New York County Lawyers’ Association Ethics Opinion 749

Committee on Professional Ethics Topic: “A lawyer’s ethical duty of technological competence with respect to the duty to protect a client’s confidential information from cybersecurity risk and handling e-discovery when representing clients in a litigation or government investigation”   From

Tags: , , ,

D.C. Bar issues comprehensive guidelines on lawyers’ use of social media (Opinion 370 and 371)

In November 2016, the DC Bar Legal Ethics Committee issued Ethics Opinion 370 (Social Media I) and 371 (Social Media II), which address the use of social media by lawyers for marketing and personal use and for providing legal services.

Tags: , , ,

California issues Opinion 2015-193 on lawyers’ ethical duties in handling e-discovery

In Formal Opinion 2015-193 the State Bar of California Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct (“California Ethics Committee” or “Committee”) discussed three of the duties applicable to attorneys involved in e-discovery: the duty of competency, the duty to supervise,

Tags: , , , , ,

Lawyers may advise clients to remove not material information from their social media pages as long as an appropriate record is preserved

On January 23, 2015, the Professional Ethics Committee of the Florida Bar issued Florida Proposed Advisory Opinion 14-1 providing guidelines for lawyers advising clients to “clean up” their social media pages not material to litigation. The Committee warns that “What constitutes an

Tags: ,

Passive Lawyer Review of Jurors’ Internet presence is ethical. ABA Formal Opinion 466

The ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility recently issued an opinion addressing lawyers’ review of jurors’ internet presence distinguishing: (i) a “passive lawyer review” (i.e., a juror’s webpage is publicly available and the juror is unaware of lawyer’s

Tags: , ,

A proposed California ethics opinion warns lawyers of their duty of competence and confidentiality in e-discovery

Based on a hypothetical situation in which an attorney – mistakenly believing that the existing clawback agreement is broader than it is and would allow recovery of inadvertently produced material –  agrees with opposing counsel that his client’s database could

Tags: , ,