Virtual Law Practice

Category: Ethics

  • Launch of Unbundling Book at ABA Techshow

    Last week at the ABA Techshow in Chicago, I was pleased to launch the publication of my new book on unbundling.

    Writing a book on limited scope services seemed like a logical next step in the process of reevaluating how the legal profession can adapt to the changes it faces as a result of disruptive technology, economic recession, Internet-empowered consumers and other factors that I discuss in the book. In my opinion, unbundling is a concept that underlies and works with all of the changes that legal visionaries like Richard Susskind, Jordan Furlong and others have been preaching to us for the past several years. I was grateful to Jordan Furlong for writing a wonderful Foreward for the book.

    The goal of this book is to educate lawyers and law firms on the processes they should to go through to responsibly add limited scope services as part of restructuring their delivery methods to adapt to changes in our legal marketplace. Whereas my other book on virtual law practice was geared more towards solos and firms that were interested primarily in online delivery methods, this book on unbundling is applicable to almost every firm structure from traditional to a hybrid virtual law firm, from solos to large firms and in-house counsel.

    It is not only individuals of lower to moderate means who are seeking limited scope services from law firms, but many more sophisticated client bases are keen on finding law firms that provide this. Accordingly, there is a great potential here for increased revenue for law firms as well as for the public to receive alternative forms of legal service delivery, increasing access to justice across the board. Naturally, the book covers the many ethics rules, best practices, and sometimes complex process of determining when unbundling is appropriate and when full-service is necessary. (more…)

  • Ethics of Virtual Practice in South Carolina Lawyer

     

    The March issue of the South Carolina Lawyer features an article I co-wrote with Courtney Kennaday entitled “Ethics of Virtual Law Practice.” The full version of the issue is accessible online.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Factors Determining “Reasonableness”

    The ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 published its revised draft resolutions for comment regarding Technology and Confidentiality at the end of last month. Under Comment [16] to Rule 1.6 “Confidentiality of Information”, the revised draft contains a list of factors that determine whether the lawyer has made reasonable efforts to prevent “unauthorized access to, or the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of, confidential information.” Comment [16] states:

    Factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of the lawyer’s efforts include the sensitivity of the information, the
    likelihood of disclosure if additional safeguards are not employed, the cost of employing additional safeguards, the difficulty of implementing the safeguards, and the extent to which the safeguards adversely  affect the lawyer’s ability to represent clients (e.g., by making a device or important piece of software excessively difficult to use). (more…)

  • Update on the Ethics of Performance-Based Marketing

    Most lawyers who have researched ethics opinions related to online advertising are familiar with the Total Attorneys ethics matter, which began in April, 2009 when a single Connecticut lawyer filed an ethics complaint with the state bar disciplinary counsel in 47 states. The complaints targeted not just the company, but also more than 500 of its bankruptcy law firm customers. Here’s the final update on how this played out along with my thoughts on the significance of this process.

    Established in 2002, Total Attorneys is a cloud-based technology and marketing company that is the country’s oldest and largest performance-based lead generation provider to small law firms. As some of you probably know, this is the company that acquired VLOTech, the software that I co-created and use for my virtual practice. For those not familiar with advertising terminology (after all, we don’t typically receive business education in law school), a “lead” for a law firm would be a “prospective” client. (more…)

  • NC Cloud Computing Opinion Published

     

    At its meeting on January 27, the NC State Bar Council adopted and published the last version of 2011 Formal Ethics 6 “Subscribing to Software as a Service While Fulfilling the Duties of Confidentiality and Preservation of Client Property”.  The last version of this opinion was sent to subcommittee in July 2011, but the discussion over the structure of the opinion has been almost a year and a half-long process. At one point, a draft of the opinion contained a list of minimum requirements for the use of SaaS which raised some concern with NC lawyers as well as others nationwide who are interested in the development of legal technology.

    The final conclusion of the published Opinion:

    a law firm may contract with a vendor of software as a service provided the lawyer uses reasonable care to safeguard confidential client information.

    The ethics subcommittee that reviewed this issue should be commended for the amount of research and thought that they put into this process. They pulled in experts on both sides on the fence on the issue of using SaaS in law practice and really made an effort to understand the broad impact that the opinion would make on NC practitioners in a variety of practices. At one point, experts in online banking, which also relies on strict security standards for the use of SaaS, were called in to provide their perspective.

    Here are some key items to notice in this opinion: (more…)

  • Slides from CALI’s Topics in Digital Law Practice Session

    CALI is hosting a MOOC (massively open online course) called Topics in Digital Law Practice. I gave a presentation for them today. Below are the slides. There is a homework assignment posted on the blog for this session and students are encouraged to create homework wikis. Looking forward to reading some of those.

    There are over 700 people registered for the course, and 270 attended the webinar this afternoon. The sessions will be recorded and archived for those who cannot make the live webinar. Apparently there are registrants from all over the world. I’m looking forward to attending the upcoming sessions taught by Marc Lauritsen, Ron Staudt, Richard Granat, Will Hornsby, Sarah Glassmeyer, Kingsley Martin, and Ernie Svenson. Thanks to John Mayer and CALI for the opportunity to share.

    Digital Law Practice – CALI Session

  • NJ May Revise Bona Fide Office Rule

    The New Jersey State Supreme Court Professional Responsibility Rules Committee has recommended an amendment to the bona fide office rule, Rule 1:21-1(a). The proposed changes would no longer require that the lawyer provide a physical office location as long as the lawyer was accessible by his or her clients, the courts and other lawyers, including for purposes of service of process.

    The changes proposed by the committee would overrule the Joint Opinion issued in March 25, 2010 that drew much criticism for denying lawyers the freedom under Rule 1:21-1(a) to use a temporary office location or shared office space with a shared receptionist claiming that such arrangements did not provide sufficient access for clients, courts and other lawyers for lack of a 9-5 traditional business hour office structure. Virtual law practitioners who wished to work from home offices were upset by the Joint Opinion that required that they place their home contact information on any advertising for their practice or on their website.

    This Committee’s proposed changes would allow lawyers, especially those whose work is primarily transactions-based, to use alternative office locations other than a traditional brick and mortar structure. The proposed change are at the bottom of this post.

    However, because they have included access “for service of process”, inspection of records and HAND DELIVERIES,  (more…)

  • Educating the Digital Lawyer eBook Available for Free Download

    An exciting new resource for lawyers and legal educators has been published online for free thanks to the sponsorship of Harvard’s Berkman Center LawLab and LexisNexis.

    The book project called Educating the Digital Lawyer is now available for download as an epub file here. Editors Oliver Goodenough and Marc Lauritsen pulled together the collection from contributors most of whom met and discussed issues related to digital legal education during a working group that was part of the Future Ed Conference.

    The book contains suggestions for changes that need to be made to legal education with a strong emphasis on how the law school curriculum needs to better prepare law students to practice law in a digital environment. Other online resources, such as videos, podcasts, webinars, or other written materials, related to topics in the book may be forthcoming. The resources in this book are useful not only to law school faculty and students, but also to practitioners who may need direction on how to fill in their own law school education gap. Yours truly contributed chapter 10 “What Should be in a Digital Curriculum: A Practitioner’s Must Have List.”

     

  • Standing Committee Recommends Deletion of Problematic Advertising Rule

    Remember how I wrote that virtual practitioners may need to collaborate with “branded network concepts” when updating their marketing strategies?  I also argue that this is necessary in the conclusion of my new book on unbundling because it’s a major component in increasing overall access to justice. Apparently I’m not the only one who sees the potential benefits to the public and the profession from the availability of newer online lawyer advertising methods.

    The ABA Standing Committee on the Delivery of Legal Services has written a letter to the Commission on Ethics 20/20 providing its recommendations regarding lawyer advertising rules. In an interesting move, the Committee has recommended the deletion of Model Rule 7.2(b).

    For those of us in virtual practices who depend on online advertising methods perhaps moreso than traditional law firms, this would be a potentially revolutionary change to the rules. Model Rule 7.2(b) is the rule that prohibits a lawyer from giving anything of value for recommendation for his or her services with four exceptions. It is these exceptions and the speed at which online advertising methods have developed that has caused confusion and controversy over the past few years.

    The Committee’s letter provides a background on how changes in online advertising methods have impacted the options available to the public seeking legal services. Because one of the primary goals of the Committee is to increase access to justice for individuals of moderate income levels, they are quick to point out that these new online methods actually allow for individuals of all income levels to find both the lawyers that they could work with as well as other resources that empower them to make educated decisions about the legal services they might need. (more…)

  • Proposed CA Ethics Opinion on Virtual Law Offices

    The State Bar of California has released a draft formal ethics opinion (No. 10-0003) regarding the use of a “virtual law office practice” by an attorney. This seven page ethics opinion was tentatively approved by the State Bar Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct on November 5th and has been published for a 90-day public comment period.

    The question posed in the opinion:

    May an attorney maintain a virtual law office practice (“VLO”) and still comply with her ethical obligations, if the communications with the client, and storage of and access to all information about the client’s matter, are all conducted solely through the Internet using the secure computer servers of a third-party vendor (i.e., “cloud computing”)?

    The opinion acknowledges the impact that the Internet and technology have had on the legal profession and that “the provision of legal services via a VLO has started to emerge as an increasingly viable vehicle in which to deliver accessible and affordable legal services to the general public.” (more…)

MENU