Advocacy Letter

Proposed Rule Changes Addressing Public Licensee Information and Required Reporting December 13, 2019 Suzanne GrandtOffice of General Counsel180 Howard StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105Email: Rule.2.2.Public.Comment@calbar.ca.gov Dear Ms. Grandt: The California Lawyers Association (CLA) submits these comments in response to the State Bar’s request for public comment on the proposed rule changes addressing public licensee information and required reporting. We note that the State Bar specifically seeks public comment on its recommendation that “practice area information be made searchable in the interest… Read more

Proposed California Consumer Privacy Act Regulations December 6, 2019 Privacy Regulations CoordinatorCalifornia Office of the Attorney General300 South Spring Street, First FloorLos Angeles, CA 90013Email: PrivacyRegulations@doj.ca.gov Dear Attorney General Becerra: The California Lawyers Association (“CLA”) Privacy Working Group (“PWG”) respectfully submits these comments on the proposed California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) regulations. The PWG is a multidisciplinary group with members drawn from various sections of the California Lawyers Association, including: Antitrust, UCL and Privacy; Business Law; and Intellectual Property Law.… Read more

CLA supported proposed amendments to the Code of Judicial Ethics, to allow a judge to comment publicly about a pending case that formed the basis of criticism of a judge during an election or recall campaign, provided the comment would not reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of the proceeding. CLA has worked closely with other interested stakeholders to address the increasing attacks on judges and judicial independence. These efforts have involved defense by third parties. The proposed amendments would provide judges with the option of defending themselves. Read more

CLA submitted extensive comments expressing concerns about the State Bar proposal that would, among other things, allow nonlawyers to provide legal advice and services under certain circumstances; permit nonlawyers to own or have a financial interest in a law practice; and permit lawyers to share fees with nonlawyers under certain circumstances. This proposal is still under consideration and CLA continues to be actively engaged in the process. Read more

CLA successfully resisted the amount of the licensing fee increase the State Bar sought, ultimately resulting in a much smaller increase. Our comments expressed numerous concerns with the proposed fee increase, urging a cautious approach with a sharp focus on the State Bar’s current use of revenue derived from licensing fees and future use of revenue that may be derived as a result of any increase to the licensing fee. Read more

CLA successfully advocated in support of the enactment of legislation that increased funding for programs established under California’s Sargent Shriver Civil Counsel Act. The Shriver Act established funding for pilot programs, providing representation of counsel for low-income persons who require legal services in specified civil matters, including tenants facing eviction, parents involved in child custody disputes, and families in urgent need of guardianships or conservatorships. The increase in funding was vital in order to continue offering legal representation to litigants who are most vulnerable. Read more

In 2018, legislation was introduced that would have required lawyers to annually complete a minimum of 25 hours of pro bono service or contribute $500 to support legal services. Although CLA strongly supports both pro bono legal services and increased funding to support the provision of legal services to indigent persons, CLA expressed several concerns with the legislation as introduced, as well as its views on alternative ways in which the overarching goals of the legislation could be met. Ultimately, the legislation did not advance. Read more

We are deeply engaged in the policy debate to resist a movement to tax legal and other professional services in California.  Imposition of such a tax would increase the cost of legal services, decrease access to justice, put California law firms at a competitive disadvantage as compared to out-of-state law firms, and disfavor California offices of national law firms because clients might opt to use offices in other states that do not impose such a tax. Read more

CLA successfully advocated in support of the enactment of legislation that authorized out-of-state attorneys and attorneys from foreign jurisdictions to represent parties in international commercial arbitrations in California.  Read more