December 2001

Working with Our Colleagues in Neighboring States

by Dale L. Carlisle, WSBA President

The Board of Governors is moving ahead in several areas related to multijurisdictional practice. We would like to report to you on these matters, and welcome your thoughts and suggestions concerning them.

The board met in mid-October in Vancouver, Washington. In addition to a very successful "listening lunch" with members of the Clark County Bar Association, we met with 10 lawyers and four Bar Association executives from Idaho, Oregon and Utah. This regional group started about two years ago, and resulted in Idaho and Oregon adopting reciprocity rules for licensing, which tie into an already existing reciprocity rule in Washington. Utah was originally invited and did not participate, but is now considering a similar reciprocity. The ABA, at midyear and annual meetings, has featured this Northwest alliance as a unique answer to some multijurisdictional practice issues. The program was also recognized earlier this year at a Western States Bar Conference.

I am not going to recite the specifics of complying with these reciprocity rules; however, WSBA General Counsel Robert Welden has authored an article about our reciprocity rule, which includes references to the Idaho and Oregon rules ("Reciprocal Admission," Bar News, Sept. 2001, p. 43). All three states have instructions for application on their Web sites (Washington at www.wsba.org/lawyers/licensing/faq-reciprocity.htm). Generally, one must: (1) have practiced continuously for the prior three years; (2) pass a character and fitness requirement; (3) pay the licensing fee; and (4) take 15 hours of CLE covering ethics and special state-specific procedure areas. Idaho and Oregon will begin accepting applications by the first of the year. Each state has implementation actions in process.

The questions I am most frequently asked about the reciprocity rule is how CLE and discipline will be handled. The answers demonstrate the close relationship we have with our neighboring states. Except for 15 hours of state-admission CLEs, the current planning is that the fulfillment of CLE requirements of the attorney's state of residence meets the requirements for continued licensing in the other state. Discipline will be handled by the state in which an ethics violation occurs, and under the existing rules, the other states where the attorney is admitted will impose comparable discipline.

If Utah adopts a similar rule, we would have approximately 50,000 lawyers eligible for reciprocal practice in four neighboring states. By the end of next year, I believe this will be the case. All four states expect this to lead to more uniformity in ethics and practice rules as we continue to work together. Reciprocity will benefit WSBA members; our Northwest colleagues; and our clients, as their business and legal problems increasingly cross state lines.

Pro hac vice is another area of multijurisdictional practice which should also become more uniform. Idaho and Oregon both have a centralized system of licensing and reporting for pro hac vice admissions. It is generally limited to one person, one case, one court, and for up to one year. Washington has no such uniform rule; each court operates on its own. This creates issues in discipline and may also be inconsistent with our reciprocity rule. The Board of Governors has initiated a study of submitting a uniform rule to our Supreme Court. We will continue to communicate with the Oregon and Idaho bars about the possibility of having some uniformity among the three states.

All of this is consistent with our Future of the Legal Profession Study Group, which, over the past year, addressed the future of the practice of law, and recommended that we move forward with multijurisdictional practice rules. They also recommended we consider for Washington a model rule that the ABA will consider in February.

In discussions with our neighboring states, it appears that many issues the other states are addressing are similar to those Washington is facing. Sharing of ideas and various possible solutions are of benefit to the bar associations of each state.

•  The Oregon State Bar has its own long-standing malpractice insurance program, which it underwrites and operates. Oregon lawyers are required to participate. (This is also true in British Columbia.)

• The Idaho State Bar sponsors an annual six-week-long "law school" for non-lawyers, which operates in conjunction with one of their colleges and helps citizens with knowledge and understanding of the legal system.

•  The Oregon pro hac vice fees are earmarked for access to justice programs. The Idaho fees are retained in their general funds.

• Oregon has a 14-member Board of Commissioners which includes three nonlawyer members. Members of the Idaho and Utah boards, like Washington, are all lawyers. All boards are generally based on geographic representation, but have some additional representation for areas of higher lawyer population.

The WSBA can only benefit from closer relationships not only with bar associations from neighboring states, but also with our own specialty bar associations. The BOG focus on continuing and strengthening these contacts will benefit Washington lawyers and their clients. I welcome your suggestions or thoughts. (Contact me at dcarlisle@gth-law.com or 253-620-6401.) As demonstrated at our Vancouver meeting, the Board of Governors looks forward to continuing to listen to and interact with our members, as well as our colleagues in neighboring states.

Back to table of contents >>