WHEN I WAS director and general counsel of legal services in the South Bronx back in the ’60s, I felt that our service to our clientele could have been improved with greater funding, with law reform litigation that more closely reflected the issues we encountered on a day-to-day basis, and with a public education/consultation program, where, at times and locations convenient to the community, lawyers could educate groups of community members on relevant legal topics, answer their questions, and be available for individual consultation sessions.
I felt that this three-pronged approach would help provide our clientele with similar access to the civil justice system as that enjoyed by the more privileged. Now, having observed the situation for over 30 years, I still believe in those measures. And while the first two measures have been the subject of much debate and political strife over those 30 years, the third has gotten far less attention,[1]� even though it could arguably be done inexpensively, use limited resources more efficiently, and provide a great benefit to both legal services-eligible and moderate income clientele.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
