2009-10-09 Lsba Rules Committee Minutes

LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2009 AT 1:30 P.M.

Roll Call Participants: Richard C. Stanley, Chair Susan B. Barnett, Committee Member Jennifer B. Bechet, Committee Member, via conference call Shaun G. Clarke, Committee Member Val P. Exnicios, Committee Member Pablo Gonzalez, Committee Member Sam Gregorio, Committee Member, via conference call Sheryl M. Howard, Committee Member Clare F. Jupiter, Committee Member Michelle Marney, Committee Member, via conference call Ryan M. McCabe, Committee Member Sharrolyn J. Miles, Committee Member, via conference call William M. Ross, Committee Member Leslie J. Schiff, Committee Member, via conference call Marta-Ann Schnabel, Committee Member Joseph “Larry” Shea, Jr. Committee Member Lauren A. McHugh, Supreme Court Liaison, Ex-officio Richard K. Leefe, Board Liaison Richard P. Lemmler, Jr., Ethics Counsel Eric Barefield, Assistant Ethics Counsel William King, Professional Programs Counsel Not Participating: Michael J. Begoun, Committee Member Dane S. Ciolino, Committee Member Paula H. Clayton, Committee Member Harry S. Hardin, III, Committee Member Paul J. Hebert, Committee Member Christine Lipsey, Committee Member Edward Walters, Jr., Committee Member Charles B. Plattsmier, Disciplinary Liaison, Ex-officio Cheri Cotogno Grodsky, Associate Executive Director for Professional Programs

Agenda Item 1.

Roll Call

The Chair, Richard C. Stanley, called the meeting to order. Business was conducted in accordance with the agenda below. New Committee members were welcomed to the Rules of 1

Professional Conduct Committee and the mission statement of the committee was discussed. Agenda Item 2. Approval of January 6, 2009 Meeting Minutes The minutes from the meeting held on January 6, 2009 were adopted by the Committee. Agenda Item 3.

Request for Opinion – May 20, 2008 letter from Leslie Schiff

Leslie Schiff discussed the issue of predatory lenders obtaining interests in litigation in violation of the spirit of revised 1.8(e). This is an ongoing problem for plaintiff lawyers who want to follow the letter and spirit of the rules. Marta Schnabel indicated she is aware of two related problems. The first is that it is possible that some of the lenders obtaining litigation interests might be advertising in the Bar Journal. Further, there is a parallel problem where third party medical providers are up-charging their advanced costs in certain cases. The consensus of the Committee was to appoint a subcommittee to define the scope of the problem and determine if there may be a solution. Leslie Schiff, Marta Schnabel and Val Exnicios volunteered to be on the Subcommittee. Agenda Item 4.

Resolution re: Rule XIX and Adversarial Non-Client Litigation Complaints

This matter was deferred until Paul Hebert or one of the authors of the resolution can speak on the issue. It was noted that any resolution for the midyear meeting would need to be filed in December. This resolution should be put on the agenda for the next meeting to hear from the authors. Agenda Item 5.

Rule 26(f) modification

Bill Ross submitted a revised Rule XIX, Section 26(f) that would complement the Committee’s prior action on Rule XIX, Section 26(a). The Committee will review and study the rule change for the next meeting. Agenda Item 6.

Rules Regarding Mass Torts – Val Exnicios

For the next meeting, Val Exnicios will make a short report with the top (5) issues concerning mass torts where there may need a rule review. Agenda Item 7.

3.8 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct

There was discussion concerning the new Model Rule. While some committee members were in favor of the new rule it was the consensus that the rule needed more study. An email discussion of the merits and negatives of the rule was encouraged. The Public Defenders’ Association and the Right to Counsel Committee should be approached about their views. The Chief Public Defender in the state should be contacted to comment. The rule should be put on the website again for more comment. Any decision in favor of the rule would need to go to the LSBA House of Delegates. This would 2

best be at a Mid-year meeting where those with a stake in the rule would be allowed to speak. This rule would be controversial. The Supreme Court would ultimately decide on implementation. Agenda Item 8.

New ABA Model Rule 1.10 – Dane Ciolino

This item was deferred. Agenda Item 9.

Recommendation to add ethics to the essay portion of the bar exam – Dane Ciolino

This item was deferred. Agenda Item 10.

Lawyer Advertising (Informational Item)

Richard Lemmler offered and presented a Lawyer Advertising educational session immediately after the Rules of Professional Conduct meeting for interested committee members. Adjournment

3