Out of Sight and Out of Line: The Need for Regulation of Lawyers' Negotiations with Unrepresented Poor Persons
California Law Review, Vol. 85, No. 79, 1997
- 1Citations
- 2,228Usage
- 1Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Paper Description
In a variety of civil legal settings, negotiations between lawyers and unrepresented parties are common. Despite this fact, the ethical rules governing lawyers, as well as most ethics textbooks, fail to address such negotiations in any specific way. The ethical rules do, however, prohibit the giving of advice to unrepresented parties. Through an examination of the New York City Housing Court and other contexts where such negotiations are commonplace, the author concludes that lawyers frequently violate existing rules against giving advice to unrepresented parties. Because the unrepresented litigants often are poor, are people of color, and are women, these ethical violations fall most heavily on members of those groups. The author reviews several possible responses to lawyers' abuses of ethical rules, concluding that no single response will curtail the problem. He calls, therefore, for a strategy that combines enhanced enforcement of existing ethical rules, the passage of additional ethical rules concerning negotiations with unrepresented parties, increased supervision by courts, and expanded provision of counsel in civil actions.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know