Thanks for the heads-up, Kevin. I have not seen these materials so I really
cannot comment on them. However, we have had some problems with similar
stuff -- not because of any UPL aspects, but because the forms were legally
incorrect for our jurisdiction. Folks who could not afford (or felt they
could not afford) an attorney were paying up to $150 for the software only
to have the Court reject the pleadings. This situation was one of the
motivators to have our Conference of Chief Judges approve the production of
sets of authorized Family Law forms for pro se's which are distributed at
cost by district courts and, in our County, by both the County Law Library
and the County Public Library. Our MN Bar, perhaps not so paranoid as Texas
lawyers over potential loss of business, bought into the concept and,
sixteen lawyers served on the committee that developed the forms. I guess,
no matter how bad the product may be, the ruling sends shivers up the backs
of those of us who both work on the pro se situation every day and who have
a slight affection for the First Amendment. LISP, let's chew this over in
DC...
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Miles [mailto:Librarian@vialaw.com]
Sent: Monday, February 01, 1999 8:30 AM
To: law-lib@ucdavis.edu
Subject: Worth reading ....
The lead article in today's Texas Lawyer is worth reading....
http://www.texlaw.com/today/020199a.htm
Kevin Miles, Librarian
Vial, Hamilton, Koch & Knox
Dallas, Texas
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:50:02 PST