Guest Posts

From my perspective as the director of a law school innovation lab, legal education is disengaged from the regulatory reform effort: only a handful of legal academics have chimed in on regulatory reform or been involved in task force efforts. But legal education should join the conversation and prepare for the changes ahead, for several reasons.

On January 1, 2020, Michigan implemented its first major overhaul of its civil discovery rules in nearly forty years. A State Bar Association Committee was formed in 2017 to evaluate the current rules and recommend amendments that could help increase access to the courts; as a foundation to its work, the Committee looked to the 2015 federal civil rule amendments, the discovery innovations in other states, IAALS’ research and recommendations, and the Conference of Chief Justices’ national recommendations for state reform.

As a member of the California State Bar Task Force on Access Through Innovation of Legal Services, I’m often asked how things are going with ATILS and what is coming next. Considering the recent increase in news coverage of our efforts, the critical feedback received to date, and with the Task Force recently being named to the 2020 American Bar Association’s list of Legal Rebels, I thought it was the right time to put together this quick blog post to provide everyone with an update from the Golden State.

In Ohio, state judges are currently chosen in nonpartisan general elections (although they do compete in partisan primaries). But House Bill 460 would allow judicial candidates to place their party affiliations directly on the general election ballot. If the measure becomes law, Ohio would be the second state in recent years to move from nonpartisan to openly partisan elections. 

Eldercaring Coordination is an innovative dispute resolution process for high-conflict cases, providing an alternative to the traditional adversarial court process. By directly focusing on elders and their legally authorized decisionmakers, Eldercaring Coordination helps families work together to regain harmony and make decisions for the elder that all family members can agree on. 

Some lawyers have expressed concern that changes to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct will allow new players into the field, potentially reducing their income and/or taking their jobs. On the contrary, however, allowing new players in the business of legal services may make it possible for lawyers to scale their practices and enlarge the legal services pie for all.

The legal system has been regulated so tightly that it has led to a world where only a fraction of the citizens who require legal services can access them, and we cannot afford to fail those who cannot afford legal representation. Unlocking legal regulation is the answer and stands at the heart of the worthy efforts underway in states across the country.

Based on IAALS' model for out-of-court divorce, the Family Resolutions Specialty Court in Massachusetts helps parents of minor children work through issues related to divorce, separation, paternity, and more—and keeps the focus on the best interests of the child.

Innovations in the delivery of legal services can also be laboratories for testing innovations in legal education. Many innovations in education spring from the IAALS out-of-court divorce model and had an effect on the law students who participated in the on-campus center that provided the services.

Nevada, which directly elects nearly all of its state judges, has never implemented an official judicial performance evaluation program. Instead, between 1992 and 2013, the state’s largest newspaper conducted its own surveys of attorneys in Clark County regarding judges seeking reelection until their survey methodology came under sharp criticism. Now the surveys are set to return, with some significant retooling.