About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

27 Alaska B. Rag 1 (2003)

handle is hein.barjournals/askabar0027 and id is 1 raw text is: &'AIuk VOLUME 27, NO. 1 Dignitas, semper dignitas $3.00 JANUARY - FEBRUARY, 2003 Court promulgates new pro bono rule By VANCE SANDERS & ANDY HARRINGTON he Alaska Supreme Court, at the recommenda- tion of the Board of Governors, has promulgated an updated version of Rule of Professional Con- duct 6.1, on pro bono service. The new rule tracks the version proposed by the ABA in 1993, and Alaska joins fourteen other states which have enacted that updated version of the rule (or a substantially similar version). Q. Is the rule requiring pro bono work a radi- cal change in the Code? A. Not really. Both the former Code of Professional Responsibility and the prior version of Rule 6.1 in the Rules of Professional Conduct contained pro bono language. The original Code of Professional Responsibility adopted by the ABA in 1969 included an Ethical Consideration 2-25 stating in pertinent part: Every lawyer, regardless of professional prominence or pro- fessional workload, should find time to participate in serving the disadvantaged. In 1983, the ABA promulgated Model Rule (of Professional Conduct) 6.1 which stated that a lawyer should render public interest legal service, a respon- sibility which could be discharged by service in activi- ties for improving the law, the legal system or the legal profession, and by financial support for organizations that provide legal services to persons of limited means. Alaska subsequently adopted this version of the Rule when it promulgated the Rules of Professional Con- duct in 1993. In 1993, the ABA revised Model Rule 6.1, and that is the version that Alaska has now adopted. Q. What is different about the new rule? A. Several things, which I'll summarize here and expound on below if you'll keep on asking such helpful questions. The new Rule quantifies the amount of pro bono work a lawyer should ordinarily plan to put in annually. It creates and prioritizes two categories of pro bono work. It clarifies the relation- -T ship between performing pro bono work and making financial contributions to organizations that serve the under-rep- resented. Q. What is the amount of pro bono work speci- fied under the new Rule? A. Fifty hours per year. Q. Isn't that a lot? A. No. The majority of states that have enacted a particular quantity have used 50 hours. Some set less. Oregon uses 80 hours; D.C. uses 50 hours plus one court appointment. Q. What are the two categories of pro bono work? A: The highest priority, to which a substantial majority of the 50 hours should be devoted, requires that the work be done without fee or expectation of fee and be provided either directly to persons of limited means or to charitable, religious, civic, com- munity, governmental or educational organizations in matters which are designed primarily to address the needs of persons of limited means. Q. What is the second priority? A. Well, I was just going to tell you. The second Continued on page 4 FINDING PEACE IN MEDITATION - Page 14 U.S.juries continue to award record verdicts in 2002 A fter a post-9/11/01 lull, jury awards skyrock eted nationally. Terror- ist attacks may have im- pacted the size of awards in 2001, but not in 2002 Large jury verdict awards to individuals plaintiffs sagged considerably in the U.S. during the 12 months following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks - but Ameri- can juries' frugality disap- peared, especially in the last part of 2002. Overall, jury awards surged in the latter part of last year. Topping the list: a record- setting $28 billion award to a smoker in California. That verdict was nearly six times larger than the previous 2002 record verdict. A $225 mil- lion verdict against Ford that was one of the largest per- sonal injury awards in his- tory against an auto manu- facturer, according to Law- yers Weekly USA, a legal newspaper that tracks large verdicts. There was an obvious change in U.S. courtrooms following Sept. 11 - big-money cases were either settled or their trials were delayed. But that impact was relatively short-lived, as the year ended with record setting jury awards last year. An unprec- edented six verdicts of $80- million-plus came down in the last quarter of 2002, said atty. Paul Martinek, pub- lisher and editor-in-chief of Alaska Bar Association P.O. Box 100279 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Lawyers Weekly USA. The annual list of the Top Ten Jury Awards compiled by Lawyers Weekly USA was dominated by awards im- posed against three groups that have traditionally been on the receiving end of large verdicts in recent years: to- bacco companies, doctors and car makers. (The Top Ten list for 2002 actually included Continued on page 11 Non-Profit Organization U.S. Postage Paid Permit No. 401 Anchorage, Alaska Inside: LAWYERS AS (TAXABLE) 'TRAVELING SALESMEN' DIGITAL CAMERA LOWDOWN REMEMBERING GAIL ROY NO JAIL FOR SATTERBERG ATTORNEYS DO GOOD WORKS I -- PAGE 24 j ------7 I

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most