics so that veterans across the United States have sufficient access to much needed legal services. Respectfully submitted, ABA/YLD Government, Military & Public Sector Lawyer’s Committee February 2014
