Tag Archives: professional responsibility

New ABA Ethics Opinion – Lawyers Working Remotely

Posted on by
2

On December 16, 2020 the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility issued Formal Opinion 495. Here is the synopsis:

Lawyers may remotely practice the law of the jurisdictions in which they are licensed while physically present in a jurisdiction in which they are not admitted if the local jurisdiction has not determined that the conduct is the unlicensed or unauthorized practice of law and if they do not hold themselves out as being licensed to practice in the local jurisdiction, do not advertise or otherwise hold out as having an office in the local jurisdiction, and do not provide or offer to provide legal services in the local jurisdiction. This practice may include the law of their licensing jurisdiction or other law as permitted by ABA Model Rule 5.5(c) or (d), including, for instance, temporary practice involving other states’ or federal laws. Having local contact information on websites, letterhead, business cards, advertising, or the like would improperly establish a local office or local presence under the ABA Model Rules.

The opinion does not address confidentiality, use of technology, or other issues that may arise in remote working situations. Read the full opinion here.

All Rights Reserved Beverly Michaelis 2021

Federal District Court Draws Distinction Between Disciplinary and Malpractice Defense in Coverage Decision

Quote

Posted on by
1

Professional liability policies for lawyers and law firms often distinguish between disciplinary and malpractice defense. Some don’t cover disciplinary defense or, if they do, include a much lower coverage limit. A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington underscored the practical impact of the distinction between disciplinary and malpractice coverage.

Chochrane v. American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Company, 2020 WL 3798928 (W.D. Wash. July 7, 2020) (unpublished), was a coverage action by a lawyer against her carrier. The lawyer’s professional liability policy included coverage for disciplinary matters—but the limit was only $10,000. A grievance had been filed against the lawyer. No separate litigation for malpractice, however, was involved. Although the disciplinary matter was eventually dismissed, the lawyer incurred substantially more than the $10,000 limit in fees and costs in her defense. Because a part of the grievance included allegations of malpractice, the lawyer argued that her carrier should cover the expenses above the $10,000 limit. The carrier declined and the lawyer brought a coverage case against the carrier.

via Fine Print: Federal District Court Distinguishes Disciplinary and Malpractice Defense in Coverage Decision — NWSidebar

Learn about Oregon’s Professional Liability Fund Primary Coverage plan here.

Negative Online Reviews

Posted on by
2

We all know that negative online reviews can be hurtful and maddening.  Last month I highlighted suggestions from the July Oregon State Bar Bulletin article by Linn Davis, with a few additions of my own.  Because I know this topic strikes a nerve, I wanted to share some further advice from our friends at NW Sidebar.

  • A reasonable and measured response is key. Blasting people who give you a negative review is not a good business model. You can try contacting the review site and asking for the review’s removal if you can prove the review is false, defamatory or written by a competitor. This, however, may not be successful, especially if the review is anonymous. See Thomson v. Jane Doe, 189 Wn. App. 45, 356 P.3d 727 (2015) , when the court refused to force disclosure of an anonymous online reviewer’s identity.
  • You can respond directly to the review on the site. Be courteous and explain that due to your duty of confidentiality, you can’t address the facts of the complaint, but that you do not believe it presents a fair and accurate portrayal of the events. Make clear that you are always available to meet with former clients and address any concerns they may have.
  • If possible, try to contact the reviewer directly and seek to ameliorate the situation or explain to them further why the representation unfolded as it did. If this is successful, don’t hesitate to ask for an updated review.
  • Try to avoid further negative reviews by soliciting client feedback directly as the representation continues and in exit interviews. Try to give your clients every opportunity to air their grievances with you and your firm directly so they don’t have the need to vent in public.
  • Lastly, the best antidote to a negative review is positive reviews. Keep your profile updated and facilitate the opportunity for your other clients to post their own satisfied reviews.

via Responding to Negative Online Reviews — NWSidebar

As I’ve said before, I am not a fan of engaging with the reviewer/client online.  However, the idea of soliciting client feedback during and after the course of representation is stellar.  As Sandra Schilling notes, this is about giving your clients the opportunity to vent so they don’t feel the need to blast you online.  I would add: it may also be preemptive. While there will always be clients who are perpetually unhappy, most people are reasonable.  If you learn about a client’s dissatisfaction early, you can intervene and repair the relationship.  The unappealing alternative is to allow the client’s bad feelings to fester – never a good solution.

All Rights Reserved 2017 Beverly Michaelis

Your Online Reputation

Posted on by
3

The July issue of the Oregon State Bar Bulletin features an excellent article by Linn Davis entitled “Responding to Negative Online Reviews: Reputation Management.”  If you’ve ever received a negative review, or fear that negative content is inevitable, this post is for you.

While Davis’ article focuses on ethical dos and don’ts, it also contains solid practical advice.  The following excerpt describes what you cannot do, what you should not do, how to preempt negative reviews, and how to respond to a negative review. Also included are my two cents on best practice recommendations.

What You Cannot Do

  • Reveal information relating to the representation of a client
  • Post inaccurate content
  • Allow misleading information that creates false expectations regarding fees, results, or your firm’s resources
  • Use subterfuge (employees posing as satisfied clients offering glowing reviews)
  • Fail to promptly update information when it changes
  • Engage in real-time interactions that violate in-person solicitation rules

What You Should Not Do

  • Sue the source of the negative review for defamation
  • Attempt to restrict clients from posting negative reviews
  • Form an unintended attorney-client relationship in an online legal forum
  • Fail to screen for conflicts in an online legal forum
  • Offer incentives for a positive review without considering the ethical and legal implications. See Oregon RPC 1.8(a), and 16 CFR Part 255 relating to FTC regulation of endorsements.

How to Preempt Negative Reviews

  • Contribute accurate and valuable information regarding yourself and your firm
  • Use disclaimers when participating in online legal forums
  • Provide clients with professional and competent work product

How to Respond to a Negative Review

One possibility is to do nothing.  As Davis points out, “not every opinion (on the Internet) must be contested.”  If, however, you feel you must respond, Davis offers three ethically permissible approaches:

  • Encourage the client to contact you to resolve the concerns expressed (this could be done online or offline)
  • Post that you disagree with the client’s account but are prevented by your professional standards from responding in a public forum without the client’s consent
  • Direct readers to other forums where your representation is regarded more “fully, accurately, and favorably”

Best Practices – My Two Cents

If the negative review comes from a client:

Your best tactic is to encourage the client to contact you. I suggest doing this privately and leaving the online post alone.  Why?  Responding to a negative review in any fashion will cause it to rank higher in search results.  Remember: search engines use algorithms based on quantity and quality. The more online engagement surrounding a negative thread, the more prominent it will become.

The good news is that you can exploit the quantity/quality preference of search engines by contributing your own accurate and valuable information.  In addition to Davis’ suggestions about adding basic biographical data and a description of your services, list yourself on free online legal directories, blog, update your Website, post to social media, share photos, and reshare/repost content.  It will take time and effort, but your content can and will push the negative review below the first page of search results.

If the negative review comes from a non-client:

I’ve known many lawyers who received negative “reviews” from non-clients – either disgruntled opposing parties or those who are motivated to attack the lawyer because of her practice area or representation of a particular client. Examples include immigration law, debt collection, or defending a client accused of a crime. Other than overwhelming the negative review with your own positive content, there isn’t much you can do when a non-client complains. Responding will only spur on the commentor.

Parting Thoughts

While it is important to monitor what people are saying about you online, try to have a thick skin. I know that negative reviews can be hurtful and maddening – especially when the source is motivated to keep attacking.  However, and pardon my French, but most of us can spot a “whack job.” Therefore, if a potential client decides not to meet with you because of what he sees or reads on the Internet, it’s probably a good thing.

All Rights Reserved Beverly Michaelis 2017