State Bar of Wisconsin

Meeting Minutes
September 14, 1999
State Bar of Wisconsin
Madison

Chair Attorney Pam Barker called the meeting to order at approximately 9:00 a.m. Present were Attorney Casey Andringa, Mary Celentani, Attorney John Decker, John Goudie, Shawn Olley, Attorney John Frank, Christine Ouimet-Durrow and staff liaison, Linda Barth. Attending via telephone was Attorney Mary Triggiano Hunt.

Minutes

The Task Force approved adoption of the minutes from June 24, 1999 with the changes suggested by Attorney Mulligan regarding his remarks and correcting Ms. Donovan's name. Ms. Barth announced that the minutes from the November 19, 1998 meeting had be approved by the survey that went out over the summer.

Education Package

The Task Force discussed the comments provided in the summer's survey regarding the education package. Chair Barker said that most of the comments were made regarding the lack of an ethics credit which seemed to be inadvertently deleted when the changes were drafted. Attorney Frank agreed and said that he would make the necessary changes to the language. The group also thought that "LTC" should be deleted on page 3.

Attorney Triggiano Hunt explained that the comments on her survey response were from paralegals in her office. She said that the apprenticeship idea needs work but it might be helpful in rural areas and for solo and small firm practitioners.

Mr. Goudie said that when he was trained, an internship was required and internships were hard to find. That's his problem with the internship concept. Attorney Andringa said that requiring internships could water down the whole system and monitoring would be difficult. He explained that he is a sole practitioner in a rural area and he can employee a legal secretary or if he wants more training, he can hire a paralegal.

Ms. Ouimet-Durrow suggested leaving the requirement for an internship up to the school. Mr. Goudie noted it would put the burden on the schools and if the schools can abide with the requirement, then we're fine.

Attorney Triggiano Hunt said she just wanted to put all the ideas out there.

Chair Barker expects that most people will come in under the grandfather clause.

Attorney Triggiano Hunt said that her office, Legal Action of Wisconsin, will train volunteer lawyers in the fall and they will also train paralegals.

Chair Barkers noted that training must be addressed, especially in the rural areas. It can be provided by the State Bar, at the Technical Schools and through technology. When writing the education section of the report, an explanation of the debate and issues discussed should be included. It should explained how easy it can be to get credits and how inexpensive the different choices can be.

Attorney Andringa moved adoption of the education clause with modification on the ethics credit. Ms. Olley seconded. Approved unanimously.

"Legal Assistants" vs. "Paralegals"

Mr. Goudie provided two handouts: one was a recent report from the National Federation of Paralegal Associations (NFPA) listing the paralegal changes in other states and the other was a law review article on the South Dakota change. He said that the South Dakota Bar instituted licensure of paralegals and it was off everyone's radar screen. Consequently, since there was little input it is not drafted as well as it could be.

Ms. Barth asked the group how they planned to deal with term "legal Assistant" versus "paralegal". Attorney Frank explained that the American Bar Association uses the terms interchangeably. Mr. Goudie said that the NFPA feels that the term "paralegal" is the professional title.

Attorney Andringa noted that the terms "lawyer" and "attorney" are used interchangeably. Ms. Ouimet-Durrow said that the larger firms do not use the terms interchangeably--they have paralegals, legal assistants and legal secretaries. Mr. Goudie said that the group should acknowledge that people who do not want to be licensed as a paralegal will have to drop the paralegal title and will have to become legal assistants.

Attorney Frank pointed out that in Washington D.C. legal assistants are paid more that paralegals--the paralegals are part of a pool and the legal assistants are assigned to individual attorneys.

Attorney Andringa said that Wisconsin is notorious as a "cherry-picker". We have our own marital property and probate statutes. With our proposal, the term "paralegal" will be a distinction that carries a degree of responsibility and pay. We, as a group, should explain that we "cherry-picked" that term because we were creating another level.

Attorney Decker added that the issue mirrors the terms used in real estate--"broker" versus "salesperson". It's a term of art and if you are not licensed to use the term of art then you use the non-protected term. Ms. Ouiment-Durrow said that her group is the National Association of Legal Assistants but the local group is the Madison Area Paralegal Association because of paralegal billing practices in Wisconsin.

Ms. Celentani said the State of Wisconsin dealt with this issue in state employment and after extensive negotiations, defined paralegals as professional staff. The pay ranges in state employment differentiate between paralegal and legal assistant and any changes in definitions would have a significant impact on the state employment system.

Considering the impact on state civil service, it was agreed that the Task Force recommendations would use only the term "paralegal".

Chair Barker reminded the group that this debate needs to be included in the report. Attorney Triggiano Hunt agreed and said the State Bar Board of Governors will read the report and this type of information should be provided.

Chair Barker emphasized the need for those writing the different chapters to encapsulate the group's discussion and provide all necessary attachments.

The Report

Ms. Barth pointed out that all the chapters were provided except the education chapter (which had just been adopted) and a standards chapter. Chair Barker as Attorney Decker and Ms. Ouiment-Durrow to draft the standards chapter, they agreed. In addition, Ms. Celentani will add a paragraph to the definition, regarding use of only the term" paralegal".

Chair Barker said that the first rough draft was a good starting point. She reminded everyone that the group decided to use the same format as the Access to Justice Commission. The actual language is first and then the commentary follows. She noted that there needs to be more of the group's debate on major issues included in the commentary.

Time Frame

Chair Barker said that the group should have a final report completed by December so it can be added as an informational reporting item at the January Board of Governors meeting.

Simultaneously, the Task Force should start working with BAPR and BBE to get them to talk to their committees and Boards. She said this is akin to the chicken and the egg problem. The State Bar Board of Governors will want to know how BAPR and BBE respond to the report and BAPR and BBE will want to know how the Board of Governors responds.

Chair Barker asked everyone to work on their chapters and get them back to Ms. Barth--in electronic form if possible--by October 29th with all attachments. Ms. Barth will get the chapters out to the Task Force members on the 29th for review and comment before the next meeting which will be in the beginning of November. In December, the group will finalize the report and send it out to the Board of Governors. The Task Force will seek their approval in April.

For formatting purposes, it was decided that the discussion portion of the chapters would be titled "Commentary". The order of the chapters follows:

• Introduction
• Definition
• Standards
• Grandfather Clause
• Education
• Ethics

Ms. Olley said that the attachments will need to be labeled and cleaned up at the end of the process.

Ms. Barth asked for everything electronically if possible, including the attachments.

South Dakota Licensure

The group discussed the South Dakota proposal. Mr. Goudie said that the NFPA had problems with the proposal because it did not require CLE, did not cover minimum general education requirements and gave more latitude to experience in lieu of education.

Attorney Andringa said that the table of states that have addressed the issues of paralegal licensure should be included as an attachment. Chair Barker said the law review article on South Dakota should be included, too. Mr. Goudie agreed and said that it provided a good historical perspective.

Attorney Andringa moved adjournment at approximately 11:45 and Mr. Goudie seconded the motion. It was adopted.

Paralegal Task Force Main