In my last two columns, I criticized the State Bar of Wisconsin Family Law Section and the Wisconsin Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers for failing to weigh in on the significant applications of two appellate cases in our area of law, even though they were not primarily family law cases.
In both instances, neither organization sought to file an amicus brief or even seemed to be aware of the cases or their potential implications. One lawyer, active in both organizations, took me to task for my comments, asking why I was “publicly flogging my colleagues” instead of making positive suggestions.
He and I have collegially agreed to disagree, but the discussion got me thinking about what bar associations can do to better serve their members.
My next two columns will address that concern.
For starters, I’m not the only one questioning the activities – or inactivity – of bar associations.
The fact that three of the four last elections for president-elect of the State Bar of Wisconsin have resulted in a majority of the voters choosing the voluntary bar candidate speaks for itself.
But also, more recently, in a column in this paper entitled “State Bar is Squandering Dues Again,” (WLJ, Aug. 20, 2009) David Ziemer took the State Bar to task for spending its members dues on developing a logo and a slogan.
Ziemer had trouble figuring out how the logo and slogan “will enable the Bar to provide better service to Wisconsin attorneys.”
The purpose of my comments (and I suspect those of David as well) was not to “flog” anyone for the purpose of flogging – either the volunteer attorneys in leadership positions or staff members – but rather, to pose the larger question of whether these associations are providing valuable services to us, their members.
The cost of ‘free’ legal services
While bar associations have many purposes, such as aiding courts in the administration of justice, a central purpose is to help lawyers make a living.
The economic downturn has not bypassed lawyers. People are still getting divorced, but getting paid is more of a challenge. Yet instead of helping lawyers make a living, bar associations seem to be doing the opposite.
Consider that the Waukesha County Bar Association sponsors a free “Self Help Center,” which, among other services, provides instructions for people to represent themselves in a divorce. Also, its Family Legal Clinic offers 20 minutes of free legal advice with a family law attorney. Yet, “clients” of the clinic have told me that the appointments sometimes go far beyond 20 minutes and simple legal information.
Similarly, the Milwaukee Bar Association, with great fanfare, has opened a “Justice Center,” paid for and staffed by lawyers.
I support legal services for the poor and working poor. Yet in both instances, the people coming for legal services are not means-tested. That means that rich people can get free legal services. No kidding. While many – perhaps most – of the “clients” utilizing such services undoubtedly cannot afford any meaningful amount of legal services, others will be pleased to take for free what they would otherwise have to pay for.
It’s as if the American Medical Association paid for and provided doctors to staff a medical clinic in River Hills that provides free medical care, regardless of need.
In the “Chair’s message” for the Wisconsin Journal of Family Law, the section chair has been exhorting lawyers to do more pro bono work. Certainly, doing pro bono work is praiseworthy. But, how does the work benefit the profession that is supposed to be served by the section? Good P.R. for lawyers? Perhaps, but given the perception of lawyers in society (and divorce lawyers in particular), it doesn’t seem to have done much good.
Interestingly, most doctors seem to provide few, if any, free services. Yet, their public image far exceeds that of lawyers. www.gallup.com/poll/112264/Nurses-Shine-While-Bankers-Slump-Ethics-Ratings.aspx
Perhaps by promoting that we give away our services for free, we are also promoting what we think our services are worth.
This is not to say that there should not be free legal clinics or that lawyers should not be encouraged to do pro bono. However, bar associations should not be asking its members to give their services away for free to people who can afford to pay. This dilutes the services available to those who can’t afford to pay, and takes money out of the pockets of the associations’ own members.
Is that really their purpose?
![[Print]](http://wislawjournal.com/wp-content/plugins/dmc_sociable_toolbar/print.png)
![[Email]](http://wislawjournal.com/wp-content/plugins/dmc_sociable_toolbar/email_2.png)
October 13th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Consider that free legal clinics provide opportunity for young or otherwise green attorneys to practice, and practice in a time when there are few paying legal job opportunities. That is just one way, besides functioning as a positive image builder, that free legal services help our profession. It isn’t all about getting paid. That is the problem with lawyers who support the voluntary bar. They don’t consider, or care, about the effect it will have on the services that the Wisconsin State Bar puts on.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Right on, Greg! There are alot of people in this state who seem to think that attorneys spend their time sitting around and wishing there were more pro bono opportunities out there. None of these people has ever owned their own law practice. If they had, they would know there are more than enough such opportunities– they are called potential clients who can’t afford the retainer, and they have to be turned away every day.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
There needs to be a distinction made between free legal clinics and firms which provide representation to low-income clients. I work for one of the latter: Legal Action of Wisconsin, Inc., where we vigorously screen our clients. Rest assured there are no rich folks getting our help. You are correct that the clinics don
October 13th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Does anybody really believe that rich people are seeking lawyers at free clinics?
Wisconsin lawyers must deal with the fact the Wisconsin Supreme Court believes in free legal services and taxes each lawyer $50.00 a year so it can play Santa Claus and give the money away.
Doctors are encouraged to rake people over the coals and squeeze as much money out of patients as possible. Our Court encourages pro bono. So what are lawyers supposed to do when their governing body takes this approach and doctors are free to go crazy making money, because if “insurance” pays for it it’s “free.”
Lawyers rank lower than doctors? Could eight years of lawyer bashing by war criminal George Bush, a disbarred liar Bill Clinton, and two decades of constant misinformation from insurance companies and Wall Street have anything to do with that? Definitely! Obey the law, why would a President do that? Bush declared war on lawyers and that war continues on today. The idea that lawyers can fight back against the monied interests who actually run this country is laughable.
October 15th, 2009 at 9:49 am
We all know Gregg and Dave and know that they are not the curmudgeons their comments might suggest. They are well-intentioned, honest thinkers who are candid about issues that our profession face, and not afraid to post them and subject themselves to scrutiny from WLJ readers.
So we know that they don’t mean to imply what some people might read from their comments. They know that a wealthy person living in River Hills facing a divorce can’t take advantage of a self-help clinic because the advice we dispense is too basic to help someone who has a portfolio and a retirement plan. Those of you who volunteer (and I’ll bet both Gregg and David have thought about volunteering) know that by and large (way by and large) the people we serve are people who really don’t have the option of consulting a lawyer because the profession has abandoned that part of the market — it pays too little. Fortunately we can provide enough service at the self-help center to get them started on what proves to be a fairly uncomplicated process, but one that is nonetheless intimidating to so many. Ask the family court commissioners in Milwaukee and Waukesha counties — the self-help centers have proven to be a god-send.
Likewise, I’m sure Gregg and Dave would both agree that we don’t fulfill our noblest ambition as a profession by counting clients who agree to pay and then refuse as “pro bono” clients.
And lastly I’m sure they would agree that one challenge our profession faces is competition from non-lawyers who seek to provide legal services at a lower price to the consumer. What would be so bad about that? The only thing that bars them from the market are laws against practicing without a license. The State Bar defends that license, not because it is a henchman in enforcing anticompetitive laws, but because the State Bar also stands for what we stand for: That the practice of law is more than a trade — it’s a profession, one distinguishing feature of which (a distinction that cannot be claimed by any other profession, not doctors, not teachers, not accountants) is our pledge as a profession to see that all people receive legal services whether they can afford them or not.
If we really made good on that pledge — if Gregg’s and Dave’s next columns were like Carlton Standsbury’s — think about how well we might do in those polls . . .
October 15th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
judge sankovitz, I think the failure to communicate here can be explained by the fact that i was a sole practitioner for nine years, and greg has his own small firm. you were in a large firm when you practiced and Mr. Lundin works for legal aid. For attorneys like greg and I, we are inundated in pro bono opportunities. they present themselves every day. you have to be extremely selective about who you help or you will soon be indigent yourself. the question greg is asking is, what do bar associations do for its members? when you are already awash in pro bono opportunities that would send you to the poorhouse if you pursued them, and bar associations set up free clinics, the answer is simple — the association is not doing anything for you.
October 20th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
I used to volunteer at the free legal clinic in Eau Claire, in areas involving real estate and probate matters.
Unhappily for me, almost all of the people who saw me were of substantial means. No one was ‘poor’ as we apply that term in pro bono cases.
I quit volunteering at the clinic for the reason it wasn’t screening people to ensure volunteered lawyer time was spent assisting those who were in financial difficulties or otherwise unable to hire a lawyer for their private civil matter.