The Washington State Supreme Court issued an order on Thursday adopting a new regulatory framework that will permit companies and nonprofits to offer legal services by applying for temporary exemptions from the longstanding rules governing the legal profession.
"This court has determined that while serving important public protection purposes, these court rules and statutes serve as barriers to the exploration, and data-driven testing, of legal regulatory reforms that would permit entities to provide legal and law-related services to consumers in Washington, whether or not the provision of those services would constitute the practice of law," Washington State Supreme Court Chief Justice González wrote in the order.
The state will be one of just a few in the nation, alongside Arizona and Utah, to reconsider traditional licensing requirements for anyone who practices law or owns a law firm.
Recommended by the Washington State Bar Association, the proposal was developed by the Practice of Law Board, created by the state's high court to work on legal licensing issues. The bar association will be responsible for funding and administering the pilot project as well as developing an application process, according to the order.
Interested entities will have to explain how their requested exemption would impact the accessibility of legal services and outline a plan to test the reform and its impacts, according to the order. Applicants will first be recommended by the bar association to the Practice of Law Board, and then be subject to approval by the state Supreme Court.
Data gathered over the course of the pilot project, spanning 10 years from the date the first participant is approved, will then be used to decide whether the state should make more permanent changes to its rules, according to the order.
Bar officials applauded the court's adoption of the proposal in a Thursday news release, saying the pilot will help the state explore how emerging technologies and new business models can be used to give the public better access to legal services. It's also a proactive effort to prevent regulations from falling behind innovation, said Practice of Law Board member Craig Shank.
"We have seen this cautionary tale play out, with innovation outpacing regulation when it comes to transportation network companies like Lyft and Uber," said Shank. "In Washington, we believe it will benefit everyone — lawyers, businesses and, most importantly, the people who need legal services — for us to proactively gather data. We are looking at potential regulatory changes that are safe, effective and aligned with the realities of how modern entities and consumers operate."
The pilot's architects say it was developed with guardrails to ensure protection for consumers and others in the legal industry, as well as a focus on how reforms can expand access to justice. The bar association will be required to establish systems for investigating complaints regarding any of the participating entities and will also have to institute seven-year reporting schedules and monitoring requirements for approved applicants.
"We have deep justice gaps in Washington, not just for those who cannot afford legal help, but for middle-class families who are not well-served by our existing models of legal service," said Washington State Bar Association President Terra Nevitt. "As a legal community, we need to step up to see what's possible in our highly innovative and technology-forward corner of the world."
Some examples of possible innovations can be seen in Utah, which approved a "regulatory sandbox" in August 2020 allowing technology platforms and other law-oriented businesses to experiment with legal service structures that wouldn't be permitted under traditional restrictions.
Consumers in the state can visit OffTheRecord.com to get matched with a local attorney to fight traffic tickets. Meanwhile, Hello Divorce has a team of attorneys who can provide step-by-step advice to Utahns going through divorce proceedings, and public benefit corporation Rasa Legal has introduced AI-driven software that lets residents with criminal histories find out within minutes whether their records are eligible for expungement.
Washington's pilot proposal received mixed feedback during a recent public comment period, according to letters and emails published online by the state bar association. Some attorneys argued that any potential benefits are outweighed by the risks of eroding legal industry standards, subjecting consumers to poor legal advice and threatening the ability of independent attorneys to practice.
"We already have many, frankly, incompetent lawyers practicing in Washington State," Seattle-based attorney Paul Woods of Paul Woods Law Firm PLLC said in an email to the bar association. "To dumb down or outright eliminate requirements of legal training would be grossly irresponsible and disastrous, especially now that we live in an age where people can find anyone online willing to give whatever opinion they want on a subject."
The Washington State Association for Justice, a group advocating for wronged consumers and injured citizens, warned that the proposal's data collection and oversight requirements are insufficient to protect the public from harm. The group also expressed concerns about participating entities tacking on unnecessary fees and requiring consumers to sign waivers depriving them of their legal rights.
Other legal services organizations and independent attorneys chimed in supporting the proposal. Sandra Miller, executive director of Olympia-based nonprofit Sound Legal Aid, said the pilot "holds great promise for enhancing our ability to serve marginalized communities by providing legal services in more innovative and streamlined ways."
The proposal also drew praise from some existing law-focused tech firms, including ZAF Legal, a Utah-based company that's debuted a chatbot that can help users determine whether they have a personal injury case after a car crash, fall or other accident.
"By embracing a data-driven approach, the Washington Supreme Court and bar are demonstrating commitment to evaluating and adapting regulatory changes based on empirical evidence rather than unfounded fears," ZAF CEO Ty Brown wrote in a letter. "Learning from the experiences of Arizona and Utah, Washington can set a new standard in legal innovation, attracting hundreds of millions of dollars in investment and leading the way in advancing the legal profession."
--Editing by Philip Shea.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
