ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING to_Legal_Services_Augu… · 24.08.2020 · Brandy Michele Disbennett, Esq. Member 2529 Livingston Rd SW Roanoke, VA 24015 252-267-5442

ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE

MEETINGAugust 24, 2020

AGENDA

MEETING AGENDA

VIRGINIA STATE BAR

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES

August 24, 2020, 11:00 am – 2:00 pm Electronic Microsoft Teams Meetingi

AGENDA

1 Welcome and Call to Order/Roll Call/ Introductions – Fulmer (5 minutes) [A1.1]

2 Approval of January 28, 2020 Minutes* - Fulmer (2 minutes) [A2.1]

3 Old Business (35 minutes) a) Pro Bono Reporting – Gantz (10 minutes) [A3.1] b) 2020 Equal Justice Conference Highlights –L’Herrou and Fulmer (10 minutes) [A4.1] c) Elimination of Bias MCLE Proposal* - Fulmer (10 minutes) [A5.1] d) Powell and Freeman Nomination and Selection Process - Suyes (10 minutes) [A6.1, A6.2, A6.3]

4 New Business (70 minutes)

a) COVID-19 Legal Aid and Pro Bono Response – Steve Fischbach (15 minutes) [A7.1, A7.2] b) 2020 Committee Goals & Objectives* - Fulmer (20 minutes) [A8.1, A8.2] c) Birth Certificates for Sr. Citizens, VA Real ID, & Voter Registration – Henry Su (10 minutes) [A9.1] d) Activities of the ABA Standing Committee on Pro Bono & Public Service – Henry Su (5 minutes)

[A10.1] e) VLRS as an Access Service – Toni Dunson (10 minutes) [A11.1, A11.2] f) Other New Business (10 minutes)

5 Updates (17 minutes)

a) 2020 VSB Pro Bono Conference (2 minutes) [A12.1] b) Virginia Lawyer Magazine Coverage - October Pro Bono/Access Issue (2 minutes) [A13.1] c) Virginia Free Legal Answers (5 minutes) [A14.1] d) Legal Aid Update (3 minutes) e) Access to Justice Commission Update (3 minutes) f) VBA Pro Bono Council Update (2 minutes) [A15.1]

6 Dismissal/Next Meeting

* indicates an item requiring vote/action by the Committee

i Regular business meeting being held electronically pursuant to § 4-0.01(g), Acts of the Assembly, Ch. 1283 (2020), to address statutorily required business after a gubernatorial-declared emergency due to COVID-19 pandemic.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/probono_public_service/

https://vlrs.community.lawyer/?gclid=Cj0KCQjw7Nj5BRCZARIsABwxDKIqiES-w6OBuILlaneTWv1cvSvRuvaKKV8VN8ABe4htxk4jwdQnvkkaAmrQEALw_wcB

https://budget.lis.virginia.gov/item/2020/1/HB29/Chapter/4/4-0.01/

A.1.1Access to Legal Services Roster

25-Jun-2020

Term

Expires / NumberMember Address Contact

Access to Legal Services

Activities Report

VIRGINIA STATE BAR

2020-2021

Jennifer Ann Fulmer, Esq.

Chair

LSNV

100

10700 Page Avenue

Fairfax, VA 22030

703-504-9153

Fax:273-6476

22023 /

[email protected]

Alexandra Silva Fannon, Esq.

Vice Chair

PO Box 3954

Richmond, VA 23235-3954

804-240-7822

Fax:323-3404

22022 /

[email protected]

Adonica Baine, Esq.

Member

Newport News City Attorney's Office

2400 Washington Avenue, 9th Floor

Newport News, VA 23607

757 926 8416 12021 /

[email protected]

Donna Sue Baker, Esq.

Member

D. Sue Baker, P.C.

P.O. Box 429

Wise, VA 24293

276-328-8122

Fax:328-8130

U2021 /

[email protected]

Brandy Michele Disbennett, Esq.

Member

2529 Livingston Rd SW

Roanoke, VA 24015

252-267-5442 12023 /

[email protected]

Llezelle Agustin Dugger, Esq.

Member

Clerk of Court

Charlottesville Circuit Court

315 East High Street

Charlottesville, VA 22902-5195

434-970-3764

Fax:970-3380

12023 /

[email protected]

Teirra Millrene Everette, Esq.

Member

Dominion Energy

120 Tredegar St

Richmond, VA 23219

804-819-2698 U2021 /

[email protected]

om

Valerie Aline L'Herrou, Esq.

Member

Virginia Poverty Law Center

#610

919 E. Main Street

Richmond, VA 23219

804-782-9430

Fax:649-0974

22022 /

[email protected]

David Lyndon Marks, Esq.

Member

Law Offices of David L. Marks

Suite 204

10513 Judicial Drive

Fairfax, VA 22030

703-385-1100

Fax:385-1983

12022 /

[email protected]

Dale Wood Pittman, Esq.

Member

The Eliza Spotswood House

112-A West Tabb Street

Petersburg, VA 23803

804-861-6000

Fax:861-3368

12022 /

[email protected]

Devon Rood Slovensky, Esq.

Member

Slovensky Law PLLC

9450 SW Gemini Dr #29952

Beaverton, OR 97008-7105

540-523-1122

Fax:707-9221

12021 /

[email protected]

Joanna Lee Suyes, Esq.

Member

Marks & Harrison, P.C.

Suite 100

1500 Forest Avenue

Richmond, VA 23229

804-282-0999

Fax:288-1330

22023 /

[email protected]

1

25-Jun-2020

Term

Expires / NumberMember Address Contact

Access to Legal Services

Activities Report

VIRGINIA STATE BAR

2020-2021

Kristopher Richard McClellan, Esq.

YLC Liaison

Office of the City Attorney

Suite 900

810 Union Street

Norfolk, VA 23510

757-664-4529 12021 /

[email protected]

Martin Douglas Wegbreit, Esq.

Legal Aid Member

Central Virginia Legal Aid Society

P.O. Box 12206

Richmond, VA 23241

804-200-6045

Fax:649-8794

12022 /

[email protected]

Karl Anthony Doss, Esq.

LSCV Member

Legal Services Corporation of Virginia

Ste. 615

919 E. Main Street

Richmond, VA 23219

804-782-9438 U2021 /

[email protected]

Crista Lynn Gantz, Esq.

Liaison

Virginia State Bar

Suite 700

1111 East Main Street

Richmond, VA 23219-3565

804-775-0522 ----- /

[email protected]

2

A2.1MINUTES

1

MINUTES ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE

January 28, 2020

Members Present in Person: Jennifer Fulmer, Chair; Alexandra Fannon, Vice Chair; Paul Garrett; Valerie L’Herrou; Kristopher McClellan; Dale Pittman; Joanna Suyes; Marty Wegbreit; Karl Doss Members Participating by Phone: Donna Sue Baker; Polly Chong; David Marks Members Unable to Attend: Adonica Baine; Karl A. Doss; Devon Slovensky; Crystal Twitty; Judge Patricia West Guests: John Whitfield, Blue Ridge Legal Services; Nicole Harrell, VBA Pro Bono Council and Kaufman & Canoles; David Neumeyer, VBA Pro Bono Council and VLAS (by phone); David Greenspan, VBA Pro Bono Council and McGuire Woods (by phone); Brian Buniva; VSB President-elect and B.L. Buniva Strategic Advisor, PLLC. VSB Staff Present: Crista Gantz, Access to Legal Services Director; Sylvia Daniel, Executive Assistant, Legal Services and Communications Program Coordinator

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Approval of Minutes: Having a quorum of members present, Ms. Fulmer called the meeting to order at 10:10 am and performed roll call, followed by introduction of guests. Ms. Fulmer then proceeded to the approval of the minutes from the October 16, 2019 meeting. After a motion by Ms. Fannon, seconded by Ms. Suyes, the Committee unanimously approved the October 16, 2019 meeting minutes with no abstentions. Old Business

1. Voluntary Pro Bono Reporting. Ms. Gantz updated the Committee on the status of pro bono reporting. She shared proposed revisions to the voluntary reporting rule (Paragraph 22) and the VSB dues statement form (Section Five) and asked the members for feedback. Mr. McClellan suggested adding language under the “CIRCUIT” field to refer members to the list on the back of the form. Ms. L’Herrou noted a typo in the first bullet of the “Tell us more about yourself” list at the bottom of the form. Ms. Gantz noted the changes to be incorporated in the final draft. Ms. Gantz informed the members that the proposal would be submitted to the Court for consideration at its February 12, 2020 business meeting, where she and Tara Casey, chair of the Commission’s Pro Bono Committee will be presenting the proposal on behalf of the Commission.

2

1. Recap of 2019 Pro Bono Conference: Ms. Gantz provided highlights of the October 2019 VSB Pro Bono Conference. Members discussed what went well and what improvements could be made to future programming. Ms. Fannon suggested looking to add a CLE component to the morning poverty simulation program and suggested looking at the PBI program on poverty that was done in the past as a model. Members also discussed the Statewide Legal Aid Conference which was held in conjunction with the VSB conference.

2. Powell and Freeman Awards. Ms. Suyes announced that the nomination period is open for the Oliver White Hill Law Student Pro Bono Award and the Legal Aid Award. She noted that for the Hill Award we are hoping to get a more diverse pool of law schools represented; typically, William & Mary, W&L, UR, and UVA submit nominations. Would like to see candidates from Regent, Liberty, George Mason and Appalachian. Ms. Gantz announced that Ronald Flagg, President, LSC has agreed to keynote the 2020 Legal Aid Luncheon. The members discussed ideas for future keynote speakers.

New Business

1. MCLE Credit for Pro Bono Service. Ms. Gantz shared with the committee the chart she

prepared outlining state rules/regulations/policies extending MCLE credit for pro bono service. Ms. Gantz suggested that if the committee decides to pursue a rule in Virginia, it might consider starting with a limited rule allowing for credit for clinic hours served following a traditional CLE training event. The service could happen directly following the training or on another date. This would allow the sponsoring legal aid or other legal service provider to track attendance and tie the hours directly to the substantive legal education provided; the service could be couched as a form of interactive training, which might be more likely to win the favor of the MCLE Board than a broad proposal attempting to pull in a wide range of pro bono service. Mr. Whitfield noted that we should make sure the proposal includes an allowance for virtual trainings and clinic events. Ms. Suyes made a motion to refer the issue to the Rules Subcommittee to draft a proposal for consideration by the full committee. Mr. McClellan seconded. The motional passed unanimously with no abstentions.

2. Access to Justice Commission’s Judicial Circuit Pro Bono Initiative. President-elect Buniva provided an overview and background on the Commission’s initiative. He informed the committee that care was taken to select six initial legal aid programs and circuits to partner on the expansion. The members and guests discussed the future of the project, ideas of additional circuits/legal aids to involve. They also discussed barriers to success and shared suggestions on how to get judges to champion the initiative. Mr. Garrett suggested presenting the initiative at a future judicial conference to make sure the judges are aware and to give them an opportunity to express interest. Ms. Fannon suggested involving Firms in Service and perhaps developing a distance lawyering

3

component to pull in lawyers in urban areas to help launch initiatives in more rural parts of the state without a critical mass of attorneys. Mr. Garret also suggested informing the court clerks associations to make sure clerks are aware and supportive. Ms. Gantz suggested asking the Judicial Education Committee of the Commission to develop collateral to distribute to judges to address perceived prohibitions to encouraging pro bono service and to inform them of the benefits of pro bono to the courts.

3. Statewide Distribution of So You’re 18 Handbook/Potential DMV Partnership. Mr. Wegbreit summarized the idea of partnering with the DMV to distribute the VSB’s So You’re 18 handbooks to newly licensed drivers. He also shared suggestions for improving the publication and asked Ms. Gantz to communicate those to the appropriate VSB liaison. Suggestions included alphabetizing the table of contents, dividing the content and sending out to subject matter champions for additional review/QC, and including a section on interacting with law enforcement if pulled over.

4. Black Family Land Trust. Ms. Gantz provided an update on the VSB’s work with the BFLT to form a Legal Services Advisory Committee to help the organization develop a pro bono program connecting landowners in need with attorneys. Ms. Fannon asked Ms. Gantz to forward the email sent by the BFLT ED to her so she can get it to the Clearinghouse. Ms. Gantz also offered to forward the email to the committee members in case anyone is interested in getting involved.

Other Updates (legal aid, Access to Justice Commission, VBA Pro Bono Council). Ms. Gantz provided updates on important calendar items and VA Free Legal Answers. Legal aid committee members and guests updated the Committee on legal aid activity. Mr. Whitfield provided a report on the Commission’s activities. Ms. Harrell provided an update on the VBA Pro Bono Council and the upcoming Pro Bono Summit scheduled for April 1, 2020. G The meeting ended at 1:09 pm.

A3.1Pro Bono Reporting

If you are renewing by MAIL, please complete and return this form with your Annual Dues Statement in the self-addressed envelope provided. The information reported on this form will be stored anonymously and will not be associated with your name and bar number unless you opt in.

DO NOT COMPLETE AND RETURN THIS FORM IF YOU ARE RENEWING YOUR LICENSE ONLINE.

Have questions about what can be reported as pro bono? Visit https://www.vsb.org/site/news/item/faqs_about_voluntary_pro_bono_reporting. Want to make a Rule 6.1 qualified financial contribution? See our list of qualified legal service providers at https://www.vsb.org/docs/QLSP_list.pdf.

CIRCUIT_______________________ (REQUIRED) [Provide your Circuit based on your most recent VSB address of record during the 12-month reporting period ending June 30 of the current year. See reverse for Circuit list.]

Rule 6.1 of the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct establishes a goal that every lawyer should render at least 2% per year of the lawyer’s professional time to pro bono publico legal services. The Supreme Court of Virginia requests that each active member of the Virginia State Bar voluntarily supply certain information as part of the annual license renewal process by marking one or more of the following optional responses:

1. □ Pro Bono Hours. I have personally provided approximately ____________ hours of pro bono publico legal services as defined in subsection (a) of Rule 6.1 of theVirginia Rules of Professional Conduct during the previous 12 months beginning July 1 of the preceding year and ending June 30 of the current year.

2. □ Pro Bono Financial Contribution. I have personally contributed $_____________ during the 12 months ending June 30 of the current year to support programs thatprovide the direct delivery of legal services to meet the needs described in Rule 6.1 (a) of the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct as an alternative method for fulfillingmy responsibility to render pro bono legal services.

3. □ Decline to Report. I do not wish to report the hours of pro bono publico legal services I have performed this year, nor do I wish to report any financial contributionsmade in lieu of performing such services.

ANNUAL DUES STATEMENT SECTION 5 Voluntary Pro Bono Publico Legal Services Reporting for Active Members

Opt-in By providing my name and/or VSB ID Number below, I choose to associate the data I report in Section 5 with my name and bar number so that I can be considered for possible awards, recognition, and follow-up research to enhance pro bono service in Virginia, and I understand that such data may be subject to VFOIA requests.

Name: ____________________________________________________________________ VSB ID No.:__________________________ [Please fill in the blanks above with the requested information exactly as it appears at the top of your Annual Dues Statement.]

Tell us more about yourself by checking all that apply: □ I am a lawyer in private practice□ I am a government lawyer and I have no pro bono practice restrictions□ I am a government lawyer and I am restricted by statute, regulation, or agency policy from providing legal services outside my employment□ I am a lawyer with a legal aid program, nonprofit organization, or other public interest entity

□ I work for legal aid or for another nonprofit legal service provider□ I am employed by a corporation or other business entity as a lawyer□ I perform court-appointed work which I understand is not considered to be pro bono□ I maintain active status with the Virginia State Bar, but I am not practicing law□ I maintain associate status with the Virginia State Bar□ Other ____________________________________________________________

https://www.vsb.org/site/news/item/faqs_about_voluntary_pro_bono_reporting

https://www.vsb.org/docs/QLSP_list.pdf

VIRGINIA:

:Jn tIie sup'U?me eowtt of, VVtfJinia fWd at tIie sup'U?me eowtt 9Juilding in tIie em; of, 9licfurwmL on :J'tidcuf, tIie 13t1i dmj of,.MwtcIi, 2020.

It is ordered that the Rules heretofore adopted and promulgated by this Court and now in

effect be and they hereby are amended to become effective May 15,2020.

Amend Section IV, Paragraph 22 of the Rules for Integration of the Virginia State Bar, Part

Six of the Rules of Court to read as follows:

22.Voluntary Pro Bono Publico Service Reporting.

Rule 6.1 of the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct establishes an aspirational goal that every

lawyer should render at least two percent per year of the lawyer's professional time to pro bono

publico legal services. Providing an opportunity for lawyers to voluntarily report their pro bono

service on an annual basis will: (I) heighten awareness of this ethical responsibility among the bar

membership by serving as an annual reminder; (2) provide a mechanism for the bar to report and

measure its collective performance vis-a-vis the aspirational goal set by Rule 6.1; (3) provide data

for the judiciary to support its efforts to promote and recognize pro bono contributions on a local ,

regional and statewide basis; (4) provide crucial benchmark data to the Virginia Access to Justice

Commission to support its work promoting equal access to justice for Virginia residents; and (5)

enable the bar to educate the public regarding the amount of pro bono publico work provided by its

membership to the community, thereby improving the image and standing of the profession and its

membership.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court of Virginia requests that each active and associate member of

the Virginia State Bar voluntarily supply to the Virginia State Bar certain information regarding

their pro bono publico contributions as part of their annual dues renewal. Moreover, the Supreme

Court of Virginia grants the Virginia State Bar the authority to collect this information in an

efficient manner consistent with the above five enumerated purposes, on a form, which shall be

approved by the Supreme Court of Virginia, and which specifically provides an attorney the option

not to report.

A Copy,

Teste:

fi?JJL-Clerk

ebowyer

Highlight

A4.12020 EJC Highlights - A2J Part

III & Equity - Racial Justice Session Transcript

2020 Equal Justice Conference Session Title: Access to Part III & Equity

TRANSCRIPT

(highlights by chair, Jennifer Fulmer) https://www.streamtext.net/player/transcript?event=PB2008EJCW3 Speaker: Hi, welcome back to session 9: why we can't wait: training pro-bono volunteers on institutional and systemic racism. Here to introduce themselves are my colleagues. Caprise, can you do a quick introduction? Speaker: Sure, I am the director of the pro-bono volunteer unit at the New York group that offers resources to people in poverty and typically and predominantly people of color. Speaker: Thanks. Kim, how about you? Speaker: Thank you, Lillian. I'm the director of the racial justice center. I've been working with the law firm anti-racism alliance as they think about what does big law mean for this new movement toward anti-racism. Speaker: I am the pro-bono partner at Denton's. [sp?] Whenever I'm at the JC, I like to point out that I started my career at what is now Legal Aid, Chicago. I've been involved with organizing the anti-racism alliance. I'm looking forward to our conversation today. Speaker: I'm really glad to be here with you all today. We hope that we'll all leave today sharing language around social and structural systemic racism. We call it a new language for a new paradigm. We want to discuss the role of race and culture in lawyering. We know this will not be easy, so we want to prepare you for some of the challenges and next step, and how everyone can work together and addressing racial justice in civil legal services. We wanted to start with a poll. We wondered who's in our virtual room today. [Reading options on screen.] So the poll will be live in a minute, I think. And you'll be able to tell us who you are. Do I press finish? Yeah. You are finished. 68% of you are from legal services organizations like me and Caprice. An equal percentage from law firms and bar associations. Some are from a funder. That other, you can tell us in the chat what other is because I don't know. But we're interested. All right. We will explore as time goes on. Banking. You're a banker in a corporate legal department. And someone from a court system, and an action to justice firm. Welcome. We have something for everyone. I think we're going to start with Ben. Do you always get this launching of basic vocabulary so we're talking in the same language? Speaker: Yes, it's always good not to assume that everyone is on the same page or defines terms in the same way. I want to begin by making you think about the context in which we exist in this system, and pro-bono as it relates to the profit portion of that and your involvement in pro-bono. We have to think of ourselves as beings and a subconscious and we all have our own internal stuff as a consequence of that. We have to determine as individuals who we are and where we sort of fit in the context of all this work. We then have to think about what that means for our organizations, especially in a time like today. I think a lot of people individually and as organizations are rethinking the role we play. Are we prepared to step up? Can we do more, and what does that mean for us as individuals and as organizations? We'll talk more about that. Then ultimately what does that mean for our communities, both individually, in our organization, and the people we work with as pro-bono counsel, and the work we do in for-profit organizations. What are we doing to better our community and the world and hopes to change what we see around systemic racism?

https://www.streamtext.net/player/transcript?event=PB2008EJCW3

When we use the term structural racialization, we are talking about the complexity of all those individuals. We're talking about what we do and the role we play in the system, as well as what that means in our community. How we create and perpetuate the inequities and barriers we see that create opportunities for our white colleagues and barriers for people of color. Now I'm going to pitch it to my next colleague, who will start with a little scenario. Speaker: I'll just pull up the scenario, and it's on your screens. I don't necessarily want to read it. But it is a scenario of an Asian woman appearing in family court seeking a protective order. This is probably a familiar scenario where the person testifying doesn't testify in a linear fashion. So as the woman is giving her testimony about why she needs the protective order, she is rambling and forgetting details. Perhaps the legal counsel needs to ask additional questions to pull out details. And opposing counsel argues that the witness is not credible and the judge agrees. The woman's attorney doesn't reject or rebut the argument, and the order is denied. Perhaps there should not have been a protective order given, right? But we have to think of some underlying issues in this scenario. Perhaps folks can chime in in the chat about what you think. When we as advocates go into court, obviously we have the particular legal issue that we are confronting. We have to know the rules of evidence and procedure for that court, and we know our legal objectives. But then what's beneath the surface? What should we know about the court system, about the norms and values built into that system, the stereotypes and biases that might impact our client? Are there cultural issues, perhaps even in representing this client, that we should have talked about to better represent this client? This is just one scenario to start talking about the systems we need to be aware of as an advocate. I notice one person saying perhaps this person is scared because the person who abused her is in the room. That's one thing the attorney should be aware of. Speaker: Back up a minute and say how you think cross-cultural training might have affected the services this client received. You talked a little about accounting for cultural differences. Speaker: Each of us comes to any situation with our own beliefs and value systems. We don't leave that at the courtroom door. That comes with us in every situation, and it comes with our clients. When we begin to represent someone, we have to think about what questions we're asking our clients to begin with. Are we only asking them the very specific things we need to handle the legal issue, or are we considering some of the other things in play below the surface, which are cultural differences, especially if the lawyer and client are of different cultures. Are we considering the ideas of power and privilege, how some folks, depending on their culture and frame of reference, distrust the legal system? So even before we get to that first day in court, what are we talking to our clients about? What does that first interview look like? How are we preparing the client? Is the client aware of what the legal setting looks like? What does the court look like? What will happen when we get to court? Are we going through all that with each and every one of our clients? We can't assume that people have the same understanding of the legal system that we do and come from the same cultures and backgrounds that we do. Some people have never had any experience with the court system. So as advocates, we have to make sure that we are educating and really approaching cases from a client-centered perspective. If we're centering the client, we have to try to know as much about the client as we can to understand what the client needs from us. What is it that the client is seeking? All of that comes into play when we are asking our clients questions and preparing the case to bring it before the court. Sometimes we have to

acknowledge what we don't know. If you are in your own office interviewing a client who has never looked you straight in the eye, you have to engage the client in a safe and respectful way. You have to talk about issues that can impact the outcome of a case. Speaker: If you assigned this case to someone, what would you want to see in the representation? Speaker: What Caprice is talking about is so wildly important, and yet in a pro-bono context in a big law firm still is not really paid enough attention to. So you want to do exactly what Caprice said. You want to know and understand the client and her perspective. If you don't do that, you're not actually representing the client. You're representing a generic person who doesn't really exist. Lillian, if I can. Speaker: You can. Let me just say, in preparing for this workshop, I asked a number of people to share a story of the worst instance of cross-cultural lawyering they facilitated. And Ben was my first responder. Speaker: It's actually about myself. I was a Legal Aid lawyer for three years in a predominantly African-American community. I signed up to do a landlord/tenant case. The reason I'm now so thrilled to work with the law firm anti-racism alliance is because of this experience. The client lived in an illegal basement apartment. It was terrible. The landlord was evicting them, and I thought we had all sorts of counter-claims. African-American elderly woman was the landlord. My client was an African-American minister. Both lawyers were white. And I immediately slotted in everything I knew about evil, greedy landlords and tenants. We stepped up to the judge, who was African-American, and he asked, do you mind if I talk to the clients without you in the room? Yes, I mind, I'm the lawyer. But you can't really say that. We left and stood awkwardly in the hall because he was evil and I was virtuous. Speaker: And you still are. Speaker: Yeah, there we go. We go back into the judge's chambers, and the tenant and landlady were hugging and crying. The judge asked, why didn't you tell me this is a family dispute? I said robotically, because they're not. The judge said, why didn't you tell me she's his play auntie? I said, what? What's a play auntie? The judge started to explain. I literally didn't know a fact that was absolutely crucial to the representation of my client. Even though my father was a civil rights activist and I had written my thesis on the history of the White Sox, etc. I hadn't realized that we have to be client-centered and know who our clients are culturally. Now we have an opportunity to do something from a big law firm about racism, which is knowing the client. This scenario is alive in every law firm. But that's where I learned that race and culture is central to actual representation of a client. Speaker: I have to make one other small point about that. We're talking about the individual lawyer and client. I think to Kim's point, we're also looking at the overall system. The American legal system has its own culture and norms baked into it upon which it was founded. After we get to know this particular client, our next job is, how do we attack this system? The system is based on this idea of whiteness and white-dominant culture. So if that's the culture of the American legal system, everyone who is other is outside that group and their cultures are not included. I think it's a two or three-step process. Speaker: That's exactly right. What we used to talk about was cultural competence, and that was good enough even though we didn't achieve it. Now we're taught about systems theory and looking at things in a more systemic way. Although that's a challenge with pro-bono. We have to educate pro-bono lawyers just on competence, and now we have a new challenge that I hope we are up to. Speaker: In our preparation, I think our underlying agreement is really that legal representation should be race-neutral. I'm not sure we'd say culturally neutral because there has to be some understanding. But I think most would agree that legal representation should be race neutral. When you see this

question, tell me whether you think the legal representation in your office is race-neutral. I'll take it accepting that some of you are from organizations like mine, and some of you are from firms and law schools. Is your office providing legal representation that is race-neutral? Okay. You're changing your mind. Is your office providing representation that's race-neutral? Speaker: The answers are still coming in. Speaker: They're waffling. They're thinking about it. Finish? Yes. I think we're finished. Can you all see it? 62% of you said no, your firm is not providing race-neutral representation. 32% said yes. If you said yes, chat me about the training you've providing to the lawyers and advocates in your firm. You're waffling because you think the answer is yes and no. I wanted to back up and just ask Caprice again, when we offer this kind of training, is it really enough to produce race-neutral lawyering? Speaker: This wasn't meant to be a trick question, but I question whether there can be race-neutrality in the system as it exists. If the system already encompasses the norms of white culture, then already race is there. There's not an opportunity to be race-neutral. It's just a matter of whether we are also talking about the perspectives of other races. That's my take on it. We hope it exists, and it seems aspirational. But I don't think that's where we are. Speaker: Sure. Speaker: I think that's a great transition to this next point in the slide. Someone said in the chat pod that white supremacy culture and values. That was from one of my alumni. That word has become really scary to people. I don't think a lot of people understand what it means. When we say white supremacist culture, we say that America is built on what white folks think is the norm. The norm is America is white. So when you go to court with an Asian client who is not looking at a client, in Asia, that's a sign of respect to authority. On the other hand, when you're in a white supremacist culture and not looking at a judge, that means you're not only disrespectful, you're untrustworthy. So to believe that there is a way of race-neutral lawyering is to ignore the fact that we live in a space where white culture is supreme. What is the norm for white folks is the norm for everyone in our culture, and to go outside of that is not normal. When we say we're trying to be anti-racist, we're trying to change that whole conundrum. Race does not exist except in the context we say it does. It is a construct. It evolves. It constantly changes. It is very complex. Yet race, this concept that doesn't exist, is so powerful that it literally means life or death for people. It means whether you have wealth in America or you're poor and have barriers. So to say we can be race-neutral is to ignore the very fabric of the world we live in. We're trying to get a space where we as a country acknowledge this idea of race. Until we get past that point, we acknowledge it and recognize that white is the norm, we'll continue to see inequities. I want to tackle this idea of color-blindness. I live in a very diverse space. I have black and white neighbors. But I still find myself in spaces where I'm the only person of color at the table. Often I'm seen as an exception because I'm an attorney of color. As such, I can move in spaces where I normally wouldn't. I'm surrounded by people who always say they were raised not to see color. The problem with this idea is, to say that someone like me who lives in a place where white is the norm is to ignore my very background, my very essence, because I am a person of color. Not only do I want you to see that I am a person of color, I want you to respect my experience. So to walk around talking about being colorblind is to ignore inequities. We have to push past this colorblindness and move to consciousness. Speaker: Given that, what is the role of the lawyer? Let's say the decision maker is white and male, and you are a BIPOC, a black or indigenous person of color. So what is the role of the lawyer? I think it's a decision maker and to understand your client. Speaker: I think that's the power of something like the law firm anti-racist alliance. Imagine somewhere where big law is somewhere where a lawyer can say to a judge, my client is being treated differently because of race. Fighting for changing these inequities and barriers. I think the role of the lawyer is to

hopefully at some point collectively make these arguments, call it out, and stop coming to court arguing the law all the time. Because the law is not always the way to get to the root of the issue. Arguing the law but also the fact that these things exist because of inequities. We have to get past the idea of race-neutral lawyering because we don't see everything at play. Speaker: Let me hear Ben talk about this. Kim introduced it, and I'm not sure how many people in the room have heard of it. Speaker: If someone can advance the slides. I can't see them. So here's what I can give us to talk about and help us lead. Really starting last year, the association of pro-bono counsel, several of us started talking to the racial justice institute about the fact that it was time for pro-bono to start talking about things with more of anti-racism lens. That it's not just good enough to be neutral. Assuming that's what law firms have been doing. It's time to be conscious and affirmative of race. We first started working with the racial justice institute, and in March this year, we had about 35 pro-bono counsel in Chicago with the idea of starting to move towards this. And then of course the pandemic took hold, and in May, George Floyd was murdered, and things changed. Is it performative allyship? About how deeply law firms were concerned, and accounting firms were concerned, and they gave money to Black Lives Matter, and so forth. Several firms started talking about how statements were great and all, and do we have some great race-equity pro-bono work? No, we haven't focused on race. We haven't focused on the fact that so many of our direct legal aid clients are people of color and what that means. The question was, what would we recommend our firms do? It was six or seven of us. And what we came up with was the idea of, let's create an alliance of a bunch of law firms that would be explicitly anti-racist, that wouldn't just be race-neutral. It's not good enough to be neutral. You need to oppose racism. The ideas we came up were, first of all, let's not pretend we have the answers. Big law is clearly not the center of anti-racism in any way, shape, or form. So let's call our friends from the Racial Justice Institute. We came up with the idea to have a convening and training function. We can get together a lot of very powerful lawyers and in-house departments and train them on anti-racism. Let's see if the firms are interested. We wanted to ratchet up the connection to help legal services who are not in New York or Chicago but are in Kansas and Alaska and places that have been working on interesting anti-racism ideas but don't have access to big law. Then we came up with the racial inventory. It's sort of think-tanky research about the laws and procedures that undergird system racism, and then take the direction from the advocates, you all, about what to do to undo them. A few weeks ago we had a summit led by Kim. And everything she just said fiercely about how to be more than race-neutral she said to 200 members of the Anti-racism Alliance. They said, okay, we're on board. What are we going to do? They talked to their friends in the biggest New York firms and then rolled it out to other firms. We now have I believe 253 firms in all 50 states. We're starting to schedule the next summit in October that will be much more focused on what we're going to do. By the way, I am naive. I have to be to do what I do. I realize it might sound ridiculous, the idea that big law might want to be anti-racist. And those people who say that may end up being right. Race is the problem of the 20th century, and it's still the problem of the 21st century. We're going to try. We'll put the charter up so everyone can look at it. There will be a website. We're creating an actual organization. There will be structure. But that's what we're working on. Speaker: If I can piggy-back off that, one thing Ben said that I think will be a key component is how the alliance partners with the communities that we serve. In New York, the legal assistance group puts lawyers in communities and hospitals and community-based organizations to really learn the needs in those communities. So in building this out, it will be really important for all of us to have a voice and talk to one another to make sure we are giving communities what communities are asking for at the end of this. That the

people that we serve, the communities of black and brown people who have been burdened by these systems across the board, whether in housing and immigration or consumer debt, to make sure we affect the people in those communities. That partnership will be significant, especially based on where you are. It will be important with any of the firms to talk with the legal service organizations you already partner with. Some of those organizations may have already rolled out training. Maybe they think we can't talk about race within the firms. It's now time for us to be courageous about that and talk about it. We're seeing the issues concerning black and brown people amplified in the pandemic. And legal services may not be able to maintain and handle all those cases. We have to look beyond limited scope because our clients need full representation. We have to take on the cases that may not win and make the good fight. It's just that idea of how we started with access to justice. Now we have to push beyond making sure everyone has a lawyer to making sure the systems we're practicing in are just. And all these barriers in the way, we're not just shifting them or putting something over them, but we are totally tearing them apart. That is where the real work comes in. Because the system isn't just going to say, I'm going to let you dismantle me. I'm not going to do that. The system is going to shift. When slavery ended, did it really end, or did it shift? Because then you have the prison system, where black and brown people are still incarcerated in mass numbers. So the system will fight back. There are so many people who benefit from the system that getting it to change will be so difficult. I was a criminal defense lawyer in Atlanta in the '90s. There were all those differences between crack cocaine and powder cocaine, and the defendants who crack who were predominantly black men were sentenced far more harshly. I was scared every time I went into court. There were times when judges would cut me off or tell me to be held in contempt. I sat down because I'm not accustomed to being locked up. But I made the argument all the time. My point in all that is that we have to start making arguments in our papers, our oral arguments, and our briefs because that is how the system will change. If we start making attacks on the system today, maybe tomorrow we'll see some real change in the systems. Speaker: Is that high priority work for the firms who signed the anti-racism alliance charter? Speaker: The reality is that there's a huge variety of firms that have joined. From an 8-lawyer firm in Vermont. I'm sure there were some firms who signed up because there was no cost and then they could issue a press release. But there are plenty, and I've talked a lot, who say they're ready to do something different. So I agree completely. This is an opportunity that when the law firm says I want to have a clinic for disabled veterans, and I want them to all come downtown, and we want to be within five blocks, and we want to serve lunch. This is an opportunity to say those days are over because we're going to focus on the community. That's dicey, but this is the chance to do that. I agree completely. I think the answer is, if not now, when. Speaker: We talked a lot about that with the title of this workshop, why we can't wait even though we've been waiting many of us all our careers. One thing I wanted to issue all of you. Do you think your lawyers, whether staff attorneys or pro-bono volunteers, are ready to embrace cultural humility and being open to cultures and races in a humble way? Not in a mastering and gaining competence way, but in a way that allows you to communicate deeply and to use the representation to address the structural inequities, the white supremacy baked into our system, or power imbalances? When we think about approaching clients and the law from a position of cultural humility, that's what we're talking about. Are we ready in our own worlds and among our staff? Speaker: Yeah, I think we're ready. My staff is a little over 320 people. So are we all ready? Maybe not. But we're going anyway because that's the commitment of the organization. So I think that's one thing, when we talk about legal services. It has to be a commitment of the organization. Not just individual people within the organization. The entirety

of the organization has to make a commitment to the work. There will be those you have to drag along and push a little. But when you start talking about systems, I think people get a little more comfortable because it's not an indictment of the individual person. Obviously there's work for each of us as individuals to do, but as we move forward, we're looking at something bigger than that. I think we'll find that there are challenges and power dynamics. There's power in big law because most services depend on it for financial support. There is trepidation about how hard to push a firm. If a firm says no, do I not work with that firm? Because it may give us financial support. Maybe they'll let us put a few slides into a training. So it really is dicey, and I think it's something each organization will have to ask itself. What exactly are we willing to do? I think that's some of the challenge. We each have a different perspective. Legal services, courts, the law. And how do we merge those to get at this and get it right? I think there will be times when we have real questions about, can I do this with this particular firm? Maybe I'm doing something different with a different firm. I think we have to be prepared to be really flexible, and whatever plan we come up with will probably change. So we need to figure out plan B and really be shape-shifting and figure out how we morph and get at the final outcome of what we really want to happen. We have to restructure the system we're in and the way we serve our clients. Speaker: I want to bring up a question in the chat, which is whether our pro-bono and legal aid system really perpetuates racism? Most representation is from people who are white. No BIPOC, not immigrants. So any thinking about that and whether the law firm anti-racism alliance will ever impact that? Speaker: An important part of the law firm racism alliance is focused on that, the internal law firm piece. Which is that big law is not diverse at all, let alone inclusive. And that has to change. We are conscious of the fact that there's pro-bono work, external-facing. And that's important to do. But of course if law firms don't change themselves, we're not ultimately going to have credibility with the community. That's not just a law firm issue but for the legal aid community as well. So that's part of the focus. I will say that's a huge challenge for a wide variety of reasons. I've spent a lot of time with Kim over the last several months. And because I am not a full-time race equity expert like she is, we would sometimes check in like, is this real? I was struck when she was really struck by Mississippi getting rid of the Confederate flag on its flag because the football conference didn't want to come to Mississippi anymore. That was really meaningful. So that make some hopeful, but I'm not going to pretend that we have figured out how to make law firms more diverse. We haven't yet, because law firm diversity is the same systemic racism problem that affects the rest of our society. I don't know if that's a helpful answer, but we are certainly focused on that. The three people from this firms were invited with the specific reason that we don't want to look outward. We also want to look in. Speaker: I think that's great. The internal commitment was not immediately apparent to me in the charter. We love the charter and what the alliance stands for. We are worried it's another way of saying we want to have systemic impact when the largest amount of clients we have facing adversity of BIPOCs. Speaker: We completely recognize that. It's not like there's a vast oversupply of firms that want to do important impact work right now. We wish that were true. But I think we have education to do for the big firm lawyers for them to understand the systems and it's not just a poor person being evicted. The reason there's such housing segregation dates back to whatever you want to date it back to. And by educating our folks about that, they will be more willing to do individual work. So this is not in any way aimed at reducing the amount of work we do on behalf of the people who experience racism. No way. And in fact, the sort of inventory idea is much more focused on identifying the laws, not just the ones that date specifically to Jim Crow, but everything we would have said was de facto discrimination. So the goal is to increase that,

and I think the root to increasing that in part is education on systems. Speaker: To piggyback on that, I think the work that RJI is doing is amazing work. But there are only so many Kims. Speaker: There's only one Kim! Speaker: We also know that there are a lot of people who have sort of started this training. But legal services also does direct services. We are doing the work and then we engage attorneys. Then we also train in the context of the work we do. So I think getting together and having this understanding that when organizations need more training, there's a reason. The people doing the services are the same people in the communities doing the training. So it comes to the issue of funding and how we do that. Most legal services don't have the professional development team doing this training. It's a lawyer pulling together the slides and doing the research. So we have to collaborate on that as well because this training will be really big, not just at the high-level systems level, but if you're working on housing or criminal justice work, and you're talking about some specific community policing or whatever it is, there has to be a lot more training. And all of that comes down to resource allocation. They have the expertise, but getting it put together and getting it to our partners is something we'll have to have a big discussion about. What resources are we willing to allocate? Put your money where your mouth is? Generally. Speaker: I couldn't agree more. You're right. That's just another element of what our firm leaders say they want to do this, and we have to tell them what it's going to cost. And it's going to cost more. Speaker: Who's going to do the training, and is firm management going to require it? Cultural humility training. And are we being realistic? Speaker: So, I will tell you, I can only answer definitively about my own firm. We are now going to have regular cultural competence training. And I'm sure it will be mandatory in the same way we have mandatory training about not clicking on email messages that may be phishing. There will be mandatory training about this. It won't be absorbed and rejoiced by everyone. Let's not be unrealistic. But my firm has massively ramped it up, and it's not just for lawyers. It's obviously for all staff and professionals. So that's hopeful. Speaker: We have about four minutes. In our prep, Caprice talked about one approach to consent in our pro-bono volunteers, and it looks a little different than the anti-racism charter. Caprice, do you want to give us your thoughts? Speaker: Sure. There are a couple things. First of all, even in how we place cases, I think we should start pitching and talking about the work we do in racial justice and thinking about those systemic issues. I think often we divorce poverty law issues from racial justice issues. Problematic. They cannot and should not be divorced. So we have to start putting those things together. And we have to be having that dialogue. If we're pitching a case about eviction, we have to talk about what that is and have lawyers who are ready to be trained on the history and cultural aspects and values that come with that. Why is there public housing, and what is it intended to do and what has it turned out to be? So we have to have those conversations. Then we have to think about cross-cultural lawyering. We understand people won't be able to learn every culture and detail, but first of all having an awareness of who you are. What beliefs and values are you bringing to the table? Then once you have that acknowledgment, then we really start to think about how these things impact the organization. That's the kind of training my organization is doing, and really giving people tools and questions and things to think about even before the underlying subject matter. We've also been thinking about the fact that folks experiencing compounded racism, poverty, and other traumas, what does that mean when they come into the legal system? That's something people forget. We typically think about folks in domestic violence situations. But we seldom talk about the racial justice end of it. So our training will look different. We'll be having in-depth conversations with our partners and hoping they come with us. Speaker: That's great. Ben, what's your nugget for the audience, whether their firm

signs the charter or not? Speaker: You should consider joining the law firm anti-racism alliance. The best way to do that is to get in touch with Brenna. We're big law firms. We shout a lot

A5.1Elimination of Bias

MCLE Proposal

Professional GuidelinesAn agency of the Supreme Court of Virginia

Search

• VSB Home

• Rules and Regulations• Rules of Professional Conduct• Legal Ethics Opinions• Unauthorized Practice of Law Opinions• Organization & Government of the Virginia State Bar• Reciprocity: Admission on Motion• Pro Hac Vice• Corporate Counsel Limited Admission and Registration• Foreign Attorneys — Registered Military Legal Assistance Attorneys• Foreign Legal Consultant• Military Spouse Provisional Admission• Bylaws of the Virginia State Bar and Council• Unauthorized Practice Rules• Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Regulations• Clients’ Protection Fund Rules• Attorney Trust Account Regulations• Regulations of Attorney Real Estate Settlement Agents• Virginia Licensed Legal Aid Society Regulations• Principles of Professionalism• Provision of Legal Services Following Determination of Major Disaster

• Actions on Rule Changes and Legal Ethics Opinions

The Virginia State Bar

Professional GuidelinesSearch the Professional Guidelines Search

Home > Actions on Rule Changes and Legal Ethics Opinions > amendments to Paragraph 17 MCLE Rule regarding elimination of bias topic.

Proposed | amendments to Paragraph 17 MCLE Rule regarding elimination of bias topic. Comments due October 2, 2020.

Page 1 of 3Professional Guidelines - Actions on Rule Changes and Legal Ethics Opinions - amendm...

8/11/2020https://www.vsb.org/pro-guidelines/index.php/rule_changes/item/paragraph17_mcle_bias

View the Current Rule

The Virginia State bar seeks public comment on a proposal to include elimination of bias as a topic for MCLE training in addition to the existing topics of ethics and professionalism.

The proposal amends Part 6, Section IV, of the Rules of Supreme Court of Virginia, Paragraph 17 (C), which provides that all members of the Virginia State Bar shall annually complete and certify attendance at a minimum of 12 hours of approved CLE courses, at least two hours of which shall be in the area of legal ethics or professionalism.

ELIMINATION OF BIAS MCLE PROPOSAL

Amend Part 6, Section IV, of the Rules of Supreme Court of Virginia, Paragraph 17 (C), which provides that all members of the Virginia State Bar shall annually complete and certify attendance at a minimum of 12 hours of approved CLE courses, at least two hours of which shall be in the area of legal ethics or professionalism. The proposal would add the topic of elimination of bias to that section, so the newly amended section would read as follows:

(1) All active members of the Virginia State Bar shall annually complete and certify attendance at aminimum of twelve (12) credit hours of approved Continuing Legal Education courses of which atleast two (2) hours shall be in the area of legal ethics, or professionalism or elimination of bias,…

For consistency, a change to paragraph C. (2) would read:

(2) In order to provide flexibility in fulfilling the annual requirement, a one year carryover of credithours is permitted, so that accrued credit hours in excess of one year's requirement may be carriedforward from one year to meet the requirement for the next year. A member may carry forward amaximum of twelve (12) credit hours, two (2) of which, if earned in legal ethics, or professionalism orelimination of bias, may be counted toward the two (2) hours required in legal ethics, orprofessionalism or elimination of bias.

The final proposed change would be to the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Regulations 101 Definitions to add a subparagraph (x), which would read:

(x) “Elimination of Bias” training shall mean a training that it relates to bias (race, gender, economicstatus, creed, color, religion, national origin, disability, age or sexual orientation) in the legal profession. To be eligible for elimination of bias CLE credit, a program must address diversity or bias issues in the legal profession (e.g., among lawyers, in a law firm, or in the courtroom).

Inspection and Comment

The proposed changes may be inspected above. Underlined text is new language and strikethrough text indicates text being removed.

Any individual, business, or other entity may file written comments in support of or in opposition to the proposed changes with Karen A. Gould, executive director of the Virginia State Bar, not later



than October 2, 2020. Comments may be submitted by mail to 1111 East Main Street, Suite 700, Richmond, Virginia 23219-0026 or by email to [email protected].

Updated: August 10, 2020

© 1996 - 2020 Virginia State Bar | Privacy Policy1111 East Main Street, Suite 700 | Richmond, Virginia 23219-0026All Departments: (804) 775-0500Voice/TTY: 711 or (800) 828-1120Office Hours: Mon.-Fri. 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. (excluding holidays)The Clerk's Office does not accept filings after 4:45 p.m.



A6.1 Award Nominations

Deadline

Virginia State BarAn agency of the Supreme Court of Virginia

Pro Bono / Access to Legal Services

A Mission of the Virginia State Bar.

Awards• Virginia Legal Aid Award – nominations due March 6, 2020• Oliver White Hill Law Student Pro Bono Award – nominations due March 6, 2020• Lewis F. Powell Jr. Pro Bono Award – nominations due August 21, 2020• Frankie Muse Freeman Organizational Pro Bono Award – nominations due August 21, 2020

Nomination guidelines for all awards listed here are the same:There are no official entry forms to complete. Please submit your nomination, describing how the organization or person meets the criteria, in writing, including endorsements and any other supporting material in ONE of the following ways:

• by mail, to the Virginia State Bar Access to Legal Services Committee, c/o Crista Gantz, 1111East Main Street, Suite 700, Richmond, Virginia 23219

• by email to Ms. Gantz, listing the award name in the subject line, or• by fax at (804) 775-0501.

Please be sure to include your name, the name and address of the nominee, and phone numbers with your nomination. Nominations are due before 5:00 p.m. on the deadline day.

For more information, please contact Crista Gantz, Access to Legal Services Director, (804) 775-0522. Please inquire by telephone if you have not received acknowledgment of receipt of a nomination within five days.


Page 1 of 1Virginia State Bar | Pro Bono Section

8/11/2020https://www.vsb.org/site/sections/pro_bono/awards

A6.2Lewis F. Powell

Selection Criteria




Lewis F. Powell Jr. Pro Bono AwardThe Lewis F. Powell Jr. Pro Bono Award was established by the Standing Committee on Access to Legal Services of the Virginia State Bar to honor those attorneys and attorney groups that have made outstanding pro bono contributions. The Access Committee annually reviews all nominations and decides upon the recipient. The award, a framed certificate bearing the honorees name and a quote from the late Justice Powell, will be presented at a ceremony during the Virginia Pro Bono Conference in October. Recipients will also receive a copy of the limited-edition print of the painting Patrick Henry Arguing the Parson’s Cause.

CRITERIA

The recipient of the award must meet one or more of the following criteria:

• Demonstrated dedication to the development and delivery of pro bono legal services in theCommonwealth of Virginia;

• Contributed significantly toward the development of innovative approaches to the delivery ofvolunteer legal services;

• Participated in an activity that resulted in satisfying previously unmet needs for legal services orin extending services to underserved segments of the population;

• Successfully handled pro bono cases that favorably affected the provision of other services tothe poor in Virginia;

• Successfully supported legislation that contributed substantially to providing legal services tothe poor; or

• Devoted significant time to furthering the delivery of legal services to the poor in Virginia byhandling pro bono matters or providing training or recruiting volunteer attorneys for pro bonoprograms.

The nominee must be a member of the Virginia State Bar or group comprising such persons who are engaged in pro bono activity. Law firms, corporate legal departments, nonprofit legal services organizations are no longer eligible for this award (Cf., Frankie Muse Freeman Organizational Pro Bono Award) and persons whose livelihood is derived from delivering legal services to the poor are also not eligible.

See the awards page for nomination details and deadline.


8/11/2020https://www.vsb.org/site/sections/pro_bono/powell_pro_bono_award

Past Recipients

• The Honorable Lewis F. Powell Jr. (1991—Richmond) The late associate justice of the U.S.Supreme Court, prior to serving on the bench, helped create a national network of legal aidprograms.

• Oliver W. Hill (1992—Richmond) The late civil rights icon pioneered challenges tosegregation as a lead lawyer in Brown v. Board of Education.

• Ellen S. Weinman (1993—Salem) Donated more than a dozen years to representing womenand children survivors of domestic violence.

• Marion Toomey Baker (1994—Lynchburg) Volunteered as the primary family law attorney atVirginia Legal Aid Society for over a decade.

• The Honorable James Keith (1995—Fairfax) The late circuit court judge served as an in-house pro bono attorney with Legal Services of Northern Virginia (LSNV) for a dozen yearsafter retiring from the bench.

• John C. Kenny (1996—Richmond) The late Central Virginia Legal Aid board member helpedgenerate thousands of dollars in charitable contributions and donations of professional servicesfrom volunteer lawyers.

• Donald F. Mela (1997—Alexandria) The late advocate spent close to a decade assisting the probono efforts of the Alexandria Bar Association and LSNV.

• John M. Levy (1998—Williamsburg) For 30 years, engaged in law reform work, recruited probono attorneys, and personally delivered legal services to groups representing the poor.

• The Law Firm of Hunton & Williams (1998—Richmond-based) (1) met the ABA’s challengeto major firms to devote 3% of billable hours to pro bono and, (2) implemented a menu ofvolunteer service options.

• The Harrisonburg-Rockingham Bar Association (1998) Sustained, for more than 15 years,an effective pro bono program with Blue Ridge Legal Services that includes a presumption ofuniversal participation.

• Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (1999—McLean) The Legal Divisioncontributed direct pro bono legal services and other support to clients of LSNV for eight years.

• Steven D. Rosenfield (2000—Charlottesville) For two decades zealously advocated on behalfof prisoners and the poor through pro bono and court-appointed cases.

• The Virginia Beach Bar Association CLASS Project (2001) For seven years, VBBAvolunteers aided survivors of domestic violence.

• The Community Tax Law Project (2001—Richmond-based) Since 1992, more than 100volunteer lawyers and accountants have assisted low-income taxpayers.

• Donald T. Floyd (2002) Volunteered about 20 hours a week over eight years at CentralVirginia Legal Aid.

• Steven D. Benjamin (2003—Richmond) A lifetime of professional service has includedongoing leadership efforts to reform indigent defense.

• Stephen A. Northup (2004—Richmond) Volunteered on death penalty cases and helpedinstitutionalize pro bono at Troutman Sanders LLP.

• The Fairfax Bar Pro Bono Program (2004) Developed an in-house capacity to supplementlegal aid through new programs.

• Joseph W. Gorrell (2005—Fredericksburg) Devoted at least one day per week for nine yearsto needy clients of Rappahannock Legal Services.

• David P. Baugh (2006—Richmond) Devoted decades to pro bono representation on high-profile First Amendment cases and zealously defended, for nominal compensation, broadlyunpopular indigent criminal defendants.



• John M. Oakey Jr. (2007—Richmond) Subsequent to his retirement as a full-time partner atMcGuireWoods LLP, he served more than eight years as a model pro bono attorney.

• Volunteer Faculty and Cooperating Counsel affiliated with the Caplin Center at the UVaSchool of Law (2007—Charlottesville) Supervised and mentored law students to contributeexponentially to the thousands of hours of pure pro bono donated to the community.

• Phyllis C. Katz (2008—Richmond) Co-founded LINC, the nonprofit Legal InformationNetwork for Cancer, which over a dozen years aided more than 3,000 patients with the businessside of cancer diagnoses.

• Clarence M. Dunnaville Jr. (2009—Richmond) spent a lifetime volunteering in the civil rightsarena and accepted undercompensated court-appointed cases exploring a civil right to counsel.

• William B. Reichhardt (2010—Fairfax) His pro bono teaching and mentoring efforts werecrucial in expanding the statewide legal aid pool of qualified special education advocates.

• Gail Starling Marshall (2011—Rapidan) Recognized for lifelong achievements thatencompassed first amendment litigation, death penalty review cases, challenges to theCommonwealth’s parole system, and the development and delivery of free and affordable legalservices.

• Robert F. Redmond Jr. (2012—Richmond), though a products liability lawyer by trade, hecollaborated with the Virginia Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and others to establish andsustain for seven years a monthly legal clinic for underserved recent immigrants. A partner atWilliams Mullen, he is helping to expand the clinic to Northern Virginia and also helped toform a policy group to ensure that legislation aimed at illegal immigration does not harm thestate’s business reputation.

• Lewis B. Puller Jr. Veterans Benefits Clinic at the William & Mary Law School(2013—Williamsburg)

• Legal Information Network for Cancer (Richmond) and M. Steven Weaver(Harrisonburg) and Glenn M. Hodge (Harrisonburg) — 2014

• George H. Hettrick (2015 — Richmond) Chair of the Pro Bono Leadership Committee atHunton & Williams

• Law Firm of Hoover Penrod PLC. (2016 — Harrisonburg)• Ofelia Calderón (2017 — Fairfax)• G. Andrew Nea Jr. (2018 — Richmond)• Hebert “Herb” L. Sebren Jr. (2019 — Tappahannock)




A6.3Frankie Muse Freeman

Selection Criteria




Frankie Muse Freeman Organizational Pro Bono AwardThe Frankie Muse Freeman Organizational Pro Bono Award was established by the Standing Committee on Access to Legal Services of the Virginia State Bar in 2016 to honor organizations that have made outstanding contributions in the area of pro bono legal services for the poor. Organizations that are eligible for the award may include, for example, law firms, corporate legal departments, nonprofits, faith-based organizations, local bar associations, court-based projects, and law school programs. The Access Committee annually reviews all nominations and decides upon the recipient. The award, a framed certificate, will be presented at a ceremony during the Virginia Pro Bono and Legal Aid Conference in October.

CRITERIA

The organization that is the recipient of the award must meet one or more of the following criteria:

• A multi-year track record demonstrating dedication to the development and delivery of probono legal services in the Commonwealth of Virginia;

• Significant contributions toward the development of innovative approaches to the delivery ofvolunteer legal services;

• Sponsorship and promotion of activities that resulted in addressing previously unmet needs forlegal services or in extending services to underserved segments of the population; or

• Notable success in handling specific pro bono cases that resulted in important outcomes forlow-income clients or which favorably affected the provision of other vital services to the poorin Virginia.

There must be one or more members of the Virginia State Bar who are actively involved in the work of the organization. If all the attorneys who do the work of the organization are persons whose livelihood is derived from delivering legal services to the poor, then the organization is not eligible to receive the award.

See the awards page for nomination details and deadline.

PAST RECIPIENTS:

Frankie Muse Freeman (2016 — Danville)McGuireWoods (2017 — Richmond)Prince William County Bar Association (2018 — Prince William County)


8/11/2020https://www.vsb.org/site/sections/pro_bono/freeman_pro_bono_award

Consumer Litigation Associates, P.C. and Kelly Guzzo, PLC (2019 — Alexandria/Newport News and Fairfax, respectively)



8/11/2020https://www.vsb.org/site/sections/pro_bono/freeman_pro_bono_award

A7.1 COVID-19 Legal Aid and

Pro Bono Response

COVID-19 Pro Bono Interest Form – Summary of Responses

Access to Legal Services Committee August 11, 2020 Mtg Materials

































A7.2COVID 19 Google Form Response Spreadsheet

(See email attachment)

A8.1Access Committee

2019-20 Annual Report

1

Standing Committee on Access to Legal Services Jennifer A. Fulmer, Chair

Vice chair: Alexandra S. Fannon

Members: Adonica Baine, Donna Sue Baker, Polly Chong, Karl A. Doss, Teirra M. Everette1, Paul C. Garrett, Valerie Aline L’Herrou, David L. Marks, Kristopher R. McClellan, Dale W. Pittman, Devon R. Slovensky, Joanna L. Suyes, Crystal Y. Twitty2, Martin D. Wegbreit, Judge Patricia West

VSB staff: Crista L. Gantz, VSB Access to Legal Services Director

2019-20 Major Accomplishments

• Access to Legal Services officially became a standing committee of the Virginia StateBar

• Successfully completed the first year of Voluntary Pro Bono Reporting and exceededgoals for attorney response rate

• Court approval of proposed amendments to Voluntary Pro Bono Reporting Rule• Court approval of proposed amendments to Section 5 Voluntary Pro Bono Reporting

form• Distributed more than 13,000 copies of the Free & Low-Cost Legal Resources Guides to

Virginia courts• Hosted the first ever full-day Pro Bono Conference with morning poverty simulation• Publication of the December 2019 Pro Bono issue of Virginia Lawyer• Virginia.freelegalanswers.org leading the nation in attorney response rate and surpassing

3,000 questions asked and answered on the portal

Meetings:

The Committee met in Richmond on 8/26/2019, 1/28/2020, and during the joint Pro Bono Conference/Virginia Legal Aid Conference in Harrisonburg on 10/16/2019.3

Over the course of the Bar year, the Access Committee worked on a variety of access to justice issues through its subcommittees: Awards, Alternative Delivery Systems/SRL, and Rules.

During regular Access Committee meetings, subcommittees would report on their work and receive input from the entire Committee. Over the course of the Bar year, the Access Committee and its subcommittees discussed access to justice issues with numerous guests, including Marni Byrum, VSB immediate past president; Brian Buniva, VSB president; James McCauley, VSB ethics counsel; John Whitfield, Co-Chair Virginia Access to Justice Commission and executive director, Blue Ridge Legal Services; Nicole Harrell, Co-Chair, VBA Pro Bono Council and Kaufman & Canoles; David Neumeyer, Executive Director, VBA Pro Bono Council and VLAS; Kristin Clarins, CABA; Hon. David Lannetti, VBA Pro Bono Council and Judge, Norfolk Circuit Court.

2

Change from Special to Standing Committee of the Virginia State Bar

On June 13, 2019, Chip Nunley and Joanna Suyes, on behalf of the Access committee, presented a bylaw amendment proposal to Bar Council requesting to make Access to Legal Services a standing committee of the Virginia State Bar. The proposal was unanimously approved by Council4. The committee name, purpose, size (15 members) and composition are now written into the bylaws. The bylaw amendment solidifies the Committee as an essential part of the Bar’s mission, achieves structural uniformity within the Bar, and is consistent with the majority approach taken by other mandatory state bars.

Voluntary Pro Bono Reporting:

On February 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of Virginia approved the addition of Paragraph 22 to Part 6, Section IV of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia, which requests that each active Virginia State Bar member voluntarily report their pro bono hours and/or financial contributions in support of pro bono legal services on their annual dues statement. The new voluntary reporting rule went into effect on December 1, 2018. The July 2019 VSB annual dues statement for the 2020 bar year incorporates voluntary pro bono reporting as new Section 5. Members were permitted to report online or by mail. Below is an outline of three areas where the Access committee realized major successes related to voluntary pro bono reporting in the 2019-2020 bar year.

• Successful Completion of First Year of Reporting & Favorable Response Rate Achieved

In the first year of voluntary reporting more than 66 percent of active members of the Virginia State Bar participated, accounting for approximately 368,846 hours of service and more than $974,000 in financial contributions. Overall response rates in most states with voluntary pro bono reporting have been below the rates achieved in Virginia, and not a single state has had response rates higher than Virginia within the first year of implementing voluntary pro bono reporting. Oregon, Louisiana, and Georgia had response rates in the single digits in the first year of reporting, and Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee and Washington had response rates in the teens. Except for Tennessee, the response rates seen in the states with low participation have not significantly improved in future reporting years. Montana, Arizona, and Connecticut enjoy higher response rates compared to these other states, but even these three states have not had rates as high as Virginia in the first year of reporting.

• Court Approval of Proposed Changes to Voluntary Pro Bono Reporting Rule

The Court approved changes to the voluntary pro bono reporting rule allowing Associate members of the VSB to report and allowing the VSB flexibility in determining how to best collect the voluntary reporting data.

3

• Court Approval of Proposed Amendments to Section 5 Reporting Form

The Court will annually approve the VSB Section 5 form. This year they approved the proposed changes to the form without amendment. The updated form will help VSB develop a more nuanced understanding of pro bono service as well as improve data collection and reliability to help us more accurately measure the pro bono contributions of Virginia attorneys. It reflects feedback from members and stakeholders and is a significant process improvement. The 2020-21 dues statement contains the amended form.

Other Accomplishments

Virginia.freelegalanswers.org: Virginia.freelegalanswers.org, the online, interactive, pro bono question and answer website hosted by the Virginia State Bar, celebrated its three-year anniversary on August 22, 2019. The Committee continued to support the Virginia Free Legal Answers portal through daily administrative functions of the staff liaison and year-round promotional engagements. Ms. Gantz continued her annual interactive CLE training event at the University of Richmond School of Law (the third annual training of such kind). Ms. Gantz also hosted a VA FLA table at the ABA Business Law Section’s annual meeting in DC, where she was also interviewed for an ABA promotional video highlighting the Free Legal Answers program. Ms. Gantz also presented on two ABA webinars highlighting Free Legal Answers as a pro bono tool. Quarterly email updates were sent to volunteer attorneys containing helpful tips, reminders, website statistics, and volunteer recognition to increase engagement and interest. These efforts have resulted in significant growth in the number of clients (3,590 registered clients), volunteer lawyers (406) and questions asked (3,259) and answered (3,038). Virginia.freelegalanswers.org has consistently had an attorney response rate of 93 percent, putting us at the top of the nation in this category. An estimated 1,063 hours of pro bono service have been contributed to date.

Free and Low-Cost Legal Resources in Virginia Pamphlet: In February 2017, the Access Committee published, on behalf of the Virginia State Bar, a pamphlet entitled "Free and Low Cost Legal Resources in Virginia". This eight-page pamphlet is a guide for helping low-and modest-income Virginians find legal assistance and includes options for assistance by counsel and advice and counsel services for self-represented litigants. In the 2018 bar year, the Access Committee kicked off a partnership with the Diversity Conference to translate the Access guide into Spanish, which as completed last year and made available in PDF form on the bar website; next year we will print and distribute the Spanish guide to Qualified Legal Services providers and the courts.

In September 2020 Ms. Gantz attended the Annual Circuit Court Clerks Association Annual Meeting in Bristol, VA. She distributed more than 13,000 copies of the guides to GDC and circuit courts throughout the commonwealth, saving the VSB hundreds of dollars in shipping costs. Similar distribution efforts are planned for the future when in-person conferences resume.

4

Conferences, Webinars, Seminars, Presentations, and Outreach: The 2019 Virginia State Bar Pro Bono Conference was held on October 16, 2019, in Harrisonburg, VA in conjunction with the Virginia Legal Aid Conference. This was the fifth time these events were held together, and attendees were welcome to attend sessions at either conference. More than 65 people participated, plus additional attendees from the Virginia Legal Aid Conference. For the first time the conference offered a full day of events, including a well-attended, interactive poverty simulation conducted in the morning. 4 hours of CLE programming was offered in the afternoon, including a session on trauma-informed lawyering.

The Access Committee collaborated with Legal Aid organizations, law firms, non-profit legal services organizations, and bar associations to offer several webinars and seminars during the 2019-20 Bar year, most notably programs on eviction defense to mobilize pro bono attorneys to help respond to the eviction crisis in Virginia.

Awards and Recognition: On October 16, 2019, during the Pro Bono Conference, the Committee presented the Lewis F. Powell, Jr., Pro Bono Award to Herbert L. Sebren. The Committee also presented the second annual Frankie Muse Freeman Organizational Pro Bono Award to co-recipients Consumer Litigation Associates, P.C. and Kelly Guzo, PLC. Bar President Marni Byrum was the master of ceremonies and LSC President Jim Sandman gave the guest remarks. More than 350 people attended this event.

The Committee designated Emily Lopynsky of UR Law as the 2020 recipient of the Oliver White Hill Law Student Pro Bono Award and Marcel Slag of the Legal Aid Justice Center as the recipient of the 2020 Legal Aid Award. The 2020 Legal Aid Luncheon was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemics, so we were unable to formally present the awards this year. The recipients will be formally recognized at future statewide event.

Departing members: Polly Chong; Paul C. Garrett. The Committee wishes to extend its heartfelt gratitude and a tip of the hat to departing members. Their service was very valuable, and they will be missed both as colleagues and fellow Committee members.

New Members (2020-21): Llezelle Dugger; Brandy Disbennett-Albrecht

Officers (2020-21): Jennifer Fulmer, Chair; Ali Fannon, Vice Chair

1 Ms. Everette joined the committee in the 2019-20 bar year to fill the unfinished term following Ms. Twitty’s resignation. 2 Ms. Twitty resigned from the committee in the 2019-2020 bar year; her term was filled by Ms. Everette. 3 The Spring 2020 meeting scheduled for March 20 was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic and related instructions from the governor.

A8.22020-2021 Committee Goals

and Objectives

1

VSB STANDING COMMITTEE ON ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES

The Access to Legal Services Committee’s mission includes:

1. Fostering support for free and reduced-fee legal services with the goal of improving access to thelegal system for all Virginians and for nonprofit charitable and civic groups that serve the publicgood.

2. Promoting pro bono publico services by Virginia lawyers and encouraging the integrateddevelopment of like contributions by law school faculty and students, lay mediators, courtreporters, interpreters, tax accountants, paralegals, and members of related professions.

3. Examining ways in which access to legal services can be enhanced and exploring opportunities toexpand pro bono services in a fashion that supports and complements the rich regional network ofexisting service providers.

2020 – 2021 GOALS & OBJECTIVES

GOAL ONE: Increase Pro Bono Contributions Across the Legal Profession and Provide Support to Volunteers to Foster Competent and Conscientious Service

Objective 1: Educate lawyers and legal professionals about racial and other bias barriers to access; develop bias elimination and sensitivity training to address the same.

Objective 2: Expand pro bono efforts to support increased demand for QLSP services due to COVID-19.

Objective 3: Explore MCLE credit for pro bono service (limit 4 hours per year in clinic setting following CLE; certify through QLSPs)

Objective 4: Develop support systems for pro bono lawyers and the organizations they serve, including drafting Pro Bono Best Practices for QLSPs, exploring formal mentorship programs, and creating an unbundling resource kit.

Objective 5: Study ways to expand “distance lawyering” and the use of remote appearances to facilitate pro bono engagement in rural/underserved areas to address access gaps in legal deserts and other areas with high demand and low supply.

Objective 6: Increase VLRS panel membership.

Objective 7: Incentivize Pro Bono Service through CLE opportunities and recognition.

Objective 8: Increase member awareness of pro bono opportunities, including the development of a robust online directory to assist members in identifying and seeking out engagements. Develop Pro Bono Section or mailing list.

Objective 9: Publish informational and compelling Pro Bono issue of Virginia Lawyer to ignite enthusiasm for access issues and to foster a robust service ethic within the profession.

Objective 10: Administer survey to members who opted in on voluntary pro bono reporting form to gather UX data and identify barriers/opportunities related to pro bono expansion.

2

GOAL TWO: Increase Public Access to Legal Information, Resources, and Services

Objective 1: Examine racial and other bias-based barriers to access to legal services and develop programming to respond to the same.

Objective 2: Increase availability of printed materials to public-facing organizations/agencies; print and distribute Spanish-language version of VSB Access guide.

Objective 3: Increase public awareness of free and low-cost legal resources through website, social media, and educational programming. Improve Access website to make it more user friendly and helpful to the public.

Objective 4: Increase public awareness of Virginia.freelegalanswers.org (VA FLA).

Objective 5: Explore new partnerships with courts and community organizations to expand access to resources and information to new audiences

Objective 6: Publish results of pro bono reporting through local and statewide media outlets to show public the Bar is committed to improving pro bono participation and addressing the justice gap.

A9.1Birth Certificates for Senior

Citizens, VA Real ID and Voter Registration

MEMORANDUM

Virginia State Bar

To: Standing Committee on Access to Legal Services

From: Henry C. Su

Date: August 11, 2020

Re: Birth Certificates, Driver’s Licenses, Real IDs, and Voter IDs

This memorandum describes a potential need for legal assistance among senior citizens in

the Commonwealth of Virginia. It arises from a question posted by a client on the ABA Free

Legal Answers platform administered by the Virginia State Bar. The client has given me

written permission to share details regarding her situation, to the extent necessary, to bring

this issue to the Committee’s attention.1

Synopsis of Legal Problem

My client is 74 years old. Her Virginia driver’s license lapsed in April 2019. When she applied

for renewal, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) told her that she would need her birth

certificate in order to satisfy the “legal presence” requirement, Va. Code § 46.2–328.1, that

went into effect in 2004. (As discussed below, a birth certificate is also required to obtain a

REAL ID-compliant license.) She has never had a birth certificate, however.

My client therefore tried to order a copy while she was at DMV but found out that the Division

of Vital Records (DVR) doesn’t have any record of her birth in Hanover County, Virginia. She

consequently sought the registration of a delayed birth certificate pursuant to Va. Code

§ 32.1–259. DVR rejected the application, however, because she was unable to provide an

affidavit of birth executed by someone with personal knowledge of the facts of her birth (not

altogether surprising given her age); see 12 Va. Admin. Code § 5-550-260.

1 The client’s informed consent is memorialized in the messages we exchanged on the platform.

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title46.2/chapter3/section46.2-328.1/

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title32.1/chapter7/section32.1-259/

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/admincode/title12/agency5/chapter550/section260/

- 2 -

My client therefore needed my legal assistance in drafting a petition to establish record of

birth pursuant to Va. Code § 32.1–260,2 which she then filed with the Circuit Court in

Newport News, where she resides.

Discussion of Potential Legal Need

I am concerned that my client’s situation is not unique, and that there may be an

indeterminate number of senior citizens in Virginia who also do not have birth certificates

and likewise will need to petition a circuit court to establish a record of their births. They too

will need a birth certificate in order to satisfy DMV’s “legal presence” requirement and—

optionally—to obtain a REAL ID-compliant driver’s license (the deadline for which has been

extended by one year to October 1, 2021, due to disruption caused by the coronavirus

pandemic). Fortunately, the inability to apply for or renew one’s driver license should not

affect one’s ability to furnish other satisfactory proof of identification to vote in Virginia.

1. Birth Certificates. On March 12, 1912, the Virginia General Assembly passed “an Act

to provide for the immediate registration of all births and deaths,” establishing the

Bureau of Vital Statistics and charging it with the task of recording all births and

deaths in the Commonwealth. Notwithstanding this Act, it seems that the practice of

issuing birth certificates did not become uniform, consistent, and widespread until

after the Second World War, when Americans recognized their importance as proof of

citizenship for employment and benefits. See, e.g., Birth Certificates, AMERICAN BAR

ASSOCIATION (Nov. 20, 2018), https://bit.ly/3kxZpUz (“In the years following World

War II, employers, schools, and the federal government increasingly relied on birth

certificates as documentation for certain activities and benefits.”); Erin Blakemore,

The History of Birth Certificates is Shorter Than You Might Think, HISTORY.COM

(updated Aug. 22, 2018), https://bit.ly/31BvPoJ (noting that during World War II, an

estimated 43 million native-born Americans didn’t have birth certificates and an

estimated 200,000 people were being born every year without one).

While I have not researched this issue exhaustively, it seems reasonably likely that

my client’s situation is not unique among elderly Virginians. Seniors in other states

like Rhode Island and Texas, for example, are reportedly encountering similar

difficulties. See, e.g., Emily Volz, Too old for Real ID? NBC 10 responds to birth

certificate questions, NBC 10–WJAR, Jan. 30, 2020, https://bit.ly/2XKOGMS; Jesus

2 I drafted the petition in accordance with the guidance in Legal Ethics Opinion 1874 (July 28, 2014).

https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title32.1/chapter7/section32.1-260/

https://bit.ly/3kxZpUz

https://bit.ly/31BvPoJ

https://bit.ly/2XKOGMS

https://www.vsb.org/docs/LEO/1874.pdf

- 3 -

Jimenez, 95-year old driver gets license without birth certificate, but other Texans

still in the dark, DALLAS MORNING NEWS, Sept. 13, 2019, 3:09 PM,

https://bit.ly/3aetZxY.

2. Driver’s Licenses. Since January 1, 2004, DMV has required proof of “legal presence”

in order to obtain a Virginia driver’s license. See generally Virginia’s Legal Presence

Law, VA. DEP’T OF MOTOR VEHICLES, https://bit.ly/2DHpsZ5 (last visited Aug. 10, 2020).

Suffice it to say, for our purpose here, even U.S. citizens must prove their legal

presence in order to obtain a driver’s license unless they are renewing a valid,

unexpired license that was issued prior to the effective date of the requirement.3

Legal presence needs to be proven only once.

To prove legal presence, a native-born U.S. citizen must provide either a valid U.S.

passport or an official birth certificate. See Acceptable Documents by Status – Proof

of Legal Presence, VA. DEP’T OF MOTOR VEHICLES (June 30, 2020),

https://bit.ly/2PH1zU0. Additionally, a birth certificate is also required to obtain an

optional REAL ID-compliant license for boarding domestic flights starting October 1,

2021. See REAL ID – You Have a Real Choice, VA. DEP’T OF MOTOR VEHICLES (May 11,

2020), https://bit.ly/33KqI8h. But, in my client’s case, the fact that a REAL ID is

optional is of no moment because she still needs to present a birth certificate to

establish legal presence. I suspect the same will be true of many other seniors in

Virginia.

The requirement of birth certificates also negatively impacts the ability of citizens in

some States to secure proper voter identification. See, e.g., Ina Jaffe, For Older

Voters, Getting the Right ID Can Be Especially Tough, NPR – ALL THINGS CONSIDERED,

Sept. 7, 2018, https://n.pr/3kvYWCm (quoting Kat Calvin (“If you are elderly and you

were born in a rural area [or] born during Jim Crow, you may not have ever gotten a

birth certificate.”)); Marsha Mercer, Can We Still Vote? Without a valid photo ID, many

older Americans will not be allowed to vote this year, AARP BULLETIN (Aug. 30, 2012),

https://bit.ly/2XQm9FU (“People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates

because they were born before recording births was standard procedure.”). In

Virginia, however, a valid driver’s license is not the only type of photo identification

that can be used; an employer-issued photo ID is acceptable, for example.

3 If the holder of a driver’s license allows it to lapse, as was the case with my client, she must comply with the legal presence requirement. There is no grace period.

https://bit.ly/3aetZxY

https://bit.ly/2DHpsZ5

https://bit.ly/2PH1zU0

https://bit.ly/33KqI8h

https://n.pr/3kvYWCm

https://bit.ly/2XQm9FU

- 4 -

IDs Required to Vote, VA. DEP’T OF ELECTIONS, https://bit.ly/3it1sYg (last visited Aug.

10, 2020). The lack of a birth certificate therefore may not raise as significant an

access-to-justice concern from the standpoint of safeguarding the voting rights of

seniors in Virginia.

3. Petitions to Establish Record of Birth. A person seeking to obtain a delayed birth

certificate more than seven years after his or her birth must provide satisfactory

evidence as prescribed by the Department of Health in its administrative rules. If DVR

determines that the evidence submitted is insufficient, then that person must

petition a circuit court to establish a record of his or her birth. The Virginia Legal Aid

Society has posted a useful primer on the procedures for obtaining delayed birth

certificates and petitioning to establish record of birth. Leslie Dodson, Birth Record:

Getting It, or Changing It, Virginia Legal Aid Society (July 27, 2016),

https://bit.ly/2XPdeV3.

In my view, however, preparing the petition is not something that a member of the

public, especially a senior citizen, may be able to handle on his or her own.

Importantly, there is no circuit court form that can be readily filled out for this type of

petition.4 Moreover, DVR advises the applicant, in what appears to be a form letter

denying applications for a delayed certificate (which my client received), to consult an

attorney for further assistance with the petition.5

For the above reasons, the Committee may want to consider whether more can be done to

ensure that senior citizens in Virginia encountering this situation, especially as the REAL ID

deadline approaches next year, have access to legal assistance, if needed, with the

preparation and filing of these petitions and their noticing for a hearing.

H.C.S.

4 Indeed, one has to know where to look in the circuit court manual for a description of this type of action. The petition is described in the Circuit Court Clerk’s Manual – Civil, chapter 8, section XIII.B, at page 8-36. 5 The letter from DVR suggests that the applicant file a petition to establish record of birth, provide notice of the petition to the State Registrar for the Division of Vital Records, and submit the enclosed form VS40 to the court for its completion if the petition is granted. The letter does not spell out how to do any of this.

https://bit.ly/3it1sYg

https://bit.ly/2XPdeV3

http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/circuit/resources/manuals/cc_manual_civil/chapter_08.pdf

A10.1 ABA Standing Committee on

Pro Bono and Public Service

Page 1 of 9Standing Committee on Pro Bono & Public Service

8/11/2020https://www.americanbar.org/groups/probono_public_service/

















A11.1 VLRS as an

Access Service

$35 for up to 30 minutes

The Virginia Lawyer Referral Service will connect you to a lawyer for $35.

You receive a consultation of up to a half hour with him or her — no strings attached.

You can use the VLRS in three ways:

1. Call the VLRS between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Closed on state and fed-eral holidays. (804) 775-0808 (metro Richmond) (800) 552-7977 (statewide & nationwide toll-free)

2. Email the VLRS at lawyerreferral @vsb.org. Please do not send personal information regarding your case via email. We only need your contact information

3. Use the online referral system at

www.vlrs.net

The VLRS is a service of the Virginia State Bar. The bar makes no warran-ties or representations concerning a lawyer’s ability to handle a caller’s particular legal matter. The decision to employ a lawyer is solely that of the caller, subject to the lawyer’s willing-ness to accept employment.

Need a lawyer?

A11.2 VLRS as an Access

Service

What does the pre-paid $35.00 consultation fee cover?

The $35.00 fee, which is collected by the Virginia Lawyer Referral Service (VLRS) attime of referring, entitles the referred caller to an up to one half-hour (30 minute)consultation with a VLRS lawyer that is a VSB member in good standing. The up toone-half-hour consultation may be by phone or in person. There is no obligation oneither party to go beyond the initial consultation.

The consultation fee is not contingent on the consumer retaining the lawyer or thelawyer accepting the consumer as a client. Neither the consumer nor the lawyer isobligated to go beyond the up to 30-minute consultation. Refund for theconsultation fee will be issued on a case-by-case basis and at the Virginia State Bar’sVirginia Lawyer Referral Service’s (VLRS) sole discretion. Refunds, in nocircumstances will be issued for a referral after fifteen (15) calendars days of the feebeing paid to the VLRS.

How soon after a referral is made will the consultation take place?

The VLRS asks that the referred caller allow at least 48 business hours after theinitial contact for the lawyer to return the call and/or to schedule a phone or officeappointment.

Will the referred caller be entitled to an up to one-half–hour (30 minute) consultationwith the VLRS lawyer, even if the referred lawyer is not available for representation?

Yes. The $35.00 pre-paid fee entitles the referred caller to an up to one half-hour(30 minute) consultation with the VLRS lawyer to address the referred caller’s legalquestions and concerns. The consultation is not contingent on representation byVLRS lawyer. Neither the referred caller nor the referred lawyer is obligated to gobeyond the initial consultation.

If the referred lawyer is unavailable to consult with the referred caller in person or byphone, what should the referred caller do and what happens to the pre-paid $35.00consult fee?

The referred caller should contact the VLRS again and VLRS will make anotherlawyer referral to another VLRS lawyer at no additional cost. Or, if agreeable withthe referred caller, the referred VLRS lawyer may refer the referred caller to another

Frequently Asked Questions | Virginia Lawyer Referral Service https://vlrs.community.lawyer/pages/faq

1 of 2 8/17/2020, 11:48 AM

VLRS lawyer within their law office for the initial consultation.

Will the VLRS lawyer contact the referred caller to schedule a consultation?

No. Due to the sometimes sensitive and confidential nature of the caller’s inquiries,it will be the referred caller’s responsibility to make the initial phone contact withVLRS lawyer to schedule the phone or office consultation. The VLRS lawyer must atall times respect the confidentially of the referred caller who may not wish to becalled at home or in the workplace.

Is the VLRS referral based on income eligibility?

No. The VLRS will refer to anyone 18 years or older that wishes to consult with anlawyer that is a VSB member in good standing and that pays the pre-paid consult feeof $35.00. Referrals to VLRS lawyers are made based on callers' requested Virginiageographical location and requested area of legal practice.

Get a 30-minute consultation from a qualified, local lawyer for $35.

Or call us! We're here to help.

Email [email protected]. Please do not send personal information regardingyour case via email. We only need your contact information.

Frequently Asked Questions | Virginia Lawyer Referral Service https://vlrs.community.lawyer/pages/faq

2 of 2 8/17/2020, 11:48 AM

A12.1 2020 VSB Pro

Bono Conference

Access to Legal Services August 18, 2020 Mtg. Materials

2020 VSB Pro Bono Conference The Pro Bono Training/CLE Subcommittee met on August 6, 2020 to discuss several training, educational, and publicity items, including sessions for the VSB Pro Bono Conference in October, which will be a virtual event this year due to the pandemic. Ms. Gantz is working with Virginia Poverty Law Center to coordinate the Pro Bono Conference in conjunction the Statewide Legal Aid Conference (also virtual). Pro Bono session proposals were selected based on relevance of subject matter and with care to not overlap with topics presented at Statewide. With the exception of the ethics presentation on the final day of Statewide, the pro bono sessions will likely be offered in the mornings followed by the legal aid programming. Coordination with other pro bono partners and their October events is also happening to avoid duplication and foster complementary programming throughout the state. A working list of preferred and alternate session topics is below of the committee’s consideration. Session One: Domestic Violence – Nuts and Bolts – Pro Bono Protective Orders – CLE (90 minutes)

• Presenter will be asked to include trauma-informed representation tips in addition to substantive legal training

• Possible speakers: Palma Pustilnik, Susheela Varky, LSNV DV team members

Session Two: VA Free Legal Answers Best Practices – CLE Ethics (90 minutes) • Effective and compassionate communication strategies (greetings and

closings, empathetic tone, understanding complexities of client population, trauma-informed representation, etc.)

• Ethics topics: competency, diligence, confidentiality, conflict of interest, limited-scope representation, etc.

• Speakers: Cris Gantz and Jim McCauley

NOTE: Jim is only available on October 21 or 22, so we would love to have this session slotted in for one of these two days.

Session Three: Implicit Bias Training (60 minutes)

• Need ideas for potential speakers • Not sure if it can be approved for CLE training, may depend on the speakers • We think this will complement the racial justice programming at Statewide

very nicely Session Alternates:

• Life Planning – simple Wills, AMDs, POAs

Access to Legal Services August 18, 2020 Mtg. Materials

• Reentry/expungements (Ms. Fulmer getting requests for pro bono work in this area)

• No-fault Divorce and distance lawyering • Basics of unemployment (will be covered at Statewide, so not likely to be a

VSB session)

A13.1 Virginia Lawyer

Magazine Coverage

Access to Legal Services Committee August 11, 2020 Mtg. Materials

Virginia Lawyer Magazine – October 2020 Issue – Access/Pro Bono Coverage

Columns

1. Brian Buniva – President’s message2. Karen Gould – remote pro bono opportunities considering COVID-193. Legal Aid – Karl Doss - LSCV Racial Justice program (A.K.A. “IDEA”) – ask Karl to write something

about the program he is working on to look at legal aid service through a racial justice lens.

Story/Article/Ad Ideas

1. Special Education during the COVID-19 pandemic and remote learning – LAJC writing and willinclude coverage of pro bono training (YES, COVER) (LAJC)

2. ABA State of the Legal Profession – Legal Deserts highlight (YES)(DEE)

• Focus on Virginia and get quotes from legal aid providers in rural locations with a dearth ofattorneys to talk about poverty in their area and the access implications related to nothaving enough lawyers to serve the population.

• Summarize potential solutions being explored in other states.• Highlight Justice server as a currently available technology solution to connect Virginia

lawyers in urban locations to rural clients.• Follow Up article in future issue that goes more in-depth in Virginia and pulls in some

examples of remote lawyering that has happened since.

ABA Report: https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/news/2020/07/potlp2020.pdf

3. CCJ/COSCA Principles and Guidance for Post-Pandemic Court Technology (YES)(DEE) – gettingquotes from Commission members• This is a forward-looking article, but we can get quotes from Judge Ortiz in Fairfax since his

court has been successfully using WebEx for remote hearings.• Perhaps highlight a few online self-help resources/tools (iCAN)

4. Infographic on 2019 Pro Bono Reporting Statistics by Circuit/District (YES)(CRIS WORKING WITHCARYN/KAYLIN)

5. VA FLA Update and thank you to attorneys (YES)(CRIS TO PROVIDE COPY)

6. VBA Pro Bono Council - State of Pro Bono Report (YES)

7. Access to Justice Commission update (YES) (CRIS TO ASK ELLEN BOWYER AT OES) - this could bea larger article by John and perhaps Justice Goodwyn.

8. Feature recipients of the Pro Bono awards (YES) (COMM HAS INFO ON LEGAL AID/HILL; CRIS TOSEND INFO ON OTHER WINNERS AFTER SELECTIONS MADE)

https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/news/2020/07/potlp2020.pdf


9. Spotlight on a few independent pro bono programs – MLP, Immigration programs in DC area,Good Samaritan Advocates, Drive-to-Work, law school clinic, etc. (YES, if space).

10. Update on the Eviction Diversion Program and call for volunteers (YES, if space)

11. Life planning documents for essential healthcare workers (YES, if space) cover the GRBF/FIStrack for low-income individuals – about 48 served. Send proposed copy to Ali to review andedit.

12. Thank you from legal aid – list of donors and attorney volunteers (MAYBE, if interest) – Cris toemail pro bono coordinators at the various legal aid orgs to see if they want to coordinate onthis

A14.1 Virginia Free Legal

Answers

Virginia Free Legal Answers Report


Jan Feb March April May June July Total Users 5178 5314 5466 5559 5777 5913 6106 Attorneys Registered 390 391 396 403 406 406 408 Clients Registered 3226 3313 3404 3452 3590 3674 3800 "Moderated" Clients and Attorneys* 1562 1610 1666 1704 1781 1833 1898 Ineligible Clients** 72 67 59 55 77 89 89

Total Questions Asked 2912 2993 3071 3127 3259 3327 3463 Questions Answered by Attorneys*** 2702 2789 2858 2908 3038 3088 3212 Questions In Progress with Attorneys 26 10 12 14 16 11 11 Unassigned Questions 16 4 8 12 12 22 29 Average # of New Questions per Month**** 82 85 86 82 82 83 93 We had 136 questions in

July, at least 50 more per month than the five previous months.

Number of Clients Served 2458 2537 2603 2646 2763 2805 2915 COVID-19 Questions N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 26 40

Most Frequently Asked Questions Family/Divorce/Custody 36% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% 35% Housing/Property Law 15% 15% 14% 15% 15% 14% 15% Debts/Purchases 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 8% 8% Work/Employment 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Constitutional/Civil Rights 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Wills/Inheritance 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Other 27% 28% 29% 28% 28% 30% 29%

Percent of Use/Questions by Jurisdiction Virginia Beach 22% 21% 21% 21% 21% 21% 21% Norfolk City 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%

Virginia Free Legal Answers Report


Fairfax County 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Richmond City 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Henrico County 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Chesterfield County 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% Chesapeake City 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Hampton City N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Newport News City 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Loudoun County 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% All other locations 46% 48% 48% 48% 48% 48% 48%

Number of Attorneys Answering Questions 136 137 139 140 142 142 143 50+ Questions Answered 11 11 11 11 13 13 13 10+ Questions Answered 50 50 50 50 51 51 52

*Attorneys and clients are "moderated" if they fail to complete the registration process.**Clients are "ineligible" if their income exceeds the financial threshold of 250% of the federal poverty level or they have morethan $10,000 in liquid assets.***Response rate for July is 93%.****July number is based on data from the most current, complete 6-month period (February 2020 - July 2020).

A15.1VBA Pro Bono

Council Update