The State Bar of California is due to issue its first progress update to the state Auditor later this month, to show efforts achieved in fixing the attorney discipline system.
The Auditor’s report from earlier this spring found that in the last five years, case processing times had grown by 56 percent, and the case backlog had increased by 87 percent.
“Auditees must provide our office with information regarding their progress in implementing recommendations we make in our reports at three intervals (at 60 days, six months, and one year) from the date we publish our report,” Margarita Fernández, CPA, California State Auditor Chief of Public Affairs & Quality Assurance, told the Northern California Record by email. “Additionally, auditees who have not implemented all our recommendations after one year must also report to us and the Legislature the status and reasons why they have not implemented them.”
The number of attorneys disciplined — including reprovals, suspensions, and disbarments — also has declined by 54 percent.
“We did note that the State Bar is disciplining attorneys at a dramatically lower rate for reasons it cannot adequately explain,” Fernández said.
The report notes this is even more concerning because the State Bar hasn’t clarified why resolutions have declined, even after they were to start prioritizing more serious cases three years ago.
California law mandates the State Bar contract with the California State Auditor to audit the State Bar’s operations every two years.
In a preface letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom and Legislative leaders, California Auditor Elaine Howle states, “These delays allow attorneys under investigation to continue practicing law while their cases are pending, increasing the potential for harm to the public. Moreover, the State Bar has not effectively monitored the impact of its reorganization because it does not adequately measure the performance of its discipline system staff.”
The report includes a response from the State Bar, which notes it has already undertaken implementation of recommendations, including best practices for procuring vendors for administration of the bar exam and gauging staff performance in concert with case processing benchmarks.