http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=507Pennsylvania Lawyers Should Consult With Client Regarding Receipt of Errant E-mail
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=506#commentsTue, 12 Jul 2011 04:33:38 +0000PeterkConfidentialityAttorney-client relationshipE-mailAttorney-client privilegePennsylvaniaEthics Opinionshttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=506A lawyer who is mistakenly copied on an e-mail between opposing counsel and their client, must notify the sender and consult with the lawyer’s own client in deciding whether and how to use the information. Penn. Bar. Ass’n. Comm on Legal ethics and Professional Responsibility Op. 2011-10 (03/2/2011)
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=506Autocomplete Causes Misdirection: Court Disqualifies Recipients
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=499#commentsMon, 03 Jan 2011 12:10:13 +0000David HricikConfidentialityCaliforniaE-mailInternet UseComputer UseAttorney-client privilegePrivacyhttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=499The story with a link to the court’s order disqualifying the lawyers who read the misdirected e-mail is here.
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=499California Issues Ethics Opinion on Confidentiality and the Use of E-mail and Technology To Transmit Client Information
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=498#commentsSun, 26 Dec 2010 11:44:12 +0000David HricikConfidentialityCaliforniaE-mailInternet UseComputer UseAttorney-client privilegePrivacyRules of ConductEthics OpinionsDisciplineSecurityCloudhttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=498California 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.
Proposed Texas Rule of Civil Procedure: The Internet is Off Limits, Too, Jurors!
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=495#commentsThu, 16 Dec 2010 11:07:46 +0000David HricikTexasEx Parte CommunicationsE-mailDiscussion GroupsInternet UseComputer UseRules of ConductSocial NetworkingSocial ComputingEvidencehttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=495An 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.
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=495McCain Palin Learn Blackberries Contain Confidences
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=459#commentsTue, 16 Dec 2008 03:58:19 +0000David HricikConfidentialityElectronic FilesE-mailComputer Usehttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=459We’ve noted here repeatedly that lawyers must safeguard client confidences, and so this story from CNN caught my eye: their campaign sold off a bunch of Blackberries to recoup some money, but they left all the data — email, home addresses, personal phone numbers, you name it — on the little gems. Now, maybe it shows where Palin bought all those fancy clothes…
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=459No Interlocutory Appeal from Inadvertent Production of Emails
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=457#commentsWed, 12 Nov 2008 12:06:40 +0000David HricikElectronic Filese-DiscoveryE-mailhttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=457This Ninth Circuit decision breaks no new ground, but does remind lawyers that in general there will be no immediate appeal of inadvertent production issues, because both there is no “final decision” and because as a general matter there is no “collateral order” in terms of Cohen. Truckstop.net LLC v. Sprint Corp., (9th Cir., No. 07-35123, 10/28/08). The lawyers perhaps should have tried mandamus…
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=457NY St. Bar Ass’n Approves Gmail Use Despite Contextual Ad Scanning
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=452#commentsSun, 14 Sep 2008 14:54:28 +0000David HricikConfidentialityWebsitesE-mailInternet UseAttorney-client privilegeNew YorkPrivacyRules of ConductBar AssociationDisciplineEthics WallsMalpracticehttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=452The 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).
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=452Screenshots Created by Yahoo Mail and Left on Hard Drive?
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=451#commentsFri, 12 Sep 2008 10:13:09 +0000David HricikMeta-dataConfidentialityElectronic Filese-DiscoveryAttorney-client relationshipE-mailAttorney-client privilegePrivacyEthics OpinionsMassachusettshttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=451Nat’l Economic Research Assocs., Inc. v. Evans, LECG Corp., 21 Mass. L. Rptr. 337 (Mass. Super. Ct. Aug. 3, 2006) is a fascinating case in various ways, and just came to my attention. Apparently, when a user views mail on yahoo, it takes a screenshot of the mail which is stored on the hard drive. While it’s not as easy to later access as a temp file, apparently they reside on the hard drive. I couldn’t find the opinion on line, but it was on westlaw.
Anyone who uses public computers or employer-owned laptops to communicate “in confidence” should examine this issue. I’m not sure it’s accurate, but the court clearly stated that Yahoo, alone, left these ghost emails!
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=451New York City Bar Association Addresses Electronic File Copying and Retention
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=450#commentsWed, 27 Aug 2008 15:21:09 +0000David HricikElectronic Filese-DiscoveryAttorney-client relationshipE-mailComputer UseNew YorkEthics OpinionsBar Associationhttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=450In Formal Opinion 2008-1 (July 2008), the Committee on Professional and Judicial Ethics of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York addressed various issues concerning the organization, delivery, and the ability to charge clients for delivery of electronic files after the end of a representation. An earlier Wisconsin opinion on the same subject is here.