What if a lawyer makes a mistake? What guidance do legal ethics rules provide regarding materiality, conflicts of interest, and disclosure requirements? Read our newsletter to learn the importance of notifying malpractice carriers about the error.

In states with Financial Elder Abuse statutes, legal malpractice claims by seniors invoking those statutes are common. These laws are generally understood to address the conversion of property of elderly or dependent adults based on undue influence or duress. In fact, liability can usually be established based on a showing of any wrongful taking of the elder's property.[1]

It seems as though every day, there is a story in the legal news about a well-known law firm facing a disqualification motion. While disqualification motions are being filed more frequently, that is only half the story[1].

When done correctly, fee-sharing arrangements between lawyers can be lucrative for lawyers while simultaneously maximizing the quality of legal representation for the client without increasing the cost. However, lawyers who do not strictly follow the ethical rules on fee sharing may be subject to bar discipline, unable to enforce their fee agreement, or even sued by the referred client if the matter is subsequently mishandled.

Ideally, the attorney-client relationship begins once a signed written engagement agreement is in place, which clearly outlines the clients who will be represented and the agreed scope of legal services. A properly drafted engagement agreement will document the expectations and obligations of both the attorney and the client. An engagement agreement, like any contract for services, reflects the "meeting of the minds" between the parties at the outset of the attorney-client relationship. In this sense, a well-crafted engagement agreement not only ensures compliance with the rules of professional conduct but also promotes client relations and helps protect against future legal malpractice claims.

Congratulations, you won (or more likely settled) the case! Your last invoice has been paid, you have closed out the file, and after a handshake from your thankful client, you are ready to move on to your next matter. There is no way this former client can return to haunt you, right?

The COVID-19 pandemic, along with government stay-at-home orders, required millions of professionals to work from home, including attorneys. However, as the pandemic comes to an end, many attorneys wish to continue to work from home. In response, law firms across the country now offer a flexible working environment, with many settling on a hybrid working schedule and some offering fully remote positions.

The duty of loyalty is the highest duty that a lawyer owes to a client. Indeed, it can be argued that all of the duties that an attorney owes to a client are derivative of the duty of loyalty. Not surprisingly, conflicts of interest have been broadly condemned for the damage they cause to the attorney-client relationship and the legal profession.

Please note that the original published version of this newsletter stated that the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct do not address the tension between many states legalizing cannabis and the federal government still criminalizing it. While correct, some states have individually updated their own legal ethics rules to address this issue. While an exhaustive list is not included in this update, the revised version of this article now includes references to the rule updates made in New Jersey, Illinois, and California. Please refer to the rules in your specific state for the most up to date position on counseling clients regarding marijuana laws.

In the first half 2021, Accenture reported triple-digit growth in cyber intrusion activity including ransomware attacks on the world's legal, accounting, and insurance industries.[1]In that same period, the average extortion demand rose 518 from just over $1 million in 2020 to $5.3 million while actual ransomware payments increased by 82 percent.[2]

The recent case of Edelson, P.C. v. Girardi, et al.[i] shows what can happen when a fee-sharing agreement goes bad. Edelson, P.C. claims that it acted as Illinois local co-counsel for California law firm Girardi Keese under an agreement to share the contingent fees for the handling of airplane crash cases. Girardi Keese claims that the fee-sharing agreement between it and Edelson in 2019 did not comply with the applicable rules of professional conduct and state law governing these agreements and, therefore, Edelson, P.C. is not entitled to its share of the fee. Specifically, Girardi Keese alleges that the clients did not consent in writing to the fee-sharing agreement between the two law firms. When Girardi Keese raised this issue, Edelson, P.C. obtained the clients' signed consents in 2021, after the cases had settled. Edelson, P.C. also made claims for recovery under a quantum meruit theory.      

The #FreeBritney movement catapulted the ethical challenges of conservatorships into the public eye. Pop icon Britney Spears, whose father was appointed as her conservator in 2008, stands at the center of this cultural awakening. Thanks to the controversy, the issue of client diminished capacity and legal freedom of choice has never been more topical. Yet, this area of legal ethics remains ambiguous and unclear, with one author stating "capacity is the black hole of ethics".[1]

It's one of the most gut-wrenching events in a lawyer's practice when they suspect the client is lying about the facts to cover up fraudulent or criminal activity. The client may be hiding liabilities when applying for a loan or negotiating a deal. Or, the client provides the lawyer with intentionally vague information about their finances to avoid reporting the information to the IRS or other governmental agency. Or worse, the lawyer may suspect the client is using the representation to launder money. Wink-winks may be involved.

Life happens fast. Blink, and you may miss important legal ethics opinions that capture the latest risk management trends. Our New Year's Edition of the Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter highlights 11 opinions from 2021 that may not have made front-page legal news but should be on your radar.

Welcome to the Thanksgiving edition of the Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter. In this edition, we consider an attorney's ethical obligations when facing a subpoena—whether issued by the court or an individual attorney—seeking privileged information or documents related directly to the representation of a current or former client.

Before you pack up your pumpkin-spiced lattes and bring out your Holiday decorations, we have a ghoulish edition of the Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter for you. We start with some Tricks for effective communication. Spoiler alert - the trifecta duties of competence, communication, and informed consent are essential to clear client communication. We then close with some Treats – a survey of ethics opinions that help lawyers mitigate the risk of claims due to poor communication.

In this edition of the Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter we cover the following:

In this edition of the Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter we cover the following:

Download The Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter (PDF)

Download The Lawyers' Lawyer Newsletter (PDF)