2017 Happy New Year typeYou may have some holiday leftovers lurking in your fridge (potato latkes, Xmas goose, black-eyed peas, New Year’s Eve caviar), and we too have some interesting ethics topics that we didn’t have room for during 2016 — so here’s a potpourri, touching on positional conflicts, coercive settlements and maybe how not to use your firm’s

Old-time lawyers say that it used to be easy to get the court’s permission to withdraw from a case. You would just go to the judge and state, “Your Honor, we are not ready to go forward, and I am seeking leave to withdraw, because Mr. Green has not arrived.” You know: “Mr. Green” aka the moolah, aka the promised fee from the client. And, so the story goes, the judge would bang the gavel and grant your motion.

ThankfulnessLast year at this time, we published this post on gratitude, and it resonated with a lot of lawyers.  Here it is again, slightly revised.  Have a grateful Thanksgiving holiday.

Looking at the roiling current of world events, many of them dark and discouraging, can justifiably make us anxious and depressed.  Our times seem indelibly

Technophobia isn’t confined to U.S. lawyers — no surprise, it affects Canadian members of the bar, too, with the same potentially disastrous results. Last month’s cautionary tale: a lawyer who was technologically illiterate failed to supervise his wife, who ran his office and used his bar credentials to misappropriate more than $3000,000 without his knowledge. Canadian disciplinary authorities permitted him to surrender his license voluntarily, instead of revoking it.

When the government comes knocking during a grand jury investigation, can a G-man interview one of your executives without getting consent from counsel? Last month, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine said “Yes,” and refused to suppress an executive’s statements in the tax fraud case against him, holding that the ex parte chat didn’t violate ethics rules. The case shows how in a federal criminal investigation, an exception to the well-known “no-contact” rule can sweep away its protection.

LinkedIn last week announced a “rethinking” of its endorsement feature, first launched in 2012. Starting with its mobile app, the service says it has “improved targeting” so people looking at your profile will see the endorsements for you that are most relevant to them. Coming on the heels of this development, a new Ohio ethics opinion reminds us that we should be monitoring endorsements and other kinds of testimonials to ensure they are within ethical bounds.

As we’ve predicted before, the increasing globalization of high-level legal practice continues to create questions about forms of legal practice – in particular, vereins, a structure aimed at letting firms based in different countries operate under a unified brand. Mega-firms Fulbright & Jaworski and Dentons have faced motions to disqualify centered on structural issues, and now a Texas ethics opinion issued last month questions whether lawyers in the Lone Star state can use a verein name on pleadings.

Has your mother-in-law ever asked you for legal help? Giving legal advice to family members can be challenging for lots of reasons — but it comes with the territory when you have a law license. A Colorado lawyer, however, recently got into disciplinary trouble for helping his Minnesota in-laws in a small collection matter. In a badly flawed decision, the Minnesota Supreme Court decided that he’d engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.