<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: State Bars Address Virtual Law Practice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://virtuallawpractice.org/2008/07/state-bars-address-virtual-law-practice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://virtuallawpractice.org/2008/07/state-bars-address-virtual-law-practice/</link>
	<description>Delivering legal services online</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 18:07:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: TechnoEsq &#187; Ethics of Web-based Management of Client Records</title>
		<link>http://virtuallawpractice.org/2008/07/state-bars-address-virtual-law-practice/comment-page-1/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>TechnoEsq &#187; Ethics of Web-based Management of Client Records</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:09:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://virtuallawpractice.wordpress.com/?p=68#comment-46</guid>
		<description>[...] If the law firm will be contracting with a third party to maintain the web‑based management system, the law firm must ensure that the third party also employs measures which effectively minimize the risk that confidential information might be lost or disclosed. See RPC 133.  Obviously each bar association will need to promulgate their own decisions regarding the acceptability of the usage of SaaS in their respective states, but hopefully the early opinions of such progressive states as North Carolina can provide a guidance for other bar associations. Source: Virtual Law Practice [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] If the law firm will be contracting with a third party to maintain the web‑based management system, the law firm must ensure that the third party also employs measures which effectively minimize the risk that confidential information might be lost or disclosed. See RPC 133.  Obviously each bar association will need to promulgate their own decisions regarding the acceptability of the usage of SaaS in their respective states, but hopefully the early opinions of such progressive states as North Carolina can provide a guidance for other bar associations. Source: Virtual Law Practice [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: slkimbro</title>
		<link>http://virtuallawpractice.org/2008/07/state-bars-address-virtual-law-practice/comment-page-1/#comment-45</link>
		<dc:creator>slkimbro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:09:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://virtuallawpractice.wordpress.com/?p=68#comment-45</guid>
		<description>Thank you for sharing that information about the Maryland Bar, Carolyn.  Hopefully the attorneys in Maryland will share with us the general response that they receive from the Maryland Bar regarding virtual law practice.

It is my understanding that one of the attorneys licensed in Maryland would like to use the VLO to assist pro se litigants online.  This attorney would prepare the legal documents to be filed with the court and walk the pro se litigant through the necessary steps online rather than in person.   The idea is that this would lessen the burden that the local courts and legal aid system have in dealing with these individuals because they would be receiving legal guidance.  At the same time, the price the attorney would charge for unbundled online legal services would be more affordable for the pro se litigant than full-service legal representation.  It will be interesting to hear how the Maryland Bar will respond to this particular use of a VLO since it has the potential to benefit both the public and their court system.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for sharing that information about the Maryland Bar, Carolyn.  Hopefully the attorneys in Maryland will share with us the general response that they receive from the Maryland Bar regarding virtual law practice.</p>
<p>It is my understanding that one of the attorneys licensed in Maryland would like to use the VLO to assist pro se litigants online.  This attorney would prepare the legal documents to be filed with the court and walk the pro se litigant through the necessary steps online rather than in person.   The idea is that this would lessen the burden that the local courts and legal aid system have in dealing with these individuals because they would be receiving legal guidance.  At the same time, the price the attorney would charge for unbundled online legal services would be more affordable for the pro se litigant than full-service legal representation.  It will be interesting to hear how the Maryland Bar will respond to this particular use of a VLO since it has the potential to benefit both the public and their court system.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carolyn Elefant</title>
		<link>http://virtuallawpractice.org/2008/07/state-bars-address-virtual-law-practice/comment-page-1/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>Carolyn Elefant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2008 20:34:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://virtuallawpractice.wordpress.com/?p=68#comment-44</guid>
		<description>I hate to tell you this, but the Maryland Bar does NOT make ethics opinions available to the public.  You need to be a member of the Maryland State Bar Association to access decisions online.  The MSBA is a voluntary bar and many lawyers licensed in Maryland (myself included) do not have any compelling reason to join the association.   I&#039;ve always thought it was kind of ridiculous for the bar to make compliance so difficult.

One aspect of the Maryland ruling that I&#039;ll be interested in is whether Maryland will let a lawyer who resides in Maryland but is licensed only in DC or Virginia handle cases in those jurisdictions virtually.  Maryland requires lawyers who work from home offices and practice in other jurisdictions to be members of the Maryland bar so I am wondering whether that will apply to VLO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hate to tell you this, but the Maryland Bar does NOT make ethics opinions available to the public.  You need to be a member of the Maryland State Bar Association to access decisions online.  The MSBA is a voluntary bar and many lawyers licensed in Maryland (myself included) do not have any compelling reason to join the association.   I&#8217;ve always thought it was kind of ridiculous for the bar to make compliance so difficult.</p>
<p>One aspect of the Maryland ruling that I&#8217;ll be interested in is whether Maryland will let a lawyer who resides in Maryland but is licensed only in DC or Virginia handle cases in those jurisdictions virtually.  Maryland requires lawyers who work from home offices and practice in other jurisdictions to be members of the Maryland bar so I am wondering whether that will apply to VLO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

