Online legal service sites continued to raise concerns and prompt action at the New Jersey State Bar Association’s October board meeting, when trustees voted to seek amicus status in support of the state Supreme Court regulatory committees joint opinion that New Jersey lawyers cannot participate in certain of the services.
The opinion issued this summer from the Court’s Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, Attorney Advertising, Unauthorized Practice of Law committees found, in particular, that Avvo’s payment structure amounted to fee sharing and as such, New Jersey attorneys could not participate in those plans. The opinion, which was issued in response to an inquiry by the association about the role the companies seek to play in the legal market, raised other issues about companies such as RocketLawyer and Legal Zoom.
Now, the Washington D.C.-based Consumers for a Responsible Legal System, or Responsive Law, is seeking a reversal of that opinion, arguing that it restricts access to legal services, is anti-competitive and fails to recognize Avvo’s fee-sharing scheme as a permissible exception. In seeking amicus status, the association will continue the role it has played on a national level to advocate that those offering legal services should be attorneys and lawyers who are subject to the ethics rules and other regulations meant to protect the public. The petition is still awaiting certification from the Court and the association will seek friend-of-the-court status, if the Court agrees to hear the matter.
On a related note, the association board voted to respond to a recent letter from the American Bar Association to Chief Justice Stuart Rabner. The letter encouraged courts to consider the adoption of the ABA Model Regulatory Objectives for the Provision of Legal Services, a framework adopted by the ABA offering guidance in regulating the proliferation of nonlawyer providers.
Trustees noted that the premise of the letter is not something the association has been willing to concede – that non-attorneys should be engaging in legal work in the first place.
While remaining active and engaged on these fronts, trustees acknowledged that improving access to the courts for all citizens remains a worthy goal and the organization continues to work to develop a way to meet the needs of a growing number of residents who need the help of an attorney but cannot afford market rates with lawyers.
In other actions, the board voted to submit a petition for rulemaking to the New Jersey Division of Military and Veterans Affairs (DMAVA) urging they promulgate rules establishing an adequate mentor program for the newly-enacted state Veterans Diversion Program.
The diversion program is a sort of pre-trial intervention program for veterans. The association supported enactment of the program and has been working with the Attorney General’s office to implement VDP in every county.
According to the statute that created the program, the DMAVA is supposed to create a mentorship program to help the veterans in the diversion program. In addition, the Veterans Assistance Project, a separate program created nearly 10 years ago, also required the creation of a mentorship program. But to date, only three such mentors have been identified by the state agency.
The board also approved submitting comments on the proposed 2018 Attorney Discipline Budget advocating for a $5 decrease in the annual registration fee. In approving the motion, Trustees noted that the association has been advocating since 2010 for a decrease in the assessment because of the unusually high reserves the budget has carried year to year. The trustees also accepted a draft report of the annual audit.