Lawyers serving on a board of directors may derive many benefits from such service, including honing one’s business skills, developing professional relationships, enjoying the prestige and recognition of board membership, and strengthening the lawyer’s ties with an existing or potential law firm client. Lawyers contemplating board service must weigh the potential benefits against the risks inherent in such appointments prior to acceptance and throughout the tenure of any board service. Ambiguity concerning the lawyer-director’s precise role, as well as inattention to conflicts of interest and other liability issues may lead to negative consequences for the company, the lawyer’s law firm, and the lawyer herself.

There is no rule or law that prohibits lawyers from simultaneously serving as legal counsel and board members for an organization. Comment 35 to ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct [“ABA MRPC”] Rule 1.7 cautions, however, that if “there is a material risk that the dual role will compromise the lawyer’s independence of professional judgment, the lawyer should not serve as a director or should cease to act as the corporation’s lawyer when conflicts of interest arise.” Moreover, if the lawyer contemplating board service determines that conflicts probably would arise frequently and be significant, the lawyer should either decline the offer to serve as a board member or decline to represent the company as legal counsel.

Read More…

As with every other aspect of our lives, technology continues to redefine how lawyers practice and how firms operate. In view of that basic premise, the pace of changing technology provides the opportunity for firms to regularly reassess their processes, operations, and systems. Routine system-wide assessments permit greater operational efficiency and productivity, improved client service, increased new client generation, and ultimately improved financial success. Moreover, a systematic reevaluation of law firm operations (which should typically occur at least once a year) is one tool out of many that firms have at their disposal to help minimize the risk of potential malpractice claims or claims of ethical impropriety. With pervasive and ever-evolving ethics rules, opinions, and legal malpractice precedents, this protocol becomes especially important.

This challenge creates a number of questions. The questions lawyers ask themselves should not be “Must I accept electronic payments?” or “Should my solo practice need an incident response plan?” Rather, those questions are better phrased as “How do I improve my practice?” Or “How do I more efficiently track and follow up on my accounts receivable to free up more time to devote to clients?” “How can I organize my documents to be more accessible?” “Drastically reduce mistakes or human-led errors?” Compile large amounts of data while seeing only what I need when I need it without missing a beat?” “How do I more securely communicate with my clients?” “Or keep my firm and clients protected against non-stop cyber risks and attacks?” And of course, “How do I ensure that I get paid, and faster, for my work?”

Read about the Lawyers Allied Vendors Program…

Introduction:

People often ask, “When is the right time to retire?” But like so many questions about important decisions, there is no “right” answer. To find a meaningful answer, the questions should be reframed as, “When is the right time for me to retire?” And the only person who knows the right answer to that question is you. The key is to ask yourself that question now and then revisit it from time to time throughout your practice. The earlier you begin to think about it, with an eye toward retirement someday in the future, the more likely you are to be ready for a smooth transition out of practice whenever the time comes.

Lawyers tend to work longer than the general workforce. While some lawyers retire in their 50s, others continue into their 80s and even older. According to the recent ABA report, “Profile of the Legal Profession 2021”, roughly 14% of lawyers are 65 or older, double the number of that age group in the general workforce (7%). The Covid-19 pandemic has caused about a third of the lawyers over the age of 62 to reconsider their retirement plans; of that group, about half decided to accelerate retirement (47%) and the remainder (53%) decided to postpone it.

Read More…

Are You Ready to Commit to Client Intake and Proper Client Selection?

Client intake should never be dismissed as an unimportant but necessary task when taking on a new client. Creating a thorough client intake process is essential in order to establish a strong foundation for an attorney-client relationship – whether the relationship lasts for weeks or years.

By investing the necessary time and effort at the outset, attorneys may save time, money and even help to avoid legal malpractice claims. When used appropriately, the client intake process may reveal a stark reality that a prospective client should not become a current client. View the full article from CNA to learn more…

Continue Reading…

The Remote-Ready Law Firm: Managing Long-Distance Relationships

Good lawyers have their best suit at the ready, but may just as often don slippers and sweatpants. Seventy-two percent of lawyers telecommute at least some of the time according to the American Bar Association’s latest Profile of the Legal Profession. As legal technology grows more accessible and digital natives become the dominant group in the American workforce, one should only expect this percentage to rise.

Co-working spaces, cloud computing and virtual receptionists have allowed some law firms to ditch their offices entirely. Most lawyers, however, seek a middle ground: a practice capable of functioning remotely when convenient or necessary, but still anchored to a physical office. The benefits of creating a remote-capable business are well worth the investment, enabling a firm to maximize productivity when traveling, attract top-level talent, and maintain functionality during a crisis.

Minimizing Paper

If the firm does not currently have a system for doing so, digitizing client files may be the most burdensome aspect of a remote-work upgrade. Even with a system already in place, ensuring that lawyers can work remotely may require more extensive or consistent document imaging practices. All physical documents that comprise a file should be scanned, saved and, unless the original must be preserved, shredded. Lawyers should prioritize active files, with an emphasis on streamlining current and prospective workflows before tackling the mountain of closed files in storage. Remember: the goal is to facilitate remote work, not to devise a one-hundred percent paperless office, which is seldom realistic.

Depending on the volume of documents and the composition of the practice, digitizing paper files may be accomplished by in-house staff. Firms may instead consider using a third-party imaging service, especially if they intend on digitizing decades of old boxes. In any event, whether independently or in consultation with an outside vendor, lawyers must ensure that electronic files are properly labeled, organized, legible, and retrievable, which requires careful planning and the right equipment. For more on this issue, see the CNA resource Creating a File Retention and Destruction Policy.

Server Decisions

Digitizing files will reduce the cost and aggravation associated with keeping a forest’s worth of paper in a back room or offsite storage facility, but even electronic files must be stored somewhere. The default option for law firms has long been on-premise servers, which require major upfront hardware and installation costs, but allow for complete control over the security and privacy of firm data. The value of that control, however, depends greatly upon the firm’s IT expertise, which generally requires an outside consultant, as well as the firm’s commitment to its own security protocols. As the practice grows or as hardware becomes outdated, on-premise servers will likely require additional investment from the firm.

The alternative to on-premise storage, of course, is cloud storage. Most lawyers, 58 percent according to the ABA’s most recent Legal

Technology Survey Report,2 now employ cloud-based services in their practice. Undeterred and probably partially motivated by the lack of direct control over data privacy and security, lawyers opting for a cloud-based solution outsource those responsibilities to a third-party vendor. The cloud provider guarantees the integrity and accessibility of firm data, protects it from outside intrusion, and shoulders hardware costs for a monthly or annual fee. Vendors dedicated to the legal industry often provide document storage and practice management software as an all-in-one, fully integrated service.

Between firm-owned, privately managed on-premise servers and rented space within public, multi-tenant cloud servers lies a third option: a private cloud. Like more familiar public cloud-storage solutions, private clouds outsource the responsibility of owning and maintaining a server to a third-party vendor. In contrast to a public cloud, however, firm data in a private cloud is stored on a dedicated, single-tenant server, separate from other customers’ data. In addition to greater control over how firm data is managed, this allows the firm to host its software, documents and email on one platform, but at the same time places the burden of security largely on the firm itself.

(Continue Reading…)

Best Practices for Law Firms During a Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to disrupt all aspects of everyday life. As the virus spreads throughout the United States and around the globe, the number of those infected will rise, as will the death rate. Governments have issued quarantines and shelter-in-place orders in an effort to combat the pandemic, and, as a result, several businesses, including law firms, have closed offices temporarily and instituted work from home measures for lawyers and support staff.

In this challenging environment with circumstances changing on a continuous basis, law firms must remember the fiduciary duties owed to clients and their ethical duties as defined by rules of professional conduct in the relevant jurisdiction. Law firms may limit their exposure to professional liability and other claims by identifying and responding to key issues that may arise during the crisis.

Client Communications

During these stressful times, clients may require more reassurance from their lawyers than usual, which may lead to an increased need for communication between lawyers and clients. In addition to promptly complying with reasonable requests for information, lawyers must keep clients reasonably informed about the status of their matters. If law firms have closed their physical law offices on a temporary basis, such information should be communicated to clients, including any updates contact information for the law firm. Law firms may be required to ensure that phone numbers and voicemail messages are routed to the appropriate law firm personnel working remotely. The same concern applies to regular and certified mail as well as packages sent to the law firm’s office.

Security in Remote Working Situations

Attorneys must be vigilant in maintaining the security and confidentiality of data/client files while telecommunicating. Working remotely presents certain cybersecurity risks such as accessing/sending information through unsecure WIFI networks, use of unsecure personal devices, phishing attacks, and many others. Recent media reports indicate a surge in cybercrimes against law firms as criminals attempt to exploit cyber security vulnerabilities with so many lawyers working remotely. It is important to follow firm security guidelines and policies, and review data breach response plans to ensure that each practice setting is prepared and able to respond quickly to any incident.

(Continue Reading…)

Phishing Attacks Use Bar Complaints and HIPAA Audits as Bait

Attorneys have access to sensitive information and large sums of money, and although they are experts in many areas, they are seldom on the cutting edge of new technology. It should come as no surprise, then, that a growing number of email scams are targeting attorneys and other similar professionals. By mirroring an email from a state bar, legal organization, disciplinary board or government entity, these scams take a narrower focus that scatter-shot emails offering a free cruise or a one-in-a-lifetime deal with a Nigerian prince.

This brand of phishing uses a victim’s trust (or sometimes fear) of an institution as a way of influencing that person to download a malicious attachment, click on a malicious link, or transmit sensitive information to a third party. While some phishing emails remain easy to detect, others have begun displaying an incredible attention to detail. “Spoofing”, a phishing tactic that involves the technical manipulation of the email header or IP address so that it appears to have been sent from a trusted source, is especially difficult to counteract.

The two examples below illustrate the targeted nature of newer phishing attacks and the level of sophistication they employ, but also present an opportunity to educate attorneys on what they can do to avoid becoming a victim.

Bar Complaint Scam:

Officials from state bars across the country continue to warn of fraudulent emails purportedly conveying notice of a disciplinary complaint. Attorneys in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia and Nevada reports receiving the phony emails as early as last summer, but emails have continued to surface through 2017. A variant of the scam appeared in Florida alleging a past due invoice rather than a bar complaint, but the details have remained more or less the same.

Like most phishing attempts, the email appears to have originated from a trusted source, whether it is the state bar, bar association, or even the attorney general’s office. It includes an urgent call to action, typically a response within ten days, and prompts the recipient to download an attachment or follow a link to view the relevant complaint or invoice. Following these instructions, you may have guessed, triggers the introduction of malware onto your system.

This malware may directly extract data from your network, but with the growing frequency devices are instead infected with ransomware which encrypts the recipient’s hard drive. Only upon paying a fee, subject to strict, time-sensitive instructions, will the device by decrypted and restored. Failing to comply leaves your data unusable and likely compromised.

(Continue Reading…)