When you meet today with Senators and members of the House of Representatives, and they ask, "How can you justify asking for $5 million in additional MLAC funding this fiscal year, an increase of more than one-third?", I invite you to answer, "How could we justify asking for less?"
The free lunch provided by income from IOLTA accounts is over. No longer can we rely on IOLTA to generate $31 million per year for civil legal services, as it did in calendar year 2007, more than half of all funding for civil legal services. Now we can rely on IOLTA, maybe, to provide $7 million per year. Who has borne the brunt of the nearly 80 percent cut in IOLTA? Those least able to bear it: the poor of Massachusetts. The number of those in need have not dwindled; it has grown. The number of individuals and families eligible for civil legal aid in Massachusetts grew by 11 percent last year alone. The legal problems of the poor have not dwindled; they, too, have grown. More persons are losing their homes to foreclosure and their apartments to eviction; the anger and frustration arising from persistent unemployment are being vented on abused spouses and children; bleak job prospects mean that alimony and child support cannot be afforded and often must be modified.
The bar has done its part to diminish the IOLTA gap. Since 2009, contributions from attorneys and law firms to legal service programs funded by MLAC have increased by 72 percent, from $3.2 million in fiscal year 2008 to $5.5 million in fiscal year 2011. The Supreme Judicial Court has added a voluntary $51 fee to the annual attorney registration fee, and $1.1 million was raised last year from the many who agreed to pay that fee. But the private bar cannot be expected to bridge the gap alone; the state must do its part.
Why should the Legislature approve $5 million in additional funds to help bridge the IOLTA gap?
- Because legal services ensure that the promise of "justice for all" is more than a promise – that the rights granted to all who reside in this Commonwealth are enjoyed by those who may not know their rights or be able to advocate competently on their own behalf.
- Because legal services are a sound investment; the legal services programs that received $9.5 million in MLAC funds in FY 2010 saved Massachusetts taxpayers $14.6 million that year by sparing many from homelessness and domestic violence, and brought into the Commonwealth nearly $30.6 million in additional federal benefits.
- Because legal services spare our courts the time, expense, and burden of trying to ensure justice for litigants who do not know the law and sometimes lack the skills needed to articulate the facts. I am among those judges who have silently proclaimed, "Hallelujah," when I learned that a legal services attorney has come into a difficult and complex civil case to represent an indigent litigant against a represented party.
- Because legal services provide the legal infrastructure, training, advice, and community education that help the vast majority of Massachusetts residents, many more than the poor they represent, to understand, enforce, and defend their rights.
But ultimately the questions you must ask of our elected representatives are a
variation of the questions asked by Hillel at the beginning of the modern era: What kind of a Commonwealth would we be if we did not protect the rights of those in need by providing them with adequate legal services? And if we do not protect the rights of those in need, who will? And if not now, when?Ralph D. Gants, Associate Justice, Supreme Judicial Court
ADAMS PRO BONO PUBLICO AWARDS AND
PRO BONO RECOGNITION PROGRAM
The SJC's Adams Pro Bono Publico Awards will be given out and the Court's new Pro Bono Attorney Recognition Program will be inaugurated at a ceremony in the Adams Courthouse on Wednesday, October 26 at 4:00 p.m. All are invited to attend and congratulate the award winners and honored firms. If you plan to come, contact Carol Lev at 617-557-1074 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 617-557-1074 end_of_the_skype_highlighting or at carol.lev@sjc.state.ma.us.
Receiving the Adams Pro Bono Publico Awareds are:
Kerry Elizabeth Doyle
Donal Eoin Reilly
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, PC
The new SJC Pro Bono Recognition Program, proposed by Commission Co-Chair Justice Ralph Gants and to be administered by the SJC's Standing Committee on Pro Bono, honors firms which certify that they more than met the pro bono standard set in Rule 6.1. The firms being honored, and the details of the program, can be found at http://www.mass.gov/courts/sjc/pro-bono-recognition.html.
COMMISsIONER TRANSITIONS
Several members of the Access to Justice Commission have made important changes recently.
Robert B. Foster has been nominated by Governor Patrick to serve as an Associate Justice on the Land Court.
Jacquelynne J. Bowman has been appointed Executive Director of Greater Boston Legal Services, succeeding Bob Sable, who has retired.
Navjeet K. Bal has left her position as Commissioner of Revenue and is now at Nixon Peabody LLP.
CHIEF JUSTICE IRELAND SPEAKS ABOUT ACCESS TO JUSTICE
In his first annual address to the Massachusetts Bar Association on October 13, 2011, Chief Justice Roderick L. Ireland had some very supportive things to say about the work of the Commission and the commissioners. Analogizing to creation of the Business Litigation Session to meet the needs of business, he declared it a duty of the judicial branch to make courts more welcoming to those who have been historically under-served -- "people of color, immigrants, the poor and the disabled:." He tasked the Commission to provide "leadership to the many entities involved in expanding access to justice" under the leadership of co-chairs Justice Ralph Gants and Attorney David Rosenberg.
Among the access to justice initiatives he cited favorably were:
Innovative pro bono programs,
Limited assistance representation,
Justice Fein and the access to justice initiative,
Courthouse information desks,
Trial Court law libraries.
SJI grant to the Trial Court to translate small claims court forms,
Probate and Family Court financial statement now in Spanish and Portuguese,
Judicial Institute Training for court staff on serving unrepresented litigants, and
A judicial conference convened by Justice Cynthia Cohen on managing cases involving unrepresented parties
SECOND INTERIM REPORT OF THE SPECIAL PLANNING COMMITTEE
The Second Interim Report of the Special Planning Committee was approved by the Commission at its meeting September 15, 2011. The Committee issued its First Interim Report in May and took comments over the summer. The Second Interim Report is the revised version and can be downloaded here.
The Report recommends:
That a Commission goal be that ongoing, careful and comprehensive planning become a regular feature of the delivery system.
That the intake, screening and hotline functions in each region be examined, that best practices be developed and that resources be shifted to extended advocacy. The providers' intake system task force is asked to undertake this examination and to report its plans within six months.
That there be a concerted statewide effort among the providers to assess steps that can be taken to increase systemic advocacy. Massachusetts Law Reform Institute and the providers' Advocacy Coordination Committee are asked to undertake this effort and to report on their plans within six months.
That each region determine its allocation of regional resources among a range of extents of service, the spectrum of substantive areas and the variety of population groups, and then question whether that allocation maximizes impact on basic human needs, on escaping from poverty or on the quality of individual lives.
That providers utilize volunteer resources and allied professionals more effectively.
That technological innovations be more effectively employed.
That evaluation of program practices and initiatives be improved and that the results of evaluations be shared.
That the providers and the Commission continue to pursue new resources through the Commission's Revenue Enhancement Committee.
That the Planning Committee follow up on developments in the regions and in the delivery system as a whole.
The comments to the First Interim Report are also available. The first eleven are here.
1. Ann Leavenworth 2
2. Leonard Spinner 4
3. Richard McMahon and Susan Nagl 5
4. Bob Sable 7
5. Samantha Morton 11
6. Toni Wolfman 15
7. Will Ogburn 17
8. Sheila Casey, Ken McIver and Jay McManus 19
9. Kathy Boundy 30
10. Gordon Shaw 35
11. Jeff Leukens 38
Two comments were submitted in .pdf format and are linked separately.
12. Jon Mannina
13. Georgia Katsoulomitis
PRO BONO OPPORTUNITIES
The Commission sponsored a Forum in the spring of 2011 to encourage lawyers not working in private law firms to become involved in providing pro bono services. The brochure prepared for that Forum lists a number of providers who are seeking pro bono volunteers from the ranks of in-house counsel, government and academic lawyers and others.
The brochure is available here. We will try to keep the listing up to date.
LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION FUNDING UPDATE
Funding for Legal Services Corporation grantees for 2012 (the federal fiscal year 2012 began October 1, 2011) continues to be uncertain. The House Appropriations Committee endorsed a plan in July that would cut LSC by 26% (to $300 million). The appropriations subcommittee of the Senate Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Committee adopted a proposal for a 2% cut (to $396 million). Neither house has finished the relevant appropriations bill, however, and the federal government is once again running on a continuing resolution. It seems likely that final appropriation decisions will not be made until the debt ceiling super-committee process has determined whether agencies like LSC are to be cut for FY 2012.
POVERTY IN AMERICA IS ON THE RISE
In September, the United States Census Bureau released official poverty figures for 2010. The report on income, poverty and health reported that 46.2 million people lived under the federal poverty level. That's 15.1 percent. LSC promptly noted that at the 125% of poverty level which most LSC grantees use for eligibility, the same report finds 60.4 million Americans eligible for services, up 3.6 million over 2009. (The 125% level is $13,613 for an individual and $27,938 for a family of four.) That means that one in five Americans is eligible for legal assistance from an LSC program.
Of course, those programs can't begin to serve that many people. LSC grantees close less than a million cases a year, and their funding is going down (see above). Legal Aid programs in Massachusetts, and across the country, are laying attorneys off and cutting expenses to make ends meet.
IT HAPPENED IN TEXAS
This summer the Texas legislature did the unexpected -- for the second time in three years the Legislature made a special appropriation to civil legal aid to make up for the dramatic decline in IOLTA revenues since interest rates declined. The bill provided $17.5 million. Governor Rick Perry signed the bill, including the civil legal services funding, on July 19.
WORKING GROUPS
The Commission does much of its work through its six Working Groups.
UPDATES
Updates regarding access to justice in Massachusetts will be posted on this website periodically.
OTHER COMMISSIONS
For information about the growing number of access to justice commissions, visit the ABA's Access to Justice Support Project at www.ATJsupport.org.
Send comments on this website to gerrysings@aol.com
