News & Updates

For years, law school graduates have struggled to find full-time employment, facing a highly saturated, fiercely competitive job market. There continues to be a gap between what law schools teach and what legal employers expect from new graduates—and not enough traditional law firm positions to hire them all. 

Although the idea of equal protection under the law has long been at the heart of the American legal system, equal access to justice is still not a reality for many people. Former American Bar Association President Robert J. Grey Jr. discusses this equal justice gap in a recent piece for the ABA Journal.

Since publishing the results of our Foundations for Practice survey, we have been using those results in the second phase of the project to work with select law schools to develop a set of learning outcomes, assessments, instructional designs, and hiring tools to instill and identify desired characteristics, competencies, and skills in future lawyers. 

The family justice system was built on the assumption that litigants would be represented by lawyers, but that assumption no longer holds true. It is no secret among lawyers, court staff, and judges—if not the general population itself—that more and more people are representing themselves through their divorce process, instead of hiring an attorney.

Legal services consumers want greater access to law and justice, and teaching unbundling—or limited scope representation—in law schools is necessary for new lawyers to develop the skills they need to operate in today’s changing legal services market.

In direct response to an ABA study on attorney well-being and IAALS’ Foundations for Practice project and findings, University of Denver Sturm College of Law Professor Debra Austin brought to life a class called “Professionalism and Well-Being Skills for the Effective Lawyer,” which began this fall.

Through its Better Access through Unbundling Conference, IAALS has set the national agenda for expanding legal access through limited scope services—and the table is set for the use and growth of unbundling. Jurisdictions have the benefit of model rules, bar endorsement, and replicable models to encourage lawyers to unbundle and make that availability known to consumers.

The outcomes of the IAALS/ABA Better Access through Unbundling conference include specific directions and recommendations to make unbundling an even more significant way to advance affordable access to legal services. Now is the time to bring stakeholders together, solidify strategic plans, and dedicate resources to the advancement of unbundling.

In the most recent issue of the Bar Examiner, Alli Gerkman and I discuss the perceived skills gap that affects employment for newly graduated law students, an issue that has even greater implications for the profession as a whole when new lawyers enter the workforce unprepared or underprepared.

IAALS offers this new report for legal practitioners, service providers, and other access to justice advocates, which details the themes, recommendations, and strategic plans that emerged from our Better Access through Unbundling Conference—with takeaways for every jurisdiction, whether or not they have embraced unbundling to this point.

Many law school staff, administration, and faculty members have reached out to IAALS to learn more about how the foundations we have identified can improve their own programs, or to share with us how they use the foundations to inform their teaching models—and we are going to continue the conversation in an upcoming webinar.

​IAALS has long focused on increasing access to justice by helping courts develop policies and procedures to make civil litigation more efficient and less expensive. But it’s not just courts and judges that can improve access to justice—attorneys too can take steps to refine their practices to help bridge the justice gap.

Last year, we were in a bind. Our Foundations for Practice project was speeding along but we needed to develop a set of learning outcomes from our survey’s results. To do that, we needed to hire a consultant who really understood learning outcomes. Elizabeth has brought a level of expertise and thoughtfulness that gives us and our partners great confidence in the work we are doing.

The issue of how to provide litigants with equal access to legal services, regardless of the litigant’s financial status, has plagued the legal community for some time now. One solution that is gaining popularity is unbundled legal services, where lawyers work on and charge clients for only those tasks that they agree to in advance.

We have never been busier at IAALS, with projects and convenings ramping up across all of our focus areas. To help facilitate this work and expand our impact nationwide, we are pleased to welcome three new staff members to our ranks. Jonna Perlinger joined IAALS in March as a legal assistant, and Michael Houlberg and Jason Zolle joined IAALS in June as managers.

The National Self-Represented Litigants Project (NSRLP) recently published a paper that looks at costs awards to self-represented litigants (SRLs) in Canadian courts. The paper notes the leading Canadian cases in which SRLs have been ordered costs awards and analyzes the development of these principles in family law matters. Generally, the report concludes that Canadian courts have broadened SRLs’ ability to obtain costs. 

The ABA Center for Innovation launched a new project in April that will provide legal aid organizations with free technology that will hopefully make them more efficient and able to help more clients. The project, called "Legal Tech for a Change,” will allow the Center for Innovation to serve as a broker between legal aid organization grantees and established legal technology companies. The Center will also vet potential technology solutions.

The Colorado Supreme Court’s Attorney Regulation Counsel recently released statistics on the state’s legal employment, which revealed an interesting trend. According to the Denver Business Journal, the study found that fewer than half of the 1,473 active female attorneys younger than 30 years old are working in law firms of any size, and only 20 percent of female attorneys in that age range went to work for big law firms. At the same time, law school classes around the country are fairly equally divided between male and female students, on average.

In the last blog, we explained that the 77 foundations survey respondents identified as being necessary for new lawyers in the short term are largely consistent and definitive across respondents. Still, there were a few differences that highlight foundations some practice settings emphasize over others. Similarly, when we focused on private practice, we discovered only slight variations among different law firm sizes. In this blog, we explore the foundations that make up the whole lawyer for each private practice firm size category, and the differences as compared with one another and the whole lawyer overall.

In our previous blog, we explained that the 77 foundations survey respondents identified as being necessary for new lawyers immediately upon graduation from law school are consistent and definitive throughout the practice of law. The similarities we saw in responses across demographics, firm sizes, and practice-specific characteristics suggest that the findings can be employed with confidence by law schools, the profession, employers, and others to facilitate the development of crucial foundations needed by lawyers right out of law school. Nonetheless, there were a few notable practically significant differences that arose among the various practice settings we studied.