Blog

Ritman & Associates is pleased to share the following information about a new ABA Ethics Opinion which may affect the use of email in your practice, as well your insurance landscape. This update is for general informational purposes only, and does not contain legal advice.

On August 4th, 2011, the ABA issued Formal Ethics Opinion 11-459, entitled “Duty to Protect the Confidentiality of E-mail Communications with One’s Client.” The direct link to the Opinion is: Opinion 11-459

It states, in part, that “A lawyer sending or receiving substantive communications with a client via e- mail or other electronic means ordinarily must warn the client about the risk of sending or receiving electronic communications using a computer or other device, or e-mail account, where there is a significant risk that a third party may gain access.”

We have reason to believe that email typically travels the web by hopping among third party email handlers, where all or some of the contents may be disclosed. Click for an illustration of how this occurs.

Opinion 11-459 goes on to conclude, in part, that “Whenever a lawyer communicates with a client by e-mail, the lawyer must first consider whether, given the client’s situation, there is a significant risk that third parties will have access to the communications.  If so, the lawyer must take reasonable care to protect the confidentiality of the communications by giving appropriately tailored advice to the client.”

Ritman & Associates is planning be implement a new email system known as Dialawg. Among other things, clients will benefit from heightened security safeguards afforded by this simple solution.

Malpractice is a dirty word in the legal world. And the leading cause of legal malpractice claims in the United States? Believe it or not, it can be something as simple – and easily prevented – as missing a deadline or statue of limitation issues.

An example comes to mind that occurred several years ago. Though extreme, it’s a true story. A plaintiff personal injury firm of mine missed a filing deadline on an auto accident claim. After only $184 worth of defense costs, the carrier wrote a check for $100,000 to the claimant. Six months later, that same carrier wrote a non-renewal letter to the insured. Ouch! In the end, it took one lawyer, one hour, to determine the liability of my client.

So how do lawyers avoid a similar situation? Read on.

1. An effective intake procedure and conflict check. It’s important to gather good information up front and to have a lot of it. A carrier will not ask to see your intake procedures; they just expect you to have them.
2. A dual calendar process and docket control. (And, yes, even for the sole practitioner, put the date on two calendars.) It’s critical to have a fail safe calendar process in place. In this case, redundancy is a good thing! That means two separate calendars – computerized and hard copy.
3. Research, research, research. What names are listed in the claim? What is the statue or deadline timeline? What jurisdiction are you filing in? I have seen a number of my Indiana clients miss deadlines from cases taken in other states. Not being aware of the deadline or time frame is not an acceptable excuse. Just as important, be sure to list the correct entity at the time a claim in filed.

The bottom line: It’s important to build redundancy into your practice, your docket control and your calendaring systems. This doesn’t require “uber” expensive software; just use whatever works best for you.

The Hartford Insurance Company has endorsed many of their law firm specific business owners insurance policies with a legal professional liability services endorsement for many years, but, no more. We have word that The Hartford will begin to non-renew this legal professional services endorsement on all of their law firm business owners insurance policies. This non-renewal could affect a large number of Hartford policyholders in Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan and Ohio. Ritman can help.

Although Ritman & Associates, Inc. has never sold the legal professional services endorsement for The Hartford we are a licensed agent with The Hartford and offer their business owners, general liability and workers compensation insurance products. Ritman and it’s agents can facilitate an easy transition for those law firms that have purchased the legal professional services endorsement into one of our standard, admitted multiple carriers’ policies while maintaining your Hartford business owners insurance policy with The Hartford.

If your firm has received or will receive one of these non-renewal notices please contact us via our web site Get a Quote link. Contact Ritman, we’ve got your back.

Collaborative family law agreements are at the center of a new fraud targeting lawyers. The fraud entails a spousal support collection scam in which the fraudster contacts a lawyer via email for legal representation. The fraudsters typically cite their place of residence as a foreign country and request legal assistance to collect the balance of a collaborative family law agreement from a former spouse.

As outlined in a June 17 fraud alert from the Lawyers’ Professional Indemnity Company (LAWPRO), the typical email involving collaborative family law agreement fraud reads as follows:

Subject: Request for Legal Representation.

Hi Counsel,

My name is [wife’s name]. I am a contacting your firm in regards to a divorce settlement with my ex husband [husband’s name] who resides in your jurisdiction. I am currently on assignment in [Hong Kong or Japan or China]. We had an out of court agreement (Collaborative Law Agreement) for him to pay [amounts ranging from $350,000-$900,000] plus legal fees. He has only paid me [amounts ranging from $30,000-$150,000] since then.

I am hereby seeking your firm to assist me in collecting the balance from him. He has agreed already to pay me the balance but it is my belief that a Law firm like yours is needed to help me collect payment from my ex-husband or litigate this matter if he fails to pay as promised.

Yours truly
Wife’s first and last name

According to LAWPRO, at least 30 lawyers in Ontario have been targeted by this scam.  The fraud relies on the lawyer responding to the initial email, which is followed up by another email in which the fraudster signs the lawyer’s retainer agreement.

Shortly thereafter, an email appears indicating that the ex-husband is now willing to make the payment at the heart of the email. A check – which unbeknownst to the lawyer is fake – promptly arrives to the law firm and is deposited into their account. The fraudster then presses the lawyer to disburse the funds and wire the money to an offshore account.

On its Web site, LAWPRO offers several suggestions to help lawyers detect collaborative family law agreement fraud. Among them:  Don’t be fooled by legitimate looking identification. Also, if lawyers suspect a fraud, ask for further background information. This remains one of the best ways to determine if the matter is a legitimate one.

Ritman stays current on issues regarding lawyers and liability. If you have questions or want information regarding professional liability insurance leaving a message in the comment box, or the Contact Us page. We will offer you information and options.

Collaborative family law agreement fraud has become the latest scam targeting lawyers.  In recent months, at least 30 Ontario lawyers say they’ve witnessed firsthand a spousal support collection scam involving collaborative family law agreements. Reportedly at least one Ontario lawyer was successfully duped by the fraud.

Collaborative family law agreement fraud and other bad check scams are not isolated to just Ontario, however. There’s been a recent upswing in these types of scams in the United States, as well.

On June 17, 2010, the Lawyers’ Professional Indemnity Company (LAWPRO) – a legal malpractice insurer for Ontario lawyers – issued a fraud alert regarding collaborative family law agreement scams, as well as a follow-up alert containing tips on what lawyers can do to avoid becoming victims.

According to LAWPRO, the fraud begins with an email to a lawyer from a prospective client who contends a former spouse has failed to fulfill a collaborative family law agreement. The emails themselves and the information in them appear legitimate.

If the lawyer who receives the initial email responds, the fraudster promptly sends another email containing additional – and seemingly valid – settlement information. When the lawyer draws up a retainer agreement, the fraudster promises to comply and pay the lawyer’s standard hourly fees.

No litigation ever transpires, however. According to LAWPRO, another email soon appears that indicates the ex-husband is willing to make the payment. A check promptly arrives shortly thereafter and is deposited into the client’s account at the law firm. The lawyer is then pressed to wire the monies to an offshore account. Ultimately, the check turns out to be fake.

For more on collaborative family law agreement fraud, as well as on other check scams targeting lawyers, read the following article from LAWPRO Magazine.

Ritman stays current on issues regarding lawyers and liability. If you have questions or want information regarding professional liability insurance leaving a message in the comment box, or the Contact Us page. We will counsel you on your options.

Our blog is the place to keep up with the latest about Ritman and the professional liability insurance industry. Look for more blog posts soon.