The information below explains general legal concepts for educational purposes. It is not legal, financial, or tax advice, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and procedures vary by jurisdiction and may change. The author and publisher disclaim liability for actions taken based on this content.
Key Facts
- National overview: The American Bar Association adopted Resolution 108 on February 11, 2013, during its Midyear Meeting in Dallas, Texas.
- National overview: Resolution 108 encourages legal practitioners to consider offering limited-scope representation, commonly known as unbundled legal services.
- National overview: The policy aimed to expand access to affordable legal assistance for self-represented litigants navigating the justice system.
- National overview: ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.2(c) permits lawyers to limit the scope of representation if the limitation is reasonable and the client provides informed consent.
- State level: Many state bar associations have since updated professional conduct rules to formally accommodate unbundled legal services.
- State level: Common forms of unbundled services in state systems include limited litigation assistance, transactional advice, and ghostwriting pleadings.
- Federal level: Federal courts frequently disfavor or reject undisclosed ghostwriting, despite state ethics rules that may permit the practice.
Last reviewed: May 2026. Legal rules, forms, deadlines, and procedures can change by jurisdiction, agency, and court system.
State ethics rules, civil procedure requirements, and court-specific notices regarding limited-scope representation continue to evolve.
On February 11, 2013, the American Bar Association House of Delegates adopted Resolution 108 at its Midyear Meeting in Dallas, Texas. The resolution formally encouraged the legal profession to adopt unbundled legal services as a standard practice model. Also known as limited-scope representation, unbundling allows a lawyer to handle specific parts of a legal matter while the client manages the rest of the case independently.
The primary goal of Resolution 108 was to increase access to justice for moderate-income individuals and pro se litigants. According to the accompanying ABA report, attorneys who unbundle their services can maintain their standard rates while expanding their client base, as the overall cost per case remains more affordable for the public.
The resolution relies heavily on ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.2(c). This rule establishes that a lawyer may limit the scope of representation provided that the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client gives informed consent.
The ABA also called upon the judiciary, bar associations, and continuing legal education providers to educate legal professionals on their ethical obligations when offering these services. This policy initiative mirrors broader issues addressed by the ABA to implement systemic reforms and improve court accessibility.
Following the adoption of Resolution 108, many states formally updated their ethics frameworks to clarify how unbundling works in practice. State agency guidance often categorizes limited-scope representation into specific areas. For example, the Colorado Bar Association issued Formal Opinion 101, which identifies four main types of unbundling: limited litigation assistance, ghostwriting, non-litigation advice, and transactional assistance.
While state courts and ethics committees broadly adopted the principles of the 2013 resolution, federal courts maintain different standards. A significant tension exists regarding “ghostwriting,” where an attorney drafts a document for a pro se litigant without entering a formal appearance. While several state bar associations support the practice to expand assistance, federal courts generally disfavor or condemn undisclosed ghostwriting as a potential violation of federal civil procedure rules.
The 2013 ABA Midyear Meeting marked a pivotal shift in institutional support for limited-scope representation. Today, the framework championed by Resolution 108 continues to influence how legal professionals balance traditional full-service representation with the public demand for more flexible legal assistance.
