A conversation with five retiring access to justice leaders
By Kiri Somermeyer
On May 20, the MSBA Access to Justice (ATJ) Committee had the great opportunity to hear from five retiring leaders in the access to justice and pro bono legal communities. These women have left a lasting legacy throughout the state, and over the course of an hour, they shared what drew them to public service, the joys and struggles of their careers, how the legal landscape has changed, and their hopes for the future.
- Jean Lastine retired as executive director of Central Minnesota Legal Services after 27 years.
- Justice Margaret Chutich retired from the Minnesota Supreme Court this summer. She was appointed in 2016, following a period of service on the Court of Appeals that began in 2012.
- Pam Wandzel retired as director of pro bono & community services at Fredrikson & Byron, a role she started in 1997.
- Ann Cofell retired as deputy director of Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid, overseeing the St. Cloud and Willmar offices. Ann started her legal career in 1980 at the St. Cloud office and never left.
- Theresa Hughes retired as pro bono director for Stinson LLP after 20 years.
What initially drew you to a career in public interest law or pro bono work?
Jean Lastine: I spent 26 years at MMLA, starting out in a rural setting, getting an idea of rural poverty. I was involved at a time where family law became more accepted as an important poverty law area of practice. We used to have an elevator speech about the importance of family law in that it stabilizes families, protects families from abuse, and stabilizes them economically. And if you ask clients what’s important, their children are the most important thing to them.
Justice Margaret Chutich: I’ve worked most of my life in the public sector. I went to law school because I wanted to help people. After law school, I wanted to go to the Attorney General’s Office, but they had a hiring freeze, so I went to a small law firm that was doing plaintiff-side class action work in securities fraud. But those cases were very long and you didn’t really see your individual clients. And so I got interested in doing [pro bono] asylum work with the Advocates [for Human Rights] because I wanted to make a difference in somebody’s life. And I also wanted to get courtroom experience or experience with real people. I was drawn to pro bono work and I found it very rewarding.
How has the access to justice landscape changed over the course of your career?
Ann Cofell: Well, you have to understand that when I started at Legal Aid, we were using carbon paper. It’s just been incredible to see the impact that changes in technology have had on our work. I met with a client yesterday, and they had a question. I could give them the answer immediately, even though I didn’t know it off the top of my head, by doing some quick legal research at my desk. And that was impossible before. Big shout out to LawHelpMN—that lets people get information on their own so much more easily.
One of the other big changes is the development and maturity of pro bono programs. When I started at Legal Aid, there was no pro bono program. So it was me calling up friends and begging them on the cases that touched my heart in particular, because none of us went into this work to turn people away. The hardest part of our job is turning people away. And now I don’t have to do that as much thanks to the pro bono activities of people.
And immigration is a change. As immigrants began to move into the St. Cloud area in larger numbers, we wondered, why aren’t immigrants coming to our office? And when we started serving the needs that our clients saw as our priority, they came to us with all their problems. So it was a really important lesson, not just for our immigrant community, but for all of our communities, to really work to figure out what their priorities are and how we can help them with those issues.
Theresa Hughes: Pro bono has changed because law has become… a big business. When I started out in the mid-80s, law was a business, but it wasn’t a big business the way it is now.… Lawyers have more demands on their time. And so some of the traditional ways that we went about doing pro bono work—the models of sort of one-on-one full representation—that was changing and we needed to be more creative to draw volunteers in.
The other thing that I was seeing toward the end of my time at Stinson was the way lawyers moved within the profession or moved around in jobs.… In the ‘80s, people went to a firm and stayed often for their entire career. But now lawyers frequently move every couple of years. And that can make pro bono continuity challenging.
What are the biggest challenges in the pro bono legal services and access to justice space right now?
Lastine: One challenge is that many committed lawyers in the rural areas are now retiring, and lawyers are not moving to rural areas and staying. I think for the legal aid community on the staff side, just a big challenge is retention and continuous salary improvement. The student debt problem doesn’t seem to be going away.
Pam Wandzel: The hybrid work environment. The way to get many lawyers to do pro bono is to build personal relationships with them. You have to get to know them. You have to be able to take them out to coffee, you have to build these relationships of trust. The challenge with hybrid work environments is you don’t have those hallway conversations anymore.
Tell us one or two things about pro bono or access to justice that you enjoyed the most in your career?
Cofell: I went to law school knowing I wanted to do public service, and for me, it’s always been the clients. I love talking to clients. I continue to be amazed at the trust clients put in me when they first meet their lawyer. And we have to have them tell us really personal and difficult stories. And the grace they give me when I have to tell them no or give them bad news, it’s just incredible to see—to see how good people are.
I get such satisfaction from seeing the dedication and commitment of the people that will still be working at legal aid, knowing that legal aid is in really good hands.
Justice Chutich: First I want to say how lucky I feel to have been the liaison to the Legal Services Advisory Committee and to learn about the work done throughout the state of Minnesota. I’m really impressed with the diligence of the legal aid lawyers and how mission-driven you are.
I continue to believe that one of the best things I’ve ever done with my law license was when I was a brand-new attorney representing a man from Romania, back in the days of Nicolae Ceaușescu, a terrible dictator. My client was tortured for being an ethnic minority. I was a brand-new lawyer with another brand-new lawyer in our six-person firm. It was my very first trial. And the judge ruled from the bench. We just sat there in suspense, you know, hoping that the verdict was going to be a good one. And it was, fortunately. And my client just burst into tears.
And I remember tearing up myself because it was just one of those moments when you see what I like to call the awesome power of the law to change a person’s life for good.
Hughes: Later in my time at Stinson I became more involved in client work; I ended up doing a lot of brief services and legal advice in a clinic setting. Some of the most intimate and satisfying experiences in my legal career were at that clinic, looking into the faces of clients and having them share, as Ann said, telling you things about their lives and where they’ve come from and what their dreams are and what the hurdles are.
I also think about the incredible people working in this space. Like Justice Chutich. I remember when she was an associate at that six-person law firm, faithfully paying her MJF [Minnesota Justice Foundation] dues every year. And I mean, the group of people that you meet through pro bono and access to justice are the best in the profession. And the pro bono volunteers at firms take their time from these incredibly demanding schedules—families, all the stuff that life throws at you, sick, elderly parents—and they still find a way to give back.
What are your hopes for the future of access to justice work, legal services, and pro bono services in Minnesota?
Lastine: Broadly speaking, I’d like to see an understanding that access to the justice system for people with civil legal needs is an obligation of society. And that there’s an understanding that this is not just a lawyer commitment to access to justice, but it’s a societal commitment.
Funding is always going to be a struggle, but it’d be nice if the struggle isn’t always in existence so that we [have enough resources to] give people in our society what they need to live safe, fruitful lives for themselves and their children.
And, of course, I’d love to see every lawyer involved. We need pro bono.
Wandzel: It would be great if there was a public relations drive to increase the awareness of how important these services are overall. I think maintaining that funding and increasing funding, even on the pro bono side—making the law firms and the lawyers aware that this is very, very important—is something that I really hope to see.
What are some ideas you have about how to keep lawyers involved in pro bono work after retirement?
Hughes: I’m looking at reinstating my license right now. And for the [emeritus] rule, which I may have been involved in through the bar when this was initiated, the current rule allows a lawyer [to do pro bono while on retired status], but the reduced fee [for retired status] doesn’t kick in until you’re 68. When that rule was passed, the majority of lawyers leaving the practice were men. I’m just going to be frank. They were men and worked until 68 or 72. That was the norm. Now, not that women necessarily retire earlier, but I think women have been a little more on the forefront in terms of work-life balance. And the younger generation is definitely understanding work-life balance. Sixty-eight, I don’t think, is a realistic age for that retired status to kick in. I think the appropriate body should look at 60.
Lastine: I agree, keep up the goals of improving some of those rules.
What are you most looking forward to in retirement?
Justice Chutich: Well, I’m frankly just looking forward to having a little more time and space in my life. To be a better family member. To be a better friend. And to do all these things that, you know, I just don’t have time to do now. I’m hoping to just goof around for a while, putter around the house, garden, that kind of thing, and have long lunches with people I love.
Cofell: I am looking forward to everyday being a weekend day so that I’ve got the choices that I have on Saturday or Sunday every day. I am looking forward to volunteering to drive our mobile office, the Justice Bus, around. I wanted that mobile office for so long, and it came near the end of my career.
Wandzel: I love animals, and I’m now volunteering with the Animal Humane Society. I’m on the board of the West Broadway Business Area Coalition. And I’m using my relationships with Fredrikson & Byron to help facilitate projects in north Minneapolis.
Lastine: I’m still in the rest and relaxation stage. But really I’m just looking forward to the flexibility. Being available right now for some elderly family members. And putting some of my senior advocacy to work.
Hughes: I now have the chance… to do the types of things that you wouldn’t have when you’re raising a family and working. I also really wanted to step outside the legal box. So I’ve had an opportunity to be a part of an urban gardening group that mentors youth on the east side of St. Paul. It’s fun to sort of reinvent yourself. But there’s also now, because I am almost two years into retirement, there is the tension of wanting to continue to give back to the community.
What’s your advice for those in the beginning of their legal terms or mid-career reflecting on the second half of their career in this space? Any final words of wisdom?
Justice Chutich: I think the thing that I would tell people is that earlier on, I was somewhat afraid to jump in to doing pro bono work. Because it was in areas I hadn’t practiced in. You know, I really like knowing what I’m talking about when I speak to a client. And I think I didn’t realize the support that the offices can give people. You won’t be out there on your own. There will be support. And you will find it very satisfying.
Kiri Somermeyer is the executive director of the Corporate Institute at the University of Minnesota Law School, where she directs the Business Law & Entrepreneurship Clinic and oversees the corporate externship and law firm field placements affiliated with the law school’s experiential education program.
Author’s note: The panel interview has been edited and condensed for clarity based on an hour-long conversation I moderated in May 2024. Thank you to my Access to Justice Committee co-chair, Anna Beadle, for assisting with compiling and editing this interview. The MSBA Access to Justice Committee is dedicated to advancing solutions that help all people, and particularly people with lower incomes or limited access to legal assistance. Please reach out to Nancy Mischel nmischel@mnbars.org if you are interested in learning more about or joining this committee.