Editorial Advisory Board – Pro bono: Organizing to address unmet needs

The Maryland Judiciary’s annual pro bono report demonstrates a very high level of pro bono activity by Maryland lawyers. Among full-time lawyers actively practicing in Maryland in 2013, more than 60 percent rendered some type of pro bono service. Nearly 25 percent of lawyers provided 50 or more hours of pro bono service. This is a remarkable record indeed, which the Maryland Bar Association can and should celebrate at its annual meeting.

While this record is laudatory, we believe that there are many Maryland lawyers who would be interested in providing free services to persons in need (or of limited financial means) who have not had the opportunity to do so. Some have volunteered but have not been chosen; others are simply unfamiliar with the practice areas where such needs typically occur. Some have not found an avenue to obtain such client referrals.

The dilemma facing the Judiciary concerning providing counsel for bail review hearings has been in the news and the subject of our commentary. This is clearly an unmet need which can scarcely be managed through the Judiciary’s budget, but which can be ameliorated by volunteer lawyers who, we believe, would be willing provide services if given the opportunity.

There is also a need for qualified attorneys in certain civil cases, often referred to as Civil Gideon, after the case which affirmed the right of criminal defendants to legal counsel. Proponents of Civil Gideon believe that there should be an equivalent right for civil litigants in circumstances in which substantial legal rights may be lost. Areas mentioned include landlord-tenant actions, civil forfeitures, and matters involving parental rights. We certainly recognize the potential injustice that can occur when a well-funded litigant opposes a pro se party. We also recognize that the potential impact in civil matters can be as great as the impact in criminal matters.

We believe that organized pro bono can successfully address both of these issues. The large jurisdictions populated by medium and large law firms often have the resources, provided by the firms themselves, to coordinate with various agencies to provide needed pro bono services. However, in the smaller jurisdictions this can be less robust. We therefore suggest that the local bar associations consider an organized pro bono effort to address initially the bail review and potential Civil Gideon issues. Coordinating with the court, the local board could organize attorneys who volunteer for such service to handle bail review hearings. In addition, local bar associations can maintain a list of attorneys willing to provide pro bono — or, often as important, “low bono” — services. The local bar associations typically work very closely with court personnel in their jurisdictions, and may be able to identify many more cases that would otherwise be missed where Civil Gideon pro bono services would be needed.

We call upon the local bar associations to look into how this might be handled in their jurisdictions. Many already have a pro bono coordinator. Many already have a system in place. We hope that these organizations will be able to address these issues and that Maryland will continue to be a leader in the protection of the legal rights of all of its citizens.