APR 11 - Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)

• Proposed Changes to APR 11 - Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) (in Word Format)
• No comments are available at this time.

GR 9 Cover Sheet

Suggested Amendments

ADMISSION AND PRACTICE RULES (APR) Rule 11

Submitted by the Washington State Bar Association

A. Name of Proponent:

Washington State Bar Association

Robin Lynn Haynes, BOG President

B. Spokesperson:

Paula C. Littlewood, Executive Director

Jean McElroy, General Counsel and Chief Regulatory Counsel

C. Purpose:

The primary purpose of the suggested amendments to APR 11 is to redefine and incorporate the mandatory continuing legal education (MCLE) requirements for Limited License Legal Technicians (LLLTs) and Limited Practice Officers (LPOs). The goal is to centralize MCLE compliance of all legal professionals in the state of Washington into a single rule. These amendments would allow Bar staff to streamline and unify compliance with MCLE requirements, rather than build and/or maintain three separate processes that rely on volunteers and several staff members to separately handle essentially the same regulatory work for each license. The effect of the proposed changes would be to make administrative compliance uniform for lawyers, LLLTs and LPOs. Additionally, MCLE centralization would naturally increase learning opportunities as all approved courses would be available to all licensed legal professionals.

APR 11(a)

The suggested amendments establish that the purpose of APR 11 is to institute the MCLE requirements for all legal professionals licensed in the state of Washington: lawyers, LLLTs and LPOs.

APR 11(b)

The suggested amendments would include LLLTs and LPOs within the coverage of this rule, and conform definitions to those used throughout the suggested amendments to the APR.

APR 11(c)

LLLTs and LPOs are currently required to earn ten continuing legal education credits per year. The suggested amendment to APR 11(c)(1) would create a 30-credit every three years requirement for LLLTs and LPOs, which is equivalent to the existing 10 credits per year, and also promotes administrative efficiency because there are well-established processes in place to accommodate three-year reporting periods.

APR 11(d)

The suggested amendments to APR 11(d)(1) would replace the use of the term “not a member” with “a Washington resident who is not licensed to practice law”; this would ensure a public voice on the MCLE Board. It would also allow LLLTs and LPOs to become MCLE Board members. Another suggested amendment, to APR 11(d)(3), would remove a redundant sentence related to the budget (“All expenses incurred and fees collected shall be submitted on a budget approved by the Association’s Board of Governors”) because the first sentence covers the issue by providing that all reimbursements follow the Bar’s expenses policies.

APR 11(e), (f), (g) and (h)

The suggested amendments would add LLLTs and LPOs to the coverage of the rule, and make other conforming changes to language.

APR 11(i)

The suggested amendments would add LLLTs and LPOs to the coverage of the rule, and make other conforming changes to language.

The suggested amendment to APR 11(i)(8)(iv) would specifically state that the Court has the discretion to consider matters solely on the basis of the record presented to the MCLE Board, which is only implicit in the current rule.

APR 11(j) and (k)

The suggested amendments would add LLLTs and LPOs to the coverage of the rule, and make other conforming changes to language.

D. Supporting Material:

http://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/pdf/2016APRCoverLetterToCourt.pdf