Lawyers Moving in Between Firms

I just published a new article on the ethics issues when lawyers move in between firms.  You can find it here:  http://virginialawyer.vsb.org/publication/?i=625939&p=12&pp=1&view=issueViewer#{"page":"12","issue_id":625939,"numpages":"1"}

Recent Developments in 2019

1.  Amendments to LEOs 1750 (Compendium on Lawyer Advertising and Solicitation) and LEO 1872 (Virtual Law Offices) were approved by the Supreme Court of Virginia (SCV).

2.  The Virginia State Bar (VSB) just filed a petition with the SCV to adopt changes to Rule 1.15 (Trust Accounts) to simplify recordkeeping requirements and remove technical arcane language.  The proposal was approved unanimously by Council at the October meeting.

3.  Legal Ethics Opinions (LEOs).  LEOs 1890 (Compendium Opinion on 4.2—contacts with represented persons was appr’d by Council by a vote of 41-22; LEO 1891(Contacts with officers of governmental entities represented by counsel) was approved by a vote of 53-8 with 5 abstentions.  We will be filing a petition with the SCV asking the Court to adopt these LEOs very soon.

4.  The Ethics Committee (EC) is updating and amending its LEO 1850 on outsourcing legal and law-related services.

5.  The EC is working on a LEO that will address a successor lawyer’s duty to communicate with the client about the prior lawyer’s lien for fees for work performed up until the time of discharge.

6.  Effective Dec 1, we will have a new rule 4.4(b) that will require lawyers who receive inadvertently misdirected privileged documents to notify the sender, abide by the sender’s instructions and not use the information, unless there is pending litigation where the discovery rules will allow the receiving lawyer to seek a court ruling on the use of such inadvertently sent information and waiver of ACP.

7.  The EC has been working closely with Bar Counsel’s office to develop and anti-bias, anti-discrimination rule, however, there is no consensus on what the rule might look like or whether such a rule is even necessary in Virginia.  26 states have adopted some language in their RPC to address this issue but only 3 states have adopted versions of ABA MR 8.4(g) which has engendered criticism by practitioners and academic commentators.