By Mallory H. Chase
Currently out for public comment are two alternative versions of a proposed new California Rule of Professional Conduct, rule 8.3, which would address a lawyer’s duty to report the misconduct of another lawyer to the State Bar. As it stands, California is the last hold-out United States jurisdiction without an adopted rule on the topic.
By Michael L. Crowley
As most practitioners know by now, there was a major revision of the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2018 that govern us all. One controversial change was to Rule 4.2 (previously Rule 2-100) that was only the change of one word. The one-word change is highlighted in the title of the Rule. It went from “Communication With a Represented Party” in Rule 2-100 to “Communication with a Represented Person” in new Rule 4.2. The change replaced “Party” with “Person.”
By Tatiana Kline, Deputy Public Defender
This inspiration for this month’s Coaches Corner comes from a talk by Kemi Nekvapil titled “Step Into Your Power & Live Without Apology.” Given that March is Women’s History Month, I wanted to share this talk with the SDCBA community. I invite you to LISTEN HERE.
Hi NLD Members,
I’m excited to be writing this message as Co-Chair of the Community Outreach subcommittee of the New Lawyer Division (NLD) Executive Committee, with Claudia Salinas. If we haven’t met, I encourage you to attend one of our events! We coordinate pro bono and volunteer events for new lawyers and law students in San Diego County.
The State Bar of California just released two separate and sobering reports about its own failure to open any public discipline investigation of Los Angeles attorney Thomas Girardi, despite more than one hundred complaints against him between 1982 to January 2021. These reports highlight not only failures at the State Bar, but also underscore the need to carefully consider a sometimes-overlooked aspect of the conflict-of-interest rules.
A recent appellate opinion from the Fourth District, Division Two, Rodriguez v. FCA US LLC (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 209, changes the definition of a “new motor vehicle” in California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (“Act”) thereby limiting the number of consumers who can avail themselves of the Act. Courts have previously held that the Act is “manifestly a remedial measure, intended for the protection of the consumer; it should be given a construction calculated to bring its benefits into action.” Murillo v. Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc. (1998) 17 Cal.4th 985, 990.
Five minutes remained. The second hand on my watch stubbornly kept turning, along with my stomach. Three quarters of the California Bar Exam were finished, and my insides had decided to rebel right before the last push. But enough was enough. Despite my body’s objections, I hoisted myself to the sink, dabbed my face with paper, and lurched back to the exam room for another hundred multiple choice questions.
Can an attorney’s rate be likened to the value of a Pablo Picasso painting? How you monetarily value your time as an attorney can change the course of your practice and client relations.
On February 15, 2023, the New Lawyer Division was honored to be joined by Chief Judge Dana M. Sabraw of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California for the first of its biannual court practice series programming. Judge Sabraw was nominated by George W. Bush to the federal bench on May 1, 2003, and then unanimously confirmed by the Senate. He became chief judge on January 22, 2021. Judge Sabraw provided insightful tips and guidance on best practices in federal court, including his thoughts on Complaints, FRCP 12(b)(6) motions (motions to dismiss), FRCP 56 (c) motions (motions for summary judgement), briefings, oral arguments, and advice on obtaining judicial clerkships.
By Mitchell L. Lathrop
Professional ethics require that at the outset of the attorney-client relationship, the client is made aware of the nature and scope of the attorney’s responsibilities, usually through an engagement letter. Few things are as important in today’s law practice as engagement letters. Inadequate or poorly drafted engagement letters can spell real problems for the lawyer. Boilerplate terms can also be a source of trouble for the lawyer or firm utilizing them. Limited engagement letters are problematic when the limited scope is not followed. When the lawyer exceeds the scope of a limited engagement, the limited engagement letter will not protect the lawyer in subsequent legal malpractice proceedings. (Astral Brands v. Boyd, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114224, 2021 WL 2448358 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 28, 2021). As the court pointed out in Piscitelli v. Friedenberg (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 953, 983, “An attorney’s duty to his or her client depends on not only the existence of an attorney-client relationship, but also the scope of the duties assumed by the lawyer.” Where an agreement for legal services violates the Rules of Professional Conduct, it may be declared unenforceable.(Chambers v. Kay (2002) 29 Cal.4th 142 (enforcement of a fee division agreement undertaken without written client consent held unenforceable on the ground that the arrangement violated the Rules of Professional Conduct).)
