Privilege and Ethics Issues Related to In-House General Counsel within a Small or Mid-sized Law Firm
Date: Wednesday, October 1st 2014
Location: World Trade Center Mezzanine Room, Building 2, 26 SW Salmon, Portland
Credit Type(s): Ethics
To what extent can lawyers within the same small or mid-sized law firm communicate confidentially regarding an ethics or malpractice issue involving a current client? The Oregon Supreme Court decision in Crimson Trace v. Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, 355 Or 476, __ P3d ___ (2014) resolved privilege issues in the context of a large firm but did not consider whether a smaller firm may have in-house counsel and the relevant privilege, client relations, and ethics questions that may arise. Join Dan Keppler of Kennedy Watts Arellano LLP, Mark Fucile of Fucile & Reising LLP, and Bruce Schafer of the Professional Liability Fund, who will discuss the privilege implications of the Crimson Trace decision, unresolved ethics concerns, and risk management issues related to small and mid-sized firms having in-house counsel.