Generation J.D.

A few days ago, Gawker published “Confessions of a Therapist.” (Warning: The story, starting with the headline, covers some mature topics.) In it, the therapist talks about some of his clients in generalities and the approaches he took to help them. The therapist also talks about trends he saw between them and things he wished he would’ve done differently.

Is what the therapist did here breaking some kind of ethical code? Although the therapist’s article can be viewed as entertainment, it can also inspire hope and be used as a tool by other therapists as they look for ways to improve their own practices. Slate reports it’s not a violation of ethical code for a therapist to talk about his or her patients as long as the patient’s identity remains hidden.

Even though the therapist adhered to the code of ethics and concealed the identity of his clients, his (or her) actions still raised eyebrows and questions related to confidentiality. I didn’t think anything of it while reading the article, but apparently some people thought the clients could still be identified by such generalized descriptions.

For lawyers, of course, the line is a bit clearer. They must adhere to a strict code of confidentiality when it comes to information about their clients. They can only talk about or publicize information about their clients if their client has given informed consent. This happens often in high-profile cases when the lawyer basically buys the rights to a client’s case/story in order to write a book or make a movie/ TV show.

But what about if a lawyer wants to do something similar to the therapist who wrote for Gawker?

I’m many years away from starting my Great American Novel, so I’m not intimately familiar with the rules, but I imagine they are similar to in the case of the therapist. How else would books like this be able to be published? I would think it could be hard to write how-to books for lawyers given the ethical constraints, but these types of books that include first-hand accounts of professionals are incredibly valuable teaching tools. It’s the next best thing to learning by doing.

I know a glimpse into a lawyer’s mind while handling a case would have been a very welcome change from the endless waves of casebooks after casebooks I read in law school. Is it possible to create more books of this genre in the legal profession? Or are the ethical constraints too stringent to allow for this tool?

Powered by Bookmarkify™

Ah, Super Bowl Sunday. The fierce competition of rival athletes. The camaraderie of dedicated fans. The nail-biting, last minutes of a game where anything could happen. The off-hand comment, “So, who won?”

Yeah. That was my comment. I was working on the computer in the kitchen when my wife came down and said that it was over. It gets worse — she told me the answer, and my attitude was probably best described as indifferent. I am one of five brothers and the only one who has any consistent interest in sports is the oldest. The rest of us just didn’t get that gene. (My dad doesn’t have it, either, though I suppose he’s a carrier.)

I spent more time Sunday reading about football than actually watching it. I came across this article on CNN, “The president who saved football.” It seems whether you like football or hate it, you have Teddy Roosevelt to thank/blame.

Apparently, football was a very violent and unregulated sport back in Teddy’s day. In 1905, before the advent of the NFL and professional football, 18 amateur and college players died because of injuries associated with the game. Fans loved the sport with all of its raw brutality, but it had powerful detractors and was at risk of being banned.

Roosevelt called a beer summit (I can’t say that there was beer there, but one could easily imagine Teddy drinking a brew and bringing folks together) and helped influence changes to the sport that would save it while appeasing the more pacifistic opponents. No more gang tackles, 10 yards needed for a first down and the advent of the forward pass. It’s hard to believe that passing is such a relatively modern addition.

A bunch of grown men in costumes playing war games — it sounds like a Star Trek convention. Actually, how is fantasy football any different than Dungeons and Dragons? Maybe I should like it more than I do…

Powered by Bookmarkify™

A friend of mine mentioned recently that people generally either don’t use social media at all or use it as a replacement for traditional networking. (Actually, she will now be writing an article on that hypothesis for an upcoming issue of the MSBA YLS’s Advocate. Keep an eye out for that.)

That said, we’re all aware of social media as a “hot topic” for the year. Most of us use social media of some kind, for better or for worse. Most of us also wonder why and how to use social media. There are plenty of articles out there about how to conduct yourself online, how to develop relationships online and how to use social media in connection with litigation.

With all the excitement surrounding social media, it’s easy to forget about the dangers. To name a few, the Federal Trade Commission is starting to investigate bloggers who receive benefits for namedropping in their posts. Obviously, unscrupulous posts can put your reputation in question (it can also help you repair your reputation). There are security risks. And, yes, what you say online can still be used against you in a court of law (if it is properly authenticated, that is).

Despite those dangers, we seem to have become generally comfortable in this new way of communicating and are now focusing on how to most effectively exploit it.

What we lawyers cannot forget is that the rules of our profession still apply. For example, the American Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct provide guidelines on advertising, providing information about legal services, maintaining confidentiality and communicating appropriately with opposing parties, whether they are represented or not.

And state bars are enforcing these ethical guidelines. A state court judge, for instance, was reprimanded for “friending” a lawyer” in a case he was presiding over.

In practice, it is even more complicated than you might think.

While social media provides us young attorneys with many great opportunities — to highlight risks and benefits of developing technologies for our colleagues and our clients; to network from the comfort of our couches; to maximize the reach of our marketing efforts—we cannot use social media now like some of us used to.

Now, we need to think before we friend someone, before we post, before we comment on someone else’s post and even before we “like” something. We must anticipate the unintended consequences of what we do and say online.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

Between revisions for the Bowie & Jensen website, trying to organize a Team in Training team for The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society and debating the importance of a Pinterest account with staff members, I have been dealing with firm-related issues for the better part of the morning.

Most of these issues involve working with our staff. Like any other organization with lots of people, there is a hierarchy that exists. When I was a law clerk for Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge M. Brooke Murdock, I assumed the hierarchy was either judge/legal assistant/law clerk or legal assistant/judge/law clerk. (Notice how the law clerk was always last.)

In a law firm, you have different groups, including partners, associates, paralegals and staff. Early in my career, I was provided with two pieces of sound advice: if you find a good secretary/legal assistant, never let him or her go; and always be nice to those you work with (and the court clerks).

Paralegals, legal assistants and interns can save you (and your case) when time is short and a deadline is near. Staying late, working through lunch and taking extra care with the task at hand comes easier when a mutual respect exists. Talking down to or poorly about your staff to others only builds resentment. And blaming others for something that is ultimately the attorney’s responsibility is merely trying to deflect responsibility from yourself. As a general rule, it is my responsibility to make sure that there are no mistakes in any document that has my signature on it.

As such, I want to take the time to thank the staff and paralegals I work with and assist me in the zealous representation of our clients. Thanks Tina, Erin, Lara, Brad, Colleen, Jean, Lisa, Tina M. and Nancy.

Do you have staff that you want to commend? Do so in the comments section.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

My old boss, Vice President Joe Biden, weighed in on “American exceptionalism” during a speech Monday. In subscribing to the idea, the former chairman of both the U.S. Senate Judiciary and Foreign Relations committees provided the unique perspective that our exceptionalism is particularly demonstrated by our “deep commitment to the rule of law.” I think he’s got a good point. And, I think it’s notable how his view was shaped.

Biden, a lawyer, is as aware as anyone of the importance Americans place on the rule of law at home and abroad. He presided over some of our nation’s most controversial judicial nominations and later, as the Senate’s point man on foreign affairs, met with countless leaders from  different countries, territories and international organizations while pushing President Bill Clinton and the United Nations to punish rulers who flouted the rule of law.

Our own commitment to the rule of law was demonstrated to the world during the 2000 presidential election in which we accepted the Supreme Court’s decision in Bush v. Gore. Without a coup, civil war or violent rioting in the streets, the public and the losing candidate moved beyond the controversy because of respect for the rule of law and the greater good of the nation.

The respect may be especially profound to those entrusted with determining the rule of law in specific cases. It is a topic of Justice Stephen Breyer’s recent book and a favorite subject of Maryland Court of Appeals Chief Judge Robert M. Bell.

When speaking to youth about the judiciary and separation of powers, Bell often laments the court’s status as the weakest branch of government. With the legislature possessing the power of the purse and the executive having the power of the sword, the courts have only the power left to it by the willingness of the public to accept its judgments. The fact that we regularly do is truly exceptional.

Talk of American exceptionalism often seems tinged with arrogance, and this perception can be counterproductive when trying to collaborate with foreign governments. But I think Biden’s perspective gives us something to be very proud about when comparing ourselves to the rest of the world and something both sides of the political spectrum can embrace.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

I had the pleasure Thursday night of attending my first Baltimore County Bar Association banquet, colloquially known as “The Prom.” The Prom was held at Martin’s West, a place I had not been – coincidentally – since my own high school prom.

In the weeks leading up to the event, I heard great stories about bar banquets past. Only lawyers and judges can attend the Prom, and the lack of spouses and significant others may account for the legendary tales.

While last night was not as rowdy as days of yore, one great tradition remained intact: throwing rolls at the keynote speaker. I’ve asked around the courthouse to see if anyone knows the origin of the tradition to no avail. But I learned it is upheld no matter the level of dignitary at the podium. Spiro Agnew once gave the keynote while vice president; even with the Secret Service in the building, he was still pelted with dinner rolls. Last night’s keynote, Baltimore County Executive Kevin Kamenetz, came prepared with a basket of rolls to fire back at the crowd.

Throwing rolls is indicative of the general mood at the Prom. Even though everyone is dressed in their finest black-tie garb, no one takes themselves too seriously, and I think that’s precisely why it was so much fun. (The lobster dinner and open bar didn’t hurt, either.) It was a great opportunity as a young lawyer to see respected judges and lawyers let their hair down, a reminder they like having a good time just as much as the next guy.

Even though the banquet is a great party, it’s also a good place to make connections. The guest list is a who’s who of Baltimore-area lawyers and judges. One person last night told me that he gets more business in an hour at the Prom than in a week at the office, and I don’t doubt it. For every law school classmate, law clerk and former coworker I caught up with last night, I met three new lawyers.

If you’ve never been before, the Baltimore County bar banquet is a rite of passage that can’t be missed – and one professional event you won’t dread attending.

Powered by Bookmarkify™