1f47
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.7" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Legalethics.com</title>
	<link>http://www.legalethics.com</link>
	<description>Focusing on the ethical issues associated with the use of technology by legal professionals</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 01:07:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>New York Lawyers May Use Groupon to Market Legal Services</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=508</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=508#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:50:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Websites</category>

		<category>Advertising</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>New York</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=508</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A lawyer may market legal services on a “deal of the day” or “group coupon” website
provided that the advertising is not misleading or deceptive and makes clear that no lawyer-client
relationship will be formed until the lawyer can check for conflicts and competence to provide the
services.See Opinion 897 (Dec 13, 2011).

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lawyer may market legal services on a “deal of the day” or “group coupon” website<br />
provided that the advertising is not misleading or deceptive and makes clear that no lawyer-client<br />
relationship will be formed until the lawyer can check for conflicts and competence to provide the<br />
services.See <a href="http://www.nysba.org/Content/ContentFolders/EthicsOpinions/Opinions825present/EO_897.pdf">Opinion 897</a> (Dec 13, 2011).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=508</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York State Bar Issues Ethics Opinion on Cloud Storage</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=489</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=489#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 03:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Electronic Files</category>

		<category>New York</category>

		<category>Cloud</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=489</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A lawyer may use online cloud providers to store and back up client files provided that the lawyer takes reasonable care to ensure that confidentiality will be maintained in a manner consistent with the lawyer&#8217;s obligations under Rule 1.6.  Additionally, the lawyer should stay abreast of technological advances to ensure that storage remains sufficient to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lawyer may use online cloud providers to store and back up client files provided that the lawyer takes reasonable care to ensure that confidentiality will be maintained in a manner consistent with the lawyer&#8217;s obligations under Rule 1.6.  Additionally, the lawyer should stay abreast of technological advances to ensure that storage remains sufficient to protect the client&#8217;s data and should monitor the laws of privilege to ensure that the online storage will not cause loss or waive privilege. See <a href="http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Ethics_Opinions&#038;CONTENTID=42697&#038;TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm">N.Y.S.B.A. Eth. Op. 842</a> (Sept. 10, 2010).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=489</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York Professional Standards for Attorneys</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=155</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=155#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 05:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>New York</category>

		<category>Rules of Conduct</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/wordpress/2007/02/01/new-york-code-of-professional-responsibility/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The New York Rules of Professional Conduct effective April 2009. Additional Professional Standard resources are available from the State Bar.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a target="_blank" href="http://www.nysba.org/Content/NavigationMenu/ForAttorneys/ProfessionalStandardsforAttorneys/NYRulesofProfessionalConduct4109.pdf">New York Rules of Professional Conduct</a> effective April 2009. Additional <a href="http://www.nysba.org/Content/NavigationMenu/ForAttorneys/ProfessionalStandardsforAttorneys/Professional_Standar.htm">Professional Standard resources</a> are available from the State Bar.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=155</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NY St. Bar Ass&#8217;n Approves Gmail Use Despite Contextual Ad Scanning</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=452</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=452#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Sep 2008 14:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Hricik</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Confidentiality</category>

		<category>Websites</category>

		<category>E-mail</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Attorney-client privilege</category>

		<category>New York</category>

		<category>Privacy</category>

		<category>Rules of Conduct</category>

		<category>Bar Association</category>

		<category>Discipline</category>

		<category>Ethics Walls</category>

		<category>Malpractice</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[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 &#8217;scanned&#8217; 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. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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 &#8217;scanned&#8217; by Google to place contextual ads.  The committee warned that this sort of unthinking, automated review was proper, but not human review. <a href="http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Ethics_Opinions&#038;TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&#038;CONTENTID=13652"> N.Y. St. B. Ass’n. Comm. Prof. Eth. Op. 820 (Feb. 8, 2008)</a>.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=452</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York City Bar Association Addresses Electronic File Copying and Retention</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=450</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=450#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 15:21:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Hricik</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Electronic Files</category>

		<category>e-Discovery</category>

		<category>Attorney-client relationship</category>

		<category>E-mail</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>New York</category>

		<category>Ethics Opinions</category>

		<category>Bar Association</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=450</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In 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 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
1c77
<p>In <a title="Formal Opinion 2008-1" href="http://www.nycbar.org/ethics/ethics-opinions-local/2008-opinions/799-a-lawyers-ethical-obligations-to-retain-and-to-provide-a-client-with-electronic-documents-relating-to-a-representation-">Formal Opinion 2008-1</a> (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 <a title="Wisconsin Op" href="http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Wisconsin_ethics_opinions&#038;TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&#038;CONTENTID=48462">here.</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=450</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York County Bar Association Addresses Metadata</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=445</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=445#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 17:10:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Hricik</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Meta-data</category>

		<category>Electronic Files</category>

		<category>E-mail</category>

		<category>New York</category>

		<category>Ethics Opinions</category>

		<category>Malpractice</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=445</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Another opinion, this one from the New York County Bar Association (New York County Lawyers&#8217; Ass&#8217;n Comm. of Professional Ethics, Op. 738 (March 24, 2008)), suggests that lawyers should not look for metadata (again, we&#8217;re not talking in the discovery context).  The opinion is here.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another opinion, this one from the New York County Bar Association (New York County Lawyers&#8217; Ass&#8217;n Comm. of Professional Ethics, Op. 738 (March 24, 2008)), suggests that lawyers should not look for metadata (again, we&#8217;re not talking in the discovery context).  The opinion is <a title="NYCBA Op" href="http://www.nycla.org/siteFiles/Publications/Publications1154_0.pdf">here.</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=445</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York law firm adapt websites to comply with new advertising rules</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=153</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=153#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Mar 2007 19:48:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Websites</category>

		<category>Advertising</category>

		<category>New York</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/wordpress/2007/03/03/new-york-law-firm-adapt-websites-to-comply-with-new-advertising-rules/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A New York Times article describes how large New York law firms are modifying their website home pages and otherwise complying with new advertising rules.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/02/business/media/02law.html?_r=2&#038;oref=slogin&#038;oref=slogin">New York Times article</a> describes how large New York law firms are modifying their website home pages and otherwise complying with new advertising rules.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=153</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New York modifies lawyer advertising rules</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=154</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=154#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2007 19:48:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Websites</category>

		<category>Advertising</category>

		<category>New York</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/wordpress/2007/01/10/new-york-modifies-lawyer-advertising-rules/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A redline version of the new lawyer advertising rules effective February 1, 2007, is available online from the New York State Unified Court System website.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A <a href="http://www.nycourts.gov/rules/jointappellate/attorney_ads_amendments.shtml">redline version of the new lawyer advertising rules</a> effective February 1, 2007, is available online from the New York State Unified Court System website.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=154</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lawyers may not use the services of a website that forwards inquiries from potential clients to subscribing lawyers</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=285</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=285#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Nov 2006 22:04:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Lawyer Referral Services</category>

		<category>Websites</category>

		<category>Advertising</category>

		<category>New York</category>

		<category>Solicitation</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/wordpress/2006/11/12/lawyers-may-not-use-the-services-of-a-website-that-forwards-inquiries-from-potential-clients-to-subscribing-lawyers/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lawyers may not use the services of a website that forwards inquiries from potential clients to subscribing lawyers. Opinion 799 (September 29, 2006). While websites may be used for advertising purposes, they can not, in exchange for a fee, carry out activities that in a non-web setting would constitute prohibited solicitation or referral

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lawyers may not use the services of a website that forwards inquiries from potential clients to subscribing lawyers. <a href="http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Ethics_Opinions&#038;CONTENTID=13653&#038;TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm">Opinion 799</a> (September 29, 2006). While websites may be used for advertising purposes, they can not, in exchange for a fee, carry out activities that in a non-web setting would constitute prohibited solicitation or referral
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=285</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nassau County Bar Association Ethics Opinions</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=290</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=290#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Mar 2006 22:29:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>New York</category>

		<category>Ethics Opinions</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/wordpress/2006/03/04/nassau-county-bar-association-ethics-opinions/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nassau County Bar Association Ethics Opinions are available online.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.nassaubar.org/Ethics%20Opinions/EthicsOpinion.aspx">Nassau County Bar Association Ethics Opinions</a> are available online.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=290</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

0

