Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission · Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission. Meeting - Friday, June 14, 2019 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM . 2 . VI. Informational

Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission

Meeting - Friday, June 14, 2019 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM

1

Videoconference Sites: Las Vegas Carson City NV Supreme Court NV Supreme Court Conf. Room A & B Law Library, Room 107

Reno Elko 2

nd Judicial District Ct. 4th Judicial District Court

75 Court Street – Room 214 Room 214

Call-in Info: Dial In: 1-408-740-7256 / Participant Code: 111-001-1234

(Internal use only: Room System 199.48.152.152 or bjn.vc)

Meeting Agenda

I. Opening Statements from Co-Chairs & Commission Roll Call 5 minutes

II. Consent Agenda 5 minutes Tab 1

Approval of March 22, 2019 Commission Meeting Minutes

III. Discussion Items Tab 2

Nevada Civil Legal Needs Assessment Comm. Plan 60 minutes o Infographic Brochureo Publications Plano Speaking Plan

IOLTA 20 minutes o New IOLTA Rates Effective 6/1o SCR 217 Rule Revisiono New Financial Institution Recognition

Pro Bono Campaign Overview & Refresh 15 minutes

Eviction Clinic Discussion #2 5 minutes

Commission Membership Nominations /Vote 5 minutes

IV. Reports 5 minutes Tab 3

Electronic Filing by Non-Lawyers – Judge Joanna Kishner (TBD)

V. Other Business


Meeting - Friday, June 14, 2019 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM

2

VI. Informational Items Tab 4

Legal Aid Provider Highlights

Legal Aid Provider Quarterly Meeting Recap 4/13/19

IOLTA Program Highlightso IOLTA Rate Review Committee 4/23/19o Implementation of Recognition Plan

Recognition Plan Website Update

https://www.nvbar.org/member-services-3895/iolta/participating-financial-institutions/

New Nevada Bar Foundation Financial Institution Recognition Ad Nevada Bankers Association E-News Article on Recognition

Pro Bono Program Reinvigoration Planning Calls 4/25/19, 5/6/19, 5/30/19

Equal Justice Conference Attendance with Justice Douglas 5/9-10/19

Self-Help Center Statistics

Public Awareness

Our Purpose

Assess current and future civil legal needs

Develop statewide policies to improve legal service delivery

Improve self-help and pro bono services

Increase public awareness of the impact of limited access to justice

Investigate and pursue increased funding

Recommend legislation or rules affecting access to justice

Internal tech: https://bluejeans.com/111



https://bluejeans.com/111?ll=en

1

ACCESS TO JUSTICE COMMISSION

Access to Justice Commission Meeting Minutes Friday, March 22, 2019 – 2:00 p.m.

Commission Members Present

Justice James Hardesty Justice Kristina Pickering Connie Akridge Julie Bobzien Randy Boesch Julie Cavanaugh-Bill John Desmond Doreen Spears Hartwell Annamarie Johnson Judge Joanna Kishner Noah Malgeri Judge Bridget Robb Glen Stevens E. Alan Tiras Anne Traum Adam Tully Sugar Vogel Judge Nathan Tod Young

Guests Present

Barbara Buckley Phyllis Gurgevich Shelly Newton Emily Reed Christine Smith Summer Youngquist

Staff Present Brad Lewis

Call to Order/Roll Call/Minutes The Access to Justice Commission (Commission) meeting was called to order. Justice Hardesty welcomed the new Commission Co-Chair Justice Kristina Pickering, as well as recent appointee Glen Stevens, Senior Associate General Counsel, United Healthcare. A roll call was conducted and approval of the November 9, 2018 minutes was requested. The minutes were unanimously adopted with no changes.

2

Nominations Justice Hardesty shared that several new Commission nominees were present and welcomed them. He then asked for a vote for the following to become members of the Commission:

• E. Alan Tiras, Incline Village Justice of the Peaceo Nevada Judges of Limited Jurisdiction (NJLM) replacement for Judge Tammy Riggs

• Bronagh Kelly, Attorney, Woodburn and Wedge

Each was voted in unanimously. Justice Hardesty invited all new members to take a tour of their local legal aid organization offices, where a solid understanding of the work at hand can be gained.

Nevada Civil Legal Needs Assessment A key action from the November, 2018 meeting was to have a letter from the Justices about the study issued to legislators for the upcoming session. It outlined key findings and an encouragement to keep the findings in mind as legislators consider the many matters before them.

Two other items were the elevator speech/talking points and the infographic brochure. A communications sub group of the Legal Needs Study Committee convened several times to draft talking points and an infographic brochure for discussion. A good part of the meeting was spent getting insights and feedback from the full Commission. That feedback is to be incorporated, reviewed once more by a group named by Justice Hardesty, to arrive at final versions. This information is important to be able to have at hand and will be useful as we discuss study findings and present to target audiences throughout Nevada to tell the access to justice story.

Finally, Justice Hardesty asked if all Commission members would be willing to send a photo and complete the Commission profile questionnaire. None objected. Profiles will be used by selecting key Commission profiles to appear in target Nevada publications. This will raise the profile of the Commission and become part of educating the public on the importance of access to justice and encourage support of Nevada’s legal aid providers.

IOLTA Rate Review The Nevada IOLTA interest rate was discussed. Justice Hardesty began with a brief outline of Nevada IOLTA for new Commission members. He then shared the numerous conversations and Nevada Bar Foundation liaison meetings with banks that occurred over the past few months in an effort to gather relevant information from a variety of sources. In an increasing interest rate environment it is appropriate to consider a change to Nevada’s IOLTA interest rate.

Justice Hardesty noted that if a change does occur, the target date may be June 1, 2019. If that is to happen, the IOLTA Rate Review Committee would need to meet the week of April 22 to have time to act. Before that time we will need to conduct an analysis of remittances at various interest rates to

3

project receipts for help with decision making. A tiered rate where differing rates are applied to certain account balances should be developed and reviewed.

Further, Justice Hardesty shared that several financial institutions have already voluntarily agreed to increase IOLTA on all or some accounts by approximately 50 basis points from 0.70% to approximately 1.20%, including Bank of Nevada, First Independent Bank, Meadows Bank and City National Bank. He then invited feedback on the Nevada IOLTA program and the current discussions.

Commission member Randy Boesch shared that it likely was time to take a fresh look at the Nevada IOLTA rate based on the Federal Funds rate increases in the last three years. He referenced and encouraged review of the Nevada Bankers Association (NBA) memo. (Previously shared and available from the Commission.) He was encouraged that three banks had already voluntarily increased rates. He thought looking at a tiered rate would be reasonable, but reminded the Commission that banks, too, have goals, expenses, and look at the bottom line. In the case of Nevada State Bank, he suggested matching the increase of the other banks would have a cost of $200,000. He referenced the desire of the banks to get Community Investment Act (CRA) credit for IOLTA and to continue to think about recognition.

NBA President & CEO Phyllis Gurgevich outlined to the Commission that the current Nevada IOLTA rate is not a market rate, it is seven to ten times a “like” account, which is the banks’ contribution to IOLTA. While she noted that Nevada IOLTA is voluntary and she is very proud of her members for participating, that if the rate increases, banks without a large portfolio may have to drop out of the program.

Justice Hardesty thanked them for their feedback and shared that in addition to the Commission signing on with 17 other states to a CRA comment to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, that he also spoke about the importance of this issue with Nevada U.S. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto and asked for support from the Federal delegation.

Eviction Clinic Discussion Annamarie Johnson, executive director of Nevada Legal Services (NLS), outlined an initiative that resulted from the legal needs study. Housing, housing affordability, and housing retention have grown to be a significant issue in Nevada. NLS has proposed a program to the Las Vegas and North Las Vegas Justice Courts to be onsite on landlord/tenant court days to represent those in need. Some hurdles have been experienced. The Commission was generally supportive of the effort but would like to see more information. The NLS proposal and Court response will be shared so Commission members can review and consider. If most are in favor, the Commission may support a recommendation to the Court(s) to advance on this proposal on a trial basis. NLS is interested in running programs in the Las Vegas and Reno metropolitan areas.

4

Barbara Buckley commented that this was a good discussion and assistance of the Commission would be appreciated. Additionally, she suggested that perhaps for each meeting, a similar topic of importance could be outlined and strategies to tackle could be created. For example, a similar initiative is on Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada’s goals related to bankruptcy.

Electronic Filing by Non-Lawyers Judge Kishner recapped her efforts in the Eighth Judicial District Court (EJDC) related to advancing on E-Filing for pro se litigants. She shared that Judge Joe Hardy is now taking over the mantel on this initiative. She stated that at the moment, NRCP local rules have been suspended, including E-Filing but that the concept remains alive, she has urged continued work on the subject, and will press for its passage.

Other Business Justice Hardesty asked if there was other business and if the legal aid providers had anything to share. While there was no new business, the following are highlights of provider sharing:

• Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevadao Seeing organizational growth, along with the growth in legal needs continuing

• Nevada Legal Serviceso Working on a strategic plan required by the Legal Services Corporation

• Southern Nevada Senior Law Programo Have now moved into their new building on West Sahara

• Volunteer Attorneys for Rural Nevadans (VARN)o January Pro Bono Awards event was a success. They have open positions to fill.

A housekeeping item was mentioned related to Commission leadership attendance at the May Access to Justice Commission Chairs meeting in Louisville. Justice Hardesty asked for a volunteer to attend in place of himself and Justice Pickering as neither is able to attend this year. Interested parties were to respond to him soon.

Informational Items Informational items included the following:

• Legal Aid Provider Highlights & Quarterly Meeting Recap• Nevada Supreme Court Legislator Letter on Legal Needs Study• Nevada Lawyer Article “Your IOLTA Account: What You Might Not Know”• Commission Highlights

o Meadows Bank IOLTA Rate Increaseo Nevada Bar Foundation Liaison Meetings with IOLTA Banks Wells Fargo & Umpqua

Banko Family Law Section ONE Campaign Pro Bono Thank You Evento Family Law Conferenceo ABA Midyear/National Association of IOLTA Programso Pro bono survey actions plan

5

o Nevada Bankers Association SaverLife Financial Education Partnershipo Justice Douglas Retirement Dinnero ATJC New Facebook Page

• IOLTA Highlightso Rate Review Subcommittee Call Recap 1/14/19o IOLTA Summary

• Self-Help Center Statistics• Appellate Law Pro Bono Program• AG Military Pro Bono Program• State Bar of Nevada Annual Report• Nevada Bar Foundation Annual Report• Public Awareness

Nevada Publications ONLY List for Legal Needs Study –

PUBLICATIONS – (also consider TV/radio/other – see very end)

Las Vegas/N. Las Vegas

Las Vegas Review Journal – Justice Pickering Op-Ed (custom)

Las Vegas Sun

Las Vegas Weekly/Vegas Inc.

El Mundo & El Tiempo (Spanish language)

TheUrbanVoice.com and/or Black Image Magazine

Las Vegas Magazine

Las Vegas Woman – Annamarie Johnson (custom long form )

Inside Medicine – Glen Stevens (standard/profile?)

Desert Companion

Philippine Times of Southern Nevada

Vegas Legal. https://www.vegaslegalmagazine.com/

Henderson

Reno/Carson

Reno Gazette Journal – Justice Hardesty Op-Ed

Reno News and Review

Carson Now – Julie Bobzien (standard/quote)

Edible Reno-Tahoe magazine is free. (this one tends to be in the lobby at some restaurants and Ithink they give it out at Whole Foods).

Statewide

Nevada Appeal – James Conway (standard/quote)

The Nevada Independent – Barbara Buckley (custom)

Nevada Lawyer – Connie Akridge (custom)

Nevada Senior Guide – Sugar Vogel (custom)

Nevada

Nevada Business Magazine

Nevada Independent

Rural/Towns/Commission Members (Profiles or…?)/All Counties Represented

Battle Mountain/Lander – Battle Mountain Bugle

Boulder City – Boulder City Review

Caliente - Lincoln County Record

https://www.vegaslegalmagazine.com/

Elko (Julie Cavanaugh-Bill) - Elko Daily Free Press (standard/quote/profile)

Ely/White Pine - Ely Times

Eureka – Times-Standard

Fallon/Churchill (Judge Stockard) – (standard/quote/profile)

Fernley – Fernley Reporter

Goldfield/Esmeralda – Tonopah Times-Bonanza & Goldfield News

Hawthorne/Esmeralda – Mineral County Independent News

Incline Village (Hon. Tiras) – Tahoe Daily News (standard/quote/profile)

Laughlin – Laughlin Nevada Times/Mohave Daily News

Lovelock/Pershing – Lovelock Review-Miner

Mesquite – MesquiteLocalNews.com

Minden/Gardnerville/Douglas (Judge Young) – Minden Press-Herald, Record-Courier(standard/quote/profile)

Pahrump/Nye – Pahrump Valley Times

Pioche/Lincoln – Spot on Nevada

Tonopah/Nye - Tonopah Times-Bonanza & Goldfield News

Virginia City/Storey – VirginiaCityNews.com

West Wendover/ - Wendover Times

Winnemucca/Humboldt - The Humboldt Sun

Yerington/Lyon (Judge Schlegelmilch) -

Others/TV/Radio, Etc.- See Opportunities/Angles?

Inside Medicine (Las Vegas Heals – must be member)

KNPR

Desert Companion Magazine

Fox 5 MORE! Show (limited free nonprofit availability)

Channel 8 Las Vegas Now Show (limited free nonprofit availability)

Channel 8 Morning and Noon shows (limited interviews); Sunday morning show

CW Las Vegas Morning Show

Channel 3 Wake Up with the Wagners and weekend morning shows

Channel 13 Morning Blend show (limited free nonprofit availability)

Channel 13 weekend and noon shows

Asian Journal

Black Image Magazine

EVIBE (paid)

Las Vegas Business Press Online

Nevada UPlifted, Sensi (marijuana mags)

Liberty Watch magazine

Infinity Business Magazine (nonprofit spotlight)

The Urban Voice

Senior Connections

The Vegas Voice

Veterans Reporter News

The View Newspapers Online

Las Vegas Tribune

Las Vegas Informer

Q Life Magazine

Channel 2 and Channel 4 (government access)

BLVD Las Vegas

Univision

Telemundo

Las Vegas Chinese Daily news

Las Vegas Chinese News Network

Las Vegas Family Magazine

DAVID magazine

The Israelite

Luxury

Vegas Magazine

Scarlet Free Press (UNLV)

Carson Valley Times

CarsonNow.org

Northern Nevada Business View

The Sagebrush (UNR)

Channel 4

Moms Everyday KOLO 8 (paid)

KOLO 8

Channel 2

FOX Reno

bizNevada (statewide)

Nevada Current

Fernley Record-Courier

Tahoe Daily Tribune

Wells Progress

This is Reno

Lahontan Valley News

Mason Valley News

Sierra Sun

Virginia City News

Mineral County Independent

Tonopah Times

Mesquite Local News

Boulder City Review

Pahrump Valley Times

The Spectrum (Mesquite)

Battle Born Media

Access to Justice Commission Member Profiles (Voluntary) -

Hi everyone! As part of raising the profile of the legal needs study, access to justice, the Access to

Justice Commission, the value legal aid in Nevada delivers and the benefits that accrue, one angle we’d

like to pursue for 2019 is to feature profiles of Commission members. We can share these in social

media and other forums such as features, etc., as available.

If you are interested in participating, all we need is a photo of you and your answers to a few of the

questions below based on your interest. For the photos, regular head shots are fine, as are photos

showing you doing what you do, or even engaging in a favorite activity, especially if it matches with one

of your answers.

We’d love to get started on this soon, but participation is not mandatory - just an opportunity through

real people (people always get the most attention) to help us communicate our very important story.

New Commission member Latoya Bembry of The Ferraro Group will be helping to develop and place

these in relevant media.

Everyone submitting will first be able to proof and approve your profile.

Questions:

Answer all of these

o What is your job, position and what do you do?*

o What attracted you to serve on the Access to Justice Commission?*

o What have you learned during your involvement?* - OR - What do you find most

rewarding about being involved?*

Answer at least two of these

o What’s your philosophy on how to achieve justice for all?

o What key successes are you seeing in the field of legal aid?

o What key challenges are you seeing in the field of legal aid?

o What civil legal issue do you feel the strongest about and why?

o Is there any advice, story, or something else you’d like to share with our readers?

Thanks and ask any questions.

Nevada IOLTA Rate Review Language as of 050219 –

Language shared in notice:

The Commission voted to implement a new tiered rate structure. Beginning June 1, 2019 the current

interest rate of 0.70% will be maintained for accounts with an average monthly balance of less than

$150,000.00. The new interest rate on accounts with an average monthly balance equal to or greater

than $150,000.00 will be 1.0%.

New added language to be shared as necessary:

Financial institutions with systems unable to calculate and pay interest on average monthly balances

shall pay 0.70% on daily balances under $150,000.00 and 1.00% on daily balances above $150,000.00.

Alternate language:

Beginning June 1, 2019, the Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission (Commission) will

implement a tiered interest rate for Nevada IOLTA accounts. At all participating banks, the minimum

IOLTA interest paid for accounts which register an average daily balance in a given month below

$150,000 will remain at the current 0.70% Nevada IOLTA interest rate. For accounts registering an

average daily balance in a given month at or above $150,000 the minimum IOLTA interest paid shall

be 1.0%.

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

In the matter of Amendments to SCR

217(2) regarding creation and

maintenance of interest-bearing trust

accounts interest minimum standards.

)))))))))

ADKT NO.:

PETITION

The Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission (“Commission”)

hereby petitions this court to amend SCR 217(2) regarding creation and

maintenance of interest-bearing trust accounts interest minimum standards.

Since 2008, Nevada’s legal aid organizations have benefited from stable

interest on lawyer trust account (IOLTA) rates, which have traditionally been set

at 0.70 percent. Nevada has received strong support from its banking community,

with more than 30 financial institutions participating in the IOLTA program.

Annually, more than $500,000,000 is maintained on deposit in Nevada banks.

Substantially, all interest generated from these accounts is distributed to statewide

legal service organizations by the designated tax-exempt bar foundation as

outlined in SCR 216 through annual grants. In 2019, $3.4 million in IOLTA grant

dollars were awarded.

The Commission seeks to amend the interest minimum standards by setting the

current rate as its minimum or “floor” and to provide flexibility to raise the rate

consistent with the changing financial market, based in part, on the Federal Funds

Target Rate. The proposed amendments would also allow for tiered rates for

various account sizes.

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

The proposed rule, as amended, is attached hereto in its entirety as Exhibit A.

Respectfully submitted this ___ day of June 2019.


CO-CHAIRS

_______________________________________

JAMES W. HARDESTY, Co-Chair

Nevada Bar No. 1110

Supreme Court of Nevada

201 S Carson St

Carson City, NV 89148

775-684-1590

________________________________________

KRISTINA PICKERING, Co-Chair

Nevada Bar No. 992

Supreme Court of Nevada

408 E Clark Ave

Las Vegas, NV 89101

702-486-9370

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

EXHIBIT A

Rule 217. Creation and maintenance of interest-bearing trust accounts. A

member of the state bar or the member’s law firm shall create or maintain an

interest-bearing trust account for clients’ funds which are nominal in amount or to

be held for a short period of time in any banking, credit union, or savings and loan

association which is in compliance with the following provisions:

1. An interest-bearing trust account established pursuant to this rule may be

established with any state bar approved bank, credit union, or savings and loan

association authorized by federal or state law to do business in Nevada, located in

Nevada and insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal

Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation or other financial institution approved by

the state bar pursuant to Rule 78.5 of these rules. Funds in each interest-bearing

account shall be subject to withdrawal upon request and without delay.

2. Interest minimum standards. The Nevada Supreme Court Access to

Justice Commission shall review and set twice annually the rate(s) of interest

payable upon any interest-bearing trust account and make the rate(s) public at least

30 days prior to the effective date. [The rate of interest payable upon any interest-

bearing trust account shall meet any one of the following minimum standards:]

(a) The minimum rate shall be 0.70 percent.

(b) Higher rates offered by the institution [to customers whose deposits exceed

certain time or quantity minima, such as those offered in the form of certificates of

deposit,] are permissible so long as there is no impairment of the right to withdraw

or transfer principal immediately without penalty.

[(a) The 30-day LIBOR minus .50 percent, or, the Federal Discount Rate plus

.50 percent, whichever is greater; or

(b) Equal to the Federal Fund Target Rate, or, the Federal Discount Rate plus

.50 percent, whichever is greater; or

(c) Equal to or greater than an flat interest rate, which rate shall be reviewed

and approved by the Access to Justice Commission twice annually and made

public at least 30 days prior to the effective date.

(d) Higher rates offered by the institution to customers whose deposits exceed

certain time or quantity minima, such as those offered in the form of certificates of

deposit, are permissible so long as there is no impairment of the right to withdraw

or transfer principal immediately without penalty.]

3. Fees prohibited. Accounts under this rule shall be exempt from service

charges and fees.

4. Reporting. A member of the state bar or the member’s law firm

establishing such account shall:

(a) Direct the depository institution to:

4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

(i) remit interest or dividends, as the case may be, on the average monthly

balance in the account or as otherwise computed in accordance with an

institution’s standard accounting practice at least monthly, to the designated tax-

exempt foundation pursuant to Rule 216;

(ii) transmit with each remittance in an electronic format to be specified

by the designated tax-exempt foundation a statement which shall include:

(1) the name of the member of the state bar or the member’s law firm for

whom the remittance is sent;

(2) the rate of interest applied;

(3) the account number for each account;

(4) the average amount on deposit for each account;

(5) the rate and type of interest or dividends remitted;

[(6) the amount and type of charges or fee deducted, if any;]

([7]6) the average account balance for the monthly period for which the report

is made; and

(iii) transmit to the depositing member of the state bar or the member’s

law firm at the same time a report showing the amount paid to the designated tax-

exempt foundation; and

(b) Establish and follow reasonably prudent procedures to verify, at least

annually, that each account maintained under this rule is on deposit with an

institution currently listed by the designated tax-exempt foundation as operating in

compliance with the Interest Minimum Standards set forth in subsection 2 above.

Member verification shall be reported to the [S]state [B]bar, by completing and

submitting a form provided with the annual membership fee statements.

5. Exceptions. If the member or the member’s law firm does not maintain

an office within 20 miles of a complying financial institution pursuant to

subsection 6:

(a) The minimum interest standards set forth in subsection 2 (a)-(c) are

waived; and

(b) The reporting requirements of subsection 4(a)(ii) are partially waived such

that the member must direct the depositing institution to report at least quarterly,

electronically if possible, to include at a minimum the name of the member of the

state bar or the member’s law firm for whom the remittance is sent and the rate of

interest applied.

Notice of waiver shall be reported by the member or member’s law firm annually

on a form to be provided by the state bar with annual membership fee statements.

6. List of complying financial institutions. The designated tax-exempt

foundation shall maintain an accurate and up-to-date list of all financial institutions

as defined in subsection 1 above, which are in compliance with the Interest

Minimum Standards set forth in subsection 2 above. This list shall be provided to

5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

the [S]state [B]bar by the designated tax-exempt foundation, posted on the [S]state

[B]bar’s website and published in other media from time to time to facilitate

members’ compliance with this rule.

[7. Effective dates; compliance monitoring. The amendments to this rule

mandated by order dated December 16, 2009, shall be effective 30 days from entry

of order. The designated tax-exempt foundation pursuant to Rule 216 shall begin

monitoring banking compliance within 30 days of the effective date and provide

reports at least quarterly to the Access to Justice Commission and the State Bar of

Nevada. The first member reporting required pursuant to subsection 5(b) shall

begin in 2010, and reported in the 2011 annual membership fee statements.]

[8]7. Non-compliance; assessment/suspension. Active members who fail to

meet the requirements of this rule shall be notified of their non-compliance, in

writing, by the [S]state [B]bar. Upon the expiration of 30 days from the date the

[S]state [B]bar sends the member notice of non-compliance, said non-compliant

member shall be:

(a) Assessed $200, payable within 30 days to the designated tax-exempt

foundation pursuant to Rule 216; and

(b) Suspended from membership in the [S]state [B]bar, but may be reinstated

upon filing verification of compliance on a form to be provided by the [S]state

[B]bar.

Supplying false information in response to the requirements of this rule shall

subject the member to appropriate disciplinary action.

Nevada IOLTA “Leadership Institutions” Program

Thank you for your participation or interest in the Nevada IOLTA Leadership Institution Program.

Leadership Institutions have agreed to pay at least 1.2% on all IOLTA accounts under deposit.

Program & Recognition Details:

Financial institutions that voluntarily agree to pay a minimum of 50 basis points (half a percent,

0.50%) above the lowest “floor” Nevada IOLTA interest rate set by the Nevada Supreme Court

Access to Justice Commission (Commission) on all accounts are placed into a category of their

own, “Leadership Institutions”. (Currently 0.70% + 0.50% = 1.20%.) This may also operate as a

% on top of a new % of FFTR rule when in place.

“Leadership Institutions” would receive the following recognition:

o Website – listed in a special section at the top of the IOLTA financial institution listing.

Listings would include a logo, a direct link to the bank’s IOLTA page (if available), and a

personal contact at the financial institution.

o Nevada Lawyer

Half Page Advertisement Complimentary with Paid Ads – on an annual basis,

opportunity to submit a half page advertisement for complimentary placement

in Nevada Lawyer if paid ads total $3500 or more. May be requested for a

particular month, but would be run on a space available basis.

At announcement – complimentary mention in “news&notes” section

o State Bar of Nevada E-News

At announcement – complimentary mention of Leadership Institution status

Biannually, opportunity to submit a digital advertisement for complimentary

placement in State Bar of Nevada E-News which could be requested for a

particular week, but which would be run on a space available basis.

o State Bar of Nevada Annual Meeting

Supreme Court Justice mention of importance of IOLTA program and all

participating banks, with named mention of all Leadership Institutions

o Special mention in the Nevada Bar Foundation Annual Report for each year the bank

remains as a Leadership Institution

o Included on a promotional rack card of Nevada IOLTA financial institution listings

featured at various meetings, exhibits, State Bar of Nevada offices, etc.

o Quotes from State Bar of Nevada and/or Nevada Bar Foundation leadership for inclusion

in financial institution press release

o Other special announcements

State Bar of Nevada Board of Governors

Nevada Bar Foundation Board of Trustees


Nevada’s five core legal aid providers (who in turn will promote)

Social media posts - Access to Justice Commission Twitter & Facebook accounts

Social media posts - State Bar of Nevada Twitter & Facebook accounts

o Periodic social media posts recognizing named “Leadership Institutions”

Other IOLTA participants, now referred to as “Sustaining Financial Institutions” would receive:

o Website –

For banks paying standard rates - regular listing, as is currently done

For banks paying rates higher than standard rates, but not 1.2% on all IOLTA

accounts – listed in regular bank listing but with a link to bank web home page

o Meeting mentions – mentions at various meetings with thanks for funding IOLTA

o Nevada Lawyer Advertisements –

Featured with other IOLTA-participating financial institutions on Nevada Bar

Foundation ads periodically placed in Nevada Lawyer

When a new financial institution joins they will receive a complimentary

mention in “news&notes” section

o State Bar of Nevada E-News – biannual thanks to all Nevada IOLTA-participating

financial institutions

o State Bar of Nevada Annual Meeting - Supreme Court Justice mention of importance of

IOLTA program and all participating financial institutions

o Included in the Nevada Bar Foundation Annual Report



o Periodic social media posts recognizing and thanking Nevada IOLTA-participating


1


Pro Bono Promotion – Draft Plan Refresh Ideas

It’s been discussed it may be time to reinvigorate Nevada’s pro bono coordination and promotion to create increased enthusiasm and more volunteers for pro bono. Over the past couple of months, three calls have been held with Nevada’s legal aid providers to develop potential plan ideas for input and feedback from Access to Justice Commission members. It is felt that our outreach could continue under the recognizable “One Campaign” brand, focusing on “taking one case”, as it’s easy to understand, and in terms of volunteering, usually a reasonable ask. Primary focus = take a case. Secondary focus = participate in 2 Ask-A-Lawyers. Tertiary focus = donate in lieu of pro bono.

Topline goals by December 31, 2020 (TBD):

XXX cases taken

XXX Ask-A-Lawyers performed

Create a culture of participation through recognition

Identify and appoint a Pro Bono Committee and Ambassadors – primarily pro bono volunteers but alsolegal aid providers, Access to Justice Commission members and staff, and others as identified.

o GOAL: By August 15, 2019, identify and appoint a Pro Bono Committee that will help narrow,detail and execute on plans, as well as help refine a positive, consistent message communicatingthe benefits of doing pro bono; ID current “Ambassadors” (volunteered within the last two years)

Promote the “Inspire One!” campaign - identify Ambassadors already doing pro bono to encourage theirfriends and colleagues to take one case.

o GOAL: By December 20, 2019, contact all “current” pro bono volunteers with the goal to get 25%of Ambassadors to get “One” volunteer to take a case or volunteer for 2 Ask-A-Lawyers

Present to legal groups and conferences – to communicate message.o GOAL: By December 20, 2019, get in front of at least 5 groups in the South, and 2 groups in both

the North and rural, and by December 20, 2020 another 7 groups So., 4 No., and 2 rural.

Develop a Corporate Legal Department/Law Firm “Partners-in-Pro-Bono” Program – develop a programto identify and encourage in-house counsel willing to cooperate with law firms on pro bono on cases.

o GOAL: By December 20, 2019, identify and reach out to 10 corporate legal departments in LasVegas, 5 Reno area, and 2 rural with the goal to get 33% participation.

Implement a new Government/Public Attorney Pro Bono Program – designed to accommodate concernsof government attorneys.

o GOAL: Pro Bono Committee to develop a plan by the end of 2019 to be implemented in 2020.

Develop a Managing Partner pro bono pitch –o GOAL: Pro Bono Committee to develop a plan by the end of 2019 to be implemented in 2020.

Develop higher-credit-hour (3-4 hrs.) free CLEs when taking a case – for more CLE benefit for longer caseo GOAL: TBD

Develop a pilot CLE on “the business case of pro bono” – to demonstrate how pro bono can be used tobuild firm visibility, promote recruitment, retention and morale.

o GOAL: Pilot a “business case” CLE by Spring 2020; analyze results.

Write a pro bono article for Nevada Lawyer – pitch/direction to be determined by Committee.o GOAL: Late Fall/Winter issue

From A. Washington touch-base call – 1.) Justices/Judges to encourage “taking one case through OneCampaign” anytime speaking to group, bench/bar, etc., 2.) Ambassadors getting opportunity at allpossible existing events to promote One Campaign and “take one case”, 3.) Continual marketing –everyone.

Pro Bono One Campaign Stats 2014-2018

Year >>> 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Notes

Provider

LACSN 1026 1154 1168 585 518 2017 - 452 + 133 new volunteers = 585 , 2018 - 444 + 7 neNLS 275 370 424 353 354SNSLP 6 0 2 9 8WLS 14 9 3 32 32 Put in 32 (same as 2018) as placeholder for totals comparVARN 66 79 62 86 67

Total 908 1387 1612 1659 1065 979

# "New" 316 318 350 140*

GoalsTotal 1044 1526 1854New N/A 347 366

*Only LACSN reporting "new"

19

attorneys to do pro bono are: 1) helping people in need, 2) ethical obligations, and 3) professional duties. See Figure 15.

Generally, attorneys reported that they were motivated to do pro bono by either empathetic or ethical motivations, such as helping people, reducing social inequalities, being a good person, and ethical or professional obligations. Statements related to professional development - such as working directly with clients, gaining experience outside of one’s expertise, and opportunities to go to court - tend to only moderately motivate attorneys to do pro bono service. Attorneys reported being least motivated by recognition.

0% 50% 100%

Helping people in need

Ethical obligation

Professional duty

Participating in reducing social inequalities

It would make me feel like a good person

Helping the profession’s public image

A firm culture that encourages pro bono

Opportunities to interact with low-incomepopulations

Opportunities to work directly with clients

Gaining experience in an area outside of myexpertise

Opportunities to work with other attorneys

Opportunities to go to court

Recognition from colleagues and friends

Strengthening relationships private practice clientswho value pro bono

Recognition from employer

FIGURE 15. MOTIVATING FACTORS

1 - Not at all influential 2 3 4 5 - Very influential

Average

4.25

3.55

3.53

3.49

3.47

3.04

2.70

2.55

2.51

2.46

2.34

2.01

1.96

1.95

1.93

20

Despite being highly motivated to do pro bono, attorneys face many barriers to being able to undertake such services. The top three barriers to doing pro bono were: 1) lack of time, 2) commitment to family or other personal obligations, and 3) lack of skills or experience in the practice areas needed by pro bono clients. See Figure 16.

Aside from the top three discouraging factors, attorneys were moderately discouraged by a sense that clients have unrealistic expectations, a lack of clarity on how much time a case might take, scheduling conflicts, a lack of malpractice insurance, competing billable hour expectations, and a lack of interest in the types of pro bono cases for which attorneys are needed. Very few attorneys had personal objections to providing pro bono and few believed that pro bono clients could afford services.

0.0% 50.0% 100.0%

Lack of time

Commitment to family or other personal obligations

Lack of necessary skills or experience

The unrealistic expectations of clients

Lack of clarity on time commitment

Scheduling conflicts with potential court appearances

Lack of malpractice insurance

Competing billable hour expectations and policies

Lack of interest in the types of cases

Too costly; financially burdensome to my practice

Lack of administrative support or resources

Lack of information about opportunities

Preference for non-legal volunteer work

Discouragement from employer/firm

Concerns about compromising the interests of clients

A preference for providing reduced fee assistance

Belief that pro bono clients can afford legal assistance

Personal or philosophical objections

FIGURE 16. DISCOURAGING FACTORS

1 - Not discouraging 2 3 4 Very discouraging

Average

4.24

3.98

3.69

3.29

3.27

3.25

3.24

3.20

3.10

3.07

3.00

2.77

2.74

2.61

2.39

2.02

1.88

1.66

21

Many of these barriers can certainly be addressed or eased by specific actions or support that might be provided by pro bono programs. When asked about how helpful or motivating such actions would be, attorneys indicated that they would be most influenced by: 1) a judge soliciting participation, 2) limited scope representation opportunities, and 3) CLE credit for doing pro bono. See Figure 17.

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

If a judge solicited participation

Limited scope representation opportunities

CLE credit for doing pro bono

Malpractice insurance provided by referral org

If a colleague asked me to take a case

Free or reduced cost CLE

Selection from online description of opportunities

Option of selecting a client based on client…

Mentorship/supervision by an attorney

Administrative or research support

Opportunities to act as a mentor to young attorneys

Opportunities to do pro bono remotely

Opportunity to share work with another attorney

Periodic contact by a referral organization

Alternative dispute resolution opportunities

Networking opportunities with other attorneys

Reduced fee opportunities

More support from my firm

Self-reporting and state bar tracking of pro bono

Formal recognition of my past volunteer efforts

FIGURE 17. ACTIONS TO ENCOURAGE PRO BONO

1 - Not influential 2 3 4 5 - Very influential

Average

3.41

3.39

3.32

3.20

3.12

3.07

3.01

2.92

2.87

2.85

2.84

2.75

2.67

2.67

2.51

2.41

2.39

2.28

1.96

Tab 3 –

TBD report on EJDC eFiling.

1

Access to Justice Highlights 1st Quarter 2019

HIGHLIGHTS

Overall Office Highlights

Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada and the Eighth Judicial District Court announced a

strategic initiative to transform services for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking,

and dating violence. For many years, the Violence Intervention Program in Clark County has

been operated by the Eighth Judicial District Court. Survivors of violent crime such as victims

of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence and stalking visit the office to secure

assistance with filing a Temporary Protective Order (TPO). The staff provide assistance to the

victim in completing the TPO. Legal assistance is not available on site at the office. If the

victim needs information on temporary custody and living arrangements during the pendency of

the protective order process, the victim has to separately visit the Family Law Self-Help Center

operated by Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada under contract and in cooperation with the

Eighth Judicial District Court. The services are not integrated and result in retold stories, wasted

time and inefficiency. Due to the extraordinary volume of individuals seeking help at the Family

Law Self-Help Center, the wait time for these victims has increased significantly, up to an hour

and a half at the busiest time of the day.

The Eighth Judicial District Court and Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada announced an

initiative to create a victim-centered, trauma informed center with Legal Aid Center of Southern

Nevada providing all necessary legal information and assistance to victims in one newly

renovated center. Legal Aid Center will provide needed legal information to a victim of

domestic violence, stalking, sexual assault, and dating violence crime without the victim having

to go to another center. Free legal advice clinics can operate on the site for victims needing that

service. The Court will be responsible for the court administration functions: filing the TPO,

setting the matter for hearing, creating the Order, and serving the Order on law enforcement.

With this new model, applicants would no longer have to go to two centers, but will receive

necessary legal information and forms in one spot. Adequate staff would be provided so that

long waits are no longer the norm. It will also allow the creation of a high risk assessment

protocol to be utilized at the Center in order to provide critical services for those facing

significant risk. The Eighth Judicial District Court is able to provide the space, pay for the

renovations, and six positions have been funded by the Court and through VOCA. This vitally

2

needed initiative should improve outcomes for the crushing number of individuals representing

themselves in Family Court.

Community Initiatives & Outreach Highlights

New Initiatives:

We began the initial steps to develop a new Pro Bono Project website which will offer new

features and allow for greater ease in finding volunteer opportunities.

We created a weekly social media campaign during National Consumer Protection Week (March

3 - 9, 2019) consisting of various short informative videos with our consumer staff.

We collaborated with R&R Partners on planning events to recognize CAP’s 20th Anniversary

and Barbara’s 30th Anniversary.

Ongoing Initiatives:

We continued working with Clark County on the transition plan for management of the Vegas

Strong Resiliency Center which officially occurred on March 5, 2019.

We continue to provide periodic updates to community stakeholders about the Vegas Strong

Resiliency Center.

To raise awareness of CAP100 and our pro bono program, we submitted a successful application

to the American Bar Association nominating Mona Kaveh, Esq. for the Pro Bono Publico

Award. This will be publicly announced in mid-May. Press is embargoed until that time.

We continue to work on development of the “CAP app” for transitioning older youth.

We continue to work with Brad Lewis of the Access to Justice Commission on finalizing

messaging surrounding the findings from the statewide legal needs study.

We continue to participate in the Nevada Attorney General’s Home Again Program.

We continue to collaborate with Home Means Nevada on the foreclosure mediation program.

We continue to participate in the End Abuse in Later Life Coalition through the National

Clearinghouse on Abuse in Later Life (NCALL).

15 community events were held this quarter, including:

1/11/19 – CAP attended the West Prep Academy CORE organization

1/12/19 – FJP attended the Human Trafficking Resource Fair

1/30/19 – CAP attended the UNLV’s Spring 2019 Involvement Fair

1/30/19 – Consumer attended Resource Fair for Furloughed Federal Employees

2/4/19 – Immigration attended the Nurse/Family Partnership So. NV Health District

2/4 – 2/8 – Staff attended the Matt Kelley E.S. Career Week

3

2/8/19 – Immigration attended the College of Southern Nevada

2/12/19 - Hosted El Salvadoran Consul General Tirso Sermenno with an office tour and

introduction to our immigration team

2/19/19 – CAP attended the PCC Community Resources Meeting

2/26/19 – Immigration attended the UNLV immigration forum

3/2/19 – Consumer attended the Congresswoman Dina Titus’ Tax Fair

3/9/19 – Consumer attended the AG'S Legal resources/consumer protection

3/8/19 – Consumer attended the Nevada Consumer Affairs Fraud Prevention Fair

3/16/19 – Immigration attended the League of United Latin American Citizens

3/28/19 - Attended 2019 Project Safe Neighborhoods Gang and Violent Crime

Prevention Summit hosted by the District Office of Nevada for the United States

Attorney Nicholas Trutanich

Consumer Case Highlights

Client is a 30 year old veteran who was referred to Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada for

representation in his claim for Title II (SSD) disability benefits. The client was a sergeant in the

U.S. Army and was injured in Iraq and claimed disability due to Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI),

PTSD, Shrapnel in right hip, Pending surgery for replacement of right hip, History of gunshot

wound, Chronic pain syndrome, and Chronic migraine headaches. Client suffered injuries in Iraq

in 2009 and later underwent unsuccessful surgery on his right hip in 2011. At his initial

Administrative Law Judge hearing, the client explained to the judge that while he did want

representation he was unable to get a private attorney to take his case. The client was then given

a referral to Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada and we agreed to represent client at his next

hearing. We then updated his medical records from the Veteran’s Administration of Southern

Nevada and forwarded them to Social Security to include in his hearing file. We submitted a

brief on client’s behalf and represented client at his subsequent hearing at which the judge agreed

to grant Social Security disability benefits to the client. (Fleming)

Guardianship Advocacy Project Case Highlights

Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada represents Mr. Roe* in his guardianship case. Mr. Roe is

a seventy-two year old veteran who suffers from Schizophrenia, PTSD, and dementia.

Sadly, in 2015 – before attorneys were being appointed for protected person facing guardianship

– Mr. Roe was the victim of exploitation at the hands of a supposed friend. At that time, Mr.

Roe’s mental health was clearly worsening and his marriage was falling apart, so Mr. Roe’s

long-time handyman and “friend,” Mr. Smith,* stepped in to help Mr. Roe. Mr. Smith petitioned

for and obtained guardianship over Mr. Roe. During his brief stint as Mr. Roe’s guardian, Mr.

Smith sold Mr. Roe’s home, got rid of most of Mr. Roe’s personal belongings, and even botched

Mr. Roe’s divorce proceedings by foolishly agreeing to pay Mr. Roe’s ex-wife monthly payment

for the rest of her life. Adding insult to injury, Mr. Smith was awarded guardian fees for his

services in the amount of $8,762.00.

4

Finally, in 2017, the court appointed Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada to represent Mr. Roe.

When Mr. Smith filed his second annual accounting and request for fees in the guardianship

case, Mr. Roe’s Legal Aid Center attorney immediately suspected that Mr. Smith had also been

stealing money from Mr. Roe. Mr. Roe’s attorney demanded bank statements, receipts, and

other documents to support Mr. Smith’s accounting. After reviewing the records, Mr. Roe’s

attorney discovered $14,000.00 in cash withdrawals from Mr. Roe’s guardianship account that

Mr. Smith could not explain. Mr. Roe’s attorney opposed the accounting and asked the court to

refer the matter to the Guardianship Compliance Office for a full financial audit. The Court

granted the request.

The financial auditor found that, even after Mr. Roe’s Legal Aid Center attorney had questioned

Mr. Smith’s management of Mr. Roe’s estate, Mr. Smith had continued to withdraw cash from

Mr. Roe’s account. The withdrawals were without court approval and certainly not for Mr.

Roe’s benefit. The auditor concluded that Mr. Smith had withdrawn more than $25,000.00 from

Mr. Roe’s guardianship account in total. Mr. Roe’s attorney asked the court to adopt the

auditor’s findings, which the court did, and then the attorney filed a recovery action to force Mr.

Smith to repay the money he stole from Mr. Roe.

Not only will Mr. Smith almost certainly be found liable for the money he took from Mr. Roe’s

guardianship estate, but Mr. Smith is also now under criminal investigation for his actions.

(MacDonald)

*Names have been changed to protect confidentiality.

Family Justice Project Case Highlights

Kristina came to Legal Aid Center seeking assistance in her TPO case and custody case. Kristina

had been involved in an 18 year relationship with the adverse party and together the couple

shared a 9 year old son. During the course of the relationship, the adverse party isolated Kristina

from her friends and family and physically abused her. He was also a heavy drug and alcohol

user and Kristina reported that the abuse was very severe when he was under the influence. Some

of these incidents occurred in front of the minor child. Kristina obtained a TPO for an incident in

which the adverse party physically assaulted both Kristina and their minor child. At the

extension hearing, we requested the Order of Protection be extended for the maximum one year

and that Kristina be awarded temporary custody of her son. The hearing master extended the

order for one year, awarded custody to Kristina with no visitation for the adverse party, and

ordered the adverse party to relinquish any guns in his possession. I am currently representing

Kristina in the custody case, which is ongoing. (Bower)

5

Immigration Case Highlights

Client is a senior who was introduced to her husband via a friend. She lived in Russia and

wasn’t looking for a relationship. She came to visit her friend in Las Vegas and was introduced

to a friend of hers. He was very kind and attentive. He started talking to her about building a life

together. He told her he would treat her well and she should move here with him. She returned

to Russia but continued to keep in touch with him. He convinced her to come visit the next year.

She truly believed her life would be good with him and agreed to marry him. Shortly after

marrying, he became controlling and abusive. He would lock her in a room for hours without

food. He would threaten her. Once he used a drill and held it to her head to threaten her. He

also held her immigration status over her head. He filed a family petition on her behalf, but

never let her forget it. She was so frustrated she told him he could stop the process. She was

issued a conditional LPR card. Things got worse when she obtained her status. The abuse

escalated. She came to our office for assistance. We were able to assist her with removing the

condition on her LPR card. She is now a LPR with a 10 year LPR card. (Jones)

Children’s Attorneys Project Case Highlights

Heather, who is now 4, and Jessica, who is now 21 months, came into care in late 2017 when

Jessica, who was just a few months old had ingested meth. Both natural parents were charged

with child abuse and neglect. Both girls were placed with maternal grandmother. Mom’s three

other children, Fay, now 16, Jon, now 15, and Jim, now 12, were also placed with maternal

grandmother, but the Department had mom sign a temporary guardianship to grandmother and,

as a result, the 3 oldest kids never came into care. CAP was appointed in late 2018 when the

matter was set for TPR as to Heather and Jessica, as parents were not getting help for their drug

issues nor making progress on their case plans. In December, another baby, Sandra, was born

drug exposed, removed, and also placed with grandmother. At that time, CAP argued that the 3

oldest kids should be brought into care as well, as grandma was struggling financially to raise 6

kids and was not getting any financial assistance for the oldest 3, plus mom was very unstable

and could have revoked the temporary guardianship at any time. Judge Sullivan forced them to

remove the kids, and officially placed them with grandmother, who has since been able to add

the oldest 3 and the new baby to her license so that she is now receiving foster care payments for

all of them. Additionally, Fay and Jim now have an Independent Living worker and have been

able to benefit from extra support and services, as well as access to Chaffee Funds. CAP has

also been very involved in Fay’s on-going DJJS case and was successfully able to argue to

remove the delinquency court’s restriction that she could not share a room with her little sister

(which would have caused barriers for licensing). CAP was also successfully able to argue to

limit the terms of Fay’s probation so that she could be home either alone, or with her siblings,

without supervision, which was a huge relief for grandmother, as Fay is a big help with the

younger kids. CAP will continue to work with this family to achieve permanency for all of the

children with grandmother. (Abbott)

6

Education Advocacy Program Case Highlights

Trevor is a 13 year old boy who attends a local middle school and is new to the area from

another state. Trevor has been relentlessly bullied, both physically and emotionally, because he is

autistic. The mother notified the school he was autistic and to let her know if there are any issues.

Trevor is extremely intelligent and earns good grades but struggles socially. The bullying had

become so bad he was getting physically assaulted in gym class. The school did not intervene

nor provide any supports for Trevor. At one point, Trevor had enough and made a threat and was

expelled. We immediately took Trevor’s case and started working with his mother. We got the

expulsion reduced to a suspension and placement at behavior school. We immediately asked for

supports in school and counseling services. We filed due process for failure to evaluate and got

Trevor evaluated and he will get training and support in social communication and will work

with a social worker. He will have regular daily check-ins with counseling until he can better

manage the school environment. We asked Trevor to come to our hearing and the special

education director for the school district actually stated she was furious that the school did not

act sooner and she could tell this child needed additional support. (Venci)

PRO BONO PROJECT FISCAL YEAR 2017-2018 (Oct. 1 thru Sept. 30)

I. Case Placements:

During this quarter we placed 167 cases with 126 unique attorney volunteers:

January - 62

February - 40

March - 65

II. Pro Bono CLE Seminars:

1/18 CAP Supplemental CLE

1/25 CAP Basics CLE


2/22 CAP Basics CLE

3/6 42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Why Bother? CLE

3/7 Meet Your New Bar Counsel: What to Expect from Attorney Discipline

CLE (CCBA)


3/22 CAP Basics CLE

7

III. Volunteer of the Month Recipients:

January – Marjorie Guymon

February – Molly Rosenblum

March – Meng Zhong

IV. Pro Bono Firm and Bar Section Meetings:

January 29 – Garman Turner Gordon firm visit

January 31 – Dickinson Wright firm visit

March 6 – Federal Pro Bono Program Info Session

March 18 – Lunch with NLS Martha Menendez

STATS

Consumer Rights Project - Cases Quarterly Stats

1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr

Number of cases opened in quarter 697

Number of cases closed in quarter 692

Total Active cases through end of quarter 200

Consumer Hotline Calls 1168

Bankruptcy Cases - Quarterly Stats





Foreclosure Cases - Quarterly Stats





Foreclosure Hotline 40

Social Security Project Cases - Quarterly Stats





Social Security Hotline Calls 354

8

Guardianship Advocacy Project – Quarterly Stats





Family Justice Project Cases - Quarterly Stats





FJP Hotline Calls 127

Immigration - Quarterly Stats





Immigration Hotline Calls 229

Children’s Attorneys Project Cases Quarterly Stats





Education Advocacy Program Cases Quarterly Stats





Volunteer Education Advocate Program Cases Quarterly Stats





Civil Law Self-Help Center Quarterly Statistics


Number of clients served 12814

Family Law Self-Help Center Quarterly Statistics


Number of clients served 13617

9

Community Legal Education Program Attendance Statistics

CLASS JAN. - MAR.

APR. - JUNE

JULY - SEPT.

OCT. - DEC.

TOTAL FOR YEAR

Divorce 167

Paternity/Custody 94

Guardianship 74

Spanish Family Law 19

Bankruptcy 155

Spanish Bankruptcy 9

Small Claims 146

Payday Loan 4

Collection Proof 27

Family Law Litigation & Trial Prep 54

Immigration English 45

Immigration Spanish 50

TOTALS 844

Pro Bono Project Case Statistics by Quarter

1Qtr (Oct – Dec)

2Qtr (Jan - Mar)

3Qtr (Apr - Jun)

4Qtr (Jul - Sep)

TOTAL

Number of cases placed 220 167

Number of unique attorneys who accepted a new case

165 126

Number of Unique Active Cases (includes cases placed during quarter and cases placed in prior quarters that remained active for part of the quarter)

1489 1326

Number of unique attorneys with one or more active case

679 647

Number of cases closed 220 33

Ask-A-Lawyer Pro Bono Project Quarterly Statistics (All Programs Combined)

1Qtr (Oct – Dec)

2Qtr (Jan - Mar)

3Qtr (Apr - Jun)

4Qtr (Jul - Sep)

TOTAL

Total Clients Served 937 861 Total Events Held 109 130 Total Unique Attorney Volunteers 83 80 Total Volunteer Hours 451.1 433.4

10

Legal Aid Center in the News

Justice For All March 24, 2019 Nevada State Bank-A Positive OutlookJeremy Aguero For the uninitiated, the legal system can be stressful, intimidating and confusing. Read Full Article

Payday lending opponents, industry clash in charged hearing over loan database March 21, 2019 The Nevada IndependentRiley Snyder Hours of impassioned testimony dominated discussion during a hearing on a bill that would create astatewide database for tracking payday loans, a seemingly innocuous concept met with fierce resistanceand dire rhetoric from the industry and its supporters. Read Full Article

Nevada AG Calls on Feds to Protect Consumers from Abusive Lenders March 21, 2019 Public News Services

Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford is calling on the Trump administration to allow Obama-era rules onpayday lending to take effect.

Read Full Article

National Law Day Ask-A-Lawyer

Free attorney consultations will be provided to the public in honor of National Law Day on May

1, 2019. Topics include family law, immigration, child support and more! Pre-register today,

space is limited.

https://www.nsbank.com/about-us/reports/apo/

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/payday-lending-opponents-industry-clash-in-charged-hearing-over-loan-database

https://www.publicnewsservice.org/2019-03-21/consumer-issues/nevada-ag-calls-on-feds-to-protect-consumers-from-abusive-lenders/a65898-1

11

Legal Aid Center begins managing Vegas Strong Resiliency Center March 5, 2019 Las Vegas Review-JournalJessica Terrones The Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada began overseeing day-to-day operations of the Vegas StrongResiliency Center on Tuesday, according to a statement issued by Clark County. Read Full Article

Guardianship System Still Under Scrutiny - But There Is Progress February 21, 2019 Nevada Public RadioFred Wasser For the last few years, the guardianship system in Clark County has been under scrutiny and in turmoil. Read Full Article

What can Ohio learn from other state guardianship programs? February 24, 2019 Katie EllingtonOhio Center for Investigative Journalism Nevada addressed guardianship abuse after a fraud case drew national attention. Read Full Article

This and That in Court Tech January 14, 2019 National Center for State CourtsCourt Technology Bulletin Following the eCourts Conference last month, I had the opportunity of visiting the Civil Law Self-HelpCenter at the Clark County Regional Justice Center in downtown Las Vegas along with someinternational friends. The office is conveniently located on the first floor of the courthouse near theentrance. Read Full Article

Law Office Corner Jan/Feb 2019 NACC the GuadianJanice Wolf, Esq. Picture being ten and watching your father being hauled off to jail in handcuffs. Your parents’ argument escalated from verbal to physical, and now someone has called the police. Your father is cursing, andyour mother is crying and bleeding. They are both high on meth. Read Full Article

https://www.reviewjournal.com/local/local-las-vegas/legal-aid-center-begins-managing-vegas-strong-resiliency-center-1611152/

https://knpr.org/knpr/2019-02/guardianship-system-still-under-scrutiny-there-progress

https://courttechbulletin.blogspot.com/2019/01/this-and-that-in-court-tech-january-2019.htmlhttps:/www.cleveland.com/news/2019/02/what-can-ohio-learn-from-other-state-guardianship-programs.html

https://courttechbulletin.blogspot.com/2019/01/this-and-that-in-court-tech-january-2019.html

https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.naccchildlaw.org/resource/resmgr/guardian/2019_01_january/guardian_2019_v41n01.pdf

12

Kemp Jones & Coulthard inspires pro bono service & donates funds

Mona Kaveh & Kemp Jones Coulthard saw a need to inspire pro bono attorneys to take 45 foster

youth (CAP) cases from Legal Aid Center’s waiting list. For each CAP case taken, KJC donated

$1,000. The legal community stepped up and met the challenge in just 2 weeks! Thank you KJC

for the generous donation & inspiring pro bono service.

New Debt Collection Ask-A-Lawyer Program begins in January 2019!

Do you need legal advice about a debt collection matter? If so, we are offering free attorney

consultations monthly at the Civil Law Self Help Center located at 200 Lewis Ave. Please bring

relevant paperwork and click here for more details.

Guardianship reform after investigation hits 4 year mark January 10, 2019 ABC 13 KTNV Las VegasDarcy Spears Driving change is our mission at KTNV because we want to elevate Las Vegas making it a safer place tolive for everyone. We launched a years-long investigation into massive abuses against the elderly anddisabled. Now we're ready to tell you about the results. Read Full Article

https://www.ktnv.com/news/investigations/guardianship-reform-after-ktnv-investigation-hits-4-year-mark

13

Bank of Nevada Receives Award of Excellence for Its Commitment to Legal Aid Services January 8, 2019 Nevada Business PressRed 7 Communications Bank of Nevada has been recognized for its extraordinary efforts to support legal aid and pro bonoservices for Nevadans who might not otherwise be able to afford them. Read Full Article

https://www.nevadabusiness.com/2019/01/bank-of-nevada-receives-award-of-excellence-for-its-commitment-to-legal-aid-services/

1


Quarterly Nevada Legal Aid Provider/ATJC Meeting - Highlights Friday, April 12, 2019 – 10:00 a.m.

Attendees Present Julie Bobzien Barbara Buckley Venicia Considine James Conway Annamarie Johnson Sugar Vogel

ATJC Staff Present Brad Lewis

This was a one hour call focused primarily on pro bono and fundraising. Brad gave a brief recap of recent goal actions. We need more pro bono headshots and quotes to continue the recognition (and potentially recruitment) program from all providers if we want to continue. We can discuss this in conjunction with pro bono promotion. We then delved into the agenda at hand.

Pro Bono

The view is that pro bono participation is flat at best or even potentially declining and that it’s time to re-energize pro bono participation. Research done on the Chicago Investing in Justice Campaign and a review of successes during the One Campaign reinforced the need for full cooperation/coordination between all legal aid providers and also increased engagement from target leaders and sectors of the legal community.

It was agreed that Brad would arrange a call within the next couple of weeks to include all core legal aid providers and key pro bono staff to brainstorm a refreshed plan for encouraging and building pro bono in Nevada. The call agenda will be:

• Discuss the need• Establish goals• Determine theme• Discuss action steps to achieve goals• Outline engagement (to include Judiciary, law firms (LG, MD, SM), government legal leaders/attorneys

(AG, DA, PD, public attorneys), and potentially Bar sections and specialty bars, etc.)

Fundraising

A few topics were covered:

2

• NFL social justice/Raiders/legal aid partnership – Anna attempted to reach out and also provided Bradwith contact information at the NFL to potentially discuss a relationship. Neither had success. Brad toresearch current KC Chiefs and Green Bay Packers relationships as examples. James to inquire viaMcDonald Carano (who we understand are the Raiders Nevada legal firm of record) to see if we can get toa contact for discussions.

• Las Vegas music residency programs – Sugar noted that many new music star Las Vegas residencies pairwith a local non-profit. It is something to keep on the radar for any potential opportunity. Annamentioned an idea she had about Property Brothers, them living in Las Vegas and housing being such anissue. All can keep the ideas flowing and pursue good ideas.

• In lieu of pro bono – Our focus with pro bono will be on volunteer attorney recruitment. However, we willprovide the option to donate in lieu of pro bono.

• Kentucky Derby – Bank of Nevada has just 6 RSVPs and no tables sold for the Kentucky Derby eventscheduled for Saturday, May 4. Brad called Sarah Guindy to say the providers discussed and gentlysuggest perhaps we regroup and come at the partnership from a new angle. Sarah agreed but will firstlook into sunk costs, discuss with her team, and get back with us.

Providers Updates to Submit

It was suggested each provider offer an update on the following, which may help direct pro bono and/or fundraising so we are prepared/coordinated as we move forward. Brad will also review the Statewide Service Delivery Plan for relevancy for actions.

Each provider to share an update and outline of their respective:

• Fundraising• Projects• Service gaps• The need(s) being seen >>> plans to do something about the need(s)• Does the combined information present a “theme” which may be used jointly to increase pro

bono/fundraising?

1


IOLTA Rate Review Meeting Recap - Draft Tuesday, April 23, 2019 – 3:00 p.m.

Present Justice James Hardesty Justice Kristina Pickering Connie Akridge Barbara Buckley John Desmond Noah Malgeri Doreen Spears Hartwell Adam Tully

Staff Present Kim Farmer Brad Lewis

This was another call to continue the exploration of a Nevada IOLTA interest rate adjustment. To continue to explore a potential interest increase, we have met with or gotten feedback from Bank of Nevada, Wells Fargo, Nevada State Bank, and had a brief call with Citi National Bank.

Based on those conversations and several recent increases in the Federal Funds Target Rate, many believe it is warranted to increase the Nevada IOLTA rate. At the same time, it was discussed that we need to be sensitive to cost concerns, particularly for smaller banks and banks with small IOLTA accounts.

Based on discussions from the last call, Brad obtained a deep dive analysis into various IOLTA rate scenarios. This included a variety of IOLTA remittances based on funds on deposit at various interest rates ranging from 0.50% to 1.20%. The scenarios also included an account analysis of IOLTA remittances at various individual account sizes ranging from $50,000 to $250,000, and even a review of accounts at or above $1,000,000.

There were two key reasons for this review. One was the suggestion from Wells Fargo that a tiered rate might make sense. They explained that it is more costly to manage lower dollar accounts. Secondly, the Nevada Bar Foundation was particularly concerned about smaller banks and smaller accounts.

The conversation then turned to a discussion of tiered rates. It was suggested that this may, indeed, be a way to continue the full involvement of all participating financial institutions. It was hoped that all would continue, and no attorneys would need to change their IOLTA account location due to lack of future participation by financial institutions in Nevada IOLTA. It was decided we should work to accommodate smaller financial institutions.

We then discussed more specifics, including the potential to maintain 0.70% for smaller accounts but raising the rates to 0.90% or 1.0% for larger accounts. The discussion assumed a tier cutoff of $200,000 to $250,000. A decision factoring in these variables has the potential to increase remittances by $900,000 over the course of a year. Brad was asked to do a further analysis adding in more potential tier amounts in order to identify the best tier cutoff amount.

Justice Hardesty then asked for feedback from the Committee. There was general concurrence with the discussions at hand and all felt we’re heading in the right direction. A couple suggested that 0.70% as the lowest rate may not always make sense into perpetuity but felt it was fine for now. It was shared that what is outlined

2

preserves the 1.2% rate as a voluntary rate for leading financial institutions. A question arose about if it is difficult for financial institutions to pay tiered rates. Brad shared that we have some doing that now but he would make further inquiries.

It was then suggested that Brad survey other states on any split rate programs, with a focus on western states. Then Brad and Justice Hardesty could converse on the added tier analysis, other state information, and develop a recommendation for how we will advance for an electronic vote by the full Committee. Should there be further questions a call could be set for the afternoon of Monday, April 29.

We then briefly touched upon the need to update Nevada Supreme Court Rule 217 for both a clean up and to clarify multiple rate language. The rule should reflect that the Federal Funds Target Rate may be the rate benchmark used to tie future increases. It was agreed the six month rate review rule by the Access to Justice Commission would remain in place. A draft should be ready for review by the full Commission at the June 14, 2019 meeting.

Nevada IOLTA “Leadership Institutions” Program

Thank you for your participation or interest in the Nevada IOLTA Leadership Institution Program.

Leadership Institutions have agreed to pay at least 1.2% on all IOLTA accounts under deposit.

Program & Recognition Details:

Financial institutions that voluntarily agree to pay a minimum of 50 basis points (half a percent,

0.50%) above the lowest “floor” Nevada IOLTA interest rate set by the Nevada Supreme Court

Access to Justice Commission (Commission) on all accounts are placed into a category of their

own, “Leadership Institutions”. (Currently 0.70% + 0.50% = 1.20%.) This may also operate as a

% on top of a new % of FFTR rule when in place.

“Leadership Institutions” would receive the following recognition:

o Website – listed in a special section at the top of the IOLTA financial institution listing.

Listings would include a logo, a direct link to the bank’s IOLTA page (if available), and a

personal contact at the financial institution.

o Nevada Lawyer

Half Page Advertisement Complimentary with Paid Ads – on an annual basis,

opportunity to submit a half page advertisement for complimentary placement

in Nevada Lawyer if paid ads total $3500 or more. May be requested for a

particular month, but would be run on a space available basis.

At announcement – complimentary mention in “news&notes” section

o State Bar of Nevada E-News

At announcement – complimentary mention of Leadership Institution status

Biannually, opportunity to submit a digital advertisement for complimentary

placement in State Bar of Nevada E-News which could be requested for a

particular week, but which would be run on a space available basis.

o State Bar of Nevada Annual Meeting

Supreme Court Justice mention of importance of IOLTA program and all

participating banks, with named mention of all Leadership Institutions

o Special mention in the Nevada Bar Foundation Annual Report for each year the bank

remains as a Leadership Institution



o Quotes from State Bar of Nevada and/or Nevada Bar Foundation leadership for inclusion

in financial institution press release

o Other special announcements

State Bar of Nevada Board of Governors

Nevada Bar Foundation Board of Trustees


Nevada’s five core legal aid providers (who in turn will promote)

Social media posts - Access to Justice Commission Twitter & Facebook accounts

Social media posts - State Bar of Nevada Twitter & Facebook accounts

o Periodic social media posts recognizing named “Leadership Institutions”

Other IOLTA participants, now referred to as “Sustaining Financial Institutions” would receive:

o Website –

For banks paying standard rates - regular listing, as is currently done

For banks paying rates higher than standard rates, but not 1.2% on all IOLTA

accounts – listed in regular bank listing but with a link to bank web home page

o Meeting mentions – mentions at various meetings with thanks for funding IOLTA

o Nevada Lawyer Advertisements –

Featured with other IOLTA-participating financial institutions on Nevada Bar

Foundation ads periodically placed in Nevada Lawyer

When a new financial institution joins they will receive a complimentary

mention in “news&notes” section

o State Bar of Nevada E-News – biannual thanks to all Nevada IOLTA-participating


o State Bar of Nevada Annual Meeting - Supreme Court Justice mention of importance of

IOLTA program and all participating financial institutions

o Included in the Nevada Bar Foundation Annual Report



o Periodic social media posts recognizing and thanking Nevada IOLTA-participating


MEET YOURFINANCIALHEROES

NEVADA

BAR

FO

UNDATIO

N

LEADERSHIP

INSTITUTIONS

Bank of Nevada

First IndependentBank

Meadows Bank

Nevada Bank & Trust

Royal Business Bank

American First National BankBank of AmericaBank of GeorgeBank of the WestBMO Harris BankCitibankCity National BankEast West BankFinancial Horizons Credit UnionFirst Foundation BankFirst Savings BankFirst Security Bank of NevadaHeritage BankJP Morgan Chase & Co.Kirkwood Bank of NevadaMutual of OmahaNevada State BankNorthern Trust BankPacific Premiere BankPlumas BankSilver State Schools Credit UnionTown and Country BankUmpqua BankUS BankValley Bank of Nevada (BNLV)Washington FederalWells Fargo

Annually, more than $500million is held in Nevada lawyer

trust accounts. These financial institutions have agreed to pay

favorable rates on all IOLTA accounts under deposit.

Leadership institutions have committed to a rate of 1.2%.

The Nevada Bar Foundation grants more than 97% of the interestearned on these dollars - $4.5 million - to statewide legal serviceorganizations serving more than 37,000 Nevada families.

WW

W.N

EV

AD

AB

AR

FO

UN

DA

TIO

N.O

RG

NEVADA BANKERS ASSOCIATION E-NEWSLETTER 5/31/19

The IOLTA Report: Justice for All?

Did You Know? Participating in the Nevada IOLTA Program Promotes Your Financial Institution to the Legal

Community.

The Nevada Supreme Court requires that Nevada attorneys hold IOLTA accounts in financial institutions with a

physical presence in Nevada, and that agree to certain procedures and interest rates set forth in Nevada Supreme

Court Rule 217. More than 30 financial institutions participate in the Nevada IOLTA program. You help make the

IOLTA program a success.

The Access to Justice Commission and the State Bar of Nevada (state bar) think it’s important for Nevada’s lawyers

to be aware of your involvement in the IOLTA program. The state bar promotes and recognizes you in state bar

communications. This includes a website listing of approved financial institutions, mentions and reminders at select

legal education meetings and gatherings, and advertisements in the state bar’s monthly magazine, Nevada

Lawyer. You are periodically featured in advertisements in the state bar’s weekly eNews. Financial institutions are

also featured on promotional rack cards at the state bar offices in Reno and Las Vegas, in various exhibits, receive

social media recognition, and are listed in the annual report of the Nevada Bar Foundation. When you elect to

participate at the Leadership Institution level you receive additional recognition.

Interest from IOLTA accounts are pooled and directed to the Nevada Bar Foundation which grants funds to help

Nevadans struggling to make ends meet get the legal help they need with civil matters. Without legal help, justice for

all is difficult to achieve. Access to legal information or an attorney for advice, guidance or representation, promotes

fair outcomes, social stability, and reduces strain on the courts speeding court dockets for all court customers.

The Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission thanks all Nevada IOLTA-participating financial

institutions for helping to assure everyone has access to the civil justice system. If you have an idea for how we can

feature and promote financial institutions, or to participate, please contact us at [email protected].

By Brad Lewis, Director, Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission

mailto:[email protected]

1


Pro Bono Promotion Call #1 Recap

April 25, 2019 – 2:00 p.m.

Present Julie Bobzien Barbara Buckley James Conway Noah Malgeri Martha Menendez Cindy Morales Marissa Otteson Sugar Vogel Edith Zarate


This call was to begin discussions about how we refresh the promotion of pro bono in Nevada and increase the number of people taking cases, and valuing and promoting pro bono. The discussions followed these concepts:

• Discuss the need• Establish goals• Determine theme• Discuss action steps to achieve goals• Outline engagement (to include Judiciary, law firms (LG, MD, SM), government legal leaders/attorneys

(AG, DA, PD, public attorneys), and potentially Bar sections and specialty bars, etc.)

We began with a review of the One Promise campaign and its premise, which was that about a third of lawyers are doing pro bono, a third never will, and the final third can potentially be influenced to take a case. By avoiding a push about hours, and making a simple ask of taking one case, is both a great help, easily communicated, and the basis for the One Campaign. That being said, there is potentially an opportunity to leverage Rule 6.1.

The discussion then turned to what are the biggest motivators and incentives. It was pointed out that our study last year identified “support from the top” as being the single largest motivator for people to take a pro bono case. In fact, the next couple of reasons were, essentially, another way of saying someone has asked you to take a case and are supporting you volunteering pro bono.

This led to a brief sharing of success from the Chicago Justice Initiative, which is designed around influential attorneys and those with leading firms challenging both the profession at large and attorneys within their firms, to take a case. This was reinforced by someone sharing that it takes the right people giving the right signals to move the needle.

Brad shared that a review of the history of the One Campaingn at its height showed many people involved and much outreach through many avenues.

2

We then asked each person on the call to share their thoughts and suggestions about what might be successful, below is the recap:

• Discuss a plan to leverage the Justices at the Supreme Court session at the SBN Annual Meetingo Justice Hardesty suggested he could take the opportunity, introduce Justice Pickering as new

ATJC Co-Chair and she could make reasonable ask recommended by this group during SC sessiono Ideas – share that pro bono case taking is down, important to call attention to, refresh One

Campaign, challenge audience members to be ambassador (we could pre-seed volunteers?)• Identify key influencers/leaders will to motivate taking of pro bono cases within their firm and get more• Target ambassadors from State Bar of Nevada sections to promote pro bono (competition?)• Ask for the help of local and specialty bar associations• Leverage free CLE in a more impactful way (3-4 hours credit) for taking a case pro bono• Investigate the ability to get CLE credit hours for taking a case

o Brad looked into & one avenue may be to formalize a pro bono mentor program (CLE for mentor)• Promote that it’s “enjoyable” to take a case, avoid the “have-to/rule” and focus on the “feel good/need”

v. obligation• Consider raising funds in the rurals to develop “low bono” program for cases (E.g. $75/hr. Judi-Care?)• Remove barriers to attorneys saying “yes”

o Offer free CLE/knowledge/mentoring about how to handle target case typeso Discuss focus on crim. rec. seal, name changes, bankruptcy, wills, LL/T, other easy

• Leverage opportunities for attorneys to say “yes”o Referrals from judges – is there a way to formalize?

• Promote cases with discrete and predictable timelines with a pitch reinforcing “we get it”• Determine how to leverage pro bono week to promote cause 10/20-26/19

It was discussed we should begin to create a set of goals that can guide our actions toward improvement. Ideas included:

• Get 25% of Nevada-based attorneys who have not taken a pro bono case in the last 2 years to take a case• Identify one leader at 50% of large, 25% of medium, and 10% of small firms to commit to encouraging one

case taken from at least 50% of attorneys on staff• Get at least 2 government attorney pairs in key (need to name) rural Nevada towns that will agree to

hosting an Ask-an-Attorney quarterly for up to 1 hour each – or – potentially target one case type, E.g.LL/T

• Craft specific goals from other bullets above and other ideas with the ability to make an impacto What, specifically, will we do, including numbers?o By when? (2019? Or 2019-2020?)o Who is assigned?

1



May 6, 2019 – 10:00 a.m.

Present Julie Bobzien Barbara Buckley James Conway Annamarie Johnson Noah Malgeri Cindy Morales Sugar Vogel


This call was to continue discussions about how we refresh the promotion of pro bono in Nevada and increase the number of people taking cases, and valuing and promoting pro bono. The focus was on outlining specific, measurable goals to advance the program.

These intial goals were shared, crafted from the last discussion:

• Get 25% of Nevada-based attorneys who have not taken a pro bono case in the last 2 years to take a case• Identify one leader at 50% of large, 25% of medium, and 10% of small firms to commit to encouraging one

case taken from at least 50% of attorneys on staffo It was determined to consider firm sizes of:

Large = 20 or more attorneys Medium = 10-19 attorneys Small = 9 or fewer attorneys

• Get at least 2 government attorney pairs in key (need to name) rural Nevada towns that will agree tohosting an Ask-an-Attorney quarterly for up to 1 hour each – or – potentially target one case type, E.g.LL/T

o Towns suggested – Elko, Ely, Fallon, Yerington, Hawthorne, Winnemucca What about – Battle Mountain, Lovelock, Tonopah?

o It was discussed we should have rural/Government attorney goals and urban attorney goalso The discussion seemed to settle on an “Ask-an-Attorney” for rural government attorneys and to

consider landlord/tenant support for urban attorneys

It was discussed that we need to decide, specifically, how to both launch the initiative and keep the momentum going.

A key additional idea was to develop a program focused on non-law firm actors, specifically corporate legal departments, to pledge to adopt specific pro bono policies that encourage pro bono and value same in awarding business as a way to support the community. An added idea is for specific firms adopting a certain type of pro bono case type that they take on. Noah is working with Connie Akridge to develop a sample program for sharing.

2

It was decided we should leverage the full Commission as well as others to be identified so that we have a wide array of messengers encouraging increased pro bono.

Here are further ideas for goal consideration: (From 042519 memo, with updates.) • Discuss a plan to leverage the Justices at the Supreme Court session at the SBN Annual Meeting

o Justice Hardesty suggested he could take the opportunity, introduce Justice Pickering as newATJC Co-Chair and she could make reasonable ask recommended by this group during SC session

o Ideas – share that pro bono case taking is down, important to call attention to, refresh OneCampaign, challenge audience members to be ambassador (we could pre-seed volunteers?)

• Identify key influencers/leaders will to motivate taking of pro bono cases within their firm and get more• Target ambassadors from State Bar of Nevada sections to promote pro bono (competition?)• Ask for the help of local and specialty bar associations

o Those target in the past from above include – family law section, Latino bar, CCBA, WCBA,SNAWA, NNAWA, LGBT, Public Lawyers Conference, YLS, SMOLO, etc.

• Leverage free CLE in a more impactful way (3-4 hours credit) for taking a case pro bono• Investigate the ability to get CLE credit hours for taking a case

o Brad looked into & one avenue may be to formalize a pro bono mentor program (CLE for mentor)• Promote that it’s “enjoyable” to take a case, avoid the “have-to/rule” and focus on the “feel good/need”

v. obligation• Consider raising funds in the rurals to develop “low bono” program for cases (E.g. $75/hr. Judi-Care?)• Remove barriers to attorneys saying “yes”

o Offer free CLE/knowledge/mentoring about how to handle target case typeso Discuss focus on crim. rec. seal, name changes, bankruptcy, wills, LL/T, other easy

• Leverage opportunities for attorneys to say “yes”o Referrals from judges – is there a way to formalize?

• Promote cases with discrete and predictable timelines with a pitch reinforcing “we get it”• Determine how to leverage pro bono week to promote cause 10/20-26/19

Other historical ideas included – current pro bono ambassadors “Inspire One!” to take a case, lunches/events, TIP, Boyd, Judicial marketing/encourage participation.

It was discussed that the program emphasis should be on taking a case, secondarily conducting two Ask-A-Lawyer sessions, or in lieu of pro bono, consider a donation. The focus is getting attorneys to take a case.

1



May 30, 2019 – 2:00 p.m.

Present Barbara Buckley James Conway Noah Malgeri Martha Menendez Brittni Tanenbaum Sugar Vogel Edith Zarate


This call was to continue discussions about how we refresh the promotion of pro bono in Nevada, increasing the number of people taking cases, and valuing and promoting pro bono. The focus was on gaining feedback to researched concepts and ideas from the recent Equal Justice Conference to advance the program, along with discussing ideas deemed essential to success.

We began the call by recapping the last call and noting the importance of generating a certain level of excitement and enthusiasm about the pro bono program being reinvigorated and making it easy for people to act. Of course, getting back to involving more people and re-energizing the “ask” will also be an important part of the efforts.

It was noted we have two upcoming opportunities to leverage. One is the full Access to Justice Commission meeting on June 14, the other is the State Bar of Nevada Annual Meeting during the Supreme Court presentation. It would be helpful to get some input into preliminary plans for pro bono promotion from the Commission, and to create some excitement and make an ask for support at the Annual Meeting.

We then reviewed and discussed the following documents: • “Refresh Pro Bono Campaign Ideas” from the Equal Justice Conference• “Pro Bono Key Actions to Reinvigorate Campaign” for potential ideas for sharing at Annual Meeting• “Ideas for Culture Shift Involving Large Corporations” (legal departments, from LACSN intern Brittni T.)

Rather than rehashing these documents, they are available from the Commission upon request.

CLE was discussed in two contexts. One was leveraging more CLE credits (3-4 hours) combined with taking a case. The other was to trial “the business case for pro bono” CLEs to encourage particpation.

It was suggested that in addition to select ideas on documents above, we should likely maintain key actions making a difference in the past such as leveraging current pro bono volunteers as ambassadors through the One Campaign to “Inspire One!” in identifying new volunteers, as well as getting proactively back out in-the-field with ambassadors presenting the campaign and inviting participation through various bar groups.

2

Ideas for involving corporate legal and social responsibility departments to help address a community need of interest was discussed as holding promise.

A discussion about creating the right scenarios for government attorneys to participate was discussed. The feeling seems to be that targeting landlord/tenant and/or debt collection, through on site court volunteers and/or Ask-A-Lawyer sessions, were potentially the best bet that would work in both urban and rural Nevada. These could potentially be positioned as “Help Address the Housing Crisis” or “Help Eliminate Debt Problems” to focus on solving problems. Another items of note included working with under-utilized bar sections promotign a specific case type or “ask”.

It was agreed that Brad could take a first stab at drafting a plan for group input to potentially be sharing for further feedback and input at the June 14 Commisson meeting, as well as detailing an idea for pro bono promotion through the Justices at the bar annual meeting.

Page 1

Total number customer interactions (for month) 4447 Total number served in 2019 12,811Total number of intake forms collected 321 % of parties returning forms 7%Total number of intake forms sampled 321 % of collected forms sampled 7%

White 58 18% Black 105 33% Hispanic 50 16% Asian 14 4% American Indian 7 2% Multi Racial 31 10%

No Response Provided 56 17%

60 and over 39 12%No Response Provided 56 17%

Unemployed 70 22% Under $10,000 23 7% $10,000 to $20,000 47 15% $20,000 to $30,000 19 6% $30,000 to $40,000 30 9% $40,000 to $50,000 25 8% $50,000 plus 41 13%


District Court 26 8% Justice Court 0% Las Vegas 157 49% Henderson 2 1% North Las Vegas 9 3% Other 25 8% Nevada Supreme Court/Appeals 1 0%

No Case or No Response Provided 101 31%

Appeal 6 2% Auto Sale/Lease, Repair, Towing 3 1% Consumer Debt or Loan 4 1% Contract Dispute 2 1% Employment Dispute 3 1% Foreclosure Mediation Assistant 1 0% Garnishment or Execution 1 0% Guardianship 0% Harassment or Protection Order 19 6% Homeowner Eviction 13 4% Judicial Review 6 2% Landlord/Tenant Dispute or Eviction 89 28%

CIVIL LAW SELF-HELP CENTER STATISTICSMarch 2019

3/01/2019 to 3/31/2019 (21 operating days)

General

Biographical DataEthnicity:

Age:

Reason for Visit to the SHC:

Annual Household Income:

Court Case Pending In:

Page 2

Mediation 1 0% Mobile Home Sales, Repairs, or Eviction 20 6% Personal Injury/Property Damage 0% Probate 13 4% Small Claims Case 24 7% Other 33 10%


Awesome 198 62% Just OK 27 8% Bad 4 1%


Happy happy

Kat was sweet and knowledgeable

Everyone was very helpful and pleasant

Kat was amazingly helpful and patient. Prescilla was also amazing and very helpful. All of the staff was great. They were professional, courteous, helpful, kind, patient, and understanding. Not once did I feel

All of worker NEED MORE MONEY THEY WORK HARD and DO A GREAT JOBAll I can say was Kat was so helpful, kind and very patient to me. I was nervous but still she was patient.

like they just wanted me to go away like at the DMV. They were awesome.

Everyone friendly smiling and made me feel comfortable

Every question was answered in timely mannerEverybody cares, great customer service.

Satisfaction Data

Other Comments and Suggestions

Overall satisfaction:

that needed to be complete gave me all the help I needed to get my court documents filed today on a

Its nice to see people helping good people in hard times

Friday. She deserves a Gold Star or whatever recognition you have. Thanks for being here for people like

for me to complete my case. She is an asset to the citizens that come here for questions.Kat Williams was a comfort and went above and above. I think of her duty. Thank you.

me who can’t afford an attorney!

Kat is AWESOME! Thank you for your help and patience.Kat was extremely helpful in answering my questions. She went the extra mile by providing useful examples

direct me across the street to the law library. Just that bit of information and her knowledge of the forms

I really appreciate all the help that I was given far as making me aware of the law. Thanks.I was assisted by a lady named Kat. She was incredibly helpful with the appropriate documents that I

I love these people great help!

needed to complete for my probate court. While the forms that I needed were not available, she did

A lady named Kat helped me and she was awesome!

All the girls are awesome

Easy to use and helpful peopleEducation is what we need!

Excellent information from Kat Williams

All employees deserve a praise and vacation.

Awesome job for everybody. They are willing to help and very patient.

Great Personnel, Great Service, Pro Quality Treatment!

I don't know what I would do with the ladies in this office. They empower me and that's what we need.

Pam was so sweet and helpful

Kimberley Reid was very helpful w all the paperwork and explain everything word for word for me.

Pam, Lin, Kim, all helped me. They helped me and very friendly. Very knowledgeable.

May God continue to strengthen the workers and continue to bless every last one. Awesome team of Help

Page 3

Thank you for making it easy to get the forms I needed - small estate affidavit.The ladies and the gentlemen in this office are great

The staff especially Kat was fantastic. They all deserve a raise.

The two ladies who helped me today were extremely kind and helpful. They made sure I filled out the

The woman who notarized my documents was extremely understanding and polite, I felt very comfortable

They had helped so much now if I could bring them to court as my dictionary that would be great

The staff is AMAZING! Very patient and VERY PROFESSIONAL!

today.The young lady that helped me was and is awesome. Her name is Pam.

paperwork correctly so I would have no issues and I am very appreciative.

We wish we didn't have to be here. Thank you for not making it hard. - AubreiWonderful help and concern for my plight... the Ladies and the Gentlemen were Exemplary... My Sincere Thank you Re allYou all are awesome, fast and kind! Thank you!

are contributing to the 3% that give back

Staff was very welcoming and helpful

The staff are highly professional and very pleasant during such difficult situations; Thank you!The service is way faster than the dmv

We should have more people in this area doing community help. Thank you for these women and men that

They are always so helpful and friendly with my evictions

Very helpful in telling us what forms to fill out and what to expect

You guys are great!

This is my 3rd visit to the self help center and my experience has been great

AnalyticsCivil Law Self-Help Center

All Web Site Data Go to report

City Users % Users

1. (not set) 28,515 8.22%

2. Los Angeles 13,670 3.94%

3. New York 10,239 2.95%

4. Las Vegas 9,045 2.61%

5. Chicago 6,816 1.96%

6. Dallas 5,499 1.58%

7. Houston 5,276 1.52%

8. Atlanta 5,177 1.49%

9. Phoenix 4,005 1.15%

10. Washington 3,797 1.09%

Audience Overview

Jan 1, 2019 - Mar 31, 2019

Overview

Users

February 2019 March 2019

2,0002,0002,000

4,0004,0004,000

6,0006,0006,000

Users

337,188New Users

327,380Sessions

421,356

Number of Sessions per User

1.25Pageviews

741,979Pages / Session

1.76

Avg. Session Duration

00:01:37Bounce Rate

74.73%

New Visitor Returning Visitor

13.4%

86.6%

© 2019 Google

All Users100.00% Users

https://analytics.google.com/analytics/web/?utm_source=pdfReportLink#/report/visitors-overview/a44522264w75869884p78428421/_u.date00=20190101&_u.date01=20190331&overview-dimensionSummary.selectedGroup=demographics&overview-dimensionSummary.selectedDimension=analytics.city

Total number customer interactions (for month) 4146 Total number served in 2019 12,065Total number of intake forms collected 154 % of parties returning forms 4%Total number of intake forms sampled 154 % of collected forms sampled 100%

White 30 19% Black 35 23% Hispanic 61 40% Asian 5 3% American Indian 1 1% Other 5 3%


60 and over 10 6%No Response Provided 47 31%

Unemployed 26 17% Under $10,000 13 8% $10,000 to $20,000 29 19% $20,000 to $30,000 20 13% $30,000 to $40,000 16 10% $40,000 to $50,000 7 5% $50,000 plus 12 8%


One 53 34% Two 26 17% Three 12 8% More 19 12%


Adoption 0% Annulment 1 1% Child Support 4 3% Custody 55 36% Divorce 65 42% Domestic Partnership 0% Foreign Judgment 0% Guardianship 9 6% Juvenile Matters 0% Legal Separation 0% Name Change 8 5% Paternity 0% Termination of Parental Rights 1 1% Visitation 3 2% Other 7 5%

FAMILY LAW SELF-HELP CENTER STATISTICSMarch 2019

3/1/2019 to 3/31/2019 (21 operating days)

General

Biographical DataEthnicity:

Age:

Reason for Visit to the SHC:

Annual Household Income:

Number of Visits to the SHC:

Page 1


Out of total providing satisfaction information:

Strongly Agree 108 70% Agree 18 12% Disagree 0% Strongly Disagree 0% No Opinion 2 1%


Strongly Agree 96 62% Agree 33 21% Disagree 0% Strongly Disagree 0% No Opinion 0% Did Not Receive Forms or Materials this Visit 0%


Strongly Agree 92 60% Agree 31 20% Disagree 1 1% Strongly Disagree 0% No Opinion 2 1%


Very Satisfied 96 62% Satisfied 25 16% Unsatisfied 0% Very Unsatisfied 0%


Satisfaction Data

The forms and other written materials at the SHC were clear, helpful, and instructional:

Other Comments and Suggestions

The staff was knowledgeable, helpful and understandable:

I understand the court process and my situation better now than before I came to FLSHC

Overall Satisfaction

Very helpful for someone like myself who has no idea how all this works. Very helpful and professional

paperwork I needed. I was lost and confused when I came in but she helped me. All with a smile

Karla was very friendly & helpful!How wonderful they always are :) such a blessing for so many families facing so many issues legally

Karla was amazing!!

and friendly manner. Thank you very much.

Karla helped us so much. She did everything she could for us. She is very knowledgeable. She was the best person here. Thank you Karla

confident on what my next step was.

Erin was a pleasure to speak with. She's very knowledgeable of her job. She rocks!

Most helpful. Blanca gave me all the info I needed.Erin has helped me multiple times and is extremely friendly.

Karla was exceptional. Very friendly and helpful. She made me feel at ease and helped me file the Lesa is amazing she made being honest possible thank you

The person Blanca who helped me was sensitive to my situation and took the time to ensure I left

This office service is very much needed. Window 17 is great thank you.

I was helped from the moment I walked in. The process was very fast. Everything I have to do was thoroughly explained.

Page 2

Celina was greatKarla was so helpful & very kind made this "trip" an easy process

Blanca was very helpful and patient and help me with 100% confidence great attitude and well respected

I was helped by Celina at the window desk. She was so sensitive to my needs. And was extremely

Very helpful with Blanca

Big help! Explained the process very clearly

Lesa was great and helpful. Giving me the relief I need to move forward with my case.

Ms. Karla was very helpful. And Ms. Celina thank you. employee. If in the future I need help I will directly ask for her, Blanca.

I like the idea we get to see a TPO judge the very same day. It's just so time consuming of the waiting

friendly.

Blanca was very helpful, she took her time to help me and guide me through everything.

period. The staff here are excellent I must say and are very professional volunteers are amazing too.

Blanca was very helpful, sweet, and funny. I wish more people were like this working for the government.

Amazing, helpful, very knowledgeable and friendly.Blanca was extremely helpful during the process and filling out form. Very nice very polite.

Karla in self service was very helpful. She was very nice and made me understand a lot of things in my

I truly appreciate all the assistance I received from Erin. She is very knowledgeable, professional and

She was very knowledgeable of her job

paperwork.

Cinthia was very helpful great service

I will definitely be back! Thank you for this assistance.

without her help. I would have been extremely lost. Thank you all for having services like this.

my questions.Very kind supportive, helpful- she took the time to make sure I understood I really appreciate Ms. Blanca

Celina is marvelous - patient & compassionate. She explained everything to me when I was really

& lots of knowledge. She is great - she helped me 4 times. feeling bad emotionally (getting a divorce is hard). She made me feel better just with her soothing way

very pleasant to work with Blanca great attitude.

Gicola was the world's greatest. Best communication the greatest.Karla was very helpful, friendly, and respectful. She listened well and showed respect and answered all

confidently with a divorce agreement. Which was lengthy and time process.The self help center truly provided me with vital information I need to move forward, positively and

Karla is so helpful and resourceful. Her customer service is very satisfying. She is the puzzle to my life

Page 3

AnalyticsFamily Law Self Help Center

All Web Site Data Go to report

City Users % Users

1. (not set) 33,590 11.14%

2. Los Angeles 12,994 4.31%

3. Las Vegas 12,235 4.06%

4. New York 6,909 2.29%

5. Chicago 6,178 2.05%

6. Dallas 5,769 1.91%

7. Houston 4,773 1.58%

8. Atlanta 4,645 1.54%

9. Phoenix 4,516 1.50%

10. Washington 2,746 0.91%

Audience Overview

Jan 1, 2019 - Mar 31, 2019

Overview

Users

February 2019 March 2019

2,0002,0002,000

4,0004,0004,000

6,0006,0006,000

Users

286,134New Users

277,026Sessions

394,605

Number of Sessions per User

1.38Pageviews

859,636Pages / Session

2.18

Avg. Session Duration

00:01:56Bounce Rate

64.63%

New Visitor Returning Visitor

16.2%

83.8%

© 2019 Google

All Users100.00% Users

https://analytics.google.com/analytics/web/?utm_source=pdfReportLink#/report/visitors-overview/a2272248w90227506p93817607/_u.date00=20190101&_u.date01=20190331&overview-dimensionSummary.selectedGroup=demographics&overview-dimensionSummary.selectedDimension=analytics.city/

SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT STATISTICS WASHOE COUNTY LAW LIBRARY IN PERSON VISITS

JANUARY-MAY 2019

TIME GENERAL PUBLIC ATTY OR OTH LGL PROF TOTAL

8:00 AM - 10:00 AM 444 54 49810:00 AM - 12:00 PM 1269 127 139612:00 PM - 3:00 PM 1369 136 15053:00 PM - 5:00 PM 1795 70 18655:00 PM - 7:00 PM 1118 22 1140

TOTAL 6404

WASHOE COUNTY LAW LIBRARY TELEPHONE CALLS

JANUARY-MAY 2019

TIME GENERAL PUBLIC ATTY OR OTH LGL PROF TOTAL

8:00 AM - 10:00 AM 115 4 11910:00 AM - 12:00 PM 274 9 28312:00 PM - 3:00 PM 253 5 2583:00 PM - 5:00 PM 115 5 1205:00 PM - 7:00 PM 18 0 18

TOTAL 798

LAWYER IN THE LIBRARY

JANUARY-MAY 2019

PROGRAMS PARTICIPANTS PARTICIPANTS TURNED AWAY

Family Law 333 10General Law 214 12Probate 59 0

TOTAL 606 22

WASHOE COUNTY LAW LIBRARY ELECTRONIC USAGE

JANUARY-MAY 2019

ELECTRONIC USAGE TOTALCirculation of Books 105EBSCO 92Email- Ask a Librarian 30Inhouse Usage 431Internet/ Contexte 549Westlaw Searches 5000

TOTAL 6207

SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT STATISTICS WASHOE COUNTY LAW LIBRARY REFERENCE

JANUARY-MAY 2019

REFERENCE QUESTIONS GENERAL PUBLIC ATTY OR OTH LGL PROF TOTALFamily Law

Adoption/ Termination of Parental Rights 25 0 25Answers 30 0 30Child Custody 36 0 36Child Support 14 0 14Divorce/ Annulment/Separation 81 0 81Domestic Violence/TPO/EPO 50 0 50Family Court Procedures/Packets 160 0 160Guardianships Adult/Minor 90 0 90Name Change Adult/Minor 47 0 47Motions/Notice/Emergency 90 0 90Oppositions/Objections 9 0 9

Law Library ReferenceAppeals 11 0 11Civil Complaints/Petitions 85 0 85Civil Procedure/State/Federal 46 1 47Civil Rights/Constitutional Law 9 0 9Contract 3 2 5Criminal Law and Defense 33 0 33Employment/Labor 13 0 13Immigration 5 0 5Landlord/Tenant Rights 34 0 34Medical 2 0 2Military/Veterans Rights 0 0 0Personal Injury/Damages 2 0 2Probate/Wills/Trusts/Estate Planning 81 2 83Rogue Title 4 0 4Sealing of Criminal Record 45 0 45

Law Library ServicesLiberty Catalog/Circulation 130 99 229Copier Use/ Change 192 23 215Eflex / E-Filing 125 5 130Internet/ Contexte 485 33 518Lawyer in the Library Info./Referrals 266 1 267Westlaw 188 231 419

Other FunctionsCopies of Court Records 17 1 18Referrals To Other Services/NLS/WLS 122 0 122Other 177 22 199

TOTAL 3127

SELF HELP CENTER IN PERSON VISITS JANUARY - MAY 2019

DATE MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY TOTAL1/1/19 - 5/31/19 932 902 809 749 319 3711

TOTAL 3711

SELF HELP CENTER IN PERSON VISITS BY TIME JANUARY - MAY 2019

DATE TOTAL8:00 AM - 10:00 AM 49 137 107 166 88 54710:00 AM - 12:00 PM 111 293 256 262 204 112612:00 PM - 3:00 PM 137 302 261 285 278 12633:00 PM - 4:30 PM 95 192 166 152 170 775

TOTAL 3711

SELF HELP CENTER TELEPHONE CALLS JANUARY - MAY 2019

TIME GENERAL PUBLIC ATTORNEY OR OTHER LGL PROF TOTAL8:00 AM - 10:00 AM 67710:00 AM - 12:00 PM 71112:00 PM - 3:00 PM 6173:00 PM - 4:30 PM 357

TOTAL 2362

Downloads from Website TOTAL 9704

SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT STATISTICS SELF HELP CENTER QUESTION TYPE

JANUARY - MAY 2019

NATURE OF PROBLEM GENERAL PUBLIC ATTORNEY OR OTHER LGL PROF TOTALAdoption - Adult 12Adoption - Minor 41Alimony / Spousal Support 16Annulment 31Answers / Oppositions 187Case Management Conference 44Child Support 198Civil Questions 82

SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT STATISTICS

44 0198 082 0

16 031 0187 0

354 3

12 041 0

670 7703 8613 4

Court Hearings 355Criminal Questions 107Custody and Visitation 346Default 47Divorce - Complaint 339Divorce - Joint Petition 252Domestic Violence / TPO 235Eflex / E-Filing 685Ex Parte Motions 243Fee Waiver 219Foreign Judgement - Out of State Custody Order 12Grandparent's Visitation 23Guardianship - Adult 146Guardianship - Minor Child(ren) 293Jurisdiction- Child 33Jurisdiction - Family 17Mediation 44Motion 508Name Change - Adult 123Name Change - Minor 64Notary 53Objection to Master's Recommendation 15Other 734Paternity 52Petition to Domesticate a Foreign Decree 10Probate 33Settlement Conference 14Spanish Speaking General Public 66Stalking / Harassment 24Status of Order 53Stipulations 58Subpoena / Deuces Tecum 6Termination of Parental Rights 64Trial 25Nevada Legal Services Forms Clinic 69Washoe Legal Services Forms Clinic 121

TOTAL 6099121 0

24 0

25 069 0

64 0

10 033 0

53 058 05 1

14 066 0

15 0715 1952 0

123 064 053 0

17 044 0506 2

144 2292 133 0

219 012 023 0

235 0684 1242 1

46 1338 1252 0

351 4107 0346 0

Public Awareness 061419 –

Since the March 22, 2019 report…

Twitter - We increased from 133,940 to 142,830 impressions and from 6,178 to 6,551profile visits. We encourage you to follow us @NevadaATJ.

Facebook – A 2019 goal for ATJC was to start a Facebook page. Started March 11, 2019,since the last report we have increased from 494 to 5,464 people reached andengagement increased from 247 to 369. Like us on Facebook by searching NevadaSupreme Court Access to Justice Commission.

Each new reach, impression, profile visit or engagement increases people’s understanding of

access to justice and the work of the Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission and

our legal aid and pro bono partners.

Documents

Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission · Nevada Supreme Court Access to Justice Commission. Meeting - Friday, June 14, 2019 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM . 2 . VI. Informational