-
Competence (1.1)
-
Skills, knowledge, thoroughness and preparation
-
Spell these out in a problem - son in a train accident
-
Think about technology competence
- data privacy and cybersecurity
- internet research
- electronic discovery
- remember confidentiality and leaks
-
Minimum Standard
-
analyze precedent, evaluate evidence, draft legal documents
-
Not a specialist
- Except: tax, bankruptcy, patent, maritime law
- can be a new area of law through necessary study
- If complex or a specialized issue for which you do not have skills or time to dedicate, refer it out. Otherwise, Ok. This is always an objective standard - what would a reasonable lawyer have done in similar circumstances.
-
Become competent
-
Reasonable preparation
- complex transactions usually require more extensive treatment
-
Teaming up with someone competent
-
cannot be negligent; think about fee sharing
- recall problem in textbook: Mary v. Fred
- need client consent
-
Diligence (1.3)
- workload + neglect (reasonableness std.)
-
Consequences
-
malpractice - duty, breach, causation and damages
- 1.1 is used to show incompetence (duty + breach). Still need to prove causation and damages
- Malpractice Insurance - cannot prospectively limit unless client has independent counsel advising him of risks
-
ineffective assistance of counsel
- Strickland Test - "But For" test
- Discipline
-
Candid Communication (1.4)
-
informed consent
- confidentiality and conflicts
-
consult about client's objectives
- client decides objectives, lawyer decides means [1.2(a)]
-
settlement, plea, appeal, testify, bench or jury trial [1.2(a)]
-
do not counsel or assist in criminal or fraudulent activity [1.2(d)]
- HTGAWM; marijuana
- status of matter
-
Confidentiality (1.6)
-
strict prohibition against use and disclosure
-
scope
- relating to rep.
- info client comm. led to
- any form (written, electronic, verbal)
- any source (client, third party, lawyer's investigation)
- anything you discover
-
E1: consent
- informed consent - material risks + alternatives
-
E2: impliedly authorized
- consulting other lawyers + ethics hotline/ethical advice + fill out a form
-
E3: Permissive Disclosures
-
reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm
- judgment call on whether client means it
-
prevent future financial crimes or fraud
- involve lawyer's services
-
rectify past financial crimes or fraud
- involve lawyer's services
- self-defense - proceeding (fee dispute, disciplinary action, malpractice)
-
comply with law or court order
- challenge to protect client
- resolve conflicts of interest when moving firms
-
lawyer has choice on whether to disclose, may still have to withdraw because 1.2(d)
- If an organization, remember reporting up duties (1.13(b) and (c))
-
Unlawful Obstruction (3.4(a))
-
cannot hold on to or hide fruits or instrumentalities of a crime just because your client gave them to you
- can hold on to temporarily to examine but must hand it over to authorities (depending on which state you live in)
- Privilege
-
Inadvertent or Unauthorized Disclosures
-
reasonable efforts to prevent
-
Factors
- more sensitive the information, the more steps you should take to protect it
- examples: security protocols, passcodes, private wi-fi and client servers, disclaimer, etc.
- connect to technology competence
-
breach
- inform client
- incident response plan - stop breach and ensure no further breach happens
- supervisory obligations
-
recipient duties (4.4)
- notify sender - look at the document only to the extent needed to determine if it is confi.
- connect to conflict of interests. 1.7(a)(2), 1.18, 1.9(c)
- confidentiality is broader
- Any disclosure of confidential information is not open-ended. A lawyer may reveal information to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to prevent whatever harm the exception is designed to avoid.
-
Conflict of Interest (1.7, 1.18, 1.8, 1.9)
-
Current Clients
-
Direct Adversity
- two clients suing each other
- Nonconsentable conflict
- unrelated matters: representing and suing the client
- cross-examining current client
- two clients negotiating and not a scribe OR unrelated matters
- Consentable
-
Material Limitation
- check for loyalty to someone else that will limit your competence, independent judgment, ability to advocate
- other client
- former client
- third person
- personal interest of the lawyer
-
Can overcome conflict (otherwise must withdraw): competent, not prohibited by law, not facing each other in litigation, informed consent confirmed in writing (can be an advance waiver but see Sheppard Mullin v. J-M Manufacturing)
- Imputation applies; screening will not cure a concurrent conflict of interest. If personal conflict and no material limitation, no imputation.
-
Former Clients (successive conflicts)
-
1.9
-
Is this a FC?
- facts matter + client's perspective
-
same or substantially similar
- same case or transaction
- risk that confi. info obtained in prior representation would materially advance current client's position
- TC Theatre Corp.: if you can show substantial rship between the subject matter of the former and subsequent rep., court will assume that during first case, confidences were disclosed.
- Silver Chrysler: if the lawyer has left old firm + minimal work at old firm - rebuttable presumption of confi
- Goldberg: lawyer who advised FC client has left firm. Firm can continue with rep. against FC because you can show no confi info is left at firm. Thus, not a substantially related matter. Davis says otherwise.
- passage of time
-
materially adverse
- suing former client
- attacking work created for FC
-
Need FC consent in writing to continue; consider CC consent because of 1.7(a)(2)
- Imputation applies; screening will not cure if you are still working at the same firm.
- if you have left firm and moved to a new firm, you are tainted but screen will cure FC conflict for new firm; if you do not have any confi info, no FC conflict, no screen, nothing.
-
1.7(a)(2)
- material limitation due to loyalty to FC
-
Prospective Clients
-
materially adverse
- same analysis as FC
-
same or substantially related
- same analysis as FC
-
significantly harmful
- Views on settlement issues including price and timing
- personal account of the situation and PC's strategic thoughts on how to handle it
- sensitive personal information
-
Need PC (and *CC) consent or screen impacted lawyer and notify PC about screening procedures
- No imputation because no representation.
-
Formation of A/C Rship
- formal v. informal = care what the client thinks
-
Kurtenbach Test
- Did the client seek advice from the lawyer?
- Was it within the lawyer's area of competence?
- Did the lawyer either directly or implicitly, agree to give the requested advice?
-
Togstad - unintentional client
-
send non-engagement letter or DISCLAIM
- Disclaim with internet forums - social media, chat rooms, blogs, law firm websites
-
PC
-
consults lawyer about the possibility of forming a/c rship
-
owe confidentiality to learned information (remember Flatt v. Superior Court)
- limit consultation so that you aren't over-exposed
-
Ask who is the client?
- You are the organization's lawyer
- when someone else is paying
-
Fees (1.5)
-
Fixed or Hourly
- CYA - in writing: basis of fee, costs and expenses, lawyer and client duties, scope, etc.
-
Contingency
- No Fee, No Recovery - element of risk or loss
-
Written Agreement
- lawyers %, expenses deducted from recovery and whether lawyer's recovery is before or after expenses are deducted
- Prohibited in criminal cases and family matters (dissolution and child custody)
-
Dividing Fees
-
Non-firm Lawyers
- OK with client consent + joint responsibility or fees divided in proportion to work done + total fee is reasonable
-
Non-lawyers
- Prohibited - except if compensating staff or with non-profit
-
Other Fee Issues
-
Third party funders - 1.8(f)
- independent judgment + consent + confidentiality
-
Business Transactions - 1.8(a)
- Equity for fees
- selling a house or property to client/vice-versa
-
Supervisory Rules (5.1-5.3)
-
managerial authority
- reasonable efforts to ensure lawyers conform to the rules
-
responsible for other's misconduct if
- order the misconduct
- ratify it
- learns about it and does nothing
-
subordinate lawyers
- responsible for own misconduct
- can rely on supervisor's advice if arguable question of professional duty
-
Regulation & Discipline (5.5, 8.3, 8.4,)
-
complaint + trial = discipline
-
disbarred, suspension, public or private reprimand
- reciprocal discipline
-
reporting obligation
- reasonably certain - fitness, honesty or trustworthiness to practice law
- subject to confidentiality
-
general misconduct rule (8.4)
-
Lawyer 24-7
- violate or assist someone else in violation the rules
- criminal acts, dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation - reflect poorly on lawyer's honesty and fitness to practice law
-
practice law
-
Licensed in each state
- pro hac vice, admitted counsel, ADR, or related activities (5.5(c))
- in house counsel, registered military spouse certified foreign lawyer, supervised paraprofessionals
-
unauthorized practice of law
-
practice of law
- performing court services
- preparing legal documents
- giving legal advice
- Not UPL
- UPL
- filling in blanks, scribe, or pro se
- legal staff, paralegal, recent law grad, practicing in another state
-
Withdrawal (1.16)
-
Mandatory
-
would lead to violation of rules
- conflicts or counseling or assisting in crimes/fraud
-
physical or mental impairment
- connect to competency
-
client fires attorney
- absolute right
-
Permissive
-
with material adverse effect
- closer to trial; more likely MAE
- using lawyer's services to commit crime/fraud
- used lawyer's services to commit crime/fraud
- client is repugnant, fundamental disagreement,
-
substantially fails to fulfill an obligation
- give warning and notice about withdrawing
- unreasonable financial burden or unreasonably difficult
- other good cause
-
Procedural steps
-
Notice to client and court
- if court appointed or before a tribunal, court can refuse
- time to hire new counsel
- return client property/files
- return unearned fees
- Connect to scope of representation (lawyers can limit scope but still need to be competent)
- Reasonableness
- Bring up if you see legal staff, paralegals, or associates doing something unethical. That could reach Supervising Attorney.
- remember even after withdrawal or termination of rship, confidentiality continues
- Fiduciary, Contractual and Agency Rship.