NCJ Number
59874
Date Published
1979
Length
42 pages
Annotation
REFORM OF THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION'S (ABA) CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY IS ADVOCATED IN ORDER TO SHIFT THE CODE'S EMPHASIS TO THE PROTECTION OF THE INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC AND THE CLIENT.
Abstract
THE ABA CODE IS UNDER INCREASING ATTACK AS BEING IRRELEVANT, INCONSISTENT, AND CONSPIRATORIAL. IN GOLDFARB V. VIRGINIA STATE BAR (1975), THE BAR'S REGULATIONS CONCERNING MINIMUM FEE SCHEDULES WERE OVERTURNED. LIMITATIONS ON ADVERTISING THE LEGAL AID SERVICES HAVE ALSO BEEN QUESTIONED. THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CODE ARE NOT ISOLATED MATTERS ON PARTICULAR ISSUES, BUT REPRESENT PRESSURE FROM WITHIN THE OUTSIDE THE BAR CALLING FOR A RETHINKING OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY. THE PRESENT CODE IS REPEATEDLY BIASED IN ITS ORDERING OF PRIORITIES, AND CREATES A SELF-SERVING ETHIC. AN ANALYSIS OF THE CODE INDICATES THAT THE INTEREST OF THE INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEY IS PRIMARY AND THE CLIENT'S AND PUBLIC'S CONCERNS INFERIOR. THE CLEAREST EXAMPLE OF A CODE STANDARD WHICH OPERATES PRIMARILY FOR LAWYERS' BENEFIT IS THE PROHIBITION OF THE 'UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF THE LAW.' OSTENSIBLY DESIGNED TO ASSURE THAT CLIENTS ARE ONLY SERVED BY PERSONS OF COMPETENCY, THE RULE HAS BEEN USED TO SUPPRESS COMPETITION BY LAY PERSONS SEEKING TO PERFORM BASIC SERVICES AT A REDUCED COST, AND TO DETER LAY PERSONS FROM REPRESENTING THEMSELVES. RESTRUCTURING THE PRIORITIES OF THE CODE IS URGED SO THAT PROGRAMS OF PREPAID LEGAL SERVICES AND LAWYER REFERRAL AGENCIES CAN DEVELOP. MALPRACTICE CLAIMS BY AN INFORMED PUBLIC COULD SERVICE AS MOTIVATION FOR REFORM. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (TWK)