Wayne J. Positan, Esquire
July 10, 2002
Page Two
July 10, 2002
Wayne J. Positan, Esquire, Chair
ABA Multijurisdictional Practice Comm’n
103 Eisenhower Parkway
Roseland, NJ 07068-1049
Dear Mr. Positan:
The Bar Association of the District of Columbia endorses Rule 5.5 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct in the form proposed by the Multijurisdictional Practice Commission in its Final Report for consideration by the House of Delegates next month. We think it represents a substantial improvement over the prior version of the Rule proposed in the Commission’s Interim Report.
We expressed our concern about the version in the Interim Report in our statement filed with the Commission last March. We thought it was insufficiently positive in its recognition of the benefits to clients from being able to call on their lawyers for temporary non-litigation services in jurisdictions other than those in which the lawyers are admitted to the bar. We expressed a specific concern about the wording of one part of the proposed rule that seemed to limit the right of lawyers to serve their clients to only those clients located in the same jurisdiction as their lawyers.
We also expressed concern about another part of the rule proposed in the Interim Report that seemed to limit the right of clients to receive extraterritorial assistance from their lawyers to only those instances where the services had a connection to the particular “jurisdiction” where the lawyer was admitted. We suggested instead the Restatement language, which permits such services so long as reasonably related to the lawyer’s “practice in the jurisdiction” where admitted.
We were pleased to see the more positive approach to multi-jurisdictional services in your Final Report, including the implicit recognition of benefits to clients from such services in the proposed addition of “Multijurisdictional Practice of Law” to the title of Rule 5.5.
We were also pleased to see the removal of the arbitrary restriction on a lawyer’s ability to meet the extraterritorial needs of clients to those clients in the same jurisdiction as their lawyer. And we applaud the substitution of the Restatement language for the language in the Interim Report that would have required extraterritorial services to be related to the “jurisdiction” where the lawyer is admitted regardless of whether related to the lawyer’s practice in that jurisdiction.
You approached your task with an open mind and were obviously attentive to concerns expressed in our comments as well as those of other interested entities and individuals. We again express our appreciation to you and the other members of the Commission for your substantial time and effort. Your work will be an important service to lawyers, their clients, and the courts and legislatures that will look for guidance to the ABA in determining how best to facilitate the furnishing of needed legal services to clients.
Sincerely,
/s/
William E. Lawler
President, Bar Association
of the District of Columbia
WEL/wp
cc: John A. Holtaway, Esq.