The District of Columbia Bar recently issued Ethics Opinion 391, providing insight as to ethical issues lawyers and law firms should bear in mind when considering agreements with government entities. While the Opinion specifically analyzes the DC Rules of Professional Conduct, versions of the same three rules raised are found in nearly every state.
The American Bar Association Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility (the “Committee”) issued its most recent opinion, which has an interesting new take on Model Rule 1.16 and the hot potato rule.
Rule 1.16 addresses lawyer withdrawal. Subsection (a) defines when lawyers must withdraw or terminate their representation of a client, and
Conflicts of interest aren’t always straightforward, especially with trust and estate planning matters. The Supreme Court of Utah recently determined that there was no former client conflict under Utah’s Rule 1.9 where lawyers were found to have only represented the former trustees and not the trust itself in litigation.
Trustees (“Trustees”) hired lawyers to represent
A common situation faced by law firms – and especially larger law firms – is the potential conflicts and disqualifications posed by Model Rule 1.10(a)’s imputation of one lawyer’s conflicts to all lawyers in the firm. This can become a substantial issue when different lawyers get initial calls from different parties to an event or
Gift giving can be complicated, but especially so for lawyers if they are the intended recipient. A ruling handed down by the Vermont Supreme Court last month increased a lawyer’s suspension from three months to five months because the legal documents he drafted conveyed his client’s real and personal property to himself. While the lawyer
A ruling handed down last month by the South Carolina Supreme Court provides object lessons on several aspects of the lawyer discipline system and how to stay out of trouble. In its order and opinion, the court publicly reprimanded a lawyer who pursued a probate case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court,
A New York district court judge last month disqualified a firm representing hundreds of 401(k) plan participants based on a conflict of interest. The judge called the risks posed “endless,” and requested additional briefing on whether the firm would be allowed to remain as counsel in related arbitration proceedings in Missouri. The ruling spotlights the
One market effect of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is that transactional clients might be eager to offer you stock or some other form of participation in a deal in lieu of your legal fees. An uptick in proposals like this could come as clients try to limit cash outlays until the business climate and their
The eyes of the nation and of the world have been on crucial issues of racial inequity in the past few weeks following the death of George Floyd at the hands of police. These issues penetrate to the very essence of how we can maintain a just society — issues that likewise go to the
Defense counsel did not act beyond the scope of their pro hac vice admission by contacting some of their client’s former employees and offering to represent them at their depositions, said a California district court last week, turning back plaintiffs’ motion to disqualify the Ohio lawyers. In its opinion the court analyzed both pro hac