Access Granted

Listen to this article

“We recognize the needs that are out there and ultimately, that trumps everything else.” D. Michael Guerin Past-President

It took the Wisconsin State Bar Board of Governors all of two minutes to unanimously pass a motion praising the work of the Access to Justice Study Committee for their development and presentation of a comprehensive report on the unmet legal needs of low-income people in the state.

Adoption of the 12 recommendations contained within the report took substantially longer, as the board debated elements of the proposal for nearly two hours.

Ultimately, the Board of Governors voted to support all of the proposals at its May 8 meeting and took what many considered a progressive approach in policy making. Further discussion will take place regarding implementation of the proposals.

“If the board doesn’t embrace this right now, the Legislature, the courts and other members of the bar and our communities will move forward with this and the Bar will be left behind,” said Judge Richard J. Sankovitz, who chaired the Access to Justice Study Committee.

The original motion to support the report and all of the recommendations passed through the Executive Committee, 6-5, but the Board of Governors divided it into two motions. The first proposed support of the report, and passed unanimously.

The second, which eventually passed 22-13, called for adoption of nine of the recommendations with omission of those points referring to a permanent annual assessment on attorneys and allowance of paralegals to perform lawyerly duties in court.

Gov. Gretchen G. Viney was one of several who took issue with recommendation four, which suggested the Supreme Court modify ethics rules and procedure to allow paralegals to perform in the courtroom on a limited basis, in the interest of low-income clients.

While implementation of any recommendations are months and likely years away, clarification of how much legal power a paralegal would be allowed was a valid argument, according to Gov. Grant F. Langley.

“I thought the concerns expressed about paralegals were valid concerns and I’m sure that’s an issue that will be carefully discussed in the future,” said Langley, who, like many on the board, opposed wholesale adoption of the recommendations.

A second sticking point was language in proposals which support a permanent annual assessment on attorneys for legal services for the poor.

Recommendation 10(B) suggested both the State Bar support a “permanent moderate mandatory assessment upon lawyers and judges to fund civil legal services.”

For some, the proposal renewed distain for the Wisconsin Trust Account Found-ation (WisTAF) $50 annual assessment.

“Some of these proposals, including the assessment, are opposite the position this board has taken in the past and there needs to be discussion as to why we should reverse our position now,” said Gov. Gwendolyn G. Connolly.

Others maintained that adoption of the recommendations would not undo what was done and the need to look to the future should supersede dwelling on the past.

“Nothing about WisTAF is temporary at this point, and the recommendations in the report are gratuitous in that regard,” said Gov. Marla J. Stephens. “People who lost need to know how to lose and objections should not pertain to this report.”

A third motion was made by Stephens to adopt the omitted recommendations and carried by a 26-15 vote. In the final motion, the board approved a recommendation which suggested the Supreme Court modify rules to allow paralegals to perform limited lawyerly duties, as well as recommendations related to an annual assessment.

Adoption of all 12 of the committee’s recommendations was paramount, according to President-elect Thomas J. Basting, who noted further discussion among the appropriate committees will solidify implementation procedures.

“If we sent this report back, it would have died,” said Basting. “It would have been another year or two before it appeared before the board again.”

Analysis of the recommendations in portions was a wise and necessary process according to Past-President D. Michael Guerin who appointed the Access to Justice Study Committee in 2005.

“We recognize the needs that are out there and ultimately, that trumps everything else,” said Guerin. “I’m very pleased and very proud of the bar association, and of the board for taking the time to debate it, because it’s a time-consuming issue and sometimes you have to take unpopular positions on these things.

Some people recognized that there are some flaws, but those flaws will be worked out because we have a good committee that put a good report together and we should all get behind it.”