thestatebarofcalifornia · 2017-05-19 · the state bar’s attorney discipline system is designed...

Publ i c Protect ion Admin is t rat ion of Just i ce Member Serv icesAdmin is t rat ion of Just i ce Member Serv ices Pub l i c Protect ionMember Serv ices Pub l i c Protect ion Admin is t rat ion of Just i ce

The State Bar of CaliforniaAnnual Report 2006

Message from the Executive Director

PUBLIC PROTECTIONAdmissions

Chief Trial CounselProbation

Client Security FundState Bar Court

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICEGovernmental Affairs

Legal Services, Access and Fairness ProgramsCommission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation

MEMBER SERVICESMember Services Center

Mandatory Fee ArbitrationLawyer Assistance Program

Bar Relations

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENTSpecial Admissions and Specialization

Professional Competence | Ethics HotlineSection Education and Meeting ServicesCalifornia Young Lawyers Association

ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORTFinance

General CounselHuman Resources

OperationsInformation Technology

COMMUNICATIONSMedia & Information Services

Organizational Chart

1

45667

789

9101111

12131415

1516171718

18

20

The State Bar of CaliforniaAnnual Report 2006

VIS

ION

Serving the Administration of Justice

� The independence of the judiciary as the thirdbranch of government.

� Equal access to justice.� Civility and professionalism.

Serving the Public

� Helping attorneys better serve their clients.� Protection of the public.� Public service through pro bono representation.

Serving Attorneys

� Effective self-governance.� Diversity and broad participation in bar

membership and leadership.� Fiscal responsibility.� Protection of the legal profession by ensuringthe highest levels of competency.

The State Bar of California believes in:

2006 | The State Bar of Cal i fornia 1

MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

This past year, the State Bar made progress on many fronts. Our public protection efforts throughattorney regulation and discipline remained strong. We worked to simplify the rules that governattorneys. We took steps to find ways of building a more diverse State Bar membership. We

worked with others to help improve California’s system of justice and assist those who need moreaffordable legal services. And, based on a 2006 membership survey, we are now exploring a wide rangeof new member benefits, including health savings accounts and various discounted services.

At the same time, our Board of Governors and senior staff recognize the fiscal reality of our times—and have renewed the bar’s commitment to financial responsibility. One tremendously successful policychange in 2006 resulted in the collection of nearly 90 percent of our membership fees by the statutorydeadline (Feb. 1, 2007). This change dramatically cut the State Bar’s postage and production costs for latepayment notices.

As California’s courts and justice system struggle in the face of increasing demand and decreasingresources, the State Bar also has joined forces with the Chief Justice, the Administrative Office of theCourts, the Governor and the Legislature to help ensure that our courts continue to operate and that oursystem responds to the legal needs of Californians. Together, we are exploring the growing need for legalservices. Many Californians cannot afford to pay attorney fees. And many have little, if any, understand-ing of their legal rights and responsibilities and of how the system operates. To address this situation, thecourts, the bar and the Legislature must take the lead, both in terms of educating the public and recom-mending solutions to ensure access to our justice system.

On another front, we are reaching out to young people—from preschoolers to college students—through our Pipeline Project and introducing them to the possibility of becoming lawyers. This initiativeaims to build a more diverse State Bar membership. Over the long haul, a more diverse membership willbetter reflect the general population and will help broaden California’s pool of judicial candidates as well.This past year, as an outgrowth of the Pipeline Project, our Board of Governors created a Council on Access& Fairness. The council (created from existing board committees) will advise the board on strategies toenhance diversity within the legal profession.

In another reflection of our times, we are working to improve professionalism and civility amonglawyers. In 2006, the board created an Attorney Civility Task Force to study existing codes and model pro-grams and present a proposal in 2007.


Much of our recent work also reflects our current push to improve member services. In addition toour new member services center, we completed a survey of randomly selected State Bar members in 2006.As part of the survey, we asked lawyers what they want in terms of benefits and services. And wegathered member information that will help us better respond to their needs.

To further assist our members, we began revising more than two dozen separately organized sets ofState Bar rules in 2006. The aim is to simplify and clarify the rules, and merge them into one uniformstructure. The board adopted rewritten rules on member rights and responsibilities this past August. Andrevisions of the rules for Minimum Continuing Legal Education and various other programs and servicesare currently in the works.

The following pages contain additional highlights of the State Bar’s work this past year. Much of itset the stage for ongoing improvements that will help the State Bar remain a valuable, accessible resourcefor California’s consumers, lawyers, courts and legislators.

Judy JohnsonExecutive Director, The State Bar of California

MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR


The purpose of the State Bar of California is to preserve

and improve our justice system to assure a free and just

society under law.

—The State Bar’s Mission Statement

The State Bar of California Board of Governors 2006-07

As the gatekeeper to the profession, theOffice of Admissions develops and adminis-ters the California Bar Examination and the

First-Year Law Students’ Examination, conductsapplicant moral character investigations, accreditsand registers law schools and supports the Commit-tee of Bar Examiners in carrying out its functions. Itis funded entirely by applicant fees, the sale of studyaids, accreditation fees and interest income.

Accomplishments/New Developments

In 2006, the Office of Admissions:

�� Administered the California Bar Examination to14,428 law students and out-of-state attorneys (5,201in February, 9,227 in July). This amounted to 864more applicants than in 2005. Ofthose tested during both exam periods, 578 were granted testingaccommodations for disabilities. InFebruary, 40 percent of the appli-cants passed the examination, aslightly lower pass rate than inFebruary 2005. In July, the pass ratewas 51.3 percent, slightly higherthan the pass rate in July 2005. Alarge number of applicants nowtake the exam on laptop computersthat have had special security in-stalled in advance.

�� Posted the bar exam results onthe State Bar’s Web site in addition to mailing outnotices. Sample examination questions and answerswere published and posted online as well followingthe release of the test results.

�� Administered the First-Year Law Students’ Examination to 1,767 law students (937 in June, 830 inOctober). This marked a slight increase when com-pared to the pool of applicants tested in 2005. Twenty-nine applicants were granted testing accommodationsfor disabilities. In June, 21.5 percent of the applicantspassed the examination, slightly lower than the previ-ous June’s pass rate. In October, the pass rate was 28percent, slightly higher than in October 2005.

�� Performed background checks on 8,094 applicants to determine if they possess the goodmoral character necessary for admission to prac-tice law in California. Reviewed 212 investigativereports (up from 163 in 2005) and conducted 70informal conferences with moral character deter-mination applicants (up from 65 in 2005). Morethan 30 applicants (up from 25 in 2005) receivedadverse moral character determinations.

�� Processed 123 applications from attorneys seek-ing to register under the Multijurisdictional Practice Rules, which allow out-of-state attorneys,not licensed in California, to practice law in Califor-nia in limited circumstances. Applications processedin 2006 dropped dramatically from the 521 receivedin 2005, the first year of the new MJP program.

�� Assisted the Committee of Bar Examiners in thedistribution of new expanded Supplemental Statis-tics Reports (based on bar exam results) to individ-ual law schools throughout California. Launched to

enhance communications betweenthe Committee of Bar Examinersand California law schools, theproject began after the release of theJuly 2006 test results. Law schoolswill continue to receive such statis-tics for each examination.

�� Enhanced ethics screening byraising the minimum passingscore required for the MultistateProfessional Responsibility Examination (beginning in Janu-ary 2008) to a scale score of 86—up from 79. The change was first

announced and posted on the State Bar’s Web sitein December 2005.

�� Changed the way in which California Bar Examination answers are scored and tallied for afinal scale score. In addition, the changes will allowfailing applicants to receive the grades they got dur-ing all phases of grading. The changes, which tookeffect in February 2007, were made after much dis-cussion with the Law School Assembly, the BoardCommittee on Regulation, Admissions and Disci-pline Oversight, the Law School Council and theLaw School Registrars.


PUBLIC

PROTECTIO

NADMISSIONS

State Bar membership on the rise / 2001-2006

* The figures reflect the number of active StateBar members as of Dec. 1 of each year listed.

137,326

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

140,240

143,566

146,660

150,067

154,542

The State Bar’s attorney discipline system isdesigned to protect the public, the courts andthe profession from attorneys who violate the

professional standards that govern attorney conductin California. The bar’s Office of the Chief TrialCounsel (OCTC)— which handles complaint in-take, investigation/trials, central administration andprobation — is the disciplinary enforcement arm ofthis system. Selected by the State Bar and confirmedby the State Senate, the Chief Trial Counsel (CTC)reports to the Board of Governors’ Committee onRegulation, Admissions and Discipline (RAD) onsubstantive policy issues and is responsible for theoverall structure, goals and management of OCTC.

�� The Intake Unit is the starting point for consumersseeking to file a complaint against an attorney. Theunit, which consists of complaint analysts, attorneysand support staff, alsoprovides membership in-formation and responds togeneral questions regardingattorneys and State Bar pro-grams. The toll-free Attor-ney Complaint Hotline [1-800-843-9053] offers anextensive “voice tree”aimed at assisting callerswith common questions orproblems. Complaints are initially evaluated to deter-mine if they involve a violation of California’s profes-sional standards. Then, if a formal investigation iswarranted, the file is transferred to Investigations. Inaddition, the Intake Unit addresses othermatters, through education and informalmediation, which do not rise to the level ofa formal investigation. And it processes in-formation that attorneys must self-disclose(Reportable Actions) under Business andProfessions Code § 6068(o).

�� If the matter is not resolved at the investi-gation stage, a State Bar attorney prepares aformal Notice of Disciplinary Charges andfiles it with the State Bar Court. The matterthen proceeds to a Trials Unit team.

�� The Trials Unit teams are also responsible forthe prosecution of conviction referral matters, probation revocation proceedings and other regu-latory proceedings within OCTC’s jurisdiction.They handle reinstatement proceedings followingdisbarment or resignation and moral character admissions proceedings as well. And they are responsible for presenting matters on appeal beforethe Review Department of the State Bar Court.

�� OCTC also administers the bar’s EthicsSchool and minor offense diversion program,and coordinates efforts to address the disposi-tion of client files abandoned by deceased ormissing attorneys.


In 2006, the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel:

�� Promptly answered calls to the toll-free attorney complaint hotline. Callers waited an av-

erage of 24 seconds before speak-ing to a complaint analyst. Just 10percent of callers hung up beforespeaking to a complaint analyst.(See adjacent box.)

�� Reduced the case backlog by 23percent compared to 2005 (see thechart below). A case becomes abacklog case if, after its receipt, thecase is pending without closure or

resolution within 6 months of receipt or, for a casedesignated as complex, within 12 months. The year-end backlog in 2006 (246 cases) was lower than it hasbeen since 1995. In addition, 2006 marked the first

year since 1997 that the backlogdropped below 300.

�� Began implementing Busi-ness and Professions Code §6126.3 (effective Jan. 1, 2006).This legislation allows the StateBar to apply to a superior courtto take over the business of anynon-attorney practicing lawwithout a valid California li-cense. Under this section, thebar can shut down such prac-tices, seize files and return files


CHIEF TRIAL COUNSEL

Calls to the toll-free attorney complaint hotline

2002110,343

2003116,800

200489,823*

200570,902*

200672,916*

*OCTC attributes the lower number of calls to: the reduced busy rate after 4 new trunk lines were added in 2004; and the increased use of the State Bar’s Web site for information andforms. From July of 2004 to December of 2006, approximately 112,900 complaint forms were downloaded from the site.

PUBLIC

PROTECTIO

N

*Backlog cases / 2002-2006

* Cases still pending without closure or res-olution within six months of receipt or, forcomplex cases, within 12 months.

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

401

540

402

315

246

to those who appear to be the non-attorney’s clients.The tracking of such cases began in March 2006.

The Office of Probationmonitors the proba-tionary compliance of disciplined attorneyspursuant to orders issued by the California

Supreme Court and the State Bar Court. The Proba-tion Unit handles all probation revocation motionsand probation modification requests pursuant torules 550-554 of theRules of Procedure, in-cluding modificationrequests of reprovalconditions. The unitalso monitors com-pliance with rule 955of the CaliforniaRules of Court andwith Agreements inLieu of Discipline.While it remains a separate and independent office,the Office of Probation reports directly to the ChiefTrial Counsel and has done so since 2005.


In 2006, the Office of Probation:

�� Filed one more probation revocation motion in2006 than in 2005.

�� Increased referrals to OCTC for prosecution from26 in 2005 to 97 in 2006.

When an attorney steals from a client, theconsequences can be devastating—to thelegal profession as a whole as well as the

individual client. The Client Security Fund can helpsoften that blow by reimbursing victims up to

$50,000 for losses due to attorney theft or an actequivalent to theft. Financed with attorney fees,the fund is a cost-effective way of assisting vic-tims for whom reimbursement would generallynot be available from any other source. The fundalso provides a unique opportunity to promotepublic confidence in the administration of justiceand the integrity of the legal profession. TheCalifornia fund continues to receive and processmore applications per year than any other suchfund in the United States.


In 2006, the Client Security Fund:

�� Processed 1,302 claims to closure from1,314 new applications, paying nearly$5.3 million on 943 approved claims.

�� Developed an automated cost re-covery system that will soon replace themanual calculation of disciplined attor-neys’ charges to the fund, providinggreater accounting efficiency.

�� Established procedures to enforce as moneyjudgments amounts owed to the fund by attorneysunder the provisions of B&P Code § 6140.5(d).

�� Decreased the average processing time of applications and eliminated some duplication ofinvestigative work by obtaining access to theChief Trial Counsel’s computerized banking and investigative records.


CLIENT SECURITY FUND

Office of Probation

Files pending | reporting period end 791 800 857

Files opened 559 606 566

Files closed 512 559 481

Probation revocation motions filed 36 25 26

Referrals to OCTC for prosecution 10 26 97

PROBATION

2004 2005 2006

Dollars Paid by Category in 2006 | $5,299,061

Misappropriation $3,650,986

Unearned Fees $1,534,440

Investments $0

Loans $113,635

5-Year Summary of Applications Paid in Dollars

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

$5,299,061

$4,648,584

$5,681,455

$5,859,620

$6,597,057

PUBLIC

PROTECTIO

N

�� Expanded the fund’s coverage to include Foreign Legal Consultants registered with theState Bar and lawyers registered with the State Barunder the Multijurisdictional Practice Program.

The State Bar Court is the CaliforniaSupreme Court’s administrative arm in theadjudication of disciplinary and regulatory

matters involving attor-neys. It seeks to hearand decide cases fairly,correctly and efficientlyfor the protection of thepublic, the courts andthe legal profession. TheState Bar Court can im-pose a public or privatereproval when a Califor-nia attorney is found tohave violated the disci-plinary provisions of theCalifornia State Bar Act orthe Rules of ProfessionalConduct. In more seriousdisciplinary matters(those involving disbar-ment, for example), thecourt sends a discipli-nary recommendation tothe California SupremeCourt for review andadoption.


In 2006, the State Bar Court:

�� Processed 802 attorney disciplinary and regulatorymatters filed with the court, and closed 772 such mat-ters for a 96 percent closure rate.

�� Reduced the average pendency of cases in theState Bar Court hearing department to six months,down from seven months in 2005.

�� Continued through its Alternative Discipline Program (ADP) to work with attorneys sufferingfrom substance abuse and/or mental health issues. The ADP seeks to identify and refer suchrespondents to the State Bar’s Lawyer AssistanceProgram for treatment and rehabilitation.

�� Continued to produce the California StateBar Court Reporter, which contains the pub-lished opinions of the review department in at-torney disciplinary and regulatory proceedings.

�� Installed new audio equipment in all SanFrancisco and Los Angeles courtrooms.

�� Posted State Bar Court decisions and stipu-lated dispositions on the State Bar’s Web site.

The State Bar’s Office of GovernmentalAffairs serves as the liaison between theState Bar and the legislative and execu-

tive branches of government. Funded solelywith voluntary contributions, the office:

�� Identifies and tracks legislative bills affecting, orof interest to, the State Bar.

�� Advocates the State Bar Board of Governors’position on various non-ideological issues.

�� Provides technical assistance and information tothe governor and legislators (and their staffs) on issuesof relevance to the practice of law, the legal professionand consumers of legal services.

�� Initiates and implements education and assistanceprograms to increase state policymakers’ understand-ing of the legal profession, the practice of law and theState Bar’s role in the administration of justice.

�� Performs similar tasks for the State Bar sections(funded with voluntary section funds).


GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

STATE BAR COURT

Disbarment 66

Summary Disbarment 5

Suspension 250

Reprovals 96

Dismissal 58

Termination 116

Revoke Probation 20

Probation 0

Extend Probation 0

License to Practice Canceled 0

Admonition 0

Deny Petition/Application 0

Total 611

State Bar CourtClosed Disciplinary CasesDispositions2

006

ADMIN

ISTRATIO

N OF JU

STIC

E


In 2006, the Office of Governmental Affairs:

�� Played a key role in achieving significant legisla-tion to create 50 new judgeships, collect informa-tion to increase diversity in the judiciary (SB 56)and increase funding for legal services (AB 2301).

�� Developed and lobbied into law bar-sponsoredlegislation removing statutory limitations on theselection of a financial audit firm, which shouldresult in more meaningful financial audits of theState Bar (SB 262).

�� Coordinated and provided staffsupport for the legislative programfor the voluntarily funded sectionsof the State Bar, resulting in the en-actment of nine section-sponsoredbills, including the Revised UniformLimited Partnership Act, sponsoredby the Business Law Section (AB 399), and several significantproposals by the Trusts and Estates Section. The officealso coordinated and provided staff support for thesections’ highly effective involvement in more than 50bills sponsored by others.

�� Provided staff support for the voluntarilyfunded administration of justice committees thatprovided comments to Judicial Council AdvisoryCommittees, the California Law Revision Commis-sion and others on proposed rules and legislationrelating to numerous issues.

The State Bar’s Office of Legal Services, Ac-cess and Fairness Programs (LSAFP) plans,develops, administers and staffs a variety of

public and member programs. Its aim is to enhanceaccess and fairness in the profession and help im-prove the delivery of legal services to the under-served. LSAFP’s efforts include:

�� Staffing the legislatively mandated LegalServices Trust Fund Program (IOLTA) that re-ceives interest on attorney-client trust accountsand distributes the funds to legal services pro-grams throughout California.

�� Staffing the State Bar’s legal services out-reach activities, the California Young LawyersAssociation (CYLA), the Standing Committee onthe Delivery of Legal Services and the Access toJustice Commission.

�� Developing programs to enhance pro bonoservice, legal services delivery and lawyer referral

services.

�� Administering theDisaster Legal ServicesProgram (LawHelpCalifornia), whichhelps mobilize volun-teer attorneys to aidvictims of disasterswith legal issues.


In 2006, the Office of Legal Services, Access and Fairness Programs:

�� Created a Certification Mark to help consumersidentify State Bar-certified lawyer referral services(LRS’s) across the state.

�� Logged nearly 5,000 hours of pro bono legalservices, at a value of $1 million, from approxi-mately 100 retired attorneys through the bar’sEmeritus Attorney Pro Bono Participation program.

�� Printed and distributed (with a grant from the Cali-fornia Bar Foundation), as well as posted on the bar’sWeb site, a revised set of guidelines on the deliveryof legal services to accused indigents.

�� Distributed in the 2005-06 grant period more than$12 million in IOLTA grants—a 43 percent increaseover the prior year. The program persuaded banksto pay higher rates of interest on IOLTA accounts,thereby increasing IOLTA grants to all qualifiedlegal services projects and support centers.


LEGAL SERVICES, ACCESS AND FAIRNESS PROGRAMS

The Legal Services Trust Fund Program(IOLTA)

The Legal Services Trust Fund was establishedby the Legislature in the early 1980s to providemoney to help fund civil legal services for indi-gent Californians. Since its creation, more than$230 million has been distributed to legal serv-ices programs serving the poor statewide.

ADMIN

ISTRATIO

N OF JU

STIC

E

�� Distributed Equal Access Fund grants ($8.55 mil-lion) to 100 programs and $950,000 in Equal AccessFund Partnership Grants to 19 court-based self-helpcenters. The state program isadministered by the State Bar.

�� Broadened the bar’s diver-sity efforts through the work ofa broad-based DiversityPipeline Task Force, whosegoal is to develop activities toraise student awareness (be-ginning with outreach topreschools) and interest in lawas a profession. The first everJudicial Summit in Californiawas held as part of this effort.

�� Institutionalized the State Bar’s diversity pipelineinitiative with the board’s creation of a new Councilon Access & Fairness.

�� Worked with the Governor’s Office, JudicialCouncil and Legislature to achieve enactment ofSenate Bill 56, which requires annual reports fromthe Governor’s Office, the Judicial Council and theState Bar Commission on Judicial Nominees Eval-uation (JNE) providing demographic informationon race, ethnicity and gender for the pool of judi-cial applicants, rankings by JNE, and all sittingstate judges in California. (See graphic above depicting the initial statistics.)

The State Bar’s Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation (JNE) evaluates candidates who are being considered for a

judicial appointment by the Governor. The com-mission’s mission is to assist the Governor in thejudicial selection process by providing independ-ent, comprehensive, accurate and fair evaluationsof candidates for judicial appointment and nomi-nation. Appointed by the bar’s board of governors,the commission is made up of attorneys and public

members who represent a broad cross-section ofCalifornia’s legal profession and population.The all-volunteer commission cannot nominate

or appoint judges; itdoes, however, thor-oughly investigateCalifornia’s judicialcandidates under acode of strict confi-dentiality. In rating acandidate, the com-mission considers anumber of factors togauge his or her judi-cial qualifications.


In 2006, the Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation:

�� Met a total of 14 days (in addition to twodays of training) to evaluate 216 candidates submitted by the Governor, rating 179 as “quali-fied” or “well qualified”; eight as “exceptionallywell qualified”; and 29 as “not qualified.” Detailed reports were sent to the Governor.

�� Received 20 appeals to the JNE Review Com-mittee for reconsideration from those rated “notqualified”; four were rescinded, 13 were deniedand three are pending.

In 2006, the Member Services Division (MSD)continued working to build a collaborativemember services team. The Member Services

Center (MSC), Member Records (MR) and someOffice of Certification staff were consolidated intoa single Member Services (MS) department. Onemajor initiative was the successful implementationof a billing cycle change requiring 2007 memberfees to be collected by the statutory deadline ofFeb. 1, 2007.


COMMISSION ON JUDICIALNOMINEES EVALUATION

MEMBER SERVIC

ES

MEMBER SERVICES CENTER


In 2006, the Member Services Division:

�� Responded to 1,500calls a day at the peakof the shortened 2006billing cycle.

�� Effectively communi-cated the billing cyclechange to members, re-sulting in nearly 90 per-cent compliance as ofthe statutory deadline.

�� Reduced the number of members not paying by thestatutory deadline from a high of 60,000 in past yearsto 22,000, significantly cutting the postage and pro-duction costs for late payment mailings.

�� Initiated an effort to transform more than twodozen separate sets of State Bar rules into one simple,clear, uniform structure. In August 2006, the bar’sboard adopted rewritten rules on member rights andresponsibilities. Revisions are currently underway forrules on Minimum Continuing Legal Education andfor various programs and services. Work will continuewith rules on governance, admissions and discipline.

�� Implemented a document retention policy andmoved space-consuming paper files off site, freeingup space forthe MemberServices Centerstaff to moveinto a commonwork area inthe future.

�� Proposedamendments to the member list policy to reduce arequestor’s access to the membership list to two requests per year.

�� Added four new programs to the State Bar Insur-ance Program: group life, accidental death and dismemberment, homeowner and automobile. Inaddition, bids for an employment liability insur-ance vendor are currently under review and thenew program should be launched in 2007.

�� Doubled insurance income—from $1 millionto $2 million—since the MSD was created. Insur-ance monies provide $1.2 million in funding to

the Lawyer AssistanceProgram.

�� Selected AugeoAffinity Marketing asthe State Bar’s vendorfor member services,with its program slatedto launch in 2007. Thismarks the first step indeveloping a member-centric suite of prod-ucts and programs,

accessible to members on a dedicated Web site. Inaddition, a State Bar brand will be developed andtied to highly competitive and value-added prod-ucts and programs.

The Office of Mandatory Fee Arbitration of-fers mandatory fee arbitration for clients andattorneys to resolve fee disputes outside of

court and assists clients withthe enforcement of unpaidarbitration awards. It alsoprovides training and con-sultation to the 44 local barassociations that offermandatory fee arbitrationservices.


In 2006, the Office of Mandatory Fee Arbitration:

�� Raised the flat rate reimbursement of local barfee arbitration programs to $36 (from $24) per arbi-tration case assigned to an arbitrator.

�� Responded to 174 requests for fee arbitrationthroughout the state—an increase from 2005,


MANDATORY FEE ARBITRATION

Mandatory Fee Arbitration Requests 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

MFA requests filed with the State Bar 134 127 211 144 174

MFA requests filed with local bars 1,710 2,570 1,771 1,661 1,475

Requests for enforcement of award 81 86 72 78 61

MEMBER SERVIC

ES

suggesting that the Mandatory Fee Arbitration Program has become more accessible when a localbar program is unavailable or unable to provide fairand neutral arbitration.

�� Helped the Mandatory Fee Arbitration Commit-tee present eight three-hour fee arbitrator trainingprograms for local bar associations statewide.

�� Developed Model Rules of Procedure for FeeArbitration to provide local bar programs with a template of rules that are current in the law and promote consistency between programs. A growingnumber of local programs have since adopted them.

The Lawyer Assistance Program (LAP) pro-vides confidential rehabilitation support forattorneys dealing with substance abuse or

mental illness. Professional and peer assistance is alsoavailable to attorneys who are suffering from stress,burnout, depression or chemical dependency.


In 2006, the Lawyer Assistance Program:

�� Assisted 774 attorneys (56 percent without anypending disciplinary charges and 44 percent whowere involved in discipline proceedings). Thelarge percentage of participants without pendingdisciplinary charges, an ongoing trend, indicatesacceptance of the program as a confidential resourcefor attorneys with substance abuse and/or mentalhealth issues.

�� Enrolled 206 attorneys in the program—up 14percent from 2005. By year’s end, there were 362 ac-tive participants—up 24 percent from the number ofparticipants at the end of 2005.

�� Introduced and distributed approximately 1,850copies of a free one-hour self-study MCLE packet.

�� Tested on a pilot basis a prospective outcomesstudy to examine the short-term and long-termimpact of participation in the LAP. Data was col-lected from 169 program participants and ana-lyzed by a research psychologist before the start ofthe next phase of the study in March 2007. Based onthe psychologist’s recommendations, adjustmentsto the research methodology and data collectioninstruments are currently underway.

�� Approved, based on need, 189 participants forLAP Financial Assistance Plan loans. Sixteenparticipants have voluntarily stopped receivingassistance and are now paying on their own.Some 50 attorneys are slated to complete the pro-gram in 2007 and begin paying off their loans.

�� Consolidated the San Francisco and SacramentoLAP offices to provide significant administrativesavings for fiscal year 2007 as a result of lower over-head and salaries in the Sacramento area.

�� Logged another increase in the number of at-torneys participating in both the LAP and theState Bar Court’s Alternative Discipline Program(ADP)—now totaling nearly 200 respondents whoare either enrolled in the ADP/LAP (120) or beingevaluated for the program (67).

The Office of Bar Relations Outreach,through voluntary contributions to the Elimi-nation of Bias/Bar Relations Fund, staffs the

activities, programs and events of the Center for Ac-cess & Fairness and Bar Relations Outreach. Theseprograms enable the State Bar to serve as a vital linkbetween the bar and more than 230 local, minorityand specialty bar associations.


In 2006, the Office of Bar Relations Outreach:

�� Increased attendance at the annual Bar Leaders’Conference to 115—up from 92 in 2005. The one-dayeducational conference for incoming bar presidents,


LAWYER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

BAR RELATIONS

MEMBER SERVIC

ES

board members and staff from various bar associationsstatewide received a favorable rating from 75 percentof the attendees who completed evaluations.

�� Received funding from the California Bar Foun-dation to provide scholarships for participants andhost speakers for leadership and association man-agement training.

�� Migrated the Bar Relations Outreach databasedirectory of contact and bar leadership informationinto a searchable database on the State Bar Web site,insuring more up-to-date information and reducingcosts by approximately $2,000. The directory cur-rently serves 236 bar associations—the entire barcommunity—the American Bar Association staff,State Bar staff and leadership, and the Administra-tive Office of the Courts.

�� Helped facilitate a Contra Costa County Bar As-sociation board retreat in 2006, which led to thatlocal bar’s 2007 action plan. The hope is that otherlocal bar associations will, to a limited extent, alsoutilize bar relations staff as a resource for their boarddevelopment events.

The Office of Special Admissions and Specializationmanages special programs thatallow qualified individuals who are not State

Bar of California members to practice law in Californiaunder limited circumstances.

�� The Multijurisdictional Practice Program (MJP)allows attorneys licensed in other United States ju-risdictions who reside in California to register withthe State Bar to perform certain legal services for cer-tain corporations and legal services organizations. Italso allows out-of-state attorneys to temporarilycome to California in connection with certain litiga-tion and transactional activities.

�� The Pro Hac Vice Program permits out-of-stateattorneys to appear in California state courts.

�� The Out-Of-State Attorney Arbitration Coun-sel Program allows out-of-state attorneys to ap-pear in non-judicial arbitrations in California.

�� The Military Counsel Program allows non-California attorneys serving in the military to rep-resent military personnel in California courts on alimited basis.

�� The Foreign Legal Consultant Program allowsattorneys who are licensed to practice law in a for-eign country to practice the law of that country inCalifornia under limited circumstances.

�� The Practical Training of Law Students Program allows certainlaw students to gain first-hand legal experience in asupervised environment.

�� The Legal Specializa-tion Program directly cer-tifies that qualifyingCalifornia attorneys havespecial competence in oneof nine areas of law (seeadjacent box). The LegalSpecialization Programalso authorizes certainother organizations, suchas the National Board ofTrial Advocacy, to certifythat California attorneyshave special qualifications inother areas of law.

�� The self-funded Office of Special Admissions andSpecialization also authorizes education providers tooffer courses that satisfy the Minimum ContinuingLegal Education (MCLE) obligations of California at-torneys and courses that satisfy additional continuingeducation obligations of attorneys who are certifiedlegal specialists.


In 2006, the Office of Special Admissions and Specialization:

�� Certified nearly 1,600 law students under thePractical Training of Law Students Program,


PROFE

SSIO

NAL D

EVELO

PMENT

�� Appellate Law

�� Bankruptcy Law

�� Criminal Law

�� Estate Planning, Trust and Probate Law

�� Family Law

�� Franchise and Distribution Law

�� Immigration and Nationality Law

�� Taxation Law

�� Workers’ Compensation Law

The Legal Specialization Program certification areas

SPECIAL ADMISSIONS AND SPECIALIZATION

allowing them to gain practical legal experienceworking with district attorneys, public defenders,other governmental agencies and private attorneys.

�� Adopted Franchise and Distribution Law as anew specialty with board approval, becoming thefirst state to adopt a specialty that assists smallbusiness owners in the complex process of pur-chasing or selling a franchise.

�� Developed a process for out-of-state attorneys toappear in California arbitrations.

�� Helped implement a rule change that now per-mits the Client Security Fund to cover foreignlegal consultants.

�� Worked closely with the inaugural class of morethan 500 registered in-house counsel and regis-tered legal services attorneys to complete their initial annual renewal and compliance with MCLE requirements.

The Office of Professional Competence is re-sponsible for administering programs that setand maintain high standards of attorney pro-

fessional responsibility. A primary goal is the preven-tion of lawyer misconduct. Seeking to help lawyersunderstand and comply with their ethical duties, theprofessional competence staff:

�� Administers an Ethics Hotline that assistslawyers in researching professional responsibilityauthorities.

�� Serves as staff to the board of governors, itscommittees, and special commissions and taskforces involved in the development of proposedamendments to the Rules of Professional Conductand other laws governing lawyers.

�� Administers the Committee on Professional Re-sponsibility and Conduct (COPRAC), charged with

the task of drafting and issuing the State Bar’s ad-visory ethics opinions.

�� Publishes and distributes publications (such asthe California Compendium on Professional Responsi-bility) aimed at enhancing attorney professionalresponsibility.

�� Sponsors legal education and outreach pro-grams that instruct lawyers on attorney profes-sional responsibility issues and promoteawareness of the State Bar’s professional respon-sibility programs and activities.

�� Creates and maintains Ethics Information Online, an area of the State Bar’s Web site that offers a wide range of online professional responsibility resources.


In 2006, the Office of Professional Competence:

�� Issued 27 proposed new or amended rules for a120-day public comment period and conducted apublic hearing at the bar’s annual meeting in ad-ministering the work of the board’s SpecialCommission for the Revision of the Rules ofProfessional Conduct.

�� Handled more than 22,000 calls to the Ethics Hotline, receiving an average customer satisfactionsurvey rating of 9.7 (out of a possible 10) across all categories, including overall satisfaction, promptnessof response and usefulness of materials provided.

�� Participated (as part of its work for COPRAC) inan American Bar Association lobbying effort topersuade the United States Sentencing Commission(USSC) to amend the USSC guidelines regardingcredits offered in exchange for a waiver of the attor-ney-client privilege and work product protection.The USSC has since revised its guidelines to be moreprotective of the attorney-client privilege and workproduct protection.

�� Helped COPRAC develop and publish State BarFormal Op. No. 2006-170 to address the professionalresponsibility issue of liens in a contingency fee con-text. The issue arose from a recent CaliforniaSupreme Court decision that held that a lawyer’s


PROFE

SSIO

NAL D

EVELO

PMENTPROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE

ETHICS HOTLINE

lien for attorney fees in an hourly fee agreement con-stitutes an interest adverse to the lawyer’s client.

�� Enhanced the State Bar’s Web site by helping todevelop its first online public comment submissionfeature, providing an updated edition of the onlineversion of the Handbook on Client Trust Accountingand posting a new Ethics Hotline satisfaction surveythat can be completed and submitted online.

The Office of Section Education and MeetingServices provides educational services for at-torneys to enhance their professional skills

and abilities. Such services help fulfill the State Bar’smission to enhance the professional development ofattorneys who practice law in California. As part ofits role, the office administers and staffs the Councilof State Bar Sections, providing assistance with edu-cational programs, publications, meetings and re-lated events, in accordance with their voluntaryfunding requirements. The office also produces awide range of publications to provide ongoing pro-fessional development resources, in addition tostaffing and coordinating the State Bar’s AnnualMeeting, Section Education Institutes and the bar’scontinuing education provider activities.


In 2006, the Office of Section Education and MeetingServices:

�� Logged in 525 Continuing Legal Education(CLE) in-person class programs (1,161 hours of CLE,25,757 seats occupied); 724 online programs (47hours of online CLE, 599 CLEtoGo podcasts, 875hours of CLEtoGo); 4,219 Section Education Instituteseats occupied (72 classes); and 10,499 State Bar An-nual Meeting education seats occupied (203 classes).

�� Converted to an electronic MCLE record-keepingsystem (from a manual system), resulting in reducedcosts related to staff time and decreased response time

for MCLE history report requests.

�� Provided meeting support for 80 section executive committee meetings, 175 section sub-committee meetings, four Council of SectionChairs meetings and four Board Sections TaskForce meetings.

�� Launched Web-based workrooms in whichcommittee members can access, review, edit andpost documents such as committee meetingagendas and minutes.

�� Consolidated the design, printing and pro-duction services for all 16 sections, the AnnualMeeting and the Section Education Institute.


PROFE

SSIO

NAL D

EVELO

PMENT

SECTION EDUCATION AND MEETING SERVICES

The State Bar’s 16 voluntary, financiallyself-supporting sections include:

�� Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law

�� Business Law

�� Criminal Law

�� Environmental Law

�� Family Law

�� Intellectual Property Law

�� International Law

�� Labor and Employment Law

�� Law Practice Management and Technology

�� Litigation

�� Public Law

�� Real Property Law

�� Solo and Small Firm

�� Taxation

�� Trusts and Estates

�� Workers’ Compensation

California attorneys who are in their first fiveyears of practice or are 36 years old oryounger are automatically registered as

members of the California Young Lawyers Associa-tion (CYLA). No separate membership fee is re-quired. CYLA offers lawyers and new practitionersan opportunity to become involved in their profes-sion and to participate in public service. Initially created in 1965 as the State Bar’s Conference of Bar-risters, the organization was renamed the CaliforniaYoung Lawyers Association in 1977. As one of thegoverning bodies of the State Bar of California,CYLA holds a permanent seat on the bar’s board ofgovernors and has a history of zealously advocatingissues important to its membership.


In 2006, the California Young Lawyers Association:

�� Developed a CYLA e-newsletter (an opt-in listserv)that provides professional development articles, infor-mation on local bar activities for young lawyers, andannouncements from the State Bar and CYLA. Todate, there are more than 1,000 subscribers.

The Office of Finance is composed of de-partments that handle financial planningand analysis, finance, member billing and

procurement for the State Bar.

�� Financial Planning and Analysis is responsi-ble for ongoing financial planning and budgetingand assists in the creation and monitoring of theState Bar’s annual budget.

�� Finance serves as the State Bar’s controller,preparing financial statements, paying State Barobligations, managing the bar’s investments, sup-porting the Legal Services Trust Fund Program inadministering the IOLTA program and auditing recipients of IOLTA grants. In addition, the de-partment, among its other tasks, oversees payroll,administers the employee benefit 457 plan andcoordinates external audits.

�� Member Billing bills and receives member-ship and other fees; processes fee waivers; an-swers member billing inquiries; bills and receivesassessed discipline proceeding costs, Client Secu-rity Fund reimbursements, Mandatory Fee Arbi-tration awards and MCLE penalty fees; andprocesses section membership fees and issuesState Bar membership cards.

�� Procurement facilitates the State Bar’s purchas-ing and contracting procedures, including compliance with mandated competitive biddingrequirements and contract control procedures. Itprocesses purchase orders and contracts as well asmanages credit card usage.


In 2006, the Office of Finance:

�� Developed new procedures and clarified existingrules regarding member fees and status. A newpenalty structure was created and the billing cyclewas shortened.

�� Revised rules to use billing staff resources more efficiently.


ADMIN

ISTRATIV

E SUPPORT

FINANCE

General Fund | 2006

Administration of Justice 1.33%

Administration of theProfession 2.46%

Discipline 81.53%

Miscellaneous Non-departmental Expense 0.23%

Communications and CBJ 5.01%

Governance6.75%

ProgramDevelopment 2.59%

*The budget percentages amount to $53,299,000 in unaudited actualprogram expenditures.

CALIFORNIA YOUNG LAWYERS ASSOCIATION

�� Diversified the State Bar’s investments and developed a new investment policy, with investmentincome increasing by 125 percent.

�� Completed implementation of the PeopleSoftfinancial system module, resulting in full integra-tion of all State Bar financial functions.

The Office of General Counsel (OGC) is theState Bar’s in-house counsel—providinglegal advice, representation and services

to the State Bar, its governing board, executive director, senior executives and directors, staff,committees, commissions and other sub-entities.OGC attorneys:

�� Supply legal analysis and opinions on laws, is-sues and proposed legislation relevant to the StateBar and its programs and activities.

�� Provide advice on contracts, government pro-curement requirements, employer-employee mat-ters such as equal employment opportunity issuesand employee disciplinary matters, and state lawspertaining to open meetings, public records andgovernmental privacy.

�� Handle matters in state and federal courts andbefore administrative agencies.

�� Represent the State Bar in discipline and admis-sions cases before the California Supreme Court.

�� Regularly attend meetings of the board of governors and other committees and commissionsto provide legal analysis and advice on pendingmatters.

�� Draft, review and advise on contracts and otherbusiness transactions for all State Bar offices anddepartments, including employment and labor re-lations, copyright, real estate and general corporatematters.


In 2006, the Office of General Counsel:

�� Drafted amendments to the California Rules ofCourt containing procedures necessary to imple-ment the statute that authorizes the collection ofcourt-ordered disciplinary costs and restitution tothe Client Security Fund (CSF) as civil moneyjudgments, and filed a petition for their adoptionwith the California Supreme Court.

�� Helped develop an automated system to trackdisciplinary costs and CSF restitution owed bydisciplined lawyers and to locate attorneys whoowe these sums to facilitate debt collection.

�� Established an internal process for State Barstaff to draft proposed amendments to the Cali-fornia Rules of Court; developed, in conjunctionwith the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, proce-dures and a form to be used in the filing ofrules, reports, and other matters and in theirtracking and routing by the Supreme Court staff.

�� Created or updated standard agreements(templates) for 23 types of services resulting inthe waiver of review in more than 400 contractsthis year. General counsel staff negotiated andcreated master agreements with large com-monly used sites for meetings and the adminis-tration of the California bar exam as well. Andstaff developed or updated 11 templates for usein granting or denying requests to use State Barcopyrighted documents, including license agreements,permissions to reprint, assignment agreements andresponses to linking requests—reducing by 76 per-cent from the previous year the number of re-quests for review.

�� Recovered with the assistance of outside counselan overpayment of operating expenses for the LosAngeles lease site, resulting in a refund of morethan $300,000.

�� Installed a new case management software appli-cation and system, ProLaw, to replace the AS/400GEORGE-based tracking system; migrated 17,912records from the old case tracking system; trainedall attorneys and support staff; integrated ProLawwith the State Bar’s document management system


ADMIN

ISTRATIV

E SUPPORT

GENERAL COUNSEL

and existing calendaring and e-mail applications;and implemented ProLaw’s timekeeping module.

The Office of Human Resources (HR) is re-sponsible for providing the full range ofhuman resource services to the State Bar. Its

primary functions include: personnel policy admin-istration; the training, recruitment and retention ofemployees; Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)and non-discrimination policy administration; clas-sification and compensation analysis; benefit admin-istration; human resource information systemadministration; organizational development; andemployee and labor relations administration.


In 2006, the Office of Human Resources:

�� Conducted a salary/benefits comparability studyto assess the overall competitive position of the StateBar in providing compensation and benefits to its em-ployees. As a result, the State Bar’s compensationstructure was changed to maintain effective pay classi-fication and grade systems (as well as parity withother California judicial branch agencies). The assess-ment results also served as an important informationresource in union negotiations.

�� Offered Union Bargaining Unit Employees theopportunity to request participation in a VoluntarySeparation Incentive Program. With the primaryaim of inducing 5 percent of the workforce to leavevoluntarily in order to redistribute positions acrossdepartment lines, the participation was on target—amounting to budget savings of approximately$2,290,232 and eliminating the need for any furtherreduction measures.

�� Negotiated the 2006 union contract expeditiously,with the terms extended through 2008.

�� Successfully maintained cost-effective HMO andindemnity insurance coveragewith rate changesbased on market surveys and employee utilization.

Retiree health coverage is an ongoing area of studyand analysis. Insurance coverage renewals resultedin an 18.3 percent cost increase for 2007.

�� Renewed, for the second year, Workers’ Compensation coverage with American Interna-tional Group, Inc. Annual insurance premiumshave decreased significantly with the loss ratiocut by two-thirds over the last two policy years.This reduction in losses followed regularly con-ducted ergonomic evaluations, inspections, effec-tive claim reporting and proactive trainingleading to increased employee awareness.

�� Used an online “Employee Self Service” com-ponent for the annual benefits open enrollmentprocess for the second year in a row. This processhas facilitated access to health enrollment choices.

�� Conducted a State Bar health and benefits fairto provide benefit plan information to employees.

�� Extended recruitment outreach efforts throughthe Web, currently employing more than 50 organi-zations for posting State Bar job opportunities.

The Office of Operations provides a com-prehensive range of administrative and op-erational services in support of the work of

all departments of the State Bar. As the organiza-tion’s administrative support arm, the office man-ages centralized reception, mail and copy services; security; fulfillment center operations; meeting support; travel services; some financial supportservices; and facilities. It also safeguards the bar’sphysical assets.


In 2006, Operations:

�� Completed the voluntary seismic retrofit of theState Bar’s San Francisco headquarters, which took sixmonths and caused no interruption in State Bar busi-ness. The retrofit, which helped fortify the building,


ADMIN

ISTRATIV

E SUPPORT

OPERATIONS

HUMAN RESOURCES

also is expected to cut the State Bar’s earthquake in-surance premium costs. In addition, the project camein $180,000 under the budgeted $2.9 million in costs.

�� Initiated an audit of the State Bar’s Los Angeleslandlord that led to at least $525,143 in reimbursedfunds and future cost savings to the bar.

Information Technology (IT) is responsible forthe computing, telecommunications and libraryresources that support the work of the State Bar.

To meet these responsibilities, IT assesses informa-tion technologies; recommends products and serv-ices that can be supported within resourcelimitations; coordinates the selection and implemen-tation of technologies; and provides ongoing supportfor products and services that have been adopted.


In 2006, Information Technology:

�� Conducted the State Bar’s first independent security assessment to assure members and thepublic that the bar effectively reduces risks of tech-nology tampering, disruption and inappropriatedisclosure.

�� Deployed “Phase One” of the State Bar Sec-tions Collaboration Workspace, in which partici-pants at various locations can access and interactwith each other to share reviews and collaborateon work product.

�� Helped facilitate the change in the membershipfee collection cycle through enhanced IT protocols.

�� Instituted an IT Help Desk and new Service Re-quest and Account Access procedures to assist StateBar workers in performing their jobs.

�� Instituted a business case process for the re-placement and enhancement of new IT systems.

�� Implemented the ProLaw Law Office

Management System to enhance GeneralCounsel’s management capabilities, facilitate caseand file management capabilities and create meas-urable efficiencies.

�� Developed a comprehensive automated costrecovery system to replace the manual calcula-tion of monies owed to the Client Security Fundby disciplined attorneys.

�� Implemented performance management forall critical IT services, established service levels,performance commitments and system availabil-ity, and monitored qualitative feedback throughan annual State Bar Performance Survey. (Theaverage score in 2006 was 4.14 out of 5.0.)

�� Provided an array of training programs toState Bar staff and managers.

The Office of Media & Information Services provides bar members, bar associations, the media and the public with

information about the State Bar, lawyers and thelegal system throughmedia relations, con-sumer information andpublic education. Thisincludes the CaliforniaBar Journal, the State BarWeb site and consumereducation guides suchas Kids & the Law, WhenYou Become 18 and Sen-iors & the Law. The staffalso coordinates re-sponses to media in-quiries and developsaffirmative media andpublic relations strate-gies for the State Bar. In

addition, the State Bar’s Web editor provides edi-torial oversight for the content of the State Bar’s


COMMUNIC

ATIO

NS

MEDIA & INFORMATION SERVICES

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Web site, working closely with the IT staff.


In 2006, the Office of Media & Information Services:

�� Conducted four Seniors & theLaw forums (one conducted inSpanish) to mark Law Day andrelease the new version of Seniors& the Law: A Guide for MaturingCalifornians. (See graphic on previous page.)

�� Distributed more than 1.6 mil-lion public education guides andpamphlets to Californians seek-ing information about the lawand their consumer rights. Thisincluded participation in five fo-rums held throughout the stateby local leaders.

�� Created a Kids & the Law Essay Contest for the2007 Law Day celebration (to be held in conjunctionwith the release of the new version of Kids & the Law:An A-to-Z Guide for Parents) and received from the Cal-ifornia Bar Foundation a $15,000 grant to help defray

the costs of this new project. (Special note: Nearly 700essays were submitted by the February 2007 deadline.)

�� Moved the publications fulfillment centerfrom Los Angeles to San Francisco to ensuregreater accountability of publications distribu-

tion and order fulfillment. The Cali-fornia Bar Foundation provided a$25,000 grant to help defray costs oflarge publication orders to schoolsand non-profit organizations.

�� Partnered with the CaliforniaState Parent-Teacher Association, theCalifornia Law Advocates, the Cali-fornia Retired Teachers Association,the AARP, the San Diego District Attorney’s Office and other civicgroups to distribute consumer infor-mation publications around the state.

�� Streamlined the 2007 State Bar feepayment process to ensure that members paytheir dues by the February statutory deadline.(Nearly 90 percent had complied by the 2007 dead-line, up from 73 percent in the previous year.)


The State Bar of California

180 Howard Street

San Francisco, CA 94105-1639

415-538-2000

calbar.ca.gov

COMMUNIC

ATIO

NS

2006 |

The State Bar of California

20

The State Bar of California | Structure

thestatebarofcalifornia · 2017-05-19 · the state bar’s attorney discipline system is designed...

Documents