📋
Extraído del Informe Consolidado
Esta investigación fue publicada originalmente como parte de un informe consolidado más amplio que contiene múltiples investigaciones. Consulte el PDF consolidado para ver el documento completo.
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 5 findings
F1
DCLS should remain in existence. Because DCLS was formed without a proper study is no reason to disband it without a proper study. Implementation of the Grand Jury's recommendations regarding Panel Attorneys should perhaps, make DCLS more attractive.
F2
A significant number of Panel Attorneys are submitting claims which appear unreasonably large and possibly flagrantly abusive. To eliminate the excuse that billing is erratic and often deferred for long periods of time, the total hours and billings over the last 21/ 2 years were tabulated for attorneys submitting an average in excess of 2200 hours per year (Table I). 2200 hours is considered unusual when viewed in the light that total court hours are approximately 1500 and if one billed 40 hours per week for 52 weeks with no vacation the total would be 2080 hours. Of the 20 Panel Attorneys billing over 2200 hours per year during this 21/2 year period, one Panel Attorney billed an average of 3600 hours per year receiving the equivalent of $154,000 per year. In one year that attorney billed 4786 hours. Ten other attorneys received an average in excess of $120,000 per year. Many of these attorneys who appear to have abused the system are still on the 1992 panels, indicating either a lack of knowledge of this fact on the part of the judiciary or their approval.
F3
Based on total hours submitted by Panel Attorneys for the first two quarters of fiscal 1991-1992, there was the equivalent of 100 Panel Attorneys working full time (2080 hours per year) in the Dependency Court at the beginning of 1992. Juvenile Services Committee
F4
Are required to participate in initial and ongoing training
F5
Have ready-access, in their law firms, to important support personnel such as social workers, paralegals and secretaries. This closely-knit organization should make the management of courtroom time and the calendar much more efficient.
Recommendations 5
-
R1There is no question that, given the constraints on the problem, the transition to a single system of private legal representation will be slow. In the first two quarters of 1991-92, 140 Panel Attorneys submitted bills (the equivalent of 100 full time attorneys). At the same time between 50 and 60 Dependency Court Legal Services attorneys were also staffing the courts. At the present time there are several proposals being made by various groups as alternatives to DCLS, the existence of which obviously acknowledges the need for improvement in the legal representation system. Although each may have something constructive to offer, no decisions could sensibly be made without first having a clear understanding of the system that now exists, what it does, how well it works and how it can best be improved. The Grand Jury is strongly opposed to the Board of Supervisors entering into any new agreements regarding legal representation in the Dependency Court until the recommendations of this report are implemented and more informed decisions can be made.
-
R2Request the Auditor Controller to complete an audit of the claims filed by attorneys that were consistently over 2200 hours per year based on Table I. It should be noted that the names of these attorneys have already been referred to the District Attorney's office by the Grand Jury and an investigation is presently underway. Create, with the Board of the Juvenile Courts Bar Association and the Judicial Committee that reviews the Panel, a list of Panel Attorneys who are considered competent, who represent their clients effectively and whose billing records do not appear abusive. Eliminate all others from the Panel.
-
R3Are paid by the month at a fixed amount rather than by the hour. All accounting is done at the DCLS law firm
-
R4Require each Panel Attorney to submit, immediately, a list of active cases and their status in order to determine caseloads, client identification (children, parents, etc.) and the proportion of open cases being handled by the Panel. Juvenile Services Committee
-
R5Have ready-access, in their law firms, to important support personnel such as social workers, paralegals and secretaries. This closely-knit organization should make the management of courtroom time and the calendar much more efficient.