Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The COVID-19 pandemic has ushered in a new normal — the remote work environment. As organizations transitioned their employees from the traditional office environment to working from home, the use and reliance on technologies both new and old has increased dramatically. Just as the pandemic has challenged every aspect of our lives, the shift to a remote work environment has significantly impacted e-discovery and the ethical obligations of attorneys in this ever-evolving technological and legal landscape.
Under Rule 1.1 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility, "a lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation." Competency requires a lawyer to "keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, engage in continuing study and education and comply with all continuing legal education requirements to which the lawyer is subject." Courts have specifically tied this competency standard to e-discovery. "Just as lawyers have a professional responsibility to keep abreast of changes or developments in the law, it is now clear in this "digital age" that attorneys should have basic competency in working with digital evidence and understand how ESI is created, stored and retrieved." See, United States v. Montague, No. 14-CR-6136-FPG-JWF, 2016 BL 527908 (W.D.N.Y. May 17, 2016) (citing Model Rule 1.1 Comment 8 in footnote); see also, City of Rockford v. Mallinckrodt ARD, 326 F.R.D. 489 (N.D. Ill. 2018); State v. Ratliff, 2014 ND 156, 849 N.W.2d 183 (July 17, 2014) (concurring opinion cites Rule 1.1 comment 8). As the use of new and varied technologies grows, the burden on lawyers to keep abreast of these developments in the context of e-discovery has also increased.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.