Unbundled legal service, also known as “limited scope representation,” occurs when a lawyer handles only certain discrete aspects of a case. For example, the lawyer may be hired to draft pleadings to be filed with the court, but then will not be hired to represent the client at hearings. This type of limited service can save the client money while still providing skilled legal assistance with certain specific aspects of the case.
Unbundled service has been discussed by commentators for well over a decade. For a list of books and articles, see the Unbundled Legal Services Resource Guide offered by the National Center for State Courts Library.
In recent months, interest in the topic seems to have grown. For example, in January 2010, the chief justices of New Hampshire and California co-wrote an opinion article in the New York Times encouraging greater use of unbundled legal service. They described a “justice gap” where low and middle income consumers are unable to obtain the legal services they need. The chief justices recommended expanded use of unbundled service as a part of the solution to this justice gap.
Bloggers are also discussing the topic. In his March 2010 blog post on Law21, legal commentator Jordan Furlong asserted that the traditional BigLaw approach to legal service, with big fees and the lawyers in control, is dying. Furlong maintains and that the expansion of the internet is the key change, and that this new platform requires all legal practitioners to reconsider non-traditional methods of service delivery.
Specifically in the context of consumer bankruptcy, a few legal bloggers have recently written on the application of unbundled service in this practice area. See, for example, Jay Fleischman’s posts on his blog The Untethered Lawyer, and Gini Nelson’s recent post, Unbundled Legal Services In Bankruptcy, Part One.
But even with this increased interest, unbundled service has yet to catch on in the area of consumer bankruptcy. This is probably due in large part to the requirements of the Bankruptcy Code. Under the 2005 changes to the Code, lawyers are held personally liable for inaccuracies in the debtor’s submissions to the court. See 11 U.S.C. § 707(b)(4). This potential liability undoubtedly tends to discourage lawyers from giving up control of any aspect of a case.
Policymakers should consider changes to the Bankruptcy Code to make it easier for clients to obtain unbundled services in bankruptcy. Too many low and moderate income consumers are locked out of the economy because they need bankruptcy relief, but cannot afford a full service lawyer. This is harmful to the individuals, their families, and society as a whole. Many such consumers could and would proceed to seek the relief they need if they were able to obtain unbundled legal service. This concept is in wide practice in the field of family law. It is time to encourage the same in consumer bankruptcy.
Please add your comments below.
Photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
