|
Editor: Assistant Dean John M. McNamara, room 1212, ext. 393, 6mcnamar@jmls.edu.All information to be published in Up & Coming must be placed in the UPCOMING directory on the H drive of The John Marshall Law School's computer network by each Tuesday at 12 p.m. |
|---|
ContentsSchedule of EventsUpcoming Centennial EventsJohn Marshall Professor Proposes Attorney Billing Changes In Award-Winning EssayFaculty Activity and PublicationsStudent ActivitiesStudent Bar AssociationFair Housing Center/ClinicCenter for Advocacy and Dispute ResolutionJohn Marshall Receives Top Award At ABA ConventionSchedule of Events
|
John Marshall Professor Proposes Attorney Billing Changes In Award-Winning EssayAn essay by Professor Kevin Hopkins of The John Marshall Law School on how technology's efficiencies necessitate billing changes at law firms has won the top prize in the W.M. Keck Essay Contest on Legal Ethics sponsored by the Georgetown University Law Center. Professor Hopkins' award-winning essay proposes an amendment to Rule 1.5 of the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct to expressly allow for the consideration of special circumstances such as technology and expertise in modifying the final bill when the client has agreed to an hourly billing arrangement. A modified hourly billing arrangement would combine the advantages of hourly billing and value billing. The essay, to be published in the winter issue of The Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, won the $5,000 grand prize. The professor focused on how technologies are altering the practice of law by making research and legal document creation easier. "The effective use of computerized in-house databases can increase [attorneys'] proficiencies while dramatically reducing the cost of services for the client," Professor Hopkins argues. A central database also allows lawyers employed at a firm's branch office to access and share the research and documents on file at its other offices that may have addressed the same or similar legal questions. Professor Hopkins questions how attorneys bill for the research that may be used in later cases. Should they be billing only the first client for the time spent on research, or should all clients who benefit from the work be charged a fee? Because of new technologies, is the traditional hourly billing rate still valid? The current ethics rules penalize attorneys who charge an hourly rate for being technologically efficient, Professor Hopkins contends. "The solution is to modify hourly billing," he says. "The more effective and practical billing arrangement would be one that utilizes an hourly billing rate but allows the lawyer some freedom to modify the rate when special circumstances dictate." "Many firms that have incorporated current technology continue to employ billing practices that fail to account for these savings," Professor Hopkins argues. "If a lawyer's fee is based upon an hourly billing rate, technology that increases the lawyer's ability to resolve a legal issue in a quick and speedy manner may result in a loss of profit, and ultimately, the over-billing of time for work not actually performed in the handling of a client's case." Under the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct, an attorney's fees must be reasonable. Attorneys are expected to communicate the basis or rate of their fees to a client. The traditional billing method has been an hourly rate coupled with the actual time spent on the matter. At many law firms, associates are judged by their billing record. Professor Hopkins questions that procedure, and argues that many firms took a "laissez-faire attitude towards `double-billing' practices" until the resignation and imprisonment of former U.S. Associate Attorney General Webster Hubbell for federal income tax evasion and improper billing for fees during his career at Arkansas' Rose Law Firm. Hubbell's billing, including charges for personal items against client accounts, went unsupervised by the law firm's partners until a client questioned a bill. Shortly before the Hubbell case, the American Bar Association issued Formal Opinion 93-379 to address several questionable billing practices. The opinion included billing restrictions for recycled work and for the billing of multiple clients for similar work. If the ABA agrees to modify its code as Professor Hopkins proposes, lawyers would have the direct legal authority to bill for recycled work. Allowing for modification to the hourly billing arrangement "would remove much of the pressure to bill massive numbers of hours to generate revenues, and would eliminate the widespread practice of double-billing for recycled work," he argues, "thus, helping to preserve the integrity and independence of the legal profession."  Upcoming Centennial Events
Centennial ConvocationSeptember 24, 1998The John Marshall Law School begins its 100th anniversary celebration on September 24, 1998. Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice Charles Freeman, J.D. `62, will offer a testimonial to the law school on its century of achievement. Special friends, including Francis Cardinal George, and invited guests will be part of this special beginning to the two-year celebration honoring The John Marshall Law School's first hundred years. Student Bar AssociationCongratulations to the new 1998-99 Class Representatives! The first SBA meeting will be held on September 21, 1998 at 5:00 p.m. in Room 200. All the new reps must be there. Pizza and pop will be served and the meeting is open to all students, not just the new class reps. The SBA is looking for 1 or 2 people to help out with the planning of extracurricular sporting events. If you are interested, stop by the SBA office to discuss it with us. The SBA is planning on having another social in the next 2 weeks, watch the monitor and the bulletin boards for more information. The last one at Ranalli's was a huge success, so be sure to watch for details. The SBA is also hosting the movie "Breaker Morant" as part of the Centennial Movie Series on Thursday, October 1, 1998 from 4-6 p.m. This is a really great movie and we will be serving refreshments. Fair Housing Center/ClinicThe Fair Housing Legal Support Center at The John Marshall Law School presented a two-day workshop" Celebrating 30 Years of Fair Housing: A Focus on Fair Housing Enforcement," on September 11 & 12th at the Law School. Over 220 attorneys, lenders, investigators, architects, realtors, consumers, and federal and state agencies were in attendance. A conference handbook was prepared which included outlines, cases, graphs and scholarly papers from the speakers. The handbook, as well as, the videotape of the conference will be placed and made available in the library reserve collection. Speakers included Michael P. Seng, F. Willis Caruso, Joseph Butler and Francis Morrissey of The John Marshall Law School; Private Attorneys, Christopher Brancart, Scott Chang, CA; John Relman, DC; Edward Voci, IL; and Stephen Dane, OH; Merilyn Brown, Barbara Knox, Maurice McGough, and Judges Alan Heifetz and Thomas Heinz, of U.S. Department of HUD; Professors Robert Schwemm, University of Kentucky Law School and Michael Schill, New York University Law School; Calvin Bradford of Bradford Associates; Assistant Attorney General Paul Hancock, State of FL; Brian Heffernan of The U.S. Department of Justice, and Beth Rosen-Prinz, Housing Administrator of the State of CA. The past, present and the future of fair housing enforcement was discussed. Topics included the HUD Investigation, Conciliation, and Hearing Process, The Role of the Justice Department, State & Local Fair Housing Enforcement, and Private Enforcement. Barbara Knox examined the strength of HUD investigations and how the investigative process could be made to proceed faster and more efficiently. Professor Morrissey explained the risks that must be considered by complainants and respondents and the ethical considerations of Advocacy. Professor Robert Schwemm's study of 1981 showed that awards in fair housing cases ranged only from $1 to $20,000. Today damage awards have increased dramatically with many recoveries exceeding $100,000 and multimillion-dollar awards in pattern and practice cases. It was urged that lawyers think creatively about injunctive relief as well as seeking dollar awards. Paul Hancock citedHispanics United of DuPage County v. Village of Addison as a model for re-development. Attorneys from the private sector discussed how to win a case, and Judge Heinz discussed the recent decline of cases going to the ALJ's and its impact. He urged litigants to consider the ALJ trial process. Finally, Paul Hancock summarized that in the future, enforcement of Fair Housing will be in the hands of state enforcement officials using state and local resources. The conference was underwritten with grants from the Fannie Mae Foundation and the Woods Fund of Chicago. John Marshall Receives Top Award At ABA Convention
The American Bar Association, at its annual meeting in Toronto in August, honored The John Marshall Law School for its outstanding Criminal Trial Advocacy Program by awarding it the Section Officers Conference Award of Excellence. Professor Ron Smith (right) shares the award with Dean Robert Gilbert Johnston.Eight years of outstanding work on the part of Professor Ron Smith netted The John Marshall Law School a top prize from the American Bar Association. The Section Officers Conference presented its Award of Excellence to the law school for its annual Criminal Trial Advocacy Program hosted each spring in conjunction with the American Bar Association. Professor Smith has organized the program each year, developing the problem, selecting teams for the competition and getting judges from throughout the United States to serve as mentors and trial judges. "The competition is designed for law students in trial advocacy to improve their skills, and for the practicing bar to assist and evaluate the students' work," Smith explained. Many practitioners and scholars regard The John Marshall Law School Trial Advocacy Competition as the best trial competition in the country, he added. A former assistant state's attorney and criminal defense attorney, Smith draws upon his expertise in fashioning a question that will give students a variety of angles to address before the court. Each year Smith brings in 20 teams to compete. They have included teams from Harvard, Yale, University of California-Berkeley, Lewis & Clarke, Tulane, Stetson and Albany Law Schools. Last year, Smith had a team from Trinity College in Dublin, Ireland, in the competition. Center for Advocacy and Dispute ResolutionProjected Schedule of CompetitionsOctober 1Notification to students of team selections Competitions for 1998 - 99November 6 - 9,1998Georgetown University White Collar Criminal Mock Trial Competition, Washington, D.C. November 11 - 14, 1998National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) Mock Trial Competition, Atlanta, GA Nov. 7 or 14, 1998ABA Negotiations Regional Competition National - Feb. 6 and 7, 1999 - Los Angeles, CA Jan. 29 - 31 or Feb. 5 - 7, 1999ABA Texas Young Lawyers Mock Trial Competition Regional National - March 18 - 20, 1999 - San Antonio, TX February 13 or 20, 1999ABA Client Counseling Regional Competition National - March 12 at Nova University, FL and International - March 29 - April 1 at John Marshall, Chicago Spring 1999American Trial Lawyers Association (ATLA) Trial Competition Fall 1998Vis Moot Court International Arbitration Competition; Spring 1999 (Writing and research requirements October and December 1998) Vienna, Austria March 25 - 27,1999JMLS - ABA Criminal Justice National Mock Trial Competition, Chicago, IL April 8 - 9, 1999My Cousin Vinny 1st Year Intramural Mock Trial Competition, The John Marshall Law School, Chicago, IL (No tryouts necessary - all first year students invited to participate) |
September 21