Lawyers often rely on a number of legal professionals in order to more efficiently complete legal tasks. Many lawyers employ secretaries who handle administrative tasks, and some attorneys employ paralegals as well who handle basic legal work associated with files. In the past, I appreciated the help of secretaries and paralegals who made my job easier by handling some of the basic tasks associated with running a law practice. However, paralegals can make mistakes, usually because they have less legal experience since they did not attend law school and do not have the same wealth of knowledge that most lawyers possess. Lawyers should not excuse mistakes made by paralegals when a lawyer’s name is on the papers filed with a paralegal’s errors.
Earlier in my career, I worked on a relatively routine matter. However, when I got the papers, I noticed that there were mistakes in how the papers were written. The case was based on a lesser-used provision in the law, and I had never before in my career encountered a case that had been initiated on this basis. After reading the statute upon which the case was based and after researching the provision on Lexis, I knew that the timing of a given application was wrong and that it required information had been excluded from the papers.
I ended up drafting opposition papers based on the mistakes made by the other side, and I cited a voluminous number of cases and other authorities to show that the other side really messed up. It was possible that the court would excuse such mistakes, since courts sometimes exercise leeway to excuse technical issues in the interests of justice. However, I found numerous instances in which courts dismissed actions because of such technical issues, which would be great for my client since I was defending this action on my client’s behalf.
Eventually, the lawyer whose name appeared on the error-filled papers reached out to me. He said that his paralegal drafted the documents and that was why so many errors were included in the papers. The lawyer requested that I consent to amended papers as a courtesy so that hopefully the court would be more inclined to not dismiss the case, and presumably, this lawyer could save face in front of his client.
I am the type of lawyer who likes to extend courtesies, but in this instance, accepting amended documents would lead my client to forgoing substantive arguments. I ended up declining to accept the amended papers, which put my adversary in a difficult position. He attempted to rectify the errors in his reply papers, which is the tactic of many lawyers who mess up their moving papers, but this tactic is not always successful. Reply papers are not supposed to be used to correct errors found in moving papers, and this exposed the errors made in the initial submission.
I am not sure how my adversary missed all of the errors made in the moving papers. Some were glaring errors that pretty much every lawyer reading the papers would recognize instantly. I know that my adversary ran a high-volume practice, and this was likely the reason why this lawyer employed paralegals in the first place. However, since this lawyer signed the papers, he is just as responsible as the paralegal (and perhaps moreso) for the errors contained in those papers.
All told, I know firsthand that paralegals can be a helpful addition to a legal team, and I do not want this article to be construed as arguing that paralegals should not be employed to complete legal tasks. However, lawyers need to closely supervise their paralegals to ensure that their work is error-free since lawyers should not be able to excuse errors because they are attributed to a paralegal.
Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at [email protected].
