Pro bono reporting results draw mixed reaction

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The first round of data collected from Indiana’s new pro bono reporting rule invoked opposing reactions among the members of the Coalition for Court Access who recently reviewed the numbers. Some thought the amount of time and money lawyers donated to legal aid was shameful, while others were thrilled with the level of giving.

At its April 25 meeting at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, the CCA took time to examine the reporting rule information and discuss how to present the data to the public. Being just the first year, drawing inferences from the numbers is difficult, but Scott Wylie, member of the CCA pro bono working group, said the numbers provide a start.

“One year gives us a baseline as to whether or not the efforts by the CCA and other folks is moving the bar on getting people to do pro bono,” Wylie said.

Indiana amended its Rules of Professional Conduct in 2014 to include a mandatory pro bono reporting requirement. When lawyers renewed their licenses in 2016, they had to include any hours they provided legal services to the indigent and any financial contributions they made to legal aid agencies during the 2015 calendar year.

hours-table.gifThe numbers show less than 50 percent of Indiana attorneys in 2015 gave their time to helping clients who either could not pay anything or could only pay a greatly reduced rate. Of the 15,544 Hoosier lawyers covered by the reporting rule, 41 percent donated only their time. Adding in the 896 attorneys who gave both time and money, that total bumps up to 47 percent.

Joel Schumm, director of experiential learning at IU McKinney, pointed out percentage does not reflect well on the legal profession. The general public, he noted, will be able to see that 59 percent of practicing attorneys did not donate any time.

Others called the 41 percent “pathetic,” and asked if the goal behind publicizing the data was to shame attorneys into taking on pro bono work.

“I’m not necessarily thrilled with it,” said Indiana Supreme Court Justice Steven David, chair of the CCA. “… Personally, I think we would all like this to be 80 percent, but it’s not. This is one part of serving the unmet needs.”

However, Wylie, director of the Volunteer Lawyer Program of Southwestern Indiana, had a different view. He noted these numbers put Indiana in the mainstream compared to other states.

All the other states have reporting rules similar to Indiana’s, although not all are mandatory, and the level of attorney participation in donating hours generally ranges from 45 to 55 percent. Data from 2013 collected by the American Bar Association show that of the states where pro bono reporting is required, Florida had a participation rate of 51 percent, Maryland had 57 percent and Illinois had 34 percent.

“In reality, I was actually surprised (the number) was as high as it was,” Wylie said. “Considering we were 50th to come to IOLTA and we were the last state in the nation to really start pro bono work, I took this as very positive.”

Indiana’s mandatory reporting rule stirred controversy when it was being implemented. Some in the legal community believed it was the first step toward requiring pro bono service. But the Indiana Supreme Court maintained the sole purpose of the rule is to get an idea of the level of pro bono service in the state.

The grumbling is not believed to have induced attorneys to purposefully misreport. If anything, lawyers may have underreported their donations. Charles Dunlap, executive director of the Indiana Bar Foundation, which oversees the state’s pro bono districts, speculated some lawyers may have been unsure how much pro bono work they did, so, not wanting to perjure themselves, they included only the hours they could document.

Under the rule, attorneys can also list the monetary donations they made to legal aid organizations. A total of $775,122 was given in 2015, along with $281,953 of in-kind donations of property such as computers and office furniture, according to the data.

Again, of the 15,544 attorneys not exempted from the rule, 1,371 made financial contributions (this includes the 475 who donated only money and the 896 who gave time and money). The average monetary donation was $565.37.

Some on the CCA thought the dollar amount was high and wondered if there was a way to audit that by looking at the contributions the legal aid organizations received in 2015. David said he was unsure if there was any way to do an audit or even if there was any interest in doing some kind of verification.•


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Or does the study merely wish they fade away? “It just hasn’t risen substantially in decades,” Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law told Law360. “What we should be looking for is progress, and that’s not what we’re seeing.” PROGRESS = less white males in leadership. Thus the heading and honest questions here ....

  2. One need not wonder why we are importing sex slaves into North America. Perhaps these hapless victims of human trafficking were being imported for a book of play with the Royal Order of Jesters? Indianapolis hosts these major pervs in a big way .... I wonder what affect they exert on Hoosier politics? And its judiciary? A very interesting program on their history and preferences here:

  3. Joseph Buser, Montgomery County Chief Prosecutor, has been involved in both representing the State of Indiana as Prosecutor while filing as Representing Attorney on behalf of himself and the State of Indiana in Civil Proceedings for seized cash and merchandise using a Verified Complaint For Forfeiture of Motor Vehicle, Us Currency And Reimbursement Of Costs, as is evident in Montgomery County Circuit Court Case Number 54C01-1401-MI-000018, CCS below, seen before Judge Harry Siamas, and filed on 01/13/2014. Sheriff Mark Castille is also named. All three defendants named by summons have prior convictions under Mr. Buser, which as the Indiana Supreme Court, in the opinion of The Matter of Mark R. McKinney, No. 18S00-0905-DI-220, stated that McKinney created a conflict of interest by simultaneously prosecuting drug offender cases while pocketing assets seized from defendants in those cases. All moneys that come from forfeitures MUST go to the COMMON SCHOOL FUND.

  4. I was incarcerated at that time for driving while suspended I have no felonies...i was placed on P block I remember several girls and myself asking about voting that day..and wasn't given a answer or means of voting..we were told after the election who won that was it.

  5. The number one way to reduce suffering would be to ban the breeding of fighting dogs. Fighting dogs maim and kill victim dogs Fighting dogs are the most essential piece of dog fighting Dog fighting will continue as long as fighting dogs are struggling to reach each other and maul another fih.longaphernalia