The Attorney's Office Tools 1.18, Prospective Clients.5
As the Internet joins or even
surpasses traditional forms of marketing for attorneys and law firms, the lawyer’s ethical obligations remain and must be addressed. Te Ethics Committee of the Maryland State Bar
Association long ago (okay, it was in 1997) stated that an internet web page not sent “to anyone who has not sought it out,” constituted advertising under Rule 7.2 (a) as it was plainly a “communication not involving in person contact.”6 Te Committee recognized that Rule 5.5 prohibits an attorney from practicing law in a jurisdiction where he or she is not
represent a client if: 1. the lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client;
2. the representation is not prohibited by law; 3. the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the lawyer in the same litigation or other proceeding before a tribunal; and
4. each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.
5 Rule 1.18. Duties to Prospective Client. a. A person who discusses with a lawyer the possibility of forming a client-lawyer relationship with respect to a matter is a prospective client.
b. Even when no client-lawyer relationship ensues, a lawyer who has had discussions with a prospective client shall not use or reveal information learned in the consultation, except as Rule 1.9 would permit with respect to information of a former client.
c. A lawyer subject to paragraph (b) shall not represent a client with interests materially adverse to those of a prospective client in the same or a substantially related matter if the lawyer received information from the prospective client that could be significantly harmful to that person in the matter, except as provided in paragraph (d). If a lawyer is disqualified from representation under this paragraph, no lawyer in a firm with which that lawyer is associated may knowingly undertake or continue representation in such a matter, except as provided in paragraph d.
d. Representation is permissible if both the affected client and the prospective client have given informed consent, confirmed in writing, or the disqualified lawyer is timely screened from any participation in the matter and is apportioned no part of the fee therefrom.
6 MSBA Committee on Ethics, Ethics Docket 97-26
licensed and Rule 7.1 forbids misleading communications about one’s services. Terefore, since the webpage may be accessed by persons outside Maryland, the lawyer should be “very careful to make sure that [the lawyer’s] web page makes clear the states in which [the lawyer is] licensed to practice.”7 A Maryland case predating Internet advertising sheds light on the need for caution when marketing across state borders. Te Attorney Grievance Commission prosecuted a
case against a well-known television advertiser, Joel Hyatt, who operated Hyatt Legal Services, a “clinical” law firm, in several states, including Maryland. Te gravamen of the case was that the Maryland television advertisements for Hyatt Legal Services featured Mr. Hyatt as its spokesman but did not inform the viewer that he was not a Maryland lawyer and was thereby misleading. (Mr. Hyatt was licensed in Ohio.) In Attorney Grievance Commission v. Hyatt,8
the trial
judge found that Mr. Hyatt had engaged in unintentional, but nevertheless, misleading advertising because the viewer would be misled as to Mr. Hyatt’s personal availability to represent the viewer or to supervise the office of the attorney who would provide the actual representation. Te trial judge found this conduct to have violated Disciplinary Rule 2-101 (A) of the Code of Professional Responsibility, then in effect.9
7 Id. 8 302 Md. 683, 490 A.2d 1224 (1985). 9 DR 2-101(A):
Maryland Orthopedics, P.A. Board Certified Orthopedic Surgeons
Ellicott City ♦ 3570 St. Johns Lane 410-461-9500 Laurel ♦ 545 Main Street 301-776-2000
Owings Mills ♦ Physicians Pavillion, 10085 Red Run Blvd. 410-363-0777 Frederick ♦ 75 Thomas Johnson Drive 301-663-0009 WHEN QUALITY COUNTS
At Maryland Orthopedics PA, our physicians and staff pride themselves on their expertise with Personal Injury cases and work-related injuries covered under Worker’s Compensation. We understand the special challenges presented by industrial injuries and can provide many services such as x-ray, medications, neurological testing and physical therapy in house.
Most Appointments within 24 Hours Monday-Friday
Raymond D. Drapkin, M.D. William J. Launder, M.D. Kevin E. McGovern, M.D.
Michael A. Franchetti, M.D. Mark A. Cohen, M.D. Susan J. Liu, M.D.
Arthur E. Kurlanzik, M.D. ♦ Neurological Services 16 Trial Reporter / Spring 2010
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76