Law Firms Must Restructure their Pro Bono Practice

-- By DanielAdewunmi - 06 Apr 2023

Each and every public interest-minded law student is very familiar with the structure of pro bono practices at BigLaw firms. Each firm markets pro bono as a part of their culture, a serious objective, and an initiative to which they are committed to furthering. However, the realities of BigLaw firms and their work experience is not lost on their associates or on interested law students.

BigLaw associates are given billable hour targets that are hugely prohibitive to seeking out true impact in any one pro bono area. I have found through conversations with associates that especially at the junior level, pro bono investment, while possible, is not the priority simply due to the demands and rigor of the workload. As a result, associates are able to commit to pro bono sparingly, in amounts that may increase as they become more senior, on one-off projects that typically concern immigration or other disputes affecting small parties.

These firms do often have larger pro bono projects that they are eager to market towards prospective junior associates, sharing their success in higher-investment, public interest endeavors. However, the opportunity to work on these projects for any meaningful amount of time remains uncommon for most associates, and the ability to pursue additional work to further the public interest after the completion of said project is often lacking.

The cold reality of these firms is that they are for-profit firms that operate by servicing large, paying clients. Thus, associates are expected to work for the betterment of these paying clients, pursuing public interest opportunities on a sparing basis.

Conversations with George Kendall

I recently spoke with George Kendall, attorney at Squire, Patton, Boggs and leader of the Constitutional Rights in Life and Death Penalty Cases Externship at Columbia Law School. In that conversation, Mr. Kendall shared a new approach to pro bono work undertaken at his firm that may worth pursuing as an industry-wide transition. He shared that there is a small practice group within his firm who are responsible for pro bono work and do so full-time.

There are various benefits to this approach. It centralizes pro bono work allowing the firm to pursue a specific area within the public interest rather than only allowing associates to invest in smaller disputes or issues. For example, rather than 80 percent of associates taking on individual immigration cases, which are hugely important on an individual level, this practice group is able to focus on larger systemic issues for a period of years, such as solitary confinement practices in the Southern States. In centralizing the work to a group of associates working full-time, the firm is able to affect a high-impact area of their choosing without actually changing their baseline hours commitment to pro bono in a significant manner.

An additional benefit would be the attraction and training of talented, public interest-minded associates. Finances remain the largest burden to entering public interest work for law students. The costs of attaining a legal education result in a loan amount that is often prohibitive when seeking to enter spaces serving those with less access to funds. However, should law firms restructure their pro bono practices in this manner, that would create opportunities for public interest-minded law students to enter these firms without the financial sacrifice necessary. They would then be privy to the legal training so coveted at these institutions and able to further the firms influence in the impact area of the firms choosing. Additionally, should they decide to transition out of public interest work, the firms would already have a relationship with them as their employers and can facilitate the transition into another practice area without losing their associates.

Essentially, law firms redeveloping their pro bono structures would remove the lukewarm commitment currently placed on pro bono and allow the firm to impact an area of legal controversy to a much greater extent. Additionally, these firms would become much more attractive landing spots for public interest-minded students and attorneys allowing the firms to employ the best and brightest from all areas. Furthermore, this transition would require no additional financial commitments from the firms as they are simply reallocating an hours commitment from the entirety of the firm and allowing a small group of associates to produce the pro bono labor full time.

---

You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:

• #Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, DanielAdewunmi
• #Set DENYTOPICVIEW = TWikiGuest

Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules for preference declarations. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of these lines. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated ALLOWTOPICVIEW list.