AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING FLORIDA BAR, SC02-1050.

• Decision Date: 20 February 2003
• Docket Number: No. SC02-1050.,SC02-1050.
• Citation: 841 So.2d 443
• Parties: AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR: PRO BONO ACTIVITIES BY GOVERNMENT LAWYERS.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

841 So.2d 443

AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR: PRO BONO ACTIVITIES BY GOVERNMENT LAWYERS.

No. SC02-1050.

Supreme Court of Florida.

February 20, 2003.

Natasha Permaul, Chair, Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Services, Orlando, FL; Kent R. Spuhler, Executive Director, The Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Service, Tallahassee, FL; John R. Hamilton of Foley & Lardner, Orlando, FL, on behalf of the Legal Aid Society of the Orange County Bar Assocation, Inc.; and Kelly Rauch, President, the Florida Pro Bono Coordinators Association, St. Petersburg, FL, for Petitoner.

The Honorable Chris W. Altenbernd, Tampa, FL, on behalf of the District Court of Appeal Judges; The Honorable Jacqueline R. Griffin, Chair, Ad hoc Committee on Judicial Pro Bono for the Conference of District Court of Appeal Judges, Daytona Beach, FL; Arthur I. Jacobs of the Law Offices of Jacobs & Associates, P.A., Fernandina Beach, FL, on behalf of the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association; Anthony C. Musto, Hallandale Beach, FL, on behalf of The Florida Bar Government Lawyer Section; Tod Aronvitz, President of The Florida Bar, Miami, FL, on behalf of the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar; Jordan L. Clouse, MAJ, JA, United States Army, Department of the Army, Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, North Little Rock, AK; and Howard O. McGillin, Jr., Bar Member, Yorktown, VA, Responding.

PER CURIAM.

We have before us the report of The Florida Bar Standing Committee on Pro Bono Legal Service (Standing Committee) recommending that this Court amend Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 4-6.1, Pro Bono Public Service, to remove the deferral of government lawyers from the aspirational pro bono legal services goal and mandatory reporting requirement. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 15, Fla. Const. After considering the report and the comments filed, and hearing oral argument, we decline to adopt the changes proposed by the Standing Committee.

BACKGROUND

In 1993, this Court implemented a pro bono service program for Florida attorneys. See Amendments to Rules Regulating the Florida Bar—1-3.1(a) and Rules of Judicial Administration—2.065 (Legal Aid), 630 So.2d 501 (Fla.1993) (hereinafter Amendments). In the opinion, the Court expressly found that its constitutional authority to implement such a program was limited, noting that "no authority exists for this Court to address, through the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, uncompensated public service activities not directly related to services for the courts and the legal needs of the poor." Id. at 503. Thus, the Court concluded that the proposed rules should be amended to eliminate any reference to services not related to the legal needs of the poor. Id. Further, in order to accomplish the goal of motivating attorneys to provide necessary legal services to the poor, the Court found "that the definition of legal services to the poor should be narrow, expressing simply that Florida lawyers should strive to render (1) pro bono legal services to the poor or (2) to the extent possible, other pro bono service activities that directly relate to the legal needs of the poor." Id.

In implementing the program, the Court noted that there are specific rules or regulations that prohibit many government attorneys from the practice of law other than in the performance of their constitutional or statutory functions. Id. at 504.¹ Based upon these prohibitions, this Court deferred from the program any government lawyers who are prohibited by statute, rule, or other regulation from participating in the provision of legal services to the poor. Id. Nevertheless, the Court noted that various government offices had developed pro bono programs through which attorneys in those offices could engage in providing pro bono services, and the Court encouraged the development of such programs. Id.

THE REPORT OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE

In Amendments, this Court adopted Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 4-6.5, Voluntary Pro Bono Plan. See 630 So.2d at 510-13. This rule directed the president-elect of The Florida Bar to appoint a standing committee on pro bono legal service to the poor. See R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-6.5(b). The Standing Committee was charged with the following duties: (a) receiving reports from circuit committees submitted on standardized forms developed by the Standing Committee; (b) reviewing and evaluating circuit court pro bono plans; (c) beginning in the first year in which individual attorney pro bono reports are due, submitting an annual report as to the activities and results of the pro bono plan to the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar, The Florida Bar Foundation, and the Supreme Court of Florida; and (d) presenting to the Board of Governors of The Florida Bar and to the Supreme Court of Florida any suggested changes or modifications to the pro bono rules. See R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-6.5(b)(2).

On May 15, 2002, the Standing Committee filed its report pursuant to rule 4-6.5(b)(2)c. on the activities and results of the voluntary pro bono plan adopted by this Court in Amendments. In its report, the Standing Committee noted that the degree of pro bono participation varies widely from circuit to circuit and some circuits have developed special pro bono programs for participation by government lawyers. The report lists examples of the pro bono projects and activities that were reported by the circuit committees, including Teen Court, the Guardian ad Litem program, the Attorneys Fighting for Seriously Ill Children project, the handling of domestic violence permanent injunctions, and the performing of client intake for pro bono programs. Further, the Standing Committee noted that numerous governmental entities, agencies, and departments have adopted pro bono policies and programs. Concluding that the numerous organized pro bono programs across the state have demonstrated that they can work with these governmental entities to provide appropriate pro bono legal service opportunities and support services so that government lawyers may fully participate in the Florida pro bono program, the Standing Committee recommends that this Court remove the deferral from the aspirational goal and the mandatory reporting requirement set forth in Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 4-6.1. Further, the Standing Committee proposes to amend the comment to the rule to provide that the primary purpose of pro bono service is...