We’ve blogged before about the potential demise of KSAs, as well as other developments in federal hiring. Today, the Washington Post reported on plans by the White House to put pressure on the Office of Personnel Management and other agencies to move forward with meaningful hiring reform, including eliminating KSAs, tightening up the process so it will only take 80 days from posting a position to filling it (rather than the current 140-200), and moving to a system of “category hiring.” The Post explains,

Departments within agencies would also switch to a new system known as “category hiring.” Under this plan, after the Army has screened candidates and hired an accountant, for example, the Navy also could hire from the Army’s list. Currently, the Army picks from the top three candidates and the others must start the process anew, even for a similar position with a different agency in the same department.

These changes will make the federal application process much less painful, and will hopefully help encourage top talent to seek employment in the federal government. As always, PSLawNet will keep you updated as this project moves forward.

The New York Times reports:

New York’s highest court ruled Thursday that a broad class-action suit challenging the state’s system of providing public defenders can move forward because there are enough signs that the system is failing poor people.

The 4-to-3 ruling by the State Court of Appeals came in a closely watched suit that civil liberties lawyers said could be a model for similar challenges across the country. It also set the stage for a sweeping battle in the courts and perhaps the Legislature.

…

The ruling was something of a milestone after decades of reports and findings by state commissions that New York’s locally financed system for meeting the constitutional requirement to provide lawyers for indigent defendants, which varies greatly by county, is inadequate, with inattentive, unavailable, poorly trained and poorly supervised lawyers handling huge caseloads. In many counties, the ruling noted, poor defendants are routinely arraigned without lawyers at all during initial appearances, where bail is set and many defendants are sent to jail.

The way is now cleared for a trial or a settlement by New York, as has been the result in several other states that have faced such challenges. There have been similar class-action challenges over public defense systems in states like Connecticut, Indiana, Minnesota and Montana that have ended with inconsistent decisions and settlements. Last month, the Michigan Supreme Court permitted a similar challenge to proceed.

Regarding that Michigan case, which has been closely watched by civil liberties and indigent defense advocates throughout the country, 4/30/10 Associated Press coverage actually suggests that there is some uncertainty about whether the case will ultimately go forward as a class action.

The Washington Post reports on a $2.6 million cy pres award – stemming from an old, class-action lawsuit about cell-phone fees – that will go to funding financially-strapped legal services programs throughout the Terrapin State.

A legal aid clinic in Oxon Hill will reopen and one in Baltimore that serves consumers across the state will avoid a scheduled closing as a result of a $2.4 million award stemming from a decade-old lawsuit over excessive late fees on cellphone bills.

Thirteen legal programs in Maryland that help clients facing evictions, wage disputes and other civil cases will share the money, helping buoy programs battered by ongoing public funding cuts and drops in foundation donations.

…

Maryland Legal Aid in Baltimore received the largest amount — $911,000 — which its head, Wilhelm Joseph Jr., said will plug a funding hole linked to the current low interest rates on accounts that historically generate payments for legal aid programs. As rates dropped, so did the interest income on which Wilhelm’s groups and others heavily rely. “The great pain for me was watching our money decline just as more people needed our services,” said Wilhelm.

As is noted in the Post article, and as we’ve noted in the past, Maryland’s legal services funding infrastructure was hit badly by IOLTA shortfalls in recent funding cycles.  So this is great news.

Equal Justice Works has announced its incoming class of fellows.  We extend our congratulations to all 43 of them!  Now more than ever, energetic, creative minds are needed to fight for those who live on society’s margins.   A press release from Equal Justice Works notes that the 43 fellows will be placed with 41 public interest orgnizations in 17 states and in DC.  Here’s a little more from the press release:

The Equal Justice Works Fellowship program is the largest postgraduate legal fellowship program in the country.  Equal Justice Works Fellows design projects with nonprofit organizations providing legal services in low income and underserved communities in a range of issue areas including homelessness prevention, immigration, criminal defense and Native American rights.

At the East Bay Community Law Center in Berkeley, CA, Brendan Darrow will represent Spanish-speaking renters who have been thrust into the housing crisis by their landlords’ default.  Unaccompanied immigrant children facing deportation in the Greater Boston area will be able to receive legal assistance from Erin Cox, who will be working with Lutheran Social Services in Wellesley.  And at the Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment, Mike Becher’s project will address surface coal production’s effects on human health and safety and the perpetuation of poverty in the coalfields of Appalachia

“The 2010 Equal Justice Works Fellows are entering the field when legal aid has been devastated, leaving more people desperately needing affordable legal services,” said Cait Clarke, Director of Public Interest Law Opportunities at Equal Justice Works. “These attorneys have demonstrated an extraordinary commitment to public interest law and helping to address the legal needs of the most vulnerable among us.  We are proud to welcome them to the legal services community.”

Here’s a link to a list of all of the fellows and their host organizations.

Today, the New York Law Journal is reporting about the uncertain status of the Equal Justice Conference, a national gathering of legal services and pro bono advocates that is (still, at the moment) scheduled to meet next week in Phoenix.  The EJC is co-sponsored by the ABA and the National Legal Aid & Defender Association.  According to the NYLJ article, though, the NLADA has backed out of its sponsorship role in protest of the controversial immigration law that was recently passed in Arizona.

The American Bar Association is facing mounting pressure to move a conference in Phoenix scheduled for next week after its co-sponsor backed out and two New York public interest law groups called for a boycott to protest Arizona’s controversial new immigration law.

One quibble with the NYLJ article: in its headline it refers to the EJC as being an “immigration” conference.  It’s not.  While immigration advocacy is certainly a topic covered at the EJC, the conference focuses more broadly on civil legal services, pro bono, and access-to-justice issues.

UPDATE – 5.5.10 – last night the ABA circulated a statement indicating that it would go forward with the Equal Justice Conference in Phoenix.  The statement took pains, though, to recognize the difficult choice that NLADA and potential conference attendees have been facing.  Here’s a portion of the statement:

Ultimately, we have decided to proceed with the conference.  We believe that the event will strongly affirm the crucial work our participants do and serve as a clarion call that there is still much that needs to be done.  Had circumstances been different, we may well have chosen to relocate this event.  But at this time, there are simply no viable options to reschedule a conference of this magnitude .  We do not want to cancel the conference altogether; that would deny programming of critical importance to the justice community and the people they serve, and would be a disservice to the numerous registrants who are relying upon our presentation of this event.  As important, many of our colleagues in Arizona have urged us to proceed with the Conference.

The statement had this to say about NLADA’s choice not to co-sponsor the conference:

The ABA understands and respects the position taken yesterday by NLADA to withdraw its co-sponsorship of this event in protest of the very controversial Arizona law and is grateful for their support of our going forward.

For today’s dose of public interest law-related inspiration, we turn to this story in the Huffington Post on Nikki Johnson-Huston, a public sector attorney in Philadelphia who overcame childhood homelessness to graduate from Temple Law (whose Dean, Joanne Epps, we’ve interviewed on the blog). Ms. Johnson-Huston’s experiences and current success (she works in the City of Philadelphia Law Department’s Major Tax Unit) are sure to inspire victory over any looming law school final.

PSLawNet has returned to daily blogging following a week mostly away for the NALP Annual Education Conference, where we enjoyed a lot of strong public interest-related programming. We have decided to support all our law school readers who are currently facing finals by making this week Inspiration Week on the blog – we will endeavor to only share positive and inspirational stories to help you power through those pesky exams.

First up, The Legal Intelligencer recognized its 2010 Women of Distinction last week, and public interest lawyers were very well represented. We were particularly glad to see Marsha Levick and Lourdes Rosado of the Juvenile Law Center honored, as we’ve blogged about the Center here before.

So best of luck on finals, student readers, and check back throughout the week for more inspiration!

• 4.23.10 – Fulton County Daily Report (Georgia) – a local estate law attorney recounts the unique reward that comes with helping a pro bono client who had nowhere else to turn and, by way of a “top 8” list, explains the reasons that she has built pro bono into her practice.  Link to article (hosted on law.com).

• 4.22.10 – Washington Post – in Perdue v. Kenny A., a decision handed down by the Supreme Court this week, public interest lawyers may have scored a longer-term victory while enduring a shorter-term loss.  The case had to do with whether lawyers who prevail in federal cases and achieve a result in the public interest could be awarded not just attorneys fees but also financial “enhancements” on account of their advocacy.  In Perdue, a successful action brought by a public interest organization and pro bono co-counsel against the State of Georgia resulted in “a transformation of Georgia’s dysfunctional foster-case system.”  A judge awarded not just attorneys fees, but an additional amount equal to 75% of those fees in recognition of their excellent advocacy and their achieving a favorable result.  Georgia argued that there were no grounds for such an enhancement in the law.  The Supreme Court disagreed with Georgia, finding that such enhancements could be permitted.  But it set up very narrow parameters in which it could happen, preferring only an amount equal to attorneys fees to be the presumptively correct award.  It did not allow the enhancement of $4.5 million to stand in this case, and sent it back to the lower court for reconsideration.  Link to article.  See additional coverage from the ABA Journal.

• 4.21.10 – South County Spotlight (Oregon) – after Columbia County Legal Aid and the Oregon State Bar (its funder) hit loggerheads concerning the former’s precarious funding situation, a state senator helped organize a “mediation” session between the two groups.  CCLA is one of a small group of legal services organizations that does not operate under the umbrella of Legal Aid Services of Oregon.  CCLA’s funding comes from court filing fees from Columbia County, which may not be enough to sustain the staff needed to help its residents.  Still, CCLA fears that a merger with LASO would lead to closure of its office, potentially “forcing [clients] to visit LASO’s office in Portland.”  CCRA’s director argues that the unique types of issues and client base in Columbia County would make it difficult to provide out-of-county services effectively.  Link to article.

• 4.20.10 – Harvard Law Record – a group of public-service minded Harvard Law students is spearheading a fundraising initiative – the Post-Graduate Student Funded Fellowship – that would bankroll a public interest fellowship for one graduating classmate.  The group notes that “$1 per day for 1 month from each student … would fund a fellow classmate to work in the public interest for a year following graduation.”  The group, which hopes that the project will remain institutionalized after its founders graduate, has created a website to collect donations and is also taking the tried-and-true “bake sale” route to kick off fundraising efforts.   Link to article.  And see additional coverage (4.22.10) in the National Law Journal.

• 4.20.10 – San Francisco Chronicle – in the wake of a scandal inside San Francisco’s crime lab, the city’s public defender suggested that “[a]s many as 40,000 drug cases … may need to be reviewed and it’s going to take money to do it.” Already, more than 500 drug cases have been dismissed on account of “concerns about the police lab’s performance.”  The public defender is arguing that neither the police nor the district attorney should take the lead in investigating apparent malfeasance at the lab because both organizations rely on the lab for support in making criminal cases.  The defender and DA do agree, though, that any investigation will be expensive.  Link to story.  [Ed. Note: some background on the scandal, which centers on the erratic behavior of a technician who may have stolen cocaine from the lab, is available via a 4.18.10 Associated Press story.]

• 4.20.10 – American Lawyer Daily– Andrew Ardinger, a Class-of-2009 law school grad whose law firm start date was deferred, is spending a year with the Public Interest Law Project (PILP), a civil legal services organization in California.  Ardinger has occasionally blogged for the American Lawyer about his public-interest experience.  His latest AmLaw post suggests that his experience at PILP thus far has offered ample opportunities for client contact and for cultivating practice skills, including working on a complaint and participating in a settlement negotiation on an important public benefit case.  Link to blog post.

• 4.19.10 – Bangor Daily News (Maine) – since last October, the Penobscot County Bar Association has been offering free attorney consults with low-income clients who are representing (or will represent) themselves in court.  “About 75 percent of the people who appear in Maine courts in criminal, civil and family matters are not represented by attorneys, Chief Justice Leigh I. Saufley said last fall.”  One of the reasons for this is that Maine’s civil legal services programs are overworked, and can serve only about one quarter of eligible individuals who apply for services.  The clinic has by all accounts been successful, and as a result the county bar association has been nominated for an ABA public service award.  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: in recent weeks there has been coverage around the country of bar associations’ and public interest organizations’ attempts to better support rising numbers of pro se litigants.  See related stories coming out of Michigan (Detroit Free Press, 4.15.10) and Texas (Texas Tribune, 4.13.10; Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 4.1.10).]

• 4.17.10 – Wisconsin Rapids Tribune – officials in Wood County, Wisconsin hope that a forthcoming statewide change in the formula used to determine if a criminal defendant is eligible for a public defender will reduce county legal bills.  At present, “[i]f a judge decides a defendant cannot pay for a lawyer but doesn’t meet the criteria for a public defender, the judge appoints an attorney, and the county pays the bill.”  The indigent defense eligibility standards had not been updated since 1987, with a result being that a lot of poor defendants were determined ineligible for a public defender even though they were living in poverty.  The state’s decision to expand the standards will mean that more defendants will be eligible for public defenders, with the state picking up most of the tab.  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: see past coverage of the Wisconsin governor signing into law the bill to expand the eligibility standards via the Wisconsin Bar Association website (3.17.10).]

Andrew Ardinger, whose start date at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe was deferred, is spending a year with the Public Interest Law Project (PILP), a civil legal services support and resource organization that works with partners throughout California.  Ardinger has occasionally blogged for the American Lawyer about his public-interest experience.  His latest AmLaw post suggests that he’s had some valuable experiences, in terms of both professional and personal development, at PILP. 

…it was the first case that I got to see all the way through from start to finish that was the highlight of my first six months here. Through a task force that focuses on public benefits issues, PILP learned that a local county had created a rule that appeared unsupported on a legal level and grossly unfair on a gut level. As a result of the rule, poor people were being forced from stable homes to the streets because of a sharp reduction in their welfare benefits. I was involved in the preliminary investigation, researching the legal issues and talking with recipients to determine how and when this rule had been applied, and to what effect. When the decision was made to file, my bosses had me develop the complaint (at least the first draft or so), and I traveled out to our clients’ homes to meet with them and discuss the suit in detail. A while after we filed, the county agreed to discuss a settlement, and my bosses encouraged me to attend and participate in the negotiation sessions. PILP and the county reached an agreement that rescinded the rule and paid recipients across the county benefits that had been previously withheld.

It was my happy duty to discuss the terms of the settlement with our clients…

We’ve been closely following the phenomenon of deferred associates taking temporary public interest placements.  (We did some writing on the issue last December.  And a number of media articles focused on the phenomenon are collected here, on ProBono.net.)  There are many variables to consider when it comes to assessing how well things are playing out.  Two of the most important variables deal with whether the associates have opportunities to 1) interact with clients so that they can see first-hand the challenges those clients face, and 2) cultivate practice-related skills that will aid in their professional development.  It’s good to see that Mr. Ardinger’s experience has allowed him to do both.

Many law schools have had student-supported public interest funding programs for unpaid public interest summer work for years. Harvard is now taking that idea one step farther, by trying to establish a post-graduate student-funded fellowship. The fellowship would support a graduating student for a year in a public interest setting. The fellowship program chairs published an open letter to all students in yesterday’s Harvard Law Record, asking for a donation of one dollar per day for a month from all students  (which by PSLawNet’s rough calculations would work out to about $45,000) to support this program. While developed as a one-time idea in the face of immense economic difficulties, the founders express hope that this may become a permanent program.

It will be interesting to see if other schools decide to attempt this model as well. As always, we will keep you updated with any new developments.