-
Recent Posts
- ABA Formal Opinion 511 provides guidance regarding providing information about client matters on a listserv
- Massachusetts lawyer reprimanded after accidentally copying opposing counsel email to lawyer with plan to avoid judge’s call
- Georgia Supreme Court disbars lawyer who missed statutory filing deadline and created a false email and text to cover it up
- Florida Middle District Federal Judge suspends Florida lawyer for filing false cases created by artificial intelligence
- Florida Bar files Petition with Florida Supreme Court with rule revisions removing the word “zealous” and its derivatives from Florida Bar Rules
Recent Comments
Archives
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
Categories
- 2013 comprehensive Florida advertising rule revisions
- 2017 New Jersey Joint Ethics Opinion AVVO referral service violates Bar Rules
- 2018 Florida lawyer referral rule revisions matching services
- 2018 Florida lawyer referral rules qualifying providers
- 2018 New Jersey Supreme Court order denying review of 2017 AVVO joint ethics opinion
- 2018 proposed Florida RJA 2.505 revisions- stand-in covering substitute counsel
- 2018 revised Bar Rule- Florida Lawyer use of expert and specialist
- 2018 Utah rules permit non-lawyer limited practice
- 2019 California non-lawyer practice and ownership of law firms proposals
- 2020 Arizona Supreme Court permits non-lawyer fee sharing and ownership of law firms
- 2020 Utah pilot program permitting non-lawyer practice and law firm ownership
- 2022 APRL report to ABA recommending Model Rule revisions to permit lawyers to practice in all states
- 2023 Florida Supreme Court opinion professionalism and CLE
- 4-5.8 lawyers leaving law firms
- ABA advisory opinion 495 lawyers practicing remotely
- ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 481- lawyer required to advise current clients of material error
- ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 484- third party financing of attorneys fees
- ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 493 Model Rule 8.4(g) prohibiting harassment and discrimination based upon, inter alia, race, sex, religion, national origin, and sexual orientation
- ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 501 states that lawyers have an obligation to ensure that employees do not solicit clients
- ABA Formal Opinion 483- lawyer obligations before and after cyber hack or breach
- ABA Formal Opinion 487 division of fees in contingency matters when lawyer is replaced
- ABA Formal Opinion 487 division of fees in contingent matters when lawyer is replaced
- ABA Formal Opinion 492- obligations regarding prospective clients
- ABA Formal Opinion 496 responding to online complaints and criticism
- ABA Formal Opinion 496 responding to online complkaints and criticism
- ABA Formal Opinion 497 provides guidance on how lawyers should address materially adverse interests
- ABA Formal Opinion 498 provides guidance on lawyer compliance with ethics rules in a virtual practice
- ABA formal opinion 499 – lawyer ownership of Alternative Business Structures (ABE) nonlawyer owned law firms
- ABA Formal Opinion 502 – pro se lawyers contact with represented persons prohibited
- ABA Formal Opinion 504 provides guidance to lawyers who wish to practice law in more than one jurisdiction
- ABA Formal Opinion 506 – lawyer supervision of non-lawyers
- ABA Formal Opinion 508 – preparation of witnesses
- ABA Formal Opinion 511 provides guidance regarding providing information about client matters on a listserv
- ABA formal opinion referral fees and conflict of interest
- ABA formal opinion securing confidential information sent over internet
- ABA Formal Opinion- use of former client confidentiality information generally known exception
- ABA Informal Opinion 1467- filing lawsuit when client is missing
- ABA Model Rules
- ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct
- ABA opinion 480- confidentiality and lawyer blogs and other public commentary
- ABA Opinion 488- judge recusal disqualification personal relationships
- ABA opinion 491- lawyer's obligation to avoid counseling or assisting client in crime or fraud
- ABA Opinion 93-379 guidelines for costs
- ABA opinion lawyer's duties re receipt of subpoena for confidential documents information
- ABA opinion solicitation
- ABA opinions
- ABA Resolution 105 non-lawyer ownership of law firms
- ABA Resolutions
- ABA revised advertising rules
- ABA Rule 8.3 reporting professional misconduct
- Advanced Registered Paralegal Program
- AI hallucinations
- Arizona limited legal advice pilot program 2020-2021
- Attorney discipline
- Attorney disobey order of tribunal
- Attorney disqualification
- Attorney disruptive conduct in litigation
- Attorney ethics
- Attorney Ethics sharing fees
- Attorney sanctions for failure to cite controlling authority
- attorney-client privilege
- Attorney/client confidentiality
- Attorney/client privilege
- AVVO – BOG opinion that AVVO Advisors is a lawyer referral service
- AVVO Legal Advisor- termination of program/service
- Bar admission
- Bar antitrust
- Bar rule prohibiting Google Ad words misdirection to another lawyer
- Bar Rules written fee agreements
- Board of Governors opinion approving charge of cost of litigation cost protection insurance to client
- California adopts ABA Model Rules
- California Bar Rules
- California Bar Rules 2018
- California ethics opinion using improper document
- California ethics opinion using improperly obtained document
- California law requires split of lawyer regulation and trade association activities
- California lawyer sentenced to prison for wire fraud for lying to clients about winning cases and forging court document judges' signatures
- California non-lawyer ownership of law firms and practice
- Chapter 23, Registered Online Services
- client false online statement libel
- client libel
- Client with disability
- Colorado licensing of limited legal services
- Communication with client
- communication with potential clients
- competence
- Confidential Information
- Confidentiality
- Confidentiality and lawyer response to internet complaint criticism
- conflict of interest "hot potato" doctrine
- Conflict of interest criminal cases
- Conflict of interest current clients
- conflict of interest- former clients
- Contingency fees – lawyer retaining another lawyer or entity to resolve liens
- corsmeier
- Criminal misconduct murder for hire
- Daparting lawyer and law firm ethical responsibilities
- deceit
- diligence
- dishonesty
- Disqualification
- e-mail with disparaging comments regarding spouse and opposing counsel
- email scams
- ethics and lawyer blogs confidentiality
- Ethics and lawyer withdrawal
- Ethics and nonlawyer compensation
- ethics and remote practice
- ethics and UPL out of state lawyers practicing remotely
- ethics of text messaging and confidentiality
- Ethics Opinion AVVO Advisor
- Ethics opinion lawyer blogging
- Ethics opinion lawyers accepting bitcoin digital virtual currency
- Ethics opinion- protecting client confidentiality in border search
- Ethics opinion- protecting client confidentiality in search of digital device
- Ethics Opinions
- Ethics Opinions waivers of ineffective assistance and prosecutorial misconduct
- Ethics Opinions waivers of prosecutotial misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel
- ethics related to electronic hearings and proceedings
- Excessive fee
- excessive fees
- federal court sanctions
- financial assistance to client
- Florida Advanced Registered Paralegal program- 2020
- Florida advertising "Ambulances Chase Us"
- Florida Bar
- Florida Bar CLE
- Florida Bar CLE faculty diversity quotas
- Florida Bar discipline
- Florida Bar email scams
- Florida Bar ethics
- Florida Bar ethics opinion 14-1- lawyer ethics and client social media pages
- Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 18-1- lawyer referral service qualifying provider payment
- Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 20-1 responding to online complaints and criticism
- Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 72-36- filing lawsuit when client is missing
- Florida Bar ethics opinion lawyer response to negative online review complaint and confidentiality
- Florida Bar ethics opinion qualifying provider – lawyer fees
- Florida Bar non-lawyer Registered Online Service Provider Program
- Florida Bar Opinion 16-1 financial assistance to client
- Florida Bar Opinion 18-1 payment to qualifying providers
- Florida Bar proposed Advertising Advisory Opinion
- Florida Bar proposed ethics advisory opinion lawyer electronic signatures
- Florida Bar proposed ethics opinion 17-2- qualifying provider- lawyer fees
- Florida Bar Registered Online Service Provider Program
- Florida Bar request for Florida Supreme Court TIKD UPL review
- Florida Bar Rule 3-5.2 lawyer felony criminal arrest emergency suspension
- Florida Bar Rule 3-7.18 judicial referrals
- Florida Bar Rule 4-1.16 revealing confidential information responding to former client criminal allegations
- Florida Bar rule 4-1.5 resolution of extraordinary liens in contingency cases
- Florida Bar rule 4-1.6 amendment responding to former client criminal allegations
- Florida Bar rule 4-1.8(c) amended rule all gifts from clients prohibited
- Florida Bar rule 4-1.8(e) financial assistance to client
- Florida Bar Rule 4-3.1 frivolous filings
- Florida Bar Rule 4-3.3
- Florida Bar Rule 4-3.4(b) payments and inducements to fact witnesses
- Florida Bar Rule 4-5.8 lawyers leaving law firms
- Florida Bar Rule 4-7.18 misleading statements in search engine Google AdWords
- Florida Bar Rule 4-7.18 proposed comment communication with potential clients
- Florida Bar Rule 4-8.4(c) dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation
- Florida Bar Rule 8.4(d) conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice
- Florida Bar rule permitting lawyer to charge client with credit card fees
- Florida Bar Rule prohibiting misleading law firm information in advertisementss
- Florida Bar rule prohibiting misleading law firm information in all advertisements
- Florida Bar Rules
- Florida Bar Rules Chapter 20 registered paralegal
- Florida Bar Rules contingent fee agreements
- Florida Bar Rules diversion
- Florida Bar rules qualifying providers
- Florida Bar Rules Reporting Misconduct
- Florida Bar Rules trust account funds
- Florida Bar Rules Trust Accounts
- Florida Bar rules zealous
- Florida Bar TIKD antitrust lawsuit
- Florida Bar UPL
- Florida Bar v TIKD oral argument
- Florida Bar v. TIKD referee report
- Florida Bar- proposed rule would make finding of frivolous filing "conclusive determination" of Bar rule violation
- Florida Code for Reolving Professionalsim Complaints
- Florida Judge discipline
- Florida Judge ethics
- Florida Judicial Canons
- Florida lawyer 2017 mandatory technology CLE requirements and increase in hours and
- Florida lawyer advertising
- Florida lawyer advertising "411-PAIN"
- Florida lawyer advertising expert and specialist 2019 rule 4-7.14
- Florida lawyer advertising past results
- Florida Lawyer CLE
- Florida lawyer cloud computing
- Florida Lawyer comprehensive advertising rule revisions
- Florida lawyer covering counsel proposed rules
- Florida lawyer discipline- referee requires Bar to pay accused lawyer costs
- Florida lawyer mandatory technology competence CLE
- Florida Lawyer Professionalsim
- Florida Lawyer Referral Services
- Florida lawyer suspended for 91 days for xting and coaching client during a deposition and making misrepresentations regarding the texts
- Florida lawyer trust accounts
- Florida limited practice by paralegals
- Florida nonlawyer ownership of law firms proposed opinion 23-1
- Florida Proposed Advisory Opinion FAO #2019-4
- Florida proposed ethics advisory opinion- lawyer referral fees and lawyer matching services
- Florida proposed Ethics Opinion charging clients interest on advanced costs
- Florida Rules of Judicial Administration RJA
- Florida solicitation rule 4-7.18 social media class action
- Florida Statutes lawyer fiduciary privilege
- Florida Supreme Court
- Florida Supreme Court holds that an insurer may pursue malpractice claims against lawyer retained to defend the insured
- Florida Supreme Court lawyer fiduciary privilege
- Florida Supreme Court opinion new comment to Rule 4-5.5 re lawyers practicing remotely in Florida
- Florida Supreme Court opinion prohibiting diversity quotas in CLE faculties
- Florida Supreme Court opinion prohibiting racial quotas in CLE faculties
- Florida Supreme Court opinion TIKD UPL
- Florida Supreme Court opinion- Judge Facebook and social media friendship with lawyer not per se prohibited
- Florida Supreme Court opinions
- Florida Supreme Court rejection of Bar proposed rule amendment on resolution of extraordinary liens in contingency matters
- Florida Supreme Court remote practice UPL
- Florida Supreme Court Rule 4-3.4(b) payments and inducements to fact witnesses
- Florida unlicensed practice of law
- Florida unlicensed practice of law TIKD
- Florida UPL opinion out of state lawyers practicing in Florida
- Florida UPL out of state lawyers
- Florida voluntary online legal provider program
- former judge lawyer accepting gifts from counsel for opposing party
- fraud
- Illinois Bar complaint alleges that lawyer demanded future pain damages for a client who he knew was deceased
- Illinois Bar complaint alleges that lawyer demanded future pain damages for a client who he knew was no longer alive
- Illinois Hearing Board recommends reprimand for lawyer who exclaimed “gadzooks” after being admonished by the judge and was held in contempt
- Impersonating lawyer criminal conviction and prison
- inadvertent disclosure
- Indiana ethics opinion 18-1- AVVO Advisor violation of fee, referral and other Bar rules
- Ineffective Assistance of Counsel lawyer ethics
- joe corsmeier
- Joint New Jersey ethics opinion- AVVO legal services are improper fee sharing and referral fees
- joseph corsmeier
- Judge discipline Facebook
- Judge discipline likes and shares social media
- Judge disqualification
- Judge disqualification Facebook friends with lawyer
- judge disqualification Facebook friends with lawyer Florida Supreme Court
- Judge ethics and due process Facebook friends with litigant
- Judge recusal personal relationships
- Judicial candidate misconduct
- Judicial ethics accepting gifts from lawyers
- Judicial Ethics Facebook and LinkedIn
- judicial misconduct discipline
- lack of diligence
- law while incarcerated for committing a serious felony
- Lawsuit against law firm alleging lawyer liability for wire transfer fraud scam
- Lawyer abuse of nonlawyer paralegal and attacks
- Lawyer abusive language and cursing in e-mail
- Lawyer abusive language and cursing in e-mail to Bar lawyer
- lawyer accepting online payments using apps
- Lawyer access to juror social media and digital internet presence
- Lawyer advertisements Google AdWords misdirection
- Lawyer advertising
- Lawyer advertising actors reading testimonials
- Lawyer advertising and soliciation text messages
- Lawyer advertising and solicitation
- Lawyer advertising and solicitation APRL report
- Lawyer advertising and solicitation text messages
- Lawyer advertising and solicitation twitter
- lawyer advertising expert and specialist
- Lawyer advertising judicial opinion excerpts on website
- Lawyer advertising on Linkedin.com
- lawyer advertising past results
- Lawyer advertising rules federal lawsuit
- Lawyer advertising specialization and expertise
- Lawyer advertising testimonials
- Lawyer allegedly killing mother
- lawyer antitrust
- Lawyer arbitrator discipline
- lawyer billing fraud
- lawyer billing misrepresentations
- lawyer blogs
- Lawyer blogs advertising
- lawyer blogs false statements
- lawyer certification
- Lawyer charge cost of litigation cost protection to client
- Lawyer charging client with credit card fees
- Lawyer charging costs and guidelines
- Lawyer charging interest to clients on advanced costs
- Lawyer cloud computing
- Lawyer coaching client misrepresentation, fruad, deceit
- Lawyer coaching witness conduct prejudicial to administration of justice
- Lawyer coaching witness fairness to opposing party
- Lawyer coaching witness fraud
- Lawyer coaching witness on chat during virtual trial
- lawyer communications with potential clients
- Lawyer conduct adversely affecting fitness to practice
- Lawyer conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice
- Lawyer conduct that adversely reflects on fitness to practice
- Lawyer confidentiality when working remotely and from home
- Lawyer conflict of interest
- Lawyer conflict of interest positional conflicts
- Lawyer conflict of interest relationship with witness
- Lawyer conflict of interest sole discretion to settle case
- Lawyer conflict of interest sole discretion to settle case fee agreement is void and violates Bar rules
- Lawyer contingency agreements
- Lawyer conversion of client trust funds
- Lawyer criminal misconduct
- Lawyer criminal misconduct forging court documents and judge's signatures
- Lawyer criminal misconduct murder for hire
- Lawyer criminal misconduct sexual abuse of client by hypnotism
- Lawyer derogatory comments to nonpaying client in e-mail
- lawyer digital document storage
- Lawyer disbarment
- lawyer disbarment burglary and theft
- lawyer disbarment felony
- Lawyer disbarment for disparaging statements and accusations of judicial witchcraft
- Lawyer disbarment for practicing while suspended
- Lawyer disbarment forging court order
- Lawyer disbarment improper fees
- Lawyer disbarment soliciting and filming sex acts
- Lawyer disbarment stealing and using cocaine as judge
- Lawyer disbarment theft of client funds
- Lawyer disbarment trust account violations
- Lawyer discipline conduct prejudicial to administration of justice at trial
- Lawyer discipline conviction of passing contraband to client in jail
- Lawyer discipline criminal conviction battery chest bump
- Lawyer discipline criminal misconduct
- Lawyer discipline false billings
- lawyer discipline for failure to respond to Bar inquiry
- Lawyer discipline for willful and flagrant failure to pay child support
- Lawyer discipline forging court order
- Lawyer discipline improper and inflated fees
- Lawyer discipline lying to law firm suspension
- Lawyer discipline sanctions for failure to appear at hearing
- Lawyer discipline sexting texting with client
- lawyer discipline social media misconduct- creating false dating site profile on opposing counsel
- Lawyer discipline suspension
- Lawyer discipline trust account violations
- Lawyer discipline- Bar required to pay attorney's costs
- Lawyer discipline- Bar's costs denied by referee
- lawyer disciplinefor failure to disclose client’s death while continuing to litigate matter
- Lawyer discovery disclosure sanctions
- Lawyer disloyalty to client and law firm
- Lawyer dismissal of complaint
- Lawyer dismissed complaint
- Lawyer disparagement and discrimination
- lawyer disparaging other lawyers and judges in pleadings
- lawyer disparaging remarks to non-client witness
- Lawyer disqualification
- Lawyer disruption of tribunal
- Lawyer divorce contingent fee discipline
- lawyer double billing
- Lawyer duties to replace hacked trust account funds
- Lawyer e-filing confidentiality breach sanctions
- Lawyer escrow accounts
- lawyer ethical and professional risks and hazards of sending e-mails
- Lawyer ethical duties when receives earned fee subject to fee sharing arrangement
- Lawyer ethical obligations regarding third party funding of attorneys fees and litigation
- Lawyer Ethics
- Lawyer ethics and social media
- Lawyer ethics AVVO and matching services- fee splitting and sharing
- Lawyer ethics business transactions with clients
- Lawyer ethics cursing at judge
- Lawyer ethics Facebook
- Lawyer ethics opinion anonymous contact with unnamed internet defamer
- Lawyer ethics opinion impaired lawyers
- Lawyer ethics opinion Linkedin.com
- Lawyer ethics opinions
- Lawyer ethics opinions Avvo – improper fee splitting and referral fees
- Lawyer ethics opinions blogs and advertising
- Lawyer ethics opinions cloud computing
- lawyer ethics opinions marijuana
- Lawyer ethics payments to fact witnesses
- Lawyer ethics responsibilities and obligations to prospective clients
- lawyer ethics witnesses
- Lawyer ethics- AVVO lawyer independent professional judgment
- Lawyer expense reimbursement
- lawyer failure to communicate
- Lawyer failure to communicate with client
- lawyer failure to disclose client’s death while continuing to litigate matter
- Lawyer failure to provide closing statement PIP cases
- Lawyer failure to supervise non lawyer theft of trust funds disbarment
- Lawyer failure to supervise non-lawyers
- lawyer failure to supervise non-lawyers re trust account suspension and permanent ban on supervision of trust accounts
- Lawyer failure to supervise nonlawyer who steals
- Lawyer failure to timely file appeal
- Lawyer false affidavits to cover up misconduct
- Lawyer false email and text message to cover up missed statute of limitations
- lawyer false expenses
- lawyer false fee liens
- Lawyer false statements
- Lawyer false statements on Facebook
- Lawyer false statements to client
- Lawyer false statements to client regarding status of matter
- Lawyer falsifying court documents and orders
- Lawyer fee agreements
- Lawyer felony criminal arrest emergency suspension
- lawyer felony suspension and reinstatement nunc pro tunc after criminal conviction reversed
- lawyer fiduciary privilege
- Lawyer filing false documents
- Lawyer Florida IOTA trust accounts rule 5-1.1 credit unions permitted
- Lawyer fraud
- Lawyer Groupon marketing
- Lawyer hijacking former firm’s e-mail accounts and making disparaging comments on Facebook
- Lawyer improper access to opposing party Facebook
- Lawyer improper access to opposing party social media
- Lawyer improper ex parte contact with judge
- Lawyer impugning judge's qualifications or integrity
- Lawyer including client confidential psychiatric records in public record malpractice lawsuit
- Lawyer involvement in wire transfer fraud scam
- Lawyer IOTA trust accounts
- Lawyer lack of competence
- lawyer lack of diligence
- Lawyer leaving law firm
- Lawyer lien resolution
- Lawyer litigation costs
- Lawyer mandatory fees and dues
- lawyer marijuana ethics obligations
- Lawyer misappropriation and misrepresentations to law firm disbarment
- Lawyer misappropriation of funds
- Lawyer misconduct 6 month suspension for brandishing gun at deposition and disparaging comments
- Lawyer misconduct disparaging and improper comments
- Lawyer misconduct false court documents
- Lawyer misconduct false statements
- lawyer misconduct in closing argument
- Lawyer misconduct in own divorce – disbarment
- Lawyer misconduct jail sentence
- Lawyer misconduct marijuana advice incompetence and misrepresentation
- Lawyer misconduct representing self in divorce
- Lawyer misconduct smuggling contraband into prison for client
- Lawyer misconduct while representing self in divorce proceeding
- Lawyer misleading law firm information advertisements
- Lawyer misrepresentation
- lawyer misrepresentations
- Lawyer negative Yelp review
- lawyer negligence
- Lawyer non compete in employment agreement
- Lawyer obligations before and after cyber breach or hack
- Lawyer ownership of nonlawyer owned law firms
- lawyer permanent disbarment
- Lawyer positional conflict of interest
- Lawyer practicing l;aw while suspended
- Lawyer practicing without license
- Lawyer prepring false documents
- Lawyer Professional Responsibility
- Lawyer professionalism
- Lawyer puffery
- Lawyer punitive separation agreeement with associate
- lawyer ransomware attack
- Lawyer readmission denial
- lawyer referral fees
- Lawyer referral fees legal malpractice
- Lawyer referral fees void under Chandris
- Lawyer Referral Services
- Lawyer referral services 2016 proposed revisions
- Lawyer relationship with witness and lying about it
- Lawyer required to advise current clients of material error- ABA opinion
- lawyer response to internet complaint and criticism
- Lawyer restriction on right to practice in employment agreement
- lawyer revealing confidential information in motion to withdraw
- Lawyer revealing confidential information on internet in response to complaint
- Lawyer sanction- writing promising no more disruption
- Lawyer sanctions
- Lawyer sanctions alcohol/substance abuse
- Lawyer sanctions disbarment
- Lawyer sanctions disclosure of confidential documents
- Lawyer sanctions false client billings
- lawyer sanctions federal court artificial intelligence lack of diligence hallucinations
- Lawyer sanctions for failing to advise clients of suspension
- Lawyer sanctions for revealing confidential information
- Lawyer sanctions for unlicensed practice of law
- Lawyer sanctions frivolous filing
- Lawyer sanctions Instagram
- Lawyer sanctions lying in court and Instagram vacation photos
- Lawyer sanctions personal misconduct
- Lawyer sanctions revealing client confidences to lawyer with romantic relationship
- Lawyer sanctions stealing from law firm
- Lawyer sanctions suspension
- Lawyer second opinions
- Lawyer sex with client discipline
- Lawyer sex with clients in jail disbarment
- Lawyer sexual abuse of clients
- Lawyer sharing fees with non-lawyers
- lawyer social media ethics and discipline
- Lawyer social media ethics tips and traps
- Lawyer solicitation rules social media class action
- Lawyer soliciting or accepting gifts
- lawyer stealing and using cocaine as judge
- lawyer stealing fees from law firm
- lawyer stealing firm funds with improper referrals
- Lawyer submitting false document in disciplinary investigation
- lawyer suing client for false online statements
- Lawyer supervision of clients
- lawyer supervision of non-lawyers
- Lawyer suspension coaching witness with texts during deposition and misrepresentations
- Lawyer suspension criminal conviction passing contraband
- lawyer suspension Facebook misconduct
- Lawyer suspension failure to supervise nonlawyer
- lawyer suspension false and excessive fees
- Lawyer suspension for “excessively aggressive” and threatening conduct
- lawyer suspension for inflating and falsifying hours spent on client cases
- Lawyer suspension stealing fees from law firm
- Lawyer suspension/discipline alleged sexual misconduct
- Lawyer technology competence
- lawyer technology competence- scams and ransomware attacks
- Lawyer technology ethics- wire transfer fraud scam
- Lawyer testamentary gifts from clients
- Lawyer trust account discipline
- Lawyer trust account ethics
- Lawyer trust account scams
- Lawyer trust account violations discipline
- Lawyer trust accounts
- lawyer unreasonable fee
- Lawyer use of expert and specialist
- Lawyer violation of confidentiality on internet
- Lawyer virtual practice
- lawyer waiver of costs
- lawyer waiver of costs financial assistance to client
- Lawyer websites
- Lawyer websites hidden text
- Lawyer websites SEO and metatags
- Lawyer withdrawal
- Lawyer withdrawal COVID-19
- Lawyer written fee agreements
- Lawyer zealous advocacy Florida opinion
- Lawyer/client confidentiality
- Lawyers accepting bitcoin digital virtual currency
- Lawyers and bitcoin
- Lawyers and social media
- Lawyers and virtual digital currency
- lawyers sharing fees with non-lawyers
- Legal malpractice
- Legal malpractice expert witness
- Legal malpractice negligence
- Legal malpractice sufficiency of evidence and standard of care
- LegalForce v LegalZoom UPL and deceptive advertising federal lawsuit
- Mandatory arbitration Bar Rule 4-1.5(i)
- Mandatory arbitration clause in fee agreement unenforceable as violation of Rule 4-1.5(i)
- Metadata
- Metadata Lawyer Ethics
- Misrepresentations regarding CLE completion
- Model Rule 3.3 citing controlling authority
- Motion to Disqualify Facebook friends
- Nebraska ethics opinion lawyers accepting bitcoin
- negligence
- New Jersey opionion lawyer attempting to contact opposng party on Facebook
- New York Bar admission mental health questions
- New York ethics opinion marijuana advice, ownership, and use
- New York ethics opinion- AVVO legal services improper fee sharing, referral fees, and recommendations
- New York report recommends licensing social workers to provide limited legal services
- Non-lawyer Limited Licensing
- non-lawyer limited practice
- Non-lawyer ownership of law firms
- Non-lawyer practice of law
- Nonlawyer bonuses and pension plans
- Nonlawyer practice 2021 Oregon proposal for landlord/tenant and family law
- nonrefundable fees
- North Caroline federal opinion on regulation of UPL
- NYSBA ethics opinion COVID withdrawal
- Oregon paralegal limited practice program 2022
- Oregon Supreme Court opinion lawyer response to negative internet review reprimand
- Paralegal limited practice
- Payments to fact witnesses
- Pennsylvania ethics opinion maintaining confidentiality during pandemic
- privilege prohibition of inquiries into lawyer/doctor referral relationships
- Pro se lawyer contact with represented persons
- Proposed Florida Bar Advisory Opinion 24-1 provides guidance regarding lawyers’ use of generative artificial intelligence (AI)
- Proposed Florida Bar ethics opinion 20-1- response to negative online reviews
- proposed Florida Bar Rules
- Proposed Florida UPL Advisory Opinion FAO #201904 out-of-state lawyer practicing remotely
- Prosectorial misconduct
- Prosecutor disbarment for posting anonymous inflammatory comments on internet
- Prosecutor misconduct
- Prosecutorial misconduct disciplinary sanctions
- Prosecutorial misconduct eavesdropping on attorney client conversations
- Prosecutorial misconduct lawyer ethics
- Punitive damages
- remote hearings and proceedings ethics
- Rule 4-5.8 amendment to comment 2018
- Rule 8.4(h) conduct adversely affecting fitness to practice
- Sanctions for failure to cite controlling authority
- Sanctions inadvertent disclousre fo confidential documents
- Snitch rule
- technology competence
- text messaging ethics
- third party malpractice claims
- TIKD antitrust lawsuit Florida Bar motion for sanctions
- TIKD Florida Bar petition w Florida Supreme Court re UPL
- TIKD motion for sanctions
- TIKD Unlicensed Practice of Law Florida
- TIKD US DOJ Statement of Interest
- U.S. District Court Judge enjoins Pennsylvania from enforcing Bar rule with broad lawyer anti-discrimination prohibitions
- U.S. Supreme Court
- U.S. Supreme Court mandatory Bar dues
- Uncategorized
- Unlicensed practice of law
- UPL federal mail and identity fraud
- UPL fraud impersonating lawyer
- UPL North Carolina antitrust
- UPL opinions
- UPL Zlien Ohio complaint
- UPL, unauthorized practice of law, unlicensed practice of law, U.S. Constitution professional speech
- USSC North Carolina dental antitrust case
- Utah pilot program permitting non-traditional legal services, including non-lawyer firm ownership
- Utah sandbox approves Rocket Matter as legal service rovider
- Virginia Ethics Opinion duties related to impaired lawyers
- Virginia revised advertising rules 2017
- Washington DC rules related to non-lawyer firm ownership and sharing fees
- Washington Limited License Legal Technician program
- Washington LLLT sunset elimination 2020
- West Virginia lawyer’s license is annulled and suspended for, inter alia, billing over 24 hours of time multiple times
- witness preparation
Meta
Category Archives: Florida lawyer advertising
Florida Bar Board of Governors reverses advertising opinion and finds that solicitation rules apply to targeted social media
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert, which will discuss the recent Florida Bar Board of Governors (BOG) reversal of a Florida Bar advertising committee opinion that found that targeted social media advertisements were not subject to the solicitation … Continue reading →
Posted in 2013 comprehensive Florida advertising rule revisions, Attorney ethics, Florida Bar, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, Florida solicitation rule 4-7.18 social media class action, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertising, Lawyer advertising and solicitation, Lawyer Ethics, Lawyer ethics and social media, Lawyer solicitation rules social media class action, Uncategorized
|
Tagged attorney advertising, Florida Bar, Florida Bar Advertising Rules, Florida Bar Rule 4-7.18 solicitation, lawyer advertising, lawyer advertising rules, solicitation social media class actions
|
Leave a comment
Florida Bar Board of Governors finds that “Ambulances Chase Us” is improper and law firm can advertise “1-800-411-Pain”
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert, which will discuss the recent Florida Bar Board of Governors (BOG) decisions to uphold the Florida Bar Standing Committee on Advertising (SCA) decision that “Ambulances Chase Us” is deceptive or misleading and … Continue reading →
Posted in Attorney ethics, Florida advertising "Ambulances Chase Us", Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, Florida lawyer advertising "411-PAIN", joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertising, Lawyer Ethics
|
Tagged attorney advertising, Florida Bar, Florida Bar Advertising Rules, Florida Supreme Court, lawyer advertising, lawyer advertising rules, lawyer advertising specialist and expert
|
Leave a comment
Florida Supreme Court approves revised Bar advertising rule with requirements for lawyers to call themselves “experts” or “specialists”
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert, which will discuss the recent Florida Supreme Court opinion approving (with minor revisions) Bar Rule 4-7.14, which sets forth the requirements for Florida lawyers to call themselves “experts” and “specialists” in advertisements … Continue reading →
Posted in 2013 comprehensive Florida advertising rule revisions, 2018 revised Bar Rule- Florida Lawyer use of expert and specialist, Attorney ethics, corsmeier, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, Florida lawyer advertising expert and specialist 2019 rule 4-7.14, Florida Supreme Court, Florida Supreme Court opinions, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertising, lawyer advertising expert and specialist, Lawyer Ethics, Uncategorized
|
Tagged 2019 approved expert and specialist rule 4-7.14, Florida 2018 expert and specialist proposed rules, lawyer advertising expert and specialist, lawyer advertising specialist and expert, lawyer claims of specialization and expertise, Lawyer use of expert and specialist
|
Leave a comment
Florida Bar Board of Governors approves proposed Bar rule prohibiting misleading law firm information in all lawyer advertisements
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert, which will discuss the recent approval of revisions to Florida Bar Rule 4-7.13 by the Florida Bar Board of Governors (BOG). If implemented, the proposed revisions would prohibit misleading law firm information … Continue reading →
Posted in deceit, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Rule prohibiting misleading law firm information in advertisementss, Florida Bar rule prohibiting misleading law firm information in all advertisements, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, Florida Supreme Court, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertisements Google AdWords misdirection, Lawyer advertising, Lawyer advertising and solicitation, Lawyer Ethics, Lawyer ethics and social media, Lawyer misleading law firm information advertisements, Lawyers and social media, Uncategorized
|
Tagged attorney advertising, deceit, dishonesty, Florida Bar, lawyer advertising, lawyer advertising misleading law firm information, lawyer advertising rules, lawyer misleading Google adwords
|
Leave a comment
Florida Bar’s Board of Governors considers final action on proposed rule revision prohibiting misleading law firm information in all advertisements
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert, which will discuss the potential final review of potential revisions to Florida Bar Rules 4-7.13 by the Florida Bar Board of Governors (BOG), which would prohibit misleading law firm information in advertisements. … Continue reading →
Posted in Attorney ethics, corsmeier, deceit, dishonesty, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Rule prohibiting misleading law firm information in advertisementss, Florida Bar rule prohibiting misleading law firm information in all advertisements, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertisements Google AdWords misdirection, Lawyer advertising, Lawyer misleading law firm information advertisements, Lawyer misrepresentation, Uncategorized
|
Leave a comment
Florida Bar Board of Governors Ethics Committee will reconsider proposed revised Bar rules to prohibit misleading digital advertising
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert which will discuss the Florida Bar Board of Governors’ (BOG) Professional Ethics Committee’s review of a proposal to amend Florida Bar Rule 4-7.13 to prohibit certain misleading digital advertisements at its December … Continue reading →
Posted in Attorney ethics, Bar rule prohibiting Google Ad words misdirection to another lawyer, corsmeier, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, Florida Supreme Court, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertisements Google AdWords misdirection, Lawyer advertising, Lawyer Ethics, Lawyer websites SEO and metatags, Uncategorized
|
Tagged attorney advertising, deceit, Florida Bar, Florida Supreme Court, Google Adwords misdirection, lawyer advertising, lawyer advertising rules, lawyer advertising text messages, lawyer misleading and deceptive advertising GooglAdwords, Lawyer misrepresentation, misdirection Google AdWords
|
Leave a comment
Florida Bar Board of Governors approves revised rule on qualifying provider fees and ethics opinion on “expert” and “specialist”
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert which will discuss recent (October 12, 2018) vote of The Florida Bar’s Board of Governors to approve substantive revisions to Bar Rule 4-7.14 related to the use of “expert” and “specialist” and to … Continue reading →
Posted in 2018 Florida lawyer referral rule revisions matching services, 2018 Florida lawyer referral rules qualifying providers, 2018 revised Bar Rule- Florida Lawyer use of expert and specialist, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 18-1- lawyer referral service qualifying provider payment, Florida Bar ethics opinion qualifying provider - lawyer fees, Florida Bar proposed Advertising Advisory Opinion, Florida Bar proposed ethics opinion 17-2- qualifying provider- lawyer fees, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, Florida Lawyer Referral Services, Florida proposed ethics advisory opinion- lawyer referral fees and lawyer matching services, Florida Supreme Court, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertising specialization and expertise, Lawyer Ethics, Lawyer ethics AVVO and matching services- fee splitting and sharing, Lawyer ethics opinions, Lawyer Referral Services, Uncategorized
|
Tagged attorney advertising, Florida 2018 expert and specialist proposed rules, Florida Bar, Florida Bar Advertising Rules, Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 18-1, Florida Judicial Canons, Florida Supreme Court, lawyer referral, lawyer referral serices
|
Leave a comment
Florida Bar’s BOG considers rule revisions prohibiting misleading Google ad words and permitting credit charges to clients
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert, which will discuss the Board of Governor’s review of potential revisions to Florida Bar Rules 4-7.13, which would prohibit misleading words and phrases in Google ad words, and revisions to Florida Bar … Continue reading →
Posted in Attorney ethics, Bar rule prohibiting Google Ad words misdirection to another lawyer, corsmeier, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar rule permitting lawyer to charge client with credit card fees, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, Florida Supreme Court, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertisements Google AdWords misdirection, Lawyer advertising, Lawyer charging client with credit card fees, Uncategorized
|
Tagged credit card charges, Florida Bar, Florida Bar rule credit card charges, Florida Supreme Court, lawyer advertising, lawyer advertising rules
|
Leave a comment
Florida Bar’s Board of Governors considers Bar Rule amendment prohibiting lawyers from using Google AdWords to misdirect results
Hello everyone and welcome to this Ethics Alert, which will discuss the recent proposed amendment to Florida Bar Rule 4-7.13 which would prohibit a Florida lawyer from using the name of another lawyer or law firm to trigger a search … Continue reading →
Posted in Attorney ethics, corsmeier, deceit, dishonesty, Florida Bar discipline, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, Lawyer advertisements Google AdWords misdirection, Lawyer advertising, Lawyer Ethics, Uncategorized
|
Tagged ad, attorney advertising, Florida Bar Advertising Rules, lawyer advertising, lawyer advertising rules, misdirection Google AdWords
|
Leave a comment
The Florida Supreme Court rejects Bar proposed advertising Rule amendment on lawyers’ use of “expert” and “specialist”
Hello and welcome to this Ethics Alert update on the Bar’s proposed amendment to Florida Bar Rule 4-7.14 on lawyers’ of “specialization” and “expertise” in advertisements which was filed in response to the federal court opinion which found the rule … Continue reading →
Posted in Attorney discipline, Attorney ethics, corsmeier, Florida Bar discipline, Florida Bar ethics, Florida Bar Rules, Florida lawyer advertising, Florida Lawyer comprehensive advertising rule revisions, Florida Supreme Court, joe corsmeier, joseph corsmeier, lawyer advertising expert and specialist, Lawyer advertising specialization and expertise, Lawyer Ethics, Uncategorized
|
Tagged attorney advertising, Florida Bar, Florida Supreme Court, lawyer advertising, lawyer advertising rules, lawyer advertising specialist and expert
|
Leave a comment
joe corsmeier 