Apparently lost in the pro bono controversy is the substantial time already spent by members of the profession to materially improve, in one way or another, the quality of the profession. These time consuming efforts can take many different forms. These include, but are not limited to, lectures and pro bono presentations to members of the profession, the writing of articles on legal subjects published in recognized legal journals and periodicals, active participation in law related professional associations such as the New York State Bar Association, and active participation on one or more committees authorized by the chief judge or an Appellate Division. Such activities in one way or another undeniably improve the quality of the legal profession and the quality of the legal services rendered by the profession.
Concededly, there are attorneys who are actively involved in one type of professional association or another for self-aggrandizement, or enhancement of prospective legal business. Even the net result of their activities is an improvement in the quality of the legal services rendered. On the other hand, there are many who devote their time because of a belief that there is an obligation on the part of attorneys to improve the legal profession. In either event these attorneys, whatever may be their underlying motivation, expend hours of time on a voluntary pro bono basis to the benefit of the profession.
