Task Force on Access Through Innovation of Legal Services (ATILS)
Notice and Agenda
Monday, October 7, 2019
10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.

845 South Figueroa Street
Conference Rooms 2C-G, 2nd Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017-2515
1-855-520-7605

Questions regarding any agenda item should be directed to the Committee Coordinator(s), Randall Difuntorum at 415-538-2161 or Chair, Justice Lee Edmon at 415-538-2116. Committee members are requested to notify the Committee Coordinator as early as possible in advance of the meeting if they wish to remove any item/s from the consent agenda.

Committee Members: Andrew Arruda, Simon Boehme, Tara Burd, Hon. Wendy Chang, Abhijeet Chavan, Jean Clauson, Johann Drolshagen, Margie Estrada, Lori Gonzalez, Bridget Gramme, Andrew Kucera, Kevin Mohr, Heather Morse, Joyce Raby, Allen Rodriguez, Toby Rothschild, Daniel Rubins, Mark Tuft, Angelina Valverde, Joshua Walker.
The order of business is approximate and subject to change.

Additional Locations
500 Grand Avenue, Suite 100, Des Moines, IA 50309
180 Howard Street, Room 8B, San Francisco, CA 94105

To Join by Conference Call
Toll-Free Dial-In Number: 1-855-520-7605
Conference Code: 253-541-0212#

Open Session

A. Chair's Report
1. Roll Call
2. Call for Public Comment
3. Chair's Report
4. Staff Report
5. Approval of Action Summary from the August 9, 2019 Meeting
B. Consideration of Public Comment Received on Recommendations Developed by the Unauthorized Practice of Law/Artificial Intelligence Subcommittee
1. Recommendation 1.0: The Task Force does not recommend defining the practice of law.
2. Recommendation 2.2: Add an exception to the prohibition against the unauthorized practice of law permitting State-certified/registered/approved entities to use technology-driven legal services delivery systems to engage in authorized practice of law activities.
3. Recommendation 2.4: The Regulator of State-certified/registered/approved entities using technology-driven legal services delivery systems must establish adequate ethical standards that regulate both the provider and the technology itself.
4. Recommendation 2.5: Client communications with technology-driven legal services delivery systems that engage in authorized practice of law activities should receive equivalent protections afforded by the attorney-client privilege and a lawyer’s ethical duty of confidentiality.
5. Recommendation 2.6: The regulatory process contemplated by Recommendation 2.2 should be funded by application and renewal fees. The fee structure may be scaled based on multiple factors.
6. Recommendation 2.3: State-certified/registered/approved entities using technology-driven legal services delivery systems should not be limited or restrained by any concept or definition of “artificial intelligence.” Instead, regulation should be limited to technologies that perform the analytical functions of an attorney.
C. Consideration of Public Comments Received on Recommendations Developed by the Rules and Ethics Opinions Subcommittee
1. Recommendation 3.0: Adoption of a new Comment [1] to rule 1.1 “Competence” stating that the duty of competence includes a duty to keep abreast of the changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.
2. Recommendation 3.1: Adoption of Proposed Rule 5.4 [Alternative 1].
3. Recommendation 3.2: Adoption of Proposed Rule 5.4 [Alternative 2].
4. Recommendation 3.3: Adoption of a version of ABA Model Rule 5.7 that fosters investment in, and development of, technology-driven delivery systems including associations with nonlawyers and nonlawyer entities.
5. Recommendation 3.4: Adoption of revised California Rules of Professional Conduct 7.1–7.5 to improve communication regarding availability of legal services using technology in consideration of: (1) the versions of Model Rules 7.1–7.3 adopted by the ABA in 2018; (2) the 2015 and 2016 Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers reports on advertising rules; and (3) advertising rules adopted in other jurisdictions.
D. Consideration of Public Comments Received on Recommendations Developed by the Alternative Business Structures/Multi-Disciplinary Practice Subcommittee
1. Recommendation 2.1: Entities that provide legal or law-related services can be composed of lawyers, nonlawyers or a combination of the two, however, regulation would be required and may differ depending on the structure of the entity.
2. Recommendation 2.0: Nonlawyers will be authorized to provide specified legal advice and services as an exemption to UPL with appropriate regulation.
3. Recommendation 1.1: The models being proposed would include individuals and entities working for profit and would not be limited to not for profits.
4. Recommendation 1.2: Lawyers in traditional practice and law firms may perform legal and law-related services under the current regulatory framework but should strive to expand access to justice through innovation with the use of technology and modifications in relationships with nonlawyers.
E. Consideration of Public Comments Received on General Recommendations
1. Recommendation 1.3: The implementation body shall: (1) identify, develop, and/or commission objective and diverse methods, metrics, and empirical data sources to assess the impact of the ATILS reforms on the delivery of legal services, including access to justice; and (2) establish reporting requirements for ongoing monitoring and analysis.
2. Comments received on concepts not considered by the Task Force.
F. Consideration of Public Comment Testimony Received at August 10, 2019 Public Hearing
1. Public Comment Testimony Synopsis Table
Closed Session

None*

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, those requiring accommodations at this meeting should notify Angela Marlaud at 415-538-2116. Please provide notification at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to allow sufficient time to make arrangements for accommodations at this meeting.

The notice and agenda is available at: http://board.calbar.ca.gov/Board.aspx
   
 
Close
C. Consideration of Public Comments Received on Recommendations Developed by the Rules and Ethics Opinions Subcommittee:

Attachments:
None