by Richard S. Granat
The New York State Bar has withdrawn its proposed resolution regarding online legal document preparation from consideration by the American Bar Association House of Delegates because of widespread opposition by other ABA entities. These other ABA entities were not given notice of the proposed resolution and did not have sufficient time to develop their substantive positions and make their views known. However, the New York State Bar is intending to resubmit the same resolution to the House of Delegates for approval at the ABA mid-year meeting (February 2019) in Las Vegas.
Written by Ridhi Shetty
For-profit legal referral will be prohibited by a new proposed ethics opinion by the State Bar of Michigan Professional Ethics Committee that states that for-profit legal referral services violate fee-sharing prohibitions under the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct. Responsive Law has issued testimony opposing the proposed ethics opinion, urging the Committee to allow attorney participation in for-profit legal referral services to improve public access to justice.
by Richard S. Granat
Online legal document providers would be regulated under a resolution proposed by the New York State Bar Association and the New York County Lawyers Association to the American Bar Association for approval at its annual meeting in Chicago this August.
The proposal was submitted without providing an opportunity for comment and review by interested parties and other ABA entities. An annotated version of the Resolution with Responsive Law's comments can be found here.
by Ridhi Shetty
Responsive Law has issued comments to the Virginia State Bar Standing Committee on Legal Ethics regarding proposed amendments to the bar’s rules on unauthorized practice of law (UPL). Responsive Law urged the Committee to amend the UPL rules to require a showing of consumer harm rather than making a blanket prohibition on services provided by non-lawyers. Doing so could create more affordable legal services for low- and moderate-income people and would also reduce the potential antitrust liability of the Virginia State Bar.
by Bridget Fogarty Gramme
In February of this year, Assemblymember Randy Voepel, a Republican from Santee, California, introduced AB 2483, a bill that proposes to require the State of California to indemnify members of its occupational licensing boards for antitrust damages if the alleged conduct took place in their “official” capacity as board members. It also proposes to declare that treble damage awards are not considered “punitive,” thus complying with the state’s indemnification laws.