The Value of OBA Membership

By Miles Pringle

Every so often, it is necessary to step back and look at the bigger picture. As I pen my second-to-last "From the President” article, it feels appropriate to consider the significant role the OBA plays in the legal system and the benefits it conveys to its members. We can be forgiven that, in our daily grind of practicing law, we forget the broader view of how important the OBA is to our profession. The OBA is vital to supporting the administration of justice and improving attorneys’ practices.

From time immemorial, attorneys have organized themselves into associations. For example, in the late Roman Empire, lawyers admitted to practice before the same court would form schola (or college of advocates), which exercised “[s]trict professional discipline was provided for every ‘member of the bar,’ and the disciplinary supervision was exercised by the court to which he was admitted.”[1] In medieval England, Inns of Court were formed and empowered by the king to regulate the education and practice of law.[2]

In the United States, “all the colonies had their own professional bar by 1750.”[3] Our OBA was formed prior to statehood in 1904 by a merger of the Oklahoma Territory and Indian Territory bar associations. Initially subject to the Oklahoma Legislature, its current structure as a part of the judicial branch occurred in 1939.

The OBA enforces the Rules of Professional Conduct and is responsible for investigating and preventing the unauthorized practice of law. These duties benefit all Oklahomans by having qualified and ethical representation in their legal matters. The courts are benefitted by having competent and truthful advocates speak for the parties before them (or the attorney will be held accountable).

For members, once they have met the standards for admission, they benefit by practicing in a noble and possibly lucrative profession. It is a privilege and public trust to practice the law. No doubt, the fees charged for legal services would be greatly diminished if the barrier of entry was removed. Thus, the primary benefit that all members have is the right to practice the law.

This regulatory approach is a common model in the U.S. Like medical boards provide for medical professionals, banking regulators for banks and securities regulators for issuers, our society relies on bar associations to provide transparency and minimum standards of ethical conduct for lawyers.[4] Unfortunately, there are those who will take advantage of others. We need industry-specific enforcement bodies to hold rulebreakers accountable.

The OBA, however, is more than a regulator exercising its police powers. All states have a legal professional licensure regime. Most states, but not all, have a mandatory bar association whereby the regulating entity is also responsible for other endeavors, such as providing a forum for the discussion of subjects pertaining to the practice of law and encouraging practices that will advance and improve the honor and dignity of the legal profession. I would argue that this model better serves the mission to promote the administration of justice as the enforcement authority is also responsible for improving the quality of the profession – not just punishing infractions. It is a holistic approach to regulating that encompasses accountability, rehabilitation and improvement.

A prime illustration of this is the OBA’s fantastic Ethics Counsel Richard Stevens. Mr. Stevens confidentially helps practitioners with tough practical issues. The role of ethics counsel is a recognition that it is not enough to enforce the rules, the OBA should be helping its members comply with them. I am sure an enforcement-only approach would not provide this type of support.

Members also benefit from the fellowship supported by the OBA. Take sections and committees for instance. They publish materials, put on seminars and recognize worthy practitioners with awards. I am sure that members of sections, like the Family Law Section, believe their practices (and practice areas) have greatly benefited from the section.

This has been my experience. I am a member of and previously chaired the Financial Institutions and Commercial Law Section. The materials and seminars were very valuable to my development and continue to help me as general counsel for a bank. More importantly, however, are the relationships I made. I have many friends and colleagues that I can call upon to provide advice.

There are a multitude of other benefits OBA members also receive. There are quality educational materials like the Oklahoma Bar Journal and CLE programs. Last year, the CLE Department provided more than 12,608 credit hours for free, valued at over $600,000. Partnerships with third parties deliver benefits, like Fastcase, that provide legal research to all OBA members. These types of products and services are more difficult to provide and costly for other organizations.

I would like to conclude with a counterfactual: What if the OBA didn’t exist? If there was no legal licensure process, then the value of every member’s law degree and bar passage accomplishment would evaporate, as anyone could practice law. Judges would be burdened to police courtrooms with untrained advocates, and clients would not be assured of a minimum level of competence. The public justice and efficiency of the judicial system would be greatly diminished.

If Oklahoma adopted another model where there is a state regulator but a separate association for everything else, members would lose much value. Members would lose critical resources like the ethics counsel, access to A Chance to Change (Lawyers Helping Lawyers services) and lower rates from vendors. More importantly, it would gut the regulatory model where the regulator actually seeks to improve the profession, not just enforce rules.

Additionally, the support for attorney collegiality would be greatly diminished. For example, OBA sections are comprised of 12,039 members. The OBA has a little more than 18,000 members, approximately 6,000 of which reside out of state. These sections are supported by OBA staff and infostructure and would likely not exist or would cost a great deal more without the OBA’s support.

Your OBA membership is more valuable than you may realize. In numerous ways, every attorney’s practice of law is improved by the OBA. I hope everyone can see the big picture.

---

Miles Pringle is executive vice president and general counsel at The Bankers Bank in Oklahoma City.
405-848-8877
mpringle@tbb.bank

---

ENDNOTES

[1] Anton-Hermann Chroust, “Legal Profession in Ancient Imperial Rome,” 30 Notre Dame L. Rev. 521 (1955), at 578-579.

[2] Philip J. Wickser, “Bar Associations,” 15 Cornell L. Rev. 390 (1930), at Note 4 (p. 392) (“The Inns of Court are of great antiquity. They originated as companies or quasi corporations of lawyers who owned and resided in the four Inns of Court. They were patterned after the French College of Advocates and were part of the general mediaeval guild movement. Henry III in 1235 prohibited the study of law in any other place in London than the Inns of Court. They assumed somewhat their present form in the reign of Edward III in 1327.”).

[3] Friedman, Sarah, “The History of the U.S. Bar Exam, Part I – The Law’s Gatekeeper,” Library of Congress Blogs, Feb. 14, 2024 (available at https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2024/02/the-history-of-the-u-s-bar-exam-part-i-the-laws-gatekeeper/); citing  Susan Katcher, “Legal Training in the United States: A Brief History,” 24 Wis. L. Rev. 335, 339 (2006). “Each colony had its own standards for entry, usually requiring several years of experience in a law practice. Due to the expansion of the profession as the country grew, bar associations began to form in the 18th century as well and thus began to dictate the rules of legal education” (internal citations omitted).

[4] It should also be noted that those who benefit from the existence of the regulating authority, like attorneys, often fund the regulator. For example, banks pay dues or assessments to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and other regulators.

---

Originally published in the Oklahoma Bar Journal – OBJ 95 Vol 9 (November 2024).

Statements or opinions expressed in the Oklahoma Bar Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff.