Licensed Paralegal Practitioners Rules of Professional Conduct – Comment Period Closed October 15, 2017

LPP Rules of Professional Conduct

Ethics and Discipline Rules Summary

14-0802

1.00

1.01

1.02

1.04

1.05

1.06

1.07

1.08

1.09

1.010

1.011

1.012

1.013

1.014

1.015

1.016

1.017

1.018

2.01

2.03

3.01

3.03

3.04

3.05

4.01

4.02

4.03

5.01

5.02

5.03

5.04

5.05

5.06

6.01

6.03

6.04

6.05

7.01

7.02

7.03

7.04

7.05

8.01

8.02

8.03

8.04

8.05

To see and comment on the next set of rules, please click on this link:  https://www.utcourts.gov/utc/rules-comment/2017/08/31/rules-governing-licensed-paralegal-practitioner-2-of-2-comment-period-closes-october-15-2017/.

View more posts from this author
2 thoughts on “Licensed Paralegal Practitioners Rules of Professional Conduct – Comment Period Closed October 15, 2017
  1. Mark Theodore

    In the oath, I see no mention of the obligation of the paralegal to agree to only work under the supervision of a licensed attorney. The ABA defines a paralegal as a person qualified by education, training or work experience who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation, governmental agency or other entity and who performs specifically delegated substantive legal work for which a lawyer is responsible.”

     
  2. Aaron Garrett

    The bar is making a terrible mistake in allowing non-attorneys to represent individuals in family law, eviction, and collections matters. Admittedly there is a great need for representation in these fields, but the underlying assumption that they are somehow less complicated or do not require a trained legal mind to provide an adequate prosecution or defense is completely misguided. Since 2015 I have been the Executive Director of Nonprofit Legal Services of Utah. We are a firm dedicated to representing those who cannot otherwise afford an attorney or who do not qualify for free representation for one reason or another. We have handled many family law, eviction, and collections cases since that time, many of which involved arcane principles of law or procedure that a non-attorney may have not been able to identify. The concept here of expanding the availability of legal services to the unrepresented is a good one, but the execution misses the mark.

    The real solution to this problem would be to ensure that all licensed attorneys are meeting their pro bono obligations. What percentage of our community is really doing at least 50 hours of actual pro bono work each year? During the renewal process, if an attorney cannot swear as a part of their re-application that they performed 50 hours of pro bono work then they should be subject to a surcharge calculated by multiplying the attorney’s hourly rate by the number of hours under 50 they failed to perform. Those funds could then be redirected to the organizations who are confronting this problem head on. These resources would provide greatly-needed stability as well as the opportunity to expand our staff so that we can help meet the needs of the unrepresented with trained, experienced attorneys.