I. Unintentional Formation of an Attorney-Client Relationship
|
|
- Ada Barton
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 In-house lawyers face a variety of issues that create exposure to ethical violations and claims of legal malpractice. These issues are often more subtle than those facing outside counsel, and pose a risk of civil liability for which the in-house lawyer may not be insured. The following areas are among those that warrant a high degree of attention. I. Unintentional Formation of an Attorney-Client Relationship In-house lawyers operate in an environment that lends itself to the inadvertent formation of attorney-client relationships. This possibility exists because an attorney-client relationship is deemed to have been created by reference to the client s reasonable expectations, not the attorney s intentions. Where the existence of an attorney-client relationship is in dispute, courts focus on the reasonable expectations of the client rather than the mutual assent of the parties to determine whether the relationship exists. See Bartholomew v. Bartholomew, 611 So. 2d 85, 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Absent an express agreement, it is the client s subjective belief that governs the formation, and the attorney s belief or understanding of the relationship is irrelevant. Id. An attorney-client relationship arises when a person manifests to a lawyer the person s intent that the lawyer provide legal services for the person and either the lawyer manifests to the person consent to do so or fails to manifest lack of consent to do so, and the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the person reasonably relies on the lawyer to provide the services. Restatement (Third) of the Law Governing Lawyers, Section 14. These standards leave open the possibility that, as a result of a misunderstanding, an attorney will find him or herself in the unenviable position of learning that he or she has been representing a client for some period of time without even knowing it. Understanding when an attorney-client relationship is formed has become increasingly important for in-house counsel. The Restatement cautions lawyers that represent organizations that a lawyer s failure to clarify whom the lawyer represents in circumstances calling for such a result might lead a lawyer to have entered into client-lawyer representations not intended by the lawyer. Id. at Comment F. The Restatement further warns: Hence, the lawyer must clarify whom the lawyer intends to represent when the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that, contrary to the lawyer s own intention, a person, individually, or agents of an entity, on behalf of the entity, reasonably rely on the lawyer to provide legal services to Page 1
2 that person or entity.... Such clarification may be required, for example, with respect to an officer of an entity client such as a corporation, with respect to one or more partners in a client partnership or in the case of affiliated organizations such as a parent, subsidiary, or similar organization related to a client person or client entity. Id. In-house counsel representing the company should expressly advise corporate employees of the attorney s role and the implications stemming from that role. Such advice is sometimes called giving corporate Miranda warnings. Nancy J. Moore, Conflicts of Interest For In-House Counsel: Issues Emerging From the Expanding Role of the Attorney-Employee, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. 497, 503 (1998). There is not a clear consensus regarding how detailed such warnings must be in order to be effective. On the one hand, Rules 1.13(d) and 4.3 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct set what may be described as the minimum standard. Rule 1.13(d) provides: In dealing with an organization's directors, officers, employees, members, shareholders or other constituents, a lawyer shall explain the identity of the client when the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the organization's interests are adverse to those of the constituents with whom the lawyer is dealing. This rule requires a lawyer to merely explain that he represents the entity, not the individual, and only does so when the lawyer reasonably should know that the entity s interests are adverse to that of the individual. Rule 4.3 provides: In dealing on behalf of a client with a person who is not represented by counsel, a lawyer shall not state or imply that the lawyer is disinterested. When the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the unrepresented person misunderstands the lawyer's role in the matter, the lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to correct the misunderstanding. Although this rule is broader in that it is not limited to instances of adversity, it still requires that an attorney take only reasonable efforts to correct any misunderstanding, which under certain circumstances may Page 2
3 merely require a simple statement identifying the client as mandated in Rule 1.13(d). On the other hand, some have argued that a more detailed Miranda warning is required. Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 503. Such warnings would include advising corporate employees that: (a) [counsel s] role is to represent the organization, (b) an actual or potential conflict of interest may exist between the organization and the individual, (c) [counsel] cannot represent the individual, (d) their conversation may not be confidential and any information the individual provides may be used against [such individual], and (e) that he [or she] may wish to retain independent counsel. Id. Advocates of the more in-depth warning argue that such warnings are necessary to fully protect the entity from subsequent claims by the employee that the representation was joint. Id. The comment to Rule 1.13(d) actually advocates giving such a detailed warning as well, but does so in permissive, not mandatory, language. The comment also concludes that whether an in-house attorney should give a more in-depth warning to a corporate employee may turn on the facts of each case. Rule 1.13, Comment 8. In-house attorneys face the danger of inadvertent representation in a variety of situations. Corporate investigations are ripe for misunderstandings in which employees come to believe that the attorney interviewing them is doing so as their lawyer. It is also common for inhouse attorneys to provide legal services relating to quasibusiness/personal matters for corporate employees, including drafting employment agreements and compensations plans for corporate management, giving assistance regarding the exercise of stock options, and providing advice on the purchase or sale of securities and other filings. Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 505. Because these situations involve what appears to be a close relationship between the attorney and the individual, at least in the eyes of the individual, an attorney-client relationship may form under the reasonable expectations test. Id. In-house lawyers also face the danger of inadvertent representation of corporate employees when they manage litigation conducted by an outside law firm. Id. Engaging in activities such as drafting pleadings, attending depositions, and participating in interviews with employeedefendants can give the appearance that counsel is representing not only the company, but also the employees involved in the litigation. Page 3
4 II. Attorney-Client Privilege In-house attorneys face unique challenges in the creation and preservation of attorney-client privileged communications. Because inhouse attorneys often serve their employer in both a legal and business capacity, many of their communications have mixed subjects and purposes, and involve more than providing legal advice or counseling about issues related to legal representation. In-house counsel must be able to identify, craft, and preserve privileged communications. Adversaries seeking to discover communications involving in-house attorneys can get them in one of at least two ways. They can prove that the communications were not privileged in the first place, or that the privilege that attached to the communication has been waived. A. Identifying and Crafting Privileged Communications It isn t always easy to determine what communications are intended to be privileged, or which ones warrant protection of the attorney client privilege. As recently as 10 years ago, the Florida Supreme Court stated: The question of what constitutes a confidential communication in the corporate context, and under what circumstances such a communication should be protected, presents a quandary unresolved by this court or the United States Supreme Court. Southern Bell Tel & Tel. Co. v. Deason, 632 So. 2d 1377, 1382 (Fla. 1994). How can the in-house lawyer and client have any confidence that a given communication will be treated as privileged if the courts that will ultimately decide the issue are not sure themselves? As a starting point, the lawyer should ensure that the fundamentals of privileged communications are present with respect to each communication the client wishes to protect. First, the communication must meet the ordinary standards for the application of the attorney-client privilege. Allen D. Ullberg & George A. Kuhlman, Legal Ethics: Current Trends Concerning In-House Attorney- Client Privilege, SC40 ALI-ABA 379, 392 (March 1998). Under the typical standard, the privilege applies if: 1. The asserted holder of the privilege is or sought to become a client; 2. The person to whom the communication was made is (1) a lawyer or the lawyer s subordinate and (2) was acting as a lawyer in connection with the communication; Page 4
5 3. The communication relates to a fact of which the attorney was informed: a. by the client; b. without the presence of strangers; c. for the purpose of obtaining primarily an opinion i. on law; ii. legal services; or iii. assistance in some legal proceeding; and not d. for the purpose of committing a crime or tort; and 4. The privilege has been (1) claimed and (2) not waived by the client. United States v. United Shoe Mach., 89 F. Supp. 357, (D. Mass 1950) (rejected on other grounds). Second, in the corporate context, courts have created an additional set of considerations that account for the unique circumstances surrounding an in-house counsel s hybrid role. Ullberg & Kuhlman, SC40 ALI-ABA at 393. The most well-known is the Upjohn test, which stems from the United States Supreme Court case Upjohn v. United States, 449 U.S. 383 (1981). Under the Upjohn test, a court examines six factors to determine whether a corporate communication involving attorneys is privileged: 1. Whether the communications were made by corporate employees to corporate counsel upon order of superiors in order for the corporation to secure legal advice from counsel; 2. Whether the information needed by corporate counsel to formulate legal advice was not available to upper level management; 3. Whether the information communicated concerned matters within the scope of the employee s corporate duties; 4. Whether the employees were aware that the reason for communications with counsel so the corporation could obtain legal advice; Page 5
6 5. Whether the communications were ordered to be kept confidential and they remained confidential; 6. The identity and resources of the opposing party. Ullberg & Kuhlman, SC40 ALI-ABA at 393. Because the Court in Upjohn was construing Federal Rule of Evidence 501, the decision is not binding on the states. Id. In fact, a number of states have rejected the Upjohn test in favor of other approaches. Id. (noting that Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Georgia, Maine, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, and Texas have all adopted different tests either by statute or decisional law). For example, Florida has adopted a version of the subject matter test for determining whether a corporation s communications are privileged. Under Florida s test, a corporate communication is protected if: 1. The communication would not have been made but for the contemplation of legal services; 2. The employee making the communication did so at the direction of his or her corporate superior; 3. The superior made the request of the employee as part of the corporation's effort to secure legal advice or services; 4. The content of the communication relates to the legal services being rendered, and the subject matter of the communication is within the scope of the employee's duties; 5. The communication is not disseminated beyond those persons who, because of the corporate structure, need to know its contents. Southern Bell, 632 So. 2d at Other courts apply a control group test, where the determination of whether the attorney-client privilege applies focuses on which corporate employee is involved in the communication: [I]f the employee making the communication, of whatever rank he may be, is in a position to control or even to take a substantial part in a decision about any action which the corporation may take upon the advice of the attorney, or if he is an authorized member of a body or group which has that Page 6
7 authority, then, in effect he is (or personifies) the corporation when he makes his disclosure to the lawyer and the privilege would apply. City of Philadelphia v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 210 F. Supp. 483, 485 (E.D. Pa. 1962). These authorities highlight another trap for the unwary in-house attorney: whether your communication was privileged will turn on what state s laws, or federal rule, may govern the disposition of that question. Regardless of the test they apply, courts tend to focus on whether the advice given was legal advice or business advice when deciding whether the attorney-client communication was privileged in the corporate context. Ullberg & Kuhlman, SC40 ALI-ABA at 395. Given the unique role of in-house attorneys, the advice they give often contains both legal and business advice, and often it is intermingled. Id. While many courts hold that a communication is privileged only if it is predominantly legal in nature, see e.g., Rossi v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 542 N.Y.S.2d 508, 511 (N.Y. 1989), there is no bright line rule. Ullberg & Kuhlman, SC40 ALI-ABA at 395. Courts also consider a number of other factors when determining whether to extend a privilege to mixed communications, such as: Id. at For what purpose the attorney was contacted (i.e., business transaction, negotiation, imminent litigation, etc.); 2. When and where the communications took place; 3. Whether the attorney holds any other offices in the company; and 4. Whether the communication conveys any legal research. B. Maintaining the Privilege Successfully attaching the attorney-client privilege to a communication is not the end of the process in fact, it is only the beginning. After such a communication comes into existence, it must be guarded, maintained, and preserved. That job falls not just on the client, but on the lawyer as well. Attorneys owe their clients the ethical duty to preserve confidential communications and protect them from subsequent disclosure. Page 7
8 One way to prevent waiver is to make it clear on the face of the document that a given communication is privileged. If their communications are written, or if oral communications are memorialized in writing, clients and lawyers should ensure that the writing looks privileged. When a communication appears privileged on its face, the party seeking disclosure will often bear the burden of proving it is not. See e.g. Shell Oil Co. v. Par Four Partnership, 638 So. 2d 1050, (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). In-house counsel should make sure each document is labeled or titled to reflect its confidential status, and that the attorney participating in the communication did so in his or her capacity as attorney for the company client. Ullberg & Kuhlman, SC40 ALI-ABA at 402. Counsel should implement a policy for what the appropriate label should say (e.g., Privileged Attorney-Client Communication, Confidential, or Highly Confidential ) and under what circumstances it should be used. Id. Also, the company should designate legal titles for all legal personnel, and such personnel should use letterhead, stationary, note pads, and s that indicate their legal capacity. Id. Confidential documents should also be kept or stored in a fashion that indicates their privileged status. Legal files and documents should be kept separate and distinct from other business files. Id. Procedures should be enacted for retaining the confidentiality of legal communications, including segregation, cabinet locks, and computer passwords. Id. Access to these communications should be limited to legal personnel and only those others who play an integral role in the legal department. A necessary corollary to the make-it-look-privileged strategy for maintaining the attorney-client privilege is: and don t waive it. Disclosure to third parties will waive an otherwise confidential communication, and such waivers will sometimes result in ethical violations. Privileged communications should not be shared internally or externally with anyone that is not clearly a party to the privilege or the communication itself. Finally, in-house counsel should note that it is the entire board of directors that holds the privilege over confidential communications, and therefore an individual officer or director cannot waive the privilege contrary to the wishes of the company s board. Tail of the Pup, Inc. v. Webb, 528 So. 2d 506, 507 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Page 8
9 III. Conflicts of Interest A. Intended Multiple Representations Rule 1.7(a) of the Model Rule of Professional Conduct sets out two kinds of impermissible conflicts of interest, both of which pose a potential problem for in-house attorneys. One of these conflicts occurs if the representation of a client will be materially limited by the lawyer s responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest of the lawyer. Rule 1.7(a)(2). When an in-house attorney represents both an entity and an individual employee, the attorney will almost always be materially limited by his or her responsibilities to the other. Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 515. In litigation situations, for example, a conflict will most certainly arise when both the entity and the employee are named defendants, or when the employee is the subject of an investigation in which the entity is a likely target. Id. at 516. In such circumstances, an attorney s representation becomes materially limited due to the likelihood of one or both of the clients eventually pointing the finger at the other. Id. (citing as an example where the employer/entity seeks to avoid liability by establishing that the employee was acting outside the scope of his or her employment). When the positions of the clients become adverse, this constitutes a direct conflict regardless of whether the attorney s representation will become materially limited. Rule 1.7(a)(1) (stating that a conflict exists if the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client ). A problem also arises where a represented employee gives the in-house counsel information which, if disclosed to the entityemployer, would warrant the termination of the employee. Id. at 522. Another potential conflict arises where an in-house attorney negotiates a transaction between the entity and the employee, such as a compensation agreement. Id. at 515. In these situations, the attorney s duty of loyalty to each client necessarily limits her ability to zealously advocate the best possible terms for the other client. Id. Even when in-house counsel is solely representing the employee in particular litigation, the danger of a conflict of interest exists if the entity has agreed to pay for the representation. Rule 1.8(f) of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct states that [a] lawyer shall not accept compensation for representing a client from one other than the client unless, among other things, there is no interference with the lawyer s independence of professional judgment or with the client-lawyer relationship. Retaining his or her independence of professional judgment becomes difficult when the corporate client funds the representation and attempts to control or direct the representation as well. Page 9
10 Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 533. If the entity exerts control to the extent that the in-house attorney considers any interests other than the best interest of the employee-client, then an impermissible conflict has arisen. Id. at 534. Even where a conflict exists whether because the clients positions are directly adverse or the attorney s representation of one client will be materially limited Rule 1.7(b) provides that an attorney may continue to represent a client if certain requirements are met, one of which is to obtain informed written consent from all affected clients. There are some representations, however, that are non-consentable. For example, where it becomes apparent that it will be in the best interests of one of the clients to take an adverse position toward the other, the clients consent is likely invalid. Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 518; see also Rule 1.7(b)(3) (lawyer may continue despite a conflict only if the representation of the client does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the lawyer in the same litigation ). Also, where the relationship between the in-house counsel and the entity is particularly close (e.g., there is a long-standing relationship between the two), it is likely that the attorney will favor the interests of the company over the interests of the employee. Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 519. In such situations, the employee s consent may be ineffective as well. See Rule 1.7(b)(1) (lawyer may continue representation despite a conflict only if he or she reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client ). In-house counsel should be aware that even if the representation is a consentable one, the consent must be informed. This requires the attorney to adequately disclose the nature of the dual representation and the potential issues that may arise as a result. With respect to obtaining informed consent from the employee, some commentators suggest that [f]irst and foremost, the individual should understand that there can be no expectation of confidentiality; all information given to the attorney will be shared with the company and vice versa. Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 525. The attorney should also inform the employee of the various reasons why retaining independent counsel might be favorable, such as the strategic options that may be foreclosed by joint representation, the danger of the lawyer favoring the interests of the company (even if subconsciously), and the possibility that the interests of the company may become directly adverse to the employee s (which would require the employee to seek independent counsel anyway). Id. at With regard to obtaining informed consent from the company, counsel s disclosure should include the risk of subsequent disqualification from continuing to represent the entity, and any other factors that may indicate an inclination to favor the employee s interests (e.g., close relationship with senior management employee). Id. at Page 10
11 B. Unintended Multiple Representations When the in-house attorney unintentionally represents both the company and the employee, conflicts of interest pose a dangerous problem. As discussed above, an in-house attorney is particularly susceptible to creating unintentional attorney-client relationships with employees by, for example, becoming involved in internal investigations and handling quasi-business/personal matters. When a dispute arises, a judge or disciplinary authority determines retroactively whether an attorney-client relationship was formed, and conflicts of interest may have arisen that the in-house counsel did not even realize he or she had. Such conflicts may result in disqualification. Even when the attorney realizes before a dispute arises that he or she has unintentionally created an attorney-client relationship with an employee, and withdraws from representing the employee, disqualification may still result. Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.9(a) forbids a lawyer from representing a client in the same or a substantially related matter in which the lawyer represented a former client, and where the current client s interests are materially adverse to the former client s interests, unless the lawyer obtains the former client s informed consent in writing. Therefore, an attorney may not always be able to continue representing the company after he withdraws from an unintended representation of an employee. C. Potential Consequence of Conflict: Disqualification of Entire Legal Department Avoiding conflicts of interest is especially important for in-house counsel in light of the drastic consequences that result from counsel being disqualified from continued representation of the company. Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.10(a) imputes conflicts of interest created by one attorney to the attorney s entire corporate legal department. Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 522. Therefore, if an in-house attorney is disqualified from representing the company, so is the entire company legal department. Imputation of a conflict presents a particularly serious problem for organizational clients. Disqualification of the entire legal department renders a branch of the company essentially worthless (at least with respect to the matter at hand). Additionally, the disqualification not only prohibits the in-house lawyers from handling the matter, but it suggests that [they] may be barred from even managing the representation, a role which has gained increased importance in recent years. Id. at Page 11
12 IV. Unauthorized Practice of Law Even where conflict rules allow an in-house attorney to represent a company employee, the attorney must not violate still other rules: those prohibiting the unauthorized practice of law. Just like an outside lawyer, an in-house attorney licensed to practice law in one state may not represent a client, including corporate employees in a matter in another state. Although many states have rules that allow in-house lawyers who are not licensed in that state to represent their corporate employers without engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, these rules do not extend that privilege to the representation of individual employees. These situations actually pose a threat of unauthorized practice of law for both the in-house attorney and the company client. Obviously, when the attorney represents a company employee in a state in which he or she is not admitted, the attorney is committing the unauthorized practice of law. But the corporation itself is also guilty of unauthorized practice vicariously, through the actions of the in-house attorney as its agent. Moore, 39 S. Tex. L. Rev. at 512. V. Following Rule 1.13 Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.13 sets out a process that a lawyer must follow when a constituent of the entity the attorney represents (director, officer, employee, etc.) acts in a way that is a violation of law which reasonably might be imputed to the organization, and is likely to result in substantial injury to the organization. The rule requires a lawyer faced with such a situation to proceed as is reasonably necessary in the best interest of the organization, but at the same time minimize disruption of the organization and the risk of revealing information relating to the representation to persons outside the organization. Rule 1.13 does not provide a safe harbor for the attorney who chooses to become a whistle-blower. Sally R. Weaver, Ethical Dilemmas of Corporate Counsel: A Structural and Contextual Analysis, 46 Emory L.J. 1023, 1033 (1997). Given this lack of a safe harbor, the decision to whistle blow or take other similar action as required by the rule can result in serious consequences for an in-house lawyer. Id. at Circumstances to which this rule applies may place the in-house lawyer at risk to not only lose a client, but also to lose his or her job. Id. at In-house counsel can minimize their exposure to such risks by making sure the company management understands counsel s role as attorney for the organization and the responsibilities that accompany that role: Page 12
13 First, corporate counsel should define clearly their role as counsel for the organization rather than for any of the individual constituents of the entity. It is helpful to reinforce this distinction periodically.... Second, corporate counsel must diligently identify specific circumstances in which confusion about this issue can arise. Rule 1.13(d) requires counsel who confront these situations to provide Miranda-like warnings [as discussed above] to constituents of the organization.... [The rule] only requires this disclosure when the lawyer believes that the entity s interests may be adverse to those of the constituents. Prudence suggests, however, that the lawyer s ethical obligations in these situations be included in a general discussion with the board of directors and senior management about the lawyer s role as counsel to the entity. Finally, corporate counsel should ensure that their clients understand the steps that Model Rule 1.13 requires if an agent or representative of the client persists in taking an action that is a violation of a legal obligation to the organization, or a violation of law which reasonably might be imputed to the organization. Corporate counsel should discuss the ethical obligations of lawyers under Rule 1.13 with management before, rather than after, this situation arises and establish written policies and procedures for resolving internal conflicts. Id. at VI. Serving as Both In-House Counsel and Director In-house attorneys who also serve as directors of the company client face several ethical concerns. Such concerns include whether the attorney-client privilege attaches to certain communications at board meetings, client confidentiality, and conflicts of interest, among other things. In-house attorney who act in this dual role should be very familiar with the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility Opinion , which directly and comprehensively discusses these ethical concerns. VII. Legal Malpractice Like their outside counterparts, in-house lawyers must be evervigilant to avoid exposing themselves to claims of legal malpractice. Page 13
14 However, in-house attorneys face issues relating to potential legal malpractice situations that outside lawyers do not. Although many corporate attorneys purchase malpractice insurance, many others do not. Even for those that have insurance, such coverage frequently only extends to legal advice to and representation of the company and its employees. If the attorney helps someone outside the company, or unintentionally creates an attorney-client relationship with a non-employee, a legal malpractice claim arising out of this type of representation may well be self-insured. Also, in-house attorneys should be conscious of the effect that committing malpractice may have on their employment relationship with the company. When an in-house attorney commits malpractice, he or she exposes the employer to vicarious liability for the damages, which may or may not be insured. Page 14
Reflections on Ethical Issues In the Tripartite Relationship
Reflections on Ethical Issues In the Tripartite Relationship [click] By Bruce A. Campbell 1 Introduction In most areas of the practice of law, there are a number of ethical issues that arise on a frequent
More informationKENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY PRACTICE OF LAW
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY PRACTICE OF LAW SCR 3.130(1.8) Conflict of interest: current clients; specific rules (a) A lawyer shall not enter into a business transaction
More informationLegal Ethics Practical Tips from Where else?... Practice
Legal Ethics Practical Tips from Where else?... Practice Presented by: Mark C. Dosker mark.dosker@squiresanders.com Corporate Miranda or Upjohn Warnings Issues Facing Counsel at the Onset of an Internal
More informationETHICAL ISSUES IN THE EMPLOYMENT CONTEXT
ETHICAL ISSUES IN THE EMPLOYMENT CONTEXT Mark J. Oberti Oberti Sullivan LLP 723 Main Street, Suite 340 Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 401-3556 mark@osattorneys.com Edwin Sullivan Oberti Sullivan LLP 723 Main
More informationEthics Bear Traps for In-House Counsel Michael Aprahamian
Ethics Bear Traps for In-House Counsel Michael Aprahamian Unique Problems Faced by In-House Counsel The general counsel has one foot planted firmly in the shifting, treacherous terrain of the law, and
More informationDuties of Corporate Counsel
April 1, 2015 Making It To The Finish Line & How Not To Stumble Over Your Ethical Obligations When Handling Internal Investigations, Whistleblower Complaints & Social Media A Presentation to ACC-GNY Kathleen
More informationWhat to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration
What to Do When Your Witness Testimony Doesn t Match His or Her Declaration Russell R. Yurk Jennings, Haug & Cunningham, L.L.P. 2800 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004-1049 (602) 234-7819
More informationDELAWARE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS OPINION 1991-4. August 21, 1991
DELAWARE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS OPINION 1991-4 August 21, 1991 THIS OPINION IS MERELY ADVISORY AND IS NOT BINDING ON THE INQUIRING ATTORNEY OR THE COURTS OR ANY OTHER TRIBUNAL.
More informationTHE NEW ILLINOIS RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
THE NEW ILLINOIS RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT This paper serves as an introduction into the New Rules of Professional Conduct. It is neither intended to be an exhaustive review of the New Rules nor to
More informationISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct
ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct ISBA Advisory Opinions on Professional Conduct are prepared as an educational service to members of the ISBA. While the Opinions express the ISBA interpretation
More informationISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct
ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct ISBA Advisory Opinions on Professional Conduct are prepared as an educational service to members of the ISBA. While the Opinions express the ISBA interpretation
More informationEthical Wrinkles In Elder Law
Ethical Wrinkles In Elder Law Devika Kewalramani There is one rule to follow above all others: Proceed with extreme caution. Devika Kewalramani is a partner and co-chair of Moses & Singer s Legal Ethics
More informationLawyer Mobility in the Context of Corporate Law Departments
Lawyer Mobility in the Context of Corporate Law Departments Presented by: William H. Roberts, Blank Rome LLP Jeremy A. Rist, Blank Rome LLP Kevin M. Passerini, Blank Rome LLP I. Do corporations need to
More informationCollege of Labor & Employment Lawyers Seventh Circuit
College of Labor & Employment Lawyers Seventh Circuit Challenging Issues in Government Investigations: Who does the government attorney represent and who can the government attorney contact directly (and
More informationDALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION TRIAL SKILLS SECTION NOVEMBER 17, 2015. By: Robert L. Tobey Johnston Tobey Baruch, P.C. www.johnstontobey.
DALLAS BAR ASSOCIATION TRIAL SKILLS SECTION NOVEMBER 17, 2015 By: Robert L. Tobey Johnston Tobey Baruch, P.C. www.johnstontobey.com A. Lawyers owe their clients a fiduciary duty. Breach of fiduciary duty
More informationNEBRASKA ETHICS ADVISORY OPINION FOR LAWYERS. No. 12-10
NEBRASKA ETHICS ADVISORY OPINION FOR LAWYERS No. 12-10 A Nebraska lawyer s duties to former clients do not allow representing someone with interests materially adverse to the former client where the conflicting
More informationOpinion #177. Advancing Litigation Costs Through Lines of Credit
Opinion #177. Advancing Litigation Costs Through Lines of Credit Issued by the Professional Ethics Commission Date Issued: December 14, 2001 Facts and Question An attorney has requested an opinion on whether
More informationLAWYER-DIRECTORS: AN ENDANGERED SPECIES
BAILEY CAVALIERI LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW One Columbus 10 West Broad Street, Suite 2100 Columbus, Ohio 43215-3422 telephone 614.221.3155 facsimile 614.221.0479 www.baileycavalieri.com LAWYER-DIRECTORS: AN
More informationORANGE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION. Formal Opinion 2011-01 (Collaborative Family Law)
ORANGE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION Formal Opinion 2011-01 (Collaborative Family Law) Issue: Can a family lawyer enter into a collaborative law agreement consistent with her ethical duties, notwithstanding the
More informationAttorney Withdrawal: The Ins-and-Outs of Getting Out
Attorney Withdrawal: The Ins-and-Outs of Getting Out In a perfect world, every matter a lawyer handles for a client would come to a timely, successful, and profitable conclusion. Sometimes, however, it
More informationSample Letters. Sample Letters And Optional Paragraphs
Sample Letters Disclaimer The following sample letters are to be used as a guide or example, and must be adjusted to suit your client's needs. Lawyers Mutual Insurance Company of Kentucky hereby disclaims
More informationCaught in the Middle: What to Do When Conflicts Arise Between Policyholders and Insurers
Caught in the Middle: What to Do When Conflicts Arise Between Policyholders and Insurers Robert A. Shults Jacob A. DeLeon McFall, Sherwood & Breitbeil, P.C. Houston, Texas Within the tripartite relationship,
More informationSpecifically, the Bar has been asked the following questions:
ETHICS OPINION NUMBER 222 OF THE MISSISSIPPI BAR RENDERED NOVEMBER 17, 1994 CONFLICT OF INTEREST: PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS; AGREEMENTS AFFECTING LAWYER LIABILITY; RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTNER OR SUPERVISOR
More informationKENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION Ethics Opinion KBA E-290 Issued: September 1984
KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION Ethics Opinion KBA E-290 Issued: September 1984 This opinion was decided under the Code of Professional Responsibility, which was in effect from 1971 to 1990. Lawyers should consult
More informationETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND CONDO ASSOCIATION ATTORNEY. Presented May 13, 2005
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND CONDO ASSOCIATION ATTORNEY Presented May 13, 2005 Advising Homeowners and Condominium Associations Washington State Bar Association By Joseph P.
More informationBusiness Ethics Issues in Oregon and Washington: A Tale of Three Cases
Business Ethics Issues in Oregon and Washington: A Tale of Three Cases Mark J. Fucile Stoel Rives LLP 900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600 Portland, OR 97204 503.294.9501 mjfucile@stoel.com 1 This paper discusses
More informationMalpractice and Ethics Claim Avoidance for Business Lawyers
Malpractice and Ethics Claim Avoidance for Business Lawyers Author Michelle Lore, Claim Attorney Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Ins. Co. About Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Founded in 1982 by members of the Minnesota
More informationSTANDARD 3.5 ON ASSISTANCE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS
STANDARD 3.5 ON ASSISTANCE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS STANDARD In appropriate circumstances, a provider may offer pro se litigants assistance or limited representation at various stages of proceedings. COMMENTARY
More informationIn-House Insurance Defense Counsel
In-House Insurance Defense Counsel Permissible Cost-Saving Measure or Impermissible Conflict of Interest? by Nathan Price Chaney Why have In-House Counsel? From Company s point of view: Control Effective
More informationNebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 91-3
Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 91-3 I. AS COUNSEL FOR A PLAINTIFF, AN ATTORNEY MAY NOT ETHICALLY INTERVIEW PRESENT OR FORMER EMPLOYEES OF A DEFENDANT CORPORATION IF: (a) THE EMPLOYEES
More informationrequires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.
LEGAL ETHICS OPINION 1814 UNDISCLOSED RECORDING OF THIRD PARTIES IN CRIMINAL MATTERS In this hypothetical, a Criminal Defense Lawyer represents A who is charged with conspiracy to distribute controlled
More informationThe Journey from Legal Technician to Trusted Advisor: Pick up Your Road Map Here
The Journey from Legal Technician to Trusted Advisor: Pick up Your Road Map Here Thursday, April 25, 2013 2013 NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT LAW CONFERENCE APRIL 25 Panel Presentation The Journey from Legal Technician
More informationOpinion 465. October 1990 QUESTIONS PRESENTED
Opinion 465 October 1990 QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. May an attorney ethically own an interest in a lending institution which loans money to personal injury clients of the attorney? 2. May an attorney borrow
More informationTHE ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS FORMAL OPINION 2009-6 AGGREGATE SETTLEMENTS
THE ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS FORMAL OPINION 2009-6 AGGREGATE SETTLEMENTS TOPIC: Multiple Representations; Aggregate Settlements; Advance
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 14-80374-CIV-COHN/SELTZER ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISQUALIFY DEFENSE COUNSEL
PHARMA SUPPLY, INC., v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 14-80374-CIV-COHN/SELTZER MITCHELL A. STEIN and STEIN LAW, P.C., Defendants. / ORDER DENYING MOTION
More informationEthical Issues Facing Today s Transportation Lawyers
Ethical Issues Facing Today s Transportation Lawyers R I C K K I S S I N G E R K I S S I N G E R & F E L L M A N, P C D E N V E R, C O M o d e r a t o r L E E P I O V A R C Y M A R T I N, T A T E, M O
More informationInsight from Carlton Fields
Insight from Carlton Fields Serving Two Masters: of Bond Sureties By Wm. Cary Wright; Matthew R. Cogburn; J. Derek Kantaskas In construction litigation, principals and sureties on payment and performance
More informationCARLSMITH BALL LLP HONOLULU HILO KONA MAUI GUAM LOS ANGELES
Applicability Effective 1/1/2014 Hawaii U.S. District Court L.R. 83.3 Federal Agencies Patent and Trademark Office (Part II, Subpart D) Securities and Exchange Commission (17 CFR Part 205) Highlights Client
More informationEthical Considerations for the Estate Attorney. Trusts and Estates Practice is Difficult to Categorize
Ethical Considerations for the Estate Attorney Trusts and Estates Practice is Difficult to Categorize Clients are generally older, but many younger people are planning for retirement and family members.
More informationTHE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Continuing Legal Education. Estate Planning for the Family Business Owner
91 THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Continuing Legal Education Estate Planning for the Family Business Owner Cosponsored by the ABA Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law and the ABA Section of Taxation
More informationETHICAL AND MALPRACTICE ISSUES IN PROBATE ADMINISTRATION. by Mark J. Fucile
CHAPTER 7 ETHICAL AND MALPRACTICE ISSUES IN PROBATE ADMINISTRATION by Mark J. Fucile Fucile & Reising LLP 115 NW First Ave., Suite 401 Portland, OR 97209 503.224.4895 mark@frllp.com www.frllp.com How to
More informationConflict Between Driver and Guest-Passenger Legal Representation in the State of Louisiana
Louisiana State Bar Association Rules of Professional Conduct Committee 1 March 29, 2008 Conflict of Interest: Simultaneous Representation of Driver and Guest-Passenger Conflicts are probably the most
More informationAssume that the following clause was included in the retainer agreement between SK Firm LLP and the Corporation (the Relieving Clause ):
ETHICAL SCENARIO #3 I. FACT PATTERN A Saskatchewan law firm ( SK Firm LLP ) acts on behalf of an out of province (e.g. national) corporation (the Corporation ). SK Firm LLP s role has been solely to file
More informationETHICAL DIMENSIONS OF BUSINESS IMMIGRATION PRACTICE
ETHICAL DIMENSIONS OF BUSINESS IMMIGRATION PRACTICE Immigration lawyers are confronted frequently by ethical issues, particularly in the context of representing employer and employee clients in business
More information12/3/2015. Thomas J. Farrell Farrell and Reisinger, LLC Pittsburgh
Brian W. Perry, Esq. PSWZ Law Firm Harrisburg David J. Freed Cumberland County District Attorney Carlisle Thomas J. Farrell Farrell and Reisinger, LLC Pittsburgh A lawyer shall not represent a client if
More informationISBA Professional Conduct Advisory Opinion
ISBA Professional Conduct Advisory Opinion Opinion No. 14-03 May 2014 Subject: Digest: Ref.: Conflict of Interest; Professional Independence of Lawyer; Unauthorized Practice of Law; Sharing Fees with Non-Lawyers
More informationWAIVER OF FUTURE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: PERMITTED IN GEORGIA?
WAIVER OF FUTURE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: PERMITTED IN GEORGIA? Middle District of Georgia Bankruptcy Law Institute Friday, September 7, 2007 Macon, Georgia Clark D. Cunningham W. Lee Burge Professor of
More informationAS APPROVED BY CONVOCATION, MARCH 25, 2004. (new/amended rules and commentary for rule 2.02)
AS APPROVED BY CONVOCATION, MARCH 25, 2004 (new/amended rules and commentary for rule 2.02) When Client an Organization (1.1) Notwithstanding that the instructions may be received from an officer, employee,
More informationComment, A STATE SURVEY DUAL REPRESENTATION IN ADOPTION
\\jciprod01\productn\m\mat\27-2\mat207.txt unknown Seq: 1 29-JUL-15 10:30 Vol. 27, 2015 Dual Representation in Adoption 481 Comment, A STATE SURVEY DUAL REPRESENTATION IN ADOPTION Dual representation is
More informationATTORNEY CONSULTATION AND FEE CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENCY CASES
109 N. Palafox Street Telephone (850) 434-8904 Pensacola, Florida 32502 Fax (850) 434-8922 ATTORNEY CONSULTATION AND FEE CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENCY CASES THIS FEE CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENCY CASES ("Contract")
More informationNEBRASKA ETHICS ADVISORY OPINION FOR LAWYERS NO 12-09. Upon termination of representation, a lawyer shall take steps to the
NEBRASKA ETHICS ADVISORY OPINION FOR LAWYERS NO 12-09 Upon termination of representation, a lawyer shall take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client s interests, including surrendering
More informationHomeline CLE Top Ten Ethical Issue That Impact Family Law Lawyers
Homeline CLE Top Ten Ethical Issue That Impact Family Law Lawyers I. Safekeeping Property. A. Rule 1.15 of Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct requires a lawyer representing a party to safe keep their
More informationGuidelines for Outside Counsel New York University, NYU Langone Medical Center and Affiliates
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY Guidelines for Outside Counsel New York University, NYU Langone Medical Center and Affiliates Purpose and Goals New York University s Senior Vice President and General Counsel, assisted
More informationCase 2:11-cr-00157-HGB-ALC Document 104 Filed 12/09/11 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA VERSUS NO: 11-157
Case 2:11-cr-00157-HGB-ALC Document 104 Filed 12/09/11 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CRIMINAL ACTION VERSUS NO: 11-157 DOMINICK FAZZIO
More informationRUNNING THE ETHICAL OBSTACLE COURSE: JOINT DEFENSE AGREEMENTS
RUNNING THE ETHICAL OBSTACLE COURSE: JOINT DEFENSE AGREEMENTS Todd M. Sahner * The general counsel of one of your long-time corporate clients asks you to defend his company in a significant multi-party
More informationThe Georgia Brokerage Relationships in Real Estate Transactions Act
Chapter 9 The Georgia Brokerage Relationships in Real Estate Transactions Act A. OVERVIEW PURPOSE OF THE ACT The Brokerage Relationships in Real Estate Transactions Act (BRRETA) http://www.crowngeorgia.com/brreta.htm
More informationTORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER. Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and Plaintiff's Treating Physicians
This article originally appeared in The Colorado Lawyer, Vol. 25, No. 26, June 1996. by Jeffrey R. Pilkington TORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and
More informationSTATE BAR ASSOCIATION OF NORTH DAKOTA ETHICS COMMITTEE OPINION NUMBER 99-04 December 14, 1999
STATE BAR ASSOCIATION OF NORTH DAKOTA ETHICS COMMITTEE OPINION NUMBER 99-04 December 14, 1999 The Ethics Committee has received a request for an opinion from an attorney on the question of whether that
More informationEthics Rule 1.13 Representation of an Organization & Privilege. Charles W. Thompson, Jr. Executive Director and General Counsel
Ethics Rule 1.13 Representation of an Organization & Privilege Charles W. Thompson, Jr. Executive Director and General Counsel 1 Rule 1.13 Who s the client? Privilege Cases Pot pouri $200 $200 $200 $200
More informationIf It Looks Like A Parrot, Walks Like A Penguin, And Quacks Like A Duck It May Be An --
Of Counsel If It Looks Like A Parrot, Walks Like A Penguin, And Quacks Like A Duck It May Be An -- Del O'Roark, Loss Prevention Consultant, Lawyers Mutual Insurance Co. of Ky. KBA Bench & Bar, Vol. 63
More informationCan You Keep A Secret? How the Attorney- Client and Self-Evaluative Privileges Can Apply to Your Compliance Practice
Can You Keep A Secret? How the Attorney- Client and Self-Evaluative Privileges Can Apply to Your Compliance Practice Pamela J. Grimm grimmp@msx.upmc.edu Associate Counsel UPMC Health System 200 Lothrop
More informationISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct
ISBA Advisory Opinion on Professional Conduct ISBA Advisory Opinions on Professional Conduct are prepared as an educational service to members of the ISBA. While the Opinions express the ISBA interpretation
More informationOutsourcing: From Here to There
September 2013 Idaho State Bar Advocate Outsourcing: From Here to There By Mark J. Fucile Fucile & Reising LLP A key facet of the American Bar Association s recent Ethics 20/20 amendments to the Model
More informationNebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 93-2
Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 93-2 A DEPUTY PUBLIC DEFENDER MAY ACCEPT EMPLOYMENT AS A DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY IN THE SAME COUNTY IF THE FOLLOWING PRECAUTIONS ARE TAKEN: (1) ALL CASES
More informationConflict of Interests When Representing a Beneficiary and the Trustee
Conflict of Interests When Representing a Beneficiary and the Trustee In the administration of a trust or estate, an attorney may be in the position of representing both the trustee and the beneficiaries
More informationThe Foundation of Juvenile Practice Part 1: You are Adversary Counsel, NOT a GAL! Private Bar Certification Forensic Exercise November 19, 2014
The Foundation of Juvenile Practice Part 1: You are Adversary Counsel, NOT a GAL! Private Bar Certification Forensic Exercise November 19, 2014 Role of Juvenile Defense Counsel: Forensic Exercise: Question
More informationInformed Consent and Legal Malpractice
Professional Liability Conflicts of Interest By Karen Painter Randall and Andrew Sayles Informed Consent and Legal Malpractice Obtaining a valid waiver for a conflict involves many subjective assessments
More informationInside Counsel: The Attorney-Client Privilege Within Law Firms
November 2007 DRI For the Defense Inside Counsel: The Attorney-Client Privilege Within Law Firms By Mark J. Fucile Fucile & Reising LLP In recent years it has become increasingly common for a designated
More informationTHE CORPORATE COUNSELOR
THE CORPORATE COUNSELOR NOVEMBER 2013 Third-Party Litigation Investing and Attorney-Client Privilege By David A. Prange Civil litigation is potentially expensive, and achieving lucrative outcomes is not
More informationTerms and Conditions for Tax Services
Terms and Conditions for Tax Services In the course of delivering services relating to tax return preparation, tax advisory, and assistance in tax controversy matters, Brady, Martz & Associates, P.C. (we
More informationDAVIS SMITH ACCOUNTING ASSOCIATES, P.A.
DAVIS SMITH ACCOUNTING ASSOCIATES, P.A. 5582 Milford-Harrington Hwy. Harrington, DE 19952 (302) 398-4020 (302) 398-3665 fax Email: info@davis-smithaccounting.com Web site: www.davis-smithaccounting.com
More informationReflections on a Few Common Elements of Effective Law Firm Risk Management
Reflections on a Few Common Elements of Effective Law Firm Risk Management I. Introduction. by Gilda T. Russell 1 United States law firms employ varied approaches to risk management. In terms of structure,
More informationThe Fiduciary Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege and Its Application in Litigation. by George O. Peterson
The Fiduciary Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege and Its Application in Litigation by George O. Peterson I. INTRODUCTION Trusts and estates attorneys who represent fiduciaries may have little occasion
More informationMULTIPLE REPRESENTATION AND DRAFTING CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS
MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION AND DRAFTING CONTINGENCY FEE AGREEMENTS ADVANCED PERSONAL INJURY LAW COURSE CLE TEXAS STATE BAR 2013 S AM J OHNSON S COTT, DOUGLASS & MC C ONNICO, L.L.P. A TTORNEYS A T L AW WWW.
More informationBOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE FORMAL ETHICS OPINION 2013-F-157 QUESTION
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE FORMAL ETHICS OPINION 2013-F-157 Is it a conflict of interest for a lawyer who was appointed guardian ad litem to subsequently represent
More informationMARYLAND STANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR COURT-APPOINTED LAWYERS REPRESENTING CHILDREN IN CUSTODY CASES
MARYAND JUDICIAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON FAMILY LAW CUSTODY SUBCOMMITTEE HON. MARCELLA HOLLAND, CHAIR MARYLAND STANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR COURT-APPOINTED LAWYERS REPRESENTING CHILDREN IN CUSTODY CASES TEXT
More informationProhibition Against Commingling and Misappropriation of Client Funds or. Property.
RULE 1.15: PRESERVING IDENTITY OF FUNDS AND PROPERTY OF OTHERS; FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY; COMMINGLING AND MISAPPROPRIATION OF CLIENT FUNDS OR PROPERTY; MAINTENANCE OF BANK ACCOUNTS; RECORD KEEPING; EXAMINATION
More information(3) (a) whether an attorney/executor or trustee may retain his law firm as attorney for a trust or estate for which he is serving as fiduciary;
LEGAL ETHICS OPINION 1515 ATTORNEY DRAFTING INSTRUMENT WHICH NAMES SELF EITHER AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OR TRUSTEE OR WHICH DIRECTS SUCH OTHER DESIGNEE TO EMPLOY ATTORNEY AS FIDUCIARY ADMINISTRATOR.
More informationOregon Code of Professional Responsibility
Oregon Code of Professional Responsibility (06/03) 1 Oregon Code of Professional Responsibility (As approved by the Oregon Supreme Court through June 17, 2003) TABLE OF CONTENTS Disciplinary Rule 1 Maintaining
More informationBOSTON BAR ASSOCIATION ETHICS COMMITTEE OPINION 2008-01: BANKRUPTCY PRO BONO INITIATIVE SUMMARY
BOSTON BAR ASSOCIATION ETHICS COMMITTEE OPINION 2008-01: BANKRUPTCY PRO BONO INITIATIVE SUMMARY The Ethics Committee of the Boston Bar Association has been asked to analyze a pro bono initiative (the Pro
More informationCopyright 2010 National Center for Justice and the Rule of Law
The Ethics of Metadata Hans P. Sinha Clinical Professor National a Center for Justice and the Rule of Law University of Mississippi School of Law Copyright 2010 National Center for Justice and the Rule
More informationTEMPORARY LAWYERS WORKING THROUGH A TEMPORARY PLACEMENT SERVICE
LEGAL ETHICS OPINION 1712 http://www.vacle.org/opinions/1712.txt TEMPORARY LAWYERS WORKING THROUGH A TEMPORARY PLACEMENT SERVICE You have presented a hypothetical situation in which a staffing agency recruits,
More informationTENNESSEE ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS ANNUAL DUI TRAINING 2010 TUNICA, MISSISSIPPI - OCTOBER 21-22, 2010
TENNESSEE ASSOCIATION OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS ANNUAL DUI TRAINING 2010 TUNICA, MISSISSIPPI - OCTOBER 21-22, 2010 Glenn R. Funk 117 Union Street Nashville, TN 37201 (615) 255-9595 ETHICS IN DUI DEFENSE
More informationOntario s Amended Rules of Professional Conduct
Ontario s Amended Rules of Professional Conduct Bruce Blain Toronto Symposium June 5, 2014 FLSC Model Code of Professional Conduct 2004 - initiative to create uniform ethical and professional conduct standards
More informationngagement Letters EA GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS
ngagement Letters EA GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS Second Edition 2007 Funded by the American College of Trust and Estate Counsel ( ACTEC ) Foundation. ACTEC is a registered trademark of The American College
More informationTHROUGH A TEMPORARY PLACEMENT SERVICE.
LEGAL ETHICS OPINION 1712 TEMPORARY LAWYERS WORKING THROUGH A TEMPORARY PLACEMENT SERVICE. You have presented a hypothetical situation in which a staffing agency recruits, screens and interviews lawyers
More informationCASE EVALUATION AND PREPARATION DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE
CASE EVALUATION AND PREPARATION DEFENSE PERSPECTIVE Solo and Small Firm Conference James R. Hobbs Wyrsch Hobbs & Mirakian, PC In assessing a criminal case, there are many factors that need to be considered
More informationDrafting the Joint Defense Agreement
Drafting the Joint Defense Agreement (with Sample Provisions) Daralyn J. Durie Joint defense agreements have some obvious advantages, but some not-so-obvious disadvantages. If you plan to enter into one,
More informationWHEN A CHILD MAY HAVE A TORT CLAIM: WHAT S THE CHILD S COURT- APPOINTED ATTORNEY TO DO?
WHEN A CHILD MAY HAVE A TORT CLAIM: WHAT S THE CHILD S COURT- APPOINTED ATTORNEY TO DO? The Oregon Child Advocacy Project Professor Leslie J. Harris and Child Advocacy Fellows Colin Love-Geiger and Alyssa
More informationSTANDARD CONTINGENT FEE REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT FOR INDIVIDUALS
Notice: This Agreement is not valid unless signed and accepted by an officer of The Feldman Law Firm, P.C., who will make the sole decision whether to accept your case. This Agreement may be digitally
More information^^^^ A S S O C I AT I ON
?^}^1 OHIO STATE BAR ^^^^ A S S O C I AT I ON EST I880 OSBA Informal Advisory Opinion 2011-02 December 2, 2011 Re: Request for Informal Advisory Opinion You have requested the opinion of the Ohio State
More informationConstruction Defect Action Reform Act
COLORADO REVISED STATUTES Title 13. Courts and Court Procedure Damages Regulation of Actions and Proceedings Article 20. Actions Part 8. Construction Defect Actions for Property Loss and Damage Construction
More informationETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN ALTERNATIVE FEE AGREEMENTS FOR THE DEFENSE LAWYER
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN ALTERNATIVE FEE AGREEMENTS FOR THE DEFENSE LAWYER BRIAN P. VOKE CAMPBELL CAMPBELL & EDWARDS ONE CONSTITUTION PLAZA BOSTON, MA 02129 (617) 241-3000 bvoke@campbell-trial-lawyers.com
More informationWhen Can Law Firms and Lawyers Accept Stocks or Stock Options for Services? by: Sheldon I. Banoff
When Can Law Firms and Lawyers Accept Stocks or Stock Options for Services? by: Sheldon I. Banoff With increasing frequency, lawyers and law firms are being asked (or are aggressively seeking) to take
More informationUPDATES TO ETHICAL ISSUES FOR TRUST AND ESTATE LAWYERS New and Revised Rules of Professional Conduct on the Way (We think!)
34th Annual Trust and Estate Conference - USC Gould School of Law UPDATES TO ETHICAL ISSUES FOR TRUST AND ESTATE LAWYERS New and Revised Rules of Professional Conduct on the Way (We think!) INTRODUCTION
More informationLIMITED SCOPE REPRESENTATION
LIMITED SCOPE REPRESENTATION Section _.1 What is Limit Scope Representation Section _.2 Scope of Representation Rule 4-1.2(c) Section _.3 Communication Rule 4-1.2(e) Section _.4 Appearance and Withdrawal
More informationR. Scott Krause, Esq. Eccleston & Wolf, P.C. Hanover, Maryland
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN SURETY COUNSEL REPRESENTING PRINCIPAL IN PRINCIPAL S AFFIRMATIVE CLAIM AND SURETY COUNSEL SEEKING TO RECOVER A FIDELITY LOSS FROM A THIRD PARTY INVOLVING AN INSURED S SUBSTANTIAL
More informationMPRE Sample Test Questions
MPRE Sample Test Questions The following sample questions are examples of test questions similar to those on the MPRE. While these sample questions illustrate the kinds of questions that will appear on
More informationFOR PROPERTY LOSS AND DAMAGE 1
13-20-801. Short title Colorado Revised Statutes Title 13; Article 20; Part 8: CONSTRUCTION DEFECT ACTIONS FOR PROPERTY LOSS AND DAMAGE 1 This part 8 shall be known and may be cited as the Construction
More informationComparison of Newly Adopted Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct with ABA Model Rules
Comparison of Newly Adopted Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct with ABA Model Rules ARIZONA New rules as adopted by Arizona Supreme Court to be effective 12/1/03. Rules 1.13, 5.5 and 8.5 as amended
More information