By Edward McIntyre
You’re approached after church one Sunday. “Would you serve on a board the church has established to oversee church finances?” Cornered, you reluctantly agree. “But even though I’m a lawyer, I won’t serve as the board’s or church’s lawyer. Clear?” “Yes, quite clear.”
By Katie Parker
As noted in a recent Ethics in Brief column (here), an attorney’s persistent lack of civility can have concrete financial consequences. In the case at issue there, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s reliance on lack of civility in reducing an attorney’s fee award. The Court observed that plaintiff’s counsel’s “beratement of opposing counsel and belittling of the trial court were unnecessary to advocate zealously” on his client’s behalf. Snoeck v. ExakTime Innovations, Inc., 96 Cal. App. 5th 908, 925 (2023).
By Alara Chilton
When a client files or threatens to file a State Bar complaint alleging a lawyer’s ethical misconduct, a lawyer may be tempted to impede a State Bar investigation by seeking to negotiate an agreement that shields the lawyer from the State Bar’s ability to investigate and prosecute a lawyer’s ethical misconduct. Such agreements are intended to ensure a client’s or former client’s silence regarding the alleged misconduct. However, a lawyer’s efforts to enter into such an agreement may run afoul of Business and Professions Code section 6090.5.
By Valerie Silverman Massey
Scenario: As a senior or supervising attorney, you are preparing to file a document with a court. A more junior attorney prepares the document using prior office writings/research or conducting new research and preparing the document from scratch. Your name is on the caption and the signature line.
By David C. Carr
Introduction
The First Amendment guarantees free speech, which is one of our most cherished freedoms. Yet, as we all know, it is not absolute. Recently, the First Amendment has played a more significant role in the jurisprudence of lawyer discipline. Lawyers, after all, are speech warriors. Fueled by new and more effective modes of communication and the breakdown in norms of restraint, First Amendment issues are coming to the surface more often in State Bar Court. This leads to different results as the nuances of the First Amendment collide with the professional obligations of the lawyers. This edition of “Ethics in Brief” briefly examines three recent decisions of the State Bar Court where the First Amendment was raised as a defense.
By Edward McIntyre
Macbeth turned to Sara and Duncan “Pete Moore, a friend, and my go-to AI guru, asked if we could meet. Said it was urgent. I told him to come right over. Are you both free for a few minutes?”
Ethics for New Lawyers
Inadequate client communication is typically one of the top complaints to the State Bar every year. This is unfortunate because keeping clients informed of developments in the representation is one aspect of the practice of law we can actually control.
By Khodadad “Ko” Sharif
Incivility may hit a litigant’s pocketbook.
By Khodadad “Ko” Sharif
Does California Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.15, entitled “Safekeeping Funds and Property of Clients and Other Persons,” govern government agencies that are holding funds for third parties in a civil forfeiture proceeding? More specifically, should cash received or held in civil forfeiture proceedings by the Office of the District Attorney be deposited in one or more identifiable bank accounts labeled “Trust Account?”
By Andrew Servias
In a lawsuit against a School District involving a sexual assault, a video potentially relevant to the litigation was not preserved by the defendant. As a result, the plaintiff sought terminating sanctions. The trial court granted evidentiary, issue, and monetary sanctions, but refused terminating sanctions relying on an exception in Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 (f)(1) which provides that:
