CBA Record January 2017

18 / 56

Chicago Bar Foundation
Report
Note: This article is from a“Bobservations”blog
series on the CBFwebsite.You can see the full se-
ries at
Every once in a while I read an article
or hear a speech that causes me to
recognize I’ve been acting like a fool
in one way or another. And I am certain
I have many more opportunities ahead of
me for that kind of recognition. A great
example of this phenomenon occurred not
long ago when I heard Jordan Furlong, a
very perceptive analyst of the legal market
and the future of our profession, note that
we are the only profession that describes
everyone who is not one of us as a “non.”
He’s right. You don’t hear doctors calling
everyone else in the medical field “non-
doctors,” or CPAs calling their colleagues
“non-CPAs.” In fact, it sounds absurd to
even imagine them or any other profession-
als doing that. Yet that’s exactly what we do
as lawyers, and I have certainly been guilty
of my share of it over the years.
While I have no idea how we got started
using the non-lawyer expression, and I
don’t think it is something lawyers do with
any ill will, it is pretty offensive when you
think about it. And it betrays a shortsighted
and artificially limiting mindset that has a
number of negative consequences for access
to justice, the future of our profession, and
our public image as lawyers.
The Many Integral Legal Professionals
Besides Lawyers
There are so many different professionals
who contribute to a successful law practice
today that I am sure I would forget some
if I tried to name them all. In a larger law
firm you increasingly will find a team of
management, finance and administrative
professionals; professionals dedicated to
marketing and communications, tech-
nology, pricing, project management,
analytics, and more; paralegals and other
people dedicated to legal and operational
support; and many outside consultants.
Sometimes the people in these roles also
happen to be lawyers, but it is generally
more of a coincidence when that is the
case; the kinds of experience and expertise
these other professionals bring to the table
is very different from what lawyers bring.
In smaller firms and other practice envi-
ronments, these various kinds of expertise
are more likely to come from consultants
or contractors or through bar associations
or professional networks, but they are no
less important to a successful practice in
the modern era. And if anything, this will
be even more true in practices of all sizes
in the future as technology continues to
transform the practice of law.
Obviously, the delivery of quality legal
services is the ultimate output for a law
practice, and lawyers remain the core of
providing those services. But acknowledg-
ing that reality is no excuse for minimizing
these professionals by defining them as a
“non” or laying down such a bright line
divide between lawyers and the many other
professionals who are integral to delivering
the lawyers’ legal services effectively, and
who increasingly provide value to clients
in other ways as well.
That bright line divide is more than a
matter of nomenclature, as right now in
Illinois and almost everywhere else in the
country we continue to cling to ethics rules
that say only lawyers can own law firms and
it is unethical for lawyers to share profits
with anyone who is not a lawyer. As we
work to wean ourselves off our unfortu-
nate “non-lawyer” terminology habit, we
should take a hard look in the mirror at
why other legal professionals and outside
investors can’t share in the ownership of
law practices. England, Australia and other
jurisdictions have already opened the door
to other kinds of ownership, and it is time
to have a more serious conversation about
that here as well.
The Critical Roles of Other Legal
Professionals for Access to Justice
While I’ll save the law practice ownership/
investment discussion and its potential
impact on access to justice for another
By Bob Glaves, CBF Executive Director
18 JANUARY 2017
A New Year’s Resolution for the Legal Profession
Stop Calling People Non-Lawyers!