Notice of Proposed Amendments to Utah Court Rules 2

The Utah Supreme Court and the Utah Judicial Council invite comments to the following proposed amendments to court rules. Unless otherwise noted, the comment period expires March 14, 2016.

Summary of Proposed Amendments

Code of Judicial Administration

CJA 03-0302. Clerk of Court. Amend. Provides that the clerk’s office shall be open during all business hours except Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. Provides that during hours of operation the clerk or deputy shall be physically present, or immediately available remotely.
CJA 03-0306.01. Language access definitions. New. Defines terms applicable to rules 3-306.02 through 3-306.05 of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Deletions and additions to the language are redlined.
CJA 03-0306.02. Language Access Committee. New. Outlines the Language Access Committee’s responsibilities. Deletions and additions to the language are redlined.
CJA 03-0306.03. Interpreter certification. New. Outlines the process for becoming a certified interpreter. Provides a process whereby an exception may be made to one or more of the requirements as determined by the
Language Access Committee. Reiterates the policy that contract interpreters are independent contractors. Deletions and additions to the language are redlined.
CJA 03-0306.04. Interpreter appointment, payment, and fees. New. Outlines the interpreter appointment process. Provides that the Judicial Council will review a market study every three years in order to set hourly rates for interpreters. Deletions and additions to the language are redlined.
CJA 03-0306.05. Interpreter removal, discipline, and formal complaints. New. Outlines the interpreter discipline process. Provides that an interpreter may be disciplined for unprofessional conduct, or for being convicted of, or charged with, a crime. Revises the formal complaint process so that following a proposed resolution by the Language Access Program Coordinator, an interpreter may request a hearing before a panel of the Language Access Committee, and may appeal that panel’s decision to the Language Access Committee. Deletions and additions to the language are redlined.
CJA 04-0106. Electronic conferencing. Amend. Authorizes the use of remote conferencing in lieu of personal appearances when certain requirements are met.
CJA 04-0408.01 Responsibility for administration of trial courts. Amend. Removes Morgan from the list of district courts administered by a county or municipality, since it is administered by the Administrative Office of the Courts.
CJA 04-0602. Victims’ Rights Committees. Repeal. Repeals the rule because the process for establishing Victims’ Rights Committees is now outlined by Utah Code section 77-37-5.
CJA 09-0105. Justice Court hours. Amend. Provides that during hours of operation, the justice court judge or clerk shall be physically present, or immediately available remotely.
CJA 09-0302. Mandatory electronic filing. New. Provides that e-filing will be discretionary in justice court criminal cases from July 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016. Provides that e-filing will be mandatory in justice court criminal cases beginning December 31, 2016.

Rules Governing the Utah State Bar

USB 14-0503. Ethics and Discipline Committee. Amend. As part of the effort to remove responsibility for administrative support of the Ethics and Discipline Committee from OPC, describes in general terms the responsibilities of the clerk of the Ethics and Discipline Committee. Effective January 27, 2016 under rule 11-105 of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Subject to change after the comment period.
USB 14-0504. OPC counsel. Amend. As part of the effort to remove responsibility for administrative support of the Ethics and Discipline Committee from OPC, eliminates OPC’s responsibility for notice of disposition of matters. Effective January 27, 2016 under rule 11-105 of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Subject to change after the comment period.
(more…)

Notice of Approved Amendments to Utah Court Rules 1

The Utah Judicial Council and the Utah Supreme Court have approved amendments to the following court rules. Unless otherwise noted, the amendments are effective May 1, 2016.

Summary of Approved Amendments 

Code of Judicial Administration

CJA 04-0202.02. Records classification. Amend. Records classification. Amend. Deletes maiden name and mother’s maiden name from the lists of private and safeguarded information. Classifies juvenile mediation disposition notices as juvenile court social records. Notes a statutory exception to the protection of certain victim information.

Rules Governing the Utah State Bar

USB 14-0503. Ethics and Discipline Committee. Amend. As part of the effort to remove responsibility for administrative support of the Ethics and Discipline Committee from OPC, describes in general terms the responsibilities of the clerk of the Ethics and Discipline Committee. Effective January 27, 2016 under rule 11-105 of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Subject to change after the comment period.
USB 14-0504. OPC counsel. Amend. As part of the effort to remove responsibility for administrative support of the Ethics and Discipline Committee from OPC, eliminates OPC’s responsibility for notice of disposition of matters. Effective January 27, 2016 under rule 11-105 of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Subject to change after the comment period.
USB 14-0510. Prosecution and appeals. As part of the effort to remove responsibility for administrative support of the Ethics and Discipline Committee from OPC, assigns specific tasks performed by OPC to the clerk of the Ethics and Discipline Committee. Effective January 27, 2016 under rule 11-105 of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Subject to change after the comment period.
USB 14-0533. Diversion. Amend. Removes the description of OPC acting as secretary to the Ethics and Discipline Committee. Effective January 27, 2016 under rule 11-105 of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Subject to change after the comment period.

How to View Redline Text of the Amendments

To see approved rule amendments, click on the rule number above, or click on this link to: http://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/approved/. Then click on the rule number.

 

Notice of Approved Amendments to Utah Court Rules

The Utah Supreme Court has approved amendments to the following court rules. The amendments are effective January 21, 2016.

Summary of Approved Amendments 

 Rules Governing the Utah State Bar

USB 14-0503. Ethics and Discipline Committee. Amend. Provides for a third committee vice chair. Allows a chair or vice chair of one screening panel to serve on another.
USB 14-0510. Prosecution and appeals. Amend. Describes the role of the screening panel as investigator and fact finder. Requires an OPC summary — if provided to a screening panel — to also be provided to the respondent and to include any additional violations. Allows the respondent to address any additional violations. Permits the screening panel to find additional violations during the hearing. Describes the process by which the respondent may address the additional violations. Requires a formal complaint to be filed if a screening panel finds probable cause for public discipline or if the misconduct is similar to a pending formal complaint. Allows evidence of prior discipline to be presented at the hearing. Allows for multiple cases to be presented to one screening panel. Allows OPC 30 days in which to file a response to respondent’s exceptions. Allows the chair to extend the time in which to file an exception or response so the respondent or OPC can obtain a transcript of the hearing.
USB 14-0517. Additional rules of procedure. Amend. Clarifies that a screening panel chair screens complaints against OPC counsel, committee members and bar commissioners before the appointment of a special counsel.

How to View Redline Text of the Amendments

To see approved rule amendments, click on the rule number above, or click on this link to: http://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/approved/. Then click on the rule number.

Notice of Proposed Amendments to Utah Court Rules #2

The Utah Supreme Court invites comments to the following proposed amendments to court rules. The comment period expires March 1, 2016.

Summary of Proposed Amendments

Rules Governing the Utah State Bar

USB 14-0807. Law student and law graduate legal assistance. Amend. Subject to some limitations, permits 2L and 3L students, as well as recent graduates within the year following graduation, to practice under the rule. Expands the areas in which students and graduates may practice. Effective January 6, 2016 under rule 11-105(5) of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Subject to change after the comment period.

Rules of Evidence

URE 0511. Insurance Regulators. New. Creates a privilege for insurance regulators.

How to View Redline Text of the Proposed Amendments

To see proposed rule amendments and submit comments, click on this link to:  http://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/comments/, then click on the rule number.

How to Submit Comments

You can comment and view the comments of others by clicking on the “comments” link associated with each body of rules. It is most efficient to submit comments through the website. After clicking on the comment link, you will be asked for your name, which is required, and your email address which need not be your real address. The comment website is public. Although all comments will be considered, they will not be acknowledged with a response.

After submitting your comment on the webpage, you may get an error message, but your comment has been delivered to a buffer, and I will publish it as soon as possible.

Please submit comments directly through the website or to me at the address listed below. One method of submitting a comment is sufficient. If you email a comment, please list the relevant rule in the message line and include your comment in the message text, not in an attachment.

Notice of Approved Amendments to Utah Court Rules #1

The Utah Supreme Court has approved amendments to the following court rules. Unless otherwise noted, the amendments are effective May 1, 2016.

Summary of Approved Amendments 

Rules of Appellate Procedure

URAP 021. Filing and service. Amend. Provides that if a filing including an addendum contains non-public information, the filer must also file a redacted version of the filing.
URAP 038A. Withdrawal of counsel. Amend. Requires that appointed appellate counsel represent a client through the first appeal as of right.
URAP 040. Attorney’s or party’s certificate; sanctions and discipline. Amend. Provides that a person may sign a document using any form recognized by law as binding. Provides that by signing a document, a person makes certain representations to the court including that a filing made under rule 21(g) does not contain non-public information.

Rules Governing the Utah State Bar

The following proposals address changes to the Bar admissions rules. The proposed changes are primarily a reorganization of the current rules to make them easier for applicants to understand. Redundant sections of the rules were deleted and consolidated. There also are numerous changes proposed for consistency, form and clarification. Substantive changes include a change in the definition of “Active Practice” in Rule 14-701, the consolidation of all review procedures under Rule 14-715, and changes to timing of motions for admissions, the ceremony and taking of the oath of attorney in rules 14-707 and 14-716.
USB 14-0701. Definitions. Amend.
USB 14-0703. Qualifications for admission of Student and Foreign Law School Applicants. Amend.
USB 14-0704. Qualifications for admission of Attorney Applicants. Amend.
USB 14-0705. Admission by motion. Amend.
USB 14-0706. Test accommodations. Amend.
USB 14-0707. Application; deadlines; withdrawals; postponements and fees. Amend.
USB 14-0708. Character and fitness. Amend.
USB 14-0709. Application denial. Amend.
USB 14-0710. Administration of the Bar Exam. Amend.
USB 14-0711. Grading and passing of the Bar Exam. Amend.
USB 14-0712. Qualifications for admission based on UBE. Amend.
USB 14-0715. Bar Examination appeals. Amend.
USB 14-0716. License fees; enrollment fees; oath and admission. Amend.
USB 14-0717. Readmission after resignation or disbarment of Utah attorneys. Amend.
USB 14-0718. Licensing of Foreign Legal Consultants. Amend.
USB 14-0719. Qualifications for admission of House Counsel Applicants. Amend.

Rules Governing the Utah State Bar

USB 14-0807. Law student and law graduate legal assistance. Amend. Subject to some limitations, permits 2L and 3L students, as well as recent graduates within the year following graduation, to practice under the rule. Expands the areas in which students and graduates may practice. Effective January 6, 2016 under rule 11-105(5) of the Utah Code of Judicial Administration. Subject to change after the comment period.

How to View Redline Text of the Amendments

To see approved rule amendments, click on the rule number above, or click on this link to: http://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/approved/. Then click on the rule number.

Court rule change: student practice extended to second year; cases expanded to include felonies.

Court rule change:  student practice extended to second year; cases expanded to include felonies.

On January 6, 2016, the Utah Supreme Court approved changes to the Law Student and Law Graduate Legal Assistance Rule 14-807. The changes allow second year law students to provide legal assistance under the rule. The old rule only permitted third year law students and recent graduates who have not yet passed a bar exam to provide assistance under the rule. The changes also expand the types of cases law students are allowed to handle. As before the amendments, all students must be supervised by a licensed attorney and have the written consent of the client.

Students providing assistance under the rule must do so as part of a law school clinic or externship, be volunteering for a tax-exempt or governmental agency or employed by a for-profit entity and supervised by an attorney who works for that entity. The rule does not allow students to seek private clients or to provide legal assistance on their own without supervision.

Allowing second year law students to provide legal assistance will increase the pool of individuals available to assist poor and low income clients in law school and Bar clinics and other assistance programs across the State. Additionally, expanding the types of cases law students are allowed to handle will give law students in Utah more opportunity for hands on, practical training during law school.

Rule 14-807:  http://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/ucja/ch14/08%20Special%20Practice/USB14-807.html

 

 

 

 

CORRECTION – Notice of Proposed Amendments to Utah Court Rules

The Utah Supreme Court invites comments to the following proposed amendments to court rules. The comment period expires February 8, 2016.

Summary of Proposed Amendments

Rules of Appellate Procedure

URAP 004. Appeal as of right: when taken. Amend. Provides that the time for all parties to appeal from a judgment runs from the entry of a dispositive order if a party files a motion for relief under rule 60(b) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure no later than 28 days after the judgment is entered or a motion or claim for attorney fees under rule 73 of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, in addition to the other motions previously listed.

How to View Redline Text of the Proposed Amendments

To see proposed rule amendments and submit comments, click on this link to:  http://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/comments/, then click on the rule number.

How to Submit Comments

You can comment and view the comments of others by clicking on the “comments” link associated with each body of rules. It is most efficient to submit comments through the website. After clicking on the comment link, you will be asked for your name, which is required, and your email address which need not be your real address. The comment website is public. Although all comments will be considered, they will not be acknowledged with a response.

After submitting your comment on the webpage, you may get an error message, but your comment has been delivered to a buffer, and I will publish it as soon as possible.

Please submit comments directly through the website or to me at the address listed below.

One method of submitting a comment is sufficient. If you email a comment, please list the relevant rule in the message line and include your comment in the message text, not in an attachment.

A New Kind of Paralegal is Coming to Help Utahns Navigate the Court System

12/17/2015

A new kind of paralegal is coming to help Utahns navigate the court system

BY JESSICA MILLER
The Salt Lake Tribune
PUBLISHED: DECEMBER 15, 2015 08:18AM
UPDATED: DECEMBER 14, 2015 10:41PM

There are issues with how Utahns access their justice system, a Utah Supreme Court justice said.

Many people either can’t afford lawyers, Deno Himonas said Monday, or simply don’t want to hire one to help them navigate the court system as they file for divorce, settle debts or resolve eviction issues. “Lawyers have been incredibly generous with their time,” Himonas said. “And are trying to address [those issues] through pro bono measures. But at the end of the day, though, we need to come up with an economically viable model that will help improve access for those individuals in our civil justice system.”

To that end, the Utah Supreme Court has approved the creation of a new legal profession: limited paralegal practitioners.

An LPP, or paraprofessional, will have more training and responsibilities than a normal paralegal, but is not quite a lawyer. The paraprofessional will be able to help the public in those areas where Utahns generally aren’t hiring lawyers.

“They will really help [their clients] navigate the system, if you will,” Himonas told the Utah Judicial Council at its monthly meeting Monday.

Himonas, who chaired a task force committee that explored whether LPPs could help Utahns have better access to courts, told the council that the committee spent the past seven months exploring other states where similar programs exist, and examining what was successful and what was not.

The task force said an LPP can be a cheaper alternative for people who can’t afford a lawyer or don’t want to spend their money on one.

“We recognize the valuable services that lawyers provide to their clients every day, in and out of court,” the report reads. “But the data shows that, even after years of effort with pro bono and low bono programs, a large number of people do not have a lawyer to help them. … The people facing these situations need correct information and advice. They need assistance.”

An LPP will help fill in that gap — assisting clients outside of the courtroom by filling out forms, representing clients in mediated negotiations or preparing settlements.

“[But] there is a limit,” appellate court administrator Timothy Shea told the judicial council. “And that is essentially the courtroom door. An LPP cannot represent someone in the courtroom.”

This means the paraprofessional cannot present evidence inside a courtroom, question witnesses or make arguments before a judge. LPPs will be required to have a certain amount of education, according to the report. They will be required to have either a law degree or an associate degree with a paralegal certificate. They will also need to be experienced as a paralegal and complete further courses in their practice area.

The Utah State Bar would oversee licensing and disciplinary concerns for the newly formed program, according to the report. Spokesman Sean Toomey said Monday that the bar is pleased with how quickly the Supreme Court task force issued its report and “looks forward to considering its recommendations.”
(more…)

Utah State Bar hosts new divorce and custody document clinic

Sean Toomey
SALT LAKE CITY

Of the 14,088 divorces and annulments filed in Utah in 2014, both sides had an attorney in only 12% of the cases. Neither party had counsel in 60% of the cases, which reflects a sharp increase from 47% in 2005.

The unrepresented litigants are in an unfamiliar system without an advocate, without a trained professional, and without someone they can trust. They can use the forms that are available from the court’s website, but they often don’t know how to use the forms or have complications that require special treatment. The judges and court staff must remain impartial and cannot provide legal advice to a party. Maintaining impartiality can be difficult when it is clear a party needs legal counsel. This often results in many patient efforts to explain the process and to try to guide the party towards legal counsel who can properly advise them.

This increase in self-representation comes as legal issues are becoming more, not less, complex. The forms required to complete a divorce can be a challenge when there are children, real property, retirement plans, or foreign citizenship to consider.
Many potential clients do not know how to access lawyers and are concerned about the cost, especially when quoted as an open-ended hourly rate.

The Utah State Bar is working to address this issue on many fronts, including a new divorce and custody document clinic: Courthouse Steps. The clinic provides document preparation and legal advice on a one-time basis for a $100 flat fee, regardless of income. The first clinic will be held at Utah State Bar, 645 South 200 East, Salt Lake City, UT 84111 on Thursday, December 3 at 6:00 p.m. No appointment is necessary; attendees will be served in order of arrival. Additional assistance may be available on a sliding scale based upon income.

Charles A. Stormont, with the law firm of Stormont Billings, is co-chair of the Community Lawyering subcommittee of the Affordable Attorneys for All Task Force. Stormont said “There is often a disconnect between lawyers and potential middle-income clients. Many do not realize that lawyers can be hired on a per-task basis at a lower rate, which allows clients to receive needed professional guidance while effectively managing costs. With this new clinic, we are taking out the guesswork and the uncertainty by using a flat fee for discrete, but important, tasks. People will walk away with documents they need to move their cases forward and a professional resource in case they need more help down the road.”

The December 3 Courthouse Steps clinic will be staffed with attorneys from Open Legal Services, a nonprofit law firm serving low- and moderate-income clients. Open Legal Services offers legal assistance based on a sliding scale related to income. Its regular rates, outside of the clinic, start at $60 an hour, including pay-per-task services.
The Utah State Bar was established in 1931 and regulates the practice of law under the authority of the Utah Supreme Court. The vision of the Utah State Bar is a just legal system that is understood, valued, and accessible to all.
(more…)

Cyber-expert’s advice is not just for law firms

Reprinted with permission of the Intermountain Commercial Record and Donna K.W.Johnson.

Cyber-expert’s advice is not just for law firms

Donna K. W. Johnson
SALT LAKE CITY (The Record/Times)

Kim Phan works in the Washington, DC office of the law firm of Ballard Spahr as its cyber-security expert. But her expertise extends beyond law firms. She formerly worked in the Federal Trade Commission’s Office of Policy and Planning. The advice she gave at the Utah Bar’s recent Fall Forum is valuable for any company seeking to protect itself from online threats.

According to Phan, the average cost of a data breach is about $4 million over two years. Most of the regulation governing cyberspace is industry-sector-based, like HIPAA for the healthcare industry, so companies without such rules are on their own. And they risk losing more than employees’ personal information, Phan said. Trade secrets and other sensitive business information can be stolen from clients as well if that information is available in companies’ unprotected files. And the companies from whom they are stolen can be liable.

“The privacy standard is Section 5 of the FTC Act,” Phan said. “It governs general commerce. Originally it focused on deceptive practices, but later it was interpreted to say that if consumers are being harmed by an action, that constitutes a violation.”
According to Phan, the FTC bases its enforcement of the standard on reasonableness. “It’s scalable,” she explains. “They look at your company size and the resources you have and then look at what others your size are doing. What could and should you reasonably be doing?”

Occasional case-law rulings offer guidance, Phan said. In FTC v. Wyndham, the Third Circuit Court ruled that the FTC has jurisdiction over cyber-security issues. And in FTC v. LabMD, an administrative law judge ruled that in order to prevail, the complainant must prove that actual harm resulted from a data breach.

Security-consciousness starts at the top, Phan said: “It has to begin with the board-members and the CEO. The concept must be enterprise-wide. If everyone is aware of the risks and briefed on protective policies, your defense is much stronger than if some people believe they can just leave it to IT. Any organization truly is only as strong as its weakest link.”

When most people think of cyber-security, they think of outside hackers. But, Phan said, there are many other threats to security as well, including accidental exposure, employee negligence, subcontractor/third party weaknesses, routing errors and the one everyone hates to consider: insider theft. “Insider theft accounted for 15 percent of all breaches in 2014, according to the Identity Theft Resource Center,” Phan said. “And that doesn’t even consider the person who simply faxes the wrong person or mistakenly attaches a sensitive file to the wrong e-mail.”

Phan emphasized, “Privacy by design has to be baked in from the start. And you need to document it; otherwise the FTC won’t believe it’s happening. Make sure that new employees are being appropriately trained and that older ones are receiving refreshers. Monitor who’s logging on to the system, when and from where. If somebody who usually logs in between 9 and 5 suddenly shows up at 2 am, that should raise a red flag.
(more…)

Panel discusses the importance of jury selection

Reprinted with permission of the Intermountain Commercial Record and Donna K.W.Johnson.

Panel discusses the importance of jury selection

Donna K. W. Johnson
SALT LAKE CITY (The Record/Times)

At the Utah Bar’s 2015 Fall Forum, a panel composed of a trial judge, an appellate judge and a trial attorney explored the fine points of jury instructions. They emphasized that because jurors take these instructions very seriously, they are among the most-important parts of a trial.

“You should craft your jury instructions into your case from the start,” said Judge Christine Johnson of Utah’s Fourth District Court. “Because they are such a crucial component, you need time to think about them.” She added that attorneys can amend their planned instructions before submitting them if the case takes an unexpected turn.

Johnson advised asking when the trial judge wants proposed jury instructions submitted. “If the judge doesn’t give you a deadline, suggest one,” she added. “That way you know when to have them finalized. Ask if the judge has a stock set of standard instructions already. If so, all you need to submit are your own case-specific ones. That can save you a lot of paperwork and duplication.” Johnson noted that submitting proposed jury instructions electronically to the trial judge’s clerk also saves time and paper.

Johnson suggested that it’s a good idea to confer with opposing counsel and stipulate to as many common jury instructions as possible. “Judges really like those [stipulations],” she added. “If you have an objection to an instruction the other side proposes, you must identify the point you are objecting to and your grounds for doing so. You can object verbally or in writing, but again, written instructions give everyone time to think about and react to your points. Keep your objections as concise as possible.”

Trial attorney Juli Blanch of Parsons Behle & Latimer said that a second version of the Model Utah Jury Instructions, MUJI, is currently being rolled out. “They are now available for parts of both civil and criminal cases. They are easily accessible and widely accepted; they are now being used in both Utah’s state and federal courts.”

Blanch said that the new model jury instructions incorporate much less legalese: “When they were drafting them, the committee incorporated two language professors to speak for regular people. They realized that if the drafters were all lawyers, the language they produced was probably going to be too complicated.”

Blanch saw the impact of legalese in jury instructions at first hand during one of her early court cases: “The jury members kept referring to the ‘approximate’ instruction. I finally asked them what they meant. It turned out that they were talking about the proximate-cause instruction. They thought we were telling them that if we had come close to proving causation–approximated it–that was enough. MUJI 2 doesn’t refer to proximate cause anymore. It now simply uses the word ‘cause.’”

All of the panelists agreed that well-crafted jury instructions are vital on appeal. Utah Court of Appeals Judge Michele Christiansen cautioned, “One erroneous, insufficient or unclear instruction can reverse your whole case. All parties are entitled to have their theory of the case and the governing law explained, and jury instructions do that. They are one of the most-important things you do.”
(more…)

Neuroscience of decision-making in the practice of law

Reprinted with permission of the Intermountain Commercial Record and Alicia Knight Cunningham.

Neuroscience of decision-making in the practice of law

Alicia Knight Cunningham
SALT LAKE CITY (The Record/Times)

What is in a voice? A name? A face? According to Kimberly Papillon, a regular faculty member of the National Judicial College and a recognized expert on medical, legal and judicial decision-making, quite a lot.

During a presentation at the Utah State Bar Fall Forum, Papillon introduced the role of the Implicit-Association Test (IAT) to find subconscious associations or implicit biases.
According to Papillon, over 4.8 million people have taken the test online to see what biases are locked deep inside their brain.

“They are unconscious biases,” Papillon said. “They are in the background.”
Showing averaged data from IAT results, Papillon said that some biases are accepted in the United States, and there is little difference between an acknowledged bias and a subconscious one.

Bias due to another person’s age, weight or their Muslim ethnicity ranked high on an acknowledged bias level. “This is not natural,” Papillon said. “It is learned behavior, and it changes by country.” And, Papillon claimed, it does not always make sense.

She acknowledged that September 11, 2001, gave people permission to have a bias against Muslims. “But the same social permission was not granted after the Oklahoma City bombings. We did not develop a prejudice against people with the last name of McVeigh or even just ‘Mc’, Papillon said.

What Is In A Voice?
According to Papillon, learned biases are reinforced by media messages. For example, Papillon said, think about cartoons developed in the 1950s and 1960s when Russian was the dominant accent of a villain. “If you grew up during that time, you will have a reaction to that accent today.”

Papillon also claimed that in the 1970s the evil mastermind had a British accent. “Not Harry Potter British,” she explained. “Or The Beatles’ British. Americans like that accent. I’m talking about highbrow, aristocratic British. That sound creates a visceral reaction.”
Papillon also discussed how the clueless sidekick will be given an African American or Mexican accent and used the example of Disney’s ‘The Lion King’ where the evil brother had an aristocratic, British accent and his incompetent sidekick hyenas were voiced by Whoopi Goldberg and Cheech Marin.

“It is insidious, and it increases the message. We turn on this movie, and we sit our kids down and give them a juice box and crackers,” Papillon said. According to Papillon, accent is particularly important because the left brain detects the meaning of words but the detection of accents is in the right brain.

“If you have a negative reaction to an accent, it interferes with your ability to understand the words,” Papillon said. “Your level of comprehension will be down, and you will be mad, and that anger will affect your comprehension to the point that by the time you get to the fourth paragraph, your comprehension is down to 50 percent. Your own vice interferes with your comprehension,” Papillon said.

In another research study, Papillon said a group of nine year olds were asked to make a judgment based on someone’s accent. They listened to a woman with a southern accent (Kentucky) read a story followed by a person with a northern accent (Nebraska). The children said that the woman with the southern accent was nicer while the woman with the northern accent was smarter.
(more…)

Utah State Bar – New Divorce & Custody Document Clinic

Utah State Bar Hosts New Divorce & Custody Document Clinic

Courthouse Steps is part of the Bar’s new Affordable Attorneys for All Initiative

Of the 14,088 divorces and annulments filed in Utah in 2014, both sides had an attorney in only 12% of the cases.  Neither party had counsel in 60% of the cases, which reflects a sharp increase from 47% in 2005.

The unrepresented litigants are in an unfamiliar system without an advocate, without a trained professional, and without someone they can trust.  They can use the forms that are available from the court’s website, but they often don’t know how to use the forms or have complications that require special treatment.  The judges and court staff must remain impartial and cannot provide legal advice to a party.  Maintaining impartiality can be difficult when it is clear a party needs legal counsel.  This often results in many patient efforts to explain the process and to try to guide the party towards legal counsel who can properly advise them.

This increase in self-representation comes as legal issues are becoming more, not less, complex.  The forms required to complete a divorce can be a challenge when there are children, real property, retirement plans, or foreign citizenship to consider.

Many potential clients do not know how to access lawyers and are concerned about the cost, especially when quoted as an open-ended hourly rate.

The Utah State Bar is working to address this issue on many fronts, including a new divorce and custody document clinic:  Courthouse Steps.  The clinic provides document preparation and legal advice on a one-time basis for a $100 flat fee, regardless of income.  The first clinic will be held at Utah State Bar, 645 South 200 East, Salt Lake City, UT 8411 on Thursday, December 3 at 6:00 p.m.  No appointment is necessary; attendees will be served in order of arrival.  Additional assistance may be available on a sliding scale based upon income.

Charles A. Stormont, with the law firm of Stormont Billings, is co-chair of the Community Lawyering subcommittee of the Affordable Attorneys for All Task Force.  Stormont said “There is often a disconnect between lawyers and potential middle-income clients.  Many do not realize that lawyers can be hired on a per-task basis at a lower rate, which allows clients to receive needed professional guidance while effectively managing costs.  With this new clinic, we are taking out the guesswork and the uncertainty by using a flat fee for discrete, but important, tasks.  People will walk away with documents they need to move their cases forward and a professional resource in case they need more help down the road.”

The December 3 Courthouse Steps clinic will be staffed with attorneys from Open Legal Services, a nonprofit law firm serving low and moderate income clients.  Open Legal Services offers legal assistance based on a sliding scale related to income.  Its regular rates, outside of the clinic, start at $60 an hour, including pay-per-task services.

The Utah State Bar was established in 1931 and regulates the practice of law under the authority of the Utah Supreme Court.  The vision of the Utah State Bar is a just legal system that is understood, valued, and accessible to all.  See more at www.utahbar.org.
(more…)

Notice of Proposed Amendments to Utah Court Rules

The Utah Supreme Court and the Utah Judicial Council invite comments to the following proposed amendments to court rules. The comment period expires January 13, 2016.

Summary of Proposed Amendments

Code of Judicial Administration

CJA 03-0114. Judicial outreach. Amend. Reorders the intent language. Provides that model outreach programs shall take into account existing curricula. Requires the committee to propose and implement rather than develop policies that encourage judicial participation in outreach programs.
CJA 04-0503. Mandatory electronic filing. Amend. Requires an attorney seeking an exemption from efiling to submit a written request to the District Court Administrator.

Rules of Appellate Procedure

URAP 028A. Appellate Mediation Office. Amend. Outlines different processes for mediation in the supreme court and the court of appeals. Provides that the denial of a mediation request does not prevent parties from engaging in private mediation or settlement negotiations. Makes technical changes.

Rules Governing the Utah State Bar

USB 14-0515. Access to disciplinary information. Amend. Allows access to disciplinary records without the waiver of the respondent is limited circumstances. Requires that those with access maintain the confidentiality of the records. Effective November 25, 2015 under Rule 11-105. Subject to change after the comment period.

How to View Redline Text of the Proposed Amendments

To see proposed rule amendments and submit comments, click on this link to:  http://www.utcourts.gov/resources/rules/comments/, then click on the rule number.

How to Submit Comments

You can comment and view the comments of others by clicking on the “comments” link associated with each body of rules. It is most efficient to submit comments through the website. After clicking on the comment link, you will be asked for your name, which is required, and your email address which need not be your real address. The comment website is public. Although all comments will be considered, they will not be acknowledged with a response.

After submitting your comment on the webpage, you may get an error message, but your comment has been delivered to a buffer, and I will publish it as soon as possible.

Please submit comments directly through the website or to me at the address listed below.

One method of submitting a comment is sufficient. If you email a comment, please list the relevant rule in the message line and include your comment in the message text, not in an attachment.