Glacial Progress

Like a glacier, the American Bar Association is a deceptive phenomenon.

Once a year, some 6,500 of its 125,000 members meet in convention, as they did last week in Honolulu. Papers are read, committees meet, speeches get spoken, progress is made, change takes place. Measurement of that progress and change, however, is not an easy matter. As with a glacier, much of the activity goes on deep within, and the only outward signs of it are a rumble here, a new wrinkle there. Last week in Honolulu there were rumbles of new ideas. Few reached final determination; some were flatly rebuffed. But for the A.B.A., the mere fact of discussion was a sign, however faint, of forward motion. Items:

sbSPECIALIZATION. With the continuing expansion of the field of law, the individual lawyer finds it increasingly difficult to be competent in its many areas. The informal solution has naturally been to specialize. But the A.B.A. has no rules or regulations governing specialization. After lengthy consideration of the problem, a committee on the availability of legal services recommended that the board of governors be allowed to draw up standards for certification of specialists. That modestly forward-looking proposal went to the house of delegates, where it was surprisingly defeated. Reason: many of the delegates are small, jack-of-all-fields practitioners who fear that an increase in specialization would narrow the generalist's practice. The vote effectively blocked action on specialization this year, but proponents of certification promise that they will try again.

sbGROUP LEGAL SERVICES. Occasionally mislabeled group practice, group legal services are services made available by for example, a union or club as a benefit of membership. But the A.B.A. code of ethics bars them, on the ground that "the professional services of a lawyer should not be controlled or exploited by any lay agency, personal or corporate, which intervenes between client and lawyer." In a convention debate, backers of such services pointed out that they would make legal assistance possible for people who could not otherwise fully afford it. Replied Pennsylvania Attorney Andrew Hourigan Jr., chairman of the A.B.A. committee on unauthorized practice of law: "Simply because group legal services might be an improvement is no reason to rush posthaste into a major revision of ethical standards." Although Hourigan and his committee did not withdraw their opposition, legitimization of group legal services will be fought out in the house of delegates within the next year. Despite the lack of concrete affirmation, concern for broadened availability of legal services pervaded the meeting. Said new A.B.A. President Earl Morris, a supporter of group legal services: "The legal profession has responded well in the rendition of legal services to clients who could well afford them.

Lawyers as individuals and through legal-aid societies have long served the poor." Now lawyers must think of how to go about providing their services to the middle ground of Americans "at a cost they can afford to pay." The most important thing, he said in summarizing the meeting, "is that the bar recognizes that we are living in a rapidly changing and demanding society. Our role is to be attuned to this social change."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.