Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A new report from the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System recommends being thoughtful about titles given to allied legal professionals and incorporating practices such as estate planning in their work as part of an effort to meet the high demand for legal services.
The report, part of the institute’s Allied Legal Professionals (ALP) project, is a summary of discussions with regulatory experts, educators and legal professionals at a two-day convening about the future of ALP programs last year.
The legal profession is “failing to protect most people,” IAALS Director of Special Projects Michael Houlberg said in a statement.
“One day in the not-too-distant future, ALPs will exist across the country and be readily known by consumers as a more affordable option for legal help,” he said. “Until that day, and as states continue to look into and build out their own ALP programs, this report should serve as a guide toward creating the most comprehensive and effective program possible.”
The report has 18 recommendations in areas ranging from attorney supervision to training to testing requirements.
According to the report, as of May there were five states with active ALP programs — including Utah. There were two states with programs in the implementation phase, six with program proposals and “a few” that have been discussing what a program might look like.
Though it’s not statewide, the Marion Superior Court’s Legal Resource Center employs nonlawyers who can provide legal information to visitors.
“The introduction of allied legal professionals into the legal profession is a response to this call for greater access to justice, particularly for people who fall between not qualifying for legal aid and not being able to afford an attorney—which is a considerable portion of the middle class,” the report says.
The report is meant to be a guide for states to either implement or improve ALP programs.
For example, when it comes to what title an ALP should have, the report recommends avoiding terms such as “limited” and “paraprofessional,” which could suggest they aren’t fully qualified.
“Considerations should include whether the title conveys professionalism instead of limitations, creates clarity instead of confusion, and translates well into other languages,” the report says.
The report also recommends states should modify education and testing requirements to ensure ALPs can handle a case start to finish, including full in-court representation without attorney supervision.
According to the report, Minnesota allows ALPs to provide full in-court representation, and the feedback has been “very positive.”
It also recommends making sure disclosures are about informing clients what an ALP can and cannot do, rather than having the effect of pushing clients away from using those services.
The report also recommends providing different avenues to licensure for people with different levels of education and experience.
In North Carolina, for example, the report says tiered education and training requirements are based on prior education. An applicant with a law degree isn’t required to take additional courses, while an applicant with a bachelor’s degree is required to obtain a paralegal certificate or 15 credit hours of paralegal studies, in addition to completing 1,500 hours of training.
While there are “considerable differences” in state programs right now, the report says uniformity will be important eventually.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.