Texas Bar's Incubator Expands Statewide, Goes Virtual
The Texas Opportunity and Justice Incubator, a State Bar of Texas program meant to close the access-to-justice gap by training lawyers to represent low- and middle-income clients, is going virtual so it can expand across the state and accept more lawyers into the program.
October 03, 2019 at 12:55 PM
4 minute read
A legal incubator that's trained 20 attorneys in two years to represent low- and middle-income Texans is expanding to double or triple the number of lawyers in its program.
The Texas Opportunity and Justice Incubator, a program of the State Bar of Texas meant to help close the justice gap in which most people can't afford to hire attorneys, is also untethering itself from its physical location in Austin. It's extending its online reach and going virtual so that lawyers from across the Lone Star State can participate in its business, technology and marketing education curriculum.
Applications for the expanded program are due by Oct. 21, and the lawyers who are accepted will begin their training in January 2020.
Texas Lawyer spoke with incubator director Anne-Marie Rábago about the program expansion. Here are her answers, edited for brevity and clarity.
From what I understand, the incubator is going virtual by adding an online learning component. What's this all about?
As we move forward with providing the services, resources and training to lawyers here in central Texas, we were increasingly getting applicants from other parts of the state and having to say, "Are you able to move?" Lots of folks say, "No, I can't move. I have my family and my community." That is understandable.
Something we've seen with the incubator movements all across the country is the space component of providing the lawyers an office in which to work is not something they make use of.
We initially moved from providing all the lawyers with a dedicated desk to a model used by lots of large companies across the country called hoteling or hot desks. You didn't have your own desk, but had a desk if you came in the office. Over the last several months, we watched usage, and the numbers kept going down, because the lawyers want to work where the lawyers want to work. That seems like something appealing to the next generation coming into our ranks.
That created a perfect storm of lets look what we can do if we do away with the space offering and instead make this a program delivered online virtually.
Will you accept more people into the program?
Yes, it's part of the plan. We're going to change from an 18-month model to a 12-month model and recruit one cohort per year. We are looking now for 20 to 30 lawyers across the state who will come into this program in January.
How are you changing your requirement of how much experience that a lawyer should have to enter the program?
We used to market the program to folks with zero to five years of licensure. That was another point that folks would ask us about: "Why are you only allowing new lawyers to be in this program?" We heard that and at this point are targeting our e-blasts and marketing to lawyers with zero to 10 years of licensure. We are willing to accept anyone with a desire to build a law practice aligned with our mission.
What is your advice for making an application that rises to the top and wins admission?
We really are looking for what I'd label the entrepreneurial spirit: the true desire to build a business and an understanding of what that's going to take by someone from a personal and professional standpoint. They need an idea of why they want to serve, and how they want to serve those clients, and some sense of what that is going to take. It really is a lot of hard work and dedication that you're investing in yourself because you're building something that is yours. We look for the folks who have that roll-up-your-sleeves and get-to-work sensibility.
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 AllAdvising 'Capital-Intensive Spaces' Fuels Corporate Practice Growth For Haynes and Boone
4 minute readHomegrown Texas Law Firms Expanded Outside the Lone Star State in 2024 As Out-of-State Firms Moved In
5 minute readEnergy Lawyers Working in Texas Expect Strong Demand to Continue in 2025 Across Energy Sector
6 minute read'So Many Firms' Have Yet to Announce Associate Bonuses, Underlining Big Law's Uneven Approach
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
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