All in Current Events

Bondi Blues

Bondi Blues

Stacie Rosenzweig
Rules, Current Events, National

Earlier this week, and mostly along party lines, the Senate confirmed Pam Bondi to serve as the United State Attorney General.

You will note that this job is not called “Attorney General of the President,” and at least for now, the Department of Justice’s website includes this definition:

The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the Office of the Attorney General which evolved over the years into the head of the Department of Justice and chief law enforcement officer of the Federal Government. The Attorney General represents the United States in legal matters generally and gives advice and opinions to the President and to the heads of the executive departments of the Government when so requested. In matters of exceptional gravity or importance the Attorney General appears in person before the Supreme Court. Since the 1870 Act that established the Department of Justice as an executive department of the government of the United States, the Attorney General has guided the world's largest law office and the central agency for enforcement of federal laws.

Shortly after she was confirmed, Bondi issued a memo in which she seems to have announced that the Department of Justice is actually there to represent the President and his interests.

When Dumb Scams Happen To Smart People

When Dumb Scams Happen To Smart People

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, Best Practices

There was much buzz today about an article in the Cut (a lifestyle website from Vox Media/New York Magazine) – “The Day I Put $50,000 in a Shoe Box and Handed It To A Stranger.” Charlotte Cowles, the Cut’s financial advice columnist, discussed in embarrassing detail how she fell victim to what she termed a “cruel and violating [scam] but one painfully obvious in retrospect.” Cowles did not believe she could ever be a victim—she did not fit any stereotype; her mom called her “maddeningly rational.”

Well, This Is One Way To Blow Up An NDA

Well, This Is One Way To Blow Up An NDA

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, Lawyers Behaving Badly, National

What Rule 4.2 does not allow, and has never allowed, is a lawyer to actually go up to a represented opposing party, at her job, and play a confidence game to get the party’s cell phone number to drive a wedge between the party and her lawyer, and then pretend to be a “neutral” third party to broker a settlement and nondisclosure agreement, requiring forfeiture of the settlement plus $1,000 per day for breaching the agreement, which also contained illegal terms.

But, that’s what longtime Trump lawyer Alina Habba apparently did in 2021, according to Above The Law, when she allegedly induced a Bedminster Golf Club server to sign a non-disclosure agreement and settle a sexual harassment claim against the Club’s food and beverage manager. This came to light yesterday, as the server sued to void the agreement and refer Habba to the New Jersey ethics regulators.

The Most Dangerous “Lawyer” In The World Is a 1L With a Westlaw Password

The Most Dangerous “Lawyer” In The World Is a 1L With a Westlaw Password

Stacie Rosenzweig
Admissions, Current Events

It’s August so that means new law students are arriving, and 2L/3L’s are starting their upper-level classes. (Anyone have anything from this blog on their syllabus? A girl can dream.)

First, welcome, new law students! I wrote a little Q&A last year that may be helpful.

Something I didn’t write about last year was a fairly common phenomenon among my classmates, and I am sure it is common among yours as well—six weeks into law school, people are going to start asking you all kinds of legal questions.

Where does AI go from here?

Where does AI go from here?

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, Lawyers Behaving Badly, Rules

Even though I’m posting this on the Saturday of a three-day-weekend, you’re probably not actually reading this until Tuesday or later. But if you’re as terminally online as I am, you’ve already heard about the lawyer who has used ChatGPT to perhaps accelerate his own obsolescence—allegedly, he used it to generate a whole brief, which was then filed in the Southern District of New York. (The docket and most of the pleadings are available on Court Listener.)

Talking Honestly About Honesty (When You Can't Really Talk About Government Ethics)

Talking Honestly About Honesty (When You Can't Really Talk About Government Ethics)

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, Lawyers Behaving Badly, Rules

Yesterday, I (and several of my nerd friends, as it would turn out) spoke with Benjamin Penn for an article that ran today in Bloomberg Law about outgoing US Attorney Rachel Rollins, who was found by the Department of Justice’s inspector general to have engaged in wide-ranging violations of government ethics rules. I am not an expert in federal government ethics, far from it, so I stuck to the disciplinary implications of the alleged misconduct.

Relevant here, and to my quote that ran with the Bloomberg story, was that Rollins was found to have falsely testified, under oath, during the investigation of her other conduct (including leaking sensitive information to the press, and potential violations of the Hatch Act). I told Mr. Penn that “Bar regulators, in general, they’ll get their hackles up about any sort of dishonest conduct that has any nexus with the practice of law.”

Is there really that much daylight between a lawyer and client?

Is there really that much daylight between a lawyer and client?

Stacie Rosenzweig
FAQ, Current Events

"After completing his time on the Supreme Court, Daniel Kelly provided legal counsel to several clients, amongst which were the RNC and RPW," [Kelly’s spokesman Jim] Dick said (paywalled, sorry). "It is a maxim in the legal profession that the views of clients are not attributable to their attorneys."

But is it really true? Is there really that much distance or difference of opinion between a client and a lawyer?

This Blog Title Was Not Written By AI

This Blog Title Was Not Written By AI

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, My Nerd Friends

Joshua Browder, CEO of a company called “DoNotPay” (which bills itself as “the World’s First Robot Lawyer”*) announced on Twitter that the company would pay any person $1,000,000 (and later, $5,000,000) to cede control of their Supreme Court argument to its OpenAI-based “robot lawyer.” The lawyer or pro se party arguing the case would wear AirPods and “let our robot lawyer argue the case by repeating exactly what it says.”

Selected Thoughts From the Select Committee Summary

Selected Thoughts From the Select Committee Summary

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, National, Lawyers Behaving Badly

Yesterday, the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol held its last hearing and released the introductory report to its findings. The full report will not be released until tomorrow, but the summary material (which is 154 pages in itself) provides a robust roadmap.

I watched some of yesterday’s hearing, and, I’m sure, like any other member of the ethics bar who may have been listening, my ears perked up when Rep. Lofgren outlined efforts by lawyers to influence witnesses and disrupt the investigation.

What the heck...I mean you all saw that, right?

What the heck...I mean you all saw that, right?

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, Lawyers Behaving Badly

I’ve been deep in trial prep the last few days (and ahead of seeing my nerd friends at the Chicago conference, but that doesn’t mean my phone hasn’t been utterly lit up, as happens whenever a lawyer does something dumb on television. From my office, with headphones on, I could hear the collective gasps of my friends as they watched Alex Jones and his lawyer Andino Reynal have a meltdown in real time yesterday.

What happened yesterday (some video here) was, alternately (and with apologies to random social media people who made these comments but I can’t find to credit), an EPR class issue-spotting nightmare, an object lesson in FAFO, and/or a Nerd Conference Eve Present for those of us in the ethics bar.

A Stark Reminder About Confidentiality

A Stark Reminder About Confidentiality

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, National

Earlier this week, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York announced charges in four separate insider trading cases involving nine targets.

Relevant here is the case against Seth Markin (pdf), who is accused of looking through his then-girlfriend’s confidential work documents. The girlfriend, who is not named in the indictment, was an associate at a Washington DC law firm. The couple did not live together, but Markin spent significant time at her one-bedroom apartment, sometimes alone.

So, What Do We All Think About the 65 Project?

So, What Do We All Think About the 65 Project?

Stacie Rosenzweig
National, Current Events

This week, we learned about a new group, the 65 Project, dedicated to seeking professional discipline for lawyers involved in President Trump’s post-election litigation. Already, complaints have been filed with several states’ regulators. The “65” refers to the number of post-election lawsuits that were filed, that, in the group’s words, were “based on lies to overturn the election and give Trump a second term.”

So, Wait, *I* Can Be Subpoenaed?

So, Wait, *I* Can Be Subpoenaed?

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, FAQ

Today’s breaking news is not that. We learned that the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021 attacks on the Capitol issued subpoenas for Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, Sidney Powell, and Boris Epshteyn. All four are attorneys who were involved in some way in the January 6 insurrection or the litigation seeking to overturn the election results.

While predictions as to how that will play out are beyond the scope of this blog, I do occasionally get asked whether attorneys can be subpoenaed to testify about, or produce documents related to representation of, former or current clients.

Crackin' the Kraken!

Crackin' the Kraken!

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, My Nerd Friends, Lawyers Behaving Badly

Yes, I am running out of puns, and this is information isn’t breaking news anymore, but 110-page opinions have bad habits of dropping while I’m on vacation.

Anyway, while I was gone, Hon. Linda Parker of the Eastern District of Michigan sanctioned several attorneys, including Sidney Powell and Lin Wood and a few less famous, but all associated with the post-election “Kraken” litigation. My nerd friend Don Campbell did his best with exceedingly bad facts, but.

This is a remarkable opinion. It is also 110 pages, so it’s not a beach read (well, maybe it is, I won’t judge), but if this interests you at all you should read it.

Crowdfund the Kraken!

Crowdfund the Kraken!

Stacie Rosenzweig
Current Events, Rules, Best Practices

Over the weekend, mythical sea creature /(probably) soon-to-be-sanctioned lawyer Sidney Powell announced that she was joining a legal team to aid who she termed “political prisoners” (people who are accused of participating in the January 6 insurrection and are now in jail).

While, okay, everyone deserves a defense, what caught my eye was that this announcement was, of course, attached to a request for donations to Powell’s 501(c)(4). It is not clear whether donations would actually go to some sort of legal defense fund, some other project of the organization, or anywhere else.

This blog isn’t about politics so I’m not going to dive down that rabbit hole (except to remind Ms. Powell that 8.4(c) is a 24/7 law and misleading donors can get her sanctioned just as readily as misleading clients). So instead I’ll talk about crowdfunding legal fees.

Load More