Lawyers in law reform litigation often pursue remedies that diverge from client preferences.

Evidence

However, it may happen that the remedy desired by the lawyer in political litigation may diverge from that preferred by clients. In the aftermath of Brown, for example, a gap at times developed between the belief of civil rights lawyers in the importance of school integration and the desire of clients—parents and children—for educational improvement, whether in a segregated or an integrated setting. Similarly, in mental health litigation, some lawyers sought to establish a “right to treatment,” whereas most residents in institutions preferred a “least restrictive alternative” suit that would release them from the institution to a community-based mental health facility. … Or the choice may be between pressing for a legal ruling that could conceivably benefit a large number of persons or accepting a settlement beneficial to one’s client, as when the government agency being sued offers a settlement that will satisfy the client’s particular concern without establishing a binding precedent. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1178

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the course’s core tension over judicial policymaking and who controls impact litigation strategy. — connects to: Lawyers pursue client aims either as delegates or as trustees with broader goals — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 608; The lawyer-client relationship is shifting from professional dominance toward collaboration — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 756; Critics charge that LSC law reform litigation lets lawyers dominate their clients. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 761 (+7 more)
  • DEFINE: Illustrates what ‘law reform litigation’ actually looks like in practice—class-wide precedent versus individual relief.

Broader Connections