| LEO Num | Topics | Summary | Date |
1893
 Print
|
| (Minor children pursue lawsuits through a "next friend" (typically the child's parent or guardian) acting in the child's name. A lawyer representing such a "next friend" takes direction from the "next friend," although the lawyer represents the child rather than the "next friend." A parent or other such "next friend" should "frequently reassess potential conflict throughout the representation" —because (among other things) the lawyer may desire to protect the parent's lien from medical expenses incurred on the child's behalf, which will be paid out of the child's recovery against the tortfeasor. A conflict might arise if the parent wishes to settle a child's claim for an amount that will satisfy such a lien, but might not maximize the child's recovery. If the "next friend" is the child's parent or guardian, the lawyer "may presume" that the "next friend" is acting in the child's best interest, unless the lawyer "has reason to believe" otherwise. If the "next friend" is not the child's parent or guardian, such a presumption does not exist. If a conflict arises, the lawyer cannot obtain the necessary consent from the child or from the conflicted "next friend." In that situation, the lawyer may seek a guardian ad litem's appointment or judicial approval of an infant settlement — and the lawyer "must advise the parent to seek independent counsel." In other situations involving a conflict, the lawyer may petition the court to appoint a substitute "next friend." | 4/12/2023 |
Virginia-1889
Print
|
| A court-appointed lawyer has no duty to represent a parent in appealing an adverse termination of a parental rights order unless the parent has "at some stage in the proceeding" directed or requested the lawyer to appeal the adverse ruling. A lawyer must consult with the parent about filing such an appeal, but may not file the appeal if the lawyer has been unable to contact the parent and receive instructions. | 11/8/2018 |
1869
Print
|
| A family court self-help center facilitator (a lawyer or a paralegal trained in family law who volunteers to assist unrepresented customers) does not establish an attorney-client relationship with such customers, if the Customer Agreement "has the pro se litigant understand and acknowledge that the limited assistance provided by the Facilitator does not create a lawyer-client relationship, that no legal advice is given, that information will not be kept confidential and that the Facilitator may provide assistance to adverse litigants." (footnote omitted). A lawyer merely providing legal information and not legal services does not fall under Rule 6.5's provision governing "short-term limited legal services." "Merely providing sample pleadings or forms to a pro se litigant is not the practice of law; however, the completion of a form pleading or legal document for the pro se litigant would be." (footnote omitted). Rule 6.5 does not address conflicts arising after a lawyer provides such a limited representation, so the lawyer may be precluded from other representations adverse to the client the lawyer had assisted. Paralegals may not engage in the "unsupervised preparation of pleadings or other legal documents," so lawyers may not train paralegals to provide such unsupervised services. Various resources can help lawyers distinguish between providing "legal information" and "legal advice." [Approved by the Supreme Court of Virginia 11/2/16]. | 5/28/2013 |
1412
Print
|
| A solo practitioner's research and preparation of briefs and other pleadings constitutes the practice of law, which prevents the lawyer from limiting the lawyer's professional liability (regardless of the lawyer's attempt to contractually define the services as not amounting to legal services). | 6/12/1991 |
493
Print
|
| ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) prohibits conduct “that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is” “harassment or discrimination on the basis of” specifically identifiable attributes, “race, sex, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status or socioeconomic status.” The prohibition applies to all “conduct related to the practice of law.” ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) thus applies “in non-litigation matters or at law firm social events or bar association functions” (although “Rule 8.4(g) does not regulate conduct unconnected to the practice of law, as do some other rules of professional conduct”). ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) “prohibits other conduct that is not covered by other law;” and might involve “a single instance of a lawyer” engaging in the prohibited conduct. “[T]he most common violations will likely involve conduct that is intentionally discriminatory or harassing.” “The existence of the requisite harm is assessed using a standard of objective reasonableness.” ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) specifically excludes from its prohibition “[l]egitimate advice or advocacy consistent with [the ABA Model Rules].” The following acts would not violate ABA Model Rule 8.4(g): (1) a First Amendment challenge to “a local ordinance that requires all schools to provide gender-neutral restroom and locker room facilities;” (2) a CLE program speaker “express[ing] the view” criticizing “a race-conscious process in admitting African-American students to highly ranked colleges and universities;” (3) a lawyer’s membership in “a religious organization, which advocates, on religious grounds, for the ability of private employers to terminate or refuse to employ individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.” The CLE speaker scenario does not violate ABA Model Rule 8.4(g), because “even a controversial [point of view] cannot reasonably be understood as harassment or discrimination contemplated by [ABA Model] Rule 8.4(g)” – and “[t]he fact that others may find a lawyer’s expression of social or political views to be inaccurate, offensive, or upsetting is not the type of ‘harm’ required for a violation.” The following acts would violate ABA Model Rule 8.4(g): (4) an adjunct professor/lawyer “supervising a law student in a law school clinic” making “repeated comments about the student’s appearance and also making unwelcome, nonconsensual physical contact of a sexual nature with the student” (which involves “conduct related to the practice of law,” although the “conduct . . . may not necessarily fall directly within the context of the representation of a client”); (5) law firm lawyers stating during a planning session or “an orientation program for newly-hired associates to familiarize them with firm policies and procedures” stating that lawyers should “never trust a Muslim lawyer” or “represent a Muslim client” (“[b]ecause the remarks were made within the law firm setting, they were ‘related to the practice of law”). In sum, ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) “does not prevent a lawyer from freely expressing opinions and ideas on matters of public concern, nor does it limit in any way a lawyer’s speech or conduct in settings unrelated to the practice of law. The fact that others may personally disagree with or be offended by a lawyer’s expression does not establish a violation.” (which “must necessarily be judged, in context, from an objectively reasonable perspective”). | 7/15/2020 |
0596
Print
|
| Law students practicing in their third year of law school should be considered lawyers for conflicts of interest purposes. [Law students may no longer practice law.] | 8/10/1984 |
ABA-506
Print
|
| Lawyers may rely on non-lawyer "employees, agents, contractors, and vendors" to assist in "client intake tasks" under certain limited conditions -- as long as the pertinent jurisdiction does not consider their actions to be the unauthorized practice of law. Non-lawyers often engage in such intake tasks for nonprofit legal services organizations, for-profit law firms offering "limited scope online legal services," and for law firms handling "mass tort and class action representations." Although on its face ABA Model Rule 1.4(b) focuses on explaining the scope of a representation, bars also apply those duties to lawyers who communicate with prospective clients. Lawyers may "develop policies, train, and supervise" nonlawyers who engage in such actions as: obtaining "initial information about the matter"; "performing an initial conflict check"; determining if the would-be client seeks assistance "in an area of law germane to the lawyer's practice"; "answering general questions about fee agreement or process of representation"; and "obtaining the prospective client's signature on the fee agreement." But such prospective clients must be offered the opportunity to discuss fees and other pertinent issues with a lawyer, who does not relinquish her ABA Model Rule duties. Jurisdictions' unauthorized practice of law rules determine whether such non-lawyers may answer prospective clients' "specific questions." Non-lawyers may convey to a lawyer any questions that "would require the application of law to facts." Similarly, non-lawyers may provide "general information" about fees, but may not: provide advice about "what legal services the client should obtain"; negotiate fees or expenses; or offer "an interpretation of the rights and responsibilities set forth in the engagement agreement." Lawyers are ultimately responsible for making sure that their non-lawyer colleagues do not cross the line into the pertinent jurisdiction's impermissible unauthorized practice of law. | 6/7/2023 |
431
Print
|
| Lawyers might suffer from an impairment that calls into question their fitness as a lawyer, or may cause an ethics violation. Among other things, impaired lawyers may “repeatedly miss court deadlines, fail to make filings required to complete a transaction, fail to perform tasks agreed to be performed, or fail to raise issues that competent counsel would be expected to raise.” Even “a single act by a lawyer may evidence her lack of fitness.”) Although lawyers assessing their ABA Model Rule 8.3 duty to report another lawyer’s ethics violation “need not act on rumors or conflicting reports about a lawyer,” such lawyers might “consider consulting with a psychiatrist” or other third party. Lawyers might also communicate with a possibly impaired lawyer, although “the affected lawyer’s denials alone do not make the lawyer’s knowledge non-reportable under [ABA Model] Rule 8.3.” Although “information gained by a lawyer about another lawyer is unlikely to be information protected by [ABA Model] Rule 1.6 for example, observation of or information about the affected lawyer’s conduct in litigation or in the completion of transactions,” ABA Model Rule 8.3 requires a client’s consent if reporting another lawyer’s misconduct would involve disclosure of ABA Model Rule 1.6-protected information. Although a lawyer may report another lawyer’s possible impairment “to an approved lawyers’ assistance program,” “such a report is not a substitute for reporting to a disciplinary authority” if the other lawyer’s impairment results in a reportable ethics violation. | 8/8/2003 |
ABA-482
Print
|
| Lawyers who face or whose clients face the consequences of large-scale disasters such as hurricanes, floods, fires, etc.: (1) must comply with their communication duties, and therefore should maintain contact information for their clients and consider providing their own contact information to those clients; (2) if they continue to represent clients in the affected area, may be able to provide services outside their normal expertise, should evaluate in advance ways to assure that they will have the necessary client files and legal resources, keep track of litigation deadlines, take steps in advance to access trust funds and deal with affected financial institutions holding client or their own funds; (3) may have to withdraw from representations if they are unable to competently represent clients; (4) if they either permanently or temporarily re-locate to other jurisdictions, must comply with the multijurisdictional rules, other statutes and regulations of those jurisdictions; (5) must notify clients of the loss of "documents with intrinsic value" (such as executed wills, etc.), as well as other client or lawyer files that the lawyer cannot reconstruct after reasonable attempts to do so (to avoid such problems, lawyers should maintain copies of important documents in an off-site location," should consider returning all original documents and documents with intrinsic value created by the lawyer as a result of the representation to clients at the end of representation" and should also consider "including in fee agreements or engagement letters the understandings between the lawyer and the client about how the lawyer will handle documents once the representation has ended"); and (6) must avoid improper solicitation or other advertising in the wake of such disasters (remembering that they may solicit pro bono representations because those are not motivated by pecuniary gain). Out-of-state lawyers affected assisting clients in such affected areas must comply with the pertinent jurisdictions' multijurisdictional rules and other regulations. | 9/19/2018 |
1893
Print
|
| Minor children pursue lawsuits through a "next friend" (typically the child's parent or guardian) acting in the child's name. A lawyer representing such a "next friend" takes direction from the "next friend," although the lawyer represents the child rather than the "next friend." A parent or other such "next friend" should "frequently reassess potential conflict throughout the representation" - because (among other things) the lawyer may desire to protect the parent's lien from medical expenses incurred on the child's behalf, which will be paid out of the child's recovery against the tortfeasor. A conflict might arise if the parent wishes to settle a child's claim for an amount that will satisfy such a lien, but might not maximize the child's recovery. If the "next friend" is the child's parent or guardian, the lawyer "may presume" that the "next friend" is acting in the child's best interest, unless the lawyer "has reason to believe" otherwise. If the "next friend" is not the child's parent or guardian, such a presumption does not exist. If a conflict arises, the lawyer cannot obtain the necessary consent from the child or from the conflicted "next friend." In that situation, the lawyer may seek a guardian ad !item's appointment or judicial approval of an infant settlement - and the lawyer "must advise the parent to seek independent counsel." In other situations involving a conflict, the lawyer may petition the court to appoint a substitute "next friend." | 4/12/2023 |
1392
Print
|
| Plaintiff or defense lawyers may serve on Medical Malpractice Review Panels as long as they are not representing the claimant or the defendant, or are otherwise involved in actual facts before the panel. | 1/14/1991 |
ABA-469
Print
|
| Prosecutors who allow private debt collection companies to use their stationery to explicitly or implicitly threaten prosecution of delinquent debtors violate: (1) ABA Model Rule 8.4(c)'s anti-deception provision; (2) ABA Model Rule 5.5(a)'s prohibition on assisting nonlawyer's unauthorized practice of law, because such conduct necessarily involves nonlawyers analyzing whether a crime has been committed and a prosecution would be justified. | 11/12/2014 |
ABA-356
Print
|
| Temporary lawyers must comply with all ethics rules arising from a lawyer's representation of a client, but depending on the facts (such as whether the temporary lawyer "has access to information relating to the representation of firm clients other than the clients on whose matters the lawyer is working") may not be considered "associated" with law firms for purposes of the imputed disqualification rules (the firm should screen such temporary lawyers from other representations). Lawyers hiring temporary lawyers to perform "independent work for a client without the close supervision of a lawyer associated with the law firm" must obtain the client's consent after full disclosure. Lawyers need not obtain the client's consent to having temporary lawyers working on the client matters if the temporary lawyers are "working under the direct supervision of a lawyer associated with the firm." Lawyers need not advise clients of the compensation arrangement for temporary lawyers "assuming that a law firm simply pays the temporary lawyer reasonable compensation for the services performed for the firm and does not charge the payments thereafter to the client as a disbursement." | 12/16/1988 |
ABA-481
Print
|
| The Model Rules require a lawyer to inform a current client if the lawyer believes that he or she may have materially erred in the client’s representation. Recognizing that errors occur along a continuum, an error is material if a disinterested lawyer would conclude that it is (a) reasonably likely to harm or prejudice a client; or (b) of such a nature that it would reasonably cause a client to consider terminating the representation even in the absence of harm or prejudice. The lawyer must so inform the client promptly under the circumstances. Whether notification is prompt is a case- and fact-specific inquiry. No similar duty of disclosure exists under the Model Rules where the lawyer discovers after the termination of the attorney-client relationship that the lawyer made a material error in the former client’s representation. Good business and risk management reasons may exist for lawyers to inform former clients of their material errors when they can do so in time to avoid or mitigate any potential harm or prejudice to the former client. An attorney-client relationship ends when: the engagement letter specifies such a time, the lawyer or the client explicitly end the relationship, "when overt acts inconsistent with the continuation of the attorney-client relationship indicate that the relationship has ended," or "when it would be objectively unreasonably to continue to bind the parties to each other." An "episodic" client might be a continuing client in the absence of any ongoing matter if the client periodically engaged the lawyer, and the client "reasonably expects that the professional relationship will span any [such] intervals and that the lawyer will be available when the client next needs representation." | 4/17/2018 |