Pro Bono in Principle and in Practice: Public Service and the Professions

Vol. 15 No.9 (September 2005), pp.814-816

PRO BONO IN PRINCIPLE AND IN PRACTICE: PUBLIC SERVICE AND THE PROFESSIONS, by Deborah L. Rhode. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005. 256pp. Cloth. $55.00. ISBN: 0804751064. Paperback. $21.95. ISBN: 0804751072.

Reviewed by Mark C. Miller, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Government, Clark University. Email: MMiller [at] clarku.edu

Deborah L. Rhode’s new book on pro bono work by the legal profession in the United States is a wonderful collection of original research on the topic. The book is unique in that it includes research on why lawyers do or do not perform pro bono work, research comparing pro bono work across different professions in the United States, and research comparing such work among lawyers in different countries. It is a very useful volume.

Rhode has long been an advocate for increased pro bono work by lawyers and law schools in the United States. As she stated in an earlier book, “Pro bono contributions have been responsible for many of the nation’s landmark public interest cases and have helped millions of low income families meet basic needs” (Rhode 2000, at 37-38). She begins this new book by stating, “Much of what passes for “pro bono” is not aid to the poor or to public interest causes, but either favors for friends, family, or clients, or cases where fees turn out to be uncollectible. The bar’s pro bono activities are, in short, a reflection of both the profession’s highest ideals and its most grating hypocrisies” (p.1).

The first chapter discusses both American and European historical traditions of court-appointed counsel for the poor. It includes a very interesting discussion of the legal challenges associated with forcing attorneys to take court-appointed cases. The first chapter also talks about the history of voluntary pro bono activities in the U.S., as well as the encouragement that the American Bar Association has issued to its members. The first chapter also discusses current pro bono expectations and programs at law schools. It does not, however, mention government provided legal services for the poor, focusing instead on the history of pro bono work provided by private sector attorneys.

The second chapter examines the rationale and need for pro bono activities among lawyers in the United States and discusses key reasons why some lawyers oppose it. For classroom purposes, this chapter is not as good as the Katzmann edited volume (1995) in framing the debate about whether pro bono work should be voluntary or mandatory for lawyers. I find that my students clearly want to debate the question of whether such work should be mandatory for individual lawyers, law firms, law students, or for anyone in the legal profession. The third chapter examines various aspects of general research on altruistic behavior. Both of these chapters are quite interesting. [*815]

The fourth chapter is a fascinating look at pro bono work among various professionals in the United States, including the fields of medicine, engineering, and business. I am not familiar with other studies that make comparisons across the professions as this chapter does. The fifth chapter is an equally exciting assessment of pro bono work among lawyers in various countries, including the United Kingdom, Australia, and China. I think the book would have been strengthened by looking at other options for providing legal services to the poor, such as the Canadian practices of having the government pay private sector attorneys (much like Medicare and Medicaid in the U.S.) and including legal services in collective bargaining agreements. Thus Canada has a fairly low level of pro bono work because the society has chosen to meet the legal services needs of the poor in other ways. Nevertheless, these chapters are true gems.

The sixth and seventh chapters report the findings of two innovative empirical studies. The first looks at a survey of lawyers in the U.S. to see why they do or do not provide pro bono services. This chapter is very rich in data. One part of the survey asked lawyers about their general views concerning pro bono work, while the second part assesses the factors that increase or decrease the amount of work an individual lawyer performs. The most important variables were personal satisfaction and a sense of professional obligation. Awards by employers had the least impact on an attorney’s decision to provide pro bono services. The largest negative influence was a lawyer’s workload demands from their paying clients. Rhode concludes that, “All too often, official workplace policies and informal practices played a major role in discouraging public service commitments” (p.152). The last empirical chapter of the book examines programs in law schools. Again, this chapter is rich in data. She concludes that law schools need to do much more to encourage pro bono work among their students.

The final chapter presents an agenda for reform. Rhode argues that “[c]ompared with other nations and other professions, the American bar has a distinguished record. Yet compared with the unmet need for legal assistance and attorneys’ own ethical codes, considerable progress remains to be made” (p.166). While she stops short of suggesting that public service work be made mandatory for lawyers in the U.S., she does support efforts to require that law schools, law firms, and individual lawyers report their pro bono hours to the bar association, and she also offers a variety of other suggestions.

This book is clearly an important addition to the literature on pro bono activities among lawyers. The book raises a number of key issues, but undergraduate students might need more context than the book provides in order to understand the ongoing debate about legal services for the poor in the United States. Rhode’s clear and crisp writing style, however, makes the book quite accessible to non-specialists. I expect that I will use it in my senior seminar on Lawyers and American Politics, because it raises a number of useful issues for debate. Those already familiar with the issues surrounding pro bono legal services in the United States will find the book very valuable. [*816]

REFERENCES:

Katzmann, Robert A. (ed). 1995. THE LAW FIRM AND THE PUBLIC GOOD. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.

Rhode, Deborah L. 2000. IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE: REFORMING THE LEGAL PROFESSION. New York: Oxford University Press.

*************************************************