Hey, Juniors: Look Out for Outsourcing?

Ron Friedmann posts at Prism Legal about outsourcing, linking to a recent  round table discussion on outsourcing  at Law Practice Today.  I've also discussed the topic briefly here at  MyShingle.  Does your firm outsource?  And if you are a starting associate, do you fear that outsourcing may eventually jeopardize your raison d'etre at a firm.  There's been lots of commentary in the blogosphere on outsourcing, some from the solo community, which has discussed, for example, whether patent outsourcing might displace solo IP lawyers.  But to me, it seems that outsourcing poses the greatest risk for junior associates engaged in document review and more ministerial tasks.  So how about it -- are you juniors afraid of the outsourcing trend?

Posted by Carolyn Elefant

 

DO YOU HAVE BAD SPEAKING HABITS?

Posted By Tom Kane

As part of the process in preparing for my new role as adjunct faculty at the University of Miami’s Office of Professional Advancement, and the rolling out of our new two and one-half day UM Legal Marketing Program next month (hopefully), I’ve been paying a lot of attention to the subject of public speaking.  As many speeches as I have given over the years, I still know that I can always get better.

There is a lot of good stuff out there in addition to the Great Public Speaking blog, which I really like.  Yesterday, thanks to Findlaw’s The Practice Paper e-newsletter, I ran across another one.  It is an article by Carmine Gallo, a communications coach/author/speaker with an impressive background.  One of his columns in Business Week Online covered “The 10 Worst Presentation Habits” (click on arrows at top right to move through slides).

Here are the 10 bad habits:

1. Reading From Notes (know material so well, you don’t need notes – that isn’t to say you can't sneak a peak every once and awhile as I have mentioned before),
2. Avoiding Eye Contact (“maintain eye contact with your listeners at least 90% of the time,” according to Carmine),
   
   
   
3. Dressing Down (always dress appropriately, but “a little better than everyone else”)
4. Fidgeting Or Using Annoying Gestures (conveys nervousness.  If guilty of doing so, practice with a video camera),
5. Failing To Rehearse (winging it is never a good idea, even if you know your material by heart.  See an earlier post on this point here),
6. Standing At Attention (move around, use body language, be “animated in voice and body”),
7. Reading Your Slides (always bad – his rule for slides “no more than four words across and six lines down”),
8. Speaking Too Long (if you can get message across in less time, do it. Carmine says “listeners lose their attention after approximately 18 minutes”),
9. Failing To Excite Audience (tell them why they should be excited about your talk and give them a “reason to care”), and
10. Ending Without Inspiring (its okay to summarize your talk, but leave audience “with one key thought”).

So, how many bad habits do I have?  Ain't tell’n.  BUT I may see a point or two that I could improve on.  How about you?

Sincerely tours Rodrigo González Fernández, consultajuridica.blogspot.com

 

EL JUEZ CERDA opinión  de Héctor Salazar Ardiles , Abogado FASIC

Posteado a  elmercurio.com del dia sábado 14 de abril 2005

 

Las opiniones suscitadas en este periódico entre el Abogado Carlos Peña, Enrique Cibié, Héctor Salazar y otros distinguidos profesionales en relación  a fallos de la Corte Suprema , sus formas e interpretaciones, son consecuencia de la formación  en la profesión legal que han recibido los profesionales y los magistrados y también los  pocos parlamentarios que tienen esa formación. Esa formación ya está antigua, el mundo evolucionó, la sociedad evolucionó y sigue sumida en cambios profundos  y se sigue formando profesionales con ideas, sistemas y leyes que eran para el siglo XIX. La educación legal, y el derecho necesitan una readecuación un repensar en su conjunto para adecuarla al presente y a las futuras generaciones conforme a los cambios. De esto ya han hablado hace muchos años connotados intelectuales del derecho , pero no ha habido voluntad de hacer. Invito a debatir sobre este tema Saludos Rodrigo González Fernández, consultajuridica.blogspot.com

¿LOS ABOGADOS PUEDEN HACER MARKETING?

Boris Ugarte Calvimonte (*) Director Nacional de Marketing Univalle, vicepresidente Colegio de Profesionales de Marketing Cochabamba.

Poco a poco, el marketing jurídico está tomando mayor fuerza y se está volviendo cada vez más necesario en el actuar diario de los Bufetes de Abogados, pero es también una constante que no ha sido una tarea fácil y que todavía se encuentra con grandes obstáculos que no permiten el desarrollo de un marketing jurídico que tiene entre tantos objetivos, mejorar la relación de los abogados con sus clientes y buscar nuevas oportunidades de negocio.

Si nos situamos en la realidad de la gran mayoría de los bufetes en nuestro país, podemos darnos cuenta que están encasillados en una mentalidad en la cual un bufete existe en sí mismo y peor aún, subsiste por sí mismo, porque cubre necesidades muy específicas y necesarias que “ por siempre” le traerán clientes y beneficios. Es ahí donde encontramos el principal obstáculo para el marketing jurídico, luchar contra la mentalidad inflexible de algunos abogados, que en lugar de ver al marketing como una estrategia de crecimiento y posicionamiento, lo encuentran como un gasto, algo innecesario y que no traerá ningún tipo de beneficio.

Es por desgracia esta mentalidad la que no permite un crecimiento del mercado de manera constante, mientras algunos bufetes de abogados están dándose cuenta de la gran necesidad de trabajar como una empresa, delimitando sus servicios y con esto, el mercado, nos encontramos con bufetes que no quieren dar ese salto y se quedan estancados, deteniendo poco a poco el crecimiento del sector.

Un factor externo, pero no menos importante, es el mercado. Estamos ante un mercado que poco a poco está cambiando la visión de ver al bufete de abogados, estamos intentando que sea vista como una empresa prestadora de servicios, que puede utilizar todas las herramientas que cualquier empresa de servicios está acostumbrada a utilizar, sin ser juzgada o desacreditada por falta de calidad. Sin embargo, hay que tener en cuenta que en muchas ocasiones, se tiene que romper con la visión de “mis abogados para toda la vida”, esto es válido cuando el servicio que se recibe es de calidad y de acuerdo con el precio (otra herramienta de marketing) que está pagando por ello.

Pero qué pasa cuando cada vez más los despachos dejan de ser generales para empezar a especializarse en áreas especificas. No quiero decir que debe dejar a su abogado de siempre, simplemente que el mercado debe estar abierto a toda posibilidad de cambio, ser flexible, cuando el servicio que puede obtener es más especializado y con mejores resultados.

Otro caso sencillo de citar es el establecer tarifas, al existir una gran competencia en el mercado y una necesidad latente de captación, los bufetes de abogados entran en algunas ocasiones en una guerra de precios, que lo único que están haciendo es devaluar la profesión y el servicio. Es por ello que la tarea del marketing jurídico es determinar qué tipo de bufete queremos tener, qué tipo de mercado queremos abordar y cuáles son las estrategias que queremos aplicar.

En conclusión podemos decir que el marketing jurídico está en una etapa emergente porque se está reconociendo como tal, se están estableciendo parámetros para poder visualizarlo como una estrategia con la aplicación de herramientas que beneficien a los despachos de abogados, es necesario por ello SER FLEXIBLES ante los cambios que el mercado ofrece, dar ese salto para la optimización de los recursos y facilitar el trabajo ante las necesidades más especificas que nuestros clientes van descubriendo.

 

TOMEMOS UN REST Y VEAMOS ALGO IMPORTANTE EN ESPAÑOL:

EL MARKETING JURIDICO TOMA FUERZAS

Liliana Navarro Kai Marketing & Comunicación Ibáñez & Almenara , Abogados y Economistas de Barcelona . este es un excelente trabajo que nos orienta en nuestros esfuerzos  para ir introduciendo en marketing jurididicos en estudios de abogados de Santiago y también en Provincia, en Chile. La situación que se vive en España es similar a la Chilena asi que lo vertido por Liliana, es valido en nuestro país plenamente; es más ya lo he constatado personalmente en dos o tres importantes estudios en Chile

 

Poco a poco el marketing jurídico esta tomando mayor fuerza y se esta volviendo cada vez más necesario en el actuar diario de los Despachos de Abogados, pero es también una constante que no ha sido una tarea facíl y que todavía se encuentra con grandes obstáculos que no permiten el desarrollo de un marketing jurídico que tiene entre tantos objetivos,  mejorar la relación de los abogados con sus clientes y buscar nuevas oportunidades de negocio.

 

Si nos situamos en la realidad de la gran mayoría de los despachos en España, podemos darnos cuenta que están encasillados en una mentalidad en  la cual un despacho existe en sí mismo y peor aún, subsiste por sí mismo, porque cubre necesidades muy especificas y necesarias que “siempre” le traerán clientes y beneficios. Es ahí donde encontramos el principal obstáculo para el marketing jurídico, luchar contra la mentalidad inflexible de algunos abogados, que en lugar de ver al marketing como una estrategia de crecimiento y posicionamiento, lo encuentran como un gasto, algo innecesario y que no traerá ningún tipo de beneficio.

 

Es por desgracia está mentalidad la que no permite un crecimiento del mercado de manera constante, mientras algunos Despachos de abogados, están dándose cuenta de la gran necesidad de trabajar como una empresa, delimitando sus servicios y con esto, el mercado, nos encontramos con Despachos que no quieren dar ese salto y se quedan estancados, deteniendo poco a poco el crecimiento del sector.

 

Otro de los grandes obstáculos a los que el marketing jurídico se enfrenta, es la creencia de que hacer comunicación es hacer marketing, pensar que el mantener una comunicación a nivel gráfica o por Internet con sus clientes o posibles clientes, es hacer estrategias de marketing, es un grave error. La comunicación es sólo una herramienta que el marketing utiliza para transmitir un cúmulo de estrategias que previamente, debieron de realizarse con un determinado número de objetivos y un plan de acción para seguirlos, es entonces la comunicación el instrumento idóneo para mantener informados a nuestros clientes y colaboradores. Es por ello que en muchas ocasiones se establecen presupuestos de comunicación y por desgracia no tienen los resultados deseados, al no haber una base sólida del por qué y para qué de la comunicación, es casi seguro que si no fracasa no se tendrá la rentabilidad que se hubiera alcanzado de haber planeado una buena estrategia y haberla comunicado correctamente.

 

Un factor externo, pero no menos  importante, es el mercado. Estamos ante un mercado que poco a poco esta cambiando la visión de ver al despacho de abogados, Estamos intentado que sea vista como una empresa prestadora de servicios, que puede utilizar todas las herramientas, que cualquier empresa de servicios está acostumbrada a utilizar, sin ser juzgada o desacreditada por falta de calidad. Sin embargo hay que tener en cuenta que en muchas ocasiones, se tiene que romper con la visión de “mis abogados para toda la vida”, esto es válido cuando el servicio que se recibe es de calidad y de acuerdo con el precio (otra herramienta de marketing) que esta pagando por ello. Pero qué pasa cuando cada vez más los despachos dejan de ser generalitas para empezar a especializarse.

No quiere decir que debe dejar a su abogado se siempre, simplemente que el mercado debe de estar abierto a toda posibilidad de cambio, ser flexible, cuando el servicio que puede obtener es de mas especializado y con mejores resultados. Esto es un gran y arduo proceso de información y formación del mercado, que es sólo tarea del marketing jurídico y los actores del mismo, los bufetes de abogados.

La mala aplicación de estrategias de marketing en algunos de los bufetes de abogados, es otro de los grandes obstáculos a los que el marketing jurídico se enfrenta. Caso sencillo de citar es, el establecer tarifas, al existir una gran competencia  en el mercado y una necesidad latente de captación, los bufetes de abogados entran en algunas ocasiones en una guerra de precios, que lo único que están haciendo es devaluar la profesión y el servicio, si aunado a esto decimos, que esto es lo que se comunica al mercado, entramos, en una gran disyuntiva, hasta dónde se distorsiona la utilización del marketing jurídico, y esto por desgracia puede resultar perjudicial, no solo para la competencia que se gesta entre despachos de abogados si no también para los clientes que están expuestos sin desearlo, a este tipo de estrategias. Es por ello que la  tarea del marketing jurídico es determinar qué tipo de bufete queremos tener, qué tipo de mercado queremos abordar y cuáles son las estrategias que queremos aplicar.

En conclusión podemos decir que el marketing jurídico esta en una etapa emergente, no por que sea algo nuevo, porque marketing en los despachos de abogados siempre ha existido, si no porque se esta reconociendo como tal, se están estableciendo parámetros  para poder visualizarlo como una estrategia con la aplicación de herramientas que beneficien a los despachos de abogados, es necesario por ello SER FLEXIBLES ante los cambios que el mercado ofrece, dar ese salto para la optimación de los recursos y facilitar el trabajo ante las necesidades más especificas que nuestros clientes van descubriendo.

Saludos y a cambiar, a pensar más en el marketing jurídico., saludos Rodrigo González Fernández, consultajuridica.blogspot.com, marjuridico.blogspot.com

                                                                                          

LEGAL BLOG

LEGAL BLOG WATCH

The Most Taxing Podcast Ever

Jim Calloway calls it "great news for insomniacs and tax geeks alike," and it comes just in time for that most revered of days, April 15. The source of Calloway's excitement is Jack Bogdanski's announcement that he will podcast the complete Internal Revenue Code -- and he won't even charge people to listen! Home page for the project is right here, where you can already find seven IRC sections ready for downloading to your computer or MP3 player. Bogdanski should be familiar with the material, since he is a tax professor at Lewis & Clark Law School.

 

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on April 13, 2006 at 07:29 AM | Permalink

 

Murphy's Law of Lawyering

Indianapolis lawyer Stephen Terrell recently left a firm to open his own law office. In the process, he is learning some little-known lessons about starting a practice and sharing them on his blog, Hoosier Lawyer. This week, he learned that when only one thing won't work, it's something you need. He describes the lesson this way:

 

"If you have 20 outlets and jacks in your new office, but only two are absolutely crucial to your start-up operation, it is those two -- and only those two -- which won't work."

 

Maybe we should call it the Murphy's Law of lawyering.

 

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on April 13, 2006 at 07:15 AM | Permalink

 

Scalia's 'Proudest Thing'

Could a law blogger "have any finer friend than Justice Antonin Scalia?" asks Joseph Schuman at Law Blog. It sometimes seems that the brilliant-but-quirky jurist is to legal news what the talented-but-quirky Michael Jackson is to celebrity news -- an endless source of fodder. Speaking to law students at the University of Connecticut yesterday, Scalia said that his 2004 decision not to recuse himself from a case involving Vice President Cheney was the "proudest thing" he has done on the Court, as reported by Associated Press.

 

Given that Scalia has no doubt done many "things" of which he should be proud, his choice of this has Norm Pattis at Crime & Federalism wondering "if he's off his rocker, or if his meds need readjusting." But Pattis is even more disturbed about what he calls Scalia's "anachronistic crusade," his adherence to constitutional originalism. Says Pattis:

 

"It is difficult to take Scalia's commitment to originalist seriously. He blasts those favoring a living constitution, arguing that such folks are too free to impose their meaning on age-old terms of constitutional text. Yet the decision he makes to adhere to the words of those long-dead is just as much of a choice. Frankly, I'd choose even a bad doctor trained this century over Benjamin Rush, a famous colonial physician. So would Scalia."

 

Hmmm, maybe we should see what Michael Jackson thinks.

 

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on April 13, 2006 at 06:54 AM | Permalink

 

Mentioning the Unmentionable

In the annals of American jurisprudence, yesterday's decision by the Supreme Court to allow citation to unpublished opinions in federal courts may warrant little more than a footnote -- but at least it will be a citeable footnote. Among bloggers and legal commentators, however, the decision drew greater notice. Legal Times writer Tony Mauro wrote:

 

"The justices' vote represents a major milestone in the long-running debate over unpublished opinions, the sometimes-cursory dispositions that resolve upward of 80 percent of cases in federal appeals courts nationwide."

 

While many praised the decision, Nancy Soonpass of Legal Writing Prof Blog noted this concern:

 

"[F]ederal judges are concerned that they will now have to spend additional time polishing these opinions if they can be used as precedent and that such an expenditure of time will increase court backlogs."

 

Commenting from north of the border, Canadian legal researcher Elizabeth Ellis observed that the decision will add to the mountains of materials lawyers already have to sift through:

 

"Twenty five years ago, I recall spending most of my time 'researching' because the finding tools were not that helpful. .. Today, I think the 'research' time has been shortened -- but the analysis time lengthened because there is so much more material to consider and the material is often unorganized and confusing."

 

That adds up to higher legal bills for clients, she says.

 

To my mind, this is the right decision. You can judge for yourself. And feel welcome to publish your judgment as a comment here.

 

The text of the new Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure is here. The court's order adopting the rule is here. For a "compendium of information" about nonpublication of judicial opinions, see NonPublication.com.

 

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on April 13, 2006 at 06:28 AM | Permalink

 

Sponsor Spotlight

 

The Future of Silicosis Suits

Will a federal judge's scathing order, tort-overhaul legislation and a congressional investigation mean the end of silicosis litigation? At 10 a.m. (CDT) April 18, go to www.texaslawyer.com and click on "The Future of Silicosis Suits" to join an online discussion with plaintiffs lawyer Brent W. Coon and defense counsel Steve L. Russell, who have extensive experience litigating silicosis cases.

 

 

A REASON FOR LAWYERS TO PODCAST THEIR ORAL ARGUMENTS?

An interesting post from Rees Morrison talks about clients who want to hear recordings of lawyers in action before deciding which lawyer to hire as a trial lawyer.

It does make sense. If you are hiring a lawyer for his or her advocacy skills, wouldn't you ideally like to hear (or see) some examples of the lawyer in action? Event planners routinely asks for samples from prospective speakers.

Might a podcast be a way to create that kind of "sample of work" for prospective clients?

posted by Dennis M. Kennedy

 

WHY DON'T LAW FIRMS INNOVATE?
There's a post by Ron Friedmann at Prism Legal on the lack of innovation in U.S. law firms.   Ron links to this post by David Maister that offers some explanation about why lawyers themselves deter change:

"In a room full of lawyers, any idea, no matter how brilliant, will be instantly attacked . most ideas, no matter who initiates them, will be destroyed, dismissed, or postponed for future examination . law firms have a remarkable propensity for half measure, launching poorly specified programs with minimal chance of success ..

"Lawyers also have a strange view of the concept of risk. In any other business, an idea that was likely to work much of the time would be eagerly explored. [But lawyers will look for a hypothetical where the idea will fail.] There is no greater condemnation in legal discourse than to describe something as risky."

Doesn't sound as if there's much hope.

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on April 9, 2006 at 05:40 PM | Permalink

TRIALS ONLINE?
Future Lawyer has this post on the possibility of trials by blog in Korea.  According to the article:

"The Seoul Administration Court recently designated one of its court units, which rules on labor-management relations and industrial accidents, to develop a prototype model for Internet-based trial models by the end of this month.

Although the court has not yet decided on a detailed framework, it plans to allow the parties in lawsuits to submit their list of evidence, legal documents and other data on Weblogs or Internet message boards to be operated by the court. The court decisions will also be announced online.

The court also plans to allow people to buy court documents and other requirements in preparing for their lawsuits through the Internet by credit card or mobile-phone payments. "

Future Lawyer says that he'd love to be able to try cases by blog.  That's probably one development that would get more lawyers blogging, for sure.

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on April 9, 2006 at 05:36 PM | Permalink

 

WHAT TO DO WHEN YOUR SPEAKING TIME HAS BEEN REDUCED

One time a partner at a BigLaw firm where I was in charge of the marketing department said it would be fine for me to talk to the corporate associates about marketing over lunch.  However, he said my talk was to be no longer than 30 minutes.  I’m sure he was concerned about lost billable hours.  Panic?  Yeah!  Normally, my “gee-you-need-to-get-excited-about-and-start-thinking-in-terms-of-
marketing-for-the-benefit-of-your-long-term-survival-etc.” speech takes 1.5 to 2 hours. (Gosh, why do these nightmare memories keep coming back to me when I am no longer in-house?  But I digress.)

So, what did I do?  I cut my speech to 30 minutes. Duh!  Was it as effective?  Heck no, but at least I got to plant the legal marketing seed…..I think.  Tom Antion on his Great Public Speaking  blog has a post about saying it in fewer works.  I wish I had the benefit of Tom’s advice back then.  He suggests the following to compress your talk without losing impact:

• Don’t apologize for having less time (apologetic beginnings are always a loser),
• Begin with an attention getter,
• Tell them that in the next X minutes, what you will accomplish (and how it will benefit them),
• Give visual examples of your points, and
• Divide your speech into three parts – “present a problem, a payoff, and your point of view” (including the No. 1 thing they should take away from your speech).

If you get into the situation where your scheduled speech has been shortened (for whatever reason), have a back up plan that cover the points above.  Your talk may just be more memorable for your saying it in fewer words.

 

A TAXONOMY OF LEGAL BLOGS

I. General Blogs

Advice for Lawyers and Law Firms

General Legal Blogs

General Blogs – Law and Culture, Economics, Politics, etc.

    

II. Blogs Categorized by Legal Specialty

Specialty Blogs

    

III. Blogs Categorized by Law or Legal Event

Case Blogs

Statute Blogs

Trial Blogs

    

IV. Blogs Categorized by Jurisdictional Scope

State Blogs

Federal Circuit Blogs 

U.S. Supreme Court Blogs

    

V. Blogs Categorized by Author/Publisher

Anonymous Blogs

Association Blogs

Blogs by Judges

Book Supplement Blogs

Class and Student Group Blogs

Institute Blogs

Law Firm Blogs – Listed by Blog

Law Firm Blogs – Listed by Firm

Law Journal Blogs

Law Library and Librarian Blogs

Law Professor Blogs

Lawyer Webjournals

Newspaper Blogs 

    

VI. Blogs Categorized by Number of Contributors

Group Blogs

    

VII. Miscellaneous Blogs Categorized by Topic

Blogs about Judges

Event Blogs

Fictional Blogs

Humor Blogs

    

VIII. Collections of Legal Blogs

Blog Post Collections

Legal Blog Collections

Legal Blog Networks

    

Note: Readers may leave comments, criticisms and suggestions about this taxonomy at the reader feedback page.

    

Update: A Spanish translation of this page is also available.

 

LAWYER ADVERTISING OPINION #A-0l01

ELECTRONIC MEDIA ADVERTISING: Actor Portraying Attorney

Disciplinary Rule 2-l0l(A) permits a lawyer to use or participate in the use of public communication, i.e., advertising, provided that such communication does not contain a false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement or claim. The Rule articulates several examples of communications which would be violative of the prohibition, including an advertisement which contains a portrayal of a client by a non-client without a disclosure that the depiction is a dramatization. DR 2-l0l(A)(5)

The Standing Committee on Lawyer Advertising and Solicitation [Committee] has considered the issue of whether or not a television advertisement is misleading when a lawyer or law firm uses an actor to portray an attorney associated with the law firm without disclosing that fact in the advertisement.

The Committee has viewed numerous advertisements in which, either by direct statement or by implication, it appears that a person is an attorney associated with the advertised law firm, even though that person is not, in fact, an employee or member of the law firm. In particular, the Committee has noted that, when speaking, actors frequently include first person references to themselves as lawyers or as members of the law firm being advertised. The Committee is of the opinion that failing to disclose that the actor is not truly an employee or member of the law firm, when the language used implies otherwise, is misleading or deceptive.

For this reason, the Committee concludes that, in order to avoid being deceptive and violative of DR 2-l0l(A), such an advertisement either must clearly indicate that the person depicted as an attorney associated with the advertised firm is not, or must avoid giving the impression, either directly or indirectly, that the portrayed person is, in fact, an attorney at the firm.

This opinion is advisory only and not binding on any court or tribunal.

Opinion of VSB Standing Committee on

Lawyer Advertising and Solicitation

April 28, l993

 

HIGHLIGHTS FROM RECENT POSTS

	Turnover continues in Office of Bar Counsel
	"...There are presently seven attorney positions in Kentucky's Office of Bar Counsel. Only two individuals have been members of that team for more than three years, and only three have been part of the team for more than two years..."

 

	Making sense of metadata: a mega-list of links for lawyers
	"...I thought I would take a moment to pass along my own "working list" of links to on-line resources about metadata..."

 

	Oklahoma Bar puts solo practice resources online
	"...[T]he Oklahoma Bar Association [has] put up a new page on its web site called 'Starting a Law Practice - A Web Directory.' It's an excellent collection of links for solo practitioners...."

 

	Nevada ethics committee approves outsourcing of client data management
	"... The State Bar of Nevada has issued a formal ethics opinion holding that it is ethically permissible for a law firm to store electronic client records on a remote server under the control of a third party, without obtaining......"

 

	Kansas lawyer disciplined for 'rounding up' time entries
	"...Earlier this month the Supreme Court of Kansas held that a lawyer was guilty of professional misconduct when he rounded up his time entries on a client's matter, even though the lawyer claimed that he had rounded up by no......"

 

	Arkansas Bar rejects malpractice insurance disclosure rule
	"... On January 21 the Arkansas Bar Association rejected a proposed rule which would have required members of the Arkansas Bar to certify whether they carry professional liability insurance. The proposal had been drafted by the Bar's Professionalism Task Force......"

 

	Colorado holds that Consumer Protection Act applies to lawyer advertising
	"...Today’s e-mail brings me the most recent edition of “Alert from Lawyers for the Profession”, an e-mail newsletter published by the law firm of Hinshaw Culbertson. This issue calls attention to the recent decision in Crowe v. Tull, 126 P.3d......"

 

	Disciplinary lawyers discuss common concerns at mid-year meetings in Chicago
	"...Last week the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers (APRL) and the National Organization of Bar Counsel (NOBC) held their respective mid-year meetings in Chicago, along with other affiliate organizations of the ABA. I attended the APRL meeting, which (as usual)......"

 

	A few comments concerning case citations, competence and computers
	"...Recently I received a service copy of a brief from an attorney who was representing a member of the Bar in a show-cause hearing. I turned my attention to it immediately because I was working on a similar brief for......"

 

	How to find (and how not to find) Kentucky disciplinary decisions on-line
	"...Yesterday I was surprised to discover that the Kentucky Bar Association has not been keeping its on-line database of Kentucky disciplinary decisions current and up-to-date. In fact, it appears that the KBA has not added any disciplinary decisions to the......"