Offering Clients an Efficient and Affordable Way to Hire an Attorney: The Expedited Collaborative Process
By Connie Kratovil-Lavelle
Many Maryland attorneys who are solo practitioners or in small firms are struggling with getting paying clients. Likely it is the combination of a shrinking middle class, earnings not keeping up with the increased cost of living for the majority of Americans, and increased income disparity. Couple those realities with the “Do-It-Yourself and Save Money” message, and lawyers are less likely to be hired.
Collaborative law, and specifically the Expedited Collaborative Process, a model I developed with collaborative colleague LJ Pelham, presents an opportunity to reach clients who might otherwise not hire an attorney. While incorporating the basics of the traditional collaborative law model, the Expedited Collaborative Process may be particularly attractive for many clients because they can resolve their cases more quickly, spending less time and therefore less money.
While more and more states adopting collaborative law statutes and court rules, from 8 states and D.C. in 2012 to 23 in 2022, the practice is still relatively uncommon. The traditional collaborative law model uses a “team” approach for clients, typically in divorce and custody cases, the team includes the collaboratively-trained lawyers, a neutral financial professional, social workers, or mental health professionals (often called “divorce coaches”). While arguably ideal, this model can clearly be expensive.
The Expedited Collaborative Process typically does not employ the team approach and it is more affordable.
When I was with the MD judiciary as an executive director of the department that provided grants to legal service non-profit organizations, we helped establish and fund the first pro bono collaborative law program in the country. Unfortunately, the program was not having success in closing cases or reaching agreements. The obstacle was getting both parties engaged in the collaborative process. At the risk of being defunded, in 2015 I suggested that the program conduct the collaborative meetings, the settlements, at a place where both parties were likely to appear at the same time- the courthouse. Finally, in 2017, the program began an on-site pilot in the Prince Georges County Circuit Court. Magistrates from the bench referred unrepresented litigants to two collaborative attorneys on-site in the courthouse. Staffed by myself as a volunteer attorney and LJ Pelham, the sole staff person and then-director of the Collaborative Project of Maryland, we developed the Expedited Collaborative Process and reached nearly 100% agreement in the cases referred, and we did it in generally 3-10 hours per case.
We soon recognized that this abbreviated, no-frills model could be used in private practice with paying clients who wanted and needed an attorney but who also needed a process that they could afford. My colleague LJ Pelham and I have since conducted a number of training sessions on the Expedited Collaborative Process; I now regularly offer this option to clients who do not qualify for pro bono, who are on a tight budget, or who just want to “cut to the chase” and resolve their divorce matter efficiently at a minimal cost.
The same rules, the same law that applies to traditional collaborative law practice applies to the Expedited Collaborative Process, that being the Maryland Uniform Collaborative Law Act, § 3-2001 Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article and Maryland Rules of Procedure 17- 501 through 17-507. In the Expedited Collaborative Process, the parties attempt to reach an agreement in a very limited number of hours by having the attorneys help them do some of the groundwork before the first collaborative settlement meeting. When they have that first meeting, they promptly define interests and limit discussion to focus on the information needed to generate options and ultimately reach an agreement.
The basic elements of the Expedited Collaborative Process are:
Before the first collaborative meeting do any possible groundwork, such as:
Review and sign the retainer and Participation Agreement (agreement to use the collaborative process, as per Maryland law);
Preliminarily review the ground rules with your client (rules regarding taking turns talking, trying to avoid interruption, being civil, etc.…);
Gather documents from your client, for example, financial documents;
Consult and understand your client’s initial interests in an effort to identify and limit Issues, identify areas of dispute;
Discuss with your client whether there is an interest in bringing in other collaborative professionals to help inform the settlement discussions;
Share the above preliminary information with the other attorney;
Schedule the subsequent collaborative meetings;
At the first meeting, review the ground rules:
Let clients know they can have a Temporary (or Pendente Lite) Agreement first, to “try it out” (for example to test a custody arrangement);
Identify goals, interests, and concerns;
Gather further information;
Brainstorm options, emphasizing that putting an option “on the board” does not mean it is the best idea or that clients agree to it;
Evaluate options using a “Yes, No, Maybe” column on the board as a visual aid;
Reach agreement; and,
Draft the agreement for submission to the court.
Offering the Expedited Collaborative Process is a way to respond to the market, to fill a need, a gap. For example, in 2019, there were 88,464 family law cases filed in Maryland, over 50% of those cases the parties were both unrepresented. Under 2022 Maryland Legal Services Corporation income guidelines for eligibility for pro bono legal service, an individual who makes more than $32,450 a year is ineligible for pro bono. In 2020, medium individual income in Maryland was $43,352 (United States Census Bureau figures from 2020). The latest ALICE Report, based on 2018 data, reveals that 39% of households can’t afford the state’s high cost of living. (ALICE is an acronym for Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed. The earnings of Maryland ALICE individuals and families are not enough to support a “survival budget” for life’s essentials: food, housing, healthcare, childcare, transportation, taxes, and technology).
The Expedited Collaborative Process is a model that is an attractive alternative for those potential clients who might not otherwise hire an attorney because it is too costly. When the other affordable options are either “going it alone” in the protracted court process or attempting mediation without the benefit of counsel, the Expedited Collaborative Process is attractive because it is both time-limited and, consequently, affordable.
