Is the ABA Trying to Kill Lawyer Blogs, Facebook Profiles, Twitter Updates, Forum Posts and Lawyer Websites?

My friend Larry Bodine over at the Law Marketing Blog sent this email, which I immediately found both distressing and annoying.  The American Bar Association, affectionately known as the ABA, apparently formed a working group “on the implication of new technologies.”  The ABA Commission on Ethics is currently receiving comments in order to “supplement its research” concerning the following issues:

    A.    Online Social and Professional Networking Services

            1.    Identifying the Line Between Personal Communications and Lawyer Advertising.
            2.    Inadvertent Lawyer-Client Relationships
            3.    Lawyers “Friending” Judges
            4.    Gathering Information Through Networking Websites

    B.    Blogging

    C.    “Pay-per-click” advertising

    D.    Lawyer websites

            1.    False or Misleading Statements on Websites
            2.    Inadvertent Lawyer-Client Relationships
            3.    Giving Legal Advice
            4.    Confidential Information on Websites

Related  Stories:

ABA, Social Media and a time to Panic

Should State Bars Regulate Marketing?

ABA Wants To Regulate Lawyer Online Marketing

Grow Your Small Firm NOW

Carolyn Elefant of My Shingle.com and The Law Firm of Carolyn Elefant discusses the many ways solos and small firms can build their arsenal and business fast on today's GAL Radio.

Play: Grow Your Solo Or Small Firm NOW
(click title to listen)

With: Carolyn Elefant

Sponsored by: Greatest American Lawyer

---

Read Show Transcript

Publish to My Site

Share on My Networks

---

Announcer: Welcome to GAL Radio, brought to you by the Greatest American Lawyer blog. Changing the way law is practiced through technology, innovation and creativity. Turning the business of law on its head and shaking things up to the betterment of clients, lawyers, law firms and society.

Damien Allen: Good morning and welcome to GAL Radio. My name is Damien Allen, and joining me today on the phone is Caroline Elefant of the Law Offices of Carolyn Elefant in Washington, DC, and the proprietor of MyShingle.com. Good morning and welcome to the program, Carolyn.

Gender (in)Equality in the Law: A Frank Discussion with Monica Bay, Editor-In-Chief of Law Technology News

Monica Bay, the editor-in-chief of Law Technology News, discusses the technology changes within the publishing industry and gender equality within the legal profession in this GAL Radio interview.  Highlights include....

• So, what we’ve seen is a transition, a very healthy transition in my mind, to the GC’s having a lot more control over the whole process where law firms are being forced to operate, instead of like private clubs, on a much more corporate, much more transparent approach.
• About a year and a half ago, the U.S. Census released a staggering, and very disappointing figures that showed tremendous gaps in the legal profession on how we pay our women and our men.
• even among the paralegals, ...  it’s something like 97% women, and yet, with that small percentage of men who are paralegals, they’re still making more than the women.
• But, it’s unconscionable for our profession, who are leaders for justice in the rule of law, to have inequities in something as fundamental as equal pay for equal work.  So, I challenge those leaders to walk into their HR departments and get the information and fix it.

Play: Gender Equality and E-Discovery
(click title to listen)

With: Monica Bay

Sponsored by: Greatest American Lawyer

---

Read Show Transcript

Publish to My Site

Share on My Networks

---

powered by Vertio.net

Announcer:  Welcome to GAL Radio, brought to you by the Greatest American Lawyer blog, changing the way law is practiced through technology, innovation and creativity.  Turning the business of law on its head, and shaking things up to the betterment of clients, lawyers, law firms and society.

Damien Allen:  Good afternoon, and welcome to GAL Radio.  My name is Damien Allen, and joining me today on the phone is Monica Bay, editor-in-chief of Law Technology News.  Good afternoon, Monica.  Welcome to the program.

Former Partner of the Greenberg Traurig Law Firm Charged with Overbilling Client

In Martha Neil's recent ABA Journal article, Mark McCombs, a former partner of the Greenberg Traurig Law firm was recently let go and brought up on criminal charges for allegedly over-billing a client in excess of $1 million.  Here are some excerpts from the article: 

Mark McCombs, 50, is accused of taking advantage of longstanding professional and personal relationships with officials in Village of Calumet Park and charging more than $1 million since 2003 for work that wasn't performed, reports the Chicago Tribune. If convicted of the felony, he could be sentenced to six to 30 years in prison.

The Northwestern University School of Law graduate is no longer listed on the firm's website, but a 2002 Greenberg Traurig press release details his background and governmental practice at the time he began working at Greenberg Traurig's office in Chicago.

His Martindale-Hubbell listing says the village honored him by designating a "Mark McCombs Drive" in recognition of his leading role in redeveloping the commercial corridor along Ashland Avenue and Vermont Street.

A Chicago Sun-Times article provides further details about the alleged overbilling scheme and how it was discovered. In addition to overbilling, it says, McCombs is accused of charging a higher-than-authorized hourly fee.

Here is the link to the full article on the ABA Journal website:  "Greenberg Traurig Partner Charged With Overbilling Client By $1M to Gain Prestige in Firm"

What’s wrong with the Merits? How Gamesmanship Has Taken Over the Courtroom

There is a lot of talk these days about how large corporations have essentially taken over Washington, DC.  The little guy has no “access” to the political machine.  Many are asking “what good is a right to vote when corporations are pouring millions of dollars into the campaigns of those we vote for?”

The same problem that exists in Washington, DC is often replicated across America’s courtrooms.

The # 1 Client Complaint of All Time

We don’t need statistics to know it’s true.  We’ve heard it since we graduated from law school.  The number one complaint by clients is the failure to return phone calls and lack of information from their lawyer.  When clients don’t know what’s going on, they rightfully get pissed off.  What needs to be a relationship of trust becomes a relationship of mistrust.

Asking for a Malpractice Suit: Failing to Educate the Client

Over the course of my career, I would say that the vast majority of instances where a client came to a lawyer for advice, the lawyer essentially told the client what to do based on that lawyer’s own experience, expertise and knowledge of the law.  Under the “lawyer knows best” approach, the client is not expected to understand the legal intricacies or practical reality of his or her legal situation.  Even on the holy grail of settlement, where the client has to be informed of the offer and is the only one who can decide whether or not to accept or reject, the emphasis is often on telling the client to accept or reject rather than educating the client and letting them decide for themselves.

Technology allows us to push a lot of information and access to our clients.  Our model is devoted to helping the client understand the key legal principles involved and practical realities of the legal process.

I Could Be an Idiot, but You Would Never Know It Because I Look Good In a Suit

Me and the boys are out cruising downtown Saturday night in Traverse City Michigan.  At 6:46, a guy is coming across the street.  He has cropped well-groomed hair.  His appearance is All-American, and he’s wearing a suit with a green accented tie and white stuffed shirt. As attorneys in Traverse City Michigan, we don't see nearly as many suits on attorneys and lawyers  as most other places. 

I immediately stopped the conversation which was occurring in the car to show the boys.  It occurred to me they had never actually seen it before and had no idea.  I pointed with my finger extended and said, “LOOK!”

This guy stood out for a number of reasons, not the least of which is we live in Traverse City where stuffed suits are few and far between.   The bankers and the “high-end” lawyers definitely wear suits most all the time.

I explained to the boys in careful measured tones that I used to have to dress like that every day.  I thought about the comfort of my jeans and my relaxed shirt and the black crocs I wore over socks because of the recent chilly weather.  It even struck me that I spent almost a decade dressed almost every day in a suit and tie.

The guy looked pretty nice, but it occurred to me that the whole point of the suit and tie is to try and impress the client.  If you put a whole bunch of suit and ties together in a room, the importance of the room increases numerically with the number of ties.

It also occurred to me that at least half of these people might very well be idiots, but you would never know because they have a fancy haircut and very nice suit.  In a way, it’s outright fraud.  There ought to be some sort of regulations that have to be met if you want to wear a suit, but that post is for another day.  Me and the boys are going into Right Brain Brewery, play same games, drink some root beer and revel in the fact that their dad never wears a suit.

Twittering the Blow by Blow of Courtroom Action Is the Latest Onslaught by Technology on the Court System

A hardy thank you to Robert J. Ambrogi over at Robert Ambrogi’s LawSites for posting the following article on Facebook titled “Judge Shuts Down NewWest.Net Twitter Feed from Yellowstone Club Trial” by Courtney Lowery.  Federal Bankruptcy Judge Ralph B. Kircher shut down the use of Twitter in his courtroom.

Revisiting The Issue Of Why Lawyers Wear Suits

In a recent post titled “Why Do Lawyers Wear Suits”, we playfully explored the idea of the importance – or lack thereof – of a suit and tie for legal professionals.  The post drew some interesting commentary warranting a re-posting of the article here!

Are suits just another example of “form over substance” for lawyers and law firms?  I haven’t worn a suit in five years, except to court.  I deal with very powerful and important clients, as well as average business people and layman.  Clients feel more comfortable when they’re not sitting across from a stuffed suit.  No client has ever been taken aback by the fact that I wasn’t wearing a suit.  In fact, more often than not, neither were they. 

The concept that lawyers need to wear suits to meet their client’s expectations is ridiculous in most instances.  Clients aren’t that stupid.  They want good lawyers and good results.  They don’t care if their legal professional is wearing nothing but underwear while they accomplish those results.