LEF Symposia
Resources for PR Teachers
Blog Founders
Active Bloggers (in order of joining)
- Brad Wendel (Cornell Law School)
- John Steele: Attorney at Law; Adjunct Lecturer, Santa Clara University School of Law (Spring 2012)(No attorney client relationship is being sought, proposed, or created by the posts or comments on this blog.)
- David Hricik (Mercer University School of Law)
- Andrew Perlman (Suffolk University Law School)
- David McGowan (University of San Diego School of Law)
- Steve Lubet (Northwestern University Law School)
- Anita Bernstein (Brooklyn Law School)
- Steve Berenson (Thomas Jefferson School of Law)
- Monroe H. Freedman (Hofstra University Law School)
- Robert Vischer (St. Thomas School of Law)
- Alice Woolley (University of Calgary Faculty of Law)
- Roy Simon (Hofstra Law School)
- Stephen Gillers (NYU Law School)
- Renee Knake (Michigan State University College of Law)
- Richard Painter (University of Minnesota Law School)
- Dana Remus (University of New Hampshire)
Blogging Alumni
Academic Sites and Centers
- AALS Section on Professional Responsibility
- Dickinson School of Law: Global Legal Practices Resourses
- Fordham - Louis Stein Center for Law & Ethics
- Harvard - Program on the Legal Profession
- Harvard University Center for Ethics and the Professions : Sister Institutions
- Hofstra - Institute for the Study of Legal Ethics
- Holloran Center for Professional Ethics (St. Thomas)
- Jacob Burns Ethics Center in the Practice of Law (Cardozo)
- Jurist (Law Professors on the Web)
- Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University
- Mercer Center for Legal Ethics & Professionalism
- Michigan State University Kelley Institute of Ethics and the Legal Profession
- Miller-Becker Center for Professional Responsibility (Akron)
- New York Law School (Center for Professional Values and Practice)
- SOSIG: Law Gateway
Blawgs and Sites
- Volokh Conspiracy -
- Instapundit.com
- Conglomerate
- Leiter Reports
- ProfessorBainbridge.com
- Mirror of Justice
- Opinio Juris
- ACSBlog: The Blog of the American Constitution Society
- Left2Right
- The Lawyer
- JURIST - Legal News and Research
- How Appealing
- Balkinization
- Adam Smith, Esq.
- Legal Theory Blog
- Law and Society Weblog
- Ernie The Attorney
- LawyerNews
- Overlawyered
- PointofLaw.com
- Appellate Law & Practice
- SCOTUSBlog
- Robert Ambrogi's LawSites
- Adam Smith, Esq.
- Goldman's Observations
- My Shingle (Carolyn Elefant)
- f/k/a ethicalesq (David Giacalone)
- Conglomerate Blog: Law, Business & More
- Conglomerate Blog: Law, Business & More
- Legal Profession Blog
Media Sites
Judicial Ethics
- ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct
- ABA Joint Commission on the Revision to Evaluate the Model Code of Judicial Conduct
- American Judicature Society Center for Judicial Ethics
- State Materials on Judicial Ethics (ABA-CPR sponsored site)
- Code of Conduct for United States Judges
- Judicial Conference of the United States, Committee on Codes of Conduct
- Code of Conduct for Judicial Employees
Ethics in Practice Areas
General Links
Legal Ethics Journals
Law Student Blawgs
Professional Organizations - Ethics Practice Sites
- sunEthics
- Legal Ethics Blog (Ben Cowgill)
- Legal Ethics in Virginia (James McCauley)
- Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers
- National Organization of Bar Counsel
- Ethics and Lawyering Today
- LegalEthics.com
- Freivogel on Conflicts
- David Hricik's Ethics and Risk Management
- Jerome Fishkin (California focus)
Bar Associations around the World
- Canadian Bar Association
- Commonwealth Lawyers Association
- Counseil National des Barreaux (France)
- European Union Bars and Councils
- Federation of Law Socities of Canada
- General Council of the Bar of South Africa
- Hong Kong Bar Association
- Hong Kong Law Society
- International Bar Association
- Irish Bar Council
- Laurel Terry's Global Legal Practice Resource Page
- Law Society of England and Wales
- Law Society of Ireland
- Law Society of Northern Ireland
- Law Society of Scotland
- Law Society of Singapore
- Law Society of South Africa
- New Zealand Law Society
- The Bar Council (UK)
- The Faculty of Advocates (Scotland)
« IP Profs: Inequitable Conduct doctrine needs rethinking | Main | around the web (March 22, 2010) »
March 20, 2010
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
click here to advertise on this blog
Recent Posts
- Does President Obama’s Super PAC violate the Hatch Act and Insider Trading Laws?
- House votes 417-2 to pass STOCK Act without the Senate’s ill-advised political intelligence provision
- Law firm's challenge to Model Rule 5.4 is thwarted in NY case
- Unbundling, turf battles, and the decline of law as an information profession
- Responding to the structural break requires real change
- Rogerian rhetoric and law school cred – part II
- Two of three Carnegie Reports support the undergraduate law degree
- The end of law schools
- American law professors as the 99%, fortunate division
- Social dimensions of legal education
Interesting that the disciplinary commission found a violation of the excessive-fees rule, MR 1.5(a), even though the client directed the litigation strategy. The client didn't get value for her money, because the course of discovery was not directed toward establishing a legitimate legal entitlement of the client, i.e. it was frivolous. What's interesting is that the client subjectively believed she was getting value, but the disciplinary commission found, in effect, that it wasn't objectively valuable. (More support for my contention, made in connection with MR 2.1, that subjective standards of reasonableness simply aren't a part of the regulation of lawyers.)
Posted by: Brad Wendel | March 22, 2010 at 09:11 AM
Brad,
It brings to mind the case involving the artist Jeff Koons, who asked his divorce lawyers to spare no expense -- and they sure didn't. Koons lost a suit against them, on the grounds that they did what he asked.
But to get back to my hopeless formalisms, if MR 1.5 says "reasonable" is the standard for fees, I have no objection to the use of an objective test. (Indeed, it seems required.) But I don't see the logic in an argument that "because 1.5 uses an expressly objective test regarding fees, it follows that all model rules on all topics do so as well, regardless of the text of the rules."
Posted by: John Steele | March 24, 2010 at 09:29 PM