The U.S. legal profession is in need of innovation and innovation comes from open, collaborative, and diverse environments. Yet, the rules regulating the U.S. legal profession foster a closed environment, one that discourages nonlawyer influence on lawyers and alliances between legal and non-legal professionals. The Model Rules of Professional Conduct, the bar licensing requirements, the application of the work- product doctrine and attorney-client privilege, and even the way law firms structure themselves consistently impede an open multi-disciplinary approach. Instead, they favor a closed environment and/or an exclusive one-on-one relationship between attorneys and their clients. In some way or another, they support the notion that when lawyers work with nonlawyers, there are too many cooks in the kitchen. In light of our growing understanding of other fields, it may be time to reexamine some of these rules and their underlying assumptions. First, they do not represent the way many U.S. lawyers actually practice. Second, in an economic downturn, where the line between what is business and what is law is anything but clear, such tactics may limit lawyers’ range of business opportunities. Instead of protecting lawyers’ economic futures, it may provide the impetus for nonlawyers, who want a piece of the lawyers’ pie, to innovate. Essentially, an environment that fosters input from nonlawyers is better than a closed one and the legal profession’s continued attachment to rules and structures that compel closed environments and severely restrict the influence of nonlawyers on lawyers (at least in the commercial context) may leave the U.S. legal profession woefully behind other countries, and U.S. lawyers with a smaller piece of the pie.

1. Lawyers Influencing
Non-Lawyers:
Too Many Cooks in the
Kitchen or Stone Soup?
Michele DeStefano
Founder, LawWithoutWalls
Professor, University of Miami School of Law
July 2012
Lawyers Influencing NonLawyers, 80 Fordham Law Review, 2791 (2012)

2. Think of the U.S. Legal
Profession as a Castle

3. Beautiful
Ominous
Structure
Glistening
in the Distance

4. Young
College
Graduates
Aspire
To be Admitted

5. International
Lawyers
Travel
Long distances
to ―Visit‖

6. But the Castle is
Protected by a Moat:
Keeping Non-Lawyers Out

7. The Moat that Protects the
Castle is Made Up of:
• Bar Licensing Requirements
• The Model Rules of Professional
Conduct
• The ―Theory‖ of Self-Regulation

8. One Would
Think
it is
is Protected
by An Army

9. After All,
it’s
a
Castle
!!!

10. But Instead, it is Protected by
Lone Rangers

11. In the United States,

12. The Rules

13. The Regulations

14. The Way Lawyers Practice

15. Support Closed Environments

16. The Independence of the Lawyer

17. From ALL Others
Except
...

18. The Client

19. Lawyers are the Knights in
Shining Armor

20. There are So Many Rules
Restricting Influence of
Non-Lawyers on Lawyers
1.8 5.4 1.6
Financial Professional Confidentiality
Assistance Independence
5.5 The Attorney- Work Product
Uauthorized Client Doctrine
Practice of Privilege
Law

21. Rules Around Independence
Form Boundaries Between
Lawyers and Non-Lawyers

22. Rules Support Non-Collaborative,
Traditional Legal Practice
& Law Firm Structure

23. The Lore of Professional
Independence is Introduced
and Honed in Law School
Only
Law
Socratic Classes Solo
Method 1/100 Projects
Me Myself I

24. On the One Hand . . .

25. This is Not Surprising

26. Given that
The Rules Regulating Lawyers
Focus on the ―I‖

27. Focus
On the Individual
And
Independence

28. On the Other Hand . . .

29. It is Very Surprising

30. Some of the Biggest
Breakthroughs are from the
Law AND Movement

31. Yet,
The Rules
The Regulations
The Structure of Law Firm Practice
And Even Legal Education

32. All
Support
The Notion of
Professional
Independence

33. All
Support
The Notion That
When Lawyers Work With
Non-Lawyers,

34. There are Too Many
Cooks in the Kitchen

35. True

36. The rules and regulations supporting
the independence of the lawyer are
driven in part by a belief in the
benefits of a unique and confidential
relationship between lawyer and
client—possibly one of the most
valuable things lawyers offer to
clients.

37. True

38. The rules and regulations are
undeniably motivated by a legitimate
desire to protect clients, the
public, and the professionalism and
integrity of the legal profession by
ensuring lawyers’ independent
judgment.

39. True

40. Select U.S. Law Schools, U.S.
Lawyers, and U.S. Law Professors
have begun to rethink the value of
interdisciplinary interchange and
have developed programs and
practices that involve collaboration
with non-lawyers . . .

41. Examples of Disrupters
Bill Henderson, Indiana University, Full Year Legal Profession
Course for 1-Ls
David Wilkins, Harvard Law School 1-L Problem Solving
WorkShop
Michele DeStefano and Michael Bossone, Miami Law
LawWithoutWalls
Elizabeth Chambliss & David Wilkins, New York Law School
and Harvard Law School Future Ed
Tanina Rostain and Mitt Regan, Georgetown Law
Technology, Innovation, and Law Practice Experiential
Seminar
Renee Knake and Dan Katz, Michigan State

42. But the Problem is . . .

43. U.S. Rules and Regulations
are Still Designed
to Restrict
Collaboration
with Non-Lawyers

44. And Despite the Rules,
This is NOT
How Today’s
Successful,
Global
Lawyers
Practice Law

45. This is NOT
How Real
Change
Occurs

46. Multi-Disciplinary
Open Collaboration is
the Key to Innovation

47. Inaccurate Conception that
Inventions are Eureka
Moments by Scientists Alone in
a Lab

48. Instead, the ―True‖ Story is the
Story of Stone Soup

49. Really, really good ideas, successful
innovations, and creative solutions
often result from open and diverse
environments in which people from
different disciplines, varying expertise,
and multiple perspectives give ―what
[they]’ve got and put it in the pot.‖
HEATHER FOREST, STONE SOUP 28 (Susan Gaber illus., 1998)

50. Consider Apple’s Development
Cycle: ―More Like a Coffeehouse
Than an Assembly Line‖
STEVEN JOHNSON, WHERE GOOD IDEAS COME FROM: THE NATURAL HISTORY OF INNOVATION 163 (2010)

51. A Kaizen:
More Creative, Efficient,
Effective Solutions

52. Collaboration with Anyone
Interested in a Relationship Inside
or Outside the Corporation

53. ―A World Where a Diverse Mix of
Distinct Professions and Passions
Overlap is a World Where
Exaptations Thrive.‖
STEVEN JOHNSON, WHERE GOOD IDEAS COME FROM: THE NATURAL HISTORY OF INNOVATION 163 (2010) STEPHEN JAY
GOULD, THE PANDA’S THUMB: MORE REFLECTIONS IN NATURAL HISTORY 19–20 (1980)

54. What is Exaptation?
Exaptation occurs when something is
borrowed from one field and used to
solve a problem in a totally unrelated
field. In other words, innovation often
comes from ―refurbished‖ parts as
opposed to newfangled creation

55. Gutenberg’s Printing Press
Used Mechanics of
Wine Screw Press

56. Francis Crick Discovered DNA
Replication by Applying How
Copies of Sculptures are Made

57. Incubators Are Made from
Refurbished Toyota Truck
Parts for Third World Countries

59. But the Most Innovative &
Successful Entrepreneurs have
Broader More Diverse Social
Networks
Stanford Business School Professor Martin Ruef

60. These entrepreneurs were
successful because they
participated in multi-disciplinary
collaboration. They ―were able to
borrow or co-opt new ideas from
these external environments and put
them to use in a new context.‖
STEVEN JOHNSON, WHERE GOOD IDEAS COME FROM: THE NATURAL HISTORY OF INNOVATION 163
(2010)

61. Fact: Many Famous Inventions
were Serendipitous

62. However, just as Stone Soup is not
made from stone, serendipitous
innovations are not serendipitous.
They occur because an environment
exists that fosters connections
among diverse parts, diverse
disciplines, and diverse people.

63. Yet
The Rules and Regulations
Structuring the
U.S. Legal Profession
Inhibit
Multi-Disciplinary Collaboration

64. Inhibit
Creation of Environments
that Foster
Serendipitous
Connections

65. The U.S. Legal Profession’s
Rules Reject the Story of Stone
Soup

66. In favor of a Fable in which the
Individual Knight Saves the
Day

67. But A Single Knight
Cannot Compete
with Modern Technology and
An Army of Professionals

68. In an economic downturn, instead of
protecting lawyers’ economic
futures, protectionist rules may
provide the impetus for non-lawyers
and lawyers in other countries to
innovate. . .

69. For Non-Lawyers to Try to Get
A Really Big Piece
of Lawyer’s Pie

70. Innovation is Already Happening
in the UK and Australia
• Outside Investment in Law Firms
• Litigation Funding
• On Line Legal Services by Non-
Lawyers
• Legal Services Partnerships
between Lawyers and Non-
Lawyers

71. If it is true that ―we become the
stories we tell about ourselves,‖
Ian Craib, Narratives as Bad Faith, in THE USES OF NARRATIVE: EXPLORATIONS IN
SOCIOLOGY, PSYCHOLOGY, AND CULTURAL STUDIES 64

72. Then it is Time to Take Off Our
Armor and Embrace
a New Narrative

73. The time has come to rethink the
U.S. legal profession’s rules and
structures that, in the name of
Professional Independence, were
designed to narrow exposure to, and
influence by, non-lawyers.

74. Only Then,
Will the U.S. Legal Profession
Benefit
From
Exaptation

75. Only Then will the U.S. Legal
Profession Fulfill its Potential to
Innovate and to . . .