Page 117 - Impact: Collected Essays on Expanding Access to Justice

The upside of Disruption
It goes without saying that the potential benefits of expanded access to justice for low- and moderate-income Americans are too many to mention . Should new forms of legal services delivery truly expand access to justice, families who receive representation in housing court will have assistance avoiding homelessness . Individuals seeking Veterans Administration benefits will obtain health care, educational assistance, and counseling . Families fleeing intimate partner violence will find safety, housing, and assistance with any immigration issues they may face as a result of the violence they face . Workers will have assistance obtaining unemployment or workers compensation benefits . Families will avoid mortgage foreclosure . The benefits are legion . But in addition to the concrete and real benefits that will accrue to these individuals and families, a society that prides itself on the notion of “Equal Justice Under Law,” will be able to come closer to meeting that promise by ensuring that no one will have to face their legal problems without adequate legal representation .
The practical and societal benefits of greater access to justice that might come about should legal services become affordable for those who pay for their own services, or more accessible for those who still cannot, because the providers of free legal services to the indigent can meet more of the need for such services because the funding dollars go farther, are significant . However, what are the risks associated with this technology-enabled approach to the provision of legal services? The remainder of this essay attempts to identify those risks and assess their import, and whether they stand as barriers to a new access to justice paradigm made possible by disruptive innovation in the delivery of legal services .
The Downside of Disruption
Putting aside the fact that technology-enabled changes to the legal profession could mean significant disruption (for lack of a better term) of the incomes, job prospects, and plans of lawyers currently serving in incumbent firms, those in law school today, and those who still wish to attend law school in the near future, this essay will focus on some of the downside risk of disruptive innovation in the provision of legal services as it might impact low- and moderate- income consumers (and potential consumers) of legal services .
Will disruption really bring about greater access to justice on the lower end of the legal services market?
It is quite possible that Christensen’s model of disruptive innovation—where true disruption occurs at the lower end of the market and works its way up, eventually taking significant market share from incumbents until they completely displace those incumbents—will not happen in the legal services market . At present, while there are outliers, groups like Pro Bono Net, the national LawHelp network, CrowdDefend, and others that are looking to technology to help close the justice gap,11 most of the innovations in the delivery of legal services are targeted towards a wealthier clientele, or are being marketed directly to lawyers, not clients . While some websites are offering matchmaking services like LawDingo and Avvo, which make finding a lawyer easier, a group like LegalZoom appears to be the closest thing to a provider of legal services that is trying
11 Naree Chan, Can Technology Help the Middle Class Close the Justice Gap?, JurisT, Dec. 12, 2015, http://jurist.org/ professional/2015/12/naree-chan-justice-gap.php.
Alternative Models
115