26
Dec
2010
California Formal Opinion 2010-179 outlines the lawyer’s duties when transmitting or storing confidential client information when the underlying technology may be susceptible to unauthorized access by third parties. An attorney’s duties of confidentiality and competence require the attorney to take appropriate steps to ensure that his or her use of technology in conjunction with a client’s representation does not subject confidential client information to an undue risk of unauthorized disclosure. Because of the evolving nature of technology and differences in security features that are available, the attorney must ensure the steps are sufficient for each form of technology being used and must continue to monitor the efficacy of such steps.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Confidentiality, California, E-mail, Internet Use, Computer Use, Attorney-client privilege, Privacy, Rules of Conduct, Ethics Opinions, Discipline, Security, Cloud
16
Dec
2010
An article and link to the proposed amendment to emphasize that communication about a case is off limits whether on the Internet or not is here. Trial lawyers should consider asking for an instruction like this no matter where the venue.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Texas, Ex Parte Communications, E-mail, Discussion Groups, Internet Use, Computer Use, Rules of Conduct, Social Networking, Social Computing, Evidence
1
Dec
2010
The article with links to the proposal are here. To avoid getting any Kentucky readers in trouble, please don’t blog about this!
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Advertising, Attorney-client relationship, Discussion Groups, Internet Use, Computer Use, Kentucky, Rules of Conduct, Bar Association, Discipline, Social Networking
30
Apr
2009
The New York Rules of Professional Conduct effective April 2009. Additional Professional Standard resources are available from the State Bar.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : New York, Rules of Conduct
14
Sep
2008
The New York State Bar Association concluded that lawyers could use gmail and comply with the duty of confidentiality despite the fact that email is ’scanned’ by Google to place contextual ads. The committee warned that this sort of unthinking, automated review was proper, but not human review. N.Y. St. B. Ass’n. Comm. Prof. Eth. Op. 820 (Feb. 8, 2008).
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Confidentiality, Websites, E-mail, Internet Use, Attorney-client privilege, New York, Privacy, Rules of Conduct, Bar Association, Discipline, Ethics Walls, Malpractice
20
Feb
2008
Effective January 1, 2008, New Hampshire adopted a rule that clearly protects persons who, in good faith, e-mail confidential information to a lawyer from having the lawyer use the information against the prospective client. The comments to New Hampshshire Rule 1.18 provide in part: “In its version of these provisions, New Hampshire’s rule eliminates the terminology of ‘discussion’ or ‘consultation’ and extends the protections of the rule to persons who, in a good faith search for representation, provide information unilaterally to a lawyer who subsequently receives and reviews the information. This change recognizes that persons frequently initiate contact with an attorney in writing, by e-mail, or in other unilateral forms, and in the process disclose confidential information that warrants protection.”
The rule no doubt makes it more important for NH lawyersto use effective disclaimers on their web pages.
Comments : Comments Off
Categories : Confidentiality, Websites, Attorney-client relationship, Disclaimers, E-mail, New Hampshire, Internet Use, Computer Use, Attorney-client privilege, Conflicts, Rules of Conduct
6
Mar
2007
On Jan. 5, 2007, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued order 04-07 formally adopting changes to Chapter 20, the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys, effective July 1, 2007. The Wisconsin Bar offers information about the changes.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : Rules of Conduct, Wisconsin
6
Mar
2007
The Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct have been modified and adopt many of recent changes adopted by the ABA. A redline version is available from the Connecticut Superior Court. These revisions become effective on January 1, 2007, except as follows:
- Revisions to Rule 1.15 of the Rules of Professional Conduct were effective September 1, 2006
- New Sections 2-28A and 2-28B and new subsection (e) of Section 2-27 become effective July 1, 2007
Note that Rule 7.2 (advertising) now requires electronic advertisements to be copied every three months on a compact disk or similar technology and kept for three years.
Importantly, Practice Book Section 2-28A, which takes effect July 1, 2007, requires filing with statewide bar counsel a copy of most advertisements. Section 2-28B provides a procedure for lawyers to request an advance advisory opinion concerning the propriety of an advertisement.See modified rules.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : Advertising, Connecticut, Rules of Conduct
18
Feb
2007
The American College of Trusts and Estates Lawyers (ACTEC) Commentaries on the Model Rules of Professional Conduct.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : Rules of Conduct
10
Jan
2007
The revised D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct take effect Febrauary 1st. A markup of the Rules with the changes is available.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : Rules of Conduct, District of Columbia (D.C.)
14
Sep
2005
The Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure offers a list of all recent proposed rules changes.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : Maryland, Rules of Conduct
1
Jul
2003
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : Delaware, Rules of Conduct
6
Jun
2001
The ABA now publishes the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct on its website.
Cornell’s Legal Information Institute’s American Legal Ethics Library also offers an annotated version of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct with commentary.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : States, ABA, Rules of Conduct
8
Nov
1999
The D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct are available online. A separate version is offered by the Legal Information Institute.
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : States, Rules of Conduct, District of Columbia (D.C.)
8
Nov
1999
Comments : No Comments »
Categories : Rules of Conduct, Alabama