Your Forms Library is Your Most Important Asset

Posted on 01/21/2020 by beverlym

Forms and templates are the most important intellectual property owned by a law firm. We rely on them to be efficient, effective, and productive. But is that reliance misplaced?

The answer is yes, if we fail to devote the necessary time and resources to maintaining our most valuable asset.

Here are some suggestions for keeping your forms library in tip-top shape:

Update your forms in accordance with the annual rules cycle. Proposed changes to the UTCRs are effective on August 1 of each year. Supplementary Local Rules (SLRs) are effective February 1 unless disapproved. Set task reminders accordingly!
Monitor and flag out-of-cycle rule amendments by subscribing to OJD News and Media Releases.
Watch for Oregon State Bar CLEs and publications discussing pertinent legislative changes.
Use Professional Liability Fund (PLF) resources. The PLF publishes legislation alerts on the most significant changes made by the Oregon legislature. The December 2019 issue of In Brief covers updates in 13 practice areas. The PLF also offers forms, which it strives to update in accordance with the legislative cycle. Visit the PLF Forms page for more information and to view revision dates for documents pertinent to your practice. Also of interest are “Cases of Note,” included in each issue of the PLF In Brief.
Create a centralized forms library that limits editing rights, but grants access to all users. Capture the library as part of your backup and regularly test backup integrity.
Consider appointing a forms czar or committee. Establish a process for adding, updating, and dumping forms.
Ensure that form content is scrubbed of metadata and does not contain confidential client information. Variables – the client-specific information you will be inserting into the form to customize it – should be readily apparent. Using document assembly software like The Form Tool is the way to go.
Push notifications to firm members when forms in their area of practice change.
Ask firm leadership to stress the importance of using the centralized library versus hoarding resources on individual desktops or copying and pasting content from one client document to the next.

Start by Downloading the latest UTCR Forms

The latest forms adopted by the Uniform Trial Court Rules (UTCR) Committee and approved by the Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court can be downloaded in Zip, PDF, or Word format on the Oregon Judicial Department UTCR page. These include the following, which were revised in 2019:

Request to Segregate Protected Personal Information
Request to Inspect UTCR 2.100 Segregated Information Sheet
Request to Redact Protected Personal Information from Existing Case
Motion for an Expedited Civil Jury Case Designation
Order Designating an Expedited Civil Jury Case
Request for Hearing re: Statutory Restraining Order

For the latest out-of-cycle UTCR amendments – effective November 2019 and January 2020, visit the Current Rules page on the OJD website.

Are Limited License Legal Technicians Coming to Oregon?

Posted on 07/10/2017 by beverlym

With the success of the Washington Limited License Legal Technician (LLLT) experiment, will Oregon finally dip its toe into paraprofessional licensing? The answer appears to be yes.

In June 2017 the OSB Futures Task Force submitted its report to the OSB Board of Governors. Among the recommendations: implementation of a paraprofessional licensing (LLLT) program in Oregon.

The task force recommended the BOG appoint a committee to develop a detailed implementation plan. The plan would include draft rules of admission, practice, and professional conduct for approval by the Supreme Court and adoption by the BOG. ORS Chapter 9 would be amended to provide for licensure of paraprofessionals who would be authorized to provide limited legal services, without attorney supervision, to self-represented litigants in family law and landlord-tenant proceedings. Consumer protection measures would also be enacted.

Why Do We Need LLLTs (Paraprofessionals)?

Short answer: access to justice. As detailed in the task force report, the number of self-represented litigants continues to grow. Legal Aid, pro bono services, and limited scope representation only meet a small part of the need.

Minimum Qualifications and Licensing

The task force report lays out a series of minimum qualifications for paraprofessionals or LLLTs. Licensing would include “liability insurance in an amount to be determined,” preferably through the Professional Liability Fund, and continuing legal education. To protect the public from confusion, LLLTs would be required to use written agreements with mandatory disclosures.

Scope of Services

“Licensees should be able to select, prepare, file, and serve forms
and other documents in an approved proceeding; provide information and advice relating to the proceeding; communicate and negotiate with another party; and provide emotional and administrative support to the client in court. Licensees should be prohibited from representing clients in depositions, in court, and in appeals.”

Proposed Expansion of Washington’s LLLT Program

BOG approval of a LLLT/paraprofessional program seems greater than 50-50. As we await the outcome in Oregon, Washington is seeking to update its program. Under draft amendments, the LLLT role would expand to permit:

Accompanying and assisting clients in specific court proceedings, mediation, settlement conferences, and arbitration proceedings.
Attending, but not participating in, depositions.
Communicating with opposing counsel and parties on procedural matters and negotiations.
Gathering information on the value and potential encumbrances on a home.
Presenting agreed, uncontested, and default court orders.
Assisting clients seeking nonparental custody or major modifications up to the point of the adequate cause hearing.
Dividing single-family residential dwellings which have no more than twice the homestead exemption in equity.

Washington bar members have until July 17 to submit comments.

Parting Thoughts

At its June meeting, the BOG accepted the OSB Futures Task Force report. As noted on the OSB website, “the board will be looking at those recommendations throughout the year and likely into 2018.” Comments are encouraged and may be submitted to president@osbar.org.

Family Leave for Solos and Small Firm Lawyers

Posted on 03/09/2015 by beverlym

How do solos and small firm lawyers plan for extended leave when a new member is about to join the family? It can be hard enough to take a vacation!

Fortunately, there are some answers and good resources to draw upon. (Jump to the end of this post.) For now, let’s cover the basics.

Colleagues, Conflicts, and Staffing

The best coverage plan entails having a number of colleagues lined up who are willing to cover your cases. Remember what your parents said? Safety in numbers! If one person can’t cover in an emergency, someone else can. A team approach works best.

By necessity, any lawyers who might work on client matters must be screened for conflicts. Clients need to be notified anyway about your upcoming leave. Use this opportunity to get permission to share information for conflict and representation purposes. (More on this below.)

If you have staff, great! They are a huge help any time you are away from the office, more so during extended absences. They will be a lifeline for everyday communication, including screening mail, email, and calls. If you don’t have staff, consider getting a temp. Having someone who can cover day-to-day operations brings peace of mind and ensures that nothing falls through the cracks.

How Do I Tell My Clients?

One option is to send a letter or email. No surprise there. But is it the best approach?

Most lawyers anticipating family leave have a number of colleagues in mind to assist in covering their cases. This alone can make writing a letter or email complicated and confusing: “I’m going to be out of the office, but you can choose from Lawyer A, Lawyer B, or Lawyer C.” Huh?

Consider picking up the phone instead. Call clients and tell them you are taking a medical leave and why. (Of course, you can omit the “why” part – it is personal and technically no one’s business, but most lawyers taking family leave don’t mind sharing this news.)

Have a conversation with the client about what is happening. Explain your plan, offer a name of a monitoring lawyer (or team of monitoring lawyers), then get consent to screen for potential conflicts and review the client’s case with the monitoring lawyer(s). If everything is a “go,” make sure the client understands and agrees to temporary representation by the monitoring lawyer(s). Don’t forget to discuss how the billing and payment piece will work.

If the client does not agree with your proposed arrangement, you may have to disengage and withdraw from the case. The client will need to find a new lawyer of their choosing.

Confirming Arrangements in Writing

Assuming you call clients to review your plan, sending a confirming email becomes relatively easy:

“As we discussed, I will be out of the office on a medical leave of absence for ___________ (months/weeks). During my leave, I propose that _______________ monitor your file. You agree that I may share information with _____________ so (he/she) may screen for potential conflicts of interest. If no conflicts exist, you agree that I may disclose details of your case to ______________________ for purposes of monitoring your file and attending to any legal work that needs to be accomplished while I am out of the office. If we discover a conflict that prohibits ___________________ from assisting you, I will contact you immediately.

You will receive a separate written confirmation from ___________________ (the monitoring lawyer) confirming the arrangements we have made.

(Describe next how the client will be billed.)

My assistant, _______________, will be available by phone and email should you have any questions while I am out of the office. (Provide your assistant’s contact information.)

Rest assured I will stay informed regarding the status of your case. I anticipate returning to the office on ___________. If for any reason my return is delayed, I will inform you immediately.

(Optional: Please reply to this email confirming your understanding and agreement to this arrangement.)

Fee Agreements and Paying the Monitoring Lawyer

If your existing fee agreement has a provision informing the client that you have made arrangements for someone to cover your practice in the event of illness or disability you have laid the necessary foundation for using a monitoring lawyer. The PLF offers a number of fee agreements and engagement letters that incorporate “assisting attorney” language. For samples, visit the PLF website. Select Practice Management > Forms, then Engagement Letters.

If your existing fee agreement has a contract lawyering provision – meaning the client has consented to use of a contract lawyer at a specified rate – it is easy to have the monitoring lawyer step into the contract role. You may bill the client for contract lawyering services according to your existing fee agreement.

Alternatively, clients can sign separate fee agreements with the monitoring lawyer.

Learning the Ropes 2013

Posted on 10/14/2013 by beverlym

Are you new to private practice? Then I have just the ticket for you!

Attend our three day conference – Learning the Ropes: A Practical Skills & Ethics Workshop – for a mere $65. Attendance at the full program satisfies the MCLE requirements for new admittees’ first reporting period.

Choose from these concurrent sessions:

Domestic Relations or Criminal Law
Tort Litigation or Estate Planning
Civil Motion Practice or Bankruptcy
Creating a Firm or Joining a Firm

Can’t decide? All tracks are recorded for later viewing at no charge.

Plenary sessions include:

How to Develop a Successful Practice and Avoid Legal Malpractice
Client Communication and Other Practice Management Survival Tips
Alternative Dispute Resolution
The Ethics of Practice Management
Recognizing Child Abuse and Fulfilling Your Duty to Report
Negotiation Tips, Tricks, Traps, and Tools
Courtroom Do’s and Don’ts
Employment Law and Conscientious Communication
Bridging the Cultural Gap

Day 1 includes a “Meet the Judges” luncheon. Day 2 features a networking luncheon with bar leaders and respected practitioners in the fields of Appeals, Criminal Law, Employment Law, Intellectual Property, Business Litigation, Debtor/Creditor Law, Estate Planning, Litigation, Business Transactions, Elder Law, Family Law, and Real Estate.

All meals, including the luncheons, are included in your $65 workshop fee. The program is at the Oregon Convention Center November 6-8, 2013. Register here or visit the PLF Web site > Upcoming Seminars (under the heading Loss Prevention – CLE). Sign up early. Space is limited!

Is the Filing Fee Nightmare Over?

Posted on 07/26/2010 by beverlym

The OSB Court Fees Task Force has published an Initial Report with short term recommendations regarding 2009 HB 2287. Having fielded many a call on this subject, I agree with the conclusion of the task force: reform is badly needed. The current fee structure is complex, confusing, and in some cases, unfair. Here is an excerpt:

General Findings

The courts are a critically important, constitutionally mandated core function of government.
Courts must be open and accessible to all Oregonians.
The OSB’s highest legislative priority is open and accessible courts.
Keeping courts open and accessible requires stable and adequate funding.

Specific Findings

The current statutory fee structure is confusing and complex, even to experienced practitioners.
Any changes to the fee structure must not impede reasonable access to justice, including access by indigent persons, unrepresented litigants, and middle-income Oregonians.
The legislature should simplify the current fee structure to make it more predictable and more uniform.
Any changes to the fee system must maintain adequate funding for services critical to the justice system, such as Legal Aid services.
Some of the fees enacted in 2009 HB 2287 have created unintended and high transaction costs and/or unduly impaired access to justice, and should be modified or allowed to sunset.
Court-imposed financial obligations upon conviction of a crime or offense are an important part of the accountability process of the justice system.
Much of the liquidated and delinquent court-imposed debt cannot be collected and/or is owed to victims of crime, and does not represent a reasonable opportunity to increase revenue to the state or local governments.

Recommendations

Consolidate many existing fees that occur in the lifetime of a case (e.g., ex parte order and judgment fee, and fees for routine motions) into the filing and first response fees.
Enact consistent fee amounts for motions and other individual fees, so they are consistent within and among different types of cases.
Modify the following specific fees:
- Sunset the $10 ex parte order and judgment fee. This fee imposes excessive administration costs on litigants and the courts.
- Establish a statutory cap on fees in cases involving multiple parties and/or large prayer amounts. The current structure has created excessive fees in some cases.
- Sunset the expunction fee in cases where an arrest occurred but no conviction resulted. Imposing a substantial fee in these cases does not reflect court workload and imposes an unfair burden on persons not convicted of a crime.
- Restore a statutory limit on the amount retained from release security deposits, but at a higher limit than the previous $200 limit.
- Modify the mediation/conciliation fee and law library fee to a fixed amount set by statute, rather than a percentage of the filing fee set by individual counties.
The legislature should encourage efficient, effective, and fair collection of court-imposed financial obligations, maintain long-term judgments for accountability, and develop a mechanism to classify and categorize debt that can reasonably be expected to be collected.

(Emphasis supplied.)

The report continues with findings and recommendations specific to probate, family law, civil practice, and criminal practice.

The reforms proposed by the OSB Court Fees Task Force will be welcomed by everyone – court staff, lawyers, and parties – all of whom have struggled with the fee structure created by HB 2287.

Oregon Law Practice Management

Practice Management Tips for Oregon Lawyers

Tag Archives: Family Law