Article

• Jurisdiction: Utah,United States
• Citation: Vol. 29 No. 3 Pg. 16
• Pages: 16
• Publication year: 2016

Article No. Vol. 29 No. 3 Pg. 16 Utah Bar Journal June, 2016

May, 2016

Licensed Paralegal Practitioners

Deno Himonas and Timothy Shea, Justice

Introduction

In his State of the Judiciary address to the Utah Legislature, Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Matthew Durrant highlighted three initiatives recommended in three collaborative studies: indigent representation in criminal cases, pretrial release practices, and access to civil justice. In the chief justice’s words:

Now let me turn to the values I mentioned earlier – fairness, access to justice, individual rights, and public safety. Judges are in a unique position. Though we have a very limited policy role, we encounter the concrete consequences of numerous policy issues that relate to these values. I believe that with this perspective comes a responsibility to raise issues for discussion that may not otherwise be addressed. In this way, we in the judiciary serve as conveners. We bring various stakeholders together to examine these issues and to explore potential solutions to identified problems. We then usually present whatever consensus proposal there may be to you, the Legislature, for your consideration of possible action. We believe this shared process has served Utahns well.

The three initiatives are responses to difficulties faced by the judiciary, and, more important, difficulties faced by parties in the litigation process or by those whose participation is marginalized. The 2016 General Session of the Legislature considered legislation addressing the first two – indigent representation in criminal cases and pretrial release practices. The third initiative does not require legislation and is moving forward under the supervision of the Utah Supreme Court.

In May 2015, the Utah Supreme Court appointed a task force to examine a market-based, supply-side solution to the unmet needs of litigants. The court has approved the task force's recommendations, which are available on the court's website, and has appointed a steering committee to implement those recommendations. See http://ww.utcourts.gov/committees/ limited_legal/Supreme%20Court%20Task%20Force%20to%20 Examine%20Limited%20Legal%20Licensing.pdf. In a nutshell, the task force recommended:

• The Utah Supreme Court should exercise its constitutional authority to govern the practice of law to create a subset of discrete legal services that can be provided by a paralegal practitioner in three practice areas:

- temporary separation, divorce, paternity, cohabitant abuse and civil stalking, custody and support, and name change;

- residential eviction; and

- debt collection.

• Within an approved practice area, the court should authorize a paralegal practitioner to:

- establish a contractual relationship with a client who is not represented by a lawyer;

– conduct client interviews to understand the client’s objectives and to obtain facts relevant to achieving that objective;

– complete court-approved forms on the client’s behalf;

– advise which form to use; advise how to complete the form; sign, file and...