California Bar Jumps Back Into the Regulatory Sandbox
"This is a significant step and I think it will lead to an exciting future," board chairman Alan Steinbrecher said.
May 14, 2020 at 06:56 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
California State Bar trustees on Thursday revived efforts to create a "regulatory sandbox" that could allow non-lawyers to develop legal services without violating professional rules governing the practice of law.
On a 9-2 vote, trustees agreed to form a working group that will consider relaxing rules barring the unauthorized practice of law, fee-sharing and non-lawyer firm ownership, all with an eye toward expanding affordable legal help.
"This is a significant step, and I think it will lead to an exciting future," board chairman Alan Steinbrecher said.
Other states, led by Utah, are pursuing regulatory changes to encourage non-lawyers to develop apps and services that could help close the legal gap between those who can afford to hire a lawyer and those who cannot. A state bar committee earlier this year had proposed that California follow the same course. But trustees in March put the brakes on such a study in California, citing "political headwinds" from lawyers and trade groups.
Following weeks of talks among bar leaders, attorneys, state lawmakers and Supreme Court representatives, a majority of trustees on Thursday rejected a compromise proposal that would have allowed the working group to study possible solutions to the legal gap but not changes to rules governing non-lawyer ownership of law firms. A majority of trustees said it wanted a full vetting of possible regulatory changes.
"We don't know what we don't know until we try it," said trustee Juan De La Cruz. "We tend to be very cautious. I'm not like that."
Trustees did not say who would serve on the group or when they might issue final recommendations.
"I'm very happy the board of trustees voted to continue work on the regulatory sandbox," said Bridget Gramme, administrative director of the Center for Public Interest Law. Gramme was a member of the Task Force on Access Through Innovation of Legal Services and co-authored a report supporting the regulatory sandbox concept. "It really shows that they're continuing to take a leadership role in that area."
Any regulatory changes will likely need the blessing of the California Supreme Court and the Legislature, a difficult challenge given that numerous legal groups, including the Consumer Attorneys of California and Public Counsel remain opposed.
Micha Star Liberty, a former state bar board member and current president of the Consumer Attorneys, said the sandbox proposal raises "huge ethical problem[s] without really increasing access to justice."
"I don't think there is a solid enough appreciation for the political requirements to get the Business & Professions codes changed," Liberty said. "There's also a fundamental and profound misunderstanding about the process and the political will to do that."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Path in the Multiverse: Rethinking Client Engagement Through Gamification
6 minute readFrom ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute read‘What’s Up With Morgan & Morgan?’ Law, Advertising and a Calculated Rise
10 minute readChicago Midsize Firm Will Combine With Miami Boutique To Form Antitrust Powerhouse
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Free Speech Causes a Neighborly Feud
- 2Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 3Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 4When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250