The persisting problem here is that the high-dollar do-gooders who want to “solve” this problem don’t have one iota of a fleeting notion about what they are trying to do. These clients aren’t going to be doing IPOs, or mergers and acquisitions, or multi-district, class-action litigation. DLA Piper and Arent Fox, while perhaps well intentioned here, don’t know anything about the problems of these clients, and will simply not be helpful. The scenario projected here is fully as delusional as the ABA Journal articles from six or seven years ago, suggesting that these clients would be taken care of by silver-haired BigLaw retirees, looking for something to do. That obviously didn’t happen (and won’t ever). This delusional claptrap here isn’t going to work any better, for the same, fundamental reason that the do-gooders pushing it don’t have a clue. If you want to have a program that will help this client base, the “mentors” helping the newbie grads need to be legal aid lawyers and public defenders, not a bunch of ineffectual BigLaw VIPs. It is but the plain and simple truth I mention, without meaning to give any offense.
Another example of the profession destroying itself. Probably half of my client earn $50k or less per year, and are able to afford my services. If one of these “law firms” opened up next door, it would put me and numerous other firms in dire financial straits. What people can afford and what they choose to spend their money on are two different things.
50k is not sufficient income to engage a lawyer on a long-term basis. Please tell me how much do you charge per hour. Rent or a mortgage usually swallows up more than half of a person’s income without taking in consideration the utility bills, food, transportation to work. I am referring to basic necessities, not luxury. If you are disabled or caring for a disabled loved one, your expenses simply multiply. Your concern is real, but it should not block a possible solution to a serious problem facing the poor and the working/middle-class population.
And yet, I keep thinking that the real “problem” this is designed to solve is that of low ratios of lawyers with jobs divided by lawyers graduating Georgetown.
This sounds like the start to an AMAZING career that would allow someone to immediately pay off their loans, start a family, and live out the American dream LOLOLOLOLOL
I can see and empathize with both previous comments. The fact that the legal profession has gone the route of physicians and believes it is entitled to 6 figure salaries at a minimum and owes nothing to society is quite prevalent. That a big firm would support such a program is heartening. And just might work if they hire new grads that desire to serve this segment of the population and realize what it will do to their career earnings in the long run. As for the pressure it would put on the small practitioner Indeed it might. The point being what a person can afford and what they choose to spend is a valid one. It reminds me of the time when I was a public defender and I represented a client that was purportedly indigent yet made almost twice what I did as an attorney. So there would need to be some serious screening of applicants. I can see how this type of program might be very effective in an urban setting where the guilt/social welfare sympathy factor would support donations necessary to operate it. But what about the rural areas where poverty is much more endemic and the population is usually less educated on their rights than in urban areas? As for the legal profession destroying itself - to be honest a little destruction would be a good thing in my mind. Ethics violations are often not made and when they are rarely does the violations of judges or high profile legal “professionals” merit any punishment. Especially when compared to the same or substantially similar conduct done by a solo or small firm attorney. Politics has invaded the realm of the judiciary and prosecution function to such a degree that a fair and equal treatment before the law is a rarity. Judicial conflicts of interest and bias are an open secret in some areas that the bar doesn’t want spoken about and or published. I for one would like to see a more open and affordable access to the judicial system. Maybe the poverty penalty, which is often passed from generation to generation, would have less of an impact on society in general and better use of the human capitol could be made.
The article doesn’t say what kind of services Georgetown Law will be providing. While I share McLeod’s skepticism about associates doing traditional poverty law work involving areas that require a great deal of experience, such as housing, welfare, and social security, I don’t see why they can’t work on wills, simple divorces, advanced directives, health insurance, and other more limited areas.
There is never a shortage of successful people who are more than willing to make more of a name for themselves by donating other people’s time for the cause de jure.
Having recent law students do pro bono or low bono work is absurd because the graduates are probably worse off financially than their low-income clients. This is because the average law graduate has around $100,000 in student loan debt. I doubt very seriously that most low-income clients have that kind of debt - they may not make much money, but they are not that deep in debt.
So, the recent graduate is helping someone who is in a better position financially than they are. Curiouser and curiouser.
B. McLeod said:
The persisting problem here is that the high-dollar do-gooders who want to “solve” this problem don’t have one iota of a fleeting notion about what they are trying to do. These clients aren’t going to be doing IPOs, or mergers and acquisitions, or multi-district, class-action litigation. DLA Piper and Arent Fox, while perhaps well intentioned here, don’t know anything about the problems of these clients, and will simply not be helpful. The scenario projected here is fully as delusional as the ABA Journal articles from six or seven years ago, suggesting that these clients would be taken care of by silver-haired BigLaw retirees, looking for something to do. That obviously didn’t happen (and won’t ever). This delusional claptrap here isn’t going to work any better, for the same, fundamental reason that the do-gooders pushing it don’t have a clue. If you want to have a program that will help this client base, the “mentors” helping the newbie grads need to be legal aid lawyers and public defenders, not a bunch of ineffectual BigLaw VIPs. It is but the plain and simple truth I mention, without meaning to give any offense.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 01:45 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
associate said:
You’re clearly not on board with the ABA, BigLaw, and the Law School industry. Your malfunction, as I see it, is that you think.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 09:28 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
TheTruth said:
Another example of the profession destroying itself. Probably half of my client earn $50k or less per year, and are able to afford my services. If one of these “law firms” opened up next door, it would put me and numerous other firms in dire financial straits. What people can afford and what they choose to spend their money on are two different things.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 08:30 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
associate said:
bingo.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 09:28 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
kado said:
50k is not sufficient income to engage a lawyer on a long-term basis. Please tell me how much do you charge per hour. Rent or a mortgage usually swallows up more than half of a person’s income without taking in consideration the utility bills, food, transportation to work. I am referring to basic necessities, not luxury. If you are disabled or caring for a disabled loved one, your expenses simply multiply. Your concern is real, but it should not block a possible solution to a serious problem facing the poor and the working/middle-class population.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 10:07 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
SanFranciscan said:
Exactly.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 02:41 pm CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
Cynical Old Lawyer said:
And yet, I keep thinking that the real “problem” this is designed to solve is that of low ratios of lawyers with jobs divided by lawyers graduating Georgetown.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 09:20 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
associate said:
This sounds like the start to an AMAZING career that would allow someone to immediately pay off their loans, start a family, and live out the American dream LOLOLOLOLOL
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 09:25 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
MAM13 said:
I can see and empathize with both previous comments. The fact that the legal profession has gone the route of physicians and believes it is entitled to 6 figure salaries at a minimum and owes nothing to society is quite prevalent. That a big firm would support such a program is heartening. And just might work if they hire new grads that desire to serve this segment of the population and realize what it will do to their career earnings in the long run. As for the pressure it would put on the small practitioner Indeed it might. The point being what a person can afford and what they choose to spend is a valid one. It reminds me of the time when I was a public defender and I represented a client that was purportedly indigent yet made almost twice what I did as an attorney. So there would need to be some serious screening of applicants. I can see how this type of program might be very effective in an urban setting where the guilt/social welfare sympathy factor would support donations necessary to operate it. But what about the rural areas where poverty is much more endemic and the population is usually less educated on their rights than in urban areas? As for the legal profession destroying itself - to be honest a little destruction would be a good thing in my mind. Ethics violations are often not made and when they are rarely does the violations of judges or high profile legal “professionals” merit any punishment. Especially when compared to the same or substantially similar conduct done by a solo or small firm attorney. Politics has invaded the realm of the judiciary and prosecution function to such a degree that a fair and equal treatment before the law is a rarity. Judicial conflicts of interest and bias are an open secret in some areas that the bar doesn’t want spoken about and or published. I for one would like to see a more open and affordable access to the judicial system. Maybe the poverty penalty, which is often passed from generation to generation, would have less of an impact on society in general and better use of the human capitol could be made.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 09:37 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
rnh said:
The article doesn’t say what kind of services Georgetown Law will be providing. While I share McLeod’s skepticism about associates doing traditional poverty law work involving areas that require a great deal of experience, such as housing, welfare, and social security, I don’t see why they can’t work on wills, simple divorces, advanced directives, health insurance, and other more limited areas.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 10:07 am CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
Overeducated but Underemployed said:
There is never a shortage of successful people who are more than willing to make more of a name for themselves by donating other people’s time for the cause de jure.
Having recent law students do pro bono or low bono work is absurd because the graduates are probably worse off financially than their low-income clients. This is because the average law graduate has around $100,000 in student loan debt. I doubt very seriously that most low-income clients have that kind of debt - they may not make much money, but they are not that deep in debt.
So, the recent graduate is helping someone who is in a better position financially than they are. Curiouser and curiouser.
Posted: Apr 17, 2015 09:14 pm CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation
B. McLeod said:
Hey, I’m guessing they are calling this “DCALF” for a reason.
Posted: Apr 18, 2015 03:27 pm CDT
Reply to this comment | Flag this comment for moderation