Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
NY Ethics Opinion Says Lawyers May Check Jurors' Online Activity
Attorneys may monitor jurors through online social networks as long as they do not contact the jurors or in any way make their monitoring known to them, the New York County Lawyers' Association said last month in an ethics opinion. (See, NYCLA Committee on Professional Ethics Formal Opinion No. 743, https://www.nycla.org/siteFiles/Publications/Publications1450_0.pdf.) Lawyers may look up information on a potential juror for screening purposes during voir dire and may monitor a juror's online activity for misconduct during a trial, but “must not 'friend,' e-mail, send tweets to jurors or otherwise communicate in any way with the juror, or act in any way by which the juror becomes aware of the monitoring,” the opinion says.
If jurors become aware that an attorney is following them online, it could influence their deliberations, according to the opinion. “Significant ethical concerns would be raised by sending a 'friend request,' attempting to connect via LinkedIn.com, signing up for an RSS feed for a juror's blog or 'following' a juror's Twitter account,” according to the opinion.
If attorneys learn of any improper conduct by a juror through social networking during a trial, they may not use that knowledge to their clients' advantage, but must report it immediately to the court, the opinion says. Attorneys do not, however, have a duty to monitor jurors on social networking sites. The opinion also forbids attorneys from engaging in unwanted or harassing communication with jurors after a trial is over.
Brendan Pierson is a State & Federal Court Reporter for the New York Law Journal, an ALM affiliate of LJN's Legal Tech Newsletter.
Attorneys may monitor jurors through online social networks as long as they do not contact the jurors or in any way make their monitoring known to them, the
If jurors become aware that an attorney is following them online, it could influence their deliberations, according to the opinion. “Significant ethical concerns would be raised by sending a 'friend request,' attempting to connect via LinkedIn.com, signing up for an RSS feed for a juror's blog or 'following' a juror's Twitter account,” according to the opinion.
If attorneys learn of any improper conduct by a juror through social networking during a trial, they may not use that knowledge to their clients' advantage, but must report it immediately to the court, the opinion says. Attorneys do not, however, have a duty to monitor jurors on social networking sites. The opinion also forbids attorneys from engaging in unwanted or harassing communication with jurors after a trial is over.
Brendan Pierson is a State & Federal Court Reporter for the
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.