GR 9 Cover Sheet

Suggested Amendment CIVIL RULE 11(b)

Submitted by Ruth Laura Edlund

A.           Name of Proponent:

Ruth Laura Edlund

B.           Spokesperson:

Ruth Laura Edlund Wechsler Becker, LLP

C.           Purpose: The primary purpose for the suggested amendment to Civil Rule

11(b) is to clarify the ethical obligations, and the limits of those obligations, of a Limited License Legal Technician (LLLT) who is assisting an otherwise self- represented person by preparing documents for him or her. Civil Rule 11(b) currently appliesby its terms only to lawyers providing such assistance. APR 28 G.(4) requiresa LLLT to sign documentspreparedforaclient, but specifies no circumstances under which the LLLT must make inquiry into the facts represented by the client.

In addition, current CR 11(b) does not allow a court to impose sanctions on an LLLT for assisting an otherwise self-represented person in filing a frivolous pleading, when a lawyer can be sanctioned by a court in the same situation. LLLT RPC 3.1(a)(1) forbids a LLLT from counseling a client to engage, or assist in a client in engaging, in conduct including taking positions that are frivolous or lacking a good-faith basis in fact or law. LLLT RPC 3.1(a)(3) forbids a LLLT from counseling a client or assisting a client in submitting false statements of fact or evidence known to be false. However, disciplinary proceedings are slow and may actually be overkill. The courts should have the ability to impose an immediate sanction on behavior by a LLLT that would not  merit the revocation of his or her license.

APR 28 K.(1) already holds a LLLT to the standard of care of a Washington lawyer. The suggested inclusion of LLLTs within the ambit of Civil Rule 11(b) will  assist in implementing this standard of care, and protect the public, by allowing a court to impose immediate sanctions for LLLT misconduct when appropriate, particularly when license revocation would be too severe a consequence. The suggested revision to CR 11(b) also clarifies that a LLLT, like a lawyer, is entitled to rely on the otherwise self-represented person's representation of facts, unless the LLLT has reason to believe that the representations are false or materially insufficient. This therefore provides useful guidance to LLLTs as to the limits of their obligations.

Conclusion. The suggested amendment to Civil Rule 11(b) is a harmonizing change needed to clarify that the ethical obligations towards otherwise self-represented persons with regard to their assertions of fact when assisting in document drafting are the same--no higher but no lower--for LLLTs as they are for lawyers.