May 2020 - Legal Ethics Advisor

Transitioning Firms? ABA Provides Guidance in Op. 489

by AMcLaughlin in ABA, Advisory Opinion, Attorney Client Relationship. Posted May 19, 2020

The American Bar Association (“ABA”) Standing Committee on Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility recently released Ethics Advisory Opinion 489 to offer guidance on the ethical obligations that arise when lawyers lateral from one firm to another. Transitioning

California May Join Utah in the Sandbox: Working Group Empowered to Explore Innovation in the Delivery of Legal Services

by Jan Jacobowitz in Attorneys Fees, regulatory sandbox, Rule 5.4 Professional Independence of a Lawyer, Rules of Professional Conduct. Posted May 18, 2020

Last week the California State Bar Board of Trustees voted to move forward with the exploration of a regulatory sandbox approach.

Brief Writing with AI? ABA Reports on “Compose.”

by Esther Ponce de Leon in ABA Model Rule 1.1, Artificial Intelligence, Technology. Posted May 14, 2020

The ABA recently reported on an artificial intelligence program that is designed to automatically write the first draft of a legal memorandum or brief.

Beware of Providing Financial Assistance to Clients

by Vincent Halloran in Attorney Client Relationship, Lawyers, legal ethics. Posted May 12, 2020

In January, a Florida Bar News article clarified some of the issues concerning when an attorney may provide financial assistance to a client. Beware

Conduct Unbecoming: Judges Notes “Court of Public Opinion” Sanctions after Lawyer’s Misconduct Goes Viral

by John Vazquez in Professionalism. Posted May 11, 2020

A Federal District Court Judge denied a request for sanctions against an attorney for allegedly making “obscene and threatening comments” toward opposing counsel during a mediation proceeding. Conduct

Are You What You Post? Judge Reprimanded for Social Media Posts

by John Vazquez in judges on Facebook, judicial ethics, judicial misconduct, Uncategorized. Posted May 8, 2020

A Tennessee state criminal court judge was publicly reprimanded last November after complaints had been filed against him in connection with several social media posts that linked to articles that were partisan in nature.

Pandemic Increases Cybersecurity Risks

by Amanda Rementeria in ABA, COVID-19, cybersecurity, data breach, diligence, Uncategorized. Posted May 8, 2020

The current pandemic has forced attorneys to move online, resulting in a sharp increase in virtual meetings, email correspondence, and usage of cloud-based storage.

Impermissible Fee-Sharing? Missouri District Court Deems Firm to be Unconventional, But Compliant

by Esther Ponce de Leon in Attorney Fees, Fee-Sharing. Posted May 7, 2020

A “virtual” law firm got a win when the U.S, District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri held that the firm, though unconventional, did not violate fee-sharing prohibitions.

Speaking of Fraud…ABA Op. 491 Clarifies a Lawyer’s Duties To Avoid Counseling Fraudulent Conduct

by Jan Jacobowitz in ABA, ABA Model Rule 1.1, Advisory Opinion, American Bar Association, Attorney Client Relationship, Client Communication, client confidentiality, Ethics Opinion, legal ethics. Posted May 4, 2020

A lawyer's duty to avoid counseling or assisting in illegal conduct is often discussed in the context of litigation-- for example the production of fraudulent documents or dishonest testimony. Fraud

Utah Advances the Conversation: Future of Lawyering to Include NonLawyers?

by Jan Jacobowitz in ABA, Attorney Fees, client confidentiality, confidentiality, COVID-19, Rule 5.4 Professional Independence of a Lawyer, Uncategorized, Utah Regulatory Reform. Posted May 2, 2020

The Utah Supreme Court recently posted its Standing Order 15 and proposed amendments to its Rules of Professional Conduct 5.4 (Professional Independence of a Lawyer) and 1.5 (Attorney Fees), which pave the way for collaboration between lawyers and non-lawyers to both provide legal services and share revenue. Future

[…] 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	31

Monthly Archives: May 2020