MISREPRESENTATION

Nathan M. Crystal, Using Social Media to Investigate Juror

Date 07/31/2014.

South Carolina Lawyer 10 (Jul. 2014) Author discusses the basic principles that govern lawyers’ conduct while using social media sites, like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter, to obtain information in litigation about parties, witnesses, and jurors. From the article: “Several basic principles govern lawyers’ conduct. In dealing with other participants in a proceeding, lawyers must not […]

New York State Bar Opinion 1005

Date 04/02/2014.

Committee on Professional Ethics Topic: “Whether using the phrases “I KNOW HOW TO WIN FOR YOU” or “unsurpassed litigation skills,” violates Rule 7.1.” Digest of the Committee: “Neither the statement “I KNOW HOW TO WIN FOR YOU” or “unsurpassed litigation skills” in lawyer advertising is permissible under Rule 7.1 because the statements are misleading, and neither statement can […]

Nathan M. Crystal, Excerpt from Professional Responsibility – Problems of Practice and the Profession – Recording by Lawyers

Date 12/31/2012.

In Formal Opinion 01-422, the ABA Committee withdrew Opinion 337 and took a more generous view of recording by lawyers. The Committee decided that secret recording was not necessarily dishonest. The Committee cautioned lawyers that they could not engage in secret recording that violated the law of the jurisdiction where the recording occurred, nor could […]

Charles Doyle, Wiretapping, Tape Recorders, and Legal Ethics: an Abridged Overview of Questions Posed by Attorney Involvement in Secretly Recording Conversation

Date 12/31/2012.

CRS Report for Congress R42649 The report describes the view of American jurisdictions on attorneys recording of conversations. In the majority of jurisdictions a “recording with the consent of one, but not all, of the parties to a conversation is not unethical per se unless it is illegal or contrary to some other ethical standard” […]

Ohio Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline, Opinion 2012-1

Date 06/08/2012.

Topic: Surreptitious Recording by Lawyers   Syllabus of the Board: “A surreptitious, or secret, recording of a conversation by an Ohio lawyer is not a per se violation of Prof.Cond.R. 8.4(c) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation) if the recording does not violate the law of the jurisdiction in which the recording takes place. […]

New York State Bar Opinion 843

Date 09/10/2010.

Committee on Professional Ethics Topic: Lawyer’s Access to Public Pages of Another Party’s Social Networking Site, Pending Litigation A lawyer who represents a client in a pending litigation, and who has access to the Facebook or MySpace network used by another party in litigation, may access and review the public social network pages of that […]