Articles Posted in Legal Ethics

Published on:

newyorktimes.jpgRecent rulings and advisories by the National Labor Relations Board regarding social media policies in the workplace impact law firms in a variety of ways. Today’s New York Times article by Steven Greenhouse reviews how the NLRB is basically telling employers to scale back limitations as it relates to many social media policies that might be seen as illegal blanket restrictions.

Can you really stop Facebook and Twitter from happening in today’s workplace? Nope.

The NLRB says workers have a right to discuss work conditions freely and without fear of retribution, whether you are in the employee cafeteria or on Facebook. Although Facebook might have better food options (I said that. It is not in the article).

Published on:

In today’s Law360, reporter Bibeka Shrestha writes on Insurance agents taking Jacoby & Meyers LLP to task over advertising relating to Hurricane Sandy. In her article, she interviews me about my take on the complaint filed with the state court disciplinary committee by the Professional Insurance Agents of New York.

The PIA’s complaint stems from an ad that says, “If your business lost business due to the storm your insurance policy should cover it. If it doesn’t, your agent made an error. We’ll work to correct it.” The complaint cites 7.1(a)(2) of the NY RPC…the all-purpose “false, deceptive or misleading”…in regard to the advertisement’s content and message.

While I’m far from an expert on insurance law, I have trouble believing that every policy covers business interruption. I can see where agents might take offense to the suggestion that they are at fault, acting improperly or erroneous in every instance where a claim for such coverage is denied. I suggest in the article that a slight tweak from “your agent made an error” to “your agent might have made an error” would likely rectify the situation and not dilute the ad’s impact. Of course, I’ve had my fair share of fights over the years with insurance agents over what is and is not covered in a policy–so I’m not going to be a staunch defender of the industry. I’m talking to you buddy–the guy that claimed I could continue to sleep on a mattress in which a squirrel died and decomposed. “You don’t need a new one. We can just get it steam cleaned.” Yes, I got a new mattress. And, yes, I utilized my law degree in doing so. I totally get retaining counsel if you feel provisions of a policy are not being carried out.

Published on:

In August, I wrote about the Consumer Reports evaluation of online do-it-yourself legal sites (Legal DIY sites no match for a pro). This week, Wall Street Journal reporter Jennifer Smith writes on “No-Frill Legal Services Grow,” addressing many of the same DIY websites.

The impetus for the article is the lawsuit filed last month by LegalZoom.com against up-and-coming rival Rocket Lawyer. It is ironic that these entities are now fighting over what is and is not “free” in terms of form filing and other stuff where you apparently either don’t need a lawyer, or perhaps just need one that works for them at really cheap rates. Interesting side note: Both LegalZoom and Rocket Lawyer have real lawyers doing the fighting–I don’t think they are using their own self service offerings.

The debate often revolves around the potential “unauthorized practice of law.” Regardless of the semantics involved, the consumer is thinking this is a cost-effective way to resolve a legal issue. It is not like this business is new. Strip malls stores (Divorce! Bankruptcy! Wills!) have provided similar services for decades. Storefronts such as “We the People” have largely evaporated (thanks in part to the Internet and in part to State Bar issues with unauthorized practice). In recent years, the online offerings have changed the language in describing offerings to something akin to providing documents and/or providing a lawyer somewhere that can answer questions.

Published on:

wmt-logo-24b.pngIn my monthly column on internet marketing for lawyers in Web Marketing Today, I tackle the sticky issue of ethics and compliance for law firm websites. If you had told me when I started teaching ethics CLEs on this subject in 1997 that I’d be this well-versed on the subject–and it would become a niche area of expertise for my practice, I’d have laughed. But lo and behold, the Rules of Professional Conduct have become my Ten Commandments. There are plenty of golden calves and false idols–but I won’t name names. Let’s just say that websites are now the tip of the iceberg in a land of Groupons and “ask the lawyer” sites, getting the disclaimer language right should be child’s play.

Published on:

If you are like me– seemingly spending half your life reviewing state bar rules, regulations and ethics opinions for my clients that seek to ensure compliance in the states in which they practice–I’m sorry to hear that. Hopefully, like most attorneys, you are more of a casual observer. In August, the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association approved a series of changes to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Many in my realm of marketing and business development circles ask how it will impact them and what, if anything, they should be doing about it.

For starters, I remind you that these are “model rules” as opposed to “rules.” As someone long involved in various aspects of ethics and professionalism in the ABA, I can assure you that the time it will take many states to implement all or some of the rules will be “not tomorrow.” I’m pretty sure some states are still mulling over pieces of the ABA’s Ethics 2000 initiative. But it is only 2012 now, and you really just want to update your rules before the year 3000 hits or risk being seen as behind the times. And these changes come from Ethics 20/20, which is 20 years longer than 2000, divisible by 20.

Of course, the impetus for the ABA changes is simple–technology has far outpaced the long arm of the professional conduct law. The Ten Commandments would be delivered today via cloud computing, as opposed to having a long hike and getting stone tablets. Oy veh!

Published on:

If you are a PA lawyer, and it feels like you’ve been hearing me deliver marketing ethics CLE hours for the Pennsylvania Bar Institute for more than a decade now, it is because you have. My very first ethics CLE ever was given in Philly, New York and Houston in the summer of 1997. I opened with some lame canned joke involving Morgan Lewis and domain names. Trust me, I’ve gotten better. But the even weaker handout is now a collector’s item. I still have an original (see “Hoarders” and related illnesses).

Each year, I change the focus and try to cover hot topics, and changing rules, as they relate to areas of law marketing ethics. Quite honestly, some years my “show” (as I call it) is better than others. Last year’s focus on ethics of social media was very well received. But this year’s focus on ratings, rankings and reviews might be the best one yet. I mean, really, who does not debate the value, interest and impact on the multi-zillion dollar “sell stuff to attorneys” industry?

I’ve written and spoken on the rankings & ratings subject for many years, including multiple ABA Annual Meetings, as a focus of the ABA Law Firm Marketing Strategies Conference, for PBI and in at least a half dozen publications. I’m not sure if the publishers of these companies will tell you they love me or hate me (it is probably a mix, leaning more toward the negative), but it is a market that continues to fascinate. This holds true in my marketing roles, in my ethics roles, and certainly in speaking as a leader in law practice management circles.

Published on:

In April, I organized a CLE teleconference for the ABA Center for Professional Development entitled, “Is Your Legal Blog Compliant? Ethical Considerations in the Wake of Hunter v. Virginia State Bar“. The roundtable featured me, Virginia legal ethics legend Tom Spahn of McGuireWoods, big-time blogging employment lawyer Molly DiBianca of Young Conaway, and the man himself–Horace Hunter of Hunter Lipton. While the case, and the discussion, touched upon a number of legal ethics issues, the one that I personally paid the most attention to was the ongoing debate as to whether a lawyer blog constitutes advertising (thus, marketing) under the Rules of Professional Conduct.

As many of you know, as a marketing ethics guy, I’ve argued for years that a blog constitutes advertising, in the same way that any other web site would. The marketing part of me would love to agree with those that claim a blog is an editorial vehicle of sorts, and not necessarily promotional in nature. Hint: If a blog was not a marketing vehicle, I would not be writing this post! However, Micah the Ethics Lawyer will argue vehemently that a blog is unquestionably a form of marketing. You simply can’t start evaluating every online presence–a web site, a blog, a microsite, a Facebook profile, a tweet–to determine “on a case by case basis” if the content is marketing or not. If you’ve read hundreds of ethics opinions, disciplinary letters to firms, state by state versions of the model rules, you know that most state bars are simply incapable of effectively and accurately making those distinctions.

Recently, a three judge panel reaffirmed what I believed. The blog is advertising. Thus, an appropriate disclaimer was necessary on the web site. Mr. Hunter did prevail on the charge that probably was more serious in nature (for him) on whether client confidences were violated in the posts themselves. But in this case, Virginia has spoken–a blog is a web site and requires disclaimer language in step with what you would include on any other similar advertising component. Of course, this interpretation is limited to a single state. But everyone was watching to see this outcome, as a lawyer pushed the envelope and challenged the bar. According to Horace Hunter, though, he will appeal…and this story is not yet over.

Published on:

What better place to repeat the ever-popular “online marketing ethics” course for lawyers than in my old stomping grounds, before a Sixers game at the Wachovia Center…where I was an in-house attorney back in the day.

This new PBI program includes an hour of ethics CLE and a Sixers game against the San Antonia Spurs. To learn more or to register, visit the PBI Site.

The possible tools are endless – web sites, blogs, LinkedIn, Facebook, search engine optimization, referral resources, e-mail, etc. – and so are the ethics opinions, rules and interpretations of state bars coast-to-coast. Thinking about the states where you are licensed, where you have offices and where you seek clients…and staying compliant is enough to make your hard drive crash. This one hour program will examine the tools and the rules, so you can go out and use the business development opportunities on the Internet without running astray of the Rules of Professional Responsibility.

Published on:

Who would have thought the docs would beat the lawyers to the courtroom? Well, in Camden County Superior Court in New Jersey, two hospital behemoths – Virtua Health and Cooper Health System – are battling over the use of local rankings and ratings in advertising and promotion.

The argument goes to the heart of many similar debates in the law world over rankings and ratings, methodologies and research. In this case (which happens to be in my backyard…and I have no idea if my doctors are on any of these lists and could care less). Just the “local” versions include four magazines that have taken advantage of the popularity of publishing lists and generating advertising.

Read the article and ask yourself if these arguments sound familiar?

Contact Information