Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Court considers questions about foreign legal consultants

By: dmc-admin//February 16, 2009//

Court considers questions about foreign legal consultants

By: dmc-admin//February 16, 2009//

Listen to this article

The Wisconsin Supreme Court acknowledges that the practice of law is becoming more global, but it is not quite ready to give legal professionals from other countries the power to advise clients in the state.

A petition by the Board of Bar Examiners calls for creation of Supreme Court Rule 40.056 which would allow lawyers from other countries to consult Wisconsin clients on international law, but not United States law.

On Feb. 9, the court requested more information regarding cost, licensing and the application process for certification of foreign legal consultants in Wisconsin.

In his presentation to the court, BBE Vice-Chair James L. Huston suggested that the rule will benefit firms and businesses in Wisconsin by allowing them to bring in someone with specific knowledge of a county or region.

“A registered legal consultant could work with clients on the basis of being in tune to laws of other countries,” Huston said. “The [State] Bar cannot make that same representation.”

But some members of the court questioned the scope of expertise a consultant could claim and how much experience is necessary before certification.

The justices voted 5-2 to maintain the five-year practice requirement preceding application to become a legal consultant in the state, consistent with language in the petition.

Justice N. Patrick Crooks suggested that a three-year requirement would be consistent with proof of practice standards for attorneys in other states, but Justice Patience Drake Roggensack said that timeframe may be too limited for some countries.

“I tend to go with five [years] because I am uneasy not knowing what the practice of law entails in some countries,” Roggensack said.

Members of the court also noted that the scope of expertise a foreign legal consultant can claim needs to be better defined in the petition. As submitted, someone from Mexico could consult on matters of French law, and would be subject to the rules of ethics in Wisconsin.

While consultants would not be permitted to practice law in Wisconsin or take the bar, they would be “adjunct members” of the bar, according to language in the petition.

Potential consultants would be required to pay the same $850 non-resident fee attorneys do for admission on proof of practice. But foreign consultants would also have to pay annual bar dues and could be subject to additional charges during the BBE’s investigation of character and fitness.

Several justices also questioned whether Wisconsin would include a “re-certification” fee every three years, similar to a rule in Minnesota.

BBE Director John Kosobucki said a fee to renew credentials had not been discussed, but he expects to meet with the State Bar to further define membership obligations for consultants.

“We’ll have to talk about [the individual] being considered as an adjunct member of the State Bar and does this then impact Supreme Court Rule 10.03 which has various membership categories,” Kosobucki said. “So that may require a change in that Supreme Court rule as well.”

No timetable was given for when a revised petition will come before the court.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests