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
If you have not heard of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), now is the time to become familiar. Millions of companies will be affected by its reporting requirements. With the effective date being right around the corner, all lawyers need to be thinking about the CTA. The CTA, which Congress passed as a component of
“Attorneys carry substantial responsibility, but it is folly to suggest it is limitless,” said the New Jersey Supreme Court last week. The court ruled that when the Fox Rothschild firm complied with its client’s disbursement instructions it did not thereby convert funds that a non-client had wired to the firm’s trust account — even though,
The prohibition against aiding clients in carrying out crimes and frauds has been in the news lately, in connection with the quandary that lawyers find themselves in when attempting to help clients in the marijuana industry — whose conduct may be legal under state law, while remaining illegal under federal law. (We’ve blogged about it previously, here and here. ) In this environment, it is useful to consider just what constitutes assisting a client’s crime or fraud, as the Ohio Supreme Court did last week in disbarring a lawyer who helped a divorce client hide assets from her spouse.
The smoke might eventually clear for Ohio lawyers who hope to help clients engage in the medical marijuana industry after it becomes legal in the state on September 8. On August 17, the state supreme court said that it had “directed its staff to prepare a draft amendment to the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct that would clarify the services attorneys can offer clients seeking to comply with the state’s new medical marijuana law.” The announcement follows the ruling 12 days earlier by the Board of Professional Conduct that Ohio lawyers can’t provide any legal services to help clients in connection with a medical marijuana enterprise.