Roxanne Giedd

Pierre, South Dakota
Telephone: (605)
Fax: (605)
Bar Admission: South Dakota
Education: University of South Dakota School of Law, Vermillion, South Dakota
Born:

June, 2009

May, 2009

On Thursday, June 18th at the Annual Meeting of the Bar, there is a CLE program that is of vital importance: “Mental Health and Addiction in the Legal Profession: What We All Need To Know!”.

I can hear the sighs. I understand that you think you don’t need to hear this.

But I want you to consider your staff, your spouse, your significant other, your parents, and your children. In fact, I want you to SEND your staff and spouse to this CLE. (It won’t cost you anything – the Bar won’t be charging for their attendance.) Why? Because your staff, spouse, and family are those most affected and hurt by a lawyer’s depression and/or addiction problems.

I also want you to attend this CLE – if not for yourself, for the others in your life. Go so your spouse and staff will feel comfortable attending a CLE with a bunch of lawyers. Go so you can be educated on the signs and symptoms of depression and addiction in your partners and associates. Go so that you are not someday caught off-guard.

You (and your staff) are likely to be one of the first responders, the first person to notice signs of extreme stress, depression, or addiction in the behavior of a lawyer in your firm. You need to know what these signs are. You need to know how to respond – and how not to respond.

This knowledge won’t necessarily enable you to help or stop a determined alcoholic or a spiraling depression; but it may allow you to see the problem and extend an offer of help. Sometimes, that offer can be a start toward recovery.

Please call the State Bar or send in the forms to register your staff and spouse for this CLE. And, while you’re at it, register yourself too!

As you know, my “project” as Bar President concerned increasing the funding of legal services for the poor. One step toward this was to increase the donations made through our voluntary contribution to the Bar Foundation – the opt-out on our dues statement. I am proud to announce that Bar members increased this voluntary contribution by $4,000 this year! Given the low interest rates, the Bar Foundation was sorely in need of additional funds so it could continue its public service activities, including that of providing grants for legal services. Thank you all for your opt-out contribution, and please, remember next year.

The Equal Access to Our Courts Commission, which was created to provide funding for legal service corporations, has a funding mechanism whereby at least one-half of the funds remaining in a class action settlement fund are to be distributed to the Commission. SDCL 16-2-57. The Commission recently received such a distribution from a state court class action lawsuit. The Court also ordered one-half of the residual class action settlement funds to be distributed to the State Bar’s Access to Justice program! Thank you, Judge Trandahl, for thinking of Access to Justice and the legal services it provides to the poor.

Another step toward achieving an additional funding source for legal services was the enactment by the 2009 Legislature of a filing fee on certain civil petitions and motions (House Bill 1097). This filing fee, which is to be provided to the Equal Access to Our Courts Commission, will become effective in July. We are hopeful that these fees, coupled with residual class action settlement funds, will provide the Commission with sufficient funding to make significant grants available to our legal services corporations and Access to Justice.

And the next step?

Where we have fallen short is developing the endowment fund of the Bar Foundation. We need the principal of that fund to be large enough that, even in difficult economic times, it will generate enough interest to fund the Foundation’s public service activities and grants to legal services. This is our new challenge.

April, 2009

At the State Bar Annual Meeting in June, there will be elections for five Bar Commissioner positions. There is one opening for a Commissioner from the Fifth Circuit, and the remaining four openings are for at-large positions.

There are thirteen Bar Commissioners in total, one for each of the seven judicial circuits and six at-large from the state. The Bar’s Bylaws restrict the at-large Commissioners from residing in the same circuit. The term of each Commissioners is three years unless a vacancy in an on-going term is being filled (which is the case with the Fifth Circuit Commissioner position, whose remaining term is two years).

The Commissioners usually meet five times a year. Under the leadership of the President, the Commissioners determine the direction and course of the Bar’s activities (except where a policy is established by the Bar’s membership at the Annual Meeting). The Commissioners establish the budget for the Bar every year, and thereby control what activities the Bar undertakes and emphasizes throughout that year.

In practice, what this means is best reflected by the minutes of the Bar Commissioners meetings. In the past year, for example, the Commissioners have made policy decisions on issues such as development of a transition plan to address the up-coming retirement of all bar staff, and the analysis, review and approval of the Bar’s budget. Commissioners developed a new State Bar policy regarding State Bar resolutions and lobbying; began exploring issues related to the future of Dakota Disc and the Bar’s website; determined whether enforcement actions regarding the unlicensed practice of law were warranted; and took steps to further the Bar’s commitment to legal services for low-income residents.

The Bar Commissioners also constitute the Board of Directors for Access to Justice and SD CLE, Inc. As the Board of Directors for these sister organizations, the Commissioners establish the policies, budgets and activities for these organizations.

There are two methods for putting your name into consideration for a Commissioner position: nominations can be made from the floor at the Annual Meeting, or you can submit a nominating petition. Nominating petitions for a circuit position must be signed by five active members of the Bar residing in that circuit; nominating petitions for an at-large position must be signed by fifteen active members of the Bar. All nominating petitions need to be filed with the State Bar Office at least ten days before the Annual Meeting.

Ultimately, it is the Bar Commissioners who make the basic policy decisions of the State Bar and establish its direction and services. Serving as a Bar Commissioner gives you the opportunity to understand how the Bar operates and determines the Bar’s future activities. I encourage you to consider running for a Bar Commissioner seat.

In response to last month’s Presidents Page regarding the lack of lawyers in rural counties in South Dakota, there has been some e-mail discussion that has raised additional thoughts to ponder. One commenter pointed out that physicians and medical professionals aren’t in the same position as lawyers trying to establish a practice in rural South Dakota, because medical professionals are guaranteed some income due to Medicare, Medicaid, veteran accounts, and private health insurance. A rural attorney (absent a states attorney position) does not have that benefit, and therefore a law school student loan reimbursement program similar to that provided to medical professionals may not be as successful in encouraging the re-establishment of rural law practices. Further, he argues that private agriculture and ranching are consolidating into large sophisticated operations that require specialized and complex legal services that a typical rural attorney would not be able to provide even if located nearby. The commenter suggested that reorganization of governmental districts to reflect the depopulation is a more realistic solution to the problem.

This is an issue the Bar and the judiciary will need to address at some point, and it promises to be an interesting debate.

March, 2009

South Dakota has joined 47 other states in providing funding for legal services! House Bill 1097 was passed by the Senate and Governor Rounds signed the Bill on February 18th. House Bill 1097 enacts a fifty dollar filing fee (“surcharge”) for the filing of petitions and motions to: modify final child support orders (excepting petitioners who receive assistance benefits under SDCL Title 28); modify final child custody orders; modify final visitation orders; and modify final spousal support orders.

The filing fee is called the “Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts Surcharge”. It is collected by the clerk of courts upon the filing of the petitions or motions. The surcharge may be waived by court order upon the filing of an affidavit concerning the petitioner’s inability to pay under SDCL 16-2-29.2 and 16-2-29.3. The collected surcharges are to be transmitted to the Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts fund.

This funding mechanism is not unique. Thirty states utilize court filing fees and fines to provide at least part of their funding of legal services. In thirty-three states, direct state appropriations are used to fund legal services. Eighteen of the states that directly appropriate funds for legal services also utilize court filing fees and fines to provide additional funding. Many states, in addition to a direct appropriation or other state-based funding mechanism such as filing fees, provide additional funding for legal services through lawyer fund drives, attorney registration fees, bar funds, and bar dues check-offs or add-ons. In fact, most states use various combinations of these sources to provide legal services funding.

The statutory purpose of the Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts is to “provide grants to nonprofit entities that are funded, or nonprofit entities contracting with nonprofit entities that are funded, by the Legal Services Corporation and deliver legal services to persons meeting income eligibility guidelines.” Before enactment of House Bill 1097, the Commission did not have a consistent funding source. Last year’s legislation did not provide funding, although it did grant courts the authority to order undistributed money remaining in a settlement fund developed for the benefit of a class in a class action lawsuit, to be paid to the Commission.

It is anticipated that the surcharge will generate approximately $100,000 per year for the Commission. This is, in light of the economic conditions and the pre-existing need for additional funding for legal services, unlikely to be enough – but it is a step in the right direction! Clearly, however, the Bar will need to continue its support for the Bar Foundation and Access to Justice to help meet the legal service needs of low-income people.

Last month, I mentioned the crisis arising from the lack of lawyers in rural counties in South Dakota – an issue discussed many times by Chief Justice Gilbertson. I noted that one proposed solution to that problem was the establishment of a law student loan reimbursement program similar to the state program established for physicians and other health professionals who agree to work in rural communities in exchange for student loan repayment assistance.

This concept was before the Legislature this year in House Bill 1181, which proposed to establish a student loan repayment mechanism for veterinarians who agreed to provide large animal veterinary services in eligible rural communities. This Bill was recently deferred to the 41st day by Senate State Affairs. I raise this as a cautionary note: a student loan repayment program to address the lack of lawyers in South Dakota’s rural counties may be a difficult sell to the Legislature. While budget issues may have been the primary reason that the veterinarian bill failed, there may also be some resistance to the general concept of student loan repayment programs.

Spring is coming, I promise!

February, 2009

I have had the opportunity to visit with several local bars during the last months, and I am often asked what issues I see facing the Bar during the next few years. While there are a number of issues, we should all be aware of three particular challenges currently facing the Bar.

The first challenge should not, at this point, be surprising: the downturn in the economy and its affect on the Bar Foundation. The Foundation’s revenues from IOLTA have virtually disappeared, and this situation will not be improving over the next several years. As a result, the Executive Director and Commissioners are in the process of taking a hard look at the Bar’s financial policies so that the Bar can provide as much support to the Foundation as possible. We don’t want the Foundation’s programs – grants to our Legal Service Corporations, Statehouse coverage, the Ask-a-Lawyer program, and others—to be eliminated because of lack of funding.

The second challenge is the funding of legal services for the poor. I have written a great deal about this subject. The need certainly hasn’t disappeared in recent months as the economy has faltered (perhaps an optimistic euphemism?).

The Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts, established by the Legislature last year, has taken a first step to address this issue. The Commission submitted a bill to the Legislature this year that establishes a funding mechanism for the Commission’s statutory function: to provide grants to nonprofit entities funded directly or indirectly by the Legal Services Corporation that deliver legal services to low-income persons. That bill, which is House Bill 1097, provides for filing fees and surcharges in certain civil cases, with the amounts collected to be placed in the Equal Access to Our Courts fund for distribution by the Commission. As of this writing, House Bill 1097 has passed the House and is on its way to the Senate.

The third, and perhaps most difficult, challenge the Bar will need to address in the near future is one that has been raised and discussed numerous times by Chief Justice Gilbertson: the crisis arising from the lack of lawyers in rural counties in this State.

Chief Justice Gilbertson in his 2009 State of the Judiciary Message described this looming problem: “Along with a shift in overall population, the availability of attorneys within South Dakota has changed. Thirty-five percent of all licensed attorneys in South Dakota reside in Minnehaha County. To put it another way, two-thirds of all attorneys in South Dakota are found in just three of our 66 counties, Minnehaha, Pennington and Hughes. On the other hand, we now have two counties in this state without a single attorney. Fourteen counties only have one licensed attorney. Seven counties have only two licensed attorneys. Many of these rural attorneys are approaching retirement. The likelihood of replacing these attorneys is remote.”

Law School Associate Professor Patrice Kunesh recently sent me a copy of a paper written by 2009 JD Candidate Sarah L. Williamson on this subject, entitled: The Lack of Lawyers in Rural South Dakota – An Examination of the Crisis and a Legislative Solution. Ms. Williamson compiled data concerning the number of lawyers in each county of the State, and suggested as a solution that the Legislature establish a law student loan reimbursement program similar to the state program that has been established for physicians, dentists and other health professionals who agree to work in rural communities in exchange for student loan repayment assistance.

The Bar will have to face this issue and take action in the near future: we must develop one or several solutions to prevent what the Chief Justice forecasts as “a state which contains islands of justice in a sea of empty rural courthouses.”

In closing, I must make a correction: Last month when I announced the 2009 Trial Academy, I incorrectly stated that the coordinator for this year’s Trial Academy was Mike Luce. Chet Groseclose is the coordinator for the 2009 Trial Academy. Mike Luce will be the coordinator for the next Trial Academy, anticipated to occur in 2011. Mike Luce will also be assisting Chet with this year’s Trial Academy. My apologies to Chet and Mike! This is a time-consuming project, and Chet and Mike both deserve our thanks for their service on this important project.

January, 2009

Every month I receive letters and emails from bar members responding to the President’s Pages, but so many of you responded to last month’s column that I lost count! It is apparent that the issues involved in successfully balancing clients, associates, partners, work, families, friends, and self are topics that this Bar needs to continue to address. I appreciate your suggestions and will be discussing them with the Bar Commissioners for future Bar action.

Legislative session starts this month, and the stress on a number of our bar members – both those who serve in the Legislature as well as those who lobby and represent the interests of their clients before the Legislature – will be on the rise. Many thanks to our members who serve in the Legislature, and their partners, associates and families as well: Representatives Joni Cutler, Thomas Deadrick, Richard Engels, Marc Feinstein, Brian Gosch, Roger Hunt, David Lust, Lance Russell; and Senators Margaret Gillespie, Scott Heidepriem, Dave Knudson, and Nancy Turbak Berry. They make many sacrifices to perform their legislative duties and do good work for the people of the State.

Elsewhere in this Newsletter you will see the announcement for the 2009 South Dakota Trial Academy. The impetus for the Trial Academy was described by then-President Tom Welk in 2005: “One of the vexing problems we face today in our profession is the absence of meaningful trial experiences for our young lawyers. This situation has arisen from a number of factors such as increasing alternative dispute utilization and the ever increasing cost of litigation. Moreover, even the experiences which were traditionally available to younger lawyers in criminal law seem to be vanishing as the use of specialized public defender offices and career prosecutors become more prevalent…. Many other states, bar associations and trial organizations have addressed this matter by conducting various forms of trial academies which use a variety of formats such as lectures, demonstrations by instructors, and demonstrations by participants. These forums have existed in many states for years, but not in South Dakota. No longer!”

As a result of this problem, the Bar, through the leadership of Tom Welk and with the collaboration of the USD Law School and a number of other bar members, established the South Dakota Trial Academy. The Academy is offered every other year. It is modeled after out-of-state trial practice courses but based on South Dakota trial practice. The Academy is supported financially from all the trial organizations in South Dakota (Trial Lawyers, Defense Lawyers, and ABOTA).

Mike Luce has agreed to succeed Chet Groseclose as the Academy’s Director this year. Faculty for the Academy are selected from trial lawyers in the state (both plaintiff and defense), with a few out-of-state lawyers “to keep us honest”. Faculty for the coming July 2009 Academy are: Dan Duffy, Rapid City; Judge David Gienapp, Brookings; Gary Pashby, Sioux Falls; Murray Ogborn, Denver; Stephanie Pochop, Gregory; Steve Sanford, Sioux Falls; Sid Strange, Meckling; and Nancy Turbak Berry, Watertown.

Importantly, the Academy has a number of scholarships available to young lawyers who want to attend the Academy but need financial assistance to defray the cost of the week-long training. The announcement for the Trial Academy contains information regarding the submission of applications for scholarships.

Based on the reviews of the program by past participants, the Trial Academy puts on a truly excellent trial skills program and is indeed a phenomenal success. I encourage each of you to consider sending a young lawyer from your firm, or, if you are a young lawyer, going yourself!

December, 2008

The holiday season has arrived, and I must ask: do you turn your cell phone off during family time? If not, do clients, partners, associates, and opposing counsel really need uninterrupted contact with you — and if they do, is it actually wise to give them immediate responses?

And, more importantly, what impact does this have on your mental health?

The ABA's Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs states: "Alcoholism, drug addiction, and mental health problems are afflictions that affect a great number of professionals including lawyers and judges. Reports now estimate that while ten percent of the general population has problems with alcohol abuse, anywhere from fifteen to eighteen percent of the lawyer population battles the same problem, Because many lawyers and judges are overachievers who carry an enormous workload, the tendency to "escape" from daily problems through the use of drugs and alcohol is prevalent in the legal community. Also, the daily pressures placed on these men and women can lead to inordinate amounts of stress and mental illness. Recent reports have also shown that a majority of disciplinary problems involved chemical dependency or emotional stress."

The State Bar's Disciplinary Board agrees. Disciplinary problems resulting from chemical dependency are increasing, and the stress of our profession is a source of much of the problem.

Constant access to clients and associates, and after-hours work through cell phones, blackberries, and laptops, increases our stress levels, Time that we used to spend recharging our own batteries – time spent with family members, exercising, on personal interests – has all but disappeared in the onslaught of gadgets that make us perpetually available – and perpetually working.

The holiday season is a good time to evaluate our use of technology. Do you panic or become irritable When you can't get cell phone or internet service? Have you been spending less time on personal activities (do you even have a hobby)? When was the last time you had a complete conversation with a family member without being interrupted by your cell phone? Do you take your cell phone on vacation or to holiday events and leave it on and answer it whenever it rings? Have you had a close call or traffic accident while simultaneously driving and talking or texting on the cell phone? Can you remember a complete evening when you didn't at least check your email once?

The holidays are a perfect time to take a break and remember (if you can) what your life was like before you were constantly accessible to your clients, partners, associates and other lawyers. So, find the "off' switch on your cell phone and laptop, and embrace the resulting down-time.
Enjoy the company of loved ones. Take a long walk outdoors, Reconnect with old friends. Plan some alone time to do something you've always meant to do, but never had time. Play with your children or grandchildren (or both). Have some fun. De-stress.

You will be a better lawyer for it.

I'm taking my own advice. As I wrote this column, I received a phone call from an associate who said he'd be working over the Thanksgiving weekend on a project and would get it to me on Sunday. I told him to wait, because my laptop would be off this holiday weekend. Next week, and the work, deadlines, and obligations, will arrive soon enough.

I hope you too can take time to de-stress during the holidays. In our profession, it may be as important to take a break on occasion as it is to work,

I wish you all a very relaxing holiday season.

November, 2008

You will shortly be receiving dues statements from the State Bar. These notices will again be asking you to make a voluntary contribution of $75 to the South Dakota Bar Foundation. The Bar has been making this request in the dues statements since 2004. Last year, 902 lawyers made this contribution.

The State Bar’s membership is comprised of 2,252 active bar members, and another 554 in-active bar members: 2,806 total members (as of April 1, 2008). So, something less than one-third of our membership is contributing to the Bar Foundation through the opt-out dues.

The Bar Foundation was founded by a small group of lawyers in 1983 who were inspired by the creation of Interest on Lawyer’s Trust Account (“IOLTA”). The Foundation’s purposes, approved by the Supreme Court, are: to help prevent crime; to facilitate and improve the delivery of civil and criminal legal services and the administration of justice; to encourage law-related education in the schools (K-12); to encourage law-related education of adults including seminars and programs for charitable, civic, and senior citizen groups; to give the general public information about how the courts and lawyers function; and to issue publications educating the public about the United States legal system. The Bar Foundation has no facilities or employees; by contract, its administrative needs are handled by the State Bar under the supervision of the Bar Foundation’s Board of Directors.

The Bar Foundation receives interest from small or short-term funds in lawyers’ trust accounts through IOLTA. When interest rates were high, the Bar Foundation was able to make significant contributions to projects that furthered access to justice, including grants to the State’s Legal Service corporations. When interest rates dramatically declined, the principle of the Bar Foundation eroded to the point where significant grants became impossible.

In 2004, then President Tom Welk implemented the opt-out contribution with the State Bar’s dues notice. The Bar Foundation’s Board of Directors also actively began pursuing philanthropic donations from individuals and businesses.

Last year, the Bar Foundation awarded grants in the amount of $170,000. The grants were awarded to Access to Justice, East River Legal Services, Public Information Committee (Ask-a-Lawyer), South Dakota Guardianship Program, South Dakota Public Broadcasting (Statehouse coverage), SD Teen Court, Stress / Depression Treatment, and the Young Lawyers Section (Citizenship in Our Schools and Speakers Bureau).

At this time, the Bar Foundation’s Endowment Fund approaches $500,000. Interest from the Endowment Fund and the IOLTA interest payments alone are not sufficient to allow the Foundation to meet its purpose. The opt-out contributions from Bar members permit the Foundation to both provide grant funding each year, and grow the principal of the Endowment Fund.

In addition, membership’s support through the opt-out contribution gives the Foundation credibility when it seeks donations from other entities. The Bar must support the Foundation if we are asking others to contribute! Support from only one-third of the Bar’s members is simply not enough. A voluntary contribution with your bar dues is a quick and easy way to show your support for the Foundation and its purposes.

I encourage each of you to make the $75 contribution to the Bar Foundation that appears on your dues statement. Speaking directly to public lawyers and other members whose mandatory bar dues are paid by their employer: please get out your checkbook today and send the Bar Foundation a separate check for $75.

As I discussed last month, the first training of volunteers participating in the Bar’s Stress and Depression Project is scheduled for November 20, 2008. While this training session is full, the Bar may provide additional training sessions in the future if there is sufficient membership interest. If you are interested in this training and in being available to provide assistance and support to bar members who may be suffering from stress or depression, please contact the State Bar Office.

Have a wonderful Thanksgiving!

October, 2008

Election Day is about a month away, and in addition to voting for the candidates of our choice, we will be voting on four proposed amendments to the State Constitution and three pieces of direct legislation (the initiated measures). Our clients and friends may be asking us about these proposals, and as lawyers, we have a responsibility to be informed.

The 2008 Ballot Question Pamphlet, compiled by the Secretary of State, appears on the Secretary of State's website, and contains the Attorney General Explanations for each of the amendments and measures, as well as the "Pro" and "Con" statements by proponents and opponents. The text of the constitutional amendments and initiated measures also appears on the Secretary of State's website (www.sdsos.gov). Click on the following: Elections and Voter Registration; Upcoming Election; 2008 Ballot Question Attorney General Explanations and Full Text.

At our annual Convention in June of 2008, the Bar's membership voted on three of the proposals up for vote. Constitutional Amendment H, commonly referred to as the corporate cumulative voting provision, was originally proposed by the State Bar's Business Law Committee. This Amendment was endorsed by Bar membership at the Annual Meeting.

The Bar's membership at the Annual Meeting also adopted a resolution opposing Initiated Measure 9 (commonly referred to as the short-sale or Small Investors Protection Act), and a resolution opposing Initiated Measure 10 (commonly referred to as the Open and Clean Government Act).

Last month's Newsletter contained a short article on Amendment H ("corporate cumulative voting") by Patrick Goetzinger, Chair of the Business Law Committee, and on Initiated Measure 10 ("open and clean government"). If you haven't yet read these articles, I would encourage you to
pull out the September Newsletter and look at the information provided on these two proposals. All of the amendments and initiated measures on the ballot deserve our considered attention and review. Happy voting!

Last year, President Dick Travis worked tirelessly to develop State Bar-sponsored professional assistance to members who suffer from stress, depression, and other mental health related maladies. As President Travis reported to you in his May 2008 President's Page, the State Bar has contracted with regional mental health facilities who have agreed to provide stress- related and other mental health-related counseling services to active members of the State Bar. The State Bar will pay the cost of the initial evaluation plus recommended counseling sessions in an amount not to exceed $500 per member for those members who do not have health insurance to cover the counseling services and lack the resources to pay themselves. A system has been put in place so that the name of the bar member utilizing this resource is kept confidential.

As part of this project, President Travis also strove to establish training sessions for bar members who have volunteered to provide assistance and support to those members who need professional help. I am pleased to announce that this training is about to commence.

The first training session for volunteers has been scheduled. Capital Area Counseling in Pierre will be training volunteers to prepare them to visit with bar members who may be suffering from stress and depression. This training is currently scheduled to occur on November 20, 2008. An announcement of this training session and solicitation for volunteers appears in this Newsletter.

A number of bar members have already volunteered, and space at the November training is very limited. However, depending on demand, the Bar may provide additional training sessions in the future. If you are interested in this training and in being available to provide assistance and support to our bar members who may be suffering from depression, please volunteer by contacting the State Bar office.

September, 2008

The Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts was established this year by the Legislature. The Commission has seven members, three appointed by the Governor, two by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and two by the President of the State Bar.

Appointments to the Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts were completed this month. The Governor appointed Cheryl Hanna, the Director of Access to Justice, Inc.; Steve Cutler from Sioux Falls; and Mary McClure Bibby from Brookings. The Chief Justice appointed Kathleen Caldwell from Sioux Falls, and Judith Roberts from Pierre.

I appointed two Bar members to the Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts: Tom Welk and Tom Fritz. Tom Welk and Tom Fritz are (and have been) co-chairs of the State Bar’s Legal Services Committee.

The Legal Services Committee, whose members I identified last month, was created in 2004. Its goals this year are to assist in fund-raising, increase the involvement of bar members in Access to Justice, and act as a “think-tank” for ideas to improve the Access to Justice project. This Committee has worked tirelessly for the last several years evaluating and proposing solutions to address the funding gaps in our Legal Services Corporations and the need for delivery of legal services to the poor and disadvantaged of our State.

The Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts has a similar goal. The Commission’s statutory function is to provide grants to nonprofit entities funded directly or indirectly by the Legal Services Corporation that deliver legal services to low-income persons.

The Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts will initially be faced with a limited funding structure. The 2008 Legislature appropriated $5,000 from the general fund to the Commission. The Legislature also provided authority for the courts to order the distribution of certain “residual funds” to the Commission. The involved “residual funds” are the undistributed monies remaining in a settlement fund developed for the benefit of a class in a class action lawsuit.

Another potential use of these “residual funds” was authorized by the Legislature. The same legislation that created the Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts also authorizes courts to order distribution of up to fifty percent of the “residual funds” to nonprofit charitable organizations serving “the public good”.

While this “residual funds” mechanism may at some time in the future result in funding for the work of the Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts, it is unlikely to provide meaningful funding for the Commission’s purpose for some time. Members of the Commission will therefore immediately be faced with determining, inter alia, how the Commission can accomplish its purpose, and whether a more reliable funding source is necessary.

Tom Welk, Tom Fritz, and Cheryl Hanna will be sharing their expertise and experience with the Commission on Equal Access to Our Courts. They are uniquely qualified to assist the Commission in developing a mechanism for providing grants to the eligible nonprofit entities. They are also uniquely qualified to provide the Commission with suggestions and recommendations for the design of a secure, long-term funding proposal.

Thanks to all of you who requested assignment to a Bar committee. Even if you were not appointed to a committee this year, I encourage you to again request committee assignment next year. While we attempt to honor everyone’s first choice request, committee appointments are also based on the needs of the committee at the time. The fact that you were not appointed this year does not mean you won’t be appointed next. Our committees need new appointees every year to keep the interest and energy levels high!

August, 2008

In my last President's Page, I talked about the need for legal services funding at the state (and federal) level. I received numerous responses, including a response from an attorney who used to work for one of our Legal Services corporations and who finally left because the salary didn't cover basic living expenses and student loans. I received another response from a lawyer providing legal services to tribal members who was overwhelmed by the number of persons seeking basic civil legal services. These examples underscore the need in this State for legal services funding.

In 2005, the State Bar incorporated Access to Justice (A2J) to, in part, help address the gap between the low-income civil legal services available in South Dakota and the need for the services. The stated purposes of A2J are: to provide for the coordination of pro bono lawyers to assist low-income citizens with their legal problems, thus providing access to justice for those lacking financial resources to hire a lawyer; to help ensure compliance with lawyers' ethical obligation to never reject the cause of the defenseless or oppressed; to improve the delivery of legal services to all citizens of the state; to improve the delivery of legal services to the poor; and to provide centralized information, direction and assistance, for access to justice programs in South Dakota. Cheryl Hanna leads this program from newly leased offices in Rapid City and has a staff of three.

One of Cheryl's staff is Carrie Henrichsen, an AmeriCorps attorney responsible for enhancing and expanding the law school pro bono program and working with East River Legal Services on ERLS cases. Another AmeriCorps attorney, Daniel Leon, is responsible for recruiting South Dakota attorneys and working with Dakota Plains Legal Services on DPLS cases. In addition, A2J employs Stacey Sadler, a Western Dakota Tech student, who assists with the processing of pro bono cases, posts advocate forms and handles other administrative tasks. Cheryl and her staff have done an excellent job and must be commended for moving this program from concept to reality.

Currently, A2J operates through referrals from our two legal services corporations, East River Legal Services and Dakota Plains Legal Services. Cases that don't meet the financial requirements or can't be timely handled by the Legal Service Corporations are referred to A2J. Since becoming operational in early 2006, A2J has received 459 referrals. Approximately eighty-five percent of these cases are involve family law issues. A2J currently has about 189 open or pending cases, with waiting lists of cases because of the lack of lawyer volunteers willing to take family law cases.

The Legal Services Committee is closely involved with Access to Justice. Members of the Legal Services Committee are: Tom Fritz and Tom Welk (co-chairs), Bob Hayes, Chris Hutton, Judy Meierhenry, Bob Morris, Cris Palmer, Bob Riter, Eric Schulte, and, ex-officio, Doug Cummings, Pat Donovan, Cheryl Hanna, Dick Travis, Tom Barnett, and myself.

If A2J had a slogan, it would be: "Take One Case". Please talk to the members of the Legal Services Committee or to Cheryl Hanna about A2J and how you can help by handling ONE case. A2J can help those who do not often handle family law cases by providing forms and other assistance. We know that younger members of law firms will not be able to take even ONE case without the encouragement and support of senior members, so those of you who are senior members or in management at a law firm: please encourage and make provisions so that younger members of your firm have enough time to take ONE case without repercussions.

On another note: surprisingly, summer is speeding by quickly. Take some time for yourself and your loved ones before summer is over entirely!

July, 2008

South Dakota’s poverty population, according to the United States Census Bureau, is 102,184 people. South Dakota has two primary legal services entities: East River Legal Services, which serves 46 % of this population; and Dakota Plains Legal Services, which serves 54% of this population.

The total number of lawyers in both legal service corporations is twelve.

These legal service corporations rely on funding from the United States to provide these services. Federal funding has been flat or cut since 1981, thereby reducing the availability of legal services for the state’s poverty population.

Forty-seven states provide funding to fill this gap. South Dakota does not.

I repeat: South Dakota is one of three states who does not provide funding for civil legal services for low-income people.

This neglect is leaving those people who cannot afford legal counsel out in the cold. Their basic family and other civil law needs are simply never addressed.

The Bar has taken action to assist in addressing this problem. The South Dakota Bar Foundation was established in part to create a source of funds for our legal service corporations. Access to Justice was created to establish a pool of lawyers volunteering to provide civil legal services pro bono to low-income people who were unable to obtain help from the legal services corporations. In the upcoming months I will describe these programs in more detail so you are aware of the valuable service they provide.

However, these programs do not come close to addressing the problem. Frankly, the size of this issue exceeds the Bar’s resources.

It is time for the public and the Legislature to be educated about the increasing gap between the number of people in South Dakota in need of civil legal services and the services actually available to them. Justice cannot be limited to criminal law. We need to move this issue into the public debate and work with our legislators to address the need for state funding of civil legal services for our poverty population. This is my goal for the next year, and I am counting on the assistance and advice of the Bar’s membership.

As I mentioned at the Bar Convention, I want to extend the Bar’s appreciation and gratitude to those members who have been called to serve in the military, both now and in the past. We don’t know who these members are, so I extend this anonymously to each of you who have and who are performing this service for our country. Thank you.

The Supreme Court has established a Committee for the Study of Cameras in the Trial Courts. Both Dick Travis and I are participating in this Committee on behalf of the Bar. The Supreme Court has appointed a diverse group to the Committee, including three trial court judges, four members of the media, and representatives of counties, law enforcement, prosecutors, the criminal defense bar, victim’s rights, academia, and the unified judicial system. The Committee is being asked to study the issue of cameras in trial courts and prepare an advisory report to the Supreme Court with its recommendations. Dick and I solicit your input. Committee meetings will take place at various locations throughout the State, to enable bar members and others to attend the proceedings and offer testimony. The Committee’s proceedings are broadcast live and archived on the Supreme Court’s webpage. I will keep you updated on the proceedings.

I am honored and humbled to be given this opportunity to serve the Bar as your President. Please call, write, or email me with comments, suggestions, or complaints. I truly look forward to this next year and can only hope to meet the standard of performance set by my predecessors.