Column on paraprofessional program contains factual inaccuracies

Bradley Wallace's Oct. 5 opinion piece, "Could law firms run by VC's and big corps become reality?" contains a few factual inaccuracies.

The column begins with mention of the State Bar of California's proposal, currently circulating for public comment, to license paraprofessionals. A legal paraprofessional is to a lawyer as a nurse practitioner is to a doctor: a licensed and regulated professional who can provide legal advice and representation in specific authorized practice areas, within the designated scope of practice for each area.

One feature of the current proposal would allow licensed paraprofessionals to share up to 49% ownership in a law firm, so that attorneys and paraprofessionals could partner in service delivery. It says nothing about "venture capitalists," "big corporations," "unregulated groups of nonlawyers," or the unnamed "corporate interests" that he claims -- without any evidence -- are driving this initiative.

Mr. Wallace asserts that paraprofessionals would not be held to the same ethical or professional standards as attorneys and would have "very little" proposed oversight. Anyone who reads the entire paraprofessionals proposal will see that it details rules of professional conduct modeled after the attorney rules, as well as a regulatory structure, discipline process, disclosure requirements, and other measures to protect the public.

Finally, Mr. Wallace mentions the Task Force on Access Through Innovation of Legal Services, "which proposes the creation of a regulatory sandbox." The ATILS task force completed its work in early 2020. Currently, a follow-on committee, the Closing the Justice Gap Working Group, is evaluating a regulatory sandbox and other changes that would help to spur innovation and close California's very real and growing justice gap. Its recommendations are still nearly a year away.

-- Leah Wilson

Executive Director

State Bar of California