California Bar Journal
OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA - MAY 1999
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
spacer.gif (810 bytes)

California Bar Journal

The State Bar of California


REGULARS

spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Front Page - May 1999
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
News
Lending compassion to a difficult situation
Legal specialist exam set Aug. 29
Board to meet June 25-26
Domestic violence group seeking volunteers
Northern California legal services board to fill five vacancies
Court statistics report now available on CD
For Y2K advice, link through bar's web site
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Trials Digest
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Opinion
Hear the cries this time
A single letter, a big increase
Train time at the ABA
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
From the President - Door to justice must be open
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Letters to the Editor
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Legal Tech - Litigation library great for attorneys out of office
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
New Products & Services
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
MCLE Self-Study
The Disabled Practitioner
Self-Assessment Test
MCLE Calendar of Events
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Discipline
Ethics Byte - What to do when a client goes missing
Attorney charged with exposing clients to deportation
Attorney Discipline
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
Public Comment
Fee bill introduced
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
(continued from Page 1)
spacer.gif (810 bytes)
 

The measure was scheduled to be heard by the Senate Judiciary Committee April 27, along with SB 757, authored by longtime bar critic Sen. Bill Morrow, R-Oceanside.

The biggest impact of the Schiff measure is the reduction in the number of hours required under the minimum continuing legal education (MCLE) program from 36 to 25. The four-hour law practice management requirement would be eliminated, and required ethics hours would drop from eight to four.

The exemption for retired judges would end, but exemptions for California lawmakers and full-time law professors, the target of litigation before the California Supreme Court, remain.

The First District Court of Appeal ruled in March 1997 that the MCLE program violates the equal protection rights of members of the bar who are not exempted.

The bar's appeal of the ruling in the case, Warden v. State Bar of California, is set for oral argument before the high court June 2.

Marshall said it is clear that attorneys throughout the state are dissatisfied with the MCLE program and that such sentiment must be ad-dressed, regardless of legislation or litigation. At the board of governors last month, he emphasized the need to create a commission to review all facets of the program, including the number of units, types of units and how courses become certified.

If the bill passes:

The bar would remain governed by a mostly elected board of lawyers.

The Conference of Delegates and educational sections would remain part of the State Bar, but would be self-funded.

The IOLTA (Interest on Lawyer Trust Accounts) program, which provides funds for legal assistance to the poor, and the Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation are unaffected.

The State Bar Court remains under the aegis of the State Bar and is not transferred to the Supreme Court, as proposed by reformers last year.

The Schiff measure provides for an annual $395 fee and changes the criteria to request a fee reduction.

The current three-tier dues structure - based on the number of years an attorney has been in practice - would be eliminated by SB 144.

Instead, attorneys earning less than $25,000 a year will be entitled to a 50 percent reduction in dues, and those who make less than $40,000 will receive a 25 percent break.

And although it imposes no restrictions on the subject matter of lobbying, the bill does offer attorneys an opportunity to prevent their dues from being used to lobby issues which do not fall within the purview of the Keller v. State Bar of California decision.

(In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of using mandatory fees to fund activities related to the regulation of the legal profession or improvement of the quality of legal services. In certain instances, however, it may not use compelled fees over a member's challenge.)

The bar's legislative activities were a focus of Wilson's veto and an obstacle to resolution of the funding crisis last year.

Morrow's bill imposes restrictions on bar lobbying, separates the Conference of Delegates from the bar and requires it to be self-funded, requires the bar to comply with any U.S. or California supreme court rulings on the IOLTA program, and leaves the future of MCLE in the hands of the state Supreme Court.

The Assembly version of Morrow's bill (SB 757), authored by Dick Ackerman, R-Fullerton, died in the Assembly Judiciary Committee last month.