Master primerus linked in presentation draft 5 1-1

Editor's Notes

• #4: I am going to give a very basic overview of Linkedin today. Click Join Today.Respond to an email request from a contact – We have a few attorneys who signed up this way and didn’t even know it!Do I need to upgrade? For the average user, upgrading is generally not needed. Upgrade allows you to access enhanced tools for searching, seeing who’s viewed your profile, and job searching and posting. If those features are useful to you, upgrading is relatively simple, at a cost ranging from $19.95 to $74.95 per month.Remember: Like face-to-face networking, to get the most out of this networking tool, you have to actively participate in it!
• #5: Use 1st person and make it personal - Don’t just use a copy/paste of your website bio.Make sure to include a picture and it professional – as people see you in your daily environment. No sweat pants and beer. No family.
• #6: Avoid providing any contact information you’re not comfortable having your contacts see (e.g. Home phone number or address; Facebook-type personal information). There is no expectation of disclosure in Linked-in – only what you feel comfortable sharing.Of course, exercise integrity in putting on only information that is accurate and not deceiving.Never provide any client-related information in this settingAvoid “Professional Puffing” – people want to see the real you, not an overly made-up profileDon’t include anything you wouldn’t normally think appropriate to share with a professional colleague. Avoid controversial or potentially offensive topics and interest, for example Political/Religious matters. Find ways to be personal without providing “Too Much Information” Know YOUR audience, and think through what YOU want to project to that audience.E.G. what might you typically share with someone you must met at a business networking event?
• #7: Goal: Connect with others who share your professional interests and can help you meet your goals.Linkedin will suggest connections based on the information you input such as education, involvement, past employers.Some attorneys may choose not to connect with staff or ex-clients, or opposing parties or vendors. It’s up to you. If the answer is “NO”, I don’t want to link, just hit the “ignore” button, or you may feel the need to respond with a tactful e-mail message explaining why you declined to connect (i.e. – if it is a fellow employee in your office you run into everyday)
• #8: Linkedin Home page – review other user’s postsGroups – Linkedin suggests groups based on your interests and involvement – Bar Associations, Alumni Associations, professional organizations. . . .
• #9: Recommendations – Linked allows you to initiate a written recommendation for someone by going to their page – the recommendation is then sent to the person to review and post at their discretion. Know that if you recommend someone, it will ask them to recommend you in return. If you receive one, you will be asked to recommend Endorsements – are skills that pop up either populated by the person or you may type in a skill such as commercial litigation or project management. Clicking endorse is a public acknowledgement that you recognize this skill. You may get a request to endorse someone, but be careful about asking for an endorsement or recommendation.Check your state ethic’s rules – may be in violation to ask for an endorsement or recommendation – Ashley will discuss next.Be careful who you recommend or endorse – be sure you actually have a meaningful basis and can do so with integrity. Don’t just do it for the quid pro quo effect.When others recommend you, you control whether or not its is made public and added to your profile. If you are not comfortable with it, you can suggest a revision or provide a gracious explanation of why you would prefer not to post it.Be careful about ethical traps. E.G.,A lawyer may not disclose that he represents Client without Client's express permission.  By recommending or being recommended, you may be disclosing the existence of a confidential client relationship, or other confidential information. Same goes for endorsements.Potentially interpreted as advertisement or solicitation
• #11: A 2009 survey of nearly 1,500 lawyers shows that “more than 70% of lawyers are members of an online social network—up nearly 25% from the past year—with 30% growth reported among lawyers ages 46 and older.”  Baldas, They Blog, They Tweet, They Friend, Nat’l L.J. (Dec. 21, 2009). According to the American Bar Association’s 2011 Legal Technology Survey Report:  65% of respondents reported that they maintain an online professional presence on networks such as LinkedIn, Facebook, LawLink, or Legal OnRamp.
• #12: Under Rule 8.4(e), it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to “[s]tate or imply an ability to influence improperly a judge, judicial officer, governmental agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.”A recent Florida ethics opinion concludes that “listing lawyers who may appear before the judge as ‘friends’ on a judge’s social networking page reasonably conveys to others the impression that these lawyer ‘friends’ are in a special position to influence the judge” and thus violate Cannon 2(B) of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct. Florida Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee Opinion 2009-20 (Nov. 17, 2009). A contrary result was reached by the South Carolina Advisory Committee on Standards of Judicial Conduct, which opined that “[a] judge may be a member of Facebook and be friends with law enforcement officers and employees of the Magistrate as long as they do not discuss anything related to the judge’s position as [M]agistrate.” South Carolina Advisory Committee on Standards of Judicial Conduct Opinion 17-2009 (Oct. 2009). Similarly, a New York Judicial Ethics Opinion found no per se violation of New York’s Rules Governing Judicial Conduct when a judge “establishes a connection with an attorney…appearing in the judge’s court through a social network” but advised the judge to “consider whether any such online connections, alone or in combination with other facts, rise to the level of a ‘close personal relationship’ requiring disclosure and/or recusal.” New York Judicial Ethics Opinion 08-176 (Jan. 29, 2009) (citations omitted).
• #13: The Obvious: Watch What You Say and Do! Rule 3.3(a)(1) provides that “[a] lawyer shall not knowingly: … make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer[.]” A lawyer who fails to comply with this obligation and extensively shares the details of his or her life on a social networking Web site will likely be exposed.For instance, it was reported that an attorney in Texas requested a continuance, asserting that the cause was the death of her father. However, that attorney had earlier posted a string of Facebook status updates, “detailing her week of drinking, going out and partying. But in court, in front of Criss [the judge], she told a completely different story.”Rule 4.1 prohibits a lawyer from making a false statement of material fact to a third person. Lawyers therefore should avoid “puffing” their online profiles or biographies. Using Social Networking Sites As A Litigation Tool – Internet Searches?Rule 8.4(c) provides that it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to “[e]ngage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” Using social networking sites to gather intelligence on opponents may violate Rules 4.1 and 8.4 in certain circumstances. For example, Philadelphia Opinion 2009-02 (March 2009) considered a situation where a lawyer believed that an adverse party’s witness’s private Facebook and MySpace pages might contain information that could impeach the witness’s testimony. The lawyer could not access these private pages because they were available only to the witness’s “friends”. The lawyer wanted to hire an investigator to “friend” the witness without revealing his affiliation with the lawyer, obtain access to the private pages, and then pass on any information to the lawyer. That plan was found to be deceptive under Pennsylvania’s version of Rule 8.4(c) because it would purposefully “conceal [the investigator’s reason for seeking access to the private pages] from the witness for the purpose of inducing the witness to allow access, when she may not do so if she knew the [investigator] was associated with the lawyer and the true purpose of the access.” Pennsylvania’s version of Rule 8.4 adopts the Model Rule. Compare Model Rule 8.4 (available at http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_8_4.html) with Penn. Rule of Prof. Conduct 8.4 (available at http://www.padisciplinaryboard.org/documents/Pa%20RPC.pdf).The New York Bar Association issued a recent opinion regarding researching potential jurors through their social media pages. Although it states that lawyers are permitted to gather information about potential jurors through their Facebook or other social media page, they must be extremely careful that no communication with the jurors results from such search, as prohibited by Rule 3.5. This may not be as easy as it sounds, since unfamiliarity with a particular site could lead to inadvertent communications. The opinion provides an example: “if an attorney views a juror’s social media page and the juror receives an automated message from the social media service that a potential contact has viewed her profile – even if the attorney has not requested the sending of that message or is entirely unaware of it – the attorney has arguably ‘communicated’ with the juror.” Social media research can be a valuable tool for a lawyer, but a lawyer should always proceed with caution. NYCBFormal Opinion 2012-2, Jury Research and Social Media, Op. 2012-1. Rule 3.5 prohibits any ex parte communication with jurors; beware inadvertently sent notifications or friend requests when researching jurors.Attorneys should not communicate with a represented party via social networking sites. See Rule 4.2
• #14: Confidentiality of Information.Rule 1.6(a) provides that “[a] lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph (b).” Avoid importing/uploading contact information into LinkeIn.Inadvertent Alteration of the Scope of Representation.By design, messaging and other communications on social networking sites is casual. By engaging in such casual written communications with a client, for instance, an attorney may unwittingly enlarge the scope of representation to include matters beyond an otherwise properly limited representationInadvertent Formation of an Attorney-Client Relationship --.Don’t give legal advice onlineThere is a big difference between providing legal information and giving legal advice. In most states, the formation of an attorney-client relationship is largely based on a party’s reasonable subjective belief that such an attorney-client relationship has been created.Avvo allows lawyers and clients to engage in social networking by posting, respectively, peer endorsements and reviews. Further, Avvo advertises that users can “Ask a Lawyer—Get free, personalized legal advice from experienced attorneys.” Users post their questions on a public discussion board, and the attorneys listed in Avvo’s directory may post responses. In certain circumstances, there is a possibility that an attorney may unintentionally create an attorney-client relationship by responding to a posted question.Attorney AdvertisingGenerally, an attorney is prohibited from using social networking Web sites to make false or misleading communications about the attorney or his or her services. See Rule 7.1 (“A lawyer shall not make or permit to be made a false, misleading or deceptive communication about the lawyer [or] the lawyer’s services.”).Attorneys who are licensed in multiple states should, at a minimum, ensure that their social networking Web site profiles and activities are compliant with the advertising rules in each jurisdiction in which they are licensed. For example, the Texas State Bar posted a reminder that lawyer or firm videos disseminated on video-sharing Web sites like YouTube, MySpace, or Facebook that solicit legal services are considered public media advertisements and are required to be filed with the Texas Advertising Review Committee, unless exempted. Lawyers should also avoid specific characterization of their practice on their social networking site profiles. For instance, LinkedIn profiles have a field for “specialties”. Rule 7.4 permits an attorney to “state or imply that [the] lawyer is certified as a specialist in a particular field of law” in various circumstances. Avoid conflicts of interestThe nature of social media makes you more vulnerable to conflict-of-interest situations. Much of the information posted on social networking sites is public, and people frequently use an email or online name that is shortened or different from their usual name when communicating online. Ensure you know who you are dealing with online by taking reasonable steps to make such a determination.Internet activity—is without borders! Unauthorized Practice of LawUnder Rule 5.5(a), “[a] lawyer shall not practice law in a jurisdiction in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction, or assist another in doing so.” Depending on the nature of the internet activities at issue, it could be determined either that a licensed lawyer is intentionally or unintentionally practicing law in jurisdictions in which the lawyer is not admitted. The unauthorized practice of law issue becomes a greater concern in light of positions such as that of the New York City Bar Association, which has suggested that “almost any question and answer may in fact constitute legal advice, even if the questioner does not appear to be seeking ‘specific’ legal advice.” N.Y. Ethics Op. 1998-2 (1998).Protect your identity One of the hidden risks of social networking is identity theft. Information that used to be very private is no longer so.Don’t make the wrong “friends”. In the world of social networking, people you have never met might want to “friend” you. You must think strategically about whom you want to be friends with. Lawyers should not blur their personal and professional lives online.
• #15: In using social networking as a litigation tool, and to network and market our practices, we should use common sense, think twice before we post, and consider the application of the Rules of Professional Conduct. A good rule of thumb is what my mother taught me: Don’t do or say anything you don’t want to appear on the front page of the newspaper!