One bar’s rates going down

February 11, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The current economy can make businesses cut fees in hopes of attracting more customers or raise fees to cover increasing costs and hope it doesn’t drive people away.

The American Bar Association took the first approach this week and voted to retool their dues structure in order to make it more affordable for all types of attorneys to join or continue to be members.

Solo practitioners will see their dues drop up to 50 percent; government lawyers, judges, and attorneys working for nonprofit legal services, who already receive a discount, will have their dues slashed by up to 25 percent.

The ABA will also bill lawyers in installments instead of needing the years’ worth of dues in one lump sum. A release from the ABA says it understood there wasn’t a one-size fits all approach for attorneys who practice law.

It’s not cheap for attorneys or the law firms/offices that pay for their attorneys to join various bar associations and sections. It’s nice to see the ABA recognizes that many lawyers are struggling in this economy and is trying to address the situation to allow people to maintain memberships or join at lower costs. But for smaller bar associations, it may not be economically possible to lower rates for everyone, or even just some members.

The Indiana State Bar Association voted in November to increase rates by more than 20 percent, the first rate hike in eight years. Those increases take effect in May.

Because of the ISBA’s decision and the economy, the St. Joseph County Bar Association decided to delay the 2010 rate increase, said executive director Amy McGuire. Last year, members saw a $25 increase in SJCBA dues; rates were supposed to increase another $25 dollars this year.

Some bar associations, like the Allen County or the Evansville Bar associations, have not changed dues in the last couple of years.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Other than a complete lack of any verifiable and valid historical citations to back your wild context-free accusations, you also forget to allege "ate Native American children, ate slave children, ate their own children, and often did it all while using salad forks rather than dinner forks." (gasp)

  2. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  3. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  4. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  5. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

ADVERTISEMENT