Thursday, March 13, 2008

ABA Techshow 2008 Keynote Discusses Privacy Issues

Marc Rotenberg, Executive Director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) just finished his keynote presentation at ABA Techshow 2008, and from the reactions of the audience it was a homerun.  He provided timely insights into on-line privacy using the current Spitzer Scandal as an example. Interesting, provactive, and helpful to lawyers trying to protect clients and counsel them on the realities of being on-line. Godd lessons for us too. I hope to post is presentation later or check the Techshow website.

Monday, May 28, 2007

Give Yourself a Trust Account Check-Up

For the past 6 years, I have had the pleasure of teaching the CLE seminar, Ethics & Lawyer Trust Accounts, with District of Columbia Bar Counsel, Gene Shipp. This past Wednesday night marked our twelfth time teaching the course to lawyers in the D.C. area.

Some of the lawyers who attend the seminar are there because their CLE reporting deadline is approaching. Others take the course to learn the ropes of opening and properly maintaining a trust account. Some of them are taking the course because they are facing disciplinary action. And some are taking the seminar as part of the process to regain their license to practice. Whatever their initial reason, many come up after the 3-hour class to say how grateful they were to take the seminar--i.e. we saved them from a present or potential trust account violation.

Most of the lawyers I have met in my 21 years in the legal profession dislike managing money--myself included. Rather than stare at bank statements or trust account ledgers, we'd rather be practicing law. In smaller firms, it  seems that lawyers delegate trust account management to their secretary, office manager, or receptionist--just about anybody in the office who seems worthy and loyal, so we don't have to manage it ourselves. In bigger firms, they have administrators or bookkeepers, but similar problems can still arise. Whatever size the firm, this person has your law license in the palm of their hand. Their conduct in managing the account is all that stands between you and the ability to practice law. Just ask some of the lawyers that take our seminar.

The biggest problem is that instead of just delegating management of the trust account, lawyers tend to abdicate all responsibility. After the initial training or explanation of the trust account, the person managing the account(s) is often left to their own skills to maintain the account. More often than we want to believe, the person handling our account either mishandles the bookkeeping, doesn't understand or comply with bar ethics rules, or succumbs to temptation because they know no one is watching. Even if the employee is doing a great job of writing checks and making deposits, how do we really know they are handling the money ethically and properly, unless we check behind them? Furthermore, our "bookkeeper" was instructed on the management process when they took over that function, but when was the last time they attended an ethics trust account class. As lawyers, we have mandatory ethics education requirements; how much of that do we pass on to staff?

So how to make improvements to make sure client funds are properly managed and our law license protected? Here are our top suggestions from twelve years of teaching this course:

1. Make sure your common-client (pooled) trust account complies with your state bar ethics rules. Review Rule 1.15, Rule 1.16, and Rule 1.5. (This numbering is based on the Model Rules of Professional Conduct; your state rule numbering may differ.) Read through the rules one-by-one, including the comments to each rule. Compare the requirements to how you have set up management of the account. Is the account in compliance with the requirements of these rules? Yes, this review is boring, but it will most likely prevent a trust account violation.

2. Visit your bank to review the opening signature card on the account. It is the signature card that is the evidence of a proper account, not the imprint on your checks. For many states, also make sure the account is properly set up as an "IOLTA" account. If you are just now setting up the account, make sure the bank employee does it correctly. If the account is improperly set up, it is your responsibility, not the bank's. (Yep, that's another person who may have your law license in the palm of their hand!)

2. Take control of the process. If you manage the account, then take steps to improve it. If you've delegated management of the account, take back some of the authority. Set up a system to organize and review the trust account on a monthly basis. Keep all the account records in a convenient location, such as a Redwell folder with 12 monthly sub-folders. Some state bars have specific record-keeping requirements, usually contained in Rule 1.15. Records to keep include the monthly bank statement, deposit slips, canceled checks, and the account journal. Also, if you do not handle the account yourself, make sure you set up and/or understand the process your bookkeeper/administrator uses to maintain the account.

3. Review your model fee agreement in conjunction with the aforementioned rules.  Especially review and revise your language about how client money comes in and goes out. If the agreement is silent on when and how this happens, revise the form to use in all future engagements.

4. Do not use electronic transfers. These may be convenient, but there is little or no paper trail to document our transactions. Further, we often forget to make notation of the transaction until the next bank statement is received, increasing the risk of overdrawing client funds.

5. Do not write a check out of the trust account unless that client's funds are in the account. Money in a trust account is not fungible. You may have thousands of dollars in your account, but you cannot use it to write checks for another client whose check has not yet cleared the bank. This is known as the "Good Funds" rule.

6. "Promptly" remove earned fees from the trust account, as required by Rule 1.15. Do not let them sit there until you decide to take them. After the funds have been earned, they are no longer the property of the client. By leaving your funds in the client trust account, you are commingling funds. How "prompt" should you be? This is not defined in the rule, but removing them monthly is a good business practice.

7. Have controls on your bookkeeper so temptation is reduced. Temptation is the greatest when one person handles all financial aspects of the trust account--processes all incoming checks, prepares and makes all deposits, writes all payment checks, etc. Interject yourself in this process. Make changes as suggested in Item 2 above, and handle another part of the process too: Carefully review all outbound checks or make all deposits yourself. It may be a slight inconvenience and take you away from billable time, but it will ensure a trustworthy trust account. And your bookkeeper will thank you too.

8. Know that trust account violations are often reported by dissatisfied clients, who let the problem fester before reporting it. They may wait months or several years. By that time, lawyers have moved on to other cases and clients, but the dissatisfied client has not. When a complaint comes in, will we recall the client or trust transactions? If our records are clear, understandable, and organized, we will have a much easier time to address the complaint and show our records and actions were completely ethical.

Managing a trustworthy trust account is not a easy task, but it doesn't have to be difficult if organized and maintained properly. Further, if your state or local bar offers a course similar to ours in D.C., take it--like many of those that attend ours, you'll be glad you did!

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Success in Your Fee Agreements

I believe that a lawyer unpaid is justice denied. Too often, I hear of lawyers not being paid for the great work they do, or having to write-off some or all of a client bill. Part of what I do is to work with lawyers and law firms to maximize the money they earn.  But when I read stories, like the one that follows, I just shake my head and wonder "What the hell were they thinking?!

Our society and economy allows lawyers to earn a very healthy living, limited only by the often-ignored "reasonableness" factors listed in Model Rule 1.5. However, when a lawyer's fee agreement, drafted by the lawyer, also imposes limits, then we must live by those limits or face the righteous wrath of clients.  That's the lesson of this story in the Connecticut Law Tribune. 

According to the story, a Connecticut divorce lawyer included a success fee provision in the fee agreement that stated "In addition to the hourly charges described, we may request an additional reasonable charge for matters of extraordinary difficulty, or which require special expertise or the giving of special priority treatment...This additional charge is subject to your approval after discussion with you. It cannot be imposed unless you agree to it."

So far so good. As a former divorce lawyer, I like what I've read so far.

Apparently in the midst of an intense 5-day mediation effort to resolve the divorce, the attorney insisted on a $300,000 success payment pursuant to the fee agreement.  The client balked, but finally paid the bonus after his attorney became "angry and abusive" according to the testimony at trial. 

Not surprisingly, the Connecticut jury found that the client did did not agree to the bonus and the court ordered his lawyer to return the money.  Now the lawyer is seeking to overturn the verdict and get a new trial. 

Excuse me?  He's what?

Lawyers, like everyone else, must live with the benefit of their bargain. We must carefully draft our fee agreements and be prepared to live with them. (Just like we expect our clients to honor them too.) Sure, we can attempt to renegotiate the deal if we don't like it, but we can't unilaterally make that change and expect the client to accept it. 

Isn't that a basic prinicple we all learned in law school?

Sunday, February 06, 2005

Working 94 Hour Days

As lawyers we often face ethical dilemmas.  Some are easy to resolve, others can cause us to research and analyze to make sure we stay within the Rules of Professional Conduct.  Then there are some crazy stories where you just say "What the hell were they thinkin'?"  Hence the catagory on my blog--EthX Gone Wild!  Here is the first installment, thanks to Law.com, and a solo lawyer in Connecticut. I could not find the case listed on their web site, but I betting the Connecticut Grievance Committee is closely following the matter.