Supreme Court of Texas
Public Hearing on the Status of Civil Legal Services to the Poor
January 27, 2000

Increase Financial Resources/Incentives

Create an endowment fund
Seek legislative funding (attorney occupation tax, 1/2 of punitive damages to lsp other)
Include opt-out contribution provision on attorney dues statements
Promote law firm contributions (e.g. tithing 2% of gross or net profits)
Assess cost of counsel to opposing party if possible
Provide start-up funding for new programs
Funds for sanctions assessed for abuse of process can be directed to TEAJF
Allow attorneys to "buy-out" of expectations to do pro bono work
Secure law firm support in the creation of "externships" where firm associates are assigned to legal services programs for a period of time
Increase Bar dues $50 a year and apply additional revenues to legal services to the poor
Law school loan forgiveness for legal services attorneys

Increasing Pro Bono Participation

Free CLE for doing pro bono
Court adopt SBOT's Pro Bono Policy (aspirational goal of 50 hours per year, limited to definition of pro bono legal services to the poor)
Court actively support pro bono in a very public way
Court should formally communicate to SBOT that pro bono is important
Mandatory pro bono
Court tell lawyers to do pro bono
MCLE credit for mentoring volunteer attorneys
Develop pro bono culture in law schools
Require law schools to have a pro bono requirement and create "culture of pro bono"
Require law school curriculum on family law and domestic violence
Every SBOT CLE course more than one-half day long should include a pro bono component
Introduce standardized forms, especially in family law, with instructions
Improve SBOT Board participation in pro bono activities
The court should become more directly involved in SBOT pro bono activities
Hold Supreme Court hearings on pro bono periodically
Create institutional memory on the SBOT Board re: pro bono/legal services to the poor
Create/promote opportunities for government lawyers to do pro bono

Evaluating Need for Legal Services to the Poor/Addressing unserved and underserved legal needs

Conduct legal needs survey
Valley and other high poverty areas are a particular priority
Measure effectiveness of current efforts
Identify and address gaps in service provided (immigration, etc.)
Improved technology, made available statewide, could improve services to remote areas
Partner urban attorneys and rural areas and needs

Defining & Reporting Pro Bono

Statistical sampling could more accurately assess pro bono participation
Appeal to law firms to report pro bono hours
Return to 1997 reporting system which collected only one category of data (pro bono legal services to the poor)
Mandatory reporting
Make form more user friendly (categories of hours: 0-10, 11-20, etc.)
State on form that if not returned, will presume 0 hours
Additional categories dilute pro bono message
Steps need to be taken to increase response rate

Improve Use of Current Statutes/Authorizations

Increase use of appointed counsel provisions, esp. in custody cases
Require indigency hearing in custody cases
Create guidelines for civil counsel appointments
Revise BCLS restrictions related to direct and indirect costs (Rule 9.7)
Remove BCLS restrictions and/or IOLTA restrictions
Increase use of mediation

Systemic Changes/Pro Se Access

Make available an advocate to assist pro se litigants
Access to legal research and resource people is necessary for successful pro se
Introduce standardized forms, especially in family law, with instruction
Delegalize various parts of system and create necessary bureaucracies to support that
Provide more advocacy opportunities for paralegals
Consider other systemic changes that would improve access