Year: 2018

Building Relationships from Within

By John Morrell

I admit that it’s been a while since I went to law school. I’m pretty confident, though, when I say that none of my law courses ever covered client hand-holding and new business development. I, like everyone else, was taught the areas of critical thinking, logic, research and other disciplines important to practice law. Law school never formally taught client “care and feeding” responsibilities. Read More

Twitter Tips for New Tweeters

By Karen Korr

Social media is, well, pretty social. Twitter is a social platform, but Twitter is not necessarily about checking in with friends you haven’t talked to since high school. It is a great source of news and information, a way to help position yourself and your work, and a mechanism to connect with others worldwide who share your professional and personal interests. One of Twitter’s best attributes is that it gives you access to those who you might not normally interact with in your day-to-day life — from newspaper editors to sports stars to celebrities to industry experts and more across the globe. Read More

Finding Yourself on the Internet: 5 Steps to Build a Professional Online Brand

By Jeremy Evans 

We live in an age where your first reaction when posed with a question that you do not know the answer to is to “Google it.” We use our phones, tablets and computers to use applications, search for and view information, and connect on social media, not to mention the communication resources of texting, calling and emailing. In our world, it is more likely that you will watch a live sports event on Twitter or Facebook than on your television, and that your first view/meeting of a person or their website is through a social or professional media application like Instagram or LinkedIn or via Google Chrome and Safari. Read More

Time is Money: Maximize Your Time by Incorporating Legal Billing Techniques into Your Daily Office Routine

By Jocelyn Russo

Whether you’re employed at a large or small firm, one thing is for certain: tracking and billing time is an important and inevitable part of working at a law firm. For many associates, your value at your law firm, at least partially, is directly related to the number of hours you bill per month. And, if you are a solo practitioner, although you may not necessarily have “billing requirements,” billing is still a necessary part of your practice.

Although billing may be one of the most important aspects in the legal profession, it is also likely one of the most dreaded tasks in a young associate’s legal career. Efficient billing is an art — an art that once mastered can guide your way to success at your law firm. Ironically enough, although billing may be one of the most important tasks to master during your first few years of practice, billing is one topic that is hardly, if at all, discussed in law schools.

It is no secret that legal fees have increased over the years. As a result, clients have become more cost-conscious and closely examine their legal bills. Here are several tips to help you meet your law firm’s billable hour requirement while also ensuring that your billing is fair and reasonable for clients:

Reduce Distractions Read More

Sexual Harassment: What California Employers and Employees Should Know

Sexual harassment is in the news every day, presenting a lot of questions for both employees and employers. 2018 SDCBA President Kristin Rizzo detailed some important tenets of sexual harassment claims in a recent op-ed in the San Diego Union-Tribune, explaining in part:

Sexual harassment can take one of two forms: “quid pro quo harassment” and “hostile environment harassment.” Quid pro quo means “something for something” in Latin. In the harassment context, quid pro quo means harassment happens when a boss or supervisor requires some form of unwelcome sexual favor from a subordinate as a condition of a job benefit, such as a promotion, or from a job candidate such as a precondition to their hiring, or in lieu of a job detriment, such as a demotion or termination. Hostile environment harassment happens when the person’s work environment is made so offensive or abusive by the unwelcome sexual conduct of another that it is sufficiently “severe” or “pervasive” to disrupt the work environment. Read More

Candor Always Works

By Edward McIntyre
Cartoon by George Brewster Jr.

Macbeth ushered Todd McSweeney to the conference table.

“Let’s wait for Sara and Duncan.”

“Your castle, your rules.”

With everyone seated and introductions complete, Macbeth nodded. “Todd, from the beginning?”

“OK, but it’s complicated.”

Macbeth smiled. “I think we can handle it.”

“Well, I’m in these class actions. Not lead counsel or anything. But I’ve got a piece of the action.”

“Could you explain?”

“Sure. Rounded up a few class plaintiffs. Then referred them to class-action lawyers in Los Angeles. They filed the lawsuits. They’re lead class counsel.”

Sara interrupted. “State or federal court? Not that it makes any difference.”

“But good question. Massive case. Federal court. Judge Smiley. Pleasant enough, few times I’ve been in the courtroom.”

Macbeth asked, “Are you counsel of record?”

“Well, technically. I appeared for the plaintiffs I referred. But just that. To get notices and stuff. Participate in any fee award.”

“I see.”

“But it’s not like I sign pleadings or anything. Never stood in front of Smiley and said anything. When I’m in court, I sit in back. Watch. Federal court’s not my thing.”

“We have the picture. How can we help?”

“The class actions — several of them — settled. So, I’m about to see pay day. But there’s a hitch.”

Macbeth invited McSweeney to continue.

“One settlement requires class money go to Norwegian citizens. Crazy. Don’t ask me. It’s complicated. But that’s the requirement.”

Sara again: “What happens if there aren’t enough Norwegians filing claims?”

“Just what happened. We couldn’t find many Norwegian class members. Leftover money has to go to Norwegian charities with specific purposes. All spelled out.”

“Not all that unusual, in fact.”

“Really? Class actions aren’t my thing either.”

Macbeth intervened. “What’s the ethics issue, Todd? I assume that’s why we’re here.”

“We found a Norwegian charity. Fits the bill. Just crazy luck. No names, OK?”

“Call it Norge?”

“Good one. Norge’s ideal. Except for Norwegian law. Its lawyers say Norwegian tax authorities will grab a huge chunk of any award to Norge. Scandinavian tax systems!”

“So?”

“They’ve got an idea.”

“I’m afraid to ask.”

“Hey, this is privileged, right?”

“Attorney-client privilege. Also confidential under section 6068(e)(1). Feel free to continue.”

“I form a California corporation. With the exact name as Norge. Open bank accounts here. Deposit the award into those accounts. Then disperse funds as Norge directs.”

“Think Judge Smiley will approve?”

“If I don’t tell him? After all, I’m not making representations to the court. Not signing pleadings. What’s my risk?”

Sara spoke, “Rule 5-200 and section 6068(d) prohibit misleading a judge. But —”

“But I’m not making any representations to a judge —”

“I was about to add, without evidence of specific intent to deceive the court, you might escape a violation of the rule and section 6068(d). But that may not be your only risk.”

Macbeth added, “I agree. Let’s walk this through. Can we agree it would be material to a judge that he’s approving a settlement award, on its face paid to Norge, but, in reality, paid to a California corporation with the same name?”

“Well, maybe —”

“Let’s add. As part of a scheme to evade Norwegian taxes. Material now?”

“I guess … yes.”

“And although you didn’t represent that the money is going to Norge, you know the payee on the check will appear to be Norge. But the money goes to a California sound-alike. The court knows nothing about this scheme?”

“Something like that —”

“Likely you’ll endorse the check and deposit the money. Disperse it afterward.”

“That’s the idea.”

“At a minimum, you’ll ratify whatever false statement or half-truth or non-disclosure the other lawyers make about Norge as a recipient —”

“Ratify?”

“Yes. The State Bar Court has made clear that non-disclosure to a court is the same as a half-truth or misrepresentation.”

“OK, but —”

“And, as Sara said, section 6068(d) and rule 5-200 may not strictly apply; section 6106 could.”

“Section 6106?”

Sara spoke, “Acts of dishonesty and moral turpitude. Most recently, the Moriarty case.”

Duncan came alive. “Someone made misrepresentations to get him a continuance. He didn’t make any misrepresentations, but the court found he knew and ratified the conduct. Culpable of violating section 6106.”

“What happened?”

“Recently disbarred.”

“Ouch!”

Macbeth spoke, “Think you’ll need a different solution, Todd. We suggest absolute candor, whatever the consequence in Norway.”

“Thanks — I guess.”

Sara smiled and closed her notes.

Editor’s Note: All references to sections are to the Business and Professions Code. The case to which they referred is In the Matter of Moriarty (Review Dept. 2017) _Cal. State Bar. Ct. Rptr. _, Case No. 15-O-10406 (April 20, 2017), Supreme Court affirming disbarment on Sept. 21, 2017.

Edward McIntyre Read More