Springfield, IL -- A ruling issued today by the Illinois Supreme Court is coming under fire from consumer advocates. "Today the Illinois State Supreme Court missed a golden opportunity to protect legal consumers against fraudulent lawyers," stated HALT Executive Director, James C. Turner. "Instead the Court conferred special privileges on lawyers by exempting them from the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act. Citizens of Illinois deserve better, and HALT is already working with state legislators to correct this miscarriage of justice."

HALT has argued that the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act should apply to billing and other business aspects of a lawyer's activities in relation to the Illinois Supreme Court case Cripe v. Leiter. "A lawyer who overbills a client is committing fraud, not practicing law," states a March brief the 50,000 member organization filed in the Illinois Supreme Court case.

Ignoring the fact that the Consumer Fraud Act specifically excluded some businesses -- for example, real estate brokers and newspapers -- the court rewrote the law to add a new exemption for lawyers. Because this decision was based on the Supreme Court's interpretation of the statute, the state legislature has the power to override today's decision.

The case involves 85-year old widow Roberta Schmitz who was allegedly overbilled by an attorney in an estate planning matter. Mrs. Schmitz's children sued the attorney involved for breach of fiduciary duty, malpractice and fraud, and argued for the right to seek damages under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act. They allege that Mrs. Schmitz was overbilled by more than $40,000.

Bringing attorneys under the Consumer Fraud Act would significantly level the playing field between lawyers and consumers in lawsuits alleging fraud, overbilling and other such matters. Consumer protection cases usually do not require clients to prove that their lawyers intended to deceive them (something that is very difficult to do in court) -- only that they were misled by inaccurate information.

"Our parents worked hard, raised a family and saved for their 'Golden Age.' After Dad's death, Mom sought professional legal help. No one wants to believe that an elderly client can be victimized by the legal profession -- to the tune of tens of thousands -- but that's what happened to us. We're asking the court to help us by giving us the right to sue under the state's Consumer Fraud Act. If something like this happens again, hopefully this ruling will provide the protection people need," stated Mary Ann Neuhaus, Mrs. Schmitz's daughter.

Cripe v. Leiter has been appealed from a July 10, 1997 ruling in which Justice John F. Michela noted: "the only skills required in billing are the ability to tell time and accurately report the amount of time spent in performing legal services."

The case in Illinois is part of a growing movement by consumers to develop new protections against lawyer misconduct. For example, a new law protecting legal consumers in New York went into effect in January, 1998 which requires every attorney to post a "Statement of Client Rights" which includes ten rights for legal consumers such as the right to be charged a reasonable fee, to receive an itemized bill from an attorney, and to withdraw from the attorney client relationship at any time. Similar legal consumer rights legislation was recently considered in California and West Virginia.

To build on these developments, HALT and other consumer organizations including Consumer Federation of America are advocating that consumers use a Legal Consumers Bill of Rights in their dealings with attorneys.

Although the Illinois legal establishment is arguing that bringing attorneys under the Consumer Fraud Act would disrupt the legal system, consumer protections have applied to lawyers in Connecticut, Washington State, Louisiana and Texas for over a decade with no adverse effect.

According to HALT other avenues for protecting consumers from fraudulent lawyers in Illinois are not up to national standards. For example, the state's Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission 1997 annual report documented that: only 1.8% of all disciplinary complaints filed by Illinois consumers resulted in sanctioning or disbarment compared to a national average of 3%; funds awarded through the Client Protection Program run by the Illinois Supreme Court totaled $100,000 less than was available in 1995, despite the fact that the number of claims submitted has increased by 76% from 152 in 1995 to 267 in 1997. Furthermore, the percentage of claims approved declined to just 39% in 1997 compared to 71 % in 1995.

Founded in 1978, HALT -- An Organization of Americans for Legal Reform is the largest national consumer legal reform group in the U.S. HALT pursues an aggressive education and advocacy program that challenges the legal establishment to improve access and to reduce costs in the civil justice system. HALT is known for its extensive collection of self-help law books and its advocacy to hold the legal profession accountable.