IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/empleg/v16y2019i2p318-342.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Characteristics of Lawyers Who Are Subject to Complaints and Misconduct Findings

Author

Listed:
  • Tara Sklar
  • Yamna Taouk
  • David Studdert
  • Matthew Spittal
  • Ron Paterson
  • Marie Bismark

Abstract

Regulators of the legal profession are charged with protecting the public by ensuring lawyers are fit to practice law. However, their approach tends to be reactive and case based, focusing on the resolution of individual complaints. Regulators generally do not seek to identify patterns and trends across their broader caseloads and the legal profession as a whole. Using administrative data routinely collected by the main regulator of the legal profession in Victoria, Australia, we characterized complaints lodged between 2005 and 2015 and the lawyers against whom they were made. We also analyzed risk factors for complaints and misconduct findings. We found that the odds of being subject to a complaint were higher among lawyers who were male, older, had trust account authority, and whose legal practices were smaller, in nonurban locations, and incorporated. A deeper understanding of these risk factors could support efforts to improve professional standards and reform regulatory practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Tara Sklar & Yamna Taouk & David Studdert & Matthew Spittal & Ron Paterson & Marie Bismark, 2019. "Characteristics of Lawyers Who Are Subject to Complaints and Misconduct Findings," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 318-342, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:empleg:v:16:y:2019:i:2:p:318-342
    DOI: 10.1111/jels.12216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12216
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jels.12216?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kyle Rozema, 2021. "Does the Bar Exam Protect the Public?," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), pages 801-848, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:empleg:v:16:y:2019:i:2:p:318-342. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1740-1461 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.