Minnesota Lawyer Blog

The Minnesota Supreme Court recently amended a new CLE rule allowing credits for pro bono work. The changes were made in response to criticism that original version of the rule was not inclusive enough.

The CLE rule -- which took effect on July 1 -- allows attorneys to accrue one CLE credit for every six hours of legal representation provided to a pro bono client. Attorneys can accrue a maximum of six such credits per three-year reporting-period under the rule.

As originally worded, the rule sparked some controversy because of its narrow definition of what constituted a Legal Services provider. Only work done for a Legal Services provider was eligible for credit. The rule defined a Legal Services provider as “a legal services organization funded by the Legal Services Corporation.” Several local nonprofits that provide pro bono services -- including the Volunteer Lawyers Network -- were excluded by this language.

The new version (issued the day before the pro bono CLE rule was to take effect) is much broader in its definition of pro bono work eligible for credit. In addition to work for groups funded by the LSC, it includes pro bono efforts overseen by nonprofits that have a primary purpose of providing legal services to the poor, law firms that offer similar programs with a designated supervisor and the Minnesota Judicial Branch for designated projects, such as the Guardian ad Litem Program.

There’s an outstanding CLE opportunity coming our way in conjunction with the 27th Annual Law Day Testimonial Dinner. Not only that, but it’s an opportunity to contribute to a worthy cause, The Legal Aid Society, since the tuition will be donated to it.

“Masters of the Courtroom” will be presented on Thursday May 1 and offers six CLE credits for $350 with a faculty consisting entirely of Fellows of the American College of Trial Lawyers. The combined value of jury verdicts and settlements obtained by the faculty exceeds $10 billion. In approximately the last 12 months, the presenters have obtained jury verdicts of $131 million, $52 million, $30 million and a number of settlements well in excess of eight figures.

It will be followed by the law day dinner, featuring Tom Goldstein, co-head of the Supreme Court Practice Group at Akin Gump in Washington D.C. and author of the SCOTUSBLOG.

The Minnesota Supreme Court recently approved the granting of continuing legal education credits to lawyers who do pro bono work. The wording of the rule sparked a bit of a debate by leaving out service rendered on behalf of some Legal Services providers (click here for the Minnesota Lawyer article) -- and perhaps the rule needs to be tweaked a bit before it goes into effect in July -- but I think overall the concept is a good one.

Although some have resisted the rule, I respectfully disagree. I take issue with the idea that the classroom is the primary or even best place for learning (and I have a B.A., J.D. and M.B.A.!) Nothing can substitute for real-world experiences -- and I see no reason not to count some of that experience as "education" -- particularly when that experience is gained rendering aid to the needy. If a business lawyer wants to learn the ins and outs of juvenile law in order to help a child in need of protective services, why not "reward" him/her with a few paltry CLE credits? That lawyer is going to learn a lot more about CHIPS proceedings in the field than he/she would at a panel discussion on that same topic -- and he/she won't even get a bagel break!

The CLE debate reminds me of the law school debate. I have long thought that many schools concentrate too much on the classroom at the expense of experiential learning. Fortunately, there has been some positive change in this area in recent years -- with many law schools now offering a variety of clinical components presenting students with the chance to get real-world experience.

Kudos to the Minnesota Supreme Court for its willingness to allow CLE credit for experiential learning when it's done on public-interest work.

Good news for local lawyers and law students: You will soon have Nixon to kick around again!

OK, OK, it's actually the topic of Watergate that will be kicked around at a forum at the University of St. Thomas School of Law this April -- but that doesn't make nearly as interesting a lead in, does it? The program is titled, "Watergate revisited: The ethics of lawyers."

UST snagged John Dean as one of the panelists. (Dean was counsel to Nixon, for those of you who only recall Watergate as the place where Monica Lewinsky lived.)

The event will be held on Wednesday, April 2 from 4 to 6:15 p.m. in the Schulze Grand Atrium of UST Law located between 11th and 12th and LaSalle Avenue and Harmon Place in downtown Minneapolis. Admission is $25 for the program ($75 if you want the two CLE credits). Students are admitted free. Reservations required in advance.

For more details, click here.

I have spent the last 2.5 days at Minnesota CLE's Criminal Law Institute, picking up a bevvy of CLE credits and seeing what's new in the criminal law area. From this morning's lecture on the U.S. Supreme Court, here are just a few interesting tidbits:

-- The high court decided 68 cases this term -- the lowest output since 1953;
-- Justice Anthony Kennedy was the swing vote in every one of the more than 20 opinions decided by a 5-4 margin;
-- some lawyers have, as a result, begun tailoring their Supreme Court arguments specifically to court Justice Kennedy;
-- the high court has shown a strong proclivity toward taking business cases (40 percent of the docket) and toward deciding in favor of the business in most of those cases; and
-- a woman who mailed poisoned home-baked cookies to all the justices in 2005 was sentenced to 15 years in prison last year.

The last point gave me some pause as I munched absent-mindedly on one of those free bagels they set out for you at CLE programs ...

With planeloads of military men and women returning to Minnesota, now is a great time for the Minnesota State Bar Association Military Affairs Committee to offer its "Military Legal Assistance Seminar," scheduled for Aug. 2 at 8 a.m. at the Dorsey & Whitney offices. Free CLE credits are pending for volunteers willing to take a pro bono case for a service member through the Military Affairs Committee Pro Bono Listserv. And breakfast will be provided, too!

One would hope our troops would return to a hero's welcome, but they also return to unemployment, divorce, eviction and consumer law issues, said MSBA Pro Bono Coordinator Caroline Palmer. "We hear a lot from the JAGs that they are looking for help," she said.

Information about the seminar is available at the MSBA's Web site. (Click here for more.)

The military affairs committee is co-chaired by Thomas Kayser, a retired lieutenant colonel in the Air Force Reserve who spent eight years on active duty.

"We've got to do something for these men and women. It's a terrible situation," Kayser said.
Kudos to Kayser, Palmer, and the rest who pitch in to aid those who serve our country.

The following is excerpted from my editor's column in this week's Minnesota Lawyer. The full column is available to Minnesota Lawyer subscribers by clicking here (password required).

It was 2001 and my future client — a Vietnam War veteran — was threatening to kill himself with a knife. When the police came to take him in for psychological care, he was reporting hearing voices and insisting that the year was 1901. When he later applied for veterans’ benefits for his treatment, his claim was denied. He spent the next few years locked in the labyrinth of the Veteran’s Administration bureaucracy.

How did I wind up representing this man?

A couple of years ago, I responded to then-Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz’s pro bono challenge by signing up to participate in the Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Program. ...

Why this program? I liked the idea of providing assistance to someone who served our country. It was also not a prolonged commitment since participants were only required to handle one appeal. ...

Since the 2001 incident, my client had received treatment for depression, bipolar disorder and paranoid schizophrenia. He was again functional and working as a day laborer. Although he received a small monthly stipend from the government for his service-related breathing difficulties, his claims for benefits for the psychological disorders had been repeatedly denied over the years [as not service-related]. ...

After getting a final agency denial, he appealed to the Court of U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. ...

After I prepared and filed the brief, my client and I were finally able to reach an agreement with the government. The adverse finding on my client’s psychological conditions was vacated and the case remanded back to the VA. The government admitted that there was insufficient medical testimony on the record for an adverse benefit determination to be made.

I couldn’t help but smile. One veteran had taken on the government of the United States of America and gotten it to say that it was wrong. It truly is a great country we live in.


Of course, my client’s case was not over. This just gave him a chance to be examined by a doctor and to make his case on an even playing field. But it is a good feeling to be a part in helping to make sure that someone has access to justice. I can see how Legal Aid lawyers and public defenders might get addicted to it. ...


The Minnesota Supreme Court is currently considering whether or not to make continuing legal education credits available for pro bono work. I am in support of the concept. I learned a lot more working with that one veteran than I could in a host of CLE classes — although I must admit that I do like the free chocolate chip cookies you get with the CLE programs.

The Minnesota Supreme Court announced last week that it will hold a hearing to consider a petition by the Minnesota State Bar Association to amend the Rules of the Minnesota State Board of Continuing Legal Education. The proposed amendments would allow attorneys to receive CLE credit for doing pro bono work -- up to a total of six CLE credits within a three-year reporting period.

Many within the legal community support the proposal, primarily because it will likely encourage attorneys to take on pro bono matters, therefore addressing a crisis of unmet legal needs. But some aren't convinced, and argue that the rule won't provide an incentive to lawyers who would not otherwise do pro bono work, but will only mean that lawyers who would have done pro bono work anyway will wind up with less time in the classroom. Many also lament that receiving CLE credits defeats the purpose of pro bono work, which should be a selfless act and a demonstration of professionalism.

The hearing on the proposed amendments will be held in Courtroom 300 of the Minnesota Judicial Center, on Sept. 18, 2007, at 2:00 p.m.