Legal Ethics items (July 28, 2010)

• From ALM, "Courts differ about retroactive effect of [Padilla v. Kentucky]."  The majority opinion predicted that there would ultimately be no flood of collateral litigation, but I assume that everyone knew that, at least initially, there would be plenty of incarcerated prisoners who believed that they had not been adequately counseled on the collateral effects of guilty pleas on their immigration status.
• Law Firm Risk Management Blog looks at an amendment to the conflicts rules in England and Wales that permits solicitors to use information barriers to permit them to be adverse to clients in some situations.  I expect that as the law governing lawyers liberalizes conflicts rules, we will see more private bargaining between lawyers and clients as to how conflicts will be handled.
• The State Bar of California's Board of Governors approved a large set of new ethics rules, including, thankfully, the adoption of the MR 1.7 approach in California and a comment [22] that legitimizes advance waivers in many situations.  A few rules were sent out for public comment and will be revisited in November.  Unfortunately I haven't found a good link for documentation on the recent action.
• Main Justice reports that former acting US Attorney (NJ) Ralph Marra, Jr. has been cleared by the OPR of allegations that Marra made public statements to assist in the election bid of Chris Christie to be governor of New Jersey.  (If I haven't already mentioned it, Main Justice does a terrific job reporting on the DOJ.)
• In Young v. Columbia Sussex Corp., while granting a plaintiff's request for attorneys fees, the USDC for the District of Arizona rejected an argument that plaintiff's counsel violated rule 4.2 by communicating with the defendant's employees whose acts the plaintiff was imputing to the defendant as a basis for liability.
• The Daily Mirror carries an editorial about the importance of professionalism in the Sri Lankan legal profession.
• From Japan, this editorial, citing the ABA as an example, calls for pro bono work in a variety of contexts.
• Concurring Opinions carries this report on citations to legal blogs in court opinions and law reviews since 2006.  If I've done my sorting correctly, Legal Ethics Forum is tied for 44th place in terms of frequency.
• Even if you have a heavy workload, you shouldn't forge the judge's signature.  (h/t: Australian Professional Liability Blog)  The only times I've heard of forging a judge's signature involved (1) a lawyer who blew a claim and tried to convince the client that the judge had ruled against the client; and (2) a lawyer who had had a complete breakdown and was concealing the abandonment of his practice.