September 2018 - Legal Ethics Advisor

Beware of Trusting Your Friends That Are Lawyers

by Isabella Falcon in Attorney Client Relationship, Attorneys Fees, Professionalism. Posted September 27, 2018

On August 30, in Balducci v. Cige, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey held that attorney Brian Cige had a duty to explain his legal-fee agreement to Lisa Balducci, his former client, so that she could have the opportunity to make an informed decision about her representation. Beware

Online Informal Lawyer-to-Lawyer Consultations for the Benefit of the Client are Permissible, Subject to Lawyers’ Duty of Confidentiality

by Lauren Alvarez in Attorney Client Relationship, confidentiality, Ethics Opinion. Posted September 27, 2018

The Professional Ethics Committee for the State Bar of Texas recently advised that informal lawyer-to-lawyer consultations for the benefit of the client are permissible, subject to lawyers’ duty of confidentiality. online

Tactical Maneuver or Legit Prejudice? Disqualification Motion Denied in Kashi v. McGraw-Hill

by Natalia Jaramillo in Uncategorized. Posted September 24, 2018

Judge Wendy Beetlestone recently denied a motion to disqualify counsel based on prejudice to the plaintiff and the defendant’s tactical use of the motion.

Lawyers Can’t Consult With Experts For the Sole Purpose of Creating a Conflict

by Samantha Iglesias in Conflict of Interest, Ethics Opinion, Professionalism. Posted September 14, 2018

The Professional Ethics Committee for the State Bar of Texas recently advised that it is impermissible for lawyers to disclose confidential information to a prospective expert or retain an expert for the sole purpose of disqualifying the expert from working for the opposing party.

Attorney Escapes Sanctions for Failure to Check Metadata on Client’s Staged Images

by Christina Jaramillo in Attorney Client Relationship, Technology. Posted September 10, 2018

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York did not impose sanctions on an attorney who failed to check the metadata on fraudulent photographs that were produced by his client in discovery. Escapes

Picking Favorites? Not So Fast, Says Massachusetts Federal Court

by Michael Zilber in Attorney Client Relationship, Conflict of Interest. Posted September 6, 2018

On July 26, in Altova GmbH v. Syncro Soft SRL, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts held that Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP (“Sunstein”) violated its duty of loyalty to Syncro Soft (“Syncro”) by dropping Syncro in favor of its more profitable client, Altova, in Altova’s patent infringement action against Syncro. Judge Pattis Saris granted Syncro’s motion to disqualify Sunstein. Picking

[…] of a non-binding advisory opinion, as has been the case with other jurisdictions such as, Florida, San Francisco, and Delaware, it is important to note that Ohio went a step further and amended its rule regarding […]

Remote Lawyering: New Jersey and Ohio On Board - Legal Ethics Advisor on Remote Work: San Francisco Bar Association Advice in Ethics Opinion 2021-1
Not all jurisdictions have adopted the Model Rule version of the choice of law rule; seems like there might be a different result in at least some of those states. See, e.g., NY RPC 8.5(b)(2)(i) ("If the lawyer is licensed to practice only in this state, the rules to be applied shall be the rules of this state").

Art Lachman on ABA Opinion 499 Green Lights Lawyers’ Passive Investment in Firms with NonLawyer Ownership

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
					1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30

Monthly Archives: September 2018