Badway discusses the crises of several big companies, as well as the credit card companies and international recessions. In addition, subtle issues have shaken the market, such as IFRS. Lastly, there is the mistaken belief that our markets can be perfect and need little regulation.

We hope you check out Mr. Badway's course, entitled "Transparency at the SEC: A Response to the Current Financial Crisis "

Follow Lawline.com On Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/lawline

Hardinger & Tanenholz has recently fielded questions from several contract attorney candidates who are not admitted to the DC Bar regarding their eligibility to perform document review work in DC. Specifically, there seems to be genuine confusion about whether it is necessary to be admitted to the DC Bar, or whether admission to another state is sufficient.

The answer is, in general, contract attorneys performing document review must be admitted to the DC Bar.

The unauthorized practice of law is governed by District of Columbia Court of Appeals (“COA”) Rule 49, and we encourage all attorneys seeking to work in the District to read it. In 2005, the COA’s Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law (“UPL”) issued an opinion stating that Rule 49 does, in fact, apply to contract lawyers working within the District (see http://tiny.cc/OP_16_05). The Opinion held that, in general, all contract attorneys performing document review must be admitted to the DC Bar.

Specifically, the Committee opined that even if a contract lawyer is performing work that is similar to or overlapping with work performed by paralegals, such as first level document review, the attorney is engaging in the practice of law “if the person is being held out, and billed out, as a lawyer . . .” (16-05 at 5).

So, what to do if you are a contact attorney not admitted to the DC Bar, but you want to work in DC? Opinion 16-05 urges all contract attorneys who are engaging in the practice of law to seek admission. It warns, “Failure [to apply for admission] may jeopardize the lawyer’s ability to continue to practice law in the District on a contract or other basis. Failure to do so also places the lawyer in jeopardy of discipline in jurisdictions where the lawyer is admitted . . .” (16-05 at 7).

If you are not admitted to the D.C. bar, there is nothing keeping you from working as a paralegal or law clerk, even if you are admitted to practice law in another jurisdiction. Simply make your bar status very clear to anyone with whom you have professional contact, especially your employment agency and the legal service provider who will be supervising your work. You must never hold yourself out as an attorney in DC if you are not a member of the DC Bar, even if you are fully-licensed in another jurisdiction. (See Rule 49). Remind your employer that you should not be held-out or billed out as an attorney.

Finally, we encourage all contract attorneys to read the ethical rules and relevant UPL Committee decisions (http://tiny.cc/UPLWebsite) and take full responsibility for their own professional conduct. Attorneys should not risk their bar standing by relying on the representations of employment agencies and law firms that may or may not be fully aware of the applicable ethical rules.

This blog was written by Julia Hardinger, co-founder of Hardinger & Tanenholz LLP, a unique Discovery Counsel law firm that specializes in all aspects of discovery, including the end-to-end management of large-scale document reviews. This blog is the personal opinion of the author and not intended as legal advice.

Lawline.com has been receiving great feedback on our Legal Tips of the Day (via YouTube) initative.  We've been working very hard to facilitate the flow of information and make it accessible to those that seek it.

We wanted to remind everyone that you can subscribe to Lawline.com's Channel on YouTube.  You will be notified daily on your YouTube account of the latest clips that we have posted. 

Simply go to http://www.youtube.com/lawlinecle and hit "Subscribe."

In addition to the Legal Tips from our CLE courses, we have some other fun videos to share with you.  We appreciate all feedback, so if you have any comments or questions, don't hesitate to contact us.

In today's Lawline.com Video Clip of the Day, faculty member Scott Colesanti talks about the SEC and short sales.  In short-sales, an investor who believes their stock will fall and rise within a three day period, sells their stock at a high price, and leave it hanging within the three day period so that way they can buy it back at a lower price.  Public company officials are not permitted to sell their own stock.  In July of 2009, the SEC passed Rule 204 which tightened security measures around short-selling. 

Watch the clip for more.

The clip is from Colesanti's course,  The Securities & Exchange Commission: History & Status

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) implemented rules yesterday in an attempt to alleviate “abusive short sales” (also commonly referred to as “naked” short selling) and to provide more information to the public concerning these transactions.
Rule 204T, once temporary, is now permanent as Rule 204: Amendments to Regulation SHO. 

The rule will require broker-dealers to immediately buy or borrow securities to deliver on a short-sale.   Before, the investor was able to sell the shares short, without ever actually buying them.  The temporary rule was tested last year and has shown a 57% decrease in naked-short selling.

Attorney and Professor, J. Scott Colesanti, teaches one of Lawline.com’s newest courses, “The Securities and Exchange Commission: History & Status.”  The course  offers a detailed and comprehensive history of the SEC, starting with its inception in 1934 through the Securities Exchange Act, and continuing onward through the Joseph Kennedy era and the adoption of the No Action Letter Protocol.

Mr. Colesanti also discusses the SEC’s role in the economic crisis.  He talks about the temporary Rule 204T (before it was made permanent) and its effects, as well as many other recent developments.  

Check back later today for Lawline.com’s Legal Tip of the Day featuring Colesanti’s course.

To read the press release from the SEC click here.

In today's Lawline.com tip of the day, attorney Gina Rubel describes issues surrounding publicity, the media, and litigation. She uses personal anecdotes and general tips in order to explain best practices. She advises a conservative approach to trial publicity.

Watch the clip for more information.

The clip is from the course Social Media For Lawyers: Facebook, Linked In, Twitter and More!

This week we are kicking the friday five to the curb.  But don't fret.....we have something else in store.

Recently, we were announced as a finalist for the Customer Service category of the  New York Enterprise Report Small Business Awards of 2009.  In celebration of this achievement we decided to amp our normal Friday Five to a Friday Ten.  Customer service is our passion.  Here are the top ten things you may or may not have known about Customer Service at Lawline.com.

1)    Customer support messages (through phone and e-mail) are checked and answered regularly by the friendly Lawline.com team during weeknights and weekends.

2)    Support e-mails are answered on average within fifteen minutes of submission on weekdays.

3)    In the past month three of our customers loved us so much that they joined our faculty! (Click here to find out more about becoming a faculty member.)

4)    We do our best to get to know every customer we speak to on a personal level.  It's important you know that you can rely on us in any situation, especially when those deadlines are approaching.

5)    Not a phone person?   Don’t worry about it! If you need customer support, you can also access us via LivePerson, an live online chat system where you can talk to someone on the Lawline.com support team instantly.  Don’t worry, we all type fast.

6)    Our customer service staff is awesome.  We promise you.  (Just give us a call and find out!)

7)    We hear you. We review course comments and recommendations on a regular basis.  If customers have a complaint, we address it.  When a customer makes a recommendation, we add it to a list and analyze and consider these recommendations.

8)    We follow up.  Seriously…we can’t sleep unless we know your issue was resolved.

9)    You won’t have to tell us again!  If you called or e-mailed us before about an issue, we already have it recorded.  The next time you need to ask us a question, the team member will know your technical problem before you even dial the number (okay, not quite, but we’re getting there).

10)     Best of all…our product is so seamless that chances are that you will never have to talk to us.  But you know….we are here if you need us.
 
If you have any comments or suggestions don't hesitate to contact us at support@lawline.com or 1-800-LAWLINE.

In a clip from the course entitled Estate Planning: A Perspective on Family and Values by John S. Erwin and Thomas J Henske, there is a discussion on noticing the details of a situation, especially when the law is involved. Erwin and Henske give some examples as to what matters in the long run in regards to estate planning. Morals and values are discussed, and how important details are is highlighted.

This clip is from the course, entitled "Estate Planning: A Perspective on Family and Values"

NEW YORK, July 21, 2009 /PRNewswire/ -- Lawline.com, a national continuing legal education (CLE) provider, has emerged as a finalist in the New York Enterprise Small Business Awards of 2009 in the customer service category.

Finalists were selected on the basis of the techniques employed and achievements attained through their customer service practices.

"We are proud to recognize the achievements and accomplishments of Lawline.com," said Robert Levin, Editor-in-Chief & Publisher of The New York Enterprise Report. "The use of their unique best practice has given them a distinct competitive advantage and we congratulate them for their initiatives and innovative thinking." The success of  Lawline.com's customer service system has gained recognition for placing customer service at the center of its business strategy. Development and implementation of a service based approach, with a focus on the full experience of the customer, brings the company to the forefront of the continuing legal education community.

President David Schnurman explains how the passionate customer service effort began with a mission statement. "Our overall aspiration is to serve and educate our customers. In order to do this efficiently, we need superior practices that serve our users." With this in mind, Schnurman and his team developed a training program and an entire backend system that focuses chiefly on the customer.

This system backend helps to facilitate the execution of the customer service initiative. Director of Customer Relations, Christie LaBarca, illustrates, "Customers complete their CLE feeling educated by our courses, and appreciated by our company. We extend ourselves to our fullest ability in order to demonstrate our gratitude." Schnurman says that [the initiative has] really increased our loyalty in the past three years. The retention rate has jumped from 20% to over 40%." The New York Enterprise Report Small Business Awards Gala is scheduled for Wednesday, September 30, 2009 from 6 p.m.- 10 p.m. at the Metropolitan Pavilion in New York City, NY. The Best Practices winners will be announced at the gala for Customer Service as well as for Green Business, Human Resources & Leadership, Sales & Marketing and Technology.

Lawline.com has been providing high quality online continuing legal education courses since 1999. To visit the site, go to http://www.lawline.com.

         Today we shot a new CLE course on witness preparation that was pretty exciting. It's now in it's post-production phase, but here’s some interesting insight.

            Dr. Melissa Gomez is an expert in Psychology and Education. She’s using her background to teach lawyers what they need to get witnesses ready for trial. Are they giving off nonverbal cues like pausing, wiping their brow, fidgeting, swiveling in their chairs, or darting their eyes? If so, they’re probably distracting the jury. She suggests ways to put witnesses at ease so that they can do their job—listening to questions and answering them.
         
     She’s done some surprising research. It shows that 62% of jurors use their own conception of justice rather than the court’s jury instructions when considering a case.  It just goes to show that having the law on your side may not be enough. You have to understand how juries think and learn in order to win cases.

The new course should be up on Lawline.com in the next week or so, stay tuned!

Avoiding Legal Malpractice:

A Settlement is a Settlement is a Settlement
Actions have consequences, and in legal representation it may be malpractice,   Here is an example.  Say, for example that you have a robust asbestos practice, and in one of your many pending actions, you have one of many defendants file a motion for summary judgment.  You may not be sure whether there is any evidence against that particular defendant and sign a stipulation of discontinuance.  Is the stipulation binding, when a couple of months later you determine that there was evidence against that defendant?  Can you vacate?  The short answer is NO.  The longer answer is found in Hallock v. State of New York and in Charlop v A.O. Smith Water Prods.
2009 NY Slip Op 05911 ; Decided on July 21, 2009 ; Appellate Division, First Department

Forgery Claims in a Legal Malpractice Setting
Plaintiff loses a commercial law case, and sues his attorneys for legal malpractice.  During discovery, while preparing responses to interrogatories, he discovers, and then sues over what he claims is a forged affidavit said to be prepared by the attorneys and unsuccessfully used in his case.  Worse he says, the affidavit contained inaccurate information which was the cause of the loss, and hence a sort of double malpractice.  Defendants say, its too late, and what kind of a cause of action is this, anyway?

It's Today's Law, Not Yesterday's in Legal Malpractice
Attorney takes on case for client, and the job is to check whether client can erect a Walgreens in Brooklyn.  Attorney does research, and determines that the building and parking lot will be legal in that zoning.  Attorney, however, fails to check if any new laws have been passed by the NYC Council on zoning recently. Two weeks prior to the report, the Council had passed a law which made the parking lot illegal, and those changes were certified.

Legal Malpractice and the Failure to File a Letter
Legal representation in even simple matters can lead to unintended consequences.  As an Example H & J Restaurant v, A & J Grand Enterprises and Leigh, 2009 Slip OP 21544, authored by Justice Edmead, demonstrates how a simple ministerial mistake can end up with a potential $ 400,000 loss, with later judgment against the attorney.
It's a simple transaction, A buys a restaurant from B.  As might be expected, Seller exaggerates the sales, or hides underpayment of taxes.  Since these commercial transactions have taken place since time immemorial, there are safeguards and protections. 

Ever wonder what the law has to saw about birth control? This is one area where religious organizations and the legal system collide. Lawline.com faculty member Michael Grossman explains who comes out on top. He looks at landmark cases in order to illustrate some of the finer points of the law.

Join Lawline.com faculty member, Olivera Medenica, as she discusses legal issues surrounding domain names and trademarks. She explains how to avoid inconvenient court appearances, what makes for a good case, and other issues that arise in this common E-Commerce topic. She uses illustrative examples and real world facts to tell you what you need to know about domain names.

Lawline.com faculty member Benjamin Brafman, criminal defense attorney to the stars, explains how his process of developing a summation begins. He stresses that it is a work in progress that an attorney should begin considering the moment a client walks through the office doors. Essentially, a good summation should sell the attorney, the client, and the defense to a jury.

David Tanenholz is the co-founder of Hardinger & Tanenholz LLP, a unique Discovery Counsel law firm that specializes in all aspects of discovery, including the end-to-end management of large-scale document reviews. http://www.hardingerlaw.com/

There is no doubt that Legal Process Outsourcing (“LPO”) companies have become a major force in the document review services market. A recent article from the Washington Business Journal cited an ABA Journal finding that there are currently about 100 LPO companies operating in India alone, and projects the industry to approach 4 Billion in revenue by 2015. Thus, it is not surprising that there has been much written about the most effective ways to evaluate and/or utilize these companies. Typically, commentators have focused on issues relating to security, privacy, confidentiality, privilege, as well as the logistics of performing litigation document reviews in a foreign country. We present here 5 less obvious questions that companies should consider before taking the LPO plunge.

How much money am I really saving?

By most accounts, the number one benefit of hiring an LPO to review your documents is to save money. Estimates vary widely, and the LPO’s themselves have not been shy about promoting the magnitude of their cost savings. A quick Internet search reveals the following cost saving estimates from various sources: “30%-70%,” “roughly 50%,” and “60% - 90%.”

Where are they getting these numbers?

One answer may be that they are simply comparing the hourly billable rate of their local document reviewers to more expensive US counterparts. But to whom, exactly, are they comparing their reviewers? Its easy to calculate a 90% cost savings if you are comparing a $300/hr AMLAW 100 associate to a $30/hr reviewer in India. But is that the proper comparison? Fewer and fewer US reviews are being performed by the expensive big-firm associates. It is much more common— and a much fairer comparison— for reviews to be performed by some type of lower-cost staff or contract attorney. Even in big cities like NY and DC, contract attorneys can be hired from staffing agencies in the $50/hr range, slightly more if special languages or technical skills are needed. These same attorneys can often be hired directly in the $35/hr range, and (sadly) at even lower rates during this current recession. Craigslist postings even reveal offers for US contract attorneys for as low as $20/hr. Most foreign LPOs offer their reviewers in the $30 range. US paralegals can often be obtained from staffing agencies in the $25/hr range. Thus, the analysis of “how much cheaper?” depends greatly on the who you selection as the standard for comparison..

In addition to the question of “to whom” should LPO reviewers be compared, you should also raise questions about the “what” the LPO is claiming to be cheaper than. In comparing costs between potential US attorney reviews and potential LPO reviews, you must always compare apples to apples. Many LPOs are only willing or able to perform basic, first-pass review for potential relevancy or potential privilege. Often, the “potentially relevant” set then needs to be sent to domestic attorneys for final relevancy calls, issues coding, confidentiality review, or final privilege review. The costs of these extra levels of review must be factored in when comparing the LPO review to a comparable review by licensed US attorneys who may be performing those “second-level” tasks during their initial review. Because work sent back to the US for higher level review tends to be performed by associates rather than contract attorneys, even a small amount of documents being re-reviewed greatly increase the total cost of the LPO review.

Finally, when dealing with the issues of cost, clients should always demand transparency from their vendors and counsel. It is reasonable to ask how much of the reviewer rate is being allocated between salary, overhead, and profit. A December 2008 article from Asia Legal Business News noted that the annual salary for an Indian LPO attorney starts around $6,000 per year. That roughly translates into $3/hr. So, your comfort of being charged a lower review rate for an LPO reviewer might quickly dissipate if you realize that 80-90% your fee is comprising overhead and vendor profit. Once you are aware of an LPO’s markup (or domestic vendor/law firm’s), you are better able to negotiate the best price for those services.

Thus, when evaluating the “cost savings” claims by LPOs, you should always ask them to clarify to whom and what they are comparing their costs, and also insist that any assumptions or benchmarks they are using are transparent and appropriate.

How does discovery work in the host country?

One of the primary benefits promoted by LPOs is that their attorneys are well-educated and well-trained, and might even provide superior performance to US lawyers and paralegals. For example, in a March 2009 article of the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, outsourcing consultant Stephen Seckler noted that India has “a large pool of highly educated law school graduates who have studied common law and have a strong command of the English language.” Similarly, KPO Consultants comments on its website that “Attorneys in India are familiar with the law doctrines (sic) as Indian legal system is similar to the legal systems of the UK, US, and also Indian legal training is conducted solely in English.”

Having been to India and met with and trained LPO document review attorneys, it is undoubtedly true that they are well-educated, intelligent, and focused. What is unclear from the above-cited quotes is how well to they understand the US discovery process. Simply saying that they are familiar with “common-law” or “similar” legal systems is insufficient. Having a Common Law system just means that the rule of law is based on judicial interpretation of case law, rather than solely on legislative or executive action. While this is useful background in working on US cases, it does not provide any insight into whether foreign attorneys have any legal training or experience with the US system of voluntary discovery and large-scale litigation document reviews. So, before you merely accept the fact that LPO reviewers are “attorneys” and familiar with the US legal system, delve further into precisely the type of discovery and document reviews that occur in their home country. You may find that with respect to the important roles of relevancy, privilege, confidentiality, etc., you are starting at square one.

What are the licensing requirement in the host country?

In the US, licensed attorneys must (1) graduate from a law school accredited by the ABA, (2) pass a bar examination in the state in which they wish to practice, and (3) remain in good standing. If the LPOs are touting their reviewers as “attorneys,” you should find out what are the requirements needed to achieve that status in the host country. Is there a governing body, like the ABA, that accredits schools? Do standardized tests need to be passed to qualify as an attorney?

Moreover, many LPOs like to promote the fact that they only hire the best and brightest local attorneys. SDD Global’s website provides a typical claim: ”Work is done by top law graduates and experienced lawyers and/or former law professors from some of the best legal outsourcing companies, law firms and law schools in India.”

When claims like these are made, its best to ask them to explain the basis for their characterizations. What do they mean when they use terms like “top graduates” and “top tier schools” ? Is there some type of published ranking system? What separates the top schools or students from the lower ranked ones? Are there ongoing CLE requirement like many those of US jurisdictions?

If having foreign reviewers be “attorneys” is an important factor in your decision process, you should learn exactly what that term means for those reviewers.

How are the outsourced attorneys to be trained for your case?

Even when LPO reviewers have a solid legal background and outstanding English proficiency, there is still the issue of who is going to teach them the language of your company, case, or industry? There obviously needs to be some transfer of information from the client to the LPO. Before signing on, you should obtain a clear understanding of how the LPO plans on learning that information and instilling it in their reviewers. Is the client responsible for providing that training? Is outside litigation counsel going to do it? Is the LPO itself capable of providing that training? Do they have experience in drafting manuals and other reference aids? These are all issues that should be discussed in detail before a decision on using an LPO can properly be made.

Who is responsible for the supervision of the outsourced attorneys?

Similarly, who is responsible for supervising the document review? In August 2008, the ABA rendered Formal Opinion 09-451 that said the outsourcing trend was “salutary,” but that outsourcing attorneys have the burden of ensuring that “tasks are delegated to individuals who are competent to perform them, and then to oversee the execution of the project adequately and appropriately.” How are these duties to be discharged?

Are you performing the supervision? Is your litigation counsel? Is it permissible to “outsource” the supervision of the review to the LPO? For whomever is providing the supervision, what systems are being put in place to accomplish it competently? Will the outsourcing attorney have somebody on-site to manage the reviewer? How will information be exchanged between the review team and the litigation team/client? Should domestic attorneys be engaged specially to oversee the project? Addressing these types of issues will help ensure not only that the outsourcing attorney’s ethical obligations are met, but also that your case is being litigated efficiently and properly.

Conclusion

Engaging an LPO is a huge proposition, entailing potentially huge risks and rewards. Be sure to ask the right questions so that you can make a fully-informed, responsible decision as to how to staff your review project.

Take me out to the ball game . . . but please bring me back in one piece!  In one of the latest programs from Lawline.com, experienced attorneys Gil Fried and Carla Varriale offer a fact-packed run-down on the legal ins and outs of America’s most revered sports, the dangers they pose to those who revere them, and the forms of recourse, or lack thereof, that are available to injured spectators.  Dancing the fine line between acknowledging a sports facility’s need to protect its fans and the fans’ desires to get “up close and risky,” Gil and Carla leave no stone unturned in this nuanced and highly entertaining lecture. 

See the following for more details:

http://www.lawline.com/cle/course-details.php?i=811&course_type=video

In today’s Legal Tip of the Day, Richard Roth expands on his experiences in the Entertainment and Sports Litigation world, using his past cases as examples for each category. The clip below, entitled “When a Lawsuit is Necessary in Entertainment and Sport Litigation”, is a highlight on Roth’s explanation on why sometimes a lawsuit is inevitable in the entertainment and sports arena.

Richard Roth is a prominent lawyer in New York City. His practice areas include complex commercial litigation, securities litigation and arbitration, employment litigation, entertainment and sports litigation, real estate litigation, and more. An alumnus of Hofstra University School of Law, Roth has had several high profile cases, including a major sports litigation case with Peyton Manning, the quarterback of the Indianapolis Colts.

This clip can also be found on YouTube.com, in Lawline’s Legal Tip of the Day series. 

Attorney Jay Sullivan's work has appeared in the New York Times, the New York Law Journal, and Readers Digest. Now he brings his expertise to the YouTube community as a part of the Lawline.com Legal Tip of the Day series. Watch as he explains how to transform abstract ideas into a concrete, easy to follow presentation.

His advice originally appeared in a course at Lawline.com entitled "Building Dynamic Client Meetings" but can apply to anyone who wants to improve his or her communication skills. His ideas regarding using space strategically and organizing presentations logically can apply to the client meetings and beyond.

Watch the clip for more information.

In today's Lawline.com Video Clip of the Day, Sarah Jo Hamilton discusses the historical sources of ethics law, including the issues and solutions that ensued.  She briefly goes over the development of ethics law.

Watch the clip for information.

The clip is from Sarah Jo Hamilton's course (with Berry Temkin) "Ethical Considerations in Client Perjury".

            Here at Lawline.com, we love to use Twitter as a communication tool.  It allows us to access hundreds, and even thousands, of people at the click of a button.  For anyone who didn’t know, Twitter has a limit on how many users one can follow.  This limit is set at 2000.  Once you have 2000 followers, the capacity rises.  But for anyone who is trying to publicize themselves on the internet,  especially attorneys, this can present a hurdle.  Luckily we came up with five ways that attorneys can maintain effectiveness on Twitter despite following restrictions, and why the restrictions can be a good thing.

1)    Make Smarter Choices on Twitter
Twitter has a plethora of information and benefits.   It also has a lot of junk.  It’s very easy to get lost in this when choosing who you follow.  Since there are limits, you have to be more conscious when looking at profiles and deciding to follow someone.  Although you are losing a potential follower, you are more likely to follow someone that has information that pertains to you.

2)     Keep The  Information Concise
Following an enormous amount of people on Twitter means that your main twitter page won’t be the same for more than a minute.  The fewer amount of people that you follow, the more likely you are to see consistent information.

3)    Learn Who Your Twitter Friends Are
Similar to seeing consistent information, you are also more likely to see the same users post when you are on your Twitter homepage.  This maximizes the potential of establishing relationships with other Twitter users.   Relationships with other Twitter users are often the ultimate goal of the social media tool.

4)    Appearance and Brand Image
Since Twitter was established, the best known way to get followers was to follow others.  However the image of following more than you are following isn’t always positive.  A small amount is deemed to be okay, but if the number approaches the thousands, it can begin to look desperate.   The limit will help you maintain the way your brand is perceived.   So before you hit follow, take notice of your following status.

5)    Access to You
All of the previously mentioned benefits of the Twitter limit means that the same rules apply to you.  Those people who are following you also have to deal with limits.  This gives you a better opportunity to reach them.  A better opportunity to make your voice heard.  A better chance that you’re tweet won’t get lost in the crowd.

Click here to follow Lawline.com on Twitter.

Philip Kleiner discusses what to look out for when dealing with non-immigration visas, including what is a sign of fraud and what is legitimate in immigrant marriages.

Watch the clip for more information

The clip is from Phil Kleiner's Course "Overview of Non-Immigrant Laws and Temporary Visas" which can be accessed here.

The Texas Version of Privity in Legal Malpractice

One of the beautiful things about the US is that every state has its own law.  It was shocking to learn in Law School that events a few miles away, across a state border could be handled differently.  Sure, other countries, but Connecticut?

Here is a story  from Law.Com about how Texas handles executor-estate attorney legal malpractice cases.

"In a 5-2 decision, the Texas Supreme Court held on June 26 that the executor of an estate may sue a decedent's attorneys for alleged malpractice committed outside the realm of estate planning.
"We hold that the executor should not be prevented from bringing the decedent's survivable claims on behalf of the estate," Justice Harriet O'Neill wrote for the majority in Smith, et al. v. O'Donnell.

Criminal Law and Legal Malpractice Law Intersect
Criminal law and legal malpractice law seldom intersect.  One reason is an almost complete ban on criminal defendants suing their defense attorneys.  In order to sue, one must show "actual innocence" which is customarily demonstrated by reversal upon appeal or exoneration.  Since that is a rare occurrence, there is little vitality to criminal defense legal malpractice.

Here, the view is obverse, and a real estate broker [perhaps an investor ?] sues an attorney involved in the real estate transaction for legal malpractice.  The kicker is that the attorney has been arrested upon a felony complaint, and now awaits the action of the Grand Jury.
In  THE CORCORAN LAW GROUP, L.L.C. et ano., -against- JANE Y. POSNER, ESQ. ;09 Civ. 1861 (WHP)UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK;2009 we see that the Court grants a stay of legal malpractice proceedings to see what happens to the felony complaint. 

Not Plaintiff's Attorney, But Still Owes a Duty in Legal Malpractice
Privity of contract is an important element of legal malpractice.  For policy reasons [and to avoid infinite and endless litigation] courts enforce a rather strict requirement that one may sue their own attorney, but not the opponent's in legal malpractice. There are exceptions.

In LYDIAN PRIVATE BANK d/b/a VIRTUALBANK, -v- RICHARD A. LEFF, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK;2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48756
June 8, 2009, we see a well enunciated set of rules for the combination of breach of fiduciary duty and legal malpractice by Judge Laura Taylor Swain.
"
"An action for legal malpractice requires proof of three essential elements: (1) the negligence of the attorney; (2) that the negligence was the proximate cause of the loss sustained; and (3) proof of actual damages." Mendoza v. Schlossman, 87 A.D.2d 606, 606-7, 448 N.Y.S.2d 45 (2d Dep't 1982). In some cases, a lawyer may owe duties to a nonclient that are actionable in a legal malpractice claim if his client has a fiduciary relationship with the nonclient, to the extent that action necessary to prevent or rectify the [*9] breach of a fiduciary duty owed by the client to the nonclient falls within the scope of his representation. 4 In order to state a claim for negligence, a plaintiff must demonstrate "(1) a duty owed by the defendant to Plaintiff, (2) a breach thereof, and (3) injury proximately resulting there from." Solomon by Solomon v. City of New York, 66 N.Y.2d 1026, 1027, 489 N.E.2d 1294, 499 N.Y.S.2d 392 (N.Y. 1985).

Today in Lawline.com's Legal Tip of the Day, Ron Katter discusses the plaintiff's attorney's ethical obligation when reviewing the facts of the case with a witness that is going to go through a deposition. He also talks about actually going through the importance of the deposition with your clients.

Watch the clip for more information.

The clip is from Ron Katter's Course "Depositions: The Keystone of Litigation." Which can be accessed by going here.

In today's Lawline.com clip of the day, Lawline.com faculty member and image consultant Megan Kristel, talks about preparing your image for a public appearance. She particularly focuses on the importance for attorneys to ensure they are perceived as professionals. For High Definition (HD) television, Megan recommends that individuals work with make-up artists to ensure that they're satisfied with their appearance.

Watch the clip for more information.  

The clip is from the course "Understanding How Public Relations Can Improve Your Legal Practice" which can be accessed here.

           Here at Lawline.com, we find constant inspiration through our work environment. Whether we’re discussing the recent passing of the King of Pop, Michael Jackson, or laughing about the last Milestone dinner, there is always something to keep the mind at ease. We try to keep stress at bay, and as a result more work gets done. Below is a list of five common cultural aspects that we encounter every day, and attribute to the success of Lawline.com.

1.    Easy Communication

The technology world has certainly expanded, including in the area of social networking. By keeping up with the new and improved networking tools, communication and marketing reaches new heights. Here in our office, we utilize Facebook, YouTube, Bing, and Twitter. By utilizing all of these resources, it keeps the office young and expands our customer base. In addition, it adds a fun way to reach out to people.  Skype is a communication tool we use daily to keep in contact with each other.  It’s great for asking quick questions, or even just to send a funny joke. Humor in the office leads to our next must-have characteristic.

2.    Relaxed and Laid Back Attitudes

Given this is a Friday post, we hope you’re reading it in your jeans. The office is where people spend most of their time, so it should be somewhere that they can relax. While getting work done is the main goal of the office, stressing out should not be the end result. By providing a friendly atmosphere, employees are more inclined to get work done in a timely manner. Allowing for a communal staff lunch in the conference room is something we do constantly at Lawline.com. It brings everyone together to discuss work matters in a relaxed environment, or even just chat about the weekend to come.

3.    Ownership and Responsibility

Getting everyone involved and making sure they understand they have a say in the company promotes the feeling of ownership. By delegating responsibility and making the employees understand the company relies on their hard work brings a “we’re in this together” attitude to the office.

4.    Inspiration in the Work Force

By letting ideas flow and constantly being open to new ideas, Lawline.com is always updating and improving. A major resource we use is called the suggestion box, which is an online tool that all employees can see and give input on. The suggestion box is a quick and easy way for anyone to suggest any small idea that comes to mind, right as the imaginary light bulb turns on. In addition, during weekly staff meetings, new suggestions, issues and concerns are addressed and often implemented. A constant flow of new ideas keeps the work atmosphere running progressively.

5.    Absence of Micromanagement

At Lawline.com, we have our own custom built intranet that lists each employee’s tasks for the day. By highlighting each task in certain colors, everyone can see how far along anyone is with the task at hand. This is extremely helpful and prevents micromanagement. By allowing for freedom in the office, employees feel they are trusted and are a valuable part of the company.

       Our hope is that these suggestions can be implemented in your own office, or even better- already are! We have found that the atmosphere here at Lawline.com brings smiles to our employees’ faces while increasing productivity. In the spirit of inspiration in the work force, feel free to email us at support@lawline.com with any feedback or suggestions. We’d love to hear some new ideas!

 If you're interested in learning more about culture of the work place, you would probably find this interesting too.....http://www.zapposinsights.com/live/

In today's Legal Tip of the day,  productivity expert and Lawline.com faculty member,  Neen James outlines tips specifically targeted towards boosting attorney productivity. She gives clear, simple advice on everyday practices attorneys can use to make the most of their work day.

Her mantra "plan tomorrow today" captures the idea that lawyers can prepare for upcoming meetings, appointments, or projects by devoting ten minutes at the end of the previous workday for planning. This should be accompanied by fifteen minutes of planning at the beginning of every work day. This way lawyers can strategize about how best to allocate their time.

Watch the clip for more information.

The clip is from the course "Promotions and Productivity for Lawyers"