A New Ethics Standard for Client Email?

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away the ABA issued Formal Ethics Opinion 99-413, the gist of which was to give law firms a free pass when it came to email encryption. Since 1999, technology has evolved by leaps and bounds, the ABA has updated its model rules, and cybersecurity is a national concern.  Therefore, it should be no surprise the ABA chose to revisit its 18 year-old position on email and electronic communications.

The New ABA Standard

Is email encryption required by the new ABA opinion?  Yes and no.

As Bob Ambrogi reports in his blog:

In this new opinion, the committee declined to draw a bright line as to when encryption is required or as to the other security measures lawyers should take. Instead, the committee recommended that lawyers undergo a “fact-based analysis” that includes evaluating factors such as:

  • 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.
  • 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).

However, special security precautions may be required “to protect against the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of client information when required by an agreement with the client or by law, or when the nature of the information requires a higher degree of security.” ABA Formal Opinion 477.

The Oregon Standard

The last bit of ABA Formal Opinion 477 may sound familiar to Oregon lawyers.  In this article written by Helen Hierschbiel in 2010, the bar gave us some insight on the topic of electronic communications, including email:

Although use of electronic communications is not a per se violation of the duty of confidentiality, special precautions may be necessary in particular circumstances. For example, if information is particularly sensitive or subject to a confidentiality agreement, a lawyer may need to implement special security measures. Also, if a client requests it, a lawyer may be required to avoid, or be allowed to use, a particular type of electronic communication notwithstanding expectations of privacy in the communication method.

While the article cites to a model rule that was later amended, the parallels between Hierschbiel’s language and that of the new opinion are hard to miss.  Bottom line? Email encryption is required if the circumstances warrant it.

Choosing an Email Encryption App

Fortunately, Bob Ambrogi has come to our rescue yet again.  In his article, Encryption so Easy a Lawyer Can Do It, Bob discusses three incredibly simple solutions that allow lawyers to send encrypted messages.  No more clunky interface requiring the sender to transmit keys before the recipient decrypts the message.  No more need for both parties to use the same software.  (Although a simple plug-in may be needed, depending on the software you choose.)

With secure cloud-based solutions Enlocked, Virtru, or Delivery Trust, Ambrogi concludes:

What all three programs have in common is that they make encryption as easy as the push of a button.  If you use email to communicate with clients or colleagues about sensitive matters – and what lawyer does not? – you have no excuse not to encrypt.

What To Do Next

  • Encrypt all client email, not some client email.  Why?  Mainly to eliminate guesswork, reduce risk, and preserve your sanity.  Not convinced?  Consider how clients might view on again/off again encryption: some messages are worth protecting and other’s aren’t?  Hmmm….
  • Put sensitive content behind a secure client portal.  Many practice management programs have this functionality, but if yours doesn’t, consider Slack.
  • Discuss electronic communication policies with clients and reiterate them in your fee agreement or engagement letter.

All Rights Reserved Beverly Michaelis 2017

Ethics CLE June 7  2017 – Ethical Guidelines for Client Files

Join me for a CLE on June 7, 2017 about OSB Formal Ethics Opinions 2016-191 – Client Property: Electronic-Only or “Paperless” Client Documents and 2017-192 – Client Property: Duplication Charges for Client Files, Production or Withholding of Client Files. Learn:

What are lawyers required to produce and when?

  • In some cases, lawyer notes and communications must be produced, in other instances they can be withheld: do you know the difference?
  • If you store data in proprietary law office software (e.g. in a docketing or practice management program), must you extract and convert the data for the client?
  • What circumstance might provoke disclosure of “confidential” information belonging to another client?
  • Can you refuse to deliver file material on the grounds that it is too burdensome or expensive to produce?
  • Is it possible to deliver less than the “entire client file” if the client consents?
  • Are you required to produce work product? Conflict information? Time and expense records? Reports about the client’s creditworthiness? Expert witness information? Metadata? Text messages?

Standards governing retention and storage of client files – Is it ethical to store client files electronically? Do any exceptions apply? What duties does a lawyer have when using electronic-only storage?

When to charge for locating, segregating, or duplicating file material – When you can (and can’t) pass costs on to the client, whether client originals can ever be destroyed, and your ethical responsibilities to the “impecunious client.”

Appreciate the difference between ethical duties and discoverability – The interplay of the Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct vs. state and federal rules of civil procedure.

Throughout the program “best practice” tips will be shared.

Date/Time/Location

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Pacific Time.  This is a live, online webinar. Watch from your desktop computer or mobile device. Connect to audio via telephone or computer/device speakers.

Who Should Attend?

Lawyers, office managers or administrators, staff – anyone interested in learning more about Oregon’s new formal ethics opinions, 2016-191 and 2017-192.

Does the Program Include Written Materials?

Yes.  Written materials will be distributed electronically to all registered attendees before the event.

Ask Questions/Participate in Live Polling

Questions are welcome during the live event.  Attendees are also encouraged to participate in live, anonymous polling.

Registration Fee

$25 – Visit the Upcoming CLE page or click here, or choose the Register button below. Secure payment processing powered by Eventbrite. Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and American Express accepted. Program materials included in the registration price.

Eventbrite - Ethical Guidelines for Client Files

MCLE Credits
1.5 Ethics MCLE Credits pending.

Can’t Attend?

Video and audio recordings of Ethical Guidelines for Client Files will be available to download along with the program materials following the June 7 CLE. Price: $25. Contact me or visit my online CLE store after June 7.

All Rights Reserved [2017] Beverly Michaelis

Ethical Guidelines for Client Files CLE

Join me for a CLE on June 7, 2017 about OSB Formal Ethics Opinions 2016-191 – Client Property: Electronic-Only or “Paperless” Client Documents and 2017-192 – Client Property: Duplication Charges for Client Files, Production or Withholding of Client Files. Learn:

What are lawyers required to produce and when?

  • In some cases, lawyer notes and communications must be produced, in other instances they can be withheld: do you know the difference?
  • If you store data in proprietary law office software (e.g. in a docketing or practice management program), must you extract and convert the data for the client?
  • What circumstance might provoke disclosure of “confidential” information belonging to another client?
  • Can you refuse to deliver file material on the grounds that it is too burdensome or expensive to produce?
  • Is it possible to deliver less than the “entire client file” if the client consents?
  • Are you required to produce work product? Conflict information? Time and expense records? Reports about the client’s creditworthiness? Expert witness information? Metadata? Text messages?

Standards governing retention and storage of client files – Is it ethical to store client files electronically? Do any exceptions apply? What duties does a lawyer have when using electronic-only storage?

When to charge for locating, segregating, or duplicating file material – When you can (and can’t) pass costs on to the client, whether client originals can ever be destroyed, and your ethical responsibilities to the “impecunious client.”

Appreciate the difference between ethical duties and discoverability – The interplay of the Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct vs. state and federal rules of civil procedure.

Throughout the program “best practice” tips will be shared.

Date/Time/Location

Wednesday, June 7, 2017 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Pacific Time.  This is a live, online webinar. Watch from your desktop computer or mobile device. Connect to audio via telephone or computer/device speakers.

Who Should Attend?

Lawyers, office managers or administrators, staff – anyone interested in learning more about Oregon’s new formal ethics opinions, 2016-191 and 2017-192.

Does the Program Include Written Materials?

Yes.  Written materials will be distributed electronically to all registered attendees before the event.

Ask Questions/Participate in Live Polling

Questions are welcome during the live event.  Attendees are also encouraged to participate in live, anonymous polling.

Registration Fee

$25 – Visit the Upcoming CLE, click here, or choose the Register button below. Secure payment processing powered by Eventbrite. Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and American Express accepted. Program materials included in the registration price.

Eventbrite - Ethical Guidelines for Client Files

MCLE Credits
1.5 Ethics MCLE Credits pending.

Can’t Attend?

Video and audio recordings of Ethical Guidelines for Client Files will be available to download along with the program materials following the June 7 CLE. Price: $25. Contact me for more information or visit my CLE on demand store after June 7.

All Rights Reserved [2017] Beverly Michaelis

Naming Your Law Firm

There is plenty of advice out there on how to name your law practice.

LawLytics suggests your name should convey trustworthiness, prestige, and experience. This post from Above the Law pokes a bit of fun at the prototypical ampersand law firms: A, B, C, D & E LLP.  Lawyerist reminds us there are ethical and state regulatory considerations. Yes, indeed!  More on that below!  And I love the fact that WikiHow actually has an entry entitled “4 Ways to Choose a Law Firm Name.” (While the graphics are off-putting, it’s actually an okay read.)

Let me bottom-line it for you: there are times when lawyers can benefit by taking advice from the business world, and this is one of those times.

What’s in a name?

Moving on ……..

What are the dos and don’ts in selecting a name?

The best advice I found was on Findlaw.  A little ironic, since it was written by lawyers for potential business clients, but good is good.  Here is a summary:

  • Make your name descriptive.
  • Say it out loud: how does it sound?
  • What does it look like?  What kind of visual impact will it make on business cards and other materials?
  • Is it easy to understand?
  • Is it unique enough? (Also a legal requirement. Your choice must be “distinguishable upon the record.”)
  • Does it pass the abbreviation and acronym test?  (Make sure the shortened version of your name doesn’t spell out something embarrassing.)
  • Consider the meaning of your name in other languages if relevant to your practice.
  • Avoid names that are too long.
  • Avoid trendy names, since trends come and go.
  • Don’t imply by the name that your practice is somehow affiliated with or approved by a branch of the government. (Also an ethical requirement.)
  • Run your proposed name by family members and friends.

Read the complete post here.  For a chronological list of the steps involved in choosing a business name, see this resource sheet, also on Findlaw.

Assumed business name requirements in Oregon

If you’re an Oregon lawyer you should be proud of our Secretary of State (SOS) website. It really does a good job of educating businesses and providing information.  Assumed business names (ABNs) or what us old-school types call DBAs (doing business as) is no exception.  Here is exactly what you need to know about ABNs in Oregon.  Even better is this graphic, which comes from a PDF brochure on the SOS website:

abns

The ethics of naming your practice

Oregon RPC 7.5(c)(1) prohibits a lawyer from practicing under a name that is misleading as to the identity of the lawyers practicing under the name or that contains names other than those of lawyers in the firm. Oregon RPC 7.5(e) prohibits lawyers from holding themselves out as practicing in a law firm unless the lawyers are actually members of the firm.  This means:

  • Don’t append “and associates” to your firm name unless you actually have associates (staff don’t count).
  • Don’t use the firm name Smith, Jones, & Taylor if you are solo practitioners sharing office space and not practicing together as firm members.
  • Avoid adding “Law Group” to your name unless are two or more lawyers in the firm (staff don’t count).
  • Nonlawyer names are not permitted as part of the firm name.  You may list nonlawyers on letterhead if the nonlawyer’s status is clearly identified.  For example, if your legal assistant is Alyssa Jones, you may list her on your letterhead head as:

Alyssa Jones
Legal Assistant

Lawyers are also prohibited from using trade names that suggest a connection with government or with a public or charitable legal services organization.

Historical firm names and multi-jurisdictional practice

Using names of deceased or retired lawyers is permitted.  Multi-jurisdictional firms can use the same name in both jurisdictions, “so long as the letterhead listing of firm members indicates the jurisdictional limits of those not authorized in the jurisdiction where the office is located.”  See What’s In a Name: Things to consider before hanging that shingle.

Statutory requirements for PCs, LLCs, and LLPs

If you form a PC, LLC, or LLP, then the terms professional corporation, limited liability company, limited liability partnership or their respective abbreviations must appear as part of the firm’s name. ORS 67.625(1); ORS 58.115; ORS 63.094(1).

What about domain names?

Oregon does not have an ethics opinion specifically addressing the use of domain names.  Other jurisdictions do.  Arizona forbids domain names that imply a special competency or affiliation that is not factually true.  Ohio prohibits domain names that are misleading or claim a specialization.  New York and New Jersey are very particular in their rules.  California doesn’t have a straight-off statement on the subject, but has issued an opinion stating that the rules that apply to “communication” and “advertising” apply to websites.  Presumably this includes domain names.  Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Oklahoma Texas, and Virginia have also chimed in on this topic.

Oregon lawyers are advised “to be mindful of the overarching prohibition against misleading communications” when selecting a domain name.  That seems like pretty good advice to me.

All Rights Reserved Beverly Michaelis 2017