Court targets September for new system

The new lawyer regulation system that replaces the Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility (BAPR) is anticipated to go into effect in September 2000. Wisconsin SCR Chapters 21 and 22, which describe the state's lawyer regulation system, were redrafted at the request of the justices after they agreed on a tentative new framework for lawyer discipline in January. Details are in process, but the system outlined at the supreme court's open conference May 19 and 22 includes:

• An Office of Lawyer Regulation will screen, investigate, and prosecute cases. The court-appointed director, intake and investigative staff, staff counsel, and retained counsel investigate attorney misconduct and medical incapacity allegations and present their findings to the Preliminary Review Committee.
• Two new boards, the Preliminary Review Committee and the Board of Administrative Oversight, each com-posed of 12 court-appointed members - eight lawyers and four nonlawyers - will assume the responsibilities of the previous BAPR board.
  • The Preliminary Review Committee will meet in panels of six to review investigations and determine whether there is cause for the director to proceed to file a complaint or petition with the supreme court.
  • The Board of Administrative Oversight will monitor the fairness, effectiveness, and efficiency of the attorney regulation system and propose substantive and procedural rules related to the system for the court's consideration. The board also will review the operation of the district committees after three years and submit a recommendation to the supreme court concerning their continuation or modification.
• A new central intake system will accept telephone inquiries and complaints from the public, evaluate them, and direct them as deemed appropriate.

  BAPR Interim Administrator James L. Martin has proposed rules for the central intake process and for the use of diversion from discipline programs in certain cases. The supreme court will address these rules at a public hearing on Sept. 12, 2000. (See the supreme court's order.)

• Sixteen district investigative committees, appointed by the court and composed of two-thirds lawyers and one-third nonlawyers, assist in investigating cases upon referral by the director.
• A referee, who is a court-appointed attorney or reserve judge, will hear the discipline cases, make disciplinary recommendations to the supreme court, and approve the issuance of certain private and public reprimands.

If the new Chapters 21 and 22 go into effect in September, the court will invite written comments on the new system over the ensuing six months and hold a public hearing on the rules in April 2001.

The new rules are expected to be adopted and available around mid-July and published in the September 2000 Wisconsin Lawyer. More information is available on WisBar or the state courts' Web site.

Additional mandatory court forms effective July 1

Standard court forms that are required for use by parties and court officials in civil actions go into effect July 1, 2000. These mandatory forms for small claims, family, and other civil proceedings join the criminal and juvenile forms that became effective Jan.1, pursuant to Wisconsin Supreme Court Order 98-01.

The July 1 forms also include 28 revised and two new versions of probate forms for informal probate, summary settlement, summary assignment, and other matters. Absent from the July additions is the parenting plan form, which the Records Management Committee (RMC) withdrew pending further development.

Since the juvenile and criminal forms were posted earlier this year, many have been enhanced to allow the expansion of some fields to an unlimited number of lines.

Order 98-01, which was supported by the RMC, the Director of State Courts Office, the Wisconsin Clerks of Circuit Court Association, and the Wisconsin Juvenile Court Clerks Association, created section 758.18 of the Wisconsin Statutes. The section provides for adopting standard forms for use by parties and court officials in all civil and criminal actions and proceedings in the circuit court. The order also created sections 971.025 and 807.001, mandating standard forms in Children's Code and Juvenile Justice Code proceedings and civil actions, respectively. Proponents of mandatory forms sought to standardize and maintain all state court forms to be consistent with Wisconsin statutory and case law and compatible with the growing trend toward automation.

Standard court forms are available online in PDF and MS Word. For background and information on using standard court forms, visit the circuit court forms page cited or see the December Wisconsin Lawyer.

NBTA schedules July exam, honors first class certified

The National Board of Trial Advocacy (NBTA) will administer its 41st exam to certify attorneys as specialists in civil, criminal, and family law trial advocacy July 29, 2000, in Milwaukee and 36 other locations. The daylong essay exam, which is one part of NBTA's certification application, tests practical knowledge of trial practice, ethics, and evidence relative to the specific certification area. It evaluates applicants' knowledge of the substantive law and their ability to evaluate, handle, and resolve model controversies.

NBTA recognizes original members. This year marks the 20th anniversary of the nonprofit NBTA's certification program, which is designed to provide an objective measure of skill and expertise in trial advocacy. Two Wisconsin attorneys - Robert L. Habush of Habush, Habush, Davis & Rottier, Milwaukee, and Robert W. Lutz of Lutz, Burnett, McDermontt, Jahn & King, LLP, Chilton - are among 62 members of NBTA's inaugural class who will be honored at a reception the evening preceding the July exam.

For further information regarding NBTA certification, call (617) 720-2032, or visit the Web site.

2000 Law Firm Technology Survey: MS Word use continues to rise

WordPerfect remains the predominant word-processing software used in Wisconsin law firms, but the use of Microsoft Word continues to grow. According to the recently issued State Bar of Wisconsin "2000 Law Firm Technology Survey," the percentage of Wisconsin law firms using MS Word for Windows has increased from 28 percent in 1998 to 38 percent today. However, the State Bar's fourth annual technology study also cites an increase in the use of WordPerfect from 41 to 45 percent in the same period.

The report further notes that while one-fifth (22 percent) of survey respondents plan to upgrade their current word-processing program in the coming year, only 6 percent plan to switch to a different word-processing package. Six in 10 firms changing word-processing programs are going to Microsoft Word.

The State Bar's "2000 Law Firm Technology Survey" is based on 607 responses to a questionnaire mailed to a representative sample of 1,773 firms. A report on survey results will be published in the August 2000 Wisconsin Lawyer.

Comfort with email confidentiality grows

As email use becomes more widespread, it is gaining acceptance as a means of attorney-client communication. According to a March 1999 ethics opinion published by the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, barring special circumstances, a lawyer does not violate a client's confidentiality by transmitting documents to or about the client via unencrypted electronic mail.

Because the mode of transmission affords "a reasonable expectation of privacy" from a technological and legal standpoint, the committee believes that the same privacy accorded U.S. and commercial mail, land-line telephonic transmissions, and facsimiles applies to Internet email.

Lawyers have an obligation to take reasonable steps to protect confidential client information against unauthorized use or disclosure; however, the obligation does not require an absolute assurance of privacy in a communication medium, the committee found.

Although states' earlier ethics rulings focused attention on email's potential susceptibility to unauthorized interception, "The ABA opinion is consistent with the opinions of most authors and ethics committees today," says Dean R. Dietrich, member of the State Bar of Wisconsin Professional Ethics Committee. "It recognizes that email communications are a part of everyday client communications and that email is as confidential as conventional mail. Wisconsin lawyers can be comfortable using email for all but the most confidential client correspondence and documents, such as letters summarizing trial strategy and drafts of asset purchase agreement."

The full text of ABA Formal Opinion No. 99-413, "Protecting the Confidentiality of Unencrypted E-mail," is online.

Wisconsin Lawyer