APR 12 - Limited Practice Rule for Limited Practice Officers

• Proposed Changes to APR 12 - Limited Practice Rule for Limited Practice Officers (in Word Format)
• No comments are available at this time.

GR 9 Cover Sheet

Suggested Amendments

ADMISSION AND PRACTICE RULES (APR)

Rule 12.

Submitted by the Washington State Bar Association

A. Name of Proponent:

Washington State Bar Association

Robin L. Haynes, President

B. Spokesperson:

Paula C. Littlewood, Executive Director

Jean K. McElroy, General Counsel/Chief Regulatory Counsel

C. Purpose:

The primary purposes of the suggested amendments to APR 12 are to substantially align admission, licensing and renewal processes for lawyers, LLLTs and LPOs in order to streamline administration. The scope of practice for LPOs is unchanged. The suggested amendments would move all of the procedures currently described in the appended regulations into the body of APR 12 itself or into other APR, therefore, the suggested amendments would delete the regulations in their entirety. Amendments to each section of the rule or regulation are discussed below.

APR 12(a)

The suggested amendment would remove the word “lay” from the description of LPOs.

APR 12(b)

The suggested amendments would not change the composition of the Limited Practice Board but the term of appointment would be changed to three years and ending on September 30, in conformance with other Supreme Court boards and Bar committees.

The duties of the Limited Practice Board (LP Board) under the suggested amendments would be creating and grading the LPO exam, some limited involvement with handling grievances and discipline, approving the standard forms for use by LPOs, and recommending rule changes.

The actual administration of the LPO examination has always been a function carried out by the Bar staff, and this would be explicitly stated in the amendments. Other functions currently within the realm of the LP Board, such as involvement with applications and character and fitness reviews, recommending successful examinees for admission, and approving and accrediting continuing education courses would be transferred to other existing boards (Character and Fitness and MCLE Boards) and consolidated for administration by Bar staff. Other suggested amendments would clarify that other administrative function would be performed by the Bar, including expense reimbursements and official receipt of notices.

APR 12(c)

The suggested amendments would move the LPO certification requirements in this section to APR 5, with the exception of the age requirement which would be moved to APR 3 (see the GR 9 Coversheets for APR 3 and APR 5), and would delete this section of the rule.

APR 12(d)

The scope of the LPO license remains unchanged. The suggested amendments would replace the term “certified” with “licensed”, to conform with terminology throughout the suggested amendments to the APR. LP would be added in front of “Board” to clarify that it is the Limited Practice Board to which the rule is referring (and this clarification is consistent throughout APR 12).

APR 12(e)

The suggested amendments affect numbering only.

APR 12(f)

As mentioned above, under the suggested amendments, continuing education would be consolidated for all license types under APR 11. Currently, both active and inactive LPOs maintain the same continuing education reporting requirements; the suggested amendments would require continuing education for active LPOs only. Under the suggested amendments, like lawyers, inactive LPOs would need to become current before returning to active status but would not need to report credits while continuing on inactive status.

The suggested amendments would move the detailed financial responsibility requirements from APR 12 Regulation 7 to this section with no substantive changes.

License fees and any assessments, such as for the Client Protection Fund, would have the same policies, provisions and deadlines as set forth in the Bar’s Bylaws related to lawyer fees and assessments in order to create administrative efficiency in the collection of license fees for all license types.

The procedure for trust account certification would be aligned with the lawyer procedure so the LPO, lawyer and LLLT declarations and administrative procedures can be as uniform as possible.

APR 12(g) and (h)

There are no suggested amendments.

APR 12(i)

The suggested amendments would shorten the Confidentiality and Public Records section to a reference to GR 12.4, and would delete other sections covering applications, exams, and licensing data that are already addressed in GR 12.4 or other confidentiality provisions in APR 1.

APR 12(j)

The suggested amendments would move the provisions regarding inactive status for LPOs from where it is currently in APR 12 Regulation 13 to this new section with substantive changes. Under the suggested amendments, inactive LPOs would not be required to complete MCLE requirements but would be required to adhere to MCLE requirements for returning to active status under the Bar’s Bylaws.

APR 12(k)

This suggested amendment would add a section stating that the procedures for returning to active status will be as set forth in the Bar’s Bylaws rather than through a regulation under APR 12.

APR 12(l)

In the suggested amendments, the current APR 12 Regulation 14 relating to voluntary cancellation of the LPO license would be moved to this section and conform to the resignation requirements for lawyers. Also, LPOs would use the term “voluntary resignation” instead of “voluntary cancellation.”

APR 12 Comment [1] – Unchanged.

APR 12 Comment [2]

In an effort to discontinue the use of the term “non-lawyer” the suggested amendments would modify the language of this comment but make no substantive change to the meaning of the comment.

Regulation 1

These specific requirements would be moved to APR 5, and this regulation deleted.

Regulation 2

Most of the requirements for applying for the LPO license would be moved to APR 3. The provisions regarding the fingerprinting requirement are not in the amended APR because the investigation of the LPO applicant would be handled in the same manner and with the same tools as lawyer applicants. Policies regarding filing deadlines, refunds, withdrawals and transfers are administrative in nature and will be set forth in policies approved by the Board of Governors. This regulation would be deleted.

Regulation 3

Approval of applications for admission would be moved to APR 5, and this regulation deleted.

Regulation 4

The provisions of Regulation 4 relating to an appeal of the denial of the application would not be included in the amended APR. Instead, the character and fitness investigation, review and hearing procedures in APR 20-24 would apply to LPO applicants as they do to lawyer applicants.

Regulation 5

Administration of the examination would be moved to APR 4, and this regulation deleted.

Regulation 6

The examination standards and notification of results would be moved to APR 4, and this regulation deleted.

Regulation 7

The financial responsibility requirements would be moved to APR 12(f)(2), and this regulation deleted.

Regulation 8

The provisions of regulation 8 would be moved to APR 5 as part of the admission process. LPOs would use the new Oath for the Practice of Law (see the GR 9 Coversheet for APR 5). This regulation would be deleted.

Regulation 9

As discussed above, the general license fee requirement would be in APR 12(f)(3) and the policies, provisions and deadlines would be as set forth in the Bar’s Bylaws. This regulation would be deleted.

Regulation 10

Reinstatement after an administrative suspension would be as provided for in APR 17 and the Bar’s Bylaws, and this regulation deleted. This is another example of creating an administrative efficiency by applying the same rules and procedures to all license types.

Regulation 11

The continuing financial responsibility and trust account information would be moved to APR 12(f), and this regulation deleted.

Regulation 12

As discussed above, continuing education would fall under the purview of the MCLE Board and APR 11 (see GR 9 Coversheet for APR 11), and this regulation would be deleted.

Regulation 13

See suggested amendments to APR 12(j) and (k). This regulation would be deleted.

Regulation 14

See suggested amendments to APR 12(l).

Regulation 15

This provision relates to financial responsibility and would be moved to APR 12(f)(2). This regulation would be deleted.

Regulation 16

The rules and procedures for reinstating an LPO license after it has been revoked would be the same as for disbarred lawyers and would be covered under APR 25-25.6. This would also mean that an LPO whose license is revoked would need to wait five years before applying instead of the two years now required.

Regulation 17

This language would be deleted.

Regulation 18

Administrative support is already addressed in APR 12(b)(3) and “clerk” is not used in APR 12, therefore, this regulation would be deleted.

Regulation 19

As there will be no regulations under the suggested amendments there would be no need for this regulation and it would be deleted.

D. Supporting Material:

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