LEGISLATIVE updates |
statUS UPDATE ON CALDA'S LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO PROTECT THE LDA PROFESSION
TO: CALDA Membership FROM: CALDA Board of Directors RE: STATUS UPDATE ON CALDA'S LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO PROTECT THE LDA PROFESSION DATE: AUGUST 29, 2022 Legal challenges to State Bar control: AB 2958 is the Bar’s attorney Bar dues bill for two years, or until the bar improves its disciplinary system, which would place a hold on any spending by the Bar on programs like the paraprofessional program. The question and logical assumption here is that if the Bar is restricted to this spending limitation then by default it should not be able to pursue regulating LDAs. At this time, our Lobbyist Matt Siverling is reviewing the status of this bill. The Attorney General: Seeking opinion from the California Attorney General to the effect that the State Bar of California does not have the authority under the Constitution of the State of California to regulate any group other than attorneys licensed by the State Bar of California; namely, that the Bar has no domain over Legal Document Assistants. The Department of Justice: Seeking position letter from US Dept of Justice and Federal Trade Commission directed to State of California Bar to the effect that the State Bar is not compliant with the US Supreme Court case of North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 135 S.Ct. 1101 (2015), in that the regulation of LDAs by the State Bar may have an anti-competitive effect on the public . The State Bar wants LDAs regulated. We welcome appropriate regulation, just not by the State Bar which continues its antipathy toward LDAs. Our attempts to work with the Bar on sensible regulation have been met with the sentiment that we agree to coming under their control, and we’ll negotiate the specifics later. There are approximately 480 CALDA members, but an estimated 1500 – 2000 registered LDAs in California. This total is far short of consumer need. For example, we have far fewer LDAs in California per capita, as compared to Nevada. We want to do the right thing for the consumer. We want to ensure as best we can that an LDA is trained in the discipline they offer as a service and in UPL and Ethics. California Business Professions Code 6400 Enhancement Proposals:
The foregoing might require an increase in annual registration fees for all California LDAs. Look for calls to action from CALDA. Public relations campaign channels:
|
TO: CALDA Membership FROM: CALDA Board of Directors RE: ASSEMBLY BILL 1916: PROPOSED RENEWAL OF CALIFORNIA B & P CODE SECTION 6400 DATE: JUNE 24, 2022 Subject: LDA enabling legislation is set to expire 12-31-2023. Prior renewals had been routine. Not this time. TIMELINE of actions of the CALDA Legislative Committee to date:
Specific strategic projects under way to bolster the case for LDAs to remain under the purview of the DCA and not the State Bar:
CALDA Special AB 1916 Committee Members: Rob VanSteen, Pres.; Jim Wilroy, Vice Pres.; Chester Ruiz, Legislative Committee Co-Chair; Elizabeth Olvera, Legislative Committee Co-Chair; Richard Lubetzsky, CALDA Legal Counsel; Matt Siverling, CALDA Lobbyist; Nancy Newlin, Past President, current Nominations & Elections Chair; Ian Duncan, Past Pres; and Helen Bellamy, Legislative Committee Member. |
TO: CALDA Membership FROM: CALDA Board of Directors RE: STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA PROPOSAL TO REGULATE THE LDA PROFESSION DATE: May 17, 2022 The provisions of the California Business & Professions Code Section 6400 et seq. created our profession effective January 1, 2000. Since then, its continued existence has been subject to a so-called “Sunset” provision requiring that new legislation be submitted and passed into law for additional periods, typically four years. This process has been more or less “automatic” … until now. The current enabling law will expire next year on December 31, 2023. CALDA’s Board of Directors decided to not wait until the last possible date to submit a new bill, and submitted AB 1916 on February 9, 2022, rather than nearly a year later. This bill proposed a five-year extension. After 22 years of effectively and economically serving the needs of self-represented clients by LDAs, CALDA’s Board was met with a non-negotiable requirement by the Assembly Judiciary Committee that all things LDA be placed under the control of the State Bar of California. The thrust of this demand was the belief (with no evidence actually produced) by the State Bar and the Assembly Judiciary Committee that LDAs are essentially “unregulated” and that continuing in this manner would present substantial risks to consumers seeking our self-help legal document services. This no-compromise position did not become absolutely clear until after many hours of collaboration by CALDA board members and CALDA legal Counsel Richard Lubetzky, as well as multiple meetings with representatives of both the State Bar and the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Since the specific provisions of exactly what the modified LDA legislation would look like under the aegis of the State Bar did not become clear until just a few days before the bill was due to be reported out of the committee (or not), the Board of Directors decided to withdraw the bill at this time. While the Board will continue to meet with the State Bar on what the specifics of such a program would look like, we are not optimistic at this point that the State Bar will be easily convinced to relent on the fundamental premise that LDAs should be under their domain. The following are some of the main features of the State Bar proposal to date:
For more details on the proposal from the State Bar of California, please refer to the following linked memo. Special thanks to Elizabeth Olvera for providing her excellent summary and analysis: EO memo |