CALI Spotlight

The American Legal System falls short of providing access to justice for all. With “Gaming the System: Approaching 100% Access to Legal Services through Online Games,” 88 CHI.-KENT L. REV. 917 (2013) (forthcoming), William E. Hornsby, Jr. proposes that law schools can alleviate this problem by developing online games that would increase engagement with the law and improve understanding of the circumstances under which legal solutions are available.

Will Hornsby is staff counsel at the American Bar Association, where he has provided support to the Standing Committee on the Delivery of Legal Services since 1990. Since joining the ABA staff in 1988, he has also supported the Standing Committee on Professionalism, the Commission on Responsibility in Client Development, the Committee on Research on the Future of the Law, and the ABA Presidential Commission on Access to Lawyers. Hornsby has authored an array of materials including books, white papers and law review articles at the intersection of technology and legal practice. He is also an adjunct professor at the John Marshall Law School Center for Information and Privacy Law.

Hornsby observes that people often do not recognize when they have a problem for which a legal solution is available, and therefore do not seek out lawyers or other assistance from the justice system. The costs of legal services deter some. For many, however, it is lack of engagement, rather than affordability, that causes people to forego legal solutions. While technology has addressed efficiencies in the legal process and has driven down costs, it has not sufficiently fulfilled its potential for creating engagement. Hornsby’s submission to the Chicago-Kent Law Review offers a way that law schools could increase engagement and close the justice gap.

Abstract
“By all measures, the American Legal System falls short of providing access to justice for all. Legal needs studies show that people often do not recognize when they have a problem for which there is a legal solution and therefore do not seek out lawyers or the justice system to provide assistance with their problems. Some assert that the costs of legal services are beyond the means of many people. While that is true for the poor in some areas of law, both the marketplace and specific programs, such as lawyer referral modest means panels, provide affordable legal services for many types of legal matters. For many, it is not affordability but lack of engagement that causes people to forego legal solutions. Technology has addressed efficiencies in the legal process, once again driving down costs, but has not fulfilled its potential for creating engagement. Even though the public finds the courtroom a focal point of popular culture, from novels to movies to daytime television, the legal profession has not done a good job of using the Internet to engage the public about their legal needs. The Army has used Massive Multi-player Online Games (MMOGs) to engage potential recruits and in fact serve as an effective recruiting tool. Others have used MMOGs as platforms to explore societal crises such as petroleum dependency and crowd- source solutions to medical issues. Law schools, which are leading the creative use of technology for legal matters, are well-positioned to take the lead in the development of online gaming to advance engagement in ways that enable people to recognize the circumstances under which they have legal solutions to their problems.”

Hornsby will expand on this article while presenting during the live, in-person symposium on June 15, 2013, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information.

Throughout the next two weeks, as the live symposium approaches, the CALI Spotlight Blog will preview another symposium presentation each day:

• June 5, 2013: Marc Lauritsen, “Liberty, Justice, and Legal Automata”
• June 6, 2013: William E. Hornsby, Jr., “Gaming the System: Approaching 100% Access to Legal Services Through Online Games”
• June 7, 2013: Conrad Johnson and Brian Donnelly, “If Only We Knew What We Know”
• June 8, 2013: Richard S. Granat and Stephanie Kimbro, “The Teaching of Law Practice Management and Technology in Law Schools: A New Paradigm”
• June 10, 2013: Oliver R. Goodenough, “Developing an e-Curriculum: Reflections on the Future of Legal Education and on the Importance of Digital Expertise”
• June 11, 2013: Tanina Rostain, Roger Skalbeck and Kevin Mulcahy, “Thinking Like a Lawyer, Designing Like an Architect: PReparing Students for the 21st Century Practice”
• June 12, 2013: Ronald W. Staudt and Andrew P. Medeiros, “Access to Justice and Technology Clinics: A 4% Solution”
• June 13, 2013: Hybrid Courses of the A2J Clinic Project
  • Tanina Rostain & Roger Skalbeck, Technology, Innovation and Law Practice: An Experiential Seminar at Georgetown University Law Center
  • Judith Wegner, Becoming a Professional at UNC School of Law
  • Sunrise Ayers, A2J Clinic at Concordia University School of law

• June 14, 2013: Traditional Clinical Courses of the A2J Clinic Project
  • Conrad Johnson, Mary Zulack & Brian Donnelly, Lawyering in the Digital Age Clinic at Columbia Law School
  • Joe Rosenberg, Main Street Legal Services, Elder Law Clinic at CUNY School of Law
  • JoNel Newman & Melissa Swain, Medical Legal Clinic at University of Miami School of Law

• June 15, 2013: Kevin D. Ashley, “Teaching Law and Digital Age Legal Practice with an AI and Law Seminar;” and Vern R. Walker et al, “Law Schools as Knowledge Centers in the Digital Age”

Professor Ashley and Professor Walker are unable to attend the in-person symposium on June 15, 2013, but their valuable contributions will be published with the printed edition of the Chicago-Kent Law Review that accompanies the live symposium.

Marc Lauritsen, co-editor of the “Justice, Lawyering, and Legal Education in the Digital Age” symposium, believes that the application of unauthorized practice of law regulations to restrict the use of automated legal systems is bad public policy. But he also argues in his submission to the symposium, “Liberty, Justice, and Legal Automata,” 88 CHI.-KENT L. REV. 945 (2013) (forthcoming), that such restrictions by courts could also be a violation of the programmers’ First Amendment rights.

After developing an understanding of the ways that automated systems could impact the legal services market through 20 years as a lawyer and an educator, Lauritsen founded Capstone Practice Systems to build legal systems for some of the top legal departments in the world. Since, he has become one of the foremost experts on the use of information technology in the legal profession and lectures nationally on the future of law and technology.

Large law firms seek to meet their clients’ needs more efficiently. Small law firms are competing with web entities such as LegalZoom and RocketLawyer for the latent legal market. Legal aid organizations have built a cadre of automated forms to provide more efficient legal services to the poor. However, the future of these initiatives is threatened by the possibility that the development and use of automated legal systems could be the unauthorized practice of law.

Abstract
“Legal work is increasingly doable by artificial systems built out of software. Providers in both commercial and non-profit contexts are making such systems available for direct use by consumers. Some lawyers and policy makers understandably worry that these developments pose dangers for users and may inappropriately intrude on the prerogatives of the legal profession. This article reviews the extent to which software-based legal assistance systems can or should be suppressed as the unauthorized practice of law in light of constitutional rights of free expression and the social good of access to justice.”

After Lauritsen retraces the case law, the conclusion might seem logical: “There should no more be limits about what we can code about and publish than what we can write about and publish.” But, until the courts and legislatures act to protect legal programming as they have legal publishing, the question will continue to plague legal programmers.

Lauritsen will expand on this article while presenting during the live, in-person symposium on June 15, 2013, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information.

Throughout the next two weeks, as the live symposium approaches, the CALI Spotlight Blog will preview another symposium presentation each day:

• June 5, 2013: Marc Lauritsen, “Liberty, Justice, and Legal Automata”
• June 6, 2013: William E. Hornsby, Jr., “Gaming the System: Approaching 100% Access to Legal Services Through Online Games”
• June 7, 2013: Conrad Johnson and Brian Donnelly, “If Only We Knew What We Know”
• June 8, 2013: Richard S. Granat and Stephanie Kimbro, “The Teaching of Law Practice Management and Technology in Law Schools: A New Paradigm”
• June 10, 2013: Oliver R. Goodenough, “Developing an e-Curriculum: Reflections on the Future of Legal Education and on the Importance of Digital Expertise”
• June 11, 2013: Tanina Rostain, Roger Skalbeck and Kevin Mulcahy, “Thinking Like a Lawyer, Designing Like an Architect: PReparing Students for the 21st Century Practice”
• June 12, 2013: Ronald W. Staudt and Andrew P. Medeiros, “Access to Justice and Technology Clinics: A 4% Solution”
• June 13, 2013: Hybrid Courses of the A2J Clinic Project
  • Tanina Rostain & Roger Skalbeck, Technology, Innovation and Law Practice: An Experiential Seminar at Georgetown University Law Center
  • Judith Wegner, Becoming a Professional at UNC School of Law
  • Sunrise Ayers, A2J Clinic at Concordia University School of law

• June 14, 2013: Traditional Clinical Courses of the A2J Clinic Project
  • Conrad Johnson, Mary Zulack & Brian Donnelly, Lawyering in the Digital Age Clinic at Columbia Law School
  • Joe Rosenberg, Main Street Legal Services, Elder Law Clinic at CUNY School of Law
  • JoNel Newman & Melissa Swain, Medical Legal Clinic at University of Miami School of Law

• June 15, 2013: Kevin D. Ashley, “Teaching Law and Digital Age Legal Practice with an AI and Law Seminar;” and Vern R. Walker et al, “Law Schools as Knowledge Centers in the Digital Age”

Professor Ashley and Professor Walker are unable to attend the in-person symposium on June 15, 2013, but their valuable contributions will be published with the printed edition of the Chicago-Kent Law Review that accompanies the live symposium.

“The legal profession is endangered. Law schools are in trouble. New lawyers are unprepared for economic and technological reality. There is a vast unmet need for legal services for low- and middle-income people,” according to IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law Professor Ronald W. Staudt and Marc Lauritsen, co-editors of the “Justice, Lawyering and Legal Education in the Digital Age” symposium.

Influential legal professors and practitioners working at the cross-section of information technology and the law dissect these overlapping problems and propose new solutions in the Chicago-Kent Law Review’s upcoming symposium. They also will elaborate on their submissions, answer questions and discuss these innovative ideas with attendees during an in-person symposium on June 15, 2013, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. This half-day program will be held at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law in conjunction with the Center for Computer-Assisted Legal Instruction (CALI^®)’s 2013 Conference for Law School Computing, which will be held at the law school from June 13 to June 15.

The editors of the symposium opine that they and their contributors “take it as a given [ . . . ] that the law firm economic model of the past 30 years is broken and that the U.S. needs fewer lawyers and lawyers who cost less.” However, they also see the value of teaching law students about technology.

Further, Staudt and Lauritsen observe two cross-cutting themes within the collected works:

1. “Advanced information systems have rapidly become ubiquitous both in the subject matter of legal work and in the processes through which that work is done. The Legal Academy can no longer afford to give those systems as little attention as it presently does. Lawyers can no longer afford to have as little understanding of algorithms, ontologies, and other computational concepts as they do.”
2. “By studying—or better yet, building—software systems that perform some of the tasks that lawyers and judges do, future (and present) legal professionals gain insight into emerging technologies at the center of modern law practice and also develop core competencies across a range of new and traditional lawyering skills.”

Contributors to the law review will be joined during the live symposium by participating faculty members from CALI’s Access to Justice Clinical Course Project to explore new solutions such as new law school courses that teach practical legal technology tools, while also addressing potential roadblocks facing these solutions.

For example, in “Access to Justice and Technology Clinics: A 4% Solution,” Staudt and co-author Andrew P. Medeiros propose the addition of a new type of clinical course called the Access to Justice Technology Clinic (A2J Clinic). These A2J Clinic concept is based on a course taught by Staudt at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law where students learn traditional legal skills and new technical competencies, while building automated legal forms for use by self-represented litigants. However, in “Liberty, Justice, and Legal Automata,” Lauritsen tackles the legal implications of using software tools, such as those used by students in A2J Clinics, to develop automated legal systems. Such a practice could be construed as the unauthorized practice of law, but Lauritsen argues that such a conclusion would violate the First Amendment.

The “Justice, Lawyering, and Legal education in the Digital Age” symposium will be webcast, but seats are still available. For more information, visit conference.cali.org/2013/. The full conference fee will be reduced to $99 for those attending only the Saturday symposium. To take advantage of the reduced rate, select the “Check or money order” payment method upon check out. Then send an email to lvmolde@cali.org, informing CALI that you will only be attending the symposium.

Throughout the next two weeks, as the live symposium approaches, the CALI Spotlight Blog will preview another symposium presentation each day:

• June 5, 2013: Marc Lauritsen, “Liberty, Justice, and Legal Automata”
• June 6, 2013: William E. Hornsby, Jr., “Gaming the System: Approaching 100% Access to Legal Services Through Online Games”
• June 7, 2013: Conrad Johnson and Brian Donnelly, “If Only We Knew What We Know”
• June 8, 2013: Richard S. Granat and Stephanie Kimbro, “The Teaching of Law Practice Management and Technology in Law Schools: A New Paradigm”
• June 10, 2013: Oliver R. Goodenough, “Developing an e-Curriculum: Reflections on the Future of Legal Education and on the Importance of Digital Expertise”
• June 11, 2013: Tanina Rostain, Roger Skalbeck and Kevin Mulcahy, “Thinking Like a Lawyer, Designing Like an Architect: PReparing Students for the 21st Century Practice”
• June 12, 2013: Ronald W. Staudt and Andrew P. Medeiros, “Access to Justice and Technology Clinics: A 4% Solution”
• June 13, 2013: Hybrid Courses of the A2J Clinic Project
  • Tanina Rostain & Roger Skalbeck, Technology, Innovation and Law Practice: An Experiential Seminar at Georgetown University Law Center
  • Judith Wegner, Becoming a Professional at UNC School of Law
  • Sunrise Ayers, A2J Clinic at Concordia University School of law

• June 14, 2013: Traditional Clinical Courses of the A2J Clinic Project
  • Conrad Johnson, Mary Zulack & Brian Donnelly, Lawyering in the Digital Age Clinic at Columbia Law School
  • Joe Rosenberg, Main Street Legal Services, Elder Law Clinic at CUNY School of Law
  • JoNel Newman & Melissa Swain, Medical Legal Clinic at University of Miami School of Law

• June 15, 2013: Kevin D. Ashley, “Teaching Law and Digital Age Legal Practice with an AI and Law Seminar;” and Vern R. Walker et al, “Law Schools as Knowledge Centers in the Digital Age”

Professor Ashley and Professor Walker are unable to attend the in-person symposium on June 15, 2013, but their valuable contributions will be published with the printed edition of the Chicago-Kent Law Review that accompanies the live symposium.

Last week I had the great pleasure and privilege of attending the Canadian Association of Law Libraries annual meeting in Montreal.  The theme for the conference was “Multifaceted Professional” and I gave the opening plenary talk on “Thriving On Chaos: The Future of Law Librarians” with Jean O’Grady of DLA Piper. My slides and transcript can be viewed on my personal blog.

After that, I was free to enjoy the conference and learn from Canadian legal professionals.   You’ve probably hear the famous feminist saying about Ginger Rogers that goes “She did everything Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in high heels…”  Well, Canadian legal professional are facing all the same obstacles, challenges and opportunities that American’s are…but in English AND French. (I went to a session on Quebecois legal resources that had my head spinning.)   ABS, Virtual law offices, practical legal educational, open/free law…all of the issues that we’re facing down here, our Northern Cousins are as well.

The final session of the conference was on ebook licensing.  This was fascinating to me on two levels.  First, one of the speakers was law firm librarian Bess Reynolds.  As someone who has spent her career in academia, her presentation on the challenges of ebook in law firm settings – both in getting the information into the collection in an accessible way and it dealing with the technological needs of lawyers – is all very new to me.  Secondly, another speaker was Christine Hiller, who heads up consortia book purchasing for Quebec universities.  I am a big fan of consortia, as I believe that banding together and combining efforts is always the smarter path.  I believe if libraries are going to survive the 21st century, more purchasing consortia must be formed.

Speaking of consortia, I was told several times that “We wish we had a Canadian CALI!”  Well, guess what?  You do!  CALI is open to Canadian law schools and libraries and – I believe – all Canadian law schools are already members.   I would love to see more Canadian content on CALI, both in lessons and eLangdell publications.  I’m still drafting a more organized plan for doing this, so watch this space for details!