Bar Associations' Reduced Fee Programs Aim to Assist 'In-Between' Litigants
Litigants who don't qualify for legal aid but who still cannot afford to hire an attorney at full-rate are the province of Reduced Fee Referral programs launched in New Jersey, including one by the Morris County Bar Association that recently marked its first anniversary.
October 31, 2019 at 10:03 AM
10 minute read
Litigants in Morris County who don't qualify for legal aid based on their income, but who still cannot afford to hire an attorney at full-rate, weren't receiving the legal representation they needed.
They fell into a kind of "legal no-man's land" with nowhere to turn and few resources.
Enter the Reduced Fee Referral Program—a program that was launched a year ago by the Morris County Bar Association to fill the crucial legal gap.
"This was the in-between litigant who did not qualify for legal services from a public defender because they made too much money but could not afford private counsel," said Jennifer Vuotto, immediate past president of the county bar and RFP co-chair with John Paul Velez.
The idea: Provide a highly skilled, experienced attorney at a reasonable rate that people, regardless of income, could afford.
Morris County is among the latest to implement such a program, though it isn't the first. County bar associations, under the impetus of the State Bar Association, have been behind the trend.
The Middlesex County Bar Association pioneered it, starting its own RFP in 1996.
The Bergen County Bar Association is modifying the one it started two years ago to make it more user-friendly.
"The need to access the justice system and affordable legal care has been around for a long time," said Jonathan Cowles, executive director of the Middlesex County Bar Association in a phone interview. "It is getting a lot more press now, at least in the county bar association world, and the push has been coming from across the country."
"Most (county) bar associations hope to fill that void for the in-between litigant because the legal profession wants people to have competent legal representation," added Cowles. "We are trying to fill the void of the under-represented by offering the reduced fee services in our counties."
Cowles said bar associations, which are nonprofits, already have court-approved lawyer referral services in New Jersey. Throw in the increasing number of online legal services, like LegalZoom and Avvo—in addition to limited license legal technicians, such as those Washington state approved four years ago and which Oregon is now contemplating—and the picture could become even more complex, he added.
"We are all trying to find ways to expand the reach of our members to provide anyone in need of legal service to meet that need," he said of why the bar associations have been at the forefront of the RFP movement.
For its part, the New Jersey State Bar Association developed a technology platform that provides a way to match attorneys who are willing to work at reduced rates with members of the public who need legal guidance but cannot afford the market rates of attorneys. Bar association leaders and legal services officials throughout the state helped to refine the online lawyer referral service.
Spokeswoman Kate Coscarelli said the NJSBA is making the platform, called Legal Edge, available to county and affinity bar associations for free and expects to launch the program with one or two interested entities in the coming months so the rollout can be closely monitored.
"Legal Edge was borne out of the New Jersey State Bar Association's recognition that there are many members of the public with very real and pressing legal needs who require the guidance and expertise of an attorney to resolve their problem, yet cannot afford the market rates of many attorneys," said state bar executive director Angela C. Scheck in a statement.
Vuotto, a litigator at McAndrew Vuotto in Morristown, said the state bar association put out a message to the county bar groups a few years ago—one that resonated immediately with her while she was president of the Morris County Bar Association.
"The state bar put it as an agenda to the counties," she said. "It was looking at ways to combat the rise of unrepresented litigants and the rise of online legal service providers, and made the counties aware about it. We took that and ran with it."
From that "eureka" moment about a year and a half ago, Vuotto said she and Velez laid the groundwork for the Morris County RFP.
For months the duo recruited attorneys and formed a committee to devise a fee schedule, retainer agreement, a litigant and attorney application and other program materials. Then the grassroots work began of getting the word out to courts in Morris and Sussex counties, and to the community at large, of the new service.
Last October, Vuotto and Velez officially rolled out the RFP at the annual Morris and Sussex municipal judges vicinage meeting. Six months later, they met with the judges again, this time with members of the Morris County Sheriff's Office, at the semi-annual vicinage meeting.
"We wanted to educate the judges and their staff of what we were doing to get them to be key allies to get the word out," Vuotto said in a phone interview on Tuesday. "Our biggest source of information is the courts."
The RFP is available in all Superior Court divisions.
"Assignment judges get the program materials to (potential litigants) through an appearance in court," Vuotto said. "Litigants fill out an application for a public defender, and if it's rejected because of their income, they are advised by the municipal court judge or court administrator or staff that this program may be available to them."
As the RFP celebrated its one-year anniversary on Oct. 12, she said the program has exceeded expectations and that the MCBA wants to expand it to other counties. Without naming which ones, Vuotto said at least two other county bar associations have reached out to her for guidance in setting one up to serve their respective counties.
Each RFP program is unique to its county because the demographics and socioeconomic factors differ from county to county.
For example, in Bergen County, applicants must be within $10,000 of the highest income guidelines for the Legal Services Project under the auspices of the New Jersey Legal Services program, said Frank O'Marra, executive director of the Bergen County Bar Association.
He said the county's RFP was fully modeled after the one in Middlesex County.
"Some people don't qualify for the Legal Services Project in Bergen County because they are over the income limit. We then refer them to an attorney with the RFP program who indicated they are willing to take a client on a reduced fee basis," O'Marra said. "As word develops and people decide to pursue it, it will definitely grow in response."
Litigants with a household income that is up to 250% of the poverty level in Morris County qualify for its RFP program. So far, 108 cases have been processed, and about 30 attorneys from both Morris and Sussex counties are active participants.
"The practical result is that 108 litigants were able to navigate the Morris County and Sussex County court system with an attorney, who otherwise would not have had representation," said Velez, who becomes the new president of the Morris County Bar Association next year. "It is providing a pro se litigant, or potential pro se litigant, representation to ensure their rights are being protected."
"In addition to helping litigants, this is a clear help for the court system as a whole," said Velez, a criminal defense attorney at Forster Arbore Velez in Newton. "I think calendar management is being assisted. There are less delays in the process, and it's beneficial for attorneys on both sides. Rather than dealing with pro se litigants, they are able to deal with other attorneys."
The RFP is not pro bono work for the attorney. Instead it operates on a reduced fee model. The rate will either be a flat fee or a reduced hourly rate, depending on the case. The attorney agrees to the rate listed on his or her RFP application before starting a case.
The largest number of litigants in the RFP are in Morris County's municipal courts and the Family Part, according to Cristina Jones, administrative assistant at the Morris County Bar Association. Jones said a potential litigant will fill out an application for the RFP and send it to the MCBA, and she reviews their story to match them with one of the program attorneys.
The 108 RFP cases in Morris and Sussex counties so far have run the gamut from simple traffic tickets, DWIs and marijuana offenses, to more complicated family law matters, including domestic violence and child custody.
"We do a lot of last-minute matching up with a client," said Jones. "They are happy to hear that we can retain counsel for them, and we can do it pretty quickly."
"These are calls we had been receiving for years," said Morris County Bar Association executive director Nancy Bangiola, "This program has helped us to help them solve their problems by connecting them to an attorney. Before the RFP, we did not have options for them. Now we do."
Among those options is Morris County attorney Brian D. Kenney. He has done 10 cases as RFP-appointed counsel and plans to take on more.
"I treat them like all my other clients," said Kenney, who is in the criminal practice group at Einhorn, Barbarito Frost & Botwinick in Denville. He said he usually works on RFP cases outside normal office hours.
A recent RFP case had Kenney representing a 12-year-old girl who was facing a criminal mischief charge in Morris County Superior Court. Kenney, who spent some time in the Morris County Prosecutor's Office, said he used his knowledge of juvenile law to negotiate a deal with the prosecutor on the case. Instead of having her appear before a judge and plead guilty, the girl was sent to a diversionary program. The charge was dismissed after two months, and the girl had to write an apology letter and pay $1,100 in restitution.
"For some, this is their first exposure to the court system, and I don't want them to have a bad experience," said Kenney, who said the community component of the program is what drew him in.
"You are representing them and taking the time to explain everything to them. Because they can't get a public defender, they are literally lost," he added.
"With the RFP, I'm brought in to help them out. It makes me feel good."
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 All'$10 Million? You Don't Blink at That Anymore': Are Lawyer Billboards Affecting Juries?
6 minute read'No Sir. That's Strategy': Ruling Sheds Light on Lawyer Invoices, Attorney-Client Privilege
4 minute readNew Jersey AG Gurbir Grewal Picked to Head SEC's Division of Enforcement
7 minute readTrending Stories
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