 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 
|
|
 |
||||||||||||||||
|
Bar News - March 19, 2004 Morning Mail - Deunification Issues Service Seen as Casualty of Deunification As a solo practitioner with limited resources, I rely heavily on the Bar Association and its staff to assist me with various aspects of my practice. I use Casemaker on the Web site, and have taken advantage of the on-line CLE's. I also attend live and video replay CLE programs. Using Casemaker saves me substantial sums that would otherwise be paid to Westlaw, Lexis/Nexis, or other legal information services. On-line CLE's allow me the flexibility to use my free time, instead of potentially billable time, to fulfill my requirements. I would expect that many of the services that are presently provided by the Bar would be dramatically reduced, and those that remain would become much more costly. Staffing would likely be reduced, as fewer dollars would be available from bar dues to fund those positions. The personal service that many of us have received from members of the Association staff would likely be gone forever. I cannot tell you the number of times that I have called one or another staffer looking for answers; I would hate to lose that privilege. The cost of CLE programs would likely increase, even for those of us who choose to remain members of the Association. I cannot fathom how significant pro grams such as Lawyer Referral and Pro Bono would continue to operate without the assistance of Association staff helping prepare grant applications-and while I recognize that annual Bar dues and associated costs are presently high, I simply can't imagine how much more we would be required to pay to support necessary services. In short, I doubt that our legislature has considered all the "incidentals" that will be affected should the Bar be deunified. Marlene A. Lein Unified Bar in the Public Interest As the Judge Advocate for the New Hampshire Army National Guard and a Bar member since 1980, I will vote" yes" to continue Bar membership as a condition of the license to practice law in New Hampshire. From my perspective it lies in the public interest to do so. In support of my "yes" vote I can say without hesitation that the orderly legal processing of nearly 1,000 recently deployed New Hampshire Army National Guard soldiers could not have occurred without the assistance of the networked resources of the unified New Hampshire Bar Association. The speed and size of the recent deployment in support of ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan was unprecedented. The Judge Advocate General's section of the New Hampshire Army National Guard bore the responsibility during Soldier Readiness Processing (SRP) of counseling each deploying soldier and preparing wills and powers of attorney for all soldiers who needed or wanted them. Starting in late November 2003 and continuing through February of 2004, New Hampshire units were called to active duty with often less than one-week's notice to report for SRP. With our staff of attorneys and legal clerks depleted by deployment, we lacked adequate resources to deal with the number of soldiers. Responding to calls for assistance, the Pro Bono Program, with less than 48 hours' notice in each case, marshaled to the state armories more than 30 volunteer Bar members accompanied by secretaries and paralegals to provide essential document preparation and counseling. In several cases, the attorneys continued to assist the soldiers and their families after the SRPs with the latchstring clearly out to assist as future needs arise. The grateful soldiers and their families were overwhelmed by the generous support and caring from the legal community. As the soldiers serve today in Iraq and Afghanistan, they receive some comfort in knowing that the lawyers in New Hampshire through its unified Bar take ownership in caring for them and their families in an extremely trying time. I am proud to be a Bar member and will support a mandatory association. Peter J. Duffy Massachusetts Attorney Sees Value I am opposed to the deunification of the New Hampshire Bar Association. The value we receive from the unified Bar is so great that it would be a disaster to lose it. I practice law in both New Hampshire and Massachusetts. In Massachusetts the bar is not unified. It costs me $220 just to register as a lawyer in Massachusetts. I get nothing at all for that fee except a little plastic card with my name on it. I no longer belong to the Massachusetts Bar Association because the cost was too great and the rewards too small. The fee for the MBA is $300 per year. They did not provide the level of service that the NHBA does. They have a newspaper, but it is not very good. To get the official legal newspaper in Massachusetts you have to subscribe to Mass. Lawyer's Weekly at a cost of $300. I pay $520 to the New Hampshire Bar Association [$250 is the Bar Association dues' amount] which includes all of the registration fees to the Court [remainder in court-levied discipline and public protection fees]. For that I receive the Bar News, the Bar Journal, membership in a section that has monthly meetings, a newsletter, and a very valuable email discussion group, Casemaker, and a long list of other benefits. To register with the bar, join the MBA, and get the newspaper in Massachusetts it would cost $820. The New Hampshire Bar Association is a bargain. Since New Hampshire is smaller than Massachusetts in numbers of attorneys, we would not be able to do as much with an even smaller voluntary bar. We need the strength of numbers to keep our Association strong, vital, and a force on our side. It would be a mistake to destroy our Association. Edward H. Adamsky
|
|
Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store New Hampshire Bar Association |
