{"id":4549,"date":"2003-08-15T19:11:45","date_gmt":"2003-08-15T23:11:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2003\/08\/15\/boston-bar-advocates-make-the"},"modified":"2011-08-05T15:00:45","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T19:00:45","slug":"boston-bar-advocates-make-their-strike-official-but-not-legal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2003\/08\/15\/boston-bar-advocates-make-their-strike-official-but-not-legal\/","title":{"rendered":"Boston “Bar Advocates” Make Their Strike Official (But Not Legal)"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

The stakes have been raised considerably in the battle of Massachusetts “bar advocates” to be paid for work performed in Fiscal Year ’03.  In an August 14, 2003, Press Release<\/A>, the non-profit Suffolk Lawyers for Justice, Inc., announced that its members would no longer accept new court-appointed cases as of Monday, August 18, 2003.   [See<\/A> today’s Taunton Gazette <\/EM>article, 8\/15\/03, by Scott Dolan, which headlines that the action “could paralyze the justice system in the state’s capital”]<\/P>
\n

The SLJ Press Release states:  <\/P>
\n


\n

“Collectively, the 335 lawyers who comprise Suffolk Lawyers for Justice are owed for many months of work performed this past fiscal year, and they overwhelmingly have voiced their intention to decline new cases until they are paid for that work.”<\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

ethicalEsq? <\/EM>has addressed the “strike” by Massachusetts Bar Advocates –private attorneys who take court-appointed cases for indigents — several times, most recently in a posting<\/A> on July 31, 2003, which (clearly unsuccessfully) asked the Bay State lawyers to stop their joint boycott.   The posting, which contains numerous links to relevant materials, argues that the concerted refusal to accept new clients is very likely to violate the antitrust law, as well as injuring clients.   <\/FONT><\/P>
\n

On August 10th, bar advocate Thomas Workman posted Comments<\/A> at this site in which he presents the financial-equities case of his colleagues, and pointed out that they have not made any joint strike manifestos.  Your Editor’s response can be found following that string.<\/FONT><\/P>
\n

Earlier this week, the Taunton Gazette<\/EM> reported<\/A> (August 12th) that matters in Bristol County were getting ugly, after lawyers were told that the Massachusetts Legislature would not be taking up the supplemental budget until September or October.   The Taunton Gazette<\/EM> states (emphasis added):<\/FONT><\/P>
\n