March 15, 2012 Update

Commission Meeting Today (Thursday)

The next meeting of the Massachusetts Access to Justice Commission will take place at 3:00 p.m., Thursday, March 15, 2012, in the Fifth Floor Conference Room of the Social Law Library at the Adams Courthouse, One Pemberton Square, Boston.

The Agenda for the meeting will feature a discussion of the recently released Boston Bar Association Task Force report, “The Importance of Representation in Eviction Cases and Homelessness Prevention: A Report on the BBA Civil Right to Counsel Housing Pilots.” The full report can be found on the BBA’s website, www.bostonbar.org.

Another topic on the agenda is consideration of the Commission’s “Objectives for 2012” and a discussion of whether to undertake a planning process for future years.

There will also be reports on the new Access to Justice Fellows program, improving the notices sent by DTA, the role of law libraries in helping self‐representing litigants, the development of a statewide pro bono website and the progress being made by the Trial Court’s Access to Justice Initiatives.

The next meeting of the Commission will be on May 31.

District Court Makes Limited Assistance Representation Standing Order Permanent

Chief Justice Lynda M. Connolly has amended Standing Order No. 1‐11 (Regarding Limited Assistance Representation and Substitute Counsel), implementing the LAR project in the District Court Department on a permanent basis effective January 25, 2012. She noted that there had been no reported difficulties associated with the pilot project, and that the LAR provisions were designed largely for the benefit of litigants who might not be able to afford full representation or who might feel that full representation is unnecessary. “It is hoped that over time litigants will begin to take advantage of this opportunity in increasing numbers.”

A Little More Right to Counsel

The SJC, in Adoption of Meaghan (January 30, 2012) has unanimously held that the well‐established right to counsel before the state terminates parental rights also applies when the termination will occur as the result of an adoption commenced by would‐be adoptive parents. Extending the rationale, the Court stated “Where the petitioner is a private party, the same fundamental, constitutionally protected interests are at stake, and the cost of erroneously terminating the parental rights remains too high to require and indigent parent to risk it without counsel.” The child was also found entitled to separate counsel.

Chief Justice Ireland Distributes Commission Mentor List to New Admittees

In a letter welcoming newly admitted lawyers to the bar, Chief Justice Ireland has begun distributing a list of many resources available to help a new lawyer find a mentor if one is not present on the job. The Chief Justice notes that the list was prepared by the Access to Justice Commission. The list includes mentoring programs of the Massachusetts Bar Association, County and Regional Bar Associations, affinity bar associations, other professional associations and additional resources. The letter and the list are posted on the Commission’s website, www.massaccesstojustice.org.

Justice Gants Speaks to Walk to the Hill Crowd, January 26

SJC Associate Justice and Commission Co‐Chair Ralph.D. Gants delivered the keynote address when hundreds of lawyers gathered at the State House on January 26 to support MLAC’s request for an appropriation from the legislature. Noting the large “IOLTA gap” – revenue down nearly 80% ‐‐ he asked everyone to join together in asking for help. Help is warranted because legal services::

1. ensure that the promise of “equal justice for all” is more than a promise,
2. is a sound investment, returning more money to the state than it costs,
3. saves the courts time, expense and the burden of figuring out, and
4. provide the essential infrastructure, training and advice with which the vast majority of Massachusetts residents understand, enforce and defend their rights.

“But ultimately the questions you must ask of our elected representatives are a variation of the questions asked by Hillel at the beginning of the modern era: What kind of a Commonwealth would we be it we did not protect the rights of those in need by providing them with adequate legal services? And if we do not protect the rights of those in need, who will ? And if not now, when?”

FUNDING NEWS

Pro Hac Vice Rule Out for Comment

In December the Commission submitted to the SJC a proposal for a new rule establishing a pro hac vice fee of $300. In February the Court published a slightly reworded version of the rule for comments. The comment period has now run, and the Court will take the proposal and comments up this spring.

The proposal mirrors similar rules in more than forty states and follows eight other states that dedicate proceeds of a pro hac vice fee to support for legal assistance to the poor. There is no data on the number of pro hac vice appearances that are filed each year, so the potential returns from the fee cannot be estimated.

MLAC Receives $1.0 Million Supplemental Appropriation for FY 2012

MLAC Seeks $14.5 Million for FY 2013; Governor Proposes $12.0 Million

Governor Patrick has released his proposed budget for FY 2013. It contains a request that the legislature appropriate $12.0 million for MLAC, an increase of $2.5 million over this year’s original appropriation and $1.5 million over the total funding MLAC has actually received.

MLAC itself is seeking $14.5 million, which would partially offset the historically low level of IOLTA revenue. The IOLTA picture is unlikely to improve in the next year or two; the Federal Reserve has announced its intention to keep interest rates near zero for several more years.

President Obama Requests $402 million for 2013; LSC Seeks $470 million.

The President’s budget essentially restores funding to the 2011 level, and would bring about $1.0 million in grants back to Massachusetts. In addition, the President urges Congress to lift the 1996 restriction on the use of class actions by recipients of LSC money.

What is Legal Aid Worth?

An MLAC analysis prepared during the legislative effort has some startling estimates. To start with, MLAC data showed that representation of clients brought $27.7 million in new benefits during FY ’11. Food stamps, disability and unemployment benefits accounted for most of the federal cash infusion to the state. Another $10.4 million was won for clients, mostly in state unemployment, utility arrearage forgiveness and child support cases.

MLAC grantees also saved the state an estimated $15.1 million, mostly in preventing homelessness and the related charges for the emergency shelter system, but also in medical and court costs avoided through representation of domestic violence victims.

All together, the FY ‘11 value of the legal services provided gave a $53 million boost to the state’s economy. This was no flash in the pan. For FY ’10, a comparable analysis showed the total of revenues brought to clients and savings to the state was $77.7 million. In each year, the state appropriation for MLAC? $9.5 million. The report is available at http://www.mlac.org/research.html

NEWS FROM OTHER STATES
Access to Justice Commissions – Many Models, One Goal

The ABA’s Access to Justice Support Project (www.ATJsupport.org) reports on Commission activities across the country. The January 25 report reveals quite a range of projects:

• CA: Hearings on effects of underfunding the courts and the legal services programs
• NY: Chief Judge’s Task Force Report documents negative impact of unmet need on the courts, businesses, government and vulnerable people.
• TN: Supreme Court launches website, www.JusticeForAll.TN, with downloadable forms, resources on self‐ representation, and access by email to a volunteer lawyer who will answer questions.
• TX: Presentations for judges and for clerks on what they can ethically do to help solve the problems pro se litigants face.
• DC: Commission, bar and legal services programs proposed and D.C. Courts adopted changes in the Code of Judicial Conduct to state that judges should “make reasonable accommodations that help [self‐represented] litigants” . . . .
• NM: Commission recommended and Supreme Court adopted revision to class action rules to provide that residual class action funds may go to legal aid, IOLTA or Bar Foundation.
• WI: Appointed a special committee to study costs and benefits of providing counsel in some civil legal matters where basic human needs are at stake.
• ME Access to Justice Symposium, “Changing Maine: Serving the Legal Needs of Maine’s Growing Aging and Immigrant Population.”

Texas Remarks Inspire

Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan L. Hecht presented a “Legislative Hero” award to state Senator Robert Duncan on February 16. His remarks included reference to the basic need of an increasing number of people for help with legal needs and the importance of a strong legal services infrastructure to support pro bono efforts as two reasons the state legislature appropriated $20 million in 2009 and $17 million in 2011 for legal aid programs. He continued:

“Legal services make economic sense; the financial consequences of unresolved legal problems – domestic violence, deprived children, denied veterans, forsaken elderly, and on and on – are a far more burdensome expense than the cost of providing legal services to address them. But even more important than economics, basic legal services for the poor is essential to the integrity of the rule of law. That is why the Supreme Court of Texas – myself and all my colleagues unanimously – support legal services heart and soul. A legal system too expensive for those who need it is a failure. We do not intend to preside over such a system. This is not a partisan issue. It is not Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal. This past session, Members of the Legislature, from the most liberal to the staunchest conservative, supported efforts to preserve legal services.”

Language Access in the Courts

After hearing from the Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators that its original proposal was an unfunded mandate and too expensive, the ABA modified its proposed “Standards for Language Access in the Courts” and the Standards were adopted by the ABA. The Conferences supported the revised Standards, which are now aspirational. The Conferences will convene a national summit in October 2012 in Houston, Texas, to bring together “chief justice‐led state teams composed of representatives from all three branches of government and the state bar to develop state specific strategies for improving access to justice for limited English proficient individuals.” Resolution In Support of Standards for Language Access in the Courts per A.B.A. Resolution 113, adopted December 8, 2011.