Making Justice More Accessible

USC Gould professor testifies on making justice more accessible

By Gilien Silsby

USC Gould Professor Gillian Hadfield recently testified before the State Bar of California on making justice more accessible by licensing independent paralegals. These special practitioners would perform a portion of the legal work that today requires a high-priced attorney.

Hadfield, a law and economics professor, told a special working group of the bar’s board of trustees that most Californians are locked out of the justice system because they can’t afford an attorney, which costs at least $200 an hour. She estimated that California households face a minimum of 12.5 million legal issues every year, which translates to $2.5 billion annually in lawyer fees.

The State Bar panel follows Washington and New York states’ lead by investigating the feasibility of developing and implementing standards for creating a limited license to practice law. The Washington Supreme Court adopted a rule allowing for “limited license legal technicians,” and New York’s chief judge has endorsed a similar idea. If approved in California, such a license would allow certified providers to deliver limited, discrete legal services to consumers in defined legal areas.

Other professional fields have offered similar solutions to keeping costs down, such as allowing nurse practitioners to provide some medical services instead of doctors.

“This approach benefits practically everyone up to the 1 percent,” Hadfield said. “Few people can afford an attorney at $200, minimum, an hour. This can benefit the poor, but also the middle-income Americans who may be facing foreclosure proceedings on their home, a child custody issue or an employment problem.”

State Bar trustee Loren Kieve of San Francisco said during the hearing, “I think we have clear evidence of unmet needs in the legal field. I think we would be abdicating our responsibility if we did not move forward with this.”

Hadfield cautioned the bar against simply licensing sole-practitioner paralegals as “lawyer lites.” Instead, the legal system’s regulatory approach needs to dramatically shift.

“We need to make a fundamental change in the way the judiciary regulates the practice of law,” she said. “We cannot possibly solve the access to justice problem without changes in our regulatory approach.”

Hadfield is a proponent of the British model, which authorizes a wide variety of professionals, organizations and corporations to provide legal help. She advocates allowing practitioners to work for corporations to cut costs on overhead and other inefficiencies.

“Online services in England allow you to pay a flat fee for a particular service,” Hadfield said. “For example, you might pay $200 for the simple management of a divorce. Or $230 to file the documents needed for a motion for child support change. What you really want is for the independent paralegals to work for corporations, similar to tax preparers at H&R Block. The idea is we need to get nonlegal costs out of the hourly rate charged by lawyers. Let an organization with scale and technology do it better.”

Hadfield has long advocated training non-Juris Doctor (JD) professionals to provide legal assistance to supplement the services of traditional JD-trained lawyers. Last October, she testified on the matter for the chief judge in New York. Hadfield, a member of the Legal Advisory Council for LegalZoom, also supports expanding the scope for similar low-cost online services to make legal assistance convenient, affordable and available to the general population.

The California State Bar appears to be moving closer to such crucial changes. At its hearing this month in San Francisco, the working group will recommend the creation of a practice board for limited licenses. They expect to post a draft governance structure by next week.

“I came out of this session feeling more hopeful than I expected,” Hadfield said. “If California can do this, it really moves the needle nationally. Washington state is moving ahead and New York is moving forward, and now there’s a real opportunity for California to make a significant leap.”

USC Gould professor testifies on making justice more accessible

By Gilien Silsby

Professor Gillian Hadfield of the USC Gould School of Law recently testified before the State Bar of California on making justice more accessible by licensing independent paralegals. These special practitioners would perform a portion of the legal work that today requires a high-priced attorney.

Hadfield, a law and economics professor, told a special working group of the bar’s board of trustees that most Californians are locked out of the justice system because they can’t afford an attorney, which costs at least $200 an hour. She estimated that California households face a minimum of 12.5 million legal issues every year, which translates to $2.5 billion annually in lawyer fees.

The State Bar panel follows Washington and New York states’ lead by investigating the feasibility of developing and implementing standards for creating a limited license to practice law. The Washington Supreme Court adopted a rule allowing for “limited license legal technicians,” and New York’s chief judge has endorsed a similar idea. If approved in California, such a license would allow certified providers to deliver limited, discrete legal services to consumers in defined legal areas.

Other professional fields have offered similar solutions to keeping costs down, such as allowing nurse practitioners to provide some medical services instead of doctors.

“This approach benefits practically everyone up to the 1 percent,” Hadfield said. “Few people can afford an attorney at $200, minimum, an hour. This can benefit the poor, but also the middle-income Americans who may be facing foreclosure proceedings on their home, a child custody issue or an employment problem.”

State Bar trustee Loren Kieve of San Francisco said during the hearing, “I think we have clear evidence of unmet needs in the legal field. I think we would be abdicating our responsibility if we did not move forward with this.”

Hadfield cautioned the bar against simply licensing sole-practitioner paralegals as “lawyer lites.” Instead, the legal system’s regulatory approach needs to dramatically shift.

“We need to make a fundamental change in the way the judiciary regulates the practice of law,” she said. “We cannot possibly solve the access to justice problem without changes in our regulatory approach.”

Hadfield is a proponent of the British model, which authorizes a wide variety of professionals, organizations and corporations to provide legal help. She advocates allowing practitioners to work for corporations to cut costs on overhead and other inefficiencies.

“Online services in England allow you to pay a flat fee for a particular service,” Hadfield said. “For example, you might pay $200 for the simple management of a divorce. Or $230 to file the documents needed for a motion for child support change. What you really want is for the independent paralegals to work for corporations, similar to tax preparers at H&R Block. The idea is we need to get nonlegal costs out of the hourly rate charged by lawyers. Let an organization with scale and technology do it better.”

Hadfield has long advocated training non-Juris Doctor (JD) professionals to provide legal assistance to supplement the services of traditional JD-trained lawyers. Last October, she testified on the matter for the chief judge in New York. Hadfield, a member of the Legal Advisory Council for LegalZoom, also supports expanding the scope for similar low-cost online services to make legal assistance convenient, affordable and available to the general population.

The California State Bar appears to be moving closer to such crucial changes. At its hearing this month in San Francisco, the working group will recommend the creation of a practice board for limited licenses. They expect to post a draft governance structure by next week.

“I came out of this session feeling more hopeful than I expected,” Hadfield said. “If California can do this, it really moves the needle nationally. Washington state is moving ahead and New York is moving forward, and now there’s a real opportunity for California to make a significant leap.”

USC Gould professor testifies on making justice more accessible

By Gilien Silsby

Professor Gillian Hadfield of the USC Gould School of Law recently testified before the State Bar of California on making justice more accessible by licensing independent paralegals. These special practitioners would perform a portion of the legal work that today requires a high-priced attorney.

Hadfield, a law and economics professor, told a special working group of the bar’s board of trustees that most Californians are locked out of the justice system because they can’t afford an attorney, which costs at least $200 an hour. She estimated that California households face a minimum of 12.5 million legal issues every year, which translates to $2.5 billion annually in lawyer fees.

The State Bar panel follows Washington and New York states’ lead by investigating the feasibility of developing and implementing standards for creating a limited license to practice law. The Washington Supreme Court adopted a rule allowing for “limited license legal technicians,” and New York’s chief judge has endorsed a similar idea. If approved in California, such a license would allow certified providers to deliver limited, discrete legal services to consumers in defined legal areas.

Other professional fields have offered similar solutions to keeping costs down, such as allowing nurse practitioners to provide some medical services instead of doctors.

“This approach benefits practically everyone up to the 1 percent,” Hadfield said. “Few people can afford an attorney at $200, minimum, an hour. This can benefit the poor, but also the middle-income Americans who may be facing foreclosure proceedings on their home, a child custody issue or an employment problem.”

State Bar trustee Loren Kieve of San Francisco said during the hearing, “I think we have clear evidence of unmet needs in the legal field. I think we would be abdicating our responsibility if we did not move forward with this.”

Hadfield cautioned the bar against simply licensing sole-practitioner paralegals as “lawyer lites.” Instead, the legal system’s regulatory approach needs to dramatically shift.

“We need to make a fundamental change in the way the judiciary regulates the practice of law,” she said. “We cannot possibly solve the access to justice problem without changes in our regulatory approach.”

Hadfield is a proponent of the British model, which authorizes a wide variety of professionals, organizations and corporations to provide legal help. She advocates allowing practitioners to work for corporations to cut costs on overhead and other inefficiencies.

“Online services in England allow you to pay a flat fee for a particular service,” Hadfield said. “For example, you might pay $200 for the simple management of a divorce. Or $230 to file the documents needed for a motion for child support change. What you really want is for the independent paralegals to work for corporations, similar to tax preparers at H&R Block. The idea is we need to get nonlegal costs out of the hourly rate charged by lawyers. Let an organization with scale and technology do it better.”

Hadfield has long advocated training non-Juris Doctor (JD) professionals to provide legal assistance to supplement the services of traditional JD-trained lawyers. Last October, she testified on the matter for the chief judge in New York. Hadfield, a member of the Legal Advisory Council for LegalZoom, also supports expanding the scope for similar low-cost online services to make legal assistance convenient, affordable and available to the general population.

The California State Bar appears to be moving closer to such crucial changes. At its hearing this month in San Francisco, the working group will recommend the creation of a practice board for limited licenses. They expect to post a draft governance structure by next week.

“I came out of this session feeling more hopeful than I expected,” Hadfield said. “If California can do this, it really moves the needle nationally. Washington state is moving ahead and New York is moving forward, and now there’s a real opportunity for California to make a significant leap.”

USC Gould professor testifies on making justice more accessible

By Gilien Silsby

Professor Gillian Hadfield of the USC Gould School of Law recently testified before the State Bar of California on making justice more accessible by licensing independent paralegals. These special practitioners would perform a portion of the legal work that today requires a high-priced attorney.

Hadfield, a law and economics professor, told a special working group of the bar’s board of trustees that most Californians are locked out of the justice system because they can’t afford an attorney, which costs at least $200 an hour. She estimated that California households face a minimum of 12.5 million legal issues every year, which translates to $2.5 billion annually in lawyer fees.

The State Bar panel follows Washington and New York states’ lead by investigating the feasibility of developing and implementing standards for creating a limited license to practice law. The Washington Supreme Court adopted a rule allowing for “limited license legal technicians,” and New York’s chief judge has endorsed a similar idea. If approved in California, such a license would allow certified providers to deliver limited, discrete legal services to consumers in defined legal areas.

Other professional fields have offered similar solutions to keeping costs down, such as allowing nurse practitioners to provide some medical services instead of doctors.

“This approach benefits practically everyone up to the 1 percent,” Hadfield said. “Few people can afford an attorney at $200, minimum, an hour. This can benefit the poor, but also the middle-income Americans who may be facing foreclosure proceedings on their home, a child custody issue or an employment problem.”

State Bar trustee Loren Kieve of San Francisco said during the hearing, “I think we have clear evidence of unmet needs in the legal field. I think we would be abdicating our responsibility if we did not move forward with this.”

Hadfield cautioned the bar against simply licensing sole-practitioner paralegals as “lawyer lites.” Instead, the legal system’s regulatory approach needs to dramatically shift.

“We need to make a fundamental change in the way the judiciary regulates the practice of law,” she said. “We cannot possibly solve the access to justice problem without changes in our regulatory approach.”

Hadfield is a proponent of the British model, which authorizes a wide variety of professionals, organizations and corporations to provide legal help. She advocates allowing practitioners to work for corporations to cut costs on overhead and other inefficiencies.

“Online services in England allow you to pay a flat fee for a particular service,” Hadfield said. “For example, you might pay $200 for the simple management of a divorce. Or $230 to file the documents needed for a motion for child support change. What you really want is for the independent paralegals to work for corporations, similar to tax preparers at H&R Block. The idea is we need to get nonlegal costs out of the hourly rate charged by lawyers. Let an organization with scale and technology do it better.”

Hadfield has long advocated training non-Juris Doctor (JD) professionals to provide legal assistance to supplement the services of traditional JD-trained lawyers. Last October, she testified on the matter for the chief judge in New York. Hadfield, a member of the Legal Advisory Council for LegalZoom, also supports expanding the scope for similar low-cost online services to make legal assistance convenient, affordable and available to the general population.

The California State Bar appears to be moving closer to such crucial changes. At its hearing this month in San Francisco, the working group will recommend the creation of a practice board for limited licenses. They expect to post a draft governance structure by next week.

“I came out of this session feeling more hopeful than I expected,” Hadfield said. “If California can do this, it really moves the needle nationally. Washington state is moving ahead and New York is moving forward, and now there’s a real opportunity for California to make a significant leap.”