By: Maria Hibbard

The National Law Journal has released a special report highlighting innovation in the law school classroom—law students and professors looking at the law in new ways, developing practical applications and real-world solutions. Among the programs highlighted:

• Even if mandatory pro bono doesn’t take effect in New York or elsewhere, students at Arizona State will still get valuable practical experience at a low cost to clients—through the creation of a non-profit law firm inside the Arizona State law school, set to run by 2013. The firm would allow recent grads of ASU to rotate through practice areas for a set amount of time.
• Some lawyers may still prefer to research using textbooks and registers, but students in a class at Georgetown University Law Center are making apps that provide practical advice—via smartphone applications—for avoiding copyright infringement, finding out if you have citizenship status, and figuring out the laws concerning same-sex marriage and civil unions.
• Students at University of Pennsylvania Law School are making documentaries and exploring a new method of legal advocacy—in a legal world run by reading and writing, this visual type of advocacy may possibly be a welcome change.
• Two professors—Neil Siegel of Duke Law and Robert D. Cooter of UC Berkeley School of Law—have collaborated to develop the theory of “collective action federalism,” a novel way of interpreting Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to prove the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. Since I’m still recovering from my 4-hour constitutional law final debating this very topic, I was happy to read about their innovation—potentially, their ideas might lead to decisions in Congress.
• Luke Bierman, associate dean for experiential education at Northeastern University, writes about an alliance of educators focused on building the modern law school: “This group of legal educators is committed to educating students to hit the ground running, with experience helping clients, collaborating with colleagues, resolving disputes, facing adversaries, drafting documents and interacting with judges, so that these lawyers are ready to solve legal challenges right away.”

In a day where law schools are frequently criticized for teaching methods and structures that are ineffective and out-of-date, it’s encouraging to read about new methods of research and teaching that will hopefully better equip future lawyers. What about your law school? What could you do?

By: Steve Grumm

Happy Friday, dear readers.  And happy June.  June is the sunniest month, at least for those of us living on the Earth’s northern half.  Speaking of where we are, I am in motion – aboard an Amtrak train and destined for my hometown of Philly.  I’m in Maryland now.  This state’s beauty is sadly unheralded.  To cross the bridges spanning the Chesapeake Bay tributaries just after sunrise is to observe a wonderful bit of scenery.  And the City of Baltimore is like Philly’s cool little brother, except with crabs.  There has to be a better way to phrase that.

Shortly I’ll be at the Philadelphia Bar Association, where I’ll have the pleasure of speaking with a group of law students about maximizing their summer public interest experiences.  Later I’ll join my childhood friends Billy and Sean – neighborhood riff-raff like myself – to watch the Glorious Philadelphia Phillies Baseball Franchise reel in the Marlins of Miami.  (If you think it’s bad that we call a grown man by his yesteryear nickname of Billy, imagine how bad it is for our friend Stinky.  He’s a medical doctor these days.  He really wishes we’d call him Duane.)

As you know I focus mainly on access-to-justice developments in this newsletter.  I feel strongly, though, that the AtJ community must itself monitor happenings in the law-firm world, especially those affecting the “business of law.”  So I commend to you this incisive AmLaw article by Professor Bill Henderson.  He uses this week’s demise of the storied law firm Dewey & Leboeuf to explore how large law firms must quickly rework their business models lest they risk running themselves into the ground.  (You may be required to register to read the piece; a trial registration should be free.)  Also, every Friday NALP’s executive director Jim Leipold produces a terrific legal industry digest that you may access here.

On to our news:         

This week:

• Upside: the U.S. has a strong civil justice system. Downside: poor people don’t get to use it
• The New York State Bar’s incoming president is a legal aid leader
• Student loan debt is a real big problem
• Maine’s got some King-size indigent defense funding problems
• More debate around the 50-hour pro bono requirement for admission to practice in New York
• A veteran PA children’s rights advocate moves into retirement
• Merck’s in-house team has launched a pro bono project to serve vets in need
• The Northern District of Alabama is finally going to host some federal defenders
• A great new report out of Illinois about the economic benefits generated by civil legal aid

The summaries:

• 6.1.12 – an ABA Journal piece covers one of the central access-to-justice dilemmas in the U.S.: “Two recent studies provide news good and bad for the U.S. legal system. The good: The United States’ civil legal system is one of the best in the world, according to the results of the World Justice Project’s Rule of Law Index 2011.  And the bad? According to this same study, millions of Americans can’t use this fine system because they can’t afford it. They have legal rights—to child support, Medicare benefits or protection against an improper home foreclosure—but they find these rights meaningless because they can’t enforce them….  A plethora of government and volunteer programs provide free legal aid, but they are overstretched…. To make matters worse, the system for providing free legal services is a mess. There is “an enormous diversity of programs and provision models with very little coordination at either the state or the national level,” according to Access Across America, a 2011 report (PDF) authored by Rebecca L. Sandefur and Aaron C. Smyth and funded in large part by the American Bar Foundation.”

• 5.31.12 – a legal aid leader takes the helm of the New York State Bar.  “Seymour W. James, Jr. of Brooklyn, a 38-year veteran of The Legal Aid Society of New York, assumes office on June 1 as the 115th president of the New York State Bar Association….  James is the attorney-in-charge of the criminal practice for The Legal Aid Society, which provides criminal and civil legal services for low-income individuals in New York City.  The theme for his presidency is “making a difference” with an emphasis on access to justice.”  (Story from realMedia.)

• 5.30-31.12 – the PBS Newshour aired a two-part report on the increasing crisis of skyrocketing educational debt-loads being carried by higher-ed grads, including law students.  Indeed, part two contained a lot of content about the plight of law grads.
  • Here’s part one: “The State of Student Loans: More Debts, More Defaults, More Problems”
  • Here’s part two: “Student Loan Debt: To Pay or Not to Pay”

• 5.30.12 – “Maine’s Commission on Indigent Legal Services, which provides lawyers for criminal defendants who can’t afford their own, gets inadequate funding every year. Its budget for this fiscal year recently bottomed out, and it will not be sufficient to pay lawyers for the month of June. They will be paid at the start of the new fiscal year in July, but dwindling funds are an ongoing problem.”  Thanks for the (bad) news, Maine Public Broadcasting Network.

• 5.30.11 – debate continues around the new 50-hour pro bono requirement for admission to practice law in New York.  In the New York Times, David Udell of the National Center for Access to Justice at Cardozo Law defends the initiative as one that is not overly burdensome on law students and that could have great outcomes for students and clients.  (I believe that the devil remains in the details – e.g. will work satisfying the definition of “pro bono” for a law school’s internal program count toward the requirement if that work does not meet New York’s definition? – but I generally agree with David.  More importantly: what do you think? The Times writes: “We invite readers to respond to this letter for the Sunday Dialogue. We plan to publish responses and Mr. Udell’s rejoinder in the Sunday Review. E-mail: letters@nytimes.com.”
  • And here, from Bloomberg, is a nice summary of the key considerations driving the debate.

• 5.29.12 – we bid “Happy Trails” to a veteran, Pennsylvania-based children’s advocate.  From the Philadelphia Inquirer:  “Shelly Yanoff, a longtime champion of children’s causes, will step down this fall from her role as head of the nonprofit Public Citizens for Children and Youth, the organization’s board of directors announced yesterday.”  The Inquirer did a Q&A with Yanoff which captured her thoughts on what her job had taught her: “That people can respond to the needs of kids. That there are many different ways to get to a good result and that nothing ever stays done. You have to keep at it.”

• 5.29.11 – when pharmaceutical giant Merck began supporting veterans support group Community of Hope, Merck’s in-house lawyers “…realized that they could provide services through their substantial pro bono program that would be as helpful if not moreso than the checks their company was writing to support Community of Hope. Thus was born the Hope for Veterans Program.”  Read about it in the Huffington Post.

• 5.28.12 – some federal court news: the Northern District of Alabama finally has some full-time federal defenders.  From Al.com: “North Alabama’s first crew of federal public defenders, working out of Birmingham and Huntsville, in August will begin defending indigent clients charged with crimes…. The district is one of only four federal court districts out of 94 nationwide that don’t [presently] have some form of federal public defender’s office.”

• 5.24.12 – this may even cause my friend Bob Glaves to forget about the misery of the Chicago Cubs for a bit.  The Chicago Bar Foundation was one of a few stakeholders involved in producing “Legal Aid in Illinois: Selected Social and Economic Benefits.”  This report does a wonderful job of exposing the concrete, financial benefits that inure to Illinois’s population at large because of the work that legal aid organizations do to keep families in their homes, stop domestic abuse, secure government benefits, and obtain child support for clients.  This is the so-called “business case” for legal aid, and this report makes a strong one.  Here’s the report and an accompanying press release.

Finally, this being graduation season, I leave you with the transcript of this commencement speech by Professor Lawrence Lessig.  In it, he emphasizes that if lawyers are stewards for the rule of law and for meaningful access to justice, then we must not make it a priority to serve moneyed interests at the expense of society at large – particularly our society’s most vulnerable members.  I think 90% of commencement speeches are hot air – bromides strung together lazily so as to offend no one and congratulate everyone.  This one resonates with me, though.  Happy June.  Enjoy the sun

By: Steve Grumm

The Chicago Bar Foundation and a group of other stakeholders have released a report they commissioned to look at the economic benefits that the work of the Illinois civil legal aid community brings to the larger society.  The study, performed by the Social IMPACT Research Center of the Heartland Alliance, looks like it was a pretty rigorous affair.  And it concludes that, considering work done in preventing homelessness and domestic violence, as well as securing federal benefits and monetary awards to which low-income clients are entitled, the benefits of civil legal aid to larger society are tangible indeed.

Here’s a link to press release, and here’s one to the full report, Legal Aid in Illinois: Selected Social and Economic Benefits.

Here’s are some key points from the report’s executive summary:

The Chicago Bar Foundation, the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation, the Illinois Bar Foundation, the Lawyers Trust Fund of Illinois, and the Polk Bros. Foundation commissioned this study to inform policymakers and other stakeholders about the tangible economic benefits of legal aid. This study quantifies some of the benefits to clients and other Illinoisans from cases closed by seven legal aid providers that are part of the larger network of 38 legal aid providers funded by The Chicago Bar Foundation and the Lawyers Trust Fund. It uses data from civil law cases in which clients resided in Illinois. These include cases in which a provider communicated with a third party, prepared legal documents, or helped a client represent himself or herself; negotiated a settlement with a third party; represented a client in an administrative agency process or court proceeding; and provided other services beyond legal advice. Data from 8,134 cases were used in the study. The average client helped by one of these cases belonged to a household of three people and reported annual household income of $14,075, meaning that his or her household was well below the federal poverty level.

The study quantifies four economic benefits from cases closed in 2010 by the seven legal aid providers:

• Legal aid providers won $49.4 million in monetary awards for clients. Examples of monetary awards are child support and alimony, public benefits like Social Security and unemployment insurance, and relief from illegal charges by a landlord or payment to a predatory lender;
• Legal aid providers won $11.9 million in benefits wholly or partially paid for by the federal government. It is estimated that these awards were associated with $9.3 million in demand for goods and services, $5.4 million in household income, and 172 non‐legal‐aid jobs across Illinois.
• By preventing or obtaining more time in foreclosures or evictions, obtaining, protecting, or increasing rental subsidies, and assisting clients with other housing issues, legal aid providers avoided $1.9 million in costs to homeless shelters.
• By obtaining protective orders, divorces, child custody, and legal recognition for noncitizens experiencing abuse, legal aid providers avoided $9.4 million in costs of domestic violence to individuals.

The economic benefits of legal aid in Illinois are likely to be greater than those estimated in this study. The study uses data from only seven of 38 legal aid providers funded by The Chicago Bar Foundation and the Lawyers Trust Fund. Additionally, civil law cases other than those involving monetary awards and federal benefits, homelessness, and domestic violence may have outcomes with economic benefits for legal aid clients and other Illinoisans: by overcoming expulsion of a student from school, legal aid may enable the student to obtain a high school diploma, increasing his or her lifetime earnings; by restoring a client’s drivers license or recovering a repossessed vehicle, legal aid may enable the client to access employment far from home, meeting an employer’s need for labor and contributing to the local economy. Because this study estimates economic benefits of legal aid in only four easy‐to‐monetize areas, it represents an incomplete estimate of the economic benefits of legal aid in Illinois. While a complete inventory of the economic benefits from legal aid is beyond the scope of this study, the estimates it presents can help inform policymakers and other stakeholders as they make decisions about the future of legal aid. 

By: Maria Hibbard

Since it’s intern season here in Washington, D.C., many bright-eyed and bushy tailed students with hopes of potentially working for the federal government are streaming into the city.  I may or may not be one of them!  My name is Maria Hibbard, and I’m the resident PSLawNet Intern and Publications Coordinator for the summer. I’m a rising second year law student at Case Western Reserve University. Since I grew up in Columbus, Ohio and am now in Cleveland for law school, D.C.’s vast system of public transportation and plethora of free summer activities (see the Having Fun on the Cheap page!) definitely has a big-city allure for me as well. I’ll be blogging throughout the summer here while avoiding the D.C. heat in the air conditioned office, of course.

Until recently, the path to employment at a federal agency or department has been a mystical jumble of various opportunities only found through a great degree of research: volunteer internships, compensated internships, fellowships, short-term and long-term programs. Hopefully, this jumble will soon become clearer–when President Obama’s Executive Order 13562 takes effect on July 10, 2012, current students and recent graduates will have three clear paths to federal employment via The Pathways Program. To break it down, everyone loves a list:

• Some aspiring federal employees may have heard of the Student Career Experience program (SCEP) and the Student Temporary Employment Program (STEP); both of these programs are being replaced by the all-encompassing Internship Program. While the program is still administered primarily by the hiring agency, students can possibly earn conversion into a permanent position after the completion of 640 hours of work experience.
• The Recent Grads program is a new opportunity for recent graduates within two years of obtaining any degree. Like the internship program, it is administered individually by the federal agencies, but the one year program provides structured mentorship opportunities, 40 hours of formal training, and the creation of an individual development plan. After 1 year, the graduates of the program can be eligible for conversion to permanent employment at the selected agency.

Starting in July, agencies will have to provide information about both of these programs, their specific opportunities, and application procedures on www.usajobs.gov/studentsandgrads/.

• Finally, the Presidential Management Program, while obviously not new, has been reworked to provide for a more seamless application process and administration (especially after last year’s acceptance snafu). This prestigious program, for professionals of all disciplines, places fellows at the center of federal policy making, provides at least 80 hours of formal training, and encourages the development of a performance plan.

We’ll remind you in July to start looking for opportunities on the reworked federal website; hopefully, the Pathways Program will lead more aspiring students and recent grads down the yellow-brick-“pathway” to federal employment.

By: Steve Grumm

Happy Friday, dear readers.  Earlier this week I participated in a one-day conference focused on the role of New York State’s 15 law schools in addressing the civil justice gap.  Much discussion centered on the recent announcement by NY Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman that 50 hours of pro bono service will be required for admission to practice law in New York.  Most of this blog’s readers will have been aware of how much buzz this announcement has generated.  Ink has been spilled.  Articles and opinion pieces have run in legal and mainstream media.  The old debate about making volunteer service mandatory has been revived. 

Letting alone the “mandatory v. voluntary” policy debate, I think this requirement will prove fairly easy to satisfy.  Pro bono performed in law school satisfies the requirement.  Fifty hours of pro bono over three years is just less than 17 hours per year.  Frankly, that’s easy for any law student.  That said, there are two noteworthy considerations:

1. There will be some burden on law schools (both inside and outside of NY State) to make sure worthwhile pro bono opportunities exist for their students.  Two of the law school deans who attended this week’s program made the point over and over that pro bono also has to mesh with law school’s larger mission of training tomorrow’s lawyers.  So pro bono programs should be efficiently administered, and should offer skill-development chances for students.
2. The pro bono work itself must effectively serve client communities.  And public interest law offices should not be overly burdened in offering pro bono opportunities for students.              

But given that so many schools already have some infrastructure in place for student pro bono, I think the 50-hour requirement will not be too much of a burden on students, schools, or the public interest community.

This week:

• more on NY State’s 50-hour pro bono requirement;
• $300K in grant funding divided among NV legal services providers (and my thoughts on the Las Vegas bachelor party);
• mandatory pro bono in the Caymans;
• addressing legal needs long after Hurricane Irene struck NC;
• fewer death sentences in Ohio, tracking a national trend;
• tracking wrongful convictions nationally;
• for reasons of efficiency and expediency, an early intervention court program for nonviolent offenders in one county courthouse;
• the justice gap, and legal services funding shortages, in Cleveland;
• a 2012 law grad on why he’s chosen a career in indigent defense (hint: it’s not the money);
• a special master appointed in the PA lawsuit over an underfunded indigent defense program;
• one Maryland prosecutor, under the weight of an overwhelming caseload, is pushing hard for $ to hire new attorneys.

The summaries:

• 5.24.12 – more on the recent announcement in NY State about requiring 50 pro bono hours from all bar license applicants.  While the larger policy debate about mandatory vs. voluntary pro bono will continue both in the context of this announcement and more broadly, New York’s top jurist is moving into the implementation stage: “Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman yesterday announced the creation of an advisory committee that will make recommendations on how to implement a new pro bono service requirement set to become a prerequisite in 2013 for admission to the New York bar.”  (Story from Corporate Counsel.)  And here’s more coverage from the New York Law Journal and the Lower Hudson Blog. 

• 5.23.12 – in Nevada, the state bar is divvying up about $300K in grant money among legal services providers.  (Story from KLAS in Las Vegas.)  As a personal aside, I have never told you about the bachelor party I attended in Las Vegas last year.  There are many good reasons for this.  Suffice to say I am still angry with the erstwhile bachelor for deciding that, at 35 years of age, we’d be able to contend with Las Vegas’s many attractions and excitements.  We were not.  The Vegas bachelor/ette party is a young person’s game.  What happens in Vegas does not stay in Vegas if “soul-crushing physical exhaustion” can be said to happen in Vegas.  Rather, soul-crushing physical exhaustion flies home on the plane with you and stays in your place for a week.  Never again.

• 5.22.12 – more mandatory pro bono, this time with a tropical-tax-shelter theme.  “All practicing attorneys in the Cayman Islands would be forced to work a certain number of hours for free or pay an annual fee of $2,500, according to a draft of the Legal Aid and Pro Bono Legal Services Bill, 2012.  The draft bill was made public by the attorney general’s office
last week.  According to a summary of the proposal, every attorney-at-law in the Islands to whom a practicing certificate has been issued “shall render pro bono legal services to persons in accordance with this legislation”, or face discipline under the territory’s Legal Practitioners Law.”  (Story from the Cay Compass.)

• 5.21.12 – legal woes caused by a natural disaster can exist long after the disaster itself has dissipated: “A Raleigh law firm is working with Legal Aid of North Carolina to find what problems people still have from Hurricane Irene.  [Irene struck North Carolina in August, 2011.]   The Daily Reflector of Greenville reported that Womble Carlyle and Legal Aid are asking individuals who may be struggling with recovery problems from last August’s storm to call a toll-free hotline. Such issues could include insurance claims, construction scams and mortgage-related problems.”  (Story from the Associated Press.)  

• 5.21.12 – a trend in Ohio which basically tracks national developments: far fewer death sentences as lawmakers, prosecutors, and court officials contend with the high cost of administering capital punishment programs along with changing sentiment about the death penalty’s effectiveness and propriety.  (Here’s the article from the Columbus Dispatch.)  And here’s some related follow-up…   

• 5.21.12 – ….of course one of the long-running criticisms of capital punishment stems from the risk of executing an innocent person.  Here’s an AP report on wrongful convictions: “More than 2,000 people who were falsely convicted of serious crimes have been exonerated in the United States in the past 23 years, according to a new archive compiled at two universities.  There is no official record-keeping system for exonerations of convicted criminals in the country, so academics set one up. The new national registry, or database, painstakingly assembled by the University of Michigan Law School and the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University School of Law, is the most complete list of exonerations ever compiled.  The database compiled and analyzed by the researchers contains information on 873 exonerations for which they have the most detailed evidence. The researchers are aware of nearly 1,200 other exonerations, for which they have less data.” 

• 5.20.12 – “One of the initiatives that Bibb County commissioners are considering for next year’s spending plan is a $600,000 request designed to expedite the legal process in local courts.  The request, made jointly by the Bibb County District Attorney’s Office and the Macon Circuit Public Defender’s Office, would allow each office to hire two additional attorneys as part of an Early Intervention Program. The program, officials say, would reduce the number of cases in the court system by allowing for a quicker disposition of nonviolent crimes.”  (Full story in the Macon Telegraph, a newspaper with an oddly Tolkienesque tagline: “Middle Georgia’s News Source.”)
   
• 5.20.12 – in Cleveland, the local bar president and board president of the Legal Aid Society of Cleveland make it clear just how much the organization’s funding situation has worsened, and explains how vital a service legal aid is in preserving justice.  (Op-ed in the Cleveland Plain Dealer.)   

• 5.20.12 – more Cleveland!  Jeffrey Stein, a 2012 NYU Law grad, explains his decision to pursue a career in indigent defense in the pages of the Cleveland Plain Dealer.  “It’s hiring season for public defender offices, which means it’s also the time when law students pursuing jobs in indigent defense enjoy the privilege of justifying their chosen career to skeptical — and, inevitably, disappointed — relatives (“You’re sure you wouldn’t rather make $160,000 as a first-year associate at a firm?”), friends (“But what if you know they’re guilty?”) and professors (“Ah, that’s . . . great.”).  Like the populations we serve, we who devote our professional lives to defending poor people are not a monolithic group. But, to answer your questions, here are some of the reasons I have chosen to commit my life to public defense….”  

• 5.19.12 – in the Pennsylvania lawsuit about alleged underfunding of indigent defense, a special master has been appointed to help sort things through.  (Story from the Citizens Voice of Luzerne County.) 

• 5.18.12 – in Charles County Maryland, the state’s attorney is pressing hard for funding to hire new attorneys.  “…[P]rosecutors are so overworked that they soon will have to pick and choose which cases to pursue in court, State’s Attorney Anthony B. Covington warned the Charles County commissioners Tuesday.  He asked the commissioners to give his office a $989,000 budget increase, or 41 percent, which would include enough to hire five new prosecutors in fiscal 2013, which begins July 1. Over three years, his office will require a $1.7 million increase, enough to hire a total of eight new attorneys and at least one researcher, he said. (Story from Southern Maryland News Online.)

By: Steve Grumm

Happy Friday, dear readers.  First, the Friday Trivia Question is a fairly simple one.  Four of the United “States” are actually commonwealths.  Which are they?

This week:

• bad news for Florida legal services providers;
• good news for Florida legal services providers;
• the House’s proposed LSC appropriation is $328 million;
• HUD money to Vermont Legal Aid;
• the tug of war for mortgage foreclosure settlement money in AZ;
• ABA Question of the Week: Should pro bono be required?
• this D.A. has remarkable success getting people out of jail(?);
• a pro bono appeal from a West Virginia justice;
• coverage and opinion about New York requiring 50 pro bono hours of bar applicants;
• indigent defense funding needed in Massachusetts;
• indigent defense funding needed in Tennessee;
• the increasing sophistication of corporate counsel pro bono programs;
• a report on the state of legal services funding nationwide;
• legislative efforts to raise funds for Louisiana indigent defense.

The summaries:

• 5.11.12 – the Orlando Sentinel looks at the problem of the “new poor” who are, in large numbers, seeking help from Broward and Palm Beach County legal services providers.  Those providers are laboring under extraordinary budget strains even while trying to deal with increased client demand.   

• 5.10.12 – on the other hand, class-action residuals will offer some financial help to cash-strapped legal services providers in the Sunshine State.  “More than $825,000 in unclaimed settlement money is about to be donated to eight local organizations. The donations came from four Tampa law firms, which said the organizations were selected because of their public service and consumer advocacy efforts. Recipients include Bay Area Legal Services and Gulf Coast Legal Services, two groups that provide free legal counseling for people who otherwise couldn’t afford it.”  (Story from Tampa Bay Online.)

• 5.10.12 – from the Legal Services Corporation: “The U.S. House of Representatives today approved funding legislation that provides $328 million for the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) in Fiscal Year 2013, after turning back two amendments that would have further cut or eliminated funding for the Corporation. Rep. Austin Scott’s (R-Ga.) proposed amendment to the 2013 Commerce, Justice, Science (CJS) Appropriations bill, which would have eliminated all funding for LSC, was defeated Tuesday night by a vote of 289-122.  The House also rejected, 246-165, a proposal from fellow Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland to cut the Corporation’s budget to $200 million.

• 5.9.12 – some good news in Vermont.  The US Department of Housing and Urban Development today awarded more than $324,987 to Vermont Legal Aid, Inc [VLA] to assist people in Vermont who believe they have been victims of housing discrimination.  VLA will use its grant to conduct a full service, coordinated and comprehensive fair housing program of testing, targeted private enforcement actions, broad systemic investigation, engagement with the land use and transportation planning process, and collaborative efforts to raise public awareness of housing discrimination….  The competitive grants are funded through HUD’s Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP), and are part of nearly $41.18 million distributed nationwide to 99 fair housing organizations and other non-profit agencies in 35 states and the District of Columbia.  (Story from Vermont Business Magazine.)

• 5.9.12 – a debate in Arizona over the government’s distribution of national mortgage class-action settlement funds highlights the fiscal tugs of war at play in many states as cash-starved governments and public interest advocates try to wrestle – I am really maximizing this metaphor – away as much funding as possible for their causes.  “State Attorney General Tom Horne said Tuesday he has to implement an Arizona law taking $50 million from a settlement paid by mortgage lenders over their loan practices though he thinks the transfer to help balance the budget is poor public policy.  Public interest law firms are threatening to sue to block the transfer, contending the money should be reserved for helping stressed homeowners and coping with the effects of the housing collapse.”  This greatly impacts some legal services providers who would use settlement funds to aid clients in foreclosure.  (Story from Bloomberg Businessweek.)

• 5.9.12 – the ABA Journal’s Question of the Week: “Many readers and law bloggers had a strong reaction to last week’s Law Day announcement by New York Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman that all would-be lawyers will have to perform 50 hours of pro bono before they can get a law license in the state…. So this week, we’d like to ask you: Should all lawyers be required to do pro bono or monetarily contribute to legal services offices?

• 5.8.12 – the L.A. Times looks at Dallas (Texas) District Attorney Craig Watkins’ nationally acclaimed work on exonerating the wrongfully convicted. 

• 5.8.12 – “West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals [J]ustice Brent Benjamin is imploring attorneys to come to the aid of Legal Aid of West Virginia…..’Before the [recent round of Legal Services Corporation budget] cuts, Legal Aid only had 51 attorneys covering 55 counties…,’ Benjamin noted.  [Legal Aid was subsequently force to lay off staff and close an office.]   ‘Since the most recent cut happened, they are doing the best they can with what they’ve got. We, as a Supreme Court, are stepping up to try to help them as well as help lower income West Virginians by going to the lawyers and asking directly for help.”  (Story from The State Journal, whose tagline is “West Virginia’s Only Business Paper.  Hot Damn!”  (I added the hot damn.  I should have gone into marketing.)

• 5.7.12 – some coverage stemming from New York Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman’s much-publicized announcement that, starting later this year, would-be bar admitees will have to perform 50 hours of pro bono service to be licensed in New York.
  • 5.7.12 – a New York Law Journal piece looks at the raft of implementation questions that must be answered (including an interesting one from our friend Tom Maligno about whether pro bono performed in law school would count toward the 50-hour requirement);
  • 5.7.12 – likewise, Pro Bono Institute prez Esther Lardent, writing in the National Law Journal, moves past the question of policy wisdom to look at practical implementation challenges.
  • 5.3.12 – former Association of Corporate Counsel official Susan Hacket is critical of Lippman’s proposal.

• 5.7.12 – in Massachusetts, the state house is working on a bill to shore up funding for the state’s indigent defense program, whose coffers are depleted.  (Story from the Boston Herald.)

• 5.5.12 – in Memphis, two public defenders make the case for remedying a “20-year recurring state budget miscalculation that has resulted in a multimillion-dollar funding shortage for public defense in Davidson and Shelby counties.”  (Story from the Memphis Commercial Appeal.)

• 5.4.12 – the Washington Post looks at the increasing sophistication of in-house pro bono programs: “In-house attorneys have historically gotten their hands on pro bono cases through legal aid groups or law firms on an individual basis, often without systematic backing from their employers. Now that model is changing, with several major corporations such as DuPont pushing to create more structured programs for attorneys and legal staff to do pro bono work by allocating company resources and personnel to handle client calls and paperwork, and setting benchmarks for how much time should be spent doing pro bono projects. (Capital One suggests 20 hours a year; at DuPont, it’s 2 percent of total work time).” 

• 5.4.12 -the Washington Council of Lawyers, DC’s public interest bar association (of which I’m a board member), has released a report on the beleaguered state of legal services funding nationwide.  (Read the 2012 Legal Services Funding Report.) 

• 5.4.12 – the New Orleans Times-Picayune looks at efforts in the Louisiana Senate to boost funding for public defense programs.

By: Steve Grumm

Happy Friday, dear readers.  A few items of general interest before we get to the news:

1. Last week I posed the first-ever Friday Trivia Question.  My execution was flaw…ful.  I asked folks to name the three English words beginning with “dw-“.  The source of authority for this question was my own, vague memory of having been asked the question in or around 2007.  The words I wanted were “dwarf,” dwell,” and “dwindle.”  A troublemaker from Cornell Law School whom I shan’t name Karen Comstock emailed to offer “dweeb” as an answer.  Frankly I hadn’t heard the word “dweeb” since this happened.  But, on account of my abiding sense of fairness, I dusted off a dictionary.  And I beheld an entry for “dweeb.”  Finding this entry was as surprising to me as first having found a dictionary.  So, “dweeb” is fair game.  And I am one. 
   • This experience taught me to take my trivia questioning more seriously.  Next week the Friday Trivia Question will become a fixture.  Yay for us.
2. Staying with the themes of education and edification, PSLawNet released our 2012 Summer Reading List yesterday.  We asked a handful of NALP members and some other public interest lawyers for both fiction and nonfiction reads that may be of interest to students on summer break.  Not surprisingly we ended up with a terrific list with options for public interest advocates of all ages, shapes, and sizes.  Thanks to those who pitched in.
3. Lastly I wish to note how profoundly undemocratic is the District’s professional baseball team when it comes to ticket sales.  The Nationals made news earlier this year when they schemed to avoid having their seats filled with Phillies fans during the series in DC this weekend.  Why would any team wish to keep Phillies fans out?  We’re so pleasant.  DO YOU HEAR ME??  WE’RE SO DAMNED PLEASANT!!!  Anyway, I have some respect for the sheer moxie of it, but this is probably not a gauntlet the Nats should have thrown down in front of Phils fans.  We’ll soon find out.        

There’s much public interest news to review this week.  In brief:

• pro bono required to practice in NY State;
• ‘Nova Law grad secures a Fulbright to work on anti-trafficking issues;
• a Louisiana measure to boost defender funding may fall short;
• both the Philly DA and PD are seeking more $ from City Council;
• why the veto of state funding for legal services in Florida is bad;
• ditto;
• “Another Crisis Looming for Legal Aid?” in Connecticut;
• also in Connecticut, how the state’s dealing with a huge DV caseload;
• how serious a problem is law grads’ educational debt?;
• politics and policy affecting Houston’s nascent public defense program;
• Wisconsin pro bono rules relaxed to allow lawyers to help after natural disasters.

The summaries:

• 5.1.12 – pro bono will soon be required for a license to practice in New York.   The AP reports: “New York will become the first state to require lawyers to do 50 hours of pro bono work as a condition for getting a license starting next year, Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman said Tuesday.  With about 10,000 people passing the New York Bar Exam annually, Lippman said that means about a half-million hours of free legal work yearly, mostly from law students. That should help fill ‘the justice gap’ for the poor, working poor ‘and what has recently been described as the near poor’ whose needs have risen sharply in a tough economy, he said.”
  • additional coverage from the New York Law Journal;
  • a New York Times editorial is supportive.
  • reaction and questions from folks in the legal services and law school communities, including the question about how these thousands of pro bono hours will be administered, tracked, etc. (from the Lower Hudson Valley Blog).

• 5.1.12 – a graduating Villanova Law student’s passion for working on anti-trafficking issues has netted him a Fulbright scholarship.  John Rafferty’s work has taken him from the Navy to a public interest scholarship at Villanova Law, and will next move him to Quito, Ecuador to work with the International Organization on Migration.  Pretty impressive.  (Story in the Main Line News.) 

• 5.1.12 – In Louisiana, a bill which raises court filing fees to generate extra funding for public defenders’ offices was diluted via an amendment in the house.  It may not provide enough funding for some offices to avoid layoffs and close budget gaps.  (Story from the Daily Iberian.)

• 5.1.12 – in Philly, both the public defender and DA are seeking additional funding from City Council as the body puts together the next fiscal year’s budget.  “Chief Public Defender Ellen Greenlee says the mayor’s proposed budget gives the Defender Association the same money for the fiscal year beginning July first that it has this year.  Greenlee says that’s unacceptable and without new money for almost two dozen new attorneys the office cannot continue.”  Story from WHYY. 

• 5.1.12 – Community Legal Services of Mid-Florida’s board chair explains why Gov. Rick Scott’s veto of funding for legal services will hurt the state.  “This is not a partisan issue. A Republican-controlled legislature passed the Florida Access to Civil Legal Assistance Act in 2002. Republican lawmakers have provided funds each year — up to $2.5 million — for the FACLA program.  Scott’s veto means that the number of legal aid attorneys statewide will drop from 400 to fewer than 280 next year, and the number will shrink even more in 2014 — even as the demand for services is growing….  On top of that, Florida TaxWatch (which is no friend of government spending) conducted a study in 2010 that found that for every $1 the FACLA program spent, nearly $14 in economic activity was generated. That means that the $2 million that Gov. Scott didn’t think was needed would not only have provided desperately needed legal assistance for the poor, but would also have generated nearly $28 million in economic activity.”  (Op-ed in the Daytona Beach News-Journal.)

• 4.30.12 – the funding plight of Tampa-based Bay Area Legal Services: “Funding for Bay Area Legal Services, which helps the poor navigate the civil court system, is at an all-time low, forcing the agency to reach into the legal community for help.  An unprecedented $1 million in cuts this year translates to a 14 percent reduction from last year’s budget. Nearly every funding source, including federal, state and local contributions and a trust fund set up by The Florida Bar Foundation, has reduced its contribution.”  (Story from Tampa Bay Online.) 

• 4.30.12 – a piece in the Connecticut Law Tribune homes in on the fiscal woes confronting legal services providers in the Nutmeg State., asking “Another Crisis Looming for Legal Aid?”  (I would argue that there’s been a sustained crisis since about 2009.)  As for state IOLTA funding, while it topped out at $20 million in 2007, it’s projected to produce less than $ 1million this year.

•  while Connecticut’s legal services providers feel funding strains, the states courts feel hte strains imposed by the domestic violence caseload.   Stakeholders met recently to explore “the unique pressures that upward of 28,000 domestic-violence cases per year exert on prosecutors, public defenders, family-relations counselors, victim’s advocates and judges in the state courthouses. Statewide, 30 percent of all criminal cases arise from domestic violence.”  Courtrooms with DV-only dockets have been helpful in boosting efficiency.  Story from the Hartford Courant. 

• Are school loans the next “debt bomb”?  I could do without the headline hyperbole, but a law management expert lays out the frightening student debt numbers that have become the norm for today’s grads and wonders what impact the weight of this burden will have.  (Here’s the Minnesota Lawyer piece.) 

• a two-part series by a Houston Chronicle columnist looks at the lawyer who most staunchly opposes the operation of Harris County’s new public defense office.  The assigned-counsel system was in place for years in Houston. It worried some observers who saw cronyism and unfairness in its administration.  But even as the public defense office has taken root, some judges still refuse to refer cases there.  Part one and part two.

• we’ll end where we began: pro bono.  Wisconsin’s high court has loosened restrictions on pro bono practice rules with the intended effect of allowing more pro bono lawyers to act in a natural disaster’s wake.  From the State Bar of Wisconsin: [The approved petition] “will amend Supreme Court rules by allowing out-of-state lawyers to practice pro bono temporarily in Wisconsin after a after a major disaster in Wisconsin.  The rule will also allow such lawyers to provide legal services in Wisconsin related to the lawyer’s practice in a jurisdiction affected by a major disaster.  The petition, filed jointly by the Board of Administrative Oversight and the State Bar of Wisconsin, is patterned after a model rule adopted by the American Bar Association after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita….”

By: Steve Grumm

Happy Friday, dear readers.  Today is the 140th anniversary of Arbor Day, which has its roots, so to speak, in a Druidic tree-worship ritual.  I made that up.  It is the 140th.  But we’re just supposed to plant trees, not worship them.  Unless that’s your thing.  Anyway, for the occasion here’s the Screaming Trees’ 90s indie anthem “Nearly Lost You”, a favorite from my flannel-clad adolescence.  Great drums.  Blistering guitar lick.  (Far be it from me to give credence to gender stereotypes, but I predict the fellas will like this one more than the ladies.)

Unrelated: huzzah(!) to our partners at Street Law, Inc., who celebrated a 40th anniversary here in DC on Wednesday.  Special shout-out to exec. director Lee Arbetman, who, based on the photographic evidence I’ve heard about, was an even more dapper dresser in Street Law’s early days than now.  (Congrats, Lee, Megan and company!)

Friday Trivia: there are three words in the English language that begin with “dw”.  What are they?   

Now to business.  This week in access-to-justice, funding, pro bono, and related news:

• the websites of for-profit AZ law firms can use the ol’ dot-org, says ethics opinion;
• in Spokane, WA, client demand for legal aid rising but funding is a challenge;
• the NY AG directs $3 million to legal services on foreclosure matters;
• last week’s White House Forum on the State of Legal Assistance;
• $450K in grants from the NY Bar Foundation split amongst 67 groups;
• Two grants will help U. of Wisconsin law students help vets in need;
• funding challenges confronting the Vermont Bar Foundation and legal services community;
• in the UK, the House of Lords still opposed cuts to legal aid funding;
• Florida governor’s veto of $2 million legal services appropriation draws lots of reaction;
• support for state funding of legal services in Connecticut;
• the LSC board chair on closing the justice gap;
• Illinois AG directs $20 million to legal services.  Nice way to close.

The summaries:

• 5.1.12 (from the future!) – the forthcoming ABA Journal runs a short piece about an Arizona state bar ethics opinion that allows for-profit law firms to use “.org” website domain extensions.  I predict that the “.org” will never, ever be misused by a for-profit outfit providing “legal assistance services” or some such.  No chance.  Right? 

• 4.26. 12 – the Spokane Journal of Business looks at the increased demand for legal services within the local, low-income community even as providers struggle with funding pressures.  (Password-protected.  Sorry.)
  • Personal aside: I gained my first exposure to civil legal aid in Washington State while working as a Jesuit Volunteer with the Northwest Justice Project’s Yakima field office.  One of my fondest Eastern Washington memories is running Spokane’s annual Bloomsday race, a 7.5-miler that, amazingly, draws upwards of 50,000 people.  It’s a beautiful course. 

• 4.25.12 – the New York Attorney general directed $3 million to be shared by 31 public interest law offices for foreclosure defense funding.  The funding comes from settlements over questionable mortgage lending practices.  (Here’s the Legal News Line story.)

• 4.24.12 – last week’s White House Forum on the State of Legal Assistance gathered access-to-justice stakeholders from the legal services world, law firms, and government.  (Read the full summary from the DOJ’s Access to Justice Initiative.)
  • Phyllis Holmen, executive director of the Georgia Legal Services Program, recounts her experience participating in the forum: “Six of us were chosen from around the country, directors of legal aid and legal services organizations accustomed to toiling quietly in the hinterlands. We work on behalf of low-income folks with the kind of life-and-death legal problems that the poor face: the plague of domestic violence, the near impossibility of maintaining a family structure in the face of grinding poverty, the gut-wrenching choices that have to be made between paying medical bills or buying groceries.  The opportunity to tell the president of the United States why we think our work is important was unprecedented. It was a chance to speak at the highest level of our government about the cause to which I have devoted my career: justice for all.”  (From the Daily Report.)

• 4.24.12 – “Sixty-seven organizations across New York State have received grants totaling $450,000, The New York Bar Foundation announced today….Thirteen grants will support Youth Court activities, while others will support programs that assist domestic violence victims, low-income immigrants, public service attorneys, vulnerable senior citizens and incarcerated women.”  There’s a slew of organizations receiving grant money, all of which are listed in the story from the Saugerties Post Star.

• 4.24.12 – “Two new grants will help University of Wisconsin law students gain valuable experience while helping veterans who need legal assistance.  The two Pro Bono Initiative grants for $5,000 each come from the State Bar Legal Assistance Committee and have been awarded to Dane County Veterans Legal Clinic to start a free legal clinic and to the UW Law School Pro Bono Program to expand its efforts to involve more law students in pro bono activities.”  (Story from the University of Wisconsin’s website.)

• 4.24.12 – “[L]ike so many organizations, the Bar Foundation has found itself with less money to give out in the past few years, while the need for the kind of legal services it helps fund has risen.  Vermont Supreme Court Associate Justice John Dooley is a member of the board of directors of the Vermont Bar Foundation. He spoke with VPR’s Jane Lindholm about the financial challenges faced by the organization. (Listen to the interview on Vermont Public Radio.) 
  • As an aside, when I was a 3L my dad and I went skiing in Vermont.  We stayed at a family-owned place called the Swiss Inn.  Turns out the owner was a native Philadelphian (like me and Pa Grumm) and he owned a couple of the Jersey Shore video-game arcades that sucked quarters from my pockets like a vacuum cleaner when I was a youth.  He was very generous to me at the Swiss Inn afternoon happy hour.  My quarters, after all, had paid for his inn. 

• 4.23.12 – in the UK, the House of Lords still refuses to go along with broad-based proposed cuts to the legal aid system. Watch the video on BBC.  Watching British legislative sessions is downright enjoyable.  Ever seen the SNL spoofs? 

• 4.22.12 – all kinds of coverage about Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s veto of $2 million in proposed funding that would have supported the financially embattled legal services community.
  • A News Chief editorial, “Veto Takes Jobs, Help for Poor,” is critical of the governor’s action.
  • “Budget Cuts Impact Legal Aid Society of Palm Beach County” is a WPTV story.
  • The Palm Beach Post runs “Lawyers for the Needy Decry Florida Veto.” 

• 4.21.12 – “Shelby County Public Defender Stephen Bush claims state finance officials have been misinterpreting state law regarding funding for the public defenders in Shelby and Davidson counties for 20 years and that the offices are owed $45.2 million — $28.4 million for Shelby and $16.8 million for Davidson.  The public defenders, who appeared before a state legislative committee this week, are asking the state legislature to restore that funding and fix the error going forward.”  (Here’s more in the Commercial Appeal.)

• 4.20.12 – a Hartford Courant op-ed makes the case for a legislative measure that would boost funding for legal aid in the Nutmeg State: “The Judicial Branch has recognized the seriousness of this problem. It has proposed legislation that would use increased court fees to raise $5.2 million for legal aid — enough to maintain the current level of services. There has been broad bi-partisan support to address the legal aid funding crisis. And the Judiciary Committee of the General Assembly has approved the bill on a 45-to-1 vote.  The pending legislation would successfully restructure funding for legal aid, and provide a future anchor to fund access to justice. It is vital that the Connecticut legislature approve this measure. Our system of justice depends on it.

• 4.20.12 – writing in The Hill, LSC Board chair John Levi, who has been very active in his public advocacy of LSC’s mission, explores the “widening justice gap, and why we must close it.”
  • Speaking of closing gaps, as noted last week a House proposal would cut LSC funding from the current, FY12 figure of $348 million –  which itself represents a ~14% cut from the FY11 figure – to $328 million.  A Senate proposal would ratchet funding back up to $402 million.  To put the House proposal in context: in 1981 LSC’s appropriation was about $321 million.  If that figure simply kept up with inflation, LSC’s funding in 2011 should have been over $800 million.  We’ll be lucky to get to half of that this year.

• 4.18.12 – great funding news out of Illinois, from the state attorney general’s website: “Attorney General Lisa Madigan announced that $20 million in funding from the national foreclosure settlement reached this year will be given to legal assistance programs in Illinois to address the current foreclosure crisis and to provide access to the justice system for homeowners and renters.” 

By: Steve Grumm

There has been much more than the normal share of good funding news this week.  (My weekly bulletin tomorrow may, for the first time in memory, contain more good funding news than bad.)  Today’s item comes from the Empire State.  The New York attorney general directed $3 million to be shared by 31 public interest law offices for foreclosure defense funding.  The fuding comes from settlements over questionable mortgage lending practices.  (Here’s the Legal News Line story.)

Here’s a complete tangent which is prompted by “New York + Mortgage.”  If you want a thoroughly informative yet easy-to-digest explanation of the events leading to the 2008 Wall Street crisis, do yourself a solid and watch the first two parts of this PBS Frontline series, “Money, Power & Wall Street” (parts 3/4 to air later).  This is exactly what “nonfiction television” should be about.

by Kristen Pavón

Yesterday, Gov. Rick Scott vetoed just over $142 million in line-items before signing Florida’s $70 billion budget. The budget makes deep cuts to higher education, Medicaid, other health care services, and legal services.

As a Floridian, I know how painful these cuts are and how much worse things will get in Florida as a result.

One veto in particular seems especially egregious — a $1.5 million veto for the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence. . . made during Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

The Legislature allotted the funds to the organization in order to support 30 rape crisis centers as they face impending reductions in collections, which currently is the bulk of their budgets.

The cut to the Florida Council was just one of the many health projects that Scott used his line-item veto power to eliminate from this year’s $70 billion budget. . . .

Scott has said publicly that he stands by his vetoes because he believes the programs he eliminated “weren’t a good use of taxpayers’ money and did not serve a statewide need.” He has also said he “gave each project equal and fair consideration.” (Read more here.)

Gov. Rick Scott’s veto also hit Florida’s already distressed legal services community hard.

A day after the governor vetoed $142 million from the budget, officials at an organization that provides legal help for low income Floridians said Scott’s decision will mean a 25 percent reduction in the number of attorneys available for legal assistance in the coming year. A year later, the number of available attorneys will drop even further. . . .

. . . [a] spokeswoman for Gov. Rick Scott, said there was not a clear justification for the size of the appropriation or the need for recurring funds. The spokeswoman, Jackie Schutz, also said the program has other funding sources on which it can rely during tough budget times.

“While the governor believes in the right for everyone to have representation, he doesn’t necessarily believe in funding programs with recurring funds in these economic times,” Schutz said. . . .

Senate Democratic Leader Nan Rich, who also announced this week she is running for governor, said the veto was short-sighted and comes at a time when lower income Floridians are disproportionately feeling the brunt of economic woes – foreclosures, evictions, denial of government benefits. The cutting of legal aid at a time of rising need is especially painful.

“We pride ourselves in this country on people having access to the courts,” Rich said Wednesday. “This decision flies in the face of that commitment.”

Read the rest here.

I think I’ll turn to a classic saying to end this post, “If you have nothing nice to say, don’t say anything at all.”

I’ll leave you with that. Thoughts?