A recent article by Kristen M. Blankley deals with the potential of limited scope representation. Against the background of the collaborative law procedure, Blankley explains the power of limiting the legal mandate of an attorney to counseling outside of courts. As Blankley points out, limiting the scope of legal representation could especially help clients who would otherwise be “unrepresentable” because their case is to small to yield satisfying returns for lawyers who are paid by contingency fees.

The case for collaborative law

Of course, the case for collaborative practice is much broader: collaborative law is not only for low income clients but particularly for those who have a deep interest in preserving their relationship by truly cooperative negotiations. Here, the so-called disqualification agreement, which limits the scope of attorney representation, builds a container around the parties and help them to avoid entering the spiral of mutual distrust ending in the ordinary destructive court battle (see Engel, Why Use Collaborative Law, on SSRN).