Licensing In Other States

COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

Glen Proctor

CHARGE

1.Determine which states, if any, have mandatory licensing for legal assistants and/or paralegals.

2.Determine which states, if any, have voluntary licensing for legal assistants and/or paralegals.

3.If any states have mandatory or volunteer licensing for legal assistants and/or paralegals, they are administered through the state bar associations or are they administered through a legislative agency.

FINDINGS

None.

None.

None.

While it is important to understand that contact was not made with agencies from each of the fifty (50) states with regard to the above issues, a concerted effort and emphasis was placed on those states where issues of legal assistant licensing has had the strongest consideration, influence, and potential impact.

While we understand the purpose of NALA's legal assistant certification program, there are currently, no states, bar associations, or legislative agencies that require mandatory or seek voluntary licensing of legal assistants. The most recent action, which attempted to license legal assistants, was the state of Washington Legislature, House Bill 5380. A subcommittee was assigned to review the issues and proposed legislation. However, after considerable internal debate and strong opposition from legislative attorneys, the bill died in the subcommittee. The consensus from the Washington subcommittee was that the bill would grant "too much power to paralegals." Similar legislative bills from Florida, Indiana, Oklahoma and California had also been considered. However, these bills are unique in that they focus on a particular area, such as wills and probate, where a paralegal may be called upon by his/her supervising attorney to represent a client before an administrative law agency or even participating in scheduling conferences. Marge Dover at NALA's headquarters confirmed that no legislative action nor efforts to license legal assistants were in effect as of January 20, 1998.

Research efforts were then directed to voluntary licensing. NALA has considered another approach to defining what a legal assistant and/or paralegal is. NALA's recent publication to the American Bar Association - Commission on Non-lawyer Practice detailed the various proposed definitions, along with the supportive declarations by national legal assistant organizations and even the U.S. Supreme Court's recognition of the use of legal assistants. Case law from Kentucky, New Mexico and Rhode Island was cited in an effort to clarify references to include "legal assistants," "paralegals," and "lawyers assistants." Interestingly enough, the Supreme Court Rules of South Dakota Rule 92-5, recognizes paralegals by a list of seven (7) minimum qualifications. The first qualification is successful completion of NALA's Certified Legal Assistant examination. The South Dakota minimum qualifications were established only after NALA was asked to assist the local organization with identifying the minimum criteria for legal assistants in South Dakota.

There are currently no agencies, legislative, state or otherwise, that administer or require legal assistant licensing. The above-mentioned states, along with Texas, were considered because of their vast population of legal assistants. It should be noted that NALA maintains contact with local legal assistant organizations and state bar associations to monitor developments in this area.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1.Maintain contact with NALA representatives to monitor any developments regarding mandatory licensing of legal assistants in other states.

2.Continue research efforts with other states agencies, legislatures and legal assistant organizations, to analyze and develop a resource network of any efforts in the individual states to regulate and license legal assistants.

3.Support other subcommittee efforts in areas where research of certain licensing or regulatory issues and topics may arise.